THE ISRAELITES IN SINAI I.
THE passage of the Israelites through Sinai forms the most thrilling
episode in the history of the peninsula. The how and when and where
of this journey periodically engage attention. A hundred years ago it
was a matter of common belief that Moses wrote the five books that are
associated with his name. On the contrary, Biblical criticism now holds
that, “regarded as a history of ancient migrations of the Israelites
and their establishment as a religious and political community in
Canaan, the Hexateuch contains little more than a general outline on
which to depend.”[92] But the study of the episode reviewed in the
light of modern research, reveals an unexpected accuracy, and once more
shows that tradition is of value in proportion to our power of reading
it aright.
Different views were put forward regarding the date of the Exodus and
of the Pharaohs who were in contact with Moses.
According to the Book of Kings it was “in the 480th (LXX 440th) year
after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the
fourth year of his reign,” that Solomon began to build the Temple at
Jerusalem (1 Kings vi. 1).
Solomon ruled from _c._ B.C. 974 to B.C. 935. His fourth year would be
970, and the Exodus, on this basis, happened either in B.C. 1450, or in
B.C. 1410 according to the Septuagint.
Prof. Brugsch looked upon Ramessu II as the Pharaoh of the Exodus.
Prof. Petrie endorsed the view, accepting the date of Ramessu II as
B.C. 1300-1234, and of the Exodus as _c._ B.C. 1220. One of his
reasons for doing so was that the Israelites, as stated in the Bible,
worked at the “city Raamses” (Exod. i. 11), which, as excavations have
shown, was a creation of the Ramessides. But the expression the “land
of Rameses,” was used in connection with the story of Joseph (Gen.
xlvii. 11), which deals with events that were long anterior to the
Ramessides, showing that the compilers of Exodus used expressions that
were current at the time when they wrote.
The identification of Ramessu II, a king of the Nineteenth Dynasty, as
the Pharaoh of the Exodus, clashes with the information reaching us
through Alexandrian and Syriac sources, which suggests that Moses was
befriended by Amen-hotep IV, better known as Akhen-aten (XVIII 10),
the great religious reformer, and that the Israelites left Egypt under
one of his immediate successors. This connection between Moses and the
great reformer of Egypt strikes the imagination, all the more as it is
in keeping with the Egyptian king’s Syrian affinities. The authorities
are worth recalling.
Chief among these were Demetrius Phalereus (B.C. 345) and Manetho
(_c._ B.C. 260) who were quoted by Josephus (A.D. 80) and Eusebius
(A.D. 320); and Artapanus of unknown date, passages of whose work were
preserved by Alexander Polyhistor (B.C. 140) and accepted by Eusebius
and the Chronicon Paschale. The information of Demetrius, Manetho,
and Artapanus is peculiar in that it takes no account of Scripture.
Moreover, Artapanus compared what the people of Memphis and the
Heliopolitans preserved regarding the passage of the Red Sea. Another
writer was Philo of Alexandria (A.D. 40) who wrote a _Life of Moses_.
The _Chronicon_ of Eusebius contains the Egyptian dynasties as derived
from Manetho, and in the list of kings of the Eighteenth Dynasty, Oros
stands for Amen-hotep IV (_i.e._ Akhen-aten). Against his name stands
the entry, “the Birth of Moses.”[93] In agreement with this, Epiphanius
in his book _Against all Heresies_, mentioned Thermuthis, the daughter
of Amenophis, who adopted Moses,[94] while the Syriac writer Barhebræus
(† 1218), who had access to many sources, held that the princess who
adopted Moses was Tremothisa, in Hebrew Damris, the daughter of
Amunphatisus.[95] The historian Josephus called her Thermuthis, and
related that she intended Moses for her father’s successor (_Antiq._,
ii. 9).
On the other hand, Artapanus gave the name of the Pharaoh as
Palmanothis, adding that he built sanctuaries at Kessa (perhaps Akhet
at Amarna) and at Heliopolis. His daughter Merris who was childless
adopted Moses. She was betrothed to Chenefres.[96] The Chronicon
Paschale called him Chenebron.[97]
Various traditions point in the same direction. Thus, the Arabs held
that Moses was saved by the eldest of seven little princesses, who were
daughters of the Pharaoh.[98] Students of Tell el Amarna will recall
the representations of the little daughters of Akhen-aten, of whom as
many as six are seen with their parents on the wall sculptures of the
tombs. On the Egyptian side we know that the marriage of Meryt-aten,
Akhen-aten’s eldest daughter, with Ra-smenkh-ka (XVIII 11) his
co-regent and successor, was without issue.
According to the Artapanus Moses spent his early manhood in the service
of the husband of the princess who adopted him, and led a campaign
against the Ethiopians (_Præp. Evang._, ix. 27). In keeping with this,
Stephen Martyr († _a.d._ 36) said that Moses was well nigh forty years
old before it came into his heart to look after his brethren, the
children of Israel (Acts vii. 23). The exploits of Moses against the
Ethiopians were described by Josephus (_Antiq._, ii. 10).
The identification of a daughter of Akhen-aten as the princess who
adopted Moses suggests another possible date for Exodus. The reign of
Akhen-aten was dated by Prof. Breasted to _c._ B.C. 1375-1350, and
by Prof. Petrie to _c._ B.C. 1383-1365. If Moses left Egypt during
the reign of one of his immediate successors, perhaps under that of
Tut-ankh-amen (XVIII 12), _c._ B.C. 1353-1344, the date of Exodus on
the basis of the Egyptian chronology as now accepted, would be about
B.C. 1350, as against the date B.C. 1410 or 1450 as stated in the First
Book of the Kings.
According to the Bible, Moses slew an Egyptian who had smitten a
Hebrew, whereupon the Pharaoh sought to slay Moses, and he fled (Exod.
ii. 12-15). According to Artapanus, the Pharaoh, after the death of the
princess, called upon Chanethotes (Canuthis) to kill him. Moses, warned
by Aaron, crossed the Nile at Memphis, intending to escape into Arabia.
Chanethotes lay in ambush, whereupon Moses, in self-defence, slew him.
Moses then dwelt in the land of Midian, where he watered the flock
kept by the daughters of Reuel (called Raguel in Numb. xi. 29). Reuel
befriended him and took him for a sojourner and son-in-law (Exod. ii.
21). A further passage states that Moses kept the flock of Jethro, his
father-in-law, who is described also as a priest (Exod. iii. 1), and
a Kenite. Artapanus named Raguel, describing him as ruler (ἄρχων) of
the country, and said that he desired to make an expedition into Egypt
in order to secure the crown for Moses and his daughter, but Moses
refused.[99] Barhebræus says that Moses married a daughter of Jethro,
and describes Jethro as a son of Raguel.[100] This suggests that Raguel
was the father of the tribe. Philo of Alexandria also refers to Moses’
claim to the crown of Egypt.
In the service of Jethro, Moses led the flock to the backside of
the desert, and came to the mountain of God, to Horeb (Exod. iii.
1). Here he found himself on holy ground. The presence of a priest,
of a mountain of God, and of a reserved tract of land, point to an
ancient sanctuary, and our thoughts naturally turn to Serabit, for
many centuries a High Place of Burning, a centre of moon-cult and a
shrine of the Semitic god Sopd. The wall of rough stones across the
Wadi Umm Agraf marked the limit of the ground that was reserved to the
sanctuary. This would be the backside of the desert from which Moses
approached the mountain.
The angel or messenger of God who spoke to Moses did so from a Burning
Bush inside the limit of the holy ground (Exod. iii. 5). Perhaps he
was set there as a guardian to the place. During our stay in Sinai the
guards who were appointed to watch over our encampment near Serabit,
settled near some bushes to which they added brushwood, so as to form a
circular shelter, with an opening on one side, and in this they spent
their time, mostly sitting around a small fire. The appearance of the
shelter from outside was that of a burning bush (Fig. 14).
The Divinity in Sinai revealed himself to Moses in the name of Yahveh
or Jehovah, and subsequently declared himself the God of Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob (Exod. iii. 6), “but by my name Yahveh was I not known
to them” (Exod. vi. 3). Considering the connection of Abraham and of
Joseph with Haran and the “Hermiouthian” sanctuaries mentioned above,
their God was presumably the moon-god. The word Yahveh under which the
Divinity now manifested himself, probably represents the moon-god as
Ea or Ya under a later and more spiritualised aspect. In our Bible the
term is rendered as “I am that I am” (Exod. iii. 14), which recalls the
interpretation by the Septuagint as Ὤν, the Self-existent One. From
the Song of Deborah we gather that Yahveh “came to Sinai from Seir and
the field of Edom” (Judges v. 4), which leaves us to infer that he had
sanctuaries there also. This explains how it was that during the later
progress of the Israelites, Yahveh spoke to Moses at Kadesh on the
borders of Edom (Num. xx. 7), at Hor (Num. xx. 23), and again in the
Red Sea, and how it was that the prophet Balaam was inspired by Yahveh
(Num. xxiv. 13). Various allusions render it probable that the cult of
Yahveh was peculiar to the Kenites whose home lay in Edom. Jethro, who
befriended Moses, was at once a priest of Midian and a Kenite (Judges
i. 16).
The representative of the Divinity from the Burning Bush commanded
Moses to persuade the elders of Israel to bring forth the people out
of Egypt, in order to serve God on the mountain, going three days into
the wilderness in order to sacrifice to the Lord, the women bringing
with them all available jewels of silver and jewels of gold (Exod. xi.
2, xii. 35). The pilgrimage is called a feast (Exod. v. 1, x. 9), which
may have been similar to the modern Arab _hadj_, a word which signifies
an encampment or erection of tents. This term, and the general claims
that were advanced, show that it was question of a pilgrimage to a
well-known centre, the thought of which caused no surprise to the
Egyptians. One of its features was the offering of animals. Such
offerings among the Hebrews were made to keep off the plague; they
forestalled the sacrifice of the first-born, which was the means they
used to stay the plague once it had begun. The Pharaoh, who was anxious
to prevent the Israelites from going the pilgrimage, proposed that they
should sacrifice in Egypt instead. Moses refused on the plea that their
doing so might be interpreted as sacrificing the “abomination,” _i.e._
tampering with a sacred-nome animal of Egypt (Exod. viii. 26). When the
Pharaoh, further wrought upon, said that the people alone might go,
Moses insisted that they must have wherewith to sacrifice, and that
there must be cattle, since “we know not with what we must serve the
Lord until we come thither” (Exod. x. 26).
[Illustration: Fig. 14.—Men in Burning Bush.]
This serving the Lord with animals shows that a holocaust was in
contemplation, and bears out the belief that the objective of the
pilgrimage was a High Place of Burning.
The pilgrimage as planned would have been undertaken in spring, for
the plagues carry us through a year’s course in Egypt, with the Nile
running red when it is at its lowest in April; with frogs abounding
when the inundation comes in July; with darkness and sandstorms in the
month of March. Springtime came round again before the Israelites left,
after sacrificing the lamb of the Passover.
Rallying in the city of Rameses, probably at the present Tell er Rotab,
in a marshy valley, they moved to Succoth, the Thuku of the ancient
Egyptians, and encamped at Etham (LXX, Othom), being led by a pillar
of cloud in the day and by a pillar of smoke at night (Exod. xiii.
20-22). Doughty describes how on the _hadj_ of the Moslim, “cressets
of iron cages are set up on poles, and are borne to light the way upon
serving-men’s shoulders in all the companies.”[101] The burning fire at
night would naturally take the appearance of a pillar of smoke in the
daytime.
At Etham the Israelites turned south, making for Pihahiroth, between
Migdol and the sea, over against Baal-zephon (Exod. xiv. 2). Pihahiroth
of the Bible is Pa-qahert of the Egyptian inscriptions, while
Baal-zephon is a Semitic name, recalling Zephon, the god of darkness.
Pihahiroth and Baal-zephon lay west and east of the branch of the Red
Sea which at this time extended so far north as to include the present
Bitter Lakes. Here, owing to the blowing of the east-wind (LXX, south
wind), the waters went back and the Israelites crossed (Exod. xiv. 21),
at a spot which should be sought some thirty miles north of Suez. They
continued to move south three days, through the wilderness of Shur,
stopping first at Marah, where the waters were sweetened, and then
at Elim, with its twelve wells and seventy palm-trees. Elim has been
identified as the Carandara of Pliny (vi. 23), the Arandara of the lady
Etheria (of about A.D. 450), who described how the waters disappeared
into the ground and reappeared, which applies to the present Wadi
Gharandel. If this identification be correct, the fountain which Moses
changed from bitter to sweet presumably lay about half-way between
Baal-zephon and Wadi Gharandel, where the present Ayun Musa or Wells of
Moses are found; possibly it lay nearer to the Bitter Lake.
[Illustration: Fig. 15.—Ayun Musa.]
Leaving Elim, the Israelites entered “the wilderness of Sin, which is
between Elim and Sinai” (Exod. xvi. 1). A murmur arose because of
the lack of food,—perhaps of food suitable for keeping the full moon
festival, the movements of the Israelites being timed by the phases of
the moon. For they left Egypt after keeping the Passover, a full moon
festival which comes on the 14th (Exod. xii. 6) or 15th of the month
(Josh. v. 10); and a month later “on the 15th day of the second month
after they had departed out of Egypt,” they entered the wilderness of
Sin. Moses held out the promise of help, and, as they looked towards
the wilderness, “the glory of the Lord appeared in the cloud” (Exod.
xvi. 10). The glory of the Lord probably indicates the moon. Quails
appeared between the two evenings. They were plentiful in Sinai in
the days of Josephus (_Antiq._, 88), and continue so at certain times
of the year to the present day. Manna was gathered in large quantities
which took the place of bread. This shows that the Israelites were
moving among groves of the tamarisk, for manna is the secretion which
exudes from the tamarisk, owing to the punctures of an insect during
six to eight weeks, beginning in May. A year later, when the Israelites
were in the desert of Paran or Zin, they again gathered manna at the
same season (Num. xi. 8), and continued to do so every year during the
years they spent in the wilderness (Exod. xvi. 35). Manna appears under
the name _mennu_ in the contemporary records of Egypt, and is still
collected in Sinai and exported.
The Israelites were now in Rephidim, the land of the Amalekites and,
as there was a lack of water, Moses was divinely directed to smite the
rock. The waters which he raised were Massah and Meribah (Exod. xvii.
7); the water which he struck near Kadesh, a year later, was Meribah
also (Num. xx. 13), hence the place was called Meribath Kadesh (Ezek.
xlviii. 28). A technical term for water-finding seems to be meant. In
ancient Egyptian _mer_ signifies channel, and _ba_, as mentioned above,
signifies hole, which suggests a possible derivation. For wherever
water percolates the soil with hard rock beneath it in the desert,
it is possible to reach and raise it by cutting into the soil to the
surface of the rock. The practice is still resorted to by the Bedawyn,
who are adepts at striking water when they are on the march.
In Rephidim the Israelites were attacked by the Amalekites, who harried
them while they were on their way (Deut. xxv. 17). The place where
the encounter took place is not specified, nor the losses which were
incurred.
The number of the Israelites was tabulated in two lists of the
contingents of each tribe which were drawn up, the first when they
encamped before the Holy Mount (Num. i. 46), the other when they
were on the point of entering the Promised Land (Num. xxvi. 51). The
internal evidence is strong that these census lists, which enumerate
the numbers of each tribe, are a first hand record. At the same time
the numbers arrived at by listing up the contingents of each tribe,
603,550 in the one case (Num. i. 46), and 601,730 in the other
(Num. xxvi. 51), and 600,000 speaking generally (Exod. xii. 37; Num.
xi. 21), are looked upon as in excess of the population which the
land of Goshen could contain, and the land of Sinai could receive.
Poetic licence or a mistake of the scribe was therefore put forward
as an explanation. Prof. Petrie proposed a different solution.[102]
The word _alaf_ in Hebrew signifies thousand, but it also signifies
family or tent-settlement. If we read the census lists as preserved
in Numbers taking the so-called thousands to signify families or
tent-settlements, and the hundreds only as applying to the people, the
census lists contain what appears to be a reasonable statement. Thus,
the tribe of Judah, instead of numbering 74,600 persons, numbered
74 tent-settlements, containing 600 persons, _i.e._ about eight
persons to each tent-settlement; the tribe of Issachar, instead of
numbering 54,400 persons, numbered 54 tent-settlements, containing
400 persons, and so forth. On this basis the Israelites, at the first
census in Sinai, numbered 598 tent-settlements, with 5550 persons;
and at the second census, on the entry into Canaan, they numbered
596 tent-settlements with 5730 persons. The numbers 600,000 and so
forth are attributable to a mistake of the scribe who added up the
contingents of the census lists, reading the word _alaf_ as thousand,
instead of tent-settlement.