ULC Biblical Egyptology Final Essay

Dr. of Biblical Egyptology Assignment 22: Final Essay

Pick any topic from the course.

Akhenaten's variety of Monotheism

It's the 18th dynasty; Pharaoh finally succumbed to the powerful Hebrew God and gave Moses permission to lead the Hebrews out of Egypt. Pharaoh's decision not only influenced Pharaoh's royal court and the master builder but affected the everyday citizen as well.

The traumatized Egyptians witnessed the most spectacular supernatural events in history. Not only did a once prince of Egypt come back, out of the desert, after being gone for 40 years, but he brought with him proof of the most powerful god the world has ever seen. And this God happened to be the God of the Hebrews, the people whom they've mistreated for so many years.

Yes, Pharaoh did let the Hebrews go after enduring tremendous calamities, but what happened to the Egyptians afterwards? Their own faith in shambles, they realized that their Gods were too weak to protect them; the people were looking for answers. The Egyptian priests wondered if they could promote their religious beliefs and rituals. For the first time, the Egyptian people began to lose faith in the Gods of their ancestors and started to seek the truth. Who is the God of the Hebrews? How was this one god more powerful than all of theirs?

As the years went on, these questions beleaguered the priests and the people of Egypt. But without truthful answers to their questions, the priests continued to preach what they have preached for thousands of years and the people continued to worship the gods of their lineage. What of the Egyptian Royal Court, what did they think? Did they secretly doubt the gods? Was this doubt bred into the children of the pharaoh and his royal court?

A hundred or so years later, what may have started as a small doubt in their minds may have led to the biggest change to the Egyptian religious philosophy, the revolutionary new belief that there was only one true God and not a pantheon of gods.

One day a young pharaoh had a vision. He saw a sun disk between two mountains. God was guiding him to create change within Egypt. He was shown God, the Aten, as a sun disk with light rays emanating down from the sun. The Aten meant disk of sun in Egyptian. But, to Amenhotep IV, the Aten was different; it wasn't a mere sun disk, but a living representation of God.

At first, Amenhotep IV allowed his God, the Aten, to be personified in the form of a man with a falcon head. It's possible that he thought that if he humanized the Aten like the other gods in the Egyptian pantheon that he could obtain more support from the Egyptian priests and people. That characterization ceased abruptly and subsequently the Aten was represented by the hieroglyphic symbol of a disk with radiating rays that terminated in hands, which held the ankh, the symbol of life.

During the early years, Amenhotep IV allowed the traditional gods to coexist with the Aten, although they were reduced in status compared to the Aten. In the fifth or sixth year of his reign, Amenhotep IV further displayed his adoration and reverence for the Aten by changing his own name. Amenhotep IV would shed his name, which means "Amun is satisfied", to Akhenaten, which means "he who is of service to Aten".

At the same time, Akhenaten began searching for a suitable new capital that he could dedicate to the Aten. He found a patch of desert between Thebes and Memphis that hadn't been utilized by anyone ever before. He named the new capital Akhetaten, which means "horizon of the Aten".

Situated on the east bank of the Nile, the city was positioned north to south along a "Royal Road". The Royal residences were to the north, with a central administration and religious area and the residential suburbs were located to the south. The entire city was surrounded by 14 boundary stele that described Pharaoh Akhenaten's rationale for the creation of the new capital.

One of the Boundary steles states: "His Majesty mounted a great chariot of electrum, like the Aten when He rises on the horizon and fills the land with His love, and took a goodly road to Akhetaten, the place of origin, which [the Aten] had created for Himself that he might be happy therein. It was His son Wa'enre (i.e. Akhenaten) who founded it for Him as His monument when His Father commanded him to make it. Heaven was joyful, the earth was glad every heart was filled with delight when they beheld him."

After four years of construction, the new capital was ready to be occupied. However, before Pharaoh Akhenaten left his palace in Thebes, he decreed that all Egyptians would only worship the Aten. In addition, all citizens were required to change their names as the Pharaoh had done.

Once Pharaoh Akhenaten was completely transferred to the new capital, squads of workers were sent out to remove Amun-Re from all monuments, walls, and temples throughout Egypt. The statues of Amun-Re were destroyed, the Amun-Re temples were closed, and the assets that were amassed in the name of Amun-Re were confiscated.

Pharaoh Akhenaten started to lose sight of his governmental responsibilities and allowed corruption to slither into the Egyptian bureaucracy. At every level of his administration, officials were blinded by greed and self-indulgence while the pharaoh pressed his religious crusade.

Government in decline, other nations recognized Egypt's weaknesses. The Hittite kingdom sent their warriors down through the Egyptian Empire and eventually captured a large portion of the Egyptian empire.

Pharaoh Akhenaten died in the seventeenth year of his reign and the religion of the Aten died with him. The traditional religion was slowly reestablished by the priests. Amun-Re was restored to supremacy by the priests. The capital city Akhetaten was systematically torn down; blocks of masonry were transported for use in reconstructing the temples of Amun-Re. The pharaoh's statues were demolished and his name was removed from the history of Egypt.

Several years later, Pharaoh Akhenaten was referred as "the enemy" in archival records. Pharaoh Akhenaten was lost to history until the 19th century, when his capital Akhetaten was discovered by Egyptologist, Flinders Petrie.

Egypt would not welcome monotheism again until the early centuries AD with the acceptance of Christianity.

 

~RoseMarie Juricic

  Universal Life Church

 

Biblical Egyptology Course Essay

The Importance of Flavius Josephus

in the study of The Exodus

Gary D. Pignatello

  Doctor of Biblical Egyptology Course Essay                                                                                   

Universal Life Church Seminary                                                                                       2012

 

 

            Throughout this course I made use of many of the references provided in the readings, and I found them all to be interesting and informative.  But the life of Josephus grabbed my attention from the moment of his introduction and still has not let go.  I have found his life and works so fascinating that I was compelled to begin a side study of him while completing the requirements of this course.  Interesting historical accounts, however, were not enough to satisfy me.  I wanted to find a framework to help me determine, or at least form an intelligent opinion on, the validity of his work.  This paper is the genesis of that pursuit. 

            With privilege comes opportunity; this fact is as true now as it was in 37 A.D.   And when opportunity is coupled with a high degree of personal initiative, the potential for greatness begins to percolate.  Considering the status of the family he was born to and his position in society as a Pharisee Priest, it is reasonable to assume that Josephus ben Matthias would likely have lived a life of distinction and important societal contribution.  As it turned out, such an assumption was not only reasonable it was also abundantly true in his case.  His ultimate value to the ages, however, may have manifest itself not through the priesthood, but through military prowess and a keen eye for political maneuvering as Flavius Josephus, confidant to the very man who would bring Jerusalem to its knees. 

            I do not believe that Josephus could easily be characterized as a good man.  In my opinion he was an opportunist at best, and a self-serving traitor at worst.  Nonetheless, his position as a pivotal figure in our ability to study antiquity in its context is undeniable.  Perhaps it was the very contradictions that seemed to swirl around him that made his place in history possible; who else could have held the perspective of Jew and Roman Citizen, commander and prisoner of war, historian of, and traitor to, his people?   Perhaps it was guilt over his treasonous actions that compelled him to put pen to paper and write historical accounts so valuable they would survive almost two thousand years.  There is, of course, no way of knowing the answers to the questions I pose.  The course of his life does, however, make him as interesting as he is important.

            I began to research the methods for studying and determining the validity of ancient manuscripts with the intent of applying the criteria to the works of Josephus.  This was a daunting task but I was able to find a few excellent resources.  One item of particular interest I found was a guideline on reading primary resources.  In his paper, "How to read a primary source (2004)," Patrick Rael outlines a five-step guide.  His work helped me to identify and use the standard criteria for studying and evaluating ancient texts that could be applied universally.  It also helped refine my methods which, in turn, led me to a paper written by Matthew Tague (2001) entitled, "Can the Bible Be Trusted?"  In his paper, Tague set out to determine the validity of The Bible using the criteria that I mentioned above along with rules for presenting evidence in courts of law.  This was a compelling work in which he clearly explained his use of a three-step method for determining validity in an ancient text.  The steps Tague used in his evaluation of the Bible's validity were, 1) the number of copies of an ancient document that still exist and how close they are to the original copy, 2) whether the document claims to be a historical account, and 3) if the document is verified through archeology and other ancient writers.  I applied Tague's criteria to "The Antiquities of the Jews" in an attempt to come to a judgment about the validity of Josephus' references to The Exodus using the quantitative and objective method that he delineated.  The results, which I will explain in the body of this paper, were quite amazing. 

            I was disheartened at first by the fact that no original manuscripts of any of Josephus' works exist.  I assumed that would prove to be a significant stumbling block, however, it turned out not to be an issue at all.  I quickly found out that having possession of original copies is not a critical part of the criteria for determining an ancient document's validity.  Examples of this abound.  For instance, no original works of Homer, Plato, or Aristotle exist (Tague, 2001), and those works are cornerstones in the foundation of western philosophy and civilization.  Indeed, almost none of the ancient documents that we use to set the standards in a myriad of academic disciplines exist in their original form.  So far, my jumping off point was solid.  Next, it was time to apply Tague's criteria.

            The method I used to evaluate Josephus' "Antiquities of the Jews" was the same mentioned above.  This is a three-step process that consists of the bibliographical test, the internal test, and the external test.  The bibliographical test asks, how many manuscript copies of the document currently exist and how close to the original do they date?  I am unclear on just how many manuscript copies exist, however the date of "Antiquities" provides a very strong case for validity.  A manuscript written within a thousand years of the source document is the standard time length used in this step.  As the date of a work reaches past a thousand years its validity begins to decline.  Antiquities of the Jews dates to about 70 AD, which puts it comfortably within 1500 years of the Exodus.  More importantly, however, is the fact that Josephus references direct contact with Manetho's manuscripts, which were written less than 1200 years after the approximate date of the Exodus.  The earliest copies of Plato's writings date from about 1300 years after he wrote the originals and that is considered a perfectly reasonable time distance regarding their reliability.  Certainly, if Plato is assumed to be valid after 1300 years Manetho must be afforded at least the same level of validity for a lesser time period.  "Antiquities" is a direct beneficiary of this since it has the work of Manetho as its source.

            So far Josephus gets a check in the plus column for test number 1.  Test number 2, the Internal Test, asks whether the document itself claims to be an historical account.  "Antiquities" not only makes this claim, it is an account written by the pre-eminent Jewish historian of the time.  As such, we can realistically assume a high level of professionalism in his accounting of events.  Few people would have had the level of access to firsthand knowledge and ancient documents as did Josephus.  Additionally, his perspective as a Jew was quite unique for the day as compared to his ruling Roman counterparts who might have been tempted to skew the history of the people they subjugated.  Josephus addresses this notion:

            "Now of these several reasons for writing history, I must profess the two last were             my own reasons also; for since I was myself interested in that war which we Jews             had with the Romans, and knew myself its particular actions, and what conclusion             it had, I was forced to give the history of it, because I saw that others perverted    the truth of those actions in their writings."  (Josephus, AD 67)

           

            So far, Josephus' work holds up to the first two tests solidly.  The External Test, the final criteria, compares his work to records in other disciplines.  This test asks the important question, "Do archeology and other writers support Josehpus?"  My assertion is a resounding, yes.  I found evidence within the chapters of this course, in reference materials from some of the lessons, and in completely independent sources.  Even with my admitted lack of expertise in this area I was able to find at least two solid links between Josephus and other writers, and another three supported by archaeological data.

            Writers who support Josephus were relatively easy to find, in fact, I need only look to the Bible to start.  Goldberg (1995) notes several "coincidences" between the Emmaus Narrative in Luke and Josephus' "Antiquities".  Essentially, Antiquities of the Jews (Book18, chapter 3.3) and Luke (24:18-27) align very closely in their accounts of Jesus.  Some scholars have attempted to point out these coincidences as evidence that "Antiquities" is a forgery written centuries after Josephus.  Goldberg, however, asserts that the most likely conclusion is that both writers, who were contemporaries, share an ancient source in the production of their narratives (see Goldberg, 1995 for a detailed description).

            A second independent source that corroborates Josephus' writing about the Exodus springs from fairly recent discoveries made using cutting edge technology.  In his paper, "The Exodus Controversy" Mario Seiglie (2009) noted the presence of ancient caravan routes that have been discovered through satellite infrared technology.  These routes show "… ancient tracks made by a massive number of people going from the Nile Delta straight south along the east bank of the Gulf of Suez and around the tip of the Sinai Peninsula."  He also notes the presence of large campsites along the route that support both the book of Exodus and the writings of Joesphus.

            Finding written support for Josephus' account of the Exodus can be problematic because of the many political and religious ideas, agendas, and dogma brought to, and working against, the field of Bible study.  Ancient documents can be debated ad nauseam since they now exist outside of the context, languages and cultures of their time.  Thus, "proving" legitimate but non-physical bits of evidence will often times lead to polite academic stalemates simply due to the nature of studying events that occurred millennia ago.  Physical evidence, however, is far less constrained by interpretation.  That being said, I found that the support for Josephus in written form is fairly clear and quite interesting; the support found in the archaeological data, however, is fascinating. 

            I found an article titled, "Evidence of the Exodus" (2009) on a blog called Gladio Mentis- the sword of the mind.  The author of this article pointed out several archaeological discoveries that support the Exodus and therefore the writings of Josephus.  Among the evidence is the excavation of an ancient slave town by archaeologist Flinders Petrie called Kahun in the late 19^th century.  Kahun lay in Middle Egypt and had a large living area for slaves and other workmen and their families.  When excavating the area where the slave homes were located Petrie found many wooden boxes containing the bodies of young infants buried under the homes.  The archaeological record proves that an event occurred that culminated in the death of a large number of Egyptian slave children, this fact is indisputable.  Another notable discovery was the amount of common items found in the same excavation, suggesting a hasty departure on the part of its inhabitants.  Couple this with the knowledge that Akenaten ruled during the Exodus and he was not a first-born son, and a strong historical record is easily established which supports Pharaoh's killing of Hebrew infants (Exodus 11:4) as well as "Antiquities" (book 2, 9.2).

            The final archaeological evidence I will present comes from the Ipuwer Papyrus Scroll.  Written during the 19^th Dynasty and discovered in Egypt in the early 1800's it describes a series of tumultuous and devastating events, some with clear parallels to the ten plagues (Exodus 7-11).  In the article, Hebrews in Egypt- Slave and Plagues-Extra Biblical Proof! (2011) Aaron Kolom relates the descriptions of those who witnessed these events:

        "We don't know what has happened in the land."  "The river is blood .. there is blood everywhere, no shortage of death .. many dead are buried in the river lacking are grain, charcoal .. trees are felled .. food is lacking .. great hunger and suffering". {The first plague}; "destruction of grain" {The plague of hail or locusts}; "animals moaning and roaming freely"; "darkness" {The ninth plague};  Deaths of the "children of princes, prisoners, brothers" {The tenth plague, deaths of all the first-born};  "Gone is what yesterday has seen. See now, the land is deprived of kingship. See, all the ranks, they are not in their place .. like a herd that roams without a herdsman."

 

I believe that to say these sources make a compelling case for the validity and importance of Flavius Josephus and his writings would be a gross understatement.  When one considers the fragility of artifacts, the passage of millennia, the organized efforts by the Roman Empire to wipe out the very information we seek, shifts in culture, and all the myriad events that have occurred since the Exodus, one must stand in awe of the fact that any information survived at all.  The question begs, how did evidence of the Exodus survive?  I can think of two possible scenarios to answer this extremely important question.  One answer is that most of the information regarding the Exodus was miraculously spared from the flames of history, which is not likely.  The other answer is, perhaps, so much evidence of the Exodus once existed that even the relatively small amount to survive is vast enough for a part-time 21^st century student like myself to find.  When you add to this the poignant assertion made by Jeff Laird,

            "Modern history has an emphasis on objectivity and the recording of minute details.              Ancient history, especially when it was related to the legacy of a ruling family, was             not necessarily so objective.  In other words, we can't expect to find direct mention             of an episode that so clearly showed the weakness of Egyptian religion and the             limited power of the Pharaoh.  What we can expect to find, and do find, are pieces of         secondary evidence.  (2009)"

it makes one wonder that perhaps the existence of any evidence at all, in a strange way, is evidence itself.

            The amount of information I was able to find supporting the Exodus did indeed occur, whether strictly or loosely based on the Bible's account, was astounding.  I say this because of the popular idea that the Bible is neither provable nor historically accurate.  It has been my experience that such statements are made equally in academia and personal conversations with such a high degree of assurance that it often makes studying biblical topics seem naïve and provincial.   But, if we wherewithal to step back and remove ourselves from the popular dogma, new ideas are able to germinate.   One such idea is an alternative as simple as merely holding the bible to the same standards as non-religious texts such as the reliance on support rather than hard proof.  When done, a whole new understanding of the Bible emerges.  In short, the application of objectivity and fairness to bible study is all that is required to find its significance as both a book of worship and an historical tome.    

            This course has provided me with a number of tools and a new perspective on history in general and the Bible in particular.  As such, the completion of this course signals the continuation of my studies rather than the end of them.

References

Clifton, Matthew Keedy (2009).  Archaeology and the Date of the Exodus.  [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.the7ones.com

 

 

Federspiel, Nick DCS.  (2011).  Dr. of Biblical Egyptology course.  Chapter 17.  Universal Life Church Seminary. Online course at http://www.ulcseminary.org/seminaryProgram.php

 

 

Goldberg, Gary J. Ph.D.  (1995) The Coincidences of the Emmaus Narrative of Luke and the Testimonium of Josephus.  The Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha. 13 pp. 59-77

 

 

Goldberg, Gary J. Ph.D.  (Date unknown).  A chronology of the life of Josephus and his Era.  [Web log post].  Retrieved from Josephus.org, www.josephus.org/joschron.htm.

 

 

Kolom, Aaron (2011)  Hebrews in Egypt- Slaves and Plagues- Extra Biblical Proof! [Web log post].  Retrieved from EzineArticles.com, http://EzineArticles.com/1804275.

 

 

Laird, Jeff.  Evidence of the Exodus.  (2009).  Gladio Mentis- The Sword of the Mind. [Web log post].  Retrieved from http://swordofthemind.blogspot.com/2009/04/evidence-of-exodus.html.

 

 

Rael, Patrick. How to Read a Primary Source. (2004). Associate Professor of History Bowdoin College Brunswick, Maine

 

 

Seiglie, Mario (2009).  The Exodus Controversy.  Associates for Biblical Research, Retrieved from www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2009/08/09/The-Exodus-Controversy.aspx

 

Tague, Matthew (2010).  Can the Bible Be Trusted? Unpublished manuscript.  

 

 

Whiston, William (Translator). (1998).  Josephus, The Complete Works.  Nashville, Tenn: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

 

 

Zondervan NIV Study Bible. Full ref. ed. Kenneth L. Barker, gen. ed. Grand Rapids,

MI: Zondervan, 2002. Print.

 

Christian History Course

ULC Seminary: Master of Christian History Paper

                              Lesson 18

1. Is Charlemagne essential for medieval history? Why or why not?

Answer:

Yes because Clovis' sons were incompetent rulers. This made it necessary to place royal authority into the hands of a regent known as the "mayor of the palace". These mayors of the palace would exercise royal authority in governmental affairs while Clovis' incompetent successors enjoyed life in the palace. As mayors of the palace, these regents would form what would become the Carolingian dynasty. This dynasty would gain its greatest power during the reign of Charlemagne. This made Charlemagne essential for medieval history.

Charlemagne is essential to medieval history. His coronation reconciled and united the people of the former Roman Empire with its Teutonic conqueror. It stopped the Byzantine emperor from regaining those areas lost to the barbarians in the West in the 5 th century A.D. Since the Roman pontiff had crowned Charlemagne, the pontiff's position was strengthened as one to whom the secular monarchs owed their crowns. In return the secular monarchs were bound to aid the Roman pontiff when the latter was in trouble. The reign of Charlemagne was the zenith of Frankish power which began back when Clovis decided to become a Christian.

 

2. What helped the Roman pontiff to become even more powerful and influential in the Carolingian Era?

Answer:

Charlemagne had an additional interest in the Eastern church and the Byzantine Empire, and he even made an effort to unite the East and the West into one empire that would cover most of the former Roman Empire. Since the Byzantine emperors stopped the Muslim hordes in the East from overrunning Europe until the West could recoup from the chaos created by the fall of the Western Roman Empire and the invasion of the barbarians.

The East was plagued by iconoclasm from A.D. 726-843. Emperor Leo III had decreed in A.D. 726 and 730 that images are to be removed from churches and destroyed. Charlemagne issued a statement against image worship around the time Irene became empress of the Byzantine Empire. He offered to marry Irene so that he could unite the former Roman Empire under one crown with the capital in the West. Irene refused him though, and the division started by Constantine when he moved to Constantinople from Rome in A.D. 330 continued. The Second Council of Nicaea in A.D. 787 allowed veneration but not worship of images. John of Damascus (c. A.D. 675-c. 749) also was in favor of venerating icons as part of worship.

Except for the writings of John of Damascus, the Eastern church did not do much for the development of theology from the theological rows of the 4 th to 6 th centuries A.D. until modern times. John of Damascus came up with theological ideas that would become the Eastern version of the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas. John's Fountain of Wisdom in three books became the authority for Eastern theologians just like Thomas Aquinas' writings would become the authority for Western theologians. The third book called Of the Orthodox Faith summarizes the theology of the church fathers and councils from the 4 th century A.D. until his time. It became the standard for orthodox theology in the Byzantine Empire. After the middle of the 8 th century A.D. Eastern Christianity was slow to mature possibly because it was subordinate to the Byzantine emperor. It was basically a department of the state which was the opposite of the West where the Roman pontiff was able to be free from the state and later assume superiority over the state.

By A.D. 800, the chaos resulting from the fall of the Western Roman Empire had faded. The Eastern Roman Empire was ruled by Byzantine emperors from Constantinople. The Frankish kingdom of Clovis enlarged into a Christian empire ruled by Charlemagne wherein Christian Teutons were joined with the people of the former Western Roman Empire. The southern shore of the Mediterranean Sea, which had been part of the Roman Empire, was overrun by Muslims and governed as an Islamic caliphate. Yet the Muslims were prevented from overrunning Europe from the East and the West by A.D. 732. The former western Roman territories were now divided in three parts. The history of the Christian church between A.D. 800 and 1054 was squarely focused predominately on the standoff between the Roman pontiff and the sovereign of the Frankish Empire.

 

3.     How was Charlemagne's imperial reign a "renaissance"?

Answer:

Charlemagne's imperial reign from A.D. 800-814 has been called the Carolingian Renaissance. This had not been seen since the reign of the Ostrogoth Theodoric in Italy during the 6 th century A.D. He relied on scholars from the English church such as Alcuin of York to set up schools for the education of the royal family and nobles. Miniscule or cursive writing [known today as Carolingian miniscule] was invented at this time. Charlemagne's palace school was the integral link in passing the Roman higher educational curriculum of the 5 th century A.D. Martianus Capella consisting of the trivium and quadrivium to the later medieval universities. Because of Charlemagne, the Germans were able to bring together classical and Christian learning.

Thanks,

Yours in Him,

Ikpenwa, Chizoba Gabriel