A small description in the Book of Exodus has archaeological significance, which I argue undermines the “early date” of the Hebrew exodus, placing it in the mid-fifteenth century BCE. If the exodus happened at all, placing it at some point in the thirteenth century BCE is more likely.

See: The Story (Part 1)
See: A Critical Response to the “Early Date” of the Exodus (The Merneptah Stele) (Part 4)
See: Rebutting the “Early Date” of the Exodus (the 480-years of 1 Kings) (Part 6)

In Exodus, we read that a new Egyptian Pharaoh rose to power and, afraid of the increasing numbers of Hebrews in his land, “put slave masters over them to oppress them with forced labor, and they built Pithom and Rameses as store cities for Pharaoh” (1:11). The significance of this passage is the description of these two store cities, Pithom and Rameses, which the Hebrews were forced to build out of mud brick (Exod. 5:7–8).

I am interested in “Rameses” because it offers something concrete that can be placed and dated. The only city in antiquity known by this name was Pi-Ramesses (Falk 2018, 341). Pi-Ramesses, which means “House of Ramesses” (Finkelstein and Silberman 2001, 68), was a city located in the Eastern Delta region of Ancient Egypt and the capital city of the titular Pharaoh Ramesses II (1279-1213 BCE). Pharaoh Seti I (flourished in the thirteenth century BCE) built the city on the ruins of Avaris (located in the northeastern region of the Nile Delta), and it was used by later Pharaohs (Ramesses II himself and from Ramesses IV to VI) before being abandoned as a royal residence around 1130 BCE.

The French Egyptologist Pierre Montet (1885–1966) thought he had discovered Pi-Ramesses at Tanis (1936, 200), but the blocks arranged in orientations other than in their original plane of writing indicated that the blocks were not original to the site but had been transported from another site (Bietak 1987, 164). The source of those blocks was identified by the Coptic Christian Egyptologist Habachi (2001, 23) at the archaeological site of Tell Qantir, located two kilometers east of the site of Avaris. Since 1980 the site of Tell Qantir has been excavated by German Egyptologists, and there is no more doubt that this is ancient Pi-Ramesses (Hoffmeier 2007, 8).

As a city, Pi-Ramesses had several important functions. Alongside palaces and villas, it contained a garrison, based on the discovery of large stables, and there was also the production of arms for warfare, such as arrowheads and harpoon tips. On the religious front, the presence of statues indicates cult worship, as these depicted Ramesses II as a deified king. Temples were dedicated to Egyptian deities, like Amun-Re and Re-Harakhte, as well as foreign ones, such as the Ancient Near Eastern goddess Astarte. As a “storehouse city,” Pi-Ramesses (and Pithom) were depots for storage of supplies (grain, oil, wine, etc.) (Kitchen 2003, 266) and for storing food for the offerings made in temples and royal cults (Falk 2018, 341). The mass storage of food was based on the Pharaoh’s belief that the perpetuation of offerings after his death would sustain his soul in the afterlife.

I argue that Pi-Ramesses renders the early date of the exodus problematic on archaeological grounds (Enns 2014, 105). If this store city was built in about 1270 BCE, the exodus could only have happened sometime after this date, placing it not too shy of two centuries post the early exodus date of 1446 BCE. According to Egyptologist James Hoffmeier: “The so-called “late date” is based on taking seriously the chronological datum provided by the mention of Rameses in Exod 1:11 that points to a date during the reign of Ramesses II (1279-1213 B.C.), who indeed built a new city which he named for himself (2007, 2).

Realizing the problem this poses for the early date, an attempt to overcome this challenge is to divorce pharaoh Ramesses II from the store city Pi-Ramesses based on the argument that pharaohs did not name cities after themselves (Vasholz 2006).

Although most of ancient Egypt’s oldest cities are not named after pharaohs since those cities predate the beginnings of kingship, this argument is mistaken. Given the discussion involves toponyms, it can be a complex matter requiring mastery in ancient Egyptian language; suffice it to say that many structures and sites in ancient Egypt were named after pharaohs, rulers, and royals.

These included temple complexes and their town sites, funerary and non-funerary towns and estates, mortuary complexes, military establishments and forts, and towns for housing thousands of workers who constructed pyramids and temples. One temple complex and town site in its ancient Egyptian name was called “Mansion of Millions of Years of King Usermaatre-Meriamun,” a reference to Ramesses III’s (1217–1155 BCE) throne name. Another town site was called Hetep Senusert, meaning “Senusert is at Rest or Satisfied.”

Other pharaohs who named sites after themselves included Sneferu (c. 2575–c. 2465 BCE) and Amenemhet I (d. 1965 BCE). Sites were also given the throne names of pharaohs, for example, “the House of the Mansion of Djeserkare,” the throne name of Amenhotep I. Many military sites were named after Seti I (d. 1280 BCE), and the military site “Migdol of Menmaatre (Seti I)” would later be renamed “Migdol of Ramesses (II)” and then “Migdol of Ramesses (III).” A fort was named after pharaoh Merneptah (1273–1204 BCE).

In conclusion, there is no reason to doubt what the majority of historians believe and have known for a long while, which is that “the Biblical Raamses-Rameses is identical with the Residence-city of Pi-Ramesses” (Gardiner 1918, 266).

Post Script: On the detail of the “mud bricks”

In the Book of Exodus, the enslaved Hebrews under Pharaoh had their work quotas increased, which required them to work using mud bricks instead of straw (5:7–8). Defenders of the historicity of the Hebrew exodus contend that this supports the historicity of the exodus itself, since this description demonstrates accurate knowledge of the true historical fact that mud brick was indeed made by foreign slaves in Egypt. But this apologetic is making too much of too little.

It was common knowledge that mud brick was made by foreign slaves in Egypt, as it is attested in various sources (e.g., Papyrus Anastasi I, Papyrus Anastasi III, and the tomb of Rekhmire, also called the Theban Tomb TT100, which shows Asiatic slaves making mud bricks). In other words, this detail cannot be considered impressive, as if the author demonstrates unique knowledge about a fact only an eyewitness could possibly have.

In addition, an author showing common knowledge of this unsurprising fact does not support the accuracy of the events the author describes. To provide an analogy. If a writer produces an account describing a massive migration of hundreds of thousands or millions of citizens from a particular city, are the broader details of his account rendered accurate if he makes mention that the buildings and houses these people lived in were made of concrete and bricks? Of course not. In other words, there is much more to the exodus than a single reference to mud brick.

References

Bietak, Manfred. 1987. “Comments on the Exodus.” In Egypt, Israel, Sinai: Archaeological and Historical Relationships in the Biblical Period, edited by Anson F. Rainey, 163–171. Tel Aviv, Israel: Tel Aviv University Press.

Enns, Peter. 2014. “Dating the Exodus.” In The Baker Illustrated Bible Handbook, edited by J. Daniel Hays. Cupertino, California, United States: Apple Books.

Falk, David. A. 2018 “The Egyptian Sojourn and the Exodus.” In Behind the Scenes of the Old Testament: Cultural, Social, and Historical Contexts, edited by Jonathan S. Greer, John W. Hilber, and John H. Walton, 337-346. Ada, Michigan, United States: Baker Academic. (PDF pagination)

Finkelstein, Israel., and Silberman, Neil Asher. 2001. The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology’s New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts. New York City, New York, United States: Simon and Schuster.

Gardiner, Alan H. 1918. “The Delta Residence of the Ramessides pt. IV.” JEA 5:127-138.

Habachi, Habib. 1954. “Khatana-Qantir: Importance.” ASAE 52:443-455.

Hoffmeier, James. 2007. “Rameses of the Exodus Narratives is the 13th Century BC Royal Ramesside Residence.” Trinity Journal 28:1-9.

Kitchen, Kenneth A. 2003. On the Reliability of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan, United States: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Montet, Pierre. 1936. “Avaris, Pi-Ramsès, Tanis.” Syria 17:200–202.

Vasholz, Robert. 2006. “On the Dating of the Exodus.” Presbyterion: Covenant Seminary Review 32(2):111-113