{"id":38945,"date":"2018-03-09T09:11:20","date_gmt":"2018-03-09T09:11:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/atlantipedia.ie\/samples\/?p=38945"},"modified":"2018-03-31T07:09:01","modified_gmt":"2018-03-31T06:09:01","slug":"archive-3468","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/atlantipedia.ie\/samples\/archive-3468\/","title":{"rendered":"Archive 3468"},"content":{"rendered":"

This is the html version of the file https:\/\/www.biblebelievers.biz\/edom.pdf.
\nGoogle<\/strong> automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Page 1<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

EDOM<\/strong><\/p>\n

&<\/strong><\/p>\n

THE HYKSOS<\/strong><\/p>\n

Discovery of a large early Edomite Empire<\/em><\/p>\n

David J. Gibson<\/p>\n

CanBooks<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Page 2<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Edom and the Hyksos <\/strong>by <\/em>David J. Gibson<\/p>\n

Copyright \u00a9 CanBooks 2010<\/p>\n

Printed in Canada<\/p>\n

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval<\/p>\n

system, or transmitted in any form by any means – electronic, mechanical, photocopy,<\/p>\n

recording or any other – except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the<\/p>\n

prior permission of the publisher.<\/p>\n

Sources<\/strong><\/p>\n

Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are taken from the Holy Bible,<\/p>\n

King James Version.<\/p>\n

Scripture quotations marked (ESV) are from the Holy Bible, English Standard Ver-<\/p>\n

sion, copyright @ 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. Used<\/p>\n

by permission. All rights reserved.<\/p>\n

ISBN: 978-0-9733642-6-2<\/p>\n

Further orders: https:\/\/canbooks.com<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Page 3<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

A Word of Explanation<\/strong><\/p>\n

David J. Gibson lived in western Canada for most of his life. As a victim<\/p>\n

of polio he was bound to his wheelchair but his mind was bound to nothing,<\/p>\n

other than his love for his Bible. As a young boy David learned to love history,<\/p>\n

and having inherited his father\u2019s collection of book he set about learning Hebrew<\/p>\n

and Greek, as well as making himself familiar with Egyptian herioglyphics as<\/p>\n

well as the langauges of Babylon and Assyria. Since he was limited to the books<\/p>\n

at hand, he subscribed to a number of archeological journals and purchased<\/p>\n

many good books, especially reports on the various digs and excavations that<\/p>\n

interested him. When he died in 1964, the library passed on into the hands of<\/p>\n

myself, his son Dan (the editor of this book) who continued with the research<\/p>\n

begun by his father.<\/p>\n

This manuscript lay untouched for many years as I worked on my own<\/p>\n

research and writings, but recently I felt compelled to publish this book in<\/p>\n

memory of my father. The book was first published on the Internet on the<\/p>\n

nabataea.net website, and now in 2009 it is being published as a stand-alone<\/p>\n

book in electronic format.<\/p>\n

I trust you will enjoy the book, the research and implications it makes,<\/p>\n

as well as the older writing style which expresses the heart of the author, my<\/p>\n

father and friend.<\/p>\n

Dan Gibson<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Page 4<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

ii<\/p>\n

Other books by the same author:<\/p>\n

    \n
  • Early Man in Science and the Scriptures<\/li>\n
  • Eden<\/li>\n
  • The Ships of Tarshish<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    Visit https:\/\/canbooks for more information<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Page 5<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    iii<\/p>\n

    TABLE OF CONTENTS<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Foreword<\/p>\n

    Chapter 1 The Enormous Hyksos Empire<\/p>\n

    Chapter 2<\/p>\n

    The Mixed Origin of the Edomites<\/p>\n

    Chapter 3<\/p>\n

    The Birth of the Kingdom of Edom<\/p>\n

    Chapter 4<\/p>\n

    The Book of Job<\/p>\n

    Chapter 5<\/p>\n

    The Hyksos-Edomite Empire<\/p>\n

    Chapter 6<\/p>\n

    The Hyksos Used Horses<\/p>\n

    Chapter 7<\/p>\n

    Where Did They Go?<\/p>\n

    Chapter 8<\/p>\n

    The Founding of Petra<\/p>\n

    Appendices<\/p>\n

    Chronological Table<\/p>\n

    Notes<\/p>\n

    Bibliography and References<\/p>\n

    Short Summary<\/p>\n

    Maps<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Page 6<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    iv<\/p>\n

    Dedicated to my Loving Wife<\/p>\n

    A surprising solution to a long standing intriguing problem, of great interest to<\/em><\/p>\n

    all who study history, and particularly to every student of the Bible<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Page 7<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    v<\/p>\n

    EDOM<\/strong><\/p>\n

    &<\/strong><\/p>\n

    THE HYKSOS<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Discovery of a large early Edomite Empire<\/em><\/p>\n

    David J. Gibson<\/p>\n

    CanBooks<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Page 8<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    6<\/p>\n

    FOREWORD<\/strong><\/p>\n

    The theory set forth in this book was not an over-night inspiration.<\/p>\n

    The first flash of thought along this line occurred above twenty- five years<\/p>\n

    ago. That first flash received a rather skeptical reception in my own mind,<\/p>\n

    but as time has gone on and various facets of the original idea found<\/p>\n

    enticing support through further study, and also archaeological research<\/p>\n

    reports brought confirmatory factors such as a strong Hurrian element in<\/p>\n

    the Hyksos make-up, it began to run in my mind that that first flash had<\/p>\n

    more to it than I had supposed. Thus it was finally decided to set down<\/p>\n

    the theory in writing that others might consider it. Possibly it may prove<\/p>\n

    an acceptable theoretical basis pending further light. Further information<\/p>\n

    may prove confirmatory and enable our theory to pass in whole or in part<\/p>\n

    into the realm of assured fact; or, it may not. But if further interest and<\/p>\n

    study is stirred up by propounding this theory, then, even though our main<\/p>\n

    suggestion may prove wrong, still good will have resulted by the further<\/p>\n

    research and study engendered. Then perhaps someone else will press on<\/p>\n

    to really unravel the Hyksos mystery.<\/p>\n

    Our theory draws upon two main sources of information. The science<\/p>\n

    of archaeology on the one hand, with some extra data from traditions, and<\/p>\n

    the Bible on the other. Both contribute to our study. Very heavy dependence<\/p>\n

    upon the Biblical record will be noted.<\/p>\n

    The author may appear much too sanguine in this, to those who<\/p>\n

    hold to the Graf-Wellhausen ideas of the composite J. E. P. origin of the<\/p>\n

    Pentateuch — or Hexateuch, if they wish. If the Pentateuch was compiled in<\/p>\n

    the 8th to 5th centuries B.C., as they suppose, it appeared long, long after<\/p>\n

    the times it refers to. In many minds the reliability of the writings is thereby<\/p>\n

    destroyed. Such readers may wonder why we fail to take cognizance of which<\/p>\n

    hypothetical author (J, E, or P., etc.) is supposed to have contributed this<\/p>\n

    or that particular passage which we quote and rely upon in this book, to<\/p>\n

    see what bearing such authorship might have upon our theory.<\/p>\n

    To all such we thus reply. First. This book is not the place for the<\/p>\n

    discussion of hypothetical sources.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Page 9<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    1<\/p>\n

    Second. Even if one granted the theory of the late composition of the<\/p>\n

    Pentateuch (or, beg pardon! the Hexateuch), it does not necessarily follow<\/p>\n

    that our theory would be thereby affected.<\/p>\n

    These late authors may have had; good sound well preserved oral<\/p>\n

    traditions to go by. Nay, in view of the great antiquity of writing, now fully<\/p>\n

    proven by archaeological evidence and antiquity far out-dating the times<\/p>\n

    with which we deal, these late writers may have drawn entirely from written<\/p>\n

    records originating near the events themselves! Can we prove otherwise?\u2019 We<\/p>\n

    feel we are in no pos1tian to question the accuracy of the B1blical records we<\/p>\n

    quote, unless we have very clear proof. We believe such proof to be lacking<\/p>\n

    or quite inadequate.<\/p>\n

    Again, as to whether the names preserved in early Hebrew stories are<\/p>\n

    of actual individuals or represent clans and tribes etc., we have this to say.<\/p>\n

    Supposing such to be the case, what then? If by Abraham marrying Hagar<\/p>\n

    is meant a clan from Egypt called Hagar intermingling with some Hebrew<\/p>\n

    \u201cclan\u201d from which came the Ishmaelite \u201cclan\u201d we are still confronted with the<\/p>\n

    Ishmaelites being of a mixed Hebrew-Egyptian origin anyway, just as much<\/p>\n

    as by taking\u2019 the, names to represent individuals and as telling actua1 history!<\/p>\n

    Therefore, it was felt best in this book to accept the Biblical evidence just<\/p>\n

    as it comes to our hand, without raising questions none of us can answer. We<\/p>\n

    give it the benefit of the doubt. That seemed fair treatment from any stand<\/p>\n

    one may take in this matter.<\/p>\n

    Of course, the author feels free to hold his own opinions as to the writers<\/p>\n

    of the Pentateuch. He is not ashamed to confess he finds difficulty in fully<\/p>\n

    believing in the Mosaic authorship of all the Pentateuch saving the closing<\/p>\n

    chapters of Deuteronomy. The Ugarit discoveries have put back alphabetical<\/p>\n

    writing to the age of Moses, and such writing could be quite a bit earlier.<\/p>\n

    Others may think differently. This difference need not upset fair consideration<\/p>\n

    of the theory set forth in the following pages.<\/p>\n

    We wish to thank our friend Dr. Arthur C. Custance of Ottawa for some<\/p>\n

    help given in personal correspondence. The Ameri-Cana Institute also made<\/p>\n

    some searches for us, which were helpful.<\/p>\n

    THE AUTHOR<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Page 10<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    2<\/p>\n

    CHAPTER I<\/strong><\/p>\n

    The Enormous Hyksos Empire<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \u201cCrowns and thrones may perish, Kingdoms rise and wane. . .\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

    The Mysterious Hyksos or \u201cShepherd Kings of ancient Egypt have<\/p>\n

    long presented scholars with one of the greatest puzzles of history. They were<\/p>\n

    foreigners, not Egyptians. They invaded the country, then reigned in that Land<\/p>\n

    of the Nile as Pharaohs.<\/p>\n

    Seemingly out of nowhere, about seventeen hundred years before Christ,<\/p>\n

    a Hyksos King called Salatis with his people suddenly swarm in on horseback<\/p>\n

    across the eastern border of Lower Egypt. For a few generations they vigorously<\/p>\n

    rule in the Delta, part of the time dominating all of Egypt, taking to themselves<\/p>\n

    all the titles of native Pharaohs. They even adopt Egyptian ways, yet were never<\/p>\n

    absorbed by or loved by the Egyptians; indeed the Egyptians seem to have<\/p>\n

    hated them intensely. The Hyksos seem to hold sway over an enormous ancient<\/p>\n

    empire, of which luxurious Egypt was but a part, until finally the Egyptians<\/p>\n

    arose against their masters. Then, as suddenly as they mysteriously came, they<\/p>\n

    equally mysteriously pass away, dropping completely out of sight altogether.<\/p>\n

    Driven back out of Egypt, not very long before the birth of Moses, the Hyksos<\/p>\n

    Kings with their great empire promptly fade and disappear never to rise again.<\/p>\n

    Not another trace of these people has ever yet been identified.<\/p>\n

    Where did these people go when they vanished in retreat? When Ahmose<\/p>\n

    I (the Egyptian king who founded the XVIIIth Dynasty) drove the Hyksos<\/p>\n

    armies from his country soon after 1580 B.C. ,the enemy retreated not only<\/p>\n

    to Southern Palestine, but retreated out of history itself!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Page 11<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    3<\/p>\n

    Their great empire became a forgotten empire, unrecorded in preserved<\/p>\n

    history until the new science of archaeology began piecing together the exciting<\/p>\n

    bits of evidence dug up here and there. No one has yet succeeded in tracing their<\/p>\n

    retreat any farther, or in discovering their home towards which they seemed to<\/p>\n

    be retiring. Who were these people? Many speculations and suggestions have<\/p>\n

    been made. One suggested Kadesh or some other city in Syria as their home;<\/p>\n

    some have looked toward Palestine itself; others try to link them with the Hittites<\/p>\n

    of Asia Minor; for a little it was speculated whether they were Hurrians; some<\/p>\n

    original home beyond the Caucasus was proposed, still another connects them<\/p>\n

    with early Hebrews, relatives of the Israelites. (2) It is all very uncertain. The<\/p>\n

    Hyksos remain an enigma and an unsolved riddle to this day.<\/p>\n

    A Solution From the Bible?<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Our proposal is that a clue to the origin of the Hyksos Kings and people<\/p>\n

    may be found in and through the pages of that profound and ancient Book,<\/p>\n

    the Bible.<\/p>\n

    Too often the earlier portion, of the Bible has been viewed as only myth,<\/p>\n

    legend and folklore. (3) It is looked upon as the literary product of a small and<\/p>\n

    rather insignificant Hebrew tribe, which, after a lot of wandering around, ended<\/p>\n

    up in the Palestine Hills; a tiny nation which happened to possess some great<\/p>\n

    and sublime ideas of the Creator and evolved an excellent monotheism, but<\/p>\n

    which was, paradoxically, woefully local and terribly cramped in geographical<\/p>\n

    and historical outlook!<\/p>\n

    Its book of origins (The Book of Genesis) is often considered as quite<\/p>\n

    fantastic and unreliable as a source of historical fact. But, surely, writers capable<\/p>\n

    of such sublime, spiritual concepts, and keen observers of nature about them,<\/p>\n

    (vastly superior to their po1ytheistic, magic-fearing great neighbors,) were also<\/p>\n

    capable of just as wide and as discerning a grasp of the political world about<\/p>\n

    them and of the events of their own times in which they sometimes took part.<\/p>\n

    Is it not utter folly for us to dismiss their writings as rather unreliable because<\/p>\n

    they were a small people? One may as well argue that a writer living in little<\/p>\n

    Switzerland, nestling among the Alps, simply could not be an authority on<\/p>\n

    early history because he comes from a small nation or again that he would be<\/p>\n

    unreliable on the history of two world Wars because the Swiss took no part in it\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Page 12<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    4<\/p>\n

    Swiss minds are no inferior to German, English or American in grasping<\/p>\n

    world evens: Hebrew minds were not inferior to Egyptian, Assyrian or<\/p>\n

    Babylonian in recording history; indeed we are inclined to think the Hebrews<\/p>\n

    thought in a wider and longer historical view and sense than is visible in much<\/p>\n

    of the earlier records recovered from the great nations of antiquity. We must also<\/p>\n

    remember that the Hebrews, living closer to the events we deal with likely had<\/p>\n

    better sources than we with our often sketch and incomplete monuments dug<\/p>\n

    out of the ruins of the places of self-centered and boastful monarchs. Again, in<\/p>\n

    contrast to those records which acclaim victories but omit defeats, the Hebrews<\/p>\n

    tell of both defeats as well as victories. Which do you think ultimately most<\/p>\n

    trust worthy? So let us with confidence look to the Bible for light on the times<\/p>\n

    of the Hyksos Kings.<\/p>\n

    In setting forth this theory,, may we however, first examine the historical<\/p>\n

    records uncovered by archaeologists and survey what may there be learned<\/p>\n

    concerning these puzzling Hyksos Kings. Afterwards this will be compared<\/p>\n

    with certain lesser noted parts of Scripture and a check made concerning a<\/p>\n

    people there mentioned, to see if that people may be the origin of the Hyksos.<\/p>\n

    Each reader may then draw his own conclusion as to whether our theoretical<\/p>\n

    identification is to be classified as perfect, or possible, or plausible or, (we home<\/p>\n

    not!) preposterous.<\/p>\n

    Scantiness of Hyksos Records<\/strong><\/p>\n

    It is unfortunate that the monuments of the Hyksos Kings of Egypt have<\/p>\n

    been almost wholly lost. Such monuments would no doubt, have supplied the<\/p>\n

    key to the information wee now seek. The Delta region of Egypt, where the<\/p>\n

    Hyksos appear to have established their capital after entering Egypt, is not so<\/p>\n

    favorable to the preservation of records as is Upper Egypt. Possibly later Egyptian<\/p>\n

    kings may have sought to destroy every trace of the hated invaders by throwing<\/p>\n

    down and demolishing all their monuments. (4) However, a few records have<\/p>\n

    been preserved, and some later Egyptian writings refer to them occasionally.<\/p>\n

    The following is a brief summary of the main points of our knowledge of these<\/p>\n

    mysterious kings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Page 13<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    5<\/p>\n

    No. l. The Extent of the Hyksos Empire<\/strong><\/p>\n

    The name \u201cHyksos\u201d was thought by the Egyptian historian Manetho(who<\/p>\n

    lived before Christ, yet fifteen long centuries later than the Hyksos) to mean<\/p>\n

    Shepherd Kings. Many writers still refer to them under that name. As the<\/p>\n

    Hyksos were Semites, and are also called Arabians, there may be an element<\/p>\n

    of truth in the idea.<\/p>\n

    Arabians are commonly shepherds, and Manetho may have known of<\/p>\n

    traditions current in his day giving him reason to believe they actually were<\/p>\n

    shepherds. This may have influenced him to endeavor to make this meaning<\/p>\n

    out of the obscure word, \u201cHyksos.\u201d<\/p>\n

    Modern scholars, however, are inclined to believe Manetho was mistaken<\/p>\n

    in his derivation of the word. They think it means \u201cRulers of Countries.\u201d<\/p>\n

    (5) Certainly, what we now learn of them bears out that meaning very well.<\/p>\n

    According to Sir Charles Marston in \u201cThe Bible Comes Alive,\u201d (Eyre and<\/p>\n

    Spotiswoode, London, 1937; pg. 42ff.), the word means \u201cRoyal Bedouin.\u201d He<\/p>\n

    draws attention to the Ras Shamra or Ugarit tablets which mention the existence<\/p>\n

    of Arabs in Southern Palestine in Patriarchal times, speaking an archaic Hebrew.<\/p>\n

    Prof. Breasted stated in \u201cA. History of the Ancient Egyptians<\/em>\u201d in 1919,<\/p>\n

    (paragraphs 170-173), that monuments of Khian (or \u201cJohn\u201d), one of these<\/p>\n

    surprising rulers, have been found not only in Lower Egypt, (the Delta region<\/p>\n

    where they resided,) but also 350 miles away to the south at Gebelen in Upper<\/p>\n

    Egypt. His royal cartouches are found in Southern Palestine; his name turns<\/p>\n

    up 450 miles off across the sea to the north west in the Island of Crete; also<\/p>\n

    750 miles away to the north east, in the distance beyond Palestine, Syria and<\/p>\n

    the Arabian Desert where a granite lion bearing his cartouche upon its breast<\/p>\n

    was found at Baghdad. Consider the far reach of these points on the map on<\/p>\n

    the next page.<\/p>\n

    No wonder, Prof. Breasted, viewing the great, wide sweep or this<\/p>\n

    astonishing evidence, was moved to say, a person cannot behold it without<\/p>\n

    having raised up before him, \u201cA vision of a empire which once stretched from<\/p>\n

    the Euphrates to the first cataract of the Nile.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Page 14<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    6<\/p>\n

    Were the Hyksos Kings: \u201cRulers of Countries. Yes, indeed! As heads over<\/p>\n

    an empire embracing anywhere near such an extensive area as indicated by the<\/p>\n

    locations of these monuments, they truly ruled over many countries and varied<\/p>\n

    peoples. They must have dominated the world of their day.<\/p>\n

    This, then, is our first point. There was a great Hyksos Empire, which<\/p>\n

    centered in or not far from Lower Egypt; its general area is indicated above.<\/p>\n

    The Hyksos entered Egypt from the east, and, strangely, instead of dominating<\/p>\n

    Egypt from without, from their own capital, they moved into Egypt and made<\/p>\n

    that their center. These facts will be quite important to our later studies.<\/p>\n

    No. 2. Race and language of the Hyksos<\/strong><\/p>\n

    As to the race and language of the Hyksos, scholars were at first fully<\/p>\n

    agreed they were Semites. They spoke a language closely akin to Hebrew. Then<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Page 15<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    7<\/p>\n

    modern research detected also a strong Hurrian element in their language, and<\/p>\n

    suggestions were made that the Hyksos were Hittites. One proposed a possible<\/p>\n

    Amorite connection (6) But Dr. Merril F Unger in \u201cArchaeology and the Old<\/p>\n

    Testament,\u201d Zondervan, 1954, P.14\u201d states: \u201cEventually there arose a new king<\/p>\n

    over Egypt, who .. knew not Joseph\u2019 (Exod.l:8). Thus began the long years of<\/p>\n

    \u2018oppression. This new king seems to have been the founder or an early king of<\/p>\n

    the powerful 18th dynasty (1546…1319).<\/p>\n

    Since the Hyksos invasion of Egypt was led by Semites, and not my<\/p>\n

    Hurrians or Indo-Aryans, as recent studies have shown, it appears that the<\/p>\n

    expulsion of the Hyksos around the middle of the 16th century\u201d B. C was<\/p>\n

    the important event that resulted in the oppression of the Israelites. Thus we<\/p>\n

    conclude that scholars now again consider the puzzling Hyksos to be mainly<\/p>\n

    a Semitic people, but with a Hurrian element, which we must not overlook.<\/p>\n

    On the monuments the Egyptians call the Hyksos, \u201cAsiatics\u201d and<\/p>\n

    \u201cBarbarians.\u201d Manetho calls them \u201cArabians\u201d and \u201cPhoenicians. The Jewish<\/p>\n

    writer Josephus, who lived in the time of the early Christians and was a<\/p>\n

    contemporary to the events in the later chapters of the Book of Acts, found<\/p>\n

    the then known facts concerning them so similar to his own nation that he<\/p>\n

    jumped to the conclusion the Hyksos tradition was but a garbled account of<\/p>\n

    the children of Israel in Egypt before the Exodus. This we know is not correct,<\/p>\n

    as the Israelites were slaves, not kings of a great empire, but it does reveal that<\/p>\n

    those traditions concerning the Hyksos made them appear racially very like to<\/p>\n

    the Israelites who were Hebrews.<\/p>\n

    Sir Charles Marston in \u201cThe Bible Comes Alive, argues that the Hyksos<\/p>\n

    were a Hebrew people, though not Israelites. That is, they were of the same<\/p>\n

    racial stock as Abraham, who was a Hebrew. Marston also links the Hyksos<\/p>\n

    with Arabs in part. We feel that in this, he was very near to the solution, as will<\/p>\n

    be evident from our later studies.<\/p>\n

    Of course, we must recognize that there were other Hebrews aside from<\/p>\n

    Abraham and his descendants, the Israelites. As Arthur Custance very keenly<\/p>\n

    observed in a communication to the author, Joseph when talking to Pharaoh\u2019s<\/p>\n

    butler says he was \u201cstolen out of the land of the Hebrews.\u201d (Genesis 40:15) Dr.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Page 16<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    8<\/p>\n

    Custance continues: But the mere presence of Jacob and his family in Palestine<\/p>\n

    would hardly warrant it being called Hebrew-land. Evidently a much wider<\/p>\n

    Hebrew domination was in fact existing, a domination by others than Israelites,<\/p>\n

    who were, nevertheless, termed Hebrews.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Page 17<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    9<\/p>\n

    Even at the time of Joseph those Hebrews descended from Abraham were<\/p>\n

    becoming numerous in some areas. Both the Ishmaelites and the Midianites)<\/p>\n

    who purchased Joseph of his brethren, were Hebrew entities, descended from<\/p>\n

    Abraham. No doubt other Hebrew groups had sprung up from the families of<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Page 18<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    10<\/p>\n

    Abraham\u2019s father Terah, and the general area where these groups existed from<\/p>\n

    Edom up into Mesopotamia, might thereby be termed Hebrew-Land.<\/p>\n

    To sum this matter up, it seems abundantly clear that the Hyksos were<\/p>\n

    definitely a Semitic people, or led by those who were pre-dominantly Semitic,<\/p>\n

    and that there was a Hurri element as well. Racially, they were very like the<\/p>\n

    Israelites, and could be Hebrews of some sort, or were similar to Hebrews.<\/p>\n

    We feel that this racial data is so important to our study, that it should<\/p>\n

    be summarized. To discover whence came the Hyksos, we find we must look<\/p>\n

    for a people who can rightly be called any and all of the following:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Asiatic,\u201d that is, racially not Egyptians but foreigners and strangers<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      from the east.<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Barbarians,\u201d that is, a people considered by the Egyptians as on a<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        lower cultural plane than themselves.<\/p>\n

          \n
        1. \u201cArabians,\u201d that is, a people linked with the deserts of Arabia, as<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          shepherds, Bedouin, nomads, etc.<\/p>\n

            \n
          1. \u201cPhoenicians,\u201d that is, Canaanites, either directly from the Land of<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            Canaan or a related people.<\/p>\n

              \n
            1. \u201cSemites, that is, a people speaking a Semitic tongue; but with a<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              Hurrian admixture.<\/p>\n

                \n
              1. A. people so like the Israelites that the two could rather be easily be<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                confused, the one mistaken for the other.<\/p>\n

                Each of these factors will be referred to later on in our search for the<\/p>\n

                Hyksos homeland. Each will be accounted for.<\/p>\n

                No.3. The Hyksos City \u201cAvaris\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

                The first Hyksos King is said by Manetho to have been Salatis. The<\/p>\n

                account runs that Salatis built himself a capital city named Avaris, somewhere<\/p>\n

                east from Bubastis. It is described as being located east of the eastern arm of<\/p>\n

                the Nile as it fans out in the Delta. The city Avaris would thus be close to or in<\/p>\n

                the desert area either in or not too far from the east side of the Delta towards<\/p>\n

                the south-western corner of Palestine. It is now generally identified with Tanis,<\/p>\n

                called Zoan in the Bible. (7)<\/p>\n

                It is of interest in this connection to observe that the eastern border of<\/p>\n

                Egypt has been considered by the (majority of scholars to extend over the<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                Page 19<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                11<\/p>\n

                desert beyond the Isthmus of Suez as far as the Wadi el \u2018Arish. They have held<\/p>\n

                that this wadi, dry most of the year\u2019!\u201d, is called \u201cthe river of Egypt\u201d in many<\/p>\n

                Bible passages, and name it as the real boundary between Egypt and Canaan.<\/p>\n

                On the other hand, H. Bar- Deroma in an article, \u201cThe River of Egypt (Nahal<\/p>\n

                Mizraim)\u201d, (Palestine Explora1ion Quarterly, Jan.-June 1960, P. 37), studies<\/p>\n

                the passages and gives sound reason to believe \u201cthe river of Egypt\u201d is the Nile<\/p>\n

                and or the eastern or Pelusaic arm thereof in the Delta in particular.<\/p>\n

                Somewhere in this vicinity, in the times of Moses and Joshua, lived the<\/p>\n

                Avim or Avites (Deut.2:23; Josh.13:3). The name is phonetically similar to<\/p>\n

                \u201cAvaris I\u2019, the Hyksos capital, but no connection has yet been shown.<\/p>\n

                When the Egyptians finally began to regain power, the Hyksos were<\/p>\n

                besieged in this city Avaris for an unknown length of time; it-may have been<\/p>\n

                a long, hard siege. When the city ultimately fell before the growing power of<\/p>\n

                Ahmose I, the Hyksos lost all control of Egypt and had to retreat to the city<\/p>\n

                Sharuhen in Southern Palestine.<\/p>\n

                No. 4. The Hyksos had Horses<\/strong><\/p>\n

                It is well known that the Hyksos Kings had and used horses. Indeed, it is<\/p>\n

                quite generally believed that it was the Hyksos who introduced the horse into<\/p>\n

                Egypt, since pre-Hyksos monuments do not mention these animals while later<\/p>\n

                monuments do. (8)<\/p>\n

                Sir Flinders Petrie, when excavating Hyksos graves in Southern Palestine at<\/p>\n

                Tell el Ajjul, near Gaza, found that horses had been buried evidently with their<\/p>\n

                owners. Certainly, the horses must have been loved and held in highest esteem<\/p>\n

                by these men, to merit burial with their masters. (See, \u201cA Pompeii\u2019 of Southern<\/p>\n

                Palestine\u201d in \u201c\u2019The Illustrated London News,\u201d June 20,1931, page 1050, also articles in<\/p>\n

                the same journal under dates of May 14,1932, page 814, and July 9, 1932, page 57.)<\/p>\n

                Archaeologists have also discerned several cemeteries in Tell el-Dab\u2019a<\/p>\n

                belonging to the Second Intermediate Period during recent excavations. These<\/p>\n

                burials date from late Dynasty XIII to the end of the Hyksos Period. One<\/p>\n

                of the more remarkable finds is a mud brick vaulted tomb to the west of the<\/p>\n

                main temple enclosure, which apparently belonged to a Hyksos warrior. He<\/p>\n

                was buried with his weapons, a well-preserved copper sword (the earliest of its<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                Page 20<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                12<\/p>\n

                type found in Egypt) and dagger, as well as other grave-goods and offerings. In<\/p>\n

                the entrance to the tomb the skeleton of his horse was found and next to the<\/p>\n

                north-eastern wall the body of a young girl – thought to have been a servant,<\/p>\n

                perhaps a sacrifice, who was interred at the time of her master\u2019s burial. A<\/p>\n

                number of other horse-burials have recently been uncovered. (See the web site:<\/p>\n

                Egyptian Monuments: https:\/\/www.egyptsites.co.uk\/lower\/delta\/eastern\/daba\/<\/p>\n

                daba.html) Whatever people we seek to identify as the Hyksos, they must be<\/p>\n

                a people having horses.<\/p>\n

                No. 5. The Religion of the Hyksos<\/strong><\/p>\n

                In the matter of religion it seems most evident that the later Hyksos<\/p>\n

                Kings worshipped \u201cSutekh.\u201d (9) \u201cThis Egyptian name way be identified as the<\/p>\n

                god \u201cBaal\u201d of the Phoenicians or Canaanites, or shall we say, one of the many<\/p>\n

                \u201cBaals\u201d as local districts had their own \u201cBaal-gods.\u201d<\/p>\n

                Breasted translates a folk-tale c1rculating in Egypt four hundred years<\/p>\n

                later, which includes this statement concerning Apophis, one of the Hyksos<\/p>\n

                Kings: \u201cNow King Apophis made Sutekh his Lord serving no other god, who<\/p>\n

                was in the whole land, save Sutekh. He built the temple in beautiful and<\/p>\n

                everlasting work.\u201d One might think from this that some of the earlier Hyksos<\/p>\n

                Kings worshipped some other god either solely or as well as Sutekh, until King<\/p>\n

                Apophis made Sutekh his Lord.\u201d<\/p>\n

                Nevertheless, it is certain Sutekh (or Baal)was one of their chief gods, and<\/p>\n

                at times possibly their only god. What other god or gods they may have had<\/p>\n

                before, the Egyptian records do not reveal.<\/p>\n

                Therefore, in our identification, we must look for a people who worshipped<\/p>\n

                \u201cBaal\u201d in one form or another.<\/p>\n

                No. 6. The Date of the Hyksos Empire.<\/strong><\/p>\n

                The time that the Hyksos Kings ruled in Egypt and the date of their<\/p>\n

                great empire is well established in relation to Egyptian history of that period.<\/p>\n

                It fills or nearly fills the time between the Middle Kingdom and the New<\/p>\n

                Empire commencing with the Eighteenth Dynasty. We may say it occupies<\/p>\n

                the gap between the XIIth and the XVIIIth Dynasties. The Hyksos Kings for<\/p>\n

                Dymasties XV and XVI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                Page 21<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                13<\/p>\n

                The chronology of the XVIIIth Dynasty is relatively good, and links up<\/p>\n

                well with Palestinian and Babylonian events both through written records (as<\/p>\n

                monuments and the Amarna Letters) and by archaeological evidences.<\/p>\n

                Ahmose I, the first king of the XVIIIth Dynasty of Egypt, is the king who<\/p>\n

                drove the Hyksos out of Egypt. The Pharaoh of the Exodus of Bible history, was<\/p>\n

                either Amenhotep II, or Thutmose IV, (of the XVIIIth Dynasty), or Merneptab<\/p>\n

                (of the XIXth Dynasty), by the most popular theories. This gives us a rough<\/p>\n

                method of linking the time of the Hyksos Empire with Biblical history.<\/p>\n

                The collapse of the Hyksos Empire was about 160 years before Amenhotep<\/p>\n

                II and Thutmose IV, and about 350 years before Merneptah; so we may say the<\/p>\n

                fall of the Hyksos Empire was about 160 or 350 years before the Exodus of the<\/p>\n

                Children of Israel from Egypt. Using the long chronology of the sojourn of the<\/p>\n

                Israelites in Egypt, that is, that they were in Egypt for 430 years (Exod.12:40-<\/p>\n

                4l)*, and so the Hyksos Empire existed while Israel sojourned in Egypt.<\/p>\n

                Note. There is no conflict between Exodus 12:40-41 and St. Paul\u2019s statement in<\/p>\n

                Gal 3:17, if the emphasis is put on the word \u201cconfirmed\u201d in St. Paul\u2019s statement. Then<\/p>\n

                the Abrahamic Covenant was confirmed 430 years before the giving of the law, which<\/p>\n

                confirmation would naturally be the last confirmation given to the Patriarchs. The last<\/p>\n

                time God confirmed the Abrabamic Covenant to the Patriarchs, in a vision, was just<\/p>\n

                before Jacob entered Egypt (Gen.46:l-4), from which confirmation we should measure<\/p>\n

                430 years to the giving of the law at Mount Sinai.<\/p>\n

                The existence and history of this great Hyksos Empire would not be<\/p>\n

                forgotten by the time of Moses. Therefore, some reference to the Hyksos people<\/p>\n

                and their kings would be quite natural in Moses\u2019 writings. Of course, such<\/p>\n

                reference would be under a name known to the Hebrews, rather than under<\/p>\n

                the odd, Egyptian name \u201cHyksos.\u201d<\/p>\n

                In writing his great book of origins, that is, The Book of Genesis, it does<\/p>\n

                seem, as this study will later set forth, that Moses paused in his main story<\/p>\n

                long enough to outline quickly and briefly, what his readers at that day would<\/p>\n

                readily recognize as the origin of that and elusive but great empire under the<\/p>\n

                Hyksos Kings.<\/p>\n

                Summary of Evidence to be Matched<\/strong><\/p>\n

                Here, then, is the sum of the particular evidences regarding taken the<\/p>\n

                Hyksos discovered from sources available to us; taken from tradition and gleaned<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                Page 22<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                14<\/p>\n

                from monument and archaeological findings. It presents us with a fairly definite<\/p>\n

                picture, which we must see paralleled and reflected in the Biblical people we are<\/p>\n

                to introduce in the following chapters in our attempt to unravel this exciting<\/p>\n

                and unique puzzle handed to us from the past.<\/p>\n

                The Hyksos were:<\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. Rulers of an Empire, started before the invasion of Egypt and which,<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                  at its greatest, seems to have included Egypt, the Southern portions of<\/p>\n

                  Palestine, the North Sinai desert, and to have extended its influence,<\/p>\n

                  if not direct control, across Northern Arabia to the regions about the<\/p>\n

                  Euphrates River.<\/p>\n

                    \n
                  1. A Semitic People, closely akin to Hebrews and Arabians; allied or akin<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                    to the Canaanites (Phoenicians); yet possessing a quite noticeable<\/p>\n

                    Hurrian element.<\/p>\n

                      \n
                    1. A people who likely had a capital city before entering Egypt, yet<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                      preferred to set up a new capital city, Avaris, upon entering Egypt —<\/p>\n

                      to them a conquered land — thus forsaking, as a seat of government<\/p>\n

                      whatever capital they had previously.<\/p>\n

                        \n
                      1. A people who very early had horses, and used them extensively in<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                        warfare.<\/p>\n

                          \n
                        1. A people who worshipped Baal (Sutekh)<\/li>\n
                        2. A people who attained the height of their power about 200 to 300<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                          years before the Exodus of Israel from Egypt.<\/p>\n

                          Our problem now is to see whether the Biblical people to be suggested<\/p>\n

                          can match every one of these six points, and whether there are any irresolvable<\/p>\n

                          differences or difficulties which might confute, annul or weaken our proposed<\/p>\n

                          identification. The Bible does record one nation, and one alone, which appears<\/p>\n

                          to fit all the six points listed above. To the origin and early history of that nation<\/p>\n

                          we will now turn for close study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                          Page 23<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                          15<\/p>\n

                          CHAPTER II<\/strong><\/p>\n

                          The Mixed Origin of the Edomites<\/strong><\/p>\n

                          \u201cOr profane(common) person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his<\/em><\/p>\n

                          birthright\u201d <\/em>— Hebrews 12:16.<\/p>\n

                          MUCH more space is given to the origins of the Edomites in the Book<\/p>\n

                          of Genesis than to any other non-Israelite nation. There must be a reason<\/p>\n

                          for this. Ishmael\u2019s descendants for instance, are dismissed in just seven verses<\/p>\n

                          (Gen.25:l2-l8); all the nations of the Canaanites, so familiar to the Israelites,<\/p>\n

                          are disposed of in only six verses (Gen.1O:15-20); but a whole chapter of no<\/p>\n

                          less than forty-three verses is devoted entirely to the origins of Edom (Gen. 36)<\/p>\n

                          We naturally ask Why? Moses, whom we believe was the author or<\/p>\n

                          compiler constrained to turn from his main subject, and to give quite a lengthy,<\/p>\n

                          though most compact digression, covering the details of Esau\u2019s descendents, to<\/p>\n

                          tell of the people they intermingled with and overwhelmed, to catalog the early<\/p>\n

                          Dukes of this nation, and to list the first eight kings. This is a most striking<\/p>\n

                          fact, in an author who otherwise wrote right to the point, and who does not<\/p>\n

                          go off from his main theme.<\/p>\n

                          The obvious reason for this lengthy digression is that Esau\u2019s descendents,<\/p>\n

                          the Edomites, were looked upon at that time and in that time as of great national<\/p>\n

                          or international importance, a people not to be passed over lightly, the subject<\/p>\n

                          was something not to quickly missed and forgotten, but needed to be recorded<\/p>\n

                          and preserved for future reference. The statement is repeatedly made in Genesis<\/p>\n

                          36, \u201cEsau is Edom.\u201d Edom was therefore an important name in the day when<\/p>\n

                          the Book of Genesis was written. It Is pointedly stressed that this Esau, the<\/p>\n

                          brother of Jacob, was the progenitor of this important nation, Edom. Edom is<\/p>\n

                          thus accorded a very unusual place of distinction and significance.<\/p>\n

                          If we are right in the theory that is going to be put forth, then the origin<\/p>\n

                          of the Edomites would indeed call for more than usual attention at the hands<\/p>\n

                          of the ancient historian.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                          Page 24<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                          16<\/p>\n

                          Now our theory is, in short, that the Hyksos Kings were the Edomites.<\/p>\n

                          Preposterous? We think not. We seriously suggest that the Hyksos Empire was<\/p>\n

                          an early expansion of the Edomite Kingdom, assisted by associated and related<\/p>\n

                          peoples. An empire which bloomed and blossomed early, but as quickly faded,<\/p>\n

                          withered and perished from sight.<\/p>\n

                          We feel there is much attractive suggestion and circumstantial evidence to<\/p>\n

                          support the theory, so much so that it becomes mentally difficult to reject the<\/p>\n

                          conclusion. It also seems to explain and shed light upon otherwise inexplicable<\/p>\n

                          passages of Scripture which indicate that Edom was looked upon as a strong<\/p>\n

                          nation.<\/p>\n

                          We can but set forth this theory, explaining and listing the large array of<\/p>\n

                          points in its favor, and leave the reader to judge.<\/p>\n

                          We will begin with the man Esau himself, tracing the story just as it has<\/p>\n

                          been handed down to us in the Bible.<\/p>\n

                          Esau\u2019s Parentage<\/strong><\/p>\n

                          Esau is said to be the founder of the nation Edom. He was twin brother<\/p>\n

                          of Jacob, the son of the Patriarch Isaac, and grandson of Abraham\u201d the Hebrew\u201d<\/p>\n

                          (Gen.14: 13) They were all \u201cshepherds\u201d Racially, Esau was an \u201cHebrew,\u201d a<\/p>\n

                          Semitic person.<\/p>\n

                          Esau\u2019s mother was Rebecca. She was an industrious woman, who in her<\/p>\n

                          youth, without hesitation undertook the watering of a camel caravan — and<\/p>\n

                          camels can be quite thirsty! She readily forsook her father\u2019s home in the City<\/p>\n

                          of Nahor in Northern Mesopotamia (Gen 24:10) to marry a man she had<\/p>\n

                          never seen, but whom she knew to be a worshipper of one God and one God<\/p>\n

                          only, to the entire exclusion of all other gods. He was the inheritor of certain<\/p>\n

                          peculiar promises and covenants of that God; whose name is translated in the<\/p>\n

                          Authorized Version of the English Bible as \u201cJehovah.\u201d Her father was Bethuel,<\/p>\n

                          the Syrian\u201d (Geh.24:l5; 28:5), son of Nahor the brother of Abraham. Bethuel<\/p>\n

                          lived in or near the city of Haran (Gen 29:4) where also Abraham himself had<\/p>\n

                          resided for a number of years after leaving the city of Ur (Gen. ll: 27-32) (10)<\/p>\n

                          It appears to us to be a major error to imagine that the Semitic Patriarchs,<\/p>\n

                          Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were mere wandering nomads of little or no<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                          Page 25<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                          17<\/p>\n

                          significance in the world of their day. Such views are sometimes expressed. In<\/p>\n

                          the Biblical account they are definitely pictured as men of high social standing;<\/p>\n

                          as men of influence, importance and of considerable wealth and power. They<\/p>\n

                          are set forth more in the nature of princes who had renounced their former<\/p>\n

                          national connections with the great, powerful cities of Ur and Haran; and<\/p>\n

                          who consequently had no country or people to which they any longer owed<\/p>\n

                          allegiance. Forsaking city life they deliberately chose a nomadic way of living,<\/p>\n

                          \u201clooking for\u201d a future city \u201cwhich God would give them.<\/p>\n

                          Abraham\u2019s brother Nahor appears to be the progenitor of a people<\/p>\n

                          occupying the general region around Haran. This name, Nahor, actually appears<\/p>\n

                          upon ancient cuneiform tablets referring to this district. Egyptian monuments,<\/p>\n

                          not many generations after the times of the Patriarchs, refer to the \u201cNaharain\u201d<\/p>\n

                          in the region of Northern Mesopotamia.<\/p>\n

                          Again, Laban, Jacob\u2019s uncle, seems to be a man of wealth and of power.<\/p>\n

                          Indications are he was of unusual importance, as his name seems to be<\/p>\n

                          remembered throughout a wide area in Syria. It seems to be preserved in the<\/p>\n

                          name of the mountain range, \u201cLebanon.\u201d<\/p>\n

                          Unimportant people do not usually have the distinction of having districts<\/p>\n

                          and mountains, etc., named after them.<\/p>\n

                          The peoples of Mesopotamia had their own written records and their<\/p>\n

                          traditions regarding their ancestors. Had these early Hebrew stories regarding<\/p>\n

                          their ancestors in Mesopotamia been pure fiction, had they no genuine<\/p>\n

                          relationship to the men of Nahor and to Laban, surely the Hebrew accounts<\/p>\n

                          would have been \u201claughed out of court\u201d by the men of those days. The fact that<\/p>\n

                          the Biblical accounts survived as sober history seems to show the accounts were<\/p>\n

                          accepted then and received no serious challenge. The claims of the Hebrews must<\/p>\n

                          have conformed to common knowledge at the time. Thus, we seem confronted<\/p>\n

                          by evidence that the families from which the Hebrews of the Bible originated<\/p>\n

                          were prominent and of no mean standing. It follows that Abraham would be<\/p>\n

                          well educated and not an insignificant nomad.<\/p>\n

                          Those who hold that the names in the Biblical record such as \u201cTerah\u201d and<\/p>\n

                          \u201cNahor\u201d refer only to tribes or clans of those names, (11) and not to genuine<\/p>\n

                          personalities, still must in fairness to that record, concede that such tribes or<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                          Page 26<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                          18<\/p>\n

                          clans must have been very important and powerful, because their names stand<\/p>\n

                          out on clay tablets, and became attached to places, mountains, etc. Thus, even<\/p>\n

                          if we were to view these Hebrew stories as personifying tribes and clans, we<\/p>\n

                          still are forced to much the same conclusions. The Hebrews originated from<\/p>\n

                          persons (or tribes) of importance and power.<\/p>\n

                          Now look at Abraham himself. His retinue and followers, when he<\/p>\n

                          first came into the Land of Canaan, constituted an element of such military<\/p>\n

                          significance that the Amorites of Mamre (a place later called Hebron) found it<\/p>\n

                          to their advantage to become his confederates (Gen. l4:13-14). Abraham called<\/p>\n

                          them to the war against<\/p>\n

                          Chedorlaomer, a mighty king of Elam. No little nomad would undertake<\/p>\n

                          such a war!<\/p>\n

                          Melchizedek, King of Salem, highly honored Abraham (Gen. 14:18-19).<\/p>\n

                          We have to notice, too, that Lot, Abraham\u2019s nephew, very quickly rose to a<\/p>\n

                          seat of authority and recognition in the city of Sodom, a prize of such wealth<\/p>\n

                          and prosperity that Chedorlaomer traveled many, many miles with his army to<\/p>\n

                          secure. The very early advance Philistine settlement at Gerar (the great Philistine<\/p>\n

                          immigration came generations later), feared the military strength of both<\/p>\n

                          Abraham and Isaac (Gen. 21:22-32; 26:16, 23-33). To the Hittites Abraham<\/p>\n

                          was prince. (Gen. 23.6). All this points to a man of distinction and power.<\/p>\n

                          Of such an illustrious, Semitic family came Esau, the father of the Edomites.<\/p>\n

                          Esau\u2019s Great Mistake<\/strong><\/p>\n

                          Early in life Esau manifested a materialistic tendency. He showed a low<\/p>\n

                          esteem of the spiritual values wrapped up in that covenant which God had<\/p>\n

                          made with his grandfather Abraham; a covenant involving blessing to the whole<\/p>\n

                          earth through a promised \u201cSeed\u201d (the Lord Jesus Christ), as well a numerous<\/p>\n

                          \u201cseed\u201d or posterity, and ultimate possession of all the Land of Canaan. Esau<\/p>\n

                          was more concerned with the immediate and the present, not with promises<\/p>\n

                          which were \u201cafar off;\u2019 and on\u201d which Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, and Rebecca set so<\/p>\n

                          much store (Heb.ll:13). This trait of character came up in the famous \u201cmess of<\/p>\n

                          pottage\u201d incident. Esau despised his birthright by selling it to his twin brother<\/p>\n

                          Jacob for food when he was hungry and famished. The food was material and<\/p>\n

                          the birthright was \u201cspiritual.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                          Page 27<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                          19<\/p>\n

                          God held Esau to his foolish bargain. Later God permitted the wily Jacob,<\/p>\n

                          by a lie, to steal the prophetic blessing also which the aged and blind Isaac<\/p>\n

                          still purposed to give to his favorite son Esau despite his knowledge that the<\/p>\n

                          \u201celder shall serve the younger,\u201d For this theft Jacob indeed paid dear in later<\/p>\n

                          life, reaping a terrible harvest in his sons who, in turn, lied to and deceived<\/p>\n

                          him for a number of years concerning his favorite son Joseph. How well the<\/p>\n

                          sons learned of their father!<\/p>\n

                          Esau was terrifically angry at the loss of his father\u2019s blessing, as included<\/p>\n

                          certain promises of material gain such as he craved. However, he found no way<\/p>\n

                          of repentance (Heb.12:16-17), and became thereafter an everlasting example<\/p>\n

                          of the tragedy of a fatal, wrong choice which cannot be remedied.<\/p>\n

                          He typifies, in the Book of Hebrews those who despise the gain of Heaven<\/p>\n

                          through Jesus Christ, and choose instead \u201cthe mess of pottage\u201d of this present<\/p>\n

                          world.<\/p>\n

                          So extreme was Esau\u2019s anger that he began to plot the murder of his twin<\/p>\n

                          brother. Jacob, thereupon fled, and for twenty years was absent from the Land<\/p>\n

                          of Canaan, becoming a stranger living at Haran in Mesopotamia.<\/p>\n

                          During this twenty year period, Esau and Jacob each amassed additional<\/p>\n

                          great wealth in cattle and lesser livestock. Then Jacob returned to Palestine.<\/p>\n

                          When the brothers met, Esau was pacified; the two were happily reconciled,<\/p>\n

                          and the old hatred was put away. Hereafter we hear of no further trouble<\/p>\n

                          between them.<\/p>\n

                          Esau\u2019s Marriages<\/strong><\/p>\n

                          At the age of forty, before Jacob stole the blessing, Esau had married two<\/p>\n

                          wives, both Hittites, be it noted of the Canaanite nations. This was a direct<\/p>\n

                          flowing of the family\u2019s sacred traditions. It was another clear demonstration of<\/p>\n

                          a basic despising of the religion of his father and grandfather, which religion<\/p>\n

                          forbade such ties with the Canaanites. Isaac especially loved Esau, but Esau<\/p>\n

                          cared not for his father\u2019s wishes; he did not as fully return that love. Esau was<\/p>\n

                          obviously seeking immediate material and social advantages for himself alone<\/p>\n

                          by thus joining affinity with prominent Hittite families. As we shall see later,<\/p>\n

                          he was quite successful in gaining such material and social advantage, but the<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                          Page 28<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                          20<\/p>\n

                          price was the utter and final loss of the spiritual birthright, for thereafter it<\/p>\n

                          is written by God over his life, \u201cEsau have I hated (Romans 9:13; Mal 1:2)<\/p>\n

                          Some people are sorely puzzled over the account of Esau\u2019s wives and have<\/p>\n

                          even questioned the accuracy of the text. The follow paragraphs beside helping<\/p>\n

                          our study may clear up the seeming contradictions of many of our readers.<\/p>\n

                          Esau\u2019s First Wife, Judith-Abolibamah<\/strong><\/p>\n

                          Esau\u2019s first wife was Judith. She was the daughter of Beeri a Hittite. In<\/p>\n

                          Genesis 36: 2 this woman is called also-, \u201cAholibamah.\u201d It was very common<\/p>\n

                          in those days for persons to bear more than one name: almost endless examples<\/p>\n

                          could be cited, as Abram = Abraham; Sarai = Sarah; Jacob = Israel; Esau =<\/p>\n

                          Edom; Ben-oni = Benjamin; Zaphnath paneah = Joseph; and so on. So also<\/p>\n

                          this woman is known by two names, Judith = Aholibamah: we will use the<\/p>\n

                          first name, Judith.<\/p>\n

                          Judith\u2019s mother was Anah, and Anah was ~daughter of Zibeon a Hivite<\/p>\n

                          (Gen.36:2). This woman Anah is not to be confused with a man named<\/p>\n

                          Anah, of whom we shall speak later.) Thus Judith, while Hittie on her father\u2019s<\/p>\n

                          side (Gen.26:34), was Hivite on her mother\u2019s. By marrying her, Esau smartly<\/p>\n

                          obtained family connections with both the Hittites (the children of Heth) and<\/p>\n

                          the Hivites, two prominent Canaanite nations.<\/p>\n

                          From Esau\u2019s point of view, looking for material and social advantage, he<\/p>\n

                          had made a brilliant move, but not so in God\u2019s sight. It was Esau\u2019s fall: God<\/p>\n

                          turned from him, and from then on God\u2019s hand was directed toward Jacob<\/p>\n

                          in protection, guidance, and discipline, to make him the grand character he<\/p>\n

                          became in later life.<\/p>\n

                          From this marriage three children were born in the Land of Canaan,<\/p>\n

                          named, Jeush, Jaelam and Korah. All three became Dukes in later Edomite<\/p>\n

                          government (Gen.36:5,18), but they do not appear to rank as high or to have<\/p>\n

                          been as prominent as the children of Esau\u2019s other wives. In fact, in listing the<\/p>\n

                          Dukes derived from Esau in Genesis 36:15-19, this wife and her children are<\/p>\n

                          given last place, as being in honour of a lower rank than the others.<\/p>\n

                          Esau\u2019s Second Wife, Bashemath-Adah<\/strong><\/p>\n

                          Esau\u2019s second wife, (though he appears to have married both women at<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                          Page 29<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                          21<\/p>\n

                          about the same time, Gen.26:34,) was Bashemath or Adah. (Another instance<\/p>\n

                          of dual names.) She was the daughter of Elon, a Hittite. In Genesis 36: 10<\/p>\n

                          this woman is named first in rank, and so evidently became Esau\u2019s chief wife.<\/p>\n

                          Her only named son is Eliphaz. He is called Esau\u2019s \u201cfirstborn\u201d Gen.<\/p>\n

                          36:16), so was evidently older than Esau\u2019s other children. This name \u201cEliphaz\u201d<\/p>\n

                          should be kept in mind, as we will speak of this son in a later chapter. This<\/p>\n

                          marriage also linked Esau with the Hittites of Canaan.<\/p>\n

                          Esau\u2019s Third Wife, Mahalath-Bathshemath<\/strong><\/p>\n

                          Esau\u2019s third wife was taken much later than the other two. After Jacob<\/p>\n

                          had fled to Haran, Esau came to better realize how really displeasing to his<\/p>\n

                          father and mother were his Canaanitish wives, and that his marriages, made<\/p>\n

                          for personal advantage, lay largely at the bottom of the loss of that blessing<\/p>\n

                          he now coveted. In a desperate effort to remedy an already hopeless and lost<\/p>\n

                          case, he went true to form, and again resorted to scheming a marriage to get<\/p>\n

                          what he wanted.<\/p>\n

                          Did ever any man so debase the ideal of marriage as Esau! So he planned<\/p>\n

                          his third marriage, this time to a Semetic woman not of the Canaanites.<\/p>\n

                          The Canaanites lay under the curse of utter destruction, in the religion of<\/p>\n

                          his family (Gen.16:l6).\u201d Therefore, Esau now sought a woman linked racially<\/p>\n

                          and religiously with his father\u2019s people. Evidently he hoped that both he and<\/p>\n

                          the children from such a marriage could yet inherit the blessing of Abraham.<\/p>\n

                          Yea, would he not force God to let him inherit it, if he could but succeed in<\/p>\n

                          his wicked plan to murder Jacob? Jacob was unmarried as yet. If Jacob died<\/p>\n

                          childless, the blessing would have to revert to himself, Esau evidently reasoned.<\/p>\n

                          Esau foresaw, however, that even with Jacob dead and out or the way, he<\/p>\n

                          would still have trouble because or his Hittite wives, whose children could<\/p>\n

                          not come into this distinctively Hebrew blessing. To overcome the obstacle<\/p>\n

                          he negotiated this third marriage, taking this time a Hebrew wife. He would<\/p>\n

                          create an Hebraic line of descent which could inherit the blessing of Abraham.<\/p>\n

                          So it was he went eastward into the Arabian Desert to the young, growing<\/p>\n

                          tribe of Ishmael, Abraham\u2019s eldest son, and married Mahalath or Bathshemath,<\/p>\n

                          Ishmael\u2019s daughter (Gen. 28:6-9). She was, in fact, his step-cousin.<\/p>\n

                          However, Bathshemath, this third wire, although an Hebrewess, was not<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                          Page 30<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                          22<\/p>\n

                          pure Hebrew. It is true,\u2019 she had no Canaanite blood in her, but in actuality<\/p>\n

                          she was three-quarter Egyptian, since both her mother and her grandmother<\/p>\n

                          (Hagar\u2019 were Egyptian women (Gen. 21:21). The important point to Esau was<\/p>\n

                          her Hebrew connections, and that she was not Canaanite.<\/p>\n

                          This woman had but one son, named Ruel (Gen. 36:4,10). We will refer<\/p>\n

                          to Ruel again.<\/p>\n

                          The Racial Mixture of the Edomites<\/strong><\/p>\n

                          From the foregoing we can see that in their origin the Edomites, the<\/p>\n

                          descendents of Esau, were a mixture of Hebrew, Hittite, Hivite, Ishmaelite<\/p>\n

                          (that is, Arabian) and Egyptian stock. But that is not all! As we shall see later,<\/p>\n

                          the Edomites intermingled with the Horites at an early date, a settled people<\/p>\n

                          of the north east part of the Sinai Peninsula, lying easterly from Lower Egypt.<\/p>\n

                          Now, turning back to the Egyptian references to the Hyksos people we find<\/p>\n

                          an astonishing parallel and similarity between the Hyksos and the Edomites.<\/p>\n

                            \n
                          1. Both are Semites (Semitic language and names).<\/li>\n
                          2. Both have Hebrew characteristics.<\/li>\n
                          3. Both have Hittite traits.<\/li>\n
                          4. Both appear to have been Shepherds (after Manetho).<\/li>\n
                          5. Both are Arabians. (Ishmael = Northern Arabia.)<\/li>\n
                          6. Both lived easterly from Lower Egypt.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                            The resemblance is close if not exact, and certainly is most remarkable.<\/p>\n

                            Where else can we find so complete a similarity? None of the strictly Canaanite<\/p>\n

                            entities seem to fit points 2 and 5. The Moabites and the Ammonites do not,<\/p>\n

                            as far as we know, fit with points 3 and 5. Arabian tribes beyond Edom do not<\/p>\n

                            seem to fit point 3.<\/p>\n

                            Only Edom seems to fit at all points with what we know of the Hyksos.<\/p>\n

                            One wonders how two separate peoples could be so racially and<\/p>\n

                            linguistically alike! The thought can scarcely be resisted that instead of two<\/p>\n

                            peoples, we are viewing one entity, whose description has come down to us<\/p>\n

                            through two separate channels and under different names. One channel is the<\/p>\n

                            Egyptian sources, under the name \u201cHyksos\u201d; the other channel is the Biblical<\/p>\n

                            or Hebrew sources, under the name \u201cEdom.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                            Page 31<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                            23<\/p>\n

                            But as yet we still do not have proof; only the suggestion, the thought,<\/p>\n

                            the possibility. Do we have anything stronger? Yes, we do. Most striking as the<\/p>\n

                            foregoing similarity surely is, we have next to set forth the indications of the<\/p>\n

                            tremendous growth of the Edomite Kingdom and point out how it appears<\/p>\n

                            to dovetail into the Hyksos story.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                            Page 32<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                            24<\/p>\n

                            CHAPTER III<\/strong><\/p>\n

                            The Birth of the Kingdom of Edom<\/strong><\/p>\n

                            \u201cI shall speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and<\/em><\/p>\n

                            to plant it\u201d <\/em>Jer. 18: 9.<\/p>\n

                            After Jacob returned from Reran in Padan-aram, et which time he and Esau<\/p>\n

                            were reconciled, events began to move rapidly,(Gen.32-33). Jacob sojourned<\/p>\n

                            for a short while near the city of Shechem (Gen.33 18-20. )Esau had part of<\/p>\n

                            his extensive herds and flocks in \u201cSeir\u201d that is in the country on the south<\/p>\n

                            and South-east of Canaan including the wilderness comprising the north-east<\/p>\n

                            portion of the Sinai Peninsula (Gen.\u201d32:3 33:14,16), while the rest of his herds<\/p>\n

                            and flocks were with his father Isaac at Beer-sheba in southern Canaan.<\/p>\n

                            A quarrel soon arose between Jacob\u2019s family and the Hivites in the city<\/p>\n

                            of Shechem, which ended with Simeon and Levi, two of Jacob\u2019s sons leading<\/p>\n

                            a furious, surprise attack on the city and slaying all the adult men. The wealth<\/p>\n

                            of the city was seized, and the women and children carried captive (Gen<\/p>\n

                            .34: 25-29). Jacob was much disturbed over this, fearing all the surrounding<\/p>\n

                            Canaanites tribes or nations would unite to attack him with overwhelming<\/p>\n

                            odds (Gen. 34:30).<\/p>\n

                            This particular incident gives us an insight into the large number of<\/p>\n

                            \u201cservants\u201d held by Jacob, and the military strength of his followers and of the<\/p>\n

                            Patriarchs generally. Jacob had enough men at his bidding to have no particular<\/p>\n

                            fear of any single Canaanite tribe, but this military act of his angry sons might<\/p>\n

                            be expected to incite such a united attack as he could not withstand.<\/p>\n

                            God restrained such an attack from coming. One element that might have<\/p>\n

                            had a bearing, would be the fear the Canaanites felt of reprisals from Jacob\u2019s<\/p>\n

                            powerful relatives his father Isaac, his brother Esau, and even the more distant<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                            Page 33<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                            25<\/p>\n

                            relatives in Heran. In any event, \u201cthe terror of God\u201d fell upon the Canaanite<\/p>\n

                            cities and they left Jacob and his followers alone (Gen. 35:5).<\/p>\n

                            Jacob hurriedly began moving his whole retinue and his flocks and herds<\/p>\n

                            southward to be nearer Isaac and Esau. He paused at Beth-el, then moved<\/p>\n

                            on southwards. Finding he was not perused, he established his headquarters<\/p>\n

                            for a while near Edar. Then he continued on southward and came finally to<\/p>\n

                            Beersheba where Isaac lived, physically feeble, advanced in age and blind, yet<\/p>\n

                            evidently mentally alert, controlling and directing the business affairs of his<\/p>\n

                            own great cattle herds.<\/p>\n

                            A new problem now arose. Jacob and Esau each had great herds. The<\/p>\n

                            combined consumption of\u201d pasture was more than the area could provide.<\/p>\n

                            There was not enough grass. However, no strife or quarrel took place between<\/p>\n

                            the reconciled brothers. A satisfactory solution was arrived at.<\/p>\n

                            Esau Does Right<\/strong><\/p>\n

                            Mellowed, Jacob seems to now take over the leadership of the family.<\/p>\n

                            Isaac, greatly handicapped by loss of sight and evidently weak and frail in body,<\/p>\n

                            hands over to Jacob the family authority and the priesthood, and his own<\/p>\n

                            possessions and wealth. Jacob thus is acknowledged to hold that religious title<\/p>\n

                            to the promised, ultimate possession of the Land of Canaan, handed down<\/p>\n

                            from its first recipient Abraham. Esau took his servants and his herds away, out<\/p>\n

                            of the Land of Canaan altogether, from the territory he now rightly recognized<\/p>\n

                            as assigned to his twin brother, and moved everything southward into \u201cSeir\u201d<\/p>\n

                            (Gen. 36:6-7). In this Esau did right, and the prosperity that thereafter came<\/p>\n

                            upon the Edomites, as we shall see, may have been partly God\u2019s reward for<\/p>\n

                            Esau\u2019s right act in this case, though nothing could undo his former act or<\/p>\n

                            restore what he had forever lost.<\/p>\n

                            The Horites<\/strong><\/p>\n

                            In this country of Seir there lived a people called \u201cHorites\u201d or \u201cHorims.\u201d<\/p>\n

                            Esau\u2019s family, the Edomites, began to intermarry with them: of which we will<\/p>\n

                            tell more presently. First let us consider these Horites. Who were they?<\/p>\n

                            Now, the Horites for many centuries have been entirely unknown to<\/p>\n

                            scholars outside of the few references to them in the Bible. The Horites were<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                            Page 34<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                            26<\/p>\n

                            thought to be just a little desert tribe, insignificant and rather unimportant, or,<\/p>\n

                            after the rise of the higher critical views, could even be considered to be nothing<\/p>\n

                            more than fable, a product of the imagination of the Biblical writer\u2019s mind.<\/p>\n

                            This was so until in recent years the archaeologist\u2019 s spade began to unearth<\/p>\n

                            simply astounding information about them. We are at last finding out the<\/p>\n

                            truth. Today we are now beginning to view them in an utterly different light.<\/p>\n

                            We realize the Horites were a most important and far reaching factor in early<\/p>\n

                            times, but were later completely forgotten except for what the Bible preserved<\/p>\n

                            to us. This point alone demonstrates for us both the great the importance and<\/p>\n

                            real value of the Biblical records, and that the Biblical record does indeed reach<\/p>\n

                            back an exceedingly long way into forgotten history. What the Bible has done in<\/p>\n

                            preserving a memory of the Horites, it may (we say, it has) done in still earlier<\/p>\n

                            records which the present modern and liberal schools of thought think are only<\/p>\n

                            myths and vague uncertain traditions.<\/p>\n

                            Thanks to the diligent activities of archaeologists and scholars, the Horites<\/p>\n

                            have been brought to light. We find frequent mention of them on ancient<\/p>\n

                            monuments and in clay tablets. The Egyptians called one district southerly of<\/p>\n

                            Canaan by the name, \u201cKhar.\u201d This is evidently \u201cHor\u201d It reminds us of Mount<\/p>\n

                            Hor in the region of Seir where the Hor-ites lived. The references to these people<\/p>\n

                            in the clay tablets was formerly translated \u201cHarri,\u201d but is now more correctly<\/p>\n

                            given as \u201cHurri, a phonetically close equivalent of \u201cHori\u201d (Gen.36:22).<\/p>\n

                            The Horites living south of Canaan, as we learn from the Bible account,<\/p>\n

                            were under the leadership of a family, the descendants of a man named \u201cSeir<\/p>\n

                            the Horite\u201d (Gen.36:20). The district was presumable known as \u201cSeir\u201d after his<\/p>\n

                            name. They were the inhabitants of the country in Abraham\u2019s time, and were<\/p>\n

                            looked upon as such important allies of the King of Sodom that Chedor1aomer<\/p>\n

                            the King of E1am felt the need of defeating them first before he could safely<\/p>\n

                            attack Sodom itself (Gen. 14:1-7). The region called \u201cMount Seir\u201d at that time<\/p>\n

                            apparently extended westward as far as El-paran (possibly \u201cNakl\u201d near the centre<\/p>\n

                            of the Sinai Peninsula), beyond which lay the Wilderness of Shur, stretching to<\/p>\n

                            the borders of Egypt.(Gen.14:6)<\/p>\n

                            \u201cParan\u201d means \u201cPlace of Caverns\u201d, and \u201cHorites\u201d means \u201cCave Dwellers,\u201d<\/p>\n

                            according to older Bible Dictionaries, which produce a happy harmony of<\/p>\n

                            meaningsat least. But there is now a great doubt on this point. Dr. Merri1<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                            Page 35<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                            27<\/p>\n

                              \n
                            1. Unger, in his book, \u201cThe Dead Sea Scro1ls and Other Archaeological<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                              Discoveries,\u201d (Zondervan Publishing House, l957 states on page 74: \u201cThis<\/p>\n

                              unknown people used to be thought of as a very local and restricted group of<\/p>\n

                              cave-dwellers, the name Horite being derived from Hebrew hor, (\u2018ho1e\u2019 or<\/p>\n

                              \u2018cave\u2019)… As a result of the discovery of the Hurrians, the popular etymology<\/p>\n

                              which connects them with troglodytes, or cave dwellers, has generally been<\/p>\n

                              abandoned.\u201d However, we here need to step cautiously, as we do not yet know<\/p>\n

                              what was the state of their cu1ture, or the type of dwelling used by those Horites<\/p>\n

                              living in Seir south of Canaan. Only archaeological research in that region can<\/p>\n

                              settle this point satisfactorily.<\/p>\n

                              One important point we should notice is that in the earliest times \u201cMount<\/p>\n

                              Seir\u201d seems to be the mountainous region west of the Arabah Valley.<\/p>\n

                              Later the term is used of both sides of the Arabah Valley, and more recently<\/p>\n

                              many have confined it to the east side only. This helps explain how it is that the<\/p>\n

                              names \u201cParan\u201d \u201cSeir\u201d and \u201cSinai\u201d are synonymous with \u201cHoreb\u201d, the Mount<\/p>\n

                              of the Law (Deut. 33: 2; Hab. 3: 3). The statement that there are eleven days\u2019<\/p>\n

                              journey from Horeb to Kadesh-barnea \u201cby way of Mount Seir\u201d (Deut.l:2) is<\/p>\n

                              seen to be quite natural, if \u201cMount Seir\u201d included the ring of mountains about<\/p>\n

                              the southern edge of the desert plateau of Sinai, known to the Arabs as Jebel<\/p>\n

                              el Tih. These mountains have to be passed when going from Sinai to southern<\/p>\n

                              Canaan where Kadesh-barnea was located.<\/p>\n

                              A Horite Kingdom<\/strong><\/p>\n

                              Archaeology has revealed that there was a Hurrian (Horite) Kingdom in<\/p>\n

                              Mesopotamia. It was east of the Kingdom of Mitanni. Mitanni occupied land on<\/p>\n

                              both sides of the Euphrates River north of Carchemish (12) The Hurri and the<\/p>\n

                              Mitanni, we learn, were closely related peoples, and these in turn were related<\/p>\n

                              to the Hittites of Asia Minor. (See \u201cArcheology and the Bible\u201d by George A.<\/p>\n

                              Barton, Ph.D.) The language of the Hurri is said to be not Indo-European. As<\/p>\n

                              Bible students would say, it is not \u201cJaphetic,\u201d not of the nations descending<\/p>\n

                              from Japheth, the elder son of Noah.<\/p>\n

                              Neither, it seems, is the Hurri language to be classed as Semitic. Hence, it<\/p>\n

                              appears\u201d it would be Hamitic, using the word \u201cHamitic\u201d in its broadest sense<\/p>\n

                              as including all languages which are neither Indo-European nor Semitic. The<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                              Page 36<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                              28<\/p>\n

                              Bible does not state where the Horites came from, but the inference from the<\/p>\n

                              language of the Hurri is that they came from Ham, Noah\u2019s younger son.<\/p>\n

                              That the Horites were not confined to the above mentioned kingdom<\/p>\n

                              the archaeologists have found to their surprise. The Bible itself tells of the one<\/p>\n

                              group of these people south of Canaan. But mention of the Hurri or Horites is<\/p>\n

                              cropping up in unexpected places in Assyria and Babylonia. In the city Nuzu,<\/p>\n

                              near modern Kirkuk in Iraq, the Hurrians became a very strong element soon<\/p>\n

                              after 1800 B.C. In fact, they seem to dominate much of the Near East at that<\/p>\n

                              time. Again about 131 Hurrian clay tablets were found under the ruins of a<\/p>\n

                              temple at Shimshara in the Dokan Plain. (See \u201cThe Christian, London England,<\/p>\n

                              Aug. 30, 1957, page 2.)<\/p>\n

                              When these tablets are translated, our knowledge of this very intriguing<\/p>\n

                              people will no doubt be much further enlarged. In 1958 a Danish expedition<\/p>\n

                              examined a Hurrian settlement in Northern Iraq, near Sulaimaniya. This<\/p>\n

                              settlement appears to date from about 2000 B.C. down to about 1500 B.C.<\/p>\n

                              This is the very period of history with which our study deals. It ties in nicely<\/p>\n

                              with our theory.<\/p>\n

                              These two peoples, Esau\u2019s family the Edomites and the leading Horite<\/p>\n

                              family of Seir, began to intermarry. Eliphaz, Esau\u2019s eldest son, married Timna<\/p>\n

                              the sister of Lotan and the daughter of Seir (Gen.36: 12,20,22..). From this<\/p>\n

                              marriage to a Horitess was born Amalek. He grew up to become a Duke of<\/p>\n

                              Edom and is considered to be the progenitor of the Amalekites. According to<\/p>\n

                              this view, the Amalekites would have originally been a tribe of Edom. (Some<\/p>\n

                              people have suggested that the Amalekites might have been the Hyksos, but, as<\/p>\n

                              we shall show later, the Amalekites were simply a sub-tribe of the larger Edomites<\/p>\n

                              during the time that is in question.) For more information see the website:<\/p>\n

                              Chronologically Helpful Parallels between the Hyksos and the Amalekites<\/p>\n

                              https:\/\/www.specialtyinterests.net\/hyksos.html#amada<\/p>\n

                              The Amalekites inhabited some parts of the desert plateau of Sinai,<\/p>\n

                              previously occupied by the Horites as we have seen. Now in Genesis 14:7 we read<\/p>\n

                              that Chedorlaomer smote the country of the Amalekites when it appears that<\/p>\n

                              the Amalekites had not come into existence at the time. The simple explanation<\/p>\n

                              is that the account refers to the country occupied by the Amalekites at the time<\/p>\n

                              Genesis was written. In just the same way we might say the American Indians<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                              Page 37<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                              29<\/p>\n

                              were roaming over Canada before Columbus set sail, when there was no such<\/p>\n

                              country as Canada then. We mean, of course, what is Canada now. Just so,<\/p>\n

                              the author of Genesis meant that Chedorlaomer smote the county to which<\/p>\n

                              the Amalekites later gave their name: he did not state that the Amalekites were<\/p>\n

                              smitten, which would have been an error. Horites probably occupied it then.<\/p>\n

                              The Egyptians had no \u201cL\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

                              The Egyptians had no initial \u201cL\u201d in their language.(13) In this they were<\/p>\n

                              in a difficulty similar to the Chinese, who, contrariwise, dislike beginning a<\/p>\n

                              word with \u201cR\u201d. A Chinaman feels he must substitute another sound, so uses<\/p>\n

                              \u201cL\u201d instead of \u201cR\u201d, until he masters the unfamiliar sound. Thus he tends to call<\/p>\n

                              a red rock a \u201cled lock.\u201d In exactly the reverse manner the Egyptians substituted<\/p>\n

                              \u201cR\u201d for \u201cL\u201d in foreign names.<\/p>\n

                              The Horite name Lotan came difficult to the Egyptian scribe. Dr. Barton<\/p>\n

                              tells us they substituted \u201cR\u201d for \u201cL\u201d and called it \u201cRutenu.\u201d This name is found<\/p>\n

                              in records of the time of the Twelfth Dynasty of Egypt (2000 B.C. to 1788<\/p>\n

                              B.C.), proving that the name \u201cLotan\u201d was then in use. Indeed, the name \u201cUpper<\/p>\n

                              Rutenu\u201d seems to indicate highlands in Syria, while \u201cLower Rutenu\u201d appears<\/p>\n

                              to apply to some district in the general region which is assigned in the Bible<\/p>\n

                              to the Horites, where Lotan was a leader. Thus there can be little doubt that<\/p>\n

                              \u201cLower Rutenu\u201d in the Egyptian records refers to the district of the \u201cLotan\u201d<\/p>\n

                              of Genesis 36: 12, 20, 22.<\/p>\n

                              It is to be noted that this name Rutenu or Lotan is used in the Tale of<\/p>\n

                              Sinuhe, during the reign of Sesostris I of the XIIth Dynasty, about 1950 B.C.<\/p>\n

                              This proves they name was in use at that time.<\/p>\n

                              During the XVIIIth Dynasty we meet with a new name for the Bedouin<\/p>\n

                              from Asia, the \u201cShasu.\u201d The Department of Egyptian Art at the Metropolitan<\/p>\n

                              Museum of Art in New York City informed the Americana Institute of Canada<\/p>\n

                              Ltd., in response to a special enquiry, that it did not know of earlier references to<\/p>\n

                              \u201cShasu\u201d than those of the first half of the XVIIIth Dynasty. Several authorities in<\/p>\n

                              their works on Egypt had used the term \u201cShasu\u201d in reference to earlier periods.<\/p>\n

                              However this appears to be the mistake of reading back into an earlier<\/p>\n

                              period a name belonging strictly to a later one. The fact is the Shasu appear<\/p>\n

                              first in Egyptian history about 1500 B.C.; they are not known earlier, and it<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                              Page 38<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                              30<\/p>\n

                              may be presumed were not there in the deserts east of Lower Egypt very much<\/p>\n

                              earlier than that date. Evidently the Shasu were newcomers.<\/p>\n

                              If one will take the time to examine maps covering the region of Edom,<\/p>\n

                              as put out by various Egyptologists, it will be found that the names for Edom<\/p>\n

                              (\u201cSeir\u201d \u201cAduma\u201d etc.) are very curiously pushed hither and yon about the<\/p>\n

                              country to make room for the name \u201cShasu,\u201d which is frequently splashed<\/p>\n

                              generously around the whole region from the Isthmus of Suez to the Arabian<\/p>\n

                              Desert east of Moab, including all the northerly part of the Sinai Peninsula<\/p>\n

                              to the southern parts of Palestine. Yet with all this crowding of the one name<\/p>\n

                              upon the other, it does not appear to have occurred to any that the two might<\/p>\n

                              refer to the same peoples! While we do not claim positive identification, yet it<\/p>\n

                              appears feasible that the Shashu are either the Edomites or a name inclusive<\/p>\n

                              of Edomites, Amalekites, Ishmaelites, and possibly Midianites. The word<\/p>\n

                              \u201cShasu\u201d means \u201cplunderers\u201d, \u201crobbers\u201d, an epithet befitting their characteristic<\/p>\n

                              of extracting heavy tolls of all passengers through those regions. But in any<\/p>\n

                              case, it is striking to note that \u201cRutenu\u201d (Lotan)has been replaced by \u201cShasu\u201d<\/p>\n

                              somewhere between XIIth Dynasty times and the XVIIIth Dynasty, just as the<\/p>\n

                              Bible states the Horites were placed by the Edomite shepherds about that time.<\/p>\n

                              Having now joined affinity with the Hurri or Horites of Seir, the<\/p>\n

                              Edomites began to become a quite powerful force. Rapidly they budded into<\/p>\n

                              a new, small kingdom. We must next look into their king-list, as it contains<\/p>\n

                              astonishing hints and implications of growth.<\/p>\n

                              The Early Date of the King List<\/strong><\/p>\n

                              That the Kingdom of Edom was formed soon after Esau, moved all<\/p>\n

                              his possessions into Seir, is evidenced by the genealogy of Jobab the second<\/p>\n

                              king in the king-list. Of this king we shall have much to say later. We trace<\/p>\n

                              his genealogy thus.<\/p>\n

                              One of Esau\u2019s later sons was Ruel, born before Esau finally left Canaan<\/p>\n

                              (Gen.36:4). Ruel\u2019s mother, as we mentioned before, was Mahalath or<\/p>\n

                              Bathshemath, a daughter of Ishmael. Ishmael was the progenitor of a number<\/p>\n

                              of tribes inhabiting Northern Arabia (Gen.25:13-16). Thus Ruel was part<\/p>\n

                              Arabian, that is, part Ishmaelite.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                              Page 39<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                              31<\/p>\n

                              Ruel had four sons. All became Dukes of Edom: the name of the second<\/p>\n

                              being Zerah (Gen.36:13,17). A little further on Zerah is named as the father<\/p>\n

                              of Jobab, the second king of Edom (Gen.36:33). Linking these together we<\/p>\n

                              find that the second king was great-grandson to Esau.<\/p>\n

                              On this basis, the Edomite king-list given in Genesis belongs to a very<\/p>\n

                              early period of Edomite history. The first king, Bela, would be a contemporary,<\/p>\n

                              we may well assume, of Zerah the grand- son of Esau. In other words, if Esau<\/p>\n

                              enjoyed a life about as long as his twin brother Jacob, he may possibly have<\/p>\n

                              seen the first king reigning, or it might be the first king was chosen when Esau,<\/p>\n

                              the leader died.<\/p>\n

                              \u201cBefore Any King over Israel\u201d<\/p>\n

                              The Edomite King-list opens with the words:<\/p>\n

                              \u201cAnd these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom,<\/em><\/p>\n

                              before there reigned any king over the children of Israel.\u201d <\/em>(Gen.<\/p>\n

                              36:31.)<\/p>\n

                              This statement is not a reference to the setting up of the Israelite Monarchy<\/p>\n

                              under King Saul, many centuries later. The two events are altogether too far<\/p>\n

                              separated in history to have any bearing upon one another. The events are<\/p>\n

                              recorded in different books and by different writers. No, such an understanding<\/p>\n

                              and application of the words we have quoted misses entirely the whole<\/p>\n

                              significance that was in the writer\u2019s mind when he wrote them, overlooking<\/p>\n

                              the very point which made Israel, even before the Conquest of Canaan, such<\/p>\n

                              a \u201cpeculiar people,\u201d in the eyes of all other nations. Everyone can see that the<\/p>\n

                              writer of the stories of Jacob and Joseph in the Book of Genesis was passionately<\/p>\n

                              monotheistic, one who believed with all his heart and soul in One Lord God,<\/p>\n

                              and in the worship .of that one God alone. His words absolutely must not be<\/p>\n

                              viewed apart from that primary and deep-seated conviction.<\/p>\n

                              Now early Israel, after the Exodus, considered itself to be a kingdom, yet<\/p>\n

                              without an earthly or human king. In many countries and nations (14) even<\/p>\n

                              down to Japan in recent times, the people viewed their king as their god. It<\/p>\n

                              was not so in ancient Israel: their God was their King (Deut.33:5; Judges 8:22-<\/p>\n

                              2:3; I. Sam.8:7). The God of Israel had not merely created the heaven and the<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                              Page 40<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                              32<\/p>\n

                              earth, a far-off, dim event of the past, (and an act more or less claimed for a<\/p>\n

                              multiplicity of heathen deities,) but this God had delivered them from Egypt<\/p>\n

                              and had defeated and brought low all the power and pride of a Pharaoh of the<\/p>\n

                              XVIIIth Dynasty of Egypt. They Pharaoh\u2019s of that Dynasty as its zenith were<\/p>\n

                              recognized everywhere as the greatest and most powerful monarchs on earth in<\/p>\n

                              their day, and claimed to be gods. No wonder this deliverance from Egypt was<\/p>\n

                              Israel\u2019s glory, the event more often spoken of than any other in all their history.<\/p>\n

                              This God of gods, this Supreme \u2018Being\u2019 dwelling in their midst in a cloudy pillar,<\/p>\n

                              was Israel\u2019s unique King from the day they marched victoriously out of Egypt.<\/p>\n

                              For centuries thereafter, Israel could not tolerate the idea of a human king.<\/p>\n

                              Realizing this truth, one can see that the statement the Edomite kings<\/p>\n

                              reigned before any king reigned over Israel, simply means that they reigned<\/p>\n

                              before the Exodus, that is before Israel came under her glorious King the God<\/p>\n

                              of their fathers and before Israel entered into a Blood-Covenant with God so<\/p>\n

                              that He became the actual, recognized Ruler of the nation.<\/p>\n

                              \u201cThe Last shall be First\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

                              How different the case was with Edom which had lost the Abrahamic<\/p>\n

                              Covenant, and slowly drifted away from the Abrahamic traditions and worship.<\/p>\n

                              Edom got her kingdom first long before the Israelites. The Israelites got a<\/p>\n

                              promised blessing, the Abrahamic Covenants, consisting largely of promises, not<\/p>\n

                              present possessions, and lingered 400 weary years in Egypt without a king. This<\/p>\n

                              is often seen down through history. God\u2019s people, holding to God\u2019s promises,<\/p>\n

                              see other prosper and rise to enviable position, while they themselves need to<\/p>\n

                              patiently wait and abide God\u2019s time. Consider:<\/p>\n

                              (l) Esau made advantageous marriages with the Canaanites; Jacob was<\/p>\n

                              restrained from this<\/p>\n

                              (2) Esau mingled with the Horites and gained a country (Seir) for himself:<\/p>\n

                              Jacob had to remain a stranger and a pilgrim, a sojourner to the day of his death;<\/p>\n

                              (3) Edom soon developed into a little kingdom: Israel moved into Egypt<\/p>\n

                              by the sufferance of the reigning Pharaoh;<\/p>\n

                              (4) Edom progressed into an empire (as we shall see): Israel was reduced<\/p>\n

                              to slavery.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                              Page 41<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                              33<\/p>\n

                              All the advantages seemed to be on the side of those who had lost the<\/p>\n

                              Covenant. Those who missed the blessing were blessed: those who gained the<\/p>\n

                              blessing were miserable slaves! Yet the day finally came when Moses and the<\/p>\n

                              Children of Israel sang victoriously:<\/p>\n

                              The people shall hear, and be afraid:<\/p>\n

                              Sorrow shall take hold on the inhabitants of Palestina,<\/p>\n

                              Then the dukes of Edom shall be amazed.\u201d (Exodus 14:14-15)<\/p>\n

                              The final victor is the real victor: final blessing is the only blessing.<\/p>\n

                              Even so today. The true Church of Christ must be patient. The ones who<\/p>\n

                              seek immediate, temporal power, rulership, and a kingdom, lose the blessing<\/p>\n

                              even while they think they are blessed with the prospering of their schemes<\/p>\n

                              and plans: those who, contrariwise, embrace the promises and wait patiently<\/p>\n

                              for Christ, may be persecuted and despised, and may continue sometime\u2019<\/p>\n

                              under sufferance of the world\u2019s kings and rulers, or be crushed in prison or<\/p>\n

                              concentration camp; yet the Day will come when Christ will deliver His own,<\/p>\n

                              and the true Church will reign with Christ for ever.<\/p>\n

                              The First King, Bela<\/strong><\/p>\n

                              \u201cAnd Bela the son of Beor reigned in Edom: and the name of his city was<\/em><\/p>\n

                              Dinhabah<\/em>.\u201d Gen 36:32<\/p>\n

                              We have seen that Edom was formed into a kingdom at a very early date,<\/p>\n

                              possibly even within Esau\u2019s life time. Bela could easily be a contemporary of<\/p>\n

                              Ephraim and Manasseh, Joseph\u2019s sons in Egypt. By the time Joseph\u2019s sons were<\/p>\n

                              grown to manhood, Bela may well have already begun his reign as King of<\/p>\n

                              Edom, with a number of Dukes under him.<\/p>\n

                              This king Bola, we are told, was the son of Beor. Beor is a name we do<\/p>\n

                              not find among Esau\u2019s descendents, nor yet in the family of Seir the Horite<\/p>\n

                              who occupied the country prior to the coming of Esau\u2019s family and followers.<\/p>\n

                              It is therefore quite possible that Bela was not an Edomite nor a local Horite by<\/p>\n

                              descent, but someone raised to the position of kingship by the united consent<\/p>\n

                              of the Dukes of the Edomites and the Horites.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                              Page 42<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                              34<\/p>\n

                              Balaam the soothsayer, about five hundred years later, is also called \u201cthe<\/p>\n

                              son of Beor\u201d (Num.22.5). Of course, if that Reor was the immediate father of<\/p>\n

                              Balaam, then we have no indication of any connection with the father of King<\/p>\n

                              Bela. However, if Beor was an ancestral father of Balaam, (just as the Lord Jesus<\/p>\n

                              is called \u201cson of David\u201d though 1,OOO years intervened,) then it is possible<\/p>\n

                              that both references are to the same person. In that case, this Beor would be a<\/p>\n

                              person of great and unusual importance, whom Balaam would especially claim<\/p>\n

                              as an illustrations ancestor, thereby to add to his own reputation and influence.<\/p>\n

                              He seems to strive to do that very thing in his last two prophetic utterances to<\/p>\n

                              Balak, King of Moab, opening his parabolic speeches with emphasis on this<\/p>\n

                              ancestral connection, using the words, \u201cBalaam the son of Beor hath said… \u201c<\/p>\n

                              (Num.24.3,15).<\/p>\n

                              Thus it is just possible that Beor, the father of Edom\u2019s first king, was some<\/p>\n

                              great and widely honored figure of those far off days. If that should be so the<\/p>\n

                              location of Dinhabah, the City of King Bela, could be either in Edom or near<\/p>\n

                              the River Euphrates like the home of Balaam. Then it likely would be also the<\/p>\n

                              home of Balaam\u2019s ancestral father Beor (Num. 22: 5; 23:7). However, this is<\/p>\n

                              speculation, and may not be so.<\/p>\n

                              The Destruction of the Horites<\/strong><\/p>\n

                              A very difficult problem is the question as to just where in the history of<\/p>\n

                              Edom are we to place the destruction of the Horites or Hurrians. The event is<\/p>\n

                              recorded in Deuteronomy 2:12 where the Horites are called Horims.<\/p>\n

                              \u201cThe Horims also dwelt in Seir before time; but the children of Esau<\/p>\n

                              succeeded them, when they had destroyed them from before them, and dwelt<\/p>\n

                              in their stead; as Israel did unto the land of his possession, which the Lord<\/p>\n

                              gave unto them.\u201d<\/p>\n

                              The conquest by Israel referred to here, was, of course, the Israelite<\/p>\n

                              conquest described in the context; the conquest of the lands east of the Jordan<\/p>\n

                              River where Sihon King of Heshbon and Og King of Bashan ruled. These<\/p>\n

                              Amorite kings were slain by Moses and the children of Israel who possessed<\/p>\n

                              and divided the land between the tribe of Reuben, the tribe of Gad and half<\/p>\n

                              the tribe of Manasseh. This conquest is spoken of shortly before and is fully<\/p>\n

                              described immediately after the verse we have quoted (Deut1:4; 2:24 to 3:2;<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                              Page 43<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                              35<\/p>\n

                              notice especially the following words; \u201cbegin to possess it \u2013 Sihon;s land \u2013 2:24;<\/p>\n

                              Behold, I have begun to give Sihon and his land before thee, begin to possess<\/p>\n

                              that thou mayest inherit his land\u201d 2:31; \u201cThis land which we possessed at that<\/p>\n

                              time\u201d 3:13; \u201cThe Lord your God hath given you this land to possess it\u201d 3:18) it<\/p>\n

                              therefore follows that the land of Israel\u2019s possession referred to in 2:12 is not the<\/p>\n

                              Land of Canaan taken by Joshua, but the lands east of Jordan taken by Moses.<\/p>\n

                              In a somewhat similar way, the Edomites had previously destroyed the<\/p>\n

                              Hurri or Horites. But just when did they do so? Did the Edomites destroy<\/p>\n

                              them before the first king, Bela the son of Beor, was crowned? Would they<\/p>\n

                              crown a king before possessing a country for his kingdom?<\/p>\n

                              Or did the Horites and Edomites unite to crown the first king? and<\/p>\n

                              the destruction of the Horites follow at a later time? We simply do not know,<\/p>\n

                              because the record does not say.<\/p>\n

                              Striking, confirmatory and helpful as the archaeological evidence<\/p>\n

                              is, neither does it settle the matter. Nevertheless, let us consider what the<\/p>\n

                              archaeologists have to tell us.<\/p>\n

                              Somewhere about the twenty-third century B.C. large, Bronze-Age cities<\/p>\n

                              were established along the great north-south highway which ran through the<\/p>\n

                              Transjordan plateau on the east side of the Jordan Valley and of the Dead<\/p>\n

                              Sea. This flourishing Bronze Age civilization very suddenly ended. Various<\/p>\n

                              authorities appear to differ as to the date, M. E. Kirk (\u201cOutline of Ancient<\/p>\n

                              Cultural History of Transjordan,\u201d in the Palestine Exploration Quarterly, July-<\/p>\n

                              Oct. 1944, p.18l) gives it as \u201cabout the end of the twentieth century B.C.\u201d,<\/p>\n

                              others have suggested later dates, down to about 1700 B.C.<\/p>\n

                              Then follows a long period of about 400 to 600 years of nomadic<\/p>\n

                              occupation. Of this Kirk continues: \u201cThe land was derelict. No shards of that<\/p>\n

                              dark age appear, because nomadic people do not use much else beside skin<\/p>\n

                              vessels and gourds. Of city life there was none.\u201d<\/p>\n

                              About the beginning of the thirteenth century B.C. city life in these<\/p>\n

                              regions begins to re-appear, and we meet the Iron Age kingdoms familiar to<\/p>\n

                              us from Biblical record, Edom, Moab and Ammon of the time of the kings<\/p>\n

                              of Israel.<\/p>\n

                              We feel that this evidence exactly parallels the Bible story. In what follows<\/p>\n

                              we may fly in the face of the interpretations of the archaeological evidence as<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                              Page 44<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                              36<\/p>\n

                              given by a number of authorities, but we believe our view is not only in full<\/p>\n

                              harmony with the discovered facts, but will commend itself as reasonable, and<\/p>\n

                              as fitting perfectly the sequence of events handed down to us by the Hebrews<\/p>\n

                              in their records and stories.<\/p>\n

                              The Bronze Age civilization, we suggest, is that of the Zamzummims<\/p>\n

                              Emims and Horites (Deut.2:20,10,12). The Zamzummims and the Emims<\/p>\n

                              were destroyed by the Ammonites and Moabites respectively, and the Horites<\/p>\n

                              by the Edomites (Deut.2:9,12,2l-22). These new possessors, be it noted, being<\/p>\n

                              all nomadic descendants of Abraham. They lived in tents, and kept large herds<\/p>\n

                              of cattle and sheep. This is especially evident from the story of Esau with his<\/p>\n

                              flocks and herds who moved into Seir, as we have recounted.<\/p>\n

                              The suggestion by some that the pre=Edomite Horites were some of<\/p>\n

                              the nomads, sees to us contrary to what we know of the Hurri or Horites<\/p>\n

                              elsewhere. The archaeological evidence is that the Hurri were not nomads but<\/p>\n

                              city- dwellers. They belong to the Bronze Age culture preceding the nomadic<\/p>\n

                              occupation we are dealing with.<\/p>\n

                              It has been suggested that the disappearance of the Bronze Age civilization<\/p>\n

                              in Transjordan and the sudden nomadic occupation is likely connected in some<\/p>\n

                              way with the Hyksos invasion of Egypt.<\/p>\n

                              In that we heartily agree. It is all one story. This nomadic occupation<\/p>\n

                              was a powerful one, that is, these nomads were strong warriors. They were a<\/p>\n

                              military factor of importance just as we have discerned from the stories of<\/p>\n

                              Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in Chapter II. This Bedouin occupation in Kirk\u2018s<\/p>\n

                              opinion, \u201cmust have been strong enough to frustrate the attempts of any settled<\/p>\n

                              communities to enter the country.\u201d<\/p>\n

                              We suggest that it was during this strong nomadic occupation that the<\/p>\n

                              Edomite nomads rose to first place, established a wide desert empire, burst in<\/p>\n

                              upon Egypt as the \u201cHyksos\u201d, and when expelled fell back to Edom, where but<\/p>\n

                              little \u201ccity\u201d life existed. They were thus forced back into a nomadic existence<\/p>\n

                              again.<\/p>\n

                              By 1400 B.C. they were beginning to settle, down, and soon thereafter<\/p>\n

                              turned more and more to agriculture and mining, and thus set up the Iron<\/p>\n

                              Age kingdoms the archaeologists have noted.<\/p>\n

                              This picture fits all the facts, it seems to us.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                              Page 45<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                              37<\/p>\n

                              However it is to be noted that the Horites had Dukes \u201camong\u201d the<\/p>\n

                              Edomite Dukes at the beginning (Gen.36:29-30). This seems to prove a large<\/p>\n

                              measure of friendliness and union between the two peoples at that time. It<\/p>\n

                              must have been a little later that quarrels arose and children of Esau succeeded<\/p>\n

                              them, when they had destroyed them from before them, and dwelt in their<\/p>\n

                              stead\u201d (Deut.2:l2<\/p>\n

                              Thenceforth, the Edomites dominated the kingdom, and all remaining<\/p>\n

                              Horites in the territory would be absorbed into the general population of the<\/p>\n

                              new kingdom, adding one more blood strain, a very definite Hurri element,<\/p>\n

                              into the already racial mixture comprising the \u201cEdomites.\u201d This blood strain<\/p>\n

                              was related to the Hittites, making the link between Edomites and Hitties<\/p>\n

                              very strong indeed.<\/p>\n

                              Thus was born the new kingdom of Edom.\u201d Bela the first king occupied<\/p>\n

                              the throne as the head of the government, supported by the Dukes, the chiefs<\/p>\n

                              or heads of various tribes and territories. This kingdom lay southerly of the<\/p>\n

                              Land of Canaan, in an area which we aid before was known then as Seir. Esau,<\/p>\n

                              the founder of the nation, had recognized Canaan as promised to his brother<\/p>\n

                              Jacob (Israel) and to his descendants. This important point would pass into<\/p>\n

                              the young nation\u2019s traditions. The wording of Genesis 36:6-8 indicates that<\/p>\n

                              a brotherly covenant had been arrived at, by which Esau withdrew with his<\/p>\n

                              family and all his possessions of flocks and herds from the Land of Canaan,<\/p>\n

                              because the land could not bear up to the pasturing of the herds of both of<\/p>\n

                              them. By this brotherly covenant each would respect the territory assigned to<\/p>\n

                              the other as \u201chomeland,\u201d and pass the obligation on the succeeding generations.<\/p>\n

                              It is certain that Israel under Moses felt obligated not to violate the territory<\/p>\n

                              of Edom (Deut. 2:4-7).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                              Page 46<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                              38<\/p>\n

                              CHAPTER IV<\/strong><\/p>\n

                              The Book of Job<\/strong><\/p>\n

                              \u201cYe have heard of the patience of Job\u201d <\/em>James 5:11.<\/p>\n

                              The second king of Edom was Jobab. He was not the son of the first king<\/p>\n

                              Bela, but, as mentioned previously, was the son of Zerah, the son of Ruel, a<\/p>\n

                              son of Esau. His reign is briefly recorded as follows:<\/p>\n

                              \u201cAnd Bela died, and Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned in his stead<\/em>.\u201d-<\/p>\n

                              -Gen. 36: 33.<\/p>\n

                              The city of Bozrah has been identified as Bushera north of Petra in central<\/p>\n

                              Edom by Professor Nelson Glueck. (see https:\/\/nabataea.net\/bozra.html)<\/p>\n

                              With this identification we can see that the Edom1tes now controlled<\/p>\n

                              country on the east side of the Arabah Valley. Esau, at first, appears to have<\/p>\n

                              lived, after leaving Canaan, on the west side of the Arabah Valley. This eastward<\/p>\n

                              expansion of the territory of Edom will be referred to again later. We will be<\/p>\n

                              noting a very great extension of Edomite dominion eastward from time to time.<\/p>\n

                              The reference to King Jobab is indeed short, yet scanty as is our<\/p>\n

                              information, there is enough to open up a very lengthy investigation as to his<\/p>\n

                              identity. We cannot cover this in fullest detail here, but will set out a number of<\/p>\n

                              points which seem to indicate that this king was none other than the illustrious<\/p>\n

                              and patient Job. It seems strange that this apparent identification as not been<\/p>\n

                              noted before, so far as we can ascertain. The links between the two, Jobab and<\/p>\n

                              Job, are so numerous that the identification is very probable, to say the least,<\/p>\n

                              and would indicate that Job, the great example of suffering and patience, was<\/p>\n

                              elevated to the kingship at some time after his trying experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                              Page 47<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                              39<\/p>\n

                              A careful reading of the Book of Job shows that even before his great<\/p>\n

                              testing, (with which alone the book is concerned,) Job was a person of very<\/p>\n

                              high rank amongst his contemporaries. The opening chapter tells of his great<\/p>\n

                              wealth and piety, and significantly adds:<\/p>\n

                              \u201cThis man was the greatest of all the men of the east\u201d\u201d (Job.l:1-3.). His<\/p>\n

                              high rank, then, cannot be doubted; but this is not all.<\/p>\n

                              Further on in the Book of Job we find that Job occupied and held the<\/p>\n

                              leading position in the National Council with the princes of his people (Job<\/p>\n

                              29:2,7-9,21-24). He sat \u201cchief\u201d and \u201cdwelt as a king in the army\u201d (vs.25).<\/p>\n

                              If he laughed at anyone\u2019s counsel, showing thereby that he esteemed it poor<\/p>\n

                              advice, then others at once rejected it too, and \u201cbelieved it not\u201d (vs.24). They all<\/p>\n

                              recognized that Job\u2019s intellectual ability, keen insight, and wide knowledge far<\/p>\n

                              exceeded all other members of the council, and they relied heavily upon him.<\/p>\n

                              It is clear, that while Job was hot then king, only \u201cas a king,\u201d yet he must<\/p>\n

                              have been close to the king in honor and rank.<\/p>\n

                              After his distressing trial was over, we are told that Job was greater and more<\/p>\n

                              blessed than even before (Job 42:12). That being so, it would be no surprise<\/p>\n

                              that upon the death of Bela, the first king of Edom, the National Council,<\/p>\n

                              composed of Dukes and other wise men, would elevate Job to the kingship.<\/p>\n

                              Indeed, we might well say it was a natural and logical step.<\/p>\n

                              Points Assisting Job\u2019s Identity<\/strong><\/p>\n

                              Here is a brief summary of other-factors pointing to the identity<\/p>\n

                              of Job and Jobab.<\/p>\n

                                \n
                              1. Personal Name. The similarity of names is not at first obvious as Job<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                in Hebrew is \u201cIyowb<\/em>\u201d and Jobab is \u201cyo-bab<\/em>.\u201d However, the book of<\/p>\n

                                Job is considered the oldest in the scriptures, and its language predates<\/p>\n

                                even that of Genesis. To change Iyow<\/em>b (Job) into Father Job the suffix<\/p>\n

                                of \u2018ab<\/em>) can be added, thus rendering the name Iyowbab <\/em>or Father Job.<\/p>\n

                                Over time the Iyowbab <\/em>could simply and affectionately have been<\/p>\n

                                shortened into jo-bab <\/em>the name found in Genesis.<\/p>\n

                                  \n
                                1. Same Country It seems clear they lived in the same country. Job lived<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                  in the Land of Uz (Job 1:1). (15) Jobab was King of Edom, living at<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                  Page 48<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                  40<\/p>\n

                                  the City of Bozrah but Edom itself, we read elsewhere in Scripture,<\/p>\n

                                  dwelt in the land of Uz (Lam.4:21). Evidently \u201cUz\u201d is the name of a<\/p>\n

                                  large area; that included within it the Land of Edom. Thus, if Jobab<\/p>\n

                                  was living in Edom, he must also have lived in Uz; and by this we find<\/p>\n

                                  both Job and Jobab in the Land of Uz – both lived in the same country.<\/p>\n

                                    \n
                                  1. Local Geographical Features. .Jobab lived at Bozrah, not so very<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                    far south from the Dead Sea, into which the Jordan River empties.<\/p>\n

                                    The Jordan River was the largest river in that vicinity. Job, too, was<\/p>\n

                                    definitely acquainted with the Jordan River, and it is referred to as<\/p>\n

                                    symbolical of a very large flow of water (Job 40:23).<\/p>\n

                                      \n
                                    1. Lived About Same Time. Both lived after the time of Ishmael\u2019s<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                      leaving Abraham, and the establishing of the Ishmaelite tribes in the<\/p>\n

                                      Northern Arabian Desert. Esau\u2019s descendant\u2019s, as we know, lived later<\/p>\n

                                      in time than did Ishmael. Jobab belongs to the fourth generation from<\/p>\n

                                      Ishmael\u2019s age. … Job speaks of \u201cthe troops of Tema\u201d (Job 6:l9)<\/p>\n

                                      Assuming that Tema one of the tribes descended from Ishmael (Gen.<\/p>\n

                                      25:l5), we would then have positive proof that Job also lived after the<\/p>\n

                                      time Ishmael. At the same time Job speaks also of \u201cthe companies<\/p>\n

                                      of Sheba\u201d who would be descendants of Sheba, a half-brother to<\/p>\n

                                      Ishmael (Gen. 25:3). (see Founding of the Nations chart page 8 &<\/p>\n

                                      9) The orthodox view has been that the Book of Job belongs to the<\/p>\n

                                      era before the Exodus. (16) This puts the story of Job right into the<\/p>\n

                                      same general period of history as the time of the early kings of Edom,<\/p>\n

                                      when Jobab reigned.<\/p>\n

                                        \n
                                      1. Occupation. Jobab belonged to and reigned over a pastoral people,<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                        laying much stress upon possessions of flocks and herds. Job, too, was<\/p>\n

                                        a pastoral person possessing flocks and herds.<\/p>\n

                                          \n
                                        1. Contemporary Persons. Granting to Eliphaz, Esau\u2019s eldest son,<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                          a normal life-span as common in the family and descendants of<\/p>\n

                                          Abraham, we find that this Eliphaz would be an old man, about 100<\/p>\n

                                          years of age or more, before Jobab could begin to reign.<\/p>\n

                                          Job\u2019s chief friend was a man named, Eliphaz the Temanite. He was evidently<\/p>\n

                                          an old man, much older than Job\u2019s father. Eliphaz speaks of himself and his<\/p>\n

                                          two companions as \u201caged men,\u201d saying, \u201cWith us are both the gray headed and<\/p>\n

                                          very aged men, much elder than thy father\u201d (Job 15:10).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                          Page 49<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                          41<\/p>\n

                                          From this it would seem that Job\u2019s father was still living. Also, Elihu, a<\/p>\n

                                          young man listening to Job and his three comforters, waited until these three<\/p>\n

                                          were exhausted in their arguments, \u201cbecause they were elder than he.\u201d He then<\/p>\n

                                          commences his discourse with the words, \u201cI am young, and ye are very old\u201d<\/p>\n

                                          (Job 32:4,6)<\/p>\n

                                          This aged and very old friend of Job\u2019s named Eliphaz, is called \u201ca Temanite.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                          This description of him as a Temanite greatly assists the identifying of Jobab<\/p>\n

                                          with Job, for Eliphaz, Esau\u2019s son, was actual1.y, the progenitor of the Temanites<\/p>\n

                                          through Teman his son, as we have noted before (Gen. 36: 11,15). Probably<\/p>\n

                                          living with the family or tribe of Duke Teman, he would naturally come to be<\/p>\n

                                          called \u201ca Temanite.\u201d As a man of great age, and distantly related to Job, he would<\/p>\n

                                          be expected to visit Job in his calamity. We consider thee to be one person. And<\/p>\n

                                          Eliphaz, through his father<\/p>\n

                                          Esau, and his grandfather Isaac; would possess much knowledge of God,<\/p>\n

                                          such as is displayed in his discourses with Job.<\/p>\n

                                          Again, if the young man Elihu the Buzite of the kindred of Ram in Job<\/p>\n

                                          32:2 is to be linked with Abraham\u2019s relatives \u201cBuz\u201d and \u201cAram\u201d in Gen. 22:<\/p>\n

                                          21, then the ties linking king Job with Jobab, a descendant from Abraham,<\/p>\n

                                          are strengthened.<\/p>\n

                                          There is, therefore, abundant reason for thinking that Jobab King of Edom<\/p>\n

                                          and Job the Patient One, may well be one and the same person.<\/p>\n

                                          Further Indications of Expansion<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                          Accepting the identification of Jobab with Job, several very important<\/p>\n

                                          factors to our contention follow there from. The power and influence of the new<\/p>\n

                                          Kingdom of Edom was still spreading and becoming more firmly established.<\/p>\n

                                          From the original starting point on the west side of the Arabah, (that deep valley<\/p>\n

                                          stretching from the Dead Sea southward to the Gulf of Aqaba,) the Edomites<\/p>\n

                                          had expanded eastward into and across this valley. The City of Bozrah is on the<\/p>\n

                                          east side of the valley, and was held by them; and they were overrunning and<\/p>\n

                                          occupying the Arabian Desert to the east of that. There is evidence that the<\/p>\n

                                          Arabian Desert used to be better watered and was much more habitable than<\/p>\n

                                          it is now. With a slightly higher moisture content than now it would have been<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                          Page 50<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                          42<\/p>\n

                                          very suitable for grazing sheep. As it is, to this very day Bedouin shepherd take<\/p>\n

                                          their flocks of sheep deep into the deserts, as far as Wadi Sirhan.<\/p>\n

                                          Job (or Jobab), during the reign of Bela, his predecessor, was the greatest<\/p>\n

                                          of the men of the east (Job 1:3, Bene-Kedem). There were clashes with the<\/p>\n

                                          ancient Chaldeans, who belonged to the region nearer the Euphrates River on<\/p>\n

                                          the opposite or eastern side of the desert (Job 1:17). Indeed, there is a tradition<\/p>\n

                                          that Job drank of the waters of \u201cJob\u2019s Well\u201d at the Haran Gate of the city of<\/p>\n

                                          Orfah, situated on the south bank of the Euphrates River\u201d. If this be so, Job<\/p>\n

                                          (or Jobab) in his later days as King, must have made his power felt far to the<\/p>\n

                                          east. Perhaps he raided and punished the Cha1deans, who had slaughtered his<\/p>\n

                                          servants and stolen his camels.<\/p>\n

                                          There were clashes, too, with the Sabeans who raided the land and stole<\/p>\n

                                          Job\u2019s oxen and donkeys (Job 1:14-15). Now archaeological research has shown<\/p>\n

                                          that the Sabeans migrated southward through Arabia about 1200 B.C. In<\/p>\n

                                          Southern Arabia they established a very powerful kingdom centered at Saba.<\/p>\n

                                          Prior to this migration the Sabeans (people of Sheba, Gen. 10:28), evidently<\/p>\n

                                          lived somewhere in Central or Northern Arabia. A moment\u2019s reflection will<\/p>\n

                                          give us reason to suspect that the Kingdom of Saba lay much too far south<\/p>\n

                                          (over 1,000 miles away), to harmonize readily with raids on cattle and donkey<\/p>\n

                                          herds near Edom. Thus we have here the strongest type of evidence that the<\/p>\n

                                          story of Job ante-dates the Sabean migration southward. It would be perfectly<\/p>\n

                                          natural, if the Edomites were expanding eastward into Northern Arabia prior<\/p>\n

                                          to 1200 B.C. to come into conflict with the Sabeans. The story of Job here<\/p>\n

                                          fits the earlier picture.<\/p>\n

                                          (On the other hand, if Saba had already migrated into Southern Arabia,<\/p>\n

                                          the Edomite kingdom might have been very large indeed. While living in<\/p>\n

                                          Yemen I had opportunity to visit what is known as Job\u2019s grave in Yemen. It is<\/p>\n

                                          located several miles outside of the city of Sana\u2019a. ed.)<\/p>\n

                                          Job\u2019s enormous wealth is a factor of evidence not to be overlooked. It<\/p>\n

                                          indicates an era of prosperity amongst the Edomites. Later, when he became<\/p>\n

                                          king of Edom, Job would be a very wealthy ruler.<\/p>\n

                                          Putting all this information together we begin to catch a glimpse through<\/p>\n

                                          the haze of the years of a young, flourishing, nomadic kingdom, spreading<\/p>\n

                                          and pushing outward and extending its sway. By the time of its second king<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                          Page 51<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                          43<\/p>\n

                                          the Edomites already held control over a more or less wide strip of the Arabian<\/p>\n

                                          Desert easterly from Edom.<\/p>\n

                                          From this extensive area could be drawn the swarming manpower for the<\/p>\n

                                          1ater Hyksos Invasion of Egypt.<\/p>\n

                                          As we continue, we shall discover still further evidences of Edomite<\/p>\n

                                          expansion, and what appears to be the secret of its sudden rise to power.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                          Page 52<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                          44<\/p>\n

                                          CHAPTER V<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                          The Edomite-Hyksos \u201cEmpire\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                          \u201cHe (God) enlargeth the nations\u201d <\/em>Job l2:23<\/p>\n

                                          In Genesis 36:34 the Edomite king-list continues:-<\/p>\n

                                          \u201cAnd Jobab died, and Husham of the land of Temani reigned in his stead.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

                                          We are not informed as to who was Husham\u2019s father, and, in the absence<\/p>\n

                                          of contrary information, it seems reasonable to assume that he was the son of<\/p>\n

                                          the preceding king, that is, of Jobab. We note that Husham was of the Land<\/p>\n

                                          of Temani, which was the home of Eliphaz the Temanite, Job\u2019s chief friend. It<\/p>\n

                                          would be no surprise for Job\u2019s son to make his home in the Land of Teman,<\/p>\n

                                          which was a part of Edom, when Eliphaz the chief friend of the family lived<\/p>\n

                                          there. The link seems very natural, and serves as one more tie with connecting<\/p>\n

                                          Job with the Edomites and with Edom\u2019s king Jobab.<\/p>\n

                                          We are told nothing further about King Husham, nor do we here glean<\/p>\n

                                          any information concerning expansion of Edom during his reign.<\/p>\n

                                          King Husham then passes from view.<\/p>\n

                                          The Reign of Hadad I<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                          \u201cAnd Husham died, and Hadad the son of Bedad, who smote Midian in the<\/em><\/p>\n

                                          field of Moab, reigned in his stead: and the name of his city was Avith.\u201d <\/em>Gen. 36: 35.<\/p>\n

                                          This king, whom we shall style Hadad I, was not the son of the former<\/p>\n

                                          king, Husham, but was the son Bedad. Thus a new dynasty commences with<\/p>\n

                                          Hadad I.<\/p>\n

                                          As the most significant event and explo1t of this king\u2019s reign, it is recorded<\/p>\n

                                          that he defeated Midian, doing so within the borders of Moab. The Midianites<\/p>\n

                                          lived on the edge of the Arabian Desert on the eastern border of Moab. Quite<\/p>\n

                                          a few important facts can be gathered from this record of war and victory.<\/p>\n

                                          Firstly, it becomes apparent that Moab had, at some time prior to this,<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                          Page 53<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                          45<\/p>\n

                                          conquered and displaced the Emmims the first inhabitants of the land, as<\/p>\n

                                          recorded in Deut. 2:9-11, 17 It seems all together probable that the three<\/p>\n

                                          conquests there referred to, the conquest of the Horites by the Edomites,<\/p>\n

                                          the conquest of the Emmims by the Moabites, and the conquest of the<\/p>\n

                                          Zamzummims by the Ammonites, all occurred at about the same date; indeed,<\/p>\n

                                          they could have been closely related events. This was an early Semitic conquest<\/p>\n

                                          of the fringe lands around Canaan.<\/p>\n

                                          Secondly, we observe an Edomite army occupying and waging a victorious<\/p>\n

                                          war on Moabite soi1. Since this took place on Moabite soil, either Moab was<\/p>\n

                                          friendly and cooperative with Edom, or had or been conquered by or was<\/p>\n

                                          dominated over by Edom. In either case, Edom emerges as the more powerful<\/p>\n

                                          nation, emphasizing once more that Edom was coming more and more to the<\/p>\n

                                          front.<\/p>\n

                                          Thirdly, we see Midian defeated by Hadad I. Midian is therefore added<\/p>\n

                                          to the territory controlled by Edom, in addition to the areas mentioned by us<\/p>\n

                                          before under the previous kings.<\/p>\n

                                          Fourthly, we get a hint of the northerly limit at that date, at least on the<\/p>\n

                                          east side of Canaan.<\/p>\n

                                          Edom was exercising dominion over Moab and Midian. The ancient north<\/p>\n

                                          border of Moab (before the rise of Sihon the Amorite, king of Heshbon,) was<\/p>\n

                                          the River Jabbok, which empties into the Jordan River. (Num 21:24-26) This<\/p>\n

                                          wou1d likely be the northern limit of Edom\u2019s Kingdom at that time.<\/p>\n

                                          If Edom under Hadad I still maintained sway over the Arabian Desert<\/p>\n

                                          as it apparently did under Jobab, then already a large, Arabian Desert Empire<\/p>\n

                                          was actually in existence. The evidence all support the idea of the Empire as<\/p>\n

                                          continuing under Hadad I and the suceeding kings, as we shall see later.<\/p>\n

                                          The capital city of this king Hadad I was Avith. The site of this city is as<\/p>\n

                                          yet quite unknown. However, we cannot but wonder if the name Avith is not to<\/p>\n

                                          be linked with a people known as \u201cAvim\u201d or \u201cAvites\u201d mentioned in Deut. 2:23.<\/p>\n

                                          These people lived somewhere about the south-west border of Palestine. Their<\/p>\n

                                          northern limit was at or near Azzah or Gaza. Some of the Avites ( = citizens<\/p>\n

                                          of Avith?) were still there in Joshua\u2019s day (Josh. 13:3). In that very region Sir<\/p>\n

                                          Flinders Petrie discovered a. number of Hyksos~ graves. If this suggestion should<\/p>\n

                                          pove correct, then this king\u2019s capital lay outside of Edom proper.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                          Page 54<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                          46<\/p>\n

                                          The Reign of Samlah<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                          \u201cAnd Hadad died, and Samlah of Masrekah reigned in his stead.\u201d <\/em>Gen.36:36.<\/p>\n

                                          Hadad I was succeeded by Samlah, who was possibly Hadad\u2019s son. Aside<\/p>\n

                                          from this brief reference we know nothing of this king\u2019s reign, nor do we know<\/p>\n

                                          the location of his capital city Masrekah. He was followed by a king named<\/p>\n

                                          Saul, possibly his son.<\/p>\n

                                          The Reign of Saul<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                          \u201cAnd Samlah died, and Saul of Rehoboth by the river reigned in his stead<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                          Gen. 36:37.<\/p>\n

                                          It is startling indeed to read that King Saul\u2019s capital city was \u201cRehoboth<\/p>\n

                                          by the river.\u201d This city is very far from Edom proper. It lay~ roughly 400 miles<\/p>\n

                                          north easterly, near the banks of the great River Euphrates and for years as been<\/p>\n

                                          identified with Rahabah, situated twenty-eight miles below the juncture of<\/p>\n

                                          the Khabour River River with the Euphrates. The Euphrates is often called in<\/p>\n

                                          Scripture just \u201cthe river\u201d as reference through a concordance will amply prove.<\/p>\n

                                          As already said, it is truly startling to learn that a king of Edom should<\/p>\n

                                          establish his capital 400 miles away from his own country! Clearly the Edomite<\/p>\n

                                          kingdom had now spread out enormously north- eastwards to the Euphrates<\/p>\n

                                          River, (perhaps doing so under Samlah\u2019s reign, brining Edom close to Assyria.<\/p>\n

                                          (19) Possibly the business of further conquests in this direction, or beyond the<\/p>\n

                                          river, made it advisable for King Saul (called Shaul in I. Chronicles 1:48,) to<\/p>\n

                                          set up the seat of his government so far from Edom proper.<\/p>\n

                                          It is important to observe that these kings of Edom did not hesitate to<\/p>\n

                                          establish their capitals away from their homeland, just as we know the Hyksos<\/p>\n

                                          Kings did when they invaded Egypt, for they established their capital then<\/p>\n

                                          right in Egypt.<\/p>\n

                                          Extent of the Edomite Empire<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                          Review now, for a moment, the widest extent of this Edomite Empire,<\/p>\n

                                          as hinted at in Scripture and by tradition. The empire takes in a wide sweep<\/p>\n

                                          of 500 miles across Northern Arabia, from Avim at the south-west corner of<\/p>\n

                                          Palestine near Egypt to Orfah on the lower Euphrates River, and from Rahabah<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                          Page 55<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                          47<\/p>\n

                                          or Rehboth on the north side, then 600 miles southward to Teyma or Tema (<\/p>\n

                                          south-east from Edom) (20)<\/p>\n

                                          This very extensive area includes all the range of country inhabited by the<\/p>\n

                                          Ishmaelites or Northern Arabians (Gen 25:18) described as \u201cfrom Havilah\u201d (<\/p>\n

                                          – Hal\u2019il in Central Arabia) (21) unto Shur, that is before Egypt\u201d ( = the region<\/p>\n

                                          of the Isthmus of Suez), \u201cas thou goest toward Assyria\u201d (which would be in the<\/p>\n

                                          general direction of Rahabah or Rehoboth). From this it can be inferred that<\/p>\n

                                          the Ishmaelites (North Arabians) were included in this great Edomite Empire,<\/p>\n

                                          either by conquest or by voluntary co-operation; more likely by co-operation in<\/p>\n

                                          view of Esau\u2019s family ties with Ishmael. It is possible that Hadad\u2019s defeat of the<\/p>\n

                                          Midianites involved the Ishmaelites also, since the Midianites and Ishmaelites<\/p>\n

                                          often worked jointly (Gen 37:25-28, 36; 39:1; Judges 8:21-24)<\/p>\n

                                          That an empire of this size should exist upon the very border of Egypt, and<\/p>\n

                                          the two not come into vital conflict seems impossible, human nature being what<\/p>\n

                                          it is. Our theory is that the two did clash and that the Edomite semi-nomadic<\/p>\n

                                          hordes{including. Ishmaelites, Hittites and Hivite bands, with the remnant<\/p>\n

                                          of the Horites), catching Egypt in an unprepared condition, simply walking<\/p>\n

                                          through Egypt\u2019s light defences, and pouring into Lower Egypt, the Nile Delta,<\/p>\n

                                          so taking the country without any real battle at all.<\/p>\n

                                          Now what would the Egyptians call this mixed horde braking into and<\/p>\n

                                          sweeping over the Delta Region? Obviously they would refer to them as:<\/p>\n

                                            \n
                                          • \u201cArabian\u201d <\/strong>they came form Northern Arabia (Ishmaelites)<\/li>\n
                                          • \u201cAsiatics\u201d <\/strong>they had Hittite and Hebrew blood in them (Edomites)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                            and quite likely Hittite bands form Canaan assisted.<\/p>\n

                                              \n
                                            • \u201cBarbarians\u201d <\/strong>they were semi-nomadic<\/li>\n
                                            • \u201cPhoenecians\u201d <\/strong>they were of mixed Canaanite and Hebrew stock<\/li>\n
                                            • \u201cRulers of Countries\u201d <\/strong>they already ruled over a number of other<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                              countries as we have seen. (22)<\/p>\n

                                              And that is exactly what the Egyptians called the Hyksos. Compare the<\/p>\n

                                              above with our list in Chapter One, under No. 2 Race and Language of the<\/p>\n

                                              Hyksos. What is there to hinder identifying the one with the other?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                              Page 56<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                              48<\/p>\n

                                              Identifying Kings by Name<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                              The thought now arises as to the possibility of identifying the names of<\/p>\n

                                              any Edomite kings with the names of Hyksos kings preserved to us through<\/p>\n

                                              Egyptian records. This is a matter which experts may look into at some length,<\/p>\n

                                              and no positive assertions will be ventured here; only a few tentative suggestions<\/p>\n

                                              will be given. It could be, of course that the names of Hyksos kings in Egypt<\/p>\n

                                              belong to a period after the close of the list of Edomite kings in Scripture, so<\/p>\n

                                              that the two lists would nowhere overlap. However it does seem just feasible<\/p>\n

                                              that the last three Edomite kings are the same as the first three Hyksos Kings<\/p>\n

                                              and the parallel is very attractive.<\/p>\n

                                              Thus King Shaul of Edom could be Salatis, the first named Hyksos King.<\/p>\n

                                              Josephus states that Salatis reigned thirteen years. King Saul, after completing<\/p>\n

                                              his conquests around the Euphrates River, might have turned his attention<\/p>\n

                                              next to Egypt; and basing his operations from the region of Avim in south-<\/p>\n

                                              west Palestine pushed into the Delta. The names, Saul and Salatis are similar.<\/p>\n

                                              On the border of the Delta nearest this base, Salatis founded his capital<\/p>\n

                                              city of Avaris (Tanis or Zoan) Is this name in any way related to the city of<\/p>\n

                                              Avith, and to the Avim or Acies nearby in south-west Palestine?<\/p>\n

                                              The Reign of Baal-hanan<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                              The Bible continues the Edomite record–<\/p>\n

                                              \u201cAnd Saul died, and Baal-hanan the son of Achbor reigned in his stead<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                              –Gen.36:38.<\/p>\n

                                              The name Baal-hannan could conceivably be shortened to Beon the next<\/p>\n

                                              Hyksos King. The Semitic name had to be written in Egyptian Hieroglyphics<\/p>\n

                                              and then over a millenium later was translierated into Greek by an Egyptian<\/p>\n

                                              Priest Manetho, and in that length of time a name could undergo a shortening<\/p>\n

                                              process. It seems plausible, anyway, to put forth this suggestion, pending further<\/p>\n

                                              investigation.<\/p>\n

                                              Josephus, quoting from Manetho, gives Beon a reign of 44 years.<\/p>\n

                                              The Reighn of Hadad II<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                              We come now to the last in the Biblical king-list for early Edom. This is<\/p>\n

                                              Hadar in Genesis but Hadad in I. Chronicles.l:50.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                              Page 57<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                              49<\/p>\n

                                              \u201cAnd Baal-hanan the son of Achbor died, and-Hadar reigned in his stead:<\/em><\/p>\n

                                              the name of his city was Pau, and his wife\u2019s name was Mehetabel, the daughter of<\/em><\/p>\n

                                              Matred, the daughter Mezahab. <\/em>Gen. 36: 39.<\/p>\n

                                              As this king is named Hadad in the Chronicles account, we will style him<\/p>\n

                                              Hadad II. His city of \u201d Pau (or Pai in Chronicles), has been thought to possibly<\/p>\n

                                              be Phauara in Edom (23) but this is very uncertain. In view of our theory of<\/p>\n

                                              identity of the Hyksos Kings with the Edomites, and they were at this time<\/p>\n

                                              establishing capitals outside of their homeland, we venture to suggest that this<\/p>\n

                                              city should be looked for in the Nile Delta region rather than in Edom. For<\/p>\n

                                              instance, Pau might be Pe, a suburb of Buto in Lower Egypt, a royal residence<\/p>\n

                                              of early Egyptian kings, or some such place. (24)<\/p>\n

                                              The special naming of queen Mehetabe1, wife of Hadad II, and the listing<\/p>\n

                                              of her ancestry, indicate that she was a person of quite; unusual importance.<\/p>\n

                                              However, we appear to have lost the information links which would make such<\/p>\n

                                              a reference a source of real significance and enlightenment to us. We can but<\/p>\n

                                              hope that some fortunate discovery will give us the clue some day.<\/p>\n

                                              The Importance of The Edomite King-List<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                              It is quite obvious that the writer of the Book of Genesis was listing a Line<\/p>\n

                                              of kings which he considered to be of unusual importance to his readers. So<\/p>\n

                                              important, indeed, as to draw him aside for a little from his main theme. He<\/p>\n

                                              was giving his readers references to persons, cities and events which he knew<\/p>\n

                                              they would readily recognize, understand and appreciate. Today, after three and<\/p>\n

                                              a half millenniums have passed it is difficult for us to pick up the threads. If<\/p>\n

                                              Edom was but a tiny, insignificant kinglet, as some scholars seem to want us to<\/p>\n

                                              think, all this studied, compact listing and reference was both unnecessary and<\/p>\n

                                              without point. On the other hand, if the writer was recording the origin of the<\/p>\n

                                              great Hyksos Empire, which ruled over his own people, too, while they resided<\/p>\n

                                              in Egypt, and on account of which his people were reduced to abject slavery,<\/p>\n

                                              (as we shall see later on,) then we begin to grasp the vital importance of what<\/p>\n

                                              this writer was recording, and the parts of the picture fall into place. We realize<\/p>\n

                                              he was not wasting his own and his readers\u2019 time on trivialities to no purpose.<\/p>\n

                                              We firmly believe that the more the modern science of archaeology recovers<\/p>\n

                                              ancient records from Egypt and other places in the Near East, the more we will<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                              Page 58<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                              50<\/p>\n

                                              come to value and appreciate such records as the writer of Genesis took time<\/p>\n

                                              to condense \u201cand preserve for future generations.<\/p>\n

                                              The Hyksos King Apachnias<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                              If our suggestion that the Edomite King Saul and Baal-hanan were the<\/p>\n

                                              Hyksos Kings Salatis and Beon, then Hadar or Hadad II should be Apachnias,<\/p>\n

                                              the Hyksos King who succeeded Beon. Josephus, quoting from Manetho, states<\/p>\n

                                              Apachnias reigned thirty six years and seven months.<\/p>\n

                                              It is difficult to see any similarity between the names Hadar and Apachnias,<\/p>\n

                                              though it is known that names undergo great alterations with the passage<\/p>\n

                                              of centuries, and may become so altered and corrupted as to be well nigh<\/p>\n

                                              unrecognizable. For instance, the great King Ashurbanipal of Assyria, even<\/p>\n

                                              amongst Semitic tongued people, in a few generations comes to be called<\/p>\n

                                              \u201cAsnapper\u201d (Ezra 4:10). Fifteen hundred years elapsed from the dates of the<\/p>\n

                                              Hyksos Kings to the time of Manetho who copied the names in Greek, and so<\/p>\n

                                              great distortion of names could occur.<\/p>\n

                                              There is also a possibility of the order of the names of the Hyksos Kings<\/p>\n

                                              having become confused, so that we cannot cling too tenaciously to the sequence<\/p>\n

                                              of names which has come down to us second, or third hand or possibly much<\/p>\n

                                              more remotely removed through Manetho and Josephus.<\/p>\n

                                              We definitely cannot be certain here, but just offer the suggestion that<\/p>\n

                                              Apachnias may be the Biblical Hadad II, and leave it to further research.<\/p>\n

                                              Other Hyksos Kings<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                              With the death of Kadad II the Scripture list of Edomite kings breaks off.<\/p>\n

                                              Evidently the author of Genesis felt he had carried the list as far as was necessary.<\/p>\n

                                              If our theory is correct, he did carry the list just that far, far enough to give the<\/p>\n

                                              origin of and to connect with, the well known, first few Hyksos Kings. The<\/p>\n

                                              rest of the history of the Hyksos Kings would already be sufficiently known<\/p>\n

                                              to his readers, and was beyond the scope of the writer\u2019s subject in the Book<\/p>\n

                                              of Genesis; so he naturally closed his list. We can feel very thankful to Moses<\/p>\n

                                              (who else was qualified to write Genesis? He was educated in Egypt, lived in<\/p>\n

                                              Midian, and knew the early Hebrew records and traditions,) for carrying the<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                              Page 59<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                              51<\/p>\n

                                              king-list as far as he did, just far enough as we believe to enable us to discover<\/p>\n

                                              the link with the Hyksos Kings.<\/p>\n

                                              After Apachnias, Josephus lists three more Hyksos Kings, as follows:<\/p>\n

                                                \n
                                              • Apophia (I) who reigned 61 years<\/li>\n
                                              • Jonias (John or Khian) who reigned 50 years, 1 month.<\/li>\n
                                              • Aseis who reigned 49 years, 2 months. (Josephus Against Apion I:13)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                                Joniaa or Khian, is the one whose monuments have been found in<\/p>\n

                                                such widely scattered points, as we mentioned in Chapter I, from Gebelen<\/p>\n

                                                in Southern Egypt, to Crete, and across to Baghdad. Perhaps in his reign the<\/p>\n

                                                Hyksos Empire attained its maximum dimensions.<\/p>\n

                                                Reviewing our points so far, we feel the evidence for the identity of<\/p>\n

                                                Edomites and Hyksos kings very strong indeed. The Edomite Empire from<\/p>\n

                                                Scripture indications was stretching outward over an areas which the Hyksos<\/p>\n

                                                Empire also must have embraced, particularly in reaching Rehoboth (Rahabah)<\/p>\n

                                                on the Euphrates River. The Hyksos Empire must have taken in Rahabah too,<\/p>\n

                                                if it extended into Mesopotamia towards Baghdad. And the Biblical account<\/p>\n

                                                pictures for us a growing Kingdom or Empire before the invasion of Egypt, a<\/p>\n

                                                point absolutely essential to linking up with the Hyksos story, since the Egyptian<\/p>\n

                                                sources and Josephus traditions have always seem to indicate this. Thus all the<\/p>\n

                                                evidence so far fits together amazingly well.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 60<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                52<\/p>\n

                                                CHAPTER VI<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                The Hyksos Used Horses<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                \u201cIf thou has run with the footmen, and they have wearied the then how canst<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                thou contend with horses?\u201d <\/em>Jer. 12:5.<\/p>\n

                                                It has been suggested by some that one important reason for the<\/p>\n

                                                astonishing success of the Hyksos invasion of Egypt, was the use of horses in<\/p>\n

                                                warfare by the invaders. It is also generally conceded that horses were either<\/p>\n

                                                unknown, or practically unknown in Egypt before that period in which the<\/p>\n

                                                Hyksos invasion took place. Many believe it was the Hyksos who introduced<\/p>\n

                                                the horse into Egypt. (8)<\/p>\n

                                                Nevertheless, it is true that the assumption that horses were unknown in<\/p>\n

                                                Egypt prior to the Hyksos invasion rests upon wholly negative evidence. The<\/p>\n

                                                evidence is only the entire absence of any reference to horses in the monuments<\/p>\n

                                                and records of Egypt as we know them, from the times before the Hyksos<\/p>\n

                                                Dynasties.<\/p>\n

                                                While we believe that the foregoing is very close to the truth, yet we are<\/p>\n

                                                going to suggest that horses were introduced into Egypt a good while before<\/p>\n

                                                the Hyksos invasion, but that the Egyptians were very conservative and did<\/p>\n

                                                not take to the use of horses much, until, as they learned the hard way through<\/p>\n

                                                the Hyksos invasion as to what great military advantages the war-horse gave<\/p>\n

                                                in battle. For horses give rapid transportation, maneuverability, and elevation<\/p>\n

                                                above soldiers on foot. (See Appendix 1)<\/p>\n

                                                One thing we are very sure of: the Hyksos had horses in abundance, and<\/p>\n

                                                used them extensively in warfare. Tradition so states. The monuments of Egypt<\/p>\n

                                                record the use of horses after the Hyksos age. Hyksos graves in south-west<\/p>\n

                                                Palestine are found to contain the skeletons of horses which were buried with<\/p>\n

                                                their fond masters. Everything points to the Hyksos as being great horsemen.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 61<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                53<\/p>\n

                                                No Horses in Edom?<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                Let us turn now to the Bible again. If the Edomite King List in Genesis<\/p>\n

                                                chapter 36 us the origin of the Hyksos Kings, it will be wholly in order to find<\/p>\n

                                                some reference to horses, and to their use in warfare. Indeed, it might almost<\/p>\n

                                                seem to be necessary.<\/p>\n

                                                \u201cAha!\u201d we can hear the critics exclaiming. \u201cYour theory hits a rock there<\/p>\n

                                                and flounders hopelessly, for the entire chapter gives not even one solitary<\/p>\n

                                                mention of a horse.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                But hold on a minute\u201d We believe we can show just the very evidence<\/p>\n

                                                that is needed.<\/p>\n

                                                In the genealogy of the Horites, who preceded the Edomites and were<\/p>\n

                                                subdued and absorbed by them, we read of one man named Anah:<\/p>\n

                                                \u201cThis was that Anah that found the mules in the wilderness, as he fed the asses<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                of Zibeon his father.\u201d <\/em>Gen.36:24.<\/p>\n

                                                (Note. *Some authorities would translate this passage, \u201cthat found the<\/p>\n

                                                warm springs.\u201d However Hebrew scholars for generations appear to universally<\/p>\n

                                                hold to \u201cmules\u201d as the correct meaning. We see no reason to question the<\/p>\n

                                                historically accepted meaning. \u201cWarm springs\u201d <\/em>is a modern suggestion, seemingly<\/p>\n

                                                without manuscript support, and would make Anah and Zibeon to be ignorant<\/p>\n

                                                of the natural, geographical features of their own homeland- certainly not very<\/p>\n

                                                likely.)<\/p>\n

                                                As mules are a cross between ass and horse, our argument for the presence<\/p>\n

                                                of horses is complete. You cannot have mules without horses being around.<\/p>\n

                                                Thus a group of stubborn mules blocks entirely the contention of no horses in<\/p>\n

                                                chapter 36 of Genesis.<\/p>\n

                                                From this first identification in Scripture of horses in the near east, we<\/p>\n

                                                may conclude some important points.<\/p>\n

                                                First. The Horites of Sier were commonly users of asses or donkeys, as<\/p>\n

                                                were both the Egyptians and the Babylonians at that early date; for Anah was<\/p>\n

                                                feeding \u201cthe asses of Zibeon his father.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                (note. *This Zibeon, a Horite, is not to be confused with Zibeon, a Hivite,<\/p>\n

                                                mentioned in an earlier chapter.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 62<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                54<\/p>\n

                                                Second. Horses were evidently beginning to run wild in Arabia at this time.<\/p>\n

                                                These wild horses, mingling with asses, (perhaps wild asses,) some crosses had<\/p>\n

                                                occurred, resulting in the mules which Anah discovered. The presence of these<\/p>\n

                                                mules, strange and utterly new creatures to Anah, astonished him greatly, as well<\/p>\n

                                                as others to whom he showed the mules. This was such a unique and exciting<\/p>\n

                                                event, that thereafter Anah became known as the one who \u201cfound the mules.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                The event was so noteworthy that it was especially referred to in the genealogies.<\/p>\n

                                                Third. We can surmise that horses were relatively new in this part of the<\/p>\n

                                                world. Probably herds of wild horses were wandering into Northern Arabia<\/p>\n

                                                from the north and east, and were beginning to become numerous in Arabia.<\/p>\n

                                                If horses had been known for very long in the territory of these Horites, it<\/p>\n

                                                seem unlikely that mules would be unknown altogether. Horses the Horites<\/p>\n

                                                had evidently seen, but not mules: so the advent of horses in that region can<\/p>\n

                                                be pushed back at least a generation or two before the time of Anah.<\/p>\n

                                                It does seem significant, that the very first indication of horses in the<\/p>\n

                                                Scripture record, should be with those people (the Horites) who, amalgamating<\/p>\n

                                                with the descendants of Esau, became, as we believe, the Hyksos people who<\/p>\n

                                                loved and used horses so much, and used them in warfare.<\/p>\n

                                                The Horse Domesticated<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                In his book, \u201cArchaeology and the Bible,\u201d George A. Barton states, \u201cThe<\/p>\n

                                                Hittites were the first of the peoples of western Asia to use the horse! (IVth<\/p>\n

                                                Edition, p.79). As the Hittites and the Horites ,or \u201cHurri\u201d, as we noted before,<\/p>\n

                                                were related peoples, it helps us in our theory to find the Bible, through this<\/p>\n

                                                reference to \u201cmules\u201d, indicating the presence of horses for the very first time in<\/p>\n

                                                connection with the Horites, long before other peoples around had domestic<\/p>\n

                                                horses. The Bible and the clay tablets unite in testifying that the Hittites\/Horites<\/p>\n

                                                were the first, or nearly the first, to domesticate the horse in western Asia.<\/p>\n

                                                Again, the clay tablets speak of a people called \u201cManda\u201d who came from<\/p>\n

                                                Mitanni-land by the River Euphrates north of Carchemish.(26) Barton tells<\/p>\n

                                                us the Manda were \u201chorse trainers and dealers.\u201d While these tablets come from<\/p>\n

                                                a period several generations later than Anah, who found the mules, yet this<\/p>\n

                                                statement helps to confirm the fact that the Hittites, the Horites, the Mitanni<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 63<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                55<\/p>\n

                                                and the Manda, all closely related or intermingled peoples, were noted for early<\/p>\n

                                                use of the horse. Some scholars have gone so far as to suggest that the Hyksos<\/p>\n

                                                people were the Hittites of Asia Minor, or were led by Hittites, largely on the<\/p>\n

                                                basis that both had horses.<\/p>\n

                                                However, we believe that it was the Horites of Seir who developed the<\/p>\n

                                                use of the horse along with the Edomites, and that while the Hyksos peoples<\/p>\n

                                                had many Horites in their composition the Edomites rather than Hittites were<\/p>\n

                                                the leading faction.<\/p>\n

                                                As we pointed out before, the family of Esau was already related to the<\/p>\n

                                                Hittites even before the move into Seir, and, after the move, intermingled with<\/p>\n

                                                the Horites. Thus through both the Hittites and the Horites, the Edomites<\/p>\n

                                                would soon become familiar with horses and horse raising and training. But<\/p>\n

                                                before going on to study the use of horses by the Edomites, let us look at<\/p>\n

                                                another reference to horses.<\/p>\n

                                                Horses in Egypt<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                The next reference to horses in the Bible is in Genesis 47:17, where we find<\/p>\n

                                                Joseph, the ruler of Egypt, accepting horses from certain people in exchange<\/p>\n

                                                for bread during the great famine. This would be some good while before the<\/p>\n

                                                Hyksos invasion. The wording of the story seems quite significant.<\/p>\n

                                                \u201cEgypt and all the land of Canaan fainted by reason of the famine<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                (Gen.47:13). The people finally ran out of money in both lands with<\/p>\n

                                                which to purchase bread. Then the peop1e of Egypt, (it does not say of Canaan,)<\/p>\n

                                                besought Joseph for food (vrs.14-15). He was their ru1er, and they sought a<\/p>\n

                                                solution to their need in the face of lack of funds. Joseph thereupon instituted<\/p>\n

                                                a different system of exchange to what they had been using.<\/p>\n

                                                \u201cAnd Joseph said, Give your cattle; and I will give you for your cattle if money<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                fail.\u201d <\/em>Gen.47:l6.<\/p>\n

                                                Joseph asked the Egyptian people for cattle and so commenced the<\/p>\n

                                                exchange of livestock for food. Be it noted, that all countries were at this time<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 64<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                56<\/p>\n

                                                seeking Egypt for food (Gen.4l:57), and foreigners coming into Egypt in their<\/p>\n

                                                dire need would take advantage of the new exchange system. Thus we read; \u201cAnd<\/p>\n

                                                they brought their cattle unto Joseph\u201d -the Egyptians responded with cattle: but<\/p>\n

                                                the exchanging did not stop with cattle on1y,-\u201dand Joseph gave them bread in<\/p>\n

                                                exchange for horses, and for the flocks, and for the cattle of \u201cthe herds, and for<\/p>\n

                                                the asses, and he fed them with bread for all their cattle for that year.\u201d (vs .17)<\/p>\n

                                                Now, if horses were just coming into use amongst the Horites, in the<\/p>\n

                                                times of Esau, of Jacob and of Joseph, then it would be natural enough for these<\/p>\n

                                                Horites to bring their horses into Egypt to exchange them for food. This seems<\/p>\n

                                                to be the very first appearance of horses in Egypt, introduced by trade, ~before<\/p>\n

                                                the Hyksos invasion. Horses seem to be listed quite high in this reference, too,<\/p>\n

                                                as if of great value. (See Appendix I)<\/p>\n

                                                Horses for Riding and for Chariots<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                Jacob later mentions the horse used for riding, in the blessing of his sons:<\/p>\n

                                                \u201cDan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                heels, so that his rider shall fall backward.\u201d <\/em>Gen.49:17.<\/p>\n

                                                After this, we find \u201chorsemen\u201d under Joseph at Jacob\u2019s very great funeral<\/p>\n

                                                procession (Gen.50:9) This reference is in sharpest contrast to the earlier passage,<\/p>\n

                                                when Joseph so lavishly in tender respect for his aging father from whom he had<\/p>\n

                                                been cruelly parted for years, sent wagons and many laden asses for bringing<\/p>\n

                                                his father into Egypt.<\/p>\n

                                                (Gen.45:9 – 46:6). Horses and horsemen are searched for in vain at this<\/p>\n

                                                earlier event; indeed, we might say they conspicuous by their complete absence<\/p>\n

                                                on such an occasion. At the time of Jacob\u2019s entry into Egypt, asses and asses<\/p>\n

                                                only, are referred to as for riding on, and evidently for drawing the wagons too.<\/p>\n

                                                But when we come down to Jacob\u2019s funeral, horses leap to the forefront and<\/p>\n

                                                the lowly donkey is entirely eclipsed. The very obvious inference is that the<\/p>\n

                                                horse had been introduced in the interval. Brought in by exchange, Joseph, a<\/p>\n

                                                man acquainted with nomadic life in the east saw in the horse its tremendous<\/p>\n

                                                possibilities, and quickly developed corps of horsemen and chariots.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 65<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                57<\/p>\n

                                                Horses in Warfare<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                Next, let us look reference immediately rivets our attention with a superb,<\/p>\n

                                                picturesque and dramatic description of its use in battle. God speaks to<\/p>\n

                                                Job saying:<\/p>\n

                                                \u201cWhat time she (the ostrich) lifteth up herself on high, she scorneth<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                the horse and his rider.<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                \u201cHast thou given the horse strength? Hast thou clothed his neck<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                with thunder?<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                \u201cCanst thou make him afraid as a grasshopper? The glory of his<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                nostrils is terrible.<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                \u201cHe paweth in the valley, and rejoiceth in his strength: he goeth on<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                to meet the armed men.<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                \u201cHe mocketh at fear, and is not affrighted; neither turneth he back<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                from the sword.<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                \u201cThe quiver rattleth against him, the glittering spear and the shield.<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                \u201cHe swalloweth the ground with fierceness and\u2019 rage: neither<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                believeth he that it is the sound of the trumpet.<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                \u201cHe saith among the trumpets, Ha, ha; and he smelleth the battle<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                afar off, the thunder of the captains, and the shouting.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                Job 39:18-25.<\/p>\n

                                                These stirring words vividly describe the horse, evidently but little removed<\/p>\n

                                                from its fearless wild state, being used by mounted men in fierce and headlong<\/p>\n

                                                battle. We can sense how the first use of horses in warfare gave the riders great<\/p>\n

                                                courage and advantage, so that the tide of battle swung in favor of the horsemen<\/p>\n

                                                and the best horses.<\/p>\n

                                                If we are right in identifying Job with Jobab, king of Edom, (and we are<\/p>\n

                                                sure we are,) then the earliest kings of Edom were already making skillful and<\/p>\n

                                                successful use of horses in warfare.<\/p>\n

                                                The horse in war at that time was the equivalent of atomic warfare of today<\/p>\n

                                                – there was no answer to it! The nation which was first in raising, training and<\/p>\n

                                                using war horses extensively, and was the most advanced in this \u201cnew power,\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                would be well nigh undefeatable. No wonder \u201cthe Edomite-Hyksos Empire<\/p>\n

                                                grew so greatly!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 66<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                58<\/p>\n

                                                Egypt\u2019s Defeat<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                We have mentioned how Joseph appears to have introduced the horse into<\/p>\n

                                                Egypt under his exchange policy, and quickly developed corps of horsemen and<\/p>\n

                                                chariots. But Egypt was a conservative country; it had never suffered invasion;<\/p>\n

                                                Joseph was a foreigner who had to eat at a separate table from Egyptians<\/p>\n

                                                (Gen.43:32)\u201donly accepted because of his astute wisdom and favor with the<\/p>\n

                                                reigning Pharaoh, but looked upon as a foreigner\u2019 non-the-less. After Joseph<\/p>\n

                                                was gone, his policies and his forward-looking and realistic preparation for<\/p>\n

                                                war with horses would scarcely be carried on by the native Egyptians. The<\/p>\n

                                                development and training in the horse industry, introduced by a stranger,<\/p>\n

                                                lagged or was entirely discarded and dropped. Egypt would naturally relapse<\/p>\n

                                                into her old ways and methods. But meanwhile, not far to the east, by its use<\/p>\n

                                                of trained and beloved horses, the new Edomite-Hyksos power expanded and<\/p>\n

                                                grew under Jobab and the kings which followed after him.<\/p>\n

                                                Presently, Egypt paid the price for lack of vigilance. Without horses and<\/p>\n

                                                horsemen she found herself\u2019 unable to hold back these mounted Arabian<\/p>\n

                                                soldiers swarming over her eastern frontier. She yielded to the inevitable, and,<\/p>\n

                                                as Josephus says, quoting; from Manetho, the strangers overran the country<\/p>\n

                                                of Lower Egypt without a battle. For the first time in her history, Egypt lay<\/p>\n

                                                prostrate under a foreign power.<\/p>\n

                                                Did the Edomites have horses? Well, after reading that most brilliant<\/p>\n

                                                description of horses in warfare in the Book of Job, who lived in the land of<\/p>\n

                                                Uz, where Edom was situated, we can say Yes, undoubted. All this information<\/p>\n

                                                fits precisely with our point No. 4 The Hyksos had Horses in Chapter One.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 67<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                59<\/p>\n

                                                CHAPTER VII<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                Religion and Date of the Edomite Empire<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                \u201cHath a nation changed their gods?\u201d <\/em>Jer. 2: 11<\/p>\n

                                                We come now to the question as to the religious identity of the Edomites<\/p>\n

                                                and the Hyksos. The Hyksos Kings worshipped Sutekh or Baal. What, then,<\/p>\n

                                                did the Edomites worship?<\/p>\n

                                                Esau himself was a nominal worshipper of Jehovah, the God of his fathers<\/p>\n

                                                Abraham and Isaac. We have already gone over Esau\u2019s relatively light esteem of<\/p>\n

                                                the demands of the worship of Jehovah (or \u201cYahweh\u201d as some put it); how he<\/p>\n

                                                sold his Abrahamic birthright for a mess of pottage, and then completely broke<\/p>\n

                                                with the sacred traditions of the family by marrying two Canaanite women. Baal<\/p>\n

                                                worship was dominant in Canaan. Esau sought material advantage and success,<\/p>\n

                                                and largely gained what he sought. We miss in Esau\u2019s life those deep, inward<\/p>\n

                                                climaxes resulting in conversion of character, redemption of soul, and re-birth<\/p>\n

                                                of spirit, visible in the life-story of his twin brother Jacob. Nevertheless, the<\/p>\n

                                                worship of Jehovah was not abandoned by Esau, nor by his earlier descendants.<\/p>\n

                                                Esau\u2019s eldest\u201d son was named Eliphaz, meaning, \u201cGod his strength.\u201d The<\/p>\n

                                                name of his second son, Ruel, means, \u201cFriend of God.\u201d The third son was<\/p>\n

                                                Jeush, \u201cTo whom God hastens.\u201d His fourth son Jaalam, \u201cWhom God hides.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                An early Duke of Edom is Magdiel, \u201cThe praise of God.\u201d (Gen. 36:5,43, etc. )<\/p>\n

                                                In the Book of Job we discover that Eliphaz in his old age, possessed a<\/p>\n

                                                most profound knowledge of God and of righteousness. Like his father Esau,<\/p>\n

                                                Eliphaz gave too great attention to outward, material prosperity; holding such<\/p>\n

                                                to be the ultimate proof of Divine approval. Thus Job\u2019s calamities and material<\/p>\n

                                                losses were, in his eyes, absolute and unanswerable demonstration of God\u2019s<\/p>\n

                                                anger for some terrible personal sin or sins. Eliphaz had drunk deep of the cup<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 68<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                60<\/p>\n

                                                of his father\u2019s philosophy. But it is clear that Eliphaz still followed the worship<\/p>\n

                                                of Jehovah and of Him alone.<\/p>\n

                                                Job (or Jobab) also was a worshipper of Jehovah only. But it is to be noted<\/p>\n

                                                as significant that Job speaks of idolatry as being secretly practiced by some (Job<\/p>\n

                                                31:21-28), though in general condemned by the populace of Edom at that time.<\/p>\n

                                                The Drift to Baal Worship<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                Thus up to the reign of Jobab, the second King of Edom, the worship<\/p>\n

                                                of Jehovah was continued in general amongst the Edomites, either truly and<\/p>\n

                                                sincerely or just nominally by the individuals. But by the time we reach the<\/p>\n

                                                seventh king, Baal seems to step to the front. That king\u2019s name was Baal-hanan,<\/p>\n

                                                meaning, \u201cTo whom Baal is merciful,\u201d or, \u201cWhom Baal loves.\u201d The name<\/p>\n

                                                \u201cJehovah\u201d compounded into personal names appears less and less; \u201cBaal\u201d appears<\/p>\n

                                                instead. This name \u201cBaal-hanan\u201d if compounded with \u201cJehovah\u201d instead of<\/p>\n

                                                \u201cBaal\u2019 would mean, \u201cWhom Jehovah loves.\u201d We know it as Johanan or John.<\/p>\n

                                                One of the Hyksos Kings actually bore this name. He is<\/p>\n

                                                \u201cJonias,\u201d otherwise known as \u201cJohn\u201d or \u201cKhian.\u201d This shows that the<\/p>\n

                                                name of God had not been forgotten, even so late as that, but with him the<\/p>\n

                                                last vestige of Jehocah honoring seems to have disappeared. With King John<\/p>\n

                                                the zenith of the Hyksos power passes also. Baal(or Sutekh) became their god.<\/p>\n

                                                Finally, we learn from Egyptian records that, \u201cKing Apophis made Sutekh his<\/p>\n

                                                Lord, serving no other god, who was in the whole land, save Sutekh.\u201d (27)<\/p>\n

                                                From all we know of the later Edomites it seems that Baal, in one form<\/p>\n

                                                or another, was their principal god.<\/p>\n

                                                The whole picture seems to indicate a slow change over from the worship<\/p>\n

                                                of Jehovah, derived originally from Abraham and Isaac; through a declining<\/p>\n

                                                interest in Jehovah exhibited in Esau and Eliphaz; to an exaltation of Baal<\/p>\n

                                                exhibited in the name of Baal-hanan; and the final exclusion of all other gods<\/p>\n

                                                under King Apophis. Just the same drift would have taken place in Israel more<\/p>\n

                                                than once except for the strenuous opposition of the prophets. The prophets<\/p>\n

                                                brought about revivals in which the people returned to the worship of Jehovah.<\/p>\n

                                                We know of no such revivals in the history of Edom.<\/p>\n

                                                Unger\u2019s Bible Dictionary, under \u201cHyksos,\u201d states: \u201cThe Hyksos erected<\/p>\n

                                                large earthen enclosures for their horses. This type of construction can be seen<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 69<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                61<\/p>\n

                                                at Jericho, Shechem, Lachish and Tell el-Ajjul. They also erected many temples<\/p>\n

                                                to Baal. There are also evidenced of worship of the mother goddess. Common<\/p>\n

                                                in Hyksos levels are cultic objects such as nude figurines, serpents and doves,<\/p>\n

                                                showing their complete devotion to this type of degrading worship. Hyksos<\/p>\n

                                                burial customs are distinctive as is their chariotry.\u201d (Emphasis supplied.)<\/p>\n

                                                When we consider the high and noble origins of the Edomite\/Hyksos<\/p>\n

                                                peoples, the same origin which Israel had, our hearts are saddened to behold<\/p>\n

                                                the depths to which they sank. Yet we thank God that He, through the prophets<\/p>\n

                                                whom He raised up, preserved Israel for so many centuries before they too, in<\/p>\n

                                                the days of Jeremiah, declined to the point that God ,had to remove them by<\/p>\n

                                                captivity. He said to the \u201cweeping prophet\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                \u201cBehold, I will bring evil upon them, which they shall not be able to escape;<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                and though they shall cry unto me, I will not hearken unto them For according to<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                the number of thy cities were thy gods, O Judah, (local Baals); \u201cand according to<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                the number of the streets of Jerusalem have ye set up altars to that shameful thing,<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                even altars to burn incense unto Baal…. Therefore pray not thou for this people…\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                Jeremiah 11:ll,13,14.<\/p>\n

                                                To sum up this interesting point, in spite of the paucity of specific detail,<\/p>\n

                                                in the matter of religion there is no difficulty in linking the Edomites to the<\/p>\n

                                                Hyksos. What we know of each seems to neatly dovetail into one picture, which<\/p>\n

                                                should be the case if we are really dealing with one people.<\/p>\n

                                                The Comparison o Dates<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                Let us now take up the most difficult yet most important parallel, the<\/p>\n

                                                question of the dates of the respective Edomite and Hyksos Empires. If we find<\/p>\n

                                                both existed, as near as we can tell, at the same time, then the identity of the<\/p>\n

                                                two could hardly be questioned. Two separate and unrelated empires cannot<\/p>\n

                                                be occupying the same spheres and areas at one and the same time.<\/p>\n

                                                May we say immediately, that merely attaching a certain date B.C., to the<\/p>\n

                                                one and the other from some popular (or other) chronological systems will in<\/p>\n

                                                no way assist us in this important phase of our investigation. One man\u2019s set<\/p>\n

                                                of dates for Biblical history may put the Edomite kings as about 1400 B.C.<\/p>\n

                                                or later, another set may put them as 2200 :B.C. or earlier: one Egyptologist<\/p>\n

                                                will date the Hyksos Kings as about 1800 B.C., and another at an altogether<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 70<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                62<\/p>\n

                                                different date. To use a popular expression, \u201cthat gets us nowhere fast!\u201d That<\/p>\n

                                                will not help us, nor prove similarity of time.<\/p>\n

                                                What we need to do is so relate the time of the Edomite kings recorded<\/p>\n

                                                in Scripture to some Biblical event which ties in to Egyptian history, that<\/p>\n

                                                computing from that event, we discover the times of the Edomite kings and<\/p>\n

                                                of the Hyksos Kings will link together. For instance, if we knew with absolute<\/p>\n

                                                certainty which Phharaoh was reigning at the time of Joseph, the computation<\/p>\n

                                                woul be simple; but unfortunately we do not know that Pharaoh in spite of<\/p>\n

                                                guesses and surmises we may say by the dozen! The next nearest event linking<\/p>\n

                                                Egyptian and Biblical history is the Exodus of Israel from Egypt and Joshua\u2019s<\/p>\n

                                                Conquest of Canaan.<\/p>\n

                                                The date of the Exodus is itself a very vexed question. But it seems to be<\/p>\n

                                                now generally agreed that the Exodus was either during the XVIIIth Dynasty<\/p>\n

                                                or the XIXth Dynasty. We strongly favour the time of the XVIIIth Dynasty,<\/p>\n

                                                feeling that the date of the XIXth Dynasty does not tally with the chronological<\/p>\n

                                                note given in I Kings 6:1, placing the Exodus nearly 500 years before Solomon\u2019s<\/p>\n

                                                reign, nor with the lengthy period for the Judges in Israel as mentioned by<\/p>\n

                                                Jephthah (Judg.ll:28). We will therefore consider the earlier dating, that is, that<\/p>\n

                                                the Exodus was during the XVIIIth Dynasty.<\/p>\n

                                                The Fall of Jericho<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                The Bible record gives the destruction of Jericho under Joshua as being very<\/p>\n

                                                soon after the death of Moses, at the end of the forty years of wandering in the<\/p>\n

                                                wilderness. Prof. J. Garstang\u2019s excavations at Jericho not only demonstrated that<\/p>\n

                                                the city\u2019s walls fell as with an earthquake shock, but make it fairly certain by the<\/p>\n

                                                presence of Egyptian scarabs, etc., that Jericho was destroyed during the reign of<\/p>\n

                                                the Egyptian Pharaoh Amenhotep III, dated by Breasted as 1411 – 1375 B.C.<\/p>\n

                                                Using this as a link between Egyptian and Biblical histories, let us proceed<\/p>\n

                                                to compare for confirmations of the link, and then compute back to the times<\/p>\n

                                                of the Edomite kings and of the Hyksos Kings.<\/p>\n

                                                The Amara letters<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                A number of years ago a remarkable discovery was made at Tell el Amarna<\/p>\n

                                                in Egypt of inscribed tablets giving official correspondence between government<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 71<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                63<\/p>\n

                                                officials in Palestine and the reigning Pharaoh in Egypt., These tablets are a<\/p>\n

                                                very valuable source of information, and are known as, \u201cThe Amarna, Letters.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                Some of these letters tell of a people called \u201cKhabirit\u201d (that is, \u201cHebrews\u201d)<\/p>\n

                                                who were invading Canaan from the east during the reign of Amenhotep III<\/p>\n

                                                just as did the Israelites under Joshua in the Biblical record. (28)<\/p>\n

                                                This invasion continued on into the reign of the next Pharaoh, Akhenaton<\/p>\n

                                                or Amenhotep IV. If these Khabiri are the Children of Israel (Hebrews),<\/p>\n

                                                under Joshua, and we believe they are, then the Amarna Letters confirm the<\/p>\n

                                                archaeological data as to the fall of Jericho being during the reign of Amenhotep<\/p>\n

                                                III. Thus we have two very good archaeological evidences linking Biblical and<\/p>\n

                                                Egyptian histories at this point.*<\/p>\n

                                                (note. *The recent excavations at Hazor in Northern Palestine are said<\/p>\n

                                                to strongly favor the later date for the Hebrew invasion of Canaan,more in<\/p>\n

                                                line with Merneptah as the Pharaoh of the ;Exodus. However, Razor does not<\/p>\n

                                                seem to have been wiped out by Joshua as was Jericho, for early in the Book\u2019<\/p>\n

                                                of Judges Hazor is again the capital city of Jabin (II), king of the Canaanites<\/p>\n

                                                (Judg.4:2). When Joshua burnt the city (Josh. 11:10-l3), and destroyed the<\/p>\n

                                                people found in it, the damage must have been repaired, and either later or at<\/p>\n

                                                the time re-occupied by Canaanites. For all we know, there may have been a<\/p>\n

                                                greater destruction of Hazor after Deborah and Barak than under Joshua, the<\/p>\n

                                                record does not say, and that later destruction would certainly fall in the time<\/p>\n

                                                of the XIX Dynasty by our chronology. Further search at other points occupied<\/p>\n

                                                by Israel at the Invasion is needed. The reference to a Canaanite Nazor in Judges<\/p>\n

                                                4:2 makes it impossible to say that the final destruction of Canaanite Hazor<\/p>\n

                                                was carried out by Joshua. Joshua must belong to an earlier period, therefore,<\/p>\n

                                                which would place him in the Amarna period.)<\/p>\n

                                                The Oppression and Exodus of Israel<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                Forty years before the death of Moses ~and the fall of Jericho, the Bible<\/p>\n

                                                places the Exodus of Israel from Egypt. On the other hand ,forty years before<\/p>\n

                                                the invasion of Canaan by the Khabiri (Hebrews) and before the fall of Jericho<\/p>\n

                                                from the archaeological evidence, brings us approximately to the time \u2018of the<\/p>\n

                                                death of Amenhotep II, 1420 B.C. by Breasted\u2019s chronology. We therefore<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 72<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                64<\/p>\n

                                                propose that this Pharaoh Amenhotep II was the Pharaoh of the Exodus. We<\/p>\n

                                                will use this as our working hypothesis.<\/p>\n

                                                At the Exodus, the Bible says, Moses was 80 years old and his brother Aaron<\/p>\n

                                                83 years (Exod.7:7). Using Breasted\u2019s Egyptian chronology, 80 years before the<\/p>\n

                                                death of Amenhotep II would be 1500 B.C. for the birth of Moses, and 83 years<\/p>\n

                                                before would be 1503 B.C. for the birth of Aaron. Now that date for the birth of<\/p>\n

                                                Moses would be the second year of Thutmosis III, whom some have<\/p>\n

                                                suggested as possibly the Pharaoh of the Oppression, and by the same reckoning<\/p>\n

                                                the birth of Aaron comes two years before this Pharaoh began to reign. (His reign<\/p>\n

                                                by Breasted\u2019s chronology began in 1501 B.C.) This arrangement of dates fits the<\/p>\n

                                                Biblical account astonishingly well.<\/p>\n

                                                We know that the severe stage of oppression was on right at the time when<\/p>\n

                                                Moses was born. The Pharaoh had just commanded that the Hebrew boy infants<\/p>\n

                                                be thrown into the Nile, but Moses was hidden. On the other hand, there is no<\/p>\n

                                                hint of any need for hiding Aaron who was born only thee years before Moses.<\/p>\n

                                                Evidently, the cruel command to destroy the Hebrew baby boys was not yet<\/p>\n

                                                made at the date of Aaron\u2019s birth (Exod.l:22) but it certainly was in effect at<\/p>\n

                                                the date of Moses\u2019 birth. Clearly then, the command was issued in the interval.<\/p>\n

                                                We suggest, therefore, that this new command came from the new Pharaoh,<\/p>\n

                                                Thutmos1s III, shortly after he ascended to the throne, approximately two years<\/p>\n

                                                after Aaron was born, and about one year before Moses\u2019 birth. The persecution<\/p>\n

                                                was then at its maximum.<\/p>\n

                                                Nevertheless the Biblical account indicates it was a considerable time before<\/p>\n

                                                the birth of Moses that persecution of the birth of Moses that persecution of the<\/p>\n

                                                Hebrews and the enslavement of the nation first began. It began when the reigning<\/p>\n

                                                Pharaoh feared lest these Hebrews ally themselves with Egypt\u2019s foes (Exod.l:8-l1).<\/p>\n

                                                We are not told how long a time elapsed from the beginning of this enslavement to<\/p>\n

                                                the more severe stage when the boy infants were to be destroyed, but the inference<\/p>\n

                                                is that quite a few years passed by during which the Hebrews built store-cities for<\/p>\n

                                                the king. The persecution of the Hebrews was evidently intensified from time to<\/p>\n

                                                time, finally culminating in the new command to kill the baby boys, which as<\/p>\n

                                                we have said, we think was issued by Thutmosis III shortly after he came to the<\/p>\n

                                                throne. It takes not many years, only 79, to carry us back from the accession of<\/p>\n

                                                Thutmosis III (1501 B.C.) to the founding of the XVIIth Dynasty under Ahmose<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 73<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                65<\/p>\n

                                                I who is coupled directly with the expulsion of the Hyksos kings from Egypt<\/p>\n

                                                (1580 BC). The founding of this Dynasty fits well with the wording of Exodus<\/p>\n

                                                1:8 \u201cNow there arose up a new king over Egypt (29) Ahmose I was definitely<\/p>\n

                                                a \u201cnew king\u201d and the circumstances of that king\u2019s reign might well lead to the<\/p>\n

                                                enslavement of the Israelites as we shall see in a moment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 74<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                66<\/p>\n

                                                From the foregoing study we give an accompanying Table of the Bible<\/p>\n

                                                record and Egyptian History (the latter based upon Breasted\u2019s arrangement),<\/p>\n

                                                in parallel columns. This parallel seems to be particularly happy at all points<\/p>\n

                                                of contact throughout.<\/p>\n

                                                The Edom-Israel Quarrel<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                If the Hyksos people really the Edomites and associated nations or tribes<\/p>\n

                                                as we have proposed, then Ahmose I, who expelled the Hyksos, would truly<\/p>\n

                                                fear that the Hebrew chi1dren of Israel would join with the Hyksos, since the<\/p>\n

                                                Edomites and Israelites were brother-nations. They were probably pledged to<\/p>\n

                                                respect one another\u2019s territories. Such friendly peop1es would be expected to<\/p>\n

                                                assist one another. So, whi1e Ahmose I warred with the Hyksos Kings (30)<\/p>\n

                                                chasing them out of Egypt toward<\/p>\n

                                                Southern Palestine, and was in the process of building his army and<\/p>\n

                                                organizing Egypt into a military state, he apparently took counselw1th his<\/p>\n

                                                advisers to subject Israel to slavery to nip in the bud any possible cooperation if<\/p>\n

                                                Israel with Hyksos\/Edom. It cannot be denied that the Pharaoh was expecting<\/p>\n

                                                Israel to side with Egypt\u2019s enemies.<\/p>\n

                                                How would the Hyksos\/Edom Kings view the situation? The Egyptians<\/p>\n

                                                were revolting from under their rule. Israel was as \u201cmuch foreign to Egypt\u201d as<\/p>\n

                                                were the Hyksos themselves; and Israel was their brother.<\/p>\n

                                                Hyksos\/Edom was in terrific struggle, going down in defeat and<\/p>\n

                                                humiliation. Did the Hyksos\/Edomites feel that their brethren, the Israel-<\/p>\n

                                                Hebrews, failed them in their hour of need? Did they perhaps appeal to Israel in<\/p>\n

                                                their desperate situation? Would they not blame Israel for not rising up en masse<\/p>\n

                                                against Ahmose I to contend on their behalf? We sense the reasonableness of all<\/p>\n

                                                this from the view-point of Hyksos-Edom. This view would explain why Edom<\/p>\n

                                                later so bluntly refused Israel passage through his land, why he so promptly<\/p>\n

                                                came out against his brother with a sword (Num 20:14-21), and why so bitter<\/p>\n

                                                an uunending, age-long quarrel arose between Edom and Israel.<\/p>\n

                                                The Amalekites, too, an independent tribe which branched off from<\/p>\n

                                                Edom (Gen. 36:l2,16}, probably branching off when the Hyksos\/Edomite<\/p>\n

                                                Empire collapsed, also exhibited a very bitter spite Israel, surprising them in<\/p>\n

                                                the wilderness by a sneak-attack. This was followed by a perpetual quarrel for<\/p>\n

                                                all time (Exod.11:8-l6).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 75<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                67<\/p>\n

                                                Date of Hyksos Kings and Edomite Kings<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                Prof. Breasted believed that 100 years would be ample to cover the length<\/p>\n

                                                of time the Hyksos ruled in Egypt, and it may have been less. (31) ,Now, our<\/p>\n

                                                paralle1 Table gives the expulsion of the Hyksos as 160 years before the Exodus,<\/p>\n

                                                and 100 years more would place the Hyksos invasion of Egypt as 260 years<\/p>\n

                                                before the Exodus.<\/p>\n

                                                The Children of Israel were in Egypt 430 years, from the day Jacob entered<\/p>\n

                                                Egypt to the Exodus (Exod. l2:40-4l). On the basis of this data, the Hyksos<\/p>\n

                                                invasion of Egypt would be about 170 years after Jacob and his family moved<\/p>\n

                                                from Canaan into Egypt.<\/p>\n

                                                As we said before, it appears that Bela, Edom\u2019s first king may well have<\/p>\n

                                                started his reign not very long after Jacob entered Egypt. This 170 years would<\/p>\n

                                                therefore cover the formation of Edom into a kingdom, and also the reigns of<\/p>\n

                                                the first five kings, Bela, Jobab, Husham, Hadad I, and Samlah. The average<\/p>\n

                                                reign for these five would accordingly be approximately 30 years each. This<\/p>\n

                                                seems reasonable enough, and seems to indicate we are on the right track.<\/p>\n

                                                Clearly, from the view-point of time or chronology, we find that the<\/p>\n

                                                Edomite and Hyksos Empires coalesce into one full picture. The Biblical history<\/p>\n

                                                and the Egyptian history supplement each the other. This brings our study of<\/p>\n

                                                the time-element to a happy conclusion.<\/p>\n

                                                The parallels agree exactly. That is what we set out to discover in this<\/p>\n

                                                chapter, and the agreement of dates is not only encouraging to our theory, but<\/p>\n

                                                makes it a well-nigh inescapable conclusion; because if there was an Edomite<\/p>\n

                                                Empire as we have drawn from the Scripture references, then a separate Hyksos<\/p>\n

                                                Empire could not exist at the same time in the same general area. Do empires<\/p>\n

                                                overlap like this? No; and we therefore conclude that they are one and the<\/p>\n

                                                same. Point No. 6 of Chapter I is thus found to be settled in our favour, we<\/p>\n

                                                feel, conclusively.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 76<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                68<\/p>\n

                                                CHAPTER VIII.<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                Where Did They Go<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                \u201cI shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom to pluck up,<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                and to pull down, and to destroy it.\u201d <\/em>Jer.18:7.<\/p>\n

                                                We have: seen from the beginning the startling suddenness with which<\/p>\n

                                                the Hyksos people burst in upon Egyptian history, coming from the east, out<\/p>\n

                                                of that general area which embraces the northern portion of the Sinai Peninsula<\/p>\n

                                                and the south fringe of Palestine, where lay the Land of Edom. Outside of the<\/p>\n

                                                various theories put forth, and what we have proposed in the preceding chapters,<\/p>\n

                                                we know absolutely nothing of whence these people came. It has been a baffling<\/p>\n

                                                problem to scholars for a long time.<\/p>\n

                                                It is, however, quite reasonable to suppose that when the Hyksos kings<\/p>\n

                                                were finally forced to retreat from Egypt they would fall back toward the land<\/p>\n

                                                from whence they came. Let us consider, then, the path of their retreat.<\/p>\n

                                                As we would expect, the Hyksos Kings, after a siege in Avaris, first went<\/p>\n

                                                from the Delta Region across the Isthmus of Suez. They were going back the<\/p>\n

                                                way they had come. Ahmose I, the Egyptian king credited with expelling these<\/p>\n

                                                foreigners, then pursued them eastward into southern Palestine. There the<\/p>\n

                                                Hyksos power held out against the Egyptian forces for three years at the siege<\/p>\n

                                                of Sharuhen, a very long siege indeed. (32) Finally Sharuhen fell, and with<\/p>\n

                                                that event the Hyksos power was not only broken, but vanishes completely<\/p>\n

                                                from history.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 77<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                69<\/p>\n

                                                Sharuhen is therefore of key importance in tracing the Hyksos retreat.<\/p>\n

                                                As mysteriously and as suddenly they come into history, so the Hyksos kings<\/p>\n

                                                and armies disappear again.<\/p>\n

                                                The location of this city, the last known stronghold of the Hyksos kings<\/p>\n

                                                is believed to be Tell el-Far\u2019ah (33)<\/p>\n

                                                It lies well to the South west in the Land of Canaan, in the territory<\/p>\n

                                                later assigned to the tribe of Simeon. In the Bible it .is referred to under the<\/p>\n

                                                following names:<\/p>\n

                                                Shilhim (or armed men\u201d) Joshua 15:32.<\/p>\n

                                                Sharuhen (or \u201cPleasant Dwelling\u201d), Joshua 19:6<\/p>\n

                                                Shaaraim (or \u201cThe Gates\u201d) I. Chron. 4:31<\/p>\n

                                                As we said before after their defeat at Sharuhen, the Hyksos Kings and<\/p>\n

                                                armies vanish from sight, the trail is lost. Historians and scholars think they<\/p>\n

                                                then retreated to their own country – wherever that was! and the scholars have<\/p>\n

                                                looked northward and have searched and searched in that direction for such a<\/p>\n

                                                place, but have not found it.<\/p>\n

                                                Which Way from Sharuhem?<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                Obviously, further retreat from Sharuhen could only be either northward,<\/p>\n

                                                eastward or southward. Directly eastward may be discounted as it leads towards<\/p>\n

                                                the wastes of the southern end of the Dead Sea.<\/p>\n

                                                If the Hyksos Kings retreated northward through Palestine, the inference<\/p>\n

                                                would be that their homeland lay northward of Palestine. Thus we have had<\/p>\n

                                                proposals offered us that the Hyksos were Hittites from Asia Minor under<\/p>\n

                                                another name, or came from some part of Syria. All very vague and unsatisfactory<\/p>\n

                                                suggestions, but granting that it was so, it then follows that there must have<\/p>\n

                                                been a southward conquering sweep through Palestine before the Hyksos first<\/p>\n

                                                reached Egypt. But where has any evidence of such a southward march been<\/p>\n

                                                found? The Hyksos graves found in 1931 at Old Gaza (Tell el Ajjul) are no<\/p>\n

                                                indication of a southward conquest thought Canaan, rather they appear as<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                Page 78<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                70<\/p>\n

                                                a northerly limit of Hyksos occupation. Our suggestion is that the Hyksos<\/p>\n

                                                influence spread from south to north. Turn O scholar, standing puzzled and<\/p>\n

                                                frustrated at Sharuhen because of this dead-end trail. Turn and cast your eyes<\/p>\n

                                                southward and southeastward, where lies the Land of Seir and the region of<\/p>\n

                                                the ancient Kingdom of Edom. The home of the Hyksos Kings we suggest to<\/p>\n

                                                you, was not northward from Old Gaza or from Sharuhen, but is to be found<\/p>\n

                                                south easterly in a land where the use of the Arabian horse in warfare was likely<\/p>\n

                                                first developed.<\/p>\n

                                                Why the Edomite Kings avoided overrunning Canaan<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                You may ask then, if the horse gave the Hyksos\/Edom desert kingdom<\/p>\n

                                                its battle advantage, so that they could take Egypt under control, why did<\/p>\n

                                                the Edomite Kings ot push northward into the rich land of Canaan before<\/p>\n

                                                conquering Egypt, for the horse would give a much advantage in Canaan as<\/p>\n

                                                in Egypt?<\/p>\n

                                                In relpy we suggest two factos which would operate to move Hyksos\/<\/p>\n

                                                Edom to avoid Canaan and leave it relatively untouched at first.<\/p>\n

                                                  \n
                                                1. If the Edomites were the head of the associated peoples comprising the<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                  Hyksos, they would posses the tradition handed down from Esau that<\/p>\n

                                                  the Land of Canaan was Jacob\u2019s (Israel\u2019s) and was not to be touched<\/p>\n

                                                  by them. The inclusion of Ishmaelites in the Hyksos conglomeration<\/p>\n

                                                  would do nothing to weaken this tradition. Tradition is a powerful<\/p>\n

                                                  force in any peoples, and especially so in the Near East. So Hyksos\/<\/p>\n

                                                  Edom spread its empire northward, not through Canaan but up<\/p>\n

                                                  through the Arabian Desert east from Palestine. Canaan would be to<\/p>\n

                                                  early Edom, taboo, sacredly set apart for a brother-nation, inviolate<\/p>\n

                                                  by a solemn pact between two brothers.<\/p>\n

                                                    \n
                                                  1. Another reason why a Hyksos\/Edom power would refrain from<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                    pressing into Canaan, is that Eszu had married Canaanites wives<\/p>\n

                                                    from southern Palestine, and the Canaanites in that region would<\/p>\n

                                                    be in affinity with Edom and on friendly terms. Indeed, it is quite<\/p>\n

                                                    possible that Hittites and Hivites from Canaan would be assisting<\/p>\n

                                                    Edomite Allies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                    Page 79<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                    71<\/p>\n

                                                    Breakup of the Empire.<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                    When Ahmose I defeated the Hyksos at Sharuhen, he had a wedge deep<\/p>\n

                                                    between the Canaanite allies on the north and the Hyksos-Edomite home-<\/p>\n

                                                    desert on the south. Indeed, his soldiers probably overran the Sinai Peninsula<\/p>\n

                                                    as Ahmose I would not wish to leave his right flank wide open, nor run the risk<\/p>\n

                                                    of having his retreat cut off should he not succeed in defeating the Hyksos at<\/p>\n

                                                    Sharuhen; and indeed in later history we find Edom holding but little territory<\/p>\n

                                                    west of the Arabah Valley. Edom thereafter seems to center on the east side<\/p>\n

                                                    of the valley. In conquering the south fringe of Canaan and the North Sinai<\/p>\n

                                                    Desert, Ahmose I was actually subduing the original home of Edom as that<\/p>\n

                                                    home is depicted in the Bible, and so, according to our theory, crushing the<\/p>\n

                                                    Hyksos in their own, home land. There, in that very area, he brought the foe<\/p>\n

                                                    into final, vital combat; hunted him out, overthrew him, and broke forever<\/p>\n

                                                    the Hyksos Empire. No wonder the Hyksos hung on so long at the siege of<\/p>\n

                                                    Sharuhen; fighting for three desperate years. It was their \u201clast ditch\u201d stand.<\/p>\n

                                                    They either had to defeat Ahmose I right there or go down to extinction. Oh,<\/p>\n

                                                    yes; the Hyksos had some Canaanite allies on the north in the Hittites and the<\/p>\n

                                                    Hivites, but as we said before, Canaan itself does not appear to have been a<\/p>\n

                                                    conquered part of the Hyksos-Edomite Empire, only a friendly ally; otherwise<\/p>\n

                                                    the Hyksos might have retired northward from Sharuhen to one fortified city<\/p>\n

                                                    after another throughout Palestine and worn out Ahmose I and his army. But,<\/p>\n

                                                    no, Sharuhen was final: The Hyksos conglomeration did not win, and so it was<\/p>\n

                                                    extinction: The candle had burned out: Thus we see why the Egyptian had no<\/p>\n

                                                    more wars with the Hyksos thereafter; why the story ends at Sharuhen. It was<\/p>\n

                                                    the end: Hyksos\/Edom collapsed:<\/p>\n

                                                    With this collapse and defeat of the Edomite faction, the very leaders of<\/p>\n

                                                    this Hyksos conglomeration, the whole empire would naturally go to pieces.<\/p>\n

                                                    Using our imagination a little we may infer as follows.<\/p>\n

                                                    We may suppose that any Hittite and Hivite elements assisting Hyksos\/<\/p>\n

                                                    Edom would revert to their Canaanite cities to the north. The Hittite soldiers<\/p>\n

                                                    would go back to Hebron (where the Bible places Hittites, Gen. 49: 29-32)<\/p>\n

                                                    or some such Hittite settlement; the Hivites to a Hivite home such as Gibeon<\/p>\n

                                                    (Josh.9:3-7; 11:19); or they may have fled even further than that with Ahmose\u2019s<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                    Page 80<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                    72<\/p>\n

                                                    soldiers so close at their heels, to return later when things settled down. With<\/p>\n

                                                    Sharuhen fallen, Canaan seems to have offered little resistance to Ahmose I.<\/p>\n

                                                    Amalek, originally an Edomite tribe, seems to now break away to become<\/p>\n

                                                    an independent nation. The Amalekites may have been forced away from the<\/p>\n

                                                    rest of Edom by being held under Egyptian rule during the rest of the reign of<\/p>\n

                                                    Ahmose I. and his successors. Anyway, not very long after, at the time of the<\/p>\n

                                                    Exodus, we find the Amalekites to be an independent people. They attacked<\/p>\n

                                                    the Israelites in the wilderness even before the latter reached Mount Sinai<\/p>\n

                                                    (Exod.17:8-l6). Amalek was the first of the nations to wage war with Israel~<\/p>\n

                                                    thereby falling under God\u2019s order for extermination (Num.24:20).<\/p>\n

                                                    Moab, which likely collaborated with Edom, appears to be free of Edomite<\/p>\n

                                                    control when next we meet this nation in history, toward the close of the forty<\/p>\n

                                                    years of wandering.<\/p>\n

                                                    The Midianites, close by the eastern border of Moab, who had been<\/p>\n

                                                    defeated by Hadad I King of Edom and probably remained subservient to<\/p>\n

                                                    Edom from then until the collapse at Sharuhen, probably regained complete<\/p>\n

                                                    independence, only to succumb later to the Amorite King Sihon, for in the<\/p>\n

                                                    latter days of Moses the chiefs of Midian are Dukes of Sihon king of Heshbon<\/p>\n

                                                    (Josh.l3:21). However, upon Sihon the Amorite being destroyed by Moses and<\/p>\n

                                                    the children of Israel, the five Midianite Dukes of Sihon immediately became<\/p>\n

                                                    independent, collaborated with Balak, King of Moab in hiring the Prophet<\/p>\n

                                                    Balaam (Num. 22:4,7), and very soon after, when Moses sent an expedition<\/p>\n

                                                    against them, these same five chiefs have assumed the title\u2019\u201d of \u201ckings\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                    (Num.31:8). But in all this, after the siege of Sharuhen, the Midianites appear<\/p>\n

                                                    to be no longer under Edom\u2019s thumb.<\/p>\n

                                                    The Ishmaelite segment in the Hyksos\/Edom composition, upon the fall<\/p>\n

                                                    of Sharuhen would flee towards their own country, the North Arabian Desert.<\/p>\n

                                                    Most likely this group would fly northward from Sharuhen to escape pursuing<\/p>\n

                                                    Egyptian troops, and would cross the Jordan River and Gilead to reach Arabia.<\/p>\n

                                                    The knowledge we possess of the siege of Sharuhen is given us in the<\/p>\n

                                                    record of an Egyptian army officer who served in the Hyksos wars. His account<\/p>\n

                                                    indicates there was a chasing of Hyksos remnants up into Canaan and parts<\/p>\n

                                                    of Coelesyria. But there is no account of any further sieges of cities held by<\/p>\n

                                                    Hyksos Kings: that ended at Sharuhen.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                    Page 81<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                    73<\/p>\n

                                                    In later history the Ishmaelites appear as being free of any Edomite control<\/p>\n

                                                    or leadership (Judg.8:24). The Hyksos\/Edomite King, if he survived the siege<\/p>\n

                                                    and any Edomite and Horite soldiers who happened to escape, would turn<\/p>\n

                                                    southward toward the Land of Seir. We may surmise they would cross the Arabah<\/p>\n

                                                    Valley to the east side to get away from the Egyptian armies overrunning Sinai<\/p>\n

                                                    and southern Canaan.<\/p>\n

                                                    It is thus, we suggest, that the whole Hyksos\/Edomite Empire fell to pieces,<\/p>\n

                                                    never to rise again. After the fall of Sharuhen the Hyksos\/Edomite Kings had<\/p>\n

                                                    no more strongly fortified cities into which retreat could be made, for such were<\/p>\n

                                                    lacking in the Land of Edom, at that time. Hyksos\/Edom having destroyed the<\/p>\n

                                                    Horites had not built large, fortified cities in Edom, being nomads. Archeology<\/p>\n

                                                    has confirmed this nomadic period stretching from about 1700 BC to 1300<\/p>\n

                                                      \n
                                                    1. So the Hyksos lacked fortified home cities into which to retreat.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                      Our Theory is further Supported<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                      The scattering of the Hyksos forces from Sharuhen as above depicted, is,<\/p>\n

                                                      we know speculation and surmise. Yet, the picture is not entirely without some<\/p>\n

                                                      justification for we do know that the fall of Sharuhen marked the disappearance<\/p>\n

                                                      of the last organized resistance of the Hyksos that we can find in history. The last<\/p>\n

                                                      vestiges of the Hyksos armies must have been scattered from there somewhat<\/p>\n

                                                      as we have pictured.<\/p>\n

                                                      The very fact that the Egyptian records follow up the Hyksos Kings only<\/p>\n

                                                      as far as Sharuhen, and at that point the whole Hyksos Empire suddenly fades<\/p>\n

                                                      forever, is very strong evidence the Hyksos far homeland was not far away in<\/p>\n

                                                      some such place as Syria or Asia Minor where the empire could still have carried<\/p>\n

                                                      on in strength for years outside of Egypt. No, that homeland must have been<\/p>\n

                                                      either at Sharuhen or at some very close by place, so that the fall of Sharuhen<\/p>\n

                                                      wrecked their entire empire forever. Thus our argument receives strong support<\/p>\n

                                                      by the sudden disappearance of the Hyksos Kings at Sharuhen. The close by<\/p>\n

                                                      place we suggest was Edom.<\/p>\n

                                                      We submit that in taking the North Sinai Desert, reaching Sharuhen, and<\/p>\n

                                                      levying tribute upon the Canaanite cites to the north, Ahmose I had done all<\/p>\n

                                                      that was necessary to break up the Hyksos confederation or conglomeration,<\/p>\n

                                                      whichever it was. Thereby he had driven the Hyksos Kings right back into their<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                      Page 82<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                      74<\/p>\n

                                                      own homeland, had subdued parts thereof, had left them no fortified cities,<\/p>\n

                                                      and had been able to levy tribute on the Canaanite allies. His objective fully<\/p>\n

                                                      accomplished, he desisted from further effort in that direction, and returned<\/p>\n

                                                      home in triumph there to bring Nubia into his kingdom and to consolidate<\/p>\n

                                                      his position at home.<\/p>\n

                                                      Some Important Considerations<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                      Although the Hyksos Kings vanished from sight, they have left us an<\/p>\n

                                                      important legacy. Their rule was not in vain.<\/p>\n

                                                      They introduced the use of horses for war, both cavalry and for chariots.<\/p>\n

                                                      Chariotry afterwards made Egypt the mightiest nation on earth. The Hyksos<\/p>\n

                                                      also introduced the composite bow. One wonders if the Ishmaelite allies of<\/p>\n

                                                      Hyksos\/Edom had a hand in that, for their progenitor Ishmael, according to<\/p>\n

                                                      the Scriptures, was noted as being \u201can archer\u201d (Gen. 21:20). This notation in<\/p>\n

                                                      Scripture indicates that archery was an outstanding ability with him. He or<\/p>\n

                                                      his children may possibly have originated the composite bow, or have taken it<\/p>\n

                                                      up from some earlier people and introduced it into Egypt. But it is likely that<\/p>\n

                                                      the Hyksos have made one still greater contribution to world progress, before<\/p>\n

                                                      which war horses and composite bows seem relatively unimportant. This is<\/p>\n

                                                      the alphabet.<\/p>\n

                                                      The founder of the Horite colony which occupied part of the Sinai<\/p>\n

                                                      Peninsula, the Arabah and neighboring regions, was \u201cSeir the Horite\u201d (Gen.<\/p>\n

                                                      36:20). From him the area\u201d received the name of \u201cthe land of Seir,\u201d and this<\/p>\n

                                                      branch of the Hurrians are correctly called, \u201cSeirites.\u201d The term \u201cSeirites\u201d is in<\/p>\n

                                                      later history used of the Edomites who had inter-mingled with and intermarried<\/p>\n

                                                      with these Horites, and finally supplanted them.<\/p>\n

                                                      Now the Egyptians had valuable turquoise mines at Serabit in the Sinai<\/p>\n

                                                      Peninsula. The people round about, evidently the Horites or Seirites, labored in<\/p>\n

                                                      these mines for the Egyptians. The Egyptians had long had their hieroglyphic<\/p>\n

                                                      writing where each sign or picture, as a rule, stood for a whole Egyptian word.<\/p>\n

                                                      This was not suitable for the language of the Seirite workmen and their overseers.<\/p>\n

                                                      Evidently someone hit upon the idea of using some of the Egyptian signs to<\/p>\n

                                                      represent sounds in the Seirite language, and, lo, the first alphabet was born!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                      Page 83<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                      75<\/p>\n

                                                      In 1906 the great archaeologist Sir Flinders Petrie found alphabetic<\/p>\n

                                                      inscriptions at these mines which must have been written at least as early as 1500<\/p>\n

                                                      B.C., and the study of these inscriptions has given rise to the belief the alphabet<\/p>\n

                                                      arose as described above. \u201cCompton\u2019s Pictured Encyclopedia,\u201d \u20181958 ed., Vol.<\/p>\n

                                                      I, page 186; (published by F. E. Compton & Co., Chicago,) summarizes the<\/p>\n

                                                      story thus: \u201cOrigin of our alphabet. Just how this invention was made, we do<\/p>\n

                                                      not know in detail. Some scholars believe it came when a Semitic people called<\/p>\n

                                                      the Seirites were working in some turquoise mines in the Sinai Peninsula, and<\/p>\n

                                                      the Egyptian masters of the mines taught them how to write. The Egyptians<\/p>\n

                                                      did not teach their full, elaborate method of writing with pictures, they taught<\/p>\n

                                                      a simpler method which they used for writing names. In this method, each<\/p>\n

                                                      picture stood for the first sound in the name of the object shown in the picture.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                      The Seirites, using this method could put signs together to spell out the<\/p>\n

                                                      sequence of sounds in any word in their own language.<\/p>\n

                                                      This would soon be found to be a simple and easy method of writing. The<\/p>\n

                                                      new method of using a sign for a sound instead of a sign for a word would be<\/p>\n

                                                      in use for some considerable time, we surmise, before it would begin to spread<\/p>\n

                                                      into more general use amongst the upper, learned classes. Thus the origin of the<\/p>\n

                                                      idea must go back a long time before the writing of the Serabit inscriptions of<\/p>\n

                                                      1500 B.C. The invention thus seems to belong to the Horite period.<\/p>\n

                                                      Later, the Edomites, mingling with these Seirites (Horites) around 4It<\/p>\n

                                                      1800 B.C., would learn these alphabetical signs. Under the Hyksos\/Edomite<\/p>\n

                                                      Empire the new idea would naturally pass on to their Canaanite allies. The<\/p>\n

                                                      Canaanites may have improved the alphabet. Then the Canaanites of Tyre and<\/p>\n

                                                      Sidon (the Phoenicians), sailing over the Mediterranean Sea spread the alphabet<\/p>\n

                                                      far and wide. Through the Greeks and the Romans it has passed down to us.<\/p>\n

                                                      Thus the Horites and the Edomites (the Hyksos), may have helped<\/p>\n

                                                      tremendously in giving us the alphabet. Without it, that Divine Revelation, the<\/p>\n

                                                      Bible, could scarcely have come to us; certainly the general public would never<\/p>\n

                                                      have been readers. Thanks to those Sinai mine workers, I, today can type these<\/p>\n

                                                      words from which your eye so quickly and easily gathers up my message. Did<\/p>\n

                                                      the Spirit of God move upon Moses to include in his writings these references<\/p>\n

                                                      to the Horites because of the important role they played in making Holy Writ<\/p>\n

                                                      possible?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                      Page 84<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                      76<\/p>\n

                                                      CHAPTER IX.<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                      The Founding of Petra<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                      \u201cHe (God) enlargeth the nations, and straiteneth them again.\u201d <\/em>Job 12:23.<\/p>\n

                                                      Having now surveyed an array of evidences for the identification of the<\/p>\n

                                                      Hyksos Kings with the Biblical Edomites, it is hoped we may confidently speak<\/p>\n

                                                      of them as one people, the Hyksos\/Edomites. At every point the references to<\/p>\n

                                                      each so coincide and tally that we feel justified in so doing.<\/p>\n

                                                      \u201cBut, someone may object, \u201cnot one of the points cited in the foregoing<\/p>\n

                                                      chapters in itself constitutes absolute proof.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                      That may be true, friend, we reply, but we do feel that it is the large<\/p>\n

                                                      accumulation of very striking similarities which is so greatly impressive.<\/p>\n

                                                      Still, without giving absolute proof, some may yet insist; so that the<\/p>\n

                                                      argument for the theory in unconvincing.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                      \u201cWell, friend, we have to say, you are, of course, entirely welcome to<\/p>\n

                                                      your own opinion and view. But we feel constrained to ask: How much<\/p>\n

                                                      more accumulation of evidence is needed to be conclusive? Those who have<\/p>\n

                                                      a better, more satisfactory and more convincing identification should please<\/p>\n

                                                      come forward with it. In the present state of our knowledge, there appears to<\/p>\n

                                                      be no contrary evidence. Everything fits; race, language, direction of origin,<\/p>\n

                                                      religion, method of warfare (horses), date, lands held, and direction of retreat.<\/p>\n

                                                      Confronted with so much evidence, why should anyone refuse to recognize at<\/p>\n

                                                      least the great likelihood of identity?<\/p>\n

                                                      Great Affect upon Our Views<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                      When we admit the possibility of the identity we have endeavored to set<\/p>\n

                                                      forth in these pages, we will find it clears up for us some otherwise very puzzling<\/p>\n

                                                      factors. Our views will be necessarily affected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                      Page 85<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                      77<\/p>\n

                                                      The Egyptologist will view the 36th chapter of the Book of Genesis in<\/p>\n

                                                      anew light, and all that the Biblical scholar has to say of it will be of particular<\/p>\n

                                                      interest to him. The Bible student will turn to all that the Egyptologist can tell<\/p>\n

                                                      him of the Hyksos Kings, their people, language and customs, etc. Each will<\/p>\n

                                                      have a deeper appreciation of the work of the other: each,\u201d will be assisted by<\/p>\n

                                                      knowledge supplied by the other. The historian will take a second look at Edom<\/p>\n

                                                      and at all references to Edom in monument, clay tablet, and papyri. We will all<\/p>\n

                                                      see in Edom, not just a tiny desert kinglet, but the remnant of a once migl1ty<\/p>\n

                                                      empire. The Bible scholar will discover fresh meaning in the words of Scripture.<\/p>\n

                                                      Turn to the words of Moses\u2019 triumphant song when Israel came through<\/p>\n

                                                      the Red Sea, and the Egyptians were drowned.<\/p>\n

                                                      \u201cThe people shall hear, and be afraid;<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                      Sorrow shall take hold on the inhabitants of Palestina.<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                      Then the dukes of Edom shall be amazed;<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                      The mighty men of Moab, trembling shall take hold upon them<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                      All the inhabitants of Canaan shall melt away. (34)<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                      Exodus 15: 14-15.<\/p>\n

                                                      If one remembers that not too long before the Exodus of Israel from Egypt,<\/p>\n

                                                      the Dukes of Edom were chased out of Egypt by Ahmose I, one can see why<\/p>\n

                                                      they would be simply amazed beyond measure to learn that the slave nation<\/p>\n

                                                      Israel had actually been able to march out of Egypt as victors. The Dukes,<\/p>\n

                                                      comparing the report with their own<\/p>\n

                                                      humbling expulsion from Egypt, would be filled with wonder and<\/p>\n

                                                      astonishment.<\/p>\n

                                                      They, rulers of Countries, dominating Egypt and reigning as Pharaohs<\/p>\n

                                                      in it, were expelled: Israel, crushed into helpless slavery makes a triumphant<\/p>\n

                                                      Exodus. What a contrast! The Dukes of Edom were amazed.<\/p>\n

                                                      \u201cThe horse and his rider hath He thrown into the sea\u201d The very thing<\/p>\n

                                                      which once had given the Hyksos\/Edomites such advantage in battle, and which<\/p>\n

                                                      the Egyptians had now taken up and copied, assisting in building up the great<\/p>\n

                                                      Eighteenth Dynasty Empire, was utterly defeated. Yes, those Dukes of Edom<\/p>\n

                                                      had cause for amazement indeed!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                      Page 86<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                      78<\/p>\n

                                                      Now we can see the true, deeper meaning in the words of Moses\u2019 song.<\/p>\n

                                                      The words take on real life. How exactly appropriate they were. Thus the<\/p>\n

                                                      identification of Hyksos\/Edom assists the student of Scripture to better<\/p>\n

                                                      understand what he reads, and gives reality to the passage.<\/p>\n

                                                      Did They Reign in Egypt?<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                      Another point of deep interest, which seems to have received very scant<\/p>\n

                                                      attention, is, Why did the Hyksos Kings, after conquering Egypt, move<\/p>\n

                                                      their capital into Egypt? The Assyrians later also conquered Egypt, but the<\/p>\n

                                                      Assyrian capital remained at Nineveh. Is it not quite unusual for conquerors,<\/p>\n

                                                      having already a settled home-capital, to move their seat of government into<\/p>\n

                                                      a subjugated country? If the Hyksos Kings came from Syria or Asia Minor or<\/p>\n

                                                      Canaan, then why did their capital not remain in be Syria or Asia Minor or<\/p>\n

                                                      Canaan, as the case might be? There must some good reason behind the move.<\/p>\n

                                                      If our theory is right, one needs but to compare Edom and Egypt to see<\/p>\n

                                                      one very good reason. (35) Egypt was so much more attractive to live in than<\/p>\n

                                                      the deserts of Edom, that such a move is seen to be the obvious, most natural<\/p>\n

                                                      and logical thing to do (Gen.l3:l0).<\/p>\n

                                                      We have already noted from the Biblical record that King Saul of Edom<\/p>\n

                                                      did not hesitate to set up his first capital at Rehoboth by the Euphrates, a long,<\/p>\n

                                                      long way off from Edom itself. This trait gives away the similarity if not the<\/p>\n

                                                      identity of Edomite and Hyksos.<\/p>\n

                                                      What the Hyksos Kings Took with Them.<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                      When the Hyksos Kings were expelled from Egypt, they could not but<\/p>\n

                                                      take with them the memory of life in Egypt. That memory would bear some<\/p>\n

                                                      fruit in later life. These Hyksos Kings had appreciated Egyptian art in stone,<\/p>\n

                                                      the magnificent temples and palaces in which they had worshipped and lived.<\/p>\n

                                                      They, too, had built beautiful temples in Egypt. The Horite element in the<\/p>\n

                                                      Hyksos\/Edomite make up, if there is any truth at all in the thought that they<\/p>\n

                                                      used caves in Seir, must have worked formerly in stone, and would admire<\/p>\n

                                                      Egyptian stone-art. In any case, the Hyksos\/Edomites must have learned vastly<\/p>\n

                                                      from the Egyptians. When they retreated into the Arabian Desert whence they<\/p>\n

                                                      came, they took with them a greatly enhanced knowledge in stone art with an<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                      Page 87<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                      79<\/p>\n

                                                      enlarged appreciation of what could be done. Here was a situation in which<\/p>\n

                                                      originality could fructify.<\/p>\n

                                                      As we said before, the Edomites in their retreat seem to have fallen back<\/p>\n

                                                      right to the east side of the Arabah Valley. All the extensions of the empire fell<\/p>\n

                                                      away: only the Edomite core was left. This would bring the Hyksos\/Edomite<\/p>\n

                                                      leaders remaining, right to Bozrah which had been the capital under King<\/p>\n

                                                      Jobab. Yet it is unlikely that Bozrah was fortified at this time. The Edomites<\/p>\n

                                                      had originally occupied thee country as nomads, and, as M. E. Kirk puts it, the<\/p>\n

                                                      majority seem simply to have pitched their amid the ruins of the conquered<\/p>\n

                                                      cities. (\u201cOutline of Ancient Cultural History of Transjordan\u201d Palestine<\/p>\n

                                                      Exploration Quarterly, July-October 1944, p 180)<\/p>\n

                                                      The Israelites later did the same when they overran Canaan. It was not<\/p>\n

                                                      until well over three hundred years had passed that the Israelites began to<\/p>\n

                                                      really build cities. (Those who argue for a late invasion of Canaan by Israel,<\/p>\n

                                                      around 1200 B.C., have perhaps overlooked the fact that too little time is left<\/p>\n

                                                      for nomadic Israel, fresh out of he wilderness wanderings to switch over to a<\/p>\n

                                                      city-dwelling state.)<\/p>\n

                                                      City dwelling seems to have begun even before the time of Samuel. The<\/p>\n

                                                      Hyksos\/Edomites had occupied cities outside of their home-land, but appear<\/p>\n

                                                      to have utterly neglected the building cities in Edom. At least, archeologists<\/p>\n

                                                      have not yet found trace of any in Edom at this period. Thus, thrown back<\/p>\n

                                                      to the region of Bozrah, the Hyksos\/Edomites would have little or no defense<\/p>\n

                                                      against Egyptian pursuit.<\/p>\n

                                                      The City Petra and Beidha<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                      Not very far south from Bozrah is Petra and el-Beidha \u201cLittle Petra.\u201d Both<\/p>\n

                                                      of these centers are located in a quite inaccessible valley in the heart of very<\/p>\n

                                                      rugged the country. Such locations would have offered the defeated Hyksos\/<\/p>\n

                                                      Edom a natural defense and a safe retreat. Even if this site had been occupied<\/p>\n

                                                      in a small way previously, it still could at this time have offered a haven for<\/p>\n

                                                      the crushed Hyksos\/Edomite remnant, a place where to lick the wounds while<\/p>\n

                                                      recovering from the terrific shock of defeat.<\/p>\n

                                                      Tossed back out of Egypt into nomadism, perhaps the Hyksos line of kings<\/p>\n

                                                      collapsed altogether and a new line took over. Perhaps the line continued in a<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                      Page 88<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                      80<\/p>\n

                                                      weakened state. We do not know. However some of the people had tasted life<\/p>\n

                                                      in Egypt. It would take a while to become adjusted. Not so very long after the<\/p>\n

                                                      Hyksos Expulsion which was about 1580 B.C., a great change began to come<\/p>\n

                                                      over the Land of Edom. The people commenced agricultural activities. They<\/p>\n

                                                      started to settle down. City life appeared. By about 1300 B.C. a line of fortified<\/p>\n

                                                      sites marked much of the boundary or Edom.<\/p>\n

                                                      Was it not the return of the Hyksos peoples from Egypt which gave the<\/p>\n

                                                      impetus to accomplish this in less than 300 years?<\/p>\n

                                                      Somewhere about this time Petra, the famous and beautiful rose-red Rock<\/p>\n

                                                      City, was most likely settled. Most scholars speak of the monuments in Petra<\/p>\n

                                                      as being of Nabataean skill (around 300 to 200 B.C.), which is no doubt true<\/p>\n

                                                      for the most part. But excavations are starting to demonstrate that the valley<\/p>\n

                                                      was occupied at earlier times as well.<\/p>\n

                                                      The Hyksos\/Edomite peoples having brought back with them some of<\/p>\n

                                                      the marvelous stone-art techniques learned in Egypt, in process of time, began<\/p>\n

                                                      to carve out rock dwellings and temples in the living rock or the faces of the<\/p>\n

                                                      mountains enclosing the site of Petra. Although the city has passed through<\/p>\n

                                                      a brilliant Nabataean stage since, let us, when looking upon these huge, rock<\/p>\n

                                                      temples, think back upon the Hyksos kings. Expelled out of Egypt, yet handing<\/p>\n

                                                      down stories or the greatness which had once been theirs and longing for<\/p>\n

                                                      greatness still; then setting about in that dry land to carve out great and beautiful<\/p>\n

                                                      temples of their own and they evidently achieved success.<\/p>\n

                                                      Oddly, one of these immense rock temples, facing the narrow entrance<\/p>\n

                                                      passage, today bears the Arabic name \u201cKhaznet Fir\u2019aun\u201d or \u201cTreasury of<\/p>\n

                                                      Pharaoh.\u201d Another is called \u201cKasr Fir\u2019aun\u201d or \u201cPharaoh\u2019s Palace.\u201d It is a puzzle<\/p>\n

                                                      as to why the title \u201cPharaoh\u201d so emphatically Egyptian, should crop up,<\/p>\n

                                                      seemingly without reason, at Petra. It is as if the names are trying to whisper<\/p>\n

                                                      something to us of a connection with the land of the Nile; as if saying softly,<\/p>\n

                                                      \u201cOur ancestry harks back into a dim past when the early kings of our line were<\/p>\n

                                                      once real Pharaohs.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                      Edom, \u201cA Famous Nation<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                      As we stated before, the moment we link Hyksos and Edom many puzzling<\/p>\n

                                                      bits of history begin to fit together. We gain an altogether new appreciation and<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                      Page 89<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                      81<\/p>\n

                                                      respect for the little-known Edomites. Now we can understand why Biblical<\/p>\n

                                                      writers viewed Edom as of such importance.<\/p>\n

                                                      They give it a prominence of position that heretofore has seemed all out<\/p>\n

                                                      of proportion. To those writers the Edomites bore with them the memory of<\/p>\n

                                                      a once great, dominating empire.<\/p>\n

                                                      One example of the enlightenment and help our theory provides is<\/p>\n

                                                      found in connection with the passage in Ezekiel 32:17-32. Here the Prophet<\/p>\n

                                                      Ezekiel sings a sorrowful, picturesque dirge over the fall of great and powerful<\/p>\n

                                                      Egypt before the arms of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon. He cries that the<\/p>\n

                                                      multitude of Egypt will go down in death into the abyss; she (that is, Egypt)<\/p>\n

                                                      with the daughters of \u201cthe famous nations, unto the nether parts of the earth\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                      (vs. 18). There, the strong among the mighty shall speak to fallen Pharaoh out<\/p>\n

                                                      of the midst of hell (vs 21)<\/p>\n

                                                      Now, let us ask, who are these \u201cfamous nations\u201d, the \u201dstrong among the<\/p>\n

                                                      mighty\u201d? The Prophet Ezekiel proceeds to list the famous nations\u2019 as known<\/p>\n

                                                      in his day. Most naturally the first is \u201cAsshur\u201d or Assyria, in verse 22, \u201cwhich<\/p>\n

                                                      caused terror in the land of the living\u2019. Next is Elam\u201d in verse 24, which also<\/p>\n

                                                      caused its terror in the land of the living. Then \u201cMeshech (and) Tubal\u201d, which<\/p>\n

                                                      are the Mashki and Tabal known to us from Assyrian inscriptions, and likewise<\/p>\n

                                                      \u201ccaused their terror in the land of the living.\u201d Then follows, to the surprise of<\/p>\n

                                                      thoughtful students, in verse 29, \u201cEdom, her kings, and all her princes.\u201d The<\/p>\n

                                                      parade ends with \u201cthe princes of the north\u201d (the Scythians were pushing in<\/p>\n

                                                      from the north at that time), and the \u201cZidonians\u201d in verse 30. But we ask, how<\/p>\n

                                                      marches little Edom in this parade of what are described as the famous nations?<\/p>\n

                                                      Why did Ezekiel include Edom in this array of \u201cthe strong among the mighty\u201d?<\/p>\n

                                                      Regardless of how much of this chapter is figurative, and how much literal, we<\/p>\n

                                                      are forced to admit that even down to the Prophet\u2019s day Edom was viewed as a<\/p>\n

                                                      \u201cfamous nation\u201d with something in its past to elevate it to the position of one<\/p>\n

                                                      of the strong among the mighty.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                      Little toddlers do not march in a parade restricted, let us say, to<\/p>\n

                                                      accomplished scientists such as Isaac Newton, Michael Farady, Lord Kelvin,<\/p>\n

                                                      Jeans and Einstein! If Edom was the little kinglet we have heretofore thought<\/p>\n

                                                      it, it would have been barred out from being mentioned with Assyria, Elam,<\/p>\n

                                                      Mashki and Tabal in such a listing~ But the inclusion of Edom is positive proof<\/p>\n

                                                      it was considered an unusually powerful country.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                      Page 90<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                      82<\/p>\n

                                                      We submit that, unless our theory is acknowledged, there is absolutely<\/p>\n

                                                      nothing in Edom\u2019s past to warrant it being called a famous nation. The theory<\/p>\n

                                                      we have set forth, is, so far as we are aware, the only explanation which satisfies<\/p>\n

                                                      Ezekiel\u2019s listing of \u201cfamous\u201d \u201cstrong\u201d and \u201cmighty\u201d nations recognized in his<\/p>\n

                                                      day. Evidently the memory of the enormous and powerful Hyksos\/Edomite<\/p>\n

                                                      Empire had not yet faded away.<\/p>\n

                                                      Scholars May Judge<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                      We have gone over a wide range of evidences. We have brought forth out<\/p>\n

                                                      of our treasury for you things new and old. We are content to rest our case in<\/p>\n

                                                      the hands of our judges. We leave it to you all, and in particular to the world<\/p>\n

                                                      of scholarship, to decide and determine whether we have added anything to<\/p>\n

                                                      the solution of the problem as to whence came the Hyksos Kings of Egypt.<\/p>\n

                                                      Even should our theory somehow prove to be mistaken and wrong,<\/p>\n

                                                      we trust we may stir up and trigger off further research and study of this<\/p>\n

                                                      interesting question. Archaeologists will certainly yet find more information<\/p>\n

                                                      in Egypt regarding the mysterious Hyksos. We hope they will soon investigate<\/p>\n

                                                      Edom more thoroughly, and excavate many sites. We need more light on the<\/p>\n

                                                      intriguing Hurrians, and especially on those Hurrians which inhabited Seir<\/p>\n

                                                      before the Edomite nomads\u2019 displaced and absorbed them. All of Transjordan<\/p>\n

                                                      needs further archaeological study.<\/p>\n

                                                      We trust that the \u201caverage reader\u201d for whom we have sought to write<\/p>\n

                                                      \u201cthings easy to be understood,\u201d will have gained from these pages not only an<\/p>\n

                                                      added interest in archaeology and the history of ancient Egypt, Edom, and the<\/p>\n

                                                      Hurrians, but a much greater interest in and a deeper respect for the Bible, in<\/p>\n

                                                      which it seems to us has been preserved the solution to our question, \u201cWhence<\/p>\n

                                                      Came the Hyksos Kings of Egypt?\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                      THE END.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                      Page 91<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                      83<\/p>\n

                                                      Appendices<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                      Appendix One<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                      Notes and References<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                        \n
                                                      1. Date of the Hyksos Invasion<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                        Prof J.H. Breasted in \u201cA History of the Ancient Egyptians: 1919, published<\/p>\n

                                                        by Charles Scriber\u2019s Sons, New York, Section 170, gives the invasion as in 1657<\/p>\n

                                                        BC but remarks it could be earlier. Encyclopedia Americana, Canadian Edition<\/p>\n

                                                        1963, Article Egypt under Chronology, dates the Hyksos Dynasties XV and<\/p>\n

                                                        XVI as 1730 \u2013 1580, after William Stevenson Smith.<\/p>\n

                                                          \n
                                                        1. Hyksos Leaders<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                          Breasted in \u201cA History of the Ancient Egyptians\u201d section 175 argues for the<\/p>\n

                                                          city of Kadesh in Syria as the center of the Hyksos power. George A> Barton,<\/p>\n

                                                          PH D. in Archeology and the Bile, Published by ASSU, Philadelphia PA, USA,<\/p>\n

                                                          IVth Edition, 1952, pp 28-29 notes the drift of opinion toward the Hittites as<\/p>\n

                                                          either the Hyksos or the leading faction in the Hyksos hordes.<\/p>\n

                                                          Encyclopedia Americana, Canadian Edition, Article Egypt, says \u201cThe<\/p>\n

                                                          Hyksos…. in addition to unidentifiable people, included a fair proportion of<\/p>\n

                                                          those speaking Hurrian and Semitic.\u201d The mention of \u201cHurrian\u201d (Horite) is<\/p>\n

                                                          important. See also Prof. J. H. Breasted in \u201cThe Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus,<\/p>\n

                                                          Oriental Institute Publications, Voll III, Chicago, 1930<\/p>\n

                                                            \n
                                                          1. Stories of Patriarchs as Myths, Legends, Etc.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                            Encyclopedia Americana, Canadian Edition, under Articles Abraham,<\/p>\n

                                                            Bible etc.<\/p>\n

                                                              \n
                                                            1. Hyksos Monuments Destroyed<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                              Breasted, A History of the Ancient Egyptians, Sections 173, 179<\/p>\n

                                                                \n
                                                              1. Meaning of the name \u201cHyksos\u201d<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                Breasted, A History of the Ancient Egyptians, Section 172 gives \u201cRulers<\/p>\n

                                                                of Countries.\u201d Barton, Archeology and the Bible, p 35 states the equivalent<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                Page 92<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                84<\/p>\n

                                                                of the term Ruler of Countries was previously long in use in Babylonian and<\/p>\n

                                                                other Mesopotamian cities, and it would be perfectly natural for Semitic Hyksos<\/p>\n

                                                                to use it.<\/p>\n

                                                                Encyclopedia Americana, Canadian Edition, in article \u201cEgypt\u201d under<\/p>\n

                                                                Hyksos Period equates the name Hyksos with the Egyptian \u201cHikau Khasut\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                or \u201crulers of foreign lands.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                Nevertheless, the idea of \u201cshepherd\u201d is strangely persistent. They Hyksos<\/p>\n

                                                                are constantly referred to by the most up to date writers as \u201cnomads\u201d and<\/p>\n

                                                                \u201cBedouin\u201d etc.<\/p>\n

                                                                Breasted, after arguing for Kadesh in Syria as the Hyksos home, speaks<\/p>\n

                                                                in Section 175 of the possibility of the Hebrew tribes in Egypt as \u201ca part of<\/p>\n

                                                                the Bedouin allies of the Kadesh or Hyksos Empire, whose presence there<\/p>\n

                                                                brought into the tradition the partially correct impression that the Hyksos<\/p>\n

                                                                were shepherds. Were the men of Kadesh Bedouins? Our theory allows that the<\/p>\n

                                                                Hyksos were actually a shepherd people in the main at the time of the invasion<\/p>\n

                                                                of Egypt, a point the Egyptians, who despised shepherds should feel keenly<\/p>\n

                                                                and would never forget.<\/p>\n

                                                                  \n
                                                                1. Race and Language of the Hyksos<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                  Barton \u201cArcheology and the Bible\u201d pp 28-29 states most scholars have<\/p>\n

                                                                  thought the Hyksos were Semites, but now some think they were Hittites or led<\/p>\n

                                                                  by Hittites. On p. 35 it is suggested that they could have been Amorites. See in<\/p>\n

                                                                  addition Note 2 above where the Hurrian (Horite) language is also mentioned.<\/p>\n

                                                                    \n
                                                                  1. Location of City Of Avaris <\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                    Philip Schaff\u2019s \u201cBible Dictionary\u2019 Eleventh Edition, (first published<\/p>\n

                                                                    somewhere about 1885), Article, \u201cZoan,\u201d identifies Zoan with Tanis and Avaris.<\/p>\n

                                                                    Breasted, \u201cA History of the Ancient Egyptians,\u201d in Section 171, states<\/p>\n

                                                                    the exact site of Avaris is still \u201cundetermined.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                    Encyclopedia Americana, Can. Ed. (1953), Article, \u201cTanis,\u201d says, \u201cTanis<\/p>\n

                                                                    (Hebrew, Zoan) ancient Egyptian city, south of the Delta, before the founding<\/p>\n

                                                                    of Alexandria the chief commercial city of Egypt, capital of the Hyksos kings<\/p>\n

                                                                    about 2100 B.C. \u201cWe fear the worthy encyclopedia got its directions mixed, and<\/p>\n

                                                                    its date is outdated! But it agrees that the Hyksos capital is identified with Tanis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                    Page 93<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                    85<\/p>\n

                                                                      \n
                                                                    1. Hyksos Used Horses Extensive1y.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                      Breasted, \u201cA History of the Ancient Egyptians\u201d, in Section 20, speaks of<\/p>\n

                                                                      the \u201cimportation of the horse by the Hyksos.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                      Encyclopedia Americana, Can. Ed., Article, \u201cHistory, Ancient,\u201d says, The<\/p>\n

                                                                      Hyksos \u201ccontribution was the introduction of the horse and the war chariot.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                      Again, in Article \u201cEgypt,\u201d under Hyksos Period, it states, Barbarians though they<\/p>\n

                                                                      were, the Hyksos were aided in their conquest not only by internal weaknesses<\/p>\n

                                                                      of the Egyptian state, but also by their technologically superior war material,<\/p>\n

                                                                      the horse and chariots, body amour, and the composite bow.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                      Ishmael was \u201can archer\u201d par expellant (Gen 21:20) The composite bow<\/p>\n

                                                                      may have been introduced by the Ishmaelites.<\/p>\n

                                                                        \n
                                                                      1. Hyksos Religion<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                        Breasted, \u201cA History of the Ancient Egyptians,\u201d Section l78,states, \u201cTheir<\/p>\n

                                                                        patron god Sutekh is of course the Egyptianized form of some Syrian Baal.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                          \n
                                                                        1. Haran<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                          The light to be brought out by the present archaeological research work<\/p>\n

                                                                          at the important city of Haran will be watched by all with great interest. This<\/p>\n

                                                                          city in Genesis is constantly linked very closely with the Patriarchs, and we may<\/p>\n

                                                                          learn much concerning the importance of Abraham\u2019s people.<\/p>\n

                                                                          The Book of Genesis pictures the worship of Jehovah as being practiced<\/p>\n

                                                                          in Haran. Laban says to Jacob, \u201cThe God of Abraham, and the God of Nahor\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                          (Abraham\u2019s brother)<\/p>\n

                                                                          \u201cthe God of their father Tera) judge betwixt us\u201d (Gen.3l:53). Nevertheless,<\/p>\n

                                                                          Terah and his father Nahor also indulged in idolatry (Josh.24:3), which is<\/p>\n

                                                                          probably the reason Abraham had to entirely separate from his father\u2019s with<\/p>\n

                                                                          him family. Terah very likely carried with him the religion of the Moon-god<\/p>\n

                                                                          Sin from Ur. For all we know he may have been the one who implanted it<\/p>\n

                                                                          in Haran. We do know from early records that at Ur and at Haran wee to<\/p>\n

                                                                          great centers of this religion of Sin, the Mood-god. See also the article Haran<\/p>\n

                                                                          in Unger\u2019s Bible Dictionary, by Merril F. Unger, published by Moody Press,<\/p>\n

                                                                          Chicago, Second edition, 1959<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                          Page 94<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                          86<\/p>\n

                                                                            \n
                                                                          1. Importance of Abraham<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                            Encyclopedia Americana, Canadian Edition, Article \u201cAbraham\u201d has to<\/p>\n

                                                                            admit that the higher critical school acknowledge the reality of the man Abraham<\/p>\n

                                                                            and that he must have been rather important, even while the historicity of the<\/p>\n

                                                                            entire Biblical account of him is impugned and discredited. \u201cThe critical view<\/p>\n

                                                                            is that thee was a real Abram or Abraham (the traditions existing in both forms)<\/p>\n

                                                                            with his home at Hebron, probably a considerable man form the number and<\/p>\n

                                                                            the persistence of the legends about him, but that is all we know. The name of<\/p>\n

                                                                            his brother and ancestry are not persons, but Arab clans.<\/p>\n

                                                                            12 Horites (Hurri)<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                                            Barton \u201cArcheology and the Bible, Vth Edition (not IVth) gives quite<\/p>\n

                                                                            some information regarding the Hurri.<\/p>\n

                                                                            We cannot but notice there was a lot of travel between Canaan and<\/p>\n

                                                                            upper Mesopotamia in the Age of Abraham. In the Bible Abraham himself so<\/p>\n

                                                                            journeys, Eliezer goes for Rebekah, Jacob goes himself, unknown others brought<\/p>\n

                                                                            family news to Abraham about his brother\u2019s family in Haran (Gen 22:20-24)<\/p>\n

                                                                            The Hittite Kingdom was in Asia Minor, but a group of Hittites live at Hebron<\/p>\n

                                                                            (Gen 23:2,3,10,16-20) where not many years before the Amorites held the<\/p>\n

                                                                            district. (Gen 14:13,24) The Hittites had evidently moved in, in the interval.<\/p>\n

                                                                            The Hurri or Horite Kingdom was not far from the city of Haran, yet Horites<\/p>\n

                                                                            had moved into Seir, etc, just south of Canaan (Gen 14:6). It could be that<\/p>\n

                                                                            Emmims, Zuzimz, and Rephaim were branches of the same people, as they<\/p>\n

                                                                            seem to be significantly linked together again in Deuteronomy 2:1-23. All this<\/p>\n

                                                                            indicates travel between Canaan and Upper Mesopotamia.<\/p>\n

                                                                            The Horites being such near neighbors of Abraham\u2019s relatives in Haran,<\/p>\n

                                                                            might explain how Esau\u2019s family became such intimates the Horites south of<\/p>\n

                                                                            Canaan.<\/p>\n

                                                                              \n
                                                                            1. The Egyptians had no \u201cL\u201d<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                              Barton, \u201cArchaeology and the Bible,\u201d (IVth Ed.), p. 335, footnote.<\/p>\n

                                                                              14 The King held as a god.<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                                              Sir C. Leonard Woolley, \u201cUr of the Chaldees\u201d 1930, published by Charles<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                              Page 95<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                              87<\/p>\n

                                                                              Scribner\u2019s sons, New York, p. 65, speaks of the early kings of Ur being honored<\/p>\n

                                                                              as gods, long before Abraham\u2019s time.<\/p>\n

                                                                              Lieut.-Comm. Victor L. Trumper, R.N.R., M.R.A.S., in \u201cThe Mirror of<\/p>\n

                                                                              Egypt in the Old Testament,\u201d (about 1928), Published by Marshall Morgan<\/p>\n

                                                                              & Scott Limited, London England P. 122, says, \u201cThe Pharaoh was considered<\/p>\n

                                                                              by his subjects and himself as a god, and endeavored to act and speak as such.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                                \n
                                                                              1. Land of Uz<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                Schaff, \u201cBible Dictionary,\u201d Article \u201cUz,\u201d states, It was the \u201cGeneral<\/p>\n

                                                                                portion of the Arabian Desert east of Edom and south of Trachonitis, extending<\/p>\n

                                                                                indefinitely toward the Euphrates. \u201cUnger\u2019s Bible Dictionary, Article Uz (4)<\/p>\n

                                                                                adds further details.<\/p>\n

                                                                                  \n
                                                                                1. Traditional Date of Job.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                  Schaff, \u201cBible Dictionary,\u201d Article, \u201cJob.\u201d \u201cHales places him before the<\/p>\n

                                                                                  birth of Abraham, Usher about 30 years before the Exodus.<\/p>\n

                                                                                  Unger\u2019s Bible Dictionary, Article \u201cJob\u201d Time and Composition\u201d notes<\/p>\n

                                                                                  tremendous disagreement among Bible Scholars about the date of Job.<\/p>\n

                                                                                    \n
                                                                                  1. Job at Orfah. Tradition.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                    Schaff, \u201cBible Dictionary,\u201d Article, Uz. \u201cNear the Haran-gate in that city<\/p>\n

                                                                                    (Orfah) is Job\u2019s well,\u2019 which is a sacred shrine to the people because the patriarch<\/p>\n

                                                                                    drank of its waters.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                                      \n
                                                                                    1. Rehoboth at Rahabah by Euphrates.<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                      Schaff, \u201cBible Dictionary\u201d article \u201cRehoboth\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                                      Since the discovery and excavation of Mari, a very important city only<\/p>\n

                                                                                      about 30 miles south-east Rahabah, it has become common amongst scholars<\/p>\n

                                                                                      to ignor Rahabah altogether. However, I cannot find any t reference to a close<\/p>\n

                                                                                      investigation of Rahabah and its immediate vicinity to determine whether there<\/p>\n

                                                                                      was a \u201ccity\u201d there in the second millennium B. C.<\/p>\n

                                                                                      Several factors remain to suggest that the Rehoboth of Genesis 36:37 lay<\/p>\n

                                                                                      somewhere near this region. 1. It was \u201cby the river,\u201d a term otherwise understood<\/p>\n

                                                                                      to mean by the Euphrates. 2. As to the suggestion by some that this Rehoboth is<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                                      Page 96<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                                      88<\/p>\n

                                                                                      er-Ruheibah in the Negev, south westerly from Beer-sheba, we wish to point out<\/p>\n

                                                                                      that we seem to have no evidence whatever that there was a \u201ccity\u201d at that place<\/p>\n

                                                                                      in early times (Early or Middle Bronze Age); and, moreover, that place is not<\/p>\n

                                                                                      ever said to be \u201cby the river.\u201d 3. A very important factor is that I am informed<\/p>\n

                                                                                      the Mari tablets actually mention a place called \u201cRehoboth.\u201d It is a far cry from<\/p>\n

                                                                                      Mari to the north western Negev. It therefore seems most doubtful that the Mari<\/p>\n

                                                                                      tablets refer to er-Ruhe1bah, so tiny a spot and so far away. It is far more likely<\/p>\n

                                                                                      to refer to a place relatively near to Mari where the tablets were unearthed. 4.<\/p>\n

                                                                                      It is fairly certain that Mari was only a little south of the Hurrian boundary.<\/p>\n

                                                                                      This indicates that Rahabah near the Euphrates, lying north westerly from<\/p>\n

                                                                                      Mari, was probably within Hurr1an territory. If the Edom1tes were destroying<\/p>\n

                                                                                      or had destroyed the Hurrians, then Rahabah could have fallen into Edom1te<\/p>\n

                                                                                      hands. This may be giving too wide a meaning to the Biblical statement that<\/p>\n

                                                                                      the Edom1tes destroyed and supplanted the Horites (Hurrians), but the idea<\/p>\n

                                                                                      should not be too readily discounted as sometimes the Biblical statements have<\/p>\n

                                                                                      been found to have a wider scope than at first supposed.<\/p>\n

                                                                                        \n
                                                                                      1. Hyksos at war with Assyrians<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                        The story of the Hyksos preserved in Josephus Against Apion, tells us Salatis<\/p>\n

                                                                                        their king feared the Assyrians, upon which Breasted comments, (A History<\/p>\n

                                                                                        of the Ancient Egyptians\u201d Section 172) \u201cIf we eliminate the absurd reference<\/p>\n

                                                                                        to the Assyrians,\u201d they story may be reasonable…\u201d But we wish to point out<\/p>\n

                                                                                        that if the Edomites were the Hyksos, and the Edomite capital city had to be<\/p>\n

                                                                                        established at Rahabah, prior to the conquest of Egypt, then a reference to war<\/p>\n

                                                                                        with Assyria might indeed be quite historical.<\/p>\n

                                                                                        20 Tema, Teima, or Teyma<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                                                        Robert William Rogers, Phd., Litt. D., Cuneiform Paralles to the Old<\/p>\n

                                                                                        Testament, 2nd Edition, about 1926, Pub by Oxford University Press, London,<\/p>\n

                                                                                        Page 374, Nabonidus King of Babylon, father of Belshazzar king of Babylong<\/p>\n

                                                                                        (referred to in the Book of Daniel) resided at Tema, in the Arabian Desert.<\/p>\n

                                                                                          \n
                                                                                        1. Havalah, Ha\u2019il, Hayil, in Central Arabia<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                          Barton,l Archeology and the Bible,p 541 treats \u201cHavalah\u201d as meaning<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                                          Page 97<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                                          89<\/p>\n

                                                                                          Arabia in general; but George Adam Smith in a much older work, \u201cHistorical<\/p>\n

                                                                                          Atlas of the Holy<\/p>\n

                                                                                          Land,\u201d identifies it with Ha\u2019il or Hayil in Central Arabia.<\/p>\n

                                                                                            \n
                                                                                          1. Ruled Other Countries Before Entering Egypt<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                            Barton, \u201cArchaeology and the Bible,\u201d P. 35, mentions the Hyksos ruled<\/p>\n

                                                                                            other countries previously. Breasted, \u201cA History of the Ancient Egyptians,<\/p>\n

                                                                                            Section 19, also states the Hyksos evidently ruled over a number of countries<\/p>\n

                                                                                            before invading Egypt.<\/p>\n

                                                                                              \n
                                                                                            1. Pau, Pai, Phauara, Edomite city<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                              Schaff, Bible Dictionary, Article \u201cPau\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                                              Unger\u2019s Bible Dictionary, article \u201cPau\u201d admits its position is unknown<\/p>\n

                                                                                                \n
                                                                                              1. City of Pe, in Nile Delta<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                Breasted, \u201cA History of the Ancient Egyptians, Section 34.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                  \n
                                                                                                1. Names of Hyksos Kings<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                  Encyclopedia Americana, Can. Ed., Article, \u201cEgypt,\u201d under Chronology,<\/p>\n

                                                                                                  names the following Hyksos Kings:<\/p>\n

                                                                                                  Khian (Se-weser-en-ra); whom we have listed<\/p>\n

                                                                                                  Apepi (Aa-weser-ra); whom we call Apophis I<\/p>\n

                                                                                                  Apepi (Neb-khopesh-ra)<\/p>\n

                                                                                                  Aa-seh-ra<\/p>\n

                                                                                                  Apepi (Aa-kenen-ra)<\/p>\n

                                                                                                  Barton, \u201cArchaeology and the Bible,\u201d p.35, says one seems to have been<\/p>\n

                                                                                                  named \u201cJacob-el\u2019 or \u201cJacob-her.\u201d Was he named after Jacob, Esau\u2019s father? If our<\/p>\n

                                                                                                  thoery is correct, Jacob was a family name amonst the ancestors to these kings<\/p>\n

                                                                                                    \n
                                                                                                  1. Manda People<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                    Barton, \u201cArchaeology and the Bible,\u201d (Vth edition).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                                                    Page 98<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                                                    90<\/p>\n

                                                                                                      \n
                                                                                                    1. Hyksos god Sutekh. <\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                      Breasted, \u201cA History of the Ancient Egyptians,\u201d Section 173, reports a<\/p>\n

                                                                                                      King Apophis made an altar to Sutekh, \u201clord of Avaris, when he (Sutekh) set<\/p>\n

                                                                                                      all lands under his (the king\u2019s) feet.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                                                        \n
                                                                                                      1. Khabiri People in Amarna Letters<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                        Breasted, \u201cA History of the Ancient Egyptians,\u201d Section 278, declares, \u201cthe<\/p>\n

                                                                                                        advance of the Khabiri, among whom we must recognize bands of Hebrews<\/p>\n

                                                                                                        and Aramaeans.\u201d – \u201c<\/p>\n

                                                                                                        Barton, \u201cArchaeology and the Bible,\u201d gives some helpful translations.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                          \n
                                                                                                        1. A \u201cNew\u201d King<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                          Trumper in \u201cThe Mirror of Egypt in the Old Testament,\u201d page 68, draws<\/p>\n

                                                                                                          attention to the Greek word, for \u201canother\u201d (insert Greek picture here) used of<\/p>\n

                                                                                                          this king in Acts 7:18, which means \u201canother of a different kind\u201d, as opposed<\/p>\n

                                                                                                          to the Greek word (Insert second Greek word here) which is \u201canother of a<\/p>\n

                                                                                                          similar kind.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                                                            \n
                                                                                                          1. Expulsion of Hyksos Kings<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                            Breasted in \u201cA History of the Ancient Egyptians,\u201d Section 173, informs us<\/p>\n

                                                                                                            the expulsion required quite some time. A seige of Avaris was necessary; then,<\/p>\n

                                                                                                            the Hyksos were besieged three years in Sharuhen.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                            Older translations give the siege as \u201csix\u201d years, but Breasted corrected his<\/p>\n

                                                                                                            earlier translation, to three years.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                              \n
                                                                                                            1. Length of Hyksos Rule in Egypt<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                              Breasted, \u201cA History of the Ancient Egyptians,\u201d Section 177, gives 100<\/p>\n

                                                                                                              years as ample time.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                              Encyclopedia Americana, Canadian Edition, Article \u201cHistory, Ancient,\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                                                              dates Hyksos rule in Egypt as 1680-1580 B.C. (See also Note 1.)<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                \n
                                                                                                              1. Siege of Sharuhen<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                Some authorities, following Breasted\u2019s older translation still give \u201csix\u201d years<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                for the siege; but see Note 30 above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                                                                Page 99<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                                                                91<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                  \n
                                                                                                                1. Location of Sharuhen<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                  \u201cUnger\u2019s Bible Dictionary\u201d Article \u201cSharuhen\u201d states \u201cThis site reveals<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                  impressive evidence of Hyksos fortifications:<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                  Schaff, Bible Dictionary under articles \u201cSansannah, Hazar-susah, and<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                  Hazar-susim\u201d treats another city seemingly near to Sharuhen. The latter two<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                  names mean, \u201cHorse court\u201d or \u201cdepot of horses.\u201d Being in the same group of<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                  places as Shilhim or Sharuhen (Josh.15:31-32; 19:5-6; I.Chron.4::31- \u201cShaaraim<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                  is Sharuhen) It is possible we here have a Hyksos horse depot. If so, excavation<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                  of Hazar-susim might turn up more light on the Hyksos peoples.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                    \n
                                                                                                                  1. Song of Moses<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                    One cannot but wonder if the grouping of names in Exod.15:l4-l5 is not a<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                    reference to the Hyksos peoples which would still be well known to the Israelites.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                    The name Edom would include the \u201cHurrians\u201d or Horites amalgamated with<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                    them; \u201cPalestina\u201d would take in the Philistines at Gaza (near which Petrie<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                    found Hyksos graves) and the Avim; \u201cMoab\u201d comes in as an ally of Hyksos-<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                    Edom; and \u201cCanaan\u201d would take in the Hittite and Hivite helpers from that<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                    land, which we have referred to. Only the Ishmaelites appear to be missing.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                    This grouping of names must be significant of some connection uniting these<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                    people in thought or purpose, and, aside from the explanation offered in this<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                    book, the author knows of no reason why these names should be thus grouped<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                    in the Song of Moses.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      \n
                                                                                                                    1. Sinai and Edom Deserts<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                      Palestine Exploration Fund Annual III, (1915),<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      London, England, describes this desert region on pages 15 and those<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      following. The desert appears to be most \u201cinhospitable\u201d as there stated. However,<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      this general survey of the area seemed to indicate there had been some activity<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      in that region near the middle of the second millennium B.C. or a little earlier,<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      judging from the pottery shards, etc.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Barton in \u201cArchaeology and the Bible\u201d pages 35-36, mentions that Sir<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Flinders Petrie found two remarkable camp sites in Egypt, one about 20 miles<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      north of Cairo, the other at On (Heliopolis), which he believed were original<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Hyksos camps before they began to assume Egyptian ways and civilization. The<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                                                                      Page 100<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                                                                      92<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      relatively crude, black pottery of these people is just what one would expect of a<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      nomadic people just come from ~ the inhospitable deserts of Sinai and Edom,<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      and of Horites coming from the same regions.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Appendix Two<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Earliest Horses in Egypt<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      After the text of this book was completed, in which we postulated the<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      presence of some horses in Egypt before the Hyksos Invasion brought them in<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      abundance, reports of the excavation of Fort Buhen in the Sudan have come to<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      hand. Here there was a large Egyptian fortress from the times of the XIIth and<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      of the XVIIIth Dynasties, that is, before and after the Hyksos period.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Professor Walter B. Emery, Edwards Professor of Egyptology in the<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      University of London, carrying out the excavations for the Egypt Exploration<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Society, discovered the burial of a horse definitely pre-Hyksos. He states that<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      \u201con sound archaeological evidence\u201d it antedated the Hyksos by 200 years. (See<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      \u201cIllustrated London News, September 12, 1959, page 250)<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      This single find muzzles forever the argument based solely on the silence<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      of the monuments that there \u201cwere no horses in Egypt prior to the Hyksos<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Invasion. It confirms our theory that some horses had been brought into the<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      country earlier than the times of the Hyksos.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Appendix Three<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Hyksos Influence in Canaanite Cities<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      It is definite that after the Hyksos Invasion and conquest of Egypt, the<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      power of the Hyksos Pharaohs was strongly felt in Canaan.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Scarabs of King Apophis (Pepa or Shesha) were found at Lachish<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      (Illustrated London News, Nov 27, 1937 page 944 Palestine Clues, by J. L.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Starkey, and there are marked Hyksos levels noted in excavation such cities<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      as Megiddo and Jericho. The indication is that much of Canaan came under<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Hyksos control in one way or another.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                                                                      Page 101<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                                                                      93<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Appendix Four<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Chart of Similarities<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Hyksos<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Edomites<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Empire existed about 300 to 200 years<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      before Exodus.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Formed a great kingdom about 300 \u2013<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      200 years before the Exodus<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Empire took in southern fringe of<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Canaan and likely reached Euphrates<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Edomite kingdom took in southern<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      fringes of Canaan and reached<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Euphrates at Rehoboth<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Were mainly Semites<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Were mainly Semites<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Included a strong Hurri element<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Included a strong Horite element<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      May have been connected with the<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Hittites<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Connected with Hittites<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Had horses and used horses in warfare Had horses and describe use of horse<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      in battle<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Were possibly shepherds and nomads Were shepherds and were nomadic<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      in origin<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Linked with Arabians<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Inter-related with Arabians<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Linked with Canaanites<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Inter-related with Canaanites<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Called Barbarians, ie of a lower<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      material standard to Egyptians<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Did not posses a settled, cultural life<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      like the Egyptians<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Capital city (Avaris) not in their own<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      country<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Capital cities often not in their own<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      country<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Worshiped Sutekh (Seth) or Baal<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Drifted to Baal worship<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                                                                      Page 102<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                                                                      94<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Appendix Five<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Chronology Table<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                                                                      Page 103<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                                                                      95<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Appendix Six<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Maps <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                                                                      Page 104<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                                                                      96<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                                                                      Page 105<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                                                                      97<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Bibliography<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Bar- Deroma, H. The River of Egypt (Nahal Mizraim)<\/em>, Palestine Exploration<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Quarterly, Jan.-June 1960, p. 37<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Barton, George A. Archeology and the Bible<\/em>, IVth Edition, ASSU, Philadelphia<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      PA, USA, 1952<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Bietak, Manfred, Avaris: The Capital of the Hyksos: Recent Excavations<\/em>, Books<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Britain; 1995<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Breasted Prof J. H., A History of the Ancient Egyptians <\/em>Charles Scriber\u2019s Sons,<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      New York, 1919<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Breasted Prof. J. H., The Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus<\/em>, Oriental Institute<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Publications, Voll III, Chicago, 1930<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Emery, Professor Walter B. article, name unknown <\/em>Illustrated London News,<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      September 12, 1959, page 250<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Encyclopedia Americana, Canadian Edition 1963<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Compton\u2019s Pictured Encyclopedia, Various articles <\/em>as quoted, F. E. Compton<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      & Co., Chicago 1958 ed<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Internet Site: Egyptian Monuments, 2003 <\/em>https:\/\/www.egyptsites.co.uk\/lower\/<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      delta\/eastern\/daba\/daba.html)<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Internet Site: Chronologically Helpful Parallels between the Hyksos and the<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Amalekites<\/em>, 2003, https:\/\/www.specialtyinterests.net\/hyksos.html#amada<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                                                                      Page 106<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                                                                      98<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Kirk M. E., Outline of Ancient Cultural History of Transjordan<\/em>, Palestine<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Exploration Quarterly, July-Oct. 1944<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Kuhrt, A, The Ancient Near East <\/em>Routledge; (September 1995) ISBN:<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      0415128722<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Lacheman, Ernest R, Martha A. Morrison, David I. Owen , The Eastern Archives<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      of Nuzi and Excavations at Nuzi 9\/2 <\/em>(Studies on the Civilization and the Culture<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      of Nuzi and the Hurrians, Vol 4) Eisenbrauns; 1993<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Marston, Sir Charles, The Bible Comes Alive, <\/em>Eyre and Spotiswoode, London,<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      1937<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Rogers, Robert William Cuneiform Parallels to the Old Testament <\/em>2nd Edition,<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Oxford University Press, London, 1926<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Schaff, Philip, A Dictionary of the Bible, <\/em>Eleventh Edition, ASSU, 1885<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Smith, George Adam, Historical Atlas of the Holy Land<\/em>, University of Aberdeen,<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      1915<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Starkey , J. L., Palestine Clues<\/em>, Illustrated London News, Nov 27, 1937 page 944<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      The Christian<\/em>, London England, Aug. 30, 1957<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Trumper, Lieut-Comm. Victor L, The Mirror of Egypt in the Old Testament<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Marshall Morgan & Scott Limited, London England 1928<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Unger, Merrill F. Archaeology and the Old Testament<\/em>, Zondervan, Grand Rapids,<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      1954<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Unger, Merrill F. Unger\u2019s Bible Dictionary<\/em>, Moody Press, Chicago, Second<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      edition, 1959<\/p>\n\n\n\n
                                                                                                                      Page 107<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                                                                                                                      99<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Unknown, A Pompeii of Southern Palestine, The Illustrated London News,<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      June 20,1931, page 1050<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Unknown, Illustrated London News, May 14,1932, page 814<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Unknown, Illustrated London News, July 9, 1932, page 57<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Watson, C. M., Editor, History of the Southern Desert, <\/em>Palestine Exploration<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Fund Annual III, (1915) London, England<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Wilhelm, Gernot , Jennifer Barnes (Translator) Hurrians <\/em>(Ancient Near East<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Series), Aris & Phillips; Revised edition September 1989<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      Woolley, Sir C. Leonard, Ur of the Chaldees <\/em>Charles Scribner\u2019s sons, New York,<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      1930<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                       <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                                                                                                                      This is the html version of the file https:\/\/www.biblebelievers.biz\/edom.pdf. Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web. Page 1 EDOM & THE HYKSOS Discovery of a large early Edomite Empire David J. Gibson CanBooks Page 2 Edom and the Hyksos by David J. Gibson Copyright \u00a9 CanBooks 2010 Printed in Canada […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":11,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5322],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-38945","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-archive"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlantipedia.ie\/samples\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38945","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlantipedia.ie\/samples\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlantipedia.ie\/samples\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlantipedia.ie\/samples\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/11"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlantipedia.ie\/samples\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=38945"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/atlantipedia.ie\/samples\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38945\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlantipedia.ie\/samples\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=38945"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlantipedia.ie\/samples\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=38945"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlantipedia.ie\/samples\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=38945"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}