My long-term reader might know I develop mini-obsessions. In the search for future book ideas I’ve done deep-dive research into the modern hoax of Bigfoot, the history of alien abduction stories, the identity of Robin Hood and the historicity of King Arthur. Ultimately I’ve been on a journey to figure out what drives myth. And what does truth mean when it comes to these myths? I’ve come to the conclusion that ‘truth’ is a misleading term when it comes to myth. Literal truth as we tend to mean it -i.e., was there a man named Arthur who had a magic sword and rode around ancient Britain?-is irrelevant. Myths are stories we tell about who we are. As a true, a family, a nation. We encode messages into them that give us identity and meaning. So the truth of a myth lies in the people who first told it. What are they trying to tell us about themselves?
Something else I’ve learned along the way is that all of the fields are rife with misinformation. Blogs or YouTube channels with religious or political agendas. often pretending to be ‘reasonable people asking reasonable questions.’ Arthurian ‘research’ is -and always has been- a hotbed of political identity with some nationalistic undertones. This is raised to a whole new level with my latest deep-dive. The exodus. As ever, look for the agenda. Look for the pattern of who is saying these things, and why. Some people need the Exodus (and Conquest) to be literally true because they need the bible to be literally tue. Some need it to be completely untrue because of a similar bias in the opposite direction. Some need there to be at least large grains of truth in order to justify Israel’s existence as a modern state. Others on the opposite side of that political divide need it to be completely untrue in order to illegitimate Israel. And you can never be entirely sure if you are accidentally taking one of those positions by listening to the wrong person with the wrong bias. So, as with some of my other little obsessions, I’m spilling my thoughts out here in as organised a way as I can.
ARCHEOLOGY SAYS IT DIDN’T HAPPEN
This right here is a red flag. One of the most common memes on the internet and YouTube ‘debate’ videos is the notion that archaeology and faith are in opposition on this subject. It ties into the larger pattern of being anti-science and anti-facts that has led us to where we are. Giving us something to resell against, questioning the wisdom of experts. Except, this idea isn’t true. Sure, you can find some archaeologists who will say it didn’t happen at all, and you can find many religious fundamentalists who will say it happened exactly as written, but the truth is, as ever, somewhere in the large space between those two. Scholars are open to the idea of some basis for the story, and can even make varied cases for how and when. Archaeology is a science. It boils down to things for which proof has been found, and things for which proof hasn’t been found. And yes, there isn’t proof for an event to have happened exactly as written. But that’s not the same thing as saying the event itself didn’t happen. Archaeology, as a science, is an ever evolving field, with new information being discovered and accepted each decade.
Something that is true of archaeology is that, by and large, the exodus isn’t all that important a question right now. The more people have excavated and researched, the more they have unearthed a deep and complex history in the region, of different cultures rising and falling, of settlements migrating between lowlands and highlands, of possible ties to climate change and…in all honesty this becomes far more fascinating than focusing on one event that may or may not be mythic. Archaeology may well someday prove the exodus, but if so it will come as a byproduct of other research into the region, not as the cause.
THE BIBLICAL DATE IS 1446 BCE
Here is another common meme. The date off the exodus is usually broken down to two key dates. 1446 BCE or 1260(ish) BCE. These are known as the early and late dates. 1446 is often argued to be the biblical date. This comes from the book of Kings, where Solomon is said to have started building his temple in the fourth year of his reign, 480 years after the exodus. And, since we know roughly when Solomon was supposed to have reigned, we can work backwards to circa 1446. However, this is based on the modern translation of the bible. The much older Greek version -the Septuagint- gives the number as 440 years. Which would mean 1406 bce. And this is based just on the numbers given. If we look at the places and names mentioned in the bible, we have to start looking later. The narrative tells us that the Hebrew slaves built Pi-Ramses and Pithom. (The notion that the slaves built the pyramids is not biblical - the pyramids are never mentioned - and all but the most fringe of historical theorists accept that any exodus period would have been a millennia after the pyramids.) While the identity of the latter is still debated, general consensus has long accepted that the former was the capital city of Ramses II, and we know where it was. The site has been excavated. This is the key information for proponents of the late date, and they are being just as “biblical” as fans of the early date. I would add two further biblical complications that seem to come up less often. First is that Moses is said to have performed his miracles in the fields of Zoan. And second is that the Israelites didn’t take the easiest route to the promised land -the coastal road- because they wanted to avoid the Philistines. Zoan is generally -and probably correctly- equated with Tanis, which was a city built a century after Ramses II, into the 21st Dynasty. Tanis was used as the new capital once the Nile silted up and rerouted away from Pi-Ramses. Many of the monuments and bricks from Pi-Ramses -and the nearby ruined city of Avaris- were used in the building of Tanis. We could be liberal with the phrasing and accept that the fields of Zoan mean in the region that later became the city, which still allows for the 1260(ish) date. However, the Philistines weren’t in place during Ramses II’s reign. By all general current archaeological consensus, the Philistines were one of the Sea Peoples, a loose confederation of displaced people who attacked Egypt a number of times during the twentieth and twenty-first Dynasty, and who Ramses III claimed to have “settled” in Canaan. And so, still being biblical, if the fleeing Hebrews had to avoid the Philistines, then we’re looking at an even later date. Around the time of the Bronze Age collapse. Away from the bible - let’s not forget this is a Jewish story at heart - there is a Rabbinical tradition placing the event around 1310 bce. I don’t think this fits into any larger pattern, but it’s always worth a mention.
BUT THIS IS ALL BASED ON THE BIBLE.
All of the above comes from reading the bible. Not from archeology, not from history, not from the other city states or nations of the region. And on the subject of the bible, we need to take a quick look at another topic of misinformation.
THE DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS.
What is the documentary hypothesis? If you listen to many Christian apologists, documentaries, or YouTube shows, you will be told the hypothesis is out of style or discredited. This is completely untrue. The hypothesis is still the accepted consensus view among all serious scholars of the biblical text. There may be variations and disagreements about some of the specifics, but not the broad strokes. Loosely speaking, it’s the idea that the Old Testament was stitched together from four separate sources. J, E, D and P. There is a lot of evidence behind this, and it’s a good idea to check out the work of both Richard Elliot Friedman and Joel Baden. For now I’ll just oversimplify to say that J and E are possibly dated to around the same time but possibly written separately in the north and south kingdoms, whereas D and P were written later. The general academic consensus is that these sources were stitched together either during the Babylonian exhale or at some point afterwards. There is evidence that a community of Israelites went in the opposite direction during the exile and settled on Elephantine Island in Egypt, and from papyri they left behind we see suggestions they were still polytheistic and also had no awareness of the existence of the Torah. This backs up the idea that the Torah was formed in Babylon or much later back in Canaan. Further, as Dr Yonatan Adler has shown, archaeologically there is no (current) proof of the Torah being observed on a large scale before the third century BCE. Which puts all the previous talk of biblical dates into new context. If ALL of Israel was in slavery in Egypt until wither 1446 or 1260 BCE, and were then given the rules of the Torah, how come there is no proof of those rules being followed for a further century?
SO WHAT DOES ARCHEOLOGY TELL US?
First I’d like to stay on the subject of Egypt.
OKAY, SMART-ARSE, WHAT DOES EGYPTOLOGY TELL US?
There is nothing in the records of Egypt -as yet discovered- that says “the Hebrews were here and left on X date.” That’s not necessarily a problem if the people who became Hebrews were not called that while they were in Egypt, but it is a wrinkle. What we do get from Egyptology are lots of small tantalizing pieces of a puzzle that doesn’t fit together neatly. First, the item most-often mentioned at this point is the Merneptah Stele. A monument to the victory of Pharoah Merneptah -son of Ramses II- over the first group Sea People. Right at the end of his list of defeated groups is the first generally accepted mention of Israel. Though the way it is written suggests a people, rather than a place. This stele dates to around 1206 bce, and so many argue that this is the latest date we can assign to the exodus. In effect, the argument goes, whenever the exodus happened it must have been long enough before 1206 bce that the Hebrews can have settled and become known as Israel. However, on the face of it all this stele proves is that a people named Israel were known to Egypt in 1206 BCE. And as we have seen, the kingdoms ofIsrael and Judah were not necessarily united, and were not observing the Torah. Plainly speaking, they were not Jews. Not yet. So these people Merneptah bragged about defeating could have been any one of the polytheistic tribes of the north, not yet coming together under Yahweh. Two other interesting pieces come in the form of names. From inscriptions dating back to the beginning of the Eighteenth Dynasty we can find mentions of Shasu -the word meaning foreign, and believed to be given to nomads living in the Negev, the Sinai and around the area that later became Petra. We also see numerous mentions of nomadic people called the Apiru or Habiru. That last word seems interesting in this context, right? Habiru…Hebrew? Sure. But be careful. Much of the internet’s pseudo-history is based on equating things that sound similar. It’s just as dangerous as seeing two different cultures building pyramids - the only way to make a stable tall structure in the time before iron girders - and decide they must have gotten the idea from the same place. Sometimes things just sound the same. Especially in a region where so many of the languages co-existed and fed into each other. And sometimes civilisations who are thousands of miles apart can apply the same common-sense engineering principles.
The Shasu and Apiru appear to be two different groups of people, possibly originating in different parts of Canaan. There is evidence from elsewhere across Canaan and the Middle East of people who encountered the Apiru/Habiru, but fewer mentions of the Shasu. Both groups are known to have been enslaved by Egypt. Pharoahs including Thutmose III, Amenhotep III, Horemheb, Sety I and Ramses II are known from records to have taken thousands of prisoners from these tribes and turned them into slaves.
One of the most interesting mentions of the Shasu comes in a list dated to the reign of Amenhotep III -inscribed somewhere around 1406 bce- listing the ‘Shasu of YWH.’ So, although the name Israel doesn’t appear in Egyptian records for a further 150-plus years, we have a mention of their god. Proponents of the early date will argue this inscription is proof that exodus had already happened by the date, and that the Hebrews were simply known as the Shasu until some time later. Their case would appear to be supported by the timing. 1406 is 40 years after 1446, and this would fit the years of wandering described in the bible. If this version is true, then we’re simply looking for the time and reason that ‘Shasu’ became ‘Israel.’
Proponents of the late date will say this is simply proof that YWH was already extant. Indeed, the recent scholarly consensus is that YWH was a god in the Edomite/Midianite region predating the foundation of Israel. The bible itself talks of YWH coming out of Edom, or from the region of Mount Seir. To backers of the late date, this is simply proof that YWH pre-existed the exodus.
The last record of the Apiru that I’ve been able to locate so far -and please, as ever, remember I’m not qualified in this field- dates to the third regnal year of Ramses IV, which would be somewhere just before 1150 bce. Way after even the late date. But not all that long before the building of Tanis in the fields of Zoan.
OKAY. NOW CAN WE TALK ABOUT ARCHEOLOGY?
Sure. But remember this is a huge field and I can’t cover everything in a blog post. Broadly speaking, it’s fair to say that archaeology has been finding that the tribes of Israel were native to Canaan. Dr Israel Finkelstein has covered this extensively. There is proof of both the northern kingdom of Israel, and the southern kingdom of Judah existing prior to the Babylonian exile, but nothing conclusive to show they were ever the united monarchy of David and Solomon. No proof of Solomon has been found, but there are a few (disputed, but also widely accepted) mentions of the house of David engraved in steles dating to the correct period. There are scholars of ancient Hebrew such as Joel Baden who make a good argument for the existence of David based on textual analysis. To boil his argument down: the book of Samuel goes to great lengths to absolve David of any wrongdoing. All of his political or religious enemies die, but Samuel assures us David had nothing to do with it and it was all God’s doing. So, Baden argues, why go to all that trouble? If David was entirely fictional there would be no need to provide alibi or absolution, the author simply wouldn’t write the crimes in the first place. Because Samuel seems to be engaging in a form of political spin in favour of David, this suggests David was a real person who needed that spin. It’s entirely possible David and Solomon existed and ruled in Judah, but without being the larger united monarchy of the bible. And they weren’t monotheistic. At least not in the way we tend to mean. There were multiple gods, but people would tend to favour their local deity. Even within the bible we see the vestigial traces of polytheism. Yahweh had a wife, Asherah, and sat at the head of a divine council. I.e, a council of other gods. Or…was it even Yahweh? Early on in the narrative the deity goes by the names El or Elohim, and reveals his true name at the burning bush. This change of name was one of the first clues on the road to the documentary hypothesis. Why would god change his name? (I’m using he/his purposefully Yahweh in his early form was very male.) It’s now generally accepted among scholars that El/Elohim was a god in the northern kingdom, and Yahweh was either a lesser god in a pantheon, or a national god of a southern tribe who was later made into THE god when the Torah was pieced together following the exile.
A question worth asking here is, if the Israelites were already in Canaan, why would the exodus need to happen? Could it be that the Israelites were always there, but Yahweh wasn’t?
However, archaeology does provide some interesting information. Back over in Egypt, as already stated, Thutmoses III and Amenhotep III claimed to have taken thousands of prisoners from Canaan. Professor Israel Finkelstein (who, in fairness, it should be mentioned is one of the people who believe the exodus is a myth) shows that the population of the Canaanite highlands decreased massively during the middle-to-late Bronze Age, and then rose rapidly at the start of the Iron Age. The Iron Age increase is by a factor of three. A huge surge. And many of the settlements were new – in other words they were not built on the ruins of previous sites. Many of the sites that did reoccupy previous settlements appear to be of a new culture.
Somewhere around 1177 bce the Bronze Age ended, as all of the most powerful and advanced civilizations encountered a form of systems collapse at the same time, likely the cumulative result of climate change, warfare, famine, and the Sea People invasions. What generalization can we take from this? Well, we can say that something happened to decimate the Canaanite population during the Bronze Age -which matches up exactly to the time the Pharaohs of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties were waging war and taking slaves- and then something happened at the start of the Iron Age to create a surge in the population of Canaan right around the time Egypt was collapsing. Is that proof for the exodus? Of course not. It’s always important to remember that evidence that fits isn’t automatically evidence that proves. But the date does fit quite nicely if we begin looking for the event to have happened even later than the ‘late date’, caused by the Bronze Age collapse. Though it’s also possible to think the surge in population in the Canaanite highlands was simply driven by people fleeing the coastal cities after the arrival of the Philistines, who appear to have come from the Aegean.
THE MIDIAN PROBLEM
The biblical account tells us that Moses lived in exile in Midian for a time. (40 years in the text, but I’m not focused on the numbers.) This is important because it’s there that he first encounters YWH, on a mountain either in Midianite territory, or within pastoral sheep herding range of Midianite territory. Moses is married into a Midianite family, with his father-in-law (referred to by many different names, including Jethro) said to be a priest. And its from here that he travels back to Egypt with the mission to free ‘his’ people. But why is this in the story? It’s a thorny extra detail. A convoluted plot. The story already features a group of people from one placed displaced into slavery in a second location, who then move back to the first location. Why add in a third place? Why have YWH introduced to us via Midian, rather than having the god of the Israelites be hailing from…Israel? When it comes to making up the story from scratch, it’s a mess. It’s exactly the kind of mess that, to me, suggests there’s a true event in here somewhere. The Midian connection survives because it’s true, and therefore important.
The exact location of Midian is still debated. Some place it firmly on the coast of the Arabian Peninsula. Some place it a little further north, around the top of the Gulf of Aqaba. Archeology sort-of supports both right now, leading the notion that it was perhaps a nomadic group of people, or a large territory made up of loosely connected tribes. Archeologists have found pottery that they ascribe to the Midianites in the Timna Valley, but this is still up for debate, with some saying the pottery should be Nabatean or Edomite. (The Nabatean’s are people who moved into the area after the Midianites moved further north, and come much too late to be involved in this story to be linked to the Exodus, though they did leave us the beautiful carved city of Petra.)
As I mentioned above, we have those records of the Shasu of YWH. Inscriptions bearing the name YWH have been found in the Negev desert, which is further north and while I don’t want to suggest the Midianites made it that far north in great numbers, I would add in the idea that perhaps there is a link between the ‘Shasu of YWH’ and the Midianites. The exact wording of the inscription is debated, but most consensus seems to settle on it referring to the people of an area, rather than the people of a god. An area named YWH? Perhaps a name that was later given to their god as they migrated away from their homeland? We know that Egypt called people Shasu, and we know the bible called people Midianties, but can we find or discount a connection between them? We’ve already seen that worship of YWH seems to originate in this region, whereas further north in Canaan -especially around what would become the northern Kingdom of Israel- evidence of early worship seems to be rooted more in El.
WHAT WAS THAT BIT ABOUT THE TIMNA VALLEY?
Here’s a detail I find interesting. Timna was the home to copper mining for both the Egyptians, the Israelites, and for people in-between that may or may not have been the Midianites or Nabateans. The location of Mount Horeb/Sinai is endlessly debated, and the traditional Christian location is Jebel Musa in the Sinai Peninsula. I would argue that the location isn’t important. Horeb wasn’t where Yahweh lived. It was simply where he appeared. Coming from somewhere else to reveal himself to the wanderers. Yahweh then travelled with the Hebrews, appearing in the holy shrine of the Tabernacle. All the arguments over the location of Mount Horeb really boil down to finding a place where a god may or may not have briefly rested, after travelling from one place, and continuing on to another place.
However, the location does seem important to people. And the Timnah Valley copper mines highlight an important detail in this search. The traditional Christian site is Jebel Mussa in the Sinai Peninsula. But throughout the New kingdom of Egypt -covering both the early and late dates- the Sinai was Egyptian territory. It’s not until the Bronze Age collapse that we see Egypt’s border shrink back westward across the Sinai. This needn’t be a problem if you believe whole cloth in the parting of the Red Sea, and also believe that the Pharaoh and his army were drowned. If that happened, then the fugitives would be free to spend as much time as they want worshipping at a holy mountain in the Sinai, because nobody is left to chase them. But if you find yourself looking for a more naturalistic version of events (and the original Hebrew version off the story had the Hebrews crossing the Yam Suph, which is Sea of Reeds rather than Sea of Red, which could indicate any of the large tidal marshy lakes that used to exist east of the Nile Delta before the Suez Canal) then you also find yourself looking for a Mount Horeb that was outside of Egyptian territory, beyond the reach of any surviving army or Pharoah. I’m more persuaded to find Horeb/Sinai in the mountains just beyond the Sinai, in the area Egypt never fully controlled. Which just happens to be the area that could have been Midian, and could also have been the home of the Shasu.
The Timnah Valley is something of a gray area in this regard. At the height of Egypts powers the valley -and its copper mines- were the edge of Egyptian territory. As soon as their power started to fade, during the reign of Ramses III, the valley became contested. Archaeologists have uncovered a shrine to Hathor at the foot of Mount Timna, near the mines. They have also found that the shine was destroyed by whoever occupied the site immediately after Egypt, and these new inhabitants placed a tent over the site instead. That is…a group of people living in the desert east of Egypt had a tent shrine at the foot of a mountain. They have also found a bronze snake. Moses was said to have created a bronze snake. But archaeology doesn’t tend to link this site with the Hebrews because the tent shrine dates to the mid twelfth century (near 1150bce), a hundred years after even the traditional late date exodus of Rameses II.
A MOVEMENT OF THE PEOPLE
An interesting development has come in the form of a theory put forwards by Professor Richard Elliot Freidman, who argues that the exodus is historical, but not as a migration of the whole nation of Israel. He argues -and he’s an expert on the bible and biblical Hebrew- that the Levite tribe of the narrative have Egyptian names, whereas members of the other tribes of Israel don’t. He points to similarities between the tabernacle and the war tent of Ramses as additional proof that there is a connection between Jewish tradition and Egypt. The Levites were effectively the overseers of the Jewish traditions. They were not allowed an area of land, as the other tribes of Israel and Judah were. Instead they were present in each city, taking a tithe and overseeing religious practice and the sacrifice of animals. They were the priests who handled the Ark and guarded the temple. Both Moses and Aaron were Levites. The earliest mentions of Aaron as the brother of Moses can be read as members of a brotherhood, not necessarily a blood relation. Professor Freidman also points to an interesting clue in the oldest surviving texts from the bible – the Song of Miriam and the Song of Deborah. The Song of Miriam is an account of the crossing of the reed sea. Quite literally a reference to the exodus. But it does not mention Israel. On the other hand, the song of Deborah lists the tribes of Israel who answered the call to join battle at Megiddo, and it doesn’t mention the Levites. So on the one hand a mention of the exodus that doesn’t mention Israel, and on the other a list of Israelite tribes that doesn’t mention the Levites. Both of these texts can be dated -via details in the narratives and a study of the Hebrew language used (Hebrew, like any language, has evolved, and the time in which any given text was written can be dated in the same way we can date Latin or English texts) to somewhere near the end of the twelfth century bce or very early in the eleventh. For people who find these phrases as confusing as me, that means somewhere in the low 1100’s or high 1000’s. Professor Friedman argues that this is because the two narratives were not yet linked. The Levites were leaving Egypt, and the tribes of Israel were extant in Canaan.
BUT YOU SAID ISRAEL WAS KNOWN IN 1206 BCE?
Well, yes. And it should be noted that we have begun to shift from a fairly clean set of historical views into more of a realm of speculation and educated guesses. But here’s the thing. The Merneptah Stele is proof that a people known as Israel were known, but nothing more than that. Anything more we read into it -in either direction- is still guesswork. Professor Friedman’s theory is that this should be taken literally. That there were people of Israel in Israel, but that the Stele has nothing at all to do with an exodus.
If we can briefly remove ourselves from the simplified pop-culture narrative of a whole people being enslaved, then freeing themselves from enslavement, and of their god revealing themself on a mountain before the whole nation moved into the promised land, we can start to see a version of history that might actually be supported by history.
What do we know so far? There were nomadic tribes called the Shasu and the Apiru/Habiru. Some of these Shasu were identified with YWH by around 1400 bce. Over a period of two hundred years multiple Pharoah’s took both Shasu and Habiru as slaves, not all in one go but in numerous raids. The Hebrews are credited with building two cities that were built (or rebuilt) during the reign of Ramses II. By the time if Rameses’ son, Merneptah, there people known as Israel in Canaan. Around 1177bce the Bronze Age collapse was setting in, the Philistines were living on the coast of Canaan, and the Canaanite Highlands had a massively reduced population. The events of both the songs of Miriam and Deborah can be dated to the low 1100’s or high 1000’s, at around a time when the Canaanite Highlands were experiencing a population surge. Somewhere between 1177 and the writing of these texts there were destructions at both Megiddo and Hazor.
I’ll call back an extra detail here. The last (that I know of) mention of the Apiru in Egyptian texts are in the third regnal year of Ramses IV -during whose reign the collapse of Egypt really set in- when 800 Apiru are listed as part of a quarrying project in the Sinai. Ramses IV dies around 1150 bce. His father, Ramses III, is the last (currently) known Pharoah to have control over Timnah Valley, and during R-IV’s reign is when Egyptian territory started to fall back westwards. Also the first known industrial strike in history took place during Ramses III’s reign, with the workers at Dier El-Medina refusing to work until they were provided with food. So….an unhappy workforce, right in the place where we need to be finding an unhappy workforce.
What do I speculate on top of what we know?
In line with Professor Friedman, I think the exodus happened, but to a smaller group. I think the peoples who became known as the northern tribes of Israel were already in Canaan. A key detail from the Song of Deborah is that -unless I’m mistaken- all of the tribes mentioned are from the northern area. Benjamin could be an arguable point, but Judah and Simeon are missing along with the Levites. So if we can remove the need to find a BIBLICALLY ACCURATE EXODUS and look at the evidence on the ground, we can see a possible narrative forming involving the indigenous tribes in the north, who were known to Mernaptah. Sometimes smaller tribes, sometimes united, sometimes at war with each other, sometimes on better terms.
Once the Bronze Age collapse set in two things started to happen. In Canaan, people started to move around and form newer settlements as the old ones collapsed, leading to the destruction layers at some of the cities. Hazor and Megiddo were taken during this period. While in Egypt, amid the unrest and weakening monarchy, a long drought had set in, and a new sense of identity and fresh statehood was being stoked by seeing people like the Philistines successfully take land in Canaan. This atmosphere led to the uprising that became known as the Exodus. Possibly violent, possibly peaceful.
I think the Midianite connection in the narrative exists because the exodus was originally of Midianite shasu, who went home to Yahweh’s territory. Just beyond the reach of the fading Egyptian empire on the western edge of the Sinai. Either immediately taking control of the Timnah Valley, or heading further up into the mountains and then heading back into Timnah as the Egyptians pulled out. They worshipped Yahweh in a tent shrine they erected over the ruins of the Egyptian Hathor site.
Over time this group then headed north up through the mountains and established a presence in early Judah, with Yahweh as part of the overall Canaanite pantheon. By the time of the Babylonian exile Yahwism had gained significant influence in the larger cities, and the gods of the northern tribes had faded in influence as the tribes own positions weakened. And then during the time of exile -or in the immediate aftermath of the return- the Yahweh priests stitched together the Torah in such a way to place their god as the only one -or the only important one.
It’s worth pointing out the repeating motif from Genesis up to the second temple period (after the exile) is of people not following Yahweh. Time and time again we see stories of people being killed, exiled, enslaved or punished. Even the exile itself is written as a punishment dealt out by Yahweh for his people not following his laws. Putting this against the backdrop of the historical context, it would seem a simple conclusion to me that we are looking at the post-exile mindset, and a rewriting off history to say “this is what happens when you don’t follow the right god, follow him now.” It’s national myth, political policy, and history all stitched together into something akin to the United States constitution. In effect for a United States of Israel.
Jericho remains a sticking point in this theory. The destruction layer doesn’t fit at all. But I’m happy just to call this out as something that doesn’t fit, rather than try to bend my ideas to make it all work. The same applies to the period of Judges. It’s not a neat fit. Not yet, anyway. But not everything needs to fit seamlessly. Life is complicated and weird. History is full of Rashomon. Myth is story, it;’s identity, and looking for exact 1:1 ‘truth’ in myth is a waste of time. Perhaps there was a David and Solomon, perhaps there wasn’t. Perhaps there was a united monarchy, perhaps there wasn’t. Our national myths evolve over time, taking in different events throughout history and slowly merging them inti a unifying story. Not every American can trace their ancestry back to the pilgrims of Thanksgiving. In fact, almost none can. But over time -over a relatively short time of a couple hundred years- Thanksgiving became the important foundational ‘myth’ of America, celebrated at the same time every year. By the same token, I believe though the exodus was undertaken by one or two tribes rather than all of Israel, the story grew into the foundational myth for the whole nation, celebrated at the same time every year.
TL:DR?
I do think there was a historical event behind the exodus story. But for a much smaller group of people, and not the entire nation of Israel, which can be seen archaeologically to have grown in place in Canaan. I think the current academic consensus is correct that what we see as Judaism today was created after the Babylonian exile, and that previous to this time Yahweh was one of a pantheon of Canaanite gods who get over time to be the head of the table. I’me sceptical that the pre-exile United Monarchy ever existed, but very open to the idea that David and Solomon were historical figures in the south, from tribes who worshipped Yahweh in the area that later became Judah.