Talk:Stations of the Exodus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Judaism (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Work On The Table[edit]

I've reverted a number of place-names to their more common English spellings, since 1) these spelling are more common, 2) the existing sub-articles are spelled that way, and 3) Sephardic pronunciation was probably the original anyway. Many thanks to whoever completed the references and place-names for the table, nonetheless. I suspect most Jewish readers will be pleased with the progress of scholarship in the Wikipedia on this subject, even so.

I've added "- -" to all the cells of the table that do not have information as yet, since otherwise only half the table would display. If a place is investigated, and its location is found to be uncertain, it should be given a "?" instead, at that time. --ThaThinker 20:33, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Thats not very helpful in identifying their locations. The names provide huge amounts of information when read in context in the languages that named them. Unless you think English was the original language of the Exodus and best preserves ancient Egyptian, Greek, Phoenician etc; it makes no sense to use English names rather than ancient Egyptian, Greek, Phoenician Rktect 12:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Intended additions[edit]

There are two wrinkles in the story that I plan to add, as I get time. First, it seems that part of the itenerary recap given in Nu. when it is recapped repeats part of the journey, perhaps from another source, as per the Documentary Hypothesis. Second, the itenerary recap seems to have the Israelites going back through Edom, whereas the narrative text is quite explicit that they went around it. --ThaThinker 20:33, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

The first six stations of the Exodus are in Egypt near Thebes, Karnak, and the wadi Ham ma3t leading to Thebes Red Sea Port of Elim. The seventh is the Red Sea, the ninth through 13th are around Elat at the head of the gulf of Aqaba, the next couple of Dozen follow the borders of Edom North edging the dsrt of Sn, thence east toward Moab and South to Petra. There are several at Petra including a mention of the cleft in the cleft of the rock, and then back to Kadesh Barnea before heading back north to Dibon in Moab.

The information on the stations listed in the references (book and page) refer to the books in the Syllabus. This was cross referenced but has been vandalized by some POV editors who apparently have no interest in ancient languages or history, but rather think the Bible was written in Hebrew. In Particular Rivers in the Desert by Nelson Glueck walks the route well by well back in the forties before the whole region was turned into a tourist trap.

  • 2. Nelson GlueckRivers in the Desert. HUC. 1959. Discusses The evidence for the Exodus in the Negev pp,15,41,63,95,102,106,118,119,122,123,138,143,150,151,162,167,170,171,172,186,187,194,243,246,250,258,276

Another good reference is McNeil and Sedlars discussion of the Ancient Near East (ANE)

  • 3. William H McNeil and Jean W Sedlar, The Ancient Near East. OUP. 1962.  Among other things this discusses the evidence for Habiru in Canaan

The Epic of Gilgamesh introduces some connections between Mesopotamia, Lebanon and Egypt which tie into and reinforce the antiquity of Elat as a major trade center. In particular we can look to Sumerian as providing many of the determinatives for place.

  • 4. Andrew George, The Epic of Gillgamesh. Penguin. 2000. ISBN No14-044721-0 Check |isbn= value (help).  Includes toponyms for Canaan
  • 5. James B. Pritchard, The Ancient Near East. OUP. 1968. 
  • 6. Shaika Haya Ali Al Khalifa and Michael Rice, Bahrain through the Ages. KPI. 1986. ISBN 071030112-x Check |isbn= value (help). Nice article by Zahrins on the Martu and other information such as the Mari letters.
  • 7. Dr. Muhammed Abdul Nayeem, Prehistory and Protohistory of the Arabian Peninsula. Hyderabad. 1990.  Discusses The archaeological sites in the Arabia penninsula and especially the sites around Timna.
  • 8. Michael RoafCultural Atlas of Mesopotamia and the Ancient Near East. Equinox. 1990. ISBN 0-8160-2218-6.  discusses all the cultures of the Ancient near East IN SOME DETAIL.
  • 9. Nicholas Awde and Putros SamanoThe Arabic Alphabet. Billing & Sons Ltd. 1986. ISBN 0863560350. 
  • 10. Gerard HermThe Phoenicians. William Morrow^ Co. Inc. 1975. ISBN 0-688-02908-6. Ezion Geber and other Phoenician trading ports listed on the stations list. pp 33,84-106 passim, 123,125,126,145,149,150,154

Totally disputed[edit]

This article is a joke. It has obviously been dragged away from anything like a sound documentary and archaeological treatment into a POV-pushing screed. "Ramesses" is Thebes? Nonsense. Pi-rameses in Lower Egypt is the nearly universal consensus. The only reason one might select Thebes -- which had various names in Egyptian, but never Ramesses or anything like it -- is because it accords with someone's pet theory. Citing a deluge of references, some of obviously little to no relevance, doesn't help. For all intents and purposes, this article is completely unreferenced. TCC (talk) (contribs) 07:28, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I reverted the page to how it was on June 7. The current version is significantly worse than that version. Although it was not sourced, it discussed the relevant documentary hypothesis issues and did not present conjectures as fact. Feel free, of course, to re-add details from the previous version. Please remember to mark conjectures as such. --Eliyak T·C 03:23, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry- I failed to notice that the documentary hypothesis section had simply been moved to below the list. I stand by the revert, however. --Eliyak T·C 03:25, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Total agreement with Csernica. The article does not even get the biblical narrative straight, let alone being conssistent with the generally used interpretation (in all its variations, of course). Cush (talk) 14:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Studies of the Stations of the Exodus[edit]

The stations of the Exodus have been studied for centuries. Many 19th century archaeologists made speculative claims based on a combination of religious belief and assumption which have gradually been disproven by more recent work. Thats the reason for listing footnotes and references.

False assumption No. 1. The People of the Exodus were Hebrews and spoke Hebrew. At the time the story claims the People of the Exodus left Egypt there were no Hebrews and Hebrew didn't exist as a language.

False assumption No. 2. The story refers to people crossing the Yam Suph or Reed Sea. Actually the phrase originally used was Red Sea which comes from the Greek term Erythrian Sea. It would be good if people thought things through or had some basic familiarity with the languages involved. The language of the Exodus would have been Egyptian because according to the story the people involved had lived in Egypt for close to half a millenia

False ssumption No. 3. The wanderings in the desert take place in Sinai. The identification of the stations places them in three sets. Egypt, the stations related to crossing the Red Sea from Elim to Elat. The circumnavigation of Edom. Starting at Elat they go north to the mediterranian, then east to Moab, then south to Petra and return to Elat. The evidence for this is cited in the stations with references and footnotes.

False assumption No. 4 The capital of Egypt is in the Delta. The capital of Egypt at the time in question is at Thebes.

There are a long list of further false assumptions addressed in the stations list. It would be good if people discussed some of the things they don't understand on the discussion page before deleting the references and footnotes again Rktect 00:26, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

The purpose of an article talk page is the content of the article, not to present editors' personal views on or discuss the underlying subject. See the talk page guidelines. Best, --Shirahadasha 01:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
What does the list of "false assumptions" mean? Especially False assumption No. 4 The capital of Egypt is in the Delta. The capital of Egypt at the time in question is at Thebes. What does this mean? What is the time in question? Cush (talk) 13:47, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Restoring old version[edit]

I've just restored an old version of this article. I believe that Rktect (talk · contribs) has sumbitted original research to a number of articles, removed content and failed to work with other editors. The so-called 'references' look more like a reading list and do not reference the text. I would like full discussion on this issue here before this user's content is inserted back into the article. — Gareth Hughes (talk) 02:11, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

But now, some of the links do not work anymore. There is nor article for Pi-Ramesse but only for Avaris (Pi-Ramesse redirects there), and there is no article for Tel Dar'ala. The link to Sukkot is "Sukkot#Sukkot_as_a_place". Cush (talk) 07:59, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
It seems the list has been copied from here: stations-of-children-of-israel.html Cush (talk) 08:04, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for sorting out those links. The entire article is problematical. Rktect's approach, replacing articles with own composition has not helped sort them out at all. The earlier recensions of the article are more measured, comparing biblical text rather than trying to prove a grand theory about these wanderings. It looks like a number of users have added their little theories over time: perhaps it needs to be pruned down to simple definition. — Gareth Hughes (talk) 16:12, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
I suggest that this article be merged into the Exodus article. Otherwise the controversies over the actual route of the exodus should be mentioned, and surely all references to the Ron Wyatt BS should be removed or marked as esoteric fringe (i.e. placing the crossing of Yam Suf in the Gulf of Aqaba). Cush (talk) 16:46, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
The simplest approach to understanding the list of stations is to recognize that they are located by metes and bounds as in describing a property's boundary lines. Indeed the Sons of Israel begin at as point, travel in a direction a given distance to another point consistently throughout the story. Each is generally physically adjacent within a days march or sail, to the next as if walking the bounds. The reason I put the maps in was to show where each is located relative to the others.

Numbers 34 Boundaries of Canaan

1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Command the Israelites and say to them: 'When you enter Canaan, the land that will be allotted to you as an inheritance will have these boundaries: 
3 " 'Your southern side will include some of the Desert of Zin along the border of Edom. On the east, your southern boundary will start from the end of the Salt Sea, [a] 4 cross south of Scorpion [b] Pass, continue on to Zin and go south of Kadesh Barnea. Then it will go to Hazar Addar and over to Azmon, 5 where it will turn, join the Wadi of Egypt and end at the Sea. 

The stations list walks the bounds along this border rather than wandering in the desert.

Those which say they are at a place should be located at that place. Before crossing the Red Sea the stations are in Egypt. After crossing the Red Sea they are not in Sinai but in and around Elat at the head of the Gulf of Aqaba.

1The whole Israelite community set out from Elim and came to the Desert of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai, on the fifteenth day of the second month after they had come out of Egypt. Since Egypt borders Sinai by land it doesn't take a month and a half.

The whole Israelite community set out from the Desert of Sin, ... They camped at Rephidim

The Amalekites came and attacked the Israelites at Rephidim. 9 Moses said to Joshua, "Choose some of our men and go out to fight the Amalekites. Tomorrow I will stand on top of the hill with the staff of God in my hands."

Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, together with Moses' sons and wife, came to him in the desert, where he was camped near the mountain of God.(Mt Horab)

This has nothing to do with Ron Wyatt, its just what the story tells you. Mt Horab is located on the border of Midian because that is where Moses tends Jethros flocks. Its located on the border of Rephidim because that is where Moses stands to direct the battle.
If we are going to attempt to make the stations match up to a conjecture about their name in a language which doesn't exist at the time in question why not use Greek rather than Hebrew so we can also match it up to histories of the places in question as named in the periplus of the Erythrian Sea?
The Red or Erythrian Sea and not the Yam Suf is the principle trading route between Elim and Elat. Thats well documented from the 12th dynasty onward in "The Tale of the Shipwrecked Sailor" and other Egyptian literature. Thebes was the capital of Egypt during the time in question and Hatshepset built a Red Sea fleet precisely to bring the goods necessary for the mummifications at Karnak to Thebes Red Sea Port, modern Quasir, ancient Elim.
The trade consisted of bitumen from the Dead Sea copper from Elat, Juniper berries and Linen from Byblos, Frankincense from Yemen and Myhr from Ophir in exchange for gold from Nubia.
Those are the facts and the reason for the correction; your religions POV notwithstanding. (talk) 01:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

You've been told about no original research, but continue in it. The above rant was in no way a reasoned, referenced account which is accepted norm for encyclopaedic writing. You are opposed because you break the guidelines, so stop thinking it's a conspiracy. Repeated removal of content for the insertion of your text will lead to your accounts being blocked. That is not a threat, just procedure for disruptive editors who push their own research. — Gareth Hughes (talk) 01:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Its not original research Garzo. There is nothing wrong with including sources of information other than your religion to give context to a Bible story which mentions a number of real places.
The story itself is the principle source. It says what it says in direct contradiction to what the article says in its present state. I'm really curious why you are afraid to deal with the facts as outlined here.
Far from being a rant I took a list of places and located them according to historical references to them and the internal references given in the story.
Your threats come from a desire to eradicate a challenge to your POV not reason or a desire to be encyclopedic. How about you give us a reason why you consider historical references to the subject matter such as "the Periplus of the Erythrian Sea" OR. (talk) 11:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Taking a list of places and locating them according to historical references is WP:OR and as such should not be in Wikipedia. Doug Weller (talk) 18:53, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Alternative unreferenced version[edit]

Is this some sort of joke? This 'alternative unreferenced version' is just a copy of the actual version without the table.

As for references, Z. Sitchin's books have huge lists of references, most of which is good, solid, stuff, he just doesn't use it in his books. The reference section of this article just makes it look good, it isn't useful in verifying the article. The article needs inline citations. I am considering removing all the location bits shortly if they aren't given citations. dougweller (talk) 21:53, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Route and Navbox on some station articles[edit]

If there was an Exodus, we don't know the exact route, right? So why are there navboxes on some articles taking you from one station to the next? dougweller (talk) 19:37, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't we know the exact route? I mean, more or less, we do. Most of the stations have been identified a long time ago. Only certain religious groups offer alternative interpretations for whatever purposes. Or folks like Rktect who want their "own" Exodus. But after all, the Sinai peninsula is not that big. What I find strange is that there are articles for the stations at all. Isn't the stations list sufficient?? Cush (talk) 20:05, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
I thought we did, then saw [1] p. 248. But I shouldn't have said 'route', we don't know that for sure (northern, southern, middle, aren't these still being argued)?[2]. Of course I don't think there ever was a real route/Exodus, but that's a different issue. Some of the stations are more notable then others. dougweller (talk) 20:11, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
But the route is given in the bible by naming its stations. What's uncertain is the location of some of the stations, and thus the identification with modern sites. On, and I do think that there was a real Exodus under king Dudimose as recorded by ancient historians. Just without any magic from the biblical deity. Cush (talk) 09:12, 15 February 2009 (UTC)