One pretty prevalent critical view of the #Exodus narratives, proposed by Redford, but popularised by #IsraelFinkelstein, is that - though they may hold some earlier memories - they were written in the 7th century, and basically reflect the 7th c Egyptian context.
Much could be said in response to this rather depressing claim (and has been by, e.g., Hoffmeier)
A recently finished PhD gives a bit more data relating to this question, and suggests that the Redford-Finkelstein position doesn't really fit the facts.
Ella Karev's PhD thesis examines what kinds of slavery were dominant in Egypt between 900BC and 330BC.
Google the title and you can download it for yourself:
"Slavery and Servitude in Late Period Egypt (c. 900 – 330 BC)"
Karev found that slavery in Late Period tended to be
* small scale
* family-based (rather than property of the crown)
* generally enslavement of Egyptians, rather than foreigners.
So, to go back to Finkelstein's view: if the 7th c Judean elite had decided to take a study-vacation down to Egypt to get some background for their new thriller novel: 'Exodus: the Pharaoh's Downfall', they would have found mainly Egyptian slaves, working for private individuals.
So, at least with respect to the issue of slavery, the Exodus narratives as we have them do *not* seem to fit the 7th century BC Egyptian context.
But they *do* fit the 13th century BC context extraordinarily well:
In the New Kingdom in Egypt (v. roughly 1500-1000) slaves were:
* very common
* very often from the Levant region (Israel/Palestine - Syria)
* very often set to work on crown-controlled building projects (like the Abu-Simbel temple pictured below, commissioned by Ramesses II)
In fact, even some of the most detailed elements in the Exodus narratives seem to fit what we know about Egyptian slavery in the New Kingdom era.
Like the fact that Levantine slaves were set to work making mud bricks, as I wrote a little about here:
This is beautiful!
This little #manuscript seems to be written by a regular, non-professional, member of the Jewish community of Fustat, Egypt, about 1000 years ago.
They made a little shorthand manuscript of #Psalms, for their own personal use.
This person knew the Psalms pretty well, so could abbreviate most of the words by chopping off the last letter or two (which seems more impressive when you remember that #Hebrew words tend to be short: say, 2-6 letters in the main).
This little snippet is from Psalm 9: 17-18.
But here, the writer's knowledge of the book of Psalms has actually led them astray...
Do you see the line in the image with lots of dots over all the letters? Those are erasure dots: (s)he wants, in effect, to cross out that line.
At the heart of #Psalm82 is a pair of parallel lines expressing G-d's heart for justice - particularly justice for the poor and defenceless.
They are two of the most beautiful, well-crafted lines of Hebrew I've ever read.
1/4
Each line is arranged chiastically: the verb comes first in the A-line, and last in the B-line.
The poor, orphaned, afflicted, and destitute are thereby enveloped by G-d's justice, justification, deliverance and salvation.
But the two bicola are also 'vertically parallel' - more so than any other verses I've yet noticed.
So:
The טו ending is parallel in 1st word.
Then דל repeated both lines.
Then ום paralleled by ון
Consonants רש parallel both lines
Then הצ, Hifil, and mpl ו parallel in last slot.
In their zeal to preserve EVERY detail of the biblical text accurately, the #Masoretes sometimes make up little ditties, in #Aramaic, to help remember some textual feature or another. I've just come across one I'd not seen before, & which has instantly become my favourite. (1/5)
Remember #Ezekiel 18? The righteous man and the unrighteous man. The righteous man does not eat on the mountains (i.e. at the idol shrines), but the unrighteous man does eat on the mountains
In both cases, the verb 'eat' happens to be marked w/ Zaqef. Zaqef is quite a strong disjunctive accent. S/times it causes the word it marks to be written as a pausal form (ie vowel change), s/times not. Here: 'does not eat' is pausal, but 'does eat' is written non-pausally.