Were horse-drawn chariots already in use in Old Kingdom Egypt?

by Damien F. Mackey “… the problem of proving that the highly advanced civilization of Old Kingdom Egypt did not have wheeled military vehicles a full 580 years after the invention and spread of the tripartite wheel seems to be a very much greater one than that of proving that she did”. My grappling with the very serious problem of an apparent lack of archaeology, of literature, and of architectural reliefs, for the horse and for chariots in ancient Egypt prior to the New Kingdom, can be read in articles of mine such as: Exodus Pharaoh could still gather sufficient horses after the Plagues (3) Exodus Pharaoh could still gather sufficient horses after the Plagues Is the biblical Exodus, pitched in Egypt’s Old (or Middle) Kingdom, one chariot army short of reality? (3) Is the biblical Exodus, pitched in Egypt's Old (or Middle) Kingdom, one chariot army short of reality? Expert Stuart Piggott, as referred to in Renata-Gabriela Tatomir’s 2014 article, “The presence of horse in ancient Egypt and the problem of veracity of the horseshoe magic in the ancient Egyptian folklore and mythology”, may have managed to inject some degree of hope into this extremely difficult pursuit: …. The archaeological data which are presently available (some of which have been available since 1976) seem therefore to seriously undermine the claim that Egypt was without horses until the Hyksos dynasties. The work at Nahal Tillah seems to show that horses were available in the immediate vicinity that is in the northern Negev, very early on in the history of Egypt, while Egyptians were clearly present where these horses were present. This fact made some scholars to opinate that it might be possible that the horse and military chariot were re-introduced to Egypt by the Hyksos. The time between the end of the Old Kingdom and the Hyksos is many centuries, and many things can happen in such a long time. Another hypothesis is that horses in the Old Kingdom might be an exception …. However, the scholars’ debate on the likeliness that based on zooarcheology evidence the presence of horse in Egypt may be even much earlier is a very long one, mainly because an Equus caballus is dated to the native Egyptian fauna of Palaeolithic times. According to Gaillard … the faunal samples comprised a lower molar and an incomplete mandible with P2 in situ from a true horse, «Equus caballus». The scholar points out that the morphology of these specimens compares better with that in mandibular teeth of asses …. As such, they should be included in the wild ass material. Gaillard also figured an upper third molar of a Solutrean horse … which is erroneously interpreted by Churcher … as evidence for a true horse in the Kom Ombo area. As matters stand, the presence of wild horses in the Plain of Kom Ombo during Late Palaeolithic times can be considered unsubstantiated. …. However, another issue arises: is there evidence of chariots and wheels in Zoser's reign and the end of Old Kingdom Egypt? So far, Stuart Piggott seems to be an expert in regard to early wheeled vehicles. Downhere is a quote from his book The Earliest Wheeled Transport from the Atlantic Coast to the Caspian Sea providing some helpful factual background information. The central problem of the earliest wheeled vehicles in Europe from about 3000 BC is that of assessing the respective merits of two hypotheses, that assuming a restricted place and time for an invention subsequently rapidly and widely adopted, and that permitting independent invention of the basic principle of wheeled transport in more than one locality, with subsequent parallel regional development. In specific terms it raises the classic issue of 'diffusion' from an area with a higher degree of technological performance to others with less inventive expertise: the Near East and Neolithic Europe around 3000 BC. The problem is not rendered easier by the fact that we are dealing with wooden structures with a low survival value as archaeological artifacts, helped only by fired clay models among those societies which had a tradition of producing such miniature versions of everyday objects, itself a restricted cultural trait. In the instance of the earliest agricultural communities of south-east Europe from the seventh millennium BC, which did so model humans, animals, houses and even furniture, the absence of vehicle models is at least a suggestive piece of negative evidence for a failure to make this break-through in vehicle technology, despite an efficient agrarian economy and a precocious non-ferrous metallurgy before the beginning of the third millennium. When in that millennium the first European wheels, and depictions and models of wheeled vehicles, appear, radiocarbon dates show us how close in time these are to the comparable evidence for the first appearance in Sumer and Elam of the same invention, and the likelihood of independent discovery in east and west, virtually simultaneously, is sensibly diminished. The thesis of the rapid adoption of a novel piece of transport technology originating in the ancient Near East, as proposed by Childe thirty years ago, still remains the preferable alternative. One of the most recent finds in Western Europe, the wagon from Zilrich with disc wheels of the tripartite construction, and a calibrated radiocarbon date of 3030 BC, greatly strengthens this supposition, for the relatively complex technology is precisely that of the early third millennium wheels of Kish, Ur and Susa. …. The foregoing makes it clear that according to that scholar: 1) there is an intrinsic difficulty with survival of evidence of early wheeled vehicles; 2) wagons with tripartite disk wheels were in existence by 3030 BC; and 3) this technology spread far and fast. Given these three facts, the problem of proving that the highly advanced civilization of Old Kingdom Egypt did not have wheeled military vehicles a full 580 years after the invention and spread of the tripartite wheel seems to be a very much greater one than that of proving that she did. ….

by Damien F. Mackey “Finally, Josephus actually gives us information about the Exodus as does Artapanus, the Egyptian historian. The story is actually amazing. Moses had been the Commander in charge of the Egyptian military, and had led an expedition south and extended Egypt's territory 200 miles into Nubia. This was a unique event, and the troops sought to make him pharaoh instead of Khaneferre (Sobekhotep IV) who had married Merris (the daughter of Pharaoh Palmonothes who rescued him from the river)”. Barry Setterfield ________________________________________ Introducing Barry Setterfield Paul Romano tells us something about him: Introducing Barry Setterfield — New Life Magazine We are thrilled to announce that NewLife Magazine has a new addition to our team of talented contributors! Joining us is Barry Setterfield. With an impressive background in various fields including physics, astronomy, and theology, Barry Setterfield brings a wealth of knowledge and deep insights to NewLife's diverse range of topics. We are excited to welcome Barry Setterfield to NewLife Magazine family, and we cannot wait to see the impact his contributions will have on our readership! … Barry John Setterfield was born 15th April, 1942 in Northam, Western Australia, to Salvation Army parents. His high school results earned him a full Commonwealth Scholarship for university where he majored in physics and geology and minored in mathematics and chemistry. Because of a family crisis in 1964 and an acute attack of a genetic disease, Barry had to quit university and so has no formal degree. On March 8th 1964 he accepted Christ as his Saviour. Early in 1965 he was asked by the Astronomical Society of South Australia (ASSA) to prepare for publication the research of the recently deceased Government Astronomer for South Australia, George Dodwell. From 1966 to 1971 he lectured in Astronomy for the ASSA, as well as presenting astronomy to schools, colleges and scout groups. In August 1987 he co-authored a Report for Stanford Research Institute (SRI) International on the changing values of the constants of physics. This led to his ongoing research into the effects on these constants caused by the expansion of the universe. …. During this time, he was invited to speak on a variety of biblical topics at churches and Bible colleges in Australia. In October of 2000 he married Helen (Penny) Fryman, and they presented on both bible topics and the implications of Barry’s research internationally. Barry & Penny settled in Grants Pass, Oregon, where Barry was appointed Director of the New Hope Observatory and taught astronomy at both a Christian school there as well as presenting by invitation at a secular college. He and Penny have regular Bible studies at their home as well as a monthly pastors meeting where the Bible and current events are discussed and the notes emailed internationally. [End of quote] His interests in Science and Time Although a Creationist, Barry Setterfield appears to be a highly original thinker, with certain views that would not be standard fare amongst Creationists. I first heard about him in the 1980’s, I think, when his views on the velocity of Light not being a constant were making waves, so to speak: The Atomic Constants, Light, And Time Barry Setterfield suggests that the velocity of light may not be constant and could be decreasing over time. His research indicates that all constants that carry units of per second have been decreasing since the beginning of the universe, with the velocity of light being one of the most established cases. Setterfield's hypothesis has been supported by statistical analyses, which indicate no significant variation in the velocity of light over the last 300 years. However, this hypothesis has faced criticism and has not been widely accepted in the scientific community. I, having been an ardent fan of Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky in those days, particularly his historical revision, was then somewhat interested, too, in his catastrophism, which figures in Barry Setterfield’s research. Recently, I explained very briefly to a 90+ year-old lady in Brisbane (Australia) – who is a real enthusiast of astronomy and physics, having tremendous knowledge in these areas – who drew my attention to Barry Setterfield again, why my interest in scientific catastrophism had fallen right off: … Probably why I tended to drift away from Barry Setterfield … was due to his Catastrophism, which I initially liked following Dr. Velikovsky. I used to follow the latter holus bolus, in his history and (so-called) science. Later, I came to reject his Catastrophism. For one, there was no indication whatsoever in the OT that Venus had played any sort of backdrop role in the Plagues and Exodus. But, more meaningfully for me, Mars was not the cause of the zapping of the 185,000 Assyrian army. Judith was. It was not a cosmic zapping, but a rout (as is clear from Isaiah), set in train by Judith's slaying of “Holofernes” (Sennacherib's oldest son, Ashur-nadin-shumi, the Nadin/Nadab of the Book of Tobit 14:10). …. Another area where I would not be in agreement with Barry Setterfield is with his use of the long biblical chronology (Septuagint), which cancels out Shem, son of Noah, from being Melchizedek (as according to Hebrew Tradition); and which necessitates a four-century sojourn of Israel in Egypt. While I, following the likes of Drs. Courville and Velikovsky, have sought to fix an over-extended Egyptian chronology to the much shorter biblical one, Barry Setterfield, on the other hand, with his unique adding of supposed biblical catastrophes (A Brief Earth History: A Brief Earth History), has now tied Egyptian dynastic history to his much enlarged biblical chronology. Thus he would have pharaoh Khufu (Cheops) and the Pyramid Age around 2550 BC, corresponding closely to the conventional system. I, on the other hand, have Khufu as the “new king” of Exodus 1:8, at close to 1550 BC, a millennium later. However, despite, our entirely different approaches, our Egypto-biblical models actually meet in several major places. Let us consider these. His biblico-Egyptology Barry Setterfield writes: Egypt and Exodus There are always a number of questions about the Exodus of the Israelites from ancient Egypt. Here are two of them regarding two different articles: Amenhotep II and the Historicity of the Exodus Pharaoh and A New Chronology which Barry has been asked about in two separate emails. Amenhotep II and the Historicity of the Exodus Pharaoh Mackey’s comment: Thankfully, Barry has rejected the highly unsuitable identification of the Pharaoh of the Exodus with Amenhotep II, which has become quite popular lately. Here, though, he shows his preference for the Septuagint chronology which I believe is far too long. Thanks for the link, which is appreciated. Unfortunately, there are a number of problems with both the dating and the Pharaoh of the Exodus here. First, the author is using the Masoretic text which originated at the Council of Jamnia about 100 AD. This was not the text used by Christ, the Apostles nor by the Ante-Nicene Fathers. The preferred text was the same as the Alexandrian Septuagint. This gives a significantly longer chronology back to Adam and allows for all the Egyptian Dynasties to be accounted for basically in the dates currently accepted by most archaeologists. The Masoretic text for the Old Testament, which all our modern Bibles have, does not allow that to happen. As a result, generations of Christian archaeologists have spent their lives trying to re-date Egyptian dynasties in order to bring them into conformity with the Masoretic text. This is entirely unnecessary if the Septuagint (LXX) text is used. Mackey’s comment: Barry will now ‘swing and a miss’ with his identification of the biblical “Shishak” as Ramses III. Dr. Velikovsky’s identification with Thutmose III is, I believe, far preferable. Secondly, mention is made of the fact that Pharaoh Sheshonq I is actually mentioned in our Bibles as Shishak. This again is an artifact of the Masoretic text. The LXX actually states that this pharaoh is Shushaqkim. Shishak is a shortening of this title to Shushaq. This was the Horus name for Ramesses III. Since this is fixed as being the name of the pharaoh who invaded Israel on the death of Solomon, all Biblical-Egyptological chronologies need to take note of this fact. The current authors do not do that. So the exodus event in Egyptian history needs re-evaluation. Third. much is made of the fact that 1Kings 6:1 gives us accurate information. There is an unfortunate aspect to this. That time-listing actually drops over 100 years from the record of Israelite history in the time of the Judges when Israel was under the control of foreign kings and out of fellowship with God. The early church recognised this and it is actually hinted at in Stephen's speech to the Sanhedrin in Acts 7. This passage has posed a problem for those who ignore what has been called the "Omission Principle" whereby years out of fellowship with God are omitted from the record. When these things are factored in, a much earlier date for the exodus is obtained. Mackey’s comment: Here, Barry gives his rationale for his much earlier than usual date for the Exodus, at 1603 BC, when c. 1450 BC would be more common amongst conservative biblical scholars. Fourth, the date which results from the study in the URL gives a date for the entry into Canaan under Joshua which disagrees with most of the archaeological data. As a result, many Christian archaeologists try to find "problems" with the archaeology that has been done by "unbelievers". Fifth, the use of Jubilee cycles has been shown to be notoriously unreliable. The Talmud and its suggestions for these cycles was written after the Babylonian captivity and they were making guesses based on tradition. Finally, Josephus actually gives us information about the Exodus as does Artapanus, the Egyptian historian. The story is actually amazing. Moses had been the Commander in charge of the Egyptian military, and had led an expedition south and extended Egypt's territory 200 miles into Nubia. This was a unique event, and the troops sought to make him pharaoh instead of Khaneferre (Sobekhotep IV) who had married Merris (the daughter of Pharaoh Palmonothes who rescued him from the river). Mackey’s comment: Amazingly, despite our quite different methodologies and chronologies, Barry and I will arrive at the same conclusion, that pharaoh Khaneferre Sobekhotep was the traditional “Chenephres” (Artapanus). But this is only one of my many identifications for this “Chenephres”, beginning with Chephren, son of Khufu, of the Fourth Dynasty (Pyramid Age), which Barry has way back in c. 2550 BC. See e.g. my article: ‘Chenephres’ drives Moses out of Egypt (2) 'Chenephres' drives Moses out of Egypt For this reason, Khaneferre sought an excuse to get rid of Moses, so that when Moses killed the Egyptian, Pharaoh had an excuse, and Moses went into exile. Mackey’s comment: Whereas Barry (as apparently with Dr. David Rohl) has Dudimose as the Pharaoh of the Exodus, my own preference is for the slightly earlier Neferhotep so-called I, of the same Thirteenth Dynasty. The Exodus was then in the reign of Dudimose II (Djedneferre), and what followed immediately was the 2nd Intermediate Period in Egyptian history when the Asian Hyksos marched into Egypt and took the country "without a single battle" as Manetho records. The escaping Israelites also met these "Hyksos", and the Bible calls them the Amalekites. The date of the Exodus then becomes 1603 BC from all these considerations, not 1440 BC or thereabouts as these other authors suggest. Furthermore, we have the history of Egypt to agree with that since the Ipuwer Papyrus tells of the 10 plagues suffered by Egypt just before the Hyksos came in. EGYPTIAN CHRONOLOGY & THE BIBLE Years B.C. (BCE) Pharaohs/ Events 2067- 2047 Mentuhotpe I (Thebes only) begins 11th Dynasty 2047-1603 The Middle Kingdom begins when Mentuhotpe united all Egypt under his control 2047-2016 Mentuhotpe I (united kingdom until his death) 2041 Joseph made Prime Minister at age 30 by Pharaoh Mentuhotpe I 2032 Israel enters Egypt 2016-2004 Mentuhotep II 2015 Israel (Jacob) dies; Joseph could not approach Pharaoh to bury Jacob --Genesis 50:4 2004-1997 Mentuhotep III Twelth Dynasty begins Amenemhet I usurps Throne – strongly anti-Semitic – oppression starts; oppression continues for about 400 years, as prophesied 1961 Joseph dies sometime after 1783 13th Dynasty Starts 1683 Moses born during the reign of Pharaoh Palmonothes whose daughter Merris rescued Moses (Prince Mousos) about 1650 Moses commander for Pharaoh Khaneferre (Sobekhotep IV) whom Merris had married 1643 Moses exiled from Egypt during Moses' exile Sobekhotep V (Kha’hotepre) Aya (Merneferre) Mentuemzaf (Djed’ankhre) Dudimose II (Djedneferre) 1603. Exodus in time of Dudimose II (Djedneferre) 1603 - 1532 Second Intermediate Period Begins Hyksos invade, take over, no battle Mackey’s comment: Amazingly, once again, Barry and I have several concurrences: Joseph in the Eleventh Dynasty, at the time of a Mentuhotep; Amenemhet I as the Oppressor Pharaoh (identical with Khufu, see above); and Moses a commander for Khaneferre Sobekhotep. Barry continues on with his long chronology. It is certainly true that the Septuagint currently appears to give the time of 430 years as the total time of the Children of Israel in both Canaan and Egypt. We will deal with the reason for this shortly. However, the implication is that this time is counted from the time of the entry of Abram into the Canaan unto the Exodus. This leaves about 215 years for the sojourn in Egypt, and many chronologists have accepted that as a fact uncritically. However, the debate is ongoing and has basically been fueled by the LXX as the link you gave makes plain. ….