JOHN J. BIMSON, Redating the Exodus and Conquest [2nd edition] (JSOTSupp 5; Sheffield: Almond, 1981).

Bimson accepts the Biblical accounts of the Exodus and Conquest as basically historically accurate and overtly rejects views that do not see these episodes as historical. He does, however, acknowledge difficulties in the text and believes that some population figures must be drastically reduced (e.g. wilderness population probably about 70,000 [18,000 fighting men], not 2.5 million [600,000 fighting men].) His question is not, Did the Exodus and Conquest occur?, but rather, When did they occur? Bimson's primary mode of argumentation involves attempts to match archaeological data to the Biblical text.

Here are some of Bimson's major points:

A. The identification of Pithom and Raamses (cf. Exod 1:11) is in question.

B. There is no evidence that the Egyptian expulsion of the Hyksos involved a massive invasion into Palestine which resulted in widespread destruction of cities.

C. Many cities in Palestine which have been identified as Hyksos should be identified as Israelite.

D. There is no convincing archaeological evidence for a 13th century Exodus or a 13th-12th century Conquest.

E. There is an incredible correspondence between the archaeological data of MBA destructions and the Biblical data (with the exception of Ai).

F. It is unnecessary to assume Israel was not present in Transjordan before Rameses II's Moab campaign. Israelites were just politically insignificant at that time in that region.

G. Biblical material in Judges, 1 Kings 6:1, and 1 Chronicles 6:33-37 cannot be compressed into 170 years (as many Biblical scholars do). Rather, a figure near 480 years should be retained.

H. The close of MBA II should be moved to c.1400 BC.

I. "There is no evidence which compells us to date the destruction [of Jericho] before 1500 BC; it could equally well have occurred some decades after that." {135} This means that the MBA destruction could have been under Joshua. Further, complete destruction of the walls is not a necessary interpretation of the Biblical text; it could refer to breaches. This corresponds well with the archaeological evidence that no LBA city of Jericho existed; only sporadic habitation.

J. While focusing on bichrome ware, he argues that the absolute chronology for the dating of pottery often has involved circular reasoning and therefore should be re-thought. Much should be dated somewhat later. "...there are no obstacles to dating the first appearance of bichrome ware in Palestine to c.1450 BC at the earliest. Its period of use need not have been more than 50 years, and probably ended c.1400 BC...."{171}

K. Hazor was destroyed twice by the Israelites: the late 15th century BC (under Joshua); and in the 13th century BC (cf. Judges 4-5).

L. The lack of a substantial change in material culture (if a 15th century Exodus is assumed) is no major problem. The Israelites could easily have adopted Canaanite material culture; Biblical data regarding syncretism would support this.

M. "...there is no real difficulty in placing the conquest prior to the Amarna period."{229}

N. The Pharaoh of the Exodus was Thutmosis III (c.1504-1450 or 1490-1436 BC).

O. Suggested date for the Exodus: c.1470 BC.

*Suggestion: read conclusions at the end of chapters.

*Page numbers listed are for the 1981 edition.