Ramses II and Salem

 



Judith’s City

of ‘Bethulia’

 

Part One (ii, b):

Ramses II and Salem

 

 

by

Damien F. Mackey

 

Rohl goes even further than that, and - whilst rightly rejecting Champollion’s old identification of the 22^nd dynasty’s pharaoh Shoshenq I with the biblical “Shishak king of Egypt” … proceeds to identify Ramses II as “Shishak”.

 

 

Given the strategic importance of “Salem” in the environs of Shechem during the massive Assyrian invasion of Syro-Palestine, as discussed in Part One (ii) with reference to Judith 4, then I must reconsider my former acceptance of the view of some that the pharaoh Ramses II, when conquering the “city of Shalem”, was actually attacking Jerusalem itself.   

 

Previously we noted that “… there was apparently a northern “Salem” in the region of Shechem (Genesis 33:18 KJV): “And Jacob came to Shalem, a city of Shechem …” …. It is certainly a remarkable fact … that about 4 miles East of Shechem (Nablus), there is a village bearing the name Salem”.

 

That Shalem was Jerusalem, though, is the view argued by, for instance, David Rohl in his book, A Test of Time. The Bible: - From Myth to History (Century, London 1995).

Rohl goes even further than that, and - whilst rightly rejecting Champollion’s old identification of the 22^nd dynasty’s pharaoh Shoshenq I with the biblical “Shishak king of Egypt”, who sacked the Temple of Yahweh after the death of king Solomon - proceeds to identify Ramses II as “Shishak”.

 

And Peter van der Veen will firmly back up Rohl on this:

http://www.bga.nl/en/discussion/engveen.html

 

VII. Did Ramesses II conquer Jerusalem?

 

In my view, the city of Shalem conquered by Ramesses II in his Year 8 cannot be identified with any other city in Palestine other than Jerusalem ('city of Shalem'). The inscription on the north pylon of the Ramesseum probably does not list the cities in geographical sequence but rather as highlights of the campaign. Ramesses did indeed take the cities of Merom, Kerep, etc, but this does not mean that he could not have taken a city in the south on his way back to Egypt or during his expedition against Moab. ….

 

[End of quote]

 

My own view is that pharaoh Ramses II was by no means “Shishak”, but was Thutmose III of the Eighteenth Egyptian Dynasty. See e.g. my series:

 

Bible Illuminates History and Philosophy. Part Eighteen: Thutmose III as “Shishak”

 

including:

 

(iv, a): His Campaign against Jerusalem

 

https://www.academia.edu/34530347/Bible_Illuminates_History_and_Philosophy._Part_Eighteen_Thutmose_III_as_Shishak_iv_a_His_Campaign_against_Jerusalem

 

So, I now think that Rohl was not only wrong about his choice of pharaoh for “Shishak”, but possibly also for his identification of the “Shalem” in the Egyptian records with the city of Jerusalem.