Genre: history/Biblical studies

Publisher: Turn Key Press, 2004

ISBN: 0-9754803-0-8

The following review was contributed by: John Walsh & CLICK TO VIEW John Walsh's Reviews

Could it have been that the exodus of the Israelites from the depredations of the Pharoah of Egypt really be retelling the tale of the Hyksos migration, when a people escaped persecution from the Jewish people? Might Joseph of the variously coloured coat really be Akhenaton, the mysterious pharaoh who suddenly and somewhat bizarrely introduced monotheism into happily polytheistic Egypt? Is it the case that the plagues that affected Egypt were caused by the volcanic explosion that destroyed Thera (Santorini) and which caused a cloud of ash over the lower Nile that turned the water acidic and the frogs to seek dry ground? All of these possibilities are considered in Steve Brock’s book The Double Exodus Theory, which takes as its central strand of investigation the redaction of the first books of the bible, which were written by several different and unknown authors with each a different purpose, and the possibility that this means the biblical exodus happened twice, once as expulsion and once as flight.

This is an interesting premise for a book and Brock is enthusiastic and energetic in pursuing his points. The main problems with the way it is constructed are the level of knowledge and the methodology. The former leads to incomplete analysis and leads the author into error. The latter casts doubt on the validity of all of the author’s findings. In terms of level of knowledge, Brock writes on pp.52-3 that he was previously unaware of a school of thought which is termed ‘Biblical Minimalism’ and which argues, quite cogently, that since the texts concerning the earliest history were written from such a remote viewpoint of time, then extreme caution should be exercised in using those texts to try to elucidate what really happened to supposed biblical figures. Unfortunately and, indeed, unforgivably, Brock quotes apparently with approval a quote from a magazine which accuses people pursuing this line of thought as ‘anti-Semitic’ and having a political agenda. This is not just unscientific but anti-scientific and the enemy of serious research all over the world. A competent editor would have insisted on removing this section and, also, on improving the methodology of the book as a whole.

The method employed is to use secondary research to find and analyse parallels between different parts of the Old Testament and also the recounting of some Egyptian myths. This is all very well if handled correctly but the sources chosen appear to be unreliable in some cases and there is no analysis of sources. For one example among many, the work of a certain Sniderman is employed at length but is obtained from a website and is not credited in the bibliography. These are flaws that could and should have been attended to prior to publication.

This is a very interesting topic explored with energy and imagination by a writer with some skill in assembling an argument. However, it is not a serious work of history.

John Walsh, Shinawatra International University, May 2005