The middle decades of the 14th century BCE are marked by a precarious balance of power in the Near East. Egypt held authority over Canaan through its network of vassal kings. Mitanni sought to preserve its dominance against Hittite pressure. A treaty would leave the door open to a local warlord’s schemes. And the name of Israel’s god appears for the first, and maybe second, time. Be warned: the following material can get dense.

The Hittites Reemerge from Crisis: c. 1400–1370 BCE

The reign of the Hittite king Arnuwanda I (ca. 1400–1375 BCE) was marked by the resolution of internal instability and the territorial contraction that had begun with the assassination of Muwatalli I [1]. There is some evidence that Arnuwanda I may have co-reigned with Tudhaliya II, based on a seal impression from Lidar Höyük that bears the names of both kings, suggesting a formal association or joint rule [2]. Meanwhile, the northern frontier faced repeated raids by the Kaska, a tribal confederation from the Pontic highlands along the southeastern shore of the Black Sea. These incursions were so severe that the royal court may have been temporarily relocated from Hattusa to Samuha [3].

Pharaoh Thutmose IV’s reign (c. 1415–1405 BCE) was largely characterized by peace and diplomatic consolidation, particularly through his marriage to his Mitanni princess, administrative reforms in Nubia, and flourishing trade across the eastern Mediterranean [4]. Nevertheless, early in his reign, he undertook targeted military operations in Canaan, Phoenicia, and the Orontes Valley, continuing deportations initiated by his father and asserting Egyptian authority in key northern territories [5].

Thutmose IV died around 1390 BCE, during the early years of Arnuwanda’s reign, leaving his Mitanni wife a widow. He was succeeded by Amenhotep III. According to Donald Redford, Amenhotep III’s reign ushered in a “Golden Age” for Egypt, reaping the benefits of the campaigns of previous pharaohs [6]. However, Betsy M. Bryan urges a more cautious approach due to the propagandistic nature of Egyptian claims [7], echoing the caution exercised by Dan’el Kahn [8].

Amenhotep III engaged in a diplomatic marriage to the Mitanni princess Kilu-Hepa, daughter of Shuttarna II, king of Mitanni, and also took part in other diplomatic marriages with foreign princesses, typical of the era. Kilu-Hepa was the sister of Tušratta, who would later become king of Mitanni, though the exact timing of his accession is uncertain [9]. The marriage is referenced indirectly in Amarna Letter EA 19, which highlights Egyptian-Mittanian diplomatic relations. Meanwhile, the kingdom of Arzawa exploited Hittite weakness on its western border in an attempt to reassert autonomy or expand territory [10].

The death of Arnuwanda I, apparently from natural causes, marked the end of the most acute period of internal instability in Hatti. He was succeeded by Tudhaliya II, whose exact family relationship to Arnuwanda remains unclear due to gaps in the dynastic record. Under Tudhaliya II, Hatti consolidated its power: he pushed back the Kaška and other northern threats, extended Hittite influence along the western frontier, and expanded southward into Syria [11]. Arzawa remained a threat to the Hittite kingdom [12] with Arzawa’s rulers recognized by Pharaoh Amenhotep III as recorded in the Amarna Letters [13]. This diplomatic honor was apparently not afforded to Hittite kings at this time [14].

The Mitanni throne passed from Šuttarna II to his son Artašumara. The circumstances of Šuttarna’s death are unknown; however, Artašumara was assassinated shortly thereafter, apparently the victim of internal collusion [15]. His death plunged the Mitanni kingdom into political instability, not unlike the assassination that occurred in the Old Hittite Empire. This would, as with the Old Hittite Empire, initiate a period of upheaval.

Šuppiluliuma I assumed the throne from Tudhaliya. Whether he was Tudhaliya’s son or an adopted heir remains uncertain. Some scholars, including Trevor Bryce, have proposed that Šuppiluliuma may have seized power through a palace coup [16], though definitive evidence is lacking. The available documentation is fragmentary, and the surviving records of his reign were written retrospectively by his son Muršili II [17].

The First Appearance of the Name of God

During this period, the divine name associated with the God of Israel first enters the historical record, even though no references to “Israel” or “Israelites” appear at this time. An inscription from the Temple of Soleb in Nubia, built by Amenhotep III (c. 1400 BCE), lists among the defeated peoples the “land of the Shasu of Yhw” [18]. By the Late Bronze/Early Iron Age, the Shasu are often associated with proto-Edomite or Midianite groups, and Midian [19], of course, is the region where the biblical Moses is said to have encountered the burning bush [20]. The Soleb text therefore provides one of the very few possible Bronze Age attestations of the divine name YHWH.

To add to the complexity, Egypt frequently took slaves from these same regions [21]. While speculative, this raises the possibility that two central elements of the Exodus story, a deity named Yahweh and a population enslaved by Egypt, may preserve distant memories rooted in Late Bronze Age realities.

A more controversial proposal comes from Egyptologist Thomas Schneider, who identifies a possible allusion to Yahweh in the Egyptian Book of the Dead, specifically Papyrus Leiden T5 (“Pharaonic Roll 5”), where one line reads: “My lord is the shepherd of Yah.” Schneider interprets “Yah” as a place name, perhaps linked to the Shasu references, though this interpretation remains highly debated and represents a minority view [22].

Yet the story does not end there. Within a century of the Soleb inscription, a devastating famine struck the region — an event remembered in the Exodus tradition and corroborated in both ancient texts and the scientific record. Under Ramesses II, we find a continuation of the Soleb evidence, with another inscription mentioning the “Shasu of Yhw” [23]. For the peoples of Canaan, Egypt was the natural place of refuge in such times, the land to which they turned in search of food and survival.

It however must be noted the first unambiguous reference to Yahweh worship does not appear until centuries later, on the Mesha Stele (ca. 840 BCE).

The Major Players Come to the Front: c. 1370–1350 BCE

With the death of Artašumara, five major developments would reshape the political order of the ancient Near East alluded to previously. Even though relative chronology limits the precision of dating, the following sequence can be presented with a high degree of confidence.

First, Assyria, who had been subordinate to Mitanni since the middle of the 15^th century BCE began to reemerge [24]. The reign of King Eriba-Adad I of Assyria came to an end, and his son Aššur-uballiṭ I ascended the throne somewhere between 1365 and 1360 BCE [25], shortly before the death of Šuttarna II of Mitanni. Under Aššur-uballiṭ’s leadership, Assyria began consolidating its strength and would eventually break away from Mitanni domination and assert itself diplomatically and militarily. Aššur-uballiṭ would later establish direct diplomatic ties with Egypt, a move that alarmed Babylon [26] and signaled a significant shift in the geopolitical balance.

Second, Tušratta was installed as king of Mitanni following the assassination of Artašumara. Likely young at the time [27], Tušratta may have initially served as a puppet for the faction responsible for the coup [28]. However, he would quickly assert himself, overcoming a rival to the throne by the name of Šattiwaza. Though details remain vague, Šattiwaza may have been backed by the Hittites while Tušratta was backed by Mitanni Nobles and Egypt [29].

Tušratta would take and active role in foreign diplomacy, looking to reinforce the alliance with Egypt. He exchanged letters with Pharaoh Amenhotep III, who requested a second Mitanni princess as a royal bride. Tušratta would honour this request [30]. The previous marriage alliance was initiated in an earlier generation between Šuttarna II and Egypt and reaffirmed by Tušratta in the hope to secure Egyptian support against Mitanni’s growing regional threats [31].

Third, Šuppiluliuma I came to power in Hatti as previously mentioned. As crown prince, he had already played a critical role in stabilizing the Hittite heartland during a period of dynastic turmoil. Upon becoming king, he immediately sought to neutralize threats on his eastern frontier. He arranged a marriage alliance with a Kassite princess of Babylon, likely arranged through King Burnaburiash II of Babylon. This strategic union helped secure Hatti’s eastern flank, enabling Šuppiluliuma to turn his attention toward Syria and Mitanni-controlled territories [32]. The Babylonian princess later became the stepmother of the successor of Šuppiluliuma I, Muršili II. She would be implicated in palace intrigues and accusations of witchcraft. This is recorded in Hittite texts such as CTH 378, the Plague prayers of Muršili II [33] [34].

Fourth, while Mitanni was suffering from internal instability, Egypt’s vassals in Canaan and southern Syria also began to destabilize. William G. Dever describes the disruptive element as “a motley class of peoples that some have categorized as urban dropouts, landless peasants, nomads, freebooters, highwaymen, and lawless malcontents” [35] . These Ḫabiru, long a minor nuisance, grew more influential under the direction of Abdi-Aširta, the ambitious ruler of Amurru [36]. His ability to mobilize Ḫabiru bands gave him leverage, but this does not mean he was the formal leader of a cohesive group. Rather, he exercised influence and temporary command over shifting coalitions whose loyalties were fluid.

Abdi-Aširta’s correspondence, when compared with his actions, demonstrates open defiance of Egyptian authority and shifting alliances that threatened regional stability [37]. Letters imply that he might be summoned to Egypt to answer to Pharaoh, though no evidence survives that this actually occurred [38]. The final letter in this sequence, EA 67, is catalogued with Abdi-Aširta’s correspondence, but its subject is unknown. Both William Moran [39] and Anson F. Rainey [40] suggest that Abdi-Aširta’s son and successor, Aziru, is the more likely author.

Finally, the reign of Amenhotep III came to an end, and his son Amenhotep IV, better known by his later name Akhenaten, ascended the Egyptian throne. This succession marked a turning point in Egyptian foreign policy. At first, Amenhotep IV maintained diplomatic correspondence with Tušratta [41], but as his religious revolution advanced, his focus shifted inward to the cult of Aten and the founding of Akhetaten [42]. This internal preoccupation led to a decline in Egypt’s engagement with its northern allies and vassals, leaving Mitanni increasingly isolated [43]. Notably, letters from Tušratta prior to EA 26 are addressed to Amenhotep III.

With Tušratta now ruling Mitanni, Šuppiluliuma I preparing for war, and Egypt distracted by dynastic change, the Hittites began planning a campaign to dismantle Mitanni’s holdings in Syria. The Mitanni vassal system which was already weakened by internal conflict and external threats would soon disintegrate. The stage was set for a reordering of the ancient Near East. And Assyria, no longer the quiet buffer state it had once been, was not far behind Hatti in ambition.

When the dust settled at the end of the 13th century from the chaos of war and collapse, both Hatti and Mitanni had fallen, and Egypt faltered. Babylon though remained a stable force in the region, patiently watching from the sidelines. Meanwhile, Assyria emerged as the rising power, ready to fill the power vacuum left behind.

The Amarna Letters and the Habiru Crisis: mid 1350s

It should be noted that the numerical sequence of the Amarna Letters does not necessarily reflect chronological order. They are categorized primarily by region, and the sequence within each region is inferred from internal references and historical context.

At the outset of the Ḫabiru crisis, Egypt, probably under Amenhotep III, sent troops to the Phoenician coast. The intervention was belated and ineffective. Egypt may even have hoped Mitanni would contain the problem, despite the area lying within Egypt’s sphere of influence [44].

Numerous Amarna Letters report on the activities of this disruptive group living on the fringes of society. Sometimes they are mentioned explicitly; in other cases, they are closely associated with a local warlord named Abdi-Aširta, who appears to have leveraged their unrest to expand his power across the northern Levant.

A growing crisis dominates much of the Amarna correspondence from this period. From Amarna Letter EA 68 through EA 151, the Ḫabiru recur as a primary or secondary concern in many letters. Among the most outspoken voices was Rib-Hadda, king of Byblos, who wrote dozens of increasingly urgent letters about the growing threat. His early requests for Egyptian military assistance, beginning in Amarna Letter EA 68, evolve into desperation and eventually open bitterness over Egypt’s lack of intervention. This emotional progression becomes particularly clear, where he complains:

 “Treacherous men say treacherous things to the king.” [45]

The slander he refers to may point to Abdi-Aširta [46], but this remains indirect rather than explicitly stated.

Under Abdi-Aširta, the Ḫabiru appear as a formidable and disruptive force. Rib-Hadda’s letters describe Abdi-Aširta’s advances against cities such as Ammiya [47], Sumur [48], Sigata [49], Ampi [50], Batruna [51], Ardata [52], and Irqata [53]. If these reports are accurate, Abdi-Aširta’s conquests posed a twofold threat: they weakened Mitanni’s influence under Tušratta and simultaneously eroded Egypt’s control of the region. However, these claims are preserved only in Rib-Hadda’s correspondence; no other contemporary source confirms them, and his hostility toward Abdi-Aširta raises the possibility of exaggeration.

Abdi-Aširta began corresponding with the Pharaoh, showing either familiarity with, or quick mastery of, the formal conventions of royal letters, perhaps with the help of an adviser. His letters open with the formula expected of a vassal:

“To the king, my lord, my sun: Message of Abdi-Aširta, your servant, the dirt under your feet. I fall at the feet of the king, my lord.” [54]

This highly deferential language was typical of Egyptian vassals in the Levant, reflecting the ritualized submission expected in messages to the Pharaoh.

However, later takes a more defensive tone. Abdi-Aširta responds to accusations of undermining Egyptian interests, framing himself instead as the protector of a city under threat. With the benefit of hindsight, it seems clear he was engaging in political maneuvering, trying to manipulate the Pharaoh’s perception of events.

Abdi-Aširta pushes back against accusations of disloyalty and insists on his loyalty to Egypt. He states:

“I did not expel them… the mayors lie to you.” [55]

When viewed through the letters of EA 94 and EA 108 it appears this line is tit-for-tat justification and shifts blame to other local rulers, suggesting that Abdi-Aširta sees himself as a scapegoat, or at least wants Pharaoh to see it that way. The tone is one of damage control. This defensiveness, and the attempt to undermine rival city rulers, foreshadows the more direct accusations, where he is implicated in “speaking treacherous words” [56] however the evidence remains circumstantial. 

Subsequent letters follow a predictable pattern:

• EA 63 contains more flattery and assurances of loyalty.
• EA 64 offers a bribe, ten women, alongside a plea for assistance against his enemies.
• EA 65 reflects expectation that Egyptian archers would be dispatched to help him.

EA 85 and EA 95 indicate Mitanni engagement in the region, likely a response to Hittite aggression. Ultimately his downfall is hinted at in EA 108, where Rib-Hadda refers to the ‘sons of Abdi-Aširta’ as acting independently. The absence of Abdi-Aširta’s name at this point suggests he had died.

The Rib-Hadda sequence runs in parallel to Abdi-Aširta’s own letters. It begins with a plea for help against the Ḫabiru [57], and builds with Rib-Hadda finally accusing unnamed figures of betrayal and voices bitter frustration over Egypt’s continued inaction [58]. Given the broader correspondence, particularly Abdi-Aširta’s—these accusations were likely aimed at him. Yet the letters never state this directly, and the identification remains interpretive rather than certain.

Abdi-Aširta’s death marks a pivotal turning point. EA 95 is cryptic, noting illness, though William Moran suggests this may actually imply a state of extreme distress [59]. No culprit is named in the Amarna Letters, leaving the circumstances one of the unresolved mysteries of the period. The editors of Amarna Diplomacy propose that Egyptian agents [60] may have orchestrated his death, while Trevor Bryce [61] and Donald Redford [62] adopt a more cautious stance, Bryce adding the possibility of dissident elements among the Ḫabiru.

After Abdi-Aširta’s fall, his son Aziru inherited both his ambitions and tactics. He continued cooperating with the Ḫabiru while maneuvering between Egyptian and Hittite interests. Letters from EA 156 to EA 171, whether authored by Aziru, Egyptian commissioners, or rival rulers, reveal a shrewd diplomat growing more powerful. As Egyptian-aligned cities fell to Aziru’s forces, suspicion grew in the Pharaoh’s court—but by then, it was too late.

While many local rulers understood the threat posed by the Ḫabiru, Egypt appears to have underestimated them, just as it had apparently misjudged the rise of the Hittites.

Egypt’s repeated failure to respond to Rib-Hadda’s pleas likely sealed his fate. He may have been killed by the Ḫabiru or by agents loyal to Aziru. Byblos ultimately fell and was absorbed into the growing region of Amurru, just as Rib-Hadda had warned [63].

But why was the region so vulnerable to Ḫabiru infiltration? The marriage alliance between Egypt and Mitanni, intended to secure peace [64]. Ironically, it created a vacuum—a politically unstable borderland neither side actively controlled. Into this vacuum flowed the Ḫabiru, eventually gaining dominance. The cities under Ḫabiru influence would ultimately fall under Hittite control, further weakening Egypt’s hold on the region.

Egypt’s earlier failure to counter Hittite expansion had left both it and Mitanni distracted by the rising threat of Šuppiluliuma I [65]. In this context, the Ḫabiru were likely dismissed as a minor nuisance—until their influence had grown too large to control.

It is at this time the throne would pass to a new Egyptian Pharaoh.

A New Pharaoh in Egypt c. 1353/1352 BCE

Upon the death of Amenhotep III in Egypt, shortly after the rise of Ḫabiru influence in Amurru, and around the time of Šuppiluliuma I’s ascension to the Hittite throne, Amenhotep IV succeeded to the Egyptian throne. Šuppiluliuma claims that Amenhotep III had made efforts to normalize relations between Egypt and Hatti [66], although no Egyptian or Hittite sources corroborate this assertion [67].

Šuppiluliuma portrayed Egypt and Hatti as former allies, treating Amenhotep IV as a peer and downplaying their longstanding rivalry. This was likely the diplomatic flattery, common among the “Great Kings.” Amenhotep IV appears to have been receptive.

Meanwhile, Egypt’s alliance with Mitanni deteriorated. King Tušratta’s correspondence [68] reflects growing frustration with Amenhotep IV, though the causes are unclear. Seizing this opportunity, Šuppiluliuma sent emissaries to Amenhotep IV’s third-year jubilee.

Amenhotep IV’s early fascination with his father’s jubilees with the grand rituals of divine legitimacy. It may have shaped his own vision of kingship. While Amenhotep III had used these festivals to elevate his solar identity within the framework of traditional theology, Akhenaten stripped that framework away. His third-year jubilee mimicked the outward form of the jubilee but replaced its theological core with Atenist ideology. The ritual no longer celebrated the Pharaoh’s endurance through time but his exclusive relationship with a singular god [69].

Other Great Kings, aware of the symbolic importance of such royal jubilees, known in Egypt as a Sed Festival, would have noticed the deviation, as it traditionally did not occur until a pharaoh’s 30th regnal year.

Conclusion

Now, with the major players set, war was not far behind. Abdi-Aširta’s successor would defy Egypt, Šuppiluliuma would drive Hittite armies deep into Syria, Ugarit would bow to new masters, Amenhotep IV would take a new name and reject Egypt’s old gods and Mitanni would begin to unravel. The years 1350–1335 would see betrayal and war but the end of the 14th century would see and entire Dynasty collapse.

References

---

[1] The Late Bronze Age Collapse and the Dawn of Israel, Part ” *When Gods Walked*, August 15, 2025, https://whengodswalked.com/2025/08/15/the-late-bronze-age-collapse-and-the-dawn-of-israel-part-1/

[2] Trevor Bryce, The Kingdom of the Hittites (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 128.

[3] Damien Stone, The Hittites: Lost Civilizations (New York: DK Publishing, 2021), 36.

[4] Toby Wilkinson, The Rise and Fall of Ancient Egypt (New York: Random House, 2010), 238–239.

[5] Donald B. Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992), 165–166.

[6] Ibid., 169.

[7] Betsy M. Bryan, “The 18th Dynasty Before the Amarna Period,” in The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, ed. Ian Shaw (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 153.

[8] Ibid. (referring again to the blog), accessed August 23, 2025, https://whengodswalked.com/2025/08/15/the-late-bronze-age-collapse-and-the-dawn-of-israel-part-1/

[9] Eric H. Cline, 1177 B.C.: The Year Civilization Collapsed, updated edition (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2021), 53.

[10] Damien Stone: The Hittites, p.36.

[11] Boaz Stavi, The Reign of Tudhaliya II and Šuppiluliuma I: The Contribution of the Hittite Documentation to a Reconstruction of the Amarna Age (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2015), 43-47.

[12] Trevor Bryce, The Kingdom of the Hittites, 151.

[13] William L. Moran, The Amarna Letters (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992), 101.

[14] Ibdi. (blog), https://whengodswalked.com/2025/08/15/the-late-bronze-age-collapse-and-the-dawn-of-israel-part-1/

[15] Marc Van De Mieroop, The Eastern Mediterranean in the Age of Ramesses II (Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2007), 31–32.

[16] Cline, 1177 B.C.: The Year Civilization Collapsed, Revised and Updated, p. 63; Bryce, The Kingdom of the Hittites, 155.

[17] Stavi, The Reign of Tudhaliya II, 3–4.

[18] Christian Frevel, “When and from Where Did YHWH Emerge? Some Reflections on Early Yahwism in Israel and Judah,” Entangled Religions 12, no. 2 (2021): 17, https://doi.org/10.46586/er.12.2021.8776

[19] Adele Berlin and Marc Zvi Brettler, eds., The Jewish Study Bible, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), Exod. 2:15–16.

[20] Ibid., Exod. 3:1–6.

[21] Ibid. (blog), https://whengodswalked.com/2025/08/15/the-late-bronze-age-collapse-and-the-dawn-of-israel-part-1/

[22] Thomas Schneider, “The First Documented Occurrence of the God Yahweh?” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Religions 7, no. 2 (2007): 113–120.

[23] Racheli Shalomi-Hen, “Signs of YHWH, God of the Hebrews, in New Kingdom Egypt?,” in Cultures in Contact: From Mesopotamia to the Mediterranean in the Second Millennium B.C., ed. Joan Aruz, Sarah B. Graff, and Yelena Rakic (New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2013), 280–291.

[24] Düring, The Imperialization of Assyria, 42–43.

[25] I. E. S. Edwards et al., eds., The Cambridge Ancient History, 3rd ed., vol. 1, pt. 2, Early History of the Middle East (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971), 745..

[26] Moran, The Amarna Letters, 18.

[27] Ibid., 41.

[28] Jacob Stefan, “The Rise and Fall of the Mitanni Kingdom,” in A Companion to Assyria, ed. Eckart Frahm, 117.

[29] Mario Livernai, The Ancient Near East: History, Society and Economy, 293.

[30] Moran, The Amarna Letters, 43–50, 61–71.

[31] Ibid., 41–42.

[32] Bryce, The Kingdom of the Hittites, 159.

[33] Gary M. Beckman, Hittite Diplomatic Texts, 2nd ed., Writings from the Ancient World 7 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999), 110.

[34] Bryce, The Kingdom of the Hittites, 158–161.

[35] William G. Dever, Beyond the Texts: An Archaeological Portrait of Ancient Israel and Judah (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2017), 240.

[36] Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, 170.

[37] Moran, The Amarna Letters, 131–137

[38] Ibid., 181–182.

[39] Ibid., 137 n.2.

[40] Anson F. Rainey, The El-Amarna Correspondence: A New Edition of the Cuneiform Letters from the Site of El-Amarna Based on Collations of All Extant Tablets, ed. William M. Schniedewind and Zipora Cochavi-Rainey (Leiden: Brill, 2015), 435.

[41] Moran, The Amarna Letters, 84–99.

[42] Donald B. Redford, Akhenaten: The Heretic King (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984), 141–143.

[43] Ibid., 193–196.

[44] Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, 170–171.

[45] Moran, The Amarna Letters, 168.

[46] Ibid., 181–182.

[47] Ibid., 141-146.

[48] Ibid., 146.

[49] Ibid., 181-182.

[50] Ibid., 181-182.

[51] Ibid., 159.

[52] Ibid., 160-161.

[53] Ibid., 163-164.

[54] Ibid., 131-132.

[55] Ibid., 133-134.

[56] Ibid., 181-182.

[57] Ibid., 137.

[58] Ibid., 168.

[59] Ibid., 169 n. 4.

[60] Raymond Cohen and Raymond Westbrook, eds., Amarna Diplomacy: The Beginnings of International Relations (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000), 8.

[61] Trevor Bryce, The Kingdom of the Hittites, 170.

[62] Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, 171.

[63] Moran, The Amarna Letters, 193–194.

[64] Ibid. (blog), https://whengodswalked.com/2025/08/15/the-late-bronze-age-collapse-and-the-dawn-of-israel-part-1/

[65] Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, 172.

[66]  Moran, The Amarna Letters, 114–115.

[67] Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, 173.

[68]  Moran, The Amarna Letters, 84–99.

[69] Redford, Akhenaten: The Heretic King, 62, 137.