he present article is a response to Anson Rainey's comments on Chapter 4 of my recent book, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, which appeared in Bulletin 295 (1994): 81-85. The book anticipates lengthier articles on certain ethnic terms (including C'mw) and on Ashkelon and related reliefs at Karnak, so I shall not deal with those topics here. But nature of Rainey's diatribe on my stance on Middle Bronze Age, and its wholesale misinterpretation of evidence, I feel requires an immediate answer. One of most tiresome practices of some scholars in our field today is to slot colleagues according to a sort of scholastic genealogy. When employed as a weapon in an effort to dismiss out of hand an opposing case, it adopts ploy of suggesting that, because one sat at feet of Scholar X (whose views are now outmoded), one is merely parroting Scholar X. Rainey links my views loosely with those of Kenyon and Albright. While I did not have privilege of taking courses from latter, I did work under Dame Kenyon and treasure every moment of three seasons' training. But I honestly cannot remember what she said about Middle Bronze Age. The jumping-off point for my own research in chapter about which Rainey has reservations was Egyptian textual source material bearing on Palestine in 12th and 13th Dynasties. I was certainly not looking over my shoulder at Kenyon, Albright, or even Rainey. The whole notion of schools of thought and ramifications thereof are completely alien to empirical approach so desperately needed. For what Scholar X thought (or thinks) is simply not evidence. In assaying evidence of Egyptian texts in period under discussion, it is well to keep in mind paucity of material. When even a Hellenistic historian, armed with wealth of texts from Ptolemaic Egypt, can decry anecdotal way this evidence has been handled through the analysis of specific incidents or cases (Samuel 1989: 38), it behooves historian of Levant in second millennium B.C. not to be ashamed to admit ignorance, but to label all his reconstructions as educated guesses to be relinquished at a moment's notice. Unfortunately Rainey exhibits no such circumspection, but resembles old-fashioned rationalist who can easily get inside mind of ancients and knows ll about them (cf. Trigger 1993: 24). For 12th and 13th Dynasties our scant Egyptian textual sources may be grouped under following headings:
Read full abstract