[1][2] The text is largely an account of Merneptah's victory over the ancient Libyans and their allies, but the last three of the 28 lines deal with a separate campaign in Canaan, then part of Egypt's imperial possessions.

[11] Now in the collection of the Egyptian Museum at Cairo, the stele is a black granite slab, over 3 meters (10 feet) high, and the inscription says it was carved in the 5th year of Merneptah of the 19th dynasty.

The final two lines mention a campaign in Canaan, where Merneptah says he defeated and destroyed Asqaluna, Gezer, Yanoam and Israel.

The problems began in Merneptah's 5th year (1208 BCE), when a Libuan king invaded Egypt from the west in alliance with various northern peoples.

Traditionally the Egyptians had concerned themselves only with cities, so the problem presented by Israel must have been something new – possibly attacks on Egypt's vassals in Canaan.

[12] The bulk of the inscription deals with Merneptah's victory over the Libyans, but the closing lines shift to Canaan:[13][14] The princes are prostrate, saying 'Peace!'

Desolation is for Tjehenu; Hatti is pacified; Plundered is the Canaan with every evil; Carried off is Asqaluni; Seized upon is Gezer; Yanoam is made non-existent; Israel is laid waste—its seed is no more; Kharru has become a widow because of Egypt.

[1] The line which refers to Israel is below (shown in reverse to match the English translation; the original Egyptian is in right-to-left script):

As early as 1955, John A. Wilson wrote, of the idea that this determinative means the "'ysrỉꜣr" were a people: "The argument is good, but not conclusive, because of the notorious carelessness of Late-Egyptian scribes and several blunders of writing in this stela".

[22] In contrast to this apparent Israelite statelessness, the other Canaanite groups fought by Egypt (Asqaluni, Gezer, and Yano'am) are described in the stele as nascent states.

[30][31][32][33] Michael G. Hasel, arguing that prt on the stele meant grain, suggested that "Israel functioned as an agriculturally based or sedentary socioethnic entity in the late 13th century BCE"[34] and this in some degree of contrast to nomadic "Shasu" pastoralists in the region.

Others disagree that prt meant grain, and Edward Lipinski wrote that "the 'classical' opposition of nomadic shepherds and settled farmers does not seem to suit the area concerned".