Ancient Egyptian Forum

egyptologist · Servant Joined: 18 Sep 2005 Posts: 6

i have been thinking about this topic for many years.

for a while, i was under a hunch that the exodus pharoah was infact Akhenaten, or Amenhotep lll. what do you think?
Question

Google · Sponsor

Neb-Ma'at-Re · Pharaoh Joined: 09 Dec 2003 Posts: 690

What exodus?
_________________

egyptologist · Servant Joined: 18 Sep 2005 Posts: 6

my bad! the pharoah OF exodus, as in the bible, with the unnamed "Pharoah" and all of that

bel · Pharaoh Joined: 25 May 2003 Posts: 501

You guy's,
alway's .... lead me
on the most interesting
adventure's Very Happy

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/tempest.htm

bel

JOY! · Scribe Joined: 23 Apr 2005 Posts: 55

I've always thought rameses II. Though now I'm leaning to someone around the amarna period?
there are a few other un-named pharaohs in the bible. For instance in the case of Solomon, his first wife was a egyptian princess. Besides that story I had never heard of a Egyptian Princess being given, I didn't think the pharaohs would even allow that. in the bible that is the first mention of ancient Egypt and israel. I've also heard that the queen of Sheba may have been Hatshepsut? I highly doubt that though.
then who was the pharaoh during Joseph's journey? and then the pharaoh Prophesied against by Isaiah?
I don't understand why they didn't mention the name of the pharaoh of the exodus, unless it was written after the event actually happened? Rolling Eyes

_________________

Nofret · Tomb Robber Joined: 16 Nov 2005 Posts: 1

Although the actual name is not mentioned in the bible, the movie ("The Prince of Egypt") portrays Ramses the second as being the ruler at the time. Although the historical accuracy is questionable.

egyptologist · Servant Joined: 18 Sep 2005 Posts: 6

Some people think that the people who wrote the bible were only trying to make an example of how a monetheistic religion triumphed over a polystheistic (how ever you spell it) religion, and that people should beleive in one god.

egyptologist · Servant Joined: 18 Sep 2005 Posts: 6

in addition to my last message, they made it up so there wasn't really ever a real pharoah that is described in the bible

nileqt87 · Posted: Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:20 pm Post subject:

bob brier (egyptological archaeologist) believes it's ramses II.

his arguments definitely persuaded me.

the big thing is the stela at elephantine island that says the hebrews didn't have a homeland yet during the reign of merenptah--the 40 years of wandering. thus, ramses II, merenptah's father would have to be the pharaoh of the exodus, especially since he reigned for 67 years.

interesting note: moses means "son of", hence moses was the son of blank. ramses (ramoses, rameses, etc...) means "son of ra".

egyptologist · Servant Joined: 18 Sep 2005 Posts: 6

maybe, but that is a little skeptical, like my idea.

i dont think that we'll really ever know, until we have unmistakeable archaeological evidence as to who the pharoah of the Exodus actually was.
And that might be a long time...

Psusennes I · Pharaoh Joined: 09 Sep 2004 Posts: 913 Location: England

I don't want to disillusion anyone, but all the sources I have read (including the Bible) have led me to believe resolutely that the Exodus did not occur. I accept that there may have been true historical events and occurences on which the Exodus was based, but to me it seems simply ridiculous to assume that such an event, described by only one historical source could possibly have occured without anyone else relating the huge ordeal in massive detail.

The Torah furnishes the chief account of his life, but without alternative authentification I am afraid that as a historian I must dismiss its claims as highly dubious. Even though it may be rooted in fact, it simply cannot be proved and all the tenuous links with contemporary sources seem just that - tenous and dubious.

"interesting note: moses means "son of", hence moses was the son of blank."
I'm not so sure. 'Ms' only means 'son of' and when used as a copulative with some sort of genetive (such as 'Ra'). On its own it either can be etymologically linked with 'Mesh' meaning 'child' or the Coptic 'Mo-uses' meaning 'saved from water.'
_________________

JOY! · Scribe Joined: 23 Apr 2005 Posts: 55

I have a problem with David Rohl's theory as well. His theory would place Solomon at the reign of Seti I or Ramseses II, so that would mean from the bible, that one of these kings gave away there daughter as a bride. I highly doubt Seti I or Rameses would do such a thing. Though if the Exodus happened before Rameses why would they mention his city? there'd be no need to. Unless people wrote the event down hundreds of years after it happened? and there would have to be two pharaohs of the exodus, because the one who's daughter found him the well, and the one who wouldn't let Mose's people go. When Moses came back after 40 years there was a completely different pharaoh. Which would make sense since the ancient egyptians didn't have long lifetimes.
ugh this is too confusing Confused

and true there may not be much evidence to the exodus having occured, but there are many things that have happened in the world that we have no evidence for at all.
_________________

bel · Pharaoh Joined: 25 May 2003 Posts: 501

I realize this is rather lengthly but what are we really discussing here anyway? The Exodus as part of the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me God? Biblical indeed ....
http://www.nayahushua.org/constantine.html
Sometime's the truth is hard to find but it's out there.

WriterRhon · Tomb Robber Joined: 03 Feb 2006 Posts: 1

Has anyone considered Freud's theory that Akhenaten was Moses?

Psusennes I · Pharaoh Joined: 09 Sep 2004 Posts: 913 Location: England

"but there are many things that have happened in the world that we have no evidence for at all."

Shocked

Such as?
_________________