I am kind of new here and I hope I am asking a relavent question.
I am some way into Keith Laidler's book 'The Head of God' and am intrigued by the what is stated in the first few chapters. Although the book is primarily about templaric worship of the head, Laidler touches upon research made my Sigmud Freud concerning Moses and the Akhenaten-Moses connection, made by Egyptologist Ahmed Osman. Freud suggests that Moses was in fact an Egyptian, drawing attention to his name being of possible Egyptian origin and the unlikelyhood of the 'baby on boat' scenario described in the bible. The flaw, of course, is his 'unegyptian' obsession with monotheism
this is the natural link to Akhenaten.
Several similarities are outlined, such as Akhenaten's Hebrew ancestry. The theory is that after his disappearance, after the fall of the Amarna kings, he returned to Egypt, only to leave again - this time leading the Exodus. The word Aten is suggested to be the root of the spoken name of God, Adonai - 'ai' being the added Hebrew pronoun and Adon being the direct character translation of Aten (e and t turn into d and o). Other similarities are also outlined: such as the snake staff of Akhenaten (as pharaoh) and the snake/staff of Moses, sacrifice of egyptian 'abominations' (sacred animals) and exile and return from and into Egypt.
I know the idea of Nefertiti married to Moses can seem rather far-fetched but I can do nothing but stay back and claim ignorance. I really don't know much about the subject, the dates or the whether or not what Laidler writes is full of inaccuracies and anachronisms. I hope you will be able to shed some light on this though.
Hi Buzrael! Welcome to KingTutOne!
When Sigmud Freud did his study on Akhenaten, and Moses there was some reason for his belief. There wasn't a whole lot known about Akhenaten and his religious revolution. Unlike today, where it is now known that Akhenaten didn't start a monotheist religion but replaced the middlemen, ie priests, with himself and royal family, and eliminated the old gods in favor of the Aten. Easier for the royal family to conduit to one god for everyone than a bunch of gods. So from new information we can see that all those theories based upon Freud's including Ahmed Osman, are built on a falsehood.
I am not familiar with Keith Laidler book so i can't really say to much. Except to caution you in accepting anything that is based upon the falsehood of Freud's outdated and proven wrong theory.
There is no evidence from the late 18th dynasty that Egypt laid broken, ruined, and depopulated as Exodus states it did. When Moses did lead his people out of Egypt. This should sounds chimes of caution as well.
There are no signs of Canaanite Conquest by the escaping Hebrews in the late 18th, or even early 19th dynasty. Which should again sound chimes of caution.
The best answer as to why all expects look to these 2 dynasty's as the time of the Exodus. Is because traditional Biblical or Christian chronology places it in this time. What isn't well known is that this chronology dates as far back as the 3rd century AD and traces its roots back even further back into the 3rd century BC (Greek historians) and the 1st century AD(Jewish historians). Here is an most interesting field of study that isn't studied as it should. How Biblical, Christian chronology came about, and what supports it.
Archaeology itself tells us that the chronology as used by the experts don't agree with the Bible itself. Instead of saying that is because the Bible if wrong, they really ought to consider the ancient source of the chronology that is used.
I hope this is a help. Again welcome to KingTutOne!