Hail again, Lysimachus,
I looked over your sources Mr. Ron Wyatt is another using the discredited dates from Shoshenq I and 2nd Kings 6:1. As i have stated earlier neither of these dates stand up againt a real look. See below.
Karol Mysliwiec in The Twilight of Ancient Egypt, First Millennium BCE, Cornell University Press, english translation David Lorton, 2000. pg 45 makes it almost abundantly clear that Shoshenq I wasn't Shishak.
Taken from Pharaohs and Kings A Biblical Quest by David Rohl, Crown Publishing 1995.
Champollion was wrong in his reading of the Shoshenq I's campainge. It wasn't Jerusalem but the place of the Kings Hand. pg. 122
Shoshenq does not easily translate into Shishak. pg 128.
Ramesses II does assult, and take the Canaanite town Shalem, the historical name of Jerusalem. pg 149.
Ramesses II name can be translated into Shishak. pgs 157-162.
The Merenptah Victory Stele is another source on the dating of Israel, and Exodus. However, due to the persistant belief that Exodus happens in either the 18th or 19th Dynasty. The concentration of the scholars is on the wording of the name Israel instead of on the entire stanza. The object of interest for the majority of scholars is the notation of Israel in this stanza as a non-city state people. i say big deal show me one case when Israel was ever considered a city state? What is consistantly missed by these same scholars is the first line of the stanza. Here we are told that Israel has a Prince and he is prostrated like the others begging peace.
This line states that the "Princes are prostrate saying Shalom."
When did Israel have a Prince? At and after the sacking of Jerusalem by Shishak. Israel had became a nation state not a city state unlike all the other place names. That were indicated on the Stele.
To make Ramesses II Shishak, not the Pharaoh of Oppression and Exodus, and Merenptah's mention of Israel as a nation state with a Prince. Pushes those events further back in time than most scholars are willing to do.
So i dismiss Mr. Wyatt as no more pertinent to the study of where and when than i do anyone else using such information as a starting point. Besides even if this is the correct time for the Exodus it does not the negate the rest of the research that can't find Abraham, Joseph, King David, or King Solomon.
You wonder why Amenhotep III was not found next to his wife Queen Tiy? To begin wtih the identification of Queen Tiy is not definative, it might not be her. I for one do not believe it is her thanks to two most enlightening article by Dr. Susan James found in KMT A Modern Journal of Ancient Egypt, Volume 12, Number 3, Summer 2001, see article "Who is the Mummy of Elder Lady" pgs 42-50. Then followed by her in KMT A Modern Journal of Ancient Egypt Volume 14, Number 3, Fall 2003, see article "The Dueling Nefertitis",pgs 22-29. So first you must prove the mummy is Tiy if you can't your question is moot. As for the remains of Amenhotep III they were found in the same tomb as the possible Queen Tiy/Nefertiti only in the main burial chamber. The mummy of Amenhotep III was discovered in the tomb of Amenhotep II laying in the coffin box of Rameses III and covered by the lid of a replacement coffin originally meant for Seti II (from the website http://www.secker.fsbusiness.co.uk/amenhotep3.htm
As for you slicing and dicing of the 18th Dynasty how do you explain the recorded record of the king's mothers for the Amenhoteps and Thutmoses? How do you make these women disappear?
Source Women in Ancient Egypt by Gay Robings
Mothers of the Accepted Thutmose's and Amenhotep's Pharaohs of the 18th Dynasty
Queen Ahhotep mother of Ahmose pg 42
Queen Ahmose-Nefertari mother of Amenhotep I pg 43
King's Mother Seniseneb mother of Thutmose I pg 45
King's Mother Mutnefert mother of Thutmose II (source http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/tuthmosis2.htm
King's Mother Aset mother of Thutmose III pg 150
King's Mother Meritra mother of Amenhotep pg 150
King's Mother Tiaa mother of Thutmose IV pg 150
King's Mother Mutemwia mother of Amenhotep III
Queen Tiy mother of Amenhotep IV/ Akhenaten pg 52
The Deir el-Bahri cache also casts doubts on your slicing and dicement of the 18th Dynasty because it included the remains of Seqenenre-Taa, who had fought the Hyksos and bore a great head wound as apparent evidence, Ahmose I, the founder of the New Kingdom, Amenhotep I, the first three Tutmosids, Seti I, Ramesses II, III and IX, and the coffin of Ramesses I.
I see another problem with your theory on the Thutmose being the name of the coregencey not that of the Pharaoh himself. How does your theory excuse the remains of 3 seperate Thutmose Kings? Not to mention that in your theory Amenhotep I was originally the junior king under the name of Thutmose I, to Ahmose but in this one cache we have 3 bodies that correspond with Ahmose, his son Amenhotep I, and Thutmose I. How do you explain this?
Now on to you excitment of finding 18th Dynasty chariot wheels in the Gulf of Aqaba, why is this a surprise? It isn't to me or many others with interest in the 18th Dynasty. Why? Because the 18th Dynasty was an imperialistic state meaning it lead many expeditions. From the time of Thutmose I to the reign of Thutmose IV there were atleast 10 Pharaoh lead campaigns into Palestine and Syria all starting in Egypt. This does not include those campaigns not lead by Pharaoh. I for one do not believe that all equipment made it to Palestine/Syria safety this discovery only underscores that belief of mine. Egypt has had ports off there since the Predynastic period. As for human remains with chariots being found across the whole way, Lysimachus there is such a thing called wave action. As the Gulf is a small area to begin with artifacts from humans only have so much area to disperse.
As for Saudi Arabia being the area of the real Mt. Sini okay not a problem to me.
I am sorry Lysimachus until you explain the King's mothers, offer an explaination that puts the Exodus into the 18th Dynasty without using Shoshenq I or 2nd Kings 6:1 you theory and heros remains yours and your friends alone. I still believe you owe Lord Thoth an apology