Part 1
In order for one to comprehend the amount of flexibility that exists in interpreting Egyptian history/chronology, the presented hypothesis must be seen in greater depth along with what famous authors of Egyptian history have to say. Throughout this study, you will notice my "Editors notes". Be sure to read them as well.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quoted from Dr. Lennart Moller’s book, “The Exodus Case”:
12. DOES MOSES EXIST IN EGYPTIAN HISTORY?
Is Moses to be found in Egyptian history? Moses was “only” heir to the throne and, according to Josephus, general in command of the Egyptian army, and there are many pharaohs who are mainly unknown. However, Moses was a very prominent person and it can be
assumed [
Editors note: just like all the Egyptologists can assume] on good grounds that the life of Moses was documented in various ways as the lives of all other important people were documented in Egyptian society.
To questions are of importance. On the one hand what Egyptian name could Moses have had, and on the other whether any historical information about this person has been preserved. AS we will see, the hypothesis is that Moses DOES appear during the 18th dynasty. It should be noted here that the dynasties of Egypt area relative concept but they have come to be considered as indicating different eras of time. The dynasty concept will be used for the sake of simplicity but it can be worthwhile to see what Breasted (34. J.H. Breasted (1921) A History of Egypt, Hodder and Stoughton, London, England.) writes about the dynasties as a CONCEPT:
“A more or less arbitrary and artificial but convenient subdivision of these epochs, beginning with the historic age, is furnished by the so-called dynasties of Manetho. This native historian of Egypt, a priest of Sebennytos, who flourished under Ptolemy I (305-285 BC), wrote a history of his country in the Greek language. The work has perished, and we only know it is in epitome by Julius Africanus and Eusebius, and extracts ob Josephus. The value the work was slight, as it was built up on folk tales and popular traditions of the early kings. Manetho divided the long succession of Pharaohs as known to him, into thirty royal houses or dynasties, and although we know that many of his divisions are arbitrary, and that there was many a dynastic change where he indicates none, yet his dynasties divide the kings into convenient groups, which have so long been employed in modern study of Egyptian history, that it is now impossible to dispense with them.”
Tyldesley (35. J. Tyldesley (1998) Hatshetsup, the Female Pharaoh, Penguin Books, Harmonsdsworth, England.) have the following comments related to the 18th dynasty:
“The surviving archeological evidence is therefore strongly biased toward religion and death; we have for example, two tombs, three sarcophagi and several temples built by Hatshepsut, but little trace of the palaces where she lived her life. Overall we are left with the misleading impression that the Egyptians were depressingly gloomy and morbid race.”
And further, in general comment to the Egyptian history:
“…we should never lose sight of the fact that the written record is INCOMPLETE, randomly selected, and carries its own biases. The monumental inscriptions, for example, are basically a mixture of religious and propaganda texts which tell the story that the king him – or herself wished to convey, and which cannot be taken as literal truth. The translators of these inscriptions are faced with problems not just of accuracy but of interpretation…”
And a comment to Egyptian chronology:
“However, there was no ancient equivalent of our modern calendar, and year numbers started afresh with every new reign.”
And a final comment on Egyptian names:
“Manetho, working in approximately 300 BC, compiled a detailed history of the kings of Egypt. This original work is now lost, but fragments have been preserved in the writings of Josephus (AD 70), Africanus (early third century AD), Eusebius (early fourth century AD) and Syncellus (c. AD 800). These preserved extracts do not always agree, and the names given are often wildly incorrect, but students of Egyptian history still acknowledge a huge debt to Manetho, the ‘Father of Egyptian History’.
[
Editors note: So there you have it. You cannot rely on the sources of which you gather your information stating that Senmut was after the reign of Thutmosis II, of which most love to use this argument]
13. THE CONNECTION WITH THE HYKSOS PEOPLE
The 18th dynasty is characterized by the fact that at least two and probably three pharaohs or rules reigned in Egypt at the same time. The reigning Egyptian family lived in Thebes, the pharaoh who would take over lived in Memphis, while another ruler controlled the northern delta region. The Egyptians considered the delta people to be foreigners. There is good reason to believe that it was the Hebrews, descendants of Joseph, who were the foreigners who had settled in the delta region on the orders of the pharaoh reigning at the time. It is probably that other tribes as well had moved into this fertile region of the country, tribes who gave rise to the name Hyksos.
From the beginning, the Hebrews in the delta area received royal status on account of Joseph’s contributions as minister of state when he saved Egypt from the seven years of famine. This is clear not least from the way in which Joseph’s father, Jacob, was embalmed after his death. In Gen. 50:1-14 this is described as 40 days of embalming, a 70-day period of public mourning in Egypt and a large Egyptian retinue present at the interment in Hebron. The Hebrews received a royal position and from the texts in the Book of Exodus we see how this family very quickly grew to be an entire nation.
It is therefore probably that those whom the Egyptians called foreigners and who lived in the delta region with the name of “Hyksos” were Hebrews
intermingled with other tribal peoples from Asia. Moreover it can be added that they had a different religion from the Egyptians, which also tallies with the hypothesis that it was the Hebrew people, probably with other tribes too, with a relatively independent leadership.
Inscriptions exist which in different ways mention these “shepherd kings”. This too that they are called “shepherd kings” implies a group of people with the predominating occupation of being shepherds, which is how the biblical texts describe the Hebrews and which was also the reason that Pharaoh gave them the delta land in which to settle (Gen. 46:31-34).
There is an interesting inscription (23. Hatshepsut’s Temple Inscription at Speos Artemidos, translated by Goedicke.) of queen Hatshepsut during the 18th dynasty which refers to the time when the Hyksos people had been driven out of the country: “I have restored what had decayed, I annulled the former privileges since the Asiatics were in the region of Avaris of Lower Egypt (the delta). The immigrants among them disregarded the tasks which were assigned to them, thinking Re would not consent….” The text in brackets is the author’s (Moller) comment.
The evidence is lacking to what really took place but the Egyptian records suggests that a warrior people (Asians, barbarians) lived among the Northland people (the Hebrews). The Asians (barbarians) were driven out by the Egyptians and a situation arose which most probably was threatening to the Hebrews. They were shepherds and had no possibility of defending themselves. Not least the biblical texts indicate that their position was weak and led them to become slaves, which shows how weak they were as a warrior people (Ex. 1-14).
The Egyptians wanted to be rid of the “barbarians” but considered the shepherd people (the Hebrews) as manpower to use for rebuilding the country. “I have restored what had decayed” says the inscription. The Bible tells us that as slaves the Hebrews were forced to work very hard at building. A new ruler comes to the fore in Egypt who says:
“Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that, when there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies, and fight against us, and go get them up out of the land. Therefore they did set over them taskmasters to afflict them with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities. Pithom and Raamses.” (Ex. 1:14)
“And they made their lives bitter with hard bondage, in mortar, and in brick, and in all manner of service in the field: all their service, wherein they made them serve, was with rigor.” (Ex. 1:14)
When the barbarians are driven away, the Hebrews are allowed to remain, they had received the right to live there from Pharaoh himself, but their rights were taken from them and they became a slave people. Slaves to restore “what had decayed” and presumably to build many other things too, since the Hebrews were numerous at that time.
[
Editors note: Before we continue, you need to understand who the Pharaoh’s were during the time of Moses.]
14. WHO WERE THE PHARAOHS DURING THE TIME OF MOSES?
During the 18th dynasty the Pharaohs are said to have been called or entitled Amenhotep or Thutmosis. This hypothesis can be questioned as the name alternates between Amenhotep and Thutmosis. The pharaoh was the embodiment of the most important god and this god was then the highest god for the entire royal family reigning at the time. Since the pharaohs during this dynasty belonged to the same family it is hardly likely that one pharaoh would consider Thot (Thutmosis) was the highest god while another pharaoh considered Amen (Amenhotep) the highest.
Inscriptions found in temples and graves imply rather that “Thutmosis” is a name (title) which a pharaoh might have, and in some way “Amenhotep” was a further title. It is probable that several pharaohs had the title of both “Thutmosis” and “Amenhotep” depending on the stage at which they were in their careers.
The general understanding of this period has confused many scholars, one stating in a comment on other Egyptologists as they are “unaware of the complexities of the Tuthmoside succession” (35. J. Tyldesley (1998) Hatchepsut, the Female Pharaoh, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, England.).
It may be that the co-ruler was “Thutmosis” during the time he reigned together with Pharaoh who was “Amenhotep”. When the co-ruler had to be content with a lower “god title” (Thutmosis). This understanding seems to make a great deal of more sense compared to the traditional viewpoint held that they were separate pharaohs.
To this we can add that the sun god Ra was over the other gods and sequently pharaoh could also add this title to his row of designations. In this context Ra becomes Rameses. Rameses was a title used by many pharaohs, they were all an incarnation of the sun god, as the son of the sun god, or Rameses. This creates some confusion when Rameses II is pointed out as the great pharaoh with all the temples, statues and much more. Particularly when one looks at the statues representing Rameses II. They seem to represent different people. What one should also note is that inscriptions mention the title Rameses on many statues, temples and graves but not with the specification “II”. That is a later idea.
The following is a hypothesis concerning which pharaohs reigned during the time of Moses, with their “double names” according to where in their careers they found themselves at different times.
Is there any information in the biblical texts which can be linked with the hypothesis presented according to the following table about the successions to the throne?:
Once again, Carefully analyze this chart if you would:
[
Editors note: Compare with figure 245 later in this study]
It is likely that there is a link. In the First Book of Kings the biblical text is as follows:
“And it came to pass in the four hundredth and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month of Zif, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the LORD.”(1 Kings 6:1)
Here we have a very precise indication of the date of the beginning of the construction of the temple in Jerusalem. Most often the fourth year of king Solomon’s reign is given as approximately 966 BC (ref. 36. F.F. Bruce (1963) Israel and the Nations, The Paternoster Press Ltd., Exeter England.). If one counts back 480 years from the year mentioned, this places the Exodus approximately 1446 BC. Can this date be verified?
In the Encyclopedia Britannica (2. The New Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th edition (1985), London, England.) the following stands:
“ The next date is given by a medical papyrus, to which a calendar is added, possibly to insure a correct conversion of dates used in the receipts to the actual timetable. Here it is said that the 9th day of the 11th month of year 9 of King Amenhotep I was the day of the helical rising of Sothis, i.e. 1538 BC. This date, however, is only accurate provided the astronomical observations were taken at the old residence of Memphis; if observed at Thebes in Upper Egypt, the residence of the 18th dynasty, the date must be lowered 20 years, i.e. 1518 BC.”
The chronology which is described more closely in Chapter 44 of The Exodus Case (drawn up long before reference 2 was found) shows that year nine for Amenhotep I occurred around 1519 BC which coincides AMAZINGLY with the approximate date 1518 BC from reference 2. Here an astronomic observation can be linked with the chronology mentioned in the above table (Table 5) and with great precision place the 18th dynasty within the period of time used in this study.
The following hypothesis is based on the chronology in the table (Table 5) and therewith the astronomic observation in reference 2.
[
Editors note: Questions regarding the use of 1 Kings 6:1 have been raised. Later on in upcoming chapters in this article, I will have a thorough study on the dating of the 1446 B.C. Exodus. The data provided will only reinforce that using 1 Kings 6:1 to arrive at 1446 B.C. is correct]
[
Editors note: So the next question is,
who was Pharaoh’s daughter?]
15. WHO WAS PHARAOH’S DAUGHTER?
By Pharaoh’s daughter is meant here the person who found Moses in the reed basket in the Nile and who later adopted him according to the biblical text in Exodus 2:1-10.
The question then arises if, during the 18th dynasty, there was a Pharaoh who had no son who could inherit the throne but who had a daughter who played this role. Thutmosis I/Amenhotep I tallies with this description. He lacked a male heir but had a daughter who is very well-known in the history of Egypt. Her name was Nefure AND Hatshepsut. In earlier inscriptions when she is a princess she is referred to as Nefure. Later when she becomes queen probably her name/title changes to Hatshepsut.
[
Editors note: As you can see, instead of criticizing this hypothesis based on the idea that the time and date doesn’t seem to add up, might it be more appropriate to ask ourselves the following question?: If the figures during this time frame seem to correlate as far as blood relationships, and since there is more confusion placing the appropriate figures in the 19th dynasty, perhaps the dating methods we have been using might be messed up? Perhaps we have been approaching the whole dating concept in a very wrong way? Instead of using dates as our ultimate criteria, why not adjust our approaches to see what makes sense? Not just assume that such and such a name or person cannot fit simply because the “date doesn’t add up”.]
According to this hypothesis, when Moses was born Amose reigned and lived in Thebes. Thutmosis I lived in Memphis and acted as co-ruler.
Both of them could be called Pharaoh. Pharaoh comes from the word “pero” meaning “big house”, which implies that the title was a mark of power and influence. Thutmosis I was probably the one who acted as Pharaoh in Memphis and who was the father of Nefure, the person who most likely found Moses and adopted him.
On several statues a young women with a little child is to be seen:
The wording on these statues indicates that it is Nefure and Senmut. The child is wearing a royal ornament on its head indicating royalty, in this context a future heir to the throne. An heir to the throne was always a man, hence these statues represent a little boy.
Nefure is known as a princess and the daughter of Pharaoh Amenhotep I. It is then probable that it is princess Nefure who found the baby Moses in the Nile reeds and adopted him to have an heir to the throne. Other hypotheses claim that these statues represent a man (Senmut) who is responsible for the child Nefure, which the statues do not imply since it is difficult to understand how the older person in these statues can be seen to represent a man.
Similarly it is unlikely that the child was a girl as this would be contrary to the custom in Egypt that the heir to the throne was always a man.
Senmut is an important name for Moses as it has special meaning, namely “mother’s brother”. This name goes back to the Egyptian gods (and royal family according to the Egyptian custom) Osiris, Isis and Horus. In this family in a complicated way, the son of Isis, Horus, becomes his mother’s son and his mother’s brother since he was a reincarnation of Isis’ dead husband, who in turn was Isis’ brother. In other words, Horus was also the brother of Isis (his mother’s brother). This was to show that Isis was the rightful heir to the throne in spite of the fact that his father was dead when he was born.
In the SAME WAY Moses needed to have a rightful identity in order to be heir to the throne. His adoptive mother is thus depicted with Moses, who is then called his “mother’s brother” (Senmut) and thereby receives the right to inherit the throne since his mother is the bearer of this right (although she cannot become Pharaoh). It is another way of saying that Moses, in the same way as Horus, was born into the royal family without a father. In this hypothesis Senmut is not a formal name for Moses but could perhaps be translated as “adopted son” in our everyday language. In another bible passage (Heb. 11:24) it is related that as an adult Moses refused to call himself the son of Pharaohs daughter, which is understandable in view of his adult life.
There is an interesting comment about Senmut in the literature (37. F. Tiradritti (1999) The Cairo Museum Master Pieces of Egyptian Art, Thames and Hudson, London, England.); “It is probably that Senmut abused his power and that at a particular point in the reign of Hatshepsut he fell into disgrace, as demonstrated by the damage done to most of his monuments.” This is EXACTLY what happened to Moses according to the Bible text: From an Egyptian perspective he fell into disgrace when he escaped from Egypt and it is obvious that a person, the heir to the throne, doing this would have everything in terms of monuments, statues, scrolls etc., destroyed. A person doing what Moses did, must, according to Egyptian traditions – be erased from the history.
Tyldesley writes a chapter on Senmut in the interesting review of Hatshepsut (35. J. Tyldesley (1998) Hatchepsut, the Female Pharaoh, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, England.). A number of known, strange and in many cases unclear facts related to Senmut are discussed. In the following table some of these characteristics of Senmut will be commented in relation to the hypothesis that Senmut and Moses were the same person.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6. A comparsion of Senmuts characteristics from ref 35 (J.. Tyldesley (1998) Hatchepsut, the Female Pharaoh, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, England.) in relation to Moses as described in the Bible texts, mainly the book of Exodus(B), and in some cases in relation to descriptions by Josephus(J).
--------------------------------
SENMUT
"...son of humble parents."
MOSES
Son of Hebrew slaves (B)
--------------------------------
--------------------------------
SENMUT
"Unfortunately, we have no means of knowing when Senmut had started his illustrious royal career."
MOSES
Moses was found in the reeds of the Nile river at the age of three months by the princess at the royal court (B).
-------------------------------
------------------------------
SENMUT
"Driven by a burning desire to shake off his lowly origins..."
MOSES
Lowly origins(slaves)(B).
-----------------------------
----------------------------
SENMUT
"He rose rapidly through the ranks..."
MOSES
Became heir to the throne (B).
---------------------------
---------------------------
SENMUT
"...before quitting the army..."
MOSES
Was a general (J).
---------------------------
---------------------------
SENMUT
"...to join the palace bureaucracy…”
MOSES
Was trained to be pharaoh (B).
----------------------------
----------------------------
SENMUT
"...now took the calculated decision to link his future totally with that of Hatshepsut."
MOSES
His only link to the royal court was via his stepmother, the princess who adopted him (B).
----------------------------
----------------------------
SENMUT
"...he was a close personal friend to the royal family."
MOSES
He was adopted by the royal family (B).
----------------------------
----------------------------
SENMUT
"...most typically holding the infant Nefure in his arms."
MOSES
According to the hypothesis of this book (The Exodus Case) the statues shows Nefure holding Moses in her arms. [Editors note: Not the other way around. Also, it seems quite clear that the person holding the infant reveals the features of that of a female, not a male]
----------------------------
----------------------------
SENMUT
"...sitting with Nefure...held at right angles in his lap, a position hitherto reserved for women nursing children."
MOSES
According to the hypothesis of this book (The Exodus Case) it was Nefure holding Moses, according to Egyptian customs.
-----------------------------
-----------------------------
SENMUT
"Effectively, Senmut was ruler of Egypt".
MOSES
He was to become the ruler and was, before his escape, co-ruler (B).
----------------------------
----------------------------
SENMUT
"The discovery of the shared tomb of Ramose and Hatnofer, Senmut's parents, confirms that Senmut was not of particulary high birth."
MOSES
Moses parents were slaves (B)
----------------------------
----------------------------
SENMUT
"Ramose and Hanofer...did not play a prominent role in public life."
MOSES
Moses parents was not public people in Egypt (B).
-----------------------------
-----------------------------
SENMUT
"Nor is there any evidence to suggest that Senmut ever married..."
MOSES
Moses was not married during his time in Egypt (B, J).
-----------------------------
-----------------------------
SENMUT
"...remain single, he must have been oddity, one of the few..."
MOSES
He married first when he arrived to Midian (B).
[
Editors note: It would be logical to assume that Moses was not recorded as being married, for Moses never married during the time he was in Egypt. After he left for Midian, all Egyptian records of him were closed. When he married Zipporah and then returned to Egypt, Zipporah never went with him. Egypt had no reason to record Senmut/Moses as been married]
-------------------------------
-------------------------------
SENMUT
"...evidence that Senmut's immediate family had been struck by sudden catastrophe."
MOSES
Not known. But could definitely be a possibility when Moses escaped from Egypt.
-------------------------------
-------------------------------
SENMUT
"...badly damaged fragment includes the words 'capture' and 'Nubia', is positioned next to images of running soldiers"
MOSES
He was general and organized war campaigns in Nubia (Ethiopia) and he led his army to victory(J)
[
Editors note: There is a staggering relationship here that should jolt the senses of anyone who is sincere and honest]
-------------------------------
-------------------------------
SENMUT
Senmut is busy in the palace and related to Nefure and Hatshepsut "dating to the period before Hatshepsut's accession"
MOSES
Moses grew up in the palace (B), adopted by the princess (Nefure) that later became queen Hatshepsut.
--------------------------------
--------------------------------
SENMUT
"...indicating that Senmut was in royal service during the reign of Thutmosis I..."
MOSES
Not known from the Bible, but this is according to the Hypothesis of this book (The Exodus Case). [Editors note: Amazing!]
--------------------------------
--------------------------------
SENMUT
"...Senmut's shrine omits the customary earthly and funerary feasts and includes instead a depiction of Hatshepsut being embraced by the crocodile-headed god..."
MOSES
Moses origin was that he was found in the Nile river (B), where the crocodiles were found. Hatshepsut was probably the childless women that found Moses in the river. Therefore she was in a symbolic way blessed by the god(s) related to the Nile River.
[
Editors note: Ah yes, the dots are connecting so nicely. There is most certainly a connection between Hatshepsut and Nefure, and Senmut and Moses afterall]
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
SENMUT
"Senmut was instantly stripped of all his privileges and
disappeared in mystery
circumstances."
MOSES
Moses had to escape from Egypt due to his mistake to kill an Egyptian (B). He
disappeared to Midian and lost everything he had in Egypt in a few days(B)
[
Editors note: This is absolutely astonishing. This is EXACTLY what happens to Moses when he flees for Midian. One day the world will know the truth of these dynasties, and the so called “big-wigs” of Egyptian chronology will see that they manipulated dates to fit their own preconceived ideas]
----------------------------------
----------------------------------
SENMUT
"His unused tombs were desecrated"
MOSES
His tombs were unused since he died in todays Jordan (B). His tombs would definitely be desecrated due to his escape, or betrayal of Egyptian court (B).
-----------------------------------
-----------------------------------
SENMUT
"...his monuments were vandalized and his reliefs and statues were defaced in a determined attempted to erase both the name and memory of Senmut from the history of Egypt."
MOSES
Would be expected due to his betrayal of the Egyptian court (B). The memory of Moses in Egyptian has been lost.
---------------------------------
--------------------------------
SENMUT
"At least twenty-five hard stone statues of Senmut have survived the ravages of time. This is an extraordinarily large number of statues for a private individual..."
MOSES
He was heir to the throne, not a private individual (B).
-------------------------------
------------------------------
SENMUT
"...we must assume that most, if not all, were the gift of the queen..."
MOSES
The princess (who later was queen) was the stepmother of Moses (B).
-----------------------------
-----------------------------
SENMUT
"An intimate relationship with the queen would account for the rapid rise in Senmut’s fortunes…”
MOSES
Intimate in terms of mother - son relation (B) (several hypotheses suggests that their relation was as lovers).
------------------------------
------------------------------
SENMUT
"...being near to the gods was purely a royal prerogative..." (a remark of confusion)
MOSES
He was a part of the royal family B).
-------------------------------
-------------------------------
SENMUT
"...Hereditary Prince..."
(a remark of confusion)
MOSES
Yes (B).
-------------------------------
-------------------------------
SENMUT
“What is surprising is that Senmut was able to acquire any form of hard stone sarcophagus." (only for royalties)
MOSES
He was part of the royal family (B). It was to be expected.
-------------------------------
-------------------------------
SENMUT
"Senmut's tomb was substantially complete when all building work ceased"
MOSES
Moses escaped the country (B) and betrayed the Egyptian royal court.
[
Editors note: Why would Egypt want to finish Moses’ tomb after he became such a despised individual? He fled to Midian, and therefore the Egyptians assumed he may never return]
------------------------------
-----------------------------
SENMUT
"...tomb 71 suffered a great deal of damage." "...other damage appears to have been entirely deliberate..."
MOSES
Moses escaped the country (B) and betrayed the Egyptian royal court. To destroy tombs and other objects related to Moses could be expected.
-----------------------------
-----------------------------
SENMUT
"The historical record is tantalizing silent over the matter of Senmut's death."
MOSES
The Egyptian historians did not want to know what happened to Moses, and they had no idea what was going on (B).
------------------------------
------------------------------
SENMUT
"What could have happened to him? The enigma of Senmut's sudden disappearance is which has teased egyptologists for decades..."
MOSES
It is most likely that what the book of Exodus is focused on. The life of Moses (B).
[
Editors note: Amazing. And this same scenario of puzzling questions is going to happen time and time again until Egyptologists finally decide to get their act together and take the Bible more seriously]
-------------------------------
-------------------------------
SENMUT
"Many of Senmut's monuments were attacked following his death, when an attempt was made to delete his memory by erasing both his name and his image."
MOSES
Moses has disappeared from the history of Egypt.
[
Editors note: An undeniable correlation here! This answers many of our questions, if only we will let it.]
-------------------------------
-------------------------------
SENMUT
"Each of these descriptions has been based on four surviving ink sketches of Senmut's face."
"...high-bridge nose..."
"...aquiline nose..."
MOSES
Moses was adopted, but genetically he was a hebrew (B). Hebrews are in many cases characterized as having an “aquiline nose" which was not a character of Egyptians.
------------------------------
In summary;
all these 35 comments on Senmut fits Moses very well!
[
Editors note: You cannot, I repeat, CANNOT, deny this overwhelming evidence. Why would so many comments fit so many of the characteristics in the Bible and in Josephuses' writings? Why? It only makes more and more sense why there is "no record" of Moses in Egyptian history. Egyptians were notorious for erasing all information of ANYTHING they despised. Moses was one character they despised, and in addition, would most certainly erase anything to do with the grand Exodus. So many cannot see this, and it truly makes me sad.]
[
Editors note: Now is where the references come in which I provided comparing the characteristics of Senmut from Ref 35 in relation to Moses as described in the Bible texts and in many cases in relation to the descriptions by Josephus.]
[
Added emphasis for figure: It is also interesting to note that the temple Deir-El Bahri was built by Senmut (Moses) for Hatshepsut (Moses’ stepmother).
[
Editors note: And, as many of you may correctly state, it is also said that Thutmosis II was brother and husband to Hatshepsut, but according to this new hypothesis, Thutmosis II was the adopted son (Moses) of Hatshepsut, expressed as “mother’s brother” in Egyptian tradition. According to an Egyptian inscription,
Horus (the falcon), Thutmosis II (who is in the upper left) and Hatshepsut (lower left) at Deir El Bahri. According to Egyptian custom, Thutmosis II (Moses) was his “mother’s brother”, and in this way heir to the throne (brother), but was also adopted. “Mother’s brother” which is the meaning of “Senmut”. Although there is and will always be missing links to accurately prove all of this, it unquestionably can be a plausible explanation for this hypothesis.]
The Bible relates that Moses’ biological mother was allowed to breast-feed Moses, very probably she was allowed to bring him up until he was considered old enough to begin his training at the palace.
“And the child grew, and she brought him unto Pharaoh’s daughter, and he became her son. And she called his name Moses…” (Ex. 2:10)
Probably at the same time his Egyptian “maternal grandfather”, Thutmosis I/Amehotep I, became the ruler of all Egypt, which meant that they moved to the palace in Thebes. When Moses was about 18 years old he probably was appointed heir to the throne with his foster mother, Nefure, as regent. Probably from this point in time Nefure was called Hatshepsut and queen. Senmut (Moses) had several titles as “superintendent of the grain stores, of the lands, of the livestock…” (37. F. Tiradritti (1999) The Cairo Museum Master Pieces of Egyptian Art, Thames and Hudson, London, England.).
A women could not embody the gods but could be the wife of a Pharaoh and, if there were no heir, could carry out the functions until an heir had reached a mature age. In Hatshepsut’s temple, Deir El Bahri, there is a wall where the birth of the heir to the throne is portrayed. Certain hypotheses claim that this is the birth of Hatshepsut, which becomes complicated since the child is a boy which one source tries to explain by saying that the one who made the inscription was confused. Another illustration on this wall shows the child in Hatshepsut’s arms.
[
Editors note: This confusion would make it very open to interpretation, would it not? The notion that Hatsehepsut was the foster mother of Moses (Senmut who became Thutmosis II) seems to make much more plausible sense]
A number of hypotheses claim that Hatshepsut declared herself to be king, which is based on the inscription “king Hatshepsut Xnem Amen/MaatKaRe”. This claim is that this is Hatshepsut with further additions to her name. “Hatshepsut Xmnem Amen” means “Hatshepsut united with Amen”.
“Amen” is the principle god during the 18th dynasty and another name for the son god (Ra). The name means that the “king” with his name is the product of Hatshepsut in union with the god Amen, or the offspring of the union between Hatshepsut and the god Amen.
According to the hypothesis of this chapter (15 in The Exodus Case), this “king”, or rather heir to the throne, was Moses with Hatshepsut as his
co-ruler. When someone is appointed heir to the throne, then inscriptions refer to this person as “king”. Moses was very closely connected to Hatshepsut since she was his only link to the royal family. In order to justify his accession to this elevated position it was important to observe protocol at every step so that Moses would be accepted in the existing system (see figure 245).
[
Added emphasis for figures: It is said that Senmut had a high-bridge (aquiline)( nose. Note the differences between Hatshepsut’s nose (Moses’ stepmother) and the nose of Moses (Thutmosis II) at the Deir-El Bahri temple in figures 236-240.—Figure 238: Horus (the falcon), Hatshepsut (right) and thutmosis II (left). It is said that Thutmosis II was brother and husband to Hatshepsut. According to the hypothesis of this book, Thutmosis II was the adopted son (Moses) of Hatshepsut, expressed as “mother’s brother” in Egyptian tradition. Figure 239: Hatshepsut (left) and Thutmosis II (right) at Deir-El Bahri. Thutmosis II was probably Moses. Figure 240: Horus (the falcon), Thutmosis II (upper left) and Hatshepsut (lower left) at Deir El Bahri. According to Egyptian custom, Thutmosis II (Moses) was his “mother’s brother” (see the text) and in this way heir to the throne (brother), but was also adopted. “Mother’s brother” which is meaning of “Senmut”. You can see the comparison in the figures which display Hatshepsut and Thutmosis II together, in which Hatshepsut (left) and Thutmosis (right) are at Deir-El Bahri. Thutmosis II was probably Moses. The image cannot be displayed on the web because I am unable to find the inscription on the web.]
[
Added emphasis in book: A long wall at Deir-El Bahri illustrates how Hatshepsut touches the hand of a god (=sexual relation). The next illustration shows her being pregnant, followed by a series of illustrations of a small boy growing to become a teenager. This is according to the tradition to explain an adoption. The hypothesis of this study is that Hatshepsut’s son was Moses.
16. WHO WAS THUTMOSIS II?
When Moses is finally appointed co-ruler at the age of 33 years he becomes Thutmosis II. What happens later when Moses is 40 years old is dealt with in chapter 11 and also in chapter 17 and onwards.
Near to Thebes there is a beautiful building called “Deir El Bahri”, which, according to this hypothesis, was the temple Moses built (as architect) for his stepmother Nefure.
Above this building there is a grave (grave number 71) with a statue that was never completely finished. This statue is carved out of the rock and depicts a woman holding a little child. With the hypothesis presented in this study, it is logical that this represents Moses in the arms of his stepmother Nefure.
This building was probably begun when Moses was about 18 years old – it was probably then that he was appointed heir to the throne with Nefure as regent. The names found in this grave are Nefure and Senmut!
Immediately under this grave a chamber has been found in which there are two mummies with the names Hatnofer and Ramose, most likely the Egyptian names for Moses’ biological parents. Here one can see that Moses was given a god-like position in Egyptian society by giving his biological father the name of Ramose, since Ra was the greatest god among the Egyptians.
Figure 245: A suggested system that places all these pharaohs, other people at the royal court, years and events into one system. See the text for comments.
[
Editors note: Compare with Table 5 earlier in this study]
Hatnofer was embalmed and received a royal burial, indicated by the fact that she received this place as her burial place and that her death occurred when Moses was between 18 and 40 years old. Since the building was begun when Moses was around 18 years old it is likely that Moses’ mother died when Moses was between 25 and 40 years old. She can definitely not have had this burial after Moses became 40 years old when a sentence of death was pronounced against Moses and he had to flee the country. Moses’ father, Ramose, probably died before Moses was 18 years old since he received a more simple burial and was placed at Deir El Bahri after having been moved from another grave.
Moses’ grave
was never finished and no-one was ever buried in it—[
Editors note: a very highlighting factor in our hypothesis, since there is no correct mummy for Thutmosis II or Senmut.] One reason may be that the building of an even grander grave was begun when Moses became Thutmosis II at the age of 33 years.
Grave number 353 is interesting because no-one was ever buried in this burial chamber. This was probably the second burial chamber built for Moses and in this case would represent the royal grave. When one goes down into this grave it can be seen that it is
unfinished and those who carved the reliefs stopped at a certain point and it looks as though they had just finished their work for the day (figure 247 not found on web)! Nearby there are plans for future work with inscriptions drawn in black texts on the wall. This would only make sense, since Moses never died in Egypt.
It can be noted that in Egyptian graves the dead person was depicted in different situations with his wife and others in the family. In this burial chamber the dead person (Moses) is depicted SOLELY with his parents, Hanofer and Ramose. According to the Bible, Moses had no family of his own when he lived in Egypt.
[
Editors note: As we can see, things are starting to make more and more sense, and the puzzle of the Exodus is ever more fitting.]
16.1 Who takes Moses’ place when Moses flees?
Moses flees in tremendous haste from Egypt when he is 40 years old. The question then arises concerning who became Pharaoh when Moses disappeared from the Egyptian leadership and his future place on the throne.
The pharaoh at that time, Amenhotep I, was old and during 22 years had prepared for Moses to take over the throne (see figure 245). What was to happen to this acute situation?
In Memphis there was a man who had been prepared to become co-ruler with Moses when Moses ascended the throne. Probably this man was promoted to become co-ruler with Amenhotep I with the same name (rank/title) as Moses, Thutmosis. Documents show that he received his position in his 22nd year. A co-ruler begins to count his years when he receives the position of co-ruler. This year then becomes the first year. Here we have a person who attains his position in his 22nd year with the same Egyptian name as Moses (Thutmosis)!
It should be noted that the number of years may be counted from when the person becomes heir to the throne, crown prince or co-ruler. Then, when he becomes emperor he begins to count his years
again. This leads to two lengths of rule, each as a different “god” authority. This is the reason why Thutmosis III states his reign as 54 years, while Amenhotep II’s is 26-32 years (depending on the source). Thutmosis II, who is the one who takes Moses’ place, is distinguished in that there is no trace of him as he rises in rank but he suddenly becomes co-ruler in his 22nd year (figure 245).
[
Editors note: Pay CLOSE attention to the above information! Note how the reigning years are lined up.]
What happened when Moses was suddenly forced to flee the country, was that the Egyptian authorities were obliged to find a
replacement who could embody the god Thot (with the title/rank Thutmosis). In order not to break the “line of succession”, the successor assumed the role of Moses and the years he had had in that post. Usually when a member of royalty died the god flew up the heavens and was later reborn in the person who received the same position after a time. In this case no-one died and an immediate transfer was necessary. Everything that belonged to Moses was probably transferred to this new person (Thutmosis) and
things continued without a break. This new person is called Thutmosis III. Presumably however, most of the statues said to represent him really represent Moses.
Thutmosis III was said to have reigned for 54 years, however 22 of these years were really the years Moses had in position of Thutmosis. If these 22 years are subtracted from the 54 years, then that makes 32 years in power! In on text it is stated that Thutmosis III “passed away after a rule of 32 (some say 54) years”.
The connection between these years is shown here, otherwise it is very complicated to understand since it is difficult to find a point of reference from which to start counting. This person, who reigned for 32 years as Amenhotep II before he died and was succeeded, was a great and mighty ruler in Egypt,
the super power at the same time.
Moses’ foster mother, Hatshepsut, lived for many years after the flight of Moses and is called “queen” on the monuments in the later years of the reign of Amenhotep II, only Cleopatra being more well-known among women in leading positions in Egypt.
16.2. Who does Thutmosis II represent?
The statues and images in ancient Egypt show an amazing portrait-like resemblance. All the people depicted are not idealized, but they often have not just one but several characteristics, both positive and negative. Examples of this are Pharaoh Akhenaton, who had a very peculiar build, others are dwarves, have physical features such as obesity, varying skin color, height and, to say the least, are very different in appearance. Even when army units were made as statuettes, all soldiers were different. This is mentioned as background to the well-founded assumption that artists and sculptors tried to achieve a portrait-like resemblance.
The following observations are speculative but may be interesting to note. The Egyptians, and in particular the leaders have certain traits in common. One such trait is that they have straight noses. Typical Egyptian pharaohs ALL had straight noses!
In this book the hypothesis that Thutmosis II was Moses is stated. So what do the statues of Thutmosis II look like? Moses was not an Egyptian, as far as his genes were concerned, but a Hebrew! Sometimes Hebrews can be described as having more of a hook nose than others.
It is interesting that the statue representing Thutmosis II has a more distinct hook nose compared to other statues, as can be seen below:
[
Editors note: Notice the Semitic nose:]
[
Editors note: This was the closest image of this particular statue that I could find on the web. The book has a lot more close-ups of various Egyptian statues in comparison to a better close-up of this statue of Thutmosis II. It may also be worthy to note that it took Ron Wyatt to enter the Museum of Cairo and take these photos. Traditional Egyptologists have not been so gracious as to provide a SINGLE picture of Thutmosis II’s statue—which leads me to question their integrity in providing all the necessary information for a well-thought out chronology]
[
Emphasis from book: Do not forget to take into account that there are notes that Senmut had an aquiline nose, and that Thutmosis II is depicted with a big nose on reliefs. The statue of Thutmosis II shows that he had a hook nose, typical of the Hebrews ]
If this was done purposely by the sculptor with the aim of making the representation of Thutmosis II as portrait-like as possible, then this means that the statue in the figure probably represents Moses.
16.3. Who was the Pharaoh at the time of the Exodus?
When Amenhotep II died, according to the hypothesis in this book, his co-ruler of 29, Thutmosis IV, succeeded as Pharaoh with the pharaonic title Amenhotep III. When Amenhotep III became Pharaoh he appointed his eldest son, although very young, as crown prince as was the custom. The young person who received this role was about 10 years old at the time and we know him as Tutankhamun. Amenhotep II later reigns for about 8 years before the time of the Exodus occurs.
Amenhotep III is interesting from a special point of view. It would seem that he was not intended for the throne of Egypt since he was not the eldest son through the royal mother, who custom decreed should become Pharaoh. In the Sphinx inscription, which can still be seen between the paws of the Sphinx by the pyramids in Giza outside present day Cairo, a remarkable story about Thutmosis IV is told. One day Thutmosis IV fell asleep in the shadow of the Sphinx and dreamt that the sun god came to him, and said that if he removed all the sand from around the Sphinx he would become kin.
This story would not have needed to be told if he had received the right to the throne in a traditional way – by being the eldest son. It may have been that Amenhotep II was also childless, or that for some reason the eldest son could not become Pharaoh. That son could have died young, for instance. For other reasons which we can discuss in chapter 27, we know nonetheless it was very probable Amenhotep III, was the eldest son, while Tutankhamun, heir to the throne after Amenhotep III, was the eldest son of Amenhotep III.
Tutankhamun was co-ruler and in an inscription on the statue of a lion, which Tutankhamun dedicated to the Soleb temple,
he calls his father Amenhotep III (37. F. Tiradritti (1999) The Cairo Museum Master Pieces of Eguptian Art, Thames and Hudson, London, England.), which confirms the relation between these two people!
16. 4. Can we Identify the Mummies that have been Found?
There are many mummies in Egypt and there are also problems in connecting a specific mummy to a specific Pharaoh. One example is the mummy that is supposed to be Thutmosis I who reigned for 21 years, according to inscriptions. The following is said about the mummy supposed to belong to Thutmosis I: “However, several eminent physical anthropologists who have seen these X-ray plates have been absolutely convinced that this mummy is that of a young man, perhaps 18 years of age, certainly not over twenty.” (39). Several examples can be given, but there are also explanations.
1. that the name lived on was of primary importance. The worse thing that could happen, was for the name to be removed from the inscriptions etc. It was not so important that it was precisely the right mummy because the body was dead and it was the spirit that needed a body – any body.
2. Many grave robberies (in general most graves have been robbed) have led to the contents of graves being scattered.
3. Many mummies have disappeared to be used as medicines. An ingredient in many European prescriptions in the Middle Ages was part of a mummy as they were held to a have a magical effect.
4. Later pharaohs who restored graves that had been plundered, put in another mummy.
Thus, there are many uncertainties regarding the identity of mummies that have been found. It is probably on the mummies of Amenhotep I, AmenhotepII and Tutankhamun from the 18th dynasty, who are the individuals with whom they are connected. With regard to Tutankhamun, the grave is one of the few which has not been plundered. The mummy of Amenhotep I shows a common genetic defect (protruding teeth) which existed in the family, which means that this mummy can be connected to the 18th dynasty. The other mummies are probably mixed up or placed there at a later date (e.g. after a grave robbery) since they are found in the wrong graves and/or have not received a royal burial.
Moreover, according to the hypothesis of this study, there should not be any mummies of Thutmosis II, who was Moses, nor Amenhotep III, who drowned in the Red Sea. Furthermore, according to the same hypothesis, there should only be one mummy from the name pair Thutmosis/Amenhotep since
this was one and the same person (figure 245).
[
Editors note: As we can see, there is enough ample reason to believe in this hypothesis. You will notice that even according to traditional Egyptian chronology, the writers are very uncertain and do a lot of speculating. Here is a very good website concerning traditional Egyptian chronology:
http://www.crystalinks.com/dynasty18a.html]
[
Editors note: I want you to notice the uncertainty of their language. A lot of “probably’s”, “most likely’s” and “could’s” are used extensively, but their basis for doing so is on the premise of mere speculation. We have more reason to come up with our theories based on the archeological discoveries revealing the Exodus event to actually have taken place! We have enough chariot remains (and a some very well identifiable wheels), human bones, horse bones, underwater “land bridge” (which can be discussed later), Solomon’s pillars in commemoration of the crossing, Nuweiba beach, the fact that the Bible describes the Israelites were “shut in by the wilderness” and the “mountains have entangled them”—Nuweiba beach matching the description of the Bible (no such geography exists for the Gulf of Suez), the fact that Goshen was way up north above Suez, and the mere ludicrousness of speculating that the Israelites would have headed south into Egyptian territory instead of just going east into the Sinai Peninsula and following the southern road. The fact that the Bible plainly states that Mt. Sinai is in Saudi Arabia, and Midian is in Saudi Arabia. A pattern is being developed here, and the picture is ever growing clearer.]
[
Editors note: Based on these archeological finds, the proposed chronology correlates nicely with what has been found, and explains the many unanswered questions as to how such an Exodus could have occurred.]
[
Editors note: To see a very good website describing the proposed chronology, take a look at this link:
http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/moses.htm]
[
Editors note: The above link will give you an idea as far as successions are concerned, but the author who put together the table misplaced Amenhotep I as being before Thutmosis I, when in reality, according to the hypothesis presented, Thutmosis I (who was co-regent with Ahmose) became the next Pharaoh as Amenhotep I. Thutmosis I (as co-regent had a daughter named Nefure, and Nefure was the foster mother of the baby Moses she found in the bulrushes. When Thutmosis I became Amenhotep I, Nefure became Hatshepsut (her new name as for co-regent), and it was decided that since there was no male heir, Nefure/Hatshetsup’s adopted son Moses would become co-regent ALONG with her in order for their to successfully be a male replacement after Amenhotep I dies.]
Sources of last 5 “Editors notes” derived from: The Exodus Case, The Mountain of God, and the World Wide Web
[
Editors note: During some various discussions on the subject of Moses on a message board on the internet, a particular individual raised an interesting point that might seem to conflict with the idea that Senmut could be Moses. I will quote this individual, and then you may read my response below it:
Quote:
There are some weak but valid parallels - mainly with Josephus (the best one is campaigning in Nubia - but even that is hardly decisive). But also problems. For instance Senmut appears to have joined the bureacracy after his army career. In Josephus' account he flees shortly after the one military campaign he is credited with - although his reasons for doing so are not those given in Exodus. Since Josephus also has Moses marrying an Ethiopian princess during the campaign anything other than a rapid flight to Midian goes quite clearly against the assertion that Senmut never married.
This is totally out of the question. According the Egyptian accounts, Senmut never married and they had every reason to record it thus, simply for the fact that this is all they knew. The accounts record Senmut as never marrying, and we very well know that as long as Moses was in Egypt, he never did marry. However, after Moses fled Egypt, all Egyptian accounts of Moses terminated, thus not recording his marriage to Zipporah, the Midianite. Moses was much older when he returned, and his wife did not come with him or Aaron when they journeyed back to Egypt. Of course Senmut would not have been recorded has being married. As for Josephus’ accounts where Moses marries an Ethiopian princess, bear in mind that not all of Josephus’ accounts are 100% correct. In many cases he seems to contradict the scripture, so his writings are only to be considered as auxiliary information in order to correctly assemble our hypotheses. According to scripture, Moses never married until he landed in Midian, in Saudi Arabia by Mt. Horeb (Sinai). ]
i do hope that you heal soon and well from your leg injury. First off since you limit the Lord God's creation to just 6000 years there is little i can do to sway you to the truth of his great creation. However i will continue to do as i do and pray that He will enlighten you to his greatness.
in the end if God had to have it this convoluted to do his great works... no wonder he isn't around today, as so many claim it would have tired him out... as it did me 
You all have a great day!
