|
Ron
& Mary Nell Wyatt
Part
I
(Originally
published in Newsletter # 2 dated January 1993)
(For
color photos, see photo page #2, located in the back of this
volume)
The first in-depth
study we will present will be the events of the Exodus journey,
beginning with the time the multitude leaves Egypt until they
cross the Red Sea. A map is attached for reference. We will
systematically take each step of their journey. We do not
continue their journey once they cross the Red Sea and enter
Midian, but we do show on the map the location of Mt. Sinai.
FIRST,
LOCATE MIDIAN
As I began to study
the Biblical account, in Exodus 3, Moses encounters the burning
bush while he is
in Midian, tending the flock of Jethro, his father-in-law.
There, God tells Moses that he is to bring forth the children
of Israel out of Egypt: EXO 3:12 And lie said, Certainly
I will be with thee; and this shall be a token unto thee,
that I have sent thee: When
thou host brought forth the people out of Egypt,
ye shall serve God upon this mountain.
Moses was told in
this verse to bring
them back to
Midian, to the
mountain where God spoke to him. In my studies of ancient
Egyptian history, it became clear to me that Midian was not
in the Sinai peninsula-- that it was in northwestern Saudi
Arabia: GAL 4:25 For this Agar is
mount Sinai
in Arabia,
and answereth to Jerusalem which now is,
and is in bondage with her children.
All through the Sinai
peninsula there is tremendous evidence of the ancient Egyptians
having control of this area. The inscriptions tell of their
mining operations there. There are temples out there as well
as fortresses. Had Moses led the people across the Gulf of
Suez, they would have still been in Egyptian-controlled territory.
But in Saudi Arabia,
there is no evidence of Egyptian occupation. In fact, when
I showed the archaeologist from Riyadh University the petroglyphs
of cows and bulls on the golden calf altar, he was very excited-
he said this ancient Egyptian style of petroglyph was found
nowhere else in Saudi that he knew of. The horns of the cows
and bulls were drawn in the Egyptian style which represented
the gods, Hathor and Aphis. With this established, that Mt.
Sinai lies in NW Saudi Arabia, and the crossing took place
across the Gulf of Aqaba, (see map) lets begin their entire
route to the sea.
WHERE
WAS RAMESES?
Unlike the commonly
held thought, Rameses, was not
a city- it was the Delta region; the land given to Josephs
family to live in by the pharaoh. This was called "the land
of Rameses" and "the land of Goshen." This was where the great
population of the Israelites lived: GEN 47:11 And Joseph
placed his father and his brethren,
and gave them a possession in the
land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in
the land
of Rameses1
as Pharaoh had commanded. GEN 47:27 And Israel dwell
in the land of Egyp4 in
the country of Goshen;
and they had possessions therein, and grew, and multiplied
exceedingly.
Rameses could not
be referring to a city for the simple reason that there just
wasn't a city in ancient Egypt large enough to hold the 2-3
million people Moses led from Egypt, much less all of their
flocks and herds.
They
were "In their homes" prior to leaving
Also, we know that
just before the "angel of death" took the lives of all the
first born of Egypt, and pharaoh told Moses to take the people
and go, God tells Moses to have the Israelites cook a lamb
and to place the blood of this lamb upon the doors of their
houses, that the "angel of death" would pass over their house:
EXO 12:3 Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israe4
saying, In the tenth day of this month they shall take to
them every man a lamb, according to the house
of their fathers, a
lamb for
an house:
4 And if the household be too little for the lamb, let him
and his neighbor
next unto
his house
take it according to the number of the souls;
every man according to his eating shall make
your count for the lamb.
They
leave Egypt the same day
This clearly implies
that they were in their homes
when this event occurred. Then, He goes on to tell them to
eat unleaven bread for 7 days: EXO 12:17 And ye
shall observe the feast of unleavened bread;
for in
this selfsame day have I brought
your armies out of the
land of Egypt:
therefore shall ye observe this day in
your generations by an ordinance
for ever.
God tells Moses in
this verse that on that very
day (selfsame day), while they are still in their homes,
He will have brought them put
of Egypt. This tells us that they left Egypt before
sundown the day after the angel of death visited Egypt.
*Note that a "day"
to the Israelites was not as we think of a day-from midnight
to midnight. Instead, it was from evening to evening. LEV
23:32 ..., from even unto even, shall ye celebraie
your sabbath. EXO 12:37 And the children of Israel journeyed
from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred
thousand on foot that were men, beside children.
In summary, when
word came to the people that they were allowed to leave, just
after the "angel of death" visited Egypt, they all left their
homes in Rameses, or Goshen, and proceeded to leave Egypt
"proper." How was this possible-that they were able to be
out of Egypt so quickly? On the attached map, you can see
that Egypt is extremely long, bul its east/west boundaries
are very narrow. They left Rameses and assembled in Succoth,
which was very near, but at the same time, outside of the
boundary of Egypt "proper:"

WHERE
WAS SUCCOTH?
Succoth had to be
a place large enough for this tremendous amount of people
and flocks to assemble. Long before I ever began my overseas
field work, I had studied ancient Egyptian history. I had
read numerous accounts of inscriptions which spoke of a place
called variably "Tharu", "T'aru" and "Takut," which fit the
description of Succoth perfectly. The following are quoted
from "Life in Ancient Egypt" by Adolf Erman:
p. 28- "The isthmus
of Suez was of the greatest consequence also from a military
point of view- it was doubtless fortified in very early times.
Probably here stood the great fortress of T'aru, often spoken
of as the starting-point for the expeditions into Syria,..."
p.537- "The line
of fortifications which was intended to keep back these Beduins
of the Delta, is met with as early as the time of the Middle
Empire, and is still standing. It consisted of a wall strengthened
by small towers,...; this formed an obstruction which the
slaves who tried to escape from Egypt, and the Beduins who
wanted to pasture their cattle on the fields of the Delta,
found difficult to pass. At this time we also meet with a
defensive work of another kind, namely a broad canal, which
presumably connected the lakes of the isthmus together. At
the point where a bridge crossed this canal were strong fortresses
on both sides;... The great fortress which defended this bridge
was the fortress of T'aru, which is so often mentioned as
the starting point of the military expeditions."
To sum up what he
has said, in ancient Egypt, there was a line of guarded fortifications
along the canal which connected the Gulf of Suez with the
Mediterranean Sea. This canal is known to have existed anciently
by satellite photos and infrared photos which still show its
path. At the point where one would leave Egypt proper and
go into the Sinai desert, there was a fortress and a bridge,
Inscriptions tell us that this fortress was called Tharu (or
one of the various spellings).
This is also located
near the Delta, or "Rameses," where the Israelites were living.
'Tharu" was where the Egyptian army assembled in preparation
for their military expeditions to the north. Armies consisted
of a great deal of men, horses and chariots; and they required
a large area to assemble properly.
Moses well knew Tharu,
called "Succoth" in the Biblical account- and it was here
that he organized the people for their journey. They had left
Egypt proper once they crossed this line of fortification,
just as the Lord had promised. EXO. 13:18 ;...and
the children of Israel
went up harnessed out of the
land of Egypt.
THEY
LEFT "HARNESSED"
We know of a surety
that "harnessed" doesn't mean "armed with weapons" because
they had no weapons until God provided them by washing the
bodies of the dead Egyptian army upon the shore after the
waters of the Red Sea closed back up. The chariot soldiers
had to strap their weapons to their bodies, and when they
were washed upon the shore, the multitude simply collected
their weaponry.
So what does it mean?
The Hebrew word "chamushim," which is the Hebrew word translated
"harnessed" in the above verse, is found only 4 times in the
Hebrew text-- Exodus 13:18; Joshua 1:14; Joshua 4:12; and
Judges 7:11. The word means "in ranks." Apply that definition
to the above texts and see for yourself if it does not seem
appropriate. Also of note, is the fact that in Numbers, Deuteronomy
and Joshua, the Hebrew word "chalats" is used in denoting
"armed soldiers."
If we really study
the Biblical account, and use good, common sense-- we can
learn much from what is implied, but not actually spelled
out for us. Moses, as "the son of Pharaohs daughter," was
the heir to the throne of Egypt. As such, he was the "crown
prince." If you study any Egyptian history, you learn that
the person in line for the throne was given very exacting
training-- the Pharaoh was considered the "earthly embodiment
of the god", so the "pharaoh-in-training" spent a part of
his training studying with the priesthood: ACT
7:22 And Moses was
learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and was
mighty in words and in deeds.
The next stage of
a "crown prince's" training was military. Moses was thoroughly
trained in all aspects of military leadership and would have
known well how to assemble large numbers of peoples for travel.
While no specifics
are given in the Bible as to Moses life in Egypt, several
ancient historians make reference to the fact that he was
a general. And we admit that we do not accept all of what
these people have to say as being totally accurate, but the
fact that Moses was indeed a general in the Egyptian army
seems to have been a well-known fact. Josephus writes about
this in his "Antiquities of the Jews, Book II, Chapter
X. As a military man, once again, Moses knew "Tharu",
and it was here that he organized his largest "army" ever
for travel. And from here, they traveled to Etham.
WHERE
WAS ETHAM?
EXO 13:20 And
they took their journey from Succoth, and encamped in Etham,
in the edge of the wilderness. Etham was in the "edge
of the wilderness." What wilderness was this? The answer is
in the Exodus account: EXO 13:18 But
God led the people about,
through the way of the wilderness of the Red sea:...
It was the Wilderness
of the Red Sea- the mountainous land of the mid and southern
Sinai Peninsula. This was along a route that was commonly
taken in those days by both caravans and the army, and it
was called "the southern route." This route was taken because
it was safer than travelling along the coast, where the Philistines
were.
Etham was not a singular
location, like a town- it was a designation of the land that
lay around the mid-northern edge of the Gulf of Aqaba. We
know this because once they cross the sea, they are still
in an area called Etham: NUM 33:8 And they
departed from before Pihahiroth, and passed
through the midst
of the
sea into
the wilderness, and went
three days'
journey in the wilderness
of Etham,
and pitched in Marah.
It was while they
were at Etham on the western side of the sea that God told
Moses: EXO. 14:2 Speak unto the children
of Israel, that they turn and encamp before Pihahiroth, between
Migdol and the sea, over against Baalzephon: before it shall
ye encamp by the sea. 3 For Pharaoh will say of the children
of Israel, They are
entangled in the land, the wilderness hath shut them in.
In order for them
to be "entangled in the land," they would have to be travelling
through an area of wadis (canyons) with high mountains all
around, which would seem to hem them in. This takes place
prior to crossing the sea, so I looked for an area such as
this which would terminate on a beach or shore of the sea
which was large enough to hold perhaps 2 or 3 million people,
as well as their flocks. I found a beach of tremendous size
on the Gulf of Aqaba at Nuweiba, and the only passage to it
is through an 18 mile long wadi system. (See color photo of
this beach enclosed.)
From "Etham in the
edge of the wilderness", they changed their direction of travel
from a northerly direction, (which would have soon taken them
around the northern tip of the sea,) and went south, through
a wadi system that must have appeared like an endless maze
to them. Hemmed in to the left and right, they could only
travel in one direction-- and the only path through that wadi
leads to the tremendous sized beach.
THE
SITE OF THE CROSSING
As I mentioned, I
found this tremendous beach on the Gulf of Aqaba which could
easily have held the multitude, their flocks, and also pharaoh's
army-- separating the 2 groups by several miles. But there's
another interesting fact about this site...
Josephus gives an
additional bit of information in his "Antiquities of the Jews,"
Book II, Chapter XV. Speaking of pharaoh's army pursuing the
multitude, he states: "They also seized upon the passages
by which they imagined the Hebrews might fly, shutting them
up between the inaccessible
precipices and the sea; for
there was [on each side] a [ridge of] mountains that terminated
at the sea, which was impassable by reason of their
roughness, and obstructed their flight: wherefore they
there pressed upon the Hebrews with their army, where [the
ridges of] the mountains were closed with the sea;..."
When I first visited
the site of Nuweiba in 1978, these mountains could be seen
on the south end of the beach area which terminated at the
sea- no passage would have been possible to the south, (See
color photo of this area, where the mountains meet the sea
on the south end.) As I found the chariot parts when diving
on the southern end of the beach, this implies that the multitude
traveled to this section of the beach.
Pharaoh's army entered
from the same wadi, which is the only
entrance onto the beach. This wadi is located midway of the
beach, and once the army entered the area, the multitudes
only means of escape would have been to the south. But the
mountains to the south extend all the way to the sea-- they
had no way of escape, or so it seemed.
PIHAHIROTH,
MIGDOL AND BAALZEPHON
EXO 14:2 Speak
unto the children of Israel, that they turn and encamp before
Pihahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, over against Baalzephon:
before it shall ye encamp by the sea. When God gave Moses
these instructions, it is evident that Moses knew where these
places were-- he was familiar with the land,
On the north end
of the beach area, there are the remains of an ancient Egyptian
fortress, which would have prevented their going north when
they entered the area. This fortress was another evidence
that Egyptian territory extended all the way through the Sinai
peninsula. (See color photo of this fortress on the northern
end of the beach area.) We believe this was Pihahiroth.
As they were in between
Migdol and the sea, Migdol could either be the mountains to
the west, which make a perfect barrier, enclosing them on
the beach-- or it may have been a watch-tower which set on
top of one of those mountains. We have not climbed all those
mountains and searched for one, yet. But the Egyptians did
have watch-posts all through the Sinai Peninsula, and most
likely would have had one here, to keep an eye on ships coming
up the Gulf of Aqaba, It is historically documented that they
flashed messages from watch-tower to watch-tower using reflected
sunlight by day and fire by night. In fact, that may well
be how pharaoh knew exactly where Moses and the people had
gone. Moses would have most certainly been aware of these
watch-towers.
On the opposite shore,
in Saudi Arabia, exactly across from where they entered the
sea, is another ancient structure. All alone on the beach,
it may have been a Midianite fortress, dedicated to Baal;
we believe this was Baalzephon.
The phrase "over against" seems to mean "opposite of in respect
to being across a body of water-- in the next verse, the same
phrase is used when speaking of being across the Jordan River
from Jericho: DEU 32:49 Get thee
up into this mountain Abarim,
unto mount Nebo, which is in the land of Moab, that
is over against Jericho
and behold the land of Canaan, which I give unto the children
of Israel for a possession:
The fact is that
chariot parts have never been found in the Red Sea anywhere
except at this site. The question has been asked; "Isnt this
site for the crossing too far? Wouldn't it have taken them
a long time to get there? Well, in 1967, Moshe Dyan marched
his troops from Nuweiba (the crossing site) to Suez City (near
ancient Tharu/Succoth) in 6 days. And they camped at night.
The Israelites were
told to use only unleaven bread for 7 days- indicating that
they would be travelling quite briskly without time to camp
for 7 days: EXO 13 6 Seven days thou
shalt eat unleavened bread, and in the seventh day shall be
a feast to the LORD. 8 And thou shalt shew thy son in that
day, saying, This is done because of that which the LORD did
unto me when I came forth out of Egypt.
The Israelites didn't
stop and encamp every night, as Moshe Dyans troops did-- they
traveled both day and night:
EXO 13:21 And
the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to
lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give
them light; to go
by day and night:
With the Divine assistance
of the Lord, this massive wave of people traveled in an orderly
fashion both day and night, with great speed: EXO 19:4
Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how
I bare you on eagles'
wings, and brought you unto myself The
eagle is used to denote speed: 2SA 1:23 Saul and Jonathan
were lovely and pleasant in their lives, and in their death
they were not divided: they were swifter
than eagles, they were stronger than lions.
ONE
LAST EVIDENCE
In 1978, when I first
visited the beach area with my two sons, we found a Phoenician-style
column lying on the southern end of the beach. Partially in
the water, the inscriptions had been eroded away, or possibly
they were purposefully chiseled away. We found this during
the time that Israel was occupying the Sinai, and we pointed
it out to the soldiers who were patrolling the beach. The
next time we returned, we found they had moved it across the
road and set it up in concrete.
We didn't fully understand
the importance of this column until a few years later- we
did recognize that it was definitely not of Egyptian style.
But in 1984, when we were imprisoned in Saudi Arabia, our
captors, in an effort to verify our story that we believed
Mt. Sinai was there and that "Musa" (Moses) led the people
across the sea to their country, had me take them to the beach
where they arrived after passing through the sea. I directed
them to the spot in a helicopter. Landing here, I found another
column--identical to the one on the opposite shore-- except
this one had the inscriptions intact. Noting carefully the
Phoenician (Archaic Hebrew) letters, we were later able to
have it translated. It contained the words: Mizraim (Egypt);
Solomon; Ed.M; death; pharaoh; Moses; and Yahweh. From this,
we knew that King Solomon had erected these columns in honor
of Yahweh and dedicated them to the miracle of the crossing
of the sea. And, that column possibly saved my sons and my
lives- it proved what I had been telling my Saudi jailers!
This year, we discovered
that the Saudis have removed the column on their beach from
its original location-- they have sunk a large marker in concrete
where it was located-- and we are trying to locate it in their
Antiquities files. But we have documented the solitary marker,
sunk into the ground in concrete, on the beach, just down
from the remains of the ancient fortress we believe was Baalzephon.
We will study the sites on the Mt. Sinai side of the gulf
later this year.
THE
CONTROVERSY OVER THE "RED SEA"
There has been much
controversy through the years over 'Which" Red Sea is being
referred to in the Exodus account. You will see here, that
"Red Sea" is used to refer to nil section
of that sea-- the main body, the Gulf of Suez and the Gulf
of Aqaba. If you will get a large map of Egypt, you will note
that the Red Sea is quite large-- beginning at Ethiopia on
the southwest and Yemen on the southeast. It separates northern
Africa from Arabia. At its northern end, it splits into 2
arms- the Gulf of Suez and the Gulf of Aqaba.
Let's go to the first
reference to the Red Sea in the Bible-- the plague of the
locusts had covered all the land of Egypt. If you go the map,
you will see that Egypt extended far south of the Suez arm
of the Red Sea. Thebes, the ancient capital of Egypt, lay
a good 150 miles south of the beginning of the Gulf of Suez
(as the crow flies.) Now, these locusts were in ~il
the "coasts" of Egypt, including Thebes and beyond:
EXO 10:19 And the LORD turned a
mighty strong west
wind,
which took away the locusts, and cast
them into the Red sea there remained not one locust
in all the coasts of Egypt.
A west wind, blowing
the locusts into the "Red Sea", would blow them into the main
body of the sea and the Gulf of Suez.. The second reference
is: EXO 13:18 But God led the
people about, through the way of the wilderness
of the
Red sea:
and the
children of Israel went up harnessed out of the land of Egypt
This 'Wilderness" was the land between the 2
arms of the Red Sea.
Now, we will go to
a scripture concerning Solomon's navy: 1K! 9:26 And
king Solomon made a navy of ships in Eziongeber,
which is beside Eloth, on the shore of the
Red sea,
in the land of Edom. This
reference is definitively speaking of the Gulf of Aqaba, because
we know where Eloth (Eilat) was. And this is the same Red
Sea that Moses led the great multitude across. The Red Sea
of Moses' day was the same Red Sea we know today-- the main
body of the lower Red Sea, the Gulf of Suez and the Gulf of
Aqaba.
Again, we can only
marvel at how the Lord has preserved these sites throughout
history. If the true location had been known all along, there
would be no evidence left. We live in a time when people simply
dont believe the Red Sea crossing ever really happened, and
God tells us that He knew that time would come: JER
16:14 Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the
LORD, that it shall no more be said, The
LORD liveth, that brought up the children
of Israel out of the land of Egypt;
But He does "liveth",
and before its all over with, He will vindicate His Word to
the world.
THE
EXODUS
Part
II
(Originally
published in newsletter # 3, dated April 1993- see photo page
no- 3.)
In our last newsletter,
we examined the route taken by Moses and the great multitude
as they fled Egypt. We will now examine the evidences which
tell us exactly ~ were the Egyptian royalties involved and
the approximate date the Exodus occurred. This is a subject
that gets quite involved and we will only be able to present
a bare frame of reference in this publication. Bear with us,
as we will attempt to present a large amount of information
in a short space.
THE
CHARIOT WHEELS
We will begin with
the chariot wheels that Ron and the boys found in the Gulf
of Aqaba. In 1978, on their first dive at the site, they found
these chariot remains. Uke Noahs Ark, these were not in perfect
condition and required careful examination to see exactly
what they were. They were covered in coral, which made it
difficult to see them clearly, but it appears that the coral
was the agent the Lord used to preserve them.
They found numerous
wheels- some were still on their axles, and some were off.
They found chariot cabs without the wheels, also:
EXO 14:24 ...in the morning watch the LORD looked unto
the host of the Egyptians through the pillar of fire and of
the cloud, and troubled the host of the Egyptians 25 And took
off their chariot wheels, that they drove them
heavily:...
So far, this coincided
with the Biblical account. They found several 6-spoked wheels,
as well as an 8-spoked wheel. And finally, in 1988, Ron found
the 4-spoked gold chariot wheel, which looks almost perfect.
The reason this one was so well preserved is that coral does
not grow on gold. The wood inside the gold "veneer" was deteriorated,
which made it very fragile and for that reason, he has not
attempted to retrieve it from the water.
The significance
of these wheels is of extreme importance to the dating of
the Exodus and determining which dynasty was involved. Back
in the late 70s, Ron actually retrieved a hub of a wheel which
had the remains of 8 spokes radiating outward from it. He
took this to Cairo, to the office of Nassif Mohammed Hassan,
the director of Antiquities whom Ron had been working with.
Mr. Hassan examined it and immediately pronounced it to be
of the 18th Dynasty of ancient Egypt. When Ron asked him how
he knew this so readily, Mr. Hassan explained that the 8-spoked
wheel was only used during the 18th Dynasty. This
certainly narrowed the date. We began to thoroughly research
the Egyptian chariot and soon discovered that the fact that
Ron and the boys found 4, 6 and 8 spoked wheels places the
Exodus in the 18th Dynasty according to numerous sources,
such as the following: "Egyptian literary references to chariots
occur as early as the reigns of Kamose, the 17th Dynasty king
who took the first steps in freeing Egypt from the Hyksos,
and Ahmose, the founder of the 18th Dynasty. Pictorial representations,
however, do not appear until slightly later in the 18th
Dynasty...." (From "Observations on the Evolving Chariot
Wheel in the 18th Dynasty"
by James K. Hoffmeier, JARCE #13, 1976)
Here, we learn that
it was only at the beginning of the 18th Dynasty that the
chariot comes into use in the Egyptian army. The Bible mentions
that in the time of Joseph, chariots were in use, but apparently
they weren't developed sturdily enough for use in war until
much later.
The author goes on
to explain how it was only during the 18th Dynasty that the
4, 6 and 8 spoked wheels are used-and that monuments can actually
be dated by the number of spokes in the wheel: "Professor
Yigael Yadin maintains that during the earlier part of the
18th Dynasty, the Egyptian chariot was 'exactly like the Canaanite
chariot:' both were constructed of light flexible wood, with
leather straps wrapped around the wood to strengthen it, and
both utilized wheels with four spokes. In Yadins eyes, the
four-spoked wheel is diagnostic for dating purposes; it is
restricted to the early part of the 18th Dynasty. It remained
in vogue, he says, until the reign of Thutmoses IV, when 'the
Egyptian chariot begins to shake off its Canaanite influence
and undergo considerable change.' Yadin believes that the
eight-spoked wheel, which is seen on the body of Thutmoses
IVs chariot, was an experiment by the Egyptian wheelwrights,
who, when it proved unsuccessful, settled thereafter for the
six-spoked wheel. So widespread and meticulous is the delineation
of the number of wheel spokes on chariots depicted on Egyptian
monuments that they can be used as a criterion for determining
whether the monument is earlier or later than 1400 BC." (Quoted
from the same article as above.)
For more information
on the chariots of the Egyptian army, lets go to the Biblical
account, when Pharaoh and his army go after the multitude:
EXO 14:6 And he made ready his chariot, and took his people
with him: 7 And he took six hundred chosen chariots,
and all the chariots of Egypt, and
captains over every one of them..
This verse makes
it quite clear that the Pharaoh took every chariot in Egypt-
his own, his generals (or "Captains") and a group called his
"chosen" chariots, which seem to be in addition to his regular
army ("all the chariots of Egypt"). Who might these "600 chosen
chariots" have been? This group seems too small to have been
a division of the army. We do not know the exact number in
a "squadron", but we do have information that a pharaoh, one
of his names being Rameses II, had an army of 20,000 troops,
which was divided into 4 divisions. This would imply that
each division consisted of 5,000 troops. But the army took
more than just soldiers, many times. To get a little insight,
we need to understand a bit about the Egyptian government
and economy.
"The priests and
military men held the highest position in the country after
the family of the king, and from them were chosen his ministers
and confidential advisers, 'the wise counsellors of Pharaoh,'
and all the principal officers of state." (From "The Ancient
Egyptians- Their Life and Customs" by Sir J. Gardner
Wilkinson, 1854, vol.1, p.316.)
The priesthood and
the military were closely associated- the Egyptian government
was a combination "church and state", so to speak. Their system
of "gods" was quite elaborate and we can't possibly present
an accurate description of their religious system in this
limited article. But for our purposes, we need to understand
that there were many, many gods in ancient Egypt- but the
ultimate "god" was the one represented as the "sun". This
god was known throughout the various times as Amon, Aten and
Re or Ra, among other names. And it was this "ultimate god"
that the pharaoh was considered the "earthly embodiment" of.
The divisions of
the army were named after the gods, ie. "the first army, that
of Anion, the army of Re, the army of Ptah and the army of
Sutech". When the army set out to war, elaborate ceremonies
were performed at the various temples, asking the various
gods to give them victory over their foes. Then, booty that
was gained as a result of victories was dedicated to the priesthoods
and temples of the deities. All military victories were directly
attributed to the favor of the gods.
Sometimes, the priests
would accompany the army to the battlefield in hopes that
the "god(s)" would show special favor in their endeavors.
And the evidence at hand shows that when Pharaoh and his army
set out after Moses and the great multitude, he took with
him all the priesthood of all the gods of Egypt. After all,
he had seen the power of the true God, the great "I AM". If
the Egyptian army ever needed supernatural intervention by
the hands of their so-called "gods", it was at this time.
We believe that every priest of every god was summoned to
accompany the army as they went after Moses and the multitude,
as well as all the ministers of state.
All of this is leading
up to a discussion of the gold-veneered, 4-spoked chariot
wheel Ron found in 1988. Since he found it on the Egyptian
side of the Gulf of Aqaba, that indicates that whoever was
driving that particular chariot was at the rear of the army.
It makes sense to us that a priest, who is not trained in
battle, would be in this position at the rear of the army.
Also, a gold chariot would not be practical for battle- these
chariots were more "ceremonial" than those used by the chariotry.
We also know that
the priesthood were given gold chariots, which were booty
of various foreign defeats. There is an inscription of Thutmoses
III (18th Dynasty) which relates: "He went forth,
none like him, slaying the barbarians, smiting Retenu,
bringing their princes as living captives, their chariots
wrought with gold, bound to their horses."
ln fact, we have
many, many inscriptions of the kings of the 18th
Dynasty receiving gold-plated foreign chariots, either as
spoils of war or as tribute received from conquered peoples.
There are, as well, inscriptions telling that these gilded
chariots were many times dedicated to various temples and
gods, which meant that the priests would receive these chariots.
We do know from inscriptions
that the king did go to war in a "glittering chariot of electrum"
as stated in one of Thutmoses IIIs inscriptions- but, we doubt
very seriously that he would have remained at the rear of
the army. However, Dr. Bill Shea of the Biblical Research
Institute, told us a few days ago, that he believed it was
possible that the pharaoh may
have been at the rear of the army.
With all of this
information, we feel we may conclude that the gold wheel most
likely belonged to a member of the priestly caste who was
accompanying the army, or possibly a high minister of state.
If it had belonged to the pharaoh, it would have probably
had his "cartouche" or name on it- and the one Ron found did
not have this, at least not on the exposed side. Either way,
we have evidence from ancient tombs that the Egyptians constructed
wheels of this design, and also the Retenu (Syrian) chariot
wheels were of this same design and size.
These drawings are
from 'The Ancient Egyptians" by Sir J. Gardiner Wilkinson,
and are taken from 18th dynasty tombs and monuments.
They show a depiction of a Retenu (Syrian) chariot and also
Egyptians constructing chariots- both of these wheel designs
are consistent with the 4-spoked, gold veneered wheel Ron
found.
THE
18TH DYNASTY
The data gained from
the chariot wheels placed the Exodus at the time of the 18th
Dynasty. Amazingly, this is the most well documented group
of kings in all of ancient Egypt. A "dynasty", to give a definition,
is basically a continuous family line of rulers. "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 B.C.), wrote a history of his country in the
Greek language. The work has perished, and we only know it
in an epitome by Julius Africanus and Eusebius, and extracts
by Josephus. The value of 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 then:." This
quote from "A History of Egypt" by James Henry Breasted
(1905) p. 13-14, tells us from the pen of one of the leading
authorities on ancient Egypt, that the basis on which the
information of ancient Egyptian dynasties rests, is unreliable,
yet it continues in use.
The
"Hyksos"
This so-called 18th
Dynasty consisted of a family who ruled in Thebes. At the
time this family came to the throne, it was apparent that
other dynastic families were ruling as pharaohs in other areas
of Egypt. In the north, or the delta region, there lived at
this time a people whom the Egyptians thought of as "foreign"-
these included
the descendants of Jacob, or the Israelites. It appears that
other Asiatic peoples had moved into the region along with
them- people who were ambitious and wanted to rule themselves
as the Egyptians did. And they did not conform to the Egyptian
religion.
We know that the
Israelites, by decree of the pharaoh of Josephs time, were
allowed to live as "independents" and that their leaders were
considered "royal"- when Jacob died, the description of his
funeral was exactly the same as that of the pharaohs: GEN
50:2 And Joseph commanded his serants the physicians to embalm
his father: and the physicians embalmed Israel. 3 And forty
days were fulfilled for him; for so are fulfilled the days
of those which are embalmed: and the Egyptians mourned for
him threescore and ten days. 7 And Joseph went up to bury
his father: and with him went up all the servants of Pharaoh,
the elders of his house, and all the elders of the land of
Egypt, 9 And there went up with him both chariots and horsemen
and it was a very great company.
So, for many, many
years the Israelites live peacefully among themselves, setting
up their own rulers. And doesn't it seem reasonable to assume
that relatives and friends of the Israelites would want to
move down to the Delta region with them when they saw what
a "garden of Eden" it was there? Well, whether it was friends
and relatives, or not, someone
moved in and lived along side of them. And these foreigners
soon became a "thorn in the side" of the native Egyptians.
At the end of the
17th Dynasty, ancient records tell of the Egyptians
in Thebes claiming to expel the "Hyksos" from the delta. Inscriptions
document the presence of these "Shepherd Kings" in the delta
region beginning with the 6th dynasty and terminating with
the 17th.
When the native Egyptian
Theban rulers "expelled" the Hyksos, what occurred was that
they ran these other peoples who had settled along with the
Israelites out of Egypt. And although no mention is made of
the Israelites by name, we know that it was at this
time, at the beginning of the 18th dynasty, that they were
enslaved. With the trouble-making outsiders gone, the peaceful
Israelites were at the mercy of the Theban rulers.
There is an interesting
inscription by Hatshepsut of the 18th dynasty which
refers to the restoration of Egypt after the "Hyksos" had
been expelled from the delta region: "I have
restored that which was in ruins, I have raised up that which
was unfinished. Since the Asiatics were in the midst of Avaris
of the Northland [Della], and the barbarians were in the midst
of them [the people of the Northland], overthrowing that which
had been made, while they ruled in ignorance of Re."
This wonderful passage
tells us that whoever lived in the Delta (the Israelites and
the "barbarians" from Asia) did not worship RE, the Egyptian
sun god. And we know this was true of the Israelites. So they
simply "kicked out" the troublemakers, who had no right to
be there in the first place. Then, the Israelites, who had
been given the right to live there, had their special "status"
canceled. The Egyptians had no reason to expel them- after
all, they were peaceful, industrious and hardy people. Instead,
they were enslaved.
THE
KINGS OF THE 18TH DYNASTY
The kings of the
18th Dynasty are stated by historians as being
named either Amenhotep and Thutmoses. But, there is a big
problem with this fluctuation between names. The pharaoh was
considered the earthly embodiment of the main god and his
name reflected the supreme god of his royal family. Does it
make sense to anyone that one king would consider Thoth (Thutmoses)
the supreme god while the next considered Amen (Amenhotep)
the supreme god, and continue to alternate gods through a
succession of several kings? Of course not. As we read earlier,
the list of dynasties and kings that the Egyptologists base
their information on is quite inaccurate. The inscriptions
found in temples and tombs indicate that the 'Thutmoses" name
is indicative of one of the offices of the pharaoh, just as
was the "Amenhotep" name-and that each pharaoh was both a
"Thutmoses" as well as an "Amenhotep" as he advanced in the
royal line from co-regent to emperor. From our research, it
appears that the crown prince received his "Thutmoses" title
upon being appointed co-regent, and then became "Amenhotep"
in addition to his earlier names, when he became emperor.
Let me stress that it appears
that this is the order he received each name; however, it
may possibly have been reversed. But we have no doubts that
each ruler possessed both names. And each ruler left inscriptions
relating to his reign in both names sometimes he referred
to himself as Thutmoses, while at other times Amenhotep. Each
individual king left inscriptions in both names, dating his
regnal years sometimes from the date of his co-regency and
sometimes from the date of his emperorship. We don't fully
understand the "rules" governing these practices yet.
PHARAOH
"RAMESES"
Yes, most people
think of the pharaoh of the Exodus as "Rameses". And why not?
The name "Rameses" is mentioned in the Bible as early as the
story of Joseph. Was there a "Rameses" in the 18th
dynasty? Yes... but that was more a title than a name- much
like the title "pharaoh".
Not only was "Thutmoses"
also to become "Amenhotep"- he, as main emperor of all Egypt,
was also titled "Remises". if you will recall, in the story
of Joseph, the land of Goshen was also referred to as the
land of "Remises": GEN 47:11 And Joseph placed his father
and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of
Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Remises, as
Pharaoh had commanded.
Egyptian evidence
shows that every native Egyptian king from the time of the
so-called 5th dynasty was titled "Son of the Sun" or "Remises"
in addition to his other names. This has caused massive confusion
among the Egyptian scholars, who have zeroed in on one particular
pharaoh, "Remises II", and proclaimed him the "greatest pharaoh
of all Egypt". All one needs to do is go to the museum in
Cairo and view the 4 statues of "Remeses II" in the main entrance
hall- each one is clearly a different person. The inscriptions
referring to "Remises" refer to many different pharaohs.
Also, let's go back
to the inscription of Hatshepsut in the section on the Hyksos-
remember that she said these people lived "in ignorance of
RE? This inscription makes its quite clear that whoever lived
in the delta (Goshen/Remises) region, did not worship the
native Egyptian god, Re. "Re" is the "Ra" of "Remises"- and
this verifies the supremacy of "Re/Ra" during the time of
the 18th dynasty,- and that "Remises" would indeed be one
of the titles of the pharaoh.
"Thutmoses" =
"Amenhotep"
We are going to do
a great deal of talking about the 18th dynasty kings. To make
it easier for you to follow, we will state now that we believe
Thutmoses 1 became Amenhotep 1 when he went from co-regent
to emperor. Therefore, these 2 names are the same person.
This list will tell
you who we believe were the names of each royal person we
will be discussing. You can reference this list if you get
confused.
Pharaoh at Moses'
birth THUTMOSES 1 / AMENHOTEP 1
"Pharaoh's daughter"
NEFURE / HATSHEPSUT
Moses SENMUT
(Moses Con't)
HATSHEPSUT XNEM AMEN
THUTMOSES 2
Pharaoh when he fled
THUTMOSES 3 / AMENHOTEP 2
Pharaoh of the Exodus
THUTMOSES 4 / AMENHOTEP 3
1st-born
son of Pharaoh TUTANKHAMEN
THE
DATE OF THE EXODUS
1KI 6:1 And it
came to pass in the four
hundred 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 Zif which is the second
month, that he began
to build the house of the LORD.
If you go to your
encyclopaedia or most any reference book, you will be able
to discover that the date of Solomons rule is fairly well
established and the date of the 4th year of his reign would
be 967/966 BC. In our opinion, the most accurate and authoritative
book on the subject of dating the Hebrew Kings is "The
Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings" by Edwin R. Thiele.
You can order this book from any book store if they do not
have it in stock.
With this date established
(967/966 BC) we need to go back 480 years, as the above scripture
indicates. This would place the date of the Exodus at 1447/1446
BC. I will state at this point that we do not consider any
outside source above the scriptural reference, so we will
look no further for more information as to the date.
We will, however,
look for historical references and inscriptions which may
verify this date. The following information is just such a
verification, and is from the "Encyclopaedia Britannica"
1985 ed. vol. 4 pp. 575,6:
"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
by 20 years-
i.e., 1518 BC."
When we came across
this information, we had already constructed our chronology
of the 18th dynasty, which took about 3 years.
We show year 9 of Amenhotep 1 to be 1519 BC- and this reference
places his year 9 at 1518 BC, if the observance was noted
at Thebes, which is where their royal headquarters were. This
was a very exciting confirmation which is based on solid astronomical
evidence. It, at the very least, placed the 18th
dynasty at exactly the right place in the time scale. For
it to have fit so extremely well was far more than we could
have asked for!
For more information
on Biblical chronology, see our chronology later in this volume
with references, etc.
WHO
WAS PHARAOHS DAUGHTER?
The next question
that must be addressed is whether there existed in the 18th
dynasty, a pharaoh without a royal son to pass the throne
to, and whether that pharaoh had a royal daughter of note.
The answer is a most resounding "yes"! Not only did "Thutmoses
1 / Amenhotep I" not have a royal son who lived, he had a
daughter who is the most well-known and well-documented female
personage of all ancient Egyptian history, next to Cleopatra.
Her names were Nefure and Hatshepsut. She was referred to
as "Nefure" when we first learn of her in the inscriptions.
At that time, she is a royal princess- her father was co-regent
for the emperor, "pharaoh Ahmosis". She is referred to in
the ancient records by this name, Nefure, until a point in
time when she becomes known as the "royal queen"- we'll explain
a little later.
Also, we want to
explain that when Moses was born, the emperor of all Egypt
was Ahmosis who lived in Thebes. In Memphis, Thutmoses 1 was
co-regent, and also called "pharaoh". The word "pharaoh" comes
from the Egyptian word "pero" which simply means "big house".
This "pharaoh", whose daughter rescued baby Moses, didn't
become emperor of all of Egypt until Moses was about 12 years
old.
WHO
WAS MOSES?
Let me interject
here that Egyptian scholars have constructed a scenario whereas
"Nefure" and "Hatshepsut" are 2 different people. However,
again, we can with great confidence state that these 2 names
belong to the same lady. It was young Nefure who rescued baby
Moses from the Nile while she was living at the palace in
Memphis- the royal residence of the co-regent. In the museums
across the world are various statues, unlike any other ancient
Egyptian statues, which are of a young girl holding a baby
or small child- this child wears on his head the "royal side-lock"
of a future prince. The names on these statues are "Nefure"
and "Senmut"- Senmut being the baby's name. However, the scholars
have designated the woman in these statues as being a man
named "Senmut", who is the official nurse of princess "Nefure".
Moses
= SENMUT
"Senmut" is the Egyptian
name given to Moses when he first came to live at the palace.
This name is of extreme importance for it means literally
"mothers brother". To understand the significance, we must
explain briefly a subject which normally would take several
volumes- Egyptian religion and the pharaoh...
The ancient Egyptians
believed that the first king of Egypt was Osiris.
Osiris was married to Isis, his sister. Osiris' brother, Set,
killed Osiris out of jealousy for the throne. To sum it up
briefly, Isis brought Osiris back to life for one night by
a magic spell- and during this one night she was impregnated
by Osiris, who then returned to his death state. The child
she bore was called Horus,
and he was the reincarnation of Osirus. At the end of the
story, the throne is returned to Horus, the rightful king.
Therefore, Isis'
child was her son, her husband and her brother- all in one.
All kings of Egypt were then said to be "Horus"- the reincarnation
of Osiris. Confusing?- yes. But that's what they believed.
Do you see the significance
of the name given to Moses? He was being "set up" in the Egyptian
economy to possibly be the future king- the royal heir of
his "grandfather-pharaoh". His "grandfather" (adopted, of
course) had no royal male heirs- they had died. But he had
one royal daughter, Nefure. The future king could only inherit
the throne through the royal daughter. She (Nefure) convinced
her father, the pharaoh, to make her little adopted boy his
future heir. Nefure, as the symbolic Isis, had her little
"Osiris / Horus", who was named "Senmut"- his "mother's brother".
If all of this seems a bit complicated and silly, just compare
it with the rules and regulations of the royal family of England
today. The right to the throne doesn't pass that easily to
someone inside the family, much less outside
of the family. But, in times when there is no heir, preparations
and steps must be taken to procure the right for whoever is
determined.
With this understanding,
there is a Scripture which sheds a great deal more light on
the situation of Moses as Nefure (Hatshepsut)'s son: HEB
11:24 By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to
be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter;
Nefure
= Hatshepsut
Our studies show
that Moses came to live at the palace at about age 12, about
the same time his "grandfather" became main emperor over all
Egypt. At this time, they moved from the palace at Memphis
where the co-regent ruled, to Thebes where the main palace
was. At about age 18, Moses was designated the future "heir
apparent", with his mother, Nefure as his regent. She was
now given the additional royal name of "Hatshepsut" and referred
to as "queen" instead of princess. It gets very confusing
from this point on because the Egyptologists have come up
with a very elaborate scenario whereby they say that Hatshepsut
proclaimed herself king. Now, a few words about this theory
may help give a little understanding.
For one thing, the
Egyptian line of royalty descent was based on very sacred
beliefs- beliefs which would not in any way allow for a woman
to become the "earthly embodiment" of the god. She could become
the "royal wife", the "great queen", and in some cases possess
the royal power to appoint a new pharaoh in instances whereby
the throne may be empty at one point in time. But this fantastic
scenario whereby the scholars say Hatshepsut proclaimed herself
"king" is simply not possible. In her temple at Deir El Bahri,
there is a wall which depicts the birth of the future heir
to the throne, which historians say is the birth of Hatshepsut.
But there are a couple of problems with the scenario that
these scholars have chosen to ignore. One, is that the baby
is definitely a boy
baby! And secondly, one scene shows the baby in the arms of
Hatshepsut!
One book we have explains this as "obviously a mistake on
the part of the scribes who wrote the hieroglyphics- they
must have gotten confused".
Moses
= "Hatshepsut Xnem Amen"
The evidence on which
they build the case for Hatshepsut declaring herself king
are the inscriptions of "king Hatshepsut Xnem Amen / MaatKaRe".
They assume that this is Hatshepsut with a few additions to
her royal name. But let's examine this "kings" name: "Hatshepsut
Xnem Amen" means "Hatshepsut united with Amen". "Amen" is
the supreme god of the 18th dynasty, another name for "Re/Ra",
the sun. This name means that the "king" of this name is the
product of Hatshepsut being united with Amen, or the offspring,
so to speak, of Hatshepsut by the god, Amen.
This "king", who
was not really king, but was being designated as the future
heir to the throne, was Moses, with Hatshepsut as his regent.
One someone was designated as the future heir to the throne,
his inscriptions refer to him as "king".
That Moses was always
closely associated with his adopted mother is very apparent-
after all, she was his only connection to the royal family.
To justify his elevation to such royal position had to be
carefully documented in a manner that would be acceptable
to the system.
The evidence shows
that he was elevated to this position, as "heir apparent"
when he was about 24 years old.
Moses
= Thutmoses II
Finally, when Moses
was about 33 years old, he was designated as the crown prince
and became 'Thutmoses II". Let us state at this point that
the numbers after the Egyptian kings' names are not actually
a part of their name- they are simply designations given them
by the Egyptologists to identify each succeeding person of
the same name.
Josephus tells that
Moses, as Thutmoses, was the general of the army and that
he was very popular with the Egyptians. He attributes Moses
as the general who pacified Nubia, which in turn served to
increase the wealth of Egypt greatly by the gold paid as tribute
by the Nubians.
Finally, when Moses
was 40, we know what happened at that time- and that he fled
Egypt.
ROYAL
TOMBS CONSTRUCTED FOR MOSES
Tomb
No. 71
Near ancient Thebes,
there is a magnificent building called "Deir el Bahri", which
is a temple Moses built (as architect) for his adopted mother,
Nefure. Above it is a tomb for Moses which has an unfinished
statue carved above the entrance, in the virgin rock of the
mountain, of a woman holding a small child. We, of course,
recognize this as Moses and his adoptive mother.
The records of the
building of this tomb show that it was begun when Moses was
about 18- the year he was designated as the royal son of pharaoh's
daughter and placed in line as the possible future heir-apparent.
The name "Senmut" and "Nefure" are the names mentioned in
this tomb.
Just below this tomb,
excavators found a small rock-cut chamber that held the mummies
of Hatnofer and Ramose, the Egyptian names for Moses parents.
His mother was embalmed and given a royal funeral, which indicates
that she was buried here at the time of her death. The body
of her husband, Ramose, however, was clearly a secondary burial-
his body had been removed from its original burial and transferred
to this grave- and it was clearly a non-royal burial.
This tomb was never
finished and no one was ever buried in it. One reason being
that another more elaborate, royal tomb was begun for Moses
when he was about age 33/34- the year he was designated as
Thutmoses II.
Tomb
No. 353
This tomb is equally
as fascinating as the first, for there was never a burial
in it either. This was the second tomb built for Moses and
this one would have been his royal tomb. It is very exciting
to go down into that tomb and see how, at the time Moses fled
and gave up his claim to the future throne, all work stopped
on this tomb and it remains exactly as it was left to this
day. it is finished down to the lower section of hieroglyphs
and pictures- then, where the workmen stopped work, the pictures
are drawn onto the wall in black ink. Equally amazing is the
fact that, unlike other Egyptian tombs where the deceased
is pictured with a wife and family, Moses is shown with only
his mother and father, Hatnofer and Ramose. After all, Moses
was never married while he was in Egypt.
SIR
MARSTON & JOSEPHUS KNEW HATSHEPSUT
At this point, I
would like to state that those of you who decide to research
this subject- and we definitely recommend that you do just
that- will find that the facts we have presented will be totally
different from those as presented by historians and scholars.
But view the evidences in the light that we have presented
them and see for yourself how the evidence fits. It is amazing
to us that the majority of scholars have missed this altogether.
There have been a few, however, who have made the connection.
One of these is Sir Charles Marston, who, in his book "New
Bible Evidence", 1934,
I recognizes that
the Exodus had to occur during the 18th dynasty and that Hatshepsut
was indeed the "pharaoh's daughter". If he had had the information
that the Thutmoses and the Amenhoteps of this dynasty were
in fact the same people- (they were Thutmoses when they were
co-regents in Memphis, and Amenhoteps when they arose to main
emperor),- he would have figured it all out.
Marston brings out
the fact that Josephus gives some vital information as to
this pharaoh's daughter's identity on p. 162 of his above
mentioned book: "He does, however, mention the name of
the princess who found Moses in the ark of bulrushes. He says
it was 'Thermuthis,' in which we see an echo of the name Thotmes,
or Tahutnies, which was borne by each of the three Pharaohs
in whose reigns Hatshepsut played such a leading part."
THE
MAN "WHO TOOK MOSES' PLACE"
When Moses fled Egypt
at age 40, the emperor, Amenhotep 1 was very elderly- he had
been preparing Moses for the throne for the past 22 years.
Now, there was a big problem. Who would now be the future
king?
In Memphis, a young
man was being groomed to be appointed co-regent for Moses
when he became emperor. This young man was immediately elevated
to the rank of co-regent and given the same name of Thutmoses.
The records show that he assumed the throne on his year 22.
Now, this is a strange statement and tells much more than
one might at first notice. A co-regent, or royal heir-apparent,
begins counting his years when he is designated as the "heir-apparent".
That becomes his year one. Here, we have a man assuming office
in year 22 and he assumes it under that same name a as Moses
had.
Keep in mind, that
as the royal heir assumes each
stage of office, "heir-apparent", crown prince and co-regent,
he also in some places counts his years from that particular
appointment. This is why the years of "Thutmoses Ill are given
as 54 years, while the years of Amenhotep II are given as
26 to 32 years (depending on what author you are reading).
The problem with Thutmoses III, who took Moses' place, is
that there are no records of his rise through the ranks. He
just suddenly appears in year 22 as taking the throne.
Now, what happened
here is that when Moses fled, in order to continue the reign
of the earthly embodiment of "Thoth" in the "Thutmoses" co-regent,
this man simply assumed the years that Moses had held that
position. In other cases, when a royal personage would die,
the god is said to "fly to the heavens" and then redescend
into the body of whoever becomes the next earthly embodiment
of the god. In this case, there was no death- there had to
be an immediate transfer, which is exactly what took place.
Everything that had belonged to Moses was simply figuratively
transferred to this "new" "Thutmoses" and things went along
without missing a step. This man is now referred to by scholars
as Thutmoses Ill. All of the statuary attributed to him are
actually the statues that were made of Moses.
And it was to this
Thutmoses that scholars attribute 54 years of rule. However,
22 of those years belonged to the man he replaced, Moses.
And the historic evidence proves this, too. If we subtract
the 22 years from the 54 year total, we are left with 32 years.
Now, instead of going through all the evidence, let's just
read what one historian has to say about this Thutmoses Ill:
"He passed away after a rule of thirty-two (some say fifty-four)
years, having made Egyptian leadership in the Mediterranean
world complete." This is from "The Story of Civilization"
Vol. 1 by Will Durant, (1954) p. 155. And it truly was 32
years later when the man who became emperor after taking Moses
place, died. Amenhotep Il was perhaps the greatest ruler Egypt
ever had. By the time of his death, Egypt was truly the world
power and the wealthiest nation. Hatshepsut remained alive
for many years after Moses fled, and is named as queen on
monuments very late into this king's rule.
THE
PHARAOH OF THE EXODUS
Upon
Amenhotep II's death, his co-regent for 29 years, the 4th
Thutmoses, became Amenhotep Ill. Upon his becoming emperor,
he appointed his young son, Tutankhamen, as "crown-prince"
and for the next 8/9 years, this pharaoh ruled Egypt. He inherited
the throne at a time when Egypt was well established as the
world ruler. All he basically had to do was sit back and collect
the foreign tribute as it arrived. Egypt had military troops
stationed in all the vassal territories and maintained their
empire peaceably. In his inscriptions, this emperor makes
claims to be a triumphant warrior, but these references are
to the time of his co-regency, when he accompanied Amenhotep
II in his triumphant exploits.
But most interesting
about this man is the fact that historical data shows that
he actually had no claim to the throne. He was not the first-born
of the pharaoh, which was the standard mode of becoming emperor.
The well-known "sphinx stele", still present between the paws
of the sphinx at Giza, tells the strange story of how Thutmoses
IV fell asleep one day in the shadow of the sphinx. He dreamed
that the sun god came to him and told him that if he would
clear away the sand from around the sphinx, he would make
him king. This elaborate story would not have been needed
if he had been entitled to the throne as rightful heir. But,
it appears that Amenhotep II was also without a royal son.
The inscriptions always call the new king the "son" of the
previous king, but this is figurative- as referring to Osiris
and Horus. But keep in mind that this new pharaoh was not
the first born of the last pharaoh. This is important because
this new king, Amenhotep Ill, was the pharaoh of the Exodus.
Think about this- all
the firstborn were killed by the Angel of Death; if the pharaoh
had been a
first born, he would have died that night! So it is very important
that we establish that this pharaoh was not
a firstborn.
After reigning as
emperor for 8/9 years, we reach the 40th year after Moses
had fled Egypt. Remember, the pharaoh who took Moses place
reigned 32 years. Then, this last pharaoh reigned 8/9 years.
This equalled the 40 years Moses was in the wilderness of
Midian.
At this time at the
end of the 40 years, Moses returns to the court of pharaoh
Amenhotep III as commanded by God. And soon, the plagues began
to fall upon Egypt. When the plague of the death of the first
born fell by the hand of the Angel of Death, the pharaoh was
not stricken- but his son was: EXO 11:5 And all the firstborn
in the land of Egypt shall die, from the firstborn of Pharaoh
that sitteth upon his throne, even unto the firstborn of the
maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the firstborn
of beasts.
This son was the
young crown prince known to us all as "King Tut. However,
the name is misleading, for we know he was never pharaoh,
just crown prince. And while the historians all argue over
who his father was, in an inscription on a statue of a lion
dedicated by Tutankhamen to the temple of Soleb, he calls
Amenhotep Ill his father. (Remember, Amenhotep III was also
named Thutmoses IV).
THE
ROYAL MUMMIES
Another confusing
factor in the identification of the kings and queens is the
overabundance of royal mummies. In other words, although Thutmoses
Ill and Amenhotep II are the same man, there have been found
mummies for each name. Does this shoot down our theory? No,
not in the least. First of all, it is necessary to have an
understanding of the ancient Egyptian beliefs concerning death.
At death, they believed
that a body was necessary for the ba, the ka and the akh
to survive. These were, loosely translated, the various
"spirit forms" which made up the psychic person and survived
after death. However, in cases where the person was unavailable
for burial, etc., any body would suffice as long as it was
labeled with the name of the deceased. They believed that
as long as a persons name was being spoken, or was on the
walls of his tomb, his immortality was assured. The name was
the most important factor. The following is from "Mummies,
Myth and Magic in Ancient Egypt" by Christine El Mahdy
(1989) p. 13: "The tomb, the mummy, the
equipment, the paintings and reliefs were all designed to
help preserve the name of the individual,
the greatest horror was to have your name destroyed, cut out
from a wall." (Emphasis
ours)
If the mummy of the
actual individual was so vital, why would they fear the desecration
of their name? Because it was the key, in their belief, to
their immortality. The mummy was important, as were the statues
of the deceased. But the mummy could be supplied in a pinch-
no problem.
Since it was considered
a sacred duty of each king to protect the burials of his ancestor-kings,
if a king couldn't find a mummy for a particular king, he
would provide one as is written in numerous inscriptions.
Mummies have been
found which the excavators claim to be the mummies of each
of the Amenhoteps and each of the Thutmoses. However, a careful
examination of all evidence leads one to conclude that the
only mummies which are of the actual 18th Dynasty pharaohs
in question are the mummy of Amenhotep I and Amenhotep II.
Amenhotep I (Thutmoses
I) was found in his own tomb, as was Amenhotep II (Thutmoses
Ill). Amenhotep ls mummy was never unwrapped but was x-rayed-
and it revealed several genetic peculiarities which were shared
by the mummies of several of his ancestors. The most obvious
of these was the fact that he had the same type of malocclusion
-a very prominent protrusion of the top front teeth- almost
an overbite. This genetic feature was seen in all his female
relatives- sister, mother, grandmother and daughter.
We believe the only
authentic mummies of the 18th dynasty kings to be those of
Amenhotep I and Amenhotep II. Of course, there wouldn't be
a mummy for Amenhotep Ill as he drowned in the Red Sea. Nor
would there be a mummy of Thutmoses II since he was Moses.
The others, which are said to be Thutmoses I, Ill, IV and
Amenhotep Ill we believe to be mummies supplied by later kings,
as they were all found in other tombs, in other sarcophaguses,
and as they were simply not royal burials.
Here are a couple
of examples of the evidence which shows these mummies to be
extremely doubtful. These concern the mummy said to be that
of Thutmoses 1, who is known to have ruled a minimum of 21
years by existing inscriptions: "However, several eminent
physical anthropologists who have seen these x-rays have been
absolutely convinced that this mummy is that of a young man,
perhaps 18 years of age, certainly not over twenty." "X-Raying
the Pharaohs" by James E. Harris and Kent R. Weeks, (1973)
p.131-2. The fact that this mummy is far too young to be this
king is evidence enough. But now, let's go back to when the
mummy was actually identified as Thutmoses I: "Among the
mummies discovered at Deir-el-Bahari was one, which on account
of its having been found in a coffin bearing the name of Pinozen
I of the XXIst Dynasty, was formerly supposed to be the mummy
of that king. Maspero, however, formed the opinion that it
was the mummy of Thutmoses I and account of the facial resemblance
which it bore to the Pharaohs Thutmoses II and III" "Egyptian
Mummies" by G. Elliot Smith and Warren R. Dawson (1924)
p. 91.
This mummy was identified
as Thutmoses 1 because he
seemed to favor the other mummies. Not a strong basis
for identification. Plus that fact that the mummy said to
be Thutmoses Ill was also determined to be far too young-
plus the fact that he was just barely five feet tall. Then,
there is the mummy of Thutmoses IV, who was extremely emaciated
and identified as just barely 30 years old. It doesn't even
take careful study to realize that these mummies are "impostors".
THE
"EGYPTIAN WATERGATE"
The year is about
1446 BC. The Egyptian pharaoh, his army and all the members
of all the priesthoods have left in great haste. They are
enraged that their entire slave population has fled, even
though less than a week earlier the pharaoh and his ministers
had virtually begged them to leave. The Egyptians lavished
the great multitude of slaves with objects of gold, silver
and precious stones as supposed "payment" for all the work
they had done as slaves. EXO 12:35 And the children of Israel
did according to the word of Moses; and they borrowed of the
Egyptians jewels of silver, and/jewels of gold, and raiment:
36 And the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the
Egyptians, so that they lent unto them such things as they
required. And they spoiled the Egyptians.
The Hebrew words
in this text that are translated "borrow" and "lent" are the
same word, "shaal". And this word simply means "ask", "demand"
"request", "give", etc. Only 6 times in the entire Bible is
it translated "borrow" and 2 times as 'lend" or "lent". But
87 times it is translated "ask" and in excess of 60 times
is it translated to read other words which mean simply "ask".
The verses are telling us that they "asked" for these things,
as God had told them to do so they would not be a destitute
nation. And the Egyptians were quite happy to comply with
whatever they asked. The fear of God was in the Egyptians
after the terrible plagues which had befallen them by the
Hand of the Israelites' God.
Back home in Egypt,
the entire country is trying to recover from the catastrophic
destruction the country has suffered as a results of the plagues
brought by the God of the slaves, "I AM". Every family is
in mourning for the loss of their first born. Nothing of this
magnitude has ever been experienced by these people.
The crown-prince,
the young boy, Tutankhamen, is being mourned by the entire
nation and preparations are being made for his burial. But
mostly, all is at a standstill until the pharaoh, the ministers
of state, the army and the priesthoods all return with the
slaves. Throughout the land, the continuous sound of mourning
can be heard from sun up to sun down, and even throughout
the night.
The pharaoh, as soon
he ascended the throne 8/9 years earlier as emperor, had taken
as his "great wife and queen" a lady of foreign blood by the
name of Tiy. When he had been co-regent in Memphis, he had
been married to a royal daughter, as was tradition. lt was
this royal lady who had given birth to his firstborn, Tutankhamen.
But it was the "common" foreign wife whom he elevated to "great
king's wife and queen" as soon as he was "boss"- and this
lady was to play a big part in later events of Egyptian history
after the Exodus. But now, back to the story at hand.
Soon, word arrives
at the palace in Memphis that is too fantastic to be believed-
the entire Egyptian army, all of the priesthood and the pharaoh
himself have all perished! All drowned in the Red Sea while
in pursuit of the slaves! The confusion, grief, fear and agony
of the entire country is impossible to imagine. But very quickly,
it becomes utmost in the minds of those remaining that knowledge
of what has happened must be kept secret.
The previous emperor
had secured the position of Egypt as the world power. All
nations feared as well as respected Egypt. They all, for the
most part, brought their tribute regularly to the palaces,
and Egypt had want of absolutely nothing. She had no need
to ever go to war for the nations feared her great army. If
word of what happened here became known, Egypt could lose
her control over her vassal territories and that would mean
financial disaster. There is a miraculously-preserved record
of the last official correspondences of the pharaoh who drowned
in the Red Sea, as well as correspondences with the later
pharaoh, and even Tiy. These are contained in the group of
tablets found in ancient Amarna, called the Tel-Amarna Letters.
In these were found correspondences to this pharaoh of the
Exodus, Amenhotep 3, from the Babylonian king, Kadashman-Enlil
and the Mittanni king, Tushratta, which serve to verify other
world events of this time.
The greatest contender
for world power, after Egypt, at the time of the Exodus was
the rapidly emerging Hittite Empire. And the greatest Hittite
king, Suppiluliumas, had just taken the throne a few years
earlier. The Egyptians were sitting ducks if word leaked out...
Time passed; the
Egyptians tried to pick up the pieces and go on with their
lives, but it was difficult. The only thing they had in their
favor was the fact that they were so isolated from the rest
of the world. No one could enter the country without being
detected far before they arrived. Careful precautions were
taken to see that the true situation was not discerned by
others.
There was but one
person in Egypt who had the royal right to seat a new pharaoh-
this was the original great royal wife of Amenhotep 3- the
mother of Tutankhamen. But, her situation was not an easy
one. Remember, when her husband took the throne as emperor,
he took a non-royal wife and she became his favorite.
"My
Husband has died and I have no son"
The true, royal wife
of the royal bloodline took the only step she knew to take
to secure strong leadership for the country and provide protection
and security for Egypt. She wrote a letter to the Hittite
king. We can learn about this in an inscription left behind
by the Hittite king, Suppiluliumas' son: "... When the people
of Misra [Egypt] learned of the destruction of Amqa, they
were afraid, for to make matters worse their master, Bibhuria
had just died and the widowed queen of Egypt sent an ambassador
to my father and wrote to him in these terms: `My husband
is dead and I have no son. People say that you have many sons.
If you send me on of your sons he will become my husband for
it is repugnant to me to take one of my servants to husband.'
When my father learned this, he called together the council
of the great: 'Since the most ancient times such a thing has
never happened before.' He decided to send Hattu-Zittish,
the chamberlain, `Go, bring me information worthy of belief;
they may try to deceive me; and as to the possibility that
they may have a prince, bring me back information worthy of
my belief.' While Hattu-Zittish was absent on the soil of
Egypt, my father vanquished the city of Karchemish... The
ambassador of Egypt, the lord Hanis, came to him. Because
my father had instructed Hattu-Zittish when he went to the
country of Egypt as follows: 'Perhaps they have a prince,
they may be trying to deceive me and do not really want one
of my sons to reign over them.'; the Egyptian queen answered
my father in a letter in these words; `Why do you say `they
are trying to deceive me? `If I had a son, should I write
to a foreign country in a manner humiliating to me and to
my country? You do not believe me and you even say so to me!
He who was my husband is dead and I have no son. Should I
then perhaps take one of my servants and make of him my husband?
I have written no other country, I have written to you."
There is more, but
for the sake of space, we will just tell you what happened.
Suppiluliumas finally believed her and sent a son. However,
that son never made it to Egypt. No one knows what happened
to him exactly, but we do know what happened next.
However, before we
leave this most important letter, we must point out that the
most convincing evidence of all is the fact that the queen
who wrote the Hittite king makes it quite clear that all who
remain in Egypt are her "servants"! Is this not a perfect
description of the situation that would have resulted after
all the royal ministers, priests and army had drowned in the
Red Sea? The scholars assign the name of the dead pharaoh
"Bibhuria" as being that of "Tutankhamen", for one of his
names was "Neb-kheper-ru-re"; however, we believe it should
be transliterated "Neb-maat-Re", which was one of the names
of Amenhotep 3. Either way, the evidence is equally strong.
Either the royal wife or the royal daughter (who was symbolically
"married" to Tutankhamen) of the dead pharaoh would have retained
the royal right to do this. So it really doesn't matter which
wife wrote the letter as far as the evidence goes.
Rivalry
for Power
Meanwhile, time passes
in the devastated Egypt. Petty quarrels arise between the
true royal wife and the favored foreign wife of the dead pharaoh.
It becomes a power struggle- but one that must remain confidential
in order that the outside world not realize the vulnerability
of Egypt.
There is not clear
evidence as to the exact events which next occurred, but there
is enough evidence to generally know. Th |