Dating the Exodus
(Josephus' Hyksos Expulsion vs. Manetho's Ramesside Expulsion)
31 May 2004
Updates: 01, 09, 29 June 2004 at end of article
Please click here for this website's most important article: Why the Bible Cannot be the Word of God.
For Christians visiting this website _my most important article_ is The Reception of God's Holy Spirit: How the Hebrew Prophets _contradict_ Christianity's Teachings. Please click here.
The below are "slightly edited" postings to several lists regarding the dating of the Exodus as preserved by the Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus in the 1st century CE (AD). Josephus quotes at some length, from the 3rd century BCE Egyptian historian Manetho, who wrote a History of Egypt in Greek for his Ptolemaic overlords, evidence of the antiquity of his people from Egyptian records. Josephus took issue with Manetho's claim that the Exodus occured in Ramesside times, a king called "Sethos/Ramesses" and his father "Amenophis" being held responsible for expelling some leperous quarrymen from Avaris. Josephus, however, approved of Manetho's preservation of an earlier expulsion in Hyksos times, and thought this was the biblical Exodus, primarily because of the biblical chronology. Please click here for more information on Manetho, Avaris (biblical Rameses of Exodus 12:37), and the Exodus.
So, for nearly 2000 years two "extra-biblical" identifications for the Exodus existed to bedevil scholars, Josephus' Hyksos expulsion vs. Manetho's Ramesside expulsion. What sayeth archaeology ? Most Liberal scholars understand that the Bible's Exodus date of 1446 BCE and Conquest of 1406 BCE (1 Kings 6:1) favored by many Conservatie Protestant scholars to be archaeologically unsubstaniated.
The Bible suggests Joshua successfully seized the "Hill Country" of Canaan from Galilee to the Negev. Extensive on-foot archaeological surveys of this area by professionaly trained archaeologists under the aegis of the Israeli Department of Antiquities carried out field surveys collecting pottery shards from the top soil at hundreds of sites (1970's through the 1980's), and the collated and published results showed a "near-void" of sedentary and non-sedentary peoples in this area in the Late Bronze Age (ca. 1540-1200 BCE) which would include the Protestant Conservatives' Israelite Conquest of ca. 1406 BCE. However, this area in Ramesside Iron I (1230-1100 BCE) EXPLODED with over 300+ stone farms, hamlets and villages as compared to the preceding Late Bronze Age period. It would appear that Manetho's Ramesside Exodus has been _vindicated_ by the findings of archaeology. The problem ? The pottery in these sites was not Egyptian, it was Canaanite in form. The solution ? Manetho had stated that the Hyksos' descendants had "reinvaded the Delta" and resettled at Avaris which had been reoccupied in Ramesside times. They lorded it over the Egyptians for 13 years before being expelled. It just might be that the 13 years in Egypt was too brief a time for the Hyksos' descendants to abandon their Canaanite pottery styles and adopt Egyptian forms. Thus, perhaps upon their expulsion and resettlement in Canaan, they were still casting their pots in a Canaanite manner rather than Egyptian ? This anomaly, Iron I villages full of Canaanite pots rather than Egyptian would then also "appear to align" with Manetho's statements about a Ramesside expulsion being the Hebrews' Exodus (please scroll down to the "19 June 2005 Update" at the end of this article for more details).
My conclusion from reading Manetho's account (_if_ Manetho is correctly relaying Egyptian events) is that TWO EXODUSES occurred, one in Hyksos times and the other in Ramesside times, and that these came to be fused into ONE via oral traditions by Late Iron II times when I understand the Primary History, Genesis-Kings to have been composed ca. 562 BCE in the Exile.
I understand that the fusing "mechanism" is preserved in the Bible. We are told that Israel did not obey God, _she intermarried with the Jebusites of Jerusalem_ and worshipped their gods.
According to Manetho BOTH expulsions from Egypt, Hyksos and Ramesside ended up AT JERUSALEM. So, it is my proposal that two Late Bronze Age expulsions from Egypt, ending at Jerusalem, came to passed on in oral traditions by the Jerusalemite-Jebusite-Canaanite Mothers to their Iron IA Israelite/Judahite sons. Many scholars have noted the Bible appears to be a product of the priests located at Jerusalem, and according to Manetho this city is where both Exoduses came to a conclusion.
My earlier articles posted at this website noted that the Bible's chronology appeared to be preserving a Hyksos Expulsion, but the details of the Exodus in the Bible appeared to be Ramesside. I eventually concluded that both must have been fused together into one Exodus at some point in time.
It was only recently, 28 May 2004, that I "re-read" Manetho, and realized that he had noted TWO Expulsions from Avaris to Jerusalem. Here, for me, was the _missing_ "golden key" explaining why the Bible's Exodus is date "so early" (1 Kings 6:1), yet possessing Ramesside details.
One of the "first" problems to be faced in setting a date for the Exodus is that the Bible exists today in several CONTRADICTING recensions which provide "different dates" for the creation of the world and the Exodus. One often sees the date of 1445 BC for the Exodus at many Protestant Evangelical Websites. This date is based on the chronology developed in the 17th century AD by Archbishop James Ussher of Ireland, which later in the 18th century appears in the margins of numerous King James Version Bibles (the KJV began printing in 1611 AD). Ussher calculated Creation at 4004 BC.
The Catholic Bible is a recension of the Septuaginta believed to have been compiled at Alexandria Egypt in Greek for Jews by Jews in the 3rd century BC. Catholic scholars fix creation at 5199 BC instead of 4004 BC. Why ? Because the Septuagint gives different ages for the pre-Flood patriachs which are in CONTRADICTION to ages preserved in the King James Bible.
The data preserved in modern Jewish text the TANAKH also called the Massoretic Text has creation calculated at 3740 BC.
Professor Steibing on three different and _CONTRADICTING_ dates for God's creation of the world found in the book of Genesis as calculated by Jewish, Catholic and Protestant scholars:
"Most scholars [prior to the 19th century AD] agreed that the world was only about six thousand years old, though there was considerable disagreement over the exact date of the creation. Jewish rabbinical calculations from the Hebrew Massoretic Text showed that the world began 3,740 years before the Christian Era. Roman Catholic tradition, based on the Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible, placed the creation in 5199 B.C. And most English-speaking Protestants accepted the seventeenth-century Archbishop James Ussher's calculation of the time of creation, 4004 B.C. Ussher's dates were placed in the margins of early eighteenth-century editions of the King James version of the Bible, making them seem even more authoritive." (p. 32. "The Discovery of Prehistory." William H. Steibing Jr. Uncovering the Past. New York & Oxford. Oxford University Press. 1994 [1993 Prometheus Books])
Thus Protestant Christian Evangelicals set the Exodus at circa 1445 BC using Ussher's chronology, the Roman Catholics set the Exodus at circa 1512 BC and the Jewish TANAKH's data which appears in the Jewish work called Seder 'Olam Rabbah calculates the Exodus at 1312 BC. For the 1512 BC Exodus date cf. page 190; for 1312 BC cf. p. 111 in Jack Finegan. Handbook of Biblical Chronology. Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson Publishers, Inc. 1964, 1998 Revised Edition. ISBN 1-56563-143-9).
The Roman Catholic Exodus date of 1512 BC falls in the reign of Pharaoh Tuthmoses II (reigned circa 1518-1504 BC); The Protestant Evangelicals' Exodus date from the King James Version of 1445 BC falls in the reign of Pharaoh Amenhotep II (reigned ca. 1453-1419 BC); the Jewish Seder 'Olam Rabah's Exodus date of ca. 1312 BC falls in the reign of Pharaoh Horemhab (reigned ca. 1321-1293 BC), he being succeeded by Ramesses I (reigned ca. 1293-1291 BC). Note all Pharaonic reigns are from Peter A. Clayton. Chronicle of the Pharaohs, The Reign-by-reign Record of the Rulers and Dynasties of Ancient Egypt. London. Thames & Hudson. 1994. ISBN 0-500-05074-0.
In addition to all of the above some scholars, Josephus (79 AD), Jack (1925), De Vries (1962), Hoffmeier (1996), Kitchen (2003) and Goldstein (2006) have observed that 1 Kings 6:1's statement that 480 years elapsed from the Exodus and the 4th year of Solomon's reign appears to be CONTRADICTED by the internal chonological evidence of the Bible, suggesting almost 600 years elapsed not 480 years. I have noted that when this data is added to Solomon's 4th year reckoned by some as ca. 966/967 BCE, the Exodus falls in the reign of Pharaoh Ahmose I who expelled the Hyksos, suggesting that chronological data from the books of Judges and Kings appears to align the Exodus with the Hyksos Expulsion of the mid-sixteenth century BCE. Please click here for the details.
Another "problem" related to the Exodus is that Manetho's account _contradicts_ the biblical portrayal of events. He understands the Exodus was a Ramesside event, but he has no knowledge of an Egyptian army chasing after Israel in the wilderness and being destroyed in a body of water. He understands the Egyptian army confronted the Hebrews _within_ Egypt's borders at a fortified town called Avaris. Avaris was a port, it had access to the Mediterranean Sea via the Pelusiasic branch of the Nile. It had a harbor for ships to dock at. Manetho has the surrounded Hebrews surrendering at Avaris and being allowed to return to Canaan where they eventually settle at Jerusalem.
So, the big $64,000 question becomes "Who is right? Manetho or the Bible?" Or are both wrong? Both have an Egyptian army confronting Hebrews at a body of water with no escape possible. Manetho's body of water is the Pelusiasic Nile and its canals feeding the Harbor and fields versus the Bible's Yam Suph and God performing a miracle, opening a way through the sea for his people to pass through, then destroying the pursuing Egyptian army with returning waters. Is it possble that Manetho is correct? Did the Hebrews "recast" the confrontation at Avaris' river-canal and harbor as at a location three days march from Egypt's borders in the wilderness? Is Avaris' river-harbor-canal what is behind Pi-ha-hiroth "the mouth of the canal"? Is biblical Migdol near Pi-ha-hiroth the "fortress" of Avaris (migdol is Semitric for a fort) the Hebrews were holed up in according to Manetho? Is Baal-Zaphon "the lord of the north" the Egyptian god Seth, "the lord of Avaris"? For Manetho the Hebrew Exodus was a "victory" for Egypt at Avaris whereas the Bible has Egypt "defeated" by the Hebrew God.
Please scroll down for the "modified and expanded" posts:
28 May 2004
I have been doing research on the Exodus for over 30 years, and am well aware of _all_ the conflicting proposals, Conservative and Liberal. The problem ? No period has the archaeological support, as noted by Professors William G. Dever, Israel Finkelstein, Burton MacDonald, etc.
Putting aside for the moment, _the lack of archaeological evidence_, I have of late (the past 24 hours) been "playing with, what is for me, "a new brain-child" or "idea." That the biblical account is a fusion of two events preserved in the writings of the 1st century CE (AD) Jewish Historian
Flavius Josephus.
As most on this list are aware (that is to say, those who have studied the Exodus and its dating problems), Josephus argued that the Exodus was recalling the mid 16th century BCE Hyksos Expulsion as presented by the 3rd century BCE Egyptian historian Manetho in his History of Egypt, written in Greek for his Ptolemaic overlords.
What is NOT so well known is that Josephus in citing Manetho's work, notes with great displeasure, that Manetho does NOT associate the Exodus with the Hyksos Expulsion ! Instead, Manetho claims the Exodus was in the days of the Ramessides !
I have been carefully "re-reading" Josephus' quotations from Manetho regarding the Ramesside Exodus which so incensed the Jewish scholar for "clues."
It is _my_ conclusion, after having studied Josephus' account of Manetho and having studied archaeology findings and having read innumerable Exodus dating proposals, that _TWO EXODUS EVENTS_ are being recalled in the Bible. The "first" is the mid 16th century BCE Hyksos Expulsion and the "second" is the Ramesside expulsion "narrated" by Manetho !
My query to the audience- have other scholars made this proposal ? If so, could someone direct me to a published presentation, either on the Internet or Book or Periodical ?
Regards, Walter
Walter Reinhold Warttig Mattfeld y de la Torre, M.A. Ed.
***********************
28 May 2004
My recent re-reading of Manetho _of the past 24 hrs._ has me suspecting that his "Amenophis and son Ramesses" is none other than Seti I and Ramesses II, co-reigning together. And they, according to Manetho, expel the "Leperous Quarrymen of Avaris and their Asiatic brethren" who invaded Egypt from south Canaan (Jerusalem), the Jerusalemites being invited to invade
Egypt by Osar-Seph (Manetho's name for Moses).
What strikes me is certain parallels in Manetho's account with motifs found in the Hebrew Bible.
Many Liberal scholars understand that the sudden appearance of 200+ Iron IA villages in the Hill Country of Canaan from Galilee to Arad is Israel settling the land under Joshua- and I agree. This is a Ramesside era event, which aligns "somewhat" with Israel having built Ramesses in the eastern
delta before her Exodus.
In the biblical account, once in the wilderness, Moses orders all the lepers to be expelled from the camp (Nu 5:2), and he also becomes a leper, but is healed by God (Ex 4:6). Manetho relates that Amenophis (whom I believe is Seti I) gathered together all the Lepers of Egypt and sent them to work in the stone quarries. Later they request to be relocated to an abandoned site called
Avaris (modern day Tell ed-Daba ?). He allows their settlement there. I note that nearby is Pi-Ramesses (modern day Qantir ?), which is Ramesses of the Bible, according to some scholars. So, Israel "dwelling apart from the Egyptians" in the biblical account, and building Ramesses may recall Seti's forcing leperous peoples (Egyptian and Foreigners ?) to separate from the Egyptian people and work the quarries as corvee laborers or slaves and build his many monumental temples. Perhaps Seti, co-reigning with his son, Ramesses II, named the city Pi-Ramesses in honor of his father Ramesses I (he named his son Ramesses II in honor of his father why not the town too ?) ?
In Manetho's account, the ungrateful leper-quarrymen of Avaris under their leader Osar-Seph (Moses) invite their kinsmen in south Canaan (Jerusalem) to invade Egypt and liberate them from their Egyptian oppressors. They do so, and Amenophis (Seti I) and his 5 year old son Ramesses retire with their army to a 13 year exile near Ethiopia. Then Amenophis returns with his son,
Ramesses and they expell the leperous quarrymen and their South Canaanite brethren.
Osar-seph (Moses) in inviting the Jerusalemites to invade Egypt, offered to guide them to Avaris and help reclaim the city which had _belonged to their ancestors_, apparently referring to the Hyksos Expulsion of 1560/1530 BCE.
This explains for me why the Bible preserves chronologically the Hyksos expulsion of the mid 16th century BCE as the Exodus, but speaks of the Exodus as occuring after the building of Ramesses (cf. "below," Kenneth A. Kitchen & James K. Hoffmeir's note that the elapsing time from the Exodus to Solomon's 4th year was almost 600 years, NOT 480 years, 966 BCE + 600 = 1566 BCE).
That is to say, I suspect that two different events are fused together in the Bible.
Some scholars have thought that the Amenophis who expelled the leperous quarrymen of Avaris is one of the warrior Amenhoteps (I, II or III), because Amenophis _is_ the Greek rendering of Egyptian Amenhotep.
Why do I think Seti I is Manetho's "Amenophis" and not Amenhotep I, II or III ? The _CLUE_ is that Manetho states that 1) Amenophis named his son Ramesses/Rampes "after his father", this suggests for me Ramesses II being named after his grandfather, Ramesses I. 2) When Amenophis expells the Leperous Quarrymen of Avaris it is with his 18 year old son Rameses/Rampes
at his side (his son being 5 years old when he retired to near Ethiopia 13 years earlier), suggesting co-rulership, and Ramesses II in inscriptions refers to his _co-rule_ with his father. 3) Seti I and Ramesses were famed for the plethora of monuments and temples and palaces erected in their
reigns and the stone quarries of Egypt were "kept busy" under their reigns, this aligns for me with Manetho's comments about Leperous quarrymen being settled at Avaris, probably to use the site as a work camp while they built Pi-Rameses under the joint reign of Seti I/Rameses (Ramesside incriptions mention Apiru work gangs hauling quarry blocks to erect Pylons, perhaps
Apiru=Abiru=Hebrews ?). 4) The 13 year withdrawal of Seti and Ramesses -if correctly recalled by Manetho- would explain why Israel leaves Egypt with the plunder of the Egyptians, Manetho claiming that the south Canaanites and Quarrymen are plundering Egypt for 13 years when they are expelled.
Now for the BIG MYSTERY, why is Seti I being called Amenophis (Amenhotep) ? Clayton noted that Seti I wanted to restore Egypt to her former glory in the days of Amenhotep III (Greek Amenophis). I suspect that Seti "may have" been likened to a "reborn Amenhotep" in his restoring Egypt's power and glory- I can't prove this- its only a guess or hunch.
What of Manetho's notion of an invasion of Egypt in Seti I's days, if Seti is "Amenophis" ? Seti does state he led several campaigns to put down _rebellions_ and he even captured Kadesh on the Orontes. Was there an "internal revolt" of quarrymen at Avaris and an invasion from south Canaan ? Nothing has survived in official annals (papyri and stone monuments), only Manetho's account of Amenophis and son Ramesses expelling lepers from Avaris by Pi-Ramesses and Egypt, who were plundering her, and the Exodus story of lepers in the wilderness with Egyptian gold (Ex 12:35-36), being expelled from the Israelite camp by Moses (Nu 5:2).
I have wondered about Manetho's Osar-Seph, whom he calims is Moses, and formerly a priest at Heliopolis. Osar of course is Greek Osiris, Egyptian wsr, meaning "strong, mighty, powerful", it appears in Ramesses II's tites as User-Maat-Re Setep-enre, "the justice of Re is powerful, chosen of Re." Could Osar-Seph [user-seph] then mean "powerful is Seph" ??? If so, who is Seph ? The Exodus notes that Moses' God is a "firey" God, and he also sends plague upon Egypt and upon his own people in the Wilderness. I wonder, could Osar-Seph be the Syrian-Canaanite plague god, Resheph/Reshef ? The problem of couse is the missing Re- as rsp means in Semitic "burning", an
appropriate epithet for the Hebrew God that is described as firey, and a sender of plague. Of interest is that the Hyksos assimilated their god Baal-Hadad or Baal-Saphon with the Egyptian god Set/Seth. The 400 year anniversary stela set up to honor Seth by the Ramessides, shows him in
Asiatic warrior garb usually reserved for the Canaanite fire, plague and war god, Resheph/Reshef. Could Osar-Seph [User-Seph ?], if Moses, be the adorer of "mighty Resheph," god of plague, fire, and war, associations that the Bible makes with Yahweh-Elohim ?
If Amenophis and son Ramesses/Rampses is Seti I and Ramesses, and if Manetho is "correct" in dating the Hebrew expulsion or Exodus to the Ramesside era, then the Bible's mention of Ramesses being built by a people who dwelt apart from the Egyptians, and who had lepers dwelling amongst them, begins to make some sense.
Of course, we have a problem. To what degree did Manetho know of Hebrew traditions about lepers in the Wilderness of Sinai camp and a leperous Moses, and their leaving a place in Egypt called Rameses and then work these motifs into the "Amenophis/Ramesses" expulsion of the leperous quarrymen ? The embalmed body of Ramesses V has smallpox lesions on the body, noticeable on the face particularly- were smallpox epidemics afflicting the Ramesside era ? Did Seti and Ramesses "isolate" all the "scabby-lepers" ("scabby-lepers" is Manetho's terminology which might reflect smallpox scabs ?) as an act of self-preservation, to quarries, away from the Egyptian populace, and then later expell them as a hygiene effort ?
I am not attempting to claim the Exodus happened as portrayed in the Bible -I regard that account as fictional- but I am trying to uncover "possible events" that came to be transformed into that event. If I am correct about Manetho arguing for a Ramesside Exodus and Josephus for a 16th century BCE Hyksos Exodus, then the "dance, round and round the mulberry bush" has been going on with scholars for over 2000 years ! If the events are a _FUSION_ perhaps the end of the dance is in sight ?
Regards, Walter
Walter Reinhold Warttig Mattfeld y de la Torre, M.A. Ed.
P.S.
The above data from Manetho's account is taken from the following source : W.G. Waddell. Manetho. Loeb Classical Library. 1930. Reprint.1980. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts)
********************
30 May 2004
Below is some info I have put together from Josephus' citations of Manetho and my humble attempt to come to grips with Manetho's statements and see if there is any verification or support for a Ramesside Exodus as he claimed.
As noted in earlier posts I do acknowledge two Exoduses being fused here and garbled, the Hyksos expulsion of the mid 16th century BCE and the late 13th early 12th century settlement of Canaan in Iron IA, of the Ramesside era. Below are some transcribed notes from Josephus which are germane to the arguments which follow, identifying Manetho's Amenophis with Seti I and his
son,co-ruling with him, Rameses II :
The Source:
W.G. Waddell. Manetho. Loeb Classical Library. 1930, reprint 1980. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts.
18th Dynasty :
14. Armesis, for 5 years.
15. Ramesses, for 1 year.
16. Amenophath (Amenoph), for 19 years.
Total, 263 years (18th Dynasty. p. 113. Waddell)
12. Armais (Danaus) for 5 years, banished from Egypt, fleeing brother
Aegyptus, settles at Argos, Greece.
13. Ramesses, also called Aegyptus, for 68 years.
14. Ammenophis, for 40 years.
Total, 348 years (18th Dynasty. p. 117. Waddell)
12. Armais, also called Danaus, for 5 years, banished from Egypt, flees
brother Egyptus to Argos, Greece.
13. Ramesses, also called Aegyptus, for 68 years.
14. Amenophis, for 40 years.
Total for the 18th dynasty, 348 years ( 18th Dynasty. p. 119. Waddell)
Amenophis'... 5 year old son Sethos, also called Ramesses after his
grandfather...(p. 12. Waddell)
19th Dynasty (from Syncellus) :
1. Sethos, for 51 years
2. Rapsaces, for 61 (66) years
3. Ammenephthes, for20 years
4.Ramesses, for 60 years
5. Ammenemnes, for 5 years
6. Thuoris (Homer's Polybus, wife is Alcandra, Troy falls), for 7 years
Total 209 years (19th Dynasty. p. 149. Waddell)
1. Sethos, 55 years
2. Rampses, 66 yrs.
3. Ammenephthis, 40 yrs
4. Ammenemes 26 yrs
5. Thuoris (Polybus, wife Alcandra, Troy falls), 7 yrs
Total 194 yrs (19th Dynasty. p. 151. Waddell)
Armenian Version of Eusebius
1. Sethos 55 yrs
2. Rampses 66 yrs
3. Amenephthis 8 yrs
4. Ammenemes 26 yrs
5.Thuoris (Polybus, Troy falls), 7 yrs
Total 194 yrs (19th Dynasty. pp. 151,153. Waddell)
Dynasty 18 (Peter A. Clayton. Chronicle of the Pharaohs, the Reign-by-Reign Record of the Rulers and Dynasties of Ancient Egypt. 1994. London. Thames & Hudson)) :
Amen-hotep III, 1386-1349 BCE (37 yr reign)
Amen-hotep IV (Akh-en-aten), Nefer-kheperu-re, 1350-1334 BCE (16 yr reign)
Smenkh-ka-re (Ankh-kheperu-re), 1336-1334 BCE (2 yr reign)
Tut-ankh-amun (Heqa-iunu-shema) Neb-kheperu-re, 1334-1325 BCE (9 yr reign)
Ay (it-netjer) Kheper-kheperu-re, 1325-1321 BCE (4 yr reign)
Hor-em-heb (mery-amun) Djeser-kheperu-re Setep-en-re, 1321-1293 BCE (28 yr
reign)
Dynasty 19 (Clayton) :
Ra-messes I Men-pehty-re, 1293-1291 BCE (2 yr reign)
Seti I (mery-en-ptah) Men-maat-re, 1291-1278 BCE (13 yr reign)
Ra-messes II (mery-amun) User-maat-re Setep-en-re, 1279-1212 BCE (67 yr
reign)
Mer-ne-ptah, (hetep-her-maat) Ba-en-re-mery-netjeru, 1212-1202 BCE (10 yr
reign)
Amen-messes (heqa-waset), Men-mi-re-Setep-en-Re, 1202-1199 BCE (3 yr reign)
Seti II (mer-en-ptah) User-kheperu-re-setep-en-re, 1199-1193 BCE (6 yr
reign)
Siptah (mer-en-ptah), Akh-en-re-setep-en-re, 1193-1187 BCE (6 yr reign)
Queen Twosret (setep-en-mut), Sitre-mery-amub, 1187-1185 BCE (2 yr reign)
Dynasty 20 (Clayton) :
Set-nakhte (merer-amun-re) User-khau-re-Setep-en-re, 1185-1182 BCE
Ra-messes III (heqa-iunu) User-maat-re Mery-amun, 1182-1151 BCE
Ra-messes IV (heqa-maat-re) 1151-1145 BCE
Ra-messes V User-maat-re, 1145-1141 BCE
Ra-messes VI Neb-maat-re-Mery-amun, 1141-1133 BCE
Ra-messes VII User-maat-re Mery-amun Setep-en-re, 1133-1126 BCE
Ra-messes VIII User-maat-re Akh-en-amun, 1133-1126 BCE
Ra-messes IX Nefer-kha-re Setep-en-re 1126-1108 BCE
Ra-messes X Kheper-maat-re, 1108-1098 BCE
Ra-messes XI Men-maat-re Setep-en-ptah, 1098-1070 BCE
Josephus refutes Manetho's claim that the Exodus was under a king called Sethos/Ramesses and his father Amenophis, claiming the Exodus was much earlier when the Hyksos shepherds were expelled to found Jerusalem under Pharaoh Tuthmosis :
"After citing a king Amenophis, a fictious person...Manetho attaches to him
certain legends, having doubtless forgotten that according to his own
chronicle the exodus of the Shepherds to Jerusalem took place 518 years
earlier. For Tethmois was king when they set out; and according to Manetho,
the intervening reigns thereafter occupied 393 years down to the two
brothers Sethos and Hermaeus, the former of whom, he says, took the new name
of Egyptus, the latter that of Danaus. Sethos drove out Hermaeus and reigned
59 years; then Rampses, the elder of his sons, for 66 years. Thus, after
admitting that so many years had elapsed since our forefathers left Egypt,
Manetho now interpolates this intruding Amenophis." (p. 121. Waddell)
Waddell notes various proposals for Manetho's Amenophis and 5 year old son Ramesses also called Sethos, and 'the polluted' Egyptians who have settled at Avaris and invited the Jerusalemites to invade Egypt and reclaim their ancestral home:
"This namesake [Amenophis son of Paapis], then replied that he would be able
to see the gods if he cleansed the whole land of lepers and other polluted
persons. The king was delighted, and assembled all those in Egypt whose
bodies were wasted by disease: they numbered 80,000 persons. These he cast
into stone-quarries to the east of the Nikle, there to work segregated from
the rest of the Egyptians. Among them, Manetho adds, there were some learned
priests, who had been attacked by leprosy. Then this wise seer ...added a
prediction that certain allies would join the polluted people and would take
possession of Egypt for 13 years..." (pp.123-125. Waddell)
"...king Amenophis is at one time Merneptah, son of Ramesses II; at another
time, Amenophis IV (Akhnaten), some 200 years earlier. The doings of the
polluted, the persecution of the gods, and the slaughter of the holy
animals, clearly portray the fury of Akhnaten and his followers against
Egyptian religion...For a theory about the identity of 'the polluted' (they
are the troops of Sethos I, sent to Tanis by his father Ramesses I during
the ascendancy of Horemhab) see P. Montet, "La Stele de l'An 400 Retrouvee,"
in Kemi, iii. 1935, pp. 191-215." (p. 123. note 1. Waddell)
"...Amenophis...As for his five-year-old son Sethos, also called Ramesses
after his grandfather Rapses, he sent him safely away to his friend. He then
crossed the Nile with as many as 300,000 of the bravest warriors of Egypt,
and met the enemy. But, instead of joining battle...he made a hasty retreat
to Memphis..." (p. 129. Waddell)
All who have studied Manetho and the various recensions have noted garbled and confusing statements about lengths of reigns and sequences of the reigns of the Pharaohs. But they also have recognized in the garbled information, bits and pieces of real history being preserved. The task is to winnow the chaff (misinformation) from the historical kernels, using the surviving
records of Egypt (papyri and monuments carved in stone).
Manetho's Armais has been identified by some scholars as being Pharaoh Horemhab :
"...Armesis (Armais) is probably Haremhab: Ramesses, vizier of Haremhab and
afterwards Ramesses I..." (p. 113. Note 2. Waddell)
The 18th Dynasty (see above) has Armesis (Horemhab ?) reigning 5 years (p.113 Waddell) followed by Ramesses I for 1 year, THEN _AMENOPHATH (Amenoph) for 19 years (p. 113. Waddell).
This suggests for me, that AMENOPHATH is none other than Seti I, who follows to the throne after his father, Ramesses I, who is given a reign of 2 years according to Clayton instead of 1 year according to Manetho.
This aligns somewhat with Josephus citing Manetho, that Amenophis' 18 year-old son Rameses (also called Sethos) is the grandson of Ramesses/Rhapses (p. 129 Waddell), who joins him in expelling the Leperous Quarrymen of Avaris and the Jerusalemite invaders who have despoiled Egypt for 13 years.
The problems ?
If Seti I is Manetho's Amenophis (18th Dynasty ruler number 16. Amenophath (Amenoph), for 19 years. p. 113 Waddell, following number 15 Ramesses, for 1year), then Manetho is associating the Exodus with the beginnings of the19th Dynasty, and claiming that Seti I and son Ramesses II are behind the expulsion of the polluted Egyptians and Quarrymen of Avaris and their south Canaanite allies from Jerusalem.
Some scholars claim an Exodus in the days of a Pharaoh Thutmoses. Why ? Apparently they accept Josephus' citing Manetho that the Exodus was under a Tethmosis (p. 121. Waddell's Manetho). Some also apparently accept the biblical statement of 1 Kings 6:1 that 480 years elapsed from the Exodus to Solomon's 4th year and building of the temple in Jerusalem, Solomon's 4th year as ca. 966 BCE giving an Exodus ca, 1446 BCE.
The problem ? Clayton dates Tuthmosis III, 1504-1450 BCE (p.104), and Amenhotep II, 1453-1419 BCE (cf. Peter A. Clayton. Chronicle of the Pharaohs. London. Thames & Hudson. 1994). But
there does exist disagreement amongst Egyptologists on the dating of the reigns (the so-called high-middle-low chronology) so, Thuthmoses II can be dated 1501-1447 BCE (cf. p. 599. James Henry Breasted. A History of Egypt. 1912. New York. Scribner's & Sons). However Aling, a noted conservative Christian scholar, opts for a 1446 BCE Exodus in the days of Amenhotep II, whom he dates ca. 1453-1415 BCE (p. 97. "The Exodus." Charles F. Aling. Egypt and Bible History from the earliest times to 1000 BC. 1981. Baker Book House. Grand Rapids, Michigan).
Do Egyptian annals mention _ANY_ of "the players" that appear in the Pentateuch,the first five books of the Bible allegedly written by Moses ca. 1446 BCE ? That is to say, do we find on the monuments or papyri of Egypt, ca. 1446 BCE, ANY mention of Moab, Seir, Edom, the Philistines all of whom appear in the Exodus account ? The answer is NO !
What about the Ramesside era, favored by Manetho, he having a Sethos/Ramesses expelling Leperous Quarrymen ? The Anastasi VI papyrus from the days of Merneptah mention nomads from EDOM seeking to enter Egypt to water their flocks. Ramesses II mentions raiding the tent camps of the Seirites to plunder them of their cattle. Ramesside inscriptions also mention Moab and allegedly DIBON, a town in Moab according to the Egyptologist, Kenneth A. Kitchen. Ramesses III ca. 1175 BCE mentions the Pelest (Egyptian prst) understood to be the PHILISTINES invading Egypt in his reign and settling them in cities bound in his name and their Aegean pottery appears in his reign in what we call Philista.
Archaeologists have discovered the Hill Country of Canaan where Israel settles is almost void of settlement in the Late Bronze Age (ca. 1560-1200 BCE), when the Exodus is believed to have ocurred (ca. 1446 BCE, cf. 1 Kings 6:1), but in Iron IA suddenly 300+ stone villages appear out of no where, with a population approaching 20,000+ and Hazor is destroyed and burned along with Megiddo and Lachish- all these places are mentioned in Joshua's account. From these Iron IA villages Israel in Iron II evolves into the Monarchy of Saul, David and Solomon.
It would appear that the _attestation_ from Egyptian records, papyri, and monuments supports a Ramesside event as espoused 2000 years ago by the much maligned Manetho !
Regards, Walter
Walter Reinhold Warttig Mattfeld y de la Torre, M.A. Ed.
*********************
31 May 2004
We are told Judah captured Jerusalem and set it on fire, then attacked Hebron and the Negeb.
Judges 1:8-10 RSV
"And the men of Judah fought against Jerusalem, and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and set the city on fire. And afterward the men of Judah went down to fight against the Canaanites who dwelt in the hill country, in the Negeb and in the lowland. And Judah went against the Canaanites who dwelt in Hebron..."
Joshua 6:24) RSV
"And they burned the city [Jericho] with fire and all within it..."
Joshua 11:13 RSV
"But none of the cities that stood on mounds did Israel burn, except Hazor
only; that Joshua burned."
The first generation after the Conquest, remained apart from the Canaanites, but we are told following generations intermarried with them and came to worship their gods :
Judges 2:6-13 RSV
"When Joshua dismissed the people, the people of Israel went each to his
inheritance to take possession of the land. And the people served the LORD
all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders who outlived Joshua,
who had seen all the great work which the LORD had done for Israel...And all
that generation also were gathered to their fathers; and there arose another
generation after them, who did not know the LORD or the work which he had
done for Israel. And the people of Israel did what was evil in the sight of
the LORD and served the Baals; and they forsook the LORD, the God of their
fathers, who brought them out of the land of Egypt; they went after other
gods, from among the gods of the peoples who were around them, and bowed
down to them; and they provoked the LORD to anger. They forsook the LORD,
and served the Baals and the Ashtaroth."
The Bible explained that God "left the Jebusites" to test whether or not Israel would be faithful to him (Judges 3:1).The Bible states that Israel (that is Judah) "failed" God's testing and _intermarried with the Jebusites_, the descendants of the Late Bronze Age Canaanite inhabitants of Jerusalem:
Judges 3:5 RSV
"So the people of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites, the Hittites, the
Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites; and the _JEBUSITES_; and they took
their daughters to themselves for wives, and their own daughters they gave
to their sons; and they served their gods. And the people of Israel did what
was evil in the sight of the LORD, forgetting the LORD their God, and
serving the Baals and the Asheroth."
If Manetho has correctly preserved from Egyptian records two Exoduses from Egypt, the first being the Hyksos Expulsion of the mid-sixteenth century BCE and the second of the Ramesside era, the late 13th Dynasty under Seti I/Amenophis and his co-reigning son Sethos/Ramesses II, then perhaps the the Bible provides the "mechanism" whereby the the two Exoduses came fused into one. That is to say, we are told by Manetho that _both_ expulsions had the people headed for the same place, JERUSALEM. Perhaps the Late Bronze Age traditions of two Exoduses from Egypt (Hyksos and Ramesside) were passed on by Jerusalemite-Jebusite-Canaanite mothers to their Israelite/Judahite sons, and by late Iron II times these two Late Bronze Age events were fused into
one ?
Some scholars understand that the Bible as we have it today, was compiled AT JERUSALEM, and it is AT JERUSALEM that two Late Bronze Age Exodus expulsions come to a conclusion according to Manetho.
I have argued in earlier posts to this list that perhaps the invasion of Hill Country of Canaan from Galilee to the Negev may be of Arameans driven from their marginal pasture lands by famine and war, they capturing first Transjordan then Canaan's Hill Country. If this proposal is correct, then
two Late Bronze Age Exoduses, (if correctly preserved by Manetho ?) from Egypt were fused with an Iron IA invasion from Aram (North Syria) via intermarriages with the Late Bronze Canaanite descendants of Jerusalem (the Jebusites), and by Late Iron II the fusion had been accomplished in oral traditions.
All of the above is of course _pure speculation_. Only an "extensive petrographic analysis of the clays" found in the small portable cooking pots of the many Iron IA villages of Hill Country Canaan (from Galilee to Tel Masos by Arad) and of Transjordan will settle the mystery if these people
came from Egypt via the Sinai, Negev and Arabah and Transjordan, or if they came from Syria. The technology, petrographic analysis exists and has been used in the study of Philistine pottery, now it needs to be applied to the Iron IA Hill Country and Transjordan cooking pots (invaders _need to eat_, and they would bring their portable clay cooking pots with them- the Iron IA villages _do have_ clay cooking pots).
The "old timers" on this list may recall that several years ago I posted my findings that a careful study of the chronologies preserved in the Old and New Testaments caused me to realize that the Bible had preserved a mid-sixteenth Hyksos expulsion for the Exodus, and I attempted to argue this was in fact the Exodus. But, with the passage of time and more study I came to realize the evidence for a Ramesside Exodus as argued by Kitchen and Albright was too compelling and could not be ignored. I eventually concluded that the two events must have been _fused together_. It was ONLY just two days ago that a "re-read" of Manetho caused me to realize that he had
posited two expulsions, Hyksos and Ramesside and that he had provided the details from his understanding of the Egyptian records. If Manetho iscorrect and if I am correct then "the strange early dating" of the Exodus to the Hyksos period by the bible's chronology is at last resolved and
reconciled with the Ramesside details. CF. the following url for my earlier article arguing for a Hyksos Exodus incorporating the chronologies of the Bible, which has not been updated yet with my recent findings (http://www.bibleorigins.net/Exodus1540BCHyksos.html).
Professor Hoffmeier discusses the history of the various Exodus dates (he has excavated in Egypt and is currently excavating in the NW Sinai at New Kingdom sites near Pelusium). He argues for an Exodus in Ramesside times and agrees pretty much with his older colleague, Kenneth A. Kitchen, who is now recently retired.
Hoffmeier :
"...James Jack [The Date of the Exodus in the Light of External
Evidence. Edinburgh. T & T Clark. 1925], who argued for a mid-
fifteenth-century date based on biblical data and what he believed to
be corroborating Egyptian evidence. Based on the Masoretic text of 1
Kings 6:1, which dates the departure from Egypt at 480 years before
Solomon's 4th regnal year, Jack concluded that 1445 BC was the Exodus
date since Solomon's accession date, 970 BC, 970 BC, could be
securely fixed (his 4th year being 966/7), thanks to synchronisms
between biblical and Assyrian texts." (p. 124. James K. Hoffmeier.
Israel in Egypt, The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition.
Oxford University Press. New York. 1996)
"How then is the 480 year figure treated by scholars who reject it as
a literal number ? Petrie suggested that thfe number might have
resulted from tallying up the duration of the Israelite kings from
Saul back to Joshua. However, as Jack showed, if all the periods are
added together, such as the 40 years in Sinai, the lengths of the
Judges, and periods of peace between judges, plus the length of
David's reign, the total is 534 years. On top of this figure, the
duration of Joshua's leadership in Canaan and the length of saul's
kingship, which are not preserved, bring the total close to 600
years." (p. 125.Hoffmeier)
"Another solution, which is widely held by biblical scholars, is to
regard the 480 figure as a number that symbolizes 12 x 40 with 40
representing a generation. With a generation being closer to 25
years, 12 x 25 gives 300 years; when added to Solomon's 4th year, the
Exodus falls within the reign of Ramesses II around 1267. The
reference to the store-city of Ramesses in Exodus 1:11 is viewed as
additional support for placing the oppression in Egypt's 19th
Dynasty. Furthermore, the 13th century dating squared nicely with the
so-called "archaeological date" (ca. 1230-1220 BC) of the Conquest of
the Albright-Wright school. The archaeological evidence of the
settlement of Israel in Canaan, according to Isreal Finkelstein,
dates to the late 13th century or early 12th. Finkelstein's
conclusions do not necessarily contradict an exodus in the Ramesside
period." (p. 125.Hoffmeier)
"It is clear that after over a century of academic inquiry into the date of the
exodus, we are no closer to a solution today...If there is a
prevailing view among historians, biblical scholars and archaeologists,
an exodus in the Ramesside era (1279-1213 BC) is still favored."
(p. 126. Hoffmeier)
Professor Kenneth A. Kitchen, another Egyptologist who has written on dating the Exodus in several books and articles notes the problems in accepting at face value 480 years elapsing from the Exodus to Solomon's 4th year (1 Kings 6:1) :
"The Exodus: Time and Place. 1. Date. Much disputed for a century or
more..."The lazy man's solution" is simply to cite the 480 years
ostensibly given in 1 Kings 6:1 from the Exodus to the 4th year of
Solomon (ca. 966 BC) and so to set the Exodus at ca. 1446 BC.
However, this too simple solution is ruled out by the combined weight
of all the other biblical data plus additional information from
external data. So the interval from the Exodus comes out not at 480
years but as over 553 years (by three unknown amounts), if we trouble
to go carefully through all the known biblical figures for this
period. It s evident that the 480 years cannot cover fully the 553 +
X years. At best, it could be a selection from them, or else it is a
schematic figure (12 X 40 years, or similar). But again, on other
evidence to be considered, a date of ca. 1519 BC (966+553) and
earlier is even less realistic for the Exodus. In Exodus 1:11, the
Hebrews are building Ramesses, whence also they are said to have set
out on the Exodus (Ex 12:37); "the land of Rameses" (Gen 47:11) is a
reflex of the same name and place. This place is Pi-Ramesses, the
east-delta city built by Ramesses II (1279-1213 BC). Thus the end of
the oppression and the start of the Exodus could not precede the
accession of this king at the earliest, i.e., not before 1279 BC on
our presnt knowledge of Egyptian chronology. That is only a little
more than 300 years before Solomon, not 480 or 553. In Ancient Near
Eastern terms, the solution is quite straightforward. There were most
probably consideraable overlaps between contemporary groups of judges
in Israel during the settlement period, hence 533 + X years totals up
all the years of such people, years which in reality were partly
overlapping and fitted within an absolute period of 300 years or so."
(p. 702. Vol.2. Kenneth A. Kitchen. "Exodus, The." David Noel
Freedman, editor. The Anchor BIble Dictionary. 1992. New York.
Doubleday-Anchor. 6 Vols.)
In a later work, Kitchen mentions possibly 591/596 years elapsing between the Exodus and Solomon's 4th year (I note that 967 + 591/596 = 1558/1563 BCE for the Exodus, aligning it with the mid-16th century BCE Hyksos Expulsion) :
"This possibility becomes in effect a certainty if one goes through the date lines between the Exodus and the fourth year of Solomon, the year he began to build his temple, "in the 480th year" since the Exodus (1 Kings 6:1), we are told. Thus, if that year fell circa 967 (cf. dates in chapters 2 and 4 above), a literal adding up would set the Exodus in 1447. But if we take the trouble to actually tote up all the individual figures known from Exodus to Kings in that period, they do NOT add up to 480 years. But rather to 544+x+y+z years, where x= unknown length by Joshua and the elders (minimum, 5/10 years ?), y= rule by Samuel above his stated 20 years (possibly zero), and z= the full reign of Saul (minimum, [3]2 years). The total comes to between 35 and 42 years at least, bringing the 554 years to a minimal 591/596 years. This is certainly not identical with the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1." (pp.202-203. Kenneth Andrew Kitchen. On the Reliability of the Old Testament. 2003. Grand Rapids, Michigan. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company)
As one can see from the above statements made by these two Egyptologists "possessing a keen interest in correlating the Exodus with Egyptian events," although they acknowledged that almost 600 years elapsed according to the bible's internal chronology, reckoned by adding up the total reign years of the various judges, (600 + 966 = 1566 BCE and the Hyksos Expulsion), they _rejected_ the bible's chronology, and opted for a Ramesside Exodus.
My most recent posts have been to show that BOTH Josephus and Manetho were "_right_and_wrong_" the Exodus in the Bible is for me a fusion of the Hyksos Expulsion of the 16th century BCE, the biblical chronology preserving this event (Hoffmeier's nearly 600 years elapsing) and the Bible's preserving Ramesside details like the mention of Rameses, Edom, Moab, Seir , names which appear no earlier than the 13th century BCE in Ramesside documents and monuments.
Regards, Walter
Walter Reinhold Warttig Mattfeld y de la Torre, M.A. Ed.
*****************************************
Update 01 June 2004
The Papyrus Harris I was composed under the authority of Ramesses III, narrating his deeds and that of his father Sethnakht, who brought an end to the anarchy in Egypt under an Asiatic called Irsu.
The source for the "below" transcription of the Harris Papyrus I can be found at the following url :
"The text of the complete Papyrus Harris may be found in Breasted's, 'Records of Egypt', Vol. IV, pages 87-206; Sec. 151-412.
"Former Anarchy
Hear ye, that I may inform you of my benefactions which I did while I was king of the people. The land of Egypt was overthrown from without, and every man was (thrown out) of his right; they had no chief mouth for many years formerly until other times. The land of Egypt was in the hands of chiefs and of rulers of towns; one slew his neighbor, great and small. Other times having come after it, with empty years, Yarsu, a certain Syrian (H-rw) was with them as chief. He set the whole land tributary before him together; he united his companions and plundered their possessions. They made the gods like men, and no offerings were presented in the temples.
The Rule of Setnakht
But when the gods inclined themselves to peace, to set the land (in) its right according to its accustomed manner, they established their son, who came forth from their limbs, to be Ruler, L.H.P., [Life, Health, Prosperity] of every land, upon their great throne, (even) Userkhare-Setepnere-Meriamon, L.H.P., Son of Re, Setnakht-Mererre-Meriamon, L.H.P. He was Khepri-Set, when he is enraged; he set in order the entire land of Egypt; he cleansed the great throne of Egypt; he was Ruler, L.H.P., of the Two Lands, on the throne of Atum. He gave ready faces, which had been turned away. Every man knew his brother who had been walled in. He established the temples in possession of divine offerings, to offer to the gods (psd-t) according to their customary stipulations.
The Rise of Ramses III and Death of Setnakht
He appointed me to be hereditary prince in the place of Keb, I was the great chief mouth of the lands of Egypt, and commander of the whole land united in one. He went to rest in his horizon, like the gods; there was done for him that which was done for Osiris; he was rowed in his king's-barge upon the river, and rested in his eternal house west of Thebes.
War with Northern Asiatics
I extended all the boundaries of Egypt; I overthrew those who invaded them from their lands. I slew the Denyen in their isles, The Thekel and the Peleset were made ashes. The Sherden and the Weshesh of the sea, they were made as those that exist not, taken captive at one time, brought as captives to Egypt, like the sand of the shore. I settled them in strongholds, bound in my name. Numerous were their classes like hundred-thousands. I taxed them all, in clothing and grain from the storehouses and granaries each year.
Accession of Ramses III
Then my father Amon-Re, lord of gods, Re-Atum, and Ptah, beautiful of face, crowned me as Lord of the Two Lands on the throne of him who begat me; I received the office of my father with joy; the land rested and rejoiced in possession of peace, being joyful at seeing me as ruler, L.H.P., of the Two Lands, like Horus when he was called to rule the Two Lands on the throne of Osiris. I was crowned with the etef-crown bearing the ureaus; I assumed the double-plumed diadem, like Tatenen. I sat upon the throne of Hrakhte. I was glad in the regalia, like Atum." (end of transcription from <http://www.specialtyinterests.net/harris.html> )
My interest here is that Manetho claimed that all people residing in Egypt, apparently Egyptian and foreign, who were deemed Leperous, were consigned to service in the stone quarries east of the Nile, but were later settled at Avaris by a Pharaoh Amenophis and son Sethos/Ramesses. Later, they rebelled and invited Asiatics from Jerusalem to invade and co-rule Egypt with them. Manetho tells us that Sethos/Ramesses at the age of 18 accompanied his father Amenophis in expelling the inhabitants of Avaris who fled to Jerusalem, after having earlier plundered the land and its temples for 13 years.
The description of anarchy in Egypt under the Asiatic Irsu in the above Harris Papyrus I, seems to mirror to some degree Manetho's account of "rebelling Egyptians" accompanied by "invading Asiatics," seizing control of Egypt for a space of 13 years.
If this event _is_ what is behind Manetho's expulsion of Asiatics from Avaris, then the expulsion of the Asiatics would be circa 1185 BCE, the first year of Sethnakhte (1185-1182 BCE, I am using Peter A. Clayton's Egyptian Chronology here). Adding 13 years to the beginning of Setnakhte's reign ca. 1185 BCE, would give ca. 1198-1185 BCE for Asiatics to be in some kind of control or influence over Egypt. The Asiatic control/influence of Egypt would appear to embrace the reigns of Seti II (1199-1193 BCE), Siptah (1193-1187 BCE) and Queen Twosret (1187-1185 BCE).
Egyptian records reveal that there was an Asiatic "vizier" called Beya, who served under Seti II through Twosret, as noted by Abraham Malamat. He noted that some scholars have proposed that Irsu is Beya, and that this individual is linked by others to Moses of the Bible. That is to say, the biblical account of Asiatics (Israelites) despoiling the Egyptians of their possessions and jewelry (Ex 12:35-36), and then being expelled in an Exodus, is recalling Setnakhte's ending Asiatic influence over Egypt.
Exodus 6:1 RSV
"But the LORD said the Moses, "Now you shall see what I will do to Pharaoh; for with a strong hand he will send them out, yea, with a strong hand he will drive them out of his land."
Professor Malamat :
"The sequence and chronology of the last rulers of the 19th Dynasty is now believed to be as follows: Seti II (1203-1197 BCE), during whose reign several of the papyri Anastasi were composed, was followed by his son Siptah (1197-1192 BCE), after whose death Queen Tausert (1192-1190 BCE), the widow of Seti II and regent during the reign of Siptah, ascended the throne. Then, in the aftermath of bitter internal struggles, the future Pharaoh Sethnakht (119
