The Pharoah of the Exodus was the Hyksos king Apophis.

sooda · Feb 21, 2019

gnostic said:
The problem with the Old Testament - particularly the Torah those books that were attributed to Moses - is that that were written from 7th century to the late 6th century or to mid-5th century BCE.

There were no 2nd millennium BCE written scriptures called the “Genesis” and “Exodus” in this time period, the Middle Bronze Age and Late Bronze Age.

For instance, paleo-Hebrew (ancient Hebrew) alphabet didn’t exist until the around the 10th century BCE (eg the Gezer Calendar and the Zayit Stone). These are the earliest literary evidences of Hebrew writings, but it make no mention of anything in regarding to Genesis and Exodus story, no mention of any kings (eg no David and Solomon, no Rehoboam and Jeroboam), that ruled at the time of these inscriptions were written.

Before this was Proto-Canaanite alphabet (12th and 11th century BCE), which paleo-Hebrew alphabet were derived from.

But in much of the 2nd millennium BCE, the most common way of writing (from Canaan and Syria to Babylonia and Elam) were the cuneiform, not the alphabet.

The invention of cuneiform probably originated in the city of Uruk, in which most translations of Genesis 10 referred to as Erech, a city supposed founded by Nimrod, a great grandson of Noah.

The writing is pre-Sumerian cuneiform, or what experts called proto-Sumerian, have been dated to 3500-3400 BCE, where it was found at Uruk IV.

Sumerian proper, started with Jemdet Nasir period (3100 - 2900 BCE). Much of The 4th millennium BCE called this period the “Uruk period”, c 4000 to c 3100 BCE, which coincide with use of both stone and copper tools, Chalcolithic period.

Like Jericho, Uruk was repeatedly built over older layer of the city. And the earliest layer, Uruk XII was built around 5000 BCE, so really the whole Nimrod and the Tower of Babel episodes are clearly false.

But going back to Egypt. There are no evidences to support that Israelites were living as independent and then as slaves in the 2nd millennium BCE, no evidences to support the Hyksos were Israelites or Jews. And there are no evidences to support Joshua conquering Canaan, after Moses’ death.

The Exodus’ Rameses just highlighted another thing wrong with book, contradicting archaeological evidences.

Another error is that of Genesis 10, which also claimed that Egypt didn’t exist until Ham’s son Mizraim or Egypt was born. Egyptian culture predated the 1st dynasty of Egypt. And if the Flood falls some times in the 2nd half of 3rd millennium BCE, then the pyramids of Saqqara and Giza would also predated the Flood, which would make Genesis claim false about Egypt.

Sounds to me like you have really studied Samuel Kramer's History Begins at Sumer. You know your stuff. The Bible stories are great, but they aren't history.

sooda · Feb 21, 2019

Ario said:
That's not really what the archaeological evidence suggests. See my previous comments.

They have excavated the worker camps where the people who built the Pyramids lived.. Apparently the construction was a national project that Egyptians worked on after the Nile flooded and the planting was done. The Jews probably were never slaves in Egypt.

However there was a Jewish garrison (and synagogue) on Elephantine Island in the Nile by 5th Century BC.

Ario · Feb 21, 2019

sooda said:
They have excavated the worker camps where the people who built the Pyramids lived.. Apparently the construction was a national project that Egyptians worked on after the Nile flooded and the planting was done. The Jews probably were never slaves in Egypt.

However there was a Jewish garrison (and synagogue) on Elephantine Island in the Nile by 5th Century BC.

The pyramids don’t have anything to do with this. The bible doesn’t claim that Jews built the pyramids. It talks about israelites being enslaved and made to build ‘store cities’ for the pharaoh. There’s evidence that semites were indeed enslaved during the Hyksos period at Avaris, as I noted in my previous comments. You seem to ignore what I write and just repeat your preconceived notions.

gnostic · Feb 21, 2019

sooda said:
Sounds to me like you have really studied Samuel Kramer's History Begins at Sumer. You know your stuff. The Bible stories are great, but they aren't history.

No, I haven't read Samuel Kramer, but I know that we deeply indebted to him with his involvement in Sumerian and Babylonian literature. I only know of Kramer's works through Andrew George's introduction in Epic Of Gilgamesh: A New Translation (Penguin Classics, 1999).

I am big lover in all things about myths and legends, which is the main reason why I started a website, called Timeless Myths in 1999. I was meant to start a new website called Myths of the Sands, which would include myths from Egypt, Sumer, Babylonia and Ugarit, that has been indefinitely put in the back-burner. I may not ever get this new site up, but I do have my research notes and some of pages written up.

As to the bible. Only very few things in the bible are considered "history".

The bible is never meant to be history, especially from Adam in Genesis to Solomon in 1 Kings.

We only actual "history" during the stages of kingdoms of Israel and of Judah, when we do get independent sources (eg Assyrian annals) that speak of some of the kings of their respective kingdoms, for instance, Tiglath-Pileser III receiving tributes of Ahaz of Judah, and for invasions of Israel (ie King Pekah) and Aramaic Damascus (King Rezin).

Things like Creation (Genesis 1-3), Flood (6-8), the post-Flood Table of Nations (Genesis 10), the Tower of Babel (11), the story of the 3 patriarchs, and Joseph in Egypt, none of these are history.

Then there are stories of Moses and Joshua, and the conquests of Canaan, again we have no independent records of any of these events, and no archaeological evidences.

And it does help, when the stories of Abraham, Jacob and Joseph, and of Moses, having been in Egypt, also so the stories say, not one time did ever mention the name of any pharaoh.

We verify the reigns of Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Pekah, etc, against Assyrian and Babylonian sources because of Assyrian involvement with Judah/Israel politics, but the same cannot be said about Abraham, Joseph and Moses.

I am well-aware of Josephus' interpretation of Manetho's Hyksos, and Josephus' faulty "Shepherd Kings".

Don't get me wrong, Flavius Josephus is a decent historian, but he is only "competent" recording history of his own time and a few centuries before he was born, but incompetent in regarding to the Bronze Age Egypt and Levant, because he relied too much on the scriptures.

gnostic · Feb 21, 2019

sooda said:
They have excavated the worker camps where the people who built the Pyramids lived.. Apparently the construction was a national project that Egyptians worked on after the Nile flooded and the planting was done. The Jews probably were never slaves in Egypt.

However there was a Jewish garrison (and synagogue) on Elephantine Island in the Nile by 5th Century BC.

Ario said:
The pyramids don’t have anything to do with this. The bible doesn’t claim that Jews built the pyramids. It talks about israelites being enslaved and made to build ‘store cities’ for the pharaoh. There’s evidence that semites were indeed enslaved during the Hyksos period at Avaris, as I noted in my previous comments. You seem to ignore what I write and just repeat your preconceived notions.

You are correct, Ario, that Jews has nothing to do with pyramid construction.

But according to Genesis 10, Egypt didn't exist UNTIL AFTER THE FLOOD, with Egypt or Mizraim being the son of Ham, one of the survivors of the Flood.

Based on the calculation of the reigns and generations of patriarchs, the Flood is estimated to set around, between 2400 and 2100 BCE.

The pyramids of Giza were built around the 26th century BCE, or in the case of the largest pyramid, the tomb of Khufu (reign c 2580 - c 2560 BCE). Khufu was the 2nd king of the 4th dynasty. His father Sneferu started the dynasty and built several pyramids himself (Sneferu's Red Pyramid is the first true pyramid).

The pyramid of Khufu is the largest pyramid in Egypt, but not the oldest pyramid. The first pyramid was at Saqqara, known as the Step Pyramid of Djoser (reign c 2686 - 2649 BCE), founder of the 3rd dynasty.

The 1st dynasty go back to c 3100 BCE (beginning with Menes or Narmer uniting Upper and Lower Egypt into one kingdom), but Egyptian culture predated the 1st dynasty, eg Naqada culture in Upper Egypt and the contemparory El Omari culture of Lower Egypt.

My point is that Egyptian cultures change over time, but though styles may change, the changes were incremental, so it is possible to see the "Egyptian" in predynastic period (c 4000 - c 3100 BCE) evolving into styles of dynastic period.

And because of that, we know that Genesis 10 is wrong, regarding to Egypt.

sooda · Feb 22, 2019

Ario said:
^ Unfortunately David Rohl can't see the wood for the trees and thinks that the exodus happened before the Hyksos period. This is partly because he wants to fit everything into his nutty 'new chronology' which requires redating everything by hundreds of years. And it also doesn't seem to occur to him that the Hyksos could have been the pharoahs of the Exodus, because, you know, they weren't Egyptian. Similarly the archaeologist Manfred Bietak, who has been excavating Avaris, dismisses the idea that all the asiatics and shepherds he keeps on finding there could have anything to do with the Exodus, because everyone knows that the asiatic Hyksos were rulers and not slaves. Again, it doesn't occur to him that the Israelites could have been enslaved by the Hyksos. I also get the impression that he is very anti the idea of the exodus having any real historical basis, despite the fact that he keeps on digging up evidence which screams EXODUS! right at him. In the video he wears a Palestinian-type headscarf, which might be an indication of his political persuasions. Or maybe he has to keep his mouth shut and play along to ensure that he will be permitted to continue excavating there by the Egyptian authorities. I've also not seen him acknowledge that the Hyksos rulers may have been of Indo-European or Hurrian origin, despite all the Indo-European clues such as horses, horse burials, chariots, novel metalworking techniques etc that he also documents in his report.

Palestinians believe in the Exodus.. most Jewish scholars no longer do not.

gnostic · Feb 22, 2019

Ario said:
4) Hyksos rule in Egypt collapsed and they were driven out by Ahmose I.

5) Avaris was abandoned.

At some point before 1500 BC Jericho was destroyed by an invading army. So much for the claim that there is no evidence for the conquest of Joshua.

The problem here with you identifying the Hyksos with Moses’ Israelites, is that we know that Ahmose I ruled from 1549 to 1524 BCE. And that we know that the expulsion of the Hyksos came about during Ahmose’s reign.

I think that we can agree with both of these 2 points I’ve made above. Right?

But the military confrontations between Egyptians and Hyksos occurred through some years of fighting that predated Ahmose’s reign.

The rebellion started with Ahmose’s father, Seqenenre Tao, a king of the 17th dynasty, ruling the Upper Egypt with Thebes as its capital. It was then Ahmose’s brother, Kamose, who succeeded their father and ruled only 3 years before Ahmose succeeded him.

But Ahmose didn’t continue his father and brother fight while Ahmose was still very young when he succeeded Kamose. His mother Ahhotep served as regent, until Ahmose came of age. So while Ahmose was growing into his role as king, his mother kept the Theban army together, until he was old enough to take command; what we don’t know is how long the regency lasted for, and when Ahmose became active as a warrior.

The identity with Hyksos falls apart, because there were no rebellion and no fighting in Exodus.

According to Exodus, Moses demanded the liberation of Hebrew slaves, after some plagues and the slaying of first born, the king released the Israelites (Exodus 12). All this was done without fighting.

That’s totally different from Ahmose and the Hyksos.

I find it highly doubtful that the Israelites were Ahmose.

Plus, as to Jericho. Well, the most approximate date for the specific destruction and abandonment of Jericho in the mid-2nd millennium BCE, has been dated to anywhere between 1630 and 1550, but the most recent date put the destruction a little earlier, to about 1573 BCE.

The destruction of Jericho in Joshua, was 40 years after the start of Exodus (Exo 12), but with archaeological evidence of Jericho (c 1573 BCE), the order is the other way around, with Jericho then Hyksos expulsion and Ahmose’s reign (c 1549 BCE).

Do you not see a problem, here?

sooda · Feb 22, 2019

gnostic said:
No, I haven't read Samuel Kramer, but I know that we deeply indebted to him with his involvement in Sumerian and Babylonian literature. I only know of Kramer's works through Andrew George's introduction in Epic Of Gilgamesh: A New Translation (Penguin Classics, 1999).

I am big lover in all things about myths and legends, which is the main reason why I started a website, called Timeless Myths in 1999. I was meant to start a new website called Myths of the Sands, which would include myths from Egypt, Sumer, Babylonia and Ugarit, that has been indefinitely put in the back-burner. I may not ever get this new site up, but I do have my research notes and some of pages written up.

As to the bible. Only very few things in the bible are considered "history".

The bible is never meant to be history, especially from Adam in Genesis to Solomon in 1 Kings.

We only actual "history" during the stages of kingdoms of Israel and of Judah, when we do get independent sources (eg Assyrian annals) that speak of some of the kings of their respective kingdoms, for instance, Tiglath-Pileser III receiving tributes of Ahaz of Judah, and for invasions of Israel (ie King Pekah) and Aramaic Damascus (King Rezin).

Things like Creation (Genesis 1-3), Flood (6-8), the post-Flood Table of Nations (Genesis 10), the Tower of Babel (11), the story of the 3 patriarchs, and Joseph in Egypt, none of these are history.

Then there are stories of Moses and Joshua, and the conquests of Canaan, again we have no independent records of any of these events, and no archaeological evidences.

And it does help, when the stories of Abraham, Jacob and Joseph, and of Moses, having been in Egypt, also so the stories say, not one time did ever mention the name of any pharaoh.

We verify the reigns of Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Pekah, etc, against Assyrian and Babylonian sources because of Assyrian involvement with Judah/Israel politics, but the same cannot be said about Abraham, Joseph and Moses.

I am well-aware of Josephus' interpretation of Manetho's Hyksos, and Josephus' faulty "Shepherd Kings".

Don't get me wrong, Flavius Josephus is a decent historian, but he is only "competent" recording history of his own time and a few centuries before he was born, but incompetent in regarding to the Bronze Age Egypt and Levant, because he relied too much on the scriptures.

While Genesis and Exodus are not history they do serve to give the Hebrews an historical narrative and separate identity. I worry about all those guys running around looking for the Ark.

sooda · Feb 22, 2019

TagliatelliMonster said:
afaik, what the archeological evidence suggests, is that israelites never were massively enslaved in egypt, that no exodus ever took place and that mozes is a fictional character...

That early israelites are actually just lower class caananites that revolted against the caananite elites and the reïnvented their own history and compiled that into the OT.

The early Israelites probably were landless, unaffiliated Canaanite Bedouin ..

gnostic · Feb 22, 2019

sooda said:
While Genesis and Exodus are not history they do serve to give the Hebrews an historical narrative and separate identity. I worry about all those guys running around looking for the Ark.

It is what I would call a "origin myth" or "national myth", which supposed is the myth of the origin of a specific group of people, or tribe or civilisation.

Many cultures have such myths.

The Sumerian myths for example, the creation of humans, were not just talking about the whole of mankind, but them "Sumerians" in particular, because some of these stories referred to themselves as the "black-headed people", meaning the Sumerians were black-haired people.

I am no anthropologist, nor an archaeologist, but I think during the Bronze Age, particularly in the 2nd millennium BCE, the Canaanites and Israelites were most likely indistinguishable from one another.

Ario · Feb 22, 2019

gnostic said:
The problem here with you identifying the Hyksos with Moses’ Israelites, is that we know that Ahmose I ruled from 1549 to 1524 BCE. And that we know that the expulsion of the Hyksos came about during Ahmose’s reign.

Those dates are approximate.

"Ahmose's reign can be fairly accurately dated using the Heliacal rise of Sirius in his successor's reign, but because of disputes over from where the observation was made, he has been assigned a reign from 1570–1546, 1560–1537 and 1551–1527 by various sources.[15][16] Manetho supposedly gives Ahmose a reign of 25 years and 4 months[15] (but, as Manetho called the first ruler of his dynasty "Tethmosis", he probably intended someone else). This figure is seemingly supported by a 'Year 22' inscription from his reign at the stone quarries of Tura.[17] A medical examination of his mummy indicates that he died when he was about thirty-five, supporting a 25-year reign if he came to the throne at the age of 10.[15] The radiocarbon date range for the start of his reign is 1570–1544 BC, the mean point of which is 1557 BC.[18]"

Ahmose I - Wikipedia

"According to Exodus, Moses demanded the liberation of Hebrew slaves, after some plagues and the slaying of first born, the king released the Israelites (Exodus 12). All this was done without fighting. That’s totally different from Ahmose and the Hyksos."

Maybe you didn't read my initial post and other comments. I'm saying the Hyksos invaded Egypt and enslaved the Israelites, not that the Israelites were the Hyksos.

gnostic · Feb 22, 2019

Ario said:
Those dates are approximate.

"Ahmose's reign can be fairly accurately dated using the Heliacal rise of Sirius in his successor's reign, but because of disputes over from where the observation was made, he has been assigned a reign from 1570–1546, 1560–1537 and 1551–1527 by various sources.[15][16] Manetho supposedly gives Ahmose a reign of 25 years and 4 months[15] (but, as Manetho called the first ruler of his dynasty "Tethmosis", he probably intended someone else). This figure is seemingly supported by a 'Year 22' inscription from his reign at the stone quarries of Tura.[17] A medical examination of his mummy indicates that he died when he was about thirty-five, supporting a 25-year reign if he came to the throne at the age of 10.[15] The radiocarbon date range for the start of his reign is 1570–1544 BC, the mean point of which is 1557 BC.[18]"

Ahmose I - Wikipedia

"According to Exodus, Moses demanded the liberation of Hebrew slaves, after some plagues and the slaying of first born, the king released the Israelites (Exodus 12). All this was done without fighting. That’s totally different from Ahmose and the Hyksos."

Maybe you didn't read my initial post and other comments. I'm saying the Hyksos invaded Egypt and enslaved the Israelites, not that the Israelites were the Hyksos.

I don’t think you are thinking logically.

Regardless of when he ruled of Egypt, the Hyksos were driven out of Egypt AFTER Jericho had been abandoned. Historically and archaeologically, the order was:

Jericho deserted in 1573 BCE, based on the latest dating.
Hyksos final expulsion midway through Ahmose’s reign, so somewhere between 1544 and 1536 BCE.

You need to remember that Ahmose may have captured Avaris 1550 or 1549 BCE, and weakened his enemies, but the Hyksos were still present in Lower Egypt some years later.

Are you forgetting the order in Exodus and Joshua? The order of events in the Bible are in reverse:

Israelites leaving Egypt (Exodus 12:37)
Joshua cause the destruction of Jericho (Joshua 6).

Plus, you are still forgetting the 40 years gap between exodus and Jericho.

To summarize: Not only the Bible order of events contradict those of historical Hyksos and Jericho, there are no 40-year gap between Jericho and the Hyksos’ expulsion.

Plus the history of Ahmose and the Hyksos were at war with one another. But there were no battles between Egyptians and Israelites, which is another contradiction, between history and religion.

Do you not see the illogical of your argument?

Ario · Feb 22, 2019

gnostic said:
Plus the history of Ahmose and the Hyksos were at war with one another. But there were no battles between Egyptians and Israelites, which is another contradiction, between history and religion.

How many times do I need to say this to you. I am not claiming that the Hyksos were the Israelites, ok?

gnostic · Feb 23, 2019

Ario said:
How many times do I need to say this to you. I am not claiming that the Hyksos were the Israelites, ok?

I’m sorry, Ario.

In the midst of arguing over Avaris and Pi-Ramesses, I lost track what you said earlier. My apologies.

sooda · Feb 23, 2019

gnostic said:
I’m sorry, Ario.

In the midst of arguing over Avaris and Pi-Ramesses, I lost track what you said earlier. My apologies.

Gnostics are interesting.. They must have been very severe. Have you looked into the Nag Hammadi?

gnostic · Feb 23, 2019

sooda said:
Gnostics are interesting.. They must have been very severe. Have you looked into the Nag Hammadi?

Yes, I have, back in 2005 to 2007.

I have not read all of these codices, because my main focus were on creation story, like the Secret Book of John, The Reality of the Rulers, and On Origin of the World.

I used to have a website called Dark Mirrors of Heaven, in which I retold the Gnostic creation myth, using those 3 books I mentioned above.

But also interesting reading were the Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Philip, Gospel of Mary Magdalene, The Thunder, Perfect Mind, and a few others,

sooda · Apr 4, 2019

Ario said:
^ Unfortunately David Rohl can't see the wood for the trees and thinks that the exodus happened before the Hyksos period. This is partly because he wants to fit everything into his nutty 'new chronology' which requires redating everything by hundreds of years.

And it also doesn't seem to occur to him that the Hyksos could have been the pharoahs of the Exodus, because, you know, they weren't Egyptian. Similarly the archaeologist Manfred Bietak, who has been excavating Avaris, dismisses the idea that all the asiatics and shepherds he keeps on finding there could have anything to do with the Exodus, because everyone knows that the asiatic Hyksos were rulers and not slaves.

Again, it doesn't occur to him that the Israelites could have been enslaved by the Hyksos. I also get the impression that he is very anti the idea of the exodus having any real historical basis, despite the fact that he keeps on digging up evidence which screams EXODUS! right at him. In the video he wears a Palestinian-type headscarf, which might be an indication of his political persuasions. Or maybe he has to keep his mouth shut and play along to ensure that he will be permitted to continue excavating there by the Egyptian authorities.

I've also not seen him acknowledge that the Hyksos rulers may have been of Indo-European or Hurrian origin, despite all the Indo-European clues such as horses, horse burials, chariots, novel metalworking techniques etc that he also documents in his report.

I thought the notion that the Hyksos were of Hurrian origin was a given.

The Hurrian princes took advantage of the general disorder: in about 1550 BC a great Hurrian kingdom called Mitanni arose in northern Mesopotamia and soon contested the domination of Syria with the Hittites.

All these kingdoms relied upon a new military technology, the horsed chariot and the composite bow.

The Hurrians (1500 - 1270 BC)
www.smie.co/html/cultural_history/hurrians/hurrians_1.shtml
Towards the end of their existence the Hittites adopted the Hurrian religion. The Hurrians had a rich pantheon. They had many rituals and religious ceremonies. ... Breeding and training horses were also important, possibly to be used with the chariots. ... they were known for making other military hardware, such as composite bows and siege rams ...

sooda · Apr 4, 2019

Ario said:
That's not really what the archaeological evidence suggests. See my previous comments.

Have you read much about the Habiru?

Scholars agree that there is an Akkadian equivalent in Hapiru. The reference to the Apiru in ancient Egyptian literature is simply a different name for the same group of people know elsewhere as Habiru.

Kangaroo Feathers · Apr 4, 2019

Ario said:
Many people have surmised that maybe the Hyksos were the Israelites of the Bible. Josephus made this claim, based on the Egyptian Manetho. However this seems to me to be based on a simple mistake, which results in a lot of confusion. The mistake is that the Hyksos were not the Israelites, they were instead the people who enslaved the Israelites. The available archaeological and historical evidence points to the Exodus occuring at the time of the Hyksos, however the idea that the Hyksos were the Israelites doesn't make sense as they were rulers not slaves. Hence a lot of people dismiss the notion that it could have occurred at that time.

Does anyone know of any scholars who have argued for the Hyksos being the Pharaohs of the Exodus?

You're assuming the Biblical account is historically accurate.

Kangaroo Feathers · Apr 4, 2019

Ario said:
See my earlier comment in response to sooda. According to archaeological dating, Jericho was destroyed by an invading army around 1500 BC. This is around 40 years after the approximate date of the end of the Hyksos period. It fits well with the exodus story if it happened in the Hyksos period. The reason you say ‘there is no evidence’ is because you think the evidence that actually exists is in the wrong time period.

That's not really what the archaeological evidence suggests. See my previous comments.

You seem to be running into the "Abraham Lincoln was a real person, therefore Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is true" problem. Jericho was destroyed by an invading army. Several, IIRC. Even if one of these events is the source event the Exodus story is based on, it doesn't make anything else in the Exodus story true.

Archaeological evidence is evidence only of the thing it is evidence of, if you follow me. Be careful not to claim archaeological evidence of one thing is necessarily archaeological evidence of something else.

The Pharoah of the Exodus was the Hyksos king Apophis.

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

New Member

The Lost One

The Lost One

Veteran Member

The Lost One

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

The Lost One

New Member

The Lost One

New Member

The Lost One

Veteran Member

The Lost One

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...