[b-hebrew] The Exodus' mention in Egyptian Annals ?

Peter Kirk peterkirk at qaya.org
Mon Aug 30 07:36:29 EDT 2004


On 30/08/2004 00:38, MarianneLuban at aol.com wrote:

> ...
>
> See this, then. I just put it up now, although it is part of my next 
> book. http://www.geocities.com/scribelist/Lepers.html
>
Thank you. Rohl has little to say about the troubled period of Rameses 
IV-X. He has Rameses III dying in 832, a civil war in 830, a mysterious 
period called "Repeating of Births" (wehem.mesut) 829-820, and Shoshenk 
I founding the 22nd dynasty in 822 and being dominant by 813 with 
Rameses XI, Psusennes I and Pinudjem I subservient to him. All this is 
again simply reporting what Rohl writes, as background in a book mainly 
about the Israelites.

As I said before, Rohl identifies Manetho's Amenophis with Merenptah and 
Osarseph with Amenmesse. He has King Asa of Judah helping Amenmesse, 
Siptah and Tausert, also (speculatively) an Asiatic king-maker Arsa = 
Bey who is also mentioned in 1 Kings 16:8-10. Asa, Arsa and their 
friends are therefore the "descendants of the Hyksos" who are invited 
back to Egypt by Osarseph and expelled by Setnakht. Of course Rohl does 
not link any of this to the Exodus recorded in the book of that name.

I am puzzled by your "The only pharaoh ever called “Rampses” was 
Ramesses III". "Rampses" is a very obvious Greek corruption of "Rameses" 
and so can equally refer to any Pharaoh called Rameses. On Rohl's 
interpretation Rampses father of Amenophis is of course Rameses II.

>
> >... For further remarks on Setnakht in the Classic memory, see
> >
> >http://www.geocities.com/scribelist/setnakht.html
> >
> >
>
> >>Interesting. In the same chapter Rohl dates the Trojan War 872-863 (so
> agreeing with Diodorus Siculus that this was in the time of Setnakht),
> and Menelaus visiting Setnakht (= Thouris = Polybus) soon afterwards. I
> am sure Rohl's chronology could be adjusted sufficiently to have
> Menelaus visiting Tausert instead with your identification, but wouldn't
> the Greeks have realised that it was a woman he visited?>>
>
> They did--and called her Polydamna. She was the one who introduced the 
> Greeks to a drug--nepenthe--which made people forget their woes. What 
> the Greeks didn't realize that this Polydamna was the same as Thouris.


Thank you.

>
> >>But your visit to Egypt by Helen would have to be earlier. Indeed, 
> your synchronisms of Helen visiting Setnakht before the Trojan War and 
> Menelaus visiting Tausert after the Trojan war both work only if 
> Setnakht precedes
> Tausert, and that is what Joe said is impossible.>>
>
> But I didn't say anything about "before" or "after" the Trojan War. It 
> is only said that Proteios, which I equate with Setnakt, ruled around 
> the time of the Trojan War.


My point was that, if we are taking these old Greek stories at all 
literally, Paris and Helen must have visited Egypt before the Trojan 
War, or perhaps during it, because Paris died during the war and Helen 
returned to Sparta after it.

>
> >>I wonder if Rohl tried to bring both of these synchronisms into an 
> earlier version of his chronology but was forced to make adjustments 
> by the evidence from Tausert's tomb.>>
>
> I wouldn't know anything about that. But I do know this: Tawosret was 
> a female regent for a young king named Siptah, a puppet of Bey, the 
> "kingmaker". Bey was obviously allied with Tawosret. My conclusion is 
> that, at some point, this Siptah became troublesome and Tawosret 
> usurped his prerogative--in a Hatshepsut-like maneuver. But it also 
> looks like Siptah killed Bey. Siptah was the son of an unknown pharaoh 
> but his mother had a foreign name, shortened to Tiaa. Sorry, but the 
> tomb of Tawosret, where she is at first shown with Siptah, was usurped 
> by Setnakht. The tomb of Tawosret appears to depict some stages. As I 
> said, at first she is shown with Siptah--as his regent. Then she is 
> shown with her husband, Seti II, his names being written over those of 
> Siptah. Then Setnakht takes over the tomb--his images replacing the 
> earlier ones of Tawosret. It is the sarcophagus of Setnakht that was 
> found in the tomb--not that of Tawosret. Hers was taken out in ancient 
> times and later reused to hold the body of a Ramesside prince. So 
> Tawosret was never buried in that tomb.
>
I'm not sure what your "Sorry" is about, but there is nothing here 
inconsistent with what Rohl writes.

-- 
Peter Kirk
peter at qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk at qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/





More information about the b-hebrew mailing list