Dick Gagel asks “isn’t the XII [Dynasty of Egypt] too early?” for Moses.

Dear Damien,

I must have had your paper on Moses ages ago, made my notes in the margin but never shared my understanding of the man’s early life with you.

Used the following to gainsay those who called him and the Exodus “a myth”.

It would appear we differ on both dynasties and chronology – isn’t the XII too early?

MOSES was a general, as fully described by Josephus in Antiquities, Book II, ch X.

In ch XI, after he had virtually saved Egypt as its victorious general over the Ethiopians/Cushites, he had to flee for his life from an assassination plot. He was heir to a throne in Egypt as the ruler had a daughter but no grandchildren. Josephus: “if Moses had been slain, there was no one, either a kin or adopted, that had any oracle on his side for pretending to the crown of Egypt.” Here are our clues – a dynasty in which Moses is General, and one which effectively ended at the point in history that Moses fled and did not regain authority in the land. There is such a dynasty which also exercised jurisdiction in the Northeastern Delta where Israel dwelt and Moses was found – Dynasty XIII.

The total length of this dynasty according to Africanus’ and Eusebius’ epitomes from Manetho was 453 years under 60 rulers. But the version of Barbarus provides a missing detail from Manetho. It reveals that for a time the court was not only at Thebes, but at Bubastis in the Delta for the first 153 years (Alfred Schoene’s edition of Eusebius, p. 214).

In the Turin Canon catalogue of kings of the thirteenth dynasty, listed number 17, is “The General” with the throne name of Semenkhkare (Gardiner’s Egypt of the Pharaohs, p. 440; and Weigall’s History of the Pharaohs, pp 136, 151-152). The Egyptian word for “the General” was Mermeshoi – not in all dynastic history does this title appear again as the personal name of a ruler of Egypt.

When Moses was made General or Commander of the Troops, he automatically inherited royal authority, as only kings could have the supreme command of the army, explaining his appearance in the list. Before the rise to power of this famous General, the thirteenth dynasty was of Asiatic blood. Its kings at time bore the epithet “the Asiatic” – hence no basic prejudice in adopting the Hebrew child Moses into the family. (See volume II, ch II of the revised Cambridge Ancient History, ed.1962.)

The sixteenth king listed in the Turin Canon – just before “the General” – is Userkare Khendjer – the latter being an un-Egyptian personal name. He ruled over the Delta as well as Upper Egypt. A pyramid of his has been found at South Saqqara. No descendant of his is known to have succeeded to the throne. Though nothing more is known of this man’s family, every evidence points to him as the Pharaoh whose daughter is mentioned in the book of Exodus. Within a few years the influence of this dynasty in the eastern Delta ceased.

The kings of this obscure period often have their names associated with king Neferkare (Turin Canon) on royal seals who is Phiops of Manetho, and commonly known as Pepi the Great. Here is the final proof that these minor rulers of Dynasty XIII were contemporaneous with the last great Pharaoh of the sixth dynasty of Memphis – the pharaoh of the Oppression. More than one name on a scarab has puzzled many historians, who view Egypt as generally ruled by one king at a time, but literally hundreds of such seals have been found. They are generally treated with discreet silence, for the implication of these seals would revolutionise the history of Egypt. (See The Sceptre of Egypt, by William C Hayes,, Vol.I, p.342)

Moses is finally able to return to Egypt “and it came to pass in the course of those many days that the king of Egypt died” (Ex. 2:23) confirms that it was a long wait as Pepi the Great ruled for 94 years and died at age 100, succeeded by his son Menthesuphis (Manetho) or Merenre II-Antyemzaef (Turin Canon) – the Pharaoh of the Exodus who ruled only one year 1487-1486, perishing in the Red Sea.

His widow Nitocris (Manetho) or Nitokerty (Turin Canon) ruled 12 years, followed by their son Neferka “the younger” – his first born elder brother and heir presumptive having died at the time of the Exodus.

Manetho ends his list here as the invading Hyksos having by then taken full control of the country with their Dynasty XV and ruled Egypt for the next 400 years.

I feel we are on safe ground to designate Pepi the Great as the oppressive pharaoh. Userkare Kendjer with an ethnic affinity with the Hebrews does not strictly apply the rules emanating from Memphis by elevating Moses who must later have gained huge popularity following his military success. Those factors may well have raised serious concerns at Memphis HO, prompting Pepi the Great to seek Moses’ death by giving those assassination orders to the Bubastis court, and also maintaining his fatwa against Moses till the end of his life and reign.

Best regards
….

Damien Mackey replies:

 
Dear Dick

I just remembered that I, a few months ago, wrote a proposed synthesis of the biblical era, from Abraham to the Exodus, with the corresponding Egyptian history (and archaeology). See my:

 

Connecting the Biblical Patriarchs
to Ancient Egypt

 

http://moseseditor.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/connecting-biblical-patriarchs-to.html

The article still has to be finished, but it already contains the basis of what my view is. Fundamental to my reconstruction are the following (after that I am tentative):

-The archaeological period from Abram at the time of the four Mesopotamian kings, to the Exodus, is bookended by Abram in Late Chalcolithic and Ghassul IV (Transjordan) and the Exodus Israelites as the Middle Bronze I (MBI) people.

-According to this archaeological evidence, Abram was contemporaneous with pharaoh Narmer, who may even have been the Pharaoh of Abram and Sarai. This latter, the biblical Abimelech pharaoh of Abraham and Isaac, was clearly a very long-reigning ruler, which would suit pharaoh Aha, the first dynastic king (who may have been Narmer, and Menes).

-Joseph is surely Imhotep, and Ptah-hotep.

-I fully accept the expert testimony of Dr R. Cohen (Israelites as MBI) and Professor Emmanuel Anati (Har Karkom is Mount Sinai).

-Anati notes (and I accept this) that the story of the Egyptian Sinuhe shares ‘a common matrix’ with that of Moses fleeing Egypt for Midian. (Obviously there are some vast differences as well between these two tales). That nails Moses to Late Amenemes I and early Sesostris I. Revisionists have found some striking 12^th dynasty correlations with the Exodus account (e.g. those bricks mixed with straw).

-The MBI people do just what the Israelites did in their trek through the Paran desert, Transjordania and into Palestine, where Early Bronze Jericho falls.
 

The 13^thdynasty may possibly be partly contemporaneous with the life of Moses.

But be careful. The name, “Moses”, did not mean “General”. It was given to Moses with the meaning of being “drawn from the water” (Exodus 2:10): “She named him Moses, saying, “I drew him out of the water”.” So that might shake your correspondence between Mermoshis and Userkare K.

(Perhaps Joseph, not Moses, was more likely to have left a dynasty of Asiatics).

You will see that I, too, have the 6^th dynasty contemporaneous with the era of Moses, though I have not yet been able fully to integrate it all. Given my synthesis of dynasties (following Courville’s clue but not his model), then some 13^th dynasty princes (or whatever they were) may well have been contemporaneous with the 6^th dynasty’s Neferkare (Pepi the Great).

But Pepi the Great was not a founder, a “new king” (exodus 1:8), so you perhaps need to allow for two major pharaohs before the Pharaoh of the Oppression: namely, the founder Pharaoh and then, as according to the Artapanus tradition, the “Chenephres”(Neferkare?) who married Moses’ Egyptian ‘mother’, “Merris” (Meresankh, or Meres-ankh).

Artapanus’s“Chenephres” (Neferkare) and “Merris” pattern is fulfilled both with Chephren and Ankhesenmerire (i.e. Meresankh), in the 4^th dynasty, and perhaps with Huni (Neferkare) and Meresankh, as explained in the above article, in relation to Sneferu (as Moses).

Merenre, followed by Nitocris, then the Hyksos, is a pattern that I, too, have previously proposed for the finale – but without properly having been able to blend the entire 6^th dynasty with the biblical picture.
 

I hope that this is helpful

Damien.

Joseph Davidovits claims error or forgery on "Israel Stele".



Error or forgery on the Stele of Merneptah, known as Israel Stele

Archaeology Books News29 juil 2010

....

The objectives of this article are twofold. First of all, it presents one information omitted in Chapter 11 of my last book The Lost Fresco and the Bible (De cette fresque naquit la Bible). Then, it denounces an error, or more probably the forgery of an archaeological document of the greatest importance.

The stele of Merneptah contains the oldest mention of Israel in an extra-biblical document. Flinders Petrie discovered it in 1896, at Thebes, Egypt, in Merneptah’s mortuary temple. Merneptah was the son of Ramses II. The stele describes the military campaign undertaken in 1207 B.C. against the Libyans, and, eventually a campaign to Canaan by which a group of people named Israel would have been destroyed. One reads in lines 26 to 28 of this stele, according to the official translation: The princes are prostrate, they say: let us be in peace! Nobody any more raises the head among the Nine Arcs. Tehenu is destroyed; Khati (Hittites) are in peace; Canaan is captive like its demons, Ashkelon is conquered; Gezer is captured; Yanoam became non-existent; Israel is devastated, it does not have more seed; Kharu became the widow of Egypt. All these countries are pacified. All those, which were in revolt were subdued by the king of Egypt of North and the South…
Since its discovery in 1896, the biblical historians of any obedience have tried to demonstrate the validity of the destruction of Israel by the armies of Pharaoh. However this interpretation is false and the polemical discussions around it have no grounds.

Line 27

The hieroglyphic reading of the word translated by Israel is “ iisii-r-iar ” and, in my book, I largely extended on its meaning. I have demonstrated that « iisii-r-iar » is in fact an egyptian sentence meaning: those exiled because of their sin. Pharaohs Ramsès II and Merneptah used this sentence when talking about the exiled Akhenaton’s followers, forced to quit Egypt. The name of this people iisii-r-iar changed into Israël, through the alteration of the letter r into l.
I had however omitted a detail, discussed in this present article. It relates to the sentence Yanoam became non-existent, which directly precedes the mention “ iisii-r-iar ”. As I will show it here, this translation is entirely false, because it results from the falsification of one hieroglyphic sign.
To begin with, let us look at the transliteration of line 27 of the stele, published in 1909 (cf: P. Lacau, Steles of the new empire (general Catalogue of Egyptian antiquities of the Museum of Cairo, Cairo, 1909):

Line 27, reading from left to right, with the mention “sic”

We notice that in the sentence Yanoam became non-existent a group of hieroglyphs (the eye Re + the vulture aa) is not translated, but is marked sic. The transcription of the hieroglyph represented by the bird vulture is thus doubtful, just like the sentence Yanoam became non-existent. Consequently, the significance of the remainder of the line, in particular the part comprising “ iisii-r-iar”, Israel, is also doubtful.

The tracing with chalk

The engraving of the hieroglyphs on this stele is rather coarse. This explains why, since its discovery by Flinders Petrie in 1896, one over-traced them with a chalk stick, in order to highlight them and to facilitate their reading.



Chalk tracing on the hieroglyphs of the line containing sic, photograph of the original, reading from right to left. (click on the figure to enhance it)

The drawing with chalk of the vulture aa is precise, however it carries the mention: doubtful reading sic. When I began the study of this stele, at the end of the Nineties, I wondered why this vulture transcription posed problem, and was not translated. I did not find any answer in the literature, although there are nearly 200 articles published on the Israel Stele.
 During our last visit to the Cairo Museum, I had asked my son Ralph to photograph this particular part of the stele, under the best possible conditions, by accentuating any contrasts, in order to visualize the true engraving of this hieroglyph sic.

Error or forgery ?

In the photograph below one compares the letter aa (the vulture) in the upper line 26, marked A, with the same letter in line 27 (sic), marked B.


Tracing with chalk of the hieroglyph aa in the upper line 26 and the one in line 27 containing sic, photograph of the original, reading from right to left. (click on the figure to enhance it).

We notice that for the letter marked A, the white chalk drawing follows perfectly the engraving of the hieroglyph (the vulture). On the contrary, for the letter (sic) marked B, the chalk drawing of the neck and the head of the vulture continues outside of the carving. Thus, the engraving does not correspond to this letter aa. It is a forgery.
Now, let us look closer to the engraving of the letter marked B (sic) and highlight in red the contour of the engraving of this letter sic.


The red contour of the engraving of the hieroglyph suggests that of an owl, i.e. the letter m, and not the letter aa (click on the figure to enhance it).

We can now propose a reading of the missing word that was not translated until now. We read: rem-m and we translate into tears.

New reading and its consequences

The hieroglyphs group m tem wun may be separated in two parts due to the presence of the papyrus roller preceding the rabbit (wun). The sentence Yanoam became non-existent is changed into /iinaamm rem-m tem/wun iisii-r-iar (people)/, and the new translation suggests: Yanoam tears are finished; existing is iisi-r-iar, the people.


New translation of line 27 of the Merneptah Stele with highlighted punctuation (rectangles).

The falsification of the letter m (owl) into the letter aa (vulture) was probably the fact of the discoverer of the stele, Flinders Petrie, in 1896. From the beginning, he and his colleagues traced this hieroglyph with chalk in this way, because, in their mind, Pharaoh Merneptah must have attacked and destroyed Canaan nations, in his chase of the people of Exodus, Israel.
In the edited line 27, the people iisii-r-iar (Israel) are not devastated. On the contrary, they exist. This new translation is in agreement with the teaching of Egyptology. One knows that the armies of Merneptah neither attacked nor crushed the nations and people of Canaan, since their action was limited to Libya, in the North-West of Egypt. Merneptah quite simply makes the report of the general situation of Egypt and its neighbors, Canaan included. The mention, line 27, according to which Israel does not have any more seeds (cereals) thus resulted from the falsification of the text. It relates rather to the people mentioned in the next sentence, namely Kharu, i.e. the Hittites. This interpretation is proven by archaeology. It is known that Merneptah dispatched cereals from Egypt to the starving Hittites (Khati and Kharu), victim of a famine.
Nevertheless, this chalk trace was maintained on the Merneptah Stele, until today. To my knowledge, no Egyptologist, nor biblical historian, ever called into question the reading (rather the non-reading) of this forged hieroglyph.
For any further information, see in my book The Lost Fresco and the Bible (De cette fresque naquit la Bible), Chapter 11.

Pharaoh Ramses II - Interesting Facts

Pharaoh Ramses II

 

Ramses II was the third ruler of the 19th Dynasty. Taking the throne at the age of 20, Ramses II ruled for an amazing 67 years, the second longest reign of the ancient Egyptian pharaohs. Ramses II is known for many accomplishments. While it was quite common for ancient Egyptian pharaohs to have several wives, Ramses II seems to have exceeded the norm in number of wives and children. At the end of his long life, the pharaoh had sired over 100 children.

 

The reign of Ramses 2 was marked by numerous military battles and he became one of the famous Egyptian pharaohs known for his military strength. Much of his reign was occupied with taking back territories that were lost to Egypt during the rule of other ancient Egyptian pharaohs, most notably Akehaten, was preoccupied with establishing a monotheistic religion.

 

Rames II was also interested in architecture and that interest resulted in the erection of more monuments than any of the other ancient Egyptian pharaohs. A significant number of architectural tributes still dominate the landscape of Egypt today, attributed to Ramses 2. The Ramses II monument at Abu Simbel is the most famous of all. Menataph, son of Ramses II, gained control of the throne upon the death of his father and the 19th Dynasty ended with his rule.

 

....

 

Taken from: http://ancienthistory.netscype.com/article/pharaoh-ramses-ii-interesting-facts

"... it has been suggested that [Ramses II] shows many Asiatic traits ...".





Taken from: http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/ramesses2intro.htm

....

This is the first part of a series of articles on Ramesses II, perhaps even better known as Ramesses the Great, the third ruler of Egypt's 19th Dynasty during the prosperous New Kingdom. Future parts of this series will explore this great Egyptian Pharaoh as a builder, husband and father, military leader and deity, among other topics. While Ramesses II was certainly not a typical Egyptian pharaoh, far various reasons we know a great deal about him, and exploring his life in detail should provide readers with a better understanding of all the rulers of ancient Egypt.

In his book, "Chronicle of the Pharaohs" by Peter A. Clayton, he sums up Ramesses II very nicely, stating that:

"During his long reign of 67 years, everything was done on a grand scale. No other pharaoh constructed so many temples or erected so many colossal statues and obelisks. No other pharaoh sired so many children. Ramesses' 'victory' over the Hittities at Kadesh was celebrated in one of the most repeated Egyptian texts ever put on record. By the time he died, aged more than 90, he had set his stamp indelibly on the face of Egypt."

Ramesses II's father was Seti (Sethos) I and his mother was Tuya. Tuya was not one of Seti I's major wives, and therefore Ramesses II was probably not given the training of a king from an early age (or as Ramesses II states, "from the egg"). However, he did serve as a co-regent with his father prior to Seti I's death.

We believe that Ramesses II had as many as fifty sons and fifty daughters, though only a few of them are known to us. His chief, and most likely favorite wife was Nefertari, though he obviously had many others. We believe he was succeeded by a son named Merneptah who was an old man himself by the time he ascended the throne.

It is difficult to tell from most of Ramesses II's statues and depictions on monuments exactly what he looked like physically. This is because the ancient Egyptian artists were not always intend on portraying the king in a totally realistic manner. The king probably never set for specific statues. Rather, they were based upon approved models.

Hence, the official image of Ramesses II promoted by the royal artists is not unlike the ageless portraits we find of the British monarch on stamps or American presidents on currency. His images depict him as a traditional king: tall, dignified, physically perfect and forever young, which prompted one modern scholar to comment that:

"Now Ramesses the Great, if he was as much like his portraits as his portraits are like each other, must have been one of the most handsomest men, not only of his day, but of all history."

His many statues and reliefs show his physical characteristics to include a prominent nose set in a rounded face with high cheek bones, wide, arched eyebrows, slightly bulging, almond-shaped eyes, fleshy lips and a small, square chin. He is often portrayed with a regal smile.

Of course, we have a better idea of his looks as an old man from his mummy, which has a very prominent, long, thin, hooked nose set in a long, narrow, oval face with a strong jaw. He was large for an ancient Egyptian, standing some five foot seven inches (1.333 meters) tall, and it has been suggested that he shows many Asiatic traits, which might also be recognizable in the mummies of Seti I and Merenptah.

Interestingly, the mummy's gray hair had been died red, and indeed, modern technology has proven that in his youth he was a red head, which was also not a common trait of ancient Egyptians.

Due to a fortunate combination of circumstances, including optimal Nile floods resulting in good harvests, international stability, a large family and of course, the extraordinary longevity which caused Ramesses to outlive not only his contemporaries, but many of his children and grandchildren, Egypt enjoyed a continuity of government that was the envy of the ancient world. Whether by luck, or good kingship, Egypt flourished under Ramesses II and her people were grateful.

Within his lifetime, Ramesses II was venerated as a god, particularly in Nubia. This cult following continued to flourish, even after the end of Egypt's pharaonic period. Unlike many Egyptian kings, who always sought to have their name remembered and repeated so that their soul could live on, the Egyptians continued to make pilgrimages to Abydos, Memphis, Tanis and Abu Simbel in order to make offerings to Ramesses the deity for centuries after his death. During the Graeco-Roman period, in order to elevate the status of a god named Khons, the priests literally rewrote their mythology to allow Ramesses II a starring role alongside the deity.

Ramesses II's reputation resulted in an amazing following, and even a period of Egyptian history we often refer to as the Ramesside period. During the 20th Dynasty, though not descendents, all but one of the kings took the name Ramesses in their efforts to emulate him. Unfortunately, only one of the kings, Ramesses III, would come anywhere close to Ramesses II's achievements, and in the end, this much weakened era would spell the end of the New Kingdom. Later still, the weak dynasty of Tanite kings who only had a tenuous grip on Upper Egypt also attempted to recapture some of the lost brilliance of Egypt's golden age by choosing to use Ramesses II's throne name, Usermaatre, as their own.

Hence, Ramesses II's name lived on. In 1822, when we first began to decipher the ancient Egyptian language, many new pharaohs became known to us, and later, as new tombs were discovered, along with other documents, we began to piece together a long line of rulers. Only then did we know the names of Egyptian kings and queens such as Hatshepsut, Akhenaten and Tutankhamun. However, Ramesses II was never in need of rediscovery, for his name, perhaps corrupted somewhat, was not forgotten.

Even in our modern world, he has also been remembered, though often not very realistically. He was the handsome, courageous and good hearted king of Christian Jacq's Egyptian novels, and a more lonely, complicated man in Anne Rice's "The Mummy". On the silver screen, he was introduced in the 1909 film, "Mummy of the King Ramses, and in 1923, became the great pharaoh of Cecil B DeMille's silent screen epic, "The Ten Commandments". Afterwards, Yul Brynner would become Ramesses in DeMille's more famous 1956 movie by the same name, and just recently, he was not very accurately portrayed in the DreamWorks animated interpretation of the Exodus called the "Prince of Egypt".

The great king was given the birth name of his grandfather, Re-mise, or Ramesses I (meryamun), which means, "Re has Fashioned Him, Beloved of Amun". We often find his birth name spelled as Ramses. His throne name was Usermaatre Setepenre, meaning, "The Justice of Re is Powerful, Chosen of Re".

We may find many variations of his name throughout classical history. Ramesses fame was not limited to Egypt, for he was known throughout the ancient classical world, due perhaps to a highly efficient royal propaganda machine. From the Christian bible we hear of both Ramesses, as well as his capital city of Pi-Ramesses. Manetho, a famous ancient Egyptian historian, included Ramesses II in his Egyptian chronology as Ramesses Miamun, or Rapsakes. The Greek historian, Herodotus, refers to him as King Rhampsinitus. Writing in 60 BC, Diodorus Siculus, who was especially impressed by the monument we today call the Ramesseum, the mortuary temple of Ramesses II on the West Bank at Thebes, knew him as Ozymandias, which is an obvious corruption of the king's pre-noimen, Usermaatre. Pliny and Tacitus would later write about him, calling him King Rhamsesis or Rhamses, and two thousand years later, in 1817, Percy Bysshe Shelley published Ozymandias, a poem giving his impression of the once mighty Ramesses:

I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And Wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed:
And on the pedestal these words appear: "My name is Ozymandias,
king of kings: Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!"
Nothing besides remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

In fact, prior to our modern discipline of Egyptology, the Pharaoh Ramesses II became legendary becoming a fabled king not unlike England's (Celtic) King Arthur. Like that king, an ill defined combination of real kings grew about his person, combining perhaps the deeds of the 12th Dynasty Kings Senusret I and III with those of Ramesses II under the general umbrella of Sesothes.

Yet, it was not until after Jean Francois Champollion decoded the Hieroglyphics of the Rosetta Stone that the immensity of Ramesses II's monumental building works could be appreciated by modern observers. Now, the real king became famous all over again, and not only among Egyptologists, though they certainly began to study Ramesses the Great with a new fervor. Because of the number of his monuments, he seems to have constantly been in the news, as discovery after discovery turned up bearing his name.

Early on, he received considerable bad press from scholars. For example, Bansen regarded him as:

"...an unbridled despot, who took advantage of a reign of almost unparalleled length, and of the acquisitions of his father and ancestors, in order to torment his own subjects and strangers to the utmost of his power."

Even in 1959, William C. Hayes said that he was:

"a brash young man...not overburdened with intelligence and singularly lacking in taste... [yet with] tremendous energy and personal magnetism."

Others only gave him slightly better marks. Miss Amelia B. Edwards, in her travel guide, "A Thousand Miles up the Nile", that:

"...it is safe to conclude that he was neither better nor worse than the general run of Oriental despots - that he was ruthless in war, prodigal in peace, rapacious in booty, and unsparing in the exercise of almost boundless power. Such pride and such despotism were, however, in strict accordance with immemorial precedent, and with the temper of the age in which he lived."

Essentially, Kenneth Kitchen, a more modern observer, seems to back Edwards comments, saying that:

"The deeds and attitudes of a Ramesses II cannot just be crudely measured-off against our own supposed social values, as simply boastful or megalomania; they must be compared with what were the norms and ideas in his culture, not ours."

Modern thought on Ramesses undulates from scholar to scholar, and depending on what role is discussed. However, somewhat of a consensus among Egyptologists seems to be that Ramesses II simply did what Egyptian pharaohs were suppose to do, though he had a longer period of time than average to do so. Essentially, Ramesses II is believed to have been a very traditional king in many respects, who followed in the footsteps of his predecessors.

Ideally, an Egyptian pharaoh was simply a link in a long chain of custodians who's ill defined but well understood role passed from king to king. He was the mortal link with the gods upon who's shoulders rested the responsibility of maintaining Ma'at in Egypt, and to some extent throughout the known world. Ma'at might be defined as "truth", but might be better explained as a continuity of "rightness" which could insure that things would continue to function normally. If Ma'at were in balance, there would be reasonable Nile inundations (floods) which would nourish the soil and produce good harvests, victory in battle and there would not be illness in the land. Ma'at was mostly obtained by pleasing the gods, which involved supporting their cults as well as following a righteous path. And among other requirements such as making offerings, participating in festivals and protecting the sacred land of Egypt, pleasing the gods often involved building temples and supporting their priesthood.

Of course, there would be little need for a king to actually promote himself in order to fulfill these duties. Yet, despite the belief by the ancient Egyptians that the King was at least semi-divine, they were, as we now know, all too human. Almost every Egyptian pharaoh seems to have felt a need to prove himself to his people (as well as to the gods). In fact, they wanted to prove themselves superior to their predecessors, and yet, at the same time, many of these kings actually suffered considerable self doubt, particularly when they were not born to a long dynasty of kings and also not to a "Great Wife" of the king, as was the case with Ramesses II.

Therefore, they exerted considerable efforts to build monuments and grand statues in order to re-enforce their role as a living god, as well as to defeat the enemies of Egypt in battle and in each case, they ensured that their name and titles were celebrated in connection with these deeds. Furthermore, they often exaggerated every possible deed, even to the point of fabricating war victories and usurping the monuments and statues of their predecessors.

Ramesses II was not the first, nor the last to follow such practices. He was certainly an avid builder, erecting temples and statues from one end of the Nile Valley to the other. And even when he may have failed in war, he nevertheless made it a victory by inscribing it as such on his monuments.

So in reality, regardless of our modern misgivings about Ramesses II, as a king of Egypt's New Kingdom, Ramesses fulfilled his functions, as he was basically expected to, and in return, Ma'at seems, at least to his ancient Egyptian subjects, to have been fulfilled, for the country experienced a long period of prosperity during his equally long reign.

Major Sections on Ramesses II


Main Ramesses II Page

Ramesses II: Anatomy of a Pharaoh - His Family (Specifically, his Women)

Ramesses II: Anatomy of a Pharaoh - His Family (Specifically, his Children)

Ramesses II: Anatomy of a Pharaoh - The Military Leader


See also:

Amun-her-shepeshef, First Son of Ramesses II

The Bentrech Stele

Leading up to the Battle of Kadesh:The Battle of Kadesh, Part I

The Actual Battle of Kadesh:The Battle of Kadesh Part II

Egyptian Account of the Battle of Kadesh

Nefertari, Tomb of - Valley of the Queens

Qantir, Ancient Pi-Ramesse

The Queens of Ramesses II

The First Peace Treaty in History

The Peace Treaty Document

The Sons (and Daughters) of Ramesses II


References:

Title	Author	Date	Publisher	Reference Number
Atlas of Ancient Egypt	Baines, John; Malek, Jaromir	1980	Les Livres De France	None Stated
Dictionary of Ancient Egypt, The	Shaw, Ian; Nicholson, Paul	1995	Harry N. Abrams, Inc., Publishers	ISBN 0-8109-3225-3
History of Ancient Egypt, A	Grimal, Nicolas	1988	Blackwell	None Stated
Monarchs of the Nile	Dodson, Aidan	1995	Rubicon Press	ISBN 0-948695-20-x
Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, The	Shaw, Ian	2000	Oxford University Press	ISBN 0-19-815034-2
Ramesses: Egypt's Greatest Pharaoh	Tyldesley, Joyce	2000	Penguin Books	ISBN Not Listed
Ramesses II: Greatest of the Pharaohs	Menu, Bernadette	1999	Harry N. Abrams, Inc.	ISBN 0-8109-2870-1 (pbk.)
alley of the Kings	Weeks, Kent R.	2001	Friedman/Fairfax	ISBN 1-5866-3295-7
Who Were the Pharaohs? (A history of their names with a list of cartouches)	Quirke, Stephen	1990	Dover Publications	ISBN 0-486-26586-2

Read more: http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/ramesses2intro.htm#ixzz2afotzsTv

First born son of Pharaoh Ramses II did not die in biblical plague



Who Struck Down Pharaoh's Firstborn Son?

An archeological discovery challenges the biblical story of the tenth plague, in which a cruel ruler's son was killed by God.

BY: Interview with Charles Sennott

....

Can new archeological discoveries prove--or disprove--parts of the Bible? Egyptologist Kent Weeks recently found a man's skull in a tomb believed to be that of Rameses II's oldest son, who the book of Exodus says died in the tenth plague. Beliefnet spoke with author and Boston Globe correspondent Charles M. Sennott, who worked with the Discovery Channel on a program showcasing the finding, about how the news impacts our understanding of the exodus.

Rameses: Wrath of God or Man? aired on the Discovery Channel on Sunday December 5.


Who was Rameses II in history, and who is he thought to be in the Bible?

Most historians believe that Rameses II is the pharaoh of the Exodus, in the story with the ten plagues--the one whose oldest son, the crown prince, was killed in the tenth plague. There's no way to know for sure if indeed Rameses II
was that pharaoh, but it's the consensus between historians and Egyptologists.
Rameses was the greatest pharaoh, the master builder. He built more monuments than any other pharaoh. He had over 100 children by [many] wives. He had a tremendous ego. If you see the sites of ancient Egypt, you see his image everywhere, because he believed he was a living God.
From what we know from nonbiblical sources and from archeology, was Rameses II the kind of ruler who would have been stiff-necked, who would have oppressed slaves?
Yes, the Egyptian pharaohs ruled with a serious iron fist over a vast swath of very poor people. They did this through their court, military, and the exertion of completely autocratic power. Rameses was the archetype of the master builder who required serious slave labor.

What is the new discovery related to this pharaoh?
We traveled with Kent Weeks, a world-renowned Egyptologist. I studied his work at KV5, one of the most important archeological finds since King Tut. It's essentially a vast burial ground [in the Valley of the Kings near Luxor], a serious of corridors and chambers that Weeks says holds more than 120 burial chambers, all of them dedicated, Weeks believes, to the sons of Rameses II.
Weeks discovered this in 1995. He then spent the next years digging through there [see
map]. There are relief murals that clearly show Rameses II guiding his oldest son, the crown prince Amun-her-khepeshef, into the afterlife.
Weeks' strong belief is that this is where the oldest son of the presumed pharaoh of the Exodus is buried.

But Rameses II himself was not yet dead?Yes, but as a god, Rameses would have been the one to guide him to the other gods.

Even though Rameses II, the father, was still alive, he could lead his dead son to the afterlife?Yes. He could lead him to the point where he was given over to the gods.

So the belief is that Rameses' oldest son was a military leader, because we see him depicted in relief sculpture as a man in a chariot riding off to battle. So the question is, is he buried there? Weeks found 4 skulls very close to the entry to this KV5 tomb. Weeks believes that one of these skulls, with a large fracture on the left-hand side at the rear of the skull, may indeed be the skull of Amun-her-khepeshef.

Continued on page 2:»


....

Taken from: http://www.beliefnet.com/News/Science-Religion/2004/12/Who-Struck-Down-Pharaohs-Firstborn-Son.aspx?p=1

The Scientific and Scriptural Impact of Amos’ Earthquake



by Steven A. Austin, Ph.D. *

The Bible is often regarded as a book of stories based on a primitive people's understanding of the world around them. As such, many people--and even some Christians--believe that it is not a reliable source of history. But science continues to prove them wrong.

An Ancient Earthquake
The Kings of Israel and Judah ruled during the period of time designated as the Iron Age by archaeologists. Widely separated archaeological excavations in the countries of Israel and Jordan contain late Iron Age (Iron IIb) architecture bearing damage from a great earthquake.¹ Masonry walls best display the earthquake's effects, especially those with broken ashlars or displaced rows of stones, walls that are still standing but are leaning or bowed, and collapsed walls with large sections still lying course-on-course.
Earthquake evidence is seen prominently at Hazor, Israel's largest ancient city. In excavations beginning in 1955 by archaeologist Yigael Yadin, twenty-two successive cities were discovered to have been built on top of each other.² Excavations in Hazor's Stratum VI revealed tilted walls, inclined pillars, and collapsed houses. In the Iron Age building called "Ya'el's House" within Stratum VI, objects of daily use were found beneath the fallen ceiling. General southward collapse within Stratum VI argues that the earthquake waves were propagated from the north. After more than 50 years of excavations at Hazor, earthquake damage continues to be revealed in even some of the strongest architecture.
The city of Gezer was also severely shaken. The outer wall of the city shows hewn stones weighing tons that have been cracked and displaced several inches off their foundation. The lower part of the wall was displaced outward (away from the city), whereas the upper part of the wall fell inward (toward the city) still lying course-on-course.³ This indicates that the wall collapsed suddenly.
A Magnitude 8 Event
Earthquake debris at six sites (Hazor, Deir 'Alla, Gezer, Lachish, Tell Judeideh, and 'En Haseva) is tightly confined stratigraphically to the middle of the eighth century B.C., with dating errors of ~30 years.⁴ So, the evidence points to a single large regional earthquake that occurred about 750 B.C. The accompanying map displays the site intensity (Modified Mercalli Intensity from archaeology or literature) and lines of equal intensity of shaking (isoseismals).
The epicenter was clearly north of present-day Israel, as indicated by the southward decrease in degree of damage at archaeological sites in Israel and Jordan. The epicenter was likely in Lebanon on the plate boundary called the Dead Sea transform fault. A large area of the ancient kingdoms of Israel and Judah was shaken to inflict "general damage" to well-built structures (what is called Modified Mercalli Intensity 9 or higher). The distance from the epicenter (north of Israel) to the region of "significant damage" to well-built structures (what is called Modified Mercalli Intensity 8 that is south of Israel) was at least 175 kilometers, but could have been as much as 300 kilometers.
Using the pattern and the intensity of damage through the region of the earthquake, the earthquake's magnitude can be estimated. Through a process known as scaling, the damage areas of smaller historic earthquakes of known magnitude are used to scale upward to estimate the area of damage and magnitude of the regional earthquake. Based on this method, the earthquake in question was at least magnitude 7.8, but more likely was 8.2.⁵ This magnitude 8 event of 750 B.C. appears to be the largest yet documented on the Dead Sea transform fault zone during the last four millennia. The Dead Sea transform fault likely ruptured along more than 400 kilometers as the ground shook violently for over 90 seconds! The urban panic created by this earthquake would have been legendary.
Scriptural References
In the mid-eighth century B.C., a shepherd-farmer named Amos of Tekoa de livered an ex tra ordinary speech at the Temple of the Golden Calf in the city of Bethel in the northern kingdom of Israel just "two years before the earthquake" (Amos 1:1). Uzziah was king of Judah and Jeroboam II was king of Israel. Amos spoke of the land being shaken (8:8), houses being smashed (6:11), altars being cracked (3:14), and even the Temple at Bethel being struck and collapsing (9:1). The prophet's repeated contemporary references to the earthquake's effects is why it bears his name.
Amos' Earthquake impacted Hebrew literature immensely.⁶ After the gigantic earthquake, no Hebrew prophet could predict a divine visitation in judgment without alluding to an earthquake. Just a few years after the earthquake, Isaiah wrote about the "Day of the Lord" when everything lofty and exalted will be abased at the time when the Lord "ariseth to shake terribly the earth" (Isaiah 2:19, 21). Then, Isaiah saw the Lord in a temple shaken by an earthquake (Isaiah 6:4).
Joel repeats the motto of Amos: "The Lord also will roar out of Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem," and adds the seismic theophany imagery "the heavens and the earth shall shake" (Joel 3:16; compare Amos 1:2). After describing a future earthquake and panic during the "Day of the Lord" at Messiah's coming to the Mount of Olives, Zechariah says, "Yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah" (Zechariah 14:5). The panic caused by Amos' Earthquake must have been the topic of legend in Jerusalem, because Zechariah asked his readers to recall that terrifying event 230 years later.
The author of Hebrews asks us to keep in mind the coming cosmic shakedown that will finally usher in the future "kingdom which cannot be moved" (Hebrews 12:28). In light of God's marvelous promises to those who believe, "let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear."

References

1. Austin, S.A., G. W. Franz, and E. G. Frost. 2000. Amos's Earthquake: An extraordinary Middle East seismic event of 750 B.C. International Geology Review. 42 (7): 657-671.
2. Yadin, Y. 1975. Hazor, the rediscovery of a great citadel of the Bible. New York: Random House, 280 pp.
3. Younker, R. 1991. A preliminary report of the 1990 season at Tel Gezer, excavations of the "Outer Wall" and the "Solomonic" Gateway (July 2 to August 10, 1990). Andrews University Seminary Studies. 29: 19-60.
4. Austin et al, Amos's Earthquake.
5. Austin et al, Amos's Earthquake.
6. Ogden, K. 1992. The earthquake motif in the book of Amos. In Schunck, K., and M. Augustin, eds., Goldene apfel in silbernen schalen. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 69-80; Freedman, D.N., and A. Welch. 1994. Amos's earthquake and Israelite prophecy. In Coogan, M.D., J. C. Exum, and L. E. Stager, eds., Scripture and other artifacts: essays on the Bible, and archaeology in honor of Philip J. King. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 188-198.

* Dr. Austin is Senior Research Scientist and Chair of the Geology Department.

Cite this article: Austin, S. 2010. The Scientific and Scriptural Impact of Amos' Earthquake. Acts & Facts. 39 (2): 8-9.

....

Taken from: http://www.icr.org/article/scientific-scriptural-impact-amos-earthquake/