Talk:Pharaoh of the Exodus

Velokovsky

pharoah of exodus, cannot be Ramsis II for all the previously stated reasons; no mention of drowning, losing his entire army via returning red sea, etc. I feel we should take a look at Immanual -Velokovsky's World in Chaos). In this long rejected speculative historic proposition, Velokovsky lines up the biblical narrative with the Ipuwar papyrus it is interesting to see how more convincing his argument if you adjust the calender to use the explosion of Thera as the precipitating event. Social collapse secondary to meteorologic techtonic or volcanic event makes sense. The mass exodus of everyone affected was either a necessity of survival or the opportunity afforded by the general failure of the Egyptian kingdom at this time. The wide spread fragmentations of trade, pan Mediterranean maritime destruction, and the political weakening attendant, likely precipitates the prostration of the Minoans and submersion by the warlike mycaneans. Similarly the Egyptians are overun by the Hykos. The Hyksos domination is a cultural dark age beginning speculatively while the Egyptians were weakened by the catastrophy of Thera. The biblical narrative is mum after the "escape" concerning the fate of Egypt without a pharoah or his son. There is mention of conflicts between the Israelites and the Ammalikites near mt. moriah. This enemity is apparently deep and long remembered. The severity and barbarity of the Hyksos domination was also not forgotten by the Egyptians. When did the pharoahic crown return to the Egyptians, where was the royal family during the domination?, did the Hyksos simply dissappear or were they defeated by expatriates?, when do these events occur? Another interesting consequence of adjusting the timing of the exodus with the explosion of thera as described by Velokovsky is that the restablishment of the Egyptian Dynasties beginning with Tutmoses I, would be contemporaneous with the rein of Saul in Israel, Tutmosis II with the rein of David,, and Hatsepsut with the rein of Solomen [unsigned]

I do not think it is a good idea to merge the article. It is not "pharoah" (sic) but Pharaoh. It is not "Ammalikites" but Amalekites. The clash between Israel and Amalek was not near Mount Moriah (believed to be in Jerusalem) but in the northern Sinai region. It is not "Velokovsky" but Velikovsky, not "Solomen" but Solomon. Thank you. Erudil 17:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

The usual spelling is Ramses II - but "Ramsis" could be right, who knows. But it is definitely Immanuel, not "Immanual." And it's reign, not rein. Erudil 17:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

And the book is Ages in Chaos, not "World in Chaos." Erudil 17:12, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Please don't feed the trolls with facts, it just confuses them. CFLeon (talk) 22:12, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Factual error?

"A 2006 Canadian documentary Exodus Decoded argues that Ahmose I is the Exodus Pharaoh, given that the title Pharaoh was applied only to Pharaohs after Thutmose III..."

This sentence doesn't make any sense because according to the chart above this paragraph, Ahmose I came before Thutmose III, not after. Or am I just reading it wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.116.30.118 (talk) 04:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dating shouldn't be based on the word "pharaoh" anyway. It might be that people living during the Exodus didn't call the king "pharaoh" but by the time the story was put into writing, the usage of this title was widespread and the writer used it retroactively. Interestingly, there have been theories that equate the Hebrews with the Hyksos, whose capital was Avaris, approximately at the same site where Per-Ramesses, the city mentioned in the Bible was later built. This might be another case of calling something by a name that wasn't used until hundreds of years later. – Alensha ^talk 03:04, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citation request overkill?

I note that just about every pharaoh listed has a "citation needed" notice tacked on to it. What's not clear is what the citation is needed for -- the name or years of the reign for that pharaoh, or that that particular pharaoh has been cited somewhere as the potential pharaoh of the Exodus?

Arguably it would be far better to have a section that summarizes the pluses/minuses for that contention for each pharaoh, rather than spewing citation references. Captmondo (talk) 13:51, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Missed this - any name here should have a citation to a reliable source suggesting that it was a potential pharaoh of the Exodus. This avoids OR. Dougweller (talk) 20:36, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's fair enough then. This article isn't high on my "to do" list, but will make a point of tacking on any references I run across that fit. Captmondo (talk) 19:03, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Quite a few of the citations there are ones I added. Dougweller (talk) 20:44, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ISBN numbers and page numbers are a reasonable request. Das Baz, aka Erudil 18:06, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed renaming

(Continued from Talk:Pharaoh.) The Pharaoh article lists pharaohs who were mentioned in the Bible. If we renamed this article to Pharaohs in the Bible or something similar, we could move that section here. That would keep the Bible-related info in one place. Also, then we could mention the other unidentified pharaoh, the one whose dreams Joseph interpreted. – Alensha ^talk 02:55, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple Pharaohs

There were actually two pharaohs mentioned in the Book of Exodus, the first one is recorded as having died before God contacted Moses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.20.123.101 (talk) 20:48, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Post-Merneptah Pharaohs should be deleted

Since the Merneptah (or Merenptah) Stela mentions Israel as being in Canaan, Pharaohs later in time than Merenptah - Amenmesse and Setnakht - should perhaps be deleted from the list, as being such unlikely candidates as to be virtually impossible. Das Baz, aka Erudil 18:10, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ramesses II and Merneptah.

If Ramesses II was a contempory of Soloman, it would have been during the young Ramesses well known massive military campaign in the Middle East that the Temple of Soloman was looted. After this looting the various countries including Israel must have collapsed economically.

On his return to Egypt Ramesses had plenty of money to invest in vast building schemes and looting the other nearby kingdoms would have given him the money to do.

The difficulties of tranlating heiroglyph is well known compounded by trying to guess the real meaning behind the translated words. Could the Merneptah stelae simply mean that even a generation later Israel still hadn't recovered economically.

One of the other names of Ramesses was "Sesostris" and by the time it had gone through say Aramaic to Greek to Latin perhaps the biblical "Shishak" doesn't seem so far different.

If these conjectures are correct and as there is no mention of either Pharaoh having to deal with a plague, neither Ramesses and Merneptah can be the Pharaoh of Exodus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.93.199.154 (talk) 09:53, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where's Amenhotep II?

Haven't Christian scholars proposed Amenhotep as the Pharaoh of the Exodus? WorldQuestioneer (talk) 19:52, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]