COMPENDIUM OF WORLD HISTORY

VOLUME 1

A Dissertation Presented to The Faculty of the Ambassador College Graduate School of Theology In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Theology

by Herman L. Hoeh

1962(1963-1965, 1967 Edition)

CHAPTER THREE

History Begins at Babel

The restoration of history begins with this chapter. It has taken years of research to recover all the vital pieces of evidence needed to tell the full story. The assumptions of historians and archaeologists had first to be cleared away. The most difficult part, however, was the recovery of rejected evidence -- much of it published over 100 years ag.

At last the restoration of the framework of history was complete for Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria, Greece, Media. All the records went back to one momentous event.

The event? The building of the City and Tower of Babel! The beginning of the civilization of this world! It commenced as an act of rebellion against the Government of God. It began with the establishment of the Government of Man. And just as one might expect, all the ancient nations began to reckon their kings from this event.

History Corroborates the Bible

The Biblical account of the City and the Tower of Babel may be found in Genesis 11:1-9. In the Jewish Publication Society translation we read:

And the whole earth was of one language and of one speech. And it came to pass, as they journeyed east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar: and they dwelt there. And they said one to another: 'Come, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly.' And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for mortar. And they said: 'Come, let us build us a city, and a tower, with its top in heaven, and let us make us a name: lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.' And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. And the Lord said: 'Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language: and this is what they begin to do: and now nothing will be withholden from them, which they purpose to do. Come, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.' So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth and they left off to build the city. Therefore was the name of it called Babel: because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

The most complete secular record is that found in the Acadian Creation Epic. It is reproduced in 'Ancient Near Eastern Texts', by James B. Pritchard, pages 68-69. This account, like most from ancient pagan sources, is encrusted with myth. But that does not nullify the basic historical evidence contained in the epic. Following are extracts, freely translated, from the Epic of Creation concerning the building of the City and the Tower of Babel. A vague recollection of the Supreme God is discernable.

''Now, O lord, thou who hast caused our deliverance,

What shall be our homage to thee?

Let us build a shrine ....'

Brightly glowed his features, like the day:

'Like that of lofty Babylon, whose building you have requested,

Let its brickwork be fashioned. You shall name it 'The Sanctuary''

For one whole year they molded the bricks.

When the second year arrived,

They raised high the shrine equaling a great height.

Having built a stage-tower a great height,

They set up in it an abode for Marduk, Enlil, and Ea.

'This is Babylon, the place that is your home' ...''

The account in Genesis describes exactly what is given here -- the building of a Tower, or religious edifice, and of a City.

The epic then continues with the establishment of human government. At this point the document is fragmentary, but a father and a son are clearly spoken of:

'He set up a throne ....

Another in ....

'Verily, most exalted is the son ....

His sovereignty is surpassing ....

May he shepherd the human race.'

The Biblical account reveals who these two individuals were. Cush, the father, and Nimrod, the son. 'And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth .... And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel ...' (Genesis 10:8, 10).

With the reign of Cush and of Nimrod the history of civilization begins. At this point commences also the chronology of Egypt, of Assyria, of Babylonia and of the whole Near East.

The exact date of this event was preserved down to Roman times. For Velleius Paterculus cites from Aemilius Sura, in his 'Roman History', book I, section VI, the following: 'Between this time (when Rome conquered Philip, king of Macedonia) and the beginning of the reign of Ninus (Nimrod) king of the Assyrians, who was the first to hold world power, lies an interval of 1995 years.' Philip was conquered in 197. (All dates in this compendium which are not otherwise designated are understood to be before the present era, commonly, though mistakenly, written 'B.C.') Nimrod, therefore, began his sole reign in 2192. It followed a joint reign with his father Cush for 62 years, according to Julius Africanus. That places the overthrow of Babel 2254 years before the present era. The two previous years, according to the Epic of Creation, had been spent in erecting Babel. The building of the Tower may therefore be dated 2256-2254. The Bible does not specifically date this event. But it does confirm the general period: 'And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided ...' (Genesis 10:25).

Certainly the most spectacular confirmation of this date may be found in the history of China. For the Chinese begin their authentic history also 2254 years before the present era. This is no coincidence. China's first king was 'black.' His eyes shown with 'double brightness.' That is, theologically, 'demon possessed.' They called him Shun, and his father's name is spelled variously Chusou or Kusou -- that is, Cush. In his days lived a very famous woman whose name may be translated as either 'the mother of the king of the west,' or the 'queen mother of the west ' (See the 'Annals of the Bamboo Books,' 'The Chinese Classics', by James Legge, vol. III, part I, pages 114-115.)

Before presenting the chronological history of China -- which has been preserved without alteration since the Tower of Babel, let us trace in the West the story of these heroes who founded Babel. No story of history is so unusual, so filled with the unexpected.

On to Egypt

The tombs of all the famous heroes who founded Babel are located in Egypt. Egypt early became the second center of civilization. One can now easily understand why both Babylonians and Egyptians claimed to be the first people in the world -- claimed their civilization and their religious customs were the earliest. In Egypt we now trace the history of what occurred immediately after Babel.

Egyptian history opens with Dynasty I. Its capital was Thinis in Upper Egypt. The names of the first four rulers of Dynasty I are Menes, Athothis, Kenkenes and Uenephes. The spelling of the names is from the Greek of Manetho. The early Egyptian forms vary slightly. Who were these famous individuals?

Let the Egyptians themselves provide the answer. Athothis, Egypt's second king, was Osiris. The tomb of Athothis at Abydos was 'the sepulchre of the god Osiris, and, as such, became the shrine to which millions of pilgrims made their way,' declared Arthur Weigall in 'A History of the Pharaohs', vol. I, page 111. The Egyptian god Osiris was the Baal of the Phoenicians, the Marduk of the Babylonians, the Tammuz of the Semites, the Nimrod of the Bible.

The Cairo fragment of the Annals of Dynasties I-V preserves a name of the mother of Athothis. She is Hept, meaning 'the veiled one.' This is a designation of Isis, the mother and wife of Osiris. The Assyrians called Isis or Hept Ishtar or Semiramis. In Scripture she is called Ashtoreth. This woman was originally the queen of Meni. Egypt's first king. She became Athothis' queen and wife after the planned death of Meni. Here is confirmation of the age-old tradition that Nimrod married his own mother. Later. Athothis himself was slain in the 28th year of his reign, according to Plutarch.

The father of Athothis, and Egypt's first king, was Meni or Mena -- Menes in Greek. His name means 'The Establisher' ('History of Ancient Egypt', vol. II, p. 26, by George Rawlinson), or 'The Everlasting' (Waddell's 'Manetho', p. 215) Menes was the first to ESTABLISH himself as king in place of the Everlasting God. Since Menes was the father of Athothis (Nimrod), he is the Cush of the Bible. 'And Cush begot Nimrod, he began to be a mighty one in the earth' (Gen. 10:8).

The third name in the first dynasty is Kenkenes, a Greek form of Kenken, meaning 'The Terrible.' He was born, according to Egyptian tradition, after the death of Osiris. His mother placed him on the throne. She claimed he was the reincarnation of Osiris, or Athothis; hence he is at times called Athothis, or Itit in early fragments. (These various names may be found in Sir Alan Gardiner's 'Egypt of the Pharaohs' and in Weigall's 'A History of the Pharaohs') He was also named Horus, the son of Isis.

Everyone of these famous men of old had many names. Of Nimrod, we read in the Epic of Creation:

'As for us, by however many names we call him, he is our god'

Let us then proclaim his fifty names ....'

Listed fourth in Dynasty I is Uenephes. This king was a woman! She called herself Henneit, meaning 'Neit is victorious.' Neit is the Egyptian form of the Greek Athena. She also called herself Hept, which means 'the veiled one,' as already noted. This evidence clearly means that the wife of Meni, or Cush, was the mother and later the wife of Nimrod, and later still the mother of Kenkenes or Horus.

Years later, she even propositioned her own son Horus, called Gilgamesh in Babylonian tradition, as we read in the following extracts from the Epic of Gilgamesh:

'When Gilgamesh had put on his tiara,

Glorious Ishtar raised an eye at the beauty of Gilgamesh:

'Come, Gilgamesh, be thou my lover!

Do but grant me of thy fruit.

Thou shalt be my husband and I will be thy wife'.

Gilgamesh opened his mouth to speak,

Thou art but a brazier which goes out in the cold;

A back door which does not keep out blast and .windstorm;

Pitch which soils its bearers; A waterskin which soaks through its bearer;

A shoe which pinches the foot of its owner!

Which lover didst thou love forever?

Come and I will name for thee thy lovers:

Of .... (the story of Cush is broken from the cuneiform tablet)

for Tammuz, the lover of thy youth,

Thou hast ordained wailing year after year.

them.'

(Consult Pritchard's 'Ancient Near Eastern Texts', pages 83-84. Compare the account of Tammuz with Ezekiel 8:14.)

The Chronology of Dynasty I

Now we are ready to build the chronology of Egypt and of all ancient history from its beginning. Without a knowledge of who these rulers of Dynasty I are, it would be impossible to make sense of the following lengths of reign. The various pieces of information came originally from a full-length account by Manetho. The abstractors each told only part of the full story. No one list is complete in itself, but taken together -- in the same way the Bible ought to be studied -- every chronological fact makes sense.

Eratosthenes gives 62 for Menes and 59 for Athothis.

The immediate comment that all modern historians give, is that the list is corrupt. But they have no proof. They have never assembled these figures to tell the full story. Remember, the full account of what really occurred is lost in Manetho's original work. (A few facts have been reclaimed by archaeology.) Each of the abstractors of Manetho told only part of the story. Like the writers of the four gospels, each viewed what he saw in history from a different perspective. What was important to one, did not appear as important to another. It is time scholarship had a little more respect for the documents they purport to handle so judiciously.

The numbers in this list, as in almost all ancient history and also the Bible, are calendar years. That explains why they are whole figures. The immediate years after the building of Babel are assigned to Cush, although his son Nimrod reigned jointly with him.

The account begins with the reign of Cush or Menes. He began to reign in Shinar, not in Egypt. He came to Egypt where he spent his last 30 years. Cush or Menes ruled altogether 62 years, after which Nimrod began his sole rule of 25 years. Nimrod settled in Egypt 60 years after the building of Babel, and reigned two years jointly with his father. His total reign in Egypt was therefore 27 years. Plutarch records that Osiris (Nimrod) had to flee Egypt at the end of 27 years. He was executed in the summer in his 28th year by Shem, in the month of Tammuz, the 17th day according to ancient tradition.

These events may thus be clearly dated as follows:

-or-

Cush came to Egypt about 2222 and united Upper and Lower Egypt under his supreme authority for 30 years -- 2222-2192. This marks the beginning of Cushite, or Ethiopian, settlement in Africa. Cush, at the time of death, may have been nearly 170 years of age.

Josephus confirms this restoration of history in 'Antiquities' book VIII, chapter vi, sect. 2: 'All the kings from Menes, who built Memphis, ... until Solomon ... was more than one thousand three hundred years.'

In 2167 Nimrod (Athothis) fled to Italy and was slain there. At the flight of Nimrod, his mother-wife Uenephes also had to flee -- tradition states to the Delta. At this point some continued to reckon after the era of Nimrod or Athothis, since he had no male heir. Others reckoned time after his mother-wife who went into hiding. Thirty years passed. Now see how Manetho's figures fit!

It was about 57 years after Nimrod had come to Egypt. Suddenly his widow Uenephes or Isis reappears with a son -- Kenkenes or Horus. Four years later -- 59 years after the death of Menes or Cush, she associates the son with her on the throne of Egypt. Isis or Uenephes thus temporarily triumphs over those who were responsible for the execution of Nimrod.

Eight years later -- 42 years after the death of Nimrod -- the son Horus becomes supreme ruler as his mother turns over to him the reins of government. Horus or Kenkenes reigned altogether 39 years, alone for 31 years. Uenephes therefore reigned, after her return from exile, for 12 years (four years alone and eight years with her son). Afterward she returned to the throne again for 11 years following the departure of Horus for Babylonia, making a total of 23 years. (In Babylon Horus received the name Gilgamesh.) Thus every figure of Manetho, preserved from antiquity, fits.

This information may therefore be summarized as follows:

-or-

-or-

It is immediately noticeable that Horus or Gilgamesh left Egypt exactly 100 years after Nimrod left Babylonia to come to Egypt -- 2194-2094. This figure has important significance when we come to comparing Egyptian history with that of the land of Shinar or Sumer, in Mesopotamia.

Shem in Egypt

The first book of Manetho lists four more kings in Dynasty I. Among them is Shem. All classical records agree as to the length of reign. The reconstructed Cairo fragment of the Palermo stone gives different figures, but the same total -- indicating there were contemporary reigns, during which more than one ruler shared the throne. A Biblical parallel to this may be observed in the case of Jehoshaphat and Jehoram in Judah (II Kings 8:16).

The figures appear as follows:

The total length of Dynasty I is 261 years -- 2254-1993.

The seventh king is especially significant. His original name in the Egyptian records is Semsem -- meaning the Great Sem or Shem. In the New Testament Greek, Shem is spelled Sem (Luke 3:36). The hieroglyphics representing Shem depict him in Asiatic, not Egyptian, dress. He appears as an old man with a long beard in priestly garb. Old indeed he was. About 430 years old!

Shem left Egypt in 2019 or one year before the death of Noah in 2018 which was 350 years after the Flood Shem probably heard that Noah was approaching death in 2019.

Now consider Miebis, the sixth king, and predecessor of Semsem. His tomb was defaced by Semsem. A later section, in volume II, will reveal Miebis to be Osiris II. He was slain by Semsem. The Egyptians called him Typhon. He was the 'father' or ancestor of 'Judah and Jerusalem,' records Plutarch.

Dynasty II of Thinis

The kings of the second dynasty were comparatively insignificant. Other and more powerful rulers were dominating Egypt at this time -- ever since the days of Shem, but who they were will be disclosed only after the chronology of the first eight dynasties is firmly established. The change from Dynasty I to II at this point in history will also become apparent, once we begin to examine parallel dynasties who fought over the possession of Abydos and Thinis.

The first four rulers of Dynasty II:

The fragment of the Palermo Stone agrees with this total.

In the reign of Binothris 'it was decided that women might hold the kingly office,' wrote Manetho. This legal decision accounts for the bifurcation of the dynasty within two generations. Manetho's abstractors list both branches of the dynasty in successive order, giving the false impression that one followed the other. This is the very same technique Manetho employed in listing contemporary dynasties. The Turin Papyrus and the Palermo Stone provide the information missing from Manetho. Once again all the evidence must be considered, including Manetho.

The fifth king listed by Manetho and the monuments was Sethenes (Sendi in the King-lists). He reigned altogether for 41 years -- 1852-1811. The Palermo stone provides the added fact that he associated others with him after his 37th year. His sole reign was 37 years -- 1852-1815.

At this point he associated Chaires and Sesochris with him on the throne. Sesochris -- the eighth in Manetho's list -- was succeeded by Cheneres -- the ninth in Manetho. Their reigns:

Parallel with Sesochris was Chaires, who reigned for 17 years. His successor was Nephercheres (Neferkare in the King-lists). Manetho gives him a total reign of 25 years, but the Palermo Stone and the Turin Papyrus indicate he was removed from the kingship by Sesochris after a reign of only 15 years. The Turin Papyrus preserves the record that Sesochris replaced him for 8 years. Following the usurpation by Sesochris, Nephercheres returned to the throne for 10 more years completing 25 years of reign. He was succeeded by Necherophes, the first king listed by Manetho for Dynasty III of Memphis. In chart form this information appears thus:

The Turin Papyrus indicates that the return to power of Nephercheres was facilitated by another prince of royal blood who shared the throne. Though Manetho does not list him, he and his successor appear in the King-lists and in the Turin Papyrus as follows:

Thus every date from each document is accounted for. The total length of Dynasty II is 256 years -- 1993-1737, Altogether 517 years had elapsed since human government was established after the deluge.

Joseph and the Seven-Years' Famine

It has been necessary to name kings not associated with Biblical events in order to establish the proper date for Dynasty III. This dynasty is one of the most important in all Egyptian history. In it are the records of Joseph's rulership and of the seven years' famine. This dynasty is usually mistakenly placed over a thousand years too early! But before proceeding, we must examine the Turin Papyrus for a most significant summary date.

The Turin Papyrus contains the following entry after Dynasty VIII: 'Kings since Menes, their kingdoms and years: 949 years: kingless years: 6. Total, 955.' (See Gardiner's Royal Canon of Turin.) It also lists 181 years for Dynasty VI. The known length of Dynasty III is 74 years, of Dynasty IV, 123; of Dynasty V, 140; of Dynasty VIII, 140. And remember, Dynasty I and Dynasty II totaled 517 years. Yet the total for the entire period is only 955 years. There is no other possible explanation than that certain of these dynasties reigned parallel with each other. Joseph will be found listed in two of them!

To return to Dynasty III -- the first dynasty of the city of Memphis. The Turin Papyrus, together with the restored Palermo Stone, provides the complete regnal years of the five successive kings who dominated the dynasty. The name Zoser, the first ruler of the dynasty is also spelled Djoser.

The end of a seven-year's famine occurred at the close of year 18 of Zoser I (end of winter 1719). No other seven-years' famine is reported during the entire history of the Pharaohs. This is the Biblical seven-years' famine under Joseph. It is at the right time.

An account of the calamity is to be found on the rocks of the island of Sehel, at the First Cataract. A modern translation of it may be found in 'Biblical Archaeology' by G. Ernest Wright, page 56. The account reads:

'Year 18 .... I was in distress on the Great Throne, and those who are in the palace were in Heart's affliction from a very great evil, since the Nile had not come in my time for a space of seven years. Grain was scant, fruits were dried up, and everything which they eat was short .... The infant was wailing; the youth was waiting; the heart of the old man was in sorrow .... The courtiers were in need. The temples were shut up .... Everything was found empty.' (Translation by J. A. Wilson in 'Ancient Near Eastern Texts', edited by J. B. Pritchard, page 31.)

But where does Joseph appear in this period? The answer is found in Dynasty III and Dynasty IV of Manetho. He appears under the name Suphis (or Souphis or Saophis) -- different Greek spellings from Manetho's abstractors. Joseph in Hebrew, it should be noted, is not pronounced with an English 'J' sound, but with a 'Y' sound. In Manetho's Egyptian transcription of the name only the consonents 's' and 'ph' appear -- hence the Greek Souphis or its variant forms. Eratosthenes wrote that the Egyptians had designated Suphis as a 'money-getter' or 'trafficker' (Fragment 17, 'Manetho', by W. G. Waddell, page 219).

Dynasty III in Manetho is made up of many rulers which do not appear in the Turin Papyrus. Only the two Djosers appear in each list, and in each case the full length of reign is preserved in Manetho. These otherwise unknown rulers are accounted fiction by modern historians. Had they only looked in the Bible they would have found one of them in the person of Joseph.

In Dynasty IV Suphis or Joseph is given 66 years by Manetho. This makes it clear that Dynasty IV -- a foreign dynasty -- parallels Dynasty III. The two records together tell the full story. Only the latter portion of Joseph's reign is preserved in the list of rulers in Dynasty III. The entire period of Joseph's public service is contained in the parallel account. The 66 years of Joseph's public service cover the years 1734-1668. Compare this date with Zoser's seven years of famine. The famine ended in 1719 after the rise in Upper Egypt of the new Nile during the summer of 1720 in Zoser's 18th year. The famine thus extends in Egypt from the spring of 1726 to the spring of 1719 (Jacob came to Egypt in the summer of 1725, after the harvest had failed two years in Palestine ) The seven harvests of great abundance were during the years 1733-1727. Joseph, according to the Bible, came to power in 1734, the year before the beginning of the seven years of prosperity. And 1734 is the very date for the commencement of Joseph's public office, as listed in the fourth dynasty! Joseph was 30 years of age upon entering his service (Gen. 41:46). He thus served till 96 years of age, and died at 110 (50:26).

But Manetho's account does not end here. There are yet four kings that complete the dynasty. These kings parallel, in part, those already mentioned, and whose reign is preserved in the Turin Papyrus.

In summary, the third dynasty is divided at times into two or three branches -- just as was the second dynasty. The government under this dynasty was centered at Memphis. Not every ruler was of the same rank, of course, but all exercised royal power (Genesis 41:39-44).

Although Dynasty IV, in which Joseph's and Job's long reigns are recorded, is parallel with these events, it is better to restore it after the fifth and sixth dynasties are presented.

The Exodus

In Manetho, Dynasty V is designated as from Elephantine -- far away to the south, in Upper Egypt on the borders of Nubia. Although Manetho lists nine kings in the dynasty, he plainly states that there were only 'eight kings from Elephantine.' This mystery has never been solved by historians. Their explanation is that the records are incorrect. Not so. There were only eight kings from Elephantine, because Sephres, the second in the list, was of the Memphis line and had already appeared as Sephuris in the third dynasty. He is the key to the proper dating of Dynasty V. Though from Elephantine, the government was usually centered near Memphis. The Turin Papyrus and the restored Palermo Stone give us the following summary:

With Unis the dynasty comes to a catastrophic end. (He was a contemporary of the Pharaoh who perished at the Red Sea.) The king died the night of the Passover. Unis was a firstborn' He was also a cannibal! After Moses left Egypt, he commenced the frightful practice of eating the firstborn of his enemies. That is one of the reasons God slew the firstborn of Egypt. From the pyramid-tomb of Unis one may read this horrible account of his life, his blasphemous claims, and his deeds.

'Behold, Unas hath arrived at the height of heaven .... Ra is on one side and Horus is on the other, and Unas is between them .... Unas hath weighed his word with the hidden god who hath no name, on the day of hacking in pieces the firstborn .... Unas devoureth men .... He ... cutteth off hairy scalps ... the cordmaster hath bound them for slaughter. Khonsu the slayer of ... hath cut their throats and drawn out their inward parts, for it was he whom Unas sent to drive them in: and Shesem hath cut them in pieces and boiled their members in his blazing cauldrons. Unas hath eaten their words of power, and he hath swallowed their spirits; the great ones among them serve for his meal at daybreak, the lesser serve for his meal at eventide, and the least among them serve for his meal at night. The old gods and the old goddesses become fuel for his furnace. The mighty ones in heaven shoot out fire under the cauldrons which are heaped up with the haunches of the firstborn; and he that maketh those who live in heaven to revolve around Unas hath shot into the cauldrons the haunches of their women of the gods in visible form. UNAS IS THE FIRSTBORN OF THE FIRSTBORN existence is ... and the offerings made unto him are more than those made unto the gods ...' (from E. A. Wallis Budge's 'A History of Egypt', vol. II, pages 83-88.) Compare King Unis and his blasphemous claims with II Thessalonians 2:3-4. A remarkable analogy.

Name in Manetho Length of Reign Dates

Manetho adds details to this dynasty missing from the Turin Canon. His figures for length of reign clearly illustrate that several kings of Dynasty V reigned jointly as with almost every previous royal line. From Manetho's abstractors the following table may be drawn up:

(The reign of Usercheres in the Turin Papyrus does not begin until 1627, after the end of its Dynasty IV, though he had previously been reigning.)

At this point the line of Elephantine divides into two branches. After year 17 of Cheres, Rathures came to power for 44 years and was succeeded by Unis.

After the 20-year reign of Cheres, Tancheres came to power also for 44 years, with Unis as his successor as follows:

For a total period of 9 years Mencheres shared in the government, giving rise to three parallel reigns. Subdivisions of government as here illustrated were quite typical of the ancient world. An example that might be cited is the government of the later Roman Empire when subdivided into two parts, each under two emperors.

Pharaoh of the Exodus

Now for the sixth dynasty. To determine its chronological place in history, we must first establish the end of Dynasty VIII. Dynasty VIII, located at Memphis, was a very weak period -- under foreign dominion, as will later be established. It lasted a total of 140 years. Many of the names of its kings have been found, but no regnal dates for any individual kings can be determined. (Consult Gardiner's 'Egypt of the Pharaohs', page 437.) This dynasty concludes the 955 years from the beginning of the government of Menes or Cush at Babel, according to the Turin Canon. Its dates are therefore 1439-1299.

It was preceded by 6 kingless years, extending from 1445-1439. This period corresponds with Joshua's conquest of Goshen to the Nile (Joshua 10:41 and 11:16). Sometimes these six kingless years are attached to Dynasty VI; on other occasions the period is attached to Dynasty VIII. During this period of six kingless years occurs the ephemeral seventh dynasty. Africanus records that it comprised a kind of council with 70 kings exercising authority for 70 days. Eusebius declares there were 5 kings who ruled for 75 days. Little else is known of the period.

Dynasty VI of Memphis immediately preceded this period. It lasted 181 years -- 1626-1445. The following chart is determined from archaeological evidence and the Turin Canon.

Manetho assigns to Othoes 30 years, at the end of which time he was assassinated by his bodyguard, His total reign extended from 1643-1613. Manetho's second king Phios is assigned 53 years: 1613-1560. He reigned jointly during the early years of his young son Pepi the Great (Phiops Neferkare) Menthusuphis is assigned by Manetho 7 years, and archaeological finds indicate he reigned a year jointly with his young brother before he died (1581-1580).

Compare these dates with those of Dynasty V for the Exodus. Dynasty V ended at 1486 with the death of the magician-king (Unis is called Jannes in II Timothy 3:8.) In Dynasty VI king Merenre II also dies in 1486, after only one year's reign. He was succeeded by his wife Nitocris, then by his son Neferka 'the younger.' Neferka's older brother, the firstborn, died at the Passover. No trace of him has been found. Compare this with Exodus 2:23, 'And it came to pass in the course of those many days that the king of Egypt died.' This king is Neferkare -- more commonly called Pepi II -- who reigned the longest in all Egyptian history. He came to the throne at 6 years of age and died at 100. Then God calls Moses. To Moses he declared: 'Go, return into Egypt: for all the men are dead that sought thy life' (Exodus 4:19). Merenre II was now reigning -- the Pharaoh whom Moses and Aaron met and who perished in the Red Sea. At this juncture in history Egypt collapsed. Foreign invaders enter the land -- but who they were and where they came from must wait until all the previous dynasties before the Exodus are determined.

Dynasty IV -- the Pyramid Builders

To return to the story of Joseph. Parallel with Dynasty III of Memphis, was Dynasty IV, 'eight kings of Memphis belonging to a different line.' This dynasty includes such famous names as Cheops, Chephren and Mycerinus -- to use the names made familiar by Herodotus. The list of kings of the fourth dynasty in the Turin Canon and on the Palermo Stone differs from Manetho after Cheops. The result, no doubt, of the tragic plague that came upon Cheops (Job). The Palermo Stone and the Turin Canon begin Dynasty IV 123 years before Dynasty V. That means it commenced the 24-year reign of Snefru in 1750. The following dates are from Turin Canon and restored Palermo Stone.

(According to Herodotus, the Great Pyramid took 20 years to build, much of it during the time of the seven-years' famine when labor was available. The loss of authority after 23 years appears to correspond with the plague on Job. At this point the death of several of the sons of Cheops is recorded at the tombs near Gizeh) Continuing:

At this point this branch of the dynasty was succeeded by the kings of Dynasty V, from Elephantine.

The following is the information preserved by Manetho who begins the dynasty five years earlier than does the Turin Canon. (Note that Cheops is designated as Job. See May 1958 'Good News', p. 3.)

Parallel with Mycerinus were the following:

Herodotus tells us that according to Egyptian tradition there were 150 years between the beginning of the dynasty and the end of the life of Mycerinug, 1755-1605. Manetho's account appears senseless to historians because they have assumed there were no other kings than those whose records they have found through archaeology. It is often the men who were least important in their own age whose tombs or monuments have been recovered, while the individuals who loomed large at the time have vanished completely.

COMPENDIUM OF WORLD HISTORY

VOLUME 1

A Dissertation Presented to The Faculty of the Ambassador College Graduate School of Theology In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Theology

by Herman L. Hoeh

1962(1963-1965, 1967 Edition)

CHAPTER SIX

The Revival of Egypt

The return of Egypt to a great world power commenced with the overthrow of the Shepherd Kings in Upper Egypt. It opened the way for the most glamorous -- and the most incestuous -- of all Egyptian families -- Dynasty XVIII of Thebes.

Archaeology has provided a wealth of information for this period. Yet no standard textbook has ever restored Dynasty XVIII to its rightful place in history. Because Manetho presented his history of Egypt's thirty dynasties in successive order, it was early assumed that the exodus occurred under this dynasty. Modern historians have long recognized that not one shred of evidence supports this preposterous traditional conception inherited from Catholic scholars. As a solution, they have proposed an even more preposterous theory -- that the exodus -- if it took place at all! -- was under the succeeding nineteenth dynasty. There is indeed a reference to Israel during the nineteenth dynasty of Egypt, but it is to the captivity of Israel -- not to the exodus, as will be demonstrated when restoring the Ramesside period.

Dynasty XVIII

Archaeological and classical materials are sufficient to restore in detail the dynastic sequence and relationship of the kings and queens of Dynasty XVIII. Ahmose commenced the dynasty and expelled the foreign Shepherd Kings. His queen, Ahmose-Nofreteroi, is 'depicted for some unaccountable reason with a black countenance,' declared Sir Alan Gardiner in 'Egypt of the Pharaohs', page 175. The second king, Amenhotpe (Amenophis I), was pictured, black (I. Rosellini, 'I Monumenti dell' Egitto e della Nubia', Pisa, 1832-44). Foucart in an article in the 'Bulletin de, l'Institut Egyptien', 5 serie, II (1917), pages 268-269), presented evidence that in the Egyptian royal family of this period was Ethiopian blood.

But first, to restore Dynasty XVIII to its rightful place in history. From archaeological research and the classical writers the following chronological chart may be constructed.

*Joint with Thutmose III.

At this point the dynasty should be interrupted to recount the major events in Egypt which synchronize with the history of neighhoring nations and with the Bible.

The Biblical Parallel

The synchronism of Biblical and Egyptian history begins in the reign of Solomon, king of Israel. 'Solomon became allied to Pharaoh king of Egypt by marriage, and took Pharoah's daughter, and brought her into the city of David ...' (I Kings 3:1, Jewish Pub. Soc. trans.). (Who was the Pharaoh who became Solomon's father-in-law?

The answer may be established by determining the time of Solomon's reign. It is stated in I Kings 6:1, 'And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel came out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month Ziv, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the Lord' (JPS trans.).

From Egyptian history the exodus may be dated Nisan (March-April) 1486. The 480th year thus extended from 1007-1006 (spring to spring). The fourth year of the reign of Solomon (1008-1007, reckoning autumn to autumn according to the civil calendar) thus corresponds to the time of Pharaoh Thutmose II. His chief wife and queen was Hashepsowe (Hatshepsut in earlier authors). As the mother of the Egyptian princess whom Solomon married is unrecorded it is presently impossible to determine from history whether Hashepsowe was Solomon's mother-in-law or step-mother-in-law. In either case she could learn firsthand of the riches and fame of Israel's king.

Solomon commenced the building of the Temple in his fourth year. In the eleventh year of his reign it was completed (I Kings 6:37-38). Thereupon Solomon devoted his time to the erection of his palace. 'And Solomon was building his own house thirteen years ...' (I Kings 7:1). It was now the twenty-fourth year of Solomon's reign.

'And it came to pass at the end of twenty years (7 plus 13), wherein Solomon had build the two houses ...' that Hiram the king of Tyre came to visit Solomon (I Kings 9:10). But Hiram was not the only royal visitor who came about this time. 'And when the queen of Sheba heard of the fame of Solomon because of the name of the Lord, she came to proof him with hard questions' (I Kings 10:1). Jesus called the queen of Sheba 'the queen of the south' (Matthew 12:42 and Luke 11:31). In the book of Daniel, chapter 11, the king of the south is the ruler of Egypt and Ethiopia. Jesus' designation of the queen of Sheba as the 'queen of the south' therefore means that she was the ruler of Egypt and Ethiopia. Was a woman -- a queen -- ruling Egypt in the twenty-fourth year of Solomon? Indeed -- Maekaure Hashepsowe!

Josephus, the Jewish historian, preserves an account of this famous visitor. 'There was then a woman, queen of Egypt and Ethiopia book VIII, chapter vi, part 5).

Many modern historians have assumed that both Jesus and Josephus were incorrect. They limit the land of Sheba exclusively to southern Arabia. It is at this point that they seem to forget their history. Ethiopia anciently extended to southern Arabia. The land of Sheba -- the leading Ethiopian tribe -- included both southern Arabia and Ethiopia. Under Dynasty XVIII of Thebes Ethiopia and Egypt were united. The queen of the south was therefore also queen of Egypt -- the Hashepsowe of history.

Josephus preserves the name of the Queen of Sheba. He quotes from Herodotus and calls her 'Nicaule' ('Antiquities', book VIII, chapter vi, part 2). Any philologist would immediately recognize in the name Nicaule (Nikaule in Greek) only a dialectic form of the Egyptian Maekaure, the 'prenomen' of Hashepsowe.

Perhaps the most striking proof that Hashepsowe visited Palestine may be found recorded in the temple at Deir el Bahari. The walls of this temple enshrine the visit of the Queen to 'God's Land.' The event occurred in her ninth year -- 988-987 -- the year Solomon completed his great palace. In 'Ancient Records of Egypt', by Breasted, volume II, may be found the English translation of the inscriptions of the expedition. Here are extracts from this most famous of all Egyptian voyages:

'Sailing in the sea, beginning the goodly way towards God's-Land, journeying in peace to the land of Punt ...' (section 253).

God's Land is described in detail in section 288: 'I have led them on water and on land, to explore the waters of inaccessible channels, and I have reached the Myrrh-terraces.'

Queen Hashepsowe explored in God's Land 'waters of inaccessible channels' -- an awkward modern translation meaning 'spring-fed pools.' Solomon built many spring-fed pools to supply the lovely artificial wooded terraces. 'I made me gardens and parks,' wrote Solomon, 'and I planted trees in them of all kinds of fruit; I made me pools of water, to water therefrom the wood springing up with trees' (Ecclesiastes 2:5-7).

'It is a glorious region of God's-Land; it is indeed my place of delight .... They took myrrh as they wished, they loaded the vessels to their hearts' content, with fresh myrrh trees, every good gift of this country, Puntites whom the people know not, Southerns of God's-Land.' 'Trees were taken up in God's-Land, and set in the ground in Egypt' (sect. 294). The vessels of the Queen, on the return trip up the Nile to Thebes were heavily loaded with 'all goodly fragrant woods of God's-Land' and many other rarities which previously had been imported from around the world by the people of God's-Land. 'Never was brought the like of this for any king who has been since the beginning' (sect. 265).

Scholars have foolishly puzzled for decades over the location of 'God's-Land' -- 'Toneter' in Egyptian. It is really no puzzle. The word in Egyptian signifies 'Divine Land' or 'Holy Land.' The 'Holy Land' is Palestine!

Egyptian inscriptions precisely define the location of God's-Land as Palestine. It lies between Egypt and Syria. In the Papyrus Harris one reads of 'the products of Egypt, God's-Land, Syria and Kush' (Breasted, op. cit., vol. IV, sect. 313). Again: 'products of Egypt, products of God's-Land, products of Syria' (sects. 341, 387).

From the Piankhi Stela comes the same evidence: 'Then the ships were laden with silver, gold, copper, clothing, and everything of the Northland, every product of Syria, and all sweet woods of God's-Land. His majesty sailed up-stream ...' from the Mediterranean coast southward up the Nile to Upper Egypt (Breasted, op. cit., vol. IV, sect. 883).

En route from Egypt to Upper Syria, Thutmose III passed by God's Land. 'All plants that grow, all flowers that are in God's-Land which were found by his majesty when his majesty proceeded to Upper Retenu (Syria)' (Breasted, op. cit., vol. II, sect. 451).

Amenhotpe III cut cedar in God's Land for his sacred barge: ' was dragged over the mountains of Retenu (Lebanon) by the princes of all countries' (section 888). No mistaking this reference. God's Land could refer to no other region than Palestine, the Holy Land.

In God's Land, or Palestine, Hashepsowe found more than one people. Inhabiting the southern portion, where the Queen first landed, were native 'Puntites,' presented to her as servants by the ruling people of the land. In her monuments at Deir el Bahari these 'Puntites' are pictured as a short, round-headed, dark-skinned, thick-lipped people, whereas the dominant people were white men (Naville's 'Deir el Bahari', Pt. III, page 12).

The two peoples of the Holy Land were Israelites and Canaanites. A remnant of Canaanites -- the 'Puntites' of the inscriptions -- long lived in the mountains of Seir bordering on the Gulf of Aqaba. The words 'Punt' and 'Puntite' came to be pronounced in Egyptian without the 't.' A better spelling of the Egyptian word would be 'Puoni' or 'Pwene', the latter most commonly used today by scholars. (See Gardiner's 'Egypt of the Pharaohs', page 37, note 1.) When referring to wars with the Canaanite Carthaginians, the Romans spoke of Punic wars -- Punic being a synonym for Canaanite. The chief Canaanite people were the Sidonians. The father of Sidon, in classical literature, was named Pontus (Eusebius, 'Preparation for the Gospel', I, x, 27). In Scripture he is Canaan.

The land of Punt or Pwene was the land wherever Canaanites settled. Originally the land of 'Punt' was limited to Palestine -- in Scripture 'the land of Canaan' -- but in later times signified any land to which Phoenicians or Canaanites migrated. 'Afterward were the families of the Canaanite spread abroad' (Genesis 10:18). Hence in Egyptian literature Punt included lands outside of Palestine or God's Land.

God's Land is Palestine. The Queen of Sheba is Hashepsowe. But who is 'Shishak' the king of Egypt at the close of Solomon's reign?

Shishak Captures Jerusalem

In the later years of Solomon's reign, Egypt was ruled by a king named Shishak. He is introduced in I Kings 11:40, in an account of the strife between Solomon and Jeroboam. 'Solomon sought therefore to kill Jeroboam; but Jeroboam arose, and fled to Egypt, unto Shishak king of Egypt, and was there in Egypt until the death of Solomon.' Archaeology has as yet not found this name in Egypt, but it has appeared on tablets excavated at Ras Shamra in northern Syria. (See Dhorme's article in 'Revue Biblique', XL, Jan. 1931, page 55.) The Pharaohs of Egypt usually had many names, many of which have not yet been recovered by the archaeologists. Which king of Dynasty XVIII was Shishak?

The chronological chart at the beginning of this chapter indicates he was Thutmose III, often designated 'the Great.' He reigned not only in the later years of Solomon, but in the time of Rehoboam.

The Biblical record states that Shishak invaded Judah shortly after Solomon's death. 'And it came to pass in the fifth year of king Rehoboam, that Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem; and he took away the treasures of the house of the Lord, and the treasures of the king's house: he even took away all; and he took away all the shields of gold which Solomon had made' (I Kings 14:25-26).

A parallel and richer account is preserved in II Chronicles 12:1-8:

And it came to pass, when the kingdom of Rehoboam was established, and he was strong, that he forsook the law of the Lord, and all Israel with him. And it came to pass in the fifth year of king Rehoboam, that Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem, because they had dealt treacherously with the Lord, with twelve hundred chariots, and three- score thousand horsemen; and the people were without number that came with him out of Egypt; the Lubim, the Sukkiim, and the Ethiopians. And he took the fortified cities which pertained to Judah, and came unto Jerusalem. Now Shemaiah the prophet came to Rehoboam, and to the princes of Judah, that were gathered together to Jerusalem because of Shishak, and said unto them: 'Thus saith the Lord: Ye have forsaken Me, therefore have I also left you in the hand of Shishak.' Then the princes of Israel and the king humbled themselves; and they said: 'The Lord is righteous.'

And when the Lord saw that they humbled themselves, the word of the Lord came to Shemaiah, saying: 'They have humbled themselves; I will not destroy them: but I will grant them some deliverance, and My wrath shall not be poured out upon Jerusalem by the hand of Shishak. Nevertheless they shall be his servants; that they may know My service, and the service of the kingdoms of the countries.' '

This momentous event in the history of Judah is dated to the fifth year of king Rehoboam. Reckoning from the fourth year of Solomon, 1008-1007 (autumn to autumn according to the civil calendar). the fifth year of Rehoboam would be 967-966. Now the thirty-first year of Thutmose III is 967-966 (spring to spring). The two regnal years overlap six months in the autumn and winter of the year 967-966.

In his thirtieth year Thutmose campaigned in Judah. He did not capture Jerusalem in this year (Breasted's 'Ancient Records of Egypt', vol. II, sect. 465, footnote a). However he did harvest their grain and take hostages.

Year thirty-one of Thutmose corresponds to Rehoboam's fifth. In this year Rehoboam humbled himself. Nevertheless, God allowed Thutmose to take Jerusalem. (For best Bible rendering see the Jewish Publication Society translation of II Chronicles 12:1-8.) For the list of spoils and tribute taken see Breasted, sections 471 and 473.

The first Egyptian to pierce the walls of Kadesh was Amenemhab He records in his biography: 'His majesty sent forth every valiant man of his army, in order to pierce the wall for the first time, which Kadesh had made. I was the one who pierced it, being the first of all the valiant: no other before me did it' (section 590).

Archaeologists have spent years guessing the whereabouts of the city of Kadesh. No one, it seems, has suspected that it is Jerusalem!

All scholars recognize that the word Kadesh means 'Holy.' When used in reference to a city, it means a Holy City. Jerusalem is many times called the Holy City in Scripture. In Daniel 9:24 Jerusalem is referred to as 'the holy city.' In the original Hebrew, the root word for 'holy' is KADESH. Nehemiah 11:1 speaks of 'Jerusalem the holy city.' Again the Hebrew root for 'holy' is KADESH, sometimes spelled KODESH. See also Isaiah 48:2 and numerous other passages.

In all, Thutmose mentions one hundred and nineteen captured cities of Palestine. Kadesh is listed first, Megiddo second (A. Jirku, 'Die aegyptischen Listen der Palaestinensischen und Syrischen Ortsnamen,' 'Klio Beihefte', XXXVIII, Leipzig, 1937). The wealth plundered from the Palace and the Temple in Jerusalem was engraved on the walls of the great Amon temple at Karnak and may be seen to this day.

Thutmose received continuous tribute from Judaea during the succeeding years of his reign, confirming the Biblical statement that the Jews became the 'servants' of Shishak (II Chronicles 12:8).

In the forty-second year of Thutmose's reign he again 'arrived at the district of Kadesh, captured the cities therein.' (Sections 529, 531 ) This was in 955 or one year before Rehoboam died. Rehoboam reigned seventeen years in all (II Chronicles 12:13) In 954 Abijah succeeded his father -- twelve years after the capture of Jerusalem (966) Thutmose's intention was to perpetuate Egyptian rule on the kingdom of Judah. Rehoboam was old and weak after continual wars with Jeroboam.

Before completing the life of Thutmose, it is important to consider two other campaigns which preceded the attack on Jerusalem. In his twenty-third year, 975 exactly 511 years after the Exodus and the coming of the Hyksos into Egypt, Thutmose commenced 'the first victorious expedition to extend the boundaries of Egypt with might ... Now, at that period the Asiatics had fallen into disagreement, each man fighting against his neighbor .' (Breasted, op cit., vol II, sections 415-416).

This campaign proceeded no farther north than Tripolis of the southern Lebanon. It marks the termination of the 511 years assigned to the Hyksos period by Josephus and the classical writers. Southern Phoenicia, from whence came some of the Shepherd Kings, was now subject to the Egyptians. Seven years later, 518 years after the Exodus in the thirtieth year of Thutmose III, a major campaign was carried on along the eastern Mediterranean coast to the city of Arvad (sect. 461). All of Phoenicia now passed under Egyptian sway. With this campaign the 518 years also assigned to the Hyksos period by Josephus were completed.

These momentous shifts in world politics at the close of Solomon's reign were the direct result of Solomon' sin, described in I Kings 11:1-13. Historians, interpreting history without God and the Bible, have mistakenly assumed that the spectacular growth in Egyptian power was due solely to Thutmose's political astuteness. Neglected is the military situation. Thutmose could never have accomplished his extended campaigns apart from revolts against Solomon. I Kings 11 14-40 unveils what the trip-hammer blows were that cracked Israel's power. The Edomites became restive, the Arameans in Damascus independent, and ten out of the twelve tribes of Israel were anticipating the death of Solomon as a quick remedy for excessive taxation. Thutmose merely seized the spoils of a nation which had grown soft spiritually because it set its mind on physical greatness alone.

Who Was Zerah the Ethiopian?

Time moves on to another generation. Thutmose is dead. In his stead reigns Amenhotpe II. In Jerusalem king Rehoboam was succeeded first by Abijah (for 3 years), then by his grandson Asa. The record is found in II Chronicles 14 and 15.

Important military changes were disturbing the eastern Mediterranean seaboard. Fortified cities had to be hastily constructed throughout Judah (II Chr 14:5). An efficient army was trained during ten years of quiet. Suddenly in the fifteenth year of Asa (937-936) 'there came out against them Zerah the Ethiopian with an army of a thousand thousand (one million troops), and three hundred chariots; and he came unto Mareshah. Then Asa went out to meet him ....' Judah earnestly sought divine intervention against the great host of Lubim and the Ethiopiens (II Chr. 16:8) that had come out of Egypt. 'So the Lord smote the Ethiopians before Asa, and before Judah; and the Ethiopians fled. And Asa and the people that were with him pursued them unto Gerar; and there fell of the Ethiopians so that none remained alive: for they were scattered before the Lord, and before His host: and they (Judah) carried away much booty' (Jewish translation), After the battle and the spoiling of the region of Gerar, the Jews 'gathered themselves to Jerusalem in the third month, in the fifteenth year of the reign of Asa. And they sacrificed unto the Lord in that day (Pentecost), of the spoil which they had brought ...' (II Chr. 15:10-11). Who was the Zerah whose army was totally annihilated in Asa's reign?

One would hardly expect to discover the full truth of such a catastrophic defeat engraven on the monuments of the vanquished. Perchance the defeat is glossed over and made to appear a victory.

No monument to our knowledge tells the story of the defeat. However, there certainly is an historical Zerah. He appears in the king lists of Ethiopia at the very time the battle occurred. Through the centuries the Ethiopians preserved the name of this man who played no small role in the history of Judah.

Zerah belonged to the Dynasty of Menelik I. The dynasty began with the death of Hashepsowe in 975 B.C. Menelik, the first ruler, was the son of Solomon and an Egyptian princess. The complete king list can be found in C.F. Rey's book: 'In the Country of the Blue Nile', 1927.

Dynasty of Menelik I

The king list continues down to the present and can be referred to in the Compendium, vol. II, appendix B.

In Egypt Amenhotpe II was reigning. His authority extended south beyond Napata in Ethiopia (Breasted, 'Ancient Records', vol. II, sect. 797). He succeeded his father Thutmose III in 943. Amenhotpe's first documented campaign into Palestine occurred in his year 3 (941). This was near the close of the 10th year of Asa, king of Judah. Asa had ten years of peace at the beginning of his reign (951-941). (See II Chronicles 14:1, 5, 6). A later Egyptian campaign occurred in the beginning of Amenhotpe's seventh year (937). The king set out on a grand expedition into Palestine. His seventh year corresponds to Asa's fourteenth. This date -- 937 -- is one year before Zerah's invasion. Amenhotpe's campaign, recorded on the Memphis stela, should not be confused with the Ethiopian invasion of Palestine in the spring of 936.

(NOTE: To view the figure placed here, see the file CMPDM1B.TIF in the Images\OtherWCG directory.)

The Memphis stela reads: 'Year 7, 1st month of the third season. day 25 .... His majesty proceeded to Retenu (Palestine) .... His majesty reached Shamesh-Edom.' On the Karnak stela the next move is also dated: '1st month of the third season. day 26. His majesty's crossing the ford of the Orontes on this day.' He was north of Palestine.

The prince of Kadesh surrendered the city to the armies of Amenhotpe. He swore fealty to the Egyptians rather than undergo a siege. But this Kadesh -- a holy city -- was Carchemish in Syria. (Consult Pritchard's 'Ancient Near Eastern Texts', page 245, and footnotes 8 and 9; also Breasted's translation of the Karnak stela, section 784.)

Dynasty XVIII in Manetho

Manetho's transcribers -- Josephus, Africanus, Eusebius -- are usually charged with totally corrupting this Theban dynasty. Had the archaeologists and historians spent as much time understanding Manetho's extractors. instead of condemning them, they would have recovered the full account of Amenhotpe II. The chart which follows is based solely on Manetho's transcribers. It should be compared with the first one given in this chapter which is based on archaeological evidence and on Manetho. (The abbreviations -- 'J', 'A', 'E', 'T' -- following either names, or lengths of reign stand for variations in Josephus Africanus, Eusebius, or Theophilus. -- The figures of Josephus have been reduced to whole calendar years.)

The insignificant differences of spelling in the Greek are due naturally to the changes in pronunciation of Egyptian sounds over many centuries -- and to abbreviations. Several of these names have never been discovered by archaeologists. This does not mean the Greek or Hebrew writers imagined names, but rather that archaeology is limited in what it can recover from the past.

Of greater historic significance are the variations in regnal years. Far from being mere scribal errors, each contributes additional information not preserved by the other epitomes of Manetho. If Manetho is to be fully understood, all the evidence must be taken together.

Consider the minor variations in the reign of Thutmose II and Hashepsowe. Josephus preserves the fact that he reigned only twenty full calendar years when succeeded by his son Thutmose III. But both Africanus and Eusebius bring out the detail that one more year elapsed before his sister and queen, Hashepsowe, assumed supreme rule as Queen of Egypt. Again, Africanus assigns 22 years to Hashepsowe to indicate that she was associated with her stepson for 22 calendar years after the death of her brother. Her dominant role in government as senior co-regent for 21 years is preserved only by Josephus, who is confirmed by archaeology and monumental finds.

The length of reign of Thutmose III as preserved by Manetho's abstractors has been rejected in toto. Though it appears on the surface to be irreconcilable with archaeological finds, it is nevertheless correct. Thutmose III reigned solely for only 12 years after the death of Hashepsowe. At that time he associated his son Amenhotpe II with him on the throne. Archaeology confirms a period of joint reign, but has not yet discovered its duration. Had the archaeologists opened their eyes, they would have long ago found its duration in Manetho. (See Pritchard's 'Ancient Near Eastern Texts', page 245, footnote 1.)

The figure of 13 calendar years for the reign of Thutmose III, preserved by Africanus, does not commence with the death of his step-mother, but with his assumption of power in 976 -- the beginning of his 22nd year. In the year following 976 he began his military campaign into southern Phoenicia, 511 years after the Exodus. Next the reign of Amenhotpe II -- the son of Thutmose III. His frightfully long name is not what has confounded historians. It is his length of reign that no one, it seems, has made sense of. Compare the information from archaeology, in the first chart, with these figures from Manetho. It is immediately evident that Theophilus has preserved the length of the joint reign -- 20 years -- 963-943. In 943 Thutmose III died. Josephus, by contrast, has preserved Amenhotpe II's length of reign -- 25 years -- after the death of his father. But Africanus and Eusebius give yet a different length -- 26 years. They measure the length of Amenhotpe's reign from the time he held full power during the last year of his father's reign -- that is 944-943. The emphasis upon this date in Amenhotpe's reign has been corroborated by archaeology. Again the figures of the transcribers can be explained.

It should be noted that none of the transcribers of Manetho has preserved all his facts. Each, however, complements the other. Why is Amenhotpe I missing as the second king in the dynasty? Tethmosis or Amose is correctly stated to be the first king. His 25 years are also confirmed by archaeology. He is plainly declared by Manetho's transcribers to be the father of Thutmose I or Chebron who was the third king of Dynasty XVIII. How are these apparent discrepancies to be resolved?

It has been commonly assumed by moderns that Thutmose I was a son of the first Amenhotpe by a secondary wife. But there is absolutely no evidence from archaeology to support this hypothesis (Drioton and Vandier, 'L'Egypte' (1952), page 336).

Manetho's statement that he was a son of Ahmose explains, in part, why the classical writers passed over Amenhotpe I. The story of Dynasty XVIII is the story of a family through blood descent. Apparently Amenhotpe I was not in that line of descent. He may have been a younger brother of Amosis. The following list of kings, beginning from the expulsion of the Hyksos rulers in 1076, is preserved by Syncellus from the book of Sothis. Take special note of the dates of Amose.

The Book of Sothis

This list also placed Amosis immediately before Chebron (Thutmose I). Ahmose (Amosis) reigned into his 26th year. Syncellus therefore assigned the last incomplete year as a whole calendar year and gave him 26 -- from 1076 to 1050. In 1030 his son Chebron assumed the throne under the name of Thutmose. Manetho's other transcribers gave only the length of reign from 1076 to 1051 using the non-accession year method of reckoning. By contrast Syncellus used the accession year method of reckoning for Amosis, whereby the last incomplete year is assigned to the predecessor, not to the successor. Since Syncellus also did not include Amenhotpe I, he overlooked 20 years and proceeded to name Chebron next.

To fully understand Manetho, one must combine the evidence from his transcribers with archaeological discoveries. Neither Manetho nor archaeological evidence is sufficiently complete to be used alone for the beginning reigns of this dynasty.

The Book of Sothis' dates of the reigns of the first several rulers of the Theban dynasty are not necessarily indicative of the year of death. They may designate political changes. Recall the case of Joseph in the third dynasty, who lived another 14 years after completing his term in public office.

In the book of Sothis king Thutmose II, the husband and brother of Amenses-Hashepsowe, is given only 15 years. This dating is confirmed by rock inscriptions at Assuan. Hashepsowe ordered Senmut, an important public officer, to prepare two great obelisks to commemorate her co-regency 'in year 16' of her brother Thutmose II. It has been commonly assumed that 'year 16' refers to a time in her own reign. This conclusion is totally unwarranted, for 'in year 16' Hashepsowe was still 'King's Sister, Divine Consort, Great King's Wife.' Thutmose II was still living. The inscription is in honor of 'the Divine Consort, Sovereign of the entire Two Lands' -- that is, in honor of the assumption of royal power by Hashepsowe in her brother's sixteenth year. The obelisks were not finally erected and inscribed until her joint reign with her stepson Thutmose III. (See Breasted's 'Ancient Records', vol. II, sections 359-362; also Weigall's 'History of the Pharaohs', vol. II, pages 288-289.)

Thus for five years prior to his death, Thutmose II associated his sister-wife with him on the throne as queen consort. She became senior co-regent with her stepson in 996, one year after the death of her brother. She continued in public office until 975.

Why then does her reign appear to cease in 991 according to the book of Sothis? Who is the 'king' named Misphragmuthosis who ceased to reign the very year that Hashepsowe died?

The answer is unique in Egyptian history. The masculine name Misphragmuthosis is Hashepsowe's! Under Thutmose II she was originally only queen consort. In the year after his death she began to rule as Queen. At length -- in 991 -- she assumed masculine titles, appeared as a man and took a man's name. The monuments of Egypt picture her in her later life as a male, though they at times refer to the king as 'her.'

Writes Sir Alan Gardiner in 'Egypt of the Pharaohs', page 183: ' man. The change did not come about without some hesitation, because there is at least one relief where she appears as King of Upper and Lower Egypt, and yet is clad in woman's attire.'

The inscriptions recovered by archaeologists indicate she commenced the idea of becoming a king as early as her second year. ('Nachrichten von der Koeniglichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Goettingen,' 1955, page 212.) But it was not until her sixth year that it is officially recognized in the Book of Sothis.

One other hitherto unnoticed fact appears in the book of Sothis. The reign of Misphres (Thutmose III) continues 23 years after the reign of 'King' Hashepsowe. At that point his grandson Thutmose IV is associated with him on the throne. The book of Sothis takes no notice of Amenhotpe II. These records indicate that the practice of Theban Dynasty XII, of associating sons and grandsons on the throne. was also a practice of Theban Dynasty XVIII. For the last nine years of Thutmose III or Shishak's life, he was associated on the throne with both son and grandson.

With the reign of Thutmose IV, the first half of Dynasty XVIII is completed. The succeeding rulers of the dynasty lead into the much-misunderstood period of the Ramessides, to be unravelled in the next chapter, or two.