posted
Has anyone else read Ahmend Osman's "Hebrew Pharaohs of Egypt"?
After reading most of the chapters I'm a lot less skeptical about his theory about the biblical patriarch, Joseph, and his possible linking to Egypt's 18th dynasty.
He names the 18th dyansty official, Yuya, as the real Joseph and Akhnaten is generally believed to be a grandson of Yuya. It's a very interesting read and it strengthens the likelihood that the biblical exodus did occur in some manner.
kembu Member # 5212
posted
The problem lies in documentation. The ancient Egyptians were meticulous record keepers. A major event like the exodus would have been recorded. Evidence is yet to be unearthed to support this contention.
Apparently, there are murals depicting Hebrew tribes in Egypt. The Hebrew people portrayed there look more like other Western Asias (i.e., the Syrians on the Tomb of Seti painting). They look meditteranean.
You must also realize that Hawass is meticulous about not publishing evidence that demonstrate the Africanness of the ancient Egyptians and any connections they may have had with Hebrew people.
I am not ruling it out as utter fantasy, but I am not holding my breath for such evidence to come out either.
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
The title of this book announces it's author's bias and where he'll lose objectivity. This is displayed below where he assigns Hebrew names to the Egyptic letters. Despite this glaring case of misinformation, is there anything salvageable in the passage? I mean is the rest of it valid and accurate?
quote: Their Names The only known reference to Yuya before the discovery of his tomb was in the scarab issued by Amenhotep III in celebration of his marriage to Yuya's daughter, Tiye. It seems the king wanted everyone to know the name of the woman he had made his queen against the customs of his country. Copies were sent to foreign princes, reading in part ". . . the Great King's-Wife Tiye, who liveth. The name of her father is Yuya, the name of her mother is Tuya . . ." It was only then that the identity of Tiye's parents became known: earlier she had been thought to be a Mesopotamian princess from Mitanni, sent to Egypt to marry the king.
Only four letters were used by the scribes and craftsmen who wrote Yuya's name on the objects in his tomb:
alef phonetic value A
alef or yodh phonetic value A or Y
yodh phonetic value Y
waw phonetic value W
There was a fifth sign, called a determinative, that has no phonetic value and is merely inserted to help us to understand the meaning. In this particular case it indicates that the preceding letters are to be read as a man's name. Although only four signs were used, the result was a pronounced variation in the way Yuya's name was spelled. In all there are eleven spellings:
1. Ya-a: On the sledge-shaped canopy (Cairo Museum Catalogue No. 51001), the mummy-shaped sarcophagus (51002), the mummy-shaped coffin of wood covered with silver leaf (51003) and a second mummy-shaped coffin covered with gold leaf (51004).
2. Ya: A variation on coffin No. 51004.
3. Yi-Ya: On bands which formed a cage around Yuya's mummy (51010) and three ushabti boxes (51041, 5T43 and 51044).
4. Yu-Ya: On Yuya's canopic box (51012), eight ushabti (51025 and 51028-51034), an ushabti box (51041), two other boxes (51115 and 51116), a staff (51131) and a whipstock (51133).
5. Ya-Yi: On three ushabti (51024, 51026 and 51027).
6. Yu: On an ushabti box (51053).
7. Yu-Yu: On an ushabti box (51053) and the papyrus containing his copy of The Book of the Dead (51189) where his name is always spelled Yu-Yu.
8. Ya-Ya: On a model coffin (51054).
9. Yi-Ay: On two sets of four vases on stands (51101 and 51103).
10. Yi-a: On a limestone bird with a human face (51176).
11. Yu-y: On another canopic box (51012).
The name is written in all but two cases as two syllables -- Yu on the lid of an ushabti box (although inside the same syllable is repeated as Yu-Yu) and Ya on a coffin. Every syllable begins with the letter 'Y', which in this case has to be read as a consonant because an Egyptian syllable cannot start with a vowel.
I posted the above to give a place to discuss Yuya instead of cluttering other threads and having it all scattered over everywhere. Click here to see some of the artifacts cited in the quote.
quote:Originally posted by Maahes in the Was Queen Tiye Nubian? thread: Tiye's father or surrogate father Yuya's name is clearly not Egyptian.
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
Yuyu's titles from his tomb:
Father of the God or Holy Father Master of the Horse Deputy of his Majesty in Chariotry Bearer of the Ring of the King of Lower Egypt Seal-Bearer of the King of Lower Egypt Hereditary Noble and Count Overseer of the Cattle of Min Lord of Akhmim Overseer of the Cattle of Amun Favorite of Good God Confidant of King Confidant of Good God Mouth of the King of Upper Egypt Ears of the King of Lower Egypt Prophet of the God Min Sole Friend First of Friends Prince Great Prince Great of Love Plentiful in Favors of the House of King Enduring of the Love Under His Lord Beloved of the King of Upper Egypt Beloved of the King of Lower Egypt Beloved of the Lord of Two Lands Beloved of God Possessor of Favor under the Lord of the Two Lands Praised of Good God Praised of His God Praised of His Lord Praised of his King The Wise One
R U 2 religious Member # 4547
posted
I'm not a fan of Ahmend Osman's ... he is extremely bias in a lot of his interpretations.
quote:Originally posted by neo*geo: Has anyone else read Ahmend Osman's "Hebrew Pharaohs of Egypt"?
After reading most of the chapters I'm a lot less skeptical about his theory about the biblical patriarch, Joseph, and his possible linking to Egypt's 18th dynasty.
He names the 18th dyansty official, Yuya, as the real Joseph and Akhnaten is generally believed to be a grandson of Yuya. It's a very interesting read and it strengthens the likelihood that the biblical exodus did occur in some manner.
There were at least two other men with the name Yuya during the 14th -16th dynasties. There were also other men with the name Aye that lived during the same period of time.
The strict interpretation of the King JAmes bible has Joseph avoiding the unwanted attentions of the queen. If in actuality a man named Yuya/ Yusef/Joseph actually colluded with a Nilotic (read Nile River Valley Indigenous- in other words it is next to impossible to make a map without an airplane or satellite- thus-Nilotic versus Egyptian/Sudanese/ Ethiopian) Nilotic heiress queen colluded against a Hyksos "pharaoh" and produced children together, that would not agree with the official legend in the bible.
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
The King James version means little. The primary literary document is Sepher B*reishiyth, and even then, who wants to chase fantasy. Yoseph was Yoseph and Yuyu was Yuyu. Let's stick to learning about Yuyu based on authentic AE texts and artifacts and leave flights of fantasy to the enthusiasts.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
It mystifies me why so many people try to attribute a Biblical and more precisely Hebrew/Asiatic identification to Egyptian personages when there is no evidence of such.
R U 2 religious Member # 4547
posted
Actual there is evidence ... review what this dude say ... he makes a strong linguistic argument ...
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
Co-sign times ten.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: It mystifies me why so many people try to attribute a Biblical and more precisely Hebrew/Asiatic identification to Egyptian personages when there is no evidence of such.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
quote:Originally posted by R U 2 religious: Actual there is evidence ... review what this dude say ... he makes a strong linguistic argument ...
Weren't you paying attention? There is nothing strong about the linguistic argument the man presented, and even Takruri who is himself familiar with Hebrew easily refuted it.
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
Yuyu's outer coffin.
Yuyu's second and inner coffins with bustshots of the inner. Who the faces actually belong to, if to anyone at all, is your or my guess. Percy E. Newberry noticed evidence of inscription tampering where the name appears on the inner coffin. So the visage in the bust and face shots is probably not Yuyu's.
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
^ Are you suggesting then that this is another case of an Egyptian mummy co-opting the funerary property of another, or just a case of mistaken identity??
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted [img][/img]
Yuyu's restored mummy mask. I doubt if this is Yuyu's face either. The look of the mask was intentionally stylized by the original craftsman to fit the prefered conventions of Amenhotep III.
But then, we do have Yuyu's intact and undamaged mummy to examine for his phenotypic features. Only the hair color is incorrect and is yellow due to embalming chemicals. Very unEgyptianlike in the below photo is what looks like remnants of mustache and full beard not so visible in B&W photos. Then again, it may not be hair.
Doug M Member # 7650
posted
That outer coffin is huge as sh*t.
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
Hey, when you got it like that, flaunt it like that. By the descriptions I'm reading, that old mf was richer than hell.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: That outer coffin is huge as sh*t.
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
I'm not suggesting anything. You were hasty in positively identifying it as definately being the living image of Yuyu. I'm correcting that oversight.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Are you suggesting then that this is another case of an Egyptian mummy co-opting the funerary property of another, or just a case of mistaken identity??
Djehuti Member # 6698
posted
^ Yes, well those were all just what I gathered from google image search. But now that you mention it, the features are very different from the mummy. Also, I believe Doug on the other thread called out how these images look rather effeminate.
here is another angle of that golden bust, by the way.
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
I think this one's rightfully called a mummy mask and I thank you for a clearer 3/4-face front image than the one I couldn't upload. Hope you don't mind me juxtaposing them here.
OK, so now the research is on for detailed pics and excavator/Egyptologist commentary on that big ass coffin and the 2nd coffin, if they're maybe how the guy may've looked alive.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Yes, well those were all just what I gathered from google image search. But now that you mention it, the features are very different from the mummy. Also, I believe Doug on the other thread called out how these images look rather effeminate.
here is another angle of that golden bust, by the way.
Doug M Member # 7650
posted
Considering that all the mummies we have from the 18th dynasty differ in features, how can someone claim that there was a single unique "egyptian" look? The reason I posted those photos before is to show that curly to straight hair is not uncommon to the Nile Valley and that neither is facial hair. This is seen all the way down the Nile into Sudan and elsewhere. But I understand why some could have come to the conclusion why this may appear "different". Either way, what I would like to see is the craniofacial data for Yuya's mummy so it can be compared to the statistics collected by Kent Weeks. Seems odd that with all this discussion about origins, nobody decided to gather craniofacial data. And if they did, I wish I knew where it was.
posted
So somebody did bother to go to that site referenced in my lead post. So tell me, what do you think of the skull on their Akhenaton page?
Mike111 Member # 9361
posted
quote:Originally posted by neo*geo: Has anyone else read Ahmend Osman's "Hebrew Pharaohs of Egypt"?
After reading most of the chapters I'm a lot less skeptical about his theory about the biblical patriarch, Joseph, and his possible linking to Egypt's 18th dynasty.
He names the 18th dyansty official, Yuya, as the real Joseph and Akhnaten is generally believed to be a grandson of Yuya. It's a very interesting read and it strengthens the likelihood that the biblical exodus did occur in some manner.
Neo; if you are clinging to history as purported by Greeks and Romans who usurped the Hebrew religion that we now know as Christianity, then you are right: it's all a great mystery.
However, if you can put that aside, and think logically, then there is a great deal of material available to you.
You should of course, ignore most of the artifacts that you find floating around, Europeans have spent the last 150 years repainting them and re-carving the noses.
As to Osmans book, I haven't read it, but Kembu is right, Egyptians were meticulous about documentation. And they did document their Hebrew kings, and they did document the exodus.
If you can put the nonsense spewed by Europeans aside for a minute, read "Manetho" he documents the Hyksos expulsion well, and you will note that he mentions Moses explicitly.
On those pages you will also find many images of the Hebrews, these are mostly taken from Assyrian reliefs. They look quite different from that which the Europeans provide, don't they.
Doug M Member # 7650
posted
The fact that some of the Hyksos kings have names that sound like names from the bible shows that the Hyksos expulsion is part of the historical legend of the Exodus as found in the bible. But, the problem with the Hyksos in terms of those who are trying to make biblical connections, is the timing. Many scholars understand that there is no evidence of any Hebrews or Israelites during the 12th dynasty, so many scholars try to find evidence elsewhere. That is why many scholars try to place the exodus around the 18th dynasty, when there seems to be more evidence for the Habirou. The problem here is one of trying to make the facts fit into the bible. The facts say that there were many "exoduses" or expulsion of Levantine invaders and taking of Levantine prisoners as slaves due to military campaigns between Egypt and the Levant. The whole idea that the bible Exodus as one event that can be singled out among the backdrop constant back and forth between Egypt and the Levant is ridiculous.
Identifying the remains of any person or persons buried in Egypt as a Hebrew patriarch is obviously a contradiction of biblical events. If all the Hebrews LEFT EGYPT, then no residents would have been left behind and BURIED and those that did stay behind would not have been treated as royal elites or given an elite burial. If we are talking about exodus, then the word means to LEAVE, so there should not be anyone who expects to find these patriarchs from the bible, or their families buried IN EGYPT.
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
There's too much biblical mystification going on.
Hyksos names sounding like biblical names only means that those with such names were probably Semitic speakers.
Exodus is not the name Hebrews used. The Hebrew book detailing their years as an extended family in Egypt after Yoseph died until they separated into a tribal nation is titled Sh*moth, which simply means "names."
From the time Ya`aqob's family settled in Egypt until the time they left encompassed 210 years. During that time, those who died were of course buried in Egypt. Of all those who died over the three generations only Ya`aqob and Yoseph were not buried in Egypt, all the rest were.
For other evidences that Hyksos weren't B*nei Yisra'el see here.
alTakruri Member # 10195
posted
Also there's no guess work involved in dating the departure of B*nei Yisra'el from Egypt if we use the official records of both the Israelites and the Egyptians as presented before in these forums.
posted
^ Yes, the problem is indeed too much Biblical mystification. If the Hyksos have names similar to Hebrews it could only be accounted to their Semitic heritage. However I do find those two past discussions very interesting and they may well provide clues to the so-called "Exodus" event, which in Egyptian records may not have been significant at all.
By the way, even if Hebrews were inhabitants in Egypt which no doubt they were, where is the evidence that any of them became pharaoh??
posted 
[img][/img]
