posted
Manetho in his lost history of Egypt gave an account, probably, apocryphal, of a Pharaoh named Amenophis who ruled during the Jewish exodus. In this accounting the Pharaoh wanted to see the Gods and so was advised by a priest, also named Amenophis, to expel all the lepers in Egypt. The lepers are sent to work in the quarries east of the Nile. While there they choose as their leader a Heliopolitan priest named Osarseph who subsequently changed his name to Moses. The Pharaoh subsequently allows the lepers to settle in Avaris. After settling in Avaris the lepers invite the Hyksos into the city to wage war on Egypt. Pharoah declines to fight them and chose instead to flee to Ethiopia where he was guest of the King for 13 years. The Hyksos and lepers visit destruction upon Egypt and commit outrageous acts of sacrilege. After 13 years Pharaoh’s son expels the Hyksos and bring his father back from exile. The Hyksos flee Egypt and found a city called Jerusalem. This tale was recounted by Josephus in Contra Apionem. The tale was probably popular in Egypt during Ptolemaic period.
This tale to me underscores the negative perception the AE's had of Levantine peoples throughout their history. Of course it also served as settling the score: The Jews slandered the Egyptians in their writings. This was probably their reaction, their payback if you will. Some jewish scholars call this tale the first anti-semitic writing.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I doubt they were Jews. It's possible the Jews themselves descended from Egyptian/Ethiopian emigrants who, if this is true, could very well have been lepers.
Posts: 318 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Jews did more than just "Slander" Egypt, the whole Passover tale(the Plagues) was a mockery of the Important gods of Egypt. Each plague purposely mocked the Egyptian Gods with the very 1st Turning the Nile into blood and the Last death of the 1st born being direct Insults to the very meaning of Egypt.(Which begs the question why did the Hebrews hate Egypt so much but at the same time admired her wealth and wisdom)
Obviously it stems from Egyptian control on the Levant starting with TuthmosisIII, Israel was probably a vassle or tribute state.
If the Egyptian account is true and most people now days take the Egyptian accounts over the Biblical account and Israel were the Hyksos then the early history of the Israelites is different than what is believed, They were Warriors who controlled Egypt and worshiped at one point the Egyptian God Set.
As Heru says I believe the Jews were Egyptian/Ethiopian emigrants but I doubt they were a lepar colony.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:I doubt they were Jews. It's possible the Jews themselves descended from Egyptian/Ethiopian emigrants who, if this is true, could very well have been lepers.
Jari wrote:
quote:If the Egyptian account is true and most people now days take the Egyptian accounts over the Biblical account and Israel were the Hyksos then the early history of the Israelites is different than what is believed, They were Warriors who controlled Egypt and worshiped at one point the Egyptian God Set.
During Ptolemaic times there was definitely a conflation of Jewish origins with the Hyksos invaders of Egypt. The expulsion of the Hyksos was likewise conflated with the story of the exodus. Manetho believed it and Josephus after him. That Manetho weaved a story about lepers into his version of the Jewish origins is possibly an indication that there were elements in Lower Egypt that were not loyal to the throne during the Hyksos interlude. This is not too farfetched after all Lower Egypt was conquered - a better comparison might be the Anschluss. Remember the words:
quote: Asiatics will fall to his sword, Libyans will fall to his flame, Rebels to his wrath, traitors to his might,
I always found this an interesting question and probably a topic in itself - although probably not answerable: How well integrated were Lower Egyptians into the Kemetian state? Although it will be a mistake to think in terms of the modern day nation state paradigm it's still an interesting question.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, I have wondered the same thing to, about how integrated was Lower Egypt esp. the Delta regions. Remember prior and during the Rule of the 25th Dynasty there were "Rebels" in the Delta who were subdued by Taraqo. Im sure this was not the first time that tribes in the Delta tried to Rebel against Egypt.
Maybe this is why Memphis was Located where it was and why Ramses decided to build his city further North in the Delta, to help control and put down any Rebels who posed a threat to his throne and unification of the two lands.
Will Def. have to give that a 2nd look.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Maybe this is why Memphis was Located where it was and why Ramses decided to build his city further North in the Delta, to help control and put down any Rebels who posed a threat to his throne and unification of the two lands.
Most probably why Memphis was chosen as the centre of administration. Leading up to the pre-dynastic period Upper Egyptian graves display a much higher degree of wealth and social stratification than Lower Egypt. There was definitely a strategic reason for choosing Memphis.
Unfortunately there is probably nothing written on this subject [lower Egyptian resentment] so any discussion would be almost completely speculative. However this topic is fascinating.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Apocalypse: Manetho in his lost history of Egypt gave an account, probably, apocryphal, of a Pharaoh named Amenophis who ruled during the Jewish exodus. In this accounting the Pharaoh wanted to see the Gods and so was advised by a priest, also named Amenophis, to expel all the lepers in Egypt. The lepers are sent to work in the quarries east of the Nile. While there they choose as their leader a Heliopolitan priest named Osarseph who subsequently changed his name to Moses. The Pharaoh subsequently allows the lepers to settle in Avaris. After settling in Avaris the lepers invite the Hyksos into the city to wage war on Egypt. Pharoah declines to fight them and chose instead to flee to Ethiopia where he was guest of the King for 13 years. The Hyksos and lepers visit destruction upon Egypt and commit outrageous acts of sacrilege. After 13 years Pharaoh’s son expels the Hyksos and bring his father back from exile. The Hyksos flee Egypt and found a city called Jerusalem. This tale was recounted by Josephus in Contra Apionem. The tale was probably popular in Egypt during Ptolemaic period.
This tale to me underscores the negative perception the AE's had of Levantine peoples throughout their history. Of course it also served as settling the score: The Jews slandered the Egyptians in their writings. This was probably their reaction, their payback if you will. Some jewish scholars call this tale the first anti-semitic writing.
1674 – 1535 BCE-15th Dynasty Hykos Rule
1353 BCE – 1336 BCE -18th Dynasty Akhenaten was known before the fifth year of his reign as Amenhotep IV (sometimes given its Greek form, Amenophis IV )
Manetho tells the story of Osarseph, a rebellious Egyptian priest, Pharaoh Amenhotep and his son "Ramesses also called Sethos" (of the New Kingdom). Apparently, Osarseph took control of Egypt for thirteen years. He defiled the temples and terrorised the people. Pharaoh fled from Egypt to protect his infant son, but the son returned to Egypt and threw Osarseph out of Egypt. According to Josephus, Manetho believed that Osarseph was Moses, and many have pointed to the similarity between these events and the rule of Akhenaten. Akhenaten certainly rejected the gods and imposed a form of Monotheism.
However, Josephus also quotes an alternative Egyptian historian, Chaeremon, He also identifies the rebel priest with Moses, but names him 'Tisathen'. He also claims that there was a co-conspirator named Peteseph who he considered to be Joseph! This doesn't sound much like Akhenaten who only really shared power with his wife. In any case, there is plenty of evidence that the beginning of Akhenaten's rule was fairly normal and that he was the direct successor of his father, the Pharaoh Amenhotep III. Furthermore, neither account refers to Smenkhare, or Tutankhamun and the return to Thebes.
If the bible is correct to state that Moses an adopted member of the royal household, then he may have had a tenuous claim to the throne. The fact that Akhenaten (aka Amenophis IV) has been written out of Egyptian history (he is notably absent from the kings lists written during the reigns of Seti I and Ramesses II) seems consistent with this view
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Apocalypse: Manetho in his lost history of Egypt gave an account, probably, apocryphal, of a Pharaoh named Amenophis who ruled during the Jewish exodus. In this accounting the Pharaoh wanted to see the Gods and so was advised by a priest, also named Amenophis, to expel all the lepers in Egypt. The lepers are sent to work in the quarries east of the Nile. While there they choose as their leader a Heliopolitan priest named Osarseph who subsequently changed his name to Moses. The Pharaoh subsequently allows the lepers to settle in Avaris. After settling in Avaris the lepers invite the Hyksos into the city to wage war on Egypt. Pharoah declines to fight them and chose instead to flee to Ethiopia where he was guest of the King for 13 years. The Hyksos and lepers visit destruction upon Egypt and commit outrageous acts of sacrilege. After 13 years Pharaoh’s son expels the Hyksos and bring his father back from exile. The Hyksos flee Egypt and found a city called Jerusalem. This tale was recounted by Josephus in Contra Apionem. The tale was probably popular in Egypt during Ptolemaic period.
This tale to me underscores the negative perception the AE's had of Levantine peoples throughout their history. Of course it also served as settling the score: The Jews slandered the Egyptians in their writings. This was probably their reaction, their payback if you will. Some jewish scholars call this tale the first anti-semitic writing.
Yes, Manetho was talking about the CAGOTS!
Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Manetho tells the story of Osarseph, a rebellious Egyptian priest, Pharaoh Amenhotep and his son "Ramesses also called Sethos" (of the New Kingdom). Apparently, Osarseph took control of Egypt for thirteen years. He defiled the temples and terrorised the people. Pharaoh fled from Egypt to protect his infant son, but the son returned to Egypt and threw Osarseph out of Egypt. According to Josephus, Manetho believed that Osarseph was Moses, and many have pointed to the similarity between these events and the rule of Akhenaten. Akhenaten certainly rejected the gods and imposed a form of Monotheism.
However, Josephus also quotes an alternative Egyptian historian, Chaeremon, He also identifies the rebel priest with Moses, but names him 'Tisathen'. He also claims that there was a co-conspirator named Peteseph who he considered to be Joseph! This doesn't sound much like Akhenaten who only really shared power with his wife. In any case, there is plenty of evidence that the beginning of Akhenaten's rule was fairly normal and that he was the direct successor of his father, the Pharaoh Amenhotep III. Furthermore, neither account refers to Smenkhare, or Tutankhamun and the return to Thebes.
If the bible is correct to state that Moses an adopted member of the royal household, then he may have had a tenuous claim to the throne. The fact that Akhenaten (aka Amenophis IV) has been written out of Egyptian history (he is notably absent from the kings lists written during the reigns of Seti I and Ramesses II) seems consistent with this view
You're certainly correct there were varying accounts of this story. The title of this thread specifies that the subject is Manetho's version and not Chaeremon's. But the essentials of both stories are the same. However if you're suggesting that Amenophis can definitely be identified with Akhenaten then you're absolutely wrong. I think the word conflate applies because most likely the story melds together disparate events in Egyptian history with events that were possibly fictitious. So there is no identification with a particular Pharaoh despite the temptation because of similarities in name.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
However if you're suggesting that Amenophis can definitely be identified with Akhenaten then you're absolutely wrong. I think the word conflate applies because most likely the story melds together disparate events in Egyptian history with events that were possibly fictitious. So there is no identification with a particular Pharaoh despite the temptation because of similarities in name. [/QB]
Amenophis is merely the Greek word for Amenhotep,
Akenhaten was the fourth (IV) Amenhotep
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Amenophis is merely the Greek word for Amenhotep,
Akenhaten was the fourth (IV) Amenhotep
These are trite and obvious facts, the elaboration of which, sheds no light on the issue of the authenticity, or historicity if you will, of the Pharoah in Manetho's tale.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Manetho alleges that the Theban Pharaoh laid siege to Avaris (the Hyksos capital) and the outcome was a treaty by which the Hyksos agreed to leave Egypt. Manetho also confirms that the Hyksos settled in Jerusalem.
The Hyksos seem to be too early 1674 – 1535 BCE-15th Dynasty to correspond to other history
Akenhaten ties in with the Monotheism and a more believable time period overlapping Moses.
However, even earlier we have the Merneptah Stele aka the Victory Stele or Israel Stele reign: (1213 to 1203 BC)
The black granite stela primarily commemorates a victory in a campaign against the Libu and Meshwesh Libyans and their Sea People allies, but its final two lines refer to a prior military campaign in Canaan in which Merneptah states that he defeated Ashkelon, Gezer, Yanoam and Israel among others
The line mentioning Israel is grouped together with three other defeated states in Canaan (Gezer, Yanoam and Ashkelon) in a single stanza, beside multiple stanzas regarding his defeat of the Libyans. The line referring to Merneptah's Canaanite campaign reads:
[I]Canaan is captive with all woe. Ashkelon is conquered, Gezer seized, Yanoam made nonexistent; Israel is wasted, bare of seed.[/I
Also the Mesha Stele 840 BC
a memorial of Mesha's victories over "Omri king of Israel" and his son, who had been oppressing Moab. It is the most extensive inscription ever recovered that refers to ancient Israel (the "House of Omri"). It bears the earliest extra-biblical Semitic reference to the name Yahweh (YHWH), mentioned as the God of the Israelites,
The stele measures 44"x27".[3] Its 34 lines describe:
1. How Moab was oppressed by "Omri King of Israel," as the result of the anger of the god Chemosh 2. Mesha's victories over Omri's son (not named) and the men of Gad at Ataroth, and at Nebo and Jehaz; 3. His building projects, restoring the fortifications of his strong places and building a palace and reservoirs for water; and 4. His wars against the Horonaim.
Posts: 42918 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lioness, again these are facts that are well know to many posters here. The point I'm trying to make is this: any attempt to identify Manetho's Amenophis with a particular Pharaoh is doomed to failure. In my opinion the more salient aspects of this story are these:
1) The continued demonstration of Egyptian aversion to people of the Levant - the Aamu. In this case the association of Jews with leprosy.
2) Despite their over arching Kemeto-Centrism the story underscores their symbiotic relationship with Nubia in the popular imagination of Ancient Egyptians. Even stories where they're ostensibly at odds with Nubia, such as Se-Osiris and the sealed letter, underscore their connectedness.
3) The Ancient Egyptians believed, and I think rightly so, that much of Jewish religion owe its origins to Egypt.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Originally posted by Apocalypse: Lioness, again these are facts that are well know to many posters here. The point I'm trying to [QB]make is this: any attempt to identify Manetho's Amenophis with a particular Pharaoh is doomed to failure. In my opinion the more salient aspects of this story are these:
1) The continued demonstration of Egyptian aversion to people of the Levant - the Aamu. In this case the association of Jews with leprosy.
(The Egyptians hated Jews)
2) Despite their over arching Kemeto-Centrism the story underscores their symbiotic relationship with Nubia in the popular imagination of Ancient Egyptians. Even stories where they're ostensibly at odds with Nubia, such as Se-Osiris and the sealed letter, underscore their connectedness.
(The Egyptians loved Black folk)
3) The Ancient Egyptians believed, and I think rightly so, that much of Jewish religion owe its origins to Egypt.
(The Jews ripped off their religion from the Egyptians)
quote:1) The continued demonstration of Egyptian aversion to people of the Levant - the Aamu. In this case the association of Jews with leprosy.
(The Egyptians hated Jews)
2) Despite their over arching Kemeto-Centrism the story underscores their symbiotic relationship with Nubia in the popular imagination of Ancient Egyptians. Even stories where they're ostensibly at odds with Nubia, such as Se-Osiris and the sealed letter, underscore their connectedness.
(The Egyptians loved Black folk)
3) The Ancient Egyptians believed, and I think rightly so, that much of Jewish religion owe its origins to Egypt.
(The Jews ripped off their religion from the Egyptians)
plain talk translation added, lioness
Plain talk translations? Why the need for translation? I write in plain accessible English. Lazy mind strawmen is more accurate.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic