Identifying the Pharaoh of the Exodus (yes, he is credibly identifiable!)

 

Amenhotep II, plausibly, Pharaoh of the Exodus
{HT: Expedition Bible}

Traditionally, the Pharaoh of the Exodus is a major biblical study in the folly of lawless oppressive rule, and where it ends, through the liberation of a "guest people" subjugated through fear that they were a threat. Thanks, in large part, to the predecessors who "knew not Joseph" and the blessing he had brought to Egypt. Of course, more broadly,  the Pharaoh of the Exodus is also a capital example of hard-hearted arrogant, morally blind misgovernment and where it predictably ends.

However, today, such lessons -- would that, say, Hitler, Stalin or Mao had heeded them! -- tend to be lost under a cloud of hostile skepticism and dismissive suspicion. Accordingly, a good place to begin is by dispelling such needless hostility. 

At least, for those willing to learn from history (including, sacred history).

As a beginning, Christopher Eames writes, in a recent article:

On the surface, there appear to be plenty of options for identifying the Exodus pharaoh. Dig down into the details, however, and it is evident that no other Egyptian period, dynasty and pharaoh gets nearly as close to matching the biblical text as the New Kingdom’s Thutmosid Dynasty pharaoh, Amenhotep II!  

And so, amid the multiplicity of theories about the Exodus pharaoh’s identity from scholars, ancient and modern, should it come as any surprise if the very ear-liest historians to mention his name—Egyptians, no less—got it right? More than 2,000 years ago, Manetho and Chaeremon—both Egyptian priests and histori-ans—insisted that the pharaoh of the Exodus was, as they identified him in their Ptolemaic Greek language, Pharaoh Amenophis.

Amenhotep (II), pharaoh of the Exodus.

That may seem bold, but the linked article provides substantial details, and we may find a video worth the pause to watch:

 

 Indeed, a simple timeline (clipped from the video) is suggestive, starting from the widely accepted date for building Solomon's Temple, 966/67 BC and taking the reference to 480 years since the Exodus as plausible, then using Egyptian Chronology based on Manetho:

Not to mention, the simple fact that the earliest two historians said just about that. (This should serve to counter-weight our habitual tendency to dismissiveness.)

Eames also elaborated:

Hatshepsut, plausibly Moses' step-mother

In studying Egypt’s history together with the biblical text, one can’t help but notice . . . Thutmose II’s gendercide, Hatshepsut’s lack of a son and kindheartedness for foreigners [plausibly, Moses' step-mother], and Thutmose III’s matchless power. Then there’s Amenhotep II’s cruelty [= hard heartedness], his destruction of Hatshepsut’s monuments, his wariness of foreign magicians [such as Moses and Aaron], his tubercle-riddled body [see above!] and the miss-ing latter half of his reign. Recall Thutmose IV’s surprise accession, the YHWH-worshiping nomads mentioned by Amenhotep III, and Akhenaten’s final repudiation of the very name Amenhotep and his total rejection of Egypt’s many gods (all while Canaan is being conquered by “Habiru”). All of these accounts directly parallel the bib-lical text—not only in substance but also in chronology!

 Such, should at minimum, give pause to skeptical dismissiveness. And, it should give us a modicum of confidence in pointing to and learning from the history of one of the first successful slave uprisings in history. END