The Exodus, Moses and the Pharaohs
Late Middle Kingdom IS the Egypt of Moses in 1550 b.c.e.
As mentioned in previous articles, the Middle Kingdom actually continued until Ahmose I, with the Second Intermediate dynasties running concurrently with the Middle Kingdom 12th Dynasty from Amenemhat II onwards. Therefore to revise the dates for the Middle Kingdom would require taking away the whole time allotted to the Second Intermediate period, being approx 230 years.
The social and cultural interface between Egypt and Asia had existed for millennia long before the Middle Kingdom. The continuum and connectedness of these peoples and events can be understood by Oahspe’s history of the lower heavens which provides a unique opportunity to understand the earthly history to a far greater degree than otherwise possible. As is evidenced in the inseparable cultural and religious motifs of ancient peoples, which reflect realities that were more than quaint religions and mythical tales.
In Oahspe’s Book of Wars against Jehovih is a continuous account of the events of the lower heavens during the cycle of Cpenta Armij going back to 3950 b.c.e. ( being 2400 years prior to the dawn of the cycle of Bon). During this time from about 2850 b.c.e., under the leadership of De’yus (which name was later known as Zeus to the Greeks), the false Osiris acquired heavenly dominions over the earthly regions then known as South Arabin’ya (principally Egypt). He made them his own after rebelling from Dey’us around 2150 b.c.e. (Cpenta Armij Cycle Timeline, V. W.). Osiris maintained an alliance with his two underling sub-Gods, Baal and Ashtaroth whose regions included Heleste, Western Arabin’ya (the Levant) and Pars’ie (Ancient Persia). Baal and Ashtaroth inspired mortals to war in the regions of Par’sie and Heleste for more than a hundred years, before they broke their alliance with Osiris.
Post Flood Map of the World from Oahspe with Ancient Names
While the northern and eastern regions of Baal and Ashtaroth were continually troubled with war over many centuries, Egypt was relatively free from confict. This period of stability in Egypt is reflected in historical accounts and archaeological evidence which confirm the long period of relative stability and peace in Egypt and surrounding areas. Even the conflicts of the last few hundred years of the cycle of Cpenta Armij did not result in the loss of the central power base of Egyptian rule by the Pharaohs.
From about 1850 b.c.e. the lower heaven dominions of Osiris began to break up. First Baal and Ashtaroth rebelled against Osiris, followed by the succession of several of his other generals and captains, all of which resulted in the dismemberment of Osiris’ heavenly kingdoms. The extent that this affected the land of Egypt itself is reflected in the brief autonomy of the Western Delta nobles; the break away of the Nubian (Sudan) region in the south; the so called 13th Dynasty in Thebes of Upper Egypt and the so called Hyksos in the Eastern Delta (The whole of the 2nd Intermediate Period is now understood to be a fusion of parallel historic events of the 12th Dynasty of the Middle Kingdom).
By the end of the cycle of Cpenta Armij the Egyptian oracles were controlled by Baal, and by the time of Nu-ghan’s succession to the throne, and, through Nu-ghan, Baal began establishing himself in the place previously occupied by Osiris.
Oahspe, Bk of Wars against Jehovih,
The inhabitants of Arabin’ya and Parsi’e and Heleste began again to prosper,
and became mighty. But after many years, behold, Baal and Ashtaroth rebelled against
Osiris, and seceded from Arabin’ya.....
When Baal and Ashtaroth seceded from Osiris and resumed their own kingdoms,
in all the divisions of the earth, every God was for himself and his own kingdom.
But between Osiris and Baal and Ashtaroth, a triangular war ensured in reference to the boundaries
and divisions of the lands of the earth.||
...Baal marked out for his heavenly kingdom over Heleste and north-western
and Ashtoaroth marked out for her heavenly kingdom over Parsi’e and north-eastern Arabin’ya.
And the pair no sooner chose their generals and captains, and founded their heavenly thrones
...and sent word to Osiris....
A general dismemberment of these heavenly kingdoms took place. In Osiris’
heaven there revolted
one Kabbath, who took the name Thammus. He was a general whom tens of thousands of
angel officers delighted to serve. He marked out his heavenly place over western Egupt.....
Teos-judas also revolted from Osiris, and established a heavenly kingdom over
Besides these there were: Marcus, Delos, Acta, Hebron, De-bora, Julta, Wab, Thais, D’nor, great
generals and captains in Osiris’ heavenly kingdom, all of whom revolted and began setting
up heavenly kingdoms of their own.....||
The following is a summary of the
historical events in Egypt concerning the nomarchs of the Middle Kingdom during
the last three hundred years before 1550 b.c.e., which reflects the lower
heaven events in Osiris’ kingdoms:
The succession of Kabbath, in the region of Western Egypt is mirrored in the rise of the nomarchs establishing a minor dynasty in the West Delta regions around 1730 b.c.e. And the succession of Teos-judas in the region of South Arabin’ya, is mirrored in Upper Egypt establishing a sub dynasty, called the 13th dynasty of the supposed 2nd Intermediate Period, but not having the Nubian state of Kush in their power at the southern extreme of the Egyptian Empire. Kush having diplomatic relations with the Pharaoh of Egypt, situated in Lower Egypt, also accords with the fact that the Lower Egyptian rulers were actually the Pharaohs of the Middle Dynasty who maintained power over the whole of Egypt. The continued migration of the Asiatics, coming from Baal and Ashtaroth’s territories, included those who took advantage of the opportunities for advancement within the Egyptian Osirian culture, probably even rising to nomarch status in the Eastern Delta Regions of Egypt.
The rise of the nomarchs and their inherited rulerships is a part of the Middle Kingdom history. But in the transfer of power from Amenemhat III’s family to Ahmose I, the dynasty lists of the nomarchs have gained a separate identity, adding a false period to Egyptian history -- adding some 250 years to the actual date of the Middle Kingdom, as is evidenced in the following wikipedia entry:
retrieved 20 Sept, 07
||The brilliant Egyptian Twelfth Dynasty came to an end around 1800 BC, and was succeeded by the much weaker Thirteenth. Both ruled from Itjtawy ("Seizer-of-the-Two-Lands") near Memphis and el-Lisht, just south of the apex of the Nile Delta. The Thirteenth Dynasty proved unable to hold onto the long land of Egypt, and the provincial ruling family in Xois, located in the marshes of the western Delta, broke away from the central authority to form the Fourteenth Dynasty. The splintering of the land accelerated after the reign of the Thirteenth Dynasty king Neferhotep I [ca 1730 b.c.e.]. After allowing discipline at the southern forts to deteriorate, the government eventually withdrew its garrisons and, not long afterward, the forts were reoccupied by the rising Nubian state of Kush. In the north, parts of Lower Egypt became heavily settled by an immigrant Asiatic population. An independent line of kings created the Fourteenth Dynasty that arose in the western Delta during the later Thirteenth Dynasty [ca 1720 b.c.e.]. According to Manetho, into this unstable mix came invaders from the east called the Hyksos. Their regime, called the Fifteenth Dynasty, replaced the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Dynasties in most of the country. ||
If it is the case that the Middle Kingdom did continue undisrupted to the New Kingdom, with the Pharaohs maintaining their position as rulers of Egypt without loss of central power, and those subordinate rulers were named as separate dynasties of a so called intermediate period, then what are supposedly the Upper Egypt Pharaohs of Thebes, before Ahmose I, are no more than the subsidiary southern region of Egypt, as is reflected below in the manner in which Ahmose I is referred to even after ascending the Egyptian Throne:
retrieved 20 Sept, 07
Analyzing the events of the conquest prior to the siege of the Hyksos capital of Avaris is extremely difficult. Almost everything known comes from a brief but invaluable military commentary on the back of the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus, consisting of brief diary entries, one of which reads “Regnal year 11, second month of shomu, Heliopolis was entered. First month of akhet, day 23, this southern prince broke into Tjaru.” Generally the regnal year is considered Ahmose's (hence scholars usually mark the 11th year as the beginning of his conquest), but Ahmose himself is referred to in the document as "that southern prince"; a rather disparaging term……||
The appearance of a unified Egypt by Ahmose I must also be credited to the actions of Amenemhat III. Since it was Amenemhat III who disinherited the nomarchs and thus ended the petty dynasties of the so called 2nd Intermediate Period. Ahmose I (Nu-ghan), succeeded the Egyptian throne and, under the inspiration of Baal, set himself up to rule as a God King, and thus was in the position to depict himself as a heroic unifer and conquerer.
If the southern rulers of the so called 2nd Intermediate Period expressed feelings of oppression and resentment toward the dominant power of Egypt at that time, then it was not to a foreign power, but to the central Egyptian throne, that they were subordinate, one that was influenced by Asiatic culture, as in the Middle Kingdom.
The theory of the 2nd Intermediate period is also missing the location of the Pharaohs, while it is assumed that it is at Thebes, the power of Thebes does not rise until the time of Ahmose I. The seat of power of the Egyptian Pharaohs in the 12th Dynasty of the Middle Kingdom was Itjtawy in the southern part of the delta regions, in the vicinity of Avaris.
It was from Manetho that the notion of 2nd Intermediate period originated. But Manetho’s accounts are not consistent with the lists of kings found on the temple walls of Sety I. In the temple list the 2nd Intermediate period does not exist, as though it had not occurred. Also missing are Akhenaton and Hatshepsut, both of whom were anomalies in the tradition of Egyptian rulers, which explains why the memory of them had been “cleansed” from the Egyptian records by successive rulers. But the whole of the 2nd Intermediate Period being missing requires far more explanation!
If the dynasties of the 2nd Intermediate Period were Pharoahs of Egypt, why would they be excluded as legitimate kings? There would be no reason to exclude all of the kings, if they were legitimate and abiding by tradition. Moses’ adoptive father, in approving the Migration of the Israelites, may have incurred the wrath of the Egyptian nobility and perhaps his relationship with Moses and the Israelites was eventually “cleansed” from the Egyptian records, and even if his existence had been obliterated, what about those who preceeded him?
Reason tells us that they were not excluded from the authentic king list of Sety I, but exist as the 12th Dynasty of the Middle Kingdom.
Egyptologists do acknowledge the doubtfulness of the authenticity of the King lists following the end of the 12th Dynasty:
retrieved 8 Oct, 07
||This section [of the Turin King List] corresponds to the period following the end of the 12th Dynasty, i.e. the kings placed in the 13th and 14th Dynasties. Many of the kings listed here may have ruled together over smaller parts of the country or may even be fictive....||
Conventional Egyptian history marks 1550 b.c.e. with the account of the Asiatic conquerors, the Hyksos, finally being driven out of Egypt, and the Pharaoh to whom this was attributed was portrayed as a hero who reinstated full sovereignty of upper and lower Egypt after more than 100 years of a divided Egypt under Hyksos dominant rule. This popular interpretation is more mythical than factual.
A more comprehensive reading which takes into account Oahspe’s account of the history of Moses and the Migration of the Israelites and archaeological evidence of the Asiatic influence and servitude of the Israelites in the Middle Kingdom, as well as being in accord with the ancient lists of Kings in the temple of Sety I, is summarized as follows:
The Middle Kingdom some 250 years before its end, was marked by some fragmentation in the lower heavens of Osiris the false, resulting in semi-autonomous subsidiary rulers in the West Delta Regions and the south or Upper Egypt; and an increasing population of Asiatics over a three hundred year period prior, allowed Asiatics to attain sub-rulerships in the East Delta Regions also. This is evident around the time of Amenemhat II nearly 100 years before Amenmhat III:
retrieved 8 Oct, 07.
||The nomarchs soon took advantage of this change by adapting pretentious titles sometimes imitating those of the royal court. However, Amenemhat did keep a firm hand on these matters and appears to not let these local rulers forget their allegiance to the crown. In return for royal favors, they were expected to help protect the Egyptian borders, to undertake expeditions for the king and to generally act as his deputies. In fact, the nomarchs began to disappear during the time of Senusret III because of a practice that was probably initiated by Amenemhet II. The children of nomarchs were sent to the king for their training, afterwards being sent to diverse posts. This ended up dissipating the power of the local nomarchs.||
Amenemhat III disinherited the nomarchs and dismantled the structures that allowed them to create their own dynasties, thus the by the time Ahmose I came to the throne there were no more nomarch dynasties. Such a system of sub-rulers as had arisen was not in contradiction to the philosophy of the Osiris cult, whereby others besides the King who worshiped Osiris could attain status and rank in this world and the next. The change of religion from the Osiris cult to that of Amun-Re as King of the Gods or supreme deity, consolidated Ahmose I with God-King status which recognized the Pharaoh as the only mortal invested with power of the supreme deity, also ensuring no sub-divisions of power.
All Oahspe references are from the Standard Edition Oahspe of 2007