We have Amenhotep III's body - DNA testing shows the family links from Tut backwards, he's Tut's grandad.
YES!! Finally someone who actually looked something up! So, thank you. I appreciate this academic feedback. If I may, I'd like to "respond" to what you've shared.
He isn't in the Red Sea but an obese elderly gentleman with some congenital nastiness such as having a clubfoot like his grandson.
Cause of death is the issue here. You speak of his body. I mentioned he needed special embalming so his body seemed to be in poor condition at the time of his embalming. That might have been because his body was not immediately available after death, which supports (not proves) that he died in the Red Sea. Or perhaps the special preservation process was due to his being waterlogged? Here's one quote I found, not the one I wanted though:
| Amenhotep III or Amenophis III | Very badly damaged, Amenhotep III's head is mostly a skull (no flesh). Near the time of his death, he suffered from obesity and severe dental problems. Perhaps paving the way for later mummymaking methods, mummymakers used their best methods to construct his mummy (packed with resin and linen and molded); Cairo Museum |
We have correspondence from the time period, and not a mention of a few hundred thousand Jews fleeing Egypt and heading on to Palestine (incidentally, nor is there in the diplomatic correspondence to Palestinian vassals in the reign of his son - and, no, apiru are not the Israelites as even a relatively quick read of the evidence will demonstrate).
I absolutely agree with you there. If the Exodus happened at the end of the reign of Amenhotep III, then the Israelites would have been in the wilderness for the next 40 years, during the time Akhenaten was ruling and ignoring the Canaanite vassal city-states begging for chariot support. But guess what correspondence from the Amarna letters reflects that is, to me, a confirmation Amenhotep III had a public and embarassing death at the same time as many of his subjects. It is found in Amarna letter:
It's letter EA29 from Mittani: "When my brother, [Amenhotep III], went tohis fate it was reported. When I heard what was reported... I greived,saying, "Let even me be dead, or let 10,000 be dead in my country, and in my
brother's country 10,0000 as well, but let my brother, whom I love and who
loves me, be alive as long as heaven and earth."
Now a decent enough general sympathetic note here. He'd rather die in place of his beloved friend. But note he was not informed about his death but heard of it! This is consistent with news of him dying in the Red Sea. Plus this king is informing Akhenaten that he knows how his father died and met his "fate." As if that would be something embarrassing to share. But most notable is that he offers 10,000 of his own people to die instead of the king, and then suggests it would have been better if 10,000 Egyptians had died rather than the king. That makes perfect sense if Amenhotep III died with others in a punitive situation. That is, the king is simply putting forth the idea that more citizens die and the king himself be spared. He is equating the king's personal life with 10,000 citizens, 10,000 he would gladly have sacrificed, but likewise, acknowledging a preference that 10,000 Egyptians could have been exchanged for the life of the king himself. That makes perfect sense if Amenhotep III was punished by death in the Red Sea with others! You know? He is saying his preference that he would have preferred the God of the Israelites killed 10,000 more citizens and spared the king himself. That is, he is acknowledging this was a punishment; he's just adjusting the punishment, 10,000 of his people or Egyptians for the life of the king.
This certainly, to me, is consistent with pharaoh dying a very public and embarrassing life in a punitive situation with many others! So yes, I indeed love the "correspondence" from this period.
Here's a letter about sending chariots to Egypt. Was this because of the chariot shortage?
(EA17) Behold, one chariot, two horses, one male servant, one female servant, out of the booty from the land of Hatti I have sent you. And as a gift for my brother, five chariots (and) five teams of horses I have sent you. And as a gift for Kelu-Heba, my sister, one set of gold pins, one set of gold earrings, one gold idol, and one container of "sweet oil." I have sent her.
Did Akhenaten request chariots from his allies? That makes sense if the chariot army at Egypt was depleted. It also explains why he couldn't send any help to Canaan, though they were in desperate straits. Why not? Didn't Egypt have chariots to spare during this time?
And one more I find absolutely entertaining. This is about two gold statues that apparently were already made out of solid gold. But Akhenaten sent gold plated statues. Why? Did he give the solid gold statues to the Israelites when they left? Likely! Plus other letters complain about the rationing of gold in Egypt at that time, when before they said gold was like dust in Egypt, an abundance. So why the gold rationing all of a sudden? The Bible says the Israelites "stripped" the Egyptians of their gold. So a gold shortage during this period certainly is consistent with the Exodus.
Here's a reference to those two gold statues:
Several letters were exchanged between the courts of Egypt and Mittani regarding two solid gold statues which Tushratta claimed had been promised to him by Amenhotep III. The earliest letter (EA 26 in Moran’s The Amarna Letters) was addressed to Queen Tiye, Wife of Amenhotep III and mother of Akhenaten. Tushratta reminds Tiye of his love for her deceased husband, Amenhotep, and says that he will “show 10 times – much, much - more love” to her son Akhenaten.
He then comes to the point, saying that he had asked Amenhotep for two solid gold statues, but that Akhenaten had sent him wooden statues covered in a thin coating of gold. “Is this love… my brother was going to treat me 10 times better than his father did. But now he has not [given me] even what his father was accustomed to give”. Tushratta asks Tiye to intervene so that two solid gold statues will be cast for him. After all, gold is “like dirt” in Egypt.
But in fact, the two solid gold statues had been indeed already cast, but they disappeared apparently! Who got those two original solid gold statues? Then because of the sudden lack of gold in Egypt, Akhenaten sent gold plated statues. Again, a suggestion that gold was no more so abundant in Egypt!
Rather than suffering from 10 plagues, the period is characterised as being one of great prosperity within Egypt.
Yes, during the reign of Amenhotep III. But the Exodus changed all that! Akhenaten's period is considered a period of decline compared to that of his father, Amenhotep III. There are lots of requests gold and for military support, not a reflection of great prosperity or a strong military. Plus as above, other allies were sending Akhenten chariots. Was there a chariot shortage in Egypt? It would seem so. People are sending him chariots and he can't spare even one to protect over-run city-states in Canaan. So your statement must be qualified. The period of Amenhotep III was indeed one of great posterity. But not that of Akhenaten. You have to separate the pre- and post-Exodus Periods. Your statement is inaccurate left unqualified.
And whilst Amenhotep III's first born did pre-decease him, there is evidence that this happened before where some would like to place the 'plagues' as happening (eg the co-regency seems to have been 8 or so years with Amenhotep IV).
Interesting, but per the Bible the Exodus has to end the reign of Amenhotep III. It must be dated to 1386 BCE. If he had an older son who died previously, then so be it.
"Tuthmosis was the eldest son and crown prince. He became a priest of Ptah in Memphis, but seems to have died somewhere around the 30thyear of the reign of his father. Prince Amenhotep then became the heir to the throne. Amenhotep eventually took the throne as Amenhotep IV. He married Nefertiti, and after a couple of years on the throne he changed his name to Akhenaten."
You have no evidence to base the claim upon.
Actually, I do. But I appreciate that your interpretation of the evidence might not seem sufficient. I'm all for skepticism.
You can't hammer the Egyptian chronology into fitting with an Exodus story which is clearly confused in itself.
ROFL! "Hammer"? I don't have to hammer. The archaeologists are trying to hammer! Hammering is Finkelstein trying to create a non-existent Aram-Damascus empire to destroy Solomonic Megiddo because he is not competent enough to adjust the current timeline. He's afraid of the timeline. Now my dating claims Shishak's invasion should have been around 871 BCE, year 9 of Solomon's rule which began in 910 BCE per the Bible. That is EXACTLY where the RC14 dating dates that event. I don't have to hammer. Kathleen Kenyon says Jericho fell by the "Israelites" (her assessment) between 1350-1325 BCE. The Bible says Jericho fell in 1346 BCE. So the archaeology and Biblical dating are in total agreement. I don't have to hammer a thing. It's JWs who have to "hammer" to try to convince anyone the Exodus occurred in 1513 BCE! So you have it wrong. There's no confusion now.
Once you are forced to deal with the Exodus in 1386 BCE, you are forced to examine what impact on the Egyptians we can glean if the 10 plagues happened at this specific time. Guess what? The next pharaoh became a monotheist? So if you can't see that confirming the Exodus, then that's okay. It really doesn't matter if I have "evidence" or not, because you can't see past your doubts. But at least I can correct some misconceptions for you. The misconception you maintain that is not true is that the date of the Exodus is at all in question. It is not any more. Too much coordinated archaeology confirms it happened at the end of the reign of Amenhotep III. We need to go from there. The Bible deserves the evidence supporting the Exodus at this time. Archaeologists are being dishonest.
There is a market for it all the same, as is demonstrated by the regular publication of pseudo-historical guff which appeals to the faithful.
haha! Now that's true but also only half the joke. The big money is in publications that are anti-Biblical, like Finkelstein's book claiming David and Solomon are myths and thus Jesus is a myth! There's just as big a market for atheists and non-believers out there. People who don't want to believe the Bible want to hear negative things about it but don't want to hear anything positive. I'm merely sharing why someone like myself, someone intellectual and well-researched still believes the Bible.
Of course, part of my goal is to expose the WTS as the false prophets they are. Archaeology is helping me in this regard for the period from the Exodus to Shishak, so I'm trumping it up.
Thanks for your references! Much appreciated. Most others think that name-calling is all that is needed to dismiss archaeological theory. (grin)
