Re: A searchable site this is
Wed May 9, 2018 13:08

In my post I wrote:
"Marianne wrote in her reply to Toby:
'This [the identity of the pharaoh of the exodus] has been discussed many times here. This is a searchable site.'"

Marianne wrote:
"No, I specifically referred to "Cenephres", who Toby brought up. His identity and that of "Cencheres" have been discussed in the past.

"As you for you, you seem to be assuming the character of a troll."

Anonymous II here:
Why does Marianne say no to my insertion, "the identity of the pharaoh of the exodus"? Well, Marianne appears to have forgotten that this forum is searchable, for in a previous post she wrote:

"Marianne Luban
Re: Amenhotep II and His Reign
Thu Dec 28, 2017 13:52

"This is what I [Marianne] wrote here in July of 1017 [sic] in the 'Dahamunza' thread:

    "I now believe I have solved the problem of why Eusebius, by whose reckoning Moses should have left Egypt in 1510 BCE, perversely had him returning and leading the Israelites out of Egypt soon after the reign of Amunhotep III in an epitome or kinglist. By that point in the 18th Dynasty, more than a hundred years would have passed since 1510. The pharaoh was called “Cencheres” and the notation was “About this time Moses led the Jews in the march out of Egypt.” In his kinglist Eusebius assigns sixteen years of rule to “Cencheres".

    "Pseudo-Dionysius wrote: “In the Year 490, the king of Egypt died and Cencheres reigned for sixteen years. This was he who waged a contest with Moses with the help of Jannes and Jambres the magicians. It was about him that Moses said: He drowned Pharaoh and his army in the Red Sea.”

    "The Egyptian historian, Manetho, has neither Cenephres nor Cencheres in his Dynasty 18. The real nomen of “Cenephres” was Thutmose [I], who added “xai nfrw” as an epithet in his nomen cartouche. Manetho gives him as “Tethmosis” and places him at the beginning of the dynasty where he belongs. I have come to feel that Cencheres was erroneously put near its end in the epitome of Eusebius because that is where Manetho listed some rulers he called “Acencheres”―which is how “Cencheres” is written in the Armenian version of the epitome of Eusebius, as well.

    "However, according to the math of Pseudo-Dionysius, “Cencheres” [or Achencheres] did not belong after Amunhotep III but before him. This particular Achencheres should, in fact, have come to the throne in 1450 BCE, sixty years after Moses had departed from Egypt. That indicates that, contrary to Acts 7:23, the adopted Egyptian prince was not forty years old at the time but a young man of twenty. According to the High Chronology I follow, Thutmose III ended his long reign in 1450 BCE and his son, Aakheperure Amunhotep II succeeded. Therefore, the prenomen of Aakheperure must have been the “Acencheres/Cencheres” that Pseudo-Dionysius had in mind. Otherwise, Amunhotep II is curiously absent from the kinglist of Manetho and presumably also of Ptolemy of Mendes as Africanus, who followed the latter, omits him in his proper spot in the dynastic roster, also. But now he has been found in that of Eusebius due to the mathematical hint of Pseudo-Dionysius. “Achencheres” was assigned sixteen years on the throne by Eusebius, which is a decade short of the twenty-six years of Amunhotep II. This is nothing unusual. We know that “Harmais” or King Horemheb reigned for fourteen years, but he appears with only four in the 18th Dynasty of Manetho.

    "Syncellus notes that others did not select Acencheres as the Pharaoh of the Exodus, which Eusebius, himself, admitted―but if we allow that Moses did not flee Egypt at the age of forty and was absent elsewhere for sixty years instead of only forty to return at the age of eighty, [Acts 7:30] Amunhotep II is a candidate. And he really was a new king in 1450 BCE, his father just having died―precisely as Pseudo-Dionysius claimed. The new king was only eighteen years old and he and Moses would never have previously met. Amunhotep II has the reputation with Egyptologists of having been a cruel man, lacking the redeeming intellectual qualities of his predecessor.

    "To this I will add that Cencheres appears in the Book of Sothis in the same spot, after Amunhotep III, but with 26 years--his correct duration."

Anonymous II here:
That's a pretty good explanation in my view. But in all fairness, is Marianne not trying to identify the pharaoh of the exodus in her Dec. 28, 2017 post? Did I not properly identify in brackets the topic as "the identity of the pharaoh of the exodus" whom Marianne has identified as "Cencheres" and whom she indeed has discussed before? So why say no to an obvious fact?

If some topic has been discussed before (and that means fully hashed out, not just asserted), then why continue to repeat the same discussions over and over? Isn't that a waste of server memory?

And by the way, it's kind of obvious that Eusebius (et alii) were using the statement in 1 Kings 6:1 that the span of time between the Israelite exodus from Egypt and laying the foundation of the temple in Jerusalem was 480 years. So any discussion of the opinions and chronology constructed by the "Early Church Fathers" is only pertinent to developing the correct chronology of the second millennium BC if the 480 years given in the Bible is correct. If it isn't correct, then using the biblical data will be a lot more challenging and more work, rather than simple citation, needs to be done.

Anonymous II

p.s. And I'm no troll.

  • Re: A searchable site this isMarianne Luban, Wed May 9 09:37
    Anonymous wrote: 'Marianne wrote in her reply to Toby: "This [the identity of the pharaoh of the exodus] has been discussed many times here. This is a searchable site." No, I specifically referred to ... more
    • Re: A searchable site this is — Anonymous, Wed May 9 13:08
Click here to receive daily updates