AMENHOTEP THE FIFTH and SETHOS THE THIRD.
In this argument I shall be using the group of data given by Josephus[1] concerning the progress of Dynasties XVIII, XIX and thence XX. Previously I had argued that we should give better attention to the list of Dyn XVIII pharaohs from Josephus. I make the same claim now in relation to those pharaohs that must constitute Dynasty XIX and in my opinion lead into XX, albeit with a short intervening break.
Can the characters from the above heading be real? Surely Yes! They have quite a history and follow Ramesses II as given by Josephus[2] courtesy Manetho, of whom we are exhorted to get serious[3]. We ignore their reigns and activities at our peril. It is apparent that Convention must see some basis for ignoring the story of Amenhotep and Sethos because of what follows. There Josephus[4] generally denigrates the work of Manetho and in so doing contradicts himself concerning other data for Amenhotep.
“For he mentions Amenhotep, a fictitious king's name[5], though on that account he durst not set down the number of years of his reign, which yet he had accurately done as to the other kings he mentions; he then ascribes certain fabulous stories to this king, as having in a manner forgotten how he had already related that the departure of the shepherds for Jerusalem had been five hundred and eighteen years before etc etc”.
Amenhotep V.
What then of Amenhotep, “a fictitious king's name”, and his place in history? Was he fictitious? Was he Merneptah? Do the incidents he had in Egyptian history, as given by Josephus, require our attention? Let us look to the other data concerning this character from Josephus[6] and his story of Amenhotep, successor of Ramesses II. In order to assist I have highlighted by bold text that which I deem to be the pertinent sections.
“This king was desirous to become a spectator of the gods, as had Orus, one of his predecessors in that kingdom, desired the same before him; he also communicated that his desire to his namesake Amenophis, who was the son of Papis, and one that seemed to partake of a divine nature, both as to wisdom and the knowledge of futurities. Manetho adds, "how this namesake of his told him (Amenhotep) that he might see the gods, if he would clear the whole country of the lepers and of the other impure people; that the king was pleased with this injunction, and got together all that had any defect in their bodies out of Egypt; and that their number was eighty thousand; whom he sent to those quarries which are on the east side of the Nile, that they might work in them, and might be separated from the rest of the Egyptians." He says further, that "there were some of the learned priests that were polluted with the leprosy; but that still this Amenhotep, the wise man and the prophet, was afraid that the gods would be angry at him and at the king, if there should appear to have been violence offered them; who also added this further, [out of his sagacity about futurities,] that certain people would come to the assistance of these polluted wretches, and would conquer Egypt, and keep it in their possession thirteen years; that, however, he durst not tell the king of these things, but that he left a writing behind him about all those matters, and then slew himself, which made the king disconsolate." After which he writes thus verbatim: "After those that were sent to work in the quarries had continued in that miserable state for a long while, the king was desired that he would set apart the city Avaris, which was then left desolate of the shepherds, for their habitation and protection; which desire he granted them. Now this city, according to the ancient theology, was Typho's city. But when these men were gotten into it, and found the place fit for a revolt, they appointed themselves a ruler out of the priests of Heliopolis, whose name was Osarsiph, and they took their oaths that they would be obedient to him in all things. He then, in the first place, made this law for them,
That they should neither worship the Egyptian gods, nor should abstain from any one of those sacred animals, which they have in the highest esteem, but kill and destroy them all; that they should join themselves to nobody but to those that were of this confederacy. When he had made such laws as these, and many more such as were mainly opposite to the customs of the Egyptians, (23) he gave order that they should use the multitude of the hands they had in building walls about their City, and make themselves ready for a war with king Amenhotep, while he did himself take into his friendship the other priests, and those that were polluted with them, and sent ambassadors to those shepherds who had been driven out of the land by Tethmosis to the city called Jerusalem; whereby he informed them of his own affairs, and of the state of those others that had been treated after such an ignominious manner, and desired that they would come with one consent to his assistance in this war Egypt, upon his being informed of their invasion, was in great confusion, as calling to mind what Amenhotep, the against Egypt.
He also promised that he would, in the first place, bring them back to their ancient city and country Avaris, and provide a plentiful maintenance for their multitude; that he would protect them and fight for them as occasion should require, and would easily reduce the country under their dominion. These shepherds were all very glad of this message, and came away with alacrity all together, being in number two hundred thousand men; and in a little time they came to Avaris.
And now Amenophis the king of Egypt, upon his being informed of their invasion, was in great confusion, as calling to mind what Amenophis, the son of Papis, had foretold him; and, in the first place, he assembled the multitude of the Egyptians, and took counsel with their leaders, and sent for their sacred animals to him, especially for those that were principally worshipped in their temples, and gave a particular charge to the priests distinctly, that they should hide the images of their gods with the utmost care he also sent his son Sethos, who was also named Ramesses, from his father Rhampses, being but five years old, to a friend of his. He then passed on with the rest of the Egyptians, being three hundred thousand of the most warlike of them, against the enemy, who met them. Yet did he not join battle with them; but thinking that would be to fight against the gods, he returned back and came to Memphis, where he took Apis and the other sacred animals which he had sent for to him, and presently marched into Ethiopia, together with his whole army and multitude of Egyptians; for the king of Ethiopia was under an obligation to him, on which account he received him, and took care of all the multitude that was with him, while the country supplied all that was necessary for the food of the men. He also allotted cities and villages for this exile, that was to be from its beginning during those fatally determined thirteen years.Moreover, he pitched a camp for his Ethiopian army, as a guard to king Amenhotep, upon the borders of Egypt. And this was the state of things in Ethiopia. But for the people of Jerusalem, when they came down together with the polluted Egyptians, they treated the men in such a barbarous manner, that those who saw how they subdued the aforementioned country, and the horrid wickedness they were guilty of, thought it a most dreadful thing; for they did not only set the cities and villages on fire but were not satisfied till they had been guilty of sacrilege, and destroyed the images of the gods, and used them in roasting those sacred animals that used to be worshipped, and forced the priests and prophets to be the executioners and murderers of those animals, and then ejected them naked out of the country. It was also reported that the priest, who ordained their polity and their laws, was by birth of Heliopolis, and his name Osarsiph from Osyris, who was the god of Heliopolis; but that when he was gone over to these people, his name was changed, and he was called Moses."
Manetho, according to Josephus, here equates the Jewish nation with the Hyksos through the use of a story involving shepherds and their expulsion from Egypt under Thummosis, elsewhere Tethmosis. He then has followed up this link, this calumny, by inferring that those shepherds, who had helped drive into Ethiopian exile Amenhotep, successor of Ramesses, were from the nation that then inhabited Jerusalem[7] by linking in the name, Moses. Let there be no doubt that this nation that occupied Jerusalem in the times subsequent to Ramesses II cannot be that of Israel if we follow Convention (Roux) because it is too early. If we generally follow Velikovsky it is too late, as Nebuchadrezzar has deported the tribe of Judah. Roux[8] has the death of Ramesses II as 1237 BC and the date of Moses and the Exodus at circa 1250 BC. Thus we can press on, secure in the knowledge that Manetho is incorrect at least on this point.
The Manetho/Josephus link with Amenhotep and Sethosis’ expulsion of Armais/Danaus is tied in with the expulsion of the Hyksos and a subsequent period of three hundred and ninety-three years[9]. Josephus calculated this time length from numbers provided by Manetho. Josephus does not give the numbers making up the total but I think they can be created by rationale. Even after assuming the components of 393 there is still a problem. The crunch date is the last year of Seti I that is, in my scenario, 652 BC. As I see Seti as the Zet from Dynasty XXIII then his other years be one of fifty-one, fifty-five or fifty-nine. As I use fifty-one to complete the make-up of 393 this makes the first year of Seti to be 703 BC. With Akhenaten from 719 – 714 BC the end of Ay is 703 BC and the accession of Haremhab who must, according to “That Other Dynasty XVIII”, cease to reign when the first Armais ceases, or in 690 BC. Thus there is an overlap of thirteen years within the number compiled by Josephus. He would not be aware of this problem; Manetho might have been but we will never know. The extract from Josephus that gives this number of years has a different situation for the expulsion than that derived from the above extract.
“Now, from his [Tethmosis] days, the reigns of the intermediate kings, according to Manethe, amounted to three hundred and ninety-three years, as he says himself, till the two brothers Sethos and Hermeus; the one of whom, Sethos, was called by that other name of Egyptus, and the other, Hermeus, by that of Danaus. He also says that Sethos cast the other out of Egypt, and reigned fifty-nine years, as did his eldest son Rhampses reign after him sixty-six years.”
Comments:
The last sentence in the preceding quote is wrong within the story line. If we follow the other story line the Sethos and Hermeus incident is after the expulsion of Osarsiph, dated thirteen years after the flight of Amenhotep to Nubia. Amenhotep was a son of Ramesses II so the final sentence above is well out of sequence.
Amenhotep is given as a successor of Ramesses II; Merneptah was another. It then follows that the Sethos of the expulsion incident cannot be that Sethos who was the father of a Ramesses who reigned sixty-six years. There is a Sethos who was a father to Ramesses II (who ruled for 66 years) but he is earlier. Josephus leaves out this Sethos from between Ramesses I who ruled for one year, four months, and Harmesses Miamun who ruled for sixty-six years two months.
This missing Sethos is the son of Ramesses I, and the father of Ramesses II. Sethos hailed from the Delta and was a troop captain from Sile. Either Josephus or Manetho has these probably correct regnal periods allocated to the wrong generation.
Africanus and Eusebius on the other hand seem to have it correct when they say that following Armais (4 years 1 month) that there reigned Sethos (51 or 55 years) thence the traditional Ramesses II for (61 or 66 years) followed by the very king Josephus says is fictional.
Sethos drove out the “northern rebels” and expelled his brother. If this Sethos is he who ruled after Ramesses I, i.e., the traditional Sethos I then the length of time 393 years is not consistent with the known length of Dynasty XVIII plus the inferred dynasty XIX events. Most conventional commentators give dynasty XVIII about 260 years. The misquotation in the extract is that Josephus (or Manetho) chooses the wrong persons when allocating the reign lengths of 59 and 66 years. There are two more persons called Sethos and Ramesses but their actions are 393 years after the expulsion of the Hyksos. Gardiner[10] has, in brackets, that the last Sethos, also called Ramesses, and whose power lay in chariotry and fleet, ruled for ten years but such is not stipulated in Josephus who has him with “an army of horse and a naval force”.
The period for the given XVIIIth dynasty by Josephus is 246 years. This leaves a balance of 147 years between the end of the XVIIIth dynasty and the Sethos / Hermeus’ incident. On the face of this balance figure surely we must ignore those arguments that see this Hermeus as the earlier Armais who might well be Haremhab.
However it would appear that the father of Ramesses II reigned or was a king for one of three given periods, fifty-one years, Africanus, fifty-five years Eusebius or fifty-nine years Josephus. Whereever Ramesses II ends up chronologically then his father, Sethos, has an incumbency of, or in excess of fifty-one years prior to the accession of Ramesses. These differing reign lengths could mean that there were co-regnal years between Sethos and Ramesses and that the latter was credited with any actions that occurred in his first few years of sixty-six.
Josephus does not know the conventional (monumental) kings of Dynasty XVIII. His list comprises other names that many have tried to cross identify and with no success in my opinion. Josephus would be unaware of the error Manetho makes in claiming that after driving out the Shepherds, Tethmosis began his reign of twenty-five years. Records that were not available to either Manetho or Josephus have allowed us to know that it was as in the eleventh year of Ahmose, who appears to be not Tethmosis, that the Shepherds were expelled from Egypt. Thus the date to which we will progress using the Manetho numbers will not be the expulsion date of the Hyksos but the accession date of Tethmosis. The closest that I can come to these numbers, following the story line as given, is as follows. Dates are driven by Setnakht’s death as given by The Oxford History, page 481. Sir A. Gardiner[11] has a mismatch of dates when moving from page 445 to 446. On page 445 the end of Dynasty XIX is 1194 but on page 446 the start of Dynasty XX is 1184, a mismatch of ten years. Even though I prefer to use Gardiner’s dates, they were Velikovsky’s choice. This glitch causes me to use the recently released Oxford dates for Ramesses II.
Given Periods discernable from Josephus / Length. / From / ToTethmosis to Armais, Against Apion Book One, sect 15. / 246 / 1577 / 1331
Sethos I* (Africanus) – contains a hidden 13 year overlap / 51 / 1331 / 1280
Ramesses II** (Africanus and the Oxford’s Date of Death) / 61 / 1280 / 1219
Amenhotep V*** (Josephus, Book One, section 26, and Africanus) / 20 / 1219 / 1199
Usurper Osarsiph (Josephus, Book One, Section 28) / 13 / 1199 / 1186
Expulsion by Sethosis, chase of Osarsiph into Syria – my guess / 2 / 1186 / 1184
Total Period as given by Josephus Book One section 16 / 393
The regnal periods for those kings indicated by asterisks *, **, and *** are not conventional but are derived from Gardiner[12] who advises, “The Africanus’ and Eusebius’ versions of Manetho’s Dynasty XIX begins thus”. Josephus is adamant that Osarsiph drove out Amenhotep V so I deem it appropriate that his defeat be inter leaved as it is germane to the thrust of the point being made by Josephus. The period of self imposed exile in Ethiopia is thirteen years (see Josephus section 28). The Sethos who helped Amenhotep drive out the “northern rebels” was aged five years at the beginning of this period. The computed beginning of the period length is the beginning of the reign of Tethmosis; it is not the expulsion date of the Hyksos; and here I believe that Manetho erred.