A password will be e-mailed to you.

I have been following a theory for many years now, that the Israelites were actually pharaohs of Egypt. This idea has been championed by Ahmed Osman, amongst others, but I believe I have taken the theory well beyond the reaches of any other researcher.

Having made all this effort, it is now time to disseminate the results to a wider audience – hence I have been in discussion with a handful of Egyptologists over the last months. The results of these contacts were interesting, as not one convincing argument was placed before me that would invalidate my main thesis, and I found that I had a veritable arsenal of material available to scupper each and every one of their counter-arguments. I thought it would be interesting to place those same arguments before interested members of TDG, and so I am placing this blog.

To start the discussion I will outline a few of the main planks of this thesis before you.

Firstly, the details of the Hyksos exodus out of Egypt are remarkably similar to the accounts of the Exodus from the Book of Genesis. Indeed they only seem to differ in date, and that aspect is easily explained.

Secondly, the reports and imagery from the court at Amarna bear distinct similarities to the accounts of Adam and Eve. Initially, I argued that the naked Adam and Eve were the naked love-birds, Akhenaton and Nefertiti. However, it later transpired that Eve’s Hebrew name of Khavah was based upon the almost identical word Khiyah – with both meaning ‘life’. In this case, it is likely that Adam and Khiyah (Eve) were actually Akhenaton and Kiya, his second wife.

Thirdly, there is the ‘lost’ court of Kings David and Solomon – why cannot these famous kings be found in Israel? The reason, I suspect, is that their main capital city actually lay in the Nile Delta at Tanis (Thus the biblical Zion is actually the biblical Zoan, which is another name for Tanis). What we are looking for, therefore, is a monarch who was identified with a Star and a City (as was David). What we find is that a pharaoh of exactly the same era, Psusennes II, was identified in exactly this same manner – as his cartouche contains the Star and City glyphs. A likely nickname for this pharaoh might well be Duat, which is similar to the Hebrew name Duad for David. Furthermore, this pharaoh’s daughter was called Maakhare MuTamhat, while David’s daughter was called Maakhah Tamar. His army commander was called Tchoeb while David’s was called Joab. And his architect was called Herum Atif, while David’s was called Hiram Abif (the masonic hero).

All in all, the evidence constantly points towards the Old Testament being a reliable and highly detailed account of the life and times of the royal court of the Lower Egyptian pharaonic line. The Torah is simply the ‘Day Book’ from the Egyptian royal court.

Ralph Ellis