The Fate of Pharaoh

[colliric]

The City is spelled differently (Raamses). And (at least Jews believe this) Raamses was already in existence. THat when it says they built store-cities, it means they fortified the existing cities as store-cities. By that reasoning, if we assume Raamses was named after Ramses II, then it could have been any pharoah after Ramses II that was the pharoah of Exodus, couldn’t it?

I found an article you might find interesting. An excerpt:

Protestant Christian Evangelicals set the Exodus at circa 1445 BC using Ussher’s chronology, the Roman Catholics set the Exodus at circa 1512 BC and the Jewish TANAKH’s data which appears in the Jewish work called Seder 'Olam Rabbah calculates the Exodus at 1312 BC
bibleorigins.net/ExodusProblems.html

That is of no consiquence, It was called Arvis before that as another user said and did knowingly exist before then, but thgat was before it’s restoration by Ramesses the second, and it’s original egyptian name actually translates into english 3 diffrent ways Ramses, Ramesses and Ra-amses. Also Ramesses/Ramses/Ra-amses the second probally named it himself when he restored it. Or it was built in the late 18th dynesty and was named after the first Ramses. In any case it existed and was named that new name either during or nor long before Ramesses the second’s reign.

What is more important is that Pi-tum or Pitom(as the Jews translated it) was without a doubt built and named in the late 18th to late 19th dynasty.

And it doesn’t really make valid the idea that it was another pharaoh, because Ramesses probally built 1 city(Pi-tum, which had a large erected statue of Ramesses the second and was therefore originally thought to be “Ramesses” the biblical one, until the name of the city was discovered on a plaque) and did restore Arvis or Ramesses or Raamses(they are all the same place) and therefore to me was favorably the one who renamed it.

His reign was the first time that both Pi-tum and Ramesses(Ra-amses) the cities, both existed at the same time.

 

[Valke2]

That is of no consiquence, It was called Arvis before that as another user said and did knowingly exist before then, but thgat was before it’s restoration by Ramesses the second, and it’s original egyptian name actually translates into english 3 diffrent ways Ramses, Ramesses and Ra-amses. Also Ramesses/Ramses/Ra-amses the second probally named it himself when he restored it. Or it was built in the late 18th dynesty and was named after the first Ramses. In any case it existed and was named that new name either during or nor long before Ramesses the second’s reign.

What is more important is that Pi-tum or Pitom(as the Jews translated it) was without a doubt built and named in the late 18th to late 19th dynasty.

And it doesn’t really make valid the idea that it was another pharaoh, because Ramesses probally built 1 city(Pi-tum, which had a large erected statue of Ramesses the second and was therefore originally thought to be “Ramesses” the biblical one, until the name of the city was discovered on a plaque) and did restore Arvis or Ramesses or Raamses(they are all the same place) and therefore to me was favorably the one who renamed it.

His reign was the first time that both Pi-tum and Ramesses(Ra-amses) the cities, both existed at the same time.

quite a few ifs and probably s in that post. I don’t see how anything you posted contradicts what I posted. It could have been Raamses and it could have been someone else. At best, this is an argument that it could not have been anyone preceeding Ramses.

 

[colliric]

quite a few ifs and probably s in that post. I don’t see how anything you posted contradicts what I posted. It could have been Raamses and it could have been someone else. At best, this is an argument that it could not have been anyone preceeding Ramses.

That’s quite right, thanks for pointing that out. except you did say it wasn’t Avris that became Ramesses or Raamses in hte 19th Dynesty, when in fact it was. What we also need to recall is how things got originally “translated” into Aramaic Hebrew, Pi-tum for instance was called Pitom to them. For archelogists, Raamses is too close for comfort to Ramesses or Ramses, especially the second one, so thats how they identified it, especially because of location. What you really may be indirectly questioning is the English translation and that is very interesting.

But these facts do make Ramesses 2nd the favorite.

 

[Valke2]

That’s quite right, thanks for pointing that out. except you did say it wasn’t Avris that became Ramesses or Raamses in hte 19th Dynesty, when in fact it was. What we also need to recall is how things got originally “translated” into Aramaic Hebrew, Pi-tum for instance was called Pitom to them. For archelogists, Raamses is too close for comfort to Ramesses or Ramses, especially the second one, so thats how they identified it, especially because of location. What you really may be indirectly questioning is the English translation and that is very interesting.

But these facts do make Ramesses 2nd the favorite.

I said Rameses wasn’t Avris?

 

[colliric]

I said Rameses wasn’t Avris?

You seemed to indicate you thought it was called Ramesses when it was made… I’m not sure you meant that though, it was when you said it existed before hand, you seemed to infer it was always called Ramesses. It did exist but it was called Avris. the bible specifically says Rameses, so the narrative is supposed to occur after the renaming, supported by the fact that Pi-tum(Pitom) came into existence in the 19th dynesty which is about the same time Avris changed it’s name.

 

[Valke2]

You seemed to indicate you thought it was called Ramesses when it was made… I’m not sure you meant that though, it was when you said it existed before hand, you seemed to infer it was always called Ramesses. It did exist but it was called Avris. the bible specifically says Rameses, so the narrative is supposed to occur after the renaming, supported by the fact that Pi-tum(Pitom) came into existence in the 19th dynesty which is about the same time Avris changed it’s name.

I just meant that the fact the Bible mentions Raamses, assuming it isnamed after thepharoah, can only mean that the phaorah in Exodus was either Ramses or someone after him – a phaorah who came into power after the city was named Raamses/Ramses.

 

[colliric]

I just meant that the fact the Bible mentions Raamses, assuming it isnamed after thepharoah, can only mean that the phaorah in Exodus was either Ramses or someone after him – a phaorah who came into power after the city was named Raamses/Ramses.

I agree, it was very customary for Pharaoh’s to name new or rebuilt cities in their own honor.

Also does anyone know if the firstborn reference in exodus refers to the Pharaoh’s firstborn’s general age group? I can’t remember specifically myself, but he’s always portrayed as if he were about 12 years old in the film versions. But does it actually say his age?

I ask because Ramesses presumed firstborn(the identity of the discovered body is not entirly clear and neither is weather or not this son was his first born at all.) died under weird circumstances(a forcable blow of somekind to the back of the head) when he was 40 years old.

 

[George_Waters]

I agree, it was very customary for Pharaoh’s to name new or rebuilt cities in their own honor.

Also does anyone know if the firstborn reference in exodus refers to the Pharaoh’s firstborn’s general age group? I can’t remember specifically myself, but he’s always portrayed as if he were about 12 years old in the film versions. But does it actually say his age?

I ask because Ramesses presumed firstborn(the identity of the discovered body is not entirly clear and neither is weather or not this son was his first born at all.) died under weird circumstances(a forcable blow of somekind to the back of the head) when he was 40 years old.

touregypt.net/featurestories/ramesses2ssons.htm

“Amun-her-khepseshef (Amun Is with His Strong Arm). Ramesses II’s first born son by Nefertari, he was born before Ramesses II’s ascent to the throne, until which time Amun-her-khepseshef was known as Amun-her-wenemef (Amun Is on His Right Hand). he was crown prince until his death between the age of 40 and 52. He was probably buried in the Tomb of Ramesses II’s sons in the Valley of the Kings.”

While I have not research Pithom as of yet, what I can’t get over is that there are no Egyptian records of plagues or migrations during the reign of Ramesses II as there are during the reign of Ahmose. It seems Pithom is really the only thing that really points to Ramesses II… aside from the film “The Ten Commandments”.

 

[Valke2]

I agree, it was very customary for Pharaoh’s to name new or rebuilt cities in their own honor.

Also does anyone know if the firstborn reference in exodus refers to the Pharaoh’s firstborn’s general age group? I can’t remember specifically myself, but he’s always portrayed as if he were about 12 years old in the film versions. But does it actually say his age?

I ask because Ramesses presumed firstborn(the identity of the discovered body is not entirly clear and neither is weather or not this son was his first born at all.) died under weird circumstances(a forcable blow of somekind to the back of the head) when he was 40 years old.

There’s nothing in Torah that discusses the age of pharoah’s son. I’m not sure I"m following the question. all the first born, regardless of age, were slain (unless they had marked their doorposts).

 

[colliric]

There’s nothing in Torah that discusses the age of pharoah’s son. I’m not sure I"m following the question. all the first born, regardless of age, were slain (unless they had marked their doorposts).

What I’m asking is the age of Pharaoh’s son as it is portrayed in Exodus, because I don’t recall it physically mentioned?

 

[Valke2]

you are right in that there’s nothing in Exodus to suggest the age of pharoah’s son.

 

[colliric]

you are right in that there’s nothing in Exodus to suggest the age of pharoah’s son.

So, hypothetically, it could have been that 40 year old son, who knowingly perished in odd circumstances in the 20th year of Ramesses 2’s long reign?

I guess possibly so.

 

[Valke2]

So, hypothetically, it could have been that 40 year old son, who knowingly perished in odd circumstances in the 20th year of Ramesses 2’s long reign?

I guess possibly so.

Yes. If Pharoah in Exodus was Rameses II and he had a first born son who was 40, it could have been him.

 

[Valke2]

A triple dead heat in the polls. who woulda thunk it.