Moses - Legitimate Heir to the Throne of Egypt?

Ever since Napoleon brought scholars with him when he invaded Egypt in 1798, archaeologists and Biblical scholars have been looking for the connection between Egyptian history and the Biblical sojourn of the Children of Israel in Egypt. With Ahmed Osman's identification of the Grand Vizier Yuya as the Biblical Joseph, that connection finally begins to reappear from under the sands of time. (Osman, Ahmed. Stranger in the Valley of the Kings, Harper & Row, New York, 1987.)Abraham's Visits to Egypt

According to the Bible, the tribe of Abraham made a number of visits to Egypt. Abraham's tribe would probably have been classified by the Egyptians under the generic term "Habiru", a loose designation for mostly-nomadic tribes wandering the area to the east and northeast of Egypt. Scholars are still debating whether the term "Habiru" is the source of the name "Hebrew", or not; but it does seem the likeliest explanation. Egypt seems to have had frequent interactions with the Habiru, sometimes friendly, sometimes antagonistic. It appears that groups of Habiru were often employed as mercenary troops, usually under Egyptian commanders; and Pharaoh's troops often rounded up Canaanite conscripts to serve as corveé labor on Pharaoh's public works projects. (On the other hand, Cecil B. DeMille notwithstanding, there is no evidence that either Canaanites or Habiru helped build the pyramids, which were constructed more than a thousand years before the 18th Dynasty.)

Habiru bringing tribute to Pharaoh. (Note the "coat of many colors" on the right)

Interestingly, Abraham himself seems to have had remarkably easy access to Pharaoh. He may well have brought some of his animals as tribute to Pharaoh, much like the Habiru tribesmen in the picture at left, above. It seems that wild tribes from the eastern deserts often migrated into Egypt during times of famine or severe drought. The eastern border was defended by a canal, in much the same place as today's Suez canal, and a line of forts. Together, these defenses were known as "the Wall of the Princes". It seems that one of the major functions of this defensive line was to control the passage of such migrants into and out of Egypt. Abraham and his successors in the Bible are portrayed as seeking food and water in Egypt during times of famine and drought, a practice that corresponds with Egyptian records.

Slavery vs. Conscript Labor in Ancient Egypt

Joseph Being Sold Into Slavery - Seitz

Three generations after Abraham, Joseph was sold into slavery in Egypt.

Contrary to popular imagination, slavery was not a standard commercial practice in ancient Egypt until late in the 18th Dynasty. As mentioned above, corveé labor consisting of either native Egyptian workers or conscript foreign laborers was the norm. Many native Egyptians paid their taxes by contributing 2-4 months of corveé labor a year, at times when they could afford to leave their crops to be tended by their wives and children. Recent archaeological finds around the Great Pyramids show that they were built by ordinary citizens paying their taxes to the crown by working on public projects for two or three months a year; and that, far from being abused, downtrodden slaves, they were, in fact, well fed, housed and medically cared for.  During most periods,  actual slaves were not usually purchased, but were captives brought home from foreign wars. However, late in the 18th Dynasty, a limited commercial trade in slaves did appear, which is consistent with Joseph having been sold into slavery at this time.

Unnamed Pharaohs: an Israelite Disinformation Campaign?

One of the difficulties in determining when the Israelites might have spent time in Egypt is the failure of either Genesis or Exodus to mention the actual names of any of the Pharoahs with whom Joseph or Moses interacted. Since the Israelites would certainly have known the names of the Pharaohs they dealt with, and since later books of the Bible do mention the names of Pharoahs who invaded Israel, we have to assume that this omission was deliberate. Why would the Biblical writer(s) have omitted the names of the Pharaohs involved in the entry of the Israelites into and exodus out of Egypt? It seems likely that this might have been part of history's earliest "disinformation" campaign: if, as Jewish tradition maintains, the books of the torah were originally written, at least in part, by Moses himself, he may have been protecting his own identity from possible discovery by the Egyptians. If Moses did, indeed, write or dictate an initial version of these books, it would have been done while the Israelites were out chasing around the Sinai and Negev deserts, an area under Egyptian control. There is plenty of evidence that Egyptian troops often patrolled these areas. Since the Israelites had only narrowly escaped Pharaoh's troops through the miraculous intervention of God, they would surely have been on the lookout for Egyptian troops patrolling the area. And if they had been confronted by such troops, there was a danger that any written material they possessed might fall into Egyptian hands. The author of this book believes that, for this reason, Moses might have taken the precaution of leaving the names of Pharaohs out of the stories of Joseph and Moses to prevent the Egyptians from identifying him as the former Prince of Egypt. It is unlikely that his killing of an overseer would have been sufficient cause for this concern (see below), but his having a legitimate claim to the throne certainly would have been!

The Situation of the Royal House at the end of the 18th Dynasty

MISSING PERSON: Queen Ankhsenamun

As outlined under Family Background, the line of the Thutmosid Dynasty ran out of male heirs after Tutankhamun. His Queen, Ankhsenamun, disappears after her abortive attempt to import a Hittite prince to marry. The historical record does not tell us what happened to her. There are little hints in the archaeological record that suggest she might have run away, primarily in the form of "marriage jars" (traditionally inscribed with the name of the couple and broken at the time they married) with her name and that of Niq'madda, the King Ugarit, found on a vessel that sank in the eastern Mediterranean - but there's no evidence of her having actually reached Ugarit. Maybe she tried to, but perished along the way. Or maybe she ran away, but wound up somewhere other than Ugarit. She doesn't show up in any other country's royal records, so if she wound up somewhere else, it must have been on the downlow, someplace decidedly non-royal. And if, indeed, Yuya was the Biblical Joseph, then Ankhsenamun was related to the Children of Israel; so where else would she hide, but among the Israelites? And what better way to hide than by taking over the identity of an established, but recently deceased, member of the group (in this case, Yochebed, wife of Amram)? And if, indeed, she survived among the Israelites, her son would have been the legitimate heir to the throne of Egypt. This was strikingly confirmed for the author when she discovered the real meaning of the names "Moses".

Pharoah's Daughter finding baby Moses

The Real Meaning of the name "Mosis" in Ancient Egypt

Scholars have searched for the meaning of the Biblical name "Moses" for hundreds, maybe even thousands, of years. The Bible says - once again, misleadingly - that Pharaoh's Daughter named the child she rescued from the Nile "Moses" because she pulled him out of the water. But there is no Egyptian word "Moses" that means anything like water, river, bulrushes, basket or anything else along that line. The author believes it's another case of disinformation: the intentional misdirection of attention. It's also a case of hiding something in plain sight.

In ordinary Egyptian names, the term "mosis" appears as a suffix, usually attached to the name of some deity. In this context, it means "child of" whatever god is indicated in the other part of the name. Hence, we have "Thutmosis", meaning "child of Thoth"; "Ramosis", "child of Ra"; "Ptahmosis", "child of Ptah", etc, etc. The name "Mosis", standing alone, would simply mean "child", without indicating whose child. That would be like naming your child "Kid" - only marginally better than "Hey you"!

Tomb painting showing activities on a farm

But it turns out there is another context in which the term "mosis" has a particular significance, and that is, in courts of law. In probate cases, where a title or ownership of a piece of property is contested, the term "mosis" is used to refer to the legal heir. On the wall of a family tomb at Saqqara is painted the story of a legal dispute over the ownership of a family farm, which was established by the grandfather of the tomb's occupants, then inherited by their father. After his first wife died, the father re-married, to a divorced woman who had a son by her first marriage (sounds like a very modern sort of family!). When he died, this second wife tried to claim the estate for her son, who was totally unrelated to the original founder of the estate. The eldest granddaughter brought the case to court on behalf of her brother and won the case. Throughout, the brother is referred to by the legal term "mosis", designating him as "the legitimate heir".

Hence, by naming the child "Mosis" (or Moses), the Princess was designating him as "the legitimate heir". Heir to what? Well, the title most in doubt at that time would have been the title to the throne of Egypt, which was then occupied by the usurper, Horemheb, who was totally unrelated to the previous dynasty. Naming the boy "Moses" would have been a case of hiding him in plain sight - especially if the Princess then sent him to be educated in the kap, the royal harem. And since Horemheb had no sons, the Princess's adopted son would have been a very logical candidate to inherit the throne when Horemheb eventually died.

 A Threat to the Legitimacy of Pharaoh

But if Moses somehow fell out of favor, or if his true identity were revealed while Horemheb still ruled, he would have been a threat to Horemheb's continued hold on the throne. (Horemheb's reign lasted about 27 years, certainly long enough for Moses to have come of age.) If someone (such as an overseer) discovered his true identity and threatened to reveal it, that would have been good cause for Moses to flee, much more so than his killing the overseer, which, as a prince, he could easily have gotten away with.

The legitimate heir?

Recognizable Speech

Likewise, when he later returned to lead the Israelites out of bondage, Moses repeatedly objected, saying to God that he couldn't speak to Pharaoh, ostensibly because he was "slow of speech", a problem God solved by having Aaron speak for him. But if Moses really did have some kind of speech defect, it would have marked him out. Even though the new Pharaoh (Ramses I?) was one who "knew not Joseph", he would have known a young prince raised at court; so, even if Moses' appearance was now disguised by the growth of long hair and beard and different clothing, Pharaoh would have instantly recognized his speech, with its distinctive defect. No wonder Moses didn't want to speak to Pharaoh!

And once the Israelites had further offended Pharaoh by bringing down ten plagues on Egypt, including the death of Pharaoh's son, and by escaping with treasures looted from their Egyptian neighbors, then causing the drowning of Pharaoh's six hundred chariots with men and horses, Moses would have had that much more reason to disguise his identity from the Egyptian troops who were very likely hunting him.

So, yes, Moses could very well have been the legitimate heir to the throne of Egypt!