Death of Hatshepsut the stepmother of Moses

 

Koot van Wyk (DLitt et Phil; ThD)

Visiting Professor

Kyungpook National University

Sangju Campus

South Korea

Conjoint Lecturer of Avondale College

Australia

21 August 2011

 

The Discovery Channel brought us the fascinating information about the recent discovery of the mummy of Hatshepsut. To summarize the work of Dr. Zahi Hawass and his team including many Foreign experts: "Dr Hawass and his team narrowed their search to just four mummies from thousands of unidentified corpses. The team conducted forensic analysis through cutting-edge CT scans which produced detailed 3D images of the mummies. For the first time ever, the very latest ancient-DNA testing technology has been used to analyse Egypt's royals. This means that we now have a glimpse of the DNA of the pharaohs and at long last we have definitive answers in the case of the missing queen".

Since the discovery of Hatshepsut, the University of Bonn was conducting a test on a perfume flask that they are saying, belonged to her. It is not a fake and it is known that she used cosmetics. For two years the University of Bonn thought the flask contained some perfume.

The researchers X-rayed the 15cm high flask and it was still locked. They then found that dried remainders of the original liquid were on the edge. They took it to the University of Bonn Hospital and in an operating room they opened it and found tiny samples that were taken for analysis.

On Friday 19 August 2011 Reuters announced the results to the world that the flask did not contain perfume but a highly toxic lotion.

When they found the flask, they wanted to recreate her perfume and commercially market the product. However, the discovery that it contained toxic elements in it was a shock and now they are suggesting that she may have slowly, unknowingly, by using the lotion, poisoned herself.

Hatshepsut died very young, somewhere in the fifties. She was suffering from diabetes, was obese, had liver cancer at the time of her death and then also some skin problems.

Helmut Wiedenfeld of the Pharmaceutical Institute of the University of Bonn said that the liquid contained Palmol and Muskatnussol and  fatty acids that were harmful. It also contained tar, but tar is used in lotions as a medicine even today for certain diseases. There were also Benzopyren in it. These are carcinogenic substances that are harmful to the skin.

The Egyptologist Michael Hoveler-Müller suggested that it may have been the main cause of her death.

For Seventh-day Adventists the life and death and discovery of Hatshepsut is very important.

The chronology of Wikipedia is not correct. It is following the low chronology of argued on the basis of Brinkman and Bierbrier's suggestions for the Kassite chronology and chronology of the reign of Rameses II. The article of W. Ward, "The Present Status of the Egyptian Chronology" BASOR 288 (1992): 53-66 is very important. No less than three major views with six possibilities, each view two different lengths if one say the stretch between Thumosis' reign and that of Rameses II was 200 years (Krauss) or 225 (Wente and Van Siclen). Notice one thing. If you say the start of Rameses II was in 1279 or 1290 or 1304, then all the dates of the other pharaohs are also sliding up or down. This writer's stance is always: the Bible is also an ancient source for Egyptian chronology since its chronology is very stable and very fixed. There are open questions as to a year plus or a year minus but when the biblical chronology says the Exodus was 480 years before the 4th year of Salomon and that year on the basis of internal biblical evidence and outside sources are determined to be 970 BCE, then the Exodus took place in 1450 BCE and then all the calculations of scholars for Egyptian chronology should link these two sources, since alternatives do exist (see koot van wyk, Archaeology in the Bible and Text in the Tel [Berrien Center, Michigan: Louis Hester Publications, 1996], 105).

The following scenario is biblically for Adventists the case with the Exodus:

Exodus 1:22Thutmosis I

Exodus 2:5Hatshepsut

Exodus 2:15Thutmosis II

Exodus 2:22Hatshepsut

Exodus 2:23b-14Thutmosis III

Exodus 14:6; 15:19Thutmosis III

Hatshepsut was born in 1539 BCE from her mother Ahmose, the halfsister of her father Thutmosis I. Her father died in 1524 BCE and she had to marry her halfbrother. She was only 15 years old and Thutmosis II, her halfbrother was born not from Ahmose but from another mother Mutnofret in 1545 BCE. Hatshepsut was at the Nile in Exodus 2:5 when she was only 9 years old. Too young to be a mother. That was in 1530 BCE when Moses was born (calculating 970 BCE as the fourth year of Solomon in 1 Kings 6:1-4 add the 480 years from the Exodus, arriving at 1450 BCE as the date of the Exodus; plus 80 since Moses was 80 at the time of the Exodus, thus 1530 BCE for Moses' birth).

Our Egyptian chronology follows strictly a system that was calculated and explained by Arthur Weigall, A History of the Pharoahs Vol. II (London: Thorton Butterworth Ltd, 1927). What we then did is to investigate the Egyptian options metioned above from my book and the article of W. Ward, three starting dates for Rameses II and Thutmosis III, 1504, 1490 or 1479 BCE. Since the investigator has to make a choice for the system he is going to follow, we chose the 1504 date since the chronology lines up 100% with the biblical chronology. Two systems, two chronologies, one Egyptian and one Hebrew, and yet they are lining up if we use either a 200 years stretch (Krause) from Rameses II as 1304 or a 225 year stretch (Wente and Van Siclen) from Rameses II as 1279 as Brinkman and Bierbrier suggested (Van Wyk 1996: 105).

The dates of Weigall is not lined up with Egyptian chronologies available and discussed by W. Ward in 1992, and thus our computation was necessary to shift the whole frame of Weigall over one selected Egyptian system of Ward 1992. In this way we get legitimacy and authentication from both inside the Bible and outside Egyptian sources discussed by modern and updated Egyptologists.

When Moses was 12 in 1518 BCE he came to the palace. Since Thutmosis I, the father of Hatshepsut lost two sons, he spoiled Hatshepsut (Weigall 1927: 281). The husband of Hatshepsut, Thutmosis II had only two daughters with her and no sons but Thutmosis III was born from a streetwoman with the name of Iset. She was not of royal descent (Weigall 1927: 290). He halfbrother and husband was an elegant young man, broad shouldered and very strong. He had a more intelligent head than their warlike father, Thutmosis I. He chin was slightly residing. Hatshepsut craved for a boy (Weigall 1927: 290). Bringing Thutmosis III to the palace, the street-child was upsetting to her. The street-child Thutmosis III was born in 1521 BCE. The three years before Moses arrived in 1518 BCE was not easy for her. She hated Thutmosis III and it was her mother Ahmose who took him in. The two half-brother and half-sister, Thutmosis II and Hatshepsut, now husband and wife since 1524 BCE, had a roller-coaster marriage for 7 years and it was only in 1507 BCE, after this enstrangement between the two, that they became reconciled.

When Hatshepsut was born in 1539 BCE, her father assigned the throne to her (Weigall 1927: 288). So the priests at Karnak and in the religio-political system of the power structure of Egypt would have worked with this scenario since her birth. But then during the two years of Hatshepsut and her husband’s reconciliation, a daughter was born in 1504 BCE, Merytre. The first daughter was Nofrure. That year in March 13 or April 13, Thutmosis II died. Hatshepsut was a widow. She is the strongest bloodline in the palace since Thutmosis III was illegitimate. She thought that she could be pharaoh since her father Thutmosis I allotted the throne to her. Her best sympathizer at that time was Moses, her adopted Hebrew child. But the bloodline of her mother Ahmose was stronger than hers, since she was the halfsister of Thutmosis I, so she had the casting vote over who the ruler should be. She favored Thutmosis III, not only because he is a male but he is young and full of energy, and she knows him well. At the age of 17, Thutmosis III became pharaoh of Egypt.

For the next 9 years, Thutmosis III was the pharoah of Egypt but then a disaster happened to him: his protagonist, Ahmose, the blue bloodline authority, died at the age of 67/8 years old (Weigall 1927: 303). When Hatshepsut's mother Ahmose died, immediately the priests remember her father's wish at her birth, that she should be on the throne and not the street-child of 26 years old, Thutmosis III. Hatshepsut took the throne, put on a false beard and rule the palace from 1495 BCE. Moses, her adopted son, was now 35 years old. His rival in the palace was Thutmosis III at the age of 26.

Moses went through the Egyptian university, the royal sciences, the famous Egyptian astronomer of Hatshepsut with whom she may have had a relationship, as modern Egyptologists are suggesting. The modern cosmological view of Moses in the book of Job should be seen as been taught by this astronomer to Moses in the Egyptian Palace.

Hatshepsut also dyed her hair red and used lots of lotions for her skin. She and the priests considered her as the sole ruler for the next 13 years until 1482 BCE when she suddenly died of liver cancer, diabetes, obesity and maybe the skin cancer that was reported on Friday 19th, 2011 in Reuters in nearly all languages.

A tragedy happened in her life. He favored adopted son, Moses, killed through manslaughter, in a moment of anger, an Egyptian overseer who was beating a Hebrew, and in 1490 BCE, Moses had to flee and hide in Midian. He had enough time to greet his mother who passed on to him the Book of Adam, the Book of Noah and the Book of Abraham, Izak and Jacob with the Joseph information as well. Also the Life of Job from which he composed in 1460 BCE in Midian the Book of Job.

The 9 years without Moses, her comfort and emotional strength in the palace with all the stress, was not easy for Hatshepsut. In the meantime, Thutmosis III, who was downgraded to a co-ruler with Hatshepsut, had to keep out of her way but in order to strengthen his own position and regain some blue-blood line, married the oldest daughter of Hatshepsut, Nofrure in 1493 BCE. He married her two years after he had been downgraded by the religio-political powers of the Karnak Temples and other temples.

When Hatshepsut died in 1482 BCE, Thutmosis III was in Gaza. It is our suggestion that Thutmosis III was searching for Moses since he was the greatest rival for him since he was the favored of Hatshepsut, her adopted son, learned, intelligent, a man of sober lifestyle habits, a leader, a prolific writer and Thutmosis III had to search for him in Palestine to eliminate him, since his own position was in danger as long as the rebel Moses was still alive.

Thutmosis III was in Gaza in 1482 BCE when Hatshepsut died. She died the 3rd of April and Thutmosis III received the news on the 10th of April. He jumped on a horse and raced as fast as he could to Karnak (prof. dr. Charles Fensham in his classnotes). He arrived at Karnak on the 28th of April and on the 29th of April in 1482 the priests at the temple inaugurated him at Karnak and his sole rule started. He went back to Syro-Palestine year after year. His campaigns are all recorded at the temple of Karnak. He ordered it to be inscribed on the temple in his 42nd year after his 16th expedition. That year was 1462 BCE and it was a holy year for him in which he did not undertook a military campaign. It was also the time of his second Jubilee. Thutmosis III hated Hatshepsut and this year asked that her cartouches be removed and history rewritten without Hatshepsut. Her mummy also disappeared and in modern times were discovered again.

We need to reiterate, that the dates for the events here will not line up with information from encyclopaedias, books of Egypt, commentaries, modern articles listing of dates for the pharaohs, online articles for the dates of the pharaohs. I submit that the scholars who wrote these articles online or in book-form, did not properly look at the three alternative systems for the Egyptian chronology, did look and select a wrong one, either middle or low chronology that ended with a non-biblical alignment. I also submit that a careful analysis of biblical chronology and Egyptian chronology will lead to a harmonious composite of information that is remarkably accurate on both sides and put a puzzle together that is sweet to read. It cannot be said that the above computations are not scientific and based upon the mathematics and computations of Egyptologists. The dates are not just pulled out of blue air. The methodology is to get the order of events of the Pharaohs of the Eighteenth Dynasty, ignore that Egyptologists dating, study Egyptian Chronologies by W. Ward 1992, study Biblical Chronology, select the alternative that can line up with biblical chronology, and then slide all the dates up or down according to this choice ending with a computation of all the dates. Keep to the frame provided by Weigall 1927 of the events and then describe the biblical events in a fusion of Weigall and the Bible with the correct calculated modern Egyptian chronological dates. Even though Kenneth Kitchen is a famous Egyptologist and likes to link biblical chronology to Egyptian historiography, the problem with him is that he gives preference to his own views above the Bible and reject biblical chronology for the Exodus and thus tries to see the Exodus in the time of Rameses II. It will not work. His dates for the pharaohs will also not line up with the strict chronology suggested here. That is the case with all famous world Egyptologists. J. Yoyotte came the closest with a suggestion that Thutmosis III died in 1450 (G. Posener, A Dictionary of Egyptian Civilization (London: 1962), 25 under Aton.  

 

koot theories of egyptian chronology 1992 and 1996.jpg hatshepsut mummy Amr Nabil photo.jpg

mediaManager sascha Schuermann photo.jpg hatsheptsut mummy.jpg

(Photo is supplied by Reuters but is probably by Amr Nabil or Sascha Schuemann. The first photo is by Amr Nabil. The second photo is by Sascha Schuermann. The first diagram is from koot van wyk 1996: 105b)