Who was the Pharaoh during the Exodus? Overview of the Question The identity of the Pharaoh who ruled during the Exodus has intrigued scholars and believers for centuries. References in Scripture, historical records, and archaeological studies present multiple theories. The question largely hinges on the date of the Exodus and the available evidence pointing to which Egyptian king was in power at that time. Biblical Timing: Clues from 1 Kings 6:1 One core biblical reference is found in 1 Kings 6:1: “In the four hundred and eightieth year after the Israelites had come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv (the second month), he began to build the house of the LORD.” By combining this verse with known data on the start of Solomon’s reign (commonly placed around 970–966 BC) and adding 480 years, many place the Exodus around 1446 BC. This “early date” view is widely held among conservative scholars who see the biblical text as reliable and consistent in its chronology. The Early-Date Pharaoh: Amenhotep II If the Exodus occurred around 1446 BC, the timing falls near the transition from Thutmose III (ruling until about 1450 BC) to his successor, Amenhotep II (ruling roughly from 1450–1425 BC). Many posit that Amenhotep II was the Pharaoh of the Exodus, for several reasons: 1. Succession Timeline: Thutmose III died close to the presumed Exodus date. Amenhotep II assumed the throne soon afterward, aligning with biblical accounts of a new Pharaoh who continued to oppose Moses and Israel (cf. Exodus 2:23). 2. Potential Military Gaps: Some suggest that Amenhotep II’s campaigns show an unexplained military lull, possibly correlating with the disaster of losing chariots and fighting men in the Red Sea (Exodus 14:28). 3. Cultural and Administrative Upheaval: If Egypt suffered a national catastrophe (plagues, loss of labor, and the decimation of an army), we might expect disruptions that sometimes appear in the historical and archaeological record for this period. Alternate Theories: Thutmose III or Ramesses II Other candidates have been proposed, most notably: 1. Thutmose III: Some suggest he could have been the Pharaoh who resisted Moses. However, the earlier demise of Thutmose III (around 1450 BC) often places him just before the likely Exodus date of 1446 BC, making Amenhotep II a more fitting candidate. 2. Ramesses II: Advocates of a “later date” for the Exodus (around the 13th century BC) sometimes identify Ramesses II with the Pharaoh of Exodus, citing the store city of Rameses (Exodus 1:11). Yet, many see this reference to “Rameses” as either a later place-name used retroactively or symbolic of Egyptian power. Moreover, endorsing Ramesses II as the Exodus Pharaoh places the biblical timeline out of sync with 1 Kings 6:1. Scriptural and Archaeological Considerations 1. Store Cities and Anachronisms: Critics point to Exodus 1:11—“So they appointed taskmasters over them to oppress them with forced labor. And they built Pithom and Rameses as store cities for Pharaoh.” The mention of “Rameses” can lead some to assign the Exodus to the reign of Ramesses II. Yet, ancient writings often used updated names for places, much like referencing an earlier city by its current name. This does not necessitate that Ramesses II was alive during the building of that city. 2. Egyptian Records: Egypt did not record defeats in their official annals. If the Exodus involved the catastrophic losses detailed in Exodus 7–14, we would not expect direct admissions from Egyptian scribes. However, some scholars cite indirect evidence, such as brief periods of turmoil or mentions of the Apiru (possibly a variant of “Hebrew”) in certain texts, though these remain inconclusive. 3. Historical Coordination: The robust internal chronological markers in the Old Testament (including genealogies and festival dates) point strongly to an event in the mid-15th century BC, consistent with an Amenhotep II timeline. Potential Historical Corroborations 1. Jericho’s Walls and Settlement Patterns: Excavations in Jericho and related sites show destruction layers that some interpret as evidence for an Israelite conquest. The dating of these strata broadly aligns with a 15th-century BC Exodus and subsequent conquest of Canaan (Joshua 6). 2. Short Reigns and Upheaval: Egyptian dynastic shifts near the 18th Dynasty show short periods of internal adjustment, which might mirror or correspond to significant disruptions like the plagues and the Exodus. While not definitive, it provides a circumstantial framework consistent with Amenhotep II’s reign. 3. Writings of Josephus: The Jewish historian Josephus (1st century AD) references Egyptian records and traditions hinting at an exodus under an earlier dynasty rather than a 13th-century one, though conflicting accounts exist. Conclusion Scripture offers a foundational timeline anchoring the Exodus to around 1446 BC. From that anchor point, Amenhotep II emerges as the leading candidate for the Pharaoh who hardened his heart (Exodus 9:12) and refused to let the Israelites go until repeated divine intervention. The references in 1 Kings 6:1 help guide the discussion, and an early-15th-century BC date harmonizes with several archaeological and historical indicators. While debates continue, the weight of evidence and conservative scriptural interpretation often point to Amenhotep II as the Pharaoh of the Exodus. The biblical narrative of the plagues and Israel’s deliverance (Exodus 7–14) stands at the center of this discussion, illumining why a precise historical record from Egypt would be sparse. Yet, the internal coherence of Scripture and the plausible ties to the 18th Dynasty suggest a powerful, prideful Egyptian monarch who faced divine judgment—fulfilling the Exodus account. |
    |