This page was last updated on 25 June, 2017.
The date of Exodus
1. Revision of secular dates
On the previous page I discussed the possibility that the interpretation of the original Bible is flawed; but what if secular dates are wrong?
That thought isn’t that outrageous if we consider that that the dates of various Egyptian dynasties are in a constant state of flux.
While the beginning of king Solomon’s reign is very firmly established, Egyptologists aren’t so sure at all about their dating.
1Kgs 6:1 And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month Zif, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the LORD.
If we use the widely accepted dates for Solomon’s fourth year (967-
The problem with that date is that nothing of the known history of the 18th Dynasty can be aligned with events described in the Bible.
Courv Courville 1971, Aling 1981, James 1991, Rohl 1995, Stewart 1999, Ashton and Down 2006, all challenged the current widely accepted Egyptian chronology.
The reason for that is that of some period there is a lot of information missing, inconsistencies, lack of points to align with our calendar and even the Egyptian calendar.
Using the new dating the end of the 12th Dynasty shifts 334 years forward in time; moving it from 1773 to 1439BC.
That’s still 1447-
Pharaoh Amenemhat IV died 1443BC. Link
His wife or sister Sobekneferu ruled the next ~3* year and closing the 12th Dynasty at 1439BC.
The death of Amenemhat IV is obscure. What if that’s because he’s the pharaoh that died at the start of the Exodus?
*=The duration of her ruling isn’t exactly known. It’s known to be less that 4 years (but some sources state 4-
The tombs of Sobekneferu and Amenemhat IV have never been found.
Accepting some margin of error, because the redating very likely isn’t 100% accurate, we now know Amenemhat IV was the Exodus pharaoh.
There is a little more to support that view:
3. Can the above conclusion be wrong?
See the previous and next page for alternative solutions.