![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
in Ramesses II article it says that Merneptah died from drowning (suggesting Exodus and so forth). But here in this article it says he died from natural causes. Which is it? 76.24.104.52 ( talk) 22:40, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
To my knowledge, Dr Maurice Bucaille is known to have shown that Merneptah died from drowning. If a specialist would mention this in the article, along with the proper sources. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.32.129.241 ( talk) 20:00, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
This may be simple confusion.
When Merneptahs remains were first unwrapped they were encrusted with (salt)crystals and the immediate popular reaction was that he had drowned and was identified as the Pharaoh of Exodus and had drowned in the Red Sea.
More careful examination then revealed that that the crystals were in fact the AT Kunene ( talk) 10:00, 19 December 2010 (UTC)natron (salts)used in the embalming process.
Does anybody have any details of a more recent examination of Merneptahs remains, which may finally clear this confusion?
I can't believe this article doesn't even mention that Merneptah was pharaoh when the Jewish Exodus took place. Isn't that an important fact? Or is it because this information is controversial? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimitri Weil ( talk • contribs) 13:46, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
From the same source on the 18th Dynasty, Amenophois is how Amenhotep tends to be Transliterated into Greek. Rameses II did have a son named Amenhotep, but he's not among that even served as Crown Prince much less Pharoh?-- JaredMithrandir ( talk) 07:18, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
References
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:53, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
References
@ WP:MILHIST coordinators: Would this article fall under the Classical period? Adamdaley ( talk) 22:30, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
After this discussion on the Ancient Egypt wikiproject page, I'm removing this passage again:
I first removed it in February, but an IP editor restored it recently, saying, "Astr&Geophysics is the leading journal in its field, please do not classify as dubious without published counterevidence." But the study of ancient history is paramount here, and I know of no evidence that this argument has gained traction in that field. Most obviously, the argument hangs on a lot of assumptions: that the Exodus story and the Book of Joshua are chronologically accurate, that Ramesses II was the Pharaoh of the Exodus, and that the miracle in Joshua can be explained as a solar eclipse rather than the way it is most commonly translated. Moreover, people have often attempted to explain ancient miracle stories as literal events with naturalistic causes, but the track record for such efforts is very poor. For example, people have often attempted to explain the Plagues of Egypt as the results of the Thera eruption, but such efforts have been poorly received by archaeologists (and, incidentally, would contradict the timeframe for the Exodus that Humphreys and Waddington favor).
Unless there is evidence that Humphreys and Waddington's claims have found wider support, I think they should be kept out of the article. A. Parrot ( talk) 17:17, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
they treat the events in the story as legend and not history, which, if true, would mean there is no point in searching for a scientific explanation for the stopping of the sun and moon.
References
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite uses deprecated parameter |authors=
(
help)
Following the Discussion above, I am adding a new 2020 paper which independently replicates the astronomical eclipse interpretation by Humphreys and Waddington 2017, and furthermore offers a detailed linguistic and archaeological analysis.
https://brill.com/view/journals/vt/70/4-5/article-p722_13.xml
It is one of 15 papers which have so far cited Humphreys and Waddington 2017 according to Google Scholar, and is a particular delight to read. The research on the eclipse proposal has been ongoing since 1899, and incredibly this Israeli group and the British physicists have hit upon exactly the same breakthrough conclusions independently of each other. Here, for convenience, I cite the Acknowledgments section:
Acknowledgements We thank Prof. S. Ahituv, Dr. O. Tammuz, and Dr. D. Kahn, who read this manuscript and offered valuable feedback. We should also like to thank Dr. Eve Levavi Feinstein for her editing and improving the English and to Takeji Otsuki Mizra Association, Beit Shalom, Japan, for their generous help. In an article published in October 2017, approximately ten months after our findings were published in Hebrew in the journal Beit Mikra, Humphreys and Waddington (Humphreys and Waddington 2017) arrived, completely independently (see Humphreys and Waddington 2018), at precisely the same conclusion: that the annular eclipse that occurred on October 30, 1207 BCE, was the eclipse described in Joshua 10. Their work was based om Sawyer's (1972) interpretation and on the claim that in antiquity, records did not distinguish between a total solar eclipse and an annular solar eclipse. Therefore a search for solar eclipses that match the biblical account should be broadened to include annular solar eclipses that were visible from the region of Jerusalem between 1500 and 1050 BCE. They made their calculations independently (without using the information on NASA's website) and identified the eclipse of 1207 BCE, which they claimed was the earliest recorded solar eclipse and therefore could be used to calibrate the rate of the earth's rotation.
Fascinating research. 37.5.240.213 ( talk) 21:53, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Could someone explain which is the correct pronunciation of this Pharaoh's name? Merneptah or Merenptah?
I'm somewhat persuaded to think that Merneptah is favoured because people pronounce the "P" in the name, however the "P" is silent (Ptah).
There are similar names such as Merenre (Nemtyemsaf), which are derived from "Mery", meaning "beloved".
On that basis, it seems to make sense to spell this Pharaoh as Merenptah, unless someone can show otherwise. Lkjdgr ( talk) 20:59, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
in Ramesses II article it says that Merneptah died from drowning (suggesting Exodus and so forth). But here in this article it says he died from natural causes. Which is it? 76.24.104.52 ( talk) 22:40, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
To my knowledge, Dr Maurice Bucaille is known to have shown that Merneptah died from drowning. If a specialist would mention this in the article, along with the proper sources. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.32.129.241 ( talk) 20:00, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
This may be simple confusion.
When Merneptahs remains were first unwrapped they were encrusted with (salt)crystals and the immediate popular reaction was that he had drowned and was identified as the Pharaoh of Exodus and had drowned in the Red Sea.
More careful examination then revealed that that the crystals were in fact the AT Kunene ( talk) 10:00, 19 December 2010 (UTC)natron (salts)used in the embalming process.
Does anybody have any details of a more recent examination of Merneptahs remains, which may finally clear this confusion?
I can't believe this article doesn't even mention that Merneptah was pharaoh when the Jewish Exodus took place. Isn't that an important fact? Or is it because this information is controversial? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimitri Weil ( talk • contribs) 13:46, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
From the same source on the 18th Dynasty, Amenophois is how Amenhotep tends to be Transliterated into Greek. Rameses II did have a son named Amenhotep, but he's not among that even served as Crown Prince much less Pharoh?-- JaredMithrandir ( talk) 07:18, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
References
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:53, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
References
@ WP:MILHIST coordinators: Would this article fall under the Classical period? Adamdaley ( talk) 22:30, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
After this discussion on the Ancient Egypt wikiproject page, I'm removing this passage again:
I first removed it in February, but an IP editor restored it recently, saying, "Astr&Geophysics is the leading journal in its field, please do not classify as dubious without published counterevidence." But the study of ancient history is paramount here, and I know of no evidence that this argument has gained traction in that field. Most obviously, the argument hangs on a lot of assumptions: that the Exodus story and the Book of Joshua are chronologically accurate, that Ramesses II was the Pharaoh of the Exodus, and that the miracle in Joshua can be explained as a solar eclipse rather than the way it is most commonly translated. Moreover, people have often attempted to explain ancient miracle stories as literal events with naturalistic causes, but the track record for such efforts is very poor. For example, people have often attempted to explain the Plagues of Egypt as the results of the Thera eruption, but such efforts have been poorly received by archaeologists (and, incidentally, would contradict the timeframe for the Exodus that Humphreys and Waddington favor).
Unless there is evidence that Humphreys and Waddington's claims have found wider support, I think they should be kept out of the article. A. Parrot ( talk) 17:17, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
they treat the events in the story as legend and not history, which, if true, would mean there is no point in searching for a scientific explanation for the stopping of the sun and moon.
References
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite uses deprecated parameter |authors=
(
help)
Following the Discussion above, I am adding a new 2020 paper which independently replicates the astronomical eclipse interpretation by Humphreys and Waddington 2017, and furthermore offers a detailed linguistic and archaeological analysis.
https://brill.com/view/journals/vt/70/4-5/article-p722_13.xml
It is one of 15 papers which have so far cited Humphreys and Waddington 2017 according to Google Scholar, and is a particular delight to read. The research on the eclipse proposal has been ongoing since 1899, and incredibly this Israeli group and the British physicists have hit upon exactly the same breakthrough conclusions independently of each other. Here, for convenience, I cite the Acknowledgments section:
Acknowledgements We thank Prof. S. Ahituv, Dr. O. Tammuz, and Dr. D. Kahn, who read this manuscript and offered valuable feedback. We should also like to thank Dr. Eve Levavi Feinstein for her editing and improving the English and to Takeji Otsuki Mizra Association, Beit Shalom, Japan, for their generous help. In an article published in October 2017, approximately ten months after our findings were published in Hebrew in the journal Beit Mikra, Humphreys and Waddington (Humphreys and Waddington 2017) arrived, completely independently (see Humphreys and Waddington 2018), at precisely the same conclusion: that the annular eclipse that occurred on October 30, 1207 BCE, was the eclipse described in Joshua 10. Their work was based om Sawyer's (1972) interpretation and on the claim that in antiquity, records did not distinguish between a total solar eclipse and an annular solar eclipse. Therefore a search for solar eclipses that match the biblical account should be broadened to include annular solar eclipses that were visible from the region of Jerusalem between 1500 and 1050 BCE. They made their calculations independently (without using the information on NASA's website) and identified the eclipse of 1207 BCE, which they claimed was the earliest recorded solar eclipse and therefore could be used to calibrate the rate of the earth's rotation.
Fascinating research. 37.5.240.213 ( talk) 21:53, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Could someone explain which is the correct pronunciation of this Pharaoh's name? Merneptah or Merenptah?
I'm somewhat persuaded to think that Merneptah is favoured because people pronounce the "P" in the name, however the "P" is silent (Ptah).
There are similar names such as Merenre (Nemtyemsaf), which are derived from "Mery", meaning "beloved".
On that basis, it seems to make sense to spell this Pharaoh as Merenptah, unless someone can show otherwise. Lkjdgr ( talk) 20:59, 1 March 2023 (UTC)