Monday, April 13, 2015

Moses. May be Staring Revisionists Right in the Face.





Image result for vizier of egypt


by


 Damien F. Mackey


 


 


 


If any revisionist historian had placed himself in a good position, chronologically, to identify in the Egyptian records the patriarch Joseph, then it was Dr. Donovan Courville, who had, in The Exodus Problem and its Ramifications, I and II (1971), proposed that Egypt’s Old and Middle Kingdoms were contemporaneous. That radical move on his part might have enabled Courville to bring the likeliest candidate for Joseph, the Vizier Imhotep of the Third Dynasty, into close proximity with the Twelfth Dynasty – the dynasty that revisionists most favour for the era of Moses.


Courville, however, who did not consider Imhotep for Joseph, selected instead for his identification of this great biblical Patriarch another significant official, Mentuhotep, vizier to pharaoh Sesostris I, the second king of Egypt’s Twelfth Dynasty.


And very good revisionists have followed Courville in his choice of Mentuhotep for Joseph.


 


With my own system, though, favouring (i) Imhotep for Joseph; (ii) Amenemes [Amenemhet] I for the “new king” of Exodus 1:8; and (iii) Amenemes I’s successor, Sesostris I, for the pharaoh from whom Moses fled (as recalled in the semi-legendary “The Story of Sinuhe”), then Mentuhotep of this era must now loom large as a candidate for the Egyptianised Moses.


  


 


 


Introduction


 


In 1981 I began a search for Moses in the Egyptian records.


The first lesson that I had to learn (and Courville’s two-volume set served as my guide in this) was that the history books and the Bible just did not align.


Now, after decades of effort on this work of revision, I have been blessed to have encountered - and sometimes to have made - exciting discoveries, including the appropriate era for Moses and the Exodus, and the true archaeology for the Israelite (Joshuan) Conquest of Palestine. But Moses himself, the person, has proved to be most elusive.


 


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I now think that - and it has taken me only about 34 years to realise it -


this Mentuhotep may be Moses staring revisionists right in the face.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


 


In my most recent excursion into this era of biblico-history:


 


Bible Bending Pharaonic Egypt. Part One: Abraham to Exodus.


 




 


I returned to the view - in line with the thinking of professor Immanuel Anati, in his classic, The Mountain of God - that the famous Egyptian “Sinuhe” tale carried a reminiscence of the historical Moses: “I accept that this famous Egyptian tale is based upon a real biblical event. The semi-legendary Sinuhe may at least provide us with the time of the flight of Moses from Egypt to Midian, during the early reign of Sesostris I”.


And I as well, in line with my revised Old to Middle Kingdom parallelism, tentatively making contemporaneous:


 


4th Dynasty                  6th Dynasty                 12th Dynasty               13th Dynasty


 


also suggested in this article a possible connection of Sinuhe with the Sixth Dynasty’s Weni. Thus:


 


There is a famous Sixth dynasty official, Weni (or Uni), who may be the parallel of the Twelfth Dynasty’s Sinuhe as a candidate for the elusive Moses.


I have previously written on this:


 


Now, given our alignment of the so-called Egyptian Middle Kingdom’s Twelfth Dynasty with the Egyptian Old Kingdom’s Sixth Dynasty (following Dr. Donovan Courville), then the semi-legendary Sinuhe may find his more solidly historical identification in the important Sixth Dynasty official, Weni, or Uni. Like Weni, Sinuhe was highly honoured by pharaoh with the gift of a sarcophagus. We read about it, for instance, in C. Dotson’s extremely useful article (“…. The Cycle of Order and Chaos in The Tale of Sinuhe”) (https://journals.lib.byu.edu/spc/index.php/StudiaAntiqua):


 


“…. The king gives Sinuhe a sarcophagus of gold and lapis lazuli as a housewarming gift. The gift of a coffin by the king was considered a great honor and a sign of respect.


 


In the Autobiography of Weni from the Old Kingdom, Weni records that the king had given him a white sarcophagus and “never before had the like been done in this Upper Egypt.” ….


 


[End of quote]


 


Naturally, Dr. Courville’s radical proposal that the Egyptian Sixth and Twelfth dynasties were contemporaneous - whereas, according to conventional history some four centuries separate the end of the Sixth (c. 2200 BC) from that of the Twelfth (c. 1800 BC) - has not been well received by non-revisionist historians, such as e.g. professor W. Stiebing who has written (https://books.google.com.au/books?id=Yf2NWgNhEecC&pg=PA131&lpg=PA131&dq=co): “There is simply no textual support for making the Sixth and Twelfth Dynasties contemporaneous, as Courville does”. However, as I noted in my:


 


Connecting the Biblical Patriarchs to Ancient Egypt


 




 


…. [Dr.] J. Osgood proposes a possible close relationship between the 6th and 12th dynasty mortuary temples ....:


 


Edwards certainly opens the possibility unconsciously when referring to the pyramid of Sesostris the First ....: “... and the extent to which its Mortuary Temple was copied from the Mortuary Temples of the VIth dynasty, as illustrated by that of Pepi II ... is clearly evident.” 


 


The return of a culture to what it was before ... after some three hundred years must be an uncommon event. The theoretical possibility that the two cultures, the Twelfth and the Sixth Dynasties were in fact contemporary and followed a common pattern of Mortuary Temple must be borne in mind as real. 


 


[End of quote]


 


That there is in fact some impressive evidence to suggest that, as I wrote:


 


Egypt’s Old and Middle Kingdoms [Were] Far Closer in Time


than Conventionally Thought


 




 


is apparent from a set of examples that I listed there taken from N. Grimal’s A History of Ancient Egypt (Blackwell 1994). After recalling some striking similarities between the Sixth Dynasty founder, Teti, and the Twelfth Dynasty founder, Amenemes I, as follows: “…. {Teti, I have tentatively proposed as being the same pharaoh as Amenemes/Ammenemes I, based on (a) being a founder of a dynasty; (b) having same Horus name; (c) being assassinated. ….}”, I continued:


 


Grimal notes the likenesses:


 


Pp. 80-81


“[Teti‟s] adoption of the Horus name Sehetep-tawy (“He who pacifies the Two Lands”) was an indication of the political programme upon which he embarked. … this Horus name was to reappear in titulatures throughout subsequent Egyptian history, always in connection with such kings as Ammenemes I … [etc.]”.


“Manetho says that Teti was assassinated, and it is this claim that has led to the idea of growing civil disorder, a second similarity with the reign of Ammenemes I”.


P. 84: “[Pepy I] … an unmistakable return to ancient values: Pepy I changed his coronation name from Neferdjahor to Merire (“The devotee of Ra”)”. ….


P. 159:


[Ammenemes I]. Like his predecessors in the Fifth Dynasty, the new ruler used literature to publicize the proofs of his legitimacy. He turned to the genre of prophecy: a premonitory recital placed in the mouth of Neferti, a Heliopolitan sage who bears certain similarities to the magician Djedi in Papyrus Westcar. Like Djedi, Neferti is summoned to the court of King Snofru, in whose reign the story is supposed to have taken place”.


P. 164: “[Sesostris I]. Having revived the Heliopolitan tradition of taking Neferkare as his coronation name …”.


 P. 165: “There is even evidence of a Twelfth Dynasty cult of Snofru in the region of modern Ankara”.


P. 171: “Ammenemes IV reigned for a little less than ten years and by the time he died the country was once more moving into a decline. The reasons were similar to those that conspired to end the Old Kingdom”.


 P. 173: “… Mentuhotpe II ordered the construction of a funerary complex modelled on the Old Kingdom royal tombs, with its valley temple, causeway and mortuary temple”.


P. 177:


“… Mentuhotpe II’[s] … successors … returned to the Memphite system for their funerary complexes. They chose sites to the south of Saqqara and the plans of their funerary installations drew on the architectural forms of the end of the Sixth Dynasty.


…. The mortuary temple was built during the Ammenemes I’s “co-regency” with Sesostris I. The ramp and the surrounding complex were an enlarged version of Pepy II’s”.


P. 178: “The rest of [Sesostris I’s el-Lisht] complex was again modelled on that of Pepy II”.


Pp. 178-179:


“[Ammenemes III’s “black pyramid” and mortuary structure at Dahshur]. The complex


infrastructure contained a granite sarcophagus which was decorated with a replica of the enclosure wall of the Step Pyramid complex of Djoser at Saqqara (Edwards 1985: 211-12)”. “[Ammenemes III’s pyramid and mortuary temple at Harawa]. This was clearly a sed festival installation, comparable to the jubilee complex of Djoser at Saqqara, with which Ammenemes’ structure has several similarities”.


“The tradition of the Old Kingdom continued to influence Middle Kingdom royal statuary …”.


P. 180:


“The diversity of styles was accompanied by a general return to the royal tradition, which was expressed in the form of a variety of statues representing kings from past times, such as those of Sahure, Neuserre, Inyotef and Djoser created during the reign of Sesostris II”.


P. 181:


“A comparable set of statures represents Ammenemes III (Cairo, Egyptian Museum CG 385 from Hawara) … showing the king kneeling to present wine vessels, a type previously encountered at the end of the Old Kingdom (Cairo, Egyptian Museum CG 42013 …) …”.


[End of quotes]


 


Further on, I shall be drawing multiple comparisons also between the Sixth Dynasty official, Weni, and the Twelfth Dynasty official, Mentuhotep, thus suggesting time approximation.


On the strength of this possible allowance for tucking Egypt’s Old Kingdom, in part, into the Middle Kingdom - especially with Teti being so reminiscent of Amenemes I, and with the building complexes of Pepi II so resembling those of Sesostris I - then a merger of the official Weni, with the apparently important Sinuhe, may now loom as being actually plausible.  


 




           Sinuhe Flees Egypt


 


As for the vizier Mentuhotep, however, despite his having officiated at the very same time that Sinuhe is said to have, during the reign of Sesostris I, I had not really followed through. And that despite the rapturous manner about which revisionists (thinking that Mentuhotep was the patriarch Joseph) have written of this powerful official, largely following Courville. Thus Drs. D. Down and J. Ashton (“Unwrapping the Pharaohs”), introduce him as follows (https://answersingenesis.org/archaeology/ancient-egypt/the-glorious-middle-kingdom/):


 


Sesostris [I] is known to have had a vizier, or prime minister, by the name of Mentuhotep who wielded extraordinary power, and some scholars have identified this vizier with the biblical Joseph. Sir Alan Gardiner assigns a date of 1971–1928 B.C. to Sesostris I, but by a revised chronology he would have been ruling when Joseph was sold as a slave into Egypt in about 1681 B.C.


….


Genesis 41:43 adds, “He [Pharaoh] had him ride in the second chariot which he had; and they cried out before him, ‘Bow the knee.’” That was the sort of status that was not usually ascribed to viziers, but it was in the case of Mentuhotep. Another great Egyptologist, Emille Brugsch, wrote in his book Egypt Under the Pharaohs, “In a word, our Mentuhotep . . . appears as the alter ego of the king. When he arrived, the great personages bowed down before him at the outer door of the royal palace.”3


 


And A. Montgomery writes about Mentuhotep (http://www.ldolphin.org/alanm/chron1.html):


 


Courville identified Joseph as Vizier Mentuhotep, the most powerful Vizier of the 12th Dynasty. Under Senurset [Sesostris] I, his many impressive titles were: Vizier, Chief Judge, Overseer of the Double Granary, Chief Treasurer, Governor of the Royal Castle, Wearer of the Royal Seal, Chief of all the Works of the King, Hereditary Prince, Pilot of the People, Giver of Good -Sustaining Alive the People, Count, Sole Companion, Favourite of the King [Courville, 1977, Vol. 1, p.142]. Such titles were unprecedented.


 


[End of quotes]


 


Nevertheless, Mentuhotep - the favoured candidate for Joseph amongst revisionists of a conservative Christian persuasion (e.g., Courville; Down; Ashton; Mitchell) - must have begun finally to impress himself upon my mind as being a possible candidate for Moses, instead, for I also wrote briefly in the above-mentioned ‘Bible Bending’ article:


 


Along with Weni, and the semi-historical Sinuhe, there is another powerful Twelfth dynasty character under pharaoh Sesostris I, who may be a candidate for Moses. I refer to the Vizier, Mentuhotep, on to whom Courville and others have fastened, instead, as Joseph (thereby missing out on the Joseph = Imhotep synchronism).


But I now think that - and it has taken me only about 34 years to realise it - this Mentuhotep may be Moses staring revisionists right in the face. They have dimly perceived this, though, mistaking him instead for the great Joseph. But, by having missed out on identifying Imhotep as the rightful Joseph (as I see it), and substituting Mentuhotep, they may unwittingly have rendered impossible, within their revision, for an historical identification of Moses.


[End of quotes]


 


A further potential obstacle for identifying Moses in Egyptian history has been the tendency, following midrashic and other legends, to regard him as having been “a king”, that is, a pharaoh of Egypt. Courville had toyed with the idea that Moses may have been the last of the Twelfth Dynasty pharaohs, Amenemhet [Amenemes] IV (as referred to at: https://answersingenesis.org/archaeology/ancient-egypt/pharaohs-of-the-oppression/).


And I have, for a long time, pursued this line of thought that I now believe to be erroneous. Certainly ancient legend attributes a lot to the talented Moses, who - if he were a combination of Weni (Sinuhe) and Mentuhotep - may not have fallen too far short of such startling claims. Thus we read (http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/artapanus.html


 


… the long article concerning Moses (Euseb. ix. 27) gives detailed information of his being the real founder of all the culture and even of the worship of the gods in Egypt. For he it was whom the Greeks call Musaeus, the instructor of Orpheus, the author of a multitude of useful inventions and attainments, of navigation, architecture, military science, and philosophy. He also divided the country into thirty-six provinces, and commanded each province to worship God; he also instructed the priests in [hieroglyphics]. He introduced order into State affairs. Hence he was beloved by the Egyptians, who called him Hermas, δια την των ιερων γραμματων ερμηνειαν. King Chenephres however sought, out of envy, to get rid of him. …. When [Chenephres] was dead, Moses received commandment from God to deliver His people from Egyptian bondage. …. Single traits from this history are related, with express appeal to Artapanus, in Clemens Alex. Strom. i. 23. 154, in Chron. pasch. ed. Dindorf, i. 117, and in the Chron. anonym. in Cramer, Anecdota, Paris, ii. 176.


[End of quote]


 


It should be noted here this alleged creativity generally refers only to the “Egyptianised” Moses (cf. Exodus 2:19 and Acts 7:22), and not to the post Burning Bush version of the man.


 




 


Comparing Weni - (and Sinuhe) - with Mentuhotep


 


About Sinuhe, we learn (http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/texts/sinuhe.htm): “I was a henchman who followed his lord, a servant of the Royal harim attending on the hereditary princess, the highly-praised Royal Consort of Sesostris in the pyramid-town of Khnem-esut, the Royal Daughter of Amenemmes in the Pyramid-town of Ka-nofru, even Nofru, the revered”.


We have already learned something of the greatness of Mentuhotep.


Weni has, for his part - like Imhotep (Joseph) - been described as a “genius” This little excerpt on the “Autobiography of Weni” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autobiography_of_Weni) already tells us a lot about the man:


 


Weni rose through the ranks of the military to become commander in chief of the army. He was considered by both his contemporaries and many Egyptologists to have been a brilliant tactician and possibly even a genius. His victories earned him the privilege of being shown leading the troops into battle, a right usually reserved for pharaohs. Weni is the first person, other than a pharaoh, known to have been portrayed in this manner. Many of his battles were in the Levant and the Sinai. He is said to have pursued a group of Bedouins all the way to Mount Carmel. He battled a Bedouin people known as the sand-dwellers at least five times.


[End of quote]


 


Weni’s famous “Autobiography” has been described as, amongst other superlatives (https://books.google.com.au/books?id=sgoVryxihuMC&pg=PA352&lpg=PA352&dq=the): “… the best-known biographical text of the Old Kingdom and has been widely discussed, as it is important for literary and historical reasons; it is also the longest such document”. This marvellous piece of ancient literature, conventionally dated to c. 2330 BC - and even allowing for the revised re-dating of it to a bit more than half a millennium later - completely gives the lie to the old JEDP theory, that writing was not invented until about 1000 BC.


Here I take some of the relevant inscriptions of the renowned Vizier, Mentuhotep (http://www.forgottenbooks.com/readbook_text/Ancient_Records_of_Egypt_v1_1000075076/297), and juxtapose them with comparable parts of the “Autobiography” of Weni (in brown) (http://drelhosary.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/weni-elder-and-his-mor) (all emphasis added):


 


INSCRIPTIONS OF MENTUHOTEP ….


 


531. Hereditary prince, vizier and chief judge


 


The exterior face of the north wall incorporates a large niche, and during excavations here a damaged false door inscribed for Weni the Elder was discovered in situ. Not only does this false door provide a nickname for Weni ("Nefer Nekhet Mery-Ra"--Egyptian nicknames were often longer than birth names!), but it also documents his final career promotion, a fact not recorded in his autobiography: Chief Judge and Vizier.


 


attached to Nekhen,


 


judge attached to Nekhen,


 


prophet of


 


prophet of


 


Mat (goddess of Truth), giver of laws, advancer of offices, confirming … the boundary records, separating a land-owner from his neighbor, pilot of the people, satisfying the whole land, a man of truth before the Two Lands … accustomed … to justice like Thoth, his like in satisfying the Two Lands, hereditary prince in judging the Two Lands …. supreme head in judgment, putting matters in order, wearer of the royal seal, chief treasurer, Mentuhotep.


Hereditary prince, count


 


the count


 


… chief of all works of the king, making the offerings of the gods to flourish, setting this land … according to the command of the god.


 


the whole was carried out by my hand, according to the mandate which … my lord had commanded me.


 


…. sending forth two brothers satisfied


 


pleasant to his brothers


 


with the utterances of his mouth, upon whose tongue is the writing of Thoth,


 


I alone was the one who put (it) in writing ….


 


more accurate than the weight, likeness of the balances, fellow of the king in counselling … giving attention to hear words, like a god in his hour, excellent in heart, skilled in his fingers, exercising an office like him who holds it, favorite of the king


 


I was excellent to the heart of his majesty, for I was pleasant to the heart of his majesty  


 


before the Two Lands, his beloved among the companions,


 


for his majesty loved me.


 


his majesty appointed me sole companion and superior custodian of the domain of the Pharaoh.


 


powerful among the officials, having an advanced seat to approach the throne of the king, a man of confidences to whom the heart opens.


 


his majesty praised me for the watchfulness and vigilance, which I showed in the place of audience, above his every official, above [his every] noble, above his every servant.


 


532. Hereditary prince over the … the (royal) castle (wsh't) … finding the speech of the palace, knowing that which is in every body (heart), putting a man into his real place, finding matters in which there is irregularity, giving the lie to him that speaks it, and the truth to him that brings it, giving attention, without an equal, good at listening, profitable in speaking, an official loosening the (difficult) knot, whom the king (lit., god) exalts above millions, as an excellent man, whose name he knew, true likeness of love, free from doing deceit, whose steps the court heeds,


 


when preparing court, when preparing the king’s journey (or) when making stations, I did throughout so that his majesty praised me for it above everything.


 


overthrowing him that rebels against the king, hearing the house of the council of thirty, who puts his terror … among the barbarians (fp^s'tyw), when he has silenced the Sand-dwellers, pacifying the rebels because of their deeds, whose actions prevail in the two regions, lord of the Black Land and the Red Land, giving commands to the South, counting the number of the Northland,


 


His majesty sent me to despatch [this army] five times, in order to traverse the land of the Sand-dwellers at each of their rebellions, with these troops, I did so that [his] majesty praised me [on account of it].


When it was said there were revolters, because of a matter among these barbarians in the land of Gazelle-nose, I crossed over in troop-ships with these troops, and I voyaged to the back of the height of the ridge on the north of the Sand-dwellers. When the army had been [brought] in the highway, I came and smote them all and every revolter among them was slain.


 


His majesty sent me at the head of his army while the counts, while the wearers of the royal seal, while the sole companions of the palace, while the nomarchs and commanders of strongholds belonging to the South and Northland ….


 


in whose brilliance all men move, pilot of the people, giver of food, advancing offices, lord of designs, great in love, associate of the king in the great castle (wsfi't), hereditary prince, count, chief treasurer, Mentuhotep, he says:


533. …'I am a companion beloved of his lord, doing that which pleases his god daily, prince, count, sem priest, master of every wardrobe of Horus, prophet of Anubis of … the hry ydb, Mentuhotep, prince in the seats of … Splendor … at whose voice they (are permitted to) speak in the king's-house, in charge of the silencing of the courtiers, unique one of the king, without his like, who sends up the truth ….


One to whom the great come in obeisance at the double gate of the king's-house ; attached to Nekhen, prophet of Mat, pillar … 'before the Red Land, overseer of the western highlands,


 


First of the Westerners ….


 


leader of the magnates of South and North … advocate of the people … merinuter priest, prophet of Horus, master of secret things of the house of sacred writings ….


 


Never before had one like me heard the secret of the royal harem.


 


[Sinuhe, too, was] servant of the Royal harim attending on the hereditary princess ….


 


governor of the (royal) castle,


 


governor of the South


 


prophet of Harkefti, great lord of the royal wardrobe, who approaches the limbs of the king,


 


chamber-attendant


 


…. overseer of the double granary, overseer of the double silver-house, overseer of the double gold-house, master of the king's writings of the (royal) presence, wearer of the royal seal, sole companion, master of secret things of the 'divine words’ (hieroglyphics) ….


534. Here follows a mortuary prayer, after which the concluding lines (22, 23) refer specifically to his building commissions at Abydos ….


I conducted the work in the temple, built of stone of Ayan I conducted the work on the sacred barque {nlm * /), I fashioned its colors, offering tables


 


His majesty sent me to Hatnub to bring a huge offering-table ….


 


of lapis lazuli, of bronze, of electrum, and silver; copper was plentiful without end, bronze without limit, collars of real malachite, ornaments (mn-nfr't) of every kind of costly stone. of the choicest of everything, which are given to a god at his processions, by virtue of my office of master of secret things.


[End of quotes]


 


I recall (but do not currently have it with me) that professor A. S. Yahuda had, in his Language of the Pentateuch in Its Relation to Egyptian, Vol. 1 (1933), when discussing the Exodus 5:5 encounter between Pharaoh and Moses and Aaron: “Then Pharaoh said, ‘Look, the people of the land are now numerous, and you are stopping them from working’”, referred to the rank of Moses and Aaron (differentiating them from the common people) as something akin to new men. Anyway, that is precisely how Weni is classified in this next piece (http://drelhosary.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/weni-elder-and-his-mortuary.html):


 


Everyone who has studied ancient Egyptian history is familiar with the autobiography of Weni the Elder, an enterprising individual who lived during the 6th Dynasty of the Old Kingdom (ca. 2407-2260 BCE). His Description: http://www.umich.edu/~kelseydb/Publications/spring2000/spot.gifinscription, excavated in 1860 from his tomb in the low desert at Abydos in southern Egypt, enthusiastically describes his long service under three kings, culminating in his appointment as "True Governor of Upper Egypt." Scholars have hailed it as "the most important historical document from the Old Kingdom" and have used it to illustrate the rise of a class of "new men" in Egyptian politics and society--persons whose upward mobility rested in their abilities, not in noble birth.


 


Early in the season, we excavated a number of inscribed relief fragments from this area, including two pieces that, when joined together, furnished the name "Weni the Elder" and a fragment providing the title "True Governor of Upper Egypt," the highest title recorded in Weni's autobiography. Further evidence emerged supporting this association. The exterior face of the north wall incorporates a large niche, and during excavations here a damaged false door inscribed for Weni the Elder was discovered in situ. Not only does this false door provide a nickname for Weni ("Nefer Nekhet Mery-Ra"--Egyptian nicknames were often longer than birth names!), but it also documents his final career promotion, a fact not recorded in his autobiography: Chief Judge and Vizier.


[End of quote]


 


Weni was, just like Mentuhotep, Chief Judge and Vizier.


Was this also the historical Moses, whose Judgeship, whose Rulership, some of the Hebrews chose to reject (Exodus 2:14): ‘Who made you ruler and judge over us?’

Wednesday, April 8, 2015

The Instruction of Ptah-hotep: Joseph in Egypt





Taken from: http://www.askelm.com/doctrine/d040501.htm




“The Instruction of Ptah-Hotep”



This brings us to consider the author of an early Egyptian work called “The Instruction of the Vizier [the Prime Minister] Ptah-Hotep.” The man who wrote this document of proverbial teaching was so close to the Pharaoh that he was considered Pharaoh’s son — from his own body. This does not necessarily mean that the author was the actual son of the Pharaoh. It is a designation which means that both the author (the Prime Minister) and the Pharaoh were one in attitude, authority, and family. 6
Could this document be a composition of the patriarch Joseph? There are many parallels between what the document says and historical events in Joseph’s life. Indeed, the similarities are so remarkable, that I have the strong feeling that modern man has found an early Egyptian writing from the hand of Joseph himself. Though it is evident that the copies that have come into our possession are copies of a copy (and not the original), it still reflects what the autograph said; in almost every section it smacks of the attitude and temperament of Joseph as revealed to us in the Bible. Let us now look at some of the remarkable parallels.
This Egyptian document is often called “The Oldest Book in the World” and was originally written by the vizier in the Fifth (or Third) Dynasty. The Egyptian name of this vizier (i.e., the next in command to Pharaoh) was Ptah-Hotep. This man was, according to Breasted the “Chief of all Works of the King.” He was the busiest man in the kingdom, all-powerful (only the Pharaoh was over him). He was the chief judge and the most popular man in Pharaoh’s government. 7
The name Ptah-Hotep was a title rather than a proper name, and it was carried by successive viziers of the Memphite and Elephantine governments. The contents of this “Oldest Book” may direct us to Joseph and to the later teachings of Israel.
Notice what this Ptah-Hotep (the second in command in Egypt) had to say of his life on earth. How long did he live? The answer is given in the concluding statement in the document:
“The keeping of these laws have gained for me upon earth 110 years of life, with the gift of the favor of the King, among the first of those whose works have made them noble, doing the pleasure of the King in an honored position.”
  • “The Instruction of Ptah-Hotep,” Precept XLIV
This man, with the title Ptah-Hotep, was one who did great construction works. Joseph was supposed to have done mighty works — traditionally, even the Great Pyramid was built through the dole of grain during the seven years of low Niles. And remember, Joseph also lived 110 years (Genesis 50:26) just as did this Ptah-Hotep. He resembled Joseph in another way.
“If you would be held in esteem in the house wherein you enterest, whether it be that of a ruler, or of a brother, or of a friend, whatever you do enter, beware of approaching the wife, for it is not in any way a good thing to do. It is senseless. Thousands of men have destroyed themselves and gone to their deaths for the sake of the enjoyment of a pleasure which is as fleeting as the twinkling of an eye.”
  • Precept XVIII
Here again we have Joseph! Even though adultery was the common thing in Egypt (thousands of men were doing it), only one uncommon example shines out in its history — that of Joseph. This virtue of Joseph was so strong, that its inclusion into these “Precepts” again may indicate that Joseph had a hand in writing them.
Now look at the beginning of Precept XLIV. Ptah-Hotep says that if the laws of the master were kept, a person’s father will give him a “double good,” i.e., a double portion. Joseph did in fact receive the birthright and with it the “double good” (double blessing, Deuteronomy 21:15–17). This birthright blessing is repeated in Precept XXXIX.
“To hearken [to your father] is worth more than all else, for it produces love, the possession doubly blessed.”
  • Precept XXXIX

Ptah-Hotep Was a Great Man

There is much more that is like Joseph in the document of Ptah-Hotep. Notice Precept XXX:
“If you have become a great man having once been of no account, and if you have become rich having once been poor, and having become the Governor of the City [this exactly fits Joseph’s experience], take heed that you do not act haughtily because you have attained unto a high rank. Harden not your heart because you have become exalted, for you are only the guardian of the goods which God has given to you. Set not in the background your neighbor who is as you were, but make yourself as if he were your equal.”
  • Precept XXX
The instruction above almost sounds as if it came from the Bible itself! The parallel to such high ethical teaching could be an indication that Joseph wrote it. There is also, in these Precepts, an emphasis on obedience, especially to one’s father(s).
“Let no man make changes in the laws of his father; let the same laws be his own lessons to his children. Surely his children will say to him ‘doing your word works wonders.’”
  • Precept XLII
“Surely a good son is one of the gifts of God, a son doing better than he has been told”
  • Precept XLIV
“When a son hearkens to his father, it is a double joy to both, for when these things are told to him, the son is gentle toward his father. Hearkening to him who has hearkened while this was told him, he engraves on his heart what is approved by his father, and thus the memory of it is preserved in the mouth of the living, who are upon earth.”
  • Precept XXXIX
“When a son receives the word of his father, there is no error in all his plans. So instruct your son that he shall be a teachable man whose wisdom will be pleasant to the great men. Let him direct his mouth according to that which has been told him [by his father]; in the teachableness of a son is seen his wisdom. His conduct is perfect, while error carries away him who will not be taught; in the future, knowledge will uphold him, while the ignorant will be crushed.”
  • Precept XL
The emphasis of Ptah-Hotep is that his own greatness depended upon his attendance to the laws of his fathers. He encouraged all others to do the same. This gave him the reason for recording for posterity these basic laws, and he says that these words of his fathers “shall he born without alteration, eternally upon the earth” (Precept XXXVIII).
“To put an obstacle in the way of the laws, is to open the way before violence”
  • Precept V
“The limits of justice are unchangeable; this is a law which everyman receives from his father.
  • Precept V
Some of those teachings are so biblical and right! It could well be a fact that these principles and good teachings came from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and are here recorded by Joseph, the one respecting the teachings of his fathers. Notice this Precept:
“The son who receives the word of his father shall live long on account of it.’
  • Precept XXXIX
Compare this with the Fifth Commandment:
“Honor thy father and mother: that the days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God gives you.”
  • Exodus 20:12
Could it be that many of the laws that became a part of the Old Covenant which God made with Israel at the Exodus were known long before — in the times of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? We are told that the early patriarchs knew some of God’s laws (Genesis 26:5).
The biblical agreements, however, do not stop with this reference. They are throughout the work.
“When you are sitting at meat at the house of a person greater than you, ... look at what is before you.”
  • Precept VII
And now, notice Proverbs 23:1. The agreement with the above of Ptah-Hotep is exact.
“When you sit to eat with a ruler, consider diligently what is before you.
  • Proverbs 23:1
Professor Howard Osgood, who translated into English these “Precepts of Ptah-Hotep,” has a note to the one precept mentioned above.
“This passage is found in the Proverbs of Solomon, chapter 23. The Hebrews knew then, if not the whole of the maxims of Ptah-Hotep, at least several of them which have passed into proverbs.”
  • Howard Osgood, Records of the Past 8
Why of course. Many of Solomon’s proverbs were those of ancient men. Solomon nowhere claimed to have originated all his proverbs. On the contrary, he clearly states that many of them were “words of the wise men, and their dark sayings” (Proverbs 1:6). Look at another precept of Ptah-Hotep:
“If you are a wise man, train a son who will be well pleasing to God.”
  • Precept XII
Compare this with Proverbs 22:6:
“Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.”
  • Proverbs 22:6
Solomon merely recorded many of the proverbs and laws, which were handed down in Israel generation after generation. He, of course, augmented the proverbs but he did not originate them all. In fact, it seems certain that many of them were from Joseph who further recorded for us the teachings of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
But let us go on with the Precepts of this second in command to Pharaoh.
“In doing homage before a greater man than yourself you are doing what is most pleasing unto God.”
  • Precept X
“Labor diligently while you have life, and do even more than you have been commanded to do.”
  • Precept XI
“Neglect not to add to your possessions daily, for diligence increases wealth, but without diligence riches disappear.”
  • Precept XI
“None should intimidate men, for this is the will of God.”
  • Precept VI
“Terrify not men, or God will terrify you.”
  • Precept VI
“If you would be wise, rule your house, and love thy wife wholly and constantly. Fill her stomach and clothe her body [i.e., support her], for these are her necessities; love her tenderly and fulfill all her desire for she is one who confers great reward upon her lord. Be not harsh to her, for she will be more easily moved by persuasion than by force.”
  • Precept XXI
This type of teaching for the husband to his wife seems almost like that of the New Testament. It is very different from the normal beliefs of ancient times.
“Take care of those who are faithful to you, when your affairs are of low estate. Your merit then is worth more than those who have done you honor.
  • Precept XXXV
“The man who hurries all the day long has not one good moment; but he who amuses himself all day long does not retain his house.”
  • Precept XXV
In other words, work hard but learn to relax as well, do not amuse yourself all the time.
“Treat well your people as it behooves you; this is the duty of those God has favored.”
  • Precept XXII
Continuing, he says that if you have been given a job to do, “never go away, even when thy weariness makes itself felt” (Precept XIII).
“If you are accustomed to an excess of flattery and it becomes an obstacle to your desires, then your feeling is to obey your passions.”
  • Precept XIV
“A man is naturally annoyed by having authority above himself, and he passes his life in being weary of it ... but a man must reflect, when he is fettered by it, that the annoyance of authority is also felt by his neighbor.”
  • Precept XXXI
Or, since authority is necessary, learn to put up with it.
“If you desire that your conduct be good and kept from all evil, beware of all fits of bad temper. This is a sad malady which leads to discord, and there is no more life at all for the one who falls into it. For it brings quarrels between fathers and mothers, as between brothers and sisters; it makes the husband and wife to abhor each other, it contains all wickedness, it encloses all injuries. When a man takes justice for his rule, walks in her ways, and dwells with her, there is no room left for bad temper.”
  • Precept XIX

Ptah-Hotep Was a Great Ruler

There are a great many laws found in this “Oldest Book” which echo over and over the rule of Joseph in Egypt. This man was the chief judge except for Pharaoh throughout the land. Notice Precept XVII:
“If you have the position of a Judge listen to the discourse of the petitioner. Do not ill-treat him; that would discourage him. The way to obtain a true explanation is to listen with kindness.”
  • Precept XVII
“If you have the position of leader prosecuting plans according to your will, do the best things which posterity will remember; so that the word which multiplies flatteries, excites pride and produces vanity shall not succeed with you.”
  • Precept XVI
The next Precept could certainly come from the experiences of Joseph. Notice it:
“Be not puffed up because of the knowledge which you have acquired, and hold converse with unlettered men as with the scholar; for the barriers of art are never closed, no artist has ever possessed the full limit of the knowledge of his art.”
  • Precept II
In other words, no one knows it all, even of his own profession. Even the unlettered may instruct at times.
“If you are in the position of leader, to decide the condition of a large number of men, seek the best way, that your own position may be without reproach.”
  • Precept V
“Do not speak to the great man more than he asks, for one does not know what might displease him. Speak when he invites you to do so, and your word will please.”
  • Precept VII
And finally:
“As to the great man [i.e., the ruler, master or Pharaoh] who has behind him the means of existence, his line of conduct is as he wishes. But as this means of existence is under the will of God, nothing [not even the great man] can revolt against that.”
  • Precept VII

Conclusion

The foregoing has been a selection of the remarkable precepts of this vizier. And, amazingly, throughout this document there is complete agreement to Bible principles. No paganism is found within it. The name Osiris is found once when Ptah-Hotep said that no laws had been changed since the time of Osiris. See Precept V. 9 There is hardly anything wrong with that passage.
The only possible objection is found in Precept XLII where we find: “A son who hearkens, is like a follower of Horus; he is happy because he has hearkened.” The fact is, the name Horus became a general title for all kings of Egypt. The Horus-name was applied to Pharaohs. Even Joseph possessed it! The name Horus in this passage is not necessarily a reference to the personal Horus of the First Dynasty. The monotheistic contents of these Precepts of Ptah-Hotep predominate. The Horus name is merely a title and does not reflect paganistic tendencies. Even names like “Ptah-Hotep” or like “Im-Hotep” were normally titles that could refer to people like Joseph. Note (in the comparison below) the remarkable literary agreements. 10
All indications are that the narrative about Ptah-Hotep appears to be referring to the biblical character we know as Joseph. Understand that non-biblical works may have had mistaken or untrue elements added to the narrative. Thus, they may not 100% correspond to the biblical narrative. However, that does not seem to be the case with Ptah-Hotep. Below are some side-by-side comparisons between Ptah-Hotep and Joseph.
Ptah-Hotep Precepts
:
Joseph’s History 
(1)    He lived to be 110 years old (XLIV). (1)     He lived to be 110 years old (Genesis 50:26).
(2)    He lived in the Third Dynasty. 11 (2)     The Third Dynasty saw seven years of low Niles.
(3)    The name Ptah-Hotep was a title of all Memphite viziers, those second in command to Pharaoh himself. 12 (3)     Joseph was second in command to Pharaoh. He was the vizier, as all scholars admit (Genesis 41).
(4)    Ptah-Hotep was the chief judge in ancient Egypt but had been raised to the highest office (XXX).  (4)     Pharaoh required all Egyptians to submit to the judgeship of Joseph (Genesis 41:41–44).
(5)    Ptah-Hotep was once of no account in Egypt but had been elevated to the Prime Ministership (XXX). (5)     Joseph was raised from the dungeon to sit on the very throne of Pharaoh (Genesis 41:14, 41–44).
(6)    Out of thousands who went into their neighbor’s wives, Ptah-Hotep did not, and taught people not to do so (XVIII). (6)     Joseph refused to submit to the advances of his master’s wife (Genesis 39).
(7)    Ptah-Hotep received from his father divine laws; even one of the Ten Commandments was quoted (XXXIX). (7)     Joseph was taught the divine laws from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Genesis 26:5).
(8)    Ptah-Hotep was a monotheist. No idolatry is mentioned. (8)     Joseph believed only in the God of Israel, not idols.
(9)    Many of Ptah-Hotep’s teachings went directly into the Bible especially Proverbs. 13 (9)     Solomon quoted from the ancient wise men of Israel and copied their teachings and proverbs (Proverbs 1:6).
(10)  Ptah-Hotep received a double possession from his father because of his obedience (XXXIX and XLIV). (10)   Joseph likewise received the birthright the double possession (1 Chronicles 5:2).
(11)  Ptah-Hotep warns those of advanced knowledge, such as he had, to shun being puffed up (II). (11)   There was none considered wiser in all the land of Egypt than Joseph (Genesis 41:39), but he was also humble (Genesis 45:15).
(12)  Ptah-Hotep was the first in Egypt whose great public works made him famous. (XLIV) (12)   Joseph, traditionally, built the Great Pyramid, the Labyrinth, the canal system of Egypt, and many other great public works.