Moses and Akhenaten: The Secret History of Egypt at the Time of the Exodus

by Ahmed Osman

A reinterpretation of biblical and Egyptian history that shows Moses and the Pharaoh Akhenaten to be one and the same.

• Provides dramatic evidence from both archaeological and documentary sources.

• A radical challenge to long-established beliefs on the origin of Semitic religion.

During his reign, the Pharaoh Akhenaten was able to abolish the complex pantheon of the ancient Egyptian religion and replace it with a single god, the Aten, who had no image or form. Seizing on the striking similarities between the religious vision of this “heretic” pharaoh and the teachings of Moses, Sigmund Freud was the first to argue that Moses was in fact an Egyptian. Now Ahmed Osman, using recent archaeological discoveries and historical documents, contends that Akhenaten and Moses were one and the same man.

In a stunning retelling of the Exodus story, Osman details the events of Moses/Akhenaten's how he was brought up by Israelite relatives, ruled Egypt for seventeen years, angered many of his subjects by replacing the traditional Egyptian pantheon with worship of the Aten, and was forced to abdicate the throne. Retreating to the Sinai with his Egyptian and Israelite supporters, he died out of the sight of his followers, presumably at the hands of Seti I, after an unsuccessful attempt to regain his throne.

Osman reveals the Egyptian components in the monotheism preached by Moses as well as his use of Egyptian royal ritual and Egyptian religious expression. He shows that even the Ten Commandments betray the direct influence of Spell 125 in the Egyptian Book of the Dead. Moses and Akhenaten provides a radical challenge to long-standing beliefs concerning the origin of Semitic religion and the puzzle of Akhenaten's deviation from ancient Egyptian tradition. In fact, if Osman's contentions are correct, many major Old Testament figures would be of Egyptian origin.

Genres: History, Religion, Egypt, Nonfiction, Archaeology, Ancient History, Historical

280 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1995

About the author

Ahmed Osman (Arabic: أحمد عثمان‎) is an Egyptian-born author and Egyptologist. He has put forward several theories which are mainly rejected by mainstream Egyptologists

Reviews

[Marti Martinson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Another Egyptologist, Assmann, has said this author "applies science fiction to the past". Osman does write well and coherently, and this is a very nicely produced book, but I feel the text is REALLY laboured, sort of like Von Dankien and the "Ancient Astronauts". I have no doubt that Osman is sincere, but he has to go to great pains to prove Akhenaten = Moses. Freud and Assmann, in my unqualified opinion, are probably correct that Moses must have been an Egyptian official/priest.....Still, Osman deserves credit for being an accomplished writer and researcher. Also note that he has NO religious bigotry about the past nor present. It would be neat to have Osman and Von Daniken over for a BBQ and beer.....

[Mustafa Özgür · Rating 5 out of 5]

Kitap, ilginç bir önsöz ile başlıyor (editörün şerhi bölümü). Medeniyetin, bilimin, sanatın, felsefenin kaynağı eski Yunan mı yoksa eski Mısır mı?

Yazar, Sigmund Freud'un Musa ve Tektanrılı Din adlı kitabında yaptığı spekülasyonu (Hz Musa'nın Akhenaton'un yeni getirdiği dininin bir rahibi olduğu ve Akhenaton ölünce ona inananları alıp beraber Mısır'dan çıktıkları) bu kitapta daha da ileri götürüyor.

Yazar, Akhenaton'un babası 3. Amenhotep zamanında da vezirlik yapan Yuya'nın aslında Yusuf peygamber olduğunu, Yuya'nın kızı Tiye'nin (Hz Asiye) 3. Amenhotep ile evlenerek kraliçe olup Akhenaton'u doğurduğunu, amon rahiplerinin kraliçe Tiye'yi soylu kabul etmeyip ona amon tanrısının eşi ünvanını vermedikleri için oğlunun firavun olamayacağı endişesine kapılan Tiye'nin Akhenaton'un 4. Amenhotep ismini alarak babası ile 12 sene ortak krallık yapmasının önünü açtığını, babası öldükten sonra amon tanrısını reddedip aton tek tanrı inancını getiren ve Akhenaton ismini alan firavunun aslında Hz Musa olduğunu, bu konuda dedesi Yuya'dan (Hz Yusuf'tan) etkilenmiş olabileceğini, Akhenaton'un çok güçlü amon rahiplerine karşı yaptığı dini devrimi tüm orduların komutanı olan dayısı Aye'nin (Yuya'nın oğlu) himayesinde yaptığını ileri sürüyor.

Yazar, ana hatlarıyla buraya yazdığım tezlerinin altını tek tek dolduruyor. Fizikte, matematikte, kimyada, biyolojide vs herşeyi biliyor değiliz, insanlar bazen yanılıyorlar; bilimde yapılan şey doğayı simule edebilen modeller kurmak. Kurulan modelin gerçekten doğada varolan sistemle birebir aynı olmasına gerek olmayabilir çoğu zaman. Modeller gerçek dünyayı hangi ölçüde ne kadar betimleyebiliyor; bilim adamlarının uğraştığı konu bu aslında. Yoksa elektronu, protonu, fotonu gören yok, bunlar bizim uydurduğumuz şeyler. Benzer durum tarih, arkeoloji, antropoloji vb bilimlerde de mevcut. Bu kitabı okuyunca gördüm ki bilim adamları, bulunan mumyaların, bırakın Akhenaton'a veya Tutankamon'a veya Smenkare'ye ait olduğunu, bir kadına mı yoksa bir erkeğe mi ait olduğunu dahi tartışıyorlar.

Ünlü matematikçi David Hilbert'in "Bilmeliyiz, bileceğiz" sözünün aksine, hiçbir zaman ne olduğunu tam olarak bilemeyebiliriz gibi gelmeye başladı bana :).

Herkese iyi okumalar.

[Rhonda Thomas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Suposition and conjecture? Only an ardent Egyptologist would know. Osman asserts Akhenaten and Moses are one in the same. His arguments, claims, and conclusions are based admittedly on extensive research. In his first book, Stranger in the Valley of Kings, he introduces his thesis: Akhenaten is the grandson of Joseph, Hebrew patriarch responsible for the descent into Egypt and vizier to Tuthmosis IV and his successor, Amenhotep III. Moses and Akhenaton: The Secret History of Egypt at the Time of the Exodus offers an scholarly attempt to further his thesis. I found the book interesting. I have long wondered as to why the Exodus was not readily recorded in contemporary Egyptian writings or evidenced in the archaeological record. Osman strings along a plausible solution to this problem.

[Suresh Ramaswamy · Rating 4 out of 5]

A 115 years ago, in the Valley of Kings, a tomb was discovered. This tomb belonged to a person who was not of royal blood. His name was Yuva, and he was a minister to two Pharaohs of the Eighteenth Dynasty, yet his tomb was there in the Valley of Kings.

Till that time of all the tombs discovered, only Yuva’s tomb bore the legend “the title it ntr n nb tawi – holy father of the Lord of the Two Lands,” – Pharaoh’s formal title. It occurs once on one of his ushabti (royal funeral statuette No. 51028 in the Cairo Museum catalogue) and more than twenty times on his funerary papyrus.

Could Yuva have been Joseph the Patriarch? The author Ahmed Osman had in his earlier book Stranger in the Valley of the Kings led evidence from the Old Testament, Quran and Egyptian records to conclude that it was so. And this conclusion is further strengthened by

• creating matching chronologies from Abraham to Moses on the one hand, and from Tuthmosis III, the sixth ruler of the Eighteenth Dynasty, to Seti I, the second ruler of the Nineteenth Dynasty, on the other.

• of the three periods of time given in the Old Testament – four generations, 400 years and 430 years – for the Israelite Sojourn in Egypt, four generations is correct, a view which Jewish scholars have arrived at by another reckoning;

• the four Amarna kings – Akhenaten, Semenkhkare, Tutankhamun and Aye – who ruled during a tumultuous period of Egyptian history when an attempt was made to replace the country’s multitude of ancient gods with a monotheistic God, were all descendants of Joseph the Patriarch;

• the Exodus was preceded by the ending of Amarna rule by Horemheb, the last king of the Eighteenth Dynasty.

Ramses I is known to have ruled for less than two years. The biblical account of this part of the Exodus story cannot therefore agree more precisely than it does with what we know of the history of Ancient Egypt at this time. If Ramses I was the Pharaoh of the Exodus, Horemheb was the Pharaoh of the Oppression.

In this book Ahmed Osman, tries to carry forward the theory he proposed in Stranger in the Valley of the Kings that Moses is to be considered the Pharaoh Amenhotep IV – Akhenaten.

In this book he leads evidence apart from Egyptian monuments and records to the story of Moses in the Old Testament, Quran and Talmud to prove that Moses was indeed a Pharaoh – though not of pure royal Egyptian blood.

Jacob the Patriarch was a minister to Tuthmosis III and his son Amenhotep III. The Old Testament book Genesis states that after Joseph’s brother visited Egypt for the second time and Joseph revealed himself, seventy Israelites moved to Egypt. The Genesis names sixty-nine of them. Who was the nameless seventieth person. Studying Egyptian records of the time, Osman concludes the seventieth was Tiye, wife of Amenhotep III, who was the daughter of Yuva / Joseph. Their son Amenhotep IV was the heretic Pharaoh Akhenaten.

What was the heresy committed by Akhenaten. He stopped the worship of all Egyptian Gods & Goddesses. He believed in a single new god Aten – preaching monotheism. During his reign, the Pharaoh Akhenaten was able to abolish the complex pantheon of the ancient Egyptian religion and replace it with a single god, the Aten, who had no image or form. Seizing on the striking similarities between the religious vision of this “heretic” pharaoh and the teachings of Moses, Sigmund Freud was the first to argue that Moses was in fact an Egyptian. Now Ahmed Osman, using recent archaeological discoveries and historical documents, contends that Akhenaten and Moses were one and the same man.

Leading evidence from the story of Moses in the Talmud – the compilation of Hebrew laws and legends, dating from the early centuries AD and regarded as second only to the Old Testament as an authoritative source of the early history of the Jews – contains some details not to be found in the Bible and often parallels Manetho’s account of the Exodus, derived from Egyptian folklore. One of the details is that Moses was a king.

According to the Talmud, which agrees that Moses was brought up in Pharaoh’s palace, he grew into a handsome lad, dressed royally, was honoured by the people and seemed in all things of royal lineage. However, at about the age of eighteen he was forced to flee from Egypt after, on a visit to Goshen, he came across an Egyptian smiting one of his Israelite brethren and slew him.

The Talmud goes on to relate that, at about this time, there was a rebellion against the King of Ethiopia. The king appointed a magician’s son named Bi’lam – one of Pharaoh’s advisers, who was considered exceptionally wise but had fled to Ethiopia from his own country, Egypt – to be his representative in his absence and marched at the head of a large army, which vanquished the rebels. Bi’lam betrayed his trust, however, and, usurping the power he was supposed to protect, induced the Ethiopians to appoint him in place of their absent king. He strengthened the walls of the capital, built huge fortresses and dug ditches and pits between the city and the nearby river. On his return the Ethiopian king was astonished to see all these fortifications, which he thought were defences against a possible attack by an enemy. When he found that the gates of the city were actually closed against him, he embarked on a war against the usurper, Bi’lam, that lasted nine years.

One of the soldiers who fought on the side of the king, according to the Talmud story, was Moses, who, after fleeing from Egypt, had made his way not to Midian in Sinai, as the Old Testament says, but to Ethiopia. He became a great favourite with the Ethiopian ruler and his companions with the result that, when the king died, this inner circle appointed Moses as their new king and leader. Moses, who, according to the Talmud, was made king ‘in the hundred and fifty- seventh year after Israel went down into Egypt’, inspired the army with his courage and the city eventually fell to him. The account goes on: ‘… Bi’lam escaped and fled back to Egypt, becoming one of the magicians mentioned in the Scriptures. And the Ethiopians placed Moses upon their throne and set the crown of State upon his head, and they gave him the widow of their king for a wife.’

Moses reigned ‘in justice and righteousness. But the Queen of Ethiopia, Adonith [Aten-it in Egyptian], who wished her own son by the dead king to rule, said to the people: “Why should this stranger continue to rule over you?” The people, however, would not vex Moses, whom they loved, by such a proposition; but Moses resigned voluntarily the power which they had given him and departed from their land. And the people of Ethiopia made him many rich presents, and dismissed him with great honours.’¹

So, according to this tradition, which has survived in the Talmud, Moses was elevated to the post of king for some time before eventually seeking the sanctuary of Sinai. Furthermore, where Akhenaten, as we shall see, looked upon himself as the high priest of his God, the Talmud tells us that ‘Moses officiated as the high priest. He was also considered the King of Israel during the sojourn in the desert.’ Where did the rabbis obtain the facts in the Talmud? They can hardly have invented them and, indeed, had no reason to do so. Like the accounts of the historian Manetho, the Talmudic stories contain many distortions and accretions arising from the fact that they were transmitted orally for a long time before finally being set down in writing. Yet one can sense that behind the myths there must have lain genuine historical events that had been suppressed from the official accounts of both Egypt and Israel, but had survived in the memories of the generations.

The Talmud description of Moses as a ruler is also supported by a verse of the Koran where Moses tells the Israelites after the Exodus that God has made of them kings.

In the Old Testament, second book Exodus, the story of Moses’s childhood is narrated. The story goes that the household of Pharaoh found the baby Moses in the reeds by the riverside and that the princess adopted the child. As the author Ahmed Osman states, it is most unlikely that the entire household of the Pharaoh came down to the river to bathe. Further, it would have been impossible for an unmarried princess to adopt a child and bring it up. He goes on to explain that in ancient Egypt the word ‘household’ not only referred to the house of Pharaoh, but it also indicated the wife of the Pharaoh. Hence, it was not a princess, but the queen herself who found the baby. The queen was none other than Tiye, daughter of Joseph and wife of Amenhotep III. It is also most likely that the child was born to Tiye herself – and here comes the twist in the tale. The period of birth of both Moses and Akenhaten are at the same time and since Moses had no twin brother – he and Akhenaten are on and the same.

Moses, the second son of Amenhotep III and Queen Tiye, was born at the frontier fortified city of Zarw, probably in 1394 BC. His elder brother, Tuthmosis, had already disappeared mysteriously, and, in view of the threats that were about to be made to the life of Moses, it seems more than likely that the disappearance of Tuthmosis was not the result of natural causes. The reason for the king’s hostility to the young princes was the fact that Tiye, their mother, was not the legitimate heiress. She could therefore not be accepted as the consort of the State god Amun.

Furthermore, as she herself was of mixed Egyptian-Israelite blood, her children would not, by Egyptian custom, be regarded as heirs to the throne. If her son acceded to the throne, this would be regarded as forming a new dynasty of non-Egyptian, non-Amunite, part-Israelite kings over Egypt. This is exactly the light in which the Amunite priests and nobles of Egypt, the watchdogs of old traditions, regarded Akhenaten. It was not he who first rejected the position of son of Amun: it was they, the Amunists, who refused to accept him as the legitimate heir to the throne.

Since Akhenaten was not of pure Egyptian blood, his father Amenhotep III made him the rightful heir – by arranging his marriage to his half-sister and rightful heiress princess Nefertiti. Also in his 24th or 25th year of his reign, Amenhotep III, appointed his son Amenhotep IV, later known as Akhenaten, as coregent. The coregency continued for twelve years till the death of Amenhotep III. Facing opposition from the priests of Amun-re in Memphis, Akhenaten stated construction of his new capital Amarna in his fourth year and completed the construction in the eighth year.

Akhenaten’s god Aten, it is stated is based on the sun god of Heliopolis – if that is so then Aten, in spite of being a formless / imageless deity cannot be equated to Jehovah, the Jewish God and on this ground alone the claim that Akhenaten and Moses were one and the same fails. But in many other respects the lives of Moses and Akhenaten are similar and run parallel to each other.

At the end of the book, I for one am still not convinced that Moses and Akhenaten were the same person, because Ahmed Osman has failed to give the final proof that the two were the same person.

The book is well, researched, written in an easy free flowing style. A recommended reading for the many who feel that classical Egyptian history raises more questions about the ancient civilization – than answer them.

I enjoyed reading the book and would love to give it a five star rating – but since, in my opinion it has not satisfactorily answered the identities of Moses and Akhenaten, I give it four and a half stars – rounding it off to four stars.

[Roger · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book presents an interesting twist in the attempts to match Biblical chronology with the archaeological evidence. And it's just that: interesting.

The author does a good job of weaving together seemingly unconnected dots, even if the way he presents his evidence sometimes leaves you wondering how it all does connect. But in the end, anyone with some knowledge of Egyptian and biblical history could come up with at least a few alternative interpretations to the same evidence.

Osman wants to prove that Moses and Akhenaten are the same person, and he presents information to that end. The evidence does not demand his conclusion, but his conclusion is supported by the evidence (as presented). I intentionally read "The Rise and Fall of Ancient Egypt" right before reading this.

This book is a great addition to my collection of ancient mysteries books. Aside from that, it's nothing more than pseudo-history and relies on a superficial understanding of Judeo-Christian theology.

Score for the freedom of speech, though.

[Mina · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating read!

I was intrigued by the story of the exodus as I always believed that the biblical narrative must have been an allegorical accounting to depict a series of political events.

It seemed to me that Moses must have been an Egyptian, but not being an expert in ancient Egyptian history I could not give a definitive argument as to why this would have been the case. This book provides a very good argument for why Moses and Akhenaten could have been the same person. However, a lot also hinges on the fact that Yuya may have been the historical Joseph of the Bible and I did not find much in the book that made the case. However this could be because the author had already made the case in a previous book which I have not yet read. There is some degree of conjecture with some ideas put forward by the author such as co-regency between Akhenaten and Amenhotep III, but the author gives a fair and well researched argument stating the case.

All in all a very interesting and well written book.

[Jazzysmum · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some thought provoking ideas, the basis of myths, legends and story is generally some fact.
Cetainly this is more believeable than many religious ideas.
I like that Osman does not push one religion over another and examines ideas and story from many perspectives and codes.

[Jbondandrews · Rating 2 out of 5]

I think overall Ahmed Osman tried to cover too much ground in too little book space. He does try to establish a connection between Moses and Akhenaten but he didn't do enough to persuade and talked about dates and other pharaohs to make a good enough case.

[Linda Stasi · Rating 2 out of 5]

Like Wading Thru Molasses
I was hoping for a more interesting read— and at the beginning it was. Then it becomes so thick with minutia that only a scholar of Ancient Egyptian and Hebrew histories would be able to keep track and appreciate all the solid research.

[Caitlin · Rating 5 out of 5]

So let me be clear that I am not convinced by the writer's argument. I feel that a lot of writers try to push Akhenaten into secret judeo-Christianism to resolve the conflict of who was the first monotheist, but he just can't fit in that box. That said, this is the best attempt I've seen.

[El-Jahiz · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating hypothesis. While Freud went as far as hypothesizing that Moses was probably a priest of Akhenaten, Ahmed Osman proposes that Moses may have been Akhenaten himself, and the arguments are not flimsy!

[Dr-Orban E. Hassan · Rating 1 out of 5]

أولا: أحمد عثمان ليس عالم مصريات و لاتتوافر فيه اى من الشروط التي بمقتضاها يمكن اعتباره عالما في أحد فروع العلم الهامه و الخاصة بالحضارة المصرية القديمه و لو أوتي و لو قدر ضئيل من حس العلماء لما لجأ الي هذه التخاريف التي يرفضها علماء المصريات جملة و تفصيلا

[Rakhi · Rating 3 out of 5]

Great theory (although I'm not 100 percent convinced). However, it read too much like a text book.

[Basia Norén · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very, very interesting read. Definitely recommend it if you're interested in this topic

[Neeleisch G · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book contains a whole new information on the Ancient Egypt. A completely different point of view with scientific explanations, very interesting read.

It's a re readable one.

[Virgo Phoenix Rising · Rating 5 out of 5]

Interesting to say the least!

[Pani Fernando · Rating 5 out of 5]

Historical and mythological information is given in details

[Erich · Rating 3 out of 5]

[update: theologically uninformed first draft]. Quite the sweater thread to pull on. The author doesn't make many friends with his thesis (even though I'm sure he is a fair and liberal-minded man; it happens). But I'm glad he took a scientific, mature and enlightened approach to identifying the amazingly similar "root ideology" of all the three major Patriarchal monotheistic religions (slightly less so with Christianity), which superseded the main Matriarchal polytheistic religions of the near east.

The psychological (read: group control mechanism) elements fundamental in such a shift to a single deity (read: hypnotist [my words]) was first written about by Freud in the 1930's, and in many ways acts as a basis for this authors ideas.

Spoiler: The most controversial element of the thesis is that the religion of the Israelites, Judaism, is actually the SECOND attempt by the Egyptian Akhenaten (Amenhotep IV) to implement his faceless abstract god, the Aten (in Hebrew phonetics "Adon" [Adonai]), after it failed to catch on in Egypt and supplant their much more well established, and generally loved, powerful Nine (Mother Isis, etc).

A bit of a Pandora's Box for the traditional religious community, but I'm sure the Rabbinical tradition of respectful intellectual debate and spiritual contemplation can handle it. The book will also have appeal for the areligious who are interested in history or the understanding of the evolution of morality.

[Darren · Rating 3 out of 5]

Moses = Akhenaten (Faced with the accusation that Akhenaten was not the real heir to the throne, I believe the Israelites called him mos, the son, to indicate that he was the legitimate son of Amenhotep III and the rightful heir to his father’s throne. P.67)

Joseph = Yuya (vizier, Master of the Horse and Deputy of the King in the Chariotry to both Tuthmosis IV and Amenhotep III p.53)

Tiye = Royal wife of Amenhotep III, Joseph’s Daughter, Akhenaten’s Mother

Amenhotep III = Akhenaten’s Father (18th Dynasty Pharaoh)

Horemheb = Last 18th Dynasty Pharaoh (Pharaoh of the Israelite Oppression)

Ramses I = First 19th Dynasty Pharaoh (Pharaoh of the Exodus, after Moses/Akhenaten returns from Sinai to challenge his right to the throne, upon the death of Horemheb)

Seti I = Second 19th Dynasty Pharaoh (Fought the Shasu (Israelites in the desert) and killed Moses)

Semenkhkare = Akhenaten’s brother and co-regent (died his year 3, Akhenaten’s year 17)

Tutankhamun = Akhenaten’s son (Amarna king who was erased, as was Akhenaten)

Aye = Tiye’s brother, Akhenaten’s uncle, Chief commander of the armies, main support of Akhenaten

Nefertiti = Miriam (Moses sister) p.182

[Josh · Rating 5 out of 5]

Incredibly interesting book. A good read for anyone interested in language or religion. Read Stranger in the Valley of the Kings before picking up this book.

[Michele · Rating 1 out of 5]

Don't read - not a scholar in the field - pulls on information then sensationalizes it

[Gaile · Rating 4 out of 5]

However the mummy of Akhenaten has been found disproving the theory in this book.

[Ann · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is one of the most outrageous twisting of facts to suit theory imaginable.

[Laura · Rating 4 out of 5]

I do not agree with his conclusions, but he writes in an easily understood manner and his work contains some fascinating information.