Author Wayne A. Mitchell was kind enough to send his recently published book Thutmose IV as the Exodus Pharaoh: Chronological and Astronomical Considerations, co-authored with David F. Lappin, to our institute in Jerusalem. The book follows a 2005 publication of Dr. Steven Collins, “Using Historical Synchronisms to Identify the Pharaoh of the Exodus.” Collins identifies the Exodus pharaoh as Thutmose iv, an 18th Dynasty pharaoh whose reign is typically dated to either the latter part of the 15th century b.c.e. or early part of the 14th century b.c.e. (depending on whether the high or low chronology is followed).
This falls generally in line with what could be described as the “early Exodus” view (as opposed to the “late Exodus” view, which places events during the 13th century b.c.e. or later). It is typical in early Exodus circles, however, to place the year of the Exodus at circa 1446 b.c.e. (a case we have made on this website). This is derived from the commonly accepted date of the construction of Solomon’s temple—967 b.c.e.—which the Hebrew Masoretic Text of 1 Kings 6:1 states began 480 years after the Exodus (or rather, 479 years—“in the four hundred and eightieth year”)—thus 1446 b.c.e.
Based on a 1446 b.c.e. Exodus date, within early Exodus circles, two pharaohs are typically proposed as pharaoh of the Exodus: Thutmose iii, based on low Egyptian chronology, or his son Amenhotep ii, based on a high Egyptian chronology. There is an alternate scriptural tradition for 1 Kings 6:1 found in the Greek Septuagint, which says that 440 years transpired from the Exodus to the building of Solomon’s temple: On this basis, with 1406 as the date of the Exodus, Amenhotep ii would be Exodus pharaoh on a low chronology; his son Thutmose iv or Amenhotep iii, on a high (based on slight variations). Collins, while not holding hard and fast to set dates, prefers this slightly later dating of the Exodus, with Thutmose iv as Exodus pharaoh.
In their book, published last December, Mitchell and Lappin maintain the case for Thutmose iv as Exodus pharaoh; they differ from Collins, though, in following the Masoretic Text’s 480 years, thus an Exodus occurring 1446 b.c.e. This, however, is several decades prior to even the high chronology dating for this pharaoh. Instead, they propose a new realignment of Egyptian chronology—as summarized in part on the back cover of their publication:
In Thutmose IV as the Exodus Pharaoh, Mitchell and Lappin test the theory of a scholar based on historical synchronisms that Thutmose iv lived 55 years earlier than commonly believed and was the pharaoh of the Exodus. The authors examined contemporary lunar, solar eclipse and Sothic records, biblical texts and the latest discoveries in archaeology, and in their in-depth research found considerable support for the theory.
Their book makes the case for what might be referred to as an “ultra-high chronology,” putting Thutmose iv’s reign circa 1455–1446 b.c.e. The Amazon page from which the book can be purchased notes that that the 76-page book “is a republication of their paper originally written for the academic community, with the addition of 13 images.”
The book is certainly well researched and goes into particular detail proposing alternative astronomical alignments. Suffice it to say, it does not shift my own opinion of Amenhotep ii as pharaoh of the Exodus (as articulated in “Who Was the Pharaoh of the Exodus?” and other articles). That being said, the book may still be appreciated by Amenhotep ii proponents: In proposing astronomical synchronisms for a much earlier reign of Thutmose iv, they also note their discovery of an alternate synchronism that would align 1446 b.c.e. with the final year of Amenhotep ii. As such, they leave open the suggestion that Exodus events could have occurred at, and resulted in, the end of this pharaoh’s life (rather than typical high chronology reconstructions for this pharaoh, which would put the Exodus within the first part of his reign). As summarized below:
Although Amenhotep ii as a candidate for Exodus pharaoh has been shown above to have problems with the high chronology, it should be noted that Sothic and lunar fits are possible if his last year is placed at 1446 b.c. and the conventional reconstructed calendar is adjusted to -11 days using fcv (Table 8). … Placing the last year of the reign of Amenhotep II with 1446 b.c. solves the Yam Suph problem (pages 20, 56).
I think there are good arguments that can be made both for an Exodus occurring earlier in the respective pharaoh’s reign, as well as at the end. For the former, based on Exodus 4:19—“And the Lord said unto Moses in Midian, Go, return into Egypt: for all the men are dead which sought thy life”—though this is not explicit, it would seem to refer chiefly to the death of the pharaoh himself, the key individual who sought his life (Exodus 2:15). This would therefore imply Moses’s return to Egypt during the first part of the reign of the following pharaoh. Relating to this same conclusion is the fact that Moses was in Midian for four decades—implying a long reign of the prior pharaoh. This happens to be a fit with Thutmose iii, father of Amenhotep ii and one of the longest-reigning pharaohs in Egyptian history: 54 years on the throne (including his initial 22-year coregency with his stepmother Hatshepsut).
Naturally, on the other hand, there is a desire to seek an alignment of Exodus events culminating in the death of the Exodus pharaoh at the Red Sea. As with the death of the primary oppression pharaoh noted above, the death of the Exodus pharaoh himself is not necessarily explicitly stated (as explained in Sidebar 4 of “Who Was the Pharaoh of the Exodus?”). Nevertheless, Mitchell and Lappin argue that the biblical account does best imply the pharaoh’s death at the Red Sea, and thus make the case for an alignment of events with the end of the reign of Thutmose iv (while noting a possible alignment with the end of the reign of his father Amenhotep ii). As they point out, their realignment of dates does change other popular identifications—for example, rather than identifying Hatshepsut as the famous “Pharaoh’s daughter” of Exodus 2, they identify this as the daughter of Hatshepsut, Neferure.
It goes without saying that this subject of the general identity of the Exodus pharaoh will remain a highly debated topic, let alone the exact chronological positioning of events within biblical and Egyptian history. Still, as a proponent of the early Exodus—especially as it relates to the ensuing events in Canaan during the Amarna period (something likewise emphasized by the authors, drawing attention in particular to the dating of Amarna Letter EA 254)—the book is appreciated and is sure to be of particular interest to proponents of Thutmose iv and Amenhotep ii alike.
