by
The Sinai commission to the prophet Elijah
(1 Kings 19:15-17):
Then the Lord said to [Elijah], ‘Go, return on your way to the wilderness of Damascus; when you arrive, you shall anoint Hazael as king over Aram [Syria]. Also you shall anoint Jehu son of Nimshi as king over Israel; and you shall anoint Elisha son of Shaphat of Abel-meholah as prophet in your place. Whoever escapes from the sword of Hazael, Jehu shall kill; and whoever escapes from the sword of Jehu, Elisha shall kill …’.
Here
I shall be most interested in seeking to learn whether the influence of this
divinely-chosen triumvirate had actually extended beyond Syro-Israel.
In
other words, can we enlarge any of these three characters, Hazael, Jehu,
Elisha, through biblical and/or secular alter egos?
I
believe that we surely can.
Indeed,
Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky had already ‘enlarged’ Hazael by identifying him with El
Amarna’s [EA’s] Aziru, a presumed son
of Abdi-ashirta, the latter being identified by Dr.
Velikovsky, in turn, as the biblical Syrian potentate, Ben-Hadad I (Ages in Chaos, I, 1952).
Now,
I have argued that this:
Ben-Hadad I was a true master-king
(21)
Ben-Hadad I was a true master-king
Thus,
Hazael/Aziru must subsequently have taken control of a mighty kingdom!
Jehu
is less easy to pin down. In the Scriptures he bursts on to the scene in bloody
violence, and he, for a time, takes centre stage. But he seems to fade out just
as quickly, despite his having reigned over Israel for a substantial period of
28 years.
As
far as I am aware, Dr. Velikovsky did not propose any EA identification for
Jehu.
Jehu’s
name fails to make it even into the famous Tel Dan Stele, wherein deeds that
are associated with him in the Scriptures are attributed to his military
partner, the Syrian Hazael: The Tel Dan Inscription - Bible Odyssey
“The
name of the king who commissioned this inscription is not preserved. However,
based on the historical content of the inscription and information from
Mesopotamian (cuneiform) and biblical sources, the most convincing conclusion
is that the king of Damascus (Syria) known as Hazael commissioned it in the
ninth century B.C.E., after he had usurped the throne of Damascus from Ben
Hadad (2Kgs 8:15). Hazael subsequently formed an alliance (1Kgs 19:17) with
King Jehu of Israel (reigned 843–815 B.C.E.), who was also a usurper.
Therefore, it comes as no surprise that the biblical account (2Kgs 9) states
that Jehu of Israel slew King Jehoram of Israel (reigned 849–843 B.C.E.) and
King Ahaziah of Judah (reigned 843 B.C.E.), whereas the Tel Dan Inscription
attributes these royal assassinations to Hazael. That is, these two
usurpers were working together and so both could legitimately claim to have
been responsible for the coup de grace. …”.
Where
the name of King Jehu of Israel is definitely thought to have turned up in an
historical record is in the famous Black Obelisk of the Assyrian king,
Shalmaneser III, who claimed to have received tribute from Ia-ui-a, son
of Omri.
But
objections to that standard identification have been raised:
For
one, the name Ia-ui-a does not refer unequivocally to Jehu, but
could be applicable to other, similar Israelite names.
Secondly, why would Jehu be designated
as a son of Omri, if it was the Omri/Ahab dynasty that this king of Israel had
spent every ounce of his energy wiping out?
And,
thirdly, my own contribution (towards a revision of history) is that
Shalmaneser so-called III actually reigned about a century after Jehu:
Shalmaneser III not of the El Amarna EA era
(21)
Shalmaneser III not of the El Amarna EA era
A
potential biblical alter ego for Jehu, so I had thought - without ever
having been able to be conclusive about it - was as Zimri king of Israel. I had
once written:
But, to conclude Zimri, who must not be regarded as a mere flash in the
pan,
a substantial and probably necessary alter ego for this Zimri
could be as the aggressive
Jehu, king of Israel, whom Queen Jezebel actually calls: ‘O, Zimri,
murderer of your
master’. (2 Kings 9:31). Whilst Jezebel’s statement is considered to be
a mocking
reference back to an earlier regicide, to Zimri, she may, perhaps,
simply be calling the
present regicide, Jehu, by another name, Zimri (or by his nickname).
More
recently, however, I have chosen to steer clear of that idea.
In
fact, I have only just recalled (I had completely forgotten it) that my
original idea – which I am now beginning to favour again – was that Zimri was
the same as Nimshi, the grandfather of Jehu.
I
shall be coming back to that below.
It
was in my university thesis (2007) that I really set out to establish King Jehu
of Israel as an historical figure of immense significance. But, as I badly overcooked
certain things in that particular thesis, as recalled with regret in my
article:
Damien F. Mackey’s A Tale of Two Theses
(21)
Damien F. Mackey's A Tale of Two Theses
and
as my attempted reconstruction of Jehu was at the centre of much of this jumble,
I would abandon for almost two decades any serious efforts thus to enlarge
Jehu.
Now
(29th March, 2026: Palm Sunday) I feel emboldened to resume what I
had begun in that thesis, whilst hopefully avoiding the pitfalls into which I
had then stumbled.
I
want to reconsider here what I had pursued rather too eagerly in my thesis,
that Jehu was, beyond the confines of Israel, none other than Horemheb.
To
sum up so far
As
far as I am aware, Dr. Velikovsky did not propose any EA identification for
Jehu.
Biblically
For
a king who reigned for 28 years, there is an incompleteness in the biblical
biography of Jehu.
Once
I had thought that it could, perhaps, be supplemented by - but only meagrely -
the very brief biblical account of Zimri. That consideration I now reject.
Historically
The
activities of King Jehu of Israel are recorded in the Tel Dan inscription
without Jehu being actually named therein – the credit apparently going to his
Syrian partner.
And
I personally think that we must discount any notion that Jehu is being referred
to in the much later (my estimation) Black Obelisk of king Shalmaneser of
Assyria.
Not
over much to take out in all of that!
What
about Jehu as Horemheb?
Jehu
in many ways is a good fit for Horemheb
Let
us follow through some relevant portions of what I wrote about Jehu in my
thesis (Volume One, Chapter 4).
Tammi
Schneider, in “Did King Jehu Kill His Own Family?”
(Home > Magazines > BAR > January/February
1995),
will
provide the interesting information that: “Jehu is the only king of Israel to
have his grandfather’s name listed in his patronymic”:
…. A clue: In the Hebrew Bible, Jehu is
called “Jehu son of Jehoshaphat son of
Nimshi” (2 Kings 9:2, 14).
Jehu is the only king of Israel to have his
grandfather’s name listed in his patronymic. Why? Traditional explanations
would suffice were it not for the Assyrian references.
These explanations usually suggest that
Jehu’s father was not as well known in the community as his grandfather, or
that Nimshi is a clan name whose meaning has been lost over the centuries.
Another explanation is that Jehu’s
grandfather’s name is included to show that Jehu’s father was not King
Jehoshaphat of Judah, Jehu’s contemporary.
….
that her explanation above has its problems is indicated by the three points
that she will now outline:
Although the foregoing explanations are
consistent with Biblical accounts, they face some significant problems: (1)
There is no other Biblical reference to a person named Nimshi, so that he was
probably not all that well known; (2) the name “Nimshi” appears as a personal
name on a Samarian ostracon, making it unlikely that the name referred to a
clan; (3) not only are grandfathers’ names never listed in the patronymics of
Israelite kings, but other Israelite kings who usurped the throne, such as
Zimri and Omri, have no patronymics at all! ….
The Sinai commission, quoted at the
beginning of this article, introduces a new triumvirate whom Elijah (or his
designated disciples) will anoint for the purpose of instigating a radical
purge of Baalism.
We
find that, peculiarly:
Firstly, Hazael’s father is not even
named;
Secondly, Jehu’s father is named
differently from how he is named in 2 Kings 9:2.
Thirdly, Elisha’s father is given
virtually the same name, Shaphat [i.e. Eli- or Jeho-shaphat], as was given to
Jehu’s father, Jeho-shaphat, in 2 Kings.
Now
here is what I had earlier thought about Nimshi.
The
reason that Jehu’s grandfather, Nimshi,
is given precedence over Jehu’s father, Jehoshaphat, is I believe because this Nimshi
may actually have been, for the briefest possible time, likewise a king of
Israel.
Queen
Jezebel had actually addressed Jehu as ‘Zimri,
murderer of your master’ (2 Kings 9:31);
Zimri being a commander of the chariotry who had slain king Elah of Israel
and had then become king of Israel himself for a mere seven days, before being
in turn overthrown by Omri (cf. 1 Kings 16:9-10, 15, 17-18). Nimshi, I suspect,
was the same as this Zimri, and hence Jezebel was making a clear point, just
prior to her violent death, that Jehu was a conspirator against the crown just
as his grandfather had been.
This
would explain, at least, why Jehu is graced with having his grandfather
included in his patronymic - Nimshi (Zimri) had been a King of Israel.
Moreover,
he had been, just as Jehu had now become, a regicide.
Continuing with my thesis:
Jehoram [of Judah], who had
initially slain his own brothers, was fortunate enough to have died before the
fiery wrath that was Jehu was unleashed upon the House of Ahab and the
worshippers of Baal. The dark era of Ahab and Jezebel, wrote [Philip] Mauro
with reference to 2 Kings:[1]
... was brought to a bloody end
by a ministry of judgment executed by the hand of Jehu. He made a thorough work
of it, slaying Joram (Jehoram) and his mother Jezebel (2 Kings 9:21-37), and
the seventy sons of Ahab (10:1-7) and “all that remained of the house of Ahab …
until he left him none remaining” (10:11).
Moreover, when Jehu came to
Samaria: “… he slew all that remained unto Ahab in Samaria, till he had
destroyed him, according to the saying of the Lord which He spake to Elijah”
(10:17). And finally, he executed the vengeance of God upon the priests and worshippers
of Baal (10:19-27)”.
Jezebel mentioned above by Mauro
… I identified in her EA guise … as Baalat-neše
(Sumerian: NIN.UR.MAH.MESH) ….
This was how Jehu fulfilled his
part of the Sinai commission. Though, as we are going to learn in Chapter 10, his radical and violent
reform was not confined to Syro-Palestine, but also involved Egypt …. For there
Jehu will be identified as Horemheb, the reformer, whose Horus name contained
the Egyptian verb, seped, “a
technical term describing the process of putting things in order …”.[2] And I should like to venture a
parallel between the Egyptian seped and
the Hebrew shaphat (שָׁפַט),
found in the names of the father of both Elisha and Jehu. In Chapter 10 I shall go so far as to
describe the Sinai commissioned triumvirate as ‘shaphat-police’; a kind of military police with a penchant for
legalized reform.
But what were Hazael and Elisha
doing while Jehu was so busy bloodying his chariot?
Well Hazael was doing exactly
what Jehu was doing. Though the Bible, by way of narration, attributes the
extermination of the House of Ahab entirely to Jehu, Hazael himself claimed the
credit for it in the Tell Dan inscription, at least according to Finkelstein
and Silberman:[3]
… the “House of David”
inscription, part of a black basalt monument, found broken and reused in a
later stratum as a building stone.
Written in Aramaic, the language
of the Aramean kingdoms of Syria, it related the details of an invasion of
Israel by an Aramean king whose name is not mentioned on the fragments that
have so far been discovered. But there is hardly a question that it tells the
story of the assault of Hazael, king of Damascus, on the northern kingdom of
Israel around 835 BCE. … The most important part of the inscription is Hazael’s
boasting description of his enemies: “[I killed Jeho]ram son of [Ahab] king of
Israel, and [I] killed [Ahaz]jahu son of [Jehoram kin]g of the House of David.
And I set [their towns into ruins and turned] their land into [desolation]”.
Elisha
the patriot had lived to see the fulfilment of his prophecy that Hazael would
set on fire Israel’s strongholds (2 Kings 8:12).
Yet, in the biblical narration,
the annihilation of the royal house is attributed entirely to Jehu. This is yet
another example of ‘biblical perspective’ and selectivity. But it is all one
and the same thing, as Jehu was the subordinate of Hazael; the former doing the
dirty work whilst the latter gave the orders and gained the credit for it. And
this situation, we shall find, will prevail during the whole of their long
partnership.
….
Now, continuing on into Chapter
5 of my thesis, and a consideration of Ay:
This chapter will largely be a continuation
of my discussion of the Sinai-commissioned triumvirate of Hazael, Jehu and
Elisha that I had begun in Chapter 4. But
here the emphasis will be on Egypt, not Syro-Palestine. Once again our central
character will be Jehu, but this
time in his guise as an EA governor, subordinate to Hazael: both of whom would
actually come to rule Egypt for a period of time. Some significant historical
characters will emerge from these pages.
….
We might recall from Chapter
4 that the task assigned to Hazael, Jehu and Elisha had been to annihilate
the House of Ahab and to destroy the cult of Baal in Syro-Palestine.
Thus so read the relevant Scriptures.
However, I believe that the commission actually extended
further, to include Egypt (of no particular interest in this case to the
biblical scribes) ….
….
Ay was … master of the horses [chariotry]’.
Doherty, who has variously described Ay as
“the king-maker, the overlord” and “cunning as a mongoose”,[4] also recounts Ay’s political machinations:[5]
Ay was … well placed for a
position of great power. He never took the title of vizier [sic], that was too
lowly an honour for the likes of him. Indeed, as I shall prove, Ay saw himself
as wielding supreme power over Egypt and Pharaoh Tutankhamun, the fruit of
years of scheming and plotting.
… A member of the powerful
Akhmim clan, he would owe his rise not only to family connections but to his
own innate ability and skill. Ay also proved to be a man who could swim with
the tide and trim his sails to whatever wind blew.
Doherty also tells that Ay was, for a time, “for his own secret
purposes” one of the Aton cult’s
“most fervent supporters”.[6]
He then
describes Ay’s ‘Bismarckian’
influence:[7]
Ay was the head of the Akhmim
Mafia. In this case the word Mafia most accurately describes his spider-like
power and influence. Ay’s parents were the father and mother-in-law of the
great Amenhotep III, his sister that magnificent Pharaoh’s Chief Wife and Great
Queen ….
Ay could boast of powerful
connections in the priestly caste of Amun through his brother Anen and be on
speaking terms with all the great and good in Pharaoh’s court, as well as the
civil and military administration.
….
Ay is portrayed as a sly old
man. The evidence however indicates a Mafia chief of personal charisma, power
and cunning, a man to be feared, a tough former soldier, a skilled
administrator, held in awe for his talents by all at Pharaoh’s court. Ay was
not some sly Polonius hiding behind the arras but rather the Metternich or
Bismarck of post-Amarna Egypt.
Ay had in fact inherited the same
range of devious political skills as had been possessed by the ‘duplicitous’
father of his whom he had murdered. He could emulate the latter’s (as Abdi-ashirta) wretched grovelling … (e.g.
EA 64). Or - again like Kadashman-Enlil, who had urged Amenhotep III (EA 4) to
change age-old Egyptian practice for his sake, by letting him marry the
pharaoh’s daughter: “You are the king and you may do as you please. If you were
to give a daughter, who would say anything about it?” - Ay might radically break with Egyptian tradition by his outrageous
usurping of the place of the god Amun-Re, or Montu, in one of Tutankhamun’s
smiting scenes.[8] “Here was a man with truly
grandiose dreams”, wrote Brier.[9]
….
The
Queen, Slain By Order of Jehu (Horemheb)
There are such striking
similarities between the agent of the bloody purge in Israel, Jehu (serving
Hazael), and the agent of the reform in Egypt, Horemheb (serving Ay), that I must identify ‘these’ as the
one, same general. There is a description of Horemheb in his tomb - relating to before he came to the throne - that I
think might well apply to Jehu, especially after the latter’s bloody massacre
of Ahab’s line:[10] “… [a henchman] at the feet of
his lord on the battle-field on this day of slaughtering Asiatics”.
Again, fully compatible with the
biblical portraits of Jehu are Tyldesley’s references to Horemheb as “a solid, old-fashioned [pharaoh]”, possessing “excessive religious zeal”;[11] and Doherty’s descriptions of
Horemheb as being “an inveterate red-neck [hating] everything [the cult of
Aten] stood for [and] only too ready to launch the most savage persecution
against [the cult]”.[12]
As a balance to
this, Collier has discussed Horemheb “as a good king” and a reformer of abuse.[13]
….
[Joyce] Tyldesley at least
contrasts “the heretic [Atonist] regime [with] the orthodox Horemheb”.[14] But Horemheb, like Ay, as an EA official for Egypt, must have paid lip service to
Atonism,[15] just as he as the converted
Naaman still paid lip service to Rimmon in Damascus. Horemheb would have been
largely absent anyway, defending Egypt’s borders.
….
…. The word ‘obscure’ is often
used in regard to Horemheb and his origins. And this uncertainty about the
great man is reflected in the following words by Velikovsky:[16]
It is regularly admitted that it
is not known how and when Haremhab [Horemheb] became king of Egypt. Some think
that he was the last king of the Eighteenth Dynasty; some place him at the
beginning of the Nineteenth Dynasty. … He was not the son of
a king, nor was he the father of Ramses I, who followed [sic] him.
… “Nothing is known of his antecedents”.
My identification of Horemheb with Jehu
should serve to lift the veil of obscurity surrounding the former. We know that
Horemheb’s long and illustrious career had commenced during the reign of
Amenhotep III, and had continued on through Akhnaton, reaching a high point
during the reign of Tutankhamun. After that, things are somewhat less clear;
but he is supposed to have succeeded Tutankhamun’s successor, Ay, himself having become pharaoh of
Egypt for perhaps almost three decades (c. 1323 BC - 1295 BC, conventional
dates). That is an exceedingly long floruit.
….
Queen Jezebel, having seen to the murder of
so many in Israel (and perhaps also in Egypt),[17] would now meet her own bloody
death, before the rampaging Jehu (Horemheb) (2 Kings 9:30-37):
When Jehu came to Jezreel,
Jezebel heard of it; she painted her eyes with kohl, and adorned her head, and
looked out of the Window. As Jehu entered the gate, she said, ‘Is it peace,
Zimri, murderer of your master?’ He looked up to the Window and said, ‘Who is
on my side? Who?’ Two or three eunuchs looked out at him. He said, ‘Throw her
down’.
So they threw her down; some of
her blood spattered on the wall and on the horses, which trampled on her. Then
he went in and ate and drank; he said, ‘See to that cursed woman and bury her;
for she is a king’s daughter’. But
when they went to bury her, they found no more of her than the skull and the
feet and the palms of her hands. When they came back and told him, he said,
‘This is the word of the Lord, which he spoke by his servant Elijah the
Tishbite. ‘In the territory of Jezreel the dogs shall eat the flesh of Jezebel;
the corpse of Jezebel shall be like dung on the field in the territory of
Jezreel, so that no one can say. This is Jezebel’.’
….
This is a graphic narrative. Indeed,
according to Ellis:[18]
The account of Jehu’s revolt has
long been recognized as a masterpiece of historical narrative. The wealth of
detail, the sure touch in the delineation of the various strong personalities
involved, and the headlong pace of the narrative make it certain that the
author is a contemporary and perhaps even an eyewitness.
….
Nor had [Queen Jezebel] been under any
illusions about Jehu’s intentions for her. Far from having adorned herself for
the purpose of attempting to seduce Jehu, she did so in order that she might
face death like a queen. It was perfectly in keeping with Jezebel’s proud
character. She even, by naming Jehu as ‘Zimri’ - no doubt intending this as an
insult - recalled to Jehu’s mind that his grandfather (as I have interpreted
it) had likewise staged a coup against the crown, thereby assuming rulership of
Israel for himself.
….
Projecting back those 12 or so years from
c. 841 BC, the approximate (conventional) year of the commencement of Jehu’s
reign over Israel, when the queen met her violent death, we arrive right at the
time of Ahab’s year of death in 853 BC (conventional date). This is a very
encouraging chronological fit indeed. The
queen noticeably disappears from the biblical narrative for this entire period.
….
Jehu/Horemheb: Ruler of Israel and Egypt
Jehu … was essentially a king of
Israel where he ruled for 28 years, and was subsequently buried in Samaria with
his ancestors (2 Kings 10:35-36), who I believe to have been Zimrides. …. Such
I believe to have been the background to the enigmatic Horemheb, whose
‘parentage’ is thought to be ‘completely unknown.’ Doherty, for instance,
considers Horemheb to have been “a northerner of obscure origins”.[19] He was certainly, I believe, “a
northerner”; though his origins, as a Zimride, were far from being
“obscure”.
This Horemheb, as I am going to
argue, matches Jehu in some significant ways. (For a quick summary, see points
of comparison (a)-(g) on p. 245).
….
Basically, then, our main
character was a governor for Egypt of Syro-Palestine, who - ever subordinate to
Hazael (Ay) - eventually became the
latter’s governor (vice regent), with more direct power over Egypt. In this
guise, he was, I am arguing, Horemheb. “The nature of his duties must have
removed Horemheb often from court”, wrote Collier.[20] And, according to Newby,
“[Horemheb] had been an indefatigable traveller …”.[21]
Whilst Horemheb is accredited
with 28 years of rule in Egypt, from c. 1323-1295 BC (conventional dates)[22] - exactly the same period of
rule, incidentally, as Jehu had enjoyed - the archaeological evidence would not
seem to support the view that Horemheb had ruled Egypt continuously for so
substantial a period of time.
[Geoffrey] Gammon[23] may therefore have a point with
his estimated “7/8 years” for the reign length of Horemheb inasmuch as - whilst Horemheb’s total length of kingship, as Jehu,
may have been 28 years - perhaps only “7/8” of these involved his direct and
individual rule of Egypt. A figure of around 8 years would probably account for
the fact that Horemheb’s building activity in Egypt is considered not to
represent nearly three decades of rule, consistent with my view that Horemheb
was largely a ruler of Syro-Palestine, not Egypt. Gammon continues:[24] “... apart from instances of
usurpation, Horemheb’s building activity was substantially less than that of
Seti I in a period of between 10 and 15 years. Specifically, his tomb in the
Valley of the Kings was unfinished at his death”.
Horemheb’s birth name and epithet are
thought to have been Horemheb meryamun,
meaning “Horus is in Jubilation, Beloved of Amun”; though there is some
difference of opinion as to how the first part of this name is meant to be
represented (e.g. Horemheb, Horemhab, Haremhab?).
The name Horemheb/Horam-heb, though it can certainly be a genuine Egyptian name,
looks suspiciously also like the Hebrew name, Jehoram.
We have found that Jehoram was also a name
used amongst the Omride royals. It is possible that Jehu too was variously
called Jehoram; though the name by which he is known in the Bible, as king of
Israel, is Jehu,[25] arising from ‘Yawheh’ and
‘huw’, and meaning ‘Yahweh (is) He’.
….
Jehu/Horemheb, as I have noted, cannot really be
separated from Hazael/Ay, either in
Egyptian or biblical history. Doherty has given a realistic account of these
two characters (in their Egyptian guise), alike at least in their innate
practicality, “born pragmatists”.[26] Horemheb though was perhaps the more refined, possessing, as he did, “a
strong but sensitive face”.[27] Brier has, by contrast, gives
an unflattering view of Ay’s appearance.[28]
The situation of Jehu as an
apparent subordinate to Hazael seems to be paralleled in the case of their alter egos in Egyptian history.
Consider, for example, Doherty’s estimation here:[29] “The Restoration Stela
[Tutankhamun’s] committed Egypt to re-establishing its power abroad and this
was Horemheb’s duty. Yet, even here there is evidence that, if Horemheb did the hard work, Ay … [was]
more than prepared to take the glory”.
Horemheb was, as Jehu is
represented in the Bible, the restorer of established order. This is indicated,
as we saw, by his royal titulature (especially the verb seped, ‘setting things in order’). Horemheb is most famous as a
reformer king; his Great Edict, or code of laws, was cruel but effective. He
and Ay, and apparently Elisha as
well, were law enforcers, or police, who depended on the sword to bring about
order. We recall that Ay would adopt
the cognomen: ‘Who is doing right’, and this motto seems to tie in well with
Horemheb’s titulary seped and the
Hebrew shaphat … ‘to judge, govern,
administer right’.
….
Horemheb had … astonishing
titles … [e.g. ‘King’s Deputy in All Countries’, ‘King’s Elect’, ‘The Greatest
Amongst the Favourites of the Lord of the Two Countries’, ‘The True Scribe Well
Beloved of the King’].[30] [Dr. Donovan] Courville
marvelled at the nature of Horemheb’s titles and privileges.[31] That Horemheb was already at least quasi-pharaoh
during the reign of Tutankhamun is quite apparent from the fact that Horemheb’s cartouche has been found together with
that of Tutankhamun on commemorative stone slabs found at the base of sphinxes
as part of the Avenue of Sphinxes
at Karnak.[32]
During the reign of the feeble Tutankhamun, Ay (Hazael) and his colleague, Horemheb (Jehu), seem largely to have shared the
royal power. Horemheb had married Mutnodjmet, thought by some to have been the
sister of Nefertiti. Thus Doherty:[33] “Mutnedjmet apparently
disappeared from Akhenaten’s court around Year 8 of that Pharaoh’s reign, I
consider this to be the year she married Horemheb, a political marriage
alliance arranged by Ay”. “Mutnodjmet”, writes Tyldesley,[34] “died aged between thirty-five
and forty during Year 14 or 15 of her husband’s rule, and was buried in the
tomb which Horemheb had prepared for himself at Memphis”. This was, she says, a
“second marriage, following the death of his first wife …”.[35] Interestingly, both Ay and Horemheb would designate themselves as heir. …. In the case of Ay, for instance, Tyldesley has written:[36] “… Ay is described as the
‘Eldest King’s Son’, an obviously honorary title which nevertheless implies
that the elderly Ay is recognized as the young Tutankhamen’s heir”.
And Doherty has written similarly about Horemheb, in regard to
his statue in the Turin Museum:[37] “The impression given by these
inscriptions is that Horemheb not only became Pharaoh but that he was his
predecessor’s legitimate heir”. Who
his “predecessor” actually was, however, “is left vague”.[38]
During the reign of Tutankhamun, Horemheb
became King’s Deputy (and very likely vice-regent), then quasi-pharaoh, with Ay (Hazael). “The coronation
proclamation depicts Horemheb sweeping into Thebes to a rapturous reception”,
writes Doherty.[39]
Did he ‘sweep in’ on his chariot, just as
he (as general Jehu) had swept through the Valley of Jezreel to despatch king
Jehoram, and the latter’s mother, Jezebel (2 Kings 9)?
Jehu … matches Horemheb … in at least the following
significant ways, as:
(a) an army commander,
charioteer, apparently allied to a Syrian (Assyrian) potentate; as
(b) likely a non-Egyptian;
(c) chronologically, in a
revised context;
(d) having reigned for 28 years;
(e) a cruel law enforcer;
(f) restorer of the status quo;
(g) a fanatical religious
reformer-king.
We know nothing from Egyptian records about the death of
Horemheb. His mummy has not been found. The reason for this, I suggest, is
because he was not buried in Egypt (cf. 2 Kings 10:35). Now, my revised date
for the death of Horemheb, in identifying him with Jehu, would be c. 815/814 BC
….
According to Booth:[40] “Considering that Horemheb was one of the most important kings of the
eighteenth dynasty [sic], who instigated major changes and reforms in what was
essentially a country of chaos after the Amarna Period, there is very little
evidence of his life and times. There is more evidence of the 17-year reign of
Akhenaten than the 27-year reign of Horemheb”.
….
[1] The Wonders of Bible
Chronology, p. 53.
[2] N. Grimal, A History of
Ancient Egypt, p. 243.
[3] The Bible Unearthed, p.
129. Tiglath-pileser III may later have distinguished a kingdom of
‘Beth-Hazael’ separately from ‘Beth-Omri’. See S. Irvine, Isaiah, Ahaz, and the Syro-Ephraimitic Crisis’, cf. pp. 40, 60.
[4] The Mysterious Death of
Tutankhamun, pp. 149, 81.
[5] Ibid, pp. 77, 78, 79.
[6] Velikovsky had, in this same context,
mentioned that “certain historians” have actually credited Ay with the authorship of “the self-glorifying Akhnaton’s hymn”. Op. cit. p. 116.
[7] Op. cit, p. 79.
[8] Ibid, p. 147.
[9] The Murder of Tutankhamen, p.
108.
[10] A. Gardiner, ‘The Memphite Tomb of the General Haremhab’, pp. 3-4.
Cf. K. Pflüger, Haremhab und die
Amarnazeit, p. 16; also R. Hari, Horemheb
et la reine Moutnodjemet, p. 89, and Plate XIV. J. Collier has argued that
Horemheb’s king (“lord”) at this time was Akhnaton. Op. cit, pp. 177-178.
[11] Op. cit, p. 185.
[12] Op, cit, pp. 79-80.
[13] Op. cit, p. 223.
[14] Op. cit, p. 60.
[15] See Doherty, op. cit, p.
75.
[16] The Assyrian Conquest, part
II: “The Assyrians in Egypt”.
[17] See ibid, pp. 185-187,
for a description of the religious persecution by the Atonist régime.
[18] ‘1-2 Kings’, 10:56, p. 200.
[19] Op. cit, p. 41.
[20] Op. cit, p. 151.
[21] Warrior Pharaohs, p. 136.
[22] Grimal’s dates for Horemheb. Op.
cit, p. 392.
[23] ‘The Place of Horemheb in Egyptian History’, p. 85. Gammon’s estimation concurs with an earlier one of 8 years
made by J. Harris, ‘How Long was the Reign of Haremheb?’, pp. 95ff.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Liel considers this name to be the same as EA’s Iawa/Iama, op. cit, section: “Iawa”.
[26] Op. cit, p. 96.
[27] Ibid, p. 80.
[28] Op. cit, p. 187.
[29] Op. cit, p. 117. Emphasis
added.
[30] Ibid, p. 124.
[31] Op. cit, p. 288.
[32] J. Zwick, ‘The Age of Pharaoh Haremhab’, with reference to KMT Magazine, Vol. 10, Summer, 1999, p.
38.
[33] Op. cit, p. 81.
[34] Op. cit, pp. 184-185.
[35] Ibid, p. 184.
[36] Ibid, p. 182.
[37] Op. cit, p. 217.
[38] Ibid, p. 226.
[39] Ibid.
[40] People of Ancient Egypt, p.
164.
