JETS 25/2 (June 1982) 129-137

THE BIBLICAL CITY OF RAMSES

Charles F. Aling*
Perhaps the most perplexing problem facing the advocates of an early exodus
(fifteenth century B.C.) is the series of references in the sojourn and exodus narra-
tives to a land (as in Gen 47:11) and to a city (as in Exod 1:11) of Ramses. The
difficulty is chronological: If, as is commonly assumed, the land and city were
named after King Ramses II (1290-1223 B.C.), how could the name be used cen-
turies earlier? If the start of the sojourn is to be dated to the Middle Kingdom pe-
riod of Egyptian history
1
(ca. 1876 B.C.), and if the exodus took place in the
1440s,
2
it would stand to reason that no city or land could yet have been named
after Ramses . What solutions to this problem are available, short of abandon-
ing an early date for the exodus? It is the purpose of this paper to examine several
of the more popular proposed solutions to this obstacle in the light of the Egypto-
logical evidence. We will confine our discussion mainly to the city of Ramses, but
our conclusions may be applied to the land of Ramses as well.
Let it be said at the outset that the location of the delta capital of Ramses II,
the commonly accepted Biblical city of Ramses, has recently been established
beyond serious doubt.
3
In contrast to an older theory that located Per-Ramses
("House of Ramses") at Tanis in the northeastern delta, it can now be shown that
Ramses IPs northern residence was situated in the Khatana-Qantir Tell el-Daba
region to the south of Tanis.
Among conservative American defenders of the early exodus, two explana-
tions of the seemingly anachronistic mentions of Ramses have been suggested.
The first, originated and elaborated by John Rea
4
and accepted by G. L. Archer
5
and Leon Wood,
6
denies that the name Ramses was derived from Ramses II and
states that it was in fact far older, probably going back to Hyksos times (seven-
*Charles Aling is academic dean at Valley Baptist Theological Seminary in Minneapolis.
!See J. R. Battenfield, "A Consideration of the Identity of the Pharaoh of Genesis 47," JETS 15 (1972)
77-85.
2
See the basic arguments of M. F. Unger, Archaeology and the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: 1954),
chap. 12, and G. L. Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction (Chicago: 1964), 212 ff.; or, more
recently, see the relevant chapters of C. F. Aling, Egypt and Bible History (Grand Rapids: 1981).
3
For a detailed discussion with all the evidence included see M. Bietak, Tell el-Daba (Vienna: 1975), 2.
179-220; in English see M. Bietak, Avaris and Piramesse (Oxford: 1979).
4
J. Rea, "The Time of the Oppression and the Exodus," Grace Journal 2 (1961) 5-14.
5
Archer, Survey 207-208.
6
L. Wood, A Survey of Israel's History (Grand Rapids: 1970) 93 ff.
129
130
JOURNAL OF THE EVANGELICAL THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
teenth century B.C.). Thus if the bondage began in Hyksos times, the term
Ramses would not be an anachronism. The second view, advocated most recently
by the late M. F. Unger,
7
simply regards the references to Ramses in the Penta-
teuch as updatings of place-names by Hebrew scribes working perhaps in the
thirteenth or twelfth centuries B.C. Both of these views must be closely studied.
We shall begin with the thesis of Rea.
Rea seeks to show that the city of Ramses was not named after Ramses II but
was called Ramses by the Hyksos, an Asiatic group who seized control of the Nile
delta ca. 1650 B.C. during the time of weakness between Egypt's Middle King-
dom and New Kingdom periods. In order to prove this, Rea attempts to show con-
nections between the Nineteenth Dynasty (of which Ramses II was a member)
and the earlier Hyksos. If such a connection existed, the Nineteenth Dynasty
could have used the name because the Hyksos used it, and it need not have any-
thing to do with Ramses II at all. Rea bases his thesis on three main arguments:
8
the contents of the 400-Year Stele of Ramses II, alleged veneration of the god Re
by the Hyksos, and use of Ramses as a personal name earlier than Dynasty XIX.
I. THE SO-CALLED 400-YEAR STELE
The stele in question was inscribed during the reign of Ramses (at least in
the form in which it is preserved) at the city of Ramses
9
to commemorate an
event that had taken place some years earlier, before Ramses' father Seti I be-
came pharaoh. Seti, while serving as vizier under the late Eighteenth-Dynasty
king Horemhab (ca. 1331-1304 B.C.), came to Per-Ramses to celebrate the four-
hundredth anniversary of the establishing of the Set cult in the city.
Rea,
10
following Albright, believes that this stele indicates that the Nine-
teenth-Dynasty rulers were connected in some way, perhaps genealogically, with
the Hyksos. After all, both the Nineteenth-Dynasty kings and the Hyksos vener-
ated the generally unpopular god Set. Further, a date four hundred years earlier
than the reign of Horemhab would seemingly place the inauguration of the Set
cult in Per-Ramses at the start of Hyksos rule in the Nile delta.
But does the 400-Year Stele really show any connection between Dynasty XIX
and the Hyksos? It should be noted that there is no mention of the Hyksos any-
where on the stele;
11
the emphasis is on the god Set. While it is true that the Hyk-
sos greatly venerated Set,
12
whom they probably equated with one of their own
native Asiatic deities, it is also a fact that the cult of this deity was popular with
7
Unger, Archaeology 149-150.
8
Rea, "Time" 10.
9
A translation may be found in ANET 252-253. The deity represented on the stele is labelled "Set of
Ramses," thus proving that it originally came from the city of Ramses.
10
Rea, "Time" 10.
n
Nor are they favorably mentioned in any other Ramesside inscriptions.
12
Cf. J. Van Seters, The Hyksos (New Haven: 1966) 173 ff.
ALING: THE BIBLICAL CITY OF RAMSES
131
Egyptians in the eastern delta before the Hyksos rose to power.
13
In the Pyramid
Texts Set is twice associated with the town of Henty, which is thought to have
been in the delta. Of more certain nature is Set's inclusion in the Ennead of gods
worshipped at Heliopolis near modern Cairo, just south of the delta.
14
Ramesside
interest in Set may indeed show connections with the eastern delta, but it need
not indicate any connection with the Hyksos.
Manfred Bietak, following R. Stadelmann,
15
postulates a reason for the erec-
tion of the 400-Year Stele honoring Set by Ramses : Since the Nineteenth Dyn-
asty had a nonroyal origin (its first two kings, Ramses I and Seti I, had been vi-
ziers at the end of Dynasty XVIII), legitimacy had to be proven through religious
propaganda. The 400-Year Stele provided that propaganda by showing a special
relationship between the dynastic founders and the god Set. A further purpose
was also served by elevating Set to greater prominence. For many years Egypt's
kings had sought a way to weaken a rival institution, the high priesthood of
Amon.
16
The extreme solution of Akhenaten, the abolition of the worship of
Amon, had failed. But here was a new possibility, a subtle shift of royal support to
another deity in the north, away from Thebes and its priests.
17
Finally, there is a serious chronological obstacle in the way of linking the
Nineteenth Dynasty with the Hyksos kings on the basis of the 400-Year Stele. If
we count back four hundred years from the original events commemorated by the
stele sometime in the reign of Horemhab (1331-1304 B.C.), the result is a date ca.
1731-1704 B.C., which is several decades earlier than the rise of the Hyksos to
power. That the four-hundredth anniversary celebrated by the erection of the
stele has little or nothing to do with the Hyksos is also indicated by several monu-
ments of an ephemeral pre-Hyksos Fourteenth-Dynasty king named Nehesy.
This delta prince's titles include the epithet "Beloved of Set," and it was he (or
some previous ruler in his dynasty) who established the Set cult at Avaris (which
was an earlier name for Per-Ramses, as we shall see below). The first reference to
Set as "Lord of Avaris" comes not from Hyksos monuments but from an inscrip-
tion on a colossal statue of King Nehesy found at Moqdam.
18
It is significant that
this statue was usurped later by Merneptah, the son and successor of Ramses II.
19
It seems clear that the connection shown by the 400-Year Stele was not between
Dynasty XIX and the Hyksos but rather between Dynasty XIX and the last na-
tive Egyptian rulers before the Hyksos rose to power.
13
Ibid., 100 ff. See also below.
14
Ibid., 100. See the chart of these nine deities in A. Erman, A Handbook of Egyptian Religion (London:
1907) 27.
15
Bietak, Tell el-Daba, 2. 185.
ie
See C. F. Aling, A Prosopographical Study of the Reigns of Thutmosis IV and Amenhotep III (Unpub-
lished doctoral thesis, University of Minnesota: 1976) 233 ff.
17
S. Sauneron, The Priests of Ancient Egypt (New York: c. 1969) 183 ff.
18
For bibliography and discussion on all of this see Bietak, Tell el-Daba, 2. 186; Van Seters, Hyksos
100-103.
19
Bietak, Tell el-Daba, 2. 186.
132
JOURNAL OF THE EVANGELICAL THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
There is further evidence against connecting Dynasty XIX with the Hyksos.
The ancient Egyptians compiled several king lists that have been at least partial-
ly preserved down to the present. Three of these date from the Nineteenth Dynas-
ty:
20
the Turin Canon of Kings, the Table of Sakkara, and the Table of Abydos.
The first, the Turin Canon, was originally a long papyrus written in the hiera-
tic script listing Egypt's kings from earliest times to the Nineteenth Dynasty. Un-
fortunately it has survived only in tattered fragments. One observation pertinent
to our problem may be made, however: The Hyksos kings were included in the
list, for some of them remain in the surviving fragments.
The second and third lists were not papyrus records but were display inscrip-
tions. The Table of Sakkara was inscribed on the wall of a Memphite tomb, and
the Table of Abydos was prominently displayed on an interior wall of Seti I's
great temple to Osiris at Abydos. In both cases it is important to note that (1)
these lists were meant for some kind of public consumption, however limited that
may have been, and (2) they both deleted any reference to the Hyksos kings.
These Asiatic rulers, like Akhenaten and his immediate successors, were detested
and were considered unworthy of inclusion in king lists inscribed in visible places.
We thus see from these two lists what the Nineteenth-Dynasty kings thought of
the Hyksos. Their inclusion in the Turin Canon is perfectly understandable, since
that document was not displayed for all to see but was evidently part of a collec-
tion of temple records, where accuracy and completeness were more important
than pious indignation. If Seti I or Ramses II were related to the Hyksos and were
publicly proclaiming the fact in the 400-Year Stele as Rea would have us believe,
it is difficult to understand their exclusion from the public king lists of the Nine-
teenth Dynasty.
. ALLEGED HYKSOS VENERATION OF RE
After seeking to connect the Nineteenth Dynasty with the Hyksos on the basis
of the 400-Year Stele, Rea attempts to show that since the god Re's name can be
found as a part of Hyksos royal names the term Ramses as a place-name might
also reflect Hyksos practice.
21
It is true that Re's name appears in Hyksos royal
names.
22
But this does not prove any special veneration for Re, but simply an at-
tempt by the Hyksos to find acceptance and legitimacy, as Van Seters has sug-
gested.
23
The selection of names for their progaganda value was a practice not un-
known in ancient Egypt.
Regarding Hyksos religious beliefs, there is little proof of any special favor for
Re among the Hyksos. They probably did not suppress the worship of the Helio-
politan solar deity (as was once thought by Egyptologists
24
), but neither is there
any concrete evidence that Re received special favor. Set was in fact the major
20
A. H. Gardiner, Egypt of the Pharaohs (Oxford: 1961) 47 ff.
21
Rea, " Ti me" 10.
22
See the list in Gardiner, Egypt 443.
23
Van Seters, Hyksos 172.
24
Ibid p. 173.
ALING: THE BIBLICAL CITY OF RAMSES 133
god of the Hyksos kings rather than Re. The compounding of royal names with
that of Re has less to do with religion than with politics. There is no reason to look
for places named after Re on the basis of the Hyksos throne names.
. EARLY USE OF THE PERSONAL NAME RAMSES
Conservative Biblical scholars holding Rea's position have made much of the
occurrence of Ramses as a personal name before it was popularized as a royal
name in Dynasties XIX and XX.
25
Their point has been that the Biblical city
need not have taken its name from a king named Ramses but could have been
named after some private individual. While the name did not become popular
until the days of Ramses II and later, occasional examples are known from earlier
periods. A very prominent figure in the late Eighteenth Dynasty was Ramose (or
Ramses), vizier under Amenhotep and Akhenaten. Another Ramses is known
from approximately Hyksos times,
26
and a still earlier Ramses is mentioned on a
stele of a man named Ibi-aa, probably of Twelfth-Dynasty date.
27
But do these
early examples of the proper name Ramses have any bearing on the name of the
Biblical city?
On the basis of what we know of the naming of Egyptian cities in general, it is
extremely doubtful that scattered examples of Ramses as a personal name are at
all relevant to the question of the city of Ramses. The Egyptians named cities
after gods, kings, cult objects, and sacred places, but not after nonroyal person-
ages. But we should examine all the known towns and cities of ancient Egypt that
had the word Ramses as a part of their names to see if any were named for some-
one other than a king.
A. H. Gardiner in 1918 published a thorough study on the delta residence of
the Ramesside kings, Per-Ramses.
28
While his conclusions as to the location of
Per-Ramses must now be modified in the light of recent archaeological findings,
Gardiner's gathering of all known literary references to all towns bearing the
name Ramses is still extremely valuable. From his list of cities we can learn sev-
eral things.
It is very clear that the most important Egyptian city called Ramses, more
fully "Per-Ramses Mery Amon," translated "The house of Ramses, beloved of
Amon," was named after King Ramses II.
29
This is indicated first by the epithet
Mery Amon, which was an integral part of the nomen of Ramses II. Just as
Ramses Ill's nomen was "Ramses, Ruler of Heliopolis," Ramses II's was
"Ramses, Beloved of Amon." Second, this conclusion is supported by the fact
that in virtually all references to the city that are at all contemporary with the
Biblical account the name Ramses or the whole phrase "Ramses, Beloved of
25
See for example Wood, Survey 94 n. 46, and especially G. L. Archer, "An Eighteenth Dynasty
Rameses," JETS 17 (1974) 49-50.
2 6
H. Ranke, Die Aegyptische Personennamen (Glckstadt: 1935), 1. 218, no. 3.
27
H. M. Stewart, Egyptian Stelae, Reliefs, and Paintings From the Ptrie Collection (Warminster: 1979),
2. 26, no. 110.
28
A. H. Gardiner, "The Delta Residence of the Ramessides," JEA 5 (1918) 127 ff.
29
Ibid., p. 136.
134 JOURNAL OF THE EVANGELICAL THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
Amon" is written in a cartouche or ring. Such enclosure of personal names was re-
served for gods and kings. In this case, because of the frequent epithet Mery
Amon, it is certain that King Ramses II is meant rather than a deity. Thus if Bib-
lical Ramses is Per-Ramses we have no choice but to conclude that the city was
named after Ramses of Dynasty XIX. But before we examine this possibility
and its implications we must consider other cities in Gardiner's list that had the
name Ramses incorporated in their names.
There were a number of temples in all parts of Egypt that incorporated the
name Ramses. None could be Biblical Ramses, for the Bible states that the He-
brews lived in a land of Ramses, not in a temple by that name, and that they la-
bored at a "store city" of Ramses and not at a temple. Also these temples, like the
great delta capital Per-Ramses, were named after kingsin some cases Ramses
II, in others the later Ramses III.
30
A delta village near Naucratis, attested in late texts and still known today as
Ramsis, was known as hwt nt r
c
-mss, translated "House (or temple) of Ramses."
31
The word hwt would normally lead us to expect a king's name to follow, and this
supposition is borne out by the fact that one textual reference gives a fuller vari-
ant of the name of this place: "House of Ramses, Beloved of Amon."
32
This and
the late date of the references to this town prove that it too was named after
Ramses . Nor was it an older city renamed by Ramses II; that all references to it
are quite late shows that it was a foundation dating from the reign of that king.
Thus it was not the Biblical city (which must have been in existence earlier) but
was rather a late and insignificant place of similar name.
Three towns in Nubia were named Ramses: Derr, Amara and Abu Simbel.
33
In all three cases the name Ramses was taken from Ramses II, for cartouches nor-
mally enclose the word Ramses. Often the phrase "Beloved of Amon" is also pres-
ent. Again it is not possible that any of these places was the Biblical city, for that
place of servitude was most certainly in the delta and not in Nubia.
Several settlements were named after the Twentieth-Dynasty ruler Ramses
III.
34
These places can be dismissed immediately as possibilities, for they are all
too late and too small.
We are forced to conclude with Gardiner that the Biblical city and the famous
delta capital Per-Ramses were one and the same. Only the great capital was large
and important enough to need vast quantities of slave labor, and only it was lo-
cated in the right part of Egypt for the Hebrew bondage. As Gardiner has said,
"Either Raamses-Rameses of the Bible is the residence city of the Ramessides . . .
or else it is a town unknown to the Egyptian monuments, the existence of which is
merely postulated."
35
That such an important place would have left no trace in
30
Ibid., pp. 129 ff.
31
Ibid.
32
Ibid., p. 131.
33
Ibid., pp. 133-134.
34
Ibid., pp. 134-135.
^
5
Ibi d. , p. 261.
ALING: THE BIBLICAL CITY OF RAMSES
135
the vast corpus of preserved Egyptian literature is all but impossible.
IV. THE EARLY HISTORY OF PER- RAMSES
Assuming that Biblical Ramses was Per-Ramses, the delta capital of Ramses
II, and that this city received the name "House of Ramses" from Ramses II, what
are we to conclude about the Hebrew bondage there during the Eighteenth Dyn-
asty and under the Hyksos? It is known that Ramses II did not found a new city
on virgin soil when he established his capital at Per-Ramses. He merely revived
an old city, renamed it, and inaugurated massive construction works there. Per-
Ramses, as is shown by the 400-Year Stele, existed long before Dynasty XIX,
even before the rise to power of the Hyksos. Archaeological work at the site by re-
cent Austrian excavators confirms this conclusion. Habitation at Tell el-Daba ex-
tended back into Dynasty XIII,
36
and finds from Dynasty XII are also known
from the general area.
37
Before Ramses II, however, Per-Ramses was known by
another name, Egyptian hwt w
c
rt, anglicized as Avaris.
The evidence that Avaris and Per-Ramses were located at the same site is fair-
ly conclusive. Space does not permit us to discuss all the indications,
38
but the
following are a few of the most important points: (1) Tanis, the capital of the
Twenty-First-Dynasty kings, contains a great number of stone monuments
brought there from Avaris and Per-Ramses. It stands to reason that these objects
were plundered from the same place.
39
(2) Egyptian literary references to Avaris
and Per-Ramses describe an identical geographical setting. Both cities, for exam-
ple, lay in the fourteenth nome or district of Lower Egypt; both were situated
near Egypt's northeastern frontier; both were situated on the east bank of one of
the branches of the Nile; and both were located in grape-raising country.
40
(3)
Both Avaris and Per-Ramses had a temple to the same god, Set. In the Nine-
teenth Dynasty, temples to Amon, Ptah and Re were built at the delta capital as
well, but worship of Set remained prominent. It is extremely significant that
Merneptah, the son and successor of Ramses II, indiscriminately spoke of himself
on several statues from this area as either "Beloved of Set, Lord of Avaris," or
"Beloved of Set of Merneptah." Avaris and a place called Merneptah are thus
equated, and Merneptah is certainly another name for Per-Ramses.
41
Thus
Avaris and its god Set must be equated with Ramses and its deity Set. (4) A con-
clusive piece of evidence for equating the two cities is a Twentieth-Dynasty text
now in Moscow that refers to a "Temple of Amon of Ramses, great of victories, at
the harbor of Avaris."
42
"Ramses, great of victories" is Per-Ramses, and it is here
36
Bietak, Avaris 236-237.
37
Ibid., pp. 232 ff.
38
For a complete discussion see Bietak, Tell el-Daba, 2. 189-212.
39
Ibid., p. 187.
40
Ibid., pp. 189 ff. See also Bietak, Avaris 281-282.
"Gardiner, "Delta" 255.
42
Bietak, Avaris 282.
136
JOURNAL OF THE EVANGELICAL THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
being equated with Avaris. Evidently the harbor region of the city had retained
the older name of the full city.
It is important to remember too that Avaris-Ramses was not the only Egyp-
tian town given a new name by Ramses II. Amara in Nubia was called Khnum-
waset originally but was renamed Per-Ramses Mery Amon by Ramses II.
43
V. CONCLUSION
If the name Per-Ramses did not originate with the Hyksos but was given to
Avaris by Ramses II when he made that old city his delta residence, a conclusion
that seems certain in the light of the extant evidence, what solution to the anach-
ronism remains? The only viable answer is the thesis of Unger
44
that the term
Ramses replaced Avaris as a scribal updating of the place-name. Such a change
would presumably have been made sometime between the thirteenth and ele-
venth centuries B.C. to facilitate the understanding of the Hebrew people. Out-
side of professional scribal circles in Israel the name Avaris or its Hebrew equiva-
lent would not be remembered. Thus updating of the place-name to reflect
current terminology would have increased understanding of the Pentateuch.
Unger's suggestion that a place-name has been updated in the Pentateuch is
in no way radical. Another OT example of this kind of technical change is known.
In Gen 14:14 Abraham is said to have pursued the enemy coalition of kings to a
city called Dan. But from Josh 19:47 and Judg 18:29 we learn that the early name
of the city was Laish or Leshem, and that only after the conquest (half a millen-
nium later than Abraham, and also some time after the death of Moses) was it
given the name Dan. Both passages specifically state that Laish was named Dan
after Dan the son of Jacob, thus precluding the possibility that the name Dan was
used for this city in Mosaic times or earlier. The view of Wood,
45
that the Dan of
Gen 14:14 may not be the same place mentioned in Joshua and Judges, is not
convincing. Wood's alternative site, the Dan-Jaan of 2 Sam 24:6, may well be the
same Dan mentioned in Joshua and Judges. And even if it is not, in all probabil-
ity it too received its name in honor of Jacob's son. That a city called Dan existed
in David's day is by no means proof that it was already occupied and named Dan
in the time of Abraham.
In summary, we have attempted to point out the weaknesses in Rea's thesis
that the Biblical city of Ramses received its name earlier than the reign of Ramses
II and merely continued to use the name coincidentally in the Nineteenth Dyn-
asty. We showed that although the 400-Year Stele does demonstrate a connection
between the Nineteenth Dynasty and earlier Egyptian rulers it does not prove a
relationship between the Ramesside kings and the Hyksos. Further, Rea's conten-
tion that the Hyksos showed special favor for the god Re is not supported by any
evidence. Nor does use of Ramses as a personal name before Dynasty XIX prove
anything about the city, for it is clear that Per-Ramses of the Egyptian monu-
43
B. Porter and R. Moss, Topographical Bibliography of Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts, Reliefs,
and Paintings (Oxford: 1927-1964), 7. 157.
44
Unger, Archaeology 149-150.
45
Wood, Survey 53.
ALING: THE BIBLICAL CITY OF RAMSES 137
ments and papyri was named after King Ramses II.
The best solution to the problem of the Biblical references to the land and city
of Ramses within the framework of an early exodus seems to be, on the basis of the
known evidence from ancient Egypt, to accept Unger's view. The original refer-
ences to Ramses in the Pentateuch did not include the term Ramses but read
"Avaris" or something similar. Only after Avaris had gone out of general use did
Hebrew scribes substitute the new name, Ramses, for the localities in question.
^ s
Copyright and Use:
As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.
No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.
This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).
About ATLAS:
The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously
published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.
The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.