Abstract
The Speos Artemidos inscription of Queen Hatshepsut has traditionally been interpreted as a condemnation of the Hyksos, the Asiatic rulers expelled from Egypt over a century before her reign. However, this view fails to account for the intensity and temporal distance of her polemic. When viewed through the framework of the Biblical and Lunar Synchronised Chronology (BLSC), a compelling reinterpretation emerges: Hatshepsut’s denunciation of "Asiatics" and "abominations" also targets the legacy of the Hebrews—Joseph, Jacob, and the early Israelites—who resided in Egypt in the intervening period between the Hyksos and her reign. This article explores the hypothesis that Hatshepsut’s campaign of erasure included the deliberate suppression of records from the long-reigning Merneferre Aya, under whom Joseph served as vizier, and whose historical footprint—though supported by archaeological evidence such as scarabs and seals—was largely erased from monumental inscriptions. The article examines how this revised reading clarifies longstanding historical gaps and offers an integrative framework connecting Egyptian and biblical chronologies.
Introduction
The reign of Hatshepsut (c. 1479–1458 BC) is best remembered for its monumental architecture, trade revival, and relative peace. Among her significant inscriptions, the Speos Artemidos text carved at Beni Hasan has drawn considerable attention for its aggressive denunciation of previous rulers she labeled "Asiatics." Scholars generally agree that these refer to the Hyksos, a Semitic dynasty that ruled parts of northern Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period. However, the chronological distance between the expulsion of the Hyksos (c. 1526 BC) and Hatshepsut’s reign raises questions about the immediacy and relevance of such polemics.
This article revisits the Speos Artemidos inscription through the lens of the Biblical and Lunar Synchronised Chronology (BLSC), which aligns the patriarchal narratives of Genesis with archaeological and astronomical data. According to BLSC, Joseph served as vizier under Merneferre Aya of the 13th Dynasty (reigned c. 1664–1641 BC per Krauss). The argument here is that Hatshepsut's ideological purification extended not only to the memory of the Hyksos, but also to the Hebrews who flourished under Aya’s administration, thereby explaining the scarcity of monuments for a king who ruled for over two decades.
I. The Speos Artemidos Inscription: A Purge of "Asiatics"
The inscription reads in part:
“I have restored that which was in ruins. I have raised up that which was destroyed, even from the first time when the Asiatics were in Avaris... They roamed in the land with their abominations, overturning what had been made... They ruled without Re, and he acted not by divine command down to my majesty.”
(Speos Artemidos, lines 8–12)
This text has long been viewed as a reference to the Hyksos. However, Hatshepsut was far removed from the time of their expulsion. Her reign began approximately 50 years after their removal by Ahmose I. This delay suggests that the inscription may reflect a broader ideological and historical purification campaign.
The reference to rulers who "acted not by divine command" and “ruled without Re” may have theological implications: it targets those whose foreign religion deviated from the Egyptian solar cult. In the BLSC framework, this matches the Hebrew God Jehovah, as worshipped by the patriarchs, including Joseph.
II. Merneferre Aya: A King Erased
According to seal evidence, Merneferre Aya ruled for over 20 years (Quirke, 1990; Ryholt, 1997), making him one of the longest-reigning kings of the late 13th Dynasty. Yet he remains virtually absent from king lists, monumental inscriptions, and temple texts. This discrepancy has puzzled Egyptologists. In contrast, nearly a hundred scarabs bearing his and his wife’s name have been found across Egypt and Canaan, indicating their widespread authority (Moeller, 2010).
The BLSC identifies Joseph as vizier from Aya’s 4th to 19th year (c. 1658–1643 BC). Genesis 41 and Josephus (Ant. 2.91) describe Joseph’s unprecedented authority, his control over the grain supply, and the issuance of royal seals — acts consistent with the status of a vizier. Yet Joseph's memory, and that of his descendants, is almost entirely absent from Egyptian sources.
This aligns with Hatshepsut’s purging agenda: by targeting the Asiatics of Joseph’s era, she would have viewed Aya’s reign — as the last ruler who elevated these foreigners — as ideologically polluted.
III. Scarabs and the Signet: Economic Instruments in a Time of Famine
The extraordinary number of scarabs from Merneferre Aya’s reign—far exceeding those of contemporary kings—suggests a significant increase in bureaucratic output. Scarabs functioned as seals or tokens, used to authenticate official transactions and correspondence. Their abundance under Aya points to an intensive administrative operation.
According to Genesis 41:42:
“Then Pharaoh took his signet ring from his finger and put it on Joseph’s finger..."
The signet ring granted Joseph not only symbolic status but also legal and administrative authority over Egypt. The proliferation of scarabs during Aya’s reign may reflect Joseph’s centralised grain sale operations during the seven-year famine. These scarabs could have functioned like receipts or authorization seals, allowing individuals to buy grain or trade land.
This system of seal usage likely facilitated the massive economic restructuring described in Genesis 47, which culminated in the acquisition of all Egyptian land by Pharaoh.
IV. The Fall of the 14th Dynasty and the Land-for-Grain Exchange
One of the most striking synchronisms in the BLSC model is the alignment between the collapse of the 14th Dynasty and the land sale described in Genesis. Egyptian and archaeological sources (Ryholt, 1997) date the sudden collapse of the 14th Dynasty to approximately 1649 BC — precisely when the BLSC places the third or fourth year of famine.
Genesis 47:20 states:
“So Joseph bought all the land in Egypt for Pharaoh. The Egyptians, one and all, sold their fields... The land became Pharaoh’s.”
The economic crisis caused by the famine led not only the commoners but possibly also regional elites and dynasts (like the 14th Dynasty rulers) to surrender their land to Pharaoh. The collapse of the 14th Dynasty thus appears to be less a military defeat and more an economic surrender, precipitated by Joseph’s grain policies.
This would explain why no successors of the 14th Dynasty are recorded after this point. It also reinforces the plausibility of the Genesis narrative, now supported by archaeological chronology.
V. Theological Cleansing and Historical Silence
Hatshepsut’s phrase “ruled without Re” suggests a religious offense, not merely a political one. The Hebrew God was not part of the Egyptian pantheon, and Joseph’s allegiance to a non-Egyptian deity would have been grounds for posthumous disgrace. This concept mirrors what later Pharaohs did to Akhenaten — whose religious innovations were so offensive that his name and monuments were erased.
VI. The Scarabs of Aya and Queen Ini: Remnants of Memory
Despite the campaign of erasure, Hatshepsut could not eliminate all traces of Aya and his queen Ini. Scarabs bearing their names survive in various collections and excavation reports, particularly in Lower Egypt. These portable royal symbols were beyond the reach of erasure — circulating among officials and merchants, often buried with the dead.
The survival of these artifacts suggests that:
VII. Jacob’s Funeral and the Erased Alliance: A Political Threat to Theological Reform
Genesis 50:7–9 describes Jacob’s funeral procession:
“So Joseph went up to bury his father. All Pharaoh’s officials accompanied him—the dignitaries of his court and all the dignitaries of Egypt... Chariots and horsemen also went up with him. It was a very large company.”
This was not a private burial but a state-sponsored event, including:
According to BLSC, this took place in 1631 BC, during the overlap of the 13th and 15th Dynasties. These were years in which Hyksos rulers and native Egyptian elites coexisted, and this joint funeral procession reflects a rare alliance.
The route likely passed through El Kab in Upper Egypt and Avaris in the Delta, representing both 13th Dynasty and Hyksos-affiliated territories. The funeral may have even had political overtones, with former rivals united in honoring Jacob — a patriarch who had, according to tradition, saved the Hyksos during earlier famines.
Hatshepsut, whose reign promoted theological orthodoxy and national unity under the sun god Re, could not tolerate such a memory. The funeral represented a time when:
Thus, the funeral and its memory were likely erased alongside Joseph’s legacy, viewed as an ideological threat to Hatshepsut’s program.
Conclusion
The BLSC framework provides a powerful lens to reinterpret Egyptian inscriptions and historical absences. The Speos Artemidos inscription should be seen not only as anti-Hyksos propaganda but as part of a broader erasure of the Hebrew legacy in Egypt — including Joseph, Jacob, and Moses. This erasure was both theological and political, and its effects are still visible in the missing inscriptions, the presence of unaligned scarabs, and the historical gaps of long-reigning kings like Merneferre Aya.
Rather than disproving the historicity of Israel in Egypt, these gaps point to a deliberate attempt to erase them, making the BLSC chronology not only plausible but essential to reconstructing the true biblical–Egyptian interface.