Does the Name ‘Senenmut’ Reflect the Hebrew 'Solomon'? Part Two: Egyptian and Nahuatl

 

 

by

 

Damien F. Mackey

 

 

 

This short Part Two is not primarily about Senenmut.

It is really about the close similarity between ancient Egyptian and Nahuatl.  

Nahuatl appears to add the letter “l” which is uncommon in Egyptian, as noted in Part One in relation to the Egyptian, “Senenmut”, representing Hebrew “Shelomith” (or Solomon).

 

“One very obvious characteristic of the nahuatl language is the extensive use of the letter "l" in most of the words, either as ending to the words or juxtaposed to consonants and vowels within the words. One of the very apparent characteristics of the ancient Egyptian language is the almost total absence of the use of the letter "l" within most of its word-concepts. The letter "l" appears as an ending of words only a handful of times in E.A. Wallis Budge's work, An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary. It would appear that this very dissimilar characteristic between these two languages would discourage anyone from considering a comparative analysis of possible linguistic correspondence between these two very apparently distinct idioms”.

 

Thus writes Charles William Johnson, in his fascinating article:

 

Linguistic Correspondence:
Nahuatl and Ancient Egyptian

http://www.earthmatrix.com/linguistic/nahuatl.htm

 

 

According to Johnson:

 

In our more detailed analyses of the possible correspondence among words of the ancient Egyptian language and nahuatland maya, we have seen that some word-concepts are almost exactly the same in phonetic values. Furthermore, the maya glyphs and ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs share extremely common designs in similar/same word-concepts.

Today, the idea of linguistic correspondence among the Indo-European languages is a widespread fact. From the still unknown Indo-European mother language it is thought came Sanskrit (and the contemporary languages of Pakistan and India); Persian; and Greek, Latin (and many contemporary European languages). The correspondence of similar/same words among the Latin languages is quite visible, with Spanish words, for example, resembling those of French, Italian and Portuguese. English resembles the Teutonic ones, such as, German, Dutch and the Scandinavian languages.

On the other hand, no apparent linguistic correspondence has been observed between ancient Egyptian and languages such as nahuatl or maya, at least to any significant scholarly degree. In the aforementioned essay, we have examined numerous correspondences between word-concepts (and some glyphs) between the ancient Egyptian language and the maya system. The word for day name in maya is ahau, which means place or time in ancient Egyptian. Hom is ballcourt in maya; hem means little ball in ancient Egyptian. Ik means air in maya ; to suspend in the air is ikh in ancient Egyptian. Nichim signifies flower in maya; nehem means bud, flower in ancient Egyptian. And so on, for hundreds of word-concepts that we have examined in the comparison of these two languages.

When similar kinds of linguistic correspondences were perceived by William Jones, in the latter part of the eighteenth century, between Sanskrit and other languages, such examples were sufficient to convince scholars that all of those languages probably came from a mother tongue, the Indo-European language. Today, when linguistic correspondence is observed between the ancient Mesoamerican languages and ancient Egyptian, scholars are unwilling or hesitant to accept the idea that the same laws of linguistics may apply. The reason for this is quite simple: there is no historical basis for considering the possibility that the peoples of these different languages had any physical contact among themselves. Physical contact among the peoples who descended from the Indo-European family is established by historical data. There is no obvious historical data to think that the peoples of ancient Mesoamerica and the peoples of ancient Egypt ever met or came into physical contact with one another.

Nevertheless, historical data aside for the moment, let us examine some of the obvious examples of linguistic correspondence between nahuatl and the ancient Egyptian language.

One very obvious characteristic of the nahuatl language is the extensive use of the letter "l" in most of the words, either as ending to the words or juxtaposed to consonants and vowels within the words. One of the very apparent characteristics of the ancient Egyptian language is the almost total absence of the use of the letter "l" within most of its word-concepts. The letter "l" appears as an ending of words only a handful of times in E.A. Wallis Budge's work, An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary. It would appear that this very dissimilar characteristic between these two languages would discourage anyone from considering a comparative analysis of possible linguistic correspondence between these two very apparently distinct idioms.

However, as we eliminate the letter "l" from the nahuatl words, the remaining phonemes (listed in brackets) resemble the phonemes and morphemes of ancient Egyptian in many cases. Let us offer only a few of such examples to consider a possible linguistic correspondence between these two fascinating systems of human speech.

 

	Nahuatl		Egyptian
canoe	ACAL [aca-]		AQAI	boat (page 139b from Budge's work cited above)
reed	ACATL[acat-]		AQ AKHAH-T	reed (139b) reed (8a)
a well	AMELLI [ame-i]		AMAM	place with water in them, wells (121b)
house	CALLI [ca-i]		KA	house (783a)
serpent ...	COATL [coat-] .... ...		KHUT ... ...	snake (30b) .... ...

 

Linguistic correspondence between nahuatl and ancient Egyptian appears to represent a smoking gun; that is, a trace of evidence that these two peoples did enjoy some kind of contact between themselves ages ago. The fact that we have no real evidence of said contact, or that we have been unable to find any such evidence, should not serve as the basis for denying the possibility of that contact. To attribute all of these similarities in sound, symbol and meaning to mere happenstance seems to be a very unscientific way of resolving an annoying issue. To admit the possibility of physical contact between these cultures has implications for our own interpretation of history and the aspect of technological development of our societies. Such fears are unfounded, given the already obvious fact that our technical know-how could probably not reproduce and build something as majestic as the Great Pyramid.

[End of quote]

 

It is probably as a result of the evolutionary view of things - according to which human beings sprang up from lower animal forms, all in their various places - that anthropologists and historians are unable to make the obvious connections between cultures of similar types, that shared language characteristics, pyramid building technology, and hieroglyphics, to name just a few common features.

 

The wise King Solomon’s (Senenmut’s?) view of human origins was quite different from this, and far more enlightened, I believe:

 

 

“For God created man to be immortal,

and made him to be an image

of his own eternity.”

 

Wisdom of Solomon 2:23

Textbook History Out of Kilter With Era of King Solomon By 500 Years

Dr. John Bimson’s important article, “Hatshepsut and the Queen of Sheba: A Critique of Velikovsky’s Identification and an Alternative View” (C and C Review, Vol. VIII, 1986), exposed as untenable, in the eyes of many revisionists, Velikovsky’s identification of Hatshepsut with the biblical Queen of Sheba. This was due to a series of strong arguments against Velikovsky’s reconstruction – some of these being irrefutable. Amongst the most telling of Bimson’s points were those that pertained to the famous Punt expedition, that Velikovsky had attempted to identify with the biblical visit by the Queen of the South to King Solomon in Jerusalem. Not only was Hatshepsut no longer a queen by the time of the Punt expedition – {she was actually in her Year 9 as pharaoh (king)} – but it appears from the Deir el-Bahri inscriptions that she did not actually accompany the Egyptian expedition to the land of Punt. The biblical queen, on the other hand, had most definitely visited King Solomon at Jerusalem in person.

What Bimson still shared with Velikovsky (at least in 1986), however, was the conviction that Hatshepsut was contemporaneous with the (approximate) era of King Solomon. Revisionists do not necessarily take that view anymore. And therein lies a problem. Because Hatshepsut, as queen, is still the outstanding candidate for the biblical “Queen of Sheba (of the South)”, given the testimony of Josephus that the biblical queen had ruled Egypt and Ethiopia, and given the likeness of her throne name, Maat-ka-re (Makera) to the queen’s legendary name, Makeda.

Bimson scrapped Hatshepsut as a candidate, but failed to provide any other contemporaneous woman ruler to represent this famous queen to whom both the Old and New Testaments attest. The same comment applies to Patrick Clarke in his more recent criticism of Velikovsky on the subject: ‘Why Pharaoh Hatshepsut is not to be equated to the Queen of Sheba’ (Journal of Creation, 24/2, August 2010, pp. 62-68).

And the same applies again to those whose new chronologies do not align the early (undivided) monarchy of Israel with the early 18^th dynasty of Egypt: a downward time shift of about 500 years. Now I don’t know if Eric [Aitchison] has himself come up with any candidate for the celebrated biblical queen, but I presume that he, with his “Damien likes moving things by 500 years but my preference remains at 630 years”, cannot possibly accommodate Hatshepsut in this his singular rearrangement of time.

With Hatshepsut gone, then Thutmose III as the biblical “King Shishak of Egypt” must also go. Patrick Clarke, for instance, has rejected this equation in his ‘Was Thutmose III the biblical Shishak? – Claims of the ‘Jerusalem’ bas-relief at Karnak investigated’ (Journal of Creation, 25/1, April 2011, pp. 48-56). Two important pillars of the revision thus toppled. But, again, what is the alternative? So far, Clarke has not provided any candidate of his own. And, as for those who would prefer Ramesses II ‘the Great’ as “Shishak”, well they are running into the formidable problem as pointed out by Dale Murphie: “Critique of David Rohl’s A Test Of Time (SIS C&C Review, Oct 1997:1), with Ramesses II having the powerful king Asa of Judah (in all his strength) sandwiched right between himself and his Hittite ally, Hattusilis.
 

Damien F. Mackey.

Wives of Thutmose III



Taken from: http://euler.slu.edu/~bart/egyptianhtml/kings%20and%20Queens/Tuthmosis_III.html


....

Tuthmosis III had quite few wives:

• Merytre (-Hatshepsut), King’s Great Wife, King’s Mother. She was the daughter of the Divine Adoratrix Huy. Many of her representations were reused by her daughter in law Tiaa. Her disgrace under her grandson is suggested by the apparent non-use of her tomb in the Valley of the Kings (KV 42). Titles: Hereditary Princess (iryt-p`t), Sole One, Great of Praises (wrt-hzwt-w’tit), King’s Mother (mwt-niswt), Lady of The Two Lands (nbt-t3wy), King’s Wife (hmt-nisw), Great King’s Wife (hmt-niswt-wrt), God’s Wife (hmt-ntr), God’s Hand (djrt-ntr)
• Satiah Great Wife, King’s Wife and King’s Great Wife. She was the daughter of the royal nurse Ipu. Titles: King’s Wife (hmt-nisw), Great King’s Wife (hmt-niswt-wrt), God’s Wife (hmt-ntr).
• Nebtu King’s Wife. Represented in her husband’s tomb. Titles: King’s Wife (hmt-nisw)
• Neferure King’s Daughter, Great Wife and King’s Great Wife. She was the daughter of Hatshepsut and Thutmosis II. She was possibly married to Thutmosis III (her half brother). She may have been buried in the Wadi Qubbet el Qurud in Thebes. Titles: King’s Daughter (s3t-niswt), God’s Wife (hmt-ntr),
  Possibly: Great King’s Wife (hmt-niswt-wrt), Mistress of Upper and Lower Egypt (hnwt-Shm’w T3-mhw).
  
• Menwi, Merti and Menhet. King’s Wives. Probably daughters of a Syrian chieftain. They shared a tomb in Thebes which is known for the treasures it contained. Titles: King’s Wife (hmt-nisw)
• Nebsemi: Queen mentioned on a fragment of a statue found in the funerary temple of Tuthmosis III. She may have been one of his minor wives. Titles: King’s Wife (hmt-nisw), King’s Wife, his beloved (hmt-nisw meryt.f)

At the top: Tuthmosis and his mother Isis.

Below: Tuthmosis followed by Queens Merytre, Sitiah, Nebtu and his daughter Nefertari.

 

 

 

....

Hatshepsut as 'Warrior Queen'

 



[Hatshepsut, biblical 'Queen of the South', was the daughter of Thutmose I

who we believe to have been King David himself, a warrior king]

Taken from:http://www.egyptvoyager.com/features_womeninancientegypt_hatshepsut_02.htm

...

[Hatshepsut's] temple [at Deir el Bahri] was filled with many beautiful scenes that prove herself as Pharaoh. There was even some reference to military activity at the temple, even though she is often portrayed as a peaceful queen. She did, in fact, have some conquest, like the rest of her seemingly war-loving family.
This refers to a campaign in Nubia. She even sent Thuthmose III out with the army, on various campaigns (many of which little is known at all!). One inscription even says that Hatshepsut herself led one of her Nubian campaigns. The inscription at Sehel island suggest that Ty, the treasurer of Lower Egypt, went into battle under Hatshepsut herself. This proves her as a warrior Pharaoh to her people, and also depicts her expedition to the Land of Punt.
 

....

And from: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081010133118AAvQ5UT
 

In 'Hatchepust, the Female Pharoah', Joyce Tyldesley writes:
'Evidence is now growing to suggest that Hatchepsut's military prowess has been seriously underestimated due to the selective nature of the archaeological evidence which has been compounded by preconcieved notions of feminine pacifism. Egyptologists have assued that Hatchepsut did not fight, and have become blind to the evidence that, in fact, she did. As so many of Hatchepsut's texts were defaced, amended or erased after her death, it is entirely possible that her war record is incomplete. Furthermore, Hatchepsut's reign, falling between the reigns of two of the greatest generals Egypt was ever to know (Tuthmosis I and Tuthmosis III) is bound to suffer in any immediate comparison.
The Deir el-Bahri mortuatry temple provides us with evidence for defensive military activity during Hatchepsut's reign. By the late 19th century Naville had uncovered enough references to battles to convince him that Hatchepsut had embarked on the now customary series of campaigns against her vassals to the south and east. These subjects, the traditional enemies of Egypt, almost invariably viewed any change of pharoah as an opportunity to rebel against their overlords, while the pharoahs themselves seem to have almost welcomed these minor insurrection as a means of proving their military might.
The fragments and inscriptions found in the course of the excavations at Deir el-Bahri show that during Hatchepsut's reign wars were waged against the Ethiopians, and probably also against the Asiatics. Among these wars which the queen considered the most glorious, and which she desired to be recorded on the walls of the temple erected as a monument to her high deeds, was the campaign against the nations of the Upper Nile.
Blocks origionally sited on the eastern colonnade show the Nubian god Dedwen leading a series of captive southern towns towards the victorious Hatchepsut, each town being represented by a name written in a crenellated cartouche and topped by an obviously African head. The towns all belong to the land of Cush (Nubia). Elsewhere in the temple, Hatchepsut is portrayed as a sphinx, a human-headed crouching lion crushing the traditional enemies of Egypt. There is also a written, but unfortunately badly damaged, description of a Nubian campaign in which Hatchepsut appears to be claiming to have emulated the deeds of her revered father;
.....as was done by her victorious father, the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Aakheperkare (Tuthmosis I) who seized all lands....a slaughter was made among them, the number of dead being unknown, their hands wre cut off....she overthrew (gap in text) the gods (gap in text)...
There is less direct evidence for military campaigning to the north-east of Egypt, although again the Deir-el-Bahri temple does hint at some skirmishes; in at least one inscription it is said of Hatchepsut that 'her arrow is amongst the northerners'. However, it is a consideration of the subsequent conquests of Thutmosis III which provides the best evidence for the maintenance of firm military control over the northereastern territories. When Tuthmosis III eventually became the sole ruler of Egypt, the client states in Syria and Palestine seized the traditional opportunity to rebel, a reaction which suggests that the death of Hatchepsut was viewed as a potential weakening rather than strengthening of Egypt's power in the Levant.
Hatchepsut's military policy is perhaps best described as one of unobtrusive control; active defence rather than deliberate offence. while either unwilling or unable to actually expand Egypt's sphere of influence in the near east, she was certainly prepared to fight to maintain the borders of her country. '

Source(s):

'Hatchepsut The Female Pharoah' by Joyce Tyldesley

Thutmose III Had Three Syro-Palestinian Wives, Menhet, Menwi and Merti



 

 

{AMAIC: As befitting a king who we claim was the son of the Israelite (Palestinian) King Solomon (Thutmose II)}

....

 

Taken from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menhet,_Menwi_and_Merti

 

....

 

Their tomb was originally discovered in August 1916 in the desert mountain cliffs in the southwest valley near Luxor and promptly looted by Qurnawi villagers.^[5] When the Egyptian antiquities authorities tracked down the burial in September of that year, all that was left at the original site were the objects discarded by the tomb robbers. It is thought that originally there were three intact burials at the site. Only the gold and stone objects had survived as the wood and the mummies and wooden materials had disintegrated due to moisture "from water seeping through the cliffs above."^[6] However, most of their surviving funerary remains were tracked down and purchased on the antiquities market at the time and many now reside at the Metropolitan Museum in New York.^[7]

Some of the treasures found within their tomb include gold diadems, gilded gold, toe and feet sandals, gold, carnelian and glass bracelets together with other vessels. Each of their bracelets are inscribed with the cartouche of Thutmose III. Other objects found in the tomb include Hathor decorated gold, silver and glass mirrors. While the collection is impressive, none of their headdresses employed the vulture motif used by more senior queens.^[8]

Like the cliff tomb of Hatshepsut that Howard Carter found in Wady A, the tomb of Thutmose's foreign wives was also cut into a crevice.^[9] Its entrance, though, "was cut into a platform about 10 metres from the wady floor, quite like Thutmosis III's tomb in the Valley of the Kings."^[10] Menhet, Menwi and Merti's tomb consisted "of a single undecorated chamber--ca. 5 X 7.5 metres, by 1.5 to more than 2 metres high."^[11]

 

....