The entire story is amazing. It really begins with the Battle of Rafa between the Selucids and Ptolomeys. The Selucids brought Indian elephants to battle and the Egyptians brought African elephants. The African elephants were freaked out but the Egyptians won anyway. Part of the reason they won is because for the first time since the Greeks ruled Egypt they allowed native Egyptians into the army. One theory is that these native Egyptians realized that killing Greeks wasn't that hard and this may have led to the revolt.

After several years of war, Horwennefer and part of his army was besieged for months in a fortress, I think he was banking on a high Nile to bring relief of the siege, but eventually his army surrendered or the fort was stormed and he was executed. The Greek Pharoahs thought this was the end of it but his son had his own coronation and kept the war going even longer.

The son, Anhkwennefer, fought for a long time and at one point the rebels took cities in the Delta, or Northern Egypt. The Greeks suspected the Nubians of aiding Anhkwennefer and the rebels but I don't think that was ever confirmed. In the end the Greek Pharoah offered an amnesty if the remainig fighters surrendered, and when they did he had them tortured and executed, Anhkwennefer too.

Another important aspect of this conflict is the control of the Ptolomiac government. The Ptolomeys had lots of court intrigues. When the Greek Pharoah that was in charge when the revolt began died with only a single heir, his close advisors murdered the mother and other advisors so they could control the child Pharoah. This is the time when the Macedonian King and Selucid King attacked and siezed parts of the Egyptian Kingdom. There was even more drama when a Greek general used a public appearance by the child Pharoah to publicly accuse the killer advisors of killing the Pharoah's mother. He got a crowd worked up and they attacked the royal procession and killed the advisors. The general then took the young Pharoah under his wing.

I have wanted to write a book about this since 2017 but issues with the health of a family member take up so much time I never got back into it.

I created a very detailed timeline that included sources but it was online and the website is now dead, so I can't retrieve my work.

There is little info on Wikipedia.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horwennefer

Most of the information about this I got from reading research papers. There are lots of things like the Rosetta Stone that reference the revolt, but the Ptolomeys wanted to destroy all evidence of it. They have found papyrus fragments that give us a little info, that's how we know about the families of the warriors being sold into slavery. There was one document that implied the Ptolomeys were concerned that Hannibal would join the rebels after the defeat of Carthage.

The Great Thebaid Revolt is one of the most important events in history and one of the least known. Native Egyptians named a Pharoah and fought to take the nation from the Greeks, seizing half the country in over 2 decades of war. There are temples with inscriptions naming the new liberator of Egypt. During the revolt the Ptolomaic pharoahs borrowed more and more money from the rising power of Rome who defeated Carthage during this time. The Selucids and Macedonia seized the Levant and Cypress from the Ptolomeys, but Rome warned both kingdoms not to move into Egypt itself or they would risk war with Rome.

All the assistance that Egypt got from Rome cemented a relationship that barely existed before and the Romans sent ambassadors and possibly advisors to Egypt for the first time. The revolt also fundamentally changed key aspects of Egyptian government and culture. Prior to the Great Thebaid Revolt taxes were collected by the priests in temples, but because many temples sided with the Native Egyptians, the Ptolomeys completely changed the method of collecting taxes. This in turn dramatically reduced the influence and power of temples and subsequently the Ancient Egyptian religion.

The defeated warriors were often executed, their entire families sold into slavery, and their property seized. Many temples also lost their land allotments and without the taxes many could not be funded and shut down. Eventually Egypt would be the main driver of economic growth for the entire Roman Empire and that all started because of the revolt.

Noah is a cheap copy of the far older Akkadian Altrahas. The 8 patriarchs correspond to the 8 ancient Sumerian kings. Moses' birth story is a variation of the far older Sargon of Akkad's birth. Moses commandments are a lesser copy of the far older Hammurabi's code. Solomon is a copy of Amenhotep III. After David it might be an actual record, a very loose one with lots of embellishments and some editing of prophecies, Egyptian style. But millions of clay tablets and monument inscriptions very clearly show that Israel was a tiny political entity with little significance to the events of the wider world.

>Yes, and the Hyksos were overthrown by the Ramesside dynasty and they did their damndest to erase them from Egyptian history, hence why Exodus says a Pharaoh arose in Egypt who did not know Joseph (who would have been a Vizier under the Hyksos) and then the Hebrews became slaves.

Good try sport, you only missed it by a few centuries and an entire dynasty. It was Ahmose I that overthrew the Hyksos. His dynasty, with pharaohs like Thutmose I and Hatshepsut and Tutankhamun, came before the Ramesside. I do appreciate your wishful thinking about your bible myths though.

>The previous theory was that the Hebrews split off from the Canaanites, which is laughably false. Israelite material culture is clearly distinguishable from all other Canaanite material culture and it just appears suddenly during the early Iron Age.

I am afraid the archeology doesn't support that. The archeology of the Hyksos areas in Egypt shows that they were similar to Canaanites, and Canaanites in the Levant worshiped Yahweh and El among their gods, and Hebrew is a Canaanite language. The consensus among scholars is that Hebrews are a branch of Canaanites, and the Hebrew religion is an offshoot of Canaanite religion. I am sure it is painful to learn this for people who are emotionally invested, but that has no bearing on the evidence.

>You missed the part where I pointed out that the percentage of loan words is much higher than literally everybody else living in the Levant, even in correspondence sent TO the Egyptians. Some languages have 0 Egyptian loan words and even later books of the OT have less than the Pentateuch.

What other languages are you talking about here? Aramaic? Greek? Arabic? I didn't consider it before because it's something that doesn't mean anything without context, which you have not provided.

>Ok, so you have no clue what you're talking about. There was never an Egyptian empire.

There can be a debate about the meaning of Empire, but in general it is a position above king, a king of kings, as the Persians would say. The first pharaoh was Narmer, who united the Upper and Lower Kingdoms of Egypt. Over the millennium the land of Egypt would fragment into smaller kingdoms and then be united again. Various pharaohs would extract tribute from and station troops in the Nubia and the Levant and Libya. If you don't understand that to be an Empire, then fine, pick a different word, but Egypt still had a massive presence in what later became, for very short periods of time, an independent Israel.

I could go on but there is a lot of reading you need to do before you can catch up. Good luck buddy. Maybe don't get your information from "Biblical Archeology", because those folks start out with the answers and try to find evidence they can force to support.

If you read the bible, and then read the historical documents from other kingdoms and cultures who lived in the middle east, it becomes very clear that the bible is a combination of copied Mesopotamian myths and a fictionalized history of Iron Age Hebrews. Anyone in who reads it in the modern era can figure out its not bad, it's just like any other myth.

That is correct, you can invent any silly story you want and pretend it is true just like people do with the Exodus myth.

There is no evidence for the events described in Egypt in Exodus at all, none. Avaris was the Hyksos capitol, and as the Hyksos were from the Levant it is likely that they were semitic people, but there is no evidence that the Hebrew ethnicity had split off from the other Canaanites at the time of the Hyksos. Egyptian loan words makes a lot of sense, because Egyptians controlled and dominated the Levant for the vast majority of the Bronze Age, and never once noticed the Hebrew people or religion until after the Bronze Age Collapses. The people who would eventually become Hebrews likely picked up the language and customs from the empire that ruled over them and that they paid tribute to. The oldest seals for Hebrew kings use Egyptian symbolism, indicating they were still beholden to the Egyptians even into the Iron Age around 700 BCE. Arab and Aramaic peoples arrived in the Iron Age and were more influenced by Assyrian culture.

The Mernephtah Stele does not mention the defeat of Isreal, it mentions the defeat of nomadic foreign people called Isiriar, among others. This might or might not he Israel, but if so this is rhe first ever mention in all of written history of Israel or the Hebrew people. This would be the first time that anyone in Egypt, despite extensive record keeping and despite controlling all the land of Israel for thousands of years, ever mentions anyone who MIGHT be Hebrew. There is nothing at all that indicates Rameses lost his chariots or that they have anything to do with his campaigns or why he went on them.

It's not conclusive and it isn't even compelling, it's wishful thinking by people who are desperate for confirmation bias.

It doesn't really have a narrative I would not say, more like a theme. Great visuals, but it doesn't seem to go anywhere.