Evening Star Newspaper, December 16, 1934, Page 91

KING TuT THE SUNDAY STAR, WASHINGTON, D. C, DECEMBER 16, 1934. as e HARD-HEARTED 2 EXODUS Recent Writings of the Late Prof. Arthur Weigall, Famed Egyptologist, Portray the Boy Ruler Whose Tomb He Helped Open as the Cruel Monarch From Whom the Israclites, Led by Moses, Fled Through the Red Sea. TS a poor curse that won't work both ways. That seems to be the moral drawn from the latest news of Egypt's most famous Pharaoh, Tut-ankh-Amen. About a year ago, you recall, a British Egyptologist died, and rumors buzzed that the curse of the Pharaohs had claimed another victim. The rumors said that this Egyptologist, Prof. Arthur Weigall, had brought down royal vengeance by disturbing the tomb of Tut- enkh-Amen. Common sense retorted that plenty of other people ventured without disaster into Tut-ankh- Amen’s tomb, and that Egyptologists cannot live forever. Now Prof. Weigall's last book, “A Short His- tory of Ancient Egypt,” has appeared. If there ever was a curse of the Pharaohs, the Egyptol- ogist returned it neatly to the head of Tute ankh-Amen himself. For Tut-ankh-Amen, according to Prof. Wei- gall's view, was the Pharaoh of the Exodus. That makes him one of the notoriously un- pleasant figures of history. Tut-ankh-Amen—the hard-hearted Pharaoh of the Bible who would not let the Israelites go. Such a Tut-ankh-Amen is far different from the King Tut with whom the world became acquainted a few years ago. NEARTHED from his gorgeous tomb, the Egyptian King appeared as a pathetic youngster, with a frail girl wife and weighted down by all his pomp and glory. His por- traits show a gentle, handsome face. Prof. Weigall has added the vivid touch that he had remarkably long eyelashes. Through his entire reign this Pharaoh was just in his teens. Could this childish person be the Pharaonh before whom the aged Moses stood? Was this boy the Pharaoh who hardened his heart against the Israelites and would not let them leave the country even though their leader foretold plague after plague of troubles on Egypt? Prof. Weigall's phrase is: “The probabilities point to Tut-ankh-Amen.” When the boy gives up the struggle to keep the foreign Israelites enslaved building his temples and storehouses, it is the year 1346 B.C., according to Prof. Weigall's view. The Israelites escape across the Red Sea, and within the year, young Tut-ankh-Amen is dead and his tomb is being made ready to re- ceive him. Tut-ankh-Amen is the fifth Egyptian King. at least, to be named the Pharaoh of the Ex- odus. For years Egyptologists have disagreed over the exact year, some 13 or 14 centuries before Christ, when the Israelites left Egypt to begin conquest of their promised land. Not knowing the date of the Exodus, the Egyptol- ogists naturally cannot be sure which king was in power in Egypt at the time. OTHING in Bible chapters or other ancient writings serves conclusively to identify the Bible Pharaoh of the hard heart. There are only straws of evidence which Egyptol- ogists seize upon in efforts to reconstruct the story. Artists as well as Egyptologists have puzzled over the Pharaoh whom Moses and Aaron faced. In painting this dramatic scene, they might show the King as an old man or a boy. They might show him a cripple or a powerful ath- lete. He might be fat or thin, a dominating person or a man afraid of his wife. The line-up of Kings nominated for the role in- cludes all these types. There was, for example, Thutmose the Third, Egypt’s conquering Napoleon, once promi- nently mentioned as a likely Pharaoh of the Exodus. Israelite leaders were brave indeed if they stood unflinching before Thutmose's piercing gaze. Then there was Merenptah, quite a contrast to the dynamic Thutmose. Merenptah was old and bald and fat when he reached the throne. His father, Remeses the Second, had seemed likely to live forever. Perhaps more often than any other Pharaoh, Merenptah has been mentioned as Pharaoh of the Exodus. When Prof. C. Elliot Smith un- wrapped this King's mummy some years ago, he knew that missionaries would be interested, so he invited some to be present. To the keen interest of his audience, he pointed out calcified or stony patches on the great blood vessel lead- ing from the heart. This Pharaoh suffered from a form of hard- ening of the arteries which did practically give him “hard heart.” More to the point, the dis- ease was such that it would have affected his emotional state, making him sluggish, obstinate at thought of changing policies, in fact, just the type for the “hard-hearted” Pharaoh of the Bible account. OWEVER, another Pharoah has recently been thrust into prominence as a candidate for the Bible role. This is Amenhotep the Second, suggested by several British archeologists who have been ex- cavating Bible cities. Amenhotep was as vigor- ously alive as old Merenptah was inert. No man in Egypt could draw Amenhotep’s bow, so in- scriptions of his time admiringly declare. Even a King with a short, crippled leg has been brought into the picture as a possible Bible Pharaoh. If the unfortunate King Siphtah was this character, his Queen probably had more to say about letting the Israelites gb than he did. She was “Egypt” during that brief reign. But Prof. Weigall discarded all these possi- bilities and named Tut-ankh-Amen. It was Prof. Weigall's method of reckoning " Egyptian dates that has placed Tut-ankh-Amen in an unhappy spot. Some exact dates in the later periods are established. So the earlier Kings can be more or less satisfactorily dated by adding the long string of years in the reigns preceding well- established history. Altogether Egypt had 350 Pharaohs. But the problem is not as simple as it may sound. For one thing, Egypt's calendar was far from accurate, ignoring leap year day, for instance. So it is necessary to fit our calen- dar years to those of Egypt. Moreover, some Egyptologists believe that certain dynasties doubled up in ruling Egypt. That is, several Kings may have ruled simul- taneously, each over a limited district. If true, that might shorten the ancient history of Egypt by more than 1,400 years. Prof. Weigall takes a short view of Ezypt's past. He sets the date of the Exodus at 1346 B.C, because several clews point toward that time. A Bible reference for example, First Chronicles, sixth chapter, gives genealogies for 11 or 12 generations between the Exodus and the time of King David. “Allowing the usual three generations to a century,” wrote Prof. Weigall, “this takes us back to just about the age of Tut-ankh-Amen.” There are references in the Books of Genesis and Exodus which also point to the same date, as this Egyptologist interpreted their meaning. Moreover, an inscription of Tut-ankhe Amen mentions plagues in his reign. Whoever the hard-hearted Pharaoh was, he probably did not follow the Israelites personally to the Red Sea and perish there, Tut-ankh-Amen and the rest of the “Pharaohs of the Exodus” were buried in their royal tombs and their mummies have been discovered. HE Bible with its accustomed brevity says that Pharaoh and his horsemen pursued the Israelites into the Red Sea. This is now taken to mean that the King sent his men in the name of Pharaoh to bring back the escaping band. The power of Pharaoh—not the man—is be- lieved to have pursued them., Prof. Weigall’s calculation of Bible dates brings another Pharaoh into promience. It places Moses’ early career in the reign of one of the most remarkable monarchs that Egypt or any other nation ever had. That was the Pharaoh Akhnaton, who tried to sweep Egypt into a new form of religion, and a new pattern of living, in a whirlwind reform. Akhnaton tried to drive out of Egypt all the horde of local gods and their politically- maneuvering priests, and to give the people one deity to worship. His deity was the golden disk of the sun, and Akhnaton worshiped the “The Death of Pharaok’s First-Born,” a painting by the British artist, Ernest Norman, If Prof. Weigall was correct, this Pharaoh Tut-ankh-Amen. @ 1PN, B g\ was none other than Puaraos Tut-ankh-4Amen, as he was depicted by a contemporary sculptor. Prof. Weigall's researches would make him a hard- boiled tyrant, instead of the pathetic youngster previously supposed. —Courtesy the Metropolitan Museum of Arg sun in a temple built with its walls roofless, so that the sunlight flooded the altars. So intensely did this Pharaoh desire truth that he encouraged Egypt's artists to porir:.y his face as it was—unflattering though th: ra- sults might be. When Akhnaton died and Tut-ankh-Amen b2 came King Egypt swung back to the old acci s tomed patterns of worship. Tut-ankh-Am 'n began to restore the priests to power and e temples to their former grandeur—employing, it may be, the Israelites in this labor. But Mcs-s, if he lived through Akhnaton’s reign, must have remembered, and kept the ideal of one de.ty for his people. May Add to Forest HERE is a considerable likelihood that the Harney National Forest, which is locat~d in Fall River County in South Dakota, may be extended. Pending a decision by President Roosevelt whether the forest shall be increased in size, 22,000 acres of public land have been with- drawn from entry. The section involved is part of a total tract of 87,200 acres, of which about three-fourtis already have passed to private ownership. The land is of little value from an agricule tural point of view, but still bears a moderate stand of trees. It is suitable for forest dee velopment and will be turned over to the attention of the Forest Service if the Gove * ernment sees fit to include it in the national park development,