Proper name pronunciation of Pharaoh Shishaq is ShaShuQa'a or Shasu of Qa'aWaS (an Edomite deity & the Spirit of YHWH)

Author:    Eulalio D. Eguia Jr.

Abstract: The Hebrew name of the Biblical Shishaq is made up of the Hebrew consonants: Shin-Shin-Qoph (Sh-Sh-Q). The spelling and pronunciation of Shishaq's name is not consistent throughout the Hebrew Bible. It occurs three times as Šīšaq (שִׁישַׁק), three times as Šīšāq (שִׁישָׁק), and once as Šūšaq (שׁוּשַׁק). The differences in spelling is caused by different niqqud marks, a system of diacritical signs used to represent vowels or distinguish between alternative pronunciations of letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Several such diacritical systems were developed in the Early Middle Ages. The most widespread system, and the only one still used to a significant degree today, was created by the Masoretes of Tiberias in the second half of the first millennium AD in the Land of Israel. 

In this research paper, I propose Sha-Shu-Qa'a (Shasu of Qa'aWaS - Edomite deity QWS) as the proper name pronunciation of the Biblical Pharaoh Shishaq. Furthermore, I propose Qa'aWaS (Edomite: 𐤒𐤅‬‬𐤎 QWS), as the proper pronunciation of the national god of the Edomites. The Edomites may have been connected with the Shasu - nomadic raiders mentioned in Egyptian sources believed to be worshippers of YHWH.

In my previous research paper titled “The Biblical king Shishaq is Seti I & not Shoshenq I, Egyptian chronology is 336 years too early!” I gave several reasons for identifying Seti I as the Biblical Pharaoh Shishaq rather than Shoshenq I as currently accepted by Egyptologists:

1.  In my previous research paper titled “Redating the Ugarit eclipse to April 29, 1011 BC from May 3, 1375 BC means current Egyptian chronology is at least 169 years too early!” I showed that astronomers and historians wrongly dated the Ugarit solar eclipse described in the KTU 1.78 astronomical tablet on May 3, 1375 BC. Correct and precise interpretation of the tablet would show that the April 29, 1011 BC solar eclipse is the right one instead. The KTU 1.78 astronomical text records a solar eclipse with the following description:

SIX.DAY.NEW MOON.HIYYARU

ENTER.SUN.HER GATE.RESHEP

This astro-shorthand is believed to be written by an Egyptian and should be interpreted as hour six, day of the new moon (in the month of) Hiyyaru when the sun entered into her (Shapash’s) Gate in Reshep (Taurus). Now what is hour six in ancient Egypt? It actually refers to the 6th Decan: 

The ancient Egyptians conveniently divided the 360 degree ecliptic into 36 parts of 10 degrees each, and the decans each appeared, geocentrically, to rise consecutively on the horizon throughout each daily earth rotation. The rising of each decan marked the beginning of a new decanal "hour".

Using Stellarium and setting the Algorithm of delta T to JPL Horizons, the location to Ugarit with coordinates 35° 36' 07.2" N, 35° 46' 55.2" E, the date to April 29, 1011 BC (or -1010 in astronomical year numbering) and at 5:09:30 UTC, one can see a solar eclipse in Taurus with maximum solar obscuration of 73.71% occurring 2 hours 11 minutes after sunrise, or 3 hours 41 minutes after dawn. Please note the Ecliptic position in degrees just above the horizon.

April 29, 1011 BC was Nisan 30 of that year, and this is the day of the new Moon just before the start of the Hebrew month Iyar or the Ugarit month Hiyyaru which was mentioned in the tablet. During the April 29, 1011 BC eclipse, the last decanal hour to fully rise above the horizon during the eclipse was the 6th Decan corresponding to 51° - 60° Ecliptic position. And the KTU 1.78 astronomical text specifically said that it was during the 6th Decan that the recorded eclipse was observed. Thus, there can be no doubt about it, the April 29, 1011 BC eclipse was the one described in the KTU 1.78 astronomical text.

Ammurapi was the last king (circa 1215 BC to 1180 

BC) of the ancient Syrian city of Ugarit who saw its 

destruction. He was a contemporary of Chancellor 

Bay of Egypt who rose to prominence and high office 

under Seti II, the fifth pharaoh of the Nineteenth 

Dynasty of Egypt. 

For quite an obvious reason, the KTU 1.78 

astronomical text must have been written on or before 

the final year of the last king of Ugarit in 1180 BC and 

before the destruction of this city. However, the 

correct date of the Ugarit eclipse was April 29, 1011 

BC, or 169 years later than 1180 BC. This means the 

regnal years of Ugarit kings were dated at least 169 

years too early. And since Seti II was a contemporary 

of Ammurapi, it also means that the pharaohs of the 

Nineteenth Dynasty of Egypt and possibly before and 

onwards were dated at least 169 years too early as 

well. 

Not far from the reign of Seti II of the Nineteenth Dynasty of Egypt, was the reign of Shoshenq I, the founder of the Twenty-second Dynasty of Egypt, whose reign must have been at least 169 years too early. Shoshenq I is believed by many Egyptologists to be the Biblical Pharaoh Shishaq.

2.  According to the Bible, Shishaq was an ally of Jeroboam, the first king of Northern Israel, and that he ransacked most of the treasures of the Temple and royal palace built by Solomon during the fifth year of the reign of its king Rehoboam. Shoshenq I left behind explicit records of a campaign into Canaan. The names of captured towns are located primarily in the territory of the northern Kingdom of Israel (including Megiddo). Now why would Shishaq (believed to be Shoshenq I) attack the northern kingdom of Israel, when its first king Jeroboam was his ally? So this further casts doubt about identifying Shoshenq I with the Biblical Shishaq.

3.  According to Grdsseloff, Rowe, Albrecht et Albright’s “The smaller Beth-Shean stele of Sethos”, Seti I defeated Asian nomads in war against the Apirus (Hebrews). Dussaud commented on Albright's article and I quote: 

"The interest of Professor Albright's note is mainly due to the fact that he no longer objects to the identification of ‘Apiru’ with ‘Ibri’ (that is, the Hebrews) provided that we grant him that the vocal change has been driven by a popular etymology that brought the term ‘eber’, that is to say the man from beyond the river."

However, a more exact interpretation of the term "Hebrew" generally renders its meaning as roughly "from the other side of the river”. Looking at a map of the Northern Kingdom of Israel in Samaria, one can see that its eastern border is clearly defined by the Jordan River. The “Hebrews” or “Apirus” as far as Seti I is concerned, refer to the western side of the Jordan River occupied by the Northern kingdom of Israel while in its eastern side are located the Kingdom of Aram-Damascus, the Kingdom of Ammon, and several nomadic Aramean tribes connected with Syria. These are the Asian nomads in war against the Apirus (Hebrews) which Seti I defeated in defense of the Apirus. And as far as the Asian nomads were concerned, the Hebrews or Apirus were located "from the other side of the (Jordan) river”.

And because Seti I was defending the Northern Kingdom of Israel located west of the Jordan River against its Asian nomadic enemies located east of the Jordan River, Seti I is more suitable to be identified with the Biblical Shishaq. The following is an excerpt of the Beth-Shan stele of Seti I:

www.penn.museum … the wretched enemy who was in the city of Ḥamath he had collected to himself many people, was taking away the town of Beth-shan, had made an alliance with those of Pella, and was not allowing to come forth the chief of Reḥob outside [his own city]. Then his majesty sent the first army of Ȧmen (‘Powerful Bows’) to the city of Ḥamath, the first army of Rā (‘ Many Braves’) to the city of Beth-shan, and the first army of Sutekh (‘ Strong Bows’) to the city of Yenoam, and it happened that in the space of a day they were overthrown by the will of his majesty,

Looking at a map of the Beth-Shan region during Seti I’s reign, one can see that Seti I was defending Beth-Shan and Rehob (located west of the Jordan river where the Northern Kingdom of Israel was located) against Hamath and Pella (located east of the Jordan river) as well as Yenoam (an ancient Canaanite city in Syria, located north of the kingdom of Israel).

  

4.  There were only two Egyptian Pharaohs who became allies of Israel after the Exodus, and these are the Pharaoh who gave his daughter to Solomon in marriage mentioned in 1 Kings 3: 1, and of course Pharaoh Shishaq. Therefore, if one sees evidence of a Pharaoh’s prolonged sojourn in Israel, or of any one of his officials, one can conclude that this Pharaoh must be either the Pharaoh who gave his daughter to Solomon in marriage, or Pharaoh Shishak:

The Jerusalem Post, April 9, 2014, 3,300-year-old Egyptian coffin 

found in Jezreel Valley:  “During the excavation we discovered a 

unique and rare find: a cylindrical clay coffin with an anthropoidal lid 

[fashioned in the image of a person],” said Dr. Ron Be’eri, one of the 

excavations’ three directors. Inside the coffin – the likes of which 

have not been discovered in more than 50 years – was the skeleton 

of an adult believed to be of Canaanite origin, who likely served the 

Egyptian government, Be’eri said. An Egyptian signet encased in gold 

and affixed to a ring with the name of Pharaoh Seti I on its seal was 

discovered next to the remains. Near the coffin, the archeological 

team found the graves of two men and two women who may have 

been members of the Canaanite man’s family.

The coffin of an Egyptian official of Seti I, together 

with four members of his family found in Jezreel 

Valley, Northern Israel would only mean that this 

Egyptian official was a close and respected ally of the 

Northern Kingdom of Israel, and probably Seti I’s 

ambassador. And as I mentioned earlier, there were 

only two Pharaohs who became close allies with 

Israel after the Exodus.  

In my previous research paper titled “Akhenaten died 

& Solomon's Temple was built in 1000 BC, 

Amenemhat IV was the Pharaoh of the Exodus in 

1487 BC” I identified Akhenaten as the Pharaoh who 

gave his daughter to Solomon in marriage. Thus, this 

leaves the Biblical Pharaoh Shishaq as the only 

choice for the identity of Seti I.

Note that current Egyptian chronology dates 

Akhenaten’s reign at 1351–1334 BC, and Seti I’s 

reign at 1290 BC to 1279 BC. On the other hand, the 

Bible in 1 Kings 6:1 tells us that the Exodus occurred 

480 years before Solomon began building the Temple, 

which was in the fourth year of his reign over Israel 

(dated 967-966 BC). 480 years before 967-966 BC 

gives us 1447-1446 BC as the Biblical year of the 

Exodus using the hypothesized date of Solomon’s 

reign. Thus, according to Biblical archaeology, 

Akhenaten’s and Seti I’s reign both came about a 

hundred or more years after the Exodus and long 

after Joshua’s conquest of Canaan.

Having explained my reasons for identifying the Biblical Pharaoh Shishaq with Seti I, let me now explain my theory on the meaning behind the Biblical name:

The Hebrew name of the Biblical Shishaq is made up of the Hebrew consonants: Shin-Shin-Qoph (Sh-Sh-Q). The spelling and pronunciation of Shishaq's name is not consistent throughout the Hebrew Bible. It occurs three times as Šīšaq (שִׁישַׁק), three times as Šīšāq (שִׁישָׁק), and once as Šūšaq (שׁוּשַׁק). In this research paper, I propose Sha-Shu-Qa'a (Shasu of Qa'aWaS) as the proper name pronunciation of the Biblical Pharaoh Shishaq. Furthermore, I propose Qa'aWaS (Edomite: 𐤒𐤅‬‬𐤎 QWS), as the proper pronunciation of the national god of the Edomites. The Edomites may have been connected with the Shasu - nomadic raiders mentioned in Egyptian sources believed to be worshippers of YHWH. From this point onwards in my research paper, I will refer to the enigmatic Pharaoh as Sh-Sh-Q.

Two Egyptian texts, one dated to the period of Amenhotep III (14th century BCE), the other to the age of Ramesses II (13th century BCE), refer to "The Land of the Shasu yhwꜣ", in which yhwꜣ (also rendered as yhw) or Yahu, is a toponym. Regarding the name yhwꜣ, Michael Astour observed that the: 

"hieroglyphic rendering corresponds very precisely to the Hebrew Tetragrammaton YHWH, or Yahweh, and antedates the hitherto oldest occurrence of that divine name – on the Mesha Stele – by over five hundred years." 

K. Van Der Toorn concludes: "By the 14th century BC, before the cult of Yahweh had reached Israel, groups of Edomites and Midianites worshipped Yahweh as their god."

Sh-Sh-Q took away treasures of the Temple of Solomon and the king's house, as well as shields of gold which Solomon had made. Surprisingly, Sh-Sh-Q did not destroy the Temple, unlike the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar and Roman general Titus, who both ransacked the Temple in Jerusalem and totally  destroyed it. This I believe may be due to the fact that the Egyptian Pharaoh Sh-SH-Q’s roots were among the Shasu who, as mentioned earlier, worshipped the Israelite God YHWH.

The Shasu may have been connected with the Edomites, and the Edomites worshipped another god named 𐤒𐤅‬‬𐤎 QWS. The Edomite language was very similar to Biblical Hebrew, and it does not write the vowel sounds, only its consonants. I propose Qa'a-WaS (made up of two syllables Qa'a and WaS) as the proper pronunciation of the Edomite god 𐤒𐤅‬‬𐤎 QWS. Let me explain the first syllable Qa'a:

Qa'a (also Qáa or Ka'a) (literal meaning: "his arm is raised") was the last king of the First Dynasty of Egypt. The name is made up of two letters, the Egyptian consonant Qoph (pronounced Qa’), and the diphthong vowel “ah”, and together they make up one syllable when pronounced:

 

The original sound value of Qoph was a West Semitic emphatic stop, presumably [kʼ]. In Semitic linguistics, an emphatic consonant like Qoph is an obstruent consonant which originally contrasted, and often still contrasts, with an analogous voiced or voiceless obstruent by means of a secondary articulation. In the case of Qa’a, the pronunciation of “Qa’” must be contrasted with its succeeding diphthong vowel “ah”, but still remain as one single syllable Qa’ah when pronounced and not two syllables Qa’-ah. This is accomplished by pronouncing “Qa’” and “ah” in very quick succession. 

In Ancient Egypt, what we call the soul was considered to be a compendium of different parts, just as a body is made up of different parts. Each one of the parts of the soul had its role and its function. The Ka, 𓂓, was one of such parts, its vital essence, which marked the moment of death when it left the body. Its Hieroglyphic representation is that of raised arms:

Now remember, the literal meaning of Qa’a is: "his arm is raised”, and now we see that the hieroglyphic representation of the Egyptian Ka is that of the raised arms. Also, Ka sounds like a simplification of the pronunciation of Qa'a, and I believe they are one and the same. Let me now explain the second syllable WaS in Qa'a-WaS (made up of two syllables) which I believe is the proper pronunciation of the Edomite god 𐤒𐤅‬‬𐤎 QWS. 

The Was (Egyptian wꜣs "power, dominion") sceptre is a symbol that appeared often in relics, art, and hieroglyphs associated with the ancient Egyptian religion. It appears as a stylized animal head at the top of a long, straight staff with a forked end. Was sceptres were used as symbols of power or dominion, and were associated with ancient Egyptian deities such as Set or Anubis as well as with the pharaoh. The earliest examples date to the First Dynasty. 

Now remember, Pharaoh Qa’a was the last king of the First Dynasty of Egypt. Thus I believe, a deity named Qa’aWaS could have been worshipped as early as the First Dynasty of Egypt. And the concept behind this deity is a combination of the Egyptian “Ka” (the soul that gives life to the body) and the Egyptian “Was” (representing power). 

This deity representing both “Ka" and "Was” (life giving soul with power) is very similar to the Hebrew concept of Ruach, that conveys the idea of life, power, and divine presence. "Ruach" is often associated with God's creative and sustaining power, as well as His presence and influence in the world and in individuals. 

Associating the Edomite deity Qa’aWaS to the Hebrew concept of Ruach, or Spirit of YHWH, explains why the Edomites, and the Shasu, both worship YHWH and Qa’aWaS (the Spirit of YHWH). Now note that the expression Shasu Qa’a is similar to the expression Shasu YHW, which is the shortening of the divine names QWS and YHWH (which is allowed in Semitic languages like the JaH in HalleluJah).

ShaSuQa’a is made up of the consonants Shin-Samech-Qoph (Sh-S-Q), while Sh-Sh-Q (commonly pronounced Shishaq), is made up of the consonants Shin-Shin-Qoph. I believe Sh-Sh-Q was an adaptation of the Egyptian name ShaSuQa’a to what was the preferred pronunciation in Hebrew:

Judges 12:6 they said, “All right, say ‘Shibboleth.’” If he said, “Sibboleth,” because he could not pronounce the word correctly, they seized him and killed him at the fords of the Jordan. Forty-two thousand Ephraimites were killed at that time.

Ephraimites had difficulty in pronouncing the letter Shin, so they adapted the word ‘Shibboleth’ and pronounced it as ‘Sibboleth’ instead. Conversely, it may be possible that Hebrews that were not Ephraimites may have difficulty in pronouncing the letter Samech, especially when it is combined with Shin in the same word. Thus, these non-Ephraimite Hebrews may have adapted the Egyptian name ShaSuQa’a into the Hebrew name ShaShuQa’a instead.

Ramesses I (the father of Seti I) was of non-royal birth, being born into a noble military family from the Nile Delta region, perhaps near the former Hyksos capital of Avaris. The term Hyksos is used ethnically to designate people of probable West Semitic, Levantine origin, where the Edomites and the Shasu also originated. I believe Ramesses I was a Shasu who worshipped YHWH and QWS (Qa’aWas). Thus, Seti I may have been a Shasu as well.

Seti I fought a series of wars in western Asia, Libya and Nubia in the first decade of his reign. In his first regnal year, he led his armies along the "Horus Military road", the coastal road that led from the Egyptian city of Tjaru in the northeast corner of the Egyptian Nile Delta along the northern coast of the Sinai peninsula ending in the town of "Canaan". While crossing the Sinai, the king's army fought local Bedouins called the Shasu.

I propose that the reason why the Bible referred to Seti I as Pharaoh ShaShuQa'a (Shasu of Qa'aWaS) was because Seti I deposed the then king or leader of the Shasu to become its ruler, instead of just making the then king or leader of the Shasu as his vassal.