Adam When?

    We have arrived in our discussion to the time of the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. This great event occurred in the year 1447 B.C., according to the Biblical chronology reported earlier in this study. We saw precise agreement between the secular record of the great Sesostris III of Egypt’s 12th Dynasty and the Biblical statement concerning Joseph who became prime minister during his reign. We also saw much circumstantial evidence that related the Hyksos to the Israelites. While no precise chronological evidence such as astronomical data is available, the Biblical and secular records mesh so closely that we feel justified in identifying the Hyksos and the Israelites as one and the same people, as did the historian Josephus. Moreover, we believe we have identified the pharaoh who sought to kill Moses and who died while Moses was in Midian.

    Can we find concordant information that ties the secular to the sacred record in connection with the Exodus? In this chapter, we will answer that question, and in so doing we will find that there is indeed exceedingly close meshing of the two records. In fact, we will discover another astronomical “fix” as we did with Sesostris III.

    Let us begin our search by attempting to identify the pharaoh who would not permit Moses to lead the Israelites from Egypt. Two men are frequently set forth as possible candidates for the pharaoh who refused to let the Israelites go. Conservative scholars often suggest that Amenhotep II, the pharaoh who followed the great Thutmose III, was the pharaoh to whom Moses actually appeared. Under this arrangement, Thutmose III was the pharaoh who oppressed the Israelite but who must have died before Moses returned to Egypt. The problem with this solution is that the secular sources show that Amenhotep II died about 1422 B.C. Thus, this date does not come within two decades of the Exodus.

    On the other hand, a great many archaeologists have sought to prove that the Exodus occurred about 150 or more years later, during

the reign of Rameses II. Their major argument is that the Israelites could not have arrived until the Hyksos were ruling in Egypt (about 1720-1580 B.C.), and thus the days of Thutmose III and Amenhotep II were far too early. Furthermore, the Bible declares in Exodus 1:11 that the Israelites built the store cities of Pithom and Rameses. Since no archaeological information has been discovered that mentions a city named Rameses prior to the 19th Dynasty when the Rameses were kings, these chronologists argue that the Israelites still must have been in Egypt during the reign of Rameses II in the 13th century B.C.

    It appears that this latter solution must also be discarded. There is no specific evidence in the available secular data on Rameses II that particularly identifies him with the Israelites. His death date does not coincide in any way with Biblical date for the Exodus. The fact that there is no archaeological evidence of a city called Rameses existing before his Dynasty (the 19th) should not be surprising. The archaeological record provides fragmentary evidence at best. For example, until a few years ago there was no archaeological evidence of horses in Egypt before the middle of the so-called Hyksos period (13th to 17th Dynasties), even though the Bible says very clearly that Joseph exchanged horses for food (Genesis 47:17) before the Israelites were in Egypt. Now, however, there is evidence of horses in Egypt in the Middle Kingdom (12th Dynasty), as revealed by the skeleton of a horse found at Buhen in a Middle Kingdom context.¹

    Actually, the Bible called the area where the Israelites dwelt “the land of Rameses” in Joseph’s day (Genesis 47:11). Furthermore, names with “Ra” were exceedingly common centuries before Rameses II.² The god Re from whom Rameses II takes his name was a god of the Egyptians way back in the 5th Dynasty.³ We must conclude, therefore, based upon the Biblical and secular evidence, that Rameses was a name given to a province or town of Egypt hundreds of years before Rameses II lived, and that the Israelites built or rebuilt a city by this name years before the Exodus, with no particular relationship to Rameses II or the 19th Dynasty.

    If neither Rameses II nor Amenhotep II was the pharaoh of the Exodus, who was? Can we find agreement between the Bible and archaeology? The facts offered by the sacred and secular must agree. Let us see how wonderfully these two records can be meshed.

    The pharaoh who we will show to be the pharaoh of the Exodus was the great Thutmose III who reigned during the flower of the 18th Dynasty. We shall see that his life as well as his death coincided with the

Biblical record of Exodus. Let us examine the available evidence concerning the timetable of his reign.

    The studies of R. A. Parker are extremely helpful.⁴ He has shown that the accession year of Thutmose III must be one of five dates. This is based on the discovery of the record of a helical rising of the star Sirius during his reign as well as two lunar dates, which require these narrow limits for his accession year. The possible dates are 1515 B.C., 1504 B.C., 1501 B.C., 1490 B.C., and 1479 B.C. While all of these dates are acceptable according to astronomical evidence, most archaeologists favor the period from 1504 B.C. to 1490 B.C. because of other secular evidence. For example, William C. Hayes⁵ favors 1504 B.C. although he believes 1490 B.C. is also a possibility.

    Sir Leonard Wooley⁶ also favors 1504 B.C. but concludes that with the present evidence it is impossible to determine with absolute certainty the chronology of the New Empire.

    Thus far, we know that our candidate for the pharaoh of the Exodus probably began to reign in one of three years: 1504 B.C., 1501 B.C., or 1490 B.C. Since the Biblical record is concerned with his death, we must know the length of his reign in order to tie his accession year to his death year. This is available from the archaeological record. On the wall of the tomb of one of his officers, Amenemheb by name, the notice is given that Thutmose III died in the 54th years of his reign.⁷ We will look more closely at this text a bit later.

    With the time span of his reign known, we know that if he began to reign in 1504 B.C., he must have died 1450 B.C. If his reign commenced 1501 B.C., his death would have occurred 1447 B.C., and if his reign began 1490 B.C., the year 1436 B.C. must have been his death year.

    Returning to the Biblical record we have already seen that 1447 B.C. or possibly 1446 B.C. was the date of the Exodus. Of course, 1447 B.C. is also one of the three possible dates of the death of Thutmose III in accordance with the secular record. Thus, he is indeed a leading contender for the dubious honor of being the pharaoh of the Exodus.

    Immediately a problem arises, however. If he was the king who died in the Red Sea, who is the king who sought to kill Moses forty years earlier and who, according to the Biblical notice, died while Moses was tending sheep in Midian? How could Thutmose III be the man we are looking for, if he reigned 54 years? He would have been king when Moses fled from Egypt, but how could he have died while

Moses was in Midian and yet be alive when the Israelites left Egypt? We have already seen that this was King Hatshepsut who reigned as co-regent with Thutmose III and who died about 1480 B.C. or about six years after Moses fled from Egypt.


The Napoleon of Egypt

    Thus far we have found synchronization between the secular and sacred records concerning the princess who drew Moses from the water, the king who sought to kill Moses and died while Moses was in Midian, and the death date of Pharaoh Thutmose III,⁸ which coincides with the Biblical date of the Exodus. Does Thutmose III qualify as the king to whom God, through Moses, said in Exodus 9:16:

And in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up, for to shew in thee my power; and that my name maybe declared throughout all the earth.

    Abundant archaeological materials are available concerning this question. They show that he was a great military man. He extended the boundaries of Egypt to the greatest extent Egypt had ever known. He personally conducted seventeen different military campaigns. Historians often call him the “Napoleon of Egypt.” The Encyclopaedia Britannica offers the following summary:

The immense energy of Tothmosis III now found its outlet in war. Syria had revolted, perhaps in the years of inactivity following Tothmosis I’s death; now the young king was ready to lead his army against the rebels. Unlike his predecessors, who merely overran one after another a series of isolated city-states, Tothmosis had to face the organized resistance of a large combination, embracing the whole of western Syria and headed by the city of Kadesh on the Orontes. Six carefully planned campaigns had to be fought in order to reach and capture that city. In the 33rd year of his reign he marched through Kadesh, fought his way to Carchemish, defeated the forces that opposed him there and crossed the Euphrates into the territory of the Hurrian king of Mittanni. His annals record 17 separate campaigns in Palestine and Syria and list the immense booty and tribute obtained from that rich country. Egypt was master of an empire reaching to the Amanus mountains, and the neighboring great powers hastened to send diplomatic presents. In the intervals of war Tothmosis III proved himself a wonderfully efficient

administrator, with his eye on every corner of his dominions. The Syrian expeditions occupied six months on most of his best years, but the remaining time was spent in activity at home, repressing robbery and injustice, rebuilding and adorning temples with the labour of his captives and the plunder and tribute of conquered cities, or designing with his own hand the gorgeous sacred vessels of the sanctuary of Amon. In his later years some expeditions took place into Nubia. The children of the subdued princeling in Asia and elsewhere were taken as hostages to Egypt and there educated to succeed their fathers with a due understandingly the might of the pharaoh both to protect and to punish. Thus was an empire established on a sound basis, probably for the first time in history. Tothmosis died in the 54th year of his reign. His mummy, found in the cachette at Dair al-Bahri, is remarkable for the low forehead; yet we consider him the greatest of all pharaohs.9

    His activity as a military man provides another touchstone between the secular and sacred records. When he pursued the people of Israel, we read in Exodus 14:6-7:

And he made ready his chariot, and took his people with him: And he took six hundred chosen chariots, and all the chariots of Egypt, and captains over every one of them.

    This is in complete accord with the personality of this pharaoh. On a tablet that describes a battle at Megiddo, in which Thutmose III captured 924 chariots, we read:

His Majesty set forth in a chariot of fine gold, being adorned with his panoply of war like Horns the Strong-armed, Lord of Action, and like Mont of Thebes, his father Amun strengthening his hands.10

    He had conducted 17 successful and glorious campaigns. The 18th, his last, was to end in terrible defeat.

    He was a great builder; pictures have been found that show him in a position of mastery over slaves. In regards to his building activity, Petrie writes:

We see thus the extraordinary activity in building; and probably dozens of minor temples have passed away which are quite unknown to us, as little suspected as the temples of Kom el Hisu, Gurob, and Nubt were a few years ago. As it is, we can count up over thirty different sites, all of which were built on during this reign.11

    Certainly this could be the pharaoh whom God allowed to become great for some purpose. There was no other kingdom whose destruction would so clearly reveal God’s power and His mighty name. In many ways he identifies with the Biblical account of the pharaoh who died in the Red Sea.


Thutmose III Dies

    Continuing our examination of Thutmose III, let us look at how vividly the Bible describes his death in the Red Sea.

    When the king of Egypt was told that the people had fled, the mind of pharaoh and his servants was changed toward the people. We read in Exodus 14:5-8:

And it was told the king of Egypt that the people fled: and the heart of Pharaoh and of his servants was turned against the people, and they said, Why have we done this that we have let Israel go from serving us? And he made ready his chariot, and took his people with him: And he took six hundred chosen chariots, and all the chariots of Egypt and captains over every one of them. And the LORD hardened the heart of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and he pursued after the children of Israel: and the children of Israel went out with an high hand.

    Exodus 14:10:

And when Pharaoh drew nigh, the children of Israel lifted up their eyes, and, behold, the Egyptians marched after them; and they were sore afraid: and the children of Israel cried out unto the LORD.

    Exodus 14:18:

And the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD, when I have gotten me honour upon Pharaoh, upon his chariot, and upon his horsemen.

    Exodus 14:28:

And the waters returned, and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them.

    Psalm 136:15:

But overthrew Pharaoh and his host in the Red sea: for his mercy endureth for ever.

An Unfinished Tomb

    The language of the Bible that relates to the cause and mannered the death of this pharaoh is very plain. Since the pharaoh of the Exodus experienced such a catastrophic death, one wonders if there is any archaeological evidence of his sudden end. There is. We can see this circumstantially by examining his tomb. In spite of the fact that each pharaoh considered the construction of his own tomb of paramount importance, planning and constructing it in the greatest detail, the tomb of Thotmosis III was never finished. This fact is especially interesting and significant since this great pharaoh did more building and reigned longer than any other pharaoh. We quote Weigall:

This tomb is excavate in a “chimney” of rock at the southeast corner of the valley. From the custodian’s house one walks southward, turning to the left at the junction of the paths, and thus leaving the tombs of Septah (47), Bay (13), and Tausert (14) on one’s right. The path terminates in a flight of steps leading up to the ‘chimney.’ Ascending these, and crossing a platform of rock one finds in the far corner the mouth of the tomb, which is approached by a steep flight of steps. The situation is most impressive, and repays a visit; but the descent of the tomb is somewhat difficult. The coffin and mummy of the great Pharaoh Ra-men-kheper Thothmes III (B.C. 1501-1447) were found at Der el Bahri, where they had been hidden by the priests . . . The tomb has been left partly unfinished, as though the king, occupied by the administration of the great empire he had built up, had not bothered to give much attention to his last resting place.12

    An unfinished tomb is totally out of character with the pharaohs, unless of course, a pharaoh happened to die unexpectedly! When the pharaoh of the Exodus led his great army in pursuit of the Israelites, he obviously had no idea that within the next few days the sea would close over his head! Thus, his unfinished tomb supports the truth of an unexpected demise for this pharaoh. Please note the accuracy of Weigall’s date for Thutmose III.

    The archaeological record indicates the finding of the mummy of Thutmose III. How could this be if he drowned in the Red Sea? God provided the necessary information. We read in Exodus 14:30:

Thus the LORD saved Israel that day out of the hand of the Egyptians; and Israel saw the Egyptians dead upon the sea shore.

    The Egyptians obviously hastened to find the body of their dead king to give it proper burial.


The Month and Day of Pharaoh’s Death

    Could there be even more evidence that link Thutmose III with the pharaoh of the Exodus? Wonderfully, the well-preserved and extensive records of the early Egyptian civilizations together with the marvelous accuracy of God’s Word gives us one final confirmation.

    We saw that the Exodus occurred 1447 B.C., which was also the year Thutmose III died. We shall now show that the death date of Thutmose III, as recorded in the archaeological page, coincides with the month and the time of the month of the passage of the Israelites through the Red Sea. The following passages of Scripture help us to name the month in which the Israelites escaped from Egypt. Exodus 12:1-6:

And the LORD spake unto Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt, saying, This month shall be unto you the beginning of months; it shall be the first month of the year to you. Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel, saying, In the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb, according to the house of their fathers, a lamb for an house: And if the household be too little for the lamb, let him and his neighbour next unto his house take it according to the number of the souls; every man according to his eating shall make your count for the lamb. Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year: ye shall take it out from the sheep, or from the goats: And ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening.

    Exodus 16:1:

And they took their journey from Elim, and all the congregation of the children of Israel came unto the wilderness of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai, on the fifteenth day of the second month after their departing out of the land of Egypt.

    Exodus 23:15:

Thou shalt keep the feast of unleavened bread: (thou shalt eat unleavened bread seven days, as I commanded thee, in the time appointed of the month Abib; for in it thou camest out from Egypt: and none shall appear before me empty:).

    Numbers 33:3:

    It is apparent from the above that Abib, the month in which the Israelites left Egypt, became the first month in the original Hebrew calendar. On the 14th day of this month at even, they celebrated the Passover, and very early on the morning of the 15th, the Exodus from Egypt began. One month later, they arrived at the wilderness of Sin. During this 30-day period, the company of men, women, and children, with their flocks and herds, had traveled to the Red Sea, passed miraculously through the Red Sea, rested briefly at Elim, and arrived at the wilderness of Sin. The journey to the Red Sea would have required at least ten days, and at least another ten days would have been required to trek to the wilderness of Sin. Obviously, then, the deathly of Thutmose III had to occur sometime between the 25th of the first month Abib and the 5th of the second month Ziv. Does the archaeological record relate to this date? Indeed it does.     Let us first relate the Egyptian calendar to the Israelite calendar. The following correlation¹³ between the Macedonian and Egyptian calendars is reported by Finegan.

    We are indebted to the same author for the following earlier correlation of the “Macedonian Calendar in Palestine.”

    A careful appraisal of the above calendar correlations makes it obvious that the Macedonian month Artemisios is equivalent to the Egyptian month Phamenoth and to the Jewish month Nisan. Hence, the first month Nisan, or Abib as it is rendered in the Hebrew, corresponds to the seventh month of the Egyptian calendar, Phamenoth.

    We have established, from the Biblical record, the fact that the Israelites left Egypt on the 15th day of the seventh Egyptian month Phamenoth (the Hebrew Abib or Nisan), and that the Pharaoh must have died at the time of the crossing of the Red sea, somewhere between the 25th of Phamenoth and the fifth of the eighth month Pharmuthi (the Hebrew Ziv). What can we find from the secular record that relates?

    Petrie has provided the following remarkable inscription which has direct bearing on the death of Thutmose III. It appears in early Egyptian records as the work of an officer named Amenemheb who served Menkheperra Thutmose III (see p. 125 of Petrie’s History of Egypt). It gives the significant truth that Thutmose III died on the 30th day of Phamenoth which is the 30th day of Abib.

Behold the king had ended his time of existent of many good years of victory, power, and justification from the 1st year to the 54th year. In the 30th of Phamenoth of the majesty of the king, Menkheperra deceased, he ascended to heaven and joined the sun’s disc, the follower of the god met his maker. When the light dawned and the morrow came, the disc of the sun arose and heaven became bright. The king Aa-Kheperu-ra, son of the sun, Amenhotep, the giver of life, was established on the throne of his father, he rested on the ka name, he stuck down all the thrust.

    Thutmose III was a ruler in Egypt; Thutmose III was a great builder; Thutmose III died suddenly in 1447 B.C. on the 30th of Phamenoth, the equivalent of the Hebrew Abib; the precise time when the Israelites went through the Red Sea, Thutmose III was the Pharaoh of the Exodus! The correlation of the Egyptian history and the facts recorded by the Bible could not be more exact!


The World Hears

    As we continue to compare the sacred and secular records that relate to the Exodus, we might recall that when Thutmose I was king there was an ever-present possibility of revolt by Syria and the nations of northern Palestine. This probably occasioned the increased oppression of the Israelites and the murder of their newborn sons. Then under the energetic leadership of Thutmose III, Syria and all of Palestine were brought under complete control so that his 17th campaign, which was conducted in his 42nd year, was followed by 12 years of peace. His successor, Amenhotep II, co-regent with him for the last four months of his life, was immediately faced with revolt, Breasted reports:

Syria, of course, revolted on the death of Thutmose III, and already in his second year we find his energetic son, Amenhotep II, on the march into northern Syria to quell the rebellion. Doubtless the harbor cities had also rebelled, and hence the young king is forced to proceed by land. Leaving Egypt in April, as his father had done on the first campaign thirty-three years before, he had already in early May won a battle at Shemesh Edom in northern Palestine.15

    This great disaster clearly must have been the signal for the nations of Palestine-Syria to revolt. No wonder Amenhotep II was so

busy with quelling rebellion. The news of Egypt’s defeat in the Red Sea would have spread like fire to the nation who were potential enemies of Egypt. One thinks of Rahab’s words to the spies in Joshua 2:10:

And she said unto the men, I know that the LORD hath given you the land, and that your terror is fallen upon us, and that all the inhabitants of the land faint because of you.

    We know that the dissemination of this news was God’s intention. We read that God said to the pharaoh in Exodus 9:16:

And in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up, for to shew in thee my power; and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth.

The Tenth Plague

    One other Biblical comment will be examined and then we will be finished with the question of the pharaoh of the Exodus. The Bible declares that as a result of the tenth plague, the first born of all the Egyptians died, including the first born of pharaoh. Is there any evidence of this in the archaeological findings? There surely appears to be. At the time of the Exodus two pharaohs were on the throne. The great Thutmose III was reigning in his 54th year. His son Amenhotep II, who apparently had just reigned four months as co-regent with his father, also reigned. The archaeologist Gardiner makes reference to this:

A difficulty arises, however, from the fact that the well-known biography of Amenemhab (Urk IV, 895, 16), places the death of Tuthmosis III in his 54th year on the last day of the seventh month, and affirms that Amenophis II, his son and successor, was already on the throne. The next morning . . . possibly -- it even amounts to a probability -- is that Amenophis II for exactly four months before the latter’s death . . . the most important evidence is that in the Thebean tomb of Dedi (No. 200), where the two kings were shown enthroned and inspecting a military display together.16

    The archaeological evidence thus points to the condition of a co-regency of the aged Thutmose III and his young son Amenhotep II (Amenophis II). Amenhotep II obviously was not the first born of Thutmose III or be would have died in the tenth plague. The Bible declares very plainly in Exodus 12:29:

And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle.

    The concept that Amenhotep II was not a firstborn son, even though he was the next ruler, is acceptable when we study the record concerning similar situations. A later pharaoh, Rameses II, who also reigned a long period of time (67 years), was followed by a son who was his 14th. Likewise, Amenhotep II could have been a much later child than the firstborn of his father Thutmose III.

    If Amenhotep II was not a firstborn son, who was the first born of the pharaoh who died in the tenth plague? The secular record appears to provide an answer. Co-regent Amenhotep II was followed many years later by his son Thutmose IV, but there is evidence that Thutmose IV was not a first born son. In the book Bible and Spade we read:

On an immense slab of red granite near the Sphinx at Gizeh it is recorded that Thotmes IV, while yet a youth, had fallen asleep under the famous monument and dreamed a dream. In this the Sphinx appeared to him, startling him with a prophecy that one day he would live to be King of Egypt, and bidding him clear the sand away from her feet in token of his gratitude, which on his accession, he did. It is clear from this inscription that Thotmes’ hopes of succession had been remote, which proves, since the law of primogeniture obtained in Egypt at the time, that he could not have been Amenhotep’s eldest son. In other words, there is room for the explanation that the heir apparent died in the manner related in the Bible.17

    In other words, at the time of the Exodus, there were two pharaohs on the throne. The one was Thutmose III who died in the Red Sea. The other was Amenhotep II who was probably a son of Thutmose III, but obviously not the firstborn, for then he would have died in the plague. Since the next ruler, Thutmose IV, appears by the foregoing evidence to be a son later than the first born, we can readily assume that it was his brother, the first born of his father Amenhotep II, who was the son who died in the plague.

    Therefore, we see that there is circumstantial evidence that young Amenhotep II, who ascended the throne just four months prior to the Exodus, lost his first born in the tenth plague as the Bible declares. His aged father, Thutmose III, who was co-regent with him,

died in the Red Sea as the Bible shows. The correlation of Egyptian history and the facts as recorded in the Bible is very precise indeed. All these puny efforts have only verified what has always been true: God’s eternal Word. Let God be true…



NOTES:


    ¹John Van Seters, The Hyksos, Yale University Press, 1966, p. 185. (New York, Charles Scribner & Sons, 1899.)

    ²W. M. Flinders Petrie, History of Egypt, Vol. 1. pp. 260-262. In this index Petrie lists at least 150 names beginning with ‘Ra’ all found on tablets dating before the 18th Dynasty.

    ³Ibid., p. 69.

    ⁴R. A. Parker, “The Lunar Dates of Thutmose III and Rameses II,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 16. (1957), p. 41.

    ⁵William C. Hayes, “Chronology,” The Cambridge Ancient History, Cambridge University Press (1964), p. 17.

    ⁶Sir Leonard Wooley, The Beginnings of Civilization, The New York American Library, 1965, p. 105.

    ⁷W. M. Flinders Petrie, History of Egypt, New York, Charles Scribner & Sons (1904), p. 125.

    ⁸He is variously called Thutmoses III, Thutmos III, Thutmosis III, Tothmosis III, etc.

    ⁹The Encyclopaedia Britannica (1959 ed.), p. 58.

    ¹⁰R. O. Faulkner, “The Battle of Megiddo,” in the Journal of Egyptian Archaeology (London, The Egypt Exploration Soc., 1942), p. 4.

    ¹¹W. M. Flinders Petrie, A History of Egypt during the XVIIth and XVIIIth Dynasties, New York, Charles Scribner & Sons (1904), p. 136.

    ¹²Arthur E. P. Weigall, A Guide to the Antiquities of Upper Egypt, The MacMillan Co. (1910), pp. 219-220.

    ¹³Jack Finegan, Handbook of Biblical Chronology, Princeton University Press, 1964.

    ¹⁴The Julian equivalents in “The Macedonian Calendar in Palestine” are doubtful. It seems as if the Macedonian month “Artemisios” should be placed opposite the Feb./Mar. equivalent as it appears in the Egyptian table. This is further suggested by the Early Roman Calendar depicted on p. 74 of Finegan’s book, Handbook of Biblical Chronology, where March is shown as the first calendar month.

1. Martius	7. Semtembris
2. Aprilis	8. Octobris
3. Maius	9. Novembris
4. Junius	10. Decembris
5. Quintilis	11. Januaris
6. Sextilis	12. Februarius

The logic behind this reasoning is clearly seen in the Latin prefixes and the corresponding numeral.

    ¹⁵Breasted, Ancient Records of Egypt, Vol. 11, p. 34.

    ¹⁶Alan H. Gardiner, Reginal Years and Civil Calendar in Pharaonic Egypt, Vol. 31 (1945), p. 27.

    ¹⁷Stephen L. Gaiger, Bible and Spade, Oxford University Press, London, 1936, p. 74.