What are facts about king ramsses 2?

Answer 1

He had over 100 children. (111 sons 51 daughters)

He built many temples and monuments. (ex: Ramssemeus)

Reigned for about 67 years.

He outlived many of his children. (until his 13th son) (18 total outlived)

He outlived his wife (nefretari) by 54 years!

He was a military leader at 10

He had 8 recorded wives

He signed the first peace treaty ever recorded

He was said to have lived to 102. (really probably 91)

He was tall for an Egyptian.

Was buried in the largest tomb in the Valley of the Kings.
He was a great military leader at the age of 10.

Answer 2

Ramses (or Ramesses) II was also known as "Ramses the Great" and lived for 96 years (1303-1213BC). He was the son of Seti I and started off by assisting his father in several ways and had a variety of experiences, for example, military campaigns, building projects, official etiquette and in the internal running of the house. It is believed that he took the throne in his early twenties after the death of his father. He proved to be a very effective ruler since he became the longest reigning pharaoh (sixty-seven years, 1279-1213BC), fought more battles, made more statues and constructed more building than any other pharaoh ever to rule Egypt. Ramses II was also the most "fruitful" pharaoh with all his wives and concubines, where he was a father to over 90 sons and 60 daughters.

Answer 3

Answer

Rameses II means "Son of Ra". The word "pharaoh" is greek.

He was known for his long reign, his strength of reign and his battles at Kadesh. He was also know for Abu Simbel, the Ramasseum and his other magnificent monuments.

Answer

The above answer needs one correction. "Pharaoh" is not Greek. It is found in The Bible in its Semitic original as pe-resh-ayin-he, or 'P-R-Y-H' where the 'Y' is a gutteral sound sometimes written 'nG' or more simply just 'A'. The word is probably related to, or derived from Auphirah (aleph-vav-pe-yod-resh-he) more usually but incorrectly written as "Ophir" in English translations. A very early Egyptian king is named Kh-Afre or Afre-Kh (i.e., Africa) if the hieroglyphs are read in the alternative direction, which is quite necessary when interpreting hieroglyphs when direction pointers are missing or the cluster of hieroglyphs has to be read as an acrostic as is quite often the case. Thus "Africa", "Ophir", "Pharaoh" and "Khafre" may be inter-related terms for the leader of Africa.

Answer

Ramesses (II) was one of the 12 (or possibly 13) kings of ancient Egypt who bore the title "Ramesses". Conventionally he is dated from about 1279 BC and he possibly ruled Egypt for 50 years. Most assume he was the one whom the prophet Moses confronted. In Exodus 1:11, Egyptology's '9/11' because of the implications of the information below, "Raamses" is mentioned as one of the 'two' cities the ancient Israelites built for "Pharaoh". Unfortunately, Exodus says little more on the subject here. So most people assume it was a 'ramesside' king who ruled Egypt in circa 1485 BC. That was when Moses, according to Biblical chronology integrated with our calendars, "confronted Pharaoh".

"Ramesses" of the Egyptologists, "Raamses" (Exodus1:11) or "Rameses" (Genesis 47:11) all mean the "Moses of Ra". "Pharaoh" and "Moses of Ra" were two alternative titles for the ruler of Egypt. The Hebrew "Moses", or Moshe, is itself an Egyptian name but given to a Hebrew, Israelite or Jewish boy hidden in the Nile river to save him from infanticide. Later Moshe-Moses became a common Hebrew name just as Jewish names are popular British names today (e.g., John, Sarah, Matthew). An Egyptian princess found him there and Moshe-Moses was adopted into the Egyptian Royal Family. All that leads people, quite naturally, to assume that Moses' great pharaonic adversary was "Ramesses II" although other people believe it was actually Ramesses III.

Those have been the assumptions of historians even since 650 BC in Egypt, when Ramesses more likely did live, as noted below. Ramesses II was named "The Great" because he was the most significant 'ramesside' of the 12 (or 13). William Flinders Petrie noted Ramesses II re-instituted the "Ra Shepses" or "Keeper of the Official Records". Incidentally, these records excluded Akhenaten and Hatshepsut because of religious apostasy (refer WikiAnswers regarding Hatshepsut-Sheba). Later ancient Egyptian historians and our own 'modern Egyptologists' and archaeologists then compounded errors by Ramesses II's scribes, later Egyptian historians like Manetho and then the Greeks' Herodotus, to put all the dates of these kings in chaos. Even the dynasties and how many there actually were is a chaotic affair. Briefly, only about 8 out of 26 from the first 26 dynasties are true 'dynasties'. The 19th and 26th are actually the same dynasty. However, one (the 19th) bears the Egyptian names for kings and the other (26th) bears the Greek transliterations of the Egyptian names. Except that with Ramesses II of the 19th and Necho I or II of the 26th (who is really Ramesses II) the Hebrew nick-name for "copperhead" (Nechosharosh) was used: probably borrowed from the Biblical account and swapped around in this case because the Greek name (Ramesses) appears in the 19th dynasty list and Necho (the Semitic name) appears in the 26th dynasty list. Merneptah Baenre Meriamun Hotephir-maat , son and successor to Ramesses II of the 19th dynasty, got similar treatment and was named "Hophra" or "Apries" in the 26th dynasty.

Actually, it is by using Merneptah's well-known phrase, "Israel's seed is destroyed; The Land razed to the ground" that we can properly set the dates for the 19th/26th dynasty and help reconstruct the rest of Egyptian chronology to give the world a true picture of Egypt's ancient history. Israel's own history places this disaster in 600-586 BC not the 13th century BC (1210 BC) as Egyptologists claim is the correct date for Ramesses II's most famous (or infamous) son.

The 19th dynasty which Ramesses II's father, or patron, Sety The Great established, probably after the Assyrians wrestled control of Egypt from the Ethiopians in circa 670 BC, followed the 18th dynasty a few decades after its last king Tutenkhamen died. The British Museum which is involved in a cover-up of the falsity of the chronology has data showing Tutenhkhamen died in circa800 BC based on the uncontaminated carbon-dating work done on his possessions. Tutenkhamen's tomb was uncontaminated and its objects perfectly dry and ready for Radio-Carbon-14-12 analysis. That is why we now know without much doubt that the Egyptian chronologies are wrong and by an error of 500 to 600 years for the 18th and 19th dynasties or 250 years for the 12th. The first dynasty probably did not start until circa 2200. Abraham probably visited Egypt in the 5th dynasty's era (2000 BC). That dynasty collapsed after the pharaoh tried to add Abraham's wife to his concubine only to find all his women were prevented from child-bearing so that the Egyptian royal family could no longer breed (Genesis 12:10-20). For some time after, there was no dynastic control of Egypt but Egyptologists wrongly place the 7th to 10th dynasties in that interim period. The 11th dynasty (which hosted Joseph) followed the 5th after Joseph was able to interpret the pharaoh's dreams and help the state prepare for seven years of famine after seven years of bumper crops (Genesis 41:14-57). The 12th, destroyed at the Red Sea etc., in 1485 BC, followed the 11th although another interim period of non-dynastic government may have intervened. The Hyksos-Amalekites, or the replicated chaotic-list-dynasties 7-10 and 13-16, also get a 'double-billing' like the 19th-26th dynasty problem. Thus 'Hyksos-Amalekite' king lists have been inserted after the 5th dynasty and 12th dynasty disasters. Really, the 5th, 11th and 12th dynasties follow on from each other, albeit with a gap, inter-regnum, regional priest-kings or other forms of decentralised government (or even anarchy) possibly intervening between each dynasty (certainly in the case of the 5th and 11th).

Most of the nonsense that is supposedly Egyptian chronology comes from scholars all through the centuries who have assumed Ramesses II (or possibly III) was contemporary with Moses. The mistake lies in the reading of the Hebrew in Exodus 1:11. The English should read as follows: "... and they built for pharaoh the capital city; The Pithom (The Ramesseum)". The Bible points out that the city was also named Migdol, Noph, Memphis (or 'Moph', Hosea 9:6). "Pithom" (Pith-mem) is the reverse of Mem-phit (Memphis in Greek speech). Migdol refers to the times when Tyre-Phoenicia-Carthage controlled the capital. In 600 BC, Jews from Judea, fleeing Nebuchadnezzar the Chaldean and destroyer of the Temple and razor of the Land, returned to Pithom-Migdol-Noph, where lots of mobile Phoenicians or Carthaginians did much business, and helped the ramesside pharaohs like Ramesses II, III and Merneptah rebuild or expand the city. So Jews were building the city in 1500 BC and 600 BC. That is what Exodus 1:11 was edited to point out. The original text, and this becomes obvious reading the Hebrew syntax, meant that the city had changed names but that Israelites were once again, 900 years later, building a capital city for the Pharaoh when they should have been in their own land worshipping and obeying God. They were not supposed to be in Egypt then. They had no business being there (from God's and Jeremiah's points of view). This is clear from many other Biblical texts. In 70 AD and 135 AD, after the Romans drove the Jewish people out of Israel then they began to gradually scatter all over the world (135 AD to the present) but in 600 BC they were expected to sit out their 70-year punishment in Judea as punishment for their incessant idol worship.

Thus everyone assumed from Exodus 1:11 that the ancient Israelites built "two cities on two sites in the same era" when the actual Hebrew, carefully interpreted within other Biblical texts, meant "two cities on the same site in two different eras". When that subtle, but crucially vital distinction is considered, we realise we have to re-arrange all the chronological system of ancient Egypt and all the other middle eastern countries - Israel excepted bcause the Biblical record delivers a near-perfect product. There are some typos in the Hebrew text of the Tanaach ('Old or First Testament') but they are of little material significance except in some cases where the errors, actually by their consistent repetition (iteration), tell us even more. It can be that two minuses make a plus (if multiplied or squared)!

This all suggests that Ramesses II was not the pharaoh who confronted Moses. He was not the pharaoh of the Jewish Exodus. Amenemhat IV was pharaoh of the Exodus. Ramesses II was the pharaoh of the Jewish Exile 900 years after Moses, not pharaoh of the Exodus (1485 BC). However, because Moses has to be circa1500 BC at the Exodus and Ramesses II had to be circa 1250 BC because of his relationship to other Egyptian kings and their dates in history, historians of all eras then conventionally re-dated Moses to 1250 BC. The ancient Jews, because this has been a common assumption for millennia, long-ago (300 BC?) altered their calendar to configure with this ramesside date: Moses= Ramesses II = 1250 BC. That's why the Jewish calendar based on the Bible numbers puts us in the year circa 5769 (in '2009') since Adam instead of about 6013 years since Adam's fall as we calibrate the Western Calendar (2009) with the Biblical chronology.

The whole dating system is in a mess just like the financial system and many other systems but much of the problem goes back to a simple misinterpretation of one verse in Exodus in the Bible - Exodus 1:11 - A real 9/11 for the scholars.

Answer

Khafre means "he appears like Re". I have put a link at the bottom which has carbon-dating results proving Egypt's chronologies. [Links are not approved by WikiAnswers. Readers trying to access them will not find them - Editor.]

Ramesses means "born of the sun-god Ra".

Answer

... And, for example, Thutmosis means born of Tut. Israel's Moses was the first to be given this name. Egyptians later adopted the use of 'mosis' or 'moses', which really is moshe in Semitic, in order to embarrass Israel. This is reflected in the statement recorded in the Bible by Pharaoh Necho (Ramesses II, circa620 BC) who claimed God now spoke to him when he warned Josiah not to interfere with his plans to assist Assyria against the coalition of Medes (Mitanni), Scythians and Chaldeans (Hittites). Technically, Rameses' advice should have been heeded by Josiah because the subsequent battle would have effectively neutralised all Israel's enemies (potential or current).

This is an additional explanation as to "Who Ramesses II is". Under the emerging reconstructed chronology, and Egyptologists are now privately admitting the need for a revision of the Egyptian chronology, Ramesses II is the Pharaoh Necho - the "Copper (Brass or Bronze) King".

Radio-metric techniques, used to supposedly "prove" the orthodox chronology of ancient Egyptian kings and dynasties, are widely agreed to be ineffectual because most samples are contaminated with rare exceptions such as material found in Tutenkhamen's tomb. In some cases the date might be quite accurate but one would not really know because it is almost impossible to isolate the manner or degree of contamination (if any in reality). Thus traditional techniques such as ceramic sequencing and triangulation of textual or written data (hieroglyphs, scrolls etc.,) are still the best tools to work with. At the end of the process, a radio-metric result may have some residual validity but not when, for example, a date contradicted a text such as Merneptah's "Israel's seed is destroyed; the land razed (shaved) to the ground" supposedly in 1210 BC when the same event described in Israel's history was in 586 BC. Merneptah was Ramesses II's son. Thus Ramesses II would have to be a 7th century BC king despite what any radio-metric result would suggest. Far better to rely on the texts than on contaminated samples subjected to 'chemical analysis'.

However, as experience has shown, the use of textual data such as Biblical material must be done wisely and carefully without jumping to too hasty conclusions as happened with the interpretation of Exodus 1:11.