answersLogoWhite

0

The following answer was composed by Don Stewart and edited by Thegiraffeninja. A subscriber by the name feathers101 has been obliterating other answers and inserting short, uninformative comments instead. For the meantime this question is closed as we await a more constructive approach from feathers101.

Answer

There is an argument that she became a ruler because when her father (Thutmose I) died, her half-brother was too young to become king, so she had to become the new pharaoh. The pharaoh she was married to is called Thutmose II. However, these people were products of concubines of the Egyptian and Ethiopian royal families. The situation here was complicated by an agreement between the Ethiopians and the Egyptians to live under one king who ruled the whole Nile river system. This agreement was signed in the wake of 450 years of Hyksos-Amalekite anarchic domination of Egypt. The data has been confused by Egyptologists' false chronology and by false readings of the hieroglyphs because their chronological framework is wrong by 500-600 years. Thutmose II did rule for a while, as far as the evidence goes. That much is generally agreed. Opinions then differ greatly, mainly because the chronologies are wrong and the domestic and international political situation is consequently mis-read. Egyptologists do not realise King Saul and King David of Israel defeated the Hyksos-Amalekites. The Ethiopians pressured them from the South. Ahmose, Khamose and Thutmose I, all of whom we know very little about, re-established normal government throughout Egypt and Ethiopia. Thutmose I, who may have been Ahmose, or even Khamose, seems to have sired Hatshepsut from an Ethiopian princess or an Egyptian princess if he himself was Ethiopian. No one is quite sure which way the ethnicities pan out here. When Thutmose I died, Thutmose II and Hatshepsut ruled technically as joint monarchs like William and Mary of the United Kingdom (AD 1688-1703). In the British example, Mary, the 'English' or 'Anglo-Scottish' daughter of James II died before William the Dutchman. After William died, both monarchs being officially 'childless' (although who really knows?), Parliament passed on the title to Anne the sister of Mary and younger daughter of James II. This was also part of an agreement after Britain's Glorious Revolution of 1688 where the daughters of James conspired against their father, for good reasons, to throw him out of power because of his Roman Catholicism. Although it is now known the Vatican also disliked James' plan to become Emperor of Europe. This sort of politicking probably affected the lives and reigns of these Egypto-Ethiopian kings and queen but also helped distort our scholars' understanding of the real situation. The Biblical account, rather sparsely, gives us useful data to help re-establish Egyptian history. But the scholars do not like to admit it is accurate. The temple Hatshepsut built (see other answers) helps us to determine much more precisely what happened. Hatshepsut legally and constitutionally took full control of Egypt's throne when Thutmose II, her husband, died prematurely. Otherwise she had no show of getting where she did. Another prince from the concubines was groomed, however, to replace Hatshepsut. This prince had probably been selected by Thutmose I himself in anticipation of future dynastic squabbles, as his contemporary David of Israel did vis-a-vis Solomon. There does not seem to be any evidence of an actual coup d'etat against Hatshepsut. Nor is there any real evidence she died in office. Thus the best explanation of her demise is that she abdicated or retired when the priests, army and Government pressed Thutmose III's case. This would be hard to read from the limited data we have. However, assuming she was the Queen Sheba who went to Israel to hear Solomon, and she did convert to believe Jehovah, the God of Israel, it is not unreasonable to take a logical deduction that God Himself called and protected her for the reasons outlined in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke concerning the "Queen of the South". This is highly controversial and explains why there has been so much reluctance since Dr Velikovsky first posited the idea, in the 1950's, that Sheba was Hatshepsut. If the above is correct, the simple and ultimate answer to this question is that the God of Israel ensured she became queen. He is the God who gives and takes life. This is equally controversial to the modern-day secular-evolutionist mind. But existing explanations are so enigmatic in themselves with so many more unanswered questions and mysteries, the Academy should at least be prepared to consider this line of inquiry on prima facie grounds. The Academy is otherwise guilty of quasi-science.

User Avatar

Wiki User

14y ago

What else can I help you with?