Exodus Debunked: Slave trade was not common in Ancient Egypt (Video)

“Slavery in Egypt is actually one of the biblical archeologists’ biggest disappointments. It is almost common knowledge now amongst Egyptologists that the Pyramids, long thought to have been built by the crack of the whip, were actually built by paid labor

Indeed, one of the most prominent themes we find in the Israelite stories is the theme of “slavery”. The stories of the Jewish Patriarchs of Abraham, Joseph, and Moses are all stories of slaves being bought and sold.

Throughout most of its three-thousand-year kingdom, slave-trade was not practiced in ancient Egypt. Slavery, as a public and widespread culture, was introduced in Egypt at the very late period of the Egyptian kingdom (during the 4th-3th century BC and after the Greek conquest).

But why didn’t Slave trade prosper in Ancient Egypt? In the video we put that question to Professor. Mustafa El-Abbadi, the renowned historian of Greco-Roman Egypt.

So, If ancient Egypt had no public markets for the trade of slaves where they were bought and sold, then we have to wonder how on earth Joseph ‘The Israelite Patriarch’ was ever introduced and sold in Ancient Egypt as the story goes.

Watch the video (in HD) and discover the true story of slavery in Ancient Egypt that absolutely debunks the biblical narrative about that Ancient land.

P.S. I expect many who will watch this video (and may be will get a little bit irritated) to go and dig for the key words “Egyptian slave” at Google, for (fast and furious) vindication. They will get loads of (misinterpreted) results, where “servant” in the ancient Egyptian language is often translated as “slave”.

To put it in a nutshell, Ancient Egypt knew servants and cheap laborers. As for slaves (prisoners of war), they would have also turned into household slaves of the royal and uppermost class. But they were few, and definitely not as many as an overwhelming 2 million slaves, in a land as Ancient Egypt that had a population of nearly 3-4 million people at the time of the alleged biblical Exodus.

37 thoughts on “Exodus Debunked: Slave trade was not common in Ancient Egypt (Video)

  1. The Pellean murderers (who changed their names when invaded Greece, including Macedonia: Philip, Achilles etc) NEVER called themselves as “Greeks”, but were proud for slavers’ Hittite-mycenaean ancestry (see cannibal Tantalus, Pelops’ Hittite father, sacrificer Agamemnon etc), as Trojans & Etruscans. These genociders (of the Greeks too), are advertised as “Greeks”, to confuse humankind, and distract from the Greeks’ and others’ defense against maniac warmongers (Iliad A1, where Homer used invader Hittites’ internal wars as a cover to alert allegorically about Holocene disasters)


  2. It’s actually pretty sad that many people today think they “know” all about “Ancient Egypt”. When all their “knowledge” comes from what the Bible or the Quran tells them about “Msrm”. Stories of ‘Pharaoh’s, slaves etc. and then Hollywood and other movie/television industries build on that.

    Egypt had its own fascinating history and culture, but that has been buried under the stories of Joseph, Moses and the rest of them. Actually, that’s true of other regions too.As one example, the Romans never persecuted anyone just because of their religion. yes, they had pretty brutal ways of dealing with criminals, but nobody was ever “thrown to the lions” or anything similar in Rome simply for praying to a different deity than others.


  3. I understand what you intend to mean “Egypt knew no slaves”, but I don’t understand what you mean about “Egypt knew no Pharaohs.” You mean there were no Pharaohs at all in all of ancient Egypt?


      1. Sorry, I just saw your reply. As John Miller said, unless you are arguing semantics, archaeological evidence suggests that Pharaohs, Kings, Rulers, Teti’s, whatever you call them, existed.


    1. The Egyptians called their Kings ‘Teti’. ‘Pharaoh’ is an Aramaic word, and roughly translates to being ‘Ruler of a town’.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. This is an excellent book by Dr. Ezzat, which helps elucidate the origins of the Jewish people. I would further submit that the Jews, who he says came from Yemen, migrated to Yemen from India. The ancient Jews called themselves Jehudas, and occupied a land they called Judea. However, these people were the descendants of the Jehuda tribe of northern India, of which Krishna was the ruler. When Krishna’s kingdom was destroyed by war and flood (the capital, Dwarka, is now under water two miles offshore), the Jehudas fled westward. The ancient trade routes are well known to have gone from India through Yemen and Arabia, to the Mediterranean. Also, the teachings of the one known as Jesus, originated, in India and Tibet, and what is called Christianity is the ancient teaching of the one God that existed prior to this teacher who brought it to the West (see the introduction to my book: I AM the Living Christ, Teachings of Jesus).

    Dr. Ezzat’s book is far more persuasive that the brief video. In it he describes many of the inconsistencies in descriptions, which show that Arabia, not Palestine, was a prior homeland of these peoples. I always wondered why the temple in Jerusalem is called the “Temple of the Mount,” when there is no mountain there. The real temple was on a mountain far to the south. Great work!


    1. Peter Mt. Shasta,
      Thank you so much for your positive comment and for praising my book ‘Egypt Knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites”
      I’d appreciate it very much if you wrote me a good review on Amazon. You are well aware that good reviews boost readership.
      Thank you again.


  5. wow. i read the synopsis of the video with an eye toward watching later when i have the time. then i rread the comments……especially the one by akedemos. what i find fascinating is that history is turning out to be such a load of crap perpetrated on the masses and everyday seems to bring more evidence of this(already a reader of elmer barnes). much like the current crisis in science of mass fraud in peer reviewed research papers.
    here’s where it gets interesting to me…..i started reading the first book on chronological history by anatoly fomenko recently and all calls for looking at alternative history start sounding better and better….
    looking forward to the video

    History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren’t there.
    George Santayana


    1. The bible did not say that the Israelite slaves built any pyramids . The bible clearly states the made bricks and slavery was common place all over the world in those day . So I can’t see how Exodus is debunked.


      1. There were different types of slaves and servants in Egypt. Some were paid some were not. I agree skilled craftsmen who built the pyramids would have been paid. But in Egypt work of all sorts was carried out by both paid and unpaid labour and there certainly were slaves. The bible did not state that the Hebrews work building pyramids it started that made bricks which was a lowly job . So Exodus has not been debunked. Slavery was common place and the norm in those days and was in every society and in almost every country


      2. The story of the Exodus doesn’t start with Moses; it goes all the way back – some 280 years earlier- to Joseph who was introduced in Egypt as a sold slave. But that is problematic, for Ancient Egypt did not practice slave trade and never had a market place for that abominable trade. Obviously the story of Joseph must have taken place somewhere else, where slave trade and its markets reflected a nomadic pervasive culture (maybe you need to watch the video again, that is, if you have done that in the first place)


  6. Sorry, this comes a little late in the day.

    Not a single jot of archeological evidence has ever been found supporting the existence of Hebrew life in Egypt, and that is a well-understood fact for years.

    The entire Exodus stuff belongs in the same waste basket as Jonah or Lott’s wife or Noah – absolute silly superstition.


    1. The Egyptians were known for erasing parts of their history that they did not like or painted them in a bad light . Proof of that is Akhenaten who was erase from the book of the kinds nearly all traces of his existence were destroyed. Exodus recorded that Pharoah and his army drowned and event with the Israelites was embarrassment to the Egyptians so they certainly would not have recorded this . But it has been recorded by the Hebrews and their account is believable as it is a warts and all account and their are vast episodes that paint the Hebrews in a bad way and recorded their rebellion against God. Slaves were common place all over those parts in those days and was embedded within the fabric of those societies. So to say this debunk Exodus is laughable


      1. Gees, you better go back to school to learn English grammar, spelling and composition Andrew.


    2. Quite right John. The Bible is basically a litany of plagiarism, distortion and outright lying. It is of the Jews, by the Jews and for the Jews.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. Dear sir,
    Thanks for your latest post.
    However, you missed a few small details of huge importance, and hence your post is actually not factual and hence misses the point entirely.
    Here, let me help you out with a few tips.
    When you say “ancient Egypt”, it is important to keep a few things in mind to avoid misrepresenting the facts. I will use a similar analogy to draw some facts you are knowingly or unknowing missing out.

    1) “Ancient North America” implies labels such as Anglo-Saxon, Italian, Dutch, French etc did not exist and would be entirely out of place in the discussion. Also place names such as New York, Philadelphia, Boston etc. did not exist and would also be entirely out of place in the discussion.
    Hence, what would suffice and be acceptable ONLY as accurate historical research would be a narrative using the ACTUAL historical names and ethnonyms that existed way back in “Ancient North America”. You would agree that finding names such as Apache, Cherokee, Arapaho, Arikara etc. would be the correct standard in describing the peoples who inhabited those lands if the phrase “ancient” as we know it has any meaning.
    Hence, a purported documentary subtly showing the Arapaho or the Anasazi as “household servants” to European looking peoples…while using place names such as Virginia and Maryland to prove that “slavery was non-existent in “ancient North America” would be quite hilarious, don’t you think so?
    Even more this false historical narrative would sound more bogus and unreal when no mention is made of links between the “ancient North Americans” who migrated back and forth like the Aztecs, Mayas, Olmecs etc….and other inhabitants of the landmass now known as North America.

    So, any discussion of “Ancient Egypt” has no place for Mamluks or their descendants, Ottomans and their descendants, the Ptolemies and their descendants, Mediterranean Arabs, Romans, French or British and their descendants…for the simple reason that these later peoples were simply not in the picture in “Ancient Egypt”. It is for the same reason that any discussion of “Ancient North America” would be a hilarious exercise when it shows a predominantly European cast, involving history seen entirely from a European perspective.

    Here is a little tip you could use in ruffling up some historians feathers, the Levant and the Mediterranean peoples of ancient history were predominantly BLACK PEOPLES. The MAJORITY of the fair skinned peoples who bear those labels today are products of intermarriage between the BLACK NATIVES and the hordes who came from the far North, Eastern Europe and far Asia. A lot of documented ancient history is at loggerheads with DNA analysis of these peoples because the archaeological evidence does not match with popular narratives.

    So sir, your narrative totally missed the point and hence is off the mark. Arabs as we know it was a non-existent label back then, same as all the popular ethnonyms and place names you used freely. No mention was made of the FACT that Ancient Egypt encompassed a far greater landmass than is the country now known as “modern Egypt”. Ancient Egypt extended to the places now known as Syria, Canaan, Palestine, Libya, Nubia, Sudan, all the way down to parts of Ethiopia. Ofcourse, the empire would shrink through different dynasties. There were indeed indentured servants and SLAVES that were used through out the empire, if you are not aware of this fact then you need to do further research.
    I leave it to you to figure out for yourself that the definition of slavery back in “ancient Egypt” is starkly different from the modern perspective. For one, slaves back then were largely indentured servants and belonged to the households of their masters, also the majority of these indentured servants were largely prisoners of war and tributes paid by vassal states/cities. A cursory research into burial practices for starters will help you understand the sources of the servants who followed their masters and mistresses into the afterlife. Also, a little digging and a healthy skepticism of the popular narratives you are espousing will help clear this up for you.

    2) Also telling is the subtle insistence on perpetuating the false narrative that black peoples were “slaves” and “household servants” to Arab looking white peoples in “ancient Egypt. Your “documentary” is littered with that subtle hint as a defacto assumption. I wont even mention the deliberate usage of whitewashed Egyptian sculptures and paintings totally misrepresenting the original negroid faces. Nothing could be farther from truth. Here is the fact you and other proponents of a non-existent “white Egypt” are running away from….ancient Egypt was a completely African phenomenon. Not Middle Eastern, Mediterranean or Far East or what ever non-African label is used in popular narratives.
    A deliberate mixture of different time lines in Egypt’s history to hide the fact that different people’s at different times populated the land mass known as Egypt is also a telling point in dismissing fake historical narratives. For example, mixing up pictures of Ptolemaic Egypt with Roman Egypt, and mixing up Ottoman and Mamluk Egypt with the Egypt of the ACTUAL natives who inhabited those lands before the invaders who both intermarried and displaced them. This is the actual factual perspective you have to present to get any close to an accurate historical narrative.

    We know who the ardent deniers and claimers of history that had nothing to do with them are.
    We also know who stands to benefit from destroying ancient artifacts eloquently telling the story of the people who painstakingly preserved their history in sculpture, paintings and writing.
    We also know where to go when we need to compare similarities in architecture, writing and culture where “ancient Egypt” is concerned. You and I both know the only geographical location containing as much pyramids, sculptures, paintings, temples, hieroglyphs and markers of anything recognized as “Egyptian” is to the South of Modern Egypt. No where else are temples, pyramids and writings found that so closely match what is obtained in your today’s Modern Egypt.
    We also are aware of the ardent drive to disconnect an “upper” Egypt from a “lower” Egypt.
    Even though the history of the two crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt is eloquently told in writing, painting, and sculpture without any vagueness, exaggeration or ambiguousness.
    In summary sir, your narrative is found to be riddled with historical misrepresentations and is only a rehashing of popular biased views.
    If you doubt me, check out this link for hundreds of visuals of what the rulers and servants of “Ancient Egypt” looked like before either the Assyrians, Macedonians, Romans, Mamluks, Albanians, Ottomans, French or British invaded, settled, drove out or intermarried with the natives.

    The answers you and other popular narrators of Ancient Egypt’s history are running away from are in the above link. Scroll down if you will and look at the sculpted heads of kings, queens, nobles, soldiers, administrators, scribes, servants…ALL NATIVES OF ANCIENT EGYPT. Compare their skin tones, noses, faces, hair with those found in today’s tribes of Nubia, Sudan, Ethiopia, Somalia…all over East Africa. Kinky hair, wavy hair, curly hair, straight hair, flat, straight and hooked noses, fair skin, dark brown skin, brown skin, obsidian black skin…these are ALL PHYSIOLOGICAL ATTRIBUTES of African peoples still existing TODAY and descendants of those who called their land “the Black Land”.
    Those faces can only belong to a people who WERE BOTH AFRICAN AND DARK SKINNED.
    THESE PEOPLE you see sir, are the ACTUAL kings, queens, natives and SLAVES (read indentured servants) of ancient Egypt. NOT Arabized Turkish and Mongoloid looking men selling pale faced and fair skinned men and women.

    I understand it can be a difficult pill to swallow for those who have been fed a globally accepted narrative that glorifies “white skin” and denigrates “black skin”.
    But hey, how about I tell you that when the Turks, Asians and Mongoloids accepted Islam and started practising “Arab” culture, the Arabic language, writing, culture and religion were ALREADY fully formed and the Yemenites/Sabeans, Kushites and Canaanites they borrowed/adopted Arab “culture” from and later on displaced were these SAME DARK SKINNED peoples no one wants to acknowledge? Infact, these fair skinned newcomers ALL abandoned their native tongues, writings, religions and what not for the more highly advanced Kushite ones they encountered. The Greeks and Romans were equally fascinated by what they met and witnessed in Ancient Egypt. They all adopted and borrowed the architecture,art, burial practices and religion of Ancient Egypt. They left eloquent records largely ignored by popular historians such as you.
    We know! We also know you KNOW who these Kushite peoples are. So no surprises here.

    Of course you are free to continue with the parallel narrative that gives credence to such “documentaries” implying that faces like George Washington and Bill Clinton are actual descendants and representatives of “Ancient North Americans”.


    1. I can’t generalize, as you do, that all Ancient Egyptians were black Africans. The sculpture, paintings and mummies of ancient Egyptian commoners and royalties, don’t support that hypothesis. However, the 25th dynasty (760 BC–656 BC) was from Nubia. They were Kushite (black) kings, and great leaders I might add.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. exodus is a myth, like the rest of the torah. these stories are ALLEGORICAL- ask any sane rabbi.
      moses is a mythical character, there never was any mass migration of hebrew because there never was amass of hebrew to begin with. as to the posted who seems to think all egyptians were black, no they WERE NOT:

      Ancient Egyptians: genome study reveals they were Turkish & European than African



      1. Hehehe…the ancient Egyptians were NEVER Turkish and European than Africa.
        hehehehe…numerous secret and open DNA analysis have been done, some they were bold enough to publish, others they could not to maintain the status quo of political correctness.
        One reoccuring theme runs through all these “DNA analysis”, the parameters used in selecting the samples are never published and the request for sampling is never granted EQUALLY to those with opposing views. So go figure.
        I will also drop a hint for you, the Levant and Mediterranean peoples back then were infact BROWN AND DARK skinned, and ARE NOT THE SAME as the peoples now inhabiting those lands.

        For starters my friend, there were no Turks nor Europeans back then, so maybe you might want to adjust your nomenclature to something more reflective of the ancient populations back then.
        Second, the sample size of the said DNA sample is not only dubious but severely limited.
        Which target “dynasty” or kingdom were the researchers aiming to “prove” their ethnicity?
        Which DEFINITE kingdom, epoch or dynasty did they specifically collect DNA samples from?
        Any random sampling of any site which could either be remains of any of the known invaders of ancient Egypt…Assyrians, Macedonians, Romans, Ottomans/Turks, Arabs, British, French etc. COULD HAVE BEEN USED. How do we know this was not the case?
        Was there a third party verification of the results? Can we see what the actual tombs,paintings and art of the said sites look like? What verified dates have the said sites been attributed to?
        These pertinent issues are almost always never addressed.
        So you see, the politically motivated racism that ignores the FIRST PRINCIPLES of academic research is even here also in play.
        So sigh, said research is off the mark.
        Let them publish which dynasty said samples belonged to and you can bet a comprehensive response will be issued SHOWING TO THE WORLD, what that dynasty looked like in art and sculpture.

        Lemme help you out there, there is this thing called MELANIN DOSAGE TEST.
        It basically tests the melanin levels in the skin of any mummy or cadaver which faithfully reflects the actual levels while alive, and is a very accurate pointer to which “race” or “ethnicity” any preserved body belongs to. Even the fairest of any sub-Saharan African will ALWAYS have a differing melanin dosage level to the brownest Italian or Spaniard.
        You may have heard of Cheikh Anta Diop, maybe not. While his research is still being debated across the official circles(we know why), his rather impeccable research using melanin dosage levels required just a few samples FROM ANY SITE in EGYPT to confirm the MELANIN levels in the skin of any mummy.
        I am sure you know his request has been turned down till date, even after he has passed on and there is an entrenched interest in making sure THAT REQUEST is never granted.
        You can guess why…hehehehehe.
        Let them also publish which dynasty those samples were taken from AND make available the same mummies to other independent researchers to test the melanin dosage levels.

        So my friend, the starting point of any scientific research is to start from the known to the unknown.
        Not the other way round. You look at how the ancients described themselves in writing, art, sculpture, painting…then you take that as a premise to prove or disprove any hypothesis about their race or ethnicity…IT IS NEVER THE OTHER WAY ROUND.
        Neither do you mix up the natives of a land with the invaders who displaced, ruled and occupied their land. A 1000 years from now, David Eisenhower will never be labeled a descendant of Sitting Bull…except a politically motivated game is at foot. The faces on Mount Rushmore will never be used as an evidence of what the “ancient American Indians” looked like, nor can it be attributed to them.
        Sadly that appears to be the forte of those who are incensed against any notion of a black people having their own advanced civilization.
        You can verify this for yourself, take a good look at the death mask of Tutankhamun and paintings of him in his OWN TOMB…and compare with those used by publications such as National Geographic.

        Why some diehard revisionists, after seeing the overwhelming evidence of NEGRO FACES AND BODIES in painting, sculpture and art of ancient egypt…STILL RESORT TO TURNING LOGIC ON ITS HEAD by trying so harrrrrrd to prove the opposite of what is evidently clear.
        Some folks after seeing the death mask of Tutankhamun, the sculptures/artefacts of Tuthmose, Seti etc…still had to invent their own versions of them.
        Do you want a side by side comparison of the original versions of how ancient Egyptians depicted themselves and the white washed versions?
        So the topic remains open until revisionists learn to drop the silly politics and be honest with the facts.
        Start with the paintings, sculptures, art of the ancient Egyptians…go see the originals, confirm for yourself.
        Compare what you see to the physical features of TODAY’s East Africans, Turks, “white” Arabs, Mongoloid, Europeans, Indians, Asians.Then make up your mind which living groups of peoples matches the ancient Egyptians.

        PS: Dr. Ezzat, this interesting blog of yours I gather is an attempt to correct fake historical narratives and politically motivated “hijacking” of history. I contributed my thoughts AND OPINIONS to further the discussion. It was not an attack on your person or work, so kindly post my comments.
        A great leader in Africa, Uthman Dan Fodio, once made a profound statement, goes thus:
        Conscience is an open wound, only truth can heal it.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.