Ancient Egypt Knew No Pharaohs

If you think that history is all about the past …  you’d better think again.

If you think the stories the Hebrew Bible had told about ancient Egypt were true … you’d better think once again.

And if you believe that ancient Egypt was ruled by pharaohs … then you’d better read the next lines

Dr. Ashraf Ezzat

Egypt knew no Pharaohs cover art-15-3-blurred bakground-1-resized

Ancient Egypt knew no Pharaohs


The title might sound a bit strange and perplexing, but in my book (published on Kindle) I’ve elaborated on the historical reasons why the rulers of ancient Egypt were called kings and not Pharaohs.

Supported by a community of high-profile scholars and their amazing findings, I will reveal one of the biggest acts of duplicity in history responsible for creating/concocting the myth of Egyptian Pharaohs.

And yes, the whole story of Egypt ever being ruled by so called Pharaohs is nothing but a pure myth and a blatant deception. As a matter of fact the notorious story of Moses and Pharaoh never happened in ancient Egypt, the Exodus story as narrated in the Hebrew Bible took place in an obscure and small Arabian village called Mizraim (On a modern map could be located in North Yemen)

My research combined with a body of serious and academic investigations, and supported by evidence -based findings will expose a staggering two-thousand-year deception.

In the third century BC, the Hebrew Bible was translated to Greek at the legendary library of Alexandria. Seventy Jewish scribes, hence the designation Septuagint Bible, were assigned this task by king Ptolemy II.  In the translation the Jewish scribes cunningly replaced this obscure Mizraim and its Faraon with the mighty Egypt and its king.

Ever since, this (Septuagint) forged version carrying this malicious distortion of ancient history has been the source for all translations of the Bible worldwide (even the one tucked under your warm pillow)

“א וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל-מֹשֶׁה, עוֹד נֶגַע אֶחָד אָבִיא עַל-פַּרְעֹה וְעַל-מִצְרַיִם–אַחֲרֵי-כֵן, יְשַׁלַּח אֶתְכֶם מִזֶּה: כְּשַׁלְּחוֹ–כָּלָה, גָּרֵשׁ יְגָרֵשׁ אֶתְכֶם מִזֶּה”
“And the LORD said unto Moses: ‘Yet one plague more will I bring upon Pharaoh, and upon Mizraim; afterwards he will let you go hence; when he shall let you go, he shall surely thrust you out hence altogether” Exodus 11:1

“Kings or pharaohs, what difference does it make?” some might argue. Well, it would make a world of difference if we discovered that for thousands of years we’ve been living a myth, another twisted/misinterpreted Jewish tale that we continue to cling to and hold dear as the only irrefutable truth till this very day. It would make a difference to discover that in a few centuries after the demise of the ancient world we had regrettably renounced its wisdom and mysticism and instead embraced falsehood and dogma.

It would make a world of difference if we knew that what took place at that remote time in the ancient Near East has shaped, over the long centuries and through our willful ignorance, the way we live today with all this web of political, ethnic and religious conflict and intolerance (continue reading)

Download a copy of Dr. Ashraf Ezzat book (Egypt knew no Pharaohs nor Israelites)


48 thoughts on “Ancient Egypt Knew No Pharaohs

  1. Pharaoh is a Phrygian word, how can you mention Egypt and NOT mention that the Phrygians taught them everything they knew? All those old records have been re-written repeatedly, many destroyed. It’s a lot of speculation; but to totally not mention the Phrygians; what a shame.


  2. I have not read your book yet! But i will; your post was interesting and very informative.(Egypt Knew No Pharaohs or Israelite). I’m a Christian, and starting to see that a lot that i have been told is not true.This has cause some problems in my home and church; but i’m glad that i’m finding the truth.


  3. Dear Dr Ezzat, I have just finished reading your book and want to thank you for a well written book, understandable to a layperson and a scientific appeal, not emotional. It is important that people who seek the truth about this matter do not bring in emotions and degrade others in exposing truth, for then it is hard to reach a wider audience. You have done this well, in writing objectively.

    I am a Christian and have been on a journey of discovery for many years now, trying to make sense of this world and what I have been taught all my life. The greatest challenge for me has been to reconcile the violent Old Testament of my Bible with the teachings of the New Testament. I have had to learn that most all I have been taught has been either outright lies or a twisting of the truth. Eventually I came to understand that truth is sacrificed for the sake of politics and money.

    Within the Christian community I have not found many people willing to truly examine the truth without bias and in this journey have found greater understanding to read what people outside my own culture and belief system say, which is really ironic. I am sure all truth seekers find this out.

    I have also come to see that there have been a lot of slandering of the great civilizations and their belief systems. I do hope that in our lifetime a change will come and people will desire the truth rather than the delusion we have all been living in. In the New Testament it speaks of the whole world drunk and reeling from the delusion of lies. It was true 2000 years ago and it is true today.

    Recently I obtained a copy of the Old Testament that had some of the original Hebrew names in it and Mizraim is the word used, just as you said. My first reaction was just naturally to think Mizraim was the Hebrew word for Egypt. And so I am glad to get your viewpoint which makes absolute sense. There was a lot of camels in the old stories of the patriarchs and I always wondered why Paul said Sinai was in Arabia.

    I am originally from South Africa and now live in New Zealand and in both these countries have seen that the settlers gave the names of their old country (England) to places in the new country. For example, we have a Wellington here probably named after the Wellington in England. In South Africa the part where the British settled had many of the same names that the settlers had in England. So I understand what you said in the book, namely that when people migrate they rename the new places with the old names. It not only happens in Arab culture but obviously in western culture too.

    It is important that people earnestly start speaking the truth and loving truth more than tradition, because lies kill. Our world is suffering because you cannot prosper when your life is built on lies and deception.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thank you Marym, for your downloading and reading my book. I’d really appreciate it if you wrote me a good review on US Amazon. Positive reviews boost readership. keep your quest for the truth, it is the only way I know will set us all free.


  4. Just a word on the chronology here. The German historian and archaeologist Professor Gunnar Heinsohn has done extensive work in the Near East. he has shown, through extensive work, that the chronology of the Near East has been artificially extended, that certain peoples placed centuries apart were contemporaries, and that some entire epochs are pure fiction. Much of this is beyond the scope of this article, but there are some interesting facts that should be pointed out.

    There is no trace of anything “Israelite” or “Jewish” in Palestine before about c. 600 BC. At this point we find the first mention of a “House of David”. At the time, Palestine was ruled by the Medes(though conventional history in the textbooks tells us otherwise…). No city called ‘Jerusalem’ is ever mentioned. The Mede capital was called “Meggido”. In the famous Amarna Letters, which were correspondences between the Egyptian King of the time, and the ruler of Palestine, the ruler of Palestine mentions that he is alarmed as a group of violent people called ‘Habiru’ have suddenly appeared. ‘Habiru’ was known to the be Mede and Persian word for ‘Hebrews’, but as conventional history tells us that Meggido was part of the Hebrew Kingdom of Judea at this time, mainstream historians reject this. Again, the Habiru aka Hebrews first appear in Palestine for the first time ever around 600 BC.

    Heinsohn also shows that the first time we find recognisable ‘Kings of Israel and Judea’ in Palestine is during the period of the Persian Achamenid Empire(c. 550 BC -330 BC). The Achaemenid Empire stretched from parts of modern day Libya and Greece in the west to parts of modern day China and India in the east. As such, the Empire was divided into more than 20 satrapies, with local people appointed as vassal kings, paying tribute to the Persian Great King. Two of these satrapies were called ‘Samaria’ and ‘Yihuda’. The borders are described in detail. They are EXACTLY the same borders of the “Ancient Israelite Kingdoms” of ‘Israel’ and ‘Judea’. Heinsohn conclusively showed that these “Kingdoms” are contemporaneous with the Achaemenid Empire. And the names of the local vassal kings are identical to the names of the Kings of the ‘early divided monarchy’, which the Old testament says ruled between about 900 BC- 600 BC. Only they weren’t Kings of Israel and Judea. They were local vassal kings of the Persian Great Kings. And there is no evidence for the ‘Israelite’ and ‘Judean’ Kings that the Old Testament tells us ruled from c. 600 BC until the time of Alexander the Great.

    In the Old Testament Jehu, the King of a supposedly independent Israel(ie. Samaria) is said to have an overlord. This only makes sense when we realize that he was a vassal king to the Great King of Persia.

    And a note on the Persians. They were known for their brutality, bellicose nature, and theft and desecration of other peoples’ religious and cultural places. Amongst various other things, they razed Egyptian and Babylonian temples to the ground, ate Apis Bulls(animals sacred in the Egyptian religion), looted gold, silver and other valuables whenever they found them, burnt entire cities to the ground, slaughtering the entire population, and enjoyed mutilating captive prisoners. They also made it illegal in various parts of the Persian Empire to worship any god other than their “one true god”, a the creator of the universe, who they called ‘Ahura Mazda’.

    The Persians sworn enemies were the Egyptians, the Babylonians and the Philistines, all of who continuously fought for their independence. However, the Persians had allies within their empire. These tended to include those peoples with a similar outlook to the Persians themselves, monotheistic(the Persians allowed people to worship another god, so long as it was only one, as they would then equate that ‘one god’ with their own one god), a love of gold, silver, and other valuables, and a savage cruelty. These other people too, tended to form Persian attitudes, such as a hatred for the Egyptians and the Philistines

    And wouldn’t you know it? Jewish tradition has nothing but positive things to say about the Persians. Cyrus the Great was apparently a ‘humanitarian’. Brutal Kings like Cambyses and Darius are praised etc. Interestingly the Old testament tells us how Cyrus allowed the Jews to “return to their homeland”
    after “70 years of exile” and “rebuild their temple”. Now, if the Jews first tried to invade Palestine c. 610 BC, and Cyrus formed these two Hebrew satrapies in 540 BC, then the “exile” is simply the local rulers repelling invaders. In addition, while remains of the so-called “second” temple have been found, there is not race of the “original Temple of Solomon” in Palestine. and ‘Jerusalem’ first appears as the name of a city during the Achaemenid era.


    1. It is very interesting what you mentioned. The fact that there is no mention of the Jews in Palestine before 600 BC, and that there is no archeological trace of the so called first temple is indicative of a prior Jewish immigration to Palestine.


    2. …and Cyrus formed these two Hebrew satrapies in 540 BC….
      The etymology of “satrapies”:
      As of Wikipedia:
      “The word “satrap” originates ultimately (via Ancient Greek and Latin) from Old Persian xšaçapāvan (“protector of the province”), Sanskrit kshatrapam (क्षत्रपम्) or kshtrapa, from xšaça (“realm” or “province”) and pāvan (“protector”). In Greek, the word was rendered as satrápēs (σατράπης)—which later borrowed into Latin as satrapes—from a Western Iranian cognate xšaθrapā(van). In modern Persian the descendant of xšaθrapāvan is shahrbān (شهربان), but the components have undergone semantic shift so the word now means “town keeper” (shahr [شهر] meaning “town” + bān [بان] meaning “keeper”).…….
      ……From Middle English satrape, from Latin satrapēs ‎(“governor”), from Ancient Greek σατράπης ‎(satrápēs), from Old Persian ‎(xšaçapāvā, “protector of the province”)…….”
      Etymology of Satrape in Tamil:
      Tamil: Sathira pathi = province + residing one (governor) = residing governor. There are many Tamil words as “saththiram” – any place big or small, and pathi means one who resides; Thirupathi – a place name in India.
      Example of Chhatrapati : Shivaji Bhonsle (Marathi – 3 April 1680), also known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj who wre fighting the Mugal empire.
      Chhatrapati Shivaji: Ruler/protector of the land/country.
      Etymology of Sathiram in Tamil:
      Sathiram = sa + thiram = (sun-lit) great + land = area of land (province); whereas saathiram = saa+ thiram = teach/prophecy/reciting + talent = a field of knowledge, for ex: astrology/astronomy/mathematics etc.
      Pathi = pa +thi = earth/world + have come to = have come to stay; As in Sarasuvathy = (s)arasu + vathi = holy-tree/royal + resident; athipathi = athi + pathi = of all + leader = leadership; sanathipathi – president.
      Pavan = pa + ban = pa + ba + an = earth/world + person(manifested as) + an(suffix) = one who manifested as such (protector/leader/resident).
      It was the Old form of Tamil language those days people all over the world speaking.


  5. Why did you delete my comment? Afraid of the truth? I put it again: you could comment on or refute it rather than deleting it, if you are an educated one.

    Pharo is a Tamil word. par – means see/look (world/ land), and paaro/paari means one who rules. There was a king called “Paari” in ancient Tamil land (India).
    Israel: isa+ ra + el = isa(siva) + sun + god = isa the sun god.
    Islam = isa + lam = isa + light = light of Isa.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I never delete comments on my website, no matter how ignorant and bizarre they are. Your ‘Illuminating comment’ must have been (accidentally) spammed. As for my reply, your remarks left me absolutely speechless (and for the worst reason)

      Liked by 2 people

    2. Pharaoh is an ancient Egyptian word Phaa Ahh, meaning ‘Great House’. Like the House of Windsor in Britian. Ornthe House of Savoy in Italy. Now where would we expect an Egyptian word to come from, Egypt or India? Derrr… You work it out.


    3. Your comments are really interesting and make me realize how little I (born and raised in a western country) we know about ancient India, I didn’t know for example that ancient Tamil land is India.
      They are so many things yet to know about the real history of this world and past civilizations, so much to discover or uncover …
      It is both exciting and frustrating, the frustration lies mainly about the lack of information, the deceptions and lies that are perpetuated, and the consequent prejudices …
      Now to come back to :
      Israel: isa+ ra + el = isa(siva) + sun + god = isa the sun god.
      Islam = isa + lam = isa + light = light of Isa.
      Are those words of vocables Tamil and if so can you give us example of Tamil words constructed with same vocables ?


      1. well said dear as: “….It is both exciting and frustrating, the frustration lies mainly about the lack of information, the deceptions and lies that are perpetuated, and the consequent prejudices “


      2. Sory I forgot the word “lam”:
        la: light in Tamil; la + am = light + “ness” (suffix)/being = the light-full, “light-ness” et.
        kalam: ka + lam = spirit/space + light = spirit of/with light => kaalam = time (in Tamil)
        Kalam in Abdul Kalam : the brightness.
        kalam: also means any space that is lit: kalam – ship, kalam = pot; kalam – the cell; kalam – the whole universe.
        kala: the bright spirit.
        nilam: ni + lam = that which is standing at the front + lit = land ( one of the meaning)
        nila: moon.
        ula: the inner lit one => ulakam = the world
        thalam: a place.
        valam: becoming lit => powerful, go around.
        palam: strength; paLam – fruit : both has the “lit” aspect.
        these are just some of the, there are hundreds.
        alla: al (index) + la = the + light.
        al: a + l = the + light => al became to be the “honoring”/ pointing /indexing word => “the”.
        al+ la = the + light.


      1. Dear,
        Dravidian is a coined word by the Sanskrit speaking people and used by the British linguists.
        They call/classified (for their benefit) the south Indian languages as Dravidian, and Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, and Malayalam fall into this category; actually these languages were a dialects of Old Tamil. including Sanskrit itself. The people who were in power divided Sanskrit and the north Indian languages into a separate group. But, Sanskrit and the north Indian languages have Tamil root words and they are using them without knowing the meaning. In the old days about 3000 years ago (Indus Valley Civilization) all over India (the name was not there at that time) , the languages that were spoken are dialects of Old Tamil.
        The names are just the region’s name: for example Punjabi: place name “Punjab”; Marathi – Maharasthira; Benkali – Bankalam etc. And these name itself has proper etymology only in Tamil. Sanskrit was a constructed language from the existing various dialects of the north; Sanskrit was not a spoken language; it means “refined language” – refined from what? the old languages. And, the British came, divided and ruled: Arya, and Dravida. Because they couldn’t put them all into one, because the skin tone was a problem. And “filtered” them out and annexed the one that benefits them. That is the story of Dravidian.
        “Thiram” means land in Tamil; that means the land that is used to stay and cultivate and cherish (Indus Valley Civilization for example), not to move time to time for pasturing. We have five types of “thirams”: land associated with hills and surroundings – “Kurinchi”; the land that is associated with forest and jungles (just after hiily area) – “Mullai”; the land that has lots of field of vegetation, crops is called “Marutham”; the land that is associated with desert – “Paalai”; land that is close to the see – “Neithal”. Ancient Tamil people stationed and cultivated and managed the land.

        Idam: means place in Tamil – place to live permanently. idam also means position, station etc.

        Thiram + idam = thira(m) ida(m) => thirvaida(m) => Dravidam : means the land that was occupied to staying and cherishing. This etymology is only available in Tamil because only the owner knows the exact meaning. Others just use it as a label.
        It was for those who came to the land, rather than those who stayedin the land, it would seem that the people already living in it would be “Thiravida” – Dravida.- “land-staying-people”.

        Yes, according to their classification Tamils are Dravidian.
        Thank you for asking. Keep asking please.


      1. I read some thats posted on your pages..and synopsis of you book..the info i got frm you master piece i went into debate groups on facebook to debate….n your work is very informational to us that claims Kemet history

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Plan on reading very soon like this weekend i work 3rd shift and off on weekends…i most definitely will read it for sure. Because from what i posted in debate groups it shocked the hell out of those of my peers who claim the hebrew YSRLITE faith…..its some of us who study Kemetic Science who have read it already which makes it a must read.


  6. A paper version of the book should be published before the end of 2016. And yes I’ve followed the news about the so called ‘Avaris find’ … honestly it is quite amusing; Biblical archeologists are carrying on, unabashed, with their distortion of the ancient Near Eastern history and that of Egypt.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. hi there Congrats, Ashraf, my respect and admiration, the story was always in my life so I think I can appreciate the value of your work

    being Spanish speaker, I would like to read or hear (audio book) your work in Spanish, in fact, i am on it , looking for an audiobook in Spanish now

    I would like your opinion on the Khazar theory of the origin of the ashkenzis Jews, surely you’ve been asked more than once.

    Congratulations and best of luck


      1. I paid for this e book Amazon, but my computer died year ago and now I want to reread this book again,,,, Do you have a paper copy? I really hated reading book on computer…. I like Paper books,,, Help, are you familar with the latest findings in Avaris? regards, don

        Liked by 1 person

  8. Theres no doubt that Mono-theism was stolen off the Armana Kingdom of the 18th Dynasty of Akhenaten (1353–1336 BC) and rewritten in 200 BC by 70 Hebrew scholars In Greek(Rulers of the World) for Alexanders the Greats rulers in Egypt. Every Modern archaeologist in 19th, 20th & 21st century have been saying the same thing; No evidence of Hebrews has ever been found in Egypt ever; the best minds from USA, UK, France, Germany, Israel, Italy searched and searched and still search today…..Israel history is a manufactured myth! No Hebrew written document has ever been found older than 200 BCE and all so called Old testament documents are younger than the 200 BC Greek Hebrew bible written in a conspiracy too create a myth to control the world.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. I like to see someone who is trying to get people to understand that history is very distorted. That court historian’s have changed everything. Keep up the good work and thank you very much.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Ashraf I left a comment on my youtube video you commented on. I am not sure, if it got through to you. So I repost it here:

    Thank you for your feedback. I must say that there is not much of a theory. What we have here is a mere hypothesis. I presented the evidence that speaks against its current formulation in Part II. I think however that with some modifications it can lead the the origin of the Semitic people and this is worth investigating.
    Regarding your thesis of the total absence of Pharaohs. I actually came across your article earlier while researching the claims of the Badr society. Is there a particular reason, that you do not go in your research beyond Akhenaton forward in time? I would recommend you to do a quick research on Siamun, who was a Pharaoh some 200 years after Akhenaton.
    Best wishes


    1. The etymology of israel is not this simple. Be mindful, you are showing the English spelling of a Hebrew word. Israel most likely is the combination of the words “misra” and “el”. Misra most likely means rule or dominian over, and the obvious mention of the Canaanite god El. It’s not in any way Egyptian.


  11. You have a serious complex mate… why not get a life? (quickly, before the Brotherhood and Salafists ordain one for you… then you can request political asylum with your democratic secular Israeli/te neighbours to the east)


    1. Get a life..! why don’t you get realistic and go join the thousands of secular Israelis in their protest against the haredi Jews at Beit Shemesh. they don’t seem better than the salafis, if not worth, afterall the salafis don’t spit on little girls walking down the street wearing a regular school uniform.
      ..And i don’t think you should bother yourself with the paper work needed for political asylum .. for all you have to do is to get back where you came from, before you settled in Palestine.

      Liked by 2 people

  12. “The Brotherhood is counting on the new parliament to have considerable political power to eclipse the military until its handover. In the drafting of the new constitution, the Brotherhood wants to curtail the powers of the president, which were nearly unlimited under Mubarak, and give parliament greater authority.

    The group fears that electing the president before rewriting the constitution will bring a head of state with the same overwhelming power.

    “Will (the president) have the same pharaonic powers as Hosni Mubarak had? How do we guarantee that this doesn’t impact the transition to democracy?” said Wahid Abdel-Meguid, leading member of the Brotherhood-led alliance.

    But Islam Lutfi, a former Brotherhood member whose political party backs the initiatives for an early military exit, said the Brotherhood has no clear plan for ensuring the army steps down.

    “They are scared of the military,” said Lutfi, a founder of the Egyptian Current Party. “They are only hungry for the parliament.”

    so here’s a news report featuring real Egyptian citizens speaking in real Egyptian Arabic, referencing the Pharaohs as a real political phenomenom which reverberates down the ages till late December 2011


    1. In the US we have many organizations supporting color people because they are minority class that could be overtaken or oppressed by the majority white people. In Egypt however, the minority CHRISTIANS are not organized and are given no position of power, yet the majority muslims, who hold all positions of power are afraid of losing control, and are in need of having a solidarity organization as the MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD to assure their rights? How sick or paranoid you have to be if you control ALL positions of power, yet you are still afraid from a meek, unarmed MINORITY who have been routinely oppressed for more than thousand years?

      Any rational thinker who assume that inclusivity in EGYPTIAN society must include the MB, must tell me if he is prepared to have the KKK included in our congress if they preach that black Americans are subhuman, and must be segregated from White? Would Germany include the Nazis? Would the Saudis include catholic priests in their Parliement? Oh, I know the Saudis don’t have a Parliement or allow priests in their country, yet they are not pressured to be inclusive!


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s