Identifying this pharaoh has long been a topic of historical, theological, and archaeological inquiry. The question of the Pharaoh's identity is deeply intertwined with the dating of the Exodus itself. Traditional biblical chronology, particularly 1 Kings 6:1, suggests that the Exodus occurred approximately 480 years before the construction of Solomon's temple (traditionally dated to circa 966 BCE), placing the event in the mid-15th century BCE (early New Kingdom period). This forms the basis of the "Early Exodus" theory. However, archaeological correlations with sites such as Pi-Ramesses, and the lack of evidence for widespread settlement in Canaan during that period, have led many scholars to prefer a "Late Exodus" date, typically in the 13th century BCE (late New Kingdom period). The debate remains unresolved, with each hypothesis presenting both strengths and weaknesses.

The subject of Pharaoh's identity coincides with the study of the dating the Israelite presence in the ancient Egypt and the events of the plagues of Egypt resulting in the event of Exodus and is inseparable from broader questions regarding the historicity and dating of the Exodus itself. The identity of Pharaoh in the Mosaic tradition has been a subject of extensive debate, but many scholars are inclined to accept that Exodus of the Israelites happened during the reign of King Ramses II (during the ninteenth dynasty).

Competing chronologies have produced two primary hypotheses: the Early Exodus theory, which places the event in the 15th century BCE, and the Late Exodus theory, which situates it in the 13th century BCE. Each theory proposes different candidates from among Egypt's Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties, respectively. Complicating matters further is the absence of direct Egyptian records acknowledging the Exodus or any comparable national calamity, a phenomenon not unusual given the ideological nature of Egyptian royal inscriptions, which tend to omit defeats or disasters.

circa 1550–1250 BCE

Early Exodus Theory (circa 1446 BCE)
The Early Exodus theory dates the Israelite departure from Egypt to circa 1446 BCE, based primarily on a literal reading of 1 Kings 6:1, which records that the Exodus occurred 480 years before the construction of Solomon’s Temple. Given the widely accepted date of approximately 966 BCE for the start of the First Temple, this calculation places the Exodus in the mid-15th century BCE, during the reign of either Thutmose III (reigned circa 1479–1425 BCE) or Amenhotep II (reigned circa 1427–1401 BCE) of Egypt’s Eighteenth Dynasty.

Supporters of this model also reference Judges 11:26 and the cumulative reigns of Israel’s judges to support a longer internal chronology, consistent with a 15th-century Exodus. Historically, this period in Egyptian history corresponds with a phase of military expansion and administrative centralization, particularly under Thutmose III, who conducted repeated campaigns into Canaan and Syria. Some proponents note the absence of any Egyptian campaigns into Canaan during the late reign of Amenhotep II as a potential reflection of internal disruption, though this remains speculative.

Archaeologically, proponents have pointed to destruction layers at sites like Hazor and Jericho (modern day Tell es-Sultan) as consistent with the conquest narratives of the Book of Joshua, although mainstream excavations at Jericho (notably by Kathleen Kenyon) dated the destruction layer to centuries earlier, in the Middle Bronze Age. Additionally, there is no direct inscriptional evidence from Egypt referring to the Exodus event itself or the presence of Israelite slaves.

Despite its reliance on a literal biblical timeline, the Early Exodus theory continues to attract scholarly attention due to its internal chronological coherence and the relative stability of the Eighteenth Dynasty’s political framework, which could have provided a backdrop for the emergence of a proto-Israelite identity in the central hill country shortly after the proposed Exodus date.

Late Exodus Theory (circa 1270–1250 BCE)
The Late Exodus theory places the Israelite departure from Egypt in the late 13th century BCE, during the reign of Ramesses II (reigned circa 1279–1213 BCE) or possibly his successor Merneptah (reigned circa 1213–1203 BCE), both of the Nineteenth Dynasty. This dating is primarily based on Exodus 1:11, which refers to the construction of the store-cities Pithom and Raamses. The latter is widely identified with Pi-Ramesses (later Avairs, modern day Tell Daba'), a major administrative and military capital established in the eastern Nile Delta by Ramesses II. Archaeological excavations at the site of Qantir, generally accepted as the location of Pi-Ramesses, confirm that the city flourished during this period.

Supporters of this theory argue that the mention of a city named after Ramesses implies a contemporary or near-contemporary setting for the composition or at least the historical memory of the Exodus traditions. This theory aligns the Exodus with a period of significant construction activity, imperial expansion, and military campaigns under Ramesses II, including the well-documented Battle of Kadesh against the Hittites.

Additionally, the Merneptah Stele—an inscription dated to circa 1208 BCE—contains the earliest extrabiblical reference to "Israel", described as a people (not a settled polity) in Canaan. This reference is often cited to suggest that a group identifiable as Israel was already present in the Levant by the late 13th century BCE, thereby placing any potential Exodus event prior to that date.

Critics of the Late Exodus model argue that it compresses the subsequent period of conquest and settlement described in the Hebrew Bible to an implausibly short timeframe and note the absence of direct Egyptian records corroborating a mass departure of Semitic laborers. Nevertheless, the Late Exodus theory remains influential, particularly among scholars who favor a synchronism between biblical texts and the identifiable political and urban landscape of New Kingdom Egypt under the Ramesside rulers.

circa 1539–1514 BCE

Ahmose I
Ahmose I, founder of the 18th Dynasty (reigned circa 1550–1525 BCE), is occasionally linked to the Exodus narrative due to his expulsion of the Hyksos, a Semitic group from the Nile Delta. While this event resembles aspects of the Exodus, such as the departure of a Semitic population, the chronological gap between Ahmose’s reign and biblical chronology weakens this association. The Hyksos expulsion is better understood as a political-military conflict rather than a divinely motivated liberation.

circa 1479-1425 BCE

Thutmose III
Thutmose III (reigned circa 1479–1425 BCE) is a leading candidate in the Early Exodus model. His reign aligns closely with the 1446 BCE date derived from 1 Kings 6:1. Known for his extensive military campaigns and administrative consolidation, Thutmose III left behind detailed records. However, no Egyptian sources from his reign mention a catastrophic slave rebellion or military disaster. Supporters of this theory argue that such an omission would be consistent with the Egyptian royal historiographic tradition, which avoided acknowledging failures.

circa 1427-1401 BCE

Amenhotep II
Amenhotep II (reigned circa 1427–1401 BCE) is another potential candidate within the Early Exodus framework. His reign exhibits anomalies that some scholars have interpreted as consistent with the Exodus story. For example, he conducted fewer military campaigns than his predecessor and took an unusually long gap between early and later campaigns. Some proponents claim that a catastrophic loss of Egyptian manpower might explain this pattern. However, this remains speculative without corroborating archaeological evidence.

circa 1279-1213 BCE

Ramesses the Great
Pharaoh Ramesses II (reigned circa 1279–1213 BCE), the third pharaoh of Egypt's 19th Dynasty, is the most widely proposed candidate in the Late Exodus theory. The mention of the city of Pi-Ramesses (built during his reign) in Exodus 1:11 is often cited as evidence. Ramesses II's ambitious construction projects and long reign make him a plausible candidate. However, his reign is well-documented, and no records suggest internal collapse or massive slave escape. Additionally, the chronological gap between his reign and the traditional biblical timeline raises difficulties.

circa 1213-1203 BCE

Merneptah
Merneptah (reigned circa 1213–1203 BCE), son and successor of Ramesses II, is best known for the aforementioned stele, which declares that "Israel is laid waste; his seed is not". This stele is the earliest extrabiblical mention of word Israel and suggests that the Israelites were already in Canaan during his reign. For this reason, many scholars exclude him as a candidate for the Pharaoh of the Exodus, as his reign appears to postdate the event.

Absence of Direct Egyptian Records
One of the primary challenges in identifying the Pharaoh of the Exodus is the lack of any Egyptian inscription or official record documenting such a national catastrophe. Egyptian royal annals were propagandistic in nature, designed to immortalize the king's victories and suppress unfavorable events. Disasters such as the loss of a royal army in the Red Sea or the death of a crown prince would likely have been omitted or suppressed in official discourse. This absence is not unique to the Exodus account but is consistent with other known gaps in Egypt's otherwise detailed recordkeeping.

Religious Traditions vs Historical Method
In Abrahamic tradition, the identity of the Pharaoh remains anonymous but morally significant, often portrayed in Midrash and Talmudic literature as a symbol of tyranny and divine justice. Christian exegesis typically follows similar lines, though with occasional attempts to align scriptural events with known historical figures. In Islamic tradition, the Pharaoh is likewise unnamed but depicted as a paradigmatic oppressor whose downfall illustrates divine retribution. Qur'anic exegesis (tafsir) elaborates upon his character and fate, often integrating post-biblical traditions. These religious portrayals, while not identifying the Pharaoh explicitly, have informed broader cultural conceptions and motivated historical inquiry.

Archaeological Evidence and Limitations
Archaeological excavations in Egypt and the Levant have yet to yield definitive evidence for a mass Israelite migration from Egypt. Some scholars point to the presence of Semitic populations in the eastern Delta during the Second Intermediate Period and New Kingdom as circumstantial evidence. Excavations in Canaan have revealed shifts in settlement patterns during the Late Bronze to Early Iron Age transition, which some associate with the Israelite arrival. However, the data is complex and does not align neatly with any single Exodus scenario. Many Egyptologists and biblical scholars therefore treat the Exodus as a theological tradition rooted in historical memory, rather than a precise historical event.

The question of the Pharaoh's identity has also been dramatized extensively in modern popular culture, particularly in film, animation, and literature. One of the most influential portrayals is Cecil B. DeMille’s The Ten Commandments (1956), which identifies Pharaoh Ramesses II as Moses’ adversary. The film blends biblical narrative with theatrical embellishments and was instrumental in shaping 20th-century Western perceptions of the Exodus, despite lacking historical precision. Similarly, DreamWorks’ The Prince of Egypt (1998), a traditionally animated film aimed at a wide audience, presents a stylized retelling of the Exodus narrative. It portrays Moses as a former prince of Egypt raised alongside a brotherly figure modeled after Ramesses II, aligning again with the Late Exodus theory. Literary treatments have likewise played a role in reinforcing popular Exodus imagery. Howard Fast’s *Moses, Prince of Egypt* (1958) interprets the story as a narrative of liberation and class struggle, while Sigmund Freud’s controversial *Moses and Monotheism* (1939) posits that Moses was an Egyptian priest under Akhenaten, casting doubt on conventional identifications of the Pharaoh. Though not strictly fictional, such works illustrate how literary imagination has shaped modern readings of biblical chronology and character.

These cultural depictions, though not grounded in the complexities of historical or archaeological scholarship, have had a significant influence on popular assumptions about the chronology, setting, and characters of the Exodus tradition. They illustrate how modern interpretations often prioritize narrative coherence and emotional resonance over empirical evidence, contributing to the entrenchment of the Ramesside association in public imagination.