Kings and Pharaohs in the Qur’an: Criticism of Ancient Egyptian Historiography through the Stories of Prophet Joseph and Prophet Moses

The difference between the terms al-mālik and firʿawn in narratives of Egyptian rulers raises historiographical questions about how Qur’anic terminology relates to reconstructing Egyptian history, especially since modern historiography often uses Pharaoh as a general term for Egyptian rulers. This study examines the semantic and contextual differences between the two terms in the stories of the Prophet Joseph and the Prophet Moses. It assesses their implications for reading Egyptian chronology and historiography. This library research applies thematic interpretation (mawḍūʿī), linguistic-semantic, historical-comparative, and Egyptological analysis to relevant verses, tafsīr books, historiographic sources, and epigraphic, archaeological, and philological studies. The analysis shows a consistent terminological pattern: al-mālik refers to the ruler in Joseph’s narrative, while firʿawn marks Egyptian power in Moses’ narrative. The differences extend beyond lexical variation, as the narrative context shows different political functions: the ruler in the story of Joseph appears through administrative authority and palace structures, while the firʿawn in the story of Moses is represented through claims of supremacy, bureaucratic control, and legitimacy. Comparison with Egyptology shows limited but significant correspondence in the development of royal titles and ruler nomenclature, so Qur’anic terminology is compatible with the historical differentiation between phases of Egyptian rule. These findings support a reading of the Qur’an as a narrative with terminological-historical precision, while limiting corrective claims to the generalization of the ruler’s nomenclature. This study strengthens the dialogical model between Qur’an studies and Egyptology without making correspondence the final historical evidence, because Egyptian historical evidence is partial, layered, and open to reinterpretation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Arba Jurnal Studi Keislaman
Published
2026-10-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.64691/6yts5k97
Primary Topic
Qur’anic Interpretation Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Kings and Pharaohs in the Qur’an: Criticism of Ancient Egyptian Historiography through the Stories of Prophet Joseph and Prophet Moses

Nurul Habibah Arfizeah, Oby Ara Afima, Muhammad Nur Ikhsan, Salsabila Putri Riwanda
Arba Jurnal Studi Keislaman
Qur’anic Interpretation Studies
article

Kings and Pharaohs in the Qur’an: Criticism of Ancient Egyptian Historiography through the Stories of Prophet Joseph and Prophet Moses

Nurul Habibah Arfizeah, Oby Ara Afima, Muhammad Nur Ikhsan, Salsabila Putri Riwanda
article en

Abstract

The difference between the terms al-mālik and firʿawn in narratives of Egyptian rulers raises historiographical questions about how Qur’anic terminology relates to reconstructing Egyptian history, especially since modern historiography often uses Pharaoh as a general term for Egyptian rulers. This study examines the semantic and contextual differences between the two terms in the stories of the Prophet Joseph and the Prophet Moses. It assesses their implications for reading Egyptian chronology and historiography. This library research applies thematic interpretation (mawḍūʿī), linguistic-semantic, historical-comparative, and Egyptological analysis to relevant verses, tafsīr books, historiographic sources, and epigraphic, archaeological, and philological studies. The analysis shows a consistent terminological pattern: al-mālik refers to the ruler in Joseph’s narrative, while firʿawn marks Egyptian power in Moses’ narrative. The differences extend beyond lexical variation, as the narrative context shows different political functions: the ruler in the story of Joseph appears through administrative authority and palace structures, while the firʿawn in the story of Moses is represented through claims of supremacy, bureaucratic control, and legitimacy. Comparison with Egyptology shows limited but significant correspondence in the development of royal titles and ruler nomenclature, so Qur’anic terminology is compatible with the historical differentiation between phases of Egyptian rule. These findings support a reading of the Qur’an as a narrative with terminological-historical precision, while limiting corrective claims to the generalization of the ruler’s nomenclature. This study strengthens the dialogical model between Qur’an studies and Egyptology without making correspondence the final historical evidence, because Egyptian historical evidence is partial, layered, and open to reinterpretation.

Arba Jurnal Studi Keislaman
International Islamic University Malaysia (MY), Universitas Islam Negeri Sultan Syarif Kasim Riau (ID), Universitas Muhammadiyah Riau (ID)
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Qur’anic Interpretation Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon