OK, I fixed the problem :Ellis often makes these claims that two or more historic characters, traditionally considered to be different people, are in fact one and the same. And he might very well be correct in those claims, because the coincidences are quite remarkable. But we also have to keep in mind, that it's possible that the similarities might be typological or literary. Or, that one historical character could be deliberately emulating another. Or even that strange coincidences can happen.
... David and Solomon were actually Tanitic pharaohs - at the precise time accorded for David and Solomon in the Bible.
Well, yes, Jerry, this would be somewhat of a typological issue, as the Biblical David and Solomon, as depicted in the Bible, never existed. There being only one minute archaeological reference to a minor tribal chief named David. And nothing else. And then there is such as how all the Davidic lineage names match up to the line of these same pharaohs so well.
These Tanis pharaohs were actually so rich that they had 'silver' death masks, as opposed to such as Tut's mere gold mask. Silver was much more valuable back in that day, as it was much rarer than gold, which the pharaohs had plenty of.
What we are seeing here is a very similar textual transposition of locations as Ellis points out for the real, contrived, controlled opposition, revolution of nominal Jews (the Galilean Egypto-Jews - the royal Nazarites) in that their foundational gospel narratives are shifted from 'Syria' to Galilee and Judea. In this case the narrative transposition is from Tanis (Zoan) to Jerusalem (later Zion). There has always been a problem with this issue of such as what was Mount Zion, versus Mount Moriah. And the initial seat of governance was Bethel, in what was known as Ephraim (not Judea).
Even the name Tamar, matriarch of the Jews, was a common royal Egyptian name of the Tanitic period.
This text of Isaiah is supposedly from the wider period when non-compliant tribes are being swapped out for compliant (and non-Semitic) ones, such as Gomer (from Hosea 1:1). The same thing would occur later with the Ashkenazim (who are also Gomers).
And while the texts have us transfixed on the 'Holy Land', various Sab...s are setting up in today's Yemen, and the Italian peninsula. As Sabines, the latter would later transition further northward into Sabaudia (where there is a Sion in Sabaudia's Haute Savoy). These Savoys are the current royals of Italy (having completed a time-out for their involvement with Mussolini's Fascists) and have a noble House of Savoy branch in England, where they gave birth to the Congregationalist denomination (whose ministers were frequently leaders of the Skull and Bones Society of Yale).
I have argued for such duality for such as the pharaohs Seti I and Horemheb, that they were real 'Exodus' leaders (when they were 18th Dynasty generals before later becoming 19th Dynasty pharaohs). As discussed in the Sabbah brothers' Secrets of the Exodus the tomb murals of Seti I depict scenes that one might indeed take from the Exodus.If two names equal one person, could it be we are seeing reassigned originals taking on a new persona?
Remember that phrase, "How come we never see you with so and so?". And how much easier to pull such a ruse off before television and photographs.