Don’t you think you should provide the text when you are providing a novel interpretation?
Joshua 19:1 says:
“And the second lot came forth to Simeon, even for the tribe of the children of Simeon according to their families: and their inheritance was within the inheritance of the children of Judah.”
You say Simeon received no inheritance, but Joshua still describes their lot as an inheritance, even though it was “within” the inheritance for Judah.
So I would say you are not reading Joshua correctly. Furthermore, just in case someone didn’t get the first time, Joshua 19:9 repeats the point:
“Out of the portion of the children of Judah was the inheritance of the children of Simeon: for the part of the children of Judah was too much for them: therefore the children of Simeon had their inheritance within the inheritance of them.”
As for verse Gen 49:7, we have
“Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce; and their wrath, for it was cruel: I will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel.”
As used by Israel, pronouncing his curses, Jacob and Israel are synonyms. So Levi and Simeon receive equal curses. They will be scattered in Israel. I’m not sure this helps you in the long run.
Sure, you can Simeon was scattered into the Northern Kingdom. But when? If Simeon and Levi share the same fate, then we must conclude that Simeon, like Levi, survives in Judah, right? That actually makes a little bit of sense… since Simeon’s inheritance is within Judah, and after the Assyrian conquest of the northern Kingdom, Levites survive only in Judah.
So why does the bible refer to the Ten Tribes of Israel? It’s really the Eight Tribes of Israel, right? And yet, despite the promise of the curse, King David locks up the 10 maidens of the northern Kingdom - - not 8 of them. The timeline of Simeon is still pretty much utter confusion.
Then you write this bit about Egyptian history: " I would date the beginning of the Egyptian civilization after the Flood, when it was most likely founded by Mizraim, Noah’s grandson. This is done by compressing Egyptian history by overlapping some of the earlier dynasties."
Frankly, I don’t think you have a prayer in making those timelines work out. We have archaeological history for Egypt that goes way back. For the scheme to work, you have to have the offspring of Noah start Egypt from scratch … which means having the Flood to back to before the first dynasty of Egypt. If you do that, then there isn’t enough time for Noah’s descendants to multiply into an Egyptian multitude.
And if you put the flood any time after the first dynasties have started, then you have double the problem … because you don’t have any time for Noah’s descendants to establish their multitude, and you don’t have any explanation for how newcomers to a flooded Egypt can just start up and continue with Egyptian practices, as if they have lived their lives in the culture.