Go to the Egyptian Dreams shop
Egyptian Dreams
Ancient Egypt Discussion Board
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Alignment of Hebrew and Egyptian Chronologies
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Pharaohs and Queens
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
stfranklin
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 11
Location: Baltimore, US

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 12:51 am    Post subject: Alignment of Hebrew and Egyptian Chronologies Reply with quote

I have been working on an alignment of Hebrew and Egyptian chronologies based on a biblical six-month year. Some things align rather nicely. Some things don't, but I think I've at least stumbled on the root of the problem. Any comments would be appreciated. My work so far can be found at http://neros.lordbalto.com/Contents.htm.

Keep in mind that this is preliminary and quite incomplete, but the highlights so far are as follows:

1) Shishak was in fact Shoshenq I.
2) Tausert (Sit-re Mery-amun) was the sister of Moses.
3) Moses was born during the reign of Merneptah. The stele that mentions Israel refers to the killing of the male children mentioned in Exodus.
4) Ham and Shem appear to have been Hammu-rabi and his son Samsu-iluna. Everything before him is probably mythological.
5) The battle of Gibeon aligns with the tree-ring event at 1159 BC. The murder of Ramses III. may have been at the behest of Joshua (this is speculative).
6) The destruction of the Tower of Babel, whatever that actually refers to, aligns with the tree-ring event at 1628 (though not necessarily with Thera). This is very tentative.
7) Ahmed Osman is right, at least as far as Joseph being Yuya is concerned.
8 ) The 40-year cycles that recur beginning with Moses and carrying over into the period of the Judges are actually the 20-year periods of the great conjunctions of Jupiter and Saturn (Yahweh and Elohim).

I think that's enough incendiary material for now Wink.

Regards,

Steve Franklin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
VBadJuJu
Priest
Priest


Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 733

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 8:29 am    Post subject: Re: Alignment of Hebrew and Egyptian Chronologies Reply with quote

stfranklin wrote:
3) Moses was born during the reign of Merneptah. The stele that mentions Israel refers to the killing of the male children mentioned in Exodus.

Actually, it says nothing about killing children. It says 'Israel is laid waste, its seed is not.' A very common tactic for the AEs was to burn the crops of an adversary as they passed thru. This was especially true before they figured out siege warfare or were not inclined to stop and commit to battle.

Presumably, this is based on the idea that there was an Exodus in order for there to be a Moses. To most Egyptoligists it smacks of a myth down to the name 'Moses'.
_________________
Build a man a fire and he is warm for a day.
Set a man on fire and he is warm for the rest of his life.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stfranklin
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 11
Location: Baltimore, US

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 3:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Actually, it says nothing about killing children. It says 'Israel is laid waste, its seed is not.' A very common tactic for the AEs was to burn the crops of an adversary as they passed thru.


I was hoping for a bit more serious response. No one with any credentials in this field, or anyone else who understands the context for that matter, has ever suggested this line refers to the agricultural shortcomings of the Israelites. Even those who think that Moses or anyone else in the old testament lived past 90 do not pretend that there was anything resembling a lowland Jewish presence in Palestine during this period. What I have done is simply to remove an obvious confusion over the fact that the Hebrew calendar contains two New Years. When this is done, a whole series of obvious synchronisms that have been rejected on chronological grounds are seen to be correct. All this without tampering with the established timeline by more than a year or two here and there and without assigning anything after Noah to the realm of mythology because it doesn't fit a preconceived notion of when things occurred based on a very early faulty translation. Even Rawlinson's identification of Cushan-rishathaim with Asshur-ris-ilim turns out to be correct.

I intentionally included a link so that you might at least look at the chronological tables and see the context in which these claims were made. Based on the halving of the timeline, the alignment of the birth of Moses with the fifth year of Merneptah is simply a corollary of the date of the Exodus at 1185 BC, 240 years before the building of Solomon's Temple, so that there was no Israelite presence in Palestine during Merneptah's rule. But then, you will probably tell me that Solomon was mythical too, no doubt on chronological grounds.

What has to be understood is that ALL attempts at alignment of the two civilizations up until now have been based on a systematic 2:1 error that has as its most important absurdity, among many many absurdities, the character of Moses beginning a 40-year sojourn in the desert when he was 80 years old. Yet massive amounts of total trivia continue to be written based on this unrealistic timescale. And the intellectual blades of the two sides are so dull that they either stick obsessively with the absurd timescale or they claim everything is myth and legend and throw out the most important written accounts of actual historical events because they refuse to believe that the authors could have misread a word in an original text. To this extent, the latter are no better than those who think the text was transmitted in its final received form by an Arabian volcano god who was capable of artifically extending the lives of his followers, presumably by breathing the fumes of his volcanic fires. Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
VBadJuJu
Priest
Priest


Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 733

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 4:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stfranklin wrote:
I was hoping for a bit more serious response. No one with any credentials in this field, or anyone else who understands the context for that matter, has ever suggested this line refers to the agricultural shortcomings of the Israelites.


Er, the point I was making is that it does not say that. It might refer to events in Exodus, but it certainly doesnt say that, so accepting it as such is clearly in anticipation of the conclusion. Contrary to your assertions quite a number of very, very well credentialed Egyptologists (as well as Biblical historians) have looked at the key event in Exodus and come up quite empty handed.

In short, before attempting to synchronize chronologies anchored by a Biblical event, it helps to establish that the event actually happened.

YMMV
_________________
Build a man a fire and he is warm for a day.
Set a man on fire and he is warm for the rest of his life.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Osiris II
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 1752

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 4:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
In short, before attempting to synchronize chronologies anchored by a Biblical event, it helps to establish that the event actually happened.

I must agree, VBad.
There are many who have come to believe that most of the Bible is, in short, Hebrew grandizment. An effort on the part of Israeli historian to give more of a meaningful history to their people. To try and bring known cronelogical history into line with something that is possibly a myth is only an exercise in self-dilusion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stfranklin
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 11
Location: Baltimore, US

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 6:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
In short, before attempting to synchronize chronologies anchored by a Biblical event, it helps to establish that the event actually happened.


The proposed alignment is anchored in a series of events, the primary one of which is the identification of Shishak with Shoshenq I. And no, the alignment does not necessarily require that any of the events actually occurred. The history presented in the Hebrew holy books could be the most fanciful fiction imaginable and still be based on data available to a scribe working in the royal libraries of Mesopotamia or Egypt, as A H Sayce demonstrated quite convincingly a long time ago. And his contention is only reinforced by the obvious mistranslation of what most probably was a word for the concept of "New Year" by the word "year." What is necessary is that one establish the proper scale of those accounts so that one can then determine if the events described fit the actual events on the ground. Despite what you suggest, there is no intention to deceive in these texts. Yes, there is error. But it is legitimate error, though one does have to wonder why someone wouldn't suspect this error when presented with a woman having a son at the age of 90 rather 45.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
VBadJuJu
Priest
Priest


Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 733

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 7:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stfranklin wrote:
The proposed alignment is anchored in a series of events
Spiffy. But if one or more did not happen, they are non-events

stfranklin wrote:
the primary one of which is the identification of Shishak with Shoshenq I
As anyone here can tell you there is a serious problem with identifying Pharoahs based on phenetic similarity in their Son of Re, or birth name. Namely, it is quite unlikely anyone, especially those outside Egypt, would have known what it was. Shoshenq would have been known as Hedjkheperre Setepenre. They simply did use their birth name once they ascended the throne.

stfranklin wrote:
Despite what you suggest, there is no intention to deceive in these texts.
I made no such suggestion.
_________________
Build a man a fire and he is warm for a day.
Set a man on fire and he is warm for the rest of his life.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stfranklin
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 11
Location: Baltimore, US

PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 8:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anyone here want to have a serious discussion? You may, however, want to actually read what I have written before commenting: http://neros.lordbalto.com/. You can judge for yourself what I have said and what I have not said.

Regards,

Steve Franklin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't have time right now to do a thorough reading of your site, but I did notice one thing:

Yuya as Joseph.

Yuya was never Vizier of Egypt (or Viceroy of Nubia for that matter).
In that sense the argument doesn't quite work.

There is another interesting individual of roughly the same time however: Aperel.
His tomb was found by Zivie in Saqqara. His tomb dates to the time of Amenhotep III and Akhenaten. His son Huy became a general in the army.
Aperel himself was a Master of the Horses (same title as Yuya). He was also Vizier of the North for several years.
His wife was buried with rather high honors (even more than Tuya, the wife of Yuya and mother of Tiye).
_________________
Math and Art: http://mathematicsaroundus.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stfranklin
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 11
Location: Baltimore, US

PostPosted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 11:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Now this is the kind of response I was hoping for. Thanks for the input. In the matter of Yuya, I am following Osman, whom you may disagree with, but the advantage of his theory is that it fits like a glove, so to speak, my determination that Joseph was born in the year 1420 BC and died in the year 1365: http://neros.lordbalto.com/ChapterTwo.htm, calculated by dead reckoning back from Shoshenq I/Shishak at 945 BC with the one caveat that the Hebrew chronology uses a fairly transparent 6-month year based, possibly, on a mistranslation of "year" for "New Year," of which there are two in the Jewish calendar, a civil and a religious one: http://neros.lordbalto.com/ChapterOne.htm. The problem I am facing is that the biblical chronology, with the one caveat I mentioned, appears to be so precise, possibly resulting from access to the Egyptian records as suggested by A H Sayce a long time ago, that I am forced to avoid more than the smallest "fudge" factor. Even as far back as Shem, whom I have tentatively identified with Samsu-iluna, the deviation is surprisingly small.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 2:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have to admit that I do not believe much of what Osman writes.

About Shishak:
There are a total of 6 kings named Shoshenq. I don't see why we would just assume that Shishak is Shoshenq I? These Kings span some 200 years and I think that Shoshenq I may in some sense be the least likely to be the king mentioned in the bible.
The idea that a princess was married off to a foreign king was a very alien concept to the egyptians. I would find it a bit more likely if that happened under one of the later (less powerful) kings.

About the Israel stela:
James Henry Breasted argues very strongly in Ancient records of Egypt; vol3 that the phrase "his seed is not" could not possibly refer to the slaying of the male children of the Israelites.
He points out that this phrase is used five times in the inscription referring to other people (the northern invaders, the Libyans and the Seped, Libyans, the Meshwesh, the Amor).
Breasted concludes that "their seed is not" is a conventional phrase applicable to any defeated and plundered people, and cannot possibly designate an incident peculiar to the history of Israel.

He also notes in the footnote that in earlier publications he had translated "seed" as "grain", but decided on the slightly more general translation.

Breasted mentions: "It is certain, therefore, that Merneptah campaigned in Palestine, and there can be no doubt that Israeel there suffered defeat and pillage at his hand."

Apparently he drew the conclusion that Israel had already been established at that time.
_________________
Math and Art: http://mathematicsaroundus.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kmt_sesh
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 13 Nov 2004
Posts: 7099
Location: Chicago, IL

PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 3:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Apparently he drew the conclusion that Israel had already been established at that time.


The stela would tell us that much. The Egyptian spelling of "Israel" is unmistakable. What is noteworthy, however, is the determinative used to clarify the nature of the Israelis as the Egyptians found them. Instead of the ideogram for "town" or "village" or "region," as we see throughout most of the rest of this stela, the ideogram for the Israelis was simply "people." This was the Egyptian word rmtj, and we see an example here:



The same little ideogram of the man and woman surmounting three vertical strokes is what appears on the stela as the determinative for the Israelis. This tells us that in the time of Merenptah, the Egyptians at least regarded the Israelis not as a cohesive socio-political entity but simply as a band of people. The archaeological record would support that. The Israelis of this time had yet to become a kingdom or a nation, but they definitely existed as a "tribe."

I did give stfranklin's site a peek and find it to be interesting reading. I must stress that I approach these things from a strictly academic and secular point of view, as most of the rest of you do, and while I do not view the Pentateuch as a terribly reliable work of history, the kind of timeline on which stfranklin has been working is the same kind of thing many scholars have tried to puzzle through. Bear in mind that many of the giants of Egyptology in its earliest days had much training in biblical history, and many of them originally set out to prove the accounts of the Bible correct. Most of them found little to no success aside from such discoveries as Pi-Ramesse (you're not going to find what's likely not there), but it's what gave them their start.
_________________


Visit my blog!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
VBadJuJu
Priest
Priest


Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 733

PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

anneke wrote:
Breasted concludes that "their seed is not" is a conventional phrase applicable to any defeated and plundered people, and cannot possibly designate an incident peculiar to the history of Israel.

He also notes in the footnote that in earlier publications he had translated "seed" as "grain", but decided on the slightly more general translation.


It basically comes from their form of early 'colonial warfare'. When the AE army would come up against a bottled up city, they didnt have a clue as to how to besiege it. As an alternative, they would rip up every plant, burn orchards etc and spoil the wells. This approach was very common in the campaigns of Thutmosis III as evidenced in the day books, where one entry -- surely bragging -- claims to have 'destroyed every last seed of the vile Asiatics'. The phrase was oft repeated in day books, stele and annals as to be formulaic.

After a time, there was a certain amount of hubris attached to it. T-III and A-II had a habit of showing up at harvest time to collect tribute. If a city would resist and lock themselves up it would hack them off - after all they had other city-states to get to!! So they would set about again burning and trampling everything they could not carry.

It wasnt until the time of Ramesses that they figured out siege warfare and anti-wall tools.
_________________
Build a man a fire and he is warm for a day.
Set a man on fire and he is warm for the rest of his life.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anneke
Queen of Egypt
Queen of Egypt


Joined: 23 Jan 2004
Posts: 9305

PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 2:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kmt_sesh wrote:
I did give stfranklin's site a peek and find it to be interesting reading. I must stress that I approach these things from a strictly academic and secular point of view, as most of the rest of you do, and while I do not view the Pentateuch as a terribly reliable work of history, the kind of timeline on which stfranklin has been working is the same kind of thing many scholars have tried to puzzle through.


Still haven't had the time I need to take a more thorough look Very Happy (work is hectic). But what I saw looks interesting.
There are some details I pointed out that raise some question marks in my mind, but the overall setting is intriguing.
I think these kind of theories are hard to prove (if not impossible). But I liked the set-up and the general idea.

Looks like mr StFranklin put a lot of serious effort into his work. I do respect that.


Quote:
When the AE army would come up against a bottled up city, they didnt have a clue as to how to besiege it. As an alternative, they would rip up every plant, burn orchards etc and spoil the wells. This approach was very common in the campaigns of Thutmosis III [...]

I read what Breasted wrote about Tuthmosis III (interesting read I think). There is mention in one of the campaigns that the army actually harvested the fields. I couldn't tell if they took all the grains as a tribute or if they did this as a punitive measure (or both).

Back to Merneptah's time:
I found it interesting that the year 5 victory of Merneptah was celebrated in several places. The Israel stela ("Hymn on the victory over the Libyans") is just one of several.
There is also the Athribis stela commemorating the same event. It lists the slain, captives and spoils. But that piece focusses, exclusively it seems, on the libyans and the Sherden.
The great karnak inscription is the longest document and gives an account of the war against the Libyans.
Most of the inscriptions show that the main event in the time is the attack by the coalition of foreigners on egypt and the resulting war. It seems that Merneptah went into "asia" (as they called it) on a more punitive raid?
It sounds as though Merneptah may have gone on more that one raid (maybe year 3 and year 5) against the towns in the Syria-Palestinian region. The mention of Israel is in context of those punitive raids.
_________________
Math and Art: http://mathematicsaroundus.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Smartie
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 02 Oct 2005
Posts: 250
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 4:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

what of Solomon's wife? who was a daughter of a pharaoh?
or bithia the daughter of pharaoh who Mered took?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Pharaohs and Queens All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group