history linguistics mythology palaeontology physics psychology religion Uniformitarianism
© 2001-2004 Catastrophism.com
|Sign-up | Log-in|
Introduction | Publications | More
Search results for: amarna in all categories
305 results found.
31 pages of results.
101. Editor's Notes [SIS C&C Review $]
... Rohl explained the thinking behind his chronology and gave examples of the effect it can have on understanding of archaeological finds. At Megiddo, instead of the 'Solomonic' Iron Age gate, there is a superb Late Bronze Age gate, with three courses of ashlar stone followed by a layer of Lebanese cedar, just like the biblical description of Solomon's palace. David also laid considerable importance on Wayne Mitchell's astronomical calculations which locate an eclipse of the sun at Ugarit on 9th May 1012 BC, which he linked to an inscription dated to the Amarna period which has been found there. The debate between the speakers was so lively that there was only limited time for the audience to contribute also. Despite the nominally different positions of the various participants, there was a surprising amount of common ground over the difficulties of the evidence in many areas- and the need to consider revisions to the standard chronology. On one hand, David Rohl offered a response to Aidan Dodson's coffin argument but Professor Jac. Janssen argued that there is no evidence that the Amarna letter about the eclipse ...
102. Kronos by Robert de Telder (Reviewed) [SIS C&C Review $]
... it accepts Velikovsky's reconstruction of Egyptian chronology in Ages in Chaos Vol. 1 (though Peoples of the Sea is rejected). The author also seeks to incorporate Herodotus' Egyptian chronology into his scheme and takes the Father of History at his word in placing the 4th Dynasty pyramid-builders immediately before the Ethiopian 25 th Dynasty. Essentially, therefore, this is a combination or synthesis of Velikovsky, Herodotus and the Bible, all of which are treated, more or less, as 'revealed truth'. In this way the author makes the Amarna Age (late 18 th Dynasty), which Velikovsky placed in the 9th century, contemporary with the Pyramid Age, which Herodotus placed immediately before the Ethiopian Shabaka (late 8th century). The Amarna Age pharaohs are therefore identified with the pyramid-building 4 th Dynasty. Thus Akhenaten= Cheops; Smenkhkare= Chephren; Tutankhamun= Mycerinus; Ay= Anysis. In support of such controversial identifications the author points to the fact that Cheops, like Akhenaten, was reputed to have closed the nation's temples, whilst the Egyptians of Herodotus ...
103. Revisions and Assyrians [SIS C&C Review $]
... lengths, or the idea of non-canonicals. These ideas can neither be proved nor disproved. That leaves us in limbo and seeking some other way to navigate around what has become a blockage (mentally, as well as chronologically). However, there is something else about the Assyrians that also seems to debar the kind of revision favoured by most SIS members. That is the fact that Assyrian kings of the post-Amarna period saw themselves as the direct and legitimate heirs of the royal dynast of Mitanni. In effect, they must post-date Amarna, a situation we can judge more readily in the inscriptions of Tiglath Pileser I, a contemporary of mid dynasty 20 in Egypt, when he refers to Mitanni in the past tense, several generations removed. Likewise, the LBIIB Assyrian king Shalmaneser I, a contemporary of Hattusilis III, accused the land of Uruatri of rebellion. No Assyrian king is known to have ventured that far north until Shalmaneser I but then, he was actually referring to the status of Uruatri (later Urartu or Ararat) under the dynast of Mitanni ...
104. On the Placement of Haremhab: A Critique of Gammon [Kronos $]
... to appear as the immediate successor of Amenhotep III-- and the fact that Haremhab is credited with being both the usurper and repairer of Tutankhamen's monuments. Therefore, I would suggest that a great deal of work still needs to be done before such a slender thread, in the form of a very badly damaged statue, can be expected to bind Haremhab securely to the Eighteenth Dynasty as part of a continuous chronological chain. Velikovsky has presented strong arguments in his attempt to show that the time of Haremhab was not that of the Amarna period.(25) One of the principal reasons he gives is that "had Haremhab been a prominent official in the days of el-Amarna, he, like other generals and courtiers, would have had a sepulchral chamber built for him in the necropolis of Akhet-Aton (el-Amarna)".(26) Velikovsky buttresses this statement with a footnote quoting Maspero. The words I emphasized in the preceding quotation are especially significant, for there was at least one general who had a tomb built for him at Akhet-aten. On page 81 ...
105. Heinsohn's Revised Chronology [Aeon Journal $]
... Heinsohn seems unaware of this principle, for his system requires impossible correlations of archaeological material. He has no concern for the archaeological contents of the strata which he shifts around to fit his Mesopotamian chronology. For instance, he makes the Hyksos of Egypt equal the Assyrians and dates the Hyksos layers (F through D/2) at Tell ed-Dab'a in Egypt between 750 and 625 BCE. (33) These layers contain material typical of the Middle Bronze II B (MB II B) period in Palestine, yet he places the Amarna period (which is archaeologically related to the Late Bronze II A period in Palestine) at about 650 BCE, (34) overlapping the MBII deposits at ed-Dab'a. He also claims that Tell Mardikh II B1 (the tablet layer) belongs to the first half of the seventh century BCE, since it was destroyed by Sargon II/Sargon of Akkad or Esarhaddon/Naram-Sin. Yet this stratum and its successor contain pottery typical of the Early Bronze IV/Middle Bronze I period in Palestine. (35) Furthermore, in ...
106. Shishak, the kings of Judah and some synchronisms [SIS C&C Review $]
... Palestine and Egypt during and to either side of the divided Monarchy; integration with the climatically disturbed and intermittently catastrophic era described by the Ninsianna tablets; the miraculous destruction of Sennacherib's army; the era of 10 month years. Introduction The researches of the 'New Chronologists', possibly due to over-concentration on detail, appear to be straining the overall picture of the chronological relationships between Palestine and Egypt more than seems reasonable. It is worth going back to the original raw data to check whether current trends- especially the attempts to locate the Amarna letters before the time of Solomon and to equate Shishak with either Ramesses II or Ramesses III- are really sustainable. The basic synchronisms between Mesopotamia, Palestine and Egypt (marked by capital letters in Table 1) derive from the histories of the kings of Judah and Israel, as related in the Old Testament books of Kings and Chronicles (with occasional confirmations from other OT books). Chronicles appears to be primarily a history of Judah whilst Kings appears to be primarily a history of Israel but there are endless cross-references between the ...
107. Hittites, Phrygians, and Others [Catastrophism & Ancient History Journal $]
... where Velikovsky proposed placing his series of Mars interaction disasters. This may prove to be untenable. In that eventuality the kingdom of Urartu (Iron Age) could not have been contemporaneous with the Hittites (Late Bronze), the central point made in the article, but rather came into existence after the demise of the Hittites. (2) Similarly, Sumur and Gubla of the EA correspondence, identified as Samaria and Jezreel by Velikovsky, (3) were almost certainly Byblos and Sumara in Phoenicia. This tends to suggest the Amarna age cannot be relocated in the 9th century, a realization that undermines the series of biblical parallels so cleverly contrived by Velikovsky in Ages in Chaos. In fact, the table of nations (Genesis 10:1) even preserves the memory of Sumur in the Zemarites, bracketed with Sidon and Arvad-- fellow Phoenicians. In this connection the EA tablets can hardly be dated to the age of Ahab and/or Jehoram of Israel, for there is then no correspondent who may be identified as a ruler of the northern ...
... Doubleday, 1952), Velikovsky presents extensive evidence and arguments to support his view that the famous el-Amarna tablets or letters date not from the fourteenth century B.C., as is commonly believed, but rather from the ninth century B.C. These remarkable clay tablets, written in cuneiform, were discovered by accident in the late 1880's at Tell el-Amarna in Egypt, lying buried amid a portion of the ruins of ancient Akhet-Aton, the ill-fated capital of the Eighteenth Dynasty pharaoh Amenhotep IV (Akhnaton). According to Velikovsky's historical reconstruction of the Amarna period, the letters include official correspondence with Egypt from such Biblical figures as Ahab (Rib-Addi), Jehoshaphat (AbdiHiba), Hazael (Azaru), and their contemporaries (ca. 870- 840 B.C.). Within this framework, Velikovsky also correlates various conquests and military exploits of the ninth century Assyrian monarch Shalmaneser III with information contained in the letters. He suggests, moreover, that Shalmaneser himself sent a number of letters to Egypt under the name "Burraburiash [Burnaburiash, king of Karaduniash" (Babylonia) ...
109. Cultural Aspects of the Libyan and Ethiopian Dynasties [Kronos $]
... and Twenty-first Dynasties, only to be revived under the Twenty-second or Libyan Dynasty. Scholarly opinion swung toward a Libyan date for all the chalices. Ricketts' paper of 1918, so carefully argued on the basis of artistic analogies, was termed "misleading"(10)-- yet no real reasons were adduced to invalidate the Eighteenth Dynasty attribution of the objects discussed by him. The solution to the dilemma becomes obvious when the Egyptian dynasties are placed in their correct sequence. The chalices were made as Ricketts deduced, during the Amarna period-- the late Eighteenth Dynasty. They continued to be manufactured under the Libyan Dynasty that followed, even while exhibiting the same decline in artistic standards which characterized all Egyptian art in the wake of the civil war and foreign invasion that precipitated the end of the house of Akhnaton. And if they were made, as Tait argued, "by the same group of men over no long period of time", they appear to have been manufactured in the space of two or three consecutive generations.____ ...
110. Forum [SIS C&C Review $]
... parts of the story which appear to have been embellished whilst recognising the true historical features. The Pillars of the Case The case for Exodus having occurred at or near the end of the Late Bronze Age rests on four key arguments based on the evidence of textual data plus the archaeological evidence. The key arguments are: a). the building of the store cities of Pithom and Raamses by the children of Israel (Exodus 1:11) whilst in bondage in Egypt, b). the identification of the Habiru of the Amarna Letters (the Apiru in Egyptian texts) with the Hebrew tribes, c). the evidence of the 'Israel stela' of Merenptah (mentioned above), and d). the nature of the Exodus covenant and the city lists in Joshua etc. The 19th Dynasty would have seen the end of the bondage of the children of Israel in Egypt. But this would also mean that the most part of the bondage occurred during the previous Dynasty: this conclusion parallels the information supplied by Manetho who recorded that the bondage took ...
Search took 0.080 seconds
Search powered by Zoom Search Engine