history linguistics mythology palaeontology physics psychology religion Uniformitarianism
© 2001-2004 Catastrophism.com
|Sign-up | Log-in|
Introduction | Publications | More
Search results for: assyrian in all categories
601 results found.
61 pages of results.
1. Assyria, Karduniash, Babylon: A Rational chronology [Catastrophism & Ancient History Journal $]
... Tanis-- existed, with each being ruled by contemporary kings and priests; thus the 20th, 25th; and 22nd dynasty "pharaohs" ruled side by side in the 7th century. Using this technique the problems of 8th-6th century Egyptian chronology are resolved and there is clear evidence to support the thesis. Similar analysis can be presented for first millennium Karduniash/Babylon, asserting that there were two centers of power with a Kassite (Karduniash) king, Burraburniash, ruling side by side with Marduk Zakir Sumi (Babylon prince under Assyrian influence) during the Amarna period (865 B.C.). This approach furthermore must be used by all schools, both conventional and revised, to present Egypt in the Second Intermediate Period. In this case the conventional scholars squeeze this period into 200 years, with three capitals (Avaris, Xois, Thebes), whereas the revised chronology allows about 450years for this Hyksos epoch. The Multiple Center of Rule approach is often quite sound, as early scholars may not have had enough data to define all the power centers and ...
2. Reviews [SIS C&C Workshop $]
... . Colloquium), 11 Green Hill Road, Madison, NJ 07940, United States. Erratum Under the heading Occasional Publications Series in Workshop 1989:1 we gave details of a paper by Brad Aaronson. He asks us to correct the title to 'The Jerusalem Chronology of the Israelite Monarchies' and not 'Monarchs' as given. Brad Aaronson's 'Jerusalem Chronology of the Israelite Monarchies' In his 'Jerusalem Chronology of the Israelite Monarchies', Brad Aaronson touches on a subject central to the whole revisionist debate- namely the relationship between Hebrew and Assyrian chronology. When the history of the neo-Assyrian empire was being reconstructed, towards the end of the last century, it was discovered that there was a disagreement of roughly thirty years between the chronology deduced from the Assyrian limmu or eponym lists and that of the Hebrew kings. Faced with this problem, scholars assumed that the Assyrian records were the more accurate and accordingly redated the earlier part of the Hebrew kingdoms. Such action, says Aaronson, was completely uncalled-for and reflected the anti-biblical bias of the time. The biblical record, ...
3. Who Were the Assyrians of the Persian Period [Aeon Journal $]
... ) from 539 to 465 presents major problems and that a reconstruction of the political history of the area is an almost impossible task. (A. Kuhrt, "Babylonia from Cyrus to Xerxes," in The Cambridge History of Iran, Volume IV [Cambridge, 1988, pp. 135ff.) Within the last five years, the author has synchronized the post "Ninevite 5" strata of Assyria with the following sequence of historical periods. (1) Stratigraphy History (1) Hellenistic Hellenism in Assyria (2) Late Assyrian Late Akhaemenid rule over Assyria (3) Neo-Assyrian Middle Akhaemenid rule over Assyria (4) Middle Assyrian Early Akhaemenid rule over Assyria (5) Mitanni Rule of Media over Assyria (6) Old Akkadian Period Assyrian Empire of Naram Sin Modern scholars have subjected the ancient Near East to three different dating schemes, resulting in a triplication of the actual historical periods. (2) For example, the attempt to synchronize the time of Hammurabi with Abraham necessitated placing the Babylonian ruler in the early second and/or third millennium BCE ...
4. The Hittite Raid [Catastrophism & Ancient History Journal $]
... his achievements are considered outstanding in a time of relative Babylonian weakness," says Brinkman. [20 Nebuchadnezzar I's reign was a time of cultural[2l and spiritual renaissance and has been described as a "turning point"[22 in terms of religion. He appears to have appointed his daughter as entu priestess at Ur, where a stele of his was found. [23 He is even felt to have been able to hold his own against the Assyrians, even to the point of leading and/or sanctioning raids into Assyrian territory. [24 Finally, Nebuchadnezzar I appears to be the son of Ninurta-nadin-shumi, as mentioned in sources from Nabonidus' time.[25 Unfortunately this cannot as yet be confirmed by contemporaneous inscriptions from Nebuchadnezzar I's own time. This appears however to be at least provisionally accepted, as Nabonidus is known to have had very clear antiquarian interest. An inscription of Nabonidus tells us of "the finding of a stele erected in the Giparu by Nebuchadnezzar I which portrays the entu priestess... ." [26 Genealogical information ...
5. A New Interpretation of the Assyrian King List [Catastrophism & Ancient History Journal $]
... From: Catastrophism and Ancient History XII:2 (July 1990) Home¦ Issue Contents LESTER J. MITCHAM "A New Interpretation of the Assyrian King List" Proceedings of the Third Seminar of Catastrophism and Ancient History Marvin Arnold Luckerman, Editor Reviewed by Herbert A. Storck "A New Interpretation of the Assyrian King List" by Lester Mitcham is disarmingly simple. He contends that Assur rabi (II) was not the son of Assur nasir apli (I), but rather the son of a previous Assur nasir apli, who was the son of Tukulti Ninurta (I). With this as a point of departure Mitcham proceeds to re-align the chronology of Babylonia with respect to the dual Assyrian royal line that emerges from this repositioning. That Assur nasir apli, the son of Tukulti Ninurta (I) had played a role in the revolt against his father has been suggested before by Poebel and Weidner, 1 although he is not considered to have played any further role in that short-lived coup d'etat. All in all, I can see no pressing ...
6. Heinsohn and the Hyksos (An Answer to Martin Sieff) [Aeon Journal $]
... This drastic step was followed by an even more startling departure from Velikovsky's revision. Heinsohn identified the mysterious Hyksos-- cruel conquerors of Egypt and masters of a mighty empire-- as the Assyrians. Like Martin Sieff, I had accepted Velikovsky's view that the Hyksos were the Biblical Amalekites, who left Arabia during the Exodus disaster (c. 1450 BCE), battled the escaping Israelites, and occupied Egypt. Heinsohn's claim that the Hyksos Empire-- which brought far-reaching technological and cultural innovations to Egypt-- was really the Assyrian Empire made more sense than attributing this profound influence to a relatively obscure desert tribe. On the other hand, the Hyksos period is firmly anchored in the Middle Bronze. Assyrians of the empire period were firmly placed in the Iron Age. How could Heinsohn hope to bridge this enormous archaeological gap? With Heinsohn, stratigraphic evidence comes first. If he was wrong about the Hyksos, Heinsohn said, somewhere in Egypt we should find archaeological indications of Iron Age Assyria preceded by Middle Bronze Hyksos. Stratified sites are not common in ...
7. Hittites and Phrygians [Catastrophism & Ancient History Journal $]
... small round shield, and short spear, (iii) both were considerable manufacturers of iron, (iv) similarities exist in house construction and method and style of execution, (v) similarities occur in social organization, and (vii) in art. C. W. Ceram 6 claims the plastic art of the Hittites tends toward monumentality rather than form. "It has no style as such but has crude and distinct characteristics in common with the monumentality of the Urartians." It betrays, it seems, evidence of Assyrian influence, according to Ceram, and this must be a paradox, for while Urartu was contemporaneous with Hittite empire had long disappeared before the Assyrians were in position to disseminate culture (per orthodox chronology). Ceram notes that in architecture the Hittites and Urartians differed from most other peoples who tended to build everything around the temple and religious shrine. Instead, they made the walled citadel their central architectural feature, and at an enormous cost in labor. They laid stone blocks upon almost inaccessible crags and ridges-- sites determined ...
8. Rejoinder to Aaronson [Catastrophism & Ancient History Journal $]
... my view that Amunhotep III dates earlier than Solomon. Brad expresses puzzlement that I did not "bring up the 18th Dynasty cartouches found in the foundation of a palace of Adad-nerari I...". This point requires more detailed discussion and the evidences thereof to be cited. If it is as valid as Brad clearly accepts; then by its mere acceptance Brad has ruled out all possibility of any major revision of Ancient Near Eastern chronology. What Brad would have us believe as possible is the concept of shifting a group of Assyrian kings (Ashuruballit I to Tukulti-Ninurta I) in line with a redating of Egypt's 18th and 19th Dynasties. It is my understanding that Brad also shifts Eriba-Adad I with the above group, and also the sons of Tukulti-Ninurta I. None of these kings can be moved without a complete violation of the genealogical information contained within the Inscriptions left to us by many of the kings of Assyria, and which name the king himself, and frequently his father and grandfather(s). Often we also have information telling us about previous ...
9. History, Harmony and the Hebrew Kings (review) [Catastrophism & Ancient History Journal $]
... the chronology of the Hebrew kings. This book (1986, $19.95, Chronology Books, Box 3043, Spencer, Iowa 51301) represents a contribution to that growing genre. Also to be considered briefly in this study is a recent two-part article by D. Hickman, "The Chronology of Israel and Judah" (Catastrophism and Ancient History, 7-2, July 1985; 8-1; January 1986). The present review will be organized around three major periods of Hebrew chronology (with a few minor digressions) and their corresponding Assyrian synchronisms: (a) The time of David and the suggested synchronism with Shalmaneser II; (b) The period of Ahab, which Faulstich wishes to associate with Assur nasir apli (II) although Shalmaneser (III) has traditionally been connected with these events; (c) The time of Hezekiah and the campaigns of Sennacherib. First, however, I would like to note the vastly different interpretations that Faulstich (pp. 188-89) and Hickman (Part I, 60ff.) give to the prophecy of Ezekiel ( ...
10. The Years 763 and 687 BC [SIS C&C Review $]
... From: SIS Review Vol V No 4 (1984) Home¦ Issue Contents The Years 763 and 687 BC John J. Bimson (c) JOHN BIMSON 1984 Dr John Bimson, biblical archaeologist and lecturer in Old Testament Studies at Trinity College, Bristol, is a consultant and regular contributor to the Review. The case for a major catastrophe having occurred in the year 687 BC is briefly reviewed and the idea that the 687 date is dependent on Assyrian chronology is shown to be in error. The date actually derives from Chinese evidence. Further, there seems to be no good evidence to postulate a global disaster in that year, the Chinese evidence suggesting no more than a meteor shower. However, Near Eastern evidence does suggest that the years 763 and 701 BC may have seen fairly widespread upheavals. In his letter concerning Velikovskian catastrophism and Assyrian chronology (see "Ankylosis in the Chronology of Reconstructed History?" on facing page), Marx focuses on the well-known solar eclipse recorded in the Assyrian Eponym List and conventionally dated to 763 BC. He ...
Search took 0.090 seconds
Search powered by Zoom Search Engine