history linguistics mythology palaeontology physics psychology religion Uniformitarianism
© 2001-2004 Catastrophism.com
|Sign-up | Log-in|
Introduction | Publications | More
Search results for: tutankhamun in all categories
101 results found.
11 pages of results.
81. Some Additional Evidence from the Period from the Exodus to the End of the Eighteenth Dynasty [SIS C&C Review $]
... Salomon", Revue Biblique 48, No. 3 (July, 1939). 24. J.G. Duncan: Digging Up Biblical History (London, 1931), II, p.36. 25. Y. Aharoni, BASOR 184 (1966), pp. 13ff., and 201 (1971), pp. 35f. 26. Idem, BA 31 (1968), p. 24. 27. It is quite conceivable that Samaria in Israel was the centre of ivory work on Egyptian models. The tomb of Tutankhamun contained many art objects in ivory, not dissimilar to those found in Nimrud and Samaria. 28. E. Akurgal: Die Kunst Anatoliens von Homer bis Alexander (Berlin, 1961), p. 277. 29. "No 'Dark Ages' of six centuries' duration intervened in Greece between the Mycenean Age and the Ionian Age of the seventh century."- From my Theses for the Reconstruction of Ancient History, published as an advance summary of Ages in Chaos in Scripta Academica Hierosolymitana (New York/ Jerusalem, ...
82. Letters [SIS C&C Review $]
... proposes that that date sees Saul become king of Israel, ally himself with the native Egyptians and defeat the Amalekites at their Avaris stronghold at c. 1023BC. He locates Avaris at el Arish where he confidently expected exploration to unearth the fortress. David was a contemporary of Ahmose and Amenhotep I, Solomon a contemporary of Thutmose I and Hatshepsut, and after Solomon's death Jerusalem was sacked by Pharaoh Thutmose III- the Biblical 'Shishak'. Rohl, on the other hand, ('conclusion 19') makes David a contemporary of Akhenaten, Tutankhamun, Ay and Haremhab and the Hittite emperor, Suppiluliumas I. Both authors examine the 'el Amarna letters' in great depth, but emphasise different aspects. Velikovsky stresses the importance that 'Sumur' of the letters is Samaria- a city fortress built some seventy years after the sack of Jerusalem. Rohl concentrates on 'Labayu' and the 'habiru'. There is one further point. Rohl in his examination of Royal Architect Khnemibre's genealogy inscribed in the Wadi Hammamet, counts back through 22 twenty year generations from year 26 of Darius I ...
83. Letters [SIS C&C Workshop $]
... p. 22) that I provided him with an argument that counting 'Akhenaten's years (if this actually happened) would therefore have been to ignore his memory, not to honour him'. I had suggested that if the Egyptians started counting years from the start of Akhenaten's reign (as claimed by the 'new chronologists'), this would suggest that Akhenaten was being honoured and not despised (since it would suggest that his reign began a new era). I also pointed out that if the Egyptians were doing this, then Tutankhamun, Ay and Smenkhare (whom the 'new chronologists', like their more conventional colleagues, presumably count as reigning between Akhenaten and Horemheb) should have had a higher number of years attested to their reigns than they do. If the Egyptians merely wanted to forget Akhenaten but needed a means of dating events that took place during his reign, it would hardly do to assign his years to Horemheb. The only logical approach would be to designate these years by adding years to the reign of Amenhotep III, Akhenaten's immediate predecessor, ...
84. Monitor [SIS C&C Workshop $]
... that Josephus has never ceased to amaze archaeologists with accurate descriptions of places and events, yet his account of the visit of the Queen of Sheba to King Solomon in Jerusalem, around 940BC is almost universally rejected. One reader points out that Josephus' description of her as Queen of Egypt and Ethiopia is not taken seriously because, although the visit closely resembles that of Hatshepsut to Punt, this is supposed to have been 550 years earlier. He enquires whether there has been any carbon dating of the plant material from the tomb of Tutankhamun because, if Josephus was right, this should date at about 800BC instead of 1350BC. An enquiry a few years ago revealed that no such dating had been done. Are they afraid of the answers? Another reader later pointed out that Velikovsky had come up with the Hatshepsut/Queen of Sheba equation in 1953- and still no carbon dating has been done. At least New Scientist printed the letter. Australian Nasca Science Frontiers No. 92,p.1, New Scientist 3.9.94,pp.10,36 Patterns of circles, spirals ...
85. Letters [SIS C&C Workshop $]
... to their locations. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Tell es-Safi is no more 'ridiculous' than Tell el-Hesi as a candidate; that it is only 5 miles from the candidate site for Ekron is not such a disadvantage. In response to Tony Rees, I would like to reiterate the thesis that Solomon and Seti I were allies in their campaigns in northern Israel and Syria. Firstly, consider the remarkable fact that Seti is fighting the Hittites in Syria as early as his Year 2 and yet his predecessors (Smenkhkare, Tutankhamun, Ay, Horemheb and Ramesses I) did not have a western Asiatic empire to speak of. Contrast Seti's experience in Syria with Thutmose III of the 18th Dynasty: the latter had to conduct campaign after campaign to subdue the region, to protect his lines, to obtain suitable supply ports etc. If Seti's predecessors did not campaign in the region and exercise control there, how was he able to move in so quickly? I say he could only do so if in alliance with someone who had already subdued the region ...
86. Further Notes on Abi Milki and Pygmalion [Catastrophism & Ancient History Journal $]
... providing dates of 805-790 for Joash of Judah (complying with the "Rimah stela") and producing the far more interesting dates of 833-806 for Jehu and 833-828 for Athaliah. The year 828 we have noted seems to be favorable for the demise of Akhnaton. The original calculations were designed to lower the rule of Jehu as far below 841 as possible. Revised Table Israel Judah Egypt Omri 879-869 Tibni 879-874 Thutmosis IV 876-868 Ahab 868-848 Amunhotep III 868-832 Ahaziah 847-846 Jehoram 845-834 Akhnaton 845-828 Jehu 833-806 Athaliah 833-828 Smenkare 830-828 Jehoahaz 819-803 Joash 827-787 Tutankhamun 827-819 Joash 805-790 Amaziah 802-774 Ay? Jeroboam II 789-748 Azariah 786-735 Horemhab? Zechariah 748 Pekah 748-729 Ramses I 805-804 Shallum 747 Jotham 747-732 Seti I 804-794 Menahem 747-738 Ahaz 735-717 Ramses II 803-737 Pekahiah 737-736 Merenptah 737-728 Hoshea 729-721 Seti II; Amenmesse; Siptah and Twosret Phillip Clapham References 1. i.e. Shalmaiati; Ages in Chaos, p. 318. 2. Mitcham, C&AH, vol. II part 1, p. 63. 3. Kronos, vol. IV no. 1, p. 45. ...
87. Monitor [SIS C&C Review $]
... rock crystal. How old these are is anybody's guess. Dead Sea oil factory The Times 15.2.96 An ancient fortified village has been found overlooking the Dead Sea oasis of En-gedi. It appears to have been the centre for production of valuable balsam oil, used to anoint kings, and operated from as early as the 6th century BC until the 6th century AD when it was burned down. Tutankhamun's grandmother Time-Life: Egypt, Land of the Pharaohs Analysis of hair taken from the mummy of Queen Tye has confirmed her identity as grandmother of Tutankhamun. Monumentally hard work New Scientist 20.1.96, p. 8 A workers' burial ground, close to their living quarters and one km west of the Great Pyramid, has revealed that their skeletons were often deformed and damaged, showing that they endured chronic heavy labour building the pyramids. On average they lived not much over 30 years, half that of the nobility but there are signs of medical treatment and they were probably paid employees. Alexander's syndrome New Scientist 2.3.96. p. 13 Most statues of Alexander the Great show him ...
88. A Critique of "Ramses II and His Time" [SIS C&C Review $]
... Horemheb as an intermediate ruler between the XVIIIth and XIXth Dynasties. If Velikovsky's dates for the XVIIIth Dynasty are correct, then a revised date for the XIXth Dynasty (keeping it in sequence) must place it largely in the 8th century. Outside of Egypt there is an abundance of data which leads one to the same conclusion- the XIXth Dynasty directly followed the XVIIIth. Velikovsky's late date for the XIXth Dynasty would throw all this data into confusion. For example, the Hittite Emperor Suppiluliumas was a contemporary of the Pharaohs Akhnaton and Tutankhamun (not necessarily of Amenhotep III as Velikovsky states), his son Mursilis the adversary of Seti I, and his sons Muwatallis and Hattusilis the contemporaries of Ramesses II. Because his reconstruction interposes some 150 years between the XVIIIth and XIXth Dynasties, Velikovsky is required to divide Suppiluliumas into two persons living in two different ages. The "first", an el-Amarna correspondent, he identifies with a Syrian princelet of the time of Shalmaneser III, and he ascribes the deeds of Suppiluliumas recorded by his son Mursilis to the "second ...
89. Forum [SIS C&C Review $]
... effort this Conference would not have been the success it was. Let us now look forward to the next such Conference and hope that this was but the first in a long and fruitful series. HAROLD TRESMAN Elstree Blind Dating Sir, During a discussion at the recent Glasgow conference on the use of radiocarbon dating techniques to establish an absolute chronology for the New Kingdom period in ancient Egypt, one speaker claimed that the dates of -899 and -846 obtained by the British Museum for samples of palm kernels and reed mats from the tomb of Tutankhamun (l) were untrustworthy because the precautions taken during the collection and storage of these samples were not sufficient to ensure against "contamination". It seemed worthwhile to carry out some calculations to establish what levels of contamination would be necessary to have resulted in errors which, if the conventional chronology is correct, amount to between 200 and 400 years (depending on whether the tree-ring calibration results are valid or not) (2). The half life of C14 has been variously measured, but we may accept that quoted by ...
90. Focus [SIS C&C Review $]
... this were divided, Professor Bass pointing out that the theory of "wild motions" allowed orbits to change much more rapidly, Professor Roy requiring a mechanism and outlining current theory, according to which orbital inclinations and eccentricities oscillate to a small degree between maxima and minima. In the discussion on radiocarbon dating, Michael Jones took up what Dr MacKie had called the "slightly scandalous story" of tests made by the British Museum on two short-lived samples (BM 642a and b- reeds and dom-palm nut kernels) from the tomb of Tutankhamun, which produced (uncalibrated) dates of 846 and 899 bc- clearly at odds with the conventional chronology- but which remain unpublished. Michael Jones claimed that the conditions under which the contents of the tomb were first brought to the Cairo Museum and then stored had resulted in a degree of contamination which made the results totally unreliable. (On the relevance of this question, see MICHAEL START's letter in Forum; the suggestion seems to be merely a refinement of the declaring of any discomfiting result as "contaminated", and ...
Search took 0.100 seconds
Search powered by Zoom Search Engine