"Expert" Ancient Near East Chronology


The reason and purpose of this rough article is to give some evidences for that the conventional chronology of Egypt and Bible and Mesopotamia is not so "scientific" or "expert"/"authoritative" as the people in power keep making out, and that the alternative chronology of us and others is not so "un-scientific" or "un-expert"/"un-authoritative" as they keep making out.
Below we show that there are problems with each of the main supports of the conventional chronology of Egypt and bible and Mespotamia.

Regnal Years / King Lists:
The conventional chronology does have some vertical chronological supports such as adding up the totals of reigns lengths of dynasties in the Assyrian king list, however the few evidences they have are not so infallible or reliable as they assert, and there are some places where their vertical chronology doesn't match but clashes with evidences of some sources like the bible and Herodotus, and they have no or few other confirmations.
The problems with conventional scholars vertically adding-up heaps of dynasties and kings regnal years totals include: It all hinges on the order and lengths of all the many dynasties and kings reigns all being correct. They do not prove that  every single dynasty and king/reign is fully consecutive without any coregencies or overlaps. The king lists don't say whether the regnal years include part years (preceeding/suceeding king's reign starting/finishing after only part of a year). If you have a hundred kings and each has a part year counted as a year then you have a 100 years difference by the end of the list.
Some kings reigns have disputed uncertain reign lengths with quite a large difference in the number of years. A good example is Khufu/Cheops of the 4th dynasty of Egypt whose reign ranges from 63 yrs (Manetho) to 14 yrs (Dakhla inscription taken verbatim) years! Menkaure's reign has a similar range. Pepi's reign is uncertain whether "64 or 94 years"! In Egyptology there is an issue of whether inscriptions years are years or cattle counts (2 years), which can double or half reigns lengths. Sargon of Akkad reign variously either 37 or 40 or 54/55/56 years. Hammurabi's either 42 or 55 yrs. A number of dynasties in the Sumerian king list also have different totals of the number of years.
Guti dynasty either 25 or 91/99 or 125 years.
A number of Egyptian king lists have differing numbers of kings/generations/priests/bulls between points in ancient dynastic history.
The FIP/1IP is a lacuna of uncertain length in ancient Egyptian history. The TIP/3IP is also an uncertain period, and the bible also confirms contemporary "princes of Zoan and Noph" in those times.
Mesopotamian also has a couple of "Dark Ages" periods of disputed length. (There is also a break in Mesopotamian history around the Larsa dynasty between the periods covered by the Sumerian king list and Babylonian king list, though the dynasties relationships do seem to be verified.)
The length of the year (number of days/months) also varied in/between some cultures lunar/solar calendars in different times in world history.
Herodotus said Moeris of the 12th dynasty was only 900 years before [Amasis 2], and evidence which is ignored/rejected by orthodox chronolgy seems more closer to the truth than the asserted ascribed dates for the 12th dynasty in/of the orthodox chronology.
In Egyptology some orthodox expert sources admit that the date for the early dynasties might still be out by a few centuries. A few decades ago the world already saw Egyptian dates suddenly reduced by "400 years" with Menes being changed from 3400 to 3100/3000 bc with the reason being given that some dynasties are now seen to be contemporary rather than consecutive. Menes and/or the 1st dynasty of Egypt has ranged from 5000s to 2000s bc in orthodox sources in the last few centuries.
Conventional chronology claims Moses was "1300/1200s" bc in direct conflict with the bible which has Moses "480 years before Solomon" (ca 1000s/900s bc). They also have the exodus, supposedly in the 19th dynasty in "1300/1200s bc, "too close to the mention of Israel in the Merneptah stele".
How is it that these "experts" dismiss some sources like the bible and Herodotus as "unreliable", but then they assert that some sources like Assyrian king list are infallible gospel truth "science"?

Assyrian/Babylonian king list:
The orthodox "experts" wrongly claim that the adding up of regnal years in the Assyrian king lists is "expert" and "authoritative". We have tried to show that there are problems with this but they just kept ignoring our points and asserting that the Assyrian king list is "expert". One of the things they said was "there is not proven to be any co-regencies", but this is wrong because they have not proven that there are none throughout all the Assyrian/Babylonian dynasties, and we gave some evidences that indicate that there surely are or must be. Unfortunately I have not yet found the full correct decipherment of the Assyrian king  list, but i do wish to regive here some of our evidences that the Assyrian king list seems to surely have coregencies and is unreliable until/unless someone can correctly explain the strange patterns.
We are pretty certain that King David matches the Amarna period, and this means that the Assyrian king list certainly must have some coregencies or exageration (because the king list has too many kings and total years between Ashuruballit, who was contemporary with Amarna period, and later Assyrian kings who were contemporary with kings of Israel/Judah).
The Assyrian and Babylonian and Sumerian king lists seem to have strange patterns of alternating pairs or groups of reigns lengths (and of elements of kings names) throughout the lists. Many of the reigns are pretty small number of years.
In one 400 years section of the Babylonian king list there are three 13 yrs, four 18 yrs, three 22 yrs, four 3 yrs, three 6 yrs, two 1 yrs, two 8 yrs, two 15 yrs, which surely implies a strangeness or pattern in the regnal years of the king list.
One 400 years section of the Assyrian king list has 27 kings, while the parallel Babylonian king list has 42 kings, which is quite a difference.
The Assyrian kinglist has 5 Shamsiadads and 5 Ashurniraris and 5 Shalmanesers some of who might possibly really be the same person.
Picture of Ashurnasirpal has two persons which might be 2 not 1 kings?
Picture of Ashurbanipal hunting shows two horses which might imply 2 not 1 kings?
Bible says "kings (plural) of the Assyrians" in one place (1 Chron 28:16).
Assyrian king was 'sharru rabu' "great king" in the bible which is like a high king or king of kings and might mean there were sub-kings? (Compare rabmag "chief of magi", rabsaris "chief of eunuchs", rabshakeh "chief of cupbearers (for head of the  army)", chief rabbi. Shar can mean "prince" or "host", like in Anshar, Kishar, Sarrabu/Sharrupa. Lugal is "king" in Sumerian/Akkadian, but Assyrian records use lu-gal as "chief man".)
'Daniel' in Bible has 2 or 3 co-rulers of Babylon (Nabonidus & Bel... & Daniel).
Assyrian kng list has a few kings who were "brother" or "son" of preceeding king in the list and these brothers might have partly co-reigned. It might not be true that "son of must be read descendant"?
The king list has some sons who are two or three kings later in the list which might imply co-rulers between the father and son?
The Assyrian king list has 2 or 3 or 4 periods/dynasties/capitals (Asshur, Calah, Nineveh, Mitanni/Hanigalbat, Resen, Erbil/Arbela, Rehoboth, Shubat-Enlil/Shekhna, Dur-Sharrukin, Ekallatum, Kar-Tukltininurta) not just one, and some of these might have been contemporary or overlapped.
There is an uncertain period in the middle of the Assyrian king list where a few kings have erased reigns years, which might indicate a break/join?
The bible mentions the Assyrian/Babylonian king and rabsaris and rabshakeh or tartan/general, and it is possible that some of these second officers may have co-reigned and/or also been listed in the king lists. Asyrian records mention the "King and Crown Prince" in a number of records.
Chronicle P differs with Synchronistic History on some Assyrian king list names.
The Babylonian king list includes some "Uncertain Dynasties".
Sources like the bible and Amarna letters only give the kings names and not their numbers/numerals, and some might be incorrectly corresponded.
The Assyrians rule/dominion lasted for a different number of years in classical and other sources (Berosus, Ctesias/Jerome, Herodotus, bible).
1013/1240/1280/1300/1306/1500 yrs from Bel/Semiramis to Medes 816/700 bc (Ctesias); or
1995 yrs Ninus to Philip 197 bc; or
"30/33 generations/descents from Belus/Ninus/Ninyas to Sardanapalus"; or
520 yrs duration of Assyrians until Medes (Herodotus); or
Semiramis 5 generations before Nitocris; or
"8 generations or 216 years", or
Bel 322 yrs before Trojan war 1229 bc (Thallus/Theoph.)
(Kutirnahunte 1635/1850 yrs before Ashurbanipal 650 bc.)
(Assyrians had periods of 1805 yrs with the last one ending in 712 bc.)
There are a few possibly similar sequences in the Assyrian/Babylonian/Sumerian king lists, eg:

Tukultininurta 1 and 2 both linked with 7 years periods.
Ashurnirari 3 (6 yrs), & Ashurnirari 4 (6 yrs).

Adadnirari 3 then Shalmaneser 4 then Assurdan 3.
Adadnirari 1 then Shalmaneser 1.

Ashurrisheshi 2 then Tiglathpileser 2.
Ashurrisheshi 1 then Tiglathpileser 1.

Adadnirari 1 then Tukultininurta 1 then Ashurnasirapli/Ashurnadinapli.
Adadnirari 2 then Tukultininurta 2 then Ashurnasirapli 2.

Shu-Ilishu (10 years)
Iddin-Dagan (21 years)
Ishme-Dagan (19/20 years)
Lipit-Ishtar (11 years)

Sumulailum (35/36)
Zabum (14)
Apil-sin (18)
Sin-muballit (20/30)
35 & 14 = 18 + 30.

Kurigalzu II (22/25)
Nazimaruttash (26)
Kadashman-Turgu (18)
Kadashman-Enlil (11/15)
Kudur-Enlil (9/6)
25 & 26. 26 & 18 + 9. 18 = 11 + 6/9.

Meli-Shikhu/Melishipak (15)
Marduk-apla-iddina (13)
Zababa-shuma-iddina (1)
Enlil-nadin-akhe (3)
15 & 1 = 13 & 3.

Marduk-kabit-ahheshu (18)
Nebuchadnezzar I (22)
Marduk-nadin-ahhe (18)
Adad-apla-iddina (22)

Nebuchadnezzar I (22)
= Enlil-nadin-apli (4)
+ Marduk-nadin-ahhe (18)

Nabonassar (14 yrs)
Nabunadinzur (2 yrs)
Ukinzer & Pulu/Tiglathpileser 3 (5 yrs)
Ululai/Shulmaneser 5 (5 yrs)
Mardukappaliddin/Merodachbaladin (12 yrs)
2 + 5 + 5 = 12. 14 = 2 + 12?

Kandalanu (22)
+ Nabopolasar (21)
= Nebuchadnezzar (43)

Adad-apla-iddina (22)
= Marduk-ahhe-eriba (1)
+ Marduk-zer-..... (12)
+ Nabu-shumu=libur (8)

Enlil-nasir II (6 years)
Ashur-nirari II (7 years)
Ashur-bel-nisheshu (9 years)
Ashur-rim-nisheshu (8 years)

Ashurnadinahhe 2 (10 yrs)
+ (Eriba-adad 1, 27 years)
= Ashur-uballit I (36)

Adadnirari 3 (28)
= Shalmaneser 4 (10)  
+ Assurdan 3 (18)

Shamsiadad 5 (13)
+ Adadnirari 3 (28)
= Semiramis 3 (42)

Ashur-dan II (23)
Adadnirari II (21)
Tukultininurta 1  (7)
Ashurnasirpal/Asnapper 2 (25)
Shalmaneser 3 the Great 853  (35)
23 & 21 (3 excess remainder), 7-&-25 & 35 (3 less)

Generations:
The problem with dating by the number of generations is that it is admitted that even in modern family trees the number of generations in the same period sometimes varies in different lines. The Assyrian king list and Babylonian king list have quite a different total number of kings reigns for a same period. In the bible there are a different number of generations between Joseph and Moses/Joshua in some different tribal leaders genealogies (Levite/Moses, Judahite/Caleb, etc). The genealogies in Matthew and Luke have a few missing generations known from other biblical books. It is said by some that in the Levite/Mosaic genealogy in 'Exodus' the begats are not direct son of like the ones in 'Genesis' and so there may be gaps? A generation is variously either 30/33 or 40 or 100 years in different ancient/modern sources. Also, rural mountain populations lived longer than urban civilised peoples (eg compare Jacob in Egypt Genesis). As with the king lists regnal years, some king lists don't indicate co-regencies.

Archaeological synchronisms:
There are relatively few archaeological/historical synchronisms between ancient countries like Egypt and Mesopotamia. Accepted sychronisms include Amarna letters (18th dynasty, Kassites, Mitanni, Middle Assyrian), battle of Kadesh (19th dyn & Hittites), battle of Carchemish (26th dyn & Neo-Babylonian). The synchronism of Akkadian dynasty with 6th dynasty via Ebla is said to be a little uncertain because Ebla might date some time before Akkadian conquest.
The orthodox chronology only has a few claimed horizontal synchronisms with the bible. There are many places where they admit that their chronology clashes with various evidences and sources like the bible. Examples of clashes include: "no trace found of Joseph and Moses in Egypt" in the ascribed dates dynasties that they assert they are supposedly chronologically contemporary with; "nothing much found in this strata at Jericho" in the level that they claim is supposedly the same time as Joshua; "Sheshonk's campaign doesnt match Shishak's" (and Zerah's name etc poorly matches Osorkhon's). The few claimed biblical synchronisms that the orthodox chronology does claim to have are weak or wrong (eg Shishak does not well match Sheshonk). Conventional chronology claims Moses is "1300/1200s" bc in direct conflict with the bible which has Moses 480 years before Solomon (ca 1000s/900s bc).
Meanwhile alternative scholars including myself have found pretty stark matches for these biblical persons/places/events in other "earlier" daynasties. Joseph only best matches the 3rd-4th dynasties far better than the orthodox Hyksos period and/or any other dynasty. Moses best matches the (6th and/or) 12th dynasty better than the orthodox 19th dynasty and any other dynasty.
So if people placesuch high importance in horizotal synchronisms then they must admit that the orthodox chronology  has far less quality and quantity synchronisms than the alternative revised chronology.
Examples of possible synchronisms in our own chronology include: Excellent possible match of Seqenenre with Sisera of Judges 3; Good possible match for Achish of David's times with a person in Amarna letters.

Astronomical synchronisms: (This includes the Venus tablets of Ammisaduga, and the Siriadic/Sothaic dating in Egyptology, and eclipses.)
The problem with astronomical synchronisms is that there are testified to have been changes in geo-celestial affairs in ancient times. Examples of such changes include: 3 Stonehenges; Joshua halting sun or Joshua's long day; the Venus tablets of Ammi-saduga; "stars fought in their courses" in time of Barak in Judges; Hyksos king reformed calendar (number of days/months in year); Hezekiah's sun went back 10 steps; Herodotus said Egyptian priests said sun changed its path 2 x 2 times in ancient times; Maui snaring the sun in Maori oral traditional memory. Thus no matter how much the "experts" claim that this is a "science" dating method, the truth is that this dating method has problematic pitfalls.
The Venus Tablets of Ammisaduga have a different date in some different sources ranging between 1694 (high conventional chronology), to 1638 (middle coventional chronology), to 1574 (low conventional chronology), to 1542 (ultralow conventional chronology), to 1400s (Rohl) to 8th cent bc (Velikovsky). Venus variously has a 8 or 56 or 64 year cycle. There is a possibility that the Venus Tablets might be conected with the times of Joshua halting the sun, or with "the stars fought in their courses" of Barak's times in Judges.

Coincidences/Combinations:
The problem with the common use of coinciding dates is that there are proven cases of false coincidences in world history. Examples include: Mayan start date and Egyptological Menes dates. 4 calendars coincide in 11000s bc (Mayan, Egyptian, Assyrian, and Indian, refs Bellamy, Tomas). Atlantis date and end of Ice Age date. Each of these dates has been shown to have problems and they only coincidentally coincide.
Orthodox establishment often claims that two dating methods supposedly confirm their orthodox chronology dates (eg "A recent analysis combining dendrochronology and radiocarbon dating pointed to the middle chronology as being most likely.") But these methods have problems and the coincidence can be only misleading coincidence.
On the other hand, orthodox scholars also often wrongly dismiss matches found by other scholars as just possibly only coincidental similarity.
Orthodox "expert" critics often claim things like "there were many famines in Egyptian history" and "one can find matches anywhere/everywhere". However this is often a lying claim because they ignore that there are evidences which help us narrow down which time/place persons/places/events can or can't only-best match the one described in the source texts.

Radiometric/Carbon 14 Dating:
Carbon dating has some problems and is unreliable. It depends on the rate/speed having always stayed the same unformitarian speed/rate as in recent/present/modern times. Material found in Sekhemkhet's complex yielded a date of 600 years older than the conventional date for the 3rd dynasty king. There is a famous disagreement between Thera's carbon date and "archaeological" date of a hundred or more years.

Thera:
The problem with using Thera as a dating method is that Thera's date is uncertain for various reasons, and there is a disagreement between Thera's carbon date and "archaeological" date of a hundred or so years.
Some scholars suggest that Thera's explosion might be connected with the exodus (which we place in the 2nd half of the 12th dynasty) (refs include Boysen, Mavor, Velikovsky, Compton, us).

Apis bulls:
There is a slight problem with this dating method because there is a gap in the sequence between the 20th and 22nd dynasties, and it only covers the period between the 18th and 33rd dynasties of ancient Egypt. In addition there is also a difference in the number of years length of life of Apis bulls in some sources.

Bible, Herodotus, etc:
There are many places where the orthodox chronology clashes with sources like the bible and Herodotus etc.
Conventional chronology wrongly dismisses many sources like the bible and Herodotus as "unreliable" and "not authorities".
Orthodox chronology even outright contradicts Biblical chronology on some points like Moses. They assert that Moses was "1300/1200s" bc despite the bible saying moses was 480 years before Solomon of the 1000s/900s bc (ie Moses is ca 1400s bc).
The "experts" often claim that sources like the bible, etc are "unreliable", but some other times they turn around and expect us to match the sources details totally 100 percent exactly literally as if they accept the sources as gospel truth (the very sources that they usually claim to be "unreliable").

Naramsin:
The ancient inscription information that Naramsin was 3200 years before Nabonidus of 550 bc, giving a date of 3750 bc is agreed by everyone including "authorities" to be an incorrect date. No one has yet proven what the true correct explanation of this information is. One suggestion has been that the ancient source might have added up contemporary dynasties and kings reigns as consecutive.

"Experts"/"Authority"/"Science"
Experts can sometimes/often be wrong or lying. There are a number of times in modern history where there are famous examples where the orthodox expert establishment was forced to accept a revolutionary admission that hitherto "expert" views were wrong, but people all forget and continue to believe now that experts are all right gods. (Sometimes now the experts cunningly subtly change the views falsely making it look like they are responsible for the good/great changes and not saying anything about all the people who fought for the truth in previous years/decades.)
There is a major wrong in the modern world that the elite or people in power majorly hinder/handicap other people like myself in numerous serious ways like for example forcing us to eat fluoridated water/food every meal every day, while they themselves have all the advantages. Also, instead of the issue being about proof or evidence or truth and being given a fair chance hearing of all evidences, they instead use lots of evil subtle cunning psychological and other tactics to wrongly evade/ignore/dismiss or smear/"discredit". Every single subject/topic/issue i have debated on in the last 4 to 10 years it always ends up similar in that they keep pushing "authority" over evidence, and they wrongly make themselves out to be all right gods and others to be all wrong dogs.
The elite "experts" never admit we are right about anything they just keep making out we are all wrong and they are all right. This proves that they are ingenuine. No human can be 100 pecent wrong or right about everything all the time. All humans need morale and rewards/pay and peers etc.
All human beings are fallen and have external and internal insterests and influences, not only/just "nazis/fascists/racists" and "communists" and "criminals" and "mentally ill".
The "experts" in power force people with new alternative idea to have to prove to highest excessive maximum "standards", but the people in power are able to force the reigning views to be accepted on mere "authority" without having to prove that they are true.

Some of the evidences we gave above surely show that the "experts" chronology is not necessarily so infallibly all-right and/or "scientific" and "expert" "authority" as they falsely keep claiming.

No comments:

Post a Comment