Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)
Sargon of Akkad |
Post Reply 
|
Page 12> |
| Author |
 Share Topic Printable Version Google Delicious Digg StumbleUpon Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks reddit Facebook MySpace Newsvine Furl Topic Search  Topic Options
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Arthur-Robin 
General 
Joined: 23-Feb-2006 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 937 |
 Quote Reply
 Topic: Sargon of AkkadPosted: 25-Jul-2018 at 06:02 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A thread on who was Sargon of Akkad.
(Some quick references more info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sargon_of_Akkad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manishtushu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naram-Sin_of_Akkad http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=33488 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkad_(city) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkad_(region) .) A very uncertain/doubtful possibility of my own is the following: I know that this is extremely unlikely to be right and that it is probably wrong, but there is a seeming possibility that Sargon of Akkad might be (Jacob/Israel or) Joseph (when he was in Egypt)? 1. Both similarly succeeded younger brothers. Sumerian king list: Manish-tusu the elder brother of Rimush, son of Sargon. ("... speculation ... that the two were twins, as in: man istusu? rimus! "Who is with him? His beloved!", as apparently the second born was thought to be the first conceived.") Bible: Manasseh the elder brother of Ephraim (son of Joseph). (Ephraim was put before Manasseh in Jacob's blessing in Genesis 48.) (Sargon's birth story and the name of his younger son Rimush / (Uru-(mu-))Mush are also similar to Moses and/or Ramses?) 2. Statues busts maybe similar? A year or so ago we discovered that the 4th dynasty of Egypt seems to match the Hebrews in Egypt in Joseph's time: Cheops/Khufu/Khufwey = Jacob Chephren/Khafre = Ephraim? Mycerinus/Menkaure = Manasseh? (or Benjamin? or Machir?) The statue of Manishtusu of Akkad and the statue of Menkaure do look like the 2 persons are maybe somewhat similar? 3. Sargon's story says his father's brother was in the mountains/hills. Genesis says Esau and/or Seir was in the mountains. The "father's brother" or "brothers of father" of the Sargon story are maybe similar to the brother/brothers of Jacob('s wives) and/or of Joseph? 4. Sargon's father's name is supposed to be "Laipum". Joseph/Jacob had lived with Laban. 5. Sargon "(grew up) amidst the cattle". Joseph's family were shepherds. 6. Joseph was certainly in the 3rd to 4th dynasty of Egypt. The Akkadian dynasty is supposed to be synchronous with (sometime between the 4th to) 6th dynasty in Egyptian according to orthodox historians. ("Both Empires [Old Kingdom and Akkadian] collapsed at about the same time, due to the 300 year drought." Joseph's famine? The date of Zoser/Sesortosis of 3712 bc (2500 yrs before Nilus 1212 bc) is similar/close to date of Naramsin of 3750 bc (3200 yrs before Nabonidus 550 bc). Also compare that the Jewish calendar begins in 3761 bc.) 7. Joseph was certainly in the 3rd to 4th dynasty of Egypt. Zoser of the 3rd dyn is the ca 13th/14th/15th Horus-name pharoah in Egyptian king-lists. Lugal-Zagesi the predecessor of Sargon is the ca 14th/15th king in the Kish Chronicle (and his name is also maybe similar to Zoser?) Lugal-zaggesi and Sargon also both come shortly after Kubau/Kubaba who ruled 60 + 4(0) = 64/100 years and who might match Jacob and Khufu/Cheops (or Isaac or Abraham)? (The 430 years gap in the Kish 4 dynasty just before the Akkadian dynasty is also similar to the 430 years Hebrews in Egypt?) 8. Sekhemkhet/Djoserty-ankh (and Huni) of the 3rd dynasty seemingly may match Joseph as vizier Zaphenath-paneah. The statue which is said to possibly be Sargon of Akkad is maybe similar to the smiting picture of Sekhemkhet from Sinai? Joseph is a Shemite; Sargon is supposedly "Semitic/Semite"? The name Sargon / S(h)ar-ru-(u(m)-)ki-(i/e)n(a/u(m)) is possibly similar to either Zoser/Ser/Surid or Sekhem-khet or Sneferu (& his pyramid name Kha) or Sphinx or Userkaf or Sahure? 9. Joseph's wife in Egypt was Asenath. Sargon's wife/queen was "Tashlultum" [or "Ash-Nini" according to Waddell?] 10. Sargon a "cup-bearer". Joseph story features a cup-bearer & a baker. Sargon story: a "gardener" and/or an "irrigator" and/or water-man. Joseph stored the grain of Egypt during 7 years plenty. The stories of Joseph and Sargon also both feature dreams. 11. Joseph lived to 110 yrs. Sargon's reign/life is reckoned to be either 37 or 40 or (5)4/55/56 yrs in the king list. (55 is exactly half of 110. Sargon's story also mentions "old age" which is also similar to the 110 years old "perfect old age".) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sharrukin
Chieftain 
Joined: 04-Aug-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1314 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Jul-2018 at 06:29 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A-R there is no possibility that they are one and the same. Not only are there serious geographical differences but also chronological ones as well. Come on, Sargon was from southern Mesopotamia and Joseph lived in Canaan and Egypt. Sargon lived in the late 24th to early 23rd century BC and Joseph lived sometime during the Hyksos period in Egypt (i.e. sometime between the 18th and 16th centuries BC). And, come on, the biblical narrative does not describe the patriarchs as kings. Nothing suggests that the Akkadians conquered Egypt and set up the pyramids. Therefore, any other "similarities" are merely just that......similarities.......and some very poor ones at that.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Arthur-Robin
General
Joined: 23-Feb-2006 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 937 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Jul-2018 at 06:37 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Chronological: The chronological issue is not a problem because, as everyone should know, the orthodox chronology ascribed dates of ancient Egyptian and biblical and ancient Mesopotamian history are only theory and there are evidences that they are wrong (the Egyptian/Mesopotamian dates are too old/long, and/or the biblical dates are too late/short). Sargon's date is not definitely known or proven and the "24th/23rd cent bc" date is only theory opinion of some establishment sources. Sargon "3200 years before Nabonidus" would make him 1000 years older than orthodox date. Joseph was certainly not during the Hyksos period (and/or the Hyksos was certainly not as early as the "17th cent bc") for numerous reasons. There are not any much matches for Joseph and other details of the Genesis story with/in the Hyksos dynasties period. Two "Jacob" names in the Hyksos period proves that Jacob must be earlier. Shechem and Jerusalem are in 12th dynasty execration texts, implying Genesis is older than 12th dynasty. The only best time in the whole of Egyptian history for Joseph is the 3rd-4th dynasty; the only best match for Moses is the (6th and/or) 12th dynasty. We have quality matches in the 3rd-4th dynasty for various persons etc of the Joseph story (eg Khufu/Cheops certainly matches with Jacob). There are evidences that the orthodox dates of Egyptian are wrong, eg Herodotus said Moeris of 12th dyn was only 900 years before [26th dyn]. The only one basis for orthodox Egyptian dates was the two Sothis/Sirius dates of the 12th and 18th dynasties which some orthodox sources now admit are problematic. More evidences in my draft ebook http://www.allempires.com/forum/ebook_view.asp?BookID=106 . My rough picture of Egyptian-Biblical synchronisms is roughly: 1st or 2nd dyn -- Abraham? 3rd-4th/5th dyn -- Joseph/Jacob (definite) 6th & 12th dyn -- Moses/exodus 18th dyn -- David, Solomon, Shishak/Rehoboam 19th dyn -- Zerah/Asa 26th dyn -- Necho 27th & 31st dyn -- Persians. We can not match Biblical and secular Egyptian/Mesopotamian by orthodox ascribed dates because the orthodox ascribed dates are certainly still out by centuries. Joseph certainly was in the 3rd to 4th dynasty of Egypt (and the true date of the 3rd-4th dynasty is lower than the orthodox ascribed date). As far as i can tell the Akkadian dynasty of Sargon seems to fall somewhere between Joseph [3rd/4th dyn] and Moses [12th dyn] in the Bible. Orthodox sources have Akkadian dynasty maybe synchronous with the (4th to) 6th dynasty in Egyptian (via Ebla). Enme-baragesi in the king list is possibly Abraham, and Sargon comes some time after him a few dynasties later in the king list. Geographical / conquered Egypt: My causual idea was that maybe vizier Joseph extended Egypt's domain during and/or after the famine years. Just poor similarities: I know/agree that it doesn't seem likely that Sargon is Joseph (or Jacob), and that they probably are not the same. But i couldn't totally shake off the strange similarity of succeeding elder brother Manishtusu and succeeding elder brother Manasseh (and Menkaure/Mycerinus), which is not necessarily such a poor similarity. If there are details of Sargon that certainly can or can't match then we can more certainly be sure that they are not or are the same person. Kings: The biblical account doesn't say they were not kings, and there are details that could imply Joseph may have married into the pharaonic blood line (eg "a new king who knew not Joseph"). Joseph was pretty high and powerful (2nd only the pharoah, wore his signet ring, rode in 2nd "chariot", they called "bow the knee", he married daughter of high priest of On/Heliopolis, his brothers were afraid after Jacob died, etc, and the famine was global). If Enme-baragesi/baraginma is Abraham then the Hebrews were descended from a Sumerian king. If Khufu/Cheops is Jacob then Jews are descended from Khufu/Cheops an "Egyptian" "king/pharaoh". Edited by Arthur-Robin - 26-Jul-2018 at 06:51 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
HieroglyphsOnline
Immortal Guard 
Joined: 24-Jul-2018 Location: UK Online Status: Offline Posts: 1 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Jul-2018 at 14:03 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think the problem lies in assuming that two people who are similar/share some characteristics must be the same person. Perhaps the Old Testament story of Moses was inspired by the legend of Sargon's birth. Perhaps the similarities between the two stories is just a coincidence. Personally I very much doubt that Moses was even a real historical person. He is simply a mythical ancestor. Such figures are incredibly common in world history and religions. And the chronology of ancient Egypt is not particularly uncertain. Our chronology for Egypt is based on ancient Egyptian king lists, Mesopotamian, Greek and Latin written sources, and scientifically dated material remains.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
https://egyptian-hieroglyphs.teachable.com
Online course for complete beginners |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sharrukin
Chieftain
Joined: 04-Aug-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1314 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jul-2018 at 14:23 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A-R, ummm......no. While it is true that dates are not precise, the archaeology is rather decisive on this. Not only is the inscriptional evidence thus far uncovered by archaeology enough to synchronize the rules of various kings throughout the ancient middle east in the 2nd millennium BC but also the cultural artefacts can be used the same way. You have pretty much ignored the international correspondences. For 2nd millennium BC dates ascribed to kings, the variance would be up to 50 years. For 3rd millennium BC dates the variance would only be up to 100 years, hence your idea that dates are "only theory" is merely a straw man. You just gave yourself mental permission to ignore all the evidence to come up with your alternative chronology. For the early 1st millennium BC, the variance is just 10 years or less.
Now, what do you mean by "establishment sources"? The ascription of the "3200 years before Nabonidus" has been shown to be false. 3200 years previous of 550 BC or 3750 BC would have put Naram-Sin in the Uruk Period at a time before the invention of writing!!! It would have put him a long time before the Early Dynastic Period!!! You know he is dated AFTER the Early Dynastic Period. Now for Joseph. According to the Bible, Joe's brother Levi lived just 4 generations before his descendant, Moses hence there was just a 4 generation difference between Joe and Moses. Moses is dated unanimously during the early 19th dynasty of Egypt. That makes Joe either living during the 18th dynasty or Late Hyksos period. Please note that Egypt has control over Canaan during the 18th dynasty (tell Amarna archive and other inscriptions), so no way that David and Solomon could be dated to 18th dynasty.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Arthur-Robin
General
Joined: 23-Feb-2006 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 937 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jul-2018 at 17:46 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This is a common clever untrue tactic. The only reason i tentatively suggested that Sargon might be Joseph and a matching Egyptian ruler of the 3rd/4th/5th dynasty like say Sahure is because of a number of seeming possible quality details matches evidences reasons. Joseph was definitely in the 2nd/3rd to 4th/5th dynasty of Egypt. Sargon is considered by orthodox scholarly sources to be maybe synchronous with the (4th to) 6th dynasty. In the case of Jacob and Khufu i am pretty certain they are the same; in the case of Sargon and Joseph/pharoah i am very unsure. It may well be that Sargon is not related to either Joseph or 3rd/4th/5th dynasty, but i can not just assume that he is not or is for sure unless either there are details of Sargon that more-definitely can't/don't or can/do match Joseph/pharaoh or . Because the evidences i have so far have some weight to me that i can't totally dismiss. Surely unbiased objective scholars would consider all possible evidences before either dismissing or being certainly convicted, and would hold provisional seeming evidences in objective mind as possible.
This is only opinion without any real proof. In contrast we can show evidences for Moses being a real person in the 6th and/or 12th dynasty. The status quo just asserts their opinions on mere "expert" "authority" without proving them (not proven Moses not real but made-up/composite) but the opposition has to prove everything. Judaism's whole historical origin and existence involves Moses having existed. Moses was in the (?6th and) 12th dynasty. My own candidates for Moses include Pepi 1/2 (6th dyn) and the blue kneeling figure in the pectoral of Sit-hathor-yunet (12th dyn). http://2rbetterthan1.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/moses.jpg http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=37570
The orthodox chronology of ancient dynastic Egypt is in truth extremely disputable, but the status quo falsely make-out that it is supposedly not. The orthodox chronology is based all on an artificial few factors which are all unconcrete and shaky. If i ask you to prove me proof that the 12th dynasty was "1800s bc" you could not do it except for the claimed Sirius/Sothis date which is admited to be problematic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_chronology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_ancient_Near_East The Egyptian chronology topic i have already discussed in the rough ebook http://www.allempires.com/forum/ebook_view.asp?BookID=106 . Edited by Arthur-Robin - 27-Jul-2018 at 18:49 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Arthur-Robin
General
Joined: 23-Feb-2006 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 937 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jul-2018 at 18:44 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I beg to differ. The orthodox/convention/consensus chronology of Egypt and Mesopotamian in relation to biblical is actually highly disputable. Egyptian has no real basis except the 2 sirius/sothis dates which are problematic.
I agree within millenia but not with centuries. Some orthodox sources admit that the Egyptian Old Kingdom dates may be out by centuries. If i ask you to prove that Sargon or Sahure dates to 2400s bc you could not do it other than a combination of disputible factors which are asserted to be "expert authority". There is no proof that Sargon definitely dates to 2400s-2300s bc. Even so our match of Sargon/Sharru-kin with say Sahu-re (2400s bc) has pretty close dates in orthodox ascribed dates. The synchronisms between Egypt and Mesopotamia before Amarna are scanty, but they do have Sargon around about the same time as (4th to) 6th dynasty. So maybe if we for the present disregard the biblical matches and our own assigned more-correct dates and just consider if Sargon might match Sahure?
Orthodox or consensus or conventional or "expert"/"professional". Meaning the ruling/reigning views that people accept as "expert" "authority" "consensus". I have respect for experts but i do not just accept things merely because they assert that they are experts.
Yes the inscription is "false" in that the date doesn't seem literally right. But the inscription is not necessarily totally false but may be a code/cipher or mistranslation/misunderstood. Historians have to do their best to reconcile and synthesise all existing ancient or medieval sources. The inscription might be able to one day prove the date of Sargon if it can be proven what the correct decoding is (like say 32 generations?) Forget the *ascribed* dates and just consider what the best rough matches are between the 3 Egyptian and Biblical and Mesopotamian timelines. Sargon seems to be around about 4th to 6th dynasty in orthodox synchronism which might match our theory. Sargon would seem to be somewhere between Joseph and Moses in the bible.
In the genealogy in 'Exodus' the begats between Levi and Kohath and Amran are not necessarily direct son of like the patriarchs ones in Genesis. Some of the tribes genealogies in 'Chronicles' have more generations (eg Joshua's). The correct period in Egypt seems to be 430 years not 215 years for various evidences reasons. The 400 years from Hyksos king to 19th dynasty king in the San Tablet better matches the 480 years from Moses to Solomon rather than the 430 years from "Abraham or Joseph" to Moses. Moses was certainly not in the 19th dynasty for a number of reasons including: The dynasty doesn't have any great matches with the various details of the biblical account. Too late in overall Egyptian history. Moses was 430 years before Solomon which makes orthodox "1300/1200s bc" date too late. Moses certainly only best matches (6th and) 12th dynasty better than other dynasties. Herodotus said Moeris (12th dyn) was 900 years before Amasis. Hyksos match the kings of Edom and/or Judges period. We also have other biblical points before and after Moses all agreeing with Moses in (6th &) 12th dynasty (Joseph in 3rd-4th, Solomon/Shishak in 18th). Israel in Merneptah stele is too soon after "exodus in 19th dynasty". Moses is not unanimously dated to 19th dynasty. He has been suggested by various scholars to be in various dynasties ranging from the 4th dynasty to the 24th dynasty! Orthodox/conventional: 5th Sahure in Syria-Palestine before 11th dyn -- nothing biblical! 11th/12th -- patriarchs -- "1800s bc" 15th/16th dyn -- Joseph 19th dyn -- Moses/exodus 22nd dyn -- Shishak, Zerah 25th dyn -- So, Tirhakah 26th dyn -- Neco Rohl's: 11th or 12th -- Joseph 12th or 13th -- Moses 15th/16th -- Joshua 18th dyn -- Saul, David Ours: 1st (or 2nd) dyn -- Abraham -- ca 2000s bc 3rd to 4th/5th dyn -- Joseph/Jacob -- ca 1800s bc 6th & 12th dyn -- Moses -- ca 1400s bc 18th dyn -- Solomon, Shishak 19th dyn -- Zerah/Asa 26th dyn -- Neco The orthodox "consensus" is only theory. It is wrong to act as if it is more certainly-close-to-accurate-truth than it really is. We accept the rough sequence and synchronisms (except for the wrong supposed biblical ones) but the ascribed dates are certainly wrong and the supposed biblical correspondences are wrong.
Amarna letters have good possible matches with the time of David or Solomon. Genubath of Kings/Chronicles and Agur of Proverbs seem to have links with the Amarna period. Rohl shows some. Shishak/Susakim of Kings/Chronicles is possibly Tutankhamun. Herodotus said Moeris was only 900 years before [Amasis 2]. Josephus said Menes was 1300 years before Shishak; Herodotus said Menes was (1)1340 yrs before Seti (of the 19th dynasty), which makes Menes not before 2300s bc, and makes Seti around about the time of Seti. Joseph far better matches the 3rd/4th than 15th-16th dyn. Moses better matches the (6th or) 12th than the 19th dyn. ----- Since the topic subject is Sargon it may be good to provide an alternative match which may help to see when/where/who Sargon better matches in Egyptian/Biblical history. Sargon seems to better match the likes of Sahure (and/or Joseph) than our alternative considered match of Sargon with Senusert (and/or pharaoh of Moses). We already gave some possible reasons for Sargon matching the time of Joseph and/or Sahure. Here were some reasons for alternative match with time of Moses who we place in the (6th and) 12th dynasty: - The 430 years gap in the Kish 4 dynasty (just before Akkad dynasty) resembles the 430 years between Joseph and Moses. - Rimush / (Uru-)Mush resembles Ramses or Moses of Exodus. Manistusu as the succeeding "elder brother of" Mush might match with Moses being not true son and heir of the pharaoh/king? - The birth story of Sargon resembles that of Moses. - The name Sharru-kin is maybe similar to Usert-sen / Sen-usret / Sesostris? Manish-tusu might be similar to Amuntimaeus/Amenemhet or Mentuhotep? (Sargon as "gardener/cupbearer" might match the vizier that founded 11th/12th dynasty?) (Sargon/Naramsin date .... similar to Sesortosis date ...?) - Sesostris or Hercules in Herodotus conquered the middle east. (Sargon's 55 yrs reign might also be similar to Hercules/Sesostris?) - The statue which is said to possibly be Sargon is maybe similar to head of statue of Senusret? - The 2 suns on Naram-sin stele might match sun & moon standing still of book of Joshua? - Akkad is considered to be synchornous with (4th to) 6th dynasty. Moses may match Pepi of the 6th dynasty (and Mes in pectoral of Sit-hathor-yunet of the 12th dynasty). - Naramsin conquered 17 kings similar to Joshua conquered 31 kings. - "Gushua" in Naramsin record resembles Joshua? - Iarimutta in Sargon campaign resembles Jarmuth in Joshua. - "who was king? who was not king" &/or the invasion of the Guti in the Kish Chronicle might be similar to Exodus and/or Hyksos invasion? - Some biblical scholars say that biblical verse imply that the pharaoh of the exodus was an "Assyrian". Assyrian is a closely similar Semitic type to Akkadian? - Naramsin 3200 yrs before Nabonidus resembles Moeris 900 yrs before Amasis/Herodotus. (Sargon/Naramsin date .... similar to Sesortosis date ...?) Two Mesopotamian dates of Naramsin and Ammisaduga similar to two Egyptian dates of 12th & 18th dynasty? - Old Kingdom synchronism with Ur & Lagash would make Akkadian come after the Old Kingdom (4th-6th dyns)? However there are problems with this including: We know that the 13th dynasty has a synchronism with Old Babylonian Period, while Moses seems to be in the (6th &) 12th dynasty, and the Akkadian dynasty is some dynasties before the 1st Babylonian dynasty. Manishtusu looks more like Menkaure than like Amenemhet or Mentuhotep. Edited by Arthur-Robin - 27-Jul-2018 at 19:04 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sharrukin
Chieftain
Joined: 04-Aug-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1314 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jul-2018 at 19:31 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
not really. No peer-reviewed publication uses an extremely different chronology.
the "orthodox" chronology is based on the entire corpus of ancient inscriptions, including ancient kinglists, astonomical observations dated to a certain reign of a king, and archaeology typology of cultural artefacts, which have allowed for "concrete" synchronisms throughout the Middle East.
There's nothing wrong with the Sothic Cycle, only misunderstandings regarding it. I've noted that you dismissed it as "problematic" but that is just another strawman. We do have a Sothic date for the 12 Dynasty on the 7th year of Senusret dated to 1872 BC, which is close to the estimates from the kinglists. What is "problematic" is the supposed observation of a Sothic cycle in the reign of Djer in the First Dynasty.
You glossed over the statement "Despite this consensus, disagreements remain within the scholarly community, resulting in variant chronologies diverging by about 300 years for the Early Dynastic Period, up to 30 years in the New Kingdom, and a few years in the Late Period.[1]" the chronologies only vary up to 300 years in the 3rd millennium. By the New Kingdom it is ONLY 30 years!!!!. Sorry dude, but that does NOT make the conventional chronology "unconcrete" and "shaky".
the only real issue is the date of the Venus Tablets. Modern publications opt for either the middle chronology date of 1638 or the low chronology date of 1574 for the 8th year of Ammisaduqa of Babylon. A variance of just 64 years!!!! Again, this is not enough to consider the conventional chronology "unconcrete" or "shaky". It just "floats" between those two dates in the reign of Ammisaduqa.
Edited by Sharrukin - 27-Jul-2018 at 19:33 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sharrukin
Chieftain
Joined: 04-Aug-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1314 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 27-Jul-2018 at 20:53 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Okay, so you ignore the archaeological evidence of syncronisms. Strike one.
And what are those "disputable factors"? Come on, A-R, there is too much of a dissimilarity between Sahure with Sargon. Even if I was to accept them as "contemporary", Sahure reigns for 12/13 years, and Sargon reigns for up to 56 years!!! Sahure's area of operation was from Egypt to Punt in the south and to the Lebanese coastal cities in the north, and Sargon, from Sumer, to Elam in the east, Subartu to the north, and Mari, Ebla, and the Taurus to the west and northwest. There is NO overlap of operations. It seems to me that the only thing YOU have is a imagined similarity of names, and THAT is completely unacceptable to create any king of historiography of the period.
They are considered "expert" opinions" because of the careful studies these scholars have made on these subjects. There is a corpus of work which is behind those expert opinions. These researches are something that ARE peer-reviewed!!!! Something that you don't seem to appreciate.
Okay so strike Naram-Sin at 3750 out of your chronology
A-R, trying to "decipher" that inscription is very subjective, and therefore ahistorical. How about just taking it at face value and considering it bad estimate? Maybe he was working off of kinglists which grouped dynasties consecutively instead of side-by-side? You have already admitted that the Sumerian King List itself listed dynasties which were probably contemporary with each other. Historians need not have to reconcile all contradictory sources. Yes, they should try, but if the preponderance of the evidence leads to a certain date, well if the one source is irreconcilable, it is irreconcilable. Naram-Sin was not from the Uruk Period, he was post-Early Dynastic!!!
Sargon was before Joseph and Moses. In the narratives of Joseph and Moses, there isn't ANY interaction with Babylonia, the area of Sargon. None whatsover. In the same case, in the narrative of Sargon there is NO interaction with Egypt. In the "orthodox" chronology the only State which seems to even mention Egypt as a trade partner was Ebla, and that was BEFORE Sargon conquered it.
Untrue!!! They are to be understood has a direct line of descent. What you just did was add YOUR interpretation to the biblical narrative since it doesn't support your position!!!!!
Since you disregard the Sothic Cycle, there isn't much to discuss. What is the "San Tablet"? The Hyksos Period is of necessity telescoped because there were several Hyksos dynasties ruling different parts of Lower Egypt at the same time.
So what? In my own genealogy several of my lineages have more people in line of ancestry more than others leading to contemporaries two centures ago. One lineage could have been producing generations faster than others. Facts. I will deal with the rest of your post later.
Edited by Sharrukin - 27-Jul-2018 at 21:02 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Arthur-Robin
General
Joined: 23-Feb-2006 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 937 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2018 at 01:20 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
alright i am an all-wrong dumb dog and "peers" are all-right gods.
i quit, i am sick of the same old dirty rotten slimy tactics all my "life". 10 years in all subjects i have posted on always same tactics. Always just clever cunning arguments that don't actually prove or disprove anything but just cleverly block. Change of my tactics: Yous please prove to me (to the same ridiculous excessive highest maximum "standards" of proof that always demanded of us) that Sargon was "2400s bc" date and contemporary of Pepi. PROVE, not just claim on supposed "expert authority". Prove to me that Joseph was under Hyksos and that Moses was 19th dynasty in "1300 bc". All my "life" in all subjects it always comes to the same old thing: elite are all right gods (who don't have to prove anything but only believed on mere authority supported by a few clever weak supposed supports) and we are all wrong dogs (who have to prove everything to ridiculous excessive standards). Edited by Arthur-Robin - 28-Jul-2018 at 01:35 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sharrukin
Chieftain
Joined: 04-Aug-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1314 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2018 at 01:43 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Up until the 19th dynasty, there isn't any mention of Israel until the reign of Merneptah. Until the time of Merneptah, the Egyptians had complete control of Canaan.. Remember that the Egyptians and Hittites fought a big battle at Megiddo in southern Syria during the time of his father Ramses (c. 1280 BC). The result was inconclusive with both sides suffering severe enough casualties that both had to withdraw, but Megiddo became Hittite. To the south, Canaan remained Egyptian. During the time of Egyptian domination, we certainly should've heard about Israel as part of the Egyptian Empire since we know that during this period of the Canaanite sub-rulers of the cities throughout Canaan. But, no. The appearance of Israel during the reign of Merneptah (c. 1200 BC) is the terminus ante quem of when they entered the Promised Land. The Exodus narrative does NOT mention the Egyptian presence in Canaan, so therefore Israel entered the Promised Land AFTER the Egyptian withdrawal sometime during the period 1280-1200 BC. This would have been the time of Moses. THIS matches the data.
Dynasty 19 is the best match. No mention of Isreal during the 6th Dynasty or 12th dynasty.
Herodotus says that Moeris lived 900 years before his time. Since he wrote his history by about 430 BC his Moeris lived about 1330 BC so, not even 12 dynasty.
A-R, HOW do they match? The Hyksos dominated not just Egypt but southern Canaan itself. After Ahmose (18th dynasty) defeated them in Egypt, the last remaining Hyksos retreated back into Canaan where he defeated them at a stronghold near Gaza called Sharuhen. He then conquered northern Canaan called Djahy and reached the Euphrates. After that, NO Hyksos!!!! During the reign of Merneptah of the 19th Dynasty, Edom was first mentioned in Egyptian records. The tribes are called Shasu, hence, NOT Hyksos. The Bible mentions 8 kings of Edom who ruled "before a king ruled the children of Israel", hence during the time of the Judges. Their names are not the same as the names of the Hyksos kings of Egypt.
You did not show any proof or "agreement" for Moses during 6th/12th dynasties. You completely ignore the relevance of the existence of Israel during the time of Merneptah. What you have to do is to prove the existence of Israel during the Old Kingdom/Hyksos Period/New Kingdom. Instead we have documented proof of the existence of various Canaanite city-states and rulers throughout the entire period until the 19th dynasty. (Execration Tests, Tel Amarna Archive, etc.).
yes [/quote]Rohl's: 11th or 12th -- Joseph 12th or 13th -- Moses 15th/16th -- Joshua 18th dyn -- Saul, David[/quote] Rohl's biggest weakness is lowering the reign of Ramses by about 300 years. That would have also lowered the reigns of other conteomporary Middle Eastern kings that much lower as well which would be impossible because the historical documentation in such places as Babylonia and Assyria is heavily attested in this period. His chronology is rejected by most disciplines.
No, yours!!!!
Strawman argument. Much has been written as to the reasons why it exists.
We have far too much information recovered from the spade to warp the chronology to fit ONE PERSON'S narrative of biblical events. Yes, the "orthodox" chronology is not precise, but not so much to justify your radical chronology. The documentation is there to look at. You should pay more attention to it.
Oh, please!!!! Come on A-R!!!! Have you even read the Amarna letters? They revealed much about Canaan during this time!!! There is even the mention of a ruler of Jerusalem subservient to the Egyptian king, for goodness sake!!! And his name ISN'T David or Solomon!!!!
And what is he relevance of "Moeris"?
Josephus is not an authority on Egyptian chronology
Herodotus is no authority on Egyptian chronology
So far your "proofs" just don't have weight.
Sahure and Joseph have already been discussed. Nothing substantial there. Senusert.......much more recent than Sargon. Before I analyse, which Senusert are we talking about?
thus far I see no reason.
What 430 years? Kish 4 lasted only 100 years!!!! And even that is far too much for the reign of just one queen!!!!
How does he resemble Ramses or Moses? I don't see it. Career wise they operated in diffeent parts of the Middle East and did different things. Nope I don't see it.
Rimush was a king, Moses, wasn't. Thee is a debate as to who succeeded who. Some copies of the SKL list Rimush before Manishtusu, while others list Manishtusu first. Moses was NEVER said to be heir to the king in the Bible. both Manishtusu and Rimush were assasinated. Moses, wasn't. I think you watched too much The Ten Commandments.
But, Moses didn't rule, wasn't a cupbearer, usurp a throne, create an empire, and had Ishtar as his patron deity. Nothing substantial there.
Sharru-kin is a purely Akkadian name meaning "The King is Just". Senusret is a normal Egyptian name meaning "man of [the goddess] Wosret". I see nothing to forcibly morph one name from one language to another language.
Again, the names have comprehensive meanings in their respective languages. Thee is no reason to morph the one into the other.
What vizier? Did that vizier usurp the throne, create an empire, and had Ishtar as his patron deity?
Different geography, different century, different name, different career. No.
All the sources of this legend are Greek and decidedly late. On the other what we have for the 3 Senusret kings of the 12th dynasty do not have them any further afield than Canaan. Senusret III is known for his better document conquests in Nubia than in Canaan. He is identified as the Sesostris of the Greek legends. You cannot write history from legends. All of the Senusret kings had a father who was a pharoah. Sargon didn't know who his father was. No matches.
Goodness, not by a long shot!!! Come on!!!! Look at the cultural motifs!!!! Not even the hair is the same!!!
No. Not only is the imagery different but their meaning is also different. Naram-sin's astro figures (stars or suns) represent deities. These are standard motifs for Sumero-akkadian deities. The narrative is of the defeated of the dreaded Lullubi. Nothing in the narrative matches the narrative of the sun and moon in the book of Joshua. Nothing here.
Just the 6th Dynasty
Same problem with your other narrative. Moses was NO king, or son of a king. The pectorals name Senusret II and Amenemhat III. No "Mes".
Different numbers, different locations. Nothing substantial.
Who's Gushua?
Different places. Iarimutta was located between Mari and Ebla and may comprehend the later Emar at the "bend" of the upper Euphrates. Jarmuth was the name of a city in Canaan.
Again different locations and different ethnic groups. The Guti invaded from the Zagros into Sumer. The Hyksos invaded from Canaan to Egypt. There is nothing between the two events to connect them. The Hyksos kings bore western Semitic names. The Guti kings, if not adopting Sumerian names, bore names of unknown etymology, although later Guti rulers seems to have borne Hurrian names. The Hyksos bore advanced military technology including the horse and chariot which allowed them to conquer Egypt, while the Guti were not known for such tech.
I am not aware of such an interpretation. How do they deduce this? The Assyrians don't have any records of such a conquest until the time of Esarhaddon in 671 BC. Nothing is mentioned of a conquest of Egypt in the Early or Middle Assyrian periods either. In those earlier expansions they only reached to the upper Euphrates. On the other side in each period were powerful kingdoms. So, no I don't think that the pharoah of the exodus as an Assyrian. The other part of it is rather moot. The Akkadians never conquered Egypt either.
Different starting dates, different geography, different numbers. There are NO similarities.
not according to archaeology and (ahem) "orthodox chronology". So, no.
again, no
The kings of Ur I/II and Lagash I date from between 2500-2340 BC. Lugalzagesi conquered both Ur and Lagash ending those dynasties and in turn, Sargon deposes Lugalzagesi. So the synchronism would be for Ur 1/II and Lagash synchronism with Egyptian Dynasty 5 and Lugalzagesi and Sargon's dynasty with Egyptian Dynasty 6. Edited by Sharrukin - 28-Jul-2018 at 01:48 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sharrukin
Chieftain
Joined: 04-Aug-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1314 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2018 at 02:30 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I agree that the Egyptian 13th dynasty synchronizes with Old Babylonian Period. Curious......while you synchonize Old Babylonian Period with 13th dynasty, you realize that the 1st Babylonian dynasty IS part of the Old Babylonian Period, hence 1st Babylonian dynasty is synchronized with Egyptian 13th dynasty. I still don't understand why you date Moses with dynasty 6th/12th, and hence BEFORE the 1st Babylonian Dynasty. You do realize that contemporary with the First Dynasty of Babylon was the Old Assyrian Kingdom, the Mariote Kingdom of Upper Mesopotamia, the great Syrian kingdoms of Yamkhad, and Qatna, and Canaanite Hazor. If Joshua succeeded Moses he would have to have faced those great kingdoms, but no, when the Israelites encountered Hazor it was a facit of its former self. The biblical text says that Hazor "had been head of all these kingdoms" (Joshua 11:10) mentioned in Joshua 11:1-3. Hazor had a hegemony or empire spanning the entirety of northern Canaan during Egyptian dynasty 13 so Josh could NOT have lived during Egyptian Dyn. 13 (if Moses lived during Dynasty 12). Dynasty 6 is just too early for Moses.
Menkaure was son of Khafre and grandson of Khufu. Manishtusu was son of Sargon whose father was unknown. No matches. Nothing in the Akkadian records mention pyramids and Egyptian records don't mention the conquest of the Middle East for those rulers. Again, no matches.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sharrukin
Chieftain
Joined: 04-Aug-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1314 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2018 at 02:38 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Okay, tomorrow I will want to discuss with you aspects of chronology that YOU are willing to agree with. Once we establish a date that we both can agree to, we can then go from there. Agreed? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Arthur-Robin
General
Joined: 23-Feb-2006 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 937 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2018 at 02:42 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
No i do not ignore archaeological synchronisms. I only disagree with ascribed dates. Sargon synchronism with (4th to) 6th dynasty agrees with our scenario.
There are intriguing similarities between Sargon dynasty and Joseph [and the 3rd/4th/5th dyn] and/or Moses [6th/12th dyn], some of which we have already listed. Sargon's/Sharru-kin's name might be similar to either Zoser/Seris/Surid or Sekhemkhet or Sneferu (and Huni) or Isra-el or Sa-re/Se-ra or Userkaf or Sahure. Sargon has possible connections with some of these people. Sahure was in Syria and connected with Dorak treasure. I agree that Sahure might not be as good a possible match as some of the others. Sumer-Akkadian records might have references to Egypt under different names that not recognised (eg Dilmun? Magan?). Agade/Agudu name might even be similar to Giza/Gizeh/Ergesher / Goshen. Khufu and Sargon have about same length reign of 55/56 years. (Sneferu also has quite a long reign.)
So we just have to bow to them as all right superior gods and disregard anyone else? So i who have been studying since child am nevertheless just an all wrong dumb dog (just because they refuse to give fair chance hearing but instead just play clever dirty rotten tactics)? I have personal experience testimony in my Arthurian and other theses that the "peer (review)" refuse to give a fair chance hearing of all evidences. I also see that the orthodox chronology that is claimed to be so superior all-right gods ("peer review") is not really so strong as claimed (eg Egyptian chronology has no real basis except the problematic 2 sirius dates), yet people keep making out that it is supposedly more superior.
The inscription is valid historical evidence, even though the date is not literally correct.
No it is correct to objectively consider and reconcile all ancient evidences. It is not as if i am just picking a decipherment theory and believing it without any good evidence reason. So Champollion was wrong to try decipher the heiroglyphics? Who has the right to claim something is "unreconcilable" on mere authority without proving it? When ancient and modern disagree they wrongly say the ancient is wrong and modern theory is right. They are always allowed to say "Maybe" but we aren't. I do accept though that the original point doesn't disprove the orthodox. But the orthodox date is nevertheless only ascribed/theoretical not strong fact.
I have not seen any proof that that Sargon is "before" Joseph and Moses. If you do like i did and scan the whole bible for when Sargon/Akkadian dynasty best seems to fit in you should find similar to me that he seems to be somewhere between Joseph [3rd-4th dyn] and Moses [6th/12th dyn]. You are asserting Sargon is before them only on "peer review" ascribed date and not any real concrete evidences proof. There is no solid proof of Sargon being 2400s bc date, it is only asserted authority (with a small number of supposed supporting reasons which are all not solid). Post-chapter-10 Genesis mentions Shinar, Elam, Aram, Egypt, Hittites, Canaan, Midian, etc with various interactions or movements between them. Jacob came from Aram/Mesopotamia to Egypt. Sahure was in Syria. Dorak treasure. "Mountains of the east" mentioned in Joseph section of Genesis 49. Joseph's famine was world-wide. Sargon's was the "first empire". Some of Sargons boundaries identifications are maybe disputable. Some names in Sumerian and Egyptian might not be correctly identified (Dilmun, Magan, etc). Some have claimed that Ebla records mention names similar to Genesis names like Sodom and Gomorrah.
If it is wrong (*if*), then my source was wrong, it was not my own claim. The source claimed that the Hebrew/Greek word was not direct son of. If it is wrong it doesn't mean everything is wrong (i'm fed up with always being falsely made out to be all wrong and never right, and others always all right and never wrong). The evidences are all still more in favour of 430 not 215 years in Egypt.
The San Tablet of 400 years mentions a period of 400 years between Hyksos king and 19th dynasty king. Josephus also has 500 years for about the same or slightly longer period. Hyksos period between 12th and 18th dynasties is about 200 years in orthodox chronology.
Well if we supposedly can't judge how long from any of them then neither can you.
Can we please deal with a bit/lot less massive amount of points in such short time. Today two posts with massive amounts to reply to. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Arthur-Robin
General
Joined: 23-Feb-2006 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 937 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2018 at 02:53 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I had two long posts to reply to and now two more since. So can we please lessen the sheer amount of points and posts to reply to each time to only a couple/few points? The massive amount stresses me hence my negative post (the clever tactics i always encounter are annoying enough, and the stress makes worse). We can not agree on a date unless we have a way to prove the date or unless we happen to agree on similar parallel Egyptian Biblical Mesopotamian chronologies. Akkadian is considered to be around about (4th to) 6th dynasty in orthodox sources. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Arthur-Robin
General
Joined: 23-Feb-2006 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 937 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2018 at 03:44 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yes it is my opinion that Moses was before Hammurabi. (6th &) 12th dynasty -- Moses 13th dyn -- Babylon 1 Hyksos -- Edom kings / Judges Amarna -- Solomon -- Mid Assyrian / Kassite. Hyksos scarab found at Baghdad. Hammurabi may match Baalhanan (Edomite king) and a Hyksos king. Law code of Hammurabi is very similar to Mosaic laws. (Benjaminites in Mari records similar to in Judges?) (David-like names in Isin-Larsa and Mari period?) Cushan-rishathaim might best match an Old Assyrian or Mari or Isin king. Josephus said Hyksos were afraid of Assyrians. (Og and 5 Midianite kings and Balaam are possibly similar to certain names in the period between Guti and Ur 3 and Isin-Larsa and Babylon 1?) (Sealands dynasty similar to Judah kings??) Shechem and Jerusalem are in 12th dyn execration texts. Joshua's Jericho matches end of Middle Kingdom strata. (Chariots lost in reign of Sesostris in Herodotus. Moeris 900 years before Amasis in Herodotus. Sais 800(0) yrs in Atlantis Account may match Moeris 900 and Salatis/Saites 800?) I don't see that the 6th dynasty is too early for Moses (who was early in biblical) except that the ascribed dates of the dynasty are too old/early. Joseph is certainly 3rd-4th and Moses can match (6th &/or) 12th dynasty, and Shishak seems to be 18th dyn. The end of the Old Kingdom seems to have overlaped with the Middle Kingdom (ie 6th & 12th). In one of the Egyptian king lists the 6th dyn comes immediately before reversed-order 12th dyn. What frustrates me is that no matter how much quality and quantity evidences i have tried to show in many discoveries it is never enough but they always still deny/dismiss or refuse to give fair consideration (even in some cases of even stark evidences they still deny/dismiss or evade/ignore).
Manasseh was the supplanted elder brother of younger brother Ephraim (Genesis 48). Manishtusu is the succeeding elder brother of younger brother Rimush (Akkad dynasty in Kish Chronicle), plus the "... speculation ... that the two were twins, as in: man istusu? rimus! "Who is with him? His beloved!", as apparently the second born was thought to be the first conceived." Menkaure's is the 2nd of 2nd two pyramids after Khufu's at Giza. It might only be a similarity possibly, but the similarity is intriguing enough for me to not just dismiss or believe without checking if is or is not possible match. Egyptian -- Biblical -- Akkadian? Khufu -- Jacob -- ? Redjedef/Sphinx -- Joseph/Judah? -- ? Khafre -- Ephraim? -- ? Menkaure -- Manasseh (elder son/bro)? -- Manishtusu (elder son/bro)? (Menkaure could be Manasseh or else Machir or Benjamin? But i think the overall group seems to best match Jacob and Joseph's 2 sons.) The Egyptian "sons" are not necessarily true textual records. I mean like Menkaure might not really have been the son of Khafre. Menkaure's pyramid is smaller which might match him being placed after Ephraim. Laipum is similar to Laban. Sneferu had 2 or 3 or 4 pyramids which might indicate he was powerful in conquests? Naramsin stele has a pyramid-like mountain. Joseph's famine was global. Sargon's was "first world empire". Dorak treasure. Sahure in Syria. Sargon was "Semitic". Edited by Arthur-Robin - 28-Jul-2018 at 03:47 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Arthur-Robin
General
Joined: 23-Feb-2006 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 937 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2018 at 04:42 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I tried to reply to all the posts (being online for ages). But we need to lessen that massive amount for me to reply to each time in future posts.
I'm only interested in actual historical evidences details not mere claims of authority. I do not agree that the orthodox chronology has as much quality evidences as made-out.
The quantity and quality of the small number of supports of the orthodox chronology of Egypt/Mesopotamia is not great in my view. There is not really any much strong ancient proof of any dates. Orthodox sources (like the wikipedia articles we gave links to) admit that there are a number of problems and uncertainties.
The Sothaic/Siriadic dating of Egyptian is not a reliable method because there are problems with the "understanding". You chucked-out Naramsin dating inscription for such a reason. The only basis of Egyptian chronology was the 2 sothaic dates. The orthodox Egyptian chronology has no solid basis, only a small number of supposed supporting reasons which all are not definite/concrete dating methods and/or which have problems/uncertainties/pitfalls. There is no proof of 12th dynasty being 1800s bc other than the problematic sothaic date, and there are evidences that the 12th dynasty was more like 1400s bc (eg Moeris 900 years before in Herodotus). Josephus said Menes only 1300 yrs before Shishak. My ebook gives many evidences for our own dates and i say we have more quality and quantity than the orthodox chronology has, though we can't totally prove the dates. I don't even see why it is such a big deal. We merely have a not so long length timeline and merely move biblical back a few centuries in Egyptian & Mesopotamian.
Yes the orthodox/conventional/consensus chronology admit their dates may be out by centuries in the Old/Early half. But that is only if you only consider the the orthodox sources and nothing else. Look at how much the dates for Menes / 1st dynasty have fluctated in the modern period (5000s to 2000s bc!) and i have a file of dates in a number of nations including Egypt and Biblical and Mesopotamian that shows similar ranges of ascribed dates for various events.
What i always trying to say is that have no real ancient records confirmations of the true dates of the dynasties/periods. The very few ancient evidences we have are not yet truly known the correct readings (Naramsin date inscription, Venus tablets, Sirius/Sothis dates). (And others they blatantly ignore like Herodotus saying Moeris was 900 years before.) The secular "scientific" dating attempts are likewise unreliable/problematic. Any truly honest objective scholar would admit that the whole orthodox chronology is alot less quality than is being made-out. Maybe it is pointless us arguing this. I see/say that the orthodox chronology is not so quality/sound/strong/concrete; yous assert that they are more quality/expert/superior than we do. I try to show that they have no real strong/solid dates proofs, and try to show evidences that dates are not right. The orthodox long/mid/short date for the Old Babylonian are only ascribed/theoretical without any strong proof that the date is correct. There are evidences that the dates are centuries too old/early/long. Yes experts have some quality but they are not gods and can still be wrong or lying. I personally do not just believe things only because they are "experts". |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Arthur-Robin
General
Joined: 23-Feb-2006 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 937 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2018 at 09:32 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I only answer some of the long post because the Sargon & Sesostris comparision is agreed not likely anyway as opposed to the Sargon and 3rd to 5th dynasty pharaoh correspondence which seems more likely, and so trying to answer the comments is problematic if i don't really consider the match correct anyway.
You can not only base the chronology only on one or few supposed things like supposed no mention of Israel or Ramses before 19th dynasty. It is not necessarily true that there is no Israel before 19th dynasty. There are possible matches for Israelites/Hebrews/Jews in Egypt/Palestine in earlier dynasties. Some possible examples include: Philitis & the 4th dynasty matches Jacob & sons. Asiatics in the FIP. Herusha? Asher & Menti? Followers of Apophis versus Horus/Ra in El-Arish inscription. "Typhon in Serbonis". "Hyksos" of Manetho, & Jacob names in 15th-16th dynasties. You know that Egyptians had a number of names for peoples of the area including Aamu, Namu, Set race, Shut, Fenech, Shasu, Sagaz, Habiru, Hyksos, Aati, Menti, Punt, Kharu, Amurru, etc, any of which could have included Hebrews. Israel in Merneptah is disputed by some. Horses may mean after Solomon's time. It may be the northern kingdom of Israel. Ramses 2 may match Zerah of Asa's time. Merneptah stele and the drought in those times seems about the time of Zerah or Elijah. Josephus said Menes 1300 yrs before Shishak, matching Herodotus said Menes (1)1340 yrs before Seti, making Seti close to Shishak. I don't agree that the data matches. The evidence for Moses in 19th dynasty is very scanty/poor/weak and conflicts with other evidences.
There are many reasons why Moses does not (only-best) match 19th dynasty including: Too close to Israel in Merneptah stele. 1300/1200s bc is after "480 years before Solomon". Moses much better matches (6th &) 12th dynasty. No trace of Joshua's Jericho in 1200s strata of Jericho. Merneptah's time more closer to Elijah's time than Moses' time. No quality trace of Joseph in Hyksos time. There are evidences of bible matches in earlier dynasties, eg: Mes in pectoral of Sithathoryunet. Hebrew slaves in pectoral of Mereret. Ipuwer Papyrus. Joshua's Jericho matches after end of Middle Kingdom (ref Velikovsky). Khufu matches Jacob; Shepherd Philitis in 4th dynasty; Goshen is Giza.
Its up to you whether you consider we have enough quality and quantity evidences or not in the ebook etc. We have more better ones than the orthodox has: theirs is not any more strong/solid/reliable or scientific than ours.
Can't you see general similarities between the Hyksos period and the Judges period? There are some researchers who agree that the Hyksos/Amu seem to be Amalekites and Edomites. The Edomite king list in Genesis and Chronicles may match the Hyksos kings. Shasu might be related to Esau. (Compare names in Sinuhe story?) I looked for who/what possible match of the Edomite kings and found that the Babylonian and Hyksos seem the most likely matches. Baal hanan may be Hammurabi who may match a Hyksos king. Hyksos scarab was found at Bagdad. Sharuhen is possibly connected with either Petra/Seir or Jericho. Ipuwer Papyrus may be connected. Velilovsky discussed Hyksos link with exodus and judges period in detail. Rohl showed possible link with Anakim in Joshua. Egyptian/Egyptologist use of names like "Edomite" are not necessarily always what assume they are. The names of some of the kings might be same as some names of some of the 15th/16th dynasty Hyksos in some sources. The names matches in this case are not necessarily so simple and easy as you seem to expect, especially when you consider the Babylonian dynasty names as well. Baalhanan may match Hammurabi who might match Apachnan or other Hyksos name.
So what? "Israel" (disputed by some) in Mernptah's time only proves that Israel existed then. Doesn't prove that it didn't exist before then. There is evidence for Hebrews before then but people refuse to accept the evidences and are only willing to accept excessive quality proof. I have good matches evidences that Khufu matches Jacob but it is refused to be accepted without alot more excessive quality/quantity proofs. They can't find or prove Moses in the 19th dynasty, but they say "oh you can't argue absence of evidence because we might find it some day", yet they/you argue supposed absence of evidence. They say "you have to prove this and that (the burden is on the person bringing the new), but we don't have to prove ours (we are superior experts)". I have quite a few of evidences for Moses in (6th and/or) 12th dynasty (better than other dynasties). The Biblical & Egypt matches is too big to deal with, even Moses and 12th dynasty involves alot to have to write. Easier for me to say see my ebook for the evidences. I can't provide heaps of evidences on many details of such hugh topic, i can only given evidences on one match at a time. Instead of Moses & 6th/12th match it would be easier to instead show the Khufu & Jacob match which has more evidence. I don't see why we can't just discuss Sargon possible match with Joseph and 3rd/4th/5th dynasty king pretending to accept our scenario of Joseph contemporary with 3rd-4th dynasty. The we can cut out all the verging-off-topic arguing about biblical-Egyptian chronology. Afterall the issue is not the dates but whether the persons etc really do or don't match. If the 3 persons really are same time then they will have matches. Arguing that there is a supposed chronological difference sort-of diverts.
The orthodox Egypt - Biblical matches has no biblical all before 11th/12th dynasty. Evidence of Joseph in Hyksos is weak and contradicts other evidences. Evidence of Moses in 19th is weak and conctradicts others (and is too late in overall Egyptian). Evidence of Joshua in Jericho 1200s layer is absent. Draw up whole timeline of Egyptian and Biblical and Mesoptamian post-flood histories and place then beside and you will see that biblical is placed by orthodox too late in Egyptian and Mesopotamian.
It is pretty weak basing the orthodox chronology only on one or two things like the opinion that there was supposedly no Ramses in Egyptian before 19th dynasty. If it were true then Ramses in Joseph story also must be not before 19th dynasty (unless anachronism). In our ebook we show some possible Ramses names before 19th dynasty including Rimush in Akkadian, and Ranmaat in 12th dynasty. The Assyrian king list may have contemporary or overlapping dynasties. Hoeh also showed this possibility. Velikovsky was pretty much right to place exodus in the 13th dynasty (though it seems to have been 12th dynasty).
There is no proof that ours is wrong. The biblical & Egyptian is too big and off-topic to discuss here. The problem here is there is no easy way to convey a massive amount of evidences for our chronology and/or against theirs (the ebook tried to give alot). Even if i only picked only one pin-point to prove like Khufu = Jacob. There is no easy way to prove because we only have a certain amount of quality and quantity evidences, but we can't absolutely prove with totally indismissable proofs. This is one reason i get so mad because its not fair that not matter even when we find stark evidences they still reject. Not fair that only someone that eventually finds an indismissable proof while all the others who found quality evidences were trashed. Joseph only-best matches 3rd-4th dynasty out of all dynastic Egyptian history. Moses only-best matches (6 &) 12th dynasty out of all dynastic Egyptian history. Can't discuss the many evidences here. See the ebook chapters for evidences for them then. Can't you just pretend that if we just accept our Joseph in 3rd-4th dynasty then does Sargon have possible matches with the two?
Look, many orthodox sources brag that the biblical doesn't match the archaeological. They arrograntly claim "no trace of Joseph and Moses in Egypt". They spout off that "nothing much in Jericho in this time when we place Joshua". They admit that the biblical events don't match their claimed "expert" corresponding dynasties. Meanwhile many alternative scholars including myself have found quality matches for the events in earlier dynasties. There are plenty of evidences that the orthodox dates and correspondences are wrong and the new revised ones are right. But people keep claiming "we are superior experts and have quantity/quality supports, and you are nonexperts and have [supposedly] poor evidences". We have to prove to excessive standards, but they get away with just making our they are superior experts. I do not see any proof of the Egyptian and Mesopotamian dates before Israel and Judah, just claims that the few supports they have are supposedly quality. People are not being honest, they are falsely making their chronology out to be far more superiorly infallible than it really is. There is no proof that Sargon and/or Pepi is "2400s bc", it is only "expert" assertion based on a small number of not-solid reasons. We are forced to accept the ruling opinions. The ruling scheme is not forced to consider any others.
Yes i have read some of the letters and i saw names and details matches with David's and Solomon's times. There are names similar to names in David's time (similar to Araunah, David, Dodo, Joab, Solomon, etc). Labayu & Lion of Judah? The 3 years drought in Amarna is similar to one in David's time. Like Rohl contended, the letters may relate to when David took Jerusalem. Agur (Proverbs) and/or Genubath (Kings/Chronicles) resembles Akhenaten and/or Ankhenmaat. Shishak/Susakim may match Tutankhamun whose battle armour was recently commented on.
Moeris is 12th dynasty. Herodotus said he was only 900 years before [Amasis 2]. So about same date as Moses (whose name is also similar).
The priests they chatted with and read were. They are still ancient evidences that agree with many other evidences. We have a lattice of evidences just like the orthodox claims they have, but ours has far more ancient texts matches evidences with the texts all matching. The only way to resolve this is to pick one match. I can't write on thousands of details evidences on such large issues events matches. So i will pick Khufu and Jacob. Their names have similar consonants. The meanings are identical. They both lived in Egypt 17 years. Both had similar number of wives and of sons. Herodotus said Philitis dwelt at Giza then, and he matches Jacob. Giza/Ergesher seems to match Goshen. Sphinx connects with either Zaphenath and/or head of Joseph and/or lion of Judah of Genesis 49. Khafre and Menkaure seem to link with Ephraim & Manasseh. Joseph's 7 year famine connected with 7 year drought of Djoser, and with famine scenes beside Sekhemhet complex. Models of granaries in Old Kingdom tombs. Joseph's Zaphenath name has possible matches in 3rd/4th dynasty (including Sekhemhet or Sphinx). Potiphera priest of on seemingly matches Rahotep priest of Heliopolis. Fits with Abraham in 1st dyn, and Moses in 6th/12th dynasty. Thats not all, that's just an attempted example summary of matches. Far more evidences than "Joseph in Hyksos period". I can't prove the date, but you can't say we don't have a certain amount of quality and qauntity matches evidences that Joseph matches 2nd/3rd-4th/5th dynasty better than any other dynasty.
Depends on the true/real relative times of the 2 dynasties. Akkadian does seem to be some dynasties earlier than 12th dynasty. Senusert the 3rd seems to be the main one of Moses.
Kish Chronicle king list mentions or implies a 430 years gap in the Kish 4 dynasty. This is mentioned in Waddell (who has it to Kish 4) and in Hoeh (who has it from Kish 4 to Isin). This 430 years is similar to that of 'Exodus'. Might not be connected, but it might be.
The name Rimush/Uru-mush does resemble the name Ra-mses. Rimush is son of Sargon, and Sargon birth story does resemble Moses birth story. Iraq is almost next door neighbours to Egypt. Hebrews were from Mesopotamia; Akkadian was "Semitic". "1st world empire". Joseph famine was global. Sahure in Syria, and Dorak treasure.
Moses was adopted son of pharaoh. He was leader of Hebrews/Israelites in Egypt and Sinai/wilderness. The assassinated evidence maybe more substantial evidence which i will check out with the possible matches.
Moses was adopted son of pharoah or of pharaoh's daughter. He also was leader of Hebrews/Israelites. Cupbearer was like primeminister according to some biblical/ancient sources. Sargon and Ishtar (like Ishullanu & Ishtar) has similarities with Joseph and Potiphar's wife (like Gilgamesh and Ishtar).
If any kings in Egypt and Mesopotamia do match then the names could be somewhat different renderings in the two different countries writing systems and languages. If we find a match that seems right then we will be able to show more better how the names match. Sesostris is pretty different to Senusret. Soris is pretty different to Sneferu. Waddell claimed Sargon matches Sakuni and Sagara in Indian king lists, so names could have somewhat different renderings in different languages? Sargon's name is variously rendered S(h)ar-ru-(u(m)-)ki-(i/e)n(a/u(m)) . Some of the candidates i gave may be better possible matches (Djoser/Seris or Sekhemhet or Sneferu or Israel or Sera or Userkaf or Sahure). Snefru or Sahu is not very different to Sarru? ukin or "kun" might resemble Huni (Sneferu-Huni?). Sharru is similar to Shaaru/Seris/Surid. Sneferu's name supposedly matches "Soris" (Surid) in Manetho. Sneferu's name has some different renderings in some sources. Isra-el is possibly similar to Sarru-kin if a n/l interchange which was known in some languages in the area. "king is established / just" could be a title or throne name.
Founder of the 11th/12th dynasty?
I agree that Sargon doesn't seem to match 12th dynasty. But: Sesostris is claimed to have had wide-extant conquests similar to Hercules, including Canaan and Colchis. Ancient traditional memories and legends and records all have value. How can we be so sure the Egyptian records are all hundred percent truthful honest literal in every detail? The Senursets & Amenemhets of the 12th dynasty might be the same Senusret and Amenemhet??
The ones i looked at the faces do look somewhat similar possibly. True there are some differences in facial hair, headress, etc. I think Sargon more likely matches 3rd-5th dynasty than 12th. I objectively retain in my mind all possibilities until we are sure of the right match, favouring the best.
The "2 suns" in the stele is not definitely correctly known the true meaning in the sources i have seen? The similarity was possible, but the relative time periods (not ascribed dates) seem to not match so i am not pursuing it other than remembering it is possible.
I have seen an orthodox source that said 4th to 6th dynasty. (Can't remember it was years ago.) They are not sure of the 6th dyn match because the Ebla connection has ifs and buts about the dates matches. Akkadian dynasty could match somewhere in the 4th to 6th dynasty period.
The pectoral of Sit-hathor-yunet has a Mes glyph prominent in the lower middle section. I have a dozen reasons why the pectoral probably shows child Moses. in the lower middle picture (including: water waves along bottom, Mes glyph is prominent, figure is blue, Heh was frog headed, Moses was found by daughter of pharaoh, etc). Moses was adopted by daughter of pharaoh.
"Manaila king of Westernland (Gushua)" in list of the 17 kings conquered by Manishtusu.
I'm not sure i agree that the Sargon places are all definitely different and not possibly same places as the biblical ones. Some of the places seem pretty close/similar possibly. "Iarmuti remains to be found, but the refernces imply it lay to the south...." Although Ebla has been found, Ebla's name is also similar to some other places like Jebus.
Agreed there may be differences. But i only meant more general period events similarities: FIP & SIP similar? Guti & Kassite & Hyksos invasions could be similar? Egypt after exodus & the Intermediate Periods and dark ages?
There is a verse in a biblical prophetic book mentioning the Assyrian which is said by biblical scholars to be considered to have connection with exodus pharaoh that he was an Assyrian (heard this years ago in a radio bible study but don't have the exact details). Josephus also said the Hyksos were afraid of the Assyrians. Cushanrishathaim may match Old Assyrian king or Isin king.
The date of Zoser/Sesortosis of 3712 bc (2500 yrs before Nilus 1212 bc) is similar/close to date of Naramsin of 3750 bc (3200 yrs before Nabonidus 550 bc). The coincidence is intriguing and possibly might be connected.
We only have a few actual archaeological sychronisms (not just matches of ascribed dates). We have sycnronisms of: Semainian & Jemdet Nasr "Old Kingdom graves similar to Ur 0 graves" (Waddell)? 3rd dyn with Byblos & Lagash? (4th-)6th & Akkadian (via Ebla)? 13th & Babylonian 1 dyn Amarna & Mid Assyrian & Kassite The Akkadian & 6th is said to be uncertain because date of Ebla & Akkadian is uncertain. So there is maybe some room for movement back or forward of the Egyptian/Mesopotamian dynasties in between that do not have archaeological sychronisms. Edited by Arthur-Robin - 28-Jul-2018 at 09:39 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sharrukin
Chieftain
Joined: 04-Aug-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1314 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2018 at 21:38 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
You date Solomon to the 18th Dynasty. The 18th Dynasty was a Bronze Age regime, Solomon's Kingdom was an Iron Age kingdom. So, YES you do ignore archaeological synchronisms!!!
There is no need for me to revisit this. I've already made the case regarding "similarities" of names. I've noted that you are NOW trying to connect Sargon with OTHER Egyptian kings. It only goes show how fluid your narrative gets. You can't create an historiography like that. I will no longer play "match-game" with you.
A-R we already KNOW the locations of these geographical names. I remember we discussed Dilmun once and even YOU admitted ultimately that it was located NEAR Sumer. Let's not play this game either.
And again, you are still trying to equate Sargon with yet ANOTHER Egyptian king. This game is over.
A-R, the problem is that virtually nothing can be concluded with your hypothesis. For every one of your arguments, there is a valid counter argument. Your complete dismissal of Sothis is one of them!!! Trying to find matches by "comparing names" is NOT a valid historiographical method when the historical figures themselves lived in different places, in different times, with different parentage, had different careers, and had different beliefs. And again, you keep floating Sargon around comparing him with different Egyptian kings which lived in DIFFERENT times!!! I'm sorry, but the "orthodox" chronology is much more solid than yours.
What is it a valid historical evidence of?
So, what do you get out of the inscription? By the way the inscription isn't in hieroglyphics. It is in cuneiform.
We have the corpus of Sumero-Babylonian chronicles and king lists to work with. In addition to that we have the translations of historical documents from various archives from the early 2nd millenium to work with!!!! We have the Venus tablets which anchor the chronology of the early 2nd millennium BC. This large corpus of inscriptions is what makes the "orthodox" chronology robust.
Such movements are rather timeless. At any given period one finds pastoralists and other nomads making such movements. The ethnic names change, but the behavior is the same.
Jacob came from Canaan. He had relatives living in "Aram Naharain" which comprehends the land immediately east of the bend of the upper Euphrates. He went there to get his wives.
The evidence only shows trade with coastal Canaan including Byblos as well as expeditions to the Sinai Peninsula.
While the existence of the "Dorak Treasure" is doubtful, an article of his within the assemblage may only indicate trade with Yortan Culture in the region of Troy. Sahure did have a large fleet of ships which were depicted laden with trunks of cedars of Lebanon and in some cases Asiatics, but no such evidence that he reached "Syria".
I don't see any reference to "Mountains of the East" in that "section". What is the verse?
No it wasn't.
"maybe disputable" only leads to wild speculations as to what is the case. It only leads to wild fancies of imagination - "maybe this", "maybe that". Let's stick to what documentation we have, shall we? I don't want to play another one of your games.
Initial claims as the what the Ebla archive mention was proven to be mere hype. After more careful study of the inscriptions, the mention of Sodom and Gomorrah were shown to be false. Let's take the context of the Sumero-Babylonian inscriptions shall we? They were described as being near Sumer. You yourself had already conceded the point for Dilmun sometime ago.
Edited by Sharrukin - 28-Jul-2018 at 22:10 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sharrukin
Chieftain
Joined: 04-Aug-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1314 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 28-Jul-2018 at 23:42 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Continuing with my previous post I don't see any proof that Joseph and Sahure were contemporaries. As a matter of fact I don't see any mention of a famine during the time of Sahure. There is one "7-year" famine during the time of Djoser and one which preceded the collapse of the Old Kingdom about 2180 BC. The Egyptians recorded many famines during its long history.
Now after reviewing the rest of your responses, I see its just the same "match games" which have been shown to be completely insubstantial. There seems to be just 3 themes which you are fixated on. Trying to fit Biblical figures into Egyptian chronology, trying to distort Babylonian chronology to fit your Egyptian/Biblical chronology, and trying to equate Sumero/Akkadian rulers to Egyptian and biblical figures. The first distorts biblical chronology to ridiculous lengths, the second completely ignores archaeology, and the third is totally unfounded. I will no longer play the game. What i will do is the establish the date Sargon and let the other forumites decide. I will give YOU the opportunity to criticise. Let's see whose treatment has the ring of truth. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Post Reply
|
Page 12> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz
This page was generated in 0.258 seconds.
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz
This page was generated in 0.258 seconds.
