Bible Bending Pharaonic Egypt. Part Two A: Saul, David to ‘Shishak’

by

 Damien F. Mackey

If what I have determined in PART ONE of this title is correct, then we are faced with the incredible situation that the conventional Egyptian history does not align properly with the Bible, in any one instance, for the lengthy period from Abraham to the Exodus.That, in some cases, it is more than a millennium out of kilter!

 And unfortunately, as we are going to find in this PART TWO (and later in PART THREE), there is still no alignment between these two sets of history from the United Kingdom of Israel (Saul, David and Solomon) and on throughout the Divided Kingdom, until we come all the way down to the era of King Hezekiah of Judah and Pharaoh Tirhakah (2 Kings 19:9), Hezekiah’s known contemporary (in c. 700’s BC).

These same comments would likely apply also to Syro-Mesopotamian history, in which there is no proper convergence until about the time of the neo-Assyrian king, Tiglath-pileser [III], with whom Hezekiah’s father, King Ahaz of Judah, formed a shaky alliance (2 Kings 16:7).

(All dates are BC and approximate only. Conventional dates are now totally irrelevant).

Introduction

Thankfully, the doubly complex situation with which I had had to grapple in PART ONE (http://www.academia.edu/10913875/Bible_Bending_Pharaonic_Egypt._Part_One_Abraha), of bringing into alignment Egypt’s Old and Middle kingdoms – now for Abraham, now for Joseph, and now for Moses – will not be an issue here, owing to the fact that the period under consideration constitutes just the one Egyptian kingdom: the so-called ‘New Kingdom’. Egypt’s famous New Kingdom (dynasties 18, 19 and 20) also affords us the advantage of being far better documented than its Old and Middle kingdom counterparts.

And thankfully, instead of there being a discrepancy between the Textbook and Revised histories, of, in some cases, over a millennium (e.g., as we found for the potentate, Narmer), the difference here will be fairly consistently of a more sedate (approx.) half a millennium.

Having said that, the need for a multi-dimensional archaeology, as discussed in PART ONE, will still be an issue for this article, adding that extra degree of complexity.

For complete article, go to: http://amaic-archaeology.blogspot.com.au/2015/02/bible-bending-pharaonic-egypt-part-two.html

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s