Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 17, 2017, 04:05:53 AM

267946
visitors since
june 16, 2005
+  History-Book Forum
|-+  New Chronology Discussion
| |-+  Egyptian and Levantine Chronology
| | |-+  TIP & Late Period
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 Go Down Print
Author Topic: TIP & Late Period  (Read 28021 times)
Cush
administrator
researcher
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 274



View Profile WWW
Re: TIP & Late Period
« Reply #45 on: September 20, 2007, 10:52:23 PM »

What he's provided is, imho, a decent working hypothesis. I do, however, agree that he needs to codify his findings and clarify a good many issues - especially if he hopes to convince learned scholars in leafy halls of the veracity of the NC.
Well, if folks find errors in Rohl's work those errors will be blown out of proportion instantaneously and be used to put the entire framework that Rohl has developed into question. And my point is that there are indeed errors in Rohl's work, understandable ones but also often avoidable ones. Sometimes I get the impression that Rohl takes some shortcuts (especially in biblical interpretations) that he should better should not take and instead investigate further what interpretations already exist, for not all that has been around prior to his own NC work is useless.
Logged
theelf29
researcher
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 278



View Profile
Re: TIP & Late Period
« Reply #46 on: September 21, 2007, 01:52:49 AM »

Well, if folks find errors in Rohl's work those errors will be blown out of proportion instantaneously and be used to put the entire framework that Rohl has developed into question. And my point is that there are indeed errors in Rohl's work, understandable ones but also often avoidable ones. Sometimes I get the impression that Rohl takes some shortcuts (especially in biblical interpretations) that he should better should not take and instead investigate further what interpretations already exist, for not all that has been around prior to his own NC work is useless.
Interesting ideas. Perhaps one Achilles heel for DR might be that his books are aimed at the general reader as much as the specialist. As such, critics could claim leverage if accusing him of sensationalism in his findings (though I prefer to see his work in integrating the Bible and Greco-Roman legends into his chronology as common sense, especially as the OC is unable to do so).

What errors do you see in Rohl's work? (Another intriguing possibility for discussion arises! Smiley)
Logged
theelf29
researcher
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 278



View Profile
The Chiefs of Ma
« Reply #47 on: September 26, 2007, 03:04:34 PM »

My attempt to chronologically anchor known "Chiefs of Ma", ruling various cities around Egypt during the TIP: -

Per-Banebdjedet (Mendes)
NameDatesNotes
Neskhebit
Harnakht Ason
Smendes 4son
Harnakht Bson
Smendes 5son
Djedamenefankhfl. 70021 Piankhi
Ankhorc.680?son
Djedhorplacement uncertain
Pimay [Buiama]680-665
Tjebnutjer (Sebennytos)
Akunosh Afl. 70021 Piankhi
Harsiese K685-665
Akunosh B665-650
Ka-heseb (Pharbaithos)
Iuferofl. c.735temp Shoshenq 3
Pawarama Afl. 72633 Shoshenq 3
Patjenfyfl. 7142 Shabaka
Pedikhonsfl. 6578 Psamtik 1
Aty (Busiris)
Takelot Cfl. 74118 Sheshonq 3 (who happened to be his father)
Shoshenq Efl. c. 710died temp Piankhi
Pimay 4fl. 70021 Piankhi
Shoshenq F
Pimay 5son
Pi-Sopd
Patjenfyfl. 70021 Piankhi
Pekrerfl. c.660temp Tanwetamun
Logged
Cush
administrator
researcher
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 274



View Profile WWW
Re: TIP & Late Period
« Reply #48 on: September 26, 2007, 07:13:02 PM »

Hmmm...  should I create extra dynastic lines for these local rulers or should I simply put them under the the entries of the respective city?

edit:
does "son" mean son of the previous ruler in the list?
and does the numbers before a king's name mean regal year?

edit2:
I've added all to the database.
example (with links):

Rulers of Per-Banebdjedet-
Neskhebit-
Harnakht A-
Smendes 4-
Harnakht B-
Smendes 5-
Djedamenefankh
floruit circa
700
-
Ankhor
circa
680
-
Djedhor-
PimayBuiama
circa
680
-
665

It seems that >Piy< is a good anchor for synchronisms...
« Last Edit: September 26, 2007, 11:30:31 PM by Cush » Logged
theelf29
researcher
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 278



View Profile
Re: TIP & Late Period
« Reply #49 on: September 27, 2007, 05:09:19 PM »

does "son" mean son of the previous ruler in the list?

Yes.

and does the numbers before a king's name mean regal year?

Correct again Smiley

Apologies - I should've clarified. I found the lists on the anti-Rohl "Waste of Time" site of all places, with many of the kings separated by "unattested rulers" which, of course, does seem a little suspicious.... Grin
Logged
Cush
administrator
researcher
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 274



View Profile WWW
Re: TIP & Late Period
« Reply #50 on: September 27, 2007, 10:54:09 PM »

does "son" mean son of the previous ruler in the list?
Yes.
and does the numbers before a king's name mean regal year?
Correct again Smiley
OK, that's what I assumed and that's how I entered it into the database.

Apologies - I should've clarified. I found the lists on the anti-Rohl "Waste of Time" site of all places, with many of the kings separated by "unattested rulers" which, of course, does seem a little suspicious.... Grin
Does that site feature valid points against Rohl's interpretations?
Logged
theelf29
researcher
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 278



View Profile
Re: TIP & Late Period
« Reply #51 on: September 28, 2007, 02:27:32 AM »

Apologies - I should've clarified. I found the lists on the anti-Rohl "Waste of Time" site of all places, with many of the kings separated by "unattested rulers" which, of course, does seem a little suspicious.... Grin
Does that site feature valid points against Rohl's interpretations?

Tbph, I haven't looked at the site in much depth. I was just searching for Akunosh and happened upon it. I'll have a closer look and see what sort of evidence is presented (I have a feeling that much of it relies heavily upon Professor Kenneth Kitchen's work on the TIP).
Logged
Cush
administrator
researcher
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 274



View Profile WWW
Re: TIP & Late Period
« Reply #52 on: September 28, 2007, 10:18:35 PM »

I really think it is time for Mr Rohl to publish an updated and extended version of A Test of Time...
Logged
theelf29
researcher
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 278



View Profile
Re: TIP & Late Period
« Reply #53 on: September 29, 2007, 08:34:58 PM »

I really think it is time for Mr Rohl to publish an updated and extended version of A Test of Time...
Interesting idea. It'd certainly be useful to see why he's revised his dating slightly between "A Test of Time" and his later work. Plus the NC is not static and must respond to any new discoveries made with chronological implications if it itself is to stand the test of time.
Logged
Cush
administrator
researcher
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 274



View Profile WWW
Re: TIP & Late Period
« Reply #54 on: September 29, 2007, 11:56:32 PM »

I really think it is time for Mr Rohl to publish an updated and extended version of A Test of Time...
Interesting idea. It'd certainly be useful to see why he's revised his dating slightly between "A Test of Time" and his later work. Plus the NC is not static and must respond to any new discoveries made with chronological implications if it itself is to stand the test of time.
Well, I find the lack of output from Mr Rohl on pending iussues at least disturbing. I know that when he wrote A Test of Time, he was somewhat limited in what he was allowed to publish (iirr because of a dissertation that was still in review by his university), but that phase must be long over by now and he could well publish the exact results of his research, especially his findings about the TIP which is troubling us so much.
Logged
theelf29
researcher
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 278



View Profile
Re: TIP & Late Period
« Reply #55 on: October 05, 2007, 02:36:44 AM »

Well, I find the lack of output from Mr Rohl on pending iussues at least disturbing. I know that when he wrote A Test of Time, he was somewhat limited in what he was allowed to publish (iirr because of a dissertation that was still in review by his university), but that phase must be long over by now and he could well publish the exact results of his research, especially his findings about the TIP which is troubling us so much.
You have a good point. The lack of any further output from DR on the TIP doesn't exactly instill confidence in the NC. Interesting you should call him Mr. Rohl - I believe the dissertation was his doctoral thesis.
Logged
Cush
administrator
researcher
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 274



View Profile WWW
Re: TIP & Late Period
« Reply #56 on: November 17, 2007, 11:07:06 PM »

Well, I find the lack of output from Mr Rohl on pending iussues at least disturbing. I know that when he wrote A Test of Time, he was somewhat limited in what he was allowed to publish (iirr because of a dissertation that was still in review by his university), but that phase must be long over by now and he could well publish the exact results of his research, especially his findings about the TIP which is troubling us so much.
You have a good point. The lack of any further output from DR on the TIP doesn't exactly instill confidence in the NC. Interesting you should call him Mr. Rohl - I believe the dissertation was his doctoral thesis.
There is a lot of material about Rohl and about what he does, but not so much about the contents of his findings and theories. I wish there were someone to work out all the details of the Intermediate Periods.



Here's the list of royal architects from the Wadi Hammamat quarries (ToT p. 166)
NC yeararchitectsynchronism
936 bceRahotepearly Ramesses 2 (OC - c. 1270 BC)
916 bceBakenkhons
896 bceWedjakhons
876 bceNefermenu
856 bceMay
836 bce[name lost]
816 bcePepy
796 bceAmunherpamesha
776 bceHaremsafShoshenk 1 (OC - c. 935 BC)
756 bceMermer (?)
736 bceHarernsaf
716 bceTja(en)hebyu
696 bceNestefnut
676 bceTja(en)hebyu
656 bceNestefnut
636 bceTja(en)hebyu
616 bceNestefnut
596 bceTjaenhebyu
576 bceNestefnut
556 bceWahibre-teniborn late in reign of Psamtek 1 ?
536 bceAnkh-Psamtekborn in reign of Psamtek 2 ?
516 bceAhmose-saneitborn in reign of Amasis?
496 bceKhnemibreYear 26 Darius 1
« Last Edit: November 18, 2007, 08:29:40 PM by Cush » Logged
theelf29
researcher
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 278



View Profile
Re: TIP & Late Period
« Reply #57 on: November 18, 2007, 03:56:26 PM »

Here's the list of royal architces from the Wadi Hammamat quarries (ToT p. 166)
NC yeararchitectsynchronism
936 bceRahotepearly Ramesses 2 (OC - c. 1270 BC)
916 bceBakenkhons
896 bceWedjakhons
876 bceNefermenu
856 bceMay
836 bce[name lost]
816 bcePepy
796 bceAmunherpamesha
776 bceHaremsafShoshenk 1 (OC - c. 935 BC)
756 bceMermer (?)
736 bceHarernsaf
716 bceTja(en)hebyu
696 bceNestefnut
676 bceTja(en)hebyu
656 bceNestefnut
636 bceTja(en)hebyu
616 bceNestefnut
596 bceTjaenhebyu
576 bceNestefnut
556 bceWahibre-teniborn late in reign of Psamtek 1 ?
536 bceAnkh-Psamtekborn in reign of Psamtek 2 ?
516 bceAhmose-saneitborn in reign of Amasis?
496 bceKhnemibreYear 26 Darius 1

The Ramsses 2 & Shoshenk 1 correlations per OC do call for a suspension of disbelief, don't they? Rohl's model certainly has the edge in this respect.
Logged
Cush
administrator
researcher
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 274



View Profile WWW
Re: TIP & Late Period
« Reply #58 on: November 19, 2007, 10:07:45 PM »

The Ramsses 2 & Shoshenk 1 correlations per OC do call for a suspension of disbelief, don't they? Rohl's model certainly has the edge in this respect.
I agree. But as I said, although the model seems sound, a new book to meet the criticism would be nice.

Here's the corresponding chart:



blue = Royal Architects
red = Genealogy of Nespaherenhat
green = kings
Logged
theelf29
researcher
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 278



View Profile
Re: TIP & Late Period
« Reply #59 on: November 20, 2007, 07:00:15 PM »

I agree. But as I said, although the model seems sound, a new book to meet the criticism would be nice.

Indeed. Or, at the very least, an article addressing point by point any OC acolyte's attempt at rubbishing Rohl's claims.

Btw, I understand that Rohl supporter Bernard Newgrosh has recently published a book addressing Kenneth Kitchen's assertion that Assyrian chronology provides support for the OC.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
History-Book Forum | Powered by SMF 1.0.8.
© 2001-2005, Lewis Media. All Rights Reserved.