Dating the Exodus (long)

Peter Kirk peter_kirk at sil.org
Wed Jan 26 01:30:23 EST 2000


To me, one of the most convincing parts of Rohl's book was his 
thorough rubbishing of dendrochronology. He notes that wood from Tille 
Hoyuk could be dated to three different dates, each allegedly with 
better than 99.9% certainty! So it doesn't sound like the 
dendrochronology of Turkey is quite up to what is claimed for it.

Peter Kirk


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Dating the Exodus (long)
Author:  <mc2499 at mclink.it> at Internet
Date:    24/01/2000 21:00


It might be advisable if people stopped quoting Rohl's "Waste of Time" as 
though it had much value. I have shown that his manipulation of the Amarna 
evidence is blatant and not to be trusted, especially where the evidence 
deals with relations between Egypt and the other great powers. (If the work 
is needed I can post it off-list.)

Let me add yet another example of the problem that the Rohl material faces. 
There are a number of Hittite constructions in central Anatolia (eg Masat 
Hoyuk and Ulunburun) which have yielded both pottery and valuable woods. 
The pottery in the examples I have read about is Mycenaean from the Late 
Helladic period IIIB (middle 14th century BCE), while the wood has 
furnished dendrochronological datings from the middle and late 14th 
century, thus pinning Greek pottery sequences to a fairly fixed historical 
marker. Lo and behold though, it is precisely examples of related pottery 
that is found in contexts dealing with Akhenaten -- sent by subservient 
Mycenaeans. This also guarantees that the finds from Seti I and Ramses III 
from Palestine which were found in circumstances that yielded later 
Mycenaean pottery are representative of the dates usually applied to them 
in conventional historical analyses.

Here's a random catch from the net from Sturt Manning of the University of 
Reading:

"Similarly, wood found in a shipwreck that contained a gold scarab 
inscribed with Egyptian queen Nefertiti's name now can be dated to 1316 
B.C., he said. The jewelry would not have been made until Nefertiti was 
queen, so it shows she had taken the throne by then, he said. That confirms 
standard Egyptian chronology and rules out some challenges, Manning said." 
Associated Press, Friday, June 28, 1996.

Also browse: http://www.arts.cornell.edu/dendro/

It should be clear that the Rohl stuff is of a rather fanciful nature and I 
don't see the point of citing it here. "He's dead, Jim."


Ian





---
You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: Peter_Kirk at sil.org
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-hebrew-14207U at franklin.oit.unc.e
du
To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew at franklin.oit.unc.edu.




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list