Deconstructing Rohl's Chronology
dwashbur at nyx.net
Sat Aug 18 17:04:49 EDT 2001
> >I think you [Walter] have missed Rohl's point entirely. You never addressed
> >the basis of his redating, which is a group of anomalies in Egyptian
> >chronology. Virtually all dating done on ANE artifacts is based on
> >Egyptian chronology. If that's wrong, the whole system requires re-
> >evaluation. This is Rohl's whole point. Specifically, he found errors
> >in dating of the Third Intermediate Period in Egypt, and these errors
> >threw off the entire dating sequence for Egypt, Palestine, the
> >Levant and the Sinai, among other places. I have no doubt that
> >Rohl is aware of the survey you mentioned, but that survey's dating
> >is based on the (according to Rohl) flawed chronology of Egypt and
> >hence is not reliable. You haven't "deconstructed" anything,
> >because you haven't dealt with Rohl's primary thesis.
> "Flawed" and "errors", Dave, have not been substantiated.
That's why I said "according to Rohl." And my point was and is
still, that Walter hasn't accurately dealt with Rohl's thesis. I'm not
saying Rohl is right or wrong, I'm saying that if Walter wants to
"deconstruct" it, he needs to deal with it accurately. This is
something his online paper has not done. That is my point,
nothing more and nothing less.
"You just keep thinking, Butch. That's what you're good at."
More information about the b-hebrew