[b-hebrew] Rohl's Chronology Deconstructed

Peter Kirk peterkirk at qaya.org
Tue Jul 27 12:30:16 EDT 2004


On 27/07/2004 01:18, MarianneLuban at aol.com wrote:

> ...
>
>>I don't know where the phrase "just anyone" came from, it certainly didn't 
>>come from anything I said.  Yes, the book does spend a lot of time 
>>connecting 
>>to the Bible.  But in the introduction, he not only says explicitly that he 
>>really doesn't care about the accuracy of the Bible, he also explained why 
>>he 
>>used it so much.  I'm not the one mischaracterizing him here, because my 
>>characterization is based on his own words right there in the book.
>>    
>>
>
>
>The logic of this eludes me.  One doesn't care about the accuracy of the 
>Bible--but attempts constantly to align it to Egyptian chronology.  Well, okay...
>
>  
>
On the contrary. Rohl does not realign the biblical chronology at all, 
but it accepts it almost precisely as interpreted by Thiele. What he 
realigns is the Egyptian chronology, based partly on evidence from the 
biblical chronology which he takes to be known and fixed.

>>> ...
>>>
>
>
>No, it's just my final assessment.  Anybody who points to an anonymous statue 
>and says "This is a statue of Joseph" (just to give one example of Rohl's 
>many baseless assumptions) pretty much invites brickbats. ...
>

Rohl gives a lot of evidence for this in his book. Maybe not enough to 
completely prove the point, but, given his chronology, a highly probable 
identification.

>... A man named Velikovsky 
>once wandered fearlessly into that same swamp--and got swamped.  Rohl should 
>have learned from the example of Velikovsky.  
>  
>

Comparing Rohl with Velikovsky, although widespread, is an unjustified 
ad hominem argument.

>  
>
>... If, when trying to align two 
>separate cultures, you have to take into account the dates provided by both 
>cultures--if any are given.  The dates we have for the Bible narratives are contained 
>in them.  And we also have attested regnal lengths for certain pharaohs.  The 
>fact remains is that for Rohl to give credence to his TIP theories, he had to 
>put the exodus way back in the 13th Dynasty--for which there is absolutely no 
>good evidence whatsoever--... 
>

Again, Rohl gives lots of evidence for this identification, including 
the unique name of a Pharaoh, Khenephres, given by Artapanes.


-- 
Peter Kirk
peter at qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk at qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/





More information about the b-hebrew mailing list