Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Ian Hutchesson <mc2499 AT mclink.it>]

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