Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Yigal Levin" <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>]

Yes, Peter, I am referring to Sheshonq I, who Kitchen dates to 945-924. I
was asking, are there any newer ideas about the dates? And yes, I do equate
him with the Shishak that 1 Kings 14:25 claims threatened Jerusalem and was
bribed off by Rehoboam. The only logical explanation for the author of
King's being able to name the invader AND to insert him into the correct
timeframe, is that he had access to some kind of records or traditions that
went back to the late 10th century. That Sheshonq I did invade Israel is
proven by his own relief at Karnak and by the statue found (unfortunately
not in situ) at Megiddo. That the Bible is interested ONLY in the threat on
Jerusalem, which is not even mentioned in the (extant parts of the) relief,
is a textbook case of the differences between biblical theology and royal
propaganda. None of this is new.

Yigal
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Kirk" <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
> I presume that you mean "towns" in this last sentence, and are referring
> to the same Sheshonq who is commonly identified with the biblical
> Shishak (hence the subject line), and discussed in detail in David
> Rohl's "A Test of Time" under the name "Hedjkheperre Shoshenk I". Isn't
> this the Sheshonq whose victories are listed on this relief? But why
> does Rohl call him Shoshenk I and date him to 945-924 even in his
> "conventional chronology" which he takes from Kitchen. Or are you
> referring to a different ruler, Hekakheperre Shoshenk II in Rohl's
> spelling, 890-889 in his "conventional chronology"? Which of them is
> named in the Silsileh quarry inscription? As the latter seems to have
> ruled only one year, he cannot have had a 21st year.
>
> Incidentally, Rohl lists six Shoshenks in this table, four in the 22nd
> dynasty and two in the 23rd, and argues in his Appendix A for a seventh
one.
>
> Anyway, how is the Karnak relief independent evidence of his date? Since
> there is no mention of a capture of Jerusalem in this relief (or the
> part of it which survives), it cannot even be used as a speculative
> synchronism with Shishak's sack of Jerusalem recorded in the Bible. And
> it would be rather inconsistent for anyone who has rejected as
> unreliable the date in 1 Kings 6:1 ("In the 480th year after the
> Israelites had come out of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign
> over Israel,...") to put very much reliance on 1 Kings 14:25 ("In the
> fifth year of King Rehoboam, Shishak king of Egypt attacked Jerusalem").
>
> --
> Peter Kirk
> peter AT qaya.org (personal)
> peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
> http://www.qaya.org/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
>