Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

James:

You wrote: Are you suggesting that our entire framework of Assyriology
dating also depends on Manetho's testimony?

Yes. That is what I have been repeatedly told by different sources. Rohl,
James, Velikovsky, etc. also report that when shorter dating is given to the
Egyptian records, then the histories of all the other countries around
Egypt—Greece, Anatolia, Libya, etc.—also get cleaned up automatically, and
an inexplicable “dark age” disappears (inexplicable because it shows up in
cross referencing the histories to the Egyptian history, but doesn’t show up
in the archeological record).

Karl W. Randolph.

On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:55 AM, James Christian <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com
> wrote:

> My understanding of Akkadian is that we have a fairly good model of the
> stages of its development representing various stages in its development and
> that it is the Middle-Assyrian stage of development that we see in the
> Amarna letters. Surely, therefore it is the archaeological and historical
> model of Assyriology that gives us that dating of its usage. At least I
> would expect it to be. I'm going to have to look into this a bit further.
> Are you suggesting that our entire framework of Assyriology dating also
> depends on Manetho's testimony? If that be the case then I would be forced
> to admit that that would present compelling problems to our whole historical
> framework.
>
> James Christian
>
> 2010/2/19 K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
>
>> James:
>>
>> You just made a circular argument.
>>
>> The reason for the dates of the Akkadian language use is based on Manetho,
>> and now you say that the reason we can trust the Manetho dates is based on
>> the dates for the use of Akkadian.
>>
>>
>> Karl W. Randolph.
>>
>>