Average Reviews:
(More customer reviews)To say the very least, this book is an enlightening read. The author attempts to design a new chronology of Egypt based on a number of archaeological observations he made which pointed to certain anomolies in the standard chronology of the Third Intermediate Period of Egyptian history. The TIP is one of those points in history where information is scanty and there is much room for error in interpreting existing archaeological evidence. Rohl posits that the 21st and 22nd pharaonic dynasties were at least partly contemprary in a period of balkanization of Egypt, contrary to the conventional chronology's view that they were successive. He therefore shifts the entire preceding dynastic histories downward from 200 to 300 years. That is, what we previously though to occur at 1250 BC actually happened at 1000 BC according to Rohl. In so doing Rohl has done much to synchronize Egyptian chronology with the chronology of the bible.
Rohl claims that the Amarna letters were not to be compared to Joshua's conquest of Canaan, a period where they clearly do not fit, but rather tell the tale of Saul's and David's claiming of Israel from Phillistine Egyptian vassals. He synchonizes Ramesses II's conquests of Asia Minor with the biblical invasion of Shishak. Also, he identifies the Egyptian 'Hyksos' with the Amalekites of the book of Exodus. There are many other enlightening points of connection with the bible that Rohl makes, but my point here is not to explain them all.
The true value of this book for any egyptologist, student of biblical history, or any student of the ancient world at all, is this book's popular presentation of the field of archaeology and ancient history. So rare are books that actually connect a lay reader with the methodologies and evidence upon which researchers base their works. In order to show a need for a revision of Egyptian chronology, Rohl shows how the entirety of Egyptian chronology depends on all but of a handful of archaeological finds, many of them of dubious reliability. Even if Rohl's opponents find more pieces of evidence supporting the standard chronology, the number will still be very small and they will quite likely be as subject to interpretation, as are the ones that Rohl has pointed out. Rohl goes to great lengths to show the history of the observations that scholarship has made, thereby showing us where they may have gone wrong. (As a popular book, I must confess that parts of Rohl's historical narratives depict events in which one expects to find Indiana Jones) Next, when building his own chronology, Rohl puts us close to the texts and archaeological evidence upon which he bases his theories. Rohl's conclusions are in many cases impressive, but in some cases I had to shake my head and come to the conclusion that he was grasping at straws. For instance, I believe that his work in astronomical retrocalulations to find the dates of eclipses recorded in ancient texts is pretty shaky. I even doubt that the text that he is talking about is even mentioning an eclipse. This information has proved to be incredibly valuable to me, however, as I now know that astronomy based chronology, something I though would give absolute and undisputable dates, is as foggy an area of research as any.
I do not know if I will eventually embrace Rohl's ideas or not, or if partially. I do know that reading this book has shown me the types of reasoning and observations that old world historians make, and can now make an informed decision about how firm our grip on dating events of the past is. My conclusion: if somebody tells you some biblical event did not happen because the dates don't line up with scientific knowledge, don't be disheartened. We have a LONG way to go before we can truly be confident about such statements, if indeed we will ever arrive at that sort of knowledge. This uncertainty that I have gained from Rohl's book is corroberated by the "Oxford History of Ancient Egypt" which provides wonderful information on Egyptian chronology.
Everyone who wants to study ancient history, whether it be Egyptian, biblical, Middle Eastern, or even Chinese for that matter, should read this book, so the next time they read somewhere that 'such and such happened at 3200 BC', they will know to take that statement with a grain of salt. Whether Rohl is right or not, I am forever indebted to him for showing me how chronologists operate.
Lastly, I would like to say, after all this talk about archaeology and methodology of Egyptologists, that this book is very readable and comprehensible to the lay reader. Though a smattering of knowledge of biblical and/or Egyptian history will make the book more interesting to the reader, no such knowledge is required in order to understand the book or find value in it. It is truly a popular book intended for the average interested person. I recommend it to all.
Click Here to see more reviews about: Pharaohs and Kings
0 comments:
Post a Comment