The Author's final words in this book.
This work aimed to demonstrate that the year 977 BCE was the fifth regnal year of Rehoboam of Judah synchronized with the 20th year of Shoshenq I of the 22nd Egyptian Dynasty, and not the oft-quoted date of 925 BCE. Showing that the Egyptian and Hebrew chronologies come together in the year 978/977 BCE has been the research incentive for this compilation, which eventually turned out to be much broader than initially contemplated.
A comprehensive examination of Egyptian calendars, and Sothic and lunar data, provided information for the early stages of discussion. The early dynasties (1st–6th) were composed largely from data of the Turin Canon, the Royal Annals, other king-lists and lunar dates from the Abusir archives, especially the w3gy date in the reign of Neferefre (5th Dynasty).
The early records of Manetho proposed a different dynastic affiliation from that of the other sources. However, the later dynastic chronology (11th–12th Dynasties, and 20th–25th Dynasties) utilized Manetho’s records combined with many inscriptional texts from stelae, papyri, and other sources, especially those providing Sothic or lunar dates. The Sothic date from the seventh year of Sesostris III, together with new moon dates from his reign and those of his son, Amenemhet III, provide dates for the 12th Dynasty. The Ebers calendar, prescribing a Sothic date in the ninth year of Amenhotep I of the 18th Dynasty, is possibly the most valuable record in reconstructing the entire Egyptian chronology, yet it has been “disallowed” by some scholars.
Manetho’s lists of his 18th Dynasty with its Delta provenance (different from that of the monuments) are significant. They provide a correlation with the biblical period including Ramesses II, his son Amenophis, and the Israelite enslavement and exodus from Egypt under Moses. The chronology of 22nd–25th Dynasties supplies the years from Shoshenq I in 998/997 BCE to the end of the reign of Taharqa in 664, which is the secure starting point for ancient Egyptian history. Every year is accounted for in this time period. It cannot be truncated to begin ca. 945 BCE.
The 2,725 years from Menes (the first king of the 1st Dynasty who began to rule in 3389 BCE), through to Taharqa (the last king of the 25th Dynasty, whose rule ended in 664 BCE) have been accounted for, even though the individual regnal years of the kings of the First and Second Intermediate Periods are mostly unknown.
The length of the 22nd Dynasty, of 267 years (997–730 BCE) is matched year for year with the dual chronologies of the kings of Israel and Judah as described in my The Reconstructed Chronology of the Divided Kingdom, which is based on the earliest extant Greek and Hebrew texts of the biblical Books of 1 and 2 Kings. With three lines of textual evidence in mutual agreement (the synchronized Judah/Israel pair in the divided kingdom, and now the Egyptian line independently verified from multiple sources), the conclusion can no longer be avoided that the Assyrian Eponym Canon, on which other scholars have based their dates for the kings of Israel and Judah, and consequently Egypt, is deficient in the number of years prior to the solar eclipse in 763 BCE.
The Reconstructed Chronology of the Divided Kingdom has already suggested where the years have been lost, composed of two periods of similar length; 22 years from the reign of Shamshi‑Adad V, and 21 years from the reign of Ashur‑nirari III, interspersed with years from the reign of Ashur‑nirari III. When these 43 years are reinstated into the eponyms of the years for these kings, the Assyrian Eponym Canon reconciles with the years that are provided by the chronologies of Judah and Israel; and now also, of Egypt. The Egyptian chronology as demonstrated above, vindicates the assumed reliability of the Hebrew chronology of the kings of Israel and Judah as it was written in its original record and transferred to the Books of 1 and 2 Kings. Present dates given by scholars for the kings of Israel and Judah, Egypt, Assyria, and the entire ancient Near East need to be revised (and updated) to revert to their true position in history.
A comprehensive examination of Egyptian calendars, and Sothic and lunar data, provided information for the early stages of discussion. The early dynasties (1st–6th) were composed largely from data of the Turin Canon, the Royal Annals, other king-lists and lunar dates from the Abusir archives, especially the w3gy date in the reign of Neferefre (5th Dynasty).
The early records of Manetho proposed a different dynastic affiliation from that of the other sources. However, the later dynastic chronology (11th–12th Dynasties, and 20th–25th Dynasties) utilized Manetho’s records combined with many inscriptional texts from stelae, papyri, and other sources, especially those providing Sothic or lunar dates. The Sothic date from the seventh year of Sesostris III, together with new moon dates from his reign and those of his son, Amenemhet III, provide dates for the 12th Dynasty. The Ebers calendar, prescribing a Sothic date in the ninth year of Amenhotep I of the 18th Dynasty, is possibly the most valuable record in reconstructing the entire Egyptian chronology, yet it has been “disallowed” by some scholars.
Manetho’s lists of his 18th Dynasty with its Delta provenance (different from that of the monuments) are significant. They provide a correlation with the biblical period including Ramesses II, his son Amenophis, and the Israelite enslavement and exodus from Egypt under Moses. The chronology of 22nd–25th Dynasties supplies the years from Shoshenq I in 998/997 BCE to the end of the reign of Taharqa in 664, which is the secure starting point for ancient Egyptian history. Every year is accounted for in this time period. It cannot be truncated to begin ca. 945 BCE.
The 2,725 years from Menes (the first king of the 1st Dynasty who began to rule in 3389 BCE), through to Taharqa (the last king of the 25th Dynasty, whose rule ended in 664 BCE) have been accounted for, even though the individual regnal years of the kings of the First and Second Intermediate Periods are mostly unknown.
The length of the 22nd Dynasty, of 267 years (997–730 BCE) is matched year for year with the dual chronologies of the kings of Israel and Judah as described in my The Reconstructed Chronology of the Divided Kingdom, which is based on the earliest extant Greek and Hebrew texts of the biblical Books of 1 and 2 Kings. With three lines of textual evidence in mutual agreement (the synchronized Judah/Israel pair in the divided kingdom, and now the Egyptian line independently verified from multiple sources), the conclusion can no longer be avoided that the Assyrian Eponym Canon, on which other scholars have based their dates for the kings of Israel and Judah, and consequently Egypt, is deficient in the number of years prior to the solar eclipse in 763 BCE.
The Reconstructed Chronology of the Divided Kingdom has already suggested where the years have been lost, composed of two periods of similar length; 22 years from the reign of Shamshi‑Adad V, and 21 years from the reign of Ashur‑nirari III, interspersed with years from the reign of Ashur‑nirari III. When these 43 years are reinstated into the eponyms of the years for these kings, the Assyrian Eponym Canon reconciles with the years that are provided by the chronologies of Judah and Israel; and now also, of Egypt. The Egyptian chronology as demonstrated above, vindicates the assumed reliability of the Hebrew chronology of the kings of Israel and Judah as it was written in its original record and transferred to the Books of 1 and 2 Kings. Present dates given by scholars for the kings of Israel and Judah, Egypt, Assyria, and the entire ancient Near East need to be revised (and updated) to revert to their true position in history.