New Dates for Pharaohs of Egypt - Historum

Widdekind · July 20th, 2010, 04:28 PM

http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceno...-pharaohs.html

Quote:

New Dates for Egypt's Pharaohs

As the researchers will report in tomorrow's issue of Science, they found that the Old Kingdom, which kicked off with Djoser's reign, began between 2691 and 2625 B.C.E. The New Kingdom, which starts with the reign of Ahmose, began between about 1570 and 1544 B.C.E. New Kingdom pharoah Rameses II, considered the greatest of the Egyptian kings by historians, clocks in between 1297 and 1273 B.C.E., and King Tut between 1353 to 1331 B.C.E. The dating ranges are earlier than some historians had previously proposed.

**tjadams** · July 20th, 2010, 05:18 PM

Sounds believable to me. It is always good to not let one set of rules guide generations of historians without being challenged. History should never be stagnant and all new forms of research used to get it as correct as we can.

Nikator · July 20th, 2010, 10:41 PM

Won't this have some effect on the historical chronologies of the surrounding areas?

**okamido** · July 20th, 2010, 11:39 PM

What's funny, is that there are existing chronologies that have attempted to push things to an earlier date, but were scoffed at. These discoveries just prove that the chronology is always in flux.

**okamido** · July 20th, 2010, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikator

Won't this have some effect on the historical chronologies of the surrounding areas?

Invariably so, we will just have to see how it plays out.

nbbourbaki · July 29th, 2010, 09:40 AM

New dates ? Starting date of these kings in The Oxford History by Ian Shaw :
2667 Djoser
1550 Ahmose
1336 Tut
1279 Ramses II

IamJoseph · July 29th, 2010, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikator

Won't this have some effect on the historical chronologies of the surrounding areas?

One of the best history confirming archeological relics is the Egyptian Stelle. This lists a war between Egypt and Israel [mentioned by name] which occured over 3,200 years ago. It does not get better than that in affirming the ancient history of both Egypt and the Israelites.

**okamido** · July 29th, 2010, 07:44 PM

I also believe that there is quite a lot of conjecture on whether or not Israel truly existed at the time of the Merneptah Stele, this possible adjustment of dates may serve to correct that thought.

nbbourbaki · July 30th, 2010, 03:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

This lists a war between Egypt and Israel [mentioned by name] which occured over 3,200 years ago.

Any relation with this topic ? Merenpath stele mentions a tribe whose name could look like Israel and which has been wipe out. In any case this tribe is just a side comment.

IamJoseph · July 31st, 2010, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by okamido

I also believe that there is quite a lot of conjecture on whether or not Israel truly existed at the time of the Merneptah Stele, this possible adjustment of dates may serve to correct that thought.

There is no conjecture of its circumstantial evidences, like that the Israelites had a kingdom/country fully built up and recorded in Canaan for over 3000 years, which lasted until 70 CE, and that a host of books exist with historically verifiable details of this land's stats and events throughout that period. Which other ancient country has a similar validity?

The same applies to the historical stats given about ancient Egypt - the Hebrew bible is the first record [aside from stone etchings on pyramids] of the Pharoahs, their religions, diets, cultures and cities. This makes the absence of these details from Egyptian writings the bigger mystery, but quite well explained when the later history is examined.

The Pharoahs had a track record of erasing all reference to previous kings, coupled by these countries being invaded by Islam - which again emulated such means. This says while all is not proven - much is proven, and all is authentic without any disproof. Critical mass applies.