The Amarna Correspondence and the New Chronology

Transcription

1 The Amarna Correspondence and the New Chronology Two possible dating methods compared By Giuseppe Guarino It is a paradox that Akhenaton is remembered in history as the heretical Pharaoh, because of his monotheistic beliefs. It is well known: every drastic attempt to change long traditions is in itself heretic, and, even if for the noblest of causes or the highest of ideals, it is not to be easily or quickly accepted. More so, if such changes are a threat to those who hold a position of power and prestige, political, religious, or both. The philosophical fight of Pharaoh for his new religion became more significant for the political consequences and the damage cause to the traditional clergy than for its intrinsic spiritual value. Akhenaton was the name chosen by Amenhotep IV, son of Amenhotep III. He reigned, according to the traditional dating system, from 1350 to 1334 BC. His new name was adopted in reverence to his god, Aton, the Solar Disk, which was the object of his monotheistic cult. He also became famous for his greatest achievement, the building of the town of Akhetaton. As it evident by the name of it, it was another tribute to his god. The map of the town reproduced here is taken from: In the area where this town was, called today El Amarna, 3000 years later, in 1887 AD, excavations brought to light the correspondence of Amenhotep III and his son. The incidental reader will forgive if the interest for such a wonderful discovery is still alive today, after 150! The 400 tablets found in El Amarna are a precious witness to the times of those Egyptians kings as well as of their Mesopotamian and Syrian vassal kings. They are divided between Berlin, London and Oxford. I can proudly say that, in my researches on line, I found out that some English translations of these texts are from the Italian. Very often the reverse is true! The Amarna Letters are edited in Italian by Mario Liverani, Padeia, 2 Vols., by the title: Le lettere di El-Amarna. The language used in these letters is Accadic, a Babylonian dialect, which was the diplomatic language of the time. It could be easily compared to today s English or French. This article being translated in English, though written by an Italian, is evidence of the advantage and need to write in a language understood internationally. The cuneiform writing is clearly seen in the tablet, EA161, here presented.

2 This image is taken from: For the sake of curiosity and at the same time to introduce our subject, it would be profitable to consider the content of some of these letters. The text of the letters is available on the internet in the following site: I have taken the quotations of the letters from this website. Kadashman Enlil I was king of Babylon. He writes to Amenhotep III: Kadashman Enlil of Babylon to Amenhotep of Egypt [ ] How is it possible that, having written to you in order to ask for the hand of your daughter oh my brother, you should have written me using such language, telling me that you will not give her to me as since earliest times no daughter of the king of Egypt has ever been given in marriage? - EA3. The Babylonian king calls Pharaoh his brother. He is quite disturbed by the excuses given for the refusal to give his daughter in marriage. The fact is very simply explained: the Egyptian kings were very well aware of the antiquity and prestige of their crown and very reluctant to recognize foreign rulers as their equals. It is quite understandable if we think that, at that time, the Egyptian kingdom had already existed for more than 1500 years! Notwithstanding this, the Assyrian king Ashur-uballit, is at ease writing: Great King, king of Egypt, my brother EA16. The days of Akhenaton saw the rise of turbulence in the Syro-Palestinian area. The Egyptian king was too caught in his religious speculations and busy in the construction of his city to be able to solve such crisis. The cries of help of the vassal kings soon became complaints for the king s conduct. This wonderful picture of Akhenaten is taken from David Rohl's blog The reason why the Amarna letters are so important to a Bible student is that recently they have become the field of controversy. In fact, if we accept the traditional dating for the kingdom of Akhenaton, we will approach the Amarna correspondence with some presumptions in mind and interpret it accordingly to fit our already achieved knowledge of those days. In this perspective, the letters by and concerning a king named Labaya or Labayu will not catch much of our attention, since no better identification of this king is possible and not even of the exact location of his kingdom. His language, when addressing Pharaoh is clearly formal and shows much reverence: To the king [my lord,] my [sun]: message from Lab aya, your servant, the ground on which you walk. At the feet of the king my lord and my sun, seven and seven times I throw myself. EA 253. Labaya was a pain in the neck. Kings were writing asking Pharaoh help, complaining because of him.

3 Though the Egyptian kings are long gone, Labaya is still a pain in the neck, in the neck of traditional dating supporters. Because if we can understand his name being interpreted lion of Yahweh, how is it possible that Yahweh is known during the kingdom of Akhenaton? Yahweh is considered the most probable pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton YHWH, the personal name that God revealed to Moses. According to the traditional dating, this must have taken place around the thirteenth century BC. The Exodus, always according to the traditional dating, took place under the kingdom of Ramses II, who ruled between 1279 and 1212 BC. Almost 100 years after the Amarna correspondence. How is this to be consistent with the fact that Yahweh was already known in Palestine 150 years before the people of Israel settled there? I must admit it is very easy for me to advocate David Rohl s New Chronology since it both provides a very satisfactory explanation for the above mentioned inconsistency and confirms the chronology in the Bible. The problem is that the NC explains the events but goes against the traditional views of scholars, with all the negative implications that such a change of trend would bring to the careers of many esteemed scholars and the bad light shed on the studies published so far on the subject. Like Pharaoh, Rohl is today s heretical revolutionary thinker, since his ideas openly question what has commonly been accepted by scholars for years. Or maybe it is just a matter of time! Like the world was converted to monotheism and the heretical Akhenaton became Akhenaton a hero of monotheism, may be one day, doctor Rohl will be considered a man who was able to see what his generation, for lack of spirit of adventure or laziness, has failed to observe. It must be noticed that the revision suggested by Rohl s New Chronology is not entirely revolutionary. It just reviews the traditional dates, thought to be mistaken of some years. To see what it actually means, consider that if according to the commonly accepted view Ramsses II lived between BC, the New Chronology moves him to BC. Rohl proves wrong the commonly accepted identification of the only Pharaoh called by name in the Bible, Sisac or Shishak, with the historical Sheshonq. This identification is the chief corner stone of traditional dating system. The Biblical text of I Kings reads: And it came to pass in the fifth year of king Rehoboam, that Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem: And he took away the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the king's house; he even took away all: and he took away all the shields of gold which Solomon had made. Rohl provides for his theory well documented and surprisingly fitting archaeological and historical biblical evidence. He shows how the biblical Shishak is none other than Ramsess II. He says the nickname of Ramess to be SS. Like in the English language spoken in some areas, the SS are easy to become ShSh. Since the Hebrew writing does not include the vowels, it would be very easy to introduce the vowels that would make of Ramses the Shishak of the Bible, since this name so pronounced in the Hebrew would recall the destruction for which this king deserved mention in the book of kings. Such a different identification will change all the other dates of kings and events. I know it will not be the same anymore to watch The Prince of Egypt with your kids! I myself feel so embarrassed at the thought of trying to explain the mistake (if time will prove it to really be such) to my son. But the New Chronology will confirm both archaeological data and the reliability of the historicity of the Exodus and the Bible.

4 The books by David Rohl. Accordingly, the New Chronology date for the kingdom of Akhenaton moves to BC. This would make him a contemporary of king Saul, the first king of Israel. And if we suppose that the Labaya spoken of in the Amarna texts could be identified with the biblical Saul, would this not solve entirely all the problems concerning the worship of Yahweh in Palestine at the time of Akhenaton? Saul means requested. Let us think how Peter, also called Chephas, was indeed a man called Simon. Paul s true name was Saul. Mark s name was John. Matthew s name was Levi. Jacob became Israel. May be that the requested king of Israel became known in the Bible with this nickname and his actual name was Labaya or Labayu. The fact in favour of this identification is strong, since also a lot of other details of the picture will be successfully explained. In the Amarna correspondence, if the New Chronology is accepted, David, Mutbaal, son of Saul and Joab, general of David and the events relating to them are so easily explained in the light of the accounts given in the Bible. As the intelligent reader has already guessed, the New Chronology is very easy to be accepted by those supporting the historical accuracy of the Bible and refused altogether by those who for years have been taught and have taught the traditional dates. We can only hope that time and further honest research will shed more light on this matter. And perhaps one day, the heretical David Rohl will become, like Pharaoh of old, a man ahead of his time, and his theories, like Akhenaton s monotheism, part of the new orthodoxy.

5 New Chronology Synopsis The New Chronology perfectly integrates the Biblical reference. The dates here represented are taken from The Lost Testament by David Rohl. Of course they are all BC dates. EGYPTIAN KINGS Dudimose BIBLICAL REFERENCE 1530 birth of Moses Abib 1447 BC 1447 Exodus (Numbers 33:3-4) 1446 Times of the Judges Akhenaton Amenhotep III Labaya - Saul is king David ( ) 480 years between the Exodus and the beginning of the building of the temple in Jerusalem by Salomon I Kings 6: Salomon ( ) Ramses II Kingdom devided. North: Israel. South: Juda Ramses also called Sysa - semitic: Shysha - Hebrew, Biblical Shyshak - I Kings 14:25-26