Solomon and Shishak: Current perspectives from archaeology, epigraphy, history and chronology; proceedings of the third BICANE colloquium held at Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge 26–27 March, 2011, 2015
In 2010 the author published an alternative chronology for the 22nd Dynasty which identified the ... more In 2010 the author published an alternative chronology for the 22nd Dynasty which identified the eclipse of year 15 of Takeloth II as that of 15 February 756 BC (Thijs, ZÄS 137). It also put the reign of Shoshenq I in c. 843-823 BC, which would disqualify him as the biblical pharaoh Shishak who raided the Jerusalem Temple in or near 925 BC.
In this contribution the evidence underlying this chronology is discussed in detail. Although the focus will be on Shoshenq I and his time (i.e. the 9th century BC), some discussion has been added on the preceding century. Alternative candidates for both Shishak and Zerah the Kushite are given.
Uploads
Papers by Ad Thijs
In 1984 A. Niwiński published an article in which he postulated the existence of no less than three scribes called Butehamun. Although his hypothesis was very soon afterwards falsified, the problems with the funeral equipment of Butehamun which led him to his remarkable theory have never been adequately dealt with. Like Maatkare, Butehamun himself is dated to the start of the 21st Dynasty, whereas his coffins point towards a much later date. For both problems an alternative solution is proposed.
https://buske.de/monographien-und-reihen/studien-zur-altagyptischen-kultur-sak/studien-zur-altagyptischen-kultur-bd-47-2018.html
In this contribution the evidence underlying this chronology is discussed in detail. Although the focus will be on Shoshenq I and his time (i.e. the 9th century BC), some discussion has been added on the preceding century. Alternative candidates for both Shishak and Zerah the Kushite are given.
The article contains a table in which all bulls are tentatively assigned to a specific burial chamber.
It is shown that this reconstruction is not supported by the very source it is based on and fails to explain why and when royal scenes of Pinuzem in the Temple of Khonsu were reworked into pontifical representations. The model is also hard to combine with the existence of the Banishment Stele.
This article serves as a prelude for: Ad Thijs, The scenes of the High Priest Pinuzem in the Temple of Khonsu, ZÄS 134 (2007), 50-63.
In 1984 A. Niwiński published an article in which he postulated the existence of no less than three scribes called Butehamun. Although his hypothesis was very soon afterwards falsified, the problems with the funeral equipment of Butehamun which led him to his remarkable theory have never been adequately dealt with. Like Maatkare, Butehamun himself is dated to the start of the 21st Dynasty, whereas his coffins point towards a much later date. For both problems an alternative solution is proposed.
https://buske.de/monographien-und-reihen/studien-zur-altagyptischen-kultur-sak/studien-zur-altagyptischen-kultur-bd-47-2018.html
In this contribution the evidence underlying this chronology is discussed in detail. Although the focus will be on Shoshenq I and his time (i.e. the 9th century BC), some discussion has been added on the preceding century. Alternative candidates for both Shishak and Zerah the Kushite are given.
The article contains a table in which all bulls are tentatively assigned to a specific burial chamber.
It is shown that this reconstruction is not supported by the very source it is based on and fails to explain why and when royal scenes of Pinuzem in the Temple of Khonsu were reworked into pontifical representations. The model is also hard to combine with the existence of the Banishment Stele.
This article serves as a prelude for: Ad Thijs, The scenes of the High Priest Pinuzem in the Temple of Khonsu, ZÄS 134 (2007), 50-63.
Here it is argued that his criticism is merely a strawman of his own making and ultimately a serious underestimation of the skills of the Egyptian scribe.
It shows that his claim that ca. 20 years per generation is "absurdly low" is untenable.
Rather, it is his own preferred average of 30 to 35 years per generation which can be demonstrated to lead to highly unlikely results.
It is shown that Jansen-Winkelns claim that the Harshire family could be used against my short chronology is unfounded, incorrect and misleading.
It discusses ascription of this papyrus to "year 2" of either Ramses IX Neferkere, Ramses X Khepermare, Ramses XI Menmare "proper" or the Renaissance.
Published on Academia Edu on 2017 02 27
It also questions Malcolm Gladwell's analysis of the story.
It is shown that this theory is based on an incorrect understanding of the Biblical narrative.
Published on Academia Edu in 2016
-was Zacharias, the father of John, murdered in the Temple?
-was Zacharias only mute or also deaf?
-was there an original annunciation to Elisabeth?
-why did Elisabeth hide herself and for whom?
-does the Visitatio go back to the story of an angel visiting Elisabeth?
-who sang the Magnificat: Mary or Elisabeth?
-can some details in the Protoevangelium of James (Infancy Gospel of James) be explained by the author being influenced by this hypothetical source about John the Baptist?
The story deals with tensions within the Jewish community between certain groups (exemplified here by the sons of Bilha and Zilpa) and proselytes. After her conversion Aseneth attains a high status, not only socially (as the wife of Joseph) but also religiously, via her contacts with Levi.
In the second part of "Joseph and Aseneth", the son of Pharaoh, who wants Aseneth for himself, kindles the jealousy of the sons of Bilha and Zilpa (Dan, Naftali, Gad and Aser) by saying that Joseph looks down on them due to the status of their mothers. When an ambush by the brothers goes wrong and the remaining sons of Jacob want to kill them, Aseneth stops them and restores unity.
In the end Aseneth and Levi are the only two people to uphold the moral principle not to repay evil for evil, showing that proselytes can be outstanding both morally and religiously and should not be looked down upon.
published 2016 on https://kun.academia.edu/AdThijs
It deals with the history of the Lesser Vaults in the Serapeum by combining the evidence given by Mariette with the work of Mohammed Ibrahim Aly.
The lecture also deals with the number and order of Apis bulls during this timeframe.
The lecture deals among others with the Oracle of Herihor, the origins of the 21st Dynasty, the reascription of the Banishment Stela and of sources normally ascribed to Smendes.