shijing
The Living Force
Just FYI, I just got an update from Mikamar Publishing (the electric universe people) that there are two new ebooks by Eric Aitchison, Velikovsky Revisited and Velikovsky Revised, with the following description:
Chapter descriptions for the first book:
Chapter descriptions for the second book:
http://www.mikamar.biz/Default.htm
Ebook with 467 (3.9 MB) pages of Volume I of Revised Egyptian Chronology using Immanuel Velikovsky's chronological revision as a foil. The sections within this part of a two-part set deal with perceived errors made by Velikovsky in his pioneering attempt to reduce Egyptian and related histories.
This chronological revision is the life work of Eric Aitchison, retired Health Industry Chief Executive Officer, of Newcastle, Australia, and represents one man's best effort. His interests in Velikovsky’s chronological and catastrophic theories go back to 1964. Since then his beliefs therein have changed with the realization that Velikovsky was only close to getting it right.
Eric here has used the excellent scholarship and data that has been discovered by all those who have preceded him. He would record his debt especially to Dale Murphie, thence John Crowe, Barry Curnock, Alan Montgomery, Lester Mitcham and John Lascelles and those other revisionists who have dabbled in this field and whose works are available on the British SIS CD-ROM publication. He chooses however to see the data they presented in a new perspective even though they, and others quoted, may have moved away from their earlier positions. The reasoning behind this policy is that, at the time of publication, the thought processes involved in arriving at whatever decision or outcome, were reasonable at the time.
He argues for a fold of 631 years in Egyptian and Hittite chronologies from the beginning of the XVIIIth dynasty to the end of Dynasty XXI. His theory requires no join between XXI and XXII, and the following material explains and supports these premises.
Mikamar Publishing makes no endorsement of this material and neither agrees nor disagrees with its conclusions, but is simply making it readily available for those that are interested.
Chapter descriptions for the first book:
1. Biblical History is Solid and Believable. Here it is intended that Velikovsky’s use of Biblical dates can be seen as well founded. Biblical historical dates, Thiele adjusted, are strong enough to demand a re-think of latter day Assyrian history, eg the Fall of Samaria.
2. Gold Standard Chronology. This is another aspect of the previous offering.
3. Biblical Reign Lengths for the Divided Monarchy. This is a tabulated appraisal of the adjustments to Thiele’s masterly work.
4. The Hittite Problem. This is a work in its entirety by my Canadian friend, Alan Montgomery. I thought so much of it that I requested permission to quote it in full. It is here inserted as it gives reasons why Velikovsky’s basic premise has a firm foundation.
5. Stratigraphy. Another work borrowed with approval from Alan Montgomery of Canada dealing with some stratigraphical anomalies inherent in the Orthodox offering of chronology. Again it is in support of a Velikovsky type movement of Dynasties and Cultures.
6. The El-Amarna Letters. Here it can be shown that both Velikovsky and David Rohl have used the chronological data in these letters very badly. The individual sections of Velikovsky’s arguments in “Ages in Chaos” are examined against Moran’s edition of the el-Amarna letters.
7. Saul, Velikovsky’s Hero. This section argues that there is no way that Saul could be involved at Avaris.
8. The Chronology of Saul, David and Solomon. Here we seek to get these reigns into perspective with their various stories.
9. Elhanan, David and Saul. Primarily a discussion on the theory of David Rohl that Elhanan was David.
10. The Queen of Sheba. A criticism of the theory that Hatshepsut was this queen, that she visited Solomon and the land of Punt.
11. Thutmose III: A Different Perspective. This section looks at Velikovsky’s intention to see Thutmose as Shishak and the greatest conqueror Egypt spawned.
12. So who or what was Shishak. This is an attempt to provide a different slant on this enigma.
13. Was Zerah the Ethiopian also Amenhotep II? This is another vital support theory for Velikovsky. The data surrounding the known activities of Amenhotep are investigated to see if the theory claimed as basic by Velikovsky, will stand scrutiny.
14. So, Who was Zerah? As with the Shishak question there has to be another slant to this person.
15. Oedipus and Thebes, also 16. The Epigoni (The After Born). Velikovsky’s basic theory (and some observations by others) in his book, “Oedipus and Akhenaten” is appraised against its intention.
17. The Enigma that is Haremhab. Haremhab is another hero of Velikovsky. Unfortunately I believe that Velikovsky misplaces him. This offering tries to argue for a better placement.
18. Which Harmais, if any, was Haremhab? Whilst this is not a proper piece for this part it follows logically from the previous so its inclusion seems justified.
19. The Egyptian Widow’s Letter. Velikovsky believes this widow was that of Taharka. This section argues otherwise.
20. Anysis of Herodotus. Again not a plank of Velikovsky but its inclusion here seems to support the placement of Haremhab who was linked to Akhenaten and the Ethiopians.
21. Seti, Ramesses and Nebuchadrezzar. A severe criticism is here offered against the theories offered in “Ramses II and His Time”.
22. The Israeli Stela and Yanoam. Included here because it reflects a different perspective.
23. Further Faults with “Ramses II and His Time”. The title is sufficient description.
24. The Nine Hittite Points. Continuing with the point that Velikovsky has things wrong I here deal with the arguments of Barry Curnock, (Bristol, England) that these nine points support the case made by Velikovsky. In closing I offer my nine points that I see as supportive of my theory.
25. Dynasties XIX and XXVI – A Table. A presentation of these two dynasties that Velikovsky sees as alter egos, whereas they seem better viewed as concurrent.
26. Ramesses III and His Time. This is an intended pun on the earlier work on Ramesses II and here-in we try to argue that Ramesses III is not Nectanebo of Dynasty XXX.
27. Assuruballit: Canonical or Non Canonical? As this person figures so much in “Ages in Chaos” this section tries to continue the argument that there has to be another person called Assuruballit.
28. The Conventional Link between Dynasties XXI and XXII. Included because Velikovsky alludes to the weak link that holds these two dynasties together. His effort to defuse Orthodoxy’s claim is not strong enough and this offering tries to bolster his arguments.
29. Moses, The Israelite Calendar and the Sabbath.
30. Egyptian Planetary Calendars.
31. The Calendar.
32. Orientations of Ancient Temples. Again it is argued that Velikovsky was SLIGHTLY amiss in this theory of changing year lengths. Here in these four articles we try to bolster his view that catastrophes altered the year length in steps and also possibly the declination of the Earth vis-à-vis the Sun.
33. In Conclusion. A wrap up of salient points that appear to need attention by those interested in chronology
Excel Spreadsheet - Ahmose to Alexander. The ebook has a link to this extensive spreadsheet, which has re-dated Egyptian history and with it those of related nations.
Chapter descriptions for the second book:
1. A New Egyptian History. A fresh but challenging look at what will be fleshed out in the following articles.
2. Assyria: Is The Conventional Profile Believable? A questioning of the historical data in the annals of Tiglath Pileser III, Sargon and Sennacherib as they appear in the accepted Limmu List entries.
3. Thiele’s Assyrian Reliance. Building on the perceived findings in the above this section asks why Thiele gave into the Assyriologists over the dating of the Fall of Samaria.
4. A Time Frame. Here we try to lock down a whole lot of disparate numbers into some sort of sense. In this section we begin the support of documents bequeathed us by the ancients.
5. Dynastic Dating Incongruities. Here we look at a variety of worrying sets of data that most revisionists see as incongruities.
6. Pelusium and Jerusalem. Two similar “myths” about the loss of the army of Sennacherib are discussed.
7. That Other XVIIIth Dynasty. This is a challenge to Orthodoxy over its continual attempts to identify the kings given by Josephus as the kings from the Monuments. It is maintained that there must be two concurrent dynasties XVIII.
8. The Ethiopians. The invasion date given for Piye of Ethiopia must be incorrect. A different scenario is here offered.
9. Hatti Ugarit. It is here argued that Velikovsky has erred in how he puts these concurrent histories together. The fallout is the support given to the orthodox placement of Ramesses II and Ramesses III vis-à-vis their contemporaries, not their OC dates.
10. Hurri Mitanni Urartu. Following the same line of argument this and the next few sections look at correspondences in these nations.
11. Mitanni and the Medes. It is here argued that Velikovsky has this equation wrong.
12. Carthage. Using the published work of John Lascelles we try to integrate this city’s history into our time line.
13. Dilmun and 14. Jericho. Two separate attempts to either show dark ages or identify an anomaly.
15. Kaska, Cimmerians, Scythians and Umman Manda. A fresh look that investigates whether these national groups might be identical or interchangeable.
16. The Hittite Problem. This is a work in its entirety by my Canadian friend, Alan Montgomery. I thought so much of it that I requested permission to quote it in full. It is here inserted again as it gives reasons why there should be a revision.
17. Stratigraphy. Another work borrowed with approval from Alan Montgomery of Canada dealing with some stratigraphical anomalies inherent in the Orthodox offering of chronology. Again it is in support of a Velikovsky type movement of Dynasties and Cultures.
18. Amenhotep the Fifth and Sethos the Third. This is an appraisal of the history of these two unattested kings that reside within the works of Josephus. We suggest that they might be real persons whose regnal periods have been missed and or misplaced by orthodoxy.
19. The Co Regency Question. Here we look at the question of Kadashman Harbe and wonder at that worthy’s correlations, indicating that there must be multiple kings within Assyria and Babylonia.
20. The Kassites. Questions are raised that indicate that this nation may have a shorter history than normally envisaged.
21. The Kassites Revisited. Further anomalies to this nation are here addressed.
22. Dynasties XXII and XXIII. This section unashamedly works off the hypothesis of Jean-Frederic Brunet that Dynasty XXII must start in 836 BC with a consequent movement of the start of XXIII. The end of each dynasty’s power then occurs at the invasion date of the Ethiopians.
23. Who might be Zet? This section is integral to the question of Dynasty XXIII and its finality. Was Zet a member of XXIII or XX?
24. The Dynasty XX Conundrums. Having raised the foregoing prospect it becomes necessary to look at Africanus’ and Eusebius’ periods for Dynasty XX. A unique solution presents itself.
25. The APIS Bull Question. Why are some dynasties not represented? Can the concept of a revised Velikovsky format support a revised burial sequence?
26. The Dynastic Power Bases. Integral to the question as to Manetho’s intentions is the succession of dynasties. Here we look at the power bases as given by Manetho and look for a pattern.
27. Dynasty XXI and the Priest Kings. Questions the placement and the orthodox start and length of this era.
28. The Bubastite Portal. In anticipation of orthodox criticisms this section looks at whether this construct may have been dismantled and re erected by persons unknown.
29. The Berlin and Louvre Dynasties. Questions why certain dynasties are missing from this Block of Memphite Priests and whether the inferred information might be seen in other eras.
30. The OT Book of Judith. This book, not in most Protestant Bibles, has a history that requires a fresh approach. Might this be the answer to those vexing problems that relegated JUDITH to oblivion?
31. Mita of Mushki. Here I should like to dabble with the concept that this man and his country are basically unique. He does not have an alter ego far to the West.
32. Contra 631 Years. After having argued throughout most of these articles that there is a fold of 631 years it came as a revelation that the error I knew about could be explained by adopting 592 and a revised start date of XVIII.
33. In Conclusion
34. A Step in Egyptian History. This EXCEL offering looks at a stream of activities from 1575 – 950 BC that have parallels, or close parallels to events from 950 to 343 BC. The premise used, a 631-year fold has since been realised to be an error. It is qualified in the offering at Contra 631 years.
Excel Spreadsheet - Ahmose to Alexander. The ebook has a link to his extensive spreadsheet, which has re-dated Egyptian history and with it those of related nations.
http://www.mikamar.biz/Default.htm
