Tory
Re: Kushite Chronology
Sun Jan 15, 2017 02:45
112.198.82.243

Hi Kim and Jaime

The main date is "year 6, II Shemu day 6, of pharaoh Taharqa Sieset Meryamun LPH". The earlier date is "year 7 of pharaoh Shabaka justified". I do not see any way that either reference is to a king of Kush.


Agreed these are Egyptian year dates. When I suggested the year 6 could be Kushite, I no longer think so, it was because I had Taharqa at Thebes in a Kushite year 6. I retract this.

The individuals named Shedsunefertem and Pahemnetjer on the lintel studied by Schulman are not given any family connections.


Because they have the same titles as the Shedsunefertem and his son Pahemnetjer do on the Berlin genealogy, Schulman rightly points out: “While it is possible that there were two sets of fathers and sons with identical names and virtually the same titles, it is less likely when they are so close to one another in both time and geographical location…” (Schulman, JNES 39 [1980]: 309).

It is my understanding that Tory does overlap Menkheperre with his brothers, in the early part of his tenure, in order to account for the year 6 datum. To argue that he was in office, then out, then in again is specious, as this argument does not differ in kind from the NC, or from the "dance of the high priests" suggested by the orthodox chronology and others for Osorkon B.


I don't overlap HPA Menkheperre with his brothers. The orthodox on and off again Osorkon B would be a more accurate description of my having Menkheppere put down Theban HPA for some unknown post in the north and then resuming his southern HPA-ship in year 25 of Pinudjem when he returned south. The orthodox scenario with Osorkon B in and out and in again is not specious. So I don't think its fair to say Menkheperre putting off the robe but putting it back on later after the death of his brother is an overlap or specious argument.

I don't see how Shabataka could extradite Yamani in 713, when this is before Yamani's flight to Egypt.


The flight of Yamani is not dated in the annals of Sargon II. Tadmor suggested 712 and Spallinger used this date for his paper, but Yurco (and Jenkins) pointed out this is probably wrong and the correct year is 714 or 713.

I do not see how T.P.III in 732 would know that the king of Musri was of a different dynasty to the one who sent presents to Shalmaneser III.


His exact words are: "... whose ancestors had not submitted to the kings, my predecessors, and had never sent them any message, heard about the conquest of land of Hatti. The terrifying radiance of Assur, my lord, overwhelmed him, and fear seized him; he sent envoys to my presence, to Calah, to do obeisance." (Summ. 8:20'-21'; 9:23-25). This comes just after the Gaza episode when Hananu fled to Musri so it is a king of Musri who sent an envoy to Tiglath-Pileser III and none of that king's ancestors had ever sent a message to Assyria before. The scribes of Tiglath-Pileser III must be presumed to know that a king of Musri contacted Shalmaneser III. It follows that the king of Musri who contacted Tiglath-Pileser III in 733 was not from the same dynasty as that earlier king.

"His predecessors" refers to former kings of Egypt, not to direct male line ancestors who may or may not have been Egyptian.


"predecessors" is the word Tiglath-Pileser III uses when referring to earlier kings of Assyria who were never contacted. "ancestors" (abbe.ME$) is the term used for the kings from whom the king of Musri in 733 descended. This is restored from Summ. 9:r.30.

if "time of the moon god" related to a lunar eclipse then there would be a time of the moon god every couple of years in the Assyrian empire.


It is not "time of the moon-god." It is "from days distant until the moon-god." So we start at time immemorial and then end with an envoy in Assyria in connection with the moon-god. All eclipses are not equal. As I said, some of them would be remembered for a long time while others, the majority, forgotten within minutes. It depends on the quadrant of the moon’s disc that is eclipsed and the direction of the shadow. Also what planets were visible in the sky at the time of the eclipse. Even a total lunar eclipse has to behave a certain way for it to raise any eyebrows among the Assyrian and Babylonian astrologers. I would give more details but I have misplaced my photocopies of Parpola's book where this is discussed in detail. In any case, there will not be an envoy from a Kushite king of Musri in Assyria at every eclipse. This would be an eclipse scrutinized and remembered because it just so happened to occur when the amazing thing of an envoy from Kush arriving in Assyria was taking place.

I can think of a number of solar eclipses just as spectacular as the one in 763, but only the 763 eclipse is mentioned in the Eponym Chronicle. This is because it wasn't just the eclipse but the fact that a great revolt errupted in Assyria at the same time. So the two were linked and recalled long afterwards.

Regards
Tory

  • Re: Kushite ChronologyKim Sargerson, Sat Jan 14 18:12
    Hi all Cullom was kind enough to send me Malinine's original article on Louvre E.3228c. The main date is "year 6, II Shemu day 6, of pharaoh Taharqa Sieset Meryamun LPH" The earlier date is "year 7... more
    • Re: Kushite Chronology — Tory, Sun Jan 15 02:45
      • Re: Kushite ChronologyKim Sargerson, Wed Jan 25 14:33
        Hi Tory Many thanks for your responses. I don't want to rehash old arguments too much. "When I suggested the year 6 could be Kushite, I no longer think so" Good, thank you for that. As I have seen... more
        • Re: Kushite ChronologyTory, Thu Jan 26 10:33
          Hi Kim: please could you tell me what your current thinking is on the interval between year 7 of Shabaka as pharaoh and year 6 of Taharqa as pharaoh? I think year 7 and year 6 are separated by about... more
          • Re: Kushite ChronologyKim Sargerson, Sat Jan 28 12:16
            Hi Tory Thanks for replying to both Jaime and myself in such short order. I had been mulling over my response for days, cutting out superfluous verbiage and the like, and Jaime's post had not... more
Click here to receive daily updates