Tory
Re: Libyans and Kushites
Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:50
112.198.78.163

Ooops

Year 20 Apries, II-smw 10 (P. BM 10113, Thebes) (Oct 12, 567), this is the highest known date for Apries.

Nebuchadnezzar II stormed Thebes and sacked it (Nov, 567) shortly after previous date.
The region of Pathros between the tower of Elephantine (Syene) and the border of Kush was devastated by the Babylonian army and remained desolate and uninhabited for the next 40 years (Ezek 29:10-11, 14-16).
Nebuchadnezzar II returned to Babylonia.

Year 1 Amasis, II-smw, Apries 1st attempt to recover Egypt (between Oct 13 and Nov 1, 567)

Should be Nebuchadnezzar II stormed Thebes in Oct 567, shortly after Oct 12, 567, the last date for Apries. Apries tried to reclaim Egypt later that month after Nebuchadnezzar II left the country.

Tory

  • Re: Libyans and KushitesTory, Tue Feb 21 03:24
    Hi Kim Thank you for your reply and these minor corrections to my Saite chronology. I was in bit of a rush. As I said, my wife uses a stop watch every time I sit down at the computer to do historical ... more
    • Re: Libyans and Kushites — Tory, Tue Feb 21 10:50
      • Re: Libyans and Kushites part 1Kim Sargerson, Wed Feb 22 17:19
        Hi Tory "these minor corrections to my Saite chronology." The finding of the mistakes is in no way an attempt to invalidate or criticise, quite the reverse. I know from experience the embarassment of ... more
        • Re: Libyans and Kushites part 1Tory, Wed Feb 22 23:15
          Hi Kim My wife is one of those who would prefer I go to the casino since there is chance I would actually leave with more money than I came. Lapdancers? Same thing. Hardware store? Another word for... more
          • Re: Libyans and Kushites part 1Kim Sargerson, Fri Feb 24 17:46
            Hi Tory Re: Saite chronology. Sorry, it was me missing something. Although you changed the detailed dates you kept the summary statement of reign period (e.g. "Apries (587-568) accession I-3kt 24... more
            • Re: Libyans and Kushites part 1Tory, Sun Feb 26 02:22
              Hi Kim He apparently has quit Egyptology so I have not bothered to contact him, but what Koenraad Donker van Heel said in his book and what he reiterated to Krauss is that the P. Louvre 7848 was... more
              • Re: Libyans and Kushites part 1Kim Sargerson, Wed Mar 1 15:15
                Hi Tory Sorry I mentioned the Ramesses article at all now. My thanks to you and Marianne for seeing off Fabian Boudville in style. I do however recommend Ian's article on the subject, if you have not ... more
                • Re: Libyans and Kushites part 1Tory, Wed Mar 1 23:21
                  Hi Kim So you and Marianne have had issues with this Fabian Boudville cat on EEF? I get the digest but I don't have time to read every mail inside. Why commence the writing of a document then set it... more
                  • Re: Libyans and Kushites part 1Kim Sargerson, Sat Mar 4 10:11
                    Hi Tory "So you and Marianne have had issues with this Fabian Boudville cat on EEF?" I cannot speak for Marianne's experience with the gentleman. My experience is that not only does he not listen to... more
                    • Re: Libyans and Kushites part 1Tory, Sun Mar 5 05:22
                      Hi Kim, So FB stands for full of bullshit. Got it. Thanks. "pCarlsberg only allows you to predict a lunation 25 years in advance, not weeks in advance, and it is only good for 500 years." Simply not... more
            • Re: Libyans and Kushites part 2Kim Sargerson, Fri Feb 24 18:05
              continued... "Takeloth E/F only finds a supporter in Pedubast II AFTER the death of Shoshenq III. Where he was during years 22-29 need no more be an exile than where Osorkon B was during years 6-21... more
              • Re: Libyans and Kushites part 2Tory, Sun Feb 26 04:21
                continued ... The gaps are not real. Osorkon B mentions an opponent who tried to claim 1PA only once, at the very beginning of his account. He never mentions such an opponent again. Yes but that does ... more
                • Re: Libyans and Kushites part 2Kim Sargerson, Wed Mar 1 15:17
                  Hi Tory continued from part 1... "Nor do these genealogies mention Shilkanni, but he is in the generation I place him." Nor do they mention king Ping of Zhou. Your king Takelot II has an abundance of ... more
                  • Re: Libyans and Kushites part 2Tory, Thu Mar 2 01:45
                    Hi Kim continued from previous The absence of descendants of a king who never ruled or lived in Thebes is no surprise. Or is Tukulti-Mer, king of Asshur, to be identified as Takelot-Mer(yamun)? So... more
                    • Re: Libyans and Kushites part 2Kim Sargerson, Sat Mar 4 10:23
                      Continuation: "So the absence in Thebes of descendants of Takeloth III is a surprise? Osorkon III is only a king because of an assumption that he is Osorkon B." I cannot make any sense of either... more
        • Re: Libyans and Kushites part 2Kim Sargerson, Wed Feb 22 17:24
          ...continued "Tashepenbast was the daughter of Hedjkheperre Shoshenq I. Her son the vizier Nesipakashuti A, son of 3PA Djedthutefankh, died under Usermaatre Shoshenq. My Shoshenq II is king at... more
          • Re: Libyans and Kushites part 2Tory, Thu Feb 23 00:05
            Hi Kim if Nimlot C is not an ancestor of Pasenhor B, remind me what he (and his wife) is doing in this list of ancestors... Because Wedjptahankhef’s wife Tentsepeh was the royal daughter of Osorkon... more
Click here to receive daily updates