Joe Baker
Re: Does Sotthic Dating disprove Rohl?
Sun May 20, 2018 21:19
2001:8003:8817:5900:45eb:6aa5:4267:6a

Hi Toby

When I started posting to lists some 20 years ago it was common etiquette not to crosspost. As for Rohl. I came across his book “A Test of Time” (paperback edition) back in the mid 1990’s at a university bookshop. I was immediately impressed by its layout. This is how history books should be presented, exciting format, pictures, maps, etc, not some stale back to back pages of endless boring words. I did not have much time and by luck I happened to look at the last page of Appendix A and its mention of a second Shoshenk I (now labelled Šašanq 4) which was in line with just what I was thinking. Purchased it straight away and immediately began reading and immediately thought his ideas were crazy and wrong. But the book is still on my shelf and I still use it as a valueable reference source. But then again I was bought up on Velikovsky. When I was young the only history books in my local library were “Worlds in Collision" and “Ages in Chaos”. I became an acolyte (knew no different). Then when I went to university in the late 60's, I found the ongoing Cambridge Ancient History booklets. Completely changed my ideas by introducing me to the unabridged, and not selectively referenced, preserved sources.

I joined the NewChronology list in 2000 - still a member - and enjoyed debating Rohl’s ideas, versus conventional ideas, with many of his supporters. There were several posters who posted on conventional chronology however some, like Jonathan Wade, were too aggressive and refused to abide by the rules of that list and so got barred by Cami. So Jonathan started this forum and invited those who disagreed with Rohl to post to this forum.

So I am not trying to censor free speech, just trying to direct people to the appropriate place to debate Rohl. This forum is essentially free to all, unless they are rude or off topic in which case I can remove their posts or have limited banning capacity. By the way, originally the providers of this forum did not charge for its use. Then they started charging and today it is several hundreds of dollars a year. I gladly pay it because it gives me and others the ability to debate and exchange ideas. However because I pay, I feel I have the right to have some control over its content.

Nothing against Rohl, its just that there is a NewChronology list and that is the best place to learn about his work and where to respectively discuss his ideas - it is where I go to do just that.

Regards Joe


  • Re: Does Sotthic Dating disprove Rohl?Toby Anderson, Sat May 19 09:12
    Hi Joe, Sure. I don't understand why you want me to stop posting on multiple groups and don't understand why you don't want me to post on Rohl. I've always liked the exchange of ideas.... I'm so... more
    • Re: Does Sotthic Dating disprove Rohl? — Joe Baker, Sun May 20 21:19
      • Re: Does Sotthic Dating disprove Rohl?Toby Anderson, Mon May 21 23:35
        Greetings Joe, Fascinating background you have. Are the Cambridge Ancient History 'booklets' your favorite read? Thanks for footing the bill to this discussion group. Thoughtful. You might consider... more
Click here to receive daily updates