Jaap Titulaer
Herodotus a
Sat Aug 10, 2019 12:25
85.147.177.145

Hi Toby,

Yes Khan came to essentially the same conclusion.
(This was before the reversal of the order of Shabaka & Shabataka.)
https://www.academia.edu/404048/Piankhy_s_Conquest_of_Egypt_in_Greek_Sources_Herodotus_II_137-140_Revisited_
No doubts others have thought the same or similar.

Kahn seems to agree on all major points.
Sabacon stands for all Kushite kings.
The 50 years is the Kushite domination (also remembered in Manetho by the way)
Piye is the one who invaded and then went away.
Tefnakhte is the blind man who was king once more (my take is that he was already king, Kahn thinks he only became king afterwards).
And the king after the (1st) invasion who defended Egypt against the Assyrian invasion is Shebitqu/Shabataka. Of course Kahn thinks thats in 701, because of the mention of Sennacharib, but of course it is also year 14 of Hezekiah, so 714... and now after the reversal it is indeed Shabataka who ruled in 714 BC.

Note that I had already come to the same or similar conclusion before I even knew about this paper by Kahn :)

Regards Jaap

  • Herodotus' Sabacon and SethonToby Charles Anderson, Sat Aug 10 10:58
    Hello Jaap, Me thinks Herodotus is not so mixed up as you espouse. I'll address your 2 main arguments that Herodotus is mixed up, to wit: 1. YOUR CLAIM HERODOTUS' GENERIC USE OF SABACON 2. THE... more
    • Herodotus a — Jaap Titulaer, Sat Aug 10 12:25
      • re: herodotusToby Charles Anderson, Mon Aug 12 12:46
        Hi Jaap, Thanks for the lead to Khan regarding Sabacon standing for all Kushite kings. IMHO, I reject this, 1. firstly as there seems to be too much correlation between the names of Shabako/Shabaqo... more
Click here to receive daily updates