Started  Mar. 31, 2015        Restarted Oct. 31, 2016                            Updated Nov.

Egyptian Chronologies


Sub-headings:
The Premise
Eusebius' Chronicle
Sources & Comparisons of Manetho










Related Articles                        green 004,000  brown 720,000


The Premise
Back to Top

I propose that Egyptian Chronologies are off (inflated) between the 18th and 21st dynasties, with the gap inflation existing in the 20th dynasty's accounting. Tree ring chrono-records and Carbon 14 dating help demonstrate this.

 



S

Back to Top

The Major climate association date of Mt. Thera/Santorini



Eusebius' Chronicle
Back to Top

From Wikipedia    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusebius#Chronicle

Eusebius (/juːˈsbiəs/; Greek: Εὐσέβιος; 260/265 – 339/340 AD; also called Eusebius of Caesarea and Eusebius Pamphili), was a Roman historian, of Greek descent, exegete and Christian polemicist. He became the Bishop of Caesarea about A.D 314. Together with Pamphilus, he was a scholar of the Biblical canon and is regarded as an extremely well learned Christian of his time.[1] He wrote Demonstrations of the Gospel, Preparations for the Gospel, and On Discrepancies between the Gospels, studies of the Biblical text. As "Father of Church History" he produced the Ecclesiastical History, On the Life of Pamphilus, the Chronicle and On the Martyrs.

>>I have some of the works of Eusebius on my site here. I consider his work essential Christian reading as an aid to the Bible and History. His work was also what inspired me to read many of the authors that Eusebius made reference to and quoted from. This was in 2002, which caused me to write extensively on the law of Moses and the Trinity, and numerous other works over the 2 years that followed that.<<

Chronicle

Main article: Chronicon (Eusebius)

The Chronicle (Παντοδαπὴ Ἱστορία (Pantodape historia)) is divided into two parts. The first part, the Chronography (Χρονογραφία (Chronographia)), gives an epitome of universal history from the sources, arranged according to nations. The second part, the Canons (Χρονικοὶ Κανόνες (Chronikoi kanones)), furnishes a synchronism of the historical material in parallel columns, the equivalent of a parallel timeline.[42]

The work as a whole has been lost in the original Greek, but it may be reconstructed from later chronographists of the Byzantine school who made excerpts from the work, especially George Syncellus. The tables of the second part have been completely preserved in a Latin translation by Jerome, and both parts are still extant in an Armenian translation. The loss of the Greek originals has given an Armenian translation a special importance; thus, the first part of Eusebius' Chronicle, of which only a few fragments exist in the Greek, has been preserved entirely in Armenian, though with lacunae. The Chronicle as preserved extends to the year 325.[43]

42 Barnes, Constantine and Eusebius, 112.

43 Barnes, Constantine and Eusebius, 112–13, 340 n. 58.

End Wikipedia article <<<

The following http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/jerome_chronicle_00_eintro.htm references Jerome's work of Eusibius's Chronicle. It is a very good accounting of Eusebius and Jerome and the efforts of recent years to bring an English translation of Jerome's recording of the Chronicle of Eusebius. Be sure to check it out.

Truth1 >>> There are Irish fragments of Eusebius' Chronicle as well. They date from 600-900 AD. Eusebius dates to 303 AD. There is possibly only 300 to 500 years between the 2. The Irish monks were copiers/recorders of ancient works. It was their way of worshiping God at that time. They started many libraries in Ireland, Britain, France, and Europe but most of these were attacked and destroyed by Vikings and perhaps other such unnamed parties who hated the recording and spreading of knowledge. You have to wonder about those who hate knowledge and want to deprive others of it.<<

Most of the original Greek text of the Chronicle has been lost. This translation is based on a Latin translation of the Armenian translation of the Greek original, in the Schoene-Petermann edition.

  >>This info, according to Eusebius, which he calls “The Egyptian Chronicle,” comes by way of Manetho, in possession of Egyptian records in Egypt, recorded them in 3 volumes, up to the time of Persian King Darius. Manetho was Egyptian but knew how to speak and write Greek as well, given that Greeks had ruled Egypt from near to 240 BC onward. I start with the 12th dynasty as I believe that is the one that one/we will find the pharaoh of Joseph in.<<

[48]
From the Second Book of Manetho.    12th Dynasty - 7 kings from Diospolis.

Sesonchosis the son of Ammenemes, 46 years.

Ammanemes, 38 years. He was killed by his own eunuchs.

Sesostris, 48 years.
Supposedly he was 4 cubits, 3 palms and 2 digits tall. He conquered all of Asia in nine years, as well as Europe as far as Thrace. Everywhere he erected monuments to show his control over the nations; he depicted men's genitals on the columns for brave nations, and women's genitals for cowardly nations. Therefore the Egyptians [g211] evaluated him as coming after Osiris.

Lamares, 8 years.
He built the maze at Arsinoite for his own tomb. His descendants ruled for 42 years.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 245 years      >>Note that 7 are the number of kings but only 4 are listed.

The 17th dynasty contains kings that afflicted Israel according to Isaiah, says I.<<

The 17th Dynasty

A dynasty of shepherds who were Phoenician brothers, foreign kings who took Memphis.

Saites was first, 19 years.
The district of Saite was named after him. Then they established a city in the district of Sethroite from which they advanced and conquered [g213] the Egyptians.

Bnon, second, 40 years.

Archles, years.

Apophis, 14 years.

>>Eusebius notes the following<<

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 103 years. Joseph seems to have appeared during the time of these kings.

Truth1 >>> Joseph showed up in the reign of Amenemhet/Amenmenes III. Huge amounts of trade show up in this time with that name. The 17th Dynasty was likely the "oppression of Assyria" spoken of in Isaiah 52: 4 For thus saith the Lord GOD: "My people went down aforetime into Egypt to sojourn there, and the Assyrian oppressed them without cause. (KJ21 translation). I would take these to be in the 17th Dynasty where Donald Redford notes the last 3/4 kings of the 17th dynasty above were Assyrian names.

[50] 18th Dynasty           14 kings from Diospolis

Amosis, 25 years.

Chebron, 13 years.

Ammenophis, 21 years.

Misphres, 12 years.

Misphragmuthosis, 26 years.

Tuthmosis, 9 years.

Amenophis, 31 years. He [g214] is the one believed to be Memnon, the talking statue.

Orus, 38 years.

Achencherses, 16 years. In his reign, Moses as general of the Jews, took them out of Egypt.

Acherres, 8 years.

Cherres, 15 years.

Armais, also called Danaus, 5 years. Afterwards he was expelled from Egypt, and fled from his brother

Aegyptus to Greece. He captured Argos and became king of the Argives.

Rhamesses, also called Aegyptus, 68 years.

Amenophis, 40 years.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 348 years [g215].

>>really the 19th<<  18th Dynasty             5 kings from Diospolis

Sethos, 55 years

Rhampses, 66 years

Amenephthis, (?) 40 years

Ammenemes, 26 years

Thuoris, 7 years.

Homer [Odyssey 4.126] calls him Polybus, the husband of Alcandra. In his reign Troy was captured.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 194 years

[51]

From the Third Book of Manetho.

20th Dynasty            12 kings from Diospolis, who ruled for 172 years.

>>Notice above that 12 kings are noted but not 1 name is given. Some lists call them all Rameses with a number added after, 3-12. I propose that this dynasty hides a period of total collapse and lack of either rulership or accounting of time or both. In the 21st dynasty, priests gather coffins and mummies of kings and placed them in 2 tombs, after the original tombs had been plundered, evidently in a period of chaotic break down in order. Recovery began at this time.<<

21th Dynasty        7 kings from Tanis.

Smendis, 26 years.

Psusennes, 41 years.

Nephercheres, 4 years.

Amenophthis, 9 years.

Osochor, 6 years.

Psinaches, 9 years.

Psusennes, 35 years.

Altogether [these kings] reigned for 130 years [g217]


Sources & Comparisons of Manetho
Back to Top

Manetho comes to us thru indirect routes/people as listed below. The names:

Africanus, a Christian Bishop who did a lot of work in chronologies but much of his work did not survive.

Josephus, A Jewish historian, and with close associations to the Emperors Flavian.

Eusebius, a quite well known and respected Bishop who wrote many works of a Christian nature.

There is an Armenian translation of Manetho as well, which then was Latinized.

Jerome also made a Latin version of Eusebius' Manetho, I believe.

There are Irish fragments of what was an original Greek manuscript of Eusebius' Manetho. These are not in the public domain and are pricey.

Eusebius' Chronicle is a marvelous work, with important info for me. He also covers some important bible chronology and comparisons as well. It is sad that this work did not survive in its totality, but what did survive is quite fascinating. I came across a website that offered comparisons of Manetho by 3 different sources as well as Egyptian Monument Lists. So I invoke these now to see what they might reveal in comparing them.

I want to emphasize 2 things here. 1st, there is close though not perfect, agreement between Africanus, Eusebius, and Josephus. 2nd, there is considerable difference between what is on monuments verses the 3 historians. As I see it, the monumental stuff, which was intended to be visible and reflect good on most rulers, could be the most suspect. Why are some of these rulers not so evident in the Manetho documents? Or why do their years differ so from Manetho? Some monument years seem absurdly inflated.

The California Institute for Ancient Studies - List of Dynasties    http://www.specialtyinterests.net/dyn18_19.html

Manetho through
Africanus
 
Amos.......................29  yrs
Chebros..........................13
Amenophthis...................24
Amensis..........................22
Misaphris........................13
Misphragmuthosis...........26
Thutmosis.........................9
Amenophis......................31
Orus...............................37
Acherres.........................32
Rathos..............................6
Chebres..........................12
Acherres.........................12
Armesis............................5
Rameses...........................1
Manetho through
Eusebius

Amosis.................25  yrs
Chebros......................13
Amenophis..................21

Miphres......................12
Misphragmuthosis.......26
Thutmosis.....................9
Amenophis..................31
Orus............................36
Achencheres................12
Athoris........................39
Cencheres....................16
Acherres........................8
Armais...........................5
Manetho through
Josephus

Tethmosis..............25yrs..10m
Chebron..................13.........0
Amenophis..............20.........7
Amesses..................21.........9
Mephres..................12.........9
Mephtramuthosis....25........10
Thmosis....................9..........8
Amenophis..............30........10
Orus.......................36..........5
Acencheres.............12[14].....1
Rathothis..................9[15]......0
Acencheres.............12..........5
Acencheres.............12..........3
Armais......................4..........1
Monuments
Ahmose....................22 yrs
Amenhotep I............10+ [9]
Thutmose I...............30 [More]
Thutmose II...............?
Hatshepsut.................?
Thutmose III.............54
Amenhotep II............26+ [10]
Thutmose IV...............8+
Amenhotep III...........36+ / Memnon
Amenhotep IV...........17+
Tutankhamen...............?*
Sakere (Smenkhare).....?
Eye (or Ay).................?

>>Be warned that this work was made by Velikovsky fans who love to suggest changes to some identities and shorten chronologies in general, which I do not agree with. But that said, I believe there is much about the 18th dynasty monument list that probably should be shortened considerably, but Egyptologists would bitterly object and complain. They love their monuments. But Thutmose III almost certainly includes the years of more than 1 king.

If my dates for Joseph and Amenemhet III are correct, then the time left for the rest of the 12th, 17th, and 18th dynasties must be very short.<<

After the death of Ay the 18th Dynasty ended with no heir ready to assume the crown of Egypt. See `The strange ending of the 18th Dynasty' for more. Harmhab and Armais were one and the same person. He was a general in the Egyptian army and was installed as king by the Assyrian overlord. He was king only for about 7 years.

Notes & References

[009] For a full page color image of the head of Amenhotep I, the coffin of his wife Merytamen, her AN-B burial chamber and the tomb KV39 see KMT, Winter 2003, p. 65.; For an image of the restored dyad statue of Amenhotep I and Ahmose-Nefertari see Ancient Egypt, Aug/Sep 2005, p. 17. - - Overall, evidence for Amenhotep I is scant and questionable, in particular to reign length. We believe that is so, because his `alter-ego' name is King Saul of Israel (1100-1060 BC), and when King Saul died, was impaled by the Philistines on the wall of Beth-Shan [BAR, Mar/Apr 2012, p. 34-41, 70, 71], Amenhotep I, alias King Saul, died and he was buried in Israel.

[010] For tomb information on Amenhotep II and Seti II see KMT, Summer 2000, p. 30.; For the B&W image of a statue of Amenophis II/Amenhotep II with inscriptions added by the kings of the 19th Dynasty see W.V. Davies, `Reading the Past', p. 18, BM#61. According the Amenhotep II's own records, rulers of Syria were in full revolt close to the beginning of his reign, "... some of the Asiatics who were in the city of Ikathi had plotted to make a plan for casting out the infantry of his majesty who were in the ciyu, in order to overturn ... his majesty ... pacified this city..." [Breasted, Records, Vol. II, Sec. 787. See also Sec. 791, 797, 804.] But it was the Syrian king Shaush-shatar on the strength of his friendly ties with Egypt, who invaded Assyria. Olmstead estimated that the king of Assyria at that time was most likely Ashur-bel-nisheshu or his brother Ashur-rim-nisheshu or the latters alter egos of Tab-rimmon, Eriba-Adad, etc, conventionally misdated, revised dates for Tab-rimmon, 9th century BC. [Olmstead, History of Assyria, p. 38.]
But now we think that Amenhotep III was Amenhotep II, and Amenhotep I was King Saul, and there is no difference.

To show the scantity of evidence for this named ruler - Amenhetep II, we cite from H.R. Hall, `A Note on the Reign of Amenhetep II', is an answer to Mr. F. Ll. Griffith's Article on `The Length of the Reign of Amenhetep II', PSBA Vol XXXI, p. 42. Griffith believed, "that Amenhetep/Amenhotep's reign was a short one, rejecting the combined evidence of Manetho and the (perhaps doubtful) wine-jar inscription which gives `year 26.' But I do not see that the arguments he brings forward, from the absence of documents later than the 5th year, are of any greater weight than those which he rejects. An argument from silence of monuments is a very risky one." [CIAS: Well, if it is written evidence, fine.] I may add that it seems to me reasonable to accept Manetho as much as one can, when his figures are not improbable [CIAS: Beware, beware], and in the case of Amenhetep II, they seem to fit the necessities of the general chronology of the time much better than would so small a number of years as five or six. The dates of Thothmes III and Amenhetep I (Ebers Papyrus) would not be affected, but I presume that if we adopt Mr. Griffith's short reign for Amenhetep II, the reign of Amenhetep III would be shifted 20 years earlier than the date now usually accepted. This would seriously affect the calculations of the Disk-worshippers and of Horemheb, extending by 20 years the period from the accession of Akhenaten to the probable date 1321-1318 (the era of "Menophres") in the reign of Ramses II.

I do not think that the reigns of the Hittite kings Shubbiluliuma, Aranda, and Mursil - the contemporaries of the Egyptian kings from Amenhetep III and Akhenaten to Ramses I and Seti I - will bear being extended by 20 years. As it is they are long enough, since Shubbiluliuma must - on the assumption of 26 years for Amenhetep II - have begun to reign about 1390, and Mursil died in the reign of Seti, probably about 1310. We can hardly suppose that the reign of Shubbililiuma began so early as circa 1410: a necessary supposition if we restrict the reign of Amenhetep II to 5 or 6 years. Shubbiluliuma was the father of Mursil, and it seems highly unlikely that the birth of the father took place at least 120 years before the death of his son. A century is quite enough." - - [CIAS: Here we see the conventional dillema as it was taught more than 100 years ago. All of that is unnecessary today because of written evidence for these kings did not reign in the centuries when the Hyksos/Amalekites ruled Egypt between about 1450 to 1050 BC.]

[014] Acenchere(s) may be a mistake for `Smenchere(s)' according to Arthur Weigall, A History of Egypt, 1927, p. 237.

[015] Rathoth(is) is considered to be a name for King Tutankhamun based on "Re-Tut". [Arthur Weigall, `History of Egypt', WAHE, p. 237.]

 


 



Related Articles













Back to Home/Index       Truth 1 - The best site on the internet!

Back to Top