Hello everybody, it's been its1223 back in the video, I'm just going to quickly check
to make sure the sound is working on this video, as usual.
It's working on this video, alright, so it is working.
So just to get into the subject of this video, I have to adjust my camera or my computer
a bit because I need room on my desk for these papers that I have, which I will show you.
So the last few weeks I've been really interested in the topic of chronology in the
Bible and this is something that I've really looked into before.
I really like history, I really like archaeology, anything that surrounds that I'm interested
in and my favorite period of history is ancient history, so it's really a topic which I enjoy
studying.
And I think I've talked about this before on my channel, I've made videos where I've
discussed this, I made a video on biblical archaeology last June where I talked about
archaeological evidence that the Bible is correct and the different events that are
recorded in the Bible are historical fact.
I'm not going to be going into too much detail about the things that are discussed
in this video, particularly the things I want to mention are the Exodus, the conquest,
and the reign of David and Solomon and the United Kingdom of Israel.
So in this video I'm talking about those particular periods of time and how it relates
to the chronology of Egypt and other nations which existed in the Middle East in ancient
times such as the Hittites and the Assyrians, etc.
So I drew up two timelines.
One of them is complete and one of them isn't because it requires a lot of research
and I've been doing other things recently.
I did both of these over a couple days and then I just added a few additional details
for the second timeline but the first timeline I want to show you is the traditional chronology,
the conventional or orthodox chronology that the archaeologists and Egyptologists
of the world use and the second one is the new chronology which has been proposed
by an Egyptologist named David Rolle and based on the archaeological evidence and
the historical records I believe that the new chronology makes much more sense and
I'll explain what I mean by that as I get into this video.
So I'll just be kind of going through these timelines, explaining them, and then supplementing
them with additional facts but I'm not going to go too much into the different archaeological
things in this video.
This is mostly talking about the timeline itself.
So this timeline, no I'm not going to do that.
This timeline, I don't, hopefully you can see it, this camera is low quality, I'm
going to back it up a little bit, maybe this will be the thumbnail for my video.
You probably won't be able to read that, like I said it's low quality so I'll just
go through it.
So at the top here I have the actual, this isn't a professional thing, I drew this
by hand, there's not really much detail or anything like that, it's not fancy, there's
just words and lines and that's pretty much it.
So right here is the actual dates, so it spans from 2000 BC to 800 BC, so a period
of about 1200 years, each little interval is 150 years long.
Above the dates are the traditional times for the different ages, so the Bronze Age
is usually divided into the early, middle, and late Bronze Age.
The late Bronze Age ended with the Bronze Age collapse and I actually have a book here
about the Bronze Age collapse which will be sort of useful in this video.
It's called 1177 BC, the year of civilization collapsed, I'll talk about that later.
So the traditional dates for the ending of the Bronze Age is about 1177 BC, which
is, and if you want to kind of round it up it would usually be about 1200 BC and
that's when the Iron Age supposedly started and that's divided into Iron Age I and Iron
Age II.
So these divisions I put at the top and then under that is the Egyptian chronology with
the different dynasties.
So the earliest dynasty on this one is the 12th dynasty which according to the conventional
chronology began in 1991 BC and the last one is the 22nd dynasty which ends after
this.
I don't know the exact date in which the 22nd dynasty is set to have ended but it began
around 945 BC according to conventional chronology.
Down here is another Egyptian dynasty but the reason why it's separated from the rest
of them is because there were periods which Egypt was split and there were different rulers
so particularly the 14th and the 15th dynasties were ruled by Asiatics.
So there's not really a scholarly consensus on who was ruling during the 14th dynasty
but the people ruling during the 15th dynasty were a Semitic group of people called the
Hyksos who ruled around the same time as the 16th and the 17th dynasties which were
going on above.
So you see that this will coincide.
So the 16th and the 17th dynasties were in, it's called Upper Egypt but it's lower
in terms of North and South.
So it's Southern Egypt, it's called Upper Egypt, that's where the Theban dynasties
were ruling from the city of Thebes and the other dynasty, the Hyksos, were ruling
from the city of Averis in Northern Egypt.
Then below that is the traditional dating for the Exodus and the Bible and all things
like that.
So this is what the scholars out there and as I'll explain in this video it does not
fit with what the Bible says.
It's just kind of an assumption that this is what the Bible teaches.
They put the Exodus usually around 1250 BC.
So the Exodus is right here, this little X right here and then this is the remainder
of Israel history.
So the Judges period is pretty short and is about not that much longer than the United
Kingdom of Israel and the Kingdom of Israel and Judah after that.
So the Judges period isn't that long according to this conventional chronology and the reason
why this is added on here is because conventional chronologists, most of them are secular, most
of them do not believe the Bible.
So they reject what the Bible says about these historical events, the Exodus, etc.
They believe that the Israelites were just Canaanites that just emerged in the 12th
century BC.
He even talks about it a little bit and this is written by a secular guy.
There's like a few pages on that subject where he puts forth the idea that they were
just Canaanites that kind of just came together after all these cities collapsed
in the late Bronze Age.
They believe that the Judges period was a myth, the conquest was a myth, the Exodus
was a myth, that these things didn't happen.
As I'll show you in this video that's completely false and the problem with this also is
that based on archaeological dating, based on things like radiocarbon dating, the date
of the destruction of Jericho is dated to about 1550 or the middle of the 16th century
BC and that's a problem because the Bible talks about Jericho being destroyed by the
Israelites but the conventional chronology puts the Exodus all the way over here and
all the way back here.
Now I know it kind of probably looks weird on the screen because it's reversed.
I don't know but you should understand what I'm saying, that Jericho was supposedly
destroyed 300 years before the Israelites left Egypt according to the conventional
chronology.
So then at the bottom there's other groups which existed this time.
There's the Hittite Empire which is said to have lasted from 1600 to 1177 BC.
During the Bronze Age collapse is when the Hittite Empire fell.
Then below that is Assyria.
There's large gaps between old Assyria, middle Assyria and neo-Assyria.
The middle Assyrian Empire was a period from, again, according to the conventional
chronology, from 1392 BC to 934 or 911 BC and then from then on was the neo-Assyrian
Empire which is what we mainly know as Assyria.
That was when Shalmaneser and Sennacherib and Esarhaddon and all those other rulers
that are mentioned in the Bible, that's when they ruled.
So then below that also are the Babylonians, the first Babylonian dynasty of Hammurabi,
the guy who wrote Hammurabi's code that lasted from 1894 BC to 1595 BC according to this
chronology and there's different chronologies as well for some of these, for some of these
dynasties in these kingdoms, especially in Mesopotamia.
There's the long chronology, the middle chronology, the short and the ultra short,
usually the most widely accepted is the middle chronology.
So right here I'm using the middle chronology.
The Kassites were a group that took over Babylon after the first Babylonian dynasty fell.
So what happened were the Hittites attacked Babylon, they destroyed Babylon and then they
didn't capture Babylon.
It was weird.
They just kind of attacked Babylon and just left it and a different group from over the Zagros Mountains
invaded Babylon, took it over and they ruled for about 400 years in Babylon.
They were in control.
So that's called the Kassite dynasty.
So this is the traditionally accepted timeline.
Now another thing which I pointed out, I added some minor details on here which are relevant to the
other timeline, different rulers and different events that happened.
So you'll see this little, these kind of dotted lines coming down from the Egyptian chronology
onto the Israelite chronology.
The first one, I don't know, again, I don't know if you can read it.
The first one says Ramses II because the assumption is that Ramses II was the pharaoh of the Exodus.
And I'll explain why that's wrong later in this video.
The second assumption is that Shoshank who was a pharaoh of the 22nd dynasty was the ruler mentioned
in the Bible called Shishak who came up and attacked Jerusalem during the reign of Rehoboam.
And that's mentioned in the book of 2 Kings.
So they assume that Shishak is the same thing as Shoshank.
That's been the traditional, only Catholics are saved.
I disagree with that, but that's not the subject of this video.
So they believe that Shishak is the same as Shoshank just because the name sounds similar.
There's no evidence that Shoshank, you know, well, actually, I think there is a mention
of him fighting against nations in Canaan.
But I'll, again, explain why this is wrong later in this video.
Now, the Battle of Kadesh was a battle between the Hittites and the ruler Ramses II
who, again, is assumed to be the pharaoh of the Exodus.
That happened according to the traditional chronology in 1275,
which was during the 19th dynasty, the dynasty that Ramses ruled in.
Another person to mention is Akhenaten, who was a ruler of Egypt,
a pharaoh during the 18th dynasty, whose traditional chronology dates were from 1350
to about 1340, or 1330, rather.
And David, who, chronology is from, I think, 1007 to, wait, what is it?
1010, hold on, something like that.
Okay, somewhere in the 9th or the 10th and the 11th century.
I'm sorry if I can't speak right.
I haven't really had much preparation for this video.
It's just kind of I made these timelines and I want to talk about it.
I don't really have notes to go off of.
I'm kind of trying to remember all these things from memory.
There's a lot of information on here.
So, you know, if I stumble, if I misspeak, I'll try to correct myself.
But this is the traditional chronology.
And it's based on several assumptions, especially when it comes to Egypt
and when it comes to the dating for Israel and their chronology.
So, the assumption is because in the Book of Exodus,
it says that the Israelites built the city of Pyramzies.
They believe that this means that they must have existed or they must have left
during the time of Ramses or that the Bible at least says this.
They don't assume, they don't believe that the Exodus is real at all,
but they believe that if it were real, based on this one detail,
this must mean that the Israelites left Egypt during the reign of Ramses II.
Now, that doesn't make any sense because the city of Ramses,
that was a later title for a different city called Averus
that was built on the same site, the same location.
So, basically, what it was was there was a city that was established
during the 14th Dynasty of Egypt called Averus.
It was ruled by this 14th Dynasty, then the 15th Dynasty.
And after that, it became the city of Ramses during the reign of Ramses II.
It would be like renaming a city today.
It's the same city just with a different name.
Now, I don't think that's a biblical error at all,
because in the Bible, you know, we speak English.
So, when we speak English, we refer to the nation of Egypt as Egypt.
When we read the Book of Exodus, it says Egypt.
That's not what it says in Hebrew.
It says Mitsrayim, which is the name of Egypt in Hebrew,
but that doesn't mean that it's talking about a different place.
There's different names for different regions, for different times, et cetera,
or not different regions, different languages, for different times, et cetera.
But these names are still referring to the same place.
So, when the Bible says Ramses, that's just a later change of the word Averus,
but it's referring to the same place.
It's the same city.
Ramses and Averus were the same city.
So, the assumption is that just because it mentions Ramses,
that must mean that the Exodus took place during the time of Ramses.
Now, the problem with that is that in the Bible,
there's an actual chronology that's given.
It actually gives dates for when the Exodus happened.
So, they believe that it was sometime around the mid 13th century BC
during the reign of Ramses II, who according to the traditional chronology,
range from 1275 BC to 1213 BC.
That ignores several things.
First, the Bible gives a date for when the Exodus happened.
Many point out that there are 480 years mentioned in 1 Kings 6 verse 1.
It says that there were 480 years from the Exodus to the building of the temple.
So, based on adding up the different reigns of the kings of Israel,
it's been established that Solomon began his reign in 970.
He began to build the temple in 966 BC.
So, taken 480 years, the assumption is that it's
1446 BC was when the Exodus took place.
I still think that's wrong because the 480 years do not talk about
how many exact years, but how many years the Israelites were independent.
And I'll explain why that is because it ignores other sources in the Bible
which show that these, during the period of the judges,
when the Israelites were under the control of a different nation,
the years were not counted and added on to this 480.
So, in Acts chapter 13, verse 18 to 21,
it talks about this story of the Old Testament.
And we see that the number of years, I'm not going to read it,
but you can pull it up if you want to, Acts 13, 18 to 21.
The number of the years of the judges was 450 years.
And then it says that this 450 years plus the 40 years
of wandering in the wilderness, the 40 years of Saul's reign,
the 40 years of David reign, and then the three years
until when Solomon built his temple because he built it in his third year.
That equals 573 years.
So, from the time when which Solomon built the temple until the Exodus,
or if you go back in time until the Exodus,
that was 573 years that had passed according to Acts chapter 13.
Now, that makes sense because if you consider the numbers given
when Israel is controlled by a foreign nation in the book of Judges,
where it talks about this time when Israel was ruled by judges
and was without a king, there was Cush on Rosh Hashanah,
who according to Judges 3.8 ruled for eight years,
Jabin of Hazor, which ruled for 20 years,
Midian for seven years, the Ammonites ruled for 18 years,
and the Philistines for 40 years.
Now, if you add all that up,
that equals the remaining 93 years between 480 and 573.
So, the 480 years just refers to the independence of Israel,
the total of the period of judges and the united Israel
until the time of Solomon's temple was 573 years.
So, between the time of the Exodus and Solomon's temple,
there was 573 years, not like 200 years or 300 years
as the traditional chronology dates it.
So, the reason why everything is off in the traditional timeline,
the reason why everything doesn't make sense,
why the Jericho destruction is in the mid 16th century BC,
but the Exodus is 300 years later,
and all these other rulers and everything like that is all mixed up
because there's no mention of an Exodus during the 19th dynasty,
there's no mention of that in Egypt,
there's no evidence whatsoever, archaeological evidence,
they assume that the Exodus is false.
So, there was this, not was, there still is,
a man named David Roll, he is an Egyptologist
and he has worked closely with the Assyriologist,
Bernard Newgrosh, whose works are kind of difficult to find,
you can find some...water went down wrong.
You can find some of his articles online,
but he wrote a book which is like 700 pages long
and from my understanding is really detailed,
that book is out of print though,
the one by Bernard Newgrosh,
the one by David Roll is still in print,
he's written multiple books,
one of the books of Test of Time,
I ordered from Barnes and Noble, I don't have it yet,
I didn't read it for this video,
but I just read his online sources,
watched a few documentaries and videos by him,
et cetera, to see what his theory is.
So, I think his theory makes sense
because the problem with the traditional chronology
is that they push Israelite history too far forward
and they do something else with the Egyptian chronology,
they push it back, so it's kind of, it slides apart,
but when you put it together,
when you kind of synchronize them,
everything makes sense and I'll explain what I mean
because the chronology of things that happen
in the Bible, the Exodus, things like that,
they all coincide with periods
in the Middle Kingdom of Egypt,
not the New Kingdom of Egypt,
the Middle Kingdom was the 11th Dynasty
to the 13th Dynasty,
then there was this intermediate period
called the Second Intermediate Period,
that's when the Hyksos ruled,
until the New Kingdom when Ahmosei the first
destroyed the Hyksos, he took over the rest of Egypt
and that was the 18th and 19th of the 20th Dynasties.
Ramses ruled during the New Kingdom,
during the 19th Dynasty,
but according to this new chronology,
the Exodus took place during the Middle Kingdom
and the end of the 13th Dynasty
was a result of the Exodus.
So why do we say this?
Okay, so I tried looking into some of the evidence
for David Rolle's new chronology
and what he says about it,
like I said, I couldn't find that much information,
I haven't read his book yet,
like I said, it's just like Barnard Newgrosh's thing,
it's very detailed, there's a lot of information in it,
but I haven't read it yet,
just kind of a basic synopsis of the things that he says.
First of all, the problems with the traditional chronology
in terms of the earlier periods is that the seventh
and the seventh and the ninth or 10th,
I don't remember exactly which one it was, the seventh
and then either the ninth or the 10th Dynasties,
there's very limited evidence that they even exist.
The only evidence of their existence is their mention
in the Turin Canon and the Abydos Kingless,
which were kingless or lists of pharaohs
that came nearly a millennium afterwards,
but there's not really any archeological evidence
to show that there were kings during this time.
And so it was basically a 200 year period,
which was talked about by these kings list
over a thousand years later
and then another guy named Monetho
who is very important for this video
and talking about this chronology.
Monetho talked about it as well,
but there's not really any evidence
of these certain dynasties.
So if you get rid of these dynasties,
that would remove about 200 years
from Egyptian chronology, but that goes before 2000 BC.
So that's not really relevant.
It just shows that some things are off.
That's one thing that we can talk about
in another video,
especially when we go back to the time of Abraham
and things before that and how Egypt started.
But for this video, we're just talking about the Exodus.
So David Rolle's new chronology
has several pieces of evidence for support.
He noticed that there was a severe lack
of Apis bull burials, which is a type of burial
that was done for kings during the New Kingdom
and the Third Intermediate Period
at the temple complex in Saqqara
during the period of the 21st and the 22nd dynasties
show that the 21st and the 22nd dynasties
were most likely contemporary.
Oser Khan II's tomb was built before Susenius I,
despite supposedly ruling 200 years apart.
So Oser Khan was supposedly a ruler of the,
or not supposedly, he was a ruler of the 22nd dynasty,
while Susenius was one of the 21st dynasty.
They ruled 200 years apart and yet,
the archeological evidence shows that Susenius' tomb
or Oser Khan's tomb was built before Susenius
despite ruling after him.
Now, David Rolle sees this and he thinks
that the Third Intermediate Period is greatly exaggerated.
It's not as long as it,
or it's not as short as it should be.
It's expanded by Egyptologists to make it out
to be this long three or 400 year period
when really it's not.
Now, another erroneous idea is that Rams,
or not Ramses, Shishak is Shoshank
just because the name sounds similar
and because there is a mention on,
I think at Karnak where Shoshank is said
to have attacked cities in that land and in Asia.
But it makes more sense to assume
that it is actually talking about Ramses.
So Ramses, not the pharaoh of the Exodus,
he was the pharaoh that came up against Jerusalem
at the time of Rehoboam's Rams.
So now I'm gonna show you the second,
again, I'm trying to gather my thoughts.
I don't really know what I'm saying.
Well, I do know what I'm saying
but don't have a specific order of things to say.
So this is the second one.
It's not completely finished.
I don't have anything for Babylon at the bottom.
I'm still looking into that.
The Assyrian chronology is not finished
but pretty much everything in regards
to Egypt and Israel is.
So I'm just gonna put this up
and then compare it with the other one.
This is the traditional, this is the new chronology.
As you can see, the dates are widely off.
Everything is different pretty much.
So first of all, all the dynasties of Egypt
are moved forward by about 300 years.
Well, not all of them, but some of them.
The Hyksos period is expanded.
So according to this new chronology,
the 20th dynasty or the 19th dynasty began
around 960 BC and not back all the way in like 1292 BC.
So that's 330 years later, that's a long time.
Now, if Ramses was the Pharaoh
during the time of Rehoboam who came up
against Jerusalem and attacked Jerusalem,
then we expect to find evidence of that.
And there is evidence of that.
There are inscriptions during Ramses reign
that talks about him fighting against Jerusalem.
He made several attacks,
usually because he was going into Syria
to battle the Hittites.
So he had three campaigns in the Syria.
And during one of them, he attacked cities in Israel,
including Jerusalem.
And that's also the context of the battle of Kadesh,
which happened in Ramses reign.
The reason why he was going through Canaan
was because he was trying to attack the Hittites.
And so he subjected the Israelites during that time.
The Bible talks about how in, what is it?
First Kings 14, I think.
In First Kings 14, it talks about how
when he had attacked Jerusalem,
that the kingdom of Judah and Israel
basically became subjects or tributaries to Egypt.
So even though they weren't in direct control of Egypt,
they were kind of like vassal states
or kind of like autonomous kingdoms,
which the Egyptians considered to be part of their empire,
but which were still ruling themselves,
which still had their own kings.
That's something that's happened a lot in history
with different empires.
So Ramses was the one who attacked Jerusalem.
He was the one who subjected Jerusalem
as he was going to fight the Hittites
of the battle of Kadesh.
Now there's further evidence for that.
The name of Shishak, where does that come from?
There was the treaty for the battle of Kadesh.
There is a treaty for both the Hittites and the Egyptians
and it's the only ancient treaty
that has both sides preserved.
So for the Hittite text, it's written in Akkadian.
And the name of Ramses as it's written
is written as Ria Ma'shisha.
As Ramses obviously is not how it was even pronounced
by the Egyptians, that's how it was pronounced
by the Greeks and that's still kind of our common name.
Just like how we call Moses Moses,
but in Hebrew it's Moshe.
Names change.
We kind of have this idea that his name was Ramses
but it really wasn't.
The Hittites called him Ria Ma'shisha.
So David Rolle theorizes that Shisha,
the ending of that is the hyper-charisticon
or the shortened name, like how my name is Alexander
but my hyper-charisticon would be Alex.
Shisha is the hyper-charisticon of Ria Ma'shisha
and this name Shisha was originally spelled
as Shin-yod Shin-vav in Hebrew.
But during this time period, the letters of vav
and the letters of kaf or kof,
which would be the k sound, the Q,
they looked almost exactly the same.
So I'm gonna get out a pencil
and find another piece of paper.
I could just do it on back, I guess.
So they both, both the letter of vav
and the letter of kof during this time,
where is it?
There it is.
Looked just like this,
this little circle with a line coming out of the bottom.
You know, that's, the letters look pretty much identical.
It's just like, what letter can I think of
that looks similar?
You know, a lowercase L and a capital I,
they look very similar.
So the theory is that this became
the conventional name for him
because people kept writing Shishak instead of Shisha
or they did write Shisha
and people just thought it was Shishak later.
So that became the Hebrew name of it.
It's just like the name of Nebuchadrezzar.
His name was Nebuchadnezzar
but the Hebrews called him Nebuchadrezzar.
It's just the same thing with Shisha.
His name was Shisha
but his name became Shishak in the Bible.
So, Ramses made several campaigns into Canaan and Syria
and that just fits exactly what the Bible describes.
So, David ruled Musa's,
the time of his reign to about 943 BC to 877 BC
and the attack on,
the attack on Jerusalem was in the late 10th century BC.
So this was the time when Ramses ruled.
19th dynasty was during the 10th century BC
not in the 13th century BC.
Now, I wanna go back even further, a lot further
to talk about the pharaohs of the Torah,
of the book of Genesis and the book of Exodus.
There are several pharaohs which are mentioned
and interestingly, they all fit with
actual Egyptian records that come from the Middle Kingdom,
not the New Kingdom.
So, if you move around these dates,
you bring everything forward
and you bring the Exodus back to the Middle Kingdom,
things start to line up.
So, let me give you a few examples.
So, Amenemhat III was the pharaoh of Joseph,
the pharaoh that he ruled under.
Now, here's the information about Amenemhat.
Amenemhat III ruled during a time
when there was a famine in the land of Egypt
and because of this famine,
there was a waterway built off the Nile River
towards the Fayum Lake in, I don't know the exact place,
but in like the middle of Egypt, somewhere around there,
this tributary that went towards this Fayum Lake
and it's called Bar Yusef,
which means waterway of Joseph.
That's the local name,
that's what the locals have called it
for thousands of years and nobody's really understood
why it's called the waterway of Joseph,
but this chronology makes sense.
Now, there's also recorded that during the reign
of Amenemhat, he had a vizier who was called Heti,
who was a popular man during his time,
but was criticized later in the New Kingdom
in a text called the installation of the vizier.
Now, another thing is that there's a papyrus scroll,
it's called Brooklyn 35.1446.
It dates from the reign of Sobekhotep the Third.
He was a pharaoh during the 13th Dynasty,
Amenemhat was during the 12th Dynasty,
Sobekhotep the Third was during the 13th Dynasty
and this text, this papyrus has a list of slaves
and among the slave names is Shiphrah.
And that's interesting because the Bible mentions
a Hebrew midwife named Shiphrah, Shiphrah and Puah.
So Shiphrah is a Hebrew midwife in the Bible
and that name is specifically recorded in a list of slaves
during the reign of Sobekhotep the Third.
Now Sobekhotep the Third,
even though he was considered part of the 13th Dynasty,
his father was a man named Mentuhotep
who was not a royal man, he was not a previous pharaoh.
So Sobekhotep the Third did not come from a royal lineage
he had nothing to do with this lineage of pharaohs.
So therefore, he was the pharaoh who did not know Joseph.
So in the book of Exodus, it says,
there came along a pharaoh that didn't know Joseph
and he's the one that enslaved the Israelites.
This was Sobekhotep the Third.
Now, if we continue in that chronology,
there's another pharaoh that comes soon after him
called Canaphure Sobekhotep the Fourth.
And that was the pharaoh when Moses killed an Egyptian
and fled from Egypt.
There was a Jewish historian from the third century BC
called Atrabanis and he specifically says
that the pharaoh's name who was ruling during the time
when Moses fled was Canaphores.
So that's the name of Sobekhotep the Fourth.
His name is Canephore, Canephore Sobekhotep the Fourth.
So this lines up with the chronology
of the 13th Dynasty, Sobekhotep the Fourth
comes soon after Sobekhotep the Third.
So Sobekhotep the Third enslaves Egypt,
Neferhotep the Third who was kind of in between them
and there's like one or two other rulers
they ruled for short times in between them.
He's the one who ruled when Moses was adopted,
when Moses was cast in the river.
He's the one that raised Moses.
Then about 40 years later,
you have Canephore Sobekhotep the Fourth.
He's the one who was going to kill Moses
and then Moses fled into the land of Midian.
Now, another interesting fact is what I said earlier
about the 14th Dynasty,
that the 14th Dynasty was ruled by Semites,
by Asiatics,
but it was not ruled by the Hyksos who would come later.
That would be the 15th Dynasty.
So the 14th Dynasty,
I believe these are the Hebrews
because they also lived in Avaris.
There's multiple scarab seals,
which gives several names of people
who lived in this region.
It never says particularly that they're pharaohs,
but just gives these names of people
who were living and ruling in this land.
So I believe that the 14th Dynasty,
that's why I put in this chronology,
the 14th Dynasty began during the 12th Dynasty
and continued until the,
nearly the end of the 13th Dynasty.
So those were the Israelites who were living in Avaris,
which is in the land of Goshen,
which the Bible says the Israelites lived in.
And it even says they built Avaris,
which would later be called Ramses.
So there's that.
Then Dedumose the second,
who was one of the last pharaohs of the 13th Dynasty,
he was the pharaoh of the Exodus.
Now, Benito, who was an Egyptian priest
that I mentioned earlier,
he had several, he lived during the third century BC
and he recorded a history of Egypt.
I think it's called Egyptaica.
And in it, he talked about a pharaoh named Tutameos.
He said that after the reign of Tutameos,
Egypt was subdued by foreigners from the West
who took over Egypt.
Now that's the Hyksos.
And you'll see the Hyksos are equivalent
with the Amorites and other Canaanites,
which were cast out of the land of Canaan
by the Israelites.
I'll explain that later.
But in this chronology, again, in this timeline,
this new timeline,
the 15th Dynasty starts at the end of the 13th Dynasty.
So really what happened was
when the Israelites left Egypt,
they, because of the 10 plagues,
which had come upon the nation of Egypt,
during that time, Egypt was in chaos.
It didn't last very much longer.
It kind of fell apart and the Hyksos came in.
They subdued the land.
It's as Benito wrote that they did it without a fight.
So, you know, their army was completely destroyed.
They were covered by the waves of the Red Sea.
They couldn't fight off the Hyksos.
So the Hyksos just came in
and started ruling for a few hundred years in Egypt
because of this.
And this was actually mentioned by an Egyptian text
called the Epirapapyrus.
It was written during the 13th Dynasty
and it records the Egyptian perspective of the Exodus.
Now, people reject this often
because of the traditional chronology,
because they don't understand
when the Exodus was said to take place
and they don't know about this new chronology.
So the Epirapapyrus,
it mentions slaves leaving the land.
It mentions rivers being turned to blood,
mass destruction and death,
all kinds of things like that.
And it even says that barbarians from abroad
started to take over the land.
So you have this, everything is lining up now.
You have the Israelites who are leaving,
the slaves who are leaving,
the rivers are turned to blood, mass destruction.
Those are the 10 plagues while the Israelites are leaving
and then as a result of this chaos in the land of Egypt,
foreigners from abroad start coming in
and taking over Egypt.
Those would be the Hyksos who,
according to Monetho,
took over after the reign of Tutameos,
which is dead Umozi,
one of the last rulers of the 13th Dynasty.
So it all lines up perfectly.
Now here's another thing.
One of the first rulers
or possibly the first ruler of the 15th Dynasty
was a man named Shishai.
And that was a name found in Egyptian scarab seals.
Now, I and also David Rolle
identify this as a person mentioned in the Bible
named Sheshi.
Now, the name is very similar.
There's no reason to believe that they're different.
And it says that Shishai or Sheshi in the Bible,
in the book of Joshua,
he is mentioned as an exiled Anakim leader
that when the Israelites come in
and they conquered the land of Canaan,
they kick out the Anakites,
including Shishai who was one of their leaders.
And then, wouldn't you know it,
according to Egyptian texts,
right after that, the Hyksos came in
and one of the first Hyksos rulers was named Shishai.
So he was also called as by Saides,
according to Manetho, that was his later Greek name.
So Shishai, Sheshi, Saides,
these are all the same rulers.
They're the first ruler of the 15th Dynasty
ruled by the Hyksos.
So everything in the 13th Dynasty adds up.
There's a lot of other details I could talk about.
Like I said, it's kind of difficult
for me to gather my thoughts.
There's a lot of information.
I'm kind of just going on what I see
on this timeline right here.
So, the period of Israel
began during the reign of Dedumozi II.
That's what I write right here,
this little dotted line.
If you can see, Dedumozi II.
That was the Exodus
and that little tiny bit right there is the conquest.
That line begins the period of the judges.
So this is the judges period that lasted 573 years,
or not 573 years, 450 years,
plus the additional years from the conquest.
The United Israel equals the total 573 years
from the Exodus to the building of Solomon's Temple.
So another thing which lines up
is if you move all the chronologies around,
you have the Amarna letters
being written during the reigns of Amenhotep III
and Akhenaten being during the time
of the United Kingdom of Israel.
The reason why that's important,
let me back up.
You probably don't know what the Amarna letters are.
I don't know.
The Amarna letters were probably the largest text
of cuneiform tablets found in Egypt
and elsewhere in the land of Canaan.
Basically, there were letters sent between Egypt
and rulers in the Middle East
and in the Hittites and the Assyrians, et cetera.
Basically, it was an old system of letters and treaties
and things like that where they were written back and forth
between the Egyptian pharaohs
and the different kings that were ruling at that time.
That's really important
because I think there's like over 300 of them.
I don't know exactly how many there are,
but there's a lot of these texts.
They all have different names and locations
and things like that,
which gave us a lot of context into this period
when Akhenaten was ruling.
So that would be the middle of the 18th dynasty
towards the end of the 18th dynasty.
There are only a couple of rulers after Akhenaten.
So Akhenaten, I believe,
ruled during the time of Saul and David
and that these people are mentioned in the Amarna letters.
And this is another evidence
which David Rolle gives for his new chronology.
So the Amarna letters record events
which represent the biblical story.
There is a man named Mutbal.
He's called the son of Labia.
He is a king who is living in Canaan
on the other side of the Jordan.
It says in the Amarna letter,
it's called Elamarna 256.
So the 256th letter that his father Labia ruled in
on the west side of the Jordan,
but he moved his capital over
to the east side of the Jordan after his father's death.
And his father Labia was slain by enemies at Mount Gilboa.
Now that perfectly fits the description of Saul.
Saul was slain at Mount Gilboa.
And then his son Ishmael,
who didn't subject himself to David,
he moved the capital over to the other side of the Jordan.
And interestingly, the name Mutbal
and the name Ishmael mean the exact same thing.
Mutbal is just a Canaanite way of saying man of Baal.
And then Ishmael is the Israelite,
the Hebrew way of saying man of Baal.
So you have the same name,
the father who did the same thing.
He does the same thing.
You know, everything lines up.
And in addition, it even mentions the name of Daduah
in this text, which is identified
by David Roll as being David.
So you have a name very similar to David
and all this other thing.
So everything lines up.
I think it's pretty perfect.
The last thing I'm gonna mention in this video,
there's a lot of things I could talk about,
but I don't wanna go on and ramble on forever.
I might make another video about this
when I can kind of do more research
and more, what's it called?
More detailed.
Probably do another video about this in the future.
So the Bronze Age collapse has also moved because of this,
because the Bronze Age collapse
was the end of the Hittite empire.
And it was also the end of the 19th dynasty
going into the 20th dynasty.
And that happened, according to traditional chronology,
in about 1177.
When all that's moved forward,
it would happen in about the middle
of the ninth century BCE.
So the date that I put, I put circa 875 BC.
So just around there,
there's not an actual set in stone date,
but just around that time, 875, about 300 years later.
That coincides with the reign
of the biblical king Ahab of Israel.
An interesting thing, and this is where this book comes in
that I mentioned earlier, this 1177 BC.
At the end of this, this talks about the sea peoples
who are usually picked as the culprit
for the cause of the Bronze Age collapse.
But he talks about how there's not enough evidence
to simply say that they were the sole reason
that the Bronze Age collapse happened.
I mentioned in Egyptian texts
from the reign of Ramses III,
it was a confederation of different peoples
from, it's speculated to be Italy
and Western Anatolia and Greece,
who basically invaded Egypt
and attacked other cities in Canaan.
It's speculated that they were one of the main causes
of the Bronze Age collapse,
but he looks into the evidence
and he shows that there was evidence of a famine
and a drought, a major famine and a drought,
which caused the collapse of these civilizations
during this time.
Now that's interesting because if you take
the New Chronology and you line everything up,
this, like I said, is during the reign of Ahab.
Now what happened during the reign of Ahab?
Well, according to the Bible,
the prophet Elijah shut up the heavens
by the Lord, through the Lord for three and a half years.
Now, I'd assume that this wouldn't just be something
that's just happening in the kingdom of Israel,
that it was something that kind of affected other kingdoms.
And so I believe that this period of drought
for three and a half years was very influential
in the Bronze Age collapse.
And that was one of the main reasons
besides the Sea Peoples.
So the Sea Peoples, there was the drought,
and then there was a theory
that there were several internal rebellions,
specifically in the Hittite Empire.
There were groups that were subject to the Hittites,
which rose up and attacked the capital of Hattusa.
So everything, when you just take the chronology
and go towards what the Bible says,
just believe what the Bible says,
everything makes sense.
And there's no contradiction
between these different sources.
Now, regarding Assyrian chronology,
this is something which I've been trying
to do a lot of research on.
Like I said, Bernard Newgrosh,
who is a friend of David Rose,
he's an Assyriologist.
He specializes in Assyria.
He wrote like a 700 page book about it.
I think it's called,
I don't even remember what it's called.
It's something chronology, I don't know.
Chronology is somewhere in the title.
He wrote about this, but the book is out of print.
The only place you can find it is on,
there's one website that sells it,
but it sells it for like $80 or something.
So that's pretty expensive for a book, you know?
So I'm not gonna worry too much about that
because I've found a few articles by him online.
Each essay is probably about 20 to 30 pages long.
They're packed with information.
I don't know enough about Assyrian chronology on its own
to really understand a lot of it,
but I kind of get the gist of what he's saying.
His theory is that the Assyrian chronology
has been interpreted wrong as well,
that there are problems with the Assyrian chronology
because we base it on several kings lists,
which are made during the Neo Assyrian period,
as well as a list of rulers or lists of eponyms.
So each year was named after a governor called a Lemu.
So during each king's reign,
so let's say there was a king who ruled for seven years,
each year he had a new type of governor called a Lemu
and each year was named after that Lemu.
So it would change every year.
And the assumption is, well, if a king's,
if this list says that a king has seven Lemus
or Lemum would be the plural,
that must mean he reigns for seven years.
But New Groesch points out that there were several kings
where there were several Lemus per year.
So let's say if it was seven Lemus,
it could be possible that he only reigned
for three or four years.
And he just had several changes throughout the year.
And it wasn't just one per year as people assume.
So he points out problems
with the Assyrian chronology like that.
And he also shows that there was most likely
a parallel reign after, I think,
he has like a little chart here, let me pull it up,
Tukulti-Ninurta, I think,
during the middle Assyrian kingdom.
So the, okay, yeah, so after the reign
of Tukulti-Ninurta I, it split
into two simultaneous rulers.
So there were the warrior kings
and the priest kings who would rule together.
So instead of having them all listed out in a long list,
they were simultaneous, they were contemporary rulers.
For example, Ashur-nadi-nappli is,
according to this chronology,
he ruled at the same time as Ashur-nurari III.
So based on this,
this would also move the Assyrian chronology down
and would move the,
and also there's another article he wrote
which shows that the idea that Ashur-ubali mentioned
in the, because there was a king
called Ashur-ubali I of the Assyrian kingdom,
but then there's another ruler called Ashur-ubali
who's mentioned in the Amarna text.
It's immediately assumed
that this is the same Ashur-ubali.
The problem that Newgrosh points out
is that there's no similarities
between either of these rulers.
The one mentioned in the Amarna text
and the one we know from independent Assyrian records,
it shows that they're not the same person,
that there was more than one Ashur-ubali
during the Middle Assyrian kingdom.
So I didn't do that much research on it.
Most of what I focused on was the Egyptian thing.
But he's written a lot about that.
So that's why I haven't finished the Assyrian
and the Babylonian part on this timeline.
So I hope all this makes sense.
I'm trying to gather my thoughts together again,
just kind of looking at this timeline.
I made this like two weeks ago,
so it's been a little bit,
I've been focused on some other things,
but I wanted to make a video about this.
It's a really interesting topic.
And basically the point I'm trying to make is
the Bible's correct in its Torah
and the book of Joshua and Judges and things like that.
Things like the Exodus and the conquest of Canaan
and the rule of Saul, David and Solomon,
those are historical things.
They didn't just,
they were just later stories that were made up,
hundreds of years later.
But it fits with the actual chronology of other nations
when you actually decide to interpret it right.
Because the problem with this is that, like I said,
they move the Israelite chronology too far forward,
which goes against what the Bible says.
And then they ignore these different periods
of Egyptian history,
which line up with what the Bible says.
Even though everything fits perfectly,
they're just like, nope, no correlation whatsoever.
They're not the same thing.
That just seems really silly.
So I don't believe that the traditional chronology
is correct.
This timeline, the second timeline is the chronology
in which I believe that the Israelites existed
and also the Egyptians.
So 13th dynasty ended around 14th century.
It's around 1510 BC, according to this chronology,
instead of, what is it, like 1649 BC.
So the dates are different.
The order of things is different.
That's it for this video.
It's been 53 minutes, kind of just been rambling.
So thank everybody for watching.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask.
Any observations or anything like that,
feel free to say stuff.
Just don't say silly things like Thomas Quigley
and Roman Catholic truth.
You must be a Catholic to be saved.
No, no, I don't remember that anywhere in the Bible.
That's a different topic.
I made plenty of videos on that,
but thank everybody for watching and goodbye.
God bless you.