(Disclaimer: This transcript is auto-generated and may contain mistakes.)

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.