The bible and ancient history.

[Minimalist]

What the fuck are you babbling about now? Do you ever know what you are talking about?

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/piye.htm

Most references point to Piye as being the first ruler of the 25th Dynasty. Obviously, different references refer to him under different names. We believe he ruled Kush (Nubia) from about 750 to 719 BC. Piankhi was his birth name. But in various references, we see his birth name referred to as Piankhy, Piye, Piy and Piyi. However, some references point out that his true name was Piye, and that this was wrongly read as Piankhi. His Throne Name was Men-kheper-re, meaning "The Manifestation of Re Abides"). But this name too will vary, being also spelled Menkheperra. Of course, this king, as most others, had several other names which are not generally provided.

Piye and the 25th Dynasty

Piye ascended the Nubian (Kushite) thrown (or at least its northern half) as the successor of Kashta, which explains why at least one reference refers to Kashta as the founder of the 25th Dynasty. Kashta apparently had made some earlier advances into Egypt. But it was Piye who, for the first time, consolidated the rulership of Nubia and Egypt.

From the earliest dynastic periods, Nubia was always a matter of conquest for the Egyptian pharaohs, and as such, much of Nubia was often under the control of Egypt. At times, it was very much a part of Egypt, and the customs of Nubia were a reflection of those in at least Upper Egypt. This perhaps explains Piye's seemingly strong emotional ties with Egypt, what he considered to be part of his motherland, even though he was not from Egypt proper.

Piye and the 25th Dynasty

So at least towards the end of the Third Intermediate Period, when Egypt seems to have surrendered to chaos with four kings claiming rule within Egypt, as well as a number of local chieftains exercising control, particularly in the Delta, Piye decided to step in and fix Egypt's problems.

The 25th dynasty was driven out by the Assyrians under Esarhaddon.

But we sure as shit know their fucking names.

[Godscreated]

What the fuck are you babbling about now? Do you ever know what you are talking about?

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/piye.htm

Most references point to Piye as being the first ruler of the 25th Dynasty. Obviously, different references refer to him under different names. We believe he ruled Kush (Nubia) from about 750 to 719 BC. Piankhi was his birth name. But in various references, we see his birth name referred to as Piankhy, Piye, Piy and Piyi. However, some references point out that his true name was Piye, and that this was wrongly read as Piankhi. His Throne Name was Men-kheper-re, meaning "The Manifestation of Re Abides"). But this name too will vary, being also spelled Menkheperra. Of course, this king, as most others, had several other names which are not generally provided.

Piye and the 25th Dynasty

Piye ascended the Nubian (Kushite) thrown (or at least its northern half) as the successor of Kashta, which explains why at least one reference refers to Kashta as the founder of the 25th Dynasty. Kashta apparently had made some earlier advances into Egypt. But it was Piye who, for the first time, consolidated the rulership of Nubia and Egypt.

From the earliest dynastic periods, Nubia was always a matter of conquest for the Egyptian pharaohs, and as such, much of Nubia was often under the control of Egypt. At times, it was very much a part of Egypt, and the customs of Nubia were a reflection of those in at least Upper Egypt. This perhaps explains Piye's seemingly strong emotional ties with Egypt, what he considered to be part of his motherland, even though he was not from Egypt proper.

Piye and the 25th Dynasty

So at least towards the end of the Third Intermediate Period, when Egypt seems to have surrendered to chaos with four kings claiming rule within Egypt, as well as a number of local chieftains exercising control, particularly in the Delta, Piye decided to step in and fix Egypt's problems.

The 25th dynasty was driven out by the Assyrians under Esarhaddon.

But we sure as shit know their fucking names.

You can't stand it when the Bible proves ancient history and for someone who appreciates history like you seem to, should be happy no matter were the facts come from. Also I wasn't referring to the first black pharaoh, the one I'm referring to was possibly the last, He did however help postpone Assyria's attack upon Jerusalem. I just watched a PBS special on the people who are digging up these sites and answering these questions. Nubian's were tired of Egypt's treatment of them and the great warriors Egypt employed from Nubia, turned on them and defeated Egypt.

GC

[ManMachine]

When I was in high school guitar hero was a insanely popular game, everyone loved it. But many in the music business soon found out that many in to guitar hero had a harder time learning real guitar. It was because they made assumptions about the song based on their guitar hero experience. Experience and assumptions they made about the song would be flatly wrong.
I wonder if archeology suffers from the same problem. Perhaps we have been assuming the bible is even remotely accurate. I would propose that we throw the book out wholesale and try to eliminate all assumptions of the ancient world based on the Bible. That way we can start with a clean slate, and draw our conclusions based on the historical evidence. If that eventually does prove the bible accurate then so be it.

All history is corrupted by the views of the people who record it, it's not a problem limited to Biblical studies.

A lot of Americans will tell you that the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was necessary to bring the war to a conclusion. However, there are others who see America as the first and only country ever to use nuclear weapons against fellow humans and see it as a very evil act. The reality of the atomic bombs is relative to the individual, as is all history.

Historical and archaeological studies, by their nature, have highly subjective elements. Sections of the bible is known to be at least 2000 years old (the dead sea scrolls contain biblical fragments that can be dated to approx. 150 BEC), it is a viable historic document, same as the Rosetta stone or the Gilgamesh cuneiform. The story might not be real but the setting is informative.

MM

[Lemonvariable72]

When I was in high school guitar hero was a insanely popular game, everyone loved it. But many in the music business soon found out that many in to guitar hero had a harder time learning real guitar. It was because they made assumptions about the song based on their guitar hero experience. Experience and assumptions they made about the song would be flatly wrong.
I wonder if archeology suffers from the same problem. Perhaps we have been assuming the bible is even remotely accurate. I would propose that we throw the book out wholesale and try to eliminate all assumptions of the ancient world based on the Bible. That way we can start with a clean slate, and draw our conclusions based on the historical evidence. If that eventually does prove the bible accurate then so be it.

All history is corrupted by the views of the people who record it, it's not a problem limited to Biblical studies.

A lot of Americans will tell you that the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was necessary to bring the war to a conclusion. However, there are others who see America as the first and only country ever to use nuclear weapons against fellow humans and see it as a very evil act. The reality of the atomic bombs is relative to the individual, as is all history.

Historical and archaeological studies, by their nature, have highly subjective elements. Sections of the bible is known to be at least 2000 years old (the dead sea scrolls contain biblical fragments that can be dated to approx. 150 BEC), it is a viable historic document, same as the Rosetta stone or the Gilgamesh cuneiform. The story might not be real but the setting is informative.

MM

That assumption right there is what I'm questioning. I think most of the OT, more so the parts referring Rehoboam and back are so faulty that even the information they give on the setting is likely bad.

---

What the fuck are you babbling about now? Do you ever know what you are talking about?

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/piye.htm


The 25th dynasty was driven out by the Assyrians under Esarhaddon.

But we sure as shit know their fucking names.

You can't stand it when the Bible proves ancient history and for someone who appreciates history like you seem to, should be happy no matter were the facts come from. Also I wasn't referring to the first black pharaoh, the one I'm referring to was possibly the last, He did however help postpone Assyria's attack upon Jerusalem. I just watched a PBS special on the people who are digging up these sites and answering these questions. Nubian's were tired of Egypt's treatment of them and the great warriors Egypt employed from Nubia, turned on them and defeated Egypt.

GC

Did you miss the part where he talked about how they have variation in spelling from different sources? Hence we have multiple sources.

[pgrimes15]

. . . . and the Museum of Egypt still has no names for any of the 25th dynasty.

Is it true that the Museum of Egypt does not know the names for any pharoahs of the 25th dynasty ? Minimalist says not true. Who should I believe ? (short of calling the museum itself)

Regards

Grimesy

[Lemonvariable72]

. . . . and the Museum of Egypt still has no names for any of the 25th dynasty.

Is it true that the Museum of Egypt does not know the names for any pharoahs of the 25th dynasty ? Minimalist says not true. Who should I believe ? (short of calling the museum itself)

Regards

Grimesy

The man that cites his sources is always more credible.

[pgrimes15]

Don't worry - I have just looked up their email (it's [email protected]) and asked directly whether they know the names of any pharaohs from the 25th dynasty.

I'll post if I get a reply.

Regards

Grimesy

[Mudhammam]

When I was in high school guitar hero was a insanely popular game, everyone loved it. But many in the music business soon found out that many in to guitar hero had a harder time learning real guitar. It was because they made assumptions about the song based on their guitar hero experience. Experience and assumptions they made about the song would be flatly wrong.
I wonder if archeology suffers from the same problem. Perhaps we have been assuming the bible is even remotely accurate. I would propose that we throw the book out wholesale and try to eliminate all assumptions of the ancient world based on the Bible. That way we can start with a clean slate, and draw our conclusions based on the historical evidence. If that eventually does prove the bible accurate then so be it.

I think it's a mistake to read the Bible as though it were written to convey history in the sense that modernists use the term. It's an invaluable source for understanding the history of human psychology, religion, as well as containing some brilliant poetry and literature, but severely limited in its usefulness for establishing facts--like virtually everything else written 500 years ago and older.

[IATIA]

Any story, be it King, Melvin, Crichton, Carroll, Wells, Herbert or even the bible, can be littered with facts, but that does not make the story true.

[abaris]

Any story, be it King, Melvin, Crichton, Carroll, Wells, Herbert or even the bible, can be littered with facts, but that does not make the story true.

Yet there's a crucial difference. All the above mentioned set out to write fiction. The bible on the other hand is an account, likely a collection or oral tales of the time, that set out to be the truth.

So as opposed to fictional works, you can learn a lot by analysing the bible. As I said before, not least of all, the code of conduct of the time and culture in question, how their society was structured and that they considered themselves to be a warlike people.

And by comparison you can learn where their myths originally came from.