• Abraham and Egypt

    According to biblical tradition, the Hebrews were a tribe of Mesopotamian nomads who, under the leadership of Abraham, or Abram, made their way to the “promised land” of Canaan. Their wanderings did not stop there, however, for we are told that during a time of famine Abraham led his followers into Egypt. The Scriptures tell us very little of Abraham’s sojourn in the land of the Nile, save that after an initial welcome he and his followers were asked to leave by the pharaoh. The first century historian Josephus has rather more to say and provides a curious story, evidently…

    Read more...
  • Did Bible Fundamentalism distort Egypt's history?

    The chronology of the ancient civilizations of Egypt and Babylonia, as found in the textbooks, is wrong to a dramatic degree, with major events misdated and placed many centuries before they actually occurred. The pyramids of Egypt, for example, especially the massive monuments at Giza, are utterly inexplicable and puzzling if we follow the conventional dating scheme. These gigantic structures, which seem to display a knowledge of Pythagorean geometry on the part of their builders, are nevertheless said to have been erected near 2500 BC – around 2,000 years before Pythagoras lived. Even worse, the pyramid-builders worked granite as well as…

    Read more...
  • Artaxerxes III and Nebuchadrezzar

    In my Ramessides, Medes and Persians (Algora, 2007), I argued in detail that the rulers known to history as the Neo-Assyrians and Neo-Babylonians were in fact Great Kings of the Persians under the guise of Mesopotamians. There I demonstrated how the Neo-Assyrian Tiglath-Pileser III had to be identified with Cyrus the Great, founder of the Achaemenid line, and that the Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian monarchs who followed could be identified, point by point, with the Achaemenid kings who followed Cyrus. Thus Cambyses, who reigned only six years and campaigned in the direction of Egypt, sounds like Shalmaneser V, who reigned just…

    Read more...
  • The Chronology of the Ancient Kingdoms

    As I have shown in great detail in my Ages in Alignment series, the histories of the early civilizations are much shorter than is stated in the textbooks, and that the present chronology is the result of errors and misconceptions which accumulated over the centuries, beginning even before the start of the Christian era. The first major attempt at rectifying the situation was launched in the 1950s by Immanuel Velikovsky, whose Ages in Chaos series sought to realign the histories of Egypt and Israel, so that they agreed with each other. Whilst Ages in Chaos brought forth a great quantity…

    Read more...
  • The First Civilizations and the End of the Pleistocene

    One of Velikovsky’s most fundamental and radical premises was that cosmic catastrophes occurred within the memory of mankind, and even within the period of recorded human history. In this spirit he presented, especially in Earth in Upheaval (1955), manifold proofs that the mass extinctions at the end of the Pleistocene took place no more than a few thousand years ago, with much of the evidence pointing to 1500 or 1400 BC as the cut-off point. In my own writings, and especially in The Genesis of Israel and Egypt (first published in 1997), I have presented much further evidence in support…

    Read more...
  • Venus of the Flood, Mars of the Exodus

    In his Worlds in Collision (1950) Immanuel Velikovsky used myths, legends and traditions from throughout the world to illustrate his thesis that between the fifteenth and seventh centuries BC the earth suffered a series of devastating encounters with planetary bodies, which were recorded by the peoples of the time. Controversially, Velikovsky argued that in the fifteenth century a giant ball of fire, later to be the planet Venus, had erupted in a terrific explosion from the gas giant Jupiter and that this proto-planet, pulled by the sun’s gravitation, moved towards the inner solar system, where it came on a near-collision…

    Read more...

The Books and Writings of Emmet Sweeney

In my 2006 book Empire of Thebes: Ages in Chaos Revisited I argued that most of the synchronisms and character identifications proposed by Immanuel Velikovsky in his Ages in Chaos (1952) were actually correct, and that the errors committed by him – which the critics made so much of – were of a relatively minor nature.

 

Ages in Chaos, in short, needed fine-tuning, not complete rejection. Indeed, Velikovsky missed a great deal of evidence in his favor. This was the case, for example, with the equation of Hatshepsut with the Queen of Sheba.

 

In Ages in Chaos Velikovsky argued that the Eighteenth Dynasty rose to power at the same time as the kingdom of Israel, and that the first pharaohs of that line, Ahmose and Amenhotep I, were contemporaries of Israel’s first two kings, Saul and David. About thirty years after the war of liberation, Egypt came to be ruled by Hatshepsut, an extraordinary woman, one who, unique in the annals of Egypt’s history, claimed the honor and title of Pharaoh. In Velikovsky’s system, Hatshepsut must have been a contemporary of Solomon, the fabulously wealthy and powerful son of King David. For Velikovsky, it was but a short step from placing Hatshepsut at the same time as Solomon to making her identical to Solomon’s famous royal visitor, the Queen of Sheba.

 

In support of this claim, Velikovsky noted that one of the most important events of Hatshepsut’s life was an expedition to a mysterious land named Punt. The journey to Punt, which she immortalized on her funerary monument at Deir el Bahri, was obviously regarded as an event of immense importance by the Queen, for she placed it alongside the story of her divine birth on the temple walls. Punt, Velikovsky argued, must have been Israel; and the expedition recounted on the Egyptian temple a contemporary record of the Queen of Sheba’s expedition to Jerusalem.