At no time, to the best of my (our) knowledge did we ever question or attempt question your model. It is only because you are an “Outlaw” that we felt (voted) that your mind would be one of the best to “pick”.
In the innocents of youth, we only ask these questions. Believing that the "believability gap" is a potent force preventing the realization that the 19th dynasty ran parallel with the 18th, thus we have determined to continue to research other technological solutions.
In the Spirit of Maat, let’s say we brought you a set of plans that will only enhance and augment (not argue) your model, as Jeff was wondering how Ramose II could corrupt your data.
According to touregypt.net Ramesses I was not of royal blood, but rather a career army officer who was the son of a troop commander and judge named “Seti”. His mother is unknown. Ramesses II was the son of an army commander named “Seti”; thus is it that far fetched to compare Neby to Seti?
If you were to accept that Ramose was in the family of General Haremhab and Amenhotep the Wise, why then would it seem odd for Ramesses II to actually be Ramesses I?
Can we really "know with certainty that Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year was beyond doubt the Babylonian lunar-calendar year extending from April 12, 568 B.C. through April 12, 567 B.C."?
Ok, pretend that Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year was 511 BC, or that the first of Cyrus was 483 or even 455 BC. Are we then to understand that Xenophon of Attica (427-355 BC), friend of Socrates (470-399 BC) and Plato 427-347 BC) were also dated incorrectly?
Responses To This Message
© Charles N. Pope, US Library of Congress. All rights reserved.