Archaeology for the student and layman: Ancient Near East: Archaeology is a fascinating subject which, like other specialized fields, requires the general reader to 'trust' the opinions and conclusions made by the specialists; in this case, the archaeologists and historians who write the narrative to go with the archaeological finds. Sir Alan Gardiner (1961 in James Et.Al 1991 p.222) in reference to Egyptian History, pointed out that our knowledge of ancient cultures is actually based on a collection of rags and tatters.
Note Non-current links have been removed. If the full title and author is provided you can do an internet search for a current version of the original article.
Research Vs. Bias
I was recently asked by Colonel Brown of The Park Avenue Gazette to write an introduction to a new section he is installing on his website. He has entitled the introduction "Archaeology for the Curious Student and Lay Intellectual." Colonel Brown has a great interest in Archaeology, and has for many years been researching a subject that is very fascinating. Of Archaeology he writes:
I see archaeology - rightly or wrongly - as a great reservoir of evidence to help us determine not only the physical context of past civilizations but also the 'Principles' by which they lived.
In time he hopes to build the archaeology section and provide articles from many different writers.
Here then is my introduction to the Archaeology Section
My name is R.P. BenDedek, the author of 'The King's Calendar: The Secret of Qumran' at kingscalendar.com
It gives me great pleasure to accept this offer made by Colonel Brown of (...parkavenuegazette.com) Park Avenue Gazette . Com, to write an introductory article for the Archaeological Section of this website.
Archaeology is a fascinating subject which, like other specialized fields, requires the general reader to 'trust' the opinions and conclusions made by the specialists; in this case, the archaeologists and historians who write the narrative to go with the archaeological finds.
Because we are not experts ourselves, we tend to believe whatever the experts tell us. We believe that their judgments, like the evidence they offer, is irrefutable. But in fact it is not!
Sir Alan Gardiner (1961 in James Et.Al 1991 p.222) in reference to Egyptian History, pointed out that our knowledge of ancient cultures is actually based on a collection of rags and tatters. By this he meant that we don't actually have the full picture or, as is often the case, actual evidence. Archaeologists often have to make do with their best guesses.
That there are probably many errors and circular arguments in relation to ancient history is attested to by many, including:
Colin Renfrew, Professor of Archaeology, Cambridge University (James Et. Al. 1991 : foreword pages.xiii-xv) - and -
T. E. Peet (1924. p 75) who said: "Archaeology is not an exact science, and deals more often in probabilities and possibilities than in irrefutable demonstrations.'
The more one reads, and the further back one goes in research, the more one can discover the many instances of academic error. What today is accepted as fact was yesterday considered ridiculous (like Ancient Troy), and other things accepted today will be thrown out tomorrow.
Nevertheless, average 'joes' generally have to trust the experts when they pontificate on archaeological and historical matters, because... well... 'Who are we to say otherwise?'
It was in this spirit of trust, that many years ago, during a rather boring period of my life, I decided to engage my mind in an academic exercise, just to relieve the boredom. At best I thought it would only take me a day or two. How wrong I was.
Having previously studied Ancient Israelite History, and having been a little overwhelmed by names and dates of it's various monarchs, I decided to create a list for myself, so that I could better appreciate the historical records. What I initially discovered was that different writers came up with different dates for the various reigns of the kings of Israel.
I don't just mean that they disagreed by a year or two. They were out by up to 50 years. They disagreed on the length of reigns; the actual names of the kings; whether events listed in the Bible did or did not happen during a certain king's lifetime etc.
Becoming quite frustrated with such nonsense, I decided to do my own time line; following just the chronological details and accompanying narratives in the Biblical Books of Kings and Chronicles. It was during that process that I discovered why no one could agree on anything. The synchronous material for the Divided Kingdom period didn't seem to make much sense.
We all know that the Bible is supposed to be the 'Word of God' and so there aren't supposed to be mistakes in it, but if we put that issue aside, it stands to reason that ancient historians ought to have known what they were doing when they provided for future generations, chronological details of the reigns of their kings. And lest you be unaware, the records left us for the Divided kingdom period of Israel, are the most detailed, consecutive, synchronous records of all archaeological records in existence.
Faced with the reality that these records appeared to be nonsense, it occurred to me that if the simple chronological details were completely untrustworthy, then so was everything else contained in the Bible, and if that were so, then why would any reputable academic quote from the Bible when pontificating on the history of the Ancient Near East.
The question remained however, as to whether the chronological records were or were not meant to be reliable at the time of their writing. Of course they may not have been reliably recorded, and of course something may have happened over time to screw up all the figures.
But what if the records are still as they were originally written and intended? After all. Biblical transcription accuracy of our oldest manuscripts were confirmed through a study of the Dead Sea Scrolls. They ought always to have been faithfully reproduced. If so, and given that they don't make sense, then the question must be asked: 'why don't they make sense?'
It was with this question in mind that I decided to investigate the possibility that the Chronological records are still as originally intended, but that we don't understand them. This then lead me into a 10 year period of dedicated and comprehensive research to find the answer to the puzzle.
Now although I had never heard of "The Chomsky Fallacy," I did nevertheless set about my task with a purely impersonal, academic and scientific search for the answers to my questions. In the TCS Daily article entitled: (...tcsdaily.com) 'The Chomsky Fallacy' By Keith Burgess-Jackson, the statement is made that:
Scientists who exhibit bias in their scientific work are violating a basic norm of the scientific community. They are injecting their opinions (values) rather than letting the facts speak for themselves. Science (from the Latin word for knowledge) is about getting things right, not setting them right.
The first thing I had to do as I involved myself in my work, was consciously accept that 'contradictions' are only 'apparent'; they not 'real.' This may sound a little strange, but in effect, it meant that I should accept everything, including every contradiction, as true, until the math made it obviously 'false.'
As a former member of the police force, I was well aware that several eye witnesses to an event, can, without any intent to deceive, provide contradictory testimony. This is because we all perceive events differently. And so it was that I decided to withhold personal judgement, bias, preference and choice, and let the math 'prove' what was and was not true or false.
It was this very foundational stepping stone that finally shattered what E.R.Thiele (1966 The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings) referred to as 'impossible impasses'.
Through experimentation, and quite by accident, I discovered that when you substitute the value 336 days, for each and every year listed in the divided kingdom period of Israel, the chronological synchronisms contained in the Bible do actually align. You can see this for yourself in the Divided Kingdom Chart at KingsCalendar.
The Premise of the King's Calendar Chronological Research (computer generated mathematical synchronism) is that between the 5th and 3rd centuries BCE (but continuing down to at least 104 BCE), Sectarian redactors transcribed the legitimate 'solar year' chronological records of Israel and Judah, into an artificial form, with listed years as each comprised of 12 months of 4 weeks of 7 days, or 336 days per year, thus creating a 13th artificial year where 12 solar years existed.
The only logical basis for such a conversion appears to be found in the Jubilees Calendar which operated on the basis of a 364 day year. That year neatly divides into 52 weeks of 7 days; or 13 months of 4 weeks of 7 days.
The General formula for Biblical Data conversion is:
'X' ('real/solar' years) times 364 equals 'Y' number of days
'Y' number of days divided by 336 equals 'Z' number of artificial years.
'Z' number of artificial years = 1.083'X' and represents the original number of the converted years plus 8%.
To reverse the process by hand:
'Z' years times 336 equals 'Y' divided by 364 equals the Number of 'X' years converted.
Whilst some people might find this rather 'gnostic' in approach, it does operate on a scientific and mathematical principle: The Principle of Linear Causality.
This method of calculating historical events, must abide by certain mathematical rules, the most important of which, is that if you change any date for any day, month, or year, then every other day, month, or year is effected and must also change. It's like a 'domino effect.' Chronological references cannot be 'forced' to fit, and nor can they simply be ignored or 'compressed' as is the usual case with historians and archaeologists.
If any King's Calendar chronological determination disagrees with anything in the history books, it must argue the case as to why the history books are wrong, or why the evidence for an assertion is untrustworthy. If the King's Calendar successfully defends its' position, then the history books cannot be treated as definitive, and if the King's Calendar is 'proven' wrong in any chronological place, then every other chronological reference must also be wrong. As such, the methodology can be scientifically (mathematically) tested and demonstrated to be either true or false.
In the process of reconstructing the chronological history of the Divided Kingdom Period of Ancient Israel, the results at no point contradict Egyptian, Assyrian or Babylonian Records, except the Kurkh Stele of Shalmaneser, in relation to King Ahab's presence at the Battle of Qarqar in 853 BCE. That record however is just one of two records that record identical details, bar one: Ahab's name. See:Laws, Rules of Evidence & Archaeology Part 1. Battle of Qarqar 853 BCE
What was discovered through this research, was that the synchronous chronological details for the Divided Kingdom Period were in fact synchronous, and do align with known history. Furthermore, when the examination of Chronological data was extended to include the chronologies of Josephus, Seder Olam Rabbah and the Damascus Documents of the Dead Sea Scrolls, it was discovered that those chronologies were likewise recorded in artificial years of 336 days.
When one sees that the synchronous chronological record is actually synchronous, and then reads what various historians write about certain related matters, it becomes very clear how writers use unscientific methods to 'prove their points.'
In fact, one of the greatest discoveries made during my research, is just how much Academics manipulate evidence to support their theories.
A fundamental principle of Law, is that opinion and assumptions are proof of nothing. Conclusions must always be based on legitimate facts. Everything else, is just reasonable guesswork.
Nothing in life should ever go unchallenged, and this includes archaeological theories. Unfortunately, human nature being what it is, we all prefer to 'prove' that we are right, rather than attempt to prove that we are wrong. Until we challenge ourselves and our beliefs and our opinions, we remain 'biased.'
Archaeology however is not meant to be biased. It is meant to be a scientific search for evident truth.
Gardiner. A. (1961) Egypt of the Pharaoh's. Oxford University Press. The Ancient Military Road between Egypt and Palestine. Journal of Egyptian Archaeology. No. 6 James P. Thorpe.I.J., Kokkinos.N., Morkot.R., Frankish.J. (1991) Centuries of Darkness. Rutgers Uni Press. New Jersey. Peet. T.E. (1924) Egypt and the Old Testament. University Press of Liverpool Thiele.E.R. (1966) The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings: a reconstruction of the chronology of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Paternoster Press
Despite all the hysterical accusations made by the sociopathic ideologues, the reality is that REAL everyday Muslims who have left their homelands to settle in democracy loving western lands DON’T WANT to be controlled by Islamists. They more than anyone else know what living under Islamic (theocratic) political and social control means.
Politically Correct Ideologues are people who become so trapped inside fundamentalist thinking, that they lose contact with the real world and see nothing other than their ideology. In short, they are totally focussed on what is inside their own heads, which is why I constantly refer to such people as ‘sociopathic.’
In China, the rights of society take precedence over individual human rights. This, we Westerners call totalitarianism and from an ideological perspective, desire to destroy it right? But ask yourself this: “What does MY country promote?”
There is no doubt that the immediacy of Trump’s order has caused inconvenience for many people, like the one I read about today of an Australian woman who arrived in the US only to be told that she had to leave because of her unacceptable dual citizenship. And I quote the illusion of truth:
Right now you are probably asking, ‘What the heck is the Seder Olam Rabbah?’ So here is a little information gleaned from a variety of online sources. Seder Olam Rabbah is Jewish literature of second century A.D. dated to about 160 AD. and first printed in 1514. It is a Midrashic chronological work generally regarded as a work of the tanna Jose b. Halafta. [The “tannaim” were the masters of the “oral law,” i.e. the men who wrote the Talmud.]
That there are probably many errors and circular arguments in relation to ancient history is attested to by many, including Colin Renfrew, Professor of Archaeology, Cambridge University (James Et. Al. 1991 : foreword pages.xiii-xv)
Since 2004 he has been writing academic articles, social commentaries and photographic 'Stories from China' both here at KingsCalendar, and formerly as a contributing columnist at Magic City Morning Star News (Maine USA) where from 2009 to 2015 he was Stand-in Editor. He currently has a column at iPatriot.com and teaches English to Business English and Flight Attendant College Students in Suzhou City Jiangsu Province People's Republic of China.)
BenDedek originally created the site to publicize his research results into the Chronology of Ancient Israel. Those results were published under the title: 'The King's Calendar: The Secret of Qumran.' Whilst there have been many attempts to solve the chronological riddle of the Bible's synchronisms of reigns of the kings of Israel and Judah and their synchronism with other Ancient Near Eastern Nations, no other research is based on a simple mathematical formula which could, if it is incorrect, be disproved easily. To date, no one has been able to dismiss the mathematical results of this research.
Free to air Academic articles set forth Apologetics for and results of his discovery of an "artificial chronological scheme" running through the Bible, Josephus, the Damascus Documents of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and Seder Olam Rabbah. Check the Chapter Precis Page to see details of each chapter and to gain access to the Four Free to Air Chapters
(The Download book does not contain a section on Seder Olam)
Definition: King's Calendar Chronological Research
The Premise: Between the 5th and 3rd centuries BCE (but continuing down to at least 104 BCE), Sectarian redactors transcribed the legitimate 'solar year' chronological records of Israel and Judah, into an artificial form, with listed years as each comprised of 12 months of 4 weeks of 7 days, or 336 days per year, thus creating a 13th artificial year where 12 solar years existed.
When the Synchronous Chronological Data provided in the Books of Kings and Chronicles for the Divided Kingdom Period are measured in years of 336 days, the synchronisms actually align. [Refer to Appendix 5. to see how it synchronises the Divided Kingdom Period]