Changes

==Recent Developments==

==Recent Developments==

Recent developments for numbers of New Chronology advocates start quite a while back with a book by Peter James in collaboration with I. J. Thorpe, Nikos Kokkinos, Robert Morkot & John Frankish.  More than a hundred reviews praised or damned the authors.<ref>[https://www.centuries.co.uk/reviews.htm]</ref> They identified archeological Dark Ages in the lands surrounding Egypt: the Levant, Aegean, Nubia, and elsewhere.  As archaeological dating of these lands is derived from Egyptian chronology, any wrong assumptions there result in the pervasive Dark Ages existing in these surrounding lands (and the minimalist perspective on biblical history).  They correlate the biblical [[Shishak]] as Ramesses III (in distinction from Rohl's Ramesses II, the Orthodox Chronology's Sheshonk I, or Velikovsky's Thutmoses III).   

Recent developments for numbers of New Chronology advocates start quite a while back with a book by Peter James in collaboration with I. J. Thorpe, Nikos Kokkinos, Robert Morkot & John Frankish.  More than a hundred reviews praised or damned the authors.<ref>Centuries of Darkness.[https://www.centuries.co.uk/reviews.htm]</ref> They identified archeological Dark Ages in the lands surrounding Egypt: the Levant, Aegean, Nubia, and elsewhere.  As archaeological dating of these lands is derived from Egyptian chronology, any wrong assumptions there result in the pervasive Dark Ages existing in these surrounding lands (and the minimalist perspective on biblical history).  They correlate the biblical [[Shishak]] as Ramesses III (in distinction from Rohl's Ramesses II, the Orthodox Chronology's Sheshonk I, or Velikovsky's Thutmoses III).   

The most outstanding result of their considerable subsequent work occurred in publishing their 2015 book that reflects each side of the ongoing controversy (see References). Prominent archeologists Israel Finklestein and Silberman became, perhaps, unwilling allies when they revised downward the Levant archaeological dating starting with the Late Bronze Age IIB (from the Orthodox Chronology) through the Iron Age. Though Finklestein knows that biblical minimalists use his revisions, he hasn't affirmed or denied minimalism. In contrast, the New Chronology revisions give greater historical credence to the Hebrew narratives. James reviewed the book from an archeological and historical perspective.  An important review of this book, by Assyriologist Prof. Ronald Wallenfels, has appeared in the Journal of the Ancient Oriental Society (issue 139.2, pp. 487-500). Entitled “Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation”, it provides many positive and constructive comments<ref>"Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation" Ronald Wallenfels, Journal of the American Oriental Society 139.2 (2019)[https://www.academia.edu/40041219/Shishak_and_Shoshenq_A_Disambiguation]</ref>.

The most outstanding result of their considerable subsequent work occurred in publishing their 2015 book that reflects each side of the ongoing controversy (see References). Prominent archeologists Israel Finklestein and Silberman became, perhaps, unwilling allies when they revised downward the Levant archaeological dating starting with the Late Bronze Age IIB (from the Orthodox Chronology) through the Iron Age. Though Finklestein knows that biblical minimalists use his revisions, he hasn't affirmed or denied minimalism. In contrast, the New Chronology revisions give greater historical credence to the Hebrew narratives. James reviewed the book from an archeological and historical perspective.  An important review of this book, by Assyriologist Prof. Ronald Wallenfels, has appeared in the Journal of the Ancient Oriental Society (issue 139.2, pp. 487-500). Entitled “Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation”, it provides many positive and constructive comments<ref>"Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation" Ronald Wallenfels, Journal of the American Oriental Society 139.2 (2019)[https://www.academia.edu/40041219/Shishak_and_Shoshenq_A_Disambiguation]</ref>.