by
Pharaoh Psibkhenno needs an alter ego, because much of his building work is thought
no longer to exist.
This is typical of Egypt’s so-called Twenty-First Dynasty, which is quite
archaeologically deficient.
Nicolas Grimal has written, re “The
historical interpretation of Tanis”, for instance (A History of Ancient Egypt, Blackwell, 1994, p. 317): “Nothing
remains of the actual buildings of Psusennes I …”.
And again (p. 315): “At Tanis, Psusennes I
built a new enclosure around the temple dedicated to the triad of Amun, Mut and
Khonsu. If the few traces of reuse of earlier monuments are to be believed, he
made many other contributions to the temple, but because of the current
conditions of the site little is known concerning this work”.
Psibkhenno was apparently the father-in-law
of Shoshenq I (N. Grimal, p. 319).
Smendes II, who I suspect must be
Smendes=Shoshenq I, “sent a pair of bracelets to Psusennes …”. (p. 318).
Pharaoh Psibkhenno may now, at last, enable
us to anchor Ramses II ‘the Great’ in a real historico-biblical phase.
Egypt often gets considered in complete
isolation from the other nations, from Mesopotamia, for instance, and from the
biblical history.
This is very much due to the effect of the
Sothic chronology, serving to disconnect much of Egyptian history (especially in
its earlier phases) from its real, contemporaneous scene; but it is also
because the pharaohs were more inclined to boast about themselves to the
exclusion of the other nations.
In this the ancient Egyptians were unlike,
say, the Assyrians, who - whilst likewise being boastful - kept detailed and
useful historical records, which included many handy foreign names and places.
With the name, Psibkhenno, we may perhaps be able to pick up a useful clue,
enabling at last for a potential connection for Egypt with Mesopotamia. Thanks
to David Rohl, a revisionist, we get this compelling observation of real
phonetic value: “…
we
might find the true identity of Si’be in the 21st Dynasty king
Psibkhenno, more commonly known by the classical name of Psusennes”.
(“Comments
by David Rohl”, SIS Workshop, vol. 5,
no.1, 1982, p. 19).
I had much liked this connection as made by Dr. Rohl,
and had initially embraced it – Psibkhenno, a long-reigning ‘Ramesses’, and
indeed my Ramses ‘the Great’, a contemporary of the mighty neo-Assyrian king
Sargon II.
In conventional terms, the Sargonic era is c. 700
BC, approximately 600 years from Ramses’ presumed beginnings in c. 1300 BC.
However, I have since concluded, on the basis
of the Tang-i Var inscription and other evidence, that Sargon II’s Egyptian
opponent, Si’be, was in fact, Shebitku Khaemwaset, co-regent with Ramses II,
and indeed, the son of that great pharaoh.
On this, see e.g. my article:
Khaemwaset, son of Ramses ‘the Great’
(6) Khaemwaset, son of
Ramses 'the Great'
And I have further extended the phonetics by
concluding that Sargon II’s pharaonic tribute bringer, Shilkanni, was, not the
conventional Osorkon IV of the Twenty-Second Dynasty, but was Psibkhenno:
Sargon II’s Šilkanni of Egypt was Psibkhenno, not Osorkon
(6) Sargon II’s
Šilkanni of Egypt was Psibkhenno, not Osorkon
What may strongly re-inforce Ramses II’s
place in the neo-Assyrian era is the fact that an inscription of his at the
mouth of the Nahr al-Kalb, stands opposite one of
Sennacherib’s successor, Esarhaddon (c. 680-668 BC, conventional dating).
What to make of this?
-
Convention, of course, would have
Esarhaddon arriving at the scene about half a millennium after Ramses II, and
defacing the latter’s image. Thus, for instance:
https://www.livius.org/sources/content/anet/289-esarhaddons-nahr-al-kalb-inscription/
“To make sure that the Phoenician
cities better understood that Esarhaddon was and would always be victorious,
the king left an inscription at the mouth of the Nahr al-Kalb, opposite one of the reliefs that the Egyptian king Ramesses
II had once made to commemorate his Syrian campaigns. Everyone traveling along
the coast from Byblos to Beirut would see Esarhaddon's relief and understand that Esarhaddon
was a greater conqueror than the heroes of the past”.
-
Dr. Velikovsky, with his radical
revision, actually located Ramses II even later than Esarhaddon;
-
My revision has Ramses II as an
older contemporary of Esarhaddon:
The Complete Ramses II
Charles Boutflower (The
Book of Isaiah Chapters [1-XXXIX] in the Light of Assyrian Monuments, Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge,
London/New York, 1930, p. 126) really extended Si’be, biblically, so that ‘So’,
Sibe and Shabaka were all
one and the same person. He had written that: “The Hebrew characters read
“So” should probably be read “Sĕvĕ”. And: “Sĕvĕ” … is to be identified
with Shabaka [Shabako] the son of Kashta, who succeeded his father in 715”
[sic].
The name ‘So’, it seems, can be variously rendered: e.g. Sĕvĕ;
Sua; Soan (Josephus[1]);
Soa, Soba, Segor (LXX).
Most
interestingly, in my new context, the Lucianic recension of the LXX has ‘So’ as
an “Ethiopian, living in Egypt” (one Adrammelech).
Psibkhenno was
the elusive “So king of Egypt” (2 Kings 17:4) at the time of Shalmaneser, king
of Assyria. {Psibkhenno was most likely also the Shabako of the Twenty-Fifth
Dynasty, as Boutflower had thought}.
This now extends the floruit of our Ramses ‘the Great’ all
the way from Shalmaneser to Esarhaddon.
This is also the very era of the
Book of Tobit, whose chapter 1 encompasses “Shalmaneser”; “Sennacherib”; and
“Esarhaddon”.
Book of Tobit and the Neo-Assyrian Kings
https://www.academia.edu/14097259/Book_of_Tobit_and_the_Neo_Assyrian_Kings
Sargon is not mentioned here in
Tobit.
That is because Sargon was
Sennacherib. See e.g. my article:
Sargon II and Sennacherib: More than just
an overlap
https://www.academia.edu/8854988/Sargon_II_and_Sennacherib_More_than_just_an_overlap
At last, Ramses II ‘the Great’ can
be firmly fixed to the neo-Assyrian era, from Shalmaneser to Esarhaddon,
thereby solving the long-existing problem for revisionists: Where to fit in
Ramses II?
It also solves the burning question
of who was the biblical “So”. We need no longer entertain such ridiculous
assertions that “So” pertains to pharaoh Tefnakht by a “process of metonymy” in
relation to Tefnakht’s town of Saïs (cf. N. Grimal, p. 342).
With the right key now in hand, we
can firmly identify Sargon II’s Egyptian contacts, namely:
Si’be = Shebitku;
Pharaoh of Egypt (Pirʾu of
Musri) = Ramses II ‘the Great’;
Shilkanni (thought to be
Osorkon IV) is clearly Psibkhenno
Shebitku of the Tang-i
Var inscription = Shebitku
Shilkanni’s gift to Sargon II of
“twelve great horses from Egypt, which are unrivalled in the whole country” (N.
Grimal, p. 343) is reminiscent of the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty with its love
of fine chargers. Thus, as is thought (loc.
cit.): “Piankhy … was buried at Napata along with two of the famous
Egyptian chargers … the same horses which had aroused the admiration of Sargon
II”.
No comments:
Post a Comment