CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1Ancient Egypt and ArchaeologyBiblical Studies and InterpretationAncient Near East History

Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation

Open access
Wallenfels, Ronald·2021·Journal of the American Oriental Society
DOI 10.7817/jameroriesoci.139.2.0487
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The conventional history of the ancient Near East at large, including Egypt and the eastern Mediterranean basin, contains several “Dark Ages,” poorly documented transitional periods of uncertain length. James et al. 1991 have argued that the most significant of these Dark Ages—the transition from the Late Bronze to the Iron Age during the last two centuries of the second millennium BCE—is largely an artifact of an overly long reconstruction of the Egyptian Third Intermediate Period, and that this Dark Age presents itself in every chronology linked to the Egyptian. A wide variety of often seemingly contradictory scientific, archaeological, art-historical, and philological evidence has been adduced to argue for the status quo, or to lengthen or to shorten by up to several centuries the relative chronology for this period . This review article comments on the papers presented at the Third BICANE Colloquium held at Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge (2011), summarizing a variety of recent positions taken in the ongoing evaluation of James et al. 1991, testing the specific proposition that the tenth century BCE biblical Egyptian King Shishak is to be distinguished from the historical Egyptian King Shoshenq I, who is now to be situated about a century later in the latter half of the ninth century BCE. the wider historical implications of this proposed distinction are examined in new detail.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Wallenfels reviews the BICANE colloquium volume *Solomon and Shishak*, which tests the *Centuries of Darkness* proposal that biblical Shishak is not Shoshenq I and that Shoshenq I should be placed about a century later, in the later ninth century BCE. He finds the revised chronology potentially useful but still lacking the fine-scale precision needed for an absolute chronology.

Key findings

  • The volume centers on the *Centuries of Darkness* postulate that biblical Shishak (1 Kings 14:25–26; 2 Chron. 12:2–9) is to be distinguished from Hedjkheperre Shoshenq I; Shoshenq I is sought in the later ninth-century “Omride” Iron IIA period, while Shishak is identified with Ramesses III, and Davidic/Solomonic Israel is placed in terminal Late Bronze IIB re-dated to the eleventh and tenth centuries.
  • Proposed dates for Shoshenq I vary: Thijs proposes year 1 in ca. 843; Morkot and James suggest 839 or 829; James and van der Veen locate his campaign in or shortly before his twenty-first regnal year, with a possible first year closer to ca. 817 if 2 Kings 7:6–7 is relevant; the original *Centuries of Darkness* offered ca. 810. Morkot and James also argue for a potential fifty-year range of error in the conventional chronology.
  • Zerbst and van der Veen find significant conflicts between calibrated radiocarbon and conventional historically determined dates, with the latter typically one to four centuries younger; they note a two-century error in radiocarbon dating of bones from the 612 BCE destruction of Nineveh. Porter questions Kuniholm’s dendrochronology and suggests the International Calibration Curve may be similarly suspect.
  • Bimson reports that of Rehoboam’s fifteen fortified towns taken by Shishak, only one (Marashah) of the eight sites with archaeological evidence has failed to produce evidence of LB II/Iron I occupation and abandonment. The reviewer concludes the LB/IA “Dark Age” is likely largely, but not entirely, an artifact of conventional chronology.

Methods

  • Review article of *Solomon and Shishak: Current Perspectives from Archaeology, Epigraphy, History and Chronology. Proceedings of the Third BICANE Colloquium Held at Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge 26–27 March, 2011*, edited by Peter James and Peter G. van der Veen, BAR International Series 2732 (2015). The colloquium had three sessions: ten papers on whether biblical Shishak is Shoshenq I, six on Solomon, and four on Egyptians and Jerusalem.
  • The paper synthesizes and critiques the volume’s contributions using archaeological, art-historical, philological, astronomical, radiocarbon, dendrochronological, and textual evidence. Its appendix redates the Ahiram sarcophagus reliefs and inscription to the latter half of the ninth or first half of the eighth century via the Nimrud ivory pyxis IM 79513 and related comparanda.
  • Main analysis is qualitative review and chronological argumentation rather than new primary data collection.

Limitations

  • The reviewer states that the proposed model still lacks the necessary fine-scale structure for an absolute chronology, best exemplified by the lower, more accurate, but still imprecise regnal dates proposed for Shoshenq I.
  • The reviewer notes the volume lacks indices, its internal cross-references are not reader-friendly, occasional typographical errors are present, and the physical binding is weak.
  • The reviewer states that philological arguments for Eg. *ssw* = Heb. *šyšq* are suggestive but not decisive, and calls some further discussion (e.g., Thijs on Shishak and Zeraḥ) far less compelling and more speculative. Evident from the text: several conclusions depend on contested chronological assumptions and on damaged or unstratified evidence, such as the Megiddo Shoshenq I stele fragment, which the reviewer says is of no chronological value.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7817/jameroriesoci.139.2.0487

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

1 of 36 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Findingcitation
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    Calibration introduced a two-century error into the radiocarbon dating of bones from the collapse of a city gate during the destruction of Nineveh, historically dated to 612 BCE.

    “Perhaps most telling is the two-century error introduced by calibration into the radiocarbon dating of the bones of those killed in the collapse of a city gate during the destruction of Nineveh, historically determined to be in 612 .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Taylor et al . 2010 source

      The ‘Apparent Anomaly and Alternative Explanations’ section (page unavailable) says the calibrated mean age of nine Halzi Gate bone measurements is a little less than two centuries older than the assumed death date of 612 BCE. It does not say calibration introduced the error; it considers other possible causes for the offset. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Findingcitation
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    Zerbst and van der Veen demonstrate that significant conflicts remain between archaeological- and radiocarbon-based time scales and are not ameliorated by elaborate Bayesian statistical methods.

    “Uwe Zerbst and Peter van der Veen's “Does Radiocarbon Provide the Answer?” demonstrates that there remain significant conflicts between archaeological-and radiocarbon-based time scales not ameliorated by the use of elaborate Bayesian statistical methods .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Zerbst and van der Veen

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Interpretationreasoning
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    All further proposed historical dates for these states and neighboring regions whose chronologies are built upon them, prior to the earliest secure historical dates, must be understood as modern conventions for which no further direct confirmation currently exists.

    “All further proposed historical dates for these states, and those of neighboring regions whose chronologies are built upon them (e .g., the Aegean, Cyprus, Anatolia, Elam), prior to these earliest secure historical dates must be understood to be modern conventions for which at present no further direct confirmation, scientific or otherwise, exists .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Interpretationreasoning
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    The Dark Age at the transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Iron Age in the ancient Near East is largely, but not entirely, an artifact of the conventionally reconstructed chronology.

    “In conclusion, it seems more than likely to this reviewer that the Dark Age at the transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Iron Age in the ancient Near East is largely, but certainly not entirely, an artifact of the conventionally reconstructed chronology”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Interpretationreasoning
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    The philological arguments adduced to date do not appear in themselves to be decisive on whether Egyptian ssw equals Hebrew šyšq.

    “Given the arguments and counterarguments offered here, it seems clear that, although some of the points made favoring the equation Eg .ssw = Heb .šyšq are suggestive, the philological arguments adduced to date do not appear in themselves to be decisive on this issue .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 23
  • May combine two claims. 8
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 2

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given
    § References

    Sass and Finkelstein's 2016 treatment of the replacement of LBA-early IA Old Canaanite script during the ninth century omits any discussion of the Old Byblian royal inscriptions.

    “Finally, it may be noted that Benjamin Sass and Israel Finkelstein's most recent treatment (2016) of the replacement of the LBA-early IA Old (“Proto-”)Canaanite script during the ninth century omits any discussion of the place of the so-called Old Byblian royal inscrip- tions, including the Ahiram sarcophagus inscription .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Sass and Finkelstein's most recent treatment (2016)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    The regnal dates proposed for Shoshenq I are generally lower, more accurate, but still imprecise.

    “this is best exemplified by the generally lower, more accurate, but still imprecise regnal dates proposed variously above for Shoshenq I .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    Most notably absent from van der Veen's list is Ahiram's sarcophagus inscription from Byblos.

    “Most notably absent from this list is Ahiram's sarcophagus inscription from Byblos, despite the presence on the volume's front cover of a facsimile of a detail of the sarcophagus relief showing the enthroned dead king (see appendix below) .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Peter van der Veen

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    The volume's front cover has a facsimile of a detail of the Ahiram sarcophagus relief showing the enthroned dead king.

    “despite the presence on the volume's front cover of a facsimile of a detail of the sarcophagus relief showing the enthroned dead king (see appendix below) .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    The absolute chronology of the ancient Near East during the first millennium BCE is principally determined by Ptolemy's Royal Canon, whose Babylonian segment establishes the onset of Nabû-naṣir's first regnal year on 26 February 747 BCE as the earliest secure historical date directly linked to the Julian calendar.

    “The absolute chronology of the ancient Near East during the first millennium bCe is principally determined by Ptolemy's (Royal) Canon (see Depuydt 1995a), whose Babylonian segment establishes the onset of the first regnal year of king Nabû-naṣir on 26 February 747 as the earliest secure historical date directly linked to the Julian calendar .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Depuydt 1995a

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    The presently proposed model still lacks the necessary fine-scale structure required by historiographers for an absolute chronology of the period under review.

    “Unfortunately the presently proposed model still lacks the necessary fine-scale structure required by historiographers for an absolute chronology of the period under review; this is best exemplified by the generally lower, more accurate, but still imprecise regnal dates proposed variously above for Shoshenq I .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    Whether Djahi is to be located in the Amuq plain is not a chronology-dependent question and its confirmation must come from elsewhere.

    “But whether or not Djahi is to be located in the Amuq plain is not a chronology-dependent question and its confirmation must come from elsewhere .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    Assyrian King Adad-nērārī III, whose first regnal year was 810 BCE, is not thought to have campaigned in the West prior to 796 BCE.

    “Note further that Assyrian King Adadnērārī III, whose first regnal year was 810, is not thought to have campaigned in the West prior to 796 .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    The conventional Egyptian Bronze Age chronology can only be correct in the complete absence of any calendrical tampering.

    “Leo Depuydt (1995b: 45 n .1), writing in support of this postulate, acknowledges that the conventional Egyptian Bronze Age chronology can only be correct in the complete absence of any calendrical tampering .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Depuydt 1995b

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    The absolute chronology of Assyria may be extended back to the first regnal year of Adad-nērārī II in 911/0 BCE, as determined by the Assyrian Eponym Lists, and cross-linked with Ptolemy's Canon by equating the solar eclipse during Būr-Saggilê's eponymate with the eclipse observable in 763 BCE.

    “The absolute chronology of Assyria may be extended back to the first regnal year of king Adad-nērārī II in 911/0, as determined by the Assyrian Eponym (līmu) Lists (Millard 1994), which may be cross-linked with the Canon by equating the solar eclipse noted during the eponymate of Būr-Saggilê with that calculated to have been observable in 763, as first noted by h.C. Rawlinson (1867).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Millard 1994

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Rawlinson 1867

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    Chapman's conclusion that the Iron IIA assemblages at Samaria and Megiddo are ninth-century Omride is not incongruent with the CoD model.

    “a position in line with Finkelstein's Low Chronology, and as far as it goes, not incongruent with the CoD model .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    A drought phase at the LBA/IA transition associated with a 3.2kyr BP (ca. 1050±150) aridification event had a brief but significant impact on the region.

    “Dafna Langgut et al . (2013) have presented evidence for a drought phase at the LBA/IA transition associated with a 3 .2kyr BP (ca .1050±150) aridification event that also appears to have had a brief but significant impact on the region .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dafna Langgut et al . (2013) source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    The International Calibration Curve for radiocarbon dating may be suspect because it is directly informed by dendrochronology, much of whose primary data remains unpublished.

    “Perhaps most significant is Porter's inference that as a consequence the International Calibration Curve for radiocarbon dating, which is directly informed by dendrochronology-much of whose primary data remains unpublished-may be similarly suspect, perhaps contributing to the possible systematic error in radiocarbon dates noted above .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Porter

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • Rests on an assumption: The International Calibration Curve for radiocarbon dating is directly informed by dendrochronology.
    • Rests on an assumption: Much of the primary data of dendrochronology remains unpublished.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    The conventional Egyptian chronology, whether high or low, rests on the Sothic hypothesis, which assumes that throughout Dynastic Egypt the civil year was exactly 365 days long and slipped forward continuously across the seasons in a 1460-year cycle without any adjustment.

    “The conventional Egyptian chronology (whether high or low) rests on the so-called Sothic hypothesis, wherein it is assumed that throughout the history of Dynastic Egypt the civil year was taken to be exactly 365 days long, and that as a result it slipped forward continuously”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Depuydt 1995b

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § aPPendix

    Porada concluded that Ahiram's reliefs continue iconographic traditions of Syria/Palestine and New Kingdom Egypt but have simplified heavy forms found on ninth-century Carchemish and Ashurnasirpal II.

    “Ahiram's reliefs continue the iconographic traditions of Syria and Palestine as well as of New Kingdom Egypt, but they have assumed the simplified, heavy forms found on the reliefs of Carchemish and of Ashurnasirpal II of the ninth century B .C .(Porada 1973: 364, emphasis added)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Porada 1973

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § References

    Markoe adds that the shape of the eye, nose, and short rounded ear of the lions on the Ahiram sarcophagus find close stylistic parallels in felines on the ninth-century bronze bowl from the Athenian Kerameikos.

    “Within the same context, Markoe adds (p . 24, n . 15) that “the shape of the eye, nose, and short, rounded ear” of the lions on the Ahiram sarcophagus “find close sty- listic parallels in the felines depicted on the ninth-century bronze bowl from the Athenian Kerameikos .””
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Markoe

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    Spence's date for the start of construction of Khufu's pyramid in his second regnal year is 2480±5.

    “Her date for the start of construction of Khufu's pyramid in his second regnal year is 2480±5, providing a seemingly secure anchor point for Dynasty IV .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Spence (2000 source
    • cites [2001]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given
    § aPPendix

    The ivory pyxis IM 79513 was excavated in Well AJ of the North West Palace at Nimrud.

    “the relief-carved ivory pyxis IM 79513 (height 6 .4cm) excavated in Well AJ of the North West Palace at Nimrud .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    The earthquake storm proposed by Nur and Cline may have been a significant contributor to site destructions at the LB/IA interface.

    “Amos Nur and Eric H . Cline (2000) have amassed evidence to suggest that an “earthquake storm,” a series of related earthquakes that spread across southern Greece, western Anatolia, and coastal northern Syria and the southern Levant over a fifty-year period or so at the LB/IA interface, may have been a significant contributor to the site destructions observed”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Nur and Eric H . Cline (2000) source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § aPPendix

    Herrmann noted that the arrangements of figures and furniture on the Nimrud pyxis are closely paralleled on the Ahiram sarcophagus.

    “It is remarkable just how closely the arrangements of figures and the form of the furniture, both the sphinx chair and the table, are paralleled on the scene illustrated on the famous sarcophagus of King Ahiram .(1989: 90)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Herrmann 1989 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    Porter concluded that Kuniholm's dendrochronological data and methodology have inherent weaknesses and unwarranted assumptions, so the resulting solutions cannot always be trusted.

    “Porter clearly enunciates the inherent weaknesses and unwarranted assumptions behind Kuniholm's data and his questionable methodology, concluding that the resulting solutions cannot always be trusted .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Porter

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    On the basis of the Assyro-Babylonian chronological backbone, the earliest secure Julian-year dates in neighboring states include the end of King Ahab of Israel's reign in 853 BCE and year 1 of Egyptian King Psammetichus I in 664 BCE.

    “On the basis of this Assyro-Babylonian chronological backbone, the earliest secure Julian-year dates in neighboring states may be determined: for example, the reign of King Ahab of Israel ended in 853 (Thiele 1983: 94-95); similarly, year 1 of Egyptian King Psammetichus I, founder of Dynasty XXVI, is 664 (Kitchen 2002: 5-6) .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Thiele 1983

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Kitchen 2002

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    If 2 Kings 7:6-7 reflects the events of 2 Kings 13:1-7, then Shoshenq I's first regnal year must have been closer to ca. 817 BCE rather than the dates proposed by Thijs (843), James and van der Veen (839/29), or James et al. 1991 (ca. 810).

    “James and van der Veen: 839/29; cf.james et al. 1991: ca .810) .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Thijs

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites James and van der Veen

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites James et al. 1991

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § aPPendix

    The Ahiram sarcophagus reliefs are perfectly good examples of ninth- and early eighth-century North Syrian art.

    “Porada firmly believed that the Ahiram tomb reliefs were perfectly good examples of ninth-and early eighth-century North Syrian art .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Porada 1973

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    The apparent absence of distinctive Iron I burials may be explained by the Iron I period spanning less than half a century rather than the conventional two centuries, with the Iron I population in the central highlands continuing to employ Late Bronze Age burial practices.

    “It might be added here that the apparent absence of distinctive Iron I burials may now be explained by the fact that the period spans less than half a century rather than the conventional two centuries (or more than”
    • Also stated in: § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity · plain
      “three in the Low Chronology) and that during this brief period the Iron I population in the central highlands continued to employ LBA burial practices (cf .Kletter 2002: 39) .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kletter 2002

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    The CoD model's removal of just over two centuries from the Egyptian Third Intermediate Period provides an alternative footing upon which a testable framework might be rebuilt.

    “does provide an alternative footing upon which a testable framework might be rebuilt, one where proposed new insights might be subject to rigorous testing, without resorting to faith or authority for solutions .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation
    § References

    The most parsimonious explanation for the similarities among offering tables and other iconographic details is that the artisans producing them were contemporaries rendering virtually identical pieces of elite furniture.

    “The most parsimonious explanation for the noted similarities among these offering tables (as well as numerous other previously noted iconographic details) is that the artisans producing them were more or less contemporaries rendering in their respective media and scales virtually identical pieces of elite furniture of self-evidently great prestige .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation
    § Shishak and Shoshenq: A Disambiguation ronald WallenfelS neW york UniverSity

    Peter van der Veen's summary of epigraphic finds appears to support a significantly lower chronology.

    “Peter van der Veen, “Early Iron Age Epigraphy and Chronological Revision: A Summary Article,” offers an anecdotal summary of epigraphic finds whose general provenience, if not specific stratigraphic context, is known, and that appear to support a significantly lower chronology .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Peter van der Veen

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

28 of 28

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    In the CoD model, the period of the United Monarchy is located in the latter half of LB IIB.

    “In the CoD model, with the period of the United Monarchy located in the latter half of LB IIB, so must be the Israelites' Philistine adversaries .”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The International Calibration Curve for radiocarbon dating is directly informed by dendrochronology.

    “the International Calibration Curve for radiocarbon dating, which is directly informed by dendrochronology-much of whose primary data remains unpublished-may be similarly suspect”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Much of the primary data of dendrochronology remains unpublished.

    “much of whose primary data remains unpublished”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The Ahiram sarcophagus is conventionally dated no later than circa 1000 BCE and as early as the thirteenth century BCE.

    “The sarcophagus of King Ahiram of Byblos, with its relief carvings and incised linear alphabetic inscription, is conventionally dated no later than circa 1000 bce and as early as the thirteenth century”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The Old Byblian royal inscriptions are conventionally dated to the tenth century.

    “These inscriptions (KAI 1-2, 4-7), conventionally dated to the tenth century”
5 of 5

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Champollion, Jean-François . 1868 . Lettres écrites d'Egypte et de Nubie en 1828 et 1829 . Nouvelle edition . Paris: Didier et C e . Chapman, Ruppert L ., III . 2009 . Putting Sheshonq I in His Place . Palestine Exploration Quarterly 141: 4-17 .
  2. B .C . Princeton: Princeton University Press . . 2000 . Medinet Habu: Oxcarts, Ships, and Migration Theories . Journal of Near Eastern Studies 59: 161-90 .
  3. Joseph Maran and Philipp W . Stockhammer . Pp . 198-212 . Oxford: Oxbow Books .
  4. Kahn, Dan'el . 2011 . The Campaign of Ramesses III against Philistia . Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 3/4: 1-11 . . 2016 . The Historical Background of a Topographical List of Ramesses III . In Rich and Great: Studies in Honour of Anthony J . Spalinger on the Occasion of his 70 th Feast of Thoth, ed . Tenata Landgráfová and Jana Mynářová . Pp . 161-68 . Prague: Charles University .
  5. Kletter, Raz . 2002 . People without Burials? The Lack of Iron I Burials in the Central Highlands of Palestine . Israel Exploration Journal 52: 28-48 .
  6. Porada, Edith . 1973 . Notes on the Sarcophagus of Ahiram . Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society 5: 355-72 .

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Wallenfels, R.
Corresponding author
Wallenfels, Ronald
Venue
Journal of the American Oriental Society
Publisher
American Oriental Society
Published
2021-09-19
Volume
139
Issue
2
ISSN
  • 0003-0279 (ISSN-L)
  • 2169-2289
DOI
10.7817/jameroriesoci.139.2.0487
OpenAlex
W2965991642
Semantic Scholar
21572b1454e98330107cc33d593b7a69b54fb9a7
Cited by
1
References
21
Citations by year
2021: 1
FWCI
1.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Journal of the American Oriental Society (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Ancient Egypt and Archaeology
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Ancient Near East History
Keywords
Third Intermediate Period, Dark Ages, Egyptian chronology, biblical chronology, ancient Near East, Eastern Mediterranean

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-17.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-17.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review