Bøger udgivet af Digital Ink Productions

Hebrew Maccabees is one of the stranger Hebrew books to have survived to the present and is either a relic the oldest surviving book about Judas the Hammer, or a remarkably heretical medieval forgery. There is no academic consensus on what it is, and few scholars have bothered to comment on it. The book deals with the life of Judas 'the Maccabee, ' which is of little interest to Christians. His life is of interest to Jews, however, almost all books dealing with the Maccabean Revolt are rejected as scripture in Rabbinical Judaism. Jews generally treat the Septuagint's 1ˢᵗ and 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees, and Josephus' Antiquities of the Judeans as historical texts of debatable accuracy, while using the Megillat Taanit and Megillat Antiochus as sources on how Hanukkah should be practiced. Hanukkah, also called the Festival of Lights, is a holiday based on the rededication of the temple in Jerusalem that happened when Judas occupied Jerusalem. The festival continues, but all records of what happened are lost or ignored.The Megillat Taanit dates to the 1ˢᵗ century AD, and Megillat Antiochus dates to the 2ⁿᵈ century AD, and neither is considered a historically reliable source by academics. This suggests that what actually happened in the time of Judas was actively suppressed during the Hasmonean and Herodian dynasties, likely because Judas was later viewed as a heretic. In most of the books featuring Judas, he reports seeing angelic horsemen that no one else could see. These horsemen are clearly part of Judas' story, however, if they were, in fact, angels riding horses, then Judas would be a prophet. Yet, he is not accepted as a prophet in Judaism or Christianity.The idea of angels riding horses is itself unheard of in Israelite and Judahite texts, other than in texts related to Judas, which suggests he may have actually been following a different religion. During the era of the Maccabean Revolt, the high priest in Jerusalem was not a Judahite, but a Phrygian named Philip. The Phrygians worshiped Sabazdiôs, the great horseman of the sky, who was represented by a hand. The Greeks interpreted the Phrygian Sabazdiôs and Judahite Sabaoth as two forms of Dionysus. In 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees, Dionysus is used as the name of the god worshiped in the temple in Jerusalem under Greek rule. Sabaoth was recorded by the Greeks of the Hellenistic era as the name of the Judahite god, based on the Aramaic ṣbảwt, meaning 'desires.' However, this word took on a very different meaning as Classical Hebrew formed during the Maccabean Revolt, becoming a word meaning 'armies' or 'battles.'The duel meanings of 'ṣbảwt' in Semitic languages go back to very ancient times, where the oldest recorded form was the Akkadian ṣābum, meaning 'soldier.' Over thousands of years, the name transitioned to 'server' and finally 'desires' in Aramaic and 'abundance' in Arabic. When the Hasmonean dynasty decided to 'restore' the Hebrew language, many ancient words and meanings were introduced to the Judahite dialect of Canaanite, resulting in the new Hebrew language having many archaic terms, including ṣbảwt. The name Sabaoth is used in the Septuagint, generally where the Masoretic texts used the word 'armies, ' which has resulted in many modern academics simply accepting this as a mistranslation, however, in Hebrew Maccabees, Judas is repeatedly referred to as the 'Anointed of Sabaoth, ' confirming that if nothing else, the author viewed Sabaoth as a proper god.While it is natural to assume that the Maccabean Revolt was about getting rid of the worship of Sabaoth / Sabazios / Dionysus, as recounted in 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees, this book contradicts that, and reports that Judas was a Sabaoth worshiper. Moreover, there is some incidental evidence of the continuation of Sabaoth worship under the rule of the Hasmoneans in the writing of Josephus, and also the Babylonian Talmud.

Four books of Maccabees were ultimately added to the Septuagint, three in the 1ˢᵗ century BC, and the 4ᵗʰ as an appendix in the 1ˢᵗ century AD. No trace of these books have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, and they are generally thought to have been written in Greek. 1ˢᵗ and 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees do include several Aramaic loanwords that support an Aramaic source text. Two versions of a different book of Maccabees has survived in the Arabic and Hebrew languages. Three additional books of Maccabees have survived in the Ge'ez language in Ethiopia and are generally considered translations from either Syriac or Arabian sources.1ˢᵗ Maccabees tells the story of the Maccabean Revolt against the rule of the Seleucid Empire in the 2ⁿᵈ century BC. The content of 1ˢᵗ Maccabees appears to be a Sadducee text, as it clearly gives all credit to the self-declared high-priests that led the rebellion against the Greeks, and barely mentioned the sky-god Shamayim, or the earth-goddess Eretz. It also omits the names of the other gods that 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees and 3ʳᵈ Maccabees mentions the Judeans worshiping, such as Dionysus, which supports its authorship in the Hasmonean Dynasty, when the other gods were no longer tolerated.2ⁿᵈ Maccabees claims to be an abridged version of Jason of Cyrene's now lost five-volume version of Maccabees. Jason's books of the Maccabees were likely composed earlier than 1ˢᵗ Maccabees, as the story ends decades earlier, and contains many references to Sabaoth, translated into Greek as Dionysus, which are missing from the 1ˢᵗ Maccabees. While 1ˢᵗ Maccabees is a very secular version of the events that led to the creation of the Hasmonean kingdom, and was, therefore, almost certainly composed by a Sadducee, 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees claims that Judas the Hammer, the protagonist of both 1ˢᵗ and 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees was a Hasidean, suggesting that either Jason of Cyrene, or whoever abridged his work, was a Hasidean. 1ˢᵗ Maccabees mentioned the Hasideans joining Judas' forces, but did not claim he was one.4ᵗʰ Maccabees is a philosophical interpretation of 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees. It was added to the Septuagint in the 1ˢᵗ-century AD, however, it could have been written anywhere between circa 100 BC and 100 AD. This text includes more details regarding the torture of the Hebrew youths from 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees, which may have come from Jason of Cyrene's original five-volume version of Maccabees. The author of 4ᵗʰ Maccabees accepts the flying horsemen of 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees as sky messengers, which implies the Phrygian imagery was widely accepted by Jews at the time and supports the Greek and Roman records that indicate the Phrygians and Hebrews worshiped the same god. Unlike 2ⁿᵈ and 3ʳᵈ Maccabees, 4ᵗʰ Maccabees does not mention the god Dionysus/Sabaoth, indicating that the book was written in Hasmonean Dynasty or later. 4ᵗʰ Maccabees also does not have any Aramaic loanwords, indicating it was almost certainly written in Greek.

The two books of Ezra were translated into Greek and added to the Septuagint before 200 BC when a large number of refugees fled the ongoing wars in Judea and settled in Egypt. 2ⁿᵈ Ezra became in the Masoretic Texts' version of Ezra, and by the year 100 AD the Apocalypse of Ezra was also in circulation as 3ʳᵈ Ezra. The original 2ⁿᵈ Ezra was later divided into two books in Latin translations, making a total of four books of Ezra, although one was later renamed Nehemiah. The two books of Ezra found in the Septuagint, are variously divided into two or three books, depending on the religious denomination. 2ⁿᵈ Ezra is equivalent to the Masoretic Ezra, which is used by Jews, however, there is no Hebrew version of 1ˢᵗ Ezra. Christian Orthodox, Coptic, and Tewahedo Bibles continue to use translations of the Septuagint, and therefore the books continue to be 1ˢᵗ and 2ⁿᵈ Ezra. Catholic Bibles call 1ˢᵗ Ezra 3ʳᵈ Esdras, and have 2ⁿᵈ Ezra divided into the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Most Protestant Bibles do not include 1ˢᵗ Ezra, and have 2ⁿᵈ Ezra divided into the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. The book called 4ᵗʰ Ezra in Catholic Bibles was never in the Septuagint and is about a different Ezra who lived earlier during the Babylonian Captivity.The Septuagint's 1ˢᵗ and 2ⁿᵈ Ezra are thematically similar, telling generally the same story, however from two different points of view. They tell the story of the fall of Jerusalem, first to the Egyptians, and then the Babylonians, followed by Babylon's fall to the Persians, and the Judahites to Judah to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. 1ˢᵗ Ezra was written from a non-spiritual viewpoint, common among the Sadducees, and repeatedly makes it clear that the author, Ezra, and various kings, viewed the Lord as the Judahite version of other gods, including the Egyptian creator and Sun-god Atum, and the Zoroastrian 'god of truth' and 'King of the Sky' Ahura Mazda. These views are inconsistent with the view of the Pharisees, which developed under the rule of the Hasmonean dynasty after Judea broke free from the rule of the Greeks, and the Lord became a separate god from all others.Both the Greek translations of 1ˢᵗ and 2ⁿᵈ Ezra, and the Hebrew translation of Ezra, contain relics of an Aramaic source-text, unfortunately, the Aramaic Book of Ezra-Nehemiah is lost. The difference in the surviving Aramaic words within the Greek 1ˢᵗ Ezra, and Hebrew Ezra-Nehemiah (Greek 2ⁿᵈ Ezra), it appears that the two versions of Ezra already existed in the Aramaic versions. The differences between 2ⁿᵈ Ezra and Masoretic Ezra-Nehemiah are minimal and could be accounted for as scribal notes, and the redaction of Simon the Zealot, who added the name Yahweh extensively to the ancient texts when he translated them into Hebrew. 1ˢᵗ Ezra, the less spiritual of the two versions of the Septuagint's Ezra, clearly dates to the end of the Persian era, as it treats the Judahite Lord of the Temple in Jerusalem as another version of Ahura Mazda, the Zoroastrian God. Several Zoroastrian titles of Ahura Mazda are applied to the Judahite Lord, including King of Truth, and King of the Sky. Letters from the Persian Kings Cyrus II, Artaxerxes I, and Darius II, as included in the book, all of which were closely associated with Zoroastrianism, yet, referred to the Judahite Lord using titles generally associated with Ahura Mazda. In the Greek 1ˢᵗ Ezra and 2ⁿᵈ Ezra, as well as Masoretic Ezra, the temple is described as being a Zoroastrian fire-temple, containing an eternal fire, which 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees even referred to as being burning naphtha in the time of Nehemiah, like the other fire-temples across the Persian Empire.

The two books of Ezra were translated into Greek and added to the Septuagint before 200 BC when a large number of refugees fled the ongoing wars in Judea and settled in Egypt. 2ⁿᵈ Ezra became in the Masoretic Texts' version of Ezra, and by the year 100 AD the Apocalypse of Ezra was also in circulation as 3ʳᵈ Ezra. The original 2ⁿᵈ Ezra was later divided into two books in Latin translations, making a total of four books of Ezra, although one was later renamed Nehemiah. The two books of Ezra found in the Septuagint, are variously divided into two or three books, depending on the religious denomination. 2ⁿᵈ Ezra is equivalent to the Masoretic Ezra, which is used by Jews, however, there is no Hebrew version of 1ˢᵗ Ezra. Christian Orthodox, Coptic, and Tewahedo Bibles continue to use translations of the Septuagint, and therefore the books continue to be 1ˢᵗ and 2ⁿᵈ Ezra. Catholic Bibles call 1ˢᵗ Ezra 3ʳᵈ Esdras, and have 2ⁿᵈ Ezra divided into the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Most Protestant Bibles do not include 1ˢᵗ Ezra, and have 2ⁿᵈ Ezra divided into the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. The book called 4ᵗʰ Ezra in Catholic Bibles was never in the Septuagint and is about a different Ezra who lived earlier during the Babylonian Captivity.The Septuagint's 1ˢᵗ and 2ⁿᵈ Ezra are thematically similar, telling generally the same story, however from two different points of view. They tell the story of the fall of Jerusalem, first to the Egyptians, and then the Babylonians, followed by Babylon's fall to the Persians, and the Judahites to Judah to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. 1ˢᵗ Ezra was written from a non-spiritual viewpoint, common among the Sadducees, and repeatedly makes it clear that the author, Ezra, and various kings, viewed the Lord as the Judahite version of other gods, including the Egyptian creator and Sun-god Atum, and the Zoroastrian 'god of truth' and 'King of the Sky' Ahura Mazda. These views are inconsistent with the view of the Pharisees, which developed under the rule of the Hasmonean dynasty after Judea broke free from the rule of the Greeks, and the Lord became a separate god from all others.Both the Greek translations of 1ˢᵗ and 2ⁿᵈ Ezra, and the Hebrew translation of Ezra, contain relics of an Aramaic source-text, unfortunately, the Aramaic Book of Ezra-Nehemiah is lost. The difference in the surviving Aramaic words within the Greek 1ˢᵗ Ezra, and Hebrew Ezra-Nehemiah (Greek 2ⁿᵈ Ezra), it appears that the two versions of Ezra already existed in the Aramaic versions. The differences between 2ⁿᵈ Ezra and Masoretic Ezra-Nehemiah are minimal and could be accounted for as scribal notes, and the redaction of Simon the Zealot, who added the name Yahweh extensively to the ancient texts when he translated them into Hebrew. 1ˢᵗ Ezra, the less spiritual of the two versions of the Septuagint's Ezra, clearly dates to the end of the Persian era, as it treats the Judahite Lord of the Temple in Jerusalem as another version of Ahura Mazda, the Zoroastrian God. Several Zoroastrian titles of Ahura Mazda are applied to the Judahite Lord, including King of Truth, and King of the Sky. Letters from the Persian Kings Cyrus II, Artaxerxes I, and Darius II, as included in the book, all of which were closely associated with Zoroastrianism, yet, referred to the Judahite Lord using titles generally associated with Ahura Mazda. In the Greek 1ˢᵗ Ezra and 2ⁿᵈ Ezra, as well as Masoretic Ezra, the temple is described as being a Zoroastrian fire-temple, containing an eternal fire, which 2ⁿᵈ Maccabees even referred to as being burning naphtha in the time of Nehemiah, like the other fire-temples across the Persian Empire.

The term Paralipomena, which means 'things left out, ' is a general translation of Divrei-hayyamim, which means 'things in the days.' The books are a collection of texts from various eras of Israelite history, spanning the era of the old Israelite Kingdoms, circa 1000 BC, through the Persian conquest, of circa 539 BC. Scholars have debated the origin of the books throughout their history, and there is no consensus within Rabbinical literature, Christian literature, or modern scholarship. The general Rabbinical view is that the two books of Paralipomena were written by one author, as Divrei-hayyamim, and then translated into Greek. The dominant early Christian view was that the books were written by Ezra the Scribe, circa 350 BC, however, this view was generally abandoned in Western Europe during the Protestant Reformation. Modern scholarly analysis has no consensus, however, the books do themselves indicate the eras they were compiled, nevertheless, the authors remain unknown.Based on the references within 2ⁿᵈ Paralipomenon to the Egyptian king Osorkon I as a Kushite, parts of the book must have been compiled sometime between 943 and 716 BC, when Egypt was part of the Kushite Empire, while later sections of 2ⁿᵈ Paralipomenon must have been compiled sometime after 539 BC when Cyrus the Great conquered the Babylonian Empire. The surviving Hebrew text of Divrei-hayyamim does, however, contain a reference to the Temple in Jerusalem as the 'Temple of the Gods, ' which means the original text of the book has to predate King Josiah's reforms of circa 625 BC, and likely predates King Hezekiah's similar reforms decades earlier. Both Hezekiah and Josiah are recorded as removing the idols of the gods from the temple, which had by all accounts been in the temple since it was built by King Solomon.

The term Paralipomena, which means 'things left out, ' is a general translation of Divrei-hayyamim, which means 'things in the days.' The books are a collection of texts from various eras of Israelite history, spanning the era of the old Israelite Kingdoms, circa 1000 BC, through the Persian conquest, of circa 539 BC. Scholars have debated the origin of the books throughout their history, and there is no consensus within Rabbinical literature, Christian literature, or modern scholarship. The general Rabbinical view is that the two books of Paralipomena were written by one author, as Divrei-hayyamim, and then translated into Greek. The dominant early Christian view was that the books were written by Ezra the Scribe, circa 350 BC, however, this view was generally abandoned in Western Europe during the Protestant Reformation. Modern scholarly analysis has no consensus, however, the books do themselves indicate the eras they were compiled, nevertheless, the authors remain unknown.Based on the references within 2ⁿᵈ Paralipomenon to the Egyptian king Osorkon I as a Kushite, parts of the book must have been compiled sometime between 943 and 716 BC, when Egypt was part of the Kushite Empire, while later sections of 2ⁿᵈ Paralipomenon must have been compiled sometime after 539 BC when Cyrus the Great conquered the Babylonian Empire. The surviving Hebrew text of Divrei-hayyamim does, however, contain a reference to the Temple in Jerusalem as the 'Temple of the Gods, ' which means the original text of the book has to predate King Josiah's reforms of circa 625 BC, and likely predates King Hezekiah's similar reforms decades earlier. Both Hezekiah and Josiah are recorded as removing the idols of the gods from the temple, which had by all accounts been in the temple since it was built by King Solomon.

The Septuagint's 1ˢᵗ Kingdoms retells the story of the unification of Israel under the Benjamite King Saul in the aftermath of the collapse of the Egyptian New Kingdom. The events of 1ˢᵗ Kingdoms continues the history of the Hebrews told in the book of Judges, as the era of the Judges ended with Samuel, who anointed Saul, the tallest man in the land, to rule over the Israelites. Saul fought a series of wars to establish his kingdom, based in Samaria and Gilead, but alienated his family military leaders, and the general population of the land, and was ultimately killed in battle.The Septuagint's 2ⁿᵈ and 3ʳᵈ Kingdoms continues the history of Israel, with the lives of King David, and his son King Solomon. David was another warrior king, and expanded the kingdom in every direction, ultimately leaving a kingdom surrounded by allies and subject states to his son Solomon. King Solomon's reign was considered by many later generations to have been the golden age of Israelite history. Unfortunately, the reign of his son Rehoboam was less popular, and the kingdom split into the kingdoms of Judah in the south, and Samaria, including Gilead in the north. As the archaeological record was yet to prove the existence of the kingdom of Israel, archaeologists consider the original three books of the Kingdoms to possibly be fiction, however, nothing contrary has been found either, and so the history recorded in the first three books of the Kingdoms cannot be disproved either.The Septuagint's 4ᵗʰ Kingdoms tells the history of the kingdoms of Samaria and Judah from circa 850 BC until the Babylonians conquered Judah circa 600 BC. This era of history is well documented in the historical records of the Assyrians, Egyptians, and Babylonians, and unlike the earlier books of the Kingdoms, is generally accepted by historians. This era included the rise and fall of the Aramean Empire based in Damascus, the rise and fall of the Assyrian Empire farther north, the Assyrian wars against Egypt, and the sack of Thebes, and ultimately the rise of the Babylonian Empire. During this tumultuous time, the kingdoms of Israel, Judah, and Aram, which appears to have been considered an Israelite kingdom by the prophet Ezekiel, struggled for survival and fell one by one to the expanding empires around them.Before the era of 4ᵗʰ Kingdoms, Samara had established an empire, occupying the Aramean kingdoms of Damascus and Hama in modern Syria, which had ended suddenly when an earthquake had leveled Samaria. The earthquake was mentioned in the Book of Amos, and archaeological evidence of it is found throughout modern northern Israel and the Palestinian West Bank. It is estimated to have been between 7.8 and 8.2 on the Richter Scale, and aftershocks likely lasted around 6 months. In the aftermath, Damascus rose to form its own Aramean empire, occupying Hama, and northern Samaria, as well Gilead in southern modern Syria, which had been part of Samaria since the division of Israel into Samaria and Judah. However, as Assyria began to expand to the north, Samaria and Aram formed an anti-Assyria alliance, and the Samarian forces were stationed in Aram to help defend the northern border from the Assyrians. Judah was invited to join the alliance, but instead formed an alliance with the Assyrians and invaded and pillaged Samaria and southern Aram.

The Septuagint's 1ˢᵗ Kingdoms retells the story of the unification of Israel under the Benjamite King Saul in the aftermath of the collapse of the Egyptian New Kingdom. The events of 1ˢᵗ Kingdoms continues the history of the Hebrews told in the book of Judges, as the era of the Judges ended with Samuel, who anointed Saul, the tallest man in the land, to rule over the Israelites. Saul fought a series of wars to establish his kingdom, based in Samaria and Gilead, but alienated his family military leaders, and the general population of the land, and was ultimately killed in battle.The Septuagint's 2ⁿᵈ and 3ʳᵈ Kingdoms continues the history of Israel, with the lives of King David, and his son King Solomon. David was another warrior king, and expanded the kingdom in every direction, ultimately leaving a kingdom surrounded by allies and subject states to his son Solomon. King Solomon's reign was considered by many later generations to have been the golden age of Israelite history. Unfortunately, the reign of his son Rehoboam was less popular, and the kingdom split into the kingdoms of Judah in the south, and Samaria, including Gilead in the north. As the archaeological record was yet to prove the existence of the kingdom of Israel, archaeologists consider the original three books of the Kingdoms to possibly be fiction, however, nothing contrary has been found either, and so the history recorded in the first three books of the Kingdoms cannot be disproved either.The Septuagint's 4ᵗʰ Kingdoms tells the history of the kingdoms of Samaria and Judah from circa 850 BC until the Babylonians conquered Judah circa 600 BC. This era of history is well documented in the historical records of the Assyrians, Egyptians, and Babylonians, and unlike the earlier books of the Kingdoms, is generally accepted by historians. This era included the rise and fall of the Aramean Empire based in Damascus, the rise and fall of the Assyrian Empire farther north, the Assyrian wars against Egypt, and the sack of Thebes, and ultimately the rise of the Babylonian Empire. During this tumultuous time, the kingdoms of Israel, Judah, and Aram, which appears to have been considered an Israelite kingdom by the prophet Ezekiel, struggled for survival and fell one by one to the expanding empires around them.Before the era of 4ᵗʰ Kingdoms, Samara had established an empire, occupying the Aramean kingdoms of Damascus and Hama in modern Syria, which had ended suddenly when an earthquake had leveled Samaria. The earthquake was mentioned in the Book of Amos, and archaeological evidence of it is found throughout modern northern Israel and the Palestinian West Bank. It is estimated to have been between 7.8 and 8.2 on the Richter Scale, and aftershocks likely lasted around 6 months. In the aftermath, Damascus rose to form its own Aramean empire, occupying Hama, and northern Samaria, as well Gilead in southern modern Syria, which had been part of Samaria since the division of Israel into Samaria and Judah. However, as Assyria began to expand to the north, Samaria and Aram formed an anti-Assyria alliance, and the Samarian forces were stationed in Aram to help defend the northern border from the Assyrians. Judah was invited to join the alliance, but instead formed an alliance with the Assyrians and invaded and pillaged Samaria and southern Aram.

The Book of Judges is very old, and the Song of Deborah may be the oldest surviving piece of Israelite literature. It uses some of the most archaic forms of Hebrew, and was likely composed in Canaanite before Hebrew became a defined dialect as this issue of dialect was part of the division between the Israelites during the battle between the Gileadites, east of the Jordan, and the Ephraimites from west of the Jordan. There is evidence that the book was either assembled or redacted in the Kingdom of Samaria. The region of the book also generally corresponds with the territory of the northern kingdom, both the region that had once been under Egyptian authority west of the Jordan, and the region east of the Jordan which had generally been independent of Egypt.The synchronizations between the Book of Judges and the records of Egypt are far too many to be overlooked or ignored. As almost all denominations of Christians and Jews agree that King Saul established his kingdom in 1037 BC, and the Septuagint's version of Judges includes 460 years of the land being ruled by Judges, or foreign kings, followed by an era of chaos when there was no king, the latest possible date the Exodus could have taken place was the 1500s BC, which supports the idea that the 10 plagues of Egypt were descriptions of the fallout and effects of the Minoan eruption which Egyptologists date to 1550 BC. According to Judges, 42 years later the Israelites invaded Samaria, (northern modern Israel and the Palestinian West Bank) under the leadership of Joshua, which would have been 1508 BC. The plan was already laid out in the Book of Joshua to occupy the entire land of Canaan, yet just three years later, when Joshua was 85 years old, the Israelites stopped their campaign, after having only occupied the cities in Samaria, this would have been in 1505 BC.The reason they stopped their invasion is not given, however, Egyptian records do explain it, as in the same year, 1505 BC, Pharaoh Thutmose I marched his army through Canaan to reconquer it for the Egyptian Empire. It had previously been under the control of the Hyksos Dynasty whose empire collapsed in the aftermath of the Minoan eruption. In 1550 BC, the Hyksos capital fell to the rival southern dynasty of Pharaoh Ahmose I, and the Hyksos retreated to their fortress of Sharuhen, near modern Gaza in the Palestinian Gaza Strip. This suggests the Hyksos maintained control over Canaan until Sharuhen fell to Ahmose I in 1540 BC. Ahmose I led an invasion of southern Canaan a few years later in an attempt to root out any remaining Hyksos. Egyptologists are not sure when this campaign was, placing it sometime between 1537 and 1527 BC. This campaign is not believed to have reached farther north than Byblos, in modern Lebanon, and did not result in any long-term political control over Canaan. Ahmose I's main goal seems to have been to destroy any remaining Hyksos in the region to ensure they did not try to recapture Egypt.

The Book of Judges is very old, and the Song of Deborah may be the oldest surviving piece of Israelite literature. It uses some of the most archaic forms of Hebrew, and was likely composed in Canaanite before Hebrew became a defined dialect as this issue of dialect was part of the division between the Israelites during the battle between the Gileadites, east of the Jordan, and the Ephraimites from west of the Jordan. There is evidence that the book was either assembled or redacted in the Kingdom of Samaria. The region of the book also generally corresponds with the territory of the northern kingdom, both the region that had once been under Egyptian authority west of the Jordan, and the region east of the Jordan which had generally been independent of Egypt.The synchronizations between the Book of Judges and the records of Egypt are far too many to be overlooked or ignored. As almost all denominations of Christians and Jews agree that King Saul established his kingdom in 1037 BC, and the Septuagint's version of Judges includes 460 years of the land being ruled by Judges, or foreign kings, followed by an era of chaos when there was no king, the latest possible date the Exodus could have taken place was the 1500s BC, which supports the idea that the 10 plagues of Egypt were descriptions of the fallout and effects of the Minoan eruption which Egyptologists date to 1550 BC. According to Judges, 42 years later the Israelites invaded Samaria, (northern modern Israel and the Palestinian West Bank) under the leadership of Joshua, which would have been 1508 BC. The plan was already laid out in the Book of Joshua to occupy the entire land of Canaan, yet just three years later, when Joshua was 85 years old, the Israelites stopped their campaign, after having only occupied the cities in Samaria, this would have been in 1505 BC.The reason they stopped their invasion is not given, however, Egyptian records do explain it, as in the same year, 1505 BC, Pharaoh Thutmose I marched his army through Canaan to reconquer it for the Egyptian Empire. It had previously been under the control of the Hyksos Dynasty whose empire collapsed in the aftermath of the Minoan eruption. In 1550 BC, the Hyksos capital fell to the rival southern dynasty of Pharaoh Ahmose I, and the Hyksos retreated to their fortress of Sharuhen, near modern Gaza in the Palestinian Gaza Strip. This suggests the Hyksos maintained control over Canaan until Sharuhen fell to Ahmose I in 1540 BC. Ahmose I led an invasion of southern Canaan a few years later in an attempt to root out any remaining Hyksos. Egyptologists are not sure when this campaign was, placing it sometime between 1537 and 1527 BC. This campaign is not believed to have reached farther north than Byblos, in modern Lebanon, and did not result in any long-term political control over Canaan. Ahmose I's main goal seems to have been to destroy any remaining Hyksos in the region to ensure they did not try to recapture Egypt.

L'ère du Nouvel Empire de l'histoire égyptienne émerge des ténèbres de la Deuxième Période Intermédiaire, lorsque la dynastie thébaine chasse les Hyksôs d'Égypte, puis conquiert Canaan et la Nubie. La chute de la dynastie des Hyksôs semble être due en grande partie à l'éruption minoenne en Grèce, qui a obscurci le ciel de l'Égypte et recouvert le nord de l'Égypte d'une couche de cendres pouvant atteindre deux mètres. La stèle de la Tempête de Karnak décrit les effets de la tempête jusqu'au sud de l'Égypte à l'époque d'Ahmôsis Ier, le pharaon qui a finalement chassé les Hyksôs d'Égypte.L'Autobiographie d'Ahmès fils d'Abana couvre de nombreuses batailles qui ont forgé le Nouvel Empire égyptien, notamment la bataille d'Avaris, et la bataille ultérieure de Sharouhen quelques années plus tard, qui a abouti à la prise de contrôle de l'Égypte sur l'ensemble de l'ancien domaine des Hyksôs. Ahmès fils d'Abana est souvent décrit comme un amiral égyptien, cependant, sa carrière dans la marine égyptienne a duré des décennies au service d'une série de pharaons, dont Ahmôsis Ier, Amenhotep Ier et Thoutmôsis Ier, couvrant plus de 50 ans, de 1550 av. JC aux années 1490 av. JC Comme il se décrit lui-même comme un jeune homme lors de la bataille d'Avaris, où il a servi en remplacement de son père dans la flotte, il est probable qu'il n'ait pris sa retraite qu'à l'âge de plus de 60 ans. Il a répertorié de nombreuses campagnes tout au long de sa vie, principalement dans le nord du Soudan le long du Nil et du Nil Jaune, avant que le pharaon ne tourne son attention vers le nord et ne les envoie occuper la Syrie.

The origin of the Book of Judith has been debated for thousands of years, and is often assumed to have been written in Greek as anti-Hellenic propaganda during the Maccabean Revolt. It isn't clear why an anti-Hellenic book would have been written in Greek by an Aramaic-speaking people, however, no ancient copies of it survive in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Phoenician (Samaritan / Judahite). There are Hebrew translations, however, they are dated to the middle ages, 1000 years after the oldest surviving copies of the Judith found in the Septuagint. The Greek translations are remarkably consistent compared to the radically different versions of the Book of Tobit in the surviving copies of the Septuagint.The name of the king in the book of Judith is named Nebuchadnezzar, which was the name of the king of Babylon, between 605 and 562 BC. However, other than the name of the king, no other elements of the story indicate the story originated with the Babylonians. Nebuchadnezzar did not fight the Medes, and could not have killed the king of Media, as the two countries were close allies at the time, and under King Cyaxares the Median Empire reached its peak. Nebuchadnezzar didn't launch a war against the Elamites, who in fact fell under the control of Cyaxares's Median Empire. As the name Nebuchadnezzar was used to replace Achiacharos in the book of Tobit, when the Sinaiticus version was simplified into the Vaticanus version, it's likely that the name Nebuchadnezzar was simply used to replaces an older name as well.There are several indicators in the book that point to the original king being Ashurbanipal, the king of Assyria between 668 and 627 BC. Ashurbanipal did fight two wars against Elam, and virtually annihilated the Elamites in the second war. Ashurbanipal also invaded Media, and during the fighting the Median king Phraortes was killed, allowing Ashurbanipal to claim victory, even though he didn't consolidate his victory and integrate Media back into the Assyrian Empire. When Ashurbanipal had launched the invasion of Media, in his 17th year, he ordered the local kings from across his empire to send troops to the war, but almost all refused, which was a general insurrection. Therefore, while committed to the war against Media, after defeating the Medians, he was eager to return to Assyria, and restore order to his empire.

The Amarna Letters are a collection of clay tablets found in the ruins of El Amarna, Egypt, in the 1880s. The city of El Amarna was built by the Pharaoh Akhenaten, during his religious reforms in the 1340s BC, but was then abandoned after he died and Egypt reverted to worshiping the old gods. These letters provide a unique glimpse into a period of Egyptian history, that the Egyptians themselves attempted to erase. After Akhenaten's heir Tutankhamen died, his successor Ay was only able to hold the throne for a few years before Horemheb seized it, and attempted to reunited the Egyptians by erasing all records of Akhenaten's reforms, which included erasing Akhenaten's name from almost every record in Egypt. By this period, El Amarna appears to have already been mostly abandoned, and therefore Egyptologists were able to reconstruct the strange story of Akhenaten's reign, in the middle of the New Kingdom era.The Amarna letters were recovered from the royal archives in El Amarna, where they appear to have been archived after having been translated for the royal court. The letters are inscribed on clay tablets in Cuneiform, the dominant form of writing in Mesopotamia, Canaan, and the neighboring cultures in Anatolia and Cyprus at the time. The shape of the Cuneiform logograms used are Akkadian, the parent form of the later Neo-Babylonian, Neo-Assyrian, and Ugaritic forms of Cuneiform, however, the language used in the Letters is not pure Akkadian. The Letters are between various members of the Egyptian royal court, and many different cities and nations across the Middle East, including Babylon, Assyria, Mitanni, and Cyprus, and therefore the language within the Letters is not consistent. Within the letters from Canaanite cities, all of which were subject to Egypt at the time, several transliterated names are also used, which appears to be a direct precursor to the later development of Ugaritic Cuneiform by 1200 BC, which was an abjad similar to the Canaanite script that was developed by 1000 BC, however, used Cuneiform logograms instead of alphabet-like letters.The surviving letters were mostly about trade and diplomacy, however, do include a great deal of information about what was happening in the Middle East at the time. In particular, they demonstrate how limited Egypt's actual control of its Canaanite holdings were, where the governors of cities were constantly requesting military help to defend themselves against each other, the marauding Habirus, and the Hittite-backed Amorites in northern Canaan. The Amarna Letters were written during the mid-1330s BC, during the reigns of the Pharaohs Amenhotep III and Akhenaten, although it is not always clear when in their respective reigns the letters were written, or even which pharaoh was on the throne at the time.

The current conventional Mesopotamian timeline of dynastic Mesopotamia is impossible. Believing in it means endorsing the idea the Egyptians lagged thousand years behind the Sumerians technologically during the Middle Kingdom. This timeline forces the bronze age Harappan civilization to have existed as recently as 1200 BC, even as an iron age civilization had existed on the Ganges since at least 1800 BC. It is also not what the ancient Sumerians actually recorded, so believing it means believing that modern Assyriologists know more about ancient Sumer than the ancient Sumerians themselves. Given that the ancient Sumerians lived through it, and all Assyriologists have to go on is random bits of clay-tablets and mostly ruined city-mounds, this seems like an incredible stretch of the imagination. The fact is Assyriologists cant' and don't need to explain the anachronisms, because the Mesopotamian timeline is synchronized with the Egyptian timeline, which Egyptologists insist on keeping as short as possible.The idea that the ancient Sumerians built their earliest cities in the marshlands of Southern Iraq using stone imported from other countries is entirely illogical, they would have simply built them using mud-bricks as they did in the later periods. As the stone had to have been locally quarried, the region could not have been a marshland when the earliest cities built, meaning that the oldest levels of Uruk and Eridu must date back to before the region began turning into a marshland circa 9,000 years ago. The fact that they switched to using mud-bricks simply proves that the water-levels rose during the course of Sumerian history, flooding their farmlands, and ultimately forcing the Mesopotamian cultures to migrate northward to Akkadia, Babylonia, and Assyria. The fact that Assyriologists ignore the ancient Sumerian records of the antediluvian era is probably for the best, as they cannot even accept that the 1st Kish Dynasty went back to 25,000 BC, even though it has been proven that grains was being farmed in the region at that time.Unfortunately, the timeline of Egypt and Sumer are the two pillars that ancient history is built around. As the early Sumerians were trading with the early Egyptians, Assyriologists have been forced to synchronize the Mesopotamian timeline with the preposterous timeline used by Egyptologists. While this means that most of Sumerian history is has to be ignored, is also effects the timelines of all other Eurasian cultures in contact with the Mesopotamian. The Harappan civilization of ancient India was trading with the Sumerians throughout its history and went into decline around the end of the Sumero-Akkadian dynastic period, which means the entire Harappan civilization is forced to correlate with the short Conventional Mesopotamian Timeline. This forced the entire Harappan timeline into a period of 2000 years, even though some of the archaeological sites in Pakistan and India have been carbon-dated back to over 8000 BC. These broken timelines then fan out further pulling the Minoans and Greeks, Iranians, and Chinese into this confusing mess.

The current timeline of dynastic Egypt is impossible. Believing in it means endorsing the idea the Hyksos were time-travelers, and that the Egyptians were technologically a thousand years behind their major trading partners in Mesopotamia during the Middle Kingdom. It also is not what the ancient Egyptians actually recorded, so believing it means believing that modern Egyptologists know more about ancient Egypt than the ancient Egyptians themselves. Given that the ancient Egyptians lived through it, and all Egyptologists have to go on is random bits of pottery and mostly ruined buildings, this seems like an incredible stretch of the imagination, granted no more than time-traveling Hyksos, but still a stretch. The fact that Egyptologists feel they don't need to explain these anachronisms because the history of Egypt is a political timeline, not subject to science, is insulting both to the intelligence and to the integrity of anyone that bothers looking into the history of this preeminent ancient culture.The idea that the ancient Egyptians built docks in the middle of the desert, and then dredged out mind-boggling amounts of mud to move the Nile to the docks, is beyond ridiculous. Maybe that's how Egyptologists would do it, but the existence of the pyramids proves the ancient Egyptians just weren't that stupid. The fact that they did dredge mind-boggling amounts of mud simply proves that the Nile water-levels were dropping rapidly at the end of the Old Kingdom. The fact that Egyptologists ignore the ancient Egyptian records of the pre-Dynastic era is probably for the best, imagine the nonsense they would have made up to explain the Osireion if they had to admit it is 15,000 years old!Unfortunately, the timeline of Egypt is the cornerstone of ancient history. As the Sumerian and later Mesopotamian civilizations were trading with the Egyptians, the Mesopotamian timeline is broken as the dates of certain Egyptians Kings are known to have lived at the same time as certain Mesopotamian Kings. This means that the bulk of the recorded history of Sumer has to be ignored by Assyriologists, as it just doesn't fit into the Egyptian timeline. As the Harappan history is then dated according to when they were trading with the Mesopotamians, and Indologists also fall subject to the inventive nonsense of Egyptologists. This means that Indologists have to accept the impossible fact that the bronze age Harappan civilization existed next to the iron age Ganges civilization for over 500 years, and never noticed they were there. These broken timelines then fan out further pulling the Minoans and Greeks, Iranians, and Chinese into this confusing mess.