Biblically Compatible Archaeology and Geography

  by   Damien F. Mackey   And as Jehu entered the gate, [Jezebel] asked, ‘Have you come in peace, O Zimri, murderer of your master?’   2 Kings 9:31     Following the pattern of kings and events that I have established in my articles revising the biblico-history of the northern kingdom of Israel, Zimri, who destroyed the House of Baasha, could only be Jehu, who wiped out the entire House of Ahab (= Baasha). This suspicion is strengthened by the fact that Queen Jezebel actually refers to Jehu as ‘Zimri’ (2 Kings 9:31):   ְיֵהוּא, בָּא בַשָּׁעַר; וַתֹּאמֶר הֲשָׁלוֹם, זִמְרִי הֹרֵג אֲדֹנָיו   Some translations of this verse go to extremes to make it clear that Jehu and Zimri are, as is generally thought, two different kings. For instance, Contemporary English Version offers this: “ As he walked through the city gate, she shouted down to him, "Why did you come here, you murderer? To kill the king? You're no better than Zim

       by Damien F. Mackey   New revision so far of kingdom of Israel   Duplicates need to be identified and removed from the list of the early kings of Israel (Divided Monarchy era) in order for the chronology of that era to make sense. Just as neo-Assyrian and neo-Babylonian history have been dupli-tripli-cated here and there (and likewise, of course, Egyptian history), so have the corresponding ‘histories’ of Israel and Judah. For the latter, for example, see my article: ‘Taking aim on’ king Amon – such a wicked king of Judah https://www.academia.edu/37575781/Taking_aim_on_king_Amon_-_such_a_wicked_king_of_Judah The conventional biblico-history of the kingdom of northern Israel presents us with about half a dozen names from the inception of the kingdom, with Jeroboam, until the presumed time of Omri, who was initially opposed by one Tibni. That list reads as follows: Jeroboam I Nadab Baasha Elah Zimri Omri – Tibni T

by Damien F. Mackey     “‘I will return the cities my father took from your father’, Ben-Hadad offered. ‘You may set up your own market areas in Damascus, as my father did in Samaria’.”   I Kings 20:34     Ben-Hadad I of Syria has, in this treaty statement of his to the victorious King Ahab of Israel, provided us with some chronological details of the utmost importance towards a revision of the earliest period of the Divided Monarchy.   What the King of Syria is basically saying here to Ahab is that:   Ben-Hadad’s own father, who we know from I Kings 15:18 to have been Tab-rimmon – {“ Asa then took all the silver and gold that was left in the treasuries of the Lord ’s temple and of his own palace. He entrusted it to his officials and sent them to Ben-Hadad son of Tabrimmon, the son of Hezion, the king of Aram, who was ruling in Damascus”} – had taken cities from Ahab’s father, who we know to have been Omri, the founder of Samaria, and had eve

  Esarhaddon a tolerable fit for King Nebuchednezzar   Part Four: Siege of the City of Tyre   by   Damien F. Mackey       “But as Steinmann points out ... the method of attack (vv. 8-9) is not that employed by Alexander but is similar to that of attackers previous to Nebuchednezzar (e.g., Esarhaddon in 673)”.   Arnold J. Tkacik     Fr. Arnold J. Tkacik (OSB) has written what I would consider to be a most helpful and enlightening commentary on the extremely complex biblical Book of Ezekiel in his article, “Ezekiel”, for The Jerome Biblical Commentary (1968). I refer more especially to the exegetical (or religious-spiritual) aspect of his commentary than to the historical side of it. Though, even in this latter regard - or at least as regards the chronology of the book - Fr. Tkacik has arrived at what I think are some telling conclusions.   However, if this present series is correct, according to which Nebuchednezzar ‘the Great’ is to be e