Biblically Compatible Archaeology and Geography

      by   Damien F. Mackey         Before long [Hat]she[psut] will put aside all pretence and declare herself as the first ruler of the land, duly (though bizarrely) adding a manly beard to her statues. King Solomon will enter the land at her request and will greatly assist her as Senenmut (Senmut), her multi-tasking Steward, her quasi-royal consort, and her (you name it) – Senenmut being, according to some “the real power behind the throne”.         Essential here is my identification of Hatshepsut with King Solomon’s “Queen of Sheba”:   Hatshepsut's progression from Israel, Beersheba, to woman-ruler of Egypt   https://www.academia.edu/40872080/Hatshepsuts_progression_from_Israel_Beersheba_to_woman-ruler_of_Egypt   The following sequence (i-v) is basically how I see the extraordinary progression of the career of Hatshepsut Maatkare, from   a princess in King David’s realm, beginning in the king’s old age, through vicissitud

  by   Damien F. Mackey         Baasha of Israel is so Ahab-like that I feel it necessary to return to an old theory of mine, once written up but then discarded, due to complications, that Baasha was Ahab.       Previously I had written on this:   What triggered this article was the apparent chronological problem associated with the reign of King Baasha, thought to have been the third ruler of Israel after Jeroboam I and his son, Nadab. There is a definite problem with King Baasha of Israel, who bursts onto the biblical scene during discussion in the First Book of Kings about Jeroboam I’s wicked son, Nadab (15:27), and who, though he (Baasha) is said to have reigned for 24 years (15:33), is actually found as king of Israel from Asa of Judah’s 3rd to 36 th years (cf. 15:33; 2 Chronicles 16:1), that is, for 33 years. Thus we have the headache for chronologists of their having to account for how Baasha - although he should have been dead by about

    by   Damien F. Mackey       Dear Sir, I am reading your Nabonidus papers. Re: the madness of Cambyses, this is a story made up by Darius to justify his seizure of power from the sons of Cyrus. Cyrus would have known if Cambyses was prone to madness and would not have entrusted the throne to him. Cambyses was not mad; he did die from a wound; but not one self inflicted for having killed the Apis Bull. The Apis Bull died a natural death and was replaced. There was no "imposter" Bardiya. Darius killed the real Bardiya and made up the imposter and Cambyses madness stories to cover up his seizure of power. Herodotus was taken in, or otherwise induced to endorse the false propaganda. Yours ….     Damien Mackey’s response:   …   Or is it “Cambyses” as a Persian king that has been “made up”?   For, might not “Cambyses” actually be the mad King Nebuchednezzar himself? After all, Cambyses had (as I have noted in articles) ano

  by   Damien F. Mackey       “The LORD gave Israel a savior, so that they went out from under the hand of the Syrians; and the children of Israel lived in their tents as before”.   2 Kings 13:5     וַיִּתֵּן יְהוָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, מוֹשִׁיעַ, וַיֵּצְאוּ, מִתַּחַת יַד-אֲרָם; וַיֵּשְׁבוּ בְנֵי-יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּאָהֳלֵיהֶם, כִּתְמוֹל שִׁלְשׁוֹם.         That “saviour” ( מוֹשִׁ֔יעַ ) has been variously identified by commentators and revisionist scholars as king Jehoash of Israel; Jeroboam II of Israel; Adad-nirari III of Assyria; Zakir of Hamath; and pharaoh Seti I of Egypt. Thus I wrote previously on this:     Various candidates have been suggested for the “deliverer”, or “saviour” ( מוֹשִׁיעַ ), of the prayers of Jehoahaz of Israel: e.g., Adad-nirari III of Assyria; Zakir of Hamath - neither of whom is named in the biblical account - Jehoash of Israel, or his son, Jeroboam II. Dr John Bimson had considered, for one, the possibility that Jehoash