Page 91 - BV9

Biblical personages with ancient representations In particular, Kitchen said he demonstrated evidence
known from other sources. which directly contradicted Rohl's views. With Rohl's
main focus on Egyptian chronology, Kitchen's spe-
The material Rohl focuses on is quite technical. His cialty, he provided Rohl with primary evidence from
case centers on dropping the 21st Egyptian Dynasty several vital genealogies of the 21st and 22nd Egyptian
(1069-945 BC) into being contemporary with Egypt's dynasties. In addition, he presented continuous lines of
22nd Dynasty (945-715 BC). This allows him to con- high priests for Amun (in Thebes) and Ptah (in Mem-
nect names and events from ancient history with simi- phis) going through both dynasties. Kitchen said Rohl
lar sounding Biblical events and people, even though communicated he was unaware of this material. Fur-
they were separated by as many as 350 years. thermore, Kitchen answered Rohl's two great anoma-
lies in Egyptian chronology -- the cache of royal
Admittedly, Rohl's idea is quite appealing to those reburial near Deir el-Bahri and the lack of Apis bull
frustrated by the lack of connection between Biblical burials for the 21st Dynasty.
and secular history. Conservatives want to tie Biblical
events to ancient history, and the connections he Finally, Kitchen provided parallels in the Assyrian
makes sound reasonably and offer some interesting King List, the Assyrian Eponym List and the Babylo-
possibilities. Due to the technical nature of his work, nian King List, with crosslinks illustrated by the syn-
however, few are capable of responding authoritatively. chronous history and Chronicle P. Additional links to
Consequently, his work has received widespread media New Kingdom Egypt and Hatti, plus markers showing
attention and has become popular among conservatives. which kings of Assyria successively built in the na-
But all is not well in Rohl-land! tional shrine at Assur, also bolstered Kitchen's case.

One of the experts who appeared in Rohl's videos is As a coup de grace, Kitchen brought out what he
Egyptologist Dr. Kenneth Kitchen, a conservative called "one totally damning little text" (personal com-
evangelical scholar. Kitchen says he was interviewed in munication) from Deir el-Medina in west Thebes. It
his Liverpool, England home by Rohl on May 17, precisely dated the Nile inundation at a specific time,
1995, for seven hours. Kitchen only appears in Rohl's an occurrence which takes place only once every 1460
three-video series for a total of about three minutes. years. As far as Kitchen is concerned, Rohl's proposed
Professor of Egyptology at the University of Liver- "corrections" of ancient Near Eastern chronologies
pool, Kitchen was not at all happy with Rohl's finished was dead in the water (Kitchen 1995: xlii-xlvi).
product. Sour grapes? Probably not. Angry that he did
not get more air time? I doubt it. While Rohl's books and videos appear to make a con-
vincing case for his side, he unfortunately chose to ig-
Kitchen later said he had great reservations about giv- nore contradictory evidence from Kitchen and other
ing the interview because he understood Rohl's argu- scholars. Consequently, while Rohl's work sounds
ments all too well. "The easy way out," he said, "was good, it simply does not work with the known facts of
simply to say, 'You are 90% rubbish -- go away' which Egyptian, Assyrian, Babylonian and Palestinian
would be academically justified" (personal communi- chronologies.
cation). But for all experts to respond that way would
allow Rohl to go forward with no detractors. So Rohl's efforts focused on eliminating the gaps in an-
Kitchen agreed to the interview. cient Near Eastern chronologies. Yet, it must be under-
stood that these gaps are not unaccounted periods in
According to Kitchen, most of the interview was spent the history of those civilizations. They only represent
with Kitchen demonstrating to Rohl why his theories our incomplete and uneven knowledge of these histo-
are wrong and do not work. In retrospect, Kitchen said ries. Thus, it is all right for us to have gaps; they do not
he later realized that Rohl was only looking for sound invalidate the known facts. It is not possible to simply
bites, not new information. "It is clear, now, that he had drop or add 350 years to these chronologies, despite
most of his filming already in the can by May 17th, and the supposed connections Rohl makes by doing so.
his book virtually ready for press" (personal
communication). While the Associates for Biblical Research staff, too,
is often at odds with conventional chronologies, it is
important to be honest with the known facts and deal

91