David Rohl identifies Epaphus with the Hyksos pharaoh Apophis.

Rohl identifies these Semites as the people upon whom the biblical tradition of the Israelite Sojourn in Egypt was subsequently based.

Rohl identifies:

Still others, such as David Rohl, have advocated a totally revised chronology of ancient Israelite and Egyptian history, and instead identify Labaya with Saul, and Mutbaal with Saul's son Ishbaal or Ish-bosheth.

David Rohl has claimed parallels between Enmerkar, builder of Uruk, and Nimrod, ruler of biblical Erech ( Uruk ) and architect of the Tower of Babel in extra-biblical legends.

Rohl asserts that the New Chronology allows him to identify some of the characters in the Old Testament with people whose names appear in archaeological finds.

David Rohl theorized that the Tower was actually located in Eridu, which was once located on the Persian Gulf, where there are ruins of a massive, ancient ziggurat worked from bitumen.

Thus, Rohl is of the opinion that none of these three foundations of the conventional Egyptian chronology are secure, and that the sacking of Thebes by the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal in 664 BC is the earliest fixed date in Egyptian history.

* Rohl notes that no Apis bull burials are recorded in the Lesser Vaults at Saqqara for the 21st and early 22nd dynasties of Egypt.

Most Egyptologists accept Shishaq as an alternative name for Shoshenq I. Rohl disputes that Shoshenq's military activity fits the biblical account of Shishaq on the grounds that the two kings ' campaigns are completely different and Jerusalem does not appear in the Shoshenq inscription as a subjected town.

The implications of a radical down-dating of the conventional Egyptian chronology, such as that proposed by Rohl and other revisionists, are complex and wide-ranging.

Rohl, in addition to his chronology, also has some geographical ideas that are different from the conventional notions.

While he agrees that the Exodus should be dated to the collapse of the Middle Kingdom, and that Tutimaios is the Pharaoh of the Exodus, there are few points of contact between the Velikovsky and Rohl chronologies, largely because of the different methodologies used to resolve the later periods.

Rohl and James's views remain controversial and are not accepted by most historians.

In his book Pharaohs and Kings, D. Rohl suggests Achish may be an abbreviation of Akishimige, a Hurrian name meaning " Gift of the Sun God ," equivalent to the name Suwardata in the Amarna Letters.

In the letters, Ashur-uballit refers to his second predecessor Ashur-nadin-ahhe II as his " father " or " ancestor ," rather than his actual father, Eriba-Adad I, which has led some critics of conventional Egyptian chronology, such as David Rohl, to claim that the Ashur-uballit of the Amarna letters was not the same as Ashur-uballit I.

* The number of the Amarna letter ( EA256 ), which, according to David Rohl, was written by Ishbaal and contains mentions of King David, Jesse, and Joab.

Egyptologist David Rohl identified Ishbaal with Mutbaal of the Amarna Letters.

* Brooker, R. A., Morris, D. and Rohl, J. S., Experience with the Compiler Compiler, Computer Journal, Vol.

New Chronology is an alternative Chronology of the ancient Near East developed by English Egyptologist David Rohl and other researchers beginning with A Test of Time: The Bible-from Myth to History in 1995.

Rohl asserts that this would permit scholars to identify some of the major events in the Old Testament with events in the archaeological record, and identify some of the well-known biblical characters with historical figures who appear in contemporary ancient texts.

Rohl argues instead that Shishaq should be identified with Ramesses II ( probably pronounced Riamashisha ), which would move the date of Ramesses ' reign forward some 300 years.

It should also be noted that one scholar, Kevin Wilson, agrees only partially with David Rohl.

Rohl and other New Chronology researchers contend that this fits better with the Old Testament description of Solomon's wealth.

Rohl claims that this solves many of the problems associated with the historicity issue of the biblical narratives.

He gives the example of Israeli professor of archaeology, Ze ' ev Herzog, who caused an uproar in Israel and abroad when he gave voice to the " fairly widespread " view held amongst his colleagues that “ there had been no Exodus from Egypt, no invasion by Joshua and that the Israelites had developed slowly and were originally Canaanites ," concluding that the Sojourn, Exodus and Conquest was “ a history that never happened .” However, Rohl contends that the New Chronology, with the shift of the Exodus and Conquest events to the Middle Bronze Age, removes the principal reason for that widespread academic skepticism.

* The " new king who did not know Joseph " in Exodus 1: 8 is identified by Rohl with Sobekhotep III.

* Benemina, also mentioned in EA256, is identified by Rohl with Baanah, Israelite chieftain in II Samuel 4, who would later betray and assassinate Ishbosheth.

David Rohl identified Pishon with the Uizhun, placing Havilah to the northeast of Mesopotamia.

Kitchen has strongly opposed the New Chronology views of David Rohl who posits that the Biblical Shishak who invaded Israel in 925 BC was actually Ramesses II rather than Shoshenq I and argues that the 21st and 22nd Dynasties of Egypt were contemporary with one another due to the absence of Dynasty 21 Apis Bull stele in the Serapeum.

The ultimate conclusion of this work, by scholars including Peter James, John Bimson, Geoffrey Gammonn, and David Rohl, was that this particular revision of chronology was untenable, although they considered that the work had highlighted problems with the orthodox chronology.

Courville lowered the era of the Hyksos to a period after the Exodus and, like Velikovsky and David Rohl, identified them with the biblical Amalekites.

* The third track of Mandalaband's ( see David Rohl ) 2011 album AD-Sangreal, titled Palatium Britannicum, refers to Caractacus extensively in the lyrics.

* David Rohl

David Rohl moves the Amalekites from the Negev and the Sinai to the northern Land of Israel, in the neighborhood of Mount Carmel and Jenin.

Though rejected by mainstream historians, these ideas have been developed by other historians such as David Rohl and Peter James, who have also attempted their own revised chronologies.

The Institute for the Study of Interdisciplinary Sciences ( ISIS ) is a 1985 spin off the SIS, founded under the directorship of David Rohl, who had come to reject Velikovsky's Revised Chronology in favour of his own " New Chronology ".

The ultimate conclusion of this work, by scholars including Peter James, John Bimson, Geoffrey Gammonn, and David Rohl, was that the Revised Chronology was untenable ..

* Rohl, David ( 1996 ) A Test of Time.

Chart comparing the New Chronology of David Rohl and the Egyptian chronology # Conventional chronology | conventional chronology of Ian Shaw ( Egyptologist ) | Ian Shaw

Comparison by David Rohl of ( first line ) the name Sysw ( the hypocoristicon of Ramesses II ) as it would have been written using 13th to 10th century Proto-Hebrew signs, and ( second line ) the biblical name Shyshk as it would have been written using 9th to 7th-century Early Hebrew signs.

* David Rohl

Examples of such findings include the following WIPO cases: Webpass, Inc. v. Paul Breitenbach ( 2010 ), Urban Logic, Inc. v. Urban Logic, Peter Holland ( 2009 ), David Robinson v. Brendan ( 2008 ), Decal v. Gregory Ricks ( 2008 ), Hero v. The Heroic Sandwich ( 2008 ), Poker Host Inc. v. Russ “ Dutch ” Boyd ( 2008 ), FCC Fomento de Construcciones y Contratas v “ FCC. COM ” ( 2007 ), Liquid Nutrition v. liquidnutrition. com ( 2007 ), Rohl, LLC v. ROHL SA ( 2006 ), and Deutsche Welle v. DiamondWare ( 2000 ).

# redirect David Rohl

However, author David Rohl has suggested a different interpretation: " Amongst the followers of Meskiagkasher was his younger ' brother '– in his own right a strong and charismatic leader of men.

Finally, some Egyptologists and biblical scholars, such as Kenneth Kitchen, or David Rohl have novel or controversial theories about the family relationships of the dynasties comprising the period.