Taking back the discussion here, with moderator's allowance.
Again, it's not about religious bashing, it's about history.
Archeological, historical, para-historical proofs show that Bible is not an history handbook.
It's not about offending someone believing that what Bible said about Israel is true, but about trying to make alternate history by using more or less verifiable and actual features.
Again, it's not about religious bashing, it's about history.
Archeological, historical, para-historical proofs show that Bible is not an history handbook.
It's not about offending someone believing that what Bible said about Israel is true, but about trying to make alternate history by using more or less verifiable and actual features.
Daeres said:You're making me think of ancient Israel like a horrid combination of 4chan's trolling and reddit's Atheism subreddit (oh the irony).
There's plenty of timelines possible relating to ancient Israel, Israelite independence, and ancient Israelite religion. This question is just a little too vague and bound in the Bible.
I want someone to make a timeline relating to King Omri some day.
Bee said:There's archaeological evidence for both the Northern and Southern kingdoms. Assyrian tablets and a Moabite stela refer to Omri, king Ahab's father and predecessor and Josiah of Judah definitely existed. The Tel Dan stela found in Syria dates from around 800 B.C. and refers to the rulers of the House of David.
That's not an exhaustive list. Basically, there's nowhere near enough to establish the kingdoms' extents or full history, but enough to get this thread out of ASB.
LSCatilina said:The stela of Mesha is hard to use, especially for dates : it was found outside its contexts and any datations is hasardous as best.
Regarding the "David" that exist on this same stela, it's an explanation but as the inscription wasn't preserved, it's an open field for alternative theories.
For the Tel Dan one, there's theory to understand the "David's[...]" as other meaning. Because it's not written in the classical form, it's maybe not "House" but "City".
It would be about the "City of David", Jerusalem, in this explanation.
Concerning the datation, it's sometimes considered as more recent date, between -800 and -730's.
I'm not saying that isn't acceptable as proofs for Israel and Juda existence, just that we have to be very cautious about the datations and formulas.
Of course, we can only agree on the existence of two (maybe a little more) semi-tribal kingdoms of the Hebrews in Palestine. What's is debatable is their extent, their datation and their relative independence.
Let's see the first post.
"What would be the consequences if the Ancient Israel Kingdom remained united after Solomon's death? How long an independent and united Israeli kingdom would survive?"
An UNITED kingdom, after SOLOMON's death that remain UNITED and INDEPENDENT from Sinai to Mesopotamia is nothing but ASB, as it's doomed by archeological proofs.
Bee said:Not ASB, just the usual butterflies.
There's no extrabiblical evidence for Solomon that I know of, or of a unified kingdom that later divided into Israel and Judah, but it looks like both kingdoms existed at some point. This thread just requires a larger Jewish kingdom a couple of generations before Omri instead of -- well, we don't know exactly. I don't think the bible claims that the kingdom stretched from Sinai to Mesopotamia -- the Syria of the ben Hadad dynasty would have been in the way in the north, and the thread (and the bible) allow room for the other historical entities in the area (Philistines, Moab, etc.).
Anyway, what would have happened to the unitary kingdom? Probably something similar to OTL. The Assyrian invasion succeeds (although probably not as easily as some seem to think) and the north is absorbed into the Assyrian empire. The entire country might be conquered, but if a rump state survives outside direct Assyrian control, Judah is in the right location for it.
LSCatilina said:Actually there's not evidence for Solomon. It's considered as a mythological character or a cultural hero. Therefore, any reference or timeline based on him or his supposed kingdom is ASB.
The two hebrews kingdoms probably evolved from different features, and their own semi-tribal conditions. But not about a ghostly unifed kingdom.
I 'm not saying that Israel and Juda can't unify themselves.
As they have a slightly different features and even chronological differences, it could be hard to do, but not impossible.
No what's ASB, is the Solomon's Kingdom as described in the Bible, you can turn it in every side, it's still mythological.
Daeres said:This is getting ridiculous, there are plenty of timelines with ancient PODs that rely on quasi mythological figures. Every figure that we invent for timelines that didn't really exist, or that have figures with no actual evidence for their existence, is ASB by your definition. That's pretty extreme.
Is the ongoing Lycurgus timeline ASB because it's been doubted by historians that Lycurgus even existed? No. Why is this idea ASB?
LSCatilina said:It's not my definition, it's the definition of ASB. I don't know yours, but even if it said "ASB is mythological or inexistant features, except for things i want to use or i like in a TL", i'm afraid you're the one with a bad definition.
It's as ASB than making an Ancient timeline featuring Atlantis in war with Athens, or Athens in a war with Minos' Creta involving bull-men, or a TL with Moses going into Arabia instead of Palestina in order to have all the oil for Hebrews.
Daeres said:My definition of ASB is relying on magic, aliens, or anything actually beyond the capacities of a polity, person or technology in alternate history.
You haven't answered my question. By your definition any timeline is ASB that relies on a figure we think may have been mythological or can't be proven to have existed. For anyone writing timelines pre-Classical era, that counts for maybe three quarters of the named characters of history.
Is any timeline that relies on a figure who may not have existed ASB?
LSCatilina said:Solomon (and David) are supposed to be able to create a Hebrew-Wank state thanks to divine help, both against their ennemies and because of God adding points of Wisdom on Solomon's charachter sheet.
So, i think it would be on your definition of ASB?
Quote:
You haven't answered my question. By your definition any timeline is ASB that relies on a figure we think may have been mythological or can't be proven to have existed. For anyone writing timelines pre-Classical era, that counts for maybe three quarters of the named characters of history.
Is any timeline that relies on a figure who may not have existed ASB?
Yes and No.
Yes if the premise is "Let's use this figure as described in [random mythological book] (by mythological i mean religious or a founding myth)"
No if the premise is "Okay, i know this character is probably didn't like that, but i want to use it in a TL that rely on what it could have been in reality rather than in later reports".
EDIT : by exemple, instead of a bilbical Solomon that is clearly ASB, we could have a Solomon as a hebrew-canaanite chief of the small town of Jerusalem and the surrounding tribe. He would have been at the corner of egyptian, phenician and mesopotamian influences, and probably tributary from some other country.