Whoops! Nice catch... I for some reason must have been thinking 2000 BC instead of 200 BC. Thanks; I've made a lot of small mistakes it seems - most of which I caught later, but some obviously not. Should've proofread (sp?) a lot more; will have to do later. Just the updates seem so short... I guess I just assume they're good without reading too closely sometimes. I'm tempted to make a new version with all the corrections, but maybe I'll wait a while...commandant spangler
Interesting timeline. Don't know enough to comment in detail but one question on one of the comments. Unless that is supposed to come from some time well after OT I presume there's a typo. "exaggerated take on a King that lived over four thousand years ago"
Steve
Last edited: