RABMEC, J. A. Giannini (9/21/2012)



When I decided to write this book, I found I had two things to consider. One was what the book would say; and the other was what motivated me to write it. A brief account of why I chose to write this book can help make the nature of the work more understandable. For this reason, I will tackle the second consideration first.

Like most Christians, I grew up with bible stories. I came to believe in the truth of what the Bible said. As my education in science developed, I also came to believe in the truth of the scientific model of the universe and the development of the human species. However, I was troubled. There did not seem to be much physical evidence to show that the descriptive picture presented in the Bible actually matched the scientific model. For instance, Noah's flood is a well-known story, and pivotal event in biblical history; but the physical evidence is lacking. People have been looking for Noah's ark without success for over 200 years; and, there seems to be no evidence of flood debris in the Middle East around the time when the Bible says it should be, ~2300 BC. This is just one example of a lack of scientific evidence available to support the biblical account.

After much study, I discovered, what I believe, shows how both the scientific picture and the biblical picture are telling the same true story. Only the audience is different. I discovered that there really is physical evidence to support biblical events. Only the traditional dates are shifted in time. In short, I found a different way to interpret the timing so that the biblical events and their dates actually match the physical scientific evidence and its dates. In other words, the Bible is more than just a collection of morality tales. It is real; and, it is supported by evidence when viewed from the right timeline. Because of this, I felt a need to share my discoveries. That is why I wrote this book.

I can now tell you what the book has to say. Following the Table of Contents , we begin our story with a philosophical discussion of the allure of ancient history.

In Chapter 1 , we find my perspective on the significance of trying to understand ancient history. The chapter speculates about the relationship between history and mythology. It also considers the mythological symbolism and its relation to the human psyche. Following this interlude into the psychology of ancient historical studies, we begin to discuss the main purpose of the book.

The main purpose of this book is about dating important events that happened during the ancient past. The ancient past to which I refer, includes historic events, and mythological events, which I believe, have a real place in history.

The historic period usually refers to times when there are written records. Some of the written records come in the form of monument inscriptions, stone tablets and papyrus records. Others come in the form of the Kings' Lists. These are lists of the kings, and the length of their reigns. These are the records considered here in this work. In general, there are several lists for each ancient culture or nation. Different political groups compiled the various lists, with which there is no BC date association. To obtain a complete list over the entire historic period, the collection of lists must be ordered with redundancies removed, and then tied to a BC date. This for the Sumerian and Babylonian line ( Appendix A ), the Egyptian line ( Appendix B ), and the Chinese line ( Appendix C ).   (We discuss the reason for these choices later.)

Throughout this work, we compare the RABMEC dating developed here to the traditional (standard) timeline (STL) and in many cases an older timeline development of Waddell. However, scholars know that the historical record does not support the traditional biblical timeline.

To address this, David Rohl developed a New Chronology (NC). He modified the traditional dates to be more consistent with the historical record based on astronomical consideration stated in the Bible and non-biblical historical records that support the biblical events but indicate the traditional dates are misplaced in time. Appendix F compares the RABMEC with the STL and the NC. We look at the biblical timeline, and the dating of the Sumerian/Babylonian kings and the Egyptian kings.

When you talk about timing, dates, and ancient events, you are talking about a timeline - an ordered sequence of events matched with a BC date. This means that the written and oral records from the past are ordered relative to one another. Then, the ordered list is assigned dates based on the known BC date of some of the most recent events. That is what this work does for a group of Eastern cultures. In Chapter 2, reevaluating the historic portion of the ancient timeline is the first step that I take in making my new timeline.

Even though we are looking to support biblical events with evidence, no culture (like the Hebrews in the Bible) grows and develops in a vacuum. Traditionally, the historic biblical period extended from the birth of Christ, ~6 BC, back to the birth of Adam, ~4004 BC. Throughout the Bible, there are references to other peoples with whom the Hebrews interacted. (See Figure 1.) The most notable for the purpose here were the Egyptians and the Babylonians. By looking at the records of these peoples, as well as, the Bible, I was able to see a way to match the events with different BC dates than are usually used.

Section 2.1 provides the details of the biblical genealogy beginning with Adam and going to the birth of Christ.

The Egyptians were particularly important mostly for Moses and the Exodus story. The historic period for the Egyptians traditionally extends from ~30 BC with the last Egyptian pharaoh Cleopatra, back to ~3100 BC with the first Egyptian pharaoh Menes. (Menes is important to the new timeline because his date is a pivotal point between the historic period and the mythological period. His date is needed later to date the mythological period that precedes him in time.)

The Babylonians were important largely because of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem and the subsequent exile of the Jews. The historic period for the Babylonians extends from ~538 BC when the Persians conquered the land back to the well-known king Khammu-Rabi (also known as Hammurabi), ~1728 BC. Nebuchadnezzar II, 606 BC, is the fourth Babylonian king before the Persia conquest. He is important to the new timeline because his date is a pivotal point marking: 1) the beginning of the exile, and 2) setting the length of the exile. These two things together affect other dates of the new timeline, shifting them from their traditional dates.

The Bible describes interactions of the Israeli kings with certain the Babylonian kings and the Egyptian kings. Based on these interactions, I was able to re-date the historic portion of the timeline from the traditional times, and fix the date of Menes to 2638 BC. Figure 2 shows events on the new RABMEC timeline (identified as ATL) with their traditional date and the new timeline date indicated.

The flood date is the most well-known event whose date we shifted. This shift is a direct result of the Babylonian exile. Traditionally, the exile begins in 606 BC when the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar II captured Jerusalem. The prophet Jeremiah foretold that the exile would last for 70 years. Using the genealogies in the Bible, this exile length fixes the Noah flood date at 2294 BC; but there is no evidence of a flood event in the region at that time.

The new timeline developed here uses a different definition of the exile length made by the prophet Daniel. Daniel's prophesy is more ambiguous, saying the exile would last "time, times and a half". Section 2.2 shows that the alternate definition allows the new timeline to shift the exile to begin with Nebuchadnezzar I in 1204 BC, and last for 665 years. This shifts the date of the flood to 3113 BC where there is physical evidence of a massive flood event in the Middle East. (There is more about that evidence later.)

The reevaluation of the accepted historic dates completed the historic portion of the new timeline. That is what Chapter 2 did.

After establishing the historical portion of the new timeline, we turn to the mythological times. The mythological period usually refers to times before there are written records. Knowledge of these times was passed forward in oral tradition that was later recorded when the people learned the art of writing. The traditions of interest here come in two forms. One is the mythological portion of the kings' lists. The other is the origin (creation) myths of the different cultures.

The Egyptians and the Sumerians both list mythological god-kings in the beginning of their kings' lists. However, the dating of these kings is hard because the lengths of reigns appear to be unphysical. Some last hundreds to thousands of years. In addition, it is not clear how to relate the Egyptian list to the Sumerian list to aid the dating process. In Chapter 3, we demonstrate a connection between the two cultures by showing that Egypt was part of the greater Sumerian empire. We indicate the vastness of the Sumerian empire by examining five important cultures in the broader region.

Because we are looking at the origin myths, Section 3.1 begins with a brief description of the modern concepts of cosmology, which tells the story of the development of the early universe before proceeding to the discussion of the five cultures under consideration.

The five cultures of interest include the Sumerians, the Egyptians, the Hebrews, the Hindus, and the Chinese. We see evidence that these five cultures were part of a vast empire that spread across the African and Asian continents. (See Figure 3.) Further, there are hints in the mythology that lead you to believe there is a more ancient relationship than is immediately obvious. Because of this relationship, we are able to make comparisons that allowed the dating of the mythological period.

Figure 3.This shows the extent of the Sumerian Empire. We advance the hypothesis that a group referred to as the pre-Sumerians settled around the Black Sea while it was still a fresh water lake. Around 5538 BC, a passage opened between the lake and the Mediterranean Sea raising the lake level over 300 feet and making it a salt water inland sea. The pre-Sumerians moved out (following the green arrows) colonizing other areas. The leaders of these colonizes are recognized as the Egyptian and Sumerian god-kings that ruled before the Sumerian and biblical Flood (see Appendices A and B). China recognizes two of these leaders as the first legendary emperor and Dungi who brought writing to the region. Later around 2650 BC, the Sumerian King Sargon I began another wave of expansion (following the red arrows). This wave represents the Aryan invasion of India and the beginning of the dynastic period of Egyptian pharaohs.

Section 3.2 looks at each of the five peoples and their cultures to lay the foundation for the later comparisons. It talks about the ethnic background, the language, and the political connections of the people.

Historians generally agree that the Sumerians are considered to be the oldest civilization on the planet. (See Figure 4.) They appear to have invented writing, which they spread to the other four cultures. With time, the writing of the others evolved away from the original Sumerian writing. The Egyptians and Chinese developed pictographic variations representing words and concepts with symbols. The Hindus and Hebrews evolved more toward an alphabet, though not the one used here. There is, however, little doubt that Sumerian was the source.

Some linguists believe that all languages can be traced back to a single common "first" language spoken by man before he dispersed out of Africa. With separation in time and distance, the language of the different groups drifted apart as the people migrated. Eventually, the individual variations in the language became different languages because they were so unrecognizable from one group to the other. One measures the distance in the relation by the amount of drift in language. Linguists consider Sumerian more like a distant cousin to the languages of the other four groups. Although linguists have not reconstructed the "first" language, they believe the Sumerian language is closer to that "first" language than the other groups, and may be an ancient common source of language.

In addition to writing and language, the Sumerians appear to be a common source of political unity. Although it is not a common view, some historians believe that the Sumerians were the masters of a great empire. One historian in the early 1900's, Austin Waddell, found evidence indicating that the first Egyptian pharaoh, Menes, was the son of the Sumerian king Sargon I. In addition, he concluded that the Hindu (Indian) king line had many kings that he identified as Sumerian kings or their sons. He noted that the same Sargon I appear to have led the great Aryan invasion into India. That invasion gave rise to the Hindu culture there. (It is likely not a coincidence that "Aryan" and "Sumerian" sound so much alike.) Another historian from the late 1800's, DeLacouperie, found evidence in the Chinese historical documents that Sargon I led an invasion from the West into China bringing the Sumerian culture to the people.

Figure 4.This shows the time of the five civilizations from their earliest appearance to the more recent ancient times. The timelines include some of the most important events, people and periods that are relevant to the development of the RABMEC. The lower horizontal black lines show the traditional timing (the STL). The upper horizontal red lines show the timing of the new RABMEC (identified here as ATL). Some of the events like the “Beginning of the World” according to the Egyptians have no identified STL date. Ancient archaeological sites like Jerico and Honhshan have only STL dates. The vertical dashed lines indicate RABMEC pivotal events (5538 BC, 3113 BC and 2681 BC from left to right). The 2681 BC date represents the rise of Sargon I and his son of Sumer/Akkad. It marks the beginning of the last great Sumerian expansion into Egypt, India (the Aryan invasion), and China (the Bak invasion).

Finally, the Bible indicates that the Hebrew patriarch, Abraham (known also as Abram), was a resident of Ur. Ur was one of the powerful capitals of Sumer. During his early years, Abraham was immersed in the Sumerian culture. Biblical scholars and mythologists generally accept that the earliest Hebrew stories, like the Noah flood, have a strong relation to the Sumerian stories.

The common heritage of writing, language and political leadership, which centers on the Sumerians, leads one to wonder if the mythological beliefs of the five cultures have more in common than the flood story.

Section 3.3 presents the origin myths and talks about their common phrases and concepts. We find several things by comparing the mythology of the five cultures. All of the cultures identified the state of the universe before the creation as a watery void. All of the cultures recognize the existence of a single creator who was identified by different names in the different mythologies, and who made the laws of nature. The creator mysteriously formed out of the void, and created by thinking or speaking the name of the object to be created. Words like "God" said" and "which came forth out of my mouth" indicate the different cultures had the same concept of the creation process.

The modern cosmological concept of the Big Bang (a powerful explosive force that marked the beginning of the universe) is evident in all of the cultures. Words like "a wind from God", "creative force ... fertile power ... the impulse" and "cosmos gave birth to the Breath" all indicate this Big Bang idea.

We find that the Sumerians, the Egyptians and the Hebrews had mythologies that were more physically oriented. They describe creation event-by-event through the creation of mankind. The Hindus and the Chinese describe some events, but the mythology is more mystical in nature. These two cultures present more of the feeling of the connection with the One (the creator) rather than the step-by-step progress of the stages or days of creation.

We find that the Sumerians, the Egyptians and the Hebrews had mythologies that were more physically oriented. They describe creation event-by-event through the creation of mankind. The Hindus and the Chinese describe some events, but the mythology is more mystical in nature. These two cultures present more of the feeling of the connection with the One (the creator) rather than the step-by-step progress of the stages or days of creation.

The collection of observations of political connection and mythological stories provided the basis for the broader picture of the people in the region that we use later. That is what Chapter 3 did.

No one culture has a complete picture of the beginning. However, by showing the similarities of the different mythologies, we see a relationship among the five groups. I used this relationship later in Chapter 5 to reconstruct one possible common source story. In Chapter 4, I postulate that each of the cultures evolved a common source like the one in different ways to produce the collection of myths presented in this section. Comparisons based on the relationship found allowed the dating of the mythological portion of the new timeline.

Section 4.1 dates the Sumerian mythological kings. The difficulty with dating these kings is their unrealistic reign lengths. However, the historian Austin Waddell showed that by comparing several different lists he was able to resolve much of the problem. He indicated that corruption of the lists led to the extreme reign lengths. He further showed the kind of changes likely made to reliable lists that led to the unbelievably long reigns on other lists. Using this same technique, I was able to go back farther in time and date the mythological portion of the Sumerian kings' lists. This section shows the details of this effort.

This section shows that there were four periods in the mythological list. Working backwards in time, the first period begins with the Sumerian Manishtushu and goes back to the flood. We begin with Manishtushu because beginning in 2638 BC (by the new timeline) he provides the connection with the Egyptian king line. Manishtushu was the son of King Sargon I of Sumer and heir to the Sumerian throne. In 2638 BC, he claimed the Egyptian throne and began to reign under the name of Menes. Fixing the date of Menes allowed me to date the Egyptian mythological king line later. The flood in 3113 BC (by the new timeline) is the same as the biblical flood. This provides a connection with the Hebrew mythology. (See Figure 5.) This first period lasted 475 years.

The second mythological period begins with the flood and goes back to the first Sumerian semi-divine (or super hero) king who went by the name Unzi. This period lasted for 1056 years. This corresponds exactly to the equivalent period of the Egyptian mythological king line. We use that equivalence later to continue the Egyptian mythological period.

The third period covers the time of when Badtibira was the capital city in this mythological period that directly precedes the reign of King Unzi. This period lasted for 858 years. It corresponds to the time of the Egyptian God II dynasties.

The fourth period covers the time of when Eridu was the capital city in this mythological period that directly precedes the Badtibira period. This period lasted for 511 years. It corresponds to the time of the Egyptian God I dynasties.

Figure 5. shows events on the new RABMEC timeline (identified as ATL) with their traditional date and the new timeline date indicated.

Section 4.2 dates the Egyptian mythological kings. Like the Sumerians, the Egyptian mythological kings had unrealistic reign lengths. To date these kings, I employed the same technique used for the Sumerians. Like the Sumerians, there were four Egyptian periods. Working backwards in time, the first period covered the Demi-gods dynasties. The second period was the Gods III dynasty. The third period was the Gods II dynasty, and the fourth period was the Gods I dynasty.

In their respective kings' lists, the first two Egyptian periods and the first two Sumerian periods span exactly the same number of years. This allowed me to equate the two cultures during these periods and date the Demi-gods and Gods III periods. The Gods II and Gods I periods used the date of Menes and the date of the beginning of the world to determine their dates. This section shows the details of this effort.

We find several things. The Demi-gods period ends with the first historic Egyptian pharaoh Menes in 2638 BC (by the new timeline) and goes back in time to begin with the flood in 3113 BC (by the new timeline). The kings' list names only the last demi-god during this time. It spans 475 years. (See Figure 5.)

The list of the Gods III period provides no names but spans the same number of years as the equivalent Sumerian semi-divine kings' period. This period lasted for 1056 years.

The list of the Gods II period includes familiar names we recognize most often as Greek gods and demi-gods. Those include Apollo, Zeus and Hercules. They also include the traditionally recognized Egyptian gods like Horus and Annubis . This period lasted for 858 years.

The list of the God I period contains the name of the first god-king, Hephaistos. However, according to the mythology, this god is not the creator who is known as Khepera (and sometimes Neb-er-tcher. The list also contains familiar Greek names such as Helios and Kronos, as well as the traditional Egyptian gods like Typhon, Osiris and Isis. This period spans 511 years.

We find that the total time for the four mythological periods goes from Menes in 2638 BC to the Egyptian beginning of the world in 5538 BC. This last date is important because later in Chapter 5 we see there is physical evidence of flood deposits to support that time as a cataclysmic event in the ancient past.

Section 4.3 leaves the mythological king and turns to Hebrew tradition. Here we consider the biblical days of creation. Biblical tradition says that God created the first man, Adam, about 6,000 years ago. Further, the bible says God created the universe and all it contains (including the earth and its plants and animals) in 6 days. Science says the universe is about 14 billion years old; the earth is about 4.7 billion years old; and the human species is about 2 million years old.

where t0 is the scientific estimate of the age of the universe (14 billion).

We find with this relationship that at the end of day 1 the cosmic Big Bang took place (~14 billion years ago). This was the light God created.

By the end of day 2, the stars and galaxies formed (~2.3 billion years ago). That was the waters separated from the waters.

By the end of day 3, the continents formed and vegetation began to appear (~3.9 million years ago). That was the separation of dry land and the sprouting of vegetation. Then a massive comet impact caused one of the greatest extinction in the geological past, darkening the sky for an extended time.

By the end of day 4, the sky cleared and the earth began to see new life appear (~65 million years ago). At this time the sun, moon and stars were visible for the first time to the new life. That was the creation of the heavenly bodies.

By the end of day 5, the number of new species of animals, birds and plants began to grow (~10.8 million years ago). That was the swarms of living creatures.

By the end of day 6, the large mammals developed. Evidence of the species of man (Homo Habalis and Homo Erectus) appeared (~1.8 million years ago). That was the creation of adam (the species).

Then God rested and allowed His work to develop until the individual Adam was born in 4769 BC (by the new timeline).

Finally, Section 4.4 shows the cyclic picture of the universe held by the Hindus. There is one very long cycle called a Kalpa that is 4,320,000,000 (4.32 billion) years long. The Kalpa is divided into 1000 Yugas which are 4,320,000 (4.32 million) years long each.

In this section, we see an interesting alignment of climate and catastrophe events with the Hindu cycles. We see that the global warm-cold climate cycle in the geologic record of the earth is 32 Yugas long from warm peak to warm peak. The cycle uses the last 800 million years of climate measurements.

We also see an apparent alignment of major comet impacts and species extinctions. The biblical flood in 3113 BC is the last major catastrophe that aligns with the end of the last Yuga cycle. According to the Hindus, this event takes place in the part of a Yuga cycle that is most destructive. The alignments seen here indicate that the Hindu cycles reflect the cosmic cycles of space in addition to the climate cycles of earth.

The dating of the ancient god-kings and the mythological concepts of the ancient past completed the mythological portion of the new timeline. That is what Chapter 4 did.

In Chapters 2 through four, we saw the development of a new timeline. This new timeline shifts dates from the traditional timeline dates. We also looked at the mythological traditions of the cultures whose specific events determine the new dates. In Chapter 5, we now look at the physical evidence that supports the new timeline.

In Section 5.1, we consider the common link between five cultures in language and political affiliation. We can think of this common link as the Sumerians or possibly a pre-Sumerian tribe. I speculated in Chapter 3 that these people carried language and political mastery with them as they expanded their territory.

We now go one step farther and consider the possibility they also carried a common source for the origin myths. Further, this common source myth evolved independently in each of the cultures to produce the myths that appear as different stories on casual examination. This section looks at the common phrases and ideas in the myths of the five cultures. Base on them, I reconstructed one possible form for the common original source story.

Section 5.2 returns to the discussion of the physical evidence. In this section, we consider the evidence that supports the new dating of the historic Egyptian dynasties.

Historians divided the Egyptian king line into 31 dynasties. They believe the first one began ~3100 BC. The last one ended when the Romans took control of Egypt in 30 BC. The date of the end is well documented, but the earliest date has an uncertainty of about 200 to 400 years.

Historical techniques use comparisons of kings' lists, information in monument inscriptions and dated astronomical events to determine the earliest kings' dates. In addition, radio carbon dating of plant and wood artifacts in tombs narrow the uncertainty in the kings' dates. This section shows comparisons of the new timeline kings' dates with the traditional dates.

We see that the new timeline dates of sixth through the 31st dynasty are well within the data uncertainty of the traditional dates. The new timeline dates for the oldest period (the first six dynasties) are still within date uncertainty of the traditional dates but the difference is larger.  The biggest difference is for the first king. This is the most important date for the new timeline because of its use in dating the mythological period. The new timeline date of 2638 BC says that the first dynasty was around 460 years younger than radiocarbon dates suggest. However, it agrees with other historically dated estimates.

Section 5.3 considers two catastrophic flood events to which there is reference in the mythological traditions. This section discusses the evidence for these two events.

The first is the biblical flood. Tradition places it at ~2300 BC, but there is no evidence near this date. The new timeline places it at 3113 BC. Archeological evidence in the early 1930's showed flood deposits in the region at this general time. These flood deposits are taken here as support for the new timeline date.

The second catastrophe is the Egyptian beginning of the world event. Traditional dating does not exist for this mythological event. However, the new timeline places it at 5538 BC. In 1997, two marine biologists, W. Ryan and W. Pittman, showed evidence of a massive flood event in the Black Sea region at approximately that same time. These flood deposits are taken here as support for the new timeline date of the Egyptian event.

Finally, Section 5.4 ties up the loose ends and summarizes the important findings. That is what Chapter 5 did.

Return to The Table of Contents