Pure Minnesota copper shipped across Atlantic by Bronze Age Mediterraneans

 

 

Following on from the bombshell research of Gavin Menzies (2011), the highly entertaining and interesting Nick Spanos has written (2o24):

Minoans in Michigan and the Case of the Missing Copper | by Nick Spanos | Medium

 

Minoans in Michigan and the Case of the Missing Copper

 

During the Bronze Age, from roughly 3500 [sic] to 1000 BC, civilizations across Europe and Asia experienced an era marked by remarkable advancements in metallurgy and global trade networks. At the center of this transformative period was bronze, an alloy made from copper and tin, which fueled the rise of powerful empires and enabled significant technological and cultural progress. However, a compelling mystery endures: What happened to the millions of pounds of copper extracted from the shores of Lake Superior in North America? Where did it all go?

 

The Mystery of the Missing Copper

 

Extensive archaeological records confirm that over five thousand copper mines were operational along the southern shores of Lake Superior during the Bronze Age. It is estimated that these mines yielded millions of pounds of high-purity copper. Yet, only a tiny fraction of this copper appears in the archaeological artifacts left behind by the indigenous peoples of North America. The burning question remains: If Native Americans used only a small portion of this copper, what became of the rest?

 

One intriguing theory has gained traction among historians and archaeologists: The missing copper was transported across the Atlantic Ocean to Europe, feeding the growing demand for bronze. At first, this idea seems improbable, but an increasing body of evidence suggests that the Minoans — an advanced and seafaring Bronze Age civilization from the Mediterranean — may have been responsible for this transatlantic trade.

 

Damien Mackey’s comment: I would probably identify these people as Cretans (Philistines) and Levantines, as I do not accept that there were such peoples as Minoans, or Phoenicians:

 

Of Cretans and Phoenicians

 

(10) Of Cretans and Phoenicians

 

Nick Spanos continues:

 

Revisiting the Minoan Civilization

 

The Minoans, who thrived from around 2700 to 1100 BC on the islands of Crete and Santorini, are often celebrated for their sophisticated society, impressive art, and maritime prowess. They developed extensive trade networks that spanned from the Indian Ocean to the Orkney Islands north of Scotland. But could their influence have reached even farther, across the Atlantic Ocean to North America?

 

Surprisingly, the Minoans possessed the technological means to make such a journey. Archaeological evidence shows that Minoan ships were robust and well-designed for long voyages. These vessels were more seaworthy than the ships later used by the Vikings, who successfully crossed the Atlantic to reach North America in 1000 AD. Additionally, the Minoans had access to advanced navigational tools, including star charts inherited from their close interactions with the Babylonian Empire. In fact, their knowledge of celestial navigation surpassed anything the Vikings had, making transatlantic travel by the Minoans a plausible proposition.

 

Evidence Supporting Transatlantic Trade

 

In his groundbreaking book The Lost Empire of Atlantis, historian Gavin Menzies presents a compelling case that the Minoans played a key role in extracting and exporting the Lake Superior copper to Europe. The evidence he compiles offers a fascinating and provocative perspective:

 

1.       Identical Mining Tools: The mining tools found in Lake Superior closely resemble those discovered in European mines known to be operated by the Minoans. The similarity in tool design implies a shared or transferred knowledge of mining techniques.

 

2.      Matching Pottery and Utensils: Pottery shards and everyday utensils unearthed at the Lake Superior mining sites are nearly identical to those used in Minoan settlements on Crete. This suggests that Minoan traders or laborers may have lived among or worked with the local Native American populations.

 

3.      High-Purity Copper: The copper extracted from the Lake Superior mines stands out for its extraordinary purity, exceeding 99%. Notably, many Bronze Age artifacts from Europe also contain copper of similar purity levels, hinting at a shared source.

 

4.      Abrupt End of Mining Operations: The copper mining activity at Lake Superior ended suddenly, coinciding with the decline of the Minoan civilization. This timeline aligns with the eruption of the Thera volcano around 1600 BC and the subsequent disruptions that devastated the Minoan world.

 

Genetic Evidence: The Haplogroup X Connection

 

One of the most compelling pieces of evidence linking the Minoans to North America comes from genetic studies. Researchers have identified a rare mitochondrial DNA marker known as haplogroup X, which is present in the modern descendants of the Minoans on Crete and in various regions across Europe and the Middle East where the Minoans had significant influence.

 

Intriguingly, haplogroup X also appears among the Ojibwa and Chippewa tribes near Lake Superior.

 

The distribution of this genetic marker points to an ancient link between the Minoans and the indigenous peoples of North America. Genetic analysis further suggests that haplogroup X was introduced to these Native American populations around the same time as the peak of copper mining activity, indicating a period of interaction and possibly intermarriage between Minoan traders and Native American communities.

 

Given the enormous effort required to extract millions of pounds of copper, cooperation with local populations would have been essential. The genetic evidence supports the idea that Minoan traders worked alongside Native American miners, forming alliances that facilitated cultural and genetic exchanges. The implications of these interactions remain a topic of ongoing research, but they offer a tantalizing glimpse into a more interconnected ancient world.

 

Plato’s Knowledge of the Atlantic and the Minoans

 

The ancient Greek philosopher Plato, writing around 400 BC, provides a curious historical footnote that may support the Minoan transatlantic theory. In his works, Plato described a vast ocean beyond the “Pillars of Heracles” (modern-day Strait of Gibraltar) and a landmass on the other side, which he referred to as Atlantis. While scholars have long debated the existence and location of Atlantis, Plato’s references to a navigable ocean and advanced seafaring civilizations align with what we know about Minoan maritime capabilities.

 

Damien Mackey’s comment: ‘Plato’ I would consider to be a fictitious composite, based on biblical characters, e.g. Baruch, and, in the case of some of his presumed writings, the prophet Daniel:

 

‘Plato’ much indebted to Jewish prophet Daniel

 

(10) ‘Plato’ much indebted to Jewish prophet Daniel

 

Nick Spanos continues:

 

It is plausible that the Greeks, who had inherited knowledge from earlier Mediterranean civilizations, were aware of the Minoans’ potential voyages across the Atlantic.

 

Over time, however, such knowledge may have been lost or distorted as the world entered periods of cultural decline and dark ages.

 

Damien Mackey’s comment: On “Dark Ages”, see e.g. my article:

 

How to obscure history? Just add “Dark Age”

 

(11) How to obscure history? Just add "Dark Age"

 

Nick Spanos continues:

 

Rethinking Our Historical Narrative

 

If the theory of Bronze Age transatlantic trade is true, it challenges many of our assumptions about the development of human civilization. History has often been presented as a linear story of continuous progress. Yet, the case of the missing copper suggests that history might be more cyclical, characterized by waves of cultural flourishing followed by periods of decline and forgotten knowledge.

 

The idea that a sophisticated trading network connected the Old and New Worlds thousands of years ago forces us to reconsider the capabilities of ancient societies. The Minoans, with their advanced navigation skills and global trade networks, may have been far more interconnected than previously thought. The potential for such transoceanic interactions expands our understanding of the Bronze Age and invites further investigation into the lost knowledge and achievements of our ancestors.

 

This cyclical view of history, with its booms and busts, also holds a mirror to our own time. Our current era of technological advancement and cultural prosperity has persisted largely uninterrupted since the 1200s. Could we be approaching another downturn, or have we finally broken free of history’s repeating patterns?

 

Conclusion

 

The mystery of the missing copper from Lake Superior continues to intrigue historians, archaeologists, and curious minds worldwide. While some say conclusive proof of Minoan transatlantic trade has yet to be found, the evidence — ranging from identical tools and pottery to genetic markers and advanced seafaring technology — paints a compelling picture of a deeply interconnected ancient world.

 

As new discoveries emerge and our understanding of the Bronze Age evolves, we may uncover even more secrets that challenge our views of history. The story of the Minoans and their possible voyages across the Atlantic is a testament to human ingenuity and the spirit of exploration — a legacy that continues to inspire and captivate us today.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ebla tablets attest accuracy of Bible

 

 

 

“Perhaps one of the most significant discoveries within the Ebla archives is

the presence of a creation account that bears a striking resemblance to the

biblical account of creation. According to reports, the Ebla Tablets contain

the oldest known creation account outside the Bible, predating the

Babylonian creation myth by some 600 years”.

 Edward D. Andrews

 

Sadly, the Syrian government, in its desperate attempt to portray the site of Ebla (modern Tell Mardikh) to the scholarly world as a purely Syrian entity, has thereby divested it of anything that pertains to the biblical world of the Hebrews (Israelites):

 

Bible-affirming Ebla hampered and censored by Syrian authorities

 

(6) Bible-affirming Ebla hampered and censored by Syrian authorities

 

Scandal of Ebla

 

(6) Scandal of Ebla

Edward D. Andrews here (2024) gives us a totally different picture – the correct one!

What Can the Ebla Tablets Teach Us About Biblical History and the Early Genesis Accounts? - Updated American Standard Version

 

The discovery of the Ebla Tablets has opened new avenues for understanding the ancient world, especially in terms of biblical history. Unearthed in modern-day Syria in the mid-1970s, these ancient clay tablets—dated to the third millennium B.C.E.—offer crucial insights into the social, economic, and religious life of the Eblaite civilization. More significantly, from an apologetic standpoint, they seem to provide evidence that parallels and confirms aspects of the early chapters of Genesis. As we explore the content of these tablets and their implications, it becomes clear that they strengthen the historical credibility of the biblical record.

 

The Historical Context of the Ebla Tablets

 

The Ebla Tablets, discovered in the ancient city of Ebla (modern Tell Mardikh), are believed to date from around 2580–2450 B.C.E., according to Giovanni Pettinato, or from 2400–2250 B.C.E., according to Paolo Matthiae.

 

These dates are significant because they place the tablets in a period predating other known written records by hundreds of years. However, from a biblical perspective, we must carefully examine these dates in light of the timeline provided in Scripture.

According to the Bible, the Great Flood occurred in 2348 B.C.E. (Genesis 7:6-10), an event that would have dramatically reshaped the ancient world. Given this, the Ebla Tablets would have to date after the Flood, providing us with valuable insight into the post-Flood civilizations and the cultural and religious environments in which early biblical figures lived. This is an important consideration because the information on the tablets provides historical corroboration for the early chapters of Genesis, particularly regarding the existence of certain cities and names mentioned in Scripture.

 

The Cities of Ur, Sodom, and Gomorrah: Confirmed by the Ebla Tablets?

 

One of the most intriguing aspects of the Ebla Tablets is the mention of cities that are also found in the Bible, such as Ur, Sodom, and Gomorrah. These cities play significant roles in the biblical narrative. For example, Ur is the birthplace of Abraham (Genesis 11:31), and Sodom and Gomorrah are infamous for their destruction due to their wickedness (Genesis 19:24-29).

 

The fact that these cities are mentioned in the Ebla Tablets provides additional historical grounding for their existence.

 

Critics have often argued that the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is more mythological than historical, but the mention of these cities in non-biblical sources from such an early period suggests that they were, in fact, real locations. This aligns with the biblical account and supports the view that the early Genesis narrative is rooted in historical fact, not mythology. The Ebla Tablets also show that these cities were significant enough to be documented in ancient administrative records, further underscoring their historical importance.

 

The Mention of Names from Genesis: Adam, Eve, and Noah

 

Another compelling aspect of the Ebla Tablets is the reported mention of names found in the book of Genesis, including Adam, Eve, and Noah.

 

These are, of course, central figures in the biblical narrative, representing the first man and woman created by God and the patriarch who built the ark to survive the Flood.

 

The mention of these names in ancient non-biblical texts lends credibility to the historicity of these individuals. While critics of the Bible often argue that Adam, Eve, and Noah are mythological figures, the fact that their names appear in a completely separate ancient record suggests that these individuals were known and remembered by civilizations outside of Israel. The Ebla Tablets, therefore, provide external corroboration for the existence of key figures in the early Genesis narrative.

 

Creation Accounts: Ebla’s Version and Genesis

 

Perhaps one of the most significant discoveries within the Ebla archives is the presence of a creation account that bears a striking resemblance to the biblical account of creation. According to reports, the Ebla Tablets contain the oldest known creation account outside the Bible, predating the Babylonian creation myth by some 600 years.

 

This is crucial because it demonstrates that the concept of a monotheistic Creator was present in ancient cultures long before the rise of polytheistic mythologies. The creation tablet from Ebla speaks of a single being who created the heavens, moon, stars, and earth. This parallels the Genesis account, which begins with the words, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1).

 

The Ebla account also describes creation ex nihilo, or creation from nothing, stating, “Lord of heaven and earth: the earth was not, you created it, the light of day was not, you created it.” This echoes the biblical description of God creating light by simply speaking it into existence (Genesis 1:3).

 

The fact that the Ebla creation account is older and less mythologically embellished than later accounts, such as the Babylonian Enuma Elish, suggests that the Genesis account represents the original and most accurate version of the creation story. This supports the idea that the Bible transmits historical facts without the mythological corruption seen in other ancient texts.

 

Implications for the Evolution of Religion: Monotheism Before Polytheism

 

The Ebla Tablets also have significant implications for the study of the evolution of religion. For many years, scholars following the evolutionary model of religion—championed by figures such as Charles Darwin and Julius Wellhausen—argued that monotheism evolved from earlier forms of polytheism and henotheism. According to this view, primitive humans initially believed in many gods and only later developed the concept of a single, all-powerful Creator.

 

However, the evidence from Ebla directly challenges this hypothesis. The Ebla Tablets show that monotheism existed in the third millennium B.C.E., long before the rise of polytheistic religions. The creation account from Ebla, which speaks of a single Creator, demonstrates that monotheism was the original belief system of humanity. This aligns with the biblical account, which teaches that the belief in one God—Jehovah—was present from the very beginning of human history. Genesis 1:1 affirms that “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth,” indicating that monotheism is the oldest form of belief, not a later development.

 

This has profound apologetic significance, as it refutes the idea that the Bible’s monotheistic worldview is a late theological development. Instead, the Ebla evidence supports the view that the earliest chapters of Genesis are historical and that monotheism was the original belief of humanity. The Bible’s depiction of the early worship of one Creator is not only theologically accurate but historically confirmed by the Ebla discoveries.

 

Baal and Other Pagan Gods in the Ebla Tablets

 

The Ebla Tablets also mention various pagan gods, including Baal, a prominent figure in the religious practices of many ancient Near Eastern cultures. Baal is often mentioned in the Bible as a rival god to Jehovah, and the worship of Baal is condemned throughout the Old Testament (e.g., Judges 2:13; 1 Kings 18:21). The fact that Baal is mentioned in the Ebla Tablets demonstrates that the worship of this false god was prevalent in the ancient world.

 

This aligns with the biblical narrative, which frequently warns the Israelites against adopting the pagan practices of the surrounding nations. Deuteronomy 12:29-31 specifically commands the Israelites not to follow the abominable practices of the nations they dispossess, which included the worship of gods like Baal. The mention of Baal in the Ebla Tablets thus provides additional historical context for understanding the religious environment in which the events of the Old Testament took place.

 

The Ebla Tablets and the Great Flood

 

While the Ebla Tablets do not directly mention the Great Flood, the timing of their creation places them in the post-Flood world. The Bible teaches that the Flood occurred in 2348 B.C.E. (Genesis 7:6-10), and the Ebla civilization flourished shortly thereafter. This means that the people of Ebla would have been among the early post-Flood civilizations, descendants of Noah’s sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

 

The existence of a thriving civilization like Ebla so soon after the Flood is consistent with the biblical account of the rapid repopulation of the earth. Genesis 9:1 records that after the Flood, God commanded Noah and his sons to “be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.” The development of sophisticated cities like Ebla, complete with a complex administrative system and written records, demonstrates that human civilization recovered quickly after the Flood, in accordance with God’s command.

 

Destroying the Critical Belief in the Evolution of Religion

 

As mentioned earlier, the discovery of monotheism in the Ebla Tablets dismantles the critical belief in the evolution of religion from polytheism to monotheism. For many years, the idea that monotheism evolved from earlier polytheistic or henotheistic beliefs dominated religious scholarship. This belief was rooted in the theories of 19th-century thinkers like Charles Darwin, whose evolutionary model influenced not only the study of biology but also the study of religion, and Julius Wellhausen, who applied an evolutionary framework to the development of religious beliefs in the Old Testament.

 

However, the Ebla Tablets provide clear evidence that monotheism predates polytheism.

 

The creation account found in the Ebla Tablets demonstrates that the belief in one God existed in the third millennium B.C.E., long before the polytheistic religions of Mesopotamia and Egypt gained prominence. This aligns with the biblical teaching that humanity originally worshipped one God—Jehovah—and that polytheism is a later corruption of this original belief. Romans 1:21-23 explains how humanity “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things,” a description of the descent into idolatry after the Fall.

 

Ebla’s Contribution to Apologetics and Biblical History

 

The Ebla Tablets are not just a fascinating archaeological discovery; they also provide powerful evidence that supports the Bible’s historical reliability. The parallels between the Ebla creation account and the Genesis creation narrative reinforce the idea that the Bible preserves an ancient and uncorrupted account of the origins of the universe. The mention of biblical cities and names in the Ebla Tablets also confirms the existence of these places and individuals in the ancient world, lending further credibility to the historical accuracy of the early chapters of Genesis.

 

Moreover, the evidence of monotheism in the Ebla Tablets dismantles the critical belief in the evolution of religion and supports the biblical teaching that the worship of one God is the original belief of humanity. This has significant implications for Christian apologetics, as it affirms that the Bible’s depiction of early human history is accurate and that the earliest form of religious belief was monotheistic, not polytheistic.

 

In summary, the Ebla Tablets provide valuable evidence that confirms the historical reliability of the Bible, particularly the early chapters of Genesis. They offer insight into the cultural and religious environment of the ancient Near East, demonstrating that monotheism existed long before the rise of polytheistic religions and that the biblical account of creation is the original and most accurate version. For Christian apologetics, the Ebla Tablets are a powerful tool in defending the faith and refuting critical theories that seek to undermine the truth of God’s Word.

 

Psibkhenno may serve to anchor Ramses II in a biblico-historical era

 

 

by

Damien F. Mackey

  

Pharaoh Psibkhenno needs an alter ego, because much of his building work is thought no longer to exist.

This is typical of Egypt’s so-called Twenty-First Dynasty, which is quite archaeologically deficient.

Nicolas Grimal has written, re “The historical interpretation of Tanis”, for instance (A History of Ancient Egypt, Blackwell, 1994, p. 317): “Nothing remains of the actual buildings of Psusennes I …”.

 

And again (p. 315): “At Tanis, Psusennes I built a new enclosure around the temple dedicated to the triad of Amun, Mut and Khonsu. If the few traces of reuse of earlier monuments are to be believed, he made many other contributions to the temple, but because of the current conditions of the site little is known concerning this work”.

 

Psibkhenno was apparently the father-in-law of Shoshenq I (N. Grimal, p. 319).

Smendes II, who I suspect must be Smendes=Shoshenq I, “sent a pair of bracelets to Psusennes …”. (p. 318).

 

Pharaoh Psibkhenno may now, at last, enable us to anchor Ramses II ‘the Great’ in a real historico-biblical phase.

 

Egypt often gets considered in complete isolation from the other nations, from Mesopotamia, for instance, and from the biblical history.

 

This is very much due to the effect of the Sothic chronology, serving to disconnect much of Egyptian history (especially in its earlier phases) from its real, contemporaneous scene; but it is also because the pharaohs were more inclined to boast about themselves to the exclusion of the other nations.

 

In this the ancient Egyptians were unlike, say, the Assyrians, who - whilst likewise being boastful - kept detailed and useful historical records, which included many handy foreign names and places.

 

With the name, Psibkhenno, we may perhaps be able to pick up a useful clue, enabling at last for a potential connection for Egypt with Mesopotamia. Thanks to David Rohl, a revisionist, we get this compelling observation of real phonetic value: “… we might find the true identity of Si’be in the 21^st Dynasty king Psibkhenno, more commonly known by the classical name of Psusennes”.

(“Comments by David Rohl”, SIS Workshop, vol. 5, no.1, 1982, p. 19).

 

I had much liked this connection as made by Dr. Rohl, and had initially embraced it – Psibkhenno, a long-reigning ‘Ramesses’, and indeed my Ramses ‘the Great’, a contemporary of the mighty neo-Assyrian king Sargon II.

In conventional terms, the Sargonic era is c. 700 BC, approximately 600 years from Ramses’ presumed beginnings in c. 1300 BC.

 

However, I have since concluded, on the basis of the Tang-i Var inscription and other evidence, that Sargon II’s Egyptian opponent, Si’be, was in fact, Shebitku Khaemwaset, co-regent with Ramses II, and indeed, the son of that great pharaoh.

On this, see e.g. my article:

 

Khaemwaset, son of Ramses ‘the Great’

 

(6) Khaemwaset, son of Ramses 'the Great'

 

And I have further extended the phonetics by concluding that Sargon II’s pharaonic tribute bringer, Shilkanni, was, not the conventional Osorkon IV of the Twenty-Second Dynasty, but was Psibkhenno:

 

Sargon II’s Šilkanni of Egypt was Psibkhenno, not Osorkon

 

(6) Sargon II’s Šilkanni of Egypt was Psibkhenno, not Osorkon

 

What may strongly re-inforce Ramses II’s place in the neo-Assyrian era is the fact that an inscription of his at the mouth of the Nahr al-Kalb, stands opposite one of Sennacherib’s successor, Esarhaddon (c. 680-668 BC, conventional dating).

 

What to make of this?

 

-       Convention, of course, would have Esarhaddon arriving at the scene about half a millennium after Ramses II, and defacing the latter’s image. Thus, for instance:

https://www.livius.org/sources/content/anet/289-esarhaddons-nahr-al-kalb-inscription/

“To make sure that the Phoenician cities better understood that Esarhaddon was and would always be victorious, the king left an inscription at the mouth of the Nahr al-Kalb, opposite one of the reliefs that the Egyptian king Ramesses II had once made to commemorate his Syrian campaigns. Everyone traveling along the coast from Byblos to Beirut would see Esarhaddon's relief and understand that Esarhaddon was a greater conqueror than the heroes of the past”.

 

-       Dr. Velikovsky, with his radical revision, actually located Ramses II even later than Esarhaddon;

 

-       My revision has Ramses II as an older contemporary of Esarhaddon:

 

The Complete Ramses II

 

(6) The Complete Ramses II

 

Charles Boutflower (The Book of Isaiah Chapters [1-XXXIX] in the Light of Assyrian Monuments, Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, London/New York, 1930, p. 126) really extended Si’be, biblically, so that ‘So’, Sibe and Shabaka were all one and the same person. He had written that: “The Hebrew characters read “So” should probably be read “Sĕvĕ”. And: “Sĕvĕ” … is to be identified with Shabaka [Shabako] the son of Kashta, who succeeded his father in 715” [sic].

 

The name ‘So’, it seems, can be variously rendered: e.g. Sĕvĕ; Sua; Soan (Josephus[1]); Soa, Soba, Segor (LXX).

 

Most interestingly, in my new context, the Lucianic recension of the LXX has ‘So’ as an “Ethiopian, living in Egypt” (one Adrammelech).

 

Psibkhenno was the elusive “So king of Egypt” (2 Kings 17:4) at the time of Shalmaneser, king of Assyria. {Psibkhenno was most likely also the Shabako of the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty, as Boutflower had thought}.

 

This now extends the floruit of our Ramses ‘the Great’ all the way from Shalmaneser to Esarhaddon.

This is also the very era of the Book of Tobit, whose chapter 1 encompasses “Shalmaneser”; “Sennacherib”; and “Esarhaddon”.

 

Book of Tobit and the Neo-Assyrian Kings

 

https://www.academia.edu/14097259/Book_of_Tobit_and_the_Neo_Assyrian_Kings

 

Sargon is not mentioned here in Tobit.

That is because Sargon was Sennacherib. See e.g. my article:

 

Sargon II and Sennacherib: More than just an overlap

 

https://www.academia.edu/8854988/Sargon_II_and_Sennacherib_More_than_just_an_overlap

 

At last, Ramses II ‘the Great’ can be firmly fixed to the neo-Assyrian era, from Shalmaneser to Esarhaddon, thereby solving the long-existing problem for revisionists: Where to fit in Ramses II?

 

It also solves the burning question of who was the biblical “So”. We need no longer entertain such ridiculous assertions that “So” pertains to pharaoh Tefnakht by a “process of metonymy” in relation to Tefnakht’s town of Saïs (cf. N. Grimal, p. 342).

 

With the right key now in hand, we can firmly identify Sargon II’s Egyptian contacts, namely:

 

Si’be = Shebitku;

Pharaoh of Egypt (Pirʾu of Musri) = Ramses II ‘the Great’;

Shilkanni (thought to be Osorkon IV) is clearly Psibkhenno

Shebitku of the Tang-i Var inscription = Shebitku

 

Shilkanni’s gift to Sargon II of “twelve great horses from Egypt, which are unrivalled in the whole country” (N. Grimal, p. 343) is reminiscent of the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty with its love of fine chargers. Thus, as is thought (loc. cit.): “Piankhy … was buried at Napata along with two of the famous Egyptian chargers … the same horses which had aroused the admiration of Sargon II”. 

 

 

---

[1] Antiquities, 9:14:1.