What do you think?
Rate this book
A Test of Time : The Historical Truth Behind the Old Testament Revealed
A Test of The Bible - From Myth to History volume 1 One (A Channel Four book) Pharaohs and Kings A Biblical Quest
Hardcover
First published January 1, 1995
15 people are currently reading
329 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
Read
August 6, 2011This book was an interesting read. In a nutshell it showed how much greater synthesis between archaeology and scripture can be found by adjusting our certainty on the dates for which events occurred. Rohl looks at the Egyptian chronology of kings and highlights a fuzzy period of a couple of hundred years that, he says, allows us to move the dates of ancient history by a couple of hundred years. In doing so he goes on, following his new chronology, to point out that many of the people and events of the Old Testament are documented in the carvings of the Egyptian empire. A bold statement indeed, and sometimes I believe he is too bold, building too great a theory on ambiguous evidence. However what I have gained from this is awareness that very good synthesis is possible if you recognise that our dating system might be wrong. It also exposes the arrogance of those archaeologists that you see on TV who suggest that, for example, King David was not real simply because we find archaeological evidence for him a hundred years out from when he was supposed to have lived. I would recommend this book if you are looking to balance modern day biblical minimalism with something from the other camp and form a judgement for yourself.
August 25, 2011
A brave challenge to the established order of history that has taken serious fire from mainstream scholars. I admit to having done only a very little work this particular aspect of ancient history (chronology is like the third rail of history, touch it and die, although more from boredom and minutiae than from anything shocking), but the evidence that Rohl sets out to support his position for realigning the chronology of half the ancient world is solid enough to be intriguing. Only time will tell whether his theories will prevail and become historical fact, but in the meantime this is an excellent read, literate but still accessible for any reader since everything is explained at a reasonably basic level. Clearly Rohl has pitched his book for anyone rather than just for scholars, so I will let you make up your own minds about the validity of his theories.
January 27, 2015
A challenge to established academia
2 June 2014
I have always wondered how the historians actually work out the chronologies of some historical periods when the evidence that we have at hand is incredibly scarce. At least in the post Roman European world we have a consistent dating system that allows us to track historical progress (as well as a lot more dated primary sources) but the further back in time we go the less reliable the documents, and the more difficult it becomes to actually date events. However, the archaeological (or should I say academic) community seems to have accepted a specific chronology and pretty much pushed it on to the rest of us.
Thus having been said I would have to congratulate Rohl on going out on a limb and proposing that the current dating system with regards to Ancient Egypt is out by some three hundred years and then to document over the next 800 pages how a readjusted time line makes a lot more sense. Granted, he was not the first to propose this, but unlike Immanual Velikovsky, he does not suggest that there were interplanetary collisions either, but rather he works on the principle that the current method that we are using simply does not align with the evidence at hand.
The problem with this whole three hundred years thing is that when we are looking back on a period that occurred about three thousand years ago, a three hundred year mistake does not actually seem like much. Personally, depending on your view of Ancient History, you may think that this is completely irrelevant, but then if you are thinking along those lines you are probably looking at the wrong book and maybe should go and read something live Divergent or The Wind-up Bird Chronicle. However, if you are interested in Ancient History and some new theories as to dating methods then read on.
As I have mentioned, Rohl's belief is that the Hebrew and Egyptian chronologies are out by around 300 years and by readjusting them he creates a chronology that makes a lot more sense. The one date that he uses as a reference point is the Battle of Carchemish, a battle between the Egyptians and the Assyrians (in which the Egyptians lost) that is mentioned in the Bible. From that point Rohl then moves back in time to a point where he believes he has found Joseph's house (as in Joseph and the Technicoloured Dreamcoat) and even a statue of him (though I find the statue a little doubtful).
What I found really interesting about his adjustments is that King Ankenhaten becomes a contemporary of King David (which is why one of the Psalms and one of the Amarna tablets are almost identical), and Rameses is shifted forward in time to come up in line with the Pharaoh Sisak in the bible that loots Jerusalem after the death of King Solomon (and no doubt at this time Rameses was re-establishing Egyptian dominance after a period when they were subject to Israelite rule, which a strong government in the form of King David and King Solomon would have entailed). As for the Exodus, Rohl goes on to demonstrate that by making the Pharaoh of the oppression Rameses (and the only reason they use Rameses is because a store city of the same name is mentioned as being built by the Israelites, which personally I think is ridiculous – why would a Pharaoh name a store city after himself, wouldn't he give his name something a little bit more impressive) the chronology does not work, since the effect that the plagues, and then the Exodus itself, would have had on the Egyptian empire would have been devastating. Rather he flags that the Exodus occurred just prior to the Second Intermediate Period (which makes sense because a close reading of the Exodus account indicates that the Pharaoh of the Oppression is actually the father of the Pharaoh of the Exodus so the Pharaoh of the Oppression would have had to have ruled for at least forty years, which was the period of time that Moses was in exile in the desert).
From a quick glance over Wikipedia it does seem that debate has opened up with regards to the dating of Exodus and the Egyptian Chronology, which suggests that even though initially people thought Velikovsky was a little strange with his ideas, people have come to accept that something on the scale of the Exodus would no doubt have had a huge impact upon the empire, which is flagged by the second intermediary period, since the collapse of the Red Sea pretty much wiped out Egypt's army, leaving them open to invasion.
Obviously one's acceptance of Rohl's new Chronology does also raise matters with regards to the authenticity of the Old Testament, however from a cursory glance at some of his other books (as well as having read this particular book), it is clear that Rohl does accept the Old Testament as a legitimate historical document. Mind you there is some debate as to why the Old Testament (and the Bible as a whole) is held up to greater scrutiny than, say, Ceaser's Diaries, but that is basically because, unlike the Bible, Ceaser does not purport his writings to be at all religious (despite the fact that the Romans did end up elevating him to godhood).
I also discuss these theories in my blog post on Exodus: Gods and Kings
2 June 2014
I have always wondered how the historians actually work out the chronologies of some historical periods when the evidence that we have at hand is incredibly scarce. At least in the post Roman European world we have a consistent dating system that allows us to track historical progress (as well as a lot more dated primary sources) but the further back in time we go the less reliable the documents, and the more difficult it becomes to actually date events. However, the archaeological (or should I say academic) community seems to have accepted a specific chronology and pretty much pushed it on to the rest of us.
Thus having been said I would have to congratulate Rohl on going out on a limb and proposing that the current dating system with regards to Ancient Egypt is out by some three hundred years and then to document over the next 800 pages how a readjusted time line makes a lot more sense. Granted, he was not the first to propose this, but unlike Immanual Velikovsky, he does not suggest that there were interplanetary collisions either, but rather he works on the principle that the current method that we are using simply does not align with the evidence at hand.
The problem with this whole three hundred years thing is that when we are looking back on a period that occurred about three thousand years ago, a three hundred year mistake does not actually seem like much. Personally, depending on your view of Ancient History, you may think that this is completely irrelevant, but then if you are thinking along those lines you are probably looking at the wrong book and maybe should go and read something live Divergent or The Wind-up Bird Chronicle. However, if you are interested in Ancient History and some new theories as to dating methods then read on.
As I have mentioned, Rohl's belief is that the Hebrew and Egyptian chronologies are out by around 300 years and by readjusting them he creates a chronology that makes a lot more sense. The one date that he uses as a reference point is the Battle of Carchemish, a battle between the Egyptians and the Assyrians (in which the Egyptians lost) that is mentioned in the Bible. From that point Rohl then moves back in time to a point where he believes he has found Joseph's house (as in Joseph and the Technicoloured Dreamcoat) and even a statue of him (though I find the statue a little doubtful).
What I found really interesting about his adjustments is that King Ankenhaten becomes a contemporary of King David (which is why one of the Psalms and one of the Amarna tablets are almost identical), and Rameses is shifted forward in time to come up in line with the Pharaoh Sisak in the bible that loots Jerusalem after the death of King Solomon (and no doubt at this time Rameses was re-establishing Egyptian dominance after a period when they were subject to Israelite rule, which a strong government in the form of King David and King Solomon would have entailed). As for the Exodus, Rohl goes on to demonstrate that by making the Pharaoh of the oppression Rameses (and the only reason they use Rameses is because a store city of the same name is mentioned as being built by the Israelites, which personally I think is ridiculous – why would a Pharaoh name a store city after himself, wouldn't he give his name something a little bit more impressive) the chronology does not work, since the effect that the plagues, and then the Exodus itself, would have had on the Egyptian empire would have been devastating. Rather he flags that the Exodus occurred just prior to the Second Intermediate Period (which makes sense because a close reading of the Exodus account indicates that the Pharaoh of the Oppression is actually the father of the Pharaoh of the Exodus so the Pharaoh of the Oppression would have had to have ruled for at least forty years, which was the period of time that Moses was in exile in the desert).
From a quick glance over Wikipedia it does seem that debate has opened up with regards to the dating of Exodus and the Egyptian Chronology, which suggests that even though initially people thought Velikovsky was a little strange with his ideas, people have come to accept that something on the scale of the Exodus would no doubt have had a huge impact upon the empire, which is flagged by the second intermediary period, since the collapse of the Red Sea pretty much wiped out Egypt's army, leaving them open to invasion.
Obviously one's acceptance of Rohl's new Chronology does also raise matters with regards to the authenticity of the Old Testament, however from a cursory glance at some of his other books (as well as having read this particular book), it is clear that Rohl does accept the Old Testament as a legitimate historical document. Mind you there is some debate as to why the Old Testament (and the Bible as a whole) is held up to greater scrutiny than, say, Ceaser's Diaries, but that is basically because, unlike the Bible, Ceaser does not purport his writings to be at all religious (despite the fact that the Romans did end up elevating him to godhood).
I also discuss these theories in my blog post on Exodus: Gods and Kings
September 5, 2013
Biblical History is proved accurate by a researcher brave enough to re-examine the Conventional Egyptian timeline. Excellent book! I recommend it to all serious students of Old Testament History.
November 19, 2020
David Rohl is an Egyptian archeologist who does not agree with the popular chronology set up for Egypt and things happening in the Bible. Going by this old chronology, archeologists cannot find evidence for the happenings of the Bible - so the Old Testament stories didn't happen.
Rohl says they are looking in the wrong time. When archeology first started in Egypt many searchers were looking for things related to the Bible. When they discovered Shoshenk they decided he must be the Shishak of the Bible, therefore the pharaoh of the oppression was Ramses. Not!
Rohl searches through many old papyri and tablets looking for clues of the correct chronology. The old chronology has too much time allotted to the reigns of the pharaohs. They are not counting the times when Egypt had two pharaohs at the same time, or overlapping reigns. They are looking for event in the early iron age instead of the middle to late bronze age. There are several archeologists looking at the new chronology and finding proof of it. When he looks at sites in Palestine during the bronze age, there is almost an exact correspondence to places and times in the Old Testament. He goes back through Egypt's past until he comes to Joseph as the grand vizier and discovers the remains of a statue in a burial in Goshen that was a foreign vizier, with the foreigner's symbol of office, and a coat of many colors. He is very convincing and has done much research and interpretation, including having a colleague check to see when a certain celestial event mentioned in old chronicles occurred. This was done using highly sophisticated equipment and massive computer power. All these notes add up to the truth of the Bible - and Rohl is not a believer except in that he feels the legends are true.
Fascinating book and well worth the time to read.
Rohl says they are looking in the wrong time. When archeology first started in Egypt many searchers were looking for things related to the Bible. When they discovered Shoshenk they decided he must be the Shishak of the Bible, therefore the pharaoh of the oppression was Ramses. Not!
Rohl searches through many old papyri and tablets looking for clues of the correct chronology. The old chronology has too much time allotted to the reigns of the pharaohs. They are not counting the times when Egypt had two pharaohs at the same time, or overlapping reigns. They are looking for event in the early iron age instead of the middle to late bronze age. There are several archeologists looking at the new chronology and finding proof of it. When he looks at sites in Palestine during the bronze age, there is almost an exact correspondence to places and times in the Old Testament. He goes back through Egypt's past until he comes to Joseph as the grand vizier and discovers the remains of a statue in a burial in Goshen that was a foreign vizier, with the foreigner's symbol of office, and a coat of many colors. He is very convincing and has done much research and interpretation, including having a colleague check to see when a certain celestial event mentioned in old chronicles occurred. This was done using highly sophisticated equipment and massive computer power. All these notes add up to the truth of the Bible - and Rohl is not a believer except in that he feels the legends are true.
Fascinating book and well worth the time to read.
October 1, 2020
The New Chronology Rohl proposes opens up history and matches classical writers's reports and archaeological finds (dates) sensibly so that a lot of ancient mysteries are explained.
March 15, 2016
I have the good fortune to have seen the television series which accompanied this book. The idea underlying it is extremely interesting. The critics of the idea that the normal Egyptian chronology might be wrong state that all of the arguments don't have much merit. The ideas in this book are interesting and challenging and worthy of consideration.
If you can find the TV series, Pharaohs and Kings (it is on All4 in the UK) watch it. I think that David Rohl works better with the visual medium and his foil Bob Bianchi adds to the process. The book is very interesting but I found it a little hard going.
If you can find the TV series, Pharaohs and Kings (it is on All4 in the UK) watch it. I think that David Rohl works better with the visual medium and his foil Bob Bianchi adds to the process. The book is very interesting but I found it a little hard going.
August 23, 2011
Rohl made a subject that could easily have been deadly dull come to life. I don't give a rip about proper scientific methods of archaelogy, so he was wise to intersperse the facts with tales of treasure troves and mystery. My interest in reading this is the correlation between man, his civilizations and his art, and Rohl didn't disappoint. I was also surprised to see that so much Biblical history is being uncovered. I'm more interested in knowing God than the stuff man leaves behind, but it's pretty cool to see the shiny, sparkly things.
June 3, 2012
Ground Breaking and provocative. It led me to pl;aces I did not consider. Compulsory reading.
December 28, 2018
Offers a new chronology for BC history that aligns with Biblical chronology...but without that goal.
September 26, 2021
Reviewing this book is a challenge as monumental as the book itself. First up, I am very thankful I have read it. Getting here has been a long time in the making.
Rohl challenges the very assumptions modern Egyptology is based on to revise the chronology of Ancient Egypt, and in so doing, draws the reader's attention to archaeological evidence that backs up the history of the Jewish nation as recorded in the Christian Bible's Old Testament.
Having searched for the answers presented in this book from numerous other sources, this book stands on more solid a foundation than any other material I have read. For now, I am content to accept the arguments Rohl presents as reflecting as close a version of the truth as we can get to in this day and age.
One thing is for certain. Many years ago, when reading the Old Testament, I began to get a picture of what life was like back then. As I said, the Bible began to come alive. But truly, Rohl brings it so much more to life in A Test of Time, and at the same time manages to explain quite a few mysteries contemporary Christianity has no answer for.
I will be forever thankful to Rohl's dedication to uncovering the truth, and his determination to not stay silent in the face of considerable opposition.
Rohl challenges the very assumptions modern Egyptology is based on to revise the chronology of Ancient Egypt, and in so doing, draws the reader's attention to archaeological evidence that backs up the history of the Jewish nation as recorded in the Christian Bible's Old Testament.
Having searched for the answers presented in this book from numerous other sources, this book stands on more solid a foundation than any other material I have read. For now, I am content to accept the arguments Rohl presents as reflecting as close a version of the truth as we can get to in this day and age.
One thing is for certain. Many years ago, when reading the Old Testament, I began to get a picture of what life was like back then. As I said, the Bible began to come alive. But truly, Rohl brings it so much more to life in A Test of Time, and at the same time manages to explain quite a few mysteries contemporary Christianity has no answer for.
I will be forever thankful to Rohl's dedication to uncovering the truth, and his determination to not stay silent in the face of considerable opposition.
June 15, 2021
A hefty little tome.
I hope this book becomes more and more well known. Rohl superbly gives an archeological and historical basis for the historicity of the Bible while remaining religiously unattached. (He was not a Christian last time I checked which makes his research that much more unbiased).
Rohl is extremely well researched and thorough. I learned a huge amount as I read. Definitely a book worth reading for anyone struggling with the historicity of the Bible and for those that adamantly claim the Bible to be true.
I hope this book becomes more and more well known. Rohl superbly gives an archeological and historical basis for the historicity of the Bible while remaining religiously unattached. (He was not a Christian last time I checked which makes his research that much more unbiased).
Rohl is extremely well researched and thorough. I learned a huge amount as I read. Definitely a book worth reading for anyone struggling with the historicity of the Bible and for those that adamantly claim the Bible to be true.
October 15, 2021
Fascinating, easy to read historical examination of evidence that suggests a new timeline for Egyptian chronology and creates greater alignment with OT history.
September 16, 2025
If you're interested in ancient Egypt and want to learn something about its relationship with the development of the Judaic faith, this is a must-read. In fact, you may have to read it many times.
April 27, 2023
Dr. David Rohl has brilliantly and precisely stepped into the tangled arena of conflicting ancient chronologies with a clear, yet bold, solution to this seemingly complex issue. In these past several years, since I began following his work, and have watched the various discussions among scholars that have ensued, I have not found anywhere that his perspective has been sufficiently or evidentiarily refuted.
Is the ancient biblical narrative truth or myth? Recent surveys seem to show that we are just not all that sure! Our understanding of the Hebrew Scriptures is at a crossroads & consequently the very underpinnings of our belief system seem to be eroding.
Subtly, the doubts that had quietly crept into the back pews some decades ago, have now begun to boldly take up residence on our sanctuary platforms. The Judeo-Christian world finds itself propelled toward an understanding that the scriptures we hold dear, the historical truth of the Exodus & beyond that we have built upon, has somehow soundly crumbled in the dust of archeological discovery. How do we logically address the growing dichotomy between belief in an historical Jesus, yet at the same time bow to a chronology that denies the very remembrance festival He chose for his epic and sacrificial event? This very book holds the key…..
Let us be clear: Dr. Rohl is an agnostic, and consequently does not have a dog in this fight, or any agenda to propagate. Whether you approach this material thru a biblical lens or not, you will appreciate how he trusts our intelligence and ability to understand the complexities, as he pulls from a variety of ancient and scholarly sources across various fields.
Ancient chronology is both fascinating and, at times, frustratingly ambiguous but one of Dr. Rohl’s unique gifts is the ability to unfold the history of the formation of ancient chronology, with such engaging prose that it carries his reader along as a fellow researcher, allowing time to sit in and consider research that has been culled, vetted, verified, and effectively laid out for us to grasp and understand. I would strongly encourage you to roll up your sleeves and dig in…you will thoroughly enjoy this fantastic trip thru the ancient Mediterranean world!
Is the ancient biblical narrative truth or myth? Recent surveys seem to show that we are just not all that sure! Our understanding of the Hebrew Scriptures is at a crossroads & consequently the very underpinnings of our belief system seem to be eroding.
Subtly, the doubts that had quietly crept into the back pews some decades ago, have now begun to boldly take up residence on our sanctuary platforms. The Judeo-Christian world finds itself propelled toward an understanding that the scriptures we hold dear, the historical truth of the Exodus & beyond that we have built upon, has somehow soundly crumbled in the dust of archeological discovery. How do we logically address the growing dichotomy between belief in an historical Jesus, yet at the same time bow to a chronology that denies the very remembrance festival He chose for his epic and sacrificial event? This very book holds the key…..
Let us be clear: Dr. Rohl is an agnostic, and consequently does not have a dog in this fight, or any agenda to propagate. Whether you approach this material thru a biblical lens or not, you will appreciate how he trusts our intelligence and ability to understand the complexities, as he pulls from a variety of ancient and scholarly sources across various fields.
Ancient chronology is both fascinating and, at times, frustratingly ambiguous but one of Dr. Rohl’s unique gifts is the ability to unfold the history of the formation of ancient chronology, with such engaging prose that it carries his reader along as a fellow researcher, allowing time to sit in and consider research that has been culled, vetted, verified, and effectively laid out for us to grasp and understand. I would strongly encourage you to roll up your sleeves and dig in…you will thoroughly enjoy this fantastic trip thru the ancient Mediterranean world!
February 3, 2009
Fascinating
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews