What’s the lowdown? Rohl proposes a fairly significant shift in the Egyptian timeline. The lines of evidence for his case come from quite a divergent set of data: The inadequacy of the current chronology, and the thin foundation upon which it rests; campaign inscriptions, burial tombs, riverbank flood marks, and most incredibly of all, the much better fit of his new chronology with data in the Biblical record, right down to the most precise numbers. The results? David is a contemporary of Akhenaten and Tutankhamen, and both he and Saul are mentioned in the Amarna correspondence; Jericho did indeed fall to the Israelities as described, in the Middle Bronze Age; Moses was indeed, as Josephus records, an officer in the Egyptian military involved in their campaign against Ethiopia - the list of Biblical confirmations goes on, and becomes more astounding as we read.

Rohl’s work has been well received in some quarters; you may have seen the television version. But if it does indeed bear out, we may expect to have to wait for the current generation of Egyptologists to die out before the new chronology gains wide acceptance. I can say this: The old school will have a tough time countering Rohl’s carefully-constructed results.