ologists found a wall, called Herald's Wall, at the Late Assyrian level of Carchemish. Hogarth noted the strong similarity of the art of Herald's Wall to the Imperial Hittite art at Hattusas. Woolley even argued for Late Bronze dates for Herald's Wall claiming the iconography was derived from 15th and 14th century Mitanni [James, 1993, p. 126]. Here Mitanni influence is found in Late Assyrian context as required by the RC. Furthermore, according to RC, the Mitanni still existed in circa 850 RC. In an inscription of Shoshenq I, 851 RC, the god, Amon-Re, reminds Shoshenq of the Mitannian army that was given into his hand [Breasted, 1906, sec. 722.] The conventional view must claim a 450-year anachronism [Wilson, 1969b, p. 263]. Similarly, Phase 2 of the Kapara Palace at Tell Halaf was dated to 808 GAD. Phase 1, prior to the occupation of the Late Assyrians, was dated to 900 GAD. The sculptures in this phrase reflect Mitannian and Mycenaean art circa 1300 GAD [James, 1993, p.274-75].
Mycenaean ivories and ceramics are associated with the 18th Dynasty and the Amarna pharaohs. Yet, ivories found at Delos in a deposit with Geometric pottery circa 800, were judged on stylistic grounds to be Mycenaean. Kantor wrote, &quotWhen details of the animals on Delos and Mycenaeanizing Megiddo plaques are compared with those of north Syrian ivories and the Tell Halaf orthostats the patterning is seen to be well nigh identical despite the passage of three centuries without any known links [Kantor, 1956]." Mycenaean ivories (similar to Late Assyrian ivories) are found in a 10th and 9th century deposits.
During the excavation of Samaria, ivories were found inscribed in Hebrew at the level of Ahab's palace, 929 - 908 (BIC). Hebrew letters on these ivories match those on the stele of the Moabite king Mesha who rebelled after the death of king Ahab [Velikovsky, 1952, p327-332 Crowfoot and Crowfoot, p. 2]. Excavators noticed that these ivories showed strong Egyptian influence not of the 21st or 22nd Dynasty but the 18th Dynasty, particularly the time of Tutankhamun [Crowfoot p.67]. To explain the similarity in the ivories it was proposed that in Israel there was a revival of 500-year old Egyptian art forms [Loud, 1939, p. 9]. This explanation must be regarded as strange since the Egyptian dynasties of the 9th century show no such revival of art forms. Similar ivories were found in Megiddo in the context of a large number of Egyptian scarabs of 18th Dynasty pharaohs and were dated to the 15th and 14th centuries. Thus Amarna period ivories are found in the 10th century in Israel i.e. Late Assyrian. There is not only no conflict between Amarna art, ivory and sculpture and Late Assyrian deposits but their coexistence matches perfectly.
Velikovsky identified the 5 most important kings who wrote Amarna letters: Abdi-Ashirta, king of Damascus as Ben Hadad II, Aziru assassin and successor of Abdi-Ashirta as Hazael, Abdi-Hiba (Ebed Tov) king of Jerusalem as Jehosephat, Rib-Addi king of Sumur as Ahab and King Mesha, the Habiru, as King Mesh of Moab. He also identified two captains of King Abdi-Hiba: Addadani, a son of Zuchru and Iahzibada as the captains of Jehosephat: Adnah, son of Zichri and Jehozabad [Velikovsky, 1952, ff. 240 II Chr 17:14-19]. There is no space to debate the merits of these identifications. I would only comment that Rib-Addi couldn't be Ahab for chronological reasons. He may be Jehoram, as Velikovsky himself admits [Velikovsky, 1952, p.256].
At Tell Brak, Oates, the excavator discovered six strata overlying the Old Babylonian 1600 GAD. Level VI and VII contained Mitannian ware and was dated to the 16th century. Level V and IV were dated to the early 15th. Level III and II were dated to the 14th because of the presence of cuneiform tablets of Artashumara and Tushratta who were authors of Amarna letters. Level I was dated to the 13th century [Oates, xxx]. This conforms to the generally accepted dates and gives the superficial appearance of agreeing with the evidence. A closer examination shows serious discrepancies.
In Level V there is Greyware paralleled at Nuzi Level II destruction [Oates, p. 66] which Stein proposed as &quotlate fourteenth century" [Stein, xxx, 1989]. Red-edged bowls paralleled at nearby al-Rimah in 14th century [Oates, p. 73]. Finally there are some frit-headed nails [Oates p. 240] with parallel processes used on pendants in a Middle Assyrian (MA) grave in Assur circa 14th/13th century [Haller, 1954, p.144, Taf 34: a,f]. In Level II, there is a Neo-Assyrian geometric pattern Bowl 3, [p. 29, 236] whose earliest parallel is found in 9th century. According to these chronological markers, Level V ought to be 14th century, Level IV and III ought to be 13th to 11th and Level II ought to be 9th century. If, instead of the GAD, one uses Gasche's more recent Mesopotamian chronology, then Level VI must be late 15th century also and Level V, even more certainly, must be 14th century. But, it is extremely unreasonable to ascribe all Levels V to II to the 14th century. Something is seriously wrong.
Now all these chronological markers are according to Assyrian chronology. According to the RC model, the Egyptian dates require a 5-century down dating. There should be unavoidable clashes between the GAD Egyptian markers and the Assyrian ones (shown in round brackets). In Level VI (15th), a century past the end of the MB era, is glazed pottery parallel to Alalakh Level VI <17/16th>i.e. MB II. In Level V (14th) ovoid shaped grooved travertine vases <19/16th>are found, at least 2 centuries after the end of the MB II era,. Oates mentions that the frit-nail technique is also known from the MB in Levant [Oates, p. 117]. In Level IV (13/12th), there is a sheet metal disk, which has parallels in the MB II at Tell Mardikh <17/16th>[Oates, p. 118 (Reference given [Matthiae, 1981, p 220-21])]. Also there is a glazed vessel [Oates, p.117] and small stone statuettes [p. 106] parallel to Alalakh V <16/15th>century in fill under a Level IV house. In Level II (10/9th) there are ivory, parallel to Alalakh IV, and texts of Late Mitanni Kings Artashumara and Tushratta <14th>. At the bottom of Level Ib (9th) is a Mycenaean LHIIIA stirrup jar <14th>, 5 centuries earlier than its imputed Assyrian date. There is a clear pattern of chronological error from the Level VI down to Level I that can only be explained by a major shifting of the Egyptian chronology downward to the Assyrian dates.
The language of the letters found at Tell Brak is Middle Babylonian. If the Assyrian chronological markers are accepted then the Middle Babylonian Amarna letters must be 9th and display the characteristics of Late Assyrian epigraphy. Soden, an Assyriologist, admits that Amarna letters from northern Syria display &quotastonishing" Assyriansms. [Soden, W. 1986. Sumer. Vol. 42 p. 106]." Nor are these Assyrianisms restricted to Northern Syria. Moran notes the same thing about the Jerusalem letters [Moran, 1975]. Furthermore, some Kassite texts in Babylonia are assigned to the Amarna period because of their Middle Babylonian epigraphy. Gadd, referring to these tablets of the 'Middle Kassite' period, says, &quotBut the salutations which follow this (the introduction) show a characteristic increase of formality over those of the Hammurabi period (17th century). One official, writing to another, adds after his name 'your brother' and the phrase 'be it well with you', which is ubiquitous in the " Amarna and Late Assyrian letters [Gadd, 1975, p.39]." (Italics added) These 'Middle Kassite' tablets have similar elements to the Late Assyrian letters because they, like the Amarna letters, belong to the 10th and 9th century. The Amarna letters themselves display style, idioms and Assyrianisms characteristic of the Late Assyrian period. Furthermore, these texts resemble Neo