A critical examination of chronologies
There are clear shortcomings in the chronologies of history made by scholars that deserve to be mentioned.
King Shattiwaza of Mitanni. Based on archeological data, the Babylonian king Burna-buriash II interacted with many kings who ruled at the same time. The most famous of these are the Egyptian kings Akhenaten and Amenhotep III. The third one worth mentioning is the Assyrian king Assur-Uballit I, who gave his daughter as a wife to the Babylonian kings.
The kings of smaller kingdoms, such as Mitanni and the Hittites, have received less attention. There is information about the relationship between Babylonia and Hittite king Suppiluliuma I. King Shattiwaza of Mitanni tried to get asylum in Babylon, but Burna-buriash II refused to grant it.
According to the current assumption of scholars, Burna-buriash II died three years before the beginning of Shattiwaza's reign.
Another puzzle relates to the supposed length of Shattiwaza's reign. He ruled partly at the same time as the Assyrian king Adad-Nirari I. However, scholars assume that his reign ended around the same time that Adad-Nirari I became king.
Chronological inaccuracies. Researchers have defined from the 13th century BCE. backward methodology according to medium (MC) and short chronology (SC). Let's take a look at how they have succeeded in this.
Using the medium chronology, the Mitanni king Tushratta and the Hittite king Suppiluliuma I ruled at the same time as the Egyptian king Amenhotep III. Archeology confirms that this happened. However, there is a small problem with this. Tushratta is assumed to have become king in the sixth year of Amenhotep III's reign. Archaeological records reveal that Tushratta's father, Shuttarna II, gave his daughter to Amenhotep III as his wife in the 10th year of his reign. Fast forward a few decades along this intermediate chronology, and another conundrum emerges.
It can be noted that the Hittite king Hattusili III became king in the fourth year of Ramesses II's reign. Hittite king Muwatalli II fought Ramesses II a year later. Here is a contradiction of many years.
Using a short chronology eliminates this problem. A new problem arises. The previously mentioned Suppiluliuma I would not have ruled at the same time as Amenhotep III.
This back-and-forth problem may highlight the need to shorten Egyptian chronology, which scholars have been reluctant to do. This would be possible during the reigns of Horemheb and Seti I, who ruled during this period.
