With his book "A Test of Time," the Assyrologist and Egyptologist David Rohl has presented an archeologically and astronomically supported new chronology with the reign of Ramses II placed in the 10th century BC, i.e. dated some 350 years later than traditionally recorded, and the reign of Akhenaton beginning some 3025 years ago and overlapping the ascendancy of David as the successor to King Saul. It is the opinion of some working in the field of archaeology that if independently confirmed in its key elements by further research, we could find ourselves at the threshold of a new era, providing startling synchronologies of the past. Further, many scientists and historians have criticised these publications (which primarily use comparative mythology and ancient literary sources) over the years, with some academic institutions banning their use.

Recognizing that a revised chronology could have vast implications; from Issac Newton to Velikovsky, Morozov to Rohl... What is your opinion on the number of attempts to rewrite the conventional chronology of Egyptian history, and notably to the striking parallels between Akhenaton's Great Hymn to Aton (Gardiner, p.225f) and Psalm 104 (the Bible - various authors), in which scholars suspect the authors of these texts to be identical.

Secondly, I would just love to know the exact location of "the hill of grit-stone" - a title of the 'general' Horemheb's, under Tutankhamun.

Thankyou.