By nameBy dateNext




April 14, 43

Dr. Robert H. Pfeiffer
Director of Semitic Museum
57 Francis Avenue, Cambridge, Mass.

Dear Dr. Pfeiffer,

when I received—now quite four weeks ago—your very kind letter together with my chapter about Ramses III, I thought to express you immediately my thanks for your reading, commenting and also for the corrections of style. I appreciate you liberal approach, and also your standpoint, you expressed in your letter (‘shaken but not converted’), which makes the decision depending on farther arguments.

I wished to write you all this and to accmpany my letter by another chapter, and it took much more time than I supposed to bring the chapter in its present shape, and days turned into weeks.

The one hundred odd years—from the middle of the ninth century, are treated by me in four chapters: I. Hatshepsut-Solomon, 2. Thutmose III-Rehoboam 3. Amehotep II-Asa (Ras Shamra) 4. Amenhotep II and IV-Jehoshaphat. I think that the combined proofs of these four chapters might have a cumulative value. May I again have your attention?

I enclose here a) the Thutmose III chapter with a number of new sections and a table of vessels with numbered objects. I attribute importance to the comparison of furniture and vessels of theTemple and of the Karnak basrelief, and b) the new chapter of Ras Shamra, in which ‘the poem of Keret’ section has direct relation to the time of Asa.

For an earlier orientation I supplied one of these files with a simple device: by moving the Egyptian history along the Hebrew history, and brining the catastrophe of Exodus and that of Papyrus Ipuwer to one level—we have immediately all the contracts between the two histories, which I describe in my work.

I would like to hope that a work of fundamental revision of a thousand years of world history, might be of less risk for a publisher, than regular works in special fields, as important as they are, do generally present from commercial point of view.

Yours faithfully,

Immanuel Velikovsky

By nameBy dateNext