Kings of Israel & Judah Family Tree
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 окт 2024
- Buy the poster version:
usefulcharts.c...
For our full biblical genealogy series, click here: • Biblical Genealogy (Fu...
CREDITS:
Chart & Narration by Matt Baker
Animation by Syawish Rehman
Audio Editing by Jack Rackam
Intro music: "Lord of the Land" by Kevin MacLeod and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution license 4.0.
Available from incompetech.com
![Tee Grizzley - Robbery 8 [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/34_vkNV6wrU/mqdefault.jpg)
![The Siege of Jerusalem (70 AD) - The Great Jewish Revolt [FULL DOCUMENTARY]](/img/1.gif)
Poster version of this chart is now available:
usefulcharts.com/products/biblical-family-tree
Hi Matt are the charts physical or electronic
How much is the High Resolution soft copy?
Shalom from Holland. Jacob's DNA Y-J1c3d FTDNA. Tribe of Joseph (Ephraim). Mamedov Investment Holding B.V.
@Joshua S : No John 3:16 and you need two - three witnesses. Precept upon precept, line upon line here a little and there a little. You only posted one witness. The True Royal Family The True CHOSEN PEOPLE of The Ancient Children of Yisrael and their Modern-day Descendants fit the
"CURSES" of The Book 📖 of Deuteronomy 28:15-68 and the only True Bloodline DNA 🧬 Seed/ Offspring/Descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob/Yisrael and The 12 Tribes of YISRAEL today are the so called Afrikan Diaspora Descendants of The "SLAVES". 👍👍
@@bethbartlett5692 It's spelled "Samaria" and it is not related to Sumer.
Israelites: We don't like the system of the judges we... Better Call Saul.
You were waiting for that one, weren't you?
@@UsefulCharts He probably was. Great video, very educational. This must be your longest yet.
@@UsefulCharts You disappointed me by not putting a Better Call Saul joke in the video.
And then Jesses gang showed up and took over.
I was just about to make a "better call Saul" joke but you beat me to it.
Israelite kings being assassinated sounds like a very common theme
Kings being assassinated is a very common theme.
When you play the game of kitot, you win or you die.
Exactly
@@SamAronow true
Canaanite kings too.
I am glad you included Ish-bosheth. Many people skip over him because they assume David took over all of Israel immediately when Saul died.
It's a replacement name anyway, since the name actually means "man of shame"in Hebrew. The name in the original story adapted to the final version of the bible probably had a pagan connotation - some variation of "-Baal" under Phoenician influence is most likely.
This is a fake explaination of Israel they are not white skin they are black
Suliasi Baleitavea They are Black?
Source? Unless you’re just making that up.
Its recorded that David had a lot of civil warring. With Saul, Ish-bosheth, and Absalom
@שָׁחוֹר יֵשׁוּעַ People forget how not child friendly it gets... words were not minced at all in terms of Ammon and Tamar.
4:54 "... for which Joab ends up losing his job". After that, he was only known as "A".
There’s the door leave
🚪👮👮♀️ here's the door sir please go out we have a restraining order against you
Badump bump crashhhh...😁
😂👏
Worth mentioning here that "bosheth" was a word inserted into Hebrew religious texts in place of the names of other gods. The word means "shame" - so it is shameful that a king would have the name of a god other than Yahweh incorporated into their name. So the name "Ish-Bosheth" was actually "Ishbaal" or "Eshbaal." "Mephibosheth" was a rewrite of the name "Merib-Baal."
That's very interesting. Thanks for that.
@@Unmannedair The term Ba'al just means "lord." It's a title that could refer to many different gods, including at times, Yahweh. The name Ishbaal means "the lord is great," the lord referred to being Yahweh. It's only much later that authors came to see Ba'al as the name of a false idol or foreign god, and changed names in the bible to remove -baal and add -bosheth.
@@booradley1138 I would love some sources in these comments.
@@bradbowers4414
From the Encyclopedia Britannica article on "Baal Ancient Diety"
"For those early Hebrews, “Baal” designated the Lord of Israel, just as “Baal” farther north designated the Lord of Lebanon or of Ugarit."
From The New International Encyclopædia article on "Baal"
"Jehovah himself was called Baal, and His name was thus associated with the cults at the altars and sanctuaries, which generally were erected on prominent spots, the so-called ‘high places,’ or in groves."
other sources in the wikipedia article. Sorry for multiple replies, it seems there is a word limit on the length of replies and RUclips won't let me post the links.
same thing with Akhenaten
he was previously Amenhotep (IV) before his Aten cult, and the sibling-couple Tutankhamun & Ankhesenamun were originally born Tutankhaten & Ankhesenpaaten
Last time I was this early the Israelite Kingdom was still united.
Does that mean you're a legend?
You're goddamn right!
The friendship between these two are strong.
@@frozenace3337 I can attest that bad jokes are the ultimate symbol of friendship.
Oof
16:00 Sargon king of Assyria is actually mentioned in the bible, in Isaiah 20:1
You're right. Thanks.
Nice Adrian!
how did you find it. That is insane lol
Isaiah 20:1 In the year that the supreme commander sent by Sargon king of Assyria, came to Ashdod and attacked and captured it.
Man's real did his HW 🔥
How do you know that Jezebel only uses Apple Computers?
Because she hates "Windows"
I'll let myself out.
Franz Joseph Esguerra hahahah brilliant
You are that guy! Wewe ndio ule msee!
Well, using "Windows" also triggered The 30 Years' War. So guess you are on to something.
Lol 😆
@@philosophershtone hapo umenena!! 😂😂🔥🔥
I've been in Hezekiah's Tunnel in Jerusalem and I can confirm it's a brilliant piece of engineering.
it is magnificant- the fact that it was built 2300 years ago is shocking
The book “The Strength of His Hand” by Lynn Austin is a Christian-based historical fiction work which provides interesting perspective on the engineering of the tunnel and the walls.
@@יהליקינד Roman Moses is wonderful
i recentlyy heard a minister say that going to Israel was putting the bible in color for him
16:40 "Generally the kings of Judah are presented as being good kings."
If by "generally," you mean eight out of twenty (at most), then yes. The Old Testament authors were still very critical of Judah's monarchy as well. Few kings of the southern kingdom they considered faithful to Yahweh, and even then they usually qualified their assessment (e.g., "This king still did not take down the high places and Asherah poles," etc.).
By Old Testament authors you mean God yes he was critical
@@mysteryjunkie9808 God, yes, and also the men he inspired to write the OT: the major prophets, the minor prophets, the chroniclers, etc. The Bible wasn't created in a vacuum.
@@ErikNilsen1337 الانبياء تم ذبحهم عندم نصحو اليهود أن يتوقفو عن عباده الاصنام وانتقم الرب منهم با استخدام الرومان
I just finished reading Kings and Chronicles today, and I totally agree with you. The author of this video seems very acid and leading ppl to misunderstanding through his opinions, specially when talking about the Jezebel and Athalia.
@@mysteryjunkie9808 Nobody, not even the most extreme religious communities, claims the book of Kings to have been written by god. There were scribes and they formed an opinion about the kings they wrote about.
Being a Christian, I'm just happy he doesn't drag religion though the mud as much as other people.
Chikinbokbok0815 I wholeheartedly agree
Yeah he acknowledges events and their significance and meaning without discrediting Christianity and Judaism as a whole like the some people who say saying the whole thing was made up because of some events being made up or exaggerated. Instead he explains how those story’s were made and how probable those things could have been.
Well that sort of thing doesnt really have place in this type of video. And i'm atheist and have done my fair share of "religion bashing" in my life, but it would just be annoying in this type of video. I do find the historicity of biblical events/characters to be very fascinating (especially since it has shaped the western world so much). I did very much appreciate that he clearified which characters that we have found evidence for outside the bible, seeing that there was so many it's pretty fair to assume that many of the others also were real characters.
I look forward to seeing his video on the lineage of Jesus. It will be interesting to see which people he finds historical proof and records of.
@@simonyeomans5021 Jesus was definitely real, but he did not have superpowers.
I cant be the only one who had to keep rewinding, there were so many links and names and cousins and best friends and shit to keep up with. My god, this is going to take hours to digest. Great research. Your approach is perfect balance as well. Respect the books but take the history for what it is.
What you mean, hours how about the 4,000 years since then and nobody’s digested it enough to know the answer. Here’s one for you how old was David when he became King of Judea? And how many did years was he king.
All this is in the bible but most of the things he doesn't mention
@@KAfa4Christalone wdym?
Yeah like how none of these figures are white! There are multiple verses of ‘our’ prophets letting us know that! But somehow the first man was white which goes bc against all science and basically the truth of the Bible
Hahahahaha nopppppe not by yaself
excited for genealogy of jesus
The genealogy of Jesus is well accounted for in Matthew chapter 1. I think it's the most thoroughly documented genealogy in the Bible. It's just thin on the female side of things, only a few women of note are mentioned.
@Sam Gold You are interpreting the letter wrong. Here is an example from another letter of Hadrian: "The land of Egypt, the praises of which you have been recounting to me, my dear Servianus, I have found to be wholly light-minded, unstable, and blown about by every breath of rumor. There those who worship Serapis are, in fact, Christians, and those who call themselves bishops of Christ are, in fact, devotees of Serapis. There is no chief of the Jewish synagogue, no Samaritan, no Christian presbyter, who is not an astrologer, a soothsayer, or an anointer. Even the Patriarch himself, when he comes to Egypt, is forced by some to worship Serapis, by others to worship Christ."
What it is saying (and what your quote is saying too) is that the worshiping is reversed. I. E., Christians worship Serapis and followers of Serapis worship Jesus, not that Serapis and Jesus are the same. This is pointed out in the last line of the quote, which has the Patriarch worshiping Serapis and Christ as separate entities.
Also, Josephus, a Jewish historian who died 225 years before the Council of Nicaea, has the following quote in The Antiquities of the Jews: "Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day."
Note, he referred to Jesus both as "Jesus" and "Christ", and his followers "Christians".
His genealogy will all be mythical
@@cv4809 nope bro you are mythical
@@cv4809 burning in hell 🔥 is your fate CV lest you: repent.
You're pride: shall bring you low.
...Tesrad de la Speid... A.r.r
I appreciate the hard work and the chart looks amazing. Being an evangelical Christian, I would disagree with your take on many aspects of your description, though I understand your viewpoint. I don't believe this is the forum for debate, however, I would like to point out that there are numerous scholars who disagree with the secular viewpoint of when certain portions of the Bible were written. A lack of archaelogical evidence is not proof of non-existence, Nineveh was thought to be myth for a 150 years until it was discovered, and so it is possible that either evidence hasn't been found yet, or doesn't exist at all.
I would like to stress that I really do enjoy this channel, and your charts, and these videos. Thank you for all your hard work, dedication, and objectivity!
I have a hard time taking seriously the opinions of anyone who fundamentally believes in magic and who is thus determined to interpret the evidence that they see strictly within that magical world view.
@@TacticusPrime that was a really pointless thing to say
@@legogandalf5453 When it comes to questions of truth, the religious have nothing to contribute.
@@TacticusPrime As the video demonstrates (from a secular view, no less), there is historical evidence outside of the Bible for some of the people and events that were described in the video, but as OP said, this is no forum for debate.
@@MrZeusyMoosey That doesn't mean that scholar motivated primarily by religion has anything to contribute to the conversation. A worshipper of Enkidu wouldn't have anything meaningful to contribute to an actual study of the epic of Gilgamesh. They would be hopelessly biased.
Really enjoyed this - I have a degree in religious studies so recognised a lot of these names and it was really great to see what I remembered studying way back in the mid 90s
It would interesting to see the legendary monarchs of other civilization and how the tie into modern monarchies
I try to point out legendary monarchs whenever applicable, for example, in my Japan and Scandinavia videos.
@@UsefulCharts And by extention, those link to all European royal families. Also, if you wanted you could somehow end up connecting the spanish royals to the Balthi and Amaling dinasties which would end up linking to Odin... (at least for the Amali, though I suspect the Balthi must have been their distant kin or claimed another god, maybe that of war, since they're mentioned as second in preminence after the Amali).
@@UsefulCharts 40 Those are the ten tribes, which were carried away prisoners out of their own land in the time of Osea the king, whom Salmanasar the king of Assyria led away captive, and he carried them over the waters, and so came they into another land.
41 But they took this counsel among themselves, that they would leave the multitude of the heathen, and go forth into a further country, where never mankind dwelt,
42 That they might there keep their statutes, which they never kept in their own land.
43 And they entered into Euphrates by the narrow places of the river.
44 For the most High then shewed signs for them, and held still the flood, till they were passed over.
45 For through that country there was a great way to go, namely, of a year and a half: and the same region is called Arsareth.( Southern Russia, and into Europe..( book of esdras chapter 13 conveniently taken out of of the Bible!!
@@israelwhites1334 ehhh
What is this?
@@kfiraltberger552 it's on the bottom of the message
The way you splash the full screen images on is really cool, solid addition
Very cool. Love the archeological
evidence you bring in, I live in Israel and we are constantly discovering new artifacts that prove all this. I’m sure there will be more to come.
@@AP-gw2en huh?
On the dreams of zionist son
So many of the scriptures that had previously been mocked and scoffed at has later been confirmed by Archeology... Myself this really says more about those that make claims of myths and legends and presuming the Bible is incorrect when they were simply ignorant. One of those claims was that the Book of Daniel (one of my favorites) was incorrect about Belshazzar that he was mythical and never actually existed and Nabonidus was the last Babylonian king. Then the archeologist spade uncovered the Nabonidus cylinder where he was mentioned by name also making sense of Belshazzar's promise to make who ever interpreted the writing on the wall third ruler instead of second... Well Belshazzar was the second and his father Nabonidus was number one since he was the actual king and coregent with his father.
@@jamesbowman7963 It's not mocking or ignorant, it's just the historical method. There are very strict criteria for what counts as "historical", and for good reason. Nobody is targeting the scriptures for laughs. It's held to the same standards as everything else.
That being said, I hope we find more artifacts confirming what we read in scripture.
@@randairp Wasn't a strict criteria at all it was a presumption presented as historical fact that made claims the Bible was wrong without evidence... Turns out as usual the Bible was right. It was used by scoffers to say the Bible wasn't trustworthy so no they were certainly targeting the scriptures.
The Book of Daniel was vindicated the critic exposed yet again.
as a christian and a lover of history and science, i love this video because it describes the history of the Israelites in a very satisfying way.
Hey mister, I'd just like to say, I LOVE YOU. Your charts are so delicate and informative which I deeply appreciate as a devoted lover of history 💛😭 Thank you so much for your efforts!
The level of effort to put everything together and explaining events in short is really amazing.
I hope to see such videos based on other civilizations. Keep up the good work! ✌
The comment section is a treasure trove of Black Hebrew Israelites and fundamentalist Christians accusing Matt of atheism. I love it.
*the real Hebrew Israelites
@@Zeskents Fake Hebrew Israelites*
@@flemishnationalist-prayfor9809 no such thing as fake. The only fake Israelites are those that dwell in the country of Israel
@@Zeskents you spelled America wrong.
The real israelites are the rwandans/burundians.
Another really informative video! I always appreciate how you're careful to point out what's verified and what's not. I'm also really liking the red line around who you're talking about.
I just have to say you have amazing charts and I´m loving your videos. I´m a teacher of jewish history and literature in Rio, Brazil and your perspective of the Tanakh is certainly aligned with the way I like to read this material, both as a moral tradition and some historical contexts, but mostly as an amazing literary narrative.
I like how half the names early on are perfectly normal names now, and the other half have weird names
It kind of depends if the king was seen as "good" or "bad". People would generally name their sons after righteous kings, but not after evil kings. There are some exceptions, like Menashe, but he shared a name with Joseph's son. And my own name, for some reason. And some of the other names fell into disuse. But I've never met an Ahaz or an Ahab, and I know a number of Hezekiahs and Ezekiels, and Davids and Shlomos (Solomons).
Yes, one of the surer proofs of how much got "invented later on" in the form of the parabolic is the fact that very few people took the names of their imagined forebears. No one ever named their children after any of the patriarchs or their wives? When I scan my brain for early names that got used again later, man, there's not much. That makes no sense. We see Enoch as Hanoch. We do see another Haran. Few and far between, let's say. Name another culture where children weren't given the names of its prominent forebears.
@@thomasraywood679 Perhaps the practice of naming children after forbears is less old than you think. Or perhaps the names have actual meanings, and such meanings would not necessarily be appropriate for another person. Or perhaps the names of the most prominent forbears were considered sacred, and naming a child after them might be seen as sacrilegious, or suggesting that the namesake's shoes could ever be filled.
Or, possibly, the older son and heir often got his own name, still in the lifetime of the proposed namesake, and only the younger children were named after the forbears, and these younger children are not deemed important enough to be mentioned.
By the way, Enoch is properly transliterated as Hanoch, or rather Chanoch, even at its first appearances in Genesis. "Enoch", especially in its Anglicized pronunciation, is unrecognizably wrong.
@@menachemsalomon I know about Enoch and Hanoch being the same or wouldn't have mentioned it. And I stand by the obviation that, no, there are no cultures which do not name their children after their prominent forebears. These are invented names for invented people. That doesn't make the stories not holy.
@@thomasraywood679 But you don't necessarily see many of these names being reused, even when you do get to recorded history. For example, the Talmud recounts names of hundreds of scholars, spanning some 500 years. There are Yitzchaks (Isaac) and Yaakovs (Jacob) and Yosefs (Joseph, as well as Yose/Jose), but I don't recall any Abrahams (though are are Abbas) or Moseses or Aharons or Davids, and of the names of the tribes I remember Simeon, Levi, Judah, and Benjamin, and perhaps Ashi (instead of Asher), but none of the others.
There's even a quip about the name Moses not being found among named scholars until Maimonides, placed on the latter's epitaph: "From Moses to Moses there arose none like Moses." So no, the Israelites and Jews did not reuse names willy nilly. Especially when the prominent previous owner was regarded as sinful, as were most of the kings.
My favorite series yet. I always have your intro music stuck in my head.
Me too. He needs to make a trap beat of it so I can sub it cruisin the mall.
The son of Manasseh is Amon not Ahaz. 2Kings 21 : 19-26, 2Chronicles 33 : 21
Hope the creator makes the necessary correction.
I love these charts.Ithank god for the wisdom that God has given to you. Ican understand that how much efforts you put and the extreme pain you have taken to prepare these charts. I pray for your good health and bless you and your family abandantly with heavenly blessings.May Good God bless you.🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
He’s not religious.
@@markdavidson1835 Yea and im not islamic but if an islamic man said a prayer for me id still be like "oh dang thanks bro" cuz its the thought that counts
@@plugmanjohnson7456 don’t think that’s his/her point
The son of Manasseh is Amon not Ahaz. 2Kings 21 : 19-26, 2Chronicles 33 : 21
Hope the creator makes the necessary correction.
It's a good thing I got my bible opened while watching this. 😊
Can’t say how much I love this. Thank you for doing this. (I much rather watching these charts than reading the lineage in the Bible.)
🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦
The Bible is not written to inform on historical record, it's a religious account and hence emphasizes aspects of religious importance particularly the relationship between man and God. It's a qualitative account.
I’m very well aware that it is a qualitative account. However, I still believe that on reading biblical genealogy, it becomes slightly easier to understand the context. I also agree with what he said about the fact that the portions of the Bible where we receive our information were written about a rival kingdom, and may be distorted. The Bible is an anthology written by numerous people in different time periods. Therefore, it is probably correct to take things with a grain of salt, as the ideas of these people can vary, and time also affects our perceptions.
Thank you for your comment.
@@simonyeomans5021 I see you point. But don't you agree that the same biases could be inherent in archeological evidence. For instance those writings and inscriptions on those stones could also have similar distortions depending on the inscribers positionality. Just because they are old and on stone doesn't make them immune to the biases being only ascribed to the biblical record, no?
@@dataman6744 Of course inscriptions in stones also have biases. All historical records have biases. And i don't think Useful Charts or Simon Yeomans suggested otherwise. The thing is that if someone is mentioned in the bible and also in non-biblical records then it's more safe to assume that it's historical (espesially if dating confirms it's from the time of the event/person). The more different sources you have from different sides, the better.
Dataman, as I do see your point in that there can still be biases in historical and archaeological record, I agree with Kevin Uchiha in that it is safe to have more than one source. This is the same as any research paper. Imagine there is only one reference throughout the whole paper for proof. Would you believe them more or less if they had several other sources? Any or all of the sources could be biased or untrue, however it is best to have many in any situation.
Dude, if "House of Omri" refers to the dynasty and kingship of Omri, why wouldn't the "House of David" refer to the kingship and dynasty of David? (17:39)
Probably because of some degree of bias....
@@brendanthedreamer
I would be inclined to agree.
David could be considered"legendary", but not "mythological", based on the criteria set forth for Omri.
For the same reason we don't assume that Heracles existed just because the Doric nobility of old called themselves Herakleides.
The historical documents citing Omri are almost contemporary to his supposed period, while those referring to the 'House of David' were written more than a century after his supposed kingdom.
Also, while Omri and his biblical account are compatible with archeological findings, David's account is contradictory with said findings.
That being said, since a reference to a 'house of David' can be found both in Assyrian and Egyptian records, most historians have no problem accepting the fact that a chief called David existed as the founder and ancestors to the king's of Judah, but he would've been a very different character from the one described in the Bible.
@@unochepassava1403
Exactly, legendary, but not mythological.
@@holtscustomcreations Which is exactly what this video said, if you paid attention he called David and Solomon "Legendary figures" not "Mythological figures".
Thank you so much for finally clarifying the chain of kings. It gave me a massive headache to remember the correct names and order when i studied the bible. You are so good, wish you were here back then..
This watery effect is marvelous
"Jumpin' Jehoshaphat!"
- Yosemite Sam
Generous G Old swearing substitutes had their charm. Shame they never get used outside of kid’s shows anymore
Didn't Doc Brown use that name too? 🤔🙂
This explanation is the best on youtube so far! Thanks for the amazing video. Watched the three videos in a row.
The son of Manasseh is Amon not Ahaz. 2Kings 21 : 19-26, 2Chronicles 33 : 21
Hope the creator will update this.
I think amon is the origin of amin or amen, which is the way to talk to your deity. @@janec.3533
This is the clearest well the first chart I've seen of what actually happened. Makes it so much easier to see who, what, when, why and most importantly where everyone went relating to the scriptures.
This video inspired me to go back to the British Museum to see the Black Obelisk. There are so many things that essentially look like a random stone tablet in the museum that it's easy to overlook such important artifacts so thank you for highlighting this one.
@Terrence Lamar Gantt honestly I wish we would. While I love having everything on my doorstep and understand the argument surrounding artifacts from certain areas needing to be kept safe while there are wars going on, we need to return stuff where its safe to do so.
I was just at the British museum and the louvre… I wish I knew to look for these artifacts..
I used the translator to write this message, kkk and I wanted to make one more request that if possible, you guys from the channel would put the option of translation in Portuguese, so that here in Brazil those who cannot read in English benefit from the same it would be of great help ... content like this, very rich and didactic. thanks!
I am so glad to see this video after reading the Old Testament , it brings all the events and History back and you get a clear picture of what happened during this time in the Old Testament! I wish that you had a biblical Chart on inter-between, the 400 years between Old Testament and the New Testament! I am going to be reading Completed works of Josephus and Philo the Ancient Writers! I will try to find my book called the “internet-between” gives an Historical picture of what went on after Kings Era . If you have any suggestions please let me know. Thanks 🙏🏽 Linda
The son of Manasseh is Amon not Ahaz. 2Kings 21 : 19-26, 2Chronicles 33 : 21
Hope the creator makes the necessary correction.
It's a good thing I got my bible opened while watching this. 😊
Although I don't recognize the story of the prophets Solomon and David as legendary, And I don't see the evidence you listed as sufficient of discrediting the kingdom, but it is really interesting to see what is written in the Bible (As I am a Muslim, I highly respect the writings of my Abrahamic Brothers), and their timeline 90% aligns with our Timeline of the leniage of David, I find this video very interesting and Well made and unbaiased, good job as always!
abraham was not muslim ,he carried the seed of christ ,he was shem ,
Are you admitting that Jerusalem was the capital of the Kingdom of King David? Tell your Palestinian brothers.
@@nathelondon3719 King David died 3,000 years ago there is no kingdom of king david
@@nathelondon3719 for all we know his direct descendant could be palestinian
@@plugmanjohnson7456 who is this we all know?
Probably this type of videos could have been the most boring one.. But the way u narrate makes it so much interesting. I actually watch ur every video..
It's interesting how for me all the archeological record is proof that the rest of the Bible account is also true, while for other people if there is no archeological data found - yet - it's proof that it's all legend...
Thank you for your hard work on this chart! Waiting for Jesus' genealogy...
Yeah, personally I like to take a more moderate approach in most things, so I believe that, while the kings before Omri are unverified (that is to say, mentioned in another primary source), it is likely they existed, just that the tales are somewhat exaggerated :) And same, super excited for the Jesus genealogy!!
Look at gobelki tepe and other findings
SO MUCH history is unknown and lost to time either through man made destruction like the sacking of cities and burning of lobraries or natural disasters destroying buildings, wall, statues and so on
I'm sure there were many real interesting things going on before what we know and there were records of people like David and Solomon that are just gone
Some archeological findings are not true and fabrications/exaggerations.
I agree entirely with your view. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.
Exactly , why would people inthe bible tell lies one part then add in some true events/ people,then make up all the other names.
its "mi - hal" not "may - kell"
Came here to say this
Most of the Hebrew (as well as other nations') names are harshly mispronounced in English. It's just a linguistic fact, accept it.
@@BiglerSakura never
lol
Make at least one major pronunciation error per video - check ☑️
@@UsefulCharts Well, in the case of Hebrew names it's more a tradition than a mistake. E.g., all Js are Ys in the original (Jonathan should be pronounced Yonatan, Joppa - Yafo etc.)
Fun fact: - King Josiah is one of the most important figure that even his prophecy being born has been mentioned in 1 King 13 approximately 300 years earlier.
🔥
Congratulations! Great video and very accurate. As an archaeologist working in the Middle East I’m happy to see your video is so accurate and clear
The son of Manasseh is Amon not Ahaz. 2Kings 21 : 19-26, 2Chronicles 33 : 21
Hope the creator makes the necessary correction.
This is remarkable. Thanks for making these. I am a born again Christian and my knowledge of the Kings of Israel has always been spot lights of information. This take all the spotlights and builds a contiguous history out of them and I'm eating all your videos up. One thing I am REALLY struggling with is the passing statement that Biblical scholars believe Deuteronomy (and parts of the Pentateuch if I recall from other videos) was written much later than claimed, and by several authors at that. That is really really hard to wrap my head around. I don't want to be foolish in any of my understanding, but I take the Bible literally where applicable. I need to dig deeper into that point because I am not there yet. But its amazing work you're doing. Thank you.
I was looking for a channel who combined English ( because I am learning) an history that's how I arrived here!!!! I love all your genealogy and your accent is so easy to understand. Thanks!!!!!
Can you do a Hasmonean family tree? I'm really fascinated by that time period and we don't really learn a lot about them in Jewish Studies classes.
It's next in this series.
@@UsefulCharts Awesome - sorry I didn't read the description
@@UsefulCharts, I've been studying the Hasmonean dynasty last month. Look forward to your research!
Believe there may be a typo for Zedekiah, son of Josiah. He is listed in the chart as living/ruling from 697-586, where I believe you may have meant 597-586
Yes.
@@UsefulCharts lol
One: believe's You continue to contaminate Evidence: with your Heathen Believe's. You also sound as if you speak of separate Nation(s), also. Why do you commit Heresy?
Why do you not: express Your personal beliefs on a separate section of the Video or: separate upload: altogether.
Children of God: may find Your belief(s): Hertical and Therefore: Treason.
You sound smart: you must of heard of King: Henry VIII: & The 6 Articles: thereof.
i: am: German Royal relative "Spada" / Palace of Spada: but may be prone to: Holding you Account: if You continue: with said Heresy & Treason: and may tender you (a) Writ: on pain of: Trial at: Queen's Bench - Location: The Royal Courts of Justice.
...T.Spada...a.r.r
Well - spott(ed). 😇😊
@@80smusicsmashhits10 wtf are u saying
very fascinating. As a jew watching all these history channels, I long waited for a video such as this...and to think it would come a day before my birthday.
The messiah already came
@@Arturo-ge9lf Don't worry he not a real one..
As a kid, I would spend my summers before school starts reading the Bible because I was fascinated by the stories in it (and I don't have any other accessible literature at home other than my mother's collection of mystery and detective novels). The books covering the biblical Kings was what intrigued me the most because of how it gave me a strong picture of the politics and intrigue that led to the rise and fall of these figures and their kingdoms. I've long been hoping someone would do a detailed family tree and finally I came across yours, with more information than I ever expected.
Too bad the Bible don't provide a similar family tree since it's hard to follow the stories about whose son ruled for how long and how often they get replaced by a new king and repeat. Heck, some of the rulers listed here were given passing mentions and moved on to the next. lol
Good job and thanks for your hard work. :)
The begats are the tree
The Bible is quite clear about the genealogy. It's all there. You probably skipped those parts as a kid because it's boring.
@@ninagordon4434 Kings was more or less a copy-rinse-repeat kind of book in the Bible as only a few rulers were given highlights what they've done. I didn't question the genealogy cited, but rather there weren't that much detail and attention dedicated to each and every king from the House of David except those given some degree of significance. :)
@@jlhabitan50 That's down to the creator of this video. He lacks that knowledge and the Bible is bogged down with genealogy from the very first book. I am reading Samuel 2 and Chronicles 1 right now and the genealogy and lineage always at the beginning and the end of each book. Sometimes in the middle. This creator is very dismissive of The House of David despite that Jesus came from this lineage. So, he's probably a j3w or Atheist. I said what I said.
@@ninagordon4434 The video actually provided a lot of historical detail that more than makes up for that big gap from the Bible. :)
So Omri was considered a historical figure because the mention of "the House of Omri" took place a few decades after him but David is not considered a historical figure because the mention of "the House of David" took place over a hundred years after? So "a few dozen years" is valid but "over a hundred years" is not? This seems odd considering these dates were both between 2500 and 3000 years ago.
Even though were dealing with ~3000 years ago, a lot can happen within 100 years. In this case, the archaeological record indicates that a big change did in fact occur between the time that David lived and the time that Omri lived.
@@UsefulCharts Thanks for the reply, Matt.
Excellent video. It would be nice to see some maps showing the other states that are mentioned (Assyria, Egypt, Babylon, etc).
Jorge Rojas definitely
This was very fascinating, great job!
(Yes, I watched the video before commenting)
Haha. Thanks. It's always funny when people post "great video" like one minute after it's posted!
I highly suggest watching the 3 pattern of evidence documentaries created by Tim Mahoney who review the Exodus and early history of Israel.
Also worth noting are the finds in Qumran (near the Dead Sea). There in jars hidden within a cave are copies of many books of the Bible, including Daniel, proving that they are older than the events recorded.
Brilliant without reservation, comprehensive beyond my understanding, and accurate according to everything I have read in archaeology!
Bravo! Bravo!
The son of Manasseh is Amon not Ahaz. 2Kings 21 : 19-26, 2Chronicles 33 : 21
Hope the creator makes the necessary correction.
It's a good thing I got my bible opened while watching this. 😊
Was it just me or did anyone else go mad when Joab kept killing all of the Generals?
Edit: Also if anyone was wondering according to Catholic tradition Nathan (son of David) is thought to be the ancestor of Mary (Mother of Jesus) while Joseph (Jesus' legal father on earth) comes from the line of Solomon.
Edit #2: The Bible (at least the Catholic one) doesn't paint all kings of Judah as good. I actually made a count of all the kings mentioned in the book of Kings the final count came out as 12 bad kings in Judah (Worshiped Idols etc.) and 8 good kings (took down idols and worshiped GOD etc) Asa was actually the first 'good' king mentioned in the bible and all the most of the good kings had a peaceful reign and a long life while the bad ones tended to be king for a shorter time. (Of course with a couple of exceptions)
The RC Douay-Rheims version varies little from most "Protestant" Bibles. You are correct in your comments about Judah having bad examples of kings. One thing the narrator overlooks (actually he overlooks a lot) is the north/Israel was the epicenter of pagan worship. Specifically Mt Hermon and Bashan(Gates of Hades) at its base. All kinds of pagan/demonic worship was happening there. Its also where Jesus and His disciples were standing when He asks Peter the famous question...Who do YOU say I am??
@@Baltic_Hammer6162 might be a little unfair to say that pagan worship was happening exclusively in the northern kingdom though. Archeological evidence leads us to believe that first temple (and pre) Judaism wasn't likely the monotheistic religion the bible portrays anyway and was more likely a henotheistic religion where 1 god was elevated in the pantheon but the others weren't dismissed as non-divine - just very minor deities by comparison. The theory is that both the northern Israelites and the southern judeans operated on those bases with the northern ones favouring the god El and the southerners favouring YHWH. It was the northerners emigrating down to the kingdom of Judea after the Assyrian conquest of Samaria which likely caused the fusion of the two cultures and helped to form second temple Judaism as well as the Samaritan Israelite religion still practiced by the Samaritans (direct descendants of the northern Israelite kingdom) who live in Holon and near their holy mount gerizim today in Israel
@@tzvi7989 I'm not stating the pagan worship was exclusive to the north. There's always overlap with neighboring tribes. Plus there's usually some good sprinkled in, like Lot in Sodom, Noah, etc.
That's a "small t" tradition, to be sure. Though it could easily be true given the number of generations between Mary's generation and David. The differing genealogies of Jesus (or Joseph, biologically) between two of the Gospels are likely both correct, it's just that there really are multiple paths to trace because the lines naturally get tangled up. One hypothesis is that the evangelists walked down different paths because of a popular idea at the time that the Solomonic line was cursed around the time of the exile, so the Messiah wouldn't come from it. Showing the line from Nathan would then be a way to counter that argument, whatever its merit.
Given all the twists and turns in this genealogical tree and the predominant lack of extraordinary births (son of a god/holy spirit etc.) I find it unlikely to be a figment of someone's imagination and for the most part I tend to believe the existence of the characters mentioned and their genealogy. Good work btw!
This is the distinction between myth and legend though
I really love this series! As someone how is interested in the context of religion and the Legend vs. History debate, it's all a lot of fun!
Have you ever done any Chinese history, or do you plan on it? I've been doing some personal research on it, and I was curious if you have yourself.
I've done the Chinese Emperors from Tang to Qing.
@@UsefulCharts Oh really? I must have missed them! Cheers!
@@UsefulCharts have you did the ancient Chinese emperors from the Xia dynasty?
@@hyuckacr1812 The Xia dynasty is usually considered semi-legendary
@@UsefulCharts Did you butcher the names too?
You have a lot of European faces on African people in this tree. Beside being in N. Eastern Africa, Rabbi Eleazer Ben Hercanus, one of the greatest & moat respected judges of Israel in the 1st century C.E. said that both Shem & Ham were "black". Both were ancestors of thr people Israel.
when David killed Goliath the bible describes him as ruddy (red) and fair. Davids ancestors had red hair . Esau was a red man. Many Jews today have red hair.
But those are Shem descendants not Ham
Now arabs cannot say israel doesn't have history
Did we watch the sabe video?? Most of these people must likely never existed.
Arabs don't accuse jews of not having any history... they rightfully note that the Zionist settler colonists aren't from the Levant and don't share the same heritage as the ancient people who practiced the jewish faith in the Levant.
They also rightfully note that Judaism is a religion, not a race!! Persian jews are just that... Persian. Yemeni jews are from Yemen and Iraqi jews are from Iraq!
European jews are European!!
@@nataliekhanyola5669 jews are a race of people that practice judaism, the word jew literally means "the people from judea". Of course it will be different, islam in 1400 changed so a religion that existed for more than 2000 years will change practices, modern jews are the descendents of the ancient jews that were explled by the romans from israel also zionists are not colonial settlers, first learn what colonialism means
Excellent, excellent, excellent work. Thank goodness for your dedication and commitment to this important work.
The son of Manasseh is Amon not Ahaz. 2Kings 21 : 19-26, 2Chronicles 33 : 21
Hope the creator makes the necessary correction.
It's a good thing I got my bible opened while watching this. 😊
It would be cool to see a tree of how people believed they were descended from adam and eve in the bible.
I'll be adding that to this series at some point.
we all are ,
I've seen one. It sort of tracks to David, then from there to Adam.
Why is "the chronology of the hebrew bible" video not part of this playlist? I think it should definitely be included
@@norlofthor7088 what?
The Bible describes some kings as good, some as bad, some as meh. There are 5 truly good Judean king. 5 kings that could be considered meh (a mixed bag).
I think this make the Bible a more reliable source
God tells Samuel in I Samuel chapter 8 that kings are a sacrilegious form of idol worship. So some kings are better than others, but none can be a worthy sovereign like God Himself.
I think when it comes to the history of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, most historians regard it as being mostly reliable once you get past Soloman.
@@bradpara quite odd why a Dynasty called "house of david" will name themselves after someone who didn't exist. i don't think that everything that the bible about David is true, but there was probably such a king.
the fact there isn't an archeological evidences doesn't necessarily means he wasn't exist, just that no archeological evidences haven't found YET.
archeological evidences being discovered all the time.
Y P I said “mostly reliable” as “this stuff happened, though anything involving direct intervention by YHWH should be taken with a grain of salt”
Saul- David- Soloman are seen as true in more of an Arthuresque “ Stuff happened, people did things “ kind of way.
I always find it strange that information provided by the bible about ancient kings and events are always considered untrustworthy until other sources confirm it, but official sources from kingdoms of that time (Egypt, Assyria, Babylon,...) are always taken as true, even though they all suffer from the same "problems": mythical representations, biased story telling,...
Also it's not because we have not yet found archaeological evidence, that a certain character did not exist
the diffrence is the source. The bible is a religoius text. Collected from folk stories that were told orally for centeries Made to tell the whole history of the isrealites. While the historical sources of Egypt,Assyria and Babylon we use are historical documents. Made in the time of the events. To exactly tell this specific stories. And are allready known to be (relatively) accurate. Unlike the stories of the old testerment. There are many Egyptian,Babylonian,Assyrian counterparts of similar kind of texts. Which are like the old testerment only seen as factual with other sources supporting them.A good analogy for the creditbility of the old testerment is the iliad of acient greece. We know many things it claims happened. Even historical figgures like kinf agamemnon was most likley real. But with out other sources or archelogical findings is it imposible to conform anything by the nature of the texts. And can only be used as a form of evidence.
There is books on the Israelites the Catholic church decieded to hide them and burn any they found in puplic hands. The Ethiopian bible which is at least 800 years older than the KJB 1611, has some of the lost books. The book of Enoch has a lot of information and thats about 2-3000 years old. They did have the history written down, and those who rule know exactly who are the living decendents of ancient Israel . Also on the Eygptian Assyrian walls you can see drawings of the Israelites they have pierced ears and fringes on their gowns.
@@CCI320 it is just one of many mthylogical texts. It is not even espically unique compeared to other canaan or mesoptanian texts. Stop projecting your unseceruity. And accapt that you are special snowflake...
I was thinking the exact same thing.
This has taught me more about the Bible than any CCD class hahaha. And it’s not bias af
King Ahab really disliked whales.
Everyone likes willy.
@@stickemuppunkitsthefunlovi4733 - FREE WILLY!!!
@@nothing_controversial he was freed. He was bullied by the wild wales and couldnt feed himself. He didnt last long.
@@stickemuppunkitsthefunlovi4733 - WILLEEE!!! 😭
Wish you had uploaded this video 2 weeks ago, in time for the nation-wide Bible final in Israel. This video definitely makes the lineages of the kings in my head. It would have made studying easier
See Dan Stele for extra Biblical reference to house of David, as well as the finds at Khirbet Qaiafa (Shaarayim) which show greater extent of the Davidic period.
I see he used a Finkelstein book as a reference which is a red flag. That guy oozes attitude and he hates anything connected with the Bible. He really goes out of his way to trash any idea that David was anything in Israelite history.
@@Baltic_Hammer6162 tough noogies to Finkelstein, he lost his anti-Judean cred. Main point from Shaaraim and the Arad ostraca is that once you have writing, it's history, not pre-historical myth. Finkelstein is just anti-religious. That's why he's so into the Northern Kingdom. More material goods, more idolatry.
@@chanaheszter168 Ah, makes total sense that he would be attracted to Bashan.
I enjoyed your video. I appreciate the work and the visual aid to understanding the lines succession.
Hey Matt, I would like to know why you haven't mentioned David with a red tick as well, we do have archeological proof for him in the Tel Dan Stele, which mentions as "House of David" similar to King Omri's case.
Omri is mentioned specifically in multiple contemporary monuments. David is not mentioned specifically but rather the dynasty of David. The Tel Dan is dated 100+ years after David’s reign according to the Bible.
@@Basta11 if the dynasty of David is mentioned then David is mentioned there would be no dynasty without David
the Phoenicians really did get down to buisness!
They made a colony so big it made colonies
@@MalachiCo0 this is my favorite please of the Phoenicians.
Yeah. Around the world in 80 days.
Sick, new trade routes!
ironically they were the best friends of Israel and Judah, nowadays they are mutual enemies.
Okay, so i just found this series and i could listen to you talk about theology all day. Im so grateful to have come across this series. I watched the comments video first and i started at the beginning after that, so i know of your theology history. Do you think you would ever do a series about different religions, their histories, and their beliefs? And different sects of different larger monotheist religions?
As a Christian, I approve of this
Are you a Bishop to go around approving things?
Danyil Diachenko
GTFOH
@שָׁחוֹר יֵשׁוּעַ
אני התפלל אל יהוה אלהים אברהם ויצחק ויעקב
@שָׁחוֹר יֵשׁוּעַ I know I'm kidding 🤣
Great video, I'm a desendent of the last Exilarchs that came to Spain from Iraq, later Nasi families, and the names that came with them Benvenist, Cavallier, de la Cavallería, other family Ha Levi, Maluenda, Rodriguez, Nunez, Salazar, house of Mendez and many others. And when the when we came to Northen Mexico Carvajal along many of the others, same converos family names that intermarried for years.
Really a Super and wonderful presentation, very helpful, very clear, concise and absolutely brilliant way of putting out all the most relevant information specially on both the Northern and Southern Kingdoms, never seen anything like this .💥💥💥💥💥
It really cleared lot of my doubts about their history , Thank you so much for doing it, May God Bless you and your family .🥰🙏🙏
1 Maccabees 3:48
“And laid open the book of the law, wherein the heathen had sought to paint the likeness of their images.”
King James Version (KJV)
Yeah I saw that too 😒
BIBLE PROPHECY FULFILLED!
@MySultrySounds kan! APTTMH 🙏🏿
Where in KJV is it under a different name?
6:36 I've heard that the symbolic reigns are something from the masoretic text, which had dates modified when the Maccabees took over to mark themselves as special rulers, while in the septaguant this isn't the case, and the dates are different (and it includes a book of maccabees) I could be wrong but that'd be interesting
Yes, there was a big political debate between the Pharisee Rabbis and the Hasmonean kings (descendants of the Maccabees) over what to include in the official Tanach. The rabbis in the end got their way for the most part (that’s why the books of Maccabees 1 and 2 are not in the Tanach), but the Hasmoneans did edit and censure many texts.
@@shayne-1880 and hellenic jews had the septaguant, right?
Alt-Centrist PaleoFuturist-AnarchoJacobite Yes, and also many early Christians. However, most other Jews used the masoretic text
@@shayne-1880 yeah Nicene Christians used the septaguant (vulgate is a septaguant i believe) but then protestants wanted to be more like rabbinic Jews and started using the masoretic text
None of them are melanated....why?
Not sure if this has already been pointed out by anyone in the comments. But i believe there is a slight typo near the bottom of the chart with Zedekiah son of Josiah. It shows him reigning from 697-586, which is 111 years.
Should it be 597-586 instead?
Otherwise, really great video that has lead me down several research rabbit-holes about this time in middle eastern history.
Another excellent video! Fantastic, thank you for all your content.
…
After thinking this whilst shaving…I can safely say, that as a child, long ago, I wish I had this video to watch, whilst going to Sunday school.
My Sunday school was run by elderly folks who never went into any of the history of anything, or seemed to care about actually teaching the kids. The history, is what I loved.
I feel this video and many others like it that you produce, should be marketed and used as teaching assistants and made usable to faith study/sunday schools I think giving kids a bedrock of info like this would be beneficial to us all.
FUN FACT: The Bedouin smashed the Mesha Stele into many pieces when the Ottomans demanded it over for Germany. Thankfully, the archaeologist who found it made an impression of it beforehand, so its writing was preserved. The stele on display today is actually a few recovered pieces inserted into a cast of the stele based on the impression, hence the apparent inconsistency in material.
King Solomon is technically more historical than legendary. The First Temple is alternatively known as Solomon's Temple.
People attribute things to legendary characters all the time. This alone doesn't count as good historical evidence.
@@Noam-Bahar I'm pretty sure duke Leto wasn't actually a descendant of the line of Agamemnon and Menelaus.
I disagree. Attribution should be enough. My parents named me Solomon btw, so that is enough attribution for my claim to the temple and Israel.
My dog's name is also grey, so he lays claims to anything of that color.
But presumably a massive construction project, is evidence of SOME form of centralized leadership in Jerusalem. No 'competing' Temple was ever built.
@@dongster529 doo you claim all dongs too?
I really do enjoy these charts. Helps me to get the picture well. It also got me thinking that written documentations are enough to prove history but the Bible characters need multiple witnesses outside it to qualify as historical figures. Whereas people in blue check marks e.g. are often witnesses of their own yet they both are written documents but the other has to go further to prove itself. E.g. Sargon of Akkhad Bible mention wasn't approved until another written document was found. Hm...maybe it's just me. Good videos though.
Amazing episode!! It could have been a bit better if the dates (based on secular timeline) were shown through the process but still great work!
Daniel could not have been written during the Maccabean period (160’s BC) because Daniel was translated into the Septuagint in the 3rd century BC.
Uzziah is also mentioned in extrabiblical sources, as Azaria'u of Ya'uda, in fragmentary Assyrian sources. He's also mentioned in two unprovenanced and controversial seals found in the 19th century.
ooow ... so this is the background ... Solomon married Queen Sheba of Ethiopian Kingdom.
Then The Ark of The Covenant was missing, and not explicitly described in The Bible
we have an option, there were possibility that The Ark of The Covenant was kept by Ethiopian kingdom, and it has been hereditary.
the other option was, hidden by someone and not be found, and burried in the temple building.
What's your opinion about it?
this is great education video!
He mentions it in the video on the Menelik dynasty
@@Crick1952 ok ... going to that video now ... thanx
cannot find 'menelik'. can you please share the link?
I deleted it. Uploading a new version of that one on Monday.
@@joemarselo I just checked the description. He took it down 😅
He said he'll post an updated version soon
I was confused too because I remember watching it before
Ahab was killed in war against Aram Damascus, not Judah.
It's great to see this video, especially since recently I got more into this topic thanks to cool Israeli historical RUclipsr Sam Aronow. I very much recommend his channel.
Very neat that you included what artifacts that the people are mentioned.
So well done. Brilliant and well-compiled. I appreciated the archeological comparisons greatly.
The son of Manasseh is Amon not Ahaz. 2Kings 21 : 19-26, 2Chronicles 33 : 21
Hope the creator makes the necessary correction.
It's a good thing I got my bible opened while watching this. 😊
The Bible gives an amazing narrative of these kings that point to the Messiah and it’s beautiful how secular history confirm it+++
its also noteworthy how Hezekiah won against sennacherib.. after reading Daniels prophecies, i am convinced Daniel was a historical figure.. and not a legend..
najyer aniram Goes without at saying that at least “Some” of the prophets would be.
But how? Didn't Hezekiah rule before the exile and Daniel's supposed existence?
Thank you, Useful Chart, great Teaching, of the Kingdom of Judah and, Isreal., 👏👏👏🙌🙌💡⭐️🌟.
I appreciate the chart you’ve put together. Bible history continues to be confirmed by archaeology, so it’s only a matter of time before there are more “check marks.” Not mere inventions for convenience.
This is all so incredibly helpful, thanks so much! At 21:00, you say it's possible that Isaiah is a grandson of King Josiah... but you mean King Joash, correct?
Sigh, not sure of ancient Hebrew, but nowadays most names that have a J in them are pronounced as if with Y.
Yeah, I used the English pronunciations throughout since most of these names are very commonly used in English-speaking countries.
@@UsefulCharts speaking of pronunciations, if Jezebel has such a bad context, how is Isabel(la) so prominent?
It’s also pronounced “y” for ancient Hebrew. Wikipedia has a great article on Biblical Hebrew
@@zvimur Isabella comes from Elizabeth rather than Jezebel
@@AtomickAnimal Apparently. Headscratcher, that one.
I have a Judah grandfather back in the seventeen hundreds . His name was John Andrew Judah . Mom always said we had Jewish ancestry. I wish I knew more about John Andrew Judah
Typo: The Pharao Necho should be called Necho II. his grandfather was Necho I. I know that it is not completely in line with the way we would name European monarchs, since Necho I. was not king of all of Egypt, but the Egyptologist nomenclature should be kept due to comparability between your charts.
Thanks for the shout out!