Bible and world history: 1004 BC–754 BC

Solomon’s temple

Construction: 1011–1004 BC · Timeline chronology

Biblical account

First Kings 6 dates the start of temple construction to Solomon’s fourth year and its completion to his eleventh, seven years later. First Kings 8 describes the dedication.

The poster’s 1011 BC label combines building and dedication; it should not imply that the entire project happened in one year.

Context: Building began and finished in different regnal years; the BC conversion follows the chart.

Compare 1004 BC–1000 BCReading options

Hiram and Solomon’s building project

During the chart’s traditional temple-building years · Timeline chronology

Biblical account

First Kings 5 describes Hiram’s exchange with Solomon over timber and labor for the temple. It also recalls his friendship with David.

The chart’s “Solomon’s friend” condenses this diplomatic and building relationship.

Compare 1004 BC–1000 BCReading options

Solomon’s successors: Israel and Judah

This portion of the chart: division through the eighth century BC · Timeline chronology

Biblical account

After Solomon, First Kings 12 distinguishes Rehoboam’s southern kingdom from Jeroboam’s northern kingdom. Israel and Judah then have separate, sometimes simultaneous rulers.

The poster’s Judah–Benjamin–Levi heading summarizes its arrangement of tribes; it is not a complete census or a claim that all Levites lived only in Judah.

Dates: The chart prints 974 BC for the division; this broad band is its framework, not an independently dated accession for every king.

Compare 1000 BC–900 BCCompare 900 BC–800 BCCompare 800 BC–754 BCReading options

Chavín in the Andes

Broad cultural span: approximately 1500–300 BC · Historical estimate

Americas

Chavín de Huántar was an influential ceremonial and pilgrimage center. Its shared religious imagery spread widely in the Andes.

That cultural influence is not evidence for a single state that politically united all Peru in 900 BC.

Unconfirmed detail: “Unite Peru” compresses cultural influence into a political claim not established by the cited evidence.

Compare 1004 BC–1000 BCCompare 1000 BC–900 BCCompare 900 BC–800 BCCompare 800 BC–754 BCReading options

Olmec centers and influence

Approximately 1200–400 BC · Historical estimate

Americas

Olmec centers in the Gulf Coast region produced art and religious imagery with influence across Mesoamerica. San Lorenzo and La Venta were major centers, not proof of one Olmec government over all Mesoamerica.

Dates: Cultural connections do not establish political unification in 800 BC.

Compare 1004 BC–1000 BCCompare 1000 BC–900 BCCompare 900 BC–800 BCCompare 800 BC–754 BCReading options

Egypt after the New Kingdom

Third Intermediate Period, approximately 1070–664 BC · Historical estimate

Egypt

Egypt’s later rulers shared or competed for power among several centers during the Third Intermediate Period. The poster’s broad dynasty bands and “Time of decay” summarize political fragmentation, not an absence of cultural or artistic achievement.

Dynasties 19–22 do not fit neatly into a single 1200–775 interval.

Context: Dynasty boundaries differ from the poster’s compressed range.

Compare 1004 BC–1000 BCCompare 1000 BC–900 BCCompare 900 BC–800 BCCompare 800 BC–754 BCReading options

Greek settlement around the Aegean

Early first-millennium BC regional context

Mediterranean

Greek-speaking communities spread around the Aegean, with Ionian and Dorian identities associated with different regions. Later Mediterranean colonies are a separate phase; the poster’s 1000 label is not a single foundation date for every settlement.

Context: Different settlements and phases should not be treated as one migration in one year.

Compare 1000 BC–900 BCCompare 900 BC–800 BCCompare 800 BC–754 BCReading options

Early mound building in Illinois

Early Woodland context, approximately 1000–500 BC · Historical estimate

Americas

Indigenous communities in Illinois developed mound building over a long period. The Illinois State Museum distinguishes Archaic, Woodland and much later Mississippian societies; “Mound Builders” is not the name of one vanished people.

The poster’s 1000 BC label is a broad chronological marker, not a construction date for a named mound.

Context: Do not confuse these early earthworks with the later city of Cahokia.

Compare 1000 BC–900 BCCompare 900 BC–800 BCCompare 800 BC–754 BCReading options

Shishak and Sheshonq I

Sheshonq I’s reign, approximately 945–924 BC · Historical estimate

Egypt and Judah

First Kings 14 describes Shishak’s campaign in Rehoboam’s fifth year. The Met identifies Shishak with Sheshonq I, whose reign it places around 945–924 BC.

This historical dating must be distinguished from a straightforward conversion of the chart’s earlier royal sequence.

Dates: The independently dated Egyptian reign does not exactly align with the chart’s traditional royal chronology.

Compare 1000 BC–900 BCReading options

Assyrian expansion and tributary states

Shalmaneser III, 858–824 BC

Mesopotamia

Assyrian kings campaigned across neighboring regions and received tribute from rulers who could also resist them. The chart’s grouped Tyre, Sidon, Medes and Israel label should not be read as four territories annexed in one year.

The Black Obelisk and Assyrian records identify specific campaigns and tribute relationships.

Context: Tribute, campaigning and direct government are different relationships.

Compare 900 BC–800 BCReading options

Jehu’s tribute to Shalmaneser III

841 BC

Israel and Assyria

The Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III depicts and names tribute from Jehu of the House of Omri. It supplies an independent Assyrian anchor for this part of Israel’s history.

“House of Omri” is Assyria’s designation for the kingdom, not a statement that Jehu was Omri’s biological son.

Compare 900 BC–800 BCReading options

Iranian peoples in Assyrian records

Assyrian contacts in the mid-830s BC

West Asia

Assyrian records mention Medes and western Iranian rulers in this period, with tribute and campaigns involving multiple local princes. This does not establish a unified Persian kingdom subjected in 835 BC.

Scholarly chronologies differ slightly over the earliest notices.

Names and identities: Local rulers and early notices are not the later Persian Empire.

Compare 900 BC–800 BCReading options

Carthage’s traditional foundation

814 BC in the foundation tradition · Traditional dating

North Africa

Carthage developed as a Phoenician settlement in North Africa. The 814 BC foundation date belongs to ancient tradition; the city’s growth and Mediterranean power developed over subsequent centuries.

Compare 900 BC–800 BCReading options

The Homeric poems

Approximately the eighth century BC; formation debated · Historical estimate

Mediterranean

The Iliad and Odyssey preserve traditions about an earlier heroic world. Their formation as epic poems belongs to a later oral and literary history, commonly associated with the eighth century BC.

The poems are not eyewitness reports written during the Trojan War.

Compare 800 BC–754 BCReading options

The first recorded Olympiad

776 BC in the traditional victor chronology · Traditional dating

Mediterranean

The traditional Olympic victor list begins in 776 BC. This is the usual starting point for numbered Olympiads, not proof that no games were held earlier.

Context: “First recorded” is more precise than the first competition ever held.

Compare 800 BC–754 BCReading options

From Nadab to Omri in Israel

Northern succession in 1 Kings 15–16

Biblical account

Nadab succeeds Jeroboam, Baasha kills Nadab, Elah succeeds Baasha, and Zimri kills Elah before Omri prevails. First Kings 16 describes Omri buying the hill of Samaria and building there.

This is a succession with conflict, not five kings reigning together.

Other families and themesReading options

Ahab’s household and the northern kingdom

1 Kings 16–22; 2 Kings 1 and 8–10

Biblical account

Ahab marries Jezebel, daughter of the Sidonian king Ethbaal. His sons Ahaziah and Joram (Jehoram) rule Israel in succession.

The chart’s “Jehoram II” is not a different second northern king securely identified by that numeral; distinguish Joram of Israel from Jehoram of Judah.

Names and identities: The two kingdoms reuse royal names; identify each by kingdom, not by the chart’s numeral alone.

Other families and themesReading options

Judah: Jehoram through Amaziah

2 Kings 8–14

Biblical account

Jehoram of Judah is followed by Ahaziah; Athaliah then rules before the child Joash (Jehoash) is installed. Amaziah succeeds Joash.

Joash of Judah must not be confused with the later king Joash of Israel, who fights Amaziah.

Names and identities: Joash and Jehoash are alternate name forms used for two different kings.

Other families and themesReading options

Jehu’s descendants in Israel

Jehoahaz, Joash and Jeroboam II: 2 Kings 13–14

Biblical account

Jehoahaz, his son Joash, and Joash’s son Jeroboam continue the northern royal sequence. This Jeroboam is conventionally called Jeroboam II, distinct from the earlier founder of the northern monarchy.

Second Kings describes pressure from Aram and later territorial recovery.

Other families and themesReading options

Isaiah, Amos and Hosea

Prophetic ministries identified by named kings

Biblical account

Isaiah 1 names Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah; Amos 1 places his message under Uzziah of Judah and Jeroboam of Israel; Hosea 1 names both southern kings and Jeroboam. These headings connect the prophets to the divided kingdoms, but do not make every part of their books a single simultaneous speech.

Other families and themesReading options

Joel’s prophetic message

No king or BC year supplied in Joel’s heading

Biblical account

Joel opens with the word of the Lord coming to Joel son of Pethuel and describes devastation associated with locusts. Unlike several other prophetic books, its heading names no reigning king.

Its placement on the chart is an interpretive chronology, not an explicit Biblical date.

Christian interpretation: The book’s heading does not fix the prophet to this century.

Other families and themesReading options

Instability after Jeroboam II

2 Kings 15

Biblical account

Zechariah’s short reign ends when Shallum kills him; Menahem then kills Shallum, and Pekahiah succeeds Menahem. Menahem’s payment to Pul shows increasing Assyrian pressure.

The chart’s Zechariah here is a king, not the later prophet who encouraged the Second Temple.

Christian interpretation: King Zechariah and the later prophet Zechariah are different people.

Other families and themesReading options

Abijam, Asa and Jehoshaphat in Judah

Southern succession in Kings and Chronicles

Biblical account

Abijam (Abijah), Asa and Jehoshaphat are successive kings of Judah. The Biblical accounts evaluate their worship and policies as well as recording political events.

Jehoshaphat’s alliances with Israel do not reunite the two kingdoms.

Other families and themesReading options

Jonah and Jeroboam’s time

2 Kings 14:25

Biblical account

Second Kings 14:25 identifies Jonah son of Amittai as a prophet associated with the restoration of Israel’s border under Jeroboam. This provides the royal setting for the name without assigning every episode in the book of Jonah to an exact BC year.

Other families and themesReading options

Eliezer’s warning to Jehoshaphat

2 Chronicles 20:37

Biblical account

Eliezer son of Dodavah warns Jehoshaphat about his alliance with Ahaziah and their shipbuilding venture. The poster’s “Eleazar” label appears to refer to this episode, but the Biblical name is Eliezer.

Names and identities: The cited verse names Eliezer, not Eleazar.

Other families and themesReading options

Elijah and Elisha

1 Kings 17 onward; 2 Kings 2 onward

Biblical account

Elijah ministers during Ahab’s time and confronts royal wrongdoing and Baal worship. Elisha succeeds him and ministers through later reigns.

Their related stories span several kings rather than one year.

Other families and themesReading options

Sabbatical years and Jubilee

Leviticus 25

Biblical teaching

Leviticus 25 prescribes a seventh-year rest for the land and a Jubilee after seven cycles of seven years. The long chart track illustrates this recurring pattern; it is not a dated record proving that every cycle was observed throughout Israel’s history.

Other families and themesReading options

Edom and the Israelite kingdoms

Edom’s continuing regional track

Biblical account

Second Kings 8 describes Edom’s revolt under Jehoram of Judah; chapter 14 describes Amaziah’s victory in the Valley of Salt. These are different conflicts and rulers.

The continuing Esau and Edom track connects the Biblical family association with later regional history.

Other families and themesReading options

Jehoshaphat, Moab and Ammon

2 Chronicles 20; compare 2 Kings 3

Biblical account

Second Chronicles 20 tells of a coalition threatening Judah and its destruction before Jehoshaphat’s army fights. Second Kings 3 describes a different campaign against Moab with Israel and Edom.

The chart’s short label should not combine them into one battle or a permanent conquest.

Other families and themesReading options

Ben-hadad and Hazael of Aram

Aramean kings in Kings

Biblical account

Ben-hadad is a royal name borne by more than one Aramean ruler. First Kings 20 describes conflict with Ahab; Second Kings 8 tells of Hazael succeeding Ben-hadad.

“Syria” here means the ancient Aramean setting, not today’s state boundaries.

Other families and themesReading options

Pul and Menahem’s tribute

2 Kings 15:19–20

Biblical account

Second Kings calls the Assyrian ruler who receives Menahem’s silver Pul. The payment strengthens Menahem’s position and leads the Assyrian army to withdraw.

It is not the deportation account later in the same chapter.

Context: Tribute is distinct from the later carrying away of captives.

Other families and themesReading options

Asa and Zerah’s army

2 Chronicles 14

Biblical account

Second Chronicles 14 recounts Asa’s appeal to the Lord and defeat of Zerah the Cushite, called “Ethiopian” in the KJV. That ancient term should not automatically be equated with the territory or population of the modern country Ethiopia.

Other families and themesReading options

Ishmael and Arab peoples

Genealogical tradition and later regional history

Biblical interpretation

Genesis 25 gives Ishmael’s sons and their settlements. The chart connects that family line to later Arab nations.

This is a traditional genealogical association, not evidence that every Arab population has one traceable ancestry or that Ishmael lived through later centuries.

Context: The continuing line is a traditional association, not a modern population genealogy.

Other families and themesReading options

Egypt’s overlapping dynasty bands

Dynasties 22–30 and later foreign rule

Egypt

Egypt’s later history includes competing dynasties and foreign conquests. Dynasty 22 is conventionally placed from about 945 BC.

The 950–305 BC band is a broad overview, not exact boundaries for dynasties 22–30 or one continuous sequence.

Dates: The printed band is 950–305; it is broader than those dynasty dates.

Other families and themesReading options

Lycurgus and Spartan institutions

Traditional lawgiver; date disputed in antiquity · Dating debated

Mediterranean

Spartan institutions were traditionally attributed to Lycurgus. Plutarch begins his biography by stressing disagreements about Lycurgus’s life, legislation and dates.

The chart’s concise label is a traditional attribution, not a securely dated single constitutional act.

Other families and themesReading options

Vedic and Brahmanical religious thought

Developments across centuries

South Asia

Brahmanical traditions encompass ritual, multiple deities and philosophical inquiry. Upanishadic teachings about Brahman introduce another layer.

The poster’s “pantheistic” description captures one way of interpreting some teachings, not the whole of Vedic religion or one dated change shared by everyone.

Context: The religious tradition is more varied than a single philosophical label.

Other families and themesReading options

Zoroaster and the Indo-European language headings

Zoroaster’s date is disputed · Dating debated

West Asia

Zoroaster is the Iranian religious teacher associated with the origins of Zoroastrianism. His date is disputed; linguistic arguments often place him in the second millennium BC.

The poster’s probable 2200 BC date is not an established consensus. “Indo-German” is an older label related to Indo-European language classification, not a single dated tribe or biological race.

Dates: The date remains uncertain, and language-family terms are not racial categories.

Other families and themesReading options

Zhou political ideals and King Li

A broad period label and a moral judgment

East Asia

King Li of Zhou is the ruler named in the “Li, the wicked ruler” entry. The Guoyu tradition depicts him as suppressing criticism and being warned that silencing people was dangerous.

“Wicked” is a moral characterization, not a separate historical event.

Other families and themesReading options

Political and philosophical reflection in Zhou traditions

An undated theme

East Asia

Zhou traditions preserve arguments about government, moral authority and the ruler’s responsibility. “Age of vigorous thinking” is too broad to identify a single school or dated event.

The ideas need to be read in particular texts rather than assigned one unsupported founding year.

Dates: A broad theme, without a securely identified date.

Other families and themesReading options

Piye’s campaign in Egypt

About 730–729 BC in the Met’s chronology · Historical estimate

Nubia and Egypt

Piye, a Kushite ruler based in Nubia, campaigned against Egyptian rivals and received their submission. Later Kushite rulers consolidated control.

The event belongs after this page’s 754 BC endpoint, even though the label begins nearby on the chart.

Dates: This campaign falls in the next period, not before 754 BC.

Other connections outside this periodReading options

Rome’s foundation and early peoples

753 BC: traditional foundation date · Traditional dating

Mediterranean

Rome’s traditional foundation date is 753 BC. Livy’s stories of Romans, Sabines and Etruscans describe several episodes in the early city’s development, not one documented war and union all occurring that year.

Dates: 753 BC is a traditional foundation date, not a contemporary written record.

Other connections outside this periodReading options