In other words your pretty chart is simply a contrivance designed to mislead and to deceive people base on unsound scholarship.
Having completely ignored much of the substance of my previous replies, 'scholar' resorts to petty insults. Though the Watch Tower Society's chronology is entirely unsupported by scholarship, he claims that my chart is "unsound". He is yet to point out anything in my chart that contradicts scripture. He is therefore only left with being able to make claims about interpretations, but he is not on solid ground to do so.
Your sources are based on Encyclopedias and not on serious reference works on Chronology so in other words it is amateurish.
Another trite attack. My sole source for the reigns of Judah and Israel is the Bible, which is entirely apt for compiling a chart of biblical reigns. Indeed, what would be the point of demonstrating that the Bible on its own is consistent with secular history if I were to merely copy the biblical reigns from other sources?? Encyclopedias were used for providing the years assigned by scholars for the reigns of Egypt, Babylon, Assyria and Tyre.
Our scheme of chronology is most certainly based on the Bible because it presents the reign of Hoshea accurately which your scheme does not, you mention the two texts in 2 Kings which deal with his reign but you do not treat these texts properly as do many other chronologists.
Various sources come up with an 8-year interregnum prior to Hoshea actually reigining over Israel. However, my reckoning for the reign of Hoshea is not only supported by the actual original text but also has support from scholarly sources. (However, my decision was based on analysis of the dating systems and not in deference to external sources.) The Watch Tower Society is entirely alone in its claim that Hoshea ruled 'in some sense' for 10 years before counting his reign as a 'vassal' to Tiglath Pileser III (whose reign hadn't actually even begun).
Further, your presentation of the seventy years is one-sided ignoring the Exile and period of desolation.
My chart is entirely compatible with the Bible, including its very clear statements that the 70 years was a a period during which all the nations were subject to Babylon, and that nations could remain in their own land by serving Babylon. The period of exile I have indicated is also fully compatible with secular sources.
You say that you base your application of 2 Kings 17:1 on the original text and Bible commentaries. You are no Hebrew scholar so your comment is meaningless unless you can explain what the Hebrew means and please list those commentaries that you claim to have read. Sources please!!
I can read a concordance and an interlinear. It is not necessary to be a 'Hebrew scholar' to do this. The original text does not say 'began to reign'. My decision to render Hoshea's reign was based solely on the Bible, in view of the context of the passage and compatibility with other verses that refer to Hoshea. However, my reckoning for the reign of Hoshea is not in any way novel or unique. I have support for my reckoning from the broadly accepted history of Hoshea's reign by historians, as well as the Pulpit Commentary, Gill's Exposition, and the Assyrian Eponym Canon; this is not an exhaustive list. The Watch Tower Society has no secular support for its claim about Hoshea's reign starting when he 'became a vassal' after 10 years of 'ruling in some sense'.
There is indeed additional evidence for the vassalage of Hoshea and that is confirmed by Jewish chronology namely the Seder Olam my copy of which is in boxes. Dan Green in his Sacred Chronology Of The Hebrew Kings makes reference to this on a chart, p.25. The note therein states that Hoshea was a vassal king to Tilgath-Pileser for eight years ruling fro Gilead before becoming king of all Israel ruling from Samaria in Ahaz' 12th year.
You're really not paying attention are you?! So I'll say it again: "Dan Bruce actually claims the exact opposite to what is claimed in the Watch Tower Society version. The Watch Tower Society claims that Hoshea ruled in Israel during what you call the 'interregnum', and that his reign was 'recognised' only when he was appointed as a 'vassal' later. Bruce suggests that Hoshea was a vassal in Gilead prior to officially becoming king of Israel in Samaria." And why have you changed Dan Bruce's surname to Green?!
So Dan Bruce nicely supports the fact of an interregnum for the reign of Hoshea but he does not support WT chronology nor Jeffro's pretty list.
Bruce suggests an 8-year interregnum, but gives no support for starting Hoshea's reign relative to a later period of 'vassalage'.
As have said if you are going to quote Tetley then you should read it not simple use snippets from Google. If you choose access to it in a piecemeal way then perhaps you can try to locate her reference to Hoshea's reign and confirm whether there is a interregnum after the death of Pekah.
The 'snippets from Google' were actually portions of her book available on Google Books, not merely references to her name on Google. I certainly don't have to get a book just because you think I should, and you don't decide what sources set the 'benchmark' for 'serious study'; plus, none of the sources you've suggests support JW chronology anyway. In early versions of my chart I considered the possibility of an interregnum prior to the reign of Hoshea; further analysis of the relative dating systems confirmed that the possibility can be dismissed.
What the Bible clearly indicates that the seventy years was a period of Exile-Desolation-Servitude to Babylon for anything short of this simply deconstructs the seventy years making the period meaningless as Rainer Albertz in his study of the Exile notes. The fact of Exile means everything to this catastrophe in Jewish history.
You continue to simply avoid what the Bible actually says, and instead parrot Watch Tower Society dogma. I have already very clearly indicated that the Bible does not indicate 70 years of exile, but that it in fact explicitly indicates that serving Babylon was a way to avoid exile. The Bible very clearly indicates that the 70 years were a period during which all the nations served Babylon (Jeremiah 25:8-12), that the Jews in Jerusalem were already under Babylon's 'yoke' (Jeremiah 27:1-2), that serving Babylon was a way to avoid exile (Jeremiah 27:8-17), that seventy years ended before the Jews returned to Jerusalem (Jeremiah 29:10-14).