It seems the late Alfred de Grazia anticipated the chronological impasse that has gripped some of our revisionist brethren of late. In SIS Review V:3 page 100, in a letter to the editor in response to an article by Geoffrey Gammon, he suggested the end of Late Bronze age destruction levels should coincide with Velikovsky's Martian Period (between 780 and 680BC). He also criticises Velikovsky in the same breath, suggesting that in his desire to down date Egyptian history even further, he abandoned his Martian catastrophes, a main bulwark of Worlds in Collision, the volume that struck a chord with the public. One cannot move Martian events to the 4th century BC, de Grazia continues, and one may not give Ramses III a special 'Peoples of the Sea' of his own. Whilst de Grazia assumed Martian catastrophes were a reality his point is none the less worthy of reflection. Sadly, most revisionists work in their own little bubble and totally ignore the interdisciplinary nature of Catastrophism and the necessity to bring all threads of Velikovskianism together into a single whole. The end of Late Bronze events have to be accommodated in a revision and in Egypt they are closely associated with Merenptah and Ramses III. As yet, I have not seen any revision of history that succeeds in bringing the threads together in an amicable fashion. At the moment the Centuries in Darkness approach appears to be the closest to reality.