New chronology using solar eclipses E-Book

Pekka Mansikka

• Herausgeber: Books on Demand
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 196

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2019

Beschreibung

Perhaps everyone interested in reading, for example, the history of Assyria, Babylon and Egypt, has at some point noticed some references to solar eclipses observed at that distant time. Taking a glance at the chronologies of those peoples, it can be stated that the solar eclipses observed cannot be found in the reign periods of those kings. The Author has discovered this scientific vacuum and he has considered it to be an appropriate opportunity to specify the chronologies of the peoples reigning in the Middle East in 1550-530 BC in connection with accordance of the observed eclipses. This study raises justified questions: did the solar eclipse observed in Ashur-Dan III's 9th regnal year in 800 BC or in 809 BC? Or could it have happened in 788 BC? This study presents a new feature of applying new studies by Egyptian astronomer Aymen M. Ibrahim for the first time in practice to the history of the peoples. This new study can be regarded very exceptional, as this is the world's first major encouragement of how a chronology can be timed using solar eclipses. This Book includes 44 images and more than 40 tables and text boxes.

Leseprobe

Pekka Mansikka (born 1953 in Pielavesi) is a Finnish non-academic history student. The Author has completed his youthful studies in Pielavesi and Kuopio. He worked for several years in Iisalmi, where the direction went north to Kittilä. In addition, he has been working as a developer in a free source-based Opencart online sales for many years.

He has been primarily studying the history of ancient peoples since 2011.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Prologue

Esarhaddon's eclipses

Šimbar-Šipak´s solar eclipse

Assyrian solar eclipse

Tiglath-Pileser III

Reign period of Elamite kings

Part I: Elamite kings and ABC1 Chronicle

Part II: Confusion Introduced by Elamites to Current Babylonian Chronology

Several solar eclipses in Egypt

Akhenaten´s fourth regnal year

Observations of ancient astronomers

New chronology tables

9.1 Assyrian chronology

9.2 Kings of Tyre

9.3 Babylonian chronology

9.4 Egyptian chronology

9.5 Hittite chronology

9.6 Kings of Urartu

Appendix I:

View of the history of ancient Egypt (1125-1003 BC)

Egypt in 1125-1095 BC.

Egypt in 1095-1035 BC.

Egypt in 1035-1003 BC.

Appendix II:

Assyrian rise from the confused condition (789-730 BC)

The winds of change in Assyria

Shalmaneser V and Sargon II

Interpreting the reign of Sargon II

Appendix III:

Corrected limmu-list

Appendix IV:

The astronomy of Babylonia

Nabonassar, Mukin-zeri and Marduk-Apla-Iddina II

Clay Tablet VAT 4956

Impact of Egyptian history

Pictures used

Index

Prologue

What are the reasons for making this very extensive study to remedy chronologies of ancient peoples? There are at least two reasons for this.

Firstly, professional researchers have done nothing to correct chronologies to match solar or lunar eclipses observed in ancient times. Of these, solar eclipses have naturally attracted the biggest attention. Here are a few:

Solar eclipse in Ashur-Dan III´s 9th regnal year.

Two solar eclipses during Esarhaddon era: in his 1st year and during his campaign against Egypt.

Solar eclipse in the 7th year of Šimbar-Šipak.

Solar eclipse in ca. the 17th year of Pharaoh Shoshenq I.

Solar eclipse in the 10th year of Mursili II, king of the Hittites.

However, some suggestions about them have all been to what solar eclipses could respond to them. But there is no suggestion that the chronology should be corrected accordingly. One might ask, is it not the eclipse first mentioned currently already applied to the right place in the chronology on 763 BC? The answer is: it is not. The theory that a solar eclipse observed in 763 BC would correspond to the solar eclipse of Ashur-Dan III´s 9th year, was introduced in 1867, 150 years ago. But the Assyrian chronology has never been corrected there, but that the year 763 BC is there in the 11th regnal year of Assur-Dan III.

The attitude has been similar towards those other eclipses that cannot be found in the current chronology of those times. None of the existing chronologies has been corrected for the purposes of fitting more closely in the solar eclipses recorded in ancient times.

Secondly, in the current chronologies there are major errors when examining their suitability for ancient astronomical observations and also some major contradictions in the history of other peoples (such as Elam). Although the year 763 BC in the current chronology is not targeted at Ashur-Dan III's 9th regnal year, that solar eclipse has similarly become the basic pillar of historical chronology.

It may occur that the overthrow of this basic pillar of ancient history and the calculation of a new foundation could be a very challenging project for many researchers. In addition, examining chronological timing from a purely scientific point of view may seem a fresh alternative. Namely, it excludes all possible previous interpretations of the kind that long time ago a recorded solar eclipse had never happened since it was not found in the current old chronology of the desired time. Secondly, it excludes the theory that, for example, The Babylonian calendar would have been able to transfer about a month away only on the grounds that some archaeological finding was to have forced timing into a particular year.

The abbreviated name of this new thesis could be "Solar-chronology".

The astronomy of Babylonia. Ancient Babylonian astronomers were very competent. They had the ability to study the times of lunar eclipses and, on the basis of the eclipse time, they could later establish it for a certain regnal year of a king of Babylon. If they had a proper understanding of the times of the reign periods of the kings of Babylonia, then with these lunar eclipses, the kings of Babylonia and Assyria can obtain their right place in the chronology of the 8th century BC. Even though these astronomers were actually astrologers, this book will later refer to this option as the astronomy of Babylonia.

Sargon´s way. According to researchers, Babylonian astronomers had the ability to time the movements of the Moon and planets for up to several centuries backwards. If they carried out these studies, for example, in the 4th century BC, they did not necessarily have accurate information on when the reign period of king of Babylonia who reigned 400 years earlier had started and when it ended. (They might have the same problem when defining other astronomical observations backwards until the 6th and 7th century BC). If so, the only reliable lunar eclipse in 8th century BC was the lunar eclipse seen by Sargon II and registered by himself . In this book, this option is referred to hereinafter as Sargon's way. This study applies this version to the chronology, the suitability of the two options is verified in the own attachment.

New studies. This study also introduces a new research of Egyptian hieroglyphs, which makes it possible to find several solar eclipses in Egypt´s history, from the period of the Pharaohs reigning between 1510 and 610 BC. This new study is based on the Sed festival celebrations of the Pharaohs and it was performed by Egyptian astronomer Aymen M. Ibrahem. His research work has been very valuable for the timing of the new Egyptian chronology.

Shortcomings of current chronology

When looking at the solar eclipses recorded in ancient times, one can observe some shortcomings in the current chronology.

The solar eclipse during Esarhaddon's 1st regnal year (as King of Babylon) and during his Egyptian campaign.

Neither of these is found in the current chronology´s reign period. It has been suggested that the latter solar eclipse could take place in 669 BC. However, this interpretation is distracted by an error of the present chronology in the reign period of Esarhaddon´s predecessor - Sennacherib.

The reign period of Sennacherib, which appears in our calendar for 24 years, contradicts the chronologies of Elamite and Babylon. It is true that ABC1 Chronicle reports his reign period for 24 years, but is this number rounded up or down? ABC1 Chronicle and the Assyrian limmu-list report Sennacherib's reign period within 1 day accuracy. He reigned 5 months and 8 days over a certain year. According to the chronology currently used, Sennacherib reigned 23 years and 5 months.

When that Sennacherib´s reign period is prolonged by a year, the contradictions with the chronologies of Elamite and Babylon are eliminated. As a result, however, Esarhaddon's reign period would occur one year later.

Solar eclipse in Ashur-Dan III´s 9th regnal year.

It is supposed to have occurred in 763 BC. For this to be accurate, the Assyrian chronology should be moved to two years later. How would this move work? To begin with, there would occur a small contradiction to the chronology of Babylon.

Solar eclipse in Šimbar-Šipak´s 7th regnal year.

Researchers have generally estimated that this eclipse would have occurred in 1012 BC. Applying this would necessitate to reduce the Babylonian chronology by seven years. This would cause some contradiction. Ninurta-apal-Ekur´s reign period of approx. three years would have moved to end in 1178 BC or 1177 BC. Then the reign period of Meli-Sipak II, King of Babylon, his coeval, would have begun in 1179 BC One might try to apply the 7th regnal year of Šimbar-Šiplak also to the eclipses occurred in July 1015 BC and in June 1024 BC. However, they have their own drawbacks as well.

Solar eclipse in the 10th regnal year of Mursili II.

In the current chronology, it occurred in 1312 BC, and other alternatives to the current chronology cannot be applied. However, this is connected to some detailed information. Archaeology reports that Mursili II's predecessor, Suppiluliuma I died soon after the death of an unnamed Pharaoh. According to the current chronology, Suppiluliuma I died in 1322 BC, while Pharaoh Tutankhamun died in 1324 BC. This two-year difference in their death dates is somewhat contradictory to the archaeological discovery mentioned above.

Solar eclipse during Pharaoh Akhenaten´s reign.

This is usually applied to the solar eclipse occurring in 1352 BC. This would mean that it only happened a few months after Akhenaten had become Pharaoh. This early time may cause some contradiction, as it was said he took the name Akhenaten as a result of a solar eclipse he saw.

Guidelines for a new chronology

Thus, we realise that it makes no sense to start making some minor changes to the chronology as mentioned above. Instead, the correction of chronology should start with a clean slate. It is also useful to compare the new studies that have been performed about solar eclipses, whether they are justified or not. This is closely related to the studies by Egyptian astronomer Aymen M. Ibrahem. In this studies, he has listed four new solar eclipses in Egyptian history, which have been carefully timed for a particular Pharaoh´s regnal year. In addition, he has referred to three other solar eclipses.

Thus, it can be realised that in the event of many individual years, the chronologies begin to resemble a spider's web filled with "traps", solar eclipses, where the "flies", the regnal years of certain kings, become caught.

We can see that the correction of chronology needs to emanate from an open-minded attitude, as the reign periods of kings may have to be moved a lot from their present places. But when we think of it as solving puzzles, we get all of the tens of pieces of information in place.

1. Esarhaddon's eclipses

From time to time have researchers, somewhat incidentally, made some statements about the current chronology. Most of them have been praising, especially related to the solar eclipse of 763 BC. However, there have been some discords.

Scientist David Brown, who does presumably belong to a "younger generation of researchers" (born in 1968) wrote in his thirties that perhaps some of the lunar eclipses recorded by Babylonian astrologers were recorded only in the 4th century BC.[1] This is a consistent conclusion, especially since some lunar eclipsed were recorded using the Egyptian calendar. This would seem to indicate that Egyptian culture had a very strong impact on Babylon during the time when the lunar eclipses in question were recorded. Egypt is not known to have had any effect on the Babylonian culture in the 6th to 8th centuries BC.

Another discord was involuntarily spotlighted when Professor Sidney Smith translated the cuneiform of Esarhaddon Chronicle in 1924. He translated the event that occurred in the 1st regnal year of Esarhaddon, in the Tashritu month so that it could be interpreted as meaning the solar eclipse.[2] However, it was never thought to refer to any solar eclipse because it was not found in autumn 680 BC. Finally, after a long time, researcher A. K. Grayson performed a new translation of Esarhaddon Chronicle.[3] But Sidney Smith's "witticism" preserved and due to this is known that the autumn of Esarhaddon's first regnal year could easily witness a solar eclipse.

The conclusion by researcher Brown gives us the opportunity to search for the eclipses that occurred during Esarhaddon over a somewhat longer period. If we adhere strictly to the lunar eclipse recorded by Babylonian astrologers, it would not be possible to move the reign of Esarhaddon backwards from the present time recorded in the old chronology.

But let's assume first that there was no solar eclipse in Esarhaddon's first regnal year; so we are more independent to try out different options. It has been assumed that during his Egyptian campaign, a complete lunar or solar eclipse occurred during the Tammuz or Du'ûzu month[4]. This month corresponds mostly to June-July, but sometimes it reaches the beginning of August. Any appropriate eclipses for this period?

There are a total of five appropriate lunar and solar eclipses.

Solar eclipse on 06 August 700 BC.

Lunar eclipse on 12 July 699 BC.

Solar eclipse on 28 July 691 BC.

Solar eclipse on 18 July 690 BC.

Lunar eclipse on 22 July 681 BC.

One should try to match them for the 10th or 12th regnal year of Esarhaddon, when he organised a campaign to Egypt.

Lunar eclipse 22nd July 681 BC.

Eclipses of 700 BC and 699 BC. These would seem to move the chronology of Assyria and Babylon and (maybe somewhat unexpectedly) of Egypt too much backwards. Timing the chronology to the 7th century BC would encounter new contradictions because it was possible to confirm the beginning of the reign period of Persian King Cyrus in 538 BC.

Solar eclipse on 28 July 691 BC. For this purpose, the lunar eclipse recorded by Sargon II could not be found properly. The lunar eclipse of December 735 BC was partial, with only 28% of the moon remained in Earth´s shadow. The lunar eclipse of June 735 BC was apparently not visible in Assyria.

Eclipses of 690 BC and 681 BC. As for these options, it would not be possible to find the lunar eclipse recorded by Sargon II.

It would become evident that the eclipse that occurred during the Egyptian campaign did not occur during that Tammuz month.

But what about eclipses after post-Tammuz months?

Annular solar eclipse on 28 August 683 BC.

Total lunar eclipse on 03 October 685 BC.

Total lunar eclipse on 23 August 692 BC.

Annular solar eclipse on 10 October 695 BC.

Let´s examine these listed eclipses somewhat closer.

Solar eclipse on 28 August 683 BC (12th regnal year of Esarhaddon). The part (93%) lunar eclipse recorded by Sargon II be found 12th August 729 BC.

Lunar eclipse on 03 October 685 BC (10th regnal year of Esarhaddon). This found same part lunar eclipse 12th August 729 BC.

Lunar eclipse on 23 August 692 BC. In this option, the lunar eclipse recorded by Sargon II could be found on 25 December 736 BC.

Solar eclipse on 10 October 695 BC. In this option, the lunar eclipse recorded by Sargon II could be found on 01 September 739 BC. As an instant prize, a solar eclipse was found on 19 October 704 BC, which would fit the first year of Esarhaddon's reign.

Lunar eclipse 23th August 692 BC.

On this basis, it could be concluded that Esarhaddon's first regnal year as King of Babylon began either in spring 704 BC, spring 701 BC or spring 694 BC. Before the beginning of a race, the starting blocks should be in order. Could the movement of the chronology´s basics perhaps facilitate the detection of the observed solar eclipses over the 800 years preceding this? That three-year difference would give reason to think that these two options are almost identical. However, they have a significant, fundamental difference.

Assyrian king Esarhaddon, reigned 705-693 BC.

Solar eclipse, 28th August 683 BC.

As it turned out earlier, two translations of the ancient Esarhaddon chronicle have been made. Applying the eclipse of 683 BC or 692 BC would take the view that the translation made by researcher Grayson is "the right one" and there was no solar eclipse in Esarhaddon's first regnal year. Applying the eclipse of 695 BC seems to take the view of the research by Smith, but it would also fall in line with those who support the translation by Grayson.

Applying the eclipse of 683 BC can be new problem. Finding the Assyrian solar eclipse (9th year of Ashur-Dan III) faces new challenges.

How then the said alternative dates of the solar eclipse recorded by Sargon II can be evaluated?

Sargon II discovered a lunar eclipse shortly before leaving for a fight against Urartu. So the question would be - during what time of year did he most likely leave for a campaign to Urartu? If applying to the eclipse of 692 BC, he would have attacked Urartu in midwinter, late December 736 BC. But if the eclipse of 695 BC is applied, he would have carried out his campaign in early September. It would appear that these related seasons are more supportive of the latter, which is that Esarhaddon's first regnal year began in 704 BC.

Theoretical reflection

If only solar eclipse dates are considered, then the eclipse of 695 BC would be possible to use for Esarhaddon's 1st regnal year and the eclipse of 31 October 686 BC for his 10th year. However, in the event of the latter, it would be necessary to apply a calculation error of at least 9 hours to the computer. If this option is about to be applied, this would not be the only one to be interpreted as an eclipse, but many other contradictions would appear. Regarding this option, see Chapter 3 in greater detail.

Solar eclipse, 19 October 704 BC.

[1] Brown, David: Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-Astrology, 2000. s.164,201,202

[2] Babylonian Historical Texts (London 1924) p. 14

[3] livius. org/sources/content/mesopotamian-chronicles-content/abc-14-esarhaddon-chronicle/?

[4] Leroy Waterman, Royal Correspondence of the Assyrian Empire, vol. I (1930-1936), p. 187

2. Šimbar-Šipak´s solar eclipse

Let´s have a little closer look at the solar eclipse occurring in the 7th regnal year of an unnamed Babylonian king. It is dated on the 26th day of the month simanu. This time corresponds to approx. June 17-30 June, according to the Julian calendar (approx. June 7-20 according to the Gregorian calendar), when not taking into account the sliding of the ancient calendar, which transferred the calendar regularly out of its place. This archaeological finding is currently known as the Religious Chronicle.[5] It deals with omens and events under the reigns of many kings. Although there is no king´s name found in relation to this eclipse, this archaeological finding includes the names of two Babylonian kings. These kings are Nabû-šumu-libur and Nabûmukin-apli. From this, the solar eclipse could be timed to roughly 1070-1005 BC.

First, there are two contributing factors, a point raised in this study, that the Pulu´s reign period started in 754 BC and that Meli-Šipak II has been described to send a letter to "the Assyrian king Ekur", or Ninurta-Apal-Ekur.[6] However, their reign periods do not overlap after the correction of the Assyrian chronology. Although this may also refer to some sort of error in the Assyrian chronology, it makes possible to specify an almost exact spot for the reign period of the Babylonian king Meli-Šipak II. When we look briefly at the corrected Assyrian chronology, it is observed that Ninurta-Apal-Ekur's reign period is 1227-1225 BC,[7] while Meli-Šipak II's regnal time (before the change caused by Šimbar-Šipak´s solar eclipse) is 1212-1197 BC.

A look at the Babylonian calendar

Let´s have a little closer look at the Babylonian calendar and its distinctions. Based on this review, we are able to estimate at what point the aforementioned month simanu could time there. According to the estimates of researchers, in the 9th century BC, the Babylonians had only a lunar calendar, with a year's length of 354 days only.[8] For this reason, the calendar months were transferred quickly backwards to the right position. However, they had some intercalary months, but setting their timing appeared to be random and apparently ordered by the king. At present, we are unable to know with certainty how closely the calendar progress was regulated by those intercalary months and how much it was allowed to "flow" backwards.

A hypothesis for this study is that the month simanu could start at approximately April 19/20, according to the Julian calendar. In this case, the calendar year would have started around 21 February. That particular 26th day of the month simanu would occur not earlier than 15 May. This is obviously a rather drastic option, but although it may be somewhat unlikely, the time of eclipse can be searched taking into account the variability of the ancient calendar. Moreover, it excludes speculations about the eclipses that might have been found if an eclipse is not searched for such a limited period.

And how far could the month simanu time for July? Here again, it must be borne in mind that the Babylonian calendar transferred months always backwards. So if the month simanu happened to be partially in July in some year, its reason had to be that an intercalary month had been applied in the previous calendar year in such a way that the calendar transferred slightly forward from its normal time. So it is very unlikely that the month simanu would have ever ended at the end of July or even in the beginning of August. For if that were the case, it would mean that the month simanu would have been timed to exactly the right place without the addition of an intercalary month. It is unlikely that if the last month of the calendar year ended after the vernal equinox, then one month later an intercalary month would be added, so that the year would have changed in early May, according to the Julian calendar. The most important thing in this study is the assumption that the month simanu ended approx. in July 18/19, according to the Julian calendar.

Closer examination of solar eclipses

Now let's include in this table all eclipses from the period of 1075-1010 BC.

In the light of the above, this list incorporates the eclipses that timed for 15 May to 15 July, according to the Julian calendar.

Table of alternative eclipses

Date

King

1

20 June 1070 BC.

Šimbar-Šipak

2

30 May 1060 BC.

Šimbar-Šipak

3

30 June 1052 BC.

Šimbar-Šipak

4

30 June 1033 BC.

Eulma

š

-Šakin-

š

umi

5

21 June 1024 BC.

Eulma

š

-Šakin-

š

umi

6

11 July 1015 BC.

Nabû-mukin-apli

As for this time, it can be observed that there are as many as six such eclipses that fit in that date.

In that tablet, the column "King" mentions a proposal in an archaeological finding of the identity of the unnamed king. In all of these options, the Babylonian chronology would have to be changed in order to make this option more accurate.

Let's briefly look at all different solar eclipses. The aforementioned Religious Chronicle describes this eclipse in this way:

”On the twenty-sixth of the month simanu, in the seventh year, day turned to night and there was a fire in the sky.”

At least two things can be deduced from this description: it happened in the day (not in the morning or in the evening), the saying "was a fire in the sky" can mean that it was not mostly visible as total solar eclipse.