5,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: Books on Demand
- Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
- Sprache: Englisch
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 1600-530 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 791 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 74 images and more than 40 tables and text boxes.
Das E-Book können Sie in Legimi-Apps oder einer beliebigen App lesen, die das folgende Format unterstützen:
Seitenzahl: 193
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2020
Ähnliche
Pekka Mansikka (born 1953 in Pielavesi) is a Finnish nonacademic 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 open source-based Opencart online sales for many years.
He has been primarily studying the history of ancient peoples since 2011.
The original in Finnish: “Muinaisten kansojen uusi kronologia tähtitieteen avulla, II painos”, (2020)
Cover: ”Victory stele of Assyrian king Esarhaddon, ca. 670 BCE; I Pergamon Museum, Berlin (3)”, Richard Mortel; editing Pekka Mansikka
Pictures showing eclipses:http://moonblink.info/Eclipse/search ©1995-2020 Ian Cameron Smith
Contents
Prologue
The astronomy of Babylonia
Babylonian commercial documents
New studies
Shortcomings of current chronology
Guidelines for a new chronology
1. Esarhaddon's eclipses
The eclipse during campaign against Egypt
Eclipses 700 BC and 699 BC
Solar eclipse on 28 July 691 BC
Eclipses of 690 BC and 681 BC
Time after Tammuz month
Solar eclipse on October 695 BC and 704 BC
2. Clay Tablet VAT 4956
Evaluation of researchers' conclusions
43rd regnal year of Nebuchadnezzar II
2nd regnal year of Amel-Marduk
King Jeconiah´s 37-years imprisonment
Chronology of Josephus
The three lunar eclipses of Babylonia
Lunar Eclipse 15th July 588 BCE
3. A look at the Babylonian cuneiforms
Kandalanu
Sin-shar-ishkun
Ashur-etil-ilani
Duration of reign period of Ashurbanipal
Duration of Shamash-shuma-ukin´s reign period
Conclusions of Babylonian kings
Cuneiform-based chronology
Eclipses of "Cuneiform Chronology"
Impact of Israeli history
Contradictions with Egyptian chronology
Three eclipses of Assyria
Pictures I
4. Is the chronology extendable?
Do the three Assyrian eclipses exist?
Impact of Egyptian history
Extending a chronology - where and how?
Interpretation of Ashur-etil-ilani's statement
Details
5. Lunar eclipse of Nabonidus
Entries made by Babylonian astrologers
Nabonidus Chronicle
Duration of reign period of Cyrus and Astyages
Aryenis and Cyaxares II
Nabonidus´ unrecognised regnal years
6. Assyrian solar eclipse
The options involved are as follows
Solar eclipse - June 791 BC
Solar eclipse in June 800 BC
Solar eclipse - June 809 BC
7. Tiglath-Pileser III
Potential contradictions
Regnal years 789-771 BC
Necessary changes to the Assyrian chronology
8. Shimbar-Shipak´s solar eclipse
A look at the Babylonian calendar
Closer examination of solar eclipses
Major changes to the Babylonian chronology
9. Eclipses of Takelot II and Sheshonq I
Solar eclipses of Pharaoh Shoshenq I and of Pharaoh Osorkon II
Lunar eclipse in Takelot II’s 15th regnal year
Solar eclipses of Amun´s high priests
Pictures II
10. Akhenaten’s and Hatshepsut’s eclipses
The impact of the chronology of Babylon
Major changes to Egyptian chronology
11. Tutankamun’s and Ramesses II’s eclipses
Total solar eclipse of Ramesses II
Solar eclipse of Tutankamun
Solar eclipse of Psamtik I
Solar eclipse of Psamtik II
Other solar eclipses proposed by Ibrahem
Other considered solar eclipses
Duration of reign period of Pharaoh Taharqa
Unknown time period in the history of Egypt in the 500 century BC
12. History of the Hittites
Suppiluliuma I´s letter to Egypt
Solar eclipse of Mursili II
Battle of Kadesh
Reign period of Hattusili III
13. Impact of Mitanni history
Amarna letters
Was Cushan-Rishathaim a king of Mitanni?
Suppiluliuma I´s attack on Mitanni
14. Other eclipse observations
Nabopolassar case
Solar eclipse of Cyaxares
Lunar eclipse of Ashurbanipal
Sargon II’s lunar eclipse
15. New chronology tables
Old Assyrian chronology
Middle Assyrian chronology
Neo-Assyrian chronology
Kings of Tyre
Babylonian chronology
Egyptian chronology
Hittite chronology
Kings of Urartu
Kings of Mitanni
Kings of Medias
Kings of Persia
Elamite choronology
Pictures III
Appendix I
View of the history of ancient Egypt (1125-1003 BC)
1. Egypt in 1125-1095 BC
Wenamun’s writing
Conclusions of the Smendes’ reign
Amenemnisu’s short reign
2. Egypt in 1095-1035 BC
Interpretation of the lines of Dakhla Stele
The reign of Amenemope
The tomb of Psusennes I and Amenemope
The first Libyan pharaoh
The discovery of Osochor
Other affirmations about Osochor
The length of the reign of Osorkon Older
3. Egypt in 1035-1003 BC
The reasons of the reign of Siamun
Siamun’s building projects and monuments
The possible similarities of the Siamun to the Bible
The rise of the Amun’s high priest to the phraoh of the Egypt
Confirmations of the identity of Psusennes II
Psusennes II and the length of his reign
Appendix II
The astronomy of Babylonia
1. Nabonassar, Mukin-zeri and Marduk-Apla-Iddina
Lunar eclipses under Mukin-zeri and Nabonassar
Marduk-Apla-Iddina II´s three lunar eclipses
Big contradiction
Did the Babylonians use the Egyptian calendar?
Appendix III
Corrected limmu-list
Pictures IV
Appendix IV
Simultaneous rulers – table
References
Index
Persons
Solar Eclipses
Lunar Eclipses
Prologue
To begin with, a word about this new edition. Four new chapters have been added and some chapters and annexes of minor importance have been excluded here. As for the content, this corresponds to the 2nd edition in Finnish, published at approximately the same time.
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:
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, over 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 “Solarchronology”.
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 thekings 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 astro-nomers were actually astrologers, this book will later refer to this option as the astronomy of Babylonia.
Babylonian commercial documents
In addition to solar and lunar eclipses, one should take into consideration the numerous discovered commercial documents written by the Babylonians, dated according to a regnal year of a reigning king.
The current chronology does not consider them at all. The evident reason for this is that the current old chronology was made long before these clay tablets were found and has not been corrected since then. The biggest change in this new edition is the effect of these business records written by Babylonians.
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 eclipse during Esarhaddon's during his Egyptian campaign
This is not found in the current chronology´s reign period. It has been suggested that, the this solar eclipse was 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 Shimbar-Shipak´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-Shipak II, King of Babylon, his coeval, would have begun in 1179 BC One might try to apply the 7th regnal year of Shimbar-Shipak 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 un-named 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.
Lunar eclipse in the 15th regnal year of Takelot II
This lunar eclipse observed sets detailed conditions for the chronology timing, as the exact date of the lunar eclipse is provided. It occurred approx. 5 days before the beginning of the 16th regnal year of Takelot II.
No "sound" alternatives to this lunar eclipse have been found, as the proposed alternatives would require the reign period of Takelot II to be shifted a lot away from its current position. However, there is apparently no justification for his having reigned much later than expected.
Lunar eclipses of Neo-Babylonian era
They have been commonly assessed as lunar eclipses observed in real time. However, it is noteworthy how, in this new study, one can observe that, in applying the old chrono logy, the beginning of the reign period of Nebuchadnezzar II should be moved by two years in order to correspond to archaeological discoveries. This contradicts the current interpretations of lunar eclipses in the Neo-Babylonian era.
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.
The eclipse during campaign against Egypt
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.
Eclipses during the Tammuz month
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.
Eclipses of 700 BC and 699 BC
These would seem to move the chronology of Assyria and Babylon and too much backwards. Timing the chronology to the 7th century BC would lead to new contradictions because it was possible to confirm the beginning of the reign period of Persian King Cyrus in 538 BC. However, for both of these eclipses, there is a corresponding lunar eclipse on the 6th regnal year of Sargon II.
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 eclipses recorded by Sargon II and Ashurbanipal.
As for these options, it would not be possible to find any lunar eclipses recorded by Sargon II and Ashurbanipal.
Does this mean that the eclipse that occurred during the Egyptian campaign did not occur during that Tammuz month. In general, researchers share this view.
Let's examine the related Assyrian cuneiform more closely. Professor Leroy Waterman wrote about it in his Royal Correspondence of the Assyrian Empire as early as the 1930ies:
After the king my lord went to the land of Egypt, in the month of Tammuz an eclipse took place 4
However, this record of an ancient Assyrian official seems to indicate that the eclipse occurred during Tammuz month.
So, this would encourage a question to be asked: Is there any archaeological evidence that could support the move of Assyrian chronology so much back? Are there any compelling reasons why such a large move would cause a clear conflict with the history of other nations? These topics are discussed in the following chapters.
Time after Tammuz month
However, let's briefly examine the situation where Tammuz month would not be applicable to the eclipse of Esarhaddon.
The 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 just one example, the most significant of them.
Solar eclipse on October 695 BC and 704 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.
On this basis, it could be concluded that Esarhaddon's first regnal year as King of Babylon began in spring 704 BC. As it turned out earlier, two translations of the ancient Esarhaddon chronicle have been made. 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.
Regarding this option, a question needs to be asked: is it compatible with archaeological findings?
2. Clay Tablet VAT 4956
An archaeological discovery, the Clay Tablet VAT 4956, is one of the strongest response to the legitimacy of the current Babylonian chronology. It describes the astronomical observations that are mentioned to be occurred during the 37th regnal year of Nebuchadnezzar II.
If the conclusion of the researchers on such a tablet is indisputably true, it would give strong reasoning to the current old chronology.
Evaluation of researchers' conclusions
Let us therefore have a closer look at this tablet through a picturesque scientific magnifying glass. This controversial clay tablet already depicts the first astronomical observation in its first lines: “On the 9th of nisannu, the moon was one cubit from Beta Virginis, in front of it.”
Based on the king list compiled by Berossus in 3rd century BC, the researchers suggest that it occurred in 568 BC. However, according to their calculations, they conclude that this astronomical reference occurred on 8th day of nisannu month and not on the 9th day.5 That is why 568 BC could be already regarded as an erroneous year. On the other hand, if Babylonian astrologers wrote these down hundreds of years later, then such a mistake of the day might be possible.
The Clay Tablet 4956 also refers to a lunar eclipse that would have occurred on the 15th day of simanu month. It was decided that it occurred in 568 BC, at a time equivalent to 04 July in the Julian calendar. This would mean that in the Gregorian calendar, the simanu month would be timed to approximately 14 June - 13 July. This eclipse was partial, with only 18% of the moon being shadowed. However, it is well known that the Babylonian simanu month corresponds to May-June in the Gregorian calendar.
According to the calculations made by researchers, based on that lunar eclipse, the entire Babylonian calendar´s beginning of the year in 568 BC can be well timed to a very late time, April (15 April in the Gregorian calendar).6
