25.03.2016 Views

The Gentile Times Reconsidered Chronology Christ

An historical and biblical refutation of 1914, a favorite year of Jehovah's Witnesses and other Bible Students. By Carl Olof Jonsson.

An historical and biblical refutation of 1914, a favorite year of Jehovah's Witnesses and other Bible Students. By Carl Olof Jonsson.

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

104 THE GENTILE TIMES RECONSIDERED<br />

set at 607 rather than 587 B.C.E., and that we add these twenty<br />

years to the reign of Nabonidus, making it thirty-seven years<br />

instead of seventeen. <strong>The</strong>n his first year must have been 575/74<br />

B.C.E. instead of 555/54. Nabonidus’ sixth year, when Astyages<br />

was defeated by Cyrus, would then be moved back from 550/49 to<br />

570/69 B.C.E.<br />

Those dates, however, are impossible, as Cyrus did not come to<br />

power until c. 559 B.C.E., as was shown above. He clearly could<br />

not have defeated Astyages ten years before he came to power!<br />

This is why the Society correctly dates this battle in 550 B.C.E.,<br />

thereby indicating Nabonidus’ reign of seventeen years to be<br />

correct, as is held by all authorities and classical authors. 29<br />

Though the chronicles available do not furnish a complete<br />

chronology for the Neo-Babylonian period, the information which<br />

they do preserve supports the dates for the lengths of the reigns of<br />

the Neo-Babylonian kings given by Berossus and the Royal Canon.<br />

As the earlier-presented evidence strongly indicates that both of<br />

these sources derived their information from the Babylonian<br />

chronicles independent of each other, and as their figures for the<br />

Neo-Babylonian reigns agree, it is logical to conclude that the<br />

chronological information originally given in the Neo-Babylonian<br />

chronicles has been preserved unaltered by Berossus and the Royal<br />

Canon.<br />

Even if this is agreed upon, however, can the information given<br />

by these Babylonian chronicles be trusted?<br />

It is often pointed out that the Assyrian scribes distorted history<br />

in order to glorify their kings and gods. “It is a well known fact that<br />

in Assyrian royal inscriptions a serious military set-back is never<br />

openly admitted.” 30 Sometimes scribes garbled the narration by<br />

29 1nsight on the Scriptures (1988), Vol. 1, pp. 454, 566; Vol. 2, p. 612. That Astyages<br />

was defeated in 550 B.C.E. may also be argued on other grounds. If, as stated by<br />

Herodotus (Historiai I:130), Astyages ruled Media for thirty-five years, his reign<br />

would have begun in 585 B.C.E. (550+35=585). He was the successor of his father<br />

Cyaxares, who had died shortly after a battle with Alyattes of Lydia, which<br />

according to Herodotus (Historiai I:73, 74) was interrupted by a solar eclipse.<br />

Actually, a total solar eclipse visible in that area took place on May 28, 585<br />

B.C.E., which is commonly identified with the one mentioned by Herodotus.—I. M.<br />

Diakonoff, <strong>The</strong> Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge<br />

University Press, 1985), pp. 112, 126; cf. M. Miller, “<strong>The</strong> earlier Persian dates in<br />

Herodotus,” Klio, Vol. 37 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1959), p. 48.<br />

30 A. K. Grayson, “Assyria and Babylonia,” Orientalia, Vol.49, Fasc. 2,1980, p. 171.<br />

See also Antti Laato in Vetus Testamentum, Vol. XLV:2, April 1995, pp. 198–226.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!