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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

108 THE GENTILE TIMES RECONSIDERED<br />

So it is important to ask: Are there then no historical records<br />

preserved from the Neo-Babylonian era itself which establish its<br />

chronology? Yes, there are, as is immediately evident.<br />

c) Royal inscriptions<br />

Royal inscriptions of different kinds (building inscriptions, votive<br />

inscriptions, annals, etc.) from the Assyrian and Babylonian eras<br />

themselves have been found in great numbers.<br />

In 1912 a German translation of the then-known Neo-<br />

Babylonian inscriptions was published by Stephen Langdon, but<br />

since then many new ones from the period in question have been<br />

unearthed. 37 A new translation of all the Neo-Babylonian royal<br />

inscriptions is therefore being prepared. 38<br />

This is an enormous task. Paul-Richard Berger estimates that<br />

about 1,300 royal inscriptions, one third of which are undamaged,<br />

have been found from the Neo-Babylonian period, most of them<br />

from the reigns of Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar. 39<br />

For the chronology that we are concerned with, three of the<br />

inscriptions are especially valuable. All of them are original<br />

documents from the reign of Nabonidus. 40 How do they aid in<br />

establishing the critical date for Jerusalem’s destruction?<br />

We have seen that in advocating a 607 B.C.E. date, the Watch<br />

Tower Society questions the reliability of the duration of the Neo-<br />

Babylonian period as presented by both Berossus and the Royal<br />

Canon (often called Ptolemy’s Canon), finding the total 20 years<br />

too short. <strong>The</strong> first of the royal inscriptions to be discussed, called<br />

37 Stephen Langdon, Die neubabylonischen Königsinschriften (=Vorderasiatische<br />

Bibliothek, Vol. IV) (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1912).<br />

38 <strong>The</strong> first of the three planned volumes was published in 1973 as Paul-Richard<br />

Berger, Die neubabylonischen Königsinschriften (=Alter Orient und Altes Testament,<br />

Vol. 4/1) (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1973).<br />

39 About 75 percent of these documents were found in Babylon during the detailed<br />

excavations of R. Koldewey in 1899–1917. (Berger, ibid., pp. 1–3) As explained by<br />

Dr. Ronald Sack, “a virtual mountain” of royal inscriptions have survived from the<br />

reign of Nebuchadnezzar alone. (Images of Nebuchadnezzar [Selinsgrove:<br />

Susquehanna University Press; London and Toronto: Associated University Press,<br />

1991],p. 26.) Six of the inscriptions are from the reign of Awel-Marduk, eight from<br />

the reign of Neriglissar, and about thirty from the reign of Nabonidus. (Berger, op.<br />

cit., pp. 325388.)<br />

40 In 1989 Paul-Alain Beaulieu, in his doctoral thesis <strong>The</strong> Reign of Nabonidus,<br />

included a new catalogue with detailed descriptions of the royal inscriptions from<br />

the reign of Nabonidus. —Paul-Alain Beaulieu, <strong>The</strong> Reign of Nabonidus, King of<br />

Babylon 556–539 B.C. (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1989), pp.<br />

1–42.

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!