The Gentile Times Reconsidered Chronology Christ

Appendix 327
months. When the same kinglist, therefore, indicates that
Neriglissar acceded to the throne in the month of Abu, this, too,
may very well be correct. At this point of time he had firmly
established his rule and was recognized as king in most parts of
Babylonia. 34
If the two odd dates referred to earlier are not simply scribal
errors, the reason for the overlap they create at the end of Awel-
Marduk’s reign may be the same as that suggested above for the
overlap at the beginning of his reign, namely, the prevailing
opposition against his rule, which culminated with Neriglissar’s
seizure of power through a coup d’état. This explanation has recently
been argued in some detail by R. H. Sack in his book Neriglissar-
King of Babylon. 35
Overlap Neriglissar/Labashi-Marduk?
The two last tablets known from the reign of Neriglissar are
dated 1/2/4 (April 12, 556 B.C.E.) and I?/6/4 (April 16). The first
tablet known from the reign of his son and successor, Labashi-
Marduk, is dated I/23/acc. (May 3, 556 B.C.E.), that is, twentyone,
or possibly only seventeen days later. These dates create no
overlap between the two.
Overlap Labashi-Marduk/Nabonidus?
The latest tablet known from the reign of Labashi-Marduk is
dated III/12/acc. (June 20, 556 B.CE.), while the first tablet known
from the reign of his successor, Nabonidus, is dated one month
earlier, II/15/acc. (May 25, 556 B.CE.). This overlap of somewhat
less than a month is a real one.
It may be easily accounted for, however, by the circumstances that
brought Nabonidus to the throne. As explained by Berossus,
Labashi-Marduk was “only a child” at the time of Neriglissar’s
death.
34 Documents from Uruk show that Labashi-Marduk was recognized as king in that
city in the months of Nisanu, Ayyaru, and Simanu.— Paul-Alain Beaulieu, The
Reign of Nabonidus, King of Babylon 556–539 B.C. (New Haven and London: Yale
University Press, 1989), pp. 86–88. The critical comments on the Uruk King List by
Ronald H. Sack on page 3 of his work, Neriglissar―King of Babylon (= Alter Orient
and Altes Testament, Band 236, Neukirchen-vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1994),
are mistaken, as they are based on an inadequate presentation of the list, which
also disagrees with the sources referred to in his footnote.
35 R. H. Sack, op. cit., pp. 25–31. There is some evidence that Neriglissar, before his
seizure of power, held the highest office (qipu) at the Ebabbara temple in Sippar,
and that his revolt started in that city. This would explain why the earliest texts
dated to his reign are from Sippar, indicating he was first recognized in that area
while Awel-Marduk was still recognized elsewhere for several months.—S.
Zawadzki, op. cit. (note 30 above), also J. MacGinnis in Journal of the American
Oriental Society, Vol. 120:I (2000), p. 64.