The Gentile Times Reconsidered Chronology Christ

356 THE GENTILE TIMES RECONSIDERED
LBAT Abraham J. Sachs (ed.), Late Babylonian Astronomical and.
Related Texts. Copied by T G. Pinches and J. N Strassmaier (Providence,
Rhode Island: Brown University Press, 1955).
PD Richard A. Parker and Waldo H. Dubberstein, Babylonian
Chronology 626 B.C. – A.D. 75 (Providence, Rhode Island: Brown
University Press, 1956).
(A) The supposed “overlap” between the reigns of
Nabonidus and Cyrus
An argument repeatedly used by Furuli is that the existence of
dated business documents showing chronological “overlaps” of
some days, weeks, or months between a king and his successor
proves that “something is wrong with our chronological scheme.
In that case it is likely that the successor did not succeed the
previous king in the year when he died. There may be one or more
years in between, or there may even be another ruler between the
two kings in question. This way to test a chronology is very
important because there are discrepancies between all the kings of
the New Babylonian Empire and several of the early kings of the
Persian Empire.” (p. 132)
This argument is critically examined and disproved in the
Appendix of the present work, where the conceivable “overlaps”
between the reigns of all the kings of the Neo-Babylonian period
are examined in detail. (See above, pp. 321–329.) The only
suggested “overlap” not discussed is that between the 17th year of
Nabonidus and the accession-year of Cyrus. The reason for this is
not just that there are no dated texts that show such an overlap
between the two reigns, but also because there are a number of
tablets that definitely prove that Cyrus succeeded Nabonidus in his
17th year. Five such texts are discussed in the present work on
pages 135–139 above.
Nevertheless, Furuli claims that some business tablets show an
overlap between Nabonidus’ 17th year and Cyrus’ accession-year.
His “Table 18” on p. 132 shows that the earliest tablet extant from
the reign of Cyrus (CT 57:717) is dated to day 19, month VII
(Tishri) of his accession-year, i.e., three days after the fall of
Babylon. This date is correct. But then Furuli goes on to list three
tablets in his table that seem to be dated to Nabonidus after the
earliest tablet dated to Cyrus, indicating an overlap of five months
between the two kings: