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.

360 THE GENTILE TIMES RECONSIDERED<br />

published in volumes I and V of Sachs & Hunger’s ADT. 89 For<br />

example, there are about 25 diaries from the reign of Artaxerxes II<br />

(404–358 BCE), 11 of which have the royal name and regnal dates<br />

preserved. Most, if not all, of these appear to be, not later copies,<br />

but original compilations from the 46-year reign of Artaxerxes II. 90<br />

<strong>The</strong>refore, to fix the absolute chronology of the reign of<br />

Artaxerxes II or any other Persian king, Strm Kambys 400 is needless<br />

and irrelevant. Nor is it needed to fix the reigns of Cambyses and<br />

Cyrus, which can be more securely fixed by other texts.<br />

(B-2) Potential “sources of errors” in the Babylonian<br />

astronomical tablets<br />

Attempting to further weaken the reliability of the astronomical<br />

texts, Furuli, on pages 29–37, describes nine “potential sources of<br />

error” that might undermine the trustworthiness of tablets that<br />

conflict with his Oslo <strong>Chronology</strong>, such as VAT 4956. On closer<br />

inspection, however, the supposed “sources of error” turn out to<br />

be either (a) trivial and immaterial, (b) not applicable to the tablets<br />

used for fixing the Neo-Babylonian and Persian chronology and<br />

therefore irrelevant, or (c) mere figments of imagination. All of<br />

Furuli’s “potential sources of errors” fall into one of these three<br />

categories. Some examples are given below.<br />

(B-2a) Trivial and immaterial sources of error:<br />

An example of (a) is Furuli’s description of “the process of<br />

writing down the data.” His discussion of this focuses on the<br />

astronomical diary VAT 4956, dated to the 37th year of the reign<br />

of Nebuchadnezzar. Furuli explains:<br />

<strong>The</strong> tablet itself is a copy made a long time after the original was<br />

made, but even the original was not made at the time the observations<br />

were made. <strong>The</strong> tablet covers a whole year, and because clay hardly can<br />

be kept moist for 12 months, the observations must have been written<br />

down on quite a lot of smaller tablets, which were copied when the<br />

original was made. (pp. 30, 31)<br />

As far as the copying and compilation procedure is concerned,<br />

Furuli’s description is correct and well known to Assyriologists.<br />

Copying errors do exist, but they usually create few problems in<br />

tablets that are fairly well preserved and detailed enough to be<br />

89 ADT = Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia.<br />

90 Communication H. Hunger to C. O. Jonsson, dated January 26, 2001.

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!