The Gentile Times Reconsidered Chronology Christ

524 THE GENTILE TIMES RECONSIDERED
(7) Nabonidus to Cyrus
According to the Nabonidus Chronicle (translated by A. K. Grayson as Chronicle 7 in his
Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, Locust Valley, New York: J.J. Augustin Publisher, 1975, pp.
104-111), Babylon was captured by the army of Cyrus on the 16 th day of Tishri (= month
VII), evidently in the 17 th regnal year of Nabonidus (= October 11/12, 539 BCE; the year is
damaged and illegible). This date, then, marked the end of the reign of Nabonidus. Cyrus
himself entered Babylon on the 3 rd day of month VIII, Arahsamnu (= October 28/29). 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.
Furuli, however, tries to argue that Nabonidus may have ruled longer than 17 years. He
claims that, “Some anomalous tablets w[h]ere the reigns overlap do exist, but the dates of
two [of] these tablets are explained away ad hoc by P&D, as the footnotes show.” (Furuli, p.
63) As will be demonstrated below this accusation is false.
In Table 3.6 on pages 63 and 64 he presents four tablets that he claims are dated to
Nabonidus after the fall of Babylon on VII/16/17:
Month/day/year:
Tablet no.:
VII/10/17 Strassm. Nab 1054
IX/xx/17 Strassm. Nab 1055
XII/17/17 CT 57.168
VI/06/18 Contenau 1927, 122
The first date contains a typing error and should be VIII/10/17. Actually, it has been
known since 1990 that none of these four tablets have anomalous dates, and it is quite
remarkable that Furuli does not know this. All dates are discussed, for example, in my book.
All I can do, therefore, is to repeat the information presented in GTR4 on pages 356-358
and in note 62 on page 120:
“VIII/10/17” (Strassm. Nab 1054 =BM 74972):
As Furuli explains in note 84, PD rejected this date because “the month sign is shaded” in J.
N. Strassmaier’s copy of the text published in 1889. (PD = Parker & Dubberstein, Babylonian
Chronology, 1956, p. 13; the tablet is listed as no. 1054 in J. Strassmaier, Inschriften von
Nabonidus, König von Babylon, Leipzig, 1889) They had good reasons for doing this because F.
H. Weissbach, who collated the tablet in 1908, explained that the month name was highly
uncertain and “in any case not Arahsamnu” (month VIII).
Actually, there is an even more serious error with the date. Back in 1990 I asked C. B. F.
Walker at the British Museum to take another look at the date on the original tablet. He did
this together with two other Assyriologists. They all agreed that the year is 16, not 17.
Walker says:
“On the Nabonidus text no. 1054 mentioned by Parker and Dubberstein p.
13 and Kugler, SSB II 388, I have collated that tablet (BM 74972) and am
satisfied that the year is 16, not 17. It has also been checked by Dr. G. Van
Driel and Mr. Bongenaar, and they both agree with me.” – Letter Walker to
Jonsson, 13 November 1990.
“IX/xx/17” (Strassm. Nab 1055):
This text does not give any day number, the date above just being given as “Kislimu [=
month IX], year 17 of Nabonidus”. The text, in fact, contains four different dates of this
kind, in the following chronological disorder: Months IX, I, XII, and VI of “year 17 of
Nabonidus”. None of these dates refers to the time when the tablet was drawn up. Such a
date is actually missing on the tablet. As F. X. Kugler explained, the tablet belongs to a