Dating the reigns of Xerxes and Artaxerxes

Gerard GERTOUX

Dating the reigns of Xerxes and Artaxerxes

The pivotal date of 465 BCE for the death of Xerxes has been accepted by historians for many years without notable controversy. However, according to Thucydides, a historian renowned for his high chronological accuracy, Themistocles met Artaxerxes, who had succeeded Xerxes, his father, just after the fall of Nexos (The Peloponnesian War I:98;137) which occured after the fall of Skyros dated at the beginning of the archonship of Phaedo in 476 BCE, according to Plutarch (Life of Theseus §§35,36). Thus, the meeting with Themistocles would have occurred soon after 475/474, not 465/464. The present Achaemenid chronology comes mainly from official Babylonian king lists which ignore coregents and usurpers. This official version is contradicted by contracts dated in "year, month, day" proving the existence of frequent co-regencies and usurpers. In addition, according to the astronomical tablet referenced BM 32234 the death of Xerxes is dated 14/V/21 between two lunar eclipses, one dated 14/III/21 (26 June 475 BCE), which was total, and a second dated 14/VIII/21 (20 December 475 BCE), which was partial. Thus the death of Xerxes has to be dated 24 August 475 BCE. Likewise, the death of Artaxerxes I is fixed precisely by Thucydides (The Peloponnesian War IV:50-52) just before a partial solar eclipse (21 March 424 BCE) which would imply an absurd co-regency of Darius II with a dead king for at least one year! In fact, Plutarch and Justinus have effectively described a long co-regency of Artaxerxes but with his first son Darius B (434-426), not Darius II, and afterward two shorts reigns: Xerxes II for 2 months then Sogdianus for 7 months, which occurred before the reign of Darius II. The arrangement of the intercalary months in a chronology without co-regency has several anomalies especially the presence of two months Ulul in a single cycle. By contrast, in a chronology with co-regency, and thus two distinct cycles, the abnormal intercalary month in year 30 of Darius (Persepolis) corresponds to another cycle ending in year 4 of Xerxes. The titular of Xerxes (496-475) in Egypt and the data of Diodorus confirm the co-regency of 10 years with Darius (522-486), likewise Elephantine papyri with many double dates with civil and lunar calendars. Lunar dates were supposed to come from a Babylonian calendar, but this is impossible because the city of Elephantine, in the far south of Egypt, was largely administered by Egyptian officials who used a civil calendar to date their documents. Parker (1950) assumed that the Egyptian lunar calendar began with the 1st invisibility (day after the new moon and just before the new crescent). As lunar day 1, called psdntyw "shining ones", has played a major role in Egyptian religious celebrations, it is regularly quoted in ancient documents, which sometimes also date it in the civil calendar. In the papyrus Louvre 7848 containing a double date, lunar and civil, in the year 44 of Amasis, the first date (II Shemu 13) is lunar and the second (I Shemu 15) is civil and as the civil date fell on 21 September 558 BCE the lunar date fell on 9 (= 21 – 12) September 558 BCE which was a full moon day according to astronomy, not 1st invisibility "shining ones"! The lunar calendar at Elephantine with its system of double dates used by Persians officials and Jewish scribes from 500 to 400 BCE confirms that the Egyptian lunar day 1 was a full moon.

Dating the reigns of Xerxes and Artaxerxes Abstract. The pivotal date of 465 BCE for the death of Xerxes has been accepted by historians for many years without notable controversy. However, according to Thucydides, a historian renowned for his high chronological accuracy, Themistocles met Artaxerxes, who had succeeded Xerxes, his father, just after the fall of Nexos (The Peloponnesian War I:98;137) which occured after the fall of Skyros dated at the beginning of the archonship of Phaedo in 476 BCE, according to Plutarch (Life of Theseus §§35,36). Thus, the meeting with Themistocles would have occurred soon after 475/474, not 465/464. The present Achaemenid chronology comes mainly from official Babylonian king lists which ignore coregents and usurpers. This official version is contradicted by contracts dated in "year, month, day" proving the existence of frequent co-regencies and usurpers. In addition, according to the astronomical tablet referenced BM 32234 the death of Xerxes is dated 14/V/21 between two lunar eclipses, one dated 14/III/21 (26 June 475 BCE), which was total, and a second dated 14/VIII/21 (20 December 475 BCE), which was partial. Thus the death of Xerxes has to be dated 24 August 475 BCE. Likewise, the death of Artaxerxes I is fixed precisely by Thucydides (The Peloponnesian War IV:50-52) just before a partial solar eclipse (21 March 424 BCE) which would imply an absurd co-regency of Darius II with a dead king for at least one year! In fact, Plutarch and Justinus have effectively described a long co-regency of Artaxerxes but with his first son Darius B (434-426), not Darius II, and afterward two shorts reigns: Xerxes II for 2 months then Sogdianus for 7 months, which occured before the reign of Darius II. The arrangement of the intercalary months in a chronology without co-regency has several anomalies especially the presence of two months Ulul in a single cycle. By contrast, in a chronology with co-regency, and thus two distinct cycles, the abnormal intercalary month in year 30 of Darius (Persepolis) corresponds to another cycle ending in year 4 of Xerxes. The titulature of Xerxes (496-475) in Egypt and the data of Diodorus confirm the co-regency of 10 years with Darius (522-486), likewise Elephantine papyri with many double dates with civil and lunar calendars. Lunar dates were supposed to come from a Babylonian calendar, but this is impossible because the city of Elephantine, in the far south of Egypt, was largely administered by Egyptian officials who used a civil calendar to date their documents. Parker (1950) assumed that the Egyptian lunar calendar began with the 1st invisibility (day after the new moon and just before the new crescent). As lunar day 1, called psdntyw "shining ones", has played a major role in Egyptian religious celebrations, it is regularly quoted in ancient documents, which sometimes also date it in the civil calendar. In the papyrus Louvre 7848 containing a double date, lunar and civil, in the year 44 of Amasis, the first date (II Shemu 13) is lunar and the second (I Shemu 15) is civil and as the civil date fell on 21 September 558 BCE the lunar date fell on 9 (= 21 – 12) September 558 BCE which was a full moon day according to astronomy, not 1st invisibility "shining ones"! The lunar calendar at Elephantine with its system of double dates used by Persians officials and Jewish scribes from 500 to 400 BCE confirms that the Egyptian lunar day 1 was a full moon. SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 2 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY The death of Xerxes is dated, at the present time, in 465 BCE. This date comes mainly from the official Babylonian chronology, however, the testimony of Thucydides and from some Egyptian records of Elephantine rather support the dating 475 BCE. A careful chronological analysis of Babylonian astronomical tablets allows to fix the precise date of Xerxes' death on August 24th in 475 BCE. The official Babylonian chronology is based on the tablet BM 34576 (King List copy dated 99 BCE)1: This official chronology is partly false2 (wrong datings are highlighted in orange): Year [38] [ 7] [ 8] [ 9] 27 9 6 [24] [ 1] 19 18 36 8 3 3 15 33 King Nebuchadnezzar II Nabonidus Cyrus Darius I Darius I Xerxes I Artaxerxes I Artaxerxes I Darius II Darius II Artaxerxes II Artaxerxes II Artaxerxes III Darius III Antigonus Seleucus I Seleucus I Date 567 549 531 513 495 477 459 441 423 405 387 369 351 333 315 297 279 Reign 605-[562] 556-539 539-[530] 522-486 Length [43] 17 [9] 36 486-465 465-424 21 41 424-405 19 405-359 46 359-336 336-[331] 318-312 312-[281] 23 [5] 6 [31] Co-regency Coregent Year attested Bel-shar-usur [4] attested Antiochus I [3] There is no coregent and no usurper! The "reality" was more complex3 (hereafter). In addition, the presence of months in some king lists is abnormal, because the length of reigns is always given in years. T. BOIY - Dating Problems in Cuneiform Tablets in: Journal of the American Oriental Society 121 (2001) pp. 645-649. 2 T. BOIY - Aspects chronologiques de la période de transition (350-300 av.J.C.) in: www.achemenet.com/pdf/colloque/BOIY.pdf T. BOIY - Dating Method During the Early Hellenistic Period in: Jounal of Cuneiform Studies 52 (2000) pp. 115-121. S. ZAWADZKI - The Fall of Assyria (...) in Light of the Nabopolassar Chronicle Poznan 1988 Ed. A. Mickiewick University Press. 3 T. BOIY – Between High and Low. A Chronology of the Early Hellenistic Period 2007 Leuven Ed. Verlag Antike pp. 95-131. 1 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES Official chronology Philip Arrhidaeus Antigonus Monophtha. Seleucus I Antiochus I Reconstituted chronology 323-316 Alexander IV 316-311 311-281 (Alexander IV) Seleucus I Seleucus I /Antiochus I 281-261 Antiochus I King Nabopolassar Nebuchadnezzar II Amel-Marduk Neriglissar Labashi-Marduk Nabonidus King List of Uruk 21 years 43 years 2 years [x]+2 years, 8 months […] 3 months [x]+15 years Ptolemy 21 years 43 years 2 years 4 years 17 years 323 -310 (310-305) 305-294 294-281 281-261 Berosus 21 years 43 years 2 years 4 years 9 months 17 years 3 Remark child king murdered in -310 usurped attribution 11 years of reign alone co-regency of 13 years Eusebius 21 years 43 years 2 years 4 years 9 months 17 years This chronology4 has been reconstructed through the set of Babylonian lists of kings and all dated contracts. Since then many tablets have been published (by J. Everling and by E. Leichty, A.K. Grayson, J.J. Finkelstein and C.B.F. Walker)5 which showed the frequent occurrence of co-regency: King Nabopolassar Nebuchadnezzar II Amel-Marduk Neriglissar Labashi-Marduk Nabonidus King Nabopolassar Reign 17/05/626–15/08/605 07/09/605–08/10/562 08/10/562–07/08/560 11/08/560–16/04/556 03/05/556–20/06/556 25/05/556–13/10/539 dated average lowest date texts by year 430 21 [13]/II/00 highest date 08/V/21 Nebuchadnezzar II 2322 54 01/VI/00 21/VI/43 26/VI/43 Amel-Marduk 153 77 5/[IV]/00 20/V/00 08/VII/2 [17]/X/2 Neriglissar 214 54 01/II/00 23/V/00 01/I/4 06/[I]/4 Labashi-Marduk 12 48 23/I/00 12/II/00 09/III/00 12/III/00 Nabonidus 3317 195 15/II/00 01/III/00 17/VII/17 03/VIII/17 R.A. PARKER, W.H. DUBBERSTEIN - Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C.-A.D. 75 Rhode Island 1956 Ed. Brown University Press pp. 10-13. 5 E. LEICHTY - Catalogue of the Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum VI 1986 Trustees of the British Museum. E. LEICHTY, A.K. GRAYSON - Catalogue of the Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum VII 1987 Trustees of the British Museum. E. LEICHTY, J.J. FINKELSTEIN, C.B.F. WALKER - Catalogue of the Babylonian Tablets VIII 1988 Trustees of the British Museum. 4 Length 21 years 43 years 2 years 4 years 2 month 17 years tablet (P. & D.) (P. & D.) (P. & D.) (P. & D.) (P. & D.) BM 65270 BM 75322 BM 75106 BM 61325 BM 75489 (P. & D.) (P. & D.) (P. & D.) (P. & D.) (P. & D.) (P. & D.) (P. & D.) (P. & D.) (P. & D.) (P. & D.) (P. & D.) SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 4 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY TRANSITION AND CO-REGENCY Co-regencies were in fact very frequent during transition between two kings: 562 561 560 559 556 555 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX 42 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX 3 Nebuchadnezzar II 43 0 0 Nebuchadnezzar II/ Amel-Marduk 1 Amel-Marduk 2 Neriglissar / Amel-Marduk Neriglissar 1 4 0 1 Neriglissar 0 Labashi-Marduk/ Nabonidus Nabonidus DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES 5 Greek Achaemenid Chronology According to Thucydides: Themistocles manifested a desire to visit the king of Persia (...) The storm caused the vessel to drift towards the camp of the Athenians who then besieged Naxos (...) Accompanied by a Persian coast, then he penetrated into the interior of the country and sent to Artaxerxes, who had succeeded Xerxes, his father a letter (The Peloponnesian War I:98;137). Therefore, he reports the fall of Naxos after the one of Skyros dated at the beginning of the archonship of Phaedo in -476, according to Plutarch (Life of Theseus §§35,36). Thus, the meeting with Themistocles would have occurred soon after 475/474. Furthermore, Themistocles died under the archon of Praxiergos (in -471) according to Diodorus Siculus (Historical Library XI:54-60), and Herodotus situated the transfer of power from Darius to Xerxes at the time of the revolt of Egypt (The Histories VII :1-4), four years after Marathon, or -486, and the change Xerxes / Artaxerxes shortly after the storming of Eion [dated -476], last event of the reign of Xerxes (The Histories VII :106-107). epoch historian Cyrus II Cambyses II Bardiya Nabu. III* Nabu. IV* Darius I Bel-shimanni* Shamash-eriba* Xerxes I Artaban Artaxerxes I Xerxes II Sogdianos Darius II Artaxerxes II Artaxerxes III 450 BCE 400 BCE 250 BCE Herodotus Ctesias Manetho 29 30 7 + 5 m. 18 3/6 7 months 7 months 7 months 150 CE Ptolemy 9 8 200 CE Clement 30 19 300 CE Eusebius 9 [30] 8 400 CE Sulpice 31 6 7 months 36 36 46 33 36 ?? 21 20 [-] 7 months [-] 42 40 / 41 40 45 days 2 months 2 months 6 m +15 d 7 months 35 19 19 43 26 23 21 26 36 ?? [-] 31 50 BCE Diodorus 41 19 46 21 11*/ 20 21 7 months 7 months 41 40 41 2 months 2 months 7 months 7 months 7 months 8 19 19 42 42 62 3 21 23 Greek Achaemenid chronology6: Cyrus II/ Cambyses II Cambyses II Darius I Darius I/ Xerxes I Xerxes I Artaxerxes I Artaxerxes I/ Darius B Artaxerxes I Xerxes II/ Sogdianos Darius II (Ochos) Artaxerxes II (Arsakes) Artaxerxes III (Ochos) Artaxerxes IV (Arses) Darius III (539-530) (530-522) (522-496) (496-486) (486-475) (475-434) (434-426) (426/425) (425/424) (424-405) (405-359) (359-338) (338-336) (336-331) 9 years [co-regency of 1 year] 8 years 26 years [coregency of 10 years] 11 years 41 years [co-regency of 8 years] 1 year [= "50th year"] 1 year [= "51st year"] 19 years 46 years [coregency of 3 years] 21 years 2 years 5 years M.S. KOUTORGA - Recherches critiques sur l'histoire de la Grèce, pendant la période des guerres médiques, in: Mémoires présentés par divers savants à l'Académie royale des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres de l'Institut de France, 1re série. t. VII Paris 1861. E. LEVESQUE - Revue apologétique vol. 68 Paris 1939, pp. 92-94. 6 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 6 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Achaemenid chronology according to synchronisms dated by astronomy Year 525 524 523 522 521 520 519 518 517 516 515 514 513 512 511 510 509 508 507 506 505 504 503 502 501 500 499 498 497 496 495 494 493 492 491 490 489 488 487 486 485 484 483 482 481 480 479 478 477 476 475 474 473 472 471 470 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 1 2 3 4 5 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (1) 0 King Cambyses II Co-regent Bardiya Darius I Nebuchadnezzar III Nebuchadnezzar IV Xerxes I Xerxes I Bel-shimanni / Shamash-eriba Fall of Skyros Artaxerxes I Themistocles met Artaxerxes (Artaban) Death of Themistocles DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES 469 468 467 466 465 464 463 462 461 460 459 458 457 456 455 454 453 452 451 450 449 448 447 446 445 444 443 442 441 440 439 438 437 436 435 434 433 432 431 430 429 428 427 426 425 424 423 422 421 420 419 418 417 416 415 414 413 412 411 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 (42) (43) (44) (45) (46) (47) (48) (49) 50 (51) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 (0) 0 Murashu tablets Darius B (Xerxes II) Darius II Sogdianos 7 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 8 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Chronology: Greeks versus Babylonians Anchor date (year 7 of Cambyses in 523 BCE) owing to tablet BM 330667: 19 20 21 22 mu 7 šu ge6 14 1 2/3 danna ge6 gin sin an-mi til gar i-ṣi i-ri-hi si gin ab ge6 14 2 1/2 danna ge6 ana zalàg i-ri-hi sin an-mi til gar ulù u si dir gin 19 20 21 22 Year 7 month IV, night 14, 1 2/3 beru (= 50° = 50x4 minutes) after sunset, the Moon makes a total eclipse, [but] a little is left over, north [wind] went. month X, night 14, 2 1/2 beru (= 75° = 75x4 minutes) to sunrise are left over, the Moon makes a total ecmipse. South and north, clouded, went. The sentence "a little is left over" is unusual (a guess of copyist for a damaged tablet) but the partial eclipse may be dated 523 BCE July 16/17 [mag. = 0.54] and the total eclipse 522 BCE January 9/108. Claudius Ptolemy had to know the original tablet because he gave the right magnitude of 0.50 for the partial eclipse (Almagest V:14). Another astronomical tablet (BM 36879) describes eclipses in years 1-4 of Cambyses II, dated by astronomy 529M.J. OPPERT – Un annuaire astronomique babylonien in: Journal Asiatique (1890) pp. 511-516. 8 F.R. STEPHENSON - Historical Eclipses and Earth's Rotation Cambridge 1997 Ed. Cambridge University Press pp. 166-167. 7 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES 526 BCE9. A diary (VAT 4956)10 contains numerous astronomical conjunctions in years 37 and 38 of Nebuchadnezzar which are dated from astronomy in 568 and 567 BCE. An astronomical journal (BM 38462)11 list some lunar eclipses in the years 1 to 27 of Nebuchadnezzar which are dated from 604 to 578 BCE, another one (BM 45640) gives the partial lunar eclipse in year 2 month I of Šamaš-šuma-ukîn dated 10/11 April 666 BCE.  The */II/5 of Cambyses II corresponds to the */V/2 of Psammetichus III (May -525).  According to the biography of Adad-Guppi12, mother of Nabonidus, Nabopolassar reigned 21 years, then Nebuchadnezzar 43 years, Amel-Marduk 2 years, Neriglissar 4 years just before Nabonidus. According to the Hillah's stele13 there were 54 years between the destruction of the temple of Sin, in Harran, and the beginning of the reign of Nabonidus. According to a Babylonian chronicle (BM 21901)14 and Adad-Guppi's stele, the temple of Harran was destroyed in the year 16 of Nabopolassar. The Hillah's stele also quotes some events during the 1st year of Nabonidus and mentions an astronomical configuration which happened between 2 and 6 Siwan 555 BCE.  After the fall of the Assyrian empire in October 609 BCE, Babylonian domination lasted exactly 70 years until its fall in October 539 BCE, according to Jeremiah 25:11,12.  The Assyrian period 911-648 is dated owing to its eponyms15 and the period 648-609 by a prosopography of its eponyms16.  Year 1 of Amel Marduk (in 561 BCE) corresponds to year 37 of Jehoiachin's exile (2 Kings 25:27). This exile began just after the attack on Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar II in the year 7 of his reign (in 598 BCE).  The fall of the Assyrian empire, which took place in October 609 BCE after the battle of Harran, is characterized by a quadruple synchronism, since the year of Assur-uballit II corresponds to year 17 of Nabopolassar to Josiah's year 31 and year 1 of Necho II.  Year 6 of Assurbanipal corresponds to year 1 of Psammetichus I17.  Dating Egyptian chronology exactly from February 663 BCE to April 525 BCE is possible because the precise life of the Apis bulls is known18. Egyptian king Psammetichus I Nekao II Psammetichus II Apries [Apries/ Amasis] Amasis Psammetichus III Reign 02/663-01/609 02/609-10/594 11/594-01/588 02/588-12/570 [01/569-12/567] 01/569-10/526 11/526-04/525 Length 54 years 15 years 10 months 6 years 1 month 19 years [3 years co-regency] 43 years 10 months 6 months Highest year 54 16 7 17 [3] 44 2 Synchronism with: Year 6 of Assurbanipal Year 17 of Nabopolassar Year 5 of Cambyses II P.J. HUBER, S. DE MEIS – Babylonian Eclipse Observations from 750 BC to 1 BC Milano 2004 Ed. Mimesis pp. 94-96. 10 A.J. SACHS, H. HUNGER - Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia vol. I Wien 1988 Ed. Akademie der Wissenschaften (n° -567). 11 H. HUNGER - Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia vol. V n° 6 Wien 2001 Ed. Akademie der Wissenschaften pp. 27-30,396. 12 J.B. PRITCHARD - Ancient Near Eastern Texts Princeton 1969 Ed. Princeton University Press p. 560,561. 13 P.A. BEAULIEU – The Reign of Nabonidus, King of Babylon 556-539 B.C. in: Yale Near Eastern Research 10 (1989) n°2. 14 J.J. GLASSNER – Chroniques mésopotamiennes n°22 Paris 1993 Éd. Belles Lettres pp. 193-197. 15 S. PARPOLA – Assyrian Chronology 681-648 BC. in: Letters from Assyrian Scholars to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal Part II Winona Lake 2007 Ed. Eisenbrauns pp. 381-430. 16 S. PARPOLA – The Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire Helsinki 1998 University of Helsinki pp. XVIII-XX. 17 A.K. GRAYSON – The Chronology of the Reign of Ashurbanipal in: Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie 0 (1980) pp. 227-245. 18 H. GAUTHIER – Le livre des rois d'Égypte Le Caire 1915 Éd. Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale pp. 74,87,88,92,93,106,115,119. 9 9 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 10 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY year -680 -679 -678 -677 -676 -675 -674 -673 -672 -671 -670 -669 -668 -667 -666 -665 -664 -663 -662 -661 -660 -659 -658 -657 -656 -655 -654 -653 -652 -651 -650 -649 -648 -647 -646 -645 -644 -643 -642 -641 -640 -639 -638 -637 -636 -635 -634 -633 -632 -631 -630 -629 -628 -627 -626 -625 -624 -623 -622 -621 -620 -619 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 Assyrian eponym Egyptian Esarhaddon Danânu Issi-Adad-anênu Nergal-šarru-uṣur Abî-râmu Banbâ Nabû-ahhê-iddin Šarru-nûrî Atar-ilu Nabû-bêlu-uṣur Kanûnâyu Šulmu-bêli-lašme Šamash-kâšid-ayâbi Assurbanipal Marlarim Gabbaru Kanûnâyu Mannu-kî-šarri Thebes devastated Šarru-lû-dâri Psammetichus I Bêl-na’id Tab-šar-Sîn Arba’ilâyu Girsapûnu Silim-Aššur Ša-Nabû-šû Lâ-bâši Milkî-râmu Amyânu Assur-nâsir Assur-ilâya Assur-dûru-uṣur Sagabbu Bêl-Harrân-šadûa Ahu-ilâya Belshunu Nabû-nadin-ahi Nabû-shar-ahhešu Šamaš-da’’inanni of Babylon Nabû-sharru-uṣur Nabû-sharru-uṣur de Marash Šamaš-da’’inanni of Qué Aššur-garu’a-nere Šarru-metu-uballit Mušallim-Aššur Aššur-gimilli-tere Zababa-eriba Sin-šarru-uṣur Bel-lu-dari Bullutu Upaqa-ana-Arbail Tab-sil-Sin Adad-remanni Salmu-šarri-iqbi Aššur-etel-ilâni Nabû-šarru-uṣur ?Nur-salam-sarpi? Marduk-šarru-uṣur Sin-šar-iškun Iqbi-ilani / Marduk-remanni Sin-šarru-uṣur Kanunaiu Aššur-matu-taqqin Daddî Bel-iqbi Sa’ilu Mannu-ki-ahhe Babylonian 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 [40] [41] [42] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Esarhaddon Aššurbanipal Šamaš-šuma-ukîn BM 45640 Kandalanu Sin-šum-lišir Sin-šar-iškun Nabopolassar 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES -618 46 -617 47 -616 48 -615 49 -614 50 -613 51 -612 52 -611 53 Aššur-uballit II -610 54 -609 1 Nekao II -608 2 -607 3 -606 4 -605 5 -604 6 -603 7 -602 8 -601 9 -600 10 -599 11 -598 12 -597 13 -596 14 -595 15 -594 16 1 Psammetichus II -593 2 -592 3 -591 4 -590 5 -589 6 -588 1 7 Apries -587 2 -586 3 -585 4 -584 5 -583 6 -582 7 -581 8 -580 9 -579 10 -578 11 -577 12 -576 13 -575 14 -574 15 -573 16 -572 17 -571 18 -570 19 -569 [20] 1 Amasis -568 [21] 2 -567 [22] 3 -566 4 -565 5 -564 6 -563 7 -562 8 -561 9 -560 10 -559 11 -558 12 Pap. Louvre 7848 -557 13 -556 14 Nabû-sakip Assur-remanni Bel-ahu-uṣur Sin-alik-pani Paši Nabû-tapputi-alik Shamash-šarru-ibni Nabû-mar-šarri-uṣur Nabû-šarru-uṣur Gargamisaiu 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1 2 3 [0] [1] [2] [3] 0 Tablet VAT 4956 0 0 Cyrus II [1] [2] [3] 0 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 1 2 1 2 3 4 0 Temple of Harran wrecked Stele of Adad-Guppi Nebuchadnezzar II Amel-Marduk Neriglissar Labashi-Marduk 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 12 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY -555 -554 -553 -552 -551 -550 -549 -548 -547 -546 -545 -544 -543 -542 -541 -540 -539 -538 -537 -536 -535 -534 -533 -532 -531 -530 -529 -528 -527 -526 -525 -524 -523 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 3 44 1 Psammetichus III 4 2 5 Cambyses II 6 7 stele of Hillah [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] Fall of Babylon [20] Cyrus II 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Cambyses II 1 2 3 4 Stele IM.4187 5 Tablet BM 33066 6 7 [0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [1] 1 Nabonidus Bel-shar-usur Ugbaru Cambyses II [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 An accurate chronological reconstitution does not mean one that is historically complete (usurpers and co-regencies do not appear). It also does not mean it is the same as the official chronology. For example, the official chronology of Kandalanu19 (below) was partly accurate but the reality contains many more facts making it much more complex20. -630 -629 -628 -627 -626 -625 34 35 36 37 38 39 Psammetichus I -630 -629 -628 -627 -626 -625 34 35 36 37 38 39 Psammetichus I Assurbanipal Sin-šar-iškun 39 40 41 42 43 1 Assurbanipal 39 Aššur-etel-ilâni [40] [41] [42] 0 Sin-šar-iškun 1 1 2 3 4 18 Kandalanu 19 20 21 22 1 Nabopolassar 34 35 36 37 38 39 18 19 20 21 22) 1 34 35 36 37 38 39 Kandalanu Sin-šum-lišir Sin-šar-iškun Nabopolassar The word kandalum means "crockery (?)" in Akkadian, probably because Kandalanu was a little bit simple. S. ZAWADZKI - The Fall of Assyria (...) in Light of the Nabopolassar Chronicle Poznan 1988 Ed. A. Mickiewick University Press. G. FRAME - Babilonia 689-627 B.C. A Political History 1992 Istanbul Ed. Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut pp. 302-306. F. JOANNÈS - La Mésopotamie au 1er millénaire avant J.C. 2000 Paris Ed. Armand Colin pp. 102-105. 19 20 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES 13 "OFFICIAL" KING VERSUS "REAL" KING IN 539 BCE Babylonian king Esarhaddon Šamaš-šum-ukîn Kandalanu Nabopolassar Nebuchadnezzar Amel-Marduk Neriglissar Nabonidus Cyrus II Cambyses II reign 681-669 668-648 648-627 626-605 605 -562 562-560 560-556 556-539 539-530 530-522 # 12 20 21 21 43 Persian king reign Median king Deiokes Phraortes ? ? [Madius? Scythes] 635-610 [25] Cyaxares 610-585 [25] 585 - 26 Astyages -559 559 - 20 -539 Harpagus Achemenes ? Teispes Cyrus I Cambyses I 2 4 Cyrus II 17 9 8 # reign 728-675 675-653 653-625 625 -585 585 -550 550-539 53 22 28 40 35 11 The chronology of Median kings comes from Herodotus (The Histories I:101-108). He mentions a total solar eclipse at the end of Cyaxares reign (dated May 28, 585 BCE according to astronomy). He wrote that Astyages was defeated by Cyrus after a reign of 35 years. Cyrus thus became the ruler of Persia and Media with Harpagus becoming a coregent (The Histories I:127-130, 162, 177-178). He was called "Lieutenant of Cyrus" by Strabo (Geography VI:1) and "Commandant of Cyrus" by Diodorus Siculus (Historical Library IX:31:1). Harpagus is called Oibaras by Ctesias (Persica §13,36,45). According to Flavius Josephus, Cyrus captured Babylon with the help of Darius the Mede, a "son of Astyages", during the reign of Belshatsar, in the year 17 of Nabonidus (Jewish Antiquities X:247-249). Transition in 550 BCE: year 551 550 549 month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II [A] [7] [B] [33] [C] 4 [D] [1] King [8] [34] 5 [2] [A] Cyrus II King of Persia [B] Astyages King of Media [C] Nabonidus King of Babylon [D] Belšaruṣ ur Coregent (Babylonian) [9] [35] 6 [3] [0] [10] [1] [A] Cyrus II King of Persia (and Media) [B] Harpagus Median Coregent 7 [4] According to the text of Daniel, a ram with two horns appearing in the 3rd year of Belšaruṣur represents the kings of Media and Persia (Daniel 8:1-6,20). In -550, Cyrus II became king of Persia and Harpagus, his coregent, was king of Media. SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 14 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY year 539 538 537 month 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 I** II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I** II III [A] [20] [B] [11] 0 [0] 1 [1] [C] 17 *** 2 1 King [A] Cyrus II King of Persia [B] Oibaras Coregent (Mede) [C] Nabonidus King of Babylon [D] Belšaruṣur Coregent (Babylonian) Fall of Babylon [A] Cyrus II King of Lands [B] Ugbaru Governor of Babylon (Mede) Daniel 5:30-6:1 [C] Nabonidus Governor of Carmania Berossus -Babyloniaca FGrH 680 F10a [B] Darius the Mede "King" of Babylon Daniel 9:1-2 [A] Cyrus II King of Babylon, King of Lands [B] Cambyses II King of Babylon (Double dated contract TuM 2-3 92) (feast of Akitu)** Gubaru satrap of Babylon appeared in 535 0 *** [D] [14] Herodotus actually mentions a co-regency21, between Cyrus King of Lands (year 1) and Cambyses King of Babylon (accession) (The Histories I:208). The precise chronology of the fall of Babylon is given by the Nabonidus Chronicle22: year 539 538 537 month 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I** II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV [A] [B] 0 [0] 1 [1] [C] 17 King according to the Nabonidus Chronicle Year 17 of Nabonidus the feast of the New year (Akitu) was celebrated. [C] Nabonidus King of Babylon The last tablet of Nabonidus (CT 57, 168) is dated 19/XII/17 month VII when Cyrus attacked Akkad's army, Sippar was taken on 14/VII, Nabonidus ran away. 16/VII Ugbaru, governor of Gutium and the troops of Cyrus entered Babylonia without fight. 3/VIII Cyrus entered Babylon. Ugbaru, its governor, installed some governors. From month IX to month XII the gods of Akkad came back to their sanctuaries. [A] Cyrus II (King of Lands) [B] Ugbaru Governor (King) of Babylon 11/VIII [king] Ugbaru died. *** 0 2 1 [B] Cambyses II (Crown prince) King of Babylon Month [XII] king's wife died. From 27/XII to 3/I there was a mourning in Akkad. 4/I Cambyses, son of Cyrus, came in the temple of Nabu according the ritual of enthronement [in order to be officially King of Babylon] S. ZAWADZKI - Cyrus-Cambyses Coregency in: Revue d'assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale volume XC/2 (1996) pp. 171-183 (172 note 4). J. PEAT - Cyrus "King of Lands," Cambyses "King of Babylon", the Disputed Co-regency in: Journal of Cuneiform Studies Vol 41/2 (1989) pp. 199-215 (200-203). 22 A. KUHRT - The Persian Empire London 2010 Ed. Routeledge pp. 50-53. 21 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES The name, title and role of Ugbaru is particularly confusing. The Babylonian chronicle is biased about him. It says he is governor of Gutium when he assumes the kingship (the appointment of governors, or satraps, was only done by the king23). Gutium, though is a pejorative geographical term used by the Babylonians when referring to the former territory of the ‘barbarian’ Medes. This great "governor" Ugbaru is not to be confused with the satrap of Babylon (535-525) named Gubaru24. How do we know this? Year 540 539 538 537 536 535 534 533 532 531 530 529 528 527 526 525 524 King 16 Nabonidus 17- 0 Cyrus II 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9- 0 Cambyses II 1 2 3 4 5 6 Ugbaru governor from to 3/VIII/00 11/VIII/01 from 1/VIII/04 to 27/VI/05 Gubaru satrap of Babylon (attested by dated texts) NBRU 43, 45, 46; RECC 56, 92; TCL XIII 142 RECC 70; NBRU 61 GCCI II 103; LCE 169; BIN 114 Camb. 96; BE VIII 20 TCL XIII 150, 152; GCCI II 120; RECC 127, 128 RECC 137, 160 RECC 168, 172 RECC 177, 178; TCL 168 Ugbaru, died October 26, 538 BCE, so cannot be the Gubaru, the satrap of Babylon appearing three years later (in November 535 BCE). In addition, the name Ugbaru means nothing in Akkadian (but Gubaru means "neck"), a transcription UG-ba-ru rather than ug-ba-ru as might be read in Akkadian25 uggu-baru "anger of the diviner" or šarru-baru "king of the diviner." According to the timeline of the Chronicle of Nabonidus, the [actual] king of Babylon was Ugbaru although he was not formally enthroned. Indeed, the presence of the [official or formal] King of Babylon was necessary for the ceremony of Akitu26, the New Year's Day. This celebration was observed in the year 17. Nabonidus was present on this occasion (which had not been the case in previous years). Belšaruṣur, although a coregent, was not the official king (necessary for that ceremony). On the other hand, the fact that two years later Cambyses, the son of Cyrus, had gone to the temple to celebrate this festival proves that he was officially the new King of Babylon. Indeed, among the highlights of the Akitu27, one can identify the recitation of the Epic of Creation, the coming of the statue of Nabu from Borsippa the 4th day of Nisan [date of the Chronicle], the humiliation of the king who, after being slapped by the high priest, swore in front of BelMarduk that he had not sinned against Babylon, and so on. The analysis of the titulature28 in dated documents, which follows, confirms this. The case of the Roman Emperor is a good parallel because, as governor of the Roman world, he could appoint provincial governors who could themselves only appoint their own legates, but not governors. In addition, the emperors did not receive the (legal) title of king, however the Roman historians have reckoned their years of (effective) "reign". 24 W.H. SHEA – An Unrecognized Vassal King of Babylon in the Early Achaemenid Period: IV in: Andrews University Seminary Studies vol. X:2 (1972) pp. 147-179. 25 F. MALBRAN-LABAT - Manuel d'épigraphie akkadienne Paris 1999 Éd. Librairie orientaliste P. Geuthner p. 97. 26 F. JOANNES - La Mésopotamie au 1er millénaire avant J.C. 2000 Paris Ed. Armand Colin p. 131. 27 F. JOANNES - Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne Paris 2001 Éd. Robert Laffont pp. 20-227,26-729. 28 W.H. SHEA – An Unrecognized Vassal King of Babylon in the Early Achaemenid Period: III in: Andrews University Seminary Studies vol. X:1 (1972) pp. 88-117. 23 15 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 16 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Year 539 10 11 12 538 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 Date Nabonidus 4/VII/17 7/VII/17 9/VII/17 10/VII/17 15/VII/17 16/VII/17 17/VII/17 23/VII/00 [-]/VII/00 3/VIII/17 10/VIII/17 24/VIII/00 7/IX/00 24/IX/00 [-]/IX/17 [-]/IX/[17] 21/X/00 21/XI/00 8/XII/00 10/XII/00 17/XII/00 19/XII/17 21/XII/00 [-]/XII/[17] 4/I/01 7/I/01 30/I/01 1/II/01 8/II/01 25/II/01 30/II/01 5/III/01 29/IV/01 1/V/01 1/VI/01 [-]/VI/01 8/VIII/01 11/VIII/[01] 12/VIII/01 23/VIII/01 20/IX/01 King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon 537 3 4 [-]/X/01 16/XI/01 17/XI/01 18/XI/01 19/XI/01 01 26/XI/01 27/XI/01 28/XI/01 29/XI/01 2/XII/01 18/XII/01 26/XII/01 28/XII/01 1/I/02 4/I/[02] According to the Chronicle Fall of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Lands King of Lands (Ugbaru) Cyrus King of Babylon - King of Lands King of Babylon King of Lands King of Babylon - King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands - King of Lands King of Babylon King of Babylon - King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands Cambyses King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon / King of Babylon and of King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands [King of Babylon] King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands 5 King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon son of King of Babylon son of 9/II/02 King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon 6 reference REN 189 Bertin 1627 Bertin 1633 CT 55, 191 CT 56, 55 King of Babylon Cyrus 1 2 Cyrus 26/II/02 2/III/02 King of Babylon King of Babylon 21/III/02 King of Babylon 22/III/02 King of Babylon 24/III/02 King of Babylon GCCI I 390 BM 56154 Cyr. 1 Ugbaru appoints governors (Nabonidus appointed Bertin 1054 governor of Carmania) Cyr. 2 Cyr. 3 Cyr. 4 Bertin 1055 Beginning of gods come back RECC 1 RECC 2 RECC 3 Cyr. 7 RECC 4 CT 57, 168 Cyr. 8 End of gods come back (Akitu feast) Cyr. 11 Cyr. 12 BLC C 1 RECC 10 BRLM 58 Cyr. 15 RECC 10 RECC 9 RECC 6 TCL XIII 124 GCCI II 102 RECC 7 TCL XIII 125 Death of "King" Ugbaru NBC 4761 CUL 357 BRLM 57 Cambyses replaces Ugbaru Cyr. 18 Cyr. 22 Cyr. 23 NBRU 37 NBC 4664 25/XI/00 TuM 2-3 92 Cyr. 24 Cyr. 25 VAS III 35 Cyr. 26 Cyr. 27 Cyr. 30 Cyr. 29 VAS III 60 Cyr. 32 Cambyses is enthroned as king 9/I?/01 CT 56, 126 27/I/01 BM 67848 7/II/01 CT 56, 149 9/II/01 Camb. 36 Cyr. 36 18/II/01 CT 57, 345 20/II/01 BM 63703 Cyr. 37 Cyr. 38 10/III/01 Cyr. 16 Cyr. 39 Cyr. 40 Cyr. 41 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES 7 King of Babylon son of King of Babylon son of 8/IV/02 King of Babylon 19/IV/02 King of Babylon King of Babylon then 26/IV/02 King of Babylon 8 9 King of Babylon then 3/V/02 5/V/02 13/V/02 14/V/02 27/V/02 7/VI/02 3/VIb/02 9/VIb/02 15/VIb/02 16/VIb/02 17/VIb/02 17/VIb/02 King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon 8/VII/02 10/VII/02 13/VII/02 20/VII/02 22/VII/02 30/VII/02 3/VIII/02 7/VIII/02 King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon 11/VIII/02 17/VIII/02 21/VIII/02 26/VIII/02 King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon 10 11 King of Babylon son of King of Babylon son of 12 536 1 2 King of Babylon during King of Babylon 3/X/02 5/X/02 7/X/02 14/X/02 21/X/02 29/X/02 9/XI/02 12/XI/02 King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon 2/XII/02 3/XII/02 7/XII/02 8/XII/02 21/XII/02 26/XII/02 27/XII/02 3/I/03 5/I/03 11/I/03 King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon 3 4 King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands 2/IV/01 7/IV/01 25/IV/01 20/V/01 5/VII/01 9/VIII/01 25/IX/01 25/IX/01 [-]/XI/01 17 CT 56, 142 Camb. 42 Cyr. 42 Cyr. 43 Camb. 46 Cyr. 44 VAS 6 328 Cyr. 45 Cyr. 47 Cyr. 48 Cyr. 49 Cyr. 52 Cyr. 53 Cyr. 54 Cyr. 56 Cyr. 57 Cyr. 58 Cyr. 59 Cyr. 60 OECT 10, 127 Cyr. 61 Cyr. 62 Cyr. 63 Cyr. 64 Cyr. 65 Cyr. 66 Cyr. 67 Cyr. 68 Camb. 72 Cyr. 69 Cyr. 70 Cyr. 71 Cyr. 72 Camb. 81 Camb. 426 Cyr. 74 Cyr. 75 Cyr. 76 Cyr. 77 Cyr. 78 Cyr. 79 Cyr. 80 Cyr. 81 CT 55, 731 Cyr. 83 Cyr. 84 Cyr. 85 Cyr. 86 Cyr. 87 Cyr. 88 Cyr. 89 Cyr. 96 Cyr. 97 Cyr. 98 This reconstruction shows that Cyrus lost his title as King of Babylon just after entering the city. This situation continued up to the death of Ugbaru. The only explanation for this paradox is to accept the chronological sequence of the Chronicle describing Ugbaru as the actual king of Babylon during the period from 3/VIII/00 to 11/VIII/01. At the time of the fall of Babylon, Belšaruṣur (the actual king) was killed and Nabonidus (the king in title) was captured. Babylonian scribes dated their documents according to the reign of the official King of Babylon. Thus, after the fall of Babylon, Cyrus was the only official and actual ruling king, but he was a foreign conqueror. This was not the first time there was a co-regency between the King of Babylon and another foreign king. This had already occurred in the past with the Assyrian kings29. W.H. SHEA – An Unrecognized Vassal King of Babylon in the Early Achaemenid Period in: Andrews University Seminary Studies vol. IX (1971) pp. 51-67. 29 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 18 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Year -668 -667 Date -651 -650 21/VI/18 14/III/19 23/III/19 20/I/20 29/I/20 20/XII/20 25/XII/21 20/I/22 8/[-]/22 [-]/X/26 10/VIII/28 9/VII/31 26/XII/31 15/VII/34 27/I/36 17/VI/36 [-]/[-]/36 -649 -648 -647 -643 -641 -638 -635 -633 Title of King of Assyria year of reign Title of King of Babylon Reference30 Assurbanipal 1 2 1 Šamaš-šuma-ukîn King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Lands King of Assyria King of Lands King of Lands [King of Lands?] King of Lands King of the World King of Assyria King of Lands King of the World [King of Lands?] 18 19 17 18 20 19 21 22 20 1 26 28 31 5 7 10 34 36 13 15 King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon Kandalanu King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon BR 53 RA XV 83 BM 113929 BR 13 BM 113928 AnOr IX 4 2 NT 19 AnOr IX 13 4 NT 19 BE VIII 1 2 NT 288 2 NT 289 TCL XII 5 BR 58 2 NT 342 NBRVT 2/3 132 BR 24 The actual king of Babylon generally bore the title "King of Lands" and the official king of Babylon bore the title "King of Babylon." When the city of Babylon surrendered, Cyrus became the only official and actual King of Babylon, so he combined the two titles "King of Babylon" and "King of Lands." Then, when he entered Babylon, he demoted king Nabonidus, captured in his 17th year, by the Governor of Carmania (some documents have, however, retained his old title). He replaced the effectively ruling king Belšaruṣur, killed in his 14th year, with his commander in chief Ugbaru. This new foreign king (Median) who had not been enthroned by the Babylonians was not recognized by them, hence does not appear in their documents. After the death of Ugbaru, the title of "King of Babylon" was again attributed to Cyrus, but the replacement of Ugbaru, the actual King of Babylon, by LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AnOr VIII-IX = Analecta Orientalia - Neubabylonische Rechtsurkunden aus den Berliner Statlichen Museen (Pohl A., 1933,1934). BE VIII 1 = Legal and commercial transactions dated in the Assyrian, Neo-Babylonian and Persian periods (Clay A.T., 1908). Bertin = Corpus of Babylonian Terra-Cotta Tablet, Principally Contracts I-IV (Bertin G., 1883). BIN II = Historical, Religious, and Economic Texts (Nies, J. B. & C. E. Keiser, 1920). BLC = Bodleian Library Collection, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford University. BM = British Museum tablets. BR = Babylonische Rechts-urkunden des ausgehenden 8. und des 7. Jahrhunderts v Chr (San Nicolo M, 1951). BRLM = Babylonian records in the library of J. Pierpont Morgan (Clay A.T., 1912-). BRLM I = Babylonian business transactions of the first millennium B.C. (Clay A.T., 1912). BRLM II = Legal documents from Erech dated in the Seleucid era (Clay A.T., 1913). BSCAS 32/2 = Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences Vol. 32 n°2(Knopf C.S., 1933). Camb. = Inschriften von Cambyses, Konig von Babylon (Strassmaier, J.N., 1890). CT 55-57= Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian tablets in the British Museum (Pinches T.G., 1982). CUL = Catalogue of the Babylonian Tablets in the Libraries of Columbia University (Mendelsohn, I., 1943). Cyr. = Inschriften von Cyrus, Konig von Babylon (Strassmaier J.N., 1890); GCCI I et II = Goucher College Cuneiform Inscriptions (Dougherty, R.P., 1923, 1933); LCE = Letters and Contracts from Erech Written in the Neo-Babylonian Period (Keiser, C.E., 1918). NBC = Nies Babylonian Collection (at Yale). NBRU = Neubabylonische Rechtsurkunden aus den Berliner Staatlichen Museen (Pohl, A., "Analecta Orientalia" VIII-IX, 1933-1934). NBRVT = Neubabylonische Rechts- und Verwaltungs- Texte (Kruckmann O. "Texte und Materialien der Frau Professor Hilprecht Collection of Babylonian Antiquities im Eigentum der Universitat Jena II/III", 1933). NT = Nippur Text. OECT 10 = Late Babylonian Texts in the Ashmolean Museum (McEvan G.J.P., 1984). RA = Revue d'Assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale (Paris, 1884-). RECC = Recmds from Erech, Time of Cyrus and Cambyses (Tremayne, A., "Yale oriental series. Babylonian texts" VII, 1925). REN = Records from Erech (Dougherty, "Yale oriental series. Babylonian texts VI", 1920). TCL XII-XIII = Contrats néo-babyloniens. I-II (Contenau G., 1927-29). TuM 2-3 = Texte und Materialien der Frau prof. Hilprecht collection of Babylonian antiquities II-III (Kruckmann O., 1933). VAS = Vorderasiatische Abteilung Schriftdenkmiiler (Leipzig, 1907-17). YOS 7 = Yale Oriental Series: Records from Erech. Time of Cyrus and Cambyses (Tremayne A., 1925). 30 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES Cambyses the son of Cyrus, again complicated the situation. The Babylonians had experienced a similar situation with Nabonidus, the official king, and his son Belšaruṣur, the actual king, except that the latter king had not been enthroned (as Ugbaru was). The co-regency between an official king, Cyrus, and a new appointed King, Cambyses, brought about the need for the appearance of double dated documents31 as: month I, day 27, year 1, Cambyses King of Babylon son of Cyrus King of Lands. The chronological interpretation of these documents is controversial because some scholars see that Year 1 refers to Cyrus, not to Cambyses32, but this would imply an overlap with the 1st year of Ugbaru. In fact, as Cyrus had received the title of "King of Babylon" only after month X of the 1st year of his reign33 (before this date, he was only "King of Lands"), year 1 of Cambyses coincides with year 2 of Cyrus. So according to the reconstruction of chronologically arranged documents, Cyrus chose Cambyses as King of Babylon from [-]/X/01, but he was enthroned by the Babylonians only from 4/I/02 (Akitu feast) 2 months later. The co-regency between Cyrus (actual King of Babylon) and Cambyses (official king of Babylon) had begun informally from []/X/01 of Cyrus as confirmed by a double dated document (TuM 2-3, 92)34: Transcription Translation nippurki 11) 12) ITI šabaṭu UD 25 KÀM MU 1 KÀM 13) MU NAM SAG NAM! LUGAL 14) mgan!-zi!-zi-ia šar babili(E)ki u matati(KUR.KUR) Nippur month XI, day 25, year 1 of [Cyrus] year of accession of kingship! of Ganzyse! King of Babylon and of Lands This document showing the accession of Cambyses (written Ganzyse!) is also dated year 1 [of Cyrus]. From 4/I/01, the day of Cambyses enthronement, the documents are dated, either of Cambyses (year 1) or Cyrus (year 2). The co-regency has created problems in dating, because the scribes usually dated their documents according to the official reign and not by the rule of a co-regent. A document (CT 56, 126) is dated, for example, "month X, day 9, year 1 of Cymbyse [Ku (!)-Am-bu-zi-ja] King of Babylon." The scribe began by writing "year 1 of Cyrus [Kurash]" and then changed his mind by writing Cambyses [Kambuzia]. From the 3rd year of his reign35 Cyrus turned the former Babylonian kingdom into a satrapy, but as his son Cambyses was appointed King of Babylon appearances of kingship were saved. It is likely that, following the appointment of Gubaru as governor of the satrapy of Babylon and Beyond the River (in 535 BCE), his role as viceroy became more honorary than real. The official and effective king was Cyrus once again, not Cambyses. The scribes have transferred the title "King of Babylon" to Cyrus. It is unclear whether Cambyses retained his honorary title, but it seems not, since a tablet dated 5/VIII/4 of Cyrus (Cyr 177) mentioned him only as "son of the King" and not as "King of Babylon." Year 4 of Cyrus (in 535 BCE) corresponds to the year when Gubaru appears as governor (or satrap) of Babylon. S. ZAWADZKI - Cyrus-Cambyses Coregency in: Revue d'assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale volume XC/2 (1996) pp. 171-183 (172 note 4). 32 J. PEAT - Cyrus "King of Lands," Cambyses "King of Babylon", the Disputed Co-regency in: Journal of Cuneiform Studies Vol 41/2 (1989) pp. 199-215 (200-203). 33 S. ZAWADZKI - Gubaru: A Governor or a Vassal King of Babylonia? in: Eos vol. LXXV (1987 Wroclaw) pp.69-86. 34 O. KRÜCKMANN – Neubabylonische Rechts- und Wervaltungstexte in: Texte und materialien der Frau prof. Hilprecht collection of Babylonian antiquities II-III, Leipzig 1933, N°92. 35 M. JURSA – Neo-Babylonian Legal and Administrative Documents Münster 2005 Ed. Ugarit-Verlag p. 54. 31 19 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 20 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY The death of Cyrus is controversial. According to Herodotus: Cyrus entrusted Croesus to his son Cambyses, to whom he was giving the kingdom, with the charge to honour him and treat him well, if something should go wrong with the crossing against the Massagetae (...) Most of the Persian army perished and Cyrus himself fell, after a reign of 29 years less one (...) Many stories are told about the death of Cyrus, but I think this one is the most convincing (The Histories I:208-214). According to Ctesias: On the point of death, Cyrus appointed his eldest son to kingship (...) He pronounced blessings on them, if they maintained good will towards each other, and curses, if they acted unjustly. After this speech, he died on the 3rd day after he had received his wound; he had reigned 30 years. The transition between Cyrus II and Cambyses II according to the set of dated contracts is as follows: an 530 529 mois 4 5 6 7 8 9 Cyrus II I II III IV V VI VIb VII VIII IX X XI XII I II 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 9 Cambyses II 3/I/09; 4/I/09; 21/I/09; 3/II/09; 10/II/09; 21/II/09; 22/II/09; 2/III/09; 17/III/09; [-]/III/09; 7/IV/09; 16/IV/09; 25/IV/09; 27/IV/09 12/V/09; 13/V/09; [-]/V/09; 23/VI/09 (VS 5, 42) [8] 0 19/VIII/09 (OECT 10, 123) 26/XI/09 (YOS 7, 84) 12/VI/00; 16/VI/00; 19/VI/00; 20/VI/00 6/VIa/00; 4/VIb/00; 4/VIb/00; 1/VII/00; 3?/VII/00; 29/VII/00; [-]/VII/00; 10/VIII/00; 2/IX/00; 5/IX/00; 17/IX/00; 20/IX/00; 3/X/00; 10/X/00; 12/X/00; 30/X/00; 6/XI/00; 17/XI/00; 21/XI/00; 29/XI/00; 1 The previous reconstruction may be interpreted in two ways: 1) Cyrus gave his son the kingdom (on October 530 BCE) and died 7 months later (around February 529 BCE). Thus, there was a new co-regency of 7 months between Cyrus and Cambyses. 2) Cyrus gave his son the kingdom just before the battle against the Massagetae (on October 530 BCE) then he died during the battle. As most of the Persian army perished, the moment and the place of his death remained unknown during several months. The second possibility is the most convincing, because a battle of 7 months long seems unlikely. In addition, during the first co-regency in 538 BCE, Cyrus was "King of Lands" and Cambyses was "King of Babylon", but during this short new co-regency (month VI) Cyrus and Cambyses were both "King of Babylon, King of Lands". year 530 529 month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII year of reign King 8 [7] Cyrus II King of Babylon, King of Lands 9 0 [8] Cambyses II King of Babylon, King of Lands Chronology of usurpers and co-regencies TRANSITION CAMBYSES II/ DARIUS I The transition between Cambyses II and Darius I is complicated because there were several usurpers and co-regencies involved. The reconstruction, according to the dated tablets of Bardiya36, may be interpreted in two ways: year 522 521 year 522 521 month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII year of reign 11/X/07; 14/X/07; 24/X/07; 30/X/07 7 8 0 1/XI/07; 28/XI/07; 30/XI/07 3/XII/07; 4/XII/07 2/I/08; 5/I/08; 23/I/08 xx/II/00 3/III/00; 6/III/00 15/IV/00; 25/IV/00 1 19/I/01 0 23/III/01; 26/III/01 19/IV/01; 21/IV/01; 23/IV/01; 27/IV/01; 28/IV/01 1/V/01; 3/V/01; 6/V/01; 9/V/01; 20/V/01; 21/V/01 3/VI/01; 6/VI/01/; 10/VI/01; 13/VI/01; 15/VI/01; 19/VI/01; 20/VI/01 1/VII/01; 10/VII/01; 14/VII/00; 17/VII/00; 20/VII/00 20/VIII/01; 7/VIII/00; 10/VIII/00; 24/VIII/00 year of reign 11/X/07; 14/X/07; 24/X/07; 30/X/07 7 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 (choice 1) (choice 2) 1/XI/07; 28/XI/07; 30/XI/07 3/XII/07; 4/XII/07; 14/XII/00 King of Babylon, King of Lands 2/I/08; 5/I/08; 23/I/08; 19/I/01 King of Lands xx/II/00 King of Babylon, King of Lands 3/III/00; 6/III/00; 23/III/01; 26/III/01 9/IV/01; 15/IV/00; 19/IV/01; 21/IV/01; 23/IV/01; 25/IV/00; 28/IV/01 1/V/01; 3/V/01; 6/V/01; 9/V/01; 20/V/01; 21/V/01 3/VI/01; 6/VI/01/; 10/VI/01; 13/VI/01; 15/VI/01; 19/VI/01; 20/VI/01 1/VII/01; 10/VII/01; 14/VII/00; 17/VII/00; 20/VII/00 King of Babylon 20/VIII/01; 7/VIII/00; 10/VIII/00; 24/VIII/00 7/IX/01; 20/IX/00; 21/IX/00; 26/IX/01; 19/IX/01 2/X/01; 6/X/00; 14/X/00: 15/X/00: 19/X/00: 26/X/00: 9/XI/00; 15/X/00; 20/XI/00; 27/XI/00 King of Babylon, King of Lands 4/XII/00; 13/XII/00; 19/XII/00; 21/XII/00; 22/XII/00; 23/XII/00; 24/XII/00; Choice 2 agrees with the dates (underlined) coming from the trilingual inscription on the rockface of Bisitun37: A magus, Gaumata by name, rebelled in Paishiyauvada. A mountain, by name Arakadri, from there 14/XII had gone when he rebelled. He lied thus to the people: ‘I am Bardiya, son of Cyrus, brother of Cambyses.’ Then all the people became rebellious against Cambyses; they went over to him, both Persia and Media, as well as the other peoples. He seized the kingship; 9/IV, then he seized the kingship. After that Cambyses died his own death (no date!). 10/VII, then I, with a few men, killed that Gaumata the magus, and his foremost followers. S. ZAWADZKI -Bardiya, Darius and Babylonian Usurpers in the Light of the Bisitun Inscription and Babylonian Sources in: Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran 27 (1994) pp. 127-145. 37 A. KUHRT - The Persian Empire London 2010 Ed. Routeledge pp. 140-157. 36 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 22 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Choice 1 is not possible because there were two lunar eclipses, correctly described by Ptolemy, the first one dated 28 Epiphi year 20 of Darius I and the second one 3 Tybi year 31 (Almagest IV: 9.11). They are respectively dated by astronomy on November 19, 502 BCE and on April 25, 491 BCE which confirms an accession in 522 BCE. In addition, the 8 months gap in Bardiya chronology with choice 1 is an unlikely choice. year 523 522 521 520 month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I year of reign King 6 Cambyses II King of Babylon, King of Lands 7 (Lunar eclipse dated July 16, 523 BCE) (Lunar eclipse dated January 10, 522 BCE) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 8 0 0 1 Bardiya King of Babylon, King of Lands 0 0 1 Cambyses II / Bardiya King of Lands Nebuchadnezzar III King of Babylon 0 Darius I King of Babylon, King of Lands [0] Nebuchadnezzar IV King of Babylon 1 2 The fragmentary information of Herodotus is therefore generally good: duration of Cambyses reign of 7 years and 5 month (Herodotus would include the 4 months of Nebuchadnezzar III); Bardiya reign of 7 months (The Histories III:66-67); or a total duration of 20 months for the revolt (The Histories III:152-153). The whole reconstitution is surprising, since it involves two co-regencies: one of 2 months with Bardiya at the end of Cambyses reign, and another of 10 months with Nebuchadnezzar IV at the beginning of Darius reign. As noted by Zawadzki, we are facing an extremely paradoxical fact: the scribes in the same city would have recognized both rival kings as they have simultaneously dated their documents of these two sovereigns38. Bardiya39 was regarded both as a coregent of Cambyses (The Histories III:61-63) and also as a new king (but regarded as an usurper by Darius I). S. ZAWADZKI Bardiya, Darius and Babylonian Usurpers in the Light of the Bisitun Inscription in: Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran 27 (1994) pp.127-145. 39 Bardiya is called Mardus by Aeschylus (in -472), Smerdis by Herodotus (in -450), Tanyoxarkes by Ctesias (-400), Artaxerxes by Esdras (Esdras 4:4-24), Mergis by Justinus, etc. 38 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES TRANSITION DARIUS I / XERXES I For his part, Xerxes made explicit reference to the previous choice of his father Darius. According to an inscription (XPf §4), recalling the arrival of his father, while his brothers and Hystapes Arsames were still alive: King Xerxes says: Darius had other sons, the good pleasure of Ahuramazda was that Darius my father made me the greatest after him. When Darius my father left the throne, with Ahuramazda, I became king on the throne of my father40. According to Herodotus, Darius established his son Xerxes as king (and his coregent) at the end of his reign: Now, as he was about to lead forth his levies against Egypt and Athens, a fierce contention for the sovereign power arose among his sons; since the law of the Persians was that a king must not go out with his army, until he has an appointed one to succeed him upon the throne. Darius, before he obtained the kingdom, had had three sons born to him from his former wife, who was a daughter of Gobryas; while, since he began to reign, Atossa, the daughter of Cyrus, had borne him four. Artabazanes was the eldest of the first family, and Xerxes of the second. These two, therefore, being the sons of different mothers, were now at variance. Artabazanes claimed the crown as the eldest of all the children, because it was an established custom all over the world for the eldest to have the pre-eminence; while Xerxes, on the other hand, urged that he was sprung from Atossa, the daughter of Cyrus, and that it was Cyrus who had won the Persians their freedom. Before Darius had pronounced on the matter, it happened that Demaratus, the son of Ariston, who had been deprived of his crown at Sparta, and had afterwards, of his own accord, gone into banishment, came up to Susa, and there heard of the quarrel of the princes. Hereupon, as report says, he went to Xerxes, and advised him, in addition to all that he had urged before, to plead that at the time when he was born Darius was already king, and bore rule over the Persians; but when Artabazanes came into the world, he was a mere private person. It would therefore be neither right nor seemly that the crown should go to another in preference to himself. "For at Sparta," said Demaratus, byway of suggestion, "the law is that if a king has sons before he comes to the throne, and another son is born to him afterwards, the child so born is heir to his father's kingdom." Xerxes followed this counsel, and Darius, persuaded that he had justice on his side, appointed him his successor. For my own part I believe that, even without this, the crown would have gone to Xerxes; for Atossa was allpowerful (The Histories VII:2-5). This indicates that Xerxes was appointed king (basileus), not just a crown prince, during the reign of his father Darius. Even using the official chronology of royal lists there was a co-regency (of at least 7 months) between Darius and his son Xerxes as we can see by compiling contracts dating from this period. year 486 485 month Darius I (year 36) 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 13/I/36; 27/I/36 7/II/36 I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV xx/III/[00] 16/IV/36; 5/V/36; 9/V/36; 27/V/36 22/VI/36; 24/VI/36 [2]7/VII/36 --/VIII/36; 15/VIII/36 10/IX/36; 10+x/IX/36 11/XII/36 ? P. LECOQ - Les inscriptions de la Perse achéménide Paris 1997 Éd. Gallimard p. 255. 40 Xerxes I (accession) 11/V?/00 22/VIII/00 13/IX/00 06+x/X/00; 7/X/00; 22/X/00 09/XI/00; 27/XI/00; 27/XI/00 12/XII/00; 21/XII/00; 24/XII/00; 27/XII/00 5/I/01; 7/I/01; 15/I/01; 16/I/01; 22/I/01; 23/I/01 3/II/01; 8/II/01; 10/II/01; 17/II/01; 28/II/01 3/III/01; 14/III/01; 21/III/01; 24/III/01; 26/III/01 13/IV/01; 15/IV/01; 21/IV/01; 21/IV/01; 23/IV/01 23 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 24 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY CO-REGENCY DARIUS I / XERXES I year month 486 4 I 5 II 6 III 7 IV 8 V 9 VI 10 VII 11 VIII 12 IX 485 1 X 2 XI 3 XII Darius I (year 36) 13/I/36; 27/I/36 7/II/36 Xerxes I (accession) xx/III/[00]41 16/IV/36 5/V/36; 9/V/36; 27/V/36 22/VI/36; 24/VI/36 [2]7/VII/36 --/VIII/3643; 15/VIII/3644 10/IX/3645; 10+x/IX/3646 11/V?/0042 22/VIII/00 13/IX/00 06/X/00; 7/X/00; 22/X/00 09/XI/00; 27/XI/00 12/XII/00; 21/XI/00; 27/XI/00 There are many variants of reading among cuneiform signs to represent months47: J.N. STRASSMAIER - Einige kleinere babylonische Keilschrifttexte aus dem Britischen Museum, (8. Kongr.) Christiania 1892. EKBK 21 (BM 60599) 42 M. SAN NICOLÒ, A. UNGNAD -Neubabylonische Rechts- und Verwaltungsurkunden übersetzt und erläutert, Vol. I, part 4 Leipzig, 1934, p. 544, tablet No. 634, VS 6, 177 (VAT 4397). 43 G.J.P. MCEWAN –Late Babylonian Texts in the Ashmolean Museum in: Oxford Editions of Cuneiform Texts vol. X (Clarendon Press, 1984) pp. 12, 72 n° 159. 44 J. MACGINNIS -Letter Orders from Sippar and the Administration of the Ebabbara in the Late-Babylonian Period Poznan 1995. Letter Orders n80 (BM 77850). 45 J. MACGINNIS, Letter Orders n81 (BM 71941). 46 BM 72574 47 L.-J. BORD, R. MUGNAIONI –L'écriture cunéiforme -syllabaire sumérien babylonien assyrien 2002 Paris Éd. Librairie orientaliste Paul Geuthner S.A. F. MALBRAN-LABAT - Manuel d'épigraphie akkadienne Paris 1999 Éd. Librairie orientaliste P. Geuthner. 41 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES The cuneiform signs ITI SIG4 meaning "month III" appear in the boxed part which is enlarged below: Tablet BM 60599 dated xx/III/[00] of Xerxes The accession year [00] is deduced from the prosopography of the scribes of Sippar, Marduk-mukîn-apli and Marduk-bêl-šunu, who only appear in contracts under Xerxes48 dated 7/X/00 and 27/XI/00. In addition, the titulature49 "King of Babylon, king of Lands" appears only in the year 00 (10 times) and 01 (15 times), then disappears until the year 12 (once). S. GRAZIANI - I testi Mesopotamici datati al regno di Serse (485-465 a. c.) in: Annali 46 sup. 47 (Rome 1986) Ed. Herder pp. 4-9, 14-17, 124. 49 R. ROLLINGER - Xerxes und Babylon in: Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires 1999 N°1 pp. 9-12. 48 25 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 26 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Year Xerxes 0 [1] [2], [3], [4] [5] [6] [7] period 0 Xerxes 1 ? 1 Xerxes 2 Xerxes 3 Xerxes 4 Xerxes 5 Xerxes 6 Xerxes 7 Xerxes 8 Xerxes 9 Xerxes 10 Xerxes 11 Xerxes 12 Xerxes 13 Xerxes 14 Xerxes 15 Xerxes 16 5 11 16 Xerxes 17 Xerxes 18 Xerxes 19 Xerxes 20 Xerxes 21 (each square represents 1 dated document) [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] King of Persia King of Persia (and) Media (crisscrossed) King of Persia (and) Media and (King) of lands (hatched) King of Persia (and) Media, King of Babylon and lands King of lands King of Babylon and (King) of lands No titulature Two possible readings of date: xx/III/[00], the more likely, or xx/III/[01] (in grey): Date of contract Xer xx/III/[00] Xer 7/X/00 Xer 27/XI/00 Xer xx/III/[01] 1st scribe of Sippar Marduk-mukîn-apli Marduk-mukîn-apli Marduk-mukîn-apli Marduk-mukîn-apli 2nd scribe of Sippar Bêl-ittanu Marduk-bêl-šunu Marduk-bêl-šunu Bêl-ittanu 3rd scribe of Sippar Marduk-bêl-šunu Iddin-Nabû Iddin-Nabû Marduk-bêl-šunu The prosopography of the officials of Ebabbara's administration50 shows that Marduk-mukîn-apli and Marduk-bêl-šunu were scribes (ṭupšarru) from year 28 of Darius to year 2 of Xerxes, without co-regency (or from year 0 of Xerxes to year 36 of Darius with co-regency, with the synchronism: year 28 of Darius = year 2 of Xerxes). Furthermore, Bêlittanu was not a scribe, but the chief of the temple administration (šangû). He was used as a scribe only for the accession of Xerxes, afterwards he made the receipt for the offering of Xerxes in his letter dated [-]/III/01 of Xerxes (VS 6, 179). He was still šangû in a contract dated 21/III/01 of Xerxes (BM 65378) and one dated 17/III/29 of Darius (BM 64022). J. MACGINNIS -Letter Orders from Sippar and the Administration of the Ebabbara in the Late-Babylonian Period Poznan 1995. Ed. BONAMI pp. 114-134. A.C.V.M. BONGENAAR – The Neo-Babylonian Ebabbar Temple at Sippar Istanbul 1997 Ed. Nederlands Historisch Archaeologisch Institut pp. 78-81. 50 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES Tablet VAT 4397 dated 11/V?/00 of Xerxes The full date is: ITI NE? UD! 11 KAM MU SAG meaning "month V?, [day] 11, accession year" (the word "day" UD! is missing). The month X is unlikely because it has always 4 horizontal nails (there are at least 5 visible in the photo) and the month IX never has any vertical nail at the end of the sign. The cuneiform signs ITI NE meaning "month V" appears in the boxed part which is enlarged below (grey areas replace scratched parts): 27 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 28 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY It is easy to see that the representation of the kings on the Assyrian and Babylonian bas-reliefs is conventional. They are always taller than all other officials. For example, Marduk-zakir-šumi I (left), king of Babylon and Salmanazar III (right), king of Assyria, are both greater than their officials. According to the conventional representation of kings, it was obvious that, among Persepolis bas-reliefs, the king on his throne, was Darius in front of Xerxes, the Crown prince51. The king on his throne can not be Xerxes52, because he is mentioned explicitly on some inscriptions as "son of Darius" (XPk), opposite to "Darius the king" (DPb)53. E.E. HERZFELD - A New Inscription of Xerxes From Persepolis in: Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilizations n°5 Berlin (1932) p.8. 52 A. SHAPUR SHABAZI – The Authoritative Guide to Persepolis Tehran 2004 Ed. Sanaye Farhangi Iran pp. 99,145-146. 53 P. LECOQ - Les inscriptions de la Perse achéménide Paris 1997 Éd. Gallimard pp. 100, 127, 259. 51 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES According to some records (Persepolis fortifications), mention was made of the building of a house for Xerxes54 as early as 498 BCE. Some scholars (very few) dispute this evidence which supports a co-regency between Darius and Xerxes55. Yet this fact was known since ancient times. Herodotus (The Histories VII:2-5), for example, knew that Xerxes was appointed king (basileus), not just crown prince, during the reign of his father Darius [the same term "appointed king" is used by Herodotus (The Histories I:208) to describe the co-regency between Cyrus and Cambyses]. One of the main opponents of this identification is Briant56 but his arguments are dogmatic. He writes that the new palace in Babylon that appears in the year 26 of Darius (in 496 BCE) cannot be linked with the accession of Xerxes because « king never shares power »! His claim is unfounded, it reflects only his personal concept of power (which should not be delegated). He does not address any chronological evidence. He also claims that it is difficult to draw chronological conclusions from the inscription of Xerxes (XPk), despite his never having used any chronological analysis. For scientific historians, whose chronology is considered as the eye of history, there is no difficulty. The Persepolis Fortifications57 (PF) are dated from years 13 to 28 of Darius and the Persepolis Treasury58 (PT) from year 30 of Darius to year 7 of Artaxerxes I. Irshena was treasurer from years 14 to 22 of Darius as šaramana "Responsible" (PF 280, 239), and Shuddayauda from years 19 to 26 (PF 490, 642). These two names never appear together in the same document. Then, in years 27 and 28, Baratkama was "Responsible [of Treasury]" (PF 864-868, 879, 1120). From year 32 two names appear at the beginning of documents (but not systematically), with or without their title, the first one is considered as treasurer and the second one as vice-treasurer. Thus in year 32, Baratkama was still treasurer because his name is placed at the beginning of documents dated IV/32 and XII/12 (PT 2, 9). But at the end of year 32 (beginning of year 33) the first name is Shakka (PT 1), who became the new treasurer. Baratkama's name is sometimes written with its title kanṣabara "Treasurer" (PT 12, 21, 22). Shakka's name appears in a document dated year 7 of Xerxes (PT 24). The second name (Baratkama) is mentioned with its title "Responsible", but Shakka had a more prestigious title sadabatiš "Chief of hundred". For example, Haradkama the "Chief of hundred" is before Vahauka the "Responsible" and Bakuradathe the "Chief of hundred" is before Shiraz the "Responsible" (PT1, 42). When the two titles appear at the same time, "Chief of hundred" is always written before "Responsible". The prosopography of treasurers during the transition of reign between Darius and Xerxes with or without the corengency of 10 years enables one to see which one is the more suitable. It is also interesting to use the last three contracts from Zababa-šar-uṣur's archive59 (dated 5/IX/22, 18/VIII/26 of Darius, 10/XI/4 of Xerxes) because they overlap the transition between Darius and Xerxes. Without co-regency these three contracts are separated respectively from 4 to 12 years while with co-regency there is a periodicity of 4 years, which is more logical because trade deadlines are periodic. A. FARKAS - Achaemenid Sculpture Istanbul, 1974 Ed. Nederlands Historisch Archaeologisch Instituut pp. 51-54. 55 A. KUHRT - The Persian Empire London 2010 Ed. Routeledge p. 304. 56 P. BRIANT - Histoire de l'empire perse. De Cyrus à Alexandre Paris 1996 Éd. Fayard pp. 983-984. 57 R.T. HALLOCK - Persepolis Fortification Tablets Chicago 1969 Ed. The University of Chicago Press p. 74. 58 G.G. CAMERON - Persepolis Treasury Tablets Chicago 1948 Ed. The University of Chicago Press pp. 14-17, 33 G.G. CAMERON - New Tablets from the Persepolis Treasury in: Journal of Near Eastern Studies XXIV (1965) p. 186. 59 L. DEPUYDT – Contrats babyloniens d'époque achéménide du Bît-Abî Râm avec une épigraphie araméenne in: Ressue d'Assyriologie XC (1996) pp. 41-60. 54 29 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 30 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY PROSOPOGRAPHY OF TREASURERS Without co-regency (and Zababa-šar-uṣur's archive) year Reign 509 508 507 506 505 504 503 502 501 500 499 498 497 496 495 494 493 492 491 490 13 Darius I (Grand Palace) 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 New Palace for Xerxes 27 28 29 30 31 32 489 488 487 486 485 484 33 34 35 36-0 Xerxes I 1 2 483 3 482 4 481 480 5 6 479 478 477 476 475 474 473 472 471 470 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 469 468 467 17 18 19 466 465 464 463 462 461 460 459 458 20 21-0 Artaxerxes I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 First name Irshena R. Irshena R. Irshena R. Irshena R. Irshena R. Shuddayauda R. Shuddayauda R. Shuddayauda R. Shuddayauda R. Shuddayauda R. Shuddayauda R. Shuddayauda R. Shuddayauda R. Baratkama R. Baratkama R. Second name (Irshena R.) (Irshena R.) (Irshena R.) (Irshena R.) 5/IX/22 18/VIII/26 Baratkama Baratkama Shakka Appishmanda Appishmanda Baratkama IV 32 XII 32 XII 32 Baratkama Shakka Baratkama T. Baratkama Baratkama Shakka Baratkama Shakka Darkaush Baratkama R. Aspathines Darkaush Darkaush Baratkama R. Darkaush Baratkama R. VI 2 XII 2 IV, VII 3 VI, XII 3 III 4 IV 4 VI, VII 4 X4 Baratkama T. Shakka Shakka C. Artataxma Baratkama R. Baratkama R. IX 6 XII 6 II 7 Shakka Vahush R. IX 10 Vahush T. Artataxma XII 12 Vahush T. Vahush T. Vahush R. Ciçavahush Ciçavahush X 15 IV, VII 16 XI 16 Vahush T. Vahush T. Vahush R. Vahush T. Ratininda T. Ciçavahush Megadates XII 18 IX 19 X 19 XI 19 XII 20 Artataxma Artataxma Uratinda R. IV 1 Barisha R. Barisha T. Marezza (Uratinda = Ratininda)60 L. DEPUYDT – Les compléments phonétiques ou graphiques en élamite achéménide in: Annali 49:3 (Septembre 1989), pp. 219-222. 60 Reign date Z. archive X7 10/XI/4 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES 31 With co-regency (and Zababa-šar-uṣur's archive) year Reign 509 508 507 506 505 504 503 502 501 500 499 498 497 496 495 494 493 492 491 490 489 488 487 486 485 484 483 482 481 480 479 478 477 476 475 474 473 472 471 470 469 468 13 Darius I (Grand Palace) 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26-0 Building of Xerxes’ palace 27-1 Xerxes I 28-2 29-3 30-4 31-5 32-6 33-7 34-8 35-9 36-10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21-0 Artaxerxes I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Treasurer Vice treasurer Z. archive Irshena Irshena Irshena Irshena 5/IX/22 Irshena Shuddayauda 18/VIII/26 Baratkama Darkaush or Shakka Darkaush or Aspathines Darkaush or Shakka Shakka Appishmanda or Artataxma Baratkama Vahush Shakka 10/XI/4 Artataxma Ciçavahush Ciçavahush Ciçavahush Megadates or Artataxma Artataxma Uratinda Barisha Marezza  The fact that there was a coregency explains the following:  Building of Xerxes palace in year 26 of Darius61.  There is a normal succession of treasurers who have worked 6 years on average.  Baratkama was appointed as Treasurer at the time of building of Xerxes palace (at Persepolis).  Vahush was appointed as Treasurer by Xerxes on xx/X/10 just after the death of Darius on 10/IX/36.  The last 3 contracts from Zababa-šar-uṣur's archive are dated every 4-year.  The number of texts during year 26 of Darius fall drastically62 because of the accession of Xerxes and the building of the New Palace. Calendar year (BCE) Year of Darius Number of texts 498 24 167 A.T. OLMSTEAD -History of the Persian Empire Chicago 1970 Ed. University of Chicago Press pp. 214,215. P. BRIANT - Histoire de l'empire perse. De Cyrus à Alexandre Paris 1996 Éd. Fayard pp. 983-984. 62 R.T. HALLOCK - Persepolis Fortification Tablets Chicago 1969 Ed. The University of Chicago Press p. 74. 61 497 25 67 496 26 8 495 27 30 494 28 61 32 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Briant noted that if Xerxes had been appointed as crown prince just before the death of Darius, one would have to admit that this king had waited a long time since he was 72 years old in 486 BCE63 and Xerxes was 35 years old, the marriage of his parents dating back to the accession of Darius in 522 BCE. Consequently these chronological points involve a choice before 490 BCE64. The departure of Darius in campaign cannot be used to justify his last choice since this king was almost perpetually in campaign. If Herodotus places the co-regency of Xerxes at the end of the reign of Darius, that is more a Greek interpretation of events because this explanation is found again when he places the co-regency of Cambyses at the end of the reign of Cyrus. Recent findings enable us to reconstruct the career of Xerxes. When Darius seized the throne in 522 BCE Xerxes was not yet born and Hystaspes (Vishtasp) was governor of Parthia and Hyrcania (The Histories III:70). The latest contracts where the name Hystaspes appears are dated [/IV]/23 and 15/V/23 of Darius65 (21 August 499 BCE). Regarding the date and circumstances of Xerxes' selection, the text of the tablet NN 1657 (Persepolis Fortification) is of special interest. Although this text66, dated III/24 of Darius (June 498 BCE), does not state Xerxes’ rank, it does indicate that he had at least attained a position of some importance. Parthian men, spear bearers, were assigned by him. The term used (dama) suggests in this context a role in the chain of command, perhaps as (a) commander or governor in the important satrapy of Parthia. Since the Parthian men were travelling from the king to Parthia, and were carrying a sealed authorisation from the King, they may have been initially dispatched by Xerxes to report to his father. Having done so, they were now heading back with the king’s response. The context makes the scribe’s silence on Xerxes (Xšerša) title eloquent: his position was apparently well-known. Consequently the sequence of events seems to be: after the death of Hystaspes (in 498 BCE), who was governor of Parthia, King Darius appointed his eldest son Xerxes (23 years old) to replace him at this strategic position. Two tablets dated 20/III/26 and 4/VIII/26 of Darius indicate that the New Palace (É.GAL eššú) for Xerxes was built in 496 BCE67 (Grand Palace for Darius). As in this palace one caption speaks of: Xerxes, son of king Darius, an Achaemenid (XPk), it shows that Xerxes was referred to as crown prince from the 26th year of Darius' reign. Although Xerxes was co-regent from 496 BCE his royal title never appears in the palaces built by Darius for a simple reason: the royal ideology requires having one sovereign at a time. In practice there was little ambiguity because king Xerxes, who lived in Susa, his capital, was leading the western part of the empire while king Darius who resided at Persepolis, his capital, was leading the eastern part. Moreover, according to Persian protocol an inscription could have mentioned68: king Xerxes, son of king Darius, king of kings. Even during the period when Darius was king and Xerxes was co-regent (496-486), doubledated contracts always mention only one king while there were actually two. These contracts (BM 42567, BM 75396) are crucial to confirm the co-regency of Xerxes with Darius from his year 26, but there are two obstacles: dates are usually written at the end of tablets, which are often damaged areas, and specialists tend to read 36 instead of 26 because of the official dogma of unique king (no co-regency, no usurper). 63 According to Herodotus, Darius, the eldest son of Hystaspes, was barely 20 years old in 538 BCE (The Histories I:136, 209) and according to Ctesias, he died at the age of 72 (Persica F13§23). These data are consistent and give the same lifetime to Darius (558-486). 64 P. BRIANT - Histoire de l'empire perse. De Cyrus à Alexandre Paris 1996 Éd. Fayard p. 536. 65 A. KUHRT – The Persian Empire. A Corpus of Sources from the Achaemenid Period London 2010, Ed. Routeledge pp. 574,811. 66 W.F.M. HENKELMAN – Xerxes, Atossa, and the Persepolis Fortification Archive in: Annual Report 2010. Netherlands Institute for the Near East, Leiden. pp. 26-33. 67 K. ABRAHAM – Business and Politics under the Persian Empire (BM 30589; BM 30980) Bethesda 2004, Ed. CDL Press, pp. 230-231,261-262. 68 For example, one reads (written after Darius’ death): Xerxes, great king, king of kings, son of king Darius the Achaemenid (XPe). DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES DOUBLE DATED CONTRACTS A letter (BM 42567) dated 24/[-]/00 of Xerxes (lines 6’ and 7’) is also dated year 26 of Darius (line 2). In his transcription Jursa69 chose to read "year 36" but in his drawing we can read MU 26 "year 26" (2 heads of nail and 6 vertical nails). BM 42567 M. JURSA – Das Archiv des Bel-Remanni in: Uitgaven van het Nederlands historisch-archaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul 86 (1999) pp. 138, 206-207, Tafeln VII, XLIV. 69 33 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 34 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY The sign for the word "year" (MU) appears in the lines 2, 4 and 5' of this tablet. It is formed by one horizontal nail and by four heads of nail. From the photo (below), we can read MU 26 on the drawing (right), the figure 2 is formed by 2 heads of nail and 4 chips (in grey) and the figure 6 is formed by 6 vertical nails and 2 chips. A large zoom is needed to distinguish chips from nails. The reading "year 26 [of Darius]" is also confirmed by the prosopography of some officials. For example, the career of Ribâta son of Šamaš-iddin of Maštukata family, as head of bakers (chef), of Bêl-rêmanni son of Mušebši-Marduk family of Šangû-Šamaš, a scribe of the temple, and of Itti-Šamaš-balâtu, as inspector of the canal, can be dated. This chronological reconstruction is based on a career progression (knowing that the lucrative activity of prebendary was reserved for the leaders): Personage Ribâta Bêl-rêmanni Itti-Šamaš-balâtu Date of the letter 05/ X/24 of Darius 20/IX/26 of Darius 25/IX/26 of Darius 26 of Darius; 24/[-]/00 of Xerxes 07/ X/00 de Xerxes 27/XI/00 de Xerxes 07/IX/30 of Darius 02/IV/31 of Darius 22/IV/07 de Cyrus [-]/ I/02 of Darius 18/VII/06 of Darius [-]/[-]/18 of Darius 08/ X/24 of Darius 24/[-]/26 of Darius 07/V/26 of Darius 16/VII/26 of Darius 15/III/32 of Darius 22/VII/33 of Darius 06/ X/34 of Darius 4+/XII/34 of Darius 23/XII/35 of Darius 24/[-]/00 de Xerxes 11/IX/00 de Xerxes Responsibility Delegate of the chef (Delegate of the chef) Delegate of the chef (Delegate of the chef) (Chef) Chef Prebendary and witness Prebendary and witness Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe Scribe Prebendary Prebendary Prebendary Prebendary Prebendary Prebendary Prebendary Canal inspector Canal inspector Tablet BM 64067 BM 79514 BM 49999 BM 42567 BM 75070 BM 75396 BM 74644 BM 74636 CT 56, 194 VS 5, 60 BM 74605 BM 70233 VS 3, 135 BM 42567 VS 3, 138-139 BM 74560 BM 75232 VS 3, 154 BM 74569 BM 74549 VS 5, 109 BM 42567 EKBK 22:3 Without the co-regency of Xerxes with Darius from the year 26, the careers of several top officials become implausible. Ribâta, for example, would have overseen the bakers from year 24 to 26 of Darius and then would stop for 10 years before returning to service only for the accession of Xerxes. Similarly, Bêl-remanni officiated as a scribe from year 7 of Cyrus to year 26 of Darius, and would have, too, stopped for 10 years before returning to service for the accession of Xerxes. Furthermore Ribâta who was a prebandary from 07/IX/30 of Darius would be demoted as chef for Xerxes accession and Bêl-remanni DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES who was prebandary from 07/V/26 of Darius would also be demoted as scribe for Xerxes accession. As Bêl-remanni was scribe up till 24/[-]/26 and then prebendary from 07/V/26, the month [-] of that letter must be between I to IV. Another letter (BM 75396)70 dated 27/XI/00 of Xerxes relates a settlement of accounts for the following year dated year 27 (of Darius): (1) [Letter of Marduk-mu]kin-apli and Marduk-bêl-šunu, (2) the scri[bes], to [Birûqâya], (3) [master of] the sûtu-taxe [of Šamaš-(temple)]. Bel and Nabu (4) health [and (long) life to] our brother, may they ordain (5) 9 kur of emmer, (as offering) for the month of Addaru (6) 10 kur of emmer in kupputu and [kupputu] of Addaru month (7) 2 kur of emmer, (as offering) to the temples (8) 9 kur of emmer, (as offering) for the mon[th ..] (9) [or a] total of 30 kur of emmer to (10) [Ribâ]ta, the chef, give (him). (11) Until there is a settlement of accounts, that you will do (12) as you (always) done, (13) on (the payment of) the sûtu-taxe of year [2]7 we will count it. (14) Month of Shabatu, day 27, accession year (15) of Xerxes King of Babylon, King of lands. When Strassmaier published this letter, he translated: "year 27 [of Darius]71" but Stolper72 preferred to read "year 37" because that reading would have involved a 10-year co-regency. Graziani73 preferred to correct 37 into 36 assuming an error of scribe. This last assumption is unlikely because this was an important contract in which the figures indicating the quantities and dates were crucial and, therefore, carefully checked. In any case the two readings, 36 or 37, are illogical since at the supposed epoch of writing of that letter, at the 27/XI/[36], king Darius had been dead for two months and a half (he died around the 10/IX/36) and therefore could no longer be ruling. Furthermore, S. GRAZIANI - I testi Mesopotamici datati al regno di Serse (485-465 a. c.) in: Annali 46 sup. 47 (Rome 1986) Ed. Herder pp. 6-9. J. MACGINNIS -Letter Orders from Sippar and the Administration of the Ebabbara in the Late-Babylonian Period, Poznan 1995. Letter N° 85 pp.63-64 plate 23. 71 J.N. STRASSMAIER -Einige kleinere babylonische Keilschrifttexte aus dem Britischen Museum (Actes du 8e congrès), EKBK18 1889 pp. 20-21. 72 M.W. STOLPER - The Death of Artaxerxes I 1983 Berlin in: Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran 16 p. 229 note 33. 73 S. GRAZIANI - I testi Mesopotamici datati al regno di Serse (485-465 a. c.) in: Annali 46 sup. 47 (Rome 1986) Ed. Herder pp. 9 note 7. 70 35 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 36 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Ribâta who was a prebandary from 07/IX/30 would be demoted as chef at the last year of Darius! Despite his reading ("37"), MacGinnis published a drawing where the reading MU [2]7 "year 27" (line 13) is more likely. The number "27" appears also in line 14, the number "30" in the line 9, and the sign MU "year" appears in lines 10 and 14 (see boxed parts). BM 75396 On the photo of the boxed part (below), the number [2]7 looks badly damaged, but 4 vertical nails out of 7 appear clearly and 3 vertical nails (at the right side in grey) may be guessed. The first "7" in line 13 is bigger than the second one in line 14. << << III III I III III I Darius (= year 1 of Xerxes) after having had written a digest of law Egyptian, called "Book of Ordinances", requested to add an addendum, dated in his year 27, written in Aramaic on papyrus74 (not on tablet). D. AGUT-LABORDERE – Darius législateur et les sages de l'Égypte: un addendum au Livre des Ordonnances in: Cahiers de Recherches de l'Institut de Papyrologie et d'Égyptologie de Lille n°26 (2006) pp. 1-8. 74 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES ABSOLUTE DATES FROM ASTRONOMY An astronomical tablet (BM 32234)75 contains two lunar eclipses dated [14/III] and 14/VIII in addition the death of Xerxes is dated 14/V. 1' 2' 3' 4' 5' 6' 7' 8' 9' at ˹18°?˺ [...] 40° onset, ma[ximal phase, and clearing]. The "garment of the sky [rain-clouds]" was there. In the area of the 4 rear stars of Sagittarius it was eclipsed. Month VI was intercalary Month V, the 14?, ˹Xer˺xes —his son killed him. —————————— Month VIII, the 14th, 13° after sunset, [the moon] came out of a cloud, ˹1/4˺ of the disk on the [...] and west side was covered. 8°? [onset? and] clearing [...] Given that the second lunar eclipse is dated 14/VIII (November/ December) it is easy to check what year it occurred76 and also that the first dated event 14/V was no connection with an eclipse (475 BCE = -474, P = Partial; T = Total; N = Penumbral): H. HUNGER - Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia vol V Wien 2001 Ed. Akademie der Wissenschaften pp. 20-21, 396. 76 http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEcat5/LE-0499--0400.html 75 37 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 38 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY year BCE 476 475 474 473 472 471 470 469 468 467 466 465 464 [14 III] (Sivan) 6-Jul. 26-Jun 15-Jul. 3-Jul. 23-Jul. 12-Jul. 1-Jul. 19-Jun 9-Jul. 28-Jun 16-Jul. 5-Jun 25-Jul. eclipse P T _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ N P _ 14 V (Ab) 3-Sept. 24-Aug. 12-Sept. 31-Aug. 20-Sept. 9-Sept. 29-Aug. 17-Aug. 6-Sept. 26-Aug. 13-Sept. 4-Aug. 22-Sept. eclipse _ _ _ _ _ _ _ P _ _ _ _ _ 14 VIII (Heshvan) 1-Dec. 20-Dec. 9-Dec. 28-Nov. 17-Dec. 6-Dec. 25-Nov. 14-Nov. 3-Dec. 22-Nov. 11-Dec. 29-Nov. 19-Dec. eclipse _ P N _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ T _ This preliminary analysis shows that only two years may agree: 475 or 465 BCE. A complete analysis of these eclipses (when they began and ended and how much area of the moon was darkened) enables to keep only the year 475 BCE (T then P). Contrary to the politically correct academic interpretation of astronomical data, which supports the date 465 BCE77 (P then T), the analysis of this tablet is easy and gives 475 BCE. First of all, Babylonian astronomical tablets are extremely accurate as regards their describing of astronomical events. For example, the astronomical tablet BM 71537 fixes the death of Artaxerxes III78 after the solar eclipse of 29/IV (dated 11 March 358 BCE)79: [year] 21, month IV, (after) 5 month, the 29 [...] not observed month VI, Umakuš [Artaxerxes III] went to his fate. Aršu, his son sat on the throne. King Xerxes I Artaxerxes I Darius II Artaxerxes II Artaxerxes III Artaxerxes IV Darius III Name according to astronomical tablets Ḫišiaršu Artakšatsu Umakuš, whom name is Darawušu Aršu, whom name is Artakšatsu Umakuš, whom name is Artakšatsu Aršu, son of Umasu, whom name is Artakšatsu Artakšatsu, whom name is Dariyawuš Greek name Xerxes Artoxerxes Ochos Arsakes Ochos Arses Darios Babylonian astronomers used a reference system based of course on a local observer. Stars position in the sky were measured according to their altitude, or elevation, in degrees between the horizon (0°) and the zenith (90°) and their azimuth in degrees from north (0°), east (90°), south (180°) or west (270°). Altitude is the angle above the observer's horizon and azimuth is the angle measured clockwise from north along the horizon to the point on the horizon that lies beneath the star. Meridian is an imaginary great circle that passes through the zenith from north to south, dividing the sky in two: the eastern and the western halves. It is important to be aware of this line because when an object crosses it, it's as high in the sky as it's going to get. The Sun crosses the line of the meridian around noon every day. We say that the Sun, or any star, culminates when it crosses the meridian. Meridian covers a total angle of 180° (-90° to 90°) and horizon a total angle of 360°. M.W. STOLPER - The Evidence of Cuneiform Texts for the date of Xerxes' Death in: The Journal of Hellenic Studies vol CVIII (1988) pp. 196-198. M.W. STOLPER - Late Achaemenid Babylonian Chronology in: Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires (1999) N°6 pp. 9-12. 78 F. JOANNÈS - La Mésopotamie au 1er millénaire avant J.C. 2000 Paris Ed. Armand Colin p. 145. 79 H. HUNGER - Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia vol V Wien 2001 Ed. Akademie der Wissenschaften p. 45. 77 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES 39 Babylonian astronomers measured the sky with their hands knowing that when reaches out, the little finger has an apparent width of 1° and a span (distance between the ends of the thumb and little finger) has an apparent width of 15°. Thus the moon has an apparent width of 0.5° (or 30') like the Sun. Each zodiac constellation has an apparent diameter of around 15°, "a span", so there are 12 constellations in the celestial vault. The darkness of the sky appears when the sun is 6° below the horizon. Given that the full celestial sphere (360°) is covered in a 24-hour day (or 24x60 = 1440 minutes), each celestial degree corresponds to a duration of 4 minutes (= 1440/360). For example the technical indication « 14° after sunset » means "[the eclipse began] 56 minutes (= 14x4) after sunset", likewise « 14° before sunrise » means "[the eclipse began] 56 minutes before sunrise". Paradoxically a lunar eclipse in the Babylonian astronomical records may start slightly before sunset or end slightly after sunrise, which normally is not possible (not observable), but as the beginning and end of eclipses are symmetrical, Babylonian astronomers used to add some appropriate calculations to their observations. There are two types of eclipse, total and partial. For a total eclipse (left below) the 1st onset point out the beginning of the penumbra (highlighted in grey) on the moon (in yellow), the 2nd onset: the beginning of full eclipse (in dark red), the 3rd onset: the end of total eclipse and the 4th onset: the end of the penumbra. The full length of the eclipse is given by the time between the 1st and the 4th onset (maximum of 52° or 3.5 hours). For a partial eclipse (right below) the 1st onset points out the beginning of the penumbra and the 2nd onset the end of it. In this case the surface covered by the shadow is given by means of a fraction of the lunar disk (around 2/3 for the example). 4th, ,3rd 2nd, Total lunar eclipse 1st onset 2nd, 1st onset (Moon) Partial lunar eclipse Total eclipse dated 13 December 317 BCE (-316) 5' 6' 7' 8' 9' 10' 11' Month IX, the 15th. When it began on the south and east side, in 19° all was covered. 5° maximal phase. In 16° it cleared to between north and east. 40° onset, maximal phase and clearing. During onset (and) maximal phase it was slow, during clearing fast. Its eclipse was red. 1 1/2 cubits in front of β Geminorum it was eclipsed. At 44° after sunset. SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 40 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY According to astronomy, the total eclipse dated 13 December 317 BCE (-396) lasted 220 minutes and was total during 83 minutes80. It began at 20:36 (local time) or 3:34 after sunset, which was at 17:02 in Babylon81. This length of 3:34 corresponds to 54°. Description of the eclipse (total) 1st onset [beginning] 1st onset – 2nd onset [penumbra] 2nd onset – 3rd onset [maximal] 3rd onset – 4th onset [clearing] 1st onset – 4th onset [length] according to the tablet according to astronomy 44° after sunset 54° after sunset 19° 17° 5° (20 min.) 21° (83 min.) 16° 17° (64 min.) 40° (160 min.) 55° (220 min.) difference 10° (40 min.) 2° (8 min.) 16° (64 min.) 1° (4 min.) 15° (60 min.) Partial eclipse dated 5 April 397 BCE 2' 3' 4' 5' 6' 7' 8' Month XII2, the 14th it began on the south side, 1/4 of the disk was covered. It cleared to the west. 27° onset, maximal phase, and clearing. The "garment of the sky" was there, the south wind blew. At 48° after sunset. According to astronomy, this partial eclipse dated 5 April 397 BCE (-396) lasted 63 minutes and its magnitude (covered surface of the lunar disk) was 0.0882. It began at 21:34 (local time) or 3:09 (189 minutes) after sunset83, which was at 18:25 in Babylon. This length of 189 minutes corresponds to 47°. As the "garment of the sky" means "rain-clouds84", the observation had to be difficult. Description of the eclipse (partial) 1st onset [beginning] Covered surface of the disk 1st onset – 2nd onset [length] according to the tablet according to astronomy 48° after sunset 47° after sunset 0.25 0.08 27° (108 min.) 16° (63 min.) difference 1° (4 min.) 3X 11° (44 min.) Huber85 compared the dates given by the astronomical tablets with those obtained in astronomy today. According to his analysis, indications concerning the beginning and end of the eclipse with respect to sunrise and sunset can reach a maximum deviation of +/- 20° (+/- 1 hour 20 minutes) and indications of duration of the eclipse can reach a maximum deviation of +/- 10° (+/- 40 minutes). Huber explains the origin of these differences by some difficulties of observing (when there were clouds for example), copying errors in the tablets, misinterpretation of a poorly preserved text, false identifications of eclipses especially when a predicted eclipse replaced a missing eclipse (or not observed). Finally the Babylonian concept of 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th contact (onset) may be slightly different from the present astronomical concept. http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/-0399--0300/LE-0316-12-13T.gif H. HUNGER - Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia vol V Wien 2001 Ed. Akademie der Wissenschaften pp. 6-7, 395. F.R. STEPHENSON - Historical Eclipses and Earth's Rotation Cambridge 1997 Ed. Cambridge University Press pp. 176-177. 82 http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/-0399--0300/LE-0396-04-05P.gif 83 H. HUNGER - Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia vol V pp. 12-13, 395. F.R. STEPHENSON - Historical Eclipses and Earth's Rotation pp. 169-170. 84 A. PARPOLA -The Sky-Garment. A Study of the Harappan Religion and Its Relation to the Mesopotamian and Later Indian Religions in: Studia Orientalia vol. 57 (1985). 85 P.J. HUBER, S. DE MEIS – Babylonian Eclipse Observations from 750 BC to 1 BC Milano 2004 Ed. Mimesis pp. 3,22,28-31. 80 81 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES Astronomical analysis show two important points: the Babylonian measures were excellent but their lack of precision could reach 1 hour, that is to say around "a span" (15°), and the way of describing eclipses depended on their nature, either partial or total. It is easy to verify that the two lunar eclipses which occurred in 475 BCE, first total then partial, are in reverse in 475 BCE, first partial then total. Lunar eclipses in 475 BCE86 Lunar eclipses in 465 BCE87 Stolper88 dated 4 August 465 BCE the death of Xerxes (14/V/21) as there were actually two eclipses in that year. However, the astronomical description of these two http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/-0499--0400/LE-0474-06-26T.gif http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/-0499--0400/LE-0474-12-20P.gif 87 http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/-0499--0400/LE-0464-06-06P.gif http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/-0499--0400/LE-0464-11-29T.gif 88 M.W. STOLPER - The Evidence of Cuneiform Texts for the date of Xerxes' Death in: The Journal of Hellenic Studies vol CVIII (1988) pp. 196-198. 86 41 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 42 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY eclipses does not match that indicated on the tablet (BM 32234) because the 1st eclipse was total and the 2nd eclipse was partial. A comparison of all the data from the tablet with those of astronomy gives the following results (local time in Babylon; LT = UT +2:58): Year Date of eclipse 475 BCE 26 June 20 December 5 June 29 November 465 BCE First eclipse according to the tablet [14 III] 14 VIII [14 III] 14 VIII start 1st 4:05 21:51 26 June 475 BCE 5 June 465 BCE Second eclipse 20 December 475 BCE 29 November 465 BCE start 1st 20:24 14:25 Partial eclipse First eclipse 1st onset 1st – 2nd onset 2nd – 3rd onset 3rd – 4th onset 1st – 4th onset Second eclipse 1st onset 1st – 2nd onset Type of eclipse Total Partial Partial Total 2nd 5:02 3rd 6:42 2nd 3rd 15:31 17:05 mag. 1.80 0.60 0.94 1.46 end 4th 7:39 0:55 mag. sunrise sunset 1.82 0.94 5:02 5:00 19:06 18:59 end 4th 23:20 18:11 mag. sunrise sunset 0.61 1.46 7:02 6:47 17:00 16:55 eclipse not observed at Babylon According to tablet BM 32234 [-] [-] [-] 18° 40° according agreement to the tablet total OK 0.25 (1/4) OK total NO 0.25 (1/4) NO 13° after sunset 475 BCE 26 June 13° before sunrise 14° 25° 14° 54° 20 December 51° after sunset [8°] 44° gap [-] [-] [-] 4° 14° 38° 36° total eclipse 465 BCE 5 June 43° after sunset 46° 29 November 38° before sunset 17° 24° ## 17° 57° gap [-] [-] [-] NO 6° NO NO NO NO 49° According to astronomy, only the beginning of the first eclipse (26 June 475 BCE) could be observed. In addition, the weather was rainy ("The garment of the sky was there"). Observations have therefore been difficult, thus the two durations of eclipse, 40° and [8°], were due to a guess. In 30% of cases (on average), the Babylonians completed their observations with values calculated89 according to some theories poorly understood90. Despite some difficulties of observation the results obtained by the ancient Babylonian astronomers for the two lunar eclipses of 475 BCE are remarkably good (there are 5 major disagreements in 465 BCE). A second way of checking the data in the astronomical tablet is the wording: In the area of the 4 rear stars of Sagittarius it [the moon] was eclipsed [1st eclipse]. The observations were performed in Babylon whose latitude is 32°33' (or 32.55°) North and longitude is 44°26' (or 44.43°) East91. With astronomy software it is possible to see the sky at one point and at a given time92 (in 475 BCE Universal Time: -474-06-26 0:00; Azimuth: 230°; Field of view: 45°; in 465 BCE Universal Time: -464-06-06 0:00). P.J. HUBER, S. DE MEIS – Babylonian Eclipse Observations from 750 BC to 1 BC Milano 2004 Ed. Mimesis p. 7. 90 N.M. SWERDLOW - The Babylonian Theory of the Planets 1998 New Jersey Ed. Princeton University Press pp. 44,45. 91 http://www.astro.com/cgi/aq.cgi?lang=e 92 http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/Yourhorizon 89 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES One can see that in 475 BCE the moon was 20° rear back of Sagittarius (above left) and in 465 BCE it was inside (above right). According to the astronomical tablet the first lunar eclipse [total] was: in the area of the 4 rear stars of Sagittarius [in 475 BCE]. Consequently, according to astronomy, Xerxes died (14/V/21) on Wednesday 23 August 475 BCE. Astronomical concepts necessary to historians are actually quite rudimentary. One must just know the working of solar and lunar cycles, which served to define the years and months (generally: from equinox to equinox / from 1st crescent to new moon). 43 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 44 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY As Bardiya, Xerxes began his reign on two occasions, first as co-regent his accession is dated III/00 and again as true king after the death of Darius dated 10/IX/10. year 496 495 year 486 485 484 month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II year of reign 25 Darius I 26 *** 0 Darius I / Xerxes I BM 42567 dated 24/[III?]/00 and year 26 BM 30589 dated 20/III/26 (New Palace) BM 30980 dated 4/VIII/26 (New Palace) *** 27 1 BM 75396 dated 27/XI/00 to 01/I/27 year of reign 35 9 Darius I / Xerxes I 36 10 *** Bertin 2857 dated 23/IV/10 (Babylon) *** CT 4, 34 dated 24/VIII/10 (Babylon) 10 [0] Xerxes I / [Xerxes as new king] 11 [1] BSCAS 32 n°2 dated 02/I/11 [Uruk] 0 0 Xerxes I / Bel-šimânni Xerxes I / Šamaš-erîba *** Babylonian revolts (Esther 2:21-3:7) OECT 10 176 dated 5/IX/11 (Kish) *** JCS 28 38 dated 24/XI/11 (unassigned) 12 Babylonian revolts that took place early in the reign of Xerxes (year 11), after the death of Darius, can not have occurred when he was co-regent (year 1). Indeed, from the Battle of Marathon (in 490 BCE), Herodotus describes a climate of insurrection in the Persian Empire: So the men published his commands; and now all Asia was in commotion by the space of 3 years, while everywhere, as Greece was to be attacked, the best and bravest were enrolled for the service, and had to make their preparations accordingly. After this, in the 4th year [486 BCE], the Egyptians whom Cambyses had enslaved revolted from the Persians; whereupon Darius was more hot for war than ever, and earnestly desired to march an army against both adversaries. Now, as he was about to lead forth his levies against Egypt and Athens, a fierce contention for the sovereign power arose among his sons (...) Darius, when he had thus appointed Xerxes his heir, was minded to lead forth his armies; but he was prevented by death while his preparations were still proceeding. He died in the year following the revolt of DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES Egypt and the matters here related, after having reigned in all 36 years, leaving the revolted Egyptians and the Athenians alike unpunished. At his death the kingdom passed to his son Xerxes (The Histories VII:1-4). Ctesias said after the death of Darius: Xerxes decided to make war upon Greece, because the Chalcedonians had attempted to break down the bridge as already stated and had destroyed the altar which Darius had set up, and because the Athenians had slain Datis and refused to give up his body. But first he visited Babylon, being desirous of seeing the tomb of Belitanes, which Mardonius showed him. But he was unable to fill the vessel of oil, as had been written. Thence he proceeded to Ecbatana, where he heard of the revolt of the Babylonians and the murder of Zopyrus their satrap (Persica F13§§25-26). Arrian situated also the Babylonian revolt at the time of his campaign against the Greeks (Anabasis of Alexander III:16:4; VII:17:2), which began in the spring of -485 according to Herodotus (The Histories VII:20). Strabo says that Xerxes razed the temple of Bel Marduk (Geography XVI:1:5) probably in retaliation for these brief Babylonian revolts93. Herodotus says only that Xerxes robbed the temple of Marduk and killed the priest who tried to prevent it (The Histories I:183). These two brief rebellions at the beginning of the reign of Xerxes confirm the co-regency because during his accession and his first year of reign, Xerxes was welcomed by the Babylonians and the two Babylonian revolts, just after the death of Darius, imply that the Xerxes' accession could not have taken place at that time. Plutarch, who confirms the story of Ctesias, said after the death of Darius the kingdom of Xerxes was challenged in a climate of insurrection (very different from the period of accession 10 years earlier): Arimenes came out of Bactria as a rival for the kingdom with his brother Xerxes, the son of Darius. Xerxes sent presents to him, commanding those that brought them to say: With these your brother Xerxes now honours you; and if he chance to be proclaimed king, you shall be the next person to himself in the kingdom. When Xerxes was declared king, Arimenes immediately did him homage and placed the crown upon his head; and Xerxes gave him the next place to himself. Being offended with the Babylonians, who rebelled, and having overcome them, he forbade them weapons (Sayings of kings and commanders 173c)94. If Arimenes challenged the kingdom of Xerxes that means he (Xerxes) was already king. In addition, the Babylonian revolt early in his reign had visibly worried Babylonian scribes, since we read of a trilingual inscription at Persepolis: King Xerxes says: When I became king, among the nations that are written above, it is one that rebelled, then Ahuramazda gave me his support and thanks to Ahuramazda I beat these people and I put it back in its place95. Xerxes does not name the Babylonians probably because this old people constituted a prestigious historical foundation of Achaemenid power, thus it was embarrassing to admit such an insurrection. The translation of the Babylonian inscription is also indicative of the awkwardness as it replaces the offending people by "these countries have rebelled," combining the revolt that had taken place at the time of Darius with the rebels, who were the two Babylonians: Nebuchadnezzar III and Nebuchadnezzar IV. The information from Ctesias and Plutarch overlap, making it possible to locate the two brief reigns of Bel-šimânni and Šamaš-erîba in the year 485 BCE or early in the effective reign of Xerxes after the death of Darius. According to the book of Esther96 there was a plot to kill Xerxes which was thwarted in the 11th year of his reign, we read: Bigthan and Teresh, two officials of the king's court — the porters — were outraged and sought to lay hands on King Ahasuerus. But the thing came to be known to Mordecai, and he soon revealed to Esther the queen. Herodotus wrote: one year after Darius death (in 485 BCE), Xerxes attacked the [Babylonian?] rebels (The Histories VII:7). Ctesias states that Megabyzus who suppressed the revolt and took Babylon. 95 P. LECOQ - Les inscriptions de la Perse achéménide Paris 1997 Éd. Gallimard p. 257. 96 Esther, stâra “star” in Old Persian (from Ištar), Abigail's daughter, was the wife of Xerxes from the year 7 of his reign in 489 BCE (Esther 2:15-17), and her name is close to Amestris (Ama-stari “strong woman”). Amestris would be Esther (ZAW 119:2 [2007] pp. 259271). Although portrayed as a cruel woman (Otanes' daughter, an usurper!) several points of Herodotus coincide with that of the Bible: 1) When he is king, Xerxes has only one wife (The Histories VII:61; Esther 2:17), 2) during a royal banquet the queen asks a special favor (The Histories IX:110 -111; Esther 7:1-10), and 3) this request, not good for the Persians, leads a war that the Jews won, again, a dozen young Persian of noble family were executed in retaliation (The Histories VII:114; Esther 9:12-14). 93 94 45 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 46 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Then Esther told the king in the name of Mordecai. The case was therefore sought and finally discovered, and both were hanged on a pole (...) Shortly afterwards (...) In the 1st month, that is the month of Nisan, of the 12th year of King Ahasuerus (Esther 2:21-3:7). We also note that Mordecai appears as debtor of Uštanu in a contract (dated c. 490 BCE by Ungnad97 through prosopography). The biblical text also mentions the presence of Tattenai (Ezra 4:24-6:15), the governor beyond the river, only from year 2 of Darius I, which is consistent with his early peaceful reign at the end of year 1 (Tattenai, Uštanu's assistant, the governor of Babylon and beyond the river, appears in a contract dated in the year 20 of Darius98). The destruction (maybe partial?) of the famous sanctuary of Marduk had to destabilize the Babylonian administration and may explain, in part, the disappearance of the Babylonian archives99 recorded since that time. Unlike Cambyses who "started again" his reign after the death of Cyrus, Xerxes continued his dating from the beginning of his coregency (as Bardiya did). After the death of Darius, Xerxes was then in his 10th year of reign. For example, the serious accusation against the Jews is dated in the 12th year of the legal reign of Xerxes (Esther 3:7-10), at the beginning of his effective reign (Ezra 4:6). Cameron100 notes that the 1st year and the accession of Xerxes are well represented in Babylon, it does not place the revolt over the two years since the Babylonians had clearly recognized Xerxes in his early steps. Waerzeggers101 notes that the tablet BM 96414, dated the accession of Šamaš-erîba mentions the 1st year of Xerxes, but as the legitimate king was Šamaš-erîba, for the scribe, Xerxes was an usurper in his 1st year of reign, not a legitimate king in his 11th year. Indeed, Xerxes was challenged after the death of Darius, not during the first two years of his reign. The last text of Xerxes (CBS 10059) is dated 20/V/21102. King Tablet Xerxes BSCAS 32 n°2 JCS 1, 350 n°2 AfO 19 n°23 VS 6 331 BM 87357 BM 36304 LB 1718 BM 25897 BM 96414 VS 3 178 BM 67297 BM 94878 VS 5 116 ZA 3, 157f. VS 6 173 BM 22072 VS 6 174 OECT 10, 176 JCS 28 n°38 Bel-šimânni Xerxes Šamaš-erîba Xerxes Year of Date Xerxes 11 02/I/11 [11?] 05/IV/[-] 14+/V/00 1 01/VI/00 04/VI/00 [11?] 15/VI/[-] 04/V/00 22/VI/00 1 24/VI/00 25/VI/00 25/VI/00 09/VII/00 21/VII/00 22/VII/00 23/VII/00 24/VII/00 29/VII/00 11 05/IX/11 11 24/XI/11 Place Titulature [Uruk] Babylon? Borsippa Dilbat Harru-mîlû Babylon? Sippar(!) Borsippa Borsippa Borsippa Sippar Kish Borsippa Babylon Borsippa Borsippa Borsippa Hursag-kal. Sippar ? ? King of Babylon and of lands King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Kings King of Babylon and of lands King King of Babylon, king of lands King of Babylon King of Babylon and of lands King of Babylon, king of lands King of Babylon King of Babylon and of lands King of Babylon, king of lands King of Babylon King of Babylon King of Babylon, king of lands ? A. UNGNAD - Neubabylonische Privaturkunden aus der Sammlung Amherst in: Archiv für Orientforschung XIX (1959-1960) pp. 80-81. 98 M.W. STOLPER – The Governor of Babylon and Across-the-River in: Journal of Near Eastern Studies 48 (1989) pp. 290-291. 99 According to the biblical text (Ezra 5:17-6:2; Esther 6:1), the archives were located mainly in Babylon in rolls. 100 G.G. CAMERON – Darius and Xerxes in Babylonia in: The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures 58 (1941) pp. 314-325. 101 C. WAERZEGGERS – The Babylonian Revolts Against Xerxes andthe ‘End of Archives’ in: Archiv für Orientforschung 50 (2003/2004) pp. 150-172. 102 M.W. STOLPER - Late Achaemenid Babylonian Chronology in: Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires (1999) pp. 6-7. 97 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES If the Babylonian revolts had taken place during the year 1 of Xerxes' reign (in 485 BCE), according to the tablets VS 6 331 and BM 96414, the chronological ranking of contracts103 shows us (see below) that they took place when the king was fully recognized in Borsippa, which would be incomprehensible: year month 485 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 X XI XII I II III IV V VI 10 VII 17/VII/1, 27/VII/1, 28/VII/1 11 12 1 2 VIII IX X XI 3 XII 24/VIII/1, 27/VIII/1, 30/VIII/1 13/IX/1 29/X/1 02/XI/1 03/XII/1, 13/XII/1 484 year of reign Xerxes I (year 1) Bel-šimânni Šamaš-erîba [0] 1 0 0 23/I/1 13/II/1 21/III/1 05/IV/[-], 13/IV/1, 15/IV/1 20/V/1, 21/V/1, 26/V/1, 17/VI/1, 15/VI/[-] 04/V/00, 14+/V/00, 01/VI/00, 04/VI/00, 22/VI/00, 24/VI/00, 25/VI/00, 25/VI/00 09/VII/00, 21/VII/00, 22/VII/00, 23/VII/00, 24/VII/00, 29/VII/00 A Chronicle fragment and an astronomical fragment enable the dating of these Babylonian revolts. The Chronicle fragment reads104 (BM 36304): 3. [...] they removed him [from the t]hrone. To [...] 4. [...] 5. [...] his few [troop]s from the troops [...] 6. [...] he slew. The army of Hanu, his troops wh[ich ...] 7. [...] son of Darius, king of kin[gs... ] 8. [...] on the 15th day, he put Kidinnu to the sword. In the month Elul (VI), on the [...] 9. [...] Yanu, the city of Guti [...] 10. from the p]alace of Babylon they sent out [...] The only certain clue to the chronological position of this fragment is the apparent reference to Xerxes (in line 7). In the first section which is at all legible there is mention of armies, fighting, and the Haneans. In the following, succinct section it stated that Kidinnu was slain. Finally one finds a section in which a military defeat is recorded (reverse line 12). Although the data are fragmentary they describe a revolt, dated 15/VI during Xerxes’ reign. The astronomical fragment reads105 (JCS 1, 350 n°2): 3. [...] the month of Tammuz (IV), the 5th day [...] 4. [...] to Babylon went [...] 5. [...] the troops of Elam [...] 6. [... the reg]ion of Mars which to [...] BE 8/1, 119. (Xer.01.01.23, B.); OECT 12, pl.19:A 124 (Xer.<01>.01.23, Borsippa); *Goetze JNES 3 45:YBC 11450 (Xer.01.02.13, B.); *Ungnad AfO 19:AT n246.(Xer.01.02.28?, Borsippa); VS 4, 191. (Xer.01.03.03, Borsippa); MacGinnis, Letter Orders n86 (Xer.01.03.21, <S.>); Stigers JCS 28 n51. (Xer.01.03.21, <S.>); VS 6, 179. (Xer.01.03.x, B.), *Bertin 2851. (Xer.01.04.13, B.); OECT 12, pl.13:A 111. (Xer.01.04.15, <Borsippa>); *Goetze JNES 3 45:MLC 557; VS 6, 191. (<Xer>.01.05?.13, <Borsippa>); VS 3, 204 (<Xer>.<01>.05.14, <Borsippa>); EKBK 19. (Xer.01.05.20, <S.>); OECT 10, 170 (Xer.01.05.21, H.); Wunsch AfO 42/43 n13 (Xer.01.05.26, B.); VS 4, 192. (Xer.01.06.17, o); *Goetze JNES 3 45:YBC 11293. (Xer.01.07.17, B.); MacGinnis, Letter Orders n87. (Xer.01.07.27, <S.>); *Ungnad AfO 19:AT n244 (Xer.01.07.28, o); VS 6, 192. (<Xer>.01.07.o, o); CT 44, 75 (Xer.01.08.24, S.); Stolper BaM 21 App. (Xer.01.08.27, S.); VS 4, 193. (Xer.01.08.30, <Borsippa>); *Ungnad AfO 19:AT n245 (Xer.01.09.13, Borsippa) TuM 2/3, 98. (Xer.01.10.29, Rime); Stolper AH 11 139. (Xer.01.11.02, S.); VS 4, 194. (Xer.01.12.03, Šušan); VS 6, 180. (Xer.01.12.13, [Borsippa]) 104 K. GRAYSON – Texts from Cuneiform Sources Volume V Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles Winona Lake 2000 Ed. Eisenbrauns pp. 24, 112-113. 105 W. HOROWITZ – An Astronomical Fragment from Columbia University and the Babylonian Revolts against Xerxes in: Journal of the Association of Near-Eastern Studies 23 (1995) pp. 61-67. 103 47 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 48 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY 7. [... M]ars into Cancer ente[red ...] 8. [... fle]d and into the river jumped and [...] 9. [... to] Borsippa went, destroyed the city [...] The historical notices appear to be related to a conflict between Babylon and Elam (Media and Persia). Line 4 indicates that the troops, and/or others, went to Babylon. Line 5 mentions the troops of Elam, and line 8 apparently refers to a military defeat (Here someones flees and then jumps into a river, a parallel is to be found in the annals of Assurbasirpal). In line 9 a group of people go to Borsippa. Lines 6-7 date these events to a year when the planet Mars was in the vicinity of Cancer during the month of Tammuz (IV). Observations of Mars in this context may be more than coincidental since the planet Mars is not only the planet of Nergal, the Babylonian god of war, but is also often associated with Elam in astrology. The fragment must refer to an astronomical omen rather than belonging to an astronomical diary for two reasons: 1) most information comes from a chronicle rather than an astronomical record (in which historical events are rare); 2) given that the constellation of Cancer covers 20° of the sky106 it needs 20 days to be crossed by a planet, which prevents one from making an observation dated to a specific day. For practical reasons, Mars was entering visually in a constellation when it was crossing its center. An astronomical simulation107 indicates (see below) that Mars was in the center of the constellation of Cancer around the 9 April -484 (485 BCE), that matched to Nisan (first month of Babylonian year), and again108 the 6 March -467 (468 BCE). Presumably after the death of Darius, Babylonian priests, given the dissatisfaction with Babylon and this omen early in the reign of Xerxes (year 11), had predicted wars (which happened soon after). Year -485 -484 -483 -482 Spring equinox Adar2 26 March 26 March Adar2 26 March 26 March 1/I (Nisan) 18 March 5 April 25 March 12 April 1/II 16 April 4 May 23 April 12 May 1/III 16 May 3 June 23 May 10 June 1/IV 14 June 2 July 21 June 10 July D. LEVY – Skywatching. The ultimate guide to the Universe London 1995, Ed. Collins, p. 144. 107 http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/Yourhorizon 108 The coincidence occurred after 17 sideral years or 9 sideral years of Mars (17x365.26 = 6209 days - 26 days = 9x687) 106 1/V (Ab) 14 July 1 August 21 July 9 August DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES After Xerxes had been killed (14/V/21 that is August 24, 475 BCE) there was no king any more because Artabanus was only his legal representative. Herodotus wrote: Have no fear, therefore, on this score; but keep a brave heart and uphold my house and empire. To thee, and thee only, do I intrust my sovereignty (The Histories VII:52), but Artabanus is never mentioned as coregent: For in the three following generations of Darius the son of Hystaspes, Xerxes the son of Darius, and Artaxerxes the son of Xerxes (The Histories VI:98). Justinus and Aristotle even suggest clearly that Darius, the eldest son of Xerxes, was the designated heir109. A contract under Artaxerxes I, refers to a previous arrangement dated IX/21 of 110 Xerxes , or 4 months after his death, and not to Artaxerxes accession, which had just been recognized. An Elephantine Papyri (B24) is dated: [17] Thoth, year 21 (of Xerxes), accession year of Artaxerxes111. As the 17 Thoth corresponds to January 5 (that is 10/IX/21), the accession year of Artaxerxes must have been dated around 1-10/IX/00 (between December 25, 475 BCE and January 5, 474 BCE). Xerxes must have been dead because after the 1st Thoth he would have begun his 22th year of reign in Egypt. year 475 474 month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX year of reign 20 21 Xerxes I (Total lunar eclipse of June 26, 475 BCE) (21) 0 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (Xerxes I) / Artabanus (Partial lunar eclipse of December 20, 475 BCE) Artaxerxes I / Artabanus (met by Themistocles) Artaxerxes I According to this chronological reconstitution the accession of Xerxes is dated -475 (instead of -465) which involves shifting 10 years all years of Xerxes, for example:  Mardonios died in 479 BCE (= year 17 of Xerxes). A batch of tablets on the domain of Mardonius is dated 3-10 years of Xerxes, in addition, according to Herodotus, the general died in August 479 BCE at the Battle of Plataea (The Histories IX :81-84). Stolper112 suggests that one continued to talk about him posthumously a few years after his death (up till -476) as if he were still alive, but his explanation defies common sense!  War preparations are dated 485 to 481 BCE (= year 11 to 15 of Xerxes). The book of Esther describes some events in the 12th year of Ahasuerus (Esther 3:7). According to this text, Xerxes makes a corvée on earth and the islands of the Sea (Esther 10:1), which refers to the islands of the Eastern Mediterranean and the maritime regions of the empire. P. BRIANT - Histoire de l'empire perse. De Cyrus à Alexandre Paris 1996 Éd. Fayard pp. 581-583. 110 H.H. FIGULLA - Business Documents of the New-Babylonian Period London 1949 Ed. Harrison & sons p. 15 text n° 193. 111 B. PORTEN - The Elephantine Papyri in English Leiden 1996 Ed E.J. Brill pp. 164-165. 112 M.W. STOLPER - The Estate of Mardonius in: Aula Orientalis Vol. X 1992 pp. 211-221. 109 49 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 50 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY The Hebrew word mas can be translated as "tribute" or "forced labour", but since the regions in question were already paying tribute, the translation "forced labour" is more appropriate. Xerxes prepared his expedition against Greece for 4 whole years, creating storage and building an impressive fleet of about 1,200 fighting ships and 2000 transport vessels. These preparations are to be linked with the passage from the Book of Esther. The expedition of Xerxes is dated 480 BCE. Yet Herodotus states: From the date of submission of Egypt, Xerxes took 4 whole years to assemble his army and supplies needed and he took the field at the end of the 5th year [spring 480 BCE], with immense forces (The Histories VII:20). A document called “customs registry” contains accounts of maritime traffic from the port of Memphis113 (or Naucratis) showing the amount of customs duty payable to the "king's house." These important contributions which were sent to the Persian king are dated from 11th to 15th year of Xerxes114. A royal receipt dated year 13 of Xerxes115 (10/I/13) also mentions these requisitions.  Succession Xerxes / Artaxerxes (= year 21 of Xerxes) is mentioned just after the siege of Eion (The Histories VII:106-107; The Peloponnesian War I:98,137), which is placed during the archon Phaedon, according to Plutarch (Life of Theseus §§35,36), dated 476/475 BCE. year 502 501 500 499 498 497 496 495 494 493 492 491 490 489 488 487 486 485 484 483 482 481 480 479 478 477 476 475 474 473 472 471 470 King Darius Darius / Xerxes Xerxes Artaxerxes I Historical event 20 (lunar eclipse 19 November 502 BCE) 21 22 Atossa (Udusana) is mentioned 23 Hystaspes is governor of Parthia 24 Xerxes is governor of Parthia 25 26- 0 Building of Xerxes new palace (BM 30589) 27- 1 28- 2 29- 3 End of the Ionian Revolt (Herodotus VI:17-18,31) 30- 4 31- 5 (lunar eclipse 25 April 491 BCE) 32- 6 Battle of Marathon (August 490 BCE) 33- 7 Xerxes married Esther (December 489 BCE) 34- 8 35- 9 36-10 0 Death of Darius (8 December 486 BCE) 11 1 (1) War preparations (Herodotus VII:1-4) 12 2 (2) " 13 3 (3) " 14 4 (4) " 15 5 (5) " 16 6 Battle of Salamis (September 480 BCE) 17 7 Battle of Plataea (August 479 BCE) 18 8 19 9 20 10 Siege of Eion, fall of Skyros (Life of Theseus §§35,36) 0 - 21 11 Battle of Naxos (the last one during Xerxes’ reign) 1 Themistocles met Artaxerxes (Thucydides I:98,137) 2 3 Performance of Aeschylus’ play (end of Xerxes’ empire) 4 Death of Themistocles (Diodorus XI:58:3-60:1) 5 E. BRESCIANI – L'Égypte des satrapes d'après la documentation araméenne et égyptienne in: Comptes rendus de l'Académie des Inscriptions & Belles-Lettres (1995) pp. 97-108. 114 B. PORTEN A. YARDENI - Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt, 3 1993 Ed. Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities pp. 195-203. 115 M.W. STOLPER – "Fifth-Century Nippur: Texts of the Murasus from their Surroundings" in: Journal of Cuneiform Studies 53 (2001) pp. 26-35. 113 Reference Almagest IV:9.11 PF 0163 PF 1596 PF-NN 1657 BM 42567 BM 75396 Est 1:3 Almagest IV:9.11 Est 2:16-17 Est 3:7;10:1 (Mardocai died) BM 32234 The Persians DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES DID THEMISTOCLES MEET ARTAXERXES ? Diodorus (Historical Library XI:54-60) mentions the death of Themistocles: when Praxigerus was archon [471/470]. If Artaxerxes began his reign in 465 BCE, Themistocles, who died in 471 BCE, could not have met him. Aware of this aberration, many historians today move the death of Themistocles in 460 or even in 450 BCE. But this choice comes up against a problem: the life of Themistocles is well documented. This paradox is not new, as already evoked by Cornelius Nepos: I know most historians have related that Themistocles went over into Asia in the reign of Xerxes, but I give credence to Thucydides in preference to others, because he, of all who have left records of that period, was nearest in point of time to Themistocles, and was of the same city (Life of Themistocles IX). Plutarch says: Thucydides and Charon of Lampsacus say that Xerxes was dead, and that Themistocles had an interview with his son; but Ephorus, Dinon, Clitarchus, Heraclides, and many others, write that he came to Xerxes. The chronological tables better agree with the account of Thucydides, and yet neither can their statements be said to be quite set at rest (Life of Themistocles XXVII). Cicero relates: Who was more eminent in Greece than Themistocles, who more powerful? But he, after having saved Greece from slavery by his leadership in the war with Persia, and after having been banished because of his unpopularity, would not submit to the injustice of an ungrateful country, as he was in duty bound to do: he did the same thing that Coriolanus had done among our people 20 years before. Not one single supporter could be found to aid these men against their country; therefore, each took his own life (Laelius on Friendship XII§42). Livy (Roman History II:34-39) dates precisely the life of Coriolanus, indicating that he betrayed in the consulship of Marcus Minucius and Aulus Sempronius (in -491) and died 3 years later when Spurius Nautius and Sextus Furius were consuls (in -488). The parallel between these two famous men who have had a similar purpose would involve a death of Themistocles around -468. Plutarch also says that Themistocles ended his days in the city of Magnesia, having lived 65 years (Life of Themistocles III; XXXI). According to Cornelius Nepos, Themistocles and Aristides were about the same age (Aristides I:1). Elien says: Themistocles, and Aristides Son of Lysimachus, had the same Governours, they were also brought up together, and taught by one Master, but whilest yet Boyes, they were alwaies at variance ; and this emulation continued from their childhood, to extreme old age (Various History XIII:44). Plutarch wrote: Aristides being the friend and supporter of that Clisthenes (...) had Themistocles, son to Neocles, his adversary on the side of the populace. Some say that, being boys and bred up together from their infancy, they were always at variance with each other in all their words and actions (Aristides II:1). Now, to be part of the Boule (Senate), you had to be at least 30 years old116. So Aristide have been to be born a little before -538, for the constitution of Cleisthenes is 508. With an estimated birth around -538, the death of Themistocles (65 years later) would be around -473. Ælian wrote: On a time Themistocles, yet a boy, returning from School, his Master bade him, meeting Pisistratus the Tyrant, to go a little out of the way. Whereto he generously answered, "Is not here way enough for him?" So much did something ingenious and generous appear in Themistocles at those years (Various History III:21). As Pisistratus died in the archonship of Philoneos (in 527), according to Aristotle (Constitution of Athens XVII:1-2), Themistocles had to have risen about 537/536, as being a pais (boy) at this meeting he was at less 10 years old. If Themistocles, who died at the age of 65, was born in -536, his death is therefore in -471. He must have been 46 years old at the Battle of Marathon (in -490). Stobaeus supports this testimony by saying that Themistocles was already old (which means to have been around 50 or more) when he took the head of the Athenian forces during the Median wars117. C. ORRIEUX, P. SCHMITT PANTEL - Histoire grecque. Paris 1995 Ed. Presses Universitaires de France pp. 165,197. 117 J. STOBAEI - Florilegium CXVII:9 Vol. III 116 51 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 52 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY TRANSITION ARTAXERXES I / DARIUS II According to the conventional chronology, mainly from Ptolemy's Royal Canon, supplemented by information from the ancient historians (Herodotus, Manetho, etc.), the following schema was accepted (Artaxerxes accession is supposed to be in 465 BCE): year 424 423 month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II year of reign 40 Artaxerxes I 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 (41) Xerxes II Sogdianus Darius II 1 98 Statistical spreading of tablets118 Because of the small number of tablets the chronology of Artaxerxes reign was hard to verify. However, the discovery of the Murashu archives119 completely changed the previous reconstitution since a co-regency of several months (up till month XII)120 appeared between Artaxerxes I and Darius instead of a period ruled by two usurpers121. month 424 423 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Artaxerxes I (year 41) Darius II (accession) 25/IV/00 5/V/41; 20/V/41 1/VI/41; 25/VI/41 4/VII/41; 16/VII/41 6/VIII/41 1/XI/41; 12/IX/41 14/IX/00; 29/IX/00 17/XI/41 14/XII/41; 20/XII/41 4/XI/00; 15/XI/00 9/XII/00; 22/XII/00 1824 Lipsiae Ed. Thomas Gaisford p. 392. 118 J. EVERLING – Materials for the Study of First Millenium B.C. Babylonian Texts 2000 Paris Bibliothèque du Collège de France (Assyrie) cote: TP-Everling. 119 M.W. STOLPER - Entrepreneurs and Empire. The Murashu Archive Leiden Istambul 1985 pp. 13-24. 120 V. DONBAZ, M.W. STOLPER – Istanbul Murasu Texts in: Pihans 79 (1997) Leiden-Istanbul. 121 L. DEPUYDT - The Date of Death of Artaxerxes I in: Die Welt des Orients XXVI (1995) pp. 86-96. DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES Some scholars have suggested that scribes who had dated contracts in the year 41 of Artaxerxes were unaware that Darius had begun to reign122, but this is unlikely123. Aware of this difficulty some have proposed to reduce the duration of the coregency by reading XI instead of IV, but Stolper124 acknowledges: Leichty (1974) as Walker (1979) observed that although the sign of the month is more like that ŠU than ZIZ, it is partially broken, damaged along the bottom and right edge. Thus, the reading 25/IV/41 accession of Darius (on tablet BM 33342 below) seems most likely. He added that since Artaxerxes died around -424 in March at the end of his 40th year of reign, the Babylonian scribes were well aware of his death in the 12th month of this year. Stolper thought that Darius II was immediately admitted to Babylon along with Xerxes II, Sogdianus being only recognized in Persia before being assassinated. Chronological reconstitution currently accepted is as follows: year 424 423 month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II year of reign 40 41 0 Artaxerxes I 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 / Xerxes II [Artaxerxes I] / / Sogdianus [Artaxerxes I] / Darius II / Sogdianus [Artaxerxes I] / Darius II (42) 1 F.X. KUGLER - Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel 11 Münster 1907, 1912 p. 312. 123 D.M. LEWIS - Sparta and Persia Leiden 1977 Ed. E.J. Brill pp. 70-72. 124 M.W. STOLPER - The Death of Artaxerxes I 1983 Berlin in: Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran 16 pp. 223-236. 122 [Artaxerxes I] / Darius II 53 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 54 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Although it is generally accepted that reconstitution is absurd because it implies a co-regency with a dead king. Indeed, the death of Artaxerxes is fixed precisely by Thucydides just at the end of the 7th year of the Peloponnesian War and before a partial solar eclipse in March 424 BCE according to his chronological system (The Peloponnesian War IV:50-52). Astronomy confirms the existence of the eclipse (annular eclipse of magnitude 94%)125 dated March 21, 424 BCE. However, as the 1st of Nisan fell on April 20126 in 424 BCE, Artaxerxes I could not have begun his 41st year of reign because the spring equinox fell on March 25 in 424 BCE (Julian calendar)127 and the 1st Nisan (= 1st crescent appearing after the equinox) fell on April 20 in 424 BCE. As there was an intercalary month128 in the year 40 of Artaxerxes I, year 41 should be synchronized with the equinox. Moreover, even if the 1st Nisan fell on March 22, Artaxerxes I died before that date as Thucydides puts his death before the solar eclipse of March 21. Although Artaxerxes died in March 424 BCE the co-regency with his son Darius lasted until March 423 BCE. Indeed, the tablet CBS 5506 is a contract dated --/VI/41 to take effect the 1st month of the year 42, and the tablet CBS 4986 dated 17/VII/41 is an obligation to pay dates and grain to the next harvest, in the 7th month [current year] and the 2nd month of the year 42129. The most logical solution is therefore to consider that Artaxerxes I was still alive during his 41st year. This fits especially since his 41st year fell in 434 BCE, not in 424. year 434 433 month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI year of reign 40 Artaxerxes I 41 (42) 0 Artaxerxes I / Darius B 1 (Artaxerxes I) / Darius B Plutarch and Justinus have effectively described a co-regency between Artaxerxes and his son Darius, but as the king is identified with Artaxerxes II, the story of these two historians are not taken into account. Although Plutarch announced in the introduction about the life of Artaxerxes II, his description does not match the end of his reign, which appears to have happened smoothly according to Diodorus Siculus (Historical Library XV:93), but rather that of Artaxerxes I with its fratricidal strife between his sons: Xerxes II, Sogdianus and Ochos, the future Darius II, not to be confused with the first Darius (B). http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEcat5/SE-0499--0400.html http://www.imcce.fr/fr/grandpublic/phenomenes/phases_lune/index.php 127 http://www.imcce.fr/fr/grandpublic/temps/saisons.php 128 H.G. STIGERS - Art 2. XIIb.11.40 in: Journal of Cuneiform Studies 28 (1976) note 47. H. HUNGER - Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia vol V Wien 2001 Ed. Akademie der Wissenschaften p. 227. 129 M.W. STOLPER - The Death of Artaxerxes I. 1983 Berlin in: Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran 16 p. 229 note 34. 125 126 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES Confusion of Kings among some historians is due to the frequent presence of homonyms and family trees which are close enough130: Xerxes II Sogdianus Ostanes I I I Arsanes I I I I Darius III I Ochos Cyrus Ariapes Xerxes II Sogdianus Ostanes I I I Arsanes I I I I Darius III I Ochos Cyrus Ariapes Xerxes I I Artaxerxes I I (Ochos) Darius II I (Arsakes) Artaxerxes II I (Ochos) Artaxerxes III I I (Arses) Artaxerxes IV I Xerxes I I Artaxerxes I I (Ochos) Darius II I (Arsakes) Artaxerxes II I (Ochos) Artaxerxes III I I (Arses) Artaxerxes IV I choice 1 Darius (B) Arsites Darius I Arbupales Arsames Bisthanes choice 2 Darius (B) Arsites Darius I Arbupales Arsames Bisthanes There was a co-regency at the end of the reign of Artaxerxes II, but his successor Ochos (the future Artaxerxes III), ascended the throne without difficulty. By contrast, it was not the case of Ochos (the future Darius II) who performs no co-regency with his father (Artaxerxes I) and ascended the throne after eliminating Sogdianus. According to Plutarch: But Artaxerxes, being now advanced in years, perceived that his sons were forming rival parties among his friends and chief men with reference to the royal succession. For the conservatives thought it right that, as he himself had received the royal power by virtue of seniority, in like manner he should leave it to Darius. But his youngest son, Ochus, who was of an impetuous and violent disposition, not only had many adherents among the courtiers, but hoped for most success in winning over his father through the aid of Atossa. For he sought to gain Atossa's favour by promising that she should be his wife and share the throne with him after the death of his father. And there was a report that even while his father was alive Ochus had secret relations with Atossa. But Artaxerxes was ignorant of this; and wishing to shatter at once the hopes of Ochus, that he might not venture upon the same course as Cyrus and so P. BRIANT - Histoire de l'empire perse. De Cyrus à Alexandre Paris 1996 Éd. Fayard pp. 586-589, 793, 1029. 130 55 56 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY involve the kingdom anew in wars and contests, he [Artaxerxes] proclaimed Darius, then 50 years of age131, his successor to the throne, and gave him permission to wear the upright "kitanis," as the tiara was called (...) Accordingly, it was adding fire to fire when Tiribzus attached himself to the young prince and was forever telling him that the tiara standing upright on the head was of no use to those who did not seek by their own efforts to stand upright in affairs of state, and that he was very foolish if, when his brother was insinuating himself into affairs of state by way of the harem, and his father was of a nature so fickle and insecure, he could suppose that the succession to the throne was securely his (...) Accordingly, Darius put himself in the hands of Tiribzus; and presently, when many were in the conspiracy, an eunuch made known to the king the plot and the mention of it, having accurate knowledge that the conspirators had resolved to enter the king's chamber by night and kill him in his bed. When Artaxerxes heard the eunuch's story, he thought it a grave matter to neglect the information and ignore so great a peril, and a graver still to believe it without any proof. He therefore acted on this wise. He charged the eunuch to attend closely upon the conspirators; meanwhile he himself cut away the wall of his chamber behind the bed, put a doorway there, and covered the door with a hanging. Then, when the appointed hour was at hand and the eunuch told him the exact time, he kept his bed and did not rise from it until he saw the faces of his assailants and recognised each man clearly. But when he saw them advancing upon him with drawn swords, he quickly drew aside the hanging, retired into the inner chamber, closed the door with a slam, and raised a cry. The murderers, accordingly, having been seen by the king, and having accomplished nothing, fled back through the door by which they had come, and told Tiribzus and his friends to be off since their plot was known. The rest, then, were dispersed and fled; but Tiribzus slew many of the king's guards as they sought to arrest him, and at last was smitten by a spear at long range, and fell. Darius, together with his children, was brought to the king, who consigned him to the royal judges for trial. The king was not present in person at the trial, but others brought in the indictment. However, the king ordered clerks to take down in writing the opinion of each judge and bring them all to him. All the judges were of one opinion and condemned Darius to death, whereupon the servants of the king seized him and led him away into a chamber near by, whither the executioner was summoned. The executioner came, with a sharp knife in his hand, wherewith the heads of condemned persons are cut off; but when he saw Darius, he was confounded, and retired towards the door with averted gaze, declaring that he could not and would not take the life of a king. But since the judges outside the door plied him with threats and commands, he turned back, and with one hand clutching Darius by the hair, dragged him to the ground, and cut off his head with the knife. Some say, however, that the trial was held in the presence of the king, and that Darius, when he was overwhelmed by the proofs, fell upon his face and begged and sued for mercy; but Artaxerxes rose up in anger, drew his scimitar, and smote him till he had killed him; then, going forth into court, he made obeisance to the sun and said: "Depart in joy and peace, ye Persians, and say to all whom ye meet that those who have contrived impious and unlawful things have been punished by great Orosmasdes." Such, then, was the end of the conspiracy. And now Ochus was sanguine in the hopes with which Atossa inspired him, but he was still afraid of Ariaspes, the only legitimate son of the king remaining, and also of Arsames among the illegitimate sons (Life of Artaxerxes 26:1-30:5). According to Justinus: Artaxerxes, king of Persia, had a hundred and fifteen sons by his concubines, but only three begotten in lawful wedlock, Darius, Ariarathes, and Ochus. Of these the father, from paternal fondness, made Darius king during his own lifetime, contrary to the usage of the Persians, among whom the king is changed only by death; for he thought nothing taken from himself that he conferred upon his son, and expected greater enjoyment from having progeny, if he saw the insignia of royalty adorning 131 Several commentators have corrected the number 50 into 30, because Plutarch says a little later that Darius (B) was a young man at his enthronement (less than 25 according to Cyropaedia I:2:13), which is confirmed by Justinus (Epitome of the Philippic History X:1-3). In fact, the number 50 refers to Artaxerxes’ age, not to Darius’ age. According to Esther 2:16-18, king Xerxes married Esther in the 10th month, the 7th year of his reign (in 489 BCE) and according to Ctesias: Xerxes married the daughter of Onophas, Amestris (Esther). He was born a son Darius (in 488 BCE), a second, 2 years later, Hystaspes, then Artaxerxes (in 485 BCE) and two daughters Amytis, who took the name of his grandmother, and Rhodogune (Persica F13§24). Consequently Artaxerxes was 11 years old when Xerxes died in 475 BCE, 50 in 434 BCE when Darius (B) was enthroned, and 62 when he died in 423 BCE (Plutarch says Artaxerxes reigned 62 years). According to Justinius, Artaxerxes was barely out of childhood (11) and Darius was already in adolescence (14) when Xerxes was murdered (History III:1). DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES his son while he lived. But Darius, after such an extraordinary proof of his father’s affection, conceived the design of killing him. (...) Artaxerxes, from fondness from his children, said at first that he would do so, but afterwards, from a change of mind, and in order plausibly to refuse what he had inconsiderately promised, made her a priestess of the sun, an office which obliged her to perpetual chastity. The young Darius, being incensed at this proceeding, broke out at first into reproaches against his father, and subsequently entered into this conspiracy with his brothers. But while he was meditating destruction for his father, he was discovered and apprehended with his associates, and paid the penalty of his guilt to the gods who avenge paternal authority. The wives of them all, too, together with their children, were put to death, that no memorial of such execrable wickedness might be left. Soon after Artaxerxes died of a disease contracted by grief, having been happier as a king than as a father. Possession of the throne was given to Ochus (Epitome of the Philippic History X:1-3) The length of the reign of Darius B can be deduced from two elements: the disappearance of year 9 in Murashu's archives132 and the appearance of a contract (BM 65494) dated year 50 of Artaxerxes I. 436 435 434 433 432 431 430 429 428 427 426 425 424 423 Xerxes II, Sogdianus 39 Artaxerxes I 40 41 -0 Darius B (42)-1 (43)-2 (44)-3 (45)-4 (46)-5 (47)-6 (48)-7 (49)-8 50 -(9) (51) Darius II 1 M.W. STOLPER - Entrepreneurs and Empire. The Murashu Archive Leiden Istambul 1985 pp. 23-24. 132 Tablets of Murashu death of Darius B Tablet BM 65494 Thucydide IV:50 57 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 58 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Tablet BM 65494 dated 4/VI/50 of Artaxerxes I Stolper reconstituted the prosopography of Murashu's family and has dated it according to the accepted chronology133. According to this reconstruction (choice 1), length of service is 27.5 years for the first two generations, 20.5 years for the third and 11.5 years for the fourth, which would be a surprising rejuvenation134. By contrast, taking into account Darius B (choice 2), we get a more balanced period of activity for four generations with an average of 22.5 years respectively for the first two, then 20.5 years and 21.5 years for the two following ones: Genealogy of Murashu family Choice 1 Artaxerxes (465-424) I Enlil-ḫatin (454-437) I I Rimut-Ninurta Enlil-ḫatin (429-414) (419) Choice 2 Artaxerxes (475-424) I Enlil-ḫatin (464-447) I I Rimut-Ninurta Enlil-ḫatin (439-414) (429) Ḫatin (ca. 500) I Murašu (ca. 445) I Enlil-šum-iddin (445-421) generation 1st 27.5 gap 0 2nd 27.5 0 3rd 20.5 -7 4th 11.5 -16 generation 1st 22.5 gap 0 2nd 22.5 0 3rd 20.5 -2 4th 21.5 -1 I Naqqitu (436) I Murašu (424-416) Ḫatin (ca. 500) I Murašu (ca. 455) I Enlil-šum-iddin (455-431) I Naqqitu (446) I Murašu (434-416) M.W. STOLPER - The Genealogy of the Murashu Family in: Journal of Cuneiform Studies XXVIII (1976) pp. 189-200. 134 27.5 years = (500 - 445)/2; 20.5 years = (454-437 + 445-421)/2; 11.5 years = (429-414 + 424-416)/2. 133 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES The death of Artaxerxes I is precisely dated by Thucydides (early March -424) in agreement with the account of Diodorus of Sicily who wrote: When Stratocles when archon in Athenes [July -425 to June -424] Artaxerxes, the king of the Persians, died after a reign of 40 years, and Xerxes succeeded to the throne and ruled for a year (...) King Xerxes died after a reign of 1 year, or, as some record, 2 months; and his brother Sogdianus succeeded to the throne and ruled for 7 months. He was slain by Darius, who reigned 19 years (Historical Library XII:64:1; 71:1). As Artaxerxes' death can be dated xx/XI/50 and as the first tablet of Darius II (PIHANS 79, 22) is dated 14/IX/00 (December -424), we must have the following chronology: an 425 424 423 month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III year of reign [49] 8 Artaxerxes I / Darius B 50 (9) Artaxerxes I Tablet BM 65494 dated 4/VI/50 of Artaxerxes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0? [1] (51) (Solar eclipse dated March 21, 424 BCE) Xerxes II [0] Sogdianus 0 Tablet dated 14/IX/00 of Darius Darius II Tablet CBM 12803 dated 20/XII/51 and accession of Darius 1 The story of Ctesias which is about the hectic transition between Artraxerxes I and Darius II seems very reliable, because many names that appear in the archives of Murashu are the same as those he mentioned135. Furthermore, his story is chronologically very detailed: Artoxerxes dies in his turn, having reigned 42 years (...) After the death of Artoxerxes, it was the reign of his son Xerxes, who was the only legitimate son he had by Damaspia — the life she had left the day Artoxerxès was dead. Bagorazos took into Persia the body of the father and mother. Artoxerxes I had seventeen bastards, including Sogdianus, Alogoune son of the Babylonian female, Ochos and Arsita, the son of Cosmartidene also Babylonian. Later, Ochos [Darius II] ascended to the throne (...) Concerning Ochos, his father, during his lifetime, had appointed him satrap of Hyrcania and gave him a woman named Parysatis, who was the daughter of Artoxerxes I and own sister of Ochos. Sogdianus had conciliated the eunuch Pharnakyas, who came in the hierarchy, after Bagorazos, Menostanes and others. While Xerxes became drunk at a party and he slept in the palace, they come and kill him, 45 days after the death of his father. It happened so that their two bodies were transported together into Persia (...) Sogdianus becomes king and Menostanes becomes his chief of thousand. Bagorazos was gone, then returned to Sogdianus. As an old feud brewing between them, saying that he had left there the remains of his father without his consent, Bagorazos was stoned on the order of Sogdianus. The army was deeply distressed. The king gave him gifts, D. LENFANT - Ctésias de Cnide, la Perse Paris 2004 Ed. Les Belles Lettres pp. CVI-CVII. 135 59 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 60 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY but the soldiers hated him because he had killed his brother Xerxes and Bagorazos. Sogdianus sends Ochos a message that demand. The other promises to come, but does not show up. The incident is repeated many times. Finally, Ochos surrounded by a large army and is expected to see him prevail. Arbarios, head of the cavalry Sogdianus and Arxan, satrap of Egypt, have defected to Ochos. The eunuch Artoxares comes from Armenia to join Ochos and they cause him to wear the crown in spite of himself. Ochos became king and changed his name to Darius. He pursues Sogdianus with his betrayals and his oaths, following the advice of Parysatis while Menostanes regularly calls Sogdianus not to rely on oaths and not to negotiate with people who seek to deceive him. Sogdianus is convincing nonetheless leaves, he falls into their hands, he is thrown into the ashes and dies after a reign of 6 months and 15 days. Ochos aka Darius, is only one ruler (Persica F14§46]-F15§50). Polyaenus gives another chronological detail: After the death of Artaxerxes, his son Ochus [Darius II] realised that he would not immediately have the same authority over his subjects, which his father had. Therefore he prevailed upon the eunuchs, the stewards, and the captain of the guard, to conceal the death of his father for a period of 10 months. In the meantime, he wrote letters in his father's name, and sealed them with the royal signet, commanding his subjects to acknowledge Ochus as their king, and to pay homage to him. When this decree had been obeyed by all his subjects, Ochus announced the death of his father, and ordered a general mourning for him, according to the custom of the Persians (Stratagems of war VII:17). 136 Tablet CBM 12803 12803 dated dated 20/XII/51 accession year of of Darius Darius II II 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 15 16 Transcription Translation 2 ½ ma-na kaspu šîmu 5 biltu šipâtucol mdDan-nu-aḫê-šu-ibni aplu ša mBêl-iddina ina qât mBêl-šu-nu aplu ša mMan-nu-ki-dNanâ ina na-aš-pa-aš-tum ša mEllil-šum-iddina ma-ḫi-ir u-ša-az-za-az-ma kaspu-’ 2 ½ [ma-na] mdDan-nu-aḫê-su-ibni itti mEllil-šum-iddina ana mBêl-šu-nu i-nam-din (... names of 5 witnesses ...) iti še ud 20-kàm mu 51-kàm mu sag-nam-lugal-e da-ri-a-muš lugal kur-[kur] 2 ½ mines of silver, price of 5 talents of wool Dannu-ahêshu-ibni son of Bêl-iddina received from the hand of Bêlshunu, son of Mannu-ki-Nanâ the order of Ellil-shum-iddina. He will deliver silver, that is 2 ½ mines Dannu-ahêshu-ibni with Ellil-shum-iddina paying for Bêlshunu (... names of 5 witnesses ...) month XII, day 20, year 51 [of Artaxerxes I], accession year of Darius king of lands. A.T. CLAY - Legal and Commercial Transactions Dated in the Assyrian (...) Persian Periods in: The Babylonian Expedition vol. VIII (1908) p. 34. 136 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES TRANSITION DARIUS II / DARIUS III The tablet CBS 1714137 contains year 19 of Darius II and year 1 of Artaxerxes II, confirming a planned transition between these two kings. The last tablet of Darius II is dated 02/VI/19 (TBER pl. 36; AO 17606): year 405 404 month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III year of reign 18 19 Darius II / Artaxerxes II (0) Tablet AO 17606 dated 02/VI/19 Artaxerxes II 1 Tablet AO 26780 dated 11/I/1 VAS 6186 tablet contains the last known text that is dated in the reign of Artaxerxes II. This king probably died shortly thereafter on 10/VIII/46 (November 359 BCE)138 because the astronomical tablet BM 71537 connects the accession of Artaxerxes III just before the solar eclipse of 28/XI (March 11, 358 BCE). The succession Artaxerxes II / Artaxerxes III seems to have gone smoothly according to Syncellus139. Diodorus of Sicily wrote that the Persian king died after 43 years of rule. The kingship came to Ochos who took the name of Artaxerxes and reigned for 23 years (Historical Library XV:93), a period which seems to incorporate a co-regency of 3 years in the reign of Artaxerxes III (21 years). year 359 358 month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III year of reign 45 (2) Artaxerxes II / Artaxerxes III 46 0 (3) Tablet VS 6, 186 dated 10/VIII/46 Artaxerxes III 1 M.W. STOLPER - Late Achaemenid Babylonian Chronology in: Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires (1999) N°1 pp.6-9. 138 M.W. STOLPER - Late Achaemenid Babylonian Chronology in: Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires (1999) N°6 pp. 9-12. 139 P. BRIANT - Histoire de l'empire perse. De Cyrus à Alexandre Paris 1996 Éd. Fayard p. 700. 137 61 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 62 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Artaxerxes III death is dated in month VI (September 338 BCE) in the astronomical tablet BM 71537140 between the eclipses of July 24, 338 BCE and January 20, 337 BCE. The last tablet is dated 15/VII/21 (TCL 6, 56). According to Diodorus, Artaxerxes IV died shortly after the assassination of Philip II of Macedonia141, dated 20/XII/02 (March 19, 335 BCE) in a papyrus from Wadi Dâliyeh142. According to the astronomical tablet BM 36761, Darius III lost the battle of Gaugamela against Alexander the Great in the 5th year of his reign, the 24/VI/5 (October 1, 331 BCE), just after the lunar eclipse of 13/VI/5 (September 20, 331 BCE)143. year 338 337 336 335 334 month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI year of reign 20 Artaxerxes III 21 0 Tablet TCL 6, 56 dated 15/VII/21 Artaxerxes IV 1 2 0 1 Darius III H. HUNGER - Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia vol V Wien 2001 Ed. Akademie der Wissenschaften pp. 45,398. 141 P. BRIANT - Histoire de l'empire perse. De Cyrus à Alexandre Paris 1996 Éd. Fayard pp. 794-800. 142 A. LEMAIRE – Les formules de datations en Palestine au premier millénaire avant J.-C. in: Proche-Orient ancien, temps vécu, temps pensé (Paris 1998) Éd. J. Maisonneuve p. 72. 143 J.A. BRINKMAN - BM 36761, the Astronomical Diary for 331 B.C. in: Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires (1987) §63. 140 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES year 333 332 331 330 329 month 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII year of reign 2 Darius III 3 4 Tablet UET 4, 25 dated 20/XII/4 5 [0] [1] Alexander the Great (III) 6 7 Arasiuqa (?) BRM 2, 51 dated XII/6 Tablet CBS 7345 dated 08/XII/7 The first cuneiform tablet (CBS 7345) of Alexander (III) is dated 08/XII/7, which shows that the counting of years of his reign was backdated. What makes the situation extremely complex is the use of three reckoning systems (Babylonian, Egyptian and Lydian) for formula dates and the presence of an unknown king called Arsuqa (mar-’-si-uqqa) on a tablet (BRM 2 51) dated year 6144. T. BOIY – Between High and Low. A Chronology of the Early Hellenistic Period in: Oikumene Studien zur antiken Weltgeschichte 5 (2007), pp. 22-27,73-104. 144 63 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 64 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Achaemenid chronology synchronized Date 559/539 10-539/ 10-538 11-538/ 08-530 09-530/ 02-522 03-522/ 04-522 05-522/ 09-522 10-522/ 11-522 12-522/ 01-521 02-521/ 11-521 12-521/ 04-496 05-496/ 12-486 01-485/ 07-485 08-485 09-485/ 10-485 11-485/ 08-475 09-475/ 12-475 01-474/ 03-474 04-474/ 06-434 07-434/ 03-425? 04-425/ 03-424 04-424/ 05-424 06-424/ 12-424 01-423/ 03-423 04-423/ 09-405 10-405/ 03-361 04-361/ 02-358 03-358/ 09-338 10-338/ 03-335 03-335/ 09-331 336/323 King Cyrus II Cyrus II Cyrus II Cambyses II Cambyses II Bardiya Nebuchadnezzar III Darius I Darius I Darius I Darius I Xerxes I Xerxes I Xerxes I Xerxes I [Xerxes I] Artaxerxes I Artaxerxes I Artaxerxes I Artaxerxes I Xerxes II Sogdianus Darius II Darius II Artaxerxes II Artaxerxes II Artaxerxes III Artaxerxes IV Darius III Alexander III Actual reign [20] 9 8 Coregent Harpagus [11] Ugbaru [1] Cambyses II (1) Official reign 9 8 0 Bardiya Bardiya (1) Bardiya Nebuchadnezzar III (0) Nebuchadnezzar IV (1) 36 Xerxes I (10) 36 Bel-shimanni (0) Shamash-eriba (0) 11 + (10) (41) (--) 50 (1) [51] 19 46 21 2 5 13 (Artabanus) (Artabanus) 21 41 Darius B (8) 19 Artaxerxes III (3?) 46 21 2 5 Dating based on intercalary months The achievement of the ancient Babylonian astronomers in devising the 19-year cycle with its 7 intercalated months was indeed remarkable. How the system worked in actual practice may be seen in the first 19 years of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar II145: April I II III IV V VI VI2 VII VIII IX XII XII2 11 29 29 30 29 30 30 - 29 30 30 30 29 29 - 603 602 601 600 599 598 597 596 12U 13 14 15U 16 17U 18 19U 30 30 29 29 30 29 30 29 29 29 30 30 30 30 29 30 29 29 29 29 29 29 30 29 29 30 29 30 30 30 30 30 30 29 30 29 30 30 30 30 30 30 29 30 29 30 30 30 30 28 29 30 29 30 30 30 30 30 29 29 30 29 30 30 29 29 29 29 30 30 29 30 29 29 30 30 29 29 30 29 30 30 29 29 30 30 29 29 29 29 30 30 29 30 30 30 30 29 29 29 - 595 594 593 592 591 590 589 588 587 586 1 2A 3 4 5A 6 7 8A 9 10 29 29 29 30 30 30 30 30 30 29 30 29 29 29 30 29 29 29 29 30 29 30 30 30 29 30 30 30 30 29 30 29 29 29 30 29 29 29 29 29 30 30 30 29 29 30 30 30 30 30 29 30 29 30 29 29 30 30 30 30 - 30 29 30 29 30 30 29 30 30 30 30 30 29 29 29 29 30 29 29 30 29 29 30 30 29 30 29 30 30 29 30 30 30 30 30 29 30 29 29 30 29 30 30 30 30 29 29 30 30 29 30 29 29 29 29 30 29 29 29 30 30 30 29 - year cycle 604 January X XI This cycle of 19 years was based on observation and not on calculations146 (the computed data in diaries appear roughly before 350 BCE)147. It was not a theoretical cycle like the cycle of Meton but a coincidence which came from the following equivalences: 19 solar years = 6539.6 days (= 365.24219x365) 19 lunar years + 7 intercalary months = 6539.6 days (= [19x12+7]x29.530288). The presence of four months Elul2 in the period 603-596, instead of only one, proves that the Babylonian system of intercalary months was empirical. These months (VI2) were mainly used to calibrate the 1st Tishri (VII) just after the autumn equinox. Historians of Babylonian astronomy have in recent decades come to the conclusion that the cycle was known to the Babylonians by about 500 BCE, but it must be admitted, however, that there are still problems with the list of intercalary months during the later years of the Achaemenid empire. For instance, in the 16th year of Darius II (408/407 BCE), three sources suggest an intercalary Ulul but one an intercalary Adar; in the 16th year of Artaxerxes II, two sources suggest an intercalary Ulul but one an intercalary Adar; and two sources (including a contemporary astronomical Diary) suggest an intercalary Adar in the 20th year of Artaxerxes II (385/384 BCE) whereas two other sources (including the Saros canon) attribute the intercalary month to his 21st year148. J. FINEGAN - Handbook of Biblical Chronology Massachusetts 1999 Ed. Hendrickson Publishers pp. 27-28. 146 J.M. STEELE – Calendars and Years. Astronomy and Time in the Ancient Near East Oxford 2007 Ed. Oxbow Books pp. 120-123. 147 F. ROCHBERG-HALTON – Between Observation and Theory in Babylonian Astronomical Texts in: Journal of Near Eastern Studies 50:2 (1991) pp. 107-120. 148 C. WALKER - Achaemenid Chronology and the Babylonian Sources in: Mesopotamia and Iran in the Persian Period Ed. British Museum Press (1997) pp. 23-24. 145 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 66 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY A table of intercalary months gives the impression that the 19-year cycle was standardized from -500 or -483, depending on the way to group periods149, with some exceptions. However, Parker and Dubberstein assumed, because of these anomalies, the Babylonian calendar had really been standardized as from -367 instead of -500150. In the 19-year cycle there can be only 7 intercalary months. However, during the reign of Cyrus to Darius I, two cycles contain 10, which means that multiple calendars depended on several Persian capitals (Persepolis, Suse, Ecbatana, Pasargadae), not just on Babylon. In the reign of Artaxerxes II we find, for example, an intercalary month in the year 40151, but also in the years 42, 43, 44 and 45152, which is unlikely. Anomalies (highlighted) are much more numerous than in the study of Parker and Dubberstein. cycle 1 2 3A 4 5 6A 7 8A 9 10 11 A 12 13 14 A 15 16 17 U 18 19 A 538 537 536 535 534 533 532 531 530 529 528 527 526 525 524 523 522 521 520 total 519 U 500 A 481 462 443 424 405 A U A a A a A A A A A A a a a A A A A A A a a A A A A U U U U U A A a A a A a A a a U A U A a a A A A A a a U/A U U A A U u U U u A a A A A A a a a U A 386 367 348 A a A A A A A a a 10 10 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 7 (A: attested Adar; U: attested Ulul; a: supposed Adar; u; supposed Ulul) Assuming that the set of dates came in fact from two Persian capitals (Babylon and another city) whose cycle was shifted by one year, all the abnormalities disappeared. year 386 385 364 383 382 381 380 379 378 377 376 375 374 373 372 371 370 369 368 City° A° A° a° a° a° u° a° cycle° 2 3A 4 5 6A 7 8A 9 10 11 A 12 13 14 A 15 16 17 U 18 19 A 1 Bab. a a a A A U a cycle 1 2 3A 4 5 6A 7 8A 9 10 11 A 12 13 14 A 15 16 17 U 18 19 A C°+B A° A° a A A U a year 367 366 365 364 363 362 361 360 359 358 357 356 355 354 353 352 351 350 349 City° a° A° A° a° a° u° a° cycle° 2 3A 4 5 6A 7 8A 9 10 11 A 12 13 14 A 15 16 17 U 18 19 A 1 Bab. A A A a a U a cycle 1 2 3A 4 5 6A 7 8A 9 10 11 A 12 13 14 A 15 16 17 U 18 19 A C°+B (A: attested Adar; U: attested Ulul; a: supposed Adar; u; supposed Ulul) J.P. BRITTON – Treatments of Annual Phenomena in Cuneiform Sources in: Under One Sky (Münster 2002) Ed. Ugarit-Verlag pp. 25-35. 150 R.A. PARKER, W.H. DUBBERSTEIN - Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C.-A.D. 75 Rhode Island 1956 Ed. Brown University Press pp. 1-6. 151 H.G. STIGERS - Art 2. XIIb.11.40 in: Journal of Cuneiform Studies 28 (1976) note 47. 152 H. HUNGER - Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia vol V Wien 2001 Ed. Akademie der Wissenschaften pp. 215,217,227,247,261. 149 A A° A A° A a a U a DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES 67 The arrangement of the intercalary months in a chronology without co-regency has several anomalies especially the presence of two months Ulul in a single cycle, year 30 of Darius and year 2 of Xerxes. By contrast, in a chronology with co-regency and thus two distinct cycles, the abnormal intercalary month in year 30 of Darius (Persepolis) corresponds to another cycle ending in year 4 of Xerxes (Babylon?). year 522 521 520 519 518 517 516 515 514 513 512 511 510 509 508 507 506 505 504 503 502 501 500 499 498 497 496 495 494 493 492 491 490 489 488 487 486 485 484 483 482 481 480 479 478 477 476 475 474 cycle X 8A 9 10 11A 12 13 14A 15 16 17U 18 19A 1 2 3A 4 5 6A 7 8A 9 10 11A 12 13 14A 15 16 17U 18 19A 1 2 3A 4 5 6A 7 8A 9 10 11A 12 13 14A 15 16 17U 18 Reign with co-regency 0A Darius I 1 2 3U** 4 5A 6 7 8A 9 10 11U** 12 13A 14 15 16A 17 18 19U (Persepolis) 20 21 22A (Babylon) 23 24A (Babylon) 25 0 Xerxes I 26 1 27A (Babylon) 2U (Persepolis) 28 3 29 4?A (Babylon) 30U (Persepolis) 5 31 6 32A (Babylon) 7?A (Persepolis) 33 8 34 9 35A (Babylon) 10A (Babylon) 36 11 12A (Persepolis) 13 14 15A (Babylon) 16 17 18A (Babylon) 19 20 21U-0 Artaxerxes I 1 Reign without co-regency 0A Darius I 1 2 3U** 4 5A 6 7 8A 9 10 11U** 12 13A 14 15 16A 17 18 19U (Persepolis) 20 21 22A* Babylon) 23 24A (Babylon) 25 26 27A (Babylon) 28 29 30U** (Persepolis) 31 32A (Babylon) 33 34 35A (Babylon) 36-0 Xerxes I 1 2U (Persepolis) 3 4?A (Babylon) 5 6 7?A (Persepolis) 8 9 10A (Babylon) 11 12A (Persepolis) cycle D 17U 18 19A 1 2 3A 4 5 6A 7 8A 9 10 11A 12 13 14A 15 16 17U 18 19A 1 2 3A 4 5 6A 7 8A 9 10 11A 12 13 14A 15 16 17U 18 19A 1 2 3A 4 5 6A 7 8A SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 68 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY 473 472 471 470 469 468 467 466 465 464 463 462 461 460 459 458 457 456 455 454 453 452 451 450 449 448 447 446 445 444 443 442 441 440 439 438 437 436 435 434 433 432 431 430 429 428 427 426 425 424 423 19A 1 2 3A 4 5 6A 7 8A 9 10 11A 12 13 14A 15 16 17U 18 19A 1 2 3A 4 5 6A 7 8A 9 10 11A 12 13 14A 15 16 17U 18 19A 1 2 3A 4 5 6A 7 8A 9 10 11A 12 2A 3 4 5A 6 7 8 9 10A 11 12 13A 14 15 16 17 18 19A* 20 21A 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29A 30 31 32 33 34 35A 36 37 38A* 39 40A 41 (42) (43) (44) (45) (46) (47) (48) (49) 50 [51]-0 Darius II 1 0 Darius B 1 2A 3 4 5A 6 7A 8 (0) Xerxes II (1) 13 14 15A (Babylon) 16 17 18A (Babylon) 19 20 21U-0 Artaxerxes I 1 2A 3 4 5A 6 7 8 9 10A 11 12 13A 14 15 16 17 18 19A* 20 21A 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29A 30 31 32 33 34 35A 36 37 38A* 39 40A 41-0 Darius II 1 9 10 11A 12 13 14A 15 16 17U 18 19A 1 2 3A 4 5 6A 7 8A 9 10 11A 12 13 14A 15 16 17U 18 19A 1 2 3A 4 5 6A 7 8A 9 10 11A 12 13 14A 15 16 17U 18 19A 1 2 Chronology: Egyptians versus Babylonians In his collection of hieroglyphic inscriptions153, Posener classified the Persian kings according to the chronology accepted in his time. However, several anomalies can be explained only by assuming a 10-year co-regency between Xerxes and Darius. In these inscriptions, Egyptian pharaohs, from Amasis to Artaxerxes, are still called "Lord of the Two Lands", except Xerxes who is called "Master of crowns" between year 1 and year 10 of his reign. He received the title of "Lord of the Two Lands", the official title of the Pharaohs of Egypt, only from his year 10. If Xerxes had become pharaoh immediately after the death of Darius, he would have received the usual title Lord of the Two Lands used to designate the pharaohs, but the title was awarded to him only from his year 10. In addition, for no apparent reason, the name Darius changed from year 27 up till year 36 of his reign to become inDarius. The hieroglyph in, literally meaning "contribution" in Egyptian154, or "booster", can not be a phonetic complement, since it deteriorates the pronunciation. year 2 Master of crowns, Xerxes year 6, Master of crowns, Xerxes year 10, Lord of the two lands, Xerxes year 6, Lord of the two lands, Cambyses year 36, Lord of the two lands, Darius year 12, Lord of the two lands, Xerxes King in Babylonia in Egypt Cambyses year – 8th year Kambuzia King of Babylon, King of lands K-n-b-w-d3 Lord of the two lands Darius year – 36th year Dariawush King of Babylon, King of lands (in)-Ti-rw-y-w-š3 Lord of the two lands Xerxes accession – 1st year 1st year – 10th year Khisi‘arsa King of Babylon, King of lands King of Persia and Media, King of Babylon and of lands King of lands Ḫ-š3-y-rw-š3 ? Master of crowns 5th 1st 10th year – 21th year Lord of the two lands G. POSENER - La première domination perse en Égypte Le Caire 1936 Ed. IFAO pp. 92, 120-124, 162. 154 This hieroglyph appears in the names some pharaohs like Antef "contribution of his divine father". It could be an abbreviation of the Egyptian word inpw "royal child", meaning a pretender to the throne that is a "Crown prince". 153 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 70 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY The years indicated in those documents were understood to be years of reign while they are in fact years of domination (months and days are usually unspecified). The Egyptian administrator Atiyawahy, for example, says that he spent "6 years under Cambyses and 36 years under Darius". The hieroglyph with an eyebrow above the date is used, while the years of reign are typically identified by the hieroglyph . As the Egyptian word inḥ "eyebrow" also means "surround", those years [of reign] were for the Egyptians years [of surrender]. Diodorus dates the beginning of the Persian domination in Egypt in the 3rd year of rd the 63 Olympiad [in 526 BCE] (Historical Library I: 68:6) and the end in the archonship of Euclid [in 403 BCE], or in the year 2 of Artaxerxes II, when Amyrtaeus had become the new pharaoh of the XXVIII dynasty (Historical Library XIV:11:1-12:1, I:44:3). Those data taken from his Greek chronology are accurate. However, Diodorus wrote in summary: The Persians were the masters, after King Cambyses had subjected the nation by force of arms, for 135 years, contradicting his own chronological calculations (length of 123 years obtained between 526 and 403 BCE). In fact, the total period of 123 years corresponds to an amount calculated with a 40-year reign for Artaxerxes I, while that of 135 years corresponds to an actual reign of 51 years. Diodorus probably compiled different data from an Egyptian informer (Historical Library III:11) without trying to harmonize them. Length according to: Cambyses II Darius I Xerxes I Artaxerxes I Darius II Artaxerxes II Total: dates: 526 - -403 123 years official reign 6 years 36 years 20 years 40 years 19 years 2 years 123 years actual reign 6 years 36 years 21 years 51 years 19 years 2 years 135 years The titulature of Xerxes in Egypt and the data of Diodorus confirm the co-regency of 10 years with Darius, but the discovery of the Elephantine papyri with many double dates with civil and lunar calendars have cancelled those conclusions. Indeed, the dating of these documents was consistent with the chronology from the Canon of Ptolemy155, which is still in agreement with recent studies156. This paradox could be puzzling, but the former (and unique) study of Parker that was used to validate this work is wrong mainly because of the two following reasons:  Lunar dates were supposed to come from a Babylonian calendar, but this is impossible because the city of Elephantine, in the far south of Egypt, was largely administered by Egyptian officials who used a civil calendar to date theirs documents. There was also an Egyptian lunar calendar (with the same names as the months of the civil calendar), but it was used mainly for religious celebrations organized by the Egyptian priests. Since there was never a Babylonian priesthood in Egypt, the occupying Persians and the Jews, who were accustomed to use a Babylonian calendar, therefore used the Egyptian lunar calendar but by giving it the well known names of Babylonian months.  Parker assumed that the Egyptian lunar calendar began with the 1st invisibility (day after the new moon and just before the new crescent). But the only data that was used to validate his revolutionary hypothesis, a double date in year 12 of Amasis, fell in 559 BCE instead of 558 BCE, which is the computed date from astronomy. R.S. PARKER – Persian and Egyptian Chronology in: The American Journal of Semitic Languages 58:3 (1941) pp. 285-301. 156 L. DEPUYDT – More Valuable than all Gold: Ptolemy Royal Canon in: Journal of Cuneiform Studies 47 (1995) pp. 97-117. 155 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES DATING BASED ON LUNAR CALENDAR The running of the Babylonian lunar calendar is simple, every 1st day of the month coincided with the observation of the new crescent. The running of the Egyptian lunar calendar is confusing because, according to Parker157, every 1st day of the month coincided with the observation of the 1st invisibility (day after the new moon and before the new crescent)! Despite this absurdity158, to begin the month by an observation which is in fact a non-observation, his work is always considered as authoritative. Depuydt159, for example, explains: It is necessary to check, then, whether Day 1 of the lunar month in the double date did indeed fall around astronomical conjunction or new moon. It is accepted here on the authority of others that the ancient Egyptian lunar day as a rule began in the morning of the day when the last crescent could no longer be seen in the eastern horizon. The matter cannot be discussed here (Parker 1950: 9-23). Lunar Day 1 is called psdntyw. In determining the beginning of a lunar month by means of observation, variations of one or two days are possible due to the vicissitudes of the human factor and the climate. Furthermore the pivotal date (I) coming from the year 12 of Amasis, mainly used to prove the functioning of the Egyptian lunar calendar, is doubtful: Incidentally, there is a potential weakness in the validity of date (I), because the date rests on external arguments. When Parker and Malinine first discovered the double date, Year 12 of Amasis was generally believed to be the year lasting from 10 January 558 BCE to 9 January 557 BCE. This year was obtained by a line of reasoning which cannot be discussed here in detail. In brief, there are sources that strongly suggest Amasis’s Year 44 was his last and that this Year 44 was 526/25 BCE. Counting back from 526/25 = Year 44, one obtains 558/57 = Year 12. But Parker showed that, as regards double date (I) lunar II šmw 15 cannot be matched with civil I šmw 13 for the presumed Year 12, 558/57 BCE. However, there is a match in 559/58 BCE (October 19 559 BCE). This is for various reasons the only other year that could be a candidate for Amasis’s Year 12. Parker therefore assumed that the civil year beginning in 526 BCE was Amasis’s forty-fifth. There is no evidence for a Year 45. Again, the sources strongly suggest that Year 44 was Amasis’s last. Parker’s arguments appear convincing and date (I) can therefore be deemed valid. In fact the sole weak point in Parker’s analysis, which is the necessity of assuming a Year 45 for Amasis whereas the evidence points to Year 44 as his last, can be eliminated. In conclusion, the date that was used to validate the Egyptian lunar calendar contradicts all the old Babylonian and Greek sources. But, this is not serious. Why? Chronological difficulties are numerous, but unless admitting an unlikely collusion of mistakes, the year 44 of Amasis, the last of his reign, should be dated -526, and therefore the year 12 to be dated -558. Thus, the dating of the year 12 in -559, obtained by Parker with the calculation of the double date of Papyrus Louvre 7848, is unacceptable. The solution proposed by Parker of a year 45 of Amasis dated -526 is not possible, as recognized by Depuydt160 who prefers to date the death of Amasis in -527 in his 44th year, assuming that the 4th year of Cambyses (at -526) was a period of disorder without pharaoh! But this choice leads to an implausible result, contrary to the accounts of all the ancient historians (Herodotus was close to events, and Manetho, an Egyptian priest (who haad to know the history of his country): the throne of Egypt would have been vacant for one year after the disappearance of Psammetichus III, from May 526 to May 525 BCE, when Cambyses was recognized Pharaoh. A chronological reconstitution (below) allows to check that the year 44 of Amasis must be dated in -526 and not in -527. R.A. PARKER - The Calendars of Ancient Egypt in: Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 26 (1950) Ed. University of Chicago. 158 A.J. SPALINGER – Revolutions in Time: Studies in Ancient Egyptian Calendrics Texas 1994 Ed. Van Siclen Books p. 15. 159 L. DEPUYDT - Civil Calendar and Lunar Calendar in Ancient Egypt Leuven 1997 Ed. Uitgevers Peeters pp. 164-165, 203-207. 160 L. DEPUYDT - Egyptian Regnal Dating under Cambyses and the Date of the Persian Conquest 1996 in: Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson pp. 179-190. 157 71 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 72 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY year month X 527 1 526 525 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX year in Egypt 43 King year in Persia Egypt Amasis Cambyses according to: Parker Depuydt 44 44 3 1 44 P. Rylands IX 4 45 ## 2 4 ## 1 Psammetichus III 1 2 5 Egypt defeated IM.4187 2 5 (## indicates an improbability) The end of the ancient Egyptian empire was an important milestone that has been recounted by the following historians:  According to Diodorus Siculus: After a reign of 55 years161 he [Amasis] ended his days at the time when Cambyses, the king of the Persians, attacked Egypt, in the 3rd year of the 63rd Olympiad (Historical Library I:68:6). Thus Amasis died between July -526 and July -525.  According to the Egyptian priest Manetho162: Cambyses, in the 5th year of his reign over the Persians [in -525] became king of Egypt and led it for 3 years [from spring -525 to spring -522].  According to Herodotus (around -450): On the death of Cyrus, Cambyses his son by Cassandane daughter of Pharnaspes took the kingdom (...) Amasis was the Egyptian king against whom Cambyses, son of Cyrus, made his expedition; and with him went an army composed of the many nations under his rule, among them being included both Ionic and Aeolic Greeks (...) One of the mercenaries of Amasis, a Halicarnassian, Phanes by name, a man of good judgment, and a brave warrior, dissatisfied for some reason or other with his master, deserted the service, and taking ship, fled to Cambyses, wishing to get speech with him (...) Psammenitus, son of Amasis, lay encamped at the mouth of the. Nile, called the Pelusiac, awaiting Cambyses. For Cambyses, when he went up against Egypt, found Amasis no longer in life: he had died after ruling Egypt 44 years, during all which time no great misfortune had befallen him (...) The Egyptians who fought in the battle, no sooner turned The reign of Amasis is counted from the revolt after the attack of Nebuchadnezzar II in -582. W.G. WADDELL - Manetho (Loeb Classical Library 350) Cambridge 1956 Ed. Harvard University Press pp. 169-177. 161 162 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES their backs upon the enemy, than they fled away in complete disorder to Memphis (...) 10 days after the fort had fallen, Cambyses resolved to try the spirit of Psammenitus, the Egyptian king, whose whole reign had been but 6 months (...) Psammenitus plotted evil, and received his reward accordingly. He was discovered to be stirring up revolt in Egypt, wherefore Cambyses, when his guilt clearly appeared, compelled him to drink bull’s blood, which presently caused his death. Such was the end of Psammenitus (The Histories II:1; III:1,4,10-16). The Egyptian priest Manetho indicates the same values as Herodotus, 44 years for Amasis and 6 months for Psammetichus III. By combining this information with data from the reign of Persian King Cambyses, who became Egypt in May 525 BCE, the death of Amasis can be fixed around October 526 BCE. Fixing the date of the conquest of Egypt in 525 BCE is also confirmed since the 5th year of Cambyses began the 1st Nisan (March 29) in the Persian system, and the 1st Thoth (January 2) in the Egyptian system. The account of these historians is confirmed by several archaeological finds:  The narrative of Udjahorresnet163, the Egyptian general who led the naval fleet under Amasis, then under Psammetichus III and finally under Cambyses, authenticates the version of Herodotus. This war probably lasted at least six months because, according to the historian Polyaenus: When Cambyses attacked Pelusium, which guarded the entrance into Egypt, the Egyptians defended it with great resolution. They advanced formidable engines against the besiegers, and hurled missiles, stones, and fire at them from their catapults. (Stratagems of war VII:9). These narrative overlap exactly and give the following chronological scheme: war of Cambyses against Egypt beginning in the year 44, the last year of Amasis, which ends after the brief reign of 6 months of Psammetichus III, his successor or in the 5th year of Cambyses.  According to the stele IM.4187 in the Louvre, an Apis bull was born on month 5, day 29, year 5 of Cambyses, died on month 9, day 4, year 4 of Darius I and was buried on month 11, day 13, of the same year, covering a total period of 7 years 3 months and 5 days (reading 8 years less likely). This computation is consistent (between the month9, day 4, and the month 11, day 13, there are exactly 70 days for the period of embalming the bull) gives the following dates in the Julian calendar: May 29, 525 BCE, August 31, 518 BCE and November 8, 518 BCE. This stele proves that Cambyses reigned in Egypt from May 525 BCE because at the end of this month, an Apis bull is dedicated to him. Thus the conquest of Egypt had to have been completed in early May 525 BCE as the last text referring to Psammetichus III164 (below) is dated I Peret year 2 (May 525 BCE). That Psammetichus III was the son of Amasis is confirmed by the stele No. 309 of the Serapeum (Louvre). Before his conquest Cambyses was a Persian leader but thereafter he also became an Egyptian pharaoh. This new situation has created a dual system of counting the reign.  Egyptian documents of the time of Darius I mention the events of years 3 and 4 of Cambyses, apparently before the conquest of Egypt. A papyrus dated 9th year of Darius says: In his 2nd year, therefore, Cambyses conquered Egypt really, and in 5th year he died. This demotic text165, entitled Peteisis petition spoke of a conflict in a family of priests of the temple of Amon at Teuzoi (El-Hibeh) between the 4th year of Psammetichus I and the P. BRIANT - Histoire de l'empire perse. De Cyrus à Alexandre Paris 1996 Éd. Fayard pp. 63-65. 164 It is indeed Psammetichus III because one of the contracting parties cited in the text is still alive in the year 35 of Darius I (H. GAUTHIER – Le livre des rois d'Égypte. Le Caire 1915 Éd. Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale pp. 131-132). 165 Papyrus Rylands IX 21. 163 73 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 74 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY 4th year of Cambyses166. It ends with the following dates: Until the Year 44 of Amasis. In Year 3 of Cambyses, Hor son of Psammet-kmenempe, the prophet of Amon (...) in Year 4 of Cambyses. A second Egyptian papyrus known as the Demotic Chronicle, confirmed the year 44 of Amasis as last year167. The source said that Darius I in the 3rd year of his reign (in 519 BCE) had given the satrap of Egypt the order that together a committee of wise men from among the Egyptian warriors, priests and scribes in order: that they put in writing that Egyptian law was in force until the 44th year of the reign of Amasis.  Cambyses died in 522 BCE, it was therefore his 5th year in Egypt, the 2nd corresponded to 525 BCE and the 1st to 526 BCE. This conquest began in 526 BCE, since Herodotus (The Histories III:1,10) states that the war began with the death of Amasis. Years 2 to 5 of Cambyses refer to his years of domination in Egypt. It is not logical to assume that the Egyptians used a counting system reserved for their pharaohs rather than for foreign leaders168, which Cambyses was before his conquest (though, after 525 BCE, Persian leaders were considered as Pharaohs). YEAR 12 OF AMASIS (558 BCE) The year 44 of Amasis, the last of his reign should be dated 526 BCE, and therefore the year 12 to be dated 528 BCE. Double-dated documents are rare, they are all the more valuable since they allow absolute dating, which is the case of the following papyrus (pap. Louvre 7848)169 both dated II Shemu 13 / I Shemu 15, Year 12 of Amasis (line 5): Year 12, 1st month of Shemu, (day) 21 under Pharaoh Amasis life-prosperity-health (...) Has said the choachyte Petosiris son of Itourodj son of Inarou, his [mother] being Itourou, (choachyte = mummies guardian) Tacherou and the choachyte Djechy son of Tesmont, total 3 men: “It is we who have caused the choachyte Petosiris son of Itourodj to swear for us in the presence of Chonsemwasneferhotep, in year 12, 2nd month of Shemu, (day) 13, on the 15th day of the 1st month of Shemu, saying: ‘The place of the mountain, of which I said: «I have received Parker assumed that the first date was from the civil calendar and the second from the lunar calendar, but this is illogical for the following reasons: P. BRIANT - Histoire de l'empire perse. De Cyrus à Alexandre Paris 1996 Éd. Fayard p. 92. 167 A. KUHRT - The Persian Empire London 2010 Ed. Routeledge pp. 124-125. 168 R.A. PARKER - Persian and Egyptian Chronology in: The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures LVIII/3 (1941) pp. 298-301. 169 K. DONKER VAN HEEL – Abnormal Hieratic and Early Demotic Texts collected by the Theban Choachytes in the reign of Amasis: Papyrus from the Louvre Eisenlohr Lot (Thesis). Leiden 1996 Ed. Rijksuniversiteit pp. 93-99. 166 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES 75  Egyptian lunar dates being exceptional they should be specified in the civil calendar and not the opposite. Among the twenty papyrus from Elephantine in southern Egypt, which contain double dates, all begin with the date of the lunar calendar followed by that of the Egyptian civil calendar, but never the reverse.  "It is we who have caused the choachyte to swear for us" refers to the past not to the future ("It is we who will cause the choachyte to swear for us"). If this vow was recorded and dated, it is logical to assume that it was written relatively soon after having been delivered, otherwise one would have to admit the existence of a "prophetic vow", but the document being dated I Shemu 21 in the civil calendar, the vow had to have been made on I Shemu 15, actually 6 days before.  As the lunar year is shorter than the solar year (the lunar month being 29 or 30 days while the Egyptian civil month is always 30 days), dating in a lunar calendar goes faster than in the civil calendar, thus the lunar dates are more advanced (II Shemu) than those of the civil calendar (I Shemu). According to these logical arguments, the first date (II Shemu 13) is lunar and the second (I Shemu 15) is civil. As the civil date I Shemu 15 fell in 558 BCE on September 21, the lunar date II Shemu 1 fell on September 9 (= 21 – 12), which was a full moon day according to astronomy170. However, there are two difficulties in reckoning the days:  The Babylonians counted the new day after sunset (around 18:00) while the Egyptians counted it after the disappearance of the stars (around 5 am). If a scribe wrote on 17 Thoth around 16:00, for example, he dated his document on 18 Kislev, but if he wrote about 20:00 he dated it on 19 Kislev. midnight midday midnight 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 Babylonian computation 19 Kislev 18 Kislev Julian computation 4 January 6 January 5 January Egyptian computation 16 Thoth 17 Thoth  Astronomical observations were made at night, at the beginning of the day for the Babylonians, but at the end for the Egyptians. Finally, the observation of the first crescent can be delayed by one day (due to bad weather, for example) while watching the full moon can be shifted more or less one day. According to this lunar calendar, the two papyrus double dated years 15 and 21 of 171 Xerxes involve an accession in 496 BCE (the full moon of 1st Elul fell on August 29 in 481 BCE at Elephantine and the full moon of 1st Kislev fell on December 20 in 475 BCE): Year Xerxes I Civil Egyptian Julian 481 15 28 Pakhons 14 September 474 21 17 Thoth 5 January Lunar Egyptian 1st Elul 18 Elul 1st Kislev 18 Kislev Julian 29 August 15 September 20 December 5 January Gap (full moon) 1 (full moon) 0 When Porten published the Elephantine papyri he wrote: The language, religion, and names of the Jews differed from their Egyptian neighbours, but their legal procedures and formulary bear striking similarity. Though we cannot explain the phenomenon of “Who gave to whom” we must conclude http://www.imcce.fr/fr/grandpublic/phenomenes/phases_lune/index.php B. PORTEN - The Elephantine Papyri in English Leiden 1996 Ed E.J. Brill pp. 18, 153-161. 170 171 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 76 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY that in matters legal the Jews and Arameans fit into their Egyptian environment rather snugly. Whereas the demotic contracts constitute a little over 20% of the thirty-seven demotic texts here published, the Aramaic contracts constitute almost 60% of the total Aramaic selection of fifty-two documents. If thirty documents are ample material to ascertain schemata and verify formulae, eight may not be, particularly if they are of different types. Comparison, nonetheless, shows how much the demotic and Aramaic conveyances had in common. Both followed an identical schema (...) Variations were slight. As indigenous documents, the demotic contracts noted only the Egyptian calendar, whereas the Jewish/Aramean scribes, writing in the lingua franca of the Persian Empire, added for most of the fifth century a synchronous Babylonian date. This last remark contradicts what was said at the beginning because the Egyptians never used a Babylonian calendar in Egypt. In addition, Porten fails to mention that several Babylonian dates have a gap of 2 days (which is difficult to explain by errors of scribes), or even a month apart (B32 and B42 for example), and that the lunar calendar was closer to the Jewish or Aramaic calendar than its Babylonian counterpart172. Stern173 noted: This explanation has been fully endorsed by Porten, but it is problematic in more than one respect. In the ancient world, where artificial lighting was often expensive and/or inadequate, scribes would have been reluctant to write legal documents at night: legal documents, indeed, had to be written with precision and care. Although such a practice was possible — as Porter points out, the Mishna refers to legal documents written at night (M. Gittin 2:2), and further evidence could conceivably be found — it seems unlikely that the majority of contracts at Elephantine would have been written at night (...) In order to account for this high incidence of discrepancies, it seems more plausible to argue that the Babylonian calendar at Elephantine was reckoned differently from the standard Babylonian calendar. How it was reckoned, however, remains somewhat unclear. The inconsistent relationship between document dates and visibility of the new moon (nil, 1 day, or 2 days) suggest perhaps that at Elephantine, visibility of the new moon was not used as a criterion to determine when the new month began. The solution was at hand, but Stern did not know that the problem stemmed from the wrong interpretation of Parker. This is particularly more regrettable in that Parker had given all the elements to find it. Parker refused to consider a lunar reckoning starting at full moon, as proposed by Macnaughton174, for three reasons:  He felt that Macnaughton was an eccentric175 (no comment!).  This type of calendar was not well known during his time. Parker was unaware that the Hindu lunar calendar, for example, is equally divided between amanta versions (8 states in southern India) which start on the new moon and purnimanta versions (10 states in northern India) starting on full moon. In addition, it is likely that some ancient lunar calendars began on the full moon, like the Old Persian calendar whose 30th day is called jiyamna "decreasing", that would be inexplicable if the lunar cycle began on 1st crescent.  Lunar phases being symbolized at Dendera (around -50) by 14 deities climbing stairs to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 S. STERN - The Babylonian Calendar at Elephantine in: Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 130 (2000) pp. 159-171. 173 S.H. HORN, L.H. WOOD - The Fifth-Century Jewish Calendar at Elephantine in: Journal of Near Eastern Studies XIII/1 (1954) pp. 1-20. 174 D. MACNAUGHTON - A Scheme of Egyptian Chronology London 1932 Ed. Luzac and co. pp. 145-151. 175 R.A. PARKER - The Calendars of Ancient Egypt in: Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 26 (1950) Ed. University of Chicago p. 9. 172 15 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES 77 achieve the filling of the eye Wedjat176 (safe eye) the 15th day of the full moon, the lunar day 1 (psdntyw) must match the 1st invisibility. But this cycle of 15 days is only a ½ month, the next full month had to begin at the end of this cycle, that is at the full moon. Babylonian lunar cycle astro 14 full moon 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 last quarter 22 23 24 25 26 27 last crescent 28 29 new moon 30 1st invisibility 1 1st crescent 2 3 4 5 6 first quarter 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 full moon 15 šapattu 16 17 18 19 20 21 last quarter 22 23 24 25 26 27 last crescent 28 29 new moon 30 ½ month 1 tp 3bd 2 3bd 3 4 5 6 snt 7 dnit 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 smdt E.A.W. BUDGE - Gods of the Egyptian Vol II 1969 Ed. Dover Publications p. 321. 176 Egyptian lunar cycle according to: Parker Macnaughton 1 shining ones [day] 2 month [day] 3 4 5 6 7 quarter [day] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 perceptions [day] 15 subordinate [day] 16 1 shining ones [day]  17 perceptions [day] 2 month [day] 18 Moon [day] 3 19 4 20 5 21 6 22 7 quarter [day] 23 quarter [day] 8 24 9 25 10 26 11 27 12 28 13 29 14 perceptions [day] 30 Min rise [day] 15 subordinate [day] 16 17 perceptions [day]  18 Moon [day]  19 20 21 22 23 quarter [day] 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Min rise [day]  1 astro SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 78 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Parker has compiled and explained the 30 days of the Egyptian lunar month, showing that several days do not fit at all with their Moon phases. ½ month (15) 1 2 7 14 n° 1 2 7 14 15 17 18 23 30 Name psdntyw 3bd dnit si3w smdt si3w i‘ḥ dnit prt Mn Day of the month Meaning Shining ones Month Quarter Perceptions Subordinate Perceptions Moon Quarter Min going-forth Moon phase according to: Macnaughton Parker Full moon First invisibility After full moon First crescent Last quarter First quarter Last crescent Before full moon Before new moon Full moon Before first crescent First crescent First quarter Last quarter Before full moon New moon In Parker's lunar cycle it is obvious that the meaning of days 1 (psdntyw) and 18 (i‘ḥ) has nothing to do with and is even contrary to the lunar phase that corresponds to them. The Egyptian word psdntyw literally means "shining ones" which is contrary to its moon phase (after the new moon) called "first invisibility". In addition the day 18 which literally means "moon" would have no link with the lunar cycle, which would be the last straw. According to Depuydt177: There is little doubt as to what ancient Egyptians saw of the moon on the day they called psdntyw the first of the lunar month (...) Parker has done the most to consolidate the theory of psdntyw outlined above. Yet the view that Egyptian lunar months began with the observation of nothing has met with resistance. Černy and Posener believed that the passage from Theban Tomb 57 quoted above “shows that it was possible to depict psdntyw ... For the Egyptians, psdntyw was therefore something visible ... Indeed, it would be difficult to understand how the Egyptians could have conceived of ‘moon on psdntyw’ ... if psdntyw was an invisible celestial phenomenon.” This remark disregards the fact, however, that “moon on psdntyw” is modified by “whose brightness has illuminated the netherworld” (...) “you set like Re on the day of psdntyw”. To summarize his arguments, the Egyptian day 1 (psdntyw) would represent both the invisibility of the moon for the living ones and the sun illuminating the netherworld, but this explanation is more theological than scientific. Year 10 of Amasis (in -560) that began on I Akhet 1 (January 10) coincided with a full moon, which involved the starting equivalence I Akhet 1 (lunar) = I Akhet 1 (civil). It is noteworthy that the observation of the full moon is more difficult than the 1st lunar crescent, because depending on the time of day or night the 1st astronomical crescent may be seen a day late (but never in advance) so that the full astronomical moon can be seen frequently with one day difference (delay or advance, or +/- 1 day). Amasis year 10 BCE 560 Lunar calendar (day 1) I Akhet 1 II Akhet 1 III Akhet 1 IV Akhet 1 I Peret 1 II Peret 1 III Peret 1 IV Peret 1 I Shemu 1 II Shemu 1 III Shemu 1 IV Shemu 1 I Akhet 1 Civil calendar Julian day I Akhet 1 I Akhet 30 II Akhet 30 III Akhet 29 IV Akhet 29 I Peret 28 II Peret 28 III Peret 27 IV Peret 27 I Shemu 26 II Shemu 25 III Shemu 25 IV Shemu 25 10 January 8 February 10 March 8 April 8 May 6 June 6 July 4 August 3 September 2 October 1 November 30 November 30 December L. DEPUYDT - The Hieroglyphic Representation of the Moon's Absence (Psdntyw) in: Ancient Egyptian and Mediterranean Studies (1998) Ed. L.H. Lesko pp. 71-89. 177 Full moon (astronomy) 9 January 7 February 9 March 8 April 7 May 6 June 6 July 4 August 2 September 2 October 1 November 30 November 29 December DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES 11 559 12 558 II Akhet 1 III Akhet 1 IV Akhet 1 I Peret 1 II Peret 1 III Peret 1 IV Peret 1 I Shemu 1 II Shemu 1 III Shemu 1 IV Shemu 1 I Akhet 1 II Akhet 1 III Akhet 1 IV Akhet 1 I Peret 1 II Peret 1 III Peret 1 IV Peret 1 I Shemu 1 II Shemu 1 II Shemu 13 III Shemu 1 IV Shemu 1 I Akhet 1 I Akhet 19 II Akhet 19 III Akhet 18 IV Akhet 18 I Peret 17 II Peret 17 III Peret 16 IV Peret 16 I Shemu 15 II Shemu 15 III Shemu 14 IV Shemu 14 I Akhet 8 II Akhet 8 III Akhet 7 IV Akhet 7 I Peret 6 II Peret 6 III Peret 5 IV Peret 5 I Shemu 4 I Shemu 16 II Shemu 4 III Shemu 3 IV Shemu 3 28 January 27 February 28 March 27 April 26 May 25 June 24 July 23 August 21 September 21 October 19 November 19 December 17 January 16 February 17 March 16 April 15 May 14 June 13 July 12 August 10 September 22 September 10 October 8 November 8 December 79 28 January 26 February 28 March 27 April 26 May 25 June 24 July 23 August 21 September 21 October 19 November 19 December 17 January 16 February 17 March 16 April 15 May 14 June 13 July 12 August 10 September 10 October 9 November 8 December II Shemu 13 (Egyptian lunar calendar) = I Shemu 16 (Egyptian civil calendar) = 22 September (Julian calendar). If the full moon was seen on September 9, instead of 10, we have: II Shemu 13 (Egyptian lunar calendar) = I Shemu 15 (Egyptian civil calendar) = 21 September (Julian calendar). DATING OF THE XXVIITH DYNASTY THROUGH ASTRONOMY The calendar at Elephantine (in the far south of Egypt) with its system of double dates, Egyptian and Babylonian, was used by Persians officials and Jewish scribes only during a short period from 500 to 400 BCE. For example, a Persian official erected a votive stele stating: This temple, (W)id(arnaga) head of the garrison at Syene was done in the month of Siwan, that is to say Mehir, year 7 of King Artaxerxes, (to) Osirnaḥty, the god. Peace178. After the conquest of Egypt by Cambyses Egypt became a Persian satrapy but most of the scribes were Egyptians or Jews179. Persian officials at Elephantine were familiar with three kinds of lunar calendar (Elamite, Old-Persian, Babylonian), which appear in Darius I's inscriptions at Behistun180. Jewish scribes at Elephantine were familiar with different calendars181, but they mainly used a calendar based on the Babylonian calendar after their return to Judea from Babylon (538 BCE). As the Egyptian calendar had 12 months of 30 days, plus 5 days at the end (called epagomenon in Greek), it was not lunar. As the Jews of Elephantine were in an Egyptian environment they used the Egyptian lunar calendar for the dating of their religious festivals. It is noteworthy that those Jews used only the word yerah182 "lunation" A. LEMAIRE – Recherches d'épigraphie araméenne en Asie mineure et en Égypte in: Achaemenid History V (1991) Ed. Nederlands Instituut Leiden pp.199-201. 179 According to Herodotus (The Histories II:152-154), Psammetichus I, dynasts of Sais, called on foreign mercenaries, including Ionians and Carians, to consolidate his power in Egypt. The pharaoh then installed these mercenary garrisons in Daphne west of Delta, and Elephantine, on the border in the south (The Histories II:30-31). The Letter of Aristeas to Philocrates III:13 states that among these mercenaries there were Jews. According to the biblical text, the massive emigration of Jews into Egypt began shortly after the pharaoh Necho II established King Jehoiakim (in 609 BCE) on the throne in Jerusalem (2 Kings 23:34, Jeremiah 26:21-23, 42:14). After the murder of Gedaliah, many of these Jews emigrated to Egypt (Jeremiah 43:7, 44:1) especially in the country of Patros (meaning "the Land of the South" in Egyptian) the southern province in which Elephantine was the main town. 180 P. LECOQ - Les inscriptions de la Perse achéménide Paris 1997 Éd. Gallimard pp. 171-174. 181 P. GRELOT – Documents araméens d’Égypte in: Littératures anciennes du proche orient n°5 (Cerf, 1972) pp. 33-63, 509-510. 182 B. PORTEN A. YARDENI - Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt, 3 1993 Ed. Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities pp. XXXVI. 178 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 80 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY (implying the [full] moon), to designate the month while at the same time, in Judea, the Jews of Arad used only the word hodesh "new" (implying the new [moon])183. We read for example on the ostracon n°7 (c. 600 BCE): for the 10th [month], the 1st of the month to the 6th of the month184. At that time there were the following equivalences among calendars185: SECULAR I Akhet II Akhet III Akhet IV Akhet I Peret II Peret III Peret IV Peret I Shemu II Shemu III Shemu IV Shemu Epagomen EGYPTIAN RELIGIOUS 30 Thoth (1) 30 Paopi (2) 30 Hathor (3) 30 Koyak (4) 30 Teobi (5) 30 Mehir (6) 30 Pamenotep (7) 30 Parmuti (8) 30 Pahons (9) 30 Paoni (10) 30 Epipi (11) 30 Mesore (12) 5 [xxx2] (13) JEWISH/ PERSIAN HEBREW ARAMAIC 30 29 30 29 30 29 29 29 29 29 30 29 30 BABYLONIAN JULIAN January February March April May June July August September October November December 31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 month month month month month month month month month I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX Nisan Iyyar Siwan Tammuz Ab Elul Tishri Marheshwan Kislew Nisanu Ayyaru Simanu Dumuzu Abu Ululu Tashritu Arahsamna Kislimu 30 29 30 29 30 29 30 29 30 month month month month X XI XII XIII Tebeth Shebat Adar [Adar2] Tebetu Shabatu Addaru [Addaru2] 29 January 30 February 31 28 29 March 31 186 In the Hebrew Bible , the words hodesh and yerah are often used in the sense of "month", but they are not synonymous since some phrases are found in Canaanite inscriptions187 like: hodesh yerah Etanim "new moon of Etanim (1Kings 8:2)". If the two words hodesh and yerah were synonymous the translation would be "month of the month of Etanim", which does not make sense188. This semantic distinction is important. Indeed, in a lunar calendar starting at the new moon, the two words hodesh "new [moon]" and yerah "lunation" to refer to one month may be suitable. But in a schedule starting at the full moon, only the word "lunation" is appropriate. Following the religious reform carried out by Nehemiah in Jerusalem about 440 BCE (Nehemiah 13:6-9), the Jews of Elephantine would celebrate the Passover again using an Aramaic calendar based on a Babylonian pattern189 because this festival was to be celebrated 14 days after the new moon. It was a reform of the calendar, not a reform of worship, because the Jews were in contact with the priesthood in Jerusalem and they had celebrated the Passover since at least 450 BCE190. The reform of the calendar is dated in the 5th year of Darius II (419 BCE) but as often happens, reforms are not fully followed191. At Elephantine the main system of dating was G.I. DAVIES - Ancient Hebrew Inscriptions, Corpus and Concordance Cambridge 1991 Ed. Cambridge University Press pp. 14,15,348. 184 A. LEMAIRE -Inscriptions hébraïques Tome I, Les Ostraca In: Littératures anciennes du proche orient n°9 Paris 1977 Ed. Cerf pp. 168,231. 185 A. KUHRT - The Persian Empire London 2010 Ed. Routeledge pp. 885-886. 186 The word "full moon (Proverbs 7:20)" is kese in Hebrew or lebanah "the white one (Isaiah 30:26)". 187 H. DONNER, W. RÖLLING - Kanaanäische und Aramäische Inschriften Wiesbaden 2002 Ed. Harrassowitzp. 9 N°3. 188 J.A. WAGENAAR - Post-Exilic Calendar Innovations in: Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 115 (2003) p. 7 note 9. 189 J. MÉLÈZE MODRZEJEWSKI - Les Juifs d'Égypte de Ramsès II à Hadrien Paris 1991 Éd. Errance p. 37 190 A. VINCENT - La religion des judéo-araméens d'Éléphantine Paris 1937 Éd. Librairie orientaliste P. Geuthner pp. 267-274. 191 Yefet ben Eli, a Karaite living in Iraq (c. 950 CE) recalled that while the Karaites determined the 1st lunar day according to the observation of the new moon and Rabbinites determined it by calculations, those who had determined it in the past as the full moon did not exist (S. POZNANSKI – Les écrits d'Anan in: Revue des Études Juives 44 (1902) pp. 171-172). By contrast, Jacob Qirqisani, a contemporary of Yefet ben Eli, also known Jewish supporters of the full moon: the "Margariya" and Yeshua ben Yehuda (c. 1050 CE) mentions them as the "Albedaryah". 183 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES 81 from the Egyptian calendar (secular), but as numerous religious festivals in Egypt were based on moon phases, a lunar calendar was used to fix these dates. The Jews, then the Persians, naturally used this calendar for their own festivals based on a lunar calendar (as the Passover for the Jews). The language of administration being either Egyptian or Persian, it was necessary to convert the names of the Egyptian lunar month to a common language understood by all (Aramaic). For example, the Jews converted into Aramaic the name of the months of their Hebrew calendar: It came about that in the 4th year of Darius (...) on the 4th [day] of the 9th month, [that is] in Kislev (Zechariah 7:1). Given that the Egyptian name of lunar months was the same as the one from their secular calendar, it is clear that if the Jews had only transcribed the lunar date and a current date the double dating would have been incomprehensible (except for the Egyptians). For example the papyrus Louvre 7848192 is dated (line 5): in year 12, 2nd month of Shemu, (day) 13, on the 15th day of the 1st month of Shemu. In 558 BCE the year 12 of Amasis began on I Akhet 1 (10 January) and I Shemu 1 is dated 7 September193 and as the II Shemu 1 (lunar) began on full moon (10 September)194, consequently I Shemu 15 (secular) and II Shemu 13 (lunar) are both dated 21 September: August September 558 BCE 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 IV Peret (secular) 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 I Shemu (lunar) 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I Shemu (secular) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 II Shemu (lunar) 28 29 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 For reasons of clarity the scribes of Elephantine (both Jews and Persians) used the Egyptian lunar calendar while replacing the names of months by their Aramaic equivalent, which were familiar to them. However, like the Babylonians, they counted the new day after sunset (c. 18:00) while the Egyptians counted it from the vanishing of stars (c. 05:00). If a Jewish scribe wrote on (in 475 BCE) 17 Thoth around 16:00 he dated his document on 17 Kislev195, but if he was writing about 20:00 he would have dated it on 18 Kislev. An Elephantine Papyri (B24) is dated: [17] Thoth, which is 17 Kislev, year 21 (of Xerxes), accession year of Artaxerxes196. As Xerxes died on 14/V/21 (24 August) the 1st Thoth (I Akhet 1) in 475 BCE is dated on 20 December and the 17 Thoth, on 5 January 474 BCE. The reckoning of regnal years is different depending on which pattern is referred: Egyptian or Babylonian. For example the 21st year of Xerxes' reign began on 1st Nisan (month I) at Babylon but on 1st Thoth (month I) at Elephantine. The 1st Nisan is dated 14 April in 475 BCE, which was the 1st lunar crescent197 after the spring equinox (26 March)198, and the 1st Thoth is dated 20 December as well as the 1st Kislev. In the Babylonian pattern the 1st Kislev (month IX) is dated 6 December (1st lunar crescent) while in the Egyptian pattern the 1st Kislev is dated 20 December (full moon). November 24 25 26 27 Mesore 10 11 12 13 Arahsamna 18 19 20 21 Marheshwan 4 5 6 7 December 475 BCE 28 29 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Epagomen 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1 2 3 4 5 Kislimu (Babylon) 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 8 9 7 8 9 20 21 22 23 24 25 Thoth 1 2 3 4 5 6 15 16 17 18 19 20 Kislev (Elephantine) 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 1 2 3 4 5 6 K. DONKER VAN HEEL – Abnormal Hieratic and Early Demotic Texts collected by the Theban Choachytes in the reign of Amasis: Papyrus from the Louvre Eisenlohr Lot (Thesis). Leiden 1996 Ed. Rijksuniversiteit pp. 93-99. 193 http://www.chronosynchro.net/wordpress/convertisseur/ 194 http://www.fourmilab.ch/earthview/pacalc.html http://www.imcce.fr/fr/grandpublic/phenomenes/phases_lune/index.php 195 P. GRELOT – Documents araméens d’Égypte in: Littératures anciennes du proche orient n°5 (Cerf, 1972) pp. 174-178. 196 B. PORTEN - The Elephantine Papyri in English Leiden 1996 Ed E.J. Brill pp. 164-165. 197 http://www.fourmilab.ch/earthview/pacalc.html http://www.imcce.fr/fr/grandpublic/phenomenes/phases_lune/index.php 198 http://www.imcce.fr/fr/grandpublic/temps/saisons.php 192 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 82 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY The 20 documents from Elephantine with a dual date enable us to reconstruct the chronology of the reigns of the XXVIIth dynasty. For example the papyrus B23 is dated: year 15 [of Xerxes] 18 Elul, which is 28 Pahons, hence the 1st lunar day is dated 11 Pahons (= 28 - 17), which was a full moon in 481 BCE (30 August). The 11 Pahons or I Shemu 11 matches exactly to day 11, column I Shemu, in the 25-year lunar cycle (year 8 of the cycle): Papyrus Xerxes I B23 year Lunar date 1 Elul 15 18 Elul Egyptian calendar 11 Pahons (I Shemu) 28 Pahons SEASON I 483 month Xerxes I Papyrus Darius I N°1 N°2 Xerxes I B23 Artaxerxes I B24 482 481 480 15 [0] 1 B25/26 6 B34 9 B35 14 N°43 16 B36 16 B28 16 B29 19 B30 25 B37 28 B38 31 B39 Darius B B40 38 4 B31 4 B42 8 IV 14 7 15 8 16 9 25 15 4 25 14 4 24 14 3 24 13 3 Full moon 30 Aug. 15 Sept. 481 I Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May year Lunar date 7 27 AKHET II III 1st lunar day 29 Aug. BCE 23 13 2 Egyptian calendar 6 Mehir 2 Epipi 1 Elul 11 Pahons (I Shemu) 18 Elul 28 Pahons 1 Kislev 5 epagomen 18 Kislev [17] Thoth 1 Kislev [ 1] Mesore (IV Shemu) 21 Kislev [21] Mesore 1 Kislev 28 Mesore (IV Shemu) 7 Kislev 4 epagomen* 1 Siwan 6 Pamenot (III Peret) 20 Siwan 25 Pamenot 1 Tammuz 16 Pamenot (III Peret) 18 Tammuz 3 Parmuti 1 Ab [13] Parmuti (IV Peret) 18 Ab [30] Parmuti 1 Tishri 13 Paoni (II Shemu) 24 Tishri 6 Epipi 1 Kislev 9 Mesore (IV Shemu) 2 Kislev 10 Mesore 1 Ab 6 Pahons (I Shemu) 14 Ab 19 Pahons 1 Elul 3 Paoni (II Shemu) 7 Elul 9 Paoni 1 Tishri 1 Epipi (III Shemu) 25 Tishri 25 Epipi 1 Siwan 18 Mehir (II Peret) 20 Siwan 7 Pamenotep 1 Tammuz 1 Parmuti (IV Peret) 8 Tammuz 8 Parmuti 1 Elul 1 Paoni (II Shemu) 30 Elul 30 Paoni 1 Tishri 17 Paoni (II Shemu) 6 Tishri 22 Paoni PERET II III Jun. Jul. 23 12 2 IV SHEMU II III IV I 5 Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 23 12 1 22 11 1 BCE 22 11 30 21 10 29 21 10 29 20 10 28 1st lunar day Full moon 29 Aug. 30 Aug. 19 Dec. 20 Dec. 14 Nov. 14 Nov. 10 Dec. 11 Dec. 20 Jun. 21 Jun. 29 Jun. 28 Jun. 26 Jul. 28 Jul. 24 Sep. 25 Sep. 18 Nov. 20 Nov. 16 Aug. 17 Aug. 11 Sep. 13 Sep. 8 Oct. 9 Oct. 27 May 27 May 7 Jul. 8 Jul. 5 Sep. 5 Sep. 20 Sep. 20 Sep. 3 Jun. 515 22 Oct. 495 15 Sept. 481 [475] 5 Jan. 474 4 Dec. 469 16 Dec. 466 9 Jul. 461 16 Jul. 459 12 Aug. 459 17 Oct. 459 19 Nov. 456 29 Aug. 450 17 Sep. 447 1 Nov. 444 15 Jun. 437 14 Jul. 430 4 Oct. 430 25 Sep. 426 After year 5 of Darius II (419 BCE) when a document is dated between Thoth and Koyak (December to March) the accession year is indicated199 (see below), for example (papyrus N°40): 3 Kislev, year 8 [Babylonian reckoning], which is 12 Thoth, year 9 [Egyptian P. GRELOT – Documents araméens d’Égypte in: Littératures anciennes du proche orient n°5 (Cerf, 1972) pp. 198-207. 199 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES 83 reckoning] of king Darius. The Egyptian lunar calendar began on the full moon while the Babylonian lunar calendar began on the 1st crescent, consequently the 25-year lunar cycle had to be shifted of 10 years (later). For example, a 25-year lunar cycle began in 439 BCE on the full moon dated I Akhet 1 (11 December), while the new 25-year lunar cycle in 429 BCE began on the 1st lunar crescent dated I Akhet 1 (9 December). Papyrus Darius II B32 (N°40) B33 (N°41) Artaxerxes II B43 B44 Amartaeus N°7 year Lunar date 1 Kislev 8 3 Kislev 1 Shebat 13 24 Shebat 1 Heshwan 1 24 Heshwan 1 Adar 3 20 Adar 5 Egyptian calendar 10 Thoth (I Akhet) [9] 12 Thoth [9] 16 Paopi (II Akhet) [14] 9 Hathor [14] 6 Mesore (IV Shemu) 29 Mesore 19 Hathor (III Akhet) 8 Koyak 21? Pamenhotep BCE 1st lunar day 14 Dec. 1st crescent 13 Dec. 18 Jan. 18 Jan. 2 Nov. 2 Nov. 18 Feb. 17 Feb. 16 Dec. 416 10 Feb. 410 25 Nov. 404 9 Mar. 402 19 Jun. 400 Legend of colours (I Akhet 1 in 489 BCE is dated 24 December, which was a full moon) 1 Lunar dates dated by Egyptian calendar (secular) in the 25-year lunar cycle based on full moon 1 Lunar dates dated by Egyptian calendar (secular) in the 25-year lunar cycle based on first lunar crescent 36 Darius I died on 10/IX/36 (8 December 486 BCE) just before I Akhet 1 (23 December) SEASON I month Darius I Xerxes I Artaxerxes I 491 490 489 488 487 486 485 484 483 482 481 480 479 478 477 476 475 474 473 472 471 470 469 468 467 466 465 464 463 462 461 460 459 458 457 AKHET II III IV I Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May 32 33 34 35 36 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 0 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 22 11 1 19 9 28 17 6 25 15 4 23 12 2 21 10 29 18 8 26 16 5 24 13 3 22 11 1 19 9 28 17 6 25 21 11 30 19 8 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 12 1 20 9 28 18 7 26 15 5 24 13 2 21 11 30 19 8 27 17 6 25 21 10 29 18 8 27 16 6 24 14 3 22 11 1 20 9 28 17 7 26 15 4 23 13 2 21 10 29 18 8 27 16 6 24 20 10 29 18 7 26 16 5 24 13 3 22 11 30 19 9 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 12 1 20 10 29 18 7 26 16 5 24 20 9 28 18 7 26 15 5 23 13 2 21 10 30 19 8 27 16 6 25 14 3 22 12 1 20 9 28 18 7 26 15 5 23 PERET II III Jun. 19 9 28 17 6 25 15 4 23 12 2 21 10 29 18 8 27 16 5 24 14 3 22 11 30 19 9 28 17 6 25 15 4 23 Jul. 19 8 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 12 1 20 10 28 18 7 26 15 5 24 13 2 21 11 30 19 8 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 IV I SHEMU II III IV 5 Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. 18 8 27 16 6 24 14 3 22 11 1 20 9 28 17 7 26 15 4 23 13 2 21 10 29 18 8 27 16 6 24 14 3 22 18 7 26 16 5 24 13 3 22 11 30 19 9 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 12 1 20 10 29 18 7 26 16 5 24 13 3 22 18 7 26 15 5 23 13 2 21 10 29 19 8 27 16 6 25 14 3 22 12 1 20 9 28 18 7 26 15 5 23 13 2 21 17 6 25 15 4 23 12 2 21 10 29 18 8 27 16 5 24 14 3 22 11 1 19 9 28 17 6 25 15 4 23 12 2 21 17 6 25 14 4 23 12 1 20 10 28 18 7 26 15 5 24 13 2 21 11 30 19 8 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 12 1 20 3 1 4 2 3 1 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 84 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Darius B Darius II Artaxerxes II Armataeus 456 455 454 453 452 451 450 449 448 447 446 445 444 443 442 441 440 439 438 437 436 435 434 433 432 431 430 429 428 427 426 425 424 423 422 421 420 419 418 417 416 415 414 413 412 411 410 409 408 407 406 405 404 403 402 401 400 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 0 41 1 42 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 50 0 51 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 0 19 1 2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 15 4 23 12 2 21 10 29 18 8 26 16 5 24 13 3 22 11 1 19 9 28 17 6 25 15 4 23 12 2 21 10 29 18 8 26 16 5 24 2 21 10 29 18 8 26 16 5 24 13 3 22 11 1 19 9 28 14 4 23 12 1 20 9 28 18 7 26 15 5 24 13 2 21 11 30 19 8 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 12 1 20 9 28 18 7 26 15 5 24 1 20 9 28 18 7 26 15 5 24 13 2 21 11 30 19 8 27 I AKHET II III SEASON month Dec. Jan. 14 3 22 11 1 20 9 28 17 7 26 15 4 23 13 2 21 10 29 18 8 27 16 6 24 14 3 22 11 1 20 9 28 17 7 26 15 4 23 1 20 9 28 17 7 26 15 4 23 13 2 21 10 29 18 8 27 13 3 22 11 30 19 9 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 12 1 20 10 29 18 7 26 16 5 24 13 3 22 11 30 19 9 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 30 19 9 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 12 1 20 10 29 18 7 26 13 2 21 10 30 19 8 27 16 6 25 14 3 22 12 1 20 9 28 18 7 26 15 5 23 13 2 21 10 30 19 8 27 16 6 25 14 3 22 30 19 8 27 16 6 25 14 3 22 12 1 20 9 28 18 7 26 12 2 21 10 29 18 8 27 16 5 24 14 3 22 11 30 19 9 28 17 6 25 15 4 23 12 2 21 10 29 18 8 27 16 5 24 14 3 22 29 18 8 27 16 5 24 14 3 22 11 30 19 9 28 17 6 25 I PERET II III IV Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. IV 12 1 20 10 28 18 7 26 15 5 24 13 2 21 11 30 19 8 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 12 1 20 10 28 18 7 26 15 5 24 13 2 21 28 18 7 26 15 5 24 13 2 21 11 30 19 8 27 17 6 25 11 1 20 9 28 17 7 26 15 4 23 13 2 21 10 29 18 8 27 16 6 24 14 3 22 11 1 20 9 28 17 7 26 15 4 23 13 2 21 28 17 7 26 15 4 23 13 2 21 10 29 18 8 27 16 6 24 11 30 19 9 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 12 1 20 10 29 18 7 26 16 5 24 13 3 22 11 30 19 9 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 12 1 20 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 12 1 20 10 29 18 7 26 16 5 24 I 10 29 19 8 27 16 6 25 14 3 22 12 1 20 9 28 18 7 26 15 5 23 13 2 21 10 29 19 8 27 16 6 25 14 3 22 12 1 20 27 16 6 25 14 3 22 12 1 20 9 28 18 7 26 15 5 23 10 29 18 8 27 16 5 24 14 3 22 11 1 19 9 28 17 6 25 15 4 23 12 2 21 10 29 18 8 27 16 5 24 14 3 22 11 1 19 27 16 5 24 14 3 22 11 1 19 9 28 17 6 25 15 4 23 10 28 18 7 26 15 5 24 13 2 21 11 30 19 8 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 12 1 20 10 28 18 7 26 15 5 24 13 2 21 11 30 19 26 15 5 24 13 2 21 11 30 19 8 27 17 6 25 14 4 23 SHEMU II III IV Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. 4 2 3 1 4 2 4 2 3 5 Egyptian lunar calendar record Very early (at least since the Fifth Dynasty) the Egyptians used two calendars: 1) a civil calendar (with a year of 365 days consisting of 12 months of 30 days and completed by 5 days "in addition") in order to date their documents and 2) a religious schedule to determine the days of their numerous festivals linked to the moon200. The Egyptians distinguished "seasonal festivals", celebrated in their civil calendar, from "sky festivals" related to the lunar cycle. A major point has to be noted: the Egyptians were concerned only by the increasing part of the lunar cycle, never by its decreasing part. So they celebrated their lunar festivals during the 15 last days (half a month) of the full lunar month. Obviously, the feast of psdntyw "shining ones" was the starting point, day 1 of the full month corresponding to day 15 of the half-month, which was sometimes dated in the civil calendar, and also the wag feast (day 18 of the full month, called "day of the moon", corresponding to day 2 of the half-month, called "month day"). An Egyptian document describes numerous lunar festivals201 that occurred during the 19 years of Sesostris III's reign, followed by the 45 years of Amenemhat III202. This shows that the lunar days203 psdntyw which were dated in the civil calendar (dates highlighted in dark green) fit together in a cycle of 25 years. Few wag feasts that have been dated (highlighted in blue sky) fall on lunar day 17 (instead of theoretical day 18). These dates are shifted by one day in relation to those of Parker who translated the word "up to" in an inclusive way204, not exclusive. This document can be dated precisely thanks to the Sothic rising of IV Peret 16 Year 7 of Sesostris III since, according to astronomy205, it took place on July 11 around -1850 (in Thebes). This heliacal rising of Sirius is dated between -1849 and -1846 owing to the equality: IV Peret 16 = July 11. The table below checks that the first lunar cycle of 25 years (beginning on I Akhet 1) coincided with the full moon of November 30, 1857 BCE. In addition, the Sothic rising of IV Peret 16 Year 7 of Sesostris III, dated July 11, 1848 BCE, coincided with the first lunar crescent, which ha to be a remarkable event (IV Peret 1 coincided with the full moon of June 26, 1848 BCE). Colour * Event Lunar day 1 (psdntyw) dated in the civil calendar Lunar day 1 shifted one day compared to the theoretical cycle Wag Feast dated in the civil calendar Heliacal rising of Sirius dated in the civil calendar A. SPALINGER - The Private Feast Lists of Ancient Egypt Wiesbaden 1996 Ed. Harrassowitz pp. 9-72. A. SPALINGER - The Lunar System in Festival Calendars from the New Kingdom Onwards in: Société d'Égyptologie N°19 (1995) Genève pp. 25-40. 201 R.A. PARKER - The Calendars of Ancient Egypt in: Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization N°26 (1950) Ed. University of Chicago pp. 63-67. 202 C. OBSOMER - Sésostris Ier. Étude chronologique et historique du règne Bruxelles 1995 Éd. Connaissance ancienne de l'Égypte p. 149. 203 U. LUFT – Die chronologische Fixierung des ägyptischen Mittleren Reiches Wien 1992 Ed. Akademie der Wissenschaften pp. 150,151. R. KRAUSS - Arguments in Favor of a Low Chronology for the Middle and New Kingdom in: The Synchronisation of Civilisations in the Eastern (M. Bietak 2003) pp. 175-197 204 L.E. ROSE – The Astronomical Evidence for Dating the End of the Middle Kingdom in: Journal of Near Eastern Studies 53 (1994) pp. 247-248. 205 Thebes: Longitude 32° 39' East, Latitude 25° 42' North; Arcus visionis 8.5°. http://www.imcce.fr/fr/grandpublic/phenomenes/sothis/index.php 200 86 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY Year 1857 1856 1855 Sesostris III 1854 1853 1852 1851 1850 1849 1848 1847 1846 1845 1844 1843 1842 1841 1840 1839 1838 1837 1836 Amenemhat III 1835 1834 1833 1832 1831 1830 1829 1828 1827 1826 1825 1824 1823 1822 1821 1820 1819 1818 1817 1816 1815 1814 1813 1812 1811 1810 1809 1808 1807 1806 1805 1804 1803 1802 1801 1800 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 AKHET PERET I II III IV I II III IV Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. 1 30 29 29 28 28 27 27 19 19 18 18 18 17 17 16 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 28 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 17 17 16 16 15 15 14 14 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 25 25 24 24 23 23 23 22 15 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 16 23 23 22 22 21 21 20 20 12 12 11 11 10 10 10 9 2 1 1 30 30 29 28 28 21 20 20 19 19 18 18 17 10 9 9 9 8 8 7 7 29 28 28 27 27 27 26 26 18 18 17 17 16 16 15 15 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 26 26 26 25 25 24 24 23 16 15 15 14 14 14 13 13 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 24 24 23 23 22 22 21 21 13 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 3 2 2 1 1 1 30 29 22 21 21 20 20 19 19 18 11 11 10 10 9 9 8 8 1 30 29 29 28 28 27 27 19 19 18 18 18 17 17 16 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 28 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 17 17 16 16 15 15 14 14 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 25 25 *25 24 23 23 23 22 15 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 23 23 22 22 21 21 20 20 12 12 11 11 10 10 10 9 2 1 1 30 30 29 28 28 21 20 20 19 19 18 18 17 10 9 9 9 8 8 7 7 29 28 28 27 27 27 26 26 18 18 17 17 16 16 15 15 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 26 26 26 25 25 24 24 23 16 15 15 14 14 14 13 13 *6 5 4 4 3 3 *3 2 24 24 23 23 22 22 21 21 13 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 3 2 2 1 1 1 30 29 22 21 21 20 20 19 19 18 11 11 10 10 9 9 8 8 1 30 29 29 28 28 27 27 19 *20 *19 *19 18 *18 17 *17 9 *9 8 7 7 6 6 6 28 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 17 17 16 16 15 15 14 14 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 25 25 24 24 23 23 23 22 SHEMU I II III IV 5 Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. 26 26 25 25 16 15 15 14 5 5 4 4 3 24 23 23 23 13 13 12 12 3 2 2 1 1 22 21 21 20 11 10 10 10 30 29 29 28 19 19 18 18 9 8 8 7 27 27 27 26 17 16 16 15 6 6 5 5 4 25 25 24 24 14 14 14 13 4 3 3 2 2 23 22 22 21 12 12 11 11 1 1 17 1 30 20 20 19 19 10 9 9 8 29 28 28 27 18 18 17 17 7 7 6 6 26 26 25 25 16 15 15 14 5 5 4 4 3 24 23 23 23 13 13 29 12 12 3 2 2 1 1 22 21 21 20 11 10 10 10 30 29 29 28 19 19 18 18 9 8 8 7 27 27 27 26 17 16 16 15 6 6 5 5 4 25 25 24 24 14 14 14 13 4 3 3 2 2 23 22 22 21 12 12 11 11 1 1 1 30 20 20 19 19 10 9 9 8 29 28 28 27 18 18 17 17 *8 7 6 6 26 26 25 25 16 15 15 14 5 5 4 4 3 24 23 23 23 13 13 12 12 3 2 2 1 1 22 21 21 20 DATING THE REIGNS OF XERXES AND ARTAXERXES Lunar dates have not been translated into the civil calendar, except sometimes the lunar day 1 (psdntyw), because these dates had no practical value. There were some exceptions with the lunar days coinciding with a unique astronomical event such as a helical rising of Sirius. We find such an example with the dating: III Shemu 9 "Opening of the Year" in the Ebers papyrus (below)206 dated year 9 of Amenhotep I. Year 9, in the majesty of the King of Upper and Lower Egypt Djoser-ka-Ra [Amenhotep I], living forever. Opening of the Year: [festival of] Thoth [festival of] Consent [festival of] Hathor [festival of] Soul of Horus bull [festival of] Honored spelt IV [festival of] Flare [festival of] Flare [festival of] Cheering [festival of] Khonsu [festival of] South [festival of] Opet's majesty III Shemu IV " I Akhet II " III " " I Peret II " III " IV " I Époque II " 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Rise of Sirius " " " " " " " " " " " It is indeed a lunar date because the Sothic rising is dated July 11 (around -1500) and the date in the civil calendar should have been III Shemu 14 (July 11). The number "9" in Egyptian (psd) also means "shine", which also explains the connection between the lunar day 1 psdntyw "those shining ones", the Ennead of gods (psdt) and the Nine Bows (psdt). Note that this date has not been converted into the civil calendar: III Shemu 9 (lunar) / III Shemu 14 (civil) as with the year 12 of Amasis, but was connected with the main religious festival called "Opening of the Year" celebrated on this month. The same procedure is also applied to other lunar months. Over time all the lunar months would be A.S. VON BOMHARD - Le calendrier égyptien. Une œuvre d'éternité London 1999 Ed. Periplus pp. 32-33. 206 87 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY 88 THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY designated by the name of the main festival celebrated during this month207 (with an apparent stabilization from 1100 BCE). By a process of assimilation, civil calendar months (highlighted below) have received in turn the names of their related lunar months208. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lunar month III Shemu IV Shemu I Akhet II Akhet III Akhet IV Akhet I Peret II Peret III Peret IV Peret I Shemu II Shemu Ebers festival Wp-rnpt Tḫ Mnḫt Ḥt-ḥr K3ḥrk3 Šfb-dt Rkḥ [wr] Rkḥ [nds] Rnnwt Ḫnsw Ḫnty-hty ’Ipt-ḥmt Civil month Horus 5 days I Akhet II Akhet III Akhet IV Akhet I Peret II Peret III Peret IV Peret I Shemu II Shemu III Shemu IV Shemu Later festival Dḥwty P3n-ipt Ḥwt-ḥr K3ḥrk3 T3‘3bt [P3n]-Mḫr P3n-imnḥtp P3n-Rnntt P3n-Ḫnsw P3n-Int Ip-ip Mswtr‘ Greek transcription Epagomenon Thoth Phaophi Hathyr Khoiak Tybi Mecheir Phamenoth Pharmouthi Pakhons Payni Epiphi Mesore 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 We note that the twelve lunar months (29 or 30 days) are in advance of one month compared with the twelve civil months (30 days). This advance arises because the lunar year (354 days) is shorter than the calendar year (365 days). According to astronomy there were actually several remarkable coincidences during year 9 ("shine") of Amenhotep I: Year 9 10 Astronomical event (in 1496 BCE) Full moon Summer solstice Sothic rising 25 years lunar cycle start Lunar date Festival of: Civil date Julian date III Shemu 1 III Shemu 4 III Shemu 9 IV Shemu 9 I Akhet 1 I Akhet 9 (Shining ones) III Shemu 6 III Shemu 9 III Shemu 14 IV Shemu 14 I Akhet 1 I Akhet 9 July 3 July 6 July 11 August 10 September 1 September 9 Opening of the Year Thoth (New Year) Consent (for more details see the file entitled Basic astronomy for historians to get a chronology) L. DEPUYDT - Civil Calendar and Lunar Calendar in Ancient Egypt Leuven 1997 Ed. Uitgevers Peeters p. 116. 208 L. DEPUYDT - The Two Problems of the Month Names in: Revue d'égyptologie 50 (1999) pp. 107-133. 207

Log In

Dating the reigns of Xerxes and Artaxerxes

Related papers

Related papers

Related topics