Posted by Kriss on March 20, 1999 at 15:20:15 {MW9hQZt3yw8IU}:
Fortunately, we don't have to debate about the chronology of the Neo-Babylonian period any more. The references in the VAT4956 to 511BCE as the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar I all too obvious.
Please note that Anstey and others have found it far to clear that the "70 weeks" prophecy should be fulfilled by the beginning of the restoration of Jersualem in the 1st year of Cyrus. Other sincere Bible students who recognize that Jesus must fulfill the "Festival of Booths" and thus appear during that time to begin his ministry also see a clear connection with the beginning of the work of rebuilding in the seventh month and the celebration of the "Festival of Booths" during this momentous occasion.
That being
the case, with Jesus' baptism occuring in 29CE, 455BCE becomes the obvious Biblical dating for the 1st of Cyrus. That being the case, the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar would fall in 529BCE, 74 years earlier. Remember, the 70-year
desolation period did not begin until the northern tribes were removed from the land and the last deportees from Jersusalem left which didn't occur until the last deportation from Jerusalem in the 23rd year of Nebuchadnezzar II, not the
19th year. Even though the majority of the few Jews remaining may have left to run down to Egypt, the land was yet completely desolated and those Jews who
"survived the sword" of Nebuchadnezzar's invasion of Egypt in the 23rd year,
did return to Jerusalem, at least for a short time as was prophesied (Jer. 44:14,28) before being deported to Babylon.
This is just to emphasize and crystallize that the 529BCE date for the fall of Jerusalem is part of the dating of the Jews return in 455BCE which is connected with the Messiah coming in 29CE. This is not a new date.
But if we presume that this was the original chronology and that the Persians revised their chronology, it would not be unusual if there were left remaining some references to the original chronology. That's why the reference to year 37 in 511BCE in the VAT4956 (Lines 3 and 14) is so signficant and yet profound. Because what it does is gives us another dating for year 37 of Nebuchadnezzar II, completly in line with the original dating of his 37th year.
Again, if Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year fell in 529BCE, then his 37th year would fall in 511BCE. So is it that strange that there would be references connecting 511BCE with year 37th of Nebuchadnezzar if that was the original chronology? Of course not!
But in making the reference, it confirms that the 568BCE dating is totally revised and totally fake. At the same time, it confirms the 455BCE chronology for the 1st year of Cyrus, a date we had already been locked into by correct fulfillment of Bible prophecy.
But something else also has to be considered now that we have no choice but to accept this as the absolute dating. And that is, that this chronology revisionism secret did not get lost over the centuries.
Thus part of the research that had long ago established the correct dating from background historical records of the Greeks and the Persians, avoiding the historian hype and avoidance of the problems with this chronology, was the discovery of modern-day references to the actual chronology. One incredible source from the early 19th century allows you, for instance, to extract the exact dating for the beginning Peloponnesian War in 403BCE.
So the secret wasn't lost, but maintained by some groups all through the centuries. Those who knew about the conspiracy have maintained the secret and apparently attempted to suppress discovery of the true chronology. Others seem to try to distract from a close look at this period even though they may not have been aware of just how the conspiracy worked. And, of course, varying theories and individual chronology takeoffs on the period in an attempt to adapt scripture with secular sources abound.
Jehovah's witnesses, for instance, have many great arguments for the 607BCE dating which many have accepted, even non-Witnesses since the Bible's reference to a 70-year "sabbath rest" period is so direct. Add to that Josephus' reference to a 70-year desert period and you have all the grounds you need to suspect that the reduction of the Neo-Babylonian period by 20 years was fabricated.
Still persons find it very difficult to believe that there is an 82-year discrepancy in this part of history (537 vs 455BCE) for the 1st year of Cyrus.
This is partly due to the hype over the evidence that actually supports this chronology and their lack of understanding how ancient chronology works.
For instance, the current history marks a critical fixed datable event for the Lydian-Median peace agreement in 585BCE after which Cyrus' mother was born. Yet currently, Cyrus who died at 70 in 530BCE is born in 600BCE, 15 years before his own mother. You'd think that this would be a HINT to serious chronologists that the chronology was obviously revised after Herodotus wrote his history. But it seems to have no effect on their concept of this chronology.
Part of the reason is that they are fixated my two critical misconceptions:
1) Alleged thousands of clay tablets supporting the revised chronology; and
2) Astronomical texts such as the VAT4956 that are scientifically confirmed.
But this shows their total ignorance of the actual issues. For instance:
1) As far as the thousands of clay tablets are concerned, these tablets only provide relative dating. That is, you can't derive a precise fixed date from these tablets. So most of them, such as a majority from the reign of Nebuchadnezzar and Nabonidus, are completely consistent with the original chronology and have no need for being dismissed. Only a handful, comparatively, of fake documents thus need to be dismissed. Thus tens of thousands of tablets work for the 607BCE chronology as well as the 568BCE chronology, both of which are incorrect, as well as the 529BCE chronology. But somehow, the idea is fostered that all these tablets must be dismissed if you accept the original chronology. It's not true.
2) Another total falacity that has permeated is the misrepresentation of the "conspiracy" itself. This conspiracy is specific. But it has been represented as being impossible because of the accuracy of the astronomical information in the VAT4956. Even arguments stating the scientific expertise makes the faking of the astronomical information impossible.
But the fact is, the conspiracy didn't happen until the Neo-Babylonian period was over and the VAT4956 wasn't created and redated until the Seleucid Period, which was long after the fall of the Persian Period. Thus no scientific expertise was needed at this point. It was simply a matter of copying from the selected records and changing the king's name on the text.
In the case of the VAT4956, which has references to both 568BCE and 511BCE, they astronomer-priest simply selected individual references from 568BCE original texts they had and well as a few from 511BCE which they intermixed with the 568BCE texts and handed the 40 or so references to a copyist who then just copied them onto one text, on the edge of which they put "Year 37, Nebuchadnezzar."
The text thus conformed with the revised chronology, as well as had hidden references to the original chronology, but this has nothing to do with any kind of scientific expertise. Nor is the fact that the observations are scientifically accurate for 568BCE having anything to do with the authenticity of the document as far as dating is concerned. After all, the document also has accurate references for 511BCE. Of course, the observations are extremely accurate, since they were copied from the original documents, which were then destroyed.
Here's one for you, sort of a
combination of #1 and #2.
If we are supposed to be so impressed with all the documents surviving from the Neo-Babylonian period which just generally supports the non-contested chronology from this period, then where are all the
"original" astronomical texts? Why are the most important texts all coming from the Seleucid Period with rare exception? There should have been tens of thousands of astronomical texts directly supporting the correct chronology.
Answer. These texts had to be destroyed, otherwise, they would have shown up the correct chronology. Likely this sent the astronomer-priests into shock and their need to preserve some references to the original chronology is what inspired complex "diaries" such as the VAT4956 and the SK400, which have non-matching "spurious" texts in them, thought to be "scribal errors" in general, but which now are confirmed to have been inside references to the correct chronology. This shows us how ingenious and how pervasive the conspiracy actually was.
Bottom line: those arguments about the accuracy of the astronomical information have no bearing on the conspiracy since the VAT4956 is a copied document and thus automatically considered as a "revised" dated document by chronologists; and many of the contemporary documents, particularly business documents from the Neo-Babylonian Period are nonspecific to any absolute dating and need not be dismissed even though certain specific dates change. As noted, only a few documents which were faked need to be dismissed but the greater majority of them, documents which number into the tens of thousands, are perfectly authentic and support the original chronology as well.
In addition, research confirms that the actual chronology and the secret of the revisions has survived in certain circles, so the chronology was not lost. In particular, Jewish sources have long been aware of the conspiracy and their records have been adapted to handle the revisions. Josephus certainly knew of the conspiracy, for instance, in the 1st Century and adapted this records accordingly, while at the same time, maintainin specific details from the original chronology which were consistent with the Biblical chronology. It is not likely that Jewish rabbis lost track of this critical chronology, though they may have had their reasons over the centuries not to expose it.
Others who have discovered the secret via critical research, likewise have secretly provided exculpatory data in secret books which allow us to reconstruct the chronology, not that this can't be done
by strict Biblical
research.
So for the doubters, they shouldn't be so naive as to think that the suppression of this chronology isn't still part of a modern conspiracy to leave well enough alone. A percentage of the apathy over the very direct and obvious evidence we now have as to the conspiracy and the original dating, may be due to the fact that some have long known about the conspiracy as well as the correct dating and it has been a family secret for them and they just see no need to openly acknowlege the research.
Obviously this chronology is a thorn in the side of Jeudeo-Christian polemics, especially since it will affect whether or not Jesus fulfilled the "70 weeks" prophecy in 29CE. Of course, the Jews have long maintained their "own chronology" and have long proclaimed a much shorter Persian Period than is widely accepted. Jews who have their own ancient records along with the Biblical writings are not going to be persuaded by known gentile revisionism of their records. In fact, as stated, the way the Jews handled it was to create fables and other "apocryphal" (hidden) works which adapted superficially their records to the revised chronology, yet which had secret references to how to reconstruct the original chronology. The apocryphal "Book of Esdras" in fact, was written as a cover for the canonical "Ezra/Nehemiah" for this very purpose. Comparing them will clearly demonstrate what revisions were made during the Persian Period. This was necessary on the part of the Jews in order to protect their sacred writings from being destroyed in case they didn't agree with the current politically correct revisionist chronology or history. Thus, again, the Jewish apocryphal writings are another source in which to extract the details of the conspiracy and the areas of revisionism for this period.
So the more specific information you know about, the more obvious the revisionism is. The less you know, the more apt you are to doubt the conspiracy, just due to cultural bias in not beliving in "conspiracies" or having abject trust of the academic system which totally controls this information. Unfortunately, getting over those hurdles is challenging and not easy.
That's why this recent discovery in the VAT4956 is so critical and so important. Just like those tens of thousands of clay tablets cannot give you any absolute date for this period, the VAT4956 does. Having that reference to 511BCE preempts all the fake documentation, even though it is extensive, and gives us at the same time what the original chronology was, a chronology totally consistent with the Bible's original chronology as well as adaptive Jewish chronology records. One must not isolate the evidence but look at EVERYTHING concerning this period, but especially the astronomical texts which are the most important critical source, in order to understand what happened and what the original chronology was.
So anyone who just blatantly claims this is a "crackpot" idea or trys a lot of handwaving and who is not ready to discuss some critical details, are just trying to keep you dumb and in the dark. They have their own reasons for doing so.
On the other hand, note the 529BCE chronologists! They SHOW you their evidence. They give you GIFs. They give the directions to the Lines in the VAT4956 or other documents so you can prove for yourself what the accurate information is. They are not running and claimining "Oh, I'm not going to discuss this with you any more", which is just a way to avoid being embarrassed.
Still in doubt? It's easy as pie now to get down to the original chronology. As I said, things have changed in the last year.
ALL YOU HAVE TO DO is look up Line 3 and Line 14 of the VAT4956 which will match-up to 511BCE. Then decide whether these references are accidental or not, since by dating the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar in 511BCE you get 529BCE as the fall of Jerusalem, which means after 2520 years the kingdom is set up in 1992. Of course, 1992 is the confirmed kingdom date based upon modern fulfillment of the 1335 days after 1947 which saw the Jews return to Palestine, ending their 1290 days of trampling as prophesied by Daniel 12.
So 1992 is going to be the kingdom date whether or not the ancient chronology debates get resolved. But it's rather hard to ignore a 511BCE reference in these ancient texts which line up with the 529BCE chronology and still call it a "scribal error" or coincidence.
And if it really seems too overwhelming, which it is with all the handwaving of so-called experts, who clearly have their own agendas, just remember that the current 568BCE chronology also requires you to ignore the fact that Cyrus is born 15 years before his own mother. That's a 45-60 year chronology discrepancy at least. If you're the kind of person who doesn't understand the significance of this, or just doesn't care, then that's okay. You'll just have to be satisfied with less than the correct dating.
Kriss