Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Liz Fried" <lizfried AT umich.edu>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: JOE.J.BAKER AT centrelink.gov.au
>
> Babylon can only refer to 538. Thus Cambyses ruled sometime
> during 538BC. Could
> his removal from the kingdom be due to opposition and lack of endeavour?
What is the evidence for his "removal" from the kingdom?

>
> A hint of opposition comes from the damaged part of the
> Babylonian chronicle for
> 538. Here Cambyses is prevented from carrying out some important
> elements of the
> new year festival.
There is no evidence for this. This has been an interpretation put forth
by some, but there is no evidence for it.

The Babylonian Chronicle breaks off in Day 4.
In day 4 Cambyses had gone to get the other gods (I forget which now,
Nabu, I guess) and bring him to Babylon. This is exactly what he was
supposed to have done, according to Black's reconstruction.
The Babylonian Chronicle (which is the only evidence we have, to my
knowledge) shows Cambyses did indeed participate in the Akitu festival.


 A hint of ineffectiveness in government comes
> from the early
> start to 537 when the new year began on 6 March (Gregorian). Now
> since the days
> of Nabukudurriusur the 19 year intercalary calendar had been
> adjusted so that
> this year of the cycle always began on the new moon in (our)
> April (and this
> continued to be the case in subsequent cycles). For some reason
> royal assent was
> not given for (the due) intercalary month of 538.

This does not provide any evidence for Cambyses not being accepted as
king of Babylon, nor does it provide any hint of ineffectiveness in
government.
Cambyses was King of Babylon until his father died.
At that point he became King of Lands. There is no evidence
he left Babylon until 525 when he conquered Egypt.

Best,
Liz
>
>
> Regards
> Joe Baker
>
>Lisbeth S. Fried
Department of Hebrew and Judaic Studies
New York University
51 Washington Sq. S.
New York, NY 10012