Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] actual Hebrew question about Daniel 9:25

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Rolf Furuli" <furuli AT online.no>
  • To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] actual Hebrew question about Daniel 9:25
  • Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 16:17:04 +0100

Dear Yigal,

I would like to suggest that we move the 20th year of Artaxerxes ten years
back in time. I have published a book with 76 pages discussing the chronological evidence from the reigns of Xerxes I (including Bardiya, and Nebuchadnezzar III and IV) and Artaxerxes I. On the basis of a consideration of the cuneiform evidence (the titles used by
Xerxes I in his different regnal years), Persian inscriptions and engravings
(placing Xerxes on an equal footing with his father Darius I), and the
corroboration of intercalary months in the last 11 years of Darius I and the
first 11 years of Xerxes I, a good case can be made of a coregency or Darius
I and Xerxes I of 11 years. If we take the dates of the cuneiform tablets
from the usurper Bardiya at face value, it is difficult to avoid the
conclusion that he reigned for 18 months and not for 7 (the Behistun
inscription). On this basis the beginning of the reign of Artaxerxes I can be pushed back by 10 years.

A colleague of mine, who is working on a doctoral dissertation discussing Achamenid chronology, but whose scheme differs from my chronologicl scheme in several respects, recently told me that he had made a study of the two lunar eclipses supposed to have occurred in the death year of Xerxes I (found on tablet BM 32234). His conclusion is that the description of the eclipses fit perfectly the eclipses of June 26, and December 20, 475B.C.E. but that they do not fit well the eclipses of the year 465 B.C.E (See "H. Hunger (2001) Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia, vol. V, pp. 20, 21, 396). I have only seen a picture of this tablet where the cuneiform signs were not perfectly clear, but if they can be clearly seen and interpreted by collation, this information also points to an end of the reign of Xerxes I ten years before the accepted date.

As for Artaxerxes I, my conclusion from a careful study of all the dated Elephantine tablets, is that they cannot definitely decide the question about the mentioned ten years. However, their dates are slightly in favor of the 475 date. The Greek evidence, particularly Thycudid, clearly points to an earlier date for the beginning of the reign of Artaxerxes I than is traditionally believed, and the intercalary months reported from his reign corroborates this. My suggestion, therefore, is that the 20th year of Artaxerxes when Nehemiah traveled to Jerusalem was 455 B.C.E. and not 445 B.C.E.


Best regards,

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo

-----
Original Message ----- From: "Yigal Levin" <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
To: "b-hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 8:47 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] actual Hebrew question about Daniel 9:25



Peter Kirk asked:
I don't in fact know why no one seems to suggest that Nehemiah's
Artaxerxes
was also Artaxerxes II.


The reason is simple: Shemaiah and Delaiah, sons of Sanbalat, are
mentioned
in one the Elephantine papyri dated (independently) to 402/1, year 3 of
Artaxerxes II. This would mean that Nehemiah, Snabalat's contemporary,
would
have had to have lived before that date. The only possibility is
Artaxerxes
I, whose 20th year was 445. So that the date of Nehemiah's arrival as
governor of Yehud is "fixed" at 445. The question that remains is the
arrival of Ezra and his relationship with Nehemiah.


Yigal Levin

_______________________________________________





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page