Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction

[JW Insider]

16 hours ago, George88 said:

Nebuchadrezzar and Babylon -- Wiseman, D. J. (Donald John) -- 1985

For anyone else who is interested, two of Wiseman's books that have been quoted here by George are very relevant to some of these issues.

• Chronicles of Chaldaean kings (626-556 B.C.) in the British Museum by Wiseman, D. J. (Donald John)
• Nebuchadrezzar and Babylon by Wiseman, D. J. (Donald John)

Both books can be found at archive.org where you only need a free account and can usually check out the books for an hour at a time with no issues. 

• https://archive.org/details/chroniclesofchal0000unse/page/44/mode/2up
• https://archive.org/details/nebuchadrezzarba0000wise/page/n9/mode/2up

You can also find free PDFs of each although I doubt this is a legal way of accessing them. Here's one:

• https://etana.org/sites/default/files/coretexts/20337.pdf

The actual Babylonian Chronicles in translation are available at livius.org such as the example below:

• https://www.livius.org/sources/content/mesopotamian-chronicles-content/abc-3-fall-of-nineveh-chronicle/

There are literally hundreds of fairly relevant documents that show up on JSTOR or specific Biblical/Archaeology/History Journals. I think it's still possible to get a free limited access which gets to many of them, but not all. (It's something they started during COVID.) If anyone finds an article they want from JSTOR, those with access are not supposed to share those articles. But if anyone here needs a specific page copied from one of those articles, I have full access to all JSTOR documents through an alumni account. That account also gets me full access to other academic journals, too, but I won't break the rules by copying more than one page at a time, and only for discussion purposes. This should keep it within "fair use" limits. 

Examples are:

Chronology of the Medes, from the Reign of Deioces to the Reign of Darius, the Son of Hystaspes, or Darius the Mede

I. W. Bosanquet

 

In fact, if you can get to the search bar, but can't get to the actual document, that's where I can probably help out. Here's an example showing just the first of 1,399 results for a search on "Chronology of the Fall of Nineveh:"

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, George88 said:

However, if you look at my post, you'll see that it's not a clear-cut case, not even for Dr. Wiseman.

Should be easy to check. Let's see if Dr Wiseman believes that the 18th and 19th years of King Nebuchadnezzar landed in 587 and 586 BCE. 

I see that he puts Neb's 1st year in 605. So his 18th year would be 605-18=587. So 587 BCE. That would make his 19th year 586 BCE. (605-19=586). So far, Wiseman agrees with the evidenced chronology of Neo-Babylon. Just as I would expect.

Also the Bible says that in Nebuchadnezzar's 7th year he took exiles from Jerusalem.

(Jeremiah 52:28-30) . . .These are the people whom Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar took into exile:

• in the seventh year, 3,023 Jews. 
• In the 18th year of Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, 832 people were taken from Jerusalem.
•  In the 23rd year of Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, Neb·uʹzar·adʹan the chief of the guard took Jews into exile, 745 people.
• In all, 4,600 people were taken into exile.

The 7th year is not missing from the Chronicles. So let's see what year Wiseman thinks that is:

So WIseman identifies the 7th year with 598/7 BCE. That would make the 19th year only 12 years later. 598-12=586.

So again, Wiseman agrees that the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar was 586. The Bible identifies the 19th year with the fall and destruction of Jerusalem. 

When Wiseman has trouble pinning it down to either Nebuchadnezzar's 18th or 19th year, that's not because of the Neo-Babylonian Chronology. It's because of the fact that the Bible presents both of those years: the 18th and the 19th. As you can see from the scriptures from Jeremiah 32 and 2 Kings 25 that I referenced in previous posts.

-----

While we're at it, I think you've already noted that he also agrees with 612 BCE for the fall of Nineveh

[JW Insider]

2 hours ago, George88 said:

If you choose not to acknowledge the irrefutable evidence presented by scholars, or if you believe that your non-scholar status grants you superiority over them, that is your prerogative. I have no need to convince anyone here of anything.   If you believe that Dr. Wiseman is not a scholarly authority, consider the extensive works of reputable historians and Bible scholars.

2 hours ago, George88 said:

I won't be deceived by your manipulative language. Let's have a mature conversation like adults, or none at all. 

I have to point out that your continued insults about me using manipulative language appear to still be empty claims where you make the claim but won't point to any actually manipulative language. Unless of course you just mean that any statements or evidence you don't with to deal with are "manipulating" you towards accepting statements or evidence you don't want to deal with. I've mentioned before that some of your insults that that don't make sense at face value actually do make perfect sense if I consider them to be psychological "projections" of concerns about yourself onto others.

There are hundreds of previous examples shown on the forum, but in this case, you've given a couple more. Hopefully you can explain them in a way that doesn't infer your own projections onto others of whatever you feel is more true of yourself. 

For example: I have often been insulted here for acknowledging [so-called] irrefutable evidence presented by scholars, yet here you say I am choosing NOT to do so. You indicate that I believe Dr. Wiseman is NOT a scholarly authority, even though I am the one who is FULLY accepting what he is saying and yet you are the one REJECTING his chronology.

Do you think these insults of yours really make for a mature conversation? 

[George88]

12 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I have to point out that your continued insults about me using manipulative language appear to still be empty claims where you make the claim but can't point to any actually manipulative language.

Your attempt to manipulate data in order to support your misconception of the destruction of Jerusalem in 587/6 BC is completely unfounded. You may continue playing your games, but know that your influence is limited to a closed circle of followers. I, on the other hand, will persist in warning people about the distortions you spread.

16 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

There are hundreds of previous examples shown on the forum, but in this case, you've given a couple more. Hopefully you can explain them in a way that doesn't infer your own projections onto others of whatever you feel is more true of yourself. 

I'm not wasting my time on you.

17 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

For example: I have often been insulted here for acknowledging [so-called] irrefutable evidence presented by scholars, yet here you say I am choosing NOT to do so. You indicate that I believe Dr. Wiseman is NOT a scholarly authority, even though I am the one who is FULLY accepting what he is saying and yet you are the one rejecting his chronology.

You consistently have a tendency to deny anything presented to you, acting as if you hold the ultimate authority, despite being far from it. Once more, your past posts serve as evidence of this.

[JW Insider]

9 minutes ago, George88 said:

You consistently have a tendency to deny anything presented to you, acting as if you hold the ultimate authority, despite being far from it.

Sorry about that. What have I denied that you presented? Examples? Just one?

9 minutes ago, George88 said:

I, on the other hand, will persist in warning people about the distortions you spread.

Well you should if that's what I'm doing. But I don't think it will mean as much if you won't produce a single example.

[Pudgy]

…. I was wondering how long it would take for others to lose patience with Wally.

….. probably two more days ought to be.enough to reach critical mass.

[George88]

49 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I see that he puts Neb's 1st year in 605. So his 18th year would be 605-18=587. So 587 BCE. That would make his 19th year 586 BCE. (605-19=586). So far, Wiseman agrees with the evidenced chronology of Neo-Babylon. Just as I would expect.

Can you provide the exact reference in the Babylonian Chronicle where it states the information you mentioned? Your interpretation of the chronology is flawed and lacks credibility. Present concrete evidence from the Babylonian Chronicles that supports the date 587 BC instead of engaging in misleading tactics.

52 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Also the Bible says that in Nebuchadnezzar's 7th year he took exiles from Jerusalem.

(Jeremiah 52:28-30) . . .These are the people whom Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar took into exile:

• in the seventh year, 3,023 Jews. 
• In the 18th year of Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, 832 people were taken from Jerusalem.
•  In the 23rd year of Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, Neb·uʹzar·adʹan the chief of the guard took Jews into exile, 745 people.
• In all, 4,600 people were taken into exile.

None of this holds any significance unless you establish a proper arrangement. You boldly made a claim regarding the beginning and end of BCE, yet you continue to rely on speculative assumptions.

55 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

So WIseman identifies the 7th year with 598/7 BCE. That would make the 19th year only 12 years later. 598-12=586.

So, if we consider a military campaign, your account suggests that Jerusalem was destroyed in 598/7 BC. The numbers you mentioned are insignificant when we are discussing military conquest operations.

No one, including you, AlanF, O'Maly, or anyone else in AD1914, will be able to present a convincing argument to prove that the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC is based on accurate data with flawed judgment.

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

When Wiseman has trouble pinning it down to either Nebuchadnezzar's 18th or 19th year, that's not because of the Neo-Babylonian Chronology. It's because of the fact that the Bible presents both of those years: the 18th and the 19th. As you can see from the scriptures from Jeremiah 32 and 2 Kings 25 that I referenced in previous posts.

Based on this reasoning, it can be deduced that Dr. Wiseman employed calculations starting from 626 BC, the beginning of Nabopolassar's reign, just like any scribe would have done. However, I fail to understand the purpose of misinterpretation in those particular years.

[George88]

Visitors can clearly see the manipulation in your post-JWI, where you take a swerving approach to favor yourself. Let's hope people are not that naive.

[George88]

@Pudgy How long did it take for people to lose patience with you, despite being a protected individual?

[Pudgy]

The bottom line of all this bickering and insults, and “dueling experts”, accompanied by frantic toothless banjo solos is this:

Armageddon did NOT occur in 1874, 1888, 1914, 1915, 1925  … or 1975.  I did not occur  before the end of the millennium, in 2000.

So …. does it REALLY matter about 539, or 537, or 607 etc.?

What BOTH sides are trying to support … DIDN’T HAPPEN.

There is not the slightest shred of evidence to support ANYTHING other than a “Great War” between nations … happened in 1914.

[Pudgy]

27 minutes ago, George88 said:

@Pudgy How long did it take for people to lose patience with you, despite being a protected individual?

Just how am I “protected”?

… and what the hell does that even mean?

Your hatred and jealousy of me has distorted your thinking.

You see things so very clearly that DO NOT EXIST.

HERE IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE:

[JW Insider]

2 hours ago, George88 said:

Can you provide the exact reference in the Babylonian Chronicle where it states the information you mentioned?

This was the chronology that Wiseman himself provided on page vi, page 2 and page 32 of "Chronology of Chaldean Kings." Wiseman, as I have said, doesn't use the Babylonian Chronicle to produce "BCE" dates. Neither do I. It doesn't contain any such dates. The point was about the chronology he accepts, and that I accept, and that you reject. After all these studies in 1956, you can see that he continues to support this same chronology in 1985. As I said before, that chronology is not in the Chronicles, it's in the astronomical diaries and astronomical tables, many of which were originally produced at the very time that Nebuchadnezzar himself was alive.

2 hours ago, George88 said:

Your interpretation of the chronology is flawed and lacks credibility.

I am not interpreting it. I let my astronomy software interpret it. If it is flawed, it means that the 539 date for Cyrus' conquering of Babylon is also flawed because the software gets that perfectly, too. And I've checked it against several different reports from others who use different astronomy software. It perfectly matches the other software too.

2 hours ago, George88 said:

Present concrete evidence from the Babylonian Chronicles that supports the date 587 BC instead of engaging in misleading tactics.

It's misleading to continue acting as if you can find 587 in the Chronicles. It's in the Babylonian astronomy diaries and tables. Just because the astronomy tables happen to fit several of the descriptions about what happened in the accession year, first year, seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar doesn't mean that this is where the BCE dates come from. There are no BCE dates in the Chronicles. 

2 hours ago, George88 said:

So, if we consider a military campaign, your account suggests that Jerusalem was destroyed in 598/7 BC.

As I said, I don't have to consider the Chronicles, or the military campaigns, or "my account" of anything. I only have to look at the Bible where it says that it was Nebuchadnezzar's 18th and 19th year. Then the astronomical tablets tell me that those years were 587 and 586. They also tell me, of course, that his 7th year was 598. 

If you think the Bible was wrong and that the exiles taken in his 7th year refers to the full destruction of Jerusalem, that's your prerogative. If you think the Bible was wrong when it says he sieged and destroyed Jerusalem in his 18th and 19th year, that is also your prerogative. If you want to mix up those two events and add something to the evidence based on speculation that's also your prerogative. 

2 hours ago, George88 said:

The numbers you mentioned are insignificant when we are discussing military conquest operations.

You mean the numbers of exiles that the Bible mentioned? Maybe they only counted the most elite of the exiles. It doesn't matter, I still accept the Bible's account. 

2 hours ago, George88 said:

Based on this reasoning, it can be deduced that Dr. Wiseman employed calculations starting from 626 BC, the beginning of Nabopolassar's reign, just like any scribe would have done. However, I fail to understand the purpose of misinterpretation in those particular years.

Same here. It's also what my astronomy software gives me for the beginning of Nabopolassar's reign. I see no reason or purpose for any misinterpretation, either. Why would anyone want to "misinterpret" those years? Unless of course they need his 14th year to be 632 when Wiseman's calculation (and my astronomy software) will give us 612. And I can think of only one place where that interpretation is found.