Dating the fall of Babylon and Ur

Abstract. The traditional date of 1595 BCE for the destruction of Babylon by the Hittite king
Mursili I is accepted by most historians for many years despite notable controversies. This pivotal date is
considered crucial to the various calculations of the early chronology of the ancient Near East. According to
the Venus Tablet (Enuma Anu Enlil 63) which describes the rising and setting of Venus during the reign
of Ammisaduqa, there are only four possibilities implying four dates for the destruction of Ur: 1912, 1944,
2004, 2064 BCE. However, a tablet of astronomical omens (Enuma Anu Enlil 20) mentions a lunar
eclipse, dated 14/III/48, at the end of the reign of !ulgi and another (Enuma Anu Enlil 21) mentions a
lunar eclipse, dated 14/XII/24, at the end of the reign of Ibbi-Sin. Over the period 2200-1850 BCE
there are only three pairs of eclipses, spaced by 42 years, matching the description of astronomical omens but
only one agreeing with the previous four dates. Despite the excellent agreement the date of 1499 BCE is
considered too low compared to Kassite and Hittite chronologies.
The second way to check the date for the fall of Babylon is to rebuild the chronology of this period
thanks to synchronisms dated by astronomy from Assyrian, Babylonian, Egyptian and Israelite
chronologies which provide synchronisms that can be dated independently. The Mesopotamian chronology of
this period is reconstructed using the number of Assyrian eponyms (one a year) and the length of Babylonian
reigns combined with the set of synchronisms among Assyrian and Babylonian kings in Annals.
Consequently, the reign of Kassite King Ganda" (1661-1635), obtained from average durations, coincides
with the reign of the Assyrian king Samsu-iluna (1654-1616) and Sealand king Ilum-maz-ilî (1664-
1594). In addition, the reign of Kassite King Agum II (1503-1487) and Sealand King Ayadaragalama
(1498-1482) are consistent with a fall of Babylon in 1499 BCE. During the reign of A""ur-dân I
(1179-1133) eponyms began on 1st Nisan instead of 1 !ippu, but Assyrian lunar years without
intercalation remained the norm until Tiglath-pileser I. As the Babylonian year began on 1st Nisan (shortly
after the spring equinox), Assyrian years coincided with Babylonian lunar years with intercalation, thus the
period between A""ur-dân I and Tiglath-pileser I was therefore transitional.
Owing to the Babylonian chronology and synchronisms it is possible to date other chronologies
(Egyptian, Elamite, Hittite and Mitannian). 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. This double-dating then allows an absolute dating, on condition that
provided proper identification of the moon phase for that particular day. Present specialists rely on the work
of Parker (in 1950) who defined this day as a first invisibility, that is to say the day (invisible!) just before
the first lunar crescent. However 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 first invisibility! The lunar calendar at Elephantine
with its system of double dates (Egyptian and Babylonian) used by Persians officials and Jewish scribes
from 500 to 400 BCE confirms that the Egyptian lunar day 1 was a full moon (see Dating the Reign of
Xerxes and Artaxerxes).
2 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

The date of the sack of Babylon by the Hittite king Mursili I is considered crucial to
the various calculations of the early chronology of the ancient Near East1. According to the
Venus Tablet, there are only four possible dates for the sack of Babylon. This astronomical
tablet (Enuma Anu Enlil 63)2, copied in 7th century BCE, describes the rising and setting of
Venus during the reign of Ammisaduqa (a descendant of Hammurabi):
Year 1 inferior Venus sets on Shabatu 15 and after 3 days rises on Shabatu 18
Year 2 superior Venus vanishes E. on Arahsamnu 21 and after 1 month 25 days appears W. on Tebetu 16
Year 3 inferior Venus sets on Ululu 29 and after 16 days rises on Tashritu 15
Year 4 superior Venus vanishes E. on Dumuzi 3 and after 2 months 6 days appears W. on Ululu 9
Year 5 inferior Venus sets on Nisan 29 and after 12 days rises on Ayar 11
Year 5 superior Venus vanishes E. on Kislimu 27 and after 2 months 3 days appears W. on Shabatu 30
Year 6 inferior Venus sets on Arahsamnu 28 and after 3 days rises on Kislimu 1
Year 7 superior Venus vanishes E. on Abu 30 and after 2 months appears W. on Tashritu 30
Year 8 inferior Venus sets on Dumuzi 9 and after 17 days rises on Dumuzi 26
Year 8 superior Venus vanishes E. on Adar 27 and after 2 months 16 days appears W. on Simanu 13
Year 9 inferior Venus sets on Adar 12 and after 2 days rises on Adar 14
Year 10 superior Venus vanishes E. on Arahsamnu 17 and after 1 month 25 days appears W. on Tebetu 12
Year 11 inferior Venus sets on Ululu 25 and after 16 days rises on II Ululu 11
Year 12 superior Venus vanishes E. on Ayar 29 and after 2 months 6 days appears W. on Abu 5
Year 13 inferior Venus sets on Nisan 25 and after 12 days rises on Ayar 7
Year 13 superior Venus vanishes E. on Tebetu 23 and after 2 months 3 days appears W. on Adar 26
Year 14 inferior Venus sets on Arahsamnu 24 and after 3 days rises on Arahsamnu 27
Year 15 superior Venus vanishes E. on Abu 26 and after 2 months appears W. on Tashritu 26
Year 16 inferior Venus sets on Dumuzi 5 and after 16 days rises on Dumuzi 21
Year 16 superior Venus vanishes E. on Adar 24 and after 2 months 15 days appears W. on Simanu 9
Year 17 inferior Venus sets on Adar 8 and after 3 days rises on Adar 11
Year 18 superior Venus vanishes E. on Arahsamnu 13 and after 1 month 25 days appears W. on Tebetu 8
Year 19 inferior Venus sets on II Ululu 20 and after 17 days rises on Tashritu 8
Year 20 superior Venus vanishes E. on Simanu 25 and after 2 months 6 days appears W. on Ululu 1
Year 21 inferior Venus sets on Nisan 22 and after 11 days rises on Ayar 3
Year 21 superior Venus vanishes E. on Tebetu 19 and after 2 months 3 days appears W. on Adar 22

Although the interpretation of this astronomical tablet is difficult3, because many

data appear to have been poorly copied, the fall of Babylon can be dated to the period
1500-1700 only according to four possibilities4:
Chronology (BCE): Ultra-Low Low Middle High
Fall of Ur 1912 1944 2004 2064
Reign of Hammurabi 1697-1654 1729-1686 1793-1750 1849-1806
Reign of Ammisaduqa 1551-1530 1583-1562 1647-1626 1703-1682
Fall of Babylon 1499 1531 1595 1651

The date 1595 is chosen mainly as it is consistent with the chronology accepted by
most historians to the late 20th century, hence the name of "Middle chronology". However,
other lunar eclipses are used for dating the fall of Babylon5. A tablet of astronomical omens
(Enuma Anu Enlil 20) mentions a lunar eclipse, dated 14 Siwanu, at the end of the reign of
1 R. PRUZSINSKY – Mesopotamian Chronology of the 2nd Millennium B.C.
Wien 2009 Ed. Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften pp. 17-104.
2 E. REINER, D. PINGREE – Babylonian Planetary Omens. Part 1. The Venus Tablet of Ammisaduqa

Malibu 1975 Ed. Undena Publications pp. 17-62.

3 http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0311036

V.G. GURZADYAN – The Venus Tablet and Refraction

in: Akkadica 124 (2003) pp. 13-17.
4 V.G. GURZADYAN – On the Astronomical Records and Babylonian Chronology

in: Akkadica 119-120 (2000) pp. 175-184.

5 B. BANJEVIC – Ancient Eclipses and Dating the Fall of Babylon

in: Publ. Astron. Obs. Belgrade N° 80 (2006) pp. 251-257.

 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 3

!ulgi (14/III/48) and another (Enuma Anu Enlil 21) mentions a lunar eclipse, dated 14
Addaru, at the end of the Ur III dynasty ending with the reign of Ibbi-Sin (14/XII/24).
These two lunar eclipses are separated by 42 years of reign (= 9 years of Amar-Sin + 9
years of !u-Sîn + 24 years of Ibbi-Sin). Moreover, in a tablet of Mari, a scribe mentions a
[total] lunar eclipse during the eponymy of Asqudum6 (= year 12/13 of Hammurabi).
Over the period 2200-1850 there are only three pairs of eclipses, spaced by 42
years, matching the description of astronomical omens7:

1st eclipse Magnitude 2nd eclipse Magnitude gap

(14/III/48) (14/XII/24) (1st - 2nd)
13/08/2189 1.21 12/03/2107 1.00 82 years
12/05/2175 1.80 " " 68 years
04/07/2150 1.32 " " 43 years "
25/07/2095 1.32 04/05/2063 1.78 32 years
" " 13/04/2053 0.63 42 years OK
" " 11/02/2031 1.14 64 years
26/06/2019 1.07 24/04/2016 1.84 3 years
" " 15/03/1977 0.82 42 years OK
" " 04/03/1976 1.47 43 years "
25/05/2008 0.96 15/04/1969 1.84 39 years
18/07/2002 1.08 23/02/1929 1.63 73 years
27/06/1954 1.39 16/03/1912 0.58 42 years OK
18/07/1937 0.75 14/02/1901 0.94 36, years
18/05/1915 1.47 14/02/1882 1.58 33 years
" " 27/03/1875 1.82 40 years
28/06/1908 1.04 " " 33 years
19/06/1861 1.04
31/07/1854 0.73

Lunar eclipse matching the: Fall of Babylon Chronology

Last year of !ulgi Fall of Ur III Year 12/13 of According to
(14/III/48) (14/XII/24) Hammurabi Venus Tablet
[2106]# [2064]# [1836]# 1651 High
25/07/2095 13/04/2053 #
[2046]# [2004]# [1780]# 1595 Middle
26/06/2019 15/03/1977 #
[1986]# [1944]# 03/09/1716 1531 Low
27/06/1954 16/03/1912 07/12/1684 1499 Ultra-Low

Despite the excellent agreement among all these astronomical data8, the date of
1499 is considered too low compared to Kassite and Hittite chronologies. This criticism is
unfounded, because these two chronologies are very approximate: most durations of reigns
are unknown and they have no anchor in astronomy. In addition, the dendrochronological
dating of the Acemhöyüke palace requires to locate the death of !am#î-Adad I after -17529
eliminating the Middle Chronology dating this reign 1807-1775.
The second way to set a date for the fall of Babylon is to rebuild the chronology of
this period thanks to synchronisms dated by astronomy. Assyrian, Babylonian, Egyptian
and Israelite chronologies provide synchronisms that can be dated independently. For
6 W. HEIMPEL – Letters to the King of Mari: A New Translation, With Historical Introduction, Notes, and Commentary
Leiden 2003 Ed. Eisenbrauns pp. 209-210.
7 P.J. H UBER – Astronomy and Ancient Chronology

in: Akkadica 119-120 (2000) pp. 159-176.

8 H. GASCHE – La fin de la première dynastie de Babylone : une chute difficile

in: Akkadica 124 (2003) pp. 205-221.

9 C. MICHEL, P. ROCHER – La chronologie du IIe millénaire revue à l'ombre d'une éclipse de soleil

in: Jaarbericht (...) Ex Oriente Lux N° 35/36 (1997-2000) Chicago pp. 111-126.
4 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

example, Assyrian chronology may rebuilt for the period 911-609 only thanks to eponyms.
The list of Assyrian eponyms is anchored on the solar eclipse occurred on Simanu (month
III, day 30) in the eponymy of Bur-Sagale (dated June 15, 763 BCE). The Assyrian period
911-648 is dated owing to its canonical eponyms10 and the period 648-609 by a
prosopography of its eponyms11. A few eponyms are non canonical because they died
during the year of their eponymy and there are also some gaps of 1 year between eponym
dates and regnal years in tablet with double dates because the first Assyrian regnal year
(accession) was reckoned in either system: year 0 (Babylonian) or year 1 (Assyrian). Thus,
as there are exactly 154 canonical eponyms between Gargamisaiu and Bur-Sagale, which is
dated 763 BCE, that involves to date the one of Gargamisaiu into 609 (= 763 – 154).
The only solar eclipse over Assyria during the period 800-750 is the total eclipse
dated June 15, 763 BCE. The partial solar eclipses dated June 4, 800 BCE and June 24, 791
BCE were not able to be viewed over Assyria.
! The fall of the Assyrian empire, which took place in October 609 BCE after the battle
of Harran, is characterized by a quadruple synchronisms, since the year of Assur-uballit
II corresponds to year 17 of Nabopolassar to Josiah's year 31 and year 1 of Necho II.
! 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.
! Dated lunar eclipses15 are: year 1 and 2 of Merodachbaladan (March 19/20 721 BCE,
March 8/9 and September 1/2 720 BCE); year 5 of Nabopolassar (April 21/22 621
BCE); year 2 of !ama#-#uma-ukîn (April 10/11 666 BCE); year 42 of Nebuchadnezzar
(March 2/3 562 BCE). A diary (VAT 4956)16 contains numerous astronomical
conjunctions in years 37 and 38 of Nebuchadnezzar dated from astronomy in 568 and
567 BCE. An astronomical journal (BM 38462)17 list some lunar eclipses in the years 1
to 27 of Nebuchadnezzar which are dated from 604 to 578 BCE.
The chronology of the Saite period (663-525) may be reckoned only thanks to
"biographies18 of prominent men or Apis bulls":
1. Grave stele of Psammetichus son of Genefbahorek. Date of birth: Year 3 of Necho II, month
10, day 1. Date of death: Year 35 of Amasis, month 2, day 6. Length of life: 71 years, 4
months, 6 days (see column A. 1st Thot matches the beginning of Egyptian year).
10 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.
11 S. PARPOLA – The Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire

Helsinki 1998 University of Helsinki pp. XVIII-XX.

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 F.R. STEPHENSON - Historical Eclipses and Earth's Rotation

Cambridge 1997 Ed. Cambridge University Press pp. 99-100, 151-152, 206.
16 A.J. SACHS, H. HUNGER - Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia vol. I

Wien 1988 Ed. Akademie der Wissenschaften (n° -567).

17 H. HUNGER - Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia vol. V n° 6

Wien 2001 Ed. Akademie der Wissenschaften pp. 27-30,396.

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.
F.K. KIENITZ – Die politische Geschichte Ägyptens vom 7. bis zum 4. Jahrhundert vor der Zeitwende
Berlin 1953 Ed. Akademie-Verlag pp. 154-156.
J.H. BREASTED – Ancient records of Egypt: Historical documents from the earliest times to the Persian conquest. Vol. IV
Chicago 1906 (1962) Ed. The University of Chicago Press pp. 497-498, 501-505, 518-520.
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 5

2. Grave stele of the priest Psammetichus son of Iahuben. Date of birth: Year 1 of Necho II,
month 11, day 1. Date of death: Year 27 [of Amasis], month 8, day 28. Length of life:
65 years, 10 months, 2 days (see column B).
3. Grave stele of the 4th Apis of the 26th Dynasty. Date of birth: Year 16 of Necho II, month 2,
day 7. Installation: Year 1 of Psammetichus II, month 11, day 9. Date of death: Year 12
of Apries, month 8, day 12. Date of burial: Year 12 of Apries, month 10, day 21.
Length of life: 17 years, 6 months, 5 days (see column C).
4. Grave stele of the 3rd Apis of the 26th Dynasty. Date of birth: Year 53 of Psammetichus I,
month 6, day 19. Installation: Year 54 of Psammetichus I, month 3, day 12. Date of
death: Year 16 of Necho II, month 2, day 6. Date of burial: Year 16 of Necho II,
month 4, day 16. Length of life: 16 years, 7 months, 17 days (see column D).
5. Epitaph of Apis bull from Cambyses19. Date of birth: Year 27 [of Amasis]. Date of death:
Year 6 of Cambyses II. Length of life unknown, but the average life-span of Apis bulls
is from 16 to 19 years during the 26th Dynasty20 (see column E).
6. Pharaoh Apries was still living according to a stele21 dated year 3 of Amasis (which was
beginning on January 12, 567 BCE).

Egyptian King Year 1st Thot A B C D E

Psammetichus I 1 663 5-Feb
2 662 5-Feb
3 661 4-Feb
4 660 4-Feb
5 659 4-Feb
6 658 4-Feb
7 657 3-Feb
8 656 3-Feb
9 655 3-Feb
10 654 3-Feb
11 653 2-Feb
12 652 2-Feb
13 651 2-Feb
14 650 2-Feb
15 649 1-Feb
16 648 1-Feb
17 647 1-Feb
18 646 1-Feb
19 645 30-jan
20 644 31-jan
21 643 31-jan
22 642 31-jan
23 641 30-jan
24 640 30-jan
25 639 30-jan
26 638 30-jan
27 637 29-jan
28 636 29-jan
29 635 29-jan
30 634 29-jan
31 633 28-jan
32 632 28-jan

19 A. KUHRT – The Persian Empire

London 2010 Ed. Routledge pp. 122-124.
20 M. MALININE, G. POSENER, J. VERCOUTER – Catalogue des stèles du Sérapéum de Memphis I

Paris 1968 Éd. Imprimerie Nationale p. XIII.

21 A. SPALINGER - Egypt and Babylonia: A Survey

Hamburg 1977, in: Studien Zur Altägyptischen Kultur Band 5 pp. 241-242.
6 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

33 631 28-jan
34 630 28-jan
35 629 27-jan
36 628 27-jan
37 627 27-jan
38 626 27-jan
39 625 26-jan
40 624 26-jan
41 623 26-jan
42 622 26-jan
43 621 25-jan
44 620 25-jan
45 619 25-jan
46 618 25-jan
47 617 24-jan
48 616 24-jan
49 615 24-jan
50 614 24-jan
51 613 23-jan
52 612 23-jan
53 611 23-jan 0
54 610 23-jan 1
Necho II 1 609 22-jan 0 2
2 608 22-jan 1 3
3 607 22-jan 0 2 4
4 606 22-jan 1 3 5
5 605 21-jan 2 4 6
6 604 21-jan 3 5 7
7 603 21-jan 4 6 8
8 602 21-jan 5 7 9
9 601 20-jan 6 8 10
10 600 20-jan 7 9 11
11 599 20-jan 8 10 12
12 598 20-jan 9 11 13
13 597 19-jan 10 12 14
14 596 19-jan 11 13 15
15 595 19-jan 12 14 16
Psammetichus II 16 1 594 19-jan 13 15 0 0 16y7m
2 593 18-jan 14 16 1
3 592 18-jan 15 17 2
4 591 18-jan 16 18 3
5 590 18-jan 17 19 4
6 589 17-jan 18 20 5
Apries 1 7 588 17-jan 19 21 6
2 587 17-jan 20 22 7
3 586 17-jan 21 23 8
4 585 16-jan 22 24 9
5 584 16-jan 23 25 10
6 583 16-jan 24 26 11
7 582 16-jan 25 27 12
8 581 15-jan 26 28 13
9 580 15-jan 27 29 14
10 579 15-jan 28 30 15
11 578 15-jan 29 31 16
12 577 14-jan 30 32 17y6m
13 576 14-jan 31 33
14 575 14-jan 32 34
15 574 14-jan 33 35
16 573 13-jan 34 36
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 7

17 572 13-jan 35 37
18 571 13-jan 36 38
19 570 13-jan 37 39
Amasis 20 1 569 12-jan 38 40
21 2 568 12-jan 39 41
22 3 567 12-jan 40 42
4 566 12-jan 41 43
5 565 11-jan 42 44
6 564 11-jan 43 45
7 563 11-jan 44 46
8 562 11-jan 45 47
9 561 10-jan 46 48
10 560 10-jan 47 49
11 559 10-jan 48 50
12 558 10-jan 49 51
13 557 9-jan 50 52
14 556 9-jan 51 53
15 555 9-jan 52 54
16 554 9-jan 53 55
17 553 8-jan 54 56
18 552 8-jan 55 57
19 551 8-jan 56 58
20 550 8-jan 57 59
21 549 7-jan 58 60
22 548 7-jan 59 61
23 547 7-jan 60 62
24 546 7-jan 61 63
25 545 6-jan 62 64
26 544 6-jan 63 65
27 543 6-jan 64 65y10m 0
28 542 6-jan 65 1
29 541 5-jan 66 2
30 540 5-jan 67 3
31 539 5-jan 68 4
32 538 5-jan 69 5
33 537 4-jan 70 6
34 536 4-jan 71 7
35 535 4-jan 71y4m 8
36 534 4-jan 9
37 533 3-jan 10
38 532 3-jan 11
39 531 3-jan 12
40 530 3-jan 13
41 529 2-jan 14
42 528 2-jan 15
43 527 2-jan 16
Psammetichus III 1 44 526 2-jan 17
Cambyses II 2 5 525 1-jan 18
3 6 524 1-jan (19y)
4 7 523 1-jan

Several historical synchronisms with the Egyptian chronology are anchored on

astronomical data as lunar eclipses:
! The partial eclipse in year 7 of Cambyses II (tablet BM 33066) may be dated 523 BCE
July 16/17 [magnitude = 0.54] and the total eclipse 522 BCE January 9/10. 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)
8 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

describes eclipses in years 1-4 of Cambyses II, dated by astronomy 529-526 BCE22. A
diary (VAT 4956)23 contains numerous astronomical conjunctions in years 37 and 38 of
Nebuchadnezzar dated from astronomy in 568 and 567 BCE. An astronomical journal
(BM 38462)24 list some lunar eclipses in the years 1 to 27 of Nebuchadnezzar which are
dated from 604 to 578 BCE. Other dated lunar eclipses25 are these of: year 1 and 2 of
Merodachbaladan (March 19/20 721 BCE, March 8/9 and September 1/2 720 BCE);
year 5 of Nabopolassar (April 21/22 621 BCE); year 2 of !ama#-#uma-ukîn (April 10/11
666 BCE); year 42 of Nebuchadnezzar (March 2/3 562 BCE).
! Cambyses II defeated Egypt in his 5th year, month 2 (May -525), which is also dated
year 2, month 5, of Psammetichus III (May -525).
! According to the biography of Adad-Guppi26, 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 stele27 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)28 and Adad-Guppi's
stele, the temple of Harran was destroyed in the year 16 of Nabopolassar.
! 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 eponyms29 and the period 648-609
by a prosopography of its eponyms30.
! 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 four synchronisms, since the year 3 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 I31.
Chronology of the Saite period:
Pharaoh Reign (from Apis) Length of reign Highest year Synchronism with:
Psammetichus I 02/663-01/609 54 years 54 year 6 of Assurbanipal
Necho II 02/609-10/594 15 years 10 months 16 year 17 of Nabopolassar
Psammetichus I 11/594-01/588 6 years 1 month 7
Apries 02/588-12/570 19 years 17
Apries/ Amasis 01/569-12/567 [3 years co-regency] [3]
Amasis 01/569-10/526 43 years 10 months 44
Psammetichus III 11/526-04/525 6 months 2 year 5 of Cambyses II

22 P.J. HUBER, S. DE MEIS – Babylonian Eclipse Observations from 750 BC to 1 BC

Milano 2004 Ed. Mimesis pp. 94-96.
23 A.J. SACHS, H. HUNGER - Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia vol. I

Wien 1988 Ed. Akademie der Wissenschaften (n° -567).

24 H. HUNGER - Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia vol. V n° 6

Wien 2001 Ed. Akademie der Wissenschaften pp. 27-30,396.

25 F.R. STEPHENSON - Historical Eclipses and Earth's Rotation

Cambridge 1997 Ed. Cambridge University Press pp. 99-100, 151-152, 166-167, 206.
26 J.B. PRITCHARD - Ancient Near Eastern Texts

Princeton 1969 Ed. Princeton University Press p. 560,561.

27 P.A. BEAULIEU – The Reign of Nabonidus, King of Babylon 556-539 B.C.

in: Yale Near Eastern Research 10 (1989) n°2.

28 J.J. GLASSNER – Chroniques mésopotamiennes n°22

Paris 1993 Éd. Belles Lettres pp. 193-197.

29 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.
30 S. PARPOLA – The Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire

Helsinki 1998 University of Helsinki pp. XVIII-XX.

31 A.K. GRAYSON – The Chronology of the Reign of Ashurbanipal

in: Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie 0 (1980) pp. 227-245.
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 9

BCE Assyrian king Assyrian eponym Babylonian king

Egyptian king
708 5 Sargon II !ama"-upahhir 14 [7] 2 Sargon II
707 6 Chabataka/ !a-A""ur-dubbu 15 [8] 3
706 7 Taharqa Mutakkil-A""ur 16 [9] 4
705 8 Nashru-Bêl 17 [10] 5
704 9 Sennacherib Nabû-deni-epu" 1 18 (Sargon II)
703 10 Nuh"aya 2 19 Marduk-zakir-!umi II
702 11 Nabû-lê’i 3 1 Bêl-ibni
701 12 Hananu 4 2
700 13 Metunu 5 3
699 14 Bêl-"arrani 6 1 A!!ur-nâdin-!umi II
698 15 Arda-Mulissu Sulmu-"arri 7 [1] 2
697 16 Nabû-dûru-usur 8 [2] 3
696 17 !ulmu-bêli 9 [3] 4
695 18 A""ur-bêlu-usur 10 [4] 5
694 19 Ilu-issîya 11 [5] 6
693 20 Iddin-ahhê 12 [6] 1 Nergal-u!êzib
692 21 Zazâya 13 [7] 1 Mu!êzib-Marduk
691 22 Bêl-êmuranni 14 [8] 2
690 23 Nabû-kênu-usur 15 [9] 3
689 1 Taharqa Gihilu 16 [10] 4
688 2 Iddin-ahhê 17 [11] 1 Sennacherib
687 3 Sin-ahhê-erîba 18 [12] 2
686 4 Bêl-êmuranni 19 [13] 3
685 5 A""ur-da’’inanni 20 [14] 4
684 6 Manzernê 21 [15] 5
683 7 Mannu-kî-Adad 22 [1] 6
682 8 Nabû-sharru-usur 23 [2] 7
681 9 Nabû-ahhê-êre" 24 [3] 8
680 10 Esarhaddon Danânu 1 1 Esarhaddon
679 11 Issi-Adad-anênu 2 2
678 12 Nergal-"arru-u"ur 3 3
677 13 Abî-râmu 4 4
676 14 Banbâ 5 5
675 15 Nabû-ahhê-iddin 6 6
674 16 !arru-nûrî 7 7
673 17 Atar-ilu 8 8
672 18 Nabû-bêlu-u!ur 9 [1] 9
671 19 Kanûnâyu 10 [2] 10
670 20 !ulmu-bêli-la"me 11 [3] 11
669 21 !amash-kâ"id-ayâbi 12 [4] 12
668 22 Assurbanipal Marlarim 1 1 A!!urbanipal
667 23 Gabbaru 2 1 "ama!-!uma-ukîn
666 24 Kanûnâyu 3 2 Tablet BM 45640
665 25 Mannu-kî-"arri 4 3
664 26 Thebes devastated !arru-lû-dâri 5 4
663 1 Psammetichus I Bêl-na’id 6 5 1
662 2 Tab-"ar-Sîn 7 6 2
661 3 Arba’ilâyu 8 7 3
660 4 Girsapûnu 9 8 4
659 5 Silim-A""ur 10 9 5
658 6 !a-Nabû-"û 11 10 6
657 7 Lâ-bâ"i 12 11 7
656 8 Milkî-râmu 13 12 8
655 9 Amyânu 14 13 9
654 10 Assur-nâsir 15 14 10
653 11 Assur-ilâya 16 15 11
652 12 Assur-dûru-u!ur 17 16 12
651 13 Sagabbu 18 17 13
650 14 Bêl-Harrân-"adûa 19 18 14
649 15 Ahu-ilâya 20 19 15
648 16 Belshunu 21 20 16
647 17 Nabû-nadin-ahi 22 1 Kandalanu 17
10 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

646 18 Nabû-shar-ahhe"u 23 2 18
645 19 !ama"-da’’inanni of Babylon 24 3 19
644 20 Nabû-sharru-u!ur 25 4 20
643 21 Nabû-sharru-u!ur of Marash 26 5 21
642 22 !ama"-da’’inanni of Que 27 6 22
641 23 A""ur-garu’a-nere 28 7 23
640 24 !arru-metu-uballit 29 8 24
639 25 Mu"allim-A""ur 30 9 25
638 26 A""ur-gimilli-tere 31 10 26
637 27 Zababa-eriba 32 11 27
636 28 Sin-"arru-u!ur 33 12 28
635 29 Bel-lu-dari 34 13 29
634 30 Bullutu 35 14 30
633 31 Upaqa-ana-Arbail 36 15 31
632 32 Tab-sil-Sin 37 16 32
631 33 Adad-remanni 38 17 33
630 34 Salmu-"arri-iqbi 39 18 34
629 35 A!!ur-etel-ilâni Nabû-"arru-u!ur [40] 1 19 35
628 36 ?Nur-salam-sarpi? [41] 2 20 36
627 37 Marduk-"arru-u!ur [42] 3 21 Sin-!um-li!ir 37
626 38 Sin-!ar-i!kun Iqbi-ilani / Marduk-remanni 04 22) Sin-!ar-i!kun 38
625 39 Sin-"arru-u!ur 1 1 Nabopolassar 39
624 40 Kanunaiu 2 2 40
623 41 A""ur-matu-taqqin 3 3 41
622 42 Daddî 4 4 42
621 43 Bel-iqbi 5 5 43
620 44 Sa’ilu 6 6 44
619 45 Mannu-ki-ahhe 7 7 45
618 46 Nabû-sakip 8 8 46
617 47 Assur-remanni 9 9 47
616 48 Bel-ahu-u!ur 10 10 48
615 49 Sin-alik-pani 11 11 49
614 50 Pa"i 12 12 50
613 51 Nabû-tapputi-alik 13 13 51
612 52 Shamash-"arru-ibni 14 14 52
611 53 A!!ur-uballit II Nabû-mar-"arri-u!ur 1 15 53
610 54 Nabû-"arru-u!ur 2 16 Temple of Harran wrecked 54
609 1 Necho II Gargamisaiu 3 [0] 17 Stele of Adad-Guppi 1 55
608 2 [1] 18 2 56
607 3 [2] 19 3 57
606 4 [3] 20 4 58
605 5 [4] 21 5 59
604 6 1 Nebuchadnezzar II 6 60
603 7 2 7 61
602 8 3 8 62
601 9 4 9 63
600 10 5 10 64
599 11 6 11 65
598 12 7 12 66
597 13 8 13 67
596 14 9 14 68
595 15 10 15 69
594 16 1 Psammetichus II 11 16 70
593 2 12 17 71
592 3 13 18 72
591 4 14 19 73
590 5 15 20 74
589 6 16 21 75
588 1 7 Apries 17 22 76
587 2 18 23 77
586 3 19 24 78
585 4 20 25 79
584 5 21 26 80
583 6 22 27 81
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 11

582 7 23 28 82
581 8 24 29 83
580 9 25 30 84
579 10 26 31 85
578 11 27 32 86
577 12 28 33 87
576 13 29 34 88
575 14 30 35 89
574 15 31 36 90
573 16 32 37 91
572 17 33 38 92
571 18 34 39 93
570 19 35 40 94
569 [20] 1 Amasis 36 41 95
568 [21] 2 37 Tablet VAT 4956 42 96
567 [22] 3 38 43 97
566 4 39 44 98
565 5 40 45 99
564 6 41 46 100
563 7 42 47 101
562 8 0 43 48 102
561 9 1 Amel-Marduk 49 103
560 10 0 2 50 104
559 11 1 Neriglissar 51 105
558 12 pap. Louvre 7848 Cyrus II [1] 2 52 106
557 13 [2] 3 53 107
556 14 [3] 4 54 108
0 0 Lâbâ!i-Marduk
555 15 stele of Hillah
[4] 1 Nabonidus 109
554 16 [5] 2 110
553 17 [6] [0] 3 Belshazzar 111
552 18 [7] [1] 4 112
551 19 [8] [2] 5 113
550 20 [9] [3] 6 114
549 21 [10] [4] 7 115
548 22 [11] [5] 8 116
547 23 [12] [6] 9 117
546 24 [13] [7] 10 118
545 25 [14] [8] 11 119
544 26 [15] [9] 12 120
543 27 [16] [10] 13 121
542 28 [17] [11] 14 122
541 29 [18] [12] 15 123
540 30 [19] [13] 16 124
539 31 [20] [14] 17 Fall of Babylon 125
538 32 Cyrus II 1 [1] Ugbaru 126
537 33 21 Cambyses II 127
536 34 3 [2] 128
535 35 4 [3] 129
534 36 5 [4] 130
533 37 6 [5] 131
532 38 7 [6] 132
531 39 8 [7] 133
530 40 9 [8] 134
529 41 Cambyses II 1 135
528 42 2 136
527 43 3 137
526 1 44 4 138
1 Psammetichus III
525 2 2 Stele IM.4187 5
5 Cambyses II
524 3 6 6
523 4 7 Tablet BM 33066 7
522 5 8 8
12 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

Year 44 of Amasis, the last of his reign, should be dated 526 BCE. The solution
proposed by Parker of a year 45 of Amasis dated 526 BCE is not possible, as recognized by
Depuydt32 who prefers to date the death of Amasis in 527 BCE in his 44th year, assuming
that the 4th year of Cambyses (at 526 BCE) 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, was to know
the history of his country): the throne of Egypt would have been vacuum for one year after
the disappearance of Psammetichus III, from May 526 to May 525 BCE, when Cambyses
was recognized Pharaoh. In fact, 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 years33 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 Manetho34: 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
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 to 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 Udjahorresnet35, 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
32 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.
33 The reign of Amasis is counted from the revolt after the attack of Nebuchadnezzar II in -582.
34 W.G. WADDELL - Manetho (Loeb Classical Library 350)

Cambridge 1956 Ed. Harvard University Press pp. 169-177.

35 P. BRIANT - Histoire de l'empire perse. De Cyrus à Alexandre

Paris 1996 Éd. Fayard pp. 63-65.

 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 13

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 at month 5, day
29, year 5 of Cambyses, died on month 9, day 4, year 4 of Darius I and was buried
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
bull) gives the following dates in the Julian calendar: May 29, 525, August 31, 518 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 be completed in early May 525 as the last text referring to
Psammetichus III (below) is dated I Peret year 2 (May 525). That Psammetichus III
was the son of Amasis is confirmed by the stele No. 309 of the Serapeum (Louvre). It
is indeed Psammetichus III because one of the contracting parties cited in the text is
still alive in the year 35 of
Darius I36.
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 text (Papyrus Rylands IX 21), 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 4th year of Cambyses37. 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 year38. The source said Darius I in the
3rd year of his reign would have 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 in 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 to foreign
leaders39, what was Cambyses before his conquest (though, after 525 BCE, Persian
leaders will be considered as Pharaohs).
The year 5 of Cambyses (in 525 BCE) began on Nisan 1st, that is March 28, and
Year 44 of Amasis (in 526 BCE) began on Thot 1st, that is January 2. Thus, as the reign of
Psammeticus III was 6 months length, his year 1 (in 526 BCE) began near November and
his year 2 began on Thot 1st, that is January 1st, 525 BCE, and ended around April.
36 H. GAUTHIER – Le livre des rois d'Égypte
Le Caire 1915 Éd. Institut Français d'Archéologie Orientale pp. 131-132).
37 P. BRIANT - Histoire de l'empire perse. De Cyrus à Alexandre

Paris 1996 Éd. Fayard p. 92.

38 A. KUHRT - The Persian Empire

London 2010 Ed. Routeledge pp. 124-125.

39 R.A. PARKER - Persian and Egyptian Chronology

in: The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures LVIII/3 (1941) pp. 298-301.
14 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

King Egypt BCE Persia King

Amasis 43 525 11 VIII 3 Cambyses II
12 IX
Pap. Rylands IX 44 526 1 X
1 2 XI Egypt conquest
3 XII
---------------------------------- 4 I 4
5 II
6 III
7 IV
8 V
9 VI
10 VII
Psammetichus III 1 11 VIII
12 IX
2 2 525 1 X
2 XI
3 XII
4 I 5
stele IM.4187 5 5 II Egypt defeated
6 III
7 IV
8 V
9 VI
10 VII
11 VIII
12 IX
6 3 524 1 X
2 XI
3 XII
4 I 6
5 II
6 III
7 IV
8 V
9 VI
10 VII
11 VIII
12 IX
7 4 523 1 X
2 XI
3 XII
4 I 7
5 II
6 III
7 IV
8 V
9 VI
10 VII
11 VIII
12 IX
8 5 522 1 X
2 XI
3 XII 0 Cambyses II / Bardiya
4 I 8 1
5 II 0 Bardiya
6 III
7 IV
8 V
9 VI
10 VII 0 Nebuchadnezzar III / Bardiya
11 VIII
12 IX 0 0 Darius I / Nebuchadnezzar III
1 521 1 X
2 XI [0] Darius I / Nebuchadnezzar IV
3 XII
4 I 1 1
5 II
6 III
7 IV
8 V
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 15

It is interesting to notice that the Israelite chronology fits very well the previous
chronologies (Egyptian, Assyrian and Babylonian). For example, the text of 2Kings 18:9 in
which the fall of Samaria began in the 4th year of King Hezekiah, that is, the 7th year of
Hoshea, that Shalmaneser the king of Assyria came against Samaria and began to lay siege
to it, which lasted 3 years. According to a Babylonian chronicle the fall of Samaria began
on the 5th and last year of Shalmaneser V and was achieved 3 years later on the 2nd year of
Sargon II (Annals of Sargon). According to the Bible, there are many dated synchronisms
between kings of Judah (Ahaz, Hezechiah) and kings of Israel (Pekah, Hosheah) with
Assyrian kings (Tiglath-pileser III, Salmanazar V, Sargon II, Sennacherib) and one
Babylonian king (Merodachbaladan II).
In addition, there were four dated lunar eclipses during this period: one on year 1 of
Nabû-mukîn-zêri (April 9, 731 B.C.E.), one on year 1 of Merodachbaladan II (March 19,
721 B.C.E.) and two on his year 2 (March 8, September 1st, 720 B.C.E.).
ASSYRIA BABYLONIA JUDEA ISRAEL EGYPT reference
796 15 Adad-nêrari III 14 Azariah Jeroboam 2Ki 14:23
795 16 15 /[Uziah] 28 2Ki 15:1,2
794 17 16 29 2Chr 26:3
793 18 17 30
792 19 18 31
791 20 19 32
790 21 20 33
789 22 21 34
788 23 22 35
787 24 23 36
786 25 24 37
785 26 25 38
784 27 26 39
783 28 Shalmaneser IV 27 40
782 1 [0] Bar Ga’ah 28 41 Pi(ank)e
781 2 [1] (Pulu) 29 1 Zekariah 1 2Ki 14:29
780 3 [2] 30 [2] 2
779 4 [3] 31 [3] 3
778 5 [4] 32 [4] 4
777 6 [5] 33 [5] 5
776 7 [6] 34 [6] 6
775 8 [7] 35 [7] 7
774 9 [8] 36 [8] 8
773 10 A!!ur-dân III 37 [9] 9
772 1 [10] 38 [10] 10 2Ki 15:8
771 2 [11] 39 [11]Shallum 11 2Ki 15:13
770 3 [12] Erîba-Marduk 40 1Menahem 12 2Ki 15:17
769 4 [13] 1 41 1 13
768 5 [14] 2 42 2 14
767 6 [15] 3 43 3 15
766 7 [16] 4 44 4 16 (Isa 10:5-8)
765 8 [17] 5 45 5 (Pulu) 17 2Ki 15:19-20
764 9 [18] 6 46 6 18
763 10 (total solar eclipse) 7 47 7 19 Bur-Sagale
762 11 [20] 8 48 8 20
761 12 [21] 9 Nabû-#um-i#kun 49 9 21
760 13 [22] 1 50 10 Pekayah 22 2Ki 15:22-23
759 14 [23] 2 51 1 23
758 15 [24] 3 52 Jotham 2 Pekah 24 2Ki 15:27-33
757 16 [25] 4 1 1 25
756 17 [26] 5 2 2 26
755 18 A!!ur-nêrari V 6 3 3 27
16 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

754 1 [28] 7 4 4 28
753 2 [29] 8 5 5 29
752 3 [30] 9 6 6 30
751 4 [31] 10 7 7 31
750 5 [32] 11 8 8 32
749 6 [33] 12 9 9 33
748 7 [34] 13 Nabû-nâsir 10 10 34
747 8 [35] 1 11 11 35
746 9 [36] 2 12 12 36
745 10 [0] 3 13 13 37
744 1Tiglath-pileser III 4 14 14 1 Osorkon IV
743 2 5 15 15 2 (= So)
742 3 6 16 16 3
741 4 7 1 Ahaz 17 17 4 2Ki 16:1,7-10
740 5 [1] Shalmaneser V 8 2 18 18 5 2Chr 28:16
739 6 [2] 9 3 19 19 6 2Ki 16:5,6
738 7 [3] 10 [4] 20 20 Hoshea 7 2Ki 15:27-30
737 8 [4] 11 [5] [1] 8
736 9 [5] 12 6 [2] 9
735 10 [6] 13 7 [3] 10
734 11 [7] 14 Nabû-nâdîn-zêri 8 [4] 11 2Ki 16:7-9
733 12 [8] 1 9 [5] 12
732 13 [9] 2 Nabû-mukîn-zêri 10 [6] 13
731 14 [10] 1 (lunar eclipse April 9) 11 [7] 14
730 15 [11] 2 12 [8] 15
729 16 [12] 3 Pulu 13 [9] 16 2Ki 17:1
728 17 [14] 1 14 1 [10] 17
727 18 [15] 2 Ulûlaiu 15 2 [11] 18
726 1 Shalmaneser V 1 (Shalmaneser V) 16 Ezechias 3 [12] 19 2Ki 18:1
725 2 2 1 4 [13] 20
724 3 3 2 5 [14] 21
723 4 4 3# 6 [15] 22 #(alliance) 2Ki 17:2-5
722 5 Sargon II 5 Merodachbaladan II 4 7 [16] 23 2Ki 18:9
721 1 1 (lunar eclipse March 19) 5 8 [17] 24
720 2 Fall of Samaria 2 (March 8; September 1st) 6 9 [18] 25 2Ki 18:10
719 3 3 7 [19] 26
718 4 4 8 [20] 27
717 5 5 9 [21] 28
716 6 6 10 [22] 29
715 7 #(alliance) 7 11 [23] 30 #(alliance)
714 8 -[1] Sennacherib 8 12 [24] 31
713 9 -[2] 9 13 [25] 32
712 10-[3] Ashdod Lakish 10 (failed alliance) 14 [26] 1 Chabataka Isa 36:1; 39:1
711 11-[4] taken 11 15 [27] 2 /Taharqa 1
710 12-[5] 12 Sargon II 16 [28] 3 2
709 13-[6] 1 17 [29] 4 3
708 14-[7] 2 18 [30] 5 4
707 15-[8] 3 19 [31] 6 5
706 16-[9] 4 20 [32] 7 6
705 17 Sennacherib 5 Sennacherib 21 [33] 8 7
704 1 1 22 [34] 9 8
703 2 2 Bêl-ibni 23 [35] 10 9
702 3 1 24 [36] 11 10
701 4 2 25 [37] 12 11
700 5 3 A##ur-nâdin-#umi II 26 [38] 13 12
699 6 1 27 [39] 14 13
698 7 [1] Arda-Mulissu 2 28 [40] 15 14
697 8 [2] 3 29 [41] 16 15
696 9 [3] 4 1 Manasseh [42] 17 2Ki 21:1
695 10 [4] 5 2 [43] 18
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 17

694 11 [5] 6 3 [44] 19

693 12 [6] 1 Nergal-u#ezib 4 [45] 20
692 13 [7] 1 Mu#ezib-Marduk 5 [46] 21
691 14 [8] 2 6 [47] 22
690 15 [9] 3 7 [48] 23
689 16 [10] 4 8 [49] 1 Taharqa
688 17 [11] 1 Sennacherib 9 [50] 2
687 18 [12] 2 10 [51] 3
686 19 [13] 3 11 [52] 4
685 20 [14] 4 12 [53] 5
684 21 [15] 5 13 [54] 6
683 22 [1] Esarhaddon 6 14 [55] 7
682 23 [2] 7 15 [56] 8
681 24 [3] 8 16 [57] 9
680 1 Esarhaddon 1 Esarhaddon 17 [58] 10
679 2 2 18 [59] 11
678 3 3 19 [60] 12
677 4 4 20 [61] 13
676 5 5 21 [62] 14
675 6 6 22 [63] 15
674 7 7 23 [64] 16
673 8 (Manasseh deported) 8 (2Chr 33:11) 24 [65] 17 Ezr 4:2 Isa 7:8,9
672 9 [1] A##urbanipal 9 25 18 (Israel deported into Assyria)
671 10 [2] 10 26 19
670 11 [3] 11 27 20
669 12 [4] 12 28 21
668 1 A!!urbanipal 1 A##urbanipal 29 22
667 2 1 !ama#umaukin 30 23
666 3 2 (lunar eclipse April 10) 31 24 BM 45640
665 4 3 32 25
664 5 (Thebes sacked 4 (Nah 3:8) 33 26 Ezr 4:10
663 6 5 34 1 Psammetichus I
662 7 6 35 2
661 8 7 36 3
660 9 8 37 4
659 10 9 38 5
658 11 10 39 6
657 12 11 40 7
656 13 12 41 8
655 14 13 42 9
654 15 14 43 10
653 16 15 44 11
652 17 16 45 12
651 18 17 46 13
650 19 18 47 14
649 20 19 48 15
648 21 20 Kandalanu 49 16
647 22 1 50 17
646 23 2 51 18
645 24 3 52 19
644 25 4 53 20
643 26 5 54 21
642 27 6 55 Amon 22 2Ki 21:1
641 28 7 1 23 2Ki 21:19
640 29 8 2 Josias 24 2Ki 22:1
639 30 9 1 25
638 31 10 2 26
637 32 11 3 27
636 33 12 4 28
635 34 13 5 29
18 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

634 35 14 6 30
633 36 15 7 31
632 37 16 8 32
631 38 17 9 33
630 39 18 10 34
629 1 A!!ur-etel-ilâni 19 11 35
628 2 [41] 20 12 36
627 3 [42] 21 13 37
626 4 Sin-!ar-i!kun 22 Nabopolassar 14 38
625 1 1 15 39
624 2 2 16 40
623 3 3 17 41
622 4 4 18 42
621 5 5 Lunar eclipse (22 April) 19 43 Almagest V,14
620 6 6 20 44
619 7 7 21 45
618 8 8 22 46
617 9 9 23 47
616 10 10 24 48
615 11 11 25 49
614 12 12 26 50
613 13 13 27 51
612 14 A!!ur-uballit II 14 Nineveh destroyed 28 52 Nah 3:15-19
611 1 15 29 53
610 2 16 30 54
609 3 Battle of Harran 17 BM 21901 31 Joiaqim 1 Necho II 2Ki 22:1;23:36
608 End of Assyria 18 1 2

BABYLONIA JUDEA EGYPT reference

610 16 30 54
609 3 Battle of Harran 17 [0] Joiaqim 31 0 1 Necho II 2Ki 22:1;23:36
608 18 [1] 1 1 2
607 19 [2] 2 2 3
606 20 [3] 3 3 4
605 Nebuchadnezzar 21 1 4 4 5 Battle of Karkemish Jer 25:1;46:2
604 12 5 5 6
603 23 6 6 7
602 34 7 7 8
601 Birth of Darius the 45 8 8 0 9 Joiaqim vassal of Dan 5:31
600 Mede (Harpagus) 56 9 9 1 10 Nebuchadnezzar 2Ki 24:1
599 67 10 10 2 11
598 BM 21946 78 Zedekiah 11 11 3 12 Exile of Joiakîn Jer 52:28
597 89 1 12 1 13 2Chr 36:9,10 2Ki 24:12
596 9 10 2 13 2 14
595 10 11 3 14 3 15
594 11 12 4 15 4 16
593 12 13 5 16 5 1 Psammetichus II
592 13 14 6 17 6 2
591 14 15 7 18 7 3
590 15 16 8 19 8 4
589 16 17 Jer 52:4 9 20 9 5 Siege of Jerusalem Ezk 24:1
588 Jubilee violated 17 18 50 10 21 10 6/1 Apries Jer 32:1
587 18 19 1 Temple destroyed 11 22 11 2 Exile of the people Jer 52:1,12,29
586 Ezk 26:1-12 19 20 2 1 23 12 3 1st year of exile Ezk 33:21
585 20 21 3 Dan 2:1 2 24 13 4
584 21 22 4 3 25 14 5
583 Dan 4:29 22 23 5 4 26 15 6 Last exile Jer 52:30
582 23 24 6 5 27 16 7
581 24 25 7 6 28 17 8
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 19

580 25 26 8 7 29 18 9
579 26 27 9 8 30 19 10
578 27 28 10 9 31 20 11
577 (7 years of madness) 28 29 11 10 32 21 12
576 29 30 12 11 33 22 13
575 30 31 13 12 34 23 14
574 (Tyre, siege of 13 years) 31 32 14 13 35 24 15
573 Against Apion 1:156 32 33 15 14 36 25 16 Ezk 40:1
572 33 34 16 15 37 26 17
571 34 35 17 16 38 27 18 Ezk 29:12-20
570 35 36 18 17 39 28 19
569 36 37 19 18 40 29 1 20 Amasis
568 VT 4956 (eclipse) 37 38 20 19 41 30 2 21 Jer 43:10,13
567 (Egypt attacked) 38 39 21 20 42 31 3 22 Death of Apries
566 39 40 22 21 43 32 4 1 Egypt desolated 40 years Jer 44:30
565 40 41 23 22 44 33 52
564 41 42 24 23 45 34 63
563 42 43 25 24 46 35 74
562 Amêl Marduk 43 26 25 47 36 85
561 1 27 26 48 37 9 6 Jehoiachin liberated Jer 52:31
560 Neriglissar 2 28 27 49 10 7
559 (Cyrus II Persian king) 1 29 28 50 11 8
558 2 30 29 51 12 9
557 3 31 30 52 13 10
556 La ba shi- Mar duk 4 32 31 53 14 11
555 Nabonidus 1 33 32 54 15 12
554 2 34 33 55 16 13
553 Belshazzar 3 0 35 34 56 17 14
552 4 1 36 35 57 18 15 Dan 7:1
551 5 2 37 36 58 19 16
550 Harpagus Median king 6 3 38 37 59 20 17 Dan 8:1,20-21
549 vassal of Cyrus II 7 4 39 38 60 21 18
548 8 5 40 39 61 22 19
547 9 6 41 40 62 23 20
546 10 7 42 41 63 24 21
545 11 8 43 42 64 25 22
544 12 9 44 43 65 26 23
543 13 10 45 44 66 27 24
542 14 11 46 45 67 28 25
541 15 12 47 46 68 29 26
540 16 13 48 47 69 30 27
539 Fall of Babylon 17 14 Cyrus II 48 70 31 28 Jer 25:11,12
538 Freedom year 1 1 50 49 32 29 Is 43:1,3; 45:1
537 2 50 33 30
536 3 51 34 31 Dan 10:1
535 4 52 35 32
534 5 53 36 33
533 6 54 37 34
532 7 55 38 35
531 8 56 39 36
530 90 Cambyses II 57 40 37
529 1 58 41 38
528 2 59 42 39
527 3 60 43 40 Ezk 29:12-16
526 4 61 1 44 Psammetichus III
525 5 62 2 Fall of Egypt
524 6 63
523 Lunar eclipse 16 July 7 64 BM 33066
522 08 Darius I 65
521 1 66
20 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

520 2 67
519 3 68
518 4 69 50 End of Temple's desolation Zek 7:1-5
517 5 70 1 New jubilee cycle Dan 9:2
516 6 2
515 7 3
514 8 4
513 9 5
512 10 6
511 11 7
510 12 8
509 13 9
508 14 10
507 15 11
506 16 12
505 17 13
504 18 14
503 19 15
502 Lunar eclipse 19 Nov. 20 16 Almagest IV:9
501 21 17
500 22 18
499 23 19
498 24 20
497 25 21
496 26 0 Xerxes I 22
495 27 1 23
494 28 2 24
493 29 3 25 Vashti repudiated Est 1:3
492 30 4 26
491 Lunar eclipse 25 Apr. 31 5 27 Almagest IV:1
490 32 6 28
489 33 7 29 Wedding of Xerxes Est 2:16-17
488 34 8 30
487 35 9 31
486 36 10 32
485 Babylonian revolt 11 33 Ezr 4:6
484 Est 2:21-3:7 12 34 Est 3:7-10
483 13 35
482 14 36
481 15 37
480 16 38
479 17 39
478 18 40
477 19 41
476 20 42
475 Lunar eclipse Jun. 26 0 21 Artaxerxes I 43 BM 32234
474 Lunar eclipse Dec. 20 1 44
473 2 45
472 3 46
471 4 47
470 5 48
469 6 49
468 7 50 1st jubilee celebrated Ezr 7:1-8,24
467 8 1
466 6 2
465 10 3
464 11 4
463 12 5
462 13 6
461 14 7
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 21

460 15 8
459 16 9
458 17 10
457 18 11
456 19 12
455 20 13 1 Beginning of 483 years Dan 9:24-27
454 21 14 2 (483 = 69x7) Neh 2:1-9
453 22 15 3
452 23 16 4
451 24 17 5
450 25 18 6
449 26 19 7
448 27 20 8
447 28 21 9
446 29 22 10
445 30 23 11
444 31 24 12
443 32 25 13 Inspection of Nehemiah Neh 5:14
442 33 26 14
441 34 27 15
440 35 28 16
439 36 29 17
438 37 20 18
437 38 31 19
436 39 32 20
435 40 33 21
434 41 0 Darius B 34 22
433 42 1 35 23
432 [] 2 36 24
431 [] 3 37 25
430 [] 4 38 26
429 [] 5 39 27
428 [] 6 40 28
427 [] 7 41 29
426 [] 8 42 30
425 50 0 Xerxes II 43 31
424 0 51 Darius II 44 32
423 1 45 33
422 2 46 34
421 3 47 35
420 4 48 36
419 5 49 37
418 6 50 38
417 7 1 39
416 8 2 40
415 9 3 41
414 10 4 42
413 11 5 43
412 12 6 44
411 13 7 45
410 14 8 46
409 15 9 47
408 16 10 48
407 17 11 49 (49 = 7x7) (Dan 9:25)
406 18 12 50 Jerusalem city achieved Neh 12:22-43
405 19 0 Artaxerxes II 13 51 (inauguration)
404 1 14 52
403 2 15 53
402 3 16 54
401 4 17 55
22 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

MESOPOTAMIAN CHRONOLOGY ON THE PERIOD 1133-609

The Mesopotamian chronology of this period is reconstructed using the number of

Assyrian eponyms (1 a year) and the length of Babylonian reigns (#) combined with the set
of synchronisms among Assyrian and Babylonian kings in Annals:
ASSYRIAN KING # Reign BABYLONIAN KING # Reign JUDEAN RULER # Reign
A##ur-rê#-i#i I 18 1133-1115 Ninurta-nâdin-#umi 6 1133-1127 Eli (Philistines) 40 1162-1122
Tiglath-pileser I 39 1115 - Nebuchadnezzar I 22 1127-1105 Samson 20 1122-1102
Enlil-nâdin-apli 4 1105-1101 Sons of Samuel 5 1102-1097
-1076 Marduk-nâdin-ahhê 18 1101-1083 Saul 40 1097 -
A#ared-apil-Ekur 2 1076-1074 Marduk-#apik-zêri 13 1083-1070 -1057
A##ur-bêl-kala 18 1074-1056 Adad-apla-iddina 22 1070-1048 David 40 1057 -
Erîba-Adad II 2 1056-1054 Marduk-ahhê-erîba 1 1048-1047
!am#î-Adad IV 4 1054-1050 Marduk-zêr-[…] 12 1047-1035
A##urna!irpal I 19 1050-1031 Nabû-#um-libur 8 1035-1027 -1017
Shalmaneser II 12 1031-1019 Simbar-#ipak 18 1027-1009 Solomon 40 1017 -
A##ur-nêrârî IV 6 1019-1013 Ea-mukîn-zêri 1 1009-1008
A##ur-rabi II 41 1013 - Ka##u-nâdin-ahi 2 1008-1006
Eulma#-#akin-#umi 17 1006 -989
Ninurta-kudurri-u!ur I 3 989-986
!iriki-#uqamuna 1 986-985
-972 Mâr-bîti-apla-u!ur 5 985-980 -977
A##ur-rê#-i#i II 5 972-967 Nabû-mukîn-apli 36 980-944 Roboam 17 977-960
Tiglath-pileser II 32 967-935 Ninurta-kudurri-u!ur II 3 944-943 Abiyam 3 960-957
A##ur-dân II 23 935-912 Mâr-bîti-ahhê-iddin 943- ? Asa 41 957-916
Adad-nêrârî II 21 912-891 !ama#-mudammiq ? -900 Jehosaphat 25 916-891
Tukultî-Ninurta II 7 891-884 Nabû-#um-ukîn I 12 900-888 Jehoram 8 893-885
A##urna!irpal II 26 884-859 Nabû-apla-iddina 33 888-855 [Athaliah] 6 885-879
Shalmaneser III 35 859-824 Marduk-zâkir-#umi I 36 855-819 Joas 40 879-839
!am#î-Adad V 13 824-811 Marduk-balâssu-iqbi 6 819-813 Amasiah 29 839-810
Adad-nêrârî III 28 811-783 Bâba-ah-iddina 813- ? Uziah 52 810 -
Shalmaneser IV 10 783 - 5 unknown kings ?
Ninurta-apla-[…] ?
-773 Marduk-apla-u!ur ? -770
A##ur-dân III 18 773-755 Erîba-Marduk 9 770-761 -758
A##ur-nêrârî V 10 755-745 Nabû-#um-i#kun 13 761-748 Jotham 16 758-742
Tiglath-pileser III 18 745 - Nabû-na!ir 14 748-734 Ahaz 16 742 -
Nabû-nâdin-zêri 2 734-732
Nabû-#um-ukîn II 1 732-731
Nabû-mukîn-zêri 2 731-729
-727 Tiglath-pileser III Pûlu 2 729-727 -726
Shalmaneser V 5 727-722 Shalmaneser V Ulûlaiu 5 727-722 Ezechias 29 726 -
Sargon II 17 722 - Merodachbaladan II 12 722-710
-705 Sargon II 5 710-705
Sennacherib 24 705 - Sennacherib 2 705-703
Marduk-zakir-#umi II 0 703
Bêl-ibni 3 703-700 -697
A##ur-nâdin-#umi 6 700-694 Manasseh 55 697 -
Nergal-u#ezib 1 694-693
Mu#ezib-Marduk 4 693-689
-681 Sennacherib 8 689-681
Esarhaddon 12 681-669 Esarhaddon 12 681-669
A##urbanipal 42 669-627 !ama#-#um-ukîn 40 668-648 -642
A##ur-etel-ilâni 4 630 - Kandalanu 21 648 - Amon 2 642-640
Sin-#um-li#ir -627 Josias 31 640 -
-626 Sin-#ar-i#kun 1 627-626
Sin-#ar-i#kun 14 626-612 Nabopolassar 21 626 -
A##ur-uballi" II 3 612-609 -605 -609
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 23

MESOPOTAMIAN CHRONOLOGY ON THE PERIOD 1799-1133

Fifteen royal chronicles40 make it possible to partially reconstruct41 the Babylonian

and Kassite chronologies42:
n° KASSITE KING Reign # King Highest BABYLONIAN KING Reign #
Lists date
Sûmû-abum 1799-1785 14
Sûmû-la-Il 1785-1749 36
Sâbium 1749-1735 14
Apil-Sîn 1735-1717 18
Sîn-muballi! 1717-1697 20
Hammurabi 1697-1654 43
1 Ganda# 1661-1635 26 [2]6 Samsu-iluna 1654 - 38
2 Agum I 1635-1613 22 22 -1616
3 Ka#tilia# I 1613-1591 22 22 Abi-e#u# 1616-1588 28
4 U##i 1591-1583 8 8 Ammiditana 1588 - 37
5 Abiratta# 1583-1567 [16]
6 Ka#tilia# II 1567-1551 [16] -1551
7 Urziguruma# 1551-1535 [16] Ammi"aduqa 1551-1530 21
8 Harba#ihu 1535-1519 [16] Samsuditana 1530 - 31
9 Tiptakzi 1519-1503 [16] -1499
10 Agum II 1503-1487 [16] "Babylon's restoration" 1498 - 41
11 Burna-Buria# I 1487-1471 [16]
12 Ka#tilia# III 1471-1455 [16] -1457
13 Ulam-Buria# 1455-1439 [16] 1457 -
14 Agum III 1439-1423 [16]
15 Kada#man-Harbe I 1423-1407 [16]
16 Kara-inda# 1407-1391 [16]
17 Kurigalzu Ier 1391-1375 [16]
18 Kada#man-Enlil I 1375-1360 15 15
19 Burna-Buria# II 1360-1333 27 27
20 Kara-#arda# 1333 0 0
21 Nazi-Buga# 1333 0 0
22 Kurigalzu II 1333-1308 25 [25] 24
23 Nazi-Marutta# 1308-1282 26 26 24
24 Kada#man-Turgu 1282-1264 18 18 17
25 Kada#man-Enlil II 1264-1255 9 [10 (+x)] 8 [9?]
26 Kudur-Enlil 1255-1246 9 [6] 9
27 !agarakti-#uria# 1246-1233 13 13 13
28 Ka#tilia#u IV 1233-1225 8 8 8
[Tukulti-Ninurta I] [1225-1224] [1] [1]
29 Enlil-nâdin-#umi 1225-1224 1 1,5 1
30 Kada#man-Harbe II 1224-1223 1 1,5 1
31 Adad-#uma-iddina 1223-1217 6 6 0
32 Adad-#uma-u!ur 1217-1187 30 30 13
33 Meli-!ipak 1187-1172 15 15 12
34 Marduk-apla-iddina 1172-1159 13 13 6
35 Zababa-#uma-iddina 1159-1158 1 1
36 Enlil-nâdin-ahi 1158-1155 3 3
Marduk-kabit-a##e#u 1155-1141 14
Itti-Marduk-bala"u 1141-1133 8

40 J.J. GLASSNER – Chroniques mésopotamiennes (n°22)

Paris 1993 Éd. Belles Lettres pp. 137-179.
41 F. JOANNÈS - Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne

Paris 2001 Éd. Robert Laffont pp. 164,522,565,758.

F. JOANNÈS - La Mésopotamie au 1er millénaire avant J.C.
2000 Paris Ed. Armand Colin pp. 186-187.
42 J.A. BRINKMAN – Materials and Studies for Kassite History Vol. I

Chicago 1976 Ed. The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago pp. 6-34.
24 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

After the fall of the city, the Babylonian dynasty was replaced by the Kassites in the
north, and by the Sealand dynasty in the south, whose beginning is not well known43. It
begins with Ganda#, a contemporary of Samsu-iluna, and it is precisely dated from
Kada#man-Enlil I. Synchronisms44 with Kassites kings (highlighted reigns) are as follows:
! The reigns of Kassites kings are mentioned in a Babylonian king list45 very incomplete
(Babylonian King List A) which assigns to these 36 kings a total of 576 years, implying
an average duration of 16 years by reign. The first four reigns have respective durations
of: [1]6/[2]646, 22, 22 and 8 years.
! The appearance of Ulam-Buria# coincides with the end of the restoration of Babylon
(year 41 of "recovery").
! A tablet (VAT 1429) describes the Kassite king Agum II as buka"u "Duke" of Babylon,
who is actually the first Kassite king of Babylon47.
! Alliance between Assyrian Puzur-A##ur III (1491-1467) and Kassite Burna-Buria# I.
! Alliance between Assyrian A##ur-bêl-ni#e#u (1411-1403) and Kassite Kara-inda#.
! A Babylonian chronicle mentions, in the year 9 of Samsu-iluna, an assault by Kassite
troops, likely led by Ganda#, the first Kassite king48.
The reign of Kassite King Ganda#, obtained from average durations, is dated 1661-
1635 and coincides with the reign of the Assyrian king Samsu-iluna (1654-1616). The reign
of Kassite King Agum II (1503-1487) is consistent with a fall of Babylon in -1499. If one
accepts the total duration of 576 years, the reign of Kassite King Ganda# had to start
around 1731 (= 1155 + 576) instead of 1651, which would support the Middle
Chronology, but in this case the average length of reigns would increase from 16 to 32
years (from Abiratta# to Agum II), but no known reign has reached such a length, in
addition, this contradicts the average value of 16 years indicated by the Chronicle (this
value is consistent with those of the known reigns). Finally, according to the Middle
Chronology, interruption of Babylonian kingdoms would have been complete for a century
(from 1595 to 1495), which is very unlikely:
MIDDLE CHRONOLOGY
KASSITE KING Reign Length BABYLONIAN KING Reign Length
Ganda# 1760-1734 [2]6 Samsu-iluna 1750 - 38
Agum I 1734-1712 22 -1712
Ka#tilia# I 1712-1690 22 Abi-e#u# 1712 - 28
U##i 1690-1682 8 -1684
Abiratta# 1682-1650 [32]* Ammiditana 1684-1647 37
Ka#tilia# II 1650-1618 [32]* Ammi"aduqa 1647-1626 21
Urziguruma# 1618-1586 [32]* Samsuditana 1626-1595 31
Harba#ihu 1586-1554 [32]*
Tiptakzi 1554-1522 [32]* * -
Agum II 1522-1490 [32]* "Babylon's restoration" 1495 - 41
Burna-Buria# I 1490-1470 [20]
Ka#tilia# III 1470-1454 [16] -1454
Ulam-Buria# 1454-1438 [16] 1454 -
Agum III 1438-1422 [16]
43 F. JOANNÈS - Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne
Paris 2001 Éd. Robert Laffont pp. 164.
44 K. GRAYSON – Texts from Cuneiform Sources Volume V Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles (ABC 20, 21)

Winona Lake 2000 Ed. Eisenbrauns pp. 157-170.

45 J.B. PRITCHARD - Ancient Near Eastern Texts

Princeton 1969 Ed. Princeton University Press p. 272).

46 J.A. BRINKMAN – Materials and Studies for Kassite History Vol. I

Chicago 1976 Ed. The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago p. 128.
47 J. FREU, M. MAZOYER – Des origines à la fin de l'Ancien royaume hittite

Paris 2007Éd. L'Harmattan p. 114.

48 A. GOETZE – The Kassites and near Eastern Chronology

in: Journal of Cuneiform Studies 18:4 (1964) p. 97.

 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 25

According to a Babylonian Chronicle49: he did battle against him [...] their corpses, the sea
[...] he changed and Samsu-iluna [...] Iliman attacked and [brought about] the defeat of [his] army.
Albishi, son of Samsu-iluna, set out to conquer Iliman. He decided to dam the Tigris. He dammed the
Tigris but did not capture Iliman. At the time of Samsu-ditana the Hittites marched against Akkad. Ea-
gamil, king of the Sealand, f[led] to Elam. After he had gone, Ulamburiash, brother of Kashtiliash (III),
the Kassite, mustered his army and conquered the Sealand. He was master of the land. Agum (III), son of
Kashtiliash (III), mustered his army and marched to the Sealand. Thus, after the fall of Babylon [in
1499 BCE], Agum II a Kassite King of Chaldean origin began to dominate northern
Babylonia (land of Akkad) and the Sealand Kings, perhaps of Sumerian origin, began to
dominate southern Babylonia (land of Sumer) up to Ulam-Buria# who defeated them
[around 1450 BCE]. A Synchronistic King List50 and a tablet (KAV 216, Assur 14616c) very
difficult to read give the following list: Samsud[itana reigned 31 years]. 11 kings, the cycle of
[Babylon; they reigned 300 years]. The cycle of Babylon [changed, her kingship went to Sealand]. At
Urukuga, 60 [years] Ilimalum, king; 56 [years] Itti-ili-nibi; 36 [years] Damqi-ili"u; 15 [years] I"kibal;
26 [years] !u""i, brother; 55 [years] Gulki"ar; 50 [years] Pe"galdarame"; 28 [years] Ayadaragalama, his
son, same; 26 [years] Akurulana; 7 [years] Melamkukurra; 9 [years] Ea-gam[il]; 368 [years] 11 kings,
dynasty of Urukuga. If one adds the sum of these abnormally long reigns (368 years), Iliman,
the first king, should have reigned from 1818 to 1758, which is not possible according to
the synchronisms (highlighted) . In fact, co-regencies were common among the kings of
Sealand dynasty since the year 7 of Pe#galdarame# is also dated to Ayadaragalama and his
year 29 is followed by the accession of Ayadaragalama51. Kassite and Sealand dynasties
being close in time and space, it is more likely to have an average of 16 years of reign.
AKKADIAN SUMERIAN
BABYLONIAN Reign # ISINIAN Reign #
Sâbium 1749 - 14 Iter-pi#a 1740-1736 [4]
-1735 Ur-dukuga 1736-1732 [4]
Apil-Sîn 1735-1717 18 Sîn-mâgir 1732-1721 11
Sîn-muballi! 1717-1697 20 Damiq-ilî#u I 1721-1698 23
KASSITE Reign # Hammurabi 1697-1654 43 SEALAND Reign #
Ganda# 1661-1635 [2]6 Samsu-iluna 1654 - 38 Ilum-maz-ilî 1654 - 60
Agum I 1635-1613 22 -1616
Ka#tilia# I 1613-1591 22 Abi-e#u# 1616-1588 28 -1594
U##i 1591-1583 8 Ammiditana 1588 - 37 Itti-ili-nîbî 1594-1578 [16]
Abiratta# 1583-1567 [16] Damqi-ili#u II 1578-1562 [16]
Ka#tilia# II 1567-1551 [16] -1551 I#kibal 1562-1546 [16]
Urziguruma# 1551-1535 [16] Ammi"aduqa 1551-1530 21 !u##i 1546-1530 [16]
Harba#ihu 1535-1519 [16] Samsuditana 1530 - 31 Gulki#ar 1530-1514 [16]
Tiptakzi 1519-1503 [16] -1499 Pe#galdarame# 1514-1498 [16]
Agum II 1503-1487 [16] 300 Ayadaragalama 1498-1482 [16]
Burna-Buria# I 1487-1471 [16] Akurulana 1482-1466 [16]
Ka#tilia# III 1471 - [16] Melamkukurra 1466-1459 7
-1455 Ea-gam[il] 1459 - 9
Ulam-Buria# 1455-1439 [16] -1450
Agum III 1439-1423 [16]
Kada#man-Harbe I 1423-1407 [16]
Kara-inda# 1407-1391 [16]
Kurigalzu Ier 1391-1375 [16]
Kada#man-Enlil I 1375-1360 15
49 K. GRAYSON – Texts from Cuneiform Sources Volume V Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles
Winona Lake 2000 Ed. Eisenbrauns pp. 156.
50 J.B. PRITCHARD - Ancient Near Eastern Texts

Princeton 1969 Ed. Princeton University Press pp. 271-272.

51 S. DALLEY – Babylonian Tablets from the First Sealand Dynasty in the Schøyen Collection

in: Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology Vol. 9 (CDL Press, 2009) pp. 4-10.
26 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

Several synchronisms with Assyrian reigns on the period 1400-1200 confirm the
previous chronology, taking into account that before A##ur-dân I the Assyrians years are
lunar (354 days) and no longer solar (365 days), making it necessary to reduce Assyrian
reigns of 1 year every 33 years [1 year = 33x(365 - 354 days)]52. The following synchronisms
highlight this discrepancy:
! The Assyrian king Tukulti-Ninurta I replaced the Babylonian king Ka#tilia#u IV (1233-
1225) by Enlil-nâdin-#umi (1225-1224) during the 19th eponym53 Ina-A##ur-#umi-a!bat54.
The first eponymous being the year of accession, the 19th eponym refers to year 18.
! The disappearance of the Mitannian empire (Hanigalbat) is dated in year 6/7 of
Shalmaneser I since there are at least 5 eponyms before this victory55 and 7 at most56.
But peace and alliance concluded by Hattusili III in the year 21 of Ramses II and the
tightening of links between Hattusili III and Kada#man-Turgu (1282-1264) were
responses to the threat on the Eastern border of Hatti following the disappearance of
Hanigalbat57, which implies the following synchronism: the year 21 of Ramses II fits the
year 7 of Shalmaneser I. Thus the accession of Kada#man-Enlil II (1264-1255) matches
the year 19 of Ramses II58 (1283 = 1264 + 19). Gasche proposed to advance the
Babylonian chronology of 5 years to calibrate the Egyptian chronology with an
accession of Ramses II in 127959, instead of 1283. This solution is not acceptable,
because if the reign of Enlil-nâdin-ahi is shifted by 5 years (1153-1150 instead of 1158-
1155), this contradicts the accuracy of the Assyrian eponyms and Babylonian
chronology on this period. Consistent with this reliability, the most logical choice is to
anchor the Egyptian chronology on Babylonian chronology and not vice versa.
! The letter EA 1660 d'A##ur-uballi" I is addressed to the pharaoh Aÿ (1327-1323).

n° ASSYRIAN KING gap

72 Erîba-Adad I 1391-1364 27 EGYPTIAN KING
73 A##ur-uballi" I 1364-1328 36
Aÿ 1327-1364 3<
74 Enlil-nêrârî 1328-1318 10
75 Arik-dên-ili 1318-1306 12
76 Adad-nêrârî I 1306-1274 32 BABYLONIAN KING
77 Salmanazar I 1274-1267 30
(year 7) 1267-1244 Kada#man-Enlil II 1264-1255 3
78 Tukultî-Ninurta I 1244-1226 37
(year 18) 1226-1207 Enlil-nâdin-#umi 1225-1224 2
79 A##ur-nâdin-apli 1207-1203 4
80 A##ur-nêrârî III 1203-1197 6
81 Enlil-kudurri-u!ur 1197-1192 5
82 Ninurta-apil-Ekur 1192-1179 13
83 A##ur-dân Ier 1179-1133 46
52 There is an exact difference of 6 days = 33x(29,530588x12) - 32x(365,24219). In fact, (Nx1,0306889) lunar years = N solar years.
53 W. RÖLLING – Eponymen in den Mittelassyrischen Dokumenten aus Tall Seh Hamad/Dur-Katlimmu
in: Zeitschrift für Assyrologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie 94:1 (2004) pp 18-51.
54 E.C. C ANCIK-KIRSCHBAUM – Mittelassyrischen aus Tall Seh Hamad

in: Berichte der Ausgrabung Tall Seh Hamad 4:1 (1996) pp.
55 A. HARRAK – Assyria and Hanigalbat

Hildesheim 1987 Georg Olms Verlag pp. 117-120, 157-162.

56 Y. B LOCH – The Order of Eponyms in the Reign of Shalmaneser I

in: Ugarit-Forschungen Band 40/2008 (Münster 2009) pp. 143-178.

57 J. FREU – De la confrontation à l'entente cordiale: Les relations assyro-hittites

in: Hittite Studies in Honor of Harry A. Hoffner Jr. (2003) Ede. Eisenbrauns pp. 102,103.
58 W.A. WARD - The Present Status of Egyptian Chronology

in: Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 288 (1991) pp. 55,56.
59 H. GASCHE, J.A. ARMSTRONG, S.W. COLE – Dating the Fall of Babylon

in: Mesopotamian History and Environment (1998) Chicago p. 65.

60 W.L. MORAN - Les lettres d'El Amarna

in: LIPO n°13 Paris 1987 Éd. Cerf pp. 106-109.

 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 27

ASSYRIAN CHRONOLOGY ON THE PERIOD 1799-1133

The exact period of the adoption of the lunisolar calendar (Babylonian-inspired) by

the Assyrians is difficult to determine because of the small number of documents.
According to the Assyrian Royal List, eponyms appeared at the time of Sulili (around -1950)
and were recorded from Êri#u I (1873-1834). The Assyrian dating system is based on the
principle: 1 eponym = 1 year, the paleo-Assyrian calendar had to appear at that time. The
names of 12 months of the year were influenced by other neighboring calendars (Sumerian
and Akkadian)61 and stabilized only in the eponymy of $abil-kenum62 (around -1650):
SUMERIAN AKKADIAN JULIAN PALEO-ASSYRIAN ASSYRIAN
I BÀRA-ZAG-GAR Nisannu March/April i !ip’im #ippu
II GUD-SI-SÀ2 Ayyaru April/May ii Qarrâtim Qarrâtu
III SIG4-GA Simanu May/June iii Kanwarta Kalmartu
IV !U-NUMUN- NA Du'ùzu June/July iv Te’inâtim dSin

V NE-IZI-GAR Abu July/August v Kuzallu Kuzallu

VI KIN-dINNINA Ulûlû August/Sept. vi Allanâtim Allanâtu
VII DU6- KÙ3 Ta#rîtu September/Oct. vii Bêltî-ekallim Belêt-ekalli
VIII APIN- DU8-A Ara%samna October/Nov. viii !a sarratim !a sarrâte
IX GAN- GAN-E Kisilimu November/Dec. ix Narmak A""ur "a kînâtim !a kênâte
X AB- BA-È3 Tebêtu December/Jan. x Ma""urili Mu##ur ilâni
XI ZIZ2-AM !abâtu Jannuary/Feb. xi Ab "arrâni Abû #arrâni
XII !E-KIN- KU5 Addâru February/March xii #ubur $ubur

Under the increasing influence of international relations, caused by new political

and trade links, the Assyrian calendar is gradually replaced by the standard Mesopotamian
calendar established by the Babylonian king Samsu-iluna (1654-1616). However two major
issues stand out these calendars: 1) the Babylonian contracts are frequently dated: "day D,
month M, year Y of King-so" while the Assyrian contracts are sometimes (1% of cases)63
dated: "day D, month M, eponym so and so", 2) the Assyrians, unlike the Babylonians,
never mention astronomical observations, which implies a lack of synchronization between
the solar year (365 days) with 12 lunar months (354 days) through intercalary months. This
fundamental difference can be detected by 1) military campaigns that took place (almost)
always outside of the rainy season, between the spring equinox (month I of the Babylonian
calendar) and the autumnal equinox (month VII) and 2) a statement of contracts in some
seasons64 (period 1800-1700): spring (vernal equinox on April; 5) winter (winter solstice on
January 5;) harvest (summer solstice on July 8); the end of harvest and the beginning of
plowing in autumn (autumn equinox on October 7).
Contracts of Assyrian merchants sometimes associate a month to a season. The one
sent to Ilî-âLUM (dated to -1800) parallels the month of Assur Narmak with spring,
another addressed to !u-Hubur (from the same period) juxtaposes the term of the year
with the harvest65 (July). Another contract, whose Iddin-Suen is the guarantor, put the
month of #ip’im at harvest time66. A second set of contracts and letters, when !am#î-Adad
61 Paleo-Assyrian months are preceded by the Akkadian word wara" "lunation" and Assyrian months by the Sumerian word ITI "month".
62 M.E. COHEN - The Cultic Calendars of the Ancient Near East
Maryland 1993 Ed. CDL Press pp. 237-247, 297-305.
63 C. MICHEL – Correspondance des marchands de Kani# au début du II e millénaire avant J.-C.

in: Littératures Anciennes du Proche-Orient 19 (Cerf, 2001) pp. 547-548.

64 K.R. VEENHOF, J. EIDEM – Mesopotamia. The Old Assyrian Period

in: Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 160/5 (2008) pp. 234-245.

65 R. LABAT – Unusual Eponymy-datings from Mari and Assyria

in: Revue d'Assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale 74:1 (1974) pp. 15-20.

66 J. G. DERCKSEN – The beginning of the Old Assyrian year

in: Nouvelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires 2011 N°4 pp. 90-91.

28 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

annexed Mari (1697-1680), shows that there was a lag of 5 months between the Amorite
calendar of !am#î-Adad (who died in early #ip’im)67 and the one of Mari68. Some of these
texts69 put in connection the month of #ip’im with the harvest (in July) and the month of
Te’inâtim with the harvest of late figs (in September / October):
N° MARI N° !AM!Î-ADAD (*)70 N° PALEO-ASSYRIAN JULIAN #
VI i° #ubur ("ilib) i* Niqmum (vii) i !ip’im July (harvest) 8
VII ii° Kinûnum ii* Kinûnum (viii) ii Qarrâtim August 9
VIII iii° Dagan iii* Tamhîrum (ix) iii Kanwarta September 10
IX iv° Lîlîatum iv* Nabrûm (x) iv Te’inâtim October (figs) 11
X v° Bêlet-bîrî v* Mammîtum (xi) v Kuzallu November 12
XI vi° Kiskissum vi* Mana (xii) vi Allanâtim December 1
XII vii° Ebûrum vii* Ayyarum (i) vii Bêltî-ekallim January (winter) 2
I viii° Urâ"um viii* Niggalum (ii) viii !a sarratim February 3
II ix° Malkânum ix* Maqrânum (iii) ix Narmak A""ur "a kînâtim March 4
III x° La""um x* Du'uzum (iv) x Ma""urili April (spring) 5
IV xi° Abum xi* Abum (v) xi Ab "arrâni May 6
V xii° #ibirtum xii* Tîrum (vi) xii #ubur June 7

These equivalences show that the paleo-Assyrian calendar was not synchronized
with the spring equinox as the Babylonian calendar was. #ip’im marks the beginning of the
Assyrian year, since a multi-year contract is completed in conjunction with this month (July
at that time) and another (TPAK 1, 98) reports that it is the revival (edâ") [of the year].
Since no Assyrian contract is completely dated, it is not possible to establish an exact
correspondence between months, in addition, the two series (in -1800 and -1700), being
separated by a period of about 100 years, the coincidence with the seasons is fortuitous
since 98 solar years = 101 lunar years.
The following inscription71 of Tiglath-pileser I (1115-1076) containing a double
date can be used to synchronize the Assyrian calendar: I crossed the Euphrates 28 times, 2 times
in one year, in pursuit of the Arameans a"lamû (...) I captured the palaces of Babylon which belonged to
Marduk-nadîn-ahhê king of Karduniash72, and I burned them. In the eponym of A""ur-"umu-ere" (and) in
the eponym of Ninuaya, 2 times, I drove a battle of chariots online against Marduk-nadîn-ahhê king of
Karduniash, and I defeated him (...) Month of Hibur, equivalent of the (Babylonian) month of Kislev, 18th
day [eponym] of Taklak-ana-A""ur. Another inscription says: I crossed the Euphrates [27?] times, 2
times in one year, in pursuit of the Arameans a"lamû (...) Month of Kuzallu, 13th day, eponym of
Ninuaya son of A""ur-aplu-li"ir. Depending on the date at the end of the first inscription, the
Babylonian calendar had become the reference. Assyrian kings performing a traditional
military campaign each year, the mention of 28 crossings of the Euphrates, including 2 in
one year, implies to date this inscription shortly after the year 1088 (= 1115 - 27). Thus, at
that time (in -1088), the 12th month of the Assyrian calendar ($ubur) matched the 9th
month of the Babylonian calendar (Kislev), which confirms their desynchronization. The
Babylonian year began on 1st Nisan, or April 12 in -1088, when the Assyrian year began on
1st #ippu or January 13 in -1088.
67 C. MICHEL – Correspondance des marchands de Kani# au début du II e millénaire avant J.-C.
in: Littératures Anciennes du Proche-Orient 19 (Cerf, 2001) pp. 309-310, 376-377.
68 D. CHARPIN, N. ZIEGLER – Florilegium marianum V. Mari et le Proche-Orient à l'époque amorrite

in: Mémoires de N.A.B.U. 6 (2003) pp. 155-156.

69 J. G. DERCKSEN – Weeks, Months and Years in Old Assyrian Chronology

in: Bibliotheca Orientalis LXVII 3/4 (2011) pp. 234-243.

70 Months inside brackets refer to the old numbering assuming a beginning of the Assyrian year at the winter solstice. The calendar of

Mari begins at Urâ"um (= (w)ar"um "month") and ends at Ebûrum ("Harvest"), to the autumn equinox (October).
71 A.K. GRAYSON – Assyrian Royal Inscriptions part 2

Wiesbaden 1976 Ed. Otto Harrassowitz pp. 24-29.

72 A synchronic list places the event in the 2nd year of Marduk-nadin-ahhê (1101-1083).
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 29

The presence of a double date in the reign Tiglath-pileser I shows that the new
calendar adopted by the Assyrians (the Babylonian calendar) was not yet familiar. This
change, which occurred shortly before the reign of Tiglath-pileser I, implies a
desynchronization of eponyms since the beginning of the Assyrian year began on 1st #ippu
while the Babylonian year began on 1st Nisan. The eponym marking each new Assyrian year
was therefore chosen from the month of Nisan and not from the month of #ippu, for
practical reasons. Indeed, the equivalence: 1 year = 1 eponym = 1 campaign, is generally
verified but, for reasons of stewardship (the army on campaign had to be fed, in addition,
the movements should be done on practicable grounds) military campaigns took place
outside the rainy season, between the spring equinox (month I) and the autumnal equinox
(month VII). The completion of two campaigns in one year is indeed exceptional. The
number of years (Nb) is equal to the number of campaigns minus one:
month Nb year King / eponym
-1089 1 X i #ippu 26 [25] Tiglath-pileser I
2 XI ii Qarrâtu
3 XII iii Kalmartu
4 I iv dSin
[26] Ninuaya son of A""ur-aplu-li"ir
5 II v Kuzallu
6 III vi Allanâtu
7 IV vii Belêt-ekalli
8 V viii !a sarrâte
9 VI ix !a kênâte
10 VII x Mu##ur ilâni
11 VIII xi Abû #arrâni
12 IX xii $ubur
-1088 1 X i #ippu 27
2 XI ii Qarrâtu
3 XII iii Kalmartu
4 I iv dSin
[27] Taklak-ana-A""ur
5 II v Kuzallu
6 III vi Allanâtu
7 IV vii Belêt-ekalli
8 V viii !a sarrâte
9 VI ix !a kênâte
10 VII x Mu##ur ilâni
11 VIII xi Abû #arrâni
12 IX xii $ubur (inscription at the end of the former Assyrian year)
-1087 1 X i #ippu 28
2 XI ii Qarrâtu
3 XII iii Kalmartu
4 I iv dSin
[28] (Eponym)
5 II v Kuzallu
6 III vi Allanâtu
7 IV vii Belêt-ekalli
8 V viii !a sarrâte
9 VI ix !a kênâte
10 VII x Mu##ur ilâni
11 VIII xi Abû #arrâni
12 IX xii $ubur

The beginning of regnal years is different depending on dating systems (in 1088
BCE): 1st Nisan (12 April) with accession for Babylonians and for Judeans, 1st #ippu (13
January) with accession for Assyrians, 1st Thot (22 May) without accession for Egyptians,
1st Tishri (5 October) without accession for Israelites (the accession year is the length time
between the accession and the first year of reign, "with accession" means that the accession
year is reckoned as "year 0" and "without accession" means that the accession year is
reckoned as "year 1"). Thus, according to the Assyrian calendar of this period, year 1 of
Tiglath-pileser I, based on eponyms, not 1st #ippu, began on 1st Nisan (April -1114, and
accession year in -1115).
30 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

It is noted that during the reign of A##ur-dân I (1179-1133) eponyms still begin 1st
Nisan, instead of 1 #ippu, and that Assyrian lunar years without intercalation remain the
norm. However, as the Babylonian year began on 1st Nisan (shortly after the spring
equinox) Assyrian years thus coincide with Babylonian lunar years (with intercalation). The
period between A##ur-dân I and Tiglath-pileser I is therefore transitional.
The previous system of dating is still used during the reign of A##ur-dân I. Indeed,
th
the 46 year of A##ur-dân I began to the eponym Pi#qîya (April -1133) then Ninurta-
tukultî-A##ur reigned from months !a kênâte to Abu #arrâni (from February to April -
1132), then Mutakkil-Nusku briefly (few days), then year 1 of A##ur-re#-i#i I which began
to the eponym Sîn-#êya. There is a gap73 between the eponyms that start on 1st Nisan and
Assyrian year beginning on 1st #ippu, June 16 in -1132:
month Assyrian year King eponym
-1133 1 X viii !a sarrâte 45 A!!ur-dân I
2 XI ix !a kênâte
3 XII x Mu##ur ilâni
4 I xi Abû #arrâni 46 Pi"qîya
5 II xii $ubur
6 III i #ippu
7 IV ii Qarrâtu
8 V iii Kalmartu
9 VI iv dSin

10 VII v Kuzallu
11 VIII vi Allanâtu
12 IX vii Belêt-ekalli
-1132 1 X viii !a sarrâte
2 XI ix !a kênâte 0 Ninurta-tukultî-A!!ur
3 XII x Mu##ur ilâni
4 I xi Abû #arrâni Mutakkil-Nusku Sîn-"êya
5 II xii $ubur 1 A!!ur-re!-i!i I
6 III i #ippu
7 IV ii Qarrâtu
8 V iii Kalmartu
9 VI iv dSin

10 VII v Kuzallu
11 VIII vi Allanâtu
12 IX vii Belêt-ekalli
-1131 1 X viii !a sarrâte
2 XI ix !a kênâte
3 XII x Mu##ur ilâni
4 I xi Abû #arrâni 2
5 II xii $ubur
6 III i #ippu
7 IV ii Qarrâtu
8 V iii Kalmartu
9 VI iv dSin

The following synchronism shows that before King A##ur-dân I, Assyrian eponyms
started on 1st #ippu, not on 1st Nisan. Actually, the capture of Babylon and the replacement
of its king (Ka#tilia#u IV) are dated to (Ina)-A##ur-#uma-a!bat74, the 19th eponym75 of
Tukultî-Ninurta I, which corresponds to the year 8 of Ka#tilia#u IV (1233-1225) dated 1225
BCE76. The order of eponyms from the capture of Babylon is uncertain77, but the sequence
of eponyms in this period seems to be: Ina-A##ur-#uma-a!bat (No. 18), Ninu’aju (No. 19),
Bêr-nâdin-apli (No. 20), Abi-ili son of Katiri (No. 21), !almanu-#uma-u!ur (No. 22).
73 Y. BLOCH – Solving the Problems of the Assyrian King List: Toward a Precise Reconstruction of the Middle Assyrian Chronology
in: Journal of Ancient Civilizations Vol. 25 (2010, Northeast Normal University), pp. 1-87.
74 E.C. C ANCIK-KIRSCHBAUM – Zu den Eponymenfolgen des 13.Jahrhunderts v. Chr. in Dûr-Katlimmu

in: Berichte der Ausgrabung Tall Seh Hamad 4 (1996) pp. 9-18.
75 H. FREYDANK – Zu den Eponymenfolgen des 13.Jahrhunderts v. Chr. in Dûr-Katlimmu

in: Altorientalische Forschungen 32 (2005) 1 pp. 45-56.

76 The capture of Babylon is shifted by 10 years (in -1215) if it is calibrated on the current Egyptian chronology.
77 Y. B LOCH – The Order of Eponyms in the Reign of Tukultî-Ninurta I

in: Orientalia 79:1 (2010) pp. 1-35.

 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 31

ASSYRIAN EPONYM SON OF RANK YEAR BABYLONIAN KING YEAR

-1242 Tukultî-Ninurta Ier 1st [29]/[0] !agarakti-#uria# 4
-1241 Qibi-A##ur Iba##i-ili 2nd [1] 5
-1240 Mu#allim-Adad !almanu-qarrâd 3nd [2] 6
-1239 Adad-bêl-gabbe King 4th [3] 7
-1238 !unu-qardû 5th [4] 8
-1237 Libur-zanin-A##ur 6th [5] 9
-1236 A##ur-nâdin-apli King 7th [6] 10
-1235 Urad-ilani (?) 8th [7] 11
-1234 Adad-uma’’i 9th [8] 12
-1233 Abattu Adad-#am#i 10th [9] Ka#tilia#u IV 13/0
-1232 Abattu Adad-#umu-lê#ir 11th [10] 1
-1231 A##ur-da’’an 12th [11] 2
-1230 Etel-pî-A##ur Kurbânu 13th [12] 3
-1229 U!ur-namkûr-#arri 14th [13] 4
-1228 A##ur-bêl-ilâni 15th [14] 5
-1227 A##ur-zera-iddina 16th [15] 6
-1226 A##ur-mu#ab#i (?) 17th [16] 7
-1225 Ina-A##ur-#uma-a!bat A##ur-nâdin-#ume 18th [17] Enlil-nâdin-#umi 8/0
-1224 Ninu’aju A##ur-iddin 19th [18]/1 Kada#man-Harbe II 1/0
-1223 Bêr-nâdin-apli 20th [19]/2 Adad-#uma-iddina 1/0
-1222 Abi-ili Katiri 21th [20]/3 1
-1221 !almanu-#uma-u!ur 22th [21]/4 2
-1220 Ellil-nâdin-apli (?) 23th [22]/5 3
-1219 Ka#tilia#u (?) 24th [23]/6 4
-1218 Bêr-i#manni (?) 25th [24]/7 5
-1217 Ilî-padâ (?) A##ur-iddin 26th [25] Adad-#uma-u!ur 6/0
-1216 Qarrad-A##ur (?) A##ur-iddin 27th [26] 1
-1215 Sarniqu (?) 28th [27] 2
-1214 Ninurta-nâdin-apli (?) Bukruni 29th [28] 3
-1213 Urad-Kube (?) A##ur-bel-ilani 30th [29] 4
-1212 Mudammiq-Nusku (?) Iba##i-ili 31th [30] 5
-1211 Kidin-A##ur (?) 32th [31] 6
-1210 Sin-uballi! (?) 33th [32] 7
-1209 Nabu-bela-u!ur (?) 34th [33] 8
-1208 Ri#-A##ur (?) 35th [34] 9
-1207 A##ur-nirari (?) !arri 36th [35] 10
Samedu (?) A##ur-zera-iddina 37th
-1206 A!!ur-nâdin-apli 1st [36]/[0] 11
-1205 2nd [1] 12

Counting reigns by Babylonian scribes seems incorrect since Tukultî-Ninurta I

regimented Babylonia (not reigned) for 7 years, through three successive Viceroys (whose
first two were killed by the King of Elam) or 1.5 years, 1.5 years and 6 years, giving a total
of 9 years78. In fact, the system used is the cause of these differences. The 7 years of
Tukultî-Ninurta I match the 7 eponyms and the 3 years (= 1.5 + 1.5) of the vassal kings
match the 3 eponyms or 2 years reign, because 1.5 year was no sense in the Babylonian
system (the Assyrian year started on 1st #ippu, or March 27 in -1225)79.
78 J.M. MUNN RANKIN – Assyrian Military Power, 1300-1200 B.C.
in: The Cambridge Ancient History Vol. 2 Part 2 (2000, Cambridge University Press), pp. 287-291.
79 N = 1225, (N – 1088)x365,24219 = (141)x12x29,530588 + 72 => 72 + 13 = 85th day of the year = 27 March.
32 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

Month Assyrian [A] [B] King eponym

-1225 1 X x Mu##ur ilâni 17 7 [A] Tukultî-Ninurta I Assyrian
2 XI xi Abû #arrâni [B] Ka!tilia!u IV Babylonian
3 XII xii $ubur
4 I i #ippu 18 8 Ina-A""ur-"uma-a!bat
5 II ii Qarrâtu
6 III iii Kalmartu
7 IV iv dSin
0 (Babylon taken)
8 V v Kuzallu [B] Enlil-nâdin-!umi (Babylonian Viceroy)
9 VI vi Allanâtu
10 VII vii Belêt-ekalli
11 VIII viii !a sarrâte
12 IX ix !a kênâte
-1224 1 X x Mu##ur ilâni
2 XI xi Abû #arrâni
3 XII xii $ubur
4 I i #ippu 19 1 Ninu’aju son of A""ur-iddin
5 II ii Qarrâtu
6 III iii Kalmartu
7 IV iv dSin

8 V v Kuzallu
9 VI vi Allanâtu
10 VII vii Belêt-ekalli
11 VIII viii !a sarrâte
12 IX ix !a kênâte
-1223 1 X x Mu##ur ilâni
2 XI xi Abû #arrâni 0 [B] Kada!man-Harbe II (Babylonian Viceroy)
3 XII xii $ubur
4 I i #ippu 20 1 Bêr-nâdin-apli
5 II ii Qarrâtu
6 III iii Kalmartu

Tukultî-Ninurta I ruled over Babylonia for 7 years from the 19th to the 26th eponym.
Enlil-nâdin-#umi and Kada#man-Harbe II each of them ruled Babylonia for 1.5 years from
the 18th to the 20th eponym. The third pro-Assyrian vassal king, Adad-#uma-iddina, was
subsequently reversed by Babylonian officers at the 26th eponym. The Assyrians would
have liked to impose their candidate Enlil-kudur-u!ur (?), but the Babylonians settled
Adad-#uma-u!ur, freeing themselves from the Assyrian suzerainty.
It is then possible, through the fall of Mitanni, to determine under which Assyrian
king took place the calendar change (without intercalation then with), because it is precisely
dated. This remarkable event (between April and October) is dated in year 7 of
Shalmaneser I and coincides with the accession of Kada#man-Enlil II (-1264), now
between these two events there are 152 eponyms (= 23 + 37 + 4 + 6 + 5 + 13 + 46 +18),
or 152 "years" instead of the 149 solar years (= 1264 - 1115).
ASSYRIAN KING Reign with intercalation Reign without intercalation gap
Shalmaneser I 1274-1267 7 1271-1264 (-1) 3
1267-1244 23 1264-1242
Tukultî-Ninurta I 1244-1227 17 1242-1225 (-1) 2
1227-1207 20 1225-1206
A##ur-nâdin-apli 1207-1203 4 1206-1203 (-1) 1
A##ur-nêrârî III 1203-1197 6 1203-1197 0
Enlil-kudurri-u!ur 1197-1192 5 1197-1192 0
Ninurta-apil-Ekur 1192-1179 13 1192-1179 0
A##ur-dân I 1179-1133 46
Ninurta-tukultî-A##ur 1133 0
Mutakkil-Nusku 1133 0
A##ur-rê#-i#i I 1133-1115 18
Tiglath-pileser I 1115-1076 39

If it were lunar years of 354.36706 days (instead of the solar year of 365.24219
days), the collapse of Mitanni would fall November -1262. As the period between the two
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 33

events is 149 years, the eponyms thus began 1st Nisan from the reign of A##ur-dân I (1179-
1133) instead of 1 #ippu marking the beginning of Assyrian year.
The collapse of Mitanni (called Hanigalbat by the Assyrians) is dated in year 7 of
Shalmaneser I, or during his 8th eponym80 among a set of 30, the latter being Ubru
(correspondence between Babylonian and Assyrian years is approximate)81.
ASSYRIAN EPONYM SON OF RANK regnal BABYLONIAN KING regnal
year year
-1271 Salmanazar Ier 1 [0] Kada#man-Turgu 11
-1270 Mu#ab#i’u-Sibitti (?) 2 [1] 12
-1269 !errîya 3 [2] 13
-1268 A##ur-kâ#id 4 [3] 14
-1267 A##ur-mu#ab#i Iddin-Mêr 5 [4] 15
-1266 A##ur-mu#ab#i Anu-mu#allim 6 [5] 16
-1265 Qibi-A##ur !ama#-a#a-iddina 7 [6] 17
-1264 A##ur-nâdin-#umâte (collapse of Mitanni) 8 [7] Kada#man-Enlil II 18/0
-1263 Abî-ilî A##ur-#umu-lê#er 9 [8] 1
-1262 A##ur-âlik-pâni 10 [9] 2
-1261 Mu#allim-A##ur 11 [10] 3
-1260 Ilî-qarrad (?) 12 [11] 4
-1259 Qibi-A##ur #illi-Marduk 13 [12] 5
-1258 Ina-pî-A##ur-li#lim (?) 14 [13] 6
-1257 Adad-#am#i Adad-#umu-lê#er 15 [14] 7
-1256 Kidin-Sîn Adad-têya 16 [15] 8
-1255 Bêr-#umu-lê#ir 17 [16] Kudur-Enlil 9/0
-1254 A##ur-dammeq Abî-ilî 18 [17] 1
-1253 Bêr-bêl-lîte 19 [18] 2
-1252 I#tar-êri# !ulmanu-qarrâd 20 [19] 3
-1251 Lullâyu Adad-#umu-iddina 21 [20] 4
-1250 A##ur-kettî-îde 22 [21] 5
-1249 Ekaltâyu 23 [22] 6
-1248 A##ur-da’issunu Ululayu 24 [23] 7
-1247 Ri#-Adad (?) 25 [24] 8
-1246 Nabû-bêla-u!ur 26 [25] !agarakti-#uria# 9/0
-1245 Usât-Marduk 27 [26] 1
-1244 Ellil-a#ared 28 [27] 2
-1243 Ittab#i-dên-A##ur 29 [28] 3
Ubru 30
-1242 Tukultî-Ninurta Ier 1 [29]/[0] 4
-1241 Qibi-A##ur Iba##i-ili 2 [1] 5

The reign of Shalmaneser I can be restored through the prosopography of 30

eponyms attributed to him, with the following uncertainties:
! The place of some eponyms (those with?) is not certain.
! It is possible that some eponyms are not canonical, but this possibility is very low.
Indeed, when a eponym died in the year of his eponymy, he was replaced by another
eponym who became canonical. However, among the 84 Assyrian dated reigns (No. 33
to No. 117), nine have a duration of 0 year (overrepresentation due to assassinations),
80 Y. BLOCH – The Order of Eponyms in the Reign of Shalmaneser I
in: Ugarit-Forschungen Band 40/2008 (Münster 2009) pp. 143-178.
81 The 30 eponyms of Shalmaneser I correspond to 30 lunar years and equivalent to around 29 solar years. Thus the accession of

Shalmaneser I fell in -1271 but the accession of Tukultî-Ninurta I fell in -1242.

34 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

one lasted 1 year and one lasted 2 years, giving an average of two dead during his 1st year
of reign out of 84 cases recorded (1 out 40).
! The contract referenced MI 82970 indicating that: a reception of wool, recorded by the scribe
Nabû-Mudammeq, dated 26th day of the month !a-sarrâte, eponymous year of A""ur-nâdin-"umâte,
only specifies that the transaction took place: the day when the king went to Hanigalbat and
that the country of Habriuri revolted. The collapse of Mitanni had therefore take place (just
little?) before this date.
Years of Ramses II's reign started in June (from his accession: 27th day of month
XI°) and Assyrian year began82 on June 5 in -1264.
month [A] [B] [C] [D] [E] King
-1264 1 VII° X viii 19 17 [11?] [6] [3] [A] Ramses II Egyptian
2 VIII° XI ix [B] Kada!man-Turgu Babylonian
3 IX° XII x
4 X° I xi [C] "attuara II Mitannian
18 [4]
5 XI° II xii [D] Salmanazar I Assyrian
6 XII° III i 20 0 [7] [E] !attu!ili III Hittite
7 I° IV ii
8 II° V iii
9 III° VI iv Collapse of Mitanni (Hanigalbat) ?
10 IV° VII v
11 V° VIII vi
12 VI° IX vii
-1263 1 VII° X viii *** *** The collapse of Mitanni just happened
2 VIII° XI ix
3 IX° XII x
4 X° I xi 1 [5] [B] Kada!man-Enlil II
5 XI° II xii
6 XII° III i 21 [8]
7 I° IV ii
8 II° V iii
9 III° VI iv
10 IV° VII v
11 V° VIII vi *** *** Peace treaty between Ramses II and
12 VI° IX vii #attu"ili III
-1262 1 VII° X viii
2 VIII° XI ix
3 IX° XII x
4 X° I xi 2 [6]
5 XI° II xii
6 XII° III i 22 [9]
7 I° IV ii

The system of eponyms is an institution typically Assyrian (bît limmi of A##ur), these
calendars dated by eponyms seem to have had the same type of functioning (no intercalary
month). As the eponyms of Assyria appear in some texts from Hattu#a, the Hittite calendar
should look like the lunar calendar of Assyrian type, but religious festivals occurring at
regular intervals (monthly, annually or on a longer cycle) particularly in spring, beginning of
the Hittite year (as the festival purulli marking the New Year83) and in autumn, it is unclear
whether Hittite kings counted their reigns in solar years (as the Babylonians) or lunar (as
the Assyrians). In his annals, the first 10 years of Hittite king Mur#ili (1322-1295) are
punctuated by seasonal religious festivals84 (and therefore solar).
82 L'année assyrienne lunaire (AL) débute le 13 janvier en -1088, or comme elle se décale de 10,875 jours (= AS – AL) chaque année
solaire, l'année N (>1088) est décalée de (N – 1088 = AS)x10,875 jours par rapport à celle de -1088. Calcul de ce décalage:
(AS)x365,24219 = (AL)x12x29,530588 + J, le nombre J + 13 donne la position du jour dans l'année julienne.
Exemple, si N = 1264, (N – 1088)x365,24219 = (181)x12x29,530588 + 142 => 142 + 13 =155e jour de l'année julienne = 5 juin.
Years of reign in brackets are calculated from the estimated duration of these reigns.
83 H. OTTEN – Ein Text zum Neujahrsfest aus Bo!azköy

in: Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 51 (1956), pp. 101-105.

P. H. J. HOUWINK VAN TEN CATE -Brief Comments on the Hittite Cult Calendar: The Outline of the AN.TA".!UM Festival
in: Kani""uwar, A Tribute to Hans Güterbock (dir. H. A. Hoffner Jr. et G. Beckman), Chicago, 1986.
84 T. BRYCE – The Kingdom of the Hittites

Oxford 2005 Ed. Oxford University Press pp. 190-220.

 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 35

Chronology of Assyrian reigns can therefore be fully reconstructed starting from

A##ur-uballi" II (612-609) up to Êri#u I (No. 33), since all the years of reign between these
two kings are known, being aware that Assyrian years are solar up to A##ur-dân I (1179-
1133) and lunar prior to this king. The durations of four reigns are missing (No. 65, 66, 37,
and 38), but they can be calculated through synchronisms from Assyrian annals that
indicate the exact length between the reconstruction of some famous temples85.
! Shalmaneser I (No. 77), for example, states in his inscriptions that the temple of Assur
(Ehursagkurkurra) was built by U#piya and rebuilt by Eri#u I, then 159 years later by
!am#î-Adad I and 580 years later by himself. Shalmaneser I do not specify the point
used to determine these durations, but Esarhaddon gives a figure of 126 years for the
duration between Eri#u I and !am#î-Adad I, proving that Shalmaneser I included the
33-year reign of !am#î-Adad I in his calculation (159 = 126 +33). The 159 years have
therefore to start at the end of the reign of Eri#u I to the end of the reign of !am#î-
Adad I and 580 years are completed at the beginning of the reign of Shalmaneser I (in
1271 BCE). So there are 421 lunar years ago (421 = 580 - 159) between the reigns of
!am#î-Adad I and Shalmaneser I, or a duration of 409 solar years86, which sets the end
of the reign of !am#î-Adad I in 1680 (= 1271 + 409)
! Tiglath-pileser I (No. 87) states in his annals having rebuilt the temple called Anu-Adad
at the beginning of his reign (in 1115), which was built 641 years earlier by !am#î-Adad
I. These 641 years (= 68 solar + 573 lunar) correspond to 624 (= 68 + 556) solar years,
which dates back the reign of !am#î-Adad I in 1739 (= 1115 + 624) instead of 1712, but
the scribe has probably used a King list with a reign of 40 years instead of 11 for I#me-
Dagan I (since !am#î-Adad I died in the year 17 of Hammurabi and I#me-Dagan I died
in the year 28 this king)87, which reduces the 641 years to 612 (= 641 - 29), or a duration
of 596 solar years, which fixes the beginning of the reign of Samsi-Adad I in 1711 (=
1115 + 596), in good agreement with the previous date of 1712 (= 1680 + 33 - 1).
! Esarhaddon (No. 112) also claims to have rebuilt the temple of A##ur. In an inscription
(Assur A) dated eponym Issi-Adad-anînu (679), at the beginning of his reign, he claims
that 129 years elapsed between the reconstruction of Eri#u I and the one of !am#î-Adad
I, and 434 years later Shalmaneser I has rebuilt again the temple, then 580 years later
Esarhaddon finally rebuilt the temple. The information of Esarhaddon seems accurate.
Indeed, the first term is correct, because it actually falls in the reign of Shalmaneser I
(679 + 580 = 1259). The duration between the beginning of the reign of Esarhaddon
and the end of the reign of !am#î-Adad I is 1014 years (= 580 solar + 434 lunar), which
corresponds to 1001 solar years, that sets the end of the reign of !am#î-Adad I in 1680
(= 679 + 1001). The reign of this king can therefore be set from 1712 to 1680. His
death in the year 17 of Hammurabi allows to anchor it to the Babylonian chronology88.
After his death the documents dated in different calendars allows some synchronisms89.
! The paleo-Assyrian dynasty begins after the fall of Ur90 with king Puzur-A##ur I (No.
30), which enables us to date the fall of this city around -1912 (the average length of an
Assyrian reign is 14 years over all the period).
85 H. GASCHE, J.A. ARMSTRONG, S.W. COLE – Dating the Fall of Babylon
in: Mesopotamian History and Environment (1998) Chicago pp. 57-80.
86 1 solar year = 1 lunar year x 1.0306889 (= 365.24219/12x29,530588).
87 H. GASCHE, J.A. ARMSTRONG, S.W. COLE – Dating the Fall of Babylon

in: Mesopotamian History and Environment (1998) Chicago p. 52.

88 H. GASCHE, J.A. ARMSTRONG, S.W. COLE & V.G. GURZADYAN – A correction to Dating the Fall of Babylon

in: Akkadica 108 (1998) pp.1-4.

89 D.A. BARREYRA FRACAROLI – The Chronology of Zimri-Lim's Reign A Report

in: Aula Orientalis XXIX:2 (2011) pp.185-198.

90 F. JOANNES - Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne

Paris 2001 Éd. Robert Laffont pp. 617-621,823.

36 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

Overview of the period 1954-609:

N° ASSYRIAN KING Reign length # synchronisms
27 Sulili (Zariqum) 1954-1940 [14] First lists of eponyms (lost)
28 Kikkia 1940-1927 [14] (-1)
29 Akia 1927-1913 [14] Fall of Ur (in -1912)
30 Puzur-A##ur I 1913-1900 [14] (-1) Beginning of the Paleo-Assyrian period
31 !alim-ahum 1900-1886 [14]
32 Ilu-#umma 1886-1873 [14] (-1)
33 Êri#u I 1873-1834 40 (-1) 40 First Chronicles
34 Ikunum 1834-1821 14 (-1) 159 (eponym starting on 1st Sippu)
35 Sargon I 1821-1782 40 (-1)
36 Puzur-A##ur II 1782-1774 8
37 Naram-Sîn 1774-1722 [54] (-2)
38 Êri#u II 1722-1712 [10]
39 !am#î-Adad I 1712-1680 33 (-1) year 33 of !am#î-Adad I =
40 I#me-Dagan I 1680-1670 11 (-1) 434 year 17 of Hammurabi
41 A##ur-dugul 1670-1664 6 41* Mut-A#kur/ Rimu-x/ Asîsum
42 A##ur-apla-idi 1664 0
43 Nâ"ir-Sîn 1664 0
44 Sîn-namir 1664 0
45 Ipqi-I#tar 1664 0
46 Adad-"alûlu 1664 0
47 Adasi 1664 0
48 Bêlu-bâni 1664-1654 10
49 Libbaya 1654-1638 17 (-1)
50 !arma-Adad I 1638-1626 12
51 Puzur-Sîn 1626-1615 12 (-1)
52 Bazaya 1615-1588 28 (-1)
53 Lullaya 1588-1582 6
54 !û-Ninûa 1582-1568 14
55 !arma-Adad II 1568-1565 3
56 Êri#u III 1565-1553 13 (-1)
57 !am#î-Adad II 1553-1547 6
58 I#me-Dagan II 1547-1531 16
59 !am#î-Adad III 1531-1516 16 (-1)
60 A##ur-nêrârî I 1516-1491 26 (-1)
61 Puzur-A##ur III 1491-1467 24
62 Enlil-nâ "ir I 1467-1455 13 (-1)
63 Nûr-ili 1455-1443 12
64 A##ur-#adûni 1443-1443 0
65 A##ur-rabi Ier 1443-1433 [10*]
66 A##ur-nâdin-a$$e I 1433-1424 [10*] (-1)
67 Enlil-na "ir II 1424-1418 6
68 A##ur-nêrârî II 1418-1411 7
69 A##ur-bêl-ni#e#u 1411-1403 9 (-1)
70 A##ur-rê’im-ni#e#u 1403-1395 8
71 A##ur-nâdin-a$$e II 1395-1385 10
72 Erîba-Adad I 1385-1358 27 -
73 A##ur-uballi" I 1358-1323 36 (-1)
74 Enlil-nêrârî 1323-1313 10 -
75 Arik-dên-ili 1313-1302 12 (-1)
76 Adad-nêrârî I 1302-1271 32 (-1)
77 Salmanazar I 1271-1259 12 434 eponyms from I"me-Dagan I
1259-1242 18 (-1) 580 452 = 434 + 12
78 Tukultî-Ninurta I 1242-1206 37 (-1)
79 A##ur-nâdin-apli 1206-1203 4 (-1)
80 A##ur-nêrârî III 1203-1197 6 -
81 Enlil-kudurri-u!ur 1197-1192 5 -
82 Ninurta-apil-Ekur 1192-1179 13 -
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 37

83 A##ur-dân I 1179-1133 46 - (eponym starting on 1st Nisan:

84 Ninurta-tukultî-A##ur 1133 0 - as Babylonian intercalation)
85 Mutakkil-Nusku 1133 0 -
86 A##ur-rê#-i#i I 1133-1115 18 -
87 Tiglath-phalazar I 1115-1076 39 -
88 A#ared-apil-Ekur 1076-1074 2 - (Babylonian calendar used)
89 A##ur-bêl-kala 1074-1056 18 -
90 Erîba-Adad II 1056-1054 2 -
91 !am#î-Adad IV 1054-1050 4 -
92 A##urna!irpal I 1050-1031 19 -
93 Salmanazar II 1031-1019 12 -
94 A##ur-nêrârî IV 1019-1013 6 -
95 A##ur-rabi II 1013-972 41 -
96 A##ur-rê#-i#i II 972-967 5 -
97 Tiglath-phalazar II 967-935 32 -
98 A##ur-dân II 935-912 23 -
99 Adad-nêrârî II 912-891 21 -
100 Tukultî-Ninurta II 891-884 7 -
101 A##urna!irpal II 884-859 25 -
102 Salmanazar III 859-824 35 -
103 !am#î-Adad V 824-811 13 -
104 Adad-nêrârî III 811-783 28 -
105 Salmanazar IV 783-773 10 -
106 A##ur-dân III 773-755 18 -
107 A##ur-nêrârî V 755-745 10 -
108 Tiglath-phalazar III 745-727 18 -
109 Salmanazar V 727-722 5 -
110 Sargon II 722-705 17 -
111 Sennacherib 705-681 24 -
112 Assarhaddon 681-669 12 (72) -
113 A##urbanipal 669-627 42 -
[A##ur-etel-ilâni] [630-627] [3] -
114 A##ur-etel-ilâni 627-626 1 -
115 Sin-#ar-i#kun 626-612 14 -
116 A##ur-uballi" II 612-609 3 -

This chronology obtained from Assyrian king lists is confirmed on the period from
Êri#u I (No. 33) to A##ur-dugul (No. 40) thanks to lists of eponyms91, in addition, some
comments associated with eponyms allow to fix several synchronisms, especially the start
and the duration of certain reigns.

No. ASSYRIAN KING year Comments from chronicles Number of

eponyms
33 Êri#u I 40 year 1 eponym !u-I#tar son of Abila (No. 1) 40
34 Ikunum 14 year 1 eponym Iddin-Suen brother of !uli (No. 41) 14
35 Sargon I 40 year 1 eponym A##ur-malik son of Agatum (No. 55) 40
36 Puzur-A##ur II 8 year 1 eponym A##ur-nada son of Puzur-Ana (No. 95) 8
37 Naram-Sîn [54] year 1 eponym !u-Su’en son of Babilum (No. 103) 54*
38 Êri#u II [10] !am#î-Adad I conquers Assyria, eponym Ibni-I#tar (No. 157) 10*
39 !am#î-Adad I 33 Death of !am#î-Adad I, eponym %ab-"illa-A##ur (No. 199) 33*
40 A##ur-dugul 6 Usurper ?

Overview of the period 1873-1664 year by year:

91K.R. VEENHOF – Some displaced Tablets from Kârum Kanesh (Kültepe)
C. GÜNBATTI – An Eponym List (KEL G) from Kültepe
G. KRYSZAT – Herrscher, Kult und Kulttradition in Anatolien nach den Quellen aus den altassyrischen Handelskolonien. Teil 3/1
in: Altorientalische Forschungen Band 38 (2008) 1 pp. 10-27, 103-132, 156-171.
G. KRYSZAT – Herrscher, Kult und Kulttradition in Anatolien nach den Quellen aus den altassyrischen Handelskolonien. Teil 3/2
in: Altorientalische Forschungen Band 38 (2008) 2 pp. 195-219.
38 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

N° EPONYM SON OF COMMENTS IN CHRONICLES

-1873 accession of Êri!u Ier 0
-1872 1 !u-I#tar Abila (beginning of the list KEL A) 1
-1871 2 !u-Kuttum I##uhum 2
-1870 3 Iddin-ili Kurub-I#tar 3
-1869 4 !u-Anum Isaliya 4
-1868 5 Anah-ili Kiki 5
-1867 6 Su’etaya Iribum 6
-1866 7 Daya I##uhum 7
-1865 8 Ili-ellat 8
-1864 9 !ama#-#ab 9
-1863 10 Akusa 10
-1862 11 Idnaya !udaya 11
-1861 12 Quqadum Buzu 12
-1860 13 Puzur-I#tar Bedaki 13
-1859 14 Laqipum Babidi 14
-1858 15 !u-Laban Kurub-I#tar 15
-1857 16 !u-Belum I##uhum 16
-1856 17 Nab-Su’en !u-I#tar 17
-1855 18 Hadaya Elali 18
-1854 19 Ennum-A##ur Begaya 19
-1853 20 Ikunum !udaya 20
-1852 21 A!.DINGIR Iddida 21
-1851 22 Buzutaya I##uhum 22
-1850 23 !u-I#tar Ammaya 23
-1849 24 Iddin-A##ur GUDU 24
-1848 25 Puzur-A##ur I.NUN 25
-1847 26 Quqadum Buzu 26
-1846 27 Ibni-Adad Susaya 27
-1845 28 Iri#um Adad-rabi 28
-1844 29 Menanum Begaya 29
-1843 30 Iddin-Su’en !alim-ahum 30
-1842 31 Puzur-A##ur Idnaya 31
-1841 32 !ûli Uphakum 32
33 Laqip Zukua 33
-1840 34 Puzur-I#tar Erisu’a 34
-1839 35 Aguwa Adad-rabi 35
-1838 36 !û-Su’en #illiya 36
-1837 37 Ennum-A##ur Begaya 37
-1836 38 Enna-Su’en Pussanum 38
-1835 39 Ennanum Uphakum 39
-1834 40 Buzi Adad-rabi accession of Ikunum 40
-1833 41 Iddin-Suen brother of !uli !uli son of !almah 1
-1832 42 Ikunum !udaya 2
-1831 43 Dan-Wer Ahu-ahi 3
-1830 44 !u-Anum Nerabtim 4
-1829 45 Il-massu A##ur-#ab 5
-1828 46 !u-Hubur !uli 6
-1827 47 Idua $ulili 7
-1826 48 Laqip Puzur-Laba 8
-1825 49 !u-Anum du hapirum 9
-1824 50 Uku Bila 10
-1823 51 A##ur-malik Panaka 11
-1822 52 Dan-A##ur Puzur-Wer 12
-1821 53 !u-Kubum Ahu-ahi 13
-1820 54 Iri#um Idi-A##ur accession of Sargon I 14
-1819 55 A##ur-malik Agatum 1
-1818 56 A##ur-malik Enania 2
-1817 57 Ibisua Suen-nada 3
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 39

-1816 58 Bazia Bal-Tutu 4

-1815 59 Puzur-I#tar Sabasia 5
-1814 60 Pi#a %-Ili Adin 6
-1813 61 Asqudum Lapiqum 7
-1812 62 Ili-pila % Damqum 8
-1811 63 Qulali [-] 9
-1810 64 Susaya [-] 10
-1809 65 Amaya of Armourer 11
66 Ip%urum Ili-ellat 12
-1808 67 Kudanum Laqip 13
-1807 68 Ili-bani Ikunum 14
-1806 69 !u-Kubum Susaya 15
-1805 70 Quqidi Amur-A##ur 16
-1804 71 Abia Nur-Suen 17
-1803 72 !u-I#tar !ukutum 18
-1802 73 Bazia !epa-lim 19
-1801 74 !u-I#tar Ikunum, the Star 20
-1800 75 Abia !u-Dagan Babylonian king 21
-1799 76 Salia !abakuranum Sûmû-abum 22 0
-1798 77 Ibni-Adad Baqqunum 23 1
-1797 78 A%mar#i Malkum-i#ar 24 2
-1796 79 Sukkalia Minanum 25 3
-1795 80 Iddin-A##ur Kubidi 26 4
-1794 81 !udaya Ennanum 27 5
-1793 82 Al-#ab Pila%-A##ur 28 6
-1792 83 A##ur-dammiq Abarsisum 29 7
-1791 84 Puzur-Nira% Puzur-Suen 30 8
-1790 85 Amur-A##ur Karria 31 9
-1789 86 Buzuzu Ibbi-Suen 32 10
-1788 87 !u-"ubur Elali 33 11
-1787 88 Il#u-rabi Bazia 34 12
-1786 89 Ala%um Ina%-ili 35 13
-1785 90 &ab-A##ur Su%arum Sûmû-a-il 36 14
-1784 91 Elali Ikunum 37 1
-1783 92 Iddin-abum Narbitum 38 2
93 Adad-bani Iddin-A##ur 39
-1782 94 A##ur-iddin !uli accession of Puzur-A!!ur II 40 3
-1781 95 A##ur-nada Puzur-Ana 1 4
-1780 96 Kubia Karria 2 5
-1779 97 Ili-dan Elali 3 6
-1778 98 $ilulu Uku 4 7
-1777 99 A##ur-nada Ili-binanni 5 8
-1776 100 Ikuppi-I#tar Ikua 6 9
-1775 101 Buzutaya !uli 7 10
-1774 102 Innaya Amuraya accession of Naram-Sîn 8 11
-1773 103 !u-Su’en Babilum (beginning of the list MEC A) 1 12
-1772 104 A##ur-malik Al-ahum 2 13
-1771 105 A##ur-imitti Ili-bani 3 14
-1770 106 Enna-Su’en !u-A##ur 4 15
-1769 107 Akutum Al-ahum 5 16
-1768 108 Ma"i-ili Iri#um 6 17
-1767 109 Iddin-ahum Kudanum 7 18
-1766 110 Samaya !u-Belum (beginning of the list KEL G) 8 19
-1765 111 Ili-alum Sukkalliya 9 20
-1764 112 Ennamanum A##ur-malik 10 21
-1763 113 Ennum-A##ur Dunea 11 22
-1762 114 Enna-Su’en !u-I#tar 12 23
-1761 115 Hana-Narum [-] 13 24
-1760 116 Dadiya [-] 14
40 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

117 Kapatiya [-] 15 25

-1759 118 I#me-A##ur Ea-dan 16 26
-1758 119 A##ur-muttabbil Azizum 17 27
-1757 120 !u-Nirah Azuzaya 18 28
-1756 121 Iddin-Abum [-] 19 29
-1755 122 Ili-dan Azua 20 30
-1754 123 A##ur-imitti Iddin-I#tar 21 31
-1753 124 Bu"iya Abiya 22 32
-1752 125 Dadiya !u-Ilabrat Birth of !am#î-Adad Ier 23 33
-1751 126 Puzur-I#tar Nur-ili#u Assombrissement du soleil 24 34
-1750 127 Isaya Dagan-malkum 25 35
-1749 128 Abu-#alim Ilu-alum Sabium 26 36
-1748 129 A##ur-re’i Ili-emuqi (end of the list KEL A) 27 1
-1747 130 &ab-A##ur Uzua 28 2
-1746 131 !u-Rama Uzua 29 3
-1745 132 Sin-i#me’anni (end of the list MEC A) 30 4
-1744 133 A##ur-malik !u-Hani# (beginning of the list MEC B) 31 5
-1743 134 Dan-Ea Abu-qar 32 6
-1742 135 Enna-Sîn Iddin-abum 33 7
-1741 136 A##ur-bala!i 34 8
-1740 137 Enna-Sîn 35 9
-1739 138 I!ur-A##ur 36 10
-1738 139 !u-Belum 37 11
-1737 140 !arrum-Adad 38 12
-1736 141 !u-Laban 39 13
-1735 142 A##ur-imitti Apil-Sîn 40 14
-1734 143 Dadaya 41 1
144 Dadaya 42
-1733 145 Ah-#alim 43 2
-1732 146 U"ur-#i-I#tar 44 3
-1731 147 Kataya 45 4
-1730 148 !u-Su’en 46 5
-1729 149 Abu-#alim 47 6
-1728 150 !udaya 48 7
-1727 151 !u-Dadum 49 8
-1726 152 A##ur-dugul 50 9
-1725 153 Puzur-I#tar 51 10
-1724 154 Atanah !am#î-Adad Ier conquered Ekallatum 52 11
-1723 155 Iri#um Ekallatum 53 12
-1722 156 A##ur-ennam Ekallatum (Êri!u II) 54 13
-1721 157 Ibni-I#tar Sîn-i#me’anni !am#î-Adad Ier conquered A##ur 1 14
-1720 158 A##ur-bel-malki 2 15
-1719 159 Belanum 3 16
-1718 160 Sukkallum Êri#u II 4 17
-1717 161 Amur-A##ur Êri#u II Sîn-muballit 5 18
-1716 162 A##ur-ni#u Êri#u II 6 1
-1715 163 Manawirum 7 2
-1714 164 Idnaja A##ur-imitti 8 3
-1713 165 Dadaya (end of the list MEC B) 9 4
166 Puzur-Nirah (beginning of the list MEC D) 10
-1712 167 Abiya (Assyrian reign of "am!î-Adad Ier) 1 5
-1711 168 Edinum 2 6
-1710 169 A##ur-taklatu (end of the list MEC D) 3 7
-1709 170 Isim-Su’en 4 8
-1708 171 Adad-bani 5 9
-1707 172 Abi-#agi# 6 10
-1706 173 %ab-"illa-A##ur 7 11
-1705 174 Iddin-A##ur 8 12
-1704 175 Namiya 9 13
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 41

-1703 176 Attal-#arri Ili-alum 10 14

-1702 177 Dadaya 11 15
-1701 178 Ani-m[alik] 12 16
-1700 179 Idna-A##ur* (illegible part of the list KEL G) 13 17
-1699 180 Atanum* 14 18
-1698 181 A##ur-taklatu* - (eponymous chronicle of Mari)92 15 19
-1697 182 Haya-malik* Dudanum (beginning of the list MEC E) Hammurabi 16 20
-1696 183 !alim-A##ur* !alim-Anum 17 1
-1695 184 !alim-A##ur U"ranu 18 2
-1694 185 Ennam-A##ur (position uncertain) 19 3
-1693 186 Sîn-muballi! 20 4
-1692 187 Ri#-!ama# 21 5
-1691 188 Ibni-Adad 22 6
-1690 189 A##ur-imitti 23 7
-1689 190 Ahiyaya Takigi (non canical eponym?) 24 8
-1688 191 Ili-ellat A##ur-ni#u 25 9
-1687 192 Rigmanum 26 10
-1686 193 Ikuppiya (alliance with Qatna) (Yasmah-Addu became vice-roy of Mari) 27 11
-1685 194 Asqudum 28 12
-1684 195 A##ur-malik (total lunar eclipse dated 7/12/1684) 29 13
-1683 196 Awiliya (end of the list MEC E) 30 14
-1682 197 Nimar-Su’en 31 15
-1681 198 Adad-bani 32 16
-1680 199 %ab-"illa-A##ur death of "am!î-Adad I 33 17
200 Ennam-A##ur (accession of I!me-Dagan I) 1
-1679 201 A##ur-emuqi 2 18
-1678 202 Abu-#alim 3 19
-1677 203 Pussanum Adad-rabi 4 20
-1676 204 Ikuppi-I#tar 5 21
-1675 205 Ahiya Takiki 6 22
-1674 206 Beliya Enna-Su’en 7 23
-1673 207 Ili-bani 8 24
-1672 208 A##ur-taklaku 9 25
-1671 208 Sassapum A##ur-malik 10 26
-1670 209 Ahu-waqar (accession of A!!ur-dugul) 11 27
-1669 210 Kizurum 1 28
-1668 211 Dadiya 2 29
-1667 212 Yam-NE? 3 30
-1666 213 Adad-bani 4 31
-1665 214 Ennam-A##ur A##ur-taklaku 5 32
-1664 215 Ataya !amaya 6 33

This list of eponyms used for reconstituting Assyrian reigns (from several partial
lists)93, contains the following difficulties:
! The Assyrian king list compiled under !am#î-Adad I states that the eponyms from Sulili
(Zariqum) to Il-#umma (Kings No. 27 to 32) were lost, suggesting a beginning of
Assyrian eponyms only from Sulili (-1954) and a compilation from Êri#u I (-1873).
! After the accession of King Ikunum, a list gives !uli son of !almah as eponym instead
of Iddin-Suen brother of !uli (eponym No. 41). Rather than assume an oversight in the
lists and thus keep these two eponyms, the presence of a canonical eponym replacing an
noncanonical eponym (died during the year of his eponymy) is more likely.
92 J.-J. GLASSNER – Chroniques mésopotamiennes
Paris 2004 Éd. Les Belles Lettres pp. 157-160.
D. CHARPIN, N. ZIEGLER – Florilegium marianum V. Mari et le Proche-Orient à l'époque amorrite
in: Mémoires de N.A.B.U. 6 (2003) pp. 156-157.
93 A complete list of eponyms should contain about 150 names (size of KEL G list). At the time of Esarhaddon, for example, the reigns

of Êri#u I (King No. 33) and Sennacherib (King No. 111) were separated by 1213 eponyms, which could be inscribed on about 8 tablets
of 150 names.
42 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

! The darkening of the sun mentioned during the Puzur-I#tar eponym (No. 126), the year
just after the birth of !am#î-Adad I, has been interpreted by some as a solar eclipse94.
However, there was no total solar eclipse visible in Assyria (between Ashur and
Nineveh) over this period (1800-1700), but only two partial eclipses slightly visible95.
Moreover, the term used [n]a-ah-du-ur, means an eclipse in a metaphorical way and is
different from the usual antalûm used in Mari96. These two comments have been added
later in the list of eponyms, because !am#î-Adad I was initially an Amorite king who
became part of the Assyrian dynasty only at the end of his glorious reign. Thus for the
Assyrian copyist of that time, the birth of !am#î-Adad I actually marked the end (the
eclipse) of the authentic Assyrian dynasty.
! Neither death nor the accession of Êri#u II are detailed in the lists, but this reign can be
framed by two dates: the 1st year of Naram-Sîn (in -1773) during the eponymy !u-Su’en
in the beginning of the list MEC A, and the death of !am#î-Adad during the eponymy
of %ab-"illa-A##ur (in -1680), after 33 years of reign. Thus the death of Êri#u II must go
back to 1713 (= 1680 + 33), beginning of the list MEC D. The eponyms of the list KEL
G being completely unreadable at least 11 lines, most likely 16 lines (eponyms No. 179
to 194), they were supplemented by the list MEC E whose recovery remains uncertain97.
Since the accession of Naram-Sîn is in -1774 and that the death of Êri#u II is in -1712,
then the two kings ruled a total of 62 solar years (= 1774 - 1712), or 64 lunar years (or
eponyms). The reign of Naram-Sîn was over 27 years since the list KEL A includes 27
eponyms after his accession. However, according to Assyrian king lists, his reign is [-]4
years, implying a duration of either 34, 44 or 54 years, the last two being the most likely
possibilities98. Indeed, during the eponymy Ibni-I#tar (eponym No. 157) it is stated that
"!am#î-Adad I conquered Assyria" which seems to correspond to the 1st year of Êri#u
II, his father Naram-Sin being died the previous year (beginning of the list MEC D).
This would mean that the Amorite king !am#î-Adad I conquered Assyria only gradually,
starting with the city of Ekallatum at the end of the reign of Naram-Sîn. So when Êri#u
II ascended the throne he reigned no longer than over a small part of Assyria and his
death, after 10 years of reign, what was left of Assyria was absorbed by !am#î-Adad I.
! The alliance with Qatna under eponymy of Ikuppiya coincides with the installation of
Yasmah-Addu99 (1687-1680) as king of Mari, by !am#î-Adad I.
This reconstruction of the list of eponyms confirms the reliability of Assyrian king
lists. Assyrian scribes could easily date a past event by equivalence: 1 eponym = 1 year.
However the eponymous year was lunar (354.37 days) before A##ur-dân I, then was solar
(365.24 days) from his reign (but Babylonian calendar with intercalation being adopted only
from the reign of Tiglath-pileser I). The paleo-Assyrian calendar (or Amorite) was lunar
while the calendar of Mari was lunisolar100 like the one of Babylon. Synchronization among
various calendars of the past is made difficult by these changing paradigms (unreported).
For instance, on the death of !am#î-Adad I it is possible to get the following synchronisms
among months of several different calendars101 (at least five):
94 C. MICHEL, P. ROCHER – La chronologie du IIe millénaire revue à l'ombre d'une éclipse de soleil
in: Jaarbericht (...) Ex Oriente Lux N° 35/36 (1997-2000) Chicago pp. 111-126.
95 On October 10, 1737 BCE (of magnitude 0.92) and that on September 8, 1791 BCE (of magnitude 0.92)
96 As the sentence: on the 26th day of the month Sivan, in the 7th year [of Simbar-"ipak], the day turned to night, did not describe a solar eclipse.
97 D. CHARPIN, N. ZIEGLER – Florilegium marianum V. Mari et le Proche-Orient à l'époque amorrite

in: Mémoires de N.A.B.U. 6 (2003) pp. 72-73, 134-169.

98 K.R. VEENHOF – The Old Assyrian List of Year Eponyms from Karum Kanish and its Chronological Implications

Ankara 2002 Ed Turkish Historical Society pp. 1-78.

99 D. CHARPIN – Rapport sur les conférences 1995-1996

in: Livret 11 1995-1996 (École Pratique des Hautes Études, 1997) pp. 15-16.
100 However the day 30 could be 29 or 1 (J.M. S ASSON -Zimri-Lim Takes the Grand Tour in: Biblical Archaeologist 47, 1984, pp. 246-252).
101 D. CHARPIN, N. ZIEGLER – Florilegium marianum V. Mari et le Proche-Orient à l'époque amorrite

in: Mémoires de N.A.B.U. 6 (2003) pp. 134-176, 260-262.

 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 43

BABYLONIAN JULIAN MARIOTE AMORRITE PALEO-ASSYRIAN

X Tebêtu 1 January (winter) xi° Abum (IV) xi* Abum Ab "arrâni (v*)
XI !abâtu 2 February xii° #ibirtum (V) xii* Tîrum #ubur (vi*)
XII Addâru 3 March i° #ubur (#ilib) i* Niqmum !ip’im (vii*)
I Nisannu 4 April (spring) ii° Kinûnum (VII) ii* Kinûnum Qarrâtim (viii*)
II Ayyaru 5 May iii° Dagan (VIII) iii* Tamhîrum Kanwarta (ix*)
III Simanu 6 June iv° Lîlîatum (IX) iv* Nabrûm Te’inâtim (x*)
IV Du'ùzu 7 July (summer) v° Bêlet-bîrî (X) v* Mammîtum Kuzallu (xi*)
V Abu 8 August vi° Kiskissum (XI) vi* Mana Allanâtim (xii*)
VI Ulûlû 9 September vii° Ebûrum (XII) vii* Ayyarum Bêltî-ekallim (i*)
VII Ta#rîtu 10 October (autumn) viii° Urâ"um (I) viii* Niggalum !a sarratim (ii*)
VIII Ara%samna 11 November ix° Malkânum (II) ix* Maqrânum Narmak A""ur (iii*)
IX Kisilimu 12 December x° La""um (III x* Du'uzum Ma""urili (iv*)

The end of !am#î-Adad I's reign is dated on February 20, -1679102 because this king
died on 14/xii°/33. The month VI in Mari coincides with the Assyrian month i* (months
VI to XII are dated "after the eponym %ab-"illa-A##ur"). The fall of Larsa is dated [1-
6]/XII/30 of Hammurabi and matches the [1-6]/VI/60 of Rîm-Sîn I, because Zimrî-Lîm
congratulated Hammurabi for his taking Larsa in his letter dated 7/VI/12 (ARM XXV 9).
month [A] [B] [C] [D] King / eponym
-1680 1 IV xi° X 6 32 16 46
2 V xii° XI
3 VI i° XII 33 #ab-"illa-A""ur
4 VII ii° I 17 47
5 VIII iii° II
6 IX iv° III
7 X v° IV
8 XI vi° V
9 XII vii° VI
10 I viii° VII 7 [A] Yasmah-Addu king of Mari
11 II ix° VIII [B] "am!î-Adad I king of Assyria
12 III x° IX
1 IV xi° X
[C] Hammurabi king of Babylon
-1679
2 V xii° XI 0 [D] Rîm-Sîn I king of Larsa
3 VI i° XII 0 1 after #ab-"illa-A""ur
4 VII ii° I 18 48
5 VIII iii° II
6 IX iv° III
[A] Zimrî-Lîm king of Mari
7 X v° IV [B] I!me-Dagan I king of Assyria
8 XI vi° V
9 XII vii° VI
10 I viii° VII 1 Ennam-A""ur
11 II ix° VIII
12 III x° IX
-1678 1 IV xi° X (Feast of I"tar in month xi° Ab !arrani)
2 V xii° XI
3 VI i° XII 2 A""ur-emuqi
4 VII ii° I 19 49
5 VIII iii° II
6 IX iv° III
7 X v° IV
8 XI vi° V
9 XII vii° VI
XIIb viii° VII
10 I ix° VIII 2
11 II x° IX
12 III xi° X

The presence or the absence of intercalation further complicates synchronizations

among calendars. For instance, the year 1 of Zimrî-Lîm has an intercalary month (xii°b) but
102An exorcist priest (wa"ipum) is consulted on 11/xii°/33 and the oil for the offering king's burial came on 16/xii°/33. In 1679 BCE, 1st
Nisan is dated April 5, 1st Tishri on September 30 and 1st #ip’im March 7. It is interesting to notice that the year 33 of !am#î-Adad I
started with a total lunar eclipse (bad omen) http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCLEmap/-1699--1600/LE-1678-03-21T.gif
44 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

other years are strangely irregular (2:xii°b; 5:ii°b, iii°b, v°b; 8:i°b; 10:v°b; 11:v°b)103. On the
other hand the feast of I#tar seems to be celebrated without intercalation104.
Mesopotamian chronologies are anchored by numerous synchronisms (highlighted
in light blue) and dated by astronomical phenomena (boxed Julian years). Synchronisms
with Elamite, Egyptian and Israelite chronologies are given only for information:
UR III ELAM ASSYRIA EGYPT
1967 !ulgi 35 AWAN SIMA!KI Amînum Amenemhat I 8
1966 36 Kutir-lagamar 24 Girname 9
1965 37 25 10
1964 38 26 11
1963 39 27 12
1962 40 28 13
1961 41 29 14
1960 42 30 Ebarat I 15
1959 43 31 16
1958 44 32 17
1957 45 33 18
1956 46 34 19
1955 47 35 20
1954 48 36 Sulili (Zariqum) 21
1953 Amar-Sîn 1 22
1952 2 23
1951 3 24
1950 4 Tazatta I 25
1949 5 26
1948 6 27
1947 7 28
1946 8 29
1945 9 Sesostris I 1
1944 !û-Sîn 1 2
1943 2 3
1942 3 4
1941 4 5
1940 5 Kikkia 6
1939 6 7
1938 7 8
1937 8 9
1936 9 10
1935 Ibbi-Sîn 1 Tazitta II 11
1934 2 12
1933 3 13
1932 4 LARSA 14
1931 5 15
1930 6 Naplânum 1 16
1929 7 2 17
1928 8 3 18
1927 9 4 19
1926 10 5 Akia 20
1925 11 6 21
1924 12 ISIN 7 22
1923 13 8 23
1922 14 I#bi-Erra 1 9 24
1921 15 2 10 25
1920 16 3 11 26

103 W. HEIMPEL – Letters to the King of Mari: A New Translation, With Historical Introduction, Notes, and Commentary
Leiden 2003 Ed. Eisenbrauns pp. 54-56.
104 For example the feast of I#tar is celebrated month xi in 1 year of Zimrî-Lîm, month ix in years 6-8 and month viii in year 12, which

implies a lag of about 3 months on 12 years, indicating a lack of intercalation (at least in one of the two calendars).
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 45

1919 17 4 12 27
1918 18 5 13 28
1917 19 6 14 29
1916 20 7 15 30
1915 21 8 16 31
1914 22 9 17 32
1913 23 10 18 33
1912 24 11 19 Puzur-A##ur I 34
1911 12 20 35
1910 13 21 36
1909 14 Iem!ium 1 37
1908 15 2 38
1907 16 3 39
1906 17 4 40
1905 18 5 41
1904 19 6 42
1903 20 7 43
1902 21 8 44
1901 22 9 45
1900 23 10 !alim-ahum Amenemhat II 1
1899 24 11 2
1898 25 12 3
1897 26 13 4
1896 27 14 5
1895 28 15 6
1894 29 16 7
1893 30 17 8
1892 31 18 9
1891 32 19 10
1890 33 20 11
1889 !û-ilî#u 1 21 12
1888 2 22 13
1887 3 23 14
1886 4 24 Ilu-#umma 15
1885 5 25 16
1884 6 26 17
1883 7 27 18
1882 8 28 19
1881 9 Sâmium 1 20
1880 10 2 21
1879 Iddin-Dagân 1 3 22
1878 2 4 23
1877 3 5 24
1876 4 6 25
1875 5 7 26
1874 6 8 27
1873 7 9 28
1872 8 10 Êri#u I 1 29
1871 9 11 2 30
1870 10 12 3 31
4
1869 11 13 5 32
1868 12 14 6 33
1867 13 15 7 34
1866 14 16 8 35
1865 15 17 9 36
1864 16 18 10 37
1863 17 19 11 38
1862 18 20 12 Sesostris II 1
1861 19 21 13 2
46 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

1860 20 22 14 3
1859 21 23 15 4
1858 I#me-Dagân 1 24 16 5
1857 2 25 17 6
1856 3 26 18 7
1855 4 27 19 8
1854 5 28 20 Sesostris III 1
1853 6 29 21 2
1852 7 30 22 3
1851 8 31 23 4
1850 9 32 24 5
1849 10 33 25 6
1848 11 34 26 7
1847 12 35 27 8
1846 13 Zabâia 1 28 9
1845 14 2 29 10
1844 15 3 30 11
1843 16 4 31 12
1842 17 5 32 13
1841 18 6 33 14
1840 19 7 34 15
1839 20 8 35 16
1838 Lipit-E#tar 1 9 36 17
1837 2 Gungunum 1 37 18
1836 3 2 38 19
1835 4 3 39 Amenemhat III 1
1834 5 4 40 2
1833 6 5 Ikunum 1 3
1832 7 6 2 4
1831 8 7 3 5
1830 9 8 4 6
5
1829 10 9 6 7
1828 11 10 7 8
1827 Ur-Ninurta 1 11 8 9
1826 2 12 9 10
1825 3 13 10 11
1824 4 14 11 12
1823 5 15 12 13
1822 6 16 13 14
1821 7 17 14 15
1820 8 18 Sargon I 1 16
1819 9 19 2 17
1818 10 20 3 18
1817 11 21 4 19
1816 12 22 5 20
1815 13 23 6 21
1814 14 24 7 22
1813 15 25 8 23
1812 16 26 9 24
1811 17 27 10 25
1810 18 Abî-sarê 1 11 26
1809 19 2 12 27
1808 20 3 13 28
1807 21 4 14 29
1806 22 5 15 30
1805 23 6 16 31
1804 24 7 17 32
1803 25 8 18 33
1802 26 9 19 34
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 47

1801 27 10 20 35
21
1800 BABYLON 28 11 22 36
1799 0 Bûr-Sîn 1 Sûmû-El 1 23 37
1798 Sûmû-abum 1 2 2 24 38
1797 2 3 3 25 39
1796 3 4 4 26 40
1795 4 5 5 27 41
1794 5 6 6 28 42
1793 6 7 7 29 43
1792 7 8 8 30 44
1791 8 9 9 31 45
1790 9 10 10 32 Amenemhat IV 1
1789 10 11 11 33 2
1788 11 12 12 34 3
1787 12 13 13 35 4
1786 13 14 14 36 5
1785 14 15 15 37 6
1784 Sûmû-la-Il 1 16 16 38 7
1783 2 17 17 39 8
1782 3 18 18 40 9
1781 4 19 19 Puzur-A##ur II 1 Neferusebek 1
1780 5 20 20 2 2
1779 6 21 21 3 3
1778 7 Lipit-Enlil 1 22 4 4
1777 8 2 23 5 Ugaf 1
1776 9 3 24 6 2
1775 10 4 25 7 Amenemhat V 1
1774 11 5 26 8 2
1773 12 Erra-imittî 1 27 Naram-Sîn 1 3
1772 13 2 28 2 4
1771 14 3 29 3 (Ameny)Qemau 1
1770 15 4 Nûr-Adad 1 4 2
1769 16 5 2 5 3
1768 17 6 3 6 4
1767 18 7 4 7 5
1766 19 Enlil-Bâni 1 5 8 Sehetepibre 1
9
1765 20 2 6 10 2
1764 21 3 7 11 3
1763 22 4 8 12 4
1762 23 5 9 13 5
1761 24 6 10 14 Iufni 1
1760 25 7 11 15 Amenemhat VI 1
1759 26 8 12 16 2
1758 27 9 13 17 3
1757 28 10 14 18 4
1756 29 11 15 19 5
1755 30 12 16 20 Nebnun 1
1754 31 13 Sîn-iddinam 1 21 Hornedjheritef 1
1753 32 14 2 22 2
1752 33 15 3 23 3
1751 34 16 4 24 4
1750 35 17 5 25 5
1749 36 18 6 26 Sewadjkare 1
1748 Sâbium 1 19 7 27 2
1747 2 20 Sîn-irîbam 1 28 3
1746 3 21 2 29 4
1745 4 22 Sîn-iqi#am 1 30 5
1744 5 23 2 31 Nedjemebre 1
1743 6 24 3 32 Sebekhotep I 1
48 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

1742 7 Zambîya 1 4 33 2
1741 8 2 5 34 3
1740 9 3 Silî-Adad 1 35 Rensebeb 4
1739 10 Iter-pi#a 1 Warad-Sîn 1 36 Hor I 1
1738 11 2 2 37 2
1737 12 3 3 38 3
1736 13 4 4 39 4
1735 14 Ur-dukuga 1 5 40 5
1734 Apil-Sîn 1 2 6 41 Amenemhat VII 1
42
1733 2 3 7 43 2
1732 3 4 8 44 3
1731 4 Sîn-mâgir 1 9 45 4
1730 5 2 10 46 5
1729 6 3 11 47 6
1728 7 4 12 48 7
1727 8 5 13 49 Sebekhotep II 1
1726 9 6 Rîm-Sîn I 1 50 2
1725 10 7 2 51 3
1724 11 8 3 52 4
1723 12 9 4 53 5
1722 13 10 5 54 6
1721 14 11 6 Êri#u II 1 7
1720 15 Damiq-ilî#u 1 7 2 Kendjer 1
1719 16 2 8 3 2
1718 17 3 9 4 3
1717 18 4 10 5 4
1716 Sîn-muballi" 1 5 11 6 5
1715 2 6 12 7 Semenkhkare 1
1714 3 7 13 8 2
1713 4 8 14 9 3
1712 5 9 15 10 4
1711 6 10 16 !am#î-Adad I 1 5
1710 7 11 17 2 Antef IV 1
1709 8 12 18 3 2
1708 9 13 19 4 3
1707 10 14 20 5 4
1706 11 15 21 6 5
1705 12 16 22 7 Seth 1
1704 13 17 23 8 2
1703 14 18 24 9 3
1702 15 19 25 10 4
11
1701 16 20 26 12 Sebekhotep III 1
1700 17 21 27 13 2
1699 18 22 28 14 3
1698 19 23 29 15 4
1697 20 30 16 Neferhotep I 1
1696 Hammurabi 1 31 17 2
1695 2 32 18 3
1694 3 33 19 4
1693 4 34 20 5
1692 5 35 21 6
1691 6 36 22 7
1690 7 37 23 8
1689 8 38 24 9
1688 9 39 25 10
1687 10 40 26 11
1686 11 41 27 Sahathor 12
1685 12 42 Asqudum 28 Sebekhotep IV 1
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 49

1684 13 43 (lunar eclipse) 29 2

1683 14 44 30 3
1682 15 45 31 4
1681 16 46 32 5
1680 17 47 33 6
1679 18 48 I#me-Dagan I 1 7
1678 19 49 2 8
1677 20 50 3 9
1676 21 51 4 Sebekhotep V 1
1675 22 52 5 2
1674 23 53 6 3
1673 24 54 7 4
1672 25 55 8 5
1671 26 56 9 Sebekhotep VI 1
1670 27 57 10 2
11
1669 28 58 A##ur-dugul 1 Ibia 1
1668 29 59 2 2
1667 30 60 3 3
1666 31 4 4
1665 32 5 5
1664 33 6 6
1663 34 Bêlu-bâni 1 7
1662 35 2 8
1661 36 3 9
1660 37 4 10
1659 38 5 11
1658 39 6 Aÿ 1
1657 40 7 1
1656 41 8 2
1655 42 9 3
1654 43 10 4
1653 Samsu-iluna 1 Libbaya 1 5
1652 2 2 6
1651 3 3 7
1650 4 4 8
1649 5 5 9
1648 6 6 10
1647 7 7 11
1646 8 8 12
1645 9 9 13
1644 10 10 14
1643 11 11 15
1642 12 12 16
1641 13 13 17
1640 14 14 18
1639 15 15 19
16
1638 16 17 20
1637 17 !arma-Adad I 1 21
1636 18 2 22
1635 19 3 23
1634 20 4 24
1633 21 5 Ani 1
1632 22 6 2
1631 23 7 Sewadjtu 1
1630 24 8 2
1629 25 9 3
1628 26 10 Neferhotep II 1
1627 27 11 2
50 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

1626 28 12 3
1625 29 Puzur-Sîn 1 Hori 1
1624 30 2 2
1623 31 3 3
1622 32 4 4
1621 33 5 5
1620 34 6 Sebekhotep VII 1
1619 35 7 2
1618 36 8
1617 37 9
1616 38 10
1615 Abi-e#u$ 1 11
1614 2 ISRAEL 12
1613 3 0 Bazaya 1
1612 4 Apopi 1 2
1611 5 (birth) 2 3
1610 6 3 4
1609 7 4 5
1608 8 5 6
1607 9 6 7
1606 10 7 8
9
1605 11 8 10
1604 12 9 11
1603 13 10 12
1602 14 11 13
1601 15 12 14
1600 16 13 15
1599 17 14 16
1598 18 15 17
1597 19 16 18
1596 20 17 19
1595 21 18 20
1594 22 19 21
1593 23 20 22
1592 24 21 23
1591 25 22 24
1590 26 23 25
1589 27 24 26
1588 28 25 27
1587 Ammiditana 1 26 28
1586 2 27 Lullaya 1
1585 3 28 2
1584 4 29 3
1583 5 30 4
1582 6 31 5
1581 7 32 6
1580 8 (papyrus Rhind) 33 !û-Ninûa 1
1579 9 34 2
1578 10 35 3
1577 11 36 4
1576 12 37 5
1575 13 38 6
7
1574 14 39 8
1573 15 (Turin Canon) 40 9 Dynasty XVII 0
1572 16 Moses (Apopi) 1 10 Râhotep 1
1571 17 (Madian stay) 2 11 2
1570 18 3 12 3
1569 19 4 13 4
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 51

1568 20 5 14 Sobekemsaf I 1
1567 21 6 !arma-Adad II 1 2
1566 22 7 2 Sobekemsaf II 1
1565 23 8 3 2
1564 24 9 Êri#u III 1 3
1563 25 10 2 4
1562 26 11 3 5
1561 27 12 4 6
1560 28 13 5 7
1559 29 14 6 8
1558 30 15 7 9
1557 31 16 8 10
1556 32 17 9 Antef VI 1
1555 33 18 10 2
1554 34 19 11 Antef VII 1
12
1553 35 20 13 2
1552 36 21 !am#î-Adad II 1 3
1551 37 22 2 4
1550 Ammi!aduqa 1 23 3 5
1549 2 24 4 6
1548 3 25 5 7
1547 4 26 6 8
1546 5 27 I#me-Dagan II 1 9
1545 6 28 2 Antef VIII 10
1544 7 29 3 Senakhtenrê 1
1543 8 30 4 Seqenenrê Taa 1
1542 9 31 5 2
1541 10 32 6 3
1540 11 33 7 4
1539 12 34 8 5
1538 13 35 9 6
1537 14 36 10 7
1536 15 37 11 8
1535 16 38 12 9
1534 17 39 13 10
1533 18 40 14 11
1532 19 Moses (Apopi) 1 15 Kamose 1
1531 20 (Sinai Exodus) 2 16 2
1530 21 3 !am#î-Adad III 1 3
1529 Samsuditana 1 4 2 Ahmose 1
1528 2 5 3 2
4
1527 3 6 5 3
1526 4 7 6 4
1525 5 8 7 5
1524 6 9 8 6
1523 7 10 9 7
1522 8 11 10 8
1521 9 12 11 9
1520 10 13 12 10
1519 11 14 13 11
1518 12 15 14 12
1517 13 16 15 13
1516 14 17 16 14
1515 15 18 A##ur-nêrârî I 1 15
1514 16 19 2 16
1513 17 20 3 17
1512 18 21 4 18
1511 19 22 5 19
52 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

1510 20 23 6 20
1509 21 24 7 21
1508 22 25 8 22
1507 23 26 9 23
1506 24 27 10 24
1505 25 28 11 25
1504 26 29 12 Amenhotep I 1
1503 27 30 13 2
1502 28 31 14 3
1501 29 32 15 4
1500 Fall of Alep 30 33 16 5
1499 Fall of Babylon 31 34 17 6
1498 0 35 18 7
1497 recovery of 1 36 19 8
1496 Babylon 2 37 20 9
1495 3 38 21 10
1494 4 39 22 11
23
1493 5 40 24 12
1492 6 Joshua 1 25 13
1491 7 (in Canaan) 2 26 14
1490 8 3 Puzur-A##ur III 1 15
1489 9 4 2 16
1488 10 5 3 17
1487 11 6 4 18
1486 12 7 5 19
1485 13 8 6 20
1484 14 9 7 21
1483 15 10 8 Thutmose I 1
1482 16 11 9 2
1481 17 12 10 3
1480 18 13 11 4
1479 19 14 12 5
1478 20 15 13 6
1477 21 16 14 7
1476 22 17 15 8
1475 23 18 16 9
1474 24 19 17 10
1473 25 20 18 11
1472 26 21 19 12
1471 27 22 20 Thutmose II 1
1470 28 23 21 2
1469 29 24 22 Hatshepsut 3
1468 30 25 23 [Thoutmosis III] [4]
1467 31 26 24 [5]
1466 32 27 Enlil-nâ "ir I 1 [6]
1465 33 28 2 [7]
1464 34 29 3 [8]
1463 35 30 4 [9]
1462 36 (without judge) 1 5 [10]
1461 37 2 6 [11]
1460 38 3 7 [12]
1459 39 4 8 [13]
1458 40 5 9 [14]
1457 41 6 10 [15]
11
1456 Ulam-Buria# 1 7 12 [16]
1455 2 8 13 [17]
1454 3 9 Nûr-ili 1 [18]
1453 4 10 2 [19]
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 53

1452 5 11 3 [20]
1451 6 Ku#an-ri#ataïm 1 4 [21]
1450 7 (Mitanni) 2 5 [22]
1449 8 3 6 Thutmose III 23
1448 9 4 7 24
1447 10 5 8 25
1446 11 6 9 26
1445 12 7 10 27
1444 13 8 11 28
1443 14 Othniel 1 A##ur-#adûni 12 29

The death of Elamite king Chedorlaomer in year 36 of his reign, at the end of the
period called Awan, coinciding with the death of Babylonian king Shulgi in the year 48 of
his reign, can be dated with some accuracy. The biblical chronology according to the
Masoretic text is as follows (King Hoshea died at the fall of Samaria in 720 BCE, King
Josias died at the battle of Haran in 609 BCE):
Event Period # Reference
Abraham in Ur 2038-1963 75 From birth to departure into Canaan Genesis 12:4-5
Israelites as foreigners 1963-1533 430 From Canaan stay to Egypt deliverance Exodus 12:40-41
Exodus in Sinai 1533-1493 40 From Egypt deliverance to entering Canaan Exodus 16:35
Israelites in Canaan 1493-1013 480 From entering Canaan to year 4 of Solomon 1Kings 6:1
King of Judah Reign King of Israel Reign
Solomon 1017 - 977 40 1Kings 11:42
Rehoboam 977-960 17 Jeroboam I 10/977 - 22 1Kings 14:20-21
Abiyam 960-957 3 -05/955
Asa 957 - 41 Nadab 06/955-05/954 2 1Kings 15:10,25
Baasha 06/954-04/931 24 1Kings 15:28,33
Elah 05/931-04/930 2 1Kings 16:8
Zimri 05/930 7 d. 1Kings 16:10-16
Omri/ 06/930-05/919/ 12 1Kings 16:21-23
-916 [Tibni] [06/930-01/925] 6
Jehoshaphat 916 - 25 Ahab 06/919-01/898 22 1Kings 16:29
-891 Ahaziah 02/898-01/897 2 1Kings 22:51
Jehosaphat/Jehoram [893-891] [2] Jehoram Ahab's son 02/897-09/886 12 2Kings 3:1
Jehoram 893 - 8 [Ahaziah]/ Joram [07/887-09/886] 1 2Kings 9:29
-885 Ahaziah 10/886-09/885 1 2Kings 9:24,27
[Athaliah] Jehoyada 885-879 6 Jehu 10/885-03/856 28 2Kings 10:36
Joash 879 - 40 Jehoahaz 04/856-09/839 17 2Kings 10:35; 13:1
-839 Jehoahaz/ Jehoash [01/841-09/839] 2 2Kings 13:10
Amasiah 839 - 29 Jehoash 09/839-01/823 16 2Kings 13:10
-810 Jeroboam II 01/823-05/782 41 2Kings 14:23
Uzziah 810 - 52 [Zechariah] 06/782-02/771 [11] 2Kings 14:29
[Azariah] [796 - Zechariah 03/771-08/771 6 m. 2Kings 15:8
Shallum 09/771 1 m. 2Kings 15:13
Menahem 10/771-03/760 10 2Kings 15:17
-758 Peqayah 04/760-03/758 2 2Kings 15:23
Jotham 758-742 16 Peqah 04/758-05/738 20 2Kings 15:27
Ahaz 742-726 16 [Hoshea] 06/738-01/729 9 2Kings 15:27-30
Hezekiah 726-697 29 Hoshea 02/729-09/720 9 2Kings 17:1,3
Manasseh 697-642 55 2Kings 21:1
Amon 642-640 2 2Kings 21:19
Josias 640-609 31 2Kings 22:1
Jehoachaz -609 3 m. 2Chronicles 36:2
Jehoiaqim 609-598 11 2Chronicles 36:5
Jehoiachin -598 3 m. 2Chronicles 36:9
Zedekiah 598-587 11 2Chronicles 36:11
Jehoiachin (exile) 587-561 26 2Kings 25:27-28
54 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

According to the text of Genesis 14:1-17, a coalition of Mesopotamian kings would

raided the Negev: [For] 12 years they [the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah] served Chedorlaomer, and
in the 13th year they rebelled. In the 14th year came Chedorlaomer and the kings that were with him (...)
when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he armed his trained servants, born in his own
house, 318, and pursued them unto Dan. And he divided himself against them, he and his servants, by
night, and smote them, and pursued them unto Hobah, which is on the left hand of Damascus. And he
brought back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot, and his goods, and the women also, and
the people. And the king of Sodom went out to meet him [Abraham] after his return from the slaughter of
Chedorlaomer, and of the kings that were with him, at the valley of Shaveh, which is the king's dale.
Although the kings of the biblical account have not been discovered, onomastics confirms
the existence of such a name in the early second millennium BCE105. Kedor-Lagomer (the
Hebrew 'ayn' coming from a former 'g') corresponds to the Akkadian Kudur-Lagarma
which comes from the Elamite Kutir-Lagamar "bearer (servant) of Lagamar106" (Lagamar
being an Elamite deity107). According to the biblical text, a powerful king of Elam would be
associated with three other kings, two of Sumer and one of Gutium, to make reprisals
against several wealthy cities of Transjordan, the latter ones having refused to pay their
tribute108. The operation is described as a simple police operation, not as a war of conquest.
Likewise, retaliation against Abraham's Mesopotamian kings is not presented as a war but
as a night ambush to shoot down enemies (Genesis 14:15-17). The text speaks of
"slaughter109" and not of conquest, which involves the death of all these kings.
[A] [B] [C] [D]
1967 1 35 71 [A] Kudur-Lagamar king of Elam
1966 2 36 72 [B] "ulgi king of Ur
1965 3 37 73
1964 4 38 74
1963 5 39 75 [C] Abraham arrived in Canaan from Ur at age 75 (Genesis 12:4-5)
1962 6 40 76 1
1961 7 41 77 2
1960 8 42 78 3
1959 9 43 79 4
1958 10 44 80 5
1957 11 45 81 6
1956 12 46 82 7
1955 13 47 83 8 [A] Revolt of Transjordan kings against Kudur-Lagamar (Genesis 14:4)
1954 14 48 84 9 [A] Kudur-Lagamar killed by Abraham (Genesis 14:5-17)
1953 1 85 10 [D] 10 years later (Genesis 16:4)
1952 2 86 [B] Amar-Sîn king of Ur

According to this reconstruction, Kudur-Lagamar would have intervened in

Transjordan in the last years of the reign of !ulgi. In addition, Abraham left his hometown
of Ur (in -1963) 51 years prior this City State collapsed (in -1912) due to Amorite and
Elamite invasions110. According to the Middle Chronology, he would have left this city 41
years after its destruction (in 2004 BCE)!
105 R. DE VAUX - Histoire ancienne d'Israël des origines à l'installation en Canaan
Paris 1986 Éd. Gabalda pp. 208-212.
106 R. ZADOK - The Elamite Onomasticon

in: Annali Supplementi 44:1 (1984) Ed. Istituto orientale di Napoli pp. 24-26.
107 M.J. STEVE - Mémoires de la délégation archéologique en Iran, tome III

Nice 1987 Éd. Serre p. 30.

108 L. PIROT, A. C LAMER – La Sainte Bible Tome 1, 1ère partie

Paris 1953 Éd. Letouzey et Ané pp. 247-256.

109 The Hebrew verbal form hakot means "to strike" (1Samuel 17:57, 18:6, 2Chronicles 25:14) or "kill" (Genesis 4:15, 8:21).
110 P. GARELLI, J.M. DURAND, H. GONNET, C. BRENIQUET - Le Proche-Orient Asiatique

Paris 1997 Éd. P.U.F. pp. 73-95.

G. ROUX - La Mésopotamie
Paris 1995 Éd. Seuil pp. 207-220.
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 55

Elamite chronology111 of this period can be fixed through numerous synchronisms

with Mesopotamian chronology. Some anomalies arise: 1) there is a gap of at least 60 years
between Puzur-In#u#inak the king of Awan and Girname the king of Sima#ki, it seems to
miss at least three kings at the end of the Awan dynasty (where should have appeared
Kutir-Lagamar); 2) the first kings of Sima#ki also seem to miss the call because Puzur-
In#u#inak mentions at least one in his inscriptions, again, he declares himself governor of
Susa and viceroy of the country of Elam or sometimes king of Awan112; 3) the first three
kings of the dynasty of Sima#ki were contemporaries, they probably ruled over the different
capitals of Elam (Susa, An#an, Sima#ki); 4) information on Elam, almost exclusively from
the kings of Sumer, is incomplete, biased and difficult to interpret because the reversals of
alliances between coalitions of kings, even in very remote areas were apparently common
during the period 2000-1700113. Mesopotamian kings had indeed used to intervene west
until the Mediterranean. Sargon of Akkad and Naram-Sîn had marched to Taurus
Mountains, Elam sent its armies into Syria (to Qatna), Mari went regularly to at Hazor. In
fact, King Gilgamesh (2450-2400) had already reached the Mount Hermon (Saria) in
Lebanon from his city of Uruk, flying in just 3 days (sic), a journey of 1620 kilometers
usually traveled in a month and a half (the Epic of Gilgamesh IV:12).
About twenty Economic tablets, dated year 47 of !ulgi (in -1955), mention an
incident and loot taken by the Elamites114, indirectly confirming a raid or a tribute, but the
region of origin is not mentioned. The date of death of !ulgi is known precisely, on
1/XI/48 (around February -1954) it happened in a dramatic atmosphere, because there
would have been violent death of a part of the royal family115, but we do not know why.
Thus, the death of Elamite king Chedorlaomer at the end of the Awan period,
coinciding with the death of Babylonian king Shulgi in the year 48 of his reign agrees with
the fall of Ur dated 1912 BCE. In addition, the fall of Babylon dated 1499 BCE agrees also
better with the Elamite chronology, because as F. Vallat noticed: different texts show that five
generations of the same family have occupied the space between the reign of Kutir-Nahhunte to that of Kuk-
Na"ur III, the last Sukkalmah. By assigning thirty years to each generation, the interval between the two
kings is about one century and a half. As two sovereigns rules as sukkalmahat between Kutir-Nahhunte
and Kuk-Nasur II (Temti-Agun and Kutir-Silhaha), we can estimate that one century [not two] separates
the reign of Kuk-Na"ur II from that of Kuk-Na"ur III.
To conclude, the set of Assyrian reigns (which are without intercalation before
A##ur-Dan I), combined with the construction length between temples, enable us to date
precisely the death of !am#î-Adad I in 1680 BCE, which fixes the reign of Hammurabi
(1697-1654) and therefore those of Ibbi-Sîn (1936-1912) and Ammisaduqa (1551-1530).
The lunar eclipse at the end of Ibbi-Sîn's reign and at the end of Shulgi's reign, the risings
and settings of Venus dated according to a lunar calendar during Ammisaduqa's reign,
allow to obtain absolute astronomical dating that anchoring Mesopotamian chronology
(synchronisms are highlighted, astronomical dating are highlightedin blue sky, underlined
dates are adjusted from one year to take account of the absence of intercalation, framed
dates represent exact values deduced from synchronisms and dates in italic represent the
average values deduced from synchronisms):

111 F. VALLAT, H.GASCHE - Suse

in: Supplément au dictionnaire de la Bible. Fascicule 73 (2002) pp. 374-391.
112 E. SOLLBERGER, J.-R. KUPPER – Inscriptions royales sumériennes et akkadiennes

in: Littératures Anciennes du Proche-Orient n°3, Cerf, 1971, pp. 124-127.

113 K.A. KITCHEN - On the Reliability of the Old Testament

Cambridge 2003 Ed. W.B. Eerdmans pp. 319-324.

114 F. V ALLAT, H.GASCHE - Suse

in: Supplément au dictionnaire de la Bible. Fascicule 73 (2002) pp. 374-391, 433-434.

115 F. JOANNES - Dictionnaire de la civilisation mésopotamienne

Paris 2001 Éd. Robert Laffont pp. 68,69,822-824.

56 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

ASSYRIA Reign BABYLONIA Reign ELAM (A WAN) Reign

Ur-Nammu 2020-2002 18 [-]-lu 2015-1990 25
!ulgi 2002-1954 48 Chedorlaomer 1990-1954 36
Amar-Sîn 1954-1945 9
!u-Sîn 1945-1936 9 ISIN Reign
Ibbi-Sîn 1936-1912 24 I#bi-Erra 1923 - 33
Puzur-A##ur I 1913-1900 14 Collapse of Ur
!alim-ahum 1900-1886 14 -1890
Ilu-#umma 1886-1873 14 !û-ilî#u 1890-1880 10
Êri#u I 1873 - 40 Iddin-Dagân 1880-1859 21
-1834 I#me-Dagân 1859-1839 20
Ikunum 1834 - 14 Lipit-E#tar 1839-1828 11
-1821 Ur-Ninurta 1828-1800 28
Sargon I 1821-1782 40 Sûmû-abum 1799-1785 14 Bûr-Sîn 1800-1779 21
Puzur-A##ur II 1782-1774 8 Sûmû-la-Il 1785 - 36 Lipit-Enlil 1779-1774 5
Naram-Sîn 1774 - 54 Erra-imittî 1774-1767 7
-1749 Enlil-Bâni 1767-1743 24
Sâbium 1749 - 14 Zambîya 1743-1740 [3]
Iter-pi#a 1740-1736 [4]
-1722 -1735 Ur-dukuga 1736-1732 [4]
Êri#u II 1722-1712 10 Apil-Sîn 1735-1717 18 Sîn-mâgir 1732-1721 11
!am#î-Adad I 1712 - 33 Sîn-muballi! 1717-1697 20 Damiq-ilî#u 1721-1698 23
-1680 Hammurabi 1697-1680 17 Isin annexed
I#me-Dagan I 1680-1670 11 1680 - 26
A##ur-dugul 1670-1664 6
A##ur-apla-idi 1664 0
Nâ"ir-Sîn 1664 0
Sîn-namir 1664 0
Ipqi-I#tar 1664 0
Adad-"alûlu 1664 0
Adasi 1664 0
Bêlu-bâni 1664-1654 10 -1654
Libbaya 1654 - 17 Samsu-iluna 1654 - 38 ELAM Reign
-1638 Kutir-Nahhunte I 1645 - 25
!arma-Adad I 1638-1626 12
Puzur-Sîn 1626-1615 12 -1616 -1620
Bazaya 1615-1588 28 Abi-e#u# 1616-1588 28 Temti-Agun II 1620-1595 25
Lullaya 1588-1582 6 Ammiditana 1588 - 37 Kutir-Silhaha 1595-1570 25
!û-Ninûa 1582-1568 14
!arma-Adad II 1568-1565 3
Êri#u III 1565-1553 13 -1551 Kuk-Na#ur II 1570 - 25
!am#î-Adad II 1553-1547 6 Ammi"aduqa 1551 - 21 -1545
I#me-Dagan II 1547-1531 16 -1530 Kudu-zulu# II 1545-1525 20
!am#î-Adad III 1531-1516 16 Samsuditana 1530 - 31 Tan-Uli 1525-1505 20
A##ur-nêrârî I 1516-1491 26 Fall of Babylon -1499 Temti-halki 1505 - 20
Puzur-A##ur III 1491 - 24 Agum II 1503-1487 16 -1485
-1467 Burna-Buria# I 1487-1471 16 Kuk-Na#ur III 1485-1465 20
Enlil-nâ "ir I 1467-1455 13 Ka#tilia# III 1471-1455 16 Kidinu 1465-1450 15
Nûr-ili 1455-1443 12 Ulam-Buria# 1455 - 16 In#u#inak-sunkir- 1450 - 10
A##ur-#adûni 1443-1443 0 -1439 nappipir -1440
A##ur-rabi I 1443-1433 [10] Agum III 1439 - 16 Tan-Ruhuratir II 1440-1435 5
A##ur-nâdin-a$$e I 1433-1424 [10] -1423 !alla 1435-1425 10
Enlil-na "ir II 1424-1418 6 Kada#man-Harbe I 1423 - 16 Tepti-ahar 1425 - 20
A##ur-nêrârî II 1418-1411 7 -1407
A##ur-bêl-ni#e#u 1411-1403 9 Kara-inda# 1407 - 16 -1405
A##ur-rê’im-ni#e#u 1403-1395 8 -1391 Igi-halki 1405 - 20
A##ur-nâdin-a$$e II 1395-1385 10 Kurigalzu I 1391 - 16 -1385
Erîba-Adad I 1385 - 27 -1375 Pahir-i##an 1385-1375 10
-1358 Kada#man-Enlil I 1375-1360 15 Attar-Kittah 1375-1365 10
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 57

Most experts of Hittite history116 reject this chronology, because they considered it
too short of a century against theirs (which does not based on any synchronism dated by
astronomy in the period prior -1350!). Synchronisms according to Freu117 are highlighted
and corrected reigns are reconstituted from an average (#) smaller for Hittite reigns:
n° HITTITE (Freu) # Reign # MITANNIAN Reign BABYLONIAN Reign
1 [$uzziya I ?] 1670-1650 20 1605-1585 15
[Tud#aliya ?] 1585-1565 20
[PU-!arruma ?] 1565-1550 15
2 Labarna 1650-1625 25 1550-1530 20
3 $attu#ili I 1625-1600 25 1530-1510 20
average period 1 23 18
4 Mur#ili I 1600-1585 15 1510-1500 10 Samsuditana 1530-1499
5 $antili I 1585-1570 15 1500-1495 5 Kirta 1500 -
6 Zidanta I 1570 0 1495 0 KASSITE Reign
7 Ammuna 1570-1550 20 1495-1485 10 Agum II 1503-1487
8 $uzziya II 1550 0 1485 0 -1485
9 Telipinu 1550-1530 20 1485-1480 5 !utarna I 1485-1480 Burna-Buria# I 1487 -
10 Alluwamna 1530-1515 10 1480-1475 5 Barattarna I 1480 -
11 $antili II 1515-1505 10 1475-1470 5 -1471
12 Ta#urwaili I 1505-1500 5 1470 0 Ka#tilia# III 1471 -
13 Zidanza (II) 1500-1485 15 1470-1465 5
14 $uzziya III 1485-1470 15 1465-1460 5
average period 2 11 5
15 Muwatalli I 1470-1465 5 1460-1455 5 -1455 -1455
16 Tut#aliya I 1465-1440 25 1455-1435 20 !au#tatar I 1455-1435
17 $attu#ili II 1440-1425 15 1435-1425 10 Par#atatar 1435-1425
18 Tut#aliya II 1425-1390 35 1425-1395 30 !au#tatar II 1425-1395
19 Arnuwanda I 1400 - 30 1395 - 25 Barattarna II 1395-1390
-1370 -1370 Artatama I 1390-1373
20 Tut#aliya III 1370-1350 20 1370-1355 15 !utarna II 1373-1355
average period 3 23 18 (17)
21 !uppiluliuma I 1353-1322 31 1353-1322 31
22 Arnuwanda II 1322 <1 1322 <1
23 Mur#ili II 1322-1295 27 1322-1295 27
24 Muwatalli II 1295-1275 20 1295-1275 20
25 Urhi-Teshub 1275-1268 7 1275-1268 7
26 $attu#ili III 1268-1241 27 1268-1241 27
27 Tut#aliya IV 1241-1209 32 1241-1209 32
28 Arnuwanda III 1209-1207 2 1209-1207 2
29 !uppiluliyama II 1207-1185 22 1207-1185 22
average period 4 18 18
Early Empire (n° 1 to 9); Middle Empire (n° 10 to 20); Late Empire (n° 21 to 29)
This Hittite chronology contains four periods. The first and oldest period consists
of three kings, whose reign would average 23 years, this period does not include any
synchronism. The second, which begins with the fall of Babylon, consists of 11 kings
whose average reign would be 11 years. The third comprises six kings whose average reign
would be 23 years and the fourth includes nine kings whose average reign would be 18
years. However, the average length of these reigns is arbitrary, except for the last period
which can be dated precisely thanks to synchronisms from El Amarna letters (anchored by
the total solar eclipse dated year 10 of Mur#ili II). Instead of the average duration of 23
years for the third period, it is more logical to maintain the 18 years since the third period
precedes and looks like the fourth. It is therefore necessary lowering 5 years (= 23 - 18) the
116 http://www.hittites.info/history.aspx?text=history%2fEarly+Empire.htm
117J. FREU – Note sur les sceaux des rois de Mitanni/Mittani
in: NABU (mars 2008) pp. 5-8.
58 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

reigns given by Freu for that period. The second period was very disturbed by numerous
assassinations of kings, which has arguably led Freu to choose a lower average (11 years
instead of 23 for the next period). It is therefore necessary lowering 12 (= 23 - 11) years the
reigns given by Freu for the third period. Finally, Freu has once again selected a 23-year
average for the first period. It seems more logical to maintain the average duration of 18
years from the fourth period which was relatively stable. The reconstruction based on the
corrected duration of Hittite reigns provides a chronology that agrees with the fall of
Babylon in 1499 BCE. There is no precise synchronism with Egyptian chronology that can
anchor Kassite and Mitannian chronologies. The kingdom of Mitanni appears for the first
time on the Theban stele of the astronomer Amenemhat, which mentions the name as
"land of Meten" ($3st Mtn), indicating that it was an enemy against which the pharaoh
Thoumosis I had launched an expedition in the year 4 of his reign (in -1481). Now the king
of Mitanni during this period is !utarna I (1485-1480). It is possible that the disappearance
of the Babylonian kingdom have favored the rise of the Mitanni118 and the Pharaoh had
wanted to stop a possible westward extension of this new kingdom founded by Kirta.
The triple synchronism between kings Agum II (Kassite), Kirta (Mitannian) and
Ammuna (Hittite) requires setting reign of those kings over a period covering the reign of
Agum II (1503-1487). The corrected duration of the reign of Mur#ili I (1510-1500 instead
of 1600-1585), the Hittite king who overthrew the city of Babylon, is consistent with the
date of 1499 BCE. The 14C dating of strata corresponding to the period of the Old Hittite
Empire (1565-1510) gives well 1600-1500119 instead of 1670-1530 proposed by Freu, who
also refuses dating the fall of Babylon in 1499 BCE because there would have been "too
many" kings of Hana120 during the period 1600-1500 BCE called «dark ages».
Hana, which means "Bedouins121", was a confederation of Syrian cities (at least 6)
located in the region north of Mari, however many political events in this area remain
sketchy122. Moreover its kings did not belong to a classic dynasty but it was generally used
as a honorific title, as Yahdun-Lim (1716-1700) who was "King of Mari, Tutul and the land
of Hana". The chronology of these kings123 is difficult to obtain because there are few
synchronisms, in addition, the sequence of these kings is uncertain:
! Zimri-Lim (1680-1667) was "King of Mari and the land of Hana".
! Yadi#-Abu I, overseer of Hana (ugula #ana), had fought Samsuiluna, a Babylonian king,
in the latter's 27th year (1627 BCE). Afterwards the kingdom of Hana is likely under the
influence of Kassites since the following king of Terqa was Ka#tilia# I (1613-1591).
! From Ammiditana (1588-1551) the kingdom of Hana was in fact headed by Babylonian
kings up to Samsuditana (1530-1499). Kings of Terqa were probably vassals of Babylon.
! The Hurrians were enemies of the Hittite kings $attu#ili I (1530-1510) and Mur#ili I
(1510-1500), and their strengh is shown by records of their conquest of much of the
Hittite kingdom in the time of $attu#ili I who seems to have retaliated late in his career,
attacking Aleppo (Halab). However, Kuwari, a king of Hana, managed to defeat an
attack led by the warriors of Hatti ($atte). Conceivably124, the Hittite expedition of
118 According to the Israelite chronology (Judges 3:8-15), there was also a Mitannian domination over Syria by a king called Kushan-
rishataïm (1452-1444), who was likely !au#tatar I (1455-1435).
119 R.L. GORNY – Çadir Höyük

in: 2006-2007 Annual Report, The Oriental Institute pp. 18-33.

120 J. FREU -Des origines à la fin de l'Ancien royaume hittite

Paris 2007, Éd. L'Harmattan pp. 111-117.

121 D. CHARPIN – Le «pays de Mari et des Bédouins» à l'époque de Samsu-iluna de Babylone

in: Revue d'Assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale volume CV (2011) pp. 41-59.

122 Some eras are well understood, but many others remain almost unknown.
123 A.H. PODANY –The Land of Hana: Kings, Chronology, Scribal Tradition

2002 Ed. CDL Press pp. 1-74.

124 T. BRYCE – The Kingdom of the Hittites

Oxford 2005 Ed. Oxford University Press pp. 99-100.

 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 59

Mur#ili I in arose from an alliance between the Hittites and the Kassites, the incentive
for the Hittites being the rich spoils of Babylon, and for the Kassites the prospect of
creating a new ruling dynasty in Babylonia.
! Qi#-Addu, a king of Bidah?, was a vassal of both Barattarna I and !au#tatar I. The
kingdom of Hana (Terqa) became independent afterwards. Although several Hanean
reigns are controversial its chronology is as follows125 (synchronisms highlighted):
HANEAN Reign # KASSITE Reign # BABYLONIAN Reign #
Yahdun-Lim 1716-1700 16 Sîn-muballi! 1717-1697 20
(kings of Mari) 1700-1680 20 Hammurabi 1697 - 43
Zimri-Lim 1680-1667 13
Yâpa#-!umu-Abu 1667-1654 [13] -1654
I"i-!umu-Abu 1654-1641 [13] Ganda# 1661 - [2]6 Samsu-iluna 1654-1645 38
Yadi#-Abu I 1641-1627 [14] -1635 1945-1927
[Muti-Hur#ana ?] 1627-1613 [14] Agum I 1635-1613 22 1627-1616
Ka#tilia# 1613-1591 22 Ka#tilia# I 1613-1591 22 Abi-e#u# 1616-1588 28
!unu#ru-Ammu 1591-1575 [16] U##i 1591-1583 8 Ammiditana 1588 - 37
Ammi-madar 1575 - [16] Abiratta# 1583-1567 [16]
-1559 Ka#tilia# II 1567-1551 [16] -1551
Yadi#-Abu II 1559-1543 [16] Urziguruma# 1551-1535 [16] Ammi"aduqa 1551 - 21
Zimri-Lim II 1543-1527 [16] Harba#ihu 1535 - [16] -1530
Kasap-ilî 1527-1511 [16] -1519 Samsuditana 1530 - 31
Kuwari 1511-1495 [16] Tiptakzi 1519-1503 [16] -1499
Ya'usa / Hanaya 1495 - [15] Agum II 1503 - [16] MITANNIAN Reign #
-1480 -1487 Kirta 1500-1485 15
Qi#-Addu 1480 - [25] Burna-Buria# I 1487 - [16] !utarna I 1485-1475 10
-1471 Barattarna I 1475 - 20
-1455 Ka#tilia# III 1471-1455 [16] -1455
Iddin-Kakka 1455-1435 [20] Ulam-Buria# 1455-1439 [16] !au#tatar I 1455-1435 20
I#ar-Lim 1435-1415 [20] Agum III 1439-1423 [16] Par#atatar 1435-1425 10
Iggid-Lim 1415-1395 [20] Kada#man-Harbe I 1423-1407 [16] !au#tatar II 1425-1395 30
I#i#-Dagan 1395 - [20] Kara-inda# 1407-1391 [16] Barattarna II 1395-1390 5
-1375 Kurigalzu I 1391-1375 [16] Artatama I 1390-1373 17
Ahuni 1375-1355 [20] Kada#man-Enlil I 1375-1360 15 !utarna II 1373-1355 18
Hammurapi 1355-1335 [20] Burna-Buria# II 1360-1333 27 Tu#ratta 1353-1339 14
Pagiru 1335-1315 [20] Kurigalzu II 1333-1308 25 Artatama II 1339-1325 14

The numerous synchronisms during the Late Empire confirm the chronology of
Assyrian reigns without intercalation through Egyptian chronology:
! The death of Hattu#ili III is dated in year 42 of Ramses II126.
! The Nihriya battle involved the Hittite king Tudhaliya IV, Hattu#ili III successor, and
the Assyrian king Tukulti-Ninurta I in the first two years of his reign127.
! The reign of Hattu#ili III128 is located within Shalmaneser I's reign. Hattu#ili III died
shortly before Shalmaneser I, and the successor of Hattu#ili, Tuthaliya IV, has been at
war with the successor of Shalmaneser I, Tukulti-Ninurta I, in the first two years of the
latter, which gives: Year 42 of Ramses II = death of Hattu#ili III = death of
Shalmaneser I +/- 1 year. Thus the accession of Tukulti-Ninurta I (year 0) matches the
year 42 of Ramses II. Tuthaliya IV began to rule from this year, but it is possible that his
father (Hattu#ili III), feeling old and sick, associated him to kingship as crown prince
125 S. YAMADA – An Adoption Contract from Tell Taban, the Kings of the Land of Hana, and the Hana-style Scribal Tradition
in: Revue d'Assyriologie et d'archéologie orientale volume CV (2011) pp. 61-84.
126 C. DESROCHES NOBLECOURT – Ramsès II la véritable histoire

Paris 1996 Ed. Pygmalion p. 365.

127 T. BRYCE – The Kingdom of the Hittites (tablette KBo IV 14).

Oxford 2005 Ed. Oxford University Press p. XV, 375-382.

128 G. BECKMAN – Hittite Chronology

in: Akkadica 119-120 (2000) p. 24.

60 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

(appearing under the name of Hi#mi-#arruma). Two synchronisms are therefore

particularly important to examine in order to verify the chronology:
1) accession (year 0) of Kada#man-Enlil II (in -1264) = year 19 of Ramses II.
2) accession (year 0) of Tukulti-Ninurta Ier (in -1242) = year 42 of Ramses II.
The first synchronism "year 0 of Kada#man Enlil II = year 19 of Ramses II"
derives from the sequence of the following events129:
1. To expand his empire, the Hittite king
!uppiluliuma I engaged [in -1352] a
process of conquest, which came at the
expense of Mitanni and Amurru, a vassal
kingdom of Egypt
2. To reconquer Amurru, Ramses II
attacked the Hittite king Muwatalli II.
The Battle of Kadesh is presented as a
victory by Ramses, although he actually
faced disaster because of over-optimism.
This battle is dated III Shemu 9 Year 5
(ie at the extreme end of year 5).
3. Ramses II 'took advantage' of Muwatalli II's death and of accession of young king Urhi-
Teshub [Mur#ili III] to launch a new conquest of Amurru. He temporarily conquered 18
cities (including Dapur and Tunip). This war is dated towards the end of year 8
(April/May) that implies to place the death of the Hittite king in the 1st half of year 8.
4. After 7 years of reign130, Hattu#ili III expelled his nephew Urhi-Te#ub who took refuge
in Egypt. Hattu#ili III demanded his extradition to Ramses II, who refused it.
5. Fearing a possible coup fomented by Egypt hosting Urhi-Te#ub, his rival, Hattu#ili III
combines with Babylonian king Kada#man-Turgu to face Egypt. The epithets of Ramses
on a stele at Beth-Shean, dated IV Peret 1 of his year 18 (2nd half of the year), have a
strong military flavour and attest to the frenetic activity that prevailed in this region131.
6. Having learned the collapse of the kingdom of Mitanni, annexed by Assyrian king
Shalmaneser I, Ramses II preferred to stabilize the volatile situation with Hittite king
Hattu#ili III by a peace treaty, dated I Peret 21, year 21 of Ramses II (1st half of year 21).
7. A letter of Hattu#ili III132 sent to Babylonian king Kada#man-Enlil II to justify his
shifting alliances, tells us that the latter's father, Kada#man-Turgu, had died shortly
before the peace treaty133 of the year 21.
The synchronism "year 0 of Tukulti-Ninurta I [in -1242] = year 42 of Ramses II"
results of the sequence of following events:
1. The Treaty of the year 21 led to an era of stability, which pushed Ramses II to boost his
ties by suggesting Hattu#ili III to marry one of his daughters. The Hittite king accepted
and proposed to send his daughter [Maathorneferure] for his 2nd jubilee (year 33).
Negotiations for the marriage began IV Akhet of year 33 but were without result III
until III Peret of year 34 because of the reluctance of Puduhepa, Hattu#ili III's wife.
129 K.A. KITCHEN – RAMSES II le pharaon triomphant
Monaco 1985 2003 Éd. du Rocher pp. 82-134.
C. DESROCHES NOBLECOURT – Ramsès II la véritable histoire
Paris 1996 Éd. Pygmalion pp. 257-294, 329-365.
130 T. BRYCE – The Kingdom of the Hittites

Oxford 2005 Ed. Oxford University Press p. 261.

131 C. R. HIGGINBOTHAM – Egyptianization and Elite Emulation in Ramesside

Leuven 2000 Ed. Brill pp. 31-34.

132 G. BECKMAN – Hittite Diplomatic Texts

Atlanta 1999 Ed. Society of Biblical Literature pp. 138-143.

133 T. Bryce notes that after the year 21 Hattu#ili could have appealed of extradition clauses that would contain this treaty.
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 61

2. Relations between the two kings became so cordial that Ramses II, after his 4th jubilee
year 39, proposed to the Hittite king to meet him in person. Hattu#ili III appears to
have accepted and proposed, as a pledge, another of his daughters to Ramses II to seal
this agreement at the top. Nothing is known of the name and fate of the girl who
followed her sister into the harem of Ramses II. There is also no more information on
later relationships between the two courts. The wedding date is not specified, but
presumably it intervened in the year 42, because it is from this time that Ramses II
assumed his new title of "Sovereign God of Heliopolis" (found in cuneiform texts).
The general study of special epithets shows that they were adopted at a given time
and in under certain circumstances to define and consecrate forever a theological aspect of
the royal person134. The title "Ruler of Heliopolis" appears for the first time on the
ostracon Louvre 2262, dated IV Peret, year 42 of Ramses II. This title might appear shortly
before, but this is unlikely because no special circumstances mentioned in connection with
Ramses except he married the daughter of the Hittite king. Hattu#ili III had offered her
first daughter, plus a rich dowry, for the 2nd jubilee of Ramses II year 33, one can assume
that he proceeded the same way for his second daughter at the 5th jubilee year 42. The fact
that relationships are interrupted just after the marriage can be explained only by the
disappearance of Hattu#ili III. This death has probably pushed the new Assyrian king
Tukulti-Ninurta I to attack Tuthaliya IV the young successor of Hattu#ili III, who lost his
Tarhuntassa region. This defeat pushed the Hittite king to bind to the Babylonian king (not
named) by a wedding with one of his daughters. Ramses II wrote to Tuthaliya IV to
discourage such a connection, but in vain135 (Ramses celebrated his 14th jubilee year 66136).
The year 42 of Ramses was chosen by Wennufer, high priest of Osiris at Abydos, to
praise Ramses II and to thank him for having appointed several members of his family to
high office. It is likely that this special year was one where it was decided to build the
temple of Wadi es-Seboua dedicating the new function of Ramses II as Ruler of Heliopolis.
This temple was completed after the year 44 (stele of the officer Ramose).
The reign of Ramses II is fixed by two astronomical phenomena: 1) a helical rising
of Sirius during the 11-year reign of Sety I, dated I Akhet 1, year 4137, which fixes138 his
accession around -1294 +/- 4. It is indeed a Sothic rising because the astronomical ceiling
of Sety I actually started by a Sothic rising and according to his Cenotaph: All these stars
begin on 1st Akhet when Sirius appears139; 2) the 1st day of the egyptian lunar calendar (called
psdntyw "shining ones") dated II Peret 27 in the year 52 of Ramses II140 (December 20, 1232
BCE) actually coincides with a full moon141 (such coincidence occurs only every 25 years).
Chronological reconstruction142 of all the Egyptian, Hittite, Babylonian and
Assyrian reigns over the period 1295-1215 is as follows (synchronisms are highlighted):
134 J. YOYOTTE – Le nom de Ramsès “Souverain d'Héliopolis”
in: Mit Rahineh 1956 Philadelphia Ed. The University Museum pp. 66-70.
135 T. BRYCE – The Kingdom of the Hittites

Oxford 2005 Ed. Oxford University Press pp. 297-298.

136 C. DESROCHES NOBLECOURT – Ramsès II la véritable histoire

Paris 1996 Éd. Pygmalion pp. 361-376.

137 K. SETHE - Sethos I und die Erneuerung der Hundssternperiode

in: Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache 66 (1931) pp. 1-7.

138 At Thebes (Longitude 32°39' Latitude 25°42') with an arcus visionis of 8.7 the Sothiac rising is dated 12 July on the period 1370-600

(see http://www.imcce.fr/fr/grandpublic/phenomenes/sothis/index.php ) and I Akhet 1 = 12 July only for 4 years 1293-1290

(see http://www.chronosynchro.net/wordpress/convertisseur )
139 O. NEUGEBAUER, R.A. PARKER – Egyptian Astronomical Texts I

London 1960 Ed. Brown University Press pp. 44, 54 (Text T2 plate 47).
K. SETHE - Sethos I und die Erneuerung der Hundssternperiode
in: Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache 66 (1931) pp. 1-7.
140 J.J. JANSSEN – Two Ancient Egyptian Ship's Logs

Leiden 1961 Ed. E.J. Brill p. 12.

141 http://www.imcce.fr/fr/grandpublic/phenomenes/phases_lune/index.php
142 Years of Ramses II go from June to May accession dated III Shemu 27) and years of Babylonian reigns run from April to March.
62 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

EGYPT HATTI BABYLONIA ASSYRIA

Ramses I [-]/Muwatalli II 13 1295 9
2/Sethy I [1] 14 1294 10
1/2 [2] 15 1293 11
2/3 [3] 16 1292 12
3/4 [4] 17 1291 13
4/5 [5] 18 1290 14
5/6 [6] 19 1289 15
6/7 [7] 20 1288 16
7/8 [8] 21 1287 17
8/9 [9] 22 1286 16
9/10 [10] 23 1285 17
10/11 [11] 24 1284 18
11/Ramses II [12] 25 1283 19
1/2 [13] 26/Kada!man-Turgu 1282 20
2/3 [14] 1 1281 21
3/4 [15] 2 1280 22
4/5 [16] 3 1279 23
5/6 [Battle of Kadesh] 4 1278 24
6/7 [18] 5 1277 25
7/8 [19] 6 1276 26
8/9 Urhi-Te!ub [Mur!ili III] 7 1275 27
9/10 1 8 1274 28
10/11 2 9 1273 29
11/12 3 10 1272 30
12/13 4 11 1271 31/Shalmaneser I
13/14 5 12 1270 1
14/15 6 13 1269 2
15/16 7/& attu!ili III 14 1268 3
16/17 [1] 15 1267 4
17/18 [alliance] 16 1266 5
18/19 [3] 17 1265 6
19/20 [4] 18/Kada!man-Enlil II 1264 7 [Collapse of Mitanni]
20/21 [Peace treaty] 1 1263 8
21/22 [6] 2 1262 9
22/23 [7] 3 1261 10
23/24 [8] 4 1260 11
24/25 [9] 5 1259 12
25/26 [10] 6 1258 13
26/27 [11] 7 1257 14
27/28 [12] 8 1256 15
28/29 [13] 9/Kudur-Enlil 1255 16
29/30 [1st Jubilee] [14] 1 1254 17
30/31 [15] 2 1253 18
31/32 [16] 3 1252 19
32/33 [2nd Jubilee, 1st wedding] 4 1251 20
33/34 [18] 5 1250 21
34/35 [19] 6 1249 22
35/36 [3nd Jubilee] [20] 7 1248 23
36/37 [21] 8 1247 24
37/38 [22] 9/"agarakti-"uria! 1246 25
38/39 [4th Jubilee] [23] 1 1245 26
39/40 [24] 2 1244 27
40/41 [25] 3 1243 28
41/42 [5th Jubilee, 2nd wedding] 4 1242 29/Tukulti-Ninurta I
42/43 [27]/Tut"aliya IV 5 1241 1
43/44 [1] 6 1240 2
44/45 [6th Jubilee] [2] 7 1239 3
45/46 [3] 8 1238 4
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 63

46/47 [4] 9 1237 5

47/48 [7th Jubilee] [5] 10 1236 6
48/49 [6] 11 1235 7
49/50 [7] 12 1234 8
50/51 [8th Jubilee] [8] 13/Ka!tilia!u IV 1233 9
51/52 [9] 1 1232 10
52/53 [10] 2 1231 11
53/54 [9th Jubilee] [11] 3 1230 12
54/55 [12] 4 1229 13
55/56 [Kurunta] 9 1228 14
56/57 [10th Jubilee] [14] 10 1227 15
57/58 [15] 11 1226 16
58/59 [16] 12/Enlil-nâdin-!umi 1225 17
59/60 [11th Jubilee] [17] 1/Kada!man-Harbe II 1224 18
60/61 [12th Jubilee] [18] Adad-!uma-iddina 1223 19
61/62 [19] 1 1222 20
62/63 [13th Jubilee] [20] 2 1221 21
63/64 [21] 3 1220 22
64/65 [22] 4 1219 23
65/66 [14th Jubilee] [23] 5 1218 24
66/67 [24] 6/Adad-!uma-u#ur 1217 22
67/Merenptah [25] 1 1216 23
1/2 [26] 2 1215 24

The agreement with all these dates is excellent. However this Egyptian chronology
is generally not accepted by Egyptologists who prefer to set the accession of Ramses II in
1279, based on the lunar cycle proposed by Parker143 (in 1950). Egyptian chronology of this
period (1300-1200) must be reviewed precisely.
If the dates obtained from 14C method, calibrated by dendrochronology, still remain
imprecise, however, they set out values (in 2010) with a precision of +/- 13 years over the
period 1300-1000144. Durations of reigns according to synchronisms are calculated taking
into account accession and highest dates in the reign (see next page):
Reign Length according to:
No. XIXth dynasty (14C) 14C synchronisms discrepancy
1 Ramses I 1302-1302 0 year 1 year 4 months -1
2 Sethy I 1302-1285 17 years 11 years +6
3 Ramses II 1285-1219 66 years 67 years 2 months -1
4 Merenptah 1219-1206 13 years 9 years 3 months +4
5 Sethy II 1206-1200 6 years 5 years +1
6 [Amenmes] -1209 - [4 years]
7 Siptah 1200-1194 6 years 6 years 0
-Tausert 1194-1192 2 years 1 year 6 months 0
XXth dynasty
1 Sethnakht 1192-1189 3 years 3 years 5 months 0
2 Ramses III 1189-1158 31 years 31 years 1 month 0
3 Ramses IV 1158-1152 6 years 6 years 8 months -1
4 Ramses V 1152-1148 4 years 3 years 2 months +1
5 Ramses VI 1148-1140 8 years 7 years +1
6 Ramses VII 1140-1133 7 years 7 years 1 month 0
7 Ramses VIII 1133-1130 3 years 3 months ? +3
8 Ramses IX 1130-1112 18 years 18 years 4 months 0
9 Ramses X 1112-1103 9 years 2 years 5 months +7
10 Ramses XI 1103-1073 30 years 26 years 1 month ? +4
143 L.W. CASPERSON – The Lunar Date of Ramesses II
in: Journal of Near Eastern Studies 47 (1988) pp. 181-184.
144 C.B. RAMSEY, M.W. DEE, J.M. ROWLAND, T.F. G. HIGHAM, S.A. H ARRIS, F. BROCK, A. QUILES, E.M. WILD, E.S. MARCUS , A.J.

SHORTLAND - Radiocarbon - Based Chronology for Dynastic Egypt in: Science Vol 328 (10 june 2010) pp. 1554-1557.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/data/328/5985/1554/DC1/1
64 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

DETERMINING EGYPTIAN CHRONOLOGY ON 1295-1155 PERIOD

As the lunar day psdntyw, II Peret 27, year 52 of Ramses II is astronomically dated
December 20, 1232 BCE (full moon) the accession of Ramses II (III Shemu 27) has to be
dated June 1, 1283 BCE. This date is confirmed by the accession of Sety I in 1294 BCE,
determined by the Sothic rising of I Akhet 1 year 4. In fact, the reign of Sety I lasted 11
years (actually 11 years and a few days) as shown in the autobiography of the priest
Bakenkhons145 (the 11 years of Sety I are all represented, except 10, which confirms the 11
years reign)146, his accession must be dated in 1294 (= 1283 + 11). Furthermore, the
accession of Kada#man-Enlil II (1264-1255) is dated in year 19 of Ramses II147, implying
again dating the accession of Ramses II in 1283 (= 1264 + 19). Chronology of dynasties
based on years of reign and accession dates148:
Length of reign accession date highest date Reign
Ramses I 1 year 4 months III Peret ? 2 II Peret 20 01/1295-05/1294
Sethy I 11 years III Shemu 24 ? 11 IV Shemu 13 06/1294-06/1283
Ramses II 67 years 2 months III Shemu 27 67 I Akhet 18 06/1283-07/1216
Merenptah 9 years 3 months II Akhet 5-13? 10 IV Akhet 7 08/1216-10/1207
Sethy II 5 years I Peret ? 6 I Peret 19 11/1207-10/1202
[Amenmes] [4 years] [II Shemu ?] [ 4 III Shemu 29 ?] [04/1206-03/1202]
Siptah 6 years I Peret 2? 7 IV Akhet 22 11/1202-10/1196
(Siptah)-Tausert 1 year 6 months " 8 II Shemu 29 11/1196-04/1194
Sethnakht 3 years 5 months " 4 11/1196-03/1192
Ramses III 31 years 1 month I Shemu 26 32 III Shemu 14 04/1192-04/1161
Ramses IV 6 years 8 months III Shemu 15 7 III Akhet 29? 05/1161-12/1155

The reign durations fit quite well with those of Manetho (via Flavius Josephus).
However, because of the uncertainty on some accession dates three of these reigns may
have an additional year if we place it at the end of the last year of reign instead of the
beginning. Thus, Sety II may have reigned 6 years instead of 5 (the most likely)149 and
Ramses II may have reigned 67 years and 2 months instead of 66 years and 2 months. In
his stele dated beginning of year 4, Ramses IV compares his 3 years of reign with the 67
years (not 66) of Ramses II, which involves a death of Ramses II at the beginning of his
year 68 in accordance with the number of his jubilees (sed festivals). In fact, 14 jubilees are
attested, the first one being celebrated in year 30 and the others every 3 years: the 11th in
year 60 (=2x30), the 12th in year 61 and the 14th in year 66. The case most delicate being the
4 years reign of pharaoh Amenmes, that some place between Merenptah and Sety II, and
others in parallel with Sety II (and delay it of approximately 5 months). Several
synchronisms and lunar dates, dated by astronomy, can resolve these uncertainties.
The violent crisis that hit the eastern Mediterranean caused the ruin of the great
empires of the Bronze Age, which the Trojan War is the most famous episode, is exactly
dated year 8 of Ramesses III. Thebes, Lefkandi, Tiryns, Mycenae and Pylos in mainland
145 Bakenkhonsu states that he spent 4 years as an excellent youngster, 11 years as a youth, as a trainee stable-master for king Men[maat]re (Sety I), wab priest
of Amun for 4 years, god's father of Amun for 12 years, third pries of Amun for 15 years, second priest of Amun for 12 (E. FLOOD – Biographical Texts
from Ramessid Egypt Atlanta 2007 Ed. Society of Biblical Literature p. 41).
146 E. HORNUNG – The New Kingdom

in: Ancient Egyptian Chronology (Leiden 2006) Ed. Brill pp. 210-211.
147 W.A. WARD - The Present Status of Egyptian Chronology

in: Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 288 (1991) pp. 55,56.
148 E. HORNUNG – The New Kingdom

in: Ancient Egyptian Chronology. Leiden 2006 Ed. Brill pp. 208-211.
C. VANDERSLEYEN - L'Egypte et la vallée du Nil Tome 2
Paris 1995 Éd. Presses Universitaires de France pp. 467-512.
J. VON BECKERATH – Chronologie des pharaonischen ägypten
1997 Ed. Verlag Philipp von Zabern pp. 201-202.
149 H. ALTENMÜLLER – Bemerkunden zu den königsgräbern des neuen reiches

in: Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 10 (1983) pp. 43-61.

 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 65

Greece and Chania in Crete, were ransacked and sometimes completely destroyed. Most of
these cities and their palaces were burned. In Anatolia, among the most important sites,
archaeological levels similarly destroyed are found and which dates from the same period.
Hattusha, the Hittite capital, was sacked and burned just like the major cities of Cyprus. On
the north coast of Syria, the flourishing city of Ugarit was destroyed and never inhabited
thereafter. Mesopotamia was preserved as the wave of devastation did not extend to the
east150, and it was the Egyptians who alone could stop it. The temple of Ramses III at
Medinet Habu contains an account of this victory over the Sea Peoples. The identification
of these peoples as their reasons for migration are poorly understood, however, these
events are precisely dated. The great Alexandrian scholar Eratosthenes (276-193), for
example, dated the famous Trojan War in -1184. Manetho151, while confirming the 7-year
reign of Queen [Siptah]/Tausert (1202-1194) states: Thouôris, (...) at the time when Troy was
taken, reigned 7 years (Tausert actually reigned, from 1195 to 1194, at the beginning of the
war, 10 years before the destruction of Troy)152. This destruction coincides with the fall of
the Hittite Empire dated indirectly in year 8 of Ramses III and in year 2 of Meli-Shipak (the
last texts from Emar are dated [-]/VI2/2 and 6/VII/[2] of Meli-Shipak)153, in October 1185
BCE. This war led by the Sea Peoples had to be spread over less than one year because,
according to the inscription of Ramses III, all countries (Hatti, the coast of Cilicia,
Carchemish, Cyprus, etc.) were "destroyed all at once" and, according to the text of Homer
(Odyssey XIV:240-280), the sacking of the city of Priam [Troy], after 10 years of fighting,
was followed "in less than 1 month" by the cruise of Achaeans to Egypt and the sacking of
its wonderful fields. As year 2 of Meli-Shipak is dated in 1185 BCE, Ramses III's accession
has to be dated in 1192 (= 1185 +8 – 2 +1)154. This date is consistent with the accession of
Ramses II in 1283 (= 1192 + 3+5 m. +6 + 5 + 9+3 m. + 67+2 m.).
The reign of Tausert is well known155. Wife of Sety II, she exercised after his death
a strong influence on his son Siptah (Regency?) then, at the latter's death, she continued his
reign instead of inaugurating a new one (Sethnakht also began his reign from Siptah's
death)156. Egyptian women, as wife or daughter of Pharaoh, could access the deity, which
authorized them to embody and so prolong the reign of a dead pharaoh without successor,
but not to begin a new reign. This case occurred three times over the period 1500-1200: 1)
Tausert, wife of Sety II, continuing the reign of his son Siptah, 2) Ankhkheperure
continuing the reign of Semenkhkare her husband and 3) Hatshepsut continuing the reign
of her husband Thutmose II (which was in turn extended by Thutmose III at Hatshepsut's
death). These extended reigns were interpreted by some as co-regencies, that distorts the
chronology. Another source of error comes from the change of name by some pharaohs,
interpreted as the reign of new sovereign. In fact it is not the case, since for no apparent
reason Ramses-Siptah (Sekhâenre-Meryamon) was then called Merenptah Siptah (Akhenrê-
Setepenre) from the year 3 of his reign. It is possible to anchor Tausert's reign, and
consequently the one of Ramses III, thanks to a graffito scribe named Thotemhab left at
150 R. MORKOT – Atlas de la Grèce antique
Paris 1996 Éd. Autrement pp. 33-34.
151 W.G. WADDELL – Manetho

Massachusetts 1956 Ed. Harvard University Press pp. 101-119.

152 According to Thucydides, the Trojan War was the result of an expedition of disparate tribes of pirates (see Odyssey III:71-74), living

on islands around Achaia, who were united by King Agamemnon of Mycenae. This expedition against the Trojans was the culmination
of 10 years of battle (The Peloponnesian War I:8-12). For example, a battle in Egypt is mentioned in the year 5 of Rameses III.
153 Y. COHEN, I. SINGER – A Late Synchronism between Ugarit and Emar

in: Essays on Ancient Israel in Its Near Eastern Context (Eisenbrauns 2006) Indiana p. 134.
154 Year 2 of Meli-Shipak beginning on Nisan 1, or on April 4, 1185 BCE, and year 8 of Ramesses III starts at I Shemu 26 or so in April

at that time. The accession is counted as year 0 by the Babylonians and as a year 1 by the Egyptians.
155 V.G. CALLENDER – Queen Tausret and the End of Dynasty 19

in: Studien zur Altägyptischen Kultur 32 (2004) pp. 81-104.

156 C. VANDERSLEYEN - L'Egypte et la vallée du Nil Tome 2

Paris 1995 Éd. Presses Universitaires de France pp. 591-593.

66 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

the Theban temple of Deir el-Bahari, in memory of his participation in the Festival of the
Valley. During this annual celebration, the processional statue of Amon passed two nights
at the funerary temple of the reigning monarch. The graffito of Thotemhab tells us that in
the II Shemu 28 Year 7 of Tausert, the statue of Amon was transported to the mortuary
temple. The Beautiful Festival of the Valley was celebrated the day after the 1st lunar day,
which implies a to date that day 1 (psdntyw) to II Shemu 27 Year 7 of Tausert157.
The reign of Pharaoh Amenmes158 can not be placed between that of Merenptah
and Sety II, but only in parallel with the one of Sety II, as can be deduced from the lunar
dates (see table hereafter for dates), because the insertion of 4-year reign of Amenmes
would push the lunar date, either in II Peret 21 in -1236 if the reign of Sety II is 5 years
long, either in II Peret 2 in -1237 if this reign is 6 years long, yet the only possibility is that
of II Peret 27 in -1232.
The reign of Ramses III began at I Shemu 26 year 1, or March 9, -1192. This
reconstruction also confirms the 2-year reign of the pharaoh Sethnakht because the
duration of 3 years159 would imply a lunar date II Shemu 7 (April -1196), incompatible with
that of II Shemu 27 from the graffito. This date 27 Shemu II Year 7 corresponds to April
10 in -1195 and actually coincides with a full moon160. A good indication of the rivalry
between the two kings, Setnakht and Amenmes (later considered as usurper), comes from
their cartouche, each having made erase the name of the other. Year 4 of Sethnakht (Al-
Ahram Weekly 11-17 January 2007 No. 827) involves at least 3 years of reign, but as this
reign began with the death of Siptah, Tausert's reign (1 year 6 months) must be subtracted.
We also note that the two lunar dates (psdntyw) of Ramses III (I Shemu 11 and IV
Peret 1)161 fall at the beginning and end of year 5. Moreover, the beautiful feast of the valley162
[probably at the end of year 5], celebrated just after the lunar day 1(psdntyw), is dated II
Shemu 1 and 2, which implies to date this lunar day I Shemu at 30 or March 12 in -1187
(full moon). The lunar day psdntyw has always played an important role in Egyptian cult. On
the stele from Abydos dated Year 4 of Ramses IV, Pharaoh says: My heart has not forgotten the
day of my psdntyw feast163 and this stele is dated 10 Akhet III, which implies a connection with
this lunar day. The year 4 of Ramses IV begins at III Shemu 15 (the day of his accession)164
and in 1158 according to the previous scheme, one can also verify that the 4 year of
Ramses IV begins with a lunar day 1 dated III Shemu 16, which explains the choice of the
year 4 for this inscription. The III Shemu 15 corresponds to April 19 in -1158, full moon
day, as the III Akhet 10 which corresponds to August 16, -1158.
The complete reconstruction of all Egyptian reigns on the period 1295-1155, based
on the lunar cycle of 25 years, allows to check the coincidences of dates which occur only
every 25 years, if there is no error, or every 11/14 years if there is an error of 1 day.

157 R. KRAUSS – Moïse le pharaon

Monaco 2005 Éd. Rocher pp. 125-127.
158 T. S CHNEIDER – Conjectures about Amenmesse

in: Ramesside Studies in Honour of K.A. itchen (Rutherford Press, 2011) pp. 445-451.
159 If the Elephantine Stele (KRI V:671-672) states that all the enemies of Egypt were eliminated on II Shemu 1 in year 2 of Sethnakht,

there is no explicit link with a accession date, but it could correspond to the time of the disappearance of Tausert (whose highest date is
the II Shemu 29 year 8 of Siptah).
160 http://www.imcce.fr/fr/grandpublic/phenomenes/phases_lune/index.php
161 A. SPALINGER – Egyptian Festival Dating and the Moon

in: Under One Sky (Münster 2002) Ed. Ugarit-Verlag pp. 385-389.
162 S. EL-SABBAN – Temple Festival Calendars of Ancient Egypt

Liverpol 2000 Ed. Liverpool University Press pp. 67,68.

163 A.J. PEDEN – The Reign of Ramesses IV

Warminster 1994 Ed. Aris & Phillips Ltd pp. 91-94.

164 C. VANDERSLEYEN - L'Egypte et la vallée du Nil Tome 2

Paris 1995 Éd. Presses Universitaires de France p. 616.

 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 67

Legend of colours:
Year 1 of Ramses I from IV Peret, June in -1294, to III Peret, May in -1293 (-1293 = 1293 BCE)
Synchronism with the Sothic rising dated I Akhet 1 in year 4 of Sety I (July 12, -1291).
Synchronism with Babylonian chronology:
years 19 and 42 of Ramses II (in -1264 and -1241); year 8 of Ramesses III (in -1185).
Lunar dates: year 52 de Ramses II (in -1232); year 7 de Siptah (in -1195); year 4 de Ramses IV (in -1158).

SEASON AKHET PERET SHEMU

I II III IV I II III IV I II III IV 5
month Jul. Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun.
Ramses I 1295 1 1 1 30 29 29 28 28 27 27 26 26 25 25
Sety I 1294 2 2 19 19 18 18 18 17 17 16 16 15 15 14
1293 1 3 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3
1292 2 4 28 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 24 23 23 23
1291 3 5 17 17 16 16 15 15 14 14 13 13 12 12
1290 4 6 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1
1289 5 7 25 25 24 24 23 23 23 22 22 21 21 20
1288 6 8 15 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 10
1287 7 9 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 30 29 29 28
1286 8 10 23 23 22 22 21 21 20 20 19 19 18 18
1285 9 11 12 12 11 11 10 10 10 9 9 8 8 7
1284 10 12 2 1 1 30 30 29 28 28 27 27 27 26
Ramses II 1283 11 13 21 20 20 19 19 18 18 17 17 16 16 15
1282 1 14 10 9 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4
1281 2 15 29 28 28 27 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 24
1280 3 16 18 18 17 17 16 16 15 15 14 14 14 13
1279 4 17 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2
1278 5 18 26 26 26 25 25 24 24 23 23 22 22 21
1277 6 19 16 15 15 14 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 11
1276 7 20 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 30
1275 8 21 24 24 23 23 22 22 21 21 20 20 19 19
1274 9 22 13 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 9 9 8
1273 10 23 3 2 2 1 1 30 30 29 29 28 28 27
1272 11 24 22 21 21 20 20 19 19 18 18 18 17 17
1271 12 25 11 11 10 10 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6
1270 13 1 1 30 29 29 28 28 27 27 26 26 25 25
1269 14 2 19 19 18 18 18 17 17 16 16 15 15 14
1268 15 3 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3
1267 16 4 28 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 24 23 23 23
1266 17 5 17 17 16 16 15 15 14 14 13 13 12 12
1265 18 6 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1
1264 19 7 25 25 24 24 23 23 23 22 22 21 21 20
1263 20 8 15 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 10
1262 21 9 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 30 29 29 28
1261 22 10 23 23 22 22 21 21 20 20 19 19 18 18
1260 23 11 12 12 11 11 10 10 10 9 9 8 8 7
1259 24 12 2 1 1 30 30 29 28 28 27 27 27 26
1258 25 13 21 20 20 19 19 18 18 17 17 16 16 15
1257 26 14 10 9 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4
1256 27 15 29 28 28 27 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 24
1255 28 16 18 18 17 17 16 16 15 15 14 14 14 13
1254 29 17 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2
1253 30 18 26 26 26 25 25 24 24 23 23 22 22 21
1252 31 19 16 15 15 14 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 11
1251 32 20 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 30
1250 33 21 24 24 23 23 22 22 21 21 20 20 19 19
1249 34 22 13 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 9 9 8
1248 35 23 3 2 2 1 1 30 30 29 29 28 28 27
1247 36 24 22 21 21 20 20 19 19 18 18 18 17 17
1246 37 25 11 11 10 10 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6
68 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

1245 38 1 1 30 29 29 28 28 27 27 26 26 25 25
1244 39 2 19 19 18 18 18 17 17 16 16 15 15 14
1243 40 3 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3
1242 41 4 28 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 24 23 23 23
1241 42 5 17 17 16 16 15 15 14 14 13 13 12 12
1240 43 6 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1
1239 44 7 25 25 24 24 23 23 23 22 22 21 21 20
1238 45 8 15 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 10
1237 46 9 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 30 29 29 28
1236 47 10 23 23 22 22 21 21 20 20 19 19 18 18
1235 48 11 12 12 11 11 10 10 10 9 9 8 8 7
1234 49 12 2 1 1 30 30 29 28 28 27 27 27 26
1233 50 13 21 20 20 19 19 18 18 17 17 16 16 15
1232 51 14 10 9 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4
1231 52 15 29 28 28 27 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 24
1230 53 16 18 18 17 17 16 16 15 15 14 14 14 13
1229 54 17 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2
1228 55 18 26 26 26 25 25 24 24 23 23 22 22 21
1227 56 19 16 15 15 14 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 11
1226 57 20 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 30
1225 58 21 24 24 23 23 22 22 21 21 20 20 19 19
1224 59 22 13 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 9 9 8
1223 60 23 3 2 2 1 1 30 30 29 29 28 28 27
1222 61 24 22 21 21 20 20 19 19 18 18 18 17 17
1221 62 25 11 11 10 10 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6
1220 63 1 1 30 29 29 28 28 27 27 26 26 25 25
1219 64 2 19 19 18 18 18 17 17 16 16 15 15 14
1218 65 3 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3
1217 66 4 28 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 24 23 23 23
1216 67 5 17 17 16 16 15 15 14 14 13 13 12 12
Merenptah 1215 1 6 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1
1214 2 7 25 25 24 24 23 23 23 22 22 21 21 20
1213 3 8 15 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 10
1212 4 9 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 30 29 29 28
1211 5 10 23 23 22 22 21 21 20 20 19 19 18 18
1210 6 11 12 12 11 11 10 10 10 9 9 8 8 7
1209 7 12 2 1 1 30 30 29 28 28 27 27 27 26
1208 8 13 21 20 20 19 19 18 18 17 17 16 16 15
1207 9 14 10 9 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4
Sety II 1206 1 15 29 28 28 27 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 24
1205 2 16 18 18 17 17 16 16 15 15 14 14 14 13
1204 3 17 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2
1203 4 18 26 26 26 25 25 24 24 23 23 22 22 21
1202 5 19 16 15 15 14 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 11
Siptah 1201 1 20 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 30
1200 2 21 24 24 23 23 22 22 21 21 20 20 19 19
1199 3 22 13 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 9 9 8
1198 4 23 3 2 2 1 1 30 30 29 29 28 28 27
1197 5 24 22 21 21 20 20 19 19 18 18 18 17 17
1196 6 25 11 11 10 10 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6
Tausert 1195 7 1 1 30 29 29 28 28 27 27 26 26 25 25
Sethnakht 1194 2 2 19 19 18 18 18 17 17 16 16 15 15 14
1193 3 3 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3
Ramses III 1192 1 4 28 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 24 23 23 23
1191 2 5 17 17 16 16 15 15 14 14 13 13 12 12
1190 3 6 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1
1189 4 7 25 25 24 24 23 23 23 22 22 21 21 20
1188 5 8 15 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 10
1187 6 9 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 30 29 29 28
1186 7 10 23 23 22 22 21 21 20 20 19 19 18 18
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 69

1185 8 11 12 12 11 11 10 10 10 9 9 8 8 7
1184 9 12 2 1 1 30 30 29 28 28 27 27 27 26
1183 10 13 21 20 20 19 19 18 18 17 17 16 16 15
1182 11 14 10 9 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4
1181 12 15 29 28 28 27 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 24
1180 13 16 18 18 17 17 16 16 15 15 14 14 14 13
1179 14 17 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2
1178 15 18 26 26 26 25 25 24 24 23 23 22 22 21
1177 16 19 16 15 15 14 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 11
1176 17 20 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 30
1175 18 21 24 24 23 23 22 22 21 21 20 20 19 19
1174 19 22 13 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 9 9 8
1173 20 23 3 2 2 1 1 30 30 29 29 28 28 27
1172 21 24 22 21 21 20 20 19 19 18 18 18 17 17
1171 22 25 11 11 10 10 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6
1170 23 1 1 30 29 29 28 28 27 27 26 26 25 25
1169 24 2 19 19 18 18 18 17 17 16 16 15 15 14
1168 25 3 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3
1167 26 4 28 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 24 23 23 23
1166 27 5 17 17 16 16 15 15 14 14 13 13 12 12
1165 28 6 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1
1164 29 7 25 25 24 24 23 23 23 22 22 21 21 20
1163 30 8 15 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 10
1162 31 9 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 30 29 29 28
1161 32 10 23 23 22 22 21 21 20 20 19 19 18 18
Ramses IV 1160 1 11 12 12 11 11 10 10 10 9 9 8 8 7
1159 2 12 2 1 1 30 30 29 28 28 27 27 27 26
1158 3 13 21 20 20 19 19 18 18 17 17 16 16 15
1157 4 14 10 9 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4
1156 5 15 29 28 28 27 27 27 26 26 25 25 24 24
1155 6 14 18 18 17 17 16 16 15 15 14 14 14 13
1154 15 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2

The table above may be used to check possible coincidences of dates. For example,
the helical rising of Sirius is dated July 12 at the time of Sety I (around -1300)165, which
corresponds to the I Akhet 3 in 1284 BCE166, year 10 of Sety I. The lunar day psdntyw for
Egyptian month called Akhet has to be dated I Akhet 2 in year 10 of Sety I, which
corresponds to July 11, 1284 BCE (full moon)167.
Full moon Sothic rising
Sety I 1294 2
1293 1 3 I Akhet 9 July 20 I Akhet 1 July 12
1292 2 4 I Akhet 28 August 8 I Akhet 1 July 12
1291 3 5 I Akhet 17 July 28 I Akhet 1 July 12
1290 4 6 I Akhet 6 July 17 I Akhet 1 July 12
1289 5 7 I Akhet 25 August 4 I Akhet 2 July 12
1288 6 8 I Akhet 15 July 25 I Akhet 2 July 12
1287 7 9 I Akhet 4 July 14 I Akhet 2 July 12
1286 8 10 I Akhet 23 August 2 I Akhet 2 July 12
1285 9 11 I Akhet 12 July 21 I Akhet 3 July 12
1284 10 12 I Akhet 2 July 11 I Akhet 3 July 12
1283 11 13 I Akhet 21 July 30 I Akhet 3 July 12

Synchronisms (below) between Egyptian, Babylonian and Israelite chronologies are

in perfect agreement (highlighted). Astronomical dates have been highlighted in blue sky
165 At Thebes (Longitude 32°39' Latitude 25°42') with an arcus visionis of 8.7 the Sothic rising is dated 12 July on the period 1370-600
http://www.imcce.fr/fr/grandpublic/phenomenes/sothis/index.php
166 http://www.chronosynchro.net/wordpress/convertisseur
167 http://www.imcce.fr/fr/grandpublic/phenomenes/phases_lune/index.php
70 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

ASSYRIA Reign BABYLON Reign EGYPT Reign

Erîba-Adad I 1385-1358 Kada#man-Enlil I 1375-1360 Amenhotep III 1383-1345
A##ur-uballi" I 1358 - Burna-Buria# II 1360 - Akhenaton 1356-1340
Semenkhkare 1340-1338
-1333 -Ankhkheperure 1338-1336
Kara-#arda# 1333 Tutankhamon 1336 -
Nazi-Buga# 1333 -1327
-1323 Kurigalzu II 1333 - Aÿ 1327-1323
Enlil-nêrârî 1323-1313 -1308 Horemheb 1323-1309
Arik-dên-ili 1313-1302 Nazi-Marutta# 1308 - 1309-1295
Adad-nêrârî I 1302 - Ramses I 1295-1294
-1282 Sethy I 1294-1283
-1271 Kada#man-Turgu 1282 - Ramses II 1283 -
Shalmaneser I 1271 - -1264
(-1264) Kada#man-Enlil II 1264-1255 (-1264)
-1242 Kudur-Enlil 1255-1246
Tukultî-Ninurta I 1242 - !agarakti-#uria# 1246-1233 (-1242)
Ka#tilia#u IV 1233-1225
Enlil-nâdin-#umi 1225-1224
Kada#man-Harbe II 1224-1223
Adad-#uma-iddina 1223-1217 -1216
-1206 Adad-#uma-u!ur 1217 - Merenptah 1216-1207
A##ur-nâdin-apli 1206 -1202 Sethy II 1207-1202
A##ur-nêrârî III 1202-1196 Siptah 1202-1196
Enlil-kudurri-u!ur 1196 - -Tausert 1196-1194
-1191 -1187 Sethnakht 1196-1192
Ninurta-apil-Ekur 1191-1179 Meli-!ipak 1187-1172 Ramses III 1192 -
A##ur-dân I 1179 - Marduk-apla-iddina 1172-1159 -1161
Zababa-#uma-iddina 1159-1158 Ramses IV 1161 -
Enlil-nâdin-ahi 1158-1155 -1155
Marduk-kabit-a##e#u 1155 - Ramses V 1154-1151
-1141 Ramses VI 1151-1144
Itti-Marduk-bala"u 1141 - Ramses VII 1144-1137
Ramses VIII 1137
-1133 -1133 Ramses IX 1137-1119
Ramses X 1119-1116
Ramses XI 1116-1090
Smendes 1090-1064
ISRAEL Reign [Amenemnesut] [1064-1060]
David 1057-1017 Psusennes I 1064-1018
Solomon 1017 - Amenemope 1018-1009
Osorkon the Elder 1009-1003
(-993) Siamun 1003 - 984
-977 Psusennes II/III 994-980
Rehoboam 977-960 Shoshenq I 980-959
Asa 957 - Osorkon I 959-924
Shoshenq II 924-922
Shoshenq IIb -922
-916 Takelot I 922-909
Jehoshaphat 916-891 Osorkon II 909 -
Jehoram 893-885
[Athaliah] Jehoyada 885-879 -865
Joash 879-839 Takelot II 865-840
Amasiah 839-810 Shoshenq III 840-800
Uzziah [Azariah] 810 - Shoshenq IV 800-788
A##ur-dân III 773-755 -758 Pamiu 788-782
A##ur-nêrârî V 755-745 Jotham 758-742 Shoshenq V 782-745
Tiglath-pileser III 745-727 Ahaz 742-726 Osorkon IV 745 -
Shalmaneser V 727-722 Hezekiah 726 - -712
Sargon II 722-705 -697 Chabataka/Taharqa 712-690
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 71

LUNAR DAY 1 (PSDNTYW) MATCHES FULL MOON

As lunar day 1 (psdntyw) 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.
This double-dating then allows an absolute dating, on condition that provided proper
identification of the moon phase for that particular day. Present specialists rely on the work
of Parker (in 1950) who defined this day as a first invisibility, that is to say the day
(invisible!) just before the first lunar crescent. In fact, the findings of Parker are only based
on a single document: the papyrus Louvre 7848 containing a double date (lunar and civil) in
the year 44 of Amasis. Parker's work was validated later thanks to the Elephantine papyri
(5th century BCE) containing several double dates in agreement with the Babylonian
chronology (from king lists) for the reigns of Darius, Xerxes and Artaxerxes. However, this
official Babylonian chronology is incorrect since it ignores 10 years of co-regency of Xerxes
(496-475) with Darius (522-486) and 8 years of Darius B (434-426), the analysis of the
Louvre Papyrus 7848 has to be redone.

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)168 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 it is illogical for the following reasons:
! 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
K. DONKER VAN HEEL – Abnormal Hieratic and Early Demotic Texts collected by the Theban Choachytes in the reign of Amasis:
168

Papyrus from the Louvre Eisenlohr Lot (Thesis). Leiden 1996 Ed. Rijksuniversiteit pp. 93-99.
72 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

logical to assume that it was written relatively soon after having been delivered,
otherwise one would admit the existence of a "prophetic vow", but the document being
dated I Shemu 21 in the civil calendar, the vow had to be 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
when 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 on September 21, the
lunar date II Shemu 1 fell on September 9 (= 21 – 12), which was a full moon day according
to astronomy169. However, there are two difficulties in reckoning the days:
! The Babylonians counted the new day after sunset (around 18 pm) while the Egyptians
counted it after the disappearance of the stars (around 5 am). If a scribe wrote on 17
Thoth around 16 pm, for example, he dated his document on 18 Kislev, but if he wrote
about 20 pm 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
18 Kislev 19 Kislev
Julian computation
4 January 5 January 6 January
Egyptian computation
16 Thoth 17 Thoth

! Astronomical observations being made by night, at the beginning of the day for the
Babylonians, but at the end for the Egyptians. At last, 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
Xerxes involve an accession in 496 BCE (the full moon of 1st Elul fell on August 29 in
170

481 BCE at Elephantine and the full moon of 1st Kislev fell on December 20 in 475 BCE):
Year Xerxes I Civil Egyptian Julian Lunar Egyptian Julian Gap
1st Elul 29 August (full moon)
481 15 28 Pakhons 14 September 18 Elul 15 September 1
1st Kislev 20 December (full moon)
474 21 17 Thoth 5 January 18 Kislev 5 January 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
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,
http://www.imcce.fr/fr/grandpublic/phenomenes/phases_lune/index.php
169

B. PORTEN - The Elephantine Papyri in English

170

Leiden 1996 Ed E.J. Brill pp. 18, 153-161.

 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 73

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 lunar calendar was closer to the
Jewish or Aramaic calendar than its Babylonian counterpart171. Stern172 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 that Parker had given all the elements to find it.
Parker refused to consider a lunar reckoning starting at full moon, as proposed by
Macnaughton173, for three reasons:
! He felt that Macnaughton was an eccentric174 (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 new moon and purnimanta versions (10 states in the
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
toachieve the filling of the eye Wedjat175 (safe eye) the 15th day at the full moon, the
lunar day 1 (psdntyw) must match the 1st invisibility. But this cycle of 15 days is only a $
month, the next full month had to begin at the end of this cycle, that is at the full moon.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

171 S. STERN - The Babylonian Calendar at Elephantine

in: Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 130 (2000) pp. 159-171.
172 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.

173 D. MACNAUGHTON - A Scheme of Egyptian Chronology

London 1932 Ed. Luzac and co. pp. 145-151.

174 R.A. PARKER - The Calendars of Ancient Egypt

in: Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 26 (1950) Ed. University of Chicago p. 9.

175 E.A.W. BUDGE - Gods of the Egyptian Vol II

1969 Ed. Dover Publications p. 321.

74 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

Babylonian lunar cycle Egyptian lunar cycle according to:

astro $ month Parker Macnaughton astro
14 full moon 1 shining ones [day]
15 2 month [day]
16 3
17 4
18 5
19 6
20 7 quarter [day]
21 last quarter 8
22 9
23 10
24 11
25 12
26 13
27 last crescent 14 perceptions [day]
28 15 subordinate [day]
29 new moon 16
30 1st invisibility 1 tp 3bd 1 shining ones [day] ! 17 perceptions [day]
1 1st crescent 2 3bd 2 month [day] 18 Moon [day]
2 3 3 19
3 4 4 20
4 5 5 21
5 6 snt 6 22
6 first quarter 7 dnit 7 quarter [day] 23 quarter [day]
7 8 8 24
8 9 9 25
9 10 10 26
10 11 11 27
11 12 12 28
12 13 13 29
13 14 14 perceptions [day] 30 Min rise [day]
14 full moon 15 smdt 15 subordinate [day]
15 "apattu 16
16 17 perceptions [day] !
17 18 Moon [day] !
18 19
19 20
20 21
21 last quarter 22
22 23 quarter [day]
23 24
24 25
25 26
26 27
27 last crescent 28
28 29
29 new moon 30 Min rise [day] !
30 1
 DATING THE FALL OF BABYLON AND UR 75

Parker has compiled and explained the 30 days of the Egyptian lunar month, which
shows that several days do not fit at all with their Moon phases.
# month n° Day of the month Moon phase according to:
Name Meaning Macnaughton Parker
(15) 1 psdntyw Shining ones Full moon First invisibility
2 3bd Month After full moon First crescent
7 dnit Quarter Last quarter First quarter
14 si3w Perceptions Last crescent Before full moon
15 smdt Subordinate Before new moon Full moon
1 17 si3w Perceptions Before first crescent -
2 18 i‘% Moon First crescent -
7 23 dnit Quarter First quarter Last quarter
14 30 prt Mn Min going-forth Before full moon New moon

In Parker's lunar cycle it is obvious that the meaning of days 1 (psdntyw) and 18 (i‘%)
has nothing to do and even opposed to the lunar phase that corresponds to them. The
Egyptian word psdntyw literally means "shining ones" which is opposed 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 Depuydt176: 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. !erny 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 with a day late (but never in advance) so that the full astronomical moon can be
seen frequently with one day difference (delay or advance).
Amasis Lunar calendar Civil calendar Julian day Full moon
year (day 1) (astronomy)
10 -560 I Akhet 1 I Akhet 1 10 January 9 January
II Akhet 1 I Akhet 30 8 February 7 February
III Akhet 1 II Akhet 30 10 March 9 March
IV Akhet 1 III Akhet 29 8 April 8 April
I Peret 1 IV Akhet 29 8 May 7 May
II Peret 1 I Peret 28 6 June 6 June
III Peret 1 II Peret 28 6 July 6 July
IV Peret 1 III Peret 27 4 August 4 August
I Shemu 1 IV Peret 27 3 September 2 September
II Shemu 1 I Shemu 26 2 October 2 October
III Shemu 1 II Shemu 25 1 November 1 November
IV Shemu 1 III Shemu 25 30 November 30 November
I Akhet 1 IV Shemu 25 30 December 29 December
176 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.
76 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH TO AN ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY
THROUGH SYNCHRONISMS DATED BY ASTRONOMY

11 -559 II Akhet 1 I Akhet 19 28 January 28 January

III Akhet 1 II Akhet 19 27 February 26 February
IV Akhet 1 III Akhet 18 28 March 28 March
I Peret 1 IV Akhet 18 27 April 27 April
II Peret 1 I Peret 17 26 May 26 May
III Peret 1 II Peret 17 25 June 25 June
IV Peret 1 III Peret 16 24 July 24 July
I Shemu 1 IV Peret 16 23 August 23 August
II Shemu 1 I Shemu 15 21 September 21 September
III Shemu 1 II Shemu 15 21 October 21 October
IV Shemu 1 III Shemu 14 19 November 19 November
I Akhet 1 IV Shemu 14 19 December 19 December
12 -558 II Akhet 1 I Akhet 8 17 January 17 January
III Akhet 1 II Akhet 8 16 February 16 February
IV Akhet 1 III Akhet 7 17 March 17 March
I Peret 1 IV Akhet 7 16 April 16 April
II Peret 1 I Peret 6 15 May 15 May
III Peret 1 II Peret 6 14 June 14 June
IV Peret 1 III Peret 5 13 July 13 July
I Shemu 1 IV Peret 5 12 August 12 August
II Shemu 1 I Shemu 4 10 September 10 September
II Shemu 13 I Shemu 16 22 September
III Shemu 1 II Shemu 4 10 October 10 October
IV Shemu 1 III Shemu 3 8 November 9 November
I Akhet 1 IV Shemu 3 8 December 8 December

According to this table: 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).

ELEPHANTINE CALENDARS
The calendar at Elephantine 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. 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) Osirna%ty, the god. Peace177.
After the conquest of Egypt by Cambyses it became a Persian satrapy but most of
the scribes were Egyptians or Jews. 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)
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.

177 A. LEMAIRE – Recherches d'épigraphie araméenne en Asie mineure et en Égypte

in: Achaemenid History V (1991) Ed. Nederlands Instituut Leiden pp.199-201.