On the Astronomical Records and Babylonian Chronology

TL;DR

This paper emphasizes high-quality astronomical data, especially lunar eclipses, to establish the absolute chronology of the Near East in the second millennium BC, supporting the Ultra-Low Chronology over other models.

Contribution

It demonstrates how specific astronomical records, particularly lunar eclipses, support the Ultra-Low Chronology and dismiss the Venus cycle as a reliable chronological marker.

Findings

Lunar eclipse data from EAE tablets aligns with 1954 BC and 1912 BC dates.

Venus cycle cannot be reliably traced in the Venus Tablet.

Data supports the Ultra-Low Chronology over High Chronology.

Abstract

We outline the priority of high quality data of astronomical content as our strategy for the analysis of the ancient astronomical records in the search of the absolute chronology of the Near East in II millennium BC. The correspondingly defined set of data for two lunar eclipses of EAE 20 and 21 tablets linked to Ur III period enables us the choice of eclipses of 27 June 1954 BC and 17 March 1912 BC; here the information on the exit position of the darkening of the lunar disk acts as a crucial informator survived in the records. We then discuss why the 56/64 year Venus cycle cannot be traced in the Venus Tablet and therefore cannot serve as an anchor for the search of chronologies. The month length method is discussed as well. In sum the available data support the Ultra-Low Chronology proposed in the book by H.Gasche, J.A.Armstrong, S.W.Cole and V.G.Gurzadyan, "Dating the Fall of Babylon" (1998) and, particularly, leave no astronomical background for the High Chronology. Ultra-Low Chronology is supported also by archaeological, dendrochronological, Assyrian king lists and other data as summarized at the Intern. Colloquium on Ancient Near Eastern Chronology (Ghent, July, 2000).