Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Seleucid and Parthian chronology
#16
I think you're confusing the Uruk King list with the Babylon King list.

The Uruk King list actually says "25" (dating Seleucus' "real" years as king, not stratêgos). See [url:2g1fn06n]http://www.livius.org/k/kinglist/uruk.html[/url]. The Babylon King list ([url:2g1fn06n]http://www.livius.org/k/kinglist/babylonian_hellenistic.html[/url]) says "31".

For those following the thread but unfamiliar with the subject matter: ANET = Ancient Near Eastern Texts, a standard edition of interesting texts from the 1950's. It's a monument that deserves to be in everybody's library. I am very glad to meet here someone who actually checked it.

When ANET was published, many aspects of the eastern chronology were still poorly understood. The translators wanted to show to a larger audience that the ancient near eastern texts really mattered, and choose to ignore chronological details, which were sort of passed over. Instead, they focused on the texts that were important for Old Testament studies. I think this was a sound decision. Another attitude that bedevilled the first scholars who were occupied with the oriental texts, was that they tried to find points of harmony with classical sources. Understandable, but we now know that there are also important contradictions. ANET is to be used as much as possible, but one must be careful, sometimes.

A famous example (not in ANET) is an edition of the Astronomical Diaries ([url:2g1fn06n]http://www.livius.org/di-dn/diaries/astronomical_diaries.html[/url]). One of these tablets describes the battle of Gaugamela. Still unfamiliar with the conventions of these texts, they translated "The king abandoned his troops", i.e., Darius ran away. This confirms our classical source, Arrian, who also says that Darius acted as a coward. However, we now know that in the Astronomical Diaries, the word order is often inverted to give the text an archaic look. In fact it says: "The king, his troops abandoned him". The A.D. of Gaugamela contradicts Arrian!

Here's a recent edition: [url:2g1fn06n]http://www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-alexander/astronomical_diary-330_01.html[/url]

And here's a translated chapter from my book: [url:2g1fn06n]http://www.livius.org/aj-al/alexander/alexander_z7.html[/url]

So, beware of older publications like ANET.

If you are really interested in fourth century dating systems and the beginning of the Seleucid Era, I recommend: T. Boiy, "Dating methods during the early Hellenistic period" in Journal of Cuneiform Studies 52 (2001), 115-121. Cf. the list of publications of the same man on [url:2g1fn06n]http://www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/chron_literature.html[/url]
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Reply
#17
Quote:I think you're confusing the Uruk King list with the Babylon King list.

The Uruk King list actually says "25" (dating Seleucus' "real" years as king, not stratиgos). See http://www.livius.org/k/kinglist/uruk.html . The Babylon King list ( http://www.livius.org/k/kinglist/babylo ... istic.html ) says "31".

For those following the thread but unfamiliar with the subject matter: ANET = Ancient Near Eastern Texts, a standard edition of interesting texts from the 1950's. It's a monument that deserves to be in everybody's library. I am very glad to meet here someone who actually checked it.

That link (ANET3 566 - by the way, how to put sup-tags?) was given in Gerald P. Verbrugghe and John M. Wickersham (trans.), Berossos and Manetho, Native Traditions in Ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1997. It was cited in the list of Mesopotamian rulers, which was translated in Russian and published in my site ( http://www.ancientrome.ru/antlitr/beros ... le-b-f.htm ).

Quote:I recommend: T. Boiy, "Dating methods during the early Hellenistic period" in Journal of Cuneiform Studies 52 (2001), 115-121.

I got it.

And I want to add that according to Hans Hauben, "On the chronology of the years 313-311 BC" (AJP, Vol.94, #3, 1973) "according to the Macedonian calendar, the Seleucid era began on 1 Dios 312-311 (=7 October 312); according to the Babylonian calendar, on 1 Nisanu 311-310 (=3 April 311)".


And I`ve got one more correction, concerning the last Seleucid kings. First of all the date of beginning of Philip II` kingship is not 65 BC, but 67/66 BC, as Glanville Downey says ("Occupation of Syria by the Romans", TPAPA, Vol. 84, 1951). Downey refers to Diodorus 40, 1a-b.
a.k.a. Yuriy Mitin
Reply
#18
Thanks for the last article, I didn't read it. I'll check it.
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Reply
#19
Quote:T. Boiy, "Dating methods during the early Hellenistic period" in Journal of Cuneiform Studies 52 (2001), 115-121.

This article says that 25 years are given in Babylonian chronicle (p. 116). It means that you`re confusing two king lists, not me.

Quote:The Uruk King list actually says "25" (dating Seleucus' "real" years as king, not stratêgos). See http://www.livius.org/k/kinglist/uruk.html .

I`m looking at this and i`m seeing "31 years" of Seleucus.
a.k.a. Yuriy Mitin
Reply
#20
Yes, I think I must have been mixing up things. Where's my head?
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Reply
#21
Another note regarding ANET - it has now been superceded by The Context of Scripture, edited by Hallo, which also contains a great deal of ancient Near Eastern texts with more current translations, and links them with Biblical literature. It is most useful, I have found, as an index to primary sources.

I would also point out that Irving Finkel and Bert van der Speck are re-editing the Hellenistic annals from Babylonia, and will be publishing them shortly - they have been putting their working transliterations and translations on the web here: http://www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/chron00.html

Best regards,
Jamie Szudy
LU2.DUB.SAR
http://jamie-in-vienna.blogspot.com/
Reply
#22
To this I can add something: my friend Bert van der Spek is in London right now. He's still studying some texts, but hopes to finish it these days. BCHP ("Babylonian Chronicles of the Hellenistic Period") will probably be sent to the publisher in the first half of 2006. It will include some re-edited related texts, such as the Antiochus Cylinder.
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Reply
#23
Thanks for the info, Jona. *That's* a book I can't wait to get my hands on!

Best,
Jamie
LU2.DUB.SAR
http://jamie-in-vienna.blogspot.com/
Reply
#24
Let me give you a scope: it seems that Artaxerxes III Ochus (or Artaxerxes IV Arses) has sacked Sippar. No one knew this until this week.

At least, that's what Bert writes to me this Sunday. He offers no more details, sadly.
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Early Parthian Chronology Jona Lendering 3 2,035 07-27-2011, 05:18 PM
Last Post: Megas Aleksandros
  Improved Late Seleucid Chronology Jona Lendering 5 2,537 08-31-2008, 09:50 PM
Last Post: Jona Lendering

Forum Jump: