Here are the matched graphics for the text in the VAT4956 that do not match
568 BCE but are both astronomical matches for 511 BCE.
http://www.geocities.com/siaxares/5sivan511xj.JPG
LINE 14
http://www.geocities.com/siaxares/9nisan511j.JPG
LINE 3
The VAT4956 was created during the Seleucid Era, 200+ years after the
fact.
The 511 BCE references were hidden among otherwise 568 BC references. It
is quite ingenius. It follows the principle of "hide in plain sight."
Texts were duplicated many times to preserve the references to the
original
chronology. There is only one copy of this text but there are five
copies
(or fragments) of the SK400 ("Strm. Kambyses 400"), another text with
cryptic refereces to the same dating for Nebuchadnezzar.
These references have always been mismatches for 568 BCE and noted as
"errors"; however, with modern astro programs which easily checks, it was
discovered the two "errors" actually belonged to the same lunar cycle and
year, 511 BCE. 511 BCE is the Ansty-Josephus chronology dating for year
37 of Nebuchadnezzar, thus this is not a coincidence but a confirmation of
that chronology.
Of note, one might think this adjustment, which lowers the NB Period by 57
years would cause problems, but it doesn't. It actually corrects them.
Case in point, when this reduction is made the 709 BCE eclipse is used to
date the Assyrian Period instead of the 763 BCE solar eclipse. That in
turn
lowers ****shak's invasion now dated to 925 BCE down to 871 BCE, which is
where the advanced RC14 dating methology points to:
http://www.geocities.com/siaxares/REHOVPROB.JPG
(comparison 871 vs 925
BCE)
Therefore, the dating is correct. It's possible to now harmonize two
eclipse references, the VAT4956 and the precise RC14 dating from Tel Rehov
to the same timeline, establi****ng reliable dating from the Nebuchadnezzar
back to the Exodus in the 1st of Akhenaten in 1386 BCE.
The chances of the 511 BCE inclusions as coincidental is highly unlikely.
Lars Wilson
|
