English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The traditional date of 1595 BCE for the destruction of Babylon by theHittite king Mursili I is accepted by most historians for many years despitenotable controversies. This pivotal date is considered crucial to the variouscalculations of the early chronology of the ancient Near East. According to theVenus Tablet (Enuma Anu Enlil 63) which describes the rising and setting ofVenus during the reign of Ammisaduqa, there are only 4 possibilities implying 4dates for the destruction of Ur (1912, 1944, 2004, 2064 BCE) but a tablet ofastronomical omens (Enuma Anu Enlil 20,21) mentions a lunar eclipse, dated14/III/48, at the end of the reign of Shulgi and a lunar eclipse, dated14/XII/24, at the end of the reign of Ibbi-Sin. Over the period 2200-1850 BCEthere are only 3 pairs of eclipses, spaced by 42 years, matching thedescription of astronomical omens but only 1 agreeing with the previous 4dates. The second way to check the date for the fall of Babylon is to rebuildthe chronology of this period thanks to synchronisms dated by astronomy fromAssyrian, Babylonian, Egyptian and Israelite chronologies which providesynchronisms that can be dated independently. The Mesopotamian chronology ofthis period is reconstructed using the number of Assyrian eponyms (1 a year)and the length of Babylonian reigns combined with the set of synchronisms amongAssyrian and Babylonian kings in Annals. During the reign of Assur-dan I(1179-1133) eponyms began on 1 Nisan instead of 1 Sippu, but Assyrian lunaryears without intercalation remained the norm until Tiglath-pileser I. As theBabylonian year began on 1st Nisan (just after the spring equinox), Assyrianyears coincided with Babylonian lunar years with intercalation, thus the periodbetween Assur-dan I and Tiglath-pileser I was therefore transitional. Owing tothe Babylonian chronology and synchronisms it is possible to date otherchronologies.

Dating the fall of Babylon and Ur thanks to Astronomical Events