The Fall of Babylon in 1499 NC or 1595 MC

The independent dating framework aligns best with the High-Middle Chronology (hMC) or Low-Middle Chronology (lMC).

“This aligns best with the High-Middle Chronology (hMC) or Low-Middle Chronology (lMC) (see Roaf 2012;de Jong 2012de Jong -2013de Jong , 2016de Jong -2017;;Höflmayer & Manning 2022)”

Different manuscripts of the eponym list disagree slightly, are imperfectly preserved, and breaks in communication during winter between Aššur and Anatolia introduce a 0-5 year error potential in the REL.

“These include the fact that different manuscripts of the eponym list disagree slightly, and are imperfectly preserved, and that there are breaks in communication during winter between Aššur and Anatolia, all of which allow for varying reconstructions of the sequence and introduce a 0–5 year error potential [5, 8–11].”

This calls into question existing work on Mesopotamian chronology which has used such dates as part of assessments or arguments.

“This calls into question existing work on Mesopotamian chronology which has used such dates as part of assessments or arguments (e.g. [5, 9–12, 15]).”

Our findings directly and independently support some recent analyses of the textual and astronomical records arguing for the Middle Chronology or Low-Middle Chronology as the only coherent solution(s) for Old Babylonian chronology and history.

“Our findings directly and independently support some recent analyses of the textual and astronomical records arguing for the Middle Chronology or Low-Middle Chronology as the only coherent solution(s) for Old Babylonian chronology and history [5, 9–11, 15].”

The new robust evidence finds the same Middle or Low-Middle Mesopotamian Chronology solutions are most likely, but on a more rigorous basis.

“Hence, although previous arguments using the now replaced tree-ring-based dates (e.g. [5, 9–11, 15]) are inherently invalid in this strict respect, it turns out that the new, robust, evidence nonetheless finds the same Middle or Low-Middle Mesopotamian Chronology solutions are most likely but on a more rigorous basis.”

A decision between the Middle and Low-Middle Chronology largely hinges on the astronomical evidence, especially the Mari Eponym Chronicle record of what is interpreted as a solar eclipse placed about REL 127, the year after the birth of Šamši-Adad I.

“A decision between the Middle and Low-Middle Chronology largely hinges on the astronomical evidence, especially the record in the Mari Eponym Chronicle of what is interpreted as a solar eclipse placed about REL 127, the year after the birth of Šamši-Adad I [5, 9, 10, 15]–though there is some room for debate as the relevant text is not complete [5, 9].”

By separating the two fires, the tie between the REL sequence and the astronomical data (eclipses, Venus tablets), intercalations, and potentially the suggested link between a major volcanic dust veil and northern hemisphere tree-ring growth anomalies 1628-1627 BCE and poor atmospheric observation conditions in Mesopotamian records is retained.

“More importantly, by separating the two fires, we retain the tie between the REL sequence and the astronomical data (eclipses, Venus tablets), intercalations [5, 8–11, 15] and even potentially the suggested link between a major volcanic dust veil and several northern hemisphere tree-ring growth anomalies 1628–1627 BCE and poor atmospheric observation conditions as evident in Mesopotamian records [”

The new dendro-14C dates require rethinking of recent analyses that made assumptions based on the now incorrect previous dendrochronological dates.

“The new dendro-14C dates require rethinking of recent analyses, which made assumptions based on the now incorrect previous dendrochronological dates (e.g. [5, 9, 10, 15]).”

Earlier eclipses, such as in 1859 BCE, are too early, unless substantial reconsideration of the standard textual interpretation is considered.

“Earlier eclipses, such as in 1859 BCE [9], are too early, unless substantial reconsideration of the standard textual interpretation is considered.”

Both the Middle and Low-Middle Chronology have suitable eclipse candidates within the approximate precision of the available textual evidence, but the 1838 BCE eclipse offers a slightly better (more conspicuous) case.

“Thus both the Middle and Low-Middle Chronology have suitable eclipse candidates within the approximate precision of the available textual evidence [5, 9], but the 1838 BCE eclipse offers a slightly better (more conspicuous) case [10].”

The only Mesopotamian chronological schemes potentially compatible with the wiggle-match are the High Middle or (especially) Low Middle Chronologies.

“The only Mesopotamian chronological schemes20 potentially compatible with the wiggle-match are the High Middle or (especially) Low Middle Chronologies (which are only 8 calendar years apart)18,19,21,28–31.”