JWTruth.orgDokumentierte Vergleichsquelle
Ask JWTruth Suchen
Deutsch

Diese Seite auf

Nur auf Englisch

Alle Sprachen

Chronologie und 607 v. u. Z. · Claim record

Die Könige, die nach Angabe der Organisation im Kanon des Ptolemäus fehlen, verlängern nicht den Zeitraum, auf den es ankommt. Ashur-etel-ilani und Sin-sharra-ishkun wurden in Babylonien bereits anerkannt, bevor Nabopolassar dort 626 v. u. Z. den Thron bestieg; sie hinzuzurechnen verlängert also die Zeit vor der neubabylonischen Dynastie, nicht die Spanne zwischen dem achtzehnten Jahr Nebukadnezars und dem Fall Babylons. Die Adad-guppi-Inschrift zählt das dritte Jahr Ashur-etel-ilanis ohnehin gesondert, und zwar vor Nabopolassar. Der eine ausgelassene König, der tatsächlich in die Dynastie fällt, Labashi-Marduk, wird in dem Artikel selbst genannt, und Parker und Dubberstein datieren seine erste und seine letzte Tafel auf den 22. Mai und den 20. Juni 556 v. u. Z. und kommen zu dem Schluss, er “seems to have been recognized as king only in May and June, 556” - Wochen, keine Jahre.

Claim ID claim-chronology-ptolemy-omissions-are-pre-dynasticConcerns 1. Oktober 2011Zusammenhang
Zusammenhang · 1. Oktober 2011 Geprüft

Die Könige, die nach Angabe der Organisation im Kanon des Ptolemäus fehlen, verlängern nicht den Zeitraum, auf den es ankommt. Ashur-etel-ilani und Sin-sharra-ishkun wurden in Babylonien bereits anerkannt, bevor Nabopolassar dort 626 v. u. Z. den Thron bestieg; sie hinzuzurechnen verlängert also die Zeit vor der neubabylonischen Dynastie, nicht die Spanne zwischen dem achtzehnten Jahr Nebukadnezars und dem Fall Babylons. Die Adad-guppi-Inschrift zählt das dritte Jahr Ashur-etel-ilanis ohnehin gesondert, und zwar vor Nabopolassar. Der eine ausgelassene König, der tatsächlich in die Dynastie fällt, Labashi-Marduk, wird in dem Artikel selbst genannt, und Parker und Dubberstein datieren seine erste und seine letzte Tafel auf den 22. Mai und den 20. Juni 556 v. u. Z. und kommen zu dem Schluss, er “seems to have been recognized as king only in May and June, 556” - Wochen, keine Jahre. The Watchtower, 1. Oktober 2011Chronicles of Chaldaean Kings (626-556 B.C.) in the British Museum, 1956RIBo, Babylon 7: The Inscriptions of the Neo-Babylonian Dynasty, 2020Babylonian Chronology, 626 B.C. - A.D. 45 (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 24), 1942

Die Position der Organisation oder ihre spätere Erklärung: 'In general, Ptolemy's canon is regarded as accurate. But in view of its omissions, should it really be used to provide a definite historical chronology?'

Belege anzeigen (4 Quellen)
Primärveröffentlichung von Jehovas Zeugen Geprüft

The Watchtower, “When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?-Part One, 'The Canon of Ptolemy'”

1. Oktober 2011 · pp.30-31 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania

“Notice that Ptolemy lists only four kings between the Babylonian rulers Kandalanu and Nabonidus. However, the Uruk King List-a part of the cuneiform record-reveals that seven kings ruled in between. ... In general, Ptolemy's canon is regarded as accurate. But in view of its omissions, should it really be used to provide a definite historical chronology?”

The organisation's argument that Ptolemy's canon omits kings. Its examples, Sin-sharra-ishkun and Ashur-etel-ilani, belong to the Assyrian succession before Nabopolassar took the throne of Babylon in 626 BCE.

Offizielle Quelle

Hinweis zu Herkunft und Überprüfung

Hinweis zur Vertrauensangabe. Read in the Watchtower Online Library text on 19 September 2026; page markers place the passage across pages 30 and 31. Notes 8 and 9 of the article name Sin-sharra-ishkun and Ashur-etel-ilani.

Untermauert durch. src-chr-e-wiseman-1956-p6-assyrian-kings, src-chr-e-oracc-adadguppi-i29

Abgerufen. 19. September 2026 · Quellenkennung. src-chr-e-w11-1001-ptolemy

Von Fachleuten begutachtet / wissenschaftlich Geprüft

Chronicles of Chaldaean Kings (626-556 B.C.) in the British Museum, “Introduction: the fall of Assyria”

1956 · p.6 · D. J. Wiseman · The Trustees of the British Museum, London

“Kandalanu appears to have rebelled against his overlord during the period of uncertainty over the succession which followed the death of Assur-etil-ilani, the successor of Ashurbanipal.”

Wiseman places Ashur-etel-ilani, and elsewhere Sin-shar-ishkun 'the king of Assyria', in the Assyrian succession before Nabopolassar took the throne of Babylon in 626 BCE.

Scan des Originals

Hinweis zu Herkunft und Überprüfung

Hinweis zur Vertrauensangabe. Read in the ETANA PDF on 19 September 2026; running head '6 CHRONICLES OF CHALDAEAN KINGS'. Elsewhere in the same volume Wiseman writes of 'Sin-sar-iskun, the king of Assyria' opposing the Babylonians 'before Nabopolassar's accession'.

Herkunft des Scans. Full scan of the British Museum volume hosted by ETANA (Electronic Tools and Ancient Near Eastern Archives), an academic digital-library consortium. Copyright the Trustees of the British Museum, 1956.

Untermauert durch. src-chr-e-oracc-adadguppi-i29

Abgerufen. 19. September 2026 · Quellenkennung. src-chr-e-wiseman-1956-p6-assyrian-kings

Von Fachleuten begutachtet / wissenschaftlich Geprüft

RIBo, Babylon 7: The Inscriptions of the Neo-Babylonian Dynasty, “Nabonidus 2001 (the Harran stele of Adad-guppi), column i line 29”

2020 · i 29 · Frauke Weiershaeuser and Jamie Novotny (edition) · Oracc / LMU Munich

“From the twentieth year of Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria, (during) which I was born, until the forty-second year of Ashurbanipal, the third year of Aššur-etel-ilāni, his son, the twenty-first year of Nabopolassar, the forty-third year of Nebuchadnezzar (II), the second year of Amēl-Marduk, (and) the fourth year of Neriglissar, after (these) ninety-five years”

Adad-guppi, the mother of King Nabonidus, dates her own long life by naming in order the regnal years it ran between. The count starts in the twentieth year of Ashurbanipal, in which she says she was born, and ends in the fourth year of Neriglissar, and the inscription calls that span ninety-five years: a further twenty-two years of Ashurbanipal, then three, twenty-one, forty-three, two and four. The inscription is a sixth-century BCE document from Harran, written within living memory of the reigns it counts.

Offizielle Quelle Archivierte oder alternative Kopie

Hinweis zu Herkunft und Überprüfung

Hinweis zur Vertrauensangabe. The Oracc HTML edition was downloaded and read on 19 September 2026; the transliteration and the English translation of column i 29 were read together and the line label “(i 29)” read from the page. Oracc asks that the page be cited as http://oracc.org/ribo/Q005471/. The year-numbers named here are the points the count runs between, not a list of reign lengths: 22 + 3 + 21 + 43 + 2 + 4 = 95.

Herkunft des Scans. Royal Inscriptions of Babylonia online (RIBo), Babylon 7, edited by Frauke Weiershaeuser and Jamie Novotny for the Munich Open-access Cuneiform Corpus Initiative at LMU Munich; CC BY-SA 3.0.

Untermauert durch. src-chr-e-oracc-adadguppi-ii40, src-chr-e-pd-1942-p9-10-transitions

Notes. The same inscription records that Sin kept her alive 'for 104 good years' from the time of Ashurbanipal 'until the ninth year of Nabonidus'.

Abgerufen. 19. September 2026 · Quellenkennung. src-chr-e-oracc-adadguppi-i29

Von Fachleuten begutachtet / wissenschaftlich Geprüft

Babylonian Chronology, 626 B.C. - A.D. 45 (Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 24), “II. Kings' Reigns: Nebuchadnezzar II and Amel-Marduk”

1942 · pp.9-10 · Richard A. Parker and Waldo H. Dubberstein · Oriental Institute, University of Chicago

“Evidence for End of Reign VI/14/43 (Sept. 25, 562), Uruk ... VI/26/43 (Oct. 7, 562), Uruk ... The first tablet dated to Amel-Marduk (see below) comes from Sippar (?) and is dated on the same day as the last tablet of Nebuchadnezzar from Uruk. Accordingly Nebuchadnezzar died during the first days of October, 562.”

The standard reference chronology establishes the length of each Neo-Babylonian reign from dated business and administrative tablets, listing for every king the last tablet of his reign and the first tablet of his successor's. At this junction the two are dated to the same day.

Offizielle Quelle Scan des Originals

Hinweis zu Herkunft und Überprüfung

Hinweis zur Vertrauensangabe. The full PDF was downloaded from the ISAC asset server on 19 September 2026, converted with pdftotext and read. The running head reads '10 BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY 626 B.C.--A.D. 45'.

Herkunft des Scans. Free PDF of the volume published by the Institute for the Study of Ancient Cultures (formerly the Oriental Institute), University of Chicago; CC BY-NC-ND 4.0; DOI https://doi.org/10.83354/68x5-8f30

Untermauert durch. src-chr-e-oracc-adadguppi-i29, src-chr-e-w11-1101-footnote-e

Notes. The same pages show Amel-Marduk’s last tablet on 7 August 560 and Neriglissar’s first on 13 August 560, a gap of six days. Page 10 also carries Labashi-Marduk: first dated tablet 22 May 556, last 20 June 556, with the conclusion that he “seems to have been recognized as king only in May and June, 556”. He is the one king the organisation says Ptolemy omitted who falls inside the Neo-Babylonian dynasty, and the standard chronology accounts for him in weeks, not years.

Abgerufen. 19. September 2026 · Quellenkennung. src-chr-e-pd-1942-p9-10-transitions

Seite zur Aussage Berichtigen oder aktualisieren

A direct link to this claim is https://jwtruth.org/de/evidence/claim-chronology-ptolemy-omissions-are-pre-dynastic/. Every source above opens the original document or the best available copy. If you believe the wording, date or context is wrong, report an error.