by
Damien F. Mackey
Nabonidus
is an Assyrian king.
He
adopts Assyrian titulature and boasts of having
the
Assyrian kings as his "royal ancestors".
This is what
I wrote some years ago now to Johnny Zwick, sysop of the California Institute
for Ancient Studies (then www.specialtyinterests.net/),
regarding my projected realignment of late Judah with neo Assyro-Babylonia:
My connecting of Hezekiah of Judah
with Josiah went down like a lead balloon amongst the few to whom I sent it.
(See Pope’s valuable effort at: http://www.domainofman.com/book/chart-37.html)
[Comment: I have since re-done
this properly in my article:
'Taking
aim on' king Amon - such a wicked king of Judah
So here is the next phase. I would
not actually call it a bombshell.
More like a Third World War.
Nabonidus is an Assyrian king. He
adopts Assyrian titulature and boasts of having the Assyrian kings as his
"royal ancestors". There is nothing particularly strange about his
supposed long stay in Teima in Arabia. This was a typical campaign region
adopted by the neo-Assyrian kings. There is nothing particularly remarkable
about his desire to restore the Ehulhul temple of Sin in Harran.
Ashurbanipal did that.
Nabonidus is said to have had two
major goals, to restore that Sin temple and to establish the empire of Babylon
along the lines of the neo-Assyrians. Once again, Ashurbanipal is particularly
mentioned as being his inspiration.
Nabonidus was not singular in not
taking the hand of Bel in Babylon for many years, due to what he calls the
impiety of the Babylonians. Ashurbanipal (and now you will notice that he keeps
turning up) could not shake the hand of Bel after his brother Shamash-shum-ukin
had revolted against him, barring Babylon, Borsippa, etc. to him. He tells us this
explicitly.
Nabonidus is not singular either in
not expecting to become king. Ashurbanipal had felt the same.
So, basically Nabonidus is
Ashurbanipal during his early reign. They share many Babylonian building works
and restorations, too.
Now, if Nabonidus is Ashurbanipal
(and I am now pretty much convinced that he must be), then Ashurbanipal of
41-43 years of reign (figures vary) can only be Nebuchednezzar II the Great of
an established 43 years of reign.
Nebuchednezzar is the Babylonian
face, while Ashurbanipal is the Assyrian face.
The great Nebuchednezzar has left
only 4 known depictions of himself, we are told. Ridiculous! Add to this paltry
number all of the depictions of Ashurbanipal.
The last 35 years of Nebuchednezzar
are hardly known, they say. Add Ashurbanipal (whose lack also in places is
supplemented in turn by Nebuchednezzar/Nabonidus).
It is doubted whether Nebuchednezzar
conquered Egypt as according to the Bible. Just add Ashurbanipal who certainly
did conquer Egypt.
The many queries about whether an
inscription belongs to Nebuchednezzar or Nabonidus now dissolves.
It was Nabonidus, not
Nebuchednezzar, they say, who built the famous palace in Babylon.
Nabonidus's well known madness
(perhaps the Teima phase) is Nebuchednezzar's madness.
Nabonidus calls Sin "the God of
gods" (ilani sa ilani), the exact phrase used by Nebuchednezzar in Daniel
2:47 of Daniel's God ("the God of gods").
Looking for a fiery furnace? Well,
Ashurbanipal has one. His brother dies in it.
“Saulmagina my rebellious brother,
who made war with me, they threw into a burning fiery furnace, and destroyed
his life” (Caiger, p. 176).
….
No comments:
Post a Comment