Adad-Nirari: Western Campaigns: Assyria: Babylon: Israel: Ancient Near East: Bible dates: Bible Calendars: Math and Science.The King's Calendar demonstrates that following the synchronisms provided in the Books of Kings and Chronicles does put Jehoash of Israel on the Throne by 806 BCE, thereby making possible the Primary Text reading of the Saba'a Inscription that in Adad-Nirari's 5th year (806/05 BCE), he reached Damascus. Scripture does not give us a date for this battle, but it seems likely that between Jehoash's first regnal year in 807/806 BCE (when the king of Syria (or perhaps Assyria) entered Jerusalem ), and Ben Hadad's defeat by Adad-Nirari (802 BCE. or 796 BCE), that he was not in any real position to wage war. This leaves a maximum total of between five (5) and eight ( 8 ) years during which the war could have occurred (801 - 793 BCE)
King's Calendar Chapter Ten: 849 BCE. to 756 BCE, Athaliah to Uzziah of Judah & Jehu to Jeroboam II of Israel
Part A.
Introduction.
The first task undertaken in this article is to provide internet excerpts on Adad-Nirari III that will provide some background information for students. Unfortunately, there does not seem to be too much available. The best sources are either in pay to view internet sites, or hardcopy articles.
The next step will be to discuss the math and science (not the archaeology) behind the King's Calendar interpretation of the Saba'a Inscription reference to the Western Campaigns.
The Math and Science: Linear Causality
The King's Calendar computerized mathematical reconstruction of the Chronological History of the Divided Kingdom of Ancient Israel operates on the basis of Linear / lineal Causality, which, put simply, is that one cause has one effect.Change the cause, and the effect changes.
The King's Calendar gives a set value to the word YEAR in the Bible. Commencing the calendar on a certain date, every calculation is directly related to the calculation before and after it.
Linear: of, relating to, resembling, or having a graph that is a line and especially a straight line : characterized by an emphasis on line : having or being a response or output that is directly proportional to the input : relating to, or based or depending on sequential development. (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/linear)
The King's Calendar is a very simple approach to Biblical Chronology. It substitutes a value of 336 days for every year listed in Scripture. As far as the Divided Kingdom is concerned, when you use this 336 day year value, the synchronisms actually work. To see how effective this method is, SEE:Appendix 5: Diagrammatic Reconstruction of Israelite History from 936 to 586 BCE
Because it is a mathematical system, the King's Calendar must abide by certain mathematical rules, the most important of which, is that if you change any date for any day, month, or year every other day, month, or year is effected and must also change. It's like a 'domino effect'. Chronological references cannot be 'forced' to fit, and nor can they simply be ignored or 'compressed' as is the usual case with historians and archaeologists.
Archaeologists and historians arbitrarily alter data to suit their pet theories. We will see that this especially applies to Adad-Nirari's Campaign, but it is not something that the kingscalendar has the luxury of doing.
The King's Calendar reconstruction of Israelite chronological history applies a scientific methodology to a mathematical construct to determine the results of Biblical Chronological References, and then compares the findings with current historical perspectives, to determine the accuracy of the Mathematical predictions.
The Science of the theory can easily be verified or falsified by any person who takes the time to test it.
Because this Reconstruction of Israel's history is unique in its' methodology, it can be scientifically (mathematically) tested and demonstrated to be either true or false. Its' chronological predictions are able to be 'proved' or 'disproved'.
The Difficulties of History
We sometimes tend to think that our knowledge of history is based on irrefutable evidence, but as pointed out by Sir Alan Gardiner (1961) [James Et.Al 1991 p.222] in reference to Egyptian History, our knowledge is based in a collection of rags and tatters. That there are probably many errors and circular arguments in relation to ancient history is attested to by many, including Colin Renfrew, Professor of Archaeology, Cambridge University (James Et. Al. 1991 : foreword pages.xiii-xv)
As pointed out by Peet. T.E. (1924. p 75): "Archaeology is not an exact science, and deals more often in probabilities and possibilities than in irrefutable demonstrations.'
Unfortunately however, anti-Biblical bias is strong, and some historians take a less than scientific approach to their work. For some, admitting that the scriptural record of history might be right, seems to be sufficient incentive to ensure that the Scriptural Record be summarily rejected.
James et.al. (1991, p.162) are quite straightforward in their criticisms of Academic "poor methodology, hypercritical treatment of Scripture, blindness, prejudice and a sectarian like rejection of the Biblical Record".
Whilst we might not blame Academics for distrusting the Biblical Material, What is hypocritical is that many of these same Academics will quote the very Scriptures which they consider to be fictional, to support their many and various hypotheses.
With this in mind, let's take a brief look at Adad-Nirari III.
Adad-Nirari III on the Web (Website citations appearing in this article are random. No site in particular is recommended. No responsibility is taken for their content.)
Adadnirari III. followed (812-783 B.C.), ascending the throne of his father, [Shamshi Adad IV. 825-812 B.C.], apparently in early youth, but ruling with great energy and splendor for nearly thirty years. Unfortunately, no satisfactory annals of his reign have been preserved. Royal inscriptions from the next three kings utterly fail.
However, before Assyria's protracted withdrawal from central and south Syria, Adadnirari III (805-782 BC) was able to strike a terrific blow at Damascus which was sufficiently crippling to enable the Israelites to throw off the shackles the Arameans and fastened upon them and to regain their former boundaries. On the inscribed stele of this Assyrian king (discovered in 1905) Adadnirari writes:
Against Aram [Syria] I marched. Mari', king of Aram, in Damascus his royal city, I shut up. The terrifying splendor of assur [the national god of the Asyrians]...overwhelmed him and he laid hold of my feet, he became my vassal. 2300 talents of silver, 20 talents of gold, 3000 talents of coper, 5000 talents of iron, colored woolen and linen garments, an ivory bed, an ivory couch...his property and his goods, in immeasurable quantity, in Damascus, his royal city, in his palace, I received.
By the enigmatic appelation Mari' ("my lord") the Assyrians evidently refer to Hazael toward the latter end of whose reign there was a decisive weakening of Aramean power, rather than to his son and successor, Benhadad II. In any case, there are no grounds for inserting another king named Mari' either before or after Benhadad II. The "name" is rather to be construed as "the title which had replaced the royal name in current language" and which in this instance was employed by Adadnirari III for Hazael, since it is difficult to place Hazael's death earlier than 801 BC.
In 1967, a stela of the Assyrian king Adad-nirari III was found at Tell al-Rimah, 40 miles west of Mosul. It records a campaign to the west in which Adad-nirari received tribute from Jehoash king of Israel.
Shamshi-Adad V died while Adad-nirari III (810–783) was still a minor. His Babylonian mother, Sammu-ramat, took over the regency, governing with great energy until 806. The Greeks, who called her Semiramis, credited her with legendary accomplishments, but historically little is known about her.
Semiramis Related articles:Here - and - Here - and - Here.
Part B
King's Calendar Chronology
(The King's Calendar Reconstruction for this time period - and - The Problem with Current reconstructions are found in Appendix 5 and 6 - Both of Which are found on the Precis Page.)
Adad-Nirari III commenced to reign in 811 BCE or 810 BCE
According to current chronology, Adad-Nirari III commenced a series of western campaigns (toward Syria / Palestine) between 805 BCE. and 803 BCE. although Miller & Hayes, [1986, p.298] place this at 796 BCE. The Saba'a Inscription mention of Adad-Nirari's 5th year (806/05 BCE), appears to indicate that it was in that year that he reached Damascus.
Some academics think that reference to his fifth year may only imply that he commenced his campaigns in this year, not that he reached Damascus in that year. Reason for doubt concerns the relationship that existed between Damascus, Israel and Judah. The Rimah Stela mentions Amaziah of Judah and Jehoash of Israel as paying tribute to Adad-Nirari III, but currently no one places Jehoash on the throne of Israel until several years later than Adad-Nirari's 5th year.
Dates for the Reign of Jehoash of Israel.
King's Calendar: 807 to 793 BCE
Encyclopedia Judaica 801 to 785 BCE
Bright 802 to 786 BCE
Miller & Hayes 800 to 785 BCE
According to the King's Calendar reconstruction Jehoash of Israel commenced his sole rule in 807/06 BCE, just prior to the commencement of Adad-Nirari's Western Campaigns into Northern Syria. This is the very year that the Biblical Narrative records that the King of Syria invaded Judah, threatened Jerusalem, and wounded Joash of Judah (2 Chronicles 24:23-24).
Since Amaziah commenced reigning in the second year of Jehoash of Israel, his father Joash of Judah died in the first year of Jehoash of Israel. His death (arising as it did from a Syrian invasion - 2 Chronicles 24:23-24), reasonably demonstrates that the Syrians were still in control of Israel until 806 BCE.
With regard to the timing of Adad-Nirari's conquering of Damascus, his defeat of Ben Hadad III, and collection of Tribute from Joash of Israel, Roux (1982, p.279) places it at the very beginning of the western campaigns 806/05 BCE., while Bright (1981, p.256) dates it to 802 BCE, and Miller & Hayes ( 1986, p.298 ) put it in 796 BCE during Adad-Nirari's last western Campaign.
Possible Biblical Redaction Error
If the event did occur in 806 BCE., and Joash of Israel paid tribute to Assyria, this would tend to negate the Biblical narrative of an invasion of Judah by Syria. It could however be supposed that the tribute received from Jehoash of Samaria [Rimah Stele], was instead received from Joash of Judah, and the biblical redactors incorrectly identified the Syrians instead of the Assyrians [2 Chronicles.24:23]. There is Biblical precedent for this type of Error.
For those who see an objection
(From King's Calendar Chapter Nine: 883 BCE to 756 BCE, The Ancient Near East.)
While the 'King's Calendar' commences Jehoash of Israel's reign in 807 BCE and Bright commences it in 802 BCE, and irrespective of whether Ben-Hadad's defeat occurred in 802 or 796 BCE, it is clear that it was Jehoash and not his father Jehoahaz who recovered lost territory from Ben-Hadad after his defeat. The only indication that the 'King's Calendar' can give as to when Ben-Hadad was defeated by Jehoash of Israel, is to be found in connection with the Battle of Beth-Shemesh between Jehoash and Amaziah, which occurred prior to 793 BCE.
If it was in 796 BCE. that Ben-Hadad was defeated and Jehoash of Israel paid tribute to Adad-Nirari, then Jehoash had but three years in which to regain military strength; recover the lost Israelite territory; and successfully defeat Amaziah, who by all accounts, ought to have been the stronger of the two. It therefore seems more probable that Ben-Hadad's defeat took place in 802 BCE.
From King's Calendar Chapter 10 : Section 10. Battle of Beth-Shemesh
According to 2 Chronicles 25:17, the battle of Beth-Shemesh was instigated by Amaziah of Judah against Jehoash of Israel. Jehoash of Israel, defeated Amaziah, took him captive, broke down 400 cubits of Jerusalem's wall, and plundered the Temple and the treasury.
Scripture does not give us a date for this battle, but it seems likely that between Jehoash's first regnal year in 807/806 BCE (when the king of Syria (or perhaps Assyria) entered Jerusalem ), and Ben Hadad's defeat by Adad-Nirari (802 BCE. or 796 BCE), that he was not in any real position to wage war. This leaves a maximum total of between five (5) and eight ( 8 ) years during which the war could have occurred (801 - 793 BCE)
Jehoash's reply to Amaziah was designed to provoke a war (Judaica 1972, Vol 2. p.798 ).
The Reigns of Jehoash of Israel & Amaziah of Judah
The King's Calendar has actually no interest at all in Adad-Nirari III or his inscriptions. The only interest it has is to apply a scientific (mathematical) methodology to the Synchronous chronological information provided in the Bible for the Kings of Israel and Judah, and to see how the results fit what we have accepted as the History of the Ancient Near East.
The King's Calendar demonstrates that following the synchronisms provided in the Books of Kings and Chronicles does put Jehoash of Israel on the Throne by 806 BCE, thereby making possible the Primary Text reading of the Saba'a Inscription that in Adad-Nirari's 5th year (806/05 BCE), he reached Damascus.
This is not to say that it could not have been later toward 802 BCE, but as this date is only preferred because Historians are unable to put Jehoash and Amaziah on their thrones by 806 BCE, Primary Text Reading suggests that 802 BCE is incorrect.
R.P. BenDedek
Email: rpbendedek@hotmail.com
Definition: King's Calendar Chronological Research
The Premise: Between the 5th and 3rd centuries BCE (but continuing down to at least 104 BCE), Sectarian redactors transcribed the legitimate 'solar year' chronological records of Israel and Judah, into an artificial form, with listed years as each comprised of 12 months of 4 weeks of 7 days, or 336 days per year, thus creating a 13th artificial year where 12 solar years existed.
When the Synchronous Chronological Data provided in the Books of Kings and Chronicles for the Divided Kingdom Period are measured in years of 336 days, the synchronisms actually align. [Refer to Appendix Five to see how it synchronises the Divided Kingdom Period]
General formula for Biblical Data conversion:
The formula for constructing the artificial calendar was:
'X' times 364 equals 'Y' days
'Y' days divided by 336 equals 'Z' artificial years.
Values are:
'X' = any given number of 'real/solar' years
364 = perceived days in the sectarian calendar
'Y' = number of days calculated
336 = number of days in an artificial year
'Z' = artificial years = 1.083'X' and represents the original number of the converted years plus 8%.
To reverse the process by hand:
'Z' years times 336 equals 'Y' divided by 364 equals the Number of 'X' years converted.
To see how effective this method is, SEE:Appendix 5:Diagrammatic Reconstruction of Israelite History from 936 to 586 BCE:
The Principle of Linear Causality
The King's Calendar is a very simple approach to Biblical Chronology. It substitutes a value of 336 days for every year listed in Scripture. As far as the Divided Kingdom is concerned, when you use this 336 day year value, the synchronisms actually work. To see how effective this method is, SEE:Appendix 5: Diagrammatic Reconstruction of Israelite History from 936 to 586 BCE
Because it is a mathematical system, the King's Calendar must abide by certain mathematical rules, the most important of which, is that if you change any date for any day, month, or year every other day, month, or year is effected and must also change. It's like a 'domino effect'. Chronological references cannot be 'forced' to fit, and nor can they simply be ignored or 'compressed' as is the usual case with historians and archaeologists.
If any King's Calendar chronological determination disagrees with anything in the history books, it must argue the case as to why the history books are wrong, or why the evidence for an assertion is untrustworthy. If the King's Calendar successfully defends its' position, then the history books cannot be treated as definitive, and if the King's Calendar is 'proven' wrong, then every other chronological reference it provides is also wrong.
Because of this, the King's Calendar Chronological Reconstruction of Israel's history is unique, in that its' methodology can be scientifically (mathematically) tested and demonstrated to be either true or false. Its' chronological predictions are able to be 'proved' or 'disproved'.
Copyright 2013 is held by the nominated authors on this article page.
About the KingsCalendar Publisher
R.P.BenDedek is the owner and Editor of KingsCalendar.com which was originally set up to publicize his research results into the Chronology of Ancient Israel. Those results were published under the title: 'The King's Calendar: The Secret of Qumran'.
Whilst there have been many attempts to solve the chronological riddle of the Bible's synchronisms of reigns of the kings of Israel and Judah and their synchronism with other Ancient Near Eastern Nations, no other research is based on a simple mathematical formula which could, if it is incorrect, be disproved easily. To date, no one has been able to dismiss the mathematical results of this research.
Free to air Academic articles set forth Apologetics for and results of his discovery of an "artificial chronological scheme" running through the Bible, Josephus, the Damascus Documents of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and Seder Olam Rabbah.
During the current economic downturn, this book has been dramatically reduced in price but will eventually rise as the economy improves.
Check the Chapter Precis Page to see details of each chapter and to gain access to the Four Free to Air Chapters
R.P. BenDedek writes social commentaries and photographic 'Stories from China' both at KingsCalendar, and as a contributing columnist at Magic City Morning Star News in Maine USA.He has been teaching in China since 2003 and currently (2013) is working in Suzhou City Jiangsu Province.
Part 1. The Law, Rules of Evidence & Archaeology Part 2. The Law, Rules of Evidence & Archaeology Part 3. The Law, Rules of Evidence & Archaeology Part 4. The Law, Rules of Evidence & Archaeology
