Larsguy47

NOTE: The Thales eclipse is important to Biblical criticism since it is dated to the 2-year reign of Nabonidus. Correctly dating that eclipse helps to support true Bible chronology.



Am I famous, or what? I discovered how Thales was able to predict an eclipse in Ionia!! The leading astronomers suspected it might be possible to predict a solar eclipse location and time based upon old Babylonian records possibly but didn't think it was possible. Renown in his field, Otto Neugebauer is often quoted regarding the Thales eclipse as follows:

Here's another typical quote:

But this is not true! There is a series of exeligmos eclipses that occur consistently and precisely approximately 15 degrees farther north each cycle (54 years 1 month). That means if a total eclipse location was experienced, that could be used to predict the precise location (i.e. latitude) of the next eclipse in the series. That this rare eclipse pattern was known to the ancients is clear because of the 763BCE eclipse that is now used to date the entire Assyrian Period is recorded in the limmu list and is part of likely the rarest consistent series this exeligmos ever, with the series consisting of 7eclipses moving northward from south pole to the north! Here's that rare series of predictable eclipses:



This is a rather crude total eclipse track chart, but you can see the pattern is quite consistent. (Assyria would be in the general greater vicinity of Kabul, Tehran and Istanbul in the chart). The 817BCE eclipse would have been experienced in Assyria as a 50% eclipse, the 763BCE as total and the 709BCE eclipse was another 50% eclipse. But once the patern of these eclipses was established, the 763BCE total eclipse would have made it easy to predict the date and location of the 709BCE. If this was the first predicted eclipse, or at least the first one that was turned into a social event, it would explain why it is recorded in the limmu which usually only records major social or civic events of the year. Thus this is the only astronomical event recorded.

Most importantly, it proves the experts are wrong! Eclipses indeed were predictable by certain exeligmos patterns! By the way, if we presume the limmu eclipse was a predicted eclipse by Assyria following a total eclipse observation, then 709BCE would have been the predicted eclipse, not 763BCE, meaning the original dating for that event should be 709BCE. Further, as has been pointed out, the eclipses occur every 54 years and one month apart. So to correctly predict the date of the eclipse, they are dated one month later each cycle. The normal dating for the Babylonians was the first month (new moon) after the equinox. Using that dating method, the customary third month eclipse in Simanu would have been dated in 709BCE anyway. The 763BCE eclipse would normally have been month two. As the encylopedia notes:

So now, after we update Science on ancient predictable eclipse possibilities, how does this impact upon the Thales prediction?

Easy. We only need to check to see if the only known means of solar eclipse prediction fit the pattern of the currently dated Thales eclipse event in 585BCE. Does it? No! The exeligmos eclipse prior to 585BCE occurs over Europe and thus would not have been seen as a total eclipse to allow prediction. Further, this eclipse was supposed to be over Ionia and it barely touches past Ionia. Does this mean Thales didn't predict this eclipse? No!

The reason why is because the chronology for the NB Period was revised. As noted above, the true dating for the Assyrian Period originally dated that predictable eclipse in 709BCE rather than 763BCE. Thus the Assyrian Period is dated 54 years too early. But that means so is the Neo-Babylonian Period. The VAT4966 comes to our rescue here to reestablish the original dating for the Neo-Babylonian Period since it double-dates year 37 of Nebuchadnezzar to 511BCE. Based upon that, we can date the 1st of Cyrus correctly to 455BCE. That's important since the Thales eclipse is said to have occurred during the reign of Nabonidus, and Nabonidus was only active on the throne two years before his son Belshazzar took over. So if we were going to try and find a Thales eclipse match, we'd first look during the 2-year sole reign of the correct rule of Nabonidus.

When we date the 1st of Cyrus to 455BCE, then his first year as king over Persia Minor was 20 years earlier. Usually this is expressed as 559-539BCE. This is corrected to 475-455BCE. Cyrus became king over Persia Minor before the fall of Babylon in the 6th year of Nabonidus when he overthrew Astyages. This allows us to date the 1st of Nabonidus, therefore, to 480BCE, and his first two years 480/479-479/478BCE. So the question is, was there an exeligmos predicable series eclipse that occurred over Ionia between 780-778BCE? while Nabonidus was sole ruler? The answer, of course, is YES!

In February of 478BCE a solar eclipse went right over Ionia! Was this the eclipse Thales predicted? If so, he would have had to have had access to records of an eclipse some 54 years earlier in 532BCE. And that eclipse would have had to have been total 15 degree to the south where needed to be observed and recorded. 15 degrees below Ionia is Egypt. Guess where Thales studied astronomy for 7 years? You got it: EGYPT!

Thus Egypt experienced that rare total eclipse and thus was expecting the second eclipse in this series to occur over Ionia 54 years and 1 month later. Since Thales was from Ionia, an Asiatic Greek area, of course he was obliged to "warn" the Ionians about the eclipse. As Herodotus says:

"This event had been foretold by Thales, the Milesian, who forewarned the Ionians of it, fixing for it the very year in which it took place." - Herodotus

Therefore, the MYSTERY IS SOLVED! Thales indeed could have predicted the eclipse in Ionia in 478BCE, the original year 2 of Nabonidus via Egyptian astronomical records of their total eclipse in 532BCE.



See what happens when you trust the Bible's chronology? Ancient scientific mysteries are instantly solved!!!

:notworthy: :notworthy: :notworthy:

Larsguy47

rjf

I don't understand your last line here. You didn't use biblical chronology to establish the occurance of an ancient scientific mystery, you used science and math to solve it. If the claim was that the bible should be trusted on all counts because it is historically accurate on this one count, then that's just silly.

Larsguy47

I see what you mean. The reference was that the Bible was used to first discover the corrected chronology and establish the original dating for the reign of Nabonidus. Once that was set up then, of course, the astronomical evidence then falls in place as well. So trusting the Bible's timeline (if you understand it and accept it) helps to solve scientific questions.

Larsguy47

Pataphysician

Several problems. Herodotus tells us that the eclipse caused the battlefield were the Lydians and the Medes were fighting to become completely in the dark, so the umbra of a total eclipse was directly overhead. The battle took place on the Halys River, which is not under the umbra for the 478 BCE eclipse . Also the February 17 478 BCE eclipse is not total but annular so there would not be total darkness even under the umbra, the May 28 585 BEC eclipse is total and also occurs in the right time of year for the battle. Finally If Thales knew of, or even saw the May 18 603 BCE eclipse he could have also predicted the 585 BCE eclipse, this seems likely as he was born in about 620.

Larsguy47

Yes, you're right, it's not a precise match across the board. So tell me what is your take on the king of Babylon being "Labynetus" (Nabonidus) at the time of the eclipse in a time when Alyattes and Cyaxares were still ruling?

Once you find some double history relating to the eclipse you have to know some of it was fabricated. Nabonidus and Alyattes/Cyaxares were not contemporaries. I think Herodotus was playing both eclipses the best he could.

Of interesting note, the first revision of the timeline was just removing 26 years from the NB Period to help make up for 30 years added to the reign of Darius. He survived his own death at Marathon by 5 years but after that the chronology was back in sync, including the year of Xerxes' invasion. In that year Herodotus claimed there was an eclipse of the sun in the spring. The original dating was 424BCE and there was an eclipse seen from Persia in the spring that year! But later when Xenophon added another unadjusted 56 years to the timeline Xerxes' invasion got moved from 424BCE to 480BCE, but no one rematched the eclipse, so now there is no spring eclipse during the year of Xerxes' invasion! So it's just an eclipse reference in his text appearing spourious.

What do you think?

Larsguy47

Pataphysician

Labynetus is thought to be a title not a name, this is a mistake the Herodotus makes often, he gives the name of a king of Cilicia as Syennesis, which is really a title not a name. Besides it's not like there is a rule that multiple kings cannot have the same names, in fact just the opposite is more common.

As I stated in another thread which you haven't responded to, the eclipse of 481 is the one at the start of Xerxes campaign, he started in 481 towards Greece but got sidetracked by an internal revolt. If you know what cheeky thing Herodotus put into the mouths of the Magi who interpreted it, you would know it has to be the 481 eclipse and not the 424, as only the 481 was not visible on mainland Greece, thus the hilarity of the Magi's interpretation from a Greek perspective.

Larsguy47

Yeah, right. That's just a quick exuse. This is the quote we have to deal with here, flexible or not. Book I, 77: ""He had made an alliance with the Egyptian king Amasis,which precededhis alliance with Lacedaemon, and he had also entered into a similar treaty with the Babylonians too (whose RULER at the time was Labynetus)."

Oh great! Interesting!! Please give me the specific eclipse and the month if you have it. The reference is Herodotus 7.37:

"....then, after they had passed the winter at Sardis, the army set forth from thence fully equipped, at the beginning of spring, to march to Abydos; and when it had just set forth, the Sun left his place in the heaven and was invisible, though there was no gathering of clouds and the sky was perfectly clear; and instead of day it became night. "

So this eclipse occurs at the beginning of the spring of the year Xerxes' invades, so it can't be the year before and it can't be Summer, Fall or Winter, it must be "the beginning of spring."

There was an annular eclipse in -423 (424BCE) on March 21st. The spring equinox occurs on March 21st, so you can't get any "beginning of spring" than the first day of spring.

I see an eclipse on April 30, 481 BCE a whole year ahead of time and well into spring, hardly the "beginning" of spring. And another in October that doesn't appear to have been seen in Persia. So please give more information. I'll try to find your post.

I apologize for not answering your post but you didn't give me the LINK to the unanswered post either. Sometimes I get to some posts before others.

Fun stuff though and THANKS for the alternative reference!!

LG47

rjf

Boy, I was just going to say, "so it got the reigning years of at least one foreign king right. So what?" And then there's these scholarly posts from people who know what they're talking about, and I'm too ashamed to say anything now.

Larsguy47

Fear not, we are all still "students" getting the details right and forever refining.

LG47