Kassites

he Kassites were an ancient Near Eastern people who gained control of Babylonia after the fall of theOld Babylonian Empire after ca. 1531 BC to ca. 1155 BC (short chronology).

The Kassites gained control of Babylonia after the Hittite sack of the city in 1585 BC, and estabilshed a dynasty based in Dur-Kurigalzu.  The Kassites were members of a small military aristocracy but were efficient rulers and not locally unpopular,  and their 500 year reign laid an essential groundwork for the development of subsequent Babylonian culture.  The horse, which the Kassites worshiped, first came into use in Babylonia at this time. The Kassite language is thought to have been related toHurrian,   and not Indo-European or Semitic although the evidence for its genetic affiliation is meager due to the scarcity of extant texts. However, several Kassite leaders bore Indo-European names, and they might have had an Indo-European elite similliar to the Mitanni. 

The original homeland of the Kassites is not well known, but appears to have been located in the Zagros Mountains in Lorestan in what is now modern Iran, although, like the Elamites, Gutians and Manneans, they were linguistically unrelated to the later Indo-Europeans who came to dominate the region a thousand years later.  They first appeared in the annals of history in the 18th century BC when they attacked Babylonia in the 9th year of the reign of Samsu-iluna (reigned ca. 1749–1712 BC), the son ofHammurabi. Samsu-iluna repelled them, as did Abi-Eshuh, but they subsequently gained control of Babylonia circa 1570 BC some 25 years after the fall of Babylon to the Hittites in ca. 1595 BC, and went on to conquer the southern part of Mesopotamia, roughly corresponding to ancient Sumer and known as the Dynasty of the Sealand by ca. 1460 BC. The Hittites had carried off the idol of the god Marduk, but the Kassite rulers regained possession, returned Marduk to Babylon, and made him the equal of the Kassite Shuqamuna. The circumstances of their rise to power are unknown, due to a lack of documentation from this so-called "Dark Age" period of widespread dislocation. No inscription or document in the Kassite language has been preserved, an absence that cannot be purely accidental, suggesting a severe regression of literacy in official circles. Babylon under Kassite rulers, who renamed the cityKaranduniash, re-emerged as a political and military power in Mesopotamia. A newly built capital city Dur-Kurigalzu was named in honour of Kurigalzu I (ca. early 14th century BC).

History

Their success was built upon the relative political stability that the Kassite monarchs achieved. They ruled Babylonia practically without interruption for almost four hundred years— the longest rule by any dynasty in Babylonian history.

The transformation of southern Mesopotamia into a territorial state, rather than a network of allied or combatative city states, made Babylonia an international power, although it was often overshadowed by its northern neighbour, Assyria and by Elam to the east. Kassite kings established trade and diplomacy with Assyria. (Puzur-Ashur III of Assyria and Burna-Buriash I signed a treaty agreeing the border between the two states in the mid 16th Century BC), Egypt, Elam, and the Hittites, and the Kassite royal house intermarried with their royal families. There were foreign merchants in Babylon and other cities, and Babylonian merchants were active from Egypt (a major source of Nubian gold) to Assyria and Anatolia. Kassite weights and seals, the packet-identifying and measuring tools of commerce, have been found in as far afield as Thebes in Greece, in southern Armenia, and even in a shipwreck off the southern coast of today's Turkey.

A further treaty between Kurigalzu I and Ashur-bel-nisheshu of Assyria was agreed in the mid 15th century. However, Babylonia found itself under attack and domination from Assyria for much of the next few centuries after the accession ofAshur-uballit I in 1365 BC who made Assyria (along with the Hittites and Egyptians) the major power in the Near East. Babylon was sacked by the Assyrian king Ashur-uballit I (1365 BC – 1330 BC)) in the 1360s after the Kassite king in Babylon who was married to the daughter of Ashur-uballit was murdered. Ashur-uballit promptly marched into Babylonia and avenged his son-in-law, deposing the king and installing Kurigalzu II of the royal Kassite line as king there. His successorEnlil-nirari (1330 BC to 1319) also attacked Babylonia and his great grandson Adad-nirari I (1307 to 1275 BC) annexed Bablonian territory when he became king. Tukulti-Ninurta I (1244 BC -1208 BC) not content with merely dominating Babylonia went further, conquering Babylonia, deposing Kashtiliash IV and ruling there for 8 years in person from 1235 BC to 1227 BC.

The Kassite kings maintained control of their realm through a network of provinces administered by governors. Almost equal with the royal cities of Babylon and Dur-Kurigalzu, the revived city of Nippur was the most important provincial center. Nippur, the formerly great city, which had been virtually abandoned ca. 1730 BC, was rebuilt in the Kassite period, with temples meticulously re-built on their old foundations. In fact, under the Kassite government, the governor of Nippur, who took the Sumerian-derived title of Guennakku, ruled as a sort of secondary and lesser king. The prestige of Nippur was enough for a series of 13th century BC Kassite kings to reassume the title 'governor of Nippur' for themselves.

Other important centers during the Kassite period were Larsa, Sippar and Susa. After the Kassite dynasty was overthrown in1155 BC, the system of provincial administration continued and the country remained united under the succeeding rule, the Second Dynasty of Isin.

Documentation of the Kassite period depends heavily on the scattered and disarticulated tablets from Nippur, where thousands of tablets and fragments have been excavated. They include administrative and legal texts, letters, seal inscriptions, kudurrus (land grants and administrative regulations), private votive inscriptions, and even a literary text (usually identified as a fragment of a historical epic).

"Kassite rulers in Babylon were also scrupulous to follow existing forms of expression, and the public and private patterns of behavior "and even went beyond that — as zealous neophytes do, or outsiders, who take up a superior civilization — by favoring an extremely conservative attitude, at least in palace circles." (Oppenheim 1964, p. 62). Over the centuries, however, the Kassites were absorbed into the Babylonian population. Eight among the last kings of the Kassite dynasty have Akkadian names, Kudur-Enlil's name is part Elamite and part Sumerian and Kassite princesses married into the royal family of Assyria.

The Book of Judges in the Hebrew Bible contains a reference to what appears to be a Kassite ruler, who is named asCushan-Rishathaim and described as ruler of "Aram Naharaim". "Cushan" is interpreted by Biblical scholars to mean "Kassite" and "Aram Naharaim" to mean northwest Mesopotamia. According to Judges, Cushan-Rishathaim conquered Israel shortly after the death of Joshua and held it for eight years.

The Elamites conquered Babylonia in the 12th century BC, thus ending the Kassite state. The last Kassite king, Enlil-nadin-ahi, was taken to Susa and imprisoned there, where he also died.

The Kassites did briefly regain control over Babylonia with Dynasty V (1025 BC-1004 BC), however they were deposed once more, this time by an Aramean dynasty.

Kassites survived as a distinct ethnic group in the mountains of Lorestan (Luristan) long after the Kassite state collapsed. Babylonian records describe how the Assyrian king Sennacherib on his eastern campaign of 702 BC subdued the Kassites in a battle near Hulwan, Iran.

Herodotus and other ancient Greek writers sometimes referred to the region around Susa as "Cissia", a variant of the Kassite name. However, it is not clear if Kassites were actually living in that region so late.

Herodotus was almost certainly referring to Kassites when he described "Asiatic Ethiopians" in the Persian army that invaded Greece in 492 BC. Herodotus was presumably repeating an account that had originally used the name "Cush", or something similar, to describe the Kassites; "Cush" was also a name for Ethiopia. A similar confusion of Kassites with Ethiopians is evident in various ancient Greek accounts of the Trojan war hero Memnon, who was sometimes described as a "Cissian" and founder of Susa, and other times as Ethiopian. According to Herodotus, the "Asiatic Ethiopians" lived not in Cissia, but to the north, bordering on "Paricanians" who in turn bordered on the Medes.

During the later Achaemenid period, the Kassites, referred to as "Kossaei", lived in the mountains to the east of Media and were one of several "predatory" mountain tribes that regularly extracted "gifts" from the Achaemenid Persians, according to a citation of Nearchus by Strabo (13.3.6).

But Kassites again fought on the Persian side in the Battle of Gaugamela in 331 BC, in which the Persian Empire fell to Alexander the Great, according toDiodorus Siculus (17.59) (who called them "Kossaei") and Curtius Rufus (4.12) (who called them "inhabitants of the Cossaean mountains"). According to Strabo's citation of Nearchus, Alexander later separately attacked the Kassites "in the winter", after which they stopped their tribute-seeking raids.

Strabo also wrote that the "Kossaei" contributed 13,000 archers to the army of Elymais in a war against Susa and Babylon. This statement is hard to understand, as Babylon had lost importance under Seleucid rule by the time Elymais emerged around 160 BC. If "Babylon" is understood to mean the Seleucids, then this battle would have occurred sometime between the emergence of Elymais and Strabo's death around 25 AD. If "Elymais" is understood to mean Elam, then the battle probably occurred in the 6th century BC. Note that Susa was the capital of Elam and later of Elymais, so Strabo's statement implies that the Kassites intervened to support a particular group within Elam or Elymais against their own capital, which at that moment was apparently allied with or subject to Babylon or the Seleucids.

The latest evidence of Kassite culture is a reference by the 2nd century geographer Ptolemy, who described "Kossaei" as living in the Susa region, adjacent to the "Elymeans". This could represent one of many cases where Ptolemy relied on out-of-date sources.

It is believed that the name of the Kassites is preserved in the name of the Kashgan River, in Lorestan.

Kassite Dynasty of Babylon

 

Ruler	Reigned	Comments
Agum II or Agum-Kakrime		Returns Marduk statue to Babylon
Burnaburiash I		Treaty with Puzur-Ashur III of Assyria
Kashtiliash III
Ulamburiash		Conquers the first Sealand Dynasty
Agum III
Karaindash		Treaty with Ashur-bel-nisheshu of Assyria
Kadashman-harbe I		Campaign against the Sutû
Kurigalzu I		Founder of Dur-Kurigalzu and contemporary of Thutmose IV
Kadashman-Enlil I	ca. 1374—1360 BC (short)	Contemporary of Amenophis III of the Egyptian Amarna letters
Burnaburiash II	ca. 1359—1333 BC (short)	Contemporary of Akhenaten and Ashur-uballit I
Kara-hardash	ca. 1333 BC (short)	Grandson of Ashur-uballit I of Assyria
Nazi-Bugash or Shuzigash	ca. 1333 BC (short)	Usurper “son of a nobody”
Kurigalzu II	ca. 1332—1308 BC (short)	Son of Burnaburiash II, Lost ? Battle of Sugagi with Enlil-nirari of Assyria
Nazi-Maruttash	ca. 1307—1282 BC (short)	Lost territory to Adad-nirari I of Assyria
Kadashman-Turgu	ca. 1281—1264 BC (short)	Contemporary of Hattusili III of the Hittites
Kadashman-Enlil II	ca. 1263—1255 BC (short)	Contemporary of Hattusili III of the Hittites
Kudur-Enlil	ca. 1254—1246 BC (short)	Time of Nippur renaissance
Shagarakti-Shuriash	ca. 1245—1233 BC (short)	“Non-son of Kudur-Enlil” according to Tukulti-Ninurta I of Assyria
Kashtiliashu IV	ca. 1232—1225 BC (short)	Deposed by Tukulti-Ninurta I of Assyria
Enlil-nadin-shumi	ca. 1224 BC (short)	Assyrian vassal king
Kadashman-Harbe II	ca. 1223 BC (short)	Assyrian vassal king
Adad-shuma-iddina	ca. 1222—1217 BC (short)	Assyrian vassal king
Adad-shuma-usur	ca. 1216—1187 BC (short)	Sender of rude letter to Aššur-nirari and Ilī-ḫaddâ, the kings of Assyria
Meli-Shipak II	ca. 1186—1172 BC (short)	Correspondence with Ninurta-apal-Ekur confirming foundation of Near East chronology
Marduk-apla-iddina I	ca. 1171—1159 BC (short)
Zababa-shuma-iddin	ca. 1158 BC (short)	Defeated by Shutruk-Nahhunte of Elam
Enlil-nadin-ahi	ca. 1157—1155 BC (short)	Defeated by Kutir-Nahhunte II of Elam

Culture

Social life

In spite of the fact that some of them took Babylonian names, the Kassites retained their traditional clan and tribal structure, in contrast to the smaller family unit of the Babylonians. They were proud of their affiliation with their tribal houses, rather than their own fathers, and preserved their customs of fratriarchal property ownership and inheritance. 

Language                                                                                                                                                                            There is not a single connected text in the Kassite language. The number of Kassite appellatives is restricted (slightly more than 60 vocables, mostly referring to colors, parts of the chariot, irrigation terms, plants, and titles). About 200 additional lexical elements can be gained by the analysis of the more numerous anthroponyms, toponyms, theonyms, and horse names used by the Kassites (see Balkan, 1954, passim; Jaritz, 1957 is to be used with caution). As is clear from this material, the Kassites spoke a language without a genetic relationship to any other known tongue                                                                                                                                    Kudurru                                                                                                                                                            The most notable Kassite artifacts are their Kudurru steles. Used for marking boundaries and making proclamations, they were also carved with a high degree of artistic skill.

 

First Babylonian Dynasty

Origins of the First Dynasty                                     

The actual origins of the Dynasty are rather hard to pinpoint with great certainty simply because Babylon itself, due to a high water table, yields very few archaeological materials intact. Thus any evidence must come from surrounding regions and written records. Not much is known about the kings from Sumuabumthrough Sin-muballit other than the fact they were Amorites rather than indigenous Akkadians. What is known, however, is that they accumulated little land. When Hammurabi (also an Amorite) ascended the throne of Babylon, the empire only consisted of a few towns in the surrounding area: Dilbat, Sippar, Kish, andBorsippa. Once Hammurabi was king, his military victories gained land for the empire. However, Babylon remained but one of several important areas in Mesopotamia, along with Assyria, then ruled by Shamshi-Adad I, and Larsa, then ruled by Rim-Sin.

In Hammurabi's thirtieth year as king, he really began to establish Babylon as the center of what would be a great empire. In that year, he conquered Larsa fromRim-Sin, thus gaining control over the lucrative urban centers of Nippur, Ur, Uruk, and Isin. In essence, Hammurabi gained control over all of south Mesopotamia. The other formidable political power in the region in the 2nd millennium was Eshnunna, which Hammurabi succeeded in capturing in c. 1761. Babylon exploited Eshnunna's well-established commercial trade routes and the economic stability that came with them. It was not long before Hammurabi's army took Assyria(another economic powerhouse) and parts of the Zagros Mountains. In 1760, Hammurabi finally captured Mari, the final piece of the puzzle that gave him control over virtually all of the territory that made up Mesopotamia under the Third Dynasty of Ur in the 3rd millennium.

Hammurabi's other name was Hammurapi-ilu  meaning "Hammurapi the god" or perhaps "Hammurapi is god." He could have been Amraphel king ofShinar or Sinear in the Jewish records and the Bible, a contemporary of Abraham. Abraham lived from 1871 to 1784, according to modern interpretations of theOld Testament's figures that have been usually reckoned in modern half years before the Exodus, from equinox to equinox. 

A recent translation of the Chogha Gavaneh tablets which date back to 1800 BC indicates there were close contacts between this town located in the intermontane valley of Islamabad in Central Zagros and Dyala region.

The Venus tablets of Ammisaduqa (i.e., several ancient versions on clay tablets) are famous, and several books had been published about them. Several dates have been offered but the old dates of many sourcebooks seems to be outdated and incorrect. There are further difficulties: the 21 years span of the detailed observations of the planet Venus may or may not coincide with the reign of this king, because his name is not mentioned, only the Year of the Golden Throne. A few sources, some printed almost a century ago, claim that the original text mentions an occultation of the Venus by the moon. However, this may be a misinterpretation. Calculations support 1659 for the fall of Babylon, based on the statistical probability of dating based on the planet's observations. The presently accepted middle chronology is too low from the astronomical point of view. 

A text about the fall of Babylon by the Hittites of Mursilis I at the end of Samsuditana's reign which tells about a twin eclipse is crucial for a correct Babylonian chronology. The pair of lunar and solar eclipses occurred in the month Shimanu (Sivan). The lunar eclipse took place on February 9, 1659 BC. It started at 4:43 and ended at 6:47. The latter was invisible which satisfies the record which tells that the setting moon was still eclipsed. The solar eclipse occurred on February 23, 1659. It started at 10:26, has its maximum at 11:45, and ended at 13:04. 

The chronology of the Ancient Near East provides a framework of dates for various events, rulers and dynasties. Individual inscriptions and texts customarily record events in terms of a succession of officials or rulers, taking forms like "in the year X of king Y". Thus by piecing together many records a relative chronology is arrived at, relating dates in cities over a wide area. For the first millennium BC, the relative chronology can be tied to actual calendar years by identifying significant astronomical events. An inscription from the tenth year of Assyrian king Ashur-Dan III refers to an eclipse of the sun, and astronomical calculations among the range of possible date identify the eclipse as having occurred 15 June 763 BCE. The date can be corroborated with other mentions of astronomical events and a secure absolute chronology established, that ties the relative chronologies into our calendar.

For the third and second millennia, the correlation is not so fixed. A key document is the Venus tablet of Ammisaduqa, preserving record of astronomical observations of Venus, as preserved in numerous cuneiform tablets during the reign of the Babylonian king Ammisaduqa, known to be the fourth ruler after Hammurabi in the relative calendar. In the series, the conjunction of the rise of Venus with the new moon provides a fixed point, or rather three fixed points, for the conjunction is aperiodic occurrence. By astronomic calculation, the first dates, for example, of Hammurabi can be fixed in this manner either as 1848, 1792 or 1736, depending on whether the "High Chronology" the "Middle chronology" or the "Low Chronology" is followed.

First of all, for the 3rd and 2nd millennia BC the following periods need to be distinguished:

1. Early Bronze Age: A series of rulers and dynasties whose existence is based mostly on the Sumerian King List besides some that are attested epigraphically (e.g. En-me-barage-si). No absolute dates within a certainty better than a century can be assigned to this period.
2. Middle to Late Bronze Age: Beginning with the Akkadian Empire around 2300 BC, the chronological evidence becomes internally more consistent. Essentially, for this period, a good picture can be drawn of who succeeded whom, and synchronisms between Mesopotamia, the Levant and the more robust chronology of Ancient Egypt can be established. The assignment of absolute dates is a matter of dispute; the conventional middle chronology fixes the sack of Babylonat 1595 BC while the short chronology fixes it at 1531 BC.
3. The Bronze Age collapse: a "Dark Age" begins with the fall of Babylonian Dynasty III (Kassite) around 1200 BC, the invasions of the Sea Peoples and the collapse of the Hittite Empire.
4. Early Iron Age: around 900 BC, historical data, written records become more numerous once more, with the rise of theNeo-Assyrian Empire, enabling the certain assignment of absolute dates. Classical sources such as the Canon of Ptolemy, the works of Berossus and the Hebrew Bible provide chronological support and synchronisms. An eclipse in 763 BC anchors the Assyrian list of imperial officials.

[edit]Variant Bronze Age chronologies

The major schools of thought on the length of the Dark Age are separated by 56 or 64 years. This is because the key source for their dates is the Venus tablet of Ammisaduqa and the visibility of Venus has a 56/64  year cycle. More recent work has suggested that the fundamental 8 year cycle of Venus is a better metric.,  (see update in.  There have been other attempts to anchor the chronology using records of eclipses and other methods, but they are not yet widely supported. The alternative major chronologies are defined by the date of the 8th year of the reign ofAmmisaduqa, king of Babylon. This choice then defines the reign of Hammurabi.

Due to the sparsity of sources throughout the "Dark Age", the history of the Near Eastern Bronze Age down to the end of the Third Babylonian Dynasty is a "floating chronology". In other words, it fits together internally as a "relative chronology" but not as an "absolute chronology".

Many recent textbooks on the archaeology and history of the ancient Near East use the Middle Chronology. There are also some scholars who discount the validity of the Venus tablet of Ammisaduqa entirely.

The following table gives an overview of the competing proposals, listing some key dates and the deviation relative to the short chronology:

The chronologies of Mesopotamia, the Levant and Anatolia depend significantly on the chronology of Ancient Egypt. To the extent that there are problems in the Egyptian chronology, these issues will be inherited in chronologies based on synchronisms with Ancient Egypt.

Sources of chronological data                                                                                             Inscriptional

Thousands of cuneiform tablets have been found in an area running from Anatolia to Egypt. While many are the ancient equivalent of modern grocery receipts, these tablets, along with inscriptions on buildings and public monuments, provide the major source of chronological information for the ancient Middle East. 

Underlying issues

• State of materials

While there are some relatively pristine objects, such as you might see in the Louvre or the British Museum, the vast majority of recovered tables and inscriptions are in much worse condition. They have been broken with only portions found, intentionally defaced, and damaged by weather or the effects of being buried underground. Many tablets were not even baked in antiquity and have to be carefully handled until they are heated properly.  

• Provenance

The site of an item's recovery is an important piece of information for archaeologists. Unfortunately, two factors impinge on this. First, in ancient times old materials were often reused either as building material or fill, sometimes at a great distance from the original location. Secondly, looting has been a fact of life for archaeological sites, dating at least back to Roman times. The provenance of a looted object is difficult or impossible to determine.

• Multiple Versions

Over time, key documents like the Sumerian King List were repeatedly copied across the generations. As a result, there are sometimes multiple versions of a chronological source that differ from each other. It can be very hard to determine which version is correct. 

• Translation

The translation of cuneiform documents is quite difficult, especially given the damaged nature of much source material. Additionally, our knowledge of the underlying languages, like Akkadian and Sumerian, have evolved over time, so a translation done now may be quite different than one done in AD 1900. The result of all this is that there can be honest disagreement what the document really says. Worse yet, many archaeological finds have not yet been published, much less translated. Those held in private collections may never be.

• Slant

Many of our important source documents, such as the Assyrian King List, are the products of government and religious establishments. They often have a built-in slant in favor of the king or god in charge. A king may even take credit for a battle or construction project of an earlier ruler. The Assyrians in particular have a literary tradition of always putting the best possible face on history. The tablets or inscriptions in question still have value, though one does have to keep the slant in mind.

King Lists

Keeping historical lists of rulers was traditional in the ancient Near East.

• Sumerian King List

Covers rulers of Mesopotamia from a time "before the flood" up to the fall of the Isin Dynasty. For many early city/states it is the only source of chronological data. A major problem is that many early rulers are listed with fantastically long reigns. There has been some speculation that this stems from an error transcribing from the base 60 arithmetic of the Sumerians to the decimal based system of the later Akkadians. 

• Babylonian King List

This list deals only with the rulers of Babylon. It has been found in two versions Babylonian King List A and Babylonian King List B. The later dynasties in the list reflect the Kassite and Sealand periods of Babylon. There is also a Babylonian King List of the Hellenistic Period which covers the later part of the 1st millennium. 

• Assyrian King List

Found in multiple differing copies, this tablet lists all the kings of Assyria and their regnal lengths back into the mists of time, with the portions with reasonable data beginning at around the 14th century BC.  When combined with the various Assyrian chronicles, the Assyrian King List anchors the chronology of the 1st millennium.

• Indus Valley King List

A list of Indus Valley Civilization Kings was compiled by Laurence Waddell but it is not generally accepted or well regarded by mainstream academia. 

Chronicles

Many chronicles have been recovered in the ancient Near East. Most are partial or fragmentary, but when combined with other sources, they provide a rich source of chronological data. 

• Synchronistic Chronicle

Found in the library of Assurbanipal in Nineveh, it records the interaction of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires, from the Assyrian point of view. While useful, the consensus is that this chronicle should not be considered reliable.

• Chronicle P

While quite incomplete, this tablet provides the same type of information as the Assyrian Synchronistic Chronicle, but from the Babylonian point of view. 

• Royal Chronicle of Lagash

The Sumerian King List omits any mention of Lagash, even though it was clearly a major power during the period covered by the list. The Royal Chronicle of Lagash appears to be an attempt to remedy that omission, listing the kings of Lagash in the form of a chronicle.  Some scholars believe the chronicle to be either a parody of the Sumerian King List or a complete fabrication. 

Royal inscriptions

In general, political figures in the ancient Near East liked to take credit for public works. Temples, buildings and statues built by a ruler are likely to have some sort of inscription mentioning his name. The kings also were sure to record major deeds like battles won, titles acquired, or gods appeased in some form of public inscription. These are very useful in tracking the reign of a ruler.

Year lists

Unlike current calendars, most ancient calendars were based on how long the current ruler had been in power. A year might be "the 5th year in the reign of Hammurabi". As part of this, each royal year was given a title, like "the year Ur was defeated". Most often this reflected a deed of the ruler. The compilation of these years are called date lists.  

Eponym (limmu) lists

In Assyria, a royal official, or Limmu was selected every year of a king's reign. Many copies of these lists have been found.  Naturally, details are not always clear cut. There are sometimes too many or few limmu for the length of a king's reign and sometimes the different versions of the Eponym List disagree on a limmu.

Trade, diplomatic, and disbursement records

As is often the case in archaeology, it is everyday records that give the best picture of a civilization. Cuneiform tablets were constantly moving around the ancient Near East, offering alliances (sometimes including daughters for marriage), threatening war, acting as shipping documents for mundane supplies or settling accounts receivable. Most were tossed away after use the way that we would discard unwanted receipts. Fortunately for us, tablets are durable and many are well-preserved even when used as material for wall filler in new construction.

• Amarna Letters

The classic example. A number of cuneiform tablets were found at Amarna in Egypt, the city of the pharaoh Akhenaten. They were written mostly in Akkadian, the diplomatic language of the time. Several named rulers in the region including the kings of Assyria and Babylon. Assuming that the correct kings have been identified, it locks the chronology of the ancient Near East to that of Egypt, at least from the middle of the 2nd Millennium.

Classical

Some data sources are available to us from the classical period

• Berossus

Berossus was a Babylonian astronomer living during the Hellenistic period. He wrote a history of Babylon which has not survived to modern times. Luckily, portions of this work were preserved by other classical writers.

• Canon of Ptolemy or Canon of Kings

This book provides a list of kings starting at around 750 BC in Babylon and forward through the Persian and Roman periods, in an astronomical context. It is used to help define the chronology of the 1st millennium.

• Hebrew Bible

Not having the benefit of being written into clay and buried, the records of the Hebrews have an additional layer of time to work through in being used as a source for chronology. On the other hand, the Hebrews did live pretty much in a territory directly in the crosshairs of Babylon, Assyria, Egypt and the Hittites, giving them a front row seat to actions in the area. Mainly of use in the 1st millennium and with the Assyrian New Kingdom.

Astronomical

• Venus tablet of Ammisaduqa

A record of the movements of Venus during the reign of a king of the First Babylonian Dynasty. Using it, various scholars have proposed dates for the fall of Babylon based on the 56/64 year cycle of Venus. The mentioned recent work suggesting that the fundamental 8 year cycle of Venus is a better metric, lead to the proposal of an "ultra-low" chronology. 

• Eclipses

A number of lunar and solar eclipses have been suggested for use in dating the ancient Near East. Many suffer from the vagueness of the original tablets in showing that an actual eclipse occurred. At that point, it becomes a question of using computer models to show when a given eclipse would have been visible at a site, complicated by difficulties in modeling the slowing rotation of the earth, Delta T. One important event is the Ninevah Eclipse, found in an Assyrian limmu list q.e. "Bur-Sagale of Guzana, revolt in the city of Ashur. In the month Simanu an eclipse of the sun took place." This eclipse is considered to be solidly dated to 15 June 763 BC. Another important event is the Ur III Lunar/Solar Eclipse pair in the reign of Shulgi. Most calculations for dating using eclipses have assumed that the Venus Tablet of Ammisaduqa is a legitimate source. 

Dendrochronology

Dendrochronology attempts to use the variable growth pattern of trees, expressed in their rings, to build up a chronological timeline. At present, there are no continuous chronologies for the Near East. A floating chronology has been developed using trees in Anatolia for the Bronze and Iron Ages. Until a continuous sequence is developed, the usefulness for improving the chronology of the Ancient Near East is limited.  The difficulty in tying the chronology to the modern day lies primarily in the Roman period, for which few good wood samples have been found, and many of those turn out to be imported from outside the Near East. 

Radiocarbon dating

As in Egypt and the eastern Mediterranean, radiocarbon dates run one or two centuries earlier than the dates proposed by archaeologists. It is not at all clear which group is right, if either. Mechanisms have been proposed for explaining why radiocarbon dates in the region might be skewed. Equally logical arguments have been made suggesting that the archaeological dates are too late. Time will tell.  The spread of accelerator based carbon dating techniques may help clear up the issue. Another promising front is the dating of lime plaster from structures.  Recently, radiocarbon dates from the final destruction of Ebla have been shown to definitely favour the Middle Chronology (with the fall of Babylon and Aleppo at c. 1595 BCE), and do not seem to fall with the Ultra-Low Chronology (same event at c. 1499 BCE), although it is emphasized not to be seen as a decisive argument. 

Synchronisms

Egypt (Africa)

At least as far back as the reign of Thutmose I, Egypt took a strong interest in the ancient Near East. At times they occupied portions of the region, a favor returned in later days by the Assyrians. Some key synchronisms:

• Battle of Kadesh, involving Ramses II of Egypt (in his 5th year of reign) and Muwatalli II of the Hittite empire. Recorded by both Egyptian and Hittite records. 

• Peace treaty between Ramses II of Egypt (in his 21st year of reign) and Hattusili III of the Hittites. Recorded by both Egyptian and Hittite records. 

• Amenhotep III (Amenophis III) marries the daughter of Shuttarna II of Mitanni. There is also a record of messages from the pharaoh to Kadashman-Enlil I of Babylon in the Amarna Letter (EA1-5). Other Amarna letters link Amenhotep III to Burnaburiash II of Babylon (EA6) and Tushratta of Mitanni (EA17-29) as well.

• Akhenaten (aka Amenhotep IV) married the daughter of Tushratta of Mitanni (as did his father Amenhotep III), leaving a number of records on the matter. He also corresponded with Burna-Buriash II of Babylon (EA7-11,15), and Ashuruballit I of Assyria (EA15-16)

Indus Valley

There is much evidence that the Harappan civilization of the Indus Valley traded with the region. This is demonstrated by clay seals found at Ur III and in the Persian Gulf.  In addition, if the land of Meluhha does indeed refer to the Indus Valley, then there are extensive trade records ranging from the Akkadian Empire until the Babylonian Dynasty I.

Thera and Eastern Mediterranean

Goods from Greece made their way into the ancient Near East, directly in Anatolia and via the island of Cyprus in the rest of the region and Egypt. A Hittite king, Tudhaliya IV, even captured Cyprus as part of an attempt to enforce a blockade of the Assyrians. 

The eruption of the Thera volcano provides a possible time marker for the region. A large eruption, it would have sent a plume of ash directly over Anatolia and filled the sea in the area with floating pumice. This pumice appeared in Egypt, apparently via trade. Current excavations in the Levant may also add to the timeline. Unfortunately, the exact date of the volcanic eruption is the subject of strong debate between the radiocarbon experts, who place it at latest in 1610 BC and archaeologists, who support a date around 1470 BC. 

[edit]