波斯和埃及年表

R. A. Parker
{"title":"波斯和埃及年表","authors":"R. A. Parker","doi":"10.1086/370611","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent articles in this Journal by Professors Olmstead and Poebel have once again directed attention to the question of the accession date of Darius I.1 The problem arises from the fact that two interpretations of the length of the reigns of Bardiya and Nebuchadnezzar III have been drawn from the dates by which Babylonian tablets are dated. Thus, if Bardiya ruled not seven months but a year and seven months, Darius' accession must be placed not late in 522 B.c., the usually accepted date, but in 521; and if Nebuchadnezzar III ruled not three months but nearly a year, it must be further dropped to 520, his first year, then, being 519/18.2 Consideration of the Egyptian data which bear on the problem has led me to the conclusion that the traditional date of 522 for Darius'","PeriodicalId":252942,"journal":{"name":"The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures","volume":"76 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1941-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Persian and Egyptian Chronology\",\"authors\":\"R. A. Parker\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/370611\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recent articles in this Journal by Professors Olmstead and Poebel have once again directed attention to the question of the accession date of Darius I.1 The problem arises from the fact that two interpretations of the length of the reigns of Bardiya and Nebuchadnezzar III have been drawn from the dates by which Babylonian tablets are dated. Thus, if Bardiya ruled not seven months but a year and seven months, Darius' accession must be placed not late in 522 B.c., the usually accepted date, but in 521; and if Nebuchadnezzar III ruled not three months but nearly a year, it must be further dropped to 520, his first year, then, being 519/18.2 Consideration of the Egyptian data which bear on the problem has led me to the conclusion that the traditional date of 522 for Darius'\",\"PeriodicalId\":252942,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures\",\"volume\":\"76 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1941-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"22\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/370611\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/370611","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

摘要

奥姆斯特德教授和波贝尔教授最近在本刊上发表的文章再次引起人们对大流士一世即位日期的关注。问题的起因是,根据巴比伦石板的日期,对巴底亚和尼布甲尼撒三世的统治时间有两种解释。因此,如果巴尔迪亚统治的不是七个月而是一年零七个月,大流士登基的时间就不应该晚于公元前522年(通常被接受的日期),而应该是公元前521年;如果尼布甲尼撒三世统治的不是三个月,而是将近一年,那就必须进一步减到520年,那么他的第一年就是519/18.2 .考虑到与这个问题有关的埃及数据,我得出结论,大流士统治的传统日期是522年。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Persian and Egyptian Chronology
Recent articles in this Journal by Professors Olmstead and Poebel have once again directed attention to the question of the accession date of Darius I.1 The problem arises from the fact that two interpretations of the length of the reigns of Bardiya and Nebuchadnezzar III have been drawn from the dates by which Babylonian tablets are dated. Thus, if Bardiya ruled not seven months but a year and seven months, Darius' accession must be placed not late in 522 B.c., the usually accepted date, but in 521; and if Nebuchadnezzar III ruled not three months but nearly a year, it must be further dropped to 520, his first year, then, being 519/18.2 Consideration of the Egyptian data which bear on the problem has led me to the conclusion that the traditional date of 522 for Darius'
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Darius and His Egyptian Campaign Book Review:The Prophets and Their Times J. M. Powis Smith, William A. Irwin The Oriental Institute Archeological Report on the near East, 1941 The Old Aramaic Alphabet at Tell Halaf the Date of the "Altar" Inscription Hurrian Consonantal Pattern
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1