ClaimChronology and 607 BCEverified2010sOrganisation's explanation

Cronología y 607 a. E.C. · Claim record

La segunda parte argumenta, a partir de tablillas comerciales fechadas, que los reinados parecen solaparse en las transiciones de Nabucodonosor II a Amel-Marduk y de Amel-Marduk a Neriglisar, y plantea que gobernantes no registrados o lapsos entre reinados podrían aportar al período neobabilónico los años que faltan.

Claim ID claim-chronology-business-tablets-overlapConcerns 1 de noviembre de 2011Explicación de la organización

La afirmación y sus pruebas

Explicación de la organización · 1 de noviembre de 2011 Verificado

La segunda parte argumenta, a partir de tablillas comerciales fechadas, que los reinados parecen solaparse en las transiciones de Nabucodonosor II a Amel-Marduk y de Amel-Marduk a Neriglisar, y plantea que gobernantes no registrados o lapsos entre reinados podrían aportar al período neobabilónico los años que faltan. Source: The Watchtower, 1 de noviembre de 2011

Mostrar las pruebas (1 fuente)
Publicación primaria de los testigos de Jehová Verificado

The Watchtower, “When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?—Part Two”

1 de noviembre de 2011 · pp.23-24 · pars. 16-21 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania

“Therefore, neither the Babylonian chronicles nor the business tablets provide a basis to establish with certainty that Jerusalem was destroyed in 587 B.C.E.”

The argument rests on dated receipts that the article says overlap at the transitions between reigns: tablets of Amel-Marduk’s accession year dated to the fourth and fifth months (BM 80920, BM 58872) while Nebuchadnezzar II was still ruling in his sixth and even tenth month of his 43rd year (BM 55806), and a similar overlap between Amel-Marduk and Neriglissar (BM 75106, BM 61325, BM 75489). From this the article asks: “Could others have ruled between the reigns of these kings? If so, additional years would have to be added to the Neo-Babylonian period.”

Nota de procedencia y verificación for The Watchtower, When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?—Part Two

Nota de confianza. Full document fetched from the Watchtower Online Library on 19 September 2026 and read in full; the quotation, the paragraph and the page were confirmed against the article text and its embedded page markers (span class=“pageNum”).

Notes. This is the organisation’s positive proposal: unrecorded extra kings or interregna lengthening the Neo-Babylonian period by the missing 20 years.

Consultado. 19 de septiembre de 2026 · Identificador de la fuente. src-chr-o-w-2011-1101-business-tablets

Página de la afirmación Corregir o actualizar

A direct link to this claim is https://jwtruth.org/es/evidence/claim-chronology-business-tablets-overlap/. Every source above opens the original document or the best available copy. If you believe the wording, date or context is wrong, report an error.