Chapter
1: Nebuchadnezzar's Wars
Rise of Nebuchadnezzar
The Egyptian
Holocaust
In 564 B.C. a foreign army invaded Egypt, laying
waste the country. Tens of thousands
died. Thousands more, primarily the skilled
and educated elite, priests and artisans alike, were taken captive and
deported. A minority escaped into the
surrounding desert, among them the ruling pharaoh. Only a small remnant
survived.
The physical structures of the country were also decimated. Temples and tombs
were destroyed and looted. Cities were
burned. From Migdol in the eastern Delta
to Syene near Elephantine south of Thebes, 500
miles upriver on the Nile, the country was
ravaged.
It was, quite literally, a holocaust.
Twenty years passed as the land languished, raped of
its treasure by garrisons left behind by the foreigners. No pharaoh ruled to restore order. Another
twenty years saw limited rebuilding and the gradual renewal of religious and
political life. Temples were repaired. Training began for a new generation of
priests and artisans.
The few traumatized survivors of the exile, now old,
had only a vague recollection of the days when the priests were taken away and
the population vanished. They told tales
about the nšn, “the devastation”.
The name of the invader, familiar to even the
most casual student of ancient history, was Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, at the
time the dominant power in the ancient Near East.
Only one problem surfaces in connection with this
unprecedented act of genocide and material destruction. With few exceptions, historians categorically
deny it ever happened.[1]
But they are mistaken.
This book, and those which follow, are dedicated to proving the
historicity of the event. It will not be
an easy task. The denial by historians
is based on the accepted chronology of 6th century Egypt, what we
consistently call the “traditional history”.
Proving our case will necessitate altering that chronology. It will be no minor revision. When all is said and done, in three lengthy
books filled with closely reasoned argument, a
“revised history” will emerge which bears little resemblance to the
story of Egypt told in
the textbooks. Entire dynasties will be
dislodged and displaced, often by as much as six hundred years.
The argument will be difficult to follow, though charts and diagrams are
provided to illuminate the way. The
reader will be challenged to master two histories, both the errant traditional
history and the revised alternative. It
will be toilsome work, especially for those not well versed in ancient history.
This is not light reading.
Our story begins fifty years before the Egyptian invasion of which we
speak, in the final days of Nabopolassar, the father of the famed Babylonian
king. The nation he ruled, then known as
Akkad, at the time a tributary of the Assyrian
Empire, is fighting to free itself from its suzerain. Soon it will emerge as the short-lived, but
powerful kingdom known to the modern world as the neo-Babylonian Empire.
Fall of Assyria; Rise of Babylon
The recently published Chronicles[2] of the kings of Akkad waste few words describing the fall of Assyria in 612 B.C.
In short terse sentences the text of tablet BM 21901 describes how, in
the 14th year of Nabopolassar,
the army of Akkad (Babylon) crossed the Tigris River and joined forces with Cyaxares of
Media. Together the two armies advanced
on Nineveh. For
two months, from Sivan (May/June) to Ab (July/August) the battle raged, then
ended abruptly. The narrative is
garbled, the result of considerable damage to the 2600-year-old cuneiform
tablets, but there is no mistaking the outcome. The city was ransacked; its
army routed. Its king Sinsharishkun was
deposed and likely killed. The treasures of the city were divided, and Cyaxares
returned to his homeland. Nabopolassar used the ruined city as a base of
operations as he continued his military assault on Assyrian lands.
If
Sinsharishkun did not die in the assault, then he certainly died within the
year. According to the Chronicle, at
the end of the fourteenth year (612/611 B.C.) a new king, Ashuruballit, ruled
in Harran, a provincial capital near the Euphrates on the extreme western fringe of the
kingdom. Nineveh was lost, its king had been killed, but Assyria survived.
At least for the moment.
The fall of Nineveh was not immediately followed by an assault
on Harran. Nabopolassar tarried. For two years he continued to conquer and
plunder largely undefended Assyrian territory.
The delay results, in part at least, from Nabopolassar’s reluctance to
attack Harran alone, without the help of the
Medes.[3] The alliance between the two aggressors was
renewed only in the latter part of the sixteenth year. In the month Marcheswan (October/November)
the united armies moved to unseat Ashuruballit.
Figure 1: End of the Assyrian Empire (612 &
609 B.C.)

Why were Nabopolassar and Cyaxares unwilling to pursue their advantage
after the fall of Nineveh, and immediately attack the
remnant Assyrian army in Harran? Why
the two-year delay before they resumed their aggression against the Assyrian
king? The Chronicler hints at one
possible answer. He notes, almost in passing, that an Egyptian army was present
in Harran.
Either during or immediately following the fall of Nineveh, Egypt must have
sent troops to assist Ashuruballit.
Nabopolassar and Cyaxares, perhaps intimidated by the allied armies of
the defenders, broke off their attack.
By the 16th year of
Nabopolassar conditions had apparently changed.
The Egyptian/Assyrian alliance remained but was reduced in strength. We
don’t know why. Media and Akkad
responded. Ashuruballit’s army and the
remaining Egyptian troops were taken by surprise. For a time they defended, then fled the city,
finding sanctuary west of the Euphrates. The Medes and Babylonians overran and
plundered the city, then returned to their respective homelands, leaving Harran defended
by a garrison of troops.
Ashuruballit made only one futile attempt to retake his
city. In the seventeenth year of
Nabopolassar (609/608 B.C.) his remaining forces, fortified by the arrival of
"a great Egyptian army”[4]
laid siege to Harran. The garrison of
Median and Babylonian troops held out long enough for Nabopolassar to march to
its relief. Though critical parts of the Chronicle are "broken and
uncertain" sufficient text remains to confirm that the Babylonians
repelled the counter-attack.
Figure 2: Timeline - Siege of Nineveh & Harran[5]

There is no further mention of the Egyptian army.
Ashuruballit is never heard from again. When the Chronicle continues the
historical record on another tablet (BM 22047) with the eighteenth year of
Nabopolassar, the king of Akkad has turned his
attention to Urartu.
Babylon and Egypt
Who was the pharaoh who led the “great Egyptian army”
to assist Ashuruballit in 609 B.C.?
Surprisingly, scholars have determined it was not the same pharaoh who
aided the Assyrian king in 612 B.C., whose presence had deterred the aggression
of the combined armies of Media and Babylon? Historians have identified both pharaohs, but
the identification is not based on the narrative of the Chronicle. The
Chronicle in both instances refers to an Egyptian army; it fails to name the
Egyptian king.
The identification of the two Egyptian pharaohs is
based instead on the accepted chronology of 7th century Egypt, wherein
the country was ruled by a sequence of 26th dynasty kings with capital in Sais, a town
on a Nile tributary in the
western Delta.[6] The regnal years of these Saite dynasty
kings have been precisely determined.
According to this chronology Egypt was ruled
in 612 B.C. by Wahibre Psamtik I, the first king of this dynasty, at the time
into the 52nd year of
his 54-year long kingship. Psamtik must
have been the pharaoh whose fame intimidated the armies of Cyaxares and
Nabopolassar.[7]
But according to this same traditional history Psamtik died in 610 B.C. A son named Wahemibre Necao succeeded
him. It must have been the neophyte king
Necao who came to the aid of Ashuruballit in 609 B.C.
This identification receives support from an incident
described in the Hebrew Bible. The
garrison of Egyptian and Assyrian troops in Harran abandoned
the city in the final months of the sixteenth year of Nabopolassar, possibly
January/February 609 B.C. The
counterattack by Ashuruballit and the "great Egyptian army" which had
arrived in the interim took place in the two-month period between Tammuz
(June/July) and Elul (August/September) of that same year (now the seventeenth
of Nabopolassar). In the spring of that
year, according to Jewish historians, Josiah king of Judah had an
unfortunate and fatal encounter with an Egyptian army moving northward from Egypt along the
Mediterranean coast.
While Josiah was king, Pharaoh Neco king of Egypt went up
to the Euphrates River to help
the king of Assyria. King Josiah marched out to meet him in
battle, but Neco faced him and killed him at Megiddo. (2 Kings
23:29)[8]
It is clear that the biblical text is describing the
movement of the “great Egyptian army” en route to assist Ashuruballit. Pharaoh Necho is impatient, consistent with
the urgency of his mission.
But Neco sent messengers to him saying, "What
quarrel is there between you and me, O king of Judah? It is not you I am attacking at this time,
but the house with which I am at war.
God has told me to hurry; so stop opposing God, who is with me ... (2
Chron. 35: 20,21)
The temporary delay at Megiddo was
inconsequential. Necho soon arrived to
support the Egyptian garrison at Carchemish, whence
he joined forces with Ashuruballit and his surviving army. Together they attempted to retake Harran but
within two months of engagement the counter siege was lifted. The attempt had failed. The details are unknown. Necho returned to Egypt.
With some certainty we can date the Megiddo encounter
and Josiah's death to June, 609 B.C. Three months later Necho, en route to Egypt, passed
through Judah. There he deposed Jehoahaz[9],
the son of Josiah, who had assumed the kingship of Judah at his
father's death. "He installed as
king Eliakim, another son of Josiah, and carried Jehoahaz off to Egypt." (2
Chron. 36:4) Necho changed the name of
Eliakim to Jehoiakim.
This corroborative evidence provided by the
Hebrew Bible convinces scholars absolutely that the pharaoh whose army came to
assist Ashuruballit in his struggle with Nabopolassar, who deposed and
established kings in vassal states at will, was Wahemibre Necao, the second
king of the Saite dynasty, who ruled Egypt for
sixteen years from 610-595 B.C. The name
is right. The time is right. The identity is considered a certainty.
It is unfortunate that Necao/Necho left no written
record of his wars.[10]
Figure 3: Timeline – Psamtik & Necho Alliance with Assyria

Rise
of Nubuchadnezzar
The eighteenth year of Nabopolassar not only begins a
new tablet (BM 22047) but a new era. Babylon is now in
control of all former Assyrian territory east of the Euphrates.[11] The aging king campaigned extensively and
successfully that year in the mountains of Urartu and then, in his nineteenth
year, divided the army and shared leadership with his son. Nebuchadrezzar[12]
enters history.
Later in his nineteenth year Nabopolassar, flush
from victory in the northern mountains, began to challenge Egyptian dominance
west of the Euphrates. He moved to take possession of
the city of Kimuhu on the western bank of the Euphrates, south of Carchemish. The city was presumably an
Egyptian possession. From Tisri
(September/October) to Kislev (November/December) he laid siege to the city,
until it fell. Two months later, in the
month Sebat (January/February), he returned home with prisoners, leaving behind
a garrison to defend the city.
This aggression prompted a response from Necho. Early in the 20th year of Nabopolassar, only months after that
king had departed for Babylon, Egyptian
troops arrived to retake the city. The
Egyptian army battled the Babylonian garrison at Kimuhu for four months, most
likely from May through August. The
Chronicle records the event, but provides no specific dates. The city fell and once more became an
Egyptian possession.
Nabopolassar responded. In the month Tisri (September/October) he
moved once again up the Euphrates toward its western
bend. He may well have been destined for
Kimuhu, but en route he stopped at Quramati, a Babylonian city on the eastern
bank, and sent troops across to attack the towns of Shunadiri, Elammu and Dahammu,
defeating those cities. Four months
later, in the month Sebat (January/February) he returned to Babylon.
Figure 4: Nabopolassar & Necho Battle at the Euphrates

Again Necho acted quickly. Although the main Egyptian army had long
since departed for Egypt, a
garrison of troops remained at Carchemish. These troops quickly crossed the Euphrates and
proceeded southward to attack Quramati.
The Babylonian army withdrew. We
assume the three cities on the western bank returned to Egyptian control at
this time. It was still within the 20th year of
Nabopolassar.
"In the twenty-first year the king of Akkad stayed in
his own land. Nebuchadrezzar his eldest son, the crown prince, mustered the
Babylonian army and…".[13]
The damaged conclusion to the Chronicle tablet leaves us guessing why the king
stayed home and where the prince went with the army. But since Nabopolassar
died the next year, we can surmise that he was ill.
The Battle of Carchemish
(605 B.C.)
BM 21946 continues the Chronicle with a terse description
of one of the most famous battles of antiquity. In his 21st year Nebuchadrezzar replaced his ailing father
at the helm of the army and returned to the western bend of the Euphrates,
ostensibly to avenge his father’s recent defeats. He crossed the Euphrates at Carchemish and
thoroughly routed the Egyptian garrison.
The survivors fled toward Egypt, but were
overtaken at Hamath. All were
killed. Nebuchadrezzar proceeded to
take possession of the whole of northern Syria east of
the Orontes, a land mass that
the Chronicler calls the
“Hatti-lands”. What had once
belonged to Egypt now
belonged to Babylon. Movement further south was delayed by the
untimely death of Nabopolassar in the month of Ab (July/August). Nebuchadrezzar briefly interrupted his
campaign in Elul (August/September), the month following, and returned to Babylon for his
coronation. Within the month he was back
in the Hatti lands, gathering tribute.
The year’s campaign ended in Sebat (January/February). It was the conclusion of his father’s 21st year, what the
Babylonians called the “accession year” of the new king.
The defeat of the Egyptian army in 605 B.C. was cause
for celebration in Judah. The death of Josiah and the deposition and
deportation of Jehoahaz had left the Judaeans with bitter feelings toward
Necho. The prophet Jeremiah expressed
the sentiments of the nation in a lengthy diatribe:
This is the message against the army of Pharaoh Neco
king of Egypt, which
was defeated at Carchemish on the Euphrates River by Nebuchadnezzar
king of Babylon in the
fourth year of Jehoiakim son of Josiah king of Judah: Prepare your shields, both large and small,
and march out for battle! Harness the
horses, mount the steeds! Take your
positions with helmets on! Polish your
spears, put on your armour! What do I see?
They are terrified, they are retreating; their warriors are
defeated. They flee in haste without
looking back, and there is terror on every side, declared the Lord. The swift
cannot flee nor the strong escape In the north by the River Euphrates they
stumble and fall... (Jer. 46:2-5)
The loss of Carchemish
significantly changed the balance of power in the region. Following the battle Nebuchadrezzar roamed
freely throughout Syria. In his first official year (604-603 B.C.)
"All the kings of the Hatti-land came before him and he received their
heavy tribute. He marched to the city of
Ashkelon and
captured it in the month of Kislev."[14] Ashkelon was only
a day’s march from the border of Egypt. Phoenicia and the kingdom of Judah changed
allegiance.
Figure 5: Timeline - Battles at the Euphrates (608-605 B.C.)

Jewish historians note the transition from Egyptian to
Babylonian control of Judah at the
end of 604 B.C. "During Jehoiakim's
reign, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon invaded
the land, and Jehoiakim became his vassal for three years." (2 Kings
24:1) During this time, "the king
of Egypt did not
march out from his own country again, because the king of Babylon had taken
all his territory, from the Wadi of Egypt to the Euphrates River." (2
Kings 24:7).
Both Jewish historians and the Babylonian chroniclers
agree that this first phase of Babylonian suzerainty over Judah ended
three years after it began.
In 601 B.C. Nebuchadrezzar mistook Necho's inactivity
for weakness. He moved to attack Egypt. He marched his army through the Hatti land
to the border of Egypt. In the month Kislev (November/December) the
two armies met in open battle. According
to the Chronicle both suffered considerable losses. In the end “the king of Akkad and his
troops turned back and returned to Babylon.”[15] It was the 4th year of Nebuchadrezzar.
While the Chronicle describes a standoff battle, it is
clear that Nebuchadrezzar lost the war. Judah changed
allegiance, falling once again under Necho’s control. Jehoiakim withheld tribute from Babylon.
It is again regrettable that Wahemibre Necao fails to
mention his wars with the great Babylonian king. The lack of any memorial to the conflict in
601 B.C. is particularly disturbing. For
the first time the battle was fought near the border of Egypt. And for the first time pharaoh Necho could
claim a victory over Babylon.
Jewish historians do not describe this conflict. They record only the fact that after three
years of paying tribute to the Babylonians, Jehoiakim "changed his mind
and rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar." (2 Kings 24:1)
Nebuchadrezzar remained in Babylon the next
year, his fifth, "and gathered together his chariots and horses in great
numbers."[16] In years six and seven, his military strength
renewed, he moved to recover what territory he had lost in his fourth
year. First he re-established his base
in Syria, and then
he moved in year seven (598/97 B.C.) to retake Judah. Jerusalem quickly
fell.
The First Jewish Captivity (598/97 B.C.)
Concerning the attack on Jerusalem the
Babylonian Chronicle is brief and to the point:
In his 7th year, in
the month Kislev (November/December, 598 B.C.) Nebuchadrezzar moved through the
Hatti land and laid siege to Jerusalem (“the
city of Judah”). By the second day of Adar (February/March,
597 B.C.) the city fell, its king was captured and deposed, and a replacement
installed. No names are given.
For details of this first siege of Jerusalem we rely
on Jewish literature. The assault was
not directed against Jehoiakim, who had died three months before it began, but
against his eighteen-year-old son and successor Jehoiakin.
Figure 6: Timeline – Nebuchadrezzar’s Wars (604-597 B.C.)

At that time the
officers of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon advanced on Jerusalem and laid siege
to it, and Nebuchadnezzar himself came up to the city while his officers were
besieging it. Jehoiachin king of Judah,
his mother, his attendants, his nobles and his officials all surrendered to
him.
In the eighth year[17]
of the reign of the king of Babylon, he took
Jehoiachin prisoner. (2 Kings 24:10-12)
Nebuchadrezzar proceeded to remove from Jerusalem to Babylon
everything transportable and of value.
This included skilled labour for his numerous building projects and
conscripts for his army. It was a
massive deportation.
Nebuchadnezzar
removed all the treasures from the temple of the Lord… He carried into exile all Jerusalem: all the
officers and fighting men, and all the craftsmen and artisans - a total of ten
thousand. Only the poorest people of the land were left.
Nebuchadnezzar took Jehoiachin captive to Babylon. He also took from Jerusalem to Babylon the
king's mother, his wives, his officials and the leading men of the land. The king of Babylon also
deported to Babylon the
entire force of seven thousand fighting men, strong and fit for war, and a
thousand craftsmen and artisans. He made
Mattaniah, Jehoiachin's uncle, king in his place and changed his name to
Zedekiah" (2 Kings 24:13-17)
The Jewish historian Josephus, a citizen of Rome writing
in the first century A.D., informs us that Ezekiel, a prominent prophetic
spokesman within the exiled Jewish community in Babylon, was one
of the deportees in this captivity.
It is important to note the key elements of this
invasion. Collectively they constitute a
modus operandi repeated with few variations in Nebuchadrezzar's second
assault on Jerusalem a decade
later (586 B.C.), and during his invasion of Egypt three
decades removed (564 B.C.) They include
1) extensive physical destruction; 2) the removal of all portable treasure; 3)
the deportation of a majority of the educated elite, including artisans; 4) the
removal of the king and replacement by an authority loyal to