Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
LocalandImperialDatesattheBeginningoftheHellenisticPeriod
17
demoticpapyriandAramaicostraca24–onlymentionkingPhilipasimmediatesucces-
sorofAlexandertheGreat,whereasAlexander,ssonAlexanderIVneverappearsinthe
documentationduringtheyearsimmediatelyfollowingAlexander,sdeath.Apartfrom
thefactthatAlexander,snamewasreplacedbyPhilipandthatthecountingstarted
alloveragainnothingchangedtotheimperialyear-countingsystemofregnalyears.
OnlyinBabyloniaaminorchangecanbediscerned:whereasinthepasttheremaining
monthsoftheyearafterthedeathofakingwerecalledtheAccessionYearofthenew
kinguntilhisyear1startedonthefollowingNewYear,25Phil.01startedimmediately
whenAlexanderdied(or,moreexactly,whenhisgeneralsagreedtohavePhilipastheir
king)andthefollowingNewYearPhil.02started.26InOctober317BCkingPhilipwas
murderedbyOlympias,thepoliticallyambitiousmotherofAlexandertheGreat.Also
thiseventdidnotresultimmediatelyinotherdateformulasforthedocuments:inEgypt
demoticdocumentswerestilldatedbyPhilipuntilatleastHathyrPhil.08(January/
February316BC;P.Eheverträge,p.144no2D)andinBabyloniatheposthumousdates
lastedevenayearuntilPhil.08.07.18(=9November316BC;AIONSuppl.77,79).
EspeciallyforBabyloniathiscannothavebeencausedbythedelayofthemessageof
Philip,sdeathfromMacedoniatoBabylonia.Theremusthavebeenpoliticalreasonsto
keepdatingtoalongdeceasedking.Itwasafterallnotdifficulttofindoutthenameof
thenewkingthathadtobeusedinthedateformulasbecauseAlexanderIVwasalready
anofficial(minor)kingoftheempiresincehewasbornin323BC.InEgyptthefirst
attesteddocumentdatedtoAlexanderIVisP.dem.Loeb27,dated2MecheirAlexIV.01
(10April316BC).ForBabylonianoexactdatecanbegivenwhenAlexIV.01replaced
Phil.08becausetheonlydocumentdatedtoAlexIV.01hasnofullypreserveddate.In
theIdumaeandocumentationnoostraconfromAlexIV.01ispreserved.Theseexam-
plesshowthatalsoduringthereignofAlexanderIVanimperialdatingsystemforthe
wholeempirewasinuse.Ifwetransposethesedatestoourchronologicalframeworkof
theJuliancalendarintheBC–eraAlexIV.01equals317/316BCforthedemoticdocu-
mentsand316/315BCfortheBabyloniansources.ThisdoesnotmeanthatAlexander,s
reignstartedoneyearearlierinEgypt,butthedifferenceisonlycausedbytheuseof
adifferentcalendarinEgyptandBabylonia:NewYearofthecivilEgyptiancalen-
darwasatthattimeinDecemberwhereastheluni-solarBabyloniancalendaralways
hadaspringNewYear(28Marchin316BC).Thedifferencewasthereforeonlyfour
months.WhenAlexanderinhisturnwasmurdered(probablyin310or309BC),the
dateformulasagainfailedtoreactimmediately.Inthiscaseitwasnotclearwhoshould
benamedinthedateformulasbecausetheArgeaddynastyhadcometoanendafter
Alexander,sdeath.Inaddition,Cassander,Alexander,smurderer,firsttriedtohidethe
murder,butevenwhenitwaswidelyknownthedateformulasstillkeptmentioningthe
24IncontrasttoafewGreekinscriptions(seeHabicht1973:371–372).
25ThissystemisattesteduntilAlexandertheGreat,seeBoiy2002.
26TheconversionPhil.01=323/322BCisnotclearfromthecontemporarydocumentsbecauseone
couldarguethatdocumentsbearingPhilip,sAccessionYeararenotattestedyetandthatPhil.01mustbe
datedtothefollowingyear322/321BC,aswasthenormalBabylonianpractice.Astronomicaltablesmen-
tioningeverysingleyearforlongerperiodsoftimeprovethatAlexIII.13wasfollowedbyPhil.01.Inaddi-
tion,thehistoricalcircumstancesdescribedintheSuccessor,schronicleABC10,makethesameconver-
sionnecessary.Lastbutnotleast,theastronomicaldiaryAD1-321(‘rev.23,)fortheyearPhil.02mentions
asolareclipseonPhil.02.06.28(26September322BC).Thisobservationisincompleteagreementwith
moderncomputationsandthereforePhil.01musthavebeen323/322BC(Anson2005a).
