Chronological anomalies concerning Croesus
door dr. A. Dirkzwager
Croesus and Solon
There exists a chronological anomaly concerning Croesus, the famous king of the Lydians.
The solution of that problem is important for the Phrygian chronology too, for the Phrygian
Midas(es) is/are connected with Croesus. Adrastus, a grandson of a Midas came to
Croesus (1)
With Croesus we are dealing with the 6th century. The reign of Croesus ended when Cyrus
conquered Sardes, the capital of Croesus, according to Herodotus (2). Cyrus reigned from
559 to 530. The conquest of Sardes is normally dated in 547. The reign of Croesus is
normally put between ca. 561 and 547.
Herodotus (3) has a famous story about Croesus. Solon, the lawgiver of Athens, left
Athens for 10 years after giving his constitution. During those years he visited Egypt and
Croesus. The lawgiving by Solon is dated in 594/3. That date cannot be moved to the
"normal" times of Croesus, for the very specific details about the constitutional
developments in Athens (Draco, Solon, Pisistratus) don't allow much space for such a
major "correction". So we are invited to look for possibilities to move the reign of Croesus
to the first quarter of the 6th century.
On the other hand we read the name of the pharaoh Solon visited: Amasis. Amasis did not
reign early in the 6th century. But the name Amasis can have been filled in by Herodotus to
avoid speaking about 'the Pharaoh'.
Who conquered Lydia?
In the story of the conquest, Cyrus wanted to burn Croesus on a great pyre (4). But
Herodotus himself (5) reports that the Persians believe that fire is a god and would never
burn their dead. So we are invited to look for a king belonging to another people than the
Persians as the conqueror of Sardes.
In an old article (6) I read that in the Iranian tradition the Babylonian king Nabonid is called
Kay Kâûs, the name of Cambyses.
If so, Cyrus, the predecessor of Cambyses, can have been credited with stories that
belong really to Nebuchadnezzar, the first important king of the Babylonians before
Nabonid. About military activities of Nebuchadnezzar in Asia Minor can be read in the book
of Judith (7). That book contains several historical errors (e.g. Nebuchadnezzar is said to
be king of Assyria and to have lived in Nineveh), but it can also be right from time to time.
We read (8) about a military expedition to "Turkey" in the 18th year of Nebuchadnezzar
(587), just before the conquest of Jerusalem. "Lud" is said to have been conquered.
We can conclude that possibly the reign of Croesus came to an end in 587 by the hand of
Nebuchadnezzar. As Croesus reigned for 14 years according to Herodotus (9) or 15 years
according to Eusebius, he started to reign ca.601.
In the book of Judith we read that the general of Nebuchadnezzar was called Holophernes
(10). This general is present throughout the whole account of the war in the book of Judith.
Herodotus has a similar person. The general of “Cyrus”, in whom I see Nebuchadnezzar,
is called Harpagus. He also has a prominent place in the story (11).
Now Harpagus is a name that sounds very Greek. Harpagmos means robbery. Harpazein
is to steal.
In many languages foreign names are adapted to familiar sound pattern. Genève becomes
Genf in German and Milano Mailand. Liège is Luik in Flemish and Lüttich in German. So
we can conclude that Harpagos can be the way the Greeks called Holophernes: r and l are
switched easily and there is some humor if you call a person who steals your land with a
name that echoes harpagmos.
Herodotus (12) mentions a battle between Croesus and “Cyrus”. It took place in Pteria. In
the book of Judith Nezbuchadnezzar had a camp in Upper Cilicia, near Bektilet. We don't
read there that there was a battle, but both “Cyrus” and Nebuchadnezzar started after
Pteria and Bektilet their successes in Asia Minor.
P and b can be compared: p is a voiceless b. R and l are mixed up frequently. So Pteria
and Bektilet can correspond.
Croesus and the Messenian wars
There is another text that suggests an earlier date for Croesus: according to Pausanias
(13) Croesus was involved in one of the Messenian wars. There were two Messenian wars
between Sparta and Messenia. Let us try to determine their chronology.
Thanks to new tactics the Theban general Epaminondas was able to defeat the Spartans
in the battle of Leuctra (369 BC). He got problems with the government in Thebes and
asked
to inscribe their sentence upon his tombstone, so that the Greeks might know that
Epameinondas had compelled the Thebans against their will to lay waste Laconia
with fire and sword, which for five hundred years had been unravaged ; and that he
had repopulated Messene after a space of two hundred and thirty years, and had
organized the Arcadians and united them in a league, and had restored
selfgovernment to the Greeks.
Plutarch, Sayings of Kings and Commanders 194B,
tr. Babbitt, Loeb Classical Library
So thanks to Epaminondas Messenia became a free country again after 230 years. That
can only mean that in the opinion of Epaminondas the second Messenian war, after which
Messenia was subdued by Sparta, ended in 599, to say it in numbers we are normally
using.
The traditional chronology sees here a problem. But is not our concern.
In the New Chronology by David Rohl (14) the first Messenian war lasted for 20 years and
ended ca. 640 BC. The second Messenian war "got under way" two generations later (15).
But let us start from 599 as the end of the second Messenian war. That war is said to have
lasted for 14 years. Pausanias gives that figure often (16). So we can establish the dates
of that war: 613-599.
However, already Pausanias (2nd century AD) had chronological problems. He reckons
elsewhere with a period of 18 years for that war (17). It is important to note that he gives
the 14 years by the way, when he tells the story of the war. The 18 years he mentions
when working on chronology. I would prefer to follow his casual 14 years. Chronological
reckoning can be influenced by wishful thinking.
So the second Messenian war lasted from 613 until 599.
About the beginning of the second Messenian war Pausanias says
they revolted in the thirty-ninth year after the capture of Ithome, and in the forth year
of the twenty-third Olympiad, ..
Pausanias, Travel Guide of Greece, IV 15.1
tr. Ormerod, Loeb Classical Library
The capture of Ithome ended the first Messenian war, as can be learned from Tyrtaeus.
Tyrtaeus is an important witness, for he stimulated by his poems the Spartan warriors
during the second Messenian war.
for her [Messenia] fought during 19 years ...... the fathers of our fathers, but in the
20th year they fled .... from the big mountains of Ithome.
Tyrtaeus, fragment 4, verse 4-8
We can conclude:
that the first Messenian war ended in the 20 th year
that the second Messenian war began in the 39 th year thereafter
The 39th year is 38 years later. The ancients counted the year in which they started to
count too. So the first Messenian war ended 38 years before 613, in 651. Pausanias
added that that would be the forth year of the 23 Olympiad. That would be 684. Here we
see influence from the long chronology held by the ancients too.
Tyrtaeus said that the first Messenian war lasted for 19 years. So its dates are 670-651.
Tyrtaeus, in the first line of fragment 4, which line we did not quote, mentions Theopompus
as the Spartan king of the first Messenian war.
In The Lords of Avaris by David Rohl we find the Spartan kings on p. 488.
Theopompus can been found ca. 671. For the first Messenian war, during which he was
active, we found with the help of Epiminondas and other ancient testimonies the years
671-651. That result is remarkable, because the Spartan king list in The Lords of Avaris
has been established with the same average length of the reign of all the kings.
About the kings of the second Messenian war we read
Tyrtaeus has not recorded the names of the kings reigning in Lacedaemon, during
the second Messanian war, but Rhianos stated in his epic that Leotychides was
king at the time of this war. I cannot agree with him at all on this point. Though
Tyrtaeus makes no statement, he may be regarded as having done so by the
following ; there are lines of his which refer to the first war :
"Around it they fought unceasingly for nineteen
years, ever maintaining a stout heart, the
warrior fathers of our fathers."
It is obvious then that the Messenians went to war now in the second generation
after the first war, and the sequence of time shows that the kings of Sparta at that
time were Anaxander the son of Eurycrates, son of Polvdorus, and of the other
house Anaxidamus the son of Zeuxidamus, son of Archidamus, son of
Theopompus. I go as far as the third in descent from Theopompus, because
Archidamus the son of Theopompus died before his father, and the kingdom of
Theopompus passed to his grandson, Zeuxidamus. But Leotyehides clearly
succeeded Demaratus the son of Ariston, Ariston being sixth in descent from
Theopompus.
Pausanias, Travel Guide of Greece IV 15 2-3
tr. Ormerod, Loeb Classical Library
The second war began during the reign of Leotychidas I .
In the list of Spartan kings in The Lords of Avaris Leotychidas I can be found ca. 591.
According to Pausanias the second Messenian war began during his reign. Our date of
that war was 613-599. Between Theopompus and Leotychidas there were 3 kings:
Anaxandrides I, Archidamus I and Anaxilaus.
However according to Tyrtaeus (18) the fathers of the fathers of the people that fought in
the second war ended the first.
So two generations after the first war began the second war. According to Pausanias there
were 38 years between the wars. We find 19 years for a generation. Talking about
generations does never gives exact figures of years. But 19 years is more close to the
average for a generation used in the books about the NC than the 40 or 30 years used in
certain ancient and modern chronologies. And that is a remarkable result!
If Theopompus was old when he ended the first Messenian war and Leotychidas I was
young when the second war started, Theopompus was succeeded by Anaxandrides I
soon. After the end of the first war. If Anaxandrides died "early" in his life, the next king
came "soon" after Theopompus. So the three kings between Theopompus and
Leotychidas I can be explained as filling the interbellum of 38 years. The king list in The
Lords of Avaris is very rigid in giving the same length to the reign of every king. Real life is
not rigid.
Result of these lines: it is possible to link the Messenian wars to the Classical period with
the chronology established with the help of ancient Greek testimonies. I studied the whole
period of the Messenian wars in order to show that the year of the end of the second war
according to Epaminondas can be linked to a sound system.
We started this section with a synchronism: according to Pausanias Croesus was involved
in one of the Messenian wars.
In our opinion the second Messenian war ended in 599. Our dates for Croesus were 601587. Croesus can have been involved in one of the wars.
In the traditional later chronology he cannot!
The dynasty of Croesus
Croesus 601-587.
In tradition the predecessors of Croesus reigned for very long periods:
Gyges 38 (Herodot) and 36 or 35 (Eusebius and dependent sources) years
Ardys 49 and 37, 38 or 48
Sadyattes 12 and 15 or 5
Alyattes 57 and 49 or 46.
In reality we cannot find this situation.
David Rohl counts with an avarage of 20 years for the succestion of reigning kings.
We get then for Croesus and his predecessors
Gyges
681-661
Ardys
661-641
Sadyattes 641-621
Alyattes
621-601
Croesus
601-587.
We find Gyges of Lydia in an Assyrian text of Assurbanipal (669-627) as Gugu of Luddu.
We see that our chronology is sound. Remember that our dates for Gyges are the result of
statistical reckoning. But traditional chronology must have problems with a late Gugu.
Plinius (19) gives two different years for the end of the reign of Candaules, the
predecessor of Gyges: the 18th Olympiad (708/705) and the same year Romulus died
(716 according to Varro). We can conclude that Plinius' sources were influenced by the
higher chronology of Herodotus and the one that was reported by Eusebius.
The battle with the eclipse
According to Herodotus (20), during the reign of Alyattes, the predecessor of Croesus,
there was a battle between Lydians and Medes, during which there was an eclipse. If we
read about an eclipse we know that we can get an exact date of a battle: 585 would be the
year in the orthodox system, but also 610 would be possible. And 610 fits the new date of
Alyattes. So again: no problem with the new years for the Lydian kings.
Conclusion
In this study we dated Croesus and his dynasty back into history. We got better
possibilities to date the Phrygians and by them to think about the end of the Hittite Empire
and the Trojan war.
________
1 Herodotus, Histories I 35
2 Herodotus, Histories I 79ff.
3 Herodotus, Histories I 30 ff.
4 Herodotus, Histories I 86
5 Herodotus, Histories III 16
6 F.M.Th. de Liagre Böhl, De Chaldeeuwse dynastie, in: Varia Historica aangeboden aan
Professor Doctor A.W. Byvanck, Assen 1954, p.52
7 Judith 2, 21ss.
8 Judith 2, 1
9 Herodotus, Histories I 86
10 e.g. Judith 2, 4 and 2, 28;
11 e.g. Herodotus, Histories I 171
12 Herodotus, Histories I 76
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Pausanias, Travel Guide of Greece IV 5. 3
David Rohl, The Lords of Avaris, p. 495 paperback edition
ibidem p.496
Pausanias, Travel Guide of Greece IV 15. 4,7, IV 17. 2,10 and IV 20.1
ibidem IV 15.1 and 23.4
Tyrtaeus, fragment 4, verse 6
Plinius, Naturalis Historia XXXV 8. 55
Herodotus, Histories I 74