On the Available Lunar and Solar Eclipses and Baby- Lonian Chronology

The recently shown two premises (Gurzadyan 2000), i.e. the absence of 56/64 year Venus cycle constraints, at the importance of the 8-year cycle in the Venus Tablet, stimulated new studies on the Chronology of the Ancient Near East (2nd millennium BC). The analysis by B.Banjevic using both premises, however, did not provide anchors of strenght similar to those of Ur III eclipses, while available solar eclipses lack unambiguous links to historical events. The Ultra-Low chronology (Gasche et al 1998), therefore, has to be considered as currently the one most reliably based on ancient astronomical records. There are two premises at the base of Boris Banjevic's (2005) chronological analysis. The first is that chronological proposals can no longer be legitimately constrained by 56/64 Venus-cycles (which are the base of the High, Middle and Low chronologies previously recognized), as these cycles cannot be reliably established in the existing sources. The second premise is that the 8-year cycles can be extracted from the Venus Tablet. Both premises were shown in our work (Gurzadyan 2000). Based on the historical records, the Ultra-Low chronology (Gasche et al 1998) satisfied the 8-year Venus cycle condition, which is recognized by all concerned. Furthermore, this was independently anchored via the lunar eclipses, and thus with complementary astronomical sources linked to the