No prophecies failed in regards to the 40 years, though obviously with Josephus claiming there were 74 years from the fall of Jerusalem to the 1st of Cyrus and the Bablonian records "copied"(revised?) during the Persian Period claiming 26 years less, you are not going to have a complete consensus of the events. But there are some interesting historical references that if we impose the 40 years and leave what does not directly contradict the 40 years works out. But first...
Thus we are treated in ch. 29 to a candid admission that the prophecy had failed (dated to 571 BC, the latest of the oracles in Ezekiel):
There was no "failure" here. Nebuchadnezzar completely destroyed the isle city of Tyre which was then desolated for a full 70 years like all the other cities on the list to be desolated and "drink the bitter cup of Nebuchadnezzar" with Jerusalem being first. As we know from Josephus, the absolute desolation of the land took place 4 years after the fall of Jersualem which is when the 70 years of Tyre must have likewise begun with the final deportation of whomever ws left there after a long seige. But apparently there were no great riches recovered from Tyre which could have been for any number of reasons. For that reason, God decided to pay Nebuchadnezzar off with the riches of Egypt.
The way this works out, is that the riches of Egypt went to Nebuchadnezzar when he invaded Egypt in his 37th year, and having pillaged Egypt and spread it's army abroad as is indicated in an inscription from Nebuchadnezzar regarding this campaign, the Egypt remained abandoned by the then ruling pharoah Amassis who lived abroard for 40 years before returning. So the prophecy didn't fail. Tyre fell and was desolated of its riches but this was not sufficient payment for the army of Nebuchadnezzar who had to besiege the walls of Tyre after going all the way to Lebonon to get huge trees for logs to bombard the city. Likely carrying the logs about their shoulders and on their heads they were rubbed bald.
The second important note that is not included in the post about the failed prophecy is that the prophecy for Nebuchadnezzar to attack Egypt and get the reward is dated clear in the 27th year of the excile of Ezekiel! This equates to year 32 of Nebuchadnezzar. Babylonian records indicate that between year 32 and 37 apparently pharoah Hopra was killed. The history from Herodotus does indicate that Hopra was killed by his own people though, which does fulfill that prophecy! Jeremiah 44:30 says "...Here I am giving Pharaoh Hophra, the king of Egypt, into the hand of his enemies and into the hand of those seeking for his soul."
Yet poor Apries was not yet finished. In March of 567, he again marched on Egypt at the head of a Babylonian army, but once again, Amasis defeated him, this time capturing the former king. It seem that Amasis allowed Apries to live for a short time, however, because we find Herodotus telling us that:
The Egyptians complained that he did wrong by maintaining a man who was the greatest enemy both to them and (Amasis), therefore he delivered Apries to the people, who strangled him.
http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/amasis.htm
Again, the records from Nebuchadnezzar that survives says that Amasis gathered an army to fight against him and that army was sent abroad.
A clay tablet , now in the British Museum , bears the following inscription referring to his wars: "In the thirty-seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar, king of the country of Babylon, he went to Mitzraim (Egypt) to make war. Amasis , king of Egypt, collected [his army], and marched and spread abroad." http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Nebuchadnezzar-II-of-Babylon
The tablet had lots of missing text but this was the best they could do. My question is what does "spread abroad" in this context mean? It could mean that the army did just that, spread abroad, meaning, it did not try at that time to maintain Egypt. If so, this is consistent with the Bible's prophecy that says "..I will scatter the Egyptians among the nations and disperse them among the lands."
"disperse them among the lands" and "spread abroad" seem compatible to me. Thus the only Babylonian record of this event does not conflict with what the Bible says.
LAYING OUT THE 40-YEAR CHRONOLOGY, BIBLICALLY, WITH 26 YEARS ADDED PER JOSEPHUS: As noted, there is a conflict between the surviving Babylonian records (which we know were "copied" during the Persian period and thus suspected of revisionism, these are not original Babylonian records) and that of Josephus who establishes a 74-year period from 19th of Nebuchadnezzar to the 1st of Cyrus. So I won't debate whether Josephus or the Babylonian records are true or not, but demonstrate the possibilities in the chronology compared to what history we have. Basically, Amasis ruled into the reign of Cambyses but was also present when Nebuchadnezzar attacked him in his 37th year. There could be two different kings but for now we will presume this is the same king who was absent from the land for 40 years and then returned.
A FEW DETAILS ABOUT AMASIS:
1) Hophra (Apries) was killed in the 3rd year of Amasis. I'm presuming he was attacked in his fourth year by Nebuchadnezzar as some records suggest from Egpt. So we will tentativel begin the 40 years in the 4th year of Amasis.
2) Egypt was back "on line" to help the Babylonians repel Cyrus. Thus there has to be enough time for Egypt to recover before the fall of Babylon.
3) As noted, the riches of Egypt promised to Nebuchadnezzar for his seige of Tyre which was over by his 23rd year, was not fulfilled by his 32nd year. Babylonian records confirm a 37th year invasion by Nebuchadnezzar.
Here is how the chronology unfolds from the fall of Jerusalem to the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar:
Year 19: Jerusalem falls. Tyre is likely under siege by now that would last another three years.
Year 23: Nebuchadnezzar does a final invasion of the entire region, deporting everyone including the few remaining Jews from Egypt and all the nations round about including Tyre and Ashkelon. This was the beginning of a 70-year period of total desolation of the entire land. But Egypt was spared at this time.
Year 24-25: Having conquered everything, Nebuchadnezzar feels haughty and brags about having conquered the world. God prophesies that he would go mad for 7 years but his throne would be protected. There was time for this 7-year time of madness which could have ended as early as his 31st or 32nd year, when we find some building activity in Babylon again. Year 32 was the year Ezekiel stated that Babylon would be paid off by Egypt for the invasion of Tyre that had taken place 8-10 years earlier.
Years 32-37: Problems in Egypt were occurring between Hophra and Amasis, with Hophra fleeing to Babylon. Babylon's army headed by Hopra fails against Amasis and he is surrendered by the Babylonians to the the Egyptians who kill him. Perhaps the next year, having suffered this defeat, Nebuchadnezzar wars against Amasis, conquers Egypt and disperses Amasis army abroad, where they seek asylum in Greece and elsewhere. The great wealth of Egypt is then plundered by the Babylonians who leave Egypt desolated. This begins the 40 years of desolation of Egypt.
When we apply the 74-year interval by Josephus now into the timeline ending the 1st of Cyrus, we can determine what year during the reign of Nabonidus that the 40 years end. Cyrus began his reign of Babylon 20 years after he overthrew Astyages in the 6th year of Nabonidus (i.e. 559-539 BCE vs 475-455 BCE). Using the VAT4956 chronology, just to help understand, not to promote it, year 37 of Nebuchadnezzar is the same year in the text double-dated to 511BCE. Cyrus comes to the throne in 455BCE, and Babylon falls in 462BCE in year 19 of Nabonidus, which allows for a 6-year rule for Darius the Mede per the Bible. 40 years from 511 BCE is 471 BCE, which falls in the 10th year of Nabonidus.
Ths Egypt had up to 9 years before the fall of Babylon to reestablish itself. But what little details there are, it seems as though there was not a lot of time from when Cyrus conquered Croesus and his conquering of Babylon. After conquering Croesus it seems his army was successful in conquering all other kingdoms around including Babylon within a year or so. If so, we can move the eventrs associated with Amasis, Croesus and Solon to just before the fall of Babylon by a few years. But we do have a 9-year window to work with. Obviously the closer to the fall of Babylon you are, the more established Egypt would have become, still under of the rule of Amasis. But this history is distorted. Herodotus says that Croesus ruled for 15 years. We know if he was ruling say right after the Median-Lydian Peace agreement which was mediated by Nabonidus in his 2nd year (479-478BCE) then his 15-year rule would end in 463 BCE, just a year before Babylon falls in the fall of 462 BCE. So that chronology works out while tight, arguing that Croesus was conquered just before Babylon was. This allows time for the other stories of Herodotus which says that Solon was traveling at the time and went to Egypt to visit Amasis and then went to Lydia to visit Croesus. This could have easily occurred within 4-5 years prior to the fall of Babylon. So the 40 years work just fine for these historical notes that would not contradict the Biblical 40 years, though some details, of course are presumed a bit revised (.i.e. such as the distortion of the 6-year rule of Darius the Mede).
WHAT ABOUT THE AGE OF AMASIS WHO LIVES DOWN INTO THE REIGN OF CAMBYSES? I found this to be a little challenging but I don't know the age of Amasis when he was chosen to be pharoah. Obviously, the younger he was the better and we do know of some young rulers in their 20s. But let's presume he was between 20 and 30. If so.
He would have been 24-34 for the first 4 years of his reign before the 40 years of exile from Egypt.
He would have been 64-74 upon returning to restablish Egypt.
He would have been 73-83 at the time Babylon fell.
He would have been 79-89 when Cyrus began to rule after a 6-year rule of Darius the Mede.
He would haev been 88-98 by the end of the reign of Cyrus, shortly after which he died.
I'll try to find some references as to how old he was when he died, but he died of natural causes before Cambyses could come down to kill him.
That's the rought draft for now for the 40 years using the distorted history. There is scant informatino so nothing that critically contradicts that Egypt could have been desolated all that time and with the events with Amasis that are recorded able to occur by the time he returns.
Also, there is some archaeological evidence that is puzzling that suggests there was a period of desolation for a while between two inhabitants of a coastal city that Amasis had sponsored. So that might turn out to be somethnig.
Bottom line, the Bible stands up against the challenges as true history, and those dismissing it either misquote the Bible and are not understanding the details, or have decided to go along with the "revised" history, which is fine. But the history from the Persian/Babylonians is not the only history. Josephus claims there was 74 years from the fall of Jerusalem to the 1st of Cyrus which gives plenty of time for the 40 years of Egypt to be desolated to occur.
JC
