scholar,
I haven't figured out where you are coming from yet. I believe there is a component of servitude to Babylon, backed up by both Bible Scripture, Antiquities of the Jews X and Flavius Joseph Against Apion. I do realize that the final edict against Babylon did occur after the fall of Babylon but when the final edict of Babylon occurred, there was no king of Babylon. Nabonidus, or his son Belshazzar was the last king of Babylon and Jeremiah 27:6-7 clearly states that "and now I myself have given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon my servant and even the wild beasts of the field I have given him to serve. And all the nations must serve even him and his son and his grandson until the time even of his own land comes, and many nations and great kings must exploit him as servant. The sovereign rule of Babylon was 609 BCE, (the last Assyrian king Ashur Urbilitt II fell to Babylon) until their own defeat by the Medes and Persians in 539 BCE.
The 10 tribes of Israel became servant when Assyria fell, Zedekiah was a vassal king for Nebuchadnezzar, serving him 11 years before the revolt that felled Jerusalem, and allowed to stay on his land if he did not revolt.
(Antiquities of the Jews X Chapter 7 paragraph 3) Jeremiah prophesied that Nebuchadnezzar would take Judah if they revolted and they would serve him and his posterity for 70 years having their servitude ended when the Medes and Persians overthrew Babylon. It says they will be exiled only if they revolt.
I get that you think I am incorrect but you do not state what you believe to be correct for me to understand your point.
Adda