Jeffro
t’s good that you’re researching but it sounds like your opinion is very easily swayed. In general, I would not be so hasty to prefer what is stated in Christian commentaries about the period (because they tend to cling to traditions, such as the outdated and incorrect belief that Jerusalem was destroyed in 586 rather than 587 BCE), though they shouldn’t be dismissed entirely.
--
Perhaps you learn from DJW's example and read and consult more widely taking notice of what is published in the scholarly literature and Bible commentaries instead of relying on your own mixed-up opinions. You will thus be informed that scholars since the time of Edwin Thiele advocate 586 rather than 587 BCE.
--
Consistent with what is stated in Daniel, 2 Kings and Jeremiah, BM 21946 confirms that Nebuchadnezzar led a campaign through the Hatti region (including Judea) in his accession year and comparison with the Bible suggests that whilst Nebuchadnezzar may have intended to besiege Jerusalem then, Jehoiakim averted the siege by paying tribute. However, the Babylonian chronicle indicates that this was in January-February of 604 rather than on his return from Egypt in the summer of 605 (when he was going home to claim the throne). Jehoiakim’s capitulation begins the 3 full years of him paying tribute to Nebuchadnezzar, but he refused to pay after Egypt defeated Babylon in a battle in 601. Various marauders were subsequently sent against Jerusalem while Nebuchadnezzar regrouped his army, and then besieged Jerusalem in 597 BCE.
--
My issue herein is that based on Daniel. 2 Kings, Jeremiah that your dating is in error and should be corrected or fine-tuned to 617 BCE rather than 597 BCE with the added historical correction of Jehoiakim's reign and Neb's reign in terms of Jehoiakim's vassalage to Nebuchadnezzer in his 3rd year otherwise you muck up the history and the chronology for that period. Sloppy history makes for a sloppy chronology.
scholar JW