remain about the interpretation of the record of astronomical positions of Venus, as preserved in these surviving tablets. Some copying corruptions are probable. Problems of atmospheric refraction were addressed by Vahe Gurzadyan in a 2003 publication. The entry for some years, notably 13 and 21 are not physically possible and are considered in error. Also, the tables used to calculate the heliacal rising of Venus assume a rate at which the earth is slowing, a rate which is not certain, causing "clock-time errors". David F. Lappin maintains that the best solution is 1483 BC for the positions, writing: "In summary, the 1483 BC Venus solution is among the better fits, with acceptable Venus data, and a superior match with attested 30-day months of Ammizaduga." David Rohl's New Chronology asserts that the best match on dates would be 1419 BC. See also Babylonian astronomy Chronology of the ancient Near East Short chronology References Further reading H. Gasche, J. A. Armstrong, S. W. Cole, and V. G. Gurzadyan, Dating the Fall of Babylon: A Reappraisal of Second-Millennium Chronology, Mesopotamian History and Environment Series 2, Memoirs 4, Chicago: The Oriental Institute; Ghent: The University of Ghent, 1998 V.G.Gurzadyan and D.A.Warburton, Akkadica, vol. 126, p. 195-197, 2005 V.G.Gurzadyan, Astronomy and the Fall of Babylon, Sky & Telescope, vol. 100, no.1 (July), pp. 40–45, 2000 Stephen Langdon and John Knight Fotheringham, The Venus Tablets of Ammizaduga, University Press, 1928 . The "fundamental edition", superseding Langdon et al. 1928 (Walker 1984). Mitchell, Wayne A., “Ancient Astronomical Observations and Near Eastern Chronology”, Journal of the Ancient Chronology Forum, vol. 3, pp. 7–26, 1990 External links Venus tablet at British Museum Bibliography, in context of Mesopotamian astronomy 17th-century BC works 1870 archaeological discoveries First Babylonian Empire Babylonian astronomy Chronology Clay tablets Middle Eastern objects in the British Museum Library of Ashurbanipal Venus