"it has been estimated that they recur at any given place only once every 370 years, on average."
I tend to think that some one used this same method to come to the same conclusion based upon a "average" regression! The clue is "average!" Certainly one cannot regress Haley's Comet, by using the same "average" period of its occurence and place it in the correct year over a few hundred years and neither can your "370 year average." Thus the actual date might be + or - ten or more years from the date you prefer. And the so called ancient sources do not always give an adequate description of the events, IE the near or full totally, duration, stars seen, etc.
In other words, on what basis was the BCE date first stated? What source dated this event, and how reliable is the source? Many times there exists only one source, and there is some indication that the actual times of their lives can also be doubted. Such is the case of Pliny "Elder and Younger!" and others. Can we really know of the site mentioned by the source is or was placed in the right place? Surely any mention of Babylon as a place, could mean differing places in history such as the city of Babylon in Egypt.
Rome and Troy also offer other choices, as there exists sources which locate cities with these names in various places, such as Rome = Istanbul = Alexandria, Troy in England, France, Italy or Finland, etc.
In the case where Rome was used equally to mean Alexandria in Egypt then contact between Babylon and Rome, where both are located in Egypt places contact between the two in a very new light in literature. The very same thing can be said about the word Egypt itself. Egypt can describe places in Russia, the Baltic, and Italy. There even existed a Nile (Nilus) river in Naples, for example.
You might consider that there were numerous personages who might be considered as the "real" Plato for example (see Pletho / Plethon, etc. please see this link for more:
Of the possible dates you mentioned, I might be more inclined to accept the 17th century date as the most likely one, but I could be wrong?
But any further words on this subject does not belong on this site as it shows disrespect for Charles. So, if you wish to speak to me about these subjects please attempt to do so at this site;
Responses To This Message
© Charles N. Pope, US Library of Congress. All rights reserved.