Ok, I'm on the right track, but I have to go fiddle with these images some more.
Anything written by Org. that has Nabonidus' years of rule.
Hi Alleymom, thanks for your research!
I'll just note for the record:
1) That the eclipse Herodotus descirbed was mentioned in the context of his warning "Ionia". Why? Because that is WHERE he claimed the eclpise would take place. Since you noted the tracks for both eclipses, note that the 478BCE eclipse come up from the south and across the Ionian sea and up through Ionia, but the 585BCE eclipse comes from the North into Lydia but does not go through Ionia.
2) As noted above, and as commented on by Otto Neugebaur, the 585BCE was not a predictable eclipse, but the 478BCE eclipse was. If you wish, you can thus compare the eclipse occurring 54 years and 1 month earlier in 532 BCE that went through Egypt and Babylon. That pattern would locate the next eclipse in the series approximately 15 degrees farther north, thus Thales should have predicted the eclipse occurring in Ionia based upon the previous eclipse at the precise time.
Finally, please note that another "total" eclipse Herodotus mentions was supposed to occur the same year that Xerxes invaded Greece, which is currently dated in 580BCE. But there was no eclipse in the spring in Greece that year. But per the "theory" of the revisions, the the revisions took place in two phases. One was by the Persians late in the reign of Darius II where the rulership of Darius I was extended from 6 years to 36 years, but they revised the Babylonian records, stealing 26 years of the neo-Babylonian kingship. That's why the 70 years don't work for the revised chronology. The later addition of 58 years of fake chronology for Persia didn't occur until after Thucydides wrote his history. Thus you do find the eclipses mentioned by Heroduts in the original year of 424BCE and the substitute year of 450BCE, only the 450BCE eclipse was partial. The eclipse description does not fit exactly the way it would have occurred either, but just for the notation, the ecilpses are there where they belong suggesting that Herodotus was dealing with only a 26-year distortion when he wrote his history.
I'm going to rereard Herodotus for this section to see if I can get more definition about the details he presents, plus there's another reference I want to run by you to see what you think.
Thanks so much for the effort. I hope we can get the graphics to show up. If you want to send them to me by E-mail, I can post them at my webpage which allows viewing of graphics.