3DJay

Peace

3DJay

Bullshit.

http://www.classicpersuasion.org/pw/...laristotle.htm

http://www.classicpersuasion.org/pw/...s/dlphaedo.htm

They are NOT "so interchangeable".


Peace

Larsguy47

This is RIDICULOUS. If you want to doubt this, you should have some basis for doubting it other than just thinking it's wrong. You know, some astronomical examples of where maybe the Assyrian calendar sometimes did begin the year earlier than the equinox. This statement in Wiki is based upon the surviving Babylonian texts which consistently date the beginning of the year after the "observable" equinox, that is up to 5 days after the actual equinox. So even if the new moon was technically after the equinox by our modern calculations, the Babylonians still introduced the next month as the 13th month if the new moon fell within the first five days of the equinox, that is, when they could actually observe the equinox actually occurred.

We can test this at random quite easily, thanks to the VAT4956, dated to 568BCE where it records an eclipse on the 15th of the month of Sivan, which is the third month of the year. Here's the particulars:

What we are interested in is the date of the new moon two months earlier in relation to the date of the equinox.

For this month, the new moon was on June 19. So we back up two months to April to see when the new moon of month 1 began. The new moon occured on April 21st. The vernal equinox occurred on the 27th of March. But the full moon of the previous month occurred on April 6th, which was well after the March 27 equinox by nearly ten days.

Now the Jews might have introduced the first year of the month here, since their Passover celebration would have occurred after the beginning of the new solar year. But the Babylonians did not do this, instead didn't begin their year until April 21st, up to 24 days after the equinox.

The Wikipedia only observes this practice and in so doing notes that the 763BCE eclipse does not follow this "custom" as observed from the Babylonian records.

In the case of 763BCE the new moon of the first month would begin on March 19, and the equinox 10 days later on March 29. Month two would begin on April 17 and month three (Sivan) on May 17, so that a solar eclipse would occur on the last day of this month of June 15. The new moon crescent would begin month four on June 16. So if you followed Babylonian dating, the first month of the year would not have begun on March 19, which is before the equinox, but on April 17. Thus the month beginning on May 17 would be month two, not month three.

By contrast, obviously a July 17 eclipse in 709BCE is the normal dating for a month 3 eclipse by the Babylonian "customary" method, but also the natural method of simply beginning the new lunar year the first month occurring after the solar year began (vernal equinox, March 29, Julian calendar).

So, sorry, not only do you not have a credible contradiction to the Wikipedia reference to suggest dismissing it, but that reference is quite consistent with the facts and customs of the Babylonians from what we know from later texts.

The fact that the Jews, though, sometimes early-dated the year as long as the full moon was after the equinox, the suggestion is that this reference to 763BCE was allowed to remain as an "optional" month 3 reference, but just barely. The full moon occurs on April 2, just 3-4 days after the equinox on the 29th. So that's a close call even for Jewish dating. But a testament to the precision of astronomy knowledge back then.

You can check these things quite easily with SkyMap, which gives you lunar phases for any given year, as well as the date of the solstices and equinoxes.

Anyway, we know it's the wrong date so it's no big deal that it happens not to match up with being the "customary" third month. But 709BCE, of course does.

LG47

Hex

Why bother Lars? If it doesn't fit with your precious chronology, you won't pay any attention anyhow, right?

Or, is this a chronology-breaking issue for you if it's the wrong year? I'm intruiged ...

3DJay

Like the fact that the vernal equinox is on March 20 or 21...PERFECT for the 763 Eclipse?

http://www.betnahrain.org/nisanu.htm
In ancient Assyria vernal equinox (March 21) was celebrated as the start of the New Year.

http://assyriatimes.com/engine/modul...p?storyid=3272
The Assyro-babylonian new year originated during the Sumerian period in mid third millennium B.C. was the most important religious ceremony which was observed starting on the spring equinox (March 20-21), the day of creation and also of the rebirth of the nature, according to their religion.

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Year's_Day
The Iranian New Year, called Norouz, is the day containing the exact moment of the vernal equinox, commencing the start of the spring season. This falls on the 20 or 21 March.

The Assyrian New Year, called Rish Nissanu, occurs on 1 April In the Bahá'ê calendar, the new year occurs on the vernal equinox on 21 March, and is called Naw-Rúz.

http://www.zindamagazine.com/html/ar...mar22_1999.htm
In 325 A.D. the Council of Nicaea decreed that the Resurrection of Jesus Christ should be observed on the first Sunday after the first full moon following the vernal equinox (March 21).

http://www.newyearfestival.com/new-year-dates.html
March 21 - The Assyrian New Year, called Rish Nissanu, occurs on the vernal equinox, 21 March, commencing the start of the spring.

http://www.bibarch.com/concepts/Calendrics/Index.htm
The vernal equinox refers to the time in the spring (about March 21), and the autumnal equinox to the time in the autumn (about September 22), when the sun crosses the celestial equator making night and day of equal length all over the earth.

http://www.aina.org/ata/20070403123130.htm
50,000 Assyrians ushered in the 6757th Assyrian year with a parade in Noohadra (Dohuk), north Iraq. The Assyrian New Year, called the Akitu Festival, falls on the Vernal Equinox (March 20-21) and is celebrated for 12 days.



Seems to fit, just fine.


Peace

Larsguy47

Yes I will. Besides others are interested in your information. Why back out just because you think I might reject it? I make MISTAKES all the time and others point that out to me and I refine and adjust. So I benefit as well as the readers. So let's see it? On the other hand, this is often an excuse to avoid losing a debate point.

LG47

Larsguy47

Hi 3DJay. You obviously have no clue whatsoever about this issue, or your just "running interference" to have something to post. I can't tell. But let me explain why the 763BCE is challenged per the Wikipedia reference:

The first day of a new month is the observation of the NEW MOON CRESCENT. It is visible perhaps 18 hours after the technical new moon, when the moon is aligned with the sun and is thus totally not seen.

A SOLAR ECLIPSE OCCURS DURING THE TECHNICAL NEW MOON, and thus essentially the very last day of the month before the new month would begin. So the 763BCE eclipse on June 15, represents the last day of the third month. I know the days of the month are 29 or 30 days, so please don't make a big deal of this. but if you just back up 30 days for two months, you can see generally where the last day of the first month would end. That is, if June 15 is the last day of month three (try to follow me on this, okay?), then May 15 would be the last day of month two, and April 15 would be the last day of month one. Right? If April 15 or 16 is the last day of month 1, then the first day of month 1 would be around March 16 or 17 or 18, right? March 16 occurs before the spring equinox, which per the Julian calendar occurs on the 29th.

Thus for the 763BCE eclipse to fall in month 3, the Assyrians would have celebrated the new year equinox after they had already begun the year, rather than as per later custom of first celebrating the new year at the time of the equinox and then just beginning the first month of the year at the time of the new new moon crescent.

So it doesn't work per that custom of not beginning the lunar year before the spring equinox.

So there is no need to post the eclipse track since that is not at all an issue. We're not claiming that eclipse was not seen in Assyria, just that per the normal custom it would have been dated to the last day of MONTH 2 and not MONTH 3. The Assyrian eponym requires the eclipse to occur in the third month.

Constrastly, of course, since the 763BCE eclipse is in a pattern of predictable eclipses occurring every 54 years and 1 MONTH later, the next eclipse in the series, on July 18, 709BCE does occur on the last day of the third month, and so would have been the academic first choice if there were no dating issues to deal with.

Thus the Biblical dating which requires the 1st of Cyrus to fall in 455BCE, now supported by the VAT4956 dating references to 511BCE for year 37 of Nebuchadnezzar, requires a reduction of about 56 years by the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar. When we align the Assyrian eclipse event, looking for a match 56 years later than the current misdated 763BCE event, we find it in 709BCE and this basically adjusts the 56-year error in the Assyrian timeline by 54 years. The 2-year difference is neglible. This in turn downdates everything back to Shishak by 54 years and thus his invasion in 925BCE reduced to 871BCE is compared to any RC14 dating available.

In that case, City IV of Rehov which has a high probability range for the 2-sigma calculation of 95.4% between 918-823BCE is more compatible with 871BCE than 925BCE, which falls outside that confidence range.

See?

Then when we assign 871BCE to year 39 of Solomon and his year 4 to 906BCE, we can date the Exodus via this redated eclipse to specifically 1386BCE, which is 480 years earlier. The Exodus is 19 jubilees from the time the Jews return from Babylon. 19 jubilees is 931 years. 1386 minus 931 is 455BCE.

See?

So we're set for the timeline from the Exodus all the way through to the 1st of Cyrus in 455BCE.

What is left now is to adjust Greek and Persian history by removing 82 years of fake history between the 1st of Cyrus until 358BCE, which is the beginning of the reign of Artaxerxes III. This has already been done, of course.

See?

No problem.

Because the 763BCE worked so well with the revision, it was allowed to remain, but it follows Jewish dating and not Babylonian dating. Jews would begin the new year sometimes as long as Passover fell after the equninox. Passover was held on the FULL MOON. Thus in the case of 763BCE, if the first day of the month was around the 16th or 17th, then 14 days later to the Full moon would be around the 30th or 31st of the month, which was slightly but still after the equinox on the 29th. This suggests, of course, that Jews were involved in the final reconstruction of this timeline.

But this is not an indictment of the Jews for helping to authenticate the false chronology. That's because the misdated eclipse under close scrutiny, much like the VAT4956 which hides references to the original dating, becomes a hostile witness to the revised chronology when it gets dismissed and is better matched to the true dating. So its a complete toss-up as to whether the Jews involved were co-conspirators in the beginning or counter-conspirators. This is high-level counter-intelligence at work. That is, the more ORIGINAL ASTRONOMICAL REFERENCES that only loosely match the revised chronology that they can let survive, the more original references under critical review will CONVERT to the original chronology and thus we have more documents to confirm the original chronology. That's better than if this reference had been discarded when it didn't exactly fit the right month. So the Jews pretended to go along with the changes on the surface, but knowingly left clues to the original chronology.

Herodotus does the same thing! He states one historical scenario for an eclipse but gives such specific astronomical detail that the eclipse can only occur at another time, which makes no sense until you adjust the timeline. The Thales eclipse doesn't work in 585BCE but does work in 478BCE, during the reign of "Nabonidus" which Herodotus notes. Thus he intentionally understood that someone, down the line, would link the correct eclipse event during the corrected reign of Nabonidus. In the meantime, "Nabonidus" and the eclipse references don't work with the revised timeline dating that event to 585BCE during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar.

THANKS FOR THE INFORMATION THOUGH, it suggests all the more that the equinox event was a big event and thus more likely to have preceded the dating of the lunar first month of the year.

Thanks!

LG47

3DJay

Yada yada yada, Your argument is based on the Nisan starting after the equinox "rule". Unfortunately, that rule didn't come into effect, until the calendar was reformed, around the start of the 5th century, possibly under Darius.

So, this eclipse isn't affected by "the rule", anyway.


http://www.gutenberg.org/files/20758...-h/20758-h.htm
http://www.varchive.org/lec/aaas/afterword.htm
The Hebrew calendar has its roots in the older Assyrian-Babylonian calendar. Nisan 1, 2998. on the Hebrew calendar, is March 19, 763 BCE, on the Julian Calendar.

http://www.bibleorigins.net/ShabbatShapattu.html
Even after the vernal equinox "rule"...

http://www.smoe.org/arcana/diss1.html

Peace

Larsguy47

WOW! That was interesting! And direct. Much appreciated.

"but averaged about 14 days following the vernal equinox.."

I WILL CERTAINLY REVISE. This sort of kills my "Jewish conspiracy" theory, but explains if this was an occasional practice that the 763 BCE event was seen as a legitimate substitute for the original 709BCE event.

So at this point, I CONCEDE, that 763BCE along with 709BCE could either be considered "month 3", but it is to be noted that the 763BCE event is still considered "exceptional" compared to the more "standard" dating found in 709BCE, since even in later Babylonian times it "averaged about 14 days following the vernal equinox.

Thanks, again. I wonder if there are any Assyrian calendar records that ever show a pre-vernal equinox first month? You know, an actual example?

Thanks for the research!

LG47

3DJay

The 360 and 364 Day Year in Ancient Mesopotamia

The older Babylonian system had 360 days, and the equinox fell in the last month. The post-539 BCE system also went back to the equinox falling in the last month, with a 364 day system.

In between, during the neo-Babylonian and neo-Assyrian times, the equinox fell around the middle of Nisan.


Peace