Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Larsguy47 · 05-07-2007, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3DJay

So...you didn't separate what was stated about Babylonians, from what was stated about neo-Babylonians/neo-Assyrians?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylon...ylonian_period
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylon...haldean_Era.29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyria...s_and_kingdoms
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyria...ssyrian_Empire

Peace

Here are the dates from one king's list:

Code:

Shalmaneser III         858     824     34  
                                    Defeats Arameans, captures Babylon & Persia
        Shamshi-Adad V          823     811     12  
        Shamiram                811     806     5   
                                    Ruler of Assyria while her son was a minor
        Adad-Nirari III         806     783     23  
                                    Assyrian rule weakens 
        Shalmaneser IV          782     773     9   
        Ashur-Dan III           772     755     17  (ECLIPSE) 
                                    Rebelions against Assyria 
        Ashur-Nirari V          754     745     9   
        Tiglath-Pileser III     744     727     17  
                                    Re-gains Assyrian might greater than before
        Shalmaneser V           726     722     4   
                                    Captures Samaria, deports Isrealites
        Sargon II               721     705     16  
                                    Captures Egypt, Urartu, Babylon
                                    Dies in a battle 
        Sennacherib             704     681     23  
                                    Faught rebellions, destroyed Babylon 
        Esarhaddon              680     669     11  
                                    Rebuilt Babylon, def Scyth, Cimm, & Egypt
        Ashurbanipal            668     627     41  
                                    Defeats Egypt, Lydia, & Elam 
        Ashur-Etel-Ilani        627     624     3   
                                    Babylonians attack Assyria
        Sin-Shar-Ishkun         623     612     11  
                                    Medes sack Nineveh
        Ashur-Uballit II        612     ?       
                                    Flees to Harran, supported by Egyptians

http://www.aina.org/aol/kinglist

The texts from the Neo-Assyrian Period where the occurrence of the equinox during Nisan occur only during the time noted in RED, which does not include the time of Assur-Dan III.

Allowing the equinox to slip into Nisan, therefore, might have been a temporarly practice during the reign of these last Neo-Assyrian kings and up until 595BCE when the Babylonians took over, after which the equinoxes were consistently kept during the month preceding Nisan (either Adar II or II).

Quote:

"According to the tables of R. Parker and W. Dubberstein,Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C.–A.D. 75 (Providence, 1956), 27–29,31 the Spring Equinox (March 20/21) occurs in either Adar or second Adar (Month XII, XII2) in every year in the Neo-Babylonian period (Nabopolassar to Nabonidus) after 595 B.C.E. except 564. In contrast, the Spring Equinox occurs in Nisan at least seven times between 626 and 600. (Note 33, below)

Footnote:
33. 624, 621, 619, 616, 608–607, 600 B.C.E. (611, March 21 = Nisan 1). Likewise, the Spring Equinox falls in either Nisan or Adar in Neo-Assyrian documents from the reigns of Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal.;

Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal ruled from 680-627 BCE.

LG47

Larsguy47 · 05-07-2007, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3DJay

Here....let's just try some simple math, Lars.

Year 1, Nisan 1 = vernal equinox (lets say, Gregorian, March 20).

You show me how any year, with 354, 360, or even 364, days, can land year 2, Nisan 1, right on, or after, the next vernal equinox (Gregorian, March 20), when a full year is about 365 1/4 days.

Show me your creative math skills.

Peace

Oh, it's my "creative math" you want to see?

These years were not the literal years but averaged years for the 37-month period. The 37 months, is three years of 12 months, 36, and one extra month. So in one of those three years the year would be 384 days long, since it would have the 13th month.

So in general reference say the 354-day year representing close to the actual lunar year of a combination of 29-day and 30-day months, 6 months at 30 days (=180) and six months at 29 days (=174) is 354 days. That became the general reference for the length of the year, but this was not apart from the intercalation of a 13th month every third year where you had a year of 384 days (354+30=384).

So that's how you get the equinox to say in Adar or Adar II. These different years were not years in practice since the actual months determined that, but just various ways they broke down the reference to the year in relation to the 37-month 3-year period. You see that 37-month period of 1092 days is very close to the 3-year solar year of 1095 days (3 x 365).

So get those 354, 360 and 360 REFERENCES out of your head. They are just general references to the length of their year when they average them against a 37-month three year period which includes that 13th month.

364 x 3 is more precise since it equals 1092.

354 x 3 = 1062, but then you add 30 to get 1092.

The alternate 360-year day was another general reference to the year that the Egyptians used but there still was an adjustment.

Here's a quote from your own source:

"Thus, omens derived from the 360 day calendar would cover all eventualities even in a leap year of 13 lunar months totalling approximately 384 days.

The 364 Day Year in Mesopotamia and Ancient Israel
As noted above, the ancient Mesopotamian civil and religious calendar included both regular years of 12 lunar-months (approximately 354 days) and leap-years of 13 lunar-months (approximately 384 days)."

So the "354 year" calendar is really misleading, since one of out three years would be 384 years. So it should be more the "354x2/384x1" year calendar.

The only difference is preference for some being specific, some avreaging out with the leap year. But in practice they had to go with whatever the sun and moon were doing no matter what, so.

The POINT of the article was to demonstrate that there was intercalation during these periods where these different year lengths were in reference.

LG47

3DJay · 05-07-2007, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larsguy47

So the "354 year" calendar is really misleading, since one of out three years would be 384 years. So it should be more the "354x2/384x1" year calendar.

Oh...I see how you do it...you just ignore the start date of year 2, ignore the start date of year 3, and jump right back to the year AFTER the leap year.

Nice math. I didn't ask about 3 years after, I asked about the next year. Keep up, for cryin out loud.

Quote:

The POINT of the article was to demonstrate that there was intercalation during these periods where these different year lengths were in reference.

Duh! Do you understand what intercalation is for? It's to make up lost time. 2 out of the 3 years, Nisan 1 is going to fall before the equinox. Even with the leap year, they need to make up 3.2424 days.

Here...I'll do the math for you... In year 2 Nisan 1 will land about 11 days before the equinox. In year 3 Nisan 1 will land about 22 days before the equinox.

Sheesh. It was an easy question.

Peace

Larsguy47 · 05-07-2007, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3DJay

Oh...I see how you do it...you just ignore the start date of year 2, ignore the start date of year 3, and jump right back to the year AFTER the leap year.

Nice math. I didn't ask about 3 years after, I asked about the next year. Keep up, for cryin out loud.

Duh! Do you understand what intercalation is for? It's to make up lost time. 2 out of the 3 years, Nisan 1 is going to fall before the equinox. Even with the leap year, they need to make up 3.2424 days.

Here...I'll do the math for you... In year 2 Nisan 1 will land about 11 days before the equinox. In year 3 Nisan 1 will land about 22 days before the equinox.

Sheesh. It was an easy question.

Peace

Oh, I see what you're saying. Why did you ASK then? I thought you were talking about something else.

But this is circular reasoning. That's because given that we allowed the 1st of Nisan to fall on the Equinox, March 20. We would simply introduce an intercalary month the next year. So per your scenario, where Nisan 1 would slip down 11 days, it would be renamed as Adar II. Then equinox would occur about 20 days before Nisan 1.

Since you can optionally insert an intercalary month at any point, you can regulate where the equinox will fall the next year.

So it is SUBJECTIVE/CIRCULAR. It depends on when you want to introduce an intercalary month. If you decide that you don't want to ever introduce an intercalary month, like some cultures then the equinox will eventually occur in all the months and return to Nisan.

What you don't realize is that you have to decide whether the system dates the equinox on a regular basis during Nisan or a regular basis during Adar or Adar II.

In practice, where say the first month the equinox occurs in Nisan, say Nisan 1, if an intercalary month was introduced the next year, it would remain in Adar for the next two years.

Technically, you could decide to set the equinox consistently any month of the year that you wanted, by just intercalating to effect that.

So it's not about what you could do but about what was actually done, based upon the records we have. And those records show that the primary custom was to keep the equinox in Adar I or Adar II. For a short period of time in the late Neo-Assyrian Period and the very beginning of the Neo-Babylonian Period, there was a higher occurrence of the equinox occurring in Nisan. But that was reversed back to the "natural" and "customary" Babylonian system.

Further, the specific Neo-Assyrian evidence for this practice is not stated to extend earlier than the reign of Esarhaddon, which doesn't reach back far enough to affect the 763BCE eclipse event.

LG47

3DJay · 05-07-2007, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larsguy47

Oh, I see what you're saying. Why did you ASK then? I thought you were talking about something else.

But this is circular reasoning. That's because given that we allowed the 1st of Nisan to fall on the Equinox, March 20. We would simply introduce an intercalary month the next year. So per your scenario, where Nisan 1 would slip down 11 days, it would be renamed as Adar II. Then equinox would occur about 20 days before Nisan 1.

Nooooo, the extra Adar, was in the leap year, not the normal years. It would only affect the start date of the year following leap year.

Quote:

Since you can optionally insert an intercalary month at any point, you can regulate where the equinox will fall the next year.

So it is SUBJECTIVE/CIRCULAR. It depends on when you want to introduce an intercalary month. If you decide that you don't want to ever introduce an intercalary month, like some cultures then the equinox will eventually occur in all the months and return to Nisan.

LG47

Optionally insert a month at any point? WTF? So, now you're just changing the 354, 354, 384, to something else, on your own whim?

Peace

Larsguy47 · 05-08-2007, 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3DJay

Nooooo, the extra Adar, was in the leap year, not the normal years. It would only affect the start date of the year following leap year.

The "leap year" was optional per the culture. The reference indicates that when at first, using the "Babylonian method" the equinox was always during Adar I or II, but then it was allowed to occur in Nisan apparently for a while during the late Neo-Assyrian period. It is not clear exactly why, but my suspicion until I can check it out is that the significance of the new year moved to the fall equinox and so they let the equinox occur in Nisan in anticipation of introducing an Elul II in the fall.

Quote:

Optionally insert a month at any point? WTF? So, now you're just changing the 354, 354, 384, to something else, on your own whim?

Yes, that's almost the case. Don't you remember reading about an intercalary Elul II? Elul was the sixth month. That means sometimes they intercalated in the sixth month for some reason.

The goal of the intercalation was to adjust the year in line with where they wanted the equinox to fall. But different cultures might intercalate differently. There was always a choice to intercalate a year earlier if you wanted. But then after that you had to wait two years. So it's not jus anytime, but the decision to do it was subjective.

For instance, it could be said that the Jews had a variation on the intercalation, in that they intercalated so that the FULL MOON of Nisan would follow as close after the equinox as possible. They had to start harvesting their crops in line with the seasons. So the equinox would fall more often in their first month as long as it occurred during the first 14 days before the full moon. But the Babylonians intercalated so that the New Moon would always follow the equinox. Obviously the Jews and Babylonians would have matching years some years but different months in others. They would be a month askew about every 3 years. That is, the Jews might intercalate early one year whereas the Babylonians wait until the next year. When they intercalate the Jewish and Babylonian calendars would be the same for that year and the next, then the Jews would intercalate again, etc.

So it wasn't written in stone. That's why there was an inquiry sometimes when to intercalate. For instance, in the 19-year lunisolar cycle, I believe it is every three years for most of the 7 times out of 19 years but twice the intercalation takes place after two years.

" Traditionally (in the ancient Attic and Babylonian calendars, as well as in the Hebrew calendar), the years: 3, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17, and 19, are the long (13-month) years of the Metonic cycle.

So you see, it's not precise. The Metonic cycle was set up so that it automatically intercalated in this manner rather than spontaneously depending on when the new year began. As rest of this particular calendar, sometimes the full moon begins after the equinox but the Jews will still not intercalate until the next year. As a result, the Christians celebrate Easter and Passover a whole month before the Jews celebrate passover.

So again, it's not entirely a "whim" since you can't intercalate too often, but there is a choice to wait a year sometimes, or to intercalate in the sixth month rather than the 12th. I don't think anyone has determined the criteria for that, though there seemed to be a definite number of Elul intercalations during Babylonian times.

LG47

LG47

3DJay · 05-08-2007, 03:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larsguy47

So it wasn't written in stone. That's why there was an inquiry sometimes when to intercalate. For instance, in the 19-year lunisolar cycle, I believe it is every three years for most of the 7 times out of 19 years but twice the intercalation takes place after two years.

" Traditionally (in the ancient Attic and Babylonian calendars, as well as in the Hebrew calendar), the years: 3, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17, and 19, are the long (13-month) years of the Metonic cycle.

So you see, it's not precise. The Metonic cycle was set up so that it automatically intercalated in this manner rather than spontaneously depending on when the new year began. As rest of this particular calendar, sometimes the full moon begins after the equinox but the Jews will still not intercalate until the next year. As a result, the Christians celebrate Easter and Passover a whole month before the Jews celebrate passover.

So again, it's not entirely a "whim" since you can't intercalate too often, but there is a choice to wait a year sometimes, or to intercalate in the sixth month rather than the 12th. I don't think anyone has determined the criteria for that, though there seemed to be a definite number of Elul intercalations during Babylonian times.

What? You just quoted the 19 year system, yourself. Then say it's not precise. The extra 6th month was included twice, in the 19 year system, to make up for the lag, even with the leap years.

If you want to do the math on the 19 year cycle, fine by me.

Start of year 1... Nisan 1 lands on vernal equinox (vernal equinox to vernal equinox = a 365.2424 day year)
Start of year 2... 365.2424 - 354 = Nisan 1 lands 11.2424 days before the equinox
Start of year 3... + 11.2424 = Nisan 1 lands 22.4848 days before the vernal equinox

Start of year 4... -18.7576 = 3.7272 days before the vernal equinox
Start of year 5... + 11.2424 = 14.9696 days before
Start of year 6... + 11.2424 = 26.212 days before

Start of year 7... -18.7576 = 7.4544 days before
Start of year 8... + 11.2424 = 18.6968 days before

Start of year 9... -18.7576 = 0.0608 days AFTER
Start of year 10... + 11.2424 = 11.1816 days before
Start of year 11... +11.2424 = 22.424 days before

Start of year 12... -18.7576 = 3.6664 days before
Start of year 13... + 11.2424 = 14.9088 days before
Start of year 14... + 11.2424 = 26.1512 days before

Start of year 15... -18.7576 = 7.3936 days before
Start of year 16... + 11.2424 = 18.636 days before
Start of year 17... + 11.2424 = 29.8784 days before

Start of year 18... -18.7576 = 11.1208 days before
Start of year 19... + 11.2424 = 22.3632 days before

Start of second year 1... -18.7576 = 3.6056 before

Even the 19 year cycle is going to fall short of the actual equinox. Anything less than 365.2424 days, per year, is going to fall behind. Not sure how the neo-Assyrians did it, but the Hebrew calendar has "complete" years, of 355 days, and "complete" leap years of 385 days, to get fully realigned.

And, that was assuming a system that tries to align Nisan 1 on the equinox. You said you liked my source...

Quote:

An ordinary lunar year consists of twelve lunar months; approximately six “hollow” 29 day months and six “full” 30 day months, totalling 354 days; i.e., 11!-4 days short of an ordinary solar year of 365!-4 days. In Mesopotamia, the New Year began on the ˜rst of Nisan (Month I)—according to Babylonian convention, the day of the ˜rst new moon after the Spring Equinox, which was ideally meant to occur on the 15th of Adar (Month XII).4

Quote:

4.ÙFor the two Mesopotamian systems for equinoxes and solstices: A Babylonian system where the equinoxes and solstices fall in Months XII, III, VI, IX, and a Neo-Assyrian period system where the date for equinoxes and solstices occurred one month later in Months I, IV, VII, X, see Excursus II below (42–44). According to both systems Nisan was the ˜rst month of the year (cf. Cohen, The Cultic Calendars, 14–20, for the almost universal spring New Year in ancient Mesopotamia).

one month later = a Neo-Assyrian vernal equinox on Nisan 15, not Nisan 1, system.

Quote:

Thus, ancient Mesopotamians declared a leap-year approximately every third year to keep the lunar months in their proper seasons. In leap-years, an extra lunar month was added, almost always as intercalary months XII2 or VI2 (Second Adar or Second Elul), allowing for the ˜rst of Nisan and Tishre (Months I, VII) to return to the eve of the ˜rst new moon after the equinoxes (according to the Babylonian system).6

Quote:

6.ÙThe last new moon before the equinox according to the Neo-Assyrian period system. For months other than Adar and Elul as intercalary months, see Cohen, The Cultic Calendars, 5 no. 2. For intercalary Nisan (Month I2), see CAD N/2 266b).

Quote:

Excursus II: The Dates of The Equinoxes and Solstices
Two systems for the dates of equinoxes and solstices are evident in cuneiform
texts:
I. An older Babylonian system in which the equinoxes and solstices fall in the months of Adar, Sivan, Elul, and Kislev (XII, III, VI, IX); it is attested primarily in texts from second millennium, and then reappears in the late-Babylonian period (post 539 B.C.E.).
II. A later system in which the equinoxes and solstices occur ideally one month later, on the ˜fteenth of Nisan, Tammuz, Tishre, and Tebet (Months I, IV, VII, X); it is attested in Neo- Assyrian period texts.

Quote:

It is possible that this return to the older “Babylonian” system re˘ects, in some way, an intentional Neo-Babylonian period calendrical reform since the omission of an intercalation has the eˆect of moving the solstices and equinoxes back from Months I, IV, VII, X to Months XII, III, VI, IX; i.e., moving the Spring equinox from Nisan back to Adar, etc. According to the tables of R. Parker and W. Dubberstein, Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C.–A.D. 75 (Providence, 1956), 27–29,31 the Spring Equinox (March 20/21) occurs in either Adar or second Adar (Month XII, XII2) in every year in the Neo-Babylonian period (Nabopolassar to Nabonidus) after 595 B.C.E. except 564.32 In contrast, the Spring Equinox occurs in Nisan at least seven times between 626 and 600.33

The Equinox still managed to fall in Nisan even during the neo-Babylonian period, when they were changing the calendar, back to the Adar system.

Quote:

32.ÙCf. n. 33 below, and note that according to Parker and Dubberstein (1956), 27, March 20–21 fell in the month of Shevat (Month XI)! in 595 B.C.E. The spring equinox must fall in Nisan in years when the ˜rst of Adar (or second Adar in leap-years) occurs on or before February 18th. In such years, the ˜rst of Nisan would occur no later than March 19th (or in the case of Gregorian leap-years, with an extrapolated Feb. 29th, March 18th).
33.Ù624, 621, 619, 616, 608–607, 600 B.C.E. (611, March 21 = Nisan 1). Likewise, the Spring Equinox falls in either Nisan or Adar in Neo-Assyrian documents from the reigns of Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal; see Parpola, Letters from Assyrian Scholars, 2:360–61, and 382–83, Appendix A 2.

http://orion.huji.ac.il/orion/faculty.shtml

Quote:

Wayne Horowitz (Lecturer, Department of Assyriology)
General Research Interests: Ancient Near East, Religion, Mythology, Science, Astronomy. Current Research Projects: Astrolabes, Mesopotamian Astronomy before 1,000 BCE.
Biography: Dr. Wayne Horowitz is a Lecturer in the Rothberg School for Overseas Students and the Department of Assyriology at the Hebrew University. His field of specialization is Ancient Near Eastern (Sumerian and Akkadian) literature, religion, mythology, science, and astronomy. Dr. Horowitz is a native of Rosyln, Long Island, USA, and completed his B.A. at Brandeis University. His Ph.D. is from the University of Birmingham in the United Kingdom.

http://www.zoominfo.com/people/Horow..._38194747.aspx
http://ancientneareast.huji.ac.il/StaffAssyriology.asp

Glad you liked my source, so much.

Peace

Larsguy47 · 05-09-2007, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3DJay

one month later = a Neo-Assyrian vernal equinox on Nisan 15, not Nisan 1, system.

NO. You misunderstood. "one month later" for an average date on Nisan 15 is a variation on the Adar 15 cycle. Nisan 15 is one month after Adar 15.

LG47

3DJay · 05-09-2007, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larsguy47

NO. You misunderstood. "one month later" for an average date on Nisan 15 is a variation on the Adar 15 cycle. Nisan 15 is one month after Adar 15.

LG47

I understood that quite fine... I said "Nisan 15, not Nisan 1, system" as a comparison to my math example ...glad you finally understand the Neo-Assyrian system.

Peace

Larsguy47 · 05-10-2007, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3DJay

I understood that quite fine... I said "Nisan 15, not Nisan 1, system" as a comparison to my math example ...glad you finally understand the Neo-Assyrian system.

Peace

Oh, okay. We were on the same page but different books.

Thanks, indeed, because this does revise my concept of why this eclipse redated to 763 was left on the books, simply because with the 57-year error deficit from the NB Period, the option was there to redate the 763BCE eclipse to the later month, which compensated for the 56-57 years just fine with a 54-year adjustment. There seemed to be a strong preference, of course, for keeping any coincidental astronomical references found in the original text that matched the new revised dating, which of course, adds quite a bit more fake authenticity to the reference. Problem is, though, these substitute eclipses always work out better with the original chronology as in this case, where we clearly see the primary custom well established for beginning the lunar year after the equinox, which is exceptional this early in the Neo-Assyrian Period.

Even so, the 763BCE still doesn't have the social value of being a "predicted" eclipse, which 709BCE does. 709BCE might have been the first accurately predicted solar eclipse ever in the history of ancient Mideastern astronomy; something that still isn't realized yet by the experts in the field.

LG47

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.