Considering that Dio lived and worked 150-200
years after Tiberius, and considering that both Josephus and Suetonius not only
perfectly agree with one another, thought apparently independent of one
another, but that they are also much closer to the source, I find no basis for
applying the words of Dio upon the reality of history as it is presented to me
at this point.No doubt Dio was using
some basis for his statements, but his basis is likely to have been colored by
poor availability of primary data or a correct understanding of data which were
far removed from him in time. Below I have attempted to find a reasonable basis
for Dio’s statement. However, I failed to find any precise fit or any definite
clues as to his basis.
Quoting Dio:
“Dio… states that Tiberius died on March 26, after a reign of 22 years, 7 months, and 7
days.977.“
Considerations:
How might this
statement of Dio be reasonably understood?In trying to look for possible clues I find only the following:
Bad
assumption: Assuming that Dio
is using by default a Julian calendar, and further assuming that “26” is
a typographical error somewhere along the line, what do we get?March 16 is 2 months and 16 days into
the 23rd year, which leaves four months and 14+7=21 days for
the other end. But removing the four last months out of any year brings
us into August. Lastly, 31 – 21 = 10 days. Thus we arrive at August 10,
BCE 1.But that’s no where close
to a familiar date, is it?
Bad
assumption: Let’s try a Jewish
Calendar:Let’s remove, as
defined by Josephus, 5 or 6 months, and 4 days. That leaves us with 1 or
2 months and 8-4=4 days for the opposite end, which brings us into
either Av or Tammuz 26 or 27, 1 BCE [which corresponds to July 17 or 18,
or else August 16, 17, or 18.] This brings us a little closer to our
only familiar date June 26, 1 BCE [Tammuz 4 or 5, 1 BCE,] but still no
perfect fit.
A so so
assumption with a fit: Let’s
say Dio is a misinformed late scholar in re to this particular. Let’s
say the March 26 date is an indication of this. Let’s say that he also
misunderstood the Jewish calendar in other ways. Let’s assume that he
knew Tiberius died in Adar II, but included this month by mistake in his
count, adding “7 months” rather than the correct “6 months”.Let’s further assume that he based his
count upon anssumption that the new moon occurred at the astronomical
new moon as calculated.Given all
these assumptions – which are pretty bad – the “7 days” brings us from
March 16 to the astronomical new moon on March 10.Taking away the “7 months”, i.e. 6 months,
brings us back to Tishri 1, 22 CE.“22 years” back from this point brings us to Tishri 1, 1 BCE,
which is the beginning of the civil year known as Tiberius’ first year
of reign. June 26, 1 BCE is the beginning of his accession year, which
is not counted.It’s a fit, but
could Dio, and/or his transcribers, be that unreliable in a particular
like this?
A fair
assumption with a fit: Let’s
assume the “7 days” are the 10th through the 16th
days of March, considering that March 10 is the astronomical new moon.
(I will consider “March 26” a typo until some better idea comes along.)
Removing the last “7 months”, i.e. lunar cycles, prior to the March 10
new moon brings me back to a lunar month ending at or close to the
astronomical new moon ending August 16, 22 BCE at 03:24 Rome Solar Time.
But that leaves us open for any date within an accession year ending
within the latter half of 1 BCE.This seems like a fair fit for our one and only familiar date of
June 26, 1 BCE [Tammuz 4 or 5, 1 BCE,] doesn’t it?
Another bad
to fair assumption:“March 26” occurs on full moon. Could
this be a lead? Let’s assume that the “7 days” are based upon June 26, 1
BCE. This brings us to the full moon on July 4, 1 BCE (at 09:19, Rome Solar Time.)Adding “7 months” [lunar] brings us to
the full moon January 28, 1 CE (at 01:45 Rome Solar Time.) Adding “22 years” brings me
to the full moon on January 25, 23 CE (at 16:42 Rome Solar Time.)The full moon closest to
Tiberius’ death is “March 26,” 23 CE (at 00:04 Rome Solar Time) and follows 2
lunar cycles upon the full moon of January 25, 23 CE.If this last 2 lunar cycle interval is
disregarded – leap months or accession year perhaps? - in a reversed
count using a lunar based full moonto full moon calendar
we do have a fit.But does such a
calendar exist?
Assumptions re Dios beliefs with
a fit: Assuming that Dio
believed that Tiberius’s reign started June 26, 10 CE while ending in
the 1st quarter moon 22+ Hebrew years later in the month
following after Adar II and that the Hebrew new moon was calculated
based upon the astronomical new moon.Accession year until Tishri 1, 10 CE. Adding “22 years” brings us
to Tishri 1, 32 CE.Adding “7
months” brings us to the astronomical new moon on March 19, 33 CE. Adding “7
days” brings us to “March 26,” 33 CE.
Thus, I find that I have no idea which calendar Dio
used.However, Dio’s statement
agrees within a month or two withJosephus and Suetonius who are
in perfect agreement one with another (See above!).What calendar does Dio usually use? If you
can help, please email me at PowerOfChoice@gamaliel.intranets.com
.