Without recourse. All
Rights Reserved. Tree of Life©
Statement of
belief: “Sanctify them through thy
truth: thy word is truth.” (John 17:17 KJV)
Created on or before 5926± 12
06 2022 [2006-02-05]
The prior
version was extensively revised and edited[1] on 5930± 03 03 2026
[2010-05-18]
The prior revised version
received further
evaluation re the length of the cubit etc. before this extensively revised
edition[2] of 5930± 04 15 2026
[2010-06-28]
Significant additional
revisions on 5930± 04 23 2026 [2010-07-06] - With considerable added values
over and above the prior revision.
Edit 5941[(?)] 12
23 2027 [2011-03-28]
Addition 5926[(*??*)]
12 13 2030 [2014-03-15] – Re the size of lunar halos: Beginning at the last footnote of line 14’...
This version was extensively revised and edited[3] (as indicated within by yellow highlighting) on 5927[(*??*)]
03 27 2031 [2015-07-14.] Cf. last prior version!
Specifically:
1)
“5th” of line 10 obv was corrected to “7th,” thus
resolving the problem with months of lengths other than 29 or 30. Cf. considerations
beginning at footnote
#57!;
2)
All dates, links, and footnotes of month II
were reviewed and revised in consequence of #1;
3)
My prior analyses of the definitions of cubit and finger, respectively,
were revised (cf. footnote
#51; and
4)
Translation errors in line 6 obv
were noted and briefly commented upon.
Press the
image for a high
resolution
view!
- a Transcription of
its Translation[4] and of
the Comments of its Transliteration
plus Added Links to
Reconstructions of the Events
that are Recorded on VAT 4956
and Footnotes with exact Julian Dates and Comments
by Gunnar Anders Smårs Jr©
-
A Study in Progress:
(Therefore, please forgive me
for any errors,
whether words remaining from past thinking and not yet corrected
or thoughts of mine that are still suffering from being in error until
somehow I am given additional rays of light!)
Abstract:
This is a confirmation of the exact astronomical dates for Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year of reign using Starry Night Backyard software. Said year began at sunset April 22, ‑567, i.e. 568 BCE. Twenty-one or more very precise observations of celestial events were recorded on the clay tablet VAT 4956 during said 37th year. When an ancient record with that many precise observations, all of which agree with the best available astronomical calculations, is available there is little or no room for doubt as to the exact timing of Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year of reign. Because this is one among the oldest such record that I am so far aware of, which can be exactly correlated with biblical chronology, it is of great importance in my attempts to establish an absolute chronology from the beginning of creation.
Obv[erse
side of clay table. / ToL ©]
1.
Year 37 of Nebukadnezar, king of Babylon. Month I. (the 1st [5] of which was identical with) the 30th [6] (of the preceding month)[7], the moon became visible
behind
the Bull
of Heaven[8];
[sunset to moonset:] ….[….][9]
2.
Saturn was in front of the Swallow.[10], [11] The 2nd,[12] in the morning, a rainbow stretched in the west. Night
of the 3rd,[13] the moon was 2
cubits in front of [….][14]
3.
it rained’. Night of the 9th [15] (error for: 8th)[16],
beginning of the night, the moon stood 1
cubit in front of β[17]
Virginia.
The 9th.[18] the sun in
the west (was surrounded) by a halo […. The 11th][19]
4.
or[20] 12th[21]. Jupiter’s
acronychal rising.[22] On the 14th[23]. one god was seen with the other: sunrise to moonset: 4°.[24] The 15th[25]. overcast. The 16th, [26] Venus [….][27]
5.
The 20th,[28] in the morning, the sun was surrounded by a halo.
Around noon…… rain PISAN. A rainbow stretched in the east. [….][29]
6.
From the 8th of month XII,[30] to the 28th, [31] the
river level rose 3 cubits and 8 fingers. 2/3 cubits [were missing] to the high
flood [….]
7.
were killed on order of the king. That month, a fox entered the city.
Coughing and a little risutu-disease
[….]
8.
Month II, the 1st [32] (of which followed the 30th [33] of the
preceding month), the moon became visible while the sun stood there,[34] [. It was / TOL©] 4 cubits below β Geminorum[35]; it was thick[36]: there was earthshine[37] [….]
9.
Saturn was
in front of the Swallow:[38] Mercury, which had set, was not
visible. Night of the 1st,[39] gusty storm
from east and south. The 1st, all day [….]
10. stood […. In
front] of Venus
to the west. The 2nd.[40] The north wind
blew. The 3rd,[41] Mars entered Praesepe[42], [43], [44]. The 5th, [7th [45] / TOL©] it went out (of it). The 10th,[46] Mercury
[rose[47]] in
the
west behind the [little] Twins [….]
11. The 15th.[48] ZIIR. The 18th.[49] Venus was balanced[50] 1 cubit 4 fingers
above α
Leonis.[51] The 26th,[52] {moonrise to sunrise} 23°:[53] I did not observe the moon.[54] The 27th,[55] 20 + x [….][56]
12. Month III, {the 1st [57] of which was identical with} the 30th
[58] (of the
preceding month), the
moon became visible behind Cancer:
it was thick[59]; sunset
to moonset: 20° [60]; the north wind blew. At that time. Mars
and Mercury were 4 cubits in front of α [Leonis ….][61]
13. Mercury
passed below Mars to the East; Jupiter
was above α Scorpii;[62] Venus was in the
west opposite {} Leonis[63] [….][64]
14.
1’ cubit. Night of the 5th,[65] beginning of
the night. The moon passed towards the east 1 cubit (above:below)
the bright star of the end of the Lion’s foot.[66] Night of the 6th.[67] beginning of the
night, [….][68]
15. it was low. Night of the 8th.[69] first part of the night. The moon stood
2 ½ cubits below β Librae.[70] Night
of the 9th,[71] first part of the night. The
moon [stood] 1 cubit in front of [….][72]
16. passed towards the east. The 9th.[73] solstice.[74] Night of the 10th.[75] first part of the night. The
moon was balanced 3 ½ cubits above α Scorpii.[76] The 12th,[77] Mars
was 2/3 cubits above [α Leonis….][78]
17. [….] The 15th,[79] one
god was seen with the other; sunrise to moonset: 7° 30’. [80] A lunar eclipse
which was omitted[81] [….]
18.
[…. The moon[82] was be]low the
bright star at the end of the
[Lion’s| foot |….][83]
19. [….]….[….]
Rev[erse side of
clay table. / ToL ©]
1'. [….]…. First part [of the night
….. the moon was]
2'. 1 cubit [above/below] the middle
star of the elbow of Sagittarius….[….]
3'. When 5° of daytime had passed, the
sun was surrounded by a halo. The 19th. [84] Venus was 2 ½ cubits below β Capricorni.[85] Night of the [….]
4'. That month, the equivalent (of 1
shekel of silver was): barley, 1 kur 2 sut: dates. 1 kur 1 pan ½ sut: mustard.
1 kur …. [….]
5'.
Month XI, (the 1st [86] of which was identical with) the 30th [87] (of the preceding month), the moon became
visible in the Swallow; sunset
to moonset: 14° 30’;[88] the north wind blew. At that time, Jupiter was 1
cubit behind the elbow[89] of Sagittarius [….]
6'. The 4th, the river
level rose. The 4th,[90] Venus was balanced ½ cubit
below (sic)[91] Capricorn. Night of the 6th.[92] first part of the night. The moon was surrounded by a
halo: Pleiades, the Bull of Heaven, and the Chariot [stood in it….][93]
7'. the
moon was surrounded by a halo: Leo and Cancer were inside the halo; α
Leonis was balanced 1 cubit below the moon.[94] Last part of the night, 3° of night remaining, [….]
8'. sunrise to moonset: 17°:[95] I did not watch. The sun was surrounded by a halo.
From the 4th [96] to the 15th.[97] the river level rose 1 ½ cubits. On the 16th. [98] it receded. Night of the 18th (and) the 18th. [99] rain PISAN DIB [….]
9'. when the {….] of Bel was cut off
from its place two hosts…. Went away’. The 22nd, [100] overcast. Night of the 23rd. [101] [….Mars’]
10'. was balanced
above(sic) the small star which stands 3 ½ cubits behind Capricorn.[102] Night of the 20th. [103] red glow flared up in the west: 2 double-[hours….]
11'. barley. 1 kur’; dates. 1 kur 1 pan
4 sut: mustard. 1 kur 1 pan: sesame. 4 sut: cress [….]
12'. Month XII. The 1st [104] {of which followed the 30th [105] of the preceding month}. The moon
became visible behind Aries while the sun stood there: sunset to moonset: 25°
measured: earthshine: the north wind blew. At that time. Jupiter |…. Mercury
and Saturn. Which had set.]
13'. were not visible. The 1st.[106] the river level rose. Night of the 2nd,[107] the moon was
balanced 4 cubits below η Tauri.[108] Night of the 3rd,[109] beginning of the night. 2 ½ cubits [….][110]
14'.
From the 1st [111] to the 5th.[112] the river level rose 8 fingers: on the 6th [113] it receded. Night of the 7th.[114] the
moon was surrounded by a halo: Praesepe and α Leonis [stood] in [it….][115]
15'. the halo surrounded Cancer and
Leo, it was split towards the south. Inside the halo. The moon stood 1 cubit
in of (α Leonis[116]). The moon being 1 cubit high. Night of the 10th.[117] first [part of the night. ….]
16'. Night of the 11th.[118] overcast. The 11th. rain DCL. Night of the
12th.[119] a little rain. …. The 12th.[120] one god was seen with the other: sunrise to moonset: 1° 30’[121]: ….[…. Mercury]
17'. was
in front of the “band” of the Swallow. ½ cubit below Venus, Mercury having
passed 8 fingers to the east: when it became visible it was bright and
(already) high. 1° ‘ [….Saturn[122]]
18'. was[123] balanced
6 fingers above Mercury and 3 fingers below Venus, [124] and Mars
was balanced 2/3 cubits below the bright star of[125] (….) towards [….]
19'. …, …. The 21st.[126] overcast: the river level rose. Around the 20th.[127] Venus
and Mercury entered the “band” of the Swallow[128]. From […. Jupiter.]
20'. which had passed to the east. Became
stationary. At the end of the month. It went back to the west. Around the 26th.[129] Mercury
and Venus [came out] from the “band” of Anunitu [….]
21'. the river level receded 8 fingers.
That month. On the 26th.[130] a wolf entered Borsippa and killed two dogs: it did
not go out. It was killed [….]
1.
Year 38 of Nebukadnezar, month 1, the 1st [131] (of which followed the 30th [132] of the preceding month):[133] dense clouds so that [I did not see the moon ….]
2.
Year 37 [….]
Left edge
1.
[Year 37 of Nebukad]nezar
1: The last sign visible can be any number from 14 to 18.
5: UGU-ME occurs also in rev. 16’ and 19’. It cannot designate a part of the day (as
suggested by P.V.Neubebauer and E.Weidner) because in rev. 16 it appears during
the night as well as during daytime. It is rather another weather phenomenon.
Mentioned side by side with rain
10: ALLA is used here not for the whole zodiacal constellation Cancer but only for
Praesepe since Mars can pass through it within two days. As was remarked by
P.V.Neugebauer and E.Weidner.
11: A translation “was balanced” for LAL was proposed by A.Sachs. This expression seems to
occur mostly (but not only) in those cases where both celestial bodies compared
have the same longitude. It is restricted to the oldest diaries preserved so
far. It probably went out of use because it was redundant: if no difference in
longitude was mentioned one could conclude that there was none. – siv may be a mistake[135] for the missing sign KUR “moonrise to sunrise”.
13: One is inclined to regard åer+tam DIB as an
equivalent of and NIM DIB. But this
is rendered uncertain by the occurrence of the latter expression in line 14 and
elsewhere: in addition, ana berti is
expected.
5’: The “elbow of
Sagittarius” was identified as the cluster of stars around π Sagittarii by
P.V.Neugebauer. op.cit. 50f.
13’: in the broken part at the end of the line. A reference to the moon being close to the
Normal Star α Tauri is expected.
15’: The broken star
name must have been α Leonis.
17’: According to computation. Saturn has to be restored at the end of the line.
Nebukadnezar II year
36 XII2 0 -567 Mar 23/24
year 37 I 0=XII2 29 Apr
21/22 [136]
II 0=I 30 May
21/22 [137]
X 0=IX 30 -566 Jan 13/14
XI 0=X
29 Feb
11/12
XII 0=XI 30 Mar 13/14 [139]
year 38 I 0=XII 29 30 Apr 11/12 12/13 [140]
Comments and
donations freely accepted at:
Tree of Life©
c/o General Delivery
Nora [near SE-713 01]
Sweden Republic© in Adamah Republic©
eMail: TreeOfLifeTime@gmail.com
The GateWays into Tree of
Life Chronology Forums©
The GateWays
of Entry into the Tree of Life Time Chronology Touching upon the Book of Daniel©
Pearls & Mannah – “I
found it!”
Feel free to use, and for sharing freely with others,
any of the truth and blessings belonging to God alone. I retain all the
copyrights to the within, such that no one may lawfully restrain my use and my
sharing of it with others. Including also all the errors that remain. Please
let only me know about those. I need to know in order to correct them. Others
don’t need to be focused upon the errors that belong to me alone. Please
respect that, and please do not hesitate to let me know of any certain error
that you find!
Without recourse. All Rights Reserved. Tree of Life©
[1] These revisions were prompted by an email that I received from
a certain “Ann OMaly”on “Wednesday, May 12, 2010 12:11 AM.”
Thank you, Ann!
Praise the Lord of Hosts, Yahweh Elohim, the Creator of the Universe,
who orchestrates events like these!
[2] These additional revisions
were prompted by a 2nd email that was sent to me
by my new friend Ann O’Maly on “Wednesday, May 19, 2010 8:36 PM.”
Praise the Lord of Hosts, Yahweh Elohim, the Creator of the Universe,
who orchestrates events like these!
[3] These
revisions were prompted by an email
that I received from a certain “Simon Guevara”on “Wednesday, July 12, 2015 11:03 PM.” Thank you, Simon!
Praise the Lord of Hosts, Yahweh Elohim, the Creator of the Universe,
who orchestrates events like these!
[4] [All quotes are from the original translation, by, as
best I can tell, Neugebauer P V and Weidner E F, of the cuneiform tablet unless
otherwise indicated:]
“The
terminology used in the diaries is rigid and very condensed. The order of items
recorded is also to a large extent fixed. Because of the repetitive character
of these texts, the scribes apparently, tried to reduce as much as possible the
number of words they had to write.
“In
translating I have tried to imitate this style by using a similarly rigid
terminology. Unfortunately, the almost exclusively logographic writing of the
diaries frequently makes it impossible to determine whether the Akkadian text
consisted of sentences or asyndetic sequences of nouns. Where this can be
decided with the help of one of the rare sylabie writings. I have of course
translated accordingly. But more often I had to choose some fixed translation
which may not be syntactically equivalent to the Akkadian hidden by the
logograms. In addition, several statements which are very short in cuneiform
had to be translated by longer expressions to convey the meaning without
creating a new artificial terminology. The way in which the diaries
indicate the length of a month can serve as an example. This length can be 29
or 30 days. [Which is now confirmed by the
edits of this 5927[(*??*)]
03 27 2031 [2015-07-14] version. / ToL ©] The
diaries are arranged in sections each of which deals with a single month. Each
section begins with the name of the month; after the name, a "1"
indicates that the preceding month had 30 days; a "30", that it had
only 29 days, in which case the next month begins with a "1st" day:
if a month has only 29 days, its successor begins, so to speak, already on the
"30th" day which would have been theoretically possible for the
preceding month. In order to make this visible in the translation, I have
formulated sentences which contain the words "the 1st" or "the
30th" (which are all that is written in the text), and at the same time
clearly state the situation: Month X, the 1st (of which followed the 30th of
the preceding month), or: Month X, (the 1st of which was identical with) the 30th
(of the preceding month)." (Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts From
Babylonia, p. 38)
[5] The day beginning in the evening of April 22, 568 BCE.
(Primary anchor point for this date are events of the 14th day.)
[6] Day
30 Month 12 year 36 began at sunset April 22, 568 BCE. (Primary anchor point
for this date are events of the 14th day of Month 1, year 37.)
[7] Cf. the italic blue font text in footnote #4 and my bracketed comments thereto.
[8] Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year began
at sunset April 22, 568 BCE
(-567:)
Per ADT I (Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts From
Babylonia,) p. 17-19 (= p. 7-9
of the pdf copy,) the references for words like “behind,” “in front of,” etc.
are a set of “Normal Stars.” The translation for the Babylonian name provided
in the list, “is le10,” is “the
Jaw of the Bull,” and the modern name listed is “α Tauri,” that is, Aldebaran. However, I do not see “is le10” upon the
transcript of VAT 4956. Thus, I find no definite proof for the translator’s
assumption that that is indeed the same reference as the Akkadian words used in
VAT 4956, which word(s) are translated “behind the Bull of Heaven.”
With the possible exception of the word “behind,” all of the words and
Comments pertaining to line 1, obverse, now make sense to me in terms of April
22, 568 BCE. Yet, this requires that this 1st month is reckoned as
having 31 lunar days… (!) To me this is not too strange when considering also
the likelihood of a relatively recent interplanetary catastrophe around the
first part of the 7th century BCE, as suggested by Immanuel
Velikovsky’s works. Indeed, if such series of catastrophes did occur as
Velikovsky suggests, then how would the people then living best go about
learning the ropes of the newly established paths of the heavens, if not by a
strict following of actually observed new moons etc. while avoiding as much as
possible any assumptions of their own, such as for instance a default New Moon
on the 30th of any lunar month upon inclement weather etc.? I
believe that these considerations also find support in the words of line 8,
obverse: “the moon became visible…it was thick…,”that is, while recognizing
also the translator’s Remarks on Translation
as quoted above and his added words within parenthesis in line 8. I suppose the
chief objection to a 31 day long Month I in that year is the translation “Month
III… the 30th” on line 12 obverse. However, if the corresponding
Akkadian word is understood as carrying the meaning “something not yet
perfected,” as in the 30th day being the day prior to a complete and
perfect 30 day long month, then it wouldn’t matter if the new moon crescent was
first seen at the beginning of the 29th day or at the beginning of
the 30th day and that objection would then be resolved! Consider
also the perfection commonly associated with the triangle and the associated
numbers 3, 30, etc..!
Re the words “the moon became visible behind the Bull of
Heaven…:” At first it seemed to me that that would indicate that the moon was
behind the prominent horn of the Bull of Heaven and that, from studying the
details of “VAT 4956” in comparison with Starry Night Backyard software, the
first observations of the
first New
Moon crescent
seemed to have occurred one day later than I would
have
anticipated
from the
NASA Phases of the Moon tables, and from my prior studies of current
comparable observations from the horizon of the Holy Land. (Cf. e.g. footnotes
##34 and 35.)
However, upon my discovery of a firm basis (cf. footnote #22) for establishing the beginning of month #1 on the evening of April 22,
I came to realize that the use of that Akkadian word, translated ‘behind,’ as
used in line 12, obverse, (cf. footnote #60,) makes most sense when applying it, whatever Akkadian word it may be,
relative to the “normal star” as suggested in ADT I.
[Had the evening of
April 23, 568 BCE been the beginning of month #1 - as I used to believe prior
to having a viable understanding of the event recorded for the 14th
day of this 1st month - then one might consider why the proximity
between the New Moon and Venus is not being recorded also on this clay
tablet, thus, the absence of such a record re Venus also becomes evidence
against April 23 as constituting the beginning of month #1. However, even that
argument may be countered by the fact of missing words due to the tablet being
broken at that point…]
That the dates used in the tablet began at sunset is confirmed by the
order of the relative statements in line 3 of the cuneiform tablet: “Night of
the 9th…, beginning of the night, the moon stood 1 cubit in front of
β Virginia. The 9th. the sun in the west (was surrounded) by a
halo,” that is, the darkness of the evening and night preceding the subsequent
day are all part of the same 9th day.
[9] See the translator’s Comments (under Comments: line 1 obv at the bottom of the
within translation of VAT 4956:)
”1: The last sign visible can be any number from 14 to 18.” - This
Comment becomes meaningful upon realizing that the distance between the Moon
and the Sun at the time between “[sunset and moonset]” on April 22, 568 BCE was
14°+! That is, yet another piece of evidence
against April 23 being day one of the month, obviously so, because on April 23
the corresponding distance was 26°+!
[10] Cf. “the great Swallow” as referenced in Wikipedia
under Pisces:
“According to
J. H. Rogers the fish symbol originates from some composition of the Babylonian constellations Zibatti-meš
(maybe Šinunutu4 "the great swallow" in current
eastern Pisces) and KU6 ("the fish, Ea", Piscis
Austrinus).”
I do not find anything in the ADT I list of Normal Stars
corresponding to “the Swallow” or to any of the Akkadian words I see in the
transcription of VAT 4956. However, the sequence of events described in lines
19’ and 20’ on the reverse of the tablet seems quite instructive in defining a
certain portion of “the band,” or the wing?, of the Swallow!
[11] How often is Saturn in the Swallow?
Stepping
monthly forwards in time from Mars -596; and next April 23, -567, I find that
once having left this celestial area Saturn does not return until January, -537
and after that not until March, -508, then May -479, i.e. every 30 years or so.
Cf. footnotes #44
and #62 and
notice the absence of concurrent events competing with the record in
Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year of reign! And that’s looking at only
three of these twenty-one celestial events!
“A complete cycle of Saturn phenomena in
relation to the stars takes 59 years. But when that cycle has to be fitted to
the lunar calendar of 29 or 30 days then identical cycles recur at intervals of
rather more than 17 centuries. Thus there is no difficulty in determining the
date of the present text… [p. 63]
“The Babylonian calendar was luni-solar
with an additional “intercalary” month being added on average 7 times in 19
years to bring the lunar and solar cycles into line. In the seventh century
B.C. the later “Metonic” pattern of regular intercalations was not yet in place
and it is a matter of interest to establish in which years the intercalary
months were inserted.
“The synodic period of Saturn is 378.09
days. Hence phenomena recur about 24 days later in the Babylonian calendar than
in the previous year (Schoch [1928], 109).” (Swerdlow, N. M., Editor,
Ancient Astronomy and Celestial Divination, Chapter
3 by C. B. F. Walker, Babylonian Observations of Saturn during the Reign of
Kandalanu, p. 63, 69.)
What exactly is “the Swallow”?
“The Swallow was actually composed of a portion of Pisces together with
epsilon Pegasi” (http://www.maverickscience.com/History/Retrocalculations/retrocalculations.html.)
“SIM.MAH
= shinunutu: "The Swallow"; Western fish of Pisces” (http://www.astronomy.pomona.edu/archeo/outside/starlog.html.)
“MUL.SIM.MAH
[sim.mah] (The "Great Swallow (SW Pisces [+ epsilon Pegasi);" later
to be one of the 12 ecliptic constellations.) (Greek zodiac: Pisces (the
Fish).)” (http://members.optusnet.com.au/~gtosiris/page9a.html)
[12] The day beginning in the evening of April 23, 568 BCE.
(Primary anchor point for this date is the 14th day events.)
[13] The day beginning in the evening of April 24, 568 BCE.
(Primary anchor point for this date is the 14th day events.)
[14] Measured
along direction of stars moving across the night sky (cf. line #11 of the obv[erse side of the claytable where a distance of “1 cubit” is being most precisely defined,] and also line
#3 obv. re direction of measurement) the Moon was about 2 cubits, i.e. about 3°
in front of δ Gemini. Looking at the “normal stars” listed in ADT I, I find it curious that
the star closest to the ecliptic, one of the brighter and more prominent of the
Gemini constellation, δ Gemini or Wasat, is not listed among the “normal
stars.” Nevertheless, on that particular evening of the 3rd, April
24th, 568 BCE, the one star most likely to be referenced as being
located 2 cubits behind the Moon, measured along the direction of the sky’s
movement, at the time of oncoming darkness, is none other than δ Gemini,
i.e. Wasat! (More at this
link…)
[15] The day beginning in the evening of April 30, 568 BCE.
(Primary anchor point for this date is the 14th day events.)
[16] The day beginning in the evening of April 29, 568 BCE.
(Primary anchor point for this date is the 14th day events.)
It seems that this comment, “(error for: 8th,)” (I presume
it’s the translator’s comment) is in error. That is, based upon what I’ve
learnt thus far re the use of words in reference to the constellations on the
heavens in terms of “Normal Stars,” cf. ADT I. Accordingly, I am now
able to identify the Akkadian behind the (mis-)translation “β Virginia” as
referencing γ
Virgo, one of the stars of Virgo closest to the ecliptic and one of the brightest
stars of Virgo as being located 1 cubit behind the Moon on the 9th
day, April 30, -567. What more needs be said besides that the ruler and
direction is relative to the movement of the sky?!...
[17] Per the ADT I list
of Normal Stars:
“In order to give the position of the moon
and the planets a number of stars close to the ecliptic are used for reference.
These have been called "Normalsterne" by Epping14,
and the term has remained in use ever since.”
The Babylonian term for
“β Virginis” is “GÌR ár šá A”; translated “the rear foot of the Lion.”
Corresponding to that, on the VAT 4956 transcript, I see a similar, yet
different, term “GÌR ár šá UR-A GUB.” Looking
at the artist’s conception of the constellation Virgo, as available on my
Starry Night Backyard software, it would make sense for me to perceive those
Akkadian words as referencing γ Virgo, i.e. Porrima, and the end of the
Lion’s tail (when in a normal stretched out position) and not the Lion’s rear
foot, β Virgo, i.e. Denebola. Furthermore, β Virgo, Denebola, is much
further from the ecliptic than is γ Virgo, Porrima. Thus the former star (β
Virgo, Denebola) seems a less likely choice than does the latter (γ Virgo,
Porrima) for being a Normal Star used in this setting. This assumption is being
confirmed by the VAT 4956 record on line 14, as noted also in
footnote #66!
So far as I can see, on my Starry Night Backyard software, on April 30,
568 BCE, day 9, the Moon is trailing behind β Virginis, the angular
separation between them being 11° 26’ at 7:23 PM at about the time when β
Virginis first became visible in the sky. On April 29, day 8, the two of them
were traveling side by side (angular separation 3° 43’,) the center of the Moon
being about 1° 00’ ahead of β Virginis and the diameter of the moon being
about 2° 00’. Thus, if the translator’s
assumption were to be correct, then, if the correct distance is measured center
to center, then 1 cubit = 1°.
Per ADT I the matter
of direction of measurement is controversial, which to me means that it is not
clearly understood as yet and thus open to other solutions:
“These formulations give the impression that
the distances between the moon and the Normal Stars were measured in the
direction of the cardinal points. It has also been argued, however, that they
were equivalent to our longitude and latitude. O. Neugebauer 28
considers the latter assumption impossible according to his
investigations of conjunctions between Normal Stars and planets. It remains to
be seen whether this question can be solved in some way; for reasons already
stated above (p. 7), I did not think it appropriate to embark on such an
investigation.”
Ann O’Maly seems to have
found 1 cubit to correspond to 2°, which would fit the above if the distance
measured is the front of the moon relative to the front of β Virginis in
the direction of travel.
If 1 cubit = 2° then I find
that, in the direction of the moving sky, on April 30, 568 BCE, day 9, the
center of the Moon was 1 cubit in front of Porrima, i.e. γ Virginis.
My preferred conclusion
would then be that VAT 4956 is correct, but that the translator is mistaking
the reference star. However, given that, per ADT I, γ Virginis is
another reference star with the Babylonian name “DELE šá IGI ABSIN” this conclusion may seem questionable, since that name is much
different from that seen on the tablet.
Thus, in the end it seems that the translator’s comment re an error may
not be entirely impossible?
I notice also that the very next sentence seems to indicate the
beginning of a new day’s entry, “The 9th…,” however the associated
observation pertains to the latter light portion of the day when the sun is
seen in the west. Thus, it seems only natural for the scribe of the tablet to
add “The 9th” following the last prior date given as “Night of the 9th.”
Cf. also footnote #16 above!
[18] The day beginning in the evening of April 30, 568 BCE.
(Primary anchor point for this date is the 14th day events.)
[19] The day beginning in the evening of May 2, 568 BCE.
(Primary anchor point for this date is the 14th day events.)
[20] Because an acronychal rising occurs at sunset, and
because oncoming darkness of the night is the time when the date of the month
changes from one to the next, it is only natural that the observer records this
acronychal rising of Jupiter on May 3, -567 as occurring either on
the 11th, May 2, or on
the 12th, May 3. The fact that the 11th is being
referenced along with the 12th in this instance only further emphasizes
the conclusions arrived at re the most excellent viewing locality that must
have been used by the observer of the events on the sky recorded on VAT 4956!
Cf. foot note #22 below!
[21] The day beginning in the evening of May 3, 568
BCE. (Primary anchor point for this date is the 14th day events.)
[22] Based upon my confirmed understanding re the events
recorded for the 14th on this line 4, obverse, that is, the 14th
certainly beginning with the evening of May 5, I am now prepared to draw some
valuable conclusions re the statement “12th. Jupiter’s acronychal
rising:”
It follows that the 12th is certainly beginning with May 3,
568 BCE. I notice that while having my Starry Night Backyard set for a viewing
locality at Baghdad and 3 meters elevation and a flat horizon, the sunset on
May 3, 568 BCE is at 6:38 PM, while the rising of Jupiter is 10 minutes later
(sic!) at 6:48 PM. This obviously means that for this observation to be truly
an exact “acronychal rising” the viewing location of the observer relative the
above said viewing location must have been quite excellent, perhaps elevated on
a high mountain peak and with no obstructions at either the east or the west
horizons! This fact is important to be aware of when interpreting this clay
tablet!
[23] The day beginning in the evening of May 5, 568 BCE;
accordingly, this observation was made at sunrise May 6, 568 BCE.
Having finally discovered for myself that the meaning of the phrase “one
god was seen with the other: sunrise to moonset: x°” (cf. line 17 of the
obverse, and line 16 of the reverse side of the tablet) is a precise
description for the first appearance of the rising sun while the full moon is
still visible above the horizon, and the angular distance that the moon has yet
to travel towards the horizon before setting, I now have a very powerful tool
for confirming the precise date for the beginning of the prior New Moon.
Given that said phrase is being used for the 14 day of Month 1, it
follows that day 1 of Month 1 began on April 22, 568 BCE.
[Here is a brief review of my meanderings – that is, something that
fooled me for a while - while on the path to learning this item re “one god was
seen with the other: sunrise to moonset: x°: ”At sunset May 5 Jupiter
was positioned below the moon while the two of them were rising above the
eastern horizon, getting ever closer one to the other through the night, until
setting together below the western horizon at
the point of closest encounter (being situated 4.0 degrees from one another
between “sunrise and moonset”) near sunrise the following morning, May 6. (Cf. line 16 of the reverse side:
“one god was seen with the other…”) On the evening of May 6 the two of them
could again be seen rising above the horizon while distancing
one from the other… For a while I fooled myself into thinking that this
must be considered confirmed evidence that the phrase “one god was seen with
the other: sunrise to moonset: x°” was a reference to any combination of the
sun, the moon, or planets… But, in the end, and not finding any such thing
fitting line 17 obverse, I had to keep on searching for another solution...]
[24] Re the phrase “sunrise to moonset: x°…”Cf. also the
somewhat similar phrases used in lines 11 & 12 and the corresponding
footnotes #56 & 60; and also the very similar phrases in line 17 obverse and line 16’
reverse! Notice the 30’ precision in said lines 17 and 16’! Perhaps this
precision relative to the horizon may help us in determining the point of
observation, that is, by considering a higher vantage point of the observer?
Let’s consider the nearest tall mountains some 150 miles (200 km) east of
Baghdad! The tallest among the closest group of mountains is Kuh-e Manasht,
aka. Manisht Mt., which is 2,620 meters (8,596 ft. at latitude 33° 41.4605’ N and longitude 46° 27.3728’ E per Google Earth)
above sea level (cf. this
link!,) or possibly the even taller Milagawan Mt. located another 47 km to
the SW (2,773 meter, or 9094 ft, at latitude 33° 23.577' N and longitude 46°
46.870' E per Google Earth.) Unfortunately, I discovered what seems to be a bug
in my older version of SNB, which hinders my pursuing this avenue presently…
Cf. this link!
[25] The day beginning in the evening of May 6, 568 BCE.
(Primary anchor point for this date is the 14th day events.)
[26] The day beginning in the evening of May 7, 568 BCE.
(Primary anchor point for this date is the 14th day events.)
[27] On the 16th, May 7, 568 BCE, the first star
being seen near Venus at sunset
is Pollux, β Gemini, which is traveling side by side with Venus at this
time. A little later κ Gemini, Al Kirkab, became visible between the two
and much closer to Venus. Also Mars is seen close by. Any of those may have
been referenced upon the missing portion of the tablet at this point…
[28] The day beginning in the evening of May 11, 568 BCE.
(Primary anchor point for this date is the 14th day events.)
[29] See the translator’s Comments (under Comments: line 5 rev at the bottom of the
within translation of VAT 4956:) re Obverse, line 5: “5: UGU-ME occurs also in
rev. 16’ and 19’. It cannot designate a part of the day (as suggested by
P.V.Neubebauer and E.Weidner) because in rev. 16 it appears during the night as
well as during daytime. It is rather another weather phenomenon. Mentioned side
by side with rain.”
[30] The
translation “the 8th of month XII,” if correctly translated, would
pertain to the day beginning in the evening of March 31, 568 BCE. (Primary
anchor point for this date is the 14th day of Month I events.)
However, looking at the two
cuneiform ideograms within the first highlighted area on line 6 obv of VAT 4956
(cf. below!,) I recognize these ideograms as referencing the aviv/barley of
month XII, Adar (cf. my
analysis of BM33066, line I:2 obv, the footnote at the end of the line…)
As best I can tell, the ideograms
of line 6 obv up to the ideogram translated “28th “ is a
continuation of line 5 obv, and, as such, still pertaining to “the 20th
“ of Month I, that is, to the day (Day Two [of the week]) that began at sunset
Sun May 11, 568 BCE, and which 20th day of Moon I is also the Fifth
Day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Per my
understanding of the Torah, the Waving of the Sheaf sacrifice is to be
brought on the weekly Seventh Day that falls within the Feast of Unleavened
Bread, and prior to that time eating of the fresh barley is prohibited.
Accordingly, a correct understanding of lines 5 and 6 obv may well tell us
something re these matters. (BTW, I believe the translations within VAT 4956 re
the level of the river are mistranslations. Likewise also the translations re
wind and storm.)
[31] The day beginning in the evening of May 19, 568 BCE.
(Primary anchor point for this date is the 14th day events.)
[32] Day
1 Month II began at sunset May 22, 568 BCE. (Primary anchor points for this
date are the 3rd and 5th 7th day events of
this month.)
SNB Uruk horizon May 22, 568 BCE
New Moon events: Sunset: 18:41:37; moonset: 20:36:35; lag: 114 min 58 sec;
illum.: 4.75%.
[Obsolete – upon
recognizing that “the 5th “ of line 10 obv is an error for “the 7th:”
The day beginning in the evening of
May 23, 568 BCE. (Primary anchor points for this date are the 3rd
and 5th day events of this month.)
[Notice: Given the very precise observations provided in line
#4, re the 14th day and the “4°,” and in line #10, re Mars and
Praesepe, I find that the 1st month was being reckoned as having 31
days! That is, the 2nd month began with the evening of May 23, 568
BCE, thus the translator’s interpretations re these particulars must be in
error, as follows:
1.
“Month II, the 1st (of which followed the 30th 31st of the preceding month…)” (line 8, obverse;)
2.
“II 0=I
30 31 May
21/22 22/23” (cf. Calendar entry)
3.
“Month III, {the 1st of which was identical with} the 30th 29th (of the preceding month)” (line 12, obverse;)
4.
“III 0=II 29
28 Jun
19/20” (cf. Calendar entry)
[I see no other reason
for this fact other than inclement weather at the end of the 1st
month and there being no convention introduced at this time such as would have,
by default, established the beginning of the new month at the end of the 30th
day regardless.
[Nonetheless, it may
certainly be evidence also of a degree of uncertainty at the time, possibly in
consequence of relatively recent interplanetary catastrophes near the beginning
of the 7th century BCE as also suggested in the books “Worlds in
Collision,” “Earth in Upheaval,” and “Ages in Chaos” by Immanuel Velikovsky.
(More at this link…)]
[33] Day
30 Month I began at sunset May 21, 568 BCE. (Primary anchor point for this date
is the 14th day events.)
[34] This
was the end of the 30th day of month I. The lag and the illumination
of the Moon were most favorable (lag: 114 min 58 sec; illum.: 4.75%) and thus
the New Moon became visible even prior to sunset, i.e. “while the sun stood
there.”
[Obsolete – upon
recognizing that “the 5th “ of line 10 obv is an error for “the 7th:”
What does “while the sun stood there”
mean (cf. lines 6’ & 12’ reverse?) Does it mean that the New Moon crescent
became visible while the sun was still visible above the horizon at sunset?
This would seem likely, especially considering the added comment “there was
earthshine,” which I interpret to mean that the dark part of the moon was
visible (after sunset) due to the reflected light from the earth. This would
indicate also that the atmospheric conditions for visualizing the moon were
very good. The statement “it was thick,” presumably referencing a large Moon
(re “thick,” cf. also lines 12 obverse and footnotes #8 above, and #36 below!,) but may, particularly in this instance, be also a reference to
a wide crescent, that is, considering that this is the 31st day of
the 1st month! The preceding lines of the cuneiform tablet, lines 4
through 6, seems to indicate that the weather was not the best, thus it is very
possible that no observation was possible on the preceding night, that is, even
at the end of the 30th day of the month. Thus, this month seems to
have begun one day later than it could have, had the weather allowed… or had
there been a 30th day default, as is now commonly being practiced –
yet, what basis do we have for an assumption of a like practice at that
time???!]
[35] Beta Geminorum, Pollux, per my SNB
software, was the
9th star becoming visible
on the evening sky at 19:04:44, that is, after sunset at 18:41:37. It follows
that, although the Moon may well have been seen prior to sunset, the
observations re Pollux, re “thick,” and re “earthshine,” were all observations
made following sunset.
Based upon this observation, as
originally translated, 1 cubit = 1.85±0.12 degrees measured
center to center, or 1 cubit = 1.79±0.11 degrees measured
from Pollux to the near edge of the Moon. Cf. my Excel file: re_cubits_vs_degrees.xls.
At 19:21:23 kappa Gemini also
became visible above the Moon. Based upon an observation of kappa Gemini at
this time 1 cubit = between 0.88±0.05 and 1.00±0.06.
However, being prodded by the
inconsistency of this cubit definition vs the more reliable one based upon line
11, and upon reviewing the corresponding ideogram upon VAT 4956 (the area
within the right red square:)
… I believe I find reason for
correcting “4 cubits” to “7 cubits” (or possibly “6 cubits” or “8 cubits.”) Cf.
the last two images under footnote 57!
The corresponding values will
then be: 1 cubit = 1.06 ±0.07 degrees measured
center to center, 1 cubit = 1.02 ±0.06 degrees measured
from Pollux to the near edge of the Moon, or 1 cubit = 1.09 ±0.07 degrees measured
from Pollux to the far edge of the Moon. Using the distance from Pollux to
the far edge of the Moon and “6 cubits” I get the value that best agrees with
my findings from line 11, that is, 1 cubit = 1.27 ±0.08 degrees. Cf. my
Excel file: re_cubits_vs_degrees.xls.
[Obsolete – upon
recognizing that “the 5th “ of line 10 obv is an error for “the 7th:”
[My previous
rendering of line 8 obv and links: “the moon became visible while the sun
stood there, 4
cubits below β Geminorum…”
[My previous rendering
of line 9 obv and links: “Saturn was
in front of the Swallow:[35] Mercury,
which had set, was not visible. Night of the 1st,[35] gusty storm from east and south. The
1st, all day [….]”
On May 23, 568 BCE, the
day when the New Moon crescent was first actually observed (cf. the statement “The 3rd,
Mars entered Praesepe. The 5th,
it went out (of it).,”) I notice that the New Moon crescent is located
almost exactly 4 cubits below Venus!:
[If 1 cubit = 2° or less
(1.3°-1.5° per my best estimation,) then the Akkadian behind the translation
“β Geminorum” should be identified with Venus, which was certainly the
only thing visible on the sky in the direction of the sun and the moon at that
time before sunset! The
moon was then positioned straight below Venus. (The angular separation,
center to center, between the two of them was at that time 3°
53’ 17”. The corresponding measurement along the line of travel would be
very slightly less than the angular separation. Based upon this measurement it
would follow that 1 cubit = 0.97°.) However, if the measurement is from Venus
to the distant edge of the Moon, that is, to the visible New Moon crescent,
then the angular separation is 4°
10’ 42” and 1 cubit = 1.04° (or, for 3.4 cubits [rounded up to 4,] 1 cubit
= 1.23°) (which agrees very nicely with my most precise estimates elsewhere,
especially line 11 obv. & footnote #51 (where I found 1 cubit = 1.22°.))
[Ann O’Maly is suggesting
that, on May 23, 568 BCE, based upon a 2.0° cubit, that “4 cubits below β Berninorum
Geminorum” [cf. this
link! :,) ] would fit “Pollux (beta Gem[ini])” but that
requires a different definition of the word ‘below’ than I’m seeing elsewhere
in VAT 4956, and also I find it very doubtful that Pollux “became visible while
the sun stood there,” that is, along with the moon, both of them becoming
visible before sunset – as seems to be the most natural way of understanding
the translated words “the moon became visible while the sun stood there, 4
cubits below β Berninorum Geminorum.”
[Historical note – The following text used to begin
this footnote due to a flawed transcription of mine: Besides the β Berninorum of the constellation Coma Berenices, found at zenith of the sky at this
time, angular separation from the moon = 62
degrees plus, I have not been able to identify anything named “Berninorum,”
nor have I been able to identify anything located “4 cubits above,” relative to
either the sun or the moon on May 22, -567. However, on the following day, May
23, 568 BCE, the day when the New Moon crescent was …]
[36] Perhaps ”thick” means ’large’ as in relatively close
to Earth? Angular size at
that time was 33’, which corresponds to the Moon being near its closest point
to Earth. Or else it may be referring to the illumination, which at that time
was 4.75%. Cf. footnote 32, and footnote #59 below!
[37] Cf. footnote #34 above!
[38] On the morning of May 23, 568 BCE Saturn was
passing Algenib (from being before to being behind,) which one of the stars in
the Constellation Pegasus, which is part of the Swallow, and which star was
probably the last star in the Swallow to disappear in the dawn of morning.
How often is Saturn in the Swallow?
Stepping
monthly forwards in time from Mars -596; and next April 23, -567, I find that
once having left this celestial area Saturn does not return until January, -537
and after that not until March, -508, then May -479, i.e. every 30 years or so.
Cf. footnotes #44
and #62 and
notice the absence of concurrent events competing with the record in
Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year of reign! And that’s looking at only
three of these twenty-one celestial events!
“A complete cycle of Saturn phenomena in
relation to the stars takes 59 years. But when that cycle has to be fitted to
the lunar calendar of 29 or 30 days then identical cycles recur at intervals of
rather more than 17 centuries. Thus there is no difficulty in determining the
date of the present text… [p. 63]
“The Babylonian calendar was luni-solar
with an additional “intercalary” month being added on average 7 times in 19
years to bring the lunar and solar cycles into line. In the seventh century
B.C. the later “Metonic” pattern of regular intercalations was not yet in place
and it is a matter of interest to establish in which years the intercalary
months were inserted.
“The synodic period of Saturn is 378.09
days. Hence phenomena recur about 24 days later in the Babylonian calendar than
in the previous year (Schoch [1928], 109).” (Swerdlow, N. M., Editor, Ancient
Astronomy and Celestial Divination, Chapter
3 by C. B. F. Walker, Babylonian Observations of Saturn during the Reign of
Kandalanu, p. 63, 69.)
What exactly is “the Swallow”?
“The Swallow was actually composed of a portion of Pisces together with
epsilon Pegasi” (http://www.maverickscience.com/History/Retrocalculations/retrocalculations.html.)
“SIM.MAH
= shinunutu: "The Swallow"; Western fish of Pisces” (http://www.astronomy.pomona.edu/archeo/outside/starlog.html.)
“MUL.SIM.MAH
[sim.mah] (The "Great Swallow (SW Pisces [+ epsilon Pegasi);" later
to be one of the 12 ecliptic constellations.) (Greek zodiac: Pisces (the
Fish).)” (http://members.optusnet.com.au/~gtosiris/page9a.html)
[39] Day 1 Month II
began at sunset May 22, 568 BCE. (Primary anchor points for this date are the 3rd
and 5th 7th day events of
this month.)
[40] Day 2 Month II
began at sunset May 23, 568 BCE. (Primary anchor points for this date are the 3rd
and 5th 7th day events of
this month.)
[41] Day
3 Month II began at sunset May 24, 568 BCE. (Primary anchor points for this
date are the 3rd and 5th 7th day events of
this month.)
[Obsolete – upon
recognizing that “the 5th “ of line 10 obv is an error for “the 7th:”
[My previous
rendering of line 10 obv and links: “stood
[…. In front] of Venus to the west. The 2nd. The north wind
blew. The 3rd, Mars
entered Praesepe. The 5th, it went out
(of it). The 10th, Mercury [rose] in the west behind the [little] Twins [….]”
[It follows that the 1st
day of the 2nd month began with the evening of May 23, 568 BCE. Notice:
This means that there were necessarily 31 days being reckoned for the 1st
month, and also that the 30th was not being used as an automatic
default in case of inclement weather! Cf. also the Calendar at the bottom of the page!
[I find this being
evidence for a degree of uncertainty at the time, possibly in consequence of
relatively recent interplanetary catastrophes near the beginning of the 7th
century BCE as also suggested the data shared in the books “Worlds in Collision,”
“Earth in Upheaval,” and “Ages in Chaos” by Immanuel Velikovsky.]
[42] Recognizing that the notations re Mars
vs Praesepe did cover 4 days, not only 2 days, is not enough to make obsolete
the essential point of the translator’s Comments (under Comments: line 10 obv at the bottom of the
within translation of VAT 4956:) “10: ALLA is used here not for the whole
zodiacal constellation Cancer but only for Praesepe since Mars can pass through
it within two [four / TOL©] days. As was
remarked by P.V.Neugebauer and E.Weidner.”
[Obsolete – upon
recognizing that “the 5th “ of line 10 obv is an error for “the 7th:”
[My previous rendering of
this line and links: Cf. footnote 41!
[See the translator’s
Comments re Obverse, line 10:
“10: ALLA is used here not for the whole zodiacal constellation Cancer but only
for Praesepe since Mars can pass through it within two days. As was remarked by
P.V.Neugebauer and E.Weidner.”
These observations re
Mars vs. Praesepe serve as a most definite and exact anchor point re Month #2,
in line #10 of the cuneiform tablet: “The 3rd,
Mars entered Praesepe. The 5th,
it went out (of it).” These recorded observations were made in the evenings
after the sunsets defining the beginning of the corresponding days, i.e. “The 3rd“
and “The 5th” of the 2nd month.]
[44] How often does Mars pass across Praesepe?
Trailing
Mars forwards in time I find the following sequence: May 9-11, -597; April
14-16, -595…; May 25, -567; May 4-7, -565; April 8, -563; September 12-14,
-562; August 18-20, -560…; June 29-30, -539; June 10-12, -537…; May 22, 535…;
July 15, -509; June 25-26, -507…; August 19-20, -481; July 29-31, -479… Cf.
footnotes #11 above
and #62
below and notice the absence of concurrent events competing with the record in
Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year of reign! And that’s looking at only
three of these twenty-one celestial events!
(For
further reference re the identification of Praesepe, please cf. e.g.: http://www.seds.org/messier/m/m044.html
and http://www.nexstarsite.com/NexStar50/NexStar50EncyclopediaSignori.pdf.)
[45] Day
7 Month II began at sunset May 28, 568 BCE. (Primary anchor points for this
date are the 3rd and 5th 7th day events of
this month.)
[Obsolete – upon
recognizing that “the 5th “ of line 10 obv is an error for “the 7th:”
[My previous rendering of
this line and links: Cf. footnote 41!
[The day beginning in the evening of May 27,
568 BCE. (Primary anchor points for this date are the 3rd and 5th
day events of this month.)
[It follows that the 1st
day of the 2nd month began with the evening of May 23, 568 BCE. Notice:
This means that there were necessarily 31 days being reckoned for the 1st
month, and also that the 30th was not being used as an automatic
default in case of inclement weather! Cf. also the Calendar at the bottom of the page!
[I find this being
evidence for a degree of uncertainty at the time, possibly in consequence of
relatively recent interplanetary catastrophes near the beginning of the 7th
century BCE as also suggested in the books “Worlds in Collision,” “Earth in
Upheaval,” and “Ages in Chaos” by Immanuel Velikovsky.]
[46] Day
10 Month II began at sunset May 31, 568 BCE. (Primary anchor points for this
date are the 3rd and 5th 7th day events of
this month.)
[47] Please
notice the sequence of links from 1 to 7 showing Mercury rising (sic!) in
pursuit of Venus, which is likewise
rising - from day to day – towards their highest point above the horizon!
More at this
link…
[Historical note in
the nature of three finger pointing back to me!!!: Obvious translation error: Nothing ‘rises’ in the
west! Mercury was only visible
in the west and was setting. On the 10th day, i.e. the evening
of June 1, 568 BCE, Mercury is seen as setting behind the Normal Star of
Gemini, i.e. δ Gemini or Wasat, which is the star of the constellation
Gemini closest to the ecliptic.]
[48] Day
15 Month II began at sunset June 5, 568 BCE. (Primary anchor points for this
date are the 3rd and 5th 7th day events of
this month.)
[49] Day 18 Month II
began at sunset June 8, 568 BCE. (Primary anchor points for this date are the 3rd
and 5th 7th day events of
this month.)
[50] See the translator’s Comments (under Comments: line 11 obv at the bottom of the
within translation of VAT 4956:) “11: A translation “was balanced” for
LAL was proposed by A. Sachs. This expression seems to occur mostly (but not
only) in those cases where both celestial bodies compared have the same
longitude. It is restricted to the oldest diaries preserved so far. It probably
went out of use because it was redundant: if no difference in longitude was
mentioned one could conclude that there was none. – siv may be a mistake for the missing sign KUR “moonrise to
sunrise.”
[51] Venus located 1 cubit 4 fingers
= 1° 32’ 29” above α Leonis, Regulus. Given that, per ADT I, 1 finger = 1/24 cubit, this exact measurement provides
a good definition for the relationship between angular distance and
cubits/fingers: 1 cubit = 1.32 ±0.010 degrees; 1 finger = 0.055 ±0.0034 degrees or 3.30 ±0.206 minutes; 1 degree = 0.76 ±0.0068
cubits = 18.17 ±0.0089 fingers;
1 minute = 0.0126 ±0.00011 cubits
or 0.303 ±0.0027 fingers.
Cf. my Excel file: re_cubits_vs_degrees.xls. (More at this
link…)
[Obsolete – upon recognizing that “the 5th “
of line 10 obv is an error for “the 7th:”
[Venus located 1 cubit 4 fingers = 1°
25’ 26” above α Leonis, Regulus. Given that, per ADT I, 1 finger = 1/24 cubit,
this exact measurement provides a good definition for the relationship between
angular distance and cubits/fingers: 1 cubit = 1.22 degrees; 1 finger = 0.051
degrees or 3.05 minutes; 1 degree = 0.82 cubits=20 fingers; 1 minute = 0.0137
cubits or 0.328 fingers. (More at this
link…)]
[52] Day
26 Month II began at sunset June 16, 568 BCE. (Primary anchor points for this
date are the 3rd and 5th 7th day events of
this month.)
[53] If
“I did not observe the moon” is a correct translation, then “23° “ is most likely a calculated value, but, if so, why
include it in this record of observations?
[Obsolete – upon
recognizing that “the 5th “ of line 10 obv is an error for “the 7th:”
[My previous rendering of
line 11 obv and links: “The 15th. ZIIR. The 18th.
Venus was balanced 1 cubit 4 fingers
above α Leonis. The 26th, {moonrise to sunrise} 23°:
I did not observe the moon. The 27th, 20 + x [….]” Cf.
footnote 41!
[Notice that this calculated value of “23°”
fits a potential observation
on the 25th day (the day beginning in the evening of June 16,
568 BCE), not the 26th (the day beginning in the evening of June 17,
568 BCE)! On the 26th day the record states: “I did not observe the
moon.” Apparently, the observer made an error in his calculations and missed
the expected observation by one day, such that when he looked for it on day 26
(June 18, 568 BCE,) the moon was too close to the sun for him to see it!
Very possibly, this error was due to the delayed beginning of the month, which
made month I 31 days long.]
[54] Cf.
footnote 53!
[Cf. footnote #53 above! Apparently the observer
remained unaware of the delayed reckoning of the month, i.e. the reckoning that
gave month I 31 days. In consequence he missed this anticipated observation of
day 26 by one day and was unable to see the moon, which at that time was too
close to the sun to be seen. Possibly this fact is being reflected also in the
notations for the first day observations of months #2 (“Month II, the 1st”)
and month #3 (“Month III, the 30th”,) regardless of all else?!!!
[Perhaps the immediate
reason for the error of the observer is to be found in his note of line 7
obverse: “Coughing and a little risutu-disease
[….,]” that is, the observer was sick enough to miss one day in his reckoning…
What he himself attributed his error to is anybody’s guess! So is any potential
attempt of his to cover up, or explain to himself and/or others, the reason for
his error. Quite possibly he never recognized that the error was his own… If
so, typically human behavior! Perhaps too, the explanation was part of the lost
last portion of line 7 obverse?
[Historical note – My
prior reasoning: The 23deg – 11deg = 12 deg difference between actual and
calculated, as here evidenced could well be an indication of relatively recent
prior interplanetary catastrophes! For isn’t it true that, if that was indeed
the case, then such calculations would most likely be based upon past, but no
longer current, behavior of the moon? And, if so, then the observer’s
calculations, based as they were upon now obsoleted thinking, would
consistently be off target when compared to actual observations, wouldn’t they?
Indeed, what better incentive could there have been for a careful restudy of
the heavens… and of producing a record such as VAT 4956?!!!]
[55] Day
27 Month II began at sunset June 17, 568 BCE. (Primary anchor points for this
date are the 3rd and 5th 7th day events of
this month.)
[56] Re the translator’s note (under Comments: line 11 obv at the bottom of the within
translation of VAT 4956:) Could it be that the Akkadian KUR (cf. line 8 obv. under the link!) is
a word pertaining to an actual observation, while the word found on the tablet,
siv, is a different Akkadian word pertaining to theoretical calculation
based upon prior experiences??? Cf. VAT
4956 transcript: Line #8 re KUR and line #11 re siv.
[57] Day
1 Month 3 began at sunset June 20, 568 BCE.
Or did it possibly begin on June
21,568 BCE? Let’s consider a few thoughts? (The 15th day of this 3rd
month [per the date indicated on line 17 obv] constitutes the primary anchor
point for assigning the sunset of June 20 to the New Moon of this 3rd
month. However, may seem to require – or at least it did until I discovered the
error in line 10 obv re the “5th “ that should be a “7th
“ – that Month 2 only had 28 days and that Day 1 Month 3 was identical to the
29th day of Month 2, which is most unusual and which may seem unacceptable
to some. If the ideograph read as “the 15th ” is either an original
scribal error for “14,” or else pointing to something other than the words
still extant on line 17 obv, that is, following the broken beginning of line 17
obv, then Day 1 Month 3 began at sunset June 21. The June 21, 568 BCE
alternative may be fraught with other problems as well, that is, How does that
alternative fit the following notations: 1) “The Moon became visible behind
Cancer” (line 12 obv,”) 2) “sunset to
moonset: 20° (line 12 obv,) 3) “Mercury passed
below Mars” (line 13 obv,) 4) the events of line 14 through 18??? All of said
notations constitute quite serious problems for the June 21, 568 BCE
alternative. And, even if all of those problem were to find a satisfactory
solution, which seems doubtful, it would not resolve the problem of Month 1
having 31 days, which problem, together with the problem of Month 2 having only
28 days, could be most easily resolved if the dates of Month 2 could be shifted
one day backwards to a New Moon on May 22, 568. Unfortunately, such a solution
faces serious problems from the notations as translated from line 10 obv re the
positions of Mars on the 3rd and 5th day, respectively:
If the ideograms read as “2nd,”
“3rd,” and “5th “ (cf. the blue vs red high lightening)
were to be read in terms of “3rd,” “4th,” and either “6th
“ or “7th,” which may seem doable (cf. the red high lightening,)
then that would resolve our problem re month 1 having 31 days and month 2
having only 28 days. However, besides the slightly wider space between the
first two arrows of “3rd “ and “4th,“ such a solution is
associated with unusual ideographs for “4th “ and for “6th
” that are not being used elsewhere (cf. lines 6’ and 8’ rev; as copied below)
on VAT 4956:
Nevertheless, changing nothing
but the “5th “ of line 10 obv to a “7th “ will also allow
us to date the 2nd month from one day earlier and thus resolve our
problem. Indeed, I believe that is the crux of this matter! Accordingly, our
solution is found in reading line 10 obv in terms of the dates “2nd,”
“3rd,” “7th,” and “10th.” Thusly:
By comparing the “7th
“ of line 10 obv (the 3rd highlighted area above) with the “7th “ of line 14” rev (the last highlighted area below,) I
believe I may confirm this correction of mine:
[58] Day
30 Month II began at sunset June 20, 568 BCE. (Primary anchor points for this
date are the 3rd and 5th 7th day events of
this month.)
[59] I don’t know what “thick” may mean in this setting???
Possibly that the Moon was very large, that is relatively close to Earth? Cf.
line #8 and footnote #36! Given that there was a total solar eclipse on June 20, 568 BCE, I find
that on the
NASA solar eclipse page the ‘Eclipse Magnitude,’ which corresponds to the
lunar diameter/solar diameter ratio, was quite large, 1.0659, I find support
for the Akkadian word translated “thick” quite possibly referencing the
apparent size of the moon.
[60] It is obvious from the context that the phrase “sunset
to moonset: 20°” indicates that at the time of sunset the Moon was trailing the
Sun with an angular distance of “20°.” Cf. the link and also the related
phrases found in lines ## 4, 11, 12, 17 obverse, and 5, 8, 12, & 16 on the
reverse side of the tablet!
[61] Line 13 obverse is confirmation that line 12 is indeed
June 20, 568 BCE and not June 21. The angular distance between
Regulus and Mars is 7° 24’ 42” and between
Regulus and Mercury is 7° 38’ 48”. Measured along the line of travel the
distance is 6° 47’ 30”, which, divided by 4 cubits gives us 1 cubit = 1.70
degrees, or if 4 is considered a number rounded down to the nearest whole, that
is, anything less than 5, then 1 cubit >= 1.36 degrees, which should be
compared to our results for line 11 and footnote #51 where we arrived at 1 cubit = 1.32 ±0.010 degrees, which latter value should probably be considered the
more accurate number considering the more precise measurement, that is, “1
cubit 4 fingers.”
[62] How often is Jupiter in Scorpius?
I
found the following occasions when tracing Jupiter in Starry Night Backyard
software: June -579; June -567; November -556;
November -544; October -532; October -520; September -508; May -496;
July -484; November -473; i.e. every 12 years or so. Cf. footnotes #11 and #44 above
and notice the absence of concurrent events competing with the record in
Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year of reign! And that’s looking at only
three of these twenty-one plus celestial events!
[63] Notice that at the time when Regulus, a Normal Star for
the Lion, first became visible over the darkening evening sky, Venus was
located an equal distance from Regulus, but on the exact opposite side of the
Moon, thus the words of the tablet: “Venus was in the
west opposite {} Leois.”
[64] See the
translator’s Comments (under
Comments: line 13obv at the
bottom of the within translation of VAT 4956:) re “13: One is inclined to regard åer+tam DIB as an equivalent of and
NIM DIB. But this is rendered uncertain by the occurrence of the latter
expression in line 14 and elsewhere: in addition, ana berti is expected.”
[65] The day beginning in the evening of June 24, 568 BCE.
(The 15th day constitutes the primary anchor point for this 3rd
month.)
[66] Comparing
1) line 3 obverse and
footnote #17
above and the Akkadian words translated “β Virginia” with 2)
this line 14 and the
words translated “the bright
star of the end of the Lion’s foot,” I find that the record on VAT 4956
indicates that the very same star is being referenced in both of those lines,
that is, Porrima
(γ Virginia.) Apparently the ancients considered the star Porrima the
end of the tail of the Lion. As seen by the artwork of the Lion and the
Lion’s coiled tail relative to Porrima upon this
sky map, this situation is quite well described by the words of the tablet,
if the original Akkadian words are understood in terms of ‘the bright star of
the end of the Lion’s tail!’
[67] The day beginning in the evening of June 25, 568 BCE.
(The 15th day constitutes the primary anchor point for this 3rd
month.)
[68] Cf. footnote #64.
[69] The day beginning in the evening of June 27, 568 BCE.
(The 15th day constitutes the primary anchor point for this 3rd
month.)
[70] The angular distance,
center to center, between β Librae and the Moon on June 27, 568 BCE was,
per Starry Night Backyard, 4° 18’ 28”, which gives us 1 cubit = 2.03°. However, if we measure the distance from edge
to edge, then the distance is 4° 03’ 40”, which gives us 1 cubit = 1.62° (1.35°
[3.0 cubits] - 1.48° [2.75 cubits] - 1.62° [2.5 cubits] - 1.80° [2.25 cubits] -
2.03° [2.0 cubits,]) which agrees with my findings elsewhere in VAT 4956.
Similarly if the distance is measured as the distance below the celestial North
Pole, 3° 59’ 00”, then 1 cubit = 1.59° (1.33° [3.0 cubits] - 1.45° [2.75
cubits] - 1.59° [2.5 cubits] - 1.77° [2.25 cubits] - 1.99° [2.0 cubits;] and to
the edge of the Moon, 3° 46’ 00”, then 1 cubit = 1.51° (1.26°
[3.0 cubits] - 1.37° [2.75 cubits] - 1.51° [2.5 cubits] - 1.67° [2.25
cubits] - 1.88° [2.0 cubits.])
This particular record, along with others, seems to indicate a practice
of rounding down from the next higher value of precision (re cubits) being used
in the given value… (But this requires additional confirmation and study…)
[71] The day beginning in the evening of June 28, 568 BCE.
(The 15th day constitutes the primary anchor point for this 3rd
month.)
[72] “1 cubit in front of…” Well, it seems to me as though
the choice of reference star is typically the first adjacent visible star at
nightfall, which is also a Normal Star, that is, a star close to the ecliptic.
That being considered, it seems most likely that the missing reference star at
this point is Graffias, β1 Scorpii.
Measuring from the front of the moon, in the direction of travel upon
the sky, towards the position of Graffias the distance is approximately 1 cubit
or 1.7°.
[73] The day beginning in the evening of June 28, 568 BCE.
(The 15th day constitutes the primary anchor point for this 3rd
month.)
[74] Notice: The summer solstice in 568 BCE occurred
on June 29, 568 BCE, at 2PM. Due to our movement around our galaxy it gradually
changes such that it is currently happening around June 21 each year!
[75] The day beginning in the evening of June 29, 568 BCE.
(The 15th day constitutes the primary anchor point for this 3rd
month.)
[76] Indeed, the moon was
“balanced” almost straight above α Scorpii, aka. Antares, at 1:10 AM, when
Antares was setting below the western horizon. But that is by no means the
“first part of the night,” and so far as I can tell the distance then was about
6 cubits, that is, about 7.8° angular distance… More likely, to me, is 24
Ochiuchi, which was indeed located 3.5 cubits, i.e. 5.0°, straight below the
moon and which became visible around 8:28 PM on June 29, 568 BCE! 24
Ochiuchi is the star in that area that is closest to the ecliptic and the
one lightening up first at nightfall of the two, but its very close contender
is 26
Ochiuchi, which in some respects may be a more likely candidate?
If, on the other hand I consider “balanced” meaning something quite
different than straight above or below a given reference, perhaps, in this
case, in terms of “balanced across Jupiter,” that is, given the 7:36 PM
scenario when only the three of them were visible in that area of the sky? In
that case I find the Moon being located about 5° 45’ closer to the celestial
North Pole and about 4° 45’ higher above the horizon than Antares, α
Scorpii. Perhaps these measurements may help me better understand the term
‘above?’
Well, 5° 45’ would correspond to 1 cubit = 1.64° (1.92° [3.0 cubits] -
1.77° [3.25 cubits] - 1.64° [3.5 cubits] - 1.53° [3.75 cubits] - 1.44° [4.0
cubits,]) while 4° 45’ would correspond to 1 cubit = 1.36° (1.58° [3.0 cubits]
- 1.46° [3.25 cubits] - 1.36° [3.5 cubits] - 1.27° [3.75 cubits] - 1.19° [4.0
cubits.]) Accordingly, and based upon my prior, more exact finding (cf.
footnote #51)
re the length of the cubit, I find that the word ‘above’ in this setting is
much more likely a reference to the horizon of the Earth, than a reference to
the celestial North and South Poles. For an apparently different application of
the word ‘above’ please cf. footnote #78 below.
[77] The day beginning in the evening of July 1, 568 BCE.
(The 15th day constitutes the primary anchor point for this 3rd
month.)
[78] The
angular separation between Mars and α Leonis on July 1, 568 BCE was 0° 57’
28”. This gives us 1 cubit = 1.44° (2.87° [1/3 cubits] - 1.92° [3/6 cubits]
- 1.44° [2/3 cubits] - 1.15° [5/6 cubits] - 0.96° [3/3 cubits.]) If ‘above’ is
understood as a reference to the celestial North and South Poles, then the
corresponding measurement is 0° 53’, which gives us 1 cubit = 1.33° (2.65° [1/3
cubits] - 1.77° [3/6 cubits] - 1.33° [2/3 cubits] - 1.06° [5/6 cubits] - 0.88°
[3/3 cubits.]) It appears from this
sentence that ‘above’ is not a reference to the horizon, but is a reference to
the south pole of the sky, or else, Mars is being referenced as being ever so
slightly “above,” that is, higher over the horizon, than was α Leonis,
that is, while the ‘above’ is not associated with the “2/3 cubit” measurement.
The latter would indicate as a more correct translation something on the order
of “Mars was 2/3 cubits away from and slightly above [α Leonis….]” For an
apparently different application of the word ‘above’ please cf. footnote #76 above!
In this instance then, I find that the word ‘above’ is most likely a
reference to the celestial North and South Poles.
Day 15 Month 3 began at sunset
July 4, 568 BCE. (This “15th “ day [the left highlighted area above]
constitutes a primary anchor point for this 3rd month.) It follows
that the beginning of the 1st day of the 3rd month is ascertained
to the evening of June 20, 568 BCE.
[80] As
may be seen from the linked sky map the moon is indeed very close to “ 7° 30’ “
[the right highlighted area in the image shown in footnote 79] above the
western horizon at sunrise on the morning of July
5, 568 BCE. Not (!) on the morning of July
4, 568 BCE. The “omitted… eclipse” is necessarily a reference to an event
expected prior to the point in time when “one god was seen with the other.”
That is, given that the regular
monthly event that is translated by the words “one god was seen with the other”
is an easily observable monthly event that is used for the very purpose of
knowing that the astronomical full moon has been passed, it was certainly
self-evident to the astronomer in Babylonia that any notation re an eclipse
associated with a given event of the nature “one god was seen with the other”
was referencing a point in time prior to said event. That is, the words “a
lunar eclipse which was omitted” is certainly not to be understood in terms of
an expected eclipse following the point in time when “one god was seen with the
other,” but is instead a parenthetical notation that the expected eclipse
associated with this event was not observed from Babylon during the night prior
to the morning when “one god was seen with the other.” Accordingly, there is no
valid basis for considering this notation on VAT4956 as an error. On the
contrary, any perceived error must be considered an error in the eyes of the
beholder.
[81] This partial lunar eclipse had its maximum at 1:52 PM
on July 4, 568 BCE, Babylonian local time, and was therefore not visible from
the Babylonian horizon. Cf. these NASA links: 1) Data table,
2) diagram,
3) Key to terms
used, e.g. TD, Dynamical Time for the event maximum, which UT time must be
corrected by the number of seconds listed under ΔT, that is TD-
ΔT=UT. Then add 3:00 hrs to UT for local time in Babylon. An easier way of
finding the timing for eclipses is by looking in the NASA
Phases of the Moon table, where the UT time is given for each event.
[82] “The moon…” may be an error for “Venus…” (cf. footnote
#83 below!) If correct, then this part of the record pertains to an
observation on day 16 of month III [July 5, 568 BCE.] More
at this link…
[83] I’ve found three good contenders for this incompletely
recorded event:
1)
“[…. The moon was be…]” is quite possibly the translator’s error for
what could be “[…. Venus was be…]”
“Obv. 18 [ … sha]p MULxKUR sha TIL GÌ[R UR.A ...]
is in the translation, according to the astronomical finding, to be amended
..[... Venus was be]low ...', not ..[... the moon was be]low the bright star at
the end of the [Lion's] foot [....]', whereby the contradiction is also
resolved that the moon was said to have been observed twice near the same fixed
star, here beta Virginis, within the same Babylonian month, see Obv. 14
(III 5 = 23. June -567) with Obv. 18 (III [16] = 5. July -567).” – J. Koch, JCS
49, 1997, page 84, footnote 7 [translated from the German]. More at this link…
[Historical note - (An
error of mine based upon my astro-software being set such that the
moon was being enlarged on the screen view. There was no
eclipse visible from that horizon!:) Notice this one!!!: This is a
rather perfect description of a
quite brief, very unique, event at sunset, where the Moon, while almost
eclipsing the Sun, is no doubt contributing to an unusually quick darkness such
that both the moon and the brightest star, Regulus, aka. Alpha Lionis, are
becoming visible while very close to the sun!!! A very notable event indeed!!!
This event happened at about 7:15 PM on July 18, 568 BCE, that is, on the 29th
day of the 3rd month!]
2)
This may be part
of the description of the New Moon crescent observation of Month IV, in
which case this may be a reference to July 19, 568 BCE and the star Denebola.
3)
Learning from the star, Porrima, which is almost certainly being
referenced at least twice above (cf. footnotes #17
and #66
above!) on VAT 4956, this is a very similar description, “the bright star at the
end of the [Lion’s| foot.” If Porrima is indeed the star here being
referenced, then this is an event that happened on July 21, 568 BCE, that is,
on, most likely, the 3rd day of the 4th month.
[84] Most likely the day beginning in the evening of
February 1, 567 BCE. (The 1st day of Month XI constitutes a primary
anchor point for this 10th month.)
[85] On the mornings of February 1, 2, and 3, Venus and
β Capricorni were separated by 4° 04’ 06”, 4° 19’ 19”, and 4° 51’ 58”
respectively, corresponding to a cubit length of 1.36, 1.44, and 1.62
respectively, reckoning a distance between them of 3 cubits, or else
corresponding to a cubit length of 1.63, 1.73, and 1.95 respectively, reckoning
a distance between them of 2 ½ cubits. Relative to the horizon, the word
“below,” as translated, is best describing the situation on February 3.
Relative to the lower pole of the sky , the word “below,” as translated, is
best describing the situation on February 1. Given that the cubit measurements
provided elsewhere on VAT 4956 vary from about 1.2 to 1.4 or more, the
measurement “2 ½ cubits” cannot be used for certain distinguishing between
these three days. If the New Moon crescent was seen when first potentially
visible, then February 1 is the correct date for “Day 19.” If February 3, which
is the best fit of the word ‘below’ relative to the horizon, is the correct day
19, then it follows that the dating of this month is at least one day delayed
beyond that which is expected using our standard defaults. Conclusion: No
definite date established for day 19 by this datum...
If the “Month XI, the 30th…” (line 5’) is a correct
translation then it follows that the 19th falls on the day beginning
at sunset February 1, 567 BCE. As may be seen, this date is also the one that
fits best with my prior discoveries re the length of the cubit and the above
measurements…
[86] The day beginning in the evening of February 12, 567 BCE.
(This 1st day constitutes a primary anchor point for this 11th
month.)
[87] Day 30 Month X began at sunset February 1, 567 BCE.
(The 1st day of Month XI constitutes a primary anchor point for this
10th month.)
[88] On February 12, 567 BCE at sunset, the angular
separation between the sun and the moon was 15° 50’ 16”, measured along the
ecliptic, however, the
distance between the sun and the moon, as measured above the horizon, was 14° 30’. Is this an important reference for how to
measure this distance?
[89] See the translator’s Comments (under Comments: line 5’ rev at the bottom of the within translation of VAT
4956:) “5’: The “elbow of Sagittarius” was identified as
the cluster of stars around π Sagittarii by P.V.Neugebauer. op.cit. 50f.”
Per Wikipedia
“π Sagittarii” is the same as Albaldah. In the morning of the 1st
Jupiter and Albaldah were separated as follows: 1) Measured along
the ecliptic: 1° 42’ 50”, 2) measured along
the line of travel: 1° 27’ 08”, and 3) angular
separation: 2° 20’ 09”. (As may be noted the measurement along the line of
travel is most consistent with my prior calculations of the length of the
cubit.)
[90] The day beginning in the evening of February 15, 567
BCE. (The 1st day constitutes a primary anchor point for this 11th
month.)
[91] I see nothing suggesting itself that corresponds to
the words “Venus was balanced ½ cubit
below (sic) Capricorn.” Whomever entered the “(sic)” apparently felt
likewise…
[92] The day beginning in the evening of February 17, 567
BCE. (The 1st day constitutes a primary anchor point for this 11th
month.)
[93] “The Chariot” = Auriga. Re halos, cf. footnote #Error! Bookmark not defined.!
[94] Obviously day 11 of the month; the day beginning in
the evening of February 22, 567 BCE. (The 1st day constitutes a
primary anchor point for this 11th month.) Re the halo, cf. footnote
#Error! Bookmark not defined.!
[95] Although the Moon should have been visible before sunrise on
February 25, the “17°,” indicates a date most consistent with February
26, 567 BCE, i.e. the day beginning in the evening of February 25, 567 BCE;
i.e. day 14 of the month. (The 1st day constitutes a primary anchor
point for this 11th month.)
[96] The day beginning in the evening of February 15, 567
BCE. (The 1st day constitutes a primary anchor point for this 11th
month.)
[97] The day beginning in the evening of February 26, 567
BCE. (The 1st day constitutes a primary anchor point for this 11th
month.)
[98] The day beginning in the evening of February 27, 567
BCE. (The 1st day constitutes a primary anchor point for this 11th
month.)
[99] The day beginning in the evening of March 1, 567 BCE.
(The 1st day constitutes a primary anchor point for this 11th
month.)
[100] The day beginning in the evening of March 5, 567 BCE.
(The 1st day constitutes a primary anchor point for this 11th
month.)
[101] The day beginning in the evening of March 6, 567 BCE.
(The 1st day constitutes a primary anchor point for this 11th
month.)
[102] Too many unknowns!: I don’t know how to fit this
rather strange sounding translation upon the sky?
[103] The day beginning in the evening of March 3, 567 BCE.
(The 1st day constitutes a primary anchor point for this 11th
month.)
[104] Day
1 Month 12 began at sunset March 14, 567 BCE. (The 1st and the 12th
day events constitute the primary anchor point for this 12th month.)
[105] Day
30 Month 11 began at sunset March 13, 567 BCE. (The 1st day
constitutes a primary anchor point for this 11th month.)
[106] The day beginning in the evening of March 14, 567 BCE.
(The 1st and the 12th day events constitute the primary
anchor point for this 12th month.)
[107] The day beginning in the evening of March 15, 567 BCE.
(The 1st and the 12th day events constitute the primary
anchor point for this 12th month.)
[108] It seems to me that the measurement “below” is a bit
unusual though it seems to fit here.
Another candidate, though unlikely, is the star
designated “HIP20255”.
[109] The day beginning in the evening of March 16, 567 BCE.
(The 1st and the 12th day events constitute the primary
anchor point for this 12th month.)
[110] See the translator’s Comments (under Comments: line 13’ rev at the bottom
of the within translation of VAT 4956:) “13’: in the broken part at the
end of the line. A reference to the moon being close to the Normal Star α
Tauri is expected.”
[111] The day beginning in the evening of March 14, 567 BCE.
(The 1st and the 12th day events constitute the primary
anchor point for this 12th month.)
[112] The day beginning in the evening of March 18, 567 BCE.
(The 1st and the 12th day events constitute the primary
anchor point for this 12th month.)
[113] The day beginning in the evening of March 19, 567 BCE.
(The 1st and the 12th day events constitute the primary
anchor point for this 12th month.)
[114] The day beginning in the evening of March 20, 567 BCE.
(The 1st and the 12th day events constitute the primary
anchor point for this 12th month.)
[115] Notice re the size of lunar halos: The radius of inner
edge of a lunar halo is 22º or 23º. In this instance we find α
Leonis at <19º from the Moon and Praesepe at <5º. Cf. line 6’, line
7’, and Assurbanipal’s astronomical observations from 654/653 BCE (BM 32312,)
footnote at Col. iii, line
5’!
[116] See the translator’s Comments (under Comments: line 15’ rev at the bottom
of the within translation of VAT 4956:) “15’: The broken star name must
have been α Leonis.”
[117] The day beginning in the evening of March 23, 567 BCE.
(The 1st and the 12th day events constitute the primary
anchor point for this 12th month.)
[118] The day beginning in the evening of March 24, 567 BCE.
(The 1st and the 12th day events constitute the primary
anchor point for this 12th month.)
[119] The day beginning in the evening of March 25, 567 BCE.
(The 1st and the 12th day events constitute the primary
anchor point for this 12th month…)
[120] The day beginning in the evening of March 25, 567 BCE.
(The 1st and the 12th day constitutes a primary anchor
point for this 12th month.) It follows that the beginning of the 1st
day of the 12th month is ascertained to the evening of March 14, 567
BCE, which is also the first anticipated date of visibility per the NASA Phases of
the Moon tables.
[121] [A bit of history re my road to discovery: Re “one god
was seen with the other: sunrise to moonset: 1° 30’:” Initially I was being
fooled by these facts of coincidence: (Cf. Obv[erse,] line 4, including also
footnote #24!)
Here we have Saturn, Venus, and Mercury in
close encounter one with the others; shortly after rising above the horizon
at 5:15 AM on March 27, 567 BCE Saturn was located 1° 36’ from Mercury and 1°
39’ from Venus. That would have tied the 12th day of the 12th
Moon to the day beginning at sunset March 26 and thus also the 1st
day of the 12th Moon to the evening of March 15, 567 BCE. Per the NASA Phases
of the Moon tables the New Moon crescent would have been visible on March
14, the weather allowing. Considering the frequency of inclement weather in the
winter, it certainly would not have been beyond reason to accept then March 15,
567 BCE as a confirmation for such a flawed assumption of mine, would it?!!!
Thus, it pays to be persistent and to humbly pursue any further obstacle… Which
I did…]
[122] See the translator’s Comments (under Comments: line 17’ rev at the bottom
of the within translation of VAT 4956:) “17’: According to computation.
Saturn has to be restored at the end of the line.”
[123] If I am reading this correctly, the day beginning in
the evening of March 28, 567 BCE. (The 1st and the 12th
day constitutes a primary anchor point for this 12th month.)
[124] It seems to me as though the distances to Venus and
Mercury have been mixed up??? If this conclusion is correct??, then it follows
that 1 finger is 6-7.5 minutes or .10 - .13 degrees. Also that 1 cubit =
2.4-3.0 degrees. That does not fit my prior findings… Probably a misunderstood
of mine…
[125] This gives me 1 cubit = 1.1 to 1.59 degrees.
[126] The day beginning in the evening of April 3, 567 BCE.
(The 1st and the 12th day events constitute the primary
anchor point for this 12th month.)
[127] The day beginning in the evening of April 2, 567 BCE.
(The 1st and the 12th day events constitute the primary
anchor point for this 12th month.)
[129] The day beginning in the evening of April 8, 567 BCE.
(The 1st and the 12th day events constitute the primary
anchor point for this 12th month.)
[130] The day beginning in the evening of April 8, 567 BCE.
(The 12th day events constitute the primary anchor point for this 12th
month.)
[131] Day
1 Month 1 year 38 began at sunset April 9, 567 BCE. (The Month 11:12th
day events constitute the primary anchor point for this 1st month of
year 38.)
[132] Day
30 Month 12 began at sunset April 8, 567 BCE. (The 12th day events
constitute the primary anchor point for this 12th month.)
[133] The day beginning in the evening of April 13 (or
possibly 14,) 567 BCE [cf. the 31 days of the 1st month of year 37;
line 8 obverse side.] (The events of the 12th day of the preceding
12th month constitute the primary anchor point for this 1st
day of the 1st month.)
[134] Transcribed out of vat4956translit.htm.
[135] Please cf. my comment re KUR and siv under
footnote #56!
[136] Day #1 began with the evening April 22, 568 BCE.
[137] My corrections: Day #1 began with the evening May 22,
568 BCE.
[138] My corrections: Day #1 began with the evening June 20,
568 BCE.
[139] Day #1 began with the evening March 14, 567 BCE.
[140] My corrections: This entry of the translator is
inconsistent with his own introductory Remarks
on Translation and his corresponding specific phraseology as used for line
1, lower edge. Thus, Day #1 began with the
evening April 13, 567 BCE.