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.
Edit 5942[v2016-12-14-21:32] 01 15 2039 [2023-04-07] – Edit of Footnote # 74.
Edit 5942[v2016-12-14-21:32] 02 04 2039 [2023-04-25] – Further edits of Footnote # 74.
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 Sun June 29, 568 BCE, at 12 noon UT
(Julian calendar); aka. Sun June 23, 568 BCE (Gregorian calendar).
The difference between the two
calendars, an apparent loss of 6 days between the two of them (June 23-28, 568
BCE), is explained in part by these two items:
1.
By the Vatican calendar change
from the Julian calendar to the current Gregorian calendar by eliminating the
ten [non-existent] dates of Fri Oct 5 thru Thu Oct 14, 1582; That is, following Thursday, October
4 (Julian);
the next day became Friday, October 15, 1582 CE (Gregorian), thus skipping
[ahead] 10 days in that month. Cf. the ke!san Julian and Gregorian
Calendar Calculator!
2.
By the movement of our solar
system known as Axial
Precession, aka. the Precession of the Equinoxes. Thus, the date of the
solstices gradually changes over the years, that is, by tending to fall earlier
and earlier in the year. Unfortunately, I find it easy to be misled into
overestimating the effects of this movement when using astronomical software
that uses different calendars for different eras:
a.
Gregorian calendar reckoning –
A calendar based upon 1 year = 365.2425 days: The next summer solstice will occur
June 21, 2023, at 3 PM UT (Gregorian), vs June 22, 1583 CE, 7 AM UT
(Gregorian). That is, a shift of 16
hours in 440 years, or 3.6 hours / 100 years. Or else, vs June 23, 568 BCE 11
AM UT (Gregorian). That is, a shift of 44 hours in 2023+568-1=2590 years, or 1.7 hrs / 100 years.
b.
Julian calendar reckoning – A
calendar based upon 1 year = 365.25 days: June 12, 1582 CE, 1 AM UT
(Julian) solstice, vs June 29, 568 BCE, 11 AM UT (Julian) solstice. That is, a
shift of 16 days 14 hours in a 1582+568-1=2149 year
period, or 18.5 hours / 100 years.
Comparing a. and b. above it is easy to see that the Gregorian calendar,
being 100 times more exact (two decimal places) than the Julian calendar,
indicates much less of a change relative to the 26,000 year Axial Precession of
the Earth, than that which may seem apparent from using the Julian calendar.
When using astronomical software, the Julian calendar is typically used
prior to Oct 15, 1582, while the Gregorian calendar is used after that date. This mixture of two different calendars, as
typically used in astronomical software, may be a cause for confusion at times. For instance, when
considering the precessional change as indicated by the summer solstice on June
29, 568 BCE (Julian), vs. the summer solstice on June 21, 2023 CE (Gregorian).
That is, giving the false
impression that there was an eight (8) day precessional change during those
2590 years. Please notice that 2149+ years out of said 2590 years from 568 BCE unto
2023 CE are Julian calendar dates, the remaining 440+ years being Gregorian
calendar dates.
As for the fundamental cause behind said Axial Precession,
aka. Precession of the Equinoxes, please consider the following words of mine
re a possible relationship between the 225 million year
Galactic Year and
between the 26,000 years of said Axial Precession:
Is it really true that a Galactic
Year is no less than 225 million Earth years? Or else, is that merely the apparent current length of a Galactic
Year?
It strikes me,
upon reading the above linked Wikipedia
article about the Galactic Year, that, per that same article, our galaxy, the
Milky Way, was born no more than 54 galactic years ago. That is, per said Wikipedia article, our Solar System has
rotated no more than 54 times around the center of our galaxy! But if that is
true, and if we are correct in believing that the universe is expanding, then,
in absolute terms, each of those 54 turns should take considerably longer time than the last one prior.
Then again, in
the mean time our Solar System would likewise be expanding, to the effect of,
at least partially, offsetting the duration and length of a Galactic Year as
measured in terms of Earth years.
Now, I don't
know whether or not, or to what extent, you, the reader, believe in the concepts of Biblical Creationism? Suppose the
Genesis creation, understood in terms of the
creation of the entire Universe, really did happen about
6000 years ago. If so, then 568 BCE, or 2590 years prior to 2023, would correspond to a point in time only 410 years past
the midpoint between the birth of the Milky Way Galaxy and now, would it
not?
How would that
effect said Axial Precession? I for one do not have an exact answer to
that question. No doubt it would take some advanced mathematics to figure that
one out correctly, and I certainly do not know mathematics well enough to solve
that problem in a reliable way.
Alternatively, could it be that our Solar System is
also rotating around another astronomical body within the Milky Way galaxy, thus
accounting for said 26,000 year Axial Precession?
[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.