But, how about Dio

But, how about Dio?

Abstract:

Considering that Dio lived and worked 150-200 years after Tiberius, and considering that both Josephus and Suetonius not only perfectly agree with one another, thought apparently independent of one another, but that they are also much closer to the source, I find no basis for applying the words of Dio upon the reality of history as it is presented to me at this point. No doubt Dio was using some basis for his statements, but his basis is likely to have been colored by poor availability of primary data or a correct understanding of data which were far removed from him in time. Below I have attempted to find a reasonable basis for Dio’s statement. However, I failed to find any precise fit or any definite clues as to his basis.

Quoting Dio:

“Dio… states that Tiberius died on March 26, after a reign of 22 years, 7 months, and 7 days.977.“

Considerations:

How might this statement of Dio be reasonably understood? In trying to look for possible clues I find only the following:

Bad assumption: Assuming that Dio is using by default a Julian calendar, and further assuming that “26” is a typographical error somewhere along the line, what do we get? March 16 is 2 months and 16 days into the 23^rd year, which leaves four months and 14+7=21 days for the other end. But removing the four last months out of any year brings us into August. Lastly, 31 – 21 = 10 days. Thus we arrive at August 10, BCE 1. But that’s no where close to a familiar date, is it?
Bad assumption: Let’s try a Jewish Calendar: Let’s remove, as defined by Josephus, 5 or 6 months, and 4 days. That leaves us with 1 or 2 months and 8-4=4 days for the opposite end, which brings us into either Av or Tammuz 26 or 27, 1 BCE [which corresponds to July 17 or 18, or else August 16, 17, or 18.] This brings us a little closer to our only familiar date June 26, 1 BCE [Tammuz 4 or 5, 1 BCE,] but still no perfect fit.
A so so assumption with a fit: Let’s say Dio is a misinformed late scholar in re to this particular. Let’s say the March 26 date is an indication of this. Let’s say that he also misunderstood the Jewish calendar in other ways. Let’s assume that he knew Tiberius died in Adar II, but included this month by mistake in his count, adding “7 months” rather than the correct “6 months”. Let’s further assume that he based his count upon anssumption that the new moon occurred at the astronomical new moon as calculated. Given all these assumptions – which are pretty bad – the “7 days” brings us from March 16 to the astronomical new moon on March 10. Taking away the “7 months”, i.e. 6 months, brings us back to Tishri 1, 22 CE. “22 years” back from this point brings us to Tishri 1, 1 BCE, which is the beginning of the civil year known as Tiberius’ first year of reign. June 26, 1 BCE is the beginning of his accession year, which is not counted. It’s a fit, but could Dio, and/or his transcribers, be that unreliable in a particular like this?
A fair assumption with a fit: Let’s assume the “7 days” are the 10^th through the 16^th days of March, considering that March 10 is the astronomical new moon. (I will consider “March 26” a typo until some better idea comes along.) Removing the last “7 months”, i.e. lunar cycles, prior to the March 10 new moon brings me back to a lunar month ending at or close to the astronomical new moon ending August 16, 22 BCE at 03:24 Rome Solar Time. But that leaves us open for any date within an accession year ending within the latter half of 1 BCE. This seems like a fair fit for our one and only familiar date of June 26, 1 BCE [Tammuz 4 or 5, 1 BCE,] doesn’t it?
Another bad to fair assumption: “March 26” occurs on full moon. Could this be a lead? Let’s assume that the “7 days” are based upon June 26, 1 BCE. This brings us to the full moon on July 4, 1 BCE (at 09:19, Rome Solar Time.) Adding “7 months” [lunar] brings us to the full moon January 28, 1 CE (at 01:45 Rome Solar Time.) Adding “22 years” brings me to the full moon on January 25, 23 CE (at 16:42 Rome Solar Time.) The full moon closest to Tiberius’ death is “March 26,” 23 CE (at 00:04 Rome Solar Time) and follows 2 lunar cycles upon the full moon of January 25, 23 CE. If this last 2 lunar cycle interval is disregarded – leap months or accession year perhaps? - in a reversed count using a lunar based full moon to full moon calendar we do have a fit. But does such a calendar exist?
Assumptions re Dios beliefs with a fit: Assuming that Dio believed that Tiberius’s reign started June 26, 10 CE while ending in the 1^st quarter moon 22+ Hebrew years later in the month following after Adar II and that the Hebrew new moon was calculated based upon the astronomical new moon. Accession year until Tishri 1, 10 CE. Adding “22 years” brings us to Tishri 1, 32 CE. Adding “7 months” brings us to the astronomical new moon on March 19, 33 CE. Adding “7 days” brings us to “March 26,” 33 CE.

Thus, I find that I have no idea which calendar Dio used. However, Dio’s statement agrees within a month or two with Josephus and Suetonius who are in perfect agreement one with another (See above!). What calendar does Dio usually use? If you can help, please email me at PowerOfChoice@gamaliel.intranets.com .

Comments and donations freely accepted at:

Tree of Life^©

c/o General Delivery

Nora [near SE-713 01]

Sweden Republic^© in Adamah Republic^©

eMail: PowerOfChoice@delta.se

You are hereby warmly invited to join Tree of Life Chronology Forums^© where the within historical paradigm and more is the focus of an ongoing dialogue.

Please come to Tree of Life Chronology Forums^© and share your valuable points of view such that we may all grow in knowledge and wisdom!

Free counter

Home