I j THE ANCIENT JEWISH BEGINNING OF THE YEAR I W. . 1. By common agreement—Landsberger, Radau, Ginzel, Schiaparelli, Nilsson, Bah Im an, also Josephus aad Philo—the earliest known calendar numbered its months from the autumn; and, as a result, the month eventually called "seven" was originally known as the "first.” But these authorities give no proof for their conclusion. The early inscriptions even have difficulty in identifying the season to which a month may belong. However, some evidence is found in the Bible, as for example (1) the flood calendar, in whose "first" month the waters were dried up, obviously in the season of drought—surely not in Nisan; and in whose "seventh"month the ark rested, when, consistently, both solar and lunar tidal forces must have been on the decrease, as in the moon’s last quarter in early summer, but on the contrary, not in Tishri, when both winds and solar tides are increasing, and sailing dangerous (Acts 27:9); and (2) the agricultural calendar which Isaac followed—sowing and reaping a hundred fold "in the same year" (Gen. 27:12); and (3) the Egyptian calendar in the time of Joseph, when the people were reckoning by agricultural years from, autumn to autumn (Gen.47:18-23). 2. The exodus year was, as is generally recognized, from spring to spring, especially with reference to the numbering of the months. And Moses also counted years—even his own—from spring to spring (Num.lt 1 and 33t38).a Nevertheless, the agricultural year was still reckoned from autumn and sowing time, as Ex.23:16; 34:22; and Lev.25:3,4. 3. Under the Judges and after the death of Joshua, the agricultural year seems to have been the principal guide to the calendar; in any event, the land sabbath appears to have been observed for at least 200 years— Judges 3:11; 3:30; 5t31; and 8:28. Gideon and Samuel can be mentioned in illustration of judges whose administration began in the fall. The story of Gideon begins in wheat harvest, and continues on into early vintage, during which time he carried to victory the attack against the Midianites and Amalekites, and soon after which the elders made him judge over Israel—obviously in the autumn* The judgeship of Samuel ran from fall to fall, consisting of an annual circuit to Bethel, Gilgal, and Mizpeh, the liizpeh appointment being the last, and ending in late summer, as when Samuel offered the "sucking lamb* (1 Sam.7:5-17), and after which Samuel’s "return" (tlXlU/fl) was always to Ram ah--evidently in the autumn. 4. Saul was crowned in mid summer (1 Sam.11:15 and 12:17). His first official year was therefore in autumn. 5. David was crowned in Hebron in mid summer (2 Sam.4:6 and 5:3). Therefore first official year was in autumn. 6. Solomon was anointed twice—(1) before David died; and (2) was anointed and crowned just before death of David, probably after the year’s har- a Moses was 80. and Aaron 83 in the exodus year (Ex.7:7). In the 11th month of the fortieth year, Moses was 120 (Deut.l:3 and 31:2); while in the Sth month of the same year Aaron was 123 (Num.33:38). They must have counted their birthdays therefore from Nisan, not from Tishri. Ancient Jewish Year - 2 vest (1 Chron*29:22,28) t and without doubt in the same season during which the silver tax was taken up for the ancient tabernacle* According to 1 Kings 6:38, Solomon was seven years in building the temple, and he started operations in his fourth year (verse !)• If his regnal year ran from spring to spring, then the total time of building was 7 1/2 years, which would be 8 years by Jewish reckoning* But by beginning his reign in the fall, the time of building = 6 1/2 years, or seven years by Jewish oount, in harmony with the text* 7* Dirision of the Kingdom* The chronology of the approximate two centuries during which Judah and Israel were divided monarchies is represented by about a hundred time statements in Kings, Chronicles, and Isaiah. These chronological statements appear to conform to a spring-beginning Israelite and a fall-beginning Judaite Jewish year, with respect to which (1) two lunar dates are found in the Bible, (2) two eclipses in Ptolemy’s canon, and (3) one uncertain eclipse in the Assyrian limmu list, besides a number of inscriptions! records pertaining to the kings of Israel and Judah* A simple method of demonstrating the Jewish year under the monarchies is to ley out a short period—one represented by as large a number of time statements as possible, as for example the reigns of Ahab and his two sons Ahaziah and Jehoram with the current reigns of Jehoshaphat and his successors Jehoram. and Ahaziah. This is only a method of proof as to what form of year conforms to the Israelite and Judaite kings. It is possible that more than one plan of outline can be demonstrated* 8* Hezekiah’s year appears to be in harmony with an agricultural year, which is outlined as sewing, reaping, and eating the fruits (2 Kings 19:29). 9* Jeholakim = autumn new year. This king’s fourth year apparently changed to the fifth in the seventh month (Jer. 36)* This conclusion is dependent upon showing that Baruch wrote the roll after the first of Nisan in the fourth year. But if Baruch had written Jeremiah’s dictations in the winter previous to Nisan, then the subsequent rain fast would haw logically followed in the season of the latter rain* The fact that the fast came in the ninth month is evidence that the roll was written in the interval between the spring fast and the fall fast. For on account of the drought (Jer*14:1-3), the people were desperate, and were even coming up to the temple to pour out their cries to Jehovah* 10* Jehoiachin and Zedekiah. Jehoiakim died in late spring, when the days were hot, and the nights frosty* Jehoiachin then ruled 3 months and 10 davs, after which he was taken to Babylon ”at the return of the year* At the same time Zedekiah was made king—obviously in the autumn. His years coincide with the captivity year of Ezekiel. 11* Haggai and Zechariah without doubt represent Persian year. No change of year betwe’en Saggai’ s "sixth month” in the second year of Darius and Zechariah’s “eleventh month” of the same year. Zechariah’s message seems to follow Haggai’s. 12. Period of Esther. Persian year. No change of year between Nisan in twelfth year of Ahasuerus (Esth*3:7) through 23rd Sivan (8:9), to 13th Adar (8:12). 1 Jewish Year - 3 13* Period of Daniel* Persian year* Daniel* s one date (Dan* 10s 2-4), being a spring date, and designated as "third year” of Cyrus against EzraYs "second year" for the same event, is proof that Daniel’s calendar must have been Persian and Ezra’s Jewish* For the Persian year was one in advance of the Jewish during the period from Misan to Tishri* 14* Ezra and Nehemiah* Jewish year* No change of year between the ninth month Chisleu in the twentieth of Artaxerxes and the subsequent Nisan of same year* Nehemiah’s year must therefore have changed in the autumn * The significant feature of this reckoning is the fact that Ezra and Nehemiah refer to the Persian year in terms of the Jewish calendar, which from. Nisan to Tishri was one less than the Persian year* Hence Ezra s "seventh of Artaxerxes’' in the period from, the first to the fifth months (Ezra 7s7,8) was Jewish time, while the Persians- in the same period, called the same year the eighth of the king*® Ptolemy records three lunar eclipses that belong to the period of the Persian kings; but before the Assuan papyri can be used with assurance to confirm the Persian years, it has to be demonstrated to what calendar the papyri belong* The earliest investigators considered them Jewish reckonings. The latest report dates them in Persian time.0 Eduard Mahlor, "Zur Chronologic der Babylonier," Denkschriften der kaiserliohen Akademie der Wis senaohaften Mathematisch-^aturwissen-schaftiiohe Classe. Zwelundsechzigster Band* Wien, 1895,65$. 0 Richard Ao Parker, "Persian and Egyptian Chronology," The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures. July, 1941, 285. CHRONOLOGICAL OUTLINE—TABLE "X" A z — Gract Hfitaao*. In the foregoing chronological Table, the years are founded upon four specif ic new years: 1* The Julian new year, as of January 1. 2* Ptolemy3 s Egyptian new year for the Nabonassar Era, whose 1 Thoth in the 5th century B.C* was for the most part in December*'3 3. The Babylonian or Persian new year—1 Nisan, to which the Assuan Papyri seem to conform 4* The Jewish new year—1 Tisri, upon which the dates of Ezra and Nehemiah depend* The regnal years in this Table are anchored by the lunar eclipse in the 7th of Cembysesj by the king lists in Ptolemy’s Csnonj and by the designated years and double dates of the Assuan Papyri* But in addition, the events in Jewish history that took place under the reigns of the Persian kings, as dated in the Bible, also identify these luni-solar years with their corresponding Julian years* And further, the Jewish and Persian reckonings show, that in ancient times from Nisan to Tisri, the Jewish years were numbered the same as the Persians and that from Tisri to Nisan, the Jewish were one year in advance* Among the years sustaining these calendar and tant: I II III IV 5 6 7 * Bible synchronisms in the 5th century B.C*, the following series is impor- 13 Xerxes (472-471 B*C*) = the year appointed by Haman for the destruction of the Jews on the 13th Adar, the Jewish day of full moon*^ 7th Artaxerxes (457 B*C*) = a series of seven specific days of the week, marking activities of Ezra, which cannot consistently be dated on the Jewish Sabbath* 20th Artaxerxes (445-444 B*C*) = the building of the wall by Nehemiah in 52 days—demonstrating the length of the month Ab* 20th Artaxerxes (444 B*C*) = reading of the Law by Ezra on 1 Tisri—the Jewish Sabbath* 5 Ginzel, F.K*, "Handbuch der mathematischen und technischen Chronologic,n II Band, p* 578* Leipzig, 1911* 6 The English astronomer, E*W. Maunder, insists that the spring moon, inscribed as lying on its back on the ancient Babylonian boundary stones, is a clear symbol that the Babylonians began their year in the spring*"—"Astronomy of the Bible/* 2nd Edition, p* 316* London* 7 Nptbt The Jewish prophecy in Daniel 9 identifies the Jewish new year with the autumn* For, since the prophetic phrase '’midst of the week,*’ or middle of a literal year, was coincident with the crucifixion in the spring, the end of the same year, and hence the beginning of another, must have oocurred in the fall* $ nSince Grotefend1s decipherment of the proper names in the Persepolis inscriptions, it has been generally recognized that this monarch is Xerxes* The Hebrew form Ahashwerosh corresponds to the Babylonian and Aramaic spelling of the Persian Khshayarsha, Xerxes."New standard Bible Dictionary ,n p* 229* 1936* Table WXW — 3 SYNCHRONISM I The story of Esther Is so well known that it need not be repeated here by way of introduction. It is designed only to show the important relation of this familiar histoiy to early luni-solar time. That Haman followed the Persian year in his reckoning is evident from the fact that he began the "lot” with Nisan, which the writer of Esther calls the "first month" thereby making the Persian name synonymous with the Jewish. This is the only instance in the Bible where the Persian month Nisan is identified with the Jewish first month. The book of Esther also introduces into its narrative three other Persian months, which are defined in terms of the Jewish—Sivan (third), Tebeth (tenth), t nd Adar (twelfth).9 It is therefore possible to connect the Persian calendar with the Jewish and Julian set up for the reign of Xerxes, as outlined in Table "X". The following dia- gram indicates the correspondence relating to these various calendars: DEMONSTRATION The only logical position for the Persian year is to make its month Nisan begin with the Jewish Nisaji, as in Figure 10. In order to accomplish this coincidence, the PersiaS^year itself has to begin after the Jewish. Should it begin before, that is,' for example, should the 12th of Xerxes be dated a year earlier, then the Persian Nisan and its subsequent mongysjj^uld be controlled by the Julian year 474 B.C., while the Jewish Ni-sanAan3its subsequent months would be governed by the year 473 B.C. Hence the two calendars would disagree in their embolisms. Therefore, the conclusion is obvious that the ancient Persian Nisan, upon which the Esther 9 Esther 8:9j 2:16j 3:12 Table "X” — 4 dates are based, must have been synchronous, or nearly so at least, with the Jewish Nisan* 1^ The Jewish writer of the book of Esther apparently desired to certify the synthesis between the Persian and Jewish calendars* To this authoritative testimony, Zechariah adds ’’Chisleu” as the ninth month, and ’’Sebat” as the eleventh*^ Another calendar feature belonging to Synchronism I involves the demonstration that neither 13 Adar, which date Haman set apart for the slaughter of the Jews in Persia, nor the succeeding day, 14 Adar, into which the Jews extended the fight for their lives, could have been otherwise than common days of the week* For even much later than Esther’s time we find the Jews giving up life rather than fight on the Sabbath day* And if 13 Adar had been scheduled to fall on the Jewish Sabbath, Esther would surely have appealed to Xerxes relative to such fact, for she was wholly in command of the situation* Furthermore, it is plain from the context that the Persians were able to calculate their moon’s in advance, as indicated by Haman’s Jewish date of full moon, 13 Adar, 471 B.C.l3 The following luni-solar dates for this historic year are presented in proof of the calendar facts stated: 13th Year of Xerxes the Great (472-471 B.C.) B.C. 472 1 Nisan = April 13, Monday (Table ”g”). 13 Nisan = Sabbath, April 25 w n Full Moon = April 25*48 « n Conjunction = April 10*27 n n Wax* Period = 15*21 days « n Tr* Period = 2*50 days n n Passover = Sunday, April 26 ” « Length of year = 354 days w n 1 Tisri = Wednesday, October 7 (Table ”c”) 471 13 Adar = Tuesday, March 16 »» n 14 Adar = Wednesday, March 17 M n 15 Adar = Thursday, March 18 »» n * 11 1$ It has not been definitely demonstrated that either the ancient Babylonians or Persians had the same length of Translation Period as the Jews. Hence their new years might differ by a day or two* 11 Zech. 7:1 and 1:7. 12 1 Mac. 2:34-38. 1$ Note: The moon commonly fulls around the 12th or 13th of a Jewish month* Hence Haman’s ”13th” dates are at once suggestive of full moon* From Ginzel it is ascertained that the full moon of Adar, or March, in 471 B.C. is III 15«27, G.M.T. To this date add 15 hours (*63 day) = 15*90 Babylon civ. time, or March 16, J.C.T. as in foregoing Table* Tabi© *X" — 5 The day that Haman finally chose for sending away the ’’posts’* was Sabbath, 13 Nisan, April 25, both Jewish and civil day of full moon, 472 B.C.^ And the day he appointed for the destruction of the Jews was 13 Adar, March 16, likewise the Jewish day of full moon, in 471 B.C., the following spring* It may have been the "lot" that decided the first full moon day, although it should be remembered that anciently, war and other serious projects were commonly started about the time of either new moon or full moon.^ But it was doubtless the coincidence of the Jewish Sabbath and full moon that Haman had in mind for his ill-starred design, for such was the 13th Nisan in 472 B.C. Certainly it must have struck terror and fear into the heart of the Jews in "perplexed” Shushan to see the horses, camels, mules and dromedaries "hastened" off on the Sabbath day to carry their message of death to all the provinces* But Haman’s second day of Jewish full moon was not the Sabbath day* It was Tuesday—a common week day toward the middle of the week* And in this appointment of the fateful day, we see a counter-power working in behalf of the Jews, who, in the end, were free to stand for their lives on a Tuesday, Wednesday, and even on Thursday* The Sabbath day, in this instance when life was at stake, was not made a test of loyalty to the Law of God. The influence of queen Esther upon the subjects of Ahasuerus was profound, so much so that "many of the people of the land became Jews." This remarkable scripture record, so rich in historical content, is inserted in the law in the synagogue 16 rolls, and it is treated with the highest reverence. In the familiar stoxy of Esther, important feature? lie hidden that pertain to ancient luni-solar time, both with the Jews and Persians. These calendar features are thus summarized: 1. Four specific Persian months—Nisan, Sivan, Tebeth and Adar—are identified by number with their corresponding Jewish months* The books of Esther and Zechariah alone make these synchronisms between the Persian and Jewish months. When the moon fulls before sunsot, the Jewish day of full moon is the same as the civil. 10 Soaliger, Joseph, "De Emendatlone Temporum," Prolegomena, B2. Lugdun, 1598. I® "New Standard Bible Dictionary," p. 231. Funk and Wagnails. 1936* Table ”X" — 6 2* It is apparent that Kaman knew twelve months in advance the luni-solar date of full moon—13 Adar 471 B.C* From this incident it is obvious that the Persian people, in the 5th century B*C», knew how to calculate the moon’s phases* Ahasuerus had "wise men who knew the timesf' but so had David the same, 500 years before(1 Chron* 12i32). Jewish chronologers commonly rate these officers in the court of David as astronomers* It is therefore possible and probable that the captive Jews taught the Babylonians and Persians how to compute their moon dates* Haman’s intelligence in calendar science is therefore a testimony to the people he -tried to annihilate* 3* A third chronological detail in the Esther narrative—and one of great importance—is the rule of correspondence it demonstrates between the Persian end Jewish regnal years and the Julian calendar* Consequently, the historical record of the book of Esther is synchronal in character, and lines up in importance with eclipse, tablet, papyrus, and boundary stone in establishing the chronological outline of the Persian kings* (October 20, 1941) Table "X” — 6 29 It is apparent that Haman knew twelve months in advance the luni-solar date of full moon—13 Adar 471 B.C® From this incident it is obvious that the Persian people, in the 5th century B.C®, knew how to calculate the moon’s phases® Ahasuerus had "wise men who knew the times;” but so had David the same, 500 years before(1 Chron® 12:32)<> Jewish chronologers commonly rate these officers in the court of David as astronomers® It is therefore possible and probable that the captive Jews taught the Babylonians and Persians how to compute their moon dates® Haman’s intelligence in calendar science is therefore a testimony to the people he tried to annihilate® 3© A third chronological detail in the Esther narrative—and one of great importance—is the rule of correspondence it demonstrates between the Persian and Jewish regnal years and the Julian calendar® Consequently, the historical record of the book of Esther is synchronal in character, and lines up in importance with eclipse, tablet, papyrus, and boundary stone in establishing the chronological outline of the Persian kings® (October 20, .1941) THE JEWISH REGNAL YEAR (Neo-BabyIonian and Persian Periods) In the preface to The Chronology of Ancient Nations, Edward Sachau makes * * 6”** a/i wnqu-estionable assertion. He says: No number in any chronological table can be considered correct, as long as it is not proved by computation to be so. In the face of this «4gn4-fi-cant challenge one cannot but wonder what will be- come of all the indiscriminate dates appearing in twentieth century monographs, and what impression they will make upon students who succeed to our generation. •V tr Many dates are based upon no proof whatsoever, and have in fact been continu-ally on the change. They may therefore belong^to an unattested outline, or U LT e* else to no outline at all. The trend of modem research ccppo-aro to accept at face value the inscriptional dates, but the question at once arises whether today's evaluation of the,Assy.piwa, records will hold unless given more proof than has as yet been applied. It is not enough to submit an historical epoch to a trial and error computation whose resultant figures merely conform to unproved initial postulates. IaXU > The modem rabbinical calendar can be extended back to ancient times; but its fictitious moleds, which do not allow the fifteenth of Nisan to occur on Monday, Wednesday, or Friday, could not conform to the OT days of the week, or to the OT dates, which are definitely tied to the perturbations and ine-or chronological outline, qualities of the moon. We know this because every calendar*that is based upon observation of the moon must necessarily take into account the moon’s anomaly and irregular motion. Observation of the moon means all of that. However, the Bible does not mention in detail the complex principles of lunar motion. Hence we just set them aside, and in our biblical reckoning are tempted to em-2 ploy a calendar that also sets them aside! It is said that any calendar is correct if one knows how to use it. If the student therefore understands that a table is not based upon the moon’s anomaly and inequalities, then no confusion will result in the use of it, for the user will know that he could not thereby check the exactness of any synchronism in the Bible. 2 Similarly, intercalation as such is not described anywhere in the Scrip-JXJL tures; yet this indispensable lunar principle is fully presented in the Bible first by the simple expedient of tying the paschal full moon to theAfull moon of barley harvest. At passover time a sheaf of ripe barley was waved in the tem-csw.23: topi). pie on the sixteenth of NisanA In this manner an ancient lunar date was made to coincide with the sun-ripened harvest—a solar event. The invention is 3 very old, and reaches back very early in both Jewish and Babylonian history. It has now been replaced in the rabbinical tables by a nineteen year cycle} which is pure calculation and no longer conforms to the cycle of an ancient agricultural calendar. We repeat: no lunar table whose computation sets aside the anomaly and inequalities of the moon, and also the ancient method of intercalation, can possibly conform to a^biblical outline in chronology. The number of dates in the Bible may be small, but every one belongs to a specific calendar^© period, and is as important to chronology as an eclipse. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the working of the Jewish year in the Neo-BabyIonian and early Persian era. ad We have chosen this era as one that particularly illus- trates a period when the Jews for a time still had kings of their own to ac- count for, and when at the same time and later)also, their writings had to re- cord the regnal years of foreign kings. Many cities fell in this period— Tyre (573), Nineveh (612), Carchemish (604), Jerusalem (586),ABabylon (539), Thebes (525), and the Jewish reckoning of foreign events nicely^ rapresents the chief forms o of calendar in use. v* tXvU om. . Outline of.the .Sixth-Seyenth Centuries B .C . The period outlined on the accompanying chart and the regnal years intro-4 duced are based upon many inscriptional documents. The Babylonian year began 5 in the spring, and it is so represented on the chart. The king list includes four Assyrian kings, six Babylonian kings, and three Persian, who together - 3 - nearly parallel the XXVIth dynasty of Egypt (666-525 B.C.) Also the first half of this era covers forty years of the last five kings of Judah—from the thirteenth of Josiah to the eleventh of Zedekiah. And in addition, there are the thirty-seven years of Jehoiachin’s captivity in Babylon, which extend from the eighth of Nebuchadnezzar to the first of Amel-Marduk, as described 2, by the writer of Kings and the scribe who completed the record of Jeremiah. The major part of Jehoiachin’s captivity period is featured by Ezekiel’s prophecy, which includes more lunar dates than any other single book in the Bible.^^feurtoen-altogetheyK The dated chapters, with three exceptions, represent a chronological sequence^ and the prophecies are indicated in the out-•1-ine-by the series of small dets in the years from 592 to 567. The early dates are a year or so apart; but the messages at the time Jerusalem fell were close together—only a few weeks apart. The purport of these final communi- cations is obvious. For the most part they relate to the fall of Egypt, and hence were probably given as a warning to the Jewish captives against look-A ing to Egypt for support. -important relation to the We™shall shortly analyze the Ezekiel year and its chronology here outlined. There are four forms of calendar represented in this outline: (1) Julian, (2) Egyptian, (3) Babylonian and Persian, and (4) Jewish. The Julian year is the chronologer’s year. It is a calendar measurement which has been adopted for the interpretation of ancient records. Its new year was on January 1, which marks the earliest year beginning in the outline until the year 521 B.C., during which the Egyptian new year occurred twice in the year—January 1 and December 31. The Egyptian year was employed for the Ptolemaic kings and eclipses. In 626 B.C., 1 Thoth occurred on January 27, and in 515 B.C., on December 30. As time advanced, the Thoth new year receded at the rate of one day every four years. Certain inscriptions and documents equate the Egyptian year • R A with the Persian, as in the Carobyse 400 Tablet and the Assuan papyri. Three eclipses occur in this Babylonian-Persian period, and each one is tied to the regnal year of some king. They therefore not only fix the Jul-also (O ian years in the outline, but theyApoint out/the relation of the Julian year (621 B.C.) CVV-A Vo tXjU Ato the Egyptian yearAof the Ptolemaic canon,a(2) to the Babylonian regnal 7 year (568 B.C.), and (3) to the Persian regnal year (523 B.C.). In other words, these eclipses show that the Julian new year on January 1 began first; second, there next followed the Egyptian new year, a January event at least up to 521 B.C.; and third, Athere then began the Babylonian New Year on 1 Nisan—a March-April event. The season of the Jewish new year remains to bt demonstrated. A, The Anc lent Jewish Bey/,vYe ar The earliest known year, both in Israel and Babylonia was autumn-begin-8 9 ning. The months were even numbered from the autumn. The ancient calendar was agricultural, probably similar to.the Nile calendar of the Egyptians, and the months were given agricultural names, as the old Canaanite names of 11 the Bible indicate. With the Palestinian farmer, the end of the summer was the end of the year, and the coming of the early rain was the beginning of a 12 new year. Just so the "end of the year" (going out of the year), as in Ex. 23s16, is an expression based upon culture of the land. The word ap- pears to be characteristic of the sun's revolution (Ps. 19:6), as if beginning from the fall of the year (Ex. 34:22). the—oont-rary, the word when used with is still more specific of the sun’s motion. The phrase is commonly translated ’’turn of the year,” and probably relates to the time when the sun crosses the equator. There are only a few instances of in the Bible, and the context implies which season is meant—vernal or autumnal. OX fecoim the time of the exodus, Jehovah commanded that the passover month Abib should be counted as the first month of the year (Ex. 12:2), and ever since, this has been good Jewish practice. However, the fact that the numbering of the year was ever changed—even though by divine order—has supplied a rule of procedure with some who otherwise would fail to make the outline of - 5 - biblical chronology conform bo,, dates and'figures. Begrich is one such. He A, 13 proposes a change of year from autumn to spring in the time of Hezekiah. But Welhausen is equally certain that in the time of Josiah a king’s reign Uva claaz J.4 changed in the autumn. On the contrary9 from almost the same texts, Kugler 15 concludes that the Jewish year changed in the spring. Levy has a similar 16 conclusion.- Others insist that the Jewish people adopted a spring-beginning year in Babylon, and returned to Palestine with the same calendar. And biblical all theAdates of these various computers are colored by their arguments with reference to the beginning of the Jewish year. It is impossible to connect the reigns of Jewish kings with an outline of Babylonian and Persian kings unless we know exactly when the Jewish regnal year began. Furthermore, the chronologer must also know what calendar the Jewish writers used when mentioning the reigns of foreign kings—whether spring I or autumn beginning. Biblical practice varies with regard to this. The whole pattern is also biased by the possibility that the chronologic trend of a prophet or chronicler may be interjected with dates from a foreign calendar— interpolated by some editor or scribe. And in addition, the Jewish accession year must be understood, and any Hebrew expression defining it. Then there is also the very significant but much garbled Ezekiel chronology which belongs ‘'which offer ^.-precise proof of the period to which they belong. to this period—altogether fourteen consecutive dates5a Obviously, it is an inconsistent conclusion that one simple rule could govern all this important history, and we are faced with the problem of ascertaining the method of com-putation which, each biblical writer employed^ We now presq^several arguments showing ^that^the Jewish year began in the autumn, and .that*this kind of year was common among the Jews in Babylon, andAafter the return from the captivity. 1. Josiah. This young king’s work of reform began when he was twenty years olds for "in the twelfth year [of his reign] he began to purge Judah and Jerusalem from the high places, and the graves, and the carved images, and the mol-ten images (2 Chron. 34:3). The work of cleansing proceeded throughout the - 6 - "cities of Manasseh, and Ephraim, and Simeon, even unto Naphtali" (verses 5, 6). The eighteenth year of Josiah’s reign had come before his reform had been completed, and the temple was still to be cleansed (verse 8). Sometime within this eighteenth year—in the eighth month, according to the LXX—Josiah began to repair the house of God, and for this purpose the people were bringing an offering of silver to the temple (2 Kings 22:4; 2 Chron. 34:9). This silver collection was the traditional offering for building and repairing the house of God. The actual silver in the original collection was used to make the hooks and sockets of the tabernacle (Ex. 38:26-31). This offering was taken up in the autumn, about six months after the exodus, and became traditional under the monarchy (2 Kings 12:4,5). And so David without doubt took up his magnificent offering for the new temple in the autumn after the harvest returns were in. On this occasion, Solomon was anointed king the second time (1 Chron. 29:22). It is important to take note that the addition by the LXX to the MT date 17 in 2 Kings 22:3— —is consistently supported by Lucian, and that this silver collection in the time of Josiah is consequently in harmony with the ancient half shekel tax of autumn origin. Therefore, since the silver tax for the repair of the temple was in operation in the eighth month in the eighteenth year of Josiah, and since the subsequent passover was observed in the same eighteenth year of the king, irt.JLs consistent toAconclude that the king’s reign did not change in the spring of this year, and hence must have changed on the ensuing first of Tishri Consequently Josiah’s notable and much discussed passover in his eight eenth year was coincident with the Ptolemaic eclipse on April 22, 621 B.C The eclipse occurred early in the morning of 13 Nisan (April 22), and the moon rose full at sunset on that day in when the paschal lambs were be- ing slain. The eclipse doubtless had a profound effect upon the people. We know that this dating is correct, for if we shift the calendar backward one year, then the eleventh of Jehoiakim ends on the seventh of Nebuchadnezzar contrary to 2 Kings 24:6,12. And if we advance Josiah’s eighteenth one year have then the siege of Jerusalem would Abegun on the eighth of Zedekiah, contrary 7 to 2 Kings 25:1; Jer. 39:1; 52:4; Ezek. 24:1. Thus this Ptolemaic eclipse ties together four calendars. Jehoiakim. The Josiah dating just outlined makes the fourth of Jehoiakim coincide with Nebuchadnezzar’s accession year and his first year—the latter part of one and the first part of the other. Jeremiah also equates the fourth 18 of Jehoiakim with the first of Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. 25:1). It is quite obvious that the prophet is using the Babylonian calendar for his Babylonian date. On the other hand, Josephus equates the eighth of Jehoiakim with the 19 fourth of Nebuchadnezzar, and thereby employs his own native calendar. The interesting feature in this synchronism lies in the fact that if one date is moved, then the other is disturbed. These two dates therefore lock in position two calendars—Jewish and Babylonian. On the date—fourth of Jehoiakim = the first of Nebuchadnezzar—Jeremiah offered his wine cup of fury to all the nations (Jer.25:15ff). The prophet was not yet shut up in prison. In this same fourth year, as soon as Necho reached Carchemish on the Euphrates (Jer. 46:2), Jeremiah gives a realistic description of the battle! A little later, we find him shut up in prison, and mentioned in Jer. 36:5. probably as described in chapters 19 and 20, A He fcwti calls Baruch and dic- tates to him all his prophecies, and then asks that the roll be read to the people on the fast day. These incidents occurred in the fourth year of Jehoi akim, in the first year of Nebuchadnezzar, and during the spring and summer months. When Baruch read the roll on the fast day in the n^.nth month, the con text shows that the year had changed to the fifth of Mw reign<(Jer. 36:9). The regnal year must therefore have changed on the first of Tishri. Zedekiah. Nebuchadnezzar made Zedekiah king, and took Jehoiachin captive to Babylon at one and the same time (2 Chron. 36:10). In this connection, the writer of Kings (2 Kings 24:12) and the chronicler (2 Chron. 36:10) equate the the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reignjwith the “turn of the year.”), This coincidence could have occurred only in the autumn, for if we locate these in- 2 He ^h Egypt] = 3rd of Chisleu, year 8 [ Persia] 22 K 9th of Athyr, year 14 of Darius [Egypt] = 24th Shebat, year 13 (Persia] 2. Jewish Regnal Year in Babylon The prophecy of Ezekiel shows how some Jews at least marked time in Babylon. There are several dated texts in Ezekiel that answer the question with respect to Jewish time during the captivity. In Ezek. 24:1 we read: Again in the ninth year, in the tenth month, in the tenth dey of the month, the word of the Lord came unto me saying, Son of man, write thee the name of the day, even of this same day: the king of Babylon set himself against Jerusalem this same day. The foregoing text is also recorded by the writer of 2 Kings (2 Kings 25: 1), by the prophet Jeremiah (Jer. 39:1), and by the scribe who completed Jeremiah's record (Jer. 52:4). The siege began in the winter on January 17, ac-23 cording to Passover reckoning. In this season between Tishri and Nisan, # a Jewish date in Babylon would necessarily be exactly the same as its corresponding Jewish date in Palestine. This same day, the divine pronouncement stated, the king of Babylon set himself against Jerusalem. This text identifies the chronology of Ezekiel with that in Palestine. We thereby know that the ninth year of the de jure year of Jehoiachin was the same a.s the ninth ,ye ar of the de facto reign of Zedekiah. If we advance Ezekiel’s outline six months to a spring-beginning year, then in the winter an “eighth” of Jehoiachin would match Zedekiah1s “ninth." On the contrary, if we retard the Ezekiel outline 24 six months, then Jehoiachin1s captivity began in the seventh of Nebuchadnezzar. In Ezek. 40:1, we have a hapax legomenon— This phrase is translated “in the beginning of the year,” without doubt because the word is used a number of times in the OT to signify beginning. But literally, this Ezekiel phrase means “head of the year." The same expression is not found elsewhere in the OT, and from it the modem rabbinical calendar has apparently derived its name Rosh Eashana, which has been applied only to the first day of Tishri. In Ex. 12:2 Abib is described as the "head of the months." T 10 - But in Ezek.40:l, the head of the year, as in our modern Jewish calendar, is the first day of the seventh month! On the tenth day of this month, otherwise known today as Yom Kippur, Ezekiel was given his wonderful vision of the new temple. Thus we have Ezekiel’s personal witness to the autumn-beginning of the Jehoiachin captivity year. Ezek. 26:1 is also a text that ties itself into an autumn-beginning calen-A dar. This text first informs the prophet that Jerusalem had fallen—an event which occurred on the tenth day of the fifth month. Tyre, Edom, Moab and Ammon were all clapping their hands over the fall of the city (Ezek.25:6; Lam. 2:15). Edom stood in the crossway to cut off those who had escaped. Divine reaction was immediate, and ”in the first day of the month”—Elul, the only month left before the new year would begin—the prophet is told that Tyre should be destroyed. Nebuchadnezzar began his siege of Tyre in 586 B.C., almost immediately after the fall of Jerusalem. He besieged the city for thir-teen years, and Tyre finally fell itfi„573 B.C. (Ezek.29:17). 3. The Jewish Year After the Captivity JEWISH REGNAL YEAR (SIXTH AND SEVENTH CENTURIES B.C.) January 1 1 Thoth = Jan 27 Apri 1 22 Julian 626 । 625 624 623 " 622 ’• 621 620 “ 619 618 617 * 616 615 * 614 613 Ptolemy 1 2 1 3 4 5 1 Nabopolassar 8 9 10 11 12 L13.. Assyria Assur-banipal Sin- shar-ishkun Babylon 1 42 d I 1 2 7 i 4 5 Nabopolassar £ J T9 10 11 12 Z23 Jeremiah 13 Tis 14 15 16 17 18 t losiah 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1st ye ar of J< sremi? nr Z 1 X Julian 612 * 611 610 609 * 608 607 * 606 605 604 * 603 602 601 * 600 599 Ptolemy 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 1 1 2 3 Nebuchadnezzar 6 Assyria Nis Assur-uballit II Babylon ”|S 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ■ 1 2 [Nebuchadnezzar 5 1 6 Jeremiah Tis 28 29 30 l^lll 1 1 2 3 4 Jehoiakim 7 8 9 An- t.X.XI. 1 23rd ar of Jeremiah Ant r J 71.1 Julian 598 * 597 596 * 595 594 593 * 592 591 590 * 589 588 * 587 586 585 Ptolemy 7 8 9 10 11 1 12 13 14 15 10 Tebet S i e g ; ( B 20 1 Babylon Nis „ 1 7 8 9 10 i: L 12 ! Nebuchadnezzs ir 15 16 1 17 18 19 20 Jewish 1° Tis 1 2 3 4 Zedekiah (vassal king) 8 9 10 11 i 1 t ■10 Ab Ezekiel Tis 1 2 3 4 Jehoiachin's Captivity Year 9 10 11 1 12 l ■ Messenger Julian Ptolemy Babylon Ezekiel 1 The Julian Ptolemy Babylon * 584 583 582 * 581 580 579 * 578 577 * 576 575 | 574 * 573 572 571 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 1 30 31 32 33 34 NfS 21 22 23 24 25 Nebuchadnezzar 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 1 13 T'is 14 15 16 17 18 Jehoiachin 21 22 23 24 OR 1 25 26 )th = Jan 12 July 4 R elease < of Jehoiachin ♦ 570 569 568 567 566 * 565 564 563 * 562 561 i 560 * 559 558 587 “1 35 36 37 38 39 40 L42_ 42 43 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 3 is । 35 36 37 38 Nebuchadnez zar 41 4 2 43/ II 1 il X 2 I 2 3 Ezekiel 27 6 Tis 2 ;8 29 30 (31) (32) (33) (34) (35) (36) (37) J Amel-Marduk Nergal-Sarusur Julian Ptolemy Babylon Daniel Jewish 556 555 * 554 553 | 552 * 551 550 * 549 548 547 * 646 545 544 * 543 1 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 7 8 9 10 Fn 1 12 13 *1 III 1 2 3 4 5 BM1^ha?5ar 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 Z _ Nabonidus I 1 Julian Ptolemy Persia Daniel Jewish 542 541 |* 540 539 * 538 537 536 ♦ 535 j 534 533 * 532 531 * 530 529 14 15 16 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 Nis , . nc 14 15 16 17 , Darius ( 1 the Med^ll 1 2 X 3 ' 1 । Cyrus | 5 j 6 71 1 Messianic prophecy "f“ As1 X 2 3 Cyrus 5 6 7 1 Thoth = Jan 2 July 16 Daniel - Ezra date A Julian Ptolemy Persia Jewish 528 * 527 526 525 * 524 — w — 523 522 ’ * 521 520 * 519 518 517 * 516 515 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 L 1 2 3 4 L 5 1 6 7 Nis 9 I , ,2,3 4 Cambyses 7 81 n i 2 Darius I 5 6 7 1 Tis 2 $ 4 Cambyses 7 8 1 2 , 1 3 1 4 5 X6 — * The asterisk indicates an embolismic spring Haggai Zechariah Ezra 6:15 Accession years are shaded 1. The Ptolemaic year, based upon the Egyptian year, is tied to the Julian series of years by two eclipses—April 21, 621 B.C. and July 16, 523 B.C. 2. The Babylonian year is Nisan-beginning in this table. It is linked to the Ptolemaic year by the same eclipses, and by one full moon date—July 4 568 B.C. The Babylonian king lists are confirmed by many inscriptions. JLC-Q 3. The Jewish^years areAm€wy of them double calendar dated—Jewish and Babylonian. ^Thi^ was common practise in that period. It was also common for each nation orA province to have its own calendar. The relationship between the Jewish and Babylonian regnal years is established by the following simple equations at the hands of four different writers: a. 11th Zedekiah in Ab = 19th Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 25:2,8; Jer.52:5,12). b. 10th Zedekiah = 18th Nebuchadnezzar (Jer.32:l). c. 4th Jehoiakim = 1st Nebuchadnezzar (Jer.25:1)Probably a summer date, for Jeremiah counts the subsequent 9th month as the 5/ch of Jehoiakim (Jer.36:9). d. 9th Zedekiah on 10 Tebet = beginning of siege/(2 Kings 25:1; Jer.39:l; 52:4; EZek.24:l). I If Zedekiah’s calendar is advanced six months, it is moved out of range of the siege date. If retarded six months, his 10th and 11th years are dislodged from their connection with Nebuchadnezzar’s loth and 19th years. Also Jehoia-' kirn s 4th year would thereby by disconnected from Nebuchadnezzar’s 1st year. From these four synchronisms we therefore conclude that the Jewish year in this period was fall-beginning, as represented in the table, and that it was frequent ly equated with the spring-beginning Babylonian year./\ On the contrary, Josephus uses the Jewish calendar for both Jewish and Babylonian kings, and there appear to be a few similar dates interpolated in the closing paragraphs of Jeremiah. oVrb , 4. In this table the Ezekiel outline isAlinked^to the Jewish fall-beginning calendar. There are two locks—one at the beginning and one at the end of the 37-year period. Jehoiachin’s three months' reign and surrender to Nebuchadnezzar are tied to the 8th year of the Babylonian king (2 Kings 24:12). At the "return of the year”—probably at the autumn equinox—Jehoiachin was taken captive to Babylon, and Zedekiah was made king./ If the Ezekiel series is moved back six months to a spring-beginning year, the foregoing incidents check with the 7th-instead of with the 8th of Nebuchadnezzar. If it be advanced six months, it will be moved out of range with the month Adar in Amel-Marduk’s 1st year. In Ezek.40:l, the prophet introduces the term ’‘head of the year,” or Rosh Hashana. The expression is not used elsewhere in the OT, and his vision on the tenth day of this seventh month was apparently given in recognition of this solemn Jewish festival—the only festival day among Ezekiel’s 14 dates. The prophet thereby would bear witness that in Babylon he was counting the seventh month as the beginning of the Jewish year. 5. After the captivity we find (a) Haggai and Zechariah using the Persian calendar, (b) Daniel also using the same, and (c) theorecord of Ezra tied to the Jewish calendar. These calendars can easily be demonstrated: a. There are 9 dates in Haggai and Zechariah, ranging from the 6th to the 11th months without any change of regnal year. These prophets must therefore have employed a spring-beginning calendar. b. In the "third year of Cyrus," Daniel is fasting and praying during the i -:). THE PLACE OF CHRONOLOGY IN OUR MODERN SYSTEM OF BIBLE STUDY * Many people have given very little thought to the place that chronology should - have in Bible study, being willing to take such figures as given by scholars like Ussher, Hales, or Clinton, and abiding by the decisions made by those who apparently have gone into the matter in a thorough way* But in these days when every phase of the Advent message is to be microscopically examined, it behooves us as Bible students to substantiate all our positions most accurately, not because some chronologist of a few centuries ago is followed, but because the statements that wo make are supported by the latest finds in archaeology and chronology. For a people who place so much importance on the proper interpretation of the 2300 days, for instance, it is absolutely essential for the intelligent comprehension of our message by the world that we give clear vindication of the dates we propound., In 1915, G. Campbell Morgan in writing a preface to Martin Anstey’s, The I Romance _of Bible Chronology, said, \ "Bible study is the study of the Bible® There are many methods and departments; none is without value; all of them, when done thoroughly rather than superficially, tend to the deepening of conviction as to the accuracy of the records®’ In no case is this more marked than in departments which are incidental rather than essential® If, in such a matter as that of dates — which seems to be purely incidental, and is of such a general nature that few have taken the trouble to pay particular attention to it — the method of careful study shows that these apparently incidental references are nevertheless accurate and harmonious, then a testimony full of value is borne to the integrity of the writings." Anstey himself in his preface says: "Chronology is a branch of History. As such it is governed by the laws which determine the validity of the results reached by the process of scientific investigation and historical enquiry. It is also a branch of Applied Mathematics, and Mathematics is an exact Science. ... Like Mathematics, Chronology has its axioms, its postulates, and its definitions, of which the most important and the most fundamental is the trustworthiness of the'testimony of honest, capable, and contemporary xvitnessos, like that of the men whose testimony is preserved in the records of the ’ Old Testament." At the time most of our chronologers worked and wrote there was but very little objective testimony, and they had to depend for their statements on the writings of the ancient historians, who are notorious for disagreeing among them- « 2 - solves® The curtain of history was drawn in such a way as to throw most of the dates back of the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar into a twilight zone, and many dates back of this time have boon demonstrated to be mere guess work® As an illustration of this, I found some amazing statements in Sir Isaac Newton’s _The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms, published in London in 1728® lie stated, for example that Ramses lived at 387 B® C® ; that the father of Solomon’s queen ’’was p the first king of Egypt that came into Phoenicia with an army; ” that Nitocris finished the third great pyramid in 802 B® C®^« that the Trojan war was later then the days of Rehoboam some seventy-four years after the death of Solomonv; that the Ilyksos ’’did not enter Egypt ’till after Moses had brought Israel from thence;5” that the ’’Shepherds were expelled from Egypt by Amosis a little before the building of Jerusalem and the temple;0” that Shalmaneser took Israel captive, never mentioning the name of Sargon and ignoring the statement concerning him in Isaiah 20^; and that from the fifteenth year of Asa, ”in which the father of Ramses began his reign,” to the ora of Nabonasser was two hundred years®0 It is very astonishing and almost providential that such a chronologer as Nowton, who went so far afield in the dates given for second millennium events, could have so accurately determined the opening date of the reign of Nabonasser, giving it correctly as February 26, 7^7 B® C® It is also very interesting to see how Newton, by use of the Canon of Ptolemy, places 625 B® C® as the first year of his "reign^ndThd^death in the year 6ol|. B. C®, yet by a series of very interesting mistakes in his methodology makes Nebuchadnezzar ta ko Jerusalem in 6o6 B® C®$; and also to see how ho makes the first year of Xerxes reign in lj.85 B® C® and the first year of Artaxerxes in B® C®, yet puts the seventh year of Artaxerxes 0 Sir Isaac Newton, The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms, p® 30 4L , _ \ *■"■•*•* • - w-. —.1^ **>H»f-** Olli »-l» f >1 7 Id® p® 69 ? Id® p® 51+ ’ Id® pp® 118, 150 ? Id® p® 201). ? Id® p® 205 p Id. p® 55 Id® p. 255 ' Id® p® 38 -5 - as l|-57 B. C. instead of I4.58 B. C., subtracting seven from I4.6I4. instead of six. (For if the first year of Artaxerxes reign began with the spring of I46U B. C., the seventh year would have to begin with the spring of 1+58 B* C.) Now the accuracy of this 11-57 date will be definitely demonstrated by recently discovered archaeological finds in another paper. It is mentioned hero merely to suggest the almost providential covering up of a simple arithmetical blunder on the part of such a prominent scientist as Newton, that a date, later to be proved correct, could be used as the starting point of a message to be heralded to the world announcing the close of the great 2J00 day prophecy and the ushering in of most solemn events connected with the second advent of Christ. In order to present to our minds the great necessity of most careful, painstaking scrutiny of that which Morgan calls the ’’incidental” side of Bible study, personally investigating and constantly rechecking any chronological data used by means of the most recent archaeological evidences, our attention is called in this paper to the methodology used by Newton in arriving at the date 606 for the first campaign against Jerusalem when Daniel was carried captive to Babylon in tho third year of Jehoiakim. Let Newton express in his own words his method of arriving at some of his figures: "As the Chaldean Astronomers counted the reigns of their kings’by the years of Nabonassar beginning with tho month Thoth, so tho Jews, as their authors tell us counted the'reigns of theirs by the years of Moses, beginning every year with tho month Nisan: for if any king began his reign a few days before this month began, it was rockonod to him for a whole year, and tho beginning of this month was accounted the beginning of the second year of his reignj and according to this reckoning tho first year of Jehoiakim began with the month Nisan, Anno Nabonassar 1J9> though his reign might not really begin ’till five or six months after: and the fourth year of Jehoiakim, and first of Nebuchadnezzar according to the reckoning of the Jews, began with the month Nisan, Anno Nabonassar 11|2 and the first year'of Zedekiah and of Joconiah’s captivity, and ninth year of Nebuchadnezzar, began with Nisan in the year of Nabonassar I50, and the tenth year of Zedekiah, and eighteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar began -with month Nisan in tho yoar of Nabonassar 159* Nov/ in tho ninth yoar of Zedekiah Nebuchadnezzar invadod Judea, and tho cities thoroof and in the tenth month of that year and tenth day of tho month, ho and his host besieged Jerusalem. II Kings 25:1$ Jcr. 3U*'1> 52:U» From this time to the tenth month in tho second year of Darius are just seventy years (Zech. 1:7~12). So then tho ninth year of Zodokiah in which his indignation against Jerusalem and the cities of Judah began, commenced with tho -4- month of Nisan in the year of Nabonassar I58 and tho eleventh year of Zedekiah and nineteenth of Nebuchadnezzar in which the city was taken and the temple burnt commenced with the month Nisan in the year of Nabonassar 160 as above.” To this excerpt, let us add another, a few pages back in the same book, whoro ho says: ”lt appears from the Canon that Asserhadan died in the year of Nabonasser 81, Saosduchinus his successor in the year 101, Chyniladan in the year 123, Nabopolassar in the year lljlj- and Nebuchadnezzar in the year 187* All these kings, and some others mentioned in tho Canon reigned successively over Babylon, and this last king died in the thirty-seventh year of Jochoniah’s captivity, II Kings 25:27, and therefore Jechaniah was captivated in the 150th year of Nabonassar. ’’This captivity was in tho eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, •' II Kings 21p:12, and eleventh of Jehoiakim’s: for the first year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign was tho fourth of Jehoiakim’s, Jer. 21|.:1, and Jehoiakim reigned eleven years before this’captivity, II Kings 23:36s II Chron. 36:5, and Jechoniah threo months, ending with tho captivity, and the tenth year'of Jochoniah’s captivity was tho eighteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, Jer. 32:1, and tho eleventh year of Zedekiah in which Jerusalem was taken was the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar, Jer. 52:5,12, and therefore Nebuchadnezzar began his reign in the year of Nabonasser 1^2, that is two years before the death of his father Nabopolassor, he being made king by his father, and Jehoiakim succeeded his father Josiah in the year of Nabonasser 139 and Jerusalem was taken and the temple burnt in the year of Nabonasser 160, about twenty years after tho destruction of Ninevah.”11 These excerpts are very nice roading, but if one is patient enough to tabulate them, Newton’s mistakes clearly appear. Below is a table, (sceb p, I4&}, showing the years from 628 to 559 B. C. which will indicate how Nowton did his figuring. In the second quotation he equalizes tho year of Nebuchadnezzar’s death 187 with the thirty-seventh year of Jochoniah’s captivity. Thon subtracting thirtyseven from I87 ho gets 150 and says, ’’therefore Jechaniah was captivated in the 150th year of Nabonasser.” This is identically the same kind of reasoning by which he made 457 the seventh year of Artaxerxes when his first year, according to the Canon, was in 4-64 • It is tho same identical blunder made by some of our pioneers when they said tho 13th dfcy of October, 1844, was tho first day of tho seventh month, therefore the 10th day of the seventh month would be tho 23rd of October instead of the 22nd. Id. pp. 296-298 Id. pp. 294,295 * l|.a -TABLE SHOWING SIR ISAAC NEWTON’S ARRANGEMENT OF EVENTS DURING REIGNS OF NABOPOLASSAR 'AND NEBUCHADNE ZZ’AR 1 c j 2 ; 3 4 ; 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 j 13 j 14 V) E CD E u c -c. .c C CD T9 C O O -H CO o c 0 (D O «P O O X U ' *-c ”> Q • u CD — ’■ U <0 W XT >- c —tT •— >- C • C- co >- ’P X* >- c — >- C >- c vO • « — > —• O •r— u-«* c <0 <0 ® — Q o ■ — Q ■V rs *■— c u •— r\ < — JO O T> X» (0 — o > <0 — c u ; — c u ■— JO c (/} ■>— —• - C 5E • ® o 0 M— • <0 4- a> O xi> Jl> <9 O Q 0 O G> *P — . : ,-X - * CK Ci W AC O rQ O C CJ ~ a: p ; (X. nt o 628-27 120 Spr1 ng 13 592-91 156 13 7 15 rd 7 156-57 7- 6 1 tc 14 591-90 7 14 8 16 d •H 8 7- 8 | 6- 5 2 Spr ing 15 590-89 8 15 9 17 CD 9 8- 9 5- '4 3 1 1 16 123-24 9- 8 9 16 10 18 •d CD 10 159-60 | 4- 3 4 2 2 17 4- 5 8- 7 160 17 11 19 eq 11 160-61 ■ 3- 2 F 3 3 18 8- 6 7- A 1 1« 12 20 1- 2 2- 1 6 4 4 19 6- 7 6- 5 2 19 13 21 2- 3 621-20 7 5 5 20 7- 8 5- 4 3 20 14 22 3- 4 620-19 8 5h 6 C 6 21 8- 9 4- 3 4 21 15 23 4- 5 9- 8 9 Ki co 7 Ctf W 7 rd22 129-30 3- 2 5 22 16 24 5- 6 8- 7 130 w K> 8 co u> 8 •H 23 130-31 2- 1 6 23 17 25 6- 7 7- 6 x O 9 0 9 q24 1- 2 581-80 7 24 18 26 7- 8 6- 5 2 CIO 0 10 ^25 2- 3 580-79 8 25 19 27 8- 9 5- 4 3 ,Q A 11 26 3- 4 9- 8 9 20 d 28 169-70 4- 3 4 *"‘12 <•—। 12 27 4- 5 8- 7 170 n27 21 d N 29 170-71 3- 2 5 13 13 £ 28 5- 6 7- 6 1 ^28 22 to CD 30 1- 2 2- 1 6 14 14 •H rd 29 6- 7 6- 5 2 r§29 23 d 31 2- 3 611-10 7 15 15 O cd 30 7- 8 5- 4 3 rd 30 24 d 32 3- 4 610-09 8 16 16 •H O 31 8- 9 4- 3 4 ?31 25 '0 d 33 4- 5 9- 8 9 17 17 rd 1 139-40 3- 2 5 £3 2 26 P CD 34 5- 6 8- 7 140 18 18 2 140-41 2- 1 6 ^33 27 35 6- 7 7- 6 1 19 19 9-i O 8 3 1- 2 5 71-70 7 34 28 36 7- 8 6- 5 2 20 1 20 •H 14 4 2- 3 570-69 8 35 29 37 8- 9 5- 4 3 21 2 21 •P' •H d •h 5 3- 4 9- 8 9 36 30 38 179-80 4- 3 4 1 3 •H rd 6 4- 5 8- 7 180 37 31 39 180-81 3- 2 5 2 4 •P £4 -3 7 5- 6 7- 6 1 38 32 40 1- 2 2- 1 6 3 5 d 8 6- 7 6- 5 2 39 33 41 2- 3 601-00 7 . 4 Ih 6 i 9 7- 8 5- 4 3 40 34 42 3- 4 600-99 8 5 ci N 7 \ 10 8- 9 4- 3 4 41 35 43 4- 5 9- 8 9 N) N 0 8 11 149-50 3- 2 5 42 36 44 5- 6 8- 7 150 u? £ 7 1 »3 9 1 150-51 2- 1 6 43 37 45 186-8 7 7- 6 1 T) 8 2 «5 10 d 2 1- 2 561-60 7 1 7- 8 6- 5 5- 4 4- 3 2 3 4 O g ■^10 ©xu ^11 3 4 5 O 2 X> CD 11 12 13 •H 3 r-3M h these eight so-called ’’Synchronisms” may be seen. Synchronism No. 1 ’’The word that came to Jeremiah concerning all the people of Judah in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah; that was tho first year of Nebuchadnozaar king of Babylon; the which Jeremiah tho prophet spake unto all tho peoplo of Judah, and to all tho inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying: From the thirteenth year of Josiah tho son of Amon, king of Judah, oven unto this day, that is tho three and twentieth year, tho word of the Lord hath'como unto me, a nd I have spokon unto you, rising early and speaking; but ye have not hearkened.” Jor. 25:1-3- Hie same formula is used for recording the ’’accession year” of Jehoahaz (2 Kings 2^:31)» and also that of Jehoiakim (vorse 36), as was used in recording that of Josiah (2 Chron. 3U«1)» — was ----- years old when ho began to reign,” showing that his age is reckoned to his accession year, and not to his first year. Twenty-throe years cover tho time from the 13th of Josiah through tho accession and throe months of Jehoahaz, and tho accession of Jehoiakim, up to and 12 Albright, W.'F., "-H10 Seal of Eliakim," Journal of Biblical Literature, LI (1932), p. 96. - 7 - 13 including the latter’s 24-th year. Only by so doing can one make these 23 years span the period required, for Jewish reckoning at this date in history is always ’’inclusive reckoning, taking account of both the opening and closing years in any given period. Synchronism No. 2 ’’The word that came to Jeremiah concerning’all the people of Judah in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah; that was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon.” Jer. 25*1. Here the Ipth year of Jehoiakim synchronizes with the 1st year of Nebuchad*-nezzar• 13 This year was the date of the battle of Carchemish where Nebuchadnezzar defeated Necho. (Jer. L[6:2). Breasted, (History of Egypt, p. 5^5,) makes the battle of Qarohomish 605, but Olmstead,' (HisTory of "I^le stine and Syria, p. 510) puts this campaign correctly in 6oU* 0. Cameron,- (His~tory of Early Iran,” p. 219,) infers the some date by making Nebuchadnezzar’s reign 15blp-562. «• +A very clear example of ’’inclusive reckoning” as practiced by the Jewish writers is found in 2'Kings 18:9, 10: ’’And it came to pass in the fourth year of King Hezekiah, which was the seventh year of Hoshea, son of Elah, king of Israel, that Shalmaneser king of Assyria came up against Samaria, and'besieged it. And at the end of three years they took it: even in the sixth year of Hezekiah, that is the ninth year of Hoshea, king of Israek, Samaria was taken.” Compare this thought with 2 Kings 2X4:!; Jer. 36:9,22; D Dan. 2:1. The idea of counting the entire death year of a king as an integral part of his reign, and beginning the first year of the succeeding king with the beginning of the next calendar year, is an ordinary procedure in Biblical chronological reckoning. Notice how it is followed in the chronology of the patriarchs. Adam was 130 years old when he begat Seth. (According to Gen. 7*6,11, Noah was 600 years old in his 600th year — not in his 601st year, as is reckoned in modern times.) Therefore Seth was born in Adam’s 130th year, and at the beginning of his 131st year Seth was counted as one year old. So the record in Gen. 5*3-5 checks. Adam lived 800 years after he begat Seth and all his years wore 930 (800 plus 130). In this way no fractions of years arc counted, and yet the chronology is accurately maintained. This method may be checked by figuring tho years of Methuselah’s life. By any other method he survives the flood year. — 8 — 15 Coupling the recognized length of Nabopolassar’s reign (21 years) the fact that the eclipse of the moon, taking place in 621, occurred in the fifth year of his reign, gives no alternative but to make the ’’death year” of Nabo-polassar the ’’accession year” of Nebuchadnezzar as shown in the table (see p*17 )• Thus the statement in Daniel 1:1 — ”In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim 15 • J The latest date tablet for Nabopolassar *s reign is for 21st year/ 2 mo./ 19 da. Strassmaier, Zoitschrift fur Assyriqlqgig,Vol. IV, 1U5«) This was also’the accession year f or Ifebuchadnezgar, as well as the Jrd year of Jehoiakim, thus accounting for the statement in Daniel 1:1, and 2 Kings 2ij.:l. Nebuchadnezzar at this time took Daniel and his companions captive and this year was the first year of the 70 years’ captivity, as prophesied by Jeremiah the following year. (Jer. 25:1-11). Ptolemy’s Canon agrees ('Tachsmuth, Curt, ’’Studion der Alten Geschichte” [18951, PP» 305,506) in giving Nabopo-lassar 21 years. -Cameron^ (’’History of Early Iran,” p. 219.) places Nebuchadnezzar’s reign as 60I4-562, forgetting his accession year in 605. Ho has Nabopolassar’s reivi as 626-6O4 (p. 252), but tablets and scholars agree in giving him 21 years. If 626 is his accession year, 625 is his first year, and 605 would be his 21st and the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar. ”ln the Fifth year of Nabopolassar, which is Egyptian-127th year of Nebo-nassar-close to the eleventh hour—27th, 28th of the Egyptian month Athyr, someone noticed the moon at Babylon commence her eclipse, ^ormed in the greatest phase of this eclipse a quarter of the diameter of the meridinal part of the luminary. Since the eclipse commenced at five hours after midnight, and reached the center about six hours, which made in that case at Babylon, 5 1/2 to 1/5 hours, the sun was exactly in the 27th d. of the 'remit is clear that the time of'the middle of the eclipse was for Babylon, 5 1/2 - 1/5 hours equinoxial, and for Alexandria, 5 hours only after midnight. Or the time since the epoch is 126 Egyptian years, 86 days, 17 hours equinoxial.” (M. Halma, Translator, Composition Mathomatique de Claude Ptolemao, 2 vols., Paris: 1815, Vol. II, f.) Shis corresponds to April 21, 621 B. C., the year in which the Scroll is found, the 18th of Josiah. (2 Kings 22:5-ll|S 2 Chron. 5U:8-22). Claudius Ptolemy (A.D. 70-131) was a native Egyptian mathematician and astronomer. According to his own personal testimony, he observed the heavens at least from 127 A. D. — 151 A.D. doing most of his work at Alexandria. 'He compiled'a list of kings, starting with the reign of the Babylonian ruler, Nabonassar, beginning his ’’era” with the first of the month Thoth of the year 747 3. C., the Egyptian New Year. He used a yearly ’’yard-stick” of exactly 565 days, thus making the New Year wander back through the months at the rate of one day every four years. Ulis list of kings from Nabonassar dam to his own time is known as the ’’Canon of Ptolemy." In his Almagest, the latest translation of which is in French by M.’Halma, entitled, Cexposition Mathomatiquo do Claude Ptolemae (2 Vols., Paris, 1815-1816), he records eclipses of sun and nd o n Ya 1ling in certain years of various reigns, thus securely anchoring his king-lists. Many of those'eclipses have been carefully checked with other sources (see'Pinches, T. G», Proceedings of'the Society of Biblical Archaeology, Vol. II, pp, 195-20U)j and according to Y. R, driver, ” lEe recently-discovercd contemporary monuments have fully established the accuracy of the Canon.” (Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed, Vol. Ill, p. 861, note 2.) - 9 - king of Judah come Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and beseiged it” — is in perfect harmony with Jeremiah 25:1, Nebuchadnezzar was king — it was his accession year. The next year was counted his first year* Thus the twenty-three years of Jeremiah roach back to the ’’death year” of Ashurboniapal and the ’’accession year” of Nabopolassar. ’’Jehoiakim was twenty and five years old when he began to reign; and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord his God. Against him come up Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and bound him in fetters, to carry him to Babylon* Nebuchadnezzar also carried of the vessels of the house of the Lord to Babylon, and put them in his temple at Babylon* Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim,’and his abominations which he did, and that which was found in him, behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah: and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead. Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign; and he reigned throe months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord. And when the year was expired, king Nebuchadnezzar sent, and brought him to Babylon, with the goodly vessels of the house of the Lord, and mado Zedekiah his brother king over Judah and Jerusalem.” 2 Chron. ”At that time the servants of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up against Jerusalem, and the city was besieged. And Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came against the city, and his servants did besiege it. And Jehoiachin the king of Judah went out to'the king of Babylon, ho, and his mother, and his servants, and his princes, and his officers: and the king of Babylon took him in the eighth year of his reign.” 2 Kings 21}.: 10-12. Jehoiakim reigned 11 years (2 Kings 2^:36); Johoiachin reigned three months and then was taken prisoner to Babylon in the same year, which also became the accession year of Zedekiah, as well as the first year of Jehoiachin’s captivity. Inasmuch as the king is not dead, he is counted as ruler, and Zedekiah is thought of as a regent ruling for him. Therefore the period of his captivity is an im-17 portant one. The discovery of stamped jar handles in Palestine with Jehoiachin*s name on them, verifies this hypothesis* ’’See Albright, op. cit* pp. 77-BU,102,10J) Thus the 11th year of Jehoiakim*s roign, the accession year of Zedekiah, and the first year of Jehoiachin*s captivity are equated with tho 8th year of Nebuchadnezzar. The Babylonians had boon before Jerusalem for nearly a year. (Jer. 39*1; 2 Kings 25:1.) 17 — - 1 Tho fifth year of Jehoiachin’s captivity is tho year of Ezokiol’s call. Eze. 1:1. It is also tho first yoar of tho roigh of Psamtik II* (Olmstead, History of Palestine and Syria, p. 5^3; Breasted, History of Egypt, p. 601.) - 10 ’’The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord in the tenth year of Zedekiah king of Judah, which was the eighteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar*” Jer* J2:l» That the accession year of Zedekiah was properly equated with the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar is shown by the above synchronism. This would be the only way the 10th year of Zedekiah could synchronize with the 18th year of Nebuchadnezzar Synchronism No» 5 gsyrt?, '-y-yW-'T KSSS&33SC3 "And it came to pass in the twelfth year of our captivity, in the tenth month, in the fifth day of the month, that one that had escaped out of Jerusalem came unto me, saying, The city is smitten." Eze. 33:21. Here the 12th year of Johoiachin’s captivity is synchronized with the first year of the "smiting of the city." Ezekiel received word on the fifth day of the tenth month, and the Temple was burned the tenth day of the fifth day of the fifth months so it took practically five months for the news to reach him. Synchronism No* 6 "And in the eleventh year of Zedekiah, in the fourth month, the ninth day of tho month, the city was broken up." Jer. 39^2. ’Now in the fifth month, in the tenth day of the month, which was the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, the captain of the guard, which served the king of Babylon, into Jerusalem." Jer. 52:12. "And in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month, (which is the nineteenth year of king Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon,) came Nebuzaradan, the captain of the guard, a servant of tho king of Babylon, into Jerusalem." 2 Kings 25:8. Here the eleventh year of Zedekiah is synchronized with the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar. This is the date of tho third and final campaign against Jerusalem. Synchronism No. 7 "In the five and twentieth year of dur captivity, in the beginning of the yoar, in the tenth day of tho month, in the fourteenth year after that the city was smitten, in the selfsame day, the hand of the Lord was upon me, and brought me thither." Ezo. Lj.O:l. It was in tho yoar 5$$ the 17th yoar of Nebuchadnezzar and tho 9th year of Zodokiah that Hophra (Aprios), began his reign in Egypt. (Olmstead, History of Palestine and Syria, p. 5255 Breasted, History of Egypt, p. 601.) 11 - The twenty-fifth year of Jehoichin’s captivity is synchronized with the fourteenth year of the smiting of the city* Synchronism No* 8 ’’And it came to pass in the soven and thirtieth’year of the captivity of Jehoiachin king of Judah, in the twelfth month, in the five and twentieth day of the month, and Evil-merodach king of Babylon, in the first year of his reign, lifted up the head of Jehoiachin king of Judah, and brought him forth out of prison*” Jer* 52:?1 The thirty-seventh year of the captivity of Jehoiachin is synchronized with the first year of Evil-merodach (Amel Marduk). This harmonizes Nebuchadnezzar’s reign with the 10 years given by Ptolemy, and as shown in the Table (Exhibit B)^ By a comparison of these eight synchronisms with the details of the Table I (pp.17.181 and with Chart A (p«19)» it will "foe noted that they cover the entire period of Nabopolassar’s and Nebuchadnezzar’s reigns, extending from the accession year of Nabopolassar through the accession years of both Nebuchadnezzar and Amel Marduk (Evil-merodach), giving throe instances of the use of the “accession year” idea. If one will take the pains to follow those various synchronisms through point by point, he will find that the transition made between the sacred and secular chronology is so firmly anchored that it is impossible to move a peg one way or the other. This is all the more remarkable as it is the first and only place in Biblical history when this is done. From a careful study therefore, of $ The latest dated tablet for Nebuchadnezzar’s reign ts 43 yr./ 5 rio*/ 9 da. Ungnad, Vorderasiatische Schriftdonkmalor, Heft III, 36 • Ptolemy’s Canon agrees • "(dur t WacKsmutli, dtudieti dor Alton Geschichte p* 3$5)* The latest Tablet for Amol Marduk is cfated 'd yr./r$ mo./ 17 da* (Clay, Babylonian Expedition, Vol. VIII, p* 34.) This year is also tho accession year Tor iTer gal" Sharusur• The earliest tablet found for him is dated Acc. yr./ 3 mo./ 20 da* (Ungnad, Vordorasiatischc Schriftdonkaler, Heft TV, 32). Ahmose began his reign in 5^9 .T (Olmstead, History of Palestine and Syria, p. 536* Breasted, History of Egypt, p* 601) • ' “ ihTe latest table4 for' Wergal Sharusur is dated 4 yr.7 1 mo.'/ 2 da. (Evetts, Nor gal Sharusur, p. 69). The earliest tablet found for Nabunaid is dated Acc. yr?/'2 mo./ I5 ^a. (Clay, Babylonian Expedition, Vol VIII, p. 39)• Much archaeological evidence has been found indicating that Belshazzar is a historical character, the son of Nabunaid (Nabohidus), and co-rogent with him on the throne of Babylon. (Dougherty, R. P*, Nabonidus and Belshazzar, pp. 137» 192). - 12 - these data, the following important method of chronological reckoning is demon strated; namely, For purposes of chronology, the entire last calendar year of a king’s reign is given to that monarch, and is also called the ’’accession year” nn tn■— — bubbw bbb—bmb e i hbmmm. wwbwbbbbh b mi ib imsbwmb bmbmh t- t~ -tut mbmmbbmbmi t'uB-"in rmr-i-T ir i—nr-ra iy- bi nr JU-iTr-.- - of the following ruler, the next year being called the first year of the new king Wn.B'iiBrro »i —i—BmBWB-MBMMB B nBBi—> Bn I Bin ■ MiUlf B< «B BwiMqpB >I IB' >B'-W MSBMMMMN I—in O'IIBBiB BWBMMMB BM8BNMB.MBWM iftBKMBBM* BiiBB W ml Hl I. > BB HB nB mil Bl These synchronisms may be verified without use of any definite anchor in the way of harmonizing the dates of those ancient kingdoms with our modern oalendrical system. They arc merely synchronisms between Biblical and profane history and as such would bo true regardless of whore the whole block of years was placed in the space of time* However, in order to interpret any of these dates in terms of modern reckoning, we must first link at least one of the systems up with astronomical phenomena and give careful attention to the season of the year in which the new year date of each system of reckoning fell. In Ptolemy’s Almagest we are told that ”In the 5^ year of Nabopolassar, which is Egyptian-127th year of Nabonasser — close to the eleventh hour — 27, 28th day of the Egyptian month Athyr some one noticed the moon at Babylon commence her eclipse. ... the time since the epoch is 126 Egyptian years, 86 days, 17 ,,20 hours equinoxial. This has been figured in terms of the Julian Calendar April 21, 621 B. C. Inasmuch as Ptolemy used a day yardstick for his Egyptian year neglecting the fourth of a day extra in the true tropical year, his first of Thoth or new year would drop back in terms of the Julian Calendar one day every four years* Ho began his Canon at noon, February 26, 7U7 C. and all of his measure ments are referred back to that as a starting point. By means of his Canon therefore and the eclipses of 621 we can very definitely say that the reign of Nabopl-lasser began in 625, and that the reign of Nebuchadnezzar began in 6oU« That is, the first year of Nabopolassar’s reign was from January 27, 625 to January 26, 621|_, and tho first year of Nobuchandnozzar’s reign was from January 21, 60I4. to January 20, 603, Julian time. See Noto 16, p. 8 20 - 15 - That the Jews reckoned their civil year as beginning with the seventh month Tisri is recognized by most of the scholars today. Only on this basis can one explain the feferonce in Nehemiah, chapters 1 and 2 and in Ezra 7s8« Josephus also agrees with this -when ho says ’’Moses appointed that Nisan which is the some as Xanthicus should be the first month for their festivals because he brought them out of Egypt in that month so that this month began the year as to all the solemnities they observed to the honour of God, although he preserved the original order 21 of the months as to selling and buying and other ordinary affairs.” In harmony with this Schurer says ’’Among these things the nature of the times and general practice are to be looked into; and first, the perfidy of the Jews, who ever stood boldly against God and Moses, who, when from God through Moses, they accepted the month of March as the beginning of the yoar, exercising an act of perverseness or pride, name the month of September as the new year itself, oven in 22 which month they appoint for themselves magistrates, whom they call -Archons.” Ugolino Blasio writing a few years later than Newton, who is sure that the Jewish year began in the spring says, "Tho beginning of the Jewish year is from the autumnal equinox, which is constant for tho first year of the lunar cycle of the Ptolemaic abacus John Jackson, Rector of Rossington, writing about the same time as Nowton says ”It is particularly to be noted, that when Mosos speaks of the commencement of the civil year, which was at the autumnal equinox in the month Tisri, ho never calls it the first month of the year but always the seventh.”^ He also adds 21 22 Josephus, Antiquities, I-J-J. Emil Schurer, History of tho Jewish People, 2nd Divi., Vol. II, p. 250, quoting Chrysostom, Tr. G. Amadon * Ugolino Blasio, Thesaurus Antiquitatum Sacrarum, Cols. XXI, XXII, Venice, op-755• Translation,- Grace' Amadon John Jackson, Chr-onological Antiquities, London, 1752, Vol. I, P. 28 - 1U - ”This account of the old and now year of the Hebrews is evident from Scriptures. In Exodus 2^:16 the seventh month in which was celebrated the feast of the Ingathering of all the fruits of the land; and in which they dwelt in tabernacles seven days counting from the 15th day inclusive, is said to be in the end of the year: and so in Deut. ^1:10 the same feast is said Ex. jL|.:22 to be at the revolution of the year; that is, the cardinal point, when the old year began at the autumnal equinox; and which was the seventh month from the vernal equinox, which was the epoch of the new ecclesiastical year."2^ Some scholars have quoted such references as I Kings 20:22; II Sam. 11:1; I Kings 20:26; II Chron. j6:10, where it speaks of "At the time of the year when kings go forth to battle" as indicating that the year expired in the spring for that was the time of tho various campaigns. But Beecher interprets the Hebrew word used here by saying, "The contexts show that the conception intended is that of the middle of tho year the goal from which the year turns back, retraces its steps to the point where it began; from which it ’comes around* to its starting 26 point; where it completes its ’going out* and begins its ’coming in.’" In the reckoning of the regnal year the Egyptians did not use any "accession year" as did tho Jews, Babylonians, and Persians. In the Canon of Ptolemy the entire death year of the king is counted as the first year of tho succeeding monarch. Thus the "accession year" of Nebuchadnezzar from the standpoint of the Jewish reckoning would synchronize with the last year of the old king, it being always remembered that the civil Jewish year began in the fall about nine months later than the correspondingly numbered Egyptian year. This would make it possible for Nebuchadnezzar as king of Babylon to besiege Jerusalem and take Daniel captive in the third year of Johoiakim, and at the same time call his first year equivalent with the fourth year of Jehoiakim. John Jackson, Chronological Antiquities, London, 1752# Vol. 1, p. 16 26 Willis J. Beochor, Dated Events in tho Old Testament, p. 12 - 15 - It is only in the past century that we have been able to get any archaeological facts that would give us objective evidence regarding many moot questions• And it is only within the last quarter of a century that inscriptional evidence has piled up and been deciphered to the extent that will onable us to interpret clearly many of the statements found in the Scriptures. 'Eiat Newton, for example, did a wonderful piece of work considering the material ho had to work with goes without saying, and the fact that Providence over-ruled in letting him make the seventh of Artaxerxes 457 does not mean that we should today follow in the various mistakes that he unwittingly made* The deeper wo go into the study of chronology the more sure we become of the absolute accuracy of the major dates connected with the 2300 day prophecy. This will be shown in another paper, at least so far as the 457 date is concerned. But a close study of the records both Biblical and profane makes it impossible for Newton’s date of 606 for the destruction of Jerusalem, and the captivity of Daniol and his companions, longer to be maintained. • A thoughtful, careful, study of chronology will thus be seen to be of inval- uable assistance to us in the proper exegesis of the Word. Another illustration of the ramifications of this problem may be seen by a glance at the various schools of thought regarding the date of the Exodus. By far the greater majority— perhaps one could go so far as to say almost without exception, all — of the scholars think of the period of Israel’s residency in Egypt to be 400-450 years, whereas we can demonstrate from Scriptural authority that it could not be more than 215 years. Before accepting for example, such a theory as that advocated by Petrie, placing the Exodus about 1220, one must ask oneself if the corresponding dates necessitated by Biblical chronology can be accepted. An acceptation of his date would means the following: 4 - 16 - Exodus 1220 B.C Residency in Egypt -AIS Jacob’s entrance 1105 B.C Abram’s Call to entrance 215 Abram left Haran 1650 B.C Flood to Abram 1127 Date of Flood 2077 B.C Petrie sidesteps such a conclusion by thinking of the residency as 100 years which of course cannot be accepted by students believing in the accuracy of Bibli- cal chronology. Garstang, on the otherhand, in advocating 1)|J|7 as the proper date makes use 27 of the following table so’widely at variance with Petrie and his fellow thinkers. Solomon’s Temple Judges Period 967 B.C. 1180 Exodus Wi-7 B.C. Egyptian Residency 100 Entry into Egypt 1877 B.C. -Patriarchal Period 215 Abraham* s Departure f r bm Haran 2092. B • C • But again Bible students cannot accept hiS” conoid's ions ', for tho period of Egyptian residency could not possibly bo 100 years. Unless we take into consideration the chronology of the entire sweep of Old Testament history, wo are liable to became enamored of the plausible detail offered by some scholar only to find ourselves in a chronological cul de sac. It moans deep digging and constant chocking, but we should certainly prepare ourselves for that microscopic examination of tho cardinal points of our faith that tho world is so soon to make. The acid test is certainly coming and may it not find us weighed in the balance and found wanting* 27 J. Garstang, The Heritage of Solomon, London: (193U), p. 151, NotTE Williams and Norgato CO G> 03 03 to to £ A l to 03 T ? 7 t T 9 i-* to 03 4* cn to 83 B.C. Dates (Julian Calendar) of Years of Nabonassar Era O O to Nebuchadnez zar Nabo^olassar *-* to ti* to to w- anal to Years of Nabonassar Era ro if* Regnal Years of Kings According to a Ptolemaic canon Zedekiah rjehoaichin _> J eh oi akim f^jh* ■ o -* o < Regnal Years of JUdah According to Jewish 4* Years (fall-fall) to 03 NebuchadneZTw zar to t> to >-•<-> Nabonassar Era ^j<»cn£wtoSo co to -a to o' w to »-* (jer. 25:11,12) 70 Years Captivity CD to <1 03 to if* 03 to -* (2 Chronicles 36:9,10) (Ezek. 33:21; Chock by Ezek. UO;1) __________________________________________________ co ~ (Ezek. 24:1-29; Zech. 1:7-12) Ezekiel / Jeremiah \ cn tf* 03 to h* to £5^Bto^Jtotoif*o3 to -* h* touitoOttorf*»f*>F*iFkif*if»4*tC*4*^?G3C>l to 2 a cn 3* M W H O c ft jefioiachln’s Captivity ® Year of Smiting of City ® 70 Years Indication o Years of Prophet Chronology of Egyptian Kings According to Breasted to co to co to to h i03 « P3 ?. TABLE I REGNAL SYNCHRONISMS ■According to JULIAN, PTOLEMAIC AND JEWISH RECKONINGS I CD w tv »-* o co Nab°ni-Ner^ Amel Sarusur Marduk ----- - to «-» S to ITaboni - Ne r - al Arne 1 dus Sarusur Marduk CD Ui a CD to Nebuchadnez zar Nebuchadnezzar to to £ T to ? CD ? ? O CD a> cd 8 7 w M 'J o> o co CD M w UM 01 CD $8 8 8 £ a 01 co ssasessgjjgssssgsigoEs a> 8g ms m Ahrnose II ® CD g 8 cn OJ co to to to to ►-* o mn Ezekiel Sl^Gl^oJS^SStqScD^Meo o co V IO 01 to CD CO w w tO co 8 VI CD rf* w to jCApries) Hophra (Apries) 014iUN)^0©a)'iaui 4* w to ►* toco CD CD CD •• ^OtS CD CD ct io W Cm tO N CD M? » ? MS8 ■ g • • •• B.C. Dates (Julian Calendar) of Years of Nabonassar Era Years of yabonassar Era Regnal Years of Kings According to Ptolemaic Canon Regnal Years According to Jewish Years of Judah (fall-fall) Babylonian Itegnal Years Klnss according to Jewish Years (rail-fall) to c4 o> Jewish Year (fall-fall) According to Years of < Nabonassar Era 7? Years Captivity Jeholachln’s captivity Year of Smiting of City to Years Indignation Years of Prophet Chronology of Egyptian Kings according to feasted to TABLE I (Continued) REGNAL SYNCHRONISMS According to JULIAN, PTOLEMAIC AND JEWISH RECKONINGS - 19 - CHART__A__ Eclipse * 3d Campaign 2d Campaign 37 fears 7 8 ’/k 9 Q April)- - CXv-vl i iine X jLTh®ANi- SS_ I iTK© tfexjto on */13 Nt stm \/j 4- N is aft\ x. I Tlro't h (April 7) — I 3 N is an (.April 7 ) __ ’ 1 QJ^ove/r o-n da-u o r_ t\\ qoii 5 Full Moon Date for 523 B.C. — 19-year cycle for century leading up to 523 B.C# shows that full-moon date lies between Apr 19 and 20, and that henoe 1 ^isan was either Apr 6 or 7. April new moon for 523 was Apr 4*42 (G.M.T.) and Apr 5.01 (J.C.T.). The following is the translation: Aprils 5 A 6 A7 h m Apr 6 for 1 Nisan "■ / A Tr. Per. = 18 21 g:22 (t°o short) April 5 6 A ? | Apr 7 for 1 Nisan" % ' x/ \ Tr. Per. = ld 18h 21”1 O.K. for ’’horned moon" in sign of long setting like April (Hevelius, "Selenographia," p. 281. The foregoing translation shows plainly that 1 Nisan in 523 B.C« was on April 7. It could not have been Apr 6, for the second, or horned moon never appears within so short a time after conjunction; and it could not have been April 8, for the 19-year oyole, over so short a period would not jump ahead that fast. In backward trend, the moons increase a day about every 300 years 9 LCxzvaJL . i THE JEWISH CALENDAR IN TEE FIFTH CENTURY B. C. Introductory Note: The papyri documents under consideration came from a Jewish colony established at Elephantine near the Nubian frontier under the protection of a Persian garrison. As early as 1878, it was recognized that the Aramaic papyri coming from Egypt pertained to the Persian administration in the age of Ezra and Nehemiah. Some of these papyri were found rolled up, tied and sealed. For nearly 2500 years, these seals had remained unbroken. Of additional interest is the fact that these texts were written by Jews, and, outside of the Bible, are among the earliest Jewish writings. In the words of the translator Mr. Cowley, ’’they present therefore a trustworthy picture of their surroundings, not distorted by lapse of time, nor obscured by textual corruption.” (’’Aramaic Papyri in the Fifth Century B. C.,” Preface, p. xiv). Oxford, 1923.) The confusion between modern Jewish computation and early Jewish reckoning, led the Greek author, M. L. Belleli, to doubt the authenticity of the Elephantine papyri, concerning which!!. M. Sayce and A. E. Cowley made their report in 1900. After examining the double Semitic dates in these valuable documents, and finding them not in agreement with the modern Jewish calendar, Mr. Belleli summarily concluded that they were not authentic, completely overlooking the fact that in the 5th century B. C., modern Jewish computation had not yet been devised. The unsoundness of this opinion and conclusion has been ably refuted by various authors; furthermore, the futility of applying the principles of modern Jewish calendation to the Aramaic dates has been shown by Dr. Fotheringham in his criticism of E. B. Knobel’s date argument (’’Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society,” Vol. LXIX, p. 12, ff. London, 1909). Many attempts have been made by chronologers to reconstruct synthetically, an ancient method of Jewish calendation. The fact that modern Rabbi nical computation does not agree with early Jewish dates is generally recog ii nized; but, even though this is often stressed, yet, the simple Mosaic principles that governed early Jewish time are almost completely overlooked. An important feature of the ancient history written in the various papyri, about which there is no doubt, relates to an order from the Persian king, Darius II, to keep the passover. The command concerning the Passover was given in few words: "In the month of Tybi (?) let there be a Passover for the Jewish garrison" ("Aramaic Papyri in the Fifth Century B. C.," p. 60). The date is the 5th year of Darius. Although the papyrus is imperfect, and somewhat broken, yet enough remains to show that it gives instructions to keep the festival of unleavened bread. The edict continues: "Now you accordingly count fourteen days of the month Nisan, and keep the Passover, and from the 15th day to the 21st day of Nisan (are) seven days of Unleavened bread. Be clean and take heed. Do no work on the 15th day, and on the 21st day. Also drink no beer, and anything at all in which there is leaven do not eat, from the 15th day from sunset till the 21st day of Nisan, seven days, let it not be seen among you; do not bring (it) into your dwellings, but seal (it) up during these days. Let this be done as Darius the king commanded. (Address) To my brethren Yedoniah and his colleagues the Jewish garrison, your brother Hananiah" ("Idem," p. 63). Cowley’s comment on this passover edict (Papyrus "No. 6" of Ungnad, and "Plate 6" of Sachau) is that it "removes all reason for doubting the genuineness of the Persian letters (by Artaxerxes] in Ezra" ("Idem," p. 62). The papyri themselves, therefore, show that the members of the Jewish garrison in Elephantine and Assuan were fully acquainted with the Mosaic passover regulations that commanded this feast to be kept at sunset (Deut. 16:6) on the 14th of Nisan (Ex. 12:6). Consequently, it is fully in harmony with the circumstances forming the background of the Aramaic dates to offer a method of interpretation that is based on passover observance. The calen- dric outline (page 21) pertaining to the Aramaic or Jewish dates, has already been applied to the crucifixion date problem. In this calendar problem, it iii is employed in a specific form as representative of Mosaic calendation. The Egyptian calendar made use of in this solution is the same as has been standardized for Egyptian time, with the exception, that in harmony with Ptolemy’s reckoning of intervals, and eclipses, Oppolzer's ’’Canon," and the testimony of Censorinus, the Era of Nabonassar is made to begin on February 27 instead of February 26. OUTLINE OF DISCUSSION 1. Introductory Note pp. i,ii,iii 2. Egyptian Nev/ Year Table pp. 1,2 Jewish Passover Table p. 3 3. Tables I, II, and III — Analogue of Ancient Dates and Eclipses p. 4 4. Cycle Table (IV) in time of Ezra and Nehemiah p. 5 5. Papyrus References 6. Eclipse References 7. Discussion of Problem 8. Conclusion 9. Nabonassar Era — Leap Year Table (V) pp. 6-8 pp. 9,10 pp. 11-19 pp. 20,21 p. 5"a EGYPTIAN NEW YEAR (1 THOTH) TABLE AND ITS1IULIAN EQUIVALENT DATE (NOON TO NOONt ASTRONOMICAL TIME — FROM 1356)B. C. TO 238 A.D )* B.C. 1 Thoth B.C. 1 Thoth B.C. 1 Thoth B.C. 1 Thoth B.C. 1 Thoth B.C. 1 Thoth B.C. 1 Thoth 8 24 8 23 n n 748-Feb 2^> 747 Nabonassar 672 671 596 595 594 5 93 -Ja n 520 1 RIO 4 1 444 443 442 441-Oec 368 367 366 3 6 5 - N 0 v 822 821-Mar 746 745-Feb Era 26 6 70 669-Feb 7 19 518 517-Oec fl 12 23 820 819 818 817-Ma r 15 -744- 743 7 742 > 741-Feb 1 < 25 668 667 666 665-Feb 6 592 591 590 589-Jan 18 516 515 514 513-Dec 30 440 Papyrus 439 Papyrus 438 437-Dec 11 fl p II "G_" 364 363 362 361-Nov 22 816 r 740 .< 66 4 588 512 436 36O 815 739 663 587 511 435 359 814 738 ’* 66 2 586 510 434 358 813-Ma r 812 14 737-Feb 736 « 24 661-Feb 660 5 585-Jan 584 17 509-Dec 508 29 433-Oec 432 10 357-Nov 356 21 811 735 ” 659 583 507 431 355 810 734 »' 658 582 506 430 354 809-Mar 13 733-Feb 23 657-Feb 4 5 81-da n 16 505-Dec 28 429-Oec 9 353-Nov 20 808 732 656 580 50 4 428 352 80 7 )5 731 655 5 79 503 X 427 351 806 730 654 578 502 4 26 350 805-Mar 12 729-Feb 22 653-Feb 3 577-Jan 15 501-De c 27 425-Dec 8 349-Nov 19 80 4 IV 728 652 576 500 424 348 803 1 X- 727 651 575 499 423 347 80 2 I 726 650 574 498 422 346 801-Mar 11 725-Feb 21 649-Fe b 2 573-Jan 14 497-0ec 26 421-Oec 7 345-NOV 18 800 )< 724 648 572 496 420 Papyrus "H « 344 799 '1 723 647 571 495 419 343 798 7 22 646 5 70 494 418 34'2 79 7-Mar 10 721-Feb 20 645-Feb 1 569-Jan 13 493“Dec 25 417-0e c 6 341-NOV 17 796 720 644 598 492 416 Pap yr us "J" 340 795 j lO 719 643 5o7 491 415 339 794 718 042 566 490 414 338 793-Mar I 9 7 717-Feb 19 641-Ja n 31 5 65-*Ja n 12 489-Oec 24 413-Dec 5 337-Nov 16 792 i 716 0 40 564 488 412 3)6 791 i f 715 639 563 487 411 335 790 I r 714 638 562 486 410 Papyrus 334 789-Mar 1 7JL3-Feb 18 637-Jan 30 561-Jan 11 48 5-0ec 23 409-Dec 4 333-Nov 15 788 % 712 636 560 484 408 33 2 787 1 711 635 559 483 407 331 786 % 710 634 558 482 406 330 785-Mar 1 709-Feb 17 633-Jan 29 557-Jan 10 481-Dec 22 u05-Dec 3 329-Nov 14 784 7 708 632 556 480 404 3 28 783 7 707 631 555 479 403 327 782 706 630 554 478 40 2 326 781-Mar 1 705-Feb 16 629-Jan 28 553-Jan 9 477-Oec 21 401-Dec 2 325-Nov 13 780 I 704 628 552 476 400 3 24 7 79 1 b 703 627 5 51 475 399 323 778 I k 70 2 626 550 474 398 322 777-Mar 5 701-Feb 15 625-Jan 27 549-Jan 8 473-Dec 20 397-Dec 1 321-Nov 12 776 700 624 548 472 396 320 775 f 699 623 547 471 Papyrus "A " 395 319 774 698 622 546 4 70 394 318 773-Mar 1 * 697-Feb 14 6 21-Jan 26 iZ 545-Ja n 7 4o9-De c 19 393-Nov 30 317-Nov 11 772 I 696 620 544 468 392 316 771 I F 695 619 543 46 7 391 315 770 1 f 69 4 618 542 466 390 314 769-Mar 3 693-Feb 13 617-Ja n 25 541-Jan 6 465-Dec 18 389-Nov 29 313-Nov 10 768 J 69 2 616 540 4(b4 Pap yr us "B" 388 312 767 5 691 615 539 463 387 311 7o6 690 614 538 462 386 310 765-Mar 2 689-Feb 12 613-Jan 24 537-dan 5 461-Dec 17 385-Nov 28 309-Nov 9 704 3- 688 612 536 460 Papyrus "0” 384 308 763 687 611 535 459 383 30 7 762 686 610 534 458 382 306 761-Mar 1 ,685-Feb 11 609-Jan 23- 533-Oan 4 457-Dec 16 381-Nov 27 305-Nov 8 760 4 684 608 532 456 380 30 4 759 683 607 531 455 379 303 758 Kar J 68 2 606 530 454 378 302 757-Feb 29 681-Feb 10 605-Jan 22 5 29-Ja n 3 453-Oec 15 377-Nov 26 301-Nov 7 756 X&ntf 680 60 4 528 452 376 300 755 n 754 k 679 678 603 602 527 526 451 Papyrus 450 Unqnad 112." 375 374 299 298 753-Feb 28 677-Feb 9 601-Jan 21 525-dan 2 449-Dec 14 373-Nov 25 29 7-Nov 6 752 'J'O.VT 676 600 5 24 448 372 296 751 H 750 ’< 749-Feb 27 675 674 6 8 599 598 597-Ja n 20 523 Camb yse A 5~22 Tablet 521-Jan 1 447 Papyrus 446 445-Dec 13 ” E ” 371 370 369-Nov 24 295 294 293-Nov 5 * This period covers the Sothlc Cycle from 1322 B.C, to 139 A.D. Date of 1 Thoth is placed opposite the Julian leap year, at which time it occurs a day earlier, and continues for four years. For example, February £7 Is Egyptian new year dayfor years 749 to 746 B»C. EGYPTIAN NEW YEAR (1 THOTH) TABLE AND ITS JULIAN EQUIVALENT DATE (NODN TO NOONj ASTRONOMICAL TIME — FROM 1356 B. C. TO 238 A. D. ) * B.C. 1 Tho th 292 291 290 289-Nov 9 288 287 286 285-Nov 3 284 283 282 281-Nov 2 2 80 2 79 278 277-Nov 1 2 76 275 274 273-Oct 31 272 271 270 269-Oct 30 268 267 266 265-Oct 29 264 263 262 261-Oct 28 260 2 59 2p8 257-Oct 27 256 255 254 253-Oct 26 252 2 51 250 249-Oct 25 248 247 246 245-Oct 24 244 243 242 241-Oct 23 2 40 239 238 237-Oct 22 236 235 234 233-Oct 21 232 231 230 229-0ct 20 228 227 226 22 5-Oct 19 22 4 223 2 22 221-Oct 18 2 20 219 218 217-Oct 17 B.C. 1 Tho th 216 215 214 213-Oct 16 212 211 210 209-0ct 15 208 207 206 205-Oct 14 204 203 202 201-0ct 13 200 19 9 Rosetta 198 Stone 197-Oct 12 196 195 194 193-Oct 11 192 191 190 189-Oct 10 186 187 186 185-Oct 9 184 183 182 181-Oct 8 180 179 178 177-Oct 7 176 175 174 173-Oct 6 172 171 170 169-Oct 5 168 167 166 165-Oct 4 164 163 162 161-Oct 3 160 159 158 157-Oct 2 156 155 154 153-Oct 1 152 151 150 149-Sep 30 148 147 146 145-Sep 29 144 143 142 141-Sep 28 B.C. 1 Thoth 140 139 138 137-Sep 27 136 135 134 133-Sep 26 132 131 130 129-Sep 25 128 127 126 125-Sep 24 124 123 122 121-Sep 23 120 119 118 117-Sep 22 116 115 114 113-Sep 21 112 111 110 10 9-Sep 20 108 107 10 6 10 5-Sep 19 10 4 10 3 10 2 101-Sep 18 100 99 98 97-Sep 17 96 95 94 93-Sep 16 92 91 90 89-Sep 15 88 87 86 85-Sep 14 84 83 82 81-Sep 13 80 79 78 77-Sep 12 76 75 74 73-Sep 11 72 71 70 69-Sep 10 68 67 66 65-Sep 9 B.C. 1 64 63 62 61-Sep 60 59 58 57-Sep 56 55 54 53-Sep 52 51 50 49-Sep 48 47 46 45-sep 44 43 42 41-Sep 40 39 38 37-Sep 36 35 34 33—Sep 32 31 30 29-Aug 28 27 26 25-Aug 24 23 22 21-Aug 20 19 18 17-Aug 16 15 14 13-Aug 12 11 10 9-A ug 8 7 6 5-Aug 4 3 2 1—Aug 1 2 3 4~Aug 5 6 7 8-Aug 9 10 11 12-Aug Tho th 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 A.D. 1 13 14 15 16-Aug 17 18 19 20-Aug 21 22 23 24-Aug 25 26 27 28-Aug 29 30 31 32-Aug 33 34 35 36-Aug 37 38 39 40-Aug 41 42 43 44-A ug 45 46 47 48-Aug 49 50 51 52-Aug 53 54 55 56-A ug 57 58 59 60-Aug bl 62 63 64-A ug 65 66 67 68-A ug 69 70 71 72-Aug 73 74 7 5 76-Aug 77 78 79 80-Aug 81 82 83 84-Aug 85 86 87 88-Aug Tho th 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 A.D. 1 Thoth 89 90 91 92-Aug 1 93 94 95 96-Ju 1 31 97 98 99 100-Jul 30 101 102 103 104-Jul 29 10 5 106 10 7 108—Jul 28 109 110 111 112-Jul 27 113 114 115 116-Jul 26 117 118 119 120-Jul 25 121 122 123 124-Jul 24 125 126 127 128-Jul 23 129 130 131 132-Jul 22 133 134 135 136-Jul 21 137 I38 End of 139 Sothlc CycIe 140-Jul 20 ' 141 142 143 144-Jul 19 145 146 147 148-Ju 1 18 149 150 151 152-Jul 17 153 154 155 156-Jul 16 157 158 159 160-jul 15 161 162 163 164-jul 14 A.D. 1 Thoth 16 5 166 167 168-Jul 13 169 170 171 172-Jul 12 173 174 175 176-Jul 11 177 178 179 180-Jul 10 181 182 183 184-Jul 9 185 186 18 7 188-Jul 8 189 190 191 192-Jul 7 193 19 4 195 196-Jul 6 197 198 199 200-Jul 5 201 202 203 204-Jul 4 20 5 206 207 208-Jul 3 209 210 211 212-Jul 2 213 214 215 216-Jul 1 217 218 219 220-Jun 30 221 222 2 23 224-Jun 29 225 226 227 228-Jun 28 229 230 231 232-Jun 27 233 234 235 236-Jun 26 237 238 Cens orInu s 239 240-Jun 25 * This period Julian leap February 27 covers the Sothlc Cycle from year, at which time it occurs is Egyptian new year day for 1322 B.C. to 139 A. a day earlier, and years 749 to 746 B. D. Date of continues C. 1 foi Thoth is placed opposite the ' four years. For example, PASSOVER METHOD FOR DETERMINING JULIAN EQUIVALENT ARAMAIC E A R FULL MOON G.M.T.** NISAN 13 J.C.T. NISAN 14 J.C.T. NISAN 1 J.C.T. CONJUNCTION JER. CIV. T. TRANSLA. TION PER 100 (DAY5) LE NGTH OF YEAR (DAYS) 481 May 4.04 4.63 May 5 Apr 22 Apr 19.28 2,47 (111 480 Apr 23.12 23. 71 Apr 24 Apr 11 Apr 8. 99 1. 76 35* \ 4 79 Apr 12.16 12.75 Apr 14 Apr 1 Mar 29.64 2.10 (121 355 478 Apr 30.93 31.52 May 2 Apr 19 Apr 17.58 1.16 (13 ) 383 477 Apr 19.38 19.97 Apr 21 Apr 8 Apr 5.90 1.84 (14) 355 476 Apr 9.03 9. 62 Apr 10 Mar 28 Mar 25.95 1. 79 115 > 354 475 Apr 28.04 28.63 Apr 29 Apr 16 Apr 13.64 2.10 (16) 384 4 74 Apr 17.71 18.30 Apr 19 Apr 6 Apr 2.80 2.94 (171 355 384 4 73 May 5.62 6.21 May 7 Apr 24 Apr 20.68 3.06 (18) 6939 OATj ^472 Apr 24.89 25.48 Apr 26 Apr 13 Apr 10=27 2 = 47^ 119J_ IF- Apr 13.93 14.52 Apr 15 Apr 2 Mar 30.98 1.76 (1) 35\ 4 70 Ma y 2.61 3.20 May 4 Apr 21 Apr 13.99 1=75 < 2 > 38* 469 Apr 20.83 21.42 Apr 22 Apr 9 Apr 7.51 1.23 «3 > 354 468 Apr 10.35 10.94 Apr 12 Mar 30 Mar 27.73 2.01 ( 4 1 355 467 Apr 29.34 29.93 May 1 Apr 18 Apr 15.42 2.32 <5> 16) 384 466 Apr 19.06 19.65 Apr 20 Apr 7 Apr 4.45 2.29 354 E& Ma y 7.04 7.63 May 8 Apr 25 Apr 22.21 2.53 ( 7) 384 464 Apr 26.52 27.11 Apr 28 Apr 15 Apr 11.63 3.11 (8) 355 463 462 Apr Ma y 15.73 4.40 I6.32 4.99 Apr May 17 6 Apr Apr 4 23 Apr Apr 1.29 20=30 2.45 2.44 < 9| (10 ) (11) 354 384 354 354 384 355 354 384 355 384 .315 7 354 X 383 355 355 384 35* 355 383 354 384 > 19 YEAR x rvrt f 461 s Apr Apr 22.45 11.75 23.04 12.34 Apr Apr 24 13 Apr Mar 11 31 Apr Mar 8.96 29.40 1.78 1.34 (12 1 (13 J 459 Apr 30.68 31.27 May 2 Apr 19 Apr 17.18 1=56 () 458 Apr 20.36 20.95 Apr 22 Apr 9 Apr 6.23 2.51 (15) 457 Apr 9.05 9.64 Apr 10 Mar 28 Mar 25.31 2.43 (16) 456 Apr 28.02 28.61 Apr 29 Apr 16 Apr 13.12 2.62 (17) 455 Apr 17. 44 18.03 Apr 19 Apr 6 Apr 2=61 3-12 (18) 454 453 May Apr 6.18 24.22 6.77 24.81 May Apr 8 26 Apr Apr 25 13 Apr Apr 21.59 10=31 3.15 2. 43 (19) (1) ( 2) (3> < 4) 69 40 DAYS 452 Apr 13.32 13.91 Apr 15 Apr 2 Mar 30=92 1.82 May 2.14 2. 73 May 4 Apr 21 Apr 18. 82 1.92 450 Apr 21.67 22.26 Apr 23 Apr 10 Apr 8=02 1.72 449 Apr 10.36 10.95 Apr 12 Mar 30 Mar 27 = 05 2=69 448 Apr 29.38 29.97 May 1 Apr 18 Apr 14.76 2.98 (6) { 71 O Apr 18.97 19. 56 Apr 20 Apr 7 Apr 4.02 2. 72 (384) <35*> Chance 446 445 Apr Apr 8.30 26.02 3.89 26.61 Apr Apr 10 27 Mar A pr 28 14 Mar Apr 24.59 11.61 3.15 2.13 (8! 1 9) of 444 Apr 13.04 15.63 Apr 16 Apr 3 Apr 1=31 1=43 { 10 J Embolism 443 May 3.74 4.33 Ma y 5 Apr 22 Apr 20.28 1.46 (11) 354 355 384 355 354 384 354 38'4 > -3.5.4' 354 'I 384 355 355 442 Apr 23.07 23.66 Apr 24 Apr 11 Apr 9.71 1.03 112) 4 41 Apr 11.67 12.26 Apr 13 Mar 31 Mar 28.84 1.90 ( 14) 70 YFAO E33! Apr 30.69 31.28 Ma y 2 Apr 19 Apr 16=52 2.22 1141 / CYCLE Apr 20.37 20.95 Apr 22 Apr 9 Apr 5.60 3.14 (15) 4j8 Apr 9.90 10.49 Apr 11 Mar 29 Mar 25.97 2.77 ( 1A) 437 Apr 27. 72 28.31 Apr 29 Apr 16 Apr 12,92 2.82 (171 436 Apr 16.83 17. 42 Apr 18 Apr 5 Apr 2.61 2.13 i18) 43 5 May 5.50 6.09 Ma y 7 Apr 24 Apr 21=62 2.12 ( 19 > 6939 20818=- 434 Apr 24.61 25.20 Apr 26 Apr 13 Apr 11.24 1.50 ( 1> OA 433 A pr 13.0 2 13.61 Apr 14 Apr 1 Mar 30=58 1.16 (2) * 432 Ma y 1.97 2.56 May 3 Apr 20 Apr 18.30 1.44 <3> ( 4J CYCLES 431 Apr 21.68 22. 27 Apr 23 Apr 10 Apr 7.33 2. 41 430 Apr 11.36 11.95 Apr 13 Mar 31 Mar 2 7=48 3-26 1 57 4 29 Apr 29.27 29.86 May 1 Apr 18 Apr 14=34 3.40 (6) (TJ 428 Apr 18.57 19.16 Apr 20 Apr 7 Apr 3.91 2.83 427 May 7.29 7.88 May 9 Apr 26 Apr 22.92 2.83 (8) (9) 426^ Apr 26.31 26. 90 Apr 28 Apr 15 Apr 12=63 2.11 354 384 354 355 384 355 354 425 Apr 14. 50 15.09 Apr 16 Apr 3 Apr 1.16 1. 58 (10) < 14 YEAR 424 May 3.37 3.96 Ma y 5 Apr 22 Apr 19.99 1. 75 ( 11) / CYCLE 423 Apr 22.98 23.57 Apr 24 Apr 11 Apr 9.11 1.63 ( 12) 422 Apr 12.70 13.29 Apr 14 Apr 1 Mar 29.14 2.60 ( 13) ( 14) ( 15) 4 21 Apr 30.69 31.28 May 2 Apr 19 Apr 15.89 2.85 Apr 20.20 20.79 Apr 22 Apr 9 Apr 5.28 3.46 |419l Apr 9.41 10.00 Apr 11 Mar 29 Mar 25.91 2.83 3 S3 354 334 15.5 7 418 Apr 28.09 28.68 Apr 29 Apr 16 Apr 13.93 1.81 U7I ( 18) ( 19) ( I) Apr 16. 14 16. 73 Apr 18 Apr 5 Apr 2.61 1. 22 415 Ma y Apr 4.90 24.34 5.49 24.93 May Apr 6 26 Apr Apr 23 13 Apr Apr 21=54 10.86 1. 20 1.88 ..6950 27758” OAYS IN 4 414 Apr 13.98 14.57 Apr 15 Apr 2 Mar 30.92 1.82 ( 2) J T* 384 355 354 384 354 384 354 355 413 1 May 2.00 2.59 May 3 Apr 20 Apr 17.60 2= 14 ( 4) r vri f s 412 Apr 21.67 2 2. 26 Apr 23 Apr Ma r 10 Apr 6.78 2.96 411 Apr 11.09 11=68 A pr 12 30 Mar 27=24 2.50 (5) ( 6) { 7 J Apr 29.86 30.45 Ma y 1 Apr 18 Apr 15.23 2.51- 40 9 Apr 17. 90 18.49 Apr 19 Apr 6 Apr 3.93 1.81 408 May 6.59 7.18 Ma y 8 Apr 25 Apr 22.93 1.82 1 & 1 407 Apr 25.80 26.39 Apr 27 Apr 14 Apr 12= 46 1= 28 ( 9) * The Passover dates , reckoned from full moon. determine length of year, which, in turn , establishes the length of each month. ** Ginzel* "Handbuck der mathematischen und technlschen Chronologic," Vol. II. Astronomical dates are reduced to Jerusalem Civil Time (J.C.T.) by adding to each G.M.T. date I4n SO111* or .59 of a day. Ancient Egyptian Monument Dates, Based on 365-Day Year Ptolemy's "Mathematical Syntaxis,” the Reckoning of which Began at Noon, Feb. 26/27, 747 B.C. A CalendarProblem Ancient Aramaic Observation Dates of Papyrus, Tablet and Stone Computed in Jerusalem Civil Time (Julian. Calendar) from Ginzel Tables. Time) (Alexandrian Astronomical TABLE II ARAMAIC (JEWISH) TABLE I EGYPTIAN CALENDAR CALENDAR (Jerusalem Civil Time) Julian Julian Series Number* 1 Persian Regnal Year 2 Julian Year B. C. 3 Date of 1 Thoth Egyptian Date on Papyrus F 5 Egyptian Interval rom 1 Th 6 Date Alex. M.T. Noon 7 Calendar Difference 8 Jewish Regnal Year 9 Passover 14 Nisan J.C.T. 10 Year Length (Days) 11 1 Nisan Civil Date 12 Translation Period 13 Aramaic Aramaic Date on Interval Papyrus From 1 Nis Equivalent Date s. Jer.C.T. 16 (pp.l 4 ,2) 14 15 i 1 ”400” 7 Cambyses 523 Jan. 2 17 Phamenoth 196 July 17 । + 1 7 Cambyses I Apr 20 Apr 7 1.75 14 Tammuz 102 July 18 2 "A" 15 Xerxes 471 Dec- 20 28 Pachons 267 Sept 13 + 1 14 Xerxes Apr 15 384 Apr 2 1.76 18 Elul 165 Sept 14 3 ”B” 1 Artaxerxes 465 Dec. 18 17 Thoth 16 Jan 3 + 1 21 Xerxes May 8 355 Apr 25 2.53 18 Kisleu 254 Jan 4 4 "D" 6 Artaxerxes 460 Dec. 17 1 Mesore 330 Nov 12 + 1 5 Artaxerxes Apr 13 384 Mar 31 1.35 21 "Hesvan" 227 Nov 13 5 ”30” 9 Artaxerxes 451 Dec. 15 4 Thoth 3 Dec 18 + 1 8 Artaxerxes May 4 354 Apr 21 1.93 7 Kisleu 242 Dec 19 6 ”E” 19 Artaxerxes 447 Dec. 14 10 Mesore 339 Nov 18 + 2 19 Artaxerxes Apr 10 383 Mar 28 3.15 2 Kisleu 237 Nov 20 7 • ii pit 25 Artaxerxes 440 Dec. 12 19 Pachons 258 Aug 27 + 1 24 Artaxerxes May 2 355 Apr 19 2.22 14 Ab 131 Aug 28 8 "G” No Year 439 Dec. 12 6 Epiphi 305 Oct 13 + 1 No year Apr 22 354 Apr 9 3.15 23 Tisri 199 Oct 14 9 ”H” 4 Darius 420 Dec. 7 Payni 269-299 Sept 1 to + 1 3 Darius Apr 22 354 Apr 9 3.46 Elul 147-176 Sept 3 to Oct 1 Oct 2 10 "J" 9 Darius 416 Dec. 6 12 Thoth 11 Dec 17 + 1 8 Dar ius May 6 355 Apr 23 1.20 3 Kisleu 239 Dec 18 11 "K” 14 Darius 410 Dec. 5 8 or 9 Athyr 67 Feb 10 + 1 13 Darius Apr 12 384 Mar 30 2.50 24 Shebat 318 Feb 11 12 "R.S." 9 L— Ptol. Epiph. 199 Oct. 13 18 Mechir 167 Mar 29 + 1 8 Ptol. Epiph-. Apr 9 Mur 27 3.33 4 Xanthicus 3 Mar 30 TABLE III PTOLEMAIC LUNAR ECLIPSE CHECK ON EGYPTIAN NEW YEAR TABLE • Series* Regnal Year Julian Date of Egyptian Oppolzer’s Julian Ptolemaic Egyptian Dates Full Moon Date of Computation of Eclipses in Ptolemy’s Number Year 1 Thoth Interval Dates of Eclipses and Exact position of Eclipses(Ginzel) Catalog by Egyptian New Year Table B. C. (pp. l,2)From 1 Th. (Green. Civ.Time) Eclipsed (pp> 9jl0) ' (Alex. Civ. Time) (Alexandrian Civil Time) 1 2 3 5 6 7 3 9 I1 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 n 12 13___ 1 Mardokempad 2 Mardokempad 2 Mardokempad 5 Nabopollassar 7 Cambyses 20 Darius 51 Darius Archon Ph enos-tratos 55th of 2nd Cal-lipic period 197th from Alexander 20 Hadrien Sirius rose at Alexandria Sirius rose 721 720 720 621 523 505-2 491 583-2 200 129-8 A.D. 155-6 159 258 Feb. 21 • " 20 « w Jan. 27 Jan. 2 Deo. 28 Deo. 25 Nov. 28 Oct.. 15 Sep. 25 Jul. 21 July 21 June 25 27 16 179+14 59+27 179+16 299+27 119+2 179+25 529+5 209+10 209+20 Censoring Maude, Mar „ 1 Thoth Mar «8 . -> \Thoth ’'‘./'Phamenoth'1 APr July , It 17 18/'' Phamenoth .<&&&< A- . .. Nov , IA -t /\ Epiphi .... _u„ A— Apr 2.5 A , . >• 4K3 «MA Tybi .AAaA LA .A . June ,18 . . .. >, \ L‘,25 Phamenoth . —L. x. Sept ~ J2- *r If / ' Mesore . May , 2. / 11 ‘\ Pharmuthi Mar 6 » ..." IV • A Pharmuthi is, "De Die Natali," tr. by p. 55. New York, 1900. "5 1/5 hr. before mid." "5/6 hr. before midnight." "4 1/5 hr. be-f 0 r e mi dni ght" "5 hr. after __ midnight.” "1 hr. before midnight" "1 iA hr. before midnight” "midst of 6th hour of night" "8 1A hr. after noon of 24th" ”2 1/5 civ. hr. after mid." "5 civ. hr. . - ; — Her 19.91a Mrr 9.06a Sept 1.76a Apr 22.27& Jul 17.05a Nov 20.06a Apr 25.92 June 18.87 Sept 12.11 it May 2.28 Mar 6.01 u, Feb 21+27-8+19-Mar 19 Feb 20+16=8+8=Mar 8 Feb 20+193=8+31+30+31+30+31+31+l=Sept 1 Jan 27+86-5+29+3I+22=Apr 22 Jan 2+195=29+28+31+30+31+30+16=^x16 Dec 28+326=3+31+28+31+30+31+30*31+31+30+31+19= Nov 19 Dec 25+121=6+31+28+31+25=Apr 25 Nov 28+2O2=2+31+31+28+31+3O+31+18=June 18 Oct 13+334=18+30+31+31+28+31+30+31+30+31+31+12 = Sept 12 Sept 25+219=5+31+30+31+31+28+31+30+2=^^2 July 21+229=10+31+30+31+30+31+31+29+6=MarJ? aNos. 2, 5 anJ run over into another day, because of the Guinness constants ("Idem, _ - ... .. * References on pages 6-10 gk Guinness, Vol. II, p. xlviii 4“a COMPUTATIONS EMPLOYED IN ANALOGUE TABLES 1,11,111 1. Procedure in Computation of Egyptian Dates (Table l) From Egyptian Nev/ Year Table (pp. 1,2), find Julian date for 1 Thoth of specified year. Determine interval from 1 Thoth to Egyptian date inclusive (col. 5), and add interval to civil date of 1 Thoth. Resultant figure is Julian equivalent in astronomical time (noon to noon) for the Egyptian date of papyrus, tablet or stone, as the case may be. For example; In the year 465 B. C. (papyrus ”B”), the civil date for the Egyptian new year is Dec 18 (col. 4), corresponding to a noon-to-noon day. Interval from 1 Thoth to 17 Thoth (Papyrus date, col 5) is 16 days. Add 16 days to Dec 18 and get Jan 3 — the Julian equivalent in astronomical time for 17 Thoth in year 465-464 B. C. To this date add one calendar day to reduce to Jewish civil time. Result is Jan 4, the coincident Aramaic date in Papyrus ”B.” (Comp. col. 16.) 2. Procedure in Computation of Jewish or Aramaic Dates (Table II) From Jewish Passover Table (page 3), find Julian date for 1 Nisan of specified year, and note also length of year between passovers, as given in last column. (The length of the Jewish year determines the length of its variable months. If the year has an extra day, as in a 355-day year, that day is given to Hesvan; if the year is short one day, as in a 383-day year, a day is taken from Kisleu.) Determine interval from 1 Nisan to Aramaic papyrus date inclusive, and add to civil date of 1 Nisan. Resultant figure is the Julian equivalent, in Jerusalem civil time, of the Aramaic date. For example; In the year 465 (Papyrus ”B"), 1 Nisan is dated Apr 25 (col. 12), and the length of year is 355 days (last column of Pass-over Table). Hesvan gets the extra day, and is therefore 30 days long, making the interval from 1 Nisan to 18 Kisleu, 254 days. Add 254 days to April 25 (5+31+30 ^31 +31 +30+31 +30+31 +-4), and the result is Jan 4, the Julian civil date of 18 Kisleu. This whole computation is based on the simple fact that the ancient Jewish Passover followed the Jewish day of full moon in Jerusalem at the time of barley harvest. It is always necessary to take note of the Julian leap years, when February has 29 days. If the year B. C., when divided by 4 has a remainder of 1, then it is a leap year. But, as in the case of the year 465, which had its leap day in early spring, the computation does not always pass over the leap month, and this fact has to be carefully watched. 3. Procedure in Computation of Ptolemaic Eclipses (Table III) Each eclipse is worked out in connection with Table III, and discussed in detail on pages 11 to 19. 5 CONSTRUCTION OF ARAMAIC C^^SIWAR .in, time of ezra^aiw iiEH^ii/NFl '(Nisan Limits Parked by Assuan Papyri)*” * Cowley, A.E., ”Aramaic Papyri of tho Fifth Century B.C.,” p. 10, ff. Oxford, 1923. JULIAN YEARS : . : i . j . : ‘ : • : • ? ■ • . • ; • : ■ • : : : : i • • • . • . ■ April 29 1 ? Nis an L?5 Pa$s6vdr= Hay j_ (16. &isah) :RAPYRl}s|”B” J JJ.JJ.J_ ■ J i Q 25 (1; Nisan) \ 25 25; (p. jtfi]s$n) PAPYRUS H -r” Afir.il .2.0. April 10 Mar.ch.,.31 EQUINOX KINGS regnal” CYCLE YEARS PRIESTS LENGTH OF YEAR 1 -Nd sen-- - PAPYRUS-1 J3O”J. . I (tfagninji) PAPYRUS ' nr hi 1 ;Nis& ) 19 PlPYRj i V'iJ” 09 ~T F PAPYRUS ”A 28 —J—— •;«-y • —--f"’9’ If PAPYRUS "E (1 Niscji) 28 .1! 29 (1 ;Nisan) J PAPYRUS Mar ch__1_ WW I DARIUS I jXERXES &26< ARTAXERXES; I 6 I 6 I 8 112 i 16 16 I 18 i 20 1 : 3 I 5 7 .CommoXL . L JIJ?-Embolismic7 10; 14I5- ;I7 iqj 13 ' 16' 3'4 -6 :5 ‘ 89 i II 12 __i p’i A..—» I :IO i i CYCLE; 1 CYCLE 2; Pas soycr. A^^il J0^( jlyNis an)_ 9 ; 11113 115 | 17 ) 19 ; 21 25: 25 i 2?| 2$; 31 : 33 35 I 37 26 DARIUS II JI4I5 ; 13 ’ 16 17 H [6j? ' i i isi r EZRA 3 Tn co mm co mm co m co m (From passover to passover -- reckoned from Ginzel moon tables) 9F MlhzF H7: 19 U 13^4 6! 8 10 ! h 3l i 16 : 18 5 7 8 9 H H 12; 94:15; ELIASHlB I j | CYCLE 3 : JEHOIDA GJ 13; : JCYCLfc k Change of Embolism O 23 (1 Uis an) p PJPAPX^J h t rt 1—tv Jill • Las v? 19 10 12 _1U ■ i J6; 18 ■ : ' 5 J J • O a> JOHANAN i GJ: mmm mmrqmm mmm mm mm m m mm^mm m m m Mnemonic Restored U—^-O51 '.PAPYRUS Df 1~. r XE^ m 2 z 04 : 39 i U 2 ; 6 6 : 8 I m In the accompanying diagram, the papyri, with one exception, occur at t¥ie earliest md latest limits of 1 Ilisan, By counting ahead to In Nisan, it may be noted that tho passover limits in this century are from tho date April 10 to May 8« (Cf. nE” and ”B”.) These limits are in harmony with those of the first century A.D», that Sealiger reports as April 8 to May 6 ("De Emendations Tempo-rum,” p. 265), and which would of nec essity be dated two days earlier, owing to the earlier occurrence of the moon one day every 300 years on the Julian calendar (Scaliger, ”Dc Emendatione Tempo-rum,” p. 70) • Ihe papyri dates there fore confirm Scaliger’s testimony, which ho derived from early GJ Jewish cycles he had in hand. Precession of aramaic and Egyptian new years B.C 804 Julian Years Lunar Period I _304year»5^ ^-'''Babylonian Kings'"' Paschal Limits■= Apr 11 — May 9 Recession of Observation 1 day 747 B.C. Lunar Perios II ,304 2 C Persian Kings "Paschal Limits Apr 10 May 8' 1 Recession of 1 Nisen= 1 day in 1 Thoth — in 4 yrs. 304 years Observation B.C 196 Lunar Period III 3 04 yea-Ps ^-'■'Grecian Roman Antiochus Julius Augustus ' Paschal LimitsApr 8 to May 6 Maccabean Era A.D 109 ' eo^S' Nabonassar Era 1 Thoth February 27 747 Astronomical B.C 523 471 1 Thoth Jan 2 Papyri "400" (71) 1+65 -(74) 451 - (75) 447 - (77) hko — (82) 439 Dec 20 Dec 16 Dec 15 Dec 14 Dec 12 "A" "B"‘ "30" H n 112 B.C.* JeVrish Calculation 8 45.B.C. Julian Time A.D First Century 31 Establish© d FRI | DAY j. Apr । 27 - (82) 419 --(83) I4I6 —(84) 410 "-(137) 199 u Dec n A.D 7 1! E" npJ» "G" Dec 6 Dec 5 Oct 13 Each year in the accompanying diagram corresponds to a certain number * At this time Macedonian leap month "Dioscorus" use.—2 Mao. XI:21 "6" " j" "K" "R.S." was in of leap days, as reckoned from the beginning of the Nabonassar Era, February 27, 747 B.C. Inasmuch as 1 Thoth, the Egyptian new year, slips back one day every 4 years, the position of 1 Thoth for any year, will be just as many days earlier than February 27, as there are leap days in the interval between 747 tn d the selected year (of course in advance of the beginning of the era). The following series of months corresponds to the monthly position of 1 Thoth during the Sothic Cycle from 1322 B.C. to 139 A.D.: B. C B. C. 1369 — 1246 July 517 — 394 December 1249 — 1126 June 393 - 274 November 1125 — 1002 May 273 - 150 October 1001 — 882 April 149 — 30 September 881 — 759 March A.D. 758 - 642 February 29 - 95 August 641 — 518 J anuary 96 — 219 July TABLE p PAPYRUS REFERENCES FOR ANALOGUE TABLE (PAGE 4) (Translated by A. E. Cowley from original texts) Papyrus ”A” — Grant of building rights. Date said to be quite certain, 471 B. C. Found rolled up, tied, and sealed. Translation of Date: "On the 18th of Elul, that is the 28th day of Pabons, year 15 of King Xerxes, etc."--Cowley, A. E., ''Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B. C.," p. 11. Oxford, 1923. Papyrus ”B” -- Concerning property rights. Papyrus is almost perfect, but the number in the Egyptian month is broken. Gutesmann and Hontheim calculate "17” to be the required number. Fotheringham and Shiirer — and therefore Ginzel, who made all the calculations for Shiirer —favor "17 Thoth" (Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. LXIX, 1909, p. 14). Translation of Date: "On the 18th of Chisleu, that is the 7th (17th, in harmony with foregoing) day of Thoth, in year 21, the beginning of the reign when King Artaxerxes sat on his throne, etc."—Idem, p. 16. Papyrus "D" — Translation of Date: "On the 21st of Chisleu, that is the 1st day of Mesore, the 6th year of Artaxerxes, the king, etc."— Idem, p. 23. Concerning this papyrus, Cowley reasons that Artaxerxes I is signified because the transaction relates to the same persons whose names appear in "B." But the 21st Kisleu as 1 Mesore would mean that 1 Thoth 'would have to occur a month earlier than its position in the 6th of Artaxerxes — Dec. 16/17 for 460 B. C. -- and Fotheringham and Shiirer solve the difficulty by making the Aramaic date read a month earlier, that is, as 21 Hesvan, instead of 21 Kisleu. With this reading, the synchronism is exact. See Fotheringham’s "Calendar Dates," in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. LXIX, p. 15. Papyrus "30" -- Ungnad No. "30" is the same as No. "10" in Cowley. Papyrus refers to a contract for a loan. Was a long document almost perfectly preserved, found still folded, tied and sealed. Translation of Date: "On the 7th of Chisleu, that is the 4th day of the month Thoth, the 9th year of Artaxerxes the king, etc."--"Aramaic Papyri," p. 30. The synchronization does not take place in the 9th of Artaxerxes, as reckoned from his first year in 464 B. C., but from the 9th year after the revolt of Egypt in 460 B. C., as soon as the Persians had again obtained control. The coincident year of the two dates is 451 B. C. Although the war, incited by the Libyan king Inaros, lasted six years (Thucydides, "History of the Peloponnesian War," Book 1, CVIII. 5-CX. 2. p. 183. Tr. Smith. Harvard Press, 1935), yet in a short time "the remnant of the Persians held out, and gave Artaxerxes time to send a new army to their aid" (Brugsch, Henry, "History of Egypt," Second Edition, p. 332. London, 1881). Dr. Brugsch quotes the text of a rock-inscription, in which the Persian eunuch Aliurta mentions his service under Artaxerxes as "the five years of the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, the sovereign, Arta-khshesesh (Artaxerxes), and the 16 years, etc." Evidently the Egyptian revolt in 460 B. C., resulted in the two periods of Aliurta’s office (Idem, p. 314), and Papyrus "30" seems to confirm this short lapse of Persian rule. Papyrus "E" — Cowley says that "a peculiarity of this text is the number of mistakes in spelling, though the scribe, Nathan b. Ananiah, must have been a professional notary, since he also wrote Nos. 10 and 15." References — 7 Translation^of^Date: "On the 3rd of Chisleu, that is the 10th day of the month Mesore, year 19 of Artaxerxes the king, etc."-- "Aramaic Papyri," p. 38. In Cowley’s comment on this date, he says: "According to Gutesmann it should be Chisleu 2 = Mesore 10, or Chisleu 3 = Mesore 11. Hontheim reads 2."-- Idem. It would be easier to drop a figure out of the Aramaic text than to insert one. Hence we accept the alternative reading, "Chisleu 2 — Mesore 10." Papyrus "F" — Settlement of claim. Date is 441-440 B. C. Translation of Date: "On the 14th of Ab, that is the 19th day of Pahons, year 25 of Artaxerxes the king, etc."— Idem, p. 42. "The papyrus is in an excellent state of preservation." Papyrus "G" -- Marriage contract. "About 441 B. C." Text shows that the number of the king’s year is lost, for the first line is much broken. Cowley says that the text is very difficult, "partly owing to its broken condition, and partly to the many unknown words." Owing to the age of the sons, "present marriage cannot have taken place much after 440." Synchronization does occur in 439 B. C. for 23rd of Tisri. The date for Tisri is uncertain. Translation of Date: "On the 25th (?) of Tisri that is the 6th day of the month Epiphi, year. .~T~of Artaxerxes the king, etc."— Idem, p. 45. Papyrus "H" — Settlement of a claim. 420 B. C. "The date is the 4th year of Darius, who must be Darius II, and the year is therefore 420 B. C." Translation of pate: "In the month Elul, that is Paynj., 4th year of Darius the king at that time in Yeb the fortress, etc."— Idem, p. 58. Cowley’s comment: "The day of the month is not given, which is unusual. The Egyptian month may be Payni or Paophi. From the calculations of Mr. Knobel and Dr. Fotheringham,it seems that Payni suits the chronology best. So also Gutesmann."-- Idem, p. 59. Since Elul has 29 days, and Payni, 30, the coincidence would have to occur either at the beginning or end of the month. In 420, it occurred at the end of Elul and Payni. Papyrus "J" -- Renunciation of claim. "The date, which is given twice, is the 8th (Egyptian 9th) year of Darius (ll) - 416 B. C."— Idem, p. 83. Cowley further comments on the date, saying that "the Egyptian year began with Thoth, and did not coincide with the Jewish year beginning with Nisan. This synchronism is important." Idem. Translation of Date: "On the 3rd of Chisleu, year 8, that is the 12th day of Thoth, year 9 of Darius the king at that date in Yeb the fortress, etc."-- Idem, p. 85. Papyrus "K" -- Assignment of slaves. Papyrus very well preserved, and "hardly any letter really doubtful." Cowley emphasizes the double reckoning of the regnal years, that counts 13 Jewish and 14 Egyptian for Darius II in Shebat and Athyr in 412-411 B. C. (idem, p. 103.) Translation of pate: "On the 24th of Shebat, year 13, that is the 9th day of Athyr, year 14 of Darius the king in the fortress of Yeb, etc."— Idem, p. 104. Stone "R. S." — Rosetta Stone. Ptolemy Epiphanes — the fifth Ptolemy — is the king of the Rosetta Stone (Mahaffy, J. P., "Flinders Petri Papyri," p. 27, note. Dublin, 1891), and the inscription "was certainly decreed in the 9th year of his reign" (Mahaffy, "History of Egypt," p. 151). But when Philopator References -- 8 died, young Ptolemy Epiphanes (5 years old) had already been co-regent from the year of his birth (Smyley, J. Gilbart, ’’Greek Papyri from Gurob,” p. 28. Dublin, 1921; Mahaffy, ’’History of Egypt,” p. 151). He was only later crowned at Memphis ”in the 9th year of his reign” (Revillout, E, ’’Papyrus Bilingue du temps de Philopator,” p. 42. London, 1892). His 9th year was doubtless taken to be the 9th of his co-regency, and hence of his birth year, for it is in 199 B. C. that the Rosetta Stone dates synchronize. Dr. Smyley argues (loco citato) that Epiphanes was born in 210 B. C., and was made co-regent 50 days after birth. On the basis of this history, the Rosetta Decree harmonizes with 199 B. C. Translation of the Rosetta Inscription Date: ”ln the 9th year. . . of the god Epiphanes Eucharistos. .. the 4th of the month Xanthicus, according to the Egyptians the 18th of Mecheir.”— Mahaffy, J. P., ’’History of Egypt,” p. 152. London, 1899. See also Mulleri, C andT., wFragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, Inscription de Rosette.” Tr. by Lntronne. Paris, 18&5. References 9 ECLIPSE REFERENCES FOR TABLE (PAGE 4) (Translated from Ptolemy’s Greek text) 1. ’’Therefore, of three ancient eclipses of those observed in Babylon, which we have taken, the first is recorded in the first year of Mardo-kempad, on the 29/30 of the Egyptian Thoth. The eclipse began, they say, fully an hour after the rising, and it was total. Since tho sun stood in the last of the Fishes, the night had properly 12 equinoctial hours exactly, and so the beginning of the eclipse of course fell 4 1/2 equinoctial hours before midnight, but the middle, when now the eclipse was full, 21/2 hours before midnight. . . but in Alexandria we found the middle of the submitted eclipse 31/3 equinoctial hours before midnight.”—Claudiou Ptolemaiou, "Mathematike Suntaxis,1* pp. 244, 245. In Halma. Paris, 1813. [721 B. C.TMar 197T 2. ’’And the second eclipse was recorded in the second year of the same Mardokempad on the 18/19 of the Egyptian Thoth. . . the middle of the eclipse occurred in Babylon at the middle of the night itself, but in Alexandria it appeared at 5/6 of an hour before midnight."— Idem, p. 245. [720 B. C., Mar 8] 3. "And the third eclipse was recorded in the second year of Mardokem- pad, on the 15/16 of the Egyptian Phamenoth. . • In Alexandria the middle of the time of the eclipse was complete at 41/3 equinoctial hours before midnight.’’ — Idem, pp. 245, 246. ( 720 B. C . , Sent 1 /'] 4. "For in the 5th year of Nabopollassar, which is the 127th year of Nabonassar, on the 27/28 Egyptian Athyr, toward the end of the 11th hour, in Babylon the moon began to eclipse, and for the most part a quarter of the diameter was obscured on the south. . . in Alexandria it (tho middle of the eclipse) occurred only 5 hours after midnight."— Idem, pp. 340, 341. [621 B, C.? April 22.) 5. "Again in the 7th year of Cambyses, which is the 225th year from Nabonassar, according to the Egyptian 17/18 Phamenoth, one hour before midnight, the moon was eclipsed in Babylon on the northern half of its diameter. . . in Alexandria it occurred 1 5/6 equinoctial hours before midnight." — Idem, pp. 341, 342. [ 523 B. £L..July 16. ] 6. "The second eclipse employed by Hipparchus, occurred in the 20th year of Darius, the successor to Cambyses, in the 28/29 of the Egyptian Epiphi, the night having advanced 6 1/3 equinoctial hours, in which the moon, in like manner, eclipsed the fourth part of its diameter on the south. . . in Alexandria the middle of the eclipse occurred 1 1/4 equinoctial hours before midnight."— Idem, pp. 269, 270. [502 B. C., Nov. 7. "As the first eclipse, we have named that one which, under Darius I in Babylon, in the 31st year of his reign, was observed on the 3/4 Egyptian Tybi, in the midst of the 6th hour of the night. At the same time, as the exact report runs, the moon was eclipsed two inches on the south, that is, 1/6 part of its diameter."— Idem, p. 267. [491 B. C., April 25.] References — 10 8. '’Again, they say that the eclipse occurred when Phanostratos the Athenian was archon, in the month Skirophorion, on the 24/25 Egyptian Phamenoth. . . Now the sun stood in the last part of the Gemini, thus the hour of the night amounted to 12 time-degrees, that is, 48 ; consequently made 51/2 civil hours, or 4 2/5 equinoctial hours. The beginning of the eclipse had therefore taken place 4 2/5 hours before midnight, or 7 3/5 equinoctial hours after the noon of the 24th; but since the whole length of the eclipse was given at 3 hours, thus the middle was evidently 9 1/10 equinoctial hours after the noon. In Alexandria, consequently, it must have entered 8 1/4 equinoctial hours after noon of the 24th.”—* Idem, pp. 276, 277. [382 B. Q., 18.) 9. “They say that the third eclipse occurred in the 55th year of the second period on the 5th Egyptian Mesore. . . Now since the sun stood in the midst of the Virgin, thus in Alexandria, the hour of the night amounted to 14 2/5 time-degrees, that is 57 3/5n; consequently made out the 2 1/3 civil hours after midnight, or 2 1/4 equinoctial. Therefore the middle (of eclipse) was 14 1/4 equinoctial hours after the noon of the 5th." — Idem, p. 281. [200 B. C,, Sept 12.) 10. "Hipparch asserts that he observed the sun and moon with the help of instruments in Rhodes on the 11th of the Egyptian Pharmuthi, at the beginning of the second hour — 197th year after the death of Alexander. . . Now if the observation took place at the beginning of the second hour, that is, about 5 civil hours before the noon of the 11th, etc." — Idem, p. 300. [128 B. C., May 2."] —— 11. "The third eclipse had occurred in the 20th year of Hadrian, on the 19/20 of the Egyptian Pharmuthi. The middle, according to our reckoning, entered at 4 equinoctial hours after midnight."— Idem, p. 255. [136 A. p., Mar 6. ] CORRESPONDING OPPOLZER REFERENCES (Greenwich Civil Time) 1. 2. 3. 4. Von Oppolzer, Th. Ritter, "Canon der Finsternisse," Wien, 1887. 721 B. C. 720 B. C. Idem. Idem. Idem. No. 741, No. 743, No. 744, No. 901, p. 332 = Mar 19. Mar 8. Sept 1. April 22. 19k 21h 17h 2h 4 . 30n. 4m. 38m. p. 332 p. 332 p. 334 — 720 B. 621 B. C. C. 5. Idem. No. 1056, p. 335 — July 16. 21h 0n. 523 B. C. 6. Idem. No. 1090, p. 335 ■*- Nov 19. 21h 24m. 502 B. c. 7. Idem. No. 1107, p. 336 x April 25. 19h 55n. 491 B. c. 8. Idem. No. 1276, p. 337 - June 18. 18h 31m. 382 B. c. 9. Idem. No. 1547, p. 340 — Sept 12. 0h 28n. 200 B. c. 10. Idem. No. 1660, p. 341 x May 2. 4h 35m. 128 B. c. 11. Idem. No. 2075, p. 345 Mar 6. lh 43m. 136 A. D. 11 THE PROBLEM.—In order to understand the meaning of the ancient Egyptian and Aramaic double dates, found on papyrus, tablet, and stone, it is essential first of all (1) to demonstrate the relation between the three calendars involved — Egyptian, Jewish, and Julian. Although Julian time did not exist before the age of the Caesars, yet all the chronological tables and eclipse canons which extend back to ancient periods of history are based upon a projected Julian year. The Julian calendar is therefore definitely related to the solution of this problem, and becomes the common denominator of time between the other two. A second feature (2) concerns the synthetic construction of suitable calendar tables, upon which the papyri dates can be oriented, and their epochs demonstrated. !• Relatwn Between the Calendars .--According to both tradition and authoritative chronology, the Egyptian day was astronomical, and probably extended from noon to noon. It was doubtless the forerunner of the nautical astronomical day, which was in operation until 1925. Tradition has it that the Egyptian day began when the hour angle of the sun was zero, that is, when the sun crossed the meridian. The Egyptian new year day, 1 Thoth, started at noon, and, according to Albiruni, the day was reckoned from the moment ‘’when the sun arrives on the plane of the meridian, till the same moment of the following day.” (’’Chronology of Ancient Nations,” p. 6.) The day was designated by one single date, though it passed through the midnight hour. Anciently, people were induced to prefer the meridian to the horizon, because the day from sunset to sunset varies in length, while the time between meridians is constant, and regular everywhere on earth. The horizons, on the other hand, vary for every latitude. The Jewish day, on the contrary, consists of parts of two days; but on the calendar, it is customary to civil-date the Jewish day by the Julian day with which it coincides from midnight to sunset. This is the second civil day of the two with which the Jewish year agrees. 12 While chronologers are not unanimous in their opinion concerning the Egyp tian day, as from noon to noon, yet this plan is in harmony with a reasonable solution of the papyri double dates. The following diagram further demon- strates the exact relation between Egyptian and Jewish time: Civil Time Egyptian ” Jerri sh ” (midnight to midnight) (noon to noon) (sunset to sunset) 1 Thoth Therefore 2 Nisan (April 9, civ. time)x^6 Athyr (April 8, astronom. time) —on calendar, one day difference. In this diagram, the Egyptian day, 1 Thoth, starts at noon, and is calendar-dated April 8 until the subsequent noon. It takes the date of the civil day in progress 11 one moment after the noon'* at which it begins. The Jewish day, 1 Nisan, starts at sunset of April 8 and extends to sunset of April 9. While it covers parts of two days, April 8 and April 9, on the calendar, it is designated April 9 only. Although both Jewish and Egyptian days have 18 hours in common, yet, on the calendar, the Jewish day is dated one day later than the Egyptian. There is consequently one day’s difference between these two days in their calendar dating. This is the first feature of the papyrus prob-lem to be understood. 2. The Tables^.—The second feature relates to the preparation of Jewish and Egyptian calendar tables, which will outline the two kinds of time involved—civil and astronomical. The Jewish Table, found on page 3, is based on the two crucifixion postulates: (a) The passover moon in time of barley harvest; and (b) the passover on the day following Jewish full-moon-day in Jerusalem. The Ginzel full moon dates (G.M.T.) were used in determining the true passover dates, and were first changed to Jerusalem civil time by adding 12^t 2^ 2Om(O^59) to each full moon. Those full moon Julian dates that then came before sunset were designated 13 Nisan, and those civil dates that occurred after sunset, were designated 12 Nisan. 14 Nisan was then counted 13 as the day following Jewish full moon day in Jerusalem, and the 1st day of Nisan was reckoned as the 14th day earlier. Each translation period was computed as the difference between conjunction and 1 Nisan, 6 o’clock sunset. Length of year was calculated from one passover to another, using the Julian calendar. If year was 354 days long, the months alternated a regular se-quence of 30 and 29 days, from Nisan to end of year. If year was 355 days, Hesvan was made 30 days; if 383 days, Kisleu was given 29 days. In leap year, Adar had 30, and Veadar, 29. Barley harvest moons determined whether year was common or embolismic. (For Table of Jewish and Egyptian months, cf. page 19.) The Egyptian New Year Table (pp. 1,2) is based upon months, each one of which had 30 days, except 12th month Mesore, which had 35. The Egyptian year was therefore only 365 days long, and never changed. Its new year, 1 Thoth, slipped back one day every four years, and continued for the 4-year period. (Comp. Table V for 1 Thoth months from Nabonassar era to end of Sothic cycle.) The 1 Thoth dates of the Table (pp. 1,2) are founded upon 15 or more Ptolemaic lunar eclipses (Table III, p. 4), upon coincident Julian eclipse dates from Oppolzer's Canon, and upon the corresponding full moon dates from the Ginzel and Guinness tables (Table III, p. 4, col. 8). In the "Almagest” references (pp. 9, 10), are the translations from Ptolemy’s Greek text, giving the exact position of each eclipse, first in Babylon, and then in Alexandria. From these direct quotations, it will be noted that the descriptions are not given in astronomical time, in connection with the Egyptian date, but are directly related to a single point of time — either midnight, noon, or Babylonian sunset. However, Ptolemy usually concludes with an Alexandrian dating of each eclipse. And when the Alexandrian dates are compared with Oppolzer's Greenwich civil time eclipses, they are found in almost exact agreement. Frequently Ptolemy mentions the eclipse as between two Egyptian dates; sometimes only one date is given; and then again the eclipse may occur on his second date, as is the case with No. 11, of the series here presented. 14 From these canons and tables, it is possible to establish the exact position of each Ptolemaic eclipse, its coincident Julian date, full moon date, and Egyptian date. (All these details are diagramed in columns 6, 7, and 8 of Table III, p. 4, and the eclipse references are pp. 9, 10.) But first, from Table V, p. 5”^ find the civil month that corresponds to 1 Thoth for the regnal year selected, as for example, 720 B. C., in eclipse No. 3. In this instance, 1 Thoth was in February. The statistics for eclipse No. 3 in 720 B. C., with 1 Thoth in February point to September —193 days later-- as the time of the eclipse. For September, 720 B. C., Oppolzer gives Sept. 1 17 4' (’’Canon,” No. 744, p. 332.) The equation therefore becomes possible that — September 1 17^ 4m t 2^ 10m (Oppolzer’s eolipso in Alexandrian time) ”4 1/3 hours before midnight," 15 Phamenoth (Ptolemy’s eclipse for Alexandria.) In this equation, both Ptolemy and Oppolzer are in practical agreement in n civil-dating the eclipse. Oppolzer’s "19 14"" (Alex.C.T.) was 7:14 p.m.; Ptolemy’s "4 1/3 hours before midnight" was 7:40 p.m. Hence, both dates must be treated as civil time. The important feature only is to determine which Egyptian date ends the interval, that extends back to the true date of 1 Thoth. In the diagram (Table III, column 6), the day ending each interval is stippled. In No.l instance, the eclipse position adds a part of a day to the interval. If this interval is less than 12 hours, as when eclipse occurs before midnight, it can not be designated as a whole day on the calendar without breaking the correlation of the calendars, and the two kinds of time involved. If the interval is more than 12 hours, as is the case when the eclipse occurs after midnight, then the Egyptian day of the eclipse is the end of the interval, as in Nos. 4, 9, 10, and 11. For example: In No. 9, 200 B. C., according to the testimony of Ptolemy, we may look for an eclipse on 5 Mesore, "2 1/3 hours after midnight," which would be 334 days after 1 Thoth. In 200 B. C., 1 Thoth occurred 137 days earlier than in February, 747, (cf. leap-day Table V, p.5”x) or about the 15 middle of October; 334 days later than this point of Time, point to September for the eclipse. Oppolzer’s Canon, No. 1547, p. 340, records just one lunar eclipse in the autumn of 200 B. C.—September 12 0^ SB111. The equation, therefore, can be written that -- Septemberl2 O^1 28m + 2^ 10m (Oppolzer’s eclipse in Alexandrian civil time) = ”2 1/3 hours after midnight,” 5 Mesore (Ptolemy's eclipse for Alexandria) Oppolzer’s date is 2:38 a.m., and Ptolemy’s, 2:20 a.m. They are therefore both in civil time. To this eclipse and to one more of the series in Table III (No. 10), Ptolemy ascribes a single Egyptian date. This helps much in discovering the Julian date that corresponds to his beginning of the Nabo-nassar era. In No. 9, he counts the interval from the beginning of the ’’epoch” as 547 years, 334 days, and 14-^- hours (’’MathematikS Suntaxis,” p. 281). These figures plainly declare that he was reckoning as if from February 27 as 1 Thoth in 747 B. C., which the following calendric argument shows: If February 27 was 1 Thoth in 747 B. C., as the Egyptian New Year Table represents, then in 200 B. C., the new year would have receded 137 days to October 13, as given on page 2 of the Table. Ptolemy counted 5 Mesore — the day of the eclipse -- as the 335th day of the year, which is the equivalent of 1 Thoth +334 days. By adding 334 days to 1 Thoth, or October 13 (18+30+31+ 31+28+31+30+31+30+31+31+12), we get Sept. 12 as the result, which is Oppolzer’s date for the eclipse. Consequently, the 5th Mesore must be the end of the interval, and 1 Thoth is found by reckoning back 334 days from Sept. 12, thus making October 13 to be civil date for 1 Thoth in 200 B. C., and February 27 in 747 B. C. In column 9, the reckoning is reversed, adding 334 days to October 13, thus marking September 12 as the civil date of the eclipse. The ruling is therefore important that when the eclipse occurs after midnight, the Egyptian day in progress at that time is the end of the interval. Eclipse No. 10 Ptolemy also computes in the same way (’’Idem,” p. 300). Both eclipses are important witnesses for making February 27 the beginning of the Nabonassar era. 16 No. 11 offers a slight variation from the others, in that the eclipse occurs on the second Egyptian date mentioned by Ptolemy, that is, 20 Phar-muthi. But this position is established by the testimony of Censorinus, requiring July 21 ("12th of the calends of August") as 1 Thoth in the 4-year period from 136 to 139 A. E. His statement follows: "The aeras of the Egyptians always commence on the first day of the month, Thoth, a day which, this present year, corresponds to the 7th calends of July, whilst a hundred years ago [139 A. D.], under the second consulate of the Emperor Antoninus Pius and of Bruttius Praesena, this same day corresponded to the 12th of the calends of August, the ordinary epoch of the rising of the Canicular star in Egypt. Thus we see that we are to-day really in the hundredth year of the Annus Magnus, which, as I have stated above, is called the solar and canicular year and Year of God."--"De Die Natali," tr. by Maude, p. 33. New York, 1900. On the basis, therefore, of these well-authenticated Ptolemaic eclipses, eleven of which are given in Table III, and of the corresponding Oppolzer Canon eclipse dates in Julian time, the Egyptian New Year Table, is here offered with which to solve the double dating of papyrus, tablet and stone. 1 Thoth being established for the eclipse years, it was then possible to compute 1 Thoth for the intervening years, by simply making it one day earlier every fourth year. In this manner, the New Year Table was built up. When Egyptian dates are computed according to the position of 1 Thoth, as given in the Table for the various 4-year periods, the resulting dates will occur earlier by one day than their companion Aramaic dates, the one being given in astronomical time, and the Aramaic in civil time. (Comp. Tables I and II, cols. 7 and 16, p. 4). This difference of one day was demonstrated to have existed between ancient Egyptian and Jewish calendation. The synthetic tables here presented for the solution of this calendar problem -- the Jewish, based upon the two important principles governing the crucifixion date, and the Egyptian, definitely tied to two authentic canons of eclipses -- similarly differ by one day in their resultant computed dates. With the exception of Papyrus "E," which investigators of this problem recognize to be an extra day out of alignment, the other eleven monument dates have this constant difference of one day. If the tables of Schram, 17 Ginzel or P. V. Neugebauer, should be substituted, the results would differ. Ginzel starts his Nabonassar era with February 27, the same as the Table here 4‘V * presents, but some of his 1 Thoth dates are out of agreement with important / eclipses. However, when he comes to the year 139 A. D., he places the rising of Sirius on July 21 (’’Handbuch der mathematischen und technischen Chronologic,” p. 187. Leipzig, p. 1906). This is in harmony with Censorinus, and with the eclipse in 136 A. D., March 6, the 20th year of Hadrian. In commenting on the relation of Egyptian and Julian calendars, the following remark comes from Glenn Draper, Associate Astronomer, U. S. Naval Observatory: ”lf one were privileged to tell early chronologers how to have dated their events in different calendars, the rule of correspondence should be, the day in progress one moment after noon. As it is, their confusion has come on down to modern times.”—Glenn Draper, Washington, D. C., September 20, 1940. Dr. 0. Neugebauer, professor of mathematics in Brown University, finds the Egyptian dates in Schram and Ginzel too early to agree with a dated motion of the five major planets. He was therefore interested in the Egyptian Table here presented, that begins the Nabonassar era with February 27. The principles of calendation employed in the construction and use of the Jewish Table (page 3), have been briefly outlined in the beginning of this discussion. It should be further stressed, however, that the small constant difference between the resultant Egyptian and Aramaic dates is of great importance in support of the calendar features that characterize the Jewish Table. The Egyptian calendar has no variations whatsoever; its months are each 30 days long, and five days are always added at the end of every year. The Jewish calendar is just the opposite -- varying all the time outside of its fixed feast period of seven months. Consequently, this constant difference of one day between the two systems of time reckoning -- a large portion of which is a permanent calendar arrangement that never changes -- shows that the last five months of the Jewish year, although subject to regular, repetitive change, are nevertheless balanced by the moon’s motion. It is therefore these variable calendar months that exhibit this uniform difference between two very dissim ilar methods of time calculation. Such is the paradox existing between Jewish computations and the Egyptian Sothic Cycle. The Cycle Table (page 5) is a rearrangement of the very revealing Wood 19-year cycles. Instead of conjunction dates, 1 Nisan dates have been substituted in laying out the calendar curve. This enables the passover limits to be demonstrated for the papyrus period. Papyrus ”B” and Papyrus ”E” point to April 10 and May 8, respectively, as the extreme dates for the passover. These limits are in harmony with those of Scaliger for the first century, April 8 to May 6, which are necessarily two days earlier at the end of a 600-year period of Julian time. The irregular intercalation presented by Papyrus ”E,” which demands embolism in year 8 of Cycle 3 instead of year 7, has been a source of much comment by various scholars. Fotheringham says that irregular intercalation was a definite characteristic of the ancient Babylonian cycle. (’’Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society,” Vol. LXIX, p. 18). Yet he does not consider the papyri cycles Babylonian. He quotes Shiirer as concluding that in the papyrus period, the intercalations ’’were determined on principles similar to those which guided the Sanhedrin at a later date when the weather and the state of the crops were considered as well as the course of the sun.”—Idem. M. Oppert has also proved, by his contract tablets, that the intercalations of the Babylonian calendar were irregular. (”La fixation exacte de la chro-nologie des derniers rois de Babylone,” Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie, 1893, pp. 56-74). Consequently, the change in embolism in Papyrus ”E,” which represents the Jewish calendar, would seem to indicate that observation was governing the passover date, rather than a fixed mnemonic. The fact that the papyri dates keep 1 Nisan away from the equinox, that is, they do not place 1 Nisan on or before it, is also evidence of observation only, in the papyrus period. Calculation was introduced in the Maccabean era, about 112 B. C. (Albiruni, ’’Chronology of Ancient Nations,” Tr . by Sachau, p. 68). The Macedonian leap month ’’Dioscorus,” was also in use in Syria at this time (2Mac. XI:21). 19 In 45 B. C., the Julian calendar reform was initiated, and the finishing touches were added by Augustus, in 8 A. D. Thus the way was prepared for efficient calendar reckoning in the time of Christ, based upon both observa-tion and calculation. AN CIENT CALENDAR MONTHS sr-i . wmAJi'rKT.awMMBxaaa-Trana*, ■in wn r-'wwaat Egyptian Hebrew Macedonian Thoth 30 Nisan 30 Xanthicus Paophi 11 Iyar 29 Artemisius Athyr It Sivan 30 Daesius Choiak tt Tammuz 29 Panemus Tybi It > Ab 30 Lous Me chir t! Elul 29 Gorpiaeus Phamenoth 11 Tisri 30 Hyperberetaeus Pharmuthi 11 He svan 29 (30) Dius Pachons It Kisleu 30 (29) Apellaeus Payni 11 Tebeth 29 Audynaeus Epiphi It Shebat 30 Peritius Mesore 35 Adar 29 (30) Dystrus Veadar 29 Dioscorus Macedonian months are considered commensurate with the Hebrew. This is asserted by Josephus, Scaliger, Brown and other chronolo-gers . 20 CONCLUSIONS The foregoing pages represent the synchronization of double-dated monuments — papyrus, tablet and stone — belonging to the ancient Persian period in the age of Ezra and Nehemiah. The problem necessitated the construction of calendar tables for both Egyptian and Jewish reckoning, according to which these historic dates could be computed. The use of these tables involved particular and exact specifications relating to calendation in these two kinds of time. The final solution of this calendar question has given assurance of the certainty and soundness of the principles herein employed. By the eclipse calculations, Ptolemy, Oppolzer, and the Egyptian Table of 1 Thoth dates agree. It is revealing to list the various features of the calendric outline, according to which the synchronization was made. The series pertaining to the two calendars — Egyptian and Jewish -- follow the conclusions here offered: 1. The Egyptian New Year Table of 1 Thoth dates -- constructed on the basis of Ptolemy’s catalog of eclipses, and of Oppolzer’s "Canon der Finster-nisse"— is thereby able to certify computations made according to its 1 Thoth positions, which cover a period of 1600 years. 2. The Jewish Table -- built up upon the two crucifixion postulates, involving all the principles of calculation employed in the solution of the crucifixion date, and of the 1844 event of prophecy — offers a specific method of Mosaic reckoning, which, by virtue of its coincidence with the ancient Egyptian system, is therefore attested by the supporting canons of the Egyptian calendar. 3. The constant, resultant one-day difference obtained in the computed dates, determined by the use of these two calendar Tables, is indicative of the certainty and precision of the calendar rules applied. 4. The fact that the calendric principles governing the crucifixion date, solved also the papyrus dates, and provided an independent calculation confirming the Millerite 1844 chronology, shows that all three epochs of prophecy are controlled by one and the same luni-solar system of calculation. The following calendric series was employed in the solution of the problem — 1 • Jewish Calendation (a) Jewish day calendar-dated by its second civil date. (b) Passover following Jewish full moon day in Jerusalem. (c) Passover limits (April 8 to May 6, 1st century) determined by barley harvest moons. (d) Length of Jewish year -- from passover to passover. i * t . THE JEWISH CALENDAR IN THE FIFTH CENTURY B. C. ' J ,T —&race£ft’JnaJ£)rt Introductory Note: • The papyri documents under consideration came from a Jewish colony estab-lished at Elephantine near the Nubian frontier under the protection of a Persian garrison. As early as 1878, it was recognized that the Aramaic papyri coming from Egypt pertained to the Persian administration in the age of Ezra and Nehemiah. Some of these papyri were found rolled up, tied and sealed. For nearly 2500 years, these seals had remained unbroken. Of additional interest is the fact that these texts were written by Jews, and, outside of the Bible, are among the earliest Jewish writings. In the words of the translator Mr. Cowley, "they present therefore a trustworthy picture of their surroundings, not distorted by lapse of time, nor obscured by textual corruption." ("Aramaic Papyri in the Fifth Century B. C.," Preface, p. xiv). Oxford, 1923.) The confusion between modern Jewish; computation and early Jewish reckoning, led the Greek author, M. L. Belleli, to doubt the authenticity of the Elephantine papyri, concerning which M. M. Sayce and A. E. Cowley made their report in 1900. After examining the double Semitic dates in these valuable documents, and finding them not in agreement with the modern Jewish calendar, Mr. Belleli summarily concluded that they were not authentic, completely overlooking the fact that in the 5th century B. C., modern Jewish computation had not yet been devised. The unsoundness of this opinion and conclusion has been ably refuted by various authors; furthermore, the futility of applying the principles of modern Jewish calendation to the Aramaic dates has been shown by Dr. Fotheringham in his criticism of E. B. Knobel’s date argument ("Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society," Vol. LXIX, p. 12, ff. London, 1909). Many attempts have been made by chronologers to reconstruct synthetically, an ancient method of Jewish calendation. The fact that modern Rabbi nical computation does not agree with early Jewish. dates is generally recog nized; but, even though this is often stressed, yet, the simple Mosaic principles that governed early Jewish time are almost completely overlooked. An important feature of the ancient history written in the various papyri, about which there is no doubt, relates to an order from the Persian king, Darius II, to keep the passover. The command concerning the Passover was given in few words: "In the month of Tybi (?) let there be a Passover for the Jewish garrison" ("Aramaic Papyri in the Fifth Century B. C.," p. 60). The date is the 5th year of Darius. Although the papyrus is imperfect, and somewhat broken, yet enough remains to show that it gives instructions to keep the festival of unleavened bread. The edict continues: "Now you accordingly count fourteen days of the month Nisan, and keep the Passover, and from the 15th day to the 21st day of Nisan (are) seven days of Unleavened bread. Be clean and take heed. Do no work on the 15th day, and on the 21st day. Also drink no beer, and anything at all in which there is leaven do not eat, from the 15th day from sunset till the 21st day of Nisan, seven days, let it not be seen among you; do not bring (it) into your dwellings, but seal (it) up during these days. Let this be done as Darius the king commanded. (Address) To my brethren Yedoniah and his colleagues the Jewish garrison, your brother Hananiah" ("Idem," p. 63). Cowley’s comment on this passover edict (Papyrus "No. 6" of Ungnad, and "Plate 6" of Sachau) is that it "removes all reason for doubting the genuineness of the Persian letters [by Artaxerxes] in Ezra" ("Idem," p. 62). The papyri themselves, therefore, show that the members of the Jewish garrison in Elephantine and Assuan were fully acquainted with the Mosaic passover regulations that commanded this feast to be kept at sunset (Deut. 16:6) on the 14th of Nisan (Ex. 12:6). Consequently, it is fully in harmony with the circumstances forming the background of the Aramaic dates to offer a method of interpretation that is based on passover observance. The calen-dric outline (page 21) pertaining to the Aramaic or Jewish dates, has already been applied to the crucifixion date problem. In this calendar problem, it iii is employed in a specific form as representative of Mosaic calendation. The Egyptian calendar made use of in this solution is the same as has been standardized for Egyptian time, with the exception, that in harmony with Ptolemy’s reckoning of intervals, and eclipses, Oppolzer’s ’’Canon,” and the testimony of Censorinus, the Era of Nabonassar is made to begin on February 27 instead of February 26. OUTLINE OF DISCUSSION 1. Introductory Note pp. i,ii,iii 2. Egyptian New Year Table pp. 1,2 Jewish Passover Table p. 3 3. Tables I, II, and III — Analogue of Ancient Dates and Eclipses p. 4 4. Cycle Table (IV) in time of Ezra and Nehemiah p. 5 5. Papyrus References pp. 6-8 6. Eclipse References pp. 9,10 7. Discussion of Problem pp. 11-19 8. Conclusion pp. 20,21 9. Nabonassar Era — Leap Year Table (V) p. 5~a EGYPTIAN NEW YEAR (1 THOTH) TABLE AND ITS JULIAN EQUIVALENT DATE (NOON IO NOON, ASTRONOMICAL TIME — FROM 1356 B. C. TO 238 A.D.)* B.C. 1 Thoth B.C. 1 Thoth B.C. 1 ThOth B.C. 1 Thoth B.C. 1 Thoth B.C. 1 Thoth B.C. 1 Thoth 8 24 748-Feb 27 672 596 5 20 444 368 8 23 822 ‘7 747 Nap 746 - onassar Era 671 6 70 595 594 519 518 u 443 442 367 366 821-Mar 16 745-Feb 26 669-Feb 7 593-0a n 19 517-Oec 31 441-0ec 12 365-Nov 23 820 744 668 592 516 440 Papyrus « p 11 364 819 818 it 743 742 667 666 591 590 515 514 439 Papyrus 4 78 "Jj]1 363 36 2 817-Ma r 15- 741-Feb 25 , 665-Feb 6 589-Ja n 18 513-Dec 30 437-Dec 11 361-Nov 22 816 740 66 4 588 512 436 360 815 739 663 587 511 43 5 359 814 16 738 66 2 586 510 434 353 813-Ma r ■14 737-Feb 24 661-Feb 5 585-Jan 17 509-Oec 29 433-0ec 10 357-Nov 21 812 736 660 5 34 5 08 432 356 811 735 659 583 507 431 355 810 1H 734 658 582 506 430 354 809-Mar 1J- 733-Feb 23 65 7-Feb 4 5 81-da n 16 505-Dec 28 429-Dec 9 353-Nov 20 808 732 656 530 50 4 428 352 80 7 731 655 5 79 503 427 351 806 13 730 654 578 502 4 26 350 805-Mar 1? 729-Feb 22 653-Feb 3 577-Jan 15 501-Dec 27 425-Dec 8 349-Nov 19 804 728 652 576 500 424 348 80 3 727 651 575 499 423 397 80 2 ML 726 650 574 498 422 346 801-Mar 11' 725-Feb 21 6 49-Feb 2 573-Jan 14 497-Oec 26 421-Dec 7 345-NOV 18 800 724 648 572 496 420 Papy r us "H* 344 799 11 723 647 571 495 419 343 798 7 22 646 5 70 494 418 342 79 7-Mar 10- 721-Feb 20 045-Feb 1 569-Jan 13 493-Dec 25 417-Dec 6 341-NOV 17 796 7 20 644 508 492 416 Papy r us " J" 340 795 719 643 507 491 415 339 794 10 718 642 566 490 414 338 793-Mar 9 717-Feb 19 641-ja n 31 565-Jan 12 489-Oec 24 413-Dec 5 337-nov 16 792 716 640 564 488 412 33 6 791 715 639 563 487 411 33 5 790 a 714 638 562 486 410 Papy r us "K" 334 789-Mar ■& 713-Feb 18 637-Jan 30 561-dan 11 485-Dec 23 409-Dec 4 333-Nov 15 788 712 636 560 484 408 332 787 711 635 559 483 407 331 786 2 710 634 558 482 40 6 330 785-Mar 1 709-Feb 17 633“0an 29 557-Jan 10 481-Dec 22 UQ5-De c 3 329-Nov 14 1 784 708 632 556 480 404 3 28 783 707 631 555 479 403 327 782 7 706 630 554 478 40 2 326 781-Mar -6- 705-Feb 16 629-Jan 28 55 3~dan 9 477-Dec 21 401-0ec 2 325-Nov 13 780 70 4 628 552 476 40 0 3 24 7 79 703 627 551 475 399 323 778 70 2 626 550 474 398 322 777-Mar V 701-Feb 15 625-Jan 27 549-dan 8 473-Dec 20 39 7-Dec 1 321-Nov 12 776 700 624 548 472 396 320 * 775 699 623 547 471 Papyrus "A" 395 319 774 s 698 622 546 4 70 394 318 773-Mar -4 697-Feb 14 621-Jan 26 545-Ja n 7 4o9-De c 19 393-Nov 30 317-Nov 11 772 696 620 544 f 468 392 316 771 695 619 543 a 467 391 315 770 69 4 618 54 2 3 466 390 314 K. 769-Mar 693-Feb 13 617-Jan 25 541-Jan 6 9 46 5-0ec 454 Pap 18 389-Nov 29 313-Nov 10 768 69 2 616 540 1 yr us"8" 388 312 767 691 615 539 X 46’ 387 311 766 3 690 614 538 462 386 310 7o5-Mar 2 689-Feb 12 613-Ja n 24 537-Jan 5 4 461-De c 17 785-Nov 28 309-Nov 9 764 688 612 536 460 Papyrus "0" 384 308 763 687 611 535 a f 459 383 30 7 762 X 686 610 534 458 382 306 761-Mar ■r 68 5~F eb 11 609-Jan 23 533“Jan 4 H 457-Dec 16 781-Nov 27 30 5-Nov 8 760 684 608 532 1 $ 456 380 '3O4 759 683 607 531 455 3 79 3O3 758 29 M an. 1 68 2 606 530 45 4 378 302 757-Feb 681-Feb 10 60 5~0a n 22 5 29-Ja n 3 453-Dec 15 377-Nov 26 301-Nov 7 756 680 60 4 528 1 452 376 300 755 679 603 527 451 Papyrus 375 299 754 Meet 1 678 602 526 450 Unqnad ”30" 374 298 753-Feb £&. 2.A 677-Feb 9 601-Jan 21 525-Jan 2 449-Dec 14 13. 373-Nov 25 297-Nov 6 752 2,8 676 600 5 24 - 448 372 296 751 675 599 523 Cambyse 447 Papyrus 371 295 750 674 593 522 Tablet 446 370 294 749-Feb 27 6 73-Feb 8 597-Jan 20 5 21-Ja n 1 445-De c 13 369-Nov 24 293-Nov 5 —-------—-------------------------------- (Jm- 18 z Ote’BI « - * This period covers the Sothlc Cycle from 1322 B.C. to 139 A.D. Date of 1 Thoth is placed opposite the Julian leap year, at which tine It occurs a day earlier, and continues for four years. For example, February 27 Is Egyptian new year day for years 749 to 746 B.C. EGYPTIAN NEW YEAR (NOON TO NOONj (1 THOTH) TABLE AND ITS JULIAN EQUIVALENT ASTRONOMICAL TIME — PROM 1356 B.C. TO 238 A.D. ) * (2) DATE B.C. 1 Thoth B. C. 1 Thoth 216 215 21H 213-Oct 16 212 211 210 209-0ct 15 208 207 206 . 205-Oct 14 204 202 B.C. 1_ 140 139 138 137-Sep 136 135 134 133-Sep 132 131 130 129-Sep 128 127 126 Thoth B.C. 1 Thoth A.D. 1 13 14 15 16-Aug 17 18 19 20-Aug 21 22 23 24-Aug 25 26 27 Thoth 20 19 18 A.D. 1_ 89 90 91 92-Aug 93 94 95 96-Ju1 97 98 99 100-Jul 101 102 10 3 Thoth 1 31 30 A.D. 1 Thoth 292 291 290 289-Nov 288 287 286 285-Nov 284 283 282 281-Nov 2 80 279 278 4 3 2 27 26 25 64 63 62 61-Sep 60 59 58 57-Sep 56 55 54 53-Sep 52 51 50 8 7 6 I65 166 167 168-Ju 1 169 170 171 172-Jul 173 174 175 176-Jul 177 178 7 7Q 13 12 11 ' n 277-Nov 2 76 275 274 273-Oct 272 271 270 269-Oct 268 267 266 265-Oct 264 26’ 262 261-Oct 260 2 59 2j8 2 5 7-Oct 256 255 254 253-Oct 252 251 250 249-Oct 248 247 246 245-Oct 244 243 242 241-Oct 2 40 239 238 237-Oct 236 23 5 234 233-Oct 232 231 230 229-0ct 228 227 226 225-Oct 224 223 2 22 221-Oct 2 20 219 218 217-Oct 1 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 201-Oct 13 } . 200 199 Rosetta 198 S tone 197-Oct 12 196 195 194 193-Oct 11 192 191 190 189-Oct 10 186 187 186 185-Oct 9 184 183 182 181-Oct 8 180 179 178 177-Oct 7 176 175 174 173-Oct 6 172 171 170 169-Oct 5 168 167 166 165-Oct 4 164 163 162 161-Oct 3 160 159 158 157-Oct 2 156 155 154 153-Oct 1 152 151 150 149-Sep 30 148 147 146 145-Sep 29 144 143 142 141-Sep 28 125-Se p 124 123 122 121-Sep 120 119 118 117-Sep 116 115 114 113-Sep 112 111 110 10 9-Sep 108 107 10 6 10 5~Se p 10 4 103 10 2 101-Sep 100 99 98 97-Sep 96 95 94 93-Sep 92 91 90 89-Sep 88 87 86 85-Sep 84 83 82 81-Sep 80 79 78 77-5ep 76 75 74 73-Sep 72 71 70 69-Se p 68 67 66 65-Sep 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 49-Sep 48 47 46 4 5-Se p 44 43 42 41-Sep 40 39 38 37-Sep 36 35 34 33-Sep 32 31 30 29-Aug 28 27 26 25-Aug 24 23 22 21-Aug 20 19 18 17-Aug 16 15 14 13-Aug 12 11 10 9-Aug 8 7 6 5-Aug 4 3 2 1-Aug 1 2 3 4 — Aug 5 6 7 8-Aug 9 10 11 12-Aug 5 4 3 2 1 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 28-Aug 29 30 31 32-Aug 33 34 35 36-Aug 37 38 39 40-Aug 41 42 43 44-Aug 45 46 47 48-Aug 49 50 51 52-Aug 53 54 55 56-A ug 57 58 59 60-Aug 61 62 63 64-A ug 65 66 67 68-A ug 69 70 71 72-Aug 73 74 75 76-Aug 77 78 79 80-Aug 81 82 83 84-Aug 85 86 87 88-Aug 1? 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 104-Jul 29 10 5 106 10 7 108-Jul 28 109 110 111 112-Jul 27 113 114 115 116-Jul 26 117 118 119 120-Jul 25 121 122 123 124-Jul 24 125 126 127 128-Jul 23 129 130 131 132-Jul 22 133 134 135 136-Jul 21 137 138 E nd of 139 Sothlc Cy 140—Jul 20 141 142 143 144-Ju 1 19 145 146 147 148—Ju 1 18 149 150 151 152-Jul 17 153 154 155 156-Jul 16 157 158 159 160-Jul 15 161 162 I63 164-Jul 14 180-Jul 10 181 182 I83 184-Jul 9 185 186 187 188-Jul 8 189 190 191 192-dul 7 193 19 4 195 196-Jul 6 197 198 199 200-Jul 5 201 202 203 204-Jul 4 205 206 207 208-Jul 3 209 210 211 212-Jul 2 213 214 cje 215 216-Jul 1 217 218 219 220-Jun 30 221 222 2 23 224-Jun 29 225 226 227 228-Jun 28 229 230 231 232-Jun 27 233 234 235 236-Jun 26 237 2J8 CensorInu s 239 240-Jun 25 * This period Julian leap February 27 covers the Sothic Cycle from year, at which time It occurs is Egyptian new year day for 1322 B.C. to 139 A. a day earlier, and years 749 to 746 B. D. Date of 1 continues for C. Thoth is placed opposite the four years. For example, PASSOVER METHOD FOR DETERMINING JULI AN EQ UIVAL E N T 0) OF ARAMAIC DAl'Ec* Y E A ’ R FULL MOON G.M.T.** NISAN 13 J.C.T, NISAN 14 J.C.T. NISAN 1 J.C.T, CONJUNCTION JER. CIV. T. TRANSLA- TION PERIOD (DAYS) LE NGTH OF YEAR (DAYS 1 481 May 4.04 4.63 May 5 Apr 22 Apr 19. 28 2.47 < 111 '•‘80 Apr 23.12 23. 71 Apr 24 Apr 11 Apr 8. 99 1.76 354 X 479 Apr 12.16 12.75 Apr 14 Apr 1 Mar 29.64 2.10 (12) 355 478 Apr 30.93 31.52 May 2 Apr 19 Apr 17.58 1.16 <13 I 383 *77 Apr 19.33 19.97 Apr 21 Apr 8 Apr 5.90 1.84 <14 ) 355 476 Apr 9.03 9. 62 Apr 10 Mar 28 Mar 25.95 1. 79 (15> 354 4 75 Apr 28.04 28.63 Apr 29 Apr 16 Apr 13.64 2.10 (16) 384 4 74 Apr 17.71 18.30 Apr 19 Apr 6 Apr 2.80 2.94 < 1 7 > 473 May 5.62 6.21 May 7 Apr 24 Apr 20.68 3.06 (181 JJ9± J84 6939 DAYS gS Apr 24.89 25.48 Apr 26 Apr 13 Apr 10.27 2.47 11*’ Apr 13.93 14.52 Apr 15 Apr 2 Mar 30.98 1. 76 < 11 35* x 470 Ma y 2.61 3.20 May 4 Apr 21 Apr 18.99 1.75 (21 384 469 Apr 20.83 21.42 Apr 22 Apr 9 Apr 7.51 I.23 <3 > 35* 468 Apr 10.35 10.94 Apr 12 Mar 30 Mar 27.73 2.01 ( 4 1 355 467 Apr 29.3* 29.93 May 1 Apr 18 Apr 15.42 2.32 (5> (6) 384 466 Apr 19,06 19.65 Apr 20 Apr 7 Apr 4.45 2.29 354 &15i Ma y 7.04 7.63 May 8 Apr 25 Apr 22.21 2.53 (71 384 464 Apr 26.52 27.11 Apr 28 Apr 15 Apr 11.63 3.11 ( 8) 355 463 462 Apr May 15.73 4. 40 16. j2 4.99 Apr Ma y 17 6 Apr Apr 4 23 Apr Apr 1.29 20.30 2.45 2.44 (9| I 10 ) (ID 354 384 354 354 384 355 354 384 355 384 .3.1* ' 354 X 383 355 355 384 3 r a, > 19 YEAR rvri r 461 Apr 22.45 23.04 Apr 24 Apr 11 Apr 8.96 1.78 (12 I I46Q1 Apr 11.75 12.34 Apr 13 Mar 31 :4a r 29.40 1.34 113) (14) 459 Apr 30.68 31.27 May 2 Apr 19 Apr 17.18 1.56 4$8 Apr 20.36 20.95 Apr 22 Apr 9 Apr 6.23 2.51 ( 15» (16 I 457 Apr 9.05 9.64 Apr 10 Mar 28 Mar 25.31 2.43 456 Apr 28.02 28.61 Apr 29 Apr 16 Apr 13.12 2.62 (17) 455 Apr 17. *4 18.03 Apr 19 Apr 6 Apr 2.61 3.12 i 18) 454 453 May Apr 6.18 24.22 6.77 24.81 Ma y Apr 8 26 Apr Apr 25 13 Apr Apr 21.59 10.31 3.15 2. 43 f 19J <11 ( ji 6940 DAYS 452 Apr 13.32 13.91 Apr 15 Apr 2 Mar 30.92 1.82 May 2.14 2. 73 May 4 Apr 21 Apr 18. 82 1.92 <3> t U ) 450 Apr 21.67 22.26 Apr 23 Apr )oc Apr 8.02 1.72 449 Apr IO.36 10.95 Apr 12 Mar Mar 27.05 2.69 448 Apr 29.38 29.9 7 May 1 Apr 18 Apr 14.76 2.98 * D* (6) L 7 1 (44 71 Apr 18.97 19. 56 Apr 20 Apr 7 Apr 4.02 2. 72 355 333 354 384 <384 7 t35*> Cha noe 446 445 Apr Apr 8.30 26.02 8.89 26.61 Apr Apr 10 27 Mar Apr 28 14 Mar Apr 24.59 11.61 3.15 2.13 <81 ( 9> of 444 Apr 15.04 15.63 Apr 16 Apr 3 Apr 1.31 1.43 ( 10) Embol Ism 44’ Ma y 3.7* 4.33 May 5 Apr 22 Apr 20.28 1.46 111) 354 355 334 355 354 442 Apr 23.07 23.66 Apr 24 Apr 11 Apr 9.71 1.03 (12) 4 41 Apr 11.67 12.26 Apr 14 Mar 31 Mar 28.84 1.90 < 13> 114) 3Q YF AR ra Apr 30.69 31.28 Ma y 2 Apr 19 Apr 16.52 2.22 ' CYCLE 032} Apr 20.37 20.95 Apr 22 Apr 9 Apr 5.60 3.14 (1?) < 16) 438 Apr 9.90 10.49 Apr 11 Mar 29 Mar 25.97 2.77 384 35* jIP 437 Apr 27. 72 28.31 Apr 29 Apr 16 Apr 12.92 2.82 (171 436 Apr 16.83 17.42 Apr 18 Apr 5 Apr 2.61 2.13 (18) 43 5 May 5.50 6.09 Ma y 7 Apr 24 Apr 21.62 2. 12 ( ) 6939 20818^ 434 Apr 24.61 25.20 A pr 26 Apr 13 Apr 11.24 1.50 I 11 354 A 334 355 355 r»A ys 433 Apr 13.02 13.61 Apr 14 Apr 1 Mar 30.58 1.16 (:i) 1 M •4 432 Ma y 1.97 2.56 May 3 Apr 20 Apr 18. 30 1.44 < 3 > <41 C Yr 1 F S 431 Apr 21.68 22. 27 Apr 23 Apr 10 Apr 7.33 2. 41 430 Apr 11.36 11.95 Apr 13 Mar 31 Mar 27.48 3.26 r 5 7 429 Apr 29.27 29. 86 Ma y 1 Apr 18 Apr 14.34 3.40 UI € ti a rjij. 428 Apr 18.57 19.16 Apr 20 Apr 7 Apr 3.91 2.83 Jfi4 3 5* 427 May 7.29 7.88 Ma y 9 Apr 26 Apr 22.92 2.83 < 8) 426 Apr 26.31 26.90 Apr 28 Apr 15 Apr 12.63 2.11 (9) 354 384 425 Apr 14. 5C 15.09 Apr 16 Apr 3 Apr 1.16 1.58 (10) L 19 YEAR 424 May 3.37 3.96 Ma y 5 Apr 22 Apr 19.99 1. 75 I ID 354 355 / CYCLE 423 Apr 22.98 23.57 Apr 24 A pr 11 Apr 9.11 1.63 ( 12) 422 Apr 12.70 13.29 Apr 14 Apr 1 Mar 29.14 2.60 ( 13) t 14) 384 421 Apr 30.69 31.28 Ma y 2 Apr 19 Apr 15.89 2.85 355 Apr 20. 20 20. 79 Apr 22 Apr 9 Apr 5.28 3.46 115) 116) 354 383 14191 Apr 9.41 10.00 Apr 11 Mar 29 Mar 2 5.91 2.8’ 418 Apr 28.09 28.68 Apr 29 Apr 16 Apr 13.93 1.81 '171 ( 18) 417 Apr 16. 14 16. 73 Apr 18 Apr 5 Apr 2.61 1, 12 ✓ 2 *♦ 334 J5.K 3 54'Y 334 355 354 384 354 384 354 355 *416) 415 May Apr 4.90 24.34 5.49 24.93 May Apr 6 26 Apr Apr 23 13 Apr Apr 21.5* 10.86 1. 20 1.88 ( £9) ’ ( 1) < ?) _62MO 27758 — OAYS 1 N 4 414 Apr 13-98 14.57 Apr 15 Apr 2 Mar 30.92 1.82 413 May 2.00 2.59 May 3 Apr 20 Apr 17.60 2. 14 ( 8) C YCl F S 412 Apr 21.67 2 2. 26 Apr 23 Apr 10 Apr 6.78 2.96 411 &10I Apr Apr 11.09 29.86 11.68 30.45 A pr Ma y 12 1 Mar Apr 30 18 Mar Apr 27.24 15.23 2.50 2.51. <51 ( 6) 40 9 Apr 17. 90 18.49 Apr 19 Apr 6 Apr 3.93 1.81 ( 7) 408 May 6.59 7.18 Ma y 8 Apr 25 Apr 22.93 1.82 ( 8) 407 Apr 25.80 26.39 Apr 27 Apr 14 Apr 12.46 1. 28 < ?) * The Passover dates , reckoned from full moon, determine length of year, which, in turn , establishes the length of each month. ** Ginzel, "Handbuck der mathematischen und technischen Chronologic,» Vol. II. Astronomical dates are reduced to Jerusalem Civil Time (J.C.T.) by adding to each G.M.T. date 14 aon‘, or .59 of a day. Ancient Egyptian Monument Dates, Based on 365-Day Year Ptolemy’s ’’Mathematical Syntaxis,’’ the Reckoning of which Began at Noon, Feb. 26/27, 747 B.C. ^^OG^^^^^ENTEGYPTlSL^wiSH^^vmCEDONIAl^^TES A Calendar Problem Ancient Aramaic Observation Dates of Papyrus, Tablet, and Stone Computed in Jerusalem Civil Time (Julian. Calendar) from Ginzel Tables. TABLE I EGYPTIAN CALENDAR (Alexandrian Astronomical Time) TABLE II ARAMAIC (JEWISH) CALENDAR (Jerusalem Civil Time) Julian \ / \ / Julian Series Persian Julian Date of Egyptian Egyptian Date Calendar Jewish Passover Year 1 Nisan Trans- Aramaic Aramaic Equivalent Number* Regnal Year 1 Thoth Date on Interval Alex. M.T. Differ- Regnal 14 Nisan Length Civil lation Date on Interval Date Year B. C. (pp.1,2) Papyrus From 1 Th Noon ence Year J.C.T. (Days) Date Period Papyrus From 1 Nis. Jer.C.T. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 . P 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 1 ”400" 7 Cambyses 56 523 Jan. 1 2 7 17 Phamenoth 196 July 17 i + 1 7 Cambyses 5 3.3 Apr 20 CL Apr 7 8 1.78- 14 Tammuz 102 July 18 2 "A" 15 Xerxes 6? 471 Dec. ft)’20 28 Pachons 267 Sept 13 +1 14 Xerxes Apr 15 384 Apr 2 1.76 18 Elul 165 Sept 14 3 "B” 1 Artaxerxes 71 465 Dec <1*7) 18 17 Thoth 16 Jan 3 + 1 21 Xerxes - _ ■ May 8 355 -Apr 25 2.53 18 Kisleu 254 Jan 4 4 "D" 6 Artaxerxes 72 460 Dec.06) 17 1 Mesore 'X 330 Nov 12 + 1 5 Artaxerxes H' Apr 13 384 Mar 31 1.35 21 "Hesvan" 227 Nov 13 5 ”30’’ 9 Artaxerxes 7+ 451 Dec.(14) 15 4 Thoth 3 Dec 18 + 1 8 Artaxerxes May 4 354 Apr 21 1.93 7 Kisleu 242 Dec 19 6 ”E” 19 Artaxerxes 75 447-6 Dec.14 10 Mesore 339 Nov 18 + 2 19 Artaxerxes .4^6 Apr 10 383 Mar 28 3.15 2 Kisleu 237 Nov 20 7 “F” 25 Artaxerxes 77 440 Dec.(H) 12 19 Pachons ’ 258 Aug 27 + 1 24 Artaxerxes 4 1 May ^2 355 Apr 19 2.22 14 Ab 131 Aug 28 8 "G” No Year 77439 Dec.(U) 12 6 Epiphi 305 Oct 13 + 1 No year (H4-' Apr 22 354 Apr 9 3.15 23 Tisri (x4) 199 » Oct 14 5 9 "H" 4 Darius 82 420 Dec.^t) 7 Paynix it 269-299 Sept 1 to + 1 3 Darius Apr 22 354 Apr 9 3.46 Elul 147-176 Sept 3 to Oct 1 Oct 2 10 "J” 9 Darius 82 416 Dec. 5 6 12 Thoth (H) 11 Dec 17 + 1 8 Darius H 1 <0 May 6 355 Apr 23 1.20 3 Kisleu 239 Dec 18 11 "K" 14 Darius 84 410 Dec.(^4) 5 8 or 9 Athyr 6X5 Feb 10 + 1 13 Darius 411 Apr 12 384 Mar 30■ l-jX.50 24 Shebat 318 Feb 12 ”R.S.”i 9 Ptol. Epiph. <37199 Oct.QU) 13 18 Mechir 6 167 Mar 29 + 1 8 Ptol. Epiph. Apr 9 - Mar 27 3.33 4 Xanthi cus 3 Mar 30 TABLE III PTOLEMAIC LUNAR ECLIPSE CHECK ON EGYPTIAN NEW YEAR TABLE Series Regnal Year Julian Date of Egyptian Oppolzer’s Julian Ptolemaic Egyptian Dates Number* Year 1 Thoth Interval Dates of Eclipses and Exact Position of B. C. (pp. l,2)From 1 Th. (Green. Civ.Time) Eclipses 9 jq) 1___________2 3 U 5 6 _____________ 7 ’ Computation of Eclipses in Ptolemy’s Catalog by Egyptian New Year Table (Alexandrian Civil Time) 9 Full Moon Date of Eclipses(Ginzel) (Alex. Civ. Time) 8 1 1 2 5 L 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 15 1 Mardokempad 2 Mardokempad 2 Mardokempad 5 Nabopollassar 7 Cambyses 20 Darius JI Darius Archon Phenostr at os 55th of 2nd Cal-lipic period 197th from Alexander 20 Hadrian Sirius rose at Alexandria Sirius rose 721 720 720 621 525 505-2 U91 583-2 200 129-8 A.D. 155-6 159 258 Feb. 20 ’ ” 20 tt n 6 Jan. 27 Jan. 2 Dec. 28 Doc. 25 Nov. 28 Oct.. 15 Sep. 25 Jul. 21 July 21 June 25 28 16 179+U 59+27 179+16 299+27 119+2 179+25 529+5 209+10 209+20 Censoring Maude, Mar „ 2,4 /Y 30f\ '< “ Thoth iteaZ.. .X ..... ^ar H ‘ ' Thoth" P • $" Phamenoth” ...........AiLdiilaJ—.... - Apr ‘'Athyr” . . .. . - L, ■ , A.. 18/x 'Phamenoth' Nov _• /Y ;:£+.28*Y29 Epiphi ......... j > A— . Apr 25 . A „ , Y. Tybi f ' * 1 June . J8 _ *1 - ,, / '*25 Phamenoth /,_ ...» Sept J2. „ / •• r\ Mesore / . . Y._ May . , 2. , .• , ,n -jiiY IJ \ Pharmuthi Xfe&Y' _ .I'.'.. . Mar 6 Mid » ., .»< 14 /■ \20Jk / Pharmuthi .P...... IS, "De Die Natali," tr. by p. 55* New York, 1900, "3 1/3 hr. before mid," "5/6 hr. before mi&iight. ” "i. 1/3 hr . be- ~ for e mi dn i gh t" "5 hr, after _.midniglit_” "1 hr. before midnight" "1 1A hr. before midnight” "midst of 6th hour of night" "8 1/lf hr. after noon of 26th" ”2 1/5 civ. hr. after mid." ”5 civ. hr. before noon 11th* "U hr. after miaiight” ! । . Mar 19.91a Mrr 9.06a Sept l,76a Apr 22.27a Jul -17.05a Nov 20.06a Apr 25.92 June 18.87 Sept 12.11 it May 2.28 Mar 6.01 9 Feb 2o+2y ~X+19 -Mg-r _ 19 Feb 20+16s8+8=Mar 8 Feb 20+193-8+31 T30+31-h30i-31+3K-Sept 1 6 - Jan 2^4-86-5+29+31+22-Apr 22 Jan 2+195-29+28+31+3O+31+3O+16-July 16 Dec 28+326=3+31+28^31+30+31+30^31+31*30+31+19 = Nov 19 Dec 25vl21=6+31+28+31+25=Apr 25 Nov 28+202=2+31-^31 ^28^31^-30+31+18=June 18 Oct 13+334=18+30+31+31+28+31+30+31^30+31+31+12= Sept 12 Sept 25+219=5+31^30+31+31+28+31+30+2=Ito_2 July 21+229=10+31+30+31+30+Sl+31+29+6=I4ar, 6 aNos. 2, 5 an$ 6 run over into another day, because of the Guinness constants ("Idem. coi.9). ... . . * References on pages 6-10 < ?■' ■ ‘ aGumness, Vol. II, p. xlviii 4"a COMPUTATIONS EMPLOYED IN ANALOGUE TABLES I,11,III 1. Procedure in Computation of Egyptian Dates, (Table l) From Egyptian New Year Table 30--31 "30^31+4), and the result is Jan 4, the Julian civil date of 18 Kisleu. This whole computation is based on the simple fact that the ancient Jewish Passover followed the Jewish day of full moon in Jerusalem at the time of barley harvest. It is always necessary to take note of the Julian leap years, when February has 29 days. If the year B. C., when divided by 4 has a remainder of 1, then it is a leap year. But, as in the case of the year 465, which had its leap day in early spring, the computation does not always pass over the leap month, and this fact has to be carefully watched. 3’ Procedure in Computation of Ptolemaic Eclipses (Table III) Each eclipse is worked out in connection with Table III, and discussed in detail on pages 11 to 19. 5 CONSTRUCTION OFAR AMA TC CALENDAR IN TIME OF EZRA. AND NEHE^II/xH } (nisan Limits Marked by Assuan Papyri) Cowley, A.E., "Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C.," p. 10, ff. Oxford, 1923« 1^9)147 ^9j 1427)li5^3)1^1^9l47;M5^3|Ul: 139j 1^71^5 M3!^liW9|W7[475 143^1^9^7 jl45|^3Ki61 ^59^7^5^ .^i;U9^7i April 29 O 2Ji (1 Nisan) 18 t JULIAN YEARS -1-Ni-san -.April. .2,0., Passover = Hay jLjlk Nisan) ■ !papyri|s|”B” i. L Lj . Li FApTkus (1 NiSah): ? f’T” Nt-s'sn 1 Uaxslu31 29 (1 ;Nisdn) 28 PAPYRUS ; 26 27 : DARIUS ill 12 i it : 16 39 I U 2 -4 4 EQUINOX KINGS 16 ; 20 1 ; 3 j 3 7 ! 9 ; 11 U3 113 ' 17 ] 19 . 21 | 2g j 23 j 27 | ?9 j 31 ; 33 | 33; 37 6 8 ! 10 12 it March DARIUS 1 ■ XERXES 2 t I 6 j 8 £26 ARTAXERXES I ! (1 Nisah) 28 3 Jr: : j_; ■■ ncrii ' r i PAPYRUS t- Passovei REGNAL _______XE4Ra PAPYRUS 7A'! (tfcign^i) PAPYRU$_ April 10 ■ ...paeyrus'D CYCLE YEARS PRIESTS .Common Emboli smie7: 8 9 1 he 11:12 14-15 13!’ T il7: iq | 3 16; ■!& T 5 6’ Wa f. J ilia "Tt 15 7‘1 JO 17 iq 13 16 18 3 4 al i' [6[7 5; r LENGTH OF :CYCLE;! CYCLED : EZRA'3 sll[l2j h4il5i h7; 8 10' \ yr j 1i6- i!8 ELIASH1B NUM: CYCLE 3 H j ;; 19 U: 13:4- 6 5" i JEHOIDA OJ 8 9 H 12; M “!i$ i__CYCl£ t 15 16; rr !13 18. I 3 4 .6 koiJOHAW : CM; (From passover to passover -- reckoned froia Ginzel moon tables) Change of Embolism w Mnemonic Restored Lf\ co In the accompanying diagram, the papyri, with one exception, occur at t^ie earliest rod latest .4 Nisan, it may be noted that tho passover limits in this OJ limits of 1 Nisan. By counting ahead to 1. century are from the date April 10 to May 8. (Cf. ”E” end "B".) those of the first century A.D., that Sealiger reports as April 8 to May 6 ("De Emendations Tempo- These limits are in harmony with rum," p. 263), and which would of nec essity be dated two days earlier, owing to the earlier occurrence of the moon one day every JOO years on the Julian calendar (Scaliger, "Do Emendation© Tempo-rum," p. 70)» The Papyri dates thoro fore confirm Scaliger*s testimony, which ho derived from early Jewish cycles he had in hand. rRECESSION OF ARAMAIC ALT) EGYPTIAN NEW YEARS* B.C 804 Julian Years Lunar Period I 3 0 A- yca.T’5 _ 'Babylonian Kings' Paschal Limits = Apr 11 —• May 9 747 B.c Recession of 1 Thoth — Observation 1 day in,4 yrs. Lunar Perios II ,304 s c , Persian Kings ' 500*'^Paschal Limits Apr 10 May 8' 1 Recession of 1 Nisan= 1 day in 304 years Observation B.C 1 Thoth . B.C "196 Lunar Period III ,304 yearns__ ■'Grecian Roman Antiochus Julius Augustus ' Paschal Limits=Apr 8 to May 6 Maccabean. Era A.D 109 Nabonassar Era 1 Thoth February 27 \ eT#-’ 747B.6. Astronomical 523 471 Jan 2 Papyri ”400" .... (71) 465 —(74) 451 ..- (75 ) 4476 - (77 ) 440 (82) 439 Dec 20 Dec 18 Dec 15 Dec 14 Dec 12 ”A” ”B” ”30” 112 B.C.* Je*wish Calculation First Century 8 A'D XI 45.B.c.! Pi Julian Time Establish© d' FM Say Apr 27 ! I n u --(82) 419 -■(83) 416 —(84) 410 —-(137) 199 Dec t! A.D 7 !1 "E" ”p” ”G" ”6” Dec 6 Dec 5 Oct 13 * At this time Macedonian leap month ’’Dios corus” was in use.—2 Mac. XI:21 J ”J" ”K” ”R.S.” Each year in the accompanying diagram corresponds to a certain number of leap days, as reckoned from the beginning of the Nabonassar Era, February 27, 747 B.C. Inasmuch as 1 Thoth, the Egyptian new year, slips back one day every 4 years, the position of 1 Thoth for any year, will be just as many days earlier than February 27, as there are leap days in the interval between 747 md the selected year (of course in advance of the beginning of the era). The following series of months corresponds to the monthly position of 1 Thoth during the Sothic Cycle from 1322 B.C. to 139 A.D.: B. C. b. C. 1369 — 1246 July 517 — 394 December 1249 — 1126 June 393 - 274 November 1125 — 1002 May 273 — 150 October 1001 — 882 April 149 - 30 September 881 — 759 March A.D. 758 — 642 February 29 - 95 August 641 —‘ 518 J anuary 96 — 219 July TABLE PAPYRUS REFERENCES FOR ANALOGUE TABLE (PAGE (Translated by A. E. Cowley from original texts) Papyrus "A" — Grant of building rights. Date said to be quite certain, 471 B. C. Found rolled up, tied, and sealed. Translation of Date: "On the 18th of Elul, that is the 28th day of Pa-hons, year 15 of King Xerxes, etc.”—Cowley, A. E., ”Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B. C.,” p. 11. Oxford, 1^23. Papyrus "B" — Concerning property rights. Papyrus is almost perfect, but the number in the Egyptian month is broken. Gutesmann and Hontheim calculate "17” to be the required number. Fotheringham and Shiirer — and therefore Ginzel, who made all the calculations for Shiirer --favor "17 Thoth" (Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. LXIX, 1909, p. 14). Translation of Date: "On the 18th of Chisleu, that is the 7th (17th, in harmony with foregoing) day of Thoth, in year 21, the beginning of the reign when King Artaxerxes sat on his throne, etc."--Idem, p. 16. Papyrus "D" -- Translation of Date: "On the 21st of Chisleu, that is the 1st day of Mesore, the 6th year of Artaxerxes, the king, etc."— Idem, p. 23. Concerning this papyrus, Cowley reasons that Artaxerxes I is signified because the transaction relates to the same persons whose names appear in "B." But the 21st Kisleu as 1 Mesore would mean that 1 Thoth would have to occur a month earlier than its position in the 6th of Artaxerxes — Dec. 16/17 for 460 B. C. -- and Fotheringham and Shiirer solve the difficulty by making the Aramaic date read a month earlier, that is, as 21 Hesvan, instead of 21 Kisleu. With this reading, the synchronism is exact. See Fotheringham’s "Calendar Dates," in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. LXIX, p. 15. Papyrus "30" — Ungnad No. "30" is the same as No. "10" in Cowley. Papyrus refers to a contract for a loan. Was a long document almost perfectly preserved, found still folded, tied and sealed. Translation of Date: "On the 7th of Chisleu, that is the 4th day of the month Thoth, the 9th year of Artaxerxes the king, etc."—"Aramaic Papyri," p. 30. The synchronization does not take place in the 9th of Artaxerxes, as reckoned from his first year in 464 B. C., but from the 9th year after the revolt of Egypt in 460 B. C., as soon as the Persians had again obtained control. The coincident year of the two dates is 451 B. C. Although the war, incited by the Libyan king Inaros, lasted six years (Thucydides, "History of the Peloponnesian War," Book 1, CVIII. 5-CX. 2. p. 183. Tr. Smith. Harvard Press, 1935), yet in a short time "the remnant of the Persians held out, and gave Artaxerxes time to send a new army to their aid" (Brugsch, Henry, "History of Egypt," Second Edition, p. 332. London, 1881). Dr. Brugsch quotes the text of a rock-inscription, in which the Persian eunuch Aliurta mentions his service under Artaxerxes as "the five years of the king of Upper and Lower Egypt, the sovereign, Arta-khshesesh (Artaxerxes), and the 16 years, etc." Evidently the Egyptian revolt in 460 B. C., resulted in the two periods of Aliurta’s office (idem, p. 314), and Papyrus "30" seems to confirm this short lapse of Persian rule. Papyrus "E" — Cowley says that "a peculiarity of this text is the number of mistakes in spelling, though the scribe, Nathan b. Ananiah, must have been a professional notary, since he also wrote Nos. 10 and 15." 4 References — 7 Translation of Date: ”0n the 3rd of Chisleu, that is the 10th day of the month Mesore, year 19 of Artaxerxes the king, etc.’ — Aramaic Papyri, p. 38. In Cowley’s comment on this date, he says: ’’According to Gutesmann it should be Chisleu 2 = Mesore 10, or Chisleu 3 = Mesore 11. Hontheim reads 2.”-- Idem. It would be easier to drop a figure out of the Aramaic text than to insert one. Hence we accept the alternative reading, ’’Chisleu 2 =-Mesore 10.” Papyrus "F" — Settlement of claim. Date is 441-440 B. C. Translation of Date: ”0n the 14th of Ab, that is the 19th day of Pahons, year 25 o£ Artaxerxes the king, etc.”-- Idem, p. 42. “The papyrus is in an excellent state of preservation.” Papyrus "G" -- Marriage contract. “About 441 B. C." Text shows that the number of the king’s year is lost, for the first line is much broken. Cowley says that the text is very difficult, "partly owing to its broken condition, and partly to the many unknown words." Owing to the age of the sons, "present marriage cannot have taken place much after 440.” Synchronization does occur in 439 B. C. for 23rd of Tisri. The date for Tisri is uncertain. Translation ofJDate: ”0n the 25th (?) of Tisri that is the 6th day of the month Epiphi, year. . ~of Artaxerxes the king, etc."— Idem, p. 45. Papyrus "H” — Settlement of a claim. 420 B. C. "The date is the 4th year of Darius, who must be Darius II, and the year is therefore 420 B. C." Translation of Date: "In the month Elul, that is Payni, 4th year of Darius the king at that time in Yeb the fortress, etc."-- Idem, p. 68. Cowley's comment: "The day of the month is not given, which is unusual. The Egyptian month may be Payni or Paophi. From the calculations of Mr. Knobel and Dr. Fotheringham,it seems that Payni suits the chronology best. So also Gutesmann.”— Idem, p. 59. Since Elul has 29 days, and Payni, 30, the coincidence would have to occur either at the beginning or end of the month. In 420, it occurred at the end of Elul and Payni. Papyrus ”J" — Renunciation of claim. "The date, which is given twice, is the 8th (Egyptian 9th) year of Darius (ll) = 416 B. C."— Idem, p. 83. Cowley further comments on the date, saying that "the Egyptian year began with Thoth, and did not coincide with the Jewish year beginning with Nisan. This synchronism is important." Idem. Translation of Date: "On the 3rd of Chisleu, year 8, that is the 12th day of Thoth, year 9 of Darius the king at that date in Yeb the fortress, etc,”— Idem, p. 85. Papyrus "K" -- Assignment of slaves. Papyrus very well preserved, and "hardly any letter really doubtful." Cowley emphasizes the double reckoning of the regnal years, that counts 13 Jewish and 14 Egyptian for Darius II in Shebat and Athyr in 412-411 B. C. (idem, p. 103.) Translation of Date: "On the 24th of Shebat, year 13, that is the 9th day of Athyr, year 14 of Darius the king in the fortress of Yeb, etc."— Idem, p. 104. Stone "R. S." — Rosetta Stone. Ptolemy Epiphanes — the fifth Ptolemy — is the king of the Rosetta Stone (Mahaffy, J. P., "Flinders Petri Papyri," p. 27, note. Dublin, 1891), and the inscription "was certainly decreed in the 9th year of his reign" (Mahaffy, "History of Egypt," p. 151). But when Philopator References — 8 died, young Ptolemy Epiphanes (5 years old) had already been co-regent from the year of his birth (Smyley, J. Gilbart, '’Greek Papyri from Gurob,’’ p. 28. Dublin, 1921; Mahaffy, "History of Egypt,” p. 151). He was only later crowned at Memphis "in the 9th year of his reign” (Revillout, E, "Papyrus Bilingue du temps de Philopator,” p. 42. London, 1892). His 9th year was doubtless taken to be the 9th of his co-regency, and hence of his birth year, for it is in 199 B. C. that the Rosetta Stone dates synchronize. Dr. Smyley argues (loco citato) that Epiphanes was born in 210 B. C., and was made co-regent 50 days after birth. On the basis of this history, the Rosetta Decree harmonizes with 199 B. C. Translation of ^be Rosetta Inscription Date: "In the 9th year. . .of the god Epiphanes Eucharistos. . . the 4th of the month Xanthicus, according to the Egyptians the 18th of Mecheir." — Mahaffy, J. P., "History of Egypt," p. 152. London, 1899. See also Mulleri, C and T., "Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, Inscription de Rosette." Tr» by Latronne. Paris, 1853. References — 9 ECLIPSE REFERENCES FOR TABLE (PAGE 4) (Translated from Ptolemy's Greek text) 1. ’’Therefore, of three ancient eclipses of those observed in Babylon, which we have taken, the first is recorded in the first year of Mardo-kempad, on the 29/30 of the Egyptian Thoth. The eclipse began, they say, fully an hour after the rising, and it was total. Since the sun stood in the last of the Fishes, the night had properly 12 equinoctial hours exactly, and so the beginning of the eclipse of course fell 4 1/2 equinoctial hours before midnight, but the middle, when now the eclipse was full, 21/2 hours before midnight. . . but in Alexandria we found the middle of the submitted eclipse 31/3 equinoctial hours before midnight.”—Claudiou Ptolemaiou, "Mathematike Suntaxis,” pp. 244, 245. In Halma. Paris, 1813. I~721 B. C., Mar 197T 2. "And the second eclipse was recorded in the second year of the same Mardokempad on the 18/19 of the Egyptian Thoth. . . the middle of the eclipse occurred in Babylon at the middle of the night itself, but in Alexandria it appeared at 5/6 of an hour before midnight.”-- Idem, p. 245. [720 B. C., Mar 8] 3. "And the third eclipse was recorded in the second year of Mardokem- pad, on the 15/16 of the Egyptian Phamenoth. . . In Alexandria the middle of the time of the eclipse was complete at 4 1/3 equinoctial hours before midnight."— Idem, pp, 245, 246. [720 B. C., Sept 1.] 4. “For in the 5th year of Nabopollassar, which is the 127th year of Nabonassar, on the 27/28 Egyptian Athyr, toward the end of the 11th hour, in Babylon the moon began to eclipse, and for the most part a quarter of the diameter was obscured on the south. . . in Alexandria it (the middle of the eclipse) occurred only 5 hours after midnight.”— Idem, pp. 340, 341. [621 B. C. , Anril 22. ] 5. "Again in the 7th year of Cambyses, which is the 225th year from Nabonassar, according to the Egyptian 17/18 Phamenoth, one hour before midnight, the moon was eclipsed in Babylon on the northern half of its diameter. . . in Alexandria it occurred 1 5/6 equinoctial hours before midnight.”— Idem, pp. 341, 342. [ 523 B .C^,.. July 16. ] 6. “The second eclipse employed by Hipparchus, occurred in the 20th year of Darius, the successor to Cambyses, in the 28/29 of the Egyptian Epiphi, the night having advanced 6 1/3 equinoctial hours, in which the moon, in like manner, eclipsed the fourth part of its diameter on the south. • . in Alexandria the middle of the eclipse occurred 1 1/4 equinoctial hours before midnight."— Idem, pp. 269, 270. [502 B, C., Nov. 19.] ------------------ ------------------ 7. “As the first eclipse, we have named that one which, under Darius I in Babylon, in the 31st year of his reign, was observed on the 3/4 Egyptian Tybi, in the midst of the 6th hour of the night. At the same time, as the exact report runs, the moon was eclipsed two inches on the south, that is, 1/6 part of its diameter.”— Idem, p. 267. [491 B. C.. April 25.] References — 10 8. "Again, they say that the eclipse occurred when Phanostratos the Athenian was archon, in the month Skirophorion, on the 24/25 Egyptian Phamenoth. . . Now the sun stood in the last part of the Gemini, thus the hour of the night amounted to 12 time-degrees, that is, 48’"; consequently made 51/2 civil hours, or 4 2/5 equinoctial hours. The beginning of the eclipse had therefore taken place 4 2/5 hours before midnight, or 7 3/5 equinoctial hours after the noon of the 24th; but since the whole length of the eclipse was given at 3 hours, thus the middle was evidently 9 1/10 equinoctial hours after the noon. In Alexandria, consequently, it must have entered 8 1/4 equinoctial hours after noon of tho 24th."— Idem, pp. 276, 277. [582 g, gtl Juno 9. "They say that the third eclipse occurred in the 55th year of the second period on the 5th Egyptian Mesore. . . Now since the sun stood in the midst of the Virgin, thus in Alexandria, the hour of the night amounted to 14 2/5 time-degrees, that is 57 3/5n; consequently made out the 2 1/3 civil hours after midnight, or 2 1/4 equinoctial. Therefore the middle (of eclipse) was 14 1/4 equinoctial hours after the noon of the 5th."— Idem, p. 281. [200 B. C., Sept 12.) 10. "Hipparch asserts that he observed tho sun and moon with the help of instruments in Rhodes on the 11th of the Egyptian Pharmuthi, at the beginning of the second hour — 197th year after the death of Alexander. . . Now if the observation took place at the beginning of the second hour, that is, about 5 civil hours before the noon of the 11th, etc."— Idem, p. 300. [128 B, C. t~ May ^H 11. "The third eclipse had occurred in the 20th year of Hadrian, on the 19/20 of the Egyptian Pharmuthi. The middle, according to our reckoning, entered at 4 equinoctial hours after midnight."— Idem, p. 255. [136 A, D Mar 6.] CORRESPONDING OPPOLZER REFERENCES (Greenwich Civil Time) 1. Von Oppolzer, Th . Ritter , "Canon der Finstornisse," Wien j , 1887 No. 741, p. 332 = Mar 19. 19h 4 . 721 B. C. 2. Idem. No. 743, p. 332 = Mar 8. 21** 30m. 720 B. C. 3. Idem. No, 744, p. 332 = Sept 1. 17h 4m. 720 B. C. 4. Idem. No. 901, p. 334 = April 22. 2h 38m. 621 B. C. 5. Idem. No. 1056, p. 335 = July 16. 21h 0n. 523 B. C. 6. Idem. No. 1090, p. 335 = Nov 19. 21h 24m. 502 B. C. 7. Idem. No. 1107, p. 336 = April 25. 19h 55n. 491 B. C. 8. Idem. No. 1276, p. 337 = June 18. 18 J1 31m. 382 B. C. 9. Idem. No. 1547, p. 340 - Sept 12. 0h 28n. 200 B. C. 10. Idem. No. 1660, p. 341 - May 2. 4h 35m. 128 B. C. 11. Idem. No. 2075, p. 345 = Mar 6. lh 43m. 136 A. D. 11 THE PROBLEM.—In order to understand the meaning of the ancient Egyptian and Aramaic double dates, found on papyrus, tablet, and stone, it is essential first of all (1) to demonstrate the relation between the three calendars involved — Egyptian, Jewish, and Julian. Although Julian time did not exist before the age of the Caesars, yet all the chronological tables and eclipse canons which extend back to ancient periods of history are based upon a projected Julian year. The Julian calendar is therefore definitely related to the solution of this problem, and becomes the common denominator of time between the other two. A second feature (2) concerns the synthetic construction of suitable calendar tables, upon which the papyri dates can be oriented, and their epochs demonstrated. 1* RelationBetw^n^tjie CaJLendars . --According to both tradition and authoritative chronology, the Egyptian day was astronomical, and probably extended from noon to noon. It was doubtless the forerunner of the nautical astronomical day, which was in operation until 1925. Tradition has it that the Egyptian day began when the hour angle of the sun was zero, that is, when the sun crossed the meridian. The Egyptian new year day, 1 Thoth, started at noon, and, according to Albiruni, the day was reckoned from the moment “when the sun arrives on the plane of the meridian, till the same moment of the following day.” (“Chronology of Ancient Nations,” p. 6.) The day was designated by one single date, though it passed through the midnight hour. Anciently, people were induced to prefer the meridian to the horizon, because the day from sunset to sunset varies in length, while the time between meridians is constant, and regular everywhere on earth. The horizons, on the other hand, vary for every latitude. The Jewish day, on the contrary, consists of parts of two days? but on the calendar, it is customary to civil-date the Jewish day by the Julian day with which it coincides from midnight to sunset. This is the second civil day of the two with which the Jewish agrees. 12 While chronologers are not unanimous in their opinion concerning the Egyp tian day, as from noon to noon, yet this plan is in harmony with a reasonable solution of the papyri double dates. The following diagram further demonstrates the exact relation between Egyptian and Jewish time: Egyptian Jewish Civil Time (midnight to midnight) (noon to noon) (sunset to sunset) l i h ©t h Therefore £ Nisan (April 9, civ, time) —Atbyr (April 8, astronom. time) —on calendar, one day difference. In this diagram, the Egyptian day, 1 Thoth, starts at noon, and is calendar-dated April 8 until the subsequent noon. It takes the date of the civil day in progress "one moment after the noon1* at which it begins. The Jewish day, 1 Nisan, starts at sunset of April 8 and extends to sunset of April 9. While it covers parts of two days, April 8 and April 9, on the calendar, it is designated April 9 only. Although both Jewish and Egyptian days have 18 hours in common, yet, on the calendar, the Jewish day is dated one day later than the Egyptian. There is consequently one day’s difference between these two days in their calendar dating. This is the first feature of the papyrus prob-lem to be understood. 2. The Tables.—The second feature relates to the preparation of Jewish and Egyptian calendar tables, which will outline the two kinds of time involved—civil and astronomical. The Jewish Table, found on page 3, is based on the two crucifixion postulates: (a) The passover moon in time of barley harvest; and (b) the passover on the day following Jewish full-moon-day in Jerusalem. The Ginzel full moon dates (G.M.T.) were used in determining the true passover dates, and were first changed to Jerusalem civil time by adding 12^+ 2^ 20n(0^59) to each full moon. Those full moon Julian dates that then came before sunset were designated 13 Nisan, and those civil dates that occurred after sunset, were designated 12 Nisan. 14 Nisan was then counted 13 as the day following Jewish full moon day in Jerusalem, and the 1st day of Nisan was reckoned as the 14th day earlier. Each translation period was computed as the difference between conjunction and 1 Nisan, 6 o’clock sunset. Length of year was calculated from one passover to another, using the Julian calendar. If year was 354 days long, the months alternated a regular sequence of 30 and 29 days, from Nisan to end of year. If year was 355 days, Hesvan was made 30 days; if 383 days, Kisleu was given 29 days. In leap year, Adar had 30, and Veadar, 29. Barley harvest moons determined whether year was common or embolismic. (For Table of Jewish and Egyptian months, cf. page 19.) The Egyptian New Year Table (pp- 1»2) is based upon months, each one of which had 30 days, except 12th month Mesore, which had 35. The Egyptian year was therefore only 365 days long, and never changed. Its new year, 1 Thoth, slipped back one day every four years, and continued for the 4-year period. (Comp. Table V for 1 Thoth months from Nabonassar era to end of Sothic cycle.) The 1 Thoth dates of the Table (pp. 1,2) are founded upon 15 or more Ptolemaic lunar eclipses (Table III, p. 4), upon coincident Julian eclipse dates from Oppolzer’s Canon, and upon the corresponding full moon dates from the Ginzel and Guinness tables (Table III, p. 4, col. 8). In the "Almagest” references (pp. 9, 10), are the translations from Ptolemy’s Greek text, giving the exact position of each eclipse, first in Babylon, and then in Alexandria, From these direct quotations, it will be noted that the descriptions are not given in astronomical time, in connection with the Egyptian date, but are directly related to a single point of time — either midnight, noon, or Babylonian sunset. However, Ptolemy usually concludes with an Alexandrian dating of each eclipse. And when the Alexandrian dates are compared with Oppolzer’s Greenwich civil time eclipses, they are found in almost exact agreement. Frequently Ptolemy mentions the eclipse as between two Egyptian dates; sometimes only one date is given; and then again the eclipse may occur on his second date, as is the case with No, 11, of the series here presented. 14 From these canons and tables, it is possible to establish the exact position of each Ptolemaic eclipse, its coincident Julian date, full moon date, and Egyptian date. (All these details are diagramed in columns 6, 7, and 8 of Table III, p. 4, and the eclipse references are pp. 9, 10.) But first, from Table V, p. 5”^ find the civil month that corresponds to 1 Thoth for the regnal year selected, as for example, 720 B. C., in eclipse No. 3. In this instance, 1 Thoth was in February. The statistics for eclipse No. 3 in 720 B. C., with 1 Thoth in February point to September —193 days later-- as the time of the eclipse. For September, 720 B. C., Oppolzer gives Sept. 1 17 4 ("Canon,” No. 744, p. 332.) The equation therefore becomes possible that — September 1 17^ 4m t 2^ 10m (Oppolzer*s eclipse in Alexandrian time) ™ "4 1/3 hours before midnight," 15 Phamenoth (Ptolemy's eclipse for Alexandria.) In this equation, both Ptolemy and Oppolzer are in practical agreement in k1 in civil-dating the eclipse. Oppolzer’s "19 14‘" (Alex.C.T.) was 7:14 p.m.; Ptolemy’s "4 1/3 hours before midnight” was 7:40 p.m. Hence, both dates must be treated as civil time. The important feature only is to determine which Egyptian date ends the interval, that extends back to the true date of 1 Thoth. In the diagram (Table III, column 6), the day ending each interval is stippled. In No.l instance, the eclipse position adds a part of a day to the interval. If this interval is less than 12 hours, as when eclipse occurs before midnight, it can not be designated as a whole day on the calendar without breaking the correlation of the calendars, and the two kinds of time involved. If the interval is more than 12 hours, as is the case when the eclipse occurs after midnight, then the Egyptian day of the eclipse is the end of the interval, as in Nos. 4, 9, 10, and 11. For example: In No. 9, 200 B. C., according to the testimony of Ptolemy, we may look for an eclipse on 5 Mesore, "2 1/3 hours after midnight," which would be 334 days after 1 Thoth. In 200 B. C., 1 Thoth occurred 137 days earlier than in February, 747, (cf. leap-day Table V, p.5*a) or about the 15 middle of October; 334 days later than this point of Time, point to September for the eclipse. Oppolzer’s Canon, No. 1547, p. 340, records just one lunar eclipse in the autumn of 200 B. C.—September 12 0 28m . The equation, therefore, can be written that — Septemberl2 O51 28m r 2h 10m (Oppolzer’s eclipse in Alexandrian civil time) ”2 1/3 hours after midnight,” 5 Mesore (Ptolemy’s eclipse for Alexandria) Oppolzer’s date is 2:38 a.m., and Ptolemy’s, 2:20 a.m. They are therefore both in civil time. To this eclipse and to one more of the series in Table III (No. 10), Ptolemy ascribes a single Egyptian date. This helps much in discovering the Julian date that corresponds to his beginning of the Nabo-nassar era. In No. 9, he counts the interval from the beginning of the ’’epoch” as 547 years, 334 days, and 14^- hours ("Mathematike Suntaxis,” p. 281). These figures plainly declare that he was reckoning as if from February 27 as 1 Thoth in 747 B. C., which the following calendric argument shows: If February 27 was 1 Thoth in 747 B. C., as the Egyptian New Year Table represents, then in 200 B. C., the new year would have receded 137 days to October 13, as given on page 2 of the Table. Ptolemy counted 5 Mesore -- the day of the eclipse -- as the 335th day of the year, which is the equivalent of 1 Thoth +334 days. By adding 334 days to 1 Thoth, or October 13 (18+30+31+ 31+2 8+31+30+31+30-t 31+31-t 12), we get Sept. 12 as the result, which is Oppolzer’s date for the eclipse. Consequently, the 5th Mesore must be the end of the interval, and 1 Thoth is found by reckoning back 334 days from Sept. 12, thus making October 13 to be civil date for 1 Thoth in 200 B. C., and February 27 in 747 B. C. In column 9, the reckoning is reversed, adding 334 days to October 13, thus marking September 12 as the civil date of the eclipse. The ruling is therefore important that when the eclipse occurs after midnight, the Egyptian day in progress at that time is the end of the interval. Eclipse No. 10 Ptolemy also computes in the same way (’’Idem,” p. 300). Both eclipses are important witnesses for making February 27 the beginning of the Nabonassar era. 16 No. 11 offers a slight variation from the others, in that the eclipse occurs on the second Egyptian date mentioned by Ptolemy, that is, 20 Phar-muthi. But this position is established by the testimony of Censorinus, requiring July 21 ("12th of the calends of August”) as 1 Thoth in the 4-year period from 136 to 139 A. D. His statement follows: ’’The aeras of the Egyptians always commence on the first day of the month, Thoth, a day which, this present year, corresponds to the 7th calends of July, whilst a hundred years ago [139 A. D.], under the second consulate of the Emperor Antoninus Pius and of Bruttius Praesena, this same day corresponded to the 12th of the calends of August, the ordinary epoch of the rising of the Canicular star in Egypt. Thus we see that we are to-day really in the hundredth year of the Annus Magnus, which, as I have stated above, is called the solar and canicular year and Year of God."--"De Die Natali,” tr. by Maude p. 33. New York, 1900. On the basis, therefore, of these well-authenticated Ptolemaic eclipses, eleven of which are given in Table III, and of the corresponding Oppolzer Canon eclipse dates in Julian time, the Egyptian New Year Table, is here offered with which to solve the double dating of papyrus, tablet and stone. 1 Thoth being established for the eclipse years, it was then possible to compute 1 Thoth for the intervening years, by simply making it one day earlier every fourth year. In this manner, the New Year Table was built up. When Egyptian dates are computed according to the position of 1 Thoth, as given in the Table for the various 4-year periods, the resulting dates will occur earlier by one day than their companion Aramaic dates, the one being given in astronomical time, and the Aramaic in civil time. (Comp. Tables I and II, cols. 7 and 16, p. 4). This difference of one day was demonstrated to have existed between ancient Egyptian and Jewish calendation. The synthetic tables here presented for the solution of this calendar problem -- the Jewish, based upon the two important principles governing the crucifixion date, and the Egyptian, definitely tied to two authentic canons of eclipses -- similarly differ by one day in their resultant computed dates. With the exception of Papyrus "E," which investigators of this problem recognize to be an extra day out of alignment, the other eleven monument dates have this constant difference of one day. If the tables of Schram, 17 Ginzel or P. V. Neugebauer, should be substituted, the results would differ. Ginzel starts his Nabonassar era with February 27, the same as the Table here presents, but some of his 1 Thoth dates are out of agreement with important eclipses. However, when he comes to the year 139 A. D., he places the rising of Sirius on July 21 ("Handbuch der mathematis chen und technischen Chronologie, ” p. 187. Leipzig, p. 1906). This is in harmony with Censorinus, and with the eclipse in 136 A. D., March 6, the 20th year of Hadrian. In commenting on the relation of Egyptian and Julian calendars, the following remark comes from Glenn Draper, Associate Astronomer, U. S. Naval Observatory: “If one were privileged to tell early chronologers how to have dated their events in different calendars, the rule of correspondence should be, the day in progress one moment after noon. As it is, their confusion has come on down to modern times.”—Glenn Draper, Washington, D. C., September 20, 1940. Dr. 0. Neugebauer, professor of mathematics in Brown University, finds the Egyptian dates in Schram and Ginzel too early to agree with a dated motion of the five major planets. He was therefore interested in the Egyptian Table here presented, that begins the Nabonassar era with February 27. The principles of calendation employed in the construction and use of the Jewish Table (page 3), have been briefly outlined in the beginning of this discussion. It should be further stressed, however, that the small constant difference between the resultant Egyptian and Aramaic dates is of great importance in support of the calendar features that characterize the Jewish Table. The Egyptian calendar has no variations whatsoever; its months are each 30 days long, and five days are always added at the end of every year. The Jewish calendar is just the opposite -- varying all the time outside of its fixed feast period of seven months. Consequently, this constant difference of one day between the two systems of time reckoning -- a large portion of which is a permanent calendar arrangement that never changes -- shows that the last five months of the Jewish year, although subject to regular, repetitive change, are nevertheless balanced by the moon’s motion. It is therefore these variable calendar months that exhibit this uniform difference between two very dissim 18 ilar methods of time calculation. Such is the paradox existing between Jewish computations and the Egyptian Sothic Cycle. The Cycle Table (page 5) is a rearrangement of the very revealing Wood 19-year cycles. Instead of conjunction dates, 1 Nisan dates have been substituted in laying out the calendar curve. This enables the passover limits to be demonstrated for the papyrus period. Papyrus "B“ and Papyrus “E” point to April 10 and May 8, respectively, as the extreme dates for the passover. These limits are in harmony with those of Scaliger for the first century, April 8 to May 6, which are necessarily two days earlier at the end of a 600-year period of Julian time. The irregular intercalation presented by Papyrus ”E,” which demands embolism in year 8 of Cycle 3 instead of year 7, has been a source of much comment by various scholars. Fotheringham says that irregular intercalation was a definite characteristic of the ancient Babylonian cycle. (“Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society,” Vol. LX1X, p. 18). Yet he does not consider the papyri cycles Babylonian. He quotes Shurer as concluding that in the papyrus period, the intercalations "were determined on principles similar to those which guided the Sanhedrin at a later date when the weather and the state of the crops were considered as well as the course of the sun.”—Idem. M. Oppert has also proved, by his contract tablets, that the intercalations of the Babylonian calendar were irregular. (“La fixation exacte de la chro-nologie des derniers rois de Babylone,” Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie, 1893, pp. 56-74). Consequently, the change in embolism in Papyrus ”E,“ which represents the Jewish calendar, would seem to indicate that observation was governing the passover date, rather than a fixed mnemonic. The fact that the papyri dates keep 1 Nisan away from the equinox, that is, they do not place 1 Nisan on or before it, is also evidence of observation only, in the papyrus period. Calculation was introduced in the Maccabean era, about 112 B. C. (Albiruni, “Chronology of Ancient Nations,” Tr. by Sachau, p. 68). The Macedonian leap month “Dioscorns,” was also in use in Syria at this time (2Mac. XI:21). 19 In 45 B. C., the Julian calendar reform was initiated, and the finishing touches were added by Augustus, in 8 A. D. Thus the way was prepared for efficient calendar reckoning in the time of Christ, based upon both observation and calculation. ANCIENT CALENDAR MONTHS Egyptian Hebrew Macedonian Thoth 30 Nisan 30 Xanthicus Paophi it Iyar 29 Artemisius Athyr tt Sivan 30 Daesius Choiak it Tammuz 29 Panemus Tybi tt Ab 30 Lous Me chir it Elul 29 Gorpiaeus Phamenoth it Tisri 30 Hyperberetaeus Pharmuthi n Hesvan 29 (30) Dius Pachons it Kisleu 30 (29) Apellaeus Payni it Tebeth 29 Audynaeus Epiphi tt Shebat 30 Peritius Mesore 35 Adar 29 (30) Dystrus Veadar 29 Dioscorus Macedonian months are considered commensurate with the Hebrew. This is asserted by Josephus, Scaliger, Brown and other chronolo- gers 20 CONCLUSIONS The foregoing pages represent the synchronization of double-dated monuments -- papyrus, tablet and stone -- belonging to the ancient Persian period in the age of Ezra and Nehemiah. The problem necessitated the construction of calendar tables for both Egyptian and Jewish reckoning, according to which these historic dates could be computed. The use of these tables involved particular and exact specifications relating to calendation in these two kinds of time. The final solution of this calendar question has given assurance of the certainty and soundness of the principles herein employed. By the eclipse calculations, Ptolemy, Oppolzer, and the Egyptian Table of 1 Thoth dates agree. It is revealing to list the various features of the calendric outline, according to which the synchronization was made. The series pertaining to the two calendars — Egyptian and Jewish -- follow the conclusions here offered: 1. The Egyptian New Year Table of 1 Thoth dates -- constructed on the basis of Ptolemy’s catalog of eclipses, and of Oppolzer’s ’’Canon der Finster-nisse”— is thereby able to certify computations made according to its 1 Thoth positions, which cover a period of 1600 years. 2. The Jewish Table -- built up upon the two crucifixion postulates, involving all the principles of calculation employed in the solution of the crucifixion date, and of the 1844 event of prophecy — offers a specific method of Mosaic reckoning, which, by virtue of its coincidence with the ancient Egyptian system, is therefore attested by the supporting canons of the Egyptian calendar. 3. The constant, resultant one-day difference obtained in the computed dates, determined by the use of these two calendar Tables, is indicative of the certainty and precision of the calendar rules applied. 4. The fact that the calendric principles governing the crucifixion date, solved also the papyrus dates, and provided an independent calculation confirming the Millerite 1844 chronology, shows that all three epochs of prophecy are controlled by one and the same luni-solar system of calculation. The following calendric series was employed in the solution of the problem — 1 • Jewish Calendation (a) Jewish day calendar-dated by its second civil date. (b) Passover following Jewish full moon day in Jerusalem. (c) Passover limits (April 8 to May 6, 1st century) determined by barley harvest moons. (d) Length of Jewish year — from passover to passover. 21 (e) Jewish feast period (Nisan to Tisri) — an alternate sequence of 30- and 29-day months. (f) He s van — 30 days in 355-day year; Kisleu — 29 days in 383-day year; in leap year, Adar — 30 days, and Veadar, 29 days. Vg) Translation period = 1 to 4 days. (h) Leap months determined by moon’s place on the calendar. (i) The 19-year cycle curve of the papyrus dates demonstrate the passover limits for the fifth century B. C. (April 10 to May 8). 2. Egyptian Calendation (used in this problem) (a) Egyptian year was only 365 days long, and consequently receded through all the seasons in 1460 years. (b) Egyptian day, from noon to noon, designated by one single civil date. (c) Egyptian day calendar-dated by the civil day that is in progress ’’one moment after its first noon.” (d) Date of the Egyptian New Year recedes one day every 4th year, and continues as new year date throughout the 4-year interim. (e) Egyptian Nev/ Year — 1 Thoth — continues in the same Julian month for about 120 years, according to length of Julian month. (f) Nabonassar Era began at noon, February 27, 747 B. C. These double-dated Aramaic papyri were rolled up, tied, and sealed nearly 2500 years ago. In 1900, or thereabouts, these seals were broken for the first time. They therefore present an undistorted picture of the age in which the papyri were written. Many calendar tables, cycles, and various solar and lunar constants have been tried out in the effort to harmonize these dates. But the synchronization is accomplished by the application of the two crucifixion postulates, which revive the Mosaic order of time, bring harmony and symmetry to primitive calendation, and unity and certainty to the understanding of the prophetic period under study. Grace E. Amadon. JEWISH AND BABYLONIAN TIME-KEEPING IN THE SIXTH CENTURY B.C. (An Important Principle) -Q^act ftma£fOn To the century during which Solomon’s temple was burned belongs an extraordinarily large amount of source material—discoveries during the last hundred and fifty years. Aside from the biblical ..prophets and scribes who focus their messages and communications upon this period, there are histori-ographers and chronologers—Jew, Greek, Chaldaean, Egypt!an--and, in addi-A tion, dated tablets and documents shedding light upon this memorable era. It would seem, therefore, that no consistent reason should exist why an accurate chronological and acceptable At able for the key events ofithe sixth century B.C. can not be constructed. And indeed, it is of significant important that the chronological series of Driver in 1890,1 2 supposed to harmonize with textual criticism, is practically the same, though abbreviated, as Albright’s outline forty years later, which is based upon monumental investigation. A small but interesting difference between the two tables reveals that Driver dates Necho’s defeat at Carchemish in 604 B.C., while, after four decades, the inscriptions obviously have not as yet convinced the archaeologist of any date at all for this battle, although the inscriptions and ancient chronicles have doubtless been thoroughly combed for the Neo-BabyIonian and Persian periods. It is the purpose of this study to demonstrate more fully the biblical account of this same period; and thereby to show that the Bible presents internal and actual proofs of its chronology, and to outline an important time-keeping principle underlying biblical computations and order of events. The accompanying Table W is offered as a suggestive aid for studying the various dates and periods connected with the Jewish captivity in Babylon. And in 1 S.R. Driver, An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament, New York, 1898, 247. 2 W.F. Albright, ’’The Seal of Eliakim and the Latest Preexilic History of Judah, with Some Observations on Ezekiel,” Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. LI. Part II. 1932. 85.86. An Important Principle - 2 this connection it is fitting to recall the un able words of Edward Sachau with reference to every chronological table: ”No number in any chronological table can be considered correct, as long as it is not proved by computation to be so, and even in the simplest historical narrative the editor and translator may most lamentably go astray in his interpretation, if there is something wrong with his method of research." Table W begins a little earlier than the turn of the sixth century B.C and includes the death of the last Assyrian king Assurbanipal, whose t'ed library of ancient cuneiform texts has been housed in the British museum for nearly fifty years. Josiah had reached his 13th year, during which the young priest Jeremiah was called to the prophetic office. Zephaniah and Ha- bakkuk were prophesying the imminent rise of the Chaldaean power. Daniel was a boy prince in the royal family in Jerusalem. I DESCRIPTION OF TABLE W The chronological outline here presented corresponds primarily to the synchronistic history of the closing years of the Jewish monarchy and the period of the exile. The table is built up upon four distinct systems of time— Julian, Egyptian, Babylonian, and Jewish. The eight consecutive groups of years crossing the page extend from the year 626 B.C. to 515 B.C. inclusive, and cover the reigns of the Babylonian and early Persian kings. Each calen dar series is designated by name on the left of the table. 1. The Julian year begins at midnight of January 1 on the meridian of Greenwich. This arrangement is for chronological purposes only, namely, to tie the outline to certain eclipses which determine the Julian year, and which are recorded in "vyeltzeit" in Oppolzer’s CanonA In the period which Table W represents, there is no point of time introduced by prophet or scribe that demands a more exact reckoning than year, month, or day. Frequently the season alone will link an event to the outline of its period. 2. The name Ptolemy represents the Nabonassar era, which is established by well-authenticated lunar eclipses •vid, for purely astronomical reasons „ Ptolemy employs the Egyptian year reckons the day from noon to noon. > In 3 C.Edward Sachau, The Chronology of Ancient Nations, London, 1879, Preface. 4 Th. Ritter v. Oppolzer, Canon der Finsternisse, Wien, 1887. $ F.K. Ginzel, Handbuch der mathematisohen und technischen Chronologie, I Band, Leipzig, 1911, 163. An Important Principle - 3 I the year 625 B.C., the Egyptian new year was on January 279 while in 515 B.C., this Thoth new year had retrograded to December 30 at the rate of one day backward in every four advancing years* Consequently, the beginning of each Ptolemaic year varies a little throughout the table; but the actual 1 Thoth date for any year can be obtained from any one of several standard reckonings of the Egyptian vague year*® In Table W, two of the 19 lunar eclipses of Ptolemy are recorded, together with the interval of years, days, and hours, which he counted from the beginning of the Nabonassar era—noon of Feb* 26, 747 B.C. Ptolemy’s Canon does not record the reign of any king who ruled less than a year* This feature not only increases the jzaaOe of certain kings listed, but it ascribes earlier dates to some of the reigns than the eclipses allow* The combined result is a sort of "ante-dating" which characterizes the Canon,? for which allowance must be checked* The kfng—List's of the Babylonian and Persian reigns are fixed not only by two lunar eclipses which Ptolemy describes—one on April 21, 621 B.C*, in the 5th year of Nabopolassar, and another on July 16, 523 B.C*, in the 7t£i of Cambyses,® but in addition, an ’’observation text" in the Berlin Museum'" yields an ancient saros date on 15 Simannu (July 4), 568 B.C., which identifies the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar II. This lunar eclipse was not seen in Babylon, but the full moon date left on record is of importance in establishing the year* The Ptolemaic eclipse in the 7th of Cambyses on July 16, is also confirmed by the Cambyse^"400" Tablet, whose synchronism makes 14 Tammuz = 17 Phamenoth.^0 This eclipse is indeed unique in linking together the last day of Ptolemy’s Nabonassar interval of 224 years, 196 days, 10 1/6 hours, with Oppolzer’s Julian eclipse date (July 16, No* 1056), the Persian 14 Tammuz, and the Egyptian 17 Phamenoth—four calendars altogether* By such astronomical records is the 7th of Cambyses fully established* 3* The Neo-BabyIonian year is represented by the third calendar line in each group of the table* The year runs from spring to .spring, as commonly recognized,1!- and, as will later be demonstrated, is the^Babylonian year employed by Jewish writers under the monarchy* Here we are confronted with a new kind of synchronism—one that equates the spring-beginning Babylonian year with the Jewish regnal year, which, with possibly two exceptions in the J 9 z? _ ,1 * 'YVO' D P.V. Neugebauer, Ara Nabonassar, Astrqmische Nachrichten, Band 261, 6261, 1937, colo381ff; Ginzel, Chronologie , II Band, Tafel V, Leipzig, 1911, 576ff. 7 Franz Xaver Kugler, Sternkunde und Sterndienst, Schweiter Teil, Munster, 909, 390, 391* "Ante—dating” explained in Von Moses bis Paulus, 1922, 169. Composition Mathematique de Claude Ptoldmee, par Halma, Paris, 1813, 340,341. Paul V* Neugebauer und Ernst F. Weidner, ,1Ein astronomischer Beobachtungs- text aus dem 37. Jahre Nebukadnezzars II (■— 567/66),” Berichte uber die Ver-handlungen der Konigl. Sstchsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenenschaften zu Leipzig, Philologisch-historische Klasse, 67. Band, 2 Heft, 1915, 29, 50* 10 Strassmaier, Inschriften von Cambyses, Nr. 400; Epping, Zeitschrift f* Assyr-iol. V, S. 281ff; Kugler, ib. XVII, S. 203ff und Sternkunde I, S. 61ff. 11 B. Landsberger, "Der Kultische Kalender der Babylonier und Assyrer,” Leip-ziger Semitische Studien VI, Leipzig, 1915, 21; Heinrich Zimmern ”Zum baby-lonischen Neuj ahrsfest—’’ Berichte uber die Verhandlungen der Sachsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig Philologisch-historische Klasse, 70 Band, 1918, 5 Heft. An Important Principle - 4 sixth century B.C* *, began in the autumn*^2 And in this connection, let us not pass over the fact that the Jewish scribes in preexilic times must have been familiar with this kind of synchronism., when recording the reigns of the kings of Israel and Judah, whose official first years, it can be shown, did not begin at one and the same time of year*-1-* As this study progresses, it will be seen that a spring-to-spring Babylonian year exactly conforms to the biblical time equations connected with the fall-beginning Jewish year, which is thereby locked in position* In the Babylonian year as here outlined, provision is made for the accession year so frequently mentioned in the inscriptions*1- The Babylonian day, like the Jewish, began at sunset, the only hour of day in which the nascent moon appears first to the naked eye after conjunction.15 The new crescent, with its horns upturned, sets after the sun at varying intervals—in half an hour or so when the moon is near perigee, and within two or three hours, if the moon is near apogee* Those nations who followed the new moon in starting their months, necessarily had to begin at sunset* 4* The Jewish year in this series is based upon the records of prophets, priests, and scribes* It has to agree (1) with the chronology of Jeremiah, which extends from the 13th of Josiah at least to the fall of Jerusalem; (2) it has to agree with the calendar of Ezekiel and his 14 dates, which also must check back with the records of Jeremiah, and with the writer of 2 Kings, from the death of Jehoiakim to the release of Jehoiachin; (3) it must agree with the writings of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Daniel, in the time of Cyrus; and lastly (4) with the prophecies of Haggai and Zechariah, whose dates identify a spring-beginning Persian calendar in the second year of Darius I* There are only two places in the table where Jewish accession years occur—at the beginning of the reigns of Jehoiakim and Zedekiah respectively* The detailed reckoning of these two accession periods, and their Hebrew description will be considered under Part II* It is obvious that the afore-mentioned Jewish writers and compilers must have written their individual portions of the biblical account at different times and in different places* The primary objectthis study is to demonstrate the chronological harmony that exists in their records* II BEGINNING OF THE JEWISH YEAR BEFORE THE CAPTIVITY Aside from actual periods and dates, many features enter into the identification of a season or point of time in the Bible* Chiefly among these can be mentioned the customs and operations of agriculture in the Near East, that have not materially changed in centuries of life around the Mediterranean* To the Palestinian farmer, tfdas Ende des Jahres ist das Ende des Sommers, der An- 1 Discussed in Part II. [ginning reigns of the Judaean kings. 13 A spring-beginning Israelite year is the key to harmony with the fall-be- I4 Albert T* Clay, The Babylonian Expedition of the University of Pennsylva-nia, Series A: Cuneiform Texts. Vol. VIII. Part I. Phil*. 1908, 35* *1 r*" ■- .. * x ✓ ✓ x lv Hevelius writes of actually seeing the "homed moon” in the afternoon of a clear day, although he could not see it at sunset of the following day. (Selen-ographia, Gedani, 1647, 282e) An Important Principle - 5 fang des Jahres ist der Anfang der Regenzeit." 1$ And so the “end of the year" (literally going out of the year), as in Ex.23:16, and the "year’s end" ) in Ex.34:22 are expressions based upon culture of the land. The word rifeiipfi is used four times in the OT, one of which is Ps.l9:6, where it characteristically represents the sun’s circuit. This word seems always to refer to the fall of the year, and is significant in 2 Chron<>24:23, where the Syrians must have made a surprise attack in the autumn upon Israel and Judah,when assembling for the Tishri festivals. Seeding of wheat in Palestine is in November and December, and sowing of 1' barley, in January and February, after the early rain has prepared the field. Thus when Isaac dwelt in Gerar, and had sowed the land and reaped a hundredfold "in the same year" (Gen.26:12), it obviously is an agricultural year referred to—that is, one from fall to fall. But in ancient times the agricultural year was the calendar year also, for not only the descendants of Jacob, but the Egyptians too seem to have marked off their years according to seedtime and harvest (Gen.8:22). There is the episode of the famine in Joseph’s time, when the Egyptians had been fed with bread for a full year in exchange for their cattle. And "when that year was ended, they came unto him [Joseph] in the second year" and said, "buy us and our land for bread. . • and give us seed that we may-live, and not die" (Gen.48:18,19). And Joseph did so, answering, "lo, here is seed for you, and ye shall sow the land" (verse 23)• Clearly, before the Egyptian bondage, there was an agricultural year in Egypt that began and ended in the autumn. Harvest too had a vital relation to war and siege, for armies were fed from the land they invaded. In southern Palestine, barley harvest is about 1$ Gustaf Dalman, Arbeit und Sitte in Palastina, I Band, I Halfte, 1928, 23. I7 John Kitto. Palestine. 1900. 29. An Important Principle - 6 a fortnight earlier than that of wheat9 which ripens in May in the plain of Jordan, but not until June, on the coast and farther north. The general vintage is in September, but the first grapes ripen in July,^9 pomegranates, 20 m October? mulberries, in May. While the year of husbandry begins in the autumn in the Near East,'to which the Gezer stone also is witness,* 20 21 the season of war commonly began in early spring, and campaigns would extend into the time of harvest. Indeed, the fruits of the earth were the chief cause of war among the ancient peoples, who sought food for man, and provender for cattle (Judges 6). Egypt, which had £ 22 no vmyards, and Syria too, anticipated the inviting grape harvests of Pal-A estine (1 Kings 20:16 )/p_aiid~ wo^^^ tooempaigns ae- oerdingly. Such bands of raiders were the ’’grapegatherers” of the prophets A (Jer.49:9 and Obad.5). And so, according to the writer of Samuel (2 Sam.11:1, margin), and the Chronicler (1 Chron.20:l), the kings on the occasion mentioned went forth to battle "at the return of the year” which was probably in the spring. But spring was not always the season for war and invasion, espec ially in event of a siege. The word for ’’return" in 2 Sam.ll:! is and is a noun derivative of the verbifllZ/,the common word for return in the Bible, and which requires many pages of references in the concordance. But the noun itself, aside from, or te>-e its use by Job, occurs in only four instances, onetof which, as mentioned above, may refer to the spring of the year. But the other ttawe cases of its use can with equal force be referred to the autumn in agreement with the his-tory involved." Let us analyze thew- throe bexbs: !«..A • cu OJ ^3.dem‘, 24. Ibidem • 20 William M. Thompson, The Land and the Book, New York, 1380, 285. ‘A Ibide-i. 21 ?artin P. Nilsson, Primitive Time-Reckoning, London, 1920, 234. £3 Contrary, however, to Brown, Driver and Briggs, who appear to base a precedent upon 2 Sam.ll:!. Not so Gesenius. An Important Principle - 7 !• According to 1 Sam.7:17, the prophet's return () was always to Ramah, after each annual itinerary of judging, of which Mizpeh each year was the last appointment. On this occasion Averse 6) Sammuel offered a ’’sucking lamb" (verse 9)—an act which obviously points to late summer, for lambing time was regularly in harvest (Ps.65:13). The prophet’s return to Ramah, therefore, must have been near autumn, probably before the feast period in Tishri, and before the early rains began*. 2. In 2 Chron. 36:10, the word tin Wil is an important link in the chronology of this period. That this Hebrew noun may refer to the fall of the year can be inferred from this context also. At the time Jehoiakim was captured, more conceivably in the spring.,in harmony with Babylonian military strategy, than in the fall, Nebuchadnezzar was doubtless at the garrison in Riblah in the north (Jer.52:9). Ultimately Jehoiakim was brought to him. in chains (Ezek.l9:9), probably taken to Babylon (2 Chron.36:10; 1 Esdras 1:40), and Jehoiachin was made king. Late spring in the Near East exactly fits the time when Jehoiakim died. The days were hot, and the nights frosty (Jer.36:30).^5 Jehoiachin reigned three months and ten days, and ”at the return of the year”—clearly in the fall--Nebuchadnezzar sent and brought him. to Babylon • At the same time Zed-ekiah was made king of Judah, —U5 U . In 1 Kings 20:22, the word ’Tr^llU^Jlis undoubtedly used with reference to the spring, just as Brown, Driver, and Briggs conclude; for the context is dealing with an Israelite king, and a Syrian king, both of whose peoples employed a spring-be ginning year.^^Zn 2 Chron.36:9,10, the narrative has to do with three Judaean kings—death of Jehoiakim, and reigns of Jehoiachin and Zedekiah. Naturally, the ’’return of the year” under the Judaean monarchy was in the fall. It is also significant that in connection with 2 Sarno 11:1 and 1 Kings 20:22, Josephus particularly mentions the spring, while in the case of 2 Chron. 36:10, he does not mention it or imply it® On the other hand, the context in 1 Kings 20:22 can be used conversely to show that the Israelite year did actually begin in the spring. Thus the first year of Zedekiah and the first year of Jehoiachin’s cap- 26 tivity were coincident,-' and the reign of the de facto king must have begun in the autumn. That this is the necessary chronology here can be further S UXx- ) 15 cwa.cL , 1118, 3Qb' Cf. Prov.25:13. In speaking of the strong contrasts of spring weather in Palestine, Dalman says: nHier mag dem auch nochmals der zweitagige Schneefall oder eigentlich Schloszenfall erwahnt werden, dem ich Anfang April, 1906, bei el-kerak ausgesetzt war.) So stehen Frilling und Winter in engem Zusammen-hang. Eigentumlich. sind fur Palastina die starken Gegensatze, welche infolge davon der Frilling vereinen kann.”AHere is also another similar statement: uIn volkstumlicher Weise wird anderwarts von der Sonne gesagt, dass sie im. Nisan, Ijjar und Siwan auf den Bergen wandele, um den Schnee zu schmelzen, im. Tammuz, Ab und Elul im bewohnten Lande, um die Fruchte zu reifen, im. Tischri, Maroheschwan und Kis lew auf den Meeren, um die Strom.e auszutrocknen, irn Tebeth, Schebat und Adar in der Wiiste, um die Saaten (des bewohnten Landes) nicht zu dorren.’’--Arbeit und Sitte in Palastina, HI Band, Gutersloh, 1928, ‘4-7./ W.F. Albright, *rThe Seal of Eli akim,” Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. LI, Part II, 1932, 86. John Battersby Harford, Studies in the Book of Ezekiel, Cambridge, 1935, 40. E.G. White, Prophets and Kings, pp. 448, 452. Pacific Press, California. An Important Principle - 8 proved from Synchronism IX. However} the surrender of Jehoiachin, and his final removal to Babylon "at the return of the year," were not events that initiated a new Babylonian campaign, which customarily might have set forth 27 in the spring* These late summer military activities were merely acces sory to an earlier Babylonian siege of Jerusalem, which had been in progress for about a year (2 Kings 24:10,11). And they all occurred in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, as outlined in the table (2 Kings 24:12)*-rt • From the incidents just described, it should be clear that the word is not, like the word tied to any one season of the year, and the context has to determine what time is signified. And in addition, the narra-X tive in 2 Chron.24:23, in employing the word ri’aipri, not only identifies the fall of the year, but shows that the Syrians would attack in the fall as well as in the spring. The same is also true of the Babylonians, whose long and final.siege of Jerusalem began in the tenth month (2 Kings 25:1). In this case^sudden action was caused by ZedekiahAbreaking his oathjwith' the Babylon! ar^&atsbh^ 2 Chron.36:13). So Josephus Let us now further examine the official first year of other Jewish kings. Josiah. This young king’s work of reform, actually began when he was twenty years old: for "in the twelfth year [of his reign] he began to purge Judah and Jerusalem from the high places, and the groves, and the carved images, and the molten images” (2 Chron.34:3). The work of cleansing proceeded throughout "the cities of Manasseh, and Ephraim, and Simeon, even unto Naphtali" (verses 5,6), and the eighteenth year of Josiah’s reign had come before his reform had been conoluded--a period of over five years. And the temple had not yet been cleansed (verse 8). Sometime within this eighteenth 0*7 ? Cf. Kugler s series of campaigns in Von Moses bis Paulus, 1922, 149. G. Schiaparelli, Astronomy in the Old Testament, Oxford, 1905, 116. 28 Ant.X.VII.3. An Important Principle - 9 year—in the eighth month, according to the LXX—Josiah began to ’’repair the house of his God,” and for this purpose, he asked Hilkiah the high priest to sum up the silver which was being brought into the house of the Lord (2 Kings 22:4; 2 Chron.34:9). This offering of silver was the traditional offering for building and repairing the house of God. It was first taken up in the desert of Sinai, when the tabernacle was constructed, and on that occasion, each man from twenty years old and upward was taxed a half shekel of silver when the tribes were numbered (Ex.30:12-14)♦ The actual silver in this first collection was used to make the hooks and sockets of the sanctuary (Ex.38:26-31)• c The offering must have been taken up about the middle of the exodir ye ar, which was reckoned from Nisan; for, after reaching Sinai in the third month, the law was given, the covenant made, and Moses was twice in the mount of God—forty days each time—all of which adds up to more than three months, and brings the calendar at least to the month Tishri. The tabernacle was set up on the first day of Nisan in the second year (Ex.41:17), and consequently required about six months to build. The silver offering must therefore have been made in the fall of the year, and it became traditional under the monarchy (2 Kings 12:4,5). Obviously, the autumn, after the returns from the harvest were in, was the propitious time for special gifts. And so David probably took up the magnificent offering for the new temple at this time of year, when Solomon was anointed king the second time (1 Chron.29:22). After the return from Babylon, Nehemiah restored the silver tax ’’for the service of the house of our God” (Neh.l0:32). Returning now to the temple tax in the eighteenth year of Josiah, it is important to take note that the addition to the date in 2 Kings 22:3 by the LKX— €V TO) /HrjvL Teo oycfoco —is most consistent, notwithstanding Kug-29 lers argument; for it is in precise harmony with the traditional history ■ctm Ivcvtj, ‘Vox with reference to^itsearfegin in the autumn season. When Shaphan came to Hilkiah, the high priest produced the book of the covenant, which had recently been found, and as a result, the command for a subsequent passover was issued by Josiah. And it was kept in his eighteenth year ”on the fourteenth day of the first month” (2 Chron.35:1,19). The argument for the fall-beginning of Josiah's reign is therefore as follows: Since the silver tax for the repair of the temple was in operation in the eighteenth year of Josiah, with all probability in the eighth month, or thereabouts, and the subsequent passover was observed still in the same eighteenth 2$ Kugler, Von Moses bis Paulus, p. 141. He insists that Josiah began his year in Nisan® An Important Principle - 10 year of the king, therefore the king’s reign did not change in the spring, and hence must have changed in the fall on the first of Tishri. Jehoiakim. The OT prophecies of Jeremiah and Daniel mention in detail the third, fourth and fifth years of Jehoiakim. in connection with the corresponding years of Nebuchadnezzar^ but there is very little recorded with respect to Jehoiakim’s first year. There is no way of proving that the Hebrew expression itwi in either Jer.26:l or 27:1 refers to his acces- sion year, because the date is tied to only one king, instead of two kings5 as in Jer.25;l, or as in the double dated reigns of Israel and Judah. Furthermore, the same Hebrew phrase is used in connection with the fourth year of Zedekiah (Jer.28:l), all of which makes its exact meaning involved. But in the fourth of Jehoiakim episodes occur that combine to establish the beginning and end of his reigning year. There is the important mention of the accession year of the king of Babylon in Jer.25:l. The Hebrew phrase employed in this connection is It only occurs once in the OT—-a hapax legomenon--yet scholarship accepts its application to the ac-30 cession period of Nebuchadnezzar in the fourth of Jehoiakim. For it agrees with the chronology of Josephus—based upon Berosus—who ties the fourth of Jehoiakim. and the battle of Carchemish to the time when Nebuchadnezzar "took over the government,” and the eighth of Jehoiakim to the fourth of the king the indispensable statement of of Babylon. It also agrees withADaniel, who refers to this same accession year of Nebuchadnezzar, linking it with the third of Jehoiakim (Dan.lxl), and therefore ending his own third year of royal schooling in the second of the Babylonian king (Dan.2:lff). All of these records are in perfect agreement, and Synchronism II of the 3° Albright, Levy, etc. 31 Ant.X.71.1. CL IcdjvJlcutkct o|. tXvA $ 0-|- vJ IB ( An Important Principle - 11 table represents the one arrangement according to which all the chronology checks* On this basis3 the Jewish year obviously has to begin with Tishri, and the Babylonian year, with Nisanj and thereby the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar becomes a landmark of reference in the third/fourth year of Je hoiakim in harmony with Jeremiah, Daniel, Josephus, and Berosus. Conditions in the early part of Jehoiakim’s reign are described by the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel (Ezekiel 19). Judah is to become a wilderness if she does not repent (Jer.22:6). Already the famine was‘-increasing, as in Jeremiah 14 ? ’’for there was no rain in the earth*” And by the fourth of Jehoiakim, a general fast—obviously a rain fast—was appointed (Jer.36:9). The events of this period fall into line as follows: 1. 2. Ref. Dan. 1 Jer. 25 Jer. 35 Event Daniel taken by Nebuchadnezzar, probably en route to Egypt Accession year of Nebuchadnezzar = Reohabites—Jeremiah at large = Regnal Year 3rd Jehoiakim 4th Jehoiakim "Wine cup" "Pots of wine" 3. Jer. 36 4. Jer. 45 5* Jer* 46 Jeremiah ’’shut up," roll written, a fast foreseen Message to Baruch after roll was finished Defeat of Necho at Carehemish 4th Jehoiakim) > summer 4th JehoiakimJ 6. Jer. 36 Fast appointed 4th Jehoiakim—probably late summer 5th Jehoiakim., 9th month 7. Dan. 2 End of 3 years of Daniel’s study = 2nd Nebuchadnezzar Maimonides describes in detail the ancient fasts, a continuous cause for which, he states, was a deficient supply of water: In the spring, near passover time, a fast occurred in case the latter rain had not fallen. And there was also a fast in the month, or period, of the solemnity of tabernacles for the express purpose of filling up the cisterns, pools, and pits. [Cf. Jer. 14:<>] And when the season of the early rain came, and no rain had fallen, as indicated in the ninth month of Jehoiakim’s fifth year, additional fast days were appointed. And if this failed, then the people assembled in the synagogues week after week, and poured out their cries to God. But they did not fast and pray when rain was not due: "Confecta periodo Martia, nimirum cum sol signum ingreditur, qui Taurus appellatur, nullum porro jejunium instituitur: pluvia enim ejus temporis malo est omini cum prorsus ab initio anni non pluerit." 32 Ex Rabbi Mosis Maiemonidae, De Jejunio. Tr. De Compiegne, Paris, 1667, 43. An Important Principle - 12 The fast, of which Jeremiah seemed to be fully informed (Jer*36:6), was doubtless appointed9 not only because of much needed rain, but equally also in fear of the outcome of the imminent battle between Nebuchadnezzar and Necho at Carchemish, where the forces of war were gathering, if not already in action* Earlier in this fourth year of Jehoiakim, the prophet was at large, and he had presented the "wine cup" of fury in person to all the petty 33 kings on the outskirts of Judah. He had met the Rechabites in the temple,v and had tempted them with wine, obviously in the season of wine. But summer had come when Necho was on his way north through Palestine, just as Jeremiah had vividly foretold ux^laJccL tusjq anti cVm vvtc| 11 {JLfl. QjLn.HG:s). The prophet dictates to Baruch all of his previous messages, and instructs him to read them to the people at the time of the appointed fast* Jeremiah is "shut up" and cannot go to the temple, but, nevertheless, the people are to hear the prophecy of the Egyptian defeat at Carchemish (Jer.46:8-24). When the fast day came, in the subsequent ninth month, the fourth of Jehoiakim had changed to the fifth of the king. By this we know that Jehoiakim’s reign- ing year changed in Tishri* The following diagram makes a little plainer the order of succession of these events 606 2 Tis Daniel before' kinj End. of ^Srd-^^Sr Daniel 2 I t ! Nobuohadne z z ar Wine cup" (Jer.25) ' Prophet' at large ( Rechabites (Jer*35) V/'Pots of wine" Jehoiakim As Sth monch 604 month so : ; Accession! iis 3'aruch (Jer*45) •Roll written (Jer*36) Prophet "shut up" 33 Nebuchadnezzar’s invasion of Palestine "in the third of Jehoiakim" had driven the Rechabites to Jerusalem for protection $ when the prophet was still free to go about. CSjza-3i>'• h.) kn Important Principle - 13 Arguments If the fourth of Jehoiakim should be shifted six months in advance 3 then Nebuchadnezzar’s accession year would wholly coincide with Jehoiakim’ s third, contrary to Jer.25:l; and the fourth of Nebuchadnezzar would coincide with the seventh of Jehoiakim, instead of the eighth, as reported by Josephus*^4 And if the fourth of Jehoiakim should recede six months, then the battle of Carchemish would occur in the winter instead of the summer, which is conflicting for two reasons: (1) Necho would necessarily plan to feed his army on the Palestinian harvests, for the Jews were depending upon him for help against Babylon; and (2) Jeremiah had prophesied that the Egyptians would come up at the time of the rising of the Nile, which was in mid summer* Hence Synchronism II is locked in position as it stands, and all the records are in harmony* the fore part of For two main reasons the scene inAJeremiah 36 must be ascribed to the during the vintage, summer: (1) the fact that Jeremiah was in prison, when earlier in the yearA 35 / \ he had been at large; and \2) the time of the battle of Carchemish, which m all probability had been fought, and Necho defeated when the fast occurred* This was without doubt the cause of Jehoiakim’s anger, for it was his word now against the prophet’s as to the efficacy of help from Egypt5 whose king hadA been confounded* III JEWISH YEAH DURING THE CAPTIVITY The principal source with respect to the Jewish year during the Babylo- nian captivity is the prophecy of Ezekiel and his fourteen dates* The young 36 priest was probably taken captive at the same time as Jehoiachin, in whose fifth year he had been called to the prophetic office* It is several times stated in his prophecy that the years are counted according to the captivity year of Jehoiachin: (1) Ezek*l:2; (2) Ezek*33:21; (3) Ezek*40:l; and (4) Ezek* 1:1, which evidently is to be taken as a captivity date, since it reads, ”ln the thirtieth year. • • as I was among the captivity’1 (margin)* The background of Ezekiel’s chronology is as follows: 34 Ant.X.VI.l. With a fall-beginning calendar, vintage, sowing, early rain, latter rain = the first half of the year, while harvest and summer fruits = the second half* 37 "^“consistently, verses 2 and 3 represent the original superscription of the call vision and of the prophecy as a whole* This was repeated in the sixth year (Ezek*8-ll), and again in the "SOth” year (43:1-3), when for the third time the glorious scenes of Ezekiel’s call are given. Most naturally he would introduce this last vision into the beginning of his prophecy, h? An Important Principle - 14 No other single book in the Bible has as many calendar dates—including year, month, and day—as the prophecy of Ezekiel* These dates are significant, because only one of them is a feast date, though not given its full significance in the translation.^^ Throughout the whole series there is not mentioned any special day of the week. This absence of calendrical landmarks in Ezekiel, such as the Jewish Sabbath, or any other day of the week, is outstanding as compared with other biblical records. The dates themselves, for the most part, cluster around one calamitous event—the destruction of the first temple. The prophet is informed by the Deity when the siege begins in Jerusalem (Ezek.24sl). This date is recorded three times elsewhere by three other different writers. Apparently on this very day Ezekiel1s beloved wife dies. That date would not be forgotten! In vision he marks the death of prince Pelatiah (Ezek.ll:13). About five months after the burning of the city, an escaped messenger reports to the prophet, ’’The city is smitten,” and at the same time Ezekiel’s mouth is opened, and he is no longer dumb (Ezek.33:22)o The prophet would not forget that date© And "in the fourteenth year after" the destruction of the temple, Ezekiel is taken in vision to the land of Israel, and shown a measured plan for the new temple. This occurred "in the beginning of the year, in the tenth dey of the month." The Authorized Version, "beginning of the year", wholly covers up the chronological significance of M, which reads the head of the year, and appears to be the origin of the Jewish new year—Rosh Hashana—the name for the first day of Tishri. This Hebrew expression is not found elsewhere in the OT, and hence cannot be applied to any other month than that denoted by Ezekiel© Ezekiel the priest was also able to foretell the very year when the temple would be destroyed—the time was approximately six years future from the date of his call. In answer to divine command he portrays upon a tile the siege of the city—the mount, the camp, and the batteringrams! Then comes the commission that he, Ezekiel, a sin-bearing priest, is to symbolize the temple period in its entirety—390 days for Israel, and 40 days for Judah+HJie is to bear the iniquity of the people, or 430 days in all. All that the prophet had to do was to a.dd 430 vears—each prophetic day representing a literal year—to the date of Solomon s dedication of the temple, and thereby would be obtained the fatal year when the period would expire, and the temple service ceaseAnd henceforth for many years no earthly priest would bear the sins of Israel and Judah into the innermost temple place before the vail. The Ezekiel scenes are connected with actual events in the prophet’s own time. Some of them are introduced in action by the prophet, as for example, the Zedekiah scene depicting the blind king being led away to his Babylonian prison (Ezek.l2sl-ll). Unless these enacted warnings had been given either before, or at the time of, the event described, then the stern reality of the prophecy—its purpose and office—would have been altogether nullified and meaningless© And without a clear understanding of the circumstances underlying the prophecy, the chronology is apt to become twisted and meaningless also. Obviously, Ezekiel must have been a prophet during the exile, or else, •z o ° Ezek.40:l, explained in succeeding paragraph. C.F. Burney, Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Book of Kings, Oxford, 1903, 60. An Important Principle - 15 aside from Daniel, who was tied to the royal court, no one would appear to have been divinely chosen to encourage and builtL up the stricken tribes of Israel and Judah. Throughout the period of the exile there were frequent communications between Babylon and Jerusalem.4^ For over six years Ezekiel’s warnings were received with mocking derision. False prophets contended that with the help of Egypt the captives would shortly return to the home land. But the false prophets died. Some even were roasted in fire by the king of Babylon! Step by step, dating his messages, the prophet pictures the doom hanging over the ancient city*. and all the neighboring petty kingdoms. Egypt is to lie desolate for four decades. Tyre is to be besieged. Ezekiel himself is a pathetic sign of disaster. But when Jerusalem falls, as intimated to the prophet by exulting scenes in Moab, Ammon, Edom, and Tyre—all clapping their hands over the desolation of the city (Ezekiel 25 & 26), then all the events foretold in detail^ are '"suddenly and brilliantly confirmed.'* Such is the background of the Ezekiel dates, of which the following fe-io 1 b- %'t t ‘J-ft’S r b'S7 1 1 1 is the series: ' i | 5 i i—. G 1 a 7 $ S j 1 $ 1 a $ KS 12 1 31dL U ApY H TB. RpY. 3 T Max 29 g Ap'n 6 W ApY. IA 3 Julian Year Co 592* 591 590 /588 £/ 588 °l o\ 586 *03 \ 586 I Ezekiel y m 5 4 6 6 z7 5 Z ( '9 10 10 10 11 1 11 3 Yeai d 5s-, 5?( ioa! F 10 2 12 7F v 1 ■ EZEKIEL DATE U. a. lu AUJ " ’ Difference Character of Message Reference in time Vision^ of God by the river Chebar 1:1,2 13 mo. repeated (.43:1-3; A 40:1 29:17 1:1 Cf. Jeremiah 29. 40 An Important Principle - 16 not only The numbered months of Ezekiel} instead of the use of Babylonian names,A challenge^ a late date for the prophecy, but also indicate^ that the proph-'; ’ A et is employing native Jewish reckoning, and not the Babylonian system* The chronological outline of Ezekiel’s century is pegged up by well authenticated lunar eclipses, and by other synchronisms than those of the exilic prophet; . s but it remains to prove that Ezekiel s chronology agreeAwith the fall-begin-' ning of the captivity year of Jehoiachin as represented by the language of the Chronicler, Jeremiah, and the writer of Kings. However, we should not pass over the chronological sequence that characterizes Ezekiel’s dated messa-41 ges, and, most important, is their increasing frequency during the climax of the period—the burning of Jerusalem. This established frequency of one or two months, around the time of the fall of the city up to the last wail against Egypt (32:17), should prevent the chronologer from adding a whole year to the date when the messenger reports to Ezekiel (33:21). But Ezekiel’s calendar also interferes with such dating, as we shall proceed to discover. Jerusalem fell in the 11th year of Zedekiah, and the 19th year of Nebu- i-chadnezzar, according to Jeremiah and the writer of Kings. Ezekiel confirms this date in at least three ways: (1) the exultation of Tyre in the 11th captivity year, and obviously after the city had fallen, must have finalized the fact in the prophet’s mind (Ezek.26:1,2); (2) the arrival of the messenger in the 10th month of the captivity year—hence early in the year of a fall-beginning calendar—informed Ezekiel that the city had fallen five months earlier (Ezek.33:21)and (3) three years before this, in the "ninth year, tenth month, and tenth day of the month,” Jehovah said to the prophet, "the king of Babylon set himself against Jerusalem this same day" (Ezek.24:2)o Thus, by vision, a human messenger, and direct communication with Jehovah, 41 Chapters 26 and 32 fall out of line, however. 42 If chronology should delay this report a whole year, as some insist, it would break the frequency of Jehovah’s warnings to Ezekiel at this very time; moreover, five months approximately correspond to the actual time it would take the messenger to go from Jerusalem to Tel-abib. An Important Principle - 17 Ezekiel was kept in touch with affairs in his home. land. The date for beginning the siege—ninth year, tenth month, and tenth day of the month-roust be of unusual importance, for it is recorded four times by four different biblical writers—Jeremiah (39:1), writer of Kings (2 Kings 25:1), compiler of Jeremiah (52:4), and Ezekiel (24:1).While this fact alone would not prove that each Jewish writer was using the same kind of calendar, yet the fact that the siege date was a winter date (9-10-10) would very definitely prove that in each case the regnal year was the same. For during the summer months, the Babylonians were one year in advance of the Jews, because their new-year came first, that is, in the spring; but in the winter, both peoples reckoned the same regnal year. Consequently, the siege date, being a winter date, would correspond to one and the same regnal year whether a Babylonian or Jewish calendar were employed. And this fact is of extreme importance with reference to the divine message to Ezekiel declaring that the siege had begun. For if any of the captive Jews were signing their contracts 44 in Babylonian time, there could be no possible misunderstanding as to the year signified in the divine message. The following diagram, illustrates: Julian I Siege <.-10-10) Ezek.24:l II 1'essenger (12-10-5) Ezek.33:21 1 Nebuchadnezzar 3 Spring New Year (east) 9 2 Fall New Year I 19 17 T£s lis. ..is 10 11 Nis is From Nisan to Tishri, an east calendar would have its year one in advance of the west; from Tishri to Nisan, both calendars would have the sane year. *’is Jerusalem burned (11-5-10) Jer.52:12 Josephus also gives this same date for the siege—Ant.X.VII.4. 44 Joseph Scaliger, De Emendatione Ternporum, Francofurt, 1593, 79. ”Ab illis temporibus, inquam, anno Chaldaico"rati coeperunt in contractibus suis, eoque ab initio Nabopollassari, quod consurgit ex anno Nabonassari 123 cyclo Lunae quarto, ut ex Ptolomaeo didicimus.” An Important Principle - 18 In Diagram Z 9 line 1 represents the Babylonian reckoning of Nebuchadnez-zar’s reign, with the year beginning in Nisan; line 2 represents the Jewish year beginning in Tishri; and line 3, the Jewish year assumed to begin in Nisan. The winter siege date 9-10-10 is designated ”1”, while "II” represents the winter date 12-10-5, when the messenger came to Ezekiel. The foregoing diagram plainly shows that in both I and II the tenth month belonged to the same regnal year—in I, to the 9th year, and in II, to the 12th year, had there been a ”12th" in Zedekiah’s reign. The decisive feature regarding the messenger date is the fact that in a fall-be ginning year, the figures given in Ezeko33:21 could not possibly involve more than a five months’ period; for if the interval were a year and five months, then the calendar— cfo Table W—would thereby be advanced a whole year, and thus make the first official year of Jehoiachin coincide with the ninth of Nebuchadnezzar instead of the required eighth (2 Kings 24:12). Hence the validity of Synchronism V, which is based upon Ezek.33:21, is an important landmark in Ezekiel chronology, in fixing the exact time when the messenger appeared. But the problem still demands further checking as regards a fall-beginning year for the Ezekiel dates. Let us examine Synchronism IK. Here the compilers of Jeremiah and 2 Kings are tied up with the Ezekiel captivity year, the 37th of which is equated with the ’’first year” of Evil-Marduk in the twelfth month. The M text translated "began to reign" in 2 Kings 25:27 is ririu/n and in Jer.52:31, the words moo are translated "in the A first year of his reign." The LXX does not furnish further light. But it is very clear that neither one of these Hebrew expressions could refer to the ac-45 cession year of Evil-Marduk. Since this king only reigned two years, ' the M text necessarily refers to his official first year, which must coincide with the 37th of Jehoiachin in the twelfth month. Only a fall-beginning Ezekiel year checks with this equations If the Ezekiel year is made to begin in the spring, the year 37 would coincide with the 2nd of Evil-Marduk in the 45 Albert T. Clay, The Babylonian Expedition, Vol. VIII, Part I, Philadelphia, 1908, 4. An Important Principle - 19 twelfth month instead of with Evil-Marduk’s first year. Therefore, by tying Jehoiachin’s captivity years—the 1st and 37th—to the spring-beginning Babylonian calendar in the 8th of Nebuchadnezzar and the 1st of Evil-Marduk, the ancient Jewish writers fixed the form of Ezekiel's calendar as beginning in the fall of the year* The decisive effect of an autumn new year upon the chronology of Ezekiel is shown in many ways* In Ezek*26:l, a Tishri-beginning year supplies the missing month; for, after the fall of the city in the fifth month, the sixth month Elul is the only month left before the year changed on 1 Tishri. This fact an intelligent scribe would have known, and offers a good reason for the neglect of naming the month. On the contrary, an Ezekiel year dated from the spring would bring confusion into Ezekiel 32, causing the wail against Egypt from verse 17 and on to precede the date in verse 1, although this lamentation is a logical sequence belonging to the second half of the chapter. In verse 17, the LXX consistently reads Tou TipLoToe^nvosfor the missing figure in M; but in verse 1, even though the Syriac version may insist on "11th year" instead of "12th," as in M, with a calendar year beginning in Tishri, the M text is more harmonious just as it is than the Syriac revision* Some Syriac scribe doubtless forgot that with an autumn new year, the months seven to twelve naturally precede those from one to six, which order exactly fits the chapter* An autumn new year in Ezekiel lends significance to Ezek*40:l, and focusses the Authorized Version /’beginning ofxthe year" upon the month cUa txx XjloJuj ev -npcvTty Tishri^ The Hebrew phrase UZR’ltl is not found elsewhere in the Bible. The original divine instruction to Moses commanded him. to count the paschal month as "first" only—’ptWl—of the months of the year. And Jewish months 4$ A phrase with much the same meaning tTfl*1 WRIOis found in Deut.11:12, and doubtless there refers to the autumn season when the agricultural year begins An Important Principle - 20 have ever since been numbered from Nisan. Even Moses and Aaron counted their 47 individual years from the paschal month.' But the whole Ezekiel chronology 17** agrees with the month Tishri as the ’’head of the year.” For centuries3 on the first day of Tishri, the trumpets had been blown almost continuously— / x 48 but not so on the first day of Nisan (Num.29:l), ’ And in the time of Christ3 the new year was autumnal. This fact Daniel had incorporated into his proph-49 ecy. " Similarly, also, the modern Jewish new year occurs in the autumn, and, like Ezek.40:l, its name is Nosh Hashana, ’’head of the year.” It has been questioned whether the Jewish writers, in computing the Babylonian and Persian reigns, employed the Jewish calendar, or the foreign one. For example, in 2 Kings 25s 8, is the ’’nineteenth” year of Nebuchadnezzar Jewish or Babylonian terminology? Table W answers this question. As has already been explained, the Babylonian year in this table runs from spring to spring, and its dates are fixed by eclipses and the Ptolemaic king lists. Likewise the Persian year. Thus far this study has proved, at least to the end of Babylonian rule, that the Jewish new year was in the autumn. If, in 2 Kings 25:8, the "nineteenth "of Nebuchadnezzar were Jewish reckoning, and Note; Ezek.43; l-3^is a part would have the same date, which, the twenty-fifth captivity year. of the same vision as in ch.40:l, and hence as demonstrated, was the seventh month of At this time the prophet sees the. return of the "glory of the God of Israel”—the shekinah—which he had seen depart in the sixth month of the sixth year of the captivity (Ezek.8:l), the year following his call. Harmonious is the fact that the "glory" departed in the sixth month and is seen returning in the seventh month nineteen years later. A-gain, in Jer.32:l, where the prophet equates the 10th of Zedekiah witn ( -47 Moses was 80, and Aaron 83 in the exode year (Ex.7:7). After 40 years, 417 X'/ in the 11th month, Moses was 120 (Deut.l:3 and in the 5th month of the same year Aaron was 123 (Num.33;38). TheyAreckoned therefore from. Nisan 48 On the first day of every month, however, the trumpet was blown over the burnt offeringo Cf. Num.10:10. 49 Since Jesus died "in the midst of the week,” —cf. Dan.9:27—which was the spring of the year, the actual end of the prophetic week, or literal year, would obviously be in the autumn. \ wl o-LtUc An Important Principle - 21 the 18th of Nebuchadnezzar* Here the month is not given. But if, in the : summer, the ”18th” of Nebuchadnezzar were Jewish terminology, then the ”19th” would be Babylonian; or, if it were winter, then both Jews and Babylonians would count the year as the 18th. On the contrary, Table W shows that the winter months of the 10th of Zedekiah check only with Nebuchadnezzar’s 17th year, and that no month at all of Zedekiah’s 10th comes anywhere near Nebuchad nezzar’s 19th. Hence the conclusion is both consistent and imperative that Jewish writers employed in their records the Babylonian year for the Babylonian kings, and that its new year was in the spring. The foregoing conclusion is most consequential to the chronology of the Babylonian period; for it not only furnishes Babylonian records with biblical support for important reigns of Babylonian kings, but, what is of greater import, it ties the key Jewish dates of this same period to two calendars—one spring-beginning, and one fall-beginning—whereby their validity is established. Consequently, to link the regnal dates of scribe and prophet with a Jewish calendar that has a Nisan new year, as Kugler, for example, removes the very instrument by which their chronology can be ratified. For the use of two different forms of calendar comprises an absolute check upon any chronicle or historic time record, and this method of confirmation was common prac-50 tice among nations of antiquity.v The same conclusion that appraises the use of double calendars also adds validity to certain dates of Josephus, who gives the sources from which he took his chronology. He dates the fall of Jerusalem according to Jewish records. These are his words: ’’These accounts [Chaldaean] agree with the true histories in our books: for in them it is written that Nebuchadnezzar, in the eighteenth year of his reign, laid our temple desolate,” etc.°l This statement shows definitely that the Jewish records which Josephus had in hand, 5$ For example, the trilingual inscription of the Rosetta stone. 51 Against Apion, Book I, 21. An Important Principle - 22 counted the fall of Jerusalem to have occurred in the ”18th” of Nebuchadnezzar 3 while the Babylonian records (Jer.52:12 and 2 Kings 25:8) date it in the 19th” of this king. However, both assertions are correct; for the first is Jewish, and the second, Babylonian, and in the summer month Ab, when the city fell, Babylonian reckoning would necessarily be one in advance of the Jewish. 52 Josephus records the correct date for the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem, in harmony with the four biblical records, and with the foregoing confirmation of his date for the fall of the city, credence also be given to his important chronology in X.VI.l, which is of material aid in establishing the date of the battle of Carchemish. In the last two decades of Table W appear new prophets and new kings, for Babylon has fallen, and the kingdom of Persia has taken over. IV JEWISH YEAR UNDER EARLY PERSIAN RULE In the "first year of Cyrus king of Persia,” about 50,000 captive Jews returned to Jerusalem and their native estates. (Julian year 556/535 in Table W.) One of the first steps taken toward organizing the people was the consecration of the new moon (Ezra 3:5); and the burnt sacrifices that were a witness to this calendar event (Num.10:10) were offered on the first day of the seventh month (Ezra 3:6). This month vias called Tisritu in Babylonia, but, with one exception, the record of Ezra has numbers only for the months. The consecration of the new moon on the first day of the Jewish Tishri, accompanied by a religious ceremony, is good evidence that the Jews returned from Babylon still observing a fall-beginning official year, although they had no king. And, what is most interesting, they also dated the reigns of 53 the Persian kings on this same calendar.’' 52 Ant. X.VII.4. 53 Nehemiah counts the ”20thn of Artaxerxes from the ninth month Chisleu on into the first month Nisan (Neh.l:l and 2:1). It is still the 20th when he was appointed governor (Neh.5:14). The year must therefore have changed in Tishri. An Important Principle - 23 Ezra called this year of the return the first year of their coming unto the house of God at Jerusalem (Ezra 3:8). In the second month of the second year of their coming, they began to build the temple. The Chronicler adds that they ’’laid the foundation of the house of God in the first day of the second month” (1 Esdras 5:57). Evidently it was thought fitting to begin operations at the same time in which Solomon began to build the first temple. There was one difference, however. Solomon began on the second day of the second month (2 Chron.3:2), while Zerubbabel, according to 1 Esdras, began on the first day of the second month. The reason seems obvious* In this second year of the return, which was the third year of Cyrus,according to Persian reckoning in the summer (Julian 534 B.C.), the first day of Nisan was April 9. Wednesday, on the Jewish calendar. (Conjunction = April 6.33, J.C.T. °-) The second day of the second month would therefore have been the Jewish Sabbath, and for this reason necessarily, they appear to have began operations on the first day of the second month, which was Friday.' It was an impressive occasion. Daniel*s one lunar date—in the third year of Cyrus—seems to belong to this very time of laying the temple foundation in Ezra 3. The proof of this statement is tied to Daniel’s own personal experience, and the events connected with the return of the first captive Jews to the homeland. The combined narrative and argument that follow represent the basis upon which the prophet’s single calendar date can be affirmed: The first year of~ Cyrus marked the seventieth year of his captivity, just as Josephus records,$$ and as Jeremiah foretold (Jer.29:10). The aged Daniel may have shown young Cyrus the prophecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah, which concerned not only the release of the Jews from captivity, but also portrayed the detailed part in the course of events which Cyrus himself was destined to perform (is.45:1,13). In answer to Daniel’s persistent prayer, the angel revealed to him that a decree would go forth to rebuild Jerusalem (Dan.9:25). The prophetic time periods in the vision were not understood; nevertheless, it was at least clear to the prophet that the return of the first captives would register the end of the seventy years. Daniel kept on praying. Finally, in the "third year of Cyrus,” during the paschal season, the prophet fasted and mourned twenty-one days. The angel came again and told him that during his entire three weeks’ fast the prince of Persia had been intractable—obviously with respect to the project in Jerusalem—and that he, Gabriel, would return and fight with Cyrus, and see the matter through (Dan.10:13,20). Schram’s Kalendariographische• 55 Ant. 11.1. iT— An Import-ant Principle - 24 In less than a week, over in Jerusalem, on a certain day that was dated by the Chronicler as the second year of their coming, in the second month (Ezra 3:8), and the "first day of the second month" (1 Esdras 5:57), Zerub-babel began to work on the temple. According to Daniel, this took place in the "third year" of Cyrus, but, according to the Chronicler, it was the "second year." Both reckonings are correct, for the one (Daniel’s) is dated in Persian time, and the other, obviously, in Jewish time. Here therefore is another instance in which the eastern year is one in advance of the western Jewish year, which began in the autumn six months later. This rule of correspondence between Babylonian and Jewish time is so important to chronology that biblical history ties this exemplar to the narratives of Daniel and the Chronicler. It is obvious that the three weeks of Daniel’s devotion and prayer in the first month immediately preceded the work on the temple in the second month, and that this event in Jerusalem was in reality an answer to Daniel’s plea in Persia that Jehovah would restore the desolation of the holy city (Dan.9). But there was not only a difference between the regnal years of Babylon or Persia and Jewish reckoning, a difference also existed between their lunar dates. This is nicely illustrated by the third lunar eclipse in Table W— Synchronism XII. Before comparing in detail the various computations of the eclipse, let us first ascertain the 1 Nisannu Persian date for the eclipse year 523 B.C. The translation of the Persian new moon of April for this year is as follows: 523 B.C. ^Conjunction" APRIL %5.05 M APRIL 6 H APRIL 7 / ! / zUoAR ^/29 ADAK 1 NISAa|\ I_______1.72 days_________1 Translation Period Waxing Period = 14.57 days $6 Schram’s tables An Important Principle - 25 Argument: The conjunction on April 5.05 gives a choice of only one sunset for the nevi moon’s first appearance—that on April 6. For if the calendar should date the phasis at sunset on April 5, then the young moon would thereby be represented as appearing on the very day of conjunction—in a position too near the sun to be seen. Therefore the phasis roust be dated -,r near sunset of April 6, making the calendar date for 1 Nisannu to be April 6/7. The translation period then becomes 1.72 days in full agreement with a waxing period of 14.57 days. But the Jewish date for 1 Nisan in this same year was also April 6/7. This can be shown from the passover date. In 523 B.C., the passover moon was 57 full on April 19.58 in Jerusalem, and the passover on 14 Nisan therefore followed on April 20—always on the day after full moon. Hence 1 Nisan was 13 days previous, or on April 7• Let us now examine the various computations for the Persian eclipse on 14 Dazu in this year. The several days in progress at the time of the eclipse—Julian day, Ptolemy’s noon to noon day, lunar day from ss to ss—are here placed in a diagram according to their specified relation: 523 B.Co 7th Cambyses 1 Ptolemy or Egyptian 17 Phamenoth/ • JULY 16 . (1530594) Oppolzer Ptolemy One hour before midnight” (Ptolemy) 18 Phamenoth JULY 17 (1530595) Noon Noon 1197th 196th ”i4 TAMMUZ" 13 Tammuz I JULY 18 Noon Jewish ----------- (bchrarn reckoning) ■■ 1 "Three hours after night fall" (Tablet) ' M Description: In the accompanying diagram, all of the calendaric names for the day of the eclipse have been inserted in their defined positions. In the scientific record of Alexandria, the phenomenon occurred on 17 Phamenoth; on the Cambys05-"400 tablet" it was 14 Dazu (Tammuz), reckoned from sunset to sun-set;58 in Ptolemy’s computation, the day was the 197th after 0 Thoth of the eclipse year;$9 in Oppolzer’s Canon, it was July 16, from midnight to roid- Schram’s tables. 58 David Sidersky, Etude sur la chronologie Assyro-Babylonienne, Paris, 19169 41. 5$ Claude Ptolemy, Mathematical Syntaxis, Book 5, tr. Halma. Paris, 1813, 341. An Important Principle - 26 Jl 'Z A-K— night, or J.D.N. 1530594 from noon to noon. In Jewish reckoning, it was 12 Tammuz, not 14 Tammuz as in Persia* So, although Persia and Jerusalem had the same date for the new moon of Nisan, the Persian calendar was two days in advance of the Jewish when the eclipse occurred. The explanation is as follows: Argument: From the Persian new moon date 1 Nisannu (April 7) inclusive to b" the eclipse date 14 Dazu (July Iff) inclusive, are exactly lOZdays, which the Persians would divide up as follows: Nisannu = 29^ Airu = 29, Simannu = 30, Dazu =14. But during this same period the Jews would have counted: Nisan = 30, Iyar = 29, ^iva^. = 30, and therefore Tammuz = 13 — 102. days in all. Hence the Persians were^ne days in advance of the Jews in mid summer- and their 14 Dazu was only 13 Tammuz on the Jewish calendar. cJjAxul, It is well known that the ancient Jews had an element of calculation in their calendar that the Babylonians do not appear to have hadjj Inasmuch as the Jews have always had a double-day new moon feast at the end of every 30-60 day month, they had to know in advance when the 30-day months would occur. Scaliger mentions several instances in which he finds a one-day difference 61 between the Chaldaean and Jewish dates. In the twelfth century also chronology discovered that in ancient times an eastern and western lunar date existed—the eastern date commonly being the later date of the two^^ wt f j The foregoing facts consistently explain the two-day difference in dates between Jer.52:31 and 2 Kings 25:27, the Jeremiah date corresponding to a Jewish scribe, while that in 2 Kings could reasonably be ascribed to Babylonian influence. The two texts therefore seemingly belong to two calendars. However, the regnal year of Evil-Marduk is necessarily the same in both texts because the date lies between Tishri and Nisan. The eclipse on July 16, 523 B.C. ties the Egyptian, Persian, and Jewish calendars to the canons of Ptolemy and Oppolzer. Astronomical Synchronism XII Cf. Jewish almanac. Also Horace, Opera, Sermonum, Lib.I.IX, lines 67-74. Scaliger, De Emendations Temporum, Francofurt, 1593, 77,78. Scaliger admits that he does not carry the Jewish new moons to the third day after conjunction. Had he so done, he would have discovered a two-day difference between his eastern and western dates. Jewish Quarterly Beview, Vol. 10, 1897, 153; Vol. 11, 107. ’‘Fragments syr-ischer und arabischer Historiker,” ed. Baethgen, text p. 84, tr. p. 141. An Important Principle - 27 is of indispensable aid to problems associated with ancient lunar time, for it not only fixes the date of the seventh of Cambyses, but, what is of great significance, it reveals the rule of correspondence between Persian and Jewish calendation as can be demonstrated in connection with the papyrus rolls found at the Egyptian Syene. At least one more date under early Persian rule is a witness to the fallbeginning Jewish calendar. The date is recorded in Zech.7:l, and its background is as follows: Work on the new temple, whose foundation had been laid by Zerubbabel in the second year of Cyrus, Jewish reckoning, was delayed until the second year of Darius (Ezra 4:24). The divine acknowledgment to Zechariah that the seventy years of captivity had transpired (Zech.l:12), identifies the ’’second year of Darius” as that of Darius I. But, there appears to be two distinct seventy-year periods: (1) the first, as recognized by Daniel to be nearing its end in the first year of Darius the Mede (Dan.9:l,2), and corresponding to the return of the Jews in the first year of Cyrus; and (2) the second, ending later in the fourth year of Darius I, and fully discerned by the people of Bethel, who sent men to inquire of the prophets and priests if they should longer fast and weep in the fifth month (Zech.7:1-3). Daniel lived to see the fall of Babylon, which too was to mark the end of the seventy years (Jer*25:12). But Jeremiah introduces another event that was to tally with the end of this same period. He had foreseen that the land itself would lie desolate until the neglected agricultural sabbaths should be redeemed (2 Chron.36:21). This ancient land sabbath, occurring every seventh year, provided rest for the land (Lev*25:4-6), release of the slaves (Ex*21:2), and a rehearsal of the law before all Israel (Deut.31:ll, 12). It was called the year of release (Deut*15:l)* The last instance on record of the year of release being observed, is recorded in Jeremiah 34. The final siege of Jerusalem had begun—in fact, only two ^fenced cities remained, Lachish and Azekah. Zedekiah had made a covenant with the people to let the slaves go free (verse 14), and both king and people had entered into the solemn ceremony of cutting the calf in twain, and walking between the parts. But they broke the oath; and as a result, the king of Babylon, who had left the siege to measure his strength ' against Egyptian threats was given divine command to return and destroy Jerusalem (Jer.34:21,22). Obviously therefore, the seventy years of desolation, during which time the land sabbaths were to be redeemed, must have followed upon the year when Zedekiah and the princes defiantly compelled the slaves to return to their masters. This was not the first year of the siege, but the latter part of the second, which date is recorded in Jer.32:1 as the 10th of Zedekiah and kn. Important Principle - 28 the 18th of Nebuchadnezzar. This date is just right and needs no correction as some have suggested. By comparing Table W again, it can be observed that the only coincident time between these two regnal years is from Nisan to Tishri, and that this period checks solely therefore consistently marks the beginning with the Julian year 587., which of the seventy years’ rest t&e- while the fourth year of Darius in the fall of the Julian year 518 marks the end of the period# It was in the ninth month ’’Chisleu” when the men of Bethel came up to the temple to inquire if the desolation of Jerusalem had ended. The divine answer was propitious, and the promise was given that there should be dew and rain as needed, and that the land should henceforth be prosperous (Zech.8:12). The people were also encouraged to pray for rain in the time of the spring rain (Zech.10:1)—not in the fall only. It is essential to note that the men of Bethel recognized the fall-to- fall agricultural year that characterized the seventy years of desolation, for otherwise they would have come in the spring. And it is of further sig nificance that since the period ended in the fall, it must have begun in the fall of the 18th of Nebuchadnezzar, when Zedekiah was just entering upon his 11th year. In other words, the last year for Jerusalem had come, and it was an autumn-beginning regnal year Thus it will be seen that biblical dates and chronological periods are very dependent upon biblical narrative. The confirmation of any point of time may demand review of a series of episodes, for the Bible is not a dis sertation on chronology, and yet its records are intimately linked with every branch of this science. V CONCLUSIONS Let us summarize the basic features upon which Table W is constructed. The most important date is of course the 10th of Ab in the summer of 586 B.C., An Important Principle - 29 63 when the first temple was burned by Nebuchadnezzar. This was his nineteenth year, both according to his own calendar, in conformity to eclipse and canon, and according to biblical record. The chronological factors that establish this date are first of all the biblical synchronisms that tie the fallbeginning Jewish year of Kings, Chronicles, prophets and scribes to the spring-beginning Babylonian year, which is certified by the same authorities. These synchronisms lock in place the historical landmark that signified the end of the first Jewish monarchy. And in addition, the two eclipses I and XII, and the saros full moon date VIII, together with Ptolemy1s canon, establish the Babylonian and early Persian king lists of the Table for more than a century. All of the dates and periods in the outline are outstanding. They involve no small part of OT writings. The regnal year argument is not founded upon emendation of the text, but originates with common practice among nations of antiquity. Its calculation is based, not only upon a calendar relation that existed among nations of the Near East, but also can be demonstrated in detail from the biblical context, as has been demonstrated. It is a simple factor that gives technical character to important Hebrew phrases, thereby being both selective and definitive, and therefore bringing an understanding harmony into the biblical chronology of the period under consideration. Two things are therefore essential in stating biblical time accurately: (1) the name of the authority or scribe and his calendar—whether eastern or western time; and (2) the place and season of any dated event. 63 G. Woosung Wade, Old Testament History, London, 1903, 321. (Gives 586 B.C.) Julius Oppert, "Noli Me Tangere,” Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, Vol. XX, 28th Session, 1898, 45. (Gives 587 B.C.) THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY BALTIMORE, MARYLANP ORIENTAL SEMINARY June 10th, 194? Dear Miss Amadon, I have read your article on sixth-century chronology with great interest. It seems to me that you have swung to an extreme position in one direction, just as Kugler has in another. How can you explain practically all 0T references to the beginning of the year as referring to the autumn when the official numeration of months begins (as you also accept without discussion) in the spring? There can be no doubt whatever that in \ earlier Israel the year began in the autumn (the Gezer Calendar is / . । ) incidentally a much stronger witness than supposed, since it un- ; / questionably offers a total of twelve months, not of eight as ^>4 ***^ v 1 often stated). On the other hand, in later Judah and in post-exilic s. times it began in the spring. When it is stated that the Jerusalem fell into the hand of the Chaldeans in the ninth day of -the fourth month of the eleventh year of Zedekiah, how can you reasonably reckon the fourth month as beginning six xyx±ttKsi8xiffin^o±ttngQKBxnx months before the fourth month following the autumn new-year?*. In ♦according to your sys- view of the fact that the Assyro-Babylonian calendar had been"intro— t em of reckoning regnal duced into most of Palestine in the eighth century, as we know from y ears. business documents found at Samaria and Gezer, it is scarcely surpris- ing that it was accepted by the men of Judah for civil purposes as early as the reign of Hezekiah. Substitution of ordinal numbers for Accadian names of months was only a natural procedure; after the Exile the month-names came in gradually through Aramaic influence. You should work through Begrich’s book, even if you disagree with him strenuously, since it is the latest and in some respects the most systematic attempt to solve these problems. I must say that I begin to doubt whether a final solution is at all possible until we have contemporary Jewish business or other documents which throw direct light on the problem. How can Nebuchadnezzar have taken Jerusalem before the Battle of Carchemish, at which he overthrew the Egyptian army and made an advance on Egypt possible? I sent your corrections (all minor) to Pfeiffer, but have not heard from him. I am afraid that my review of Allis is very severe (coming out in JBL this autumn, probably). I don’£ see how the author can write such a superficial book on such an important subject (which he stresses much more than I should). r Gordially, AZX.- . E P.S. I shall be in Madison, Wis., for the Linguistic Institute (J from about May 20th to the end of July, after which I return here. CHAdT G 7EGNAL SYIJCmONISliS of the JULIAN, PTOLELIAIC, AND JEVrtSH CALENDARS i 626 625 1 . 624 623 622 621 620 Julian gio 61? 616 i 1 615 j 614 | 613 "1 1 2 N.E. 4 • 5 1 6_ 1 ' • 7 Nabopolassar • 11 12 13 22 1 A 1 2 Jewish 4 5 6 • i Nabopolassar i 9 10 »1 12 - I 13 14 15 16 17 Josiah 1 20 21 22 23 24 j " " 1 25 1 612 611 610 J09—1 608 607 606 €05 604 J 603 Julian 601 600 : 599 14 15 16 1 17 N.E. 19 20 21 t 1 1 i 2 • । Nebuchadnezzar 5 1 6 13 14 15 16 J ewl sh 18 19 20 21 j A 1 1 » Nebachadnezzar 1 5 i 1 .26 27 28 29 30 31 A 1 2 Jeho: i F ■— - ■■ Laklm i 5 6 7 F b T Lm 1 596 597 596 595 i 594 593 592 Julian 590 589 588 587 586 | 585 — 7 8 9 10 1 । Nebuchadnezzar 14 15 16 N.E. 1 18 19 20 6 7 8 9 10 l । Nebijichadnez I sar 14 15 16 17 18 19 i L 9 ID 11 A 1 2 1 Zedpkiah 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 584 583 582 581 580 Julian 578 577 576 575 574 1 573 | 552 571 jj 21 22 N.E. 24 25 26 i 1 Nebuchadnezzar 30 31 32 33 34 20 21 22 23 Jewish 25 26 27 28 29 1 • i Nebuchadnezzar 33 1 □ 570 569 568 567 566 565 Julian 563 562 561 560 559 558 I 557 1 - 1 35 36 37 •|n.e. 39 40 41 42 43 1 2 1 2 1 3 34 35 36 57 Jewish 39 40 41 42 43 jA 1_ 2 T A a 1 * jj Amel Marduk 1 L-wergal Sarusur 566 555 554 553 552 551 550 549 Julian 547 546 545 544 * 543 4 1 2 3 N.E. 5 6 ! 1 7 8 ! Nabonldus 1 i 1 11 12 L» 3 4 A 1 2 3 4 [Jewish 6 7 8 1 1 9 Belshazzar ( 18 i J 542 541 540 1 539 j 53B 537 536 Julian 534 533 i 532 1 531 t 530 529 14 15 N. E. 17 1 2 3 4 i Cypis 1 i 8 1 1 9 1 ! 1 1 13 Jewish 15 16 17 A 2 A 1 2 Cyrus 5 6 I 7 A| j Darius the Mede 1 528 527 526 525 524 523 522 521 520 519 Julian 517 j 516 l_515 2 N.E 4 „ 1 Cambyses । 7 8 1 \ 2 3 4 Darius 7 1 1 2 Cambyses 5 Jew! sti 7 8 ' A 1 \1 2 Darius J i 5 el1 l l „ i Gaumata \ eoiNdfrEHtfc REGNAL OUTLINE OF THE SIXTH AND FIFTH CENTURIES B.C (Cf . Tables W and W*) ARGUMENT! (1) The autumn-beginning year of Ezra and Nehemiah in the Sth century B.C. must link up with a similar series of Jewish years in the 6th century B.C. The Jehoiachin captivity year, if running from fall to fall, is the logical series with which the Nehemiah years should connects for upon the Jehoiachin line of descent God placed his approval even before the time of Ezra (Hag.2123). But if the Ezekiel captivity years were to begin in the spring, it would not only thereby fail link up with the Nehemiah regnal years, but, in addition, the 37th captivity year would coincide with Adar in the second of Amel-Marduk instead of in the first* And furthermore, if in Table W, the Ezekiel captivity years were made to begin from the autumn, coinciding with the vBth of Nebuchadnezzar” as suggested by the writer of 2 Kings, then the messenger to Ezekiel would arrive in the 13th year of Jehoiachin’s captivity, contrary to Ezek.33t21. This is forbidding also for the reason that Jehoiakim apparently died in the summer, when his body was "cast out In the day to the heat” (Jer.36>30), after which Jehoiachin ruled 3 months and 10 days, and then Nebuchadnezzar besieged the city (2 Kings 25t11,12). The "return of the year” in 2 Chron.S6ilO, when Nebuchadnezzar sent and brought Jehoiachin to Babylon, must therefore, in this instance, check with the autumn and not with the spring. But this alignment demands that the city be burned in 586 B.C. instead of 585 B.C. (2) And if again in Table W, the 12th captivity year should begin in the autumn, and therefore follow the 11th of Zedekiah, then the 37th captivity year would exactly coincide with the second of Amel-Marduk, contrary to the Jeremiah and 2 Kings record. The conclusion therefore is obvious that the Ezekiel captivity year cannot be harmonized with Table W. And it is equally conclusive that the last chapters of Jeremiah and 2 Kings must have been written according to a Babylonian reckoning of Babylonian kings, and according to a Jewish reckoning of Jewish- kings. For only by this method of dating the regnal years do all of the records come into harmony. On this basis of computation, the fall of the Holy City occurred in 586 B.C., making the length of the siege about 30 months. This length of siege better fits the tragic results recorded by lamentations than would the 18 months siege recorded by Josephus, although it is not clear that the 18 months of Josephus extended to the actual burning of the temple (X.VIII.l). It is therefore a consistent conclusion that after the Jewish kings ceased, and especially after the setting up of the Pentateuchal new moons by Zerubbabel. Ezra and Nehemiah (Ezra 3t2-5j Neh.10i29-33), the Jews counted the reigns of foreign kings from fall to fall in like manner as the kings of Judah were reckoned throughout the theocracy. And it is possible that we have to recognize a fall reckoning of Babylonian kings by Josephus when he places the burning of the city in the 18th of Nebuchadnezzar (X.VIII.5). January 1 1 Thoth = Jan 27 Jeremiah Julian Ptolemy Babylonian Jeremiah Julian Ptolemy Babylonian Jewish Ezekiel Julian Ptolemy Babylonian Ezekiel• Julian Ptolemy Babylonian Ezekiel BABYLONIAN KINGS .d Testament Synchronisms) L 2X1______________ Julian Ptolemy •Babylonian 626 /*625 624 623 *622 *8zi [ 620 *619 61S 617 *616 615 *614 613 Nis 1 1 1 3 1 2 3 1 2b \ 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 Nabopclassar 9 10 11 12 13 13 14 15 16 17 Josiah 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 year of Jeremiah s 612 * 611 610 609 *608 607 *606 605 604 603 602 601 *600 599 Nis14 15 16 17 18 19 20 > <+3 21 1 2 Nebuchadnezzar 5 6 14 19 6 15 16 17 27 28 29 30 xs 3 Nis 1 20 1 2 flebuchadnezzar 2 3 4 T ■ Jehoiakim 7 3 9 Tts 23rd year of Jeremiah 2 C hr on. 35-20 598 *597 596 X 595 594 593 * 592 591 590 K TcJn.17 589 J 588 587 ( 565 Nis7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 10'fTbet sie6e 7 8 9 10 11 ' 1 12 ' Nebuchadnezzar 15 16 17 | 18 {19 10 11/ j 1 3 1 ’ I 4 1 Zedekjiah (vassal king) 8 9 10 n | 1 3 1 w i • 1 - £ - 4 Jehoiacfiin’s Captivity Year 0 - 9 °10 11'-, 10 Ab is Messenger (Ezex.33:21) G G t J b' BABYLONIAN KINGS Various Reckoninga Julian Year Ptolemy Jeremiah or Jewish (A Study jn Old Testament Synchronisms) April ZE 1 January / 26 Jan = 1 Thoth 626 625 _ -* j 624 623 622 \ ^21/1 620 619 618 617 616 615 614 613 1 2 3 4 6 Nabopolassar 10 11 1 12 13 22s FI A 1 2 3 4 5 6 ! 1 Nabopolassar 9 10 11 12 1\ 14 15 16 17 18 Josiah 1 21 22 23 24 25 8 . Tis Call of Jeremiah Julian Year Ptolemy Jeremiah or Jewish Julian Year Ptolemy Jeremiah & Kings [Ezekiel] Julian Year Ptolemy Jeremiah [Ezekiel] Julian Year Ptolemy Jeremiah St Kings [Ezekiel] Julian Year Ptolemy Jewish Julian Year Ptolemy Jewish Julian Year Ptolemy Persian Zeohariah 612 611 610 609 608 607 606 605 604 603 602 601 600 599 14 15 16 1 17 18 i 19 | 20 21 I 1 ,M2 Nebuchadnezzar 6 13 14 15 15 17 18 19 20 1 1 Nebuchadnezzar 4 j 5 26 27 28 29 30 MIU 31 & 1 2 | |S I| Jehoiakim 5 6 7 | 8 Tis 23rd of Jeremiah s 19 Jan = 1 Thoth 598 597 ;596 > 595 594 593 592 591 590 589 588 g587 5 86 585 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 » Nebi^chadne ar 16 Siege on 10 Tenet 19 20 6 T is 7 T is 8 T t5 9 10 l ' N e bu ch adne z z ar 14 15 16 17 T . 8 L8 t s 19 9 10 11 i'A]! 1 2 1 3 Zedekiah 6 7 8 10 11/ , X t bill X 1 2 3 4 _..5^4JehoiachiI^,s "Captivity 9 ^,10 s 8 ■City falls Call of Ezekiel S 8 2 Kgs.2&:27 Jer.52:31 |S iv| -Messenger arrives on 5 Tebet s s s s s s II -- Ties Ezekiel year to the Kings* designation of Babylonian year. 2 Kings 24:12 III — Unites Ezekiel year, Jeremiah year and year of Kings. Ezek.24:l. IV — Relates Ezekiel year to year the Holy City fell. Ezek.33:21. [Jer.52:31 V — Ties Kings’ year and Jeremiah year of captivity to Babylonian regnal year. 2 Kings 25:27 and VI — Synchronizes Julian date, Persian date and Egyptian date. Cambyse "400" Tablet. VII — Synchronizes the 4th Kisleu in the 4th year of Darius with 5.18 B.C. — a date synchronism. Zach.7; 1. s s VIII -- Identifies Haggai-Zachariah year with Persian year. Hag.1:1 and Zach.1:7. IX — Ties full moon on 14 Sivan, July 4, 56B B.C. (Babylonian calendar) to 37th of Nebuchadnezzar II. Observation text reported by P.V. Neugebauer and E.F. Weidner, Leipzig, 1915. Vlw of iotemtnin:: the Synchronism of the Various In use During tho lerchm Bcriody A hostudy of the Assuan iapyri with a .30 to In order to understand the chronology of tlio Persian loriod.it is necessary y L{ > -understand th© basis of calcndrioal reclaming used by tho various writers, for } Calendars at that time there was no universal calendar® Information has ccm© down to sod- m thaes by authors using at least four diffbrmt system of chronology: the t' Tabylmion-Persian, the ryptian, the Creel, and tho Eebrw or Aramaic attempt is mde In this discussion to translate these warims calendars in tows of the dulian, as this system of reckoning furnishes our modern wthed of all tino calculations, both historical and civil. In tho Baty 1 onion-I^rsian calendar, the year be xm in the spring, tho I^rsian month naduhannuia being equivalent to the Babylonian h'iaaanu or the Aramis . isqn,* 2 The Jay began at sunset®" -Iio year .&s strongly luni-aolar in character based on an agricultural schooe uhich was clearly ocmocted with tha various festivals of the year® This necessitated an hntorealaticn of an additional month sown th..os in every nineteen yours® 0 hastend is confident that the definite ninateesi-ye&r cyclo of intermlatim mis introduced in 7U7 by the babylcr.ian. bsbu-naslr and as early as the beginning of the fifth century, Sabu^rimmi, the great iHbylcnian historian, ms able to acgq?tite the true data of the new or full mom and to de-tomlnc both laar and solar cclipstis® kmo J'oobol, ’The ?Vm..:js and the Order of tho Old J erslan and tho Hamite Mentha dxxrlng tlio AchaeEmian Period", Ameri<^ Jcnirnal Syitje -■ ’ litoruturo. Vol, LV, IJO-Lll® ‘ ",ish as^renemr, st oFa?‘ .ption on a T?abylc»i5an bemdary stmo ^here tho crescent soon is soon lying a? its back, says, *It is most nmrly upri fit at the tine of tho autumnal equincxj It is most nearly horizontal, lying on its meh, e.t tho spriy.; otydnox® Xt is cloar frer. this syAjal, therefore, that tho Babylsnlans bemn thoir year in the spring*® Tho hstranc y of tte ’.iblo® 2d ^ditim, Imdon, p, 316® .- '■•<■*•• < .londars^ p® 5b® See also Be r*^~----------- T. (.'instead, '(f .;yla .ian ASvra-.aay - .-.it jorical t-ketch' , .1. J L, Vol. V 11 -121. 2, To keep tide Ivni-solar in propar sjmchronisation with the tho Babylcr.aans arid : crsians introduced these mbolimic 'tenths at such times during tho nincteau-yoar cyclo as would guarantee tho barley and date harvest coning at the proper time for their religious festivals. langdm makes a spl^idid con* parison of the labp laiiari aikuhr with contracts bearing on. the agricultural operations in which he quotes fra. * letter by hr. ebster of the Agricultural fvfcb) ilroctorate of Baghdad. giving th© limits of the barley harvest in the Babylonian* Bippur district as April 10 to lay 15. Tho labylo'iano and Persians possessed no eras of calculation. such as th® Greeks had in their Clytnpinds by which it >s possi lo to cent dually check the length of rei.ms. but Strassmlcr discusses quite at length & saros tabic found in the British Tusoum in 18€int. But Ginsel says Q that ftolcsrp did tHo for astrcnoriical reckoning caly and lie cuatos savorul aneiaut authorities ns disxf;reoinr us to tlio a;^.ct tisne of tho beriming of the civil day* Smo authorities iant it to be rockcncd. frm Msa to dam ululo ctiirs tliink tho Egyptians begasx the day frai nidni/lt, vdiilo still otbsrs want it to begin at s&sset, For tlw nurmsa of tMs discusslm the Tiborhp died in Larch, A. , 37> but Ptotaiy mhos tba reim of thliguli begin with the first of ghoth in the TSUth year of t J 9 ths Ccmaa, or August Hi, A. D. 5t\. lor ths purpose of reference that portion, of the Canon which deals with ths erslan Period io given herewith. Portion of Canm of itolsisy ^ovoring the Persian Period Length last Tear of King of Hoigi in Tear of ..Oanai «Mw liabonidus 17 Ml 9 Jhn. 559 * 5 thn* 538 2x>b. Cyrus 9 218 5 An. 536 - 3 am. 529 Caribysos 8 236 5 *©• 529-1 thn, 521 Ihrius I 362 1 Jm . 521 -25 Deo. I|26 Xerxes 21 25 •)ec. -17 Dec. l/‘5 Artaxarxos u 32^ 17 Dee • 1^5 — S oe. h2h. arius II 19 3U3 8 oc, 1-2- - 2 ioc « Artaxerxes II 33S‘ 2 i>3C, b.05 -21 Hov, 359 Pith such a ^ndoriag calendar as th© Egyptians possessed, it was not possible to tie their calendar in with agricultural seasons but vfer uico understood, the calendar bocaaos very useful in cheeldn;; with the saros tablet and the Olympiads, in detomining the o»ict length of the reigns of the various ktngs« Tho Greek era began in ?76 B* C«, a fW days after the rasaer solstice. This systm of chronology ws used quite oxtonsively by the ancient historians, but it is not tied in to any agricultural eystm* It is divided into Olympiads of four yours each Mth each year named after the archon of Athens. While it mhs an excellent sms of checklag other Mb* it has raany 1&MB to be iwed advisedly, or as will be in future discussion, me my be a 4M* year off in his rockminr 9a ccinplote list of the kings of ths Oancn my bo feimd in a nmber of pln-cas. fee, for instance, Curt nchsrubh, ..t-u^ivn ?or .-. Itm xjc- ?-'hte, pp, 5OS ,3^ • 5. No doubts that the Bebxw calendar ms of a luni-solar origin nor that the sacred yoar Iw^an with the crescent som of -'iafttt nor that the civil Jwish day began vdth sunset, But whathc-r in tho tino of ths horsian Period this noath Birnn began so tint the passover could Mil at tho ties of tho first full moon after the wraal equinox as is generally the case in the modern rofomod Jwish calendar, is open to serious question, Ths majority of scholars feel that tho Jems of the fifth ceatury^rwgulated their ximths by observ&tim and that this nation did not develop the nonthly sequmco of 2% 30 days nor accept the nineteen-year cyclo mthod of casputaticn with ft definite masonic until wry late in their histogy* ~ As ft result of ft' restudy of the Aramic &pyri 4t*ftftftftftl in Assuan about ths turn of tie century and published by Sayoe «&d Cwley in Aramfc Bnyri Jjiscowred at Assuan in 1906, the following hypotheses are offered subject to proofs 1, That th® luni-solar year was tatorcalatcd in such ft way as to bring the ’A f\ passover in the tim of barley tarvest (April 7 to May (3 , Gj^aAA % £ 2« The first of Blain ms figured in such a way as to bring the passover on the day ixvaodiately following th© full noon. Q-|hk ‘‘ K 3» The year ms cmnuted by a ixoxthly sequence of $0, 29 day® during the first six nmths subject to constxuit clisck by observatlm and adjusted during the last six nanths by the addition or eduction of a day in sene naxth, perhaps 1'archesvan, perhaps swiatinas Chisleu, &e damsided by the inom in giving the lunar 35be 359* 3^3# 3^4 days in 12 or 15 lunaticsis» »c ^a" Ha An extra nrnth ms interaxlatsd according to a definite meomic for the ninetean*ymr cyclo (pertaps not as definite^ adlicrod to at this early date as later, but closely enough to establish the fact of its use), 5* Tbe Jewish civil year used in the rcckmtag of the rei©o» of kings began in Tishri and not -'tan* t 6, Tlw iTJsnbor® as wll as the ruu'ies of the i.onths wre according to their place in the mcrod ymr rof’a.rdlsss of which ymr ms being used These h/r othesos will be taken up peist by point. I^rpoth:)&iS51 The luni-soMr year ms intercalated in weh a my as to bring tho passovor in the tiso of barley harvest, April 7 to 7 ay 7* = Chart A show a plot of the naw noons of l'aroh and April, fran 2^55 B, C, 10 to B, C, as given in G insel *s tables, Chart 1 shows how a ninctoon-yoar cyclo nay bo a instructed so as to mko possible the passover on the first full mocn after the vernal equinox, Chart C shows htM a similar xdneteon-yoar cycle may be constructed sc that tho ocniimctiais will lie entirely within the month of April, Chart D show how a nine tom-year cycle my be omstructod so as to .. * ■» bring no passover earlier than tho seventh of April, A stu^y of the five Jhpyri canine, within this period shoes that they fit amctly a ninsteen-ymr cycle with intercalations mde as shown on Chart • , Frm ths 10th of '. osorn (Jd of Oils leu), B, C„ to th© 12th of Thoth (2d of Chisleu), 1|16 B, C„ show an interval 10,987 days, This period demands eleven mbolymlc years. As 2J4 18 th? earliest, and eno of the latest, access in. the cycle, it is quite evident that these five Jhpyri would not fit the ninotem-yaar cyclo plan developed on either Chart B or C, As tho eleven cBbolywiQ years agro-o with Chart 1J and as ths yoars nOTticued in the doublo-dated contracts in ths lapyri would fit no other moola, it my be considered as proved that C&art D refers, in at least a general my, to the posi-tion of tho Bla&n eonjunctims for ths period -.vidor question. It is inuoro^cing to nctloo that in Chart ft tho passover will newr cam earlier than the sewith of April and this is right in tho ties of the barley Isirvoat, for one of the re-quiranents at the paosowr soasm ms th© mving of tho sha&f of ripened barley an tte seemd day following the passover,^ with lifts Is Us st&tamnt by Kicluelis: ”Tho foots wldoh l oses catmndod to be celebrated in the first, third, and seventh nenth, do not a-mo -gdth the c linn to of Th lost Ino in " k, oiisel, Bhndbuch do 7ol, I, ^7 ff. 11Uvlticus 2^810-20, ^ < ; \ i X i ! i :2i|o- X ‘ 245 i '' , 140 i : X ; i j 1111 X k c L0 4o 5: i X > C ; i i ; X ; i ? > t > ■ ; i i i X 1 C F i ART B | J Mor* lo ; c • ; ) : i ; ! X i : X X i i X i E X > : X 1 I i I i i : . i x ;c Pch. i 1 | i 1 j j j:i I : t ! 1 4 ; M : j I i \ i '.1 1 1 । 1 T I i • * I : 1 I i 1 = 1 1 '' p \ H i: i U i i \ 1 i \ i v y ; p ’ i I i : < ( 1 1 j i 1 i > 1 1 i \ AhJ -A 1 : 1 T Uri li d !■• 1 X Men. Hi ;• i i. Meh. 1 x X i j i i ; X X ■ X ; \ i ; ( ■; X j X i ; X X * X CO • ; 450 454 McJ 21 '&h Mch.xl 1-: | f 2b ; U50 1 14 ij i j j | ) > W? ; j ; > : M° c il -55 x | [hip | ! ; X : 1 A ;25 1 X lM° 1 i X i • H-ls’ < ) u : 101 I H < : : 405 i |: \ ; X X ; j i h 1 • ' 51| i h : 1 \ I Apr 1 10 : 1 j /•! I Meh 1 : I • A • n i' / \ f 1 ■ 51 J if J I ; I 1 ; 1 V * \ 11 • j —L-'W— 5 c :j j : x \ u 1 V; y X ■ 1 I ■ ? Hhi \ : bl \ \ I i 1 Mel : . • X CHART D .«i 21 ■ ■ - ■ ■ -■ - Mbl T. f H x 1 c X -x— X < x i $ X : i \ \ X 3 i X Me h. i X X X : ) c X x : : . \ > \ X ! \ x ■ L X o And again: 11. $lut this rxuoh w my with certainty affl®, that th® first asm of the Xsmolitish year, mst alwys haw itillon within our April* It ms that no®, in tho course of which, in Ihlestine, t ripe oars of con could almys be l&i, and hence it had the nmne of the aajM-'ocn, (Ablb)* On th® 16th day of it, which was the secmd day of the festiw&l of tho passewr* the flrot fruits of the rip® ears t a wro to be presented to God* • • • For example* rip® ears my always Wt had about Jarieho after the middle of our April; and consequently, th© ear-Kocn mat haw always Ihllan within that month* i'¥- , Sealiger computes fra?. bath uionysian and Jewish cycles that th® passovor limits la the ttoes of the i easlah wre fraa April 3 to XMy 6*^ Buhl® shows how agri- cultural and ecmmleal calendars mko ...Arch tho mmth of rain in lulestino and that barley quickly ripans about the middle o< April after the rains ar© owr*^ Anatolius my® that it would be impossible to keep the j&ssow before the equinox or at the equinox because th© moan of the fourteenth doos not fill the whole nighte40 Th© V@nera.blo Bed® agrees with this whm he says: *7© ar© ccxmnded to obsorw the full moon of the lb soba 1 nmth after the wmal equinox* to the ©nd* that th® sun my just mfe tho day lmger that the night, apd then the aocn jaay afford tho wrld her fall orb of light * 1 2* Ifypothosis; The first of Mima was figured in such a way as to bring the passovsr on the day immediately foliowin. ; th© fbll moon.* z In figuring th® data for these lapyrl* tho ijth of bison has -boTu-placed S® rnxsot to sunsat^f suohday# that ite mxV Ufa p3a©@ sem© tine during Its hours* The next day vfould then be tho ll|th* Counting back frm the sunset beginninc the 11;th> m® is able to locate tho sunset beginning the first of Kisan* Fma this (Mto the tiw of ajrbrononical cc&jm®'* tlm is subtracted and the result giws ths translation period for that nmth, John. LavK Michaelis* ..ai tariee on. the tors of ~ osoc, Jxx- dcn, (l‘31h) 132*135* Tr. by Alexander ^idih*... 3-5pa Buhle* Sommieal Calmer* Brunswick* (1785)* p< ^Anatolius of Alexandria, Ante- Ciiristian J&brory* ( d. by Heberts and oaaldsen)* .dinlxir^i, (1-6 f 7, ’¥**1716 .' 11 -onemblo Bodo* Opem Praxis* 1.7* el-* XXX* p* 275* Lcndm, (1G10)* from & study ] As is noticed °~ Chart A and Tables I and II, this translation period never ex* Mlfi four days WBt would be under tw days, By computing each ysar cn this basis, tho Boon. determines for itself the actual length of the year vdiothor < 35I4. 395 ®r I® the asibolysaic years, 58J or J3U days, Set until the ' .a nodem calendar ie» constructed with its "postpon«nants.” «ere there years having 355 or 535 oxya, Tho vnr was thou computed with a 30, 5$ ^X soouance for tho V first six NHMb and an aejustmnt of the calendar for tho latter half of ths year according as the moon demnded a laager or shorter period for the twelve or thir- teen lunatic&is. A study of the synchronism as shoun on pagoy. will convince any-one of the acoacy of this nothod, Aristabo g to two of Ms disciples. "mintainod that at the paschal festival the son as well as th© no® nust necessar- ily haw passed the equinoctial point j that tho day of the paschal festival began on the lUth of M son after ths gvoning, whm the moon stands diazLot ri cally opposed in to tho sun, as anyone san seo at th© tine of tho full Etoon, ■ Albirinl' states that it is an Arabic custcsi to give special mms for each throe nights of the nenth — ®ros that are dcMwd frm the state of the nocn and her light. fifth three nights (ly^ • booaus© ‘ -■ i'ce by the shinin- of the nocn fren tho beginnfi of the ni-ht untlT^iS and, » • • "Besides, they distinguished corttiin Mghts ©f tho nenth by spacial mess, ®»g», the last ni -ht of tho nenth was called sinir, because in It the riGcn hides herself > it was also called ihhaaa m account of there being no lIgS;"'ln At, , because t ing to do with it, LJtowise ths last day of th© mmth ms alhd naMr, because it is in the :alir (throat) of the ismth. The 13th night v^s "axiled the 14th, •^Ko night ofri ba dr", because in it the noon is full, andlior light cmploto,7^ f&ny scbMurs lave placed the passowr in farchmpril depending an Jose thus’ frtatomnt that it carae "whan tte srn is in Aries", The Venesable l.odo quotes !fcne of the ancients" as the author of tho follwing verse: ^Oasparl, Gh, d„ Introducti^i to the Life of Jurist, dinburgh, (18X’)« 8»9» (Tr» by . * Ais77' — 1 ^%r, C, idaard Mchau, The • c no Arabic Text of tl W I'iVirmf J, timilSi, Allen A Co, (1879) PP* '^»75* Josophns, Wtjfc* II1-10-5 • 472 B C Julian C. Jul. Ast. Jul. Bay Int. Fr. «-4 Blank Day^Thpth 0-x- Thoth 1-*-Thoth 2—;> 4- 0 1 2 4?1 B 0 Egyptian Month Int. Fr. Thoth 3 Aramaic Month Int. Fr. Nisan 0 Julian C. T. 2 Jul. Ast. Time Jul. Day Nos-Int. Fr. Jan 0 Egyptian Month Int. Fr. Thoth 0 Aramaic Month Int. Fr. Nisan 0 M Anr.12 14 M FM JL 13 13 14 14 115 12 12 549493“*^— Julian C S aJ^dT" Meh. jO**'—: 31 1549479*-*! 154948O*— 89 —M—• 90 ->*- i—Choiak 12->t—*» 13 — *4> I54948I*- - 14 - •**—Nisan 0-**—Nisan 1 —> Ju. Ast. Jul4 D^y Int n Fr. Time Nos. Jan 0 12 24 114 11 11 14 1549494-^4 104 —* 27 15 N 15 -* i 1549495--* 28 15 13 M 14 M 'S-S' “BS 14 1549645*- • 1549646*- 1549647-*. + HS 0 1 Pachons 26 —x— 27 266 267 Elul 15 16 -** 163 -x- 164 -* M Sept. 22 M 2J M 2^ M 25 M 26 M Sept . 21-x-1549654*- ■ 22 -><— 23 -H- 549655k— 1549656-* 265 -*- 266 —* ------------------------y---------- 24 —>t- 25 -*<- 26 1549657-*- 1549658-*- 1549659-* 268 269 Egyptian Month! ♦ - h. 28 - -** 29 . x- 30 Payni 7 8 —H— 9 -H- 10 11 -x- 12 Int. Fr. Thoth - 258" - -**- 269 —>♦— 271 277 278 —X 279 - 280 281 - -X- 282 — Aramaia Month « 17 - -*s- 18 —M—■ 19 -*i 1'7 Elul 26 ■*<•— 27 —X— 2.8 —> Int. Fr. Nisan — 165 •**— 166 —X— 16? -* 174 175 —■*— 176 -><- 177 -x- 178 - 179 —> CHA2T E TABLE I 14. LUNAR STATISTICS FOR THE MONTHS > OF NISAN ’ & TISHRI 500 B.C. — 400 B. C. JUL IAN DAY-NO. A V DATE OF MOOK’S CONJUNCTION NISAN l‘ITH OF 1ST OF TRANS r- LENGTH COMPUTED TISHRI TRANS- FOR DAY '* E GMT ( N-N ) JULIAN CALENDAR FULL MOON NISAN NISAN LAT ION OF 1ST OF CONJUNC- LAT1 ON BEGIN- 1 ACCORDING TO GMT SEGINS BEGINS PERIOD JEWISH TISHRI TION PERIOD NING A JERUSALEM JERUSALEM YEAR BEGINS GMT 1ST NISAN ft JERUSALEM AT SUNSET >GU 1 NNESS LANGDON GINZEL GINZEL SUNSET SUNSET SUNSET* GINZEL 500 A 18.877 18.852 18.36 May 4.37 My 5 Apr. 22 3.292 3.54 1? Oct. 16 13.61 2.54 1538910 499 A 8.338 8.372 8.37 A 23.76 A 24 Apr. 11 2.78 354 « 5 2.72 2.43 1539 334 • 498 M 29.009 29.067 29.06 A 12.84 A 13 Meh. 31 2.09 334 Sept. 24 21.72 2.43 1539618 497 A 16.030 16.096 16.09 A 30.51 M 1 Apr. 18 2.06 354 Oct. 12 9.50 2.65 1540002 496 A 5.672 5.700 5. 68 A 19.65 A 20 Apr. 7 1.47 354 " 1 S.28.81 2.34 1540356 I 495 M 26.065 26.031 26.02 A 9.07 A 9 Meh. 27 1. 13 384 Sept. 20 18.38 1.77 1540710 494 A 13.820 13.747 13.74 A 28.02 A 28 Apr. 15 1.41 355 Oct. 9 7.47 1.68 1541094 J 493 A 1.847 1.760 1.75 A 16.73 A 17 Apr. 4 2.40 384 Sept. 28 25.56 2.59 1541449 492 A 20.591 20.764 20.48 My 5.74 My 6 Apr. 23 2.67 355 Oct. 17 15.12 2.03 1541833 491 A 9.782 9.775 9.79 A 25. 33 A 26 Apr. 13 3.36 "7 4.45 2.70 1542188 » 490 M 30.318 30.357 30. 36 A 14.61 A 15 Apr. 2 2.79 . ■2 384 Sept. 26 23.27 2.88 1542542 489 A 17.322 17.378 17. 39 My 2.32 My 3 Apr. 20 2.76 3 354 Oct. 14 11.25 2.90 1542926 <■ 488 A 7.032 7.091 7.09 A 21.34 A 22 Apr. 9 2.06 4- 354 Oct. 3 S.30.34 2; 81 1543280 487 M 27.617 27.628 27. 61 A 10.54 A 11 Meh. 29 1.54. -5 384 Sept. 22 19. 26 2.89 1543634 486 A 15.481 15.454 15. 44 A 29.41 A 30 Apr. 17 1.71 6 354 Oct. 11 8.77 2.38 1544018 485 A 3.642 3.565 3.55 A 18.03 A 18 Apr. 5 1.60 . -7 355 Sept. 29 27.42 1.73 1544372 484 M 23.655 23.584 23.58 A 7.74 A 8 Meh. 26 2.57 8 384 Sept. 19 16.52 2.63 1544727 483 A 11.384 11.328 11.33 A 26.73 A 27 Apr. 14 2.82 A 20.933 20.950 20.95 My 4.90 M 5 Apr. 22 1.20 355 Oct. 16 14. 12 2.03 1569591 415 A 10.320 10.279 10.27 A 24.34 A 25 Apr. 12 1.88 , 354 Oct. 6 3.70 2.45 1569946 414 M 30.414 30.339 30.33 A 13.98 A 14 Apr. 1 1.82 . 384 Sept. 25 23.38 1.77 1570300 413 A 17.090 17.025 17.01 My 2.00 M 2 Apr. 19 a.u 355 Oct. 13 11.43 1.72 1570684 412 A 6.207 6.193 6. 19 A 21.67 A 22 Apr. 9 2.96 2.50 J- 354 Oct. 3 30.89 2. 26 1571039 411 M 26.624 26.656 26.65 A 11.09 A 11 Meh. 29 384 Sept. 22 20.05 2.10 1571393 -410 A 14.586 14.633 14. 64 A 29.86 A 30 Apr. 17 2.51 354 Oct. 11 8.81 2.34 1571777 409 A 3.287 3.338 3.34 A 17.90 Apr. 5 1.81j> 354 Sept. 29 26.80 2.35 1572131 408 M 23.948 23.809 23.97 A 7.00 ( A 7 A Mar. 25 1.18 ? 384 Sept. 18 16.07 2.08 1572485 407 A 11.879 11.876 11.87 A 25.80 Apr. 13 1.28 355 Oct. 7 5.04 2.11 1572869 406 A 1.173 1.112 1.11 A 15.30 A 16 Apr. 3 2.0 4_^ 384 Sept. 27 24.67 2.48 1573224 405 A 18.885 18.815 18.81 My 3.29 M 4 Apr. 21 2.34 11 354 Oct. 15 12.75 2.40 1573608 404 A 7.904 7.851 7.85 A 23.01 A 23 Apr. 10 2.30 355 Oct. 4 2.37 1.78 1573962 . 403 M 28.092 28.099 28.09 A 12.62 A 13 Meh. 31 3.06 384 Sept. 24 21.75 2.40 1574317 402 A 15.972 16.000 15.99 My 1.49 M 2 Apr. 19 3.16 354 Oct. 13 10.57 2.58 1574701 401 A 4.582 4.640 4.64 A 19.70 A 20 Apr. 7 2.51 354 Oct. 1 28.58 2.57 1575055 » 400 M 25. 289 25.322 25.34 A 8.71 A 9 Meh. 27 1.81 Sept. 20 17.63 2.52 1575409 * PotherIngham, R.A.S. Monthly Notices, LXIX (1908), p. 30, says ^11 Tishrls (Araralc) he has dated fall "not earlier than September 17, nor later than October 16. TABLE II 16. SEQUENTIAL DAY NUMBERS FOR THE FOUR STYLES ; of JEWISH YEARS MONTH SEQUENCE REG. A8UN. DEF. REG. month SEQUENCE MONTH SEQUENCE MONTH 3.54 355 3H 384 MONTH 30 8 355 383 384 308 Nisan 1 1 Sivan 19 78 Elul 7 155 Mar-. ■ 25 232 232 232 232 She - 13 309 307 2 2 20 79 8 56 ches -26 233 33 33 33 bat 14 09 310 08 09 3 3 21 80 9 57 van 27 234 34 34 34 15 310 311 09 310 4 4 22 81 10 58 28 235 35 35 35 16 311 12 310 3H 5 6 I 23 82 11 59 29 236 36 36 36 17 12 13 11 12 24 83 12 160 30 37 18 13 14 12 13 7 7 25 84 13 161 Chis - 1 237 38 37 37 19 14 15 13 14 8 8 26 85 14 62 leu 2 238 39 38 38 20 15 16 14 15 9 9 27 86 15 63 -3 239 240 39 39 21 16 17 15 16 10 10 28 87 16 64 4 240 241 240 240 22 17 18 16 17 11 11 29 88 17 65 5 241 42 41 241 23 18 19 17 18 12 12 30 89 18 66 6 42 43 42 42 —24 19 320 18 19 13 13 Tammuz 1 90 19 67 7 43 44 43 43 25 320 321 19 320 14 14 2 91 20 68 8 44 45 44 44 26 321 22 320 321 15 15 3 92 21 69 9 45 46 45 45 27 22 23 321 22 16 16 4 93 22 170 10 46 47 46 46 28 23 24 22 23 17 17 5 94 23 171 11 47 48 47 47 29 24 25 23 2u 18 18 6 95 24 72 12 48 49 48 48 30 25 26 24 25 19 19 7 96 25 73 13 49 250 49 49 Adar 1 26 27 25 26 20 20 8 97 26 74 14 2 50 251 250 250 2 27 28 26 27 21 21 9 98 27 75 15 251 52 251 251 3 28 29 27 28 22 22 10 99 28 76 16 52 53 52 52 4 29 330 28 29 23 23 11 100 29 177 17 53 54 53 53 5 330 331 29 330 24 24 12 101 Tishri i 1 178 18 54 55 54 54 6 331 32 330 331 25 25 13 02 2 179 19 55 56 55 55 7 32 33 331 32 26 26 14 03 3 180 20 56 57 56 56 8 33 34 32 33 27 27 15 04 4 181 21 57 58 57 57 9 34 35 33 34 28 28 16 05 5 ,82 22 58 59 58 58 10 35 36 34 35 29 29 17 06 6 83 23 59 260 59 59 11 36 37 35 36 30 30 18 07 7 84 24 260 261 260 260 12 37 38 36 37 Iyyar 1 31 19 08 8 85 25 261 62 261 261 13 38 39 37 38 2 32 20 09 9 86 26 62 63 62 62 14 39 340 38 39 3 33 21 110 10 87 27 63 64 63 63 15 340 341 39 340 4 3*1 22 111 11 88 28 64 65 64 64 16 341 42 340 341 5 35 23 12> 12 89 29 65 66 65 65 17 42 43 341 42 6 36 24 13 13 190 30 66 67 66 18 43 44 42 43 7 37 25 \14 14 191 Te- 1 67 68 66 67 19 44 45 43 44 8- 38 26 15- / 15 92 beth 2 68 69 67 68 20 45 46 44 45 9- 39 27 16 16 93 3 69 270 68 69 21 46 47 45 46 10 40 28 17 17 94 4 2 70 271 69 270 22 47 46 46 47 11 41 29 18 18 95 5 271 72 2 70 271 23 48 49 47 48 12 42 Ab 1 19 19 96 6 72 73 271 72 24 49 350 48 49 13 43 2 120 20 97 7 73 74 72 73 25 350 51 49 350 14 44 3 121 21 98 8 74 75 73 74 26 351 52 350 351 15 45 4 22 22 99 9 75 76 74 75 27 52 53 351 52 16 46 5 23 23 200 10 76 77 75 76 28 53 54 52 53 17 47 6 24 24 201 11 77 78 76 77 29 354 355 53 54 18 48 7 25 25 02 12 78 79 77 78 30 54 55 19 49 8 26 26 03 13 79 230 78 79 Adar 1 55 56 20 50 9 27 27 04 14 280 281 79 280 II 2 56 57 21 51 10 28 28 05 15 281 282 280 281 3 57 58 22 52 11 29 29 06 16 82 83 281 82 4 58 59 23 53 12 130 30 07 17 83 84 82 83 5 59 360 24 54 13 131 Mar- 1 08 18 84 85 83 84 6 360 361 25 55 14 32 ches- 2 09 19 85 86 84 85 7 361 62 26 56 15 33 van 3 210 20 86 87 85 86 8 62 63 27 57 16 34 4 211 21 87 88 86 87 9 63 64 28 58 17 35 5 12 22 88 89 87 88 10 64 65 29 59 18 36 6 13 23 89 290 88 89 11 65 66 Stvan 1 60 19 37 7 14 24 290 291 89 290 12 66 67 2 61 20 38 8 15 25 291 92 290 291 13 67 68 3 62 21 39 9 16 26 92 93 291 92 14 68 69 4 63 22 140 10 17 27 93 94 92 93 15 69 370 5 64 23 141 11 18 28 94 95 93 94 16 370 3 71 6 65 24 42 12 19 29 95 96 94 95 17 371 72 7 66 25 43 13 220 She. - 1 96 97 95 96 18 72 73 8 67 26 44 14 221 bat 2 97 98 96 97 19 73 74 9 68 27 45 15 22 3 98 99 97 98 20 74 75 10 69 28 46 16 23 4 99 300 98 99 21 75 76 11 70 29 47 17 24 5 300 301 99 300 22 76 77 12 71 30 48 18 25 6 301 02 300 301 23 77 78 13 72 E lul 1 49 19 26 7 302 03 301 02 24 78 79 14 73 2 150 20 27 8 03 04 02 03 25 79 380 15 74 3 151 21 28 9 04 05 03 04 26 380 381 16 75 4 52 22 29 10 05 06 04 05 27 81 82 17 76 5 53 23 230 11 06 07 05 06 28 82 83 18 77 6 54 24 231 12 07 08 06 07 29 383 384 Techn ische Chr onoloq ie , Vol II, p. 86. Ma the mat I sc he und See F. K. Ginzel ♦1 DATE SYNCHRONISMS. OF THE ASSUAN PAPYP.I1 . Papyrus No Regnal Year Solar Year Egyptian Date Julian Calendar Jul. Day Number Aramaic Date 0 Nisan for Jul. Day No. Jul. Day No. for 0 Nisan Add ' Increment Jul. Day Number Difference A B C D E F g3 II J K lyth of Xerxes 21 Xerxes 1 Artax. 19th of Artax. 25th of Artax. (No year) 4th of Darius Sth, 9th Darius 13th,14th Darius 471 (464) 446 440 446 420 416 4io 28th of Pachons 17th of2 Thoth DATE UNCERT. 10th of Mesore 19th of Pachons 6th of Epiphi Payni 12th of Thoth 9th of Athyr Sept. 12, 471 Jen. 2, 464 P A P Y R ;IN: - 1st I Nov. 17, 446 Aug. 26, 440 oct. 14, 446 Sept. 2 - Oct.l, 42 0 Dec. 16, 416 Feb. 10, 410 1549645 155194-9 u s ^esore /21s 15588*42 1560951 1558808 1568263 to 1568292 1569829 1571711 18th of Elul 18th of Chisleu D A M A G : Chisleu i 2d Chisleu 13th of Ab 25th of Tisri Elul 3d of Chisleu 24th of Shebat Meh. 31 Apr. 23 E D ml ess 1st N: (' 3S31 Meh. 26 Apr* 17 (355) Mar• 26 Apr. 7 Apr. 21 Xch. 28 15492(80 1551695 .san were the 1558606 1560820 ’ 1558606 1568115 1569590 1571392 Max. 166 254 ,155) Last of 238 131 (13X) 202 149 to 177 240 319 1549646 SjcJi&E 1551949 Hz Feb. 1558844 n&o h 1550951 1558808 Oetr I M 1568264 to 1568292 1569830 17 15717-11 FJt 10 + 1 0 + a 0 0 0 + 14 0 D. Sidersky, Etude sur la chronologic as syr o-baby lonienne (1916): "Contribution a 1’ etude de la chronologie neo-babylonienne" R A XXX (1933), 53f, has shown that the nineteen-year cycle of intercalation, employed to brings together at its end the solar and lunar years, was introduced in 747 hy Nabu-nasir. A. T. Olmstead - A J S L LV (1938), 123, places the responsibility on Nabu-timanni for Babylonian computation of true date of new~and full moon early in the fifth caitury. 2Part of the date of Thoth is missing. It could be 7th, 14th, 17th, 24th, Cowley Aramaic Papyri, p. 17, thinks there is not room enough for 17 but Gutesmann and Hontheim compute it thus, and it is the only one that synchronizes. ^The year is omitted. It to uld give equally satisfactory results for the year 460 B. C. Th:e papyrus has a break in the first lino but because of the. material dealt with, Cowley wants to date it 441* Gutesmann dates it 447 - 449* ^his difference becomes zero if Chisleu could be given an extra day instead of Harchesvan, as might be possible before the system of intercalation was completed. IS Arlos H0 Hirixoan Ite, thou look©st to Kisaa latter IMin ’Muras th© April CM lends. I My admires file horns of the Bull Iyar w.'rves^ } (Barley) (Wheat) C-mini of Agcnomus. June sees the twin Spartans runnf- Slwn (Mnaer in the shy. In the suxwr solstice July carrios Ihsmiz Leo the constolls.tion of hot Cancer. Loo. fervid with fire, buna# up the Ab Virgo rmth of Au/yst. SeP^SBber* enrichoB Bacchus by thy Elul (Vintage) Libra sttxx', (- Vir(^« And Cctobor emparus to Libra in Tisri boedtins Gcorpio Tino of sowing, dcorpio In haste coxumds Lovmbor Beswn arly Fain S&gittarins to hibernate* The Archer snds Ms signs in tho Mslou Capricora xiiddlo ox cox tber» Ckprloom, turning baefc. sanotifios Tebeth Aquarius the begimilng of the month of January. In tm ma^th of ,.um> tho cmstel* Shebat .iscas lutlm of Tquarius stands azrAro Ln tlie Mdst* The tv;o Fl shoe ccmo forth in Adar latter lain Vc'a.v 43few>of the •* ^rch. eight Jhpyri studied synchronize exactly >*ft'vAA«L'Av? on tide plans wry by one day, while the sMt** .fren all tho translations which are available, bokis to vary two days$ but these will bo emsidered later. If the hynothoMs stated was not tho exact nethod of calculation, wMtcvor nathod vas used. giiiffiiiiiir^.te fit so closely the amputations offered in this discussion that they synchronize admirably. (See comparisons & liypatliesis: Tho ymr vo.s cmputed by a monthly soqumae <3 of JO, 29 days during the first six months, sub joct to caiwbant ehae& by obsormticn and adjusted during the last six non ths by the addition or deduct ion of a day in sols jaaath, yorws ■ ■ as dgmndsd by tho bo® in riving 355 » 3&3> w 3^U days in 12 or 1J lunations. the tar year JU;, ^^Vmarabilis Bedaa. Gpuscula tciont-ifica, he Tmporw .'batlone, didit J. A. Giles, London, (V'l^TT Anad.cn). Totico the graph showing the position of the date given in Mpyrus #K% Tho date is glwa wx*/ clearly in tho roe ord — ?on the 2l*th of Shebat in the year IJj that is, the 9th day of Athyr, year ll| of Darius,’* Th? first of Thoth, year 14 of inrius, according to ltol®nyfs reekming, was s ♦ By using the method outlined m page ipfor detemSjiing the first day of Wisan, 1111 and 1^10, it is found that tho soon ..‘®nands a JJV.i-day y»r in ordei* to properly synchronize with the barley harvest« Applying tho regular JO, 29 sequence for the first six lamths and mkinr all tho required adjustments in the last six months as shewn in the table of day numbers for the Jewish calendar, (see mg© 20), the Sixth of Shebat synchronizes o^ictly with tho 9th of Athyr; but the lapyras says this is the IJth year of arius according to Jewish reckoning, It is, therefor©, mrked IJth on the .graph, Tho Jewish civil year is reckoned frm. th© first of Tishri as will be ecmonatrated a little later. Look now at tho graph showing ths location of the date given in Papyrus tt jn which verifies the sequence of years shown in Again t*B doable year date is wry carefully givent "In the Jd of Chisloy of the 9th years that is, the 12th day of Thoth of the fth year of 7arius,n According to tho proper wthod of calculation as sham in tho table of day nmbers for tho J*nd.sh year, tho adjustment of the calendar is mdo in Mrchesvan, and thorn is a difference of cso cMy in the . ' ■’ • Im * f'. ■ Hoxnvor, if the adjuster 'dw alenMr should be yade in Chisleu instead of •.ai’chosvs.n, the synahrmian ’would he exact. Because of the dates in Chisleu that synchronize asewtly with the other fryvtinn dateo, it seem to law been teicnstmtod as a general thing that the adjusfexont of ths ^lmp ungear, To, JOj ^owley, xa&mic “AifyTi oTCent -:ry, Lccidm, Ho, 10, pp, COMPARATIVE TRANSLATIONS OF THE ASSUAN PAPYRI Papy- A. E. Cowley E. B. Knobel i J. K. Fotheringham rus Jew. Date Eg. Date Reign Yr. Jew. Date Eg. Date Reign Yr. ! Jew. Date 1 . Eg. Date Reign Yr. A 18 Elul 28 Pachons 15 Xerxes 471 18 Elul 28 pachons 15th of Xerxes 471 i 17, (18) Elul 27, (28) Pachons 14, (15) Xerxes 471 B 18 Chisleu 7 Thoth 21; Begin, of Artax. 465 18 Chisler 6 Thoth 1st of Artax. 464 18 Chisleu 6, (7)(8)? Thoth 20, (21) Xerxes 464 D 21 Chisleu 1 Mesore 6th of Artax. 459 Cann ot be harmt >nized 21 Chisleu 1 Mesore 6, (5) Artax. 46o E 3 Chisleu 10 Mesore 19th of Artax. 447 3 Chisler 10 Me sore 19th of Artax. 446 3 Chisleu 10 Mesore 19th of Artax. 446 F 14 Ab 19 Pachons 25th of Artax. 441 14 Ab 19 Pachcns 2pth of Artax. 440 13, (14) Ab. 19 Pachons 2pth of Artax. 440 G 25 Tishri 6 Epiphi — — — — — 441 Suggest: ; Year 24+6 26 Tishri 6 Epiphi - - - - - 446 H Elul Payni 4th of Darius 420 Suggest: ; Year 420 Suggests fear 420 J 3 Chisleu Yr. 8 12 Thoth Yr. 9 8, 9th of Darius 416 3 Chisleu 12 Thoth 8th of Darius 416 3 Chisleu 11, (12) Thoth 7, (B)(9) Darius 1|16 K 24 Shebat Yr. 13 9 Athyr Yr. 14 13, lit of Darius 410 24 Shebat 9 Athyr 4th of Darius 4io 23, (24) Shebat 8, (9) Athyr 13, (14) Darius 410 A. E* Cow] Aramaic Pt Ley ipyri of the E. B. Knobel "Suggested Explanation of the J. K. Fotheringham ’’Calendar Dates in the Aramaic 3th Century, B. C. Oxford Clarendon jPress (1923) Ancient Jewish Calendar Dates on the Atamaic Papyri.” Fapyn irom Assuan. Monthly Notices R.A.J U, LXIX Monthly Notices R.A.S* LXVIII, (1908) , London R.A.S. (1908) pp. 334 - 345• (1908) ! London, R.A.S., (19092 pp. 12 - 20. ro o 21 “UUpyrus K” Pated l^th yr, Darius 2£[th of Shebat — 14th yr, Darius 9th of Athyr Sayce & Cowleys — Aramaic fhpyri Discovered at Assuan 22 6 7 K Jewish 331i5 (381+) CQ______________________ 8 331(6 Xi. (355) o 3314-7 9........ (351+) Julian 417 B*C Jul. 1)298 416 B.C N . 3. 331 "7.... m ..®. N 3.332 o- .........CD- 8 « j Jul, 1|299 413 B.C N. E. 333 ..............® 9 Jul. 4300 414 11. e. 334 10 1 2 E U P H S M U S 91 Olympiad 92 Olympiad 8 9 10 PERS JAI! RE CRON III G YEARS OF DARIUS II 7 8 9 ic SAROS TABLET YEARS OF CYCLE KO 4t DARIUS II CD ’’JhpyrUS J1' Dated; 8th year Ihrius 3d Chisleu 9th year Darius 12th Thoth Sayce & Cowley: *—> Aramaic Jhpyri Discovered at X ssuan a >BlB 1b tlB same BMB of the year la ths 9th year of Artaxerxes* Though dated in the sane season of the year as both !t^ and WI% It giws the yoar in teras of the Egyptian oalmdar only, taking it for granted that the parties caiconod vn.ll kno^ that at this time of the year tho 9th ymr of Aria* xerxes in the Egyptian calendar w.s tho Sth year of Artaxerxes according to the Jewish calendar, Ihpyrus (soe graph, page* 24) clarifier .Xy sequence established by rfl~* I'M date of the yy tian sianth Is dam ;ed, only the last four stroke of the sl^ showing, By careful study of the space given in the line for tho date, it has bom deteroined by several scholars that this date should be the 17th of Thoth* Though Ccmley thinks there is hardly rocn for the signs for 17, Outesmun and tateJs disagree with him, Xs sequence of the "21st of Xbraasj that is, the 1st of Artaxerxes ,n agrees exactly .rith ifcpyri *3* and *K% While Ihpyrus "If1 (see graph, page 25. s only the 24th year of nrius, in the actual dating, it is quite evident that this lul is the last month of the 3d year (Hebrew reckoning), while It is ths 10th month of the 4th year according to the L'OTtMji reckoning. In no other wy could the yearly sequence as proven by Mpyri nBn# w (1^5), p* 17, 21 20 Jewish 5296 (355) §i 3297 xa______ 1..A.,.co (58U> J ..........1. 3298 1^5 B.c Jul. I425O I46U B.C. Jul. 4251 CV1 .......... > <35U) t __________£Z1. L163 N. E. 282 20 3 LYSANIAS L Y S I T IE US n) E. 281; N. E. 285 ..2. 1 ARCHEDEMIDES 78 Olympiad 79 Olympiad 20 '21 A 1 2 KRSIA1I CALEB EAR — Y EARS OF XERXES & ARTAXERXES 12 13 A 15 SAROS TABLET — YEARS OF CYCLE XERXES ARTABABUS 4 s .Co "Lhpyrus Bn Dated 21 Year Xerxes 18 Chisler — 17 (?) Thoth 1 Year Artaxerxes Sayce & Cowley ~ Aramaic Bapyri Discovered at^Assuan 25 C\J 33^0 (3314.) 3 Jewish 33U1 (355) OJ 4 MMfe . of md £uj6 B* C, Bo^uso of the wsartaM^ Mte* howvsr, wry littla wight )m tom giwn to the itipyrus in dealing with the WMmb hypoth- oses. 28 17 Jewish §• ___________co 18 3315 (355) 3316 19 CALL Jul, L|267 W B,cj Jul, 1l268 N, E, 301 18 T IM A R C H I D E S 83 Olympiad 18 19 FERS IAN CALENDAR 13 SAROS TABLET 19 20 (383) 3317 (55U) Jul, 1(269 1|45 N. E, 303 20 o © Jul, 1(270 N. E, 30U 21 3 IMA COS U ITS IMA CHIDE S YEARS OF ARTAXERXES YEARS OF CYCLE 20 15 S....A RTAXERXES "Ihpyrus E” Ihted: - 19th yr, Artaxerxes 3d Chisleu - 10th lie sore Sayce & Cowley: «« Aramaic Ripyri Discovered at Assuan 29 ......13................... 1U.... 3289 (35U) £ Jewish 3290 (35U) irv instead of cmfoming to thia moiaiic, drops back to rr a J f~ the standard torn putting an intercalary azmth in 1Ji5 and not in ljq6 as one rdgM be led to expect. These slight variations fra;, the s-jandard fbn:i tend to eonflm tte roliability of tte dates in general and dcusistrate the reasonablaness of the LX 1 I . ‘ . C* C -vx_- steteaent that obsorvaticn assisted calculation' in tetemining tho rwthod of in—1 calati&u It night bo pOGsible to arrange a wmcnlo between the ZfH- and hlO such as is shown on Charts 3 and C -Meh weald tew 19 Imr years, but in either caso the dates of tho Tapyri would not s^-chronizo. Because of the close synclirmi®:). of ths Ibpyrl Mth the barley harvest time nnemmie shorn m Chart B, and bemuse of their positions showing tho upper and Ixmr Waits of this / 3) and because of tho two inters Is of 51 years and JO yoars deciding each its cw ‘-Z.. 1* Knobel, ffA Suggostivo xplanatlcn of the Ancient Jewish G&lmchr atss on the Aranaic Ihpyi , (190B), pp, 30. Yr* duHan !&t© for 6th of/dpipM ■Mys of the Year* So* liy So* 0 Mean -ay . o* 29th Mui Corros. Mt* in. Tishri bet. 18 291 103 280** 11 143 16 291 SS 269 22 l|^2 IB ^'1 111 283 3 l?61* Oct* 17 291 100 277 460 - 17 290 SB 26.5 25 ld?9 17 2SK) 107 284 6 458 17 290 97 2^i 16 457* Oct* 16 86 265 27 U5^> 16 289 id)- 281 8 16 289 94 271 10 16 2S9 113 290 «w** 453* bet* 15 209 102 279 10 452 15 2B8 90 267 21 451 15 288 103 203 3 1i50 15 2BS 15 449* Oct* 11* 288 88 23 w? 14 287 107 3 14 287 96 14 h>^ - a 287 e 25 to* Oct* 13 287 103 230 7 iui 13 20" 91 368 18 Wi? 13 286 110 287 «BHh» 442 13 286 99 276 10 iJA* .Oct, 12 286 266 20 In viw of these iapyrus c&te* caaing Span a mn^s of six nmths in the calMX year and covering a range of noro than half a century in the Persian period* it |MMMI increasingly evident that the Jewish calsad&r at this tta* had Just as definite a method ci oalculatiai as had the ..gyptian and that if /J the doos not represent the actual wthodology used by the Bjbrwws, it approaches it so nearly as to be syaclirancus • with it* hypothesis: An extra nonth was intercalated according to a rswsmlc for the 19-yoar cycle (perhaps not so definitely adhered to at this early date as later, but closely enough to establish the Mot of its use,)* %> ovwx*^ 6U ;' -A_Aa-- !Q. OxO O , , 690 co 680 620 Sennache riK A |Ashur-na- | j jSennacherib! Esarhaddon t din-Shumu ytMuBhezib Hard*k Belibni ---------------- v ITergal-Ushezib ___(BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY, according to Ptolemy’s Canon, Barton, and Olmstead) _______660 Shama sh-shum-ukin J Y IS SO SHABAKA? A. T. Olmstead, History of Palestine and Syria, (1951), P» U5^« ’’Tiglath Hieser died and his son came heme from Smyrna to reign as Shalmaneser V (720-722);‘his absence from Syria allowed new revolts to be stirred up by Sibu or So, perhaps one of the Egyptian Delta kings and Tyre, Sidon, and Accho rebelled,” Oh p. 1|B1 after Sennacherib’s seige of Lachish and the destruction of his army, Olmstead speaks of his treaty with Shabaka. This he can do for he places the one invasion of Sennacherib in 701* J. H. Breasted, A History of Egypt, (1912), p. 5^9. ”ln the"shor¥ reign of Shalmaneser IV, who followed Tiglath Pileser III, Israel with others was encouraged to revolt by Sewa or So, (2 Kgs. 17th-) who was either an otherwise unknown Delta Dynast or ruler of Uusri, a kingdom of North Arabia, the name of which is so like that of Egypt as to cause confusion in our understanding of the documents of the time, a confusion which perhaps already existed in the minds of the cuneiform scribes.” H. R. Hall, The Ancient History of the Near East, (1955), P» h-71« "In Hoshea of Israel and the king of lyre relying, as we read in the Book of Kings, (2 Kgs. 17th) on the promised help of "Seve (So), king of Egypt," refused his yearly tribute. Now that the theory of the existence of a hitherto unknown land, bearing the same name as Egypt, (Musri), in North Arabia, to whom this Seve, the Sib’u of the Assyrians, and the "Pir’u of Musri,” also mentioned in the Assyrian inscriptions, were assigned, is generally discredited, we have returned to the original and perfectly natural identifications of Seve or Sib’u with Shabaka (the.Sebichos of the Greeks) and of "Pir’u of Musri" with Pharaoh of Egypt. It is very probable that the Biblical mention of "king" Seve in connection with Hoshea in 725 is a misA placement from the year of Sargon’s victory at Raphia in 720, when "Sib’U, the commander-in-chief (turtan) of Pir’u," is mentioned as defeated by the Assyrians (he is not mentioned in 725)* 'fe must suppose that Sib’u and Seve are the same person, in which case the contemporary Assyrian record must be followed, and Seve transferred to 720. And then the probability of the identity of Sib’u-Seve with Shabaka is evident." In a note, same page, Hall sayss "The identification of So or Seve with Sib’u is generally accepted, but not the further identification with Shabaka (Greek Sabakon or Sebichos), although the earlier writers, like Rawlinson and Oppert, did not doubt it. Nowadays W. Id. Buller, Enoycl. Bibi., s.v* So; Steindorff, BeitrUge zur Assyriologie, I, pp. 559^*1 Alt, Israel und Agypten, pp. 5^ffT; Rogers, Hist. Bab. A~ssyr. II, p. J06; Peet, Egypt and the Old Testament, p. 171; and Olmstead, Hist. Assyr., pp. 201|.,207, all reject it. I am, however, by no means convinced by the gregarious unanimity, and since no other Egyptian candidate for identification with Sib’u-Seve exists, continue to consider it probable that he is Shabaka.” REIGN OF SHISHAK (SIIESHONK) First Fnaraoh of the Twenty-second Dynasty Both'Breasted (History of Egypt, 529), and Olmstead (History of Palestine and Syria, 34o> give The" reign" or aKishak as 945-924* Breasted plac'es the invasion of Palestine in the fifth year of Rehoboam in 926 (Hist* Egypt, 529) while Olmstead puts it in 931 (Hist* Pal*, 354)* Breasted makes Shishak the Fharaoh who captured Gezer and gave it to his daughter, Solomon’s wife (1 Kg* 9:15"17), and also the harbourer of Jeroboam (1 Kg* 11 :JUo), as well as the invader of Palestine in days of Rehoboam* (Hist* Egypt, 529) (1 Kg. 14:25-28) Solomon began the temple in his 4th year and finished in the 11th—-being 7 years in building* (1 Kg* 6:58) Bien he was 13 yrs* building his own house* (1 Kg. 7:1) Both together lasting 20 yrs. (1 Kgs. 9:10) Established a levy to build cities including Gezer (1 Kg. 9:15) which Pharaoh had given his daughter* She stayed in the city of David some time before the house was built. (1 Kg. 9:24) W. J. Beecher: The Dated Events of the 0* T., pp* 18ff. "For checking the Assyrian against' Kibl¥caI*Tates, a good point of reference is in Shishak’s invasion in days of Rehoboam* Shishak was contemporary with Solomon (1 Kg* 11:40) and invaded Judah the fifth year of Rehoboam (1 Kg* 14:25). According to Eg. records this was not later than 20th year of Shishak* According to Assyrian records supported by Biblical (2 Kgs. 11 s 1-6) Shabaka the So of the Bible, the first king of the 25th Dyn. was on the throne when Sargon invaded Palestine in B.C. 720. It is not known what year of his reign this was. Call it 720 * x . Add to this the number of years of each Dynasty back to Shishak. (According to Breasted) Accession of Shabaka 720 t x 24th Dyn. 6 23d ” 37 * 3* 22d ” 230 < 6x Accession of Shishak 993 *r0x~~ Tirhakah the second king after Shabaka was on the throne (2 Kg. 19:9) at the time of Sennacherib’s invasion 701• Accession of Tirhakah 701 * x Years of Previous kings 24 Accession of Shebaka 725 ~x which put in place of 72Q ♦ x makes the accession of Shishak 998 * 10x. The years of overlapping reigns would about balance the lOx and thus the date 993-998 as the time of accession of Shishak is better than 947* (See Breasted analysis of this problem by estimating Eg. co-reigns and overlaps at 30 yrs., canceling all x values by assuming the last date found on the monuments indicates the last year of the reign; thus in contradiction to Assyrian records the first year of Shabaka is set at 712 and Tirhakah at 688. Then he arbitrarily drops 10 years from the minimum dates of the 23d Dyn. (Ano* Record Vol* I, pp. 23-48)” 1022 MLQ. qj k..—..... Possibl^ Solarri Shishak 21 — --------- •Rehoboam !L2fia (Synchronization of the reigns of Shishak and Solomon according to the Bible) CONTEMPORANEOUS ICINGS OF THE ASSYRIAN AND ISRAELI HSU KINGDOMS Biblical chronology ties on to Babylonian chronology by means of eight synchronisms during the reigns of Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar, and thus makes the final destruction of Jerusalem in the nineteenth year (586-586) of Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kg* 25:8). This harmonizes with the Assyrian record and thus it can be said that at the destruction of Jerusalem the Assyrian and Biblical chronologies are synchronous* Both records make Esurhaddon (681-668) and Manasseh contemporaneous* According to Biblical chronology Manasseh reigned 696-6U1* Esarhaddon was encouraged in his western trip because of good news from his astrologer on account of an eclipse of the sun in January, (See A.T.O*, Hist* Pal*, U86). Ihere are two possible eclipses by which to date'this event, Jan. 11, 689, and Jan* 12, 662 (See F. K* Ginzel, Spezieller Kanon, pp. 6.8,U9)• Olmstead wants to make the latter the eclipse mentioned in the record, but it seems to fall a bit too late for Esarhaddon’s reign* Ihe earlier date would fit into Manasseh’s reign, but would be too early for the Assyrian date given to Esarhaddon. This is a good problem for scmeone to work out. That Manasseh was spoken of as contemporaneous with Esarhaddon in the Assyrian records, see R* W. Rogers, Cuneiform Parallels, p. 356* Ihe invasion of Sennacherib against Jerusalem is placed by Assyrian records at 701-700 (See Rogers, 3U2-3h-3)« Ihere seems to be no record of an earlier invasion by the Assyrian king, but the Bible is clear that this record is distinct from the one in the l$th, li|th year of Hezekiah* Ihere is practically no difficulty in synchronizing these two kings* Sargon and Hezekiah are recognized in both records as being contemporaneous. According to Biblical Chronology Hezekiah reigned from 725 to 696. Sargon according to the Assyrian record reigned from 722 to 705* He is assigned to the Assyrian Eponym List for 719 (See Rogers, 22U). For the campaign of Sargon against Ashdod (is* 20:1), the Assyrian record places it at 7H (Rogers, 328), which would fall well within Hezekiah’s reign and Sargon specially emphasizes that he captured Samaria (Rogers, 331)* The Assyrian record synchronizes the reigns of Tiglath-pileser, Pekah of Israel, and Rezon of Damascus; therefore of Ahaz of Judah. Ihe Biblical record says that Hoshea slew Pekah (2 Kg. 1500) and the Assyrian record practically agrees by saying nAs Pekah their king they had deposed, Hosea I established as king over them.” (Rogers, 321) Rezon was slain by Tiglath-pileser (2 Kg. 16:9). Olmstead places his death in the same year as Pekah, 732 (Hist. Pal. & Syr*, 4-51, 6-53 )• According to the Biblical chronology, Pekah was slain 736• Bius~ there seems to be a small difference of I4-—5 years in the chronologies. Ihe tribute of Menahem of Israel to Pul, King of Assyria (Compare 2 Kg* 15:19 with 1 Chr* 5*25,26) indicates that Menahem and Tiglath-pileser was contemporaneous. Olmstead places the date of the tribute as 739*738 (Hist* Ass* 181, 189), "but according to Biblical chronology Menahem ruled 768-75$* ifiis” shows a difference in the chronologies of 21-29 years. According to Biblical chronology Jehu reigned 892-865. No reference is made to his paying tribute to Assyria but the black obelisk of Shalmaneser III records it, thus making the two kings contemporaneous. The date generally given for the payment of this tribute is 8Lj2 (See Rogers, 303,301;; A,T.O., Hist. Pal, and Syr,, 398). Sane authorities put it 81;1 (C,A,H., Vol. IH, 262). There is therefore a discrepancy here of 30-50 years as the payment of this tribute might have happened near the beginning of the reign of Jehu, Ahab’s reign, according to Biblical chronology is 925-9O1;. Shalmaneser III records the battle of Qarqar in which Ahab and Ben Hadad took part (Rogers, 29U-297)* Olmstead puts the battle of Qarqar at 85U; Cam, Ano, Hist,, Vol, III, 262, makes it 853. There is no reference to this in Scripture, but probably it took place toward the latter part of Ahab’s reign. Thus the difference between the two chronologies is roughly 50 years. Tabulating the results it is noted that the discrepancy grows: EsBrhaddon—Lianas seh Sennacherib—Hezekiah Sargon—Samaria Tiglath-pileser—Hoshea Ti gl ath-pi 1 e s e r-I _e nahem Shalmaneser III--Jehu Shalmaneser III—Ahab Synchronous tt t! I4-6 years off 21-29 years off 30-50 years off oir, 50 years off From Shalmaneser III to Tiglath-pileser III, the period of Assyrian decline, there is no mention of this power on the part of the Biblical writers. ASSYRIA on K\ CM fl fl co CD Eclipse .D>- One Dynasty----- Expansi .n — 'Home- >, xt-Abroad Decline fl § r-4 fl 5 'tO CM fl CO 1000 co •H co © fl I CO G'x © co fl fl r-4 to & ro fl fl ft fl co © CO © fl fl I fl fl rfl CO •fl fl fl I Tj fl O Lft Gxco co co 900 w fl fl © m © fl fl I •H m co 5 CO co in cm fl fl I T3 fl co 800 © w © fl fl fl rfl CO CM CM fl fl fl fl fl fl CO fl to © CO © fl fl fl co CM CM CM fl o to fl fl co LCx O © fl o fl fl fl © 700 fl O fl co fl ft fl I fl fl P I CM fl fl fl fl fl CO © fl co fl fl © fl O © 3 « 6oo I I 1 I © w 5 w M W (Assyrian Chronology according to A* T. Olmstead, History of Assyria) 1000 Solomon 900 Kingdom of Israel 800 4 CM CM 700 600 S ___ Kingdom of Judah (Chronology of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah according to A. T. Olmstead, History of Palestine and* Syria) 4 CM CM CM CO 1000 S olomon j. 900 800 700 co Lft ___t__ 6oo Kingdom of Israel Kingdom of Judah — 1st Group Prophets-------- (Scriptural Chronology of t] a 2nd Group Prophets © fl he Kingdoms of Israel and Judah) 3rd Group Pr ophet s- s4o Jeroboam II 8^0 820 BIBT.ICjAL CHR01ji0L,0GY — TIHES EIGHTH CENTURY PROPHETS / /pzziah / / / / / // \ Jotham x/^ ////Ahazy/ ////l^/////766/X\\ w ///// Interregnum r— ------------- Men- j : I ahem I A'.Pekahiah X_____i□LJ ' ^x. Hezekiah : 72X \ \ \ Pekah Enter- l regnum Ho- j shea I 800 Jeroboam II r Hoshee , Pekah J&kahiah ezekiahx \ > \\\\ 7Q\ Men-ahem SYNCHRONOUS ISRAELITE AND ASSYRIAN CHRONOLOGY ACCORDING TOA.T. OLMSTEAD, HIST.PAL. &SYRIA, 415-462 AND HIST. ASSYRIA 1—1 OLD DI NAo 11 Hi HI > t> H X-X HI 1—1 > W HI nJ -H -H Jh M *rt d X g © r 0 722 H Sargon II 40 820 800 Yrs. 780 760 710 ATO 720 H.P. Yrs. 700 BIBLE Yrs. ATO H.P. BIBLE Yrs. Jeroboam 785-7L5 420 10 832-791 11 Amaziah 799-782 115 17 847-818 29 Interregnum. 7L5-7L4 1 791-769 22 Interregnum 818-807 11 Menahem 711-735 139 9 769-759 10 Uzziah 782-751 117 31 807-755 52 Interregnum — 759-758 1 J otham 751-736 } |) |2 15 755-739 16 Pekahiah 735-731 W* 1 758-756 2 Ahaz 736-721 112 15 739-723 16 Pekah Interregnum Hoshea 731-732 732-723 151 2 9 756-736 736-728 728-719 20 8 9 Hezekiah 721-693 462 28 725-696 29(2 yas, Co-Rc Early and latter Rain ’’The following items respecting the seasons in Palestine, are taken from an ’Economical Calendar’ of that country, by John Gotlieb Buhle, Fellow of the Philo-logic Seminary, at Brunswick, 178 5. The Calendar was compiled from the researches of travellers of acknowledged authenticity, at the request of the Directors of the royal college of Gottingen, and may be found in full in ’Calmet’s Dictionary.’-'— (Advent Shield, January, 1845, p. 275): ’March. The inundation of the river Jordan, caused by the melting of the snow on the mountains, is about the end of this month, at which time, barley is often ripe at Jericho, when it is about fourteen days earlier than at Jerusalem. In this month every tree is in full leaf. The fig blossoms about the middle, and the Jericho plume, toward the end of it. The latter rains commence in this month, and continue into April; after which, none are observed until summer. ’April. In April, the heat begins to be extreme. The harvest falls out entirely according to the rainy season. After the rains cease, the corn soon arrives at maturity; but it usually remains in the fields a long time after it is ripe. Barley is ripe in the beginning of April, in the plain of Jerichos according to Mariti, l.c. In all other parts of Palestine, it is in ear at this time, and the ears turn yellow about about the middle of this month. (Shaw, l.c.) ’May. In the month of May, the summer season commences, when the excessive heat of the sun renders the earth barren. Wheat is out dawn in May, in Galilee, but it is often not gathered till the first of June. Frequently, barley is not all out down until this month commences.’ (Buhle, Johan Gotlieb, ’’Economical Calendar,” page Brunswick, 18[75.) "During the months of November and December tha rains continue to fall heavily; afterward they return at longer intervals, and are not so heavy; but at no period during the winter do they entirely cease to occur. Rain continues to fall more or less during the month of March, but is afterwards very rare. Morning mists occur as late as May, but rain almost never. Rain in the time of harvest was as incomprehensible to an ancient Jew as snow in summer (Prov. 26:1; 1 Sam.xl2:17; Amos 4:7). The ’early’ and the ’latter’ rains, for which the Jewish husbandman awaited with longing (Prov. 16:15; James 5:7), seem to have been the first showers of autumn, which revived the parched and thirsty soil, and prepared it for the seed; and the later showers of spring which continued to refresh and forward the ripening crops and the vernal products of the fields.”—Kitto, John, "Palestine,” p. 23. New York, 1900. THE ARGUMENT The Spirit of Prophecy likens the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the days of Pentecost to the beginning of the early rain. It is also called the ’’former rain.” The ’’sowing” had been in process ever since Adam fell, and Christ finished the seeding in His generation. The disciples were the ’’reapers,” and they gathered, in large measure a harvest which they had not sown. Acts of Apostles, page 54. The Holy Spirit, in the time of Christ, ”was not limited to any age or to any Early and latter Rain — 2 race” (Acts of Apostles, p. 49). The same spiritual manifestation was given to Cornelius and his Italian friends, and to the Ephesians, as to the disciples at Pentecost in the summer of 31 A.D, These seasons of refreshing were not all on the occasion of Pentecost, but it was the same blessing (Acts 11:15 and 19:6). Consequently, though the beginning of the spiritual ’’early rain” was at Pentecost, and indeed, over two months after the spring latter rain of that year* this first refreshing of the kind from heaven was given at any time or season throughout the ministry of the apostles, and therefore, it symbolised both rains of Palestine, and not just one. The prophecy of Joel, which Peter quoted, bears this out. And just as Pentecost, and the Italian and Ephesian bestowals of spiritual grace represented both the literal ”early”and ”latter” rains of seedtime and harvest, so it will be in the final harvest at the end of the world. Unless the ’’former” has possessed the heart, to the extent that all sin is confessed and forgiven, then the ’’latter” rain cannot finish the harvest, and souls are destitute, as in the parable in Matthew 25, This condition is fully described in Test, to Ministers, p. 506. The blessing required for this generation is the "double rendering” described in Zech 9:12, and fully explained in Vol. 8, p~ 21, and involves an experience based on both "seedtime” and "harvest” rains. One is not enough. CONCLUSION — (1) The outpouring fulness of the Holy Spirit the Scriptures liken to the rains of seedtime and harvest in Palestine, the "early" rain of autumn, and the "latter" rain of spring. The spiritual figure is based upon both rains. (2) The Pentecostal administration of the Spirit is called by the Spirit of Prophecy the Beginning of the Early Rain (Acts of Apostles, p. 54), which continued throughout the apostolic ministry, and onward. The Waldensians , "in their lonely retreats often met their Redeemer and conversed with Him (Historical Sketches, p. 243), and thus prepared the way for the Reformation (Acts of Apostles, p. 53). (3) The bestowal of the Holy Spirit in the final harvest is the same kind as in apostolic times, only more of it. A double measure of both "early" and "latter" rain, that is, both confession and forgiveness, and the blotting out of sin and victory over sin (Zech. 9:12; Vol. 8, p. 21), and the perfection of character. (4) Consequently, the administration of the Holy Spirit in apostolic times, was the "former" or "early" rain, not in the sense that it corresponded to the rain of seedtime only, butthat it was the beginning of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, such as had never before been given.