The Great Pyramid: It's Divine Message - Chapter I

¶ 48. THE XVIIITH DYNASTY VAGUE CALENDAR YEAR.

It is an undisputed fact that during the entire duration of the XVIIIth [Dynasty of Egypt, the Egyptian Calendar year consisted of 365 days without any intercalation. In other words, the Egyptians of this period had no equivalent for our Leap Year. This form of year is known as the Egyptian Vague (or Wandering) Year. It is so called, obviously, from the fact that it slips pack round the Julian year of 365.25 days, at the rate of one day in four Julian wears. The slip back amounts to one complete Calendar year of 365 days in 1460 Julian years. At this time the vague Calendar year began with Day 1, Month I, of the now mis-named Calendar Season of Sowing.

¶ 49. THE VAGUE CALENDAR YEAR FROM 6th CENTURY B.C. I TO 3RD CENTURY A.D.

It is also a fact beyond dispute that the vague Calendar year of 365 days was in use by the Egyptians from the 6th century B.C. to the 3^rd century A.D. It continued in use even after 25 B.C., when the fixed Alexandrian (Julian) year was adopted for Egypt. The evidence concerning all this is too reliable and too purely established to require repeating. At this time, also, the vague Calendar year began with Day 1, Month I, of the now mis-named Calendar Season of Sowing.

¶ 50. BETWEEN DYNASTY XVIII AND THE 6th CENTURY B.C.

The evidence is also very complete that, between the period of Dynasty XVIII and the 6^th Century B.C., a vague year was in use, with Month I of the so-called Calendar Season of Sowing as the first month of the Calendar year. But as to whether or not the vague year during this interval continued its |tranquil wandering unaffected by legislation or other means of revision is a question that has failed to receive the critical treatment warranted by the evidence.

¶ 51. EVIDENCE POINTING TO TWO REVISIONS.

The evidence indicates that the vague year was twice subjected to revision during the interval defined. It points to a first revision during the reign of Ramessu II (Dyn. XIX), and to a second revision during the reign of Uasarkon II (Dyn. XXII). The indications are that the first revision belongs to the 27^th year of Ramessu II, and the second to the 22^nd year of Uasarkon II.

¶ 52. THE EFFECT OF THE REVISIONS.

Neither of these revisions effected any considerable displacement of the Calendar year. But they so completely broke the uniform rate of the vague year’s wandering that the solution of the astronomical chronology of the Dynasties is a. considerably more complicated matter than has hitherto been supposed.

The data concerning the two revisions are deep rooted in the Egyptians’ own presentation of their history. For this reason, consideration of the evidences will be given only as the various items of the data arise, and for the same reason, cannot be completed within the present volume.

The two regnal years are now, however, stated as an introductory basis of reference for the various items of the data as they emerge.

The date of the revision of Uasarkon II determines that the vague year continued its unbroken uniform rate of slip backwards round the Julian year —in spite of other two attempts at revision¹—from late in the 9^th century B.C. to the middle of the 3^rd century A.D.

¹Decree of Canopus, 238 B.C., and the Institution of the fixed Alexandrian (Julian) year 25 B.C

¶ 53. THE ASSUMPTIONS COMMONLY MADE.

The following assumptions have hitherto been made with the utmost assurance :

That the XVIIIth Dynasty vague year continued without revision—
i.e., uniformly slipping back without interruption, one day from the Julian year in every four Julian years—during the period intervening to the 6th century B.C. ; and
That the same uniform rate of wandering had continued without
revision or alteration, during the whole period of Dynastic history,— and earlier, from 5700 B.C. or alternatively from 4240 B.C. to 238 A.D. when Censorinus wrote concerning the Vague Year in his De Die Natalis.

¶ 54. THE FIXED YEAR OF PERIOD DYNASTIES VI TO XII.

The basis of the common assumption is that the Egyptian Calendar— during the period of Dynastic history—always consisted of an unintercalated Calendar year of 365 days. Much might be said concerning the flaws in this assumption. The comparative charts, diagrams and data of Plates IX, X, and XI, however, render any such discussion superfluous.¹ Here we have the facts concerning the events of the seasons of the solar year compared with all the dated events of the defined seasons of the Calendar year in Egyptian records belonging to the period of Dynasties VI to XII inclusive. This comparison shows that during this period the calendar seasons coincided exactly with the actual seasons from which they derived their names. In other words, during Dynasties VI to XII, the Egyptians had a fixed (intercalated) year beginning at the commencement of the November Agricultural Year.

¶ 55 THE XIITH DYNASTY RECORD OF THE HELIACAL RISING OF SIRIUS.

The first appearance of the Hittites during the reign of Senusert III of Egyptian Dynasty XII, during the reign of Khammurabi, the Babylonian contemporary of Abraham, and during the life of Abraham in Canaan, fixes the date of the beginning of the reign of Senusert III not earlier than 2100-1900 B.C. This fixing of the date is apart from any real or imaginary astronomical fixing.

For many centuries around this period — vide Oppolzer’s calculations — — Sirius rose heliacally at Memphis on 18^th July (Julian) in three out of every consecutive four years, and on 18^th July (Julian) in one out of every consecutive four years. From 2100 to 1900 B.C. (astronomical) these dates coincided with 1^st July (Gregorian) and 2^nd July (Gregorian) respectively. Hence from 2100 to 1900 B.C. (astronomical) Sirius rose heliacally on 1^st July (Gregorian) in three out of every consecutive four years, and on the 2^nd July (Gregorian) in one out of every consecutive four years.

Amongst a number of Papyri discovered at Kahun, and belonging to the period of Dynasty XII, were two mentioning the heliacal rising of Sirius in the 7^th year of Senusert III. The account containing this notice narrates that on Day 25, Month III, Season Pert (Growing and Harvest), the superintendent of the temple advised the governor that arrangements were being made for the festival of the heliacal rising of Sirius which would take place on Day 16 of the following month. The narrative, continuing in diary form, gives, under Day 17, Month IV, Season Pert, an inventory of the “ festival offerings for the rise of the star Sirius “ on that date.

The heliacal rising therefore took place on 1^st or 2nd July (Gregorian), 226 days after the commencement of the Calendar year. The current Calendar year, therefore began on the 17^th or 18^th November (Gregorian) — 16 or 17 days after the fixed position of the true beginning of the year.

This interval, obviously, indicates why special attention was directed to the Sirius rising in this particular year. In this year Sirius rose heliacally on Day 17 of the 8^th Calendar Month, and the first day of the current Calendar year began on Day 17 of the 1^st month of the fixed Calendar year, as defined by the Pyramid’s 1^st November phenomena. Here we find indicated the connection between the two alternative month datings celebrated as the day of the Festival of the Dead. (Refer Sect. I, ¶ 28 and 29.)

¹See also Petrie, “ Historical Studies,” p. 8.

¶ 56. THE MONTH NAME REVISIONS FROM DYNASTY XII TO 6TH CENTURY B.C

Table II and IIIa & b have shown that the intercalations of the 360 days' year occurred at intervals of five or six years. The Annals of the early Dynasties, of whichthe Palermo stone is a considerable fragment, indicate that the Festival of Sokar,1 (Osiris) occurred after precisely this interval.

Now Dr. Frazer ("Adonis, osiris, Attis") has shown that the festival of Sokar (Osiris) is identical with the Festival of the Dead. (Refer Sect. I, ¶¶26.) It therefore fell on the 1^st November (Gregorian), (refer Sect. I, ¶¶25) which accounts for its celebration once only in every five or six years during the period of Dynasties I and II. The Palermo Stone, therefore, proves that an intercalary cycle kept the Calendar year adjusted to the 1^st November year at the time of Dynasties I and II.

Maspero and Budge, again, have shown repeatedly that the Epagomenal days - "the five days over the year"¹ - were known as early as the beginning of Egyptian Dynastic History. This necessarily implied that the year of 365 days was in use at the same time as the year of 360 days. As the latter was intercalated with respect to 1^st November, the former must have been intercalated with respect to 1st November. It follows, then, that the two Calendar years followed the same Calendar Cycle. This is the case with the Calendar cycle of 103 years.

(Refer Tables II and III, Sect. I., ¶¶31.)

¹Breasted, "Ancient records," I, pp. 58-63.

¶ 57. THE MONTH NAME REVISIONS FROM DYNASTY XII TO 6TH CENTURY B.C.

The XXth Dynasty Calendar on the walls of the Temple of Amen at Medinet Habu give the months of the Celestial or Sothic (fixed) year and the _ month datings of the annual festivals. This has no relation to the contemporary vague or wandering year. Day 1 Month I begins with the Heliacal rising of Sirius, and Day 1, Month IV of the Calendar is the Day of the Feast of Hathor. The latter proves that Hathor was the name of the 4^th month of the Calendar (and that Mesore was the name of the 1^st month) at the time of Dynasty XX.

This identification of the names for the Calendar months agrees with the identification for the period of Dynasty XII.¹ It does not, however, agree with the identification of month names for Dynasty XVIII. Hathor was the name of Month III, and Thoth the name of Month I of the Calendar at the time of Dynasty XVIII.² This, again, was the identification holding from the end of the 9^th century B.C. to the middle of the 3^rd century A.D.

It is obvious then, that the Calendar was revised between Dynasty XII and Dynasty XVIII ; again, between Dynasty XVIII and Dynasty XX ; and again, between Dynasty XX and the end of the 9^th century B.C. The latter revision certainly took place after the 3^rd year of Uasarkon II, as is proved by the high Nile dating recorded for that year at Thebes. (Refer ¶¶48-53). Discussion of this subject will be resumed later.

¶ 58. THE XXTH DYNASTY CELESTIAL OR SOTHIC CALENDAR.

The XX^th Dynasty fixed Sothic Calendar and its datings (¶ 57) are stated in Table VIII. The Gregorian month

datings follow from the facts :—

That Dynasty XX certainly began around 1200 B.C.
That around, and for several centuries after 1200 B.C., Sirius rose heliacally three years in every consecutive four years on July 19^th (Julian), and one year in every consecutive four years on July 18^th (Julian).
That July 18-19 (Julian) coincided with July 7-8 (Gregorian) from 1301 to 1100 B.C. inclusive.

Table VIII shows that the Feast of Sokar (Osiris) was celebrated on 31^st October or 1^st November (Gregorian). In spite, then, of the contemporaneous vague year Calendar, the XXth Dynasty Egyptians celebrated the Festival of Sokar—the Festival of the Dead—on the same day of the solar year as had been observed during the period of Dynasties I to XII.

¶ 59. THE PTOLEMAIC CELESTIAL OR SOTHIC CALENDAR.

This fixed Sothic Calendar and its festival datings, together with the description of the festival rites of Osiris, as observed in Ptolemaic times, are contained in a long inscription in the Temple of Osiris at Denderah. The essential festivals and their month datings are stated in Table IX. The Gregorian month datings follow from the facts :—

That the inscription belongs to a period between 301 B.C. and 102 B.C. when the heliacal rising of Sirius occurred on one or other of the days July 19-20 (Julian).
That from 301 B.C. to 102 B.C. July 19-20 (Julian) coincided with July 15-16 (Gregorian).

Table IX shows that the Ptolemaic Festival of Osiris Khent-Amenti takes the place of the XXth Dynasty Festival of Osiris Sokar. The Ptolemaic Festival lasted for 18 days—from Day 12, Month IV (October 24-25) to Day 30, Month IV (November 12-13) —”and set forth the nature of Osiris in his triple aspect as dead, dismembered, and finally reconstituted by the union of his scattered limbs. In the first of these aspects he was called Khent-Amenti, I in the second Osiris-Sop, and in the third Sokar.”

The Festival of Osiris I Khent-Amenti—the festival of the dead Osiris—fell on October 28-29 (Gregorian), a slip of three days being indicated from the original placing still retained in the time of the XXth Dynasty.

¹Petrie, “ Historical Studies,” II, pp. 8 and 22, and Ancient Egypt, 1917, p. 45 ; revision ol “ Historical Studies.”
²Month name identifications on a clepsydra of Amenhotep III, Karnak. Ancient Egypt, 1917, pp. 42-45.

The slip is accounted for, as will be shown later, by the fact that whereas the later Egyptian astronomer priests (Dynasty XX to Ptolemaic times) reckoned the Sothic year as 365.25 days, they also reckoned the Solar year as 365.24 days, to obtain Precession of the Solar year round the Sothic year once in 36,525 years. The difference between the true solar and the nominal solar year amounted to 2.5 to 3 days between 1200 B.C. and 100 B.C. In the same period, the nominal solar year had receded from the Sothic year to the extent of ten days. This accounts for the ten days difference between the XX^th Dynasty and the Ptolemaic seasonal datings.

Comparison of the two Calendars (Tables VIII and IX) again, shows that in both XX^th Dynasty and Ptolemaic times, the Feast of the Exhibition of the Image of Did was attached to Day 30, Month IV. This indicates that certain festivals were not seasonal and that such festivals remained attached to the day of the month at which tradition of a certain period placed them.

¶ 60. THE NUMERICAL DETAILS OF THE PTOLEMAIC FESTIVAL.

In the Ptolemaic celebration of the Festival, 34 Papyrus boats conveyed 34 images. These obviously were derived from, and symbolise, the 34 intercalary periods of the 103 years’ cycle (Tables II and III). From Tables II and III, we observe as follows :—

34 intercalated years of the 360 days’ calendar

=34 intercalated years of 365 days’ calendar,

=34.5 years of 360 days (not intercalated),

=12,420 days=414 months of 30 days each.

The numerical significance of the enumeration here becomes apparent,

For, since 4x414 months = 1656 months,

and since the Osirian texts state that “ one day counts for a month,” so, presumably, one month counts for a year, and therefore, 1656 months symbolise 1656 years. This gives symbolically the date of the Noachian Deluge Ending 1656 A.K., as in Table V.

A similar numerical identity—giving the Deluge Date 1656 A.K.—was found by Oppert,¹ in the case of the mythical chronology of the Babylonians.

¶ 61. THE HYKSOS CALENDAR RECORD OF AN INTERCALARY CYCLE.

From the earliest dynastic times, the Egyptians referred to the epagomenal days—the five days over the year—as the birthdays of certain gods and goddesses. These were, respectively, in the order of the days, Osiris, Horus, Set (Typhon), Isis and Nephthys. Now the civil calendar of 360 days was in use from Dynasty I to Dynasty XII at least, in conjunction with the Calendar year of 365 days. At this early period, then, the epagomenal days—the birthdays of the five gods or goddesses—coincided, between intercalary years, with certain five days of Month I, Season of Sowing. Immediately after an intercalation, Day 1, Month I of the 360 days’ Calendar would follow the fifth of the Epagomenal days of the 365 days’ Calendar. In the second year after an intercalation, Days 1 to 5, Month I, of the 360 days Calendar would coincide with the five Epagomenal days of the 365 days Calendar.

Now there is precisely such a record as this on the back of the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus.² This Papyrus was compiled during the reign of a Hyksos king (Dynasty XV or XVI), and Egyptologists generally believe it to be of an earlier date than Asseth, the last Hyksos king.

The record states as follows :—

“Year II, Month I, Day 3, birth of Set; the majesty of this god caused his voice (to be heard).” “ Birth of Isis, the heaven rained.”

¹Gott, Gel. Nachrichten. 1877, p. 205. VOL. I.
²Petrie, “ Historical Studies,” II.

The record states that the birthday of Set (the third of the Epagomenal days) fell on Day 3, Month I, and that the birthday of Isis (the fourth of the Epagomenal days) followed, obviously on Day 4, Month I. As the coincidence noted always occurred in the second year after an intercalation, it is obvious that the Hyksos record indicates two facts.

These are :—

That in Hyksos times (Dynasties XV and XVI) the intercalated Calendar years of 360 and 365
days — in use from Dynasty I to XII — were still in use at the time of Dynasty XV or XVI.
That such intercalations occurred at the intervals of five or six years found established at the time of
Dynasties I and II. The Hyksos Calendar record on the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus therefore proves, in conjunction with the preceding data, that the fixed November year and the conforming intercalated Calendar years of 360 and 365 days were in continuous use from Dynasty I to Dynasty XV or XVI.

¶ 62. EARLY EGYPTIAN EXAMPLES OF . ”THE ALMANAC TRADITION"

One point, however, requires to be cleared up. The Hyksos’ Calendar record, under “ birth of Set,” on Day 3, Month I, states that “the majesty of the god caused his voice (to be heard).” This does not mean that thunder was heard on this day in the particular year recorded. Any ancient or modern almanac — by the kind of reference given — will show what is meant. The record is an early example of what we now term “ The Almanac Tradition.” Almost every Almanac, in any year, gives the anniversary of the Battle of Waterloo. In this case of the Hyksos’ record, the day is the anniversary of the day upon which Set, at his birth, first rended the sky (the goddess Nuit) with his thunderbolts. Thus the Egyptian Book of the Dead¹ refers to Set as the god who “letteth loose the storm clouds and the thunder in the horizon of heaven.” According to Plutarch, Set tore his mother’s bowels at birth, Set’s mother, Nuit, being the sky goddess.

Similarly, Isis was not only the primitive goddess of grain, but as such, was also the goddess of verdure, moisture and rain, and is referred to as “the wife of the lord of the Inundation, the creatrix of the Nile flood.”² Her tears for

the dead Osiris were supposed to produce the Inundation. Hence the Hyksos record refers to Day 4, Month I of the current Calendar year as falling upon the anniversary of the “ birth of Isis,” when “ the heaven rained.” In this case also, as in the case of Set, we have an early example of the “ Almanac Tradition.” It is unnecessary, therefore, to point out that the record does not refer to rain falling upon this day in the particular year of the record.

This explanation has been rendered necessary owing to the fact that the dates of the Hyksos’ Dynasties have been “fixed“ from the supposed occurrence of rain on the day and month stated.

¶ 63. THE ESTABLISHING OF THE VAGUE YEAR.

The Egyptian “ Book of the Sothis,” preserved by Syncellus, states that the vague or wandering year of 365 days was first instituted by the last Hyksos king, Asseth.

The statement is : — ”This king (Asseth) added the five Epagomenae and in his time they say the Egyptian year was reckoned as 365 days, having before this time counted only 360.” Obviously, the statement means that prior to Asseth, the last Hyksos king, the civil Calendar of 360 days was the intercalated year, and that Asseth, who reigned not long prior to Dynasty XVIII, instituted, as the civil year, the unintercalated or vague year of 365 days. Two facts confirm this.

These are :—

(1) That from Dynasties I to XV or XVI, according to the evidences discussed, the Civil Calendar year was an intercalated Calendar year, adjusted at intervals of five or six years, to the fixed 1^st November Agricultural year.
(2) That the month datings for the recorded heliacal risings of Sinus during Dynasty XVIII determine that the vague year was then in use, but had not long prior to Dynasty XVIII, been in its true 1^st November-beginning position—with the Calendar Season of Sowing coincident with the actual Season of Sowing.

¹Budge, “ Gods of the Egyptians,” Vol. II, pp. 246-7.
²Budge, “ Gods of the Egyptians,” Vol. II, p. 214.
Moret, “ Kings and Gods of Egypt,” p. 106.

All the evidences, then, from the period of Dynasties I to XVIII, combine to prove :—

(1) That the year was a fixed November-beginning Agricultural year from Dynasty I to XVI.
(2) That the last king of Dynasty XVI first established the vague or wandering year ; and
(3) That the first Egyptian records, employing the vague year for month datings, are the records of Dynasty XVIII.