I
THE ACCADIAN CALENDAR
[Reprinted from the _Proceedings of the Society of Biblical
Archæology, January 1892_]
Epping and Strassmaier, in their book _Astronomisches aus Babylon_,
have lately translated three small documents, originally inscribed on
clay tablets in the second century B.C. From these tablets, we learn
that the Babylonians of the above date possessed a very advanced
knowledge of the science of astronomy. Into the question of the extent
of that knowledge we need not here enter further than to say that it
enabled the Babylonian astronomers to draw up almanacs for the ensuing
year; almanacs in which the eclipses of the sun and moon, and the times
of the new and full moon, were accurately noted, as also the positions
of the planets throughout the year. These positions were indicated by
the nearness of the planet in question to some star in the vicinity
of the ecliptic, and the ecliptic was portioned off into twelve
groups, coinciding very closely in position and extent with the twelve
divisions of the Zodiac as we now know them.
As to the calendar or mode of reckoning the year, we find that the
order and names of the twelve months were as follows: Nisannu (or
Nisan), Airu, Simannu, Dûzu, Abu, Ulûlu, Tischritu, Arah-samna,
Kislimu, Tebitu, Šabâtu, Adaru.
Of these months Ulûlu and Adaru could be doubled as Ulûlu Sami (the
second Elul), and Adaru Arki (the last Adar). The Babylonian years were
soli-lunar: that is to say, the year of twelve lunar months, containing
three hundred and fifty-four days, was bound to the solar year of three
hundred and sixty-five days by intercalating, as occasion required, a
thirteenth month.
Out of every eleven years there were seven with twelve months, and four
with thirteen months. The first day of the year being, like some of our
church festivals, dependent on the time of the new moon, was “moveable”
(_schwankende_). The year, according to the tablets before Epping and
Strassmaier, “_began with Nisan, hence in the spring_.”[1]
[1] “Was den Anfang des Jahres betrifft, so haben wir schon gezeigt,
das die seleucidische Aera, wie sie in unseren drei Tafeln vorliegt,
ihre Jahre mit dem Nisan, also im Frühjahr begann.” (Epping and
Strassmaier, _Astronomisches aus Babylon_, p. 181).
This is a sketch of the Babylonian calendar in the second century B.C.,
as drawn from the work of the two learned Germans above-named.
Now we find in the British Museum a great number of trade documents
which, according to the Catalogue, “cover a period of over two thousand
years.” There are “tablets of the time of Rim-sin, Ḫammurabi, and
Samsu-iluna; tablets of the time of the Assyrian supremacy, of the time
of the native kings, and of the time of the Persian supremacy; tablets
of the times of the Seleucidæ, and the Arsacidæ.”[2]
[2] See _Guide to the Nimroud Central Saloon_, B.M., 1886. The dates
of the rulers mentioned are as follows:--
Rim-sin, about 2,300 B.C.
Ḫammurabi, about 2,200 B.C.
Samsu-iluna, about 2,100 B.C.
Assyrian supremacy from about 1275 to 609 B.C.
The latest tablet in the collection is dated, according to the
Catalogue, 93 B.C.
These documents are all dated in such and such a month of such and such
a year of some king’s reign; the months are the same (at first under
their earlier Accadian names[3]) as those we find in the almanacs
translated by Epping and Strassmaier, and we meet in them, and in
other historical inscriptions, with the intercalary months, the second
Elul, and the second Adar. It would seem, then, that it was the same
calendar, worked in the same way, that held its place through these two
thousand years.[4]
[3] ASSYRIAN. ACCADIAN MONTH NAMES, AND TRANSLATIONS.
1. Ni’sannu, { _Sara_ (or _Bar_) _zig-gar_ (“the
{ sacrifice of righteousness”).
2. Airu, _Khar-sidi_ (“the propitious bull”).
3. ’Sivanu, _or_ Tsivan,{ _Mun-ga_ (“of bricks”), and _Kas_ (“the
{ twins”).
4. Duzu, _Su kul-na_ (“seizer of seed”).
5. Abu, _Ab ab-gar_ (“fire that makes fire”).
6. Ulûlu, _Ki Gingir-na_ (“the errand of Istar”).
7. Tasritu, _Tul-cu_ (“the holy altar”).
8. Arahk-samna (“the }
8th month”), } _Apin-am-a_ (“the bull-like founder?”).
9. Cisilivu, _or_ } _Gan ganna_ (“the very cloudy”).
Cuzallu, }
10. Dharbitu, _Abba uddu_ (“the father of light”).
11. Šabahu, _As a-an_ (“abundance of rain”).
12. Addaru, _Se-ki-sil_ (“sowing of seed”).
13. Arakh-makru (“the }
incidental month”), } _Se-dir_ (“dark [month] of sowing”).
--_Records of the Past_, vol. i. p. 166.
[4] As evidence of the antiquity of a fixed calendrical method
of counting the year, and of a method closely resembling, if not
identical with, that used in the latest periods of Babylonian
history, the importance and trustworthiness of these documents can
scarcely be over-rated. They were inscribed on soft clay (which was
afterwards baked either by sun or fire), many of them four thousand
years ago. No correction or erasure can have been made in them since
that date. A translation of one of these tablets as given at p. 75
in the _Guide to the Nimroud Central Saloon_, is here given as an
example of the style of many others.
“No. 3. Tablet and outer case inscribed with a deed of partnership or
brotherhood between Sini-Innanna and Iriba^{m}-Sin.
“Tablet. Ṣini-Innanna and Iriba^{m}-Sin made brotherhood; they
took a judge for the ratification, and went down to the temple of
the sun-god, and he answered the people thus in the temple of the
sun-god: ‘They must give Arda-luštâmar-Šamaš and Antu-lišlimam, the
property of Iraba^{m}-šin, and Ârdu-ibšînan and Antu-am-anna-lamazi,
the property of Ṣini-Innanna.’ He proclaimed [also] in the temple
of the sun-god and the moon-god: ‘Brother shall be kind to brother;
brother shall not be evil towards, shall not injure, brother; and
brother shall not harbour any angry thought as to anything about
which a brother has disputed.’
“They have invoked the name of Innannaki, Utu, Marduk,
Lugal-ki-ušuna, and the name of Ḫammurabi [Kîmta-rapaštu] the king.”
Here follow the names of eight witnesses. The translation of the
inscription on the outer case is much to the same purpose, and need
not here be quoted; the names of nine witnesses are appended to it.
The _Guide_ continues, after some other explanations, as follows:
“The whole of the first paragraph (except a few ideographs) is in
Semitic Babylonian. The invocation is in Akkadian. The list of
‘witnesses,’ again, is in Semitic Babylonian, _and the date in
Akkadian_.... The tablet is dated in the same way as the other
documents of this class: ‘Month Adar of the year when Ḫammurabi the
king made (images of) Innanna and Nanâ.’”
But, further, there are astrological works copied for the library of
Assurbanipal from ancient Babylonian originals. The compilation of many
of these originals is placed by scholars in the reign of Sargon of
Accad,[5] at the remote date of 3,800 B.C.
[5] Sargon I. of Accad was of Semitic race. He was established
as ruler in the city of Accad, and there reigned over a great
non-Semitic race, in ancient cuneiform inscriptions styled the
_Accadai_ (Accadians). This word, as scholars tell us, carried the
meaning of “highlanders,” or “mountaineers.” From this fact it is
inferred they were not indigenous to the low plain surrounding the
city of Accad, to which they gave their name. Their language contains
few words for the productions of the almost tropical climate of
Babylonia, but it shows familiarity with those of higher latitudes.
At the time when Sargon, either by peaceful or warlike arts, was
established as ruler over the Accadians, they were already a very
highly civilized people. They possessed a literature of their own,
which embraced a wide variety of subjects. The learning of the
Accadians was highly esteemed, and translations into the Semitic
language were made of important religious and scientific Accadian
works. These works, down to the latest days of Babylonian power,
were preserved and venerated, and many copies of them were made and
preserved in public libraries in Babylonia and Assyria.
The Accadian after Sargon’s date gradually dropped out of general
use, and became a “learned” language, holding amongst Babylonians and
Assyrians much the same position as Latin and Greek amongst Europeans.
In these ancient astrological works, the same calendar referred to
in the trade documents, and in the late Babylonian almanacs, appears
to obtain. We find in them the same year of twelve lunar months,
reinforced at intervals by a thirteenth intercalated month, and, which
is very important, the order of the months is always the same. Nisan
(Accadian Barzig-gar), everywhere appears as “the first month,” and is
distinctly stated to be “the beginning of the year.”[6]
[6] See _Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archæology_, 1874.
Paper entitled, _The Astronomy and Astrology of the Babylonians_,
Prof. Sayce, p. 258, W.A.I. iii. 60.
As early as the year 1874, Professor Sayce pointed out that there
was good reason for supposing that the twelve Babylonian months
corresponded to the twelve divisions of the Zodiac. At page 161 of his
Paper, _The Astronomy and Astrology of the Babylonians_, we read: “Now
a slight inspection of the calendar will show that the Accadian months
derived their names from the signs of the Zodiac.”
He then proceeds to discuss and compare the meanings of the Accadian
and Semitic month names, and to point out those in which a reference to
the Zodiac might most clearly be traced.
That the constellations of the Zodiac were from a remote age recognized
by the dwellers in Mesopotamia is scarcely to be doubted. We find on
the boundary stones in the British Museum _representations_ of several
of their figures. The Bull, the Tortoise (in lieu of the Crab), a
female figure with wings, the Scorpion, the Archer, and the Goat-fish,
are all portrayed, not only on boundary stones, but also on cylinder
seals and gems.
Again, in the old astrological works, we find _mention_ of the Scorpion
“Gir-tab,” and of the Goat-fish “Muna-xa,” and as planets are said to
“approach to,” and “linger in,” the stars of Gir-tab and of Muna-xa, it
may well be supposed that they were the Zodiacal constellations still
represented under the forms of Scorpion and Goat-fish.
Out of the many star-groups mentioned in the old tablets, only a few
have as yet been certainly identified with their modern equivalents. As
to the identity of others, we may guess. For instance, when it is said
“Mercury[7] lingered in the constellation Gula,” we may guess that Gula
represents Aquarius, which sign in the Epping and Strassmaier tablets
figures as “Gu.”
[7] _Infra_, p. 47, note.
From all these sources of information, we gather that the twelve
divisions of the ecliptic had been mapped out at the time the
astrological works were drawn up, and that some (at least) of these
divisions corresponded exactly to those now represented on celestial
globes.
The suggestion, therefore, put forward by Professor Sayce and other
scholars, that the twelve Accadian months corresponded to the twelve
constellations of the Zodiac, and that we may trace a resemblance
in some instances between the name of the month in the old Accadian
language and the constellation into which the sun at that time of the
year entered, is not in itself improbable.
The following months are those in which this resemblance is very
striking:
1st month, Bar zig-gar (“the sacrifice of righteousness”), Aries.
2nd month, Khar-sidi (“the propitious bull”), Taurus.
3rd month (sometimes called) Kas (“the Twins”), Gemini.
6th month, Ki Gingir-na (“the errand of Istar”), Virgo.
We know from the Epping and Strassmaier tablets as a matter of fact,
that the months and the constellations of the Zodiac _did_ in the
second century, B.C., correspond with each other in order and sequence
as above suggested, and if further research should establish the fact
that they so corresponded in Sargon’s time, then as we find Nisan (Bar
zig-gar) throughout all these ages holding the place of “first month,”
and marking “the beginning of the year,” it will necessarily follow
that the Accadian, Babylonian, and Assyrian calendars dealt with a
_sidereal_ and not a _tropical_ year.
Ours is a _tropical_ year, that is to say, according to the Julian
calendar (afterwards amended by Pope Gregory) it is bound to the
_seasons_, and its months maintain a constant relation to the four
great divisions of the ecliptic, _i.e._ the solstices and the
equinoxes. The winter solstice always falls about the 22nd of December,
the spring equinox about the 21st of March, the summer solstice about
the 21st of June, and the autumnal equinox about the 23rd of September.
But (as has been suggested) the Accadian year was a _sidereal_
year, and its months maintained a constant relation to the twelve
_star-marked_ divisions of the ecliptic, or, as they are called, the
constellations of the Zodiac. Nisan always corresponded (as closely as
a lunar month might) to the time during which the sun traversed the
constellation Aries; Airu to the time during which it traversed the
constellation Taurus; and so on through the twelve months of the year.
The equinoctial points are, however, always, though slowly, changing
their position amongst the twelve constellations of the ecliptic. The
months, therefore, which in 3,800 B.C., and still in the second century
B.C., corresponded to the same star-groups, as above noted, must have
held in different ages very different positions in regard to the four
great divisions or _seasons_ of the year.
We find in the tablets translated by Epping and Strassmaier the year
“_beginning with Nisan, hence in the spring_,” and this seems a more
or less natural season from which to count the year; but when, taking
the precession of the equinoxes into account, we find that the year in
Ḫammurabi’s time (2,200 B.C.) must have commenced one month, and in
Sargon’s time (3,800 B.C.) two months before the spring equinox, we
feel surprised and perplexed to find that the year must then have begun
without any reference to the seasons--the four great and most easily
observed divisions of the ecliptic.
It is difficult to imagine that the astronomers who so skilfully
divided the ecliptic into its twelve parts, and who originated the
wonderful Accadian calendar--a calendar so well thought out that,
as we have seen reason to believe, it resisted all the shocks of
time for nearly four thousand years--it is difficult to imagine that
such astronomers should have taken no note of the four prominent
divisions of the year and of the ecliptic, _i.e._ the solstices and the
equinoxes.
[Illustration: PLATE I.
FIG. 1.
FIG. 2.
The first and last months of the Accadian, sidereal, year, compared
with the months of the Gregorian, tropical, year: at 6,000 B.C. and at
600 A.D.
[_To face p. 13._]
There is, however, a way to account for this anomaly, or, rather, there
is a supposition which, if adopted, will allow these astronomers of old
to have taken note, not only of the _months_, but also of the _seasons_
of the year, when first they drew up their mighty scheme.
Let us suppose that the calendar which, as we may learn from the
astrological tablets, was already in Sargon’s time a well known and
venerated institution, had been originally drawn up at a date much
earlier than Sargon’s, when the first month (Bar zig-gar), was not
the first _spring_ month, but when it was the first _winter_ month
of the year. This date (see Plate I., fig. 1) would have been about
6,000 B.C.; for then the sun entered the constellation Aries at the
_winter solstice_--a season equally well, if not better suited than
the spring equinox to hold the first place in the calendar.[8] Under
this supposition, it would no longer be difficult to imagine why the
ancient Accadian astronomers should have chosen Aries as the first
constellation of the Zodiac, and Nisan (Bar zig-gar) as the first
month, and the “beginning of the year.”
[8] After this paper had appeared in the _Proceedings of the Society
of Biblical Archæology_, a corroboration of this opinion occurred to
the writer’s mind, suggested by a further study of the month names in
the Accadian calendar. It is as follows:--
The twelfth month is named “sowing of seed.” Seed may be and is,
sown in many latitudes in _spring_, and also in _winter_ time.
“Sowing of seed” might therefore describe a month at the ending of
an equinoctial or of a solstitial year: but the thirteenth (_i.e._
the occasionally intercalated) month is named that of “dark sowing.”
This epithet _dark_, added to the “sowing” of the twelfth month, very
plainly points to a solstitial or midwinter ending of the year.
The thirteenth month in a luni-solar year, whose beginning should be
bound to the vernal equinox, must always cover some of the concluding
days of March and some of the first days of April; and those days
are certainly much _lighter, not darker_ than those of the preceding
month, covering parts of February and March, whereas, the thirteenth
intercalary month in a luni-solar year, whose beginning should be
bound to the winter solstice, must always cover the concluding days
of December and those at the beginning of January; and might well be
distinguished by the epithet _dark_, not only from the days of the
preceding month, but indeed from those of any other month of the year
(see Plate I., figs. 1, 2.)
It is of interest here to note that this insistence in Accadian
month nomenclature on the darkness of the thirteenth month, tends to
confirm the already formed opinion of scholars, that the Accadians
were not indigenous to Babylonia, but had descended into it from more
northern latitudes, where darkness is a more marked concomitant of
winter than in the nearly tropical latitude of Babylonia.
Nor need we throw discredit on the early calendar makers 6,000 B.C.,
if we take for granted that they were not acquainted with the fact that
slowly but inevitably the seasons must change their position amongst
the stars, and that, not knowing this, they believed that in making
the _beginning of the year_ dependent on the sun’s entry into the
_constellation Aries_, they were also binding it to the _season of the
winter solstice_.
As centuries rolled by, however, and slowly the stars of Aries receded
from the winter solstice, Bar zig-gar was no longer the first month in
the sense of being the first winter month. Still, the authority of the
originators of the calendar held sway; provision had been only made for
counting the year as a sidereal year; and Bar zig-gar, or the month
in which the sun entered Aries, was still called the first month, and
looked on as the beginning of the year.
To carry out the reformation of any long established calendar is, we
know, not a trifling undertaking. Even on secular grounds, any proposed
reform encounters strong opposition. But the calendar in Babylonia was
not only a civil, it was also a religious, institution. Its origin
was attributed to the Creator, and as the work of the Creator, it is
described in one of the old Babylonian tablets.[9]
[9] _Records of the Past._ New series. Vol. i. p. 145.
“For each of the twelve months HE fixed three stars” (or groups of
stars). “From the day when the year issues forth to the close.”[10]
[10] In modern works we find the terms “useless,” “fanciful,” and
“inconvenient,” applied to the Zodiac and its constellations; and for
regulating a tropical year the constellations _are_ “useless” and
“inconvenient,” but the theory that the reckoning of the year and all
its religious festivals depended on the observance of the Zodiacal
star-groups, would help to account for the widely spread veneration
in which they were held throughout so many ages and by so many
nations.
The astronomical and astrological texts drawn up for Sargon of Accad
are entitled “The Illumination of Bel,”[11] and still as late as the
second century B.C., all Babylonian almanacs bore the heading: “At the
command of my Lord Bel and my Lady Beltis, a decree.”[12] Thus it was,
we may suppose, that under the protection of the gods the Accadian
calendar continued unchanged throughout all the changing ages.
[11] _Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archæology_, 1874, pp.
150, 151.
[12] Epping and Strassmaier, _Astronomisches aus Babylon_, p. 161.
(_Auf Geheiss von Bel und Beltis meiner Herrin, eine Entscheidung._)
But during all the ages the winter solstice moved on steadily through
almost a quarter of the great circle of the ecliptic,[13] and in the
second century B.C., the _spring equinox_ was not far from the same
point of the star-marked ecliptic where the _winter solstice_ had been
when first the calendar-makers had “fixed” the constellations “for the
twelve months from the day when the year issues forth to the close,”
and we who now read the almanacs drawn up at that late period of
Babylonian history are not (as has been said above) surprised to find
the year “_beginning with Nisan, hence in the spring_.” (See Plate I.,
fig. 2.)
[13] This moving of the equinoctial point through a _quarter_ of the
great circle may perhaps explain the tradition to which Syncellus
twice alludes, once when he states that Eusebius was aware of the
Greek opinion that many ages, or rather myriads of years had passed
since the creation of the world, _during the mythical retrograde
movement of the Zodiac, from the beginning of Aries, and its return
again to the same point_ (_Chronographia_, p. 17.)
And again at p. 52, he refers to “the return of the Zodiac to its
original position, according to the stories of the Greeks and
Egyptians, that is to say, the revolution from one point back again
to the same point, which is the first minute of the first division
of the equinoctial sign of the Zodiac, which is called κριος (Aries)
by them, as has been stated in the _Genica_ of Hermes and in the
Cyrannid books.”
He goes on to say that this is the ground of the chronological
division of Claudius Ptolemy.
Jean Silvain Bailly, speaking of the Indian Zodiac, the beginning of
which is placed by the Brahmins at the first point of Aries, suggests
that a similar tradition may have prevailed amongst the Indians and
other ancient nations to account for the pre-eminence so generally
accorded to Aries. He says:
“Mais pourquoi ont-ils choisi cette constellation pour la première?
Il est évident que c’est une affaire de préjugé et de superstition;
le choix du premier point dans un cercle est arbitraire. Ils auront
été décidés par quelque ancienne tradition, telle par example que
celle que Muradi rapporte d’après Albumassar et deux anciens livres
égyptiens, où on lisoit que le monde avoit été renouvellé après le
déluge lorsque le soleil étoit au 1° du bélier, régulus étant dans
le colure des solstices. D’Herbelot ne parle point de régulus; mais
il dit que selon Albumassar les sept planètes étoient en conjonction
au premier point du bélier lors de la création du monde. Cette
tradition, sans doute fabuleuse, qui venoit des mêmes préjugés que
celle de Bérose, étoit asiatique. Elle a pu suffire, ou telle autre
du même genre, pour fonder la préférence que les brames, ou les
anciens en général, ont donnée à la constellation du bélier, en
l’établissant la première de leur zodiaque. Ils ont cru que ce point
du zodiaque étoit une source de renouvellement, et ils ont dit que
le zodiaque et l’année se renouvelloient au même point où le monde
s’étoit régénéré.” (Bailly, _Histoire de l’Astronomie Ancienne_, pp.
482, 483.)
The propositions contained in this Paper are these:--
I. The Accadian year was counted as a sidereal year.
II. The Accadian calendar was first thought out and originated at a
date not later than 6,000 B.C.
The first proposition is founded on the opinion, long ago expressed
by many Oriental scholars, that the Accadian months corresponded in
very early ages with the constellations of the Zodiac, Nisan--the
month during which the sun was in conjunction with the constellation
Aries--holding the first place then, as also in the latest times of
Babylonian history, and, presumably, through the intervening period.
But even if the first proposition is granted, the second, it must be
confessed, is only an opinion based on the unlikelihood that the old
Accadian and sidereal year, otherwise so skilfully dealt with in the
calendar, should have begun, in what would appear to be a haphazard
manner, at no definite season of the year.
It may seem that too much weight has been attached in this Paper to
what can only be called a guess; but where there is so much that we
desire to know, and so little as yet absolutely known of the early
history of astronomy, the temptation to make such guesses is great.
It is to their earliest heroes and to their gods that the ancient
heathen nations attributed the invention of astronomy, and amongst the
Jews also, according to Josephus, the children of Seth were looked
upon as being the first teachers of the science.[14]
[14] _Antiquitates Judaicæ_, I. 2, § 3.
Modern astronomers often speak in general terms of their science as
having existed in a “hoar antiquity,” and in “prehistoric times.” But
questions as to when, and where it took its rise, are still unanswered.
During the last hundred years these questions have been keenly
discussed. Babylon, Egypt, Greece, India, and China, have each been
claimed as “the cradle” of the science. Some few writers (and prominent
amongst them Jean Silvain Bailly, a brilliant scholar and an eminent
astronomer) have contended for the view that not by any one nation were
the chief advances in astronomy made, but that before the great races
of mankind separated from the parent stock, and spread themselves over
the globe, the phenomena of astronomy had been closely observed, and
scientific methods for measuring time had been adopted. Bailly speaks
of “une astronomie perfectionnée,” of which only “les débris” are to be
met with in possession of the civilized races of antiquity. He claims
an antediluvian race as the originators of astronomic science.
It may seem a bold suggestion to place the formation of the calendar
at a date so high as 6,000 B.C., a date exceeding as it does by 2,000
years that given to us in the margin of our Bibles for the story of the
fall of man and his expulsion from Eden. It was in following Archbishop
Usher’s calculations that the date of 4,004 was adopted and placed,
where it still remains, in our English Bibles. But the difficulty of
determining the early dates of Bible history has always been felt to be
very great, and “it is quite possible to believe that Genesis gives us
no certain data for pronouncing on the time of man’s existence on the
earth.”[15] Scholars, in basing their calculations on the authority of
Scripture, have arrived at very different conclusions. Some only demand
3,616, others 6,984 years, as required from Scriptural sources for “the
years of the world to the birth of Christ.”[16]
[15] Introduction to the Pentateuch, by E. Harold Browne, D.D.,
Bishop of Ely. Holy Bible, with Commentary, edited by F. C. Cook,
M.A., Canon of Exeter.
[16] The following extracts are taken from the Preface to _An
Universal History from the Earliest Account of Time to the Present:
Compiled from Original Authors [Etc.]. Dublin: Printed by Edward Bate
for the Editors: M,DCC,XLIV._
They are interesting as showing that even before archæological
research had extended the limits of ancient history, as it has done
during the last fifty years, many biblical scholars assigned a far
higher date than Archbishop Usher’s 4,004 years for the history of
Adam’s race on earth.
P. lxv. _et seq._: “So that on a strict view and due examination
of the antiquities of nations, and the records that have been left
us, those of the Jews, exclusive of their divine authority, will
evidently appear to be the most certain and authentick.... However
it must be confessed that there is no certain uniformity in the
Jewish computation, and that the several copies of their records,
_viz._, the Hebrew, Samaritan Pentateuch, and Septuagint differ
very much from one another.... This variety of computations hath
left room for Chronologers to enlarge or contract the space of time
betwixt the flood and the birth of Christ, by adhering to one copy
rather than another; or by rejecting or retaining the whole numbers,
or the particulars, just as it suited their humour of making the
Sacred History agree with the Prophane; or otherwise of reducing the
Prophane to the Sacred, and as the disagreement among the heathen
writers is great also, and every author hath followed the historian
he liked best, hence a wide difference hath arisen amongst modern
Chronologers as appears by the various computations ... which we here
give as collected by Strauchius, Chevreau, and others. It would be
endless as well as unnecessary here to examine into the particular
causes of this great difference amongst authors, every one still
pretending to ground his system on the authority of the Scripture.
A Table of the years of the world to the birth of Christ, according
to the computations of several chronologers.
Alphonsus, King of Castile, in Muller’s Tables 6,984
The same, in Strauchius 6,484 9 months
Onuphrius Panvinius 6,310
Suidas 6,000
Lactantius, Philastrius 5,801
Nicephorus 5,700
Clemens Alexandrinus 5,624
The author of the Fasti Siculi 5,608 9 months
Isaac Vossius, and the Greeks 5,598
Etc. etc.” „
It will be seen that the earlier of these dates leads us back to an
even more remote age than that in which, if the theory here proposed is
a true one, the marvellous achievement of the formation of a scientific
sidereal calendar was accomplished.
To attribute to the dwellers in Eden or to their immediate descendants
intellectual gifts that should enable them to perfect so grand a
scheme, does certainly not contradict the story of the fall, but
rather may open up for us fresh lines of thought, when we read of that
transgression in which the pride of intellect played so important a
part.
II
THE CONSTELLATION ARIES
[Reprinted from the _Proceedings of the Society of Biblical
Archæology_, _March 1893_]
In the January number of the _Proceedings of the Society of Biblical
Archæology_ for last year, under the title _The Accadian Calendar_, two
propositions were advanced:--
I. The Accadian year was counted as a sidereal year.
II. The Accadian calendar was first thought out and originated at a
date not later than 6,000 B.C.
The fact that the sun’s entry into the constellation Aries appears to
have marked through many millenniums the beginning of the Accadian
year, was cited in support of the first proposition, and the fact that
the sun’s entry into Aries coincided about 6,000 B.C. with the winter
solstice, was relied on to support the probability of the second
proposition, namely, that at the above date the calendar, which so
honoured the inconspicuous constellation Aries, was first drawn up.
If we now find this inconspicuous part of the heavens equally honoured
by several nations in very ancient times, we shall be led to think
either that these nations, independently of each other, happened to
observe and mark out the sun’s annual course through the heavens at
exactly the same date, and therefore chose the same point as marking
the winter solstice; or we must suppose that they derived their
calendar and knowledge of the Zodiac from observations originally made
by some _one_ civilized race.
The Brahmins of India claim a high antiquity for the science of
astronomy in their country, and their observations and calculations
profess to date back to the fourth millennium B.C. The names of the
Indian constellations are preserved to us in the Sanscrit language, and
these names are, so to speak, identical with those that we use at the
present day when we speak of the figures of the Zodiac. Many scholars
of to-day believe that only after Alexander’s conquests in India did
the knowledge of the twelve-fold division of the Zodiac penetrate into
that country. Some, on the other hand, maintain the opposite opinion,
namely, “that the names of the signs can be proved to have existed in
India at as early a period as in any other country.”[17]
[17] V. p. 90.
Jean Silvain Bailly, whose opinions as to the antiquity of the science
of astronomy have been already quoted in the foregoing Paper, in his
work on the history of ancient astronomy, speaking of the Brahmins of
India, the initial point of whose Zodiac is at the first star in the
constellation Aries, writes as follows:[18]--
“Mais pourquoi ont-ils choisi cette constellation pour la première?
Il est évident que c’est une affaire de préjugé et de superstition;
le choix du premier point dans un cercle est arbitraire. Ils auront
été décidés par quelque ancienne tradition.”
[18] The initial point of the Hindu Zodiac (see Plate III.) is about
9½ degrees to the west of the boundary line of the constellation
Aries, as it is drawn on our celestial globes. One foot of Aries,
however, extends beyond the boundary line, and touches a line drawn
through the initial point of the Hindu Zodiac and the poles of the
ecliptic. At page 132, the question of the date of the fixation of
this initial point is discussed, and a high antiquity for it is
claimed. There are many considerations which may lead us to the
opinion that not only in India, but amongst the ancients generally,
the first degree of the constellation coincided with the Hindu
initial point, and not with the boundary line of the constellation,
as it is now drawn. Greek and Latin authors, writing in the first
century B.C., speak of the solstitial and equinoctial colures, as
being “at the eighth degree of the Zodiac,” and these statements,
which have caused modern commentators much perplexity (see _Handbuch
der Klassischen Alterthumswissenschaft_; _Zeitrechnung der Griechen
und Römer_, Unger), may be easily explained, if we realize that they,
in all likelihood, counted the degrees of the Zodiac from the same
initial point as that in use amongst Hindu astronomers, which in the
first century B.C. was eight degrees to the west of the equinoctial
point.
Dupuis, writing at nearly the same date as Bailly, about a hundred
years ago, and in conflict with him on many points relating to the
Zodiac, was also struck by the choice of this same inconspicuous
point in the great circle of the ecliptic, not only by the Brahmins
of India, but also by other ancient nations. He further explains that
the difference in the choice of initial point by the Chinese, and by
the other nations, is only an apparent, and not a real difference. On
the wonderful agreement shown by so many nations, in their choice of
the stars by which they marked the beginning of their Zodiacs, Dupuis
relied to support his views concerning the unity of the astronomical
and religious myths of all nations.
At the end of his work, _Mémoire Explicatif du Zodiaque_, Dupuis gives
in a diagram several Zodiacs in concentric circles; some divided into
twelve, some into twenty-seven or twenty-eight parts. He represents
the colures by a cross which quarters these concentric Zodiacs, and
speaking of the twenty-seven- and twenty-eight-fold divisions, he
observes as follows:
“On remarque d’abord, que ces divers systèmes lunaires, tirés de
l’Astronomie de différens peuples, s’accordent tous à placer dans
les cases correspondantes à-peu-près les mêmes étoiles. Il suffit,
pour s’en assurer, de comparer les étoiles designées dans la même
case de la division de chaque peuple. On remarque aussi qu’ils ont
pris tous, excepté les Chinois, les mêmes étoiles, pour point initial
de la division, savoir, celles de la tête du Bélier. Les Chinois,
au contraire, ont fixé le point initial dans la partie du ciel
diamétralement opposée, vers les pieds de la Vierge et près l’Epi”
(p. 4).
Dupuis’ arguments, drawn from the choice by several nations of the
first division of Aries as the initial point of the Zodiac and year,
are of equal cogency in support of a calendar such as he suggests,
drawn up more than 12,000 B.C., for a year beginning at the _autumn
equinox_; or for a calendar, as suggested in this Paper, drawn up about
6,000 B.C., and dealing with a year beginning at the _winter solstice_;
and it may be claimed that the facts brought to light by the study of
the ancient Accadian calendar, while greatly strengthening the ground
for Dupuis’ opinion concerning the early acceptance by many nations
of the stars of Aries as a mark for the beginning of the year in
prehistoric times, seem more in favour of the first month of that year
having been counted from the _winter solstice_ than from the _autumn
equinox_.
Quotations from authors like Bailly and Dupuis may seem nowadays
somewhat out of date; for though they were amongst the foremost
scholars of their time, they were necessarily ignorant of all the
archæological discoveries that have succeeded each other with such
rapidity during the last century. Unless, therefore, the brilliant
guesses and astronomical speculations of these writers can find
confirmation in the results of modern researches, their theories may
well be disregarded. But it seems to me that many of their theories
are meeting with such confirmation.
Turning first to some of the facts which archæology has taught us
regarding the ancient Egyptians, it will be interesting to see if there
are any indications in their astronomy or mythology of honour paid to
the constellation Aries in connexion with the progress of the sun and
moon through the figures of the Zodiac.
It is true that the acquaintance of the ancient Egyptians with these
figures is a matter still in dispute, and the various methods of
counting the year followed by them also present great difficulties to
scholars. It is, however, admitted that they were a people much given
to the observation and worship of the heavenly bodies, and that their
astronomy and mythology were very closely interwoven with each other.
In the time of the Middle Empire, it seems, the months in the civil
year were not counted as lunar months, but as months of thirty days
each. The year was not counted as a sidereal year, but as one of
three hundred and sixty days--twelve months of thirty days--with five
days added at the end of each year to bring up the number to three
hundred and sixty-five days. No attention was paid to the odd hours and
minutes over and above the three hundred and sixty-five days, which are
occupied by the sun in completing his annual course.
Mr Griffiths has remarked in the number of the _Proceedings of the
Society of Biblical Archæology_ for March 1892, that the hieroglyph
for month points to an _originally_ lunar month, and I would suggest
that the star under the first crescent seems to point also to a month
originally counted sidereally, _i.e._, dependent upon the conjunction
of the sun and moon in some particular star-group of the ecliptic. As
a matter of fact, the Egyptians made use not only of a civil year such
as has been above described, but also of a sidereal year, counted from
the heliacal rising of Sirius, and it is perhaps possible that the
months in this sidereal year were counted as lunar months, and the year
treated as soli-lunar and sidereal.
In these two Egyptian _calendars_--so far as they are at present
understood--no reference to the constellation Aries seems to be
discernible. The agricultural importance of the season of the summer
solstice in Egypt, coinciding as it does with the rising of the Nile,
may have induced calendar-makers at some very early date to re-arrange
the order of the year, so as to make it begin at the _summer_ rather
than the _winter_ solstice--the season, as it is contended in these
Papers, originally chosen 6,000 B.C. by astronomers in a more northern
latitude than that of Egypt as the starting-point of a year sidereally
marked by the conjunction of the sun with the constellation Aries.
But if we turn to the Egyptian _mythology_, the importance of the Ram,
or rather of the head of the Ram, as it is revealed in the monuments,
and in the pictorial art of the ancient Egyptians, must continually
strike the student of Egyptian symbolism.
Amen, the great god of the Theban triad (Amen, Maut, and Chons), is
sometimes represented as ram-headed--his boat and his sceptre are
always adorned with a ram’s head, and the great temple to him, in
conjunction with the sun, _i.e._ to Amen-Ra, is approached through an
avenue of gigantic ram-headed sphinxes, and this is also the case as
regards the temple of Chons--the moon-god--at right angles, and in
close proximity, to the great temple of Amen-Ra.
Scholars tell us that Horus, Isis, and Osiris,--the Memphian
triad--symbolized the _diurnal_ motion of the sun and other heavenly
bodies, and it need not appear improbable that the great Theban triad,
Amen, Maut, and Chons, should have originally symbolized the _annual_
course of those same bodies through the constellations of the Zodiac.
This would account for the prominence of the Ram in connexion with
the worship of this triad--the Ram, which, as I have argued, in many
countries, and possibly in Egypt also, marked the first division of the
Zodiac and year.
A prayer to Amen is translated by G. Maspero in the April number for
1891 of the _Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archæology_;[19]
from this translation it would appear that Amen is implored to bring
the calendar into touch with the real seasons of the year. If Amen
represented a sidereally marked point in the yearly course of the
sun, such a prayer might suitably have been addressed to him by the
Egyptians.
[19] “Il ne me reste plus qu’à donner la traduction suivie du texte
(Papyrus Anastasi, iv., p. 10. L 1-5), dont je viens d’expliquer le
sens et le développement littéraire.
“Viens à moi, Amon, me délivrer de l’année fâcheuse, où le dieu Shou
(Shou était, à l’époque des Ramessides et plus tard, le dieu du
soleil solstitial, du soleil d’été, comme Brugsch l’a montré fort
ingénieusement) ne se lève plus, où vient l’hiver où était l’été,
où les mois s’en vont hors leur place, où les heures se brouillent,
où les grands t’appellent, ô Amon, où les petits te cherchent, où
ceux même qui sont encore dans les bras de leur nourrice, ceux-là
(crient): ‘Donne les souffles!’--Amon trouve Amon écoute, Amon est le
sain devant qui marchent les souffles agréables; il me donne d’être
comme l’aile du vautour, comme la palette chargée des discours des
Esprits pour les bergers dans les champs, pour les laveurs sur la
berge, pour les garde-chasse qui sortent au territoire des gazelles
afin de lacer (le gibier).”
M. Maspero states that the latter lines of the text are injured and
difficult to decipher or to understand.
The great temple to Amen-Ra at Thebes, approached, as has been stated
above, through an avenue of ram-headed sphinxes, is oriented to the
setting sun of the season so important to Egyptians, that of the
summer solstice, and this fact strengthens the opinion that Amen was
considered to be a god in some way presiding over the course of the
year and its right measurement. It is true that this orientation of
his temple precluded the possibility of the light from any star of
the constellation Aries ever shining into the shrine of the god; but
it is perhaps possible that the ceremony of “the great feast-day
of Amon Father,” described by Ebers, may have been devised by the
votaries of Amen as a means whereby they could honour the god, as one
presiding over the most propitious season of the year, and also recall
the sidereal connexion of the god of the year with the, from times
immemorial highly reverenced, constellation Aries.
At pp. 277 and 278 of _Egypt, Descriptive, Historical, and
Picturesque_, vol. ii., Ebers, having referred to some figures
represented on the walls of a Memnonium in the Nekropolis erected by
Rameses II., exactly opposite to the Great Temple of Karnak, observes:--
“Of these figures the inscription says:--‘As they approach the king
their arms are filled with choice produce and stores, and all the
good things that the earth brings forth are gathered by them to add
to the joy on the great feast-day of Amon, the father.’”
“These words refer to the great ‘feast of the Valley’ (_heb en-ant_),
when, on the 29th day of the second month of the inundation, the
statue of Amon was brought forth from the sanctuary with much
magnificence and solemnity, and conveyed across the Nile to the
Nekropolis, that the god might there offer sacrifices to his
ancestors in the other world. The priests of the house of Seti
received the procession with the splendid bark Sam, the most sacred
of all the vessels that were preserved in the temple of Karnak:
in this the statue of the god was placed, and borne first to the
Memnonium of Seti, and then round about the Nekropolis, preceded
by a crowd of temple servants, who strewed the way with sand. The
solemnities ended with a grand nocturnal spectacle, on the great
sacred lake of which traces may still be seen to the extreme south of
the Nekropolis.
“The Egyptian religion prescribed to all its followers that they
should visit the tombs of their dead and bring offerings, in grateful
remembrance of their parents and forefathers; and as, day after day,
millions of suns had gone to rest--as men do--behind the realm of
tombs in the Libyan hills, the god himself was brought to do honour
to his departed ancestry, and to sacrifice to them.”
The rising of the Nile in Egypt coincides very closely with the season
of the _summer solstice_. At the date of Rameses II.--a date not yet
unanimously agreed on by scholars, but which may be safely placed
between 1,400 and 1,100 B.C.--the sun at the season of the _summer
solstice_ was in the constellation Cancer (see Plate II.), and two
months later its place in the ecliptic was a few degrees to the west of
a point exactly opposed to the first stars of Aries and to the initial
point of the Indian Zodiac. On the evening, therefore, of the 29th day
of the second month of the inundation, when the sun had now sunk behind
the Libyan hills, and daylight had faded sufficiently to allow them to
show their light,[20] the first stars of Aries rose above the eastern
horizon, and at midnight attained to the southern meridian.
[20] When the sun is about 7° below the western horizon, stars in the
opposite quarter of the heavens begin to be visible.
[Illustration: PLATE II.
Relating to “the Feast-day of Amon, the Father.”
Position of sun on first of fixed Thoth varied by about one degree in
two hundred years.
[_To face p. 36._]
Thus at the season of all the year, when Aries specially dominated the
ecliptic, the statue of the god Amen was, as we learn, brought out of
his dark temple shrine and carried in procession to the Nekropolis,
from whence the constellation Aries--not hidden by obstructing walls
and columns--was fully visible; and there honour was done and sacrifice
offered to “Amon Father.”
But it may be said that we should understand “the second month of the
inundation” to refer to the second month of the Egyptian sidereal
year counted from the 1st Thoth (fixed) and marked by the heliacal
rising of Sirius. At the date of Rameses the beginning of this sidereal
year fell, as may be proved, a fortnight after the _summer solstice_
(see Plate II.), and still on the 29th of the second month of this
sidereal year the stars of Aries might be seen rising in the east--no
longer only its first stars, but nearly the whole constellation then
becoming visible--and at about midnight its brightest stars, α and β
Arietis, culminated on the meridian. Whether, therefore, the “Feast
of the Valley” was held at the end of the second month of the actual
inundation, or of the second month of the sidereal year, the stars of
Aries presided over its “nocturnal” solemnities.
Some scholars claim, however, that all Egyptian festivals were swept
round through the seasons, and the stars that marked those seasons, in
the course of fourteen or fifteen hundred years, inasmuch as they were
firmly bound to the _vague_ calendrical year of 365 days. If this was
indeed so, it would be difficult to imagine that Seti I. or Rameses
II. could have established the festival in question as in any way
connected with honour to be paid to the constellation Aries; for though
during the reign of Seti, and perhaps during the early part of that of
Rameses, the vague and fixed years coincided more or less closely (see
Plate II.), yet before the death of Rameses they were already so far
apart that the 1st Thoth (vague) fell, not a fortnight later than the
summer solstice, but about a fortnight earlier; and therefore on the
29th day of the second month of the vague year the stars of Aries would
not have risen until long after sunset, nor would any one of them have
culminated on the meridian at midnight.
If now we turn our attention of the temple of Amen-Ra at Aboo Simbel,
we may observe that, unlike that to the same god at Karnak, it is not
oriented to any definite _season_ of the year. The rising sun shines
into it now, and must always have shone into the Holy of Holies of that
rock-hewn temple on the morning of a day somewhat more than two months
distant from the winter solstice, and somewhat less than a month
before the season of the spring equinox, namely, on the morning of the
26th February (Gregorian).[21]
[21] “I was fortunate in seeing another wonderful thing during my
visit to Aboo Simbel. The great temple is dedicated to Amen-Ra, the
sun-god, and on two days in the year the sun is said to rise at such
a point that it sends a beam of light through both halls till it
falls on the shrine itself in the very Holy of Holies. Many theories
are based on the orientation of the temples, and Captain Johnston
wished to find on which day in the spring of the year the phenomenon
took place; so he took his instruments, and we all went up to the
temple before dawn. It was the 26th February. The great hall, with
its eight Osiride pillars, was wrapped in semi-darkness. Still darker
were the inner hall and shrine. Behind the altar sat the four gods,
Amen, Horus, Ptah, and Rameses himself, now deified. All the East was
a deep rosy flush; then that paled, and a hard white light filled the
sky. Clearer and whiter it grew, till, with a sudden joyous rush, the
sun swung up over the low ridge of hill, and in an instant, like an
arrow from the bow of Phœbus Apollo, one level shaft of light pierced
the great hall and fell in living glory straight upon the shrine
itself.”--A. F. [Extract from the _Pall Mall Gazette_, 20th April,
1892.]
The sun now (1893 A.D.) is, at the season named, in the constellation
Aquarius; but if we calculate back to a date anywhere between 1,400
and 1,100 B.C., we shall find (see Plate III.) that when Rameses II.
dedicated this temple to Amen-Ra, the sun when it penetrated into the
shrine of the temple at Aboo Simbel was in conjunction with the first
stars of the constellation _Aries_, and this fact must, it would seem,
encourage us to adopt the opinion put forward above concerning the
desire of Rameses II. to honour that constellation in connexion with
the god Amen.
[Illustration: PLATE III.
Relating to the Orientation of a Temple to Amon-Ra.
[_To face p. 40._]
It would seem then that there are indications in the mythology and
in the history of the Egyptians, of honour paid to the constellation
Aries, and as we further study the records of antiquity, now within our
reach, it will, I believe, become evident that not only the Egyptians,
but also all the great civilized nations of the East, had traditions
of a year beginning when the sun and moon entered the constellation
Aries--such a year as that in use amongst the Babylonians during their
long existence as a nation, and such as that which is used by the
Hindus in India to this present day.
If we allow weight to these considerations, it will be difficult to
think that such a method of reckoning the year--involving, as it did,
the recognition of the ecliptic star-groups under the fanciful figures
of the Zodiac--should have been arrived at by each of these nations
independently. Whether one nation borrowed these ideas from another,
or whether some “earlier race of men” bequeathed this knowledge to
their many descendants, is still an open question. Scholars have not
unanimously awarded the palm of seniority in civilization to any one
nation, and we are not at variance with proved facts, if we elect to
adopt the theory of a common stock, from which the divergent races
sprang. If, then, it should appear that these races possessed and
incorporated into their mythologies a knowledge of the Zodiac, and of
the first degree of Aries as its initial point, their separation from
the parent stock must have been subsequent to the formation of the
scheme that dealt with a calendar based on an observation of the colure
of the winter solstice at that point, and under this supposition the
date of 6,000 B.C. becomes a foothold for the chronology of ancient
history. We should also be led to think of the common ancestors of the
civilized races not as ignorant barbarians, but rather as men graced
with high intellectual gifts--men whose teachings have been handed
down through all the ages to this present day, and of whose imaginings
the Zodiac remains as the most ancient monument of the work of
intelligent man.
III
[Illustration] (_GU_), ELEVENTH CONSTELLATION OF THE ZODIAC
[Reprinted from the _Proceedings of the Society of Biblical
Archæology, February 1896_]
In the astronomical tablets (of the 1st and 2nd cent. B.C.) translated
by Epping and Strassmaier, the twelve constellations of the Babylonian
Zodiac are constantly referred to. Their names appear under very
abbreviated forms in the tablets, and are as follows:[22]--
1. [Illustration: cuneiform] (_ku_(_sarikku_)) = aries.
2. [Illustration: cuneiform] (_te_(_mennu_)) = taurus.
3. [Illustration: cuneiform] (_mašu_) = gemini.
4. [Illustration: cuneiform] (_pulukku_) = cancer.
5. [Illustration: cuneiform] (_arū_) = leo.
6. [Illustration: cuneiform] (_serû_) = virgo.
7. [Illustration: cuneiform] (_zibanîtu_) = libra.
8. [Illustration: cuneiform] (_aqrabu_) = scorpio.
9. [Illustration: cuneiform] (_pa_) = arcitenens.
10. [Illustration: cuneiform] (_enzu_) = caper.
11. [Illustration: cuneiform] (_gu_) = amphora [aquarius].
12. [Illustration: cuneiform] (_zib_) = pisces.
[22] _Zeitschrift für Assyriologie_, v Band, 4 Heft, Oct. 1890, p.
351.
Also in Epping and Strassmaier’s work, _Astronomisches aus Babylon_,
under the heading _Die Zeichen des Thierkreises_, pp. 170, 171, and
_Namen der Sterne_, pp. 174, 175, the twelve abbreviations met with in
the tablets are discussed at some length.
From a study of the list here given and of the passages referred to,
we learn that it has been found possible to suggest for some of the
abbreviations suitable terminations, and in the completed words thus
obtained, the familiar constellations of the Zodiac, as we know them,
are easily to be recognized.
As regards other of the abbreviations, and amongst them that of
[Illustration] (Gu) for the eleventh sign (Amphora or Aquarius), no
termination has been suggested; and of it Strassmaier thus writes:[23]
p. 171:--“Gu ist sonst fast ausschliesslich nur als Silbenzeichen
gu bekannt”; and Jensen, discussing Epping and Strassmaier’s
constellation list, writes thus of the abbreviation Gu for the eleventh
constellation:[24] “Ob Gu einen ‘Wassereimer,’ ‘Schöpfeimer,’
bezeichnen kann, weiss ich nicht. Die bisher veröffentlichten Texte
geben keinen Aufschluss darüber.”
[23] _Astronomisches aus Babylon._
[24] _Kosmologie der Babylonier_, p. 314.
As a probable completion for the abbreviation Gu, the following
suggestion is here put forward:--
In the ancient astrological tablets translated by Professor Sayce
in his Paper, _The Astronomy and Astrology of the Babylonians_,[25]
pp. 189, 190, “the star of Gula” is mentioned. The first syllable of
this word is composed of the same cuneiform group as that used in
the abbreviation for the eleventh constellation of the Zodiac in the
astronomical tablets of the first and second centuries B.C. above
referred to. But this fact, if it stood alone, would not be enough
to do more than point to a possible identification of Gu in the late
tablets with Gula in the ancient astrological works. Amongst the many
constellations in the heavens the name of more than one might have
begun with the syllable Gu.
[25] _Transactions, Biblical Archæology_, vol. iii., February 1874.
We find, however, at a later page (206) of Professor Sayce’s Paper,
this sentence translated from W.A.I., III. 57, 1:--
“Jupiter[26] in the star of Gula lingers.” None of the five planets
known to the Babylonians could ever with truth have been described
as appearing or “lingering” in any part of the heavens outside the
band of the Zodiac stars. “The star (or constellation) of Gula,” we
must therefore assume, was a Zodiacal star or constellation. This
restriction of the position of the “star of Gula” renders it scarcely
a rash conclusion to arrive at, that the _Zodiacal_ Gu of the later
tablets is an abbreviation for the _Zodiacal_ Gula of the ancient
astrological works.
[26] Or, rather, “Mercury.” See Epping and Strassmaier,
_Astronomisches aus Babylon_, p. 112 _et seq._
As to a mythological reason for the choice of the goddess Gula to
preside over the constellation known to us as Aquarius, we find it in
the fact that Gula appears as another name for the goddess Bau[27] and
Bau (or Bahu) was a personification of _the dark water_, or chaos.
[27] Maspero, _Dawn of Civilization_, p. 672, notes 1, 2.
If we adopt this identification of the star or constellation Gula with
the constellation, or some star in the constellation, Aquarius, it will
throw light on many of the inscriptions found on statues and other
monuments at Telloh (the modern name of the mound which covers the
ruins of the ancient city of Lagash),
We find from these inscriptions that the deities especially worshipped
at Lagash were not the same as those who held the foremost places
contemporaneously in the Accadian, and at a later time in the
Babylonian Pantheon. Ningirsu and “his beloved consort,” the goddess
Bau, received in Lagash the highest honours. On one of the statues of
Gudea, “the priestly governor of Lagash,” this inscription occurs:[28]--
“To Ningirsu, the powerful warrior of Ellilla [this is dedicated] by
Gudea, priestly governor of Lagash, who has constructed the temple of
Eninnu, consecrated to Ningirsu.
“For Ningirsu, his lord, he has built the temple of Ekhud, the tower
in stages, from the summit of which Ningirsu grants him a happy lot.
“Besides the offerings which Gudea made of his free will to Ningirsu
and to the goddess Bau, daughter of Anna, his beloved consort, he has
made others to his god Ningiszida.
“That year he had a block of rare stone brought from the country of
Magan; he had it carved into a statue of himself.
“On the day of the beginning of the year, the day of the festival of
Bau, on which offerings were made: one calf, one fat sheep, three
lambs, six full grown sheep, two rams, seven _pat_ of dates, seven
_sab_ of cream, seven palm buds.
“Such were the offerings made to the goddess Bau in the ancient
temple on that day.”
[28] Evetts, _New Light on the Bible_, p. 162.
Ningirsu, the god--so highly exalted in this and in other inscriptions
found in the mounds of Telloh--has been identified with the god
Ninib[29] of the Babylonians. Much difference of opinion prevails as to
what astronomical ideas were connected by the ancient inhabitants of
Mesopotamia with the god Ninib.
[29] Maspero, _Dawn of Civilization_, pp. 637, 645.
Jensen admits that the generally received opinion as to Ninib is that
he represents the “southern sun.”[30] He, however, contends, with great
eagerness, that this is a mistaken opinion, and that Ninib is really
the eastern or rising sun. Many of Jensen’s arguments against the
possibility of Ninib representing the southern sun are based on the
assumption that the epithet “southern,” applied to the sun, denotes the
power of the mid-day sun; whereas, in other descriptions of Ninib, he
appears as struggling with, though in the end triumphant over, storm,
and cloud, and darkness.
[30] Jensen, _Die Kosmologie der Babylonier_, p. 460.
The sun in his _daily_ course attains the southern meridian at noon,
and that may well be described by Jensen as the “alles verzehrenden
und versengenden Süd- oder Mittagssonne,” but if we think of the sun
in his _annual_ course, the words “southern sun” may more fitly in
an astronomical sense mean the struggling and finally triumphant sun
of the winter solstice. And if we so understand the expression, the
apparently contradictory references to Ninib are easily explained.
At mid-winter the sun rises and sets more to the south than at any
other time of the year; at noon on the day of the winter solstice the
sun is forty-seven degrees nearer to the south pole of the heavens than
it is at the summer solstice.
If, instead of adopting Jensen’s contention, and looking upon Ninib
as the eastern rising sun, we revert to the generally held opinion
that Ninib was the god of the southern sun, and if we understand
the southern sun in its astronomical sense as the winter, or more
strictly speaking the mid-winter sun, it will naturally lead us to the
conclusion that “the day of the beginning of the year,” the day of the
festival of Bau, Ningirsu’s (= Ninib’s) “beloved consort,” was held at
the time of the winter solstice.
Speaking in round numbers, from 4,000 to 2,000 B.C., the winter
solstice took place when the sun was in conjunction with the
constellation Aquarius, which constellation, or some one of its stars,
was, as has been suggested, called by the Babylonian astronomers, Gula,
Gula being another name for Bau.
It is not therefore surprising to find that those rulers of Lagash,
whose dates fell between 4,000 and 2,000 B.C., should have so often
associated together Ningirsu and Bau; and further, that Gudea,
whose rule is placed at about 2,900 B.C., should on “the day of the
beginning of the year” have kept high festival in honour of Bau, as
the beneficent deity presiding in conjunction with Ningirsu over the
revolving years.
The precession of the equinoxes must necessarily in the course of ages
introduce confusion into all Zodiacal calendars, and into all ritual
and mythological symbolism founded on such calendars. From 2,000 b.c.
down to the beginning of our era, the winter solstice took place when
the sun was in conjunction with Capricornus, not with Aquarius. In
those later days, if the inhabitants of Lagash still celebrated their
new year’s festival at the winter solstice, Bau (= Gula = Aquarius)
could only have laid a traditional claim to preside over it.
In accordance with these astronomical facts, we learn from the
teachings of the tablets that the especial reverence paid to Bau =
Gula, in the Lagash inscriptions was not extended to her in later times.
As to Ninib, we know that even at Gudea’s date in the neighbouring
state of Accad, and in later times in Babylon, he did not hold the
pre-eminent position accorded to him by the early rulers of Lagash.
This difference in the religious observances of Accad and Lagash
regarding Ninib--if we suppose him to be the god of the winter
solstice--may also receive an astronomical explanation.
According to the evidence of _The Standard Astrological Work_, the
compilation of which is generally attributed to the date 3,800 B.C.,
and according to the evidence of many other tablets, the year in Accad
and afterwards in Babylon began not at the winter solstice, but on
the 1st day of Nisan, and Nisan (Acc. Bar zig-gar), the month of “the
sacrifice of righteousness,” was, as its name suggests, the month
during which the sun was in conjunction with the constellation Aries.
At Gudea’s date, about 2,900 B.C., the 1st of Nisan, if it was
dependent on the sun’s entry into Aries, must have fallen about midway
between the winter solstice and the spring equinox, and as century
succeeded century, the 1st of Nisan must slowly but surely have receded
further from the solstice and have approached more and more to the
equinoctial point.
In Accad, therefore, neither at Gudea’s nor at any later date, did the
year begin at the winter solstice, and hence we can understand why in
that state, and afterwards in Babylon, Ninib was not as highly honoured
as in Lagash, and why he and his consort Bau (= Gula) were not referred
to as the deities presiding over the beginning of the year.
In a former number of these _Proceedings_[31] I drew attention to the
Accadian calendar. It was there suggested that the choice of the first
degree of Aries as the initial point of the Zodiac was originally made
when the winter solstice coincided with the sun’s entry into that
constellation, _i.e._ about 6,000 B.C.
[31] January 1892, V. p. 13.
If that suggestion, and the present one concerning the new year’s
festival in Lagash are accepted, it will be easy to imagine that the
Lagash observance betokened a sort of effort to reform the sidereal
calendar in use in Accad, and it may be elsewhere.
In Accad the calendar makers clung to the originally instituted
_star-mark_ for the year, and made it begin with the sun’s entry into
Aries; therefore by degrees the beginning of their year moved away
from the winter solstice, and in the first century B.C. coincided very
closely with the spring equinox.
In Lagash, on the contrary, the calendar makers clung to the
originally established _season_ of the year, and made it begin at the
winter solstice; therefore by degrees the beginning of their year moved
away from the constellation Aries, and in Gudea’s time the new year’s
festival was held in honour of the goddess Bau = Gula = Aquarius.
IV
THE MEDIAN CALENDAR AND THE CONSTELLATION TAURUS
[Reprinted from the _Proceedings of the Society of Biblical
Archæology, June 1897_]
In a former number[32] of these _Proceedings_ I contrasted as follows,
what I believed to be the calendar of the Accadians with that of the
inhabitants of Lagash:--
“In Accad the calendar makers clung to the originally instituted
_star-mark_ for the year, and made it begin with the sun’s entry
into [the constellation] Aries; therefore by degrees the beginning
of their year moved away from the winter solstice, and in the first
century B.C. coincided very closely with the spring equinox.
“In Lagash, on the contrary, the calendar makers clung to the
originally established _season_ of the year, and made it begin at
the winter solstice; therefore by degrees the beginning of their year
moved away from the constellation Aries, and in Gudea’s time [about
2,900 B.C.] the new year’s festival was held in honour of the goddess
Bau = Gula = Aquarius.”
[32] V. p. 54.
I now desire to draw attention to the Median calendar, which appears
to have differed from that used, as above suggested, in Accad or in
Lagash; inasmuch as the beginning of the Median year was not dependent
on the sun’s entry into the _constellation Aries_, as in Accad; nor was
it fixed to the season of the _winter solstice_ as in Lagash.
The beginning of the Median year was fixed to the _season of the spring
equinox_, and remaining true to that season, followed no star-mark.
The great importance, however, of Tauric symbolism in Median art
seems to point to the fact that _when the equinoctial year was first
established_ the spring equinoctial point was in the constellation
Taurus. Astronomy teaches us that was the case, speaking in round
numbers, from 4,000 to 2,000 B.C.
It is true that we have no documentary proof of the existence of a
Median _equinoctial_ calendar in the remote past, such as that which
we possess in the Babylonian standard astrological works regarding
the ancient _sidereal_ Accadian calendar. We have, however, among the
modern representatives of the Medes, the Persians, a very distinctive
calendrical observance, namely, that of the Nowroose, or the festival
of the new year; and we have the Persian tradition that the institution
of this festival was of fabulous antiquity. I quote from Ker Porter’s
remarks on this subject:--
“The 21st of March, the impatiently anticipated day of the most
joyous festival of Persia, at last arrived. It is called the feast of
the Nowroose, or that of the commencement of the new year; and its
institution is attributed to the celebrated Jemsheed, who, according
to the traditions of the country, and the fragments yet preserved
of its early native historians, was the sixth in descent from Noah,
and the fourth sovereign of Persia, of the race of Kaiomurs, the
grandson of Noah.... But to return to the feast of the Nowroose. It
is acknowledged to have been celebrated from the earliest ages, in
Persia, independent of whatever religions reigned there; whether the
simple worship of the One Great Being, or under the successive rites
of Magian, Pagan, or Mahomedan institutions.” (_Travels_, vol. i. p.
316.)
This equinoctial and solar year, as the writer proceeds to point out,
is adhered to by the Persians, though they, being Mahomedans, also
celebrate Mahomedan lunar festivals, and for many purposes make use of
the Mahomedan lunar year.
It is easy to see how greatly the Persian Nowroose differs from the
purely lunar Mahomedan anniversaries--anniversaries which in the course
of about thirty-two and a half years necessarily make a complete
circuit through the seasons. The difference, though not so marked,
which exists between the purely solar Nowroose, and all soli-lunar
festivals, such as those of the Babylonians, should also be taken note
of. These last, like our Easter, were dependent on the phases of the
moon, and were therefore “moveable.” The Persian Nowroose, like our
Christmas Day, is an “immoveable” festival--fixed to the day of the
spring equinox.
Modern tradition concerning the distinctively Persian custom of
celebrating the Nowroose would, if it stood alone, furnish very slight
grounds on which to found a far-reaching theory; but historical
evidence confirms this tradition to a great extent, by teaching us that
the Median and Persian worshippers of Ahura Mazda, and of Mithras,
certainly under the Sassinide dynasty, and almost with equal certainty
under the Achæmenid kings, kept their calendar and celebrated their
religious festivals in a manner differing from that of the surrounding
nations; their months were not lunar, their years were not soli-lunar
but distinctly solar, and the spring equinox was the date to which as
closely as possible the beginning of their year was fixed.
In Darmesteter’s translation of the _Zend Avesta_ the Persian months
are treated of in Appendix C, p. 33, and in Appendix D, p. 37, we read
of the Persian years:--
“L’année était divisée en quatre saisons, correspondant aux nôtres.
Cette division ne paraît guère que dans les textes post-avestéens;
mais il y a dans l’Avesta même des traces de son existence ancienne.
La division normale de l’année est, dans l’Avesta, en deux saisons,
été et hiver; l’été, _hama_, qui comprend les sept premiers mois (du
1^{er} Farvardîn au 30 Mihr, soit du 21 mars au 16 octobre).... Cette
division a une valeur religieuse, non seulement pour le rituel, mais
aussi pour les pratiques, qui varient selon la saison.”
The worship of the Persian sun-god Mithras was introduced into Rome
about the time of the fall of the Republic. How far this worship
differed from that taught in the Zoroastrian writings we need not
inquire; however changed it may have been, it was evidently derived
originally from a Persian or a Median source. The worship of Mithras,
in spite of much opposition, gained many followers in Rome. The
birthday of the sun-god was kept at the winter solstice, but the great
festivities in his honour, “_the mysteries of Mithras_,” were as a rule
celebrated at the season of the spring equinox,[33] and were famous
even among Roman festivals. Let us now turn our attention to the Tauric
symbolism so closely connected with Mithraic observances in Rome.
[33] Cumont, in the first volume of his _Monuments figurés relatifs
aux mystères de Mithra_, p. 326, having spoken of the solstitial
festival in honour of the birthday of the god, observes as follows:
“Nous avons certaines raisons de croire que les équinoxes étaient
aussi des jours fériés où l’on inaugurait par quelque salutation
le retour des Saisons divinisées. Les initiations avaient lieu de
préférence vers le début du printemps, en mars ou en avril....”
A writer in the _Athenæum_ thus describes a Roman Mithræum:[34]
“Discovery was made during some excavations at Ostia of a handsome
house containing among its various rooms a _mithræum_.... Into
the kitchen opens a narrow and tortuous passage, from which by a
small half-concealed staircase the _mithræum_ is reached; ... it
is quadrangular and regular in shape, as is usually the case in
buildings of the kind. Almost the whole length of the two lateral
walls run two seats, and on the side opposite the door is seen a
little elevation, which served as the place for the usual statue
of Mithras in the act of thrusting his dagger into the neck of the
mystic Bull. A very singular peculiarity of this little Ostian
_mithræum_ is that it is entirely covered with mosaics--pavements,
seats, and walls alike. The various figures and the symbols are
splendidly drawn, and all executed in black _tesseræ_ on a white
ground. Upon each side of the seats, turned to the entrance door, is
figured a genius bearing a lamp, that is, the genius of the spring
equinox, with the face raised, and that of the autumn equinox, with
the face cast down.... It is known, in fact, that the whole myth of
Mithras is related to the phases of the sun ... hence are represented
in the ground below the seats all the twelve signs of the zodiac, by
means of the usual symbols, but each accompanied by a large star.”
[34] _Athenæum_, 1886, October 30 and November 6.
In the many sculptures of the Mithras group similar to that above
described, which have been so well figured in Lajard’s _Culte de
Mithras_, various heavenly bodies are represented. The Scorpion (the
constellation Scorpio of the Zodiac opposed to Taurus) joins with
Mithras in his attack upon the Bull, and always the genii of the spring
and autumn equinoxes are present in joyous and mournful attitudes.
In looking at these plates the conviction is clearly forced upon our
minds that the Bull so persistently, and, it may be added, so serenely,
slain by Mithras in these Roman representations, is the Zodiacal Bull,
overcome, and as it were destroyed or banished from heaven, in the
daytime by the sun-god, and at night by Scorpio, the constellation in
opposition. With almost equal conviction we arrive at the conclusion
that this triumph of Mithras was associated traditionally--in Roman
days it could only have been traditionally--with the occurrence, at a
remote date, of the spring equinox during the time that the sun was in
conjunction with the constellation Taurus.
In the ruins of Persepolis, ruins of buildings designed, erected, and
decorated by the worshippers of the supreme God Ahura Mazda, and of
his friend and representative Mithras, Tauric symbolism abounds. We do
not amongst these ruins find portrayals of Mithras as a youth wearing
a Phrygian cap, and “thrusting his dagger into the neck of the mystic
Bull,” but again and again, in the bas-reliefs adorning the walls,
we do find a colossal being thrusting his dagger into the body of a
still more “mystic” creature than the Bull of the Roman sculptures--a
creature combining in one instance at least[35] the attributes of Bull,
Lion, Scorpion, and Eagle, and frequently those of two or more of these
animals.
[35] See Plate IV.
[Illustration: PLATE IV.
Persépolis. Combat du roi et du griffon. Palais n^{o} 3.
Perrot et Chipiez. _Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité_, Tome v.
opposite page 547.
[_To face p. 64._]
Perrot and Chipiez have supposed this constantly repeated scene to
represent imaginary contests between the reigning monarch and all
possible or impossible monsters, but a very different impression was
produced on the mind of Ker Porter by these same bas-reliefs; and
though he did not adopt a purely astronomic theory to explain them, he
was firmly convinced that the combat depicted was not one waged between
an ordinary human being and an ordinary or extraordinary animal, but
that it was a symbolical representation of the combat constantly
carried on by Ormuzd (Ahura Mazda), and by his representative Mithras,
against the powers of evil and darkness.[36]
[36] “The man who contends with the animals ... is represented as a
person of a singularly dignified mien, clad in long draperied robes,
but with the arms perfectly bare. His hair, which is full and curled,
is bound with a circlet or low diadem; and his sweeping pointed beard
is curled at different heights, in the style that was worn by majesty
alone.... The calmness of his air, contrasted with the firmness
with which he grasps the animals, and strikes to his aim, gives
a certainty to his object, and a sublimity to his figure, beyond
anything that would have been in the power of more elaborate action
or ornament to effect. From the unchanged appearance of the hero,
his unvaried mode of attack, its success, and the unaltered style of
opposition adopted by every one of the animals in the contest, I can
have no doubt that they all mean different achievements towards one
great aim....”--Ker Porter’s _Travels_, vol. i. p. 672.
With the astronomic clue to Persian symbolism put into our hands by
the Roman sculptures, of which mention has been made, and by a study
of the researches of Lajard, it is not difficult to recognize in the
composite animals represented on the bas-reliefs allusions not only to
the Zodiacal Bull, traditionally associated with the spring equinox,
but also to three other constellations which at the same date of the
world’s history (namely, from 4,000 to 2,000 B.C.) marked more or less
accurately the remaining colures, _i.e._ the Lion, the Scorpion, and
the Eagle.
The constellations of the Lion and the Scorpion, there can be no doubt,
were appropriate star marks for the summer and autumn seasons, when the
spring equinoctial point was in the Bull,[37] but as regards the Eagle
it must be admitted that though it adjoins the Zodiacal Aquarius (the
constellation in which the winter solstitial point was then situated),
yet its principal stars lie considerably to the north and west of that
constellation.
[37] The solstitial and equinoctial colures were situated, speaking
in round numbers, for 2,000 years in the constellations Taurus, Leo,
Scorpio, and Aquarius.