PreprintPDF Available

Towards an absolute scientific date for the Egyptian New Kingdom, part 1: the Egyptian Civil Calendar revisited

Authors:
Preprints and early-stage research may not have been peer reviewed yet.

Abstract

In this article we take a closer look at the Egyptian civil calendar and its primary sources to see if this provides useful understanding for the Egyptian chronology. Scientific dates for e.g. the Egyptian New Kingdom do still not comply fully with the historical consensus chronology in force. This might be due to the lingering use of outdated scientific parameters, perhaps because of historical bias at Egypt's transition from sovereign kingdom to Roman province.
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 1 of 21
Towards an absolute scientific date for the Egyptian New Kingdom,
part 1: the Egyptian Civil Calendar revisited
Petra Ossowski Larsson* and Lars-Åke Larsson, Sweden
* Corresponding author: petra@cybis.se
Abstract
In this article we take a closer look at the Egyptian civil calendar and its primary
sources to see if this provides useful understanding for the Egyptian chronology.
Scientific dates for e.g. the Egyptian New Kingdom do still not comply fully with the
historical consensus chronology in force. This might be due to the lingering use of
outdated scientific parameters, perhaps because of historical bias at Egypt's
transition from sovereign kingdom to Roman province.
Introduction
An approximate scientific date for the Egyptian New Kingdom (18th to 20th Dynasty)
has been established as a result of a groundbreaking radiocarbon study by
Christopher Bronk Ramsey et al. (ref.1). The study utilizes radiocarbon wiggle-
matching of shortlived organic material from secure contexts sequenced according to
two historical chronologies (king lists). The chronology compiled by Ian Shaw (ref.2),
which also seems to be the consensus chronology in force, apparently gives the best
conformity towards the radiocarbon study. There is however a small offset (Shaw's
dates being generally a few years younger than the radiocarbon dates) which opened
up for the proposal that "the New Kingdom might have begun earlier by about a
decade than the consensus date of Shaw" (ref.1). This gets even more marked if you
consider our hypothesis that the dendrochronological time base of the radiocarbon
calibration curve might be eight years too young in the 2nd to 6th millennia BC (ref.3).
How could Shaw's "floating" chronology be placed almost correct in time? The list of
New Kingdom pharaohs is traditionally anchored in the absolute astronomical time-
line via a few written records of astronomical observations regarded as trustworthy.
These are a couple of so called "heliacal risings of Sothis", and dates for the "day of
the Feast of the New Moon", typically given as the regnal year of a certain pharaoh
plus the day in the Egyptian civil calendar. Due to inherent uncertainties in the civil
calendar various alternative dynasty start dates have been proposed, Shaw's
proposal being the "middle chronology" with -1549 to -1294 for the 18th Dynasty, and
-1294 to -1068 for the Ramessid period (19th and 20th Dynasties). James Henry
Breasted (ref.4) for example opted for a some decades older "high chronology".
There are also a number of "low" chronologies, but these are not compatible with the
new radiocarbon results and thus will not be discussed here.
The relationship between Egyptology and (archeo-)astronomy seems to be
complicated, maybe just because of the scarcity of trustworthy observations (ref.5).
Though the ancient Egyptians apparently were skilled sky watchers who were aware
of the length of the solar year, they did not hand down written systematical
astronomical diaries as the Babylonians did. Lunar phases and star constellations
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 2 of 21
played an important role for their religion, but no records of solar or lunar eclipses are
extant. It has been proposed that the Egyptian monuments and temples were built
under strict observation of the celestial mechanics, but wild speculations and an
over-enthusiastic belief in archeo-astronomy at the end of the 19th century ended with
a veritable crash of the chronological system and caused a deeply rooted scepticism
among Egyptologists about astronomy (ref.6).
The existence and design of the Egyptian civil calendar was described by Eduard
Meyer in 1904 (ref.7). But Meyer's too optimistic extrapolation of the date for the
launch of the civil calendar (ref.7, page 41) supported the now expired "long
chronology", which - in a time when no independent scientific dating method like
radiocarbon was available which could provide a firm framework - placed the 1st
Egyptian Dynasty around 5000 BC. We know today that the 1st Dynasty has to be
placed 2000 years later around 3000 BC instead (ref.1).
In the following sections we will analyze what we know about the Egyptian civil
calendar, and if this provides useful understanding for the Egyptian chronology.
The Egyptian civil calendar
Our own Gregorian calendar, introduced in the catholic parts of Europe and its
colonies as early as 1582, is designed to follow the solar year as close as possible
using quite complicated rules for the insertion of leap days. At introduction, its explicit
purpose was to keep the seasons and especially the vernal equinox at a constant
time of the solar year in order to facilitate the computation of the correct date for the
Christian Easter celebration. The forerunner of the Gregorian calendar was the
simpler Julian calendar, introduced in the Roman empire under Julius Caesar, which
inserts one leap day each forth year. At about the same time it is said, a calendar
with the same year length as the Julian calendar was introducted in Egypt, the Coptic
calendar. Before this so-called Augustean reform however, the Egyptians had an
even simpler civil calendar without any leap days at all (ref.7).
The length of the Egyptian civil year was exactly 365 days distributed to 12 months
with 30 days each, and an additional "month" of 5 days known at least since the
second half of the third millennium BC from the "pyramid texts" of the Old Kingdom.
The 12 months were grouped into 3 seasons of 4 months each (hence 120 days),
beginning around midsummer with the flood season, followed by the growth season
starting late in October and finally the harvest season starting early in spring. New
Year was celebrated on I Thoth 1, the first day of the flood season.
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Intercalary
month
Thoth Phaophi Athyr Choiak Tybi Mechir Phamenoth Pharmuthi Pachons Payni Epiphi Mesore Hryw Rnpt
(1)
Akhet (2)
Akhet (3)
Akhet (4)
Akhet (1)
Peret (2)
Peret (3)
Peret (4)
Peret (1)
Shemu (2)
Shemu (3)
Shemu (4)
Shemu 5 days
Flood season Growth season, winter Low water or harvest season, summer
Table 1: Months and seasons of the Egyptian civil calendar. A date can be given as a certain day (e.g.
20) either of a month of the year (e.g. IX Pachons 20) or a month of a season (e.g. (1) Shemu 20).
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 3 of 21
When the civil calendar was launched it was in phase with the seasons, of course.
The year began when the water of the Nile rose due to the monsoon rains in its
upper reaches and started to flood the delta lowlands. This occurs every year around
the summer solstice, i.e. midsummer. But the Egyptians had also noticed that the
water of the Nile rose about simultaneously with the heliacal rising of a star they
called Sopdet, most probably identical with Sirius which the Greek called Sothis.
Heliacal rising means the occasion when the star becomes visible for a short while
above the eastern horizon just before sunrise (when the sunlight drowns out the
star's faint light again) after a period of invisibility. This period of invisibility occurs
during summer.
Maybe it was regarded easier to watch the heliacal rising of Sirius than to determine
the summer solstice. Watching Sirius was straight forward and possible for everyone
in all parts of Egypt, while measuring the summer solstice required special
equipment. It is said that the Egyptians had a deep well at Aswan in southern Egypt
where they could observe the distinct date of the summer solstice. Aswan is located
near the tropic of cancer and zenith pass (when the sun would be right overhead and
shine into the well) would occur only for a very short time close to midsummer (ref.8).
A couple of years after its launch a peculiarity of the civil calendar must have become
apparent. As the solar year is longer than the civil year, almost ¼ day, the Egyptian
civil calendar lagged 1 day in 4 years. Therefore the civil year slowly cycled
backwards through the solar year, growing more and more out of phase with the
seasons. One full "Sothic cycle", when the civil year again was in phase with the
seasons, took 1460 (4 x 365) years. For this peculiarity the Egyptian civil calendar is
sometimes called the "wandering calendar".
A "Great Year" was when the heliacal rising of Sirius fell on the first day of the first
month of the flood season (I Thoth 1) in the civil calendar (i.e. New Years Day) once
for a period of four years in 1460 years. But in which year in our calendar did that
happen? The Egyptian sources are silent about that matter, maybe not that strange
considering that the Egyptian and Roman civil calendars were reformed about
simultaneously in a joint effort (the Julian calendar was designed by Egyptian
astronomers). The only direct date is given by Censorinus, a Roman writer living in
the 3rd century AD. He states that the latest Great Year of the old calendar was
"under the second consulate of the Emperor Antoninus Pius and of Bruttius
Præsena", which is interpreted as 139 in the conventional chronology. This also
means that the previous Great Year would have been in -1321. Theon, the
astronomer living in Alexandria in the 4th century AD, gives a similar account and
calls the Sothic cycle starting in -1321 the "Era of Menophres". Read about the
details in Appendix A.
Having the start and end years for the most recent Sothic cycle, we can ask if there
were cycles before that. There is strong evidence for one more cycle starting in -2781
if we assume that its end date is -1322 and its length 1460 years. A lot of calendar
dates are preserved from old dynastic Egypt, a most recent example is a Sothic date
(date for the heliacal rising of Sirius, (4) Akhet 1 = IV Choiak 1) in the range -2421 to
-2418 on a small jar from the Old Kingdom (ref.9).
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 4 of 21
The start year -2781 for this early Sothic cycle points to the early dynastic period,
perhaps the 2nd Dynasty, for the launch of the civil calendar. Modern simulations
show that at that time the summer solstice and the heliacal rising of Sirius took place
almost simultaneously at Memphis, Egypt's capital city in that period. This would
support our reasoning that the observation of Sirius was chosen as a substitute for
the more difficult direct observation of the summer solstice when the Egyptian civil
calendar was launched, see table 2.
Note: The date for the heliacal rising of Sirius depends on the latitude where it is
observed, around -2781 it was on July 16Jul in Memphis (Cairo), but on July 11Jul in
Thebes (Luxor) and on July 9Jul in Elephantine (Aswan) (ref.10).
Column
A B C D E F G
Gregorian calendar Julian calendar
Year Summer
solstice
Heliacal
rising at
Memphis
(ref.11)
Summer
solstice
(ref.11)
Heliacal rising at Memphis
Stellarium Schaefer de Jong
-2781
June 21
June 23 July 14 July 16 July 16
July 16
-2000 June 29 July 8 July 16 July 17
July 17
-1321 July 5 July 3 July 17 July 17
July 17
-1000 July 8 June 30 July 17 July 17
July 17
-1 July 16 June 23 July 18 July 18
July 18
1000 July 25 June 15 July 19
2000 Aug. 3 June 8 July 21
Table 2: Dates for the summer solstice and the heliacal rising of Sirius at the horizon of Memphis
(Cairo) for different millennia, both for the Gregorian and the Julian calendars. Heliacal rising
simulated with Stellarium (ref.10), with light pollution 1 (minimum) and extinction coefficient 0.35 as in
ref.12, results principally in the same dates as proposed by Bradley Schaefer (ref.12) and Teije de
Jong (ref.13, III.9, with by the author preferred ext. coeff. 0.27). Column D created from column B
using the Fourmilab's calendar converter (ref11). Stellarium data in column E converted to column C
the same way.
During the almost three thousand years the civil calendar was in service the timing of
the summer solstice and the heliacal rising of Sirius in the solar year slowly drifted
apart (see e.g. columns B and C in table 2). This was most probably not perceived as
a problem as the Nile flood was not too punctual (ref.8). At least since the New
Kingdom the Egyptians certainly knew that the solar year was longer than their civil
year, because at that time they built temples with solar orientation, e.g. at Abu Simbel
(forthcoming), where the seasonal light show would slowly change civil date as the
years passed. But they kept their wandering reckoning anyway, maybe because it
allowed them to keep a longterm yearcount besides their usual count of regnal years
which was reset at each succession (see "Discussion and Conclusions"). But maybe
it was just because a simple calendar without special rules for the insertion of leap
days would be robust and predictable for administrative purposes. Because it was
certainly for administrative purposes that the civil calendar was launched, intriguingly
at the beginning of the dynastic period when a central administration developed
which would need tools for book-keeping and planning in a land stretching over more
than seven degrees of latitude. The peasants of course did their job according to the
seasons of the solar year and independent of the civil calendar.
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 5 of 21
After this reasoning we propose that the Egyptian civil calendar was launched in
-2781 in Memphis on July 16Jul, the day for the heliacal rising of Sirius at this place,
and that it never was changed or adjusted according to real observations until the
reform which is accredited to Augustus. Any change would have spoiled the
administrative value of the calendar. Eduard Meyer, who discovered the Sothic cycle,
had the same opinion about a rigorous, non-astronomical rule for the Egyptian civil
calendar (ref.7), in contrast to many other chronologists who made a lot of
assumptions and amendments which finally rendered the civil calendar worthless as
an independent dating tool. Read more about the arguments for and against a
rigorous "schematic" calendar in ref.13, III.10.
Knowing the start- and end-years of the Sothic cycles, we can now write a table
which allows the direct assignation of all possible dates for the heliacal rising of Sirius
(i.e. Sothic dates) in the Egyptian civil calendar to the corresponding four-years
period in our calendar, see Appendix B. Note: this table allows direct conversion only
if the Sothic date was taken (by the administration) from the schematic calendar (i.e.
without observation), or if any observation was made in the delta lowlands during the
first half of the older Sothic cycle. This is because the astronomical date for the
heliacal rising of Sirius at Memphis shifted from July 16Jul to July 17Jul many years
before the end of the first cycle in -1322, see columns E, F and G in table 2.
Appendix B is only valid for the heliacal rising of Sirius at Memphis on the Julian date
July 16.
When did the Egyptians abandon their wandering calendar and move over to the
Coptic calendar? In his 9th regnal year, Ptolemy III Euergetes I attempted a calendar
reform in the so called Canopus decree, cut in stone and still extant in at least three
copies. The relevant part reads as follows (ref.14):
... so shall similarly be prepared a great festival ..., on the day of the rising of the
Divine Sothis, which is called the New Year ... At present it occurs in this 9th
year on 1st day of Payni, in which month is celebrated the festival of New Year,
of the goddess Bast and the great festival of the goddess Bast in this month,
and also it is the time for the collection of all fruits and rise of the Nile. But as
the case will occur, that the rise of Sothis advances to another day in every 4
years, the day of the celebration of this feast, shall not pass along but it shall be
celebrated on first day of Payni and the feast shall be celebrated as in the ninth
year.
But that these feast days shall be celebrated in definite seasons for them to
keep for ever, and after the plan of the heaven established on this day and that
the case shall not occur, that all the Egyptian festivals, now celebrated in winter,
shall not be celebrated some time or other in summer, on account of the
procession of the rising of the Divine Sothis by one day in the course of 4 years,
and other festivals celebrated in the summer, in this country, shall not be
celebrated in winter, as has occasionally occurred in past times, therefore it
shall be, that the year of 360 days and the 5 days added to their end, so one
day as feast of Benevolent Gods be from this day after every 4 years added to
the 5 epagomenae before the new year, whereby all men shall learn, that what
was a little defective in the order as regards the seasons and the year, as also
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 6 of 21
the opinions which are contained in the rules of the learned on the heavenly
orbits, are now corrected and improved by the Benevolent Gods.
The 1st day of Payni (which is the 10th month) is 95 days before the 1st day of Thoth
(which is New Year's day). This means that the 9th year of Ptolemy III was 95 x 4 =
380 years before the Great Year 139. Looking at the table in Appendix B, the Sothic
date of X Payni 1 is valid for the four years -241 to -238. This gives us the interval
-249 to -246 for the accession of Ptolemy III. Conventionally, the 1st regnal year of
Ptolemy III is assumed to be -246 (according to the Canon of Kings in the Almagest,
ref.15).
Most probably, Ptolemy III's calendar reform (which prescribed similar rules for the
insertion of leap days as Augustus' reform) was never implemented. It would have
stopped the wandering of the civil calendar. But as it was designed to preserve the
status 380 years before the Great Year, it would not have rendered the civil year in
phase with the seasons. New Year would have been "for ever" celebrated after the
autumnal equinox when the water of the Nile was at its highest level and the time for
cultivation of the fields was approaching.
However, the reform was anyway put in effect about 200 years later. We know this
because the Coptic New Year (I Thout 1) is always celebrated on August 29 in the
Julian calendar (see table 3). The Coptic and Julian calendars share the year length
(365 ¼ days), but insert leap days each forth year according to different rules. We
assume that the introduction of leap days was the only change made to the civil
calendar - just as described in the Canopus decree - and that the count of months
and days was continued as before the reform.
We also know that the approaching Great Year would have been in 139 with New
Year's day on July 16Jul. Between July 16Jul and August 29Jul are 44 days, so it would
have taken 44 x 4 = 176 years in the civil calendar to reach the Great Year. 139 - 176
= -37, this means that the Coptic calendar came into force in -37, a surprising date
indeed as there is a statement by Theon in his Lesser Commentary on the Handy
Tables of Ptolemy. We cite here the translation given in ref.16:
Now this period of 1460 years, commenced from a certain time, terminated in
the 5th year of the reign of Augustus so, from the last epoch, the Egyptians
begin all over again to find themselves every year one quarter of a day in
advance.
The 5th year of Augustus is conventionally dated to -21, that means 16 years later
than -37. We will certainly have to discuss this discrepancy in detail.
No.
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Intercalary
month
Coptic
Thout Paopi Hathor Koiak Tobi Meshir Paremhat
Parmouti
Pashons
Paoni Epip Mesori Pi Kogi Enavot
Julian
Aug 29 to
Sept 27 Sept 28
to Oct 27
Oct 28 to
Nov 26
Nov 27 to
Dec 26
Dec 27 to
Jan 25
Jan 26 to
Feb 24
Feb 25 to
Mar 26
Mar 27 to
Apr 25
Apr 26 to
May 25
May 26
to Jun 24
Jun 25 to
Jul 24 Jul 25 to
Aug 23
Aug 24 to Aug
28
Table 3: Months of the Coptic calendar, compared with the dates of the Julian calendar with which it
shares the year length. This table is for a year without leap day in either calendar. Leap days are
inserted each forth year, but according to different rules.
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 7 of 21
An example and a check
If you are a bit distrustful of the correctness of the late Roman statements about the
Egyptian civil calendar made by Censorinus and Theon, here is a check with one of
the Sothic dates handed down via an early Egyptian original. The Papyrus Berlin
10012 was purchased by Ludwig Borchardt in 1899 at al-Lahun (ref.17). The papyrus
consists of two fragments from the diary of the funerary temple of Senusret II (a
Pharaoh of the 12th Dynasty). One fragment is a copy of a letter, in which the date
for the approaching heliacal rising of Sirius is forwarded to a temple priest. The letter
is dated (3) Peret 25 (VII Phamenoth 25), year 7 of an unnamed Pharaoh, and the
heliacal rising is on (4) Peret 16 (VIII Pharmuthi 16). The second fragment contains
information about the supplies for the Sothis-feast which was held on (4) Peret 17
(VIII Pharmuthi 17). There is strong evidence that the unnamed Pharaoh is Senusret
III (ref.17).
Using the conversion table (Appendix B), we see that VIII Pharmuthi 16 was the
Sothic date in either -418 to -421, or -1878 to -1881. As the Pharaohs of the 12th
Dynasty lived in the 19th century BC, we would therefore propose that the 7th regnal
year of Senusret III fell in the range -1881 to -1878 and thus his accession year in the
range -1887 to -1884. Ian Shaw (ref.2) has the accession year of Senusret III at
-1869, thus his 7th year at -1863. This means that there is an offset, Shaw's date
being too young by at least 14 years. But Shaw's date is also a few years too young
compared with Bronk Ramsey's radiocarbon data (ref.1), which would be enhanced
by eight extra years if there is an error in the dendrochronological time base of the
radiocarbon calibration curve (ref.3). These two offsets together would about
compensate for Shaw's 14 years, which means that the true accession date for
Senusret III could well be between -1887 and -1884.
That the al-Lahun Sothic date was taken from a schematic calendar and not an
observation is evident from the fact that the order was forwarded three weeks in
advance. Such a treatment would also ensure that the Sothis-feast was celebrated
on the same day in whole Egypt, and that sufficient supplies were in place.
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 8 of 21
Trying to evaluate some Sothic dates from the New Kingdom
The Great Year -1321 (when the Egyptian civil calendar was in phase with the
seasons) occurred during the New Kingdom, more precisely at about the end of the
18th and the start of the 19th Dynasties as proposed by Ian Shaw (ref.2). Flinders
Petrie's list of dated heliacal risings of Sothis highlights this fact (ref.18).
Column
A B C D E F
Heliacal
rising
Egyptian
date
Pharaoh and
regnal year Julian year,
schematic,
see App.B
*)
Accession
year (1st regnal
year),
schematic
Accession
year Shaw
(ref.2)
Accession year
Bronk Ramsey
(ref.1), minus 8
years (ref.3)
XI Epiphi 9 Amenhotep I 9
th
(18th dyn.)
-1549/
-1546
-1557 to -1554 -1524 ~ -1541
XI Epiphi 21 Hatshepsut 16
th
(18th dyn.)
-1501/
-1498
-1516 to -1513 -1472 ~ -1490
XI Epiphi 28 Thutmose III 33
rd
(18th dyn.)
-1473/
-1470
-1505 to -1502 -1478 ~ -1496
I Thoth 22 Rameses II 41
st
(19th dyn.)
-1237/
-1234
-1277 to -1274 -1278 ~ -1294
I Thoth 29 Merenptah 2
nd
(19th dyn.)
-1209/
-1206
-1210 to -1207 -1212 ~ -1228
(extrapolated)
Table 4: Dated heliacal risings of Sirius during the New Kingdom (ref.18). The bold line marks the
Great Year -1321 when Sirius rose heliacal on I Thoth 1. The 19th Dynasty is assumed to have started
16 years before Rameses II's accession, with Rameses I who had the throne name Menpehtyra
(compare with Theon's statement that the Era of Menophres started in -1321). *) Petrie arrived at the
same Julian dates which means that he had the same view regarding the Egyptian civil calendar as
assumed in this article. Column A converted to column C according to Appendix B. The regnal years
of column B together with column C are converted to column D.
Table 4 gives the range for the accession years for the mentioned Pharaohs (column
D), provided that the Sothic dates were taken from the civil calendar and not
observed (see Appendix B). This is compared with the accession years proposed by
Shaw for the middle chronology (ref.2, column E), and the accession years
suggested by the radiocarbon study by Bronk Ramsey et al. (ref.1) minus our extra
offset of eight years due to a proposed error in the dendrochronological time base of
the radiocarbon calibration curve (ref.3) (column F).
The apparent mismatch between columns D, E and F is most probably due to that
the heliacal risings were observed and the places of observation are unknown.
Moreover, the local weather conditions could have influenced the observations by
several days.
In the case of the Sothic date for the 9th year of Amenhotep I, it is taken from the
Ebers Papyrus calendar which still generates more questions than it answers
(ref.19). XI Epiphi 9 could just be an "example date" which was chosen because 9
was a divine number in ancient Egypt.
Now let us check alternative observed Julian dates for the Sothic dates in table 4. In
table 5 we have listed the accession years of the five pharaohs for a number of
probable places and dates of observation. The heliacal rising of Sirius proper (Julian
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 9 of 21
date, simulated, highlighted) would have been on July 17 at Memphis, July 12 at
Thebes and July 10 at Elephantine. A later observation date could be due to a delay
because of bad atmospheric conditions, and an earlier observation date could be due
to cleaner air. If we compare these suggested accession years with the approximate
accession years derived from the radiocarbon study (column M, same as table 4
column F), we get a match for Thutmose III for an observation at Memphis, one day
later than the simulated heliacal rising (column D). Observations at Thebes and
Elephantine are out of question. However, for Rameses II and Merenptah the
observations were most probably made at Thebes under good atmospheric
conditions, or at Elephantine under bad atmospheric conditions (column J).
Column
A B C D E F G H I J K L M
Heliacal
rising
Egyptian
Date
Pharaoh
and regnal
year
Julian year,
schematic
see App.B
*)
Accession year if heliacal rising observed at Access.
year
radio-
carbon
Memphis Thebes Elephantine
July 18 July 17 July
16 **) July
15 July
13 July
12 July
11 July
10 July 9
XI Epiphi 9 Amenhotep I
9th -1549/ -1546 -1549/
-1546 -1553/
-1550 -1557/
-1554 -1561/
-1558 -1569/
-1566 -1573/
-1570 -1577/
-1574 -1581/
-1578 -1585/
-1582 ~ -1541
XI Epiphi 21 Hatshepsut
16th -1501/ -1498 -1508/
-1505 -1512/
-1509 -1516/
-1513 -1520/
-1517 -1528/
-1525 -1532/
-1529 -1536/
-1533 -1540/
-1537 -1544/
-1541 ~ -1490
XI Epiphi 28 Thutmose III
33rd -1473/ -1470 -1497/
-1494 -1501/
-1498 -1505/
-1502 -1509/
-1506 -1517/
-1514 -1521/
-1518 -1525/
-1522 -1529/
-1526 -1533/
-1530 ~ -1496
I Thoth 22 Rameses II
41st
-1237/ -1234 -1269/
-1266
-1273/
-1270
-1277/
-1274
-1281/
-1278
-1289/
-1286
-1293/
-1290
-1297/
-1294
-1301/
-1298
-1305/
-1302 ~ -1294
I Thoth 29 Merenptah
2nd -1209/ -1206 -1202/
-1199 -1206/
-1203 -1210/
-1207 -1214/
-1211 -1222/
-1219 -1226/
-1223 -1230/
-1227 -1234/
-1231 -1238/
-1235 ~ -1228
Table 5: Dated heliacal risings of Sirius during the New Kingdom, columns A to C same as in table 4.
Now the approximate accession year from the radiocarbon study (column M, same as table 4 column
F) is compared with accession years based on simulated observations at three different latitudes. The
alternatives best matching the radiocarbon dates are highlighted. Most probable Julian date for the
observation of the heliacal rising of Sirius (with extinction coefficient 0.35) is July 17 at Memphis, July
12 at Thebes and July 10 at Elephantine (highlighted, ref.10). An earlier observation date would mean
that the air was cleaner, and a later observation date could be due to a delay because of bad
atmospheric conditions.
The bold line marks the Great Year -1321 when Sirius rose heliacal on Thoth 1. *) If Great Year -1321.
**) Observed at Memphis, or taken from schematic calendar.
Though we know that we are close, we can not synchronize the New Kingdom
chronology unambiguously with our calendar using dated heliacal risings of Sirius
alone. There are too many factors of uncertainty.
Discussion and Conclusions
We know details about the design of the Egyptian civil calendar at least since the 5th
Dynasty (second half of the third millennium BC), (ref.20, p.28). A lot of civil dates
from old dynastic Egypt exist, which allows - backed by the radiocarbon dates for this
period - to postulate that the civil calendar was launched early before the Old
Kingdom and that it was in service for almost two 1460-years cycles.
From the very start of the civil calendar the Egyptians must have been aware that
their civil year was slowly wandering through the seasons of the solar year. So, what
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 10 of 21
was the advantage of this odd reckoning and why didn't they stop the wandering, for
example when the first cycle had elapsed, by inserting a leap day every forth year? A
hypothesis might be that the Egyptians recognized the value of a long-term year
count, much like in our supporting table in Appendix B. Instead of the year number
"since the launch of the civil calendar", they could just give the calendar date for the
heliacal rising of Sirius. This would pin any historical or memorable event to a unique
four-years-period within living memory.
That the Egyptians from time to time used their civil calendar in a completely
rigorous, non-astronomical manner is proved both for the Middle Kingdom and the
Ptolemaic period. The al-Lahun Sothic date was in fact forwarded three weeks in
advance of the actual astronomical event. And the Sothic date of the Canopus
decree leads to the exact accession year of Ptolemy III Euergetes I when inserted
into the schematic table in Appendix B. However, during the New Kingdom Sothic
dates were apparently based on observations at various places, see table 5. This
does of course not mean that the rigorous rule for the civil calendar was changed
accordingly. But the occurrence of observations, and the fact that each Sothic date is
valid for a four-years-period, makes that we can not synchronize the New Kingdom
king list with our calendar unambiguously and exactly to the year using dated heliacal
risings of Sirius alone. Fortunately there are also a few unambiguous astronomical
observations made during the New Kingdom which we will deal with in a forthcoming
article. As a tool for that article we need the knowledge about the Egyptian civil
calendar which we have just established.
Now to the puzzling result that the Egyptians apparently stopped the wandering of
their civil calendar when New Years day (I Thoth 1) fell on August 29 in the Julian
calendar, and that this was in -37. How do we arrive at year -37? This has to do with
the very definition of the Egyptian civil calendar, its rigorous non-astronomical rule.
Between July 16Jul (the Sothic date observed when the Egyptian civil calendar was
launched and therefore also the Sothic date of the Great Year 139) and August 29Jul
are 44 days, which amounts to 176 (44 x 4) years in the civil calendar.
139 - 176 = -37, this means that the Coptic calendar came into force in -37, 176
years before the Great year.
However, Theon states that the Egyptian civil calendar was terminated in Augustus'
5th year (see above), which would be -21 according to the conventional historical
narrative. To arrive at -21 the civil calendar would have stopped 16 years later than
-37, which means that the Egyptians would have calculated with the Sothic date July
20Jul (four days later than July 16Jul). But July 20Jul is far too late to be astronomically
viable for the heliacal rising of Sirius anywhere in Egypt in the 3rd millennium BC.
Censorinus states explicitely that the Sothic date of the Great Year 139 was July
21Jul, see Appendix A. This is one day later than the date which theoretically could
have been obtained by observation of Sirius in Alexandria at that time (ref.10).,
namely July 20Jul as implied by Theon.
In the Almagest there are also a number of equinox and solstice observations dated
in old Egyptian fashion around Great Year 139 made by Ptolemy in Alexandria.
However, Ptolemy does not mention anything about the coincidence with the Great
Year. The last dated observation in the Almagest is from early 141. Ptolemy's
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 11 of 21
observations are listed in table 6 together with modern astronomical dates for the
phenomena. This allows the calculation of the Julian dates for I Thoth 1 for each
observation.
Year, observed
(ref.15)
Type ob.
(ref.15) and
Julian date
(ref.21)
Egyptian date,
observed (ref.15)
Distance
(days)
Eg. date to
I Thoth 1
I Thoth 1
Julian date
(Julian date
ref.21 ± distance)
Hadrian 17
(132)
autumnal
equinox
Sept. 24
(3) Athyr 7 66 July 20
(Sept.24 - 66
days)
Antoninus 3
(Alexander 463)
(139)
autumnal
equinox
Sept. 24
(3) Athyr 9 68 July 18
(Sept.24 - 68
days)
(Antoninus 3)
Alexander 463
(140)
vernal
equinox
March 21
(9) Pachons 7 119 July 18
(Mar.21 + 119
days)
(Antoninus 3)
Alexander 463
(140)
summer
solstice
June 23
(12) Mesore 11
(night towards the
12th)
25 July 18
(June 23 + 25
days)
Table 6: Equinox and solstice observations made in Alexandria and reported by Ptolemy in the
Almagest (ref.15). The data can be used to determine the Julian dates for I Thoth 1 in the Egyptian
civil calendar for the years of observation.
Ptolemy's Julian date for I Thoth 1 varies from July 18 to 20. To summarize, Ptolemy,
Theon and Censorinus do not mention the Sothic date at the start of the Egyptian
civil calendar, but refer to and work with newly observed Sothic dates in Alexandria
which hardly can have been valid for the old calendar.
Eduard Meyer and influential astronomers of his time knew all this, of course, and
made own calculations of the standard (start) date for the heliacal rising of Sirius
(ref.7, page 14ff). Meyer believed that the start date was July 19Jul, and that this date
was the astronomical Sothic date at Memphis from before -4000 to -1000. Then July
20Jul followed on. What modern studies and simulators have to say about this is
compiled in table 2: the Julian date for the heliacal rising of Sirius at Memphis started
at July 16 in -2781 and slowly but significantly increased during the three millennia
the civil calendar was in force. Surprisingly, Meyer's and sometimes even Theon's
start date (July 20) are still used by modern historians as the foundation of the
Egyptian dynastic chronology, as we will demonstrate in a forthcoming article. This is
the very reason why Shaw's middle chronology is a couple of years too young
compared with scientific dating results.
That astronomers were and are reluctant to use new, earlier start dates might be due
to the fact that start dates before July 18Jul are incompatible with the conventional
written history. They would point to a year for the termination of the Egyptian civil
calendar when Egypt still was a sovereign kingdom. Table 7 summarizes the
consequences of the use of different start dates for the termination of the Egyptian
civil calendar.
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 12 of 21
This
article Ptolemy Meyer Theon
Ptolemy Censorinus
Julian start date I Thoth 1 July 16 July 17
July 18
July 19
July 20 July 21
Difference (days) to
I Thoth 1 on Aug 29 44 43 42 41 40 39
Difference (years) to Great
Year 139 176
(44 x 4)
172 168 164 160 156
Year CE for termination of
the Egyptian civil calendar -37
(139-176)
-33 -29 -25 -21 -17
Government in Egypt
(conventional history) sovereign kingdom Roman province
Table 7: Consequences of the use of different start dates for the termination of the Egyptian civil
calendar. Using July 16 or July 17 as start date for the calendar implies that Egypt was a sovereign
kingdom at the time the calendar was stopped.
Meyer apprehended that observations of the heliacal rising of Sirius in connection
with the launch of the Egyptian civil calendar would be the basis for its rigorous, non-
astronomical rule. However, he and his contemporary astronomical experts
calculated the wrong date, maybe because of historical bias. But what was the role of
Censorinus, Theon and Ptolemy in all this? Did they just say stuff because they did
not know better? We do not think so, because the astronomical years -37 and even
-21 were many years before Julius Caesar, Augustus and the annexation of Egypt to
the Roman empire if our scientifically reinforced hypothesis is correct (ref.22). Sorry
that this might sound like a conspiracy theory, but "Theon" the astronomer told the
historians that it was Augustus who reformed the Egyptian civil calendar in -21.
Therewith he placed Augustus firmly on the astronomical time line, in bad faith as we
assume. "Ptolemy" the astronomer backed up the reasoning with suitable
"observations" in certain regnal years of Roman emperors, so once again we find the
Almagest at the epicenter of the chronological fraud which - for some reason - made
West-Roman history 232 years older than it was. And "Censorinus" wrote down the
"facts" about the Egyptian civil calendar for dummies. We have in a previous article
(ref.23) unmasked Theon as leading a double life: he is fixed to the real
(astronomical) time line by a unique observation of a solar eclipse in the 4th century
CE, while at the same time he appears in a dialog by Plutarch living in the 2nd century
in Roman context. Both dates are far too early to propose that the real Theon could
be the forger, we assume instead that somebody else - during the 7th century in
Alexandria - altered Theon's work.
What really happened with the Egyptian civil calendar was probably the following: at
least since Ptolemy III's Canopus decree the Egyptians knew how to stop their
wandering calendar. They did so in -37 CE, and since then the Coptic calendar was
in force. About two centuries later Julius Caesar asked the Alexandrian astronomers,
as stated by Pliny (ref.24), to design a solar calendar for the Roman republic. It had
the same year length as the Coptic calendar, but other months and date for New
Year, and came into force by edict in 187 CE (-45 in Roman context). As the Roman
priests did not interpret the rule for the insertion of leap days correctly, Augustus had
to take corrective measures some years later. There were never any problems with
the Coptic calendar, because it was invented long time before Augustus by the
Egyptians themselves. And moreover, if Augustus had forcibly overridden the
Egyptian civil calendar, why didn't he directly introduce the Julian calendar instead?
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 13 of 21
Anyhow, historians will certainly need to take a closer look at Egyptian history
between Ptolemy III and Cleopatra VII.
That we nowadays can be confident when rewriting chronology and history depends
solely on the availability of historically independent scientific dating methods -
radiocarbon wiggle-matching and dendrochronology - and the availability of
advanced astronomical simulators. As Bradley Schaefer wrote in the introduction to
his article (ref.12): This paper targets the question of the dates of Sirius's heliacal rise
from ancient Egypt with the full power of modern astronomy.
But do not forget that the availability of independent methods today is largely
enhanced by the enormous amounts of computing power owned by everybody, and
the free access to all the knowledge on the Internet. Our interdisciplinary approach
would not have been possible just twenty years ago.
References
1. Bronk-Ramsey, C., Dee, M.W., Rowland, J.M., Higham, T.F.G., Harris, S.A., Brock, F., Quiles, A.,
Wild, E.M., Marcus, E.S. and Shortland, A.J. 2010. Radiocarbon-Based Chronology for Dynastic
Egypt. Science 328: 1554 –1557. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44683433_Radiocarbon-
Based_Chronology_for_Dynastic_Egypt
2. Shaw, I. ( Ed.), The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2000).
3. Ossowski Larsson P. & Larsson L.Å. (2017). Miyake Events from a dendrochronological point of
view. ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.15276.26241.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316141198_Miyake_Events_from_a_dendrochronological_p
oint_of_view
4. Breasted J.H. Ancient Records of Egypt: Historical Documents (Chicago: 1906),
a. Part II. http://etana.org/sites/default/files/coretexts/14897.pdf
b. Part III. http://etana.org/sites/default/files/coretexts/14898.pdf
5. Belmonte J.A. (2016). Is There a Conflict between Archaeology and Archaeoastronomy? An
Astronomer’s View. Journal of Skyscape Archaeology, Vol 2, No 2, p.255-260.
https://journals.equinoxpub.com/index.php/JSA/article/viewFile/31902/pdf
6. Shaltout, M. and Belmonte, J.A. 2005. On the orientation of ancient Egyptian temples: (1) Upper
Egypt and Lower Nubia. Journal for the History of Astronomy, xxxvi, 273–98.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234487564_On_the_Orientation_of_Ancient_Egyptian_Tem
ples_1_Upper_Egypt_and_Lower_Nubia
7. Meyer E., Ägyptische Chronologie, Abhandlungen der Königlich Preussischen Akademie der
Wissenschaften 1904. https://archive.org/details/abhandlungenderk1904kn
8. Belmonte, J. A. The Egyptian Civil Calendar: a Masterpiece to Organize the Cosmos. Cosmology
Across Cultures ASP Conference Series, Vol. 409, 2009., p.116.
http://adsbit.harvard.edu/full/2009ASPC..409..116B
9. Habicht M.E., Gautschy R., Siegmann R., Rutica D. and Hannig R. (2015). A New Sothis Rise on a
Small Cylindrical Jar from the Old Kingdom (Collection of Prof. Peter A. Kaplony). Göttinger Miszellen
247, 41-49.
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 14 of 21
10. Simulation done with Stellarium, http://www.stellarium.org
11. Fourmilab's Calendar converter, by John Walker (Sept. 2015).
https://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/calendar
12. Schaefer B.E. 2000. The heliacal rise of Sirius and ancient Egyptian chronology. Journal for the
History of Astronomy, Vol. 31, Part 2, 149 - 155. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/2000JHA....31..149S
13. Ancient Egyptian Chronology. Edited by Hornung E.,Krauss R. and Warburton, D.A. Brill, Leiden,
Boston 2006. https://archive.org/details/AncientEgyptianChronology_201303
14. The Canopus decree. Translated by André Dollinger from the hieroglyphic version by S. Birch,
Records of the Past, Series 1, Vol.VIII, 1876. Samuel Bagster and Sons, London.
http://www.attalus.org/egypt/canopus_decree.html
15. Ptolemy's Almagest. Translated and annotated by G.J.Toomer, Duckworth London 1984.
https://isidore.co/calibre/get/pdf/Ptolemy%26%2339%3Bs%20Almagest%20-
%20Ptolemy%2C%20Claudius%20%26amp%3B%20Toomer%2C%20G.%20J__5114.pdf
16. Mosshammer A.A.: The Easter Computus and the Origins of the Christian Era. Oxford Early
Christian Studies. Xi + 474 pp (Oxford 2008).
17. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_Berlin_10012, accessed 2018-08-03.
18. Petrie W.M.F., A History of Egypt during the XVIIth and XVIIIth Dynasties, London Methuen, 1896.
Vol. 2, 32. https://archive.org/stream/cu31924085360844
19. Depuydt L. (1996). The Function of the Ebers Calendar Concordance. Orientalia NOVA SERIES,
Vol. 65, No. 2, pp. 61-88. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43076265?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
20. Clagett, M. Ancient Egyptian Science, Volume 2: Calendars, Clocks, and Astronomy. Philadelphia:
American Philosophical Society, 1995.
https://books.google.se/books?id=xKKPUpDOTKAC&pg=PA28&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
21. Solstices & Equinoxes for Alexandria (Egypt) (100—149). Accessed 2019-12-31.
https://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/seasons.html?year=100&n=426
22. Ossowski Larsson P. & Larsson L.Å. (2019). About the obsession with Roman heirlooms in Late
Antiquity ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.28780.31368.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335517926
23. Ossowski Larsson P. & Larsson L.Å. (2016). Astronomical dating of Roman time. ResearchGate
DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2703.3363.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/296060902_Astronomical_dating_of_Roman_time
24. Pliny, Natural History, Book XVIII, chapter 57, trans. Bostock and Riley.
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0137%3Abook%3D18%3
Achapter%3D57
25. Censorinus, De Die Natale. Translated into English by William Maude, New York: The Cambridge
Encyclopedia Co., 1900. http://elfinspell.com/ClassicalTexts/Maude/Censorinus
26. MacNaughton D., A scheme of Egyptian chronology with notes thereon. Luzac & Co. London
1932. https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.104225
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 15 of 21
Appendix A: Details about the Egyptian civil calendar
The details about the synchronization of the Egyptian civil calendar are all from the
Roman period. Censorinus describes the calendar in his De Die Natale (ref.25),
composed for the birthday of Cerellius, “the day which he religiously celebrates each
year as the day of his birth.” The year is 238 in Roman context, at the begin of the
reign of Gordian III and under the consulate of Ulpius and Pontianus.
(Chapter XVIII, the Great Year): This difference in the length of the Great Year comes
from the fact that the astrologers did not agree either on what should be added to the
365 days of the solar year, or what should be taken from the thirty days of the lunar
month. On the other hand, the Egyptians, in the formation of their Great Year, had no
regard to the moon. In Greece the Egyptian year is called cynical (dog-like) and in Latin
canicular, because it commences with the rising of the Canicular or Dog star, to which
is fixed the first day of the month which the Egyptians called Thoth. Their civil (equable)
year had but 365 days without any intercalation. Thus with the Egyptians the space of
four years is shorter by one day than the space four natural (Julian) years, and a
complete synchronism is only established at the end of 1461 years. The 1461st year by
some is called the Heliacal and by others the Year of God.
(Chapter XX, the historical period): The æras of the Egyptians always commence on
the first day of the month, Thoth, a day which, this present year, corresponds to the 7th
calends of July, whilst a hundred years ago, under the second consulate of the
Emperor Antoninus Pius and of Bruttius Præsena, this same day corresponded to the
12th of the calends of August, the ordinary epoch of the rising of the Canicular star in
Egypt. Thus we see that we are to-day really in the hundredth year of this Annus
Magnus, which, as I have stated above, is called the solar and canicular year and Year
of God.
Censorinus was a writer without specific scientific skills. There is however a similar
statement by Theon of Alexandria, a skilled mathematician and astronomer. It
appears as a note about "how to find the rising of the Dogstar" in an unpublished
manuscript which was often cited and discussed around year 1900. Here is one of
the more initiated examples (ref.26):
(Note 46. the era of Menophres, page 234): Writing in the 4th Century A.D. the
astronomer Theon said that from Menophres to the beginning of the Era of Diocletian
was 1605 years. The Era of Diocletian being 284 A.D. this gives the date 1322 B.c. as
the Era of Menophres in the opinion of Theon. Now from 1322 B.C. to 139 A.D., the
year which Censorinus mentioned as commencing a Sothiac cycle, is 1,460 years and
this is exactly the interval from the date of Rising of Sirius on 1st Thoth to its next
cyclical Rising on that date in the opinion of the chronologists of the 4th Century. The
calculation is approximately correct if the assumption is sound that there was no
alteration in the calendar throughout that period and that the Rising of Sirius in the
North of Egypt was at both dates considered more important than in the South, and
more important than the Rising of any other star.
...
Names of pharaohs similar to Menophres which have been traced (WC. 10-11) are
Mennofirre on a Hyksos scarab, Mernohrre Ai of the Thirteenth Dynasty, Merenptah of
the Nineteenth Dynasty. As none of these fitted the date 1322 on the chronologies of
recent years, Sir Flinders Petrie suggested that Menophres was perhaps to be
identified with Ramses I., whose throne name was Menpetirah.
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 16 of 21
Appendix B: Sothic dates for all years from -2781 to 138
Knowing the start- and end-years of the two Sothic cycles, we can write a table which allows the direct assignation
of all possible dates for the heliacal rising of Sirius (i.e. Sothic dates) in the Egyptian civil calendar to the
corresponding four-years period in the Julian calendar. Note: this table allows direct conversion between the years
of the civil calendar and the Julian calendar if the Sothic date was taken from the schematic calendar (i.e. without
observation), or if any observation was made in the delta lowlands during the first half of the older Sothic cycle.
Example: the schematic al-Lahun Sothic date discussed in section "An example and a check" above.
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-2781 -1321
I Thoth 1
-2780 -1320
-2779 -1319
-2778 -1318
-2777 -1317
I Thoth 2
-2776 -1316
-2775 -1315
-2774 -1314
-2773 -1313
I Thoth 3
-2772 -1312
-2771 -1311
-2770 -1310
-2769 -1309
I Thoth 4
-2768 -1308
-2767 -1307
-2766 -1306
-2765 -1305
I Thoth 5
-2764 -1304
-2763 -1303
-2762 -1302
-2761 -1301
I Thoth 6
-2760 -1300
-2759 -1299
-2758 -1298
-2757 -1297
I Thoth 7
-2756 -1296
-2755 -1295
-2754 -1294
-2753 -1293
I Thoth 8
-2752 -1292
-2751 -1291
-2750 -1290
-2749 -1289
I Thoth 9
-2748 -1288
-2747 -1287
-2746 -1286
-2745 -1285
I Thoth 10
-2744 -1284
-2743 -1283
-2742 -1282
-2741 -1281
I Thoth 11
-2740 -1280
-2739 -1279
-2738 -1278
-2737 -1277
I Thoth 12
-2736 -1276
-2735 -1275
-2734 -1274
-2733 -1273
I Thoth 13
-2732 -1272
-2731 -1271
-2730 -1270
-2729 -1269
I Thoth 14
-2728 -1268
-2727 -1267
-2726 -1266
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-2725 -1265
I Thoth 15
-2724 -1264
-2723 -1263
-2722 -1262
-2721 -1261
I Thoth 16
-2720 -1260
-2719 -1259
-2718 -1258
-2717 -1257
I Thoth 17
-2716 -1256
-2715 -1255
-2714 -1254
-2713 -1253
I Thoth 18
-2712 -1252
-2711 -1251
-2710 -1250
-2709 -1249
I Thoth 19
-2708 -1248
-2707 -1247
-2706 -1246
-2705 -1245
I Thoth 20
-2704 -1244
-2703 -1243
-2702 -1242
-2701 -1241
I Thoth 21
-2700 -1240
-2699 -1239
-2698 -1238
-2697 -1237
I Thoth 22
-2696 -1236
-2695 -1235
-2694 -1234
-2693 -1233
I Thoth 23
-2692 -1232
-2691 -1231
-2690 -1230
-2689 -1229
I Thoth 24
-2688 -1228
-2687 -1227
-2686 -1226
-2685 -1225
I Thoth 25
-2684 -1224
-2683 -1223
-2682 -1222
-2681 -1221
I Thoth 26
-2680 -1220
-2679 -1219
-2678 -1218
-2677 -1217
I Thoth 27
-2676 -1216
-2675 -1215
-2674 -1214
-2673 -1213
I Thoth 28
-2672 -1212
-2671 -1211
-2670 -1210
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-2669 -1209
I Thoth 29
-2668 -1208
-2667 -1207
-2666 -1206
-2665 -1205
I Thoth 30
-2664 -1204
-2663 -1203
-2662 -1202
-2661 -1201
II Phaophi 1
-2660 -1200
-2659 -1199
-2658 -1198
-2657 -1197
II Phaophi 2
-2656 -1196
-2655 -1195
-2654 -1194
-2653 -1193
II Phaophi 3
-2652 -1192
-2651 -1191
-2650 -1190
-2649 -1189
II Phaophi 4
-2648 -1188
-2647 -1187
-2646 -1186
-2645 -1185
II Phaophi 5
-2644 -1184
-2643 -1183
-2642 -1182
-2641 -1181
II Phaophi 6
-2640 -1180
-2639 -1179
-2638 -1178
-2637 -1177
II Phaophi 7
-2636 -1176
-2635 -1175
-2634 -1174
-2633 -1173
II Phaophi 8
-2632 -1172
-2631 -1171
-2630 -1170
-2629 -1169
II Phaophi 9
-2628 -1168
-2627 -1167
-2626 -1166
-2625 -1165
II Phaophi
10
-2624 -1164
-2623 -1163
-2622 -1162
-2621 -1161
II Phaophi
11
-2620 -1160
-2619 -1159
-2618 -1158
-2617 -1157
II Phaophi
12
-2616 -1156
-2615 -1155
-2614 -1154
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-2613 -1153
II Phaophi
13
-2612 -1152
-2611 -1151
-2610 -1150
-2609 -1149
II Phaophi
14
-2608 -1148
-2607 -1147
-2606 -1146
-2605 -1145
II Phaophi
15
-2604 -1144
-2603 -1143
-2602 -1142
-2601 -1141
II Phaophi
16
-2600 -1140
-2599 -1139
-2598 -1138
-2597 -1137
II Phaophi
17
-2596 -1136
-2595 -1135
-2594 -1134
-2593 -1133
II Phaophi
18
-2592 -1132
-2591 -1131
-2590 -1130
-2589 -1129
II Phaophi
19
-2588 -1128
-2587 -1127
-2586 -1126
-2585 -1125
II Phaophi
20
-2584 -1124
-2583 -1123
-2582 -1122
-2581 -1121
II Phaophi
21
-2580 -1120
-2579 -1119
-2578 -1118
-2577 -1117
II Phaophi
22
-2576 -1116
-2575 -1115
-2574 -1114
-2573 -1113
II Phaophi
23
-2572 -1112
-2571 -1111
-2570 -1110
-2569 -1109
II Phaophi
24
-2568 -1108
-2567 -1107
-2566 -1106
-2565 -1105
II Phaophi
25
-2564 -1104
-2563 -1103
-2562 -1102
-2561 -1101
II Phaophi
26
-2560 -1100
-2559 -1099
-2558 -1098
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 17 of 21
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-2557 -1097
II Phaophi
27
-2556 -1096
-2555 -1095
-2554 -1094
-2553 -1093
II Phaophi
28
-2552 -1092
-2551 -1091
-2550 -1090
-2549 -1089
II Phaophi
29
-2548 -1088
-2547 -1087
-2546 -1086
-2545 -1085
II Phaophi
30
-2544 -1084
-2543 -1083
-2542 -1082
-2541 -1081
III Athyr 1
-2540 -1080
-2539 -1079
-2538 -1078
-2537 -1077
III Athyr 2
-2536 -1076
-2535 -1075
-2534 -1074
-2533 -1073
III Athyr 3
-2532 -1072
-2531 -1071
-2530 -1070
-2529 -1069
III Athyr 4
-2528 -1068
-2527 -1067
-2526 -1066
-2525 -1065
III Athyr 5
-2524 -1064
-2523 -1063
-2522 -1062
-2521 -1061
III Athyr 6
-2520 -1060
-2519 -1059
-2518 -1058
-2517 -1057
III Athyr 7
-2516 -1056
-2515 -1055
-2514 -1054
-2513 -1053
III Athyr 8
-2512 -1052
-2511 -1051
-2510 -1050
-2509 -1049
III Athyr 9
-2508 -1048
-2507 -1047
-2506 -1046
-2505 -1045
III Athyr 10
-2504 -1044
-2503 -1043
-2502 -1042
-2501 -1041
III Athyr 11
-2500 -1040
-2499 -1039
-2498 -1038
-2497 -1037
III Athyr 12
-2496 -1036
-2495 -1035
-2494 -1034
-2493 -1033
III Athyr 13
-2492 -1032
-2491 -1031
-2490 -1030
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-2489 -1029
III Athyr 14
-2488 -1028
-2487 -1027
-2486 -1026
-2485 -1025
III Athyr 15
-2484 -1024
-2483 -1023
-2482 -1022
-2481 -1021
III Athyr 16
-2480 -1020
-2479 -1019
-2478 -1018
-2477 -1017
III Athyr 17
-2476 -1016
-2475 -1015
-2474 -1014
-2473 -1013
III Athyr 18
-2472 -1012
-2471 -1011
-2470 -1010
-2469 -1009
III Athyr 19
-2468 -1008
-2467 -1007
-2466 -1006
-2465 -1005
III Athyr 20
-2464 -1004
-2463 -1003
-2462 -1002
-2461 -1001
III Athyr 21
-2460 -1000
-2459 -999
-2458 -998
-2457 -997
III Athyr 22
-2456 -996
-2455 -995
-2454 -994
-2453 -993
III Athyr 23
-2452 -992
-2451 -991
-2450 -990
-2449 -989
III Athyr 24
-2448 -988
-2447 -987
-2446 -986
-2445 -985
III Athyr 25
-2444 -984
-2443 -983
-2442 -982
-2441 -981
III Athyr 26
-2440 -980
-2439 -979
-2438 -978
-2437 -977
III Athyr 27
-2436 -976
-2435 -975
-2434 -974
-2433 -973
III Athyr 28
-2432 -972
-2431 -971
-2430 -970
-2429 -969
III Athyr 29
-2428 -968
-2427 -967
-2426 -966
-2425 -965
III Athyr 30
-2424 -964
-2423 -963
-2422 -962
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-2421 -961
IV Choiak 1
-2420 -960
-2419 -959
-2418 -958
-2417 -957
IV Choiak 2
-2416 -956
-2415 -955
-2414 -954
-2413 -953
IV Choiak 3
-2412 -952
-2411 -951
-2410 -950
-2409 -949
IV Choiak 4
-2408 -948
-2407 -947
-2406 -946
-2405 -945
IV Choiak 5
-2404 -944
-2403 -943
-2402 -942
-2401 -941
IV Choiak 6
-2400 -940
-2399 -939
-2398 -938
-2397 -937
IV Choiak 7
-2396 -936
-2395 -935
-2394 -934
-2393 -933
IV Choiak 8
-2392 -932
-2391 -931
-2390 -930
-2389 -929
IV Choiak 9
-2388 -928
-2387 -927
-2386 -926
-2385 -925
IV Choiak 10
-2384 -924
-2383 -923
-2382 -922
-2381 -921
IV Choiak 11
-2380 -920
-2379 -919
-2378 -918
-2377 -917
IV Choiak 12
-2376 -916
-2375 -915
-2374 -914
-2373 -913
IV Choiak 13
-2372 -912
-2371 -911
-2370 -910
-2369 -909
IV Choiak 14
-2368 -908
-2367 -907
-2366 -906
-2365 -905
IV Choiak 15
-2364 -904
-2363 -903
-2362 -902
-2361 -901
IV Choiak 16
-2360 -900
-2359 -899
-2358 -898
-2357 -897
IV Choiak 17
-2356 -896
-2355 -895
-2354 -894
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-2353 -893
IV Choiak 18
-2352 -892
-2351 -891
-2350 -890
-2349 -889
IV Choiak 19
-2348 -888
-2347 -887
-2346 -886
-2345 -885
IV Choiak 20
-2344 -884
-2343 -883
-2342 -882
-2341 -881
IV Choiak 21
-2340 -880
-2339 -879
-2338 -878
-2337 -877
IV Choiak 22
-2336 -876
-2335 -875
-2334 -874
-2333 -873
IV Choiak 23
-2332 -872
-2331 -871
-2330 -870
-2329 -869
IV Choiak 24
-2328 -868
-2327 -867
-2326 -866
-2325 -865
IV Choiak 25
-2324 -864
-2323 -863
-2322 -862
-2321 -861
IV Choiak 26
-2320 -860
-2319 -859
-2318 -858
-2317 -857
IV Choiak 27
-2316 -856
-2315 -855
-2314 -854
-2313 -853
IV Choiak 28
-2312 -852
-2311 -851
-2310 -850
-2309 -849
IV Choiak 29
-2308 -848
-2307 -847
-2306 -846
-2305 -845
IV Choiak 30
-2304 -844
-2303 -843
-2302 -842
-2301 -841
V Tybi 1
-2300 -840
-2299 -839
-2298 -838
-2297 -837
V Tybi 2
-2296 -836
-2295 -835
-2294 -834
-2293 -833
V Tybi 3
-2292 -832
-2291 -831
-2290 -830
-2289 -829
V Tybi 4
-2288 -828
-2287 -827
-2286 -826
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 18 of 21
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-2285 -825
V Tybi 5
-2284 -824
-2283 -823
-2282 -822
-2281 -821
V Tybi 6
-2280 -820
-2279 -819
-2278 -818
-2277 -817
V Tybi 7
-2276 -816
-2275 -815
-2274 -814
-2273 -813
V Tybi 8
-2272 -812
-2271 -811
-2270 -810
-2269 -809
V Tybi 9
-2268 -808
-2267 -807
-2266 -806
-2265 -805
V Tybi 10
-2264 -804
-2263 -803
-2262 -802
-2261 -801
V Tybi 11
-2260 -800
-2259 -799
-2258 -798
-2257 -797
V Tybi 12
-2256 -796
-2255 -795
-2254 -794
-2253 -793
V Tybi 13
-2252 -792
-2251 -791
-2250 -790
-2249 -789
V Tybi 14
-2248 -788
-2247 -787
-2246 -786
-2245 -785
V Tybi 15
-2244 -784
-2243 -783
-2242 -782
-2241 -781
V Tybi 16
-2240 -780
-2239 -779
-2238 -778
-2237 -777
V Tybi 17
-2236 -776
-2235 -775
-2234 -774
-2233 -773
V Tybi 18
-2232 -772
-2231 -771
-2230 -770
-2229 -769
V Tybi 19
-2228 -768
-2227 -767
-2226 -766
-2225 -765
V Tybi 20
-2224 -764
-2223 -763
-2222 -762
-2221 -761
V Tybi 21
-2220 -760
-2219 -759
-2218 -758
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-2217 -757
V Tybi 22
-2216 -756
-2215 -755
-2214 -754
-2213 -753
V Tybi 23
-2212 -752
-2211 -751
-2210 -750
-2209 -749
V Tybi 24
-2208 -748
-2207 -747
-2206 -746
-2205 -745
V Tybi 25
-2204 -744
-2203 -743
-2202 -742
-2201 -741
V Tybi 26
-2200 -740
-2199 -739
-2198 -738
-2197 -737
V Tybi 27
-2196 -736
-2195 -735
-2194 -734
-2193 -733
V Tybi 28
-2192 -732
-2191 -731
-2190 -730
-2189 -729
V Tybi 29
-2188 -728
-2187 -727
-2186 -726
-2185 -725
V Tybi 30
-2184 -724
-2183 -723
-2182 -722
-2181 -721
VI Mechir 1
-2180 -720
-2179 -719
-2178 -718
-2177 -717
VI Mechir 2
-2176 -716
-2175 -715
-2174 -714
-2173 -713
VI Mechir 3
-2172 -712
-2171 -711
-2170 -710
-2169 -709
VI Mechir 4
-2168 -708
-2167 -707
-2166 -706
-2165 -705
VI Mechir 5
-2164 -704
-2163 -703
-2162 -702
-2161 -701
VI Mechir 6
-2160 -700
-2159 -699
-2158 -698
-2157 -697
VI Mechir 7
-2156 -696
-2155 -695
-2154 -694
-2153 -693
VI Mechir 8
-2152 -692
-2151 -691
-2150 -690
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-2149 -689
VI Mechir 9
-2148 -688
-2147 -687
-2146 -686
-2145 -685
VI Mechir 10
-2144 -684
-2143 -683
-2142 -682
-2141 -681
VI Mechir 11
-2140 -680
-2139 -679
-2138 -678
-2137 -677
VI Mechir 12
-2136 -676
-2135 -675
-2134 -674
-2133 -673
VI Mechir 13
-2132 -672
-2131 -671
-2130 -670
-2129 -669
VI Mechir 14
-2128 -668
-2127 -667
-2126 -666
-2125 -665
VI Mechir 15
-2124 -664
-2123 -663
-2122 -662
-2121 -661
VI Mechir 16
-2120 -660
-2119 -659
-2118 -658
-2117 -657
VI Mechir 17
-2116 -656
-2115 -655
-2114 -654
-2113 -653
VI Mechir 18
-2112 -652
-2111 -651
-2110 -650
-2109 -649
VI Mechir 19
-2108 -648
-2107 -647
-2106 -646
-2105 -645
VI Mechir 20
-2104 -644
-2103 -643
-2102 -642
-2101 -641
VI Mechir 21
-2100 -640
-2099 -639
-2098 -638
-2097 -637
VI Mechir 22
-2096 -636
-2095 -635
-2094 -634
-2093 -633
VI Mechir 23
-2092 -632
-2091 -631
-2090 -630
-2089 -629
VI Mechir 24
-2088 -628
-2087 -627
-2086 -626
-2085 -625
VI Mechir 25
-2084 -624
-2083 -623
-2082 -622
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-2081 -621
VI Mechir 26
-2080 -620
-2079 -619
-2078 -618
-2077 -617
VI Mechir 27
-2076 -616
-2075 -615
-2074 -614
-2073 -613
VI Mechir 28
-2072 -612
-2071 -611
-2070 -610
-2069 -609
VI Mechir 29
-2068 -608
-2067 -607
-2066 -606
-2065 -605
VI Mechir 30
-2064 -604
-2063 -603
-2062 -602
-2061 -601 VII
Phamenoth
1
-2060 -600
-2059 -599
-2058 -598
-2057 -597 VII
Phamenoth
2
-2056 -596
-2055 -595
-2054 -594
-2053 -593 VII
Phamenoth
3
-2052 -592
-2051 -591
-2050 -590
-2049 -589 VII
Phamenoth
4
-2048 -588
-2047 -587
-2046 -586
-2045 -585 VII
Phamenoth
5
-2044 -584
-2043 -583
-2042 -582
-2041 -581 VII
Phamenoth
6
-2040 -580
-2039 -579
-2038 -578
-2037 -577 VII
Phamenoth
7
-2036 -576
-2035 -575
-2034 -574
-2033 -573 VII
Phamenoth
8
-2032 -572
-2031 -571
-2030 -570
-2029 -569 VII
Phamenoth
9
-2028 -568
-2027 -567
-2026 -566
-2025 -565 VII
Phamenoth
10
-2024 -564
-2023 -563
-2022 -562
-2021 -561 VII
Phamenoth
11
-2020 -560
-2019 -559
-2018 -558
-2017 -557 VII
Phamenoth
12
-2016 -556
-2015 -555
-2014 -554
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 19 of 21
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-2013 -553 VII
Phamenoth
13
-2012 -552
-2011 -551
-2010 -550
-2009 -549 VII
Phamenoth
14
-2008 -548
-2007 -547
-2006 -546
-2005 -545 VII
Phamenoth
15
-2004 -544
-2003 -543
-2002 -542
-2001 -541 VII
Phamenoth
16
-2000 -540
-1999 -539
-1998 -538
-1997 -537 VII
Phamenoth
17
-1996 -536
-1995 -535
-1994 -534
-1993 -533 VII
Phamenoth
18
-1992 -532
-1991 -531
-1990 -530
-1989 -529 VII
Phamenoth
19
-1988 -528
-1987 -527
-1986 -526
-1985 -525 VII
Phamenoth
20
-1984 -524
-1983 -523
-1982 -522
-1981 -521 VII
Phamenoth
21
-1980 -520
-1979 -519
-1978 -518
-1977 -517 VII
Phamenoth
22
-1976 -516
-1975 -515
-1974 -514
-1973 -513 VII
Phamenoth
23
-1972 -512
-1971 -511
-1970 -510
-1969 -509 VII
Phamenoth
24
-1968 -508
-1967 -507
-1966 -506
-1965 -505 VII
Phamenoth
25
-1964 -504
-1963 -503
-1962 -502
-1961 -501 VII
Phamenoth
26
-1960 -500
-1959 -499
-1958 -498
-1957 -497 VII
Phamenoth
27
-1956 -496
-1955 -495
-1954 -494
-1953 -493 VII
Phamenoth
28
-1952 -492
-1951 -491
-1950 -490
-1949 -489 VII
Phamenoth
29
-1948 -488
-1947 -487
-1946 -486
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-1945 -485 VII
Phamenoth
30
-1944 -484
-1943 -483
-1942 -482
-1941 -481
VIII
Pharmuthi 1
-1940 -480
-1939 -479
-1938 -478
-1937 -477
VIII
Pharmuthi 2
-1936 -476
-1935 -475
-1934 -474
-1933 -473
VIII
Pharmuthi 3
-1932 -472
-1931 -471
-1930 -470
-1929 -469
VIII
Pharmuthi 4
-1928 -468
-1927 -467
-1926 -466
-1925 -465
VIII
Pharmuthi 5
-1924 -464
-1923 -463
-1922 -462
-1921 -461
VIII
Pharmuthi 6
-1920 -460
-1919 -459
-1918 -458
-1917 -457
VIII
Pharmuthi 7
-1916 -456
-1915 -455
-1914 -454
-1913 -453
VIII
Pharmuthi 8
-1912 -452
-1911 -451
-1910 -450
-1909 -449
VIII
Pharmuthi 9
-1908 -448
-1907 -447
-1906 -446
-1905 -445 VIII
Pharmuthi
10
-1904 -444
-1903 -443
-1902 -442
-1901 -441 VIII
Pharmuthi
11
-1900 -440
-1899 -439
-1898 -438
-1897 -437 VIII
Pharmuthi
12
-1896 -436
-1895 -435
-1894 -434
-1893 -433 VIII
Pharmuthi
13
-1892 -432
-1891 -431
-1890 -430
-1889 -429 VIII
Pharmuthi
14
-1888 -428
-1887 -427
-1886 -426
-1885 -425 VIII
Pharmuthi
15
-1884 -424
-1883 -423
-1882 -422
-1881 -421 VIII
Pharmuthi
16
-1880 -420
-1879 -419
-1878 -418
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-1877 -417 VIII
Pharmuthi
17
-1876 -416
-1875 -415
-1874 -414
-1873 -413 VIII
Pharmuthi
18
-1872 -412
-1871 -411
-1870 -410
-1869 -409 VIII
Pharmuthi
19
-1868 -408
-1867 -407
-1866 -406
-1865 -405 VIII
Pharmuthi
20
-1864 -404
-1863 -403
-1862 -402
-1861 -401 VIII
Pharmuthi
21
-1860 -400
-1859 -399
-1858 -398
-1857 -397 VIII
Pharmuthi
22
-1856 -396
-1855 -395
-1854 -394
-1853 -393 VIII
Pharmuthi
23
-1852 -392
-1851 -391
-1850 -390
-1849 -389 VIII
Pharmuthi
24
-1848 -388
-1847 -387
-1846 -386
-1845 -385 VIII
Pharmuthi
25
-1844 -384
-1843 -383
-1842 -382
-1841 -381 VIII
Pharmuthi
26
-1840 -380
-1839 -379
-1838 -378
-1837 -377 VIII
Pharmuthi
27
-1836 -376
-1835 -375
-1834 -374
-1833 -373 VIII
Pharmuthi
28
-1832 -372
-1831 -371
-1830 -370
-1829 -369 VIII
Pharmuthi
29
-1828 -368
-1827 -367
-1826 -366
-1825 -365 VIII
Pharmuthi
30
-1824 -364
-1823 -363
-1822 -362
-1821 -361
IX Pachons
1
-1820 -360
-1819 -359
-1818 -358
-1817 -357
IX Pachons
2
-1816 -356
-1815 -355
-1814 -354
-1813 -353
IX Pachons
3
-1812 -352
-1811 -351
-1810 -350
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-1809 -349
IX Pachons
4
-1808 -348
-1807 -347
-1806 -346
-1805 -345
IX Pachons
5
-1804 -344
-1803 -343
-1802 -342
-1801 -341
IX Pachons
6
-1800 -340
-1799 -339
-1798 -338
-1797 -337
IX Pachons
7
-1796 -336
-1795 -335
-1794 -334
-1793 -333
IX Pachons
8
-1792 -332
-1791 -331
-1790 -330
-1789 -329
IX Pachons
9
-1788 -328
-1787 -327
-1786 -326
-1785 -325
IX Pachons
10
-1784 -324
-1783 -323
-1782 -322
-1781 -321
IX Pachons
11
-1780 -320
-1779 -319
-1778 -318
-1777 -317
IX Pachons
12
-1776 -316
-1775 -315
-1774 -314
-1773 -313
IX Pachons
13
-1772 -312
-1771 -311
-1770 -310
-1769 -309
IX Pachons
14
-1768 -308
-1767 -307
-1766 -306
-1765 -305
IX Pachons
15
-1764 -304
-1763 -303
-1762 -302
-1761 -301
IX Pachons
16
-1760 -300
-1759 -299
-1758 -298
-1757 -297
IX Pachons
17
-1756 -296
-1755 -295
-1754 -294
-1753 -293
IX Pachons
18
-1752 -292
-1751 -291
-1750 -290
-1749 -289
IX Pachons
19
-1748 -288
-1747 -287
-1746 -286
-1745 -285
IX Pachons
20
-1744 -284
-1743 -283
-1742 -282
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 20 of 21
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-1741 -281
IX Pachons
21
-1740 -280
-1739 -279
-1738 -278
-1737 -277
IX Pachons
22
-1736 -276
-1735 -275
-1734 -274
-1733 -273
IX Pachons
23
-1732 -272
-1731 -271
-1730 -270
-1729 -269
IX Pachons
24
-1728 -268
-1727 -267
-1726 -266
-1725 -265
IX Pachons
25
-1724 -264
-1723 -263
-1722 -262
-1721 -261
IX Pachons
26
-1720 -260
-1719 -259
-1718 -258
-1717 -257
IX Pachons
27
-1716 -256
-1715 -255
-1714 -254
-1713 -253
IX Pachons
28
-1712 -252
-1711 -251
-1710 -250
-1709 -249
IX Pachons
29
-1708 -248
-1707 -247
-1706 -246
-1705 -245
IX Pachons
30
-1704 -244
-1703 -243
-1702 -242
-1701 -241
X Payni 1
-1700 -240
-1699 -239
-1698 -238
-1697 -237
X Payni 2
-1696 -236
-1695 -235
-1694 -234
-1693 -233
X Payni 3
-1692 -232
-1691 -231
-1690 -230
-1689 -229
X Payni 4
-1688 -228
-1687 -227
-1686 -226
-1685 -225
X Payni 5
-1684 -224
-1683 -223
-1682 -222
-1681 -221
X Payni 6
-1680 -220
-1679 -219
-1678 -218
-1677 -217
X Payni 7
-1676 -216
-1675 -215
-1674 -214
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-1673 -213
X Payni 8
-1672 -212
-1671 -211
-1670 -210
-1669 -209
X Payni 9
-1668 -208
-1667 -207
-1666 -206
-1665 -205
X Payni 10
-1664 -204
-1663 -203
-1662 -202
-1661 -201
X Payni 11
-1660 -200
-1659 -199
-1658 -198
-1657 -197
X Payni 12
-1656 -196
-1655 -195
-1654 -194
-1653 -193
X Payni 13
-1652 -192
-1651 -191
-1650 -190
-1649 -189
X Payni 14
-1648 -188
-1647 -187
-1646 -186
-1645 -185
X Payni 15
-1644 -184
-1643 -183
-1642 -182
-1641 -181
X Payni 16
-1640 -180
-1639 -179
-1638 -178
-1637 -177
X Payni 17
-1636 -176
-1635 -175
-1634 -174
-1633 -173
X Payni 18
-1632 -172
-1631 -171
-1630 -170
-1629 -169
X Payni 19
-1628 -168
-1627 -167
-1626 -166
-1625 -165
X Payni 20
-1624 -164
-1623 -163
-1622 -162
-1621 -161
X Payni 21
-1620 -160
-1619 -159
-1618 -158
-1617 -157
X Payni 22
-1616 -156
-1615 -155
-1614 -154
-1613 -153
X Payni 23
-1612 -152
-1611 -151
-1610 -150
-1609 -149
X Payni 24
-1608 -148
-1607 -147
-1606 -146
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-1605 -145
X Payni 25
-1604 -144
-1603 -143
-1602 -142
-1601 -141
X Payni 26
-1600 -140
-1599 -139
-1598 -138
-1597 -137
X Payni 27
-1596 -136
-1595 -135
-1594 -134
-1593 -133
X Payni 28
-1592 -132
-1591 -131
-1590 -130
-1589 -129
X Payni 29
-1588 -128
-1587 -127
-1586 -126
-1585 -125
X Payni 30
-1584 -124
-1583 -123
-1582 -122
-1581 -121
XI Epiphi 1
-1580 -120
-1579 -119
-1578 -118
-1577 -117
XI Epiphi 2
-1576 -116
-1575 -115
-1574 -114
-1573 -113
XI Epiphi 3
-1572 -112
-1571 -111
-1570 -110
-1569 -109
XI Epiphi 4
-1568 -108
-1567 -107
-1566 -106
-1565 -105
XI Epiphi 5
-1564 -104
-1563 -103
-1562 -102
-1561 -101
XI Epiphi 6
-1560 -100
-1559 -99
-1558 -98
-1557 -97
XI Epiphi 7
-1556 -96
-1555 -95
-1554 -94
-1553 -93
XI Epiphi 8
-1552 -92
-1551 -91
-1550 -90
-1549 -89
XI Epiphi 9
-1548 -88
-1547 -87
-1546 -86
-1545 -85
XI Epiphi 10
-1544 -84
-1543 -83
-1542 -82
-1541 -81
XI Epiphi 11
-1540 -80
-1539 -79
-1538 -78
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-1537 -77
XI Epiphi 12
-1536 -76
-1535 -75
-1534 -74
-1533 -73
XI Epiphi 13
-1532 -72
-1531 -71
-1530 -70
-1529 -69
XI Epiphi 14
-1528 -68
-1527 -67
-1526 -66
-1525 -65
XI Epiphi 15
-1524 -64
-1523 -63
-1522 -62
-1521 -61
XI Epiphi 16
-1520 -60
-1519 -59
-1518 -58
-1517 -57
XI Epiphi 17
-1516 -56
-1515 -55
-1514 -54
-1513 -53
XI Epiphi 18
-1512 -52
-1511 -51
-1510 -50
-1509 -49
XI Epiphi 19
-1508 -48
-1507 -47
-1506 -46
-1505 -45
XI Epiphi 20
-1504 -44
-1503 -43
-1502 -42
-1501 -41
XI Epiphi 21
-1500 -40
-1499 -39
-1498 -38
-1497 -37
XI Epiphi 22
-1496 -36
-1495 -35
-1494 -34
-1493 -33
XI Epiphi 23
-1492 -32
-1491 -31
-1490 -30
-1489 -29
XI Epiphi 24
-1488 -28
-1487 -27
-1486 -26
-1485 -25
XI Epiphi 25
-1484 -24
-1483 -23
-1482 -22
-1481 -21
XI Epiphi 26
-1480 -20
-1479 -19
-1478 -18
-1477 -17
XI Epiphi 27
-1476 -16
-1475 -15
-1474 -14
-1473 -13
XI Epiphi 28
-1472 -12
-1471 -11
-1470 -10
Dating New Kingdom - Civil Calendar, draft, 2020-01-12, Page 21 of 21
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-1469 -9
XI Epiphi 29
-1468 -8
-1467 -7
-1466 -6
-1465 -5
XI Epiphi 30
-1464 -4
-1463 -3
-1462 -2
-1461 -1
XII Mesore 1
-1460 0
-1459 1
-1458 2
-1457 3
XII Mesore 2
-1456 4
-1455 5
-1454 6
-1453 7
XII Mesore 3
-1452 8
-1451 9
-1450 10
-1449 11
XII Mesore 4
-1448 12
-1447 13
-1446 14
-1445 15
XII Mesore 5
-1444 16
-1443 17
-1442 18
-1441 19
XII Mesore 6
-1440 20
-1439 21
-1438 22
-1437 23
XII Mesore 7
-1436 24
-1435 25
-1434 26
-1433 27
XII Mesore 8
-1432 28
-1431 29
-1430 30
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-1429 31
XII Mesore 9
-1428 32
-1427 33
-1426 34
-1425 35
XII Mesore
10
-1424 36
-1423 37
-1422 38
-1421 39
XII Mesore
11
-1420 40
-1419 41
-1418 42
-1417 43
XII Mesore
12
-1416 44
-1415 45
-1414 46
-1413 47
XII Mesore
13
-1412 48
-1411 49
-1410 50
-1409 51
XII Mesore
14
-1408 52
-1407 53
-1406 54
-1405 55
XII Mesore
15
-1404 56
-1403 57
-1402 58
-1401 59
XII Mesore
16
-1400 60
-1399 61
-1398 62
-1397 63
XII Mesore
17
-1396 64
-1395 65
-1394 66
-1393 67
XII Mesore
18
-1392 68
-1391 69
-1390 70
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-1389 71
XII Mesore
19
-1388 72
-1387 73
-1386 74
-1385 75
XII Mesore
20
-1384 76
-1383 77
-1382 78
-1381 79
XII Mesore
21
-1380 80
-1379 81
-1378 82
-1377 83
XII Mesore
22
-1376 84
-1375 85
-1374 86
-1373 87
XII Mesore
23
-1372 88
-1371 89
-1370 90
-1369 91
XII Mesore
24
-1368 92
-1367 93
-1366 94
-1365 95
XII Mesore
25
-1364 96
-1363 97
-1362 98
-1361 99
XII Mesore
26
-1360 100
-1359 101
-1358 102
-1357 103
XII Mesore
27
-1356 104
-1355 105
-1354 106
-1353 107
XII Mesore
28
-1352 108
-1351 109
-1350 110
Year CE
1stcycle 2ndcycle
Sothic date
-1349 111
XII Mesore
29
-1348 112
-1347 113
-1346 114
-1345 115
XII Mesore
30
-1344 116
-1343 117
-1342 118
-1341 119
Hryw Rnpt 1
-1340 120
-1339 121
-1338 122
-1337 123
Hryw Rnpt 2
-1336 124
-1335 125
-1334 126
-1333 127
Hryw Rnpt 3
-1332 128
-1331 129
-1330 130
-1329 131
Hryw Rnpt 4
-1328 132
-1327 133
-1326 134
-1325 135
Hryw Rnpt 5
-1324 136
-1323 137
-1322 138
... In part 1 of our Egyptian suite of articles we took a closer look at the Egyptian civil calendar (ref. 5). This was a solar calendar with a year of exactly 365 days distributed to 12 months with 30 days each, and an additional "intercalary month" of 5 days. ...
... Modern astronomical retrocalculations show that this date was July 16 Jul . Read more about the civil calendar and the heliacal rising of Sirius in ref. 5. See also appendix A for an example how the Sothic date wanders through the years. ...
... This changes however if we re-generate the table with the start date July 19 Jul for the heliacal rising of Sirius at Memphis in -2781 (table 5). July 19 Jul has been used -and is still usedfor the conversion of Egyptian civil dates to Julian calendar dates since the discovery of the Egyptian civil calendar, though this start date has been astronomically outdated for some time (ref.5). This means that the accession years for Thutmose III and Rameses II discussed so far by Egyptologists still depend on one wrong, outdated parameter value.A closer look at table 5 reveals that there is no "perfect" match for all three New Moon observations for any of the accepted options (highlighted in blue). ...
Preprint
Full-text available
Using modern astronomical parameters and based on handed-down dates for "days of the Feast of the New Moon", we propose the exact accession years for two Egyptian New Kingdom pharaohs:-1497 for Thutmose III, and-1297 for Rameses II. These accession dates comply well with recent radiocarbon dates. We also include some remarks about the eight years adjustment of the radiocarbon calibration curve (Intcal) which we have applied in our Egyptological studies. As it appears just now, this eventuality seems to be at least detected-but not yet acknowledged-in recent academic research.
... Appendix: Civil dates related to the seasonal lightshow at Abu Simbel during the reign of Rameses II The direct assignation of possible Sothic dates in the Egyptian civil calendar to the corresponding fouryears period in the Julian calendar (youngest to oldest) is taken from a schematic calendar (i.e. without observation of Sirius), see Appendix B in ref. 1 ...
Preprint
Full-text available
The rock-cut Great Temple at Abu Simbel in Nubia built by Rameses II has been associated with the royal jubilee of the pharaoh. Based on our proposed accession year-1297, we can demonstrate that the first few jubilees of the king would have been celebrated when the traditional civil date for the festival (V Tybi 1) coincided with the climax of the autumnal lightshow at Abu Simbel. We regard this coincidence as a proof that we indeed have identified the absolute (astronomical) year for Rameses II's accession.
Preprint
Full-text available
This article is about the historical consequences of our scientifically reinforced hypothesis that the West-Roman empire is conventionally dated some 232 years too old. We offer an alternative interpretation of some Roman heirlooms retrieved from the grave of the Frankish king Childeric, and from a Japanese grave dated to the late 5th century.
Working Paper
Full-text available
Cosmic abrupt radionuclide enrichment events provide a new exciting possibility for the exact dating and synchronization of organic samples or annually resolved sequences of organic samples using 14C measurement. Ice cores can be synchronized to the same events using 10Be measurement instead. The two globally assured events in 775 and 994 have already proved the worth of this concept. We propose that a third event has been spotted between -2467 and -2465 in bristlecone pine, perhaps together with another event ten years later between -2457 and -2455. By detecting that double-event in wood from the Belfast Long chronology it would be possible to once and for all time determine a definitive date for this European key oak chronology. We also propose that Belfast Long has to be dated eight years earlier than conventionally assumed. This small offset would have far-reaching consequences for the internal linkage of the entire Belfast chronology, and moderate consequences for the radiocarbon calibration curve.
Research
Full-text available
Published or otherwise available European oak tree-ring chronologies archaeologically anchored in Roman time are all separated from early medieval chronologies by a severe timber depletion in late antiquity. Our recent dendrochronological study shows that this gap probably is unnecessarily wide because the Roman dendro complex as a whole appears dated too old by 218 years. The subject of the here presented astronomical study was to investigate if there is additional scientific support for such a mistake which would mean a large calendar error in the Christian era. Our results indicate that the Christian era was inflated with 232 years already when it was invented. This was done by backdating West-Roman and related history by means of astronomical retrocalculation after the western part of the Roman empire had declined. A remarkable result of our astronomical study is that the postulated astronomical/ historical error (232 years) appears to be offset by 14 years from the dendrochronological error (218 years). This means that, if we are right, then all current dendrochronological dates within the Roman time complex are given 14 years too young. According to our interpretation, the 14 years offset was caused by an improper synchronization of the Roman dendro complex towards Roman history done more than 30 years ago.
Article
Full-text available
The historical chronologies for dynastic Egypt are based on reign lengths inferred from written and archaeological evidence. These floating chronologies are linked to the absolute calendar by a few ancient astronomical observations, which remain a source of debate. We used 211 radiocarbon measurements made on samples from short-lived plants, together with a Bayesian model incorporating historical information on reign lengths, to produce a chronology for dynastic Egypt. A small offset (19 radiocarbon years older) in radiocarbon levels in the Nile Valley is probably a growing-season effect. Our radiocarbon data indicate that the New Kingdom started between 1570 and 1544 B.C.E., and the reign of Djoser in the Old Kingdom started between 2691 and 2625 B.C.E.; both cases are earlier than some previous historical estimates.
Book
Published in six volumes between 1894 and 1905, this collection served as a valuable reference work for students and scholars of Egyptology at a time when ongoing archaeological excavations were adding significantly to the understanding of one of the world's oldest civilisations. At the forefront of this research was Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie (1853–1942), whose pioneering methods made Near Eastern archaeology a much more systematic and scientific discipline. Many of his other publications are also reissued in this series. Britain's first professor of Egyptology from 1892, Petrie was conscious of the fact that there was no textbook he could recommend to his students. The work of Weidemann was in German and out of date, so Petrie and his collaborators incorporated the latest theories and discoveries in this English-language resource. In Volume 2 (1896), Petrie covers the seventeenth and eighteenth dynasties.
Article
The ointment jar from the collection of late Professor Peter A. Kaplony can be stylistically dated to the Old Kingdom, most likely to the 5 th or early 6 th Dynasty. The inscription mentions the rise of Sothis on the IV. Akhet, day 1. Since the Egyptian civil calendar shifted towards reality one day in four years, the connection of a civil calendar date with the heliacal rising of Sothis is vitally important for the reconstruction of chronology. An assumed point of observation in Memphis dates this rise of Sirius to a time window 2419 to 2411 BC, depending on the arcus visionis.
Article
The ancient Egyptians had just one calendar in operation, the civil one, during most of their history and before the overwhelming influence of Hellenic culture. This calendar may have been invented for a specific purpose in the first half of the third millennium B.C., when the previous local Nile-based lunar calendars were rendered useless, as the result of the unification of the country and new social, economic and administrative requirements. The civil calendar always started at the feast of Wepet Renpet in the first day of the first month of the Inundation season (I Akhet 1). Its peculiar length of only 365 days (without leap years) might have been established from simple astronomical (presumably solar) observations. Consequently, Wepet Renpet wandered throughout the seasons in a period close to 15 centuries. Our research has shown that this phenomenology was reflected in the Egyptian worldview by the orientation of most important sacred structures accordingly.
Article
This paper targets the question of the dates of Sirius's heliacal rise from ancient Egypt with the full power of modern astronomy.