The Chronology of the Aramaic Papyri from Elephantine Author(s): O. Neugebauer Source: Isis, Vol. 33, No. 5 (Mar.

, 1942), pp. 575-578 Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of The History of Science Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/330666 . Accessed: 10/10/2011 10:50
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The University of Chicago Press and The History of Science Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Isis.

http://www.jstor.org

The Aramaic Papyri from Elephantine

Vol. 2 includes (p. 288-91) a full bibliography of all the editions, 27 in number.

575

Articles by GACHARD in Biog. nat. de Belgique (vol. 3, 180-91, 1872). FERDINAND VAN DER

Bibliotheca belgica (vol. 3, B45-77, Gand 1880-90). P. A. MATTIOLI: Opera quae exstant omnia (Basel 1598). Copy kindly lent by the Arnold Arboretum, Boston. DIOSCURIDES: Codex Aniciae Iulianae picturis illustratus nune Vindobonensis Med. Gr. 1 phototypiceeditus (2 large folio vols. Leyden 1906). Our figures 4 to 7 are reproduced from that work.
HAEGHEN:

The

Chronology
Papyri

of

the

Aramaic

from

Elephantine

(Remarks about a new Chronology proposed by A. Kenney-Herbert)

By 0. NEUGEBAUER

1. In Isis 29 (1938) p. 393-97 appearedan articleentitled "TheElephanin which this author tine Aramaic Papyri" by Lt. Col. A. KENNEY-HERBERT investigated the famous double datings (Jewish and Egyptian calendar) found in some of the Elephantine papyri. He came to the spectacular result that all conclusions previously drawn from these texts were erroneous and that the Achemenian kings ruled about 60 years earlier than is usually assumed. The aim of the following remarks is to show the source of error which led K.-H. to his chronology, which contradicts, e.g., the astronomically determined Ptolemaic canon-not to speak of general history. The way followed consists in restating clearly the arguments used by K.-H. which are only very incompletely represented in his article. 2. It is for this purpose sufficient to consider the following coincidences:
No.l 5 6 10 13 14 Regnal year Xerxes 15 Xerxes 21 Artaxerxes I 9 Artaxerxes I 19 Artaxerxes I 25 Jewish cal. VI IX IX IX V 18 18 7 3 14 Egypt. cal. IX I I XII IX 28 142 4 10 19

(1)

1 Numbersaccording to A. COWLEY,AramaicPapyri of the Fifth CenturyB.C. Oxford,1923. 2 K.-H. chooseswithoutdiscussion mentioned fromthe threepossibilities this reading p. 17. by COWLEY

576

0. Neugebauer

We now modify this list in such a way that all dates in the Jewish calendar become equal, say 18:
No. 5 6 10 13 14 Regnal year Xerxes 15 Xerxes 21 Artaxerxes 9 Artaxerxes 19 Artaxerxes 25 Jewish cal. VI IX IX IX V 18 18 18 18 18 Egypt. cal. IX I I XII IX 28 14 15 25 23

(2)

3. From scheme (2) K.-H. derives the following time differences:

No. 5 6 (3) 10 13 14 Regnal year Xerxes 15 Xerxes 21 = Artax. 1 Artax. 9 Artax. 19 Artax. 25 Eg. cal. IX 28 I 14 I 15 XII 25 IX 23 Differences3

6 years +4 months +5 epag. days -14 days = 2301 days 8 years+1 day =2921 days 10 years +11 months +10 days =3990 days 6 years -3 months -2 days = 2098 days4

These differences are obtained by simple subtraction of regnal years, months, and days. But this procedure is correct only if the following is true: (A) The beginning of the year "Artaxerxes 1" belongs to the interval from XII 25 to I 15. If we assume that his regnal years began, e.g., on VI 1, then we would have a situation such as indicated in fig. 1, and the time difference between year 9 I 15 and year 19 XII 25 would be only 9 years (+11 months+10 days) instead of 10 years (+11 months+10 days). In other
I and Egyptian years are assumed to words, regnal years of ARTAXERXES

coincide practically completely.

regnaL years

of Artax.
E 3. years I

9
I C" 15

to

18

19

rT 25
FIGURE 1.

(B) On the contrary, the assumption is made that the regnal years of XERXES do not begin between IX 28 and I 14. If we assume the coincidence of regnal years and Egyptian years, we would have a situation such as described in fig. 2, and the time difference between year 15 IX 28 and year
3

4 This numberomittedby K.-H. but certainfromhis total.

Years and months in Egyptian style, i.e., 365 and 30 days, respectively.

The Aramaic Papyri from Elephantine

577

21 14 would be only 5 years (+4 months-9 days) instead of 6 years (+4 months-9 days).
of Xerxes
Eg. years
regnal years
-

15

6
I I FIGURE2.

20

21
I o(I 14 IZ/4 -t

28

The calculations of K.-H. are therefore based on the tacitly made and totally unproved "assumption 1" of different methods of counting regnal years during the reign of XERXES and his successor. 4. The resulting chronology proposed by K.-H. is equivalent to the following equations:
No. 5 6 10 13 14 Jewish cal. VI IX IX IX V 1 1 1 1 I Julian cal. -409 -403 -395 -384 -378 Aug. Nov. Nov. Oct. July 11 28 27 30 29 Time differences 2301 2921 3990 2098 days days days days

(4)

where the time differences are the same as calculated in (3) making "assumption 1." The author now explicitly makes "assumption 2" that the Jewish dates "1" mean astronomically new moons and not first visible crescents, an assumption which is contradictory to all our knowledge of the Babylonian calendar and its derivations, and affects K.-H.'s calculations by at least one day. But even if we assume that the dates in (4) represent new moons, we get the following results:
No.
5 6 10 13 14

New moon5
-409 -403 -395 -384 -378 Aug. 10.4 Nov. 30.3 Dec. 1.6 Oct. 31.3 July 29.4

Dates (4)
Aug. Nov. Nov. Oct. 11 28 27 30 July 29

Deviation
-1 2 5 1 0 days

(5)

6 According to the tables in GINZEL, Chronologic I p. 547 ff. K.-H.'s calculations are "based on GRATTAN GUINNESS' published lunar tables." I owe the librarian of the Brown University Science Lithe complete title of these tables: "HENRY Creation cenGRATTAN GUINNESS, brary, Mr. D. A. JONAH, tred in Christ, vol. 2. Tables of vernal equinoxes and new moons for 3555 years. 1. In old style from B.C. 1622-A.D. 1934. 2. In new style from the English reformation of the calendar A.D. 1752 to A.D. 1934; computed from prophetic times in the book of Daniel regarded as astronomical cycles." London 1896. I was unable to obtain a copy of this work.

578

Rudolf von Erhardt and Erika von Erhardt-Siebold

This shows that the "new moons" according to K.-H.'s chronology are permitted to have an age up to 5 days! It is hard to understand how this result can be considered as the basis of a new chronology of the Persian kingdom.

Archimedes'

Sand-Reckoner
ERIKA VONERHARDT-SIEBOLD

Aristarchos and Copernicus

By RUDOLFVONERHARDTand

Summary of Principal Contents

HE present study analyzes the famous heliocentric passage in the

Sand-Reckoner (4auATr77s), a short treatise attributed to the great ARCHIMEDES of Syracuse (ca. 287-212 B.C.). This passage has been

regarded the principal and most reliable testimony for the promulgation by ARISTARCHOS of Samos (ca. 310-230 B.C.) of a genuine heliocentric astronomy. It will be shown that current interpretations text of ARCHIMEDES'

cannot claim to be the only possible ones. In particular, the two proportions occurring in it will be given new meanings as a result of a short analysis of some Greek conceptions of the point, especially of PTOLEMY'S point proposition. ARCHIMEDES' authorship of the Sand-Reckoner is, for the first time, questioned, and ARISTARCHOS' presumable line of thought conjecturally reconstructed. References in other writers to ARISTARCHOS' doctrines are touched while in the PLUTARCHOS' text merely upon, Quaestiones is subjected

to renewed criticism. Finally, attention is drawn to the almost certain

with the Sand-Reckoner. acquaintance of COPERNICUS

The Heliocentric Passage in the Sand-Reckoner For convenience of reference, the following famous passage in the SandReckonerhas been subdivided by numerals:
(I).
KaTexeLs 6b, b6Ltb KaXeCLat K6i0OS V)7O tev rWXV TrXelorWcov a0rpoXo0YWv KEVTpOV,a 6e
TaS yas

aa4ctpa, as
/ieTaCv
TOV

aOTl KEVTpov JEV TO TaS Yas

KEVTpOU

lV bK TOV KeV7pOV

a TL EVOeLa

Ta

TOV CLXLov Kat

TOV

KVTpOV

TCavC

'yap El TCv 7aLs ypaoCLO vals

a ap

TWV aC'T-

poXoyoWv 6EItetaL 6tacKovras.

(2).

'AploTapXos

6e o latuos

ViroEowvtLv TLVWV
V TOE

(TvJLpaivEL TOV KO6O-OV7roXXa\\arloov e[L KELt,LVOYV

Ev atLs EK T V V'trOeES6WKeV ypaCa4s, a V vVv Elpr)jiVov. (3). vi).trOelrat y Yp

Lev a7rXavea TWv a(aTpowv Kal TOv LaXtov Tadv 6E yav 7rEptep(peTOaC repl TO7 aKvYrT7Jov, MieverLV C aXtov KaTa KVKXOV 'V Tca eL p6Ox fLy 7 TrepLtcpeLta, gS(TV (4). Tav 6E Twv at7XavYOV KEILEVOS,