The Classical Latin Continuity Kludge

Roman Authors unravel an Etruscan enigma, a Punic puzzle, and the Roman riddle.

The history of Roman Authors starts smoothly in 240 BC when a Roman audience enjoys an Early Latin version of a Greek play.

Formal Latin literature began in 240 BC, when a Roman audience saw a Latin version of a Greek play. The adaptor was Livius Andronicus, a Greek who had been brought to Rome as a prisoner of war in 272 BC. [citation needed]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_literature

Rome’s original native language was early Latin, the language of the Italic Latins.

Most surviving Latin literature is written in Classical Latin, a highly stylised and polished literary language which developed from early and vernacular spoken Latin, from the 1st century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_republic#Education_and_language

Origin of the regular Roman drama.

It begins with the year 240 B.C., when at the Ludi Romani, held with unusual splendour after the first Punic War, its victorious conclusion was, in accordance with Macedonian precedent, celebrated by the first production of a tragedy and a comedy on the Roman stage.

The author of both, who appeared in person as an actor, was Livius Andronicus (b. 278 or earlier), a native of the Greek city of Tarentum, where the Dionysiac festivals enjoyed high popularity.

1911 Encyclopædia Britannica – Volume 8
Drama – Roman Drama

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica/Drama/8

The Ludi Romani (“Roman Games”) was a religious festival in ancient Rome.

The festival first introduced drama to Rome based on Greek drama.

These games — the chief Roman festival — were held in honour of Jupiter, and are said to have been established by Tarquinius Priscus on the occasion of his conquest of the Latin town of Apiolae.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludi_Romani

Livius Andronicus (circa 470-550 A.V.C.) … Of the tragedies we have a few fragments of the Aegisthus, Aiax, Andromeda, Tereus, Equus Troianus ; but they are not sufficient to enable us to form any regular judgment upon him. They must have been, however, bald imitations or adaptations of the Greek, with perhaps occasional good lines.

Fragments and Specimens of Early Latin
John Wordsworth – 1864

https://archive.org/details/fragmentsspecime00word/page/567/mode/1up

Lucius Livius Andronicus (c. 284 – c. 205 BC) was a Greco-Roman dramatist and epic poet of the Old Latin period.

He wrote works for the stage—both tragedies and comedies—which are regarded as the first dramatic works written in the Latin language of ancient Rome.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livius_Andronicus

Livius Andronicus (c. 284–204 B.C.), the founder of Roman epic poetry and drama. … To judge, however, from the insignificant remains of his writings, and from the opinions of Cicero and Horace, he can have had no pretension either to original genius or to artistic accomplishment.

1911 Encyclopædia Britannica – Volume 16 – Livius Andronicus
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica/Livius_Andronicus

Andronicus was not very popular at all during the heyday of Roman literature.

Additionally, Horace mentions that his archaic Latin was particularly difficult for students to read, and it appears that it was archaic not only during the first century BCE, but even during Andronicus’ time as well. He was only quoted for this unusual language until his works were permanently lost around the seventh century CE.

Early Latin Authors – Livius Andronicus
http://earlylatinwritings.com/oldlatin/livius-andronicus/

But the smooth start soon begins to spit and splutter.

https://www.thoughtco.com/roman-authors-timeline-119490

The spit and splutter is structured like a Three Act Play.

The Roman Empire narrative is best understood as a theatrical production.

The origins of the Roman Empire narrative can be traced back to Medieval times when the life and times of Jesus of Nazareth turned history into a Two Act Play with Act I based upon the “Old Testament” and Act II based upon the “New Testament”.

The success of the Two Act Play encouraged the authors to improvise a Third Act that provides an impressive provenance for the production company.

This impressive provenance began life as the Roman Empire.

The Roman Empire narrative was cobbled together by liberally borrowing historic characters, storylines and artefacts that were excluded from the Two Act Play.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2019/01/18/the-roman-empire-in-three-acts/

The Three Act Play reveals a significant decline in life expectancy was experienced by Roman Republic Authors.

The Roman Republic was the era of classical Roman civilization, led by the Roman people, beginning with the overthrow of the Roman Kingdom, traditionally dated to 509 BC, and ending in 27 BC with the establishment of the Roman Empire

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_republic

One of the factors contributing to this decrease in life expectancy [measured in years] was an increase in the number of days per year from 360 to 365¼.

Unlike Gradualist Historians the Maya went with the flow and simply called the extra five days “days without names”.

Amazon US: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1906833117
Amazon UK: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1906833117

The year, haab, was intended to begin on the day of the transit of the sun by the zenith, and was counted from July 16th. It was divided into eighteen months, u (u, month, moon), of twenty days, kin (sun, day, time), each.

As the Maya year was of 365 days, and as 18 months of 20 days each counted only 360 days, there were five days intervening between the last of the month Cumku and the first day of the following year.

These were called “days without names,” xma kaba kin (xma, without, kaba, names, kin, days), an expression not quite correct, as they were named in regular order, only they were not counted in any month.

The Maya Chronicles – Daniel G Brinton – 1882
https://archive.org/details/mayachronicles00briniala/page/50/mode/1up

The Three Act Play contains a clumsy Continuity Kludge at 75 BC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin

A kludge or kluge is a workaround or quick-and-dirty solution that is clumsy, inelegant, inefficient, difficult to extend and hard to maintain.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kludge

By Early Latin I understand Latin of the whole period of the Republic, which is separated very strikingly, both in tone and outward form, from that of the Empire.

Fragments and Specimens of Early Latin
John Wordsworth – 1864

https://archive.org/details/fragmentsspecime00word/page/n8/mode/1up

The Continuity Kludge transitions from Old Latin to Classical Latin.

Old Latin, also known as Early Latin or Archaic Latin, was the Latin language in the period before 75 BC, i.e. before the age of Classical Latin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Latin

Classical Latin Era: 75 BC to AD 3rd century, when it developed into Late Latin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_Latin

The Old Latin literature created before 75 BC is [more than likely] a makeover of the mysteriously missing Etruscan Literature.

One enduring mystery is the extinction of the Etruscan language in 50 AD. … A second enduring mystery is the total eradication of Etruscan literature in Europe.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2018/05/03/roman-chronology-the-etruscan-mystery/

The Etruscan language was the spoken and written language of the Etruscan civilization, in Italy, in the ancient region of Etruria (modern Tuscany plus western Umbria and northern Latium) and in parts of Corsica, Campania, Veneto, Lombardy and Emilia-Romagna.

Attested from 700 BC to AD 50, the relation of Etruscan to other languages has been a source of long-running speculation and study, with it being referred to at times as an isolate, one of the Tyrsenian languages, and a number of other less well-known possibilities.

The last person known to have been able to read Etruscan was the Roman emperor Claudius (10 BC – AD 54), who authored a treatise in 20 volumes on the Etruscans, called Tyrrenikà (now lost), and compiled a dictionary (also lost) by interviewing the last few elderly rustics who still spoke the language. Plautia Urgulanilla, the emperor’s first wife, was Etruscan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Etruscan_language&oldid=839638994

The Latin alphabet evolved from the visually similar Etruscan alphabet, which evolved from the Cumaean Greek version of the Greek alphabet, which was itself descended from the Phoenician alphabet, which in turn derived from Egyptian hieroglyphics.

The Etruscans ruled early Rome; their alphabet evolved in Rome over successive centuries to produce the Latin alphabet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_alphabet

Sometime after 1593 the letter M became the standard symbol for 1000.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2018/10/01/n-for-numeral/

The evidence suggests the Roman Republic was an Etruscan Republic that collapsed [with the era of massive masonry] at the Arabian Horizon [637 CE].

In theory, the stratigraphic layers from the Crypta Balbi in Rome should be fairly well aligned with the stratigraphic layers from Kom El Deka in Alexandria, Egypt.

A side-by-side comparison confirms Alexandria and Rome are fairly well aligned.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2018/09/07/r-for-rome/

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2019/10/10/three-flavours-of-700-year-old-fudge/

The Arabian Horizon was also the catalyst for the collapse of Phoenicia when 1,170 phantom years are accounted for i.e. 539 BC + 1,170 years = 631 CE.

Phoenicia 2500 BC–539 BC

Phoenicia was an ancient Semitic-speaking thalassocratic civilization that originated in the Levant region of the eastern Mediterranean, specifically modern Lebanon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenicia

Only a “few vestiges” of Punic literature have survived.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2020/09/27/welsh-with-a-pinch-of-punic/

The Fall of Babylon denotes the end of the Neo-Babylonian Empire after it was conquered by the Achaemenid Empire in 539 BCE.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Babylon

The extraordinary excavation of Nippur at the end of the 19th century provided extraordinary evidence that the Fall of Babylon [officially 539 BC] coincided with the transformation of cuneiform into Arabic letters at the Arabian Horizon [637 CE].

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2020/02/16/nippur-and-the-great-trench/

The 1,170 year difference aligns the Antonine Plague with the Black Death i.e. 180 AD + 1,170 years = 1350 CE.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2020/07/26/the-british-brick/

After the Arabian Horizon the surviving Etruscans agreed a non-aggression pact with the Carthaginians in 661 CE i.e. 509 BC + 1,170 years = 661 CE.

The Pyrgi Tablets (dated c. 500 BCE) are three golden plates inscribed with a bilingual Phoenician–Etruscan dedicatory text.

They may relate to Polybius’s report (Hist. 3,22) of an ancient and almost unintelligible treaty between the Romans and the Carthaginians, which he dated to the consulships of Lucius Junius Brutus and Lucius Tarquinius Collatinus (509 BC).[citation needed]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrgi_Tablets

Polybius – The Histories – Book III – 22.3

I give below as accurate a rendering as I can of this treaty, but the ancient Roman language differs so much from the modern that it can only be partially made out, and that after much application, by the most intelligent men.

The treaty is more or less as follows:

“There is to be friendship between the Romans and their allies and the Carthaginians and their allies on these terms:

The Romans and their allies not to sail with long ships beyond the Fair Promontory unless forced by storm or by enemies: it is forbidden to anyone carried beyond it by force to buy or carry away anything beyond what is required for the repair of his ship or for sacrifice, and he must depart within five days.

en coming to trade may conclude no business except in the presence of a herald or town-clerk, and the price of whatever is sold in the presence of such shall be secured to the vendor by the state, if the sale take place in Libya or Sardinia.

If any Roman come to the Carthaginian province in Sicily, he shall enjoy equal rights with the others.

The Carthaginians shall do no wrong to the peoples of Ardea, Antium, Laurentium, Circeii, Terracina, or any other city of the Latins who are subject to Rome.

Touching the Latins who are not subjects, they shall keep their hands off their cities, and if they take any city shall deliver it up to the Romans undamaged.

They shall build no fort in the Latin territory.

If they enter the land in arms, they shall not pass a night therein.”

The “Fair Promontory” is that lying in front of Carthage to the North.

To Carthage itself and all parts of Libya on this side of the Fair Promontory, to Sardinia and the Carthaginian province of Sicily the Romans may come for trading purposes, and the Carthaginian state engages to secure payment of their just debts.

The phrasing of this treaty shows that they consider Sardinia and Libya as their own, whereas they distinctly express themselves otherwise about Sicily, mentioning only in the treaty those parts of it which are under Carthaginian rule.

Similarly, the Romans include in the treaty Latium alone, making no mention of the rest of Italy as it was not then subject to their authority.

Published in Vol. II of the Loeb Classical Library edition 1922-7
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Polybius/3*.html

In historic times the Corredor Bético connected the Atlantic to the Mediterranean.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2017/08/10/crashing-carthage/

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2019/01/14/roads-to-rome/

Karaly was established around the 8th/7th century BC as one of a string of Phoenician colonies in Sardinia, including Tharros.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cagliari

Ostia Antica … harbour city of ancient Rome … now lies 3 kilometres from the sea. … The city was finally abandoned in the 9th century …

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostia_Antica

The Carthaginian treaty with the Etruscans was the bedrock upon which the Carthaginians built their “Hellenistic-inspired empire” that used Late Latin as it’s “lingua franca”.

The suspicion that the colonial connection between the Carthaginians and the Etruscans has been accidentally [or deliberately] erased from the official historical narrative is reinforced by the observation that the Carthaginians “established a Hellenistic-inspired empire”.

the remarkable similarities between the Phoenician, Carthaginian Punic, Archaic Etruscan and Iberian Greek alphabets indicates it’s difficult to determine which of these cultures [originally] contributed words to the vocabulary to the Spanish language.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2018/05/17/latin-languages-purged-punic/

Late Latin is the scholarly name for the written Latin of late antiquity.

This somewhat ambiguously defined version of Latin was used between the eras of Classical Latin and Medieval Latin.

There is no scholarly consensus about exactly when Classical Latin should end or Medieval Latin should begin.

However, Late Latin is characterized (with variations and disputes) by an identifiable style.

The linguist Antoine Meillet wrote, “Without the exterior appearance of the language being much modified, Latin became in the course of the imperial epoch a new language”, and, “Serving as some sort of lingua franca to a large empire, Latin tended to become simpler, to keep above all what it had of the ordinary”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Latin

A lingua franca is a language or dialect systematically used to make communication possible between groups of people who do not share a native language or dialect, particularly when not one of the speakers’ native languages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingua_franca

Unsurprisingly, the official list of Roman Authors doesn’t explicitly recognise the Carthaginian Empire that flourished until the Heinsohn Horizon [912 CE].

Instead, Carthaginian literature was recast as Roman Late Latin.

Roman Classical Latin literature was easily fabricated after the Heinsohn Horizon [75 BC + 1,170years = 1095 CE] because Medieval Latin is [very conveniently] deemed to be a continuation of Classical Latin.

Medieval Latin represented a continuation of Classical Latin and Late Latin, with enhancements for new concepts as well as for the increasing integration of Christianity. Despite some meaningful differences from Classical Latin, Medieval writers did not regard it as a fundamentally different language.

There is no real consensus on the exact boundary where Late Latin ends and Medieval Latin begins.

Some scholarly surveys begin with the rise of early Ecclesiastical Latin in the middle of the 4th century, others around 500, and still others with the replacement of written Late Latin by written Romance languages starting around the year 900.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Latin

The mainstream’s 700 years of Late Latin between 200 and 900 AD are Gunnar Heinsohn’s 700 phantom years in the first millennium.

However, the chronology and narrative problems involve [at least] 1,170 phantom years when the BC and AD eras are accounted for.

Related Posts

The difference of 1,170 years accounts for most of the 1,208 phantom years added into the Radiocarbon Calibration Curve between 465 BCE and 743 CE.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2020/07/26/the-british-brick/

In general terms these “1,200 phantom years” begin with the Achaemenid Empire [550 BC – 330 BC] and last “until the 7th century Muslim conquest” i.e. the Arabian Horizon centred on 637 CE.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2020/02/16/nippur-and-the-great-trench/

The gap between Anaximander’s cylindrical map of [say] 546 BC and Ptolemy’s cylindrical map arriving in Europe in 1406 AD reinforces the view the mainstream have inserted [more than] 1,200 phantom years into the historical narrative.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2019/07/24/alaskan-muck-anaximanders-cake/

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2017/11/24/deranged-dating-the-roman-problem/

In other words:

The Roman narrative was cobbled together after 1095 CE by liberally borrowing [and bending] historic characters, literature and artefacts.

The start date of 1095 CE aligns well with the view that the surviving manuscripts of Ptolemy’s Geography [AD 150] date from “about 1300” i.e. 150 AD + 1170 years = 1320 CE.

The maps in surviving manuscripts of Ptolemy’s Geography, however, only date from about 1300, after the text was rediscovered by Maximus Planudes.

It seems likely that the topographical tables in books 2–7 are cumulative texts – texts which were altered and added to as new knowledge became available in the centuries after Ptolemy. This means that information contained in different parts of the Geography is likely to be of different dates.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemy#The_Geography

The Geography, also known by its Latin names as the Geographia and the Cosmographia, is a gazetteer, an atlas, and a treatise on cartography, compiling the geographical knowledge of the 2nd-century Roman Empire.

Originally written by Claudius Ptolemy in Greek at Alexandria around AD 150, the work was a revision of a now-lost atlas by Marinus of Tyre using additional Roman and Persian gazetteers and new principles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_(Ptolemy)

Maximus Planudes (c. 1260 – c. 1305) was a Byzantine Greek monk, scholar, anthologist, translator, mathematician, grammarian and theologian at Constantinople.

His numerous translations from the Latin included Cicero’s Somnium Scipionis with the commentary of Macrobius; Ovid’s Heroides and Metamorphoses; Boethius’ De consolatione philosophiae; and Augustine’s De trinitate.

Traditionally, a translation of Julius Caesar’s De Bello Gallico has been attributed to Planudes, but this is a much repeated mistake.

These translations were not only useful to Greek speakers but were also widely used in western Europe as textbooks for the study of Greek.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximus_Planudes

Finally, the Roman Authors Timeline suggests the [so-called] Roman Empire had a bumpy ride that lasted until the end of the Hecker Horizon:

071 BC + 1,170 years = 1099 CE
069 AD + 1,170 years = 1239 CE
117 AD + 1,170 years = 1287 CE
193 AD + 1,170 years = 1363 CE
238 AD + 1,170 years = 1408 CE.

And in one of life’s curious coincidences the South England Flood of 1287 aligns with the “greatest extent” of the Roman Empire in 117 AD if there are 1,170 phantom years in the mainstream chronology i.e. 1287 – 1170 = 117.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2020/09/14/the-riddle-of-the-goodwin-sands/

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2020/09/21/british-bones-and-the-academic-abyss/

… two fearful storms, one of which occurred in 1014, in the reign of Edward the Confessor, and was accompanied by a terrible earthquake, and the other, and by far the more severe of the two, in 1099, in the time of William II. Each of these so-called ” storms ” was followed by a most appalling inundation of the sea, occasioning frightful loss of life, land, and all kinds of property.

Memorials of the Goodwin Sands – George Byng Gattie – 1904
See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2020/09/14/the-riddle-of-the-goodwin-sands/

The Year of the Four Emperors, 69 AD, was a period in the history of the Roman Empire in which four emperors ruled in succession: Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and Vespasian.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Four_Emperors

The Year of the Five Emperors was 193 AD, in which five men claimed the title of Roman emperor: Pertinax, Didius Julianus, Pescennius Niger, Clodius Albinus, and Septimius Severus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Five_Emperors

The Year of the Six Emperors was the year 238 AD, during which six people were recognized as emperors of Rome.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Six_Emperors

Renaissance Latin is a name given to the distinctive form of Latin style developed during the European Renaissance of the fourteenth to fifteenth centuries, particularly by the Renaissance humanism movement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_Latin

Renaissance humanism was a revival in the study of classical antiquity, at first in Italy and then spreading across Western Europe in the 14th, 15th, and 16th centuries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_humanist

Humanists of the Renaissance (1450-1600) desired to transform themselves into the archetypes of Latin and Greek heroes by adopting classical names.

Overview of Medieval and Renaissance Italian Names
Signora Giata Magdalena Alberti – Society for Creative Anachronism, Inc.

https://heraldry.sca.org/kwhss/2013/Giada_Alberti/Overview_of_Medieval_and_Renaissance_Italian_Names.pdf

Overall, the Continuity Kludge attempts to mask:

1) The development of the Carthaginian Empire and Late Latin between the Arabian Horizon [637 CE] and the Heinsohn Horizon [912 CE].

2) The revival of Latin as Medieval Latin in the Balkans around 1095 CE.

The epigraphic evidence suggests Rome wasn’t the centre of the Latin universe.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2018/08/03/e-for-epigraphy/

The two epochs are clearly identifiable in Britain.

For example:

The first millennium Carthaginian Saxon Shore.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2018/09/24/shaping-the-saxon-shore/

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2020/09/14/the-riddle-of-the-goodwin-sands/

The second millennium Balkan DNA of the “Roman Army”.

Abergele is a small market town and community, situated on the north coast of Wales between the holiday resorts of Colwyn Bay and Rhyl, in Conwy County Borough. Its northern suburb of Pensarn lies on the Irish Sea coast.

Membership in Y chromosome haplogroup E1b1b1a2 (E-V13) was found to average at 38.97% in a small sample of 18 male y-chromosomes in Abergele.

This genetic marker is found at its highest concentrations in the Balkans at over 40% in areas, but at much lower percentages in Northern Europe at less than 5%.

The reason for notably higher levels of E1b1b in Abergele is most likely the heavy presence of the Roman Army in Abergele as most of the soldiers that came to Britain did not come from Italy, but from other parts of the Roman Empire.

Other notable levels of genetic marker E-V13 have been found in a few other towns in Britain that were known to have had a heavy Roman presence nearly 2000 years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abergele

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2016/04/23/the-wroxeter-chronicles-losing-the-legion/

As always:

Review the evidence and draw your own conclusions.

This entry was posted in Arabian Horizon, Books, Deranged Dating, Epigraphy - Inscriptions, Geology, Hecker Horizon, Heinsohn Horizon, History, Language, Latin Languages, Old Japanese Cedar Tree, Radiocarbon Dating, Roman Chronology. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to The Classical Latin Continuity Kludge

  1. Yes, a good long read. And a decent service to lubricate the gear-wheels of the mind.

    There are two point that I find that invite comment. Specifically because they deal with calendars and chronology.

    The first is the Mayan Calendar; the long count. Mathematics is a very good tool but it seems God hates mathematicians in that there are, in a perverse way, many uncountable numbers, and a natural world that does not favour math use. Like other calendars the Mayan suffers from that too. Counting in base20 makes no difference to the inherent short-comings (Akkadian math is base60 but named in base10. Sumerian numbers, like Roman, is in base5) The long count, in spite of having the earliest date at 36bce, starts somewhere, it is said, near 3114bce. The Dresden codex points to some cataclysm, which might align to 3200bce, the Piora Oscillation (plus seismic event I know from archaeo-geology). That indicates a span of time that is corroborated from other sources.
    I add something here. The year at 360 or 365days is questionable since evidence points to continual change effected by the dynamics of the earth; vide GF Dodwell as well. The Astronomical Union always preferred things simple but they certainly are not.

    The other point concerns Ptolemy. (He seems to have a very bad reputation; see http://dioi.org/vols/wm0.pdf I have tried to find faults here; found none) . There is another interesting issue with Ptolemy. He is accused in tampering with the Zodiac, setting the Tropical zodiac, a departure from the Sidereal. And also in obfuscating it by changing the star names, seemingly to appease. (Al Sufi translated his work into Arabic but changed the star names back to original). However that sets another clock in motion. Since the heavens/constellation rotate, some 1 degree every 72 years, it can be worked backwards when he did it, simply by converting in years the angular discrepancy of the two versions of the zodiac. Easy answer here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidereal_and_tropical_astrology (not accurate but likely within a century).

    • malagabay says:

      ”The year at 360 or 365 days is questionable since evidence points to continual change effected by the dynamics of the earth”

      The “continual change” line of argument is very viable.

      The evidence for “continual change” includes bumps and plateaus.

      See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2017/04/17/deranged-dating-the-big-picture/

      In the context of “continual change” the work of Immanuel Velikovsky suggests there was a 360 days per year plateau.

      Numerous evidences are preserved which prove that prior to the year of 365¼ days, the year was only 360 days long.

      The texts of the Veda period know a year of only 360 days.

      The ancient Persian year was composed of 360 days or twelve months of thirty days each.

      The old Babylonian year was composed of 360 days.

      The Assyrian year consisted of 360 days;

      The Egyptian year was composed of 360 days before it became 365 by the addition of five days.

      The ancient Romans also reckoned 360 days to the year.

      the Mayan year consisted of 360 days; later five days were added, and the year was then a tun (360-day period) and five days; every fourth year another day was added to the year.

      In ancient South America also the year consisted of 360 days, divided into twelve months.

      The calendar of the peoples of China had a year of 360 days divided into twelve months of thirty days each… When the year changed from 360 to 365¼ days, the Chinese added five and a quarter days to their year, calling this additional period Khe-ying;

      Worlds In Collision – Immanuel Velikovsky – 1950

      The history of “continual change” in Mesoamerica ranges from 260 to 365 days per year.

      The two most widely used calendars in pre-Columbian Mesoamerica, were the 260-day Tzolkʼin and the 365 day Haabʼ. The equivalent Aztec calendars are known in Nahuatl as the tonalpohualli and Xiuhpohualli.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoamerican_Long_Count_calendar

      And, curiously enough, the Roman Authors chronology provides support for this [far more radical] interpretation of history.

      80 years x 260 days per year = 20,800 days.

      20,800 days / 360 days per year = 57.778 years
      20,800 days / 365 days per year = 56.986 years

    • malagabay says:

      Ptolemy – He seems to have a very bad reputation

      Ptolemy’s “bad reputation” shouldn’t influence whether the surviving manuscripts of Ptolemy’s Geography date from “about 1300”.

      Amongst Gradualists Ptolemy’s Geography does indeed have a bad reputation.

      This is especially true for Gradualists who don’t accept Before and After Earth images represent a catastrophic transformation.

      Instead of identifying changes Gradualists identify “errors”.

      Instead of acknowledging change Gradualists explain away anomalies.

      See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2020/08/12/cape-bojador-and-the-fortunate-islands/

      On the other hand:

      Ptolemy provides unparalleled perspectives.

      The “habitable world” is wedged between burning and freezing zones.

      The digitised gazetteer also reveals the migration of the Red Sea coastlines since 194 BC.

      See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2016/10/17/the-arabian-horizon-the-ptolemy-inheritance/

      See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2017/02/10/shaping-scotland-in-two-shakes/

      See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2018/09/20/shaping-roman-scotland/

      See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2017/08/15/lost-in-academia-periplus-of-the-erythraean-sea/

      See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2017/05/12/indian-impacts-taprobane/

      But, more significantly, Ptolemy’s map of the world is a cylindrical chart that [officially] arrived in Europe 1,952 years after Anaximander’s death.

      See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2019/07/24/alaskan-muck-anaximanders-cake/

      See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2020/08/12/cape-bojador-and-the-fortunate-islands/

      New School Scholars are extremely reluctant to acknowledge the large island South-East of the Isle of Thanet [aka Toliatis] on Ptolemy’s maps.

      See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2020/09/14/the-riddle-of-the-goodwin-sands/

      • My point re Ptolemy is dating the man himself from the Zodiac.
        There is also a second point – from the/a DIO article if I recall correctly- that Ptolemy used/plagiarised Hipparchus’ info on stars and added a factor to account for the period elapsed between them. From their recorded star positions one can arrive at a date of when the recordings were made.
        We also have ‘Al-Sufi published his famous Book of Fixed Stars in 964’ and Ulugh Beg
        quote wiki “Using it, he compiled the 1437 Zij-i-Sultani of 994 stars, generally considered[who?] the greatest star catalogue between those of Ptolemy and Tycho Brahe, a work that stands alongside Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi’s Book of Fixed Stars. The serious errors which he found in previous Arabian star catalogues (many of which had simply updated Ptolemy’s work, adding the effect of precession to the longitudes) induced him to redetermine the positions of 992 fixed stars, to which he added 27 stars from Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi’s catalogue Book of Fixed Stars from the year 964, which were too far south for observation from Samarkand.”
        I have not done the exercise here but seems one can find time past between Hipparchus and Tycho Brahe.

  2. Agreed. However the problem, from my point of view (and the way I’d want it), is that it cannot be securely nailed down – yet-.

    This was my first problem with megalithic calendars. The early ones had what have been called ‘libation holes’ but which others called ‘post holes’ at what turned out to be a critical point in their structure. As they functioned as a ‘camera obscura’ the post holes were very near to the focal point where, as I found later, the pin-hole would be placed. The site that was key to understand their method of working had only one hole (see https://melitamegalithic.wordpress.com/2017/02/24/blog-post-title/ ) while others had several. Since reading the date was by observing first flash of sunrise, this did not occur at same place on the horse-shoe at same time of year, as long as the year was not a precise number of days. However I am not sure that explains it. In the new design that method was not needed, and one finds no such post holes in the later design.
    Thus the one single post hole indicates a precise number of days per year. A more tenuous piece of evidence would point to 360days. 5000 years ago the Earth’s orbit was very near circular, ie equal days per season. Only a 90 day season length fits.

  3. Pingback: Harold Sterling Gladwin: In The Dog House | MalagaBay

  4. Pingback: Harold Sterling Gladwin: The Minoan Maze | MalagaBay

  5. Pingback: The Ptolemaic People Puzzle | MalagaBay

  6. Pingback: The Senegal Swing | MalagaBay

  7. Pingback: The African Ditch | MalagaBay

  8. Pingback: 1400 Years of Fabricated Frosts | MalagaBay

Comments are closed.