Next, as a matter of fact it is known (I have the high authority of Dr. Krall for the statement) that each king was supposed to begin his reign on the 1st Thoth (or 1st Pachons) of the particular year in which that event took place, and the fact that this was so further supports the suggestion we are considering. During the reign its length and the smaller events might be recorded in vague years and days so long as the date of its commencement had been referred to a cycle.
The diagram will show how readily the cycle year can be determined for any vague year. If, for instance, the 1st Thoth in the vague year falls on 1 Tybi of the cycle, we see that 980 years must have elapsed since the beginning of the cycle, and so on.
Here, then, we have a true calendar system. If the Egyptians had not this, what had they?
Dealing, then, with the matter so far as we have gone, we find that the system suggested enabled the place of the beginning of each vague year and of each king's reign to be dated in terms of the cycle of 1460 years; and further that, if they had not such a system as this, they had no means of recording any lapse of time which exceeded a year. It is not likely that any nation would put itself in such a position, least of all the ancient Egyptians.
The existence of periods of 365 years and of 120 years among the Egyptians is easily explained when the existence of this great year is recognised; the 365 years' period, marking approximately the intervals from solstice to equinox and equinox to solstice, in the natural year.
Let us next try to get a little further by assuming the supposed method of dating to have been actually employed, and finding the year of the beginning of one or more of these cycles thus obtained. This should eventually help us to determine whether or not the Egyptians acted on this principle, or used one widely different. In such an investigation as this, however, we are terribly hampered by the uncertainty of Egyptian dates; while, as I have said before, there is great divergence of opinion among Egyptologists as to whether, from very early times, there was not a true fixed year.
But let us suppose that the vague year was in common use as a civil year, and that the rising of Sirius started the year; then, if we can get any accepted date to work with, and use the diagram to see how many years had elapsed between that date and the start-point of the cycle, we shall see if there be any cyclical relation; and if we find it, it will be evidence, so far as it goes, of the existence not only of a vague year, but of the mode of reckoning we are discussing.
Now it so happens that there are three references, with dates given, to the rising of Sirius in widely different times; and, curiously enough, the month references are nearly the same. I begin with the most recent, as in this case the date can be fixed with the greater certainty. It is an inscription at Philæ, described by Brugsch (p. 87), who states that, when it was written, the 1st of Thoth = 28th of Epiphi. That is, according to the view we are considering, the heliacal rising of Sirius—that is, the 1st Thoth of the vague year fell on the 28th Epiphi of our cycle. He fixes the date of the inscription between 127 and 117 B.C. Let us take it as 122. Next, referring to our diagram to find how many years had elapsed since the beginning of the cycle, we have—
| Days. | |
|---|---|
| 5 | Epacts. |
| 30 | Mesori. |
| 2 | Epiphi. |
| —— | |
| 37 | × 4 = 148 years elapsed. |
The cycle, then, began in (118 + 122 =) 270 B.C.