Acronycal Risings in Babylonian Astronomy L H* J M. S † Babylonian observations of planets fall into two main types: (i) passages of the planets by one of the so-called ‘‘Normal Stars’’ (reference stars distributed unevenly in longitude, but all near the ecliptic), and (ii) synodic phenomena such as first visibilities, stations, etc. For the outer planets (Mars, Jupiter and Saturn) there are five of these synodic phenomena, and modern scholars have conventionally denoted them by Greek letters. These ‘‘Greek-Letter phenomena’’, as they have become known, are: IGI UŠ aná ME-e UŠ ŠÚ G F Q Y W First appearance First stationary point ‘‘Opposition’’ Second stationary point Last appearance For the inner planets (Mercury and Venus), Q ‘‘opposition’’ is of course replaced by the last appearance in the east (S) and the first appearance in the west (X). In addition to acting as useful shorthand, use of the Greek-Letter designations allows us to avoid the problem of the exact interpretation of these phenomena. For example, W should probably be understood as the first date on which a planet was not seen, rather than the last day on which it was seen (Huber et al, 1982, p. 14). Nevertheless, it is important to attempt to identify the precise meaning of these phenomena if we are to try to understand the *Department of Physics, University of Durham, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, England. † Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology, Victoria College, University of Toronto, 73 Queen’s Park Cres. E., Toronto, M5S 1K7, Canada. C 2004: V. 46: . 145–162 C Blackwell Munksgaard 2004. Centaurus ISSN 0008-8994. Printed in Denmark. All rights reserved. 146 Louise Hollywood and John M. Steele Babylonian observational record and, in particular, its role in the development of mathematical astronomy. The identification of Q is not straightforward. True astronomical opposition occurs when a planet is at an elongation (difference in longitude) of 180æ from the sun. However, this is an event that cannot be directly observed since only half of the ecliptic is visible above the horizon at any given time. In principle at opposition a planet and the sun cross the opposite horizons at sunrise and sunset, but at these moments the planet cannot be seen due to the sky brightness. A planet needs to be a certain amount above the horizon and the sun a certain amount below it before the planet can be seen with the naked eye. There is no exact method to calculate when this occurs as it is dependent upon a number of factors such as the observer’s eyesight, location, atmospheric extinction and refraction, etc, many of which are nonconstant. Around opposition, however, there are two events which are observable: acronycal rising and cosmical setting. Acronycal rising is the evening when a planet is seen to rise for the last time after sunset. Cosmical setting is the first time the planet is seen to set before sunrise. Both events are subjective. For a few days after an acronycal rising the planet will still theoretically rise above the horizon, but this will occur when the sky is too bright to make out the planet and so when it is first seen, it will already be some distance above the horizon.1 For an object on the ecliptic, acronycal rising will occur a few days before the planet reaches opposition, and will therefore have an elongation (l첐ªlp) less than 180æ. However, the situation becomes more complicated when the object is not on the ecliptic. A positive latitude will make the object higher above the horizon than the point on the ecliptic with the same longitude, and so acronycal rising will occur earlier, at a lower elongation. On the other hand, an object with a negative latitude will be lower with respect to the horizon than the corresponding point of the ecliptic, and so acronycal rising will occur later, at a greater elongation. For objects below the ecliptic by a certain amount, such as Sirius whose ‘‘opposition’’ is also recorded, the order acronycal rising – opposition – cosmical setting will be reversed, with acronycal rising happening after opposition (Neugebauer 1975, p. 1091). The extent by which a planet’s latitude will change the date of acronycal rising, and hence it elongation, depends also upon the time of year. At sunset in the winter the ecliptic is inclined at quite a flat angle to the horizon and so the Acronycal Risings in Babylonian Astronomy 147 effect of latitude is more pronounced than in the summer when the ecliptic is closer to vertical. Before going any further, it will be useful to provide an overview of the main statements of the meaning of Q that have appeared in the literature. Epping (1889), p. 113 initially interprets the phenomena as ‘‘opposition of the outer planets with the sun’’, when listing the phenomena he wishes to discuss: b. Opposition der äußeren Planeten mit der Sonne. But later (p. 135), when discussing opposition, he describes a position where the planet is opposite the setting sun on the horizon: Eine bemerkenswerthe Stellung am himmel nimmt ein Planet dann ein, wenn er der Sonne gerabe gegenübersteht, oder, was dasselbe ist, wenn er beim Untergange der Sonne über den horizont sich erhebt. Kugler (1907), p. 15 also simply translates the phenomena as ‘‘opposition with the sun’’, in a list of important appearances that demand attention: Vor allem fesselten alle jene Erscheinungen ihre Aufmerksamkeit, die von der wechselnden Stellung der Planeten zur Sonne und Erde ... ihre Opposition mit der Sonne, Ihr zweiter Stillstand, und ihr Verschwinden in den Sonnenstrahlen (heliakischer Untergang). But in Kugler (1909), p. 490 he translates 8 AN aná ME.E.A as 8 Mars im akronychischen Aufgang (kurz vor der Opposition) In his classification article, Sachs (1947), p. 274 lists Q as ‘‘opposition’’, but places it in quotation marks. In Sachs (1952), p. 105 he describes records of Sirius as comprising: a triplet of dates for the heliacal rising (igi), ‘‘opposition’’ (actually apparent acronycal rising; aná ME (-E) (-A)), and heliacal setting (šú). 148 Louise Hollywood and John M. Steele The ‘‘opposition’’ of Sirius is written with the same phrase as used for Q of the planets, and surely corresponds to the same phenomena. The same year, Neugebauer (1952), p. 93 stated: Disappearance and reappearance of the planets are phenomena close to the horizon and it seems also ‘‘opposition’’ of a planet was defined as rising or setting at sunset and sunrise respectively. Later, in ACT (1955), p. 280 he summed up the assumption as: All phenomena under consideration, with the sole exception of the stationary points, are phenomena in the horizon. This also holds for Q which we simply call ‘‘opposition’’ but which, in all probability, is ‘‘acronycal rising’’, i.e. rising of the planet at sunset. Then in Neugebauer (1975), p. 399 he refers to a translation of Sachs’ within a discussion of the procedure texts: ... Q is not the ‘‘opposition’’ in the strict sense of Greek or modern astronomy but ... it corresponds to the ‘‘akronycal rising’’ of the planet. The planet is then just visible in the east shortly after sunset; the Babylonian term means in fact ‘‘opposition in the east.’’ [Ana ME-a ina kur, or similar (Sachs).] Most authors since Neugebauer have assumed that Q refers to acronycal rising, often with a reference to one of the above publications. In this paper we shall take a fresh look at the evidence in an attempt to evaluate this common interpretation of Q. Evidence from the texts of mathematical astronomy A small amount of information concerning Q is provided by the texts of mathematical astronomy.2 Q is regularly computed in the ephemerides of the outer planets. For Jupiter and Saturn this is done in the usual fashion using the appropriate System A or B schemes. For Mars, however, Q (and the other retrograde phase Y) is instead calculated as a satellite phenomena of F.3 Four different schemes for determining these phenomena of Mars were identified by Neugebauer.4 However, only for one of these, called by Neugebauer S, is information fully preserved on the complete Acronycal Risings in Babylonian Astronomy 149 retrograde arc, rather than just the part from F to Q. In scheme S the arc from Q to Y is equal to 3/2 of the arc from F to Q. The fact that Q is closer to F than to Y means that Q has an elongation from the sun of less than 180æ (Neugebauer 1975, p. 459), supporting the hypothesis that Q corresponds to acronycal rising. Schemes for the subdivision of the synodic arc of the other planets are known from several procedure texts. For example, ACT No. 813, a mixed collection of Jupiter procedures, contains in section 2 a scheme for System A where on the slow arc F to Q is ª4æ and Q to Y is ª6æ, and on the fast arc F to Q is ª4;48æ and Q to Y is ª7;12æ (Neugebauer 1975, p. 449). Again, this asymmetry in the division of the retrograde arc supports the identification of Q as acronycal rising. Further evidence is supplied by Swerdlow (1999, pp. 58–61), who investigated the elongations of Q from the mean sun as implied in ephemerides, template texts and procedure texts. He concluded that Q falls short of the mean opposition by about 3æ for Saturn, about 5æ, 6æ or 2æ for Jupiter (depending upon which scheme was used), and about 6æ or 7;30æ for Mars (again, depending upon the scheme). As he notes, it is not clear whether these precise numbers have any significance, but they nonetheless indicate that Q occurs at a mean elongation of less than 180æ, again supporting the identification of Q as acronycal rising. Evidence from the texts of non-mathematical astronomy The non-mathematical astronomical texts (Astronomical Dairies, Planetary Compilations, Goal Year Texts, Almanacs and Normal Star Almanacs) all contain observations and/or predictions of Q for the outer planets (Sachs 1947; Hunger 1999). The Astronomical Diaries contain observations and predictions made on a day-by-day basis. Generally planetary phenomena are recorded as observed, but occasionally predicted data was inserted in the record instead. For example, whenever certain observations could not be made due to bad weather, a computed value was entered followed by the remark ‘‘I did not see it’’ or ‘‘I did not watch’’. Planetary Compilations are simply collections of records for a specific planet. They were often arranged in periods appropriate to the planet. Planetary data contained in the Goal Year Texts was to be used in making predictions for a coming ‘‘goal’’ year. 150 Louise Hollywood and John M. Steele The data was taken from a number of years previously corresponding to the following characteristic periods: Mars Jupiter Saturn Mercury Venus 47 years 79 years 71 years 83 years 59 years 46 years 8 years for for for for conjunctions with Normal Stars Greek-Letter Phenomana Greek-Letter Phenomena conjunctions with Normal Stars It is possible, indeed likely, that all the data in the Goal Year Texts and Planetary Compilations was taken directly from the Diaries.5 The Almanacs contain data about the moon, a planet’s Greek-Letter phenomena and entries into zodiacal signs, the sun and Sirius. The Normal Star Almanacs contain data concerning the planet’s Greek-Letter phenomena and conjunctions with Normal Stars, the moon, the sun and Sirius. They both contain predicted data that would presumably have been obtained by using the Goal Year Texts, with appropriate corrections to the Goal Year Periods. We have collected together all recorded entries for Q of a planet from these sources that were available to us. For the Diaries and Planetary Compilations we have used the editions by Sachs and Hunger (1988, 1989, 1996) and Hunger (2001). Data from the Goal Year Texts was read from the copies by Pinches and Strassmaier in LBAT (ΩSachs 1955). For the Almanacs and Normal Star Almanacs, we have collected data from the copies in LBAT, Epping (1889), Kugler (1900, 1907–1935), and editions of individual texts by Sachs (1976), Sachs and Walker (1984), and Hunger (1999).6 All of the usable records are collected in the appendix. From the dates of Q the difference in longitude with the sun was calculated using a program designed by Kevin Yau and F. Richard Stephenson based upon the planetary ephemeris of Bretagnon and Simon.7 Dates in the Babylonian calendar were converted to the Julian calendar using the tablets of Parker and Dubberstein (1956). Calculations were made uniformly for an Ephemeris Time (ET) of 20.00, which corresponds roughly to shortly after sunset in Babylon. It was not considered necessary to make more precise estimates of the time of observation (eg by taking into account the variations in the Earth’s rotational clock error (DT), or the time of sunset at Babylon), since we have no infor- 151 Acronycal Risings in Babylonian Astronomy Fig. 1. Calculated elongations at Q for all Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. mation about when during the course of the night Q was observed (although if Q is indeed acronycal rising, then the observations take place shortly after sunset). If the computations were made for the end of the night the elongations would be approximately 0.5æ greater. All of the computed elongations range from 165–195æ. Occasionally we have two records with conflicting information concerning the date of Q. In the following, we have omitted these cases from our analysis, although including them would have made little difference to the statistics. In figure 1 we examine the data by source. Overall the data is centred around a little less than 180æ, but it is clear that the extent of the spread in elongations varies depending upon the source. This is analysed in the table below: Source Diaries Planetary texts Goal year texts Almanacs Normal star almanacs Average Standard Deviation No. records 178.2 177.0 179.2 179.7 180.9 2.2 2.0 4.8 2.8 7.7 35 47 15 14 8 152 Louise Hollywood and John M. Steele The three sources which generally contain observational data have very similar averages, as is to be expected if we assume that the Planetary Compilations and the Goal Year Texts were extracted from the observations in the Diaries. There is a greater standard deviation for the Goal Year texts, but this is probably partly caused by the smaller number of observations available from this source, and also by one particularly high point, an elongation of 192æ for Saturn in SE 32. Although there is much less data available for the texts which contain predictions, the Almanacs and Normal Star Almanacs do seem to place Q at a somewhat greater elongation than the observational material. The reason for this becomes clearer when we consider each planet separately (see figures 2–4): For Mars, the distribution is similar for all classes of text. The mean elongation at Q is 176.5æ, with a standard deviation of 5.2æ. For Jupiter, the mean elongation at Q is 177.5æ, almost identical to that of Mars, but the spread in values is somewhat less, resulting in a standard deviation of 2.2æ. As with Mars, the distribution is similar for all classes of text. For Saturn, the mean elongation at Q is 180.5æ, with a standard deviation of 3.9æ, reflecting a large spread in elongations. Furthermore, there are clear differences between the data from different classes of text; this is especially obvious between data from Astronomical Diaries and Normal Star Almanacs (although curiously Fig. 2. Calculated elongations at Q for Mars. Acronycal Risings in Babylonian Astronomy 153 Fig. 3. Calculated elongations at Q for Jupiter. Fig. 4. Calculated elongations at Q for Saturn. not Almanacs). In order to explain this we first have to look at how the predictions were made. The Goal Year Texts were presumably the source of the predicted data in the Almanacs and Normal Star Almanacs, and ultimately any predicted data 154 Louise Hollywood and John M. Steele that enters the Diaries due to bad weather preventing observation. To make a prediction of a Greek letter event from data in a Goal Year Text, one simply moves on the relevant period and adds a small correction to the date in the Babylonian calendar, to find the date in the new Babylonian year. Occasionally, it is necessary to adjust this date by one month in order to take into account intercalation. Indeed, it seems that at least some Goal Year Texts allowed for this by adjusting the month of the recorded data when compiling original observations, so the intercalation correction did not have to be made when the text came to be used (Brack-Bernsen 1999). Hunger (1999) has computed the necessary corrections to the Goal Year periods from modern computation. On average they are π4 days for Mars (using the 79 year period), 0 days for Jupiter and ª6 days for Saturn. A few texts are known (e.g., Text E in Neugebauer & Sachs 1971 and LBAT 1515) which attest these or similar corrections. However, Hunger (1999) has also shown by comparing preserved Goal Year Texts and Almanacs/Normal Star Almanacs that the correct correction was rarely applied in practice. For Mars he found the correction varied between 0 and π9 days, for Jupiter between ª1 and π1 days and for Saturn between ª4 and ª13 days. For Saturn, a difference in the applied correction of 1 day corresponds to a change in elongation of about 1æ, since 1æ is roughly the mean daily motion of the sun, and Saturn moves hardly at all over a few days. Incorrectly applied corrections to the Goal Year period for Saturn will therefore translate directly to the elongation derived from dates of Q in Almanacs and Normal Star Almanacs. This is presumably the cause of the very high (greater than 180æ) elongations for the Saturn data taken from Normal Star Almanacs. It may simply be chance that the available Normal Star Almanacs all err in the same direction (too small a day correction), whereas the Almanacs apply a correction that is about right, and so result in elongations which are similar to those found in observational texts. In this respect, it is worth noting that several, though by no means all, of the Saturn data with elongations greater than 180æ taken from observational texts are accompanied by the phrase ‘‘I did not watch’’, indicating that these are predictions, presumably taken from the Almanacs/Normal Star Almanacs. It is largely due to predicted data that the mean elongation at Q for Saturn is marginally above 180æ, and as we have seen this is an artefact of the way they were computed, and not a reflection of observational practice. For Jupiter, the applied corrections are in good agreement with what they should be, and as a result the distributions for the Acronycal Risings in Babylonian Astronomy 155 predicted and observed data are similar. There is too little data to draw any similar conclusions for Mars. There are two more issues that deserve comment as they explain why there is a greater spread in elongations for Mars and Saturn than there is for Jupiter, even when we disregard the predicted data. These are the effects of a planet’s latitude and magnitude on the observed date of acronycal rising. As discussed in the introduction, acronycal rising does not occur at a fixed distance from the sun. This is because it is a visibility phenomenon, and so depends upon a number of factors such as climatic/atmospheric conditions, the observer’s eyesight, etc. The variations in the factors will naturally produce some spread in the elongation at which acronycal rising will occur for a given planet. Furthermore, the magnitude of a planet directly affects the date of visibility, since clearly a bright object can be seen closer to the horizon and when the sky is lighter, than a dim object. This is particularly relevant for Mars, whose magnitude varies significantly, and to a lesser extent Saturn. In this regard it is significant that there is a greater spread in elongations for Mars and Saturn than for Jupiter, although the effect of magnitude variation cannot be investigated quantitatively as there is insufficient data to isolate magnitude effects from other factors. The variation in a planet’s latitude will have a similar effect, since when the planet is further away from the ecliptic, it will rise several days earlier or later than when it is close to the ecliptic. The variation in the latitude of Saturn is about twice that of Jupiter, and Mars’s latitude varies still further, especially around opposition, so this may be one reason why there is less spread in the distribution of elongations of Jupiter. Quantitatively, again, it is hard to analyse the effect of latitude on the elongation at Q, since the effect is also dependent upon the time of year. We might expect a correlation between elongations of over 180æ and dates when the planet has negative latitude. Although this is true most of the time for Mars and Jupiter (3 out of 4 and 7 out of 8 cases respectively), it is clearly not always the case for Saturn (only 8 out of 17 cases). In figure 5 we plot elongation at Q against latitude. For the reason just stated it is hard to interpret such a plot. Nevertheless, two points can, we believe, be made: (i) as expected, there is some correlation between elongation and latitude, with elongations of greater than 180æ more often occurring when the latitude is negative; however, (ii) for Saturn the effect of latitude is less significant than other factors, in particular when we are dealing with predicted data. 156 Louise Hollywood and John M. Steele Fig. 5. The dependence of elongation at Q on planetary latitude. Conclusions All of the evidence considered in this paper leads to the not unexpected conclusion that the phenomena Q observed and predicted by the Babylonians corresponds to the acronycal rising of the planet, not opposition. Both the theoretical schemes of the Mathematical Astronomical Texts, and the observed data on the Non-Mathematical Astronomical Texts indicate that Q occurs at elongations less than 180æ, and the differences in the spreads of elongations for the three planets indicates that Q is a visibility phenomena. These two factors inevitably indicate that Q is aconycal rising, as the only obvious observable visibility phenomena with at an elongation a little less than 180æ. Qualitative support for this conclusion is also provided by the application of the so-called Uruk scheme to computing dates of Sirius phenomena (Sachs 1952). This scheme predicts dates of Sirius’s Q (again written aná ME-E-a) at elongations somewhat greater than 180æ, and this is just what we would expect for a star with Sirius’s fairly large negative latitude. One problem that remains is how exactly an acronycal rising was observed. Due to extinction effects, a planet is never actually seen to cross the horizon; instead it is first seen at a small distance above the horizon. This distance will vary night by night due to changing atmospheric conditions. It is quite Acronycal Risings in Babylonian Astronomy 157 possible that the Babylonian astronomers used more than one criterion (for example, a combination of the height of the planet above the horizon when first seen and measurements of the time interval between sunset and first sighting of the planet) to judge when an acronycal rising had occurred. Acknowledgements We wish to express our thanks to Lis Brack-Bernsen and Teije de Jong for their helpful comments and advice during the writing of this paper. John Steele’s work was made possible through the awards of a Leverhulm Trust Research Fellowship at the University of Durham and the E. P. May Fellowship at the University of Toronto. References Aaboe, A. 1987: ‘‘A Late Babylonian Procedure Text for Mars, and Some Remarks on Retrograde Arcs’’, in King, D. A., and Saliba, G. (eds.), From Deferent to Equant: A Volume of Studies in the History of Science in the Ancient and Medieval Near East in Honor of E. S. Kennedy, New York, pp. 1–14. Aaboe, A., Sachs, A. J. 1966: ‘‘Some Dateless Computed Lists of Longitudes of Characteristic Planetary Phenomena from the Late Babylonian Period’’, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 20, pp. 1–33. Brack-Bernsen, L. 1999: ‘‘Ancient and Modern Utilization of the Lunar Data Recorded on the Babylonian Goal-Year Tablets’’, in Actes de la VémeConférence de la SEAC, Warszawa-Gdansk, pp. 13–39. Epping, J. 1889: Astronomisches aus Babylon, Freiberg im Breisgau. Huber, P. J., et al. 1982: Astronomical Dating of Babylon I and Ur III, Malibu. Hunger, H. 1999: ‘‘Non-mathematical Astronomical Texts and Their Relationships’’ in N. M. Swerdlow (ed.), Ancient Astronomy and Celestial Divination, Cambridge, MA, pp. 77–96. 2001: Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia Volume V, Vienna. Kugler, F. X. 1907–1935: Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel, Münster. Neugebauer, O. 1952: The Exact Sciences in Antiquity, Princeton. 1955: Astronomical Cuneiform Texts, London. 1975: A History of Ancient Mathematical Astronomy, Berlin. 158 Louise Hollywood and John M. Steele Neugebauer, O. and Sachs, A. J. 1971: ‘‘Some Atypical Astronomical Cuneiform Texts I’’, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 21, pp. 183–218. Parker, R. A. and Dubberstein, W. H. 1956: Babylonian Chronology, Providence. Sachs, A. 1948: ‘‘A Classification of the Babylonian Astronomical Tablets of the Seleucid Era.’’ Journal of Cuneiform Studies 2, pp. 271–290. 1952: ‘‘Sirius dates in Babylonian astronomical texts of the Seleucid period.’’ Journal of Cuneiform Studies 6, 105–114. 1955: Late Babylonian Astronomical and Related Texts, Providence. 1976: ‘‘The Latest Datable Cuneiform Tablets’’, in B. Eichler (ed.), Kramer Anniversary Volume: Cuneiform Studies in Honour of Samuel Noah Kramer, Neukirchen-Vluyn, pp. 379–398. Sachs, A., Hunger, H. 1988–1996: Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia Volumes I–III, Vienna. Sachs, A., Walker, C. B. F. 1984: ‘‘Kepler’s View of the Star of Bethlehem and the Babylonian Almanac for 7/6 BC’’, Iraq 46, pp. 43–56. Swerdlow, N. M. 1999: ‘‘Acronychal Risings in Babylonian Planetary Theory’’, Archive for History of Exact Science 54, pp. 49–65. Appendix The following tables contain lists of all entries in Non-Mathematical Astronomical Texts known to us which concern the phenomena Q. In the first column, a reference is given to the source of the record. Diaries (D) are cited from their publication in Sachs & Hunger (1988–1996); Planetary Compilations (P) by their text number in Hunger (2001); Goal Year Texts (G), Almanacs (A) and Normal Star Almanacs (NSA) by their LBAT number. The date column refers to the Babylonian calendar. The following abbreviations apply: AΩ Alexander III, ArIIΩArtaxerxes II, ArIIIΩArtaxerxes III, DIΩDarius I, DIIIΩDarius III, NEIIΩNebuchadnezzar II, PAΩPhilip Arrhidaeus, SEΩSeleucid Era MARS Month Day lM l첐 l첐ªlM Latitude Comments Source Year D –276 D –229 D –143 SE 35 SE 82 SE 168 XI XI V 15 19 5 151.16 327.20 176.04 145.57 321.92 176.35 317.65 138.81 181.16 4.27 4.42 1.18 D –137 D –133 P 68 SE 174 SE 178 SE 8 X XII II 1 28 6 101.05 277.33 176.28 171.42 349.27 177.85 233.64 52.21 178.57 4.20 3.42 ª2.24 Text: 19? Around ... I did not watch All day overcast Around ... 159 Acronycal Risings in Babylonian Astronomy ª3.85 3.43 4.56 P 69 P 69 P 76 SE 27 SE 31 SE 50 VI IX XI 12 20 19 351.10 172.51 181.42 82.61 256.69 174.08 136.98 314.72 177.74 P 76 P 79 A 1164/5 A 1174 G 1228 SE 52 SE 142 SE 234 SE 236 SE 18 XII IX VIII IX X 12 25 8 6 16 177.35 94.37 42.29 83.15 128.95 167.55 171.54 179.40 173.75 177.52 3.36 3.85 0.75 3.37 4.62 G 1265 SE 89 G 1300 SE 245 NSA 998 SE 55 NSA 1050 SE 187 V II II VII 1 21 8 27 312.34 136.99 184.65 247.89 58.59 170.70 221.99 47.10 185.11 52.47 219.06 166.59 ª6.51 ª2.94 ª1.42 0.95 344.90 265.91 221.69 256.90 306.47 Around ... I did not watch I did not watch Date partially broken away, could be 26 Ideal date JUPITER Month Day lJ l첐 l첐ªlJ Latitude Comments Source Year D –567 NII 37 I D –357 D –346 D –302/1 ArIII 1 ArIII 12 SE 9 XI X VII 15 20 4 145.66 321.96 176.30 119.60 296.29 176.69 5.44 182.88 177.44 1.63 1.18 ª1.70 D D D D D –273 –253 –245 –218 –209 SE 38 SE 58 SE 66 SE 93 SE 102 XII VII IV VIII V 16 29 8 7 1 176.07 60.73 282.46 41.14 298.12 354.06 236.72 100.82 217.87 114.55 177.99 175.99 178.36 176.73 176.43 1.73 ª0.54 ª0.74 ª1.08 ª1.13 D –208 D –201 D –198 D –178 D –171 D –161 D –141 D –140 P 54 P 60 P 60 P 63 P 60 SE 103 SE 110 SE 113 SE 133 SE 140 SE 150 SE 170 SE 171 DI 19 ArII 18 ArII 19 ArII 41 ArII 41 V XII2 IV XII VIII V I I VIII V VI IV IV 22 30 4 21 2 15 12 27 9 28 16 17 15 333.84 202.49 267.29 180.71 26.15 318.60 193.95 225.02 59.46 328.64 5.05 302.59 302.86 155.24 20.75 88.03 358.91 204.26 137.21 11.80 44.19 238.25 146.50 183.01 121.56 119.62 181.40 178.26 180.74 178.20 178.11 178.61 177.85 179.17 178.79 177.86 177.96 178.97 176.76 ª1.73 1.46 ª0.29 1.71 ª1.40 ª1.54 1.59 0.98 ª0.49 ª1.71 ª1.70 ª1.29 ª1.28 11,12 219.76 35.83 176.07 1.04 Text: [11th] or 12th Previous entry 7th, next 16th Around ... Date (1st or 2nd) is broken away, next entry 3rd. I did not watch Text: 30? Around ... Around ... Around ... Around ... Around ... Around ... Aquarius 160 Louise Hollywood and John M. Steele P P P P P P P P 63 60 60 60 66 66 69 66 ArII 42 ArII 43 ArII 44 ArII 45 ArIII 1 ArIII 2 ArIII 4 ArIII 5 VI VII VIII IX XI XII I II 5 21 8 22 15 27 12 27 339.29 15.67 50.57 83.63 145.66 175.85 206.52 238.59 156.53 192.24 227.53 260.96 321.96 352.22 23.87 56.10 177.24 176.57 176.96 177.33 176.30 176.37 177.35 177.51 ª1.78 ª1.57 ª0.79 0.20 1.63 1.74 1.34 0.57 P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 70 70 70 70 70 70 72 72 70 72 72 72 78 78 78 80 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 ArIII 9 ArIII 10 ArIII 12 ArIII 14 ArIII 16 ArIII 17 ArIII 18 ArIII 19 DIII 1 DIII 2 DIII 4 DIII 5 Al 7 Al 11 Al 13 SE 12 SE 13 SE 14 SE 15 SE 21 SE 23 SE 23 SE 24 SE 24 SE 25 SE 26 SE 33 SE 114 SE 119 SE 120 SE 131 SE 163 SE 164 SE 165 SE 166 SE 167 SE 170 SE 171 SE 172 VII VIII X XII I II IV IV XI XI I I III VII X X X XII XIII VI IX IX X X XI XII VII IV X XI X VI VIII VIII X XI I I III 9 24 20 16 30 16 2 20 8 21 4 14 1 15 11 18 28 13 25 23 22 19 5 4 16 27 10 22 6 21 26 22 8 22 5 15 13 17 12 20.66 55.52 119.60 180.08 211.07 243.27 277.63 313.40 124.06 154.24 184.58 216.10 248.42 30.86 97.71 106.54 137.43 167.30 197.88 10.53 79.29 79.69 110.91 111.05 141.51 171.87 15.44 302.55 116.35 146.36 120.25 0.12 36.12 70.32 102.74 133.87 193.82 226.27 258.05 198.43 231.70 296.29 358.14 28.75 61.90 94.09 129.51 300.42 332.04 2.12 29.81 63.90 207.69 272.42 283.77 312.70 345.10 14.96 188.99 256.63 253.56 288.91 287.90 318.76 348.12 195.14 123.33 289.85 323.70 298.02 180.52 214.58 247.96 279.31 308.33 12.77 34.64 75.39 177.77 176.18 176.69 178.06 177.68 178.63 176.46 176.11 176.36 177.80 177.54 173.71 175.48 176.83 174.71 177.23 175.27 177.80 177.08 178.46 177.34 173.87 178.00 176.85 177.25 176.25 179.70 180.78 173.50 177.34 177.77 180.40 178.46 177.64 176.57 174.46 178.95 168.37 177.34 ª1.49 ª0.66 1.18 1.72 1.28 0.43 ª0.62 ª1.49 1.27 1.71 1.68 1.18 0.29 ª1.30 0.59 0.85 1.51 1.75 1.53 ª1.64 0.04 0.04 0.96 0.96 1.57 1.75 ª1.57 ª1.25 1.05 1.61 1.15 ª1.74 ª1.20 ª0.27 0.69 1.41 1.59 1.00 0.04 Text: 21? Text: [1]2 Text: month I, editor corrected Around ... I did not watch I did not watch Around ... Around ... Around ... Until around ... 161 Acronycal Risings in Babylonian Astronomy A 1148 A 1151 A 1160 A 1174 A 1195 G 1233 G 1249 G 1251 G 1253 G 1261 G 1280 G 1283 NSA 1052 SE 198 SE 201 SE 233 SE 236 SE 305 SE 35 SE 64 SE 69 SE 71 SE 87 SE 116 SE 120 SE 188 V IX V VIII VI IX II VIII X I VI XI VIII 28 11 3 24 21 8 3 3 2 3 27 22 11 339.24 84.85 318.20 65.36 348.63 84.07 215.92 30.98 97.68 192.77 15.78 146.23 46.52 160.16 259.45 138.10 245.67 170.09 259.79 32.61 209.57 276.33 18.65 193.92 324.69 221.86 180.92 174.60 179.90 180.31 181.46 175.72 176.69 178.59 178.65 185.88 178.14 178.46 175.34 ª1.75 0.15 ª1.52 ª0.42 ª1.77 0.18 1.19 ª1.30 0.59 1.58 ª1.60 1.61 ª0.97 Ideal date Ideal date SATURN Month Day ls l첐 l첐ªls Latitude Comments Source Year D –380 D –342 ArII 24 ArIII 16 X I 26 21 111.22 287.47 176.25 203.35 20.12 176.77 0.90 2.68 D –333 DIII 2 IV 19 306.42 123.25 176.83 ª1.56 D –332 D –322 DIII 3 PA 1 V IX 16 23 318.79 138.58 179.79 99.15 274.21 175.06 ª2.05 0.27 D D D D D –277 –365 –232 –198 –165 SE 34 SE 48 SE 79 SE 113 SE 146 IV IX X XII I 6 18 27 10 1? 272.03 91.96 179.93 100.62 275.91 175.29 120.98 303.66 182.68 178.37 358.78 180.41 208.00 25.11 177.11 0.08 0.37 1.31 2.84 2.62 D –158 SE 153 IV 18 286.84 109.41 182.57 ª0.61 D –157 D –149 P 62 A 1122 A 1134 A 1135 A 1152 A 1185 A 1188/9 A 1195 G 1220 SE 154 SE 162 ArII 26 SE 128 SE 178 SE 179 SE 209 SE 282 SE 300 SE 305 SE 32 IV VII XI VI III II III IX IV VI II 11 28 20 10 1 23 1 4 16 21 29 298.83 46.49 137.10 342.38 236.66 247.84 254.24 79.41 286.29 348.61 248.58 ª1.18 ª2.15 2.01 ª2.67 1.76 1.29 1.02 ª0.82 ª0.49 ª2.73 1.16 120.75 227.28 318.08 165.07 58.79 69.98 75.44 257.74 103.12 170.12 79.06 181.92 180.79 180.98 182.69 182.13 182.14 181.20 178.33 176.83 181.51 190.48 Around ... Clouds, I did not watch No date, previous entry 18, next 20 Clouds crossed the sky I did not watch Date of entry broken away, next 3rd. Around ... I did not watch Around ... 162 G 1229 G 1236 G 1265 G 1291 NSA 1008 NSA 1010 NSA 1016 NSA 1020 NSA 1057 Louise Hollywood and John M. Steele SE 46 SE 48 SE 109 SE 148 SE 96 SE 104 SE 107 SE 111 SE 194 VIII IX XI II V IX X XII X 30 18 6 19 10 3 13 2 6 72.17 100.62 128.69 230.34 309.46 59.01 102.00 153.58 82.56 250.93 275.91 309.41 48.55 129.49 242.68 279.64 342.64 272.39 178.76 175.29 180.72 178.21 180.03 183.67 177.64 189.06 189.83 ª1.07 0.32 1.62 1.99 ª1.66 ª1.65 0.37 2.48 ª0.57 Ideal Date Ideal Date NOTES 1. See Swerdlow (1999, p. 55). 2. The principle texts are published in Neugebauer (1955) and Aaboe & Sachs (1966). See also the discussion in Neugebauer (1975). 3. The likely reasons for this are discussed by Aaboe (1987, p. 11). 4. See Neugebauer (1955, pp. 305–306), Aaboe (1987, pp. 9–13) and Neugebauer (1975, pp. 458–460). 5. See Hunger (1999) however. 6. Before beginning this analysis it is worth noting that the data is limited by those tablets that have survived (and published in some form) and is by no means a standardised cross section. Consequently we have an uneven distribution over the years, and for the Almanacs, Normal Star Almanacs and Goal Year Texts we have a very limited number of relevant entries. 7. We thank F. R. Stephenson for generously making available his program. 8. For further cases of conflicting data in overlapping texts, see Hunger (1999).