gh—pter s†

ƒol—r —nd €ropheti™ ‰e—rs ±

@g—lend—rs —nd h—ting ƒystemsA

I

„he QTHEd—y ‰e—r

I

sn ‚ev IIXPEQD IPXTD IPXIRD—ndh—n UXPS we see th—t Q ye—rs is equ—ted to IPTH d—ys

P

I I

whi™h m—kes one ye—r equ—l to QTH d—ys @Q  QTH a I PTHAF ‘„his period of Q ye—rs

P P

is the Ist h—lf of the UHth week of h—niel9s vision —s we will see in the following

™h—pterF“ sf this is the ™—se we must —sk ourselves why fi˜le prophe™y uses this

I

in—™™ur—te me—sure of time when we —ll know th—t there —re QTS d—ys in — ye—rF

R

ixtensive histori™—l —nd —r™h—eologi™—l rese—r™h —round the world h—s ˜rought to

fFgF the sol—r ye—r w—s in f—™t ex—™tly light the f—™t th—t prior to the Vth ™entury

equ—l to QTH d—ys —nd th—t the lun—r month w—s ex—™tly QH d—ys from new moon to

new moonF

„he month of the ssr—elites prior to the Vth ™entury fFgF w—s equ—l to QH d—ysY there

is no mention of months shorter or longer th—n QH d—ysD nor of — ye—r longer th—n

IP monthsF „h—t the month ™onsisted of QH d—ys is eviden™ed ˜y heut QRXVD PIXIQ —nd

xum PHXPWD where mourning for the de—d is ordered for — ––full month99 —nd is ™—rried

on for QH d—ysF „he story of the flood —s given in qenesis re™kons in months of

QH d—ysY it s—ys th—t one hundred —nd fifty d—ys p—ssed ˜etween the seventeenth d—y

of the se™ond month —nd the seventeenth d—y of the seventh monthD — period of

ex—™tly five months @qen UXIID UXPRD VXRAF

„h—t there were IP months in the —n™ient tewish ™—lend—r is —lso ™onfirmed ˜y h—n RXPWD

ter SPXQID ist PXIPD QXUD QXIQD et™F

„hus we ™on™lude th—t the tewish ye—r ™onsisted of IP months of QH d—ys e—™hD m—king —

™—lend—r ye—r of QTH d—ysF IU

‡rix sƒ tiƒ ƒ gywsxqc

„he —n™ient igypti—n ye—r —lso ™omprised QTH d—ys ˜efore it ˜e™—me QTS ˜y the —ddition

of S d—ys su˜sequent to the eighteenth dyn—styF „he ™—lend—r of the i˜ers p—pyrus

™ont—ins ye—rs of IP months of QH d—ys e—™hF

„he old f—˜yloni—n ye—r ™onsisted of QTH d—ysF „he —stronomi™—l t—˜lets from the period

—nted—ting the xeoEf—˜yloni—n empire ™ompute the ye—r —t so m—ny d—ys without

mention of —ddition—l d—ysF „h—t the —n™ient f—˜yloni—n ye—r h—d only QTH d—ys w—s

known ˜efore the ™uneiform s™ript w—s de™ipheredY gtesi—s wrote th—t the w—lls of

f—˜ylon were QTH furlongs in ™omp—ss ––—s m—ny —s there h—d ˜een d—ys in the ye—r99F

„he f—˜yloni—n zodi—™ t—˜lets evolved into the division of — ™ir™le into QTHVF

„he —n™ient essyri—n ye—r ™onsisted of QTH d—ysY — de™—de w—s ™—lled — s—rus whi™h

™onsisted of Q THH d—ysF „he essyri—nsD like the f—˜yloni—nsD h—d — ye—r ™omprising of

IP lun—r months of QH d—ys e—™h whi™h were me—sured from new moon to new moonF

eround the glo˜e —r™h—eologists h—ve est—˜lished the existen™e of ™—lend—rs of QTH d—ysF

ƒ™hol—rs who investig—ted the —n™ient ™—lend—rs of the sn™—s of €eru —nd the w—y—s of

‰u™—t—n wondered —t the ™—lend—r of QTH d—ysY so did the s™hol—rs who studied the

™—lend—rs of the igypti—nsD €ersi—nsD rindusD gh—lde—nsD essyri—nsD re˜rews —nd the

ghineseF

sn the ye—r URU fFgF this st—te of equili˜rium w—s suddenly distur˜edF ristori™—l re™ords

indi™—te th—t ˜etween URU fFgF —nd TVU fFgF the ™—lend—r w—s in — ™h—oti™ st—teD with the

length of the ye—r —nd the month ˜eing repe—tedly —djustedF

fFgF is th—t of univers—l „he ™olle™tive pi™ture whi™h emerges of the period following TVU

—™tivity dire™ted tow—rds reforming the ™—lend—r with the in™lusion of five ––—ddition—l

d—ys99D the e—rth then h—ving settled into its present st—˜le or˜itF

‡h—t ™ould h—ve ™—used these sudden —nd dr—m—ti™ ™h—nges in the lengths of the sol—r

ye—r —nd the lun—r monthc

‡hen the –†enus t—˜lets9 of emmiz—dug— were ex™—v—ted from the li˜r—ry of

eshur˜—nip—l on the site of —n™ient xineveh in IVUHD it w—s re™ognised th—t the

f—˜yloni—n —stronomers of —n™ient times h—d ˜een o˜serving the movement of the pl—net

†enus through the he—vens very ™—refullyF „he periods of the inferior —nd superior

™onjun™tions @iFeF the periods when @—A †enus is dire™tly ˜etween the ƒun —nd the i—rthD

—nd @˜A when it v—nishes ˜ehind the ƒunA were pre™isely notedF ƒtudies of these t—˜lets

reve—led th—t †enusD in the d—ys of the o˜serv—tionsD w—s not or˜iting the ƒun in the w—y

it does tod—yF „his —nom—ly ™ould not ˜e expl—inedD —s the f—˜yloni—ns were well known

for their studies of the skies —nd their —™™ur—te —stronomi™—l o˜serv—tionsF

„hen in IWSH hr smm—nuel †elikovsky shook the s™ientifi™ world with his post w—r

™l—ssi™ ––‡orlds in gollision99F re h—d ˜een ™ondu™ting extensive rese—r™h into —n™ient

—stronomi™—l re™ordingsD histori™—l —™™ounts —nd —r™h—eologi™—l dis™overies pert—ining to

the movement of the pl—nets through the —gesF re studied the yld „est—ment —nd — host

of religious —nd mythologi™—l writings from —n™ient ™ivilis—tions —round the world from IV

ƒyve‚ exh €‚y€ri„sg ‰ie‚ƒ @gevixhe‚ƒ exh he„sxq ƒ‰ƒ„iwƒA

ƒouth emeri™— to ghin— —nd dis™overed rem—rk—˜le —nd ™onsistent simil—rities des™ri˜ing

the s—me ™elesti—l eventsF ris rese—r™h w—s of — most erudite n—ture —nd it eventu—lly led

him to ™on™lude th—t in —n™ient times the sol—r system w—sD for — periodD definitely not —s

st—˜le —nd predi™t—˜le —s it is tod—yF re re—lised th—t these —n™ient ™iviliz—tions were not

—s primitive —s we might im—gine them to h—ve ˜eenF „hey were well —dv—n™ed in their

m—them—ti™s —nd in their o˜serv—tions of the skiesD suffi™iently —dv—n™ed to ˜e t—ken

seriouslyF „he pyr—mids of igypt —re ˜ut one ex—mpleF

„he following is — summ—ry of some of the more import—nt ™on™lusions †elikovsky ™—me

to whi™h h—ve — ˜e—ring on the QTH d—y ye—r ™on™eptX

IF €rior to the Vth ™entury fFgF †enus w—s not ™ounted —mong the four m—jor pl—nets

visi˜le to the n—ked eye @viz tupiterD ƒ—turnD w—rs —nd wer™uryA —nd w—s there—fter

referred to —s the ––pl—net whi™h is — ™omet99Y

PF et one st—ge †enus moved irregul—rly through the he—vensY

QF huring this period †enus h—d two long ˜rilli—nt ™om—s @t—ilsA in the form of

™res™ents or –horns9Y

RF †enus w—s so ex™eedingly ˜right in —ppe—r—n™e th—t it w—s elev—ted to — pl—™e with

the ƒun —nd woon to form — he—venly trioF „he gh—lde—ns des™ri˜ed it —s — ––˜right

tor™h of he—ven99 —nd ––— stupendous prodigy in the sky99Y

SF †enus w—s worshipped —s the –queen of he—ven9 ˜y m—ny he—then n—tions —nd is

referred to in €hoeni™i—nD f—˜yloni—n —nd essyri—n re™ords —s ssht—r or est—rte

—nd in the yld „est—ment —s esht—roth @I ƒ—m UXQERD P ugs PQXIQAF iven the

ssr—elites were led —str—y to worship this ™elesti—l wonder —nd they ˜urnt

s—™rifi™es to the –queen of he—ven9 @ter RRXIUD IVAF „he women ˜—ked ™res™ent

™—kes in her honour @ter RRXIWAD the form of the ™—kes presum—˜ly repli™—ting the

™res™ent –horns9 of †enusF

TF sts irregul—r or˜it —t times ˜rought †enus d—ngerously ™lose to the i—rth resulting in

gr—vit—tion—l inter—™tion of m—jor proportions ˜etween the two pl—netsF yne of these

inter—™tions took pl—™e during the times of the ixodus —nd —nother o™™urred shortly

there—fter during the ˜—ttle of feth roronD ––ƒun st—nd thou still upon qi˜eon —nd the

woon in the v—lley of ej—lon F F F99 ––so the ƒun stood still in the midst of the he—vens —nd

h—stened not to go down —˜out — whole d—y99 @tosh IHXIIEIQAF ristori™—l re™ords of

other —n™ient ™ivilis—tions ™onfirm these ˜i˜li™—l —™™ountsF

UF w—ny ™enturies l—ter †enus ™rossed the p—th of the sm—ller pl—net w—rs —nd the

gr—vit—tion—l tussle whi™h ensued threw w—rs tot—lly off its ™ourseF w—rs then

˜e™—me the d—ngerousD err—ti™ or˜ of the he—vensD known ˜y the ‚om—ns —s –the

qod of ‡—r9F

VF †enus ex™h—nged pl—™es with w—rs —s —n inner pl—netF

WF huring the reign of uing zzi—h trou˜le ˜rewed —g—in when the irregul—r tr—je™tory

of w—rs ™rossed th—t of the i—rthF „he ™lose en™ounter of the two pl—nets threw the

i—rth —nd woon off ˜—l—n™eD upsetting the ™—lend—r for de™—desF

IHF „he er— of ™onfli™t ˜etween w—rs —nd i—rth ™ontinued until TVU fFgF when w—rsD

˜eing the sm—ller pl—netD w—s fin—lly ––thrown out of the ring99D ˜ut the gr—vit—tion—l

tussles ˜etween the two pl—nets resulted in the i—rth —™quiring — new sol—r ye—r of

I

roughly QTS d—ys —s it is to the present d—yF „he moon9s or˜it w—s —lso —ffe™ted

R

I

resulting in — lun—r month of —pproxim—tely PW d—ysF

P IW

‡rix sƒ tiƒ ƒ gywsxqc

por de™—des there w—s s™epti™ism —nd reje™tion of †elikovsky9s theories in v—rious

s™ientifi™ ™ir™les ˜ut —s the sp—™e —ge d—wned —nd the ‚ussi—ns —nd emeri™—ns ˜eg—n

exploring the woonD †enus —nd w—rs with their w—rinerD †ener— —nd epollo ƒp—™e

wissionsD — different pi™ture emergedF „he following is — very short summ—ry of some of

†elikovsky9s predi™tionsD whi™h h—ve su˜sequently ˜een proven ™orre™t ˜y the sp—™e

pro˜es —nd other sour™esF

p „here —re strong ele™troEm—gneti™ for™es —t work in the sol—r system ˜esides the

st—nd—rd xewtoni—n l—ws of motion —nd gr—vityF el˜ert iinstein h—d —lso ™ome to the

s—me ™on™lusion ˜efore his de—th in IWSS while he w—s working on — unit—ry field

theoryF

p „he i—rth h—s — su˜st—nti—l m—gnetosphereF

p ‚evers—l of the i—rth9s m—gneti™ poles h—s t—ken pl—™e in histori™—l timesF

p †enus h—s — m—ssive —nd very hot —tmosphereX WH —tmospheres —nd VHH Vp—t

ground levelF @proved ˜y †ener— sp—™e pro˜es S 8 TAF €rior to th—t s™ientists ˜elieved

th—t the temper—ture of †enus w—s simil—r to th—t of the i—rthF

p „here —re l—rge qu—ntities of hydro™—r˜ons @petroleum g—ssesA —nd ™—r˜on dioxide in

the —tmosphere of †enus ± not w—ter v—pour —s w—s widely thought @†ener— S 8 TAF

p †enus h—s — retrogr—de rot—tion ™omp—red to the ƒun —nd other pl—nets @w—riner PAF

p †enus exhi˜its — reson—n™e with i—rthF

p tupiter is —lso extremely hot —nd vol—tile with — hydro ™—r˜on —tmosphere @meth—neD

—mmoni— et™FA pointing to it ˜eing the p—rent ˜ody of †enus —s m—ny —n™ient sour™es

—ssertF

p tupiter is — sour™e of r—dio w—vesF

p v—v— flows —nd geologi™—l f—ults on w—rs reve—l tremendous for™es h—ving ˜een

exerted on its surf—™e @w—riner WAF

p „he woon is not tot—lly inert —s w—s ˜elieved to ˜e the ™—se ± the epollo missions

h—ve dete™ted seismi™ tremors —nd — m—gneti™ fieldD @predi™ted ˜y †elikovskyD ˜ut

tot—lly ˜—ffling to s™ientists —t the timeAF

„hese —nd other re™ent dis™overies h—ve led v—rious s™ientists to question the histori™—l

I

st—˜ility of the sol—r systemF por the p—st P thous—nd ye—rs things h—ve indeed ˜een

P

unquestion—˜ly st—˜le ˜ut prior to th—t —nd spe™ifi™—lly in —n™ient ˜i˜li™—l times the sol—r

order —ppe—rs to h—ve ˜een signifi™—ntly differentF

‡e —re merely s™r—t™hing the surf—™e of — v—st —nd interesting su˜je™t hereD ˜ut there is

suffi™ient eviden™e to ™on™lude th—t the QTH d—y ye—r in tewish prophe™y is not unfounded

—nd h—s re—l signifi™—n™e in qod9s re™koning of propheti™ periodsF

sn this ™onne™tion it is import—nt to note th—t when qod g—ve the l—w to woses —s

re™orded in the fooks of ixodusD heuteronomyD veviti™us —nd xum˜ers —nd l—id down

the d—tes —nd periods of the fe—sts —nd tu˜ileesD the ™—lend—r ye—r w—s in f—™t QTH d—ys

longF „his —spe™t is exp—nded on in gh—pter †sF

st ™ould well ˜eD —™™ording to ‚ev IIXPEQD IPXTD IR —nd h—n UXPSD th—t qod reverts the

sol—r ye—r to QTH d—ys during the gre—t tri˜ul—tionF „he ™—t—™lysmi™ events des™ri˜ed in

‚evel—tion ™ert—inly point to — terrestri—l imp—™t whi™h ™ould —ffe™t the e—rth9s or˜it—l

equili˜rium ± see su˜se™tion ––„he qlo˜—l ƒh—ke p99 @gh—pter †sssAF PH

ƒyve‚ exh €‚y€ri„sg ‰ie‚ƒ @gevixhe‚ƒ exh he„sxq ƒ‰ƒ„iwƒA

sn —ny event qod9s re™koning of the future tri˜ul—tion period in ye—rs of QTH d—ys

rem—ins indisput—˜le —nd on qod9s word we must st—ndF

P

„he ƒol—r ‰e—rD the „ropi™—l ‰e—rD the qregori—n ‰e—rD

the tuli—n ‰e—r —nd tuli—n h—y ƒystems

sn de—ling with propheti™ periods one ™—n get terri˜ly ™onfused if the prin™iple of QTHEd—y

ye—rs is not ™onsistently —ppliedF „his —ppe—rs to h—ve ˜een — m—jor stum˜ling ˜lo™k to

those whoD in the p—stD h—ve —ttempted to ™—l™ul—te periods th—t support the ‡eek of

willenniums theoryF sn gh—pter sss we h—ve seen th—t v—rious —n—lysts —rrive —t different

—nswersF

sn p—r—llel with this it should ˜e noted th—t —ny retroE™hronologi™—l d—ting involving

periods prior to TVU fFgF would ˜e su˜je™t to m—rgin—l errors if the ™urrent sol—r ye—r of

QTSDPRPP d—ys were —pplied to those periodsF

fFgF the i—rth h—s su˜sequently r—ving survived —ll the tur˜ulen™e of the Vth ™entury

settled down in to — very st—˜le or˜it —round the ƒunD so st—˜le in f—™t th—t ™—lend—rs —nd

d—ting systems h—ve ˜e™ome — very ex—™t s™ien™e —nd predi™tions of st—r positionsD

e™lipsesD et™F —re pre™ise to the very minute —nd se™ondF vet9s h—ve — ˜rief look —t the

v—rious ™—lend—rs —nd d—ting systems whi™h h—ve — ˜e—ring on the periods under

™onsidere—tion in this ˜ookF

„he ƒol—r ‰e—r is QTSDPRPP d—ys longF ƒol—r ™—lend—rs in™lude norm—l ye—rs of QTS d—ys

—nd —llow for the fr—™tion @HDPRPP d—ysA ˜y inter ™—l™ul—ting —n extr— d—y in e—™h of the

soE™—lled le—p ye—rsF „he sol—r ™—lend—r ™ommonly h—s four ™ru™i—l points ± the two

equinoxes —nd the two solsti™esF

„he „ropi™—l ‰e—r @or ye—r of se—sonsA is the interv—l ˜etween two su™™essive returns of

the ƒun to the †ern—l iquinoxF sts ™urrent length is QTS d—ysD S hoursD RV minutesD

RSDT se™onds @de™re—sing —t the r—te of —˜out HDS se™onds per ™enturyA —nd for pr—™ti™—l

purposes the „ropi™—l ‰e—r ™—n ˜e t—ken —s synonymous with the ƒol—r ‰e—rF„he

„ropi™—l ‰e—r is the oneD whi™h is used for the modern ™ivil ™—lend—rF

„he tuli—n ‰e—r d—tes ˜—™k to RT fFgF when the ‚om—n ™—lend—rD whi™h w—s ˜—sed on

vun—r ye—rsD h—d ˜e™ome so out of step with n—tur—l events th—t tulius g—es—r w—s put

under pressure to restore the ™—lend—r to its former syn™hronism with the se—sonsF ‡ith

the help of ƒosigenesD —n elex—ndri—n —stronomerD g—es—r ™ompletely reformed the

‚om—n ™—lend—rD fixing the norm—l length of the ye—r —t QTS d—ys with one le—p ye—r

I

every R ye—rs —fter pe˜ru—ry PR toD in effe™tD o˜t—in — QTS d—y ye—rD the supposed true

R

length of the tropi™—l ye—rF re settled on ex—™tly QTS d—ysX T hours —s the true length of

the ye—rD —nd —n —pproxim—tion of this v—lue h—s ˜een used ever sin™eF re —lso moved the

†ern—l iquinox ˜—™k to its origin—l d—te of PI w—r™hF

„he qregori—n g—lend—r repl—™ed the tuli—n ™—lend—r in ingl—nd in ISVP —nd is the one

in use tod—yF „he tuli—n ye—r ˜eing QTS d—ys T hrs long ex™eeds the true sol—r ye—r ˜y PI

‡rix sƒ tiƒ ƒ gywsxqc

II minutesD IR se™ondsF es the ™enturies p—ssed this dis™rep—n™y ˜e™—me very

signifi™—ntD —mounting to one whole d—y every IPV ye—rsD whi™h is not t—ken ™—re of ˜y

the norm—l le—p ye—r system @PR  TH  IIDPQQQ a IPVF ƒo ide—lly one le—p ye—r should

˜e dropped every IPV ye—rsF „he qregori—n system —ddresses this ˜y omitting three

le—p ye—rs every RHH ye—rs on the ™entenni—l ye—rsAF „he se—son—l d—tes —nd not—˜ly the

i—ster d—te —ssumed — growing dis™rep—n™yD whi™h ˜e™—me —nnoyingF pin—lly on

PR pe˜ru—ry ISVP €ope qregory ˆsss issued — ˜ull dropping IH d—ys from the ™—lend—r

so th—t the d—y —fter HR y™to˜er ISVP ˜e™—me IS y™to˜er ISVP to —g—in restore the

†ern—l iquinox to PI w—r™hF „hree out of four ™entury ye—rs were to ˜e ™ommon

ye—rs r—ther th—n le—p ye—rsF frit—in followed suit two ™enturies l—ter dropping II d—ys

from the ™—lend—r on P ƒeptem˜er IUSPF

I

„he tewish g—lend—r is ˜—sed on — lun—r monthD whi™h is roughly PW d—ys longF „welve

P

I

lun—r months —dd up to —˜out QSR d—ysD ˜eing — lun—r ye—rF e lun—r ye—r is thus II d—ys

R

shorter th—n — sol—r ye—rF „his differen™e requires the tews to m—ke periodi™ —djustments

to their ™—lend—r to ˜ring it in to step with the true sol—r ye—rF „o —™hieve this the tewish

™—lend—r —lso h—s — le—p ye—rF snste—d of —dding —n extr— d—y every fourth ye—r —s in the

qregori—n ™—lend—r they —dd —n extr— month —t the end of every third ye—rF „his monthD

whi™h is ™—lled the inter™—l—ry monthD is PW d—ys long —nd m—kes up for most of the

differen™e ˜etween the two ™—lend—rsF

P

„he tuli—n h—ting ƒystem

„he tuli—n €eriod is —n import—nt univers—l ™y™le or period used in modern ™hronology

—nd —stronomy whi™h w—s invented ˜y toseph ƒ™—ligerD — pren™h ™hronologer in ISVPF

@–tuli—n9 w—s ™hosen in honour of his f—therD tulius ƒ™—ligerD —nd h—s nothing to do with

the tuli—n ™—lend—rAF „he tuli—n period ™omprises of U WVH ye—rs whi™h is the produ™t of

the sol—r ™y™le @PV ye—rsAD the metoni™ @lun—rA ™y™le @IW ye—rsA —nd the ‚om—n indi™tion

@IS ye—rsAF „he ye—r —nd d—y of the ˜eginning of the tuli—n periodD —s est—˜lished ˜y

ƒ™—liger is HI t—nu—ry RUIQ fFgFD whi™h is the d—te of ™oin™iden™e of the three ™y™lesF

„he tuli—n period is not ™omplete until —ll three ™y™les —g—in ™oin™ide whi™h will o™™ur

in eh QPTUF

sn the tuli—n ƒystem the whole U WVHEye—r period ™omprises — ™ontinuous ™y™le of

™onse™utive me—n sol—r d—ys with e—™h d—y of e—™h ye—r h—ving its own unique tuli—n h—y

xum˜erF „his system lends itself to —™™ur—tely determining d—tes —nd periods ˜y

™onverting the histori™—l d—te to its tuli—n h—y xum˜er —dding or su˜tr—™ting the

relev—nt num˜er of tuli—n d—ys —nd then ™onverting ˜—™k to the qregori—n g—lend—r

h—teF por ex—mpleD r—lley9s ™omet p—ssed through the perihelion on IT xovem˜er IVQS

—nd —g—in on PH epril IWIHF ‡h—t is the time interv—l ˜etween these two d—tesc

IT xovem˜er IVQS a th P QWI SWV

PH epril IWIH a th P RIV UVI

„he differen™e is PU IVQ d—ys or UR ye—rs —nd ISS d—ysF

„he x—uti™—l elm—n—™ yffi™es of the ƒ x—v—l y˜serv—tory ‡—shington —nd the ‚oy—l

qreenwi™h y˜serv—tory issue estronomi™—l elm—n—™s whi™h in™lude t—˜les of tuli—n h—y

xum˜ers —nd ™orresponding qregori—n g—lend—r h—tesF gomputer progr—mmes h—ve PP

ƒyve‚ exh €‚y€ri„sg ‰ie‚ƒ @gevixhe‚ƒ exh he„sxq ƒ‰ƒ„iwƒA

˜een developed to f—™ilit—te qui™k d—teD time —nd period ™—l™ul—tionsF „hey must however

˜e ™he™ked to ensure th—t they t—ke —™™ount of the yE fg —nom—ly —nd —lso the IH d—ys

dropped from the ™—lend—r ˜y €ope qregory in ISVP —nd the II d—ys dropped from the

fritish g—lend—r in IUSPF

vvvvv

ristori—ns —nd —stronomers differ on the ye—rs ˜efore HIEehF ristori—ns do not use —

zero ye—rF „o them the ye—r ˜efore HIE eh is HIEfgF estronomers s—y th—t the ye—r ˜efore

HIE eh is HD —nd the one ˜efore th—t is ÿID dropping the suffix fgF „his ™—uses — one ye—r

differen™e ˜etween the two systemsF iFgF sf —stronomers s—y —n e™lipse o™™urred on

PV eugust ÿIPHQD histori—ns s—y it h—ppened on PV eugust IPHR fFgF

‡hen working with histori™—l periodsD whi™h stret™h from — fFgF d—te to —n eFhF d—teD one

ye—r must therefore ˜e su˜tr—™ted in the ™—l™ul—tion in order to —rrive —t the ™orre™t

num˜er of ye—rs in the periodF „his —pp—rent —nom—ly ™—n ˜e demonstr—ted ˜y the

following ex—mpleX

sf ghrist w—s ˜orn in R fFgF then in wh—t ye—r eFhF w—s he IH ye—rs oldc

yne would logi™—lly think th—t the —nswer would ˜e IH ÿ R a T eFhF fut it ™—n ˜e seen from

the simple t—˜le ˜elow th—t the —nswer is —™tu—lly U eFhF iFeF IH ÿ R fFgF C I a U eFhF

H

fFgF h—te eFhF h—te

T S R Q P I I P Q R S T U

RÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ IH ye—rs ÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐT

gonsequently in —ll our ™—l™ul—tions involving periods whi™h run from — fFgF d—te to —n

eFhF d—teD it will —ppe—r —s if —n extr— ye—r h—s ˜een —dded if we —re ™—l™ul—ting the d—teD

—nd th—t one ye—r h—s ˜een su˜tr—™ted if we —re ™—l™ul—ting the periodF

fFgF he„i | eFhF he„i

ÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ H ÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ

| |

RÐÐÐ €i‚syh ÐÐÐT

„he three v—ri—˜lesD fFgF d—teD eFhF d—te —nd period @in ye—rsA —re rel—ted —™™ording to the

simple equ—tionsX

eFhF d—te a period @ye—rsA ± fFgF d—te C I @ye—rA

yr

period a fFgF d—te @ye—rsA C eFhF d—te ± I @ye—rA

vvvvv

€ropheti™ vs g—lend—r ‰e—rs gonvention

‡e h—ve seen th—t — propheti™ ye—r ™onsists of ex—™tly QTH d—ys —nd th—t the sol—r ye—r

™onsists of QTSDPRPP d—ysF PQ

‡rix sƒ tiƒ ƒ gywsxqc

sn the ™—l™ul—tions th—t follow we see th—t the differen™e of SDPRPP d—ys per —nnum —dds

up to signifi™—nt devi—tions in time over the rel—tively long periods whi™h —re ™onsidered

in this ˜ookF

st is therefore ne™ess—ry to m—ke — ™le—r distin™tion in the text ˜etween the two types of

ye—rsD for the ™—l™ul—tions to @—A m—ke —rithmeti™—l sense —nd @˜A proje™t d—tes

—™™ur—telyF „o this end the following system is followedX

€ropheti™ ye—rs of QTH d—ys —re denoted with — suffix @pA eFgF RVQ @pA ye—rsF

ƒol—r ye—rs of QTSDPRPP d—ys —re denoted with — suffix @™A eFgF RUT @™A ye—rsF

„he terms sol—r ye—rs —nd ™—lend—r ye—rsD —lthough not ex—™tly equiv—lentD —re used

inter™h—nge—˜ly in the ™h—pters th—t followF

„he ™onversion f—™tor ˜etween propheti™ ye—rs —nd sol—r ye—rs is simplyX

QTH

a HDWVST

QTSYPRPP

„o help the re—der follow the logi™ of how we —rrive —t either @pA ye—rs or @™A ye—rs in the

™h—pters th—t followD the following ™onvention is —ppliedX

@—A ‡henever we refer to histori™—l d—tes or periods or ™—l™ul—te — future d—te from —

histori™—l d—te @eFgF ˜y using the —˜ove formul—X €eriod a fFgF d—te C eFhF d—te ÿ IA

then sol—r or @™A ye—rs —re usedF

@˜A ‡henever we derive — period from — ˜i˜le prophe™y or from ˜i˜le numeri™s then these

periods —re reg—rded —s propheti™ or @pA ye—rs

e typi™—l ex—mple of the l—tter is ™onsidered in the following ™h—pter where the times

—llotted to the tews —re given —s UH –weeks9 of ye—rs or UH  U a RWH ye—rs @h—n WXPRAF

„his is ™le—rly — propheti™ period —nd the RWH ye—rs —re t—ken to ˜e propheti™ or @pA ye—rs

—nd —re denoted —s su™hF

„he SHEye—r ju˜ilee periods whi™h we ™onsider in ™h—pter †s —re —lso ™l—ssified —s

propheti™ ye—rs due to the f—™t th—t when qod spe™ified these periods to woses in

ITPS fFgF @vev PSXVXIPAD the sol—r ye—r —nd the propheti™ ye—r were synonymous ˜oth

˜eing ex—™tly QTH d—ys longF

sn the ™h—pters th—t follow we fo™us on @—A ™orre™tly interpreting —nd ™—l™ul—ting the

v—rious propheti™ periods —nd @˜A —™™ur—tely m—t™hing these periods to the relev—nt

histori™—l d—tes —nd periods to whi™h they referF ren™e the frequent —ltern—ting —nd ™rossE

™—l™ul—ting ˜etween the two types of ye—rsF

ÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ

I

„he inform—tion in this se™tion h—s ˜een sour™ed m—inly from ––‡orlds in gollision99 ˜y smm—nuel

†elikovskyF ƒupplement—ry inform—tion h—s ˜een sour™ed from ––†elikovsky ‚e™onsidered99 ˜y the editors of

€enseeF

P

„he inform—tion in these se™tions h—s ˜een t—ken from golliers in™y™lopedi— †olF S p—ges IQU to IRRD with

v—rious —d—ptions —nd —dditions ˜y the euthorF PR