--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, enlil@... wrote:
> Loreto:
> You say that "four" and "seven" are not the favourites? Well with
> what other numbers may we divide the lunar cycle to give the
optimal
> accuracy? ... Um, well... We have:
>
> 3 * 9 = 27 (off by a small fraction)
> 4 * 7 = 28 (off by a larger fraction)
> 5 * 6 = 30 (off by a couple of days)
Well since the lunar cycle you gave is in error my answer could be
irrelevant.
But anyway if I would gaze at the moon today I might as well come to
the same conclusions as most ancients did. In which I would start
some time period with the appearance of the first light of the
crescent. And many cultures already did that and still doing today
(chinese, arabs, indics etc.). Then the simplest would be that I'll
count how many days to full moon an also to its full disappearance.
So the simlest could any be of 14 and 2 or 15 and 2. But the full
moon varies also and so was the NO MOON (the moon does not appear).
That is the simplest and it seems the concept of 'week' does not
come directly from the lunar cycles. So much so of the seven day
week.
It really is more probable that the number seven have more relevance
with some ancient religions/experiences rather than on calendars or
astronomy? It was only later when it was applied to the stars and
other heavenly bodies as well as our human cycles.
On 'holy' seven we have the concept of the seven sages from the east
in Sumerian. Seven layered heavens and hells in Buddhism and Islam.
Seven is very important in Hebrew/ Judaism. There are I think 280
passages in the OT in which it was mentioned. If you take a look at
the Menorah, it has seven branches. The Solomon seal on the other
hand are two triangles. Three and three? Much as we dont see it
(much) there could be other unknown relation(s) between three and
four. NOt just that one follows the other but on speculative
linguistics and others. (I'm a fan of (V)-t-r and I see it in both
three and four of IE-Semitic). In which it could really be related
on the number of days the moon was dead. For example You would note
that the start of Ramadhan vary from place to place (different in
Saudi Arabia, Bosnia, Pakistan etc.) . This is due to the fact that
the appearance of the first crescent vary from place to place also
(between 3 to 4 days, sometimes 5).
I remembered one passage in the Bible in which Jesus said "touch me
not since I have'nt yet come to my father". It's like saying shh-h
or keep quiet on the fourth day?
The moon is immortal. It dies and is ressurrected around 3-4 days.
Such observations found in many mythologies in the Pacific, Indian
Ocean and Africa.
One more observation...some people argue of the cognancy
of "Sabbath" with the Babylonian sabatu. Well perhaps cognate or
perhaps not. But I read that the Babylonian sabatu refers to the
15th day in a month. Around the full moon.
There are at least two passages again in the Old testament where the
New Moon and the seventh day means days of renewals. And all these
indicates that there are some flows or shifts which are unaccounted
in very old Semitics.
But admittingly it is very convenient to divide the month into four
but not necesarrily each one of them seven. that is if I were to
make my own calendar based on the the combined lunar-solar cycles.
> Now yes, it would seem like "nine" and "three" are the favourites
> because it's most optimal. So why favour "four" and "seven"?
Some people see some things as convenient. What happens is that four
and seven are generally victorious. Say Windows vs Linux? Anyone can
give several reasons why. Perhaps combinations of luck, propagation
and debatable worthiness.
> The year is approximately 365 days long, for one thing. When you
take
> the lunar cycle in _combination_ with the solar cycle, "seven" is
> really great. The solar year can be approximated using 7 and 52
> (a multiple of 13). So we can approximate 13 lunar cycles in such
> a rounded-off year, or rather 13 monthes... all using nice whole
> numbers. Sweet!
Loreto