Fresh Batch #153: Origin of the Great Year

Egyptians Utilized Heliacal Rising (Dedicated to Sidereal Astrologers Who Muddy the Waters of History)

Heliacal Rise of Sirius

Lockyer wrote (Dawn Astr. p. 250.), “There was a difference of seven days in the date of the heliacal rising, according to the latitude, from southern Elephantine and Philæ, where the heliacal rising at the solstice was noted first, to northern Bubastis. There was a difference of four days between Memphis and Thebes, so that the connection between the heliacal rising and the solstice depended simply upon the latitude of the place. The further south, the earlier the coincidence occurred.

“Here we have an astronomical reason for the variation in the date of New Year’s Day.

“There no doubt was a time when the Egyptian astronomer-priests imagined that, by the introduction of the 365-days year, marking its commencement, as I have said, by the rising of one of the host of heaven, they had achieved finality. But, alas, the dream must soon have vanished.

“Even with this period of 365 days, the true length of the year had not been reached; and soon, whether by observations of the beginning of the inundation, or by observations of the solstice in some of the solar temples when these had been built, it was found that there was a difference of a day every four years between the beginning of the natural and of the newly-established year, arising, of course, from the fact that the true year is 365 days and a quarter of a day (roughly) in length.”

If Lockyer is correct, that the temples were originally built so they were oriented with the summer solstice, then the downside of the temples losing their ability to capture light on that significant day would get rectified by the reward of being able to accurately measure the situation which would become known as precession.

He continued (Ib. pp. 250, 251.), “With perfectly orientated temples they must have soon found that their festival at the Summer Solstice—which festival is known all over the world to-day—did not fall precisely on the day of the New Year, because, if 365 days had exactly measured the year, that flash of bright sunlight would have fallen into the sanctuary just as it did 365 days before. But what they must have found was that, after an interval of four years, it did not fall on the first day of the month, but on the day following it.”

I have to agree with Lockyer that the 365.25-day length of the year would not be difficult to figure out after four to eight years if the temples were erected to line up with the sun’s position at the summer solstice. But I don’t think the temples would be built to align with anything other than the sun at the summer solstice because temples take longer than four years to build, so their utility to reckon the days of a calendar prior to the 365.25-day one would be a futile endeavor, even for the short-term. The Julian calendar took over a thousand years before it had to be corrected by the Gregorian one, which calculates the length of a solar year at 365.2425 days, but it’s even more precise than that rounded figure. This prompted Lockyer (and others I presume) to call the true natural year a fixed year and the 365-day year a vague year. According to Lockyer, 365.2425 days isn’t even the accurate length of the year. He wrote (Ib. p. 251.), “In the time of Hipparchus 365.25 did not really represent the true length of the solar year; instead of 365.25 we must write 365.242392—that is to say, the real length of the year is a little less than 365.25 days.”

Again on page 252, “The variations between the fixed and the vague years were known perhaps for many centuries to the priests alone. They would not allow the established year of 365 days, since called the vague year, to be altered, and so strongly did they feel on this point that, as already stated, every king had to swear when he was crowned that he would not alter the year. (Where is the evidence for this claim? Lockyer has not provided it thus far.) We can surmise why this was. It gave great power to the priests; they alone could tell on what particular day of what particular month the Nile would rise in each year, because they alone knew in what part of the cycle they were; and, in order to get that knowledge, they had simply to continue going every year into their Holy of Holies one day in the year, as the priests did afterwards in Jerusalem, and watch the little patch of bright sunlight coming into the sanctuary. That would tell them exactly the relation of the true solar solstice to their year; and the exact date of the inundation of the Nile could be predicted by those who could determine observationally the solstice, but by no others.”

If a culture relied on heliacal rising stars at this time, as Egyptians are claimed to have done, then when the stars change their positions due to precession, the use of them to warn of the beginning of the year, or the flood of the Nile, would become obsolete.

To learn more about the universal system of priestcraft, invest in the Spirit Whirled series, and to learn more about the empire who spread it, read The Real Universal Empire.

Become a member to access the rest of this article.