See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/285926277

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE Journal All papers free downloaded Vol 1, No 2, 2015

Book · May 2015

CITATIONS READS

0 4,336

1 author:

Ioannis Liritzis
University of the Aegean
270 PUBLICATIONS   2,350 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

BIOARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS S.E. MEDITERRANEAN, NEAR & MIDDLE EAST View project

NOVEL APPROACHES FOR SURFACE LUMINESCENCE DATING IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL & GEOARCHAEOLOGICAL CASE STUDIES View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ioannis Liritzis on 06 December 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Scientific Culture
Journal of Applied Science & Technology
to Cultural Issues

EDITORIAL BOARD

Editor-in-Chief (Founder)

Professor Ioannis Liritzis

(Archaeometry, Archaeological Sciences, Archaeoenvironment, physical sciences in culture; Member
European Academy of Sciences & arts, Saltzburg, Austria; University of the Aegean, Dept of
Mediterranean Studies, Lab of Archaeometry, Rhodes, Greece (liritzis@rhodes.aegean.gr;
www.liritzis.gr; http://www.aegean.gr/aegean/en/intro_en.htm)

Editors

Prof. Dr. Markus Hilgert (Germany) (Professor of Assyriology/ Sumerology, Member European
Academy of Sciences & arts, Saltzburg, Austria; Heidelberg University, Germany; http://www.asia-
europe.uni-heidelberg.de/en/people/person/persdetail/hilgert.html; m.hilgert@smb.spk-berlin.de)
Prof. Vladimir Ivanovich Ionesov (Russia) (Archaeology- Cultural studies, Head, Department of
Theory and History of Culture, Samara State Academy of Culture and Arts, Samara; Russia;
ionesov@mail.ru; www.smrgaki.ru; www.acdis.net; http://smrgaki.ru/inst_ikskt/_____eng.html)
Dr. George P. Pavlidis (Senior researcher, image processing and multimedia applications in culture
and education, Head of the Multimedia Research Group, Athena Research Centre, Greece;
gpavlid@ceti.gr; http://multimedia.ceti.gr; http://georgepavlides.info)
Dr Marise Campos de Souza (Brazil) (Cultural heritage archaeologist, Instituto do Patrimônio
Histórico e Artístico Nacional – IPHAN Superintendência, São Paulo, Brazil, Chefe do setor de
Arqueologia do IPHAN-Estado de São Paulo; marisecampos@hotmail.com;
http://portal.iphan.gov.br/portal/montarPaginaSecao.do?id=10&sigla=Institucional&retorno=paginaI
phan)
Prof. Zheng Jie Jane (Hong Kong) (Cultural management, The Chinese University of Hong Kong,
Shatin, N.T., Hong Kong, BA Programme in Cultural Management; janezzn@hotmail.com;
http://www.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/cum/en/prof_zheng.html)

Members of Editorial Board

Prof. Alonzo C. Addison (digital tools for heritage management and protection; Special Advisor to
the Director of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre;addison@cal.berkeley.edu;
https://berkeley.academia.edu/LonAddison; http://www.linkedin.com/in/lonaddison;
http://www.v-must.net/about/experts_advisory_board)
Dr Wolfgang H. Börner (Archaeology, Museen der Stadt Wien - Stadtarchäologie
Austria; wolfgang.boerner@stadtarchaeologie.at; http://www.wien.gv.at/archaeologie;
http://m.wien.gv.at/;t=to/advuew/internet/AdvPrSrv.asp?Layout=personen&Type=K&PERSONCD=
2011021205004309)
Prof. Jelle Zeilinga de Boer (Geology in Archaeology, Harold T. Stearns Prof. of Earth Science,
Wesleyan University, Middletown, USA , jdeboer@wesleyan.edu;
http://www.wesleyan.edu/ees/faculty.html
Dr Julien Curie (Geoarchaeology, Archaeosciences, UMR ArTeHiS 6298, UFR Sciences de la Terre et
Environnement, Université de Bourgogne; julien.curie@u-bourgogne.fr; http://www.artehis-
cnrs.fr/CURIE-Julien)
Prof. Catherine Cameron (Archaeologist working in the American Southwest Department of
Anthropology, University of Colorado Boulder, USA, catherine.cameron@colorado.edu;
http://www.colorado.edu/anthropology/index.html)
Dr Dave Cowley (Archaeology, Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of
Scotland, Edinburgh, dave.cowley@rcahms.gov.uk; http://www.rcahms.gov.uk/)
Assoc Prof Darren Curnoe (Biological anthropology and archaeological science, Australian Research
Council Future Fellow, School of Biological, Earth & Environmental Sciences , University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia; darrencurnoe@icloud.com; d.curnoe@unsw.edu.au;
www.darrencurnoe.net/; http://www.bees.unsw.edu.au/darren-curnoe)
Prof. Boyce Driskell (Emeritus Director of the Archaeological Research Laboratory, Research
Professor (adjunct), Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee; bdriskel@utk.edu;
http://archaeology.as.utk.edu/people/boycedriskell.html)
Prof. Kord Ernstson (impact and archeology/ancient cultures & geophysics and archeology/ancient
cultures, Faculty of Philosophy I, University of Wu rzburg, Germany; kernstson@ernstson.de;
https://uni-wuerzburg.academia.edu/KordErnstson) http://www.ernstson.de/;
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kord_Ernstson)
Prof. Jean Ferrari (Philosophy, Academician, Dijon, France, Jean.Ferrari@u-bourgogne.fr;
http://www.acascia-dijon.fr/accueil/lacademie/membres-2/ferrari-jean/)
Prof. Arne Flaten (History & Digital Culture, Chair, Department of Visual Arts
Professor of Art History, Coastal Carolina University;
arflaten@coastal.edu;http://ww2.coastal.edu/arflaten/CV-FLATEN%202013%20arial.pdf;
http://www.coastal.edu/art/flaten.html)
Dr Javier Garcia-Guinea (Geoarchaeology, Research Professor of the Spanish CSIC (Consejo
Superior Investigaciones Científicas) Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, Madrid, Spain;
Javier.Garcia.Guinea@csic.es ;
http://www.mncn.csic.es/Menu/Investigacin/Departamentosdeinvestigacin/Geologa/seccion=1219&idi
oma=es_ES.do)
Prof Robert Hannah (Professor of Classics - Greek and Roman Archaeology and Art;
Archaeoastronomy; the Classical Tradition. Dean, Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences, Acting Director,
NIDEA, The University of Waikato, New Zealand, email: roberth@waikato.ac.nz;
http://www.waikato.ac.nz/fass/about/staff/roberth)
Prof. Ahmad Sanusi Hassan ( Architecture; School of Housing, Building & Planning, University
Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia, sanusi@usm.my;
http://www.hbp.usm.my/HBP06/staff/psyhbp/psysanus.htm)
Prof. Charles Higham (Archaeology, New Zealand, Dept of Archaeology & anthropology, University
of Otago, New Zealand; http://www.otago.ac.nz/anthropology/arch/people/higham.html;
charles.higham@otago.ac.nz)
Prof Luis A. Hernández Ibáñez (virtual heritage, Department of Mathematical Methods and
Representation, Univesidade da Coruna, E.T.S. de Ingenieros de Caminos, C. y P.| Fac. Ciencias da
Comunicación, Coruña, España; lhernandez.udc@gmail.com; http://videalab.udc.es)
Prof. Nizar Abu-Jaber (Geology & Geochemistry in ancient material culture/Cultural Heritage &
science, Jordan; nizar.abujaber@gju.edu.jo;
http://www.gju.edu.jo/page.aspx?id=21&type=s&lng=en&page=54)
Prof.Zheng Yao Jin (Archaeological Sciences, Professor of the Department of History of Science and
Technology and Archaeological Science, Head of the Archaeometry Laboratory, University of Science
and Technology of China (USTC), zyjin@ustc.edu.cn; http://en.archlab.ustc.edu.cn/)
Prof. Miao Jianmin (scientific studies of cultural relics, Key Scientific Research Base of Ancient
Ceramics, State Administration of Cultural Heritage (The Palace Museum, Conservation Department
and Department of Objects and Decorative Art, China; miaojianmin@hotmail.com;
http://www.dpm.org.cn/shtml/2/@/8797.html#150)
Assoc. Prof. Ioannis Karapanagiotis (University Ecclesiastical Academy of Thessaloniki,
Department of Management and Conservation of Ecclesiastical Cultural Heritage Objects,
Thessaloniki, Greece; y.karapanagiotis@aeath.gr; URL: www.aeath.gr)
Dr Gabriela Kilianova (Culture & Ethnology, Institute of Ethnology Slovak Academy of Sciences,
Bratislava; http://www.uet.sav.sk/; gabriela.kilianova@savba.sk, Slovakia)
Prof. Elleonnora Kurulenko (Cultural Science, anthropology, policy, Head of the Dept of Theory and
History of Culture, State Academy of Culture & Arts, Samara, Rector of Samara State Academy of
Culture & Arts, Russia;, ekurulenko@mail.ru; http://smrgaki.ru/inst_ikskt/_____eng.html)
Prof. Thomas Levy (Distinguished Professor of Archaeology, Norma Kershaw Chair in the
Archaeology of Ancient Israel and Neighboring Lands at the University of California, San Diego,
USA; thomasevanlevy@gmail.com; tlevy@ucsd.edu;
http://anthropology.ucsd.edu/faculty-staff/profiles/levy.shtml)
Prof. Assaf Yasour-Landau (Director, the Maritime Coastal Archaeology and Underwater Survey
Lab, University of Haifa, Israel;
assafyasur@hotmail.com;https://haifa.academia.edu/AssafYasurLandau)
Dr Jean P Massue (Physical Sciences in Cultural issues, EUR-OPA Major Hazards Agreement
Strasbourg, France; Member European Academy of Sciences & arts, Saltzburg, Austria;
jeanpierre.massue@free.fr)
Assoc. Prof. Fernando Feliu-Moggi (Cultural Studies, Associate Professor, Languages and
Cultures, University of Colorado-Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, USA; ffeliumo@uccs.edu;
http://www.uccs.edu/langcult/fernando.html )
Dr J Mckim Malville (Astronomy, Professor Emeritus, Department of Astrophysical and Planetary
Sciences, University of Colorado; Kim.Malville@Colorado.EDU;
http://aps.colorado.edu/directory_full.shtml)
Prof. Alexander Nehamas (Professor of the Humanities and of Comparative Literature, Princeton
University, USA; nehamas@Princeton.EDU;
http://philosophy.princeton.edu/content/alexander-nehamas;
http://www.princeton.edu/complit/people/display_person.xml?netid=nehamas)
Assoc. Prof. Calin Neamtu (Engineerer/Digital Modeling, Technical University of Clui-Napoca,
Romania; calin.neamtu@muri.utcluj.ro, cneamtu@mail.utcluj.ro
https://utcluj.academia.edu/NeamtuCalin; www.utcluj.ro)
Prof. Lorenzo Nigro (Phoenician Punic Archaeology, Sixteeth to eighteenth century Sicilian Fine
arts and history, Prehistoric Archaeology, Near Eastern Archaeology, Classical Archaeology,
Archaeology; Professor of Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Art History, Sapienza University
Rome Italy; lorenzo.nigro@uniroma1.it; http://uniroma1.academia.edu/LorenzoNigro)
Prof Magda El-Nowieemy (Professor of Graeco-Roman Studies, Faculty of Arts, University of
Alexandria, Egypt. magda_now@yahoo.com; http://encls.net/?q=profile/magda-el-nowieemy;
https://alex.academia.edu/MagdaElNowieemy)
Dr David Peterson (Anthropology & Archaeological Sciences, Dept of Anthropology, Idaho State
University, Director of Archaeological Research in the Eurasian Steppes (ARIES);
davepeterson26@hotmail.com; www.linkedin.com/pub/david-peterson/35/322/587;
https://chicago.academia.edu/DavidPeterson)
Dr Eva Pietroni (art historian, a conservation specialist of Cultural Heritage and a musician;
Institute of Sciences and Technologies of Cognition & Institute of Technologies Applied to Cultural
Heritage of CNR, co-director of the Virtual Heritage Lab of CNR ITABC, Rome, Italy;
eva.pietroni@itabc.cnr.it;
http://www.itabc.cnr.it/en/organization/staff_and_contacts/eva_pietroni/1024)
Prof Teresita P. Pareja (Philosophy in Applied Linguistics, Chair, Languages and Literature
Department, College of Liberal Arts and Communication, De La Salle University-Dasmariñas,
Philipines; tisha1557@yahoo.com; http://www.dlsud.edu.ph/LLD.htm)
Dr Michael A. Rappenglück (Ancient Philosophy, archaeoastronomy, history of astronomy,
managing director of the vhs Gilching eV (School for Adult Learning), Germany; mr@infis.org;
http://www.infis.org/imprint.html; www.symbolforschung.org; www.astrogilde.de)
Dr Valentine Roux (Archaeology, Director of Research, French National Centre for Scientific
Research, Préhistoire & Technologie (UMR 7055), France (valentine.roux@mae.u-paris10.fr;
http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Valentine_Roux)
Prof Ana Maria Rocchietti ( Anthropology, Diretora escuola de Antropologia, Faculdade de
Humanidades e Artes, Universidade Nacional do Rosário-Argentina, Rosario - Santa Fe, Argentina;
anaau2002@yahoo.com.ar; http://www.fhumyar.unr.edu.ar/index.php?id=centros)
Prof. Bogdan C. Simionescu (Member of the European Academy of Sciences, Member of the
Romanian Academy, Department of Natural and Synthetic Polymers, "Gh. Asachi" Technical
University, Iasi, Romania and "Petru Poni" Institute of Macromolecular Chemistry, Romania;
bcsimion@icmpp.ro;
http://www.wmp.ajd.czest.pl/media/domeny/121/static/prof_zagr/CV_Simionescu.pdf; http://www.ad-
astra.ro/whoswho/view_profile.php?user_id=2657)
Dr Christopher M. Stevenson (Archaeologist-Obsidian studies; Anthropology Program, Virginia
Commonwealth University, Richmond; USA; cmstevenson23805@gmail.com;
http://www.has.vcu.edu/wld/faculty/stevenson.html)
Prof Glenn R. Summerhayes (Anthropology & Archaeology, University of Otago, NEW
ZEALAND; glenn.summerhayes@otago.ac.nz;
http://www.otago.ac.nz/anthropology/arch/people/summerhayes.html)
Assist. Prof Priya Thakur (Culture & Archaeology, Dept of History & Archaeology, Tumkur
University, India), priya912@gmail.com; priyathakur@tumkuruniversity.in;
http://tumkuruniversity.ac.in/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/DR.-PRIYA-THAKUR.pdf)Dr Despoina
Tsiafaki (Archaeology-Cultural Heritage, ATHENA - Research and Innovation Center in
Information, Communication and Knowledge Technologies, Cultural and Educational Technology
Institute, Greece ; tsiafaki@ipet.athena-innovation.gr;
http://www.ipet.gr/index2.php?lang=en&mod=lab&id=1;
http://www.ipet.gr/index2.php?lang=en&mid=0&mod=person&id=5;
http://athena-innovation.academia.edu/DespoinaTsiafakis/CurriculumVitae )
Assoc. Prof. Yulia Ustinova (Ancient Greek religion and culture; Department of History, Ben-Gurion
University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel; yulia@bgu.ac.il; http://bgu.academia.edu/YuliaUstinova)
Prof. Ladislau Vekas (Member of European Academy of Sciences & Arts, Lab. Magnetic Fluids
Center for Fundamental and Advanced Technical Research, Romanian Academy, Timisoara Division,
Romania; vekas.ladislau@gmail.com; http://www.euro-acad.eu/organisation/delegations)
Prof. Fred Valdez (material culture, Dept of Anthropology, College of Liberal Arts, The University of
Texas at Austin (fredv@mail.utexas.edu; http://www.utexas.edu/experts/fred_valdez)
Prof. Dr. Andreas Vött (Professor of Geomorphology, Natural Hazard Research and Geoarchaeology,
Institute for Geography, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Germany; voett@uni-mainz.de;
www.geomorphologie.uni-mainz.de)
Prof Marshal Weisler (anthropology, prehistoric archaeology, geoarchaeology on Pacific islands,
Professor, School of Social Science, The University of Queensland, Australia; m.weisler@uq.edu.au;
http://socialscience.uq.edu.au/marshall-weisler)
Prof. Willeke Wendrich (Joan Silsbee Chair of African Cultural Archaeoloy, Professor of Egyptian
Archaeology and Digital Humanities, University of California, Los Angeles, USA; Editorial Director
of the Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, Editor-in-chief of the online UCLA Encyclopedia of
Egyptology; wendrich@humnet.ucla.edu; http://nelc.ucla.edu/people/faculty/2-uncategorised/114-
willeke-wendrich.html)
Prof. Xiaohong Wu (Professor, School of Archaeology and Museology, Peking University, China;
wuxh@pku.edu.cn; http://web5.pku.edu.cn/kaoguen//szdw/kgjsff/;
http://www.harvard-yenching.org/scholars/wu-xiaohong)
Prof. Jing Zhichun (Canada Research Chair in East Asian Archaeology
Department of Anthropology, University of British Columbia, Canada; jingzh@mail.ubc.ca;
http://www.anth.ubc.ca/Zhichun_Jing.1895.0.html)
 Publication and Subscription Rates
SC is an open access journal. It is published
thrice per year (January- May- September) in
paper and in electronic edition. Subscription
rates for printed matter in 2015 are 100 Euros
per 3 issues including postage. Special Issues:
60 Euros each.
No part of this publication may be reproduced
partly or wholly, in summary or paraphrased,
stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in
any form, or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording or other
without the prior permission of the publishers.
Law 2121/1993 and the rules of International
Law applying in Greece.

Copyright © 2015 SC
BANK DETAILS: Bank address: ALPHA
All rights reserved
BANK, KOUNTOURIOTOU - 15, MYTILENE
GREECE. Account information: Νame of Correspondence and Inquiries
account: AEGEAN UNIVERSITY PROPERTY All correspondence and inquiries
MANAGEMENT Corp. IBAN: GR95 0140 6010 regarding reprints, manuscript
6010 0200 1000 131 BIC/SWIFT: preparation, submission status of
CRBAGRAAXXX manuscript and matters arising, should be
directed to SC e-mail or the Editor-in-Chief
(Please mention agent name, subscription year, following the instructions in our website:
company/client, and reason of deposit. A http://www.sci-cult.com/files/. E-mail:
scanned copy of the deposit proof should be info@sci-cult.com.
sent be email to: liritzis@rhodes.aegean.gr.)
 i

Aims and Scope

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE is a peer-reviewed, open access international scientific journal, an open
information vehicle of academic community with a global coverage and issues touching local and
regional interest; it is intended as a starting point for presenting research devoted in the broad field of
diachronical Cultural Heritage. The journal provides a broader coverage of studying ancient cultures
with natural sciences focused on specific topics of global interest. Amongst the published themes
emphasis is given to: Ancient cultures; hidden information in art by symbolism; composition of
artifacts; parallels in ancient and recent cultural issues; the role of liberal arts to cultural background;
cultural development and the question of independent, autochthonous, interactive patterns;
theoretical approaches: archetypal concept and globalization effects; inter-, intra-settlement and
environmental interactions on cultural evolution; art and science, virtual culture, cognitive
archaeology via positive sciences etc.

Objectifs et portée
CULTURE SCIENTIFIQUE est un véhicule de l'information ouverte de la communauté universitaire
avec une couverture et les questions touchant l'intérêt local et régional et mondial; il est conçu comme
un point de départ pour la présentation des recherches dans le vaste domaine du patrimoine culturel
diachronique. La nouvelle revue fournit une couverture plus large de l'étude des cultures anciennes
avec les sciences naturelles ont porté sur des sujets spécifiques d'intérêt mondial. Parmi les thèmes
publiés, l'accent est donné à cultures anciennes; informations cachées dans l'art par le symbolisme;
Composition d'objets; parallèles dans les questions culturelles anciennes et récentes; le rôle des arts
libéraux à fond culturel; le développement culturel et la question des modèles indépendants,
autochtones et / ou interactifs; approches théoriques: les effets du concept et de la mondialisation
archétypes; inter-, intra-établissement et environnementaux interactions sur l'évolution culturelle; art
et la science, la culture virtuelle, archéologie cognitive via sciences positives etc

Ziele und Umfang

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE ist ein öffentlich zugängliches, internationales Wissenschaftsjournal, ein
offener Informationsträger der wissenschaftlichen Gemeinschaft mit einem thematisch weltweiten
Anspruch und Themen, die lokale und regionale Interessen berücksichtigen. Das wissenschaftliche
Niveau wird durch Peer-Review-Verfahren sichergestellt. Das Wissenschaftsjournal ist als Startpunkt
für die Veröffentlichung von Forschungsarbeiten gedacht, die im breiten Feld des diachronisch
verstandenen kulturellen Erbes ansetzen. Es wird einen weiten Umfang wissenschaftlicher
Untersuchungen alter Kulturen abdecken, wobei der naturwissenschaftliche Ansatz auf spezifische
Themen globalen Interesses abzielt. Unter den möglichen Publikationsbereichen des
Wissenschaftsjournals liegt der Fokus auf folgenden Themen: Alte Kulturen; symbolisch dargestellte
Information in der Kunst; Gestaltung von Artefakten; Parallelen in alten und neuen kulturellen
wissenschaftlichen Fragestellungen; die Rolle der Geisteswissenschaften mit Bezug zum kulturellen
Hintergrund; die kulturelle Entwicklung und die Frage nach unabhängigen, ursprünglichen und /
oder miteinander wechselwirkenden Mustern; theoretische Methoden: die Wirkungen des Konzepts
und der Globalisierung von Archetypen; Wechselwirkung von Wohnen, Besiedlung und Umwelt mit
der kulturellen Evolution; Kunst und Wissenschaft, virtuelle Welten, kognitive Archäologie
gegenüber deskriptiven Wissenschaften etc.

Topics
- comparative cultures
- conservation and restoration of cultural assets
- cybernetics in cultural systems
- Cultural dynamics via stochastic processes
- Cultural politics & technology
- revealing parameters of Tangible Cultural Heritage (chronology, provenance, technology,
characterization of monuments and artifacts, landscapes and sacred places)
- unfolding ideas and scientific thought of the past of Intangible Cultural Heritage (timing to execute
certain actions, archaeoacoustics, restoring oral histories, beliefs, practices, rituals, ceremonies,
customs, crafts and other arts via modern science, digital technologies)
- authenticity of material culture
 ii

- promote the added value of modern science in cultural heritage that refer, in the broader sense, to
humanities, i.e. use of the scientific data to social sensitization, social coherence and sustainable
development
- linking society, with modern technology, digital museums and economy
- show up interrelated topics of conservation, restoration, management, connecting always the emerged
value of cultural assets with scientific means.
- Linking anthropological reminiscent with the far past by reproduction and simulation of preserved
pieces of history
- Connecting distant cultures either far apart or as close neighbors and explaining their difference
- Scientific measures and documented criteria to protect cultural resources
- Proper maintenance and guarantee for existence of World cultural sites
- Strategies with scientific tools to support and expand sites protected by UNESCO
- Neurolinguistic approach to cultural evolution
- Documenting the beginning of civilization, writing, settlement, food production, celestial guiding of
everyday activities, movements etc.
- Human Evolution through technological tools: implications, interpretations, modeling.
- Cultural dynamics via stochastic processes
- Cognitive and preventive archaeology

The primary objective is to serve the academic community with the highest quality and speed and
non-profit one.

It is published online thrice per year (January, May and September) in PDF electronic format, and in
print, and contains research and theoretical articles on cultural issues coupled with science in English,
but also in French and German (with extended English summary) languages.

The SCIENTIFIC CULTURE stands upon the Culture and Cultural Heritage which comprises the
cultural legacy inherited from previous generations, a legacy which we often want to identify and
preserve because it reinforces our cultural identity or sense of who we are as a people. Communities
and nations are interested in celebrating and preserving their heritage, and governments have enacted
laws to protect cultural resources. In today’s spirit of globalization the identification and
documentation of past local or regional high development in material, technology and ideas stand
alone as anticipated peaks of acme in human evolution that distinguish and recognize the difference
between the similar.

Cultural Heritage law is absolutely vital to States, intergovernmental organizations and non-State
actors. The most important international organization that deals with Cultural Heritage is the United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). UNESCO has been charged
with assisting States to develop legal instruments to better protect Cultural Heritage and to also help
in updating and reforming cultural policies. SC enters the current scientific media having a global
perspective, promoting key issues in the reconstruction of the past, decoding knowledge from
materials but also restoring the ideas behind those that shaped the cultural evolution. Prominent tools
are the science and technology, applied and innovative instrumentation, the documentation and
dissemination of cultural assets. As an end product SC will publish original articles having a
multipurpose aim in following categories: innovative research, applications, short correspondence
papers, matters arising, news items, meeting reports, book reviews.

At the initial issues the article submission and processing is free of charge. There will be a double
blind peer review and content of articles will be judged for their innovative nature, either as research
papers or applications, and short notes.

ISSN (online): 2407-9529

ISSN (print): 2408-0071
 SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No. 2, (2015), pp. 1-21
Copyright © 2015 SC
Open Access. Printed in Greece. All Rights Reserved.

The encounter of Simon the Just with Antiochus the Great:

From Zenon of Rhodes to Josephus Flavius and the Talmud

Ari Belenkiy
Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby BC, Canada
(ari.belenkiy@gmail.com)

Received: 09/01/2015
Accepted: 09/02/2015

ABSTRACT

The story of the encounter of Alexander Macedon with the Jewish nation, reported by Josephus and the
Babylonian Talmud, was a favorite topic of many generations of Judaica scholars but fell in complete
disrepute in the last century due to several inconsistencies. To account for some of them, Solomon Zeitlin
(1924) suggested that the Greek king of the encounter was King Antiochus III, not Alexander, however his
idea did not receive the recognition it deserves. Here I enrich Zeitlin’s idea with several new insights.
As Antiochus was accompanied by a historian of note, Zenon of Rhodes, the encounter story is likely a
fragment from non-extant history writings by Zenon, known to us through Polybius. I conjecture that it was
dessiminated by Timagenes of Alexandria who changed the king’s name to Alexander Macedon. In this
form, through Strabo, the story became known to Josephus who made further amendments changing the
high priest’s name to Yaddua.
Developing my earlier (2005) insight, I give a rational explanation to a seemingly fabulous detail of the story,
the king’s alleged ‘recognition’ of the high priest, and also resolve several other discrepancies between
Josephus and the Babylonian Talmud related to ‘Parmenio’ and ‘Antipatris’. Summing up, I claim the
encounter story describes a genuine historical episode, which can be dated according to the historical context
to January 9, 198 BC.
This reading may provide new bounds on the timing of Septuagint, explain a cryptic episode in the Talmud
Yerushalmi and shed light on the circumstances of creating the ‘Alexander Romance.’

KEYWORDS: Encounter, Septuagint, Josephus Flavius, King Antiochus III, Simon the Just, Polybius, Antipatros, Zenon
of Rhodes, Canopus, “Chambers of the South”, Talmud Yoma, Alexander Romance, Timagenes of Alexandria, Strabo
2 Ari Belenkiy
1. INTRODUCTION
What makes a story genuine? Why do we retell one
story and neglect another? Is a story true if a reputa-
ble historian tells it, if no one contradicts him, and if
there are no improbable details? And if some condition
fails, at whose expense must we restore it? Or should
we reclassify the story as a fairy tale or myth?
Let us revisit the famous story of the encounter
between Alexander the Great and the Jewish nation
to see whether we can bring all three conditions to-
gether. The story, told by Josephus Flavius in the
Jewish Antiquities (Antiq. 11:325-339) and repeated,
differing in several important details, in the Babylo-
nian Talmud, b. Yoma 69a, and in the Scholion to Me-
gillat Ta‘anit, was dear to all Biblical scholars from
the surge of European interest in Judaica in the 16 th
century till the end of the 19th century, when Ben-
edikt Niese and other historians destroyed its histor-
ic veracity. 1 Yet almost all of these historians be-
lieved the story camouflaged a real historic episode.
Hugo Willrich (1895: 9-10) argued the story was in-
spired by Marcus Agrippa’s visit to Jerusalem dur-
ing the time of King Herod, Agrippa’s sacrificing in
the Jerusalem Temple and defending civic rights of
the Jews in Asia Minor (Antiq. 16:12-65). Adolph
Büchler (1898) thought the background of the en-
counter story comes from a meeting between Julius
Caesar and High Priest Hyrcanus in Syria and Cae-
sar’s decrees conferring various benefits to the Jews
(Antiq. 14:185-216). Friedrich Pfister (1914: 25-6)
suggested the story was written by an Alexandrian
Jew who reflected on the meeting between Emperor
Claudius and the Alexandrian Jewish delegation to
Rome after the tumult between local Jews and
Greeks in 41 AD and Claudius’ verdict restoring
Jewish rights (Antiq. 19: 279-291).
Yet none of these versions gained wide recogni-
tion. Pfister’s idea that both Josephus and the Tal-
mud drew independently from an earlier source was
ignored. Solomon Zeitlin’s paper (1924), which ar-
gued that the hero of the encounter could have been
another Greek King, Antiochus III the Great, was
scarcely noticed by his contemporaries or the next
generation of scholars. The only early exception
seems to be G.F. Moore (1927), who mentioned
‘Zeitlin’s conjecture’ quite favorably. Later, J. D.
Purvis (1968: 123-6) used Zeitlin’s basic idea for his
own purposes.
Several subtle arguments to save the historicity of
the original story with Alexander Macedon as its
hero were advanced by Israel Abrahams (1927) who
argued that Alexander might have visited Jerusalem
immediately after the siege of Gaza. The same idea
was supported later by David Golan (1983). But be-
lief in the historicity of the story among later histori-
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 1-18
ans faded until it was quietly dropped from text-
books (see, e.g., Schürer 1973: 138). At this low ebb of
the story’s popularity, Arnaldo Momigliano
(1994:81) denied the possibility of the visit of Alex-
ander to Jerusalem “dogmatically” since “it is not
recorded by any respectable ancient source on Alex-
ander and is full of impossible details.”
Supported by Momigliano’s verdict, modern
scholars attributed the story to Jewish historic imagi-
nation and placed it entirely within the literary gen-
re. Shaye Cohen (1982/3) even described it as “a
complex amalgam of motifs rather than a representa-
tive of a single genre” and assumed that “Josephus
was not a mindless paraphraser of the work of oth-
ers, but was a real editor, an active participant in the
formation of the story as we have it.” Erich Gruen
(1998: 195) wrote, “Alexander’s visit to Jerusalem is
outright fabrication” and “Alexander historians
could hardly have missed or omitted it.” James Van-
derkam (2004: 148), though briefly discussing alter-
native options, assigned the “tale” to “the huge body
of Alexander romances and to the narrower corpus
of Jewish anti-Samaritan literature.” Inter alia, Van-
derkam dismissed “Zeitlin’s attempt to rescue some-
thing historical from it by substituting Antiochus III’
name for that of Alexander” since it “fails to address
the problem with Antipatris and collapses before the
fact that Judeans did not rebel against Antiochus”
(ibid, 148-9).
However, it is impossible to drop the issue at this
point. A serious matter is at stake: two major Jewish
ancient historical sources are implicated – explicitly
or not – in creating and perpetuating a romantic lit-
erary fiction. This is hard to accept. Heinrich Graetz
(1891-8: vol. 1, 413) , a major authority in this area,
though designating the story as a legend and dis-
missing its semi-fantastic elements, did not deny the
possibility of such an encounter suggesting however
more prosaic circumstances. As recently as 1941,
W.O.E. Oesterley (1970: 16-7) wrote, “to rule out the
whole episode as imaginary fiction, a view held by
some, strikes us as a little too drastic.” Even later,
Salo Baron (1952: 185) maintained that “Josephus’
report of Alexander’s friendly treatment of Palestini-
an Jewry has a solid kernel of historical truth.”
Despite these pronouncements, no-one studied
how the story could have been recorded and trans-
mitted, if it were based on a historical incident. This
is unfortunate since any success in this direction
would certainly undermine the strength of
Momigliano’s argument. Alexander’s era was fa-
mous for a number of prominent historians (Ptolemy
Soter, Nearchus, Callisthenes), who personally wit-
nessed every public move made by Alexander.
Many other Greek kings were less fortunate with
respect to their posthumous fame, and subsequently
The Encounter of Simon the Just with Antiochus the Great
the writings of their contemporary historians might
not be extant.
King Antiochus III falls in the latter category.
What we know of him comes from Polybius’ Histo-
ries, a second-hand account, and the portion related
to the king’s entrance to Jerusalem and known to
Josephus is not extant. Zeitlin (1924) developed the
Antiochus option only from the general perspective
of Jewish history: the king was a contemporary of
High Priest Simon, and the factional strife within the
Jewish elite at that time might have allowed Antio-
chus to enter Jerusalem without a fight. Recently,
Jonathan Goldstein (1993), seemingly unaware of
Zeitlin’s work, analyzing the encounter story from
the perspective of “broken loyalty,” discussed the
Antiochus option but finally rejected it, failing to
find support for it in the Book of Daniel.
Though the story in its present form cannot be his-
torically associated with the named participants and
– no! – Josephus was not “a mindless paraphraser of
the works of others,” the possibilities that it is histor-
ically based have not been exhausted. This paper
explores the implications of the hypothesis that the
story is based on real events.
Following this idea, I develop a more compelling
picture of the encounter between Antiochus III and
Simon the Just than Zeitlin’s and Goldstein’s. Every
section contains new insight never discussed by his-
torians. In sections 1-5, I dispel all the improbable
elements from the story showing that supposedly
“fantastic” or conflicting details in the tales of Jose-
phus and the Talmud can be resolved only if Antio-
chus III, not other contenders, is the hero of the epi-
sode. Inter alia, in section 3, I date the rabbinical ver-
sion in b. Yoma 69a and propose its authors. In sec-
tion 5 I build a bridge between the encounter and
another famous ‘Alexander’ story. In sections 6 and
7, I date the episode, and finally, in section 8, I find
the story’s true author. Thus, the story acquires all
the attributes of a true historical episode.
In sections 9 and 10, I speculate on why and when
the story was transformed before it reached Josephus
and the rabbis and what could have motivated Jose-
phus to introduce several amendments. Though I
occasionally advance conjectures to link the events
when explaining the missing reasons or circum-
stances, they are both probable and historical, as for
example, the one that follows.
2. THE RECOGNITION OF THE HIGH
PRIEST BY THE KING
When a procession of Jewish priests from Jerusalem
approached the Greek camp, the Greek king bowed
to and saluted the high priest, explaining to his reti-
nue that he recognized the man as someone he had
3
seen once during his youth in a dream and who had
promised him divine protection in his future en-
deavors (Antiq. 11:332-4):
“The kings of Syria and the rest were
surprised at what Alexander had done
and supposed him disordered in his
mind. However Parmenio alone went
up to him and asked him how it came
to pass that, when all others adored
him, he should adore the high priest of
the Jews? To whom he replied, “I did
not adore him, but that God who has
honored him with that high priesthood. For
I saw this very person in a dream, in this
very habit, when I was at Dium (Dion) in
Macedonia, who, when I was considering
with myself how I might obtain dominion
of Asia, exhorted me to make no delay, but
boldly to pass over the sea thither, for that
he would conduct my army and would give
me dominion over the Persians.”
Both the king’s behavior and his subsequent ex-
planation seem fantastic and must be explained. In-
deed, an ordinary king hardly would have allowed
himself to behave so extravagantly. But the Greek
king certainly was not ordinary, as is seen from his
retinue’s reaction to his behavior. His explanation of
the reasons for his bow seems to convince his retinue
but could it convince a modern reader?
To turn the explanation from being fantastic to re-
al, a simple assumption suffices: the king was famil-
iar with a detailed description of the high priest’s
garments, which must ultimately have been derived
from Ex. 28 or 39.2 Each of the eight pieces of a high
priest’s clothing was remarkable on its own, but the
12 precious stones on the breastplate likely produced
an unforgettable effect, so anyone knowledgeable of
jewelry could visualize it. Josephus intimated that
that the Greeks had knowledge of the breastplate,
calling it “The Oracle,” and that an especially beauti-
ful sardonyx (Urim), attached to the right shoulder,
was seen from afar, but that both the breastplate and
the sardonyx had ceased shining 200 years before he
composed his book, “God having been displeased at
the transgression of his laws” (Antiq. 3:217-8). Since
the Jewish Antiquities are dated to AD 93/4, the shin-
ing stopped c. 108/7 BC. The Mishna, M. Sotah 9:12,
says: “when the First Prophets died, Urim and
Thummim ceased,” which seems to imply an earlier
date if the Biblical prophets were meant. However,
this can be resolved differently since Josephus’s date
is close to the end of the life of High Priest John Hyr-
canus, d. 104 BC, to whom Josephus ascribed the gift
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 1-18
4 Ari Belenkiy
of prophecy as well (Antiq. 13:300). This may resolve
the contradiction.
Accepting Josephus’ testimony would mean the
stones were certainly in use during most of the 2nd
century BC, and in all likelihood, the high priest
would have put this breastplate on before going to
meet the king. And indeed, both Josephus (Antiq.
11:331) and the Talmud (see below) emphasized that
the high priest wore the full set of his regalia at the
encounter (Fig. 1). Thus the king recognized this im-
age, being familiar with a description of it at some
time in his past (Belenkiy 2005).
Figure 1. High Priest’s garments
One cannot assume that the Greek king knew He-
brew, for no such thing is recorded. Therefore, the
timing of Septuagint, a purported translation of the
Bible into Greek, is crucial for the trustworthiness of
the encounter story. If Septuagint was composed at
the time reported by Josephus, i.e., during Ptolemy
II’s reign, 283-246 BC, then Alexander Macedon
must leave the scene.
One can argue that Septuagint could not have
been the only text in Greek with a description of a
high priest’s clothes. Yet, I confess I don’t know of
any earlier text. The only possible earlier Greek text,
On the Jews, ascribed to Hecateus of Abdera of the 4th
century BC, lacks such a description, and moreover
was recently proven by Bezalel Bar-Kochva (1996:
113) to be a later forgery. If the king did not read
Septuagint itself, we may suppose he read a lost text
derived from it, now unknown; for simplicity of de-
scription we will suppose that he read Septuagint.
Though Septuagint as a source for the king’s
dream excludes Alexander from the role of the hero
of the encounter, it does not exclude several other
pretenders. According to Josephus (Contra Apion
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 1-18
2.48), Ptolemy III bypassed Judea twice during the
Third Coele-Syrian War (245-241 BC), while Ptolemy
IV could have visited Judea after the battle at Raphia
(217 BC) during the Fourth Coele-Syrian War (III
Macc. 1.6-2.23). However both kings were masters of
Judea, not conquerors as the king in the encounter
story seemed to be. Two other known visitors to Je-
rusalem, the Romans Agrippa (Antiq. 16:14) and Vi-
tellius (Antiq. 18:122) were not kings and were not at
war with the Jews. In comparison, King Antiochus
III, the Great is a much stronger case – he was in the
Land of Israel at least twice on military campaigns,
the Fourth and Fifth Coele-Syrian wars, in 220-217
and 199-198 BC (as I argue later), as a conqueror.
When and where could Antiochus III have read
Septuagint? Septuagint’s time of appearance is un-
certain. The Macedonian city Dium seems so far
from Antioch and Syria that one must be surprised
to hear of it in connection to Antiochus III.
The so-called Letter of Aristeas, better known from
Josephus’s paraphrase (Antiq. 12:11-118), ascribes the
rendering of the Bible into Greek to the direct com-
mand and personal endeavors of Ptolemy II Phila-
delphus (283-246 BC). If so, Septuagint certainly ap-
peared before Antiochus III was born (c. 241 BC).
Though the Letter of Aristeas seems to be written
some 100 years later than the events it describes, it
may contain true historic elements, like the names of
the translators (Isserlin 1973). Let us support its ve-
racity for the timing of Septuagint’s appearance, fur-
ther narrowing it from another story.
A letter to High Priest Onias, written by the Spar-
tan king, Areus, acknowledged a blood relationship
between the two peoples, Spartans and Jews,
through the patriarch Abraham (I Macc. 12:19-23;
Antiq. 12:226). This suggests that a Greek text on
Jewish history was written and became known to the
Greek world outside Alexandria. Since four High
Priests Onias occur in Jewish history, the timing of
the letter is unclear. How and when could the Spar-
tans have become aware of the text?
Discussing the possibilities, Erich Gruen gives
309-265 BC for the years of Areus I’s reign and says
that “the Spartans did enjoy an alliance with Ptole-
my II Philadelphus, concluded at some time prior to
the Chremonidean War in the 260s” (Gruen 1998:
254, n. 32; 256), but he seemed too timid to proceed
further. Let us develop the next step on our own.
The Encounter of Simon the Just with Antiochus the Great
Figure 2. The Greek states in the 3rd century BC
The Chremonidean War, waged by the Greek
states against Macedonian King Antigonus Gonatas,
is usually dated to 267-261 BC, so the Egyptian-
Spartan alliance was likely concluded before the
War, in 268 BC. This leaves a full 15 years (from the
beginning of Ptolemy’s II’s reign) for the Septuagint
to have been composed. To date the composition to
273-269 BC seems quite realistic (see, e.g., Gmirkin
2006: 142).
This fact and a well-known ancient custom of pre-
senting copies of rare books to kings, especially al-
lies, explains how Septuagint could have come to
Sparta, while the king’s letter to the acting high
priest testifies to the impression it produced in the
Greek world.3 VanderKam (2004) again weighed pros
and contras and did not find the claim of forgery
convincing. Surprisingly, he never argued about
Septuagint as a background for the king’s letter. Be-
sides, the name of the Spartan messenger, De-
moteles, mentioned by Josephus twice -- in the Spar-
tan letter (Antiq. 12:227) and in the Jewish response,
which the reciprocal Judean embassy brought to
Sparta (Antiq. 13:167) -- speaks in favor of its authen-
ticity. The name ‘Demoteles’ () is quite
rare and seems a surprising choice to be used in a
fabrication. A Lexicon of Greek Personal Names (Fraser
& Matthews, 1987-2010) counts only 28 people with
name Demoteles, mostly Athenians, three or four
from the 3rd century BC.4 While the Lexicon does not
list any Spartan examples, two are well-known: a
Spartan messenger, named by Xenophon in Hellenica
7.1, in 368 BC; and a head of the Spartan secret po-
lice, who betrayed Cleomenes III at Selassia in 222
BC (Plutarch, Cleomenes, 28.2-3). The claim, that Jo-
sephus copied Demoteles’ name from Xenophon,
was found unsupported by Vanderkam (2004: 127).
Thus the gift dates to 268 BC, while the letter
might have been written either by Areus I sometime
in 268-265 BC or, alternatively, sometime later, in the
name of the child-king Areus II in 262-254 BC. Alt-
hough there is a great deal of uncertainty about the
timing of priesthood of the four High Priests
Oniases, the addressee was likely High Priest Onias
5
II, who held the office until the reign of Ptolemy III
Euergetes (246-222 BC) though he might have been
quite old at that time (Antiq. 12:157-9).
The story concerning the Spartan letter offers also
a plausible way for the Septuagint to have appeared
in Antioch sometime before 223 BC, when 18-year-
old Antiochus III was crowned and embarked on his
first campaign in Coele-Syria. The Septuagint could
have come to Antioch during the short period of
peace between the Ptolemies and Seleucids, 253-246
BC, when a daughter of Ptolemy II was married to
Antiochus II (Daniel 11:6). Ptolemy II, who valued
the Septuagint highly, could have presented a copy
as a royal gift to his son-in-law. Though the marriage
soon ended tragically (Antiochus II died and his
wife was assassinated), the book could have re-
mained in the Antiochean library, where a young
Antiochus III could have read it. Such a library did
exist, and was under the royal auspices: as Suda
E3801 narrates, after 223 BC, a certain Euphorion of
Calcius was appointed by Antiochus III to be the
head of the public library. There is evidence (Finkel-
berg 2006) that the library started much earlier, as
early as the invitation of poet Aratus to the court of
Antiochus I (281-261 BC).
An alternative scenario is also plausible: young
Antiochus could have seen his dream in Dium, Mac-
edonia, after visiting Sparta, where in the local li-
brary he could have acquainted himself with the
copy of Septuagint presented by Ptolemy II to King
Areus. The Seleucid kings might have had the cus-
tom of sending their sons to their native country for
education and a patriotic upbringing. Too little is
known of King Antiochus’ early years to confirm or
reject this idea.5 If this latest scenario is true, then, at
this point, Josephus faithfully followed the original
narrative.
It is an interesting why the high priest’s image
heralded victory to Antiochus III. A plausible an-
swer is that the king did not restrict himself with
reading two small passages from the Book of Exo-
dus, but read the whole story. Then the high priest,
in his eyes, could represent the mighty Jewish god,
who granted Jews a victory over Egyptians. Let us
remind that before embarking on the Persian cam-
paign, Antiochus III launched the Fourth Coele-
Syrian war against Egypt in 219 BC, which ended in
his defeat at the Battle of Raphia in 217 BC. Thus,
Antiochus III was in the Land of Israel at least a year
and could have familiarized himself with the local
population and the national legends, in particular,
the Exodus story.
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 1-18
6 Ari Belenkiy
Figure 3. King Antiochus III’s bust. (Louvre)
3. “THE BOOK OF DANIEL” AND
PERSIAN ALLUSIONS
Josephus (Antiq. 11:337-8) further says:
“And when the book of Daniel was
shown him [Alexander], wherein
Daniel declared that one of the
Greeks would destroy the empire of
the Persians, he supposed that he,
himself, was the person intended;
and as he was glad he dismissed the
multitude for the present; but the
next day he called them to him and
bade them ask what favors they
pleased of him. Whereupon the high
priest desired that they might enjoy
the laws of their forefathers and
might pay no tribute on the seventh
year. He granted all they desired,
and when they entreated him that
he would permit the Jews in
Babylon and Media to enjoy their
own laws also, he willingly
promised to do hereafter what they
desired.”
Josephus most likely referred to Daniel 8:3-7, 20-
21, which describes a Greek putting an end to the
Persian Empire. Shaye Cohen (1982/3: n. 80) asserts
that Josephus invented this episode. Indeed, the ref-
erence to the Persian Empire seems to point unique-
ly to Alexander – after all, who else had defeated
Persia? For one, Antiochus III, the Great! He also had
a victory over Persia in his military career, a fact
missed by Shaye Cohen. After Antiochus’ father’s
death c. 220 BC, the satraps of Persia and Media de-
clared independence from the Seleucid Empire and
it was young King Antiochus’s particular task to re-
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 1-18
cover them. According to Polybius (Histories 5.30-40),
it was after the Persian campaign that the appella-
tion of ‘Great’ was bestowed upon King Antiochus
by the world.
The fact that the king promised the high priest to
“permit Jews in Babylon and Media to enjoy their
own laws” (Antiq. 11:338) immediately eliminates
Alexander, who had yet to conquer these places, as a
hero of the encounter story, but definitely supports
Antiochus III, who had just reestablished his domi-
nance over these places. Actually such a request
from the high priest to Alexander could have only
jeopardized the Jews of Persia still living under Da-
rius’ rule, who easily could have been accused of
dual loyalty and punished. Moreover, the conspicu-
ous absence of the Egyptian Jews in the high priest’s
request not only supports Antiochus rather than Al-
exander, as Goldstein (1993) has noticed, but also
negates all Ptolemys once and for all.
Of course, this does not mean that the “Book of
Daniel” shown to the king was the book we know.
True, Daniel 11:13-19 and particularly verse 15 (“So
the king of the North shall come and cast up a
mount, and take the most fenced cities, and the arms
of the south shall not withstand”) are a direct refer-
ence to Antiochus III’s campaign during the Fifth
Coele-Syrian War. Moreover, Goldstein claims verse
14 relates to the campaign by Egyptian general Sco-
pas discussed below. However, this is just another
indication that chapter 11, as well as all of Part III of
Daniel, i.e., chapters 8-12, was written later than the
events I discuss here, which is a common view (Col-
lins 1994: 499).
Alternatively, Josephus could have taken liberty
to name the most appropriate book in his mind, con-
flating discussion about Persian Jews with the Book
of Daniel, while the true book shown to the king
could have been something else, for example, the
Book of Exodus. The latter could have easily seduced
the man who had just defeated the Egyptians to “re-
joice”. The death of the Pharaoh and his charioteers
could have been one such example. Upon listening
to Exodus 23, the king could have agreed to a remis-
sion of taxes every seventh year (Antiq. 11:338),
while the description of the tabernacle in Exodus 26
could have caused him to agree to the Jews’ plea to
improve the building and the state of its servants
(Antiq. 12:141-44).
4. DATING BARAITA IN B. YOMA 69A
To understand the nature of discrepancies between
Josephus and the Talmud let us first examine the
passage in b. Yoma 69a (Epstein 1938: vol. 2, Yoma
69a):
The Encounter of Simon the Just with Antiochus the Great
“It was taught: the twenty-[fifth of
Tevet] is the day of Mount Gerizim – it
is forbidden to say a eulogy, [since on
that] day the Samaritans asked
Alexander Macedon to destroy our
Temple and were permitted,
whereupon some people came and
informed Simon the Just. What did he
do? He put on priestly garments and
robed himself in priestly garments and
[took] with him noblemen from Israel
who held torches in their hands. They
walked all the night, some walking on
this side and others were walking on
the other side until the dawn. When
dawn rose, [the king] asked: “Who are
those?” [They] answered: “Jews, who
rebelled against you!” When they
reached Antipatris, the sun rose and
they met. As soon as [the king] saw
Simon the Just he went out of the
chariot and bowed down to him. [They]
asked him: “You, the great king, bow
down before this Jew?!” He answered:
“His image it is which wins for me in all
my battles!” [?] He said to them: “What
have you come for?” They said: “Is it
possible that star-worshippers [?]
should mislead you to destroy the
House wherein prayers are said for you
and your kingdom that it be never
destroyed!” He said to them: “Who are
these?” They said to him: “These are
Samaritans who stand before you!” He
said: “They are delivered into your
hand.” At once they perforated their
heels, tied them to the tails of their
horses and dragged them over thorns
and thistles, until they came to Mount
Gerizim, which they ploughed and
planted with vetch, even as they had
planned to do with the House of God.
And that day they made a festive day.”
This is Soncino’s translation. VanderKam (2004:
140-1) gives an identical translation of this passage
with a reference to Soncino’s translator, L. Jung. Yet,
as one may verify, the two extant manuscripts of b.
Yoma containing page 69a, one at the Vatican Library
(Ebr. 134) and the other at the Jewish Theological
Seminary Library (Rab. 1623), have “goyim” )‫)גוים‬
instead of “star-worshippers” (‫)עבדי כוכבים‬.6 It could
be that L. Jung had at his disposal only three other
extant manuscripts of b. Yoma, one at London and
two at Munich, where page 69a is missing, and was
forced to translate this page from the earliest printed
7
versions, perhaps from the 16th century, where the
censors often replaced the word ‘goyim’ with some-
thing else, the expression ‘star-worshippers’ being
one alternative (Steinsaltz 1976: 81-5).
Since the writing of the Babylonian Talmud is
stretched over many centuries, it is important to find
the exact time it recorded the encounter story. Notic-
ing that the above passage is cited with a preamble
“it was taught,” Goldstein (1993) rightly qualifies the
story as a baraita and consequently dates it to some-
where in the Mishnaic period, between 48 and 230
AD.
Another implication of Goldstein’s insight is that
the encounter story was taught by a rabbi who came
from the Land of Israel. This is reassuring since the
local rabbis spoke and read Greek at least till the 4 th
century (as seen in several examples, including Rab-
bi Yona’s below)7, while one would have difficulty
explaining how Persian (“Babylonian”) rabbis could
have learned it. Though the author of the baraita is
unknown, the best candidates are the first great
leaders of Parthian-Persian Jewry, Rav and Shmuel,
who came to Parthia in 180-220 AD to become the
heads of two major Talmudic academies and whose
teachings were often accompanied by this preamble. 8
Let us warn, however, that the final “touches” to
the story could have been added either by Rav Ashi,
c. 425 AD, or by Ravina, c. 499 AD, the editors of the
Babylonian Talmud. 9 The trace of editing the en-
counter story in b. Yoma 69a is seen in the reversed
order of the Hebrew words in the phrase described
above in italics: ( ‫דמות דיוקנו של זה מנצחת לפני בבית‬
.‫)מלחמתי‬, where the order of the second (‫ )בבית‬and
the third word (‫ )לפני‬from the end must be reversed.
This not only would restore the meaning of the pas-
sage as “this image appeared at home, before the
war,” but also would closely match Josephus’s ver-
sion, where the image appeared before the king only
once, at his home city, before his Persian campaign.
More importantly, the editing might have affected
two elements of the story in b. Yoma 69a: the date of
the episode, Tevet 25, and the name ‘Antipatris,’ dis-
cussed below. Importantly, born in Persia, both edi-
tors were not supposed to know Greek.
The Scholion to Megillat Ta‘anit is practically iden-
tical to b. Yoma 69a, and since it supposedly was
written in the 7th century, some two centuries after
the closure of the Babylonian Talmud, it is most cer-
tainly derived from b. Yoma 69a.
5. “KINGS OF SYRIA” AS SAMARITANS,
“PARMENIO” AS ANTIPATROS
Accepting the encounter story with Antiochus as a
hero allows resolving two troubling discrepancies
between Josephus and the Talmud.
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 1-18
8 Ari Belenkiy
First, Josephus says that Kings of Syria (Συρίας
βασιλεῖς) were present at the encounter while b. Yoma
69a mentions only Samaritans. However, although
not speaking directly of Samaritans, Josephus men-
tions among the king’s retinue “the rest” who could
be the Samaritans. Of the two groups, “kings of Syr-
ia” and Samaritans, the latter was by far more im-
portant to the Talmudic rabbis. This eliminates the
problem. But a simpler solution is at hand: since
both Judea and Samaria were parts of Coele-Syria,
the “kings of Syria” and ‘Samaritans’ could be one
and the same group. Samaritans certainly are not
accidental heroes in the story, as we shall see, be-
cause Antiochus took over Samaria just before ap-
proaching Jerusalem. It seems Samaria surrendered
to him to be first in line for future rewards and to
bargain a deal with the king regarding the Jerusalem
Jews.
Second, Josephus says it was Parmenio, the sec-
ond in command in Alexander’s army, who asked
Alexander about his strange behavior at the encoun-
ter with the Jewish high priest. Actually Parmenio
was mentioned twice, the second time as an ad-
dressee of the king’s speech. But Parmenio could not
possibly have been there if Alexander’s name was
substituted for Antiochus! Then Parmenio’s name
also must have been substituted for one of Antio-
chus’ generals. Antiochus’ closest comrade-in-arms
was his nephew Antipater or Antipatros (αντίπατρος),
whom Polybius mentioned at least four times in the
narrative about the Fourth and Fifth Coele-Syrian
war as a key commander (Histories, 5.82-7 and 16.18)
and later after the defeat at Magnesia (21.16), as a
negotiator for peace. At the Battle at Panium, An-
tipatros was in command of the Tarentine, mercenary
cavalry armed in a particular way. Can we find any
textual support of Antipatros in the encounter story?
Yes, the above baraita in b.Yoma 69a mentions this
name, though in a strange fashion. The baraita says
that the Jewish procession reached ‘Antipatris,’ pre-
sumably the place of the encounter. But could it be
so?
The answer is no! Josephus not only reports that
the encounter occurred at ‘Saphein’ (Σαφειν) but also
takes pains to explain the etymology of that word to
Greek readers as ‘scopon’ (σκοπόν) or ‘observer’
since “one can observe thence Jerusalem and the
Temple” (Antiq. 11:329). There is only one place in
modern Israel that simultaneously carries both char-
acteristics – etymological and geographical: Har Ha-
Tsofim (‫הר הצופים‬, in Modern Hebrew) or Har Ha-
Tsofin (‫הר הצופין‬, in Mishnaic Hebrew), literally:
‘Mount of Observers,’ also known by its Greek
equivalent ‘Mount Scopus.’ It is the hill located
north-northeast of the Temple Mount, the direction
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 1-18
from which Antiochus approached Jerusalem. Alex-
ander certainly would have come to Jerusalem from
Gaza, which lies southwest of Jerusalem, a direction
from which there is no convenient hill to observe
Jerusalem and the Temple Mount. Other convenient
places to see the Temple Mount in modern Jerusa-
lem, like Talpiot in the south and along the Jaffa
Road in the west, have names that are far from
‘Saphein,’ and there is no reliable history for their
original names.
One may suppose that the Talmud gives a later
name for the place, and indeed, King Herod built or
rebuilt several cities naming them after his father
Antipatros (Tcherikover 1970:48, nn. 25 & 26.). How-
ever, these cities, for example, Saba, were quite dis-
tant from Jerusalem; therefore, it is impossible to
accept Marcus’ comment (1966: 518) that “either site,
Saphein or Saba, is geographically suitable.” Saba is
located near modern Kefar Saba, a suburb of modern
Tel-Aviv, some 52 km from Jerusalem, so the Temple
could not possibly be seen from it. Besides, it is diffi-
cult to imagine that a group of unarmed people
walked throughout the night in wartime for many
hours! However, it is possible that the original barai-
ta could have had both ‘Saphein’ (‫ )צופין‬and ‘Antipa-
tros’ (‫ )אנטיפטרוס‬but its editor, Rav Ashi or Ravina,
not having benefit of Josephus’ detailed explanation
of the origin of the word ‘Saphein’ and seeing near-
by the name ‘Antipatros’, confused the former with
Saba (‫ )סבא‬and conflated both words into ‘Antipatris’
(‫)אנטיפטריס‬. Antipatris has practically the same
spelling in Hebrew as Antipatros, with letter yud (‫)י‬
instead of vav (‫ )ו‬, and these two letters were often
interchanged or omitted.10
Thus, the Talmudic ‫( אנטיפטריס‬Antipatris,
αντιπατρής) could not have been initially referring to
the place of the encounter. It was rather the name of
a person, ‫( אנטיפטרוס‬Antipatros, αντίπατρος). It was
Antipatros, captain of the vanguard, who first met
the Jewish delegation at the Mount Scopus and es-
corted them to King Antiochus. It was he who later
asked the king about his strange behavior before the
high priest. Actually, who else, save a close relative,
a nephew, would dare to ask the Great King such a
question?
The rabbis were much less prepared than Jose-
phus to explain who the historical Antipatros was,
and it is no surprise the editor, either Rav Ashi or
Ravina, felt confused upon seeing his name in the
baraita. Antipatris, the city, was the safest escape
from the confusion. There was a less innocent escape
as well: the Talmudic MS Oxford, for example, has a
garbled version: ‫( אנטיפרס‬Antipars), which forced
Dikdukei Soferim to discuss a variant ‫( אנטיפוס‬Antipas)
(Rabbinovicz 2002, Yoma, page “mem”). These vari-
The Encounter of Simon the Just with Antiochus the Great
ant spellings clarify nothing, but instead show the
degree with which the later rabbis were confused
over the meaning of ‘Antipatros.’
Settling the problem of ‘Antipatris’ as meaning
‘Antipatros,’ I set aside the first of Vanderkam’s ob-
jections to Zeitlin’s version. His second objection that
“Judeans did not rebel against Antiochus” refers to
the exclamation “Jews, who rebelled against you!”
by the king’s retinue, cited in b. Yoma 69a. However
this fact can be easily explained.
Before approaching Jerusalem, King Antiochus
most likely dispatched an order to the ruler, the high
priest, requesting surrender. Most likely, strife in
Jerusalem between two factions, pro-Ptolemaic and
pro-Seleucid, could have broken out, as Solomon
Zeitlin (1924) suggested (see also Tcherikover 1970:
81-89). And certainly, the pro-Ptolemaic faction,
backed by an Egyptian garrison in the Citadel, ini-
tially could have turned down such a request. That
would explain why the high priest would have been
“in agony and under terror, not knowing how to
meet the Macedonians, since the king was dis-
pleased by his foregoing disobedience” (Antiq.
11:326). The very purpose of convening the Great
Assembly at that moment was to resolve the prob-
lem: to surrender or not. The result is known to us:
the encounter.
Setting aside the high priest’s name, Goldstein
(1993) correctly notes: “Thereafter, only one change
of ruler confronted the Chosen People with the di-
lemma which had faced Yaddua: the war of 203-197
between the empires of Ptolemy V and the Seleucid
Antiochus III.” However, failing to discern in Daniel
11 any vestige of the “broken loyalty,” Goldstein
looked for other episodes in later Jewish history that
could have brought about the Encounter story and
found one in the time of John Hyrcanus. Goldstein
did not consider the possibility that the encounter
was a real story and not an “eschatological guide”
for future generations. Why the author of Daniel
chose not to reflect on this episode is a separate
(though certainly not trivial) problem.
6. THE CITADEL AND ANOTHER
‘ALEXANDER’ STORY
The Citadel evokes another story, attached to ‘Alex-
ander Romance’ and invariably considered as a fic-
tion. This is a cryptic story from the Talmud
Yerushalmi (y. ‘Aboda Zara, 3.42c) attributed to a
rabbi of the early 4th century AD:
‫א"ר יונה אלכסנדרוס מוקדון כד בעא מיסק לעיל‬
‫והוה סלק וסלק סלק עד שראה את העולם ככדור‬
‫ואת הים כקערה בגין כן ציירין לה בכדורא בידה‬
.‫ויצורינה קערה בידה‬
9
“Rabbi Yona said: when Alexander
Macedon intended to rise, he rose
higher and higher, until he saw the
world as a ball and the sea as a bowl.
That’s why [they] depict her with a
ball in her hand; and her hand is
depicted as a bowl.”
The whole passage is most enigmatic; the second
phrase is even difficult to translate. W.J. van Bekkum
(1992: 11-12) incorrectly translates ‘bowl’ (‫ )קערה‬as
‘dish’ and, more importantly, ‘her’ (‫ )לה‬as ‘him’ (‫– )לו‬
thus giving a misleading impression that the second
phrase also refers to Alexander.11 Unfortunately, van
Bekkum was quoted indiscriminately by several lat-
er authors (see, e.g., Stoneman 2008: 107).
Ory Amitay (2010: 72) gives a better translation,
similar to ours, additionally suggesting that the sec-
ond phrase may refer to a statue. Indeed, what else
could have been “depicted” except for a statue or,
with less probability, a fresco? Yet Amitay seems to
miss the fact that the generic “statue” (‫ )פסל‬and
“fresco” (‫ )תמשיח‬are masculine both in Hebrew and
Aramaic! Therefore the reference must be to a specific
statue with a feminine name, as is discussed later in
this section.
Thus, according to Rabbi Yona, the Greek king
rose till he saw the round Earth floating in the sea.
To best interpret this statement, the missing part of
the argument must be recovered. For that, we have
to find how Greeks talked about the Earth. Indeed,
those who “depicted” were certainly Greeks, since
Jews were forbidden to “depict” by their laws.
According to Aristotle (De Caelo 2:14.297b30-
298a9), the most advanced proof that the Earth is
round (“as a ball”) in the south-north direction is a
different sky (with different stars) at different latitudes.
Therefore, the most logical interpretation of the
above passage is that Antiochus was shown a star or
a number of stars that demonstrated to him the Aristo-
telian argument (Belenkiy 2005). The main star of
consequence could have been Canopus, Alpha Cari-
nae, the second brightest star in the northern hemi-
sphere. Canopus certainly was Aristotle’s main tar-
get, being by far the brightest among the stars that are
“seen in Egypt and in the neighborhood of Cyprus
but not in the northerly regions.” Aristotle’s books
were an important part of education of every Greek,
particularly kings. King Antiochus likely took the
opportunity to personally check Aristotle’s state-
ment since in his native Antioch (modern Antakya,
36:21 N), Canopus not only rises above the horizon
for just a few minutes in the winter months, but also
culminates at negligible 1.2 degrees and is practically
unobservable.12
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 1-18
10 Ari Belenkiy

In c. 200 BC, Canopus could be seen from Jerusa- could have been used to adorn that device. But the
lem only from October to March. This timing speaks king saw the Earth as a “millstone,” i.e., flat.
against Alexander Macedon, who was known to A version of the Greek Alexander Romance (re-
have marched near Jerusalem in the summertime, cension ) was translated into Latin c. 320 AD and
but improves the chances for Antiochus III, who then both underwent numerous recensions in many
marched on Jerusalem in the winter. This fact en- languages (Carey 1967:10). As we saw, all those that
courages us to explore Antiochus’ story further, up- reached us claim that the Earth is flat. Rabbi Yona, a
on which we immediately see where to advance. Ca- sage of the early 4th century AD, used quite a differ-
nopus rises quite low above the horizon of Jerusalem ent source, which refers to the Earth as “a ball.” This
(31:47 N), by 5.6 degrees of altitude. Before Herod must be viewed not as a incidental correction but as
the Great’s renovation of the Temple Mount in the a conceptual schism and implies that at the turn of the
20s BC to clear the way for observing the star on the 4th century AD, the Alexander Romance already exist-
southern horizon, one would probably have found it ed at least in two different versions and therefore the
necessary to climb to a very high point in the Temple original source, Pseudo-Callisthenes, might have
Mount’s vicinity. Let us look for such a point in Jo- greatly predated the 4th century. The original source
sephus’ narrative. surely had Rabbi Yona’s version – one would hardly
The striking gap in the flow of Josephus’ narra- believe that the Greeks or Romans viewed the Earth
tive, between describing King Antiochus’ advance to as flat before Christianity became the state religion,
Jerusalem and quoting the king’s letter to Ptolemy V that is, before the 4th century. Indeed, Pliny the El-
with details of the city’s surrender (Antiq. 12:138), der, in Natural History 2:64-66, written in the 70s AD,
suggests the exact place the encounter story could testifies that the Earth was commonly viewed as a
have originated. Antiochus’ letter offers a missing “round ball” being “hemmed in the midst of the sea
link to the Canopus story – it is the Citadel, a fortress that flows round about it.” The Babylonian Talmud,
near the Temple Mount, captured by Antiochus from by the mouth of a well-known Jewish leader, Rabbi
the Egyptian garrison. Yehuda ha-Nasi, fl. 180-220 AD, provides evidence
The Citadel likely was Baris (the future Antonia that the “nations” (i.e., Greeks and Romans) viewed
fort) on the northwest of the Temple Mount known the Earth as round, while rabbis viewed it as flat (Ep-
from the Book of Nehemiah (2:8 and 7:2) as the ‘Cas- stein 1938: vol. 2, Pesachim 94b). Thus the original
tle’ (‫ ;)בירה‬its existence in 160s BC is confirmed in the source could not be rabbinical. Later in the text, I
Second Book of Maccabees (II Macc. 4:12, 5:6). The hypothesize on its identity.
Citadel would have been an excellent place for ob- The female holding a ball in her hand, mentioned
serving the sky, and a king trained in philosophy by Rabbi Yona in the second phrase, was most likely
would not have missed an opportunity to gain a new a statue of Urania, Greek muse of astronomy (Fig. 4).
experience.13
How could the king “rise higher and higher”? A
fantastic answer comes from the Greek Alexander Ro-
mance (Stoneman 1991: 123) which says the “king
was raised by two large birds yoked to the ox-skin
bag.” However, it also says the king saw the Earth in
the shape of a “threshing floor,” i.e., flat, which con-
tradicts Rabbi Yona’s saying.
A better explanation comes from the medieval re-
cension, Wars of Alexander, a part of the so-called He-
brew Alexander Romance: “He ascends the air in the
iron car raised by four griffins” (Skeat 1886: 271).
The story immediately acquires realistic features
(“the iron car”) while the raising device (“four grif-
fins”) must have been artistically ingenious. Certain-
ly, Egyptian engineers were technically skillful – the
Pyramids are a prime example. Discussing this epi-
sode, Richard Stoneman (2008:112) correctly ob-
serves that already in the reign of Ptolemy II, Greek
inventor Ctesibius (d. 225 BC) began experimenting
with pneumatic devices; to have such a device in-
stalled in the Citadel seems quite plausible. Griffins,
well-attested to in ancient Egyptian and Greek lore,

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 1-18

The Encounter of Simon the Just with Antiochus the Great
Figure 4. Urania, Muse of Astronomy. The Muse holds a ball in
her left hand and a pointer in her right hand. Second century
Roman copy of a statue of Urania; probably created c. 350 BC
(Pergamon Museum, Berlin).
Though Rabbi Yona’s mention of Urania looks
more like a side remark, unrelated to the original
story, one may imagine the statue being present in
the Citadel c. 200 BC. This would suggest a Greek-
Egyptian sky observatory on the Citadel’s roof, built
by an order of one of the first four Ptolemys. We
know that astronomy definitely flourished in 3rd cen-
tury BC Alexandria, and its renowned astronomer,
Timocharis, conducted many observations of the
stars as early as 300 BC (Toomer 1998: 330-8). A
Greek-Egyptian garrison might have carried out not
only military but also cultural functions among bar-
baric people.
Though Canopus seems to be the most appropri-
ate star to support Aristotle’s argument, another op-
tion must be considered as well. The Book of Job
(9:9) mentions the “Bear [?], Orion, and Pleiades and
the Chambers of the South.” Italian scholar G.V.
Schiaparelli suggested that the “Chambers of the
South” (‫ )חדרי תמן‬could have been a reference to the
spectacular show in the southern sky of the constel-
lations Centaurus and Crux (Southern Cross). 14
Though nowadays both constellations are complete-
ly out of sight for the latitude of Jerusalem, the situa-
tion was quite different in the 1st millennium BC
when they had declination c. 50 degrees S and could
arise to an altitude of 10 degrees for an observer in
Jerusalem. They were visible in the Jerusalem sky
from October till June.
11
Although the view in Jerusalem was very impres-
sive, especially in winter and spring, both Centaurus
and Crux also could have been observed in Antioch
and even in Athens, though with lesser effect, since
the stars would be at a lower altitude, some just
grazing the horizon.
Note that Alexander of Macedon is an unlikely
hero of R. Yona’s story as he could not have seen
either Canopus or the “Chambers of the South,” at
least in Jerusalem. Indeed, after taking Tyre in July
332 BC, Alexander marched directly to Gaza, and
then, after the two-month siege, went to Egypt,
spending the winter and spring there. From there he
marched through the Land of Israel northward to-
ward the Gaugamela battle on October 1, 331 BC.
Thus, he might have been in the vicinity of Jerusa-
lem sometime between July and mid-September
when the major stars of our three constellations are
unobservable in all the Near East.
7. THE YEAR OF THE ENCOUNTER
The year of the encounter is problematic. In his later
work, Zeitlin (1962: 16) dated the encounter to 202
BC. Goldstein (1993) dated the capture of Gaza and
Sidon to 202 BC and the encounter to the winter of
201/200 BC.
Josephus provides only one hint. In a post-war let-
ter to Ptolemy V, Antiochus wrote about the won-
derful reception and assistance given to him by the
Jews, and how he, aiming to repopulate Jerusalem,
“granted a discharge from taxes for three years to its
present inhabitants and to such as shall come to it
until the month Hyperberetus” (Antiq. 12:138).
Let us note that according to Parker and Dub-
berstein (1956: 40, line 8), the Seleucid calendar re-
quires intercalation of Hyperberetus II in the fall of
199 BC, corresponding to the Babylonian Ululu II. If
this is correct, it is unlikely that the encounter hap-
pened in the winter 200/199 BC, since the king did
not specify which Hyperberetus he meant.15
Another argument is implied by “a discharge
from taxes,” which points to the beginning of a Sab-
batical year; the only Sabbatical year during the Fifth
Coele-Syrian war was 199/198 BC.16 The other two
years of the king’s decree likely included two post-
Sabbatical years.
Clearly, the date of the battle at Panium could be
decisive for dating the encounter. However, there is
no agreement among scholars about it. The majority
of 20th century scholars date the battle to the winter
of 201/200 BC (see M. Stern 1974). Summarizing
their arguments, John Grainger (2010: 257) puts it in
the second half of 200 BC.
However, there is also a dissenting opinion.
Gaetano de Sanctis (1969: 115, n. 8) is in favor of the
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 1-18
12
winter of 199/198 BC and even suggested emending
the above text by Josephus:
“Book XVI of Polybius comprises
the third and fourth year of the
144th Olympiad (BC 202-200). But
since the Egyptian insurrection must
have taken place after Scopas
recruited troops in Aetolia, it must
be an error on the part of Josephus.
The fragment hence refers to book
XVII (i.e., the year 199/98).”
M. Stern (1974: 114) dismisses de Sanctis’ opinion
and concludes that the “arguments for year 200 BC
as the year of the battle at Panium are convincing
enough.” But he immediately contradicts himself,
saying that “the last remnants of Ptolemaic domin-
ion fell into the hands of Antiochus only in 198 BC.”
It is unclear what those “last remnants” are: do they
include Gaza and Sidon only, or Jerusalem as well?
Let us argue that the Fifth Coele-Syrian War be-
gan in 199 BC and was over by 198 BC. Obviously,
202 BC or even 200 BC is a mistake. Indeed Livy, in
the History of Rome 33:19, says:
“Still more opportune was the
victory over Philip at a time when
Antiochus was already taking
hostile action from Syria. Not only
was it easier to meet each singly
than if they had joined forces, but
Spain was giving trouble at the same
time and a warlike movement on a
large scale was taking place in that
country. During the previous
summer, Antiochus had reduced all
the cities in Coele-Syria, which had
been under Ptolemy’s sway, and
though he had now withdrawn into
winter quarters, he displayed as
great activity as he had done during
the summer.”
If the “hostile action from Syria” taken by Antio-
chus happened sometime in 202-200 BC, the first
phrase of Livy becomes completely incomprehensible
since the Roman victory over Philip, at Cynoscepha-
los, came only in 197 BC. However, the phrase is
quite transparent if Livy meant the campaign of 199-
198 BC as the only campaign of Antiochus. Besides,
the last phrase clearly indicates that Antiochus’
campaign lasted no more than two summers with
one winter in between.
Livy’s statement that in the winter Antiochus dis-
played as much activity as in the summer is quite
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 1-18
Ari Belenkiy
remarkable. Let us show that, indeed, the Jewish
sources believed that the winter of 199/198 BC was
the time of the encounter and find the exact date.
8. THE DATE OF THE ENCOUNTER
The fact that the encounter story is cited by b. Yoma,
dedicated to the Yom Kippur festival, held on
Tishrei 10, may suggest the encounter occurred in
Tishrei (i.e., in September-October) (Belenkiy 2005).
However, the discussion in b. Yoma is not related to a
particular time but only to the possibility of taking a
High Priest’s clothes out the Temple, so this fact
alone does not necessarily fix the month of the en-
counter.
In all likelihood, King Antiochus was near Jerusa-
lem in the winter. From Josephus (Antiq. 12:135) we
learn about the following (though non-extant) frag-
ment from Polybius’ Histories:
“Polybius of Megalopolis testifies to
this. For he says in Book XVI of his
Histories: “Scopas, Ptolemy’s general, set
out into the upper country and destroyed
the Jewish nation in this winter.” And
also: “The siege having been negligently
conducted, Scopas fell into disrepute and
was violently assailed.”
As we have seen, tractate b. Yoma gives the Jewish
date for the encounter, Tevet 25, the winter month
(December-January). However, the printed copies of
b. Yoma always have the month’s name, Tevet, in
brackets, indicating “confusion” about the real date
when the text was transmitted from the manuscript
to the printed book. Moreover, Raphaelo Rabbi-
novicz alerted to the fact that not only the name of
the month, but also the expression ‫“( וחמשה‬and five”)
must appear in brackets too, since both are missing
in the extant manuscripts. Instead, two extant manu-
scripts have at that place the word ‫“( ואחד‬and one”),
making the date “21” without naming the month. 17
This date, together with the words that immediately
follow, “The day of Mount Gerazim,” closely resem-
ble one entry in Megillat Ta‘anit, a famous scroll from
the Second Temple time containing references to
thirty-five important festive events in Jewish history,
month by month. The entry corresponding to “The
day of Mount “Gerazim” is dated “Kislew 21” (No-
am 2006: 343, no. 24), which immediately explains
where “21” belongs. But this event is commonly be-
lieved to refer to the destruction of the Samaritan
Temple on Mount Gerazim by High Priest John Hyr-
canus in 129 BC (ibid, 345) -- and thus has nothing to
do with the encounter story!
The Encounter of Simon the Just with Antiochus the Great
Thus, b. Yoma 69a commingles two separate sto-
ries, “Mount Gerazim” and the “Encounter.” This
confusion has a plausible historical background --
the editing of the Babylonian Talmud by Rav Ashi, c.
425, and Ravina, c. 499, as discussed above. The
scope of editing was enormous, probably, all 63 trac-
tates in their entirety. Under such an amount of
work, the editor could have made errors, conflating
two stories related to the two close entries in Megillat
Ta‘anit. The second one is: “On Tevet 28 the Knesset
took its seat for judgment”(Noam 2006: 343, no. 26).18
As mentioned earlier, it was Solomon Zeitlin’s in-
genious idea that the Knesset [the Great Assembly]
took place on those days, during Antiochus III’s ap-
proach to Jerusalem. The editor of the Talmud con-
flated two events, on Kislew 21 and Tevet 28, into
one, leaving out the second date. How the editor of
the first printed version of b. Yoma was able to recov-
er the original date remains a puzzle.
If this indeed is what happened, the month, Tevet,
could be considered accurately established for the
encounter, while which of the two dates, 25 or 28, is
correct remains uncertain. Actually, one could be a
misprint for another, since “5” (‫ )ה‬can be easily con-
fused with “8” (‫)ח‬.
Accepting Tevet 25 as it is, let us find its equiva-
lent in the proleptic Julian calendar. In 199 BC, Bab-
ylonian Tashritu began on October 18 (Parker &
Dubberstein 1956: 40). However, translating the
Babylonian date into the Jewish date, one faces a
problem due to a peculiar difference between the
two calendars. During the 19-year cycle, the Baby-
lonian calendar was intercalated six times with Ada-
ru (Adar) II and once with Ululu (Elul) II. However
the Jews, who on return from the Babylonian exile
used the Babylonian calendar with Babylonian
names, resisted intercalating Elul II in the middle of
the year (counted from Nisan to Nisan) even once,
preferring to wait an extra six months to intercalate
Adar II at the end of the year. During the half-year
period that passed between these two intercalations,
from Elul 199 BC to Adar 198 BC, there was a one-
month discrepancy between the Babylonian and
Jewish calendars.
While Jerusalem leaders may have expected vari-
ous benefits from the surrender, the subsequent
agreement had to include a calendar concordance.
Permission to “enjoy the laws of their forefathers,”
13
granted by the king, meant the Jews could continue
intercalating Adar II, not Elul II.
Indeed, assuming that Elul II was not intercalated
in 199 BC, then Jewish Tishri began a month earlier
than Babylonian Tashritu, i.e., on September 18. This
implied a perfect timing, October 2, for the begin-
ning of the Feast of Tabernacles (Tishri 15th), the fes-
tival that had to closely follow the autumnal equi-
nox, which fell on September 25 in the second centu-
ry BC. Further assuming that Heshvan and Kislew
lasted for 29 and 30 days respectively, Tevet 25 must
have fallen on January 9, 198 BC.
Support for early January as a plausible date of
the encounter comes from Polybius who says that
the Egyptian general Scopas passed through Galilee
“in the winter.” According to Pliny the Elder (Natu-
ral History 18.60), both the Greeks and Romans
counted winter from November 10-11. Winter seems
to be a strange time to conduct warfare, but this
might be among the surprise tactics that Antiochus
used in abundance in this war, as Bezalel Bar
Kochva (1976: 145) describes. The king likely gath-
ered his forces in Damascus and there began his
campaign in mid-November. Scopas rushed across
the upper country, Galilee, likely from his base at a
sea port, Gaza or Sidon, to prevent the king from
entering it. Assuming the events cited by Josephus
from Polybius – “the siege was negligently conduct-
ed, Scopas fell into disrepute and was violently as-
sailed” – occurred within a month, Antiochus, on the
route taking four other cities that did not offer any
resistance, still had three-four weeks to arrive at Je-
rusalem.
Antiochus could have observed Canopus in com-
fort from Jerusalem in the evening of January 9, 198
BC. On that day the star rose at 20:06 p.m., culminat-
ed at 22:36 p.m., and set at 01:06 a.m. the next day;
hence, it could be observed for all five hours, since
sunset was at 17:16 p.m. and complete darkness fell
at 18:36 p.m.19
And what a spectacular sky the king could have
seen before sunrise, soon after the setting of Cano-
pus (Fig. 5)! At 3:42 a.m. the entire Crux culminated.
At 4:53 a.m. Beta Centauri, a star of 0.6 magnitude,
culminated at 9;45 degrees altitude. At 5:32 a.m. Al-
pha Centauri, a star of 0.0 magnitude, next in bright-
ness after Canopus, culminated at 8;0 degrees alti-
tude, though the latter two were obscured by the
appearance of the waning crescent Moon. The dawn
at 6 a.m. impelled the king to continue his warfare.
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 1-18
14 Ari Belenkiy

Figure 5. Constellations Centaurus and Crux at night of January 9, 198 BC, seen from Jerusalem at 10 m altitude
(Program STELLARIUM).

Even if the Egyptian garrison in the Citadel resist- nium (Histories 16.20). Seemingly Zenon agreed with
ed Antiochus for a period up to three months, Antio- this critique and, according to Polybius’ testimony,
chus could have seen Canopus, and if six months, would have been willing to make some amendments
the brightest stars of Crux and Centaurus. to his text had the text not been finalized and sent
away to different places.
9. THE CHRONICLER OF THE The scope of required amendments should not be
ENCOUNTER exaggerated -- as we know from another occasion,
much of Polybius’ criticism of Callisthenes’ descrip-
Let us now argue that the original version of the en-
tion of the battle of Issus is “demonstrably wrong-
counter story, naming Antiochus and Antipatros,
headed” (Bosworth 1988: 4-5). But the fact that Ze-
came from the pen of a professional historian, Zenon
non recognized the critique as valid serves as proof
of Rhodes.
that he had been an eyewitness to the battle or heard
Though Zenon’s work did not come down to us,
it directly from eyewitness – indeed, only an eyewit-
in Book XVI of his Histories Polybius cited several
ness could have known the truth of these arguments.
fragments from Zenon’s account of the Fifth Coele-
Therefore, he must have taken part in King Antio-
Syrian War, esteeming him highly compared to oth-
chus’ campaign. Certainly, it would be no surprise if,
er contemporary historians (Histories 16.14):
as a “court” historian, he stayed at the king’s head-
quarters20 and thus had been an eye-witness to the
“These are Zenon and Antisthenes
encounter, and in particular, to its most striking de-
of Rhodes, whom for several reasons
tails: the king’s bow to the high priest and his expla-
I consider worthy of notice. For not
nation for his deed.
only were they contemporary with
How could a copy of Zenon’s work find Polybius?
the events they described, but they
Surely some copies were distributed across the
also took part in politics, and gener-
learned world, in Rome and Athens in particular,
ally speaking they did not compose
and deposited in the local libraries. Since Zenon was
their works for the sake of gain but
still alive at the time Polybius read his work, the
to win fame and do their duty as
reading happened most likely before 146 BC, in
statesmen.”
Rome, where Polybius was kept as a hostage, rather
than later, when Polybius stayed in Greece as Roman
Polybius not only appreciated Zenon’s skills but
envoy. Though we don’t know the scope of Zenon’s
also engaged him in polemics pointing to the incon-
work, most likely it included not only the battle of
sistencies of Zenon’s description of the battle at Pa-
Panium but also other details of King Antiochus’

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 1-18

The Encounter of Simon the Just with Antiochus the Great
campaign, for example, the route the king’s army
followed after Panium. Unfortunately, this part of
Book XVI is missing.
Josephus read Book XVI of the Histories (or Book
XVII, as de Sanctis suggested), quoting two non-
extant fragments from it in Antiq. 12:136.21 Moreover,
in the same place, Josephus narrates something that
closely resembles the encounter story:
“He [Polybius] also says, in the same
book: “when Scopas was conquered by
Antiochus, Antiochus received Betanea
and Samaria, and Abila, and Gadara;
and that awhile afterwards, there came
in to him those Jews who inhabited near
the temple which was called Jerusalem;
concerning which, although I have more
to say yet do I put off my history till
another opportunity.” This is what
Polybius relates; but we will return
to the series of the history when we
have first produced the epistles of
King Antiochus.”
Scopas, the Egyptian general of Aetolian descent,
was defeated at river Panium, a tributary of the Jor-
dan River, to the north of the Sea of Galilee. Seem-
ingly Scopas escaped to Sidon and was besieged
there, but there is no proof Antiochus personally
followed him. The most likely southern route for
Antiochus was along the eastern bank of the Jordan
River through Decapolis in Transjordan, where he
“received” Abila and Gadara. Bezalel Bar-Kochva
(1976: 147) certainly errs by placing the route to the
west of the Jordan River -- because Samaria was
mentioned by Josephus prior to Abila and Gadara.
Enumerating the events or sources, Josephus often
does not follow a chronological sequence, as we shall
see below.
The choice of the route through Greek Decapolis
means that the Galilee inhabited by Jews remained
faithful to their Egyptian ruler and that Scopas or
another Egyptian general likely waited for him
there. King Antiochus circumvented him from an-
other side of the Sea of Galilee. After crossing the
Jordan River at the southern shore of the Sea and
taking Samaria, the king secured a direct route to
Jerusalem, known among Jerusalem Jews as the
“road to Shechem.” Along the way, Antiochus “re-
ceived” Bethania, a city near Jerusalem. Since all four
cities had just surrendered to Antiochus, the advance
was quick, not longer than three weeks, as was sug-
gested earlier. At this point, the encounter episode
near Jerusalem would have its most logical location
in Polybius’ and Josephus’ narratives.
15
10. AN INTERMEDIATE SOURCE
One may wonder about the meaning of Polybius’
words “although I have more to say [concerning
Jews and Jerusalem] yet do I put off my history till
another opportunity.” Was he originally prepared to
tell the general history of the Jews including the en-
counter? If so, why then did he omit it? Polybius re-
proached Zenon for “not having been as much con-
cerned with inquiry into the facts, as with elegance
of style”; could he have found the encounter story
too fantastic and omitted it from his narrative? If this
is the case, then either Josephus concocted the story
himself or learned it from another source.
The first assumption is impossible. If Josephus au-
thored the story, then the rabbis could have learned
it only from him. So far this seems plausible since the
rabbis did assimilate other Josephus’s stories.22 But if
the rabbis of the Talmud learned the story from Jo-
sephus, why are there serious deviations between
their versions, the major one being the name of the
high priest? Besides, it would be unclear where the
rabbinical story of the “lifting the king” came from
since it is not found in Josephus.
Clearly both Josephus and the rabbi of the Talmud
relied on an intermediate source, one who, upon read-
ing Zenon or Polybius, singled out the encounter
story, replacing Antiochus’ name with Alexander’s
or simply omitting the king’s name from the narra-
tive. This source had to have been highly educated
in order to handle the Aristotelian argument implied
in y. ‘Avoda Zara. Five possible names are suggested
by Josephus in a later work (Contra Apionem, II:83)
when enumerating them in one line after Polybius –
though, quite surprisingly for a historian, not in
chronological order: Strabo the Cappadocian, Nico-
laus of Damascus, Timagenes, Castor the Chronicler,
and Apollodorus.
Timagenes and Castor, the most obscure, are the
foremost candidates for popularizing Zenon’s sto-
ries. According to Suda, Castor was from Rhodes,
thus a compatriot of Zenon, and supposedly lived in
Rome though the exact time is uncertain. Timagenes,
an Alexandrian, in 55 BC was taken prisoner by the
Roman general Aulus Gabinius and, on the orders of
Pompey the Great, brought to Rome, where he sub-
sequently lived. Timagenes was notorious for his
loose tongue and fell out of favor with Octavian. In
spite of that, he was “commonly esteemed because
of his learning and elegant rhetorical style” (Schürer
1973: 22-3). Suda T588 alleges that he “advised Cleo-
patra to kill Mark Antony or deliver him to Octavian
and that he later fled from Octavian after destroying
his writings.” But certainly, he could not destroy all
his writings since some of them influenced several
later writers, like Strabo, Pompeius Trogus, Curtius
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 15, 2 (2015) 1–21
16
Rufus etc. Timagenes is also known to have com-
posed a tractate on the Jews (Stern 1974: 222-3).
Timagenes was the source for Josephus for the
events in Judea at the turn of the 1st century BC (An-
tiq. 13:319 and 13:344), certainly for the important
fact that the breastplate and sardonyx Urim “ceased
shining” in 108/7 BC and most likely for the entire
tenure of High Priest John Hyrcanus (Antiq. 13:299).
Born in c. 100 BC, Timagenes could have heard these
facts in his immediate environment, but to learn
about high priests’ historical importance in Jewish
history in the earlier times, he had to have found
references in history books, like Zenon, Polybius,
and Apollodorus. An Alexandrian, Timagenes could
have read King Antiochus’ letter to King Ptolemy,
either at the Alexandrian library or Ptolemaic court
archives. Timagenes was certainly capable of using
the Aristotelian argument. In Rome, sometime be-
tween 55 and c. 40 BC, in his tractate on the Jews,
Timagenes could have utilized Zenon’s work, mix-
ing Antiochus’ exploits with Alexander lore from
Samaritan sources (Antiq, 11:321-5). In such a case it
would be natural to attribute all laurels to one king.
Actually, Timagenes possessed all the characteris-
tics modern historians attribute to the original au-
thor of the Alexander Romance, Pseudo-Callisthenes -
a “native of Alexandria,” who composed his work
“at some date after 200 BC and possibly much later”
(Carey 1967: 9). The stimulus for replacing Antio-
chus with Alexander could be either his origin or his
personal history. His origin is murky: Suda T588
mentions rumors that his father was “an Egyptian
and a royal banker.” But his motivation could have
arisen for a different reason: he could have befriend-
ed the Jews exiled by Pompey from Judea in 63 BC,
who resided at the Tiber Island (Canfora 2007: 211). He
certainly knew Cecilius, a sophist and prolific writer
in Rome during Emperor Octavian’s era, who, ac-
cording to Suda K1165, was of Jewish faith and ser-
vile parentage.
Indeed, the desire to eliminate Antiochus from
Jewish history for a Jewish writer at the end of the
2nd century BC or later was clear: Antiochus the
Great was a figure of the past and historians had
started to reevaluate his “greatness.” As early as 130
BC, in analyzing the Fifth Coele-Syrian War, Polybi-
us had already remarked that “in the late period of
his life, Antiochus became inferior to his former self”
(Histories 15.37). Besides, Romans would not ap-
plaud the Jews for surrendering to an enemy of Rome,
which Antiochus III became toward the end of his
life. In Jewish circles, his name was discredited by
his son and namesake, Antiochus IV, who violated
the sanctity of the Jerusalem temple. Jewish histori-
ans could have considered obliterating the name of
Antiochus from Jewish history as early as 165 BC -
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 15, 2 (2015) 1–21
Ari Belenkiy
after the first political overtures to Rome, initiated by
Judah Maccabee. This type of argument suggests an
outright falsification, but – remember! – at stake
were international public relations: the people of
Samaria had a true Alexander story in their historical
luggage (Antiq. 11:321), while the Jews did not
(Büchler 1898). The need became urgent when the
schism between the two peoples regarding the in-
ception of Antiochus IV’ policies broke out c. 166 BC
(Antiq. 13:74-79) and even imperative in order to jus-
tify the destruction of Samaria by John Hyrcanus in
108 BC (Antiq. 13:275-281).
In that era there appeared a number of Jewish
writers capable of creatively reading Greek authors.
Gruen suggests, for example, that the author of The
Third Book of Maccabees could have consulted Polybi-
us (Gruen 1998:227). The person best fitted to stand
behind such a falsification would be the Jewish phi-
losopher, Aristobulus, mentor to Ptolemy VI Philo-
meter. As a resident of Alexandria, Aristobulus
seems to be the only historian, after Zeno and
Timagenes, who could have held in his hands Antio-
chus’ original letter to Ptolemy V. Russell Gmirkin
(2006: 77) charged Aristobulus with forging the Let-
ter of Aristeas, presently dated to 150 BC. If proven,
this would of course, tell much about Aristobulus’
character and habits. However, in Aristobulus’ writ-
ings, preserved by Eusebius, there is nothing similar
to the encounter story. Another writer who could
have quoted King Antiochus III’s letter to Ptolemy,
as well as a second-hand eyewitness report about
Antiochus’ behavior at the encounter, was Ei-
polemus, a Maccabean diplomat, author of the book,
On the Kings of Judea (c. 150 BC).
No matter how significant the hatred of Antio-
chus’ name was, the mid-2nd century BC does not
seem ripe for using Alexander’s name as a substi-
tute. Indeed, Alexander Macedon’s service to hu-
manity was not yet fully understood. The use of the
appellation “Great” in connection with Alexander’s
name came later. As late as 130 BC, the author of the
First Book of Maccabees calls Alexander simply a
“son of Philip, king of Macedonia.” Also, Polybius,
throughout the Histories (c. 140-120 BC), simply calls
him ‘Alexander.’ Only with the large-scale Roman
military expansion in the 1 st century BC did Alexan-
der’s popularity in Rome soar reaching a peak in the
era of Julius Caesar and Octavian Augustus, as Sue-
tonius Tranquillus testifies in The Lives of the Twelve
Caesars, 1:7 and 2:18.
Hence, a later author could have been responsible
for singling out the encounter story of Zeno’s work
using Alexander’s name. The story of how a high
priest, rather than a king, saved the Jewish nation
could have been of special importance in a particular
historical period. The most suitable is the turn of the
The Encounter of Simon the Just with Antiochus the Great
1st century BC, when the sons of High Priest John
Hyrcanus, Aristobulus and then Alexander Janneus,
put the king’s diadem upon their head. This would
be an intended rebuke to the kings, so the author
might be foreign, likely from Alexandria. Likewise,
Momigliano (1994: 83) says: “it is difficult to imagine
Palestinian Jews inventing a visit of Alexander to
Jerusalem between 170 and 70 BC. But the story of
Alexander’s visit to Jerusalem may have been in-
vented in Egypt.”
This attitude, however, became legitimate in Ju-
dea after Pompey’s arrival in the Near East. Accord-
ing to Diodorus Siculus, Pompey’s decision to abol-
ish the Jewish kingdom in 63 BC in favor of restoring
rule by the high priest, Hyrcanus II, came from the
argument that theocracy was the true Jewish form of
government (Gmirkin 2006: 70; 259-63). Büchler’s
(1898) insight that the generous tax exemption (“no
tribute in the seventh year”) granted to the Jews by
the Greek king is identical to the one granted to Ju-
dea by Julius Caesar (Antiq. 14:202) suggests the en-
counter story obtained its final form only after the
period 48-44 BC; the intention was to please Julius
Caesar by connecting his actions to those of Alexan-
der the Great, its alleged hero. We know that
Timagenes composed Universal History up to the
time of Julius Caesar, whom Timagenes certainly
esteemed as the destroyer of Pompey. On the other
hand, the story could have been publicized even lat-
er, as a memorial to Julius Caesar, who was deified
in 42 BC. The story could have safely circulated be-
fore Herod was proclaimed king of the Jews by the
Roman Senate in 40 BC. After this, only Herod’s en-
emy would champion such a story. Again,
Timagenes, who hated Mark Anthony, a patron and
close friend of King Herod, is the best candidate for
this role.
The encounter story from Timagenes’ tractate on
the Jews could have become popular in the third pe-
riod without a king - after King Herod’s death in 4
BC and the banishment of Herod’s son and successor
Archelaus in AD 10 by Octavian August and before
a brief reign of King Agrippa I in Judea in 41-44 AD.
One major historian of that era, Nicholas of Damas-
cus, an intimate friend of King Herod (Antiq. 16:299)
and Archelaus (Antiq. 17:240), is an unlikely candi-
date for propagating this story. But another major
historian, Strabo (63 BC-24 AD), could have been the
one, since he cited Timagenes on several occasions,
in particular his description of the events in Judea at
the turn of the 1st century BC, as testified by Jose-
phus by the words “as Strabo bears witness in the
name of Timagenes” (Antiq. 13:319).
While writing the Jewish Antiquities in Rome in the
early AD 90s, Josephus Flavius was concerned as
much with the Jews’ destiny as his reputation as a
17
reliable historian: Rome of Tacitus and Pliny the
Younger was a merciless critic. Alexander Macedon
was deemed by Rome a hero, almost mythological,
and Josephus probably thought that it would be
helpful for the future Jewish cause to associate Jews
with his name. Though he did not cite the encounter
story in someone’s name, he had to be prepared to
provide a reference upon request. Timagenes’ trac-
tate on the Jews, even if it had been destroyed, could
be such a reference, especially if the story also had
been favorably cited subsequently by such an im-
portant writer as Strabo. On the other hand, Jose-
phus’ reliance on Strabo is overwhelming: almost all
of the fragments of Strabo’s Histories have reached us
through Josephus Flavius (Canfora 2007: 215).
Though study of the Talmudic borrowings from
Strabo is not known to us, Luciano Canfora points to
an important fact, that Strabo sometimes cites differ-
ent writers on the same event, even if they diverge in
details (Antiq. 14.137-9). This fact could explain the
major discrepancies between b. Yoma 69a and Jose-
phus.
11. JOSEPHUS THE HISTORIAN
Though Josephus (Fig.6) should be exonerated from
the charge of concocting the encounter story, let us
address Shaye Cohen’s (1982/3) question as to what
extent Josephus had edited the works of his predeces-
sors.
Isaac Newton (1728: chapter 5), in comparing two
versions of the Encounter, that of Josephus and that
of the Talmud, suggested that Josephus “computed
backward” the High Priest’s identity, changing the
original name, Simon, to Yaddua. Newton’s guess
might stem from the fact that Josephus (Antiq.
12:157-8; 12:224-5) felt it necessary to introduce in his
narrative, close to the time of Alexander, another
High Priest Simon, now known as Simon I – not nec-
essarily a historic figure.23
Was Josephus an honest person? Did he himself
believe in the encounter story with Alexander as the
hero? There is no reason to say he did not. He could
have experienced difficulty working with at least six
historical sources, often mutually contradictory. See-
ing Antipatros’ name, he likely thought it was just
an error in transmittal of the story but not in its es-
sence, since there was indeed an existing Antipatros
closely associated with Alexander. He could have
been the second in command and could have re-
proached Alexander for his strange behavior upon
meeting the Jewish high priest. But during Alexan-
der’s Persian campaign, Antipatros remained in
Greece, which was known to Roman historians.
Therefore Antipatros’s name was just a ‘typo’ that
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 15, 2 (2015) 1–21
18
had to be amended to the true second in command,
Parmenio.
Josephus was certainly an “editor” – perceiving
historical inaccuracy in the source he trusted, he was
looking for the most historically probable substitution.
Hence, two problematic proper names that we met
in his text, the “Book of Daniel” and “Dium” must
be questioned as authentic as well. Both could be
substitutions for something else, such as the Book of
Exodus and Sparta, respectively. Josephus was ca-
pable of omitting an entire passage that did not fit
his strategy: the omission of Polybius’ description of
Jerusalem is most conspicuous.
But this is all Josephus allowed himself as an edi-
tor: there is no reason to assert he had “invented” the
episode concerning the Book of Daniel, or the refer-
ence to the Jews of Persia and Media, or changed
“the nature of Alexander’s dream” or made “many
other changes which we can no longer identify,” as
Shaye Cohen (1982/3, n. 80) asserts.
Figure 6. Josephus Flavius (?) (Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek,
Copenhagen, Denmark).
12. SUMMARY
To sum up: historians who deny historicity of the
encounter missed several important facts: Antiochus
III could have learned the description of the high
priest’s garments from Septuagint; the Babylonian
Talmud was edited by two men who were ignorant
of Greek; the encounter story is interconnected with
another ‘Alexander’ story from the Talmud
Yerushalmi via Citadel; the encounter episode with
Antiochus III as its hero could be eye witnessed by a
reputable historian, Zenon of Rhodes; and Josephus
learned the Jewish history of the 2nd century BC from
Strabo and Timagenes. When combined, these facts
make a strong cause for Antiochus III.
Thus we see that the encounter story and its satel-
lite stories need not be regarded solely as literature,
but can reasonably be interpreted as an account of a
precise historical event that has been adapted for
other purposes. From that perspective, with Antio-
chus the Great as its hero, the encounter story gives
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 15, 2 (2015) 1–21
Ari Belenkiy
life to several rabbinical stories that previously were
regarded as fabulous and discarded. As a result, we
are rewarded with the circumstances of Jerusalem’s
surrender: the observation of the several bright stars
in the southern sky from the Citadel’s roof; and An-
tipatros, Antiochus’ nephew, being another hero of
the encounter.
To support Antiochus’ claim that he had seen the
image of a high priest in his youth, one must assume
that a portion of the Torah, which included Exodus
28 or 39, describing the attire of the Jewish high
priest, had already been rendered in Greek by 223
BC. An ordinary king hardly could have allowed
himself to behave at the encounter so extravagantly,
but King Antiochus III, the Great, was not ordinary.
The story was recorded by Zenon of Rhodes, a re-
puted historian acknowledged by Polybius, and an
eyewitness to the event. The exact dating of the sto-
ry, January 9, 198 BC, enhances the case from conjec-
tural to almost certain. Therefore, the story is genuine
– to the extent that all ancient stories are genuine.
The story underwent some intermediate meta-
morphoses before it reached Josephus and rabbis of
the Talmud. Sometime between 44 BC and 40 BC, a
Jewish author, or one affiliated with Jews, separated
the encounter and other episodes from Zenon’s work
related to Antiochus III’s entrance in Jerusalem and,
mixing them with Alexander Macedon lore from
Samaritan sources, gathered them in a set of legends,
later known as the Alexander Romance. The author of
this compilation, the so-called Pseudo-Callisthenes,
could be Timagenes, an Alexandrian historian. The
encounter story could later have been reiterated by
Strabo in a non-extant 43-book history.
Either Timagenes or Strabo became a source used
independently by Josephus and the rabbis. Except
for swallowing Alexander’s bait, in all other aspects
the rabbi of the Talmud, likely Rav or Shmuel, retold
the encounter story from that source faithfully. Lat-
er, in the 5th century, an editor of the Babylonian
Talmud, either Rav Ashi or Ravina, believing ‘An-
tipatros’ represented a possible place of the encoun-
ter, changed it to Antipatris. He also commingled
two separate entries from Megilat Ta‘anit into one,
producing the date “21” instead of correct Tevet 25
or 28.
Josephus, however, could not pass on the story as
it was left by Timagenes or Strabo without correcting
its glaring inconsistencies. Writing in Rome for Ro-
mans, he had to convince Romans of the historicity
of the encounter between the Jews and Alexander
Macedon by removing historically inaccurate ele-
ments, and so he replaced Antipatros with Parmenio
and Simon the Just with Yaddua. Approved by the
Roman elite, the encounter story within the Jewish
Antiquities seemed much more reliable to later gen-
The Encounter of Simon the Just with Antiochus the Great 19

erations of historians than the Talmudic version.
Newton’s warning was not heard and the story told
by Josephus was cloned in a thousand books till the
end of the 19th century when a group of historians
denied the historicity of the encounter between a
Jewish high priest and Alexander Macedon. A new
explanation, first introduced by Solomon Zeitlin in
1924 and developed further here, must bring the en-
counter story back from legend to history, though
with two new major heroes, King Antiochus III and
High Priest Simon the Just, as well as a number of
new supportive characters and details, like Antipa-
tros and Zenon of Rhodes, Canopus and the Citadel,
Mount Scopus and January 9, 198 BC.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks are due to Farhad Assar (Oxford UK), Christopher Bennett †( San Diego CA), Jan Kalivoda (Prague),
Yuri Khramov (Richmond BC), Yigal Levin (Bar-Ilan University, Israel), Victor Rejss (Dublin, Ireland), Gary
Thompson (Melton West, Australia), Ernie Wright (USRA), Joan Griffith (Annapolis MD) and Sarah Olesh
(Vancouver BC).

REFERENCES
Abrahams, I. (1927) Campaigns in Palestine from Alexander the Great. London, Oxford University Press.
Amitay, O. (2010) From Alexander to Jesus. University California Press.
Antonello, E. (2011) “Schiaparelli and the Dawn of Astronomy.” Memorie della Societa Astronomica Italiana, vol. 82, 280-9.
Bar-Kochva, B. (1976) Seleucid Army. London, Cambridge University Press.
Bar-Kochva, B. (1996) Pseudo Hecataeus “On the Jews”: Legitimizing the Jewish Diaspora. Berkeley, University of California
Press.
Baron, S.W. (1952) Social and Religious History of the Jews, vol. 1. Columbia University Press.
van Bekkum, W.J. (1992) A Hebrew Alexander Romance According to MS London, Jews’ College, no. 145. Louvain, Peeters
Press.
Belenkiy, A. (2005) “Der Aufgang des Canopus, die Septuaginta und die Begegnung zwischen Simon dem Gerechten
und Antiochus dem Grossen,” Judaica, vol. 61 (1), 42-54.
Bennett, C. (2011) Alexandria and the Moon. Peeters, Leuven-Paris-Walpole, and Addenda et Corrigenda
at http://www.academia.edu/attachments/6979691/download_file
Bosworth, A.B. (1988) From Arrian to Alexander. Oxford, Clarendon Press.
Brown, T.S. (1964) “Polybius’ Account of Antiochus III.” Phoenix, vol. 18 (2), 124-36.
Büchler, A. (1898) “La relation de Josephe concernant Alexandre le Grand,” Revue des Etudes Juives, vol. 36, 1-26.
Canfora, L. (2007) Julius Caesar: The Life and Times of the People’s Dictator. University of California Press.
Carey, G. (1967) The Medieval Alexander. Cambridge University Press, 1956, reprinted 1967.
Cohen, S.J.D. (1982/3) “Alexander the Great and Jaddus the High Priest according to Josephus,” AJS Review, vol. 7-8, 41-
68.
Collins, J.J. (1994) Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Hermeneia: a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible).
Augsburg Fortress Publishers.
Epstein, I (ed.) (1935) Babylonian Talmud, in 35 volumes.
Epstein, I. (ed.) (1938) Babylonian Talmud, Seder Moed, in 4 volumes.
Finkelberg, M. (2006) “Regional Texts and the Circulation of Books: the Case of Homer.” Greek, Roman, and Byzantine
Studies, vol. 46, 231–248.
Fraser, P.M. & Matthews, E. (eds.) (1987-2010) A Lexicon of Greek Personal Names. Oxford, Clarendon Press.
Golan, D. (1983) “Joseph ben Matatiyahu, Alexander of Macedon’s Visit and New Historiography” in: Uriel Rapoport
(ed.), .‫ישראל בתקופה ההלניסטית והרומית‬-‫ היסטוריון של ארץ‬.‫[ יוסף בן מתתיהו‬Josephus Flavius: Historian of Israel in the Greek and
Roman Era], Jerusalem, Yad Ben Zvi.
Gmirkin, R.E. (2006) Berossus and Exodus, Manetho and Genesis. Hellenistic Histories and the Date of Pentateuch. NY and Lon-
don, T&T Clark Int’l.
Goldstein, J.A. (1993) “Alexander and the Jews,” Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research, vol. 59, 59-101.
Graetz, H. (1891-8) History of the Jews. Philadelphia, The Jewish Publication Society of America, vol. 1.
Grainger, J.D. (2010) The Syrian Wars. Leiden-Boston, Brill.
Gruen, E.S. (1998) Heritage and Hellenism: the Reinvention of the Jewish Tradition. University California Press.
Isserlin, B.S.J. (1973) “The names of 72 translators of the Septuagint (Aristeas, 47-50)”, Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern
Society of Columbia University, vol. 5, 191-197.
Marcus, R. (1966) Josephus. Loeb Classical library, Harvard University Press, vol. VI.
Momigliano, A. (1994) “Flavius Josephus and Alexander’s Visit to Jerusalem,” in Essays on Ancient and Modern Judaism.
Edited, and with an introduction by S. Berti; translated by M. Masella-Gayley. Chicago.
Moore, G.F. (1927) “Simeon the Righteous,” in Jewish Studies in Memory of Israel Abrahams, (G.A. Kohut, ed.), NY, Press of
the Jewish Institute of Religion, 348-364.

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 15, 2 (2015) 1–21

20 Ari Belenkiy

Newton, I. (1728) Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended. Ch. 5, Of the Empire of Persians. London.
Noam, V. (2006) “Megillat Ta’anit – the Scroll of Fasting.” In: The Literature of the Sages, S. Safrai, Z. Safrai, J. Schwartz,
P.J. Tomson (eds.), Fortress Press.
Oesterley, W.O.E. (1941) The Jews and Judaism During the Greek Period. NY/London, Kennikat Press, Port Washington,
(reissued in 1970).
Parker, R.A. & Dubberstein, W.H. (1956) Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C.-A.D. 75. Brown University Press.
Pfister, F. (1914) “Eine jüdische Gründungsgeschichte Alexandrias,” Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der
Wissenschaften, vol. 5 (11).
Pinsker, M. (2005) Lincoln’s Sanctuary: Abraham Lincoln and the Soldiers’ Home. Oxford University Press.
Purvis, J.D. (1968) The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Origin of Samaritan Sect. Harvard University Press.
Rabbinovicz, R. (1867) Variae Lectiones in Mischnam et in Talmud Babylonicum (“Dikdukei Soferim”), (in Hebrew). Munich,
H. Roesl: 1867; Jerusalem, Ohr Hahakhmah: 2002.
Roth, G.D. (2009) Handbook of Practical Astronomy. Springer.
de Sanctis, G. (1969) Storia dei Romani, vol. IV: La fondazione dell'impero. Parte I: Dalla battaglia di Naraggara alla
battaglia di Pidna (Il Pensiero Storico 38, IV), Florence.
Schürer, E. (1973) The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135). A New English Version
revised & ed. by G. Vermes, F. Millar & M. Black. Vol. I, Continuum International Publishing Group.
Skeat, W.W. (ed.) (1886) The Wars of Alexander: An Alliterative Romance, translated chiefly from Historia Alexandri Magni
De Prelis. London, Early English Text Society.
Steinsaltz, A. (1976) The Essential Talmud. Translated from Hebrew by Chaya Galai. NY, Basic Books, Inc.
Stern, M. (1974) Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism. Jerusalem.
Stern, S. (2001) Calendar and Community. Oxford University Press.
Stoneman, R. (2008) Alexander the Great: A Life in Legend. New Haven, Yale University Press.
Stoneman, R. (ed.) (1991) The Greek Alexander Romance. Penguin Books.
Tcherikover, V. (1970) Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews. Philadelphia,Jewish Publication Society of America.
Toomer, G.J. (ed.) (1998) Ptolemy’s Almagest. Princeton University Press.
Vanderkam, J.C. (2004) From Joshua to Caiaphas: High Priests After the Exile. Minneapolis, Fortress Press.
Willrich, H. (1895) Juden und Griechen vor der makkabaischen Erhebung. Gottingen.
Wirgin, W. (1969) “Judah Maccabee’s Embassy to Rome and the Jewish-Roman Treaty,” PEQ, vol. 101, 15-20.
Xenophon, (1832) The Whole Works of Xenophon. London, Jones & Company.
Zeitlin, S. (1924) “Simon the Just and the Great Assembly,” in: Ner Maaravi: Volume on Torah Heritage, NY: 1924, 137-42.
.‫יורק‬-‫ ניו‬,‫ כסלו ה'תרפ"ד‬,‫ מאסף לתורה וחכמת ישראל‬:‫" נר מערבי‬,‫ "שמעון הצדיק וכנסת הגדולה‬,‫ צייטלין‬.‫ ז‬.‫ש‬
Zeitlin, S. (1962) The Rise and Fall of the Judean State: a Political, Social and Religious History of the Second Commonwealth.
Philadelphia, Jewish Publication Society of America.

NOTES
1 References can be found in Marcus 1966, vol. VI, App. C, 512-513.
2 There also a description in Lev. 8 but brief and unimpressive.
3 A similar insight, though without specific details and dating, was offered earlier by Wolf Wirgin (1969).
4 Name Demoteles: vol. I: Aegean Islands, p. 218, from Thasos, III BC, and Euboia, IV/III BC; vol. II: Attica, p. 112, from

Pallene, 228/7 BC; vol. V-a: Coastal Asia Minor, p. 127, from Sinope, III BC.
5 See an attempt to recover Polybius’ sources on Antiochus by Brown (1964).
6 See the National Library and HUJI's Online Treasury of Talmudic Manuscripts

http://jnul.huji.ac.il/dl/talmud/intro_eng.htm (for b. Yoma 69a). Not clear why Vanderkam left it as it is, seeing
that there is a difference between the baraita and a similar piece in the Scholion to Megillat Ta’anit.
7 The official permission to learn Greek was given by Rabban Gamaliel II, fl. c. 100 AD (Tosefta Soṭah, xv. 8; b. Soṭah, end).

Gamaliel’s son Simon relates (b. Soṭah 49b) that many children were instructed in his father's house in “Greek
wisdom.”
8 See Foreword by Rev. Dr. J.H. Hertz (Epstein 1935, Nizikin, vol. 1, XXII). See also

http://halakhah.com/talmud/nezikin_h.html
9 Ibid. (See also Jewish Encyclopedia). Though modern scholarship suggests existence of later editors of Talmud Bavli,

their names are not preserved, most likely, because their contribution was miniscule compared to the above two.
Besides, they certainly suffered the same disadvantage as the former ones – poor knowledge of Greek.
10 For example, the Vatican manuscript (Ebr. 134) has “yud” in ‘Antipatris’ while the Jewish Theological Seminary man-

uscript (Rab. 1623) does not.

11 Moreover, the second Hebrew phrase contains three other words, twice ‫“( בידה‬in her hand”) and ‫“( ויצורינה‬is depict-

ed”), where suffix ‫ ה‬indicates the feminine gender.

12 Moreover, a star seems dimmer near the horizon due to atmospheric extinction (Roth 2009: 561).

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 15, 2 (2015) 1–21

The Encounter of Simon the Just with Antiochus the Great 21

13 This was true till modern times. Abraham Lincoln visited the Naval Observatory on 22 August 1863 to observe the
Moon and Arcturus with a telescope (Pinsker 2005: 115, 200).
14 See Antonello (2011) and particularly Fig. 2 with a computer simulation of the sky visible in the Land of Israel in

biblical times.
15 However, there are now indications that the Seleucid calendar had a one month differential vs. the Babylonian at least

as early as 210 BC, i.e., its first month Dios was aligned with the eighth Babylonian month Arahsamnu, not
Tashritu. In this calendar, the intercalated Macedonian month corresponding to Ululu II in 199 was Gorpiaios II,
not Hyperberetus II. See Bennett 2011: 219-220 and Addenda et Corrigenda
at http://www.academia.edu/attachments/6979691/download_file
16 Some scholars argue that it could have been a year later (S. Stern 2001: 89-92).
17 Rabbinovicz 2002: Yoma, page “mem.” The manuscript from the Vatican Library has clear ‫ ואחד‬, while the one from

the Jewish Theological Seminary Library has somewhat confusing ‫וחד בה‬. See the National Library and HUJI’s Online
Treasury of Talmudic Manuscripts; http://jnul.huji.ac.il/dl/talmud/intro_eng.htm
18 The only other entry between these two is the reference to Hanukah on Kislew 25.
19 All times given in local Jerusalem time (UT+2). See Sky View Cafe 4.0 at:

http://www.skyviewcafe.com/ introducing the date as “-197/01/09”.

20 As most “court” historians of the campaigning kings did in the past, from Alexander to Napoleon. The earlier

example, Callisthenes, could be an inspiration for Zenon.

21 M. Stern (1974: 115) claims Josephus “knew Polybius only indirectly, mainly through Nicolaus of Damascus or

Strabo.”
22 The most famous assimilation is Josephus’ prophecy that General Vespasian would be the future Emperor (The Wars of

the Jews 3.399-407), which Talmud (b. Gittin 56b) bestowed upon a rabbi, a contemporary of Josephus.
23 Moore (1927) also pointed out that in Josephus’ list of priests almost nothing is said about the High Priest Simon I.

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 15, 2 (2015) 1–21

 SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No. 2, (2015), pp. 22-32
Copyright © 2015 SC
Open Access. Printed in Greece. All Rights Reserved.

The calculation of doomsday

based on Anno Domini

Sepp Rothwangl

Waldwirtschaft Hubertushof Scheibsgraben 49, A-8661 Wartberg, Astria

(CALENdeRsign.com;calendersign@gmx.at)

Received: 10/01/2015
Accepted: 15/02/2015

ABSTRACT

Anno Domini, or the year Christ’s birth, was an invention made some 1400 years ago by Dionysius Exiguus,
who adjusted a new Easter Computus in order to avert end time fever with the pretext to solve a dispute
upon the correct date of Easter.
Right at the beginning of Christianity, early Christians expected in the near future the return of Christ, which
was associated with the end of the world, together with the Seventh Day of the Lord. Such a scenario
ocurred already in the cosmic year Anno Mundi (AM) 6,000 based upon a teleological concept by
interpreting the Bible. AM produced a calendrical end time with its year 6000 due to equating the Six Days
of Genesis with the verse of the Bible saying one Day of the Lord was the same as 1000 years of mankind. To
combat the end of the world fever caused by this time concept at the beginning of the 6th century Dionysius
Exiguus created a new temporal hinge point for counting the years: Anno Domini.
Obviously this chronology is not in harmony with ancient historical works, as even former Pope Benedict
XVI recognized, but is an end time prophecy by interpreting the Gospel, the Apocalypse, the scientific
cosmology of antiquity, and astronomical values. New evidence shows that Dionysius intended to begin his
“anni ab incarnatione Iesu Christi” exactly 2000 years before his forcasted Last Day at the prophecied end of
the world.

KEYWORDS: Dionysius Exiguus, Anno Domini, Anno Mundi, Great-Year-doctrine, Apocalypse, Precession, Symposion,
planetary massing.
THE CALCULATION OF DOOMSDAY BASED ON ANNO DOMINI
1. INTRODUCTION
As far as we know, we owe the establishment of the
Anno Domini count to the Scythian canonist and
scholar Dionysius Exiguus (Dennis the Little). Only a
few things are known about his life. He lived some
1,500 years ago at the beginning of the sixth century
and was a colleague of Cassiodor, who was among
the clergy in the court of Theodoric, king of Ostro-
goths. Of Cassiodor is well known that he founded
in Calabria the Monasterium Vivariense, where he col-
lected and compiled Greek and Roman classical lit-
erature, which might have studied also Dionysius
Exiguus.
He is the author of the Collectio Dionysiana, can-
ons of the councils and synods of Nicea, Con-
stantinople, Calcedon, and Sardica (Peitz 1960). One
of his works, which is part of the "Patrologia Latina,"
is still powerfully influential today, although it is not
in harmony with ancient historical facts (Ratzinger
2012). Dennis invented the AD count by establishing
a new Easter calculation, which he dedicated in 525
to a Bishop Petronius. (Schwartz 1905) He called his
Easter table CYCLUS DECEMNOVENNALIS DIO-
NYSII, (19-year cycle of Dionysius) which now
commonly is called LIBER de PASCHATE (Book of
Easter) (Krusch 1938).
Dionysius explained that his reason to introduce
his new cycle was to avoid counting the years after
Diocletian:
…Because the blessed Cyril began his first cycle in the
153rd year of Diocletian and ended his last cycle in the
247th year of Diocletian, we have to start in the 248th
year of this man, who was a tyrant rather than emperor.
However, we did not want to preserve the memory of an
impious persecutor of Christians in our cycles, but chose
rather to mark the times with the years from the incarna-
tion of our Lord Jesus Christ, so that the commencement
of our hope will appear more familiar to us and the origin
of the redemption of mankind, that is the Passion of our
Redeemer, will shine in a more glorious way. (Transla-
tion: Declercq).
1. Controversy over a correct date for Easter
2. The arrival of Anno Mundi 6000
3. The Great Year doctrine
4. Astrological allegories in the Gospels
5. End-time prediction of the Revelation
6. The change of the equinoctial constellations
7. The rate of the precession of the equinoxes
8. Argument and Result
2. CONTROVERSY OVER OF A CORRECT
DATE FOR EASTER
Between Constantinople, Alexandria, and Rome
(Mosshammer 2009) there existed over the many
centuries a severe controversy over the date of Easter
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 22-32
23
(Geerlings 1999). It occurred because of different ca-
lendrical systems as well as by different interpreta-
tions of the Gospels.
The new Easter Computus of Dionysius was one
of many attempts to solve this problem.
3. THE ARRIVAL OF ANNO MUNDI 6000
Another reason was the calendrical end-time be-
cause of the imminent arrival of the cosmic year 6000
in the first Christian chronology, called Anno Mundi
(AM).
The concept of Anno Mundi (AM) was an inven-
tion in 2nd century by Julius Sextus Africanus
(Wallraff 2006) and corresponds to a quotation in the
New Testament stating that Christ appears in the
last hour.
[I John 2:18]: Children, it is the last hour; and as you
have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many anti-
christs have come; therefore we know that it is the last
hour.
Consequently, in the AM count, the date of
Christ’s birth was adjusted in the middle of the sixth
millennium to the year AM 5500, because it corre-
sponded with the 11th hour of the available 12.
(6000 : 12 * 11 = 5500).
Even the dimensions of the Ark of the Covenant
was used as an analogy for the 5,500 years. [Exodus
25:10] tells that it was 2 1/2 cubits long, 1 1/2 cubits
wide, and 1 1/2 cubits high. Irion (Hieron) of the
court of Constantinople and Hippolytus both inter-
preted these dimensions, amounting to 5 1/2 cubits,
as symbolic of 5,500 years.
The AM method profoundly influenced early
Byzantine and Roman Christian chronology, as
shown in the chronicles of Hippolytus in Rome, Sul-
picius Severus, Panodoros, and others. Out of this
concept arose the Alexandrian method of Annianos,
who lived in the year that the patriarch Theophilus
died (412 CE).
The Anno Mundi chronological systems became
very popular in the first Christian centuries, but cre-
ated a huge problem: end-of-the-world fever, caused
by a looming Seventh Day that equated with the end
of the 6000-year period and corresponded to a date
some 500 years after Christ's purported birth. At the
turn of the fourth to fifth centuries, i.e. precisely the
moment when the barbarian invasions may have
stirred up apocalyptic anxieties, the North African
bishop Julius Hilarianus, for instance, wrote a trea-
tise ‘On the Duration of the World,’ in which he cal-
culates 5530 years from creation to the Passion of
Christ, and 369 years from that event until the consu-
late of Caesarius and Atticus (AD 397); there remain,
so he concludes, 101 years to go before the Resurrection
of the dead. (Declercq 2000.)
24
This world’s expiration date as predicted by the
AM system was preached by a number of bishops. A
century later, this surely caused problems of credi-
bility when the prophesied end did not come! What
to do? A new Bible-connected chronology was need-
ed in order to head off hysterical civil and religious
disturbance.
There were three strategies available to combat
the fear caused by this time concept and avert Chili-
asm, Millenarianism, and eschatological fever:
A. Shift the era of creation to the past in order to
show that the dreaded year AM 6000 had long
passed, as the chronicler John Malalas did by identi-
fying the year 6000 with the passion of Christ. This
had the consequence that the Seventh Day had al-
ready begun, which surely was inconvenient for
Church authorities, since it erased the motivating
effect of the Last Judgment on believers.
B. Rejuvenate the age of the world and delay the
year AM 6000 into the future, which was the method
of the fourth century chronicler Eusebius. Influenced
by Jerome, Eusebius delayed the birth date of Christ
by three centuries to AM 5199. According to this
popular world-year-count, the year 6000 would oc-
cur around 800 CE again, which was reason for the
Venerable Bede in the ninth century CE to favor An-
no Domini (Wallis 1999).
C. Start a new counting of the years from another
fictitious point in time: Christ’s incarnation. Diony-
sius Exiguus made the most popular attempt at this
when he created a new temporal hinge point for
counting the years: Anni ab incarnatione Domini
Iesu Christi (The years since the incarnation of Jesus
Christ).
Yet, influenced by current perceptions Dionysius
in fact postponed the return of Christ again into the
far future.
These perceptions were the current doctrine of the
Great Year and the effect of the wobble of Earth’s
axis, both mirrored in New Testament and Christian
symbolism.
4. THE DOCTRINE OF THE GREAT YEAR
The doctrine of the Great Year (Waerden 1952) is
based upon the idea of the return of everything.
(Staehlin 1960) It states that the planets generate
time, and if the planets repeat their movement, then
time and all events repeat. (Calatay 1996).
A quote of Eudemos illustrates this idea very viv-
idly:
There is a common multiple of all orbital times, the
large year; at its expiration all planets are again in the
Sepp Rothwangl
same place. If one believes the Pythagoreans, then I will
return also in the future, as everything after its number
returns, and I will tell you here again fairy tales, holding
this stick in my hand, while you will sit likewise before
me. Likewise everything else will repeat itself. (Eudemos,
Aristotle’s disciple at the Lykaion at Athens).
Heraclitus Stoicus equates the Olympic Symposi-
um of Gods, which took place after the Titan Prome-
theus created mankind at a conjunction of the seven
naked eye planets:
Some people want the conjunction of the seven planets
in one zodiacal sign to be referred to by these words of
Homer, and also the universal destruction, whenever this
should happen. He (Homer) alludes to the confusion of the
universe when he brings together Apollo, i.e., the Sun and
Artemis, whom we identify with the Moon, as well as the
stars of Aphrodite, Ares, Hermes and Zeus. 
 (Heraclitus
Stoicus, Quaestiones homericae, 53)
According to Seneca the astrologer Berossos (of 3rd
cent. BC) describes such an end time situation very
impressively placing all planets in a straight line:
Berossos, who interpreted the prophecies of Bel, at-
tributed… the end of the world and its aftermath to the
movements of the planets. He maintains that the Earth
will burn whenever all the planets, which have different
orbits, converge... and are so arranged in the same path
that a straight line can pass through all their orbs and
there will be a further great flood, when the planets so
converge in Capricorn. (Seneca, Naturales Questiones
3.29.1) (Verbrugghe and Wickersham. 2001: p 66)
We find an almost perfect pictorial representation
of Berossos’ idea (Schnabel 1968) of the planets
aligned in a straight line in images of the Babylonian
planet Mars representing God Nergal (as shown in
Figure 1), a Syrian Sun God (Figure 2), and on coins
of Roman emperor Constantine (Figure 3) showing a
planetary alignment on a military standard.
These iconographies symbolize the heavenly
power, with which priests, kings, and rulers give the
impression to their followers to be in harmony with
the cosmos since the beginning until the end.
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 22-32
THE CALCULATION OF DOOMSDAY BASED ON ANNO DOMINI 25

2. c. BC Posidonios,Alexander Polyhistor, Juba

1. c. BC Diodourus Alexandrinus, Ps.Epikurus Lu-
cretius, Vetusta Placita, Varro, Dydimus,
Hyginus, Vitruvius, Eudoros Diodorus Sicu-
lus,
1. c. CE Papirius, Fabianus, Polyhistor interpolatus,
Seneca, Plinius, Josephus, Pamphilius
2. c. CE Aetios, Ps. Plutarchos, Theophilos Tatianos,
Diogenaios, Ailianos Nikomachos
3. c. CE Kleomedes, Censorinus, Abydenos, Hippo-
lytos, Africanus, Clemens Alexandrinus,
Athenios
4. c. CE Anonym. Aratum isagoga, Eusebios, Augus-
tinus, Hesychios
5. c. CE Stobaios, Isodoros, Kyrillos, Panodoros, Hel-
ladios
6. c. CE Palchos, Versio latina barbara, Scholastica
Figure 1. The God Nergal with planetary standard Germanici, Verso Armeniaca, Synkellos,
http://www.storiadimilano.it/arte/nergal.jpg
Agathias, Photios

We find iconographic ideas of the heavenly sym-

posium as an allusion to the beyond in pre-Christian
funeral scenes (See:Figure 4), such as the sepulcher
of Vincentius in Rome. (Nilsson 19889)

Figure 2. Syrian Sun God. The Parthian and Sassanian

Dynasties - 249 BC to AD 651" by Roman Ghirshman. Published
by Golden Press, New York, 1962. On p. 86 Figure 4. Wall painting of funeral of Vicentius in catacomb,
Rome. Vincentius during introduction (left), and as one of the
seven sacerdotes in the beyond (right). Nilsson, Martin Persson.
Geschichte der griechischen Religion: Die hellenistische und
römische Zeit. C.H Beck. 1950

In many variations we find the same idea e.g. in

the seven Sages, the seven Rishis during the deluge
in India, and the seven Sleepers of Ephesus, which is
found also in the Qur’an as Al Kahf, the legend of
the cave (Surah 18, verse 9-26).
The Christian legend of the seven Sleepers tells
that in year 251 Emperor Decius martyred seven
Christians by walling them inside a cave. After 200
(or 372) years they resurrected.
An echo of this idea is found in Grimm’s fairy tale
of the Seven from Swabia, who chase with one spear
Figure 3. Coin of Contanine with standard. George Beke:
CONSTANTINE’S TRUE VISION. From Plato’s Chi (X) To The a monster in the shape of a hare. Their names point
Christian Chi Rho us to the days of the week and thus to the planets.
Another example is the fairy tale “Courageous Tai-
lor” also called “Seven with One Stroke,“ who finally
The huge list of authors of the GY-doctrine shows
conquers a giant.
its circulation until 6th century:
From Nemesius, a Christian writer of about 400
5. c. BC Pythagoras
CE, we have a witness that the alignment of the sev-
4. c. BC Plato, Aristotle
3. c. BC Berossos, Eudemos

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 22-32

26 Sepp Rothwangl

en planets was imagined at the Resurrection of 5. ASTROLOGICAL AND PLANETARY

Christ at the end of the world: ALLEGORIES IN THE GOSPEL
According to the Stoics the conflagration and the
Like an allegory the Gospel of John 21:1-4 tells
destruction of all beings is generated, after stated
that Jesus came back after his crucifixion to seven of
periods of time, by the planets, when they come
his disciples. These had taken up their former occu-
back,... Then, from the start the world is restored
pation as fishermen at Lake Tiberias, but with little
anew. ... There will be again Socrates and Plato and
success, because they had caught nothing in their
every man, with their friend and fellow-citizen. ...
nets. Jesus stood on the shore and told them to throw
Christians imagine the Resurrection by way of this
the net on the other side of the boat, after which they
restoration,... Christ's words instruct that the Resur-
caught 153 fish. After eating some fish, Jesus gave
rection will take place once and not periodically.
Peter three times the missionary order: feed my
For this quote by Nemesius we find con-firmation
lambs and pasture my sheep.
in several graffiti in early Christian catacombs of
A similar story is told by Luke 5:1-10 about the
Rome (Figure 5), which is usually called the Meal of
event at Lake Gennesaret, where seven of his disci-
the Seven (Pillinger 2011), echoing the Olympic
ples had caught nothing all night. Jesus gave the ad-
symposium of Gods (the alignment of the seven
vice to put the net into deep water and they caught
planets) at the beginning of mankind, but also por-
such a large number of fish that their nets began to
traying such a situation at its prophesied end.
break. Then Jesus says: From now on you will fish for
men.
As an astrological allusion these words indicate
the shift from the age of Aries to the new age of Pi-
sces.
The comparison of this parable with the Hindu
myth of the deluge with Manu and the seven Rishis
Figure 5. Early Christian funeral graffiti in the Catacombs of (Figure 8), which as well represent the seven planets,
Callixtus Rome. The Meal of the Seven, a Christian imagination makes evident the mythic shift of an age, if seven of
of the afterworld. Public domain
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Agape_feast_05.jpg
such characters converge.

We have witness of the Great Year doctrine also

from Scythia, the homeland of Dionysius Exguus, by
the recently found treasure of Preslav with the num-
ber seven prominent in its design. (see Figure 6)

Figure 6. Treasure of Preslav, Bulgaria 8tth cent. Rosette of

bronze, with seven
 astral runes (left), golden necklet with
seven enameled lokets (right) (Photo: Rothwangl)

In Bosnia and Herzegovina are still found so

called Stecak (as shown in Figure 7), tombstones Figure 7. Stecaks of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Tombstone of
with seven astral symbols of Bogumils, Bogumils. (Zalkida Hadzibegovic, Astronomical Heritage in
(Hadzibegovic 2010) a heretic movement based upon Bosnia and Herzegovina: Late Medieval Tombstones and Astral
Motifs as Their Decoration http://seac-2010.vhs-
Manichean and Zoroastrian ideas, who were related
gilching.org/plaintext/conferences/programme/index.html
to Paulicians. 
 The Bogumils were banished by the
Byzantine Empire and emigrated from the Black Sea
region called Scythia the homeland of Dionysius Ex-
iguus.

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 22-32

THE CALCULATION OF DOOMSDAY BASED ON ANNO DOMINI
Figure 8. Manu and the seven Rishis at the deluge
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_fish_avatara_of_V
ishnu_saves_Manu_during_the_ great_deluge.jpg (left);
Seven disciples of Jesus fishing, Duccio di Buoninsegna.
http://images.zeno.org/Kunstwerke/I/big/1390036a.jpg (right)
We find in the Gospel another pictorial descrip-
tion of an alignment of all planets at the end of time
in the end time parable of Matthew with the mar-
riage scene, where five wise and five foolish virgins
with lamps wait for the bridegroom. The marriage is
a classic ancient metaphor for an align-ment of sun
and moon, at new moon or even at a solar eclipse,
when the other planets can be aligned (shine like the
lamps of the wise virgins) or not (like the foolish vir-
gins with unlighted lamps):
No one knows either the day or the hour wherein the
Son of Man cometh... At that time the kingdom of heaven
will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out
to meet the bridegroom. Five of them were foolish and five
were wise. The foolish ones took their lamps but did not
take any oil with them. [Mt 25:1-13]
We can conclude that the GY-doctrine is based
upon the ancient assumption, what as well as the
Bible and Plato told, i.e., that the movements of Sun,
of the Moon and of the planets are responsible for
the existence of the time itself. Due to their cyclical
periods the cosmological idea of the cyclical quality
of time and its theory of the eternal return (in Greek:
apokatastasis pantoon) was born.
6. END-TIME PREDICTION OF THE
REVELATION OF JOHN OF PATMOS
Franz Boll says about the astrological and astro-
logical context of the Apocalypse of John of Patmos
that the text tells of the starry sky and must have
extraordinary meaning at the cusp of a new aeon or
age. (Boll 1903, 1914)
Revelation invoking the seven cities equates clear-
ly the seven stars with the lamps or deities of the
seven cities.
[Rev 1:11]: Write what you see in a book and send it to
the seven churches, to Ephesus and to Smyrna and to
Pergamon and to Thyatira and to Sardis and to Philadel-
phia and to Laodicea.
[Rev 1:20]: As for the mystery of the seven stars which
you saw in my right hand, and the seven golden lamp
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 22-32
27
stands, the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches
and the seven lamp stands are the seven churches.
The deities of the seven cities are easy to identify
as the gods of the seven planets such as in Ephesus
once was the main sanctuary of Artemis, Goddess of
the moon; Pergamon with its famous altar of Zeus
relates to planet Jupiter and so on. The introducing
invocation to the seven cities of the Apocalypse is a
hint to the doctrine of the Great Year and to an
alignment of all planets at the end of time.
7. THE CHANGE OF THE EQUINOCTIAL
CONSTELLATIONS
Precession is a very slow movement of Earth’s axis,
which can be comprehended only after generations
and thus in former times was handed down mostly
by cults and religions (Dechend and Santillana 1977).
Earth’s axis describes by a gyroscopic movement a
double cone in the shape of an hourglass, pointing
with its center to the poles of the ecliptic. Doe to pre-
cession the Northern axis of the Earth describes a
circle among the stars, centered on the ecliptic north
pole.
The wobble of Earth’s axis has the effect that due
to precession before a decisive moment of the year,
i.e., at the dawn of the day of vernal equinox during
many millennia one constellation after the next an-
nounces New Year’s Day in spring.
New year of many ancient cultures start with the
vernal equinox, such as the Persian calendar, which
begins with Nauroz (meaning new day) but also the
beginning of Dionysius’ Anno Domini, is 25th of
March, the former feast of Christ’s incarnation (now
Annunciation). Also the Latin names of the months,
September, October, November, and December
make sense only if you start counting with March at
the vernal equinox.
Due to the gyroscopic wobble of the Earth every
about 1500 or 2500 years, depending on the size of
the constellations, each succeeding constellation not
only announces the New Year’s Day, but identifies
also the temporal orientation and adoration of the
age. The change of these constellations seemingly
was noted by a change in worship handed down in
myths and idols.
Some 5,500 year ago, when Taurus was at the he-
liacal rising constellation, we find bull symbolism in
different myths and cults of Europe (the myth of
king Minos), Middle East (Baal of Mesopotamia and
Golden Calf of Bible), and Egypt (Apis bull).
Some 3,500 years ago the next vernal equinox con-
stellation Aries announced the next age and had an
effect on the myth of the Argonauts, searching for
the Golden Fleece, the wool of a winged ram. Also
28
Moses appears with horns of a ram, condemning the
former bull worship, belittled as the Golden Calf.
Other expressions of this change were the ram-
like Amun in Egypt and the Mithrean religion
(Strohm 2008) with Mithras slaughtering the celestial
bull (Beck 2006) and the myth of Theseus killing the
Minotaur, a perversion of the Minoan bull.
Some 2000 years ago fish symbols represented the
current equinox constellation Pisces, embodied in
first Christian symbols. Jesus was named after the
Latinized Greek word for fish: ICHTHYS. Another
Christian symbol, the sacrificed lamb, is a parallel to
the slaughtered bull after the age of Taurus during
the age of Aries (see Figure 9).
If we look now before dawn of vernal equinox to
the Eastern horizon of the sky (as shown in Figure
10) we can observe with the next helical vernal equi-
nox constellation the breaking of a new age of pre-
cession: Aquarius.
It seems that John of Patmos has prophesied it
with these words:
[Rev 14:2] And I heard a voice from heaven like the
sound of many waters and like the sound of loud thunder.
Figure 9. Petroglyphs in early Christian Roman catacombs.
Rome. Photos of Postcards.
Figure 10. Star map of predawn at vernal equinox 2000, view to
Eastern horizon. (starchart created with SkyMap pro v11.0.3)
8. THE RATE OF THE PRECESSION
One of the first to calculate how the constellations
shift against the equinoxes and solstices was Hip-
parchos, of whom Ptolemy reported:
Sepp Rothwangl
On the variability of the solstices and equinoxes Hip-
parchos compared lunar eclipses of his time with such in
former times of Timocharis [approx. 150 years before]
and came to the result that the star Spica was 8° apart
from the signs of autumn equinox, but at Timocharis'
time almost 6° distant. (Ptolemäus 1963)
This report as well as calculations of Ptolemy
himself show both could have known better of an
approximate rate of 75y/1° but instead used and
handed down a rate of 100y/1°, giving 3000y each
30°, which was used in the Western civilization until
the time of Kepler.
Because the correct rate is about 71.6y/1°
(2148y/30°) soon mediaeval astronomers of the
Middle East (Hartner 1979) realized that Ptolemy’s
rate was wrong and used a faster rate estimating
only 2000y for 30° which equals 66y/1°.
List of oriental medieval astronomers using the
rate 2000y each 30°:
 Early Indian Brahmin rate (Bennedik 2007, de
La Galaisière 1789)
 Theon of Alexandria (4th Cent.) a changing
rate (trepidation) of 66 y/1
 Tables of the Shah (Zij-i Shah, 6th Cent.)
(Burckhardt and Waerden 1969)
 Al-Khwarizmi, al zij Sindhind (9th Cent.)
 Tabulae probatae or az-Zig al-mumtan (9th
Cent.)
 Al-Battani, called Albategnius, al-Zij (c. 880)
 al-Sufi, also called Azophi (c. 965)
 Al Biruni (973-1048), al Canon al Masud
 Arabian fixed star cataloque of 1st Oct. 1112
CE (ed. Paul Kunitzsch)
 Libros del Saber of Alfons of Kastilla (1252-
1284)
 Judah ben Verga of Lissabon (c. 1470) (Gold-
stein 2001)
Apart of mythic handed down values of pre-
cession with the rate 666 y/1° one of the earliest such
value we find in India. The French astronomer Guil-
laume Joseph Hyacinthe Jean-Baptiste LE GENTIL
de la Galaisiere was in India to observe the Venus
transits of 1761 and 1769. From this journey, he pro-
duced a report with material about the ancient trad-
ing connection and scientific exchanges that oc-
curred between Arabia and India. Le Gentil gives an
account of precession and the Indian calculation of
the age of the world, claiming that he had discussed
the matter with an Indian Brahmin, who kept his
knowledge secret from the common people. The
Brahmin said that Indian astronomy was improved
and renewed under the king Salivaganam 1691 years
ago (calculated from the year 1769 CE, this would be
78 CE). The Brahmins use a period of 60 years and its
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 22-32
THE CALCULATION OF DOOMSDAY BASED ON ANNO DOMINI 29

multiple for chronology, and the stars precede in the dera shows the 36 decans as human characters. The
following way: apocalyptic number 666 thus reflects the rate of pre-
Each year 54 arcsec. 
 In 60 years 54 min. 
 In 3600 cession for each decan.
(60*60) years 54 degree.
 
 Any step between this [Rev 13:18]: This calls for wisdom: 
 let him who has
periods differs by a factor 60, and the rate of preces- understanding reckon the number of the beast, for it is the
sion conform to 66 y/1°, 666 y/10°, 2000 y/30°, or number of a human, its number is six hundred and sixty-
24,000 years for the precession’s cycle as a whole.
 six.
The Brahmins use 4,320,000 years as a value for the It seems that a medieval star map from about 800
duration of the world and divide it into four ages:
 CE expresses the imminent threatening new age
 1st age, 1,728,000 years
 . with the image of the horned beast of Apocalypse,
 2nd age, 1,296,000 years (3/4 of 1st age)
 . showing this beast at the position between Pisces
 3rd age, 864,000 years (2/3 of 2nd age) and Capricorn (see Figure 11), where usually is
 
 4th age, 432,000 years (1/2 of 3rd age).
 found Aquarius. (Haffner 1997)
The current Indian age, the Kali Yuga thus lasts The illustrator of this medieval commentary of
432,000 years. In sexagesimal system (base 60) it re- Aratos seemed to be influenced by John of Patmos
sults in 2*60*60*60, thus written in this system it and identifying the future vernal equinox constella-
gives 2.0.0.0. For an ignorant, who misinterprets this tion Aquarius with the beast of Revelation.
number system as decimal, it could easily result in [Rev 13:11] Then I saw another beast coming up out of
2000 years, as already van der Waerden indicates.
 the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb and he spoke
Another assertion of the Brahmin was that in 1762 as a dragon.
CE, 4863 years of the fourth age, the Kali Yuga Revelation also gives an astrological prophesy not
(Calyougan) had passed. By this calculation, the Kali only to Aquarius’ rising on the Eastern horizon but
Yuga started in -3101 (3102 BCE), the year Aryabhata also of the recent view to the Western horizon of the
of Kusumpara reports and as Berossos asserts as be- vernal equinox predawn, where Leo is setting:
ing the date of the deluge. This strongly suggests the [Rev 10:1-2] And he set his right foot on the sea, and
ancient transfer of astronomical and chronological his left foot on the land, and called out with a loud voice,
knowledge between Inda and Greece. like a lion roaring.
The Brahmin asserts also that 20,400 years before The comparison of an image of the beast of Reve-
the beginning of the Kali Yuga, a conjunction of all lation on the wall-carpet of Angers (Figure 12) with
the planets had occurred. This is very interesting the view to the Western horizon at predawn at ver-
because 20,400 = 24,000 – 3,600! As shown above, nal equinox (Figure 13) shows impressive parallels.
3600 years also represents exactly the precessional
shift (by the Brahmin value) of 54°. 24,000 / 3,600
gives the same relation as a result, namely 20/3, as
the ominous number 666. The adjustment of the In-
dian Yuga system is thus based upon both the Great
Year doctrine with the return of the alignment of all
planets, and the Brahmin constant of precession 666
y/10°.
Further Indian rate of the shift of the colure we
find with Pingree, who reports of Bhaskara (around
600 CE), that he know from earlier times a value of
about 1° in 60 years. Pingree supplies Indian sources
as Varahamira and Haridatta, which cite the shift of
the equinoxes 27° in 1800, what is 1° in 66.6 years or
30° in 2000 years.
 
 Figure 11. Illustration of constellations. 
 Commentary of
Another transfer of knowledge from India to the Germanicus on the Phenomena of Aratos.
 Codex Basiliensis of
Mediterranean at the end of antiquity is ascertained about 800 CE. Haffner, Mechthild: Ein antiker
Sternbilderzyklus und seine Tradierung in Handschriften vom
by the 9th century patriarch Photius of Constantino-
frühen Mittelalter bis zum Humanismus. Untersuchungen zu
ple, as well as by Cedrenus in the 11th century: Dur- den Illustrationen der Aratea des Germanicus. Hildesheim. 1997
ing the reign of Constantine in 4th century, Metro-
dorus, who created a 532-year-period Easter cycle,
visited India to study philosophy with the Brah-
mins.

This rate of 2000 years for 30° results in 666 years
each decan of 10°. The ceiling of the temple of Den-

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 22-32

30
Figure 12. Illustration of Revelation; wall-carpet of Angers
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/La_Bête_
de_la_Mer.jpg
How to interpret Revelation [Rev 10:1-2] and the
lion stepping with one foot out the sea, we can learn
from the myth of Kallisto, which tells that she “could
never take a bath in the Sea”, but which describes in
“Mythic” (which Herta von Dechend called the sci-
entific languade of the pst) the constellation of the
Greater Bear as circumpolar and thus never setting.
“To take a bath in the Sea” thus means “to set”. The
roaring lion stepping out of the Sea with its left foot
on the land thus describes Leo as half risen due to
precession. Remember Leo’s precessional predeces-
sor at this position, Virgo, attributing Christ being
born out of a virgin 2000 years ago.
Figure 13. Star map of predawn at vernal equinox 2000, view to
Western horizon. ((starchart created with SkyMap pro v11.0.3))
It is a matter of fact that in May 2000 a salient
massing of the classical planets occurred.
The alignment of all planets on 5-May-2000:
JDN 2451670.
 Right Ascension:
Moon 3h 55m;
Sun 2h 51m;
Sepp Rothwangl
Mercury 2h 34m;
Venus 2h 14m;
Mars 3h 55m;
Jupiter 3h 0m;
Saturn 3h 11m.
Why does this planetary massing occur in year
2000 of all years? The claim of this article is the the-
sis, that the appearance and temporal coincidence of
this planetary event with the calendrical second mil-
lennium was calculated and planned.
It is not of random origin but based upon the plan
of Dionysius, who forecast this alignment with com-
mensurable planetary periods known to him and
dated it together with another astronomical phe-
nomenon: precession.
9. ARGUMENT AND RESULT
Dionysius searched for an alignment of all planets in
order to find Christ’s second coming, the main topic
of early and still Christian belief. After having found
such a planetary massing 1500 years ahead of his
time he assumed to have found the date of the Last
Day at the end of the age of Pisces.
 Then, 2000
years before this calculated alignment he dated the
beginning of his Anno Domini years according the
value of precession of 2000 year each 30° at the ver-
nal equinox (the former feast day of incantation of
Christ). He must have sought to be in harmony with
the beginning of the Age of Pisces (ICHTHYS), the
first symbol of Christians. In addition he searched
for a solution for the calendrical end of the world. It
occurred during his lifetime by arrival of Anno
Mundi 6000 and by his AD-adjustment he post-
poned this end into the far future: AD 2000.
As a result in year 2000 of all years a planetary
massing took place, within a span of 26°. Such a
massing, where all planets are in pro-grade motion
are very rare.
p (6000y, 30°) = 0,026
Yet, Dionysius gives us no hint of how he has per-
formed his calculation. No doubt he could have
done it, just like his contemporary Aryabhata of
Kusumpara (Clark 1930), who calculated the start of
the Kali Yuga some 3600 years backwards from his
lifetime to a conjunction of all planets on 17th Febru-
ary 3102 BC. Interestingly Abu Mashar dated at the
very same year the deluge of Noah (Pingree 1968,
Waerden 1980).
Dionysius’ reckoning could have been based on
the known common multiple planetary periods
shown also in the so-called goal year texts, (Hunger
2006) the periods of the inscription of Keskinthos,
(Jones 2006) or the know-ledge that enabled to con-
struct the Antikythera mechanism.

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 22-32
THE CALCULATION OF DOOMSDAY BASED ON ANNO DOMINI 31

Some commensurable planetary periods. i.e. peri- Anno Domini is based upon a now unrealistic
ods, after which planets conjunct again: cosmological concept, which postulates that the
 3 Conj (J&S) = 2 Saturn = 5 Jupiter (59 years)
 world would end at the planetary alignment of May
 43 Conj (J&S) = 29 Saturn = 72 Jupiter = 400 2000 together with the second coming of Christ.
Mars = 854 years However, the orientation towards a massing of
 65 Jupiter = 875 Moon all planets has worldwide parallels in timekeeping
 
 152 Venus = 243 years
 such as in the Kali Yuga or the Deluge in 3102 BCE,
 5 Venus = 99 moon = 8 years = 2920 days
 or the Zhuanxu dynasty and its calendar in 1953 BC.
 101 Conj (J&S) = 2006 years. An astronomical project in the Austrian Alps has
(Rothwangl 2004) actualized this idea in the Planetary Trail “Heaven
upon Earth.” Models in the scale of 1 : 1 Billion show
in size and distance the massing of the classical
CONCLUSION
planets, but as well together with the modern plan-
The invention of Anno Domini was based upon an ets Uranus and Neptune. The next such alignment,
end-time-plan with the correct calculation of a fore- which will occur exactly at vernal equinox in 660
cast of a massing of the classical seven planets. Yet, years. (20-03-2675).
the dating of Christ’s incarnation happened with a
wrong value of precession.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I thank Ioannis Liritzis for invitation to publish this paper in SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Mrs. Joan Griffith for
English corrections and the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments.

REFERENCES
Beck, Roger (2006) The Religion of the Mithras Cult in the Roman Empire. Mysteries of the Unconquered Sun. Oxford.
Bennedik Susanne (2007) Die Siebenplanetenwoche in Indien. Dissertation. Bonn
Boll, Franz (1903). Sphaera. Neue Griechische Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Sternbilder. Leipzig
Boll, Franz (1914) Aus der Offenbarung Johannis. Hellenistische Studien zum Weltbild der Apokalypse. Leipzig-Berlin
Burckhardt. J. J. and Bartel L. van der Waerden (1969) Das astronomische System der persischen Tafeln I. Centaurus vol. 13
Calatay de, Godefroid (1996) Annus Platonicus. A Study of World Cycles in Greek, Latin and Arabic Sources. Universite
Catholique de Louvain. Institut Orientaliste. Peeters Press Louvain - Paris.
Dechend, Hertha von, and Giorgio de Santillana (1977) Hamlet's Mill: An Essay on Myth and the Frame of Time. Godine.
Boston.
Declercq, Georges (2000) Anno Domini. The Origins of the Christian Era. Turnhout Belgium.
Clark, W. E. (1930)The Aryabhatiya of Aryabhata. Chicago.
Evans, James (2006) The History and Practice of Ancient Astronomy. Oxford University Press.
Gentil de La Galaisière, G.J.H.J.B. Merck, J.H. [Übersetzer]: Von der Dauer der Welt, und ihrem verschiednen Alter, nach der
Lehre der Braminen. Der Teutsche Merkur. 1773-89.
Geerlings, Wilhelm (1999) Die Berechnung des Geburtsjahres Christi. Wissenschaftsmagazin der Ruhr-Universität Bochum.
Grimm, Gebrüder: Kinder und Hausmärchen. Erlangen
Goldstein, Bernard R (2001) The Astronomical Tables of Judah Ben Verga of Lisbon. Suhayl.
Hadzibegovic, Zalkida (2010) Astronomical Heritage in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Late Medieval Tombstones and Astral Mo-
tifs as Their Decoration. Talk at SEAC conference, Gilching.
Haffner, Mechthild (1997) Ein antiker Sternbilderzyklus und seine Tradierung in Handschriften vom frühen Mittelalter bis zum
Humanismus. Untersuchungen zu den Illustrationen der Aratea des Germanicus. Hildesheim.
Hamel, Jürgen (1996) Astronomiegeschichte in Quellentexten: von Hesiod bis Hubble. Heidelberg, Berlin Oxford. Spectrum,
Akad. Verl.
Hartner Willy (1979) The Young Avestian Calendar and the Antecedents of Precession, Journal for History of Astronomy 10
Hunger, Hermann (2006) Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia. Volume VI: Goal Year Texts. Denkschriften
der phil.-hist. Klasse 346. Austrian Academy of Sciences Press.
Jones, Alexander (2006) The Astronomical Inscription from Keskintos, Rhodes. Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeome-
try, Special Issue, Vol. 6, No 3, pp. 213-220
Krusch, Bruno (1938) Studien zur christlich-mittelalterlichen Chronologie: die Entstehung unserer heut. Zeitrechn. I. Victori-
us; Ersatz der fehlerhaften Ausg. Mommsens in d. M.G. II. Dionysius Exiguus, d. Begründer der christlichen Ära.
Berlin: de Gruyter
Mosshammer, Alden A. (2009) The Easter Computus and the Origins of the Christian Era. Oxford University Press.
Nilsson, Martin Persson (1988) Geschichte der griechischen Religion: Die hellenistische und römische Zeit. C.H Beck
Noone, Richard W. (1997) 5/5/2000. Ice. The Ultimate Disaster. Three Rivers Press. 1997.

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 22-32

32 Sepp Rothwangl

Peitz, Wilhelm M. S.I. (1960) Dionysius Exiguus-Studien, Neue Wege der philologischen und historischen Text- und
Quellenkritik. Berlin
Pillinger, Renate J. (2011) Dead Sea Scrolls and Early Christian Art. The Dead Sea Scrolls in Context. Integrating the Dead
Sea Scrolls in the Study of Ancient Texts, Languages, and Cultures. Volume Two. Brill.
Pingree, David. Precession and Trepidation in Indian Astronomy before A.D. 1200. Journal for the History of Astronomy, Vol.
3
Pingree, David (1968) The Thousands of Abu Mashar. The Warburg Institute. London.
Pingree, David (1976) The Recovery of early Greek astronomy from India, Journal for the History of Astronomy, Bd. 7, ,
S. 112.
Ptolemäus. (1963) Handbuch der Astronomie (Almagestum). Deutsche Übersetzung v. Karl Manitius. Leipzig.
Ratzinger Joseph, Pope Benedikt XVI. (2012) Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives.
John of Patmos. Revelation. Bible Browser Basic Home Page.
http://www.stg.brown.edu/webs/bible_browser_message.html
Rothwangl, Sepp (2004) Consideration of the Origin of the Yearly Count in the Julian and Gregorian Calendars. Cosmology
Through Time. Ancient and Modern Cosmologies in the Mediterranean Area. G. Giobbi S. Colafrancesco (Editor).
Mimesis.
Schnabel, Paul (1968) Berossos und die Babylonisch-Hellenistische Literatur. Hildesheim.
Schwartz, E. (1905) Christliche und jüdische Ostertafeln. Abhandlungen der Göttinger Gelehrten Gesellschaft.
Staehlin, Ernst (1960) Die Wiederbringung aller Dinge. Rektoratsrede, gehalten zur Jahresfeier der Universität Basel am 18.
November
Strohm, Harald (2008) Mithra. Oder: Warum ‚Gott Vertrag‘ beim Aufgang der Sonne in Wehmut zurückblickte. Fink
Verlag. München
Verbrugghe, Gerald and John M. Wickersham (2001) Berossus and Manetho, Introduced and Translated. Native Traditions
in Ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt. University of Michigan Press.
Waerden, Bartel L. van der (1952) Das Große Jahr und seine Ewige Wiederkehr. Hermes 80.
Waerden, Bartel Leendert, van der (1980) The Conjunction of 3102 BC. Centaurus. International Magazine of the History of
Science and Medicine, 24
Wallis, Faith (editor) (1999) Beda Venerabilis. De temporum ratione. Liverpool Univ. Press.
Wallraff, Martin (2006) Julius Africanus und die christliche Weltchronik. Walter de Gruyter.

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 22-32

 SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 33-38
Copyright © 2015 SC
Open Access. Printed in Greece. All Rights Reserved.

Aesthetic resources of social survival and sustainable develop-

ment: the beauty in Culture

Vladimir I. Ionesov
Samara State Institute of Culture, Samara, Russia & Samara Society for Cultural Studies,
PO Box 3004 RU 443099, Samara, Russia, (ionesov@mail.ru)

Received: 08/02/2015
Accepted: 28 /02/2015

ABSTRACT

The aim of this article is study of the phenomenon of beauty in culture and aesthetic resources of social
survival in changing world. In the broadest sense, beauty is a category indicating complete harmony in an
object, based on an ideal correspondence of form and concept. Liberated by beauty, man recovers his lost
link with nature and extends the boundaries of his existence. Aesthetic manifestations are very important
resource of overcoming of crisis and social trials. Focusing on the character of phenomenological essence of
beauty in culture the study outlines how aesthetic means influence on cultural process and how cultural
process determines the art-creativity. Based on ideas of F.Dostoevsky, V. Solovyev, A. Camus this article
develops the phenomenological view at nature and social mission of beauty in culture. The beauty and
ritual-mythological creativity are saving lighthouses for the rebellious spirit and crisis-ridden consciousness
in the changing culture. Moreover the aesthetic process we can define as the special strategy of culture's
survival and as cultural paradigm. It allows us to understand also how to exploit the crisis points and
transitional situations in culture.

KEYWORDS: beauty as concept, history of culture, myth, ritual, art-creativity, transformation, survival.
34
1. INTRODUCTION
Since Culture has existed, a great multitude of words
have sprung from men’s lips, a huge variety, simple
and complicated, sonorous and so-so: but probably
none of them can compare in force, profundity and
inherent sense with the concept of beauty.
Anyone who has ever tried to capture the sense of
beauty has floundered or sunk into aria pedantry. As
one of the ancient Chinese wise men was warning:
“Approach [beauty] from where you will, from be-
fore or behind, you will see neither a beginning nor
an end” [Cited in Tkachenko 1990, p. 212]. The surest
way to put anyone to shame in the face of the truth is
to allow him to report on the subject of beauty. Beau-
ty cannot be proven: it must be seen, heard, felt, for
it is itself a demonstration. The paradox of beauty
has silenced even the most talkative. This is what
that ancient Chinese tradition by Lao-Tsi of tells us
(Cited in Tkachenko 1990, p.212):
Begin to analyze a five-colored ornament –
your eyes will be dazzled,
Begin to distinguish the sounds in five-toned music –
your ears will buzz,
Start to tease apart the five senses –
you will be torn apart.
But the temptation of the handsome is too great,
and will always prompt people to analyze. It could
scarcely be otherwise, for this is a topic that deserves
to be talked about, even at the risk of scorching one's
wings on the way to the sun.
The history of world culture is a history of a
thorny way of man looking for freedom, order in the
world and social harmony. Ideal beauty is the em-
bodiment of the order in the world. The factor of
beauty has always been an extraordinarily signifi-
cant accompaniment of the cultural and historical
process. It strengthened the fundamental basis of
cultural life. The necessity of beauty showed itself
especially brightly on historical overbanks, and in
the situations of changing of vital cycles of culture.
Saving force of beauty often retained culture from
disintegration and exposed the hidden possibilities
of its spiritual revival and self-developing. Beauty is
a powerful, but, unfortunately, still not enough real-
ized resource of cultural practice and multicultural
teaching. The history of beauty is a school of thought
and culture of peacemaking, the cleanest source of
philosophy of kindness, love, peace, nonviolence
and tolerance. And that is why turn to beauty is an
important factor of development of cultural policy,
in general, and multicultural creativity, in particular.
Actually, all the historical experience of humanity
shows that exactly in beauty or in ‘the imaginative
Vladimir I. Ionesov
absolute’, as J.E. Golosovker would say, there is spir-
itual nucleus of the cultural identity of different
people, peoples and generations (Golosovker 1987).
2. BEAUTY AS CONCEPT
A short look at beauty in a dialogic space of culture
and in the context of philosophical-anthropological
comprehension of aesthetic opinions and cultural-
historical landscapes of different epochs is exposed
in this article. Thus, I tried to generalize estimations
and interpretations of beauty as the phenomenon of
culture and artistic paradigm, existing in the history
of social thought. The maintenance of category of
wonderful in the history of world culture opens up by
the example of different artistic traditions.
It becomes more and more obvious, that in the ba-
sis of artistic myth creating there is the fundamental
man’s orientation on beauty as a strong point of cul-
ture in world transformation and in strategy of sur-
vival of humanity.
It should be noted that the look at beauty repre-
sented in the article, is just a look, and it’s sure not
complete understanding of wonderful. It’s just a look,
as we presumptuously suppose, at the rootage of
culture. In fact there is too much noise on mobile
branches of cultural life, in order to hear a quiet
voice of the truth, even if this voice speaks to us in
language of beauty.
The leaves of life move too much, and they don’t
allow us to see what lies at the basis. All that lies at
the basis is unattainable, and all the unattainable can
not be grasped by a sense, its destiny is different - to
be a guide-book in the gloomy distances of human
life. Attractive power of beauty as a spiritual force of
culture shows up exactly in the fact that the world of
wonderful remarkably incarnates the triumph of life
in its untiring opposition to death. In culture the
beauty is a life-asserting ideal, saving lighthouse, the
sense of which is in the process of the constant ap-
proaching to him, but not in his conquest.
Surely, we should confess that the manifestations
of beauty in this world are exceptionally many. We
find the beauty in nature, in people, in culture... But
what is it that makes us consider that so many dif-
ferent phenomena are equally beautiful? What is
beauty?
The scrutinizer we try to analyze beauty in detail,
the less of it we see. Analysis and comparison are
only the methods of cognition, but they are not the
knowledge itself of subject of our reflections. Analy-
sis breaks up the wholeness. We can see the truth
only in distance from us, but not nearby. To under-
stand the truth does not mean to see it in details. The
closer we get to the beauty, the less of it we notice. It
is better to look at it from a long way off. Beauty is
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2015), pp. 33–38
AESTHETIC RESOURCES OF SOCIAL SURVIVAL AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
best seen against an ugly background. It is the ugly
and unsatisfactory that makes us notice beauty.
If we enter the world of beauty, we do not notice
it, because we are inside it. We watch at beauty
when we are standing on unbeautiful side, i.e. when
we much strongly need beauty. The beauty is way of
harmony and reconciliation in culture. Every art-
manifestation presents re-integration and admiration
of beauty. Music is integrity of diverse sounds, poet-
ry is integrity of words, dance is integrity of mo-
tions, painting is integrity of images and colours,
and sculpture is integrity of shape and space.
It seems that while creating beauty, a human be-
ing creates his own environment of survival. The
more beauty surrounds him, the more living com-
pleteness it becomes for him. Maximum beauty is
maximum genuine life. Thus, beauty is life itself.
It is another question concerning the sense of
beauty. Why we are opening the beauty in ancient
figures, for example the armless Aphrodite of Melos
(2nd century BC), whereas modern armless statues
seem ugly to us? Why the ruins of Athens’ Acropolis
are magnificent for us, but ruined, semi-destroyed or
unfinished modern houses are ugly for our percep-
tion? Probably, there are several reasons:
1. Beauty is always perceived as wholeness, in
context of time and space. Lost antiquity is
archaic in its sense. And its artefacts (the re-
mains of matter) must correlate with its ar-
chaic essence (the remains of historical time).
The amount of object’s shape and material
depends on that of the epoch, preserved.
Living history and the spirit of the epoch are
seen in those artifacts, while modern shabby
or old-fashioned things break up the whole-
ness, correspondence and order of our days,
thus becoming ugly.
2. There is another reason as well. We see the
creative living side of the artifacts, no matter
how damaged they are, because everything
that can be destroyed is destroyed and only
pieces of life have remained. It is they that
we percept as an archaic wholeness. The ar-
chaic things are integral due to their vivid
power prevailing over death. Life and death
merge there, making up a binary opposition.
That is why they are so distinctly seen for us.
Any an archaic thing, even it if broken, revives
our knowledge of the epoch (i.e. it revives the histor-
ical spirit/sense). On the contrary, every a modern
broken thing decreases this knowledge. The last
pieces of object express the death, destroy and chaos.
Besides, an archaic thing does not need to be utilitar-
ian or functional, whereas a modern thing should be
one. Seeing a modern broken thing, we see its harm-
ful and destructive side, as it breaks the integrity and
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2015), pp. 33–38
35
real order. Any damage ousts it from the functional
context of life, opposing it to life. Beauty is always
benefiting. However, not every benefit is beauty al-
ways. Thus, beauty is not bound within a thing, its
shape etc. If Aphrodite of Melos were our contempo-
rary, we would hardly think her to be beautiful.
Thus, we can determine the beauty (in the broad-
est sense) as a category indicating complete harmony
in an object, based on an ideal correspondence of
form and concept. As Vladimir Solovyev put it, “we
must define beauty as the transformation of material
through the incarnation in it of another, transcend-
ent principle” (Solovyev 1990, p.358).
In general we can also distinguish three types of
beauty: (1) emotional; (2) physical, and (3) spiritual.
Of course, no one kind of beauty can exist separate-
ly. We can only speak of one or another manifesta-
tion of beauty being dominant. But the highest form
of beauty is the union of the three in one. In Christi-
anity, this is reflected in the famous Trinity: God the
father, God the son and God the Holy Ghost.
The existence of beauty is bound up with such
universal human values as truth, love and goodness.
Truth shows itself through beauty, beauty shows
itself through love, love shows itself through good-
ness, goodness shows itself through truth. This is the
path to human salvation, the “bridge leading [man]
from the kingdom of necessity to the kingdom of
liberty” and true harmony.
Dostoevsky says, “Beauty is always useful”. “The
need for beauty develops when a person is at odds
with reality, in disharmony, in conflict, in other
words, when he is most alive” (Cited in Stolovich
1994, p.344-345). Liberated by beauty, man recovers
his lost link with nature and extends the boundaries
of his existence.
In beauty, everything attains its culmination and
acquires its true identity for man: work becomes cre-
ation, the output of labour becomes the products of
art, feelings become love, duty becomes goodness,
need becomes freedom, knowledge becomes truth,
form becomes harmony and concepts become hu-
manism (Ionesov, 1999). In beauty man brings the
world into harmony. This is why beauty always
brings people good health, peace joy and self-
fulfillment. In beauty our brain is feeling, our feels
are thinking.
3. IMAGES OF BEAUTY IN CULTURE
Human being has always tried to make beauty his
companion in life, hoping that it will bring fortune
and success and protect him from evil. Hence he
gives a new-born child the handsomest name, so that
beauty will always be with him. Sometimes a hand-
some name has awaited as yet unborn owner. The
36
beauty that the imagination of oriental man has in-
stilled into given names! They are a veritable bou-
quet of sophistication and brilliance the like of which
is hard to find. Here are some examples: Jamal is Ar-
abic for beauty; Kamil is Arabic for perfection; Aini-
jamal is Persian for the essence of beauty; Ainikamil is
Persian for the essence of perfection Burkhan is Ara-
bic for beauty qua demonstration, light, protection;
Gulchekhra is Persian for a face like a flower; Gulsara
is Persian for the freshest, finest bloom or the flower
lying a top the basket, Saonat is Tajik for art or beau-
ty; Nigina is Persian for a precious stone (Gafurov,
1987).
It is absolutely no coincidence that in the lan-
guages of many peoples beauty, love and goodness
combine into something integral and indivisible. In
Russian culture such words are blagoobrazje and blag-
olepie, in ancient Greek Kalokayathia in ancient Chi-
nese shan-mei, in ancient Iranian (Zoroastrian) hvare-
nab.
It is instructive that all these words trace their
birth back to distant historical times. Through them,
our ancestors seem to be telling us that beauty must
not be dissociated from goodness or goodness from
beauty. “And if the ancient trust in beauty leaves us,
what will become of us?” writes Averintsev (1988).
The contemplation of beauty is often regarded as
admiration or veneration - veneration of a mystery, a
miracle, a god, for “beauty is there where God
dwells with man”, as the “Tales of Ancient Times” say.
Thus whenever he contemplates beauty man per-
ceives truth and hence experiences spiritual joy, en-
chantment and veneration It is in and through beau-
ty that man becomes truly happy. Beauty is a verita-
ble miracle-working force. It is no accident that in
Russian the word “wonderful” is a synonym of
“beautiful, handsome fine”.
Another representation of beauty in world-wide
culture has been light vanquishing darkness and
bestowing life and well-being. The ancient East of-
fers the best example:
My eyes wish to see the sun
I wish to be sated with light!
If the darkness will withdraw,
What radiance there will be.
- exclaims Gilgamesh in the famous Mesopo-
tamian epic.
The starry sky overhead has since time immemo-
rial been taken as a source of light, beauty, harmony,
order and might. The image of beauty was assimilat-
ed to that of the heavenly beacon especially clearly
in Zoroastrian tradition Hvarenah, the bearer of god-
ly beauty, is hymned in the Zend-Avesta as the radi-
Vladimir I. Ionesov
ant creation of Akhura-Mazda (the most-high)
(Hymn to Hvarenab, 19,I,10) (Avesta,1990). The hand-
some As-hi goddess of fate and fortune, is consid-
ered to be Just as radiant, “shining down blessedness
on men and giving good glory” (Hymn to As-hi, 17,I,
6) (Avesta, 1990).
Really, history has unremittingly attuned the hu-
man mind to the pure perception of beauty. World
history is not only a great poet but also a brilliant
artist. Thanks to it we are better aware that genuine
harmony in diversity can emerge only in dialogue
among the cultures of the widest variety of peoples.
Only through dialogue among diverse traditions,
lifestyles and values can the culture of each individ-
ual nation assume its rightful place under the sun
and thus truly be brought within the reach of all
mankind.
Beauty in its ultimate manifestation is always in-
imitable, while the ugly is characterless just as light
enables us to distinguish between things, pinpoint-
ing their differences, but darkness neutralizes those
differences, reducing them to an absence of charac-
ter. Consequently, culture manifests in beauty al-
ways affirms nations individuality and establishes
the colour and ornamentation of that individuality
on the palette of universal human values. But any
individuality is based on knowledge, of oneself,
one's culture, ones heritage and so forth. And
knowledge is the comprehension of differences. And
any difference is comprehended through compari-
son. Consequently, the beauty of a culture, its na-
tional coloring and attractiveness cannot be en-
hanced without opening that culture up to the
world, without cultural dialogue or comparisons
(Ionesov 1999).
The most important means of dialogue between
cultures is art. Through art, culture reveals beauty to
us. But, this is a two-way process. Art affirms itself
in beauty, beauty affirms itself in art. Beauty and art
are as twins. Both are born in the imagination. A
lively imagination is always a spiritual force shaping
the plenitude of daily existence. Art, as the top of
spirituality, is always oriented towards beauty on
N.A. Berdyaev (1994). And it is only in art that the
spirit apprehends the plenitude and sense - in other
words the purpose - of existence. In works of art,
beauty looks us in the face, for there “the spirit be-
comes visible” (Plotinus Enneads, 31,3,21in Henry &
Schwyzer, 1982). And that brings harmony to peo-
ple's lives, a fusion of the spiritual and the material,
the hidden and the overt, the finite and the infinite,
the temporal and the eternal.
Art is always peace-loving and by its very nature
more humanistic than any other thing. A need for
high art is often more keenly felt at dramatic turns in
history. Not a single historic turning point in the de-
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2015), pp. 33–38
AESTHETIC RESOURCES OF SOCIAL SURVIVAL AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 37

velopment of society has occurred without art and,
through art the beauty to support it. All revolutions
are nihilistic, but for all their nihilism every one cre-
ates its own art since the romance of revolution can
exist only in art. Art helps to overcome dread, dread
of solitude, dread of the undefined, for it provides
what people need what they lack. What soothes
them “While we are enjoying something beautiful
our entire nature is acting in its indivisible whole-
ness, integrity, “wrote the Russian philosopher N.I.
Nadezhdin (2000, p.369). In art, man finds relief
from the world's alienation “Art shows us, through
art-experience of overcoming, the limits of the possi-
ble in life” (Kraus 1991, p.249) and makes of man the
true creator of daily existence, cultivating in him,
according to Dostoevsky, a “universal responsive-
ness” (Cited in Stolovich 1994, p.351).
Painting possesses especial emotional and inspira-
tional force. Everything is subordinated to harmony
and consonance peace: vanquishes violence; light,
darkness; hood, life, death. Indeed, “the art of paint-
ing is the ability to hold the whole world in one's
hands” (Dong Qigang) (Cited in Malyavin 1995,
p.187), and when the world founders in confronta-
tion, sometimes only the artist can save it from de-
struction, as history eloquently testifies.
Who saved the culture of Egypt, ancient Greece
and Rome and the civilizations of the Incas, the Ma-
ya and the Aztecs for us? Was it not first and fore-
most the creative artists, known and unknown,
whose works, overcoming time, have brought the
vivid rays of light down to us? Greedy Time has car-
ried off all it can, but art has proved stronger than
Time. History teaches us that life can overcome
death if it can turn to art for support.
4. CONCLUSION
Beauty teaches us not selfishness, but brotherhood.
Some years ago Albert Camus remarked that “beau-
ty has never yet enslaved a single person. On the
contrary, for millennia it has brought comfort, every
day, every moment, to millions of the oppressed,
and has at times set some of them free forever.” He
drew a very important conclusion: “Beauty is bound
to help ease man's pains and his attainment of free-
dom.” People increasingly need such help during
these transitional stages of their history (Kamyu
(Camus) 1990, p.373-374).
Where do we turn in time of trouble? To our im-
aginations, which make up for foundering reality; to
the beauty of an image or an ideal. Beauty, surely, is
the embodiment of eternity, of the regular, of order,
of harmony. And where else can man turn, given the
constant changeability of this transitional era, when
the old is everywhere at variance with the new,
when all is unstable, all is in flux, all is indetermi-
nate? In saying “to beauty, of course” I make no mis-
take. In time of disaster, want and fear of the future,
the need for art grows deeper and stronger than
when life is easy (Kraus 1991, p.245).
The first humans turned to the beauty of nature to
save themselves from their physical weakness. The
early prophets, Moses, Zarathustra, Jesus Christ and
Mohammed in their confrontations with paganism
drew on the beauty of the godhead. The artists of the
Renaissance drew on the beauty of ancient realism in
their struggles against mediaeval dogma. The crea-
tors of science drew on the beauty of reason as they
steered culture into the technological age. All of us
today at twenty-first century draw on the beauty of
culture in our efforts to integrate the world anew.
Beauty is directly related to the present-day re-
surgence of historical and cultural heritage of hu-
mankind. The beauty embodied in the architecture
of World Heritage of has turned it into an eternal,
indivisible city, and at time of global transformations
it remains for many, many people a solitary source
of comfort and support during the harsh years of
change. And when we, reviving culture, turn to
beauty I involuntarily recall the words of Dostoev-
sky: “If among a people there are persisted the ideal
of and a need for beauty, this means there is also a
need for health, for something regular, and the fur-
ther development of that people is thus assured”
(1972-1990, p.94). Who knew better than Dostoevsky
that a return to beauty is the most important condi-
tion for the resurgence of the “good reality” and,
ultimately, the salvation of the world?

REFERENCES
Averentsev, S.S (1988) Krasota kak svyatost, Kurier UNESCO, no. 7, July, pp. 9-13.
Avesta, (1990) Izbranye gimny. Translation in Russian and commentary by IM Steblin-Kamenskiy, Adib, Dushanbe.
Berdyaev, N.A (1994) Filosofia tvorchestva, kultury i iskusstva, Iskusstvo, Moskva, Tom 1-2.
Dostoevsky, F.M (1972-1990) Polnoe sobranie sochinenii v 30 tomakh, tom (vol.) XVIII, Nauka, Leningrad.
Gafurov, A (1987) Imya i istoriya. Ob imenakh arabov, persov, tadjikov i tiurkov, Slovar, Nauka, Moskva.
Golosovker, Y.E (1987) Logika mifa, Nauka, Moskva.
Ionesov, V.I (1999) Beauty as a Manifestation of Peace, International Teacher, no.1, pp.11-13.
Kamyu, A (1990) Buntuiuschiy chelovek, Politicheskaya literatura, Moskva.
Kraus, V (1991) Nigilism i idealy, Raduga, Moskva.

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2015), pp. 33–38

38 Vladimir I. Ionesov

Malyavin, V.V (1995) Kitay v XVI-XVII vekakh. Traditsiya i kultura, Iskusstvo, Moskva.
Nadezhdin, N.I (2000) Estetica. Filisofiya, Socnineniya v dvukh tomakh i odnoi knige, Russkiy Khristianskiy Gumanitarny
Institut, Sankt-Peterburg.
Henry, P & Schwyzer, H.R (eds) (1982) Plotinus, Enneads, vol. III, eds., Oxford, UK.
Solovyev, V.S (1990) Sochineniya, Mysl, Moskva.
Stolovich, L.N. (1994) Krasota. Dobro. Istina. Ocherk istorii estechicheskoi aksiologii, Respublika, Moskva.
Tkachenko, G.A. (1990) Kosmos. Myzyka. Ritual. Mif i estetika v “Liuyshi-Chuntsiu”, Nauka, Moskva.

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2015), pp. 33–38

 SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2, (2015), pp. 39-46
Copyright © 2015 SC
Open Access. Printed in Greece. All Rights Reserved.

The romantic movement on European arts:

a brief tutorial review

Anna Lazarou
Academy of Athens, 84 Solonos Str., Athens 10680, Greece
(lazarou.anna@gmail.com; lazarou@academyofathens.gr)

Received: 10/01/2015
Accepted: 25/02/2015

ABSTRACT

The movement of romanticism in art (18th-19th c) is briefly reviewed. This artistic movement
institutionalized freedom of personal expression of the artist and presented various art styles, which were
rooted mainly in topics of the past. One of the manifestations of the romantic spirit was Neoclassicism which
was based on copies of works of Greek and Roman antiquities. Romantic painters, musicians and architects
have left as heritage an amazing wealth of art works.

KEYWORDS: art, architecture, music, romance, artistic movement, neoclassicism.

40 Anna Lazarou

1. INTRODUCTION his vision was a European empire with its capital

The period from the second half of the 18 th century Paris. The economic downturn that led to wars and
until the first half of the 19th century in western Eu- social changes created by the Industrial Revolution,
rope was of a multidimensional character both in art made Europeans to feel trapped by events that ex-
and in other fields of intellectual life, expressed by ceeded the control, which could not be explained by
the romance, the first great movement of ideas of rational perception. Even Napoleon's career was for
that era e.g. architecture, music, literature (Blayney many a supernatural power and his defeat, a divine
Brown 2001). Originally it was developed in Great judgment (Fig.1). Another factor which determined
Britain and Germany, to spread later mainly in the character of the second half of the 18th century.
France and Spain. First was a literary trend, howev- was the great colonial expansion -especially the Brit-
er, been extended to both visual arts and music. It ish in America and India- and seafood exploratory
followed historically the Enlightenment period and trips. Missions accompanying artists and scientists
opposed the aristocracy of the time, being linked as shown by the many illustrations (Bazin, 1964).
strongly with the ideas of Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
The main characteristic of romanticism is the em-
phasis to the challenge of strong emotion through art
as well as greater freedom in form, relative to the
more classical conceptions. In romance, the domi-
nant element is the emotion instead of logic. Roman-
ticism was the beginning connected with the old
"Romance", the stories of knights, adventures and
romances, that the feature was the high sense, the
improbable, the excessive, the unreal, contradict the
serious and rational view of life. That is why the
word "romantic" appears in sentences with the
meaning of fake, counterfeit, fictitious (Furst, 1969).
In the age of rationalism (17th c.) and in a world
dominated by class and absolute truth, the word Figure 1. Francisco Goya, The 2nd of May 1808, oil in canvas,
romance means chimera, the bombast, the ridiculous 1814, 266Χ345 cm., Prada Museum Madrid
(Hampshire, 1961). The term "romantic" is not so
from the beginning a term of art criticism. Indicates
basically a way of thinking that is directed towards 3. IDEAS AND TRENDS OF ROMANCE
the fantastic and emotional. Here we unfold in a Romanticism as a philosophical and literary move-
brief manner the most significant stages of this peri- ment was created as response to the intellectual
od and present characteristic works of art discussed movement of enlightenment and classicism of the
in the frame of that era. Historical context, architec- 18th century. Main manifestations -which will be
ture, paintings and music are touched on a summary discussed more here- was the subjective mentality,
of tutorial style that critically describes the motives and individual freedom.
and reasoning behind those. The expression of dreams, imagination and emo-
tion become an institution in the art of romance. For
2. HISTORICAL CONTEXT romantics, the imagination was the most precious
gift of the artist, a substantial gift, but ultimately in-
The first and most critical historical events of the
explicable, and could cause not only ecstatic joy, but
period was the conquest of American independence
nightmares and despair. Often fantastic visions are
in 1776 and the French Revolution in 1789 (Weiner,
inspired by the divine.
2005). In these two events a desire for freedom and
In romance nature was celebrated, as well as, in-
social equality was dominated that led to an utopia.
stinct and heroism (individual and collective) and
While democratic America - despite the existence of
general human struggle against all forms of oppres-
colored slaves – was exhibited in Europe as a beacon
sion. From the mid-18th century in Germany, liter-
of freedom and democracy, hopes for an ideal socie-
ary work does not only imitate nature, but also the
ty in France vanished. The revolution initially de-
recording of the creative power of man and his re-
generated by terrorism which led to confrontations
flections over this power (Preisendanz, 1977). So the
opposing factions and many people in guillotine.
work of art, according to Goethe, is a creation of the
Napoleon Bonaparte then appeared first as a hero
human spirit that does not imitate anything, but cre-
who would restore order and then as a great tyrant
ates "a little world in itself “, organized according to
who drew in warfare all the European powers, since

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2015), pp. 39–46

The Romantic Movement on European arts: a brief tutorial review
their own laws. On the one hand completely frees art
from any imitation of nature and the other considers
this small world according to its own laws (Fig.2) He
argues that "the perfect work of art is the work of the
human spirit" and in this sense is also the work of
nature. Many times it is not recommended the natu-
ral order, but the artificial confusion, not the illusion
of necessity, but the semblance of chance, not har-
mony, but the discord, not the whole, but the quote,
not imagination for the truth of the real, but unlim-
ited arbitrariness and confusion that has organized
structure and symmetry, as chaos distinguished by
art (Preisendanz, 1977).
Figure 2. Jacques-Louis David, The Death of Marat, 1793. Oil on
canvas, 165x128 cm., Royal Museums of Fine Arts, Brussels
The cult of the hero stereotype associated with
romance, leads to the greatest of all romantic para-
doxes, which is the main cause of frustration and
failure sentiment felt by so many of the Romantics.
Another feature of romantic is the desire for the dis-
tant and exotic. The descriptions of artists and in-
vented nostalgia of the authors illustrate in the best
possible way the extremes which could reach their
imagination on this subject.
So, distant places changed, like the distant past, to
destinations of romantic getaway, facing similar ex-
periences as trips to the discovery of our inner self.
The meetings (real or imagined) with distant peo-
ples, cultures and places, symbolized the renewal
sought for their project and the escapism and free-
dom seeking in their life.
They believed that through the acquaintance with
these civilizations it would give birth to a pluralist
culture, where the classical tradition would domi-
nate.
They sought from distant people not only new
styles and themes, but a purer and honest lifestyle.
Under the influence of the ideas of this movement a
41
nostalgia for the past was created and came to light
old acquaintances and unknown treasures of human
history, monuments mentioned in mythology, histo-
ry, religion, legends and folk poetry (Fig.3, 4).
Figure 3. Francisco Goya, La maja desnuda, 1798-1800, Oil on
canvas, 97CH190 m., Prado Museum, Madrid
Figure 4. Francisco Goya, The dressed Maha, 1798-1805, Oil on
canvas, 95x190 cm., Prado Museum, Madrid
4. ROMANTICISM IN THE
DEVELOPMENT OF THE ARTS
In art the romance was not expressed in a single
style. The emphasis on subjective mentality resulted
in freedom of artistic expression i.e. pluralism. This
pluralism of expression included both modern fea-
tures, and manifestations of previous epochs. Great
source of inspiration is the Greek and Roman antiq-
uity. So, techniques of the past were studied, such as.
the Romanesque and Gothic art, painting of Michel-
angelo, the Mannerism and the Baroque painting of
Rubens.
By turning to classical antiquity neoclassicism was
developed, which fits into the broader context of the
romantic spirit. This movement reflected the return
to architectural types in the forms of other artistic
expressions, but also the lifestyle of Greek and Ro-
man antiquity (Turner, 1996; Hamilton, 1970). The
superiority of the ancient remains strong and we all
want to follow their example. Their influence emerg-
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2015), pp. 39–46
42
es particularly in France, where the monarchical re-
gime imposed autocracy in politics and literature.
Unlike in England, the political organization and
literary tastes were more ingenuity and showed
some disdain in neoclassical rules and general belief
in logic shaken from their pre-romantics (Furst,
2003).
Pre-Romantics looked natural and spontaneous as
the innermost emotions, and the outside world. The
flow of sad feelings, the expression of emotion,
shady, full of mysterious landscapes, the magnificent
expressions innate melancholy, herald the romantic
style. Furthermore, they were interested in fields
quite unlike false urban and especially luminal life,
as the nature and simple, primitive society. The ob-
servation of nature leads to the identification of its
potential and organic character and the unremitting
and core changes that are so diverse
Specifically, the philosophy of nature in the Ger-
man romanticism is an important chapter in the his-
tory of Western esotericism because philosophers of
nature are all Theosophists (Gardiner 1969). The ro-
mantic movement is the continuation of pre-
romanticism, but presents a new element: the evalu-
ation of the imagination. Simultaneously, the artists
were seeking creative solutions to replace the domi-
nant forms of the classical tradition. Below are ex-
amples of features romantic works.
5. PAINTING
The revelation of the ego is the heart of romantic art.
the seascape of Turner entitled the Snow Storm:
Steam-Boat off a Harbour's Mouth, proclaims his own
vision of nature (Fig.5).
Figure 5. Turner J.M.W, Snow Storm: Steam-Boat off a Harbour's
Mouth, 1842. Oil on canvas, 91.5x122 cm., Tate Gallery, London
The image surprised with sweeping twirling sea,
sky and snow showing. The turner placed between
the spectacle and the spectator becomes the inter-
preter who reached the limits of human endurance,
seeking the truth.
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2015), pp. 39–46
Anna Lazarou
Many romantics shared belief in the divine inspi-
ration and the gift of vision. This feeling led Philipp
Otto Runge to create a completely original landscape
painting, in which the natural world is broken into
symbolic components. He was a great painter and
theorist of colour, representing the traditional theos-
ophy and mysticism (Littlejohns, 2003). He agreed
with turner that it was not necessary artistic lan-
guage always understood by everyone else. for
Blake, imagination was a gift of substantial and un-
explained, who painted visions inspired also by his
devine, like other romantics, understood faith as a
living force, were released from the precepts of the
church and the concept of punishment in christiani-
ty, as incompatible with the romantic element of
personal fulfillment. The brutish state had made
man after original sin expressed vigorously by the
rampant attitude and sullen gaze hero Nempouchant-
nezar (Fig.6).
Fig 6. William Blake, the two forms of Los with Enitharmon,
plate 100, Jerusalem, 1804-1820. Copper engraving plate, water
colours and gold 14.6Cx22.2 cm. Center British Art Yale
University, Paul Mellon Collection, New Haven.
Goya was a dreamer surrendered to the
imagination, explorer of the subconscious and
strict judge of insanity and superstitions of the
time was equivalent of Blake. Characteristic
works are the Pilgrimage to St. Isidore's Hermitage,
the Saturn eating his children (Fig 7), the bedlam,
and his last self-portrait. the satirical etchings
titled whim was absurd questions which were
designed to expose to the public the wealth of
the follies and errors are common in every soci-
ety sensational is the work of the 3rd may 1808
(Fig.8) that records the execution of innocent by
the troops of Napoleon.
The Romantic Movement on European arts: a brief tutorial review
Figure 7. Francisco Goya, Saturn, 1820-1823, oil on canvas, 146x83
cm, Prado Museum, Madrid)
Figure 8. Francisco Goya, The May 2, 1808, Oil on canvas, 1814,
266x345 cm., Prado Museum, Madrid
It was designed to perpetuate (with paintbrush)
the most notable and heroic actions against the ty-
rant of Europe. The central figure in place of Goya,
that the white shirt looks parody allegiance, pinning
fearful eyes of a faceless military detachment who
shoots and ready to add to the bloodied heap lying
in front of her. It expresses the ultimate frustration
for the ideals that had failed and the impoverish-
ment of the people. At this point, we could not omit
Géricault and the Raft of the Medusa that also shocked
the audience of his time. Other works inspired by
historical events are the massacre at Chios (Fig 9) by
Delacroix and Liberty leading the people (Fig.10).
43
Figure 9. Eugène Delacroix, Scenes from the Massacre of Chios,
1824. Oil on canvas, 419x354 cm., Louvre, Paris
Figure 10. Eugène Delacroix, The July 28, 1830: Liberty Leading the
People, 1830. Oil on canvas, 260x325 cm., Louvre Museum, Paris.
The latter shows a wild, inspired action featuring
topless freedom, who is not the absolute leader. It is
charming how mixed is the idealized and allegorical
element with the true.
However, Delacroix’s Sardanapalus, is the most
romantic work ever painted. It is pounding the sens-
es with the violence and brutality that characterizes
the work. The absurd composition and excessive
colours dazzle the viewer. All are freely (and uncon-
trolled) gliding and spinning and colour flows like
blood. All artistic rules have been removed.
6. ARCHITECTURE
The ideas of romance created problems for archi-
tects, since the dependence on customer require-
ments but also stylistic dictates of the time were
great. The values of Romanesque and Gothic archi-
tecture were studied and began to compete with
those of the classic. Beside the neoclassical is pre-
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2015), pp. 39–46
44
sented the neo-Gothic, the neo-Renaissance, the neo-
Byzantine and neo-Egyptian style. Each of these
styles could be used for a specific category of build-
ings, without this rule to be absolute. The churches
usually were built in Gothic style, because it was the
pace of the times considered as the "age of faith". For
theatres and operas were using usually the baroque
style, while for the palaces, mansions, academic
buildings were built in majestic rhythm of the Italian
Renaissance and neoclassical styles (Fig.11).
For example, the architecture of the churches, the
architects of the time chose between early Christian,
Byzantine and Western medieval standards. The Ca-
thedral of Marseilles Saint-Vincent-de-Paul (1855), a
work of Léon Vaudoyer's, combines with the Byzan-
tine elements, Gothic and Renaissance (Lejeune &
Sabatino, 2010).
Figure 11. Academy of Athens. The building was designed in 1859
by the Danish architect Theophil Hansen,. Funds had been
provided by the magnate Simon Sinas. Construction, Sculptures
and paintings were executed by famous artists (Ernst Ziller,
Leonidas Drosis, Piccarelli, Franz Melnitzky, Christian
Griepenkerl)
The High Court of Justice built by the architect G E
Street in 1882, with strict gothic elements shows the
mood of the architect to integrate the middle Ages to
modern social structures. Charles Robert Cockerell
(1788–1863 uses Greek, Roman, Baroque and Renais-
sance elements in the Asmolean museum at Oxford.
Luigi Canine builds a New Egyptian gate at villa
Borghese in Rome in 1828, in order to mark the
boundary between the new and the old grounds, in
1831 architect and archaeologist Luigi Canina de-
vised and built a scenographic gate in Egyptian
style, consisting of a short porch with rather stout
columns on each side of the way, with an obelisk
standing in front; the latter bears hieroglyphs in-
scribed only on its front side (see,
http://roma.andreapollett.com/S3/roma-co4.htm).
G.Sember (1803-1879) builds the new-Renaissance
opera in Dresden (Loffler, 2006; http://www.sights-
and-culture.com/Germany/dresden-semper-
opera.html). K.f. Sheinkel (1781-1841) used occasion-
ally items from various architectural orders (styles)
of the past, all his works are distinguished by a very
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2015), pp. 39–46
Anna Lazarou
personal sense of volume, balance, proportions, ac-
curacy in details. One of his works The Gendarmen-
markt in Berlin Theatre
(http://gendarmenmarkt.de/history-gendarmenmarkt-
berlin-mitte-english.htm) is a combination of rectangu-
lar forms, ensuring perfect visual effect of any point
someone observes. Ionic antis dominate the entrance
and the other classic architectural elements have a
simple geometry. Noteworthy is that for the con-
struction of public buildings architects remained
mostly faithful to the standards of classicism, while
for farmhouses (cottages) oriental architectural ele-
ments were used. The Gothic revival was soon
adopted as a dominant trend in the architecture of
the English-speaking world and to a lesser extent in
France and Germany. A typical example is the build-
ing of the English House of Commons (parliament) 1835
in London by Sir Charles Barry (1775-1860) and
A.W.N Pugin (1812-1852) (Gombrich, 1995) (Fig.12)
Figure 12. the Houses of Parliament, or the Palace, lies on the
Middlesex bank of the River Thames in the City of Westminster,
in central London. Present status is a (re)Construction made by
architect Charles Barry in the Perpendicular Gothic style, in 1840
and lasted for thirty years.
The new-Gothic architecture is associated with
romance and searching national traditions, by con-
trasting the uniqueness of the classic, the reaction to
the dominance of industrial production in the art,
with the restoration of medieval ruins, with the de-
sire the building to reveal the construction of struc-
ture and not the outer lining with elements foreign
to it
7. MUSIC
In the early 19th century the German romantic
opera is developed. The material is folklore, fairy
tales and the dramatized story. The nature (forest,
sea) plays a central role, as well as the supernatural
element with spirits and demonic forces. Typical is
the idea of redemption of man who has been in-
volved with sin and destiny. Elements of this type
The Romantic Movement on European arts: a brief tutorial review
are the prelude, the vernacular dialogue, scene and
aria, rich orchestration, the reminding patterns and
the vocal choirs. At the same time the comic opera
(operetta) develops influenced by the French Opera
comique, mixing of frolics up comedy jokes and
emotions that meet tastes of the German Biedermeier
movement (Michels, 1977). August Wilhelm von
Schlegel (1767- 1845), one of the founders of the
German Romantic Movement, as well as one of the
most prominent disseminators of its philosophy, not
only in Germany but also abroad and, most notably,
in Britain, believes that music is the highest of all the
arts, is the general art: "Every art is governed by music
and is the same great music". Music is not a means of
referring to something else beyond, such as lan-
guage. It is autonomous, pure and not related to imi-
tation and reflection. It affects on us without con-
quering the imagination through a fixed object
(Preisendanz, 1990). Romanticism in music is inau-
gurated by Beethoven. With his nine symphonies,
the mental conditions, the joys and sorrows of the
composer are disclosed in an intense expression. The
sensitivity reveals the innermost feelings. While the
old forms continue and expand, at same time new
forms are born, like a symphonic poem, the declara-
tory pattern of Weber and Wagner, and the constant
contemplation of Berlioz (in fact Berlioz’s own pas-
sionate feelings, and his behaviour, as recurrence in
all the movements of the symphonies, but embedded
in the romantic style of the era) (Holomon, 1989).
The Der Freischütz of Carl Maria von Weber (1821)
finds broad response as the first great German ro-
mantic opera with references to popular characters,
the full nature forests, superstitions and miracles
(Warrack, 1982).
A typical example of a free piece for piano is also
the Invitation to the Waltz of Weber. This work, like
the scintillating study Concerto in F minor has the
form and dramatic tone that distinguish generally all
his compositions. Songs by Schubert express the po-
etic spirit of this era fully completed as much as his
instrumental music too. Although Schubert in his
symphonies Symphony in C minor and Symphony in
Do major follows the classic spirit and form of Bee-
thoven’s Symphony, the style is romantic, "modern-
ist" as Schumann already called. For example, the
melody of the horn from the beginning of the Sym-
phony in C, with the romantic style, the swing of be-
tween major and minor way, is not a simple intro-
duction, as it would require the classical form of the
agreement, but an integrated independent image.
Also, the allegro and the following sections and
these are a series of such images separately (Nef,
1935). In pithy music of Beethoven contrasts playful,
artificial and conservative music of Rossini.
45
The Fantastic Berlioz Symphony reflects the gen-
eral spirit of the age. Unrivalled however is the vir-
tuosity of Liszt and Paganini. Chopin is magical, the
Mendelssohn classic-romantic love with the fantastic
element and Schumann poetic. The Mendelssohn
lived carefree in his own fantasy world, so he wrote
the masterly introduction to the Midsummer Night
attaches so faithfully the fantastic element of the po-
etry of Shakespeare. The other imports of Felix Men-
delssohn, The Hebrides, the Fingal’s Cave (1832), the
Calm Sea and Prosperous Voyage, Opus 27, are lively
and orchestral colourful richness. Romantic opera
writes Wagner and Verdi. A typical example of ori-
ental inspiration is Nabucco. The Ring Cycle of Wag-
ner is the ultimate expression of romantic total work
of art, and his work Meistersinger proclaims the free-
dom and independence of romantic art. Finally the
late romanticism, expressed formalistic and expres-
sionist aesthetics, historicism, naturalism and na-
tionalism, represented by Brahms, Franck and
Bruckner.
8. AESTHETIC AND IDEOLOGICAL
REQUEST POSED BY ROMANCE
As we have seen, the romance was a subversive re-
sponse to classicism and the existing order of things
in general. It did not propose a systematic program
and was a mix of views that defend freedom of ex-
pression and encouraged the artist to be addressed
directly to the feelings of the public. The new gener-
ation has chosen to explore the capabilities of emo-
tion and instinct more than the conscious mind and
focused mainly on dignity, pain, sadness, fear, joy,
humble, natural and idiosyncratic element and not
in obedience and refined ideal models. Victor Hugo
argued that "the richness and variety of expression and
experience more effectively reflect the complexity of the
world and of us from the cold formalism of classical dra-
ma." He recognized more the ability of ugly or gro-
tesque to stimulate the senses, in lieu the ability of
beauty to win admiration (Bleiny Brown, 2001). The
pioneers of German romanticism Herder and Schle-
gel, supported a world view, according to which
every culture and every society should be judged on
its own terms, and not in relation to the standards of
an alleged superior race. They were calling people to
broaden their horizons. Furthermore, the certainty of
the spiritual texture of nature, the reality of the
world, embraces the view that all knowledge and
science is not a depiction of an actual world subject-
ed to laws. The creation of the world is an endless
path of the spirit which is depicted by the "global
mind". People are even created through the unity of
all consciousness, that is actually part of a process
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2015), pp. 39–46
46 Anna Lazarou

with the interdependence of all spirits (Preisendanz, 9. CONCLUSION

1977).
Supplement of these considerations is the belief
that the creative imagination is the central spiritual
potential and therefore the beginning of each cosmic
creation. This is because the imagination is the basic
skill of consciousness and this ability is a universal
objective power of the human spirit.
With the amazing wealth of art works, with the wide
geographical and historical spread, with the variety
of the topics, the romance is an inexhaustible capital.
But the rooted cause of its eternal charm lies in its
same essential purpose. Leaving the confidence of
rationalism, romanticism opened wide the gates of
reviewing the reconsideration of each field: the aes-
thetic, metaphysical, religious, and political. It is a
movement that poses questions that often remain
unanswered.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I thank the anonymous reviewers for constructive comments.

REFERENCES
Blayney Brown, D (2001) Romanticism (art and ideas), Phaidon Press Limited, London.
Bent, I (1994) Music analysis in the 19th century: Hermeneutic approaches. Cambridge readings in the literature of music, 2
volumes, CUP
Bazin, G (1964) Development of 17th- And 18th-century Western Europe, Thames & Hudson, Oxford.
Furst, L. (1969) Romanticism in Perspective (London: MacMillan).
Gardiner, P. (1969) Nineteenth century philosophy, The Free Press, New York
Gombrich E. H (1995) The story of Art, 16th edition, Phaidon Press Ltd Text, London
Hamilton G.H (1970) 19th and 20th Century Art, Painting, Sculpture, Architecture. Harry N.Abrams, Inc, New York.
Hampshire S. (1961) the age of reason. 17th century philosophers, a mentor book (the new american library), sixth printing
edition .
Honour, H and Fleming, J (1982) a world history of art. john calman & king ltd., london.
Holomon, D. Kern (1989) Berlioz. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University press, USA.
Littlejohns, R (2003) Philipp Otto Runge's Tageszeiten and their relationship to romantic nature philosophy.(Critical Es-
say), Studies in Romanticism , Vol. 42, No. 1, 55-74.
Lejeune J-F and Sabatino, M (eds) (2010) Modern architecture and the mediterranean. Vernacular dialogues and contested
identties. Rutledge, USA.
Löffler F. (2006) Das alte Dresden – Geschichte seiner Bauten. 16th ed. Leipzig: Seemann.
Μichels, U. (1977) DTV-Atlas zur Musik II, Taf. u. Texte. Bärenreiter-Verlag: Deutscher Taschenbuch-Verlag, Kassel: 11th
ed.
Νef, K. (1935) An outline of the history of music. Columbia University Press.
Preisendanz, W. (1977) Wege des realismus. Fink, Munchen.
Turner J (editor) (1996) The dictionary of art, Macmillan,London
Warrack J(editor) (1982) Carl Maria von Weber: writings on music.CUP,UK.
Weiner R.I (2005) The Long 19th Century: European History from 1789 to 1917. Chantilly, VA: The Teaching Company.

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2015), pp. 39–46

 SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, Vol. 1, No 2 (2015) pp. 47-56
Copyright © 2015 SC
Open Access. Printed in Greece. All Rights Reserved.

The roles of observational astronomy in ancient Greece

Robert Hannah
Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences, The University of Waikato
Private Bag 3105, Hamilton 3240, New Zealand
(roberth@waikato.ac.nz)

Received: 16/02/2015
Accepted: 10/03/2015

ABSTRACT

This paper offers an investigation into the interface between science, in the form of astronomy, and culture,
in the form of religion and the calendar. Early societies made use of a variety of mechanisms to mark time,
based on the cycles of the sun, moon and stars, whether separately or in combination. In this paper I provide
a survey of the use of one of these cycles, namely that of the stars, in one ancient culture, that of the Greeks. I
show how gradually the night sky was mapped out with a number of distinct constellations, the number
increasing over time. The Greeks used the first and last visible risings and settings of these stars at dawn and
dusk as ‘event markers’, in order to signal the appropriate time for pivotal activities, especially in the
agricultural sphere, such as ploughing, sowing and harvesting. At the same time, Greek societies used the
moon as the basis for their civil and religious calendar, and within the lunar months were situated regular
festivals of an agricultural nature. Agriculture is tied to the seasons and hence the sun, which the star cycle
matches fairly well, but the moon runs on a different cycle which does not keep pace with the sun and stars.
The increased refinement of the star calendars with a larger number of constellations might be a result of a
desire to help synchronise the divergent seasonal and lunar timetables. Examples are provided to illustrate
how particulars stars might have been associated with particular divinities and festivals.

KEYWORDS: Astronomy, constellations, sky maps, calendar, agriculture, event-markers, religious festivals.
48
1. INTRODUCTION: COSMIC CYCLES
It has become popular in recent years in the ‘West-
ern’ world to mark in some public fashion the start
of several ‘New Years’ in the course of a single cal-
endar year. Western/European New Year falls al-
ways on 1 January; Chinese New Year occurs at var-
ying times in the early part of the western calendar;
and less obviously, the first day of Muharram, the
start of the Islamic religious year, runs gradually
over time through all the seasons (the ninth month,
Ramadan, tends to attract more attention). Underly-
ing each of these lies a different methodology for
calculating the start of the year – the cycle of the sun
for Western New Year; the cycle of the moon for the
Islamic New Year; and the combined cycles of sun
and moon for Chinese New Year. Other holidays or
festivals in the course of the calendar year also use
these cycles. The placements of Jewish Passover and
Christian Easter rely on calculations of the combined
solar and lunar cycles, with the added complication
in the Christian context of conventional rather than
astronomical definitions of the terms ‘full moon’ and
‘equinox’. Similarly, the increasingly popular Hindu
festival of lights, Diwali, is timed according to a
mixed lunar and solar, or lunisolar, calendar. In
some parts of the world the combined cycles of the
stars and the moon provide a time signal, as in New
Zealand for Māori New Year (Hannah, 2005: 5–15;
Hannah, 2009: 14, 157-58 n. 7-8).
That these cosmic cycles still govern the marking
of time today is testament to how fundamental they
are to the human perception of time, regardless of
the fact that we have now other, more precise mech-
anisms to measure and mark time, notably the atom-
ic clock, which is independent of the slight but sig-
nificant vagaries of the cosmic bodies. In common
speech we still talk of sunrise and sunset, terms that
imply that the sun really rises or sets. Our ordinary
language of time does not acknowledge that it is
simply the motion of the earth around its axis that
gives us the impression of the sun’s rising or setting.
Sense perception dominates, whatever our brain tells
us is really happening.
2. STAR CYCLES
In this paper I wish to focus on just one of these
older mechanisms for marking time, the cycle of the
stars, because it is this which provides, I believe, a
new key to understanding ancient social practices.
One great advantage that the stars offer over other
celestial bodies is that they rise and set always at the
same points on the horizon. Where the Pleiades rise
in June, that is where they will rise every month of
the year for several decades. In this respect they dif-
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 1, 2 (2015) 47–57
Robert Hannah
fer markedly from the sun and the moon, whose size
and brightness otherwise naturally attract us to them
over and above the tiny stars, but their movements
are very variable in space and time due to their prox-
imity to the earth. The sun shifts up and down the
horizon with the seasons. While the moon does this
too, to further confuse us it rises and sets at consid-
erably different times of the month, making tracking
it more complicated. With the stars being much fur-
ther away from the earth, on the other hand, all that
changes in the course of the year is the period of vis-
ibility for each star. We can see the Pleiades rise just
before dawn in June, but at other times of the year
they rise at other times of the night or day. At some
point people also realized that those stars that rise
and set are visible only in certain seasons but invisi-
ble in others. Therefore they could be used as sea-
sonal or monthly markers.
3. MAPPING THE SKY
In the ancient world, the mechanisms for marking
time via the cosmic cycles are usually found to be
tied to religious beliefs. For the ancient world we
must mentally work our way into a religious context,
however hard that is now at the theoretical level –
what do we mean by ‘religion’? – let alone at the
practical level. Fortunately, one modern aspect of
this investigation is in our favour. Our night sky is
still populated by constellations, many of whose
names reflect their origins in Classical antiquity. The
Pleiades, Pegasus and Perseus are just a few of the
ancient Greek configurations, which populate the
modern celestial map. These names represent origi-
nally mythological figures, who were ‘catasterized’,
or transformed into stars, by the Greeks (Aratus,
Phaenomena; Pseudo-Eratosthenes, Katasterismoi;
Kidd, 1997). Of course, people from time immemori-
al appear to have created pictures by joining the dots
that are the stars in the night sky, although the fur-
ther back we go in time, the harder it is to be certain
that the images we have from the Paleolithic or Neo-
lithic periods do indeed constitute ‘star charts’ of
some sort, because the words which might tell us
this do not survive (Magli, 2009; Kyriakidis, 2005).
Even if the words did survive, would we understand
them, and how literally should they be taken? In the
western tradition, it is not until we get to Egyptian
and Babylonian written records that we can be sure
that people were not only observing the night sky in
a systematic fashion, but were mapping it as well
(Hunger and Pingree, 1989; Neugebauer and Parker
1960–1969; Lull and Belmonte, 2009). The constella-
tions which these peoples created, some of which
were passed on to the Greeks and then to the Ro-
THE ROLES OF OBSERVATIONAL ASTRONOMY IN ANCIENT GREECE
mans and so to us, represent complex processes of
comprehension, conceptualisation and categorisa-
tion, which have allowed observers then as now to
locate bodies in the celestial sphere (Hannah, 2002).
In this regard, NASA is no different from the name-
less scribes of Babylon: all have recourse to the map-
ping facility offered by the constellations, however
arbitrary and culturally-situated they are.
Before the Greek astronomers from Hipparchos to
Ptolemy, between the second century BC and the
second century AD, developed a coordinate system
for placing stars on the celestial globe, these constel-
lations provided the usual means of situating any-
thing in the night sky (Dilke, 1987: 181-82). In the
third century BC Aratos wrote a poem which de-
scribed the stars in a pre-coordinate fashion. It is
clear from him that the imaginary mythological or
zoological figures, which formed the constellations,
also provided rough-and-ready means of navigating
one’s way across the sky:
Let the left shoulder of Andromeda be a sign for
the northern Fish, for it is very near to it. Both of her
feet indicate her bridegroom, Perseus, as they move
always on his shoulders. He is taller than others in
the north. His right hand is stretched out towards
the seat of his mother-in-law’s throne, and as if pur-
suing on foot he lengthens his stride, running in the
world of his father Zeus. Near his left knee altogeth-
er are the Pleiades. Not much space at all holds them
all, and they are faint to observe (Aratos, Phaenomena
246-256; trans. author).
But mapping is one thing, and a complex thing at
that. Knowing why people map is another. Why did
the Babylonians and Greeks – since this is the tradi-
tion we still work in – populate the sky with these
particular figures?
The earliest records suggest the night-sky was
mapped initially for practical purposes, such as nav-
igation (even in the Egyptian afterlife) or the timing
of agricultural activities (e.g. Hesiod, Works and
Days). This process is made complicated because of
the apparent movement of some of the celestial bod-
ies. The band of sky which the sun itself appears to
move across in the course of a year encompasses
stars which were parcelled out from around 3000 BC
by the Mesopotamian peoples into what was even-
tually called the zodiac by the Greeks, because of the
animate forms into which they configured the stars
(a bull, a lion, a scorpion, etc.). This zodiacal band of
stars was regarded as special because it was seen to
be populated not only by the light-giving sun and
moon but also by those stars which were not fixed in
place relative to others, but which moved or wan-
dered – the planets, as the Greeks called them, from
their word for ‘wanderers’. These special stars, or
planets, were deified by these societies, and regard-
49
ed as having power over human events and eventu-
ally, under the Babylonians, Egyptians and Greeks,
over individual human lives (Neugebauer and Van
Hoesen, 1959; Barton, 1994; Jones, 1999; Holden 2006;
Rochberg , 1998, 2004, 2010).
One debased trace of this practice in the modern
world is our continuing familiarity with our astro-
logical ‘star signs’ – supposedly those zodiacal con-
stellations across which the sun passes in the course
of the year. We talk of ‘when the sun is in’ Pisces or
Aries or whichever of the twelve ‘signs’ of the zodi-
ac. While the sun is now never ‘in’ these constella-
tions at the moments when we say they are, nonethe-
less we have an idea of these stars being able to tell
us the time of year because of where the sun is sup-
posedly situated in relation to them (Beck, 2007: 23–
25). Deducing when the sun occupied the space de-
voted to one constellation or another was something
that was best done just before sunrise or just after
sunset, because then the immediately neighbouring
constellation could still be discerned. In our western
tradition, this notion goes back directly to the Baby-
lonians at least as far back as the second millennium
BC (Rochberg, 1998, 2010). Their records list the ap-
pearance and disappearance of certain stars and the
planets through the course of the year. They can be
situated within a context that we call astrological,
but which was generally not distinguished from ob-
servational astronomy until the late Roman and ear-
ly Medieval period. For the astronomer Ptolemy,
observational astronomy and horoscopal astrology
were ‘a single predictive enterprise, of greater or
lesser certitude, searching for regularities and signif-
icance in the motions and positions of the celestial
bodies’ (Beck, 2007: 2).
The belief in the ability of stars, planets and con-
stellations to influence human life we call astrology
today in disparaging tones, but we must never lose
sight of the fact that however superstitious such ac-
tivity appears to us now, it was this metaphysical
activity which gave the impetus to astronomy as we
know it, not only in antiquity but long afterwards as
well. Ptolemy, Newton and Kepler, great astrono-
mers though they were, were also practising astrolo-
gers Campion, 2008, 2009; Holden, 2006).
Having set aside the wandering stars, which in-
cluded the sun and moon, and other occasionally
periodic oddities like comets and meteors, the an-
cients were left with a vast number of dots in the
sky, which remained in the same position relative to
one another. Of course, these so-called ‘fixed’ stars
have their own proper motion, but that is not im-
portant at this level of observation. To any casual
observer they look utterly unconnected, as indeed
most are in reality, being made by our eyes to look
as though they are lights on a two-dimensional can-
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 1, 2 (2015) 47–56
50
opy of the sky. Yet some do seem to stand out for
one reason or another in certain configurations, per-
haps because of the surrounding blackness of the sky
once our eyes move outside that thickly populated
band which we call, with the Greeks and Romans,
the Milky Way. At other times we can assume that
the ‘en-figuring’ of the night sky occurred in the way
it did because certain stars could be readily grouped
into configurations, which were easily recognisable
within certain cultures. The longevity of some con-
figurations shows how some shapes have stood the
test of time and culture: the Scorpion is a good ex-
ample in the Middle Eastern–Mediterranean worlds,
since it was devised by the Babylonians and passed
on to the Greeks and Romans, all of whom knew
what a real scorpion looks like. Egyptian constella-
tions, on the other hand, seem not to have filtered
across and remain today difficult to identify (Lull
and Belmonte 2006). The stars that we call Pegasus
were seen by the Babylonians, not unreasonably, as
simply a Field, whereas the Greeks imagined them
as the body of a Horse, which eventually came to be
identified with the mythological Pegasus (Boll and
W. Gundel VI (1924-37) col. 928-31; Kidd, 1997: 258-
59). It is not that the Babylonians were simply more
prosaic than their Greek neighbours, for they could
certainly picture elaborate figures in the sky, and
they could coordinate these thematically, if they
wished. The constellations which we call Aries, Au-
riga, Taurus and Orion, for example, the Babyloni-
ans called the Hired Man, the [shepherd’s] Crook,
the Bull, and the True Shepherd of Anu, all reflecting
agricultural influence and all rising at dawn in
spring time, when work in the fields would start up
again (Hunger and Pingree, 1989: 137-38). But the
Babylonians seem not to have had an inclination to
use mythological stories which connected one con-
stellation with another. This the Greeks did with
gusto, creating thus a celestial carpet of intercon-
nected catasterism myths linking the constellations
with one another. An example of this is the cataster-
ism myth which links Artemis’ maidens, the Pleia-
des, the hunter Orion and his dog Sirius (Condos,
1997: 172).
But again, this simply states the obvious, that the
Greeks told stories through the stars. Why did they
do so? To answer that, we may start by asking: who
are these ‘stars’ of the celestial stage?
The particular constellations relating to the myth
of Perseus seem to have been placed in the sky
(‘catasterised’) as a narrative group in what looks like
a conscious project at the end of the fifth century BC.
We find this reflected – not necessarily initiated – in
the plays of Sophokles and Euripides (according to
pseudo-Eratosthenes, Cat. 15, 16, 17, 36, and Hygi-
nus, Astr. 2.9–11), who between them place as con-
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 1, 2 (2015) 47–56
Robert Hannah
stellations in the sky the princess Andromeda, her
mother and father Cassiopeia and Cepheus, and the
sea monster Cetus. Perseus must have been sent up
there too then or earlier, but the record does not sur-
vive to tell us so (Hannah, 2002).
The constellation Perseus therefore belongs to a
new class of figures in the sky whose source lies in
narrative mythology. Extensive areas of the sky were
now populated by inter-connected characters from
Greek mythology. In this way the heavens were
mapped out in a manner which we continue to uti-
lize today, and this very process of mapping, this
method of articulating a way through the whole
panorama of the stars, is part of the reason why
these catasterisms were invented. But that begs the
question why should people need to navigate their
way through the sky. One obvious answer lies in the
need for peoples in the Mediterranean to find their
way from one landfall to another in their seafaring
journeys. This is illustrated early on in Greek litera-
ture in a famous, if contentious, passage in Homer’s
Odyssey, in which Odysseus is given sailing instruc-
tions by the goddess, Athena (Hannah, 1997):
Glad with the wind, noble Odysseus spread sails. Sit-
ting down, he skilfully held it straight with the steering-
paddle, and sleep did not fall on his eyelids as he looked to
the Pleiades and late-setting Boötes, and the Bear, whom
they also name Wagon, which turns round about there
and watches Orion closely, and alone is without a share in
the baths of Ocean. For Kalypso, noble among goddesses,
commanded him to pass over the sea, keeping the Bear on
his left hand. Seventeen days he sailed, passing over the
sea, and on the eighteenth day there appeared the shadowy
mountains of the land of the Phaiakians, where it was
nearest to him, and it looked like a shield on the sky-like
sea (Homer, Odyssey 5. 269-81 (trans. author)).
Certainly in this realm the use of large constella-
tions rather than tiny pinpoints of single stars makes
a great deal of sense, as research on star navigation
methods in other cultures has demonstrated (Lusby,
Hannah and Knight, 2010a, 2010b; Lewis, 1994). But
lists of constellations are more likely to have been
kept in seafarers’ heads than in city centres, and yet
it is in city centres – arguably Classical Athens itself
and certainly Hellenistic Miletos – where we happen
to have found them archaeologically (Hannah, 2001)
These findspots demand another explanation for the
peopling of the sky.
4. ASTRONOMY AND AGRICULTURE:
EVENT MARKING
A traditional role of observational astronomy in
ancient Greece was to provide indications of pivotal
moments of change in the seasonal year.
THE ROLES OF OBSERVATIONAL ASTRONOMY IN ANCIENT GREECE
That Minoan Cretans may have used a sophisti-
cated astronomy and even instrumentation, such as
the magnetic compass, in orienting their palaces and
other buildings towards the rising-points of the sol-
stices and apparently even of the equinoxes as well
as the moon and certain stars on the horizon – is cur-
rently being argued and demonstrated. On this basis
a native Minoan lunisolar calendar has been pro-
posed, and its preservation into the historical period
presumed (Henriksson and Blomberg 1996, 1997-8,
Blomberg and Henriksson, 2000, 2003; Downey 2011,
2015 forthcoming). However, the degree to which
there was continuity of thought and practice from
the Bronze Age to the historical period, across the
great divide of the so-called Greek Dark Age, re-
mains problematic.
For Homer and Hesiod, at the dawn of Greek lit-
erature, the rising and setting of just a handful of
stars and constellations served as agricultural ‘event
markers’, much like calendar dates, signalling or
reflecting the appropriate time for various activities.
In particular, Hesiod’s wisdom-poem, Works and
Days, provides a rough-and-ready calendar for activ-
ities down on the farm, each often timed by the ap-
pearance or disappearance of a star (West 1978). So,
for example, the time of winter ploughing is sig-
nalled by the dawn setting of the Pleiades, the Hya-
des and Orion (Works and Days 614–17). Hesiod ex-
horts his farmer to start the harvest at the dawn ris-
ing of the Pleiades, at the end of their 40-day period
of invisibility (Works and Days 383–7, 571–3). Else-
where he mentions the culmination of Orion and
Sirius at the time of Arcturus’ dawn rising to indi-
cate the period of the grape harvest in September
(Works and Days 609–11). In all, he provides just nine
observations of the risings or settings of five stars or
star groups – Sirius is mentioned once, while the
Pleiades, the Hyades, Orion, and Arcturus are all
noted twice – and he adds the culmination of Orion
and Sirius to the rise of Arcturus. These observations
are so arranged that the farmer was given a remark-
ably economical safety-net of successive warnings of
the appropriate date for a certain activity on the land
(Reiche, 1989).
Homer also has occasion to use the stars as event
markers, though his intention is not at all didactic
like Hesiod’s is. Star lore is simply part of the back-
cloth the poet has at his disposal to add depth to
scenes he imagines. At Iliad 18. 483-89, for instance,
Homer describes the decoration placed by Hephais-
tos on a new shield for Akhilleus (Hannah, 2005: 18–
27; Ferrari, 2008: 88-89):
He made on it earth and sky and sea, and untiring sun
and moon coming full, and all the signs with which heav-
en is wreathed, Pleiades and Hyades and the strength of
Orion and Bear, whom they also name Wagon, which
51
turns round about there and watches Orion closely, and
alone is without a share in the baths of Ocean (Homer,
Iliad 18. 483-89 (trans. author)).
On the new shield Homer lavishes a great deal of
decorative detail about human life, in the city and
the countryside, which arguably has much to do
with the larger themes of the poem. This description
of human life begins with the lines quoted above,
and these lines foreshadow the seasonal work of the
countryside detailed soon afterward in the shield’s
description. The astronomical content of the decora-
tion of the shield is very season-specific. We have
seen already that for Hesiod the time of winter
ploughing is signalled by the dawn setting of the
Pleiades, the Hyades and Orion, three of the star-
groups listed by Homer; only the Bear is missing
from Hesiod. But the Bear is doing something signif-
icant astronomically at this time. This large constella-
tion is situated so far north in the Greek sky that it
neither rose nor set over the horizon, but always
stayed above it in the course of its circuit round the
sky. In this circuit, it reached its upper transit, or
culmination, across the north-south line of the me-
ridian at the time of the setting of the Pleiades, Hya-
des and Orion. This took place around November in
our terms, and signalled the time for ploughing and
sowing. As is apparent in the last line of the above
excerpt, the Greeks were aware of this difference in
the Bear’s movement from a very early date.
But these same stars can do double duty. Let us
recall that for Hesiod the dawn rising of the Pleiades
marked the time of summer harvesting. In fact, har-
vesting and threshing would span a long period,
about May-to-July in our terms, and during this time
not only the Pleiades but, of course, the Hyades and
Orion would also rise successively just before dawn.
Simultaneously, the Bear – neither rising nor setting
– reached its lower transit across the meridian, just
skimming the northern horizon. The relationship of
the Bear to the other three star-groups is a close one
in the geometry of the sky, and it would seem also in
the related activities on the land, where ploughing
and sowing are first signalled, and later harvesting.
We may also see the significance of the Bear’s second
name, the Wagon, a useful vehicle at harvest time.
5. AGRICULTURE, RELIGION AND THE
CALENDAR
The agricultural cycle was also intimately bound
up with the religious cycle in ancient Greece. Festi-
vals of ploughing, sowing and harvesting articulate
both the agricultural and the religious year.
A skyphos (bowl), found in the vicinity of an Ar-
chaic temple at Halai in East Lokris in mainland
Greece, and dated on the basis of its Corinthian-style
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 1, 2 (2015) 47–56
52 Robert Hannah

decoration to ca. 625 BC, gives a hint of the link be- within a determinable period of about six weeks fol-
tween the stars and the seasons within a religious lowing the March equinox.
context. The bowl carries a painted frieze of animals, To illustrate the point, the following Table 1 gives
now only partially preserved: still remaining are a the dates of Passover for the period between 1994
bull, a snake, a hare, a dog, a scorpion, a dolphin, and 2013:
and a lion/panther. The animals have no obvious
narrative or mythological connection, but have been Table 1. Passover dates for 1994-2013
convincingly interpreted as representations of some Year Passover Year Passover
of the constellations: the bull for Taurus, the snake 1994 27 March 2004 6 April
probably for Hydra, the hare for Lepus, the dog for 1995 15 April 2005 24 April
Canis Major, the scorpion for Scorpius, the dolphin 1996 4 April 2006 13 April
for Delphinus, and the lion/panther for Leo. These 1997 22 April 2007 3 April
have further been interpreted as groups signaling 1998 11 April 2008 20 April
the four seasons: autumn, winter, spring and sum- 1999 1 April 2009 9 April
mer, via the rising and setting of the relevant con- 2000 20 April 2010 30 March
stellations at sunset. It has been speculated that this 2001 8 April 2011 19 April
seasonal decoration may reflect the function of the 2002 28 March 2012 7 April
skyphos as a votive object for the nearby temple, 2003 17 April 2013 26 March
with the four seasonal groups matching the timings
of religious events. Unfortunately we have no specif- Some years have 12 months, others need to have
ic information about the religious calendar at Halai, 13, so as to keep New Year’s Day falling soon after
so for now this must remain only speculation the March equinox. If we did not add this extra
(Barnes, 2014). month every two or three years, the brake would be
The particular association of the Pleiades, the Hy- lifted off our calendar and it would run instead like
ades, Orion and the Bear / Wagon with agricultural the Islamic religious calendar, which has only 12 lu-
activities that we have also seen, may go deeper still nar months every year and therefore only 354/355
in ancient Greek society. The great agricultural and days, with the result that Islamic New Year’s Day
religious festivals of Demeter and Persephone in and every other holiday of the year run through all
Athens occurred, not surprisingly, at times signifi- of the seasons over a period of 30 years. This is why
cant to agricultural activity. These festivals took Ramadan, for instance, occurs at different times and
place within fixed months of the Athenian festival seasons of the year.
calendar (Mikalson, 1975). However, this calendar At some point in ancient Greece it was discovered
was not a solar one like ours is, but a lunisolar one, that a reasonable degree of synchronicity between
tied to both lunar and solar phenomena, like the calendar and seasons could be maintained if one
Jewish religious calendar or the Asian calendars to- added an extra lunar month at irregular intervals of
day. This means that in any given year in antiquity, two or three years, but on a regular basis over a set
we cannot usually tie a given Athenian date to a giv- number of years. The eight-year cycle, or octaeteris, is
en modern equivalent. (I say ‘usually’ because on just such a method. Censorinus (On the Birthday 18.5)
very rare occasions it is possible to pin down a date reports that its invention was sometimes attributed
if it is related to a phenomenon like a lunar or solar to Kleostratos, whom we may place with some prob-
eclipse, which we can date independently of the an- ability towards the end of the sixth century BC. It is
cient calendar.) not impossible that the cycle existed in various forms
To get a sense of the vagaries of a lunisolar calen- before this time and that what Kleostratos did was
dar, let us imagine our New Year’s Day falling on simply to invent a particular form of it. So the cycle
Jewish Passover or Easter Sunday every year. We are could have been used from the first celebrations in
familiar with these shifting around a period of weeks Delphi from 582 BC.
in the early part of our year. This is because both are The Pythian Games were celebrated at Delphi
fixed to the first full moon after the northern spring every four years – indeed, it makes its appearance in
equinox, although there are disturbances in the simi- this format on the recently discovered ‘Olympiad
larity brought on by artificial, rather than astronomi- dial’ of the Antikythera Mechanism, along with oth-
cal, definitions of some of the terms in the algorithm, er sets of games held also on four-year cycles (the
notably ‘full moon’ and ‘equinox’ in the Christian Olympic Games and the Naa at Dodona) or two-year
tradition. Now let us think of either of these festivals cycles (the Isthmian and Nemean Games) (Freeth et
as New Year’s Day. From one year to the next, New al. (2008)). However, writing in the 3rd century AD,
Year would fall on a different date in the year, but Censorinus (On the Birthday 18.6) noted that many

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 1, 2 (2015) 47–56

THE ROLES OF OBSERVATIONAL ASTRONOMY IN ANCIENT GREECE
Greek cults celebrated their festivals at an interval of
eight years, and he expressly mentioned the Pythian
Games as an example of just such a festival. On this
basis, then, it is reasonable to assume the use of an
octaeteris as a means of calculating when the Games
at Delphi should take place (Hannah, 2012).
Literary and epigraphic sources indicate that the
Pythian Games were celebrated on the seventh day
of the month Boukatios, which was the second
month after the summer solstice in the lunar calen-
dar of Delphi. It can be shown that in order to cele-
brate the Pythian Games in the same lunar month,
Boukatios, every four years, there must be an alter-
nating interval of 49 and 50 months between succes-
sive celebrations. This alternation managed to pre-
serve attachment to the same lunar month. Table 2
shows an octaeteris incorporating the Pythian Games
in month ii (standing for Boukatios).
We can see that celebrating the Pythian Games
always in month ii leads to unequal intervals of al-
ternately 49 and 50 lunar months between celebra-
tions. The festival would be held first in month ii of
year 1 of the cycle. Maintaining attachment to month
ii, the next celebration would be in year 5, by which
time an intercalary month has been added. Then the
next Games would occur in year 9, by which time
two further intercalary months have been added.
Also at Delphi there were occasions when oracles
were given, and times of year when they were not.
The observations of certain stars may have helped to
signal the appropriate time for the delivery of ora-
cles. The time when the oracular god Apollo was
absent from the site and was imagined to be visiting
the northern Hyperboreans corresponded to winter
(Ahl, 1980). During those months, between Decem-
ber and March, it has been calculated that the con-
stellations Lyra and Cygnus, which were associated
with Apollo, were visible only for a short time at
night, and never reached the zenith. This period pos-
sibly also coincided with the time when hallucina-
tion-inducing vapours from the underlying rock
formations were reduced, thus limiting the time
when the priestess could be under their influence to
deliver oracles. The god then ‘returned’ to the tem-
ple at Delphi, arguably around the time of the spring
equinox, when Lyra and Cygnus first reached the
zenith at sunrise. Furthermore, regular observations
of these stars could be used to assist in signaling
when the extra, intercalary month should be added
to the calendar (Liritzis and Castro 2013; compare
Salt and Boutsikas 2005).
Because of the wandering character to the Atheni-
an calendar, even with its periodic insertion of an
intercalary month, it is practically impossible to be
precise about when in terms of our calendar an event
in the past took place. But we can be sure of the sea-
53
son, and as a result we can see that the festivals held
in honour of the agricultural goddesses, Demeter
and Persephone, occurred not only at significant
moments in the agricultural cycle, as we would ex-
pect, but also at times that were culturally significant
in astronomical terms. The Stenia and Thesmophoria
festivals were held in the first half of the month of
Pyanepsion, the fourth month of the Athenian year,
corresponding roughly to our October-to-November.
This situates the festivals around the time of the
dawn setting of the Pleiades, Hyades and Orion. The
festival of Skira, a summertime event, was held in its
eponymous month, Skirophorion, the last month of
the Athenian year and the month that we know con-
tained the summer solstice. New Year’s Day, and
with it the first month of the new year, would begin
in the evening of the day of the first sighting of the
new moon after the solstice. So we are in June-to-
July with Skirophorion, a period that would have
witnessed the dawn rising of the Pleiades, Hyades
and Orion. The great Eleusinian Mysteries were cel-
ebrated in the middle of the month of Boedromion,
the third month of the year. They will have taken
place at the one time of the year when these same
constellations were visible throughout the whole
night from dusk to dawn – and we know that an all-
night ceremony was part of the proceedings, so the
coincidence, if it is only that, is striking. And finally
the Haloa festival, in Poseideon in mid-year, be-
longed to a time when the Pleiades were culminating
at dusk.
Added to these possible connections between reli-
gious and astronomical/calendrical phenomena is
the potential for the landscape to have played a role
also. The western horizon from the Akropolis is an
important one in terms of sacred space: it looks out
towards the site of Eleusis, home of the Mysteries
held in honour of Demeter and Persephone. The Sa-
cred Way, which connected Athens to Eleusis, runs
in the direction of sunset on the summer solstice
when viewed from the Akropolis. A coincidence
perhaps, since the road runs through a hill pass that
happens also to lie on this alignment, but a sugges-
tive one nevertheless that astronomy, religion and
landscape could be intimately connected.
That similar possibilities exist elsewhere in the
Greek world may be illustrated by an example from
Cyprus. Evidence from the major surviving calendar
on Cyprus, from Akanthos (the so-called ‘Bulwer
Tablet’, dating to the 5th century BC: Neumann,
1963; Masson 1983), provides a probable indication
of relevant cultic activity in the period of spring and
early summer, with month-names indicating refer-
ence to Aphrodite (a-po-ro-ti-si-jo, ‘of Aphrodisios’)
and Dionysos (ti-wo-nu-si-o, ‘of Diwonusios’). [While
the Cypriot rendering of Dionysos (ti-wo-nu-si-o) is
SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 1, 2 (2015) 47–56
54 Robert Hannah

Table 2: The Pythian Games organized according to an octaeteris. Columns Y1–Y8 are years in the cycle,
each comprising months i–xii, alternately of 30 and 29 days, plus an intercalary month of 30 days to be set
somewhere in years 3, 5 and 8. Sum of months stands for between successive celebrations.

Month Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6 Y7 Y8 Y9
i 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
ii 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29
iii 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
iv 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29
v 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
vi 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29
vii 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
viii 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29
ix 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
x 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29
xi 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
xii 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29
Intercalary 30 30 30
Sum of months: 49 50
________________________________________________________________________

similar to the syllabic rendering in Linear B (di-wo-
nu-so), the month-name does not recur in the scanty
evidence of Mycenaean calendars in Linear B (Han-
nah, 2005: 16-17)]. Given Aphrodite’s and Dionysos’s
relationship with fertility, this is not surprising but
worth having confirmed, especially as no mainland
Greek calendars preserve so direct an association
with these two gods in their month-names. Given
the overriding importance of the goddess to Cyprus
in myth and cult, it would not be surprising that the
Cypriot calendars should honour her (Karageorghis,
1977). The link between Aphrodite and Dionysos
with springtime, to which the Bulwer Tablet testifies,
may help us to discover archaeoastronomical signifi-
cance in the temples on Cyprus. For instance, the
Great Mother on Cyprus evolved to be associated
with or to become the Greek goddess Aphrodite
(Karageorghis, 1977; Karageorghis, 1998). Both god-
desses were linked with ideas of generation and re-
generation in nature. At Tamassos, the Temple of
Great Mother (Masson, 1964; Buchholz, 1973) is unu-
sually aligned both towards north and yet slightly
off true north by just 10˚ east. The temple faces the
low hill of Pano Vouno in the distance, so there is an
obvious topographical focus, but what significance
this may have had is not yet clear. The temple also
faces the circumpolar stars – the Great and Little
Bears and most notably the constellation of Draco
(the Snake). In spring at dawn and dusk Draco
stands vertically above the hill of Pano Vouno. The
snake in Greek and other ancient cultures was a
symbol of the underworld and afterlife, but also of
rebirth (Toynbee, 1973), so there may be a conscious
linkage between its appearance and configuration at
this time of year and the cult of the Great Mother at
Tamassos. This needs further investigation, especial-
ly with regard to Cypriot and Near Eastern concep-
tions of the circumpolar constellations.
In comparison with Hesiod’s nine observations of
star phases around 700 BC, 42 observations of 15
stars or star-groups survive from the late fifth centu-
ry BC Euktemon’s data set, which we find excerpted
in later, Hellenistic and Roman parapegmata; whether
he originally recorded more, we have no way of
knowing now (Hannah, 2002; Lehoux 2007). So large
an increase in star observations may have resulted
from a desire to secure the placement of seasonal,
and hence solar, events related to the agricultural
year within the awkwardly mobile lunar calendar
that Greek city-states maintained. In particular, agri-
culturally-focussed religious festivals could have
benefitted from a more stable calendar to maintain
synchrony between nature and ritual. It is unlikely
that this increase was the result of an attempt to
‘weatherproof’ the observations (i.e. by having more
observations for the same time period the chances of
missing the desired moment in the year because of
poor weather conditions may be greatly reduced).
Should this have been the reason for the great in-
crease in the recording of fifth century observations
we would expect that the majority of added star
phases would have been during the winter months
when bad weather conditions are more likely to oc-
cur, which is not the case.
More work needs to be done on this aspect of the
Athenian calendar. It touches on aspects of Athenian
society well beyond the religious sphere – although
we should never underplay this aspect of ancient

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 1, 2 (2015) 47–56

THE ROLES OF OBSERVATIONAL ASTRONOMY IN ANCIENT GREECE 55

society, since religion and cult practices permeated dusk as ‘event markers’, so as to signal the
every fibre of society in a way that we witness now- appropriate time for pivotal activities, especially in
adays in, say, Islam and orthodox Judaism. the agricultural sphere, such as ploughing, sowing
and harvesting. Examples have been given in this
6. CONCLUSIONS paper of how particulars stars might have been
associated with particular divinities and festivals.
In this paper I have demonstrated how science, in
Agriculture is tied to the seasons and hence the sun,
the form of astronomy, and culture, in the form of
which the star cycle matches fairly well. At the same
religion and the calendar, were interlinked in ancient
time, however, Greek societies regularly used the
Greece. The Greeks used a variety of mechanisms to
moon as the basis for their civil and religious
mark time, based on the cycles of the sun, moon and
calendar, and within the lunar months were situated
stars, whether separately or in combination. In order
festivals of an agricultural nature. The moon does
to use the stars, the Greeks over time gradually
not follow the solar seasonal cycle, so mechanisms
mapped out the night sky, populating it with a
had to be found in order to synchronise the lunar
number of distinct constellations, the number
and solar cycles. While the addition of lunar months
increasing over time from just a handful around 700
at certain intervals over a period of years was one
BC to 42 by the end of the 5th century BC. The actual
such mechanism, observing the stars could also help
identification of the constellations seems to have
in this time-keeping enterprise. The increased
been a function of the Greeks’ desire to narrate
refinement of the star calendars with a larger
myths and stories through the stars, a feature which
number of constellations by the end of the 5th
appears distinctive to them among contemporary
century BC might be a result of a desire to help
and neighbouring cultures. On the other hand, like
synchronise the divergent solar/seasonal and lunar
their Egyptian and Babylonian neighbours, the
timetables. Thus astronomy and religion were
Greeks also brought observational astronomy to bear
intimately bound together, the former in the service
on their sky mapping, by using the first and last
of the latter.
visible risings and settings of their stars at dawn and

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was supported by grants from the British Academy/Association of Commonwealth Universities
Grants for International Collaboration, and from the Marsden Fund of the Royal Society of New Zealand. I
thank Dr Efrosyni Boutsikas (University of Kent) for her collaboration on these projects and her comments
on earlier drafts of this paper. Any errors that remain are my responsibility.

REFERENCES
Ahl, F. M. Amber, Avalon, and Apollo’s singing swans, American Journal of Philology, Vol. 103, No. 4, p. 373-411.
Barnes, J. T. (2014) Αsteras eipein: an Archaic view of the constellations, Hesperia Vol. 83, p. 257-76.
Barton, T. (1994) Ancient astrology (London: Routledge).
Bilić, T. (2009) The myth of Alpheus and Arethusa and open-sea voyages on the Mediterranean – stellar navigation in
antiquity, The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology Vol. 38, No. 1, 116-32.
Blomberg M. and Henriksson G. (2000) Further Evidence for the Minoan Origins of the Greek Calendars. In Pepragmena
8. Diethnous Kretologikou Synedriou: Herakleio, 9-14 Septembriou 1996, Tomos A1, Proistorike kai Arkhaia Ellenike Periodos
(Herakleion: Hetairia Kretikon Historikon Meleton), p. 109-28.
Blomberg M. and Henriksson G. (2003) The Minoan Peak Sanctuary on Pyrgos and its Context. In Calendars, Symbols, and
Orientations: Legacies of Astronomy in Culture, M. Blomberg, P. E. Blomberg and G. Henriksson (eds) (Uppsala: Upp-
sala Astronomical Observatory), 127-34.
Boll, F. and Gundel, W. (1924-37) Sternbilder. In Ausführliches Lexicon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie, W. H.
Roscher (ed.) (Leipzig) vol. VI, col. 928-31.
Buchholz, H.-G.(1973) Tamassos, Zypern, 1970-1972, Archäologischer Anzeiger, 295–388.
Coldstream, N. and Huxley, G. (1996) An astronomical graffito from Pithekoussai, Parola del Passato, Vol. 51, 221-24.
Condos, T. (1997) Star myths of the Greeks and Romans: a sourcebook (Grand Rapids, MI: Phanes Press).
Dilke, O. A. W. (1987) The culmination of Greek cartography in Ptolemy. In The History of Cartography, Vol. 1: Cartography
in prehistoric, ancient, and medieval Europe and the Mediterranean, J. B. Harley and D. Woodward (eds) (Chicago: Uni-
versity of Chicago Press), p. 177-200.
Downey, W. S. (2011) Orientations of Minoan buildings on Crete may indicate the first recorded use of the magnetic
compass, Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry Vol. 11, No.1, p. 9‐20.
Downey, W. S. (2015, forthcoming) The Cretan middle bronze age ‘Minoan Kernos’ was designed to predict a total solar
eclipse and to facilitate a magnetic compass, Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry Vol. 15, No.1.

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 1, 2 (2015) 47–56

 56 Robert Hannah

Ferrari, G. (2008) Alcman and the cosmos of Sparta (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
Freeth, T., Jones, A., Steele, J. M. and Bitsakis, Y. (2008) Calendars with Olympiad display and eclipse prediction on the
Antikythera Mechanism, Nature Vol. 454 (31 July), p. 614-617.
Fresa, A. (1969) La navigazione astronomica per la Magna Grecia, Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Navale di Napoli, Vol. 8,
p. 241-57.
Hannah, R. (1997) Odysseus’s navigation, Prudentia, Vol. 29, p. 15-33.
Hannah, R. (2001) From orality to literacy? the case of the parapegma,. In Speaking volumes: orality and literacy in the Greek
and Roman world, J. Watson (ed.) (Leiden: Brill), p. 139-59.
Hannah, R. (2002) Imaging the cosmos: astronomical ekphraseis in Euripides. In The verbal and the visual: cultures of ekphra-
sis in Antiquity, J. Elsner (ed.), Ramus Vol. 31, Nos. 1-2, 19-32.
Hannah, R. (2005) Greek and Roman calendars: constructions of time in the classical world (London: Duckworth).
Hannah, R. (2009) Time in antiquity (London: Routledge).
Hannah, R. (2012) Early Greek lunisolar cycles: the Pythian and Olympic Games. In Living the Lunar Calendar. J. Ben-Dov,
W. Horowitz, J.M. Steele (eds) (Oxford: Oxbow Books), p. 79–93.
Henriksson G. and Blomberg M. (1996) Evidence for Minoan Astronomical Observations from the Peak Sanctuaries on
Petsophas and Traostalos, Opuscula Atheniensia Vol. 21, p. 99-114.
Henriksson G. and Blomberg M. (1997-8) Petsophas and the Summer Solstice, Opuscula Atheniensia Vol. 22-3, p. 147-51.
Holden, J. H. (2006) A History of Horoscopic Astrology (Tempe, AZ: American Federation of Astrologers, Inc).
Hunger, H. and Pingree, D. (1989) MUL.APIN : an astronomical compendium in cuneiform (Horn: Verlag Ferdinand Berger
und Söhne).
Jones, A. ed., (1999) Astronomical papyri from Oxyrhynchus: P. Oxy. 4133-4300a, Memoirs of the American Philosophical
Society 233 (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society).
Karageorghis, J. (1977) La rande eesse de Chypre et son culte a travers l’iconographie de l’epo ue neolithi ue au Ieme s. a.C.
(Lyons/Paris: Maison de l’Oriente).
Karageorghis, V. (1998) Greek Gods and Heroes in Ancient Cyprus (Athens: Commercial Bank of Greece).
Kidd, D. (ed.) (1997) Aratus, Phaenomena (Cambridge: Cambridge university Press).
Kyriakidis, E. (2005) Unidentified floating objects on Minoan seals, American Journal of Archaeology Vol. 109, 137-54.
Lehoux, D. R. (2007) Astronomy, weather, and calendars in the ancient world: parapegmata and related texts in classical and Near-
Eastern societies (Cambridge).
Lewis, D. (1994) We, the navigators: the ancient art of landfinding in the Pacific (2nd ed. Honolulu: University of Hawaii
Press).
Liritzis, I. and Castro, B. (2013) Delphi and Cosmovision: Apollo’s absence at the Land of the Hyperboreans and the time
for consulting the Oracle, Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage, Vol. 16, No. 2, p. 184-206.
Lull, J. and Belmonte, J. A. (2009) The constellations of ancient Egypt. In In search of cosmic order, J. A. Belmonte (ed.),
(Cairo: Supreme Council of Antiquities Press), p. 155-94.
Lull, J. and Belmonte, J. A. (2006) A firmament above Thebes: uncovering the constellations of ancient Egyptians, Journal
for the History of Astronomy Vol. 37, 373-92.
Lusby, S. R., Hannah, R. and Knight, P. (2010a) Navigation and discovery in the Polynesian oceanic empire, part 1, The
Hydrographic Journal Vol. 131/132, 17-25.
Lusby, S. R., Hannah, R. and Knight, P. (2010b) Navigation and discovery in the Polynesian oceanic empire, part 2, The
Hydrographic Journal Vol. 134, 15-25.
Magli, G. (2009) Mysteries and discoveries of archaeoastronomy: from Giza to Easter Island (New York: Copernicus Books).
Masson, O. (1964) Kypriaka: I. Recherches sur les antiquités de Tamassos, Bulletin de Correspondance Helléni ue Vol. 88,
199–238.
Masson, O. (1983) Les inscriptions chypriotes syllabiques (2nd ed. Paris: de Boccard).
Medas, S. (2004) e rebus nauticis : l’arte della navigazione nel mondo antico (Rome: L'Erma di Bretschneider).
Mikalson, J. D. (1975) The sacred and civil calendar of the Athenian year (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
Neugebauer, O. and Van Hoesen, H. B. (1959) Greek horoscopes (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society).
Neugebauer, O. and Parker, R. A. (1960–1969) Egyptian astronomical texts (Providence, RI: Brown University Press).
Neumann, G. (1963) Zur Deutung der kyprischen “Bulwer-Tafel”, Kadmos Vol. 2, 53–67.
Reiche, H. A. T. (1989) Fail-safe stellar dating: forgotten phases, Transactions of the American Philological Association Vol.
119, 37-53.
Rochberg, F. (1998) Babylonian horoscopes, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society n.s. Vol. 88, No. 1
(Philadephia: American Philosophical Society).
Rochberg, F. (2004) The heavenly writing: divination, horoscopy, and astronomy in Mesopotamian culture (Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press).
Rochberg, F. (2010) In the path of the moon: Babylonian celestial divination and its legacy (Leiden: Brill).
Salt, A. and Boutsikas, E. (2005) Knowing when to consult the oracle at Delphi, Antiquity Vol. 79, p. 564-572.
Toynbee, J. M. C. (1973) Animals in Roman Life and Art (London: Thames and Hudson).
West, M. L. (1978) Hesiod: Works and Days (Oxford: Clarendon Press,).

SCIENTIFIC CULTURE, 1, 2 (2015) 47–56

View publication stats