years, eight or nine months, and an entire sign in 2152 or 2153 years.[1] They, therefore, divided the 43,200 by 71; this gave them the number 608 3271, and from this arose the sacred number of their Manwanteras 71. It is evident that the error is so small a fraction, as to amount in practical effect to nothing in these long periods; for as, in these religious systems, they calculated in whole numbers, the error did not operate unless it was more than a fraction of the 72 years in one degree.
It is necessary to observe, that few of the numbers respecting the precession are absolutely correct: for instance, the number of years for a sign is 2153, instead of 2160; the difference arises from fractions, as I have stated above, and is so small, that it is not worth notice. The following observation of M. Volney’s will explain it.
“Edward Barnard discovered from ancient monuments that the Egyptian priests calculated, as we do, the movement of precession at 50″ 9‴ ¾ in a year: consequently that they knew it with as much precision as we do at this day.
“According to these principles, which are those of all astronomers, we see that the annual precession being 50″ and a fraction of about a fourth or a fifth, the consequence is, that an entire degree is lost, or displaced, in seventy-one years, eight or nine months, and an entire sign in 2152 or 2153 years.”[2]
Again Volney says, “It is, moreover, worthy of remark, that the Egyptians never admitted or recognized, in their chronology, the deluge of the Chaldeans, in the sense in which we understand it: and this, no doubt, because among the Chaldeans themselves it was only an allegorical manner of representing the presence of Aquarius in the winter solstitial point, which presence really took place at the epoch when the vernal equinoctial point was in Taurus: this carries us back to the thirty-first (3100) or thirty-second century before our æra, that is, precisely to the dates laid down by the Indians and Jews.”[3]
The observation respecting the Hindoo period of 3100 years before Christ is striking. What he means by the Jews, I do not understand.
Besides the Neros of 600 years, and the great Neros of 608 years, which were both sacred numbers, the ancients had also two other remarkable and sacred numbers—650 and 666. Sir William Jones, I have before observed, has stated that the Hindoos at a very early period must have believed, that the precessional year consisted of 24,000 years. “They computed this motion (the precession of the equinox) to be at the rate of 54″ a year: so that their annus magnus, or the times in which the stars complete an entire revolution, was 24,000 years.”[4]
I will now try to shew how the above-named sacred numbers arose.
I suppose that at first the Soli-lunar cycle was thought to consist of 666 years, and the great year, caused by the precession of the equinoxes, of 24,000 years. Nothing can be more awkward and intractable than these numbers. 66 years to a degree give 23,760 to the great year, which are too few; and 67 years to a degree give 24,120 to the great year, which are too many to complete a period without fractions: thus, 66×30×12=23,760; 67×30×12=24,120. Nor will 666 divide equally in 24,000, for they leave a remainder of 24. The Luni-solar period of 666 years was abandoned when its incorrectness was perceived. About the same time it was thought to be discovered that the equinox did not precede 24,000 in the great year, but 65 years in a degree, and 23,400 in the great year, the Soli-lunar period was thought to be 650 years. These two periods agree very well, and together form a cycle: 36×650=23,400. Then 650 became a sacred number, and we have it recorded in the number of the stones at Abury. Of this cycle M. Basnage has given an account.
2 A 2
