Replies

>>>Researcher David Deal, to whom we owe credit for a drawing of the site, has identified the eclipse astronomically as occurring on September 15, 107 B. C. E. I have run that date on a sophisticated computer calendar that does conversions to the ancient Hebrew calendar and surprisingly, that date turns out to fall on Tishri 1st, or Rosh HaShanah of that year—107 B.C.E.! <<<

I pulled this date up on my astronomy program and did not get the same result.

However, there was a solar eclipse on September 29th, -107 (-107 in astronomical calculations - when year zero included - but otherwise considered as 108 BC). Since a solar eclipse did appear in the general time frame, I would hope it (Sept 15) is just a copy error. There was also a hybrid eclipse on September 18 -106 (@0.1%), but looking back through August/Elul, both appear to have been 1 day early for the start of 1 Tishri (phases at 0.0% and 0.1% respectively). They weren't using computer programs back then, but in any case, neither eclipse occurred on the 15th. As far as the data for the 15th goes (FWIW)...

For -106 (107 BC), the moon phase was at 16.9% on 15 September, with 1 Tishri commencing on either the 19th (0.2%) or the 20th (2.4%).

For -107, The moon phase was at 99.9% on 15 September, with 1 Tishri likely commencing on September 30 (0.5%) or on Oct 1 (2.8%).

For -108, te moon phase was at 17.3% on 15 September, with 1 Tishri likely commencing on September 11 (0.3%) or on thw 12th (2.1%).

For -105 (106 BC), it's not close to a new moon either (48.6%).

The asronomical new moon (no moon) typically falls on the eve of the new Hebrew calendar month (or in this instance Erev Rosh Hashanah), so it looks like they kind of fudged the data a bit to align with Rosh Hashanah. It's really a minor issue, but it makes me wonder what else was tweaked to make the data fit a particular theory.