Re: Why not 13 months? (Was La Systeme Metrique)
Michael L. Siemon (mls@panix.com)
Sat, 08 Jul 1995 19:11:32 -0400
In article <3tmvdd$e65@shore.shore.net>, Whittet@shore.net (Whittet) wrote:
+Early calenders did have 13 months of 28 days (4 weeks of 7 days)(52 weeks)
+One such example is the Phaistoes Disk, dated to c 1,700 BC Crete.
This is beyond even the usual level of unreal fantasy of Steve Whittet's
contributions. I don't know where Steve gets this absurd notion of the
Phaistos disk being anything of the kind. It is (roughly) circular, with
each side containing a spiral of glyphs -- not yet deciphered, mind you
-- with a total of 241 signs arranged in 61 delimited boxes. Reading
this as even remotely suggesting weeks, months or years in ANY kind
of calendar is patently ridiculous. I note that Steve in his huge cross-
posting of this contribution omits his usual haunt sci.archaeology, where
he is known for his (ummm) "creative" ideas. Despite my distaste for
cross-posting, I am adding sci.archaeology back into the mix, in case
someome competent there wishes to comment on current speculations
concerning the Phaistos Disk.
There is (to the best of my knowledge) NO evidence whatsoever for
early 28-day months, nor any evidence before Ezekiel (post-exilic)
for a continuous 7-day cycle of days.
--
Michael L. Siemon (mls@panix.com)
"For all but the last ten thousand years of human history,
unfettered travel was impossible, and diffusion of sweatshirts
was very limited." -- Jared Diamond
|