text:
Talk:Egyptian calendar

Discussion
The only true sothic cycle of 1460 years has been 139ad to 1599ad. The reason for current stability (1461 days) is because sothis is at the 6 hour right ascension. However, the shifting of the right ascension prior to 139ad is so drastic that Sothis of 30 degree latitiude makes a 1452-year cycle from 1314bc July 18 to 139ad July 20. Because 2030bc July 17 is the heliacal-rising Sothis at Memphis. The Egyptians and Babylonians calculated the 1460-year cycle as 2770bc July 17 to 1310bc July 17 (chronologies prove they accepted 1313bc as July 17). Ask any astronomer, and they will tell you and show you the heliacal-rise at Memphis for 2782bc is July 17 which would be the date Epagum 3, so that Thoth does not become July 17 until 2773-2770bc. It is absolutely horrendous that this internet domain can be dominated by selfish egotistical intruders who push their weight of lies into these articles. Most of us do not waste our time anymore at the collapsing deterioration of this wikipedia. I prefer to call it Wicked-Pedia to express its footsteps.98.144.71.174 (talk) 13:21, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Meh.

 * a, It's great if you can improve the article, but you should on the part of your fellow editors and

 * b, you need to be able to back up wholesale revisions of the material with that support your contention. —  Llywelyn II   13:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Edited
I've edited this page to move the more "interesting" discussion to the bottom.

The main article doesn't make clear the significance of the Egyptian New Year's Day falling on July 20. May I presume that others assume that in the year that the calendar was started, the Egyptian New Year started with the heliacal rising of Sirius? --Vrmlguy 15:10, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The date 1322bc July 20 Thoth 1 is a lie, the observation in 1322bc was visible on July 18. And so Thoth did not slip back to it until 1314bc. So too the observation 2782bc July 20 is also a lie. The observation was visible on 2782bc July 17, which means Thoth slipped back to it in 2770bc. Wikipedia allows liars to moderate things that were trashed 60 years ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.144.71.174 (talk • contribs) 00:08, 28 September 2011
 * See above. — Llywelyn II   13:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Evidence?
What evidence is there for the following statement?
 * It was used by astronomers in the Middle Ages because of its mathematical regularity.

This sounds very dubious. —Nefertum17 23:01, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I think that is very true. -Anonymous — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.76.89.17 (talk) 17:47, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * It is true, but it was because of the calendar's use by Ptolemy not because of its own virtues. — Llywelyn II   13:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * See the following for similar statements:   — Joe Kress 08:00, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)

Calculation
How do you calculate what today's date would be in this calendar? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.210.130.121 (talk • contribs)
 * Use Calendrica listed in External links. It is in the ninth row. — Joe Kress 19:32, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Answer: You use the date July 20 of 1599 AD as Thot 1 and retreat one date back every 4 years, or 30 days back in 120 years. Example, 240 years is 60 days back to May 21 of 1839 AD, or Apr 21 of 1959 AD, then add 13 days in our 1900 or 2000 century to have Gregorian May 4 in 1959 AD. Another 44 years to 2003 AD and 11 leap days takes all the dates back to April 23. Then 2004-2007 is April 22. In reply to the post below which says the Coptic calendar is not Egyptian, the answer is our September 11 as Thot 1 is Julian August 29. Though the Coptic calendar (Egyptian with leap days) was accepted in 284 AD (which Era of Diocletion is the Era of Christian Martyrs so coincidentally the year 6000 of Adam in the Jewish book of Josephus published in Rome), this calendar leap day was created in 27 BC by Augustus Octavius Caesar who inaugurated it in 25 BC when Thoht 1 becomes August 29. Therefore, the Coptic calendar is Julian (not Gregorian). Events against America have been on Egyptian dates. The August 2 invasion of Kuwait is Julian July 20 and the invasion takes place at 30 degrees where the rise of Sothis occurs on that date only at that latitude; this implying Saddam chose the rise to invade. However, they felt world trade controlling oil was USA blame. Another date is Thoth 1 was Feb 26 in 747 BC. In 1993 the world trade was bombed on Gregorian Feb 26 not taking into account that Julian Feb 26 is March 11 (March 10 in leap year). The Coptic calendar honors this date as the half year placing Pamenot 1 on March 10 and the internet terrorists attempt to destroy world trade by constantly revising the March 10 virus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.76.46.169 (talk • contribs)

Still used?
In my opinion, any reference that the Egyptian calendar is still used appears to be a misunderstanding, written by people who think that the Coptic calendar is the Egyptian calendar. The Coptic calendar differs from the Egyptian calendar by adding a leap day every four years, a feature that the Egyptian calendar never had. I can only accept a reference that it is still used if the writer knows of this difference or if the writer knows that the Egyptian New Year's Day differs from the Coptic New Year's Day by five months. In the Gregorian year labeled 2006 the Egyptian New Year's Day (1 Thoth) was 22 April, whereas the Coptic New Year's Day was 11 September. The reference to Saint's days (never used in Ancient Egypt) and the Youssef reference by a linguist proves this misunderstanding. — Joe Kress 00:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The coptic calendar is nearly exactly the same, and is the same principle. Treat it like this:  You have one open source game engine, but you change, say, what colour the mouse is in it.  They are the same engine.  --86.14.243.202 17:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The Coptic calendar is exactly the same as this calendar after 22, except for the era of its year. It isn't the same as this calendar before that date. The article does a better job of expressing that now. — Llywelyn II   13:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * You assume incorrectly that the author is unaware of this rather trivial detail. The change introduced under the Ptolemies (the so-called "Alexandrian calendar") represents a simple reform to the Egyptian calendar. The Coptic calendar is a direct continuation of the Egyptian calendar with the addition of Euergetes' leap day that was adopted later. That the Egyptian calendar prior to the Graeco-Roman period did not have that feature is entirely irrelevant to the simple statement I added, which I am now going to re-add with further additions to the article. Furthermore, the population at large, who is mostly Muslim, technically does not use the official Coptic calendar, whose dating begins with the Christian 'Era of the Martyrs'. That detail did not prevent you, however, from stating that that Coptic calendar is used by "the Egyptian populace in general". This is true only in the sense that the calendar used by Egyptian Muslims is a continuation of the Coptic calendar, in turn with roots in ancient Egypt. The agricultural calendar used by Egyptian farmers today is simply the Egyptian agricultural calendar, same Egyptian seasons, same Egyptian months. — [ zɪʔɾɪdəʰ ]   ·    ☥   11:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Your additions to the article are very good, but I must insist that that "trivial detail", the Alexandrian reform, be mentioned relative to the modern version of the Egyptian calendar. Accordingly I am adding the one word "reformed". Your previous wording did not delimit who was using what calendar, especially the misleading sentence "It is associated with many local saint festivals throughout Egypt." There was no discussion of who uses what eras, and there still is none. I consider that a critical detail. If Egyptian Muslims don't use an era with their Egyptian calendar, then state so—but they may use a modified Hijra era, like that used in association with the Turkish version of the Julian calendar for over a century immediately prior to its adoption of the Gregorian calendar . — Joe Kress 21:29, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

 * As a side note, the Alexandrian calendar was Augustus's reform and not Ptolemy III's. — Llywelyn II   13:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Sothis
I submitted this information from the Carina Software Voyager program. Because everyone online seems to think Sothis rises the same day every year at every latitude. The date July 20 is Julian and comes from 30 degree GIza and Memphis. At 31 degree Alexandria (and Ur) the absence is 72 days instead of 70 because it cannot be seen July 20 and it rises a day later on July 21. Septua-Gint means 72 not 70. That's the first fact the rise is pending latitude. The further fact is that rise at Memphis is July 17 not July 20 thru the years 2782-1872bc which means in 2782bc the July 20 rise of Sothis on Thoth 1 is already the 4th rising having been seen July 17 on epagum day 3. Thus Thoth 1 must slip back 12 years 3 leap days to be July 17 the first day of rising. When information like this is submitted and deleted, it is arrogance and wicked heart that does so. So i submit no longer, and advise many never to donate cash to this cause. 98.144.71.174 (talk) 13:30, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

 * "Septua-Gint means 72 not 70."
 * Really? That is interesting, do you have any source for that? Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 14:01, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

 * The source is the astral facts with historic facts. Historically the septuagint was written in Alexandria where astrally sothis is 72 days absent at 31* the same as it is in Ur at 31* not the 70 days that it is at 30* Memphis. Traditions of 70 days hold because of Egyptian foundation at Giza and then Memphis. Even at Ur, in the suicide tombs where Sothis is absent 72 days, there are only 69 graves of 2 princes, 63 wives, and 4 guards as if 69 were going to heaven to be with the 70th (Peleg). Is Tanis near Alexandria? I ask because though Israel was in Goshen (72-day absence of Sothis), they mourn Jacob 70 days at death, thus the fixation of the 30* latitude. This is why in 1990 i was asking people if the troops of Saddam were at the border 70 days before they crossed over themorn of Sothic rising (G.Aug 2 = July 20). By the way this other information here is me. 24.167.196.43 and 69.76.46.169 (no idea why these numbers change) 98.144.71.174 (talk) 09:25, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Sothic chart
(The following table is tab-formatted. I'd fix it myself, but I'm not sure what it means or its significance to the article.  --Vrmlguy 15:10, 22 October 2007 (UTC))

The Days That The Star Sothis Is Absent (mid crossing) +June 12 33°	76 days	May  5     	to July  20 32°	74 days	May  6       	to July  19 31°	72 days	May  7        +	to July  18         LXX (72 men 72 days) 30°	70 days	May 8	to July 17 Memphis (70 men 70 days) 29°	68 days	May  9	to July  16 28°	66 days	May 10	to July  15 27°	64 days	May 11	to July  14 26°	62 days	May 12	to July  13 25°	60 days	May 13	to July 12  encasing one month 24°	58 days	May 14      	to July  11 23°	56 days	May 15     	to July 10  solstice for 100 years 22°	54 days	May 16   	to July   9 Sothic Rising in 2030 BC varies 1° between 33°- 23° Lat one day per degree + 	Absence	June 12	 Rise date &	Time	 Dawn Sun 40° 	Apr 25    	96 days	to July  30	3:47a	  -9°49’51” 39° 	Apr 27    	92 days	to July  28	3:53a	  -9°19’47” 38° 	Apr 28    	90 days	to July  27	3:54a	  -9°41’29” 37° 	Apr 29    	88 days	to July  26	3:56a	  -9°53’49” Nineveh 36° 	May  1     	84 days	to July  24	4:02a	  -9°20’58” 35° 	May  2     	82 days	to July  23	4:04a	  -9°32’01” 34° 	May  3     	80 days	to July  22	4:05a	  -9°52’32”	_ 33° 	May  4     	78 days	to July  21	4:07a	-10°02’53”  Babel May  5     	76 days	to July  20	4:11a	( -9°16’52”) 32° 	May  6       	74 days	to July  19	4:13a	  -9°26’21” 31° 	May  7        	72 days	to July  18	4:15a	  -9°35’24”   Ur 30° 	May  8	70 days	to July 17	4:17a	  -9°43’58” 29° 	May  9	68 days	to July  16	4:19a	  -9°52’06” 28° 	May 10	66 days	to July  15	4:21a	  -9°59’46” 27° 	May 11	64 days	to July  14	4:23a	-10°06’59” 26° 	May 12	62 days	to July  13	4:26a	-10°02’26” 25° 	May 13	60 days	to July 12	4:28a	-10°08’34” 24° 	May 14       	58 days	to July  11	4:30a	-10°14’14” 23° 	May 15      	56 days	to July 10	4:32a	-10°19’26” 22° 	May 17    	52 days	to July   8	4:39a	-  9°21’48” —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.167.196.43 (talk) 05:08, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Doesn't seem to have any application at Wikipedia, unless there's a specific line or two that are relevant to a point being made by the article. It would still need a source. — Llywelyn II   13:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Outright lies continually replace truth
If you delete this from discussion, it will be put in the main article, and i will write congress and the senate to close Wikipedia.

This following statement is an outright lie, and although sources neglegiently once thought this 100 years ago, people like AnonMoos like to worship such lies and then pretend nothing has never corrected it in our schools. It shows a lack of respect for the scholars who have corrected it and published it. It shows arrogance when he is one man in millions.

quote: From this it is possible to calculate that the previous occasion on which this occurred was 1322 BCE, and the one before that was 2782 BCE. This latter date has been postulated as the time when the calendar was invented, but Djer's reign preceded that date. Other historians push it back another whole cycle, to 4242 BCE.

TRUTH: not my truth but published truth, go find an astronomer rather than prove yourself this arrogant evil person you are. Fact, 1322 BC July 20 is Thoth 1, heliacal-rise occurred 2 days earlier on July 18. (fact) In, 1314 BC July 18 is Thoth 1 (it WANDERS bcause of 2 leap days) and heliacal-rise occurs. Truth, Richard Parker famed Egyptologist who AnonMoos despises by deleting Parkers research and astronomy, 1872 BC heliacal-rise occurs on July 17 at Memphis not July 20. Truth, Richard Parker therefore corrects 2782 BC Thoth 1 July 20 as the 3rd day after July 17 heliacal-rise, 2770 BC July 17 is Thoth 1.

quote: The heliacal rising of Sothis returned to the same point in the calendar every 1460 years (a period called the Sothic cycle).

That is false, the New YearThoth 1 returns in 1460 years not Sothis prior to 139 AD. It has been 1460 years only since 139 AD where no one has used Egypts calendar but rather the Julian calendar which is absolutely Sothic since 139 AD.

quote: The difference between a seasonal year and a civil year was therefore 365 days in 1460 years, or 1 day in 4 years.

This is false, a Sothis year is not seasonal. any Mayan scholar will tell you taht 1508 haab is 1508 egyptian years or 1507 Gregorian years which are seasonal. That means that in 1460 years or 1507 years or 1508 years is 377 days not 365 days. The seasonal year is 12 days less than the sothic julian year and so the egyptian calendar has to WANDER back another 12 days in 48 years.

How come AnonMoos is allowed to ruled. How come he isn't forced to consult an accurate scholar. This country has had three attacks on Egyptian dates including Thoth 1 September 11 and i will write President Bush and ask if AnonMoos is involved. I am serious. The FBI will be on your ass if you think you can twist pertinent information that China has to question should be banned or not, and you think our children should go to your twisted almighty lies as reference material. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.76.46.169 (talk) 14:16, 7 February 2007 (UTC).

How many times must you be told that this is false astrology not true astronomy. The 1460-year cycle is calendar not Sothic. 1461 egyptian years = 1460 Julian years but does not equal Sothis. The star Sothis from 2782 BC to 1872 BC is known to rise 3 days earler than it did in 139 AD to 240 AD. So if Memphis those dates are July 17 drifting to July 20. But you continue to replace the truth with lie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.144.120.119 (talk • contribs) 05:51, 12 October 2009
 * With all due respect, writing in this tone makes you sound unhinged. Simply speak respectfully and present sources to back up your points. — Llywelyn II   13:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

heliacal rising of Sirius
Did you realize, that in your article is mathematic mistake? If there was heliacal rising in year 1322 BCE and the cycle is 1460 years, how could be heliacal rising in year 139 CE? Wasn't it year 138?--Niusereset czech Wiki-user 13.XI. MMVII 13:20 CET

 * The difference between 1322 BCE and 139 CE is 1460 years because there was no year 0.

 * All calculations that involve both BCE and CE have to adjust to take this into account. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.159.95.252 (talk) 11:58, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Astrally the year 1322bc is labelled as -1321. Leap years are thus divisible by 4 in the astral system not the BC system. example 2369bc is leap year, it is -2368. example Mayan 3113bc is leap year it is -3112. Further the actual Censorinus record calculated by astronomy as 139 AD July 20 is calculated by calendar as 140 AD July 21. This is a 2 day discrepancy since 140 AD is a leap year so that Thoth July 20 in 139 becomes July 19 in 140 AD, or Thoth July 22 in 139 becomes Thoth July 21 in 140. Since the natural rising doesnt leap the same year the calendar does, I guess July 20 was the solution as the average rise every year (Memphis latitude). The reason July 20 has stood the most recent 1460 years is because the star is currently on the axis line of the summer solstice 6-hour Right Ascension. The distance before that line in 1322bc is an angle that makes Sothis appear 2 days earlier as well as being 3 days earlier in 2782bc and 2770bc. This is why it is so pathetic that you list Richard Parker as a source while you ignore his pointing out July 17 for all years 2782bc to 1872bc. His 1991bc 12th dynasty is based on year 120 (1872bc July 17) and yet you keep claiming July 20. And since Thoth is July 20 in 139 but not 140, they then conclude the year recorded as 140 must be a mistake for 139. I fail to see the reasoning. There is no logic being used by them.98.144.71.174 (talk) 08:59, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Alleged "texts" from the reign of Djer - dubious

 * "A text from the reign of First Dynasty King Djer (c.3000 BC) indicates that the Egyptians had already established a link between the heliacal rising and the beginning of the year."

A text from the reign of Djer, eh? This needs sourcing. My understanding is that there are no known "texts" from the reign of Djer. In fact, the first complete sentences do not even appear until around the time of Peribsen. Anyone know if there is a Reliable source for this and most of the other unsourced "statements" in this article??? Many thanks, Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 10:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, I looked into this myself and found some more accurate info - will be updating the article with refs shortly... Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 11:07, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Biblical connection
The rising of Sothis is in Genesis. The 70 days of Sothic absence is the reason they morn Jacob 70 days. The 365-day calendar begins with those 70 days (May 8 to July 17). Manetho uses a 5200bc Adam. It is proven that he thinks Menes is Adam because his 1st dynasty begins 930 years later in 4270bc when his Adam (Menes) would have died and 1st dynasty kings would be successors of him. He then says the 7th dynasty was 70 kings who ruled 70 days. And this falls in 2770bc which then means he is using the May 8 thru July 17 system. As for Genesis long chronology, it avoids doing what short Genesis does which is place those 70 days at the death of Peleg when Unas Sakkara died. This is because in short Genesis his death is year 340 after the Flood, but in Egyptian it is 3090-2321bc (768 years after it, with another 768 to Moses). AS for new years day, the same word is used for Thoth as Sothis, yet Thoth is on Sothis for only 4 years every 1460 years. It is also a word used for winter solstice and summer solstice. The date Parmuti 16 is said to be 1872bc July 17 which is 8 days after July 9 summer solstice (July 10 in 1991bc). But 48 years later in 1824bc July 10 is a rise of Sothis at 12th dynasty Fort Quban on 23*latitude on PERSIAN Parmuti 16, and 185 days after Egyptian Paopi 16 is on January 6 (winter solstice was Jan 6 in 1991bc and Jan 5 in 1824bc). You see I beleive every calendar shows a global disaster by comet encounter in the year of exodus and every nation decided to add 180 leap days for their pasty 720 years of 365-day calendar. China and Maya both pivot their calendars on the year 1513bc, and the 1444 years that Greeks use as 2958-1514bc is used by Africanus as 3237-1793bc (end of his Noahs Flood to an exodus leaving Hamurabi of Babylon. He further says the flood of Ogygos (destruction of Greece by the flood of Thera Atlantis) was the same year as exodus. Information from Jack Finegan chronology. 98.144.71.174 (talk) 09:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

More dates, please
It would be nice to know when the first undiputed use of this calendar began. We are told that the 3000 BC date is "too early", but not what a more reasonable estimate might be. When was the lunisolar calendar thought to be used? When did the Copts add the leap day? Etc. Rwflammang (talk) 14:07, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * WHEN? My personal belief is this calendar began 2030bc on July 17 (340 years after a 2370bc global Flood that carbon dates as 20,000bc). This 2030bc July 17 which now appears calculated as a Pamenot 6, is retained as Persian Pamenot 1. However, for those who do not wish this Bible Genesis view of calendar at Peleg's death, you will be happy to know that original Septuagint chronologies and pre-Roman chronologies of nations use 2770bc July 17 (Thoth 1). For NeoBabylon (747bc) this is a Flood of 2947bc and a calendar 177 years later (6-orbit Saturnalia of Saturn). It is derived from Ur ruling 177 years as 2207-2030bc, but the fall in 2029bc is later regarded as 3rd dynasty because Ibbi-Sin is in Ur and scholars will not believe he lived 159 years (2060-1901bc) to have died in a 3rd dynasty (2009-1900bc). It is Moslem Genesis and Christian Africanus who use the 2782bc July 20. So you are talking about 2770bc July 17 used by chronologists from 1290-280bc, and then 2782bc July 20 used by chronologists from 139-622 AD; and my chronologist named Moses is 1513bc. But i do use all calendars to prove Moses correct, rather than just think he is because he's a Bible. 98.144.71.174 (talk) 09:44, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

 * Done, although you're right that the earliest certainly attested date would be nice. I think it's all going to depend on the reconstructions of the Sothic cycle but maybe there's a few pieces that are separately confirmed, such as a treaty with the Hittites or something. — Llywelyn II   13:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Ancient Egyptian calendar and Coptic calendar were different!
Ancient Egyptian calendar and Coptic calendar were different! (but the names of the months were the same!)

Ancient Egyptian month "Thot" = July 19 - August 17 (but this is Julian calendar!) = June 15 - July 15 (Gregorian calendar) Coptic month Thout = September 11 - October 10

so they were different! (but this makes confusion! Today, most of the people think that the Ancient Egyptian calendar begins on September 11! In fact, it begins on June 15!) Böri (talk) 12:44, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You are correct that the ancient Egyptian calendar is not the Coptic calendar, but your supporting dates are misleading at best. Although the ancient Egyptian calendar does not begin on September 11 Gregorian, it does begin on the first day (Thoth 1) of the Alexandrian calendar (called the Reformed calendar in the article), created by Roman Emperor Augustus in 25 BC when he added a leap day every four years to the ancient Egyptian calendar, which had no leap days. The Coptic Church formed in Alexandria, so it adopted the Alexandrian calendar as its own Coptic calendar. Julius Caesar began the Julian calendar a bit earlier in 45 BC. The Coptic/Alexandrian calendar begins on August 29 in the Julian calendar, except that it begins on August 30 when Thoth 1 is within the six month period between the Coptic/Alexandrian and Julian leap days. Only between 1900 and 2099 is August 29/30 Julian equal to September 11/12 Gregorian.

 * Because the ancient Egyptian calendar does not have leap days while the Julian calendar does have leap days, it cannot begin on any fixed Julian date like July 19. Instead, the beginning of the ancient Egyptian calendar wanders through the seasons and the Julian calendar, taking 1460 years for Thoth 1 to return to the same Julian date. This cycle is called the Sothic cycle as explained in that article. Your July 19 is usually stated to be July 20, which was Thoth 1 in the four year period including AD 139, 1322 BC, and 2782 BC, but it was not July 20 in any other year. A century ago the Egyptian scholar Eduard Meyer extended the Sothic cycle one cycle further back to 4242 BC, but no modern Egyptian scholar supports that date. Indeed, many Egyptian scholars now state that no Sothic cycle ever existed. Only in 4242 BC is July 20 Julian equal June 15 Gregorian. In 2782 BC it is June 27 Gregorian, in 1322 BC it is July 8 Gregorian, and in 139 AD it is July 19 Gregorian.

 * The next Coptic New Year (Tut 1) will be September 12, 2011 Gregorian (and August 30 Julian) because it is one day after the Coptic leap day (6 al-Nasi) and six months before the next Julian leap day on February 30, 2012. September 12, 2011 Gregorian is Tybi 25 in the ancient Eqyptian calendar, which has continued to wander since the Alexandrian/Coptic calendar diverged from it in 25 BC. Tybi 25 is about five months after Thoth 1 in the ancient Egyptian calendar because the last year that Thoth 1 was July 20 Julian was in AD 1599. — Joe Kress (talk) 19:01, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Eh, he's just wrong. It's ok to say that. — Llywelyn II   13:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * "he's just wrong" = I'm not wrong! You're wrong. / The first day of the year was fixed at July 19 (Julian = June 15, Gregorian), when two extra-ordinary events greeted the eyes of tillers - the beginning of the Nile flood and the appearance in the heavens at the hour of sunrise of the star Sothis (Sirius)... / from "From Tribe to Empire" (A. Moret and G.Davy, 2013, First published in 2005) / You can find it on Google. / It says: June 15 / That book of Alexandre Moret and Georges Davy was written in 1926. Böri (talk) 13:24, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Mismatch
Studying calendars you will find religious mismatches. EXAMPLE the (Egyptian Greek) Alexandrian Era of 5500bc is a date for Adam using the Coptic calendar new year August 29. Though long chronologies started with a Flood in year 2256am, the prefs have become 2242am and 2262am for the Flood (Hippolytus 3258bc; Africanus 3238bc). But the EGYPTIAN COPTIC new year Aug 29 is taken from the Neo Babylon Flood year 2947bc (Thoth 1 = Aug 30) and Noah's grandson Arpaxad 2945bc (Thoth 1 = Aug 29) which is 2256am for a 5200bc Adam, not 5500bc. This 1460-year cycle hits the years 2947 to 1487 to 27bc, and 2945 to 1485 to 25bc, when the Coptic calendar was created by Octavian Augustus. This Coptic calendar was NOT created in 284 AD and yet August 29 is used by many as that Era too, which is when the book Josephus claims is 6000 of Adam from 5716bc (he uses 2256am to Flood 3460bc, but also 2656am to Flood 3060bc). The point is all these Eras are misusing a Thoth date that came from the year 2947bc as calculated in 747bc and is used by Caesar in 27bc after 720 years of 180 leap days.98.144.71.174 (talk) 09:54, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

How were the years numbered?
What I came here hoping to know was how are the years numbered in the Egyptian Calendar? Are they numbered from a specific event? Or at all? Thanks. -- Irrevenant [ talk ] 05:53, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
 * They datet time after rule or king. 1 year of regnal king yxz, 12 year of regnal king xy... etc...
 * I have another question: "The heliacal rising of Sothis returned to the same point in the calendar every 1,460 years (a period called the Sothic cycle). The difference between a seasonal year and a civil year was therefore 365 days in 1,460 years, or one day in four years. Similarly, the Egyptians were aware that 309 lunations nearly equaled 9,125 days, or 25 Egyptian years, which was later used in the construction of a secondary lunar calendar that did not depend on observations."
 * The Egyptians used 365 day calendar, not 365,25, so if the astronomical years its 365,256 day that corelates with star rises at the same site on the same point, its obivious that corelation its not 1460 years. But 1/(365/365,256)=> 1/(1,0007-1)=1425,78 years. That means if the sothis rises is in 139,6? AD the cycle is: 1287,1 BC, 2712,8 BC, 4138,6 BC. Bynk--195.91.43.138 (talk) 08:41, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * The correlation within the 365-day calendar is 1461 years exactly but that's not important for our dating within our own system. (Which should really be consistently Gregorian but historians have never really wanted to bother with adjusting the old Julian dates if they can avoid it.) — Llywelyn II   13:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

 * Hey! 4138,6 BC. was in midst of stone age. No calendar at that time! Even in the pre-dynastics they didn't count years but kept track of them by plates denoting a year by some extraordinary event which incidentally happened in that very year.--Vollbracht (talk) 00:10, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Fixed calendar
Moved here from discussion misplaced on my talk page:
 * The first day of the year was fixed at July 19 (Julian = June 15, Gregorian), when two extra-ordinary events greeted the eyes of tillers - the beginning of the Nile flood and the appearance in the heavens at the hour of sunrise of the star Sothis (Sirius)... / from "From Tribe to Empire" (A. Moret and G.Davy, 2013, First published in 2005) / You can find it on Google. / It says: June 15 / That book of Alexandre Moret and Georges Davy was written in 1926. Böri (talk) 13:23, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

That's completely incorrect, as is thoroughly documented in the existing article and any scholarly treatment of the subject. Clagett's books are much more recent than 1920, so no idea where that complaint comes from. The idea that the Egyptian new year corresponded with the rise of Sirius is a common misconception based on the scholars talking about the Sothic cycle, whose existence precisely belies the idea. The calendar was presumably adopted in a year when Sirius began it, but it rotated out of that alignment without any correction twice in the historical record and claims to the contrary—Parker's prehistoric intercalating lunar calendar or others' proposed early Julian systems—are completely unsupported by the current record.

Now, there was eventually a fixed Egyptian calendar but that's glossed here and mostly treated at the Alexandrian calendar article. It wasn't established in a year when the new year correlated to the rising of Sirius and the Nile flood was never a very timely event and moved around over several months from year to year, though, so the rest of the points being made are still wrong. — Llywelyn II   14:35, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Plse read Richard Anthony Parker: The Calendars of Ancient Egypt. In: Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization. Band 26. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago (Illinois) 1950, p. 31, §151! What does Clagett write responding to Parker? --Vollbracht (talk) 00:25, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Sources for article expansion
The following 'sources' were listed in the Bibliography but completely unused by the article: Kindly restore them once they are being used to verify some statement within the running text. — Llywelyn II   13:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Grimal, Nicolas. A History of Ancient Egypt. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1997.
 * Shaw, Ian. ed. The Oxford Illustrated History of Ancient Egypt. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
 * Watterson, Barbara. The Egyptians. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. 1997.
 * Youssef, Ahmad Abdel-Hamid. From Pharaoh's Lips: Ancient Egyptian Language in the Arabic of Today. Cairo: American University in Cairo Press, 2003.

"Antikythera Mechanism" versions of month names
that were previously given here, at its Wikipedia article, and since copied around the internet were unsourced and are apparently utter bullshit. The complete treatment of the Antikythera parapegma is behind a paywall for Almagest Vol. 7 No. 1, but this source states that only three of the months—none involving variant spellings—survived and the rest are simply reconstructions. — Llywelyn II   23:56, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Hieroglyphic form of "Temple Month"
is from the individual words given in transcription by Parker but, since spellings can vary, it should be replaced by an attested form of the name when a source provides it. — Llywelyn II   04:04, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Parker provides a transliteration, but it neither matches the current generally accepted orthographic convention for transliterating the Egyptian term ḥwt-nṯr, nor what was provided in the hieroglyphs here, which did not say "temple month", but something closer to "God's-Belly Month". I have corrected both, and chosen a slightly more common orthography of the word Ꜣbd in the hieroglyphs. Anyone who wants to check these changes, can consult the Thesaurus Linguae Aegyptiae (http://aaew.bbaw.de/tla/), or a standard Egyptian dictionary. I am not aware of any hieroglyphic or hieratic source which contains the phrase "temple month" at the moment. Neither the TLA nor the Ramses corpus has an attestation of the phrase "temple month", and I am mystified as to why it's been singled out for putting into hieroglyphs here. Nevertheless, the edit I have made has rendered a comprehensible text in ancient Egyptian; the previous text did not. 92.13.221.157 (talk) 21:48, 15 October 2017 (UTC)Nefertum

Flooding of the Nile
from the internet: the flooding of the Nile began each year around the end of June / Akhet was the first season of the year, between the months of June and September. / Akhet began in June. / the Nile's flood which began in late June / The Nile flooded in a more or less predictable pattern. Each year in late June, the Nile began to rise because of heavy rains in the highlands of Ethiopia / The flooding usually began around June and it happens every year / The 1879 very high flood started as early as June. (about the Nile) /the rise of the Nile began in the month of June / During the month of June, the Nile began to rise / spring rains are carried by the Blue Nile into Egypt and cause the Nile to flood. This overflow, beginning each year early in June / Before the Aswan Dams were built in the twentieth century, the Nile River flooded annually. The inundation began in June and lasted until September. Böri (talk) 07:51, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * other sources: "History of Ancient Egypt" (Nathaniel Harris)- Sirius, the bright "dog star", rose above the horizon on about 19 July, beginning the new year and, more or less simultaneously, the inundation. / "Encyclopedia Americana" (1973), Volume 10, Egypt, Ancient - Science and Technology - Timekeeping: inundation (July-September) / "Pockets- Ancient Egypt" (Scott Steedman) akhet (July to October)Böri (talk) 07:17, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

German Wikipedia
see the table on German Wikipedia https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achet Böri (talk) 09:16, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

 * Thank you for that hint! This table is nonsense. Reference is a software tool but no Egyptology science. According to B. E. Schaefer: The heliacal rise of Sirius and ancient Egyptian chronology. In: Journal for the History of Astronomy. Band 31, Mai 2000,, p. 154 those dates suggest an unrealistic precision. In addition it's based on a single support date which by good chance has been misinterpreted. Even in Richard Anthony Parker: The Calendars of Ancient Egypt. In: Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization. volume 26. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago (Illinois) 1950 the author advocates the theory of a rise of Sothis date tied to astronomy while seasonal month names aren't tied to the seasons although all feasts "of the times" being celebrated only once a year have been tied to the civil calendar by the time of the New Kingdom. --Vollbracht (talk) 23:48, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

James P. Allen's book
The year began traditionally around mid-July... "Inundation" (mid-July to mid-November)/ from: "Middle Egyptian: An Introduction to the Language and Culture of Hieroglyphs", the book of James Peter Allen Böri (talk) 11:03, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

 * Only in moon calendar. The civil calendar year started after 365 days without regard of the season. --Vollbracht (talk) 23:52, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Egyptian calendar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110201063027/http://www.tyndalehouse.com/Egypt/ptolemies/chron/egyptian/chron_eg_intro.htm to http://www.www.tyndalehouse.com/Egypt/ptolemies/chron/egyptian/chron_eg_intro.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050216102054/http://emr.cs.iit.edu/home/reingold/calendar-book/Calendrica.html to http://emr.cs.iit.edu/home/reingold/calendar-book/Calendrica.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:41, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Claim that the old Egyptian calendar loses four months against the sun every century
Until this morning the article said that this calendar lost one day against the sun every four years (which is true). It then went on to say that this shortfall would accumulate to four months (i.e. 120 days) every century. If you do the math, however, since there are 25 groups of four years in a century the actual shortfall is 25 days. The article was corrected, but the claim has come back. What I guess happened is that in doing the math the editor mistakenly took the shortfall as 1.25 days per year instead of 0.25. In a century this comes to four months. 2A00:23C3:36:BC00:6DED:1968:40DC:CDDD (talk) 12:03, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * This error has been in the article since February 2017 when one user made a large number of changes, until an anonymous user attempted to correct it. I have made another attempt to correct it. Karl (talk) 13:26, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Egyptian calendar


text: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2005 February 19

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Camille Laurin

Camille Laurin (May 6, 1922 – March 11, 1999) was a psychiatrist and Parti Québécois (PQ) politician in the Canadian province of Quebec. A MNA member for the riding of Bourget, he is considered the father of Quebec's language law known informally as "Bill 101".

Biography
Born in Charlemagne, Quebec, Laurin obtained a degree in psychiatry from the Université de Montréal where he came under the influence of the Roman Catholic priest, Lionel Groulx. After earning his degree, Laurin went to Boston, Massachusetts, in the United States, where he worked at the Psychopathic Department of Boston State Hospital. Following a stint in Paris in 1957, he returned to practice in Quebec. In 1961, he authored the preface of the book Les fous crient au secours, which described the conditions of psychiatric hospitals of the time.

He was one of the early founders of the Quebec sovereignty movement. As a senior cabinet minister in the first PQ government elected in the 1976 Quebec election, he was the guiding force behind Bill 101, the legislation that placed restrictions on the use of English on public signs and in the workplace of large companies, and strengthened the position of French as the only official language in Quebec.

Laurin resigned from his cabinet position on November 26, 1984 because of a disagreement with Lévesque on the future of the sovereignty movement. He resigned from his seat in the National Assembly on January 25, 1985. He was elected once again to the Assembly on September 12, 1994 but did not run in the 1998 election for health reasons.

He died in 1999 after a long battle with cancer.

title: Camille Laurin


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Project jedi

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS; thus the article is kept. —Korath (Talk) 11:47, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

I count four deletes, a merge, and four keeps (including nixie's move and Average Earthman's comments). —Korath (Talk) 11:47, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

Project jedi
Nonsense about a supposedly classified super-soldier project. I respect the attempt at conspiracy theory fiction, so I didn't nominate for speedy. There's almost no chance of expansion or verification since the article states "Little else is known about Project Jedi at this time, pending further declassification of Special Forces documentation." Delete. Carrp | Talk 23:02, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Suggested literature is "The Men Who Stare At Goats"??? This is almost BJAODN material imho. Delete. Radiant! 23:19, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)--Sn0wflake 03:16, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * The book is real. This is probably taken from the book.  Weak Keep and send to Cleanup. Uncle G 23:49, 2005 Feb 18 (UTC)
 * Keep, but with reservations. Article neesd cleanup and expansion. Megan1967 00:45, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Too much theorization and lack of factual proof. --Sn0wflake 03:16, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * This isn't a joke - seriously. The US took research into alternative methods of warfare quite seriously, with the idea that not testing something just because it seems very, very silly may be a bad move in the long run. So, apart from anything else, they tried staring at goats to see if they could will them to die (one goat did, but it was statistical that if you stare at a goat for long enough one will have a heart attack). Col. John B. Alexander is another name to look up related to this. Since then they dumped the hippy ideas, and took on things such as playing the Barney the Dinosaur theme on a loop to prisoners to try to make them crack. Not sure how much of this article is a summary, and how much is a straight lift from Jon Ronson's book. Average Earthman 01:02, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * It's a real book Amazon. I would suggest moving the material from this article to The men who stare at goats rewriting it to be about the book unless there's anything else to substantiate the information presented.--nixie 12:05, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Doesn't conform to laws of physics enough to be included for factual accuracy and doesn't have enough publicity to be included as notable hoax. Delete. --Pjacobi 14:48, 2005 Feb 20 (UTC)
 * So you're saying that if the US government did something really, really silly that relied on them breaking the laws of physics to work, we should just pretend they never tried it? Why not delete the article on SDI, since it was economically and practically impossible? Or, hey, communism doesn't work, so let's delete the article on communism. I think an article on the US PsyOps thinking of the past, relying on publicised sources such as Ronson's book, is worth having. Shame this isn't it, though. Average Earthman 19:01, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * No, I consider the extent of breaking the laws of physics to be a hint, whether it is hoax or history. --Pjacobi 21:11, 2005 Feb 20 (UTC)
 * The article states that they were trying to break the laws of physics, not that they succeeded. So this suggests historic lunacy at high levels of a military that is armed with nuclear weapons. Average Earthman 12:57, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge with all the other articles on the Army's crank research under some suitable title. --Carnildo 20:31, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
User talk:Dbmercer

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Battle of Spanish Fort
Hello and welcome to wikipedia. To view an entire page, like at Battle of Fort Blakely, you click on edit this page at the top. So, at the Battle of Fort Blakely, when you edit the page, it starts with this long thing called a Battlebox. You can leave that out for now but you should try to figure out how it works for future articles.

The first thing you should do is go to this site and look for your battle. The Battle of Spanish Fort is listed as being part of the Mobile Campaign of the Main Western Theater. So, click on the red link for "Battle of Spanish Fort", and you'll be taken to a blank page to creat the new article. Write whatever you want, as long as it's not copyrighted, and then click Save page. After you create the page, send me a message and I'll get the page organized and added to the collection of other civil war battle pages.

If you create any battle pages, you should add them to this list: New articles (Battles). Click on "edit this page", and below the line that says "==February 2005==" add this whole line:

* Battle of Spanish Fort ~

Then click Save Page. -- brian0918 ™  23:04, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Make sure when you create an article that you add it to at least one category. For civil war battles, there is a hierarchy, but if you aren't sure where to add the battle, just put it in Category:Battles of the American Civil War by adding this text at the bottom:

title: User talk:Dbmercer


text:
Edward Meredith Cope

Edward Meredith Cope (28 July 1818 – 15 August 1873), English classical scholar.

He was educated at Ludlow College and then Shrewsbury. He then went onto Trinity College, Cambridge, of which society he was elected fellow in 1842, having taken his degree in 1841 as senior classic. He was for many years lecturer at Trinity, his favorite subjects being the Greek tragedians, Plato and Aristotle.

When the professorship of Greek became vacant, the votes were equally divided between Cope and BH Kennedy, and the latter was appointed by the chancellor. It is said that the keenness of Cope's disappointment was partly responsible for the mental affliction by which he was attacked in 1869, and from which he never recovered.

As his published works show, Cope was a thoroughly sound scholar, with perhaps a tendency to over-minuteness. He was the author of An Introduction to Aristotle's Rhetoric (1867), a standard work; The Rhetoric of Aristotle, with a commentary, revised and edited by JE Sandys (1877); translations of Plato's Gorgias (2nd ed., 1884) and Phaedo (revised by H Jackson, 1875). Mention may also be made of his criticism of Grote's account of the Sophists, in the Cambridge Journal of Classical Philology, vols. i., ii., iii. (1854–1857).

title: Edward Meredith Cope


text:
Saltburn, Ross and Cromarty

Saltburn (Allt an t-Salainn ) is a long linear coastal village, which is situated on the northern shore of the Cromarty Firth, in Ross-shire, Scottish Highlands, and is in the Scottish council area of Highland.

The village developed in the same manner as Invergordon, in connection with the Royal Naval base.

title: Saltburn, Ross and Cromarty


text:
Grit (newspaper)

Grit is a magazine, formerly a weekly newspaper, popular in the rural U.S. during much of the 20th century. It carried the subtitle "America's Greatest Family Newspaper". In the early 1930s, it targeted small town and rural families with 14 pages plus a fiction supplement. By 1932, it had a circulation of 425,000 in 48 states, and 83% of its circulation was in towns of fewer than 10,000 inhabitants.

History
The publication was founded in 1882 as the Saturday edition of the Williamsport, Pennsylvania, Daily Sun and Banner. In 1885, the name was purchased for $1,000 by 25-year-old German immigrant Dietrick Lamade (pronounced Lam'-a-dee), who established a circulation of 4,000 during the first year.

Lamade was born February 6, 1859, in Gölshausen, Baden-Württemberg, Southern Germany, one of nine children of Johannes Dietrick and Caroline Stuepfle Lamade. The family moved to Williamsport in 1867, where Johannes died of typhoid fever on January 4, 1869. To support the family, Dietrick, his sister, and his older brothers quit school. At age ten, Dietrick began working as an errand boy, earning a weekly salary of $3 in the office of a local German-language weekly, Beobachter (literally Observer), when he was 13 years old.

At 18, Lamade began printing theater programs and a four-page ad brochure, the Merchants' Free Press. In the summer of 1880, he did Camp News for the Pennsylvania National Guard, and he married the following year. In 1882, Lamade became the ad compositor and assistant composing room foreman for the Daily Sun and Banner, and that same year, Grit began as the paper's Saturday edition, typeset by Lamade. He left the Daily Sun in 1884 to launch the weekly Times as a daily, but finances and the health of the owner led the Times to cease publication. With two children and no job, 25-year-old Lamade became a publisher. Teaming with two partners, he bought the Times equipment plus the Grit name and goodwill. During his first year, he increased Grit's circulation to 4,000. He operated from a third-floor single room, moving to a storefront location in 1886, establishing a weekly circulation of 20,000 by 1887.

With rapid expansion, a wagon of Remington typewriters was delivered to the Grit offices in 1892. In 1894, one member of the art department was the 16-year-old C. W. Kahles, later famed as the creator of the long-run comic strip Hairbreadth Harry.

Grit displayed news and features aimed at rural America, and climbed to a weekly circulation of 100,000 by 1900, following an editorial policy outlined by Lamade during a banquet for Grit's employees:

"Always keep Grit from being pessimistic. Avoid printing those things which distort the minds of readers or make them feel at odds with the world. Avoid showing the wrong side of things, or making people feel discontented. Do nothing that will encourage fear, worry, or temptation... Wherever possible, suggest peace and good will toward men. Give our readers courage and strength for their daily tasks. Put happy thoughts, cheer, and contentment into their hearts."

While introducing such innovations as national newsboy delivery and direct mail, Lamade expanded his content to combine news, human interest articles, comic strips (sometimes filling ten pages), puzzles and serials in fiction supplements ("Grit Story Section"). Circulation reached 300,000 in 1916.

Little League and newsboy sales
Grit was a familiar newspaper in small towns across the U.S. for over a century. By the time of its 50th anniversary in 1932, 400,000 people bought the newspaper each week, increasing to 500,000 by 1934. Lamade retired in 1936, and died October 10, 1938. His son, George R. Lamade, became the publisher and editor, with grandson Howard Lamade Jr. serving as Grit's production manager. George R. Lamade died by suicide in August 1965.

Another son, Howard J. Lamade, was vice president, and also served as a top executive with Little League Baseball, helping to build it into a national institution. The main stadium used for the Little League World Series was built on land donated by the Lamade family, and it is named Howard J. Lamade Stadium in his memory.

Grit went to a tabloid format in 1944.

During the first three-quarters of the 20th century, Grit was sold across the country by children and teenagers, many recruited by ads in comic books from the 1940s to the 1970s. Approximately 30,000 children collected dimes from more than 700,000 American small town homes during the 1950s when the publication still carried the subtitle, "America's Greatest Family Newspaper." A comical ad in Richie Rich comic books aimed to recruit more young salesmen, suggesting that Richie's father, Richard Rich, got his start as a businessman selling Grit.

Content
By the 1940s, the paper was separated into five different sections "for ease of handling and reading." For instance, the 44-page issue for Sunday, January 1, 1950, was divided as follows:
 * News Section (12 pages)
 * Women's Section (8 pages)
 * Family Section (4 pages)
 * Comic Section (4 pages)
 * Story Section (16 pages)

The News Section, displaying a dramatic page-one headline, "Atomic Energy Provides Man Tool of Death or Good Life," followed with a variety of human-interest stories, a coverage of "1949 in Review," a "Stranger Than Fiction" column and a page of international news. More than a few photos focused on unusual highway accidents.

The Women's Section included fashion features and recipes, along with stories on house plants, new gadgets and how to hold a tea party. The Family Section featured jokes, puzzles and the "Odd, Strange and Curious" page with stories on such subjects as a two-headed turtle and the world's largest collection of cigarette lighters. The Story Section opened with the first installment of the serialized "Ring Out the Old" by Mary Hastings Bradley and included "Modern Parables", a series by Fulton Oursler, author of The Greatest Story Ever Told.

Comic strips
The Comic Section for January 1, 1950, carried the following Sunday comic strips in black-and-white: Chic Young's Blondie, Young's Colonel Potterby and the Duchess, Dixie Dugan by J. P. McEvoy and John H. Striebel, Walt Disney's Donald Duck, Flash Gordon by Mac Raboy and Don G. Moore, Carl Anderson's Henry, Ham Fisher's Joe Palooka, Jungle Jim by Paul Norris and Moore, Fran Striker's The Lone Ranger, Mandrake the Magician by Lee Falk and Phil Davis, J. R. Williams' Out Our Way, Hal Foster's Prince Valiant and Ed Reed's three-panel The Three Bares, extracted from Reed's Off the Record gag panel feature. To squeeze three or four strips on a page, some strips appear to have panels slightly cropped and other strips were stacked vertically, with The Three Bares inserted at the bottom as a filler.

A few years later, Grit reduced the number of pages from 44 to 40, and went from five sections to four sections by combining the comic strips and illustrated stories into a single section. In this format, the strips were scattered about with a single strip used as a design element to relieve the monotony of many grey columns of story text.

Charlie Walker, writing in the February 16, 2000, edition of The News (Kingstree, South Carolina), described a 1956 issue:
 * A few weeks ago, Leo Barrineau, who lives at Barrineau's Crossroads, gave me a call. His son Steve, while remodeling the church at Broad Swamp, had discovered a 1956 Grit newspaper in the walls of the church. When it comes to old newspapers, old pictures and old phonograph records, I don't need Viagra to turn me on. This Grit was published January 1, 1956. It contained 40 pages and cost a dime. So hop aboard the Twilight Zone Express. Put your memory in reverse, and together, we will remember the way it was. The back page of this 44-year-old newspaper recalled the dramatic events of 1955. The polio vaccine was developed by Dr. Jonas Salk. President Eisenhower suffered a heart attack. The first atomic-powered submarine, the Nautilus, was launched. In 1955, the Brooklyn Dodgers beat the New York Yankees in the World Series. Oklahoma was the No. 1 college football team in the land.

 * Bennett Cerf wrote a column for Grit. The funnies included Blondie, Joe Palooka, The Lone Ranger, Donald Duck and Henry. There was a crossword puzzle and a serial, a murder mystery called, Tell Her It's Murder. This copy of Grit contained the 29th and final chapter. The first Grit of 1956 also contained predictions for the upcoming year. The unicycle would be the number one sport in the summer of 1956. And the TV program that would replace The $64,000 Question would be one called Can You Trust Your Wife? And in 1956 just like today, doctors still couldn't cure the common cold. Grit carried a full-page ad offering Valentine cards for seven cents each. Grit also carried an ad for Sinclair Gasoline. (Willie Munn operated a Sinclair station at the corner of Main and Jackson streets in Kingstree.) Grit was recruiting carriers to sell their paper. You could make 4¢ for each paper you sold.

Grit was a pioneer in the introduction of offset printing. It was one of the first newspapers in the US to run color photographs, with the first full-color picture (of the American flag) appearing on the front page in June 1963. At its peak in 1969, Grit had a weekly circulation of 1.5 million copies.

The Lamade family owned Grit for nearly 100 years, but in 1981, ADVO-System, Inc. of Hartford, Connecticut purchased the paper. In 1983, Grit was purchased by Stauffer Communications, Inc. of Topeka, Kansas, which already owned Capper's Weekly, a national tabloid also marketed to rural areas and small towns, albeit mostly in the Great Plains and Midwestern states.

From Williamsport to Topeka
In 1992, Grit left Williamsport after 111 years and moved its offices to Topeka. At that time, Roberta Peterson was editor-in-chief of Grit and also of Best Recipes, a bimonthly glossy magazine that grew to be a Top 10 paid circulation national food title. Peterson left the group for a Senior Editor position at Meredith Corporation (Better Homes and Gardens, Ladies Home Journal) in 1995, at the time of the magazine group's double sale—first to Morris Communications, and very shortly after in the same year, to Ogden Publications. At that time, publishing of Best Recipes was suspended.

For decades Grit had published a national edition, a Pennsylvania edition (for sale within the Keystone State, featuring mostly Pennsylvania-related stories) and a local edition. The local edition was the Sunday newspaper for Williamsport and Lycoming County, Pennsylvania, and was circulated in 13 other counties in north-central Pennsylvania as well; the National Edition served essentially as its magazine. This edition stopped publication in the early 1990s, whereupon the Williamsport Sun Gazette began producing a Sunday edition. Michael R. Rafferty, who later served as a city councilman and mayor of Williamsport (2000–2004), was the last native-born Williamsporter to serve as editor of the Grit national and city editions, leaving Grit in 1991. He served as editor of Webb Weekly, a Williamsport publication with an approach similar to Grit's from 2004 to 2013 when he retired from journalism after 30+ years.

In 1995, the Morris Communications Corporation purchased Stauffer Communications, giving Morris a total of 32 daily newspapers in 13 states when it added Stauffer's 20 daily papers, including the Stauffer flagship, the Topeka Capital-Journal. Morris president Paul S. Simon said he intended to sell Stauffer's broadcast division, including 11 stations and several radio networks, and Stauffer Magazine Group, which included Grit, Cappers (a rural tabloid with a 120-year history, formerly the Cappers Weekly referred to above) and Best Recipes magazine. Later that year, Grit and Cappers were acquired by Ogden Publications. Grit, which had until this time been biweekly, was then edited by Kathryn Compton as a monthly with the subtitle "Stories of American Life & Tradition." Other Ogden Publications include American Life & Traditions, Farm Collector, Mother Earth News and Utne Reader. Beginning with the September 2006 issue, Grit converted to an all-glossy, perfect bound magazine format and a bi-monthly schedule. The revamped editorial policy encompasses more of a contemporary rural emphasis on content, rather than the nostalgic themes of the previous decade. With a print run of 150,000 and Time Warner as the national newsstand distributor, Grit was displayed and sold at general newsstand outlets, bookstores and specialty farm feed and supply stores, including Tractor Supply Company.

title: Grit (newspaper)


text:
Talk:Private spaceflight

Proposal to merge NewSpace into Private Spaceflight
I'm proposing to merge NewSpace into Private spaceflight. There are numerous overlaps between the two articles, and the scope of NewSpace is contained entirely within private spaceflight. The differences between the two are sufficiently small that I don't think it would make this article too bulky. -- Marx01  Tell me about it 03:43, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

 * Note: In a week from the time of this proposal, I will just perform the merge (assuming support) to be bold! -- Marx01  Tell me about it 08:10, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

 * Merge Given the above rationale --Lena Virginia Birse (talk) 01:07, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge Entirely within scope of "private spaceflight" per proponent. No clear reason for separate article. —DIYeditor (talk) 03:13, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Proposition to move page to NewSpace
The articles did overlap and a merge was necessary. Private Spaceflight was indeed better developed and more organized. However, as "NewSpace" is a much more popular terminology both on internet in academic research I am suggesting moving this page to NewSpace instead of "Private Spaceflight".

Comparison of usage:
 * Google Trend "Private spaceflight" vs NewSpace vs alt.space
 * Google Scholar Private Spaceflight (806 results) vs NewSpace (2000 results)
 * On site nasa.gov "private spaceflight" (101) vs NewSpace (327)

In addition, many "Private spaceflights" are false positive, as it does not only reference a "term" but two words not referring to this trend. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikiael (talk • contribs) 18:27, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

as the person who did the merge, and as a more experience wikipedian, do you have any opinion? --Mikiael (talk) 11:43, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Private spaceflight is common and understandable. NewSpace is technospeak and obscure. Rmhermen (talk) 16:16, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

 * Oppose. I agree with . Also, though NewSpace when directly compared to private spaceflight hit more results on your examples, in general a term like "private spaceflight" has many technical synonyms (e.g., "aerospace private sector"). It's important to mention this newer jargon, since it's used to some degree, but it has not adequately usurped "private spaceflight" in the public lexicon to merit a title change. -- Marx01  Tell me about it 20:03, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

This article lacks scope, credible definitions, updated information and reliable sources.
There's massive overlap in between the chapters, e.g. the introduction repeats most of the history chapter. There's also massive overlap with other articles which is induced by the total lack of scope and definition of what is meant with spaceflight here (i.e. new space, space tourism, commercial access to space, private launcher companies,.. etc.). The article is generally not up to date, the terminology and examples used are outdated and vast topics are missing entirely.

It needs total refurbishment. Ld4795 (talk) 05:07, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Private spaceflight


text:
Pyramid of the Moon

The Pyramid of the Moon is the second-largest pyramid in Mesoamerica, after the Pyramid of the Sun, and located in modern-day San Martín de las Pirámides, Mexico. It is found in the western part of the ancient city of Teotihuacan and mimics the contours of the mountain Cerro Gordo, just north of the site. Cerro Gordo may have been called Tenan, which in Nahuatl, means "mother or protective stone". The Pyramid of the Moon covers a structure older than the Pyramid of the Sun which existed prior to 200 AD.

The Pyramid's construction between 100 and 450 AD completed the bilateral symmetry of the temple complex. The pyramid is located at the end of the Avenue of the Dead, connected by a staircase, and was used as a stage for performing ritual sacrifices of animals and humans upon. It was also a burial ground for sacrificial victims. These burials were done in order to legitimize the addition of another pyramid layer over the existing one. The passing of several rulers, and rapid changes in ideologies, led to the Pyramid of the Moon's exponential expansion between 250 and 400 AD. A platform atop the pyramid was used to conduct ceremonies in honor of the Great Goddess of Teotihuacan, the goddess of water, fertility, the earth, and even creation itself. This platform and the sculpture found at the pyramid's bottom are thus dedicated to The Great Goddess.

Opposite the Great Goddess's altar is the Plaza of the Moon. The Plaza contains a central altar and an original construction with internal divisions, consisting of four rectangular and diagonal bodies that formed what is known as the "Teotihuacan Cross."

Background and history
Between 150 BC and 500 AD, a Mesoamerican culture built a flourishing metropolis on a plateau about 22 km2. The ethnicity of the inhabitants of Teotihuacan is a subject of debate, therefore "Teotihuacan" is the name used to refer to both the civilization and the capital city of these people. Teotihuacan was a highly influential civilization in Mesoamerica. The city was home to a religious complex which was the religious center of all of Mesoamerica. The people who lived there constructed a city conducive to religious life and worship by incorporating cosmology into every aspect of the urban plan.

During the initial phase of Teotihuacan, called Tzacualli (0–150 AD), ingenious building systems were developed to erect the monumental bases of the Pyramids of the Moon and the Sun. The Teotihuacan metropolis has a planified urbanization with main axis, and a huge palace surrounded by 15 monumental pyramids. It was said by the Aztecs to have been surmounted by a huge stone figure related to the moon. This figure was uncovered (weighing 22 metric tons and was somehow lifted to the top of the pyramid) and it represents the Great Goddess as a water deity.

Beginning in 1998, archaeologists excavated beneath the Pyramid of the Moon. Tunnels dug into the structure have revealed that the pyramid underwent at least six renovations; each new addition was larger and covered the previous structure.

As the archaeologists burrowed through the layers of the pyramid, they discovered artifacts that provide the beginning of a timeline to the history of Teotihuacan. In 1999, a team led by Saburo Sugiyama, associate professor at Aichi Prefectural University in Japan and adjunct faculty at Arizona State University, and Ruben Cabrera of Mexico's National Institute of Anthropology and History, found a tomb apparently made to dedicate the fifth phase of construction. It contains four human skeletons, animal bones, jewelry, obsidian blades, and a wide variety of other offerings. Archeologists estimated that the burial occurred between 100 and 200 AD.

Another tomb dedicated to The Great Goddess was discovered in 1998. It is dated to the fourth stage of construction. It contained a single human male sacrificial victim as well as a wolf, jaguar, puma, serpent, bird skeletons, and more than 400 other relics which include large greenstone and obsidian figurines, ceremonial knives, and spear points.

Basic structure
The pyramid is shaped like many of the other pyramids of Mesoamerica. The outer layer of the pyramid, which is currently visible, features a talud-tablero shape. It has 7 layers of buildings built on top of each other. It is 43 meters tall. Its base is 147 meters in the West to East direction by about 130 meters in the North to South direction. Given the name and contents of the pyramid, it is hypothesized that there the symbolism of the moon may have been associated with water, the rainy season, femininity, fertility, and even earth.

Placement
Among Mesoamerican cultures it is common to use the urban planning of their city to echo their cosmological and mythological beliefs regarding the order of the universe. The positioning of this pyramid plays into the narrative of Teotihuacan.

The Pyramid of the Moon was deliberately placed at the end of the Avenue of the Dead and at the foot of Cerro Gordo. This central position makes the processional nature of the Walk of the Dead rather clear. This mimicking of natural structures in human temples has been seen throughout Mesoamerican culture. The relation between the mountain, pyramid, and road has been theorized to resemble a connection between the road and the watery underworld, whereas the mountain serves as a sort of anchor to the earth. Also significant in the larger plan of the city is the orientation of all of the buildings. The north–south axis of the city emphasizes the cosmological and astrological ideologies of the city, since there was a connection between this orientation and the ritual 260-day calendar. The east–west was the worldly structure of the city used for the sake of symmetry. Connecting the Pyramid to the Avenue of the Dead is a public plaza, located at the base of the pyramid. This plaza was viewed as the ritual/sacred site, while the pyramid was seen as a structure built on top of it.

Building layers
This pyramid has 7 different layers of buildings which were constructed on top of each other in order to update the building's religious power over time. Building 1 is the oldest monument in Teotihuacan, from approximately 100 CE. The structure was a square pyramidal platform with talud side facades that were about 23.5 meters long. Building 2 was a minor enlargement that covered the entire previous structure, while correcting its orientation, which was slightly unaligned from the true east–west axis of the Pyramid of the Moon Complex. Building 2 was also in talud style whose east–west walls were about 29.3 meters long. Building 3 covered the construction before it, but did not expand much. Building 4: was a substantial enlargement which rendered the building's east–west width is 89.2 meters and its north–south length is 88.9 meters. This building was completed in approximately 250 CE. Building 5 was somewhat expanded, the architectural style of the building was the main shift. The east–west size did not change, but the north–south wall grew to 104 meters. The style used was talud-tablero on both the main body and an additional adosada platform. This design still used the pyramid as a stage for ritual, rather than a house for a temple. Building 6 grew to be east–west 144 meters while north–south remained the same. This building was constructed to contain Burials 5 and 4 in approximately 350 CE. Building 7 is the final structure, which is still visible today, but was built in about 400 CE. A distinct shift in architectural style between the first three buildings may be indicative of an ideological shift.

Ritual sacrifice
This pyramid had several religious functions. The main function of the pyramid was public ritual sacrifice. Archaeologists have found a great number of sacrificed remains in the foundations of the pyramid. Among the sacrificial victims were felines, birds of prey, snakes, humans, and more. These sacrifices can be carefully cataloged and examined when looking at the different burials within the different layers of buildings. Thus far, archaeologists have found a total of 5 rectangular burial offering complexes within the 7 layers of the pyramid. Sacrificial and inanimate offerings were carefully selected to represent large ideas of Teotihuacan cosmology (such as authority, militarism, human and animal sacrifice, femininity) rather than the worship of a single ruler or deity.

Burials
Within the seven layers that make up the Pyramid of the Moon, there are five burial complexes labeled two through six. They were found to have contained sacrificial victims and other remains such as figurines, obsidian objects, as well as nonhuman animal remains. While the pyramid structures are labeled from the earliest to the oldest (one through seven), the burial structures are numbered in the order in which they were found (two through six). For example, burial two and six are associated with the time of the fourth structure, three with the fifth structure, and four and five with the sixth structure. It is important to note that there have been no associated burials within structures one through three. The burials begin in conjunction with structure four. Due to this, Siguyama suggests a large-scale change politically and militaristically within Teotihuacan during the period of which structure four was built. This is because of the substantial increase in size of structure four, as well as the addition of ritualistic burials that correlate to the addition of new structures to the Pyramid of the Moon.

Burial two was built during the construction of Building four and was believed to be built around 250 AD. It contained a single-seated corpse of a man facing west who was probably around 40–50 years of age. The structure also contained part of a different person's occipital bone. The first individual had offerings associated with him such as ear flares, beads, and a pendant. This would suggest that he was of relatively high status. Also, within the pit, their other offerings. First, there were several assortments of figurines depicting a human, blades of obsidian, and shells. The offerings were displayed so that the figurines had the obsidian blades pointing towards their heads. There were also storm god vessels that were placed near each corner of the burial pit. Finally, there was another figure of greenstone, probably depicting a female instead of a male. This is significant because many of the figurines were either not depicted as a clear gender, or were male. Scholars have suggested that this female figure may represent the goddess to which the ritual was being made. Adding to this, there were nonhuman sacrifices as well such as pumas, eagles, falcons, crows, owls, rattlesnakes, and mollusks. The individual found, and his positioning suggests that he was probably bound before he was thrown into the grave hole. Studies on oxygen-isotope and strontium-isotope ratios within tooth enamel and bone were done by White and his team in order to determine possible locations of origin. Their work has revealed that the full skeleton was probably not originally from Teotihuacan, which could suggest that he was a sacrificial victim of war.

Burial three is associated with structure five, and dates to approximately 300 A.D. In this chamber, there are a total of four people, who are all male. The first individual was thought to be about 20–24 years old, the second 18–20, the third 40–44, the fourth 13–15, all of whom were probably foreign to Teotihuacan. There are signs that the individuals had been tied and bound within the pit, suggesting again that they were possible captives. Associated with burial three there were other fibers found that may indicate that there was once a mat. Mats have been discovered to signify political authority in many Mesoamerican societies during the time. Adding to this, there were figures of greenstone, beads, shells, and blades. There were also ear flares and beads that suggested that at least three of the individuals were of high status. There were also a total of 18 severed heads of wolves, pumas, a jaguar, and a hawk.

Burial four was made in conjunction with structure six and dates to around 350 – 400 A.D. The pit contained seventeen human heads that, from what could be identified, were middle aged males. Adding to this, burial four contained no offerings or material remains, other than the fibers from the material that was used to gag the victims. White has suggested that the placement of the skulls may have something to do with where they were originally from. Due to the violent nature in which the victims where sacrificed, as well as the lack of burial offerings, it has been suggested that the individuals were of relatively low status.

Burial five occurred at a similar time to burial four datings to around 350 – 400A.D and was also linked to the construction of building six. In it were three skeletons who were displayed in a position common in painted representations of Maya elites. This is interesting because it is an uncommon mode of burial at Teotihuacan. Adding to this, their hands were not bound but instead laying out in front of them resting on their legs. The first person was probably 50–75 years of age, the second 40–50, and the third 40–45. Adding to this, two individuals were wearing rectangular pectorals, which is often linked to high-ranking Mayas. Their burial suggests that these individuals were of extremely high status. The corpses were also accompanied by animals that may have represented their animal spirit, two pumas and a golden eagle.

Lastly, burial six occurred within a similar time frame to burial three which coincided with the building of structure five around 300 A.D. There was a total of twelve skeletons found within this chamber and they all had their hands bound, once again suggesting that they were sacrificial victims. Two skeletons stood out as possibly being higher up in status, while the other ten were decapitated and seemed to be thrown about at random. Adding to this there were fragments of about 43 animals.

Given the contents of these burials, Archaeologists, Leonardo Lopez Lujan and Saburo Sugiyama have theorized that they are possible cosmograms, representations of the heavens which were carefully laid out by priests according to predetermined patterns. Archaeologists also have concluded that human sacrifice to sanctify buildings was common throughout Mesoamerican time and geography[8]. In Teotihuacan, the preferred victims were sub-adult and adult males who were not from Teotihuacan, which differs from other structures at Teotihuacan. This could suggest that many of the sacrificial victims found at the Pyramid of the Moon were war captives. The animals used in the burials were all carefully selected, they included felines, canids, birds of prey, and rattlesnakes, all of which are carnivorous and can be associated with warfare[8]. Adding to this Siguyama has suggested heavily that sacrifice and large-scale construction correlate directly to the growth of state and military power.

Other functions
The pyramid was also used for rituals other than sacrifices. Mesoamerican cities used plazas as the core of social life; in the case of the Pyramid of the Moon, the public plaza was also used for astronomical observation and calendar-related activities. The complex contained small pyramidal structures, rooms, porticoes, patios, corridors, and low platforms. Moon plaza served as a supra-regional ceremonial, political and socioeconomic center.

Archeologists have examined the different layers of the pyramid and found a great number of these contained artifacts and remains which can be examined, and even presented to the public. Some of the artifacts found by archaeologists were made of greenstone, obsidian, and ceramic, all of which were carefully crafted in Teotihuacan. These artifacts included figurines and serpent knives.

title: Pyramid of the Moon


text:
Contribution

Contribution or Contribute may refer to:

Music

 * Contribution (album), by Mica Paris (1990)
 * "Contribution" (song), title song from the album
 * Contribution, a 1976 album by Shawn Phillips

Finance and law

 * Contribution (law), an agreement between defendants in a suit to apportion liability
 * Contributions, a vital goal of fundraising
 * Contribution margin, the selling price per unit minus the variable cost per unit
 * Contribution, a principle of insurance

title: Contribution


text:
List of bridge–tunnels

List of bridge–tunnels:

title: List of bridge–tunnels