RABMEC, J. A. Giannini (7/25/2012)





          The goal of this chapter is to provide calibrated dates for the mythological events and people of four of the five cultures discussed in the last chapter.  The Hebrews, Egyptians, Sumerians, and Hindus all reference such events and kings in their traditions.


 Chapter 2 dated the historical portion of the RABMEC timeline based primarily on the Hebrew genealogies in the Bible.  As part of that dating process, interactions of the Israeli kings with named Babylonian and Egyptian kings helped to fix historical dates in the Hebrew line. 


These Babylonian and Egyptian kings lived in the well-accepted historical time of their respective countries.  The Babylonians were masters of the Tigris-Euphrates region of the mid-East after the dominance of the Sumerians.  For this reason, we consider a single king line (the Sumerian/Babylonian) as ruling the region.  This single king line consists of the Sumerian king line followed immediately by the Babylonian king line. 


The kings’ lists for both the Egyptians and the Sumerians have kings that precede their respective historical times.  These kings are considered part of the mythological period.  There are no monuments or other records that validate their existence.  Because of this, traditional dating of these kings is not possible.


In the Hebrew tradition, the Bible contains the creation story.  This period of time occurs before the historical genealogies.  For this reason, we consider the creation story to be the mythological period of biblical times.


We do not consider the Hindu king line.  However, the Hindu tradition describes the past development of the earth in terms of divine cycles. 

          In the following sections, we address the calibrated dating of these ancient traditions.  We date the mythological part of the Sumerian and Egyptian kings’ lists.  We calibrate the biblical days of creation.  Finally, we correlate the Hindu Divine world cycles with identified geological events and catastrophes.


          4.1. The Dated Sumerian Mythological Kings


          4.2. The Dated Egyptian God Kings


          4.3. The Dated Seven Days of Creation


          4.4.  The Hindu Divine Cycles And The Geological Past


          4.5 References for Chapter 4


          Return to The Table of Contents


          Return to Preface




          4.1. The Dated Sumerian Mythological Kings


          The new RABMEC timeline with respect to the Sumerians (Appendix A) has two parts: 1) an historical part (developed in Section 2) that extends from the birth of Christ (6 BC RABMEC) back to the beginning of the reign of Unzi (4169 BC RABMEC), the first historical king; and, 2) a mythical part from Unzi back to the beginning of the Mythological Chronicle (5538 BC RABMEC).  (The Mythological Chronicle is the term used here to refer to the Antediluvian Dynasties and Early Postdiluvian Dynasties at Kish from the Isin Dynasty List).


The process of dating the mythological portion of the RABMEC begins here by considering the Sumerian Kings List (referred to simply as the Kings List) back to the earliest Sumerian period, before the first historical king.  The Kings List is a list of kings and their years of reign. 


The proper dating of the kings in ancient times is difficult because there is no unified time reference as there is today.  The dates of events are referenced to a specific year of a specific king; and relative positions of events are only properly oriented if the proper order of the kings is known.  In ancient Sumer (as elsewhere in the ancient world), there was no master list of ordered kings.  Therefore, multiple lists from more than one source are considered, and the inconsistencies are resolved making judgment calls about authenticity and accuracy of the sources (Ref. 1, Ref. 2, and Ref. 3). 


The RABMEC, for the historic period, based its ordering and years on the more traditional timeline of Waddell (Ref. 1) (though even Waddell's timeline is not considered the standard), and then made modifications based on further comparisons with biblical references to historic individuals in the Sumerian/Babylonian (Appendix A) and the Egyptian (Appendix B) king lines.  The Kings List used here maintains the same order as the RABMEC but keeps the older chronicles' lengths of reign as seen in the more notable sources.  This allows a comparison of realistic years of reign (RABMEC) with the older "corrupted years of reign (which is discussed in detail later).


          To begin the dating process, it is necessary to pick a starting point in the historic period to begin the march backwards.  The point selected is 18 years into the reign of Sargon I (2638 BC RABMEC).  This point was chosen because this is when a Sumerian prince became the first pharaoh of Egypt.  This ties the Egyptian king line to the Sumerian king line.  This allows comparisons between the two when dating the mythological portion of both lines.


To provide motivation for the connection (which justifies the comparison of the two cultures into the past), according to Waddell(1), when Sargon became king of the Sumerian empire (in 2656 BC RABMEC), his two sons, Manishtushu and Rimush, were acting in the capacity of governors in Egypt.  In 2638 BC RABMEC, Manishtushu declared independence from his father and established himself as king of the newly united Upper and Lower kingdoms of Egypt under the name of Menes. 


Further, Waddell proposes that Sargon's and his sons' relationship to Egypt was not new or unique in the governance of that country.  So comparing the king lines of Egypt and Sumer is appropriate, especially in the dating context.  The comparison of Egyptian and Sumerian king lines is considered in the Egyptian discussion (Section 4.2), but the time span and ways of recording the years of reign for the Sumerian king line are presented here.


          From the historical time of Sargon's 18th year of reign back to the beginning of the Mythological Chronicle, there are four distinct periods with identifiable boundaries between them. 

Within the historical period, the Flood (3113 BC RABMEC) is clearly recorded in the Kings List as one boundary.  (The Flood is the same biblical Flood of Noah.)  From the Flood to king, Unzi (4169 BC RABMEC) is a second clearly identifiable period.  Before King Unzi, the mythological portion of the kings’ list is divided between two capital cities or dynasties (beginning 5027 BC RABMEC and 5538 BC RABMEC respectively - see Table 4.1).  In the following subsections, each of the four periods and the records of the time span are considered.



Table 4.1.  This table shows the four periods in the Sumerian timeline from Manishtushu's independence (2638 BC RABMEC - 18 years into Sargon's reign) to the beginning of the Mythological Chronicle.  The RABMEC shows the realistic "man years" for the period.  The (Sumerian) Kings List shows the "corrupted years" as recorded in the older chronicles. And the Mythological Chronicle shows the years for the period corrupted to "god years" (to be discussed later).




Kings List


Mythological Chronicle

years of reign


Flood to Manishtushu's






Unzi to Flood



68,400  (3-city period)


Badtibira City Period





Eridu City Period






4.1.1. Manishtushu's Independence Back to the Flood (period a) 


          The resolved RABMEC for this period spans 29 kings over 475 years.  The Sumerian Kings List for this same set of kings spans 5124 years (see Table 4.2).  The difference in the two numbers (475 vs. 5124) results from the Kings List endowing some of the kings with extraordinary lifetimes. 


It is likely that two things contributed to these extreme lengths.  First, the tablets on which the lists were recorded, both, 1) were not robust (easily cracked and corrupted by accident or politically motivated design), and, 2) lacked a single master list (multiple lists needed to be integrated to produce a contiguous line of kingship).  Secondly, and probably more importantly, the Sumerian view of kingship is one of being divinely conferred.  This means that the priests who maintained the lists had both a political, as well as a religious, reason for writing the years of reign in a fashion that emphasized the importance of their earliest kings. 



Table 4.2.   This shows the Sumerian dynasties from Sargon (18 years into his reign) back to the Flood.  Column 2 shows the total number of kings in the dynasty, and the (number of kings whose reign were corrupted to give the Kings List years).

Capital City 


Number of Kings

(# with corrupted reign)


Years of Reign

Kings List

Years of Reign   


11   (4)




3   (2)




4   (0)




3   (3)




6   (6)




2   (0)

25 (Lugalzaggesi)    

18 (into Sargon I)




29   (15)





A detailed examination of the kings in this period(Ref. 1 and Ref. 2) shows that of the 29 kings, 14 had the same normal reigns in both the RABMEC and the Kings List.  Of the remaining kings, the extraordinary reigns appear to have been recorded by miswriting the numerical symbol "D" (which equals 1 in Sumerian) as "D" (which equals 60).  For example, the 3rd king of Erech after the Flood, Dumuzi the fisherman, is listed in the Kings List with a reign of 100 years (i.e., D oooo, note o = 10), but by writing "D" as "D" the reign length becomes the one and forty (41) years in the RABMEC which was verified by Waddell in his comparisons with lists from other sources. 


No simple transformation seems to explain the years for Awan which lists three nameless king reigning 356 years; but, which Waddell verified to be six years using another source.  It is clear that decisions made about the degree of corruption to be applied, were based on the perceived importance of the individual kings within a dynasty relative to one another. 

For example, the 2nd king in Erech, Lugalbabda, is listed as 1200 years (vs. 20) in the RABMEC.



The 1st, 3rd, and 4th have reigns of 420, 100 and 126 years (vs. 7, 41 and 26); and the last seven were not corrupted at all in the Kings List with reigns from 6 to 36 years (the same as the RABMEC). 


Further, decisions were clearly made about the importance of one set of dynasties relative to other sets as seen in the pattern and degree of corruption for the earlier three periods (sections 4.1.2 through 4.1.4 below).  We use the results of this section (475 "man years" translating into 5124 "corrupted years") later in the Egyptian discussion of the Demi-god period (section 4.2.1).


          So, for the purposes of comparison, the period from the 18th year of Sargon's reign back to the Flood covers 475 "man years", which is equivalent to 1524 "corrupted years", and is dated from 2638 BC RABMEC to 3113 BC RABMEC.


4.1.2. The Flood Back to Unzi, the First Historical King (period b) 


          This period directly precedes the last one (section 4.1.1, period a) in time, going back to the beginning of the historic period.  The resolved RABMEC for the period discussed here spans 18 kings over 1056 years.  The Sumerian Kings List for this same period lists 22 kings over 1240 years.  The RABMEC and the Kings List have three differences (see Table 4.3). 


In Kish I, the RABMEC has the one king, Ku-Bau, as reigning for 64 years (i.e., D DDDD = 60 + 4), which was verified by Waddell from another source.  However, the Kings List records it as 100 years (i.e., D oooo = 60 + 40, in this case "D" would have been miswritten as "o"). 



Table 4.3.  This shows the Sumerian dynasties from the Flood back to the first king, Unzi.  Column 3 shows the corruption to the "man years" in the RABMEC to produce the "corrupted years" in the Kings List.  The last column shows the "god years" for the same period - known as the 3-Cities Period in the Mythological Chronicle.  The three cities as placed on the table do not equate with the capital cities in column 1, but the period is specified to end with the Flood.

Capital City



Years of  Reign

Corruption to


 to Give Kings List

Kings List

Years of Reign


3-Cities Period Years of Reign







Kish I


60 + 4 -> 60 + 40




30 + 1 -> 30 + 60






4 kings added

47 -> 47 + 89


Kish II



















In Adab, the RABMEC records Lugalannemundu as reigning 31 years (i.e., D ooo = 1 + 30).  However, the Kings List has his reign as 90 years (i.e., D ooo = 60 + 30, again miswriting "D" as "o").  


The corruption to Mari appears to be a little different.  The Kings List records two kings over 47 years plus four unnamed kings covering 89 years for a total of 136.  The RABMEC found the years of reign to be 47.  This implies that the other kings were minor rulers, possibly added to increase the importance of the dynasty.  In his analysis, Waddell found that minor rulers were listed as kings even though the rule is coincident with the king in the king line.


          There is also another Sumerian record of the time span for this period from the Mythological Chronicle which is different from the Kings List used above.  Like the Kings List, the Mythological Chronicle clearly makes the end of the period with the Flood specified. 


In a more dramatic way than simply corrupting the "man years" to emphasize importance, it addresses the more relevant case of emphasizing the divine right of the kings.  The connection between the "man years" of actual reign and the "god years" of the Mythological Chronicle becomes relevant later in the comparison of the Egyptian with the Sumerian king lines (Section 4.2).  This is because the last two Sumerian periods have no corresponding "man years" but the Egyptian record does.  However, the Egyptian record is without an absolute BC time reference which the Sumerian record provides.  So, it is necessary to show here that a plausible corruption path exists showing that the 1056 RABMEC "man years" can be corrupted (perhaps in more than one step) to the 64,800 "god years" of the Mythological Chronicle (see Table 4.4).



Table 4.4.  This shows one possible corruption path for "man years" of reign to "god years" of reign for the Sumerian dynasties of the 3-city period.  The final corruption from the 1056 "man years" to the 68,400 "god years" reflects the Sumerian view of the divine right of the kings.  The only corrupted number used is for Kish I (100 rather than 64).  

Capital City



Years of Reign

Representation of

Years of Reign



  1x60 + 3x10 + 9

Kish I*

64 -> 100

  1x60 + 4x10



              3x10 +1



              4x10 + 7

Kish II


  8x60 + 1x10 +1



  5x60 + 2x10 + 4

numerical summation


Sumerian representation

17x60 + 3x10 + 6

      written as

600 + 7x60 + 3x10 + 6

15x60 + 17x10 + 22 = 19x60 +2

         written as

   600 + 8x60 + 1x10 + 2

corruption to change

"man years" to "god years"



drop the extra 2 and miswrite

10 (o)  ->  3600 (O)

60 (D)  -> 3600 (O)

600 (    )  -> 36,000 (    )



"man years" = 1056

1x36,000 + 9x3600

"god years" = 68,400



There is no obvious way to match up which of the six Kings List dynasties correspond to any particular one of the three mythological cities.  For this reason, only the final sum totals are compared. 




          Column 2 shows the years of reign.  In the case of Kish I, the 100 years have been corrupted from the actual years of 64. 


Column 3 shows how the years would have been recorded given their base symbols 1, 10 and 60.  For example, in the base 10 system we use, 99 is written as 9x10 + 9x1.  For the Sumerians, 99 is written as 1x60 + 3x10 + 9x1.  For simplicity 9x1 is represented as 9.  The sum of the first six rows in this column (19x60 + 2) is shown in row 7.  This sum is then rewritten as the Sumerian might have done taking advantage of their symbol for 600 (i.e., 19x60 + 2 = 600 + 8x60 + 1x10 + 2).  At this point, no corruption has been applied to the years of reign.


Row 8 of column 3 now shows the possible systematic corruption that is applied to the sum 19x60 + 2 = 600 + 8x60 + 1x10 + 2 to go from the “man years” of the first seven rows to the “god years” in the last row.  This example shows just one possible corruption path from the "man years" to the "god years” in the two different kings’ lists for the same period. 



So, for the purposes of comparison, the period from the Flood back to the first historic king, Unzi, covers 1056 "man years", which is equivalent to 68,400 "God years", and is dated from 3113 BC RABMEC to 4169 BC RABMEC.


          4.1.3. The Badtibira Period (period c) 


          The Badtibira period is a mythological period that directly precedes the reign of King Unzi. The Mythological Chronicle lists three kings that reigned a total of 108,000 years, making the time span clearly recorded in "god years" (see Table 4.1). 


Unlike the previous two periods (periods “a” and “b” above) which have historic records and alternate historic sources, the Badtibira period has no alternate historic sources.  The "man years" (858) shown on the table are determined by equating this period with the Egyptian God II dynasties (shown later in Section 4.2.3).


          So, for the purposes of comparison, the Badtibira period covers 108,000 "god years", and ends in 4169 BC RABMEC.  The equivalent 858-"man years" are developed in Section 4.2.3 which indicates the period begins in 5027 BC RABMEC.


4.1.4. The Eridu Period (period d) 


          The Eridu period is a mythological period that directly precedes the Badtibira period and begins the Mythological Chronicle. The Mythological Chronicle lists two kings that reigned a total of 64,800 years, making the time span clearly recorded in "god years" (see Table 4.1).  Like the Badtibira period (section 4.1.3), there are alternate historic sources.  The "man years" (511) shown on the table are determined by equating this period with the Egyptian God I dynasties (shown later in Section 4.2.4).


          So, for the purposes of comparison, the Eridu period covers 64,800 "God years", and ends in 5027 BC RABMEC.  The equivalent 511-"man years" are developed in Section 4.2.4) which indicates the period begins in 5538 BC RABMEC.


          Return to Top





          4.2. The Dated Egyptian God Kings


          Considering the mythical god-kings period in Egypt, although a slight diversion from the mythical reading, is useful here in providing dating for the earliest pre-history, before the traditional historic period dated by the usual methods.  As one moves back in time, it allows a perspective on the Egyptian timing of the "beginning of the world", and, the calibrated dating of the god-kings in pre-history otherwise un-datable by traditional methods. 


          Like its counterpart in the Sumerian tradition (Section 4.1 above), Egypt has an historical period and a mythological period.  Manetho of Sebennytus compiled a comprehensive list of Egyptian kings (4) for Ptolemy of Philadelphus in the third century BC. 


He divided the historical kings (beginning with Menes) into 30 dynasties; and, the time before Menes is referred to as the mythical period composed of four God and Demi-god dynasties.  The total time span for all of the kings, including the gods and demi-gods, by Manetho's record according to Boeckh, is 24,836 years (Table 4.5).  We begin with a brief discussion of the historical part to provide some perspective on the perceived accuracy of the list as a whole, and then move on the mythological part - the part of particular interest here.


          In the RABMEC, the historical period begins with the first Egyptian pharaoh of the united Upper and Lower kingdoms, i.e., Menes.  He was located in time (2638 BC RABMEC) based, in part, on Waddell's analysis (1) that equated Menes with the Sumerian king, Manishtushu (son of Sargon I).  Manetho's original list was lost, but several different copies have been found (dated some 500 years later, and, which do not all perfectly agree).  


For the historic period, the number of kings varies between 361 and 561, depending on the version of the list.  The total years of reign are between 4480 and 5813 years.  Generally, experts seem to agree that Manetho's sources were not entirely reliable, so other sources, not related to Manetho, are also considered. 


For example, the Chronicle of Eratosthenes (Ref. 4, p LXXIII) begins with Menes in the year 2900 AM (Anno Mundi or from the beginning of the world) and lists 38 kings over 1076 years, going as far as Manetho's 13th dynasty; and, the Sothis (Ref. 4, p LXXV), a priest sect, begins with Menes in 2776 AM and lists 86 kings over 2160 years going as far as the 26th dynasty. 


Modern chronologist, using the best, but incomplete records and monument inscriptions, estimate the historic period as covering 2757 years beginning around 3100 BC; however, because of the condition of the records they have, and the multiple names associated with each king, they are unable to identify which king is Manetho's Menes.  (The RABMEC resolution of the list is provided in Appendix B and spans 2608 years, beginning 2638 BC RABMEC).


          The approximately 3000 years preceding Menes are believed to be a period of conflict between the Upper kingdom of moon worshipers, under the divine dynasty of Osiris (in the south) and the Lower kingdom of Anu worshipers, under the divine dynasty of Set (in the north).  (The two cults were united around 3500 BC - hundreds of years before political unification under Menes).  This is the period that corresponds to Manetho's mythological dynasties.  The lack of supporting records and the extreme reign lengths makes Manetho's list for this period unacceptable to modern historians who regard it as nothing more than unbelievable tales.  Further, the other chronicles do not address it. 


          In the following sections (a thru d), each of the pre-history periods are addressed for dating purposes assuming Manetho's list is based in fact even if the reign lengths are corrupted.  By Waddell's analysis (1), the first dynastic Egyptian king was Menes, who was the Sumerian Manishtushu; but, there was also the suggestion that the pre-dynastic kings of Egypt (the gods and demi-gods) were, at the same time, the pre-Manishtushu Sumerian king line.  Working backwards in time (and assuming this suggestion is correct), the Egyptian God and Demi-god dynasty periods are provided with calibrated dating by making comparisons with the corresponding Sumerian periods where reasonable.  With this introduction, we now proceed with the dating.



Table 4.5. This shows the dynasties of the mythical period(Ref. 31, p LX  ) according to Manetho as recorded by Boeckh.  The Demi-gods I - IV are unnamed; and Gods III only lists the last god. Gods II and Gods I have a full list of names and reigns that are specified in Tables 4.6 and 4.7 respectively.



Length of

Reign (yrs)






Demi-gods I

Demi-gods II

Demi-gods III

Demi-gods IV




  350    .

5,124   total


Gods III



Gods II



Gods I


2,985    .

11,985   total



          4.2.1. The Demi-gods I - IV Period (period a)


          The period that Manetho attributed to the Demi-god dynasties (period a) is the most recent of the four periods after the historic one (Table 4.5).  It is the last of the mythological periods and spans 5,124 years. Since this Egyptian period begins with Menes as you go backward in time, and the Egyptian Menes is the Sumerian Manishtushu, the Egyptian Demi-god period - (a) is compared with the Sumerian period - (a) from Manishtushu (2638 BC RABMEC) back to the Flood (3113 BC RABMEC). 


The Sumerian period spans 475 "man years" in the resolved RABMEC;    but, as shown in Table 4.2, the Sumerian Kings List(2) for the same period spans exactly 5124 "corrupted years".  Since the Egyptian period - (a) and the Sumerian period - (a) start with the same man (going backward in time), and since the time span for the period in both traditions is exactly the same number of "corrupted years" we conclude the comparison is justified.  So, the equivalence of the Sumerian Kings List "corrupted years" with the Egyptian Demi-gods dynasties years supports Waddell's hypothesis that the two represented the same king line; and further the date 3113 BC RABMEC can be assigned to the beginning of the Demi-gods I - IV (i.e., the Demi-gods period - (a) spans 475 "man years" and lasts from 2638 BC RABMEC to 3113 BC RABMEC).


          4.2.2. The Gods III Period (period b)


          This Egyptian period that directly precedes the Demi-gods period - (a) is the Gods III (period b) which spans 1,056 years.  From the Demi-gods period - (a), we know that the Gods III period - (b) ends in 3113 BC RABMEC with the Flood.  However, we don't know if the 1056 years are "man years" or "corrupted years" without comparison to the equivalent Sumerian period, i.e., the Sumerian period - (b) that goes from the Flood back to Unzi, the first historic Sumerian king. 


From Table 4.3, the Sumerian period - (b) spans exactly 1056 "man years".  So, the Egyptian 1056 years are "man years" - supporting Waddell's hypothesis of a common king line for the Egyptians and Sumerians into yet a second period before Menes.  The equivalence of the Egyptian period - (b) with the Sumerian period - (b) allows us to assign a starting year for the Gods III period - (b) as 4169 BC RABMEC (i.e., the Gods III period - (b) spans 1056 "man years" and lasts from 3113 BC RABMEC to 4169 BC RABMEC).


          4.2.3. The Gods II Period (period c)


          This Egyptian period that directly precedes the Gods III period - (b) is the Gods II (period c) which spans 858 years (see Table 4.6).  From the Gods III period - (b), we know that the Gods II period - (c) ends in 4169 BC RABMEC.  However, again we don't know if the 858 years are "man years" or "corrupted years" without comparison to the equivalent Sumerian period, i.e., the Sumerian period - (c) - the Badtibira period, the second of the Sumerian mythological periods. 



Table 4.6.  This shows the Egyptian God II years of reign.  Nine gods are listed with 2 years wanting at the end indicating Boeckh was referring to another list and was unable to resolve, unambiguously, the number conversion from the other list.



God II

Years of Reign







Herakles (Greek Hercules)


Apollo (Greek Apollo)








Zeus (Greek Zeus)


years wanting






To this point as one works backward in time, there have been reasonably reliably dated Sumerian king lines (with "man years") to compare with the Egyptian line for dating purposes.  However, the Badtibira period has no "man years" available.  It only has "god years" that span 108,000 years (see Table 4.1).  We assert here that the 858 years of God II - period (c) are most likely "man years" for several reasons. 


First, from Table 4.6, although the reigns seem a little longer than is usual, they are not excessively long, giving us hope that the years are indeed "man years".  Second, because both the Egyptian period - (c) and the Sumerian  period - (c) end at the same time, and precede, in time, two successive periods that were shown to be the same (periods (a) and (b) in both traditions), it is reasonable to assume that period (c) in both traditions represents the same time. 


Based on this assumption, we establish a corruption path from the 858 Egyptian years to the 108,000 Sumerian "god years" for the Badtibira period - (c) (using a method like the one used in Section 3.3.4 (c) between the two Sumerian versions of the years of reign for the same period) would further support the idea that the 858 years are "man years".  This is easily done by writing the Egyptian years in the Sumerian way.



          So, the RABMEC, for the Gods II period - (c), spans 858 "man years" and lasts from 4169 BC RABMEC to 5027 BC RABMEC).


          4.2.4. The Gods I Period (period d)


          This Egyptian period that directly precedes the Gods II period - (c) is the Gods I period - (d) which spans 11,985 years (see Table 4.7).  From the Gods II period - (c), we conclude that the Gods I period - (d) ends in 5027 BC RABMEC. 



Table 4.7.  This shows the Egyptian God I years of reign as recorded by Boeckh.  Six gods are listed.  The extremely long reign lengths make it likely that the years have already been corrupted - especially for the first god on the list.



God I

Years of Reign









Osirir & Isis








Because of the extremely long reigns for each of the kings, it is clear that the 11,985 years are "corrupted years", so comparisons with other sources are needed to determine the equivalent "man years".  However, the Eridu period is the Sumerian period corresponding to Gods I.  It is the first of the Sumerian mythological periods which has no "man years".  It only has "god years".  A comparison of Egyptian "corrupted years" with the equivalent Sumerian "god years" does not give any useful information about the equivalent "man years" which are needed to extend the RABMEC further back in time.  So, additional information to resolve the question is needed. 


          Here, the additional information comes from Egyptian records (i.e., the Egyptian determination of the time of the beginning of the world relative the beginning of the reign of Menes, 2638 BC RABMEC).  Recall from Section 3.4.2, that the Sothis list placed the beginning of the world at 2776 years before Menes; and, Eratosthenes placed it at 2900 years before Menes.  From the previous sections, we know that the total year spanned by the Demi-gods period through the Gods II period was


Total number of years  =  475 +1056 + 858 = 2389 "man years".


This means that the span of "man years" for the God I period - (d) according to the Egyptians would be either


                          2776 - 2389 = 387 years (according to the Sothis)

or  2900 - 2389 = 511 years (according to Eratosthenes).


The "real" number of years to the beginning of the world should be obtainable by comparing the 511 or 387 possible "man years" for the God I period - (d) with the Sumerian Eridu period - (d) "god years" and showing a corruption path between the two.  However, there is no reasonable path of corruption from 511 to 64,800 or from 387 to 64,800.  So, another idea is needed.


          Considering again the years from Menes to the beginning of the world does help, however.  The Sothis and Eratosthenes came up with two different numbers of years (2776 and 2900 respectively) for the time span.  If it is assumed that both numbers came from a common source, written in such a way that it could be misinterpreted, then the solution to the problem of the timing of the beginning of the world is to determine how the Sothis and Eratosthenes might have misread the "real" number differently to produce the two different estimates. 


This is done by seeing if it is possible to de-corrupt the "known" numbers (2776 and 2900) back to the "real" number.  Writing the numbers in Sumerian fashion we show the possible corruption path for each. 



So, it seems likely that the "real" beginning of the world is 2880 or 2882 years before Menes.  Choosing 2880 for the time span, the "man years" for the God I period - (d) becomes 2880 - 2389 = 491 (that is, Menes to the beginning - Menes to the end of God I).  So we have:



This is equal to the 64,800 "god years" of the Sumerian Eridu period.  Having shown a corruption path between the Egyptian period - (d) "man years" (491), and the Sumerian period - (d) "god years" (64,800), it seems likely that the choice of 2880 "man years" from Menes to the beginning of the world was valid.   


So, the RABMEC, for the Gods I period - (c), spans 491 "man years" and lasts from 5027 BC RABMEC to 5518 BC RABMEC.


          A final note before proceeding to the next culture should be made.  The corruption paths, in both the Sumerian and here in the Egyptian dating, assumed two things. 

First, the actual years recorded on the various kings lists, although treated as exact, do have some uncertainty. This allowed the dropping of a small numbered of years (1 or 2) when constructing corruption paths from "man years" to "corrupted years" or "god years".  Further, the actual process used to corrupt "man years" may have been accomplished in more than one step rather than the simple, direct path presented. 


Second, the corruption process presented here was as simple and direct as possible.  That is, in no single path was an individual character interpreted simultaneously in more than one way to get the answer required.  For example, a 6 = 6xD might be interpreted as 6xD or 6xo, but not 2xD + 4xo; and further, the fewest number of changes were made in any corruption path.


          Return to Top





          4.3. The Dated Seven Days of Creation


          The seven days of creation described in the Tanakh and the Bible are taken by some as seven 24-hour time periods.  However, it is known that the word "day" in ancient Hebrew had more than one meaning.  One meaning was a 24 hour period; but, a second meaning was an indefinite period of time (e.g., like an epoch). 


Assuming this second meaning was the one intended in the original texts, and recognizing the geologic age of the earth as more than ~6,000 years (as the Hebrew genealogies might suggest), the question becomes one of reconciling the biblical time and the geologic time (in the broader sense of the beginning of the universe through earth's geologic and paleontological development) for the period from the beginning to the appearance of Adam, the first biblical man. 


          Note that the Hebrew word for "man", as in "God formed man from the dust of the earth" (Ref. 5, Chapt. 2:7) was "adam".  So, the creation of "adam", the species, and, the birth of Adam, the first biblical man, must be recognized as possibly two separate events in identifying the length of the biblical days. 


In the traditional religious view, the creation of "adam", and the birth (creation) of Adam are one and the same.  In the more naturalist view, the beginning of "adam" is not a well-defined moment in time, and could be as much as several hundred thousand or more years before the birth of Adam (if such an individual can be assumed). 


The existence of the individual, Adam, is assumed.  When correlating the biblical texts with the Sumerian and Egyptian King's Lists (Appendices A and B respectively), we determine that Adam's birth year was 4769 BC (somewhat earlier than the traditional date, ~4000 BC). We now address the question of which event represents the end of "Day = 6” (Gen. 1:26) in any scheme for counting the days of creation.  Does the end of Day 6 represent the birth of the individual Adam (4769 BC RABMEC) or the creation of the species man (around 1-2 million years ago)? 

There are two tools available to help with this reconciliation: 1) the base of the counting system, and 2) the scientific point-of-view of relativity.

          First it is worth noting that the Hebrew patriarch, Abraham, came from Ur, a Sumerian city of much repute.  The considerable influence of the Sumerian culture on the Hebrew culture brought with Abraham is well known - most notably, the similarity of the two Flood stories (Ref. 2, chapt. 4). 


The Sumerians were known to have a mathematical system (Ref. 2, chapt. 3) based on a peculiar mixture of both "6" and "10", rather than "10" alone as is common in our current Western culture.  So, it is not unreasonable to assume that the base 6 part of the number system might have some relevance to the determination of the correlation of the biblical days with geologic time.  This relevance becomes evident in the discussion of the second tool, the relativistic perspective.


          Let us pretend that God's point-of-view is a relativistic one, in the scientific sense of two observers traveling in space with different timescales.  The days (or specifically, the end of the days in question) are then the points of time when both observers (i.e., God and man) see the events occurring simultaneously. 


The reference to relativity typically brings to mind the General Relativity (GR) of Einstein (Ref. 6, Chapt. X).  GR assumes equivalence in the laws of nature for all observers whatever their state of motion.  A consequence of this assumption is that two observers in different systems locate an event in their own reference frame ("t1, x1, y1, z1" or "t2, x2, y2, z2") and relate the two coordinate systems by the 4-D distance between them and the speed of light carrying the signal from one to the other (i.e., s2 = Dt2 - [Dx2 + Dy2 + Dz2]/c2 , where Dt2 = [t1 - t2] 2, ...). A requirement for this condition is that both observers measure the same D-coordinate (i.e., using the same rigid ruler and uniformly ticking standard clock) in their respective reference frames.  Although this is the most familiar relativity form, other versions have been proposed that can differ radically from GR. 


          One version of particular relevance to the days of creation is known as kinematic relativity (Ref. 6, Chapt. XI) (KR) proposed by Milne in 1948.  In KR, the laws of nature may be the same, but how the universe is seen will be different for observers in the same place but in different states of motion. 


The most important concept of KR is that of the passage of time.  It assumes that any observer can locate two local events as a sequence (one later than the other).  However, it does not require 'a uniform flow of time' (i.e., an evenly running clock).  This dynamical time, therefore, provides for the existence of different time-scales (unlike GR which has shifted but equivalent time-scales in different reference frames). 


Although, there are an infinite number of possible time-scales that satisfy the conditions of KR, the scale called t-time appears most relevant to the biblical day question.  The transformation from t-time (one observer's time-scale) to t-time (a different observer's time-scale) is:


(1)                          t = t0 log(t/t0) + t0


where the log is base-10.  The zero of t-time is the origin and fundamental event - when the separation of the observers vanishes.  In t-time, the event takes place in the infinite past. 

For the purposes of the biblical-geologic time correlation a slight modification of this form is taken:


(2)                          t = t0 log6(t0/t) + t0


The reversal of the log argument results from the direction of time flow (t0 > t) in the calibrated t-time system (years BC).  Note that years BC is equivalent to relative years ago for times more distant that a million or so years.  Also, the log is base-6 here and the usual definition of log6(x) = ln(x)/ln(6) is used.  Further, we identify the end-of-day with t/t0.  Solving for t-time gives:


(3)                geologic year = t0 / exp[(end-of-biblical-Day - 1) . ln(6)]



It is now possible to determine the geologic year of the biblical days once t0 is determined.


          From one cosmological point-of-view (7), there are cyclic rises and falls in the order and matter content of the universe at-large (not inconsistent with the Hindu view of Kalpa cycles (seen below in Section 3.6.6), denoted here as HC-K,m).  The process of selecting t0 begins by assuming a massive destructive event of some previous phase of the universe at HC-K=1, m=1 (Appendix D) (i.e., at 14,929,491,113 BC) that leaves a mass-less void.  The t0 occurs after that, coincident with the Big Bang of modern cosmology.  The event recognized as the Big Bang (traditionally placed at ~14 billion years ago) corresponds, in time, to the event HC-K=1, m=4 (i.e., 14,003,776,827.2 BC).  It is this event that we chose as t0. 


So, the modified kinematic relationship (3), using t0 = 14,003,776,827.2 BC, gives the geologic year when a given end-of-biblical-Day occur (indicated as the Day). (Again, for

convenience, years BC is used because of its equivalence to relative years ago for times more distant than around ten thousand years):


          4.3.1. Day 1: ends at 14,003,776,827.2 BC    


          The "light" in verse 1 is the burst of energy of the Big Bang.  There was now in the universe a distinction between the void and matter/energy as the "light was separated from "dark".


          4.3.2. Day 2: 14,003,776,827.2 BC to 2,333,962,804.5 BC 


          The early universe was forming - creating a sea of fundamental particles.  By BB + 400,000 yrs, these particles coalesced into neutral hydrogen in the expanding space, to "separate the waters from the waters".   By BB + 1 billion yrs, small galaxies were forming.  By 4.7 billion yrs ago, the solar system including the earth had formed - separating the gases into well-formed bodies.  By ~2 billion yrs ago, early land masses were beginning to form with the first signs of life - the Pre-Cambrian (4.7B-550M) geologic age.  This appears to be a reference to the development of stars and galaxies, and the solar system and earth through its initial cooling period.)


           4.3.3. Day 3: 2,333,962,804.5 BC to 388,993,800.8 BC


          By ~1.1 billion yrs ago, "the dry land" had formed into a super-continent that, over 300 hundred million years broke apart and reformed with ocean basins forming, "the Seas".  In the process, it suffered many major impacts and numerous mass extinctions.  The earth was now in the Paleozoic (550M-250M) age.   Primitive sea plants, seed ferns and corals flourished in the CO2 rich atmosphere as the "earth sprouted vegetation".  This could be a reference to the early continent building in the Paleozoic - the time of many mass extinctions and repopulation of species.)


          4.3.4. Day 4: 388,993,800.8 BC to 64,832,300.1 BC


          Thru the later Paleozoic and the Mesozoic (250M-65M) age, amphibians and reptiles, including the carnivores and dinosaurs, developed - again after a series of mass extinction events.  At the close of the Cretaceous period of the Mesozoic (65M), a massive comet impact in Mexico caused global storms, tsunamis and forest fires.  These, combined with the impact debris, blocked the sun leaving the earth in total darkness and cold, for an extended period of time, resulting in the extinction of over 70% of all species, before the atmosphere finally cleared to reveal new "lights in the sky" (the sun, moon, and stars).

Is this a reference to the period after the great KT extinction, ~65 MYA, when the atmosphere finally cleared exposing the sun and other celestial bodies?)


          4.3.5. Day 5: 64,832,300.1 BC to 10,805,383.4 BC


          The earth now entered the Tertiary (63M - 2M) age.  It "brought forth swarms of living creatures" that repopulated the species (both surviving ones and many new ones) as the warm sunlight brought the planed back to life.  It was a period of explosive growth in the number of small mammals, rodents and birds, and plants (both in numbers of species and numbers within the species).  For the first time, modern birds, fish and marine invertebrates appeared.  This may be a reference to the early to middle Tertiary when repopulation of the species began again.


          4.3.6. Day 6: 10,805,383.4 BC to 1,800,897.2 BC


         Through the late Tertiary and into the Quaternary (2M to present) age, growth continued in "every kind of living creature".  Grassy planes appeared along with the larger grazing mammals, including the modern horse, elk, elephants, camels, bison; as well as, the "wild beasts", such as wolves, foxes, badgers and saber-tooth tigers.  By ~7,000,000 BC, the primate line split between the ape line and what is referred to as the pre-man line, which finally leads to the human species.  At ~2,500,000 BC, early man (Homo Habalis and Homo Erectus) appeared, and was well on the way in its development by the end of Day 6.  The species of man (or mankind) was now created. 


After that, with the beginning of Day 7, the "creation process" ended and God rested; but, the development process continued according to plan.  By ~250,000 BC early Homo Sapiens and Homo Neanderthalis are found; and, by ~150,000 BC modern humans are recognized (~ Day 7.4).  The first complex language is postulated to have appeared by ~40,000 BC (Day 8.1); and evidence of the first farming occurred in the Levant ("the garden") by ~10,000 BC (Day 8.9).  Finally, the individual Adam is born in 4,769 BC RABMEC (Day 9.3). 


          This protracted time line appears at odds with the Bible that traditionally accepts Day 6 as the creation of Adam the individual.  However, it is clear from comparisons, of the Hebrew tradition with the Sumerian tradition (that have much in common because of Abraham's birth place in Ur), that the extended picture is not out of line. 


The Sumerian tradition (Section 3.3.3) indicates that, when "mankind" was first created, it had much in common with the animals.  No clothes were worn (presumably because hair coats made them unnecessary).  They grazed in the fields and drank water from the ditches.  This description is in keeping with modern anthropology's view of "early man" where the tool makers shared more in common with the apes and pre-man than the thinkers ("modern man"). 


The end of Section 3.3.3 indicates that Man ("the thinker") was finally "given breath" for the purpose of satisfying the needs of the gods.  This occurred in two steps: 1) the gods gave mankind the names (i.e., the secret words or complex language, as indicated below in the Hindu tradition Section 3.6.4); and 2) the gods taught the knowledge of agriculture so man could till the fields and tend the sheep.  This all indicates that the Kinematic Relativity picture of the Days of creation is reasonable.


          Return to Top





          4.4.  The Hindu Divine Cycles And The Geological Past


          In the previous cultures, dating of the king lines and creation days of the mythological periods was done to extend the RABMEC backward in time.  In this section, the Hindu tradition does not include a datable king line to support the previous efforts.  However, it does have as part of its mythological tradition its cosmic cycles. 


Coomaraswamy and Nivedita (Ref. 8, p 392) describe the Hindu concept of the universe in terms of a series of cycles.  The longest, the Kalpa (K) is 4,320,000,000 calendar years.  The Kalpa is divided in fourteen manvantaras (m), ~308.57 million years long. 


The Kalpa is also divided into 1000 maha-yuga cycles (y), each of which consists of four ages:  the Satya yuga (A1) lasting 1,728,000 years; followed by the Treta yuga (A2) lasting 1,296,000 years; followed by the Dvapara yuga (A3) lasting 864,000 years; and finally followed by the Kali yuga (A4) lasting 432,000 years.  The total length of the maha-yuga is 4,320,000 years. 


Other sources (Ref. 9, p 326) identify these long cycles as divine cycles because they are based on the regular cycles' definition except that the years are divine years (i.e., 360 calendar years).  For example, the regular maha-yuga is 12,000 years = divine maha-yuga / 360 = 4,320,000 / 360. 


Because of their long lengths, the divine cycles are more easily related to cosmic and early geologic events; while the regular cycles are more easily related to recent events (tens to hundreds of thousands of years ago).  Table 4.8 shows a selection of the major events that are considered.  (Appendix D provides a more inclusive list of events in the development of the earth; but, most are not relevant to the discussion here.) 


The time of the events on the table is given in millions of years ago (MYA).  The only exceptions are the orbit change at 18,000 YA (16,100 BC) that precipitated the end of the last great Ice Age (~2.5 MYA which is approximately 2.5 BC), and the biblical Flood at 5013 YA (3113 BC RABMEC).  The resolution of the dating process for the geologic years is at least a million (and as much as 5 to 10 million) years.   All of the events considered here are within the divine K=4 (the current) cycle that began 1,969,491,113 BC (10).


          4.4.1. The Climate Cycles and Extinction Events


          The warm-cold cycles of the earth's climate tend to be thought of in terms of the Pleistocene period (2.5 MYA - 11,500 YA) of the current Quaternary geological age (i.e., the period of the great Ice Ages).  Analysis of the recurrent glaciations of the period (11) shows cycles with periods of 100 TY (thousand years), 43 TY, 24 TY and 19 TY.  These cycles are associated with the parameters of the earth's orbit, such as, the inclination of the earth's axis relative to the orbital plane, the orbit eccentricity (i.e., the degree of its circularity), and the phase of the perihelion (i.e., the timing of the position of the orbit's most distant point from the sun). 


The glaciations-cycles of this period show some correspondence to the regular (as opposed to the divine) Hindu cycles.  We determine this correspondence by comparing the span of the regular maha-yuga (DyR = 12,000) with the glaciations-periods (without considering any calibration of the yR's to BC date).  For example, a single 24 TY glaciation-period is exactly 2.DyR. 


For the other periods, a string of several consecutive cycles are considered.  For example, 5 consecutive 19 TY periods equals 7.DyR + 11 TY which puts the end of the fifth period in the AR = 4 of the 8th yR cycle.  (The AR = 4 age of the y-cycle is considered to be the most destructive of the four age.)  Similarly, 5-43 TY periods = 17.DyR + 11 TY, and 3-100 TY periods = 25.DyR exactly. 


This recurrent match-up would hint that the geologically recent, ecologically destructive glaciations could be observed in the regular y-cycle when properly calibrated to BC date (possibly being particularly long or cold when the end of the string of periods matched with the end of the y-cycle, that is at the boundary between y's or within the A = 4 period of a particular y). 


We note, here, that the shorter period yR cycles are not restricted to describing only recent (2.5 MYA to present) time.  They are simply less well suited to describing longer period events.  More about the regular yR cycle is discussed later in the context of the most recent events.  However, we now proceed to the discussion of long period climate cycles and the correspondence with the divine yD cycle.


          The long period climate cycle is associated with the orbital period of the solar system around the galactic core (~200 MY), and its position relative to the galactic plane.  Over the course of the orbit, the solar system passes thru the galactic plane in an off-set zigzag (above and below the plane) pattern (Ref. 12; Ref. 9, p61; Ref. 13, p41), passing thru the disc material (dust, comet-like bodies, etc.). 


This material impacts the long period climate by masking the sun's light and altering the heat balance at the earth's surface in several ways.  Dust clouds can shroud the sun directly (and fill the earth's atmosphere externally) shifting the wavelength or reducing the intensity of the light that reaches the earth's surface.  In addition, increased large body impacts can increase the atmospheric dust internally, having the same effect.  


One specific example of this was the comet impact and subsequent mass extinction of over 70% of the species (including the dinosaurs) 65 MYA.  Impact dust blocked the sun's light, plunged the earth into near darkness, and precipitated the beginning of the climate shift to the cold part of the cycle.  This example also demonstrates the relation between the long period climate cycle and the extinction events.


          A detailed temperature trace for the last 65 MY (14) and temperature change data for the last 500 MY (Ref. 15, p182), were used here to show a long period cycle that is consistent with these data and is correlated with the divine Hindu y cycle (Table 4.8, column 1).  The comparison method is similar.  That is, it uses the span of the divine maha-yuga (DyD = 4,320,000), but in this case it is tied to calibrated BC years.  As with the regular y-cycle, A4 is the most destructive age of the yuga, and for the divine cycle, A4 occurs at 0.9yD = 3,888,000. 


The identified long period cycle is 38.25 MY (peak-to-peak of the warm periods, and also peak-to-peak of the cold periods) for a span of Dy = 32.DyD.  The time from the warm peak to the following cold peak is 99.33 MY (Dy = 23.DyD); and, from the cold peak to the following warm peak is 38.92 MY (Dy = 9.DyD).  This warm-to-cold and cold-to-warm cycle asymmetry results from the non-symmetrical (off-set zigzag) pattern of the solar system's path in its orbit.  Column 2 shows the major impact and species extinction events with the time data uncertainty. 


The recognized uncertainty in all of the times is not readily available, but is shown where possible.  The peak temperature time span, < >, shows the climate data uncertainty (Ref. 15, p182).  The extinction time span, { }, shows the extinction data uncertainty (Ref. 9 and Ref. 15). 


Table 4.8. A relation between the major climate and extinction events and the divine Hindu y-cycles (in the K = 4 major cycle).  Column 1 shows the identified long period warm/cold cycle of the climate in millions of years with the corresponding y-cycle.  Column 2 shows the time of the observed major climate and extinction events in millions of years with the data uncertainty indicated in < > for the climate data and { } for the extinction times.  Column 3 shows the beginning of Age = 4 for the closest corresponding y-cycle.


(and Hindu Y Cycle)


YEAR (MYA) and the


772.85  [warm peak] y = 278    

750  (beginning of Frozen Earth)

747.4   y=283,A4

673.52  [cold peak]   y = 301



634.6 [warm peak]    y = 310

635 (end Frozen Earth)

600  (comet impact)

570 (comet impact)

550 (extinction)

635.0   y=309,A4

600.5   y=317,A4

570.2   y=324,A4

553.0   y=329,A4

535.27 [cold peak]    y = 333

<535-520> cold peak


496.35 [warm peak]  y = 342

<500-480> warm peak

500 (volcanic period)

450 (Ice Age)

440  (extinction)


501.1  y=340,A4

449.3  y=352,A4

440.6  y=354,A4

394.02 [cold peak]     y = 365   

<400-390> cold peak


358.1 [warm peak]     y = 374

<375-355> warm peak

360 (extinction)

310 (extinction)

300 (Ice Age)


358.7  y=373,A4

311.0  y=384,A4

298.0  y=387,A=4

258.77 [cold peak]      y = 397

<275-260> cold peak

250 (comet impact, extinction)


250.6  y=398,A4

219.58 [warm peak]    y = 406

<225-215> warm peak

{208-210} (extinction)

{160-163} (extinction)

{144-146} (extinction)


207.4  y=407,A4

159.8  y=419,A4

146.9  y=422,A4

120.52 [cold peak]       y = 429

<125-110> cold peak

{90.3-91} (extinction)


90.7   y=435,A4

81.6 [warm peak]         y = 438


<80-60> warm peak

65 (comet, extinction)

55 (extinction)

35 (extinction)

30 (extinction)

10 (extinction)

2.5 (Pleistocene Ice Age)

{16100-9100} BC (orbit change)

3113 BC (biblical Flood)


64.8   y=441,A4

56.1   y=444,A4

34.7   y=448,A4

30.2   y=449,A4

8.6     y=454,A4

2.5     y=455, in A1

~16100  y=456, in A3

3,113  y=456,A4

-17.68 [cold peak]        y = 460

*timing possibly disrupted by the orbit change ~16 TY BC



Column 3 shows the year of the indicated yD that is closest to the corresponding event in column 2.  All of the events are associated with the beginning of A4 for the identified yD with the exception of the Pleistocene Ice Age and the orbit change; but, considering the progress of the Ice Age can provide insight into the apparent difference in behavior with respect to the destructive A4 of a yD cycle.


          The temperature record for the last 65 MY(14) shows a high variability curve that decreases roughly linearly from all warm temperatures (at ~ 55 MYA) to all cold temperatures (thru ~2.5 MYA when the Ice Ages began to ~18,000 YA when it reached its minimum).  Following that is a sharp rise in temperature (associated with a change in the earth's orbit) that interrupted the long-period climate cycle leaving a roughly flat, relatively low variability temperature trace of alternating warm and cold temperatures that has lasted to the present. 


It was during this last period that melting glaciers discharged large amounts of water with the warmer temperatures that allowed the development of agriculture for the first time.  From the Middle Ages to the end of the 1800's AD, the Little Ice Age (16) there were periods of glacier advance and retreat, interspersed with decadal periods of hot and dry, causing chaos primarily in the agriculture of Europe.  (These conditions seem to be evident today indicating the Ice Age may not be over as the long period climate cycle would indicate). 


          It is here that we turn back to the regular yR Hindu cycles which, previously, were not calibrated to BC years.  In the divine cycles, 3113 BC is registered to the A4 of a given yD which was then used to work backwards to the beginning of the current KD cycle and its 14 mD cycles. By also registering 3113 BC to the A4 of a yR cycle, we can again work backwards to the beginning of the current regular KR cycle and its 14 mR cycles.  Beginning with 3113 BC, one full yR cycle back is 15113 BC (within the data uncertainty time span for the orbit change, i.e., {16100-9100} BC).  This event also occurs at the beginning of the A4 age of that yR cycle.  And, going back 136 full yR cycles from 3113 BC is 2,499,113 BC (the beginning of the Pleistocene Ice Age), also the beginning of A4 for that yR cycle. 


          The major events in Table 4.8 are shown on average to occur at roughly 30 MY intervals (~7 yD cycles) for the more distant past; and roughly 11 MY (~1 yR cycles) for the most recent times.  This indicates that the distant events and the nearer events, as well as, the climate cycles seem to be associated with the Hindu cycles (divine or regular).


          Return to Top





          4.5 References for Chapter 4


1 L.A. Waddell, Makers Of Civilization In Race And History, London (1929), (Kessinger

Pub. reprint)

2 S.N. Krammer, The Sumerians, Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago (1963)

3 G.P. Verbrugghe and J.M. Wickersham, Berossos and Manetho - Native Traditions in Ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt, Michigan Univ. Press, Inc., Ann Arbor (1996)

4 E.A.W. Budge, Egyptian Literature, Vol I: Legends of the Egyptian Gods, Kegan, Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. Ltd, London (1912), Dover Edition (1994)

5 The Holy Bible, King James Version, Thomas Nelson Pub. (1990)

6 H. Bondi, Cosmology, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, (1952), Dover Edition (1960)

7 M. Bojowald, "Following the Bouncing Universe", Scientific American, October (2008)

8 A. Coomaraswamy and Sister Nivedita, Myths of the Hundus and Buddhists, George G. Harrap & Co, (1913), Dover edition (1967)

9 P.A. LaViolette, Earth Under Fire, Bear & Co., Rochester, VT (1997)

10 The date of the beginning of the current Kalpa cycle (K=4, relative to the Kalpa containing the Big Bang) is based on Coomaraswamy and Nivedita(Ref 26, p 393), using the present day in their calculation as 1900 AD (i.e., the present day is the 5013th of the Kali yuga of the present maha-yuga, which is the 28th of the 7th manvantara of our kalpa.  With this, the starting date (K=4, y=1, A=1) occurs on 1,969,491,113 BC.

11 J. Imbrie, and K.P. Imbrie, Ice Ages, Harvard Univ. Press, Inc., Cambridge, MA (1979)

12 M.R. Rampino and R.B. Stothers, "Terrestrial Mass Extinctions, Cometary Impacts and the Sun's Motion Perpendicular to the Galactic Plane", Nature Vol 308  pp 709 - 712 (1984);  Ref. 25, page 318; P. Moore, The Data Book of Astronomy, Institute of Physics Pub. Ltd., Phila. PA (2000); R.T Dixon, Dynamic Astronomy, Prentice Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1971), Chapt. 14.

13 L. Blitz, The Dark Side of the Milky Way ,Sc Am. Oct. 2011, p37

14 N.G. Sovity, Earth in Flux, National Geographic Supplement, May 1998

15 R. Firestone, A. West and S. Warwick-Smith, The Cycle of Cosmic Catastrophes, Bear & Co., Rochester, VT (2006)

16 B. Fagan, The Little Ice Age, Basic Books (2002)


          Return to Top