9. But I have not convinced myself. For instance are there more than one atariki in the H text:
Suppose the night side of the rongorongo texts should be 'counted according to Moon' meaning there are 2 glyphs necessary to measure the time instead of 1 glyph for each day on the front side. The 'night' has been divided in 2 parts since the era of Marduk, the last part of 'the old one' and the first part of 'the new one'. Such a method of counting would make the G text easier to accept, because 236 + 236 / 2 = 354 = 12 * 29.5 and we would not have to worry about those 4 extra months beyond the end of the year. And 100 glyphs from glyph number 314 to tamaiti in Gb7-3 would suddenly collapse into 50 days, with vaha kai in the center and with the satisfactory day number 300:
Should we therefore possibly recount 384 into 236 + (384 - 236) / 2 = 310 = 10 * 31?
No, this does not seems right, because the long text of H could have winter solstice at the beginning of side a. We can presumably equate glyph number 236 in G with glyph number 295 (= 236 + 59) in H:
384 should then instead be recounted as 295 + (384 - 295) / 2 = 339.5, and in order to avoid 0.5 we could say that *Ha7-39 indicates the 2nd half of day number 339:
Not convincing. In the long text of H it should not be necessary - nor even desirable - to count 2 glyphs per night in 'the season of Moon'. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
