Obviously the Orion figure must have, since very early times, been recognized as a major feature of the 'geography' up in the sky. "The earliest depiction that has been linked to the constellation of Orion is a prehistoric (Aurignacian) mammoth ivory carving found in a cave in the Ach valley in Germany in 1979. Archaeologists have estimated it to have been fashioned approximately 32,000 to 38,000 years ago." (Wikipedia)  "The artist cut, smoothed and carved one side (A) and finely notched the other side (B) and the edges. Side A contains the half-relief of an anthropoidal figure, either human or a human-feline hybrid, known as the ‘adorant’ because its arms are raised as if in an act of worship. On side B together with the four edges is a series of notches that are clearly set in an intentional pattern. The edges contain a total of 39 notches in groups of 6, 13, 7 and 13. A further 49 notches on side B are arranged in four vertical lines of 13, 10, 12 and 13 respectively plus a further notch that could be in either of the middle two lines." (UNESCO: Portal to the Heritage of Astronomy.) Although the precise relative positions of its stars must have changed over time due to their individual proper motions. "The grouping of the notches on the plate suggests a time-related sequence. The total number of notches (88) not only coincides with the number of days in 3 lunations (88.5) but also approximately with the number of days when the star Betelgeuse (α Ori) disappeared from view each year between its heliacal set (about 14 days before the spring equinox around 33,000 BP) and its heliacal rise (approximately 19 days before the summer solstice). Conversely, the nine-month period when Orion was visible in the sky approximately matched the duration of human pregnancy, and the timing of the heliacal rise in early summer would have facilitated a ‘rule of thumb’ whereby, by timing conception close to the reappearance of the constellation, it could be ensured that a birth would take place after the severe winter half-year, but leaving enough time for sufficient nutrition of the baby before the beginning of the next winter. There is a resemblance between the anthropoid on side A and the constellation Orion. None of these factors is convincing when taken in isolation, because of the high probability that apparently significant structural and numerical coincidences might have arisen fortuitously. However, taken together they suggest that the anthropoid represented an asterism equivalent to today’s constellation of Orion, and that the ivory plate as a whole related to a system of time reckoning linked to the moon and to human pregnancy. If so, then ethnographic comparisons would suggest that the Geißenklösterle culture related their ‘anthropoid’ asterism to perceived cycles of cosmic power and fertility." (UNESCO: Portal to the Heritage of Astronomy.) "The Ancient Egyptians identified it with their god Osiris ..." (David Whitehouse: Oldest 'star chart' found.)
In my writings I have used the equation 'heliacal' date = 'nakshatra' date + / - 183 days based on a conversion from the RA positions of stars in space to positions in time. When for instance I have assigned the date June 17 (168) for heliacal Betelgeuze in rongorongo times it does not mean the heliacal rising occurred at that time: "... risings and settings can be observed directly, and it is these which have played a part in calendars. Heliacal rising the first visible, though brief, appearance of a star on the eastern horizon before sunrise. On the previous morning, sunlight made the star invisible. When the rising of a star is spoken of, it is usually the heliacal rising that is meant. In ancient Egypt, the helical rising of Sirius coincided with the annual rising of the Nile at Memphis. Heliacal setting: the last visible setting of a star in the evening twilight. On the following evening, the star will pass below the horizon while there is still too much sunlight for it to be seen ..." (Wikipedia) We have to add approximately 16 days before reaching the day when the human eye could have detected the heliacal rising of Betelgeuze. And instead of March 7 (66) for the heliacal setting we have to change the date to 66 - 16 = 50 (February 19) in order to arrive at my corresponding date:
This, in turn, would make it possible to use months with 29 nights in order to arrange the period of invisibility to be 87 = 3 * 29 nights.
And then we could change the time from prehistoric to rongorongo:
Or to the time of Gregorius XIII:
ºJune 13 (6-13) counts as 61 * 3 = 183 (= 366 / 2). Possibly we should add 88 to 366 because a period of invisibility should not count. 366 + 88 = 454 (= 12 * 29½ + 100). Furthermore, 454 alludes to 227 (π) + 227 (π). | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
