7. But now we have day 409 in two different places, and neither of them is at a glyph which counted from Ea1-1 has ordinal number 409:
How can this be possible? It 'proves' the text of E is not to be regarded as a description of a great single calendar cycle (or at least not simply so). The text definitely has as its subject matter the 'geography of time', but why should it be forbidden to mention the beginning of the year (if such is the meaning of number 409) in more than one place? 409 may very well be used only as a symbol in some places. 40 * 9 = 360. |
