Table 2.5.
Intercalations in the later Achaemenid period (from Darius II) and the Seleucid period, arranged in 19-year cycles
Year 1of cycle12 34 5 6 7 8 910111213141516171819424/3XII2XII2XII2XII2XII2VIa 2XII2405/4XII2XII2XII2XII2XII2VIb 2XII2386/5XIIc 2(XII) 2
dXII2XII2(XII) 2
e(VI) 2
fXII2367/6XII2XII2XII2XII2XII2VI2XII2348/7XII2XII2XII2XII2XII2VI2XII2329/8XII2XII2XII2XIIg 2XII2VI2XII2310/9XII2XII2XII2XII2XII2VI2XII2291/0XII2XII2XIIh 2XII2XII2VI2272/1XII2XII2XIIi 2XII2XII2XII2VI2XII2253/2XII2XII2(XII) 2
jXIIk 2XIIl 2VI2XII2234/3XII2XII2XII2XII2XII2VI2215/14XII2XII2XII2XII2VI2XII2196/5XII2XII2XII2XII2XII2VI2XII2177/6(XII) 2
mXII2XII2158/7XII2XII2aSo, for 408/7, according to two sources (of which one is economic) listed in Parker and Dubberstein (1956: 9) and one additional source listed byWalker (unpubl.: LBAT 1411- 12).
Walker notes that according to LBAT 1427 the intercalation was XII; it is likely that LBAT 1427, a Saros text of lunar eclipses, represents a theoretical reconstruction of the calendar that is 2historically incorrect (seeWalker 1997: 24).bSo, for 389/8, in Parker and Dubberstein (1956: 9) and in an observational text in Sachs and Hunger (1988-2006: v, no.59; see also textual reconstruction ibid. no. 61). It has beensuggested that LBAT 1414 implies instead XII( 2
Walker 1997: 24)—which if correct, would push the institution of the Saros Canon cycle even later—
but according to Sachs and Hunger(ibid. no. 2, pp. 6- 7; also the appendix by J. M. Steele, ibid. 390
- 9), this entry in LBAT 1414 is to be dated
- 333 (334
BCE).cSo according to observational astronomical texts in Sachs and Hunger ibid. i, no. 384, v, nos. 59
- Saros Canon texts, however, place this intercalation in the next year (384/3), where
indeed it would rightly belong according to the Saros Canon cycle (in year 3): see Aaboeet al.(1991) 14
- Britton (2007: 122) argues that
‘since this is the sole anomaly in a century of