Calendar Start December 25, 3117 BC - LexiLine Journal 321

UPDATE from the year 2010

Please note: The astronomical Delta-T value is disputed among the astronomers and influences the calculation of solar eclipses. For example, our original calculation of a December 25, 3117 B.C. solar eclipse may, according to Alcyone Software http://www.alcyone.de/, actually be the June 29, 3117 B.C. (Julian) solar eclipse over Cairo. This does not influence our basic arguments, but only details. The first Dynasty began at this time, even if shifted six months.
______________

A reader has written to ask how I arrived at December 25, 3117 BC as the alleged start of the Pharaonic Egyptian, Hindu (Vedic) and Maya calendar(s). Here is my answer.

The dates I use are based on an many years of analysis of Pharaonic Egpytian dynasties and other sources - Sumerian artifacts, the Maya and Hindu calendars, etc., which are currently said to start in 3114 BC and 3012 BC respectively - see e.g.

http://webexhibits.org/calendars/calendar-mayan.html
http://www.vedicsky.com/KeyFeatures.pdf
http://webexhibits.org/calendars/calendar-ancient.html

as well as on the basis of a study of solar eclipses and on the way the megaliths mark the sky at megalithic sties. Due to precession, the sky "moves" - as seen from the earth - in a cycle of ca. 26,000 years, so that the positions of the solstices and equinoxes in the sky of stars (as marked e.g. on the megaliths) also move. If a solstice or equinox is marked on an ancient stone as taking place within a given constellation, the date can be computed. There is a lot of information at http://www.megaliths.net on this but for the calendar in particular see:

http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi20.htm
http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi760.htm
http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi18.htm
http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi768.htm
http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi762.htm
http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi75.htm
http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi203.htm
http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi78.htm
http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi102.htm
http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi11.htm
http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi69.htm

This is complicated stuff. For now, my analysis must be considered very speculative, until or unless it is confirmed down the road by other researchers. The Maya scholars do not budge from their August 3114 BC date, but as I show at http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi75.htm they are clearly in error.