242 Proceedinfis of the Roiial Irish Academn. 



It follows that according as Papyrus J was in the 7th, Sth, or 0th year, 

 Papyrus K was in the 12th, 13th, or 14th }'ear of Darius. For Papyrus K the 

 12th year is impossible, and, therefore, the 7th year is impossible for 

 Papyrus J. Since we must take the higher number in one case, we should 

 take it in all cases ; for we can hardly suppose that the Jews employed a 

 numerical system which would have been ambiguous even to themselves. 



We can now tabulate the results so far obtained, choosing in each case 

 the higher numbers ; but in Papyri A and B the question will still be left 

 open, because an important chronological difficulty arises, the solution of 

 which depends upon the choice of the numbers of the years. 



A. loth (14th year of Xerxes. 



18 Elul = 28th Paehons = 12th September, 471 B.C. 



B. 21st (20th T) year of Xerxes = year of accession of Artaxerxes. 



(1) 18 Chisleu = 7 Thoth = 2:3rd December, 464 B.C. 



(2) 18 Chisleu = 17 Thoth = 2nd January, 464 B.C. 



E. 19th year of Artaxerxes. 



2 Chisleu = 10 Mesore = 17th Xovember, 446 B.C. 



r. 25th year of Artaxerxes. 



14 Ab = 19 Paehons = 26th August, 440 B.C. 



J, 3 Chisleu, Sth year =12 Thoth, 9th year of Darius = 16th December, 

 416 B.C. 



K. 24 Shebat, 13th year = 9 Athur, 14th year of Darius = 10th February, 

 410 B.C. 



Up to this point in the argument only approximations to the numbers 

 of the years of the reigns have been employed ; it remains to be examined 

 whether the results which have been obtained can be reconciled with the 

 actual numbers given for those years. 



But before entering on a detailed comparison it is necessary to discuss 

 the ways in which the years of the reign may have been counted. 



The theory that the years were counted from the anniversary of the 

 king's accession may be rejected. Such a method would have given rise 

 to serious practical difficulties, and was probably not adopted by any ancient 

 people. It is also clearly excluded by the form of the date of Papyrus B. 

 Three other theories as to the beginning of the year are a priori equally 

 possible : the year may have been counted («) in Egyptian style, from the 

 1st Thoth ; or (&) in Babylonian style, from the apparent new moon 

 corresponding to the 1st of Xisan ; or (c) in the style adopted by the later 

 Jews, from the apparent new moon corresponding to the 1st of Tishri. In 



