How many divisions did the front calendar ring have?
Most likely: the ring had 354 holes, a lunar year, so the Egyptian calendar ring sat over a lunar-year scaleAhead on the evidence, not yet confirmed. It needs two reviews to be accepted.
Where it stands
Four answers have been proposed. The ring had 354 holes, a lunar year, so the Egyptian calendar ring sat over a lunar-year scale. leads, with evidence 3 for, 1 against: partly supported by its tests. Three are still possible.
Why it matters
The ring's count decides whether the front dial tracked the 365-day Egyptian civil year, as assumed since 2006, or a 354-day lunar year, which would change what the device was for and who it was made for. Three analyses of one dataset of 81 hole positions disagree with a 2025 reconstruction[1][2][3].
Answers 4
History
- Freeth et al. puts forward: the ring had 365 holes, one per day of the Egyptian civil year.
- Budiselic et al. puts forward: the ring had 354 holes, a lunar year, so the Egyptian calendar ring sat over a lunar-year scale.
- Budiselic et al.: the 2020 measurement and spacing analysis gives about 354.For: The ring had 354 holes, a lunar year, so the Egyptian calendar ring sat over a lunar-year scale.
- Dickens & Malin puts forward: the ring had some other count (for example 360 or a count near 352), reflecting a different scheme.
- Woan & Bayley: a Bayesian fit to the 81 hole positions finds 365 not plausible and 360 strongly disfavoured.Against: The ring had 365 holes, one per day of the Egyptian civil year.
- Dickens & Malin: a least-squares re-analysis puts the chance of 365 below one in ten thousand.Against: The ring had 365 holes, one per day of the Egyptian civil year.
- Whiddington: specialists object that the Metonic dial already gives a lunar calendar, making a second, cruder one…Against: The ring had 354 holes, a lunar year, so the Egyptian calendar ring sat over a lunar-year scale.
- Woan & Bayley: independent Bayesian analysis gives 354 to 355.For: The ring had 354 holes, a lunar year, so the Egyptian calendar ring sat over a lunar-year scale.
- Dickens & Malin: independent least-squares analysis gives 352.3 plus or minus 1.5, within 350 to 355 at 95 per cent.For: The ring had 354 holes, a lunar year, so the Egyptian calendar ring sat over a lunar-year scale.
- Woan & Bayley: 360 is strongly disfavoured by the Bayesian fit.Against: The ring had some other count (for example 360 or a count near 352), reflecting a different scheme.
- Dickens & Malin: dickens and Malin's best estimate is 352.3, below 354, though they judge 354 far more likely than 365.For: The ring had some other count (for example 360 or a count near 352), reflecting a different scheme.
- Voulgaris et al.: the ring carries Egyptian month names, which belong to a 365-day calendar, and the 2025 front-dial…For: The ring had 365 holes, one per day of the Egyptian civil year.
- Asked on this site