205

SVANTE JANSON, Tibetan Calendar Mathematics. Internet publication on the

server of the Department of Mathematics, Uppsala University, December 2007,
47 pages. http://www.math.uu.se/~svante/papers/calendar/tibet.pdf
NACHUM DERSHOWITZ and EDWARD M. REINGOLD, Calendrical Calculations.
Third Edition. Cambridge, New York etc. 2008, 479 pages. ISBN 978-0-52170238-6. Here reviewed: pp. 315-322 = Chapter 19, The Tibetan Calendar, and
pp. 435-37.
EDWARD HENNING, K@lacakra and the Tibetan Calendar. Treasury of the
Buddhist Sciences series. Published by The American Institute of Buddhist
Studies at Columbia University in New York. Co-published with Columbia
Universitys Center for Buddhist Studies and Tibet House US. New York 2007.
XV, 391 pages. ISBN 978-0-9753734-9-1.
Modern research on the Tibetan calendar started in 1834 with the first
explanation of the Tibetan Sexagenary cycle by Alexander Csoma de Krs.29
Unfortunately Csoma de Krs wrongly fixed the first year of the first Rabbyu$-cycle as 1026 instead of 1027. This mistake passed unnoticed for almost
80 years, with the consequence that many dates given by historians according to
the Western calendar were wrong by one year.
Almost 80 years later, Paul Pelliot published in 1913 his outstanding article Le
Cycle Sexagnaire dans la Chronologie Tibtaine30, in which he corrected this
mistake. Shortly afterwards Bertold Laufer confirmed this discovery (The
Application of the Tibetan Sexagenary Cycle).31 Nevertheless many problems of
computing Tibetan dates into Western time-reckoning remained unsolved and
the principal structures of the Tibetan calendrical systems were completely
unknown. The beginning of the Tibetan year is not only different from the new
year in the Western calendar. It changes every year, and the exact reasons for
these variations remained unknown. The same held true for the problem of
29

Alexander Csoma de Krs: A Grammar of the Tibetan Language. Calcutta 1834, p.

148: reckoning the beginning of the first cycle from the year 1026 of the Christian
era;
30
Paul Pelliot: Le Cycle Sexagnaire dans la Chronologie Tibtaine. Journal Asiatique,
Tome 1, Paris 1913, pp. 633-667.
31
Berthold Laufer: The Application of the Tibetan Sexagenary Cycle. Toung Pao, Vol.
14, 1913, pp. 569-596.

ZAS 37 (2008)

205

206
intercalary months in the Tibetan calendar and for the fact that calendar day
numbers (dates) were sometimes omitted or duplicated.
More than 50 years after Pelliots and Laufers articles, three scholars suddenly
showed new interest in the problems of Tibetan astronomy and calendrical
calculations. The first one was Winfried Petri, who was an experienced
astronomer. He studied Sanskrit and Tibetan under Helmut Hoffman and in
1966, submitted his second thesis under the title "Indo-tibetische Astronomie",
to the Faculty of Natural Sciences of Munich University32. Copies of this thesis
were distributed widely among many scholars and are still available in several
libraries. But the thesis was never published properly. Additionally Petri
published several articles about his research on astronomy and the calendrical
calculation of the K@lacakratantra.33 Petris main interest was the history of
astronomy. Petri studied for his thesis especially the first chapter of the
K@lacakratantra called Lokadh@tupaala (Tibetan: Jig-rten khams kyi leu).34
His thesis starts with a chapter on the history of Indian astronomy. The second
chapter contains a detailed description of the sources he used. These were
besides the K@lacakratantra several texts found in the Tibetan canon and the
famous Vairya dkar-po35, completed in the year 1695 by the well known
Winfried Petri: Indo-tibetische Astronomie. Habilitationsschrift zur Erlangung der
venia legendi fr das Fach Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften an der Hohen
Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultt der Ludwig Maximilians Universitt zu Mnchen,
Mnchen, Februar 1966, 151 pages.
33
The following four articles are important:
Winfried Petri:
a) Tibetan Astronomy. Vistas in Astronomy 9 (1968), pp. 159-164.
b) ber den astronomischen Inhalt des ersten Buches Kalatschakra (nach
Sanskrit und tibetischem Text). Histor.-astron. Forschungen (in Russian), vol. 9,
Moskau 1966, pp. 171-178.
c) Uigur und Tibetan Lists of Indian Lunar Mansions. The Indian Journal of
History of Sciences, Vol. 1 (1966), pp. 83-90.
d) Colours of Lunar Eclipses According to Indian Tradition. The Indian Journal
of History of Science, Vol. 3, No. 2, 1968, pp. 91-98.
34
For bibliographical details and contents analysis of this chapter see Dieter Schuh:
Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der tibetischen Kalenderrechnung, Wiesbaden 1973, pp.
23-26.
35
Complete Tibetan title: Phug-lugs rtsis kyi legs-bad mkhas-pai mgul-rgyan vair
dkar-poi do-al dpyod-ldan si$-nor. For bibliographical details see Dieter Schuh, op.
cit. footnote 6, pp. 27-28 and for a very detailed contents analysis see Dieter Schuh:
32

ZAS 37 (2008)

206

207
Tibetan regent sde-srid Sa$s-rgyas rgya-mtsho (1653-1705). Of special
importance are chapter 6 (description of the ecliptic), chapter 7 (movement of
the moon and time calculation), Petris descriptions of the calculation of the
movement of the planets (chapter 8) and of the calculations of the sun and the
moon eclipses (chapter 9). There are of course some shortcomings in his
descriptions. Especially we have to mention that he did not solve the special,
basic problems of the Tibetan calendar. However, his results were very valuable,
even nowadays, and showed that Tibetan astronomy and the Tibetan calendar
were fully based on the teachings of the first chapter of the K@lacakratantra.
In 1967 Dieter Schuh, at that time a young student of mathematics and physics at
Cologne University, was sent by Prof. Walther Heissig (University of Bonn) and
Prof. Klaus-Ludwig Janert (University of Cologne) to Dharmsala (India) in order
to study Tibetan mathematics, astronomy and calendrical calculations. Schuhs
teacher for astronomy and calendrical calculations (skar-rtsis) in Dharmsala was
the astrologer Blo-gros rgya-mtsho. He also studied Tibetan arithmetic (rdeurtsis) and Sino-Tibetan divinations (nag-rtsis) with the nobleman Phun-chogs
dba$-rgyal from the house of Ba-gis. After his return to Germany in autumn
1969, he published several articles on Tibetan arithmetic36, calendrical
calculations and astronomy37, and Sino-Tibetan divination (nag-rtsis)38, from
Tibetische Handschriften und Blockdrucke sowie Tonbandaufnahmen tibetischer
Erzhlungen, Teil 5, Wiesbaden 1973, pp. 266-276. An incomplete modern reprint of the
Vairya dkar-po was printed in 1997 in Amdo (mTsho-s$on mi-rigs dpe-skrun kha$).
36
Dieter Schuh: Studien zur Geschichte der Mathematik und Astronomie in Tibet, Teil
1, Elementare Arithmetik. Zentralasiatische Studien des Seminars fr Sprach- und
Kulturwissenschaft Zentralasiens der Universitt Bonn, 4, 1970, pp. 81-181
37
Dieter Schuh:
a) Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der tibetischen Kalenderrechnung,
Wiesbaden 1973, VIII, 164, 239 pages.
b) Grundzge der Entwicklung der Tibetischen Kalenderrechnung, Zeitschrift
der Deutschen Morgenlndischen Gesellschaft, Supplement II. XVIII.
Deutscher Orientalistentag vom 1. bis 5. Oktober 1972 in Lbeck.
Vortrge, 1974, pp. 554-566.
c) Detailed descriptions and contents analysis of Tibetan block prints and
manuscripts in: Tibetische Handschriften und Blockdrucke sowie Tonbandaufnahmen tibetischer Erzhlungen, Teil 5, Wiesbaden 1973, pp. 267-309.
38
Dieter Schuh:
a) ber die Mglichkeit der Identifizierung tibetischer Jahresangaben anhand
der sMe-ba dgu, Zentralasiatische Studien des Seminars fr Sprach- und

ZAS 37 (2008)

207

208
1970 onwards. His thesis "Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der tibetischen
Kalenderrechnung" was published in 1973. In this book, he described the
principles and development of the Tibetan calendrical and astronomical
calculations and their literature from the beginning, marked by the translation of
the K@lacakratantra and other Indian texts into Tibetan during the 11th century,
up to modern times. As he was aware of the fact that historians would never take
on the burden of complicated astronomical und calendrical calculations, he
published detailed computer tables for the conversion of dates from the Tibetan
calendar into our Western system of time calculation. Although one thousand
copies were printed at that time, this book has now been out of print for more
than 15 years. When Dieter Schuh started his work he was fully aware of Petris
research. Dieter Schuhs research revealed that during the last thousand years
several schools of calendrical und astronomical traditions were established in
Tibet. This resulted in the usage of different calendars in different parts of the
country at different times. Thus the conversion of Tibetan dates into Western
time reckoning is not an easy task even today.
Completely independently of Winfried Petri and Dieter Schuh, the Japanese
scholar Zuih Yamaguchi published in 1973, in Japanese language a rather small
but highly significant article on the Tibetan calendar. He described, very
correctly, the basic principles of Tibetan calendrical calculations.39 For this
article he was able to use several old almanacs issued by the famous School for
Medicine, Astronomy, Astrology and Divination (sMan-rtsis kha$) in Lhasa.
These almanacs cover the years 1923-1940 and are fortunately preserved in the
Kulturwissenschaft Zentralasiens der Universitt Bonn, 6, 1972, pp. 485504.
b) Die Darlegungen des 5. Dalai Lama #ag-dba$ blo-bza$ rgya-mtsho zur
Kalkulation der neun sMe-ba, Zentralasiatische Studien des Seminars fr
Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaft Zentralasiens der Universitt Bonn, 7,
1973, pp. 285-299.
c) Der Chinesische Steinkreis. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Sino-tibetischen
Divinationskalkulationen, Zentralasiatische Studien des Seminars fr
Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaft Zentralasiens der Universitt Bonn, 7,
1973, pp. 353-423.
d) Politik und Wissenschaft im 13. und 17. Jahrhundert, Zentralasiatische
Studien des Seminars fr Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaft Zentralasiens der
Universitt Bonn, 33, 2004, pp. 1-23
Chibetto no
Zuiho Yamaguchi: Chronological Studies in Tibet
rekigaku: Annual Report of the Zuzuki Academic foundation, X, 1973, pp. 77-94.

39

ZAS 37 (2008)

208

209
Library of the University of Tokyo.40 Based on these Tibetan almanacs,
Yamaguchi published a table recording all Tibetan days for a period of 15
Tibetan months (hor-zla) and their Western equivalents.41 The table starts from
the 1st Tibetan day of the 3rd Tibetan month, which corresponds, according to this
table, to 17 March 1923. It ends with the 29th day of the 4th Tibetan month,
which corresponds, according to the almanac quoted by Yamaguchi, to 1 June
1924. Yamaguchis table also records all Tibetan days which were counted twice
or which were omitted in the Tibetan almanac. If we compare this data with the
data of the computer tables published by Schuh in 1973, we find out that they
match completely. Later on, Zuih Yamaguchi published three more articles on
this subject (one in Japanese and two in English).42 The last one, published in
1992, deals with the problem of computing the intercalary months and deserves
our special attention. In this article Yamaguchi compared all the computer tables
for the years 1923 up to 1940, published by Dieter Schuh, with data in the
original almanacs of the sMan-rtsis kha$ in Lhasa for the respective years and
came to the following result: If, by the way of experiment, we now compare the
almanacs published by the sMan-rtsis khang of the Tibetan government for the
years 1923-40 with the corresponding section of Schuhs work, we find that
the superfluous (lhag) and deficient (chad) days are all correctly
recorded. But Yamaguchi notes that he found differences in respect to the
recorded intercalary month. It goes without saying that the calculation of the
omitted day and the added days form the most difficult part of Tibetan
calendrical calculation. Insofar Yamaguchis observations confirm that Schuhs

40

:Tky Daigaku shoz Chibetto bunkenmokuroku

(Catalogue of Tibetan works in the Possession of the
University of Tokyo 1965), nos. 343-360.
41
Zuih Yamaguchi, op. cit. footnote 11, p. 88.
42
Zuih Yamaguchi:
a) Methods of Chronological Calculation in Tibetan Historical Sources.
Tibetan and Buddhist Studies Commemorating the 200th Anniversary of the
Birth of Alexander Csoma de Krs, Budapest 1984, pp. 405-424.
b) The Significance of Intercalary Constants in the Tibetan Calender and
Historical Tables of Intercalary Month. Tibetan Studies: Proceedings of the
5th Seminar of the International Association for Tibetan Studies. Narita
1989. Narita 1992, Vol. 2, pp. 873-895.
See Kitamura Hajime

c)

((Tibetan) Calendar, Divination).

.

ZAS 37 (2008)

209

210
computer tables form an absolutely solid base for any calculation of Western
equivalents for Tibetan dates. But Yamaguchis interesting and highly
significant statements on the intercalary months certainly open a new field of
research. I will follow up this matter thoroughly in due course.
In 2005 the Taiwanese scholar Te-ming Tseng published his thesis on SinoTibetan divination.43 The book is especially important for the understanding of
the Tibetan Calendar as the calculations of the Sino-Tibetan divinations play an
important role for the construction of the calendar system in Tibet.
Although the Tibetan calendar is of outstanding importance for scholars in the
field of Tibetan history44, there is an astonishing lack of attention to the results of
the research work of Winfried Petri, Dieter Schuh und Zuih Yamaguchi. Dieter
Schuhs tables for the conversion of Tibetan dates were frequently used, but this
usage lacked any critical approach. There was a strong hope that the increasing
number of studies on Tibetan biographies and Tibetan histories would lead to a
collection of calendrical data and further discussions, but this hope was never
fulfilled, obviously due to lack of interest. It is easy to demonstrate how even
well-known scholars neglected the results of this research field. The following
three examples are only a small selection from similar cases:
1. Saul Mullard, at that time a young doctorate student from the University
of Oxford, remarks in his article on the Sikkimese Brag-dkar-ba
family45: document YA4 dated by Dieter Schuh as 1785, although
the date of this text should be 1784 46 In a subsequent footnote
Mullard provides additional explanations: Schuh gives the date of 1785
for document YA4 but this seems to have resulted from a misreading of
shing brug for shing sbrul. If we look at the document edited and
translated by Dieter Schuh and L. S. Dagyab 30 years ago we read

43

Te-ming Tseng: Sino-Tibetische Divinationskalkulationen (Nag-rtsis) dargestellt

anhand des Werkes dPag-bsam ljon-i$ von Blo-bza$ tshul-khrims rgya-mtsho. Halle
2005. 294 pages.
44
Compare the statement of the famous historian Luciano Petech, written almost 50
years ago: (L. Petech: The Dalai Lama and Regents of Tibet. Toung Pao, Ser. II, Vol.
48, 1959, p.369) A thorough scientific study of the calendar is one of the most urgent
desiderata in the field of Tibetan historical studies.
45
Saul Mullard: The Brag dkar pa Family and g.Yang thang rdzong: An Example of
Internal Alliances in Sikkim. Bulletin of Tibetology, Volume 39, No. 2, Gangtok 2003,
pp. 53-66.
46
Mullard, op. cit. footnote 17, p. 54.

ZAS 37 (2008)

210

211
clearly:47 i$ brug zla * 12 * tshes * 15 * la, lugs gis gyis (!) gdan sa
chen po (pho-bra$s (!)) rabs (!) brtan rce nas bris / The German
translation of this sentence by Dieter Schuh and L. S. Dagyab reads as
follows (here by courtesy translated into English): Written on the 15th
calendar day of the 12th (Tibetan) month in the i$-brug(-year) [25th
January 1785] . According to all relevant schools of the Tibetan
calendar the wood dragon year in question starts with 21 February 1784
and ends with 9 February 1785.48 There is not the slightest doubt that the
document was issued in the month of January, 1785. Obviously Mr.
Mullard never paid any attention to the structure of the Tibetan calendar.
2. Shen Weirong, a highly gifted young scholar from China, published his
thesis on the life of the first Dalai Lama dGe-dun grub-pa in 2002.49 His
book contains the translation of a Tibetan biography of the first Dalai
Lama and a facsimile edition of this source. Here we read about the
K@lacakra studies of the first Dalai Lama in the monastery E-va~ chossde: (p. 352) l$a-bsdus kyi ri-mo tsam ig da$-po gsa$-phur thugs-sbyo$
gi dus mjad ci$ dbya$s-char sogs kya$ s$a-mor la-stod lhor mjad kya$
dus-khor gyi sa-bris yo$s su rjogs-pa$ dir mjad /. Shen Weirong
translated this sentence (p. 192) as follows (here by courtesy
translated into English): Moreover he completed a painting of the five
elements, which he had drawn before during his spiritual exercises in
gSa$-phu, and a schema of the K@lacakra, which he had made before in
lHa stod lHo among others for dByangs-char [gyi rgyud].50 I refrain
from discussing the details of this interpretation as the following
translation is unquestionably correct: Although he had partially

47

Dieter Schuh und L. S. Dagyab: Urkunden, Erlasse und Sendschreiben aus dem Besitz
sikkimesischer Adelhuser und des Klosters Phodang. St. Augustin 1978, pp. 43-50.
48
Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 9, p. *192*.
49
Shen Weirong: Leben und historische Bedeutung des ersten Dalai Lama dGe-dun
grub-pa dpal bza$-po. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der dGe-lugs-pa-Schule und der
Institution der Dalai Lamas. Sankt Augustin 2002.
50
In German: Ferner vollendete er ein Bild der fnf Elemente, welches er schon frher
whrend der geistigen bung in gSa$-phu gemacht hatte, und ein Schema des
K@lacakra, welches er frher in lHa stod lHo u. a. fr dByangs -char [gyi rgyud]
gemacht hatte.

ZAS 37 (2008)

211

212
studied51 the computation52 of the five components of the calendar (l$absdus, Skr. pac@$ga)53 for the first time in gSa$-phu and although he
had studied before in lHa-stod lho the dBya$-char(-Astrology)54 among
others, he completely mastered the calculation of the K@lacakra here (in
E-va~ chos-sde).
3. In 2007 Per K. Srensen, a well known scholar and Professor for
Tibetan Studies at the University of Leipzig, published a facsimile
edition and a translation of the source book Gu$-tha$ dkar-chag.55 About
the birth date of the famous Bla-ma a$ we read in this source book56:
rab-byu$ gis-pai chu-mo-yos kyi lo ston-zla bri$-poi tshes bi la
sku bltams. Prof. Srensen translates this as follows: He was born in
autumn, on the fourth day of the middle autumn month [= eighth lunar
Hor-month] of the female Water-Rabbit year [1123 A. D.].57 In a
footnote (no. 16) he adds: It corresponds to ca. 27.08.1123 A. D. of the
Western Calendar. bKa brgyud chos byung 65a3 has 1122. Prof.
Srensen omits in his translation the wording rab-byu$ gis-pai of
the second Rab-byu$(-Cycle). Equivalents for his translation in
autumn cannot be found in the source book. It is not possible that the
middle autumn month of the year 1123 is the eighth lunar Hormonth. The counting of a month with a cardinal number, called Hormonth (Mongolian month), was introduced about 150 years later by
51

thugs-sbyo$ mjad-pa is the honorific form for blo-sbyo$ byed-pa and has the
meaning to study.
52
The term ri-mo (figure) is used frequently for arithmetic calculation, since the
Tibetan astronomers used for their computations the so-called sand abacus, a tablet
covered thinly by sand. The numbers, engraved on such a tablet, could be easily
extinguished and thus replaced by new ones.
53
See Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, p. 130.
54
This is the Indian Svarodaya-Astrology. Compare Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6,
p.19.
55
Per K. Srensen and Guntram Hazod in Cooperation with Tsering Gyalpo: Rulers on
the Celestial Plain. Ecclesiastic and Secular Hegemony in Medieval Tibet. A Study of
Tshal Gung-thang. Vol 1 and Vol. 2. Wien 2007, pp. 69-295.
56
Quoted from Karl-Heinz Everding: Der Gung-thang dkar-chag. Die Geschichte des
tibetischen Herrschergeschlechts von Tshal Gung thang und der Tshal-pa bKa brgyudpa-Schule. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Lhasa-Tales in der Zeit des 12.-19.
Jahrhunderts, Bonn 2000, p. 22.
57
Per K. Srensen, op. cit. footnote 21, p. 77.

ZAS 37 (2008)

212

213
chos-rgyal Phags-pa (1235-1280). It is completely improbable that a
calendar based on the K@lacakratantra was in use in Tibet at the time of
the birth of Bla-ma a$. In the case of the birth date of Bla-ma a$ it is
by no means certain that the middle autumn month is the same as the
Khrums-month, which later on was also counted with the number 8.
Even if we assume that a calendar based on the K@lacakratantra was in
use at that time, the middle autumn month could only have been the 9th
or 10th lunar month, since the calculations of all relevant calendar
systems show an intercalary month for the first half of that year. If we
accept that this middle autumn month is the 9th lunar month, we must
come to the conclusion that the birth date of Bla-ma a$ was exactly 26
August 1123 A. D. of the Western calendar and not ca. 27.8.1123. But
the absolutely meaningless date ca. 27.8.1123 is also obviously a
counting mistake.
The reasons for the shortcomings described above are not only a lack of interest,
but also a lack of communication between the scholars who are only
occasionally confronted with the problems of the Tibetan calendar, and the
specialists. I have described a number of mistakes from the so-called scholarly
literature on Tibet to create a certain understanding for the shortcomings in at
least the first two of the three publications which I shall review here. Two
characteristic features are common to all three publications. Their authors show
genuine interest in the Tibetan calendar and none of them has any professional,
scholarly background in respect of the language, history, religion and culture of
Tibet.
Svante Janson is Professor for Mathematics at the Department of Mathematics of
Uppsala University in Sweden. As a professional mathematician he is interested
in various calendars as a hobby. He was especially intrigued by and interested in
the Tibetan calendar. The main source of his article on the Tibetan calendar was
my book Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der Tibetischen Kalenderrechnung.
He also used the book K@lacakra and the Tibetan Calendar written by Edward
Henning and several websites of Buddhist communities in the internet, which
are, at least according to my opinion, unfortunately not quotable as a source of
serious, reliable statements and research. The aim of Jansons article is
characterized by him in a private communication to me as describing and
recasting the traditional calculation methods of Tibet in terms of modern
mathematical descriptions. A certain weakness of Jansons article is the fact, that

ZAS 37 (2008)

213

214
he had no contact with any professional Tibetologist. Therefore a number of
statements in Jansons article demand further clarification.
Janson, p. 1:As in Indian calendars [1], months are lunar (from new moon to
new moon), but numbered by the corresponding solar months.
Janson, p. 3: The Julian day number (which we abbreviate by JD) for a given
day is the number of days that have elapsed since the epoch 1 January
4713 BC (Julian)
Janson, p. 3: The Tibetan day begins at dawn, about 5 am local time
Janson, p. 5: Remark 1. Most Tibetan calendars start, however, with month 3;
this month is identified with the Kalacakra month Caitra, The
standard numbering system is known as Mongolian month (hor zla), and
was introduced in the 13th century,
Janson, p. 6: The months are described by year, number (from 1-12) and
possibly the label leap. To avoid confusion with the yearly
numbering from 1 to 12, we use the term month count and the variable n
for this numbering. Thus month count 0 is month Mo of year Yo. (The
month count is often called the true month
Janson, p. 9: In other words, 804 (lunar) months = 65 (solar) years. 67 (lunar)
month = 65 solar month.
Janson, p. 11: Since the months are numbered by the corresponding solar
months, First, (solar) months are counted starting after month 3
(Caitra); hence the number of zodiacal month (khyim-zla) is M - 3.
The result is called true month (zla-dag)
Janson, p. 12: Each (day) month is (as in Indian calendars) divided into 30
lunar days (tshes zhag, Sanskrit tithi); these thus do not correspond
exactly to the calendar days. During each of these lunar days, the
elongation of the month increases by 1/30 (= 12).
Janson, p. 12:The basic rule is: A calendar day is labelled by the lunar
day that is current at the beginning of the calendar day.
Janson, p. 14: The traditional reckoning counts days modulo 7 only, i.e. day of
week
Janson, p. 20: The mean length of the month is m1 = 29; 31, 50, 0, 480 (60, 60,
6, 707) ... 29.530587 days
Janson, p. 21: The mean length of the year is 365.270645 days, which is

ZAS 37 (2008)

214

215
0.02846 days more than the modern astronomical value of the tropical
year and 0.02815 days longer than the Gregorian year also longer
than the sidereal year
These quotations show one basic shortcoming of Jansons article, the lack of
precise definitions of terms and their strict usage. Hereby we have to keep in
mind that the Tibetan scientific literature on calendrical and astronomical
calculation uses a special terminology. In this literature, the Tibetan term for
year is Lo, the term for month is Zla-ba and the term for day is ag.
There are three different types of days (ag), the Khyim-ag, the Tshes-ag and
the in-ag.
The first two of these days are astronomical days. The time needed by the mean
sun to pass through one of the twelve traditional constellations of the zodiac (the
twelve Khyim) is called Khyim-zla, which Janson calls a zodiacal month. But
since the length of one Khyim-zla is equal to what we call usually a solar month,
we should use this term solar month for the translation of the Tibetan word
khyim-zla. One-thirtieth of one solar month (khyim-zla) is one Khyim-ag,
which we might call a zodiacal day, because we do not have an equivalent in the
Western terminology.
The time needed by the moon for the elongation of 12 degrees is one lunar day
(tshes-ag, Sanskrit thiti). The lengths of such lunar days vary considerably due
to the anomaly in the movement of the moon and the sun.
30 lunar days form one lunar or synodic month (tshes-zla), the period from new
moon to new moon. This is equal to the time needed by the moon for the
elongation of 360 degrees.
The natural day (in-ag) is defined by the Tibetans as the period from dawn to
dawn. Jansons explanation that the beginning of the natural day takes place
about 5 am local time is incomprehensible.
Strictly speaking, the months appearing in a Tibetan almanac, called by us
Tibetan calendar months, are not the same as lunar or synodic months (tsheszla). In Tibetan there is no special term for calendar month. These calendar
months are just called Zla-ba (month).
As Janson states himself, a Tibetan calendar month normally starts with the
week day or natural day (gza or in-ag) in which the first lunar day (tshes-ag)
ends.58 A Tibetan calendar month normally ends with the week day or natural

58

Jansons statement that is current at the beginning of the calendar day is incorrect.

ZAS 37 (2008)

215

216
day (gza or in-ag) in which the 30th lunar day (tshes-ag) ends. In
consequence, a Tibetan calendar month (zla-ba) comprises 29 or 30 natural days.
In the sequence of natural days or week days, there are no omitted days (chad) or
days that occur twice (lhag). But since these days are also named by the term
tshes together with a cardinal number, it happens that certain numbers or dates
(the corresponding lunar day numbers) do not occur at all or appear twice. The
lunar day numbers are counted from 1 to 30 and it can happen that a Monday
with the lunar day number 1 (tshes gcig) is followed by a Tuesday with the
moon day number 3 (tshes gsum). On the other hand, a Monday with the lunar
day number 1 (tshes gcig) may be followed by a Tuesday with the lunar day
number 1 (tshes gcig). In other words, it happens quite often that certain dates do
not appear in the Tibetan almanac and certain dates occur twice. But there are no
natural days or week days that occur twice or which are omitted.
The obvious oldest method of naming Tibetan calendar months derives from the
four seasons of the year and contains 12 names. The usual naming is as follows:
first spring month (dpyid-zla ra-ba), middle spring month (dpyid-zla bri$-po),
last spring month (dpyid-zla tha-chu$) etc.59
A second method is the naming of Tibetan months by the names of the animals
of the Chinese twelve-year cycle. Here also the corresponding names of the five
elements in Sino-Tibetan Divination (nag-rtsis) are sometimes added. The
history of its introduction, most probably connected with that of Sino-Tibetan
Divination (nag-rtsis), has still not been researched.
According to the tradition of the K@lacakratantra, calendar months are named by
certain lunar mansions. The following list of lunar mansions and calendar
months (printed in red) shows this very clearly: (0) tha-skar (zla-ba), (1) bra-e,
(2) smin-drug (zla-ba), (3) snar-ma, (4) mgo(-zla), (5) lag, (6) nabs-so, (7)
rgyal(-zla), (8) skag, (9) mchu(-zla), (10) gre, (11) dbo(-zla), (12) me-bi, (13)
nag(-zla), (14) sa-ri, (15) sa-ga (zla-ba), (16) lha-mtshams, (17) snron(-zla), (18)
snrubs, (19) chu-stod (zal-ba) , (20) chu-smad, (21) gro-bin (zla-ba) , (22) mongre, (23) mon-gru, (24) khrums-stod (zla-ba), (25) khrums-smad, (26) nam-gru.
With these names for the months, the lunar mansions are mentioned in which the
full moon roughly (rags-pa) occurs.
A fourth method of naming calendar months goes back to the famous religious
and political leader chos-rgyal Phags-pa (1235-1280). He fixed the beginning of
the Tibetan year according to that of the Mongol Empire of Qubilai Khan,
established the K@lacakra calendar as the official calendar of political Tibet and
59

For details see Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, p. 146.

ZAS 37 (2008)

216

217
counted the month, beginning from the newly established New Year, by ordinal
numbers. This numbering, from the 1st Mongolian month (hor-zla da$-po) to the
12th Mongolian month (hor-zla bcu-gis-pa), has nothing to do with the
numbering or counting of so called solar months. Insofar Janson is mistaken,
when he states (pp. 1, 11) that the Tibetan calendar months are numbered by
the corresponding solar months.
The Khyim (signs of the zodiac) derive from the partition of the ecliptic into 12
equal parts, called Khyim. The first of these Khyim is named lug and counted
with the number 0. The names of the 12 Khyim are (0) lug [Aries], (1) gla$
[Taurus], (2) khrig-pa [Gemini], (3) karkaa [Cancer], (4) se$ge [Leo], (5) bumo [Virgo], (6) sra$ [Libra], (7) sdig-pa [Scorpio], (8) gu [Sagittarius], (9) chusrin [Capricorn], (10) bum-pa [Aquarius], (11) a [Pisces]. The beginning of the
first lunar mansion (0) tha-skar and the beginning of the first zodiacal sign Lug
are identical. But in the system of counted months, the month Tha-skar is
counted as the 9th Hor-month. When the sun passes the first zodiacal sign Aries,
full moon roughly occurs in the lunar mansion Nag. But the month Nag-zla is
counted as the 3rd Hor-month.
The traditionally produced almanac for a certain year starts, like a normal
Tibetan book, with a title. In one of the almanacs, produced by the School for
Medicine and Astronomy (sman-rtsis kha$) in Dharmsala in India, we read:

mDzes-byed ces-pa byu$-ba bi-ldan chu mo yos kyi ra-thu rgyal-ba dgyes-pai
mchod-sprin es bya-ba bugs so // Herein is contained the almanac of the
female water hare (year), which is called mJes-byed and which has four
(different) elements, named clouds of offerings, which makes the victorious ones
happy.
This almanac starts with the calendar date 1 of the 3rd Hor-month, which is
equivalent to 24 April 1963, and ends with the calendar date 30 of the second
Hor-month, which is equivalent to 13 March 1964. This confirms Jansons
statement, that most [exact: all traditional] Tibetan calendars of the last centuries
start, however, with month 3 [to be exact: the third Hor-month]; this month is
identified with the K@lacakra month Caitra. But we have to keep in mind that
the water-hare year, mentioned above, starts two calendar months earlier and the
last two months, recorded in this almanac as 1st and 2nd Hor-month, belong to the
following wood dragon year. On the base of traditional almanacs of the Central
Tibetan Government and of the Phug-pa school, the period for one year,
normally starting from calendar date 1 of the 1st Hor-month and ending normally
with calendar date 30 of the 12th Hor-month, is clearly fixed and may be termed

ZAS 37 (2008)

217

218
Tibetan calendar year. Of course this is true only if the respective calendar dates
occur in the almanac concerned. Otherwise the year may start with calendar date
2 (as happened for instance in 1748, 1801 and 1820) and end with calendar date
29 (as happened for instance in 1891 and 1944).
It is beyond question that the Tibetans use for this period the name Lo year.
Tibetan astronomers however have a second understanding of the term Lo. In a
Tibetan handbook on Tibetan calendrical calculations and astronomy, written at
the beginning of the 20th century,60 we find the following definition of the term
lo: i-mas khyim-zla bcu-gis-po// bgrod-yun dus-bi rdzogs-pa la// lo gcig cespai tha-sad btags // To the time, in which the sun moves through all the
twelve solar months (khyim-zla bcu-gis-po) (and) the four seasons (of the year)
are completed, we attach the term one year (lo-gcig). This means that Tibetan
astronomers have a notion and term for the so called solar or tropical year. But
when they calculate the length of such a year, they reckon the time for the
revolution of the sun (i-mai dkyil-khor). Thus the time for a circulation of the
sun (i-mai khyim-ag dkyil-khor) and the length of a solar year is equal to 12
solar months or 360 zodiacal days.
Moreover, for the Tibetan astronomer, there is a direct correlation between the
solar month (khyim-zla) and length of the sun. A certain solar month starts when
the mean sun enters a certain zodiacal sign and ends when the mean sun leaves
this zodiacal sign. This can be easily explained, if we look at the basic reckoning
at the beginning of every Tibetan calendrical calculation. The aim of this
operation is to find out the exact number of past lunar months (tshes-zla rnampar dag-pa or zla-dag) since the given epoch at the beginning of a certain month
in a certain year. The basic relation is that the period of 67 lunar months and 65
solar months are equal. If we start with the beginning of the paticular year, the
number of past solar months is: (number of past years since the epoch)x12. If we
now take for instance the epoch of the K@lacakratantra, that is the month Nagzla (caitra) in the year 806 A. D., the beginning of the first lunar month and the
beginning of the corresponding solar month is the same, at least according to the
calendar of the K@lacakratantra. The mean sun enters the zodiacal sign Lug
(Aries). For the length of the mean sun at that time, the K@lacakratantra records
26.58 lunar mansions.61 This is the beginning of the lunar mansion Nam-gru plus
58 Chu-tshod. The small difference of two Chu-tshod to the beginning of lunar
60

mKhyen-rab nor-bu : bsTan-bcos vairya dkar-po da$ in-byed sna$-bai dgo$s-don

gsal-bar ston-pa rtsis-gii man-$ag rigs-ldan si$ gi thig-le, block print, p. 7r.

61

See Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, p. 118.

ZAS 37 (2008)

218

219

The ecliptic and its partition into 27 lunar mansions (rgyuskar) and 12 zodiacal signs (khyim). Lunar mansions, used for
naming months, are shown in green.

0 tha-skar

1 bra-e

26 nam-gru
25 khrums-smad

2 smin-drug
24 khrums-stod
3 snar-ma
23 mon-gru
4 mgo
0 lug
1 gla$

5 lag

22 mon-gre

11 a
10 bum-pa

2khrig-pa

9 chu-srin

6 nab-so

19 chustod

7 sdig-pa

4 se$ge

8 skag

20 chusmad

8 gu

3 karkaa

7 rgyal

21 grobin

5 bu-mo

18 snrubs

6 sra$

9 mchu

17 sron
10 gre

16 lha-mtshams
11
dbo

12
mebi

15 sa-ga
13
nag

14
sari

ZAS 37 (2008)

219

220

Months, seasons, solstices and equinoxes, based on the

K@lacakratantra (the Hor-month system was introduced later)
2nd autumn
month:
tha-skar zla-ba
[hor-zla 9]
smin-drug zla-ba:
3rd autumn month
[hor-zla 10]

khrums-stod zla-ba: 1st

autumn month [hor-zla 8]

Vernal equinox:
sun enters lug

mgo zla-ba: 1st

winter month
[hor-zla 11]

0 lug

11 a

1 gla$

10 bum-pa

2khrig-pa
rgyal zla ba:
2nd winter
month [horzla 12]

Summer solstice: sun

enters karkaa

9 chu-srin
Winter solstice: sun
enters chu-srin
8 gu

3 karkaa
4 se$ge

7 sdig-pa
5 bu-mo

6 sra$

Autumnal equinox:
sun enters sra$

mchu zla-ba: 3rd

winter month [horzla 1]
dbo zla-ba:
1st spring
month [horzla 2]

gro-bin zlaba: 3rd summer month

[hor-zla 7]

Nag zla-ba: 2nd

spring month
[hor-zla 3]

chu-stod zlaba: 2nd summer month

[hor-zla 6]
sron zla-ba: 1st
summer month
[hor-zla 5]

sa-ga zla-ba: 3rd spring

month [hor-zla 4]

At the beginning of the month Nag-zla (caitra) in the year 806 A. D., the mean sun enters the zodiacal
sign lug (Aries). This is identical with the vernal equinox. The position of the moon and the sun is the
same (new moon). Full moon occurs 15 lunar days later in the lunar mansion Nag. This is the reason
for naming this month Nag-month (nag zla-ba). In correspondence with the vernal equinox, the month
is also called 2nd spring month. The month names of the K@lacakratantra are related to the position of
the moon in the system of lunar mansions, when full moon occurs. The old Tibetan month names, the
12 month of the four seasons, are related to the solstices and equinoxes of the sun. The Hor-zla
numbers are added here, because this correlation was also partially used in Tibet after the 13th century.

ZAS 37 (2008)

220

221
mansion (0) Tha-skar (= beginning of zodiacal sign Lug) was neglected by the
astronomers.
If we multiply the number of past solar months by 67 und divide the result by
65, the result is the number of past lunar months (zla-dag) since the epoch plus a
remainder, which is smaller than 65. This remainder is called by the Tibetans
Zla-bol rtsis-phro Remainder for the calculation of leap-month or mDa-roi
lhag-ma Remainder of the division by 65. Let us call this remainder r. So r:65
is the time, given in 65th parts of one lunar month, that the mean sun needs to
enter the next zodiacal sign after the end of the previous lunar month. Since one
lunar month consists of 30 lunar days, it is obvious, that (30xr):65 = (6xr):13 is
the number of mean lunar days and parts thereof, that the mean sun needs to
enter the next zodiacal sign after the end of a certain lunar month. In other
words, measuring from the beginning of a next lunar month, (30xr):65 delivers
as the integer the number of past mean lunar days (khyim-slebs ches-gra$s
number of (past mean) lunar days, when the mean sun enters the zodiacal
sign) and as the remainder in 65th parts, the lunar day time for the moment
when the mean sun enters a zodiacal sign.62 If we start from the epoch of the
K@lacakratantra and calculate r for the end of the 32nd month, we find r=64.
Furthermore we calculate (6x64):13 = 29 + 6:13. This means, that the mean sun
enters the zodiacal sign in the last mean lunar day of the following month. For
the 33rd month, we get r=66 and (6x66):13 = 30 + 6:13. This means, in the following lunar month, the event of the mean sun entering a zodiacal sign (in
Tibetan pho-ba and Sanskrit sa~kr@nti) does not take place. As a consequence,
a leap-month has to be added.63 But there are also different explanations for this
insertion of leap-months.
In the first half of the 12th century, Abhay@karagupta described in his K@lacakr@vat@ra a method to determine the solstices by using the gnomon.64 During
the middle ages, the Tibetans used this method and found out that the winter
solstice occurred when the sun entered the zodiacal sign gu (Sagittarius) and
that the summer solstice occurred when the sun entered the zodiacal sign Khrigpa (Gemini). This resulted in a change of the correlation between the month of
the seasons and the month named according to the lunar mansions.65
62

See Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, p. 115.

For details see Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, pp. 107-112.
64
For details of this text and its translation into Tibetan see Dieter Schuh, op. cit.
footnote 6, pp. 26-27.
65
See Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, p. 114.
63

ZAS 37 (2008)

221

222

Months, seasons, solstices and equinoxes, based on the new

measurement of the solstices by means of a gnomon.
3rd autumn
month: thaskar zla-ba
[hor-zla 9]

smin-drug zla-ba: 1st

winter month [hor-zla
10]

khrums-stod zla-ba: 2nd

autumn month [hor-zla 8]

11 a
mgo zla-ba:
2nd winter
month [horzla 11]

0 lug
1 gla$
Summer solstice:
sun enters khrig-pa

Vernal equinox:
sun enters a

10 bum-pa

2khrig-pa

rgyal zla ba:

2nd winter
month [horzla 12]

9 chu-srin
8 gu

3 karkaa

Autumnal equinox:
sun enters bu-mo

5 bu-mo

dbo zla-ba:
2nd spring
month [hor
month 2]

chu-stod zlaba: 3rd summer month

[hor-zla 6]

Winter solstice: sun

enters gu

4 se$ge

mchu zla-ba: 1st

spring month
[hor-zla 1]

gro-bin zlaba: 1st autumn month

[hor-zla 7]

7 sdig-pa
6 sra$

nag zla-ba:3rd
spring month
[hor-zla 3]

sron zla-ba: 2nd

summer month
[hor-zla 5]

sa-ga zla-ba: 1st summer month [hor-zla 4]

At the beginning of the month Nag-zla (caitra) in the year 806 A. D., the mean sun enters the
zodiacal sign lug (Aries). The position of the moon and the sun is the same (new moon). Full moon
occurs 15 lunar days later in the lunar mansion Nag. In correspondence with the new fixation of the
vernal equinox, the month is now also called 3rd spring month. The month names of the
K@lacakratantra are related to the position of the moon in the system of lunar mansions, when full
moon occurs. The old Tibetan month names, the 12 months of the four seasons, are related to the
solstices and equinoxes of the sun and have now been changed now. The Hor-zla numbers are added
here, because this correlation was used after the introduction of the Hor-zla-system of counting.

ZAS 37 (2008)

222

223
The difference from the K@lacakratantra was explained by the Tibetan
astronomers by the variation of solstices in the direction of east and west.
Accordingly the geographic position of Tibet was fixed far to the east of India.
In the 15th century, we observe remarkable developments in the field of Tibetan
astronomy and calendrical calculations. These were mainly initiated by Phug-pa
lHun-grub grub-rgya-mtsho and mkhas-grub Nor-bza$ rgya-mtsho. Phug-pa
lHun-grub rgya-mtsho proposed among others the change of the Zla-bol rtsisphro Remainder for the calculation of leap-month for the beginning of the
year 806 from 0 to 61.66 This had serious impact on the insertion of leap-months,
although otherwise, the basic method of calculation of leap-months was not
changed by Phug-pa lHun-grub rgya-mtsho at that time.
One observation, made by mkhas-grub Nor-bza$ rgya-mtsho 19 years after the
completion of the Padma dkar-poi al-lu$, deserves our special attention. In the
years fire dog (me-khyi) 1466/67 and fire pig (me-phag) 1467/68, Nor-bza$
rgya-mtsho, accompanied by witnesses, measured the time of occurrence of the
winter solstice. For his observations, he used a gnomon (thur-i$).67 According
to Nor-bza$ rgya-mtsho, the winter solstice occurred in the fire dog year on the
fifth calendar day (tshes) of the 12th Hor-month and in the fire pig year on the
16th calendar day of the 11th Hor- month. The first date corresponds to 22
December 1466 and the second to 22 December 1467 according to the Gregorian
calendar!68 Nor-bza$ rgya-mtsho calculated in both cases the length of the mean
sun as 18 sKar-ma, 31 Chu-tshod and 30 Chu-sra$. This is exactly equal to 8
solar months (khyim-zla) and 7 zodiacal days (khyim-ag). This means that
according to Nor-bza$ rgya-mtshos observations, winter solstice occurred 7
zodiacal days after the sun had entered the zodiacal sign gu (Sagittarius).69 For
Nor-bza$ rgya-mtsho, this observation had no immediate consequences for the
calculation of the intercalary month. But it paved the way for the use of the
Chinese Chi knots70 for the calculation of the intercalary month more than two
hundred years later.

66

For the cause of this change see Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, p. 104.
Legs-par bad-pa padma dkar-poi al-lu$, Beijing 2002, p. 458.
68
Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, pp. *112*-*113*. The corresponding dates in my
tables (12th December of the years 1466 and 1467) are calculated according to the Julian
calendar. To get the Gregorian dates, one should add 10.
69
Already reported by Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, pp. 114-115.
70
For the Chi knots see Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, pp. 113 and 115-116.
67

ZAS 37 (2008)

223

224

Solstices and equinoxes according to the observations of mkhasgrub Nor-bza$ rgya-mtsho during the years 1466-1467

1 bra-e

0 tha-skar

26 nam-gru
25 khrums-smad

2 smin-drug
24 khrums-stod
3 snar-ma
23 mon-gru
4 mgo
Winter solstice: 7
zodiacal days
after mean sun
entered khrig-pa

5 lag

2khrig-pa
6 nab-so

Autumn
equinox: 7
zodiacal days
after mean sun
entered bu-mo

7 rgyal
8 skag

22 mon-gre

11 a
Spring equinox: 7
zodiacal days
after mean sun
entered a

21 grobin
20 chusmad

Summer
solstice: 7
zodiacal days 8 gu
after mean sun
entered gu

19 chustod
18 snrubs

5 bu-mo
9 mchu

17 sron
10 gre

16 lha-mtshams
11
dbo

12
mebi

15 sa-ga
13
nag

14
sari

ZAS 37 (2008)

224

225
Out of the two different Chi knots in Chinese astronomy, only the knots called

sGa$ by the Tibetans had any significance for the Tibetan calendar. There are
twelve sGa$ within the full cycle of the 12 zodiacal signs. Now the mean sun
reaches each of these twelve sGa$ exactly 8 zodiacal days (khyim-ag) after it
entered the respective zodiacal signs. Here, we observe an obvious close
connection between Nor-bza$ rgya-mtshos oberservation of the solstices (7
zodiacal days after the sun enters the specific zodiacal sign) and the sGa$ (8
zodiacal days after the mean sun enters the specific zodiacal sign).
It is very simple to calculate the mean lunar days of a certain month and the
lunar daytime for the arrival of the mean sun at a certain sGa$. Since we
calculated (6xr):13 as the time in lunar days the mean sun needs to enter a
certain zodiacal sign, we just have to add 8x(67:65). The result, (6xr):13 +
8x(67:65) amod 30 delivers the number of past mean lunar days and the lunar
day time for the arrival of the sun at a certain sGa$.71 In addition to the
calculation of the particular lunar time, when the sun enters a certain sGa$, the
Tibetans calculate the mean weekday and the mean solar length for that moment
also. These values are noted down in the almanac together with the designation
sGa$. To give an example, we look at the almanac of the fire-sheep year
1967/68, published in Dharmsala. For the calendar date 30 of the 7th Hor-month
(the month gro-bin), we find the following information:

Lunar date number: 30

71

Name of the weekday: Monday

Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, p. 116.

ZAS 37 (2008)

225

226

Mean weekday
(2) for the time
when sun enters
sGa$.

Weekday (2) and

exact daytime (gzadag) for the end of the
30th lunar day.

Mean length of
the sun for the
time when sun
enters sGa$.

Exact length of
the sun (i-dag).

Designation sGa$. Mean

lunar day is 30.

In certain traditions (especially in Dharmsala between 1963 und 1973) of

Tibetan almanacs, the name sGa$ is always noted down in the space of the
calendar day, which has the same lunar date number. Another basic rule is: if the
name sGa$ appears on the day with the lunar date number 30, we add to this
month an extra month. This may take place, when r is either equal to 48 or to 49.
Hereby, the month without a sGa$ is considered to be the leap-month (lhag) and
is called bol-zla. In the example, quoted above, the next month, following the
7th Hor-month is registered as a leap-month (bol-zla). In this leap-month, no
sGa$ occurs. If the name appears on the day with the lunar day number 1, the
next month is considered to be an intercalary month (phyi-ma bol). This may
take place, when r is equal to 50 or 51. But I would like to add a warning:
According to my observations, there are different traditions to handle the leapmonths by means of the sGa$.
It happens quite often, that the exact weekday, in which a given lunar day ends,
(gza-dag) and the mean weekday for the occurrence of the sGa$ are different.
This is the case in the 8th month of the fire sheep year 1967/68 according to the
almanac quoted above. This almanac contains for the beginning of the 8th Hormonth the following information:

ZAS 37 (2008)

226

227

Lunar date
number: 1

Lunar date
number: 2
Name of the weekday:
Wednesday

Weekday (4) and

exact daytime (gzadag) for the end of the
1st lunar day.

Name of the weekday:

Thursday

Designation sGa$. Mean

lunar day is 1.
Mean weekday
(5) for the time
when sun enters
sGa$.

Weekday (5) and

exact daytime (gzadag) for the end of the
2nd lunar day.

All the almanacs from Dharmsala, produced between 1963 and 1973, follow this
rule: If the exact weekday, in which a given lunar day ends, (gza-dag) is smaller
than the mean weekday for the sGa$ for the respective lunar date number (1), the
name sGa$ is noted down in the field of the common lunar day (here 1) and the
numbers for the mean weekday and the mean sun are noted down in the field of
the following day (here 2). This is always the day on the right side of the
designation sGa$.
If the exact weekday in which a given lunar day ends (gza-dag) is greater than
the mean weekday for the sGa$ for the respective lunar date number, the name
sGa$ is noted down in the field of the common lunar day and the numbers for
the mean weekday and the mean sun are noted down in the field of the preceding
day. This is always the day on the left side of the designation sGa$. This can be

ZAS 37 (2008)

227

228
demonstrated by means of the almanac of the wood dragon year 1964/65. This
almanac contains for the calendar dates 24 and 25 of the 5th Hor-month the
following information:

Lunar date
number: 24

Lunar date
number: 25

Name of the weekday:

Saturday

Weekday (0) and

exact daytime (gzadag) for the end of the
24th lunar day.

Name of the weekday:

Sunday

Mean weekday
(0) for the time,
when sun enters
sGa$.

Designation sGa$. Mean

lunar day is 25.

Weekday (1) and

exact daytime (gzadag) for the end of the
25th lunar day.

There is another interesting feature in the almanacs from Dharmsala for the
years 1963 to 1973. For the wood dragon year 1964/65, we find the designation
sGa$ in the field of the calendar day with the date number 30 of the 10th Hormonth. The mean weekday and the mean length of the sun are noted down in the
field of the calendar day with the date number 1 in the following month, which
is counted as the 11th Hor-month. But this 11th Hor-month is not considered to
be a leap-month. Instead the month following the 11th Hor-month is named as
an additional leap-month (bol-zla phyi-ma).

ZAS 37 (2008)

228

229
Moreover, if we look at the almanac, published in Dharmsala for the water bird
year 1993/94, we observe a different method for recording the sGa$. For the 6th
Hor-month, the number of the exact weekday in which a given lunar day ends
(gza-dag) is smaller than the mean weekday for the sGa$ for the respective
lunar date number (17). But here, the name sGa$ is noted down in the field of
the following lunar day (here 18) and the numbers for the mean weekday and the
mean sun are noted down in the field of the same day (here 17). This is the rule I
described on the basis of several classical Tibetan works on calendrical
calculation.72
Lunar date
number: 17

Lunar date
number: 18
Name of the weekday:
Wednesday

Weekday (4) and

exact daytime (gzadag) for the end of the
17th lunar day.

Mean weekday
(5) for the time,
when sun enters
sGa$.

Name of the weekday:

Thursday

Designation sGa$. Mean lunar day is 17.

The number of the sGa$ is 6.
Weekday (5) and
exact daytime (gzadag) for the end of the
18th lunar day.

Older almanacs from the sMan-rtsis kha$ in Lhasa, published before 1960,
follow the same rule.
In the almanac for the water bird year 1993/94 we observe that the sGa$ are
numbered according to the corresponding Hor-month. This numbering is also
common to all almanacs published in Kinnour (India). In the almanacs from
Kinnour, the designation sGa$ and the values for the mean weekday and the
mean sun are always noted down in one field of the almanacs. This is always the

72

Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, p. 116.

ZAS 37 (2008)

229

230
field of the weekday (gza-dag), which bears the same weekday number as the
mean weekday of the sGa$.
Actually, in the traditional Tibetan almanacs, the leap-months are not numbered
at all. They just bear the name bol-zla (leap-month) or bol-zla phyi-ma (later
leap-month). But in historical sources, the leap-months are generally mentioned
with the number of the preceding regular Hor-month and the addition second
or subsequent. Thus, in historical sources, we find quotations like second 8th
month or subsequent 8th month.
I have described some well known fundamentals of the Tibetan calendar,
because Jansons descriptions on the calculation of the leap-months (pp. 7-9)
appear to be very problematic, at least to me. I very much doubt that these
calculations are of any practical use.
Janson describes the different methods of counting and naming years in a correct
manner. Whereas the sixty year cycles of Indian origin were counted by ordinal
numbers (1st rab-byu$, 2nd rab-byu$ etc.), the different years within such a cycle
were, at least according to my knowledge, traditionally never numbered or
counted. Therefore, I personally think that it does not make much sense to
develop formulas like n = (Y -1026) amod 60 (Janson, p. 4). Here n gives the
number of a year within a sixty years cycle and Y is the Gregorian year. Such
numbers do not exist within the Tibetan system of time reckoning. Insofar this
kind of formula has nothing to do with the intention of this article, namely the
description and recasting of the traditional calculation methods of Tibet in terms
of modern mathematical descriptions.
Janson, p. 1: There are at least two versions (Phugpa and Tsurphu) of the Tibetan calendar in use to day by different groups inside and outside Tibet,
see Appendix B. The description of the Phugpa tradition, introduced
in 1447, which is followed by the Dalai Lama is the most common
version; it can be regarded as the standard version of the Tibetan
calendar.
Janson, p. 25: Phugpa. (Phugluk)It was started in 1447 and is based on works
by Phugpa and others in the 15th century
Tsurphu. (Tsurlug, Karma Kagyu) This version was started at about the
same time by Jamyang Dongrub Wozer and derives from the 14th
century commentaries to Kalacakra Tantra by the Third Karmapa
Rangjung Dorjey, of Tsurpu monastery.

ZAS 37 (2008)

230

231
Jansons treatment of Tibetan names and historical facts is completely
unacceptable. For example, I do not see the slightest reason for the spelling
Tsurphu instead of mTshur-phu. Moreover, especially in this case, the letters ts
and tsh have different phonemic value. So the spelling Tsurphu is completely
misleading, too. It has the same consequence as if someone exchanges in
English the word bush by the word push. Although all these Tibetan
denominations were properly recorded and explained in my Untersuchungen
zur Geschichte der Kalenderrechnung 35 years ago, Janson has chosen, for
whatever reason, to use the clumsy, unscholarly so-called transcriptions of
Edward Henning. What would be the reaction of a report from a German
scientist to a congress in the USA in a scientific publication, which is written in
the following manner: First I travelled via Nju Jork to Los ngeles, where I
met Djordsch Pusch, the successor of Mr. Klinten, who also follows the
Gregorian calendar in the JU.S.. Then I listened to the papers of Mr. Robet A.
F. Termen from the Kolmbia Juniversitie Senter. Congratulations to the author
and to the editor (Mr. Robet A. F. Termen from the Kolmbia Juniversitie Senter
in Nju Jork) of Hennings book! Unfortunately, Dershowitz and Reingold also
use these obscure transcriptions. So we find amazing spellings like (p. 315)
Phugpa and Phukluk instead of Phug-lugs.
There are no versions of the Tibetan calendar called Phug-pa or mTshur-phu.
Phug-pa is the first part of the name of the person Phug-pa lHun-grub rgyamtsho, who is sometimes called Phug-pa only.73 The Phug-pa tradition was not
introduced in 1447, but the basic scholarly work on astronomy and calendrical
calculation, written by Phug-pa lHun-grub rgya-mtsho, was completed in that
year. As Janson knows himself, the mTshur-phu school or mTshur-phu tradition
of calendrical and astronomical calculation derives from the well known Tibetan
monastery mTshur-phu. The basic facts of the history of this school of
astronomy were described extensively in my Untersuchungen zur Geschichte
der tibetischen Kalenderrechnung, op. cit. footnote 6, pp. 34ff, 42, 82f and
105ff. Therefore, I will refrain here from making any comments on the rest of
Jansons statements quoted above.

73

For Phug-pa lHun-grub rgya-mtsho and his work see Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6,
pp. 83-87. In 1973 his major work, the Pad-dkar al-lu$, was not available to me. In
1983 I was able to acquire a block print copy from the sMan-rtsis kha$ in Lhasa. In the
meantime this work was reprinted also in China: Legs-par bad-pa padma dkar-poi allu$, Beijing 2002.

ZAS 37 (2008)

231

232
Janson uses a number of terms, such as (p. 11) true month (zla-dag), month
count, true date (gza-dag), mean date (gza-bar), semi-true date (gzaphyed dag-pa) and true sun (i-dag). Here again, he basically follows the
obscure terminology of Henning, who obviously has only a very limited
knowledge of the structure of the Tibetan language. To make this understandable
for outsiders, I quote from Stephan V. Beyers book on the classical Tibetan
language74: classical Tibetan had available several ways of compounding old
words to create new words for example, modifying a noun with a preceding
noun, as in me[fire]-rdo[stone] fire-stone flint, or modifying a noun with a
following adjective, as in rdo[stone]-ri$[long] long stone monument. There
are almost innumerable examples for this kind of construction of new words out
of the existing stock of language in classical Tibetan. Thus rkub anus, ass +
skyags to hold up rkub-skyags is not an ass holder but the Tibetan name
for chair, rlu$ air + phrin message rlu$-phrin is not an air message
but radio and me fire + tog top me-tog is not the top of a fire but
flower. Similar to these compounds, the word zla-dag is certainly an
abbreviation of tshes-zla rnam-par dag-pa, which is a modification of the noun
tshes-zla lunar month with the adjective rnam-par dag-pa pure, correct or
true.75 But its meaning is not true lunar month (forget the translation true
month) but correct number of (past) lunar months since the epoch. This
number is definitely an integer and there is no reason to invent additional terms
like month-count, which is identical with this number of lunar month.
Jansons term true-date (gza-dag) derives from Hennings true weekday.
gZa-dag gives the weekday and the daytime for the true end of a certain lunar
day (as for instance Monday, 3 oclock). Accordingly gza-bar is neither mean
date (Janson) nor mean weekday (Henning), but the weekday and daytime for
the end of a certain mean lunar day. It is unavoidable that a reader of Jansons
article is confronted with a number of terms from the terminology of astronomy,
mathematics and Tibetology. In certain cases, when an English term does not
exist for a certain object, denominated in Tibetan language, it may be useful to
define a new term, like zodiacal day for Khyim-ag. But it is completely
unnecessary to invent new, incomprehensible words in English or in any other
language by translating Tibetan words in such an unsophisticated manner.

74

Stephan V. Beyer: The Classical Tibetan Language. Delhi 1993, p. 103.

The Sanskrit equivalent is uddham@sa according to the K@lacakratantra. Petri, op.cit
footnote 4, p. 121.

75

ZAS 37 (2008)

232

233
Janson, p. 32:APPENDIX D: FURTHER ASTROLOGICAL CALCULATIONS
In this chapter, Janson describes attributes of years, months and days that derive
from the Sino-Tibetan divination system (nag-rtsis). The base of this system of
divination is the calculation of elements, which are considered to be the basic
components of time. Sino-Tibetan divination has nothing to do with astrology.
See the definition of astrology in the Encyclopaedia Britannica. In the light of
the enormous amount of research work done in this field between 1973 and
2007, this chapter should be completely rewritten.
The basic principles of Tibetan calendrical calculations are well known since
1973 due to the research work done by Zuiho Yamaguchi and me. For a long
time, Tibetan descriptions of calendrical and astronomical calculations were
considered to be very difficult. There are two reasons for this judgement: First
texts are written in Tibetan language and use a special terminology that was
unknown before 1973. Second the descriptions are similar to computer
programmes written for the execution of arithmetic calculations on the sand
abacus. Tibetan astronomers do not know algebra and fractional arithmetic. To
understand the difference between modern mathematics and Tibetan calculation,
we may look at the following statement by Janson (p. 7): The key is the mean
solar longitude (MSL). This increases by the same amount, say s1 for each
[lunar] month. Hence MSL at the beginning of month count n, which I denote by
MSL(n), is given by the linear formula MSL(n) = s1n + s0, where s0 = MSL(0) is
the MSL at the epoch. The Tibetan description for this operation runs as
follows76: zla-dag gnas l$a ste$ rim-bin // skar mig dbyugs phyogs (10) sra$ klu
dba$ (58) // dbugs gzugs (1) cha-as gza-zlas (17) bsgyur // ste$ rim de-id (25)
gter (8) da$ ni // thig gzugs (10) rig-byed (4) so (32) yis brgyan // gyen rim ri ro
(67), dus (6) mkhar ro (60) // thig mchams [60] khor-los (27) dor-bai lhag //
i-mai dhru-va es su grags // (Write down) the number of past (lunar) month
[= n] (in) five places. (Starting) from the top, multiply respectively the lunar
mansion with 2, the dByugs with 10, the Sra$ with 58, the dBugs with 1, the
Cha-as with 17 [=s1]. From the top add respectively 25, 8, 10, 4, 32 [=s0].
Upwards (convert) successively by 67, 6, 60, 60, 27. The rest, after
76

Here we quote again from a block print of the treatise bsTan-bcos vairya dkar-po

da$ in-byed sna$-bai dgo$s-don gsal-bar ston-pa rtsis-gii man-$ag rigs-ldan si$ gi
thig-le, written by mKhyen-rab nor-bu in the first half of the 20th century, p. 13r.

ZAS 37 (2008)

233

234
extinguishing (the highest figure), is called mean longitude of the sun. If we
write this on the sand abacus, we get the following picture for n=5.
1st step
5
5
5
5
5

2nd step
change 5x2
to:
5x10
5x58
5x1
5x17

6 th step
35
58
(300+2):60
1
9

7th step

3rd step
change 10+25 change
to:
50+8 to:
290+10
5+4
85+32

4th step

5th step

35
change 35
change
58
to:
58
to:
300
300
9
(9+4):6
117:27
9

8th step

9th step
10th step
1
change (35+1):27change 9
change 9
35
(58+5):60to:
3
to:
3
to:
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
9
9
9
9

In the absence of any knowledge of algebra and fractional arithmetic, the

Tibetan astronomers were able to make complicated mathematical conclusions
only by thinking in the structure of these kinds of arithmetic operations. It is
certainly very helpful to our way of thinking, if we reduce the schema of
arithmetic operations, described above, to the formula MSL(n) = s1n + s0. But
we have to keep in mind also, that due to this most probably unavoidable
interpretation or transformation, we reduce the whole culture of Tibetan
astronomical and mathematical thinking to almost nothing.
For the construction of a Tibetan almanac for a certain year, the main task of a
Tibetan astronomer is the calculation of the weekday, in which a given lunar day
ends (gza-dag). As the main result, an almanac is constructed which delivers us
a fixation of time priods by weekday, corresponding lunar day number, month
and year. For a historian, this fixation of time appears as a date for a certain
historical event according to the Tibetan almanac. It is of course the main
interest of a historian to find the corresponding date according to the Western or
any other calendar.

ZAS 37 (2008)

234

235
A general modern mathematical model for the computation of the different
Tibetan calendar systems would serve the interest of the Tibetan astronomers
and the historian. Therefore, I welcome the efforts of Svante Janson very much
and I hope that my critical remarks do not discourage him from continuing his
useful and highly valued efforts.
The aim of the book Calendrical Calculations, written by Nachum Dershowitz
and Edward M. Reingold, is described in the preface (pp. xx-xxi): In this book
we give a unified algorithmic presentation for more than 30 calendars of current
and historical interest: ... Our goal in this book is twofold: to give precise
descriptions of each calendar and to make accurate calendrical algorithms
readily available for computer use. Working computer programs are included
in an appendix. One of these 30 calendars is called the Tibetan calendar. The
precise descriptions of the Tibetan calendar can be found in chapter 19 (pp.
315-322). The algorithm is a computer program, written in Common Lisp, a
dialect of the Lisp programming language (pp. 435-437).
Chapter 19 called The Tibetan Calendar unfortunately begins with the
propagation of a Tibetan myth: The Tibetan system of astronomy and astrology
is extremely complex. It takes five years to study and master it at the Astro
Division of the Tibetan Medical and Astro Institute in Dharamsala, India. This
is a quotation from the website of the American Buddhist Alexander Berzin,
who teaches at Dharma centers and publishes the website berzinarchives.com to
propagate Buddhism. Provided that someone has a decent training in modern
elementary mathematics, astronomy and (!) the classical Tibetan language, the
whole system of Tibetan calendrical calculations and astronomy is definitely
comparatively simple. If the authors Dershowitz and Reingold want to claim a
certain scientific standard, they should omit such ridiculous, misleading
quotations in the next edition.
Chapter 19 begins with elementary information such as Tibetan names of month,
weekdays and years. The central part is the mathematical description of a
calendar, which the authors describe as official Phugpa or Phukluk version of
the K@lacakra (Wheel of Time) calendar. The calendar, described here, is one
of the eleven systems of Tibetan calendrical calculations, which are well known
and were described in detail 35 years ago.77 It was introduced between 1694 and
1696 by the famous regent sde-srid Sa$s-rgyas rgya-mtsho (1653-1705) and
used by the so-called Central Tibetan Government from 1696 up to 1959.78
77
78

See Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6.

Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, pp. 138-139.

ZAS 37 (2008)

235

236
During this period of time, several well known different calendars were in use
even in the area ruled by this government, as well as in other parts of Tibet. This
calendar system is still in use by the Tibetan government in exile in Dharmsala
(India) and used by a major part of the Tibetan community in exile for the
fixation of yearly festivals and for astrological and other purposes. In 1972, I
wrote a computer program for the construction of Tibetan calendars and the
equivalents of dates according to the Julian and Gregorian calendar, which
cover the period from 1027 A. D. to 1971. The program included the calculation
of four calendar systems, namely the byed-rtsis calendar of the K@lacakratantra
(known in Tibet since the 11th century), the byed-rtsis calendar of chos-rgyal
Phags-pa (Blo-gros rgyal-mtshan) (1235-1280), the older grub-rtsis of the
Phug-pa school, the new grub-rtsis of the Phug-pa school and the calculation of
leap-months for the calendar of the so called mTshur-phu tradition. I used the
programming language Fortran IV. The digital computer program was executed
on the IBM 7090/1410 at the University of Bonn.79 The computing time was
about 8 hours and 30 minutes, which posed a big problem at that time, because I
blocked the use of this computer for almost an entire night. The results, date
conversion tables for the period 1027-1971, were published in 1973.80 These
tables, list for the Tibetan calendar systems mentioned above, the month number
in the Hor-zla system and the different leap-months for each Tibetan year. For
the beginning of each Tibetan month, the corresponding dates according to the
Julian and Gregorian calendar as well as the weekday are listed. For each month,
the omitted dates and leap dates are also included.
The computer program, published by Dershowitz and Reingold, covers only the
calendar of the new Phug-pa tradition, introduced in 1696. However for the
purposes of a historian, I unfortunately do not see much scientific progress
compared with what was achieved already in 1973. But compared with the
program I wrote 35 years ago, the setting of a task by Dershowitz and Reingold
is different. Whereas I used a computer program to reconstruct different Tibetan
calendars for a period of almost 1000 years and added the Western equivalents
successively, Dershowitz and Reingold started from a given Tibetan date of the
later Calendar of the Phug-pa school and constructed a computer program for the
conversion of this date into the Julian or Gregorian calendar. For the time being,
this special task is not really of much use for historians. But it is certainly a
problem in the science of calendar mathematics.
79
80

Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, p. 133.

Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, pp. *3*-*239*.

ZAS 37 (2008)

236

237
According to my opinion, the biggest problem for the direct conversion of a
given Tibetan date by a computer program derives from the Tibetan input data,
taken from historical sources. If a leap-day occurs, this leap-day is counted in the
almanacs by the number of the subsequent calendar day. This is the second
natural day bearing the same number as the leap-day. In the almanac of the water
hare year 1963/64 the two days of the 4th Hor-month, counted by the same
number 12 are recorded as follows:

Date number 12

Date number 12

Weekday: Monday

Weekday: Tuesday

Designation: Extra
Gregorian equivalent: 3.6.1963

Gregorian equivalent: 4.6.1963

If an event happens on this second day, the historical sources will normally
quote this as second 12th day of the 4th Hor-month. The conversion of this
date should cause no problem if we chose as input data for the day the number
12. But what happens, if the event took place on the extra day? Normally the
historical source will not give us any information on whether this day is a leapday or not. It will just mention that the event took place on the 12th day. If we
chose the input data 12, the Gregorian equivalent will be wrong by one day. If
we chose the input data 11, the Gregorian equivalent is also wrong. As a
consequence, someone has to calculate, for almost every day quoted in a

ZAS 37 (2008)

237

238
historical source, the Gregorian equivalents for the quoted date number and the
preceding date number. Then he has to check whether the differences in the two
Gregorian dates are greater than one. If this is the case, the Gregorian equivalent
of the given Tibetan date is of course the calculated Gregorian date minus 1. I
doubt that the program published by Dershowitz and Reingold is appropriate for
the solution of this problem.
Similar problems may arise in respect to a leap-month, which could precede the
given month in the same year.
A great part of the shortcomings in the contributions to the Tibetan calendar by
Janson, Dershowitz and Reingold derive from the book of Edward Henning,
The K@lacakra and the Tibetan Calendar. One of the strange features of this
book is the pretention of the author to be unaware of everything published so far
about Tibetan astronomy and Tibetan calendar. Henning reports (p. XV), that he
travelled frequently to Munich during the last twenty years to meet Gnter
Grnbold, director of the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich, who shared his
interest in the K@lacakra. Henning writes: On the many occasions that I visited
during the last 20 years, there was always a pile of recommended reading
awaiting me. Accordingly, Dr. Grnbold, who knew Winfried Petri personally,
among others, and who was certainly familiar with Petris publications, must
have kept secret the whole well known scientific literature on Tibetan calendar
and astronomy, although he provided a pile of recommended reading. I really
cant believe this. It is quite obvious that Henning lacks scholarly fidelity.
Apart from numerous mistakes, Hennings book does not contain anything new.
Therefore I would like to comment only on his explanations of the conversion of
Tibetan dates into dates of the Western calendar. On page 10 of Hennings book,
we find the following statement:
The epoch that is going to be used here is the start of the third month in the
Tibetan calendar (nag-pai zla-ba, caitram@sa) in the Fire-Rabbit year, 1927. The
date in western terms is Friday 1st April 1927. This western date is not explicitly
given in the original material, but as modern almanacs have for many years
included western dates it is easily calculated.
These so called easy calculations are described in the chapter Correlation with
western dates (pp. 45 49). This chapter starts with the following explanation:
I stated at the start of these calculations for the five components of the calendar
that the correlation of the epoch of 1927 with western dates was easily
calculated. I simply gave the epoch as Friday 1st April 1927, and I shall now

ZAS 37 (2008)

238

239
describe how this is determined. Using a similar method one can correlate
Tibetan and western dates back through history, if required.
Hereafter a number of so called easy calculations, 4 pages long, follow. The
chapter end with the following statement (p. 49):
This is the Julian day number for Friday 1st April 1927, the day I gave
originally as the epoch of the Essence of the Kalk.
If we look into the conversion tables that I published 35 years ago, we find as
equivalent for the 1st Tibetan day of the 3rd month of the Fire-Rabbit year81 the
following Western date: Monday 2nd May 1927.82 The equivalent for the 1st
Tibetan day of the 2nd month of the same year is recorded as Sunday 3rd April
1927. This is the beginning of the 3rd month of the older Phug-pa-calendar,
which was definitely not in use at that time. Thanks to the writings of Prof.
Yamaguchi, we know that old Tibetan almanacs for the years 1923 to 1940 are
preserved in the Tkan Collection of the University of Tokyo. I am very grateful
that Prof. Kodo Yotsuya has kindly sent me copies of these 18 almanacs. Except
for three from the sMan-rtsis kha$ in Lhasa, 15 of these almanacs were (contrary
to Yamaguchis statement mentioned above) published in Kinnour (Ku-nu) in
India, but all follow the later (new) Phug-pa-tradition.83 If we now look at the
almanac for the Fire-Rabbit year 1927, published in Kinnour, we observe that
the first month recorded is the 3rd Hor-month. This is not surprising, since we
know that all Tibetan almanacs start with the 3rd Hor-month or Nag-zla. For the
first day of this month, the almanac records the weekday Zla, which is Monday,
and the weekday number 2, which is also a Monday. The last month recorded in
the almanac for the Fire-Tiger year 1926 is recorded as second Hor-month. For
the first day of this month, the almanac records the weekday i, which is
Sunday, and the weekday number 1, which is also a Sunday.
This means that the Western equivalent for the 1st day of the 3rd Hor-month is
definitely Monday 2nd May 1927, as shown in my tables. The equivalent for the

81

According to the calendar of the new Phug-pa-tradition, used at that time by the sManrtsis kha$ in Lhasa and by the astronomers from Kinnour (India). This tradition uses for
the calculation of the intercalary months the Chi knots called sGa$.
82
83

Dieter Schuh, op. cit. footnote 6, p. *228*.

The special treatment of the sGa$ and the leap months has to be mentioned!

ZAS 37 (2008)

239

240

Title page Fire-Tiger 1926

Title page Fire-Hare 1927

ZAS 37 (2008)

240

241

2nd Hor-month
Sunday
1st day

Weekday number 1 = Sunday

3rd Hor-month

1st day

Monday

Weekday number 2 = Monday

ZAS 37 (2008)

241

242
1st day of the 2nd Hor-month is Sunday 3rd April 1927, as also shown in my
tables. The results of Hennings complicated calculations are absolutely wrong
and his calculations are therefore unreliable.
Hennings publication is characterised by deficient scholarship, fundamental
misunderstandings, lack of scholarly fidelity and lack of mathematical
reliability.
I would like to close this review with a personal remark. The basic problem for
the high-flying English-speaking community is the fact that they believe that
nothing exists if it is not written in the English language. Finally this will take
back science into the beginning of the 19th century. I personally recommend that
such types of publications as Edward Hennings book should be completely
ignored.

Dieter Schuh

Halle (Saale)

ZAS 37 (2008)

242