The source of the ancient 360-day year

By Ronald G. Messick

The ancient Assyrians, Chaldeans, Egyptians, Hebrews, Persians, Greeks, Phoenicians, Chinese, Mayans, Hindus, and Carthaginians all used 360-day calendars.

Most of us find that strange because our common sense tells us that clocks and calendars evolved naturally from people’s obsession with the movement of objects across the sky. It would seem natural that observations from different latitudes would lead to a multitude of schemes to describe what had been observed.


In spite of latitude, vast distances, and physical barriers, such as mountains and oceans, people all over the planet had come up with the exact same schematic. How is that even possible?

Academia, for the most part, has chalked it up as coincidental. Another sizable group, commonly referred to as catastrophists, believe there was a period of planetary upheaval in ancient times that caused the length of the year to expand from 360 to 365-days. I’d like to offer what I consider to be a more plausible explanation.

Recent research has traced the earliest known use of the 360-day calendar to the ancient Vedics long before it appeared in Mesopotamia, Egypt or Meso-America. In studying Vedic science, I learned that the numbers 108 and 216 are considered sacred. Number 108, for instance, is said to reflect “the distance to the Sun” and, the number 216 is said to reflect “the distance to the sky”.

We can only assume the ancient astronomers’ point of reference was from Earth. Accordingly, one would assume that number 108 refers to the distance from the Earth to the Sun, and that the number 216 refers to the distance from the Sun to the sky (or the 360-degree circle of the sky).

The Surya Siddhanta references Earth’s polar circumference as 24,883.2 British miles. When that figure is multiplied by 108 the result is 2,684,385.6 miles which, if our supposition is true, would reflect the Solar circumference. But, the Earth also has an equatorial circumference which s slightly larger. So, I multiplied the equatorial circumference of 24,903.95329-miles by 109 which resulted in a solar circumference of 2,714,530.909-miles.

The thought of the Sun having two different diameters seemed strange, but evidence provided by NASA Goddard Space Flight Center confirmed that the Sun’s shape is not a perfect circle that I had imagined.NASA_The Shape of the Sun

At this point, we have calculated the two theoretical solar circumferences. Now we need to multiply those figures by 216 to calculate the 360-degree circumference of the sky. Here’s what that looks like.

The Ancient Vedic Sky

Interestingly, the ancient formula for calculating the Sun’s photospheric circumference is: [12^7 X 400 /5280 = 2,714,530.909-miles] or precisely [24,903.95329 X 109].

The next step is to make sure that orbital distances match orbital time periods. That will be determined by the orbit’s velocity. Orbital velocity is distance (miles) divided by time (seconds). Here’s what that looks like.


Velocity is obtained by the application of kinetic energy to an orbit’s axis of rotation. That requires a unique multiplier or Pi() value, and, as illustrated in the above table, the number of seconds is divided by 10^7 to determine what the proper multiplier is.

In the next illustration, the two orbital circumferences are divided by seconds to calculate orbital velocities. Then, the velocities are multiplied by 10^7 which calculates the length of the orbital diameters. Finally, the diameters (or axes) are multiplied by the unique Pi() values to apply the appropriate centrifugal force to sustain the orbit. If the value derived by multiplying the diameter by Pi matches the values derived by multiplying the solar circumference by 216, the orbit’s analytical values are in sync and the validation is confirmed.


Vedic science list the distance from the Earth to the Sun as 93,312,000 X 2 = 186,624,000 which matches the above polar configuration perfectly.


The numbers and methods prescribed by the ancient Vedic are accurate right down to the second and leave little room for doubt about the source of these calendars. The purpose of the 360-day calendar, however, is still a matter of interpretation.

A skilled analyst will quickly recognize the synodic implications of these two orbital periods while the amateur observer will have no clue. I am a skilled analyst and not ashamed to admit that I am bewildered by the vast knowledge of these ancient people. Let me give you two examples;

1. The synodic implications of the two solar rotation periods:

Solar Rotation Harmonics

The above analysis shows that when the solar circumferences are converted to rotation days and multiplied by 216, the calculated result is the lunar precession period or the nodal cycle–which is well-recognized as the all-important driver of El Nino and La Nina cycles. So, the ancient 360-day calendar was never about time–it is about timing.

2. Earth orbital harmonics:

Earth Orbital Harmonics

The above table shows that the 360 and 365-day calendars synodically realign every 72-years. There are precisely 360 of these alignments in one 25,920-year Platonic cycle.

I’m reminded of a quote by the late Nikola Tesla—the Serbian-American inventor that discovered the alternating electric current that lit up our world:

If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency, and vibration.”

― Nikola Tesla

The solar rotation and planetary harmonics described above is exactly the kind of thing that Tesla is referring to. But, it seems that most 360-day calendar aficionados are only interested in using the 360-day calendar to support a broader catastrophist or faith-based narrative. So, there is virtually no one paying attention to this extremely important area of research.

Your comments may be sent to

Ronald G. Messick


Cycle Research Institute:

1/2 of the lunar nodal cycle:

9.33-year cycle sales of a manufacturing company; 104; 431; 434
9.33-year cycle wholesale price index; all commodities; 104
9.34-year cycle silver mine production; 104
9.37-year cycle sweet potato acreage harvested; 105
9.4-year cycle tree-ring width; 105
9.4-year cycle varves; 105
9.41-year cycle sugar prices; 105
9.44-year cycle cotton production; 105
9.46-year cycle cheese consumption; 105
9.47-year cycle cotton prices; 105
9.48-year cycle sheep value; 105
9.4- or 9.5-year cycle cotton production; 94
9.4- or 9.5-year cycle rainfall; 94
9.4- or 9.5-year cycle weather; 94

18.40-18.664 year nodal cycle

18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle building activity and construction; 26; 343-345; 349; 443-444
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle building permits; 444; 611
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle buildings (residential); 351; 355
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle discounts and loans; 443-444
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle freight traffic (Canadian Pacific Railway); 444
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle furniture produced; 444
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle an industrial company; 443
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle lumber production; 444
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle marriage rates; 343; 345; 349; 443
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle panics; 444
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle pig iron; 443-444
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle pig iron production; 347; 444
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle production; 314; 343-357
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle real estate activity; 17-18; 343; 349; 353-354; 611
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle residential permits; 444
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle sales of an industrial company; 347; 349
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle sales of a public utility company; 27-29; 443-444; 611
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle stock prices; 23; 26; 347-349
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle varves; 26
18.33- (18 1/3)- year cycle wheat acreage; 345; 349; 444; 611
18.3562-year cycle stock prices; 442
18.539-year cycle post office revenues; 598; 600
18.6-year cycle axis of earth; 748

.1/2 of the 72-year cycle:

35.5-year cycle weather; 63
35.9-year cycle auroras; frequency of; 63
36-year cycle barometric pressure; 63
36-year cycle English consols value; 63
36-year cycle manufacturing production; 63
36-year cycle wheat prices; 63
36.5- (36 1/2 )-year cycle floods; Nile River; 115



Published by

Ronald Messick

Ron is an independent researcher with a focus on the inner workings of the solar system in general and on solar variability in particular. His most recent project, the solar system's schematic, has been a fulltime labor of love for the past 16-years. He is retired and resides in the beautiful Pacific Northwest.

Leave a Reply