If you roll the clock back at Giza to Julian date 0000.0000 (01/01/4713 BC noon GMT) you find that Sirius, this most important of celestial markers to the ancient Egyptians, is in a very significant location at 33° below the Eastern horizon. Now, the chances of rolling a calendar, any calendar, back exactly to its origin (over 6,700 years ago!) at exactly the place we would expect to be most significant, and finding exactly the astronomical body we would expect to find in one of the few significant altitudes we would expect to find it, is, well, astronomical! Keeping in mind that the Julian calendar is timed out to the minute, and that Caesar certainly understood the significance of Sirius, we cannot fathom any other conclusion than that this is a product of intentional design! So, we have yet another indisputable confirmation of our Egyptian alignment astronomical model -- this stunning example, at the literal heart of a calendrical system still in use world wide -- not just by NASA ... but by the entire astronomical community.

The placement of this star at 33° is a clear signal that Sosigenes understood the coded basics and symbolic importance of tetrahedral physics. Now it came as no great surprise to us that the starting point of this calendar would be marked by a sacred acknowledgement of the importance of Sirius. Any calendar based in the Egyptian astronomical mysteries the way this one was would almost have to mark its origins with respect to this most sacred star. What is haunting us is the next question: why did Caesar and Sosigenes go all the way back to the predynastic era to "start" their calendar? The Roman civil calendar previously in use had dated from the founding of the city by Romulus and Remus in 753 BC (Gregorian). Why not anchor the new Roman calendar from this same date? Why go all the way back to 4713 BC?

The argument of "mainstream" history is that they didn't ...

Joseph Justus Scaliger

Although this system of dating, called the Julian day numbering system, is usually attributed to Joseph Justus Scaliger (born 1540-08-05 J in Agen, France, died 1609-01-21 J in Leiden, Holland), there is ample evidence that he in fact did not invent it. Scaliger was one of Clavius' advisors, and is generally considered to have been one of the founders of the science of chronology. Scaliger combined three traditionally recognized temporal cycles of 28, 19 and 15 years to obtain a great cycle, the Scaliger cycle, or Julian period, of 7980 years (7980 is the least common multiple of 28, 19 and 15). According to the Encyclopedia Britannica:

"Chronological system now used chiefly by astronomers and based on the consecutive numbering of days from Jan. 1, 4713 BC. Not to be confused with the Julian calendar, the Julian period was proposed by the scholar Joseph Justus Scaliger in 1583 and named by him for his father, Julius Caesar Scaliger. Joseph Scaliger proposed a period of 7,980 years of numbered days to be used in determining time elapsed between various historical events otherwise recorded only in different chronologies, eras, or calendars. The length of 7,980 years was chosen as the product of 28 times 19 times 15; these, respectively, are the numbers of years in the so-called solar cycle of the Julian calendar in which dates recur on the same days of the week; the lunar or Metonic cycle, after which the phases of the Moon recur on a particular day in the solar year, or year of the seasons; and the cycle of indiction, originally a schedule of periodic taxes or government requisitions in ancient Rome. The epoch, or starting point, of 4713 BC was chosen as the nearest past year in which the three cycles began together. 

Contrary to the statement above, the "Julian period" was not named for Scaliger's father, Julius Caesar Scaliger. In his De Emandatione Temporum (1583; "Study on the Improvement of Time") Scaliger writes: "Julianam vocauimus, quia ad annum Julianum accommodata ..." (translated by R. L. Reese et al. (3) as "We have termed it Julian because it fits the Julian year ...").

And according to the US Naval Observatory:

"In the 16th century Joseph Justus Scaliger tried to resolve the patchwork of historical eras by placing everything on a single system. Not being ready to deal with negative year counts, he sought an initial epoch in advance of any historical record. His approach was numerological and utilized three calendrical cycles: the 28-year solar cycle, the 19-year cycle of Golden Numbers, and the 15-year indiction cycle. The solar cycle is the period after which week days and calendar dates repeat in the Julian calendar. The cycle of Golden Numbers is the period after which moon phases repeat (approximately) on the same calendar dates. The indiction cycle was a Roman tax cycle of unknown origin. Therefore, Scaliger could characterize a year by the combination of numbers (S,G,I), where S runs from 1 through 28, G from 1 through 19, and I from 1 through 15. Scaliger first stated that a given combination would recur after 7980 (= 28 x 19 x 15) years. He called this a Julian cycle because it was based on the Julian calendar. Scaliger knew that the year of Christ's birth (as determined by Dionysius Exiguus) was characterized by the number 9 of the solar cycle, by Golden Number 1, and by number 3 of the indiction cycle, or (9,1,3). Then Scaliger chose as this initial epoch the year characterized by (1,1,1) and determined that (9,1,3) was year 4713 of his chronological era. Scaliger's initial epoch was later to be adopted as the initial epoch for the Julian Day numbers."

In other words, the conventional wisdom is that the 4713 BC "zero point" of the Julian calendar comes not from Caesar and Sosigenes, but from a 16th century Catholic astronomer. This is not the case, however.

Roger, Bishop of Hereford, discusses the three cycles used by Scaliger in his Compotus (written in 1176 CE) and states that "these three ... do not come together at one point for 7980 years", although he does not identify the year (4713 B.C.) of their coincidence. Furthermore, according to R. L. Reese et al. ("New evidence concerning the origin of the Julian period", American Journal of Physics, vol. 59 (1991), 1043.):

"A 12th-century manuscript indicates that the 7980-year period was used explicitly for calendrical purposes by an earlier Bishop of Hereford, Robert de Losinga, in the year A.D. 1086, almost a century before the Bishop of Hereford named Roger. ... Robert de Losinga combines the solar, lunar and indiction cycles into a "great cycle [magnum ciclum]" of 7980 years ... Thus the manuscript by Robert de Losinga places the earliest known use of the Julian period in the year A.D. 1086."

So the use of the Julian period, the anchoring of the Julian calendar to 4713 BC, goes back almost a thousand years. Given that Caesar and Sosigenes both had knowledge of Lunar and Solar cycles and obviously the Roman cycle of indiction, it seems likely to us that they could have come to the same conclusion. As it stands, we are not aware of any firm information concerning the original start date of Caesar's calendar.

If we assume for the moment that Caesar and Sosigenes did understand the importance of the Sirius anchor to their calendar system, and were aware of the coincidence of the three cycles in 4713 BC, what is the meaning of this anchor point so long ago, other than the simple homage to the goddess Isis?