In a message dated Mon, 17 Jun 2002 3:33:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b at dd-b.net> writes: I'm running a little late, and had to quick finish chapter two before checking my email today. And my meticulous notes only cover through the Preface, so my big post won't be ready until tonight or tomorrow. It's odd making careful note of things I want to mention only to find someone else already posted about it. It'll be odder if Thomas does his Distracted by Shadows thing here. Anyway... > And of course no explanation is given. > > But it's gotta be the 309th year of the reign of the > current Emperor (who I think is actually an Empress, but > whatever; see previous message). > > So the rest would have to be positions in cycles and > super-cycles, I guess? What order do they go in? Since > 309 is first, does that mean that the first 2 is the > position in the basic cycle, being the next-smallest unit? ... since I *did* spend the time yesterday doing the math to fix the mistakes in the dates, I get to feel all smug and superiour when reading this. :) (hint: Paarfi is consistently omitting things, and Dragaerans apparantly haven't invented the zero yet) --KG