Translation:Talmud/Seder Moed/Tractate Rosh Hashanah/2b

We learn from this that Nisan is the new years for kings, and one day into the year is counted as a [full] year. And if they didn't take the throne until the first of Nisan, a year is not counted until the following Nisan. Is this not obvious? No, we need [to state it] for a case where the king was appointed on Adar [and didn't take the throne until Nisan]. One may think that the first year counts.

The Rabonon State: "If a king died in Adar and another was appointed in Adar, the year can be counted by both. If a king died in Nisan and another was appointed in Nisan, the year can be counted by both. If a kind died in Adar and another was appointed in Nisan, the first year is counted by the first [king] and the second year by the second [king]."

We said earlier "If a king died in Adar and another was appointed in Adar, the year can be counted by both." [Is this not] obvious? One may [mistakenly] think that the date can only be for one king. Therefore we learn this. [So a date can be stated in two ways, one based on the year of the reign of the first king and one based on the second. (RASHI)]

"If a king died in Nisan and another was appointed in Nisan, the year can be counted by both." [Is this not] obvious? One may [mistakenly] think that a single day can count as a year only if the king took the throne in the beginning of the year and not the end. Therefore we learn this.

If a kind died in Adar and another was appointed in Nisan, the first year is counted by the first [king] and the second year by the second [king]." [Is this not] obvious? No, we need [to state it] for a case where the king was appointed in Adar and he is the son of [the previous] king. One may [mistakenly] think that two years are counted [starting from the appointment]. Therefore we learn this.

Rabi Yochanan says: From where do we learn that a kings reign is counted by year starting on Nisan? For it says (1 Kings 6) "And it was in the eightieth and four hundredth year when the Children of Israel left the Land of Egypt. On the fortieth year in the month of Ziv which was the second month of King Solomon of Israel". A connection is made between the Reign of Solomon and the Exodus of Egypt. Just as the Exodus of Egypt happened in the month of Nisan, so too the Reign of Solomon started in Nisan.

And how do we know that the Exodus of Egypt is counted from Nisan? Perhaps it is counted from Tishrei? Do not think like that. For it is written, (Numbers 33) "And Aharon the Priest went up to Har HaHor on the word of Hashem. And he died there in the fortieth year since the Children of Israel left the Land of Egypt on the fifth month on the first of the month." And it is written (Deuteronomy 1) "And behold it was in the fortieth year in the eleventh month on the first of the month, Moses spoke etc." What happened in Av is called the fortieth year and what happened in Shvat is called the fortieth year. Therefore, the new years cannot be on Tishrei [as it comes between Av and Shvat].

This makes sense if we are counting from the Exodus of Egypt, but why [start from] the Exodus of Egypt, [instead] count from the building of the Tabernacle? It is like Rav Popa says (on page 3b) "Just like we can use the repetition of the words 'Twenty years' to create a Drasha, so to we can use the repetition of the term 'Forty years' to create a Drasha. Just like over here it refers to the Exodus of Egypt, so too over there it refers to the Exodus of Egypt."

But how do we know that the narrative which happened in Av came first [chronologically], perhaps the narrative in Shvat cam first? Do not think like that. For it is written (ibid) "After Sihon was struck." For when Aharons soul went to rest, Sihon was still alive, for it is written "And the Canaanite, the king of Arad heard".