Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

BM 76829: A small astronomical fragment with important implications for the Late Babylonian Astronomy and the Astronomical Book of Enoch

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Archive for History of Exact Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

BM 76829, a fragment from the mid-section of a small tablet from Sippar in Late Babylonian script, preserves what remains of two new unparalleled pieces from the cuneiform astronomical repertoire relating to the zodiac. The text on the obverse assigns numerical values to sectors assigned to zodiacal signs, while the text on the reverse seems to relate zodiacal signs with specific days or intervals of days. The system used on the obverse also presents a new way of representing the concept of numerical ‘zero’ in cuneiform, and for the first time in cuneiform, a system for dividing the horizon into six arcs in the east and six arcs in the west akin to that used in the Astronomical Book of Enoch. Both the obverse and the reverse may describe the periodical courses of the sun and moon, in a similar way to what is found in astronomical texts from Qumran, thus adding to our knowledge of the scientific relationship between the two cultures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We publish this fragment by the courtesy of the Trustees of the British Museum.

  2. For the project “The Great Star List and Related Texts: Astronomy, Mysticism, and Learned Knowledge in the Ancient Near East” funded by the Israel Science Foundation. See also Horowitz (in press).

  3. Beginning with the first sign Aries would demand that the list ended with the 12th sign Pisces at our obv. 7′, the last surviving line on the obverse of the fragment, leaving space for a number of lines at the bottom of the original tablet unaccounted for.

  4. This would have been a problem for the early history of the zodiac rather than for the later and thus seems to confirm our hypothesis of the early fourth-century BCE date for the fragment as given in Sect. 2.2.

  5. For the stellar Paths of Anu, Enlil, and Ea as bands crossing the sky from east to west rather than arcs along the horizon as argued earlier by Pingree and Reiner see Horowitz (2014, pp. 11–15) with further bibliography.

  6. The true synodic month is approximately 29.53 days, and the sidereal month is approximately 27 1/3 days.

  7. For Wise (1994), who assumes a 364-day year, there are four 31-day long months. At the end of these months, 3 days will be added to the general pattern.

  8. Since the sidereal month is shorter than the synodic month, the dates in which the moon correlates to a specific zodiacal sign shift along the year.

  9. The present fragment is not thick enough to be from a large enough tablet to allow for sections for all 12 months, but could give an excerpt from such a full system for a month or season.

  10. For this usage in the second millennium BCE see Horowitz (2014, p. 227).

  11. Hørup (2002, pp. 293–294), previously said that initial and final zeros are never marked in cuneiform at all.

  12. Or Glossenkeil—53—nim.

  13. See e.g., Ossendrijver (2012, pp. 18–19), who describes all Glossenkeile as gam sign.

  14. See Sachs (1952, p. 148) and Neugebauer (1955, p. 418) reference to ACT 813 rev. III 14, 14 (section 28).

  15. The case of 3, 0, 6 is to be interpreted 3,0 (180 degrees) = 6 danna (geometric leagues of 30° each).

  16. See e.g., the hand copy of ACT 122, LBAT 66 obv. ix 13 (initial + final), × 10–11 (final), rev. v 14 (initial + final), 19 (medial).

  17. With reference to additional examples noted by M. Sigrist.

  18. Neugebauer (1955: 477a) takes this for Akkadian ul išī, which could be translated “it does not have (a value),” while Ossendrijver (2012, p. 18) footnote 100 gives it as ul ibašši. Neither CAD B 144b nor AHw 112b give tuk as a standard sumerogram for bašû. Therefore, nutuk-ši should rather be rendered as ul irašši “it has not acquired (a value),” as is commonly used in omen texts and elsewhere.

  19. Neugebauer (1955, p. 197).

  20. For lal interpreted as increasing latitude and referring to “near the ascending node” in the context of eclipse magnitudes see Steele (2000, p. 128).

  21. Al-Rawi and George (1991–92, p. 55).

  22. E.g. Ossendrijver (2012, p. 18) footnote 101 with reference to text 52 Ri9; Pearce–Wunsch (2014, pp. 118–119) text no. 15 line 19 (zero date dates assessed).

  23. See Aaboe–Sachs (1966, p. 6b) for Text A (BM 36300+) rev. iv 22 and vi 14, where riq (i.e., the sign ṢU) is written where initial zero is expected.

  24. In a mathematical text, see Friberg (2007, p. 269) with reference to MS 3052 § 1d (transliteration pp. 267–268) line 16.

  25. The terminus ante quem is determined according to the Dead Sea Scroll 4Q208, the earliest copy of the AB that was transcribed at the end of the third-century or beginning of the second-century BCE. For a summary of the debate on the paleographical and C14 dating of this scroll, see Ratzon (2015a). The terminus post quem relies on the AAB’s knowledge of the zodiac. See Brack-Bernsen and Hunger (1999), Ben-Dov (2008), Drawnel (2011), Ratzon (2014) and Jacobus (2014a, b). Three other copies of the Aramaic AB have survived among the Dead Sea Scrolls: 4Q209 dated to the end of the first-century BCE or beginning of the first-century CE. It contains an astronomical treatise similar to the one in 4Q208 and parts of 1 Enoch 76–79, 82, known from the Ethiopic version of the book; 4Q210 dated to the middle of the first-century BCE. It contains only parts of 1 Enoch 76–78 without the astronomical treatise found in 4Q208-9; 4Q211 dated to the first half of the first-century BCE. It does not contain any parallel to the Ethiopic version of 1 Enoch nor to the astronomical treatise, but it contains a section that was probably lost from the end of 1 Enoch 82, and a very fragmented section dealing with the stars.

  26. The relationship between Enochic and earlier Mesopotamian astronomy has been studied intensively. For a summary, see VanderKam 2008, pp. 965–978; Ratzon 2012, pp. 299–301; and note the bibliography given in the previous note.

  27. Ben-Dov (2008) demonstrates that while the Aramaic scroll discusses both spatial and temporal aspects of lunar theory together, the Ethiopic translation distinguishes between them and addresses each aspect in a separate chapter.

  28. For a possible Mesopotamian antecedent to this diagram, compare the Late Babylonian compass card from Uruk most recently discussed in Horowitz (2015), and the diagram on the reverse of the ziqpu-star fragment (BM 61677) in Horowitz and Al-Rawi (2001, p. 180).

  29. While only the Ethiopic version of the AB explicitly describes the gate system, the Aramaic version assumes and uses the same system, since every one of the gates is mentioned in Aramaic. See Ratzon (2015a, fn. 11).

  30. The Ethiopic version of the AB refers to one of the middle gates, the fourth gate, as “the big gate” (1 Enoch 72:6). The first commentators of 1 Enoch, Dillman (1853) and Charles (1912) explain that the gate is considered big compared to the windows surrounding it. In response Neugebauer (1985) asks why only the fourth gate is called big, if all other gates are also surrounded by windows. However, in his figures and computations, he refers to all the gates as equal in size (Neugebauer 1964), and so do other scholars (Albani 1994; Glessmer 1996). Barker (1989) and Brack-Bernsen and Hunger (1999) have proposed that the middle gates were larger. However, the term ‘big gate’ might not reflect astronomical considerations at all, but instead perhaps be understood from a more architectural perspective with the “great gate” being like the main gate of a city (Sumerian-Akkadian ká.gal = abullu “gate”) rather than ordinary gates (ká = bābu “door, gate,” Sumerian gal = rabû “big, large.” For an astronomical example of ká.gal used in this way for thunder at 'The Gate of the Moon,' with no apparent observational inference see Hunger (1992: 74–75, no. 119: 5). For architectural themes in cosmography see e.g., Van Leeuwen (2010), and in relation to the Enochic gates see Barker (1989), Thiering (2004), and Nickelsburg and VanderKam (2012, p. 423). In any case, it is important to note that nowhere in 1 Enoch is the third gate, which is also a middle gate, referred to as big. Another issue is the fact that the adjective “big” is only mentioned in the Ethiopic version, and might be a later insertion.

  31. An exceptional is Wise (1994) who reads this text within the Qumran context and sees an underlying 364-day year.

  32. However, note the drawing of the zodiacal sign Virgo with a female figure, presumably the Virgin, in VAT 7847 + AO 6448 (see Weidner 1967, Tafel 9–10 and now Beaulieu–Frahm–Horowitz–Steele (2018, p. 99).

  33. The date of the beginning of annual astronomical cycle is not fixed in cuneiform astronomical texts. For example, some begin with the month of the Spring Equinox (Months III or IV) while others begin with the month of the Summer Solstice (Months IX or X). For the parallel Babylonian systems of placing the solstices and equinoxes in Month XII, III, VI, IX and/or Months I, IV, VII, X see e.g., Horowitz (2014, pp. 16–18).

Abbreviations

ACT:

See Neugebauer (1955)

A.H.:

Tell Abû Ḥabbah, modern name of ancient Sippar; abbreviation for the tablets found at Sippar in the British Museum registration books

BM:

Museum number of the British Museum, London

BRM IV:

A. T. Clay, Epics, Hymns, Omens and Other Texts, Babylonian Records in the Library of J. Piermont Morgan, Part 4. Yale University Press, New Haven 1923

LBAT:

Th. G. Pinches and J. N. Strassmaier, Late Babylonian Astronomical and Related Texts. Brown University Studies 18, Providence, Rhode Island: Brown University Press

TU:

F. Thureau-Dangin, Tablettes d’Uruk à l’usage des prêtres du Temple d’Anu au temps des Séleucides. Musée du Louvre: Textes cuneiforms tome VI (TCL VI), Paris: Paul Geuthner

References

  • Aaboe, A., and A. Sachs. 1966. Some Dateless Computed Lists of Longitudes of Characteristic Planetary Phenomena from the Late-Babylonian Period. Journal of Cuneiform Studies 20: 1–33.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Albani, M. 1993. Der Zodiakos in 4Q318 und die Henoch-Astronomie. Mitteilungen und Beiträge der Forschungsstelle Judentum der Theologischen Fakultät Leipzig 7: 3–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Albani, M. 1994. Astronomie und Schöpfungsglaube: Untersuchungen zum astronomischen Henochbuch. Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament 68, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Butzon & Bercker Kevelaer and Neukirchener Verlag des Erziehungsvereins Neukirchen-Vluyn.

  • Albani, M. 1999. Horoscopes in the Qumran Scrolls. In The Dead Sea Scrolls After Fifty Years. A Comprehensive Assessment, vol. 2, eds. P.W. Flint, and K.C. VanderKam, 279–330. Leiden: Brill.

  • Al-Rawi, F.N.H., and A. George. 1991–92. Enūma Anu Enlil XIV and Other Early Astronomical Tables. Archiv für Orientforschung 38–39: 52–73.

  • Barker, M. 1989. The Temple Measurements and the Solar Calendar. In Temple Scroll Studies: Papers Presented at the International Symposium on the Temple scroll, Manchester, ed. G.J. Brooke, 63–66. Sheffield: JSOT Press.

  • Beaulieu, P.-A., E. Frahm, W. Horowitz, and J. Steele. 2018. The Cuneiform Uranology Texts, Drawing the Constellations. Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben Dov, J. 2008. Head of All Years. Leiden-Boston: Brill.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brack-Bernsen, L., and H. Hunger. 1999. The Babylonian Zodiac: Speculations on its Invention and Significance. Centaurus 41: 280–292.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Britton, J.P. 2002. Treatments of Annual Phenomena in Cuneiform Sources. In Under one Sky. Astronomy and Mathematics in the Ancient Near East. Alter Orient und Altes Testament Band 297, eds. J.M. Steele and A. Imhausen, 21–78. Münster: Ugarit Verlag.

  • Britton, J.P. 2010. Studies in Babylonian Lunar Theory: Part III. The Introduction of the Uniform Zodiac. Archives for History of Exact Science 64: 617–663.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Charles, R.H. 1912. The book of Enoch, or 1 Enoch. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conlan, Chr. 2013. Note on an Ur III Administrative Tablet. N.A.B.U. 2013 (4), 104–105 no. 62.

  • Dillman, A. 1853. Das Buch Henoch übersetzt und erklärt. Leipzig: Wilhelm Vogel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dimenstein, E. 2004. On the Term lá-ì su-ga in Ur III Tablets. N.A.B.U. 2004 (1), 17–18 no. 17.

  • Drawnel, H. 2011. The Aramaic Astronomical Book (4Q208-4Q211) from Qumran. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friberg, J. 1987–90. Mathematik. In Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie Band 7, ed. D.O. Edzard, 531–585. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter.

  • Friberg, J. 2007. A Remarkable Collection of Babylonian Mathematical Texts. Manuscripts in the Schøyen Collection—Cuneiform Text I, Sources and Studies in the History of Mathematics and Physical Science. New York, NY: Springer.

  • Glessmer, U. 1996. Horizontal Measuring in the Babylonian Astronomical Compendium mul.apin and in the Astronomical Book of 1 Enoch. Henoch 18: 259–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenfield, J.C., and M. Sokoloff. 2000. 4QZodiology and Brontology ar. In Qumran Cave 4 XXVI (DJD 36), ed. Philip. Alexander et al., 259–274. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heimpel, W. 1986. The Sun at Night and the Doors of Heaven in Babylonian Texts. Journal of Cuneiform Studies 38(2): 132–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, W. 1998. Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, W. 2014. The Three Stars Each: The Astrolabes and Related Texts, Archiv für Orientforschung Beiheft 33. Wien: Institut für Orientalistik der Universtät Wien.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, W. 2015. The Mesopotamian Wind-Star Directions and a Compass Card from Uruk. Journal of Skyscape Archaeology 1: 200–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, W. in press. A New Source for The Great Star List, its Ancient Name, and Issues for Further Study. Journal of Cuneiform Studies.

  • Horowitz, W., and F.N.H. Al-Rawi. 2001. Tablets from the Sippar Library IX: A Ziqpu-Star Planisphere. Iraq 63: 171–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hørup, J. 2002. Lengths, Widths, Surfaces. A Portrait of Old Babylonian Algebra and Its Kin. Sources and Studies in the History of Mathematics and Physical Sciences. New York, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

  • Hunger, H. 1976. Spätbabylonische Texte aus Uruk Teil I. Ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft in Uruk-Warka Band 9. Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag.

  • Hunger, H. 1992. Astrological Reports to Assyrian Kings, State Archives of Assyria, Volume VIII. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press.

  • Hunger, H., and D. Pingree. 1989. MUL.APIN. An Astronomical Compendium in Cuneiform. Archiv für Orientforschung Beiheft 24. Horn: Ferdinant Berger & Söhne.

  • Hunger, H., and E. Reiner. 1975. A Scheme for Intercalary Months from Babylonia. Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 67: 21–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobus, H.R. 2010. 4Q318: A Jewish Zodiac Calendar at Qumran. In The Dead Sea Scolls: Text and Context. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 90, ed. Ch. Hempel, 365–95. Leiden, Boston: Brill.

  • Jacobus, H.R. 2014a. Zodiac Calendars in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Their Reception: Ancient Astronomy and Astrology in Early Judaism. Leiden, Boston: Brill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobus, H.R. 2014b. Greco-Roman Sundials and their Links to a Qumran Calendar (4Q208-4Q209). Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry 14 (3): 67–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knibb, M. 1978. The Ethiopic Book of Enoch: A New Edition in the Light of the Aramaic Dead Sea Fragments, vol. 2. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lourié, B. 2010. Between Babylonia and Ethiopia: Some Thoughts about a Recent Book on the Qumranic Calendars (Jonathan Ben-Dov, Head of All Years. Astronomy and Calendars at Qumran and Their Ancient Context). Scrinium 6: 413–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neugebauer, O. 1941. On a Special Use of the Sign “Zero” in Cuneiform Astronomical Texts. Journal of the American Oriental Society 61(4): 212–215.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Neugebauer, O. 1955. Astronomical Cuneiform Texts. Babylonian Ephemerides of the Seleucid Period for the Motion of the Sun, the Moon, and the Planets. London: Humphries for the Institute for Advances Studies, Princeton.

  • Neugebauer, O. 1964. Notes on Ethiopic Astronomy. Orientalia 33: 49–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neugebauer, O. 1979. Ethiopic Astronomy and Computus. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neugebauer, O. 1985. The “Astronomical” Chapters of the Ethiopic Book of Enoch (72 to 82). In The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch, ed. M. Black, 326–386. Leiden: Brill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nickelsburg, G.W.E. 2001. 1 Enoch 1: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 1–36; 81–108. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nickelsburg, G.W.E., and J.C. VanderKam. 2012. 1 Enoch 2: Chapters 37–82. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ossendrijver, M. 2012. Babylonian Mathematical Astronomy: Procedure Texts. Sources and Studies in the History of Mathematics and Physical Science, New York, Berlin, Heidelberg etc.: Springer.

  • Ossendrijver, M. 2014. Some New Results on a Commentary to Enūma Anu Enlil Tablet 14. Nouevelles Assyriologiques Brèves et Utilitaires 2014(4), 158–161 no. 101.

  • Pearce, L.E., and C. Wunsch. 2014. Documents of Judean Exiles and West Semites in Babylonia in the Collection of David Sofer. Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology (CUSAS) 28. Bethesda, MD: CDL Press.

  • Pingree, D. 2000. Astronomical Aspects. In Qumran Cave 4 XXVI (DJD 36), ed. Philip. Alexander et al., 270–274. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratzon, E. 2012. The Conception of the Universe in the Book of Enoch. Ph.D. dissertation, Tel Aviv University.

  • Ratzon, E. 2014. The Gates for the Sun and Moon in the Astronomical Book of Enoch. Tarbiz 82(4): 497–512. (in Hebrew).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratzon, E. 2015a. The Gates Cosmology of the Astronomical Book of Enoch. Dead Sea Discoveries 22(1): 93–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratzon, E. 2015b. Methodological Issues Concerning the Astronomy of Qumran. Dead Sea Discoveries 22(2): 202–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratzon, E. 2016. Early Mesopotamian Intercalation Schemes and the Sidereal Month. Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry 16(4): 143–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratzon, E. 2017. The First Jewish Astronomers: Lunar Theory and Reconstruction of a Dead Sea Scroll. Science in Context 30(2): 113–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratzon, E. 2019. 4Q208: A New Reconstruction and Its Implications on the Evolution of the Astronomical Book. Revue de Qumran 31: 51–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rochberg, F. 2004. A Babylonian Rising-Time Scheme in Non-Tabular Astronomical Texts. In Studies in the History of the Exact Science in Honour of David Pingree, Islamic Philosophy, Theology and Science—Texts and Studies, vol. LIV, ed. Ch. Burnett et al., 56–94. Leiden, Boston: Brill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, A. 1952. A Late Babylonian Star Catalogue. Journal of Cuneiform Studies 9: 146–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steele, J.M. 2000. A 3405: An Unusual Astronomical Text from Uruk. Archives for History of Exact Science 55: 103–135.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Thiering, B. 2004. The Temple Scroll Courts Governed by Precise Times. Dead Sea Discoveries 11: 336–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ungnad, A. 1940–41. Besprechungskunst und Astrologie in Babylonien. Archiv für Orientforschung 14: 251–284.

  • Van Leeuwen, R.C. 2010. Cosmos, Temple, House: Building and Wisdom in Ancient Mesopotamia and Israel. In From Foundations to the Renellations: Essays on Temple Building in the Ancient Near East and Hebrew Bible, ed. M.J. Boda and J. Novotny, 399–422. Münster: Ugarit Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanderKam, J.C. 2008. Sources for the Astronomy in 1 Enoch 72–82. In Birkat Shaom: Studies in the Bible, Ancient Near Eastern Literature, and Postbiblical Judaism Presented to Shalom M. Paul on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday, vol. 2, eds. Ch. Cohen et al., 965–978. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

  • Weidner, E. 1967. Gestirn-Darstellungen auf Babylonischen Tontafeln. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse, Sitzungsberichte, 254. Band, 1. Abhandlung. Wien: Hermann Böhlaus Nachf.

  • Wise, M. 1994. An Annalistic Calendar from Qumran. In Methods of Investigation of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Khirbet Qumran Site: Present Realities and Future Prospects. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 722.1, eds. M.O. Wise et al., 389–408. New York: New York Academy of Sciences.

  • Yardeni, A. 2000. Paleography. In Qumran Cave 4 XXVI (DJD 36), ed. Philip Alexander et al., 259–261. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Jeanette C. Fincke

  2. Hebrew University, Mount Scopus, Jerusalem, Israel

    Wayne Horowitz

  3. Ariel University, Kiryat Hamada, Ariel, Israel

    Eshbal Ratzon

Authors
  1. Jeanette C. Fincke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wayne Horowitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eshbal Ratzon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeanette C. Fincke.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Communicated by Alexander Jones.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fincke, J.C., Horowitz, W. & Ratzon, E. BM 76829: A small astronomical fragment with important implications for the Late Babylonian Astronomy and the Astronomical Book of Enoch. Arch. Hist. Exact Sci. 75, 349–368 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00407-020-00268-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00407-020-00268-7

Search

Navigation