NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: A calendar question
From: Herbert Prinz
Date: 2005 May 31, 15:10 -0400
From: Herbert Prinz
Date: 2005 May 31, 15:10 -0400
Jared Sherman wrote: >...Who shortchanged February?! > > Cesar's reform started out from the old Roman calendar that, by the time of the republic, had evolved from a year of originally 10 months = 304 days to a lunisolar year of 12 months = 355 days. Of course, 12 lunations would be 354 days, but superstition apparently prevented even numbers. For the same reason, the lengths of the months were not simply alternating between 29 and 30 days (like in all the other places in the world with lunar calendars). Instead, 4 months had 31 days, 7 months had 29 days and February normally 28 days. February was the last month and also the leap month. When Cesar converted from lunisolar to solar, he had to add 10 days to the year. He added 1 or 2 days to some of the months that had only 29 days before. February, still the last month of the year, was not changed and kept as the month during which intercalation was effected. Cesar's reform was just one more patch (although an important one) on an enormous patchwork. His reform was practical and politically reasonable. (Remember what happened to the French calendar, when a reform from scratch was attempted?) But the whole issue affords us a good perspective on the state of science in the Roman Empire. As a Western European, I tend to think that we might have fared better if Alexander would have come our way instead of these country bumpkins. Herbert Prinz