Misplaced Pages

Talk:Julian calendar: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 05:32, 17 April 2010 edit71.136.67.20 (talk) Undid revision 356013080 by 81.148.119.239 (talk)← Previous edit Revision as of 05:34, 17 April 2010 edit undoFlyguy649 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users21,392 editsm Reverted edits by 71.136.67.20 (talk) to last version by 81.148.119.239Next edit →
Line 7: Line 7:
{{archive box|] ]}} {{archive box|] ]}}


==Celsus and the Triennial Cycles: A Proposal== ==Triennial cycles debunked==


There is an inscription which says that in Asia in an unspecified year the last day of the old lunar calendar was 14 Peritios = a.d. X Kal. Feb. (23 January). The following day, from which the calendar would remain aligned to the Roman calendar, was 1 Dystros, a.d. IX Kal. Feb. (24 January). Thereafter, the Asian month would begin on a.d. IX Kal. of the Roman month. The old calendar being lunar, the problem comes down to seeing when 23 January equates to a full moon.
And a happy Mother's Day (it's different over here). I thought the indent rule was that each contributor's posts were aligned, so that on this thread Dr Bennett would be justified left, I would be on first tab and Gerry on second. If I am wrong no doubt Joe will put things right.


My table shows two likely candidates - 8BC and 5BC.
I take it from the last post that none of the people Dr Bennett wants to call as witnesses is alive. I therefore suggest the following wordings:


{|class="wikitable"
'''Motivation'''
!Year BC (*=regular leap year)||Julian||colspan=2|Irregular Julian (*=leap year)
|-
|10||January 19||January 16||January 16
|-
|9*||January 8||January 6||January 5*
|-
|8||January 27||January 25||January 24
|-
|7||January 16||January 14||January 13
|-
|6||January 5||January 3||January 2
|-
|5*||January 24||January 22||January 21
|-
|4||January 13||January 12||January 11
|-
|3||February 1||January 31||January 30
|-
|2||January 21||January 20||January 19
|-
|1*||January 10||January 9||January 8
|}


There was an eclipse on March 23, 5BC (Julian date). There was thus also a full moon on January 24, 5BC (Julian date). I have not investigated the arrangement of intercalary years in the ancient Greek calendar.
The ordinary year in the previous Roman calendar consisted of twelve months, for a total of 355 days. In addition, a 27 or 28 - day intercalary month, the ''mensis intercalaris'', was sometimes inserted immediately after February 23, the last five days of February (''a.d. VI Kal. Mart.'' to ''Prid. Kal. Mart.'') becoming the last five days of the ''mensis intercalaris'' with the same names. The start of the ''mensis intercalaris'' was delayed by one day in 170BC to prevent certain festivals of March (then the first month of the year) falling on a market day. An alternative model, proposed by Mrs Agnes Kirsopp Michels in 1967, is not now regarded as viable. The decision to insert the intercalary month, etc.


The inscription mentions an intercalation. It is unlikely that the irregular Julian calendar was being introduced (in 8BC) because it was no longer intercalated at that time, and the purpose of the reform (as in Egypt and Rome) was to introduce the correct Julian calendar. The likely date is therefore 5BC, with the regular Julian intercalation coming a few weeks after adoption.
'''Leap year error'''


There is clear indication that, having moved to correct the calendar in Rome in 9BC, Augustus turned his attention to Asia. He would have been well aware of the situation in Egypt, and the fact that he felt no need to take any action there indicates that no action was needed. Professor Jones says:
...In 1999, an Egyptian papyrus was published that gives an ephemeris table for 24BC with both Roman and Egyptian dates. The Roman dates are not aligned with any of these solutions - they are aligned with the Julian calendar as it would have been if it had been operated corrrectly.(note 8). One suggested resolution of the problem is that the triennial cycle never found favour in Egypt.


:The Egyptians must at some point have become aware that the Roman dates that they assigned to particular days differed by one or two days from the dates according to the pontifices, but we should not assume that they would have immediately changed the reckoning to conform with the official version of the calendar. The calendar equation Roman July 19 = Egyptian Epeiph 27 discussed by Hagedorn indicates that conformity was imposed by 2BC.
I don't follow Dr Bennett's reasoning on the fifth triennial cycle. If you apply it to my table ], by 24BC 1 Thoth (wandering) is falling on August 27, but on the true Julian calendar it is falling on August 29 (the same day as in the fixed Alexandrian calendar). ] (]) 16:32, 7 March 2010 (UTC)


This date equation puts the wandering year out of the picture, but to conclude that that indicates that the Egyptians had been forced to abandon the fixed relationship with the Alexandrian calendar seems to me misguided. From 9BC the pressure was all the other way.
:Thank you for confirming beyond doubt that you are our hydra-headed IP friend the Intercalary Fool engaged in yet another strategy for block evasion. Since WP does encourage blocked IP users to take a User ID (something I tried to get you to do 2 years ago), you get one free pass. And only one.


I used the Easter holiday to translate a paper made use of by Dr Bennett in his argument.
:Re your first point: It hardly matters whether any of the scholars I listed are dead or alive (though FYI some are very much alive -- and if that's your standard Ideler, de Sanctis and even Bickerman have been deader for far longer). The fact is that Michels' reconstruction '''is''' the standard view of modern scholarship, and the cited work of these scholars is irrefutable evidence of it. The reasons for this have been repeatedly explained to you over two years. Further, you have been repeatedly challenged (a) to read Michels' book and (b) to provide any evidence at all of widely accepted refutations of her reconstruction (or indeed '''any''' published refutation by a reputable scholar), and you have repeatedly ignored this. Without such evidence, there is no reason at all even to consider your suggested edit, which anyway does not belong in this article.


Dieter Hagedorn
:Re your second point: you are now arguing about whether the observation of a match to the proleptic Julian calendar belongs in the body of the text or a footnote. Since the subject of the section is the triennial cycle, the main point is to explain why an alternate triennial cycle was suggested, so this text clearly belongs in a footnote. If you really need it to be in the main text, please provide a justification for placing it there which amounts to something other than you don't think my reconstruction can be right, apparently because you don't like me.


On the Egyptian calendar under Augustus
:Your other suggestion here, that the triennial cycle "never" found favour in Egypt, is entirely your own speculation. Jones' proposal to explain the Egyptian data is that the correct Julian calendar was in place in 24 B.C. but had been replaced by the Roman calendar sometime before 2 B.C.


from: Zeitschrift fuer Papyrologie und Epigraphik 100 (1994) 211 - 222.
:As to how my triennial cycle works please see the Excel spreadsheet on my site at (HTML version at ).


Copyright: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn
:As I said, this is your one free pass as far as I am concerned. If you start engaging in serious discussion we can discuss. If you carry on as you have done, and as I fully expect you to do, I will be reverting you in both the article and this talk page for block evasion, and I trust others will too. --] (]) 19:13, 7 March 2010 (UTC)


ON THE EGYPTIAN CALENDAR UNDER AUGUSTUS
==New calendar (Eastern churches)==


Theodore Cressy Skeat is the author of that basic description of the way the Ptolemaic calendars work , of which practical conversion tables we all make use, dealing with dates, which through the naming of the regnal years of one of the Ptolemies and of the day in an Egyptian month are fixed, to convert them to their Julian equivalent.
There is still time to vote on the proposed change of name for this article. Please cast your ballot at ]. ] (]) 16:32, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

==Eastern European calendar: naming proposal==

On this glorious Easter Tuesday, united around the world, here is an update on the progress of the ballot.

:Option 1 - Meletian calendar - 1 vote (recommended option)
:Option 2 - New calendar (Eastern churches) - no votes (this option is not recommended)
:Option 3 - No change - 2 votes (this option is not recommended)
:Option 4 - "Revised" Julian calendar - no votes (this option is not recommended)

To vote by proxy, write QUICKVOTE and sign with four tildes. If you want your proxy to vote in a particular way, add the option number in brackets. Thus QUICKVOTE (1) means your vote will be cast in favour of option 1.

The tilde is the wavy line ~ sometimes placed above n (in Spanish) or a or o in Portuguese where, following the medieval Latin copyists, it marks the omission of a following letter n.

'''This is not the place to vote'''. Click on this link ], read the manifestos and then add your vote underneath the others.

Uma Paschoa muito feliz a todos. '''O povo unido ja mais sera vencido'''. ] (])

Revision as of 05:34, 17 April 2010

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconTime High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconClassical Greece and Rome Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Misplaced Pages's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Archiving icon
Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2


Triennial cycles debunked

There is an inscription which says that in Asia in an unspecified year the last day of the old lunar calendar was 14 Peritios = a.d. X Kal. Feb. (23 January). The following day, from which the calendar would remain aligned to the Roman calendar, was 1 Dystros, a.d. IX Kal. Feb. (24 January). Thereafter, the Asian month would begin on a.d. IX Kal. of the Roman month. The old calendar being lunar, the problem comes down to seeing when 23 January equates to a full moon.

My table shows two likely candidates - 8BC and 5BC.

Year BC (*=regular leap year) Julian Irregular Julian (*=leap year)
10 January 19 January 16 January 16
9* January 8 January 6 January 5*
8 January 27 January 25 January 24
7 January 16 January 14 January 13
6 January 5 January 3 January 2
5* January 24 January 22 January 21
4 January 13 January 12 January 11
3 February 1 January 31 January 30
2 January 21 January 20 January 19
1* January 10 January 9 January 8

There was an eclipse on March 23, 5BC (Julian date). There was thus also a full moon on January 24, 5BC (Julian date). I have not investigated the arrangement of intercalary years in the ancient Greek calendar.

The inscription mentions an intercalation. It is unlikely that the irregular Julian calendar was being introduced (in 8BC) because it was no longer intercalated at that time, and the purpose of the reform (as in Egypt and Rome) was to introduce the correct Julian calendar. The likely date is therefore 5BC, with the regular Julian intercalation coming a few weeks after adoption.

There is clear indication that, having moved to correct the calendar in Rome in 9BC, Augustus turned his attention to Asia. He would have been well aware of the situation in Egypt, and the fact that he felt no need to take any action there indicates that no action was needed. Professor Jones says:

The Egyptians must at some point have become aware that the Roman dates that they assigned to particular days differed by one or two days from the dates according to the pontifices, but we should not assume that they would have immediately changed the reckoning to conform with the official version of the calendar. The calendar equation Roman July 19 = Egyptian Epeiph 27 discussed by Hagedorn indicates that conformity was imposed by 2BC.

This date equation puts the wandering year out of the picture, but to conclude that that indicates that the Egyptians had been forced to abandon the fixed relationship with the Alexandrian calendar seems to me misguided. From 9BC the pressure was all the other way.

I used the Easter holiday to translate a paper made use of by Dr Bennett in his argument.

Dieter Hagedorn

On the Egyptian calendar under Augustus

from: Zeitschrift fuer Papyrologie und Epigraphik 100 (1994) 211 - 222.

Copyright: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn

ON THE EGYPTIAN CALENDAR UNDER AUGUSTUS

Theodore Cressy Skeat is the author of that basic description of the way the Ptolemaic calendars work , of which practical conversion tables we all make use, dealing with dates, which through the naming of the regnal years of one of the Ptolemies and of the day in an Egyptian month are fixed, to convert them to their Julian equivalent.

Eastern European calendar: naming proposal

On this glorious Easter Tuesday, united around the world, here is an update on the progress of the ballot.

Option 1 - Meletian calendar - 1 vote (recommended option)
Option 2 - New calendar (Eastern churches) - no votes (this option is not recommended)
Option 3 - No change - 2 votes (this option is not recommended)
Option 4 - "Revised" Julian calendar - no votes (this option is not recommended)

To vote by proxy, write QUICKVOTE and sign with four tildes. If you want your proxy to vote in a particular way, add the option number in brackets. Thus QUICKVOTE (1) means your vote will be cast in favour of option 1.

The tilde is the wavy line ~ sometimes placed above n (in Spanish) or a or o in Portuguese where, following the medieval Latin copyists, it marks the omission of a following letter n.

This is not the place to vote. Click on this link Talk:Revised Julian calendar#Proposal to change article name, read the manifestos and then add your vote underneath the others.

Uma Paschoa muito feliz a todos. O povo unido ja mais sera vencido. 212.85.12.219 (talk)

Categories: