| Flash
|
| 10867. Tue Nov 16, 2004 10:01 pm |
 |
|
Q: What happened between September 2 and September 14, 1752?
A: Nothing
The Gregorian calendar was devised because the mean year in the Julian Calendar was a little too long, and was promulgated by the eponymous Pope Gregory XIII on February 24, 1582. Under the Gregorian system years divisible by 100 are leap years only if they are divisible by 400 as well. When the new calendar was put in use, to correct the error already accumulated in the thirteen centuries since the council of Nicaea, a deletion of ten days was made. In Roman Catholic countries the last day of the Julian calendar was October 4, 1582 and this was followed by the first day of the Gregorian calendar October 15, 1582. This created some consternation, and the church was accused of stealing ten days of people's lives. The dates "5 October 1582" to "14 October 1582" (inclusive) exist only in the Proleptic Gregorian calendar, which is confined to special scientific contexts and has no relevance for dating ordinary historical events.
In Great Britain and its overseas possessions (including the American colonies), the new calendar was not introduced until 14 September 1752, so that for 170 years our dates were 10 days out of sync with the Continent, which can lead to some confusion: William and Mary of Orange seeming to arrive in London to accept the English crown a week or so before they left the Netherlands; and Shakespeare and Cervantes apparently dying on exactly the same date, when in fact Cervantes predeceased Shakespeare by 10 days in real time.
By 1752 it was necessary to adjust by 11 days rather than 10, and September 2, 1752 was followed by September 14. Again, people objected to the change, although in this case it was not because they literally thought days were being stolen from their lives but because they were required to pay a full month's rent for the shortened September but they were paid only for the days actually worked.
From 1 January 1622, the first day of the year was standardised as January 1. This was already the system used in Italy, Germany, and other places, but not universally (England, for example, began the year on March 25).
Russia did not accept the new calendar until 1918, with January 31 being followed by February 14. In consequence the anniversary of the 'October Revolution' now falls in November.
s: paraphrase of part of the Wikipedia article "Gregorian Calendar" |
|
|
|
 |
| Jenny
|
| 10873. Tue Nov 16, 2004 10:26 pm |
|
|
| 'Why does the anniversary of the October Revolution fall in November?' might be a good question for that one. |
|
|
|
|
| Flash
|
| 10877. Tue Nov 16, 2004 10:32 pm |
|
|
| Quote: | | they were required to pay a full month's rent for the shortened September but they were paid only for the days actually worked. |
This might suit a show with Mark Steel or Jeremy Hardy in it - the toffs framing laws to suit themselves and exploit the working man - should give them something to work with. |
|
|
|
|
| Frederick The Monk
|
| 10904. Wed Nov 17, 2004 10:59 am |
|
|
Anglo-Saxons counted years by the most complicated method they could possible find - indiction. Below my thoughts on this from the 'Brand New Information' thread:
"Just when you thought calendars had got confusing enough, along comes Constantine the Great with a really splendid new way of making life even trickier.
An indiction was originally a period of 15 years during which the accounts of the Roman Empire were meant to be balanced and this handy accounting figure was also used as the timing or the appointment of some of the legislature and judiciary.
The idea of indictions was said to have been introduced by Constantine the Great and certainly this method of counting time was in widespread use within a few years of his death, particularly amongst the Eastern emperors at Constantinople. Time was reckoned simply by counting the number of complete indictions from 312 A.D (or to be exact from the dismissal of the Nicene Council in 312) and then adding the number of years through the next indiction that you're in. The Nicene Council probably finished in June or July or 312 but, as no one was exactly sure when they took 1st September as a nice easy date to remember.
So 312 was the first year of the first indiction, running from 1st September 312 to 31st August 313. Hence 1st September 344 to 31st August 345 (the thirty-second year) was the second year of the third indiction.
At least that was how things were in the Eastern (Byzantine) empire which used these 'Constantinian, or 'Constantinopolitan' indictions. Over in the West we used 24th September as the start date for our 'Imperial' or 'Caesarean' indictions and this method was widely adopted across Western Europe. The choice of 24th September originated in Anglo-Saxon England, probably with the Venerable Bede, and was based on his miscalculation of the date of the Autumn equinox - so the whole calendar was based on an error in the first place. To make matters worse, a number of early mediaeval souces also got the year of the Nicene Council wrong so start their first indiction in 313.
What everyone did agreed on was that indictions start in September each year - which is also handily the start of the agricultural year and is still the start of the school year. This does not mean that they considered this to be the true New Year however which began on Christ's birthday - traditionally said to be 25th December - or in some cases on the start of the Civil Year on January 1st.
Confused? So was the Pope.
So much so in fact that in the ninth century he ordered the introduction of the 'Papal' or 'Roman' Indiction which begins on 25th December - New Year's Day as was - to neaten things up. Except where he introduced the Indiction starting on 1st January of course to match their civil year. As part of this tidying-up exercise he then ordered that the first indiction should be counted from the birth of Christ rather than the Nicene Council. This involved a lot of back-counting. To be honest everyone was SO CONFUSED by this point that even the Vatican used different indiction calculations.
For those that are interested we are currently in the 12th year of the 112th indiction (using my preferred Caesarean indictions)" |
|
|
|
|
| Massingberd
|
| 10949. Thu Nov 18, 2004 12:07 pm |
|
|
| I’m terrified to ask, Frederick, but did not the (first) Nicene Council take place in 325 AD? Was this (312) an abortive precursor, along Council of Trent lines? 312 AD was the year that Constantine was victorious at the Battle of Milvian Bridge, thus gaining control over the Western Roman Empire. |
|
|
|
|
| Frederick The Monk
|
| 10957. Thu Nov 18, 2004 4:47 pm |
|
|
You are, of course, absolutely right Massingberd and I must be having some sort of temporal lobe seizure.
312 is the Milvian bridge (and, incidentally, the year in which Arius was ordained - probably) The First Council of Nicaea was 325.
However indictions do seem to be counted from 312 (which is also one of the estimates for the number of bishops at the First Council of Nicaea) although I'm having trouble finding out it that's anything to do with the battle of the Milvian bridge. I have however found another system for counting indictions - the indictio Senensis - which begins on 8th September, just in case everything wasn't complicated enough.
Further rooting around has thrown up the idea that the first indiction was believed in the early church to have begun in 3 BC, making 312 AD the 21st indiction, not the first. Now I'm really confused too. If this is so (and I need to check) does that suggest that:
a/. 3 BC was chosen by the early church fathers because it made the number of years to 312 divisible by 15.
b/. 3 BC was the actual date for the beginning of the 'economic cycle' in Rome and when Constantine did the Milvian bridge thing in 312 this just handily happened to be in an indiction year and hence the clock was 'reset' at that date by said Church fathers.
I fear I shall have to go and ask a Classicist (although it one of those that told me indictions ran from the dismissal of the Council of Nicaea. I shall tread with care........ |
|
|
|
|
| brackett
|
| 16116. Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:32 pm |
|
|
I posted this factoid a long time ago, in a thread far away:
Roger Bacon believed that the Calendar of his time was out by 11 minutes every year.
And that since 45 BC enough of those minutes had accumulated to put the Calendar out by ten days.
This of course was a terrible thing to have happened. Particularly for Religious reasons. Imagine innocently going to Church for Sunday Mass, and not realising that it was actually a Wednesday!
Bacon worried, and rightfully so, that all religious functions were being celebrated on the wrong day. People all over the world were getting Birthday presents on the wrong day. They were Showing up, days late, for an important meeting–only to notice that coincidentally everyone else had shown up to the meeting at the same late time. And they were being thoroughly confused as to why their Milk was going off days before the use-by date had said it was meant to.
Bacon pleaded to have the Calendar rectified. But it was not.
It wasn’t until 1582 –almost 300 years after Bacons death- that Pope Gregory XIII had his people draw up a new Calendar. Bacons calculations were adopted for this newly rectified Calendar, however he received no credit for it at all.
Up until 1752 Britain, all of its Colonies and America were living by Bacon’s measurements.
Source: The first Scientist: A life of Roger Bacon, Brian Clegg
|
|
|
|
|
| MatC
|
| 16129. Tue Mar 15, 2005 1:37 pm |
|
|
| There's a piece on the myth of the "calendar riots" in Fortean Times (FT163, page 48), written by Paul Sieveking. Basically, he says the famous "give us back our eleven days" riots never happened - the stories arose from a Hogarth picture, and memories of anti-Jewish riots which *did* take place at the same time. |
|
|
|
|
| Flash
|
| 16131. Tue Mar 15, 2005 2:18 pm |
|
|
| Got it - thanks. |
|
|
|
|
| eggshaped
|
| 16268. Sat Mar 19, 2005 2:45 pm |
|
|
Something that is new to me, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was well known to everyone else, is the reason that the months all have such an odd number of days. It seems that Julius (c.f. Caesars) had alternate months of 31 and 30 days, with February shortened to accommodate the leap year. However when Augustus came along, he renamed the eighth month after himself, and realising that Julius’ month (July) had 31 days, he added one to his own at the expense of poor February which went down to 28.
So February is short, purely due to the ego of a Roman Emperor, but he’s not the only person to have messed with the names of the months:
| Quote: | Caligula renamed Septembris [Seventh month] as Germanicus; Nero renamed Aprilis as Neroneus, Maius as Claudius and Iunius as Germanicus; and Domitian renamed Septembris as Germanicus and Octobris [Eighth month] as Domitianus. Septembris was also renamed as Antoninus and Tacitus. Novembris was renamed Faustina and Romanus
(wikipedia) |
| Quote: | | …in 190 [commodus] renamed all the months to correspond exactly with his titles. From January, they run as follows: Lucius, Aelius, Aurelius, Commodus, Augustus, Herculeus, Romanus, Exsuperatorius, Amazonius, Invictus, Felix, Pius. According to Dio Cassius, the changing of the names of the months was all part of Commodus' megalomania. Commodus was the first and last in the Antonine dynasty to change the names of the months. |
http://www.roman-emperors.org/commod.htm
Charlemagne renamed all of the months agriculturally into Old High German.
(January-December):
Wintarmanoth (winter month),
Hornung (bastard?),
Lentzinmanoth (Lent month),
Ostarmanoth (Easter month),
Winnemanoth (grazing month),
Brachmanoth (plowing month),
Heuvimanoth (hay month),
Aranmanoth (harvest month),
Witumanoth (wood month),
Windumemanoth (vintage month),
Herbistmanoth (grazing month),
and Heilagmanoth (holy month).
| Quote: | The meaning of HORNUNG is uncertain. It might relate to words like ON hyrning (f) "corner", hyrningr (m) "angle", OE hyrne "corner, angle", MnE dialect: hurn, (h)on "river bend", etc. - maybe this month was seen as the turning point, when the first signs were felt that winter was ending - or maybe the name was displaced from some true (solsticial) turning point?
More often though, Hornung is explained by Old Friesian horning, ON hornungr, OE hornungsunu, MLG, MDu. horninc "bastard" (from the idea of being conceived in the corner, as opposed to the marriage bed (Kluge, 1998)), since February is the odd one out and defective in days compared to the other months These allusions to February as the defective month obviously depend on the Julian/Gregorian calendar, or something very like.
Another theory links Hornung to deer, who shed their antlers in the spring (Kluge, 1998; Arnold et al. 1979, p. 63). It's possible the name was understood differently in different times and places, whatever its original signification
Yet another idea is that Hornung derives from a verb "horen" meaning "to mate" (cf. MnE whore, etc.) - with reference to the animal world... |
http://www.oe.eclipse.co.uk/nom/calendar.htmh |
|
|
|
|
| Jenny
|
| 16269. Sat Mar 19, 2005 3:13 pm |
|
|
| The middle of February is known as 'breaking the back of winter' here in Maine. However, you wouldn't know it from the four foot high snowbanks still lining the sides of the road. |
|
|
|
|
| Flash
|
| 16872. Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:30 pm |
|
|
Shipped in from eggshaped's post on the Confectionary thread:
| Quote: | [the Confectionary] industry lobbied Parliament to have [Easter] on a fixed date each year. In a bid to win their votes, the Government’s Easter Bill aimed to do just that. Royal Assent was granted in 1928, and officially at least, it became an Act. Until Pope Pius XI got to hear about it
After mass-complaints from Christian groups, the law was suspended and for the past 70-odd years, apart from occasional grumblings, no-one has suggested the idea again. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Gray
|
| 17217. Wed Apr 06, 2005 11:56 am |
|
|
Q: What will you be doing on December 21st 2012?
F: Wrapping my kids' jetpacks.
A: Becoming one with the universe.
Because the Maya spotted that there are obvious cycles in the heavens (days, months, years, lunar eclipses, positions of venus) they made their calendar cyclic to enable them to make predictions (and scare people into submission!).
The ritual year (called the tzolkin) was composed of 260 days, linking the numbers 1 to 13 with 20 days named after objects. You start with 1-imix, then 2-ik ... 13-ben, then 1-ix, 2-men ... 8-imix, and so on. When you get back to 13-ben again, the 260-day cycle starts again.
The solar calendar (called the haab) had 365 days, consisting of 18 months of 20 days, with a short month of 5 days (called the wayeb), which was considered to be a dangerous time.
With a little maths, you can see that the tzolkin calendar and the haab calendar move through a complete cycle every 52 years - this is the 'Short Count' calendar. The 'Long Count' calendar marks 13 'baktun', which is 13 x 144,000 days, and marks the full extent of the Mayan calendar, at the end of which many nutcases insist world will come to an end, mate with the universe, or enter its next magical phase.
This will happen on December 21st, in 2012. (Or the 23rd, depending on which date correlation you like).
Mayan date calculator tools! - Now Y2K compatible! Maybe use this for the broadcast date of the show, or mention today's mayan date during recording and invite people to calculate when it was actually recorded? |
|
|
|
|
| Jenny
|
| 18743. Sun May 01, 2005 2:43 pm |
|
|
Just come across some QI information about the Aztec calendar.
| Quote: | The Aztec calendar kept two different aspects of time; tonalpohualli and xiuhpohualli. Each of these systems had a different purpose.
The tonalpohualliwas the 'counting of days.' It originated by ancient peoples observing that the sun, crossed a certain zenith point near the Mayan city of Copan, every 260 days. So this first system is arranged in a 260-day cycle. These 260 days were then broken up into 20 periods, with each period containing 13 days, called trecenas. Each period was given the name of something that was then shown by a hieroglyphic sign, and each trecena was given a number 1-13. Each trecena is also thought to have a god or deity presiding over each of the trecena. They kept these counts in tonalamatls, screenfold books made from bark paper.
The Aztecs used this as a religious calendar. Priests used the calendar to determine luck days for such activities as sowing crops, building houses, and going to war.
The xiuhpohualli was the 'counting of the years.' This calendar was kept on a 365-day solar count. This was also the agricultural and ceremonial calendar of the Aztec state. It was divided into 18 periods, with each period containing 20 days, called veintenas. This left five days that were not represented. These were called "nemontemi." These were the five transition days between the old and the new year, and were considered days of nothing. This was a time of festivals. People came to the festivals with their best clothes on, and took part in singing and dancing. This is also when the priest would perform sacrifices, most of these sacrifices were human, but others were preformed on animals and fruit.
The solar year was the basis for the civil calendar by which the Aztecs determined the myriad ceremonies and rituals linked to agricultural cycles. The calendar was made up of 18 months, each lasting 20 days. The months were divided into four five-day weeks. The year was rounded out to 365 days by the addition of the five-day nemontemi (empty days), an ominous period marked by the cessation of normal activities and general abstinence. The correlation of dates in the Gregorian calendar is uncertain, although most authors on the subject affix the beginning of the Aztec year to early February. A variety of sources were consulted in developing the following chart of some of the ritualistic activities associated with each month.
Every 52 years the tonalpohualli and the xiuhpohualli calendars would align. This marked what was known as a Mesoamerican "century." Every one of these centuries was marked by xiuhmolpilli - Binding Up of the Years or the New Fire Ceremony.
This was a festival that lasted 12 days and included fasting as a symbol of penitence. At the beginning of this festival all the lights in the city were extinguished - people let their hearth fires go out.
Then on midnight of the 12th day of the festival, a prisoner was taken to the priest. The priest would watch in the night sky for the star of fire to reach the zenith. Once it did, the priest would remove the heart of this man, and replace it with a piece of wood, that was laid on a piece of turquoise. This is where the priest would start the new fire that would once again light the city. |
So - how many months were there in an Aztec year, how many years in a century, and why would you not want to be the honoured guest at an end-of-century party?
http://groups.msn.com/SeekersInclusive/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=&ID_Message=57 |
|
|
|
|
| garrick92
|
| 18752. Sun May 01, 2005 5:46 pm |
|
|
Q: Why might the day drag on a bit on June 30 or December 31?
A: Because those are the two days on which a Leap Second can be added to the year.
These days, our clocks run to standards set by atomic clocks, rather than astronomical observations.
Since 1967, the International System of Units (SI) has defined the second as 9,192,631,770 cycles of the radiation which corresponds to the transition between two energy levels of the ground state of the Cesium-133 atom. No, it's not terribly catchy, but there you go.
Anyway, the upshot of this is that Leap Seconds are necessary to keep time standards synchronized with civil calendars, because the Earth's rotation is slowing down very very v e r y v e r y g r a d u a l l y .
So far, leap seconds have been inserted upon us on the following dates: 30 June AND 31 December 1972, 31 December 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979; 30 June 1981, 1982, 1983, 1985; 31 December 1987, 1989, 1990; 30 June 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1997; 31 December 1998.
So, so far, anyone born prior to 30 June 1972 has had 22 seconds -- nearly half a minute! -- lopped off their tally of days, without even knowing it! I shall write to my MP.
And you can hear them if you dial the speaking clock at midnight on the day a Leap Second appears. There is a rather odd thrill to be had from listening to the Speaking Clock say: "At the fourth stroke ..."
Oh, you're going to ask why it's always on 30 June or 31 December, aren't you? The answer is, I have not the foggiest idea.
http://hpiers.obspm.fr/eop-pc/earthor/utc/leapsecond.html |
|
|
|
|
