Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SteampunkDesperado t1_j6937kh wrote

What's the real story of the early Roman calendar? (The one that began in March and ended in December.) They didn't actually disregard two whole months, did they?

5

Thibaudborny t1_j6azco2 wrote

You're suggesting 12 months is a universal standard, when in reality, that only came about later. You can not disregard that which doesn't exist. It is Caesar who reformed the system to be more structured.

1

LateInTheAfternoon t1_j6b00q7 wrote

The pre-Julian Republican calendar (dating back to at least 183 BC) had twelve months; it was not solar like the Julian one (it was lunisolar, like most of the calendars of its time). They are asking about the calendar which preceded that one.

2

GSilky t1_j6er23c wrote

IIRC the Roman calendar before Julian hardly lived up to it's name. It was confusing at best.

1

LateInTheAfternoon t1_j6eum10 wrote

The pre-Julian Republic calendar was an ordinary twelve-month lunisolar calendar, not unlike the ones in Greece and Mesopotamia. And it wasn't any less functional than those. According to tradition that twelve-month calendar went back to the time of king Numa. The weird ten-month calendar, which this question is about, was the one which it replaced.

2

GSilky t1_j6fqf6g wrote

Gotcha, now I'm going down the rabbit hole on this lol

1