|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.1.1.4
A Probable Agricultural Calendar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is likely that the Roman calendar did evolve over time and probably had its roots in agricultural cycles. Johnson, for example (The Roman Origins of Our Calendar, p. 8) states the possibility that the oldest Roman calendar was an attempt to synchronize a 30-day lunation cycle with an eight-day market week. The market days were nundinae, or "ninth days" by the inclusive Roman reckoning, and were possibly originally determined by the interval required for the processing of goat's cheese. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are good reasons for believing that the month of Martius was originally called Caprotinus and the month of Iunius was called Fabarius. Hence, both names refer to the breeding of pigs. According to one more recent interpretation, the name of the month of Aprilis is derived from the term aper, or boar, and the name of the month of Maius is derived from the word maia, or sow. These four original months formed a cycle, or annus, of 120 days, which roughly corresponds to the gestation cycle of the pig. The other six months, simply numbered, were obviously added to round out another cycle. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The period of 10 lunations, which corresponds approximately to the gestation cycle of cattle, was apparently filled out by adding a day to the long months of Martius, Maius, Quintilis, and October, to create a cycle of (431 + 630 =) 304 days. This figure is an even multiple of eight (388 = 304), which is the number of days in a market cycle. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are good grounds for believing that the earliest Roman calendar, then, was based upon agricultural and marketing cycles and was probably restarted each spring. At some point, the calendar was changed to incorporate a year of 355 days. You can surmise that this change involved a switch from an agriculturally based calendar to a luni-solar calendar. This switch is probably the event attributed to Numa Pompilius. If the year continued to be synchronized with the market week, such a calendar would necessarily involve the intercalation of additional days, since neither 354 nor 355 days are even multiples of eight. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.1.2
Roman Republican Calendar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In this section, I consider what is known and can be reconstructed about the pre-Julian calendar of Republican Rome. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The calendar actually used by Rome prior to the Julian reform is nowhere described definitively in the Roman literature, but its structure and history can be reconstructed with some confidence. |
|
|
|
|
|