Numbering of days within the Roman Interkalaris

[Otero, Daniel]

Greetings.  As a new member of the CLNDR-L, I’d like to pose two questions.  I’ll save the second for a separate post.

Please excuse me if this has been discussed here before; perhaps someone could simply point me to the appropriate archival digest if that is the case.

My question: Prior to the Julian reform of the Roman lunar calendar, the Romans inserted from time to time an intercalary month called Interkalaris or Mercedonius between the 23rd and 24th days of Februarius (the 23rd being the feast of Terminalia).  In such a situation, the Ides of Februarius was followed not by A.D. XVI Kal. Mart. as in common years, but by A.D. XI Kal. Interkal. (or perhaps A.D. XI Kal. Merc.).  Then followed the Kalends, Nones and Ides of Interkalaris, with days appropriately numbered.  The final day of the intercalary month was followed by A.D. VI Kal. Mart., the 24th day of Februarius, which dutifully led up to the Kalends of Martius.  I assume then that the numbering of days between the Nones of Interkalaris and the end of that month continued the numbering backward from Kal. Mart.  (I believe that the day following Non. Interkal. would be A.D. XX Kal. Mart.  Is this correct?

Many thanks in advance for your consideration.

--Danny Otero
Dept. of Mathematics & Computer Science
Xavier University
Cincinnati, OH 45207-4441
otero@...

[Chris Bennett-8]

Dear Danny --

 

This description is not quite correct.

 

The pre-Julian intercalary year was either 377 or 378 days long.  The intercalary month began on the day following the Terminalia in a 377-day year or on the following day in a 378-day year; Livy gives an example of each.  The official name was Mensis Interkalaris and the few contemporary attestations we have, from fasti, tesserae and sources like the letters of Cicero all use this name.  Mercedonius is attested only in later literary sources like Plutarch; it seems to have been a popular or slang name. 

 

The Fasti Antiates Maiores shows Interkalaris as a 27 day month with a Nones on the 5th and an Ides on the 13th, and Livy explicitly dates the triumph of Scipio Asiagenus after Magnesia to prid Kal Mart in the intercalary month.  So, in effect, February was truncated to 23 or 24 days and followed by an Interkalaris of 27, rather than having a 22-day Interkalaris inserted into February after the Terminalia or the following day. The festivals of the last 5 days of February were held on the last 5 days of Interkalaris, though this of course did not change their nominal date, since this was still a backwards count to Kal Mart.

 

It is unclear whether the day between the Terminalia and Kal Int in a 378 day year was considered to be a separate intercalary day or as part of February.  It is also not clear how the days in February between Id Feb and Kal Mart were counted.  One would expect a.d. NN Kal Int, as you describe, but there are no examples of such dates, and there are quite a few examples of dating by festivals that fell at this time (Quirinalia, Feralia, Terminalia, though not yet Lupercalia), which may or may not indicate that the date was in an intercalary year.  There is one certain example of a date relative to the Terminalia in a year that is known to be ordinary, but the source (Cicero) may have expected it to be intercalary at the time. 

 

The bible on this stuff is A K Michels, The Calendar of the Roman Republic (Princteon, 1957).  You can also see a discussion on my website at http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Egypt/ptolemies/chron/roman/chron_rom_cal.htm

 

Best wishes

Chris Bennett

 

 

From: otero@...

Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 6:12 PM

Subject: Numbering of days within the Roman Interkalaris

Greetings.  As a new member of the CLNDR-L, I’d like to pose two questions.  I’ll save the second for a separate post.

Please excuse me if this has been discussed here before; perhaps someone could simply point me to the appropriate archival digest if that is the case.

My question: Prior to the Julian reform of the Roman lunar calendar, the Romans inserted from time to time an intercalary month called Interkalaris or Mercedonius between the 23rd and 24th days of Februarius (the 23rd being the feast of Terminalia).  In such a situation, the Ides of Februarius was followed not by A.D. XVI Kal. Mart. as in common years, but by A.D. XI Kal. Interkal. (or perhaps A.D. XI Kal. Merc.).  Then followed the Kalends, Nones and Ides of Interkalaris, with days appropriately numbered.  The final day of the intercalary month was followed by A.D. VI Kal. Mart., the 24th day of Februarius, which dutifully led up to the Kalends of Martius.  I assume then that the numbering of days between the Nones of Interkalaris and the end of that month continued the numbering backward from Kal. Mart.  (I believe that the day following Non. Interkal. would be A.D. XX Kal. Mart.  Is this correct?

Many thanks in advance for your consideration.

--Danny Otero
Dept. of Mathematics & Computer Science
Xavier University
Cincinnati, OH 45207-4441
otero@...

[Otero, Daniel]

Chris,

Thanks much for your correction and explanation.  A follow up question: is there an explanation for how the Pontifex decided whether a 22-day or 23-day intercalation was needed?

--Danny


On 8/9/09 4:45 PM, "Chris Bennett" <cjbennett@...> wrote:

Dear Danny --

This description is not quite correct.

The pre-Julian intercalary year was either 377 or 378 days long.  The intercalary month began on the day following the Terminalia in a 377-day year or on the following day in a 378-day year; Livy gives an example of each.  The official name was Mensis Interkalaris and the few contemporary attestations we have, from fasti, tesserae and sources like the letters of Cicero all use this name.  Mercedonius is attested only in later literary sources like Plutarch; it seems to have been a popular or slang name.  

The Fasti Antiates Maiores shows Interkalaris as a 27 day month with a Nones on the 5th and an Ides on the 13th, and Livy explicitly dates the triumph of Scipio Asiagenus after Magnesia to prid Kal Mart in the intercalary month.  So, in effect, February was truncated to 23 or 24 days and followed by an Interkalaris of 27, rather than having a 22-day Interkalaris inserted into February after the Terminalia or the following day. The festivals of the last 5 days of February were held on the last 5 days of Interkalaris, though this of course did not change their nominal date, since this was still a backwards count to Kal Mart.

It is unclear whether the day between the Terminalia and Kal Int in a 378 day year was considered to be a separate intercalary day or as part of February.  It is also not clear how the days in February between Id Feb and Kal Mart were counted.  One would expect a.d. NN Kal Int, as you describe, but there are no examples of such dates, and there are quite a few examples of dating by festivals that fell at this time (Quirinalia, Feralia, Terminalia, though not yet Lupercalia), which may or may not indicate that the date was in an intercalary year.  There is one certain example of a date relative to the Terminalia in a year that is known to be ordinary, but the source (Cicero) may have expected it to be intercalary at the time.

The bible on this stuff is A K Michels, The Calendar of the Roman Republic (Princteon, 1957).  You can also see a discussion on my website at http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Egypt/ptolemies/chron/roman/chron_rom_cal.htm

Best wishes
Chris Bennett

 

From: Otero, Daniel <otero@...>  
Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 6:12 PM
Subject: Numbering of days within the Roman Interkalaris

Greetings.  As a new member of the CLNDR-L, I’d like to pose two questions.  I’ll save the second for a separate post.

Please excuse me if this has been discussed here before; perhaps someone could simply point me to the appropriate archival digest if that is the case.

My question: Prior to the Julian reform of the Roman lunar calendar, the Romans inserted from time to time an intercalary month called Interkalaris or Mercedonius between the 23rd and 24th days of Februarius (the 23rd being the feast of Terminalia).  In such a situation, the Ides of Februarius was followed not by A.D. XVI Kal. Mart. as in common years, but by A.D. XI Kal. Interkal. (or perhaps A.D. XI Kal. Merc.).  Then followed the Kalends, Nones and Ides of Interkalaris, with days appropriately numbered.  The final day of the intercalary month was followed by A.D. VI Kal. Mart., the 24th day of Februarius, which dutifully led up to the Kalends of Martius.  I assume then that the numbering of days between the Nones of Interkalaris and the end of that month continued the numbering backward from Kal. Mart.  (I believe that the day following Non. Interkal. would be A.D. XX Kal. Mart.  Is this correct?

Many thanks in advance for your consideration.

--Danny Otero
Dept. of Mathematics & Computer Science
Xavier University
Cincinnati, OH 45207-4441
otero@...

------ End of Forwarded Message