---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Michael Ossipoff <email9648...@gmail.com> Date: Sun, Sep 18, 2022 at 2:50 PM Subject: Re: Republican Calendar, Year 231 To: Jack Aubert <j...@chezaubert.net>
I should add that it seems to me that that earlier Roman Calendar only had 10 months. I prefer our Julian Calendar (with its Gregorian-restored alignment with the original Julian Calendar. I prefer it because of its February & April positioning. The earlier 10-month one didn’t even have February. On Sun, Sep 18, 2022 at 2:31 PM Michael Ossipoff <email9648...@gmail.com> wrote: > Pre-Julian…As you probably know, the Romans earlier had a calendar that > started at the Vernal Equinox. …with March 1st. > > That’s why September, October, November & December are so-named. > > …& so, resetting it wouldn’t be a problem. Just start the year as close as > possible to the Vernal Equinox. > > You could do that by the FRC’s method: March 1st would be the day that > contains the Vernal Equinox. …or better yet, the day that starts closest > to Vernal Equinox. > > …the actual astronomical Vernal Equinox. > > …or an arithmetical-approximation. Most calendars us an approximation. > e.g, The Gregorian rule was designed to approximate having the Vernal > Equinox on March 21st, because that’s when it was in the Julian Calendar. > > You could just say that, the calendar’s first year starts at that year’s > Vernal Equinox. > > & that each year starts on the day that starts closest to N days after the > previous one. > > …where N is the actual length (including the fraction) of a Vernal Equinox > tropical-year ( the duration between successive Vernal Equinoxes). > > That’s if you want to optimize for minimum calendrical-drift-rate of the > Vernal Equinox. > > If you want to minimize the average calendrical-drift over all the year’s > days, then use, for N, the length of the Mean Tropical Year. It’s about > 365.2422 days, but you could look it up for more accuracy. > > Likewise, the length of the Vernal Equinox tropical year can be looked up. > > BTW, the tropical year’s length, reckoned at different Solar ecliptic > longitudes, differs due to precession of the equinoxes & the ellipticity of > our orbit. > > The tropical year-lengths are all gradually changing, largely because of > precision of the apsides. > > Currently, the most nearly constant-length tropical year is the north > solstice tropical year. > > I.e. the summer solstice of the Nortern Hemispher > > > > > On Sun, Sep 18, 2022 at 5:49 AM Jack Aubert <j...@chezaubert.net> wrote: > >> Michael, >> >> >> >> I don’t think anybody is seriously contemplating calendar reform. I got >> a copy of the English version of the French Republican calendar from Frank >> King and It is hanging on a wall in my house. I love it because it is >> historically interesting and, in retrospect, amusingly goofy. The names >> of the months were parodied by contemporaneous English writers as >> adjectives like “sneezy, chilly, and breezy.” I would actually love to >> have a French version if anybody publishes one. It would have to retain >> the juxtaposition of the normal calendar with the FRC calendar so you can >> tell what today’s day and month would have been called. >> >> >> >> I wonder if anybody can figure out a way to juxtapose a pre-Julian Roman >> calendar onto a modern calendar. I think it would have to be arbitrarily >> reset somehow rather than fast forwarded. >> >> >> >> Jack Aubert >> >> >> >> *From:* sundial <sundial-boun...@uni-koeln.de> *On Behalf Of *Michael >> Ossipoff >> *Sent:* Saturday, September 17, 2022 9:02 PM >> *To:* fabio.sav...@nonvedolora.it >> *Cc:* Sundial sundiallist <sundial@uni-koeln.de> >> *Subject:* Re: Republican Calendar, Year 231 >> >> >> >> . >> >> The first thing I want to emphasize is that calendar-reform is not going >> to happen. What to do? Just deal with the calendar that we have…the one >> that we’ve had for two millennia.(…but with its Gregorian-modernized >> leapyear-system). Don’t waste your time on calendar-reform, because, for >> one thing, it isn’t going to happen. >> >> . >> >> But suppose that there’s an alternative calendar that you like. Calendar >> reform advocates are notoriously un-cooperative among eachother, & that >> further eliminates any chance of reform. But, even if the calendar were >> changed, then with the many different proposals around, what is the chance >> that the one that you’d like would be the one that somehow got adopted? >> Zilch. So that’s another reason to forget calendar-reform & just deal with >> the calendar that we have, the 2000-year-old Roman Calendar. >> >> . >> >> The OP was advocating for the French Republican Calendar, translated into >> your particular country’s language. >> >> . >> >> …but would its seasons be relevant to those who reside south of the >> equator, or in the tropical regions? No. >> >> . >> >> It would be a seasonal calendar based on the seasons of one particular >> lat-band. Hardly something that could be called internationally-fair or >> meaningful. >> >> . >> >> But let’s look at some other attributes of the French Republican Calendar >> (FRC): >> >> . >> >> It starts its year at the Autumnal Equinox, for those north of the >> equator. (A more generally meaningful name for that equinox would be the >> Southward-Equinox.) >> >> . >> >> Why? Well, the French Republican government started around that time of >> the year. That was a commendable government, & an improvement on what it >> replaced, but is its commemoration really what we need as the basis of our >> year-start choice? >> >> . >> >> There are good arguments for starting the year at the >> northern-hemisphere’s Vernal-Equinox, Winter-Solstice, or >> Summer-Solstice...or at the ancient Celts’ year-start at their Samhain >> holiday, which corresponds to our Holloween...or at the start of October, >> the Roman month that contains Samhain...or at the start of Scorpio the >> ecliptic-month that contains Samhain. >> >> But I’ll spare you the year-start discussion, because, for one thing >> there isn’t going to be a new calendar. >> >> . >> >> Resuming the attributes of the FRC: >> >> . >> >> The FRC is a year of 12 months of exactly 30 days each. Seems like a nice >> aesthetic simplification. But it leaves 5 or 6 days that aren’t any day of >> the week, & don’t belong to any month …not so neat after-all. >> >> . >> >> Days that aren’t any day-of-the-week are called “blank-days”. They’re a >> mess, & that’s too obvious to need any explanation. >> >> . >> >> But, whatever reform-calendar you might like, its unlikely that it would >> be the one adopted, among the many proposals. …as if there were even any >> chance of any new calendar being adopted anyway. >> >
--------------------------------------------------- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
