Calendar

[The Shaws]

As a follow on from the Calendar questions from Frank Evans a few weeks ago, there's something that's been niggling me for a while. Someone on the list is bound to know the answer.   46 BC is widely reported to have had 2 extra months, and to have been 445 days long, to make things ready for the introduction of the new Julian calendar.  But it doesn't say why. I have a thought about it, and I wonder if this is the reason.   The pre-Julian Roman calendar was lunar with an extra month being added as necessary to keep it in line with the solar year. Each month started at a new moon - I guess they thought of it as a "life", starting with nothing, growing to full maturity, then going back to nothing again. It would seem logical then, for the new solar calendar to start at the shortest day - the year would then work on a similar principle. So why didn't it? Perhaps someone, (the priests, the traditionalists, even Julius himself?) said "We must start off the new calendar on a new moon - it's been like that for about 700 years, we can't break away from tradition completely". Now, if I set up my "moonstick", I see that 1st January 45 BC WAS a new moon, so it does seem to hang together.    Anyone know the answer?   Mike Shaw   53.37 North 03.02 West   www.wiz.to/sundials