6 ms·

This calendar would cause the seven-day week to get out of sync. I was curious about this some time back and couldn't find an exact history, but it certainly se

by geofft 8y ago

This calendar would cause the seven-day week to get out of sync. I was curious about this some time back and couldn't find an exact history, but it certainly seems like the seven-day cycle has been maintained continuously for millennia - probably dating from Babylonian and early Jewish practice, then spreading to Europe via Christianity, without skipping/adjustments. The shift to the Gregorian calendar, for instance, removed days but kept the cycle of weekdays - in continental Europe, 4 October 1582, a Thursday, was followed by 15 October 1582, a Friday. Wouldn't this proposal cause nations that adopt it to shift their weekdays from nations (and religions) that don't, at the rate of one a year?

Falkon1313 8y ago
We already have leap years that add a day. The months have different lengths, so the days of the week fall on different dates all the time. More like it's always been out of sync, and this would bring it _into_ sync.
- geofft 8y ago
  Yes - it would bring a lot of things into sync, but the tradeoff is that you wouldn't be guaranteed that seven days after a Monday is another Monday. That is true and has been true since before the Julian calendar even existed, as far as I can tell.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - jacobolus 8y ago
    Strict 7-day weeks were a Jewish thing from sometime before 500 BC, unrelated to the Roman calendar. Even in other cultures that split time into weeks based on lunar phases, weeks were adjusted to match the moon (a lunar week is ~7.4 days). From what I understand the Romans didn’t adopt a 7-day week as a core part of the calendar until after the emperor had converted to Christianity. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nundinae https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nundinae
- TimTheTinker 8y ago
  Yes, but leap years don't interfere with the fixed weekly succession of 7 named/numbered days.
TimTheTinker 8y ago
> Wouldn't this proposal cause nations that adopt it to shift their weekdays from nations (and religions) that don't, at the rate of one a year? Yes, and this is the primary problem with the 13mo/yr proposal, even more intractable than the constant month/day conversions between countries that would result. The "1 day of rest per week" (which is inseparable from the 7-day cycle) is very important to a large segment of the world's population, especially Muslims, Jews, and Christians.
- philistine 8y ago
  Bingo! That's the whole crux of the problem there. You can't get rid of the 7-day cycle for religious reasons. So when you try to create a universal calendar that satisfies all the religious constraints, you end up with ... something so close to what we already have that it's not worth the hassle.
  - TimTheTinker 8y ago
    Well, just subtract the week-month alignment and "Year Day" and you're good. I don't see any problem with adding a 13th month with 29 days instead of 28 -- where religions and countries want specific monthly calendars, they already have their own maintained forks. Although the below nursery rhyme would be deprecated. That might be enough to kill it :) 30 days hath September April, June, and November All the rest have 31 But February alone Which hath 28 days square, and 29 in each leap year That or the fact that a lot of people are superstitious about the number 13.
    - c3534l 8y ago
      That nursery rhyme is deprecated for the simple fact that it doesn't actually rhyme.
      - TimTheTinker 8y ago
        Where doesn’t it? Note “thirty-one” and “alone” are an eye rhyme. Should have spelled it out. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_rhyme https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_rhyme Also I’m not sure if I should have put the last “and” at the beginning of the last line.

by geofft 8y ago

Falkon1313 8y ago

We already have leap years that add a day. The months have different lengths, so the days of the week fall on different dates all the time. More like it's always been out of sync, and this would bring it _into_ sync.

geofft 8y ago
Yes - it would bring a lot of things into sync, but the tradeoff is that you wouldn't be guaranteed that seven days after a Monday is another Monday. That is true and has been true since before the Julian calendar even existed, as far as I can tell.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- jacobolus 8y ago
  Strict 7-day weeks were a Jewish thing from sometime before 500 BC, unrelated to the Roman calendar. Even in other cultures that split time into weeks based on lunar phases, weeks were adjusted to match the moon (a lunar week is ~7.4 days). From what I understand the Romans didn’t adopt a 7-day week as a core part of the calendar until after the emperor had converted to Christianity. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nundinae https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nundinae
TimTheTinker 8y ago
Yes, but leap years don't interfere with the fixed weekly succession of 7 named/numbered days.

TimTheTinker 8y ago

> Wouldn't this proposal cause nations that adopt it to shift their weekdays from nations (and religions) that don't, at the rate of one a year? Yes, and this is the primary problem with the 13mo/yr proposal, even more intractable than the constant month/day conversions between countries that would result. The "1 day of rest per week" (which is inseparable from the 7-day cycle) is very important to a large segment of the world's population, especially Muslims, Jews, and Christians.

philistine 8y ago
Bingo! That's the whole crux of the problem there. You can't get rid of the 7-day cycle for religious reasons. So when you try to create a universal calendar that satisfies all the religious constraints, you end up with ... something so close to what we already have that it's not worth the hassle.
- TimTheTinker 8y ago
  Well, just subtract the week-month alignment and "Year Day" and you're good. I don't see any problem with adding a 13th month with 29 days instead of 28 -- where religions and countries want specific monthly calendars, they already have their own maintained forks. Although the below nursery rhyme would be deprecated. That might be enough to kill it :) 30 days hath September April, June, and November All the rest have 31 But February alone Which hath 28 days square, and 29 in each leap year That or the fact that a lot of people are superstitious about the number 13.
  - c3534l 8y ago
    That nursery rhyme is deprecated for the simple fact that it doesn't actually rhyme.
    - TimTheTinker 8y ago
      Where doesn’t it? Note “thirty-one” and “alone” are an eye rhyme. Should have spelled it out. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_rhyme https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_rhyme Also I’m not sure if I should have put the last “and” at the beginning of the last line.