9 ms·

Roman Imperialism that was peddling Christian Imperialism. Let us not forget that the calendar was made for and named after Pope Gregory XIII and the years are

Roman Imperialism that was peddling Christian Imperialism. Let us not forget that the calendar was made for and named after Pope Gregory XIII and the years are structured around the death of Christ. Naming the weeks after pagan gods (in my opinion) was a similar act to moving Christmas to fall on Saturnalia. The purpose being to appease pagans and slowly convert them to Christianity.

ysavir 4y ago
The Gregorian calendar was a relatively light modification to the Julian Calendar, created by Julius Ceasar, who predates both Christian Rome and Christianity as a whole. The Gregorian calendar is very much a Roman calendar, with a slight astronomically-inclined update by Gregory to fix leap year drift, 1500 years after Caesar introduced it. That the years are structured around the death of Christ... Eh? Hard to say. I believe that was retro-fitted, and probably was more centered around Augustus's rise to power and Rome moving from a republic to an empire. Or maybe not, I haven't read the relevant wikipedia page for that.
- connorgutman 4y ago
  While the Julian calendar was clearly more secular, The motivation for the adjustments in the Gregorian calendar was to re-align Easter to a historically accurate date and to ensure that people around the world were celebrating it at the same time. While you are definitely right that the Gregorian calendar stems from Roman culture, one cannot deny that its revisions were religiously motivated and funded. Further, that its history and global adoption is intertwined with the spread of Christianity around the world. With its global adoption cultures all around the world have lost their connection to their own calendars and practices. As for the BC/AC part I believe it was always part of the Gregorian calendar? The Julian calendar also used BC/AC. :) EDIT: I meant to say that the Julian calendar did not always use BC/AC but adopted it some time prior to the invention of the Gregorian calendar.
  - Archelaos 4y ago
    > While the Julian calendar was clearly more secular, The motivation for the adjustments in the Gregorian calendar was to re-align Easter to a historically accurate date was in the focus results not only from the fact of it being the most important festival, but from the complexity of its calculation The motivation was to stop the drift of the whole Christian festival calendar towards later and later days in the year. We have some confusion about Easter in contemporary accounts of the reform, but the date of Easter when calculated as the first Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox is independant of any calendar system. This would have implied that all other festivals, based on the Julian Calendar, would have caught up and then overtaken Easter (and caught up again, etc.). > and to ensure that people around the world were celebrating it at the same time. This was definitely not the intention. All people in the Protestant/Catholic/Orthodox "realm" were already using uniformely the Julian Calendar. Differences of the Easter date were due to different algorithms for its calculation. In practice, on the contrary, it led to more differences, because the reform was not accepted for a long time in many parts of the Christian world, even in Catholic ones. > While you are definitely right that the Gregorian calendar stems from Roman culture, one cannot deny that its revisions were religiously motivated and funded. Well, the flaws of the Julian System had a consequence for the Christian festival calendar. But to correct this flaw was also a very reasonable thing to attempt. We are in in age were astronomy (and astrology) become a very popular science. > Further, that its history and global adoption is intertwined with the spread of Christianity around the world. This is not true. For example in what become later the British empire the Julian Calendar was in use until 1752. So for many areas the adoption come long after Christianity took roots. And then it was implemented in areas that never become widely Christian, such as India. > With its global adoption cultures all around the world have lost their connection to their own calendars and practices. Most did not loose connection. It become rather dual use. > As for the BC/AC part I believe it was always part of the Gregorian calendar? The Julian calendar also used BC/AC. :) > EDIT: I meant to say that the Julian calendar did not always use BC/AC but adopted it some time prior to the invention of the Gregorian calendar. "BC/AC" is wrong, it is: "BC/AD" ("Before Christ" and "Anno Domine" = "In the year of the Lord"). The Gregorian Calendar strictly speaking applies only to dates after AD 1583. If you extent it backwards (avoiding the date gap in 1583), it is called the "proleptic Gregorian Calendar". There exist different version of it. For example ISO 8601 uses a proleptic Gregorian Calender with a year zero. Besides first appearances in the late 15th century, Julian Calendar BC dates started to be widely used only much later than the Gregorian reforms. When writing about ancient history, authors used AUC dates ("Ab urbe condita" = "From the founding of the City [Rome]" = 753 BC) or dated from the (suppost) beginning of the world, thus avoiding negative numbers.
- wl 4y ago
  Julius Caesar created the Julian calendar as part of his role as Pontifex Maximus. Popes continue to hold that title today, so the Pope updating the calendar is weirdly appropriate.
  - tsol 4y ago
    (For context I'm not Christian I'm Muslim) Wait is the modern pope an extension of the Christian Roman emperor? I always knew the Vatican was in Rome, but I never knew the reasoning
    - wl 4y ago
      In some sense, the Roman Catholic Church is the last vestige of the Roman empire. The Pope is sometimes floated as someone who might have a claim to the title of Roman Emperor. (Personally, I think the Ottomans have the best claim here, but that's neither here nor there.) But no, at the time Julius Caesar was Pontifex Maximus, he wasn't emperor. It was an elite priesthood office. Hundreds of years later, the Roman Emperors claimed the title. In the 15th century, the Roman Pope started formally claiming it for themselves.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
protomyth 4y ago
Well, birth of Jesus. If you read the Bible you'll notice that the bishop who calculated Christ's birth was off by a number of years.
- bazoom42 4y ago
  There is no right or wrong since nobody actually knows when Jesus was born. The Bible is inconsistent regarding the birth of Jesus, so the calendar had to make a choice.
  - protomyth 4y ago
    Well, there is a correct answer that might be an unknown. If you compare the named rulers death dates with the New Testament there is a very obvious error.
- dotancohen 4y ago
  Today's most secularly accepted value was actually calculated by Isaac Newton.
llanowarelves 4y ago
It is true that Christians integrated some pagan holidays (and in the process Christianity became more Germanicized). Around the millennium. But much before that, Jewish-Christians were not exactly friendly to Romans/"pagans", and vice versa. To put it lightly. Clash of civilizations: completely different values.
- wl 4y ago
  The appropriation of pagan holidays by Christianity is a myth, originally pushed by Protestants to discredit extra-biblical Catholic traditions but later uncritically accepted by atheist activists who didn't know any better. https://historyforatheists.com/2020/12/pagan-christmas/ https://historyforatheists.com/2020/12/pagan-christmas/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJq70tf0AsY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJq70tf0AsY

ysavir 4y ago

The Gregorian calendar was a relatively light modification to the Julian Calendar, created by Julius Ceasar, who predates both Christian Rome and Christianity as a whole. The Gregorian calendar is very much a Roman calendar, with a slight astronomically-inclined update by Gregory to fix leap year drift, 1500 years after Caesar introduced it. That the years are structured around the death of Christ... Eh? Hard to say. I believe that was retro-fitted, and probably was more centered around Augustus's rise to power and Rome moving from a republic to an empire. Or maybe not, I haven't read the relevant wikipedia page for that.

connorgutman 4y ago
While the Julian calendar was clearly more secular, The motivation for the adjustments in the Gregorian calendar was to re-align Easter to a historically accurate date and to ensure that people around the world were celebrating it at the same time. While you are definitely right that the Gregorian calendar stems from Roman culture, one cannot deny that its revisions were religiously motivated and funded. Further, that its history and global adoption is intertwined with the spread of Christianity around the world. With its global adoption cultures all around the world have lost their connection to their own calendars and practices. As for the BC/AC part I believe it was always part of the Gregorian calendar? The Julian calendar also used BC/AC. :) EDIT: I meant to say that the Julian calendar did not always use BC/AC but adopted it some time prior to the invention of the Gregorian calendar.
- Archelaos 4y ago
  > While the Julian calendar was clearly more secular, The motivation for the adjustments in the Gregorian calendar was to re-align Easter to a historically accurate date was in the focus results not only from the fact of it being the most important festival, but from the complexity of its calculation The motivation was to stop the drift of the whole Christian festival calendar towards later and later days in the year. We have some confusion about Easter in contemporary accounts of the reform, but the date of Easter when calculated as the first Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox is independant of any calendar system. This would have implied that all other festivals, based on the Julian Calendar, would have caught up and then overtaken Easter (and caught up again, etc.). > and to ensure that people around the world were celebrating it at the same time. This was definitely not the intention. All people in the Protestant/Catholic/Orthodox "realm" were already using uniformely the Julian Calendar. Differences of the Easter date were due to different algorithms for its calculation. In practice, on the contrary, it led to more differences, because the reform was not accepted for a long time in many parts of the Christian world, even in Catholic ones. > While you are definitely right that the Gregorian calendar stems from Roman culture, one cannot deny that its revisions were religiously motivated and funded. Well, the flaws of the Julian System had a consequence for the Christian festival calendar. But to correct this flaw was also a very reasonable thing to attempt. We are in in age were astronomy (and astrology) become a very popular science. > Further, that its history and global adoption is intertwined with the spread of Christianity around the world. This is not true. For example in what become later the British empire the Julian Calendar was in use until 1752. So for many areas the adoption come long after Christianity took roots. And then it was implemented in areas that never become widely Christian, such as India. > With its global adoption cultures all around the world have lost their connection to their own calendars and practices. Most did not loose connection. It become rather dual use. > As for the BC/AC part I believe it was always part of the Gregorian calendar? The Julian calendar also used BC/AC. :) > EDIT: I meant to say that the Julian calendar did not always use BC/AC but adopted it some time prior to the invention of the Gregorian calendar. "BC/AC" is wrong, it is: "BC/AD" ("Before Christ" and "Anno Domine" = "In the year of the Lord"). The Gregorian Calendar strictly speaking applies only to dates after AD 1583. If you extent it backwards (avoiding the date gap in 1583), it is called the "proleptic Gregorian Calendar". There exist different version of it. For example ISO 8601 uses a proleptic Gregorian Calender with a year zero. Besides first appearances in the late 15th century, Julian Calendar BC dates started to be widely used only much later than the Gregorian reforms. When writing about ancient history, authors used AUC dates ("Ab urbe condita" = "From the founding of the City [Rome]" = 753 BC) or dated from the (suppost) beginning of the world, thus avoiding negative numbers.
wl 4y ago
Julius Caesar created the Julian calendar as part of his role as Pontifex Maximus. Popes continue to hold that title today, so the Pope updating the calendar is weirdly appropriate.
- tsol 4y ago
  (For context I'm not Christian I'm Muslim) Wait is the modern pope an extension of the Christian Roman emperor? I always knew the Vatican was in Rome, but I never knew the reasoning
  - wl 4y ago
    In some sense, the Roman Catholic Church is the last vestige of the Roman empire. The Pope is sometimes floated as someone who might have a claim to the title of Roman Emperor. (Personally, I think the Ottomans have the best claim here, but that's neither here nor there.) But no, at the time Julius Caesar was Pontifex Maximus, he wasn't emperor. It was an elite priesthood office. Hundreds of years later, the Roman Emperors claimed the title. In the 15th century, the Roman Pope started formally claiming it for themselves.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

protomyth 4y ago

Well, birth of Jesus. If you read the Bible you'll notice that the bishop who calculated Christ's birth was off by a number of years.

bazoom42 4y ago
There is no right or wrong since nobody actually knows when Jesus was born. The Bible is inconsistent regarding the birth of Jesus, so the calendar had to make a choice.
- protomyth 4y ago
  Well, there is a correct answer that might be an unknown. If you compare the named rulers death dates with the New Testament there is a very obvious error.
dotancohen 4y ago
Today's most secularly accepted value was actually calculated by Isaac Newton.

llanowarelves 4y ago

It is true that Christians integrated some pagan holidays (and in the process Christianity became more Germanicized). Around the millennium. But much before that, Jewish-Christians were not exactly friendly to Romans/"pagans", and vice versa. To put it lightly. Clash of civilizations: completely different values.

wl 4y ago
The appropriation of pagan holidays by Christianity is a myth, originally pushed by Protestants to discredit extra-biblical Catholic traditions but later uncritically accepted by atheist activists who didn't know any better. https://historyforatheists.com/2020/12/pagan-christmas/ https://historyforatheists.com/2020/12/pagan-christmas/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJq70tf0AsY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJq70tf0AsY