A Brief History of the Western Calendar

Time is an abstract notion. It takes a trained and smart mind to measure and arrange it into a readable calendar. We have been working on the calendar as we know it today for over one thousand years.

Introduction

Albert Einstein once said, "The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once." For the genius physicist, this possibility was feasible, but for ancient people, things happened at different moments. They noticed the sun going down, the star rising, the sun going up again, the birth of a child, the death of an elderly person, the plants growing and cropping, the trees changing from green to yellow, and so on.

People did not invent time; they just ordered it, gave it a name, and tried to arrange their lives around it. So, they made calendars and time machines and kept records of their most important events so that now, we would remember them. And we do, as much as we can.

The Babylonians and their calendar

The first ones to divide a year into 12 months were the Babylonians. They observed the rising of the stars, which happens before dawn. Day after day, during a year, they noticed that the sun passes the same stars at the same time. They divided the sky into 12 constellations and a period in which the sun passed a constellation became a month. The month then was divided into thirty days.

Elizabeth Taylor as Cleopatra

This nice arrangement would have worked well if not for the moon. The moon was a very important deity well venerated in many societies. The moon did not have the same cycle as the sun. We know now that the solar cycle is 30.4 days while the moon cycle is about 29.53 days. So, there is a shift of an average of a day for each successive month. The two celestial calendars needed to be corrected. There were many attempts to align the two cycles. Again, about 499 B.C., the Babylonians came up with a plan. In a period of 19 years, the third, fifth, eighth, eleventh, thirteenth, sixteenth, and nineteenth years had an extra month.

Another idea we inherited from the Babylonians was the division of a month into seven seven-day periods, each ending with an "evil day" to please the goods. The days were named after the seven planets that, unlike the stars, appeared to change position.

The division of a day into 24 hours seems to come from Egypt, but later, the Babylonians started to divide an hour into periods of 30s and 60s, which came to us as seconds and minutes. The Babylonians were very good astronomers, and their knowledge spread around the Orient and Occident, reaching China and India, Greece, and Rome.

The Romans and their calendar

When Julius Caesar changed the Roman calendar in 45 B.C., time in ancient Rome was somewhat out of control. The years before his reform were also called "the years of confusion."

Christopher Plummer as Julius Caesar

At first, Rome had a 10-month calendar that began in March. Numa, the second king of Rome, introduced 2 more months. In time, the Romans produced a 24-year cycle with about 355 days/year and leap years of 277 or 278 days, averaging 365.4 days per year in a cycle. Pretty good. But why would they change it? The reason was political. Numa also appointed the Pontiff Maximus (the great priest) to correct the calendar, adding the intercalary months when needed. The pontiffs were also involved in politics. A magistrate position in Rome lasted 1 year, so the pontiffs could make it shorter or longer, according to their interests, by adding or omitting the intercalary months.

By the time Caesar became dictator in Rome (46 B.C.), the calendar was drifting so far away that the crossing of the Rubicon did not take place on January 10, 49 B.C., but earlier in mid-autumn. He started by lengthening the year 46 B.C., introducing the month that had been missing during the " years of confusion." With the help of astronomer Sosigenes of Alexandria (little is known about him), Caesar regulated the calendar: a year had 365 days, divided into 12 months, with a leap day added every 4 years to the month of February. Every year began in January, the month that magistrates took office in Rome. This is the calendar we are using today.

Later reforms of the calendar

Pope Gregory XIII

The main reform later introduced to the Julian Calendar was made by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582, who decreed that October 5th, 1582, should be October 15th. This 10-day drift was meant to align the calendar year with the tropical year (a period in which the Earth completes an orbit around the Sun).

The reform also slightly corrects the leap years and the time we celebrate Easter.

    The name of the days

•             Sunday - sun's day (Latin Domenica - the day of the Lord)

•             Monday - moon's day (Italian - lunedi - they of the Moon)

•             Tuesday - the day of the Nordic warrior god Tyr (Italian - martedi - Mars' day)

•             Wednesday - the day of the god Odin (Italian - mercoledi - Mercury's day)

•             Thursday - the day of the god Thor (Italian - jovedy - Jupiter's day)

•             Friday - the day of the wife of Odin, goddess Frigg (Italian - venerdi - Venus' day)

•             Saturday - Saturn's day (Italian Sabato - from Jewish Shabbat, the seventh day)

Also from Romans we inherited the name of the months:

1.            January - from Ianus, the god of gates, beginnings and endings

2.            February - from the roman festival of Februa (purification) which took place on February 15th

3.            March - from Mars, the god of war

4.            April - from the Latin term "aperire" that means "to open"

5.            May - from Maia, the Greek goddess of fertility

6.            June - from goddess Juno, the wife of Jupiter

7.            July - from the month when Julius Caesar was born

8.            August - in the honor of emperor Augustus

9.            September - from "septem", that means "seven" because originally it was the seventh month of the year

10.          October - originally the eighth month of the year

11.          November - originally the ninth month of the year

12.          December - originally the tenth month of the year

Year 0 for

•             Christians - year 0 the birth of Jesus (year 4 BC)

•             Romans - 753 BC, foundation of Rome

•             Greeks - 776 BC, the first Olympiads

•             Egyptians - 2773 BC, the introduction of the calendar

•             Chinese - 2637 BC, not sure but this is the year for the first Chinese calendar

•             Jewish - 3761 BC, the date of Creation Muslims - 622 AD, Hegira

Note: I previously published this article in a website called Hubpages. As the website changed its format, I decided to take it down and put it on my own blog. In the future, there would be other articles coming here. Stay tuned. 

On making tools: what would mankind be without tools?

Just look around you and try to discover something that is not—or has not been produced without—a tool. There is the tree, a cloud, the bird...But everything else is or requires a tool: the house you live in, the car you drive, the food you eat, the work you do, and so on.


So, I was just wondering, what would mankind be without tools?
When did the first tool enter our lives?

Yes, we know that about the Stone Age, but it was such a big period of time. The Stone Age covers a little less than 3 million years! Its beginning has been dated back 2.9 million years, and it ended about 5.000 years ago.

Humans have created tools that we regard as “primitive” today. They would have been like the first computers that took up a whole room, compared to a tablet, or like the first chubby mobile phones. But we know that without these beginnings, we wouldn't have tablets or smartphones, right?

So, someone 3 million years ago started the trend, and we follow it till today.
I was trying to imagine how they did it. How a person, if I can say so, or a hominid, more likely a Homo Habilis, have come up with the idea of creating a tool? 

The first tools were made out of stones. You think is easy to pick up a stone and smash a coconut and drink its milk. Then do it again and again, and there you go, you have a tool. But aren't monkeys doing the same thing and even more, and yet they did not pass the picking stage? So, it must be more. It must be that primordial thought that ran through that stone-agers mind.  “What if?” -  they must have said and experimented with it for as long as they needed it. They were not in any hurry. In less than 3 million years, they transformed a river stone into a deadly weapon.

Here is a list of tool-producing techniques from the Paleolithic period in chronological order:
1. Oldowan technique - from river stones,  stones have one sharp edge or one sharp point.

2. Acheulean technique - a sharp edge obtained by chipping a stone to make concave surfaces, known as biface or hand axe.

3. The lithic reduction process discovered by Neanderthals, or Levallois technique - all edges sharp, also smaller stone tools

4. Aurignacian technique - produced sharp, long stone tools intended to be blades (for killing?).

5. Microlithic technique - produced small sharp core stones that were used to be attached to a spear, or later as arrow points.

From this point, humans discovered metals, and the rest is history. So, are we smarter than an Australopithecus? Maybe. But we definitely have more knowledge that we inherited from our stone-age ancestors.

Use and abuse; the status of a woman in a noble house

Like today, Middle Ages society was governed by men. And just like today, those brave, smart, and powerful men were also insecure. Their problem was adultery. They judged everybody in accordance with their own behavior. So, if they were infidels to their wives, they assumed the wives did the same.


This is a painting by Vasily Polenov that I found on Wikipedia.
 It represents a father bringing his daughter to his lord.
Look at the posture of the lord...
It looks like he is counting his sheep!

If the household of ordinary people was a little more relaxed, being a matter of economy involved (work and feed the family), the nobles’ households were very strict regarding the women physical freedom. Maybe those restrictions were coming via church, were the men were in power over “weaker souls” that could be easier seduced by other men (that could have been husbands too) and fall into sin. Women were closely watched for any sign of “deviant” behavior. If caught, or even suspected, they risk their lives. Here is what
we read in A History of Private Life:

“The first duty of the head of household was to watch over, punish, and if necessary kill his wife, sister and daughters as well as the widows and orphans of his brothers, cousins and vassals.Since females were dangerous, patriarchal power over them was reinforced. They were kept under lock and key in the most isolated part of the house: the chamber des dames (the room of the ladies, my translation from french) was not a place for seduction or amusement but a kind of prison, in which women were incarcerated because men fear them” (A History of Private Life; II, Revelation of the Medieval World; George Duby; 1988, Harvard College; p.77).

But why were women so feared? Well, for once, they were the link to an alliance. Most of the time, men did not marry a woman because they loved her or got along very well. It was because of who her daddy was. The marriages were negotiated. The more powerful the dad, the more desired the daughter.
 
Then, men had to keep that alliance alive. Even in the event of the death of the wife, if the death occurred because of infidelity, then the man risked being disgraced by his father-in-law, not speaking about the shame that came with it.
Also, some women were  feared because of what secrets they may have had, what
magical tricks they may have learned or for the seduction they could have pursued upon men.

And maybe some fears were legitimate because society devalued women, which, in return, were abused ...by men.

But unlike in medieval times, today, women have a better life (or do they?).

The life of men and women in the Neolithic village of Abu Hureyra

Abu Hureyra is a place now buried under Lake Assad in Syria. Before the waters invaded the place, there was a mound, and, as usual, where there is a mound, there is digging; a team of archeologists came to unearth the remains of a Neolithic village. 

After digging, washing, brushing, cleaning, classifying, and annalizing, they came to some conclusions about how people lived in the Neolithic, especially in the period when they settled to live in one place, cultivating plants and raising livestock versus migrating from place to place, following the animal herds and crop seasons. 

According to the book The Early Human World by Peter Robertshaw and Jill Rubalcaba, which follows the discoveries at Abu Hureyra, the life of Neolithic people was very hard: hours and hours of long physical work, repetitive (and boring, according to modern standards) daily jobs, and enduring, alienating illnesses. 

Archeologists' conclusions after digging and analyzing the site suggest a heartbreaking, hard-to-believe picture of a small society trying to survive by farming and raising sheep and goats. 

Archeologists have uncovered seeds of wheat and barley and the remains of sheep, goats, pigs, and cattle. 

The Neolithic villagers used to carry their crop from the field to their houses on their heads, so the neck bones grew larger. Also, their upper arms got stronger from heavy lifting, causing the bones to bulge. 

They used to grind the grains between two rocks for hours, with their toes curled under their feet until their big toe bones would wear off. They often used their teeth as tools. The archaeologists think they held canes so they could have free hands for other tasks and/or chewed plants to make strings. They used their teeth so much that they carved deep grooves, which must have hurt a lot since they were down to the roots. 

One particular bone deformity speaks about their health. The eye sockets were pitted, and this condition was attributed to the parasites eroding the bone. 

The book mentioned above is full of surprises about the life of Neolithic men and women. The picture is often very different than what we may think after learning from our textbooks. The style is vivid and entertaining. I find it fascinating.  

How did early Franks wear their hair

Clovis, second king of France (481-511).

The hair is one part of the human body that has received the most attention throughout history.
Even today, grooming our hair is a daily routine, taking anywhere from one minute to over an hour, depending on how much emphasis one puts on it.

From ancient Egyptians, who used wigs and fake beards, to 18th-century nobilities, who created skyscraping powdered wigs, the decoration of the head was beyond anyone’s imagination.

In this post, I will tell you about the hairstyle of early Franks.

Let’s start with a short description of the Frank men by  Sidoine Apollinaire (a gallo-roman writer who lived between 430 and 486 A.D.):

“They tied up their flexen or light-brown hair above their foreheads, into a kind of tuft, and then made it fall behind the head like a horse’s tail. The face was clean shaved, with the exception of two long mustaches” (Medieval Life, Paul Lacroix, Arcturus Publishing Ltd, 2011, p. 514). 

So, they used to make what we now call a ponytail on top of their heads and pair it with mustaches. However, they did not cut their hair; the longer the hair, the wealthier the person. Accordingly, the length of the hair was an indicator of one’s social status.

The kings and other nobles of the Franks wore their hair parted in the middle and falling over the shoulders, sometimes sprinkled with gold dust. The hair was plaited with bands sewn with precious metals and stones.

Franks loved and treasured their hair so much that they swear on it or offer it as a symbol of trust, politeness, and appreciation.

On the other side, touching someone’s hair with a razor was an insult and cutting it was a punishment.

For a glimpse into fashion in history READ THIS:

The Complete History of Costume and Fashion from Ancient Egypt to Present Days

By Bronwyn Cosgrave

Table of Content:

Introduction

The Ancient Egypt: The first fashion style

Crete: Minoan splendor

Ancient Greece: Classical Elegance

Ancient Rome: Roman Extravagance

The Byzantine Period: Lavish Imperialism

The Middle Ages: Medieval Europe

The Renaissance: Early Renaissance Style

Baroque Period: The Age of French Dominance

Eighteenth Century: The Rococo

Nineteenth Century: The Birth of the Dandy

Twentieth Century: The Age of Diversity

Index

Bibliography

Acknowledgments

256 p

First published in Great Britain in 2000, by Hamlyn, a division of Octopus Publishing Group Limited

My Notes:

• There are beautiful pictures of historical sources, sometimes 2 per page, and sometimes one picture covers the whole page.
• There are not too many details about costumes or ornaments, just basic information and description, enough for a nonprofessional reader.
• As a plus, the book offers a short overview of the historical period covered in every chapter, as well as an overview of the status of women. 
• It is very fun to stroll through fashion from ancient Egyptians, with their simple wrap-up loin clothes, through the Middle Ages with its awkward poulains (the long pointy shoes), through the baroque with the sophisticated wigs, and finally, arriving at our days with the emancipation of the woman body, almost a 360-degree turn, to the simplicity of the first fashion styles.

How did a girl got married in the Middle Ages

Marriage was probably the worst thing that could happen to women in the past till at least two centuries ago. During the late Middle Ages and Renaissance, or even in the modern centuries, marriage was often a reason for crying and grief. Until early in the 20th century in some countries, there was a great sobbing coming from the bride on the day of her wedding.

Why was marriage so bad?
Because:

• ninety percent of the time, there was no love involved (the percent represents my personal estimate);
• because the husband basically owned the wife, and he had the right to apply coercions if he felt it was right; in other words, he could beat up his wife at will;
• because the wife couldn't get a divorce;
• because a woman had no right whatsoever unless she was rich and there was money involved.

Girl inspecting a Hope Chest. 1929, author Poul Friis Nybo.
U.S. public domain
from Wiki Commons

So, how did the couples get married?
First, marriages were based on interests and wealth. If a woman owned some land, cattle, or goods to put her above the peasant class, she could expect a husband with a similar status or wealth. But if she were Cinderella with a golden heart and a super-model overall appearance but was too poor, her parents may give her to an old, rich, and mean bachelor for a few bucks. That’s bad, to begin with!

Second, somebody else was choosing her husband, usually her parents, not because they didn’t love their daughter but because they followed the local traditions, like everybody. They would choose whatever was best for her and for them from among the suitors. Sometimes, midwives paired a bride with a groom and negotiated a contract. Those middle persons (or shall I call them marriage agents?) would come to the bride’s house to propose a groom, and then they would say what was expected of the bride to bring into the marriage. She’ll bring what is called a dowry, often composed of household items and personal pieces of clothing. Wealthy families would even give land, money, cattle, and other goods, including real estate, especially if they had little or no pretenders.


Third, once married, the woman stayed married. No way around it. If she couldn’t take it anymore, the only option was to run away, hoping that the mean husband wouldn’t find her and bring you back, in which case she not only endured increased beating from her significant other but public opprobrium as well. When a girl married, she had to move to her husband’s house. Usually, he was still living with his parents, grandparents, siblings, aunts, uncles, and other relatives. There was a whole new world, waiting for the new wife to start cooking, cleaning, working the farm, taking care of the kids, and performing other tasks that were assigned by her mother-in-law.

Maybe the worst thing was that the boy she liked was still in the village and married to someone else he didn’t care about.

So, was there a wedding?
When their kids got married, most wealthy families put up a public announcement and a small party not to celebrate the event but to show off their social status. Also, much thought was put into the gifts given to the newlyweds by their godparents or local lord protector. However, marriage into a poor family often went quiet, the event being reported only to the church, which kept a record, and to close relatives. In some cases, not even the church knew. It wasn’t until the Reformation that the church started to ask for a formal ceremony in front of a minister.

Then, after the wedding, what?
Simple! The woman took her dowry chest and moved away from home. From now on, she was on her own. If she made it through the marriage, as most couples did, then she did the same for her children as her parents had done for her. And the cycle started over again—and it didn’t stop until the 20th century!