Calendars provide some of the most obvious examples of the lasting influence that innovations from the ancient and medieval period continue to have on our everyday lives. However, many questions on their history remain to be answered. In the course of diligently and persuasively addressing some of them, the authors in this volume touch upon topics that might be of interest to readers of this journal who would not expect so in view of the title: for example, the relations between imperial Rome and its Eastern provinces or routes of transmission of Roman knowledge to the early medieval West.
Nevertheless, this book is not intended to be an easily readable introduction or an overview making calendrical history accessible to a broader audience (while the beautiful cover and illustrations, the subtitle and the detailed table of contents might convey that impression). There are, indeed, many things it is not intended to be, as Stern discusses in the introduction. It is not a multi-authored monograph; thus, it is neither comprehensive nor always consistent (even in the way in which the term ‘calendar’ is used). It somehow is an essential output of Stern's European Research Council project ‘Calendars in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages: Standardization and Fixation’ (London), but the contributors are not entirely identical with the core team of the project. It is worth pointing out the excellent website of this project, where much further information can be found, for example recordings of the conference ‘Calendars in Antiquity and the Middle Ages’ (3–5/7/2017, University College London; https://www.ucl.ac.uk/hebrew-jewish/research/research-projects/calendars-late-antiquity-and-middle-ages-standardization-and-fixation-7). Stern stresses that the book should not be regarded as conference proceedings, and especially not as a random collection, pointing to a common statement: calendars are made by humans. Their origins are not only to be sought in primordial times; throughout history, changes that prove significant in distant retrospect qualify as ‘origins’.
The volume is looking at some such origins in antiquity and the Middle Ages, mostly focusing on questions that have not been studied for a long time or in detail. The scope, from ancient Rome to the early modern Jewish world, from Ireland to Persia, is appropriate against this background, though difficult to put into concise words. A placeholder ‘n’ still to be found on the back of the book is more indicative of this problem than of the general level of proofreading. In what follows I will place more emphasis on the chapters falling more clearly within the scope of this journal.
The book is published in the renowned series Time, Astronomy, and Calendars, likewise edited by Stern (in collaboration with C. Burnett). If this allowed for some creative leeway, it was certainly not used at the expense of academic rigour, but, to the contrary, for some unusually long chapters and footnotes, the eschewal of a sweeping common narrative and caution regarding some results. While this is to be commended, the book could have been made more accessible by adding abstracts, especially as the main conclusions are not easy to find in all chapters.
In Chapter 1 I. Bultrighini and Stern investigate the origins of the seven-day week being used for dating purposes. The first sources the authors could find in which the week is clearly structured into individual days, numbered in relation to the Sabbath, date to the second century bce (the Dead Sea Scrolls with the Qumran calendars). But they regard these sources as theoretical, not as evidence of practical use. Such evidence they can find in the first century ce in Judaea, but more clearly in Italy: the (astrological) Roman planetary week, which was early on equated to the Jewish week. They attribute standardisation and diffusion in the following centuries to Christianisation and the increased cultural uniformity of the Empire. With 70 pages, this is the longest chapter, and there are many more issues addressed. Characteristically for the entire book, this is partly because numerous sources are discussed in a well-structured manner (from the Hebrew Bible to a law issued by Constantine in 321 ce, via Ptolemaic papyri, Judaean ostraca, Aramaic tombstones, Tibullus, a graffito from Pompeii etc.). Though the chapter is a long read, its thoroughness makes it an immensely useful reference for researchers.
Bultrighini also authors Chapter 2, in which she looks at the relationship of the Julian calendar and local calendars of the Greek East. Her central sources are the Hemerologia tables, early medieval manuscripts listing the days of the months from various calendars in relation to the Roman ones, which have been edited and compared to further sources by W. Kubitschek (Kalenderbücher [1915]). Bultrighini lists and uses 104 inscriptions and documents that were not yet known to Kubitschek. She cannot narrow down the date of the composition of the Hemerologia, but argues that comparable tables might have been used from the early imperial period onwards and that local calendars were adapted early to the structure and length of the Julian year. This middle way is part of the reason why Bultrighini does not assume that the Romans tried to impose their calendar on the East. She suggests the calendrical adaptations and adoptions were gestures of loyalty (furthered by the worship of Julius Caesar and Augustus) and a matter of administrative convenience.
Chapter 3 is written by I. Warntjes, who does not belong to Stern's ERC project. His contribution is part of his wider research on the impact of Irish computus (the calendrical science centred around the reckoning of Easter) on Carolingian Europe. Here, he focuses on the renascence of ‘calendars’ as a written genre in the early medieval Latin West. A. Borst, who made several crucial contributions to the study of such calendars (e.g. Reichskalender [2001]), defined them as including liturgical, computistical and astronomical information. Warntjes contests this and regards only computistical information as essential. In addition, he questions the common narrative (likewise championed by Borst, among others), according to which the Frankish calendars have a late antique prototype that was received via Northumbria from (papal) Rome in the eighth century. Warntjes argues that no Roman model was required, but computists were able to create the given calendars independently. He asserts that a plethora of features from one of the very few extant eighth-century calendars (Zürich, ZB Rhen. 30, 166v–169v) is related to Irish computistics (especially the Computus Einsidlensis, Einsiedeln, SB 321, 82–125), not to those of the Northumbrian Bede. This is the only chapter that focuses on disputing a well-trodden path instead of exploring uncharted territory.
In Chapter 4 F. de Blois looks for the origin of the Islamic calendar, with its peculiar movements of lunar months through the solar year. He argues that this was not yet the case in the ancient Arab calendar owing to the regular intercalation of months and that the months were in their original position in the year when the Prophet fled to Medina. While de Blois admits that this might be a coincidental recurrence, he regards it as much more likely that Muḥammad, whom he likens to Julius Caesar, abolished the intercalations. This would confirm the controversial Islamic narrative and chronology. De Blois expressively highlights that his point remains a mere hypothesis.
In Chapter 5 J. Thomann, the second guest contributor, discusses why the Jalālī calendar from 1079 ce was in use simultaneously with other calendars. His explanation draws on the concept of ‘civil time’ (simple calendars, like the older Persian calendar of 365 days per year without intercalations, being used for worldly purposes), ‘ritual time’ (the Islamic calendar for religious purposes) and ‘cosmic time’ (the Jalālī calendar, with intercalations based on the Julian calendar, for astrology). Editions and translations of the relevant Arabic, Persian and Turkish sources are made accessible in the appendix.
Chapter 6, by N. Vidro, addresses several questions regarding the Jewish 247-year cycle. According to her, this cycle was invented by a Babylonian scholar in the tenth century ce and became very popular throughout the Jewish world as a simpler alternative to the standard Rabbinic reckoning, which accordingly was too complicated for some communities. Even though this cycle was partly inaccurate, Vidro cannot find any festivals celebrated on different dates and therefore assumes that there was sufficient awareness of the deficiencies. Vidro's study is based on a large corpus of European and Middle Eastern manuscripts containing or discussing the 247-year cycle and calendars with mistakes due to its use.
Only in this last chapter the terms molad and moladot, featuring repeatedly and rather explained in passing, made me look, in vain, for a glossary. A glossary of key terms would have helped readers struggling with the technical contents and would have been an interesting general tool for experts. Of course, this would have been the icing on the cake rather than something to be expected. Most terms are explained well when first introduced, and there is an index that can be used to find their first mention. The index is neatly arranged and divided into one for calendars and related terms, and a general index (the latter, unsurprisingly, also contains many terms related to calendars). However, one should not expect an exhaustive list. For instance, the short list of ‘Month Names’ is obviously just a select sample of presumably particularly important months, though the criteria for the choice are not revealed. One will not only look in vain for ‘January’ (50 times in the PDF that has been kindly provided to me in addition to the hard copy), but even for Nisan (the first month of the Jewish calendar, also crucial for the development of the Christian Easter reckoning; found 17 times). For the listed month names the numbers, in like manner, do not point to all occurrences. Some readers might therefore prefer the PDF version to the high-quality hard copy.
The terse index, however, does not compare to the impressive appendices to several chapters, a true gift to future researchers, providing lists, introductions, editions and translations of sources. In chapters without such an appendix, similar overviews of sources can be found in the main texts.
At a price of €134 there will probably be few individual readers to buy this book. It is, therefore, to be hoped that many libraries will make it easily accessible. Providing solid and helpful foundations for further research, the chapters have the potential of someday being regarded as ‘origins’ of a better understanding of the making of calendars, and of the people who made them.
