Herodotus’passage). Many believed that the Egyptian calendar was regulated
by the sun;^5 only the more astronomically inclined recognized that the Egyp-
tian calendar was regulated neither by the moon nor by the sun, as it was
constantly falling behind the seasons.^6
But the reason why the Egyptian calendar spread and took over the ancient
world was not that Greek writers had praised it; in actual fact, of all peoples in
Antiquity, the Greeks probably remained the most resistant to its adoption.
Nor can one assume that the Egyptian calendar was attractive because of its
inherent simplicity. To some extent, the notion that the Egyptian calendar was
simple and easy to use is a modern misconception, based on the modern
experience of the Gregorian calendar; but as will be argued further on in this
chapter, ancient perspectives may have been quite different. The displacement
of other calendars in the Mediterranean and the Near East in favour of the
Egyptian calendar or its derivatives will be discussed in the next chapter, but it
is unlikely to have been due to belief in the intrinsic superiority of the Egyptian
calendar.
The Egyptian calendar is so simple and non-problematic that it would
appear, atfirst sight, not to demand any discussion or analysis. Yet for a
number of reasons, it has been the focus of considerable debate among
Egyptologists.^7 Above all, there is the problem of the evidence. The earliest
description we have of the Egyptian calendar is in Herodotus, an external and
relatively late source (cited above); descriptions of this kind appear only later
in indigenous Egyptian sources. The calendar can be identified in much earlier
Egyptian texts, but the evidence is sporadic and usually open to more than one
interpretation. The first section of this chapter will address some of the
debated issues, including the origins of the Egyptian calendar, and how
Egyptian society accommodated itself to a calendar that was slowly drifting
from the seasons: in particular, whether there was a‘Sothic calendar’(an
alternative calendar that remained stable in relation to the seasons), and
how the decree of Canopus should be interpreted. The second section of this
chapter will turn to the Egyptian lunar calendar—an alternative, cultic calen-
dar that appears to have regulated the organization of priesthoods and
(^5) Diodorus Siculus loc. cit.; Strabo 17. 1. 29, 46. Strabo’s explanation of the sixth epagomenal
day makes it clear that he is referring to the Alexandrian calendar, which was instituted by the
time he was writing, even though in thefirst passage he claims, perhaps not unreasonably, that
the year length of 365¼was known to Egyptian priests already in the period of Plato and
Eudoxus. The Alexandrian year length is much closer to the solar year than the 365 days of the
pre-Roman Egyptian calendar, but I suspect Strabo would have also characterized the latter as
solar.Whether Diodorus is referring to the Alexandrian calendar or the pre-Roman Egyptian
calendar is more ambiguous: see above, n. 3.
(^6) Geminus,Elem. Astr.8. 16–25 (Aujac 1975. 51–2).
(^7) The literature is abundant, and stretches right back to 19th-c. scholarship. For various
summaries, see Parker (1950) and Clagett (1989–99) ii. The most important single contribution
to this subject was probably made by Parker, although he certainly did not have thefinal word.
The Egyptian Calendar 127