as a purely scientific discipline is thus not only reductionist but also, in most
cases, misplaced.
The notion of progress in the history of calendars, which scientific reduc-
tionism implicitly assumes, depends in turn on another common misconcep-
tion, that theflexible and irregular calendars of early Antiquity were inferior
to, andless desirable than, thefixed and regular calendar schemes thatlater
replaced them.It is on this basis, for example, that JuliusCaesar’s reform of
the Roman calendar in 46BCEis generally accepted by modern scholars as a
necessity in no need of justification—an assumption thatIshallquestion in
Ch. 4. Fixed calendars such as the Julian calendar did offer the undeniable
advantage of stability and predictability, which facilitatedlong-term planning
in political, economic, and possibly other spheres; but theflexibility of earlier
calendars had certain advantages which must be given equalconsideration.
For example,flexiblelunar calendars, if based on astronomicalobservations
(like the Babylonian calendar), could keep a closer track of the new moon and
the seasons, whereas mostfixed calendar schemes had to compromise on
astronomicalaccuracy and incurlong-term discrepancies (even the Babylo-
nian 19 - year cycle, for allits accuracy, deviates from the seasons at a rate of
about one day in 200 years).
Flexiblecalendars, such as the Roman calendar beforeCaesar’s reform, also
had significant politicaladvantages, because they could be used by political
rulers as means of socialcontrol—often even for the public good. Itis
debatable, indeed, whether predictability in calendars should be regarded as
a superior virtue.We treat it as a virtue because in societies dominated by the
fixed, Gregorian calendar, predictability is what we have come to expect of
calendars.It is difficult for us to imagine how aflexiblecalendar could
function in the modern world, and how modern economies could function
with months and years of unpredictablelengths.However, it must be recog-
nized that even in the modern world, not everything is predictable or in need
of predictability: for example, interest rates, share prices, precious metaland
oilprices, and currency exchange rates are not only unpredictable but also
deliberately kept unpredictable, out of concern that otherwise world econo-
mies would be adversely stifled. Far from being a hindrance, theflexibility and
unpredictability of the modern economy are what give it its vitaldynamism.
The calendar, in modern society, happens not to be one of its dynamic,
unpredictable variables, but there is no reason in theory why it could not be
so. The assumption thatflexible, unpredictablecalendars are socially and
culturally inferior tofixed calendar schemes is onlyareflection of modern
prejudice. The cities of the Greek peninsula whereflexiblecalendars were
retained were noless‘civilized’than the rest of the Roman Empire; theflexible,
irregular calendars that dominated the ancient world untilaround 500 BCE
(with the only exclusion of Egypt) were not intrinsically inferior to thefixed
schemes that were generally adoptedlater.
Introduction 15