Length of the Gregorian Year being 365d. 5h. 49m. 12s. True length of the Solar Year being 365d. 5h. 48m. 51s. 20 S. Therefore the Gregorian Year is too long by An excess which will not amount to one day in 4500 years. If the insertion of a day be omitted each 4000th year— Length of year according to cycle of 4000 years365d. 5h. 48m. 50s. which is too short by one second-a deficiency which will not amount to a day in 70,000 years. 23. We may now say a few words with regard to the longer divisions of time, the 'Lustrum' and the ' 'Saeculum.' The word 'Lustrum' (see p. 331), derived from 'luo,' signified properly the expiatory sacrifice offered up for the sins of the whole people by the Censors at the end of every five years, the period during which these magistrates originally held office. Hence 'lustrum' was used to denote 'a space of five years,' and the Censors in performing the sacrifice were said, 'condere lustrum,' to bring the 'lustrum' to a close. Varro, in explaining the term, derives it from 'luere,' in the sense of 'to pay'— 'Lustrum nominatum tempus quinquennale a luendo, id est, solvendo, quod quinto quoque anno vectigalia et ultro tributa per censores persolvebantur' L. L. 6. 2. It is to be observed here that 'quinto quoque anno,' according to the Roman method of computation, might mean 'every fourth year,' and 'quinquennale tempus,' a term of 'four years,' just as Cicero (De Orat. 3. 32) calls the Olympic games 'maxima illa quinquennalis celebritas ludorum;' but since we know from other sources that the Censors originally held office for five years, and that the taxes were farmed out upon five years' leases, the interpretation of the above passage is not open to doubt. We may add, that wherever the word 'lustrum' occurs in the older writers, it is always in connection with the duties of the Censors. When we come down to the age of Ovid, a confusion seems to have arisen, and the meaning of 'lustrum' was no longer definite; in Amor. 3. 6, 27 'Nondum Troia fuit lustris obsessa duobus,' it unquestionably stands for five years, and also in Fast. 3. 119, where the ten-month year of Romulus is described, 'Ergo animi indociles et adhuc ratione carentes, i.e. the 'lustra' were too short by ten months. But with singular inconsistency, a few lines farther on (v. 165), where he is explaining the Julian Year, and the intercalation of the 'Dies Bissextus,' 'Hic anni modus est. In lustrum accedere debet, Quae consummatur partibus una dies,' 'lustrum' must as certainly denote 'four' years. Again in Trist. 4. 10, 96, compared with the E. ex P. 4. 6, 5, (see p. 73, and notes, p. 331,) we see the Roman 'Lustrum' identified with the Grecian Olympiad, each being supposed equal to five years. As we come down lower, Pliny twice in one chapter (H. N. 2. 47) calls the four-year cycle of the Julian year a lustrum:' we find in inscriptions the intervals between the successive exhibitions of the Capitoline games instituted by Domitian, and celebrated every four years, designated as 'lustra1;' and in the third century the original force of the term seems to have been quite forgotten, for Censorinus, in defining the 'Lustrum' or 'Annus Magnus,' seems to be quite ignorant that it ever did differ from the Olympiad, or denote any period but four years. This uncertainty may probably be traced to the irregularity with which the sacrifice of the 'lustrum' was performed. It was omitted sometimes from superstitious motives, as when we read in Livy 3. 22 'Census actus est eo anno (457 B.C.), lustrum propter Capitolium captum, consulem occisum, condi religiosum fuit,' and often from other causes, for upon looking over the Fasti Capitolini, in which the Censors are registered, and the letters L. F. attached to the names of those who completed this rite, we shall find that although the usual interval is five years, yet not unfrequently six and seven were allowed to elapse, while occasionally it was repeated after four only. These facts seem to account for the inconsistencies of the later Roman writers, without going so far as Ideler, who maintains that 'Lustrum' never was used for a fixed space of time. 24. The duration of the 'Saeculum' was a theme of controversy among the Romans themselves in the days of Augustus. The historians and antiquaries seem all to have agreed that the 'Saeculum' was a period of 100 years, while the 'Quindecimviri,' the priests to whom was intrusted the custody of the Sibyiline books, reposing, it would seem, upon the testimony of their sacred registers, asserted that 110 years 1 Gruter. C. I. 332. 3, Censorin. 18. was the interval at which the solemn 'ludi saeculares,' which marked the close of each 'saeculum,' had ever been and ought to be celebrated. The 'locus classicus' on this subject is in Censorinus 17. 'Romanorum autem saecula quidam ludis saecularibus putant distingui. Cui rei fides si certa est, modus Romani saeculi est incertus. Temporum enim intervalla, quibus ludi isti debeant referri, non modo quanta fuerint retro, ignoratur, sed ne quanta quidem esse debeant, scitur. Nam ita institutum esse, ut centesimo quoque anno fierent, id, cum Antias aliique historici auctores sunt, tum Varro de Scenicis Originibus libro primo ita scriptum reliquit. Cum multa portenta fierent, et murus ac turris, quae sunt intra portam Collinam et Esquilinam, de caelo essent tacta, et ideo libros Sibyllinos X-viri adissent, renuntiarunt, uti Diti patri et Proserpinae ludi Terentini in Campo Martio fierent, et hostiae furvae immolarentur, utique ludi centesimo quoque anno fierent. Item T. Livius libro CXXXVI. Eodem anno ludos saeculares Caesar ingenti adparatu fecit; quos centesimo quoque anno (is enim terminus saeculi) fieri mos. At contra, ut decimo centesimoque anno repetantur, tam Commentarii quindecimvirorum, quam D. Augusti edicta testari videntur. Adeo ut Horatius Flaccus in carmine, quod saecularibus ludis cantatum est, id tempus hoc modo designaverit, Certus undenos decies per annos Nocte frequentes.' The passages from Antias, Livy, and Varro, quoted above, are extracted from lost works, but a precise testimony of the last is to be found in a treatise still extant. 'Saeclum spatium annorum centum vocamus' Varro L. L. 6. 2, to which add Festus, Saeculares Ludi apud Romanos post centum annos fiebant quia saeculum in centum annos extendi existimabant.' Censorinus has preserved the conflicting statements with regard to the actual celebration of these games from the time of their institution, and his dates are all fixed by the Consuls in office at the time. They are as follows: The first Secular games were celebrated according to :{ Valerius Antias, A.U.C. 245 ries of the XV-viri 298 The seventh by Domitian, A.U.C. 737 or B. C. 17 A.U.C. 800 or A.D. 47 A.U.C. 841 or A.D. 88 The eighth by Sept. & M.A.Antoninus, A. U. C. 957 or A.D.204 To attempt to discover the causes which led to this strange disagreement would be absolute waste of time. We can scarcely hesitate to believe that the computations of the XV-viri were trimmed to serve an end; but it is remarkable that the period chosen by Augustus does not absolutely agree with their views, since the fifth games ought to have been held A. U.C. 738, and not 737, as they really were. 25. We may conclude with a few words upon what has been termed the 'Astronomical Portion' of Ovid's Fasti. A nation like the Greeks, whose delightful climate permitted them to watch their flocks by night in the open air during a considerable part of the year, could not fail to gaze with attention on the starry firmament, and to remark that certain fixed stars appeared and disappeared in regular succession, as the sun passed through the different stages of his annual career. Accordingly we find, that as early as the time of Hesiod, the changes of the seasons, and the more important operations of agriculture, were fixed with reference to the risings and settings of Orion, the Pleiades, the Hyades, Arcturus, and Sirius. Such observations were in the first instance extremely rude; but after Thales had turned the attention of his countrymen to scientific astronomy, these celestial phenomena were determined with great care and accuracy; tables were drawn up in which the risings and settings of the more brilliant stars, with reference to the sun, were fully detailed, together with such notices touching the winds and weather to be expected at the different epochs, as experience suggested. Copies were engraved on stone or brass, and being nailed or hung up in the market-places of large towns and other places of public resort, received the name of παραπήγματα. Two catalogues of this description have been preserved, which are valuable, inasmuch as they for the most part quote the authority of the early Greek astronomers, Meton, Euctemon, Eudoxus, Calippus, &c. for their statements. The one was drawn up by Geminus of Rhodes (fl. 80 B.C.), a contemporary of Sulla and Cicero, the other by the famous Ptolemy (A.D. 140). In the former the risings and settings of the stars are fixed accordingly to the passage of the sun through the signs of the Zodiac; in the latter they were ranged under the months and years of the Julian Calendar. The practice commenced by Hesiod was followed by subsequent writers upon rural economy, and we accordingly find that all the precepts in Virgil, Columella, and Pliny are delivered with reference to the risings and settings of the stars, forming a complete 'Kalendarium Rusticum.' Ovid has combined the Fasti of the city with these Rural Almanacs, and has thus gained an opportunity of enlivening his poem by recounting the various myths attached to the constellations'. The early Grecian parapegmata were undoubtedly constructed from actual observation in the countries where they were first exhibited, and must therefore have completely answered the purpose for which they were intended. But this does not by any means hold good of the corresponding compilations of the Romans, who, being little versed in astronomy themselves, copied blindly from others without knowledge or discrimination. It is essentially necessary to attend to two facts:— i. The time of the risings and settings of the fixed stars varies for the same place at different epochs. Thus the Pleiades which at Rome rose along with the sun on the 16th of April, 44 B.C., rose with the sun at Rome several days earlier in the age of Meton, and do not now rise with the sun at Rome until several days later. This is caused by the Precession of the Equinoxes. ii. The time of the risings and settings of the fixed stars is different on the same day in places whose latitude is different. 1 It would appear that Caesar, when he reconstructed the Fasti of Rome, included the risings and settings of the stars, since Pliny frequently quotes the authority of Caesar for his statements on these points. In this case the Fasti of Ovid may be considered as a commentary upon the Almanac in common use. |