1 October, 331 BC

[marcus]

Dear all,

I am reminded by RogueClassicism that today is perhaps the anniversary of the Battle of Gaugamela.

ATB

[Taphoi]

Sadly, no. Not if you mean the day on which the battle occurred a whole number of years ago, which is what people usually think they mean. However, let's all celebrate the fact that Gaugamela occurred 2340 years and 5 days ago today instead

Best wishes,

Andrew

[the_accursed]

I suggest we light candles to commemorate the victims of the Macedonian horde. One for each victim should suffice.

[marcus]

Sadly, no. Not if you mean the day on which the battle occurred a whole number of years ago, which is what people usually think they mean. However, let's all celebrate the fact that Gaugamela occurred 2340 years and 5 days ago today instead

Yes, I did say "perhaps", and if you read what it says on RogueClassicism it does allow a margin of doubt/error.

ATB

[Taphoi]

Sadly, no. Not if you mean the day on which the battle occurred a whole number of years ago, which is what people usually think they mean. However, let's all celebrate the fact that Gaugamela occurred 2340 years and 5 days ago today instead

Yes, I did say "perhaps", and if you read what it says on RogueClassicism it does allow a margin of doubt/error.

Hi Marcus,

There is no error. It is dated precisely by the Lunar eclipse seen eleven days earlier. That is why we know that it happened on the fourth day after the Autumnal Equinox in 331BC. Strange indeed therefore that anyone should celebrate its anniversary on the ninth day after the Autumnal Equinox

Best wishes,

Andrew

[amyntoros]

Jona Lendering of Livius.org has the eclipse take place on the 20th of September, and the battle following on October 1. I can't argue for his date – I have no opinion - but I seem to recall that he studied the astronomical diaries and actually had museum access. Marcus, am I remembering correctly that he was also allowed/invited into the vaults of the British Museum? Not that it really matters, but I'd like to establish his credentials (as much as I can) as he is no longer on Pothos.

Best regards,

[Taphoi]

Jona Lendering of Livius.org has the eclipse take place on the 20th of September, and the battle following on October 1. I can't argue for his date – I have no opinion - but I seem to recall that he studied the astronomical diaries and actually had museum access. Marcus, am I remembering correctly that he was also allowed/invited into the vaults of the British Museum? Not that it really matters, but I'd like to establish his credentials (as much as I can) as he is no longer on Pothos.

Sorry, maybe I'm not being clear. I am not disputing that the battle took place on 1st October. It undoubtedly did. However, it did not take place on 1st October in our (Gregorian) calendar system, which is not used for ancient dates. As a perfectly reasonable matter of convention a version of the ancient Roman calendar (Julian) is used for ancient dates. An unfortunate consequence is that it is quite wrong (and potentially thoroughly misleading to innocent researchers etc.) to use the Julian dates as if they were Gregorian dates to establish anniversaries. There is a mismatch of approximately five days between the Julian and Gregorian calendars in the late fourth century BC. The year is precisely defined as the interval between two successive Autumnal equinoxes, so there is no need for any confusion. If you don't make this correction, then people will be led to assume that events took place later in whichever season than they really did.

Best wishes,

Andrew

[Paralus]

Sorry, maybe I'm not being clear. I am not disputing that the battle took place on 1st October. It undoubtedly did.

Then leave it at that. You pick the nits from your own follicles.

It is a great pity that the walking encyclopaedia of ancient history - Jona Lendering - no longer frequents this place.

[marcus]

Jona Lendering of Livius.org has the eclipse take place on the 20th of September, and the battle following on October 1. I can't argue for his date – I have no opinion - but I seem to recall that he studied the astronomical diaries and actually had museum access. Marcus, am I remembering correctly that he was also allowed/invited into the vaults of the British Museum? Not that it really matters, but I'd like to establish his credentials (as much as I can) as he is no longer on Pothos.

Best regards,

He did go into the vaults of the BM, where we had a look at the tablet decyphering room - fascinating! I went with him - and I think Andrew (Taphoi) did as well - Andrew, you did come with us on that visit, didn't you? I'm pretty sure you did.

ATB

[marcus]

Sadly, no. Not if you mean the day on which the battle occurred a whole number of years ago, which is what people usually think they mean. However, let's all celebrate the fact that Gaugamela occurred 2340 years and 5 days ago today instead

Yes, I did say "perhaps", and if you read what it says on RogueClassicism it does allow a margin of doubt/error.

Hi Marcus,

There is no error. It is dated precisely by the Lunar eclipse seen eleven days earlier. That is why we know that it happened on the fourth day after the Autumnal Equinox in 331BC. Strange indeed therefore that anyone should celebrate its anniversary on the ninth day after the Autumnal Equinox

http://www.iranchamber.com/history/acha ... gamela.php

The Battle of Gaugamela
By: Ernst Badian


Site of one of the greatest battles in history, resulting in the decisive victory of Alexander of Macedon over the last Achaemenid Emperor, Darius III (qq.v.) on 1 October 331 B.C.E. (the date, long debated, is now certain: see A. J. Sachs and H. Hunger, Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia, Vienna, 1988, pp. 178-79).

Why would Badian (and others) refrain from using the Gregorian Calendar? I am sure you know all these sources much better than I do, but it seems rather absurd for all these scholars to be using a defunct calendar. I am curious.

To be honest, I really don't care what date the battle was actually fought on. I merely posted a piece from RogueClassicism, as it was relevant to the subject of this website, not really expecting to find myself under attack for doing so. Humble apologies.

ATB

[Taphoi]

Why would Badian (and others) refrain from using the Gregorian Calendar? I am sure you know all these sources much better than I do, but it seems rather absurd for all these scholars to be using a defunct calendar. I am curious.

Hi Marcus,

We all use the Julian Calendar for ancient dates (me included). The reason is that many of the dates in Roman sources are given in this calendar, so it would be confusing and complicated to try retrospectively to apply the Gregorian calendar to those sources. Scholars have decided, "When in Rome, do as the Romans did!"

The price of this compromise is that you cannot use ancient dates as modern anniversaries without adjustment. This does not stop people from doing so, but they miss the point of celebrating an exact number of years since the event and it sows confusion. It is no different in principle to getting somebody's birthday wrong by five days: if it's worth remembering, then it's worth getting the day right.

I'm not complaining against you, since you're merely copying something from elsewhere. I am just making a general observation about the absurdities that arise, if chronology is ignored.

Best wishes,

Andrew

[amyntoros]

The price of this compromise is that you cannot use ancient dates as modern anniversaries without adjustment. This does not stop people from doing so, but they miss the point of celebrating an exact number of years since the event and it sows confusion. It is no different in principle to getting somebody's birthday wrong by five days: if it's worth remembering, then it's worth getting the day right.

I'm not complaining against you, since you're merely copying something from elsewhere. I am just making a general observation about the absurdities that arise, if chronology is ignored.

I can't see any "absurdities" in all of this, except perhaps that it's a little absurd to assume that everyone really cares. IMO, if something is worth remembering it's worth remembering, whether on the exact date or five dates later, or whenever the event is brought to one's attention. And most of the time people treat notifications such as those on Rogueclassicism as no more than an interesting reminder that an event took place. It's not as if there are national or international holidays involved in "celebrations" of ancient events (although there may be one or two in Greece, but I couldn't say). We're not exactly parading in the streets, nor burning several hundred thousand candles as was suggested here with a measure of irony. And those who do actively celebrate occasions such as Alexander's birthday ought not to care either that they may not be spot on with the date. In Alexander's time they used a lunar calendar which means any birthday celebrations wouldn't have fallen on the same day each year anyway.

Best regards,

[marcus]

Why would Badian (and others) refrain from using the Gregorian Calendar? I am sure you know all these sources much better than I do, but it seems rather absurd for all these scholars to be using a defunct calendar. I am curious.

Hi Marcus,

We all use the Julian Calendar for ancient dates (me included). The reason is that many of the dates in Roman sources are given in this calendar, so it would be confusing and complicated to try retrospectively to apply the Gregorian calendar to those sources. Scholars have decided, "When in Rome, do as the Romans did!"

So, my question is now why Badian - and others, would therefore give a date using the Gregorian calendar, if "we all" use the Julian and if the Gregorian date of 1 October is incorrect? That doesn't make sense.

Sorry about my little bit of petulance - but it did seem like a personal attack (perhaps I was feeling too tired). I still don't actually care when the battle was, but I've actually moved on to this new question of why so many people would therefore provide a Gregorian date. I am genuinely interested in your view, I am not trying to pick an argument, I promise. But you can, surely, see where my confusion comes from - if eminent scholars are doing the opposite of what you say everyone does (which I don't disagree with), I don't understand why they should do so.

ATB

[Semiramis]

Accursed,

I suggest we light candles to commemorate the victims of the Macedonian horde. One for each victim should suffice.

I have like a dozen candles in my house. Will have to raid several candle factories to follow through with your suggestion. Impractical mate...

[the_accursed]

I have like a dozen candles in my house. Will have to raid several candle factories to follow through with your suggestion. Impractical mate...

That was my idea of a joke. They are usually received approximately like that one. Yes, following through with that suggestion could possibly turn the world economy around (were we to buy the candles rather than besiege candle factories).

I'm not really the candle lighting kind of guy, not even for victims of wars or other disasters. I consider such actions meaningless.