Geek Trivia: Creative differences

by Jay Garmon | Aug 30, 2005 6:02:00 PM

Tags: Jay Garmon, Christian Biblical, creation date, scholar, Geek Trivia Newsletter

Takeaway: What is the term for a calendar that's extended to represent a date that occurred before the invention of the calendar itself?

Today marks the fourth anniversary of yours truly taking over the reins of this very column, a subject that I elaborate on in my blog. However, this merely serves as the inspiration, not the subject, for this week's trivial topic: creation dates. Specifically, tomorrow the earth will celebrate its 7,514th birthday�at least according to the Eastern Orthodox Church calendar, which interpreted Christian Biblical texts to arrive at an explicit creation date of Sept. 1, 5509 B.C.

Now, before we begin tossing around epithets or invoking the touchy debate of intelligent design versus the Flying Spaghetti Monster, let's bear in mind that Eastern Orthodox Christianity is far from the only faith that has assigned a specific calendar date to the beginning of time. For example, the Mayan Long Count Calendar is renowned for having a "zero day"�an official beginning of time�calculated as either Aug. 11 or Aug. 13, 3114 B.C.

Perhaps the most well-known creation date among Western Christians is the one derived from the Ussher-Lightfoot Calendar. Two 17th-century Christian scholars�Irish Archbishop James Ussher and Cambridge University Vice-Chancellor John Lightfoot�both deduced from their interpretations of Biblical accounts that the earth's creation occurred at nightfall on the Sunday preceding an autumnal equinox.

However, the two scholars disagreed on the details. Ussher held that the Earth began at the nightfall preceding Sunday, Oct. 23, 4004 B.C. Lightfoot, on the other hand, pegged the year as 3929 B.C. Ussher's date, published in 1650, was more popular, and some Creationists still cite the collective Ussher-Lightfoot chronology as the basis for a literal age of the earth at or around 6,000 years.

Jewish scholars put forth similar efforts to identify the earth's age using the Hebrew calendar. A popular creation date cited by this reckoning is Oct. 7, 3761 B.C. (or Tishri 1, AM 1 using Hebrew calendar reckoning). However, discrepancies exist�both between and within Judeo-Christian denominations�based on which translation of text the theory cites. (Discrepancies in the book of Genesis arise when comparing the third-century Greek Septuagint and the fifth-century Latin Vulgate.)

Moreover, all of the Judeo-Christian creation date theories mentioned above derive their dates using the Julian calendar�enacted by Rome in 45 B.C.�rather than the modern Gregorian calendar. Scholars used the Julian calendar as a means to tie Biblical accounts to independently recorded Roman history, effectively giving Biblical researchers a starting point for their calculations. These scholars then had to reverse-engineer a Julian chronology, effectively writing a calendar that predates the actual invention of the calendar system itself.

WHAT IS THE TERM FOR A CALENDAR THAT'S EXTENDED TO REPRESENT A DATE THAT OCCURRED BEFORE THE INVENTION OF THE CALENDAR ITSELF?

What's the term for a calendar that extends backward, to a time before the invention of the calendar system itself�a breed of historical calculation often used to derive precise creation dates using the sacred texts of various religions?

A proleptic calendar is the term you're looking for. Perhaps the most famous (relatively speaking) example is the proleptic Julian calendar, which Judeo-Christian scholars have used to pin exact dates on Biblical and Talmudic accounts of past events.

Enacted by Julius Caesar (hence the name), the Julian calendar became Roman law in 45 B.C. So any events occurring before 45 B.C. would be part of the proleptic Julian calendar.

(Let's not confuse the proleptic Julian calendar with the so-called astronomical Julian calendar, which includes a confusing "year 0" between 1 B.C. and 1 A.D. The astronomical Julian calendar is itself proleptic, employed to calculate the past dates of astronomical events, with the year 0 used for simplified mathematical calculations. Hope that clears things up.)

It's possible to extend any calendar proleptically, though it can easily lead to confusion. For example, scholars can and often do extend the modern Gregorian calendar proleptically to account for dates prior to its introduction in 1582. However, proleptic Gregorian dates overlap with standard Julian dates, so historians must document precisely which calendar they're using when specifying calculated dates. And when calculating the birth of the world, precision is everything.

That said, some proleptic calculations of religious events defy simple comprehension. Take, for example, the complex cycle of yugas observed by Hindus.

Based on astronomical measurements of solar years�the length of time that the Sun takes to return to the same position along the orbital ecliptic�yuga "ages" vary in length between 432,000 and 1,728,000 solar years. (And that doesn't account for the fact that solar years don't match up to calendar years, and they also aren't static�they vary over time).

Using the proleptic Julian calendar, the current Kali Yuga age began at midnight, Feb. 18, 3102 B.C. Of course, Hinduism preaches a continuous cycle of death and rebirth, so pinning down a Hindu "creation date" for the universe is beyond the context of the faith.

Despite that fact, Hinduism does calculate the life cycle of its creator god Brahma as a function of multiple yugas, working out to some 311 trillion years. Now that's some old-school Geek Trivia.

Check out the Trivia Geek's blog!

Keep in touch with Trivial Pursuits, the Trivia Geek's online journal of rants, opinions, crazy ideas, half-baked notions, bizarre concepts, wild schemes, and trivial observations unfit even for Geek Trivia.

The Quibble of the Week

If you uncover a questionable fact or debatable aspect of this week's Geek Trivia, just post it in the discussion area of the article. Every week, yours truly will choose the best post from the assembled masses and discuss it in the next edition of Geek Trivia.

This week's quibble comes from the August 17 edition of Geek Trivia, "Alien evaders." Several TechRepublic members took issue with my description of a modified base-35 number system for encoded signals on Ohio State's now-defunct "Big Ear" radio telescope. Member Slprice started it off with this quibble:

"If the digits have the values of 0 through 35, then that would be a base-36 number system."

But member Mikes had my back on this one:

"Actually, digit '0' is not used according to the article. That would make it base-35."

I should have made it more clear that the Big Ear used a modified base-35. In the "real" world, Slprice would have had me dead to rights. Keep those quibbles coming!

Falling behind on your weekly Geek fix?

Check out the Geek Trivia Archive, and catch up on the most recent editions of Geek Trivia.

Test your command of useless knowledge by subscribing to TechRepublic's Geek Trivia e-newsletter. Automatically sign up today!

The Trivia Geek, also known as Jay Garmon, is a former advertising copywriter and Web developer who's duped TechRepublic into underwriting his affinity for movies, sci-fi, comic books, technology, and all things geekish or subcultural.

4 comment(s)