儒略曆 (Chinese Wikipedia)

Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "儒略曆" in Chinese language version.

refsWebsite
Global rank Chinese rank
230th place
439th place
3rd place
8th place
1st place
1st place
155th place
474th place
14th place
18th place
6th place
4th place
2,228th place
4,582nd place
26th place
113th place
2nd place
23rd place
low place
low place
40th place
100th place
5,978th place
low place
low place
low place
low place
low place
237th place
329th place
low place
low place
low place
low place
low place
low place

archive.org (Global: 6th place; Chinese: 4th place)

  • H. Matzat, Römische Chronologie I (Berlin, 1883), 13–18. His argument rested on Dio Cassius 48.33.4 which mentions a leap day inserted in 41 BC, "contrary to the (i.e., Caesar's) rule", in order to avoid having a market day on the first day of 40 BC. Dio stated that this leap day was compensated for "later". Matzat proposed this was done by omitting a scheduled leap day in 40 BC, rather than by omitting a day from an ordinary year.
  • C. L. Ideler, Handbuch der mathematischen und technischen Chronologie (Berlin, 1825) II 130–131. He argued that Caesar would have enforced the bissextile day by introducing it in his first reformed year. T. E. Mommsen, Die Römische Chronologie bis auf Caesar (Berlin, 1859) 282–299, provided additional circumstantial arguments.

archive.today (Global: 14th place; Chinese: 18th place)

astropixels.com (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

  • William Smith, Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities: Year of Julius Caesar, following Ideler, interprets Macrobius, Saturnalia 1.14.13 (Latin) to mean that Caesar decreed that the first day of the new calendar began with the new moon which fell on the night of 1/2 January 45 BC.
    The new moon was on 2 January 45 BC (in the Proleptic Julian calendar) at 00:21 UTC, according to IMCCE (a branch of the Paris Observatory): Phases of the moon (between −4000 and +2500) 互联网档案馆存檔,存档日期2011-07-20.. This is in agreement with the historical moon phase tables by Fred Espenak in which the new moon was on 2 January 45 BC at 00:43 UTC. Espenek's table assumes that the first Julian year of 45 BC was a leap year. If the first year of 45 BC was not a leap year, there would be a day offset, and the new moon would have been on 1 January 45 BC at 00:43 UTC.
    Espnek's historical moon phase tables also indicate that there was a new moon on 1 March 45 BC at 08:39 UTC (Kalends of March), quarter moon on 8 March 45 BC at 09:00 UTC (a day after Nones of March), and full moon on 15 March 45 BC at 07:19 UTC (Ides of March). Espenak's tables of the phases of the moon are based on computational procedures described in Astronomical Algorithms by Jean Meeus (Willmann-Bell, Inc., Richmond, 1998).
    More recent studies of the Macrobius manuscripts have shown that the word on which Idler's supposition is based, which was read as lunam, should be read as linam, meaning that Macrobius was simply stating that Caesar published an edict giving the revised calendar – see e.g., p.99 in the translation of Macrobius by P. Davies.
    Smith gives no source or justification for his other speculation that Caesar originally intended to commence the year precisely with the winter solstice.

books.google.com (Global: 3rd place; Chinese: 8th place)

britannica.com (Global: 40th place; Chinese: 100th place)

dailysabah.com (Global: 2,228th place; Chinese: 4,582nd place)

doi.org (Global: 2nd place; Chinese: 23rd place)

  • Hartner, Willy. "The young Avestan and Babylonian calendars and the antecedents of precession." Journal for the History of Astronomy 10 (1979): 1. pp. 1–22. doi:10.1177/002182867901000102

elfinspell.com (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

  • Censorinus, The Natal Day, 20.30, tr. William Maude, New York 1900 available at [6].

hermetic.ch (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

  • For the list of triennial leap years proposed by Bünting, Christmann and Harriot, see Harriot's comparative table reproduced by Simon Cassidy (Fig. 6). The table numbers years as Julian years, where Julian year 1 = 45 BC. Thus, Scaliger and Clavius (col. 7) resume intercalation in Julian year 53 = AD 8, while Bünting (col. 8) and Harriot (col. 3) resume it in Julian year 49 = AD 4 and Christmann (col. 9) in year 52 = AD 7.

imcce.fr (Global: 5,978th place; Chinese: low place)

bugle.imcce.fr

  • William Smith, Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities: Year of Julius Caesar, following Ideler, interprets Macrobius, Saturnalia 1.14.13 (Latin) to mean that Caesar decreed that the first day of the new calendar began with the new moon which fell on the night of 1/2 January 45 BC.
    The new moon was on 2 January 45 BC (in the Proleptic Julian calendar) at 00:21 UTC, according to IMCCE (a branch of the Paris Observatory): Phases of the moon (between −4000 and +2500) 互联网档案馆存檔,存档日期2011-07-20.. This is in agreement with the historical moon phase tables by Fred Espenak in which the new moon was on 2 January 45 BC at 00:43 UTC. Espenek's table assumes that the first Julian year of 45 BC was a leap year. If the first year of 45 BC was not a leap year, there would be a day offset, and the new moon would have been on 1 January 45 BC at 00:43 UTC.
    Espnek's historical moon phase tables also indicate that there was a new moon on 1 March 45 BC at 08:39 UTC (Kalends of March), quarter moon on 8 March 45 BC at 09:00 UTC (a day after Nones of March), and full moon on 15 March 45 BC at 07:19 UTC (Ides of March). Espenak's tables of the phases of the moon are based on computational procedures described in Astronomical Algorithms by Jean Meeus (Willmann-Bell, Inc., Richmond, 1998).
    More recent studies of the Macrobius manuscripts have shown that the word on which Idler's supposition is based, which was read as lunam, should be read as linam, meaning that Macrobius was simply stating that Caesar published an edict giving the revised calendar – see e.g., p.99 in the translation of Macrobius by P. Davies.
    Smith gives no source or justification for his other speculation that Caesar originally intended to commence the year precisely with the winter solstice.

jstor.org (Global: 26th place; Chinese: 113th place)

  • Parker, R. A. Ancient Egyptian Astronomy. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences. May 1974, 276 (1257): 51–65. JSTOR 74274. 

mcllibrary.org (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

aa.usno.navy.mil

ryanfb.github.io (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

  • Marcus Terentius Varro, On the Latin Language, 6.13, tr. Roland Kent, London 1938 available at [8].

tufts.edu (Global: 155th place; Chinese: 474th place)

perseus.tufts.edu

uchicago.edu (Global: 230th place; Chinese: 439th place)

penelope.uchicago.edu

  • T H Key, "A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities" (article Calendarium), London, 1875, available at [1].
  • Censorinus, De die natali 20.7 (拉丁語) Latin)
  • Varro, On Agriculture I.1.28.
  • Suetonius, Caesar 52.1. Archive.today存檔,存档日期2012-05-30
  • Plutarch, Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans: Caesar 59.
  • Macrobius, Saturnalia I.14.2 (Latin).
  • Dio Cassius 54.21
  • William Smith, Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities: Year of Julius Caesar, following Ideler, interprets Macrobius, Saturnalia 1.14.13 (Latin) to mean that Caesar decreed that the first day of the new calendar began with the new moon which fell on the night of 1/2 January 45 BC.
    The new moon was on 2 January 45 BC (in the Proleptic Julian calendar) at 00:21 UTC, according to IMCCE (a branch of the Paris Observatory): Phases of the moon (between −4000 and +2500) 互联网档案馆存檔,存档日期2011-07-20.. This is in agreement with the historical moon phase tables by Fred Espenak in which the new moon was on 2 January 45 BC at 00:43 UTC. Espenek's table assumes that the first Julian year of 45 BC was a leap year. If the first year of 45 BC was not a leap year, there would be a day offset, and the new moon would have been on 1 January 45 BC at 00:43 UTC.
    Espnek's historical moon phase tables also indicate that there was a new moon on 1 March 45 BC at 08:39 UTC (Kalends of March), quarter moon on 8 March 45 BC at 09:00 UTC (a day after Nones of March), and full moon on 15 March 45 BC at 07:19 UTC (Ides of March). Espenak's tables of the phases of the moon are based on computational procedures described in Astronomical Algorithms by Jean Meeus (Willmann-Bell, Inc., Richmond, 1998).
    More recent studies of the Macrobius manuscripts have shown that the word on which Idler's supposition is based, which was read as lunam, should be read as linam, meaning that Macrobius was simply stating that Caesar published an edict giving the revised calendar – see e.g., p.99 in the translation of Macrobius by P. Davies.
    Smith gives no source or justification for his other speculation that Caesar originally intended to commence the year precisely with the winter solstice.
  • Macrobius, Saturnalia 1.14.9 (Latin). Exceptionally, the extra day in April was inserted as the 26th, a.d. VI Kal. Mai. in the Julian calendar, in order to avoid adding a day to the Floralia, which ran from a.d. IV Kal. Mai. (27 April in the pre-Julian calendar) to a.d. V Non. Mai.
  • Macrobius, Saturnalia 1.14.12 (Latin).
  • Dio Cassius 48.33.4, 60.24.7; C. J. Bennett, "The Imperial Nundinal Cycle", Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 147 (2004) 175–179.
  • The Roman History of Ammianus Marcellinus, 26.10, Loeb Classical Library vol. II, Harvard 1940, available at [4].
  • Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus, Life of Julius Caesar, 40.1, Loeb Classical Library, Harvard 1913, available at [5] Archive.today存檔,存档日期2012-05-30.
  • Macrobius Ambrosius Theodosius, Saturnalia, 1.14.13–1.14.14, tr. Percival Vaughan Davies, New York 1969, Latin text at [7]
  • H. Matzat, Römische Chronologie I (Berlin, 1883), 13–18. His argument rested on Dio Cassius 48.33.4 which mentions a leap day inserted in 41 BC, "contrary to the (i.e., Caesar's) rule", in order to avoid having a market day on the first day of 40 BC. Dio stated that this leap day was compensated for "later". Matzat proposed this was done by omitting a scheduled leap day in 40 BC, rather than by omitting a day from an ordinary year.

upmf-grenoble.fr (Global: low place; Chinese: low place)

webu2.upmf-grenoble.fr

web.archive.org (Global: 1st place; Chinese: 1st place)

  • William Smith, Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities: Year of Julius Caesar, following Ideler, interprets Macrobius, Saturnalia 1.14.13 (Latin) to mean that Caesar decreed that the first day of the new calendar began with the new moon which fell on the night of 1/2 January 45 BC.
    The new moon was on 2 January 45 BC (in the Proleptic Julian calendar) at 00:21 UTC, according to IMCCE (a branch of the Paris Observatory): Phases of the moon (between −4000 and +2500) 互联网档案馆存檔,存档日期2011-07-20.. This is in agreement with the historical moon phase tables by Fred Espenak in which the new moon was on 2 January 45 BC at 00:43 UTC. Espenek's table assumes that the first Julian year of 45 BC was a leap year. If the first year of 45 BC was not a leap year, there would be a day offset, and the new moon would have been on 1 January 45 BC at 00:43 UTC.
    Espnek's historical moon phase tables also indicate that there was a new moon on 1 March 45 BC at 08:39 UTC (Kalends of March), quarter moon on 8 March 45 BC at 09:00 UTC (a day after Nones of March), and full moon on 15 March 45 BC at 07:19 UTC (Ides of March). Espenak's tables of the phases of the moon are based on computational procedures described in Astronomical Algorithms by Jean Meeus (Willmann-Bell, Inc., Richmond, 1998).
    More recent studies of the Macrobius manuscripts have shown that the word on which Idler's supposition is based, which was read as lunam, should be read as linam, meaning that Macrobius was simply stating that Caesar published an edict giving the revised calendar – see e.g., p.99 in the translation of Macrobius by P. Davies.
    Smith gives no source or justification for his other speculation that Caesar originally intended to commence the year precisely with the winter solstice.
  • Justinian, Digest 50.16.98 互联网档案馆存檔,存档日期2012-02-08..
  • Introduction to Calendars 互联网档案馆存檔,存档日期2019-06-13.. (15 May 2013). United States Naval Observatory.
  • C. J. Bennett, "The Early Augustan Calendars in Rome and Egypt", Zeitschrift fűr Papyrologie und Epigraphik 142 (2003) 221–240 and "The Early Augustan Calendars in Rome and Egypt: Addenda et Corrigenda", Zeitschrift fűr Papyrologie und Epigraphik 147 (2004) 165–168; see also Chris Bennett, A.U.C. 730 = 24 B.C. (Egyptian papyrus).