Laurence Dixon ‘Why Change a ? - Which year did think he lived in?’

Article from & Catastrophism REVIEW 2010 (Production: Val Pearce) © Society for Interdisciplinary Studies, UK.

NOTES

Any errors found post-publication of the original article will have been noted in a subsequent issue of Chronology & Catastrophism REVIEW and as far as possible such errors (and any other errors found) will have been corrected in this PDF edition. Original formatting style and layout has been retained. Page numbers are those in the original article

VJP - 25.6.2012

Why Change a Calendar? - Which year did Bede think he lived in? by Laurence Dixon

One of the reasons that chronology is difficult and interesting, is that our forefathers frequently changed the dating system which they used to record their past and present activities. In this paper I will consider briefly those changes made in the last 1,400 years, when the changes were made, and provide the possible reason for each. I will work backwards to end with a consideration of the of Bede.

As we will see, changes to the calendar system have ‘Club Indenture Tripartite made the thirteenth day of occurred frequently. In AD 1800 most regions of the world April in the three and thirtieth year of the reign of our had their own calendar and the Gregorian system was only in sovereign Lord Charles the Second by the grant of use in Europe, America and their colonies. In contrast by god of England, Scotland, France and King, 2000 that calendar had been adopted in most countries Defender of the Faith, One Thousand throughout the world. Why? Because international trade was six hundred eighty and one’. by then global in nature and using a single calendar made trade accounts simpler. Even so many countries retained their Therefore, he claimed to have reigned more than the 23 traditional system for other purposes. In AD 1800 the years normally given him and if he had reigned in earlier Gregorian dates were quoted as Anno Domini (AD), centuries this would have posed a difficult chronological celebrating the birth of Christ, but as the system is now problem, especially in those periods when only the year of used by non-Christians, too, by AD 2000 it was advocated the king’s reign was quoted. In Charles II’s case it is known that this be changed to Common (CE). However the AD he insisted that his reign started when his father was executed. symbol is retained in Britain. The still use their Anno This is usually ignored because charters from his reign are Mundi system in which 2000 CE is AM 5761, and the not commonly on display. Moslems use their Anno Hegirae (AH) calendar in which AH 1 starts on July 16 th 622 CE. The Hindus use many different In the sixteenth century the Spanish conquered the Maya, calendar systems. Dershowitz and Reinbold [1] state that 30 Aztec and Inca empires in South America, destroyed the are in active use and that though an attempt has been made systems that maintained their and imposed their recently to unify and revise them to be similar to the own calendar. Conquered countries often, but not always, Gregorian system, it has not been very successful. had to adopt the conquerors’ calendar. Dershowitz and Reinbold also give details of the Maya These three recent examples of changes introduced for and Aztec calendars of South America and the Persian, political reasons, illustrate that revolution, regal diktat and Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese calendars from conquest could lead to changes in the calendar. Let us now the Far East but these will not be discussed in this essay. consider the last major calendar change made partly for astronomical reasons. In this brief glance at the calendar systems in use today we have already identified one cause for a change in system, The namely the needs of international trade. As we proceed we In AD 1582, Pope Gregory’s advisors decided that the will identify three more reasons why calendars have been then in use was unsatisfactory [2], mainly changed, namely politics, religion and . due to the fact that the spring equinox was no longer taking st, Recent Changes Made for Political Reasons place on March 21 the date the experts at the Council of in AD 325 had expected it to occur. The date of the In this section we will note three changes made for spring equinox was easily determined by the scientific political reasons. instruments then available and in AD 1582 it occurred on th In AD 1792 the French people overthrew their monarchy March 11 . This change in date was due to the fact that the and created a republic. As they did not wish to retain length of the year was not precisely the 365.25 days assumed anything that reminded them of their kings they completely by the structure which formed part of the Julian changed the calendar. Each year contained twelve months of system. In this a leap year, with an extra day, occurred every 30 days, each divided into 3 periods of 10 days, together with four years, including each century year. Throughout 5 or 6 extra days which were added to the end of each year. the number of days in a year has steadily declined. To correct The system was abandoned by Napoleon in AD 1806. It was this drift it was decreed that century years that were not unusual in that most calendars had weeks of seven days, and divisible by 400 would no longer be leap years. So, in 1,200 did not disturb the days of the week when making other years, there would be 300 leap years in the Julian calendar changes. and 300 - 12 + 3 in the Gregorian. This formula is still in use, but does not reflect the current number of days in a year In AD 1660 Charles II of England became king, he is exactly. You may wonder whether it is the length of the year known to have ruled until AD 1683, a reign of 23 years. My that is changing, or the length of the day. This was an attention was recently drawn to a Royal Charter from his unanswerable question until recently, when the second was reign, it started: redefined using the frequency of radiation from a Caesium

Chronology & Catastrophism REVIEW 2010 35

atom, so that whether the number of such seconds in a day The Start of the Julian Calendar was constant could then be determined, although I am unaware that such experiments have been performed. Let us consider when the Julian calendar might have come into use. Presumably when it was introduced the vernal One reason that the date of the vernal equinox was equinox did occur on March 21 st . Assuming that the important to the Christian community was that it was used to Gregorian leap-year system would have been as accurate calculate the date of . The Council of Nicaea in AD before AD 1582 as it has been since, we can apply the 325 agreed that Easter would be celebrated on the first correction in reverse (all datesAD). Sunday after the first full moon occurring on or after the vernal equinox [3]. In the tables of the This gives: prepared by Dionysius Exiguus in AD 532, it was assumed March 22 (Gregorian) = March 11 (Julian) from 1500-1699 that the vernal equinox would always occur on March 21 st [4]. = March 12 1400-1499 When it varied this caused arguments about when Easter = March 13 1300-1399 should be celebrated between those Christians who assumed that the vernal equinox occurred on March 21 st and those = March 14 1100-1299 who used instruments to observe when it in fact occurred. = March 15 1000-1099 = March 16 900- 999 As the date of the vernal equinox had already changed in = March 17 700- 899 AD 1582, a second decree stated that Thursday October = March 18 600- 699 th 4 AD 1582 (Julian) would be followed by Friday October = March 19 500- 599 th 15 AD 1582 (Gregorian); a change of 11 days. = March 20 300- 499 A third change was also made at that time. The start of a = March 21 200- 299 th st was changed from 25 March to 1 January. This Therefore, we would expect that the equinox was on restored a previous arrangement, made by the Council of March 21 st at some date between AD 200 and AD 299; two Tours in AD 567, when they changed the start of the New to three hundred years after the start of the Julian calendar. Year from 1 st January to the vernal equinox; intended at that th However, I have found two references to a in time as 25 March [5]. this century, when the equinox was reset to March 21 st . If Because the political relationships between the Protestant days had to be omitted, as in AD 1582, we cannot retro- countries of Northern Europe and the Papacy were very calculate Julian dates before AD 285. strained at this time, the Protestants chose not to implement ‘[AD 285] Indiction 4 year 1, the second consulship the change and England continued to use the Julian system of Diocletian Augustus and that of Aristobulus. The until AD 1752. As a leap year had not occurred in AD 1700 regnal years of Diocletian in the Easter Tables are (Gregorian), a 12 day period then had to be omitted. It is th determined from these consuls. (An important step interesting to note that March 25 , the start of the New Year rd on the Julian calendar, became April 6 th in the Gregorian was taken in the mid 3 C by the Egyptian Anatolius, system and that April 6 th is still the start of the English Bishop of Laodicea in , who exploited a 19 year tax year. lunar cycle for the computation of Easter and probably produced a 95-year table (5 cycles) whose The use of the Julian calendar in England, while France notional beginning was in 258. In order to place the was using the Gregorian calendar, led to some unexpected equinox correctly on 21 March, a reform was complications. For instance Elizabeth Tudor, Queen of th th undertaken at Alexandria in the early 4 C and the England, died on March 24 AD 1603 (Julian), but in France revised cycle was notionally begun either in 303 or this date was April 4 th AD 1604 (Gregorian). Most English one cycle earlier in 284; the latter coincided with the history books still use Julian dates when discussing years regnal years of Diocletian which were used for dating before AD 1752. purposes especially in Egypt, where the new cycle In AD 1917 the Russians still used the Julian calendar; the was adopted).’ [7] revolution that overthrew the Tsar occurred in October (Julian) but that date was in November on the Gregorian The above era is known as the Diocletian era. Calendar used in Western Europe. So the anniversary of the In AD 1852, Greswell [8] asserted that he had proof that October revolution is celebrated in November. The Russians a calendar reform occurred in AD 225. It would have been had adopted the Julian calendar when Tsar Peter, ‘the Great’, feasible for the reform to have been introduced in different decreed that st AM 7207 would henceforth be st years in different parts of the Empire, which was in chaos for known as January 1 AD 1700. He also changed the date of much of that century. the New Year from 1 st September to 1 st January. The simple formula for going from AD to AM dates, AM = AD + 5,507 If the year was the same length as the Gregorian year for years, is therefore only accurate for part of the year and is the period we are considering, then March 21 st (Gregorian), one year out for the rest. The AM calendar was introduced supposedly the vernal equinox, could not have occurred on into Russia by Vladimir of Kiev when he converted to March 21 st (Julian) in AD 532, when Dionysius supposedly Christianity and this is usually said by modern scholars to compiled his Easter tables. Dionysius’ date is incompatible have occurred in AD 988 (AM 6495). According to a letter in with the calendar reform of AD 225. Possibly Dionysius did the publication Current World [6], the AM date not observe the equinox himself and simply continued reflects the resettling of displaced inhabitants of Southern Anatolius’ Easter cycles. Now we will look at the calendar Ukraine after the flood of the Black Sea. change immediately before Gregory’s.

36 Chronology & Catastrophism REVIEW 2010

The Reform of Nicephorus Gregares AD 1333. A Leaving aside the last sentence, we note that from AM Political Reform. 6248-6232 is 16 years. After the recovery of by the Byzantines, The of Theophanes is our main source for in AD 1261 efforts were made to reconcile the Greek and eastern history from AD 603 – 813, but Turtledove, the Roman-Christian religions, etc . In these translator, commented that Theophanes mainly used AM negotiations, Nicephorus took a leading role on the Greek dates and that he, Turtledove, had added the corresponding side. He was born in AD 1283 and rose to be the archivist in AD dates by subtracting 5492/3 from the AM dates. However, the court at Constantinople; leading the negotiations in AD where Theophanes himself gave AD dates they differed and 1333. He died in AD 1360. Alexander del Mar [9] claims that should be ignored [13]. To get to Theophanes’ AD dates you need to subtract 5,500, so Theophanes’ own system is AM = one point at issue was that the Romans claimed Christ was AD + 5,500. An example is AM 6095 (Theophanes) = AD born 15 years before the Greeks had determined it. At this 603 (Turtledove) = AD 595 (Theophanes). Victorian time the Romans used an AD calendar and the Greeks used historians, like Turtledove, who assumed they could correct an Anno Mundi calendar, but of course they ‘knew’ the AM AM dates, may have misled generations. date of the birth of Christ in their system. The year AD 1333 after the birth of Christ on the , was only Two examples of Theophanes’ headings (below) illustrate 1,318 years after the birth of Christ according to the Greek the details he quoted. system. Del Mar claimed that Nicephorus made the dates Annus Mundi 6095 (602-603 ) Annus Mundi 6268 (775-776) agree by adding 15 years in the Greek system, by arbitrarily AD 595 AD 768 changing the reign lengths of certain emperors before Justin Roman Emperor Phokas (7 yrs: yr 1) Roman Emperor Leo (5 yrs: yr 1) II to achieve this. Del Mar claimed that the had Persian King Khosroes (39 yrs: yr 15) Arab ruler Mahdi (9 yrs: yr 1) already added 15 years centuries before. Bishop of Constantinople Kyriakos Bishop of Hadrian: (11 yrs: yr 9) (27 yrs: yr 7) On p. 203, del Mar quotes Nicephorus as stating that Bishop of Jerusalem Isaac (8 yrs: yr 3) Bishop of Constantinople Justin II died in AD 578 on the Roman Fasti system; and in Niketas (14 yrs: yr 11) Bishop of Alexandria Eulogios (27 yrs: AM 6098, which equalled AD 593 in Nicephorus’ own yr 24) system, after he had added 15 years. However, modern Bishop of Antioch Anastasios (9 yrs: yr 3) scholarship states that Justin II did indeed die in AD 578! Under AM 6255, (Turtledove AD 763), Theophanes states So it appears that Nicephorus’ reforms were only that it was so cold in October that the north shore of the temporary. Nicephorus’ new relationship was AM = AD + Black Sea froze to a depth of 30 cubits 100 miles out and, as 5505/6. If he added 15 years to both the AM and AD dates the snow kept falling, the depth increased another 20 cubits, then the formula linking them would have been unaltered, but so that the sea became dry land. When it began to melt in there would have been a gap of 15 years in Byzantine history February icebergs formed and damaged the gates of the around AM 6839. Nicephorus did write a history of the harbour of Constantinople. It must have been an Romans [10] covering the period AD 1222-1351 and whether exceptionally cold spell. or not he had made the modification that del Mar claimed, he wrote it as a seamless history with no gap. Unfortunately, his Two reforms occurred about AD 1079 history does not appear to have been translated into English. Del Mar [14] reported that Omar Kayyam reformed the A search on the web located online Greek and versions, as well as references to early 19 th century translations into Persian calendar in AD 1079. At about the same time the French and German. Armenians, who had used the Buddhist Divine Cycle of 552 years, changed to the Dionysian 532 year cycle, bringing the Probably the only place where we might find verifying end of the cycle forward from AD 1104 to AD 1084. evidence that Nicephorus’ made reforms would be in a contemporary chronicle relating the details of the Crusaders’ The Venerable Bede AD 672-735? A Mystery occupation of Constantinople. Bede was a monk at the Northumberland monastery of St The Chronicle of Theophanes, AD 813. Politics Peter at Monkwearmouth, now within Sunderland. He was a Again theologian, historian and chronologist and wrote over 60 books. His most famous book is his Historia Ecclesiastica Before the time of Nicephorus, Theophanes wrote a Gentis Anglorium , ( Ecclesial History of the English People ) chronicle. Harry Turtledove translated the Chronicle of [15]. When he attempted to date past events he was faced Theophanes into English in 1982 [11] and used an AM with a difficult situation, as traders came to Jarrow from both system. The Chronicle ended in AM 6305 with the start of the eastern empire and from western rulers, bringing their the reign of Leo V, which Turtledove and other modern chronological systems with them (including conflicting Anno scholars date to AD 813. Subtracting the dates gives AM = Mundi systems and conflicting records of past emperors’ AD + 5,492, which is known as the Alexandrian AM system. reigns). In AD 703 he wrote De Temporibus [16], a short Under year AM 6232 Theophanes states: work containing 15 pages, and included in it his own ‘According to the Romans, [that is Constantinople] independent Anno Mundi system. Anno Mundi systems were this year was 624 8 years after the creation of the meant to start at the biblical creation of the world and many world [from the time of ]; according to the chroniclers attempted the task of adding up the years given in Egyptians [that is the Alexandrians] 6232. It was 1063 the , but then switched to the chronologies of years after Philip of Macedon.’ [12] the Persian and following Ptolemaic dynasties in Egypt to

Chronology & Catastrophism REVIEW 2010 37

determine the number of years that had passed between the AD 712 and not in AD 703. Then, according to modern creation and their own time. Unfortunately, they all obtained scholars, 22 years later in AD 725 he wrote De Temporus different answers. Confused, Bede did the sum for himself Ratione and included his Chronica Majora in chapter 66, and obtained yet another value. which also lists the lengths of the reigns of the Roman Emperors. It should be stressed that the Chronica Minora The Anno Mundi system in use in western Europe was the contains no AD or AM dates; it simply lists the length of system proposed by of Caesarea [17] in his reigns of recognised Roman and eastern emperors. In , published in about AD 325. Bede states that contrast, the Majora also gives the AM (Bede) date for the Eusebius did not include dates in the Chronicon, but added end of each reign and a short description of the major events up the years of the lives of fathers before their eldest child that occurred. Victorian editors, Mommsen and Migne, was born, as recorded in the . He obtained added summary tables which often do not agree with the the figure 5,199 years from the creation of the world to the numbers in the Latin scripts; I have chosen to ignore their birth of Christ. His system was used by a series of western modifications. Christian chroniclers for over 1,000 years. Adding the reign lengths in both Chronica agree that from The Anno Mundi system, popular in the eastern empire, the start of Tiberius to the end of Justin II is 563 years, to was based on the belief that the phrase ‘one day is with the which Christians would add 15 years in order to reach the Lord as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day’ date of the birth of Christ, giving AD 578. According to del meant that, since it is said in Genesis that the world had been Mar, Nicephorus also had AD 578 before he made his created in six days, it would end 6,000 years after it was modification and changed it to 593 AD (because he inserted created. Again, it was assumed that the Messiah would be his modifications before the reign of Justin II. His date born in the last hour and, since an hour was one twelth part of should be ignored). The agreement between the first three the day, it was decided the Messiah would be born 5,500 figures inspires confidence, until it is noticed that earlier years after the creation, giving AM = AD + 5,500. This individual reigns are as much as 5 years different, when it system is often credited to Hippolytus ( c. AD 235). In this then looks contrived. Justin II is the last reign detailed by del system the 16 th year of Tiberius was dated AM 5531. As we Mar from Nicephorus. The Chronica Majora continues past have seen, this system was still used by Theophanes. It had, the end of the Minora (which ends with Leo III, whose reign however, been revised first by Annianus, a monk in ends in AD 712 in the Minora and AD 700 in the Majora ), Alexandria, working under their Arch Bishop, Theoplitius, up to the end of the reign of Leo ‘IIII’ [IV] which, by simple who introduced the formula AM = AD + 5,493 in Alexandria arithmetic, makes AD 728. Bede obviously changed his mind in about AD 412. This was the system Turtledove used in about the date in which he was living after publishing the altering the AD dates in Theophanes. The system was revised first book. His two dates for Leo I are 12 years apart, the again at the Quinisext Council called by Justinian II in about difference being mainly located in the reigns of Heraclius, AD 692, who ruled that henceforth AM = AD +5,509 should which he quotes as 36 and 25 years long respectively. be used in Constantinople. Obviously De Temporibus must have been published after Bede had to decide which system to use and decided to do the last event mentioned in it. On a straight summation of the the arithmetic himself. In contrast to Eusebius’ use of the years since the birth of Christ that Bede lists within it, the last Septuagint Old Testament, Bede used the Latin Old event occurred 712 years later than Christ’s birth, yet modern Testament as translated by and obtained 3,952 years scholars date the publication to AD 703. In De Temporus for the time between Adam and Christ. When this appeared Ratione dated by modern scholars to AD 721, Bede included in De Temporibus he was accused of heresy, but wrote a his own retro-calculated AD dates, which differ from the sum letter [18] to Plegwin explaining how both Eusebius’ and his in De Temporibus. Possibly, a Pope commissioned Bede to own figures were reached. It was essentially a difference in write his second history and provided him with papal the length of the second ‘age’ from Noah to . The correspondence in order to improve his dates, but while AD reason for the change in system was purely religious. As both dates in this paper after about AD 750 can be used to the Septuagint and the Latin Bible are extant, anyone can do calculate the number of years before today, no AD date the sums and check their arithmetic. Bede defeated the quoted earlier than AD 750 should be assumed to be precise. charge of heresy and his AM system was used to date church buildings in England for at least 600 years. As we have seen, the time of Bede’s life was also covered by Theophanes. However, he states that Herakleios reigned It surprised me to learn that the Jewish rabbis got a for 31 years, his son Constantine III reigned for 4 months, slightly different total to Bede (in AD 2000 they were in AM and another son Heraklonas reigned for 6 months, before 5760) implying a difference of 192 years from Bede. Part of Constantine IV son of Constantine III came to the throne and the difference occurs because the Jews allocate a mere 52 reigned for 27 years. Theophanes dates the end of the reign years for the Persian period of their history, despite the fact of Leo III to AM 6232 (and subtracting 5,500 this is AD732, that Cyrus II is separated from Alexander by 206 years, not AD 728 as given by Bede, nor AD 741 as implied by according to modern historians. Turtledove). Herakleios’ father had ruled the African provinces before being summoned to Constantinople to expel In De Temporibus, which modern scholars claim was the emperor Phokas, when he sent his son in response. In the published in AD 703, Bede included his Chronica Minora , a younger Herakleios’ first 12 years, the Persians took more list of Emperors and the length of their reigns continuing to and more of the Asian empire. Then, in years 12 to 18, the end of Leo I, and simple summation within the text gives Herakleios succeeded in recovering the provinces, but the 712 years from the birth of Christ. So, when Bede published wars reduced both armies and in his 23 rd year the Arab this book, he obviously must have thought he was living after armies began to sweep over the Asian provinces, Persia and

38 Chronology & Catastrophism REVIEW 2010

Africa. Herakleios died of dropsy in year 31 and Umar began that he was, this history is seamless and gives no hint that he to build the mosque in Jerusalem in year 2 of Constans. This ever had any doubts. Modern historians also write seamless was obviously a disastrous period for the eastern Empire and and ignore these difficult changes. the chronology is in a mess at this time. The reign of Conclusion Herakleios is given 3 different lengths (36 yrs, 31 yrs and 25 yrs in the three we have considered). Turtledove In this paper I have looked at calendar changes since the dates the end of Leo II in AD 698, in agreement with the time of Bede. Calendar changes due to considerations of Chronica Majora , while Theophanes dated it at AD 691 and commerce, religion, politics and astronomy have occurred in the Minora to AD 712. the centuries since Bede and I have attempted to explain them. However, at this point in time, the calendar changes Speculating, it appears at first glance that Bede made a reflected in the early (AD) by the differences between mistake in his first book, but it cannot be that simple, because Bede’s two histories and Theophanes’ chronicle remain a when he wrote it he must have believed he was living after mystery, which I hope to solve in another paper. AD 712, so that must have been the AD date in use in Jarrow. Accepting that his information and his AD date had been Notes and references wrong, he was commissioned to write his new history and 1. N. Dershowitz and E. Reingold, Calendrical Calculations . CUP, 2008, p. did so using his new calendar, but he must have known how 275. many years he had lived between writing his two histories. 2. Ibid p. 47. Was it 22 years or 13, or was Theophanes correct and it was somewhere in between? Theophanes, of course, lived about 3. Ibid p. 113. 100 years after the events he was recording, but Turtledove 4. Ibid p. 114. [19] suggests that Theophanes probably used the chronicle of the earlier Nikephorus, whose Historia Syntomos covers the 5. J. Wilson, ‘It’s Another New Year’. http://www.wilstar.com. /holidays/newyear/1997. period AD 602-769. A brief glance at the translation shows that Nikephorus includes no AD or AM dates. Cyril Mango 6. I. Nasaduke, ‘Counting Time’. Current World Archaeology, 36, August [20], the translator, in his ‘Introduction’, draws attention to a 2009, pp. 6-7. curious hiatus in both Theophanes’ and Nikephorus’ 7. M. Whitby & M Whitby, translators of . Liverpool discussion of events in Constantinople after AD 720 University Press, 1990, pp. 284-628. (Mango’s date for the coronation of Constantine V, 8. E. Greswel, Origines Kalendariae Hellenicae, Vol. 6. 1862, p. 443. Theophanes gives as AD 733). Theophanes also mentions events in Constantinople in AD 727 (Turtledove) when there 9. A. del Mar, The Worship of Augustus Caesar . California, 1899. Reprinted 1976, p. 68. was a volcanic eruption in the sea near Thera. 10. Nicephorus ( c. 1333), History of the Romans. As the Arab advance through France was only halted at Tours by Charles Martel in AD 731, Northumberland may 11. Theophanes ( c. 815), Chronographia. Translated by H. Turtledove. 1982; The Chronicle of Theophanes Anni Mundi 6095-6305. Pennsylvania well have seemed to the Pope to be the most secure and University Press. prosperous Christian land at that time and the safest place in 12. Ibid, p. 103-105. which to write the official chronicle. 13. Ibid, p . xvi. Under the heading AM 6247, Theophanes states: 14. Del Mar, op. cit ., p. 269. ‘The Emperor Constantine resettled in Thrace the 15. Bede (c. 731), Ecclesiastical History of the English People. Translated Syrians and Armenians …. . In the same way he by B. Colngrove and R.A.B. Mynors. OUP, 1969. brought men and their families from the islands, 16. Bede ( c. 703), De Temporibus. A Latin version of the full book is and the southerly regions because there were available in Giles’ Complete works of Bede. The Chronica Minora is few property owners in the city. He had them settle available on the MGH website http://www.mgh.de/dmgh. there, thickly studding it with them.’ 17. Eusebius ( c. 325). The Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius Pamphilius , The had obviously been devastating. translated by C. F. Cruse. Bell and Daldy, London, 1868. 18. F. Wallis, Bede, . Liverpool University Press. So, when precisely did Bede think he was living in the 1999, pp. 405-416, which includes translations of: Bede ( c. 725), De interval between writing his two books? Temporus Ratione and Bede ( c. 704), Letter to Plegwin .

After Bede had written De Temporus Ratione (AD 725), 19. H. Turtedove op. cit. p. xvi he wrote his famous Ecclesiastical History of the English 20. Nikephorus ( c. 769), Historia Syntomos ; Nikephorus’ Short History. People (AD 731). This is famous as the first history written Washington. Translated by C. Mango, 1990. using the AD system. After dating Julius Caesar and Augustus using the calendar dating from the foundation of Rome (AUC), he listed the events in the Emperors’ reigns ______using AD dates from Marcus Antonius Verus in AD 156 until the reign of Mauricius in AD 582, at which point he ceased to refer to Roman Emperors and switched to Pope Gregory, Acknowledgements - This essay could not have been who sent Augustine to Kent. With the Roman Church written without considerable help from Trevor Palmer and established in the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms he related their Steve Mitchell, but the views reflected in this paper are my history using AD dates until AD 725. As the skilled narrator own views and are quite different from theirs.

Chronology & Catastrophism REVIEW 2010 39