Fasti | Page 6

any great improbability in supposing the same to have been the case at Rome? The religious year of ten months, as being least used, may have proceeded with numerical appellations from its first month to December, while the months of the civil year had each their peculiar appellation derived from the name of a deity, or of a festival. It is remarkable that the first six months of the year alone have proper names; but the remaining ones may have had them also, though, from causes which we are unable to explain, they have gone out of use, and those of the cyclic year have been employed in their stead.[6]
The oriental division of time into weeks of seven days, though resulting so naturally from the phases of the moon, was not known at Rome till the time of the emperors. The Etruscan year, as we have seen, consisted of weeks of eight days, and in the Roman custom of holding markets on the _nundines_, or every ninth day, we see traces of its former use, but a different mode of dividing the month seems to have early begun to prevail.
In the Roman month there were three days with peculiar names, from their places with relation to which the other days were denominated. These were the Kalends (Kalendae or _Calendae_,) the Nones, (_Nonae_) and the Ides (Idus or _Eidus_). The Kalends (from _calare_, to proclaim,) were the first day of the month; the Nones (from _nonus_, ninth) were the ninth day before the Ides reckoning inclusively; the Ides, (from iduare, to divide,) fell about, not exactly on, the middle of the months. In March, May, July and October, the Ides were the 15th, and, consequently, the Nones the 7th day of the month; in the remaining months the Ides were the 13th, the Nones the 5th. The space, therefore, between the Nones and Ides was always the same, those between the Kalends and Nones, and the Ides and Kalends, were subject to variation. Originally, however, it would appear, the latter space also was fixed, and there were in every month, except February, 10 days from the Ides to the Kalends, The months, therefore, consisted of 31 and 29 days, February having 28. In the Julian Calendar, January, August and December were raised from 29 to 31 days, while their Nones and Ides remained unchanged. It was only necessary then to know how many days there were between the Kalends and Nones, as the remaining portions were constant. Accordingly, on the day of new moon, the pontiff cried aloud _Calo Jana novella_[7] five times or seven times, and thus intimated the day of the Nones, which was quite sufficient for the people.
We thus see that the Roman month was, like the Attic, divided into three portions, but its division was of a more complex and embarrassing kind; for while the Attic month consisted of three decades of days, and each day was called the first, second, third, or so, of the decade, to which it belonged; the days of the Roman month were counted with reference to the one of the three great days which was before them. It is an error to suppose that the Romans counted backwards. Thus, taking the month of January for an example, the first day was the Kalends, the second was then viewed with reference to the approaching Nones, and was denominated the _fourth before the Nones_; the day after the Nones was the _eighth before the Ides_; the day after the Ides, the nineteenth before the Kalends of February.
The technical phraseology of the Roman Calendar ran thus. The numeral was usually put in the ablative case, and as the names of the months were adjectives, they were made to agree with the Kalends etc. or followed in the genitive, mensis being understood. Thus, to say that an event occurred on the Ides of March, the term would be _Idibus Martiis_, or Idibus Martii (_mensis_). So also of the Kalends and Nones, for any other day the phrase would be, for example, _tertio Kalendas, i. e. tertio (die ante) Kalendas_ or _tertio (die) Kalendarum_, The day before any of the three principal days was _pridie (i. e. priore die) Kalendas_ or _Kalendarum, Nonas_ or _Nonarum, Idus_ or Iduum.
Another mode of expression, was to use a preposition, and an accusative case. Thus, for tertio Nonas they would say _ante diem tertium Nonas_, which was written _a. d. III. Non_. This form is very much employed by Livy and Cicero. It was even used objectively, and governed of the prepositions in and ex. We thus meet _in ante tertium Nonas_, and _ex ante diem Nonas_, in these authors. Another preposition thus employed is _ad_, we meet ad pridie Nonas.
As the Romans reckoned inclusively, we must be careful in