Автор сообщения: gorm
Дата и время сообщения: 07 April 2007 at 23:30:58:
В ответ на сообщение: Re: аксиоматика
Я посмотрел, Графтон целую главу посвящает разбору того, как у Скалигера возникло это отличие.
Establishing the Babylonian origins of the Jewish calendar did not, of course, amount to giving a definitive account of it. Scaliger dealt at length with its peculiar technical components-elements not, in his view, to be derived from an earlier source. And he elaborated some peculiar doctrines of his own in analysing and accounting for these.
In the first place, the Jews, unlike the Babylonians, had access to accurate information about the history of the world from its creation. And they assumed that the sophisticated calendar elaborated under Babylonian influence matched the lunar months which they took to have existed even in the earliest periods of history. Accordingly, they stretched their calendar proleptically backwards to the creation of the world, giving each year a numerical designation as an annus Mundi. Scaliger set the Jewish world era in autumn 3760 BC. Thus the Jewish year 5342 began in autumn 1582, 5343 in autumn 1583, and so on. The problem here is simple; in the normal Jewish calendar that had been analysed by Muenster or Schreckenfuchs, the Jewish-year dates corresponded differently to the Julian: Creation fell in autumn 3761 BC, and accordingly the Jewish year 5342 began in Autumn 1581, 5343 in autumn 1582, and so on.1 Why then did Scaliger maintain a doctrine so oddly divergent from the normal?
The key to Scaliger's procedures appears at the end of his treatment of the Islamic calendar, where he mentions a deviant Jewish method for conversion from Islamic to Jewish years:
"It seems strange that the Jews of Palestine, whose calendar has come into my possession, compute the era of Ishmael at one year less [than the Muslims). For in the present year of the Lord , as I have said over and over again, the Muslim year 990 began on 25 January. But the Jews in their year-by-year computus set 989 by the Tisri of the next year 5342, which matches 18 September of next autumn, that is, that of AD 1582. Thus Tisri will be the ninth month of 989 according to the Jews of Palestine. But I cannot explain the reason for this divergence, since I have no idea what it can be."2
Scaliger's Prolegomena-clearly written after the body of the work was complete-clarified his position. He gave a divergent system for numbering years of the Jewish world era because he followed the practice of the Jews of Palestine, 'who regularly match the years of the Lord in the era of Dionysius to their own in such a way that this year, AD 1583, is 5342-not, as it is for the European Jews, 5343".3 And he actually fitted his instructions for converting years of the Palestinian Jewish world era into Julian years to the Palestinian system, not the European one-though he also explained how to go through the text converting all of his dates for years and new moons to the normal system.
Scaliger's source for Palestinian doctrine was apparently a single document, a calendar for forty years published by the Polish-born Uri ben Simeon in Venice in 1575. This offered Jews living in exile accurate instructions for regulating their calendars, as set out by Uri and corrected by the learned Mendelin Port. It also listed the major epochs of world history and specified the intervals between them. And it did offer two hints that could conceivably mislead a reader as to the world era it used. On the one hand, it set the interval from Creation to the era of Contracts as 3448 complete years. Since the normal date of the era of Contracts was i October 312 BC, the world era computed backwards would be i October 312 + 3448 = 1 October 3760 BC, which does indeed make the interval between Creation and any given year of the Lord one year shorter than would normally follow from the Jewish era. Moreover, Uri treated his Jewish years as equivalent not to the year of the Lord in which they began but to the year of the Lord in which the bulk of the Jewish year fell. Since the Jewish year begins in autumn, the numbers he gave were apparently displaced downwards by one, consistently with his value for the date of the era of Contracts. It was accordingly just conceivable that Uri- and thus the Palestinians, who could be assumed to have retained an older and purer tradition than the European Jews-really used a world era different from the normal one.4
The problem here - as Scaliger's critic Jacob Christmann would point out over and over again in the years to come, to Scaliger's disgust and rage-was simply that Uri had never meant to offer divergent doctrine. The date of the world era was set for calendrical, not historical, reasons, as we shall eventually see, and accordingly could not be moved. Uri's date for Contracts was a simple slip. His equivalences for Jewish years and years of the Lord were meant only to make it easier to sec which dates corresponded to which, not to offer a different system for conversion. The Islamic conversion Scaliger could not understand proved beyond doubt where Uri thought the truth lay. As Scaliger said, Uri held that the Jewish year 5342 began in the Muslim year 989, which in turn began on 5 February 1581. But by Scaliger's reckoning the Jewish year 5342 should correspond to the Muslim year 990. The reason Uri gave the conversion he did was simple: he used the standard Jewish era after all, so that his conversion of the Islamic year was in fact correct, as a table of years of the Lord, the Hegira, and the Jewish era will make clear at once:
988 17 Feb. 989 5 Feb. 990 26 Jan.
5341 10 Sept. 5343 17 Sept. 5342 29 Aug.
1580 1 Jan. 1581 1 Jan. 1582 1 Jan.
The very doctrine that Scaliger could not reconcile with his understanding of Uri's peculiar calendar showed that his calendar was not peculiar after all.5 Admittedly, Uri's Islamic conversions did eventually go wrong, but that was for a different and quite simple reason. Because the Islamic New Year, 1 Muharram, corresponded closely to i January in the 15705, Uri assumed that he could simply line up the Islamic years with Christian years of the Lord. By 1585 he was in trouble, making that year correspond to the Islamic year 992, which actually ended on 23 December 1584. The Julian year 1584 began in the Islamic year 991, which ended on 3 January; 992 began on 4 January and, being purely lunar, ended before 1584 did, on 23 December.
Again, in short, Scaliger's appetite for the flavour of an unusual document had led him to cook up an idiosyncratic doctrine from it; and no amount of rhetoric in later years about the fact that he had known perfectly well that he had departed from normal Jewish computistic procedure could disguise the fact that he had done so on the basis of an error in interpretation. Christmann happily made his correction of Scaliger on this point the basis for elaborate boasting about his superior familiarity with the strange world of Jewish customs-and his more systematic use of native informants:
"How could one be so eager to know about the Jewish computus and not have dared to go to the Jews who live everywhere in the populous cities of Italy, Germany, Poland, and elsewhere, to ask them how years are computed? Many of them can be found who have undergone long pilgrimages and reached Palestine and other remote lands with great effort, so that they could observe the customs of foreign peoples and especially the ceremonies of their own race. Had they seen that it was proper to follow other men's example in the ordering of the year, and to make some fundamental change, they would certainly have spared no effort or expense to improve the timing of their feasts. But now we see that all the Jews agree on the observation of new moons and Passovers, and consider the calendar of the Palestinians authentic. That indicates that they approve of the same epoch for the years [of the world].6
No very effective reply could be made.