In December of 2012, I posted a few remarks about the calendar. The visual representations of the calendar we see in the West usually take the form of a grid in seven columns, each representing a day of the week, with the rows representing the succession of the numbered days of the month as iterations of the sequence of the seven days of the week. As for example:
What occasioned my post in December of 2012 was this xkcd cartoon, in which Randall Munroe wrote the number of each date in a size that reflects the relative frequency with which that date is mentioned in materials searchable through Google NGrams:
The patterns here made me wonder if our usual grid layout oversimplifies the way the calendar is actually structured in our thought and social practice. I’m a Latin teacher, and so my working life brings me into contact with the calendar of the ancient Romans. That calendar did not include the week and was not organized as a grid. Rather, each month had an internal structure in which days were expressed by their proximity to other days and by their religious status. A visual representation of the Roman calendar might look like this:
Recently, other bits have appeared online suggesting that the calendar may have more internal structure than we commonly realize. This morning on Slate, Ben Blatt looked at times of the year when newborns are most and least likely to be given particular names. Mr Blatt’s charts, and the box in which readers can search for the seasonal patterns of particular names, are based on death reports released by the US Social Security Administration, since there is no national agency in the USA that collects and publishes comprehensive reports about births. So his data is about 80 years behind the times, but it still is interesting.
For example, Mr Blatt shows that babies born on prominent saint’s days in the USA 80 years ago were much likelier than other babies to be named after those saints. So lots of Valentines and Valentinas were born on 14 February, lots of Patricks and Patricias born on 17 March, lots of Johns and Janes born on 24 June, etc. This strikes me as a bit sad- I’ve always thought the Orthodox had a good idea with celebrating both a birthday and a name day. Having your birthday and your saint’s day simultaneously would cheat you out of an excuse for a party in your honor. Mr Blatt also shows that lots of girls named June were born in June, lots of boys named August were born in August, etc.
Last week, Cracked highlighted an old piece called “The 9 Most Statistically Terrifying Days on the Calendar.” I remember the weaknesses of Cracked magazine, I even remembered them in a post here, and more than once I’ve seen things on the site that I knew to be false. So I take everything I read there with a grain of salt. But each of the items on that listicle looks pretty plausible. For example, #9 tells us that traffic accidents spike the morning after people set their clocks ahead for daylight savings, since the hour of sleep-deprivation has the same effect as drinking a couple of shots of Scotch. I haven’t done any checking to verify that or any of the other claims on the list, but none of them is outlandish on its face, and they all have explanations attached that make me feel smart when I read them, so why the hell not repeat them.