Suetonius, Cæsar, 32.
930
De la Nauze refers this opposition to the 17th of April following (Académie des Inscriptions, tom. XXVI. 244). His calculation is incorrect.
931
De la Nauze, influenced by his wrong calculation of the opposition of Jupiter, insists that these events took place at the approach of spring. He overlooks the particle jam. Ideler suppresses it from the German text.
932
According to the system of Ideler, the Helvetii only started on the Julian 16th of April. On that reckoning, we cannot find room for the numerous events which occurred before the wheat was ripe. (Cæsar, De Bello Gallico, I. 16.)
933
The system of Ideler (see Korb, in Orelli, Onomasticum Tullianum, tom. I., p. 170), according to whom the 6th of the Calends of October fell on the Julian 30th of August, is manifestly in the wrong. Cæsar, who, in the preceding year, saw no objection to pass into Britain at the end of August, would not have troubled himself about the equinox when it was still 27 days’ distant.
934
General de Gœler has sought to raise a new system founded on the assumption that the Roman year had only 354 days. According to him, this reduction would have been necessary to find the 560 days of which Cicero speaks. The author commits more than one error; among others, he ascribes, by inattention, 29 days instead of the 27, to the month of February in the year 703. (De Gœler, p. 91.)
935
Suetonius had written: “Cæsar placed, for this time, two more months between November and December, so that the year had fifteen months, including the one to be intercalated, which, following the usage, had fallen in this same year.” Censorinus, adopting this view, finds that Cæsar intercalated 90 days in the year 708. But Suetonius has bequeathed us other errors. Dio Cassius, consul for the second time in the year 229 after Christ, had drawn from authentic sources; it is better to hold to his system, which restores the astronomical concordance for the equinox in the year 700, whereas, with the system of Censorinus, it has been sought in vain what Cæsar’s intention could have been.