🚀 go-pugleaf

On 6/18/25 10:20 AM, James Nicoll wrote:
> Counting the Days: Five SFF Approaches to Calendars
>
> So many different ways of measuring history and the passage of time...
>
> https://reactormag.com/counting-the-days-five-sff-approaches-to-calendars/


Given the different planets and settings, no surprise that Le Guin also
had many calendars in her Hainish works. I don’t remember any of the
details at this far remove, though.

In the Vorkosigan Saga, Barrayar uses calendars based on the Emperors
birthdays (for things like taxes, for example). I think they also use
the Emperor's reigns for keeping track of years.

Asimov’s Foundation series used Galactic Era and Foundation Era,
depending on the work. Trantor used GE. Terminus used FE. I don’t
remember when GE starts. FE starts in something like 12000GE, tied to
the start of the Encyclopedia Foundation.

I recently finished Rhythm of War (the 4th novel in Sanderson’s
Stormlight Archive series). This is set on planet Roshar, which uses a
calendar based on the highstorms. (Highstorms are hurricane-like storms
that blow through the land every few days). Years have 500 days.

Tony

In article <102uhvh$f8$1@reader1.panix.com>,
James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote:
>Counting the Days: Five SFF Approaches to Calendars
>
>So many different ways of measuring history and the passage of time...
>
>https://reactormag.com/counting-the-days-five-sff-approaches-to-calendars/

Some examples of my own acquaintance:

Graydon Saunders' Commonweal uses the French revolutionary calendar,
but with a couple of subtle modifications: first, the Commonweal is in
the southern hemisphere, so the months are aligned to local seasons
rather than Paris ca. 1789; and second -- this took me quite a while
to notice -- Saunders has moved Festival, and thus the turning of the
year, from the end of summer to the beginning.  There is off-hand
mention of pre-Commonweal dating systems but not in enough detail to
identify them.

Diane Duane's Middle Kingdoms use a calendar based on four 90-day
seasons, with the equivalent of the Gregorian adjustment implemented
by dropping the 208th day of every 128th year.  The extra five days
(six days for leap years) are the "Dreadnights", intercalated at the
winter solstice.  I believe there have been similar calendars proposed
IRL but don't know what they were called.  In an appendix, Duane notes
that the people of the Middle Kingdoms do reckon by the lunar cycle as
well, they just don't use this for dating; the lunar and solar cycles
coincide for Opening Night every 19 years, which is called Nineteen
Years' Night, obviously enough.  The dragons, being interstellar
travelers, have their own ways of timekeeping.

(I should go back and read those books and stories, given that it's
Pride Month and all, but I'm still trying to finish my Hugo reading
before the voting closes.)

-GAWollman

--
Garrett A. Wollman    | "Act to avoid constraining the future; if you can,
wollman@bimajority.org| act to remove constraint from the future.  This is
Opinions not shared by| a thing you can do, are able to do, to do together."
my employers.         | - Graydon Saunders, _A Succession of Bad Days_ (2015)

On 18/06/2025 21.32, Tony Nance wrote:
> On 6/18/25 10:20 AM, James Nicoll wrote:
>> Counting the Days: Five SFF Approaches to Calendars
>>
>> So many different ways of measuring history and the passage of time...
>>
>> https://reactormag.com/counting-the-days-five-sff-approaches-to-calendars/


> Asimov’s Foundation series used Galactic Era and Foundation Era, depending on the work. Trantor used GE. Terminus used FE. I don’t remember when GE starts. FE starts in something like 12000GE, tied to the start of the Encyclopedia Foundation.

According to stuff that I teased out of _Forward the Foundation_ some years
back, Seldon died in 12,069 GE, which was also 1 FE. So, presumably, FE started
in 12068 GE.

Per "Beginning of War" (Chapter 16 of _Second Foundation_), GE started with "the
accession of the traditional Kambale dynasty."

This dating was being used for dates by the time of "Blind Alley"[1], which is set
in 977-978 GE. I believe that GE dating also appears in _The Stars Like Dust_, but
a quick scan of my copy doesn't reveal any examples.

Also, by the time of "Blind Alley", mm/dd has gone away; days are just numbered
1-365 within a year. And, yes, an "Intergalactic [sic] Standard Year" is always
365 days in length, per Chapter 16 of _Second Foundation_.

Well, mm/dd had almost gone away. Despite having said in "Beginning of War" that
the war started on day 185, the quotation from the _Encyclopedia Galactica_ that
heads "End of War" (Chapter 18 of _Second Foundation_) says that the war between
Kalgan and the Foundation ended on "9, 17, 377 FE".


I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned the Shire-reckoning yet. Those crafty
hobbits set up a calendar of twelve 30-day months. Since that didn't align too
well with the Earth's annual trip around the sun, they threw in some part days
that weren't part of any month. Five or six of them, as needed.

It's all laid out in detail in Appendix D[2] of _The Lord of the Rings_, which
also covers some other calendrical systems used by various peoples of Middle
Earth.


[1] <https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?41602>
[2] <https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1047472>
--
Michael F. Stemper
Deuteronomy 10:18-19

On 20/06/2025 19:50, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
> On 18/06/2025 21.32, Tony Nance wrote:
>> On 6/18/25 10:20 AM, James Nicoll wrote:
>>> Counting the Days: Five SFF Approaches to Calendars
>>>
>>> So many different ways of measuring history and the passage of time...
>>>
>>> https://reactormag.com/counting-the-days-five-sff-approaches-to-
>>> calendars/
>
>
>> Asimov’s Foundation series used Galactic Era and Foundation Era,
>> depending on the work. Trantor used GE. Terminus used FE. I don’t
>> remember when GE starts. FE starts in something like 12000GE, tied to
>> the start of the Encyclopedia Foundation.
>
> According to stuff that I teased out of _Forward the Foundation_ some years
> back, Seldon died in 12,069 GE, which was also 1 FE. So, presumably, FE
> started
> in 12068 GE.
>
> Per "Beginning of War" (Chapter 16 of _Second Foundation_), GE started
> with "the
> accession of the traditional Kambale dynasty."
>
> This dating was being used for dates by the time of "Blind Alley"[1],
> which is set
> in 977-978 GE. I believe that GE dating also appears in _The Stars Like
> Dust_, but
> a quick scan of my copy doesn't reveal any examples.
>
> Also, by the time of "Blind Alley", mm/dd has gone away; days are just
> numbered
> 1-365 within a year. And, yes, an "Intergalactic [sic] Standard Year" is
> always
> 365 days in length, per Chapter 16 of _Second Foundation_.
>
> Well, mm/dd had almost gone away. Despite having said in "Beginning of
> War" that
> the war started on day 185, the quotation from the _Encyclopedia
> Galactica_ that
> heads "End of War" (Chapter 18 of _Second Foundation_) says that the war
> between
> Kalgan and the Foundation ended on "9, 17, 377 FE".
>
>
> I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned the Shire-reckoning yet. Those
> crafty
> hobbits set up a calendar of twelve 30-day months. Since that didn't
> align too
> well with the Earth's annual trip around the sun, they threw in some
> part days
> that weren't part of any month. Five or six of them, as needed.

One or two midsummer days that aren't weekdays
either.  So that one year's calendar is practically
identical to the next.  Saves on stationery.
Only the length of midsummer varies, and that's
holiday.

The actual Earth orbit year is 365 and a fraction
days, and apparently was back then, too.  And 365
is one day off being 52 whole weeks.

> It's all laid out in detail in Appendix D[2] of _The Lord of the Rings_,
> which
> also covers some other calendrical systems used by various peoples of
> Middle
> Earth.
>
>
> [1] <https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?41602>
> [2] <https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1047472>

On 6/20/25 2:50 PM, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
> On 18/06/2025 21.32, Tony Nance wrote:
>> On 6/18/25 10:20 AM, James Nicoll wrote:
>>> Counting the Days: Five SFF Approaches to Calendars
>>>
>>> So many different ways of measuring history and the passage of time...
>>>
>>> https://reactormag.com/counting-the-days-five-sff-approaches-to-
>>> calendars/
>
>
>> Asimov’s Foundation series used Galactic Era and Foundation Era,
>> depending on the work. Trantor used GE. Terminus used FE. I don’t
>> remember when GE starts. FE starts in something like 12000GE, tied to
>> the start of the Encyclopedia Foundation.
>
> According to stuff that I teased out of _Forward the Foundation_ some years
> back, Seldon died in 12,069 GE, which was also 1 FE. So, presumably, FE
> started
> in 12068 GE.
>
> Per "Beginning of War" (Chapter 16 of _Second Foundation_), GE started
> with "the
> accession of the traditional Kambale dynasty."
>
> This dating was being used for dates by the time of "Blind Alley"[1],
> which is set
> in 977-978 GE. I believe that GE dating also appears in _The Stars Like
> Dust_, but
> a quick scan of my copy doesn't reveal any examples.
>
> Also, by the time of "Blind Alley", mm/dd has gone away; days are just
> numbered
> 1-365 within a year. And, yes, an "Intergalactic [sic] Standard Year" is
> always
> 365 days in length, per Chapter 16 of _Second Foundation_.
>
> Well, mm/dd had almost gone away. Despite having said in "Beginning of
> War" that
> the war started on day 185, the quotation from the _Encyclopedia
> Galactica_ that
> heads "End of War" (Chapter 18 of _Second Foundation_) says that the war
> between
> Kalgan and the Foundation ended on "9, 17, 377 FE".
>

Nice. Thanks for tracking all that down.


> I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned the Shire-reckoning yet. Those
> crafty
> hobbits set up a calendar of twelve 30-day months. Since that didn't
> align too
> well with the Earth's annual trip around the sun, they threw in some
> part days
> that weren't part of any month. Five or six of them, as needed.
>
> It's all laid out in detail in Appendix D[2] of _The Lord of the Rings_,
> which
> also covers some other calendrical systems used by various peoples of
> Middle
> Earth.
>

I'd forgotten all of that. It has probably been 30+ years since I last
read The Lord of the Rings. I should read it again some time.

Tony

>
> [1] <https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?41602>
> [2] <https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1047472>

On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 22:32:42 -0400, Tony Nance <tnusenet17@gmail.com>
wrote:

>In the Vorkosigan Saga, Barrayar uses calendars based on the Emperors
>birthdays (for things like taxes, for example). I think they also use
>the Emperor's reigns for keeping track of years.
>
Is this something like the modern British celebrating "The Queen's
Birthday" (24th May) where I didn't find out till my last year of high
school that the Queen in question was Victoria not Elizabeth.....

On Sat, 21 Jun 2025 15:35:31 +0100, Robert Carnegie
<rja.carnegie@gmail.com> wrote:

>The actual Earth orbit year is 365 and a fraction
>days, and apparently was back then, too.  And 365
>is one day off being 52 whole weeks.
>
Which is why only 1 out of 4 century ending dates (e.g. 1700, 1800,
1900, 2000 etc) is a leap year - because the fraction ISN'T 1/4 and
that 3/4 00's years thing is an attempt to keep things in order.

Not that that will impact any adult living now since the next 'ending
in hundred leap year' will be 2400. That said, my 3 year old
grand-daughter has a very good chance of seeing the 22nd century -
hope she is there to lift a glass and remember us then!

On 6/23/25 4:02 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 22:32:42 -0400, Tony Nance <tnusenet17@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> In the Vorkosigan Saga, Barrayar uses calendars based on the Emperors
>> birthdays (for things like taxes, for example). I think they also use
>> the Emperor's reigns for keeping track of years.
>>
> Is this something like the modern British celebrating "The Queen's
> Birthday" (24th May) where I didn't find out till my last year of high
> school that the Queen in question was Victoria not Elizabeth.....

It seems to be not quite the same. In the Vorkosigan Saga, the date
moves to the actual birthday of the current Emperor. On that day, for
example, the Counts give the Emperor a substantial amount of money -- as
a birthday gift, of course, since obviously the Counts could never do
something as unseemly as pay taxes to the Emperor/Empire.

On Jun 23, 2025, Tony Nance wrote
(in article <103cdjg$1e7o7$1@dont-email.me>):

> On 6/23/25 4:02 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 22:32:42 -0400, Tony Nance <tnusenet17@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In the Vorkosigan Saga, Barrayar uses calendars based on the Emperors
> > > birthdays (for things like taxes, for example). I think they also use
> > > the Emperor's reigns for keeping track of years.
> > Is this something like the modern British celebrating "The Queen's
> > Birthday" (24th May) where I didn't find out till my last year of high
> > school that the Queen in question was Victoria not Elizabeth.....
>
> It seems to be not quite the same. In the Vorkosigan Saga, the date
> moves to the actual birthday of the current Emperor. On that day, for
> example, the Counts give the Emperor a substantial amount of money -- as
> a birthday gift, of course, since obviously the Counts could never do
> something as unseemly as pay taxes to the Emperor/Empire.

wasn’t there a throwaway line or two about the time that there were (IIRC)
three Emperors in one year and a few of the Counts were short of cash?

On 6/24/25 12:06 AM, WolfFan wrote:
> On Jun 23, 2025, Tony Nance wrote
> (in article <103cdjg$1e7o7$1@dont-email.me>):
>
>> On 6/23/25 4:02 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>>> On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 22:32:42 -0400, Tony Nance <tnusenet17@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In the Vorkosigan Saga, Barrayar uses calendars based on the Emperors
>>>> birthdays (for things like taxes, for example). I think they also use
>>>> the Emperor's reigns for keeping track of years.
>>> Is this something like the modern British celebrating "The Queen's
>>> Birthday" (24th May) where I didn't find out till my last year of high
>>> school that the Queen in question was Victoria not Elizabeth.....
>>
>> It seems to be not quite the same. In the Vorkosigan Saga, the date
>> moves to the actual birthday of the current Emperor. On that day, for
>> example, the Counts give the Emperor a substantial amount of money -- as
>> a birthday gift, of course, since obviously the Counts could never do
>> something as unseemly as pay taxes to the Emperor/Empire.
>
> wasn’t there a throwaway line or two about the time that there were (IIRC)
> three Emperors in one year and a few of the Counts were short of cash?
>

That sounds very familiar, but I don't remember specifically which work
it came from.

Tony

On 22/06/2025 20.45, Tony Nance wrote:
> On 6/20/25 2:50 PM, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
>> On 18/06/2025 21.32, Tony Nance wrote:
>>> On 6/18/25 10:20 AM, James Nicoll wrote:
>>>> Counting the Days: Five SFF Approaches to Calendars
>>>>
>>>> So many different ways of measuring history and the passage of time...
>>>>
>>>> https://reactormag.com/counting-the-days-five-sff-approaches-to- calendars/
>>
>>
>>> Asimov’s Foundation series used Galactic Era and Foundation Era, depending on the work. Trantor used GE. Terminus used FE. I don’t remember when GE starts. FE starts in something like 12000GE, tied to the start of the Encyclopedia Foundation.
>>
>> According to stuff that I teased out of _Forward the Foundation_ some years
>> back, Seldon died in 12,069 GE, which was also 1 FE. So, presumably, FE started
>> in 12068 GE.


> Nice. Thanks for tracking all that down.

I got so engrossed in "what did the calendars look like?" that I
forgot about the point of James' post, which was more along the
lines of "when was the year zero/one?" To make up for that:

Middle Earth:

The events that we see in _The Lord of the Rings_ all take place
in the Third Age. Obviously, if there was a Third Age, there must
have been First and Second Ages.

Appendix B does not say when the First Age began. It does, however,
tell us that:
   The _First Age_ ended with the Great Battle, in which the
   Host of Valinor broke Thangorodrim and overthrew Morgoth.

The Second Age ended, and the Third Age began, in SA 3441, when:
   Sauron overthrown by Elendil and Gil-galad, who perish.

The next transition is complicated:
   The _Third Age_ came to its end in the War of the Ring, but
   the _Fourth Age_ was hot held to have begun until Master
   Elrond departed ...

So, the Third Age ended on 25 March, TA 3019, but its successor
did not start until 21 September, TA 3021. What did they do
during that 18-month interregnum? The hobbits, of course, ate
and drank a lot, as if it was an extended Overlithe.

Speaking of the hobbits, although the other Free Peoples all
recognized these Ages, the hobbits had their own "freedom
calendar', which started in TA 1601, when a bunch of them
left Bree, crossing the Baranduin (presumably to preserve
the way of life to which they wished to become accustomed).

So, although Dwarves, Elves, and Men all considered the (latest)
downfall of Sauron as happening in TA 3019, the hobbits (at
least those who could be bothered to care about such foreign
events) saw it as happening in SR 1419.
Imperium/Foundation:

The Trantorian Empire used GE (Galactic Era) dating, which started
with the accession of some brutal lout of the Kamble Dynasty to the
Imperial throne.

The Foundation switched from GE to FE (Foundation Era) some time
after the breakup of the Periphery. The year 1 FE was the year
of Seldon's death, and most likely the founding of the Foundation.
We have the equivalence 1 FE == 12069 GE.

However, with the breakup of the Periphery (and of the Empire as a
whole), other starting points also came into use. Per Chapter 16
of _Second Foundation_, there were at least:
   GE: Galactic Era
   AS: After Seldon (starting from his birth)
   YF: Year of the Foundation (presumably, the same as FE)
   FC: First Citizen (from the creation of that office by the Mule)

However, we can't really get any valid relationships between these,
since the Good Doctor says that the war between Kalgan and the
Foundation started in 11,692 GE, which was before the Foundation was
established. Centuries before.

I just noticed that it was 377 years before the Foundation was set
up. It's possible that, since other text[1] says that the war started
in 377 FE that Dr. A. simply subtracted instead of adding. If
that's so, then it really started in 12446 GE. If my hypothesis is
correct, then we can relate eras as follows:

   12446 GE = 419 AS = 348 YF = 56 FC

Although this blows my idea that YF was another term for FE right
out of the water.

[1] Quotation from the _Encyclopedia Galactica_ that starts Chapter 19.


> I'd forgotten all of that. It has probably been 30+ years since I last read The Lord of the Rings. I should read it again some time.

Well, I find it rewarding every time. Of course, the last time that you
read it was about when I set myself the rule of always waiting at least
twelve months between successive readings of it.


--
Michael F. Stemper
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.

The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 22:32:42 -0400, Tony Nance <tnusenet17@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> In the Vorkosigan Saga, Barrayar uses calendars based on the Emperors
>> birthdays (for things like taxes, for example). I think they also use
>> the Emperor's reigns for keeping track of years.
>>
> Is this something like the modern British celebrating "The Queen's
> Birthday" (24th May) where I didn't find out till my last year of high
> school that the Queen in question was Victoria not Elizabeth.....
>
The English celebrated the birthday of  the original Queen Elizabeth for
about 150 years after her death.

When a new Dutch ruler came to the throne a couple of decades ago the
country continued to celebrate the predecessor's birthday, as that came
in may and the new ruler's in midwinter.

William Hyde

Robert Carnegie wrote:
>
>
> The actual Earth orbit year is 365 and a fraction
> days, and apparently was back then, too.  And 365
> is one day off being 52 whole weeks.

In Baxter's "Galaxias" the length of the year changes.  England (the
word here is unambiguous) adopts the "English Reformed Calendar", with,
IIRC Dec 21 2056 as day one of year one.

The rest of the world continues to use the old calendar, so once in a
while July is the middle of the northern hemisphere winter.

William Hyde

On 7/1/25 3:33 PM, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
> On 22/06/2025 20.45, Tony Nance wrote:
>> On 6/20/25 2:50 PM, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
>>> On 18/06/2025 21.32, Tony Nance wrote:
>>>> On 6/18/25 10:20 AM, James Nicoll wrote:
>>>>> Counting the Days: Five SFF Approaches to Calendars
>>>>>
>>>>> So many different ways of measuring history and the passage of time...
>>>>>
>>>>> https://reactormag.com/counting-the-days-five-sff-approaches-to-
>>>>> calendars/
>>>
>>>
>>>> Asimov’s Foundation series used Galactic Era and Foundation Era,
>>>> depending on the work. Trantor used GE. Terminus used FE. I don’t
>>>> remember when GE starts. FE starts in something like 12000GE, tied
>>>> to the start of the Encyclopedia Foundation.
>>>
>>> According to stuff that I teased out of _Forward the Foundation_ some
>>> years
>>> back, Seldon died in 12,069 GE, which was also 1 FE. So, presumably,
>>> FE started
>>> in 12068 GE.
>
>
>> Nice. Thanks for tracking all that down.
>
> I got so engrossed in "what did the calendars look like?" that I
> forgot about the point of James' post, which was more along the
> lines of "when was the year zero/one?" To make up for that:
>
> <snip wonderful research and info about LOTR calendars>
>
>

Wow - thanks for all that.

>
>
>> I'd forgotten all of that. It has probably been 30+ years since I last
>> read The Lord of the Rings. I should read it again some time.
>
> Well, I find it rewarding every time. Of course, the last time that you
> read it was about when I set myself the rule of always waiting at least
> twelve months between successive readings of it.
>

Yeah, it's definitely on my short list to re-read now.
- Tony

On Tue, 24 Jun 2025 00:06:08 -0400, WolfFan <akwolffan@zoho.com>
wrote:

>wasn’t there a throwaway line or two about the time that there were (IIRC)
>three Emperors in one year and a few of the Counts were short of cash?

Don't know about the last part but there were definitely 3 emperor
years in the Roman Empire.

I suppose the counts might have gotten lucky in having #1 and or #2
keel over before they had to fork it out...

Of course there were plenty of Emperors "elected" by no one other than
whichever Legion was based in Rome.

On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 10:14:18 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
wrote:

>On Tue, 24 Jun 2025 00:06:08 -0400, WolfFan <akwolffan@zoho.com>
>wrote:
>
>>wasn’t there a throwaway line or two about the time that there were (IIRC) 
>>three Emperors in one year and a few of the Counts were short of cash?
>
>Don't know about the last part but there were definitely 3 emperor
>years in the Roman Empire.

This is very confusing, as we appear to be mixing up "the Vorkosigan
Saga" and the Roman Empire. And I don't care which was founded on
what.

Nero was followed by four emperors in the next year (12 months):
Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and Vespasian.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Four_Emperors>

So, if this is a contest, the Roman Empire wins by 1 Emperor.

>I suppose the counts might have gotten lucky in having #1 and or #2
>keel over before they had to fork it out...

>Of course there were plenty of Emperors "elected" by no one other than
>whichever Legion was based in Rome.

They didn't have to be based in Rome. A fair number of Emperors (and
would-be Emperors) were proclaimed to be Emperor by their Legion(s)
and then marched on Rome to expell the current one.

Those were not good times for the Roman Empire. The periods where son
succeeded father for several generations were much better, at least as
far as civil war went.
-- 
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

In article <9mfn7kp293qk8deovljv09rnrin7mmjecp@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person  <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 10:14:18 -0700, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 24 Jun 2025 00:06:08 -0400, WolfFan <akwolffan@zoho.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>wasn’t there a throwaway line or two about the time that there were (IIRC)
>>>three Emperors in one year and a few of the Counts were short of cash?
>>
>>Don't know about the last part but there were definitely 3 emperor
>>years in the Roman Empire.
>
>This is very confusing, as we appear to be mixing up "the Vorkosigan
>Saga" and the Roman Empire. And I don't care which was founded on
>what.
>
>Nero was followed by four emperors in the next year (12 months):
>Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and Vespasian.
>
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Four_Emperors>
>
>So, if this is a contest, the Roman Empire wins by 1 Emperor.
>
>>I suppose the counts might have gotten lucky in having #1 and or #2
>>keel over before they had to fork it out...
>
>>Of course there were plenty of Emperors "elected" by no one other than
>>whichever Legion was based in Rome.
>
>They didn't have to be based in Rome. A fair number of Emperors (and
>would-be Emperors) were proclaimed to be Emperor by their Legion(s)
>and then marched on Rome to expell the current one.
>
>Those were not good times for the Roman Empire. The periods where son
>succeeded father for several generations were much better, at least as
>far as civil war went.

Adopted sons were best.  (And the Romans had a tradition of adult adoption).
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 08:57:16 -0700, Paul S Person
<psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

>This is very confusing, as we appear to be mixing up "the Vorkosigan
>Saga" and the Roman Empire. And I don't care which was founded on
>what.


While I've read all or nearly all the Miles books I was pretty sure on
the Roman emperors (surer than on Miles as a matter of fact but hadn't
taken time to look them up again - and all of the following names are
familiar - just couldn't remember whether they were in the same year
or over 12 months over two years. (And read both Tom Holland's
Dominion and his book on Rome since April)

>Nero was followed by four emperors in the next year (12 months):
>Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and Vespasian.
>
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Four_Emperors>
>
>So, if this is a contest, the Roman Empire wins by 1 Emperor.
>
>>I suppose the counts might have gotten lucky in having #1 and or #2
>>keel over before they had to fork it out...
>
>>Of course there were plenty of Emperors "elected" by no one other than
>>whichever Legion was based in Rome.
>
>They didn't have to be based in Rome. A fair number of Emperors (and
>would-be Emperors) were proclaimed to be Emperor by their Legion(s)
>and then marched on Rome to expell the current one.

True though when there were rival emperors backed by different legions
with neither in Rome at that point the usual outcome was that each
marched on Rome and fought it out somewhere nearby.

>Those were not good times for the Roman Empire. The periods where son
>succeeded father for several generations were much better, at least as
>far as civil war went.

Even Nero's reign (which was one of those you cited) was relatively
'good times' for the Empire though I remind you that aging Emperors
routinely adopted their successors. (Which was one of the better ways
of avoiding succession crises)

In article <XnsB3225ACC58399mmikedacomcastnet@85.12.62.254>,
 Michael Ikeda <mmikeda@erols.com> wrote:

> ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote in
> news:me1vieF4e2aU1@mid.individual.net:
>
> > In article <9mfn7kp293qk8deovljv09rnrin7mmjecp@4ax.com>,
> > Paul S Person  <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

(Snip)

> >>
> >>Nero was followed by four emperors in the next year (12 months):
> >>Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and Vespasian.
> >>
> >><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Four_Emperors>
> >>

(Snip, re inheritance of Empire in Rome)

> >
> > Adopted sons were best.  (And the Romans had a tradition of
> > adult adoption).
>
> If you exclude adult adoption, I don't think there IS an example of
> "son succeeding father for several generatioons" in the Roman
> empire.  At least if you require "several" to be more than two.  I
> THINK there's at least one case of two.
>
> (And I haven't systematically checked whether there's a "several"
> in the Eastern Roman empire but from what I've seen there doesn't
> seem to be a lot of "several" there either.)

The Macedonian Dynasty (c. 9th-11th Centuries) did last several
generations, albeit with some hiccups (BTW, while that period wasn't the
focus of Turtledove's PhD dissertation, he has written 2 fantasy
trilogies that were inspired by the Macedonian Dynasty).

--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
‹-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com

ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote in
news:me1vieF4e2aU1@mid.individual.net:

> In article <9mfn7kp293qk8deovljv09rnrin7mmjecp@4ax.com>,
> Paul S Person  <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 10:14:18 -0700, The Horny Goat
>><lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 24 Jun 2025 00:06:08 -0400, WolfFan
>>><akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>wasn’t there a throwaway line or two about the time that
>>>>there were (IIRC) three Emperors in one year and a few of the
>>>>Counts were short of cash?
>>>
>>>Don't know about the last part but there were definitely 3
>>>emperor years in the Roman Empire.
>>
>>This is very confusing, as we appear to be mixing up "the
>>Vorkosigan Saga" and the Roman Empire. And I don't care which
>>was founded on what.
>>
>>Nero was followed by four emperors in the next year (12 months):
>>Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and Vespasian.
>>
>><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Four_Emperors>
>>
>>So, if this is a contest, the Roman Empire wins by 1 Emperor.
>>
>>>I suppose the counts might have gotten lucky in having #1 and
>>>or #2 keel over before they had to fork it out...
>>
>>>Of course there were plenty of Emperors "elected" by no one
>>>other than whichever Legion was based in Rome.
>>
>>They didn't have to be based in Rome. A fair number of Emperors
>>(and would-be Emperors) were proclaimed to be Emperor by their
>>Legion(s) and then marched on Rome to expell the current one.
>>
>>Those were not good times for the Roman Empire. The periods
>>where son succeeded father for several generations were much
>>better, at least as far as civil war went.
>
> Adopted sons were best.  (And the Romans had a tradition of
> adult adoption).

If you exclude adult adoption, I don't think there IS an example of
"son succeeding father for several generatioons" in the Roman
empire.  At least if you require "several" to be more than two.  I
THINK there's at least one case of two.

(And I haven't systematically checked whether there's a "several"
in the Eastern Roman empire but from what I've seen there doesn't
seem to be a lot of "several" there either.)

The Roman empire didn't tend to have lengthy dynasties.