It’s 2024. Happy New Year! For many around the globe, reckoning time through the Anno Domini (AD) system, counting years forward from the widely accepted birth year of Jesus Christ, is the norm. Combined with Before Christ (BC) for years prior, this system, rooted in Christian tradition, feels almost universal. But have you ever stopped to wonder, “What Year Are We In” from a different historical perspective? How did people keep track of time before the 6th-century establishment of BC/AD? Let’s journey back to ancient Rome to uncover their fascinating methods of marking the passage of years.
For Romans living in what we now call 50 BC, the concept of ‘Before Christ’ was, of course, non-existent. They operated within their own unique frameworks for understanding and recording time. They primarily utilized two main systems: dating Ab Urbe Condita (AUC), meaning “from the founding of the City,” and the more prevalent system of consular dating.
Ab Urbe Condita: Referencing Rome’s Legendary Foundation
The Ab Urbe Condita era began, according to Roman legend, with the founding of Rome in 753 BC. Therefore, a Roman might have referred to 50 BC as the year DCCIII AUC (703 ab urbe condita). While this system provided a grand, sweeping historical context, linking dates back to the mythical origins of their civilization, it wasn’t the most practical for everyday use. Imagine always having to calculate years from a fixed, somewhat distant point in the past! While Ab Urbe Condita dating was employed on significant anniversaries and for historical narratives, it generally took a backseat to a more immediate and politically relevant method.
Consular Dating: Naming Years After Leaders
The Romans, with their strong emphasis on civic duty and public service, developed a system of dating years that was deeply intertwined with their political structure: consular dating. This system revolved around the two consuls, the highest elected officials in the Roman Republic. Consuls were elected annually in pairs, embodying the Republican ideal of shared power and preventing any single individual from becoming too dominant. The year was identified by the names of the two serving consuls.
Initially designed for the Republic, the consular system adapted even as Rome transitioned into an Empire. While the Emperor gradually became the ultimate authority, and the consulship lost much of its political clout, the tradition of naming years after consuls persisted. Often, the Emperor himself would hold the consulship, further embedding this dating system into the fabric of Roman life. To distinguish between individuals who held the consulship multiple times, Roman numerals were added after their names, indicating the number of times they had served.
For example, instead of saying 50 BC, a Roman official might have declared, “it is the year when Lucius Aemilius Lepidus Paullus and Gaius Claudius Marcellus Minor are consuls.” This system, while seemingly cumbersome to us, was deeply ingrained in Roman administrative and societal practices.
A golden aureus coin minted during the joint reign of Emperors Caracalla and Geta (AD 211-2), depicting the brothers as consuls in curule chairs, symbols of their office.
The Practicalities and Quirks of Consular Dating
Consular dating had both advantages and disadvantages. On the one hand, it provided each year with a distinct identity, linked to contemporary figures known to everyone. The consuls assumed office on January 1st each year, creating a clear and annual cycle. In the short term, referencing the consuls was a readily understandable way to pinpoint a specific year.
However, unlike the linear progression of BC/AD, consular dating lacked a predictable numerical order. To understand the temporal distance between two consular dates, one needed to recall the sequence of consuls. Imagine trying to quickly calculate how many years passed between the consulship of Lucius Aemilius Lepidus Paullus and Gaius Claudius Marcellus Minor and another pair of consuls without a readily accessible list! For everyday Romans, this likely wasn’t a major issue as they primarily used more personal time references like “last year” or “the year my son was born.” Consular dating was mainly reserved for official documents, inscriptions, and formal record-keeping. The Roman state, of course, maintained records of consuls, ensuring chronological order was preserved for official purposes.
Consider the modern analogy: Imagine dating years by the Prime Minister or President in office – and then imagine two of them, changing annually! While seemingly complex to us now, consular dating was a functional system within its specific historical and cultural context.
A humorous cartoon illustrating the potential confusion of dating years by constantly changing pairs of consuls, compared to a more straightforward numerical system.
Dating Latin Inscriptions: Put Your Roman Time Skills to the Test
Inscriptions, especially those on stone and brick, often utilized abbreviated forms of consular dates to save space. The formula typically involved the two consuls’ names followed by “COS,” an abbreviation for consulibus, meaning “when they were consuls.”
Now, let’s put your newfound knowledge of Roman dating to the test! Below are three Latin inscriptions from the Ashmolean Museum’s collection that employ consular dates. Unscramble the dates and, using the provided list of Roman consuls, determine the equivalent AD year.
~O~O~O~O~O~O~O~O~O~O~
1. Easy: An altar dedicated by a freedman to the god Silvanus (Ashmolean ANChandler.3.14):
C(aio) Mini- cio Fundano et C(aio) Vettennio Se- vero co(n)s(ulibus)
“When Gaius Minicius Fundatus and Gaius Vettennius Severus were consuls”
2. Tricky: On this brick stamp, the consuls’ names encircle the central “COS” (Ashmolean AN1972.1497):
Serviano III et Varo co(n)s(ulibus)
“When Servianus (for the third time) and Varus were consuls”
3. Fiendish: This brick-stamp presents a fragmented first consul’s name and a highly abbreviated second consul before “COS” (Ashmolean AN1872.1500):
…Tit(iano et) M(arco) Squil(la) Ga(llicano) co(n)s(ulibus)
“When … Titianus and Marcus Squilla Gallicanus were consuls”
~O~O~O~O~O~O~O~O~O~O~
Answers to the Inscription Challenge
- The consulship of Gaius Minicius Fundatus and Gaius Vettennius Severus corresponds to AD 108.
- The consulship of Lucius Julius Ursus Servianus (for the third time) and Titus Vibius Varus was in AD 134.
- The consulship of Titus Atilius Titianus and Marcus Squilla Gallicanus was in AD 127.
Conclusion: A Different Way to Ask “What Year Is It?”
So, the next time you ask, “what year are we in?”, remember that the answer is culturally and historically contingent. While we comfortably use AD 2024, the Romans, before the widespread adoption of the BC/AD system, had their own unique ways of marking time. Their systems, Ab Urbe Condita and consular dating, offer a fascinating glimpse into how ancient societies structured their understanding of history and the present, linking time to foundational myths and contemporary leadership rather than a linear count from a single religious event. Exploring these alternative approaches enriches our understanding of history and the diverse ways humans have made sense of time itself.
