A.D. 672 – The Apex of Apocalyptic Thought in the Early Medieval Latin West

Probably not a substantial claim.

The first year in this cluster of countdowns is A.D. 672.

“The first year in this cluster of countdowns is A.D. 672.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The biggest corpus of countdowns survives for AMII, according to which the sixth millennium ended in A.D. 799/800.

“The biggest corpus of such countdowns survives for AMII, according to which the sixth millennium ended in A.D. 799/800.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The evidence for the A.D. 670s cluster comes from four different manuscript contexts (continuations of Isidore's chronicle; Frankish summae annorum; Victorian computus; non-Isidorean Iberian tradition) and from four different geographic regions (Neustria, Burgundy, Aquitaine, Iberia).

“The evidence comes from four different manuscript contexts (continuations of Isidore's chronicle; Frankish summae annorum; Victorian computus; and the non-Isidorean Iberian tradition) and from four different geographic regions (Neustria, Burgundy, Aquitaine, Iberia).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Victor of Capua, replying to the pope's question about the Easter date for A.D. 550, was furious that Victorius provided both a correct (though with the wrong lunar date) and a wrong date for that year.

“Victor of Capua, replying to the pope's question about the Easter date for A.D. 550, was furious that Victorius provided both a correct (though with the wrong lunar date) and a wrong date for this year.”

• cites [32]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

The fourth countdown states that Chlothar III died after ruling for 15 years and 5 months, and that his reign was followed by the tyranny in Neustria of Childeric II who reigned for 2 years and 5 months.

“The fourth provides more detail, stating that Chlothar III died after ruling for 15 years and 5 months, and that his reign was followed by the tyranny in Neustria of Childeric II who reigned for 2 years and 5 months.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Every 19th year, the Easter full moon fell before the equinox.

“This still meant that every 19th year, the Easter full moon fell before the equinox.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

In such years, Easter Sunday would fall on 28 March, luna 22, or alternatively 21 March, luna 15, which Alexandria considered unlawful.

“This led to Easter Sunday on 28 March, luna 22, or, alternatively (if double dates were applied), 21 March, luna 15 (i.e., on the equinox), which Alexandria considered unlawful.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

For any of the 19 years in Victorius's lunar cycle, Easter Sunday could fall on seven different consecutive dates, luna 16 to 22, with Victorius also noting the alternative luna 15 if Easter fell on the latter date.

“For any of the 19 years in Victorius's lunar cycle, Easter Sunday could fall on seven different consecutive dates, luna 16 to 22 (with Victorius also noting the alternative luna 15 if Easter fell on the latter date, as discussed above).”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Victorius did not provide details about the construction of his 19-year lunar cycle, and never specified the exact place of the embolisms.

“Victorius (like Dionysius) did not provide details about the construction of his 19-year lunar cycle.In particularly, he never specified the exact place of the embolisms, the intercalated lunar months that would bring the 354 ¼-day lunar year in line with the 365 ¼-day solar year.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

The second and third countdowns transcribed refer to the 15th and 16th year of the Neustrian-Burgundian king Chlothar III, respectively.

“The second and third countdown transcribed above refer to the 15th and 16th year of the Neustrian-Burgundian king Chlothar III, respectively.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Many Victorian Easter tables from the later seventh and eighth centuries dropped the double dates, no doubt to give them more authority and to avoid confusion.

“Many Victorian Easter tables from the later seventh and eighth centuries, however, dropped the double dates, no doubt to give them more authority and to avoid confusion.”

• cites [35]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

This reign came to an end with the accession of Theuderic to the Neustrian throne.

“This reign, in turn, came to an end with the accession of Theuderic to the Neustrian throne.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Victorius discussed only one year of his Easter table in detail, which is one of epact 27, but with Saturday (rather than the problematic Friday) on 1 January.

“Interestingly, Victorius discussed only one year of his Easter table in detail, which is indeed one of epact 27, but with Saturday (rather than the problematic Friday) on 1 January.”

• cites [48]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

In such years, Victorius argued, Easter Sunday could only be celebrated on 20 March according to the Latins, which had never been done, or on 24 April according to the Alexandrians, which had been observed a few times.

“In such years, he argued, Easter Sunday could only be celebrated on 20 March according to the Latins, which had never been done, or on 24 April according to the Alexandrians, which had been observed a few times (no doubt referring to Leo's concession of A.D. 455).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Victorius did not do this consistently for every year in which his system allowed Easter Sunday on luna 22; a comprehensive study of how exactly he set the double dates remains a major desideratum.

“However, he did not do this consistently for every year in which his system allowed Easter Sunday on luna 22; a comprehensive study of how exactly he set the double dates remains a major desideratum”

• cites VictoriusNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

It may state two separate claims as one.

In his prologue, Victorius explained that the Latini allowed the Easter new moon (luna 1) to fall as early as 5 March, which leads to Easter full moon (luna 14) on 18 March, and the earliest Easter Sunday (luna 16) on 20 March.

“In his prologue, Victorius explained that the Latini allowed the Easter new moon (luna 1) to fall as early as 5 March, 38 which leads to Easter full moon (luna 14) on 18 March, and the earliest Easter Sunday (luna 16) on 20 March.”

• cites [38]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim.

Which of these was Easter Sunday in a given year depended on the weekday of 1 January.

“Which of these was Easter Sunday in a given year depended on the weekday of 1 January; the weekdays are here numbered in early medieval fashion from 1 = Sunday to 7 = Saturday.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Victorius still set the Easter full moon (luna 14) as early as 20 March every 19th year (in years with epact 25), which led to 22 March, luna 16 as the earliest possible date for Easter Sunday.

“He still set the Easter full moon (luna 14) as early as 20 March (i.e., before the vernal equinox) every 19th year (in years with epact 25), which led to 22 March, luna 16 (i.e., after the vernal equinox) as the earliest possible date for Easter Sunday.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

For the year of epact 27, all three texts follow the same doctrine: the embolism is pushed to 3 May to 1 June, whereas Victorius's original Easter table suggested it had to be intercalated before Easter Sunday.

“For the year in question (epact 27), however, all three texts follow the same doctrine (spelled out in most detail in Quaest.Austr.):Whereas Victorius's original Easter table suggested that the embolism of that year had to be intercalated before Easter Sunday, here the embolism is pushed to 3 May to 1 June.”

• cites [54]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

It may state two separate claims as one.

The Bern version differs markedly from its Paris and Cologne counterparts because it begins with the year of epact 1 on 1 January, while the other two chose the year of epact 9 as their starting point.

“The Bern version differs markedly from its Paris and Cologne counterparts not least because it begins with the year of epact 1 on 1 January (coinciding with the first year to which Victorius's table could have been applied, A.D. 458), while the other two chose the year of epact 9 (the Victorian equivalent to the first year of the Dionysiac 19-year cycle) as their starting point.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The events of the A.D. 660s took place in Britain and Ireland, whereas the countdowns of the A.D. 670s originated exclusively on the Continent.

“However, the events just described took place in Britain and Ireland, whereas the countdowns of the A.D. 670s originated exclusively on the Continent.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

In A.D. 577, some churches in Gaul, following the Spanish example, kept Easter Sunday on 21 March, while Tours and other cities preferred 18 April.

“He says that in this year, A.D. 577, some churches in Gaul, following the Spanish example, kept Easter Sunday on 21 March, while Tours and other cities preferred 18 April.”

• cites [61]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

It may state two separate claims as one.

In the first instance, AP 151, the lunar age of Easter Sunday is in line with the canonical Victorian Easter table; in the remaining three cases (AP 170, 189, 208), the lunar age of Easter Sunday is systematically incremented by one compared to Victorius's original construction.

“In the first instance, AP 151, the lunar age of Easter Sunday is in line with the canonical Victorian Easter table; in the remaining three cases (AP 170, 189, 208), however, the lunar age of Easter Sunday is systematically incremented by one compared to Victorius's original construction, no doubt because of the later placement of the embolism discussed above.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Only two chapters later Gregory extends the list of divine punishment from plague to famine in other parts of Gaul, citing Matthew 24:7-8/Mark 13:22 on the signs of the End Times.

“Certainly, only two chapters later Gregory extends the list of divine punishment from plague to famine in other parts of Gaul, citing Matthew 24:7-8/Mark 13:22 on the signs of the End Times:”

It may state two separate claims as one.

18 April, Gregory's Easter Sunday, fell on luna 15, a practice he was to condemn later in his work.

“The information provided by Gregory is rather sparse, and for very good reasons: 18 April, his Easter Sunday, fell on luna 15, a practice he was to condemn later in his work, in the passage cited above.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

We have no account similar to that provided by Gregory on the reactions to this intellectual dilemma, principally because the A.D. 670s are one of the least documented decades in Merovingian history.

“We have no account similar to that provided by Gregory on the reactions to this intellectual dilemma, principally because the A.D. 670s are one of the least documented decades in Merovingian history.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

The year in question in Gregory's first passage is A.D. 590, and Victorius provided two dates for Easter Sunday in this year, 26 March (luna 15) and 2 April (luna 22).

“The year in question is A.D. 590, and the problem the one outlined under 1 above: Victorius provided two dates for Easter Sunday in this year, 26 March (luna 15) and 2 April (luna 22).”

It may state two separate claims as one.

This leads to a lunar age for Easter Sunday incremented by one compared to Victorius's original table, and thus a lawful Easter Sunday of 18 April, luna 16 (rather than luna 15 as Victorius would have it) in the year in question.

“and thus a lawful Easter Sunday of 18 April, luna 16 (rather than luna 15 as Victorius would have it) in the year in question.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

The first of these dates was supposed to reflect Alexandrian customs, the second Victorius attributed to the Latini.

“The first one was supposed to reflect Alexandrian customs, the second one Victorius attributed to the Latini.”

• cites [57]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Victorius thought the decision about which Easter date to use was the pope's to make.

“Victorius thought the decision was the pope's to make.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

25 April with luna 22 was not considered a possible date for Easter Sunday by followers of Victorius in Gaul or Spain, if Gregory can be trusted here.

“Certainly, 25 April with luna 22 was not considered a possible date for Easter Sunday by followers of Victorius in Gaul or Spain, if Gregory can be trusted here.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

The passage containing the fourth countdown contains one of the earliest uses of the incarnation era, which remains the standard in the 21st century.

“This passage contains one of the earliest uses of the incarnation era, which remains the standard in the 21st century.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Gregory of Tours includes two passages in his Ten Books of Histories designed to illustrate the invocation of portents of the apocalypse that will follow if Easter is not celebrated on the right day.

“In his Ten Books of Histories, he includes two passages designed to illustrate the invocation of portents of the apocalypse that will follow if Easter is not celebrated on the right day.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

AMI goes back to Hippolytus of Rome and Julianus Africanus in the third century, who both dated Christ's birth to AM 5500; the end of the sixth millennium would therefore occur in A.D. 500.

“AMI goes back to the writings of Hippolytus of Rome and Julianus Africanus in the third century, who both dated the birth of Christ to AM 5500; the end of the sixth millennium would therefore occur in A.D. 500.”

• cites HippolytusNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Julianus AfricanusNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

The Viking incursions in Britain and Ireland starting in the A.D. 790s had a similar effect and are more directly connected to contemporary apocalyptic discourse.

“Likewise, the Viking incursions in Britain and Ireland starting in the A.D. 790s had a similar effect (and are more directly connected to the contemporary apocalyptic discourse).”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

In times of crisis, Christian intellectuals responded in two ways depending on their status.

“In such times of crisis, Christian intellectuals responded in two ways, depending on their status.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Writing in the early medieval Latin West was almost exclusively in the hands of a Christian intellectual elite of considerable spiritual, political, and economic power, whose prime legitimisation was Christianity.

Probably not a substantial claim.

The sixth-century text De excidio et conquestu Britanniae, ascribed to Gildas by Columbanus and Bede, describes in detail the conquest of late Roman, Christian Britain by the pagan Saxons, its prehistory, causes and consequences.

“The sixth-century text known as De excidio et conquestu Britanniae, ascribed to a certain Gildas by both Columbanus and Bede, describes in detail the conquest of late Roman, Christian Britain by the pagan Saxons, its prehistory, causes and consequences.”

• cites ColumbanusNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites BedeNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

It may state two separate claims as one.

In the period c. A.D. 640-800, the Arab invasion of the Iberian Peninsula from A.D. 711 onwards was the most cataclysmic political change, though it only indirectly influenced Beatus of Liébana's commentary on the apocalypse.

“In the period under discussion here, between c. A.D. 640 and 800, the Arab invasion of the Iberian Peninsula from A.D. 711 onwards was the most cataclysmic political change (though it only indirectly influenced Beatus of Liébana's commentary on the apocalypse, which contained the last countdown listed in Table 1 above).”

• cites Beatus of LiébanaNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim.

There were external and internal factors that could challenge or threaten the close link between the Christian intellectual elite and Christianity.

“There were external and internal factors that could challenge or threaten the close link between this elite and Christianity.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Writing in the early medieval Latin West was almost exclusively in the hands of a Christian intellectual elite of considerable spiritual, political, and economic power, whose prime legitimisation was Christianity.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The connection of the Second Coming to the beginning of the seventh millennium raised apocalyptic expectations for the end of the sixth millennium.

“This raised apocalyptic expectations for the end of sixth millennium.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The rhetoric and imagery of De excidio et conquestu Britanniae are decidedly apocalyptic.

“The text's rhetoric and imagery are decidedly apocalyptic.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

AMII replaced AMI roughly 100 years before AMI would have reached the end of the sixth millennium, and AMIII replaced AMII similarly.

“AMII replaced AMI roughly 100 years before AMI would have reached the end of the sixth millennium, and the same applies to AMIII replacing AMII.”

• cites LandesNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Apocalyptic narratives were regularly employed to cement privilege and power.

“This method was so effective that apocalyptic narratives were regularly employed to cement privilege and power.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Writing in the early medieval Latin West was almost exclusively in the hands of a Christian intellectual elite of considerable spiritual, political, and economic power, whose prime legitimisation was Christianity.

Probably not a substantial claim.

AMIII is the Vulgate count popularised by Bede in the eighth century, according to which Christ was born in AM 3952.

“AMIII is the Vulgate count popularised by Bede in the eighth century, according to which Christ was born in AM 3952.”

• cites BedeNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Military defeat at the hands of a pagan force was a potential external factor threatening the elite's dominance.

“Potential external factors threatening the elite's dominance included, most prominently, military defeat at the hand of a pagan force”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Writing in the early medieval Latin West was almost exclusively in the hands of a Christian intellectual elite of considerable spiritual, political, and economic power, whose prime legitimisation was Christianity.

Probably not a substantial claim.

Richard Landes drew attention to the phenomenon that AMI was widely replaced by AMII, and AMII in turn by AMIII, shortly before the end of the sixth millennium was reached according to their respective calculations.

“Richard Landes drew attention to the phenomenon that AMI was widely replaced by AMII, and AMII in turn by AMIII, shortly before the end of the sixth millennium was reached according to their respective calculations.”

• cites LandesNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

The Christian elite's role was to safeguard God's blessing of society, and military defeat, famine, plague, extreme weather, and celestial phenomena were interpreted as signs of God's displeasure and indicators of the elite's failure.

“The Christian elite's role was to safeguard God's blessing of society, and military defeat and other external factors, like famine, plague, extreme weather, and celestial phenomena, were interpreted as signs of God's displeasure with society's behaviour and thus indicators of the elite's failure to fulfill its prime task.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Writing in the early medieval Latin West was almost exclusively in the hands of a Christian intellectual elite of considerable spiritual, political, and economic power, whose prime legitimisation was Christianity.

It may state two separate claims as one.

Outside the political sphere, the A.D. 660s saw the highest density of unsettling and catastrophic events in the seventh and eighth centuries, starting with the total solar eclipse of A.D. 664, followed by plague and widespread famine.

“Outside of the political sphere, the A.D. 660s saw the highest density of unsettling and catastrophic events in the seventh and eighth centuries, starting with the famous total solar eclipse of A.D. 664, which was followed by plague and widespread famine.”

• cites Annals of UlsterNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites BedeNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

It may state two separate claims as one.

Both the Arab invasion and the Viking incursions took place too late to explain the cluster of chronological millennialism under discussion.

“Both events, however, took place too late to explain the cluster of chronological millennialism under discussion here.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The corpus of countdowns was inspired by the second-century Letter of Barnabas, whose author combined the six days of creation with the psalmist's statement that one day of the Lord is like 1000 years into the theory that the Second Coming would occur at the end of the sixth millennium.

“This corpus was inspired by the second-century Letter of Barnabas, whose author combined the six days of creation with the psalmist's statement that one day of the Lord is like 1000 years into the theory that the second coming of Christ would occur at the end of the sixth millennium.”

• cites Letter of BarnabasNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Those among the intellectual Christian elite who did not hold high office used external and internal shortcomings of higher-ranked clergy to undermine the latter's authority and position themselves as potential successors of higher moral integrity.

“Those among the intellectual Christian elite who did not hold high office or enjoy power, privilege, and authority, but only aspired to these, used also external, but particularly internal shortcomings of the higher-ranked clergy in order to undermine the latter's authority and position themselves as potential successors of higher moral integrity.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Writing in the early medieval Latin West was almost exclusively in the hands of a Christian intellectual elite of considerable spiritual, political, and economic power, whose prime legitimisation was Christianity.

It may state two separate claims as one.

Bede's method was not used for calculating the end of the world, as his more prominent use of anni domini gave rise to the belief that the Second Coming would occur a millennium after the first, i.e. in A.D. 1000.

“Bede's method was not used for calculating the end of the world, as his more prominent use of anni domini (A.D.), still in use today, gave rise to the belief that the second coming of Christ would occur a millennium after the first coming, i.e. in A.D. 1000”

• cites BedeNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Victorius was supposed to reconcile Roman with Alexandrian tradition.

“Victorius was supposed to reconcile Roman with Alexandrian tradition.”

• cites VictoriusNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

A first step was to abandon the Roman 84-year Easter table and to adopt a 19-year lunar cycle.

“A first step was to abandon the Roman 84-year Easter table and to adopt a 19-year lunar cycle.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The brief given to Victorius by Pope Leo I must have explicitly forbidden Easter Sunday to fall later than 24 April.

“The brief given to Victorius by Pope Leo I must have explicitly forbidden for Easter Sunday to fall later than on 24 April.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

If 21 April was to be kept as an upper Julian calendar limit, Easter Sunday had to fall before the vernal equinox of 21 March.

“If 21 April was to be kept as an upper Julian calendar limit, Easter Sunday had to fall before the vernal equinox of 21 March.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

For commemorating a change in rulership, a simple summa annorum would have been enough; there was no need for adding a countdown to the end of the sixth millennium.

“However, for this purpose a simple summa annorum, counting the years to the accession of the new king, would have been enough, there was no need for adding a countdown to the end of the sixth millennium.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The connection of Easter to the lunar phases proved fateful.

“The connection of Easter to the lunar phases (or the synodic lunar month, i.e. the period from one new or full moon to the next) proved fateful.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Following the Gospels, the first Sunday after the full moon occurring at the time of the Hebrew lunar month Nisan was proclaimed the correct date for Easter.

“Rather, following the information provided in the Gospels, the first Sunday after the full moon occurring at the time of the Hebrew lunar month Nisan (the first month of spring) was proclaimed the correct date.”

• cites GospelsNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

By the seventh century, when the popularity of countdowns to the end of the sixth millennium grew, adherents of Victorius's calculations came increasingly under attack from the rising number of supporters of the Alexandrian (Dionysiac) reckoning.

“Certainly by the seventh century, when the popularity of countdowns to the end of the sixth millennium grew, adherents of Victorius's calculations came increasingly under attack from the rising number of supporters of the Alexandrian (Dionysiac) reckoning.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

The second book of Adomnán's Life of Columba ends with Saint Columba's patronage and spiritual guidance protecting the regions of modern-day Scotland from the plague.

“The second book ends with Saint Columba's patronage and spiritual guidance protecting the regions of modern-day Scotland from the plague.”

• cites AdomnánNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

It may state two separate claims as one.

Since this mistake appears twice in the Gotha table, and is confirmed for AP 455 (= A.D. 482) by the oldest (partial) Victorian table, known as the Paschale Campanum, there cannot be any doubt that Victorius himself listed these dates.

“Since this mistake appears twice in the Gotha table, and is confirmed for AP 455 (= A.D. 482) by the oldest (partial) Victorian table, known as the Paschale Campanum, 50 there cannot be any doubt that Victorius himself listed these dates.”

• cites [50]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

In the second century, followers of the still emerging Christian belief decided that Easter was not to be celebrated on a fixed Julian calendar date.

“In the second century, followers of the still emerging Christian belief decided that their highest religious feast day, commemorating the crucifixion and resurrection of their saviour, was not to be celebrated on a fixed Julian calendar date.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The lunar age of any given Julian calendar date recurs to the exact same value after exactly 19 years, but not before.

“This means that the lunar age of any given Julian calendar date will recur to the exact same value after exactly 19 years, but not before.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The last of these three countdowns, written at the end of the conflict, could have explicitly referred to it, but chose to remain silent.

“Also, the last of these three countdowns, written at the end of the conflict, could have explicitly referred to it, but chose to remain silent.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

There were three reasons why some of these 532 years proved problematic for later users of Victorius's table.

“There were three reasons why some of these 532 years proved problematic for later users of Victorius's table.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Every 19th year, the one with epact 25 in Victorius's Easter table, must have led to debates between the two opposing camps.

“Every 19th year, the one with epact 25 in Victorius's Easter table, must have led to debates between the two opposing camps.”

• cites [43]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

The developing Eastern churches, with their intellectual centre in Alexandria, favoured a 19-year lunar cycle, while the emerging Western church with Rome at its core first experimented with an 8-year lunar cycle, before embracing an 84-year lunar cycle in the late third and early fourth centuries.

“The developing Eastern churches, with their intellectual centre in Alexandria, favoured a 19-year lunar cycle, while the emerging Western church with Rome at its core first experimented with an 8-year lunar cycle, before embracing, in the late third and early fourth centuries, an 84-year lunar cycle.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

In A.D. 457, Pope Leo I commissioned Victorius, a renowned mathematician from Aquitaine, with the task of bringing the Western calculations in line with the East.

“In A.D. 457, Pope Leo I commissioned Victorius, a renowned mathematician from Aquitaine, with the task of bringing the Western calculations in line with the East.”

• cites Pope Leo INot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites VictoriusNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

It may state two separate claims as one.

None of the extant Victorian Easter tables records the 'Greek' double date in such years (A.D. 471, 661, and 756), and it must be presumed that Victorius deliberately avoided them for these years in his original composition.

“But none of the extant Victorian Easter tables records the “Greek” double date in such years (A.D. 471, 661, and 756), 41 and it must be presumed that Victorius deliberately avoided them for these years in his original composition.”

• cites [41]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

For centuries after Victorius no further attempt was made at establishing a more accurate system; it must have been deemed too complex a task.

“Certainly, it seems that for centuries after Victorius no further attempt was made at establishing a more accurate system: besides other considerations, it must have been deemed too complex a task.”

Probably not a substantial claim.

Since Easter was agreed to fall on the first Sunday after the first full moon (luna 14) after the spring equinox, the lunar age on this day could vary by seven days.

“Since Easter was agreed to fall on the first Sunday after the first full moon (luna 14) after the spring equinox, the lunar age on this day could vary by seven days.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

Following the Alexandrian example, Victorius opted for a 19-year lunar cycle, though the structure of his version differed from the Alexandrian one in a number of details.

“Following the Alexandrian example, Victorius opted for a 19-year lunar cycle, though the structure of his version differed from the Alexandrian one in a number of details.”

• cites VictoriusNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

It may state two separate claims as one.

The first of the three countdowns appears to have been written before the conflict broke out, which turned into a large-scale political crisis only at Chlothar's death and Childeric II's accession.

“Particularly the first of the three countdowns appears to have been written before the conflict broke out, which, however, turned into a large-scale political crisis only at Chlothar's death and Childeric II accession.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

This variation in practice led to ongoing disputes between Alexandria and Rome, which the pope found increasingly embarrassing.

“This variation in practice led to ongoing disputes between Alexandria and Rome, which the pope found increasingly embarrassing.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

Since the authors of the countdowns belonged to the Christian intellectual elite, the trigger may have been a theological or intellectual problem, rather than a political event or a social, celestial, or natural phenomenon.

“Since their authors belonged to the Christian intellectual elite, the trigger may have been a theological or intellectual problem, rather than a political event or a social, celestial, or natural phenomenon.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: The authors of the AMII countdowns belonged to the Christian intellectual elite.

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

This elite held the religious, moral, and intellectual monopoly, often coupled with considerable political power.

“This elite held the religious, moral, and intellectual monopoly, often coupled with considerable political power.”

It may state two separate claims as one.

The problems were caused by the construction of the Victorian Easter table, and followers of this system connected conflicting dates for Easter Sunday or unlawful data with portents of the end of the world.

“The problems were caused by the construction of the Victorian Easter table, and followers of this system connected conflicting dates for Easter Sunday or unlawful data with portents of the end of the world.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

The late date for Easter Sunday on 25 April (exclusive to the Alexandrian/Dionysiac system) celebrated by the Visigoths in this year was still viewed with considerable suspicion by the Iberian intellectual elites, a reminder of the Roman past of Iberia.

“At the same time, the late date for Easter Sunday on 25 April (exclusive to the Alexandrian/Dionysiac system) celebrated by the Visigoths in this year was still viewed with considerable suspicion by the Iberian intellectual elites, a reminder of the Roman past of Iberia.”

• cites [65]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim.

Their reflections were more often triggered by intellectual questions, problems, and challenges than by real-life experiences.

“Their reflections were more often triggered by intellectual questions, problems, and challenges than by real-life experiences.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

Krusch rightly identified the celebration of Easter Sunday on 21 March as an alternative within the Victorian system.

“rightly identified the celebration of Easter Sunday on 21 March as an alternative within the Victorian system”

• cites Krusch, "Die Einführung des griechischen Paschalritus im Abendlande," 127-128Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

It may state two separate claims as one.

This tampering was done in Gaul, probably after substantial intellectual debate around the year A.D. 672 as witnessed by three of the four countdowns transcribed above.

“This was done in Gaul, probably after substantial intellectual debate around the year A.D. 672 as witnessed by three of the four countdowns transcribed above.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Sometimes, as in the case of the countdowns to the end of the sixth millennium discussed here, apocalyptic allusions were simply the result of a theological and/or technical problem important to Christian intellectual circles alone, without any bearing on our understanding of the politics of the day, or even of the sentiments of a wider public.

“Sometimes, however, as in the case of the countdowns to the end of the sixth millennium discussed here, apocalyptic allusions were simply the result of a theological and/or technical problem important to Christian intellectual circles alone, without any bearing on our understanding of the politics of the day, or even of the sentiments of a wider public.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Gregory clearly did not have the same regard for Roman authority.

“Gregory clearly did not have the same regard for Roman authority.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

In De temporum ratione chapter 61, Bede explicitly outlines the case of Easter Sunday falling after the Easter full moon, however, before the equinox.

“In chapter 61, he explicitly outlines the case of Easter Sunday falling after, the Easter full moon, however, before the equinox.”

• cites Bede, De temporum ratione 61-62Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Whether the choice made was right or wrong was not determined by inquiry in Rome, but by consultation of the holy wells in Spain, which could only sanction or condemn the action retrospectively.

“Whether the choice made was right or wrong was not determined by inquiry in Rome, but by consultation of the holy wells in Spain, which obviously could only sanction or condemn the action retrospectively.”

• cites [59]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

Gregory had an interest in not providing further information, and his own unease with the choice of Easter dates available to him that year is obvious in the remainder of this chapter.

“Gregory had an interest in not providing further information, and his own unease with the choice of Easter dates available to him that year is obvious in the remainder of this chapter:”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

The message was clear: celebrating Easter on the wrong date could lead to apocalyptic consequences.

“The message was clear: celebrating Easter on the wrong date could lead to apocalyptic consequences.”

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

The thought-world of that elite was not that of the lay nobles, nor of the commoners.

“The thought-world of that elite was not that of the lay nobles, nor of the commoners.”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

Members of the early medieval intellectual elite tried to play the apocalypse to their advantage, claiming moral superiority over their secular or ecclesiastical rivals, as in Gildas' case.

“Its members tried to play the apocalypse to their advantage (claiming moral superiority over their secular or ecclesiastical rivals, as in Gildas' case)”

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Bede uses the strongest language in De temporum ratione 51, which principally deals with Easter Sunday before the equinox, but chapter 50 leaves no doubt that this applies equally to the Easter full moon before the equinox.

“Bede uses the strongest language in De temporum ratione 51, which principally deals with Easter Sunday before the equinox, but chapter 50 leave no doubt that this applies equally to the Easter full moon before the equinox”

• cites Bede, De temporum ratione 51Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

It may state two separate claims as one.

The technical trick of shifting the embolism to after Easter in years of epact 27 was only introduced at some point in the second half of the seventh century, and may have been a regional solution restricted to northern Burgundy and Austrasia.

“Clearly, this technical trick of shifting the embolism to after Easter in years of epact 27 was only introduced at some point in the second half of the seventh century (and may, in fact, have been a regional solution, restricted to northern Burgundy and Austrasia).”

It may state two separate claims as one.

A metropolitan bishop in Gaul held as much (if not more) power than the bishop of Rome, and there was no question of outside interference in spiritual matters; decisions were taken locally not centrally.

“A metropolitan bishop in Gaul held as much (if not more) power than the bishop of Rome, and there was no question of outside interference in spiritual matters; decisions were taken locally not centrally.”

• cites [58]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

Celebrating Easter Sunday on 21 March is an interesting alternative within the Victorian system (not considered by its Aquitanian author), as its lunar age, luna 17, is uncontroversial; but it meant commemorating the resurrection on rather than after the equinox, which was considered problematic in itself.

“Celebrating Easter Sunday on 21 March is an interesting alternative within the Victorian system (not considered by its Aquitanian author), as its lunar age, luna 17, is uncontroversial;foot_2 but it meant commemorating the resurrection on rather than after the equinox, which was considered problematic in itself (see 2 above).”