I think that is actually a bit accurate and thought as much as well.
I would agree with it for two reasons:
1) The modern year is based on a solar year, and back in the day only very few believed there to be any motion of the earth around the sun, no less could calculate how long it took. And those that did believe the earth went around the sun were not seen too positively by the powers at be in the church. So it would be odd for them to refer to a calendar they didn't believe in.
2) There are seasons everywhere and one could certainly base a yearly calender on those alone, however in the desert area of the planet there are not many indicators to seasonal changes.
With those two reasons the only thing noticeable by the masses would be the phases of the moon to tell the passage of time on a larger scale.
I think that is actually a bit accurate and thought as much as well.
I would agree with it for two reasons:
1) The modern year is based on a solar year, and back in the day only very few believed there to be any motion of the earth around the sun, no less could calculate how long it took. And those that did believe the earth went around the sun were not seen too positively by the powers at be in the church. So it would be odd for them to refer to a calendar they didn't believe in.
2) There are seasons everywhere and one could certainly base a yearly calender on those alone, however in the desert area of the planet there are not many indicators to seasonal changes.
With those two reasons the only thing noticeable by the masses would be the phases of the moon to tell the passage of time on a larger scale.