 |
|||||||||||||||
|
Old Style and New Style Dating: If an apology were needed for trying, with an attempt at succinctness, to treat of the calendar that our ancestors used when they first came to this country, and of the one that we now employ, which, though having had birth in 1582, was not adopted by Great Britain and her dependencies until 1752, such an apology were more than justified by the prevailing ignorance of the subject on the part of the average person. Some know that once upon a time something was done to the calendar, but so long ago as not to be worth troubling themselves about; some religiously copy double years or “O.S.” and “N.S.” after dates with only a vague idea of their meaning; while others, the greatest number, unfortunately, know nothing about the matter. It is in the hope of throwing a little light on what is regarded as a puzzling subject by those who encounter it for the first time, that the following has been written. it makes no claim to originality, but is based on such trustworthy authorities as were found.[1] As the calendar now in use was preceded by the Julian calendar, and that in turn by others, it may be of interest briefly to trace their succession. To Romulus is given the credit of having, during his reign, divided the year into ten months with a total of 304 days. His successor, Numa, made changes in this method of reckoning for purposes of greater accuracy; but even so, in 452 B.C. the year had only been given 355 days, or a deficiency of a fraction over 10 days according to the solar reckoning. Further corrections were subsequently made and the year increased to 366¼ days, or an excess of (approximately) one day per year. This error was rectified and the number of days put at 365¼. The right to alter the calendar for purposes of correction was placed in the hands of the Roman pontiffs, who so misused their power for political ends that in the time of Cæsar the vernal equinox, according to the calendar, differed from the true astronomical by three months, and appeared in the summer. Julian Calendar, or Old Style The necessity of some action to eliminate these discrepancies had become so great that Cæsar, as Pontifex Maximus, in his third consulate, inserted in the calendar two intercalary months, with a total of sixty-seven days, between November and December, and gave an additional twenty-three days to February, which, added to the 355 days of the year as previously reckoned, made a total of 445 days and brought about uniformity between the calendar and actual time, so that the vernal equinox was restored to March 25. To form a calendar which should more nearly approximate correctness, Cæsar, with the aid of Sosignes, a famous Egyptian scholar, based his calculations upon a (mean) solar year of 365¼ days. For purposes of intercalation a day was added every fourth year to the month of February. Such years were known as bissextile.[2]This new calendar went into effect in the year 45 B.C.[3] In March, 1582, Pope Gregory XIII, having found the principal Catholic countries ready to adopt his views, issued a brief abolishing the Julian calendar and substituting in its place the one since generally known by his name, the author of which was one Aloysius Lilius, or Lilio Ghiraldi, a Neapolitan astronomer and physician. In order to bring the vernal equinox to March 21, as it was at the time of the Council of Nice, in 325 – for it had now retrograded to March 11 – the Pope directed that the 5th of October be reckoned the 15th, and that in future the year begin on January 1st. For purposes of intercalation, such years as were evenly divisible by four (for example, 1604, 1728, 1896, etc.), and such centesimal years as were evenly divisble by 400 (for example, 1600, 2000 etc.), were to be considered bissextile or leap years, and an extra day was to be added to February. In other, or common, years February was to have twenty-eight days.[4] The new style of reckoning was promptly adopted by most Catholic countries, some coincidently with Rome, others later.[5] In the cities of the Protestant Netherlands,[6] e.g. Rotterdam, Amsterdam, Leyden, Delft, Harlaem, and the Hague, Old style ended on Friday, December 21, 1582, and New Style began on Saturday, December 22 (January 1), 1582-3. England, however, adhered for 170 years to the Old Style, with a pertinacity due to prejudice in favor of ancient practice against which reason and convenience seemed to have no weight. It was not until 1751 that the correction of the calendar was introduced by Act of Parliament (24 Geo. II, ch. 23).[7] It was enacted that throughout all his majesty’s dominions the 1 st of January, 1752, should be reckoned the first day of the year, and to correct the error of eleven days, the 3 rd of September should be reckoned the 14th. Many mistakes have been made in reducing Old Style to New Style from a misapprehension of the number of days’ difference between the two. Thus the 22nd of November, 1620, N.S., has been erroneously adopted, instead of the 21st, for the date of the Signing of the Compact on the Mayflower, and the Landing of the Pilgrims has been placed (equally erroneously) on the 22nd of December, 1620, N.S., instead of the 21st. This mistake seems due to the idea that as eleven days were needed to reduce Old Style to New Style when the calendar was corrected in 1752, therefore eleven is the magic number to be used in all such cases, no matter what the century concerned is. The following table shows the correct number of days to be applied to change Old Style to New Style: – From March 1, 1399, to February 29, 1499, inclusive, add 9 days. From March 1, 1499, to February 29, 1599, inclusive, add 10 days. From March 1, 1599, to February 29, 1699, inclusive, add 10 days.[8] From March 1, 1699, to September 2, 1752, inclusive, add 11 days. Russia and the Greek Church still hold to the Julian calendar, and according to our reckoning are now twelve days behind time. Commencement of the Year In England the year commenced as follows previous to the adoption of the New Style, 1752, when January 1 was made the legal date: – Seventh to thirteenth centuries, on Christmas Day. Twelfth century, by the Church, on March 25. Fourteenth century, by civilians, on March 25. In Holland and the Low Countries the year commenced as follows: – Some provinces of the Low Countries, for example, Gueldres, Friesland, and Utrecht (since 1333), at Christmas. Utrecht, previous to 1333, on March 25. Delft, Dort, Brabant, on Good Friday. Holland, Flanders, and Hainault, on Easter Day.[9]
Two forms have generally existed in England for the commencement of the year, namely, (1) that which began on January 1 and was known as the historical year; (2) that which began on March 25 and was known as the civil, legal, and ecclesiastical year. This double system has been the cause of much confusion, for some writers have used one form and some the other, yet both were equally correct from different points of view. To lessen the confusion and to avoid mistakes, it became the general custom to double-date, that is, to give both the legal, or civil, and the historical; for example – 26 January, 163½ {Civil and legal year / Historical year or, as it is often seen, 1631/2 or 1631-2, according to the fancy of the writer.[10]It was customary also to number the months and days of the week.[11] It should be borne in mind that in Old Style the order of the months was: –
It was usual to place the day of the month first, then the month, and lastly the year, but examples can easily be found which begin with the month. The following have been taken at random: 26 – 2 mo – 46, ye 14 11 82, (18) (12) 1648, 6th mo. 18, 1663. a numerical abbreviation of the months is sometimes seen, as, for instance, 7ber, 8ber, 9ber, 10ber, for September, October, November, and December. Where a single date is “given as the first month in the seventeenth century, without any surrounding entries to show the chronological position, it will almost always be safe to double-date it”;[12]for example, if the entry reads 13 day 1 mo. 1658, add the historical year thus, 1658[-9].
Conclusion Many persons prefer (quite properly) not to trust to copies of records as final if they can consult the originals for their information. To these persons I would take the liberty of offering the following suggestions: –
Footnotes: [1]. For those who care to pursue the subject further the following list of books will be found useful: M. de Saint-Allais, L’art de vérifier les dates (Paris, 1818); Harris Nicolas, Chronology of History (London, 1833); John J. Bond, Handy-Book of rules and Tables for Verifying Dates with the Christian Era (London, 1869); Encyclopædia Britannica (9th ed.), v. 4. [2]. From bissextus = twice six. “This extra day was provided for by reckoning twice the sixth day before the calends (or first) of Marrcy, … the ‘sixth’ (or first sixth) day proper thus corresponding to February 25, according to our reckoning, and the extra ‘sixth,’ or ‘second sixth,’ to our February 24. Since 1662, when the Anglican liturgy was revised, the twenty-ninth day of February has been more conveniently regarded as the intercalated day in all English-speaking countries. In the ecclesiastical calendars of the countries of continental Europe, however, the twenty-fourth day of February is still reckoned as the bissextus or intercalary day.” – Century Dictionary. [3]. The Roman year began in March, the months following in their present order, though February had at one time preceded January. March, May, July, September, November, and January had each thirty-one days: the remaining months had each thirty days with the exception of February, which in common years had twenty-nine day, and every fourth year thirty days. The lack of system in the number of days in the months as we now know them is interesting. July (previously Quintilis) was named after Cæsar; August (previously Sextilis) was called after Augustus, and to gratify the inordinately vanity of this sovereign by giving his month as many days as Cæsar’s – thirty-one February was robbed of a day. To avoid three consecutive months of thirty-one days each, September and November were reduced by to thirty days and October and December were each given an extra day. [4]. “The Gregorian calendar gives ninety-seven intercalations in 400 years, or, reduced to days, hours, etc., an excess of twenty-six seconds a year over solar time, or one day in 3,323. To correct this slight error, it has been suggested that the year 4000 and its multiples be considered common years.” Encyclopædia Britannica. [5]. See especially Bond’s Handy-Book for full tables. [6]. “By Edict or Plakaet of 10 December, 1582 (entered in the Great Plakaet boek, I, 395, in the Record Office of the Hague), introduction of the New Style was fixed for the fifteenth of December, 1582; but afterwards settled by a resolution of the States of Holland, to begin on the first of January, 1583.” Bond, op. cit. [7]. A similar attempt was made March 16, 27 Eliz., 1584-5; but after a second reading in the House of Commons it was lost sight of. (For this and the preceding, see Nicolas, Chronology of History, 34.) [8]. The lack of retrogression here is due to the fact that 1599-1600 was a leap year in both styles. The table which follows … [this table has been removed - editor]. [9]. This “style notaries adopted in their acts; but to avoid mistakes, they were compelled to add, ‘according to the style of the court,’ or ‘before Easter,’ or ‘more Gallicano.’ In 1575 the duke of Requesens, governor of the Low Countries, ordered the year to commence on the first of January. The States of Holland had long before adopted this calculation [?], and endeavoured, as early as 1532, to bring it into general use.” – Nicolas, op. cit., 44-45. [10]. [Early 20 th Century oddity example given in footnote that has been removed.] [11]. The Latin names for the days of the week are: Dies Saturni, Saturday; dies Solis Sunday; Dies Lunæ, Monday; dies Martis, Tuesday; Dies Mercurii, Wednesday; Dies Jovis, Thursday; Dies Veneris, Friday. [12]. Letter of W. H. Whitmore in Boston Record Commissioners’ Report, No. 28, p. vii. [13]. Albert Bushnell Hart, American History Told by Contemporaries (New York, 1897-1929), 1: 17. [14]. Editor’s Note: The conversion from Old to New Style was in vogue at the beginning of the 20 th Century, a practice long since abandoned since it would have been foreign to our ancestors. An example many may recall is deciding which day to celebrate George Washington’s birthday, 11 or 22 Feb. It is common to see the date 22 Feb. 1732, but he was born on 11 Feb. 1731/2.
[This article first appeared in
Researched and created by F. Apthorp Foster Please report any broken links, additions, or corrections to the webmaster. Page updated 19 July 2010
|
|||||||||||||||