The Evolution of the Calendar

The Evolution of the Calendar Robert F. Morris UR CALENDAR WASN'T ALWAYS AS WE KNOW IT TODAY. Astronomical computations and religious customs have brought changes over the centuries which are sometimes perplexing to those interested in genealogy and history. O For example, your research may disclose incontrovertible evidence that a great, great, . . great-grandfather died in, let us say, February 1750. Then you go to the City Hall to consult the will and see that he signed it in November 1750. He died in February, yet there in his own handwriting is his signature in Novembe-r of the same year. Then, there is the confusion of some important dates in history being commemorated annually on a date ten or eleven days later than the original date. Some dates are expressed as to the year with two consecutive years, e.g. 1723/4. April was not always the fourth month of the year, as indicated by William Penn, who, in writing his famous Charter of Liberties closed that great document with, ". . In Witness whereof. I the said Wm. Penn have hereunto this Charter of Liberties, set my hand and broad seal, this five and twentieth day of the second month vulgarly [commonly] called April, in the year of our Lord, 1682." Now that the tercentenary of the granting of the Charter for Pennsylvania is nearly upon us, questions as to its date are bound to come up. At the Land Registry Building, London, in Colonial Entry Book [C05/1236, pp. 1-21,], the date on the copy of the charter is 4 March 1680/1, and at the end there is an added date entry of 4 March 1681. At Harrisburg in the William Penn Memorial Museum and Archives Building the date on the charter itself is ". . the fourth day of March in the three and thirtieth year of our Reigne." The grantor, King Charles II, claimed his reign began in January 1649, when his father was beheaded; three and thirty years later, including 1649, would be 1681, however there was an interregnum period under Cromwell and the coronation of Charles II was not held until 1660. The date of March 14th, not the 4th, is used by some who wish to express "new style" and "old style" calendars. All these apparent anachronisms can be explained by a brief review of the history of our calendar. 283 284 The Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine There were at least ten in ancient times; Roman, Chinese, Jewish, Greek and others. These systems were keyed, in general, to the regular and constant movement of the heavenly bodies. The Roman Republican Calendar, from which ours evolved, was based upon the orbits of the moon around the earth and the earth around the sun. There seemed to be twelve lunations, or orbits of the moon around the earth, during one complete cycle of the four seasons, or an orbit of the earth around the sun. A lunation took about 291/2 days, which, times 12, gave a year of 354 days. The Roman civil year was actually 355 days, but it was more than 10 days short of the solar, or astronomical year of 365 and a fraction days. Since the civil calendar year was shorter than the true solar year it caused events observed annually at certain seasons of the solar year to move forward on the calendar. The seasons were moving backward through the civil calendar and days needed to be added to it to allow the solar year to catch up. By the time of Julius Caesar, ca. 100 B.C. to 44 B.C., this annual difference was officially noted. In fact it was determined that within a period of thirty-five years a given date would move through all four seasons and return to where it started. The Alexandrian astronomer, Sosigenes made remarkably accurate calculations and about 46 B.C. Caesar, as Roman Emperor and Pontifex Maximus, decreed changes. Sosigenes had observed that a complete orbit of the earth around the sun took 365 days and six hours. The number of days in the existing twelve months were therefore varied to take up the extra days and the remaining six hours were included by adding one day at the end of February of each year evenly divisible by four. Such quadrennial years were called bissextile, or leap years. It then became necessary to adjust the civil calendar to some definite point on the solar year, so sufficient days were intercalated [inserted in the calendar] between November and December of 46 B.C. to make that particular year 445 days long and to bring the vernal equinox to the beginning of the new year, March 25th. With these changes the Julian Calendar, named after Julius Caesar, went into effect in the year 45 B.C. It was soon used in the commercial and religious countries of the occidental world. This same system, with years numbered from the birth of Christ, and with refinements later instituted at the time of Pope Gregor)! XIII, is the calendar now used throughout the civilized world. Others have survived, such as the Chinese and Jewish calendars, but they are used mainly for religious purposes and limited historic references. When used they are usually transposed parenthetically to our own. The Evolution of the Calendar 285 The months of the Julian Calendar, from the beginning of the year: (R= Roman Republican Calendar days. j= Julian Calendar days). Martins Aprilis Maius I unius Quintilis Sextilis September October November December anuarius Februarius 31 days 29 days 31 days 29 days 31 days 29 days 29 days 31 days 29 days 29 days 29 days 28 days 355 days 31 days 30 days 31 days 30 days 31 days 31 days 30 days 31 days 30 days 31 days 31 days 28 days 365 days The days, in the original Latin and as adopted in the Saxon tongue were: Dies Solis Dies Lunae Dies Martis Dies Mercurii Dies Jovis Dies Veneris Dies Saturni Sun's Day Moon's Day Tiw's Day Woden's Day Thor's Day Frigg's Day Seterne's Day At this juncture we may as well deal with the determination of Easter, which, although seldom of genealogical concern, nevertheless is integral in our calendar. It was desired to have the full moon and the vernal equinox as determiners of Easter and also have it always on a Sunday. Moreover, it was not to coincide with the Jewish Passover date which is ordained to be celebrated on the 14th day of the Paschal month. The Paschal month is that of which the 14th day, or full moon day, falls on or next follows the vernal equinox. Thus it can be seen that the calendar computation was complicated. In 325 A.D. the ecumenical General Council of Nicaea decreed that Easter should be on the Sunday immediately following either that full moon which occurs on the day of the vernal equinox, or if there is no full moon on that day, then on the Sunday following that full moon which occurs next after the day of the vernal equinox, March 21st. For practical purposes if one thinks of Easter as falling on the first Sunday after the first full moon after March 21st it will usually but not quite 286 The Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine always come out right* It can occur on our present calendar as early as March 22nd and as late as April 25th. As noted earlier, the Julian calendar set the equinox on the first day of the new year, March 25th, but by the fourth century it was found to fall on March 21st. No effort was made at Nicaea to correct that disparity and by 730 A.D. it was noted that on March 21st the sun had progressed three days north of the equator and the vernal equinox had correspondingly retrogressed to March 18th on the civil calendar. In the thirteenth century the difference was seven days and in the fifteenth century nine days. Pope Paul III, 1534-1549, being aware of this widening devergence, obtained authority to make corrections and proceeded with astronomers of the time who correctly determined the changes required. However, no action was taken during his reign, nor those of the next five popes. In 1572 Ugo Buoncompagni, 1502-1585, became Pope Gregory XIII. Realizing that the problem would not go away but indeed would become worse, he put three astronomers to work on it. They recalculated and verified what predecessors had found before— that the solar year was not exactly 3651/4 days long as previously supposed, but was only 365 days, five hours, forty-eight minutes and fortysix seconds. So the civil year under the Julian calendar then in use was eleven minutes and fourteen seconds longer than the true solar year. This overage amounted to the addition of one whole day in 128 years and in the twelve centuries from the Council of Nicaea to the sixteenth century amounted to ten days. Thus from a given point, say March 21st in the year 325 A.D. to March 21, 1572 there were ten extra days of civil time. In those days the sun had advanced north of the equator by that amount but the civil calendar read March 21st. Conversely, when the sun was actually on the equator the civil calendar read March 11th, back into winter. The calendar was working backward through the seasons of the true solar year. Gregory, being satisfied with the astronomical calculations, then set forth a revision of the Julian calendar in a brief issued in March of 1582. He directed that the day following the Feast of St. Francis, October 5th, be reckoned as October 15th, This advance of the calendar shortened the year by ten days so that the next vernal equinox would fall correctly on March 21st instead cif' March 11th. In order to remove *The ecclesiastical full moon is not quite the same as the astronomical, or solar, full moon. A study of such elements as the epacts, the Sunday or dominical letters, the golden numbers, etc. is required to make precise calculations, These factors are described in many prayer books to be round in American and British churches. The Evolution of the Calendar 287 the extra day every 128 years and thus keep the civil calendar in line with the solar year for future centuries he ordered that there would be no leap year on centesimal years except when a centesimal year could be evenly divided by 400. In other words, centesimal years though always evenly divisible by four and eligible to be a leap year, would not be a leap year unless evenly divisible by 400. The year 1600, evenly divisible by both four and 400 would be a leap year; the year 1700, divisible by four but not by 400 would not be a leap year; nor would 1800 or 1900. The year 2000 would be a leap year, and so on until the forty-first century, when an additional calculation would have to be made. Under the Gregorian reformation it was also decreed that the first of the year would be January lst instead of March 25th. The coincidence that Annunciation Day, or Lady Day was March 25th had been of no consequence as to the start of the new year. This Gregorian, or new style calendar was adopted in 1582 in the Italian states, Portugal, Spain and France. In the Roman Catholic states of Germany it went into effect in 1583 and in the remainder of Germany in 1700. Other countries of Europe followed except Russia, which did not adopt it until 1917. England and her colonial possessions adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1752, although Scotland had put it in effect earlier. By 1752 the Julian, or old style calendar was eleven days out of kilter. Let us now turn to the "Reform of the Calendar Act." This changed the calendar in use in England and colonial America from the Julian to the Gregorian and prescribed all of the provisions of the calendar under which we now operate. An understanding of it will give us the clues to solve the dilemmas expressed at the beginning of this treatise. Spread over twenty-six closely written pages of the records of Parliament in 1751 under C. 20-23 Anna vicefimo quarto Georgii beginning on page 329 we find: CAP XXIII An Act for Regulating the Commencement of the Year; and for Correcting the Calendar now in Ufe. Whereas the legal Supputation of the Year of our Lord in that Part of Great Britain called England, according to which the Year beginning on the twenty-fifth Day of March, hath been found by Experience to be attended with divers Inconveniences . ..And whereas . Julian Calendar, hath been difcovered to be erroneous, by means whereof the Vernal or Spring Equinox, which at the Time of the General Council of Nice in the Year of our Lord three hundred and twenty-five, happened on or about 288 The Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine the twenty-firft Day of March, now happens on the ninth or tenth Day of the fame month That in and throughout all his Majesty's Dominions from and after the bit day of December one thoufand feven hundred and fifty-one . . that the firft Day of January next following the faid loft Day of December (hall be reckoned, taken, deemed and accounted to be the firft Day of the Year of our Lord one thoufand feven hundred and fifty-two . and that the natural Day next immediately following the faid fecund Day of September ( 1752) (hall be called, reckoned and accounted to be the fourteenth Day of September, omitting for that Time only the eleven intermediate nominal Days of the common Calendar . Be it further enacted That the feveral Years of our Lord, one thoufand eight hundred, one thoufand nine hundred, two thoufand one hundred . . or any other hundredth Years of our Lord, which fhall happen in Time to come, except only every four hundredth Year of our Lord . . whereof the Year two thoufand than be the firft, than not be . Biffextile or Leap Years, but (hall be taken to be common Years, confifting of three hundred and fixty-five Days, and no more . . The Act went on to prescribe that the payment of rents and interest would not be accelerated by reason of the Act; nor would contracts, annuities or agreements terminate earlier; the age of persons born before the 14th of September would be reckoned the same as it would have been without the passage of the Act. Tables and rules for the determination of Easter and other movable feasts were set forth as reckoned by the new calendar. Now that we have learned from the Calendar Act that in 1750 in colonial America February followed November in the same year, it is easy to understand how that legal testament mentioned earlier could have been drawn in November 1750 though the decedent died in February 1750. Quakers usually stated the months before the days, but William Penn dated his Charter of Liberties ". . this five and twentieth day of the second month . ." (1682), rather than writing—second month, twenty-fifth. They often used all numerals as 2-9-1800 for February ninth, 1800, but sometimes, though not often, they transposed the month and day, as 9-2-1800, meaning the same date. Prior to 1752 March was stated as the first month whether after the 25th or before, and you may find as consecutive days 1-24-1750 and 1-25-1751. Today, genealogists would write those two contiguous days as March 24, 1750/1 and March 25, 1751. The Evolution of the Calendar 289 Where so-called "Old Style," (O.S.) and "New Style," (N.S.) dates are used we make our own confusion. The practice stems partly from continued usage of a necessary expression which existed at the time the calendar change was made in 1752. Contracts, annuities, ages of persons, etc. were then materially affected by dropping the eleven days. During the lifetime of the person or contract double dating was often required for legal or precise reckoning, but that time has long since passed. When King Charles II made his grant of Pennsylvania to William Penn he used the date 4 March 1680/1. There was good reason for double years because in France it was 1681, while in England and America it was still 1680. Charles considered himself Emperor of France as well as King of England, as evidenced by numerous‘fieurs-delis which embellish the patent and as actually stated in the preamble. Today it could be written March 4, 1680/1 or March 4, 1681. The latter is just as proper and is preferred by historians who do not wish to confuse readers and also do not wish to create an impression that they didn't know which year it really was. But to write the date as March 14, 1681 (N.S.) hardly contributes anything to the knowledge of history. Penn's first landing in Pennsylvania on October 28, 1682 is properly marked upon the spot. It was in what is now lower Chester, Delaware County, just above the twelve mile radius from New Castle, Delaware. Thoughts have been promulgated to designate the date as O.S. and append a new date, November 7, N.S. Let's let the marker alone. Betsy Ross was born on January 1, 1752—the first day of the first year that the first of the year was in January. Let's let the date for that great lady rest in peace and not move her up to January 11, N.S. [the eleven days were not dropped until September of that year]. If one would like to re-state dates way back in history to O.S. and N.S. terms he would embark on a sizeable and complicated task. What about the year 1700 which was a leap year in England but not in France? In all fairness, it should be pointed out that there is reasonable purpose in stating two calendar dates in certain cases. For instance, if you are regarding a date in the year 5735 A.M. [Anna Mundi--jewish Calendar], you may wish to state that that year was equivalent to the period between September 17, 1974 and September 5, 1975 on our present calendar. But to interpolate only eleven days or less for O.S. and N.S. hardly serves a practical purpose. For genealogical clarity from March 25th back to January 1st. Let's say your records show certain ancestors made their "second appearance" [final appearance 290 The Pennsylvania Genealogical Magazine before the Board of Overseers of a Quaker Meeting for permission to marry] on April 10, 1730. But the records also show they did actually marry on January 10, 1730. In order to clear up any suspicion that they married three months prior to officially obtaining their 'permission a genealogist would show the marriage date as ,January 10, 1730/ 1. He could also write the dates according the Quaker method as: 2nd mo. 10, 1730 and 11th mo. 10, 1730. There is a simple and practical way out of all these dilemmas caused by calendar changes. That rule is: Don't try to modernize dates at all! Competent historians have seen no purpose in modernizing dates. Genealogists have not either, except for clarity in the uncommon cases noted above. A Formula to Determine a Date of Birth from a Tombstone Inscription Let us say you have found the tombstone of an ancestor, and on that stone you find the date of his death and his age at death. You want to determine the date of his birth. He died 16 April 1904. 1904 (year) 4 (months) 16 (days) He was age 61 (years) 1 (month) 10 (daysl 1843 (year) 3 (months) 6 (days)= 6 March 1843 But, too often it is more complicated than that. He died 16 April 1904. 1904 (year) 4 (months) 16 (days) His age was 83 (years) 8 (months) 21 (days) What you do is borrow 30 days from April for a total of 46 days and borrow 12 months from 1904 for a total of 15 months, having already borrowed a month. So you get— 3 3 4 (monthsY 16 (days) 1904 (year) +12 (months2 +30 (days) 1903 (year) —15 (months) —46 (days) 8 (months)_21 (days) 83 (years) age 7 (months) 25 (days) or born, 1820 (year) 25 July 1820. To check this, say he was born 25 July 1820, and lived to the age of 83 years, 8 months and 21 days. Put everything back that you have borrowed. 7 (months) 25 (days) 1820 (year) 21 (days 8 months 83 years' 15 (months) 46 (days) 1903 (year) +12 (months) + I (month) —30 (days) 16 (months) 16 (days) 1904 (year) 12 (monthsl_ 4 (months) Dorothee Hughes Carousso