Greetings from South Carolina.  The following appeared on another list, but I
thought it might be helpful for those of you who are confused by the double
dates.
URQ

In a message dated 98-07-02 19:27:36 EDT, [email protected] writes:

<< Jeff Linscott wrote an excellent reply to my query about double digit
 notation for some dates.  He OK'd my idea of broadcasting his response
 for the benefit of all the "new" genies out there. So here it is!
 
 E. Hubbard:-)
 
 Hi Eugene. Below is what I have at the beginning of my family histories
 to help explain the double-dating. Hope it helps you.
 
 Jeff Linscott
 So. China, ME
 
         Below is a statement, taken from "Searching For Your Ancestors,"
 by
 Gilbert H. Doane & James B. Bell, pub. 1981 by the University of
 Minnesota, that I hope will explain some of the 'double dates' seen in
 this listing [my book]:
 
         'The Calendar - A stumbling block for many an ancestor hunter,
 when
 attempting to check the dates of forebears, is a mysterious discrepancy
 of either a few days or a year which throws out calculations.  If this
 does not arise, then the 'double' date in some old record may cause the
 searcher to wonder why those who made the contemporary record did not
 know whether the child was born in 1702 or 1703.  If you have much
 experience with them, you will note that these double dates occur in the
 
 old records only in January, February, and March - never in any other
 months and never after 1752.'
 
         'This system of 'double- dating' arose as a result of a change
 made in
 the calendar in 1582.  Before that date the so-called Julian calendar
 was used throughout the Christian world.  It was established by Julius
 Caesar, hence its name.  This system, which divided the year into 365
 days, plus an extra day every fourth year, was officially adopted at the
 
 sitting of the Nicene Council in A.D. 325.  As it became possible to
 measure more accurately the length of the solar year, it was found that
 the Julian system of measuring exceeded the solar year by eleven
 minutes, or twenty-four hours every 131 years, and three days every 400
 years.  This excess amounted to about 10 days between A.D. 325 and A.D.
 1582.  Thus the date of the vernal equinox had been thrown back, by that
 
 time, from 21 March to 11 March and the calculations for Easter were
 thrown out.'
 
         'In 1582 Pope Gregory XIII, then head of the Roman Catholic
 Church,
 ordered that 10 days be dropped out of the calendar, thus restoring the
 equinox to its accustomed date, 21 March.  To prevent the recurrence of
 the error, he ordered further that, in every four hundred years, leap
 year's extra day should be omitted three times.  To accomplish this in
 an orderly fashion it was to be omitted on centennial years of which the
 
 first two digits could not be divided by four without a remainder.  Thus
 
 it was omitted in A.D. 1700, 1800, and 1900, but will not be omitted in
 A.D. 2000.  Moreover, the decree changed the beginning of the new year
 from 25 March to 1 January.  This system, known as the Gregorian
 calendar, now prevails and we are right with the sun.'
 
         'Following the edict of the Pope, all Catholic countries adopted
 the
 new system of reckoning.  But, England, in difficulties with the Church
 of Rome and always reluctant to accept a new and untried idea, even
 though scientifically proved, refused to adopt the new calendar
 officially and did not adopt it until 1752, or 170 years later, when the
 
 difference between the calendar and the Sun was a little more than
 eleven days.  So in English-speaking countries (including the English
 colonies) and in Russia, the Julian calendar continued to prevail as the
 
 official system of counting time.  Throughout that time (that is, until
 1752) the new year did not begin until 25 March, and there was still a
 difference of eleven days between the English calendar and that used in
 the rest of Europe.'
 
         'In spite of this difference in the official calendar, many
 people
 began to use the Gregorian system.  Hence, in many of the early colonial
 
 records you will find 'double dates', generally written like this: '9
 March 1656/57,' indicating that, although it was officially still 1656,
 some people considered it 1657.'
 
         'In 1752, when the British government finally decided to
 recognize the
 fact that a mistake had been made in calculating the length of the solar
 
 year, and to shift into line with the other countries of Europe in use
 of the calendar, Parliament passed an act by which the Gregorian system
 was officially adopted.'
 
         There are some dates in this listing as indicated in the above
 explanation. I hope that this explanation will help the reader in
 understanding any dates with a slash mark ('/') separating the dates.
 
  >>


==== SCROOTS Mailing List ====