home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: uk.misc
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!agate!netsys!ibmpcug!pipex!warwick!coventry!cmh004
- From: cmh004@cck.coventry.ac.uk (Dave)
- Subject: Re: Was: Re: 29 Feb 2000?; Now: Gregorian Calendar
- Message-ID: <By0rvz.GJz@cck.coventry.ac.uk>
- Sender: news@cck.coventry.ac.uk (news user)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: cc_sysk
- Organization: Lanchester Polytechnic
- References: <1992Nov18.093753.27974@infodev.cam.ac.uk> <Bxyurt.F5t@cck.coventry.ac.uk> <28444@castle.ed.ac.uk>
- Distribution: uk
- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 14:50:22 GMT
- Lines: 38
-
- In article <28444@castle.ed.ac.uk> rwb@castle.ed.ac.uk (Richard Bingham) writes:
- >In <Bxyurt.F5t@cck.coventry.ac.uk> cmh004@cck.coventry.ac.uk (Dave) writes:
- >)> No I was right the second time. As the 'new' calander wasn't thought up by
- >)> a few people in a pub on 2/9/1752 who thought it would be a good idea to
- >)> wake up the next day on the 13th. The 'new' calander was in planning for
- >)> several years. The transfer was, day after 31/12/1751 is 1/1/1752 and the day
- >)> after 2/9/1752 is 13/9/1752. So it would be the months of January and Febuary
- >)> 1751 which would not exist plus the first 24 days of March 1751.
-
- >Eh??? They must teach a different form of arithmetic in Coventry to
- >that which my school taught me more than 30 years ago...
- >The only missing days I can see there are those between 2/9/1752 and
- >13/9/1752, hence the "Give us back our eleven days" protesters. I
- >also understood that the "Twelve Days of Christmas" originated from
- >those missing days.
-
- OK everyone I have with me a copy of the:
- CALENDER (NEW STYLE) ACT 1750 (24 Geo 2 c 23).
-
- Section 1
- "...which the year of our Lord beginneth on the twenty-fifth day of March,
- shall not be made use of from and after the last day of December one thousand
- seven hundred and fifty-one; and from that first day of January next following
- ...(31/12/1751)...shall be reckoned, deemed, and accounted to be the first
- of the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and fifty-two;...."
-
- Hence because 1751 started on the 25th March and ended on the 31/12/1751
- that means that January, February and the first 24 days of March 1751 would
- never have existed. Yet the cal program will still produce a calender for those
- months as they are really the January and February of 1750.
-
- Those who want to look for the rule for leap years it will be found in section
- 2 of the act, but it is not very clear.
- --
- Dave cmh004@cck.cov.ac.uk
- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
- Call this place what you like - Coventry University, Coventry Polytechnic or
- Lanchester Polytechnic it is all the same and is called school.
-