---- >All colonial genealogists learn that Britain and its colonies changed >from the old style (Julian) calendar to the new style (Gregorian) >calendar on January 1, 1752. If you do colonial New York research, >however, you also have to know that in Holland this change occurred >170 years earlier, in 1582, and the Gregorian calendar therefore was >used in the Dutch colony of New Netherland. > >Under the old calendar in use prior to January 1, 1752 in Britain and >its colonies, the year began on March 25, and March was the first >month, February the twelfth. Dates in January, February, and the >first 24 days of March were often double-dated to indicate both the >past and incoming years. For example, what we would call February 24, >1714 would then have been February 24, 1713, but could also be written >February 24, 1713/14. It would also have been the 24th of the twelfth >month, not the second month. > >When the new calendar was adopted in 1752, eleven days had to be >dropped, and this was done by declaring that the day after September >2, 1752 was September 14, 1752. > >The colony of New Netherland which preceded New York operated >according to the laws and customs of the Netherlands province of >Holland, where the new calendar had been in use since Pope Gregory >introduced it in 1582. Therefore New Netherland records are dated as >we would date them today, with the year beginning January 1 and no >double-dating. > >After the English conquered New Netherland in 1664, and except for the >brief return of Dutch rule in 1673-74, the old (Julian) calendar was >used in official documents, but the Dutch often continued using the >Gregorian calendar in their church and family records. > >Some genealogists have tried to convert all old style dates to their >new equivalents, and published only the new forms, just like we say >George Washington was born February 22, 1732, when at the time he was >born the date was February 11, 1731/2. Unfortunately, too many >genealogists have interpreted the old dates incorrectly, forgetting >particularly that the months were not numbered as they are today. In >the case of colonial New York, they may have converted a date >correctly according to English rules, ignoring the fact that the >record was a Dutch one that did not require any conversion. > >It is recommended practice to show dates exactly as you find them in >the records, and not attempt to modernize them. If you find a date >between January 1 and March 24 where a double year is not indicated, >then which calendar is being used, and the actual year, can often be >determined by studying the source as a whole, and not just looking at >the single record of interest. > >For more helpful tips on New York research visit our website at >www.nygbs.org and click on the ONLINE RESOURCE CENTER link. > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >