I found an interesting article in AntiqueWeek Magazine May 17, 1999 written by Bob Brooke Brooke says that on Sept 2, 1752, the British Isles and all the English colonies, including America, lost 11 days--Sept 2-Sept 13. One night they went to sleep and woke up to a calendar which said it was eleven days later. All this was due to the adjustment that The British finally made to their flawed Julian Calendar. It had been determined by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582 that an adjustment needed to be made, but non Catholic countries refused to go along with the decision. England was having difficulties with the Church of Rome and refused to do this." All the British lands except Scotland, which had changed its calendar 100 years before, now celebrated New Year's Day on Jan. 1. In Russia, the Julian calendar continued to be used." "Despite the official calendar, people in England and the colonies began to use the Gregorian system as early as the 16th Century. Many early Colonial records include double dates, writen as "12 February 1661/2 indicating that although officially it was 1661, some considered it to be 1662." How does this affect us as researchers? "We need to double check dates found in English-speaking countries between 1582 and 1752. Are these dates Old Style (O.S.) or New Style (N.S.) If a date is listed as 1750/51, it means the records was created between Jan 1 and March 24. These double dates occur only in January, February, and March--never in any other months and never after 1752." Additionally, "dates in the 17th century frequently have the month indicated by its number rather than its name. This was because most of the months had Pagan or Roman names and the Puritans and Quakers didn't like them. Since March was considered the first month of the year in the old (Julian Calendar) before 1752, a date before that might read 13th, 2nd mo:1683. This is actually 13 April 1683." "This change in the calendar might help explain the birth of two children in too short a period of time. If a researcher finds that Joshua and Rachel Smith had a daughter Mary, born 22 March 1638, and from another record a son, Henry born 27 February 1639, it would seem they were 28 days apart, but they are actually 11 months apart." Carol