Hi all, By Old Style, I mean a calendar or a system of dating in which the year begins on 25 March. Thus, March is the 1st month, April is the 2nd month and so on until Dec becomes the 10th month, January the 11th, and Feb becomes the 12th month. By New Style, I mean a calendar or a system of dating in which the year begins on 1 Jan (like we do now). Thus, Jan is the 1st month, Feb is the 2nd month and so on until Dec becomes the 12th month. For more info on this, see: http://www.genfair.com/dates.htm I have lately been looking through the early Abington and Gwynedd Friends Monthly Meeting records (LDS films #0,383,428 and 0,388,439 respectively). The Quakers seemed to prefer to refer to months almost entirely by using their number. Thus, you see an event on the 3rd month, say. So, the question in this case is, Is that March or May? The answer, of course, is that it depends on whether they are using Old Style or New Style. I should mention here that England used Old Style until they switched to new style starting with 1 Jan 1752. While according to the above web site, Germany and The Netherlands had switched to New Style by 1583. Based on this difference of what was being used in Europe, it was not clear to me at the start which system the above Friends records would be using before 1752. However, in looking through them, I noticed an interesting thing. Many of the times when an event was in the 11th or 12th month, they would use "double dates" for the year. (This, also, is discussed on the above web site.) Thus I found: 12-24-1718/19. This is interpreted as the 12th month of 1718 Old Style (with March as the first month). Thus, this would be Feb., the last month of 1718 using Old Style. Or if you were using New Style, it would be Feb of 1719. (Which is why the 2 years are shown.) Thus, it appears that their month numbering was Old Style. Furthermore, I noticed several dates of 2-30-xxxx. In other words, the 30th day of the 2nd month. Thus, again it appears that this was Old Style because the 2nd month Old Style is April (which has 30 days) while the 2nd month New Style is Feb, which only has 28 (or 29). Lastly, in the Gwynedd records I found the following sequence of dates for their monthly meetings: 9 - 26 - 1751 Dec 31 - 1751 28th day of the 1st mo. called January 1752 2 - 25 - 1752 31st of 3rd mo. (March) 1752 So, it appears that the 9th month above was Nov (Old Style), then followed by December, and then starting in Jan 1752 they were on New Style. Exactly as the English did. So, in conclusion, it appears to me that these records are Old Style before 1752 and New Style beginning Jan 1752. So, if you wish to convert numbered months to named months (eg. to compare with other sources) you need to start counting at March or January as appropriate when using these records. (Of course, you would want to record, as well, the record as written with the numbered month.) I am curious if others have come to the same conclusion about which named months correspond to the numbered months in these records. Regards, Howard [email protected]

I am not sure exactly what you are asking but the calendar in use in the British Empire until September 1752 (the change was not made on January 1, 1752) was the Julian Calendar (aka Old Style). In that September, the Empire changed to the Gregorian Calendar (New Style), which we still use today. For part of the time that the British Empire used the Julian Calendar, many countries in Europe were using the new Gregorian Calendar so, very often, dates were written to include both calendars, thus giving the double years in some dates. In the Julian Calendar, March was the first month. In the Gregorian Calendar, January is the first month. The Quakers used the same calendar as the Empire used. However, the Quakers never used the names of the days or the months because these names were based on Paganism. Thus, Sunday was the first day and Saturday was the seventh day. This nomenclature is still in use. When the British Empire changed to the Gregorian Calendar, the Quakers also changed but they still did not use the names of the months. So, the first month changed from March to January. As genealogists, we should never, if possible, change the Quaker custom to include the names of the months. People have been doing this for a long time in their genealogies and have caused great confusion. If you must use the name of the month, then include the number somewhere in a note. A further note, in the British Empire, September 2, 1752 (Wednesday) was followed by September 14, 1752 (Thursday) because along with changing the first month of the year, the Gregorian Calendar had a correction in the dates because the Julian Calendar was 11 days off from the true year. You will never, in primary documents, find any date of September 3-13, 1752. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Howard Swain" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2000 3:11 PM Subject: [ORIGINAL-13] Old Style or New Style for Quaker dates > By Old Style, I mean a calendar or a system of dating in which the > year begins on 25 March. Thus, March is the 1st month, April is the > 2nd month and so on until Dec becomes the 10th month, January the 11th, > and Feb becomes the 12th month. > > By New Style, I mean a calendar or a system of dating in which the > year begins on 1 Jan (like we do now). Thus, Jan is the 1st month, > Feb is the 2nd month and so on until Dec becomes the 12th month. > > For more info on this, see: > http://www.genfair.com/dates.htm > > I have lately been looking through the early Abington and Gwynedd > Friends Monthly Meeting records (LDS films #0,383,428 and 0,388,439 > respectively). > > The Quakers seemed to prefer to refer to months almost entirely by > using their number. Thus, you see an event on the 3rd month, say. > So, the question in this case is, Is that March or May? > The answer, of course, is that it depends on whether they are using > Old Style or New Style. . > > However, in looking through them, I noticed an interesting thing. > Many of the times when an event was in the 11th or 12th month, > they would use "double dates" for the year. (This, also, is > discussed on the above web site.) Thus I found: 12-24-1718/19. > This is interpreted as the 12th month of 1718 Old Style (with > March as the first month). Thus, this would be Feb., the last > month of 1718 using Old Style. Or if you were using New Style, > it would be Feb of 1719. (Which is why the 2 years are shown.) > Thus, it appears that their month numbering was Old Style. > > Furthermore, I noticed several dates of 2-30-xxxx. In other words, > the 30th day of the 2nd month. Thus, again it appears that > this was Old Style because the 2nd month Old Style is April > (which has 30 days) while the 2nd month New Style is Feb, > which only has 28 (or 29). > So, it appears that the 9th month above was Nov (Old Style), then > followed by December, and then starting in Jan 1752 they were on > New Style. Exactly as the English did. > > So, in conclusion, it appears to me that these records are Old Style > before 1752 and New Style beginning Jan 1752. So, if you wish to > convert numbered months to named months (eg. to compare with other > sources) you need to start counting at March or January as > appropriate when using these records. (Of course, you would > want to record, as well, the record as written with the numbered > month.) > > I am curious if others have come to the same conclusion about which named months correspond to the numbered months in these records. > > Regards, > Howard > [email protected] > > > ==== ORIGINAL-13 Mailing List ==== > Unsubscribe by sending a blank email with only the word unsubscribe in > the Subject and Body fields, with no signature file, etc., to: > [email protected] or [email protected] > > ============================== > Genealogy calendars, guestbooks and more: > Visit RootsWeb's Resource Center at > http://resources.rootsweb.com/ >