TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2005-02 > 1107379668


From: "Norb Bankert" <>
Subject: RE: [TMG] Julian vs Grgorian and OS vs NS
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 16:28:03 -0500


My email was lost the last few days so I'm coming in late here. I'm not
quoting any sources <g> because I don't have any but:
It is my understanding that OS/NS dates for our genealogical purposes have
nothing to do with the Gregorian calendar. Puritan roots in early America
rejected the Gregorian calendar because of their reluctance to adopt a
calendar developed by a Catholic Pope. While much of the world had adopted
the Gregorian calendar, America and England continued to use the Julian
calendar until 1752, which necessitated some adjustment because of the flaws
in the Julian calendar.
For our purposes we are using only the Julian calendar. In colonial America
the civilian population considered January 1'st the beginning of the new
year while the legal year did not begin until March 26. OS/NS could also be
stated Legal/Civil. When we say someone was born in 1725/26 we are saying
that they were born in the legal year of 1725 and the civil year of 1726.
We still have something similar today. We celebrate New Years on January 1,
however our "fiscal" year begins on October 1 (I think), so today could be
written as 2 Feb 2004/2005 if we wanted to indicate fiscal/civil.
With the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1752 adjustments were made,
January 1 was considered the new year, and the Julian calendar was dropped.
While some may refer to Julian/Gregorian as OS/NS, it has little meaning for
us other than the 10 day adjustment.

To reiterate, Julian calendar OS/NS = Julian Legal/Civil.
Julian vs. Gregorian is a separate issue.

Until it finally dawned on me that two were separate issues, I could not
grasp the concept of OS/NS dates.

Norb Bankert
Family and Genealogy pages at www.bankert.org


This thread: