CHRONOLOGY
739
CHRONOLOGY
ther complicated. King John dated his reign from
his coronation, 27 May, 1199, but this being the Feast
of the Ascension, his years were counted from one oc-
currence of this festival to the next, and were accord-
ingly of varying length. Edward I dated from noon,
20 November, 1272, and in consequence this day in
each year of his reign was partly in one regnal year
and partly in another. In the civil wars of York and
Lancaster, Henry VI and Edward IV equally ignored
the period during which his rival assumed or recov-
ered power, and counted their years continuously on-
wards from the time when they mounted the throne.
Charles II, though he began to reign de facto only at
the Restoration (29 May, 1660"), reckoned his years,
de jure, from his father's execution, 30 .January,
1648-9, ignoring the Commonwealth and Protector-
ate. Queen Mary Tudor reckoned her reign from the
death of Edward VI, 6 July, 15.53, but the interval un-
til 19 July of the same year being occupied by the
abortive reign of Lady Jane Grey, public documents in
her name commence onlv with the latter date. Wil-
liam III and .Mary II began to reign 13 Feb., 1688-9,
BS "William and Man,'". Man - died 2N December,
1694, when the style was altered to " William " alone;
but no change was made in the computation of regnal
years. Within the > r ear, it was long usual to specify
dates by reference to some well-known feast in the ec-
clesiastical calendar, as, for instance, "the Friday be-
fore Pentecost " or " the day of St. John the Baptist ".
Indictions. — In papal and other documents, an- other epoch is often added, namely, the Indiction. This had originally been a period of fifteen years, at the close of which the financial accounts of the i Empire were balanced; but for purposes of chronology the indictions are conventional periods of fifteen years, the first of which began in the reign of Constantine the Great. Unlike the Olympiads, the indictions themselves were not numbered, but only the place of a year in the indiction in which it fell. Thus Hone quart*} signifies not "in the fourth indic- tion". but "in the fourth year of its indiction ". what- ever this was. It was obvious that such an element of computation could serve only to verify more precisely the date of a year already approximately Known. Moreover, the indictions were calculated on different systems, which have to be understood and distinguished: (1) The Greek, Constantinian, or Con- Stantinopolitan Indictions were reckoned from 1 Sep- tember, 312. These were chiefly used in the East. (2) The Imperial. Cesarean, or Western Indictions eom- menced with 21 September, 312. These were usually adopted in Western Christendom. They appear to have been of Anglo-Saxon origin, and to have owed their popularity to the authority of the Venerable Bede. The day he chose for the starting point was due to an erroneous astronomical calculation which made the autumnal equinox fall on 24 September. Further confusion was caused by the mistake of some chroniclers who wrongly began the indictional cycle a year late 21 September, 313. (3) The Roman, Papal, or Pontifical Indictions, introduced in the ninth century, made the series start from the first day of tin 1 civil year, which was in some cases 25 Decem- ber, in others 1 January. This system was also com- mon in Western Christendom, but in spite of its ap- pellation it was by no means exclusively used in papal documents.
BEGINNING of the Year. — The date at which the year commenced varied at different periods and in different countries. When Julius Csesar reformed the calendar (45 n. c.) he fixed 1 January BS New Year's Day, a character which it seems never quite to have lost, even among those who for civil and legal purposes chose another starting point. The most common of such starting points were 25 March (Feast of the Annunciation. " Style of the Incarnation *' i and 25 December (Christmas Day, ' ' Style of t he Nat ivity ")•
In England before the Norman Conquest (1066) the year
began either on 25 March or 25 December; from 1087
to 1155 on 1 January; and from 1155 till the reform of
the calendar in 1752 on 25 March, so that 24 March
was the last day of one year, and 25 March the first
day of the next. But though the legal year was thus
reckoned, it is clear that 1 January was commonly
spoken of as New Year's Day. In Scotland, from
1 January, 1600, the beginning of the year was reck-
oned from that day. In Prance the year was vari
ously reckoned: from Christmas Day, from Easter eve,
or from 25 March. Of all starting points a movable
feast like Easter is obviously the worst. From 1564
the year was reckoned in France from 1 January to 31
December. In Germany the reckoning was anciently
from Christmas, but in 1544 and onwards, from 1
January to 31 December. In Rome and a great part
of Italy, it was from 25 December, until Pope Gregory
XIII reformed the calendar (1582) and fixed 1 Janu-
ary as the first day of the year. The years, however,
according to which papal Bulls are dated, still com-
mence with Christmas Day. Spain, with Portugal
and Southern France, observed an era of its own long
after the rest of Christendom had adopted that of
Dionysius. This era of Spain or of the Caesars, com-
menced with 1 January, 38 b. c, and remained in
force in the Kingdom of Castile and Leon till A. n.
1383, when a royal edict commanded the substitution
of the Christian Era. In Portugal the change was not
made till 1422. No satisfactory explanation has been
found of the date from which this era started.
The Gregorian Reform. — The introduction of the < Iregorian Calendar entailed various discrepancies between the dates which different people assigned to the same events. The Julian system of time-measure- ments, introduced by Csesar, was not sufficiently ac- curate, as it made the year slightly too long, with the result that by the sixteenth century it had fallen ten days in arrear, so that, for instance, the day of the vernal equinox, which should have been called 21 March, was called 11 March. To remedy this, be- sides substituting an improved system which should prevent the error from operating in future, it was necessary to omit ten full days in order to bring things I lack to the proper point. Pope Gregory XIII, who in- troduced the reformed system, or "New Style", or- dained that ten days in October, 1582, should not be counted, the fourth of that month being immediately followed by the fifteenth. He moreover determined that the year should begin with 1 January, and in order to prevent the Julian error from causing retardation in the future as in the past, he ruled that three leap years should be omitted in every four centuries, viz. those of the centennial years the first two figures of which are not exact multiples of four, as 1700, 1800, 1900, 2100, etc. The New Style (N. S.) was speedily adopted by Catholic Stales, but for a long time the Protestant States retained the < »ld (O. S.), from w bich there followed important differences in marking dates according as one or other style was followed. In the first place there was the original difference of ten days bel reen them, increased to eleven by the O. S. 29 February in a. d. 1700, to twelve days in 1800, and to thirteen in 1900. Moreover, the period from 1 Janu- ary to 24 March inclusive, which was thi rnenl of the year according to X. S.. according to O. S. was t he conclusion of the year previous. From want oi at lent ion to this, important event.-, have sometimes been misquoted by a year. In illustration maybe Considered the death of Queen Elizabeth. This oc- curred in what was t lien My led in I Ingland 2 I March, 1602, being the last day of that year. In France and wherever the N. S. prevailed, this day was described as 3 April, 1603. To avoid all possible ambiguity such dates are frequently expressed in fractional
21 March 2
form, as ~ *. — =-, 100 s. In our modern histories 3 April 3
