In the Old Style, every year of an exact century—every centurial (or,
as it was sometimes called, secular) year—was a leap-year of 366 days.
What would be the effect of treating every centurial year as a common
year of 365 days? We should have suppressed four days at the end of
four centuries when we ought to suppress only three in 399 years. So
it was suggested that while three successive centurial years should be
regarded as common years, the fourth centurial year should be treated
as a leap-year. Thus, in both Old and New Style the years 1600 and 2000
are leap-years; but 1700, 1800, and 1900, which in the Old Style were
leap-years, are in the New Style treated as common years of 365 days.
And the rule laid down in the Gregorian system was that if the number
expressed by the first two figures of the century was exactly divisible
by 4 it should be a leap-year, but if not exactly divisible by 4 it
should be treated as a common year. The numbers 16 and 20 are exactly
divisible by 4, but 17, 18, and 19 are not so divisible. The years 1600
and 2000 are in the New Style leap-years, but the years 1700, 1800, and
1900 are in the New Style common years.
It is true that the adoption of 133 years, instead of 130 years, as the
time in which in the Old Style one day was gained by the Kalendar on the
sun, imports an error into the system, which causes the Kalendar to fall
behind the sun. This error, as has been said, will accumulate to the
extent of one day in A.D. 5200. It may be thought that, if men be on the
earth at that date, they will know how to deal with the case. Yet it is
suggested for the instruction of our remote posterity that they will have
only to make A.D. 5200 a common year, instead of a leap-year, to bring
things back to correctness[166].
For the Sunday letters in the New Style and for the Cycle of Epacts in
the Gregorian Kalendar, see Dr Seabury, _Theory and Use of the Church
Calendar_.
The work of the Gregorian reformation is marvellous in its elaborate
ingenuity. It even provides for a case which will not occur till
Dec. 31, A.D. 8600. Yet it does not reach the attainment of an exact
correspondence with astronomical phenomena. And it has been frequently
observed that the new moons of the Kalendar may occur one, two, or
even three days _later_ than the new moons of the astronomer. In fact
the astronomical new moon rarely occurs on the date marked for the
ecclesiastical new moon. But care has been taken that the new moon of the
Kalendar never occurs _earlier_ than the new moon of astronomy.
_The adoption of the New Style._
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account