The Eastern seaboard of the United States changed from Julian to Gregorian calendar with Great Britain in 1752. Thus Ethan Allen was born under the Julian calendar. I think it's a bad idea to change his birthdate to Gregorian, especially without indictating that you've changed it. The date on which he was born was [[January 10]], [[1738|1737/8]] (O.S.) which is equivalent to [[January 21]], [[1738]] (N.S.), and he died [[February 12]], [[1789]]. Is changing dates from Julian to Gregorian a standard? If so I think we should reconsider it. -- [[User:Someone else|Someone else]] 09:35 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
On the [[January 21]] page we can truthfully only say:
Births:
* 1738 - Ethan Allen, American patriot (+ 1789) who would have been born on January 21st if the Gregorian calendar were in effect when he was born, but who instead was born on January 10, the day on which he would have celebrated the aniversary of his birth. Nonetheless whe have chosen to give you the calculated date of his birth in the proleptic Gregorian calendar.
Or on the [[January 10]] page we could say:
* 1738 - Ethan Allen, American patriot (+ 1789) (the Julian date on which he was born)
-- [[User:Someone else|Someone else]] 09:47 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed in any way by the Wikimedia Foundation or any of its affiliates. In fact, we fucking despise them.
|
