I Would Also Leap to That Conclusion

Florence Beatrice Stevens, born on February 29, 1904, has celebrated only 25 birthdays. Could she be the oldest living person born on a leap year day? Beverly (Mass.) Historical Society & Museum director Stephen P. Hall was put on the case.

I had to give this question some thought, because whenever you assign any “superlative” to a person you want to be on a strong footing. But the more I thought about it, to be an older “leap-year day” baby you would have to be at least 108 years old, (a very small percentage of the population) and also be born on the 29th of February 1900. The odds of someone still alive in 2008 and being born on leap year day 108 years ago are astronomical. [Link]

Lucky in Love (They Hope)

Last year, no one wanted to have a baby on 6/6/06. This year, everyone wants to get married on 7/7/07.

[W]edding planners and venues have reported a startling rise in the number of couples who have booked weddings — especially in Las Vegas — on July 7, 2007, many of them having done so in the belief that 7-7-07 is a date with luck written all over it. [Link]

Happy Birthday to Few

According to mental_floss (citing a 2001 study), today is the least popular day to be born.

According to the inquiry, an average of 12,576 people are born each year on the 5th of October. It also suggests that some 968,000 Americans celebrate this day annually.

Which birth date is the least common? May 22nd with an average of 10,259 persons born each year.

A Birthday Without a Birth

Presidents Day is ostensibly a birthday celebration, which is strange since no President could possibly have celebrated his birthday on the third Monday in February.

George Washington was born either on February 11, 1731 (according to the old-style Julian calendar, still in use at the time), or on February 22, 1732 (according to the Gregorian calendar, adopted in 1752 throughout the British Empire). Under no circumstances, therefore, can Washington’s birthday fall on Washington’s Birthday, a.k.a. Presidents Day, which, being the third Monday of the month, can occur only between the 15th and the 21st. Lincoln’s birthday, February 12th, doesn’t make it through the Presidents Day window, either. Nor do the natal days of our other two February Presidents, William Henry Harrison (born on the 6th) and Ronald Reagan (the 9th). A fine mess! [Link]

Something Doesn't Add Up

Sometimes it pays to look at old evidence with fresh eyes.

I was looking over the family record of my great-great-grandfather Lemuel Dunham this afternoon, and noticed something odd. On Oct. 3, 1825, Lemuel married Molly (Bisbee) Bryant—a young widow who had borne an illegitimate child at age 17. On Mar. 26, 1826, Lemuel and Molly's first child was born.

I have read these dates thousands of times in the past, but only today did I notice that my ancestors had rolled in the hay prior to taking their vows.

Primoprematurity is nothing new in my family: three of my four sets of great-grandparents had children less than nine months after marrying. My paternal grandmother's father married twice, and on both occasions there was a bun in the oven. But this is the first proof of premarital conception in my Dunham line—proof I can't wait to spring on my father.

Will There Be an Antichristening?

Many couples were worried about giving birth on 6/6/06, but not Mike and Suzanne Cooper. Their son was three days overdue, and they already had a name picked out.

[Mike] had to persuade his wife, a 36-year-old special needs teacher, to agree to the name.

'The Omen is one of our favourite films and that's why I was keeping my legs crossed for a birth on the sixth,' she said. 'It does seem a bit weird I suppose – but he's perfect.' Damien was born at Southmead Hospital in Bristol. [Link, via Neatorama]

How About 'Damien' If It's a Boy?

Some expectant mothers are getting nervous about their due dates as 6/6/06 approaches. It may be irrational, but they'd rather not have their babies born the same day as the Antichrist.

The remake of the 70's original called "The Omen" is scaring the devil out of expecting mothers to the point that many have canceled their appointments to be induced next Tuesday. Dr Suzanne Roberts, an OBGYN who's delivered thousands of babies, is amazed by all the hype and its effect on mom's to be. “A lot of our patients are requesting that they be induced either before that or they get scheduled for induction after that and they are wanting to know, if they happen to come in, is there anything we can do to prevent them from delivering on June 6," said Dr. Roberts.

Hollywood's big-screen is fiction, but here in the birthing room, it's 100% reality. Nature's reality. "If the baby wants to come on June 6th, the baby will come on June 6th," laughed Roberts. [Link (Thanks, Dave!)]

[tagged: genealogy, family tree, ancestry]

Died on His 100th Birthday?

From a sidebar of the Orlando (Fla.) Sentinel of Sept. 11, 2005:

Suspicious birth and death dates are a clue this grave marker was a salesman's sample and never used.

Double Dating in Colonial America

Ever wonder why September is, etymologically speaking, the "seventh month," October the eighth, and so on?

This is a consequence of the Julian Calendar, which held sway in Europe from Roman times until 1582, when Pope Gregory XIII imposed the present system. Prior to 1582, March 25 was celebrated as New Year's Day, and March was considered the first month of the calendar year (even though only seven days of March fell within the new year). Worse, the Julian calendar required leap years every four years without exception, leading to a "drift" in dates. Equinoxes and solstices were still tied to their celestial hitching posts, but the dates on which they occurred drifted as much as ten days.

Gregory's new calendar was a sensible solution to these problems, and therefore was ignored by the British. In England and its colonies, the Julian remained the de jure calendar, even as the Gregorian became the de facto calendar. The most troublesome problem for those recognizing both calendars was designating dates from January 1 through March 24. On the Julian calendar, these were the last days of the old year, while on the Gregorian calendar they were the first days of the new year.

An example from my own family demonstrates the confusion that could arise from the Julian calendar. Jonathan Coolidge, son of John and Mary (Ravens) Coolidge of Watertown, Massachusetts, was born (according to town records) on the tenth day of the first month of 1645. A glance at adjacent records shows that the clerk was using the Julian calendar, whose first month was March. But in the Julian system, the first day of the first month is March 25. Undoubtedly, Jonathan was born on the tenth of March, but the year of his birth was actually 1644 (by the Julian calendar). The clerk's record is both correct—Jonathan was born in the first month of 1645, and on the tenth day of that month—and incorrect—Jonathan was born on the tenth day of March, which lay in 1644.

Such confusion led to a compromise: "double dating," or "split year dating." For dates on the Gregorian calendar prior to March 25, both years would be given. For example, "March 4, 1643/4" was both "March 4, 1643" (Julian) and "March 4, 1644" (Gregorian). This convention was widely used until the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1752.

For genealogists, it is important both to understand and to respect the double-dating system. When transcribing a record, one should always write the date as given—either in Old Style (Julian) or in New Style (Gregorian). For dates prior to 1752 written without double dating (e.g. "March 4, 1733"), one should not assume the use of either calendar without evidence. If one can reach a conclusion, the conclusion should be bracketed to prevent confusion (e.g. "March 4, 1733[/4]"). If evidence is less than conclusive, this should be indicated as well (e.g. "March 4, 1733[/4?]").

More Reading:

• Encyclopedia of Genealogy: Calendar Change - 16th Century