Monday, 22 August 1485

Does anyone know why traditional historical sources have 22 August 1485 falling on a Monday, but when I look at multiple online generators for the medieval English calendar/Julian, they all seem to have 22 August falling on Sunday?

Is there an online medieval English calendar that doesn't have 22 August falling on Sunday? I want to look at the days of the week for months other than August 1485, and am getting confuzzled.

~Weds

To further confuse me, I just discovered that this site:

http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/cal/medcal.shtml

has the *historical* 1485 listing 22 August as a Sunday, but its "regnal" year for Richard listing 22 August as a Monday. (Both the historical and regnal calendars are linked to this page.)

Wha-at? Use regnal years and not historical when it comes to kingly dates, and historical dates when it comes to everyone else? Is this a Norman Conquest thing?

~Weds



--- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
> Does anyone know why traditional historical sources have 22 August 1485 falling on a Monday, but when I look at multiple online generators for the medieval English calendar/Julian, they all seem to have 22 August falling on Sunday?
>
> Is there an online medieval English calendar that doesn't have 22 August falling on Sunday? I want to look at the days of the week for months other than August 1485, and am getting confuzzled.
>
> ~Weds
>

Would it be anything to do with the Julian / Gregorian discrepancies?
Good luck with abandoning confuzzlement!!!

--- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
> To further confuse me, I just discovered that this site:
>
> http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/cal/medcal.shtml
>
> has the *historical* 1485 listing 22 August as a Sunday, but its "regnal" year for Richard listing 22 August as a Monday. (Both the historical and regnal calendars are linked to this page.)
>
> Wha-at? Use regnal years and not historical when it comes to kingly dates, and historical dates when it comes to everyone else? Is this a Norman Conquest thing?
>
> ~Weds
>
>
>
> --- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone know why traditional historical sources have 22 August 1485 falling on a Monday, but when I look at multiple online generators for the medieval English calendar/Julian, they all seem to have 22 August falling on Sunday?
> >
> > Is there an online medieval English calendar that doesn't have 22 August falling on Sunday? I want to look at the days of the week for months other than August 1485, and am getting confuzzled.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
>

Nope, 'cause the Gregorian calendar was proclaimed in A.D. 1582 by Pope Gregory XIII as a reform of the Julian calendar. In Richard's time, it was Julian/Old Style.

There's something called "New style synoptical reference" (as here: http://5ko.free.fr/en/jul.php?y=1484) but I think that's clarification for current day users. Mebbe.

~Weds


--- In , "blancsanglier1452" <blancsanglier1452@...> wrote:
>
> Would it be anything to do with the Julian / Gregorian discrepancies?
> Good luck with abandoning confuzzlement!!!
>
> --- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> >
> > To further confuse me, I just discovered that this site:
> >
> > http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/cal/medcal.shtml
> >
> > has the *historical* 1485 listing 22 August as a Sunday, but its "regnal" year for Richard listing 22 August as a Monday. (Both the historical and regnal calendars are linked to this page.)
> >
> > Wha-at? Use regnal years and not historical when it comes to kingly dates, and historical dates when it comes to everyone else? Is this a Norman Conquest thing?
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Does anyone know why traditional historical sources have 22 August 1485 falling on a Monday, but when I look at multiple online generators for the medieval English calendar/Julian, they all seem to have 22 August falling on Sunday?
> > >
> > > Is there an online medieval English calendar that doesn't have 22 August falling on Sunday? I want to look at the days of the week for months other than August 1485, and am getting confuzzled.
> > >
> > > ~Weds
> > >
> >
>

The Gregorian calendar gives us 97 leap years per 400 and the Julian 100. Counting from 0, we have a difference of 11 by 1485 (*3/400). We could also be looking at a retrospective Gregorian calendar, although that doesn't have a difference of 8.
Counting modulo 7, 11=4 whilst 8=1.

In other words, I have a mathematical explanation but it doesn't fit the data yet.

----- Original Message -----
From: wednesday_mc
To:
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 8:44 PM
Subject: Re: Monday, 22 August 1485



Nope, 'cause the Gregorian calendar was proclaimed in A.D. 1582 by Pope Gregory XIII as a reform of the Julian calendar. In Richard's time, it was Julian/Old Style.

There's something called "New style synoptical reference" (as here: http://5ko.free.fr/en/jul.php?y=1484) but I think that's clarification for current day users. Mebbe.

~Weds

--- In , "blancsanglier1452" <blancsanglier1452@...> wrote:
>
> Would it be anything to do with the Julian / Gregorian discrepancies?
> Good luck with abandoning confuzzlement!!!
>
> --- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> >
> > To further confuse me, I just discovered that this site:
> >
> > http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/cal/medcal.shtml
> >
> > has the *historical* 1485 listing 22 August as a Sunday, but its "regnal" year for Richard listing 22 August as a Monday. (Both the historical and regnal calendars are linked to this page.)
> >
> > Wha-at? Use regnal years and not historical when it comes to kingly dates, and historical dates when it comes to everyone else? Is this a Norman Conquest thing?
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Does anyone know why traditional historical sources have 22 August 1485 falling on a Monday, but when I look at multiple online generators for the medieval English calendar/Julian, they all seem to have 22 August falling on Sunday?
> > >
> > > Is there an online medieval English calendar that doesn't have 22 August falling on Sunday? I want to look at the days of the week for months other than August 1485, and am getting confuzzled.
> > >
> > > ~Weds
> > >
> >
>

I went to the Epheremis site to try and find sun up at Bosworth, which I assumed was corrected by geography and calendars. There were hundreds of posts about Greenwich mean and location, which I had done. So good luck. If we had the time, place and date/ hour of Richard's birth, it would be fun to do his natal chart.


On Mar 7, 2013, at 2:16 PM, "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...<mailto:wednesday.mac@...>> wrote:



Does anyone know why traditional historical sources have 22 August 1485 falling on a Monday, but when I look at multiple online generators for the medieval English calendar/Julian, they all seem to have 22 August falling on Sunday?

Is there an online medieval English calendar that doesn't have 22 August falling on Sunday? I want to look at the days of the week for months other than August 1485, and am getting confuzzled.

~Weds

I can generate a natal chart and post it to the files here if someone tells me the time to use and someone else can analyze it. Otherwise, I can give you a "canned" reading from software. (I know to add 9 days to make him born on 11 October, to adjust for the Gregorian shift.)

I'm not an astrologer, I just find natal charts are handy when I'm creating a character and assigning their traits.

~Weds



--- In , Pamela Bain <pbain@...> wrote:
>
.
.
.
If we had the time, place and date/ hour of Richard's birth, it would be fun to do his natal chart.

If we have birth time you can get his Rising Sign which is a great tool for insight into his personality.

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 7, 2013, at 3:42 PM, "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...<mailto:wednesday.mac@...>> wrote:



I can generate a natal chart and post it to the files here if someone tells me the time to use and someone else can analyze it. Otherwise, I can give you a "canned" reading from software. (I know to add 9 days to make him born on 11 October, to adjust for the Gregorian shift.)

I'm not an astrologer, I just find natal charts are handy when I'm creating a character and assigning their traits.

~Weds

--- In <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Pamela Bain <pbain@...> wrote:
>
.
.
.
If we had the time, place and date/ hour of Richard's birth, it would be fun to do his natal chart.

Less 'nope' perhaps. The point is not the Gregorian exchange which we no about: but whether the SOFTWARE for the sites that she uses are programmed to account for it. See, calculating days etc is a mathematical algorithm, and a simple one in programming (like those sites that tell you how many hours you've lived etc)- but to suddenly throw in a random change at a certain point would affect the calculation. Get WITH it! :)

--- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
> Nope, 'cause the Gregorian calendar was proclaimed in A.D. 1582 by Pope Gregory XIII as a reform of the Julian calendar. In Richard's time, it was Julian/Old Style.
>
> There's something called "New style synoptical reference" (as here: http://5ko.free.fr/en/jul.php?y=1484) but I think that's clarification for current day users. Mebbe.
>
> ~Weds
>
>
> --- In , "blancsanglier1452" <blancsanglier1452@> wrote:
> >
> > Would it be anything to do with the Julian / Gregorian discrepancies?
> > Good luck with abandoning confuzzlement!!!
> >
> > --- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> > >
> > > To further confuse me, I just discovered that this site:
> > >
> > > http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/cal/medcal.shtml
> > >
> > > has the *historical* 1485 listing 22 August as a Sunday, but its "regnal" year for Richard listing 22 August as a Monday. (Both the historical and regnal calendars are linked to this page.)
> > >
> > > Wha-at? Use regnal years and not historical when it comes to kingly dates, and historical dates when it comes to everyone else? Is this a Norman Conquest thing?
> > >
> > > ~Weds
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Does anyone know why traditional historical sources have 22 August 1485 falling on a Monday, but when I look at multiple online generators for the medieval English calendar/Julian, they all seem to have 22 August falling on Sunday?
> > > >
> > > > Is there an online medieval English calendar that doesn't have 22 August falling on Sunday? I want to look at the days of the week for months other than August 1485, and am getting confuzzled.
> > > >
> > > > ~Weds
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

From: "Pamela Bain" <pbain@...>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 9:46 PM
Subject: Re: Monday, 22 August 1485


> If we have birth time you can get his Rising Sign which is a great tool
> for insight into his personality.

We haven't, unfortunately.

Last child....... My husband was the first grandchild on both sides. My brother-in-law said that my husband had every breath recorded in the Baby Book, and his entire life was in one Manila envelope. He died way too young, and we found all of his things, including a big Baby Book, after his death. Poor Richard was probably like that, wet nursed and mama and poppa way too busy to remark on his progress. There may be a noted astrologer somewhere who could do a pretty good approximation based on his life events. No doubt, with all the hoopla, someone will.

On Mar 7, 2013, at 4:04 PM, "Claire M Jordan" <whitehound@...<mailto:whitehound@...>> wrote:



From: "Pamela Bain" <pbain@...<mailto:pbain%40bmbi.com>>
To: <<mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>>
Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 9:46 PM
Subject: Re: Monday, 22 August 1485

> If we have birth time you can get his Rising Sign which is a great tool
> for insight into his personality.

We haven't, unfortunately.

Pamela Bain wrote:
>
> I went to the Epheremis site to try and find sun up at Bosworth, which I assumed was corrected by geography and calendars. There were hundreds of posts about Greenwich mean and location, which I had done. So good luck. If we had the time, place and date/ hour of Richard's birth, it would be fun to do his natal chart.

Carol responds:

Oddly enough, William of Worcester recorded the supposed birth hour and birth dates of some of Richard's brothers and sisters (with some errors, according to Marie), but for Richard, he recorded only the birth date, which corresponds with the date Richard himself wrote in his book of hours. Rous, who was comparing him to the anti-Christ and claimed that he was two years in his mother's womb, also claimed that he was born with Scorpio rising, but since he could not have had access to Richard's horoscope and also got his birth date wrong, he probably made the whole thing up. (Richard's sun sign, Libra, would obviously not have worked for the monstrous image Rous--who had earlier depicted him as a model king--was trying to create.

Even if we could cast his horoscope, I much prefer the solid evidence of letters, legislation, and other official documents.

Carol

Oh absolutely......at the very best, astrology can be predictive, but not factual. Hard data is very much more fun to find, than guess at a supposed placement of his houses, ascendants, etc. I find it so interesting that the last of the children, actually accomplished the most, was the most reviled, most mysterious, and now probably one of the most famous and best kings. It was a long time coming, but I would say, he earned it.

On Mar 7, 2013, at 7:11 PM, "justcarol67" <justcarol67@...<mailto:justcarol67@...>> wrote:



Pamela Bain wrote:
>
> I went to the Epheremis site to try and find sun up at Bosworth, which I assumed was corrected by geography and calendars. There were hundreds of posts about Greenwich mean and location, which I had done. So good luck. If we had the time, place and date/ hour of Richard's birth, it would be fun to do his natal chart.

Carol responds:

Oddly enough, William of Worcester recorded the supposed birth hour and birth dates of some of Richard's brothers and sisters (with some errors, according to Marie), but for Richard, he recorded only the birth date, which corresponds with the date Richard himself wrote in his book of hours. Rous, who was comparing him to the anti-Christ and claimed that he was two years in his mother's womb, also claimed that he was born with Scorpio rising, but since he could not have had access to Richard's horoscope and also got his birth date wrong, he probably made the whole thing up. (Richard's sun sign, Libra, would obviously not have worked for the monstrous image Rous--who had earlier depicted him as a model king--was trying to create.

Even if we could cast his horoscope, I much prefer the solid evidence of letters, legislation, and other official documents.

Carol

The spirit of the Gregorians is even now floating in the ether, going, "Heh, heh, heh, third one today!"

--- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
> To further confuse me, I just discovered that this site:
>
> http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/cal/medcal.shtml
>
> has the *historical* 1485 listing 22 August as a Sunday, but its "regnal" year for Richard listing 22 August as a Monday. (Both the historical and regnal calendars are linked to this page.)
>
> Wha-at? Use regnal years and not historical when it comes to kingly dates, and historical dates when it comes to everyone else? Is this a Norman Conquest thing?
>
> ~Weds
>
>
>
> --- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone know why traditional historical sources have 22 August 1485 falling on a Monday, but when I look at multiple online generators for the medieval English calendar/Julian, they all seem to have 22 August falling on Sunday?
> >
> > Is there an online medieval English calendar that doesn't have 22 August falling on Sunday? I want to look at the days of the week for months other than August 1485, and am getting confuzzled.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
>

I don't believe there's a rock-solid extant source for his birth time. I believe the search for Richard's rising sign has been tabled until the advent of more reliable TARDIS technology.

--- In , Pamela Bain <pbain@...> wrote:
>
> If we have birth time you can get his Rising Sign which is a great tool for insight into his personality.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 7, 2013, at 3:42 PM, "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@...<mailto:wednesday.mac@...>> wrote:
>
>
>
> I can generate a natal chart and post it to the files here if someone tells me the time to use and someone else can analyze it. Otherwise, I can give you a "canned" reading from software. (I know to add 9 days to make him born on 11 October, to adjust for the Gregorian shift.)
>
> I'm not an astrologer, I just find natal charts are handy when I'm creating a character and assigning their traits.
>
> ~Weds
>
> --- In <mailto:%40yahoogroups.com>, Pamela Bain <pbain@> wrote:
> >
> .
> .
> .
> If we had the time, place and date/ hour of Richard's birth, it would be fun to do his natal chart.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Indeed, a major plot point in "Foucault's Pendulum" hangs upon this very question. (Um... not the software, the math.)

--- In , "blancsanglier1452" <blancsanglier1452@...> wrote:
>
> Less 'nope' perhaps. The point is not the Gregorian exchange which we no about: but whether the SOFTWARE for the sites that she uses are programmed to account for it. See, calculating days etc is a mathematical algorithm, and a simple one in programming (like those sites that tell you how many hours you've lived etc)- but to suddenly throw in a random change at a certain point would affect the calculation. Get WITH it! :)
>
> --- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> >
> > Nope, 'cause the Gregorian calendar was proclaimed in A.D. 1582 by Pope Gregory XIII as a reform of the Julian calendar. In Richard's time, it was Julian/Old Style.
> >
> > There's something called "New style synoptical reference" (as here: http://5ko.free.fr/en/jul.php?y=1484) but I think that's clarification for current day users. Mebbe.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> > --- In , "blancsanglier1452" <blancsanglier1452@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Would it be anything to do with the Julian / Gregorian discrepancies?
> > > Good luck with abandoning confuzzlement!!!
> > >
> > > --- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > To further confuse me, I just discovered that this site:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/cal/medcal.shtml
> > > >
> > > > has the *historical* 1485 listing 22 August as a Sunday, but its "regnal" year for Richard listing 22 August as a Monday. (Both the historical and regnal calendars are linked to this page.)
> > > >
> > > > Wha-at? Use regnal years and not historical when it comes to kingly dates, and historical dates when it comes to everyone else? Is this a Norman Conquest thing?
> > > >
> > > > ~Weds
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In , "wednesday_mc" <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Does anyone know why traditional historical sources have 22 August 1485 falling on a Monday, but when I look at multiple online generators for the medieval English calendar/Julian, they all seem to have 22 August falling on Sunday?
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there an online medieval English calendar that doesn't have 22 August falling on Sunday? I want to look at the days of the week for months other than August 1485, and am getting confuzzled.
> > > > >
> > > > > ~Weds
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>