Evening Star Newspaper, January 1, 1933, Page 49

THE SUNDAY -STAR, WASHINGTON, D. C, JANUARY 1, 1933, '1n A -NEW CALENDAR, BUT SAME OLD FLAWS BY MARY PORTER RUSSELL. HE houses of the land are filled with new calendars today. By the millions they have com: into our homes—bright new calendars, tasteful and garish, large and small. We have bought them from our newsboys, we have re- ceived them as gifts, as advertisements and as New Year greetings. Most of them have been Jost to view, perhaps, in the .general after- Christmas confusion; but today we will dis- cover one in its hiding place, and we will study it a moment before placing it upon our desk or hanging it at our bedside or above the kitchen sink. . We will study it a mcment, and in the grip of one of those moods of fleeting seriousness the season brings, we will run our hands over the unborn days. For the calendar refuses to be regarded as merely a useful table. It is tinie made tangible; it is a portion of our life- time, measured, definite—inspiring hopes and inspiring fear, arousing us from our lethargy. So essential to us the calendar has become that it is difficult for us to realize that man lived long years upon the earth with no means of making note of the seasons or of counting the passing days. The length of the year was too big a thing for the mind of primitive man to comprehend. He was amazed and bewildered by the myriads of ever-shifting stars, by the apparently varying speeds of the sun-god in traveling from east to west. He was baffled, too, by the mysterious phases of the moon; and the coming of the harsher seasons was a fear- ful thing, brought on by wrath of gods or chance. But eventually man began his crude attempts to measure time. The evolution of our calen- dar from those early beginnings to the present day is filled with inconsistencies, and haloed with romance. * ‘The variation of the length of years has been extremely wide. The first “year” consisted of the period of time in which each moon waxed and waned—for the moon was more easily studied than the sun or stars, and became the first means of regulating the illusive and slip- pery days. . Years of one moon or month grew tedious in time, and five moons (the number that could be counted on one hand) became the estab- year. Later the year was increased in from moons to 6, from 6 to 10, and to 12. These moon months, consisted of 30 days, and the days were off by the use of bundles of stcks. Each morning one stick was drawn from the bundle until the days that were to be became the relationship of the earth and the sun, and began measuring the shadows of their huge pyramids that the true length of the year was discovered as being 365.242 days, Even after this discovery the Egyptians retained their ‘JT IS easy to trace the increasing lengths of the years through the diminishing ages of Biblical characters. Methuselah, that grand old man who lived 969 years, we have been told, was, in reality, only 73 when he died, for he lived in the era of single moon counts. Adam, if we subject him to the indignity of measuring his life span by full-length years, spent 75 years upon this earth, instead of 930; Noah 77, in- stead of 950. Abraham and Isaac belonged to the era of five-month years, and so lived not 175 and 180 years, respectively, but 72 and 74. Jacob, coming in the six-month period, lived only 73 of the 147 years with which he is ac- credited. During their sojourn in Egypt the Israelites learned the true length of the year, but while there they held tenaciously to their forefathers’ six-month year. After the exodus from Egypt, however, the ages of men recorded in the Bible are within the normal range of lives. The Egyptians and the Israelites kept their precious information to themselves, and the scattered nations and tribes of Europe used notched sticks to ally 5, 6 and 10 moon years until Numa, the Roman King during the seventh century before Christ, added the months of January and February to make 12, alternating 29 and 30 days to each moon. Even wita the addition of these two months, however, the year consisted of only 354 days, and the calendar had come into hope- less confusion by the time of Julius Caesar, " Many persons are of the opinion that Caesar originated the calendar which came to bear his name, and which, in modified form, is now in almost universal use. The fact is, how- ever, that he adopted it from the Egyptians, after conquering Egypt in 46 B.C. It seemed obvious that the ever-wandering moon calen- dar could never be made satisfactory, and Caesar was delighted with the advantages the sun calendar offered. Only one difficulty wor- ried him: The Egyptians used 12 equal months of 30 days each. Twelve months of even num- bers of days could not be tolerated, he insisted. Was it not odd numbers that were lucky? The outcome was that the Egyptian calendar was adopted, with one important change: The five extra days (six in leap years), which the Egyptians had celebrated as festival days, were distributed throughout the year, and since it was desired that every alternate month be made 31 days long, one day was subtracted from Pebruary—leaving that month with enly 29 days. The months were divided into Kal- ends, Nones and Ides. The Kalends were the first of every month, the Nones and Ides were the 7th and 14th of March, May, July and October. In other months the Nones were the 5th, and the Ides the 13th. Dates were reckoned backward. The days of the months were juggled about still further after Julius Caesar was assassin- ated in 44 Bf. His successors, Augustus Caesar, consumed by a desire to equal in im- portance his distinguished uncle, demanded that there be as many days in the month of his-hirth (August) as in the birth- month of . The System Is All Wrong, According to -Modern Precepts,but We Cling toItfor Reasons Sentimental and Otherwise. LCHAPON sc. At the turn of the year. Julius (July). The 20th day of February was therefore taken away and added to August. To avoid having three successive months of 31 days each, the 31st days of September and November were given 1o October and December. “Thirty days hath September,” said Augustus, and 30 days it hath continued to this day to have, -Another idiosyncrasy of the Julian calendar which has come down to us through the cen- turies is the date of the beginning of the year. Caesar planned to begin his year wiith the Winter solstice—December 22. - At this time the sun has reached its farthest position south of the equator, and, begins to return, with promise of new warmth, to northern latitudes. Since prehistoric times men have made this event an occasion for celebration and rejoicing. From the standpoint of both logic and sentiment, it would seeméhe proper day to herald the new year. But the people of Rome were grounded <4n the belief that the new year must begin with a new moon, and Caesar thought it ex- pedient to accede to their wishes. January 1st was therefore placed on the first day on which the new moon appeared after the Winter solstice. NLY two important changes have been made in the Julan calendar since its adopted in 46 B. C. The first was the recogni- tion of the seven-day week as an official divi- sion of time. "This was brought about by Em- peror Constantine’s edict of 321 AD. which sanctioned the Christian Sunday as a day of rest, and authorized the use of seven pagan names—the ones still in use—to designate the seven days of the Christian week. The second change' occurred more than " twglve hundred years later, when it was de- " Dairy Improvement Pays Well A CHANCE"to reduce the amount of work one must do by half through a little addi- tional work nd care *vith the same financial return would seem to be an attractive proposi- tion, but one group of farmers is hard to con- vince along this line. For some years, the Department of Agricul- ture has sought to impress upon the dairy farmer the advisability and economy of keep- ing herd records of their milk production in order that the so-called boarder and the low producers might be eliminated. Yet, despite the arguments of the field men and the vol- umes which have been written, progress has been slow. Comparative figures for last year however, tell the story. 4 Back in 1924, cows whose owners belanged ‘o herd improvement associations Jproduced an average of 7,092 pounds of milk and 279 pourrds of butter fat a year. Last year these figures had risen to 7,784 pounds of milk and 306 pounds of butter fat. Compared with these figures were those of the non-improvenfent herds in which in 1924 the yield was 4,134 pounds of milk and 162 pounds of butter fat* Last year the figures were 4,466 pounds of milk and 176 pounds of butter fat. The difference between the two sets of fig- ures is the difference between prosperity on the dairy and the struggle to keep ahead of the sheriff. i In proper herd control, each cow has a sep- arate record sheet. On it is recorded each day the weight of the milk given and the amount of grain fed. A sample of the milk is taken each day, also, for testing purposes every 15 days to determine the percentage of butter far. A little calculation then gives the cow’s output for the 15-day period and the value is quickly computed. From this is deducted the cost of the grain fed and the profit remains. Surpris- ingly often, however, in herds newly subjected to this accounting system, the yield of the milk is deducted from the value of the grain fed and the remainder represents the loss. In herds under proper improvement proced- ure, the boarders, or the cows shown to actually fail to pay their way, let alone show a profit, are slaughtered. The heifer calves are raised to replace them. The sire of such z herd is always a thoroughbred coming from a line of proven milk producers. When the heifers start ' v to produce, it is soon determined whether their yield will make them more profitable than other individuals in the herd and when this psoves to be the case, they take the place of the older animals. . In this way, in a few years, a herd of little more than ordinary worth is developed into a really profitable herd. The advantage of ob- taining the same amount of milk from 20 cows as would ordinarily be had from 40 is evident at once. The feed bill also is reduced, for the first 27 pounds of fed grain goes toward what is known as the maintenance ration, that is the amount necessary to support the life of the animal. The grain above that figure is represented in the milk yield. If but 20 cows need this 27 pounds each instead of 40, the saving on the feed bill is apparent. Yet despite these convincing facts, matters of actual record, far too many dairy men fail to carry out the recommendations of the scien- tists. It explains, in part, why so many are in serious financial straits. I;hony Disease Real PLANT disease, the name of which belies its record, is the phony peach disease. It is far from phony, for its effect is to stunt the trees it attacks and, naturally, reduces the crop as a consequence. The disease is rather wide- spread in this country, last year being marked by outbreaks in as widely separated areas as Texas and Illinois. It is now found in Alabama, Georgia, Louis- iana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas. Speed Champion According to their own account, the children were first in something at school. One was first in reading, another in arithmetie, another in sports. Bertie alone remained silent. - “Well, Bertie, how about you?” his uncle asked. “Aren’t you first in anything?” " “Yes,” said honest Bertie, “I am first out of the building when the bell rings” - /.. vl " 1 cided that a defect in the leap year rule must be remedied. Caesar had based his caleddar on & 365.25-day year, and had ordained that there be an extra day added to February every fourth year to rectify the irregularity. But in reality there are only 365.242 days in the year, and the observance of lcap year every four years caused the calendar gradually to fall be- hind the sun. The discrepancy was too slight to be noticed at first, but by 1582 A.D. the calendar year was 10 days out of place. Pope Gregory XIII, upon the advice of prominent astronomers, dropped these 10 days from the calendar, and established a new leap year rule —that three century leap years in each four hundred years must be non-leap years. The Gregorian calendar was adopted by all Catholic countries in 1582, Protestant Ger- many did not accept it until 1700; and Great Britain, with all her colonies, the United States, refused to acknowledge it umtil 1752. Since a leap year was skipped, under the Gregorian calendar, in 1700, it was neces- sary for Great Britain to drop 11 days in- stead of the 10 days canceled by Pope Gregory. These. 11 days were. cropped between Septem- ber 2 and September 14. It is because of this calendar change that George Washington’s birthday is celebrated on February 22. Ac- cording to the Washington family Bible at Mount Vernon, he was born on “Ye 11th of February.” : For many years afier the reform of 1752, dates were referred to as “old style” and “new style,” and one can surmise that considerable confusion existed. = But finally the comfusion passed away, and people ceased to remember that thefe had ever béen other than “new style” dates. A A movement has been under way since the early days of the present century to make further and more drastic changes in our ealen- dar, so that its faults may be minimized. In 1924 the problem was brought before the League of Nations at Geneva, where it has been periodically studied, discussed and debated, and where it is still pending as an important matter of world concern. More than two .hundred plans for revision have been presénted to the League, but only two of these have survived as worthy of pro- longed consideration. One of these calls for a division of our days into a thirteen-month year; the other provides for a rectifying of the present 12-month calendar, with four equal seasons. Absolute simplicity is, of course, unattainable because day and year, week and year, Junar month and year, are incommensurable periods of time. Proponents of reform, however, are Both the 13-month and equal-quarters plans of revision call for the fixity of our cal- endar by the interczlation of a year day year and a leap day every four day to be added at the end of December leap day at the end of June, would belong to no week, and would not ‘interfere with the permanent relation week days to specific dates. The assortment of days in any month would be exactly the same as in the same month of the preceding year. Calendars would be made of durable ma- terials, and the hanging of fresh, new ones each year would become just a custom of the quaint and inefficient past. The advocates. of the 13-month pilan claim that it is superior to any other because of the fact that its months are exactly even— 28 days in each—and because i{he dates any month would fall not oply em same week days as in the preceding year, on the same week days as in any other The reform would have to be put on a year when January 1 comes on as it does this year. Thereafter the every month would always fall on Si 28th on Saturday, and—woe be unto 13th on Priday. The thirteenth month be called “Sol,” and would be intercalated tween June and July. of the but £ xilggg%g NDER the equal-quarters plan, the would be divided into equal halves quarters, containing 364 days of the year. quarters would consist of three months the first month having 31 days and other two months 30 days month would contain some fraction of a A and not all months would have the same assort- ment of days. The plan has the advantage of equal quarters, however, and this fact is con- sidered of importance by many persons, Both the 13-month and equal-quarters calendars would change many of our holidays to the Mondays preceding their present dates, so that extended week ends might be enjoyed; and Easter Sunday, which now wanders from March 22 to April 25, would be fixed at some certain date—probably early in April. sl ¥ would fall on Friday. Against these stand thoce. who would welcome the change person: ally on the ground of efficiency, and, with them, a group of crusaders who see in the reform genuine boon to all mankind. and who beli that we should tolerate willingly the incomn- veniences of its introduction, for the sake the generations to come. But many of us, if the truth be known, be divided in another way. We approve change because we would find interesting unusual an upheaval of things as are; we object to it because the defects of our ent calendar appeal to us sentimentally tie with the distant past. new calendar we will hang 1 ‘ will bring us its messages of hope g tHE ]