which begins thus: "Anno igitur gratiæ secundum Dionysium MC, secundum Evangelium vero MCXXII, suscepit Henricus primus monarchiam totius Angliæ," &c. Here the year of grace is clearly marked for that of the incarnation. But what is more remarkable, is the distinction between the years of the incarnation according to Dionysius Parvus, and the same years according to the Gospel. He supposes, then, that Dionysius was deceived in reckoning the years of the incarnation, and that, according to the Gospel, we must add 22 complete years to his calculation, in order to find the true year of the incarnation. Marianus Scotus, who died at the end of the 11th century, and other writers of chronicles, though small in number, have made the same supposition. We find it so in a rescript of Urban II: "Data Laterani, vII kal. April. anno ab incarnatione Domini, secundum Dionysinm MXCVIII, secundum vero certiorem Evangelii probationem, MCXXI, indictione VI, epacta IV." Pope Urban & Gervase agree in what they say In 1350 it was ruled in Arragon, by an ordinance of Peter, dated Perpignan, Dec. 16, that the year should begin at Christmas, and that the kalends, nones & ides, should be omitted in the date of the day (Du Cange, t. I, col. 468). Previously the year began March 25, later than ours by 3 months minus 7 days. The same law was published at Castille, 1383, to the Cortes at Segovia; and in Portugal, King John I gave a similar ordinance in 1420. This usage subsisted in the 16th century, as appears by the date of the treaty between the emperor, Charles V, and King Francis I: "Ainsy faict traicte et conclu en la ville de Madrid, &c. le Dimanche 14 du mois de Janvier, 1526, pris a la Nativite de N. Seigneur selon le style d'Espagne." A similar ordinance was issued in the same age by Charles IX, in France. The Russians, in the 11th century, began the year at Spring, but at length they adopted the Greek kalendar. In Sicily, from the invasion of the Normans, they began March 25-but in the 15th century, July 1; yet the notaries in the middle of the 17th century continued to take March 25, though the people and the magistrates used Jan. 1: In Cyprus, the year began at Christmas. In England, we find vestiges of this usage from the 7th century, and it continued to the 13th century. Gervase of Canterbury testifies that all preceding writers began at Christmas, because that day served for the term at which the sun ended his course: "Hac ut æstimo ratione inducti sunt omnes fere qui ante me scripserunt, ut a Natali Domini anni subsequentis sumerent initium." However, it appears that, from the 12th century, the custom of the English church was to commence the year on March 25; and it is no doubt for this reason that Eadmer, who wrote towards the middle of this century, styles the ember week of Pentecost, the fast of the fourth month. This style passed into the civil in the 14th century. A diploma of Edward III, by which he pledged his crown to Baldwin, archbishop of Treves, is dated-" Datum anno Domini MCCCXXXVIII secundum stylum & consuetudinem ecclesiæ Anglicanæ et provinciæ Trevirensis, die penultima mensis Septembris” (Rymer, t. V, p. 101.) We have seen that, at Treves, the year began March 25. This custom was preserved in England until the reception of the reformed kalendar, when the beginning of the year was fixed to be Jan. 1. For the rest, we must distin respecting the calculation of Dionysius, which is not distinguished from ours; but there is one year of difference in their manner of reckoning the years, which they say are according to Gospel proof. According to Gervase, in order to find the true year of the incarnation, we must add 22 years to our Christian era, or to the calculation of Dionysius. According to Urban, we must add 23. Marianus Scotus, with Gervase, says we must add 22. Florent. (Bravonius) Worcest. adopts the same opinion in his chronicle, composed at the beginning of the 12th century. He arranges his facts under two eras of the Gospel, which he expresses by S. E., and the era of Dionysius, which he designates by S. D. For instance, he places a voyage of William II, duke of Normandy, into England, under the year 1051 of the era introduced by Dionysius, and under the year 1073 of the evangelic erawhence we see that he places the first era 22 years before the other. Others, such as Helinand, the monk of Froimont, who wrote at the end of the 12th guish three sorts of years-the historical, legal & liturgic. The historical for a long time began Jan. 1; the legal at Christmas, which was followed in the public acts up to the end of the 13th century, and the liturgic year, the first Sunday of Advent. The Low Countries, Gueldres & Friesland, began the year at Christmas; the same custom was observed at Utrecht after 1333-but before, they began March 25. Good Friday began the year at Delft, Dordrecht & Brabant. In Holland, Flanders & Hainault, it was Easter Day, and this is the style of the notaries in their public acts; but to avoid confusion, they added to their dates, when they preceded Easter-according to the court style, or before Easter, or more Gallicano. This last style is that of Savoy. With regard to France, the custom, from the time of Charlemagne, was to begin the year at Christmas, and it was almost universal in the 9th centurywe say almost, because there are some exceptions. In several places they began at Easter. A charter of Aire, in Artois, is dated-" Actum Aria monasterio vi kal. April. anno incarn. DCCCLVI, et bissextili, ascensu I, indictione IV, ac embolismo, Sabbato ante Mediam Quadragesimam anno XVII regnante Karolo cum fratre Hludovico ac nepote Hlothario." This date belongs to 856 in our reckoning, and is full of contradictions. Easter, in 856, fell on March 29, and consequently March 27 was Friday. The year 856, the 17th of Charles the Bald, did not begin till June 20, his father dying this day in 840: Easter was not yet finished. But all this is reconciled by referring this date to 857. In fact, Easter fell April 18—March 27 was Saturday of the third week of Lent, and the morrow, the fourth Sunday of Lent, was exactly the middle of Lent, properly so called. The 17th year of Charles runs then to June 20, and indiction 4, begun at Easter, was not yet finished. It is true that 857 was not leapyear, but 856 was, and, consequently, the portion of the following year to which it was extended was thought so too. There is a fault in saying so much of the lunar embolismal year, which was really this year 856, having II for the Golden Number, but which was not thought finished like the solar till Easter. Lastly, the expression ascensu I appears to mark the regular, which was I. We are, therefore, sure that there were places where the year began at Easter in the VOL. II. 3 G century, anticipated Dionysius only 21 years: Hoc anno (he says, under 979) complentur mille anni a nativitate Christi secundum veritatem Evangelii, qui secundum cyclum Dionysii anno abhinc vicesimo primo finiuntur." For the reasons on which these authors found their distinction, see Petav. de Doctrina Temporum, 1. XII, c. 5. Another mode of marking the year of the incarnation, is Annus Trabeationis Christi, which is found in several charters of the 11th century. Du Cange explains it by-" Annus quo Christus trabi affixus est." But he was mistaken; and in the new edition, at the word Trabeatio, Annus Trabeationis is demonstrated to be the same as Annus Incarnationis. In a multitude of charters cited to prove this, the decrce of the election of Borel, bishop of Roda in Catalonia, is found: Anno trabeationis D. N. J. C. millesimo XVII, æra vero millesima quinquagesima quinta, indictione xv, concur 9th century, but examples of them are rare. At length, nothing was more constant. Some began at Dec. 25, others at the day or eve of Easter. The almost invariable custom of the kings in their diplomas, from the end of the 11th century, and that of the parliament of Paris after it was made stationary, up to the edict for Jan. 1, was to begin at Easter, or rather the Sabbatum Sanctum, after the consecration of the paschal taper. But in the provinces possessed by the English, the more common practice was to begin at Christmas. When they dated otherwise, i. e. began at Easter or March 25, they generally added more Gallicano. At Rheims, in the 13th century, they began March 25, as in the acts of the Concil. Reimense in 1235: "Notandum quod more Gallicano mutatur annus in Annunciatione Dominica." This custom subsisted in Montdedier to the 16th century, and letters of the provost royal and other deeds are dated in this manner: April 8, 1441, " de l'incarnation renouvelée" or March 25," de l'incarnation renouvelée avant Paques," or the day of the Annunciation last past before Easter. At Soissons, in the 12th century, they began Dec. 25; at Amiens, in the same age, they began on the eve of Easter, after the benediction of the taper. At Peronne, in the 15th century, the eve of Easter was New Year's Day. A register begins with-" Sabbato in vigilia Paschæ 14 April. 1487 post cerei benedictionen." In several parts of Picardy, they dated from Jan. 1 after the middle of the 13th century. A charter of 1274 is dated-" Au mois de Janvier, le lendemain du premier jour de l'an." The Chronicles of Froissart follow this style. In Poitou, Guienne, Normandy and Anjou, they began at Christmas, after and while they were in the power of the English. There is an important example for Poitou. Otho of Brunswick, earl of Poitou, and afterwards emperor, the fourth of the name, dates a charter, in which he takes only the title of earl of Poitou, Dec. 29, 1198. He had not then taken the empire. It is certain, from German historians, that he was crowned at Pentecost, 1198. Here is an apparent contradiction, which can be removed only by saying, that the year 1198 in the charter was begun at Christmas, and, consequently, that Dec. 29 belonged to our 1197. But before Poitou passed to the English, they commonly began the year at Easter. An account of Maude d'Artois, countess of Burgoyne, imports that Paques fleuri was April 11, 1304, and “finit à Pasques que li milliaire commença 1305."—Abridged from L'Art de veréfier les Dates, t. I, p. 8—30. rente 1, epacta xx." All these dates agree with the year 1017 of the incarnation, the same as that which is at the end of the decree-" anno XXI regnante Roberto rege." It is not, therefore, doubtful that Annus Trabeationis and Annus Incarnationis are the same thing. The source of Du Cange's error is in the word trabs, whence he derives trabeatio-instead of which it comes from trabea, a sort of robe which was used by ancient kings, and with which the statues of the gods were ornamented. St. Fulgentius, in a sermon pronounced on St. Stephen's Day, which every body knows is the day after Christmas Day, says-" Heri rex noster trabea carnis indutus est." It is very probable that the word trabeatio has been taken from this passage by the notaries. At least, it is certain that trabeatio and trabea carnis mark the incarnation of the word, and that is every thing necessary to be known for the prevention of mistakes. 66 The last remark that we shall make on the manner of dating by the years of the incarnation, is on the omission of a number of years to abridge a date, particularly when it is repeated. In the Hist. of the Bishops of Auxerre, we find the translation of Ardouin to this see dated," in principio anni MCCCL in nativitate Domini ;" and 12 lines after-"anno quinquagesimo tertio curiæ Romanæ (that is to say, beginning the year Dec. 25) more autem Gallico (beginning at Easter) anno quinquagesimo secundo, in festo purificationis beatæ Mariæ." The historian has twice omitted this date, anno millesimo trecentesimo." It is true that it is easy to supply it from the text; but similar omissions occur in dates which are not repeated, nor have been preceded by entire dates. The first edition of Martial (4to) is dated thus: "Impressum Ferrariæ die secunda Julii MLXXI," instead of " MCCCCLXXI.” * Year of Crowning. The patent, charter, close & fine rolls of Chancery date the regnal years of our kings from the day of their coronation, and not from that of the death of their predecessor, or day of accession (see v. I, p. 50-1). This manner of dating is sometimes specified in chronicles; thus, Robert of Gloucester dates the rearing of Reading Abbey in the 22nd year of the crowning of Henry I: "po was pþoru be kyng arerde pe abbey of Redynge Chron., p. 440. The following are the dates of the coronations of the earlier kings :- In a charter granted in 1421, this year is expressed as " Anno XXI” (Mabillon, Diplom., 1. II, c. 23). The following is another instance of the same kind of omission: "In the duke's palace yard at Norwich, at the entrance of a house near the river, lies a large grave, with an abbot in his robes cut thereon, brought from the ruins of this abbey (St. Bennet's Hulme), and thus inscribed - Frater Ricardus de South Walsham, abbas monasterii Sancti Benedicti de Hulmo, qui obiit anno Dominj quadragintesimo vicesimo nono,' with the arms of this monastery." Sir Henry Ellis, who quotes this passage from the fifth volume of Blomfield's History of Norfolk (p. 1430), remarks that "the reading must be faulty; the inscription ought to run-Millesimo quadragintesimo trecesimo nono.”—Dugd., Monast. Anglic., t. III, p. 65 n. o. GLOSSARY. 1087.-William II, crowned Sept. 27; his diplomas generally bear only the date of place. Died Aug. 2, 1100. (See Lammas.) 1100.-Henry I was consecrated, according to Matthew Paris, Aug. 15 -but others say Aug. 5: "pe Sonday he was ycrouned, of heruest þe vyfte day, þe verbe after hys broper depe, as hys conseyl bysay." Robert of Gloucester, p. 422. A second coronation with Maude, or Matilda, on St. Martin's Day: "þe corounyng of Henry, of Maude þat may, He is commonly said to have died Dec. 2, 1135, but he died on the "þe vorste day of Decembre kyng Henry þen deb nome, In þe preþrýttype ger of hys kynedome And in enlene hundred ger syxte 7 þrýttý þerto." Robert of Gloucester, p. 443. The second part of this date is wrong; he died in the 36th year of his reign. As to the year 1136, it is to be reconciled by the manner of beginning the year on the previous Christmas, or March 25, 9 months & 7 days before us. 1135.-Stephen was crowned Dec. 22: "In the yeare of oure lorde M'. CXXXVI Stephene Bloys the xxii day after his uncles dethe was crouned kyng" (Chron. quoted by Hearne). Speed makes the day Dec. 26, St. Stephen's Day (Chron., p. 468), and others Christmas Day; but this was only the day on which he first held his court and wore the crown : "A Seyn Steuene's day, pe croune vorst he bere, He died Oct. 25, 1154. Robert of Gloucester, p. 445. 1154.-Henry II, crowned Dec. 19 by Theobald, archbp. of Canterbury: "Henri þe emperesse sone, po king Stefne ded lay At Westminstre let him crouny king þe next Soneday He died July 6, 1189. Rob. of Glouc., p. 467. "As enlene hundred zer of grace 7 eigtetinine The sixte day of Jul he deide, 7 mid gret onour prute At fount Ebraud he was ibured, as he lith gute." 1189.-Richard, crowned Sept. 3 at London: Ibid., p. 481. |