CONTENT
 
OTHER PLANS DISTRACT CALENDAR REFORM
 
 

HOME

BLOG

THE CALENDAR
About /
Reasons/History
COMPARE!

Ecological
FAQ

THE ASSOCIATION
Name/Logo

Global

History
-- Early
-- 2000
Membership

RESOURCES:
Journal of
Calendar Reform

--1930-1955
--1955-2012
Publicity

GUESTBOOK

WEBMAIL

CONTACT US


JOIN US
TODAY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. . . just getting starting here with a few printable examples of articles published in the Journal of Calendar Reform between 1930 - 1955.

Past study and rejection of calendar reform plans other than The World Calendar have not stopped their supporters from slightly reformatting and/or renaming them before representation as 'new'. Since their promotions rarely refer to the specific disadvantages that continue, even with modifications, and usually do not acknowledge The World Calendar for sake of comparison, here are some of the conveniently unmentioned reasons to disregard them.

Two main types of calendars that have existed for consideration are variations of the 13-month version and the leap-week version. Worldwide calendar reform study early last century included them, but resulted in a more favorable overall attitude towards The World Calendar.

13-month plans
The 13-month calendar tends to cause more problems than it fixes. Quite significantly, it effectively destroys quarters. All versions also always utilize the 365th and 366th day without a weekday designation (called Worlds Day and Leap Year Day in The World Calendar), which tends to emphasize the mathematical solution that this feature brings to calendar reform. Although The World Calendar closely maintains Gregorian calendar structure to achieve added benefits, 13-month calendars must also overcome the severe social and mechanical limitations to acceptance that the extra month provides. Criteria for any calendar reform includes a likelihood of acceptance or the reform simply does not occur. Any serious consideration of 13-month calendars is a distraction to successful calendar reform.

 

'The 13-month plan makes demands that are altogether too radical. It would lose all approximate correspondence with comparable dates in our present calendar, would introduce a new month, would be based on an indivisible unit of calculation (13), would offend the superstitious, etc. Today, the 13-month calendar is hardly mentioned, since it was definitely rejected by the League of Nations authorities entrusted with the study of calendar reform proposals. The same is true of intercalary week or month schemes.'

-- From The National Catholic Almanac, 1947.
Holy Name College, Washington, D. C.
(Reprinted in Journal of Calendar Reform Vol. 17, 1947, pg. 45)

 

As early as 1936, a Swiss Committee for Calendar Reform study of changes required in Swiss internal law when a revised calendar is adopted concluded that 'No legal technicalities arise in the changeover to The World Calendar' and desired also 'to state that all the authorities agree in condemning proposals for a 13-month calendar. It is clear that such a drastic change would be followed by great difficulty and that many provisions of Swiss law would be inapplicable to such a system.'


-- From 'NO LEGAL TECHNICALITIES ARISE IN
THE CHANGEOVER TO THE WORLD CALENDAR
'
(JCR, Vol. 19, Third Quarter 1949, pages 249-252)

PDF <--> HTML

 

'The mere mention of the 13-month calendar brought instant criticism from Dr. Crawford. He felt that, while the calendar was in need of revision, a change to 13 months would only serve to make it worse—make an already cumbersome calendar more unwieldy.'
-- From 'ASTRONOMY’S CONTRIBUTION'
(JCR Vol. 23, June 1953, pages 69-70)
PDF <--> HTML



Leap Week (or Leap Month) plans

The leap week calendar avoids the 365th day without a weekday designation (Worlds Day and Leap Year Day in The World Calendar) at the expense of less calendar accuracy overall. Proponents claim more likelihood of acceptance by avoiding the intercalary days. This builds on misunderstandings about this repeatable feature and replaces it with a calendar that cannot be completely memorized: Leap years occur every five or six years. Each leap-week calendar year uses months that vary enough from the Gregorian calendar to suggest difficulty in overall acceptance. All leap-week calendars "save" the 365th day each year until seven accumulate into a week and that week is then inserted into the year. The accuracy is similar to a stopped clock, which is completely accurate twice a day.

'Two of the major defects are, first, the disregard of the annual seasons, integral parts of the calendar, and secondly, the exclusive emphasis upon one particular time unit—the week—at the expense of the other time-periods of which the calendar is composed.'

--From
'OCCASIONAL LEAPWEEKS NOT PRACTICAL'
By Elisabeth Achelis
(JCR Vol. 25, 1955-56, pg. 187-190)
PDF <--> HTML

 

'It is no merely personal opinion that the Leap Month is fantastic and that the Leap Week is impossible. In 1931, the League of Nations, after full consideration, issued a report on calendar reform in which this particular device was described as “inferior to the existing calendar.” It was added that such a plan ”cannot be considered at all.” The verdict must be accepted as final.'


--From 'DISCUSSION OF LEAP WEEK'
By DR. P. W. WILSON
Formerly Member of British House of Commons
(JCR Vol. 5, 1935, pgs. 18-23)
PDF < >
HTML



.PDF files require Adobe Acrobat Reader. Download it free from Adobe's site.
C
ursor and magnification tools _ # %__ help guide the views.

 

HOME

 
 

Copyright 2006-2010 The World Calendar Association - International

Last updated 25 June 2010