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

In the realm of calendar reform, the "competition" rarely if ever acknowledges The World Calendar.

Past study and rejection of calendar reform plans other than The World Calendar have not stopped their supporters from slightly reformatting and renaming them for presentation as 'new'. Since their promotions also do not mention this, or the specific disadvantages that remain, here are some of the conveniently forgotten reasons to dismiss them.

13-month plans

'…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, 1947 Vol. 17 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.'

Leap Week (or Leap Month) plans

OCCASIONAL LEAP-WEEKS NOT PRACTICAL .PDF
'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.'
(Journal of Calendar Reform, Vol. 25, 1955-56 pg. 187-190 - Posted 22 May 2006

LEAP-WEEK DISCUSSION .PDF
'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.” '
(Journal of Calendar Reform, Vol. 5, 1935 pg. 18-23) - Posted 12 June 2006

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

HOME