[DCRM-L] Interpolation of double-dates (DCRMMSS)

[Jay Moschella]

Greetings All -

I'm wondering about applying DCRM(MSS) 4C2.5.2 (Calendars with start dates other than January 1). My question is this: for correspondence written in Britain or in the British colonies prior to 1752 and dated between January 1 and March 24 (but not double-dated) are we simply to record the dates and encode the records with the year as-is (the easiest solution), or do we add the double-dating in?

4C2.5.2 notes that, in case of doubt, the cataloger should record the year as found on the manuscript. This might be nit-picking, but I wonder if the "doubt" clause pertains only to doubts about whether the manuscript was created in a territory still using old-style dates, or if the rule is referencing doubts regarding the specific writing habits of the person who sent the letter.

Any advice is much appreciated!

For reference, the text of the rule:


4C2.5.2. Calendars with start dates other than January 1. If the year of production is based on a calendar in which the new year begins on any day other than January 1, such as Lady Day (the feast of the Annunciation, March 25), double-date the year to reflect both the year as it appears on the item and the year according to the modern calendar, if different. Separate the two years by a slash. In case of doubt, only record the year found on the manuscript. Transcribe the date in a note if considered important.


, 1588/1589 February 8

Optional note: Date appears as: "Februar. 8. anno 1588"

, 1603/1604 March 15

Optional note: Date appears as: "decimo quinto die Martij Anno

        domini 1603 Primo Jacobi Regis"

Jay Moschella
Curator of Rare Books
Boston Public Library
700 Boylston St.
Boston, MA 02116
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20200626/6123fdfc/attachment.html>