USA > Maryland > The history of Maryland : from its first settlement, in 1633, to the restoration, in 1660 ; with a copious introduction, and notes and illustrations > Part 31
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106 | Part 107 | Part 108 | Part 109 | Part 110 | Part 111 | Part 112 | Part 113 | Part 114 | Part 115 | Part 116 | Part 117 | Part 118 | Part 119 | Part 120 | Part 121
VOL. I .- 35
274
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS.
mence. This prevailed for some time, but as it occurred to some good chris- tians, that the years of a man's life were not numbered from the time of his con- ception, but from that of his birth, which must have been nine months after- wards, a difference in the commencement of the year took place among the christian churches throughout Europe, some adopting the day of Christ's birth, to wit, the 25th of December, as the commencement of the year, others adhering to that of his incarnation, and others again to the old Roman method of the cal- ends of January, which last happened to be also the day of Christ's circumcision. The result was, that different nations, and indeed different writers, considering. the subject rather in a temporal than in an ecclesiastical point of view, regula- ted the commencement of their civil year in their own way, still however com- puting from the supposed commencement of the christian era; from which dis- agreement it is supposed, that an error of one year at least, if not two, in the number of years elapsed of the christian era, has crept into the vulgar compu- tation now genearlly in use throughout Christendom.
Although the Roman calendar had been regulated by Numa Pompilius, and afterwards by Julius Cæsar, yet as astronomy was far from being so completely understood in those days as it was afterwards even in the sixteenth century, it was found in the lapse of several centuries, that the Roman computation disa- greed much with the motion of the earth, and that the holy feast of Easther, which was dependent on the vernal equinox, had got quite out of its place. Pope Gregory, therefore, in the year 1582, to counteract so great an inconve- nience to the church, procured a thorough correction of the Roman calendar, and by a bull commanded all the Catholic states of Europe to adopt his correction, prescribing in the same bull also, that the commencement of the year should for the future be on the first day of January. This regulation, as may be supposed, was conformed to by most of the Catholic states : but the Protestants at first peremptorily refused to receive it; though at last, from the obvious propriety of the measure, it met with a general reception even among them. England, Rus- sia, and Sweden held out in opposition to it longer than any, and it was not till the year 1751, that an act of parliament was made, (stat. 25, Geo. 2, cap. 23,) prescribing the first day of January to be deemed for the future, throughout all the British dominions, the first day of the year, and such alterations in the com- mon English calendar were directed also as brought it to be the same as the Gregorian, then generally in use throughout the most of Europe.
As the British colonies in America, now United States, naturally adopted the mode of computation practised by their mother country, it is materially important to them to know the computation used in England by the historians of that country from the adoption of the christian era in the time of Dyonisius before mentioned, or at least from the time of the first British settlements in America, to the alteration of the style in the year 1751 .. It is alleged by Dr. A. Holmes, in his very judicious work-"American Annals," (Note I, annexed to his sec- ond vol.) "that Beda," (sometimes called the venerable Bede, the oldest Eng- lish historian except one, and who lived from the year 673 to that of 735, about a century after Dyonisius Exiguus,) "took the Christian era from Dyonisius, and used it in all his writings ; and by that recommendation of it occasioned its adop- tion and use in Great Britain, and the western parts of Europe." Although the Doctor does not expressly allege in the above cited note, that Bede adopted the commencement of the year used by Dyonisius, to wit, the incarnation, the 25th of March, yet in the text to which it is subjoined he strongly leaves that inference. But I find that a contrary opinion as to Bede is held by the anonymous writer of a learned "Dissertation on the ancient manner of dating the beginning of the year," (published in the Annual Register for 1759, a few years after the last al- teration of the style in England,) who is of opinion that Bede commenced the
275
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS.
year at the nativity of Christ, at least in some instances, and cites a passage from him in proof thereof, wherein he plainly places January among the first and not among the later months of the year. The same writer proceeds to trace this subject in the following manner ;- "From Bede's time quite down to the Norman conquest, the constant way of computation seems to be from Christmas_ day. The Saxon Chronicle also, (which comprises a period from the birth of Christ to the deatlı of king Stephen in the year 1154,) begins the year from the nativity of our Lord."
"After the conquest, Gervase, a monk of Canterbury, in the preface to his chronicle, takes notice of many different ways of computation in his time, that is, at the end of the twelfth, or the beginning of the thirteenth century. He says, that some computed from the annunciation, some from the nativity, some from the circumcision, and others from the passion of our Lord. The solar year, con- tinues he, according to the custom of the Romans, and of the church of God, beginning from the calends of January, (circumcision-day ;) but he rather chooses to fix the commencement of it to Christmas-day, because we compute the age of men from the day of their birth."
"This shows there was no standing, fixed rule of computation in Gervase's time ; and the following observation confirms it, not only in his age, but also for several centuries after him. Matthew Paris, Matthew of Westminster, Ralph de Diceto, and Polydore Virgil, place the coronation of William the conqueror upon Christmas-day, A. D. 1067, that is, these authors begin their new-year with that day, at least in this instance ; whereas Thomas Walsingham, Roger de Hoveden and John Brompton, all refer it to Chrismas-day, A. D. 1066, which proves that they do not in this place begin the year till after that day."
This writer further observes, that "Thomas Walsingham, who lived in the fifteenth century, although he was one of the most accurate of our monkish historians, does not always count from the same day." He adduces two instan- ces to prove, that "he sometimes begins the year from the circumcision," (first day of January,) "and sometimes from the nativity," (twenty-fifth day of De- cember ;) for which he supposes the reason to be, "that in his Ypodigma Neus- træ, he writes as a Norman, and that they computed the year only from the cir- cumcision, whereas in his History of England he writes as an Englishman, who in his time," (about the time of Cabot's voyage,) "generally reckoned from the nativity."
" Hitherto nothing of our late custom of computing from the annunciation, has appeared in any of our old historians, except the bare mention of it in Gervase. There is good reason to think it began about the beginning of the reign of king Edward, IV .; " which was in 1461. In confirmation of this the author of this dissertation adduced the history of Croyland Abbey, and also a biogra- phical account of William of Wickham, written by Thomas Chandler, who was chancellor of Oxford from 1458 to 1462, who dates the beginning of the year from the annunciation, and "about 15 or 16 years after," he says, "this cus- tom" of beginning the year with the annunciation, that is, the 25th of March; "seems to have been fully settled."'-This deduces the practice of the English historians nearly down to the time of Cabot's commission.
" At the reformation in England, in Henry the eighth's reign, in the early part of the sixteenth century, both the civil and the ecclesiastical authority inter- posed, to fix the commencement of the year to the feast of the annunciation, by adding the following rubric to the calendar immediately after the table of movea- ble feasts for 40 years, viz. "Note, That the supputation of the year of our Lord, in the Church of England, beginneth the 25th of March, the same day supposed to be the first day upon which the world was created, and the day when Christ was conceived in the womb of the Virgin Mary ;" which stood thus
276
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS.
down to the Savoy conference, soon after the restoration, when it was thought proper to retain the order, and drop the reason given for it, and in this shape it was continued down to the late parliamentary correction of the calendar, (in 1751,) which brings it back to the first of January, and is indeed the only legal settle- ment of it for civil affairs, for the rubric above mentioned settles only the supputa- tion of the Church of England, and says nothing of the civil government, which seems to have never used any other date than that of the king's reign, till after the restoration, not even in common deeds. During the usurpation of Oliver Cromwell, the years of our Lord seem to have been introduced, because they did not choose to date by the years of the King's reign, and continued for conve- nience afterwards, without the interposition of legal authority."
"Our neighbours the Scots, from time immemorial, have invariably observed the 25th day of March as the first day of the year, till November 27th, 1599, when the following entry was made in the books of the privy council : On Monday proclamation made be the king's warrant, ordaining the first of January, in tyme coming, to be the beginning of the New- Year, which they have as constantly followed ever since."
As supplementary to the foregoing extracts from the before mentioned disser- tation, it may be observed, that the neighbouring kingdom of France had also different dates for the commencement of their year at different periods of time. " During the reigns of the Merovingian race, the French year began on the day whereon the troops were reviewed, which was on the first day of March. Under the Carlovingians it began on Christmas-day; and under the Capetians, on Easther day, which last still remains the beginning of the French ecclesiastical year," (unless altered by the late revolution,) " but for the civil year, Charles IX., ap- pointed in 1564, but a few years before the pope's bull for that purpose before mentioned,) that for the future it should commence on the first of January." See Chambers's dictionary, verb. year.
It will be acknowledged, we may suppose, that this variance in the commence- ment of the year would not affect the dates of any events mentioned to have occur- red out of the space of time contained between the first of January and the twen- ty-fifth of March. It is true that those who compute the christian era from the incarnation or 25th of March, vary one whole year from those who compute it from the calends of January ; but that variance is only in the number of years which have elapsed from the birth of Christ. It does not affect the date of any intervening event, occurring in the space of time to which those who calculate from different commencements of the year, affix the same date as to the year, that is, in the space of time between the 25th of March and the first of January next succeeding. To save much reasoning, necessary to elucidate this, I will beg leave to cite a scientific authority upon the subject. In Keil's Astronomical Lectures, (lec. 28,) published before the alteration of the style in 1751, are the following passages ;- " The English reckon from the feast of lady-day, 1718, (that is, from the 25th of March, 1718,) that there are completed 1717 years ; but from the birth of our Lord, to the feast of the Nativity of the year 1717, they number only 1716 years elapsed ; whereas all the rest of the christian world count 1717 years .- But yet for all this, the English, for the greatest part of the year, design it by the same number that the rest of the christian world does ; but for three months, viz. from the calends of January to the 8th of the calends of April," (that is, from the first day of January to the twenty-fifth day of March, ) " they write one less." This is illustrated by the instance put by our American annalist, Dr. Holmes, in the note last cited from him ; "it was customary" (says he) " to give a double date from the 1st of January to the 25th of March. Thus, February 8th, 1721, was written February 8th, 1727." 2º." This demonstrates, that in the remaining part of the year there was no difference between the English
277
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS.
and the rest of Europe, as to the date of the year. It is true that the ten days thrown out by pope Gregory, in his reformation of the calendar, made that much difference from the English computation, in the days of the months, but as to the date of the year, which is the present question, it has no effect.
Hence, therefore, as the commencement of the reign of Henry VII. who made this patent to Cabot, and whose reign is therein alluded to, is an event which occurs in that part of the year, wherein all " the christian world" agree in their number, and this too whether it be fixed on the day of his accession to the throne, when he gained the battle of Bosworth from Richard III., which was on the 22d day of August, 1485, or on the day of his coronation, which was on the 30th of October following, in the same year, and the patent or commission to John Cabot bears date on the 5th of March, in the eleventh year of the reign of Henry VII., we are enabled to affix to this commission the year of Christ, as well as that of the reign of the king. For, calculating the commencement of his reign from either of those events, to wit, the battle of the coronation, it will be found, that the 5th of March in the eleventh year of his reign, must be either in the year 1495 or 1496, according to the time of the commencement of the year 1496. If the commencement of the year 1496 is fixed on the 25th of March, agreeably to old style, the 5th of March of the eleventh year of his reign, will undoubtedly be in the year 1495, which is the year to which Hackluit, Harris, and Robertson have referred the date of this commission ; but if the commencement of the year 1496 is fixed on the first day of January, agreeably to new style, the 5th of March of the eleventh year of his reign will be in the year of Christ, 1496, to which year Rymer, Rapin and Chalmers have referred its date.
Before this subject is closed, it will be proper to take notice of another note subjoined by Dr. Holmes in the first volume of his "American Annals," (p. 15, anno 1495.) It is as follows : "Henry was crowncd Oct. 30th, 1485. If that year be reckoned the first of his reign, this commission is rightly placed by Hackluit, Robertson, and others, in 1495; but, if the first year of his reign be reckoned from 1486, the commission must be placed, where Rymer and some others have placed it, in 1496." This judicious annalist has accordingly adopted the former opinion, and in his work referred the date of the commission to the year 1495. But it must be observed, that his reasoning here is either very inaccurately or very obscurely expressed. The word "from" being always ex- clusive, if the year 1486 is thrown out of the computation of the eleven years al- together, it would place the date of the commission in 1497, contrary to his in- ference. Although the end of " the first year of his reign would undoubtedly be in 1486, to wit, either on the 22d of August, or 30th of October of that year, yet one year of his reign, being then complete and ended, it must be counted as one in the computation of the eleven years. The progression then would bring the end of the tenth year of his reign to the 22d of August or 30th of October, 1495, when the eleventh year of his reign would commence, and would end on the 22d of August, or 30th of October, 1496. It would then be obvious, that the 5th of March in the eleventh year of his reign, would be referable either to the year 1495 or 1496, according to the commencement of the year 1496, as before explained. But as the new style, that is, the computation of the year from the first day of January, is now generally adopted in the United States, as well as in Europe, per- haps by force of the English statute before mentioned, and when a year is men- tioned in history, it is so computed in the mind of almost every reader, unless otherwise expressed, it would seem to be most proper to refer the date of the patent or commission to Cabot and his sons to the year 1496. For the same reason also, the author has thought it best, throughout this work to adjust the chronology of it according to what is called new style, commencing the year always on the first of January. It is hoped, therefore, that although the date of
278
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS.
this commission is a matter of little importance, yet, as the same variance in the commencement of the year pervades every part of the early history of the British colonies in America, the reader will excuse the length of this note.
NOTE (B) p. 19.
Mr. Holmes, in his " American Annals," Note I, at the end of his first volume, expresses himself as satisfied, that Cabot sailed as far south as Cape Florida. It is with great diffidence, that I venture on an opinion different from that of so ac- curate and judicious a writer. The passage which he cites from Peter Martyr, as the ground-work of his opinion, is according to him, thus: " Quare coactus fuit, uti ait, vela vertere, et occidentem sequi : tetenditque tantum ad meridiem, littore sese incurvante, ut Herculei freti latitudinis ferè gradum æquarit : ad oc- cidentemque pofectus tantum est, ut Cubam insulam a lævo, longitudine graduum pene parem, habuerit." To which he immediately afterwards adds,-" Obscure as this passage is, it satisfies me, that Cabot sailed to Cape Florida, which lies in 25 deg. 20 min. north lat." From the manner in which the last sentence of the above passage from Peter Martyr, is printed in his "Annals," (to wit : in Italics,) it is to be inferred, that he laid a stress upon this sentence in particular, as warranting the opinion he gives. But to come fairly at the meaning of the passage, every part of it should be taken into consideration ; and it may be thus rendered into English : " Wherefore he was forced, as he says, to turn his course toward the west; and he stretched so far to the south, the shore bending in, as to be almost in the same degree of latitude as the Mediterranean : and he went so far to the west, as to have the island of Cuba lying on his left hand, almost equal in the longitude of degrees." That the word " meridiem" is here to be rendered south is evident, not only because it is often so used according to the best Latin dictionaries, but that otherwise it would be here unintelligible, unless indeed it should be said to mean, " towards the equinoctial line ;" in which, it would be synonymous to south in this case. (N. B. In pope Alexander's bull, in 1493, before referred to, which is published at large in the original Latin, in Hazard's Collections, vol. 1, p. 5, the word " meridiem" is used as synonymous to Antarc- tic or South Pole.) Then the extent of Cabot's voyage to the south, is here very clearly confined to the same degree of latitude as the Mediterranean ; almost to it, but certainly not beyond it. Now, the mouth of the Mediterranean, or Straits of Gibraltar, are well known to be in about 36º north lat., which brings the voyage here spoken of, along the coast of America no further south than Roanoke, or Albemarle Sound, in North Carolina. But the word " fere," almost, is not to be altogether rejected as a mere expletive; it plainly intimates that Cabot did not come down to the 36th degree of north latitude, and being indefinite as to the precise mi- nute or degree above 36°, leaves the extent of his voyage southerly, to be collected from circumstances only, with this express restriction, that it did not reach quite to 36°. A strong inference is to be drawn also, from the agreement of so many respectable historians, besides Oldmixon, before cited in the text, who speak of Cabot's voyage, as extending southerly only to the 38th degree of north latitude. Harris, in his Collection of Voyages, Vol. 2, p. 191, edit. 1748, and Robertson, in his History of Virginia, both limit it to the 38th degree. There must have been some solid ground for this coincidence of opinion. Harris cites Robert Fa- bian, as expressing himself, that Cabot sailed to the 56th deg. of north lat., " and from thence he ran down to the 38°, along the coast of the continent of Ameri- ca, which, as he (Fabian) says, was afterwards called Florida." Fabian lived and wrote in the reign of Henry VII. and must have had some substantial au- thority for fixing it to the 38º ; most probably, from the Journal of the Voyage, then newly published, and fresh in the memory of every literary man. This
279
NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS.
agrees also, with what is a well known historical fact, that the Spaniards, after Ponce de Leon's discovery of Florida, gave that name indefinitely, to the whole of the coast connected with the land he discovered, as appears from their subse- quent claims, in virtue thereof, to both the Carolinas, even as high up as the 37º of latitude. (See Harris's Voyages, Vol. 2, p. 275. Mod. Univ. Hist. Vol. 44, p. 41.) To proceed, however, with the above extract from Peter Martyr, par- ticularly upon that part printed in Italics by Holmes, and on which he seems to rely ; " ad occidentemque profectus tantum est, ut Cubam insulam á lævo, lon- gitudine graduum pené parem, habuerit." Although this passage is obscure, as he observes, yet I think it may be understood without carrying Cabot down to Cape Florida. Having ascertained how far south, or towards the Equinoctial, Cabot went, to wit: not farther than the latitude of the Mediterranean, Peter Martyr then proceeds to show how far west he went, and in doing this, he at- temps to ascertain the degree of longitude to which he went west; and it is well known, that the only way of ascertaining the situation of places on the globe, is by ascertaining their latitude and longitude. When he makes use of the expres- sion, " longitudine graduum," longitude of degrees, I understand him to mean longitude as ascertained by the degrees on the equator, in the same manner as lon- gitude is now and was then, calculated from some first meridiem, and in contra- distinction to the longitude or length of distance, which the ship had run from her place of departure. But the longitude of Cape Maize, the easternmost end of the island of Cuba, is 74° 25', west from London, as appears from the most authen- tic tables and maps of the West Indies. A meridian line drawn through Cape Maize, would intersect the coast of North America a little to the north of Cape May, one of the capes of Delaware bay, in about 39º of north latitude. The coast there trending southwesterly, Cabot might still be said to have proceeded westerly as soon as he reached the 39º of latitude ; and thus proceeding westerly, he might with perfect propriety, be said to have the island of Cuba on his left hand, as soon as he had passed the meridian of Cape Maize, above mentioned. Then from Cape May to the 38° of latitude, (the point of division on the coast, between the states of Maryland and Virginia,) which is contended to be the ut- most extent of his voyage towards the south, he was sailing with Cuba on his left, agreeable to the passage in Peter Martyr, and still more so, if it is supposed that he extended his coasting voyage to the 36° of latitude. It ought to be re- membered, that Peter Martyr and Sebastian Cabot were cotemporaries. When Martyr, therefore, wrote his book De Orbe Novo, from whence the preceding pas- sage was probably extracted, his knowledge of the coast of North America, in a relative situation to that of Cuba, must have been very limited indeed ; and possessed, as most navigators were at that time, with the idea of there being a free passage to the East Indies by holding a western course, he might with no great improprietry have expressed himself as he did with regard to Cuba, and yet not have meant that Cabot had continued his route as far as Cape Florida. An addi- tional reason for this supposition, might be drawn from the words "pene parem," almost equal ; not quite to the same degree of longitude as Cuba, but almost to it. But if he had sailed to Cape Florida, he would have been not only almost to the same degree of longitude, but almost past it, or very near to the western ex- tremity of that island. It would be difficult also, in such case, to reconcile the limitation which Martyr had just before given, to what may be called the south- ing of Cabot's voyage, when he expressly confines it to the northward of the lat- itude of the Herculean sea, which without doubt, means the mouth of the Med- iterranean, and which is, as before mentioned, in about 36º north latitude.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.