Re: The Emacs Calculator and calendar

[Paul Eggert]

On 10/08/2012 03:39 PM, Richard Stallman wrote:

> ... That objection seems to be a red herring
> since all the dates you gave are after 1556.

My email had a typo.  The Cabrillo Expedition was in 1542, not 1742.
The objection was not a red herring.  Sorry about the confusion.

> Maybe one named "Hungarian" would be most convenient.

Two jurisdictions around then could plausibly be called "Hungarian",
but neither one controlled what is now Budapest.  Using the name
"Hungarian" for the jurisdiction that controlled Budapest back then
would be ahistorical; it'd be a bit like using the name "German" for
the jurisdiction that now controls Kaliningrad, Russia,
merely because what is now Kaliningrad was formerly part of Germany.

> Did the Ottoman empire use the Islamic calendar?

Yes, back then.

> If so, most Hungarians probably used some Christian calendar
> during that period, and would be more satisfied if that one
> were used for those years.

Yes, no doubt most Hungarians of the time would have preferred some
Christian calendar.  But they weren't running the show, and for all I
know were not even a majority in the area in question.

This was not a temporary situation: the area was part of the
Ottoman Empire for longer than Colorado has been a U.S. state.

> Basically you are trying to make this idea fail
> by being too rigid about it.

Mostly, I'm just trying to explain how calendars get used.