Conversation

Notices

1. Santa Claes 🇸🇪🇭🇰🎅 (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Friday, 20-May-2022 05:18:09 UTC Santa Claes 🇸🇪🇭🇰🎅
   It's not just on fedi:[ . . . ] Top-level comments need to be substantiated, historical answers to the question and the rest need to be reasonably on-topic. Not layman speculation. Not which arbitrary standard is best. Not so-and-so uses so-and-so.
   
   I hate to be so stern about it but seriously... 120 of 160 comments [deleted].The question?
   When did the USA originally start using the mm/dd/yyyy format and for what reason?farside.link/teddit/r/AskHisto…
   • Santa Claes 🇸🇪🇭🇰🎅 (clacke@libranet.de)'s status on Friday, 20-May-2022 05:41:33 UTC Santa Claes 🇸🇪🇭🇰🎅

     in reply to
     In the 40 remaining comments there are some interesting and surprising finds. In particular, mm/dd/yyyy, with digits, was not introduced with computers, contrary to what many are assuming:
     I have been working with a collection of mid-18th to early 19th-century English correspondence, and the mm/dd/yyyy format is used on occasion. Sometimes the same person will date a letter, say, 4/10/1797 (for April 10th), and the next letter will be 12/4 (for April 12th). I'd previously had no idea that this format was in use so long ago (mm/dd or exclusively numbers).farside.link/teddit/r/AskHisto…