Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2024 June 23

= June 23 =

"...year of his age"
The grave of Pelham Humfrey states: "Here lieth interred the body of Mr. Pelham Humphrey, who died the fourteenth of July, Anno Dom. 1674, and in the twenty-seventh year of his age". Does this mean age 27, as stated in the article, or rather age 26? Can we be sure about the right interpretation of 17th century English? --KnightMove (talk) 16:46, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth, our article at Mary Jones and her Bible seems to document a case, in 1800, where " in the 16th year of my age" must have meant "in the year leading up to my 16th birthday", i.e. at the age of 15. I don't know how consistent historical usage would have been about this either way. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:20, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks - and there are sufficient sources to confirm this viewpoint. Example. --KnightMove (talk) 18:23, 23 June 2024 (UTC)


 * It's a translation of the Latin phrase "(Anno) Aetatis Suae", and may not have ever been very natural in English... AnonMoos (talk) 22:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Apparently, since we only know the year of his birth, it's not possible to say whether he was 26 or 27 when he died. This is a clever way of putting it. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:04, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * [slinks into dunce corner and hangs head in shame] Clarityfiend (talk) 06:39, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I don't think so anymore because the phrase is also used for people with completely known birth-and-death dates. Another example to the one I have linked above (Benjamin Franklin), from the same period as Humfrey: "... Mr. Philip Henry, minister of the gospel near Whitchurch in Shropshire, - Who died June 24, 1696, in the sixty fifth year of his age..." (source) - Henry was 64 years old.
 * Although we don't know Pelham Humfrey's date of birth anymore, and it probably wasn't known at the time, they seem to have assumed he was 26 years old when he died, and this is the best information we have. That's why several sources give the time of his birth as 1647/48 (never 1646/47), consistently interpreting his gravestone in this way. --KnightMove (talk) 05:43, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * In Latin it would imply 26. --Lambiam 07:17, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * It's obviously 26. In your first year, you're age 0; in your second year you're age 1; in your 27th year you're age 26.  Nyttend (talk) 09:53, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yep. Standard fencepost error. Same thing that confuses some people about the century divides. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 13:15, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Agreed. When you are in your first year of your age, you have not yet reached your first birthday. Alansplodge (talk) 14:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC)


 * I strongly suggest that we handle human age the same way as we count floors on buildings. In the USA we start at one and anywhere else we start at zero.  This would simplify any emergent confusion.  For selected celebrities from Muslimic areas we should also use the lunar calendar to avoid any accusations of cultural appropriation.  In the case of scientists engaged in cosmology or astronomy the inverse square rule is mandatory, modified by the curvature of space-time.  --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 16:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Better still, we should handle days, months and years the same way we do hours, minutes and seconds. Today is 2023:05:25. — Kpalion(talk) 09:38, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * (closing small tag) AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 11:04, 26 June 2024 (UTC)


 * According to traditional East Asian age reckoning, you were 1 year old when you were born, and this number was added to by 1 on each subsequent Chinese New Year (no relevance to Mr. Pelham Humphrey, of course)... AnonMoos (talk) 18:29, 26 June 2024 (UTC)