FH's ability to cope with dates before 1000 (AD) is a bit ropey according to my experiments - yes, I got interested. Firstly the YEAR, according to GEDCOM 5.5 can be 3 digits:
And the Gregorian version of the year reads:YEAR:= {Size=3:4}
A numeric representation of the calendar year in which an event occurred.
So - 3 digits and it allows B.C. But not AD. Quite how you are supposed to get from 100 to 100 B.C. without going through 2 digit years, I've no idea. Maybe the idea was to avoid any confusion about which element of 26 Oct 30 was the year and which the day of the month?YEAR_GREG:= {Size=3:7}
[ <NUMBER> | <NUMBER>/<DIGIT><DIGIT> ]
The slash "/" <DIGIT><DIGIT> a year modifier which shows the possible date alternatives for pre-1752 date brought about by a changing the beginning of the year from MAR to JAN in the English calendar change of 1752, for example, 15 APR 1699/00. A (B.C.) appended to the <YEAR> indicates a date before the birth of Christ.
What's on the file? Strange to relate given FH's outputs - 3 digit years!
Alfred's data was added through FH. So, really, the leading zero should not be added to dates in diagrams, queries and reports. It's actually added by FH, not failing to be suppressed, if you see what I mean.1 NAME Alfred //
1 SEX M
1 BIRT
2 DATE 849
2 PLAC Wantage (Berkshire)
1 DEAT
2 DATE 26 OCT 899
2 PLAC Winchester
I didn't have much joy entering BC into FH directly, but if I editted it into the GEDCOM file, thus:
Then it gets read quite happily, thus: Note, however, the years are 4 digit with leading zeroes. How much latitude there is with recognising BC/B.C. whatever, I don't know except that the 2nd date has no space between 100 and "B.C."1 NAME Gauis Julius /Caesar/
1 SEX M
1 DEAT
2 DATE 15 MAR 44 B.C.
2 PLAC Rome, Italy
1 BIRT
2 DATE 12 JUL 100B.C.
2 PLAC Rome, Italy
Unfortunately - but unsurprisingly - the same trick with editing "A.D." into the GEDCOM file doesn't work - it just gets represented as a date phrase with those annoying quotes around.
So, at the very least, I reckon FH should be modified to suppress / not generate any leading zeroes in the year component of dates.
Does it matter much? Well, if you have a gateway ancestor taking you into the English Royal Family, you can get back to Alfred the Great and thereabouts, I believe...