Date of Vernal Equinox and Precession

The Encyclopaedia Britannica (1959 edition) states, under Precession:
"It should be understood that the precession of the equinoxes ... has
no connection with the gradual departure of the spring equinox from
March 21..."

I thought that was precisely the cause of the shift. Can someone
explain this statement ?

On Jun 4, 4:17 pm, wrote:
The Encyclopaedia Britannica (1959 edition) states, under Precession:
"It should be understood that the precession of the equinoxes ... has
no connection with the gradual departure of the spring equinox from
March 21..."

I thought that was precisely the cause of the shift. Can someone
explain this statement ?


Maybe they are referring to the departure of the equinox over a four-
year period. Then they keep sticking a leap year in to bring it back.

Double-A

In article .com,
wrote:

The Encyclopaedia Britannica (1959 edition) states, under Precession:
"It should be understood that the precession of the equinoxes ... has
no connection with the gradual departure of the spring equinox from
March 21..."

I thought that was precisely the cause of the shift. Can someone
explain this statement ?

No; I'm with you, at a loss. What phenomenon does the article say *has*
a connection with the drift of the vernal point?

--
Odysseus

Odysseus wrote in newsdysseus1479-at-
:

In article .com,
wrote:

The Encyclopaedia Britannica (1959 edition) states, under Precession:
"It should be understood that the precession of the equinoxes ... has
no connection with the gradual departure of the spring equinox from
March 21..."

I thought that was precisely the cause of the shift. Can someone
explain this statement ?

No; I'm with you, at a loss. What phenomenon does the article say *has*
a connection with the drift of the vernal point?

Duh. The date drifts because there aren't actually 365 days in a year.
Hence adding leap days resets the equinox back to the 21st. Before the
Gregorian calendar was introduced there was a difference of about twelve
days between the equinox and 21 Mar. I read that some people thought they
were being robbed of twelve days of their life when the adjustment was
made.

Klazmon.

In article ,
Llanzlan Klazmon the 15th wrote:

Odysseus wrote in newsdysseus1479-at-
:

In article .com,
wrote:

The Encyclopaedia Britannica (1959 edition) states, under Precession:
"It should be understood that the precession of the equinoxes ... has
no connection with the gradual departure of the spring equinox from
March 21..."

I thought that was precisely the cause of the shift. Can someone
explain this statement ?

No; I'm with you, at a loss. What phenomenon does the article say *has*
a connection with the drift of the vernal point?

Duh. The date drifts because there aren't actually 365 days in a year.
Hence adding leap days resets the equinox back to the 21st. Before the
Gregorian calendar was introduced there was a difference of about twelve
days between the equinox and 21 Mar. I read that some people thought they
were being robbed of twelve days of their life when the adjustment was
made.

That must be it. I was thinking of position rather than time -- silly of
me, as the date was mentioned. BTW at the time the Gregorian correction
was ten days; since then we've skipped three leap-years (1700, 1800, &
1900) that the Julian calendar observes.

--
Odysseus