>Jim,
>
>>That would result in 1600 not being a leap year and it was as was 1200 adn will be in 2400.
>
>Unfortunately, I though 1600 was not a leap year, and 1200 certainly was not either. Leap years where invented after 1600 (by some pope i think). ;-)
>
>Walter,
I think you're correct that 1600 was not a leap year. The Gregorian calendar we use today was adopted in 1753 ??, I think.