Date: 2008-11-03 03:07 pm (UTC)
I'd go with an author's note at the back, stating that yes, the year was 1648 by the way people then reckoned time, but that this would confuse contemporary readers, so you stuck with the modern dating system.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

erastes: (Default)
erastes

December 2012

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
91011 12131415
16 171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 13th, 2025 07:26 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios