Skip to main content

View Diary: It's Not a New Decade. Yes, It Is! No, It Isn't! (164 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  asdf (4+ / 0-)

    There was no Year 0.

    What astronomers do in their work has precisely nothing whatsoever to do with historical calendar-making to denote events.

    When the French had their little revolution and discarded all things past, they began their new calendar with the Year ONE - NOT the Year '0'.

    Really, this is firmly established ground for anyone with an IQ in 3 digits and the ability to count in base 10.

    Why Years That End in "0" Are the END of Decades...

    I don't have "issues". I have a full subscription!

    by GayIthacan on Fri Jan 01, 2010 at 01:19:05 PM PST

    •  Quite incorrect; Dionysius refers to zero years (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BigOkie, kalmoth

      on his tables using "nullus" and "nihil". 1 AD is a year after the Incarnation (and, only incidentally, birth) of Jesus according to his calculations, so the 0 is implicit.

      Indeed Dionysius' use of zero before its formal invention, much less introduction to Europe, causes him to stand ahead of his peers.

      Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

      by Robobagpiper on Fri Jan 01, 2010 at 01:27:50 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  asdf (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BigOkie, kalmoth

        How sad that we do not use Dionysus' calendar system. :D

        As a historian, I go by the numbering system and calendar that is universally accepted by my profession and by nearly every world professional and government organization.

        There was no April 17, 0000. An the same goes for every other date. No modern historical or official source uses such notation or conception.

        'Referring' to something and having it generally accepted are two different things. :D

        I know most adults love things that end in "0" and somehow think such designations are 'special' - but facts is facts.

        BUt it is fun!

        I don't have "issues". I have a full subscription!

        by GayIthacan on Fri Jan 01, 2010 at 01:42:34 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  There is no April 17, 0000 (0+ / 0-)

          But that is a defect of the BC calendar that overwrote it eleven centuries after Dionysius, not the AD calendar. The AD calendar is still a year into things when AD 1 rolls around.

          Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

          by Robobagpiper on Fri Jan 01, 2010 at 02:02:53 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Erm..... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            NYFM

            The AD calendar is still a year into things when AD 1 rolls around.

            .

            No.

            The Year 1 BEGAN on January 1, 1 - and ended on December 31, 1.

            Then we moved on to year 2........

            It's like birthdays. If one is born on, say, May 29, 1960 - then on May 29, 2000, one is 40 years old - but is entering their FORTY-FIRST year of life. May 30, 2000 is like January 1, 41 of your 'life calendar'. The year is not added until it is FINISHED.

            [wave]

            I don't have "issues". I have a full subscription!

            by GayIthacan on Fri Jan 01, 2010 at 02:10:12 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yes; because the AD calendar begins (0+ / 0-)

              in the year 753 AUC with the Incarnation. 1 AD is 754 AUC. The AD calendar was a year into things when 1 AD rolled around. That's what the AD calendar is.

              I'm not questioning your ordinal number usage. Yes, while we are in the 21st century and the 202nd decade now, the date of the transition is necessarily on years that end with zero, not the year that ends with 1. The "first decade" was AUC 753-762 (1 BC - 9 AD), the "second decade" wad AUC 763-772 (10 AD - 19 AD), and so on.

              So in this way, it's exactly like birthdays and anniversaries. One's life or marriage doesn't begin on 1, it begins the year before 1.

              Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

              by Robobagpiper on Fri Jan 01, 2010 at 02:28:49 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  Exiguus considered ... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kalmoth

        ...the incarnation to be conception. But some other scholars argued that his incarnation came at the time of his birth. (Which is a whole other discussion.)

        Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

        by Meteor Blades on Fri Jan 01, 2010 at 01:57:37 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Except that very smart people ... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kalmoth, geez53, R Rhino from CT4

      ...with IQs firmly in the 3-digit range still argue about it.

      Don't tell me what you believe. Tell me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Fri Jan 01, 2010 at 01:53:41 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site