History not science - sorry
Discussion
Prior to the common adoption of ‘BC’ or AD’ (or BCE and CE for that matter), what year (at least in the western world) calendars did societies use? For example, in the U.K. (or what it was at the time), did different kingdoms use a different calendar, specifically an annual one? For example, in 200 BC (or BCE), they obviously didn’t know someone who died 200 years subsequent would be used to define their era. So what did they use? Was there any general consensus?
In village A was it year 209 after chief X died, but in the neighbouring village was it year 72 after chief Y died?
Even post JC, in the Roman Empire for example, I *assume* they had a common calendar across the empire, but what was the reference point, at least prior to Christianity becoming the de facto religion?
Totally aware that even today some societies use a different annual calendar.
Also, relating to the first sentence, when did common era take over from anno domini (etc) and is there any difference?
I’ve worded this extremely badly, I know, but hopefully my general point comes across.
In village A was it year 209 after chief X died, but in the neighbouring village was it year 72 after chief Y died?
Even post JC, in the Roman Empire for example, I *assume* they had a common calendar across the empire, but what was the reference point, at least prior to Christianity becoming the de facto religion?
Totally aware that even today some societies use a different annual calendar.
Also, relating to the first sentence, when did common era take over from anno domini (etc) and is there any difference?
I’ve worded this extremely badly, I know, but hopefully my general point comes across.
Edited by ChevronB19 on Tuesday 15th November 14:10
ChevronB19 said:
Even post JC, in the Roman Empire for example, I *assume* they had a common calendar across the empire, but what was the reference point, at least prior to Christianity becoming the de facto religion?
IIRC the Roman calendar originally had 10 months, then they added July and August (after Julius and Augustus Caesar) to make it the 12 we know today.Aztecs had their own system, as no doubt did every other civilisation. Or maybe they didn't need a calendar - all you really need to observe are seasons for planting crops etc.
I'm not religious but was perfectly happy with AD for Anno Domini, After the Master. Is 'CE' some woke b
ks?
Simpo Two said:
I'm not religious but was perfectly happy with AD for Anno Domini, After the Master. Is 'CE' some woke bks?
I suspect it's so that certain types aren't offended... Before Christian Era/Christian Era. I guess it may make things less fraught if you're dealing with Muslims who (IIRC) are looking at the year 1440ish and the Jewish 5780ish/ks?I think the Chinese (back in the day had their various dynasties to measure time?
Wasn't Stonehenge a calendar pf sorts?
I believe back in the mists of time there were no calender's as such, just observations of the seasons for planting and harvesting etc.
It was only later than some worked out when eclipses and suchlike were due to happen, and they became wizards and priests to the gullible.
I believe back in the mists of time there were no calender's as such, just observations of the seasons for planting and harvesting etc.
It was only later than some worked out when eclipses and suchlike were due to happen, and they became wizards and priests to the gullible.
DodgyGeezer said:
Simpo Two said:
I'm not religious but was perfectly happy with AD for Anno Domini, After the Master. Is 'CE' some woke bks?
I suspect it's so that certain types aren't offended... Before Christian Era/Christian Era. I guess it may make things less fraught if you're dealing with Muslims who (IIRC) are looking at the year 1440ish and the Jewish 5780ish/ks?I think the Chinese (back in the day had their various dynasties to measure time?
E63eeeeee... said:
Common Era/ Before Common Era - but otherwise what you said.
Good grief, so it really was a 'Musn't offend the Muslims'... I almost suggested that but thought it would be seen by some racist.... after all we have to be guilty of something...I will continue to use AD and also miles not f
king kilometers!Simpo Two said:
E63eeeeee... said:
Common Era/ Before Common Era - but otherwise what you said.
Good grief, so it really was a 'Musn't offend the Muslims'... I almost suggested that but thought it would be seen by some racist.... after all we have to be guilty of something...I will continue to use AD and also miles not f
king kilometers!
Calling it the Common Era (as much as I don't really agree with it) avoids passing off all sorts of eejits
Probably a bit of that, but also I imagine the realisation that the year they started counting almost certainly wasn't correct for the event they thought they were counting from, so it presumably makes more sense just to rename it as something that means "the year most people think it is" without any baggage or scope for tedious debate.
E63eeeeee... said:
Probably a bit of that, but also I imagine the realisation that the year they started counting almost certainly wasn't correct for the event they thought they were counting from, so it presumably makes more sense just to rename it as something that means "the year most people think it is" without any baggage or scope for tedious debate.
Bit of an aside but until Victorian times Acts of Parliament were dated not by year but by the number of years the Monarch had been on the throne at the time they were passed, so if you wanted to know the actual year you had to get out the ice-pack.
Bit before even my time but if the convention had been maintained I think an act passed since The Queen died would be dated 1 Charles 111.
Bit before even my time but if the convention had been maintained I think an act passed since The Queen died would be dated 1 Charles 111.
NMNeil said:
Wasn't Stonehenge a calendar pf sorts?
I believe back in the mists of time there were no calender's as such, just observations of the seasons for planting and harvesting etc.
It was only later than some worked out when eclipses and suchlike were due to happen, and they became wizards and priests to the gullible.
How did they set it forwards and back twice a year?I believe back in the mists of time there were no calender's as such, just observations of the seasons for planting and harvesting etc.
It was only later than some worked out when eclipses and suchlike were due to happen, and they became wizards and priests to the gullible.
Roofless Toothless said:
NMNeil said:
Wasn't Stonehenge a calendar pf sorts?
I believe back in the mists of time there were no calender's as such, just observations of the seasons for planting and harvesting etc.
It was only later than some worked out when eclipses and suchlike were due to happen, and they became wizards and priests to the gullible.
How did they set it forwards and back twice a year?I believe back in the mists of time there were no calender's as such, just observations of the seasons for planting and harvesting etc.
It was only later than some worked out when eclipses and suchlike were due to happen, and they became wizards and priests to the gullible.
E63eeeeee... said:
Probably a bit of that, but also I imagine the realisation that the year they started counting almost certainly wasn't correct for the event they thought they were counting from, so it presumably makes more sense just to rename it as something that means "the year most people think it is" without any baggage or scope for tedious debate.
I think there's some school of thought that says that there are several hundred years of history that didn't exist.Found it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_time_hypothe...
As for CE/BCE vs AD/BC, I have no particular preference, but I will point out that BCE means something very old, and coincidentally BCE are the initials of Bernard Charles Ecclestone...
Simpo Two said:
E63eeeeee... said:
Common Era/ Before Common Era - but otherwise what you said.
Good grief, so it really was a 'Musn't offend the Muslims'... I almost suggested that but thought it would be seen by some racist.... after all we have to be guilty of something...!
te spouted by someone on twitter who is ‘thinking of others’ReallyReallyGood said:
Simpo Two said:
E63eeeeee... said:
Common Era/ Before Common Era - but otherwise what you said.
Good grief, so it really was a 'Musn't offend the Muslims'... I almost suggested that but thought it would be seen by some racist.... after all we have to be guilty of something...!
te spouted by someone on twitter who is ‘thinking of others’Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff