|From: Imran Ghory <imran(a)bits.bris.ac.uk> |Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 19:52:13 +0100 (BST) | |On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Jeroen Heijmans wrote: |> >What *is* our convention on BC / BCE and AD / CE? |> > |> >On the en: wiki, the year, century, etc pages are called "BC", but I |> >think a majority of articles use "BCE". |> >I bumped into an article specifically about the naming system, which |> >states that "BCE" and "CE" are now preferred, in general. |> > |> >perhaps we should take our own advice? |> > |> I think we should give preference to the BC/AD system. Before I found |> Wikipedia, I had never heard of the other convention, and I think BC/AD |> is still the most used and best known system - the best reason for |> preferring it over the other. | |I agree that it's the best known system, however most modern works use |BCE/CE and that's what I was taught at school. | |I tend to use whatever is appropriate for the article in question, for |instance articles related to the Christian world use AD/BC, those |related to Arab world I've used the AH calender with CE/BCE date in |brackets, etc. | |Imran |-- It seems that we should go light on this one. Depending on your point of view, the switch from BC/AD to BCE/CE is either mildly hypocritical or mildly polite to others, but no more in either case. Is it more comforting to the French (to choose a relatively neutral example of a nation that tried to impose a different counting system) to say "Common Era" rather than "Year of our Lord"? The year 1 in either case started in a manger in Bethlehem, like it or not (and, yes, I know, there was no year 0 and Jesus was born, if at all, in 6 AD, one of my favorite paradoxes). On the other hand, since the actual year entries are all BC/AD I believe they should stay. Then we should make BCE/CE optional depending on the writer's taste and keep other counting systems available depending on the need to give a year in another counting system because of the subject matter or other dictates of the article. I can add something to the Manual of Style if there's no objection. BTW, what *are* the other systems likely to be encountered? Muslim and Jewish are all I can think of, but maybe the Baalists have some preference that hasn't come to my agnostic attention. Tom Parmenter Ortolan88

Vicki Rosenzweig wrote: I'm one who would leave it at the option of the writer, although some consistency within any individual article is desirable. In practical terms only the BC/BCE is used extensively. A year without any indicator is presumed to be AD/CE. If a person wants to use AD it is important to remember that it belongs in front of the year, and not after. The phrase "anno domini" means "in the year of our Lord", "anno" being in the ablative case. Thus we are in AD 2002 not 2002 AD. The French for BC is "avant Jésus-Christ" which is abreviated "av. J.-C." and AD is "après Jésus-Christ" or "ap. J.-C.". Frankly, I find the French usages make for awkward typing. Eclecticology

Anthere wrote: Interpreted literally, Av. J.C. means before his birth, while Ap. J.C. means after his death. This is untenable -- how do we date his lifetime -- so we reconcile ourselves to picking a specific moment in his lifetime and dating from *that*. But nobody said that this moment should be his birth. Even Dionysius Exiguus didn't intend it to be his birth, but instead to be the first new year *after* his birth (since he didn't intend to change the annual calendar). Since JC was presumably born sometime BC and surely died AD, then we are indeed counting from some moment in his childhood. Of course, there is the question of whether he existed at all, but we can give him the benefit of the doubt. -- Toby

6 AD? The dates I have heared are all earlier than that, usually between 7 BC and 4 BC. And I don't see why you would doubt that Jesus was born - either you believe in the Bible which says he did, or you do not believe that a miracle is involved, and then you'll have to accept that since he has lived, he must have been born. Andre Engels

Yes, but not between 7 _BC_ and 4 _BC_. Andre Engels