Re: UPDATE: Web-Grognards, 19 Dec 99

From: alsandorz@netcom.ca (Michel Boucher)

Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0000

steenkh@nospam.dk (Steen Kastoft Hansen) wrote in
<c4kr5s8itvj610skhtk7j30irrslgfkj7b@4ax.com>:

>There also usually is a proper start to a decade etc., like a
>year 10 or a year 100. The problem with the millenium is that no
>year 0 was defined, only a year 1.

Actually, a decade does *not* start on a 10, but on an 11.  A decade *is*
ten and must, by definition, include the tenth year.  We have a convention
that says every year that has the same third number is of the same decade
and that is patently erroneous.

Also, there is no year 0 because year 1 was not identified until the mid
5th century when the Pope asked astronomers (likely they were astrologers
also) to pinpoint as year 1 the year in which a new moon fell on January 1.
That became, by convention, the first year of the Christian era, not that
anyone living at the time thought it was year 1 or anything like that...

---------------

Congratulations, Canada, on preserving your national igloo.

Mike Huckabee
                                   Governor of Arkansas

To send private mail, get the zed out.

References

UPDATE: Web-Grognards, 19 Dec 99
Alan Poulter <alan@poulter.demon.co.uk>
Sun, 19 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: UPDATE: Web-Grognards, 19 Dec 99
"rs88" <rs88@gci-net.com>
Sun, 19 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: UPDATE: Web-Grognards, 19 Dec 99
Steen Kastoft Hansen <steenkh@nospam.dk>
Mon, 20 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0000