Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Yes, I'm back

From:H. S. Teoh <hsteoh@...>
Date:Monday, January 20, 2003, 1:28
On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 08:14:36PM -0500, James Landau wrote:
> > Minor nit-pick: Jesus was most likely born B.C. 4-7, but you may have > > already known that. > > I've usually seen it given as "4 B.C.". (If you can think of any other way > to express the would-be year 0 that marked the transition from B.C. to A.D., > tell me). Of course there had to be some significance to "0" too, or else why > would anyone have started there if they knew he wasn't born at that point? Or > did the extra four years just come when they switched over from the Julian to > the Gregorian, or come about because they started the calendar sometime after > Jesus' birth and were unable to count?
[snip] I believe it's the latter. The (Gregorian) calendar was not instituted until a number of years after Jesus' death, and apparently they miscalculated (or had inaccurate information about) the year he was born. T -- All men are mortal. Socrates is mortal. Therefore all men are Socrates.