On 14/03/2016 17:10, Alastair wrote:
On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 3:52:47 PM UTC, Asha Santon wrote:
Disclaimer: This is a serious question which has everything to do with
how to count and nothing to do with religious beliefs. I ask it here
because some wise heads are present.

The date 1AD refers to the year a man I will call Yesus was born. It is
irrelevant whether it actually happened or not. Most of the world did
not know about it at the time anyway.

News of the event did not reach the British Isles for a very long time
so my question is this:

In the British Isles during the year we now call 1AD, what was the date
(year only)?

I don't even know how to look it up.
I am aware of the Gregorian, Julian, and AUC calendars but I don't want
to know what the date was in Rome.

--
Asha
minnies.opcop.org.uk
Scotland

It wasn't 1 AD anywhere. That number was allocated many years later. It was 754 AUC in Rome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ab_urbe_condita

In the British Isles each tribe would have its own chronicles based on king lists, but no numerical scheme which was only introduced later by the Church.


Today is the day after yesterday, as they used to say.

On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 10:31:13 PM UTC, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:
On Monday, 14 March 2016 19:32:36 UTC, Alastair wrote:
On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 5:16:32 PM UTC, David Mitchell wrote:
On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 4:47:27 PM UTC, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Monday, 14 March 2016 15:52:47 UTC, Asha Santon wrote:
Disclaimer: This is a serious question which has everything to do with
how to count and nothing to do with religious beliefs. I ask it here
because some wise heads are present.

The date 1AD refers to the year a man I will call Yesus was born. It is
irrelevant whether it actually happened or not. Most of the world did
not know about it at the time anyway.

News of the event did not reach the British Isles for a very long time
so my question is this:

In the British Isles during the year we now call 1AD, what was the date
(year only)?

I don't even know how to look it up.
I am aware of the Gregorian, Julian, and AUC calendars but I don't want
to know what the date was in Rome.

--
Asha
minnies.opcop.org.uk
Scotland

Interesting question, but surely misdirected in these scribblings. Can't help you.

Tudor Hughes

Surely it wasn't 1 AD, as that wouldn't occur until a year later. That being said, Christmas Day should be the start of the New Year, so we've all got it wrong. Well I probably have anyway.

Anyway, with AGW and all other threats we are facing, I suggest we stop counting up and start counting all over from 0, with a sweepstake to be won by whoever gets the end of the world date correct. (Prize to be collected posthumously).

Starting from now, I'm going for 127, 13 May, approximately 1321 BST.

Yes, but no-one has decided the start date yet:
http://www.nature.com/news/anthropoc...an-age-1.17085

I know you were pointing Gianna in the right direction but that article is full of self human hate we are nothing but bacteria to the mass of the earth. What a load of dramatic twaddle.

That article was not for Asha. It was posted for David Mitchell to help him with choosing a start date for his new era. They use 1950 for carbon 14 dating because after that the atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons has mucked up the isotope ratios.

On 14/03/2016 20:04, Asha Santon wrote:
On 2016-03-14 17:10:15 +0000, Alastair said:

On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 3:52:47 PM UTC, Asha Santon wrote:
Disclaimer: This is a serious question which has everything to do with
how to count and nothing to do with religious beliefs. I ask it here
because some wise heads are present.

The date 1AD refers to the year a man I will call Yesus was born. It is
irrelevant whether it actually happened or not. Most of the world did
not know about it at the time anyway.

News of the event did not reach the British Isles for a very long time
so my question is this:

In the British Isles during the year we now call 1AD, what was the date
(year only)?

I don't even know how to look it up.
I am aware of the Gregorian, Julian, and AUC calendars but I don't want
to know what the date was in Rome.

--
Asha
minnies.opcop.org.uk
Scotland



In the British Isles each tribe would have its own chronicles based on
king lists, but no numerical scheme which was only introduced later by
the Church.

Ah good. That was what I hoped. Thank you.
I shall leave you all in peace now.



I think the tribes of the UK didn't keep a count on years, they just did
the same rituals the same time every year. They probably used the sun
and moon as calendars (Markers) for their rituals.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 14/03/2016 22:31, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:
On Monday, 14 March 2016 19:32:36 UTC, Alastair wrote:
On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 5:16:32 PM UTC, David Mitchell wrote:
On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 4:47:27 PM UTC, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Monday, 14 March 2016 15:52:47 UTC, Asha Santon wrote:
Disclaimer: This is a serious question which has everything to do with
how to count and nothing to do with religious beliefs. I ask it here
because some wise heads are present.

The date 1AD refers to the year a man I will call Yesus was born. It is
irrelevant whether it actually happened or not. Most of the world did
not know about it at the time anyway.

News of the event did not reach the British Isles for a very long time
so my question is this:

In the British Isles during the year we now call 1AD, what was the date
(year only)?

I don't even know how to look it up.
I am aware of the Gregorian, Julian, and AUC calendars but I don't want
to know what the date was in Rome.

--
Asha
minnies.opcop.org.uk
Scotland

Interesting question, but surely misdirected in these scribblings. Can't help you.

Tudor Hughes

Surely it wasn't 1 AD, as that wouldn't occur until a year later. That being said, Christmas Day should be the start of the New Year, so we've all got it wrong. Well I probably have anyway.

Anyway, with AGW and all other threats we are facing, I suggest we stop counting up and start counting all over from 0, with a sweepstake to be won by whoever gets the end of the world date correct. (Prize to be collected posthumously).

Starting from now, I'm going for 127, 13 May, approximately 1321 BST.

Yes, but no-one has decided the start date yet:
http://www.nature.com/news/anthropoc...an-age-1.17085

I know you were pointing Gianna in the right direction but that article is full of self human hate we are nothing but bacteria to the mass of the earth. What a load of dramatic twaddle.


Self hate? Must be a socialist or any other left wing loon.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On Monday, 14 March 2016 23:27:56 UTC, jumper wrote:
On 14/03/2016 22:31, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:
On Monday, 14 March 2016 19:32:36 UTC, Alastair wrote:
On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 5:16:32 PM UTC, David Mitchell wrote:
On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 4:47:27 PM UTC, Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Monday, 14 March 2016 15:52:47 UTC, Asha Santon wrote:
Disclaimer: This is a serious question which has everything to do with
how to count and nothing to do with religious beliefs. I ask it here
because some wise heads are present.

The date 1AD refers to the year a man I will call Yesus was born. It is
irrelevant whether it actually happened or not. Most of the world did
not know about it at the time anyway.

News of the event did not reach the British Isles for a very long time
so my question is this:

In the British Isles during the year we now call 1AD, what was the date
(year only)?

I don't even know how to look it up.
I am aware of the Gregorian, Julian, and AUC calendars but I don't want
to know what the date was in Rome.

--
Asha
minnies.opcop.org.uk
Scotland

Interesting question, but surely misdirected in these scribblings. Can't help you.

Tudor Hughes

Surely it wasn't 1 AD, as that wouldn't occur until a year later. That being said, Christmas Day should be the start of the New Year, so we've all got it wrong. Well I probably have anyway.

Anyway, with AGW and all other threats we are facing, I suggest we stop counting up and start counting all over from 0, with a sweepstake to be won by whoever gets the end of the world date correct. (Prize to be collected posthumously).

Starting from now, I'm going for 127, 13 May, approximately 1321 BST.

Yes, but no-one has decided the start date yet:
http://www.nature.com/news/anthropoc...an-age-1.17085

I know you were pointing Gianna in the right direction but that article is full of self human hate we are nothing but bacteria to the mass of the earth. What a load of dramatic twaddle.


Self hate? Must be a socialist or any other left wing loon.


You get people who tell you humans are ruining everything well locked rivers are a fine example if it wasn't for humans controlling the river flow with gates and locks those poor imprisoned fish would have the freedom to suffocate when low tide interacts with drought. ******* humans how could they deny the fish pro death choice.

On Monday, 14 March 2016 15:52:47 UTC, Asha Santon wrote:
Disclaimer: This is a serious question which has everything to do with
how to count and nothing to do with religious beliefs. I ask it here
because some wise heads are present.

The date 1AD refers to the year a man I will call Yesus was born. It is
irrelevant whether it actually happened or not. Most of the world did
not know about it at the time anyway.

News of the event did not reach the British Isles for a very long time
so my question is this:

In the British Isles during the year we now call 1AD, what was the date
(year only)?

I don't even know how to look it up.
I am aware of the Gregorian, Julian, and AUC calendars but I don't want
to know what the date was in Rome.

Since we know the date he died, to the hour we can work ou that the year he was born was something in the region of October 3 BC or maybe 2 BC there wasn't year zero and all dates were given in respect of agencies other than the birth of a person in dispute.

The Roman year was decided arbitraily by the person in charge of the senate two chosen for each year -who had to show a profit or a victory by the end of the year which in one case was over 400 days long.

Dates were given as a comparison with rulers, usually cross referenced between rulers or sub-rulers. (E.g. "In the year of so and so when so and so else was so and so-ing and etcetera was etcetera.")

In Noah's time years appears to have been divided equally by constellations.. Julius Caesar had the court astronomers reckon the length of the year quite accurately and the year was divided into 10 months. Later this was changed to honour dead people (not called Februs evidently.)

The answer to your question would be there was no Britain per se as the Romans sub-let their colonies to regional kings. An annus would be reckoned from the ascendancy to each region's throne. The first year of the reign would be called the ascendancy (I'm not sure of the correct term.)

Thus the year would be spoken of as the nth year of the reign of so and so when tributary so and so became king and vassal so and so was regent of wherever and that sort of thing; naming plenty of people gave historians a chance to keep up to date by the time the newspaperslabs came back from the stonemasons.

The idea of dating years from the birth of Christ began with Constantine I believe but the marking of time still ran from the deaths of kings for most of the world. Whoever came up with the idea was motivated by ideology but it was most likely a convention worked out backwards and badly.

By the time of Mohammed the world was converting to papyrus. (The date of the invention of wood-pulp newsprint being lost to history.) No doubt keeping pace with page numbering systems that evidently confused not a few monks whose reliance on calf skins depended on the number of Egyptian manuscripts they could over-write.

You can see the point though?
History is subject to approval.

On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 23:03:56 +0000
jbm wrote:



Today is the day after yesterday, as they used to say.


And, as the notice used to say on the door of the Met Office's computer
help-desk team, 'Today marks the beginning of a new error.'

--
Graham P Davis, Bracknell, Berks. [Retd meteorologist/programmer]
http://www.scarlet-jade.com/
I wear the cheese. It does not wear me.
Posted with Claws: http://www.claws-mail.org/

On 14/03/2016 15:52, Asha Santon wrote:

Disclaimer: This is a serious question which has everything to do with
how to count and nothing to do with religious beliefs. I ask it here
because some wise heads are present.

The date 1AD refers to the year a man I will call Yesus was born. It is
irrelevant whether it actually happened or not. Most of the world did
not know about it at the time anyway.

News of the event did not reach the British Isles for a very long time
so my question is this:

In the British Isles during the year we now call 1AD, what was the date
(year only)?

I don't even know how to look it up.
I am aware of the Gregorian, Julian, and AUC calendars but I don't want
to know what the date was in Rome.

The simple answer would be that at that time years would not be numbered
at all. The indigenous population would have had no need to know what
the year was, although they may have had some concept of their own age
or that of relatives. Ages would probably be related to 'x summers'.
The pre-Roman population can be characterised as Iron Age Britons
(mostly Celts). They are estimated to have numbered between 3 & 4
million (1stC BC).

Tribal elders may have kept some form of record which may have been
related to the number of years since an important event happened -
possibly when a village or tribal leader (or king) assumed 'office'.
Britain's tribal kings had mostly been allied to Rome since Caesars
so-called invasions over 50 years earlier, and might have used the Roman
calendar (revised by Julias Caesar in 46BC, hence the Julian Calendar),
but again the years were not numbered in the old BC style.

At that time the Romans identifed years by naming them after the two
consuls who took office during the year. This was known as the consular
year. They also used the regnal year of the Emperor. Occasionally they
might have used the number of years since the founding of Rome, or ab
urba condita (AUC).

In Britain though, the year usually began on December 25 - the winter
solstice, as it had from pagan times. In Anglo-Saxon times the year
was generally deemed to start on September 24. It was only after the
Norman Conquest (in 1087) that the year started on Jan 1st as it had
in the Roman Calendar for centuries.

On Tuesday, 15 March 2016 11:02:50 UTC, Brian Lawrence wrote:
On 14/03/2016 15:52, Asha Santon wrote:

Disclaimer: This is a serious question which has everything to do with
how to count and nothing to do with religious beliefs. I ask it here
because some wise heads are present.

The date 1AD refers to the year a man I will call Yesus was born. It is
irrelevant whether it actually happened or not. Most of the world did
not know about it at the time anyway.

News of the event did not reach the British Isles for a very long time
so my question is this:

In the British Isles during the year we now call 1AD, what was the date
(year only)?

I don't even know how to look it up.
I am aware of the Gregorian, Julian, and AUC calendars but I don't want
to know what the date was in Rome.

The simple answer would be that at that time years would not be numbered
at all. The indigenous population would have had no need to know what
the year was, although they may have had some concept of their own age
or that of relatives. Ages would probably be related to 'x summers'.
The pre-Roman population can be characterised as Iron Age Britons
(mostly Celts). They are estimated to have numbered between 3 & 4
million (1stC BC).

Tribal elders may have kept some form of record which may have been
related to the number of years since an important event happened -
possibly when a village or tribal leader (or king) assumed 'office'.
Britain's tribal kings had mostly been allied to Rome since Caesars
so-called invasions over 50 years earlier, and might have used the Roman
calendar (revised by Julias Caesar in 46BC, hence the Julian Calendar),
but again the years were not numbered in the old BC style.

At that time the Romans identifed years by naming them after the two
consuls who took office during the year. This was known as the consular
year. They also used the regnal year of the Emperor. Occasionally they
might have used the number of years since the founding of Rome, or ab
urba condita (AUC).

In Britain though, the year usually began on December 25 - the winter
solstice, as it had from pagan times. In Anglo-Saxon times the year
was genetically deemed to start on September 24. It was only after the
Norman Conquest (1087. See in Order Nate's Numbers below)
in that year, the year started on Jan 1st as it had
in the Roman Calendar for centuries and seconded on the second for seconturions.

Radio carbon dating goes back over 500 years and proves that people had the IQ rating one might find in an exceptional primary school these days; where the infants are capable of building small boats and bronze swords -even the occasional iron one that couldn't be trusted in cold weather due to crystllographic failure rates or in wet weather for redoxicality but at least we were relatively carbondioxidegated.

Then before that we had little elves and pixies in the middle of the "wild" woods making forgeries. Eventually the two genotypes were fused with Roman effecto-politics to become the mind meld that empires are made of: Religious bigotry and upper classes.

Of course, one can not have upper classefulness without the lower classes so politics and religion between them devised a way of remedying the situation internatio-profitanually. And so we developed Irishness, Scotiobillies and other ranks or "Peasants" and the glories of 1 of June when naval peasant hunting was introduced in British waters. But that was in the dark ages and couldn't hold a candle to Irogenocide.

When we began to run out of Irish to genocide against, we started picking on men in dresses, the glorious 12th (of August this time but whose counting?) unfortunately they had a habit of fighting back (hence the term nately's whore -originally Nately's War) but fortunately we had better blacksmiths. Then in the Lighter ages we began sharing them with the men in dresses even lending it to the Irish survivors on Wednesday -half closing.

On 15/03/2016 14:45, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 March 2016 11:02:50 UTC, Brian Lawrence wrote:
On 14/03/2016 15:52, Asha Santon wrote:

Disclaimer: This is a serious question which has everything to do with
how to count and nothing to do with religious beliefs. I ask it here
because some wise heads are present.

The date 1AD refers to the year a man I will call Yesus was born. It is
irrelevant whether it actually happened or not. Most of the world did
not know about it at the time anyway.

News of the event did not reach the British Isles for a very long time
so my question is this:

In the British Isles during the year we now call 1AD, what was the date
(year only)?

I don't even know how to look it up.
I am aware of the Gregorian, Julian, and AUC calendars but I don't want
to know what the date was in Rome.

The simple answer would be that at that time years would not be numbered
at all. The indigenous population would have had no need to know what
the year was, although they may have had some concept of their own age
or that of relatives. Ages would probably be related to 'x summers'.
The pre-Roman population can be characterised as Iron Age Britons
(mostly Celts). They are estimated to have numbered between 3 & 4
million (1stC BC).

Tribal elders may have kept some form of record which may have been
related to the number of years since an important event happened -
possibly when a village or tribal leader (or king) assumed 'office'.
Britain's tribal kings had mostly been allied to Rome since Caesars
so-called invasions over 50 years earlier, and might have used the Roman
calendar (revised by Julias Caesar in 46BC, hence the Julian Calendar),
but again the years were not numbered in the old BC style.

At that time the Romans identifed years by naming them after the two
consuls who took office during the year. This was known as the consular
year. They also used the regnal year of the Emperor. Occasionally they
might have used the number of years since the founding of Rome, or ab
urba condita (AUC).

[snipped my next paragraph which has been garbled beyond recognition]

Radio carbon dating goes back over 500 years and proves that people had the IQ rating
one might find in an exceptional primary school these days;

I was going to point out that radiocarbon dating was first developed in
the 1940s which wasn't 500 years ago, but OTOH it has been used to date
samples which were well over 10,000 years old. It cannot be used to
determine IQ in any circumstances. But then I read further ....

and realised it would be futile to continue :-)

where the infants are capable of building small boats and bronze swords -even the occasional iron one that couldn't be trusted in cold weather due to crystllographic failure rates or in wet weather for redoxicality but at least we were relatively carbondioxidegated.

Then before that we had little elves and pixies in the middle of the "wild" woods making forgeries. Eventually the two genotypes were fused with Roman effecto-politics to become the mind meld that empires are made of: Religious bigotry and upper classes.

Of course, one can not have upper classefulness without the lower classes so politics and religion between them devised a way of remedying the situation internatio-profitanually. And so we developed Irishness, Scotiobillies and other ranks or "Peasants" and the glories of 1 of June when naval peasant hunting was introduced in British waters. But that was in the dark ages and couldn't hold a candle to Irogenocide.

When we began to run out of Irish to genocide against, we started picking on men in dresses, the glorious 12th (of August this time but whose counting?) unfortunately they had a habit of fighting back (hence the term nately's whore -originally Nately's War) but fortunately we had better blacksmiths. Then in the Lighter ages we began sharing them with the men in dresses even lending it to the Irish survivors on Wednesday -half closing.