Recent comments in /f/history

SolomonBlack t1_j0fypcl wrote

Reply to comment by masshiker in The Garamantes: Rome's neighbours in the Sahara. by AugustWolf22

Nobody knows but it is not a guess. That would imply you could lob out almost any answer which would be very lazy (and indeed unscientific) scholarship.

Like we have references in multiple Gospels to him being born in the reign of Herod the Great so 1 AD is rather probably off because the man was already dead then. Though there is some dispute about when Herod died too. Ancient dates are hard and every nice pretty date you see comes from sorting out and connecting X year of so-n-so's reign or who was consul. And taking on faith your source remembered it right.

Meanwhile even discounting mentions of his birth Pontius Pilate was only governor of Judea for a limited period so one can work backwards from there as to what might be an appropriate age.

So Anno Domini is most likely late by a few years but probably still within a decade of whatever the real number is, which maybe isn't bad for work done in 525 on such a low key historical figure.

3

Alluvium t1_j0fooi0 wrote

Reply to comment by Trovadordelrei in The Garamantes: Rome's neighbours in the Sahara. by AugustWolf22

It’s less Jesus and more the fact that during the start of the common era there was unifying religious events.

It also occurs as the romans establish a republic and kick off “modern government” in Europe. At the same time as others.

CE is less religion and more a western concept avoiding its primary importance to the religious folk - since fairytales don’t work well in history.

1

The_Evanator2 t1_j0fob0o wrote

Reply to comment by Co0lie5ter in How do countries that lack long, ancient histories and myths (or feel they lack it), or have lost all records of them, compensate for this loss or absence? Can these invented ancient myths become as "legitimate" as the truly old histories/myths of countries that have them? by raori921

Ya I'm from northern California. Native history is fascinating and really interesting to learn about. California had the highest concentration of native Americans. Chico state was built basically on the ground of the of where the mechoopda village was located. To be specific, I played for the rugby club there.

My coach for a couple years worked on the reservation outside chico and apparently the rugby and athletic fields are exactly where the tribes main location was. The club now has a piece mechoopda art on the back of their jerseys. Super awesome

1

Unnamed_Bystander t1_j0fjyc9 wrote

Reply to comment by Trovadordelrei in The Garamantes: Rome's neighbours in the Sahara. by AugustWolf22

I think in this context "more correct" can be taken to mean, "more in keeping with currently accepted practice." It's a style thing, whether or not it really makes any difference or sense. In official capacities, most present historians use BCE/CE.

As to whether we should, that's another question entirely. If anything, I'd say it makes more sense to call the breaking point around the time of the first evident monumental architecture circa 10,000-12,000 years ago if we really cared about secularizing the dating system, but that's expecting a lot of change. I can see the impetus to do so, given the ever diminishing role of Christianity in a global and generally less religious society, as well as a desire to re-frame history away from Eurocentric terms, but things like a dating system have tremendous cultural inertia to overcome, so we end up with half measures that satisfy nobody, but we use them anyway because that's the style.

6