I have found the discussion of AD/BC, and CE/BCE a bit off-center. The
argument of AD/BC goes that it is representative of the birth of Christ
as the marker for our year count. Dionysius, under direction of the
Pontiff set the year one as that of Christ's birth. But several things
conspire to put Dionysius marker some years off. Dionysius missed the
reign of Emperor Quirenies, resulting in a four year error and the
potential for Christ's birth in 4 BC.
Further, St. Luke notes His birth took place during the census, which
started in 7 BC. And the star in the east, a possible an asterism of
Jupiter and Saturn in the constellation of Pisces, occurred in 3 BC. If
Christ's death can be reckoned to be Friday April 7 29 CE this
strengthens the best guess of birth during the spring of 4 BCE.
If we take the errors and uncertainties in stride then it matters little
whether we call our year count "Common Era " or "Anno Domini". Likewise
"BC" or "Before Common Era" really doesn't matter... it is the
familiarity of what you grew up with. CE and BCE are technically more
accurate since they take the year count "as is" without assigning an
event at year one.
And if you like to count tree rings or do carbon or other isotope ratios
dating for a living, then Before Present ("BP") makes a more convenient
marker.
Happy New Year ... but don't ask me which calendar system
Bob
---------------------------------------------------
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
