• @threelonmusketeers
    link
    English
    1
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Is it? I thought we went straight from 1 BCE to 1 CE.

    • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I guess I should have specified that centuries are zero indexed. Like we’re in the 21st century, but the year is 2024. The 1900’s were the 20th century, etc…

      • @threelonmusketeers
        link
        English
        13 months ago

        Maybe I’ve misunderstood what “zero indexed” means, but I didn’t think centuries were either. Didn’t we go from the 1st century BCE straight to the 1st century CE? I don’t think there was a zeroth century, or else we would not have the mismatch of the 1900s being the 20th century, etc.

          • @threelonmusketeers
            link
            English
            12 months ago

            If I understand correctly, years 100 BCE to 1 BCE were the “first century BCE”, and years 1 CE to 100 CE were the “first century”. If there was no “zeroth” century, how can the centuries be zero indexed?

            • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 months ago

              I mean it’s not like it’s official or anything, I was just making an observation. But the reason is because the years in the first century don’t have a 1 in front of them. A century ends at 99. The 21st century started in 2000. The 20th century started in 1900. The 1st century started in 001. Maybe the first century is an exception and didn’t end until 100, idk. But they would still leave 99 years without a hundreds character.