The American Spectator : The Zero Decade

Text Size

The Zero Decade

By Peter Hannaford on 12.28.09 @ 6:07AM

Sorry, folks, but there's one more year to go in this first decade of the 21st century.

"The Best and Worst of the Decade," proclaimed the magazine's headline, which introduced a series of photos and captions with those invented ratings so beloved by editors to mark historical breaking points such as centuries and decades. The New York Times, not to be outdone, last Sunday invited 10 writers to contribute to a feature titled "The Decade We Had."

A few years ago, when we were changing from 1999 to 2000, a large number of media people (NBC's Brian Williams was a notable exception) surmised -- without thinking -- that it denoted a change from one century to another. It did not. The centuries actually changed from the 20th to the 21st one year later, on January 1, 2001.

Now, many of these same media folk have surmised that the first decade of the new century ends this Thursday, December 31, followed by a new one the next day. Collectively, they seem to have forgotten that the world normally count from One to 10 or One to 100, not Zero to 9 or Zero to 99.

The Christian dating system ("Anno Domine" -- "The Year of Our Lord") was based on the assumption that the First Century was the one in which Christ lived. Many theologians concluded he had been born in the Year One and was crucified when he was about 33 years of age. No one argued that he was born in the Zero Century.

The "A.D." gradually became a worldwide standard so that in deference to non-Christian users its dates are now widely designated as "C.E." or Common Era.

If you think this coming Friday is the beginning of a new decade, just remember to change a lifetime's worth of dating everything in the normal way and start counting from Zero to Nine.

Confusion has marked many other aspects of New Year celebrations. There's nothing "new" about the event. The Babylonians began celebrating it about 4,000 years ago, only they considered the beginning of the year to occur with the first new moon after the Vernal Equinox (the first day of spring). The Romans, great assimilators of other people's traditions, continued this. Then, in 153 B.C., the Roman senate decreed January 1 to be the start of the new year.

As Christianity spread, the church frowned on New Year's Day celebrations, considering them to be a pagan holdover. Gradually, opposition declined, but the holiday has been widely celebrated in the West for only some 400 years.

The Babylonians also started the New Year's resolution parade. Their favorite wasn't weight loss or quitting smoking, but vowing to return borrowed farm tools.

A sprightly baby, the ubiquitous symbol of the new year in the United States, is actually an old-timer, dating from 600 B.C. in Greece. Folks showed off babies in baskets to celebrate Dionysius, the god of wine. Their babies symbolized his annual rebirth.

Father Time, who is always paired with the baby, is a more modern invention. It is unsettling to think that this stooped old geezer, often carrying a scythe, was, just 365 days before, a rambunctious baby. Tempus fugit--time flies--but not quite fast enough for those jump-the-gun journalists. So, as you declare "Happy New Year" to loved ones and friends at the stroke of midnight Thursday night (accompanied by kisses and champagne), remember, you'll have another year to go before you drink a toast to a new decade.

(Peter Hannaford expects to celebrate the New Year at about 10 p.m. the night before.)

topics:
2000-2009 C.E., 2001-2010 A.D.

About the Author

Peter Hannaford was closely associated with the late President Ronald Reagan for a number of years. His latest book is Reagan's Roots: The People and Places That Shaped His Character.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (26) | Leave a comment

Lullaby's, Legends and Lies| 12.28.09 @ 6:28AM

Thanks for pointing this out, finally, because I've been yelling at my radio, every time somebody starts talking about the upcoming end of the decade. Holy Crap man!, we count from 1-10, not 0 to 9. So let's all wait until next December (2010) to do the obligatory review of the Zero decade.
Plus, it'll give the President another full year, to make this "officially" the worst decade, many of us, if not all of us, have ever lived through (and I have complete faith in him too). But that's not my personal opinion of this decade though, because so far, it has been great for me, I guess I just love grief or something (and grief love company).

Marc Jeric| 12.28.09 @ 6:30AM

It's "Anno Domini", Sir.

themistocles| 12.29.09 @ 2:44AM

Both are correct.

Le Cracquere| 12.28.09 @ 8:31AM

I recall when men of Mr. Hannaford's kidney were making similar points about the year 2000 and the 21st century/3rd millennium. Then as now, I can confidently say two things about them:
a) They are 100%, unequivocally correct.
b) They're the last fellows you wanted at your New Year's Eve party anyway.

KyMouse| 12.28.09 @ 4:25PM

The 2000-or-2001 debate came down to this, for me: The cool thing was seeing the four numbers changing all at once, not about whether nor not the new millennium was beginning. All of us have seen the far right and second-from-right numbers change, but far fewer people have seen three of the numbers change. The last people who saw all four numbers change were living during the Dark Ages. I'm glad I was around to see all four numbers roll over.

By the way, at midnight on 12/31/99, our street was dead quiet, as if everyone was holding their breath to see what would happen (the end of the world? Y2K?) when the numbers changed. In my house, we all actually held hands for a minute or two! And only one car drove down the street between midnight and about 1 a.m.

Puquehead| 12.28.09 @ 8:38AM

At least NFL got their anniversary celebration right with noting commencement of play for AFL in 1958-1959. Philadelphia Folders hockey club celebrated 25 years beginning in 1981,the start of their 25th season.Same thing in 2006-2007 celebrating 40 years before the season ended. I thought confusing the populace was a regional thing with anniversaries. What else would you expect from writers who were educated in our public school system and can not count?

Gill O’Teen ✝✡| 12.28.09 @ 10:30AM

I celebrated the dawning of the 21st century beginning New Year’s Eve 1999 by attending as many parties as I could. I stayed at each party until I had depleted their bourbon supply. The following year I celebrated the same occasion in exactly the same manner. My motto is never let a good party go to waste!

Hannaford overlooks that I have already designated 2009 the dawning of a new age. Clearly, the inauguration of obummer mmm mmm mmm is the greatest event in the history of the Universe with the possible exception of the Big Bang. Accordingly, it is only proper that this year be designated Year One of the Age of obummer which is abbreviated 1 Yo. Thus next Friday will be January 1, 2 Yo. To convert from years A.D. to years Yo, if the year is greater than 2008 simply subtract the year A.D. minus 2008. For example, obummer will begin his 7th term as OUR fearless leader on January 20, 25 Yo, if I did the math correctly. If years before this one were years A.D. then they can be converted to years Bo, before obummer, by simply subtracting the year in question from 2009. For example, obummer was born August 4, 1961 A.D. which is August 4, 48 Bo. Years previously designated B.C. are convertible to years Bo by adding the years B.C. to 2009. The best scientific consensus of the time determined that the Big Bang occurred about 6,000 B.C. which would be 8009 Bo. This might also avoid any confusion as to when the Second Decade of obummer begins. My only regret is that I may have fewer parties to attend.
Gill O’Teen ✝✡
gill.Oteen07041776@gmail.com
Celebrate Galt Day 1/20/2010
Don’t Tread on Me!!

Al Adab| 12.28.09 @ 11:40AM

Oh Cynic, we know you. Good morning Gill, I enjoyed the other conversation as well. Amazing.
Does Freedomworks have anything planned for 1-20-10?

Gill O’Teen ✝✡| 12.28.09 @ 1:50PM

Happy New Year, Al! I’m not affiliated with Freedomworks, so I do not know if they have any plans to celebrate John Galt Day. To my knowledge, I am its only advocate. It is remarkably easy to keep this occasion. Simply commit to reducing your annual income by the equivalent of a day’s pay by whichever method works best for your personal situation. Some ideas are to enjoy an unpaid holiday from work or donate a day’s wages to your favorite tax deductible charity. In the meantime use any occasion to go to a party. We need to spread some joy around.
Gill O’Teen ✝✡
gill.Oteen07041776@gmail.com
Celebrate Galt Day 1/20/2 Yo
Don’t Tread on Me!!

Al | 12.28.09 @ 5:37PM

BTW, Scotch, older the better. Bourbon is too sweet except maybe Wild Turkey 100.

Shez| 12.28.09 @ 10:57AM

"C.E." and "B.C.E." are so juvenile, ridiculous, pathetic, sophomoric, and incredibly un-thought out that I find it staggering that even great conservatives like John Derbyshire use them.

Please, one half-moments reflection. Before WHOSE Common Era? Christians, jews, and Western men, I presume. Why, oh why, my liberal and humanist friends, this smacks of-YES! racism at its absolute highest.

Do the bushmen of Africa agree on the beginning of CE? Do Pacific Islanders acknowledge this laughable, Eggheaded-created dating method as the beginning of THEIR CE?

American Indians will argue strenuously that CE begins differently. Aluets take umbrage Harvard professors don't acknolwedge their CE. Did Dawkins consult with Aborigines before he pegged CE?

What racism! What horrible, despicable, disgusting racism. ALL users of CE and BCE must be hounded unmercilessly for being the racists they are.

Users of CE and BCE are the epitome of arrogant racists. They took no poll, asked no minorities, checked not with the Third world, but imposed their own despicable racism onto the dull-witted and half-brained of the planet.

Damn them I say! Damn the racist users of CE and BCE to burning bowels of gaia!!

drainthe swamp| 12.28.09 @ 12:03PM

The Venerable Bede, 7-8th century, English scholar and historian introduced the "A.D." notation to alleviate confusion in the dating of the reigns of the kings of England, which typically started with '1' at the accession of each new king.

Citizen Jerry| 12.28.09 @ 12:09PM

Frankly, B.C. and A.D. work for me, for each year is a year of grace.
As for flashbacks, didn't we have this argument 10 years ago when two camps tried to convince everyone they were right and everyone else was wrong about when the millennium began?
Some stories just keep repeating themselves, as I look forward to 2019.

Mister Jacks| 12.28.09 @ 12:16PM

So apparently the new day doesn't begin until 1AM?

What?

I usually agree pretty staunchly with articles on this sight, but this is bunk. When the clock strikes 12, the new day begins, and when the clock struck 1/1/2000 the new millenium began.

And no foolish math can change it.

Gill O’Teen ✝✡| 12.28.09 @ 12:36PM

I agree that the new day begins at midnight as that is how military time is calculated. However, if you think that the new millennium began at January 1, 9 Bo, then I propose you allow me to change a ten dollar bill for you. You give me a ten, I’ll count out $0-$1-$2-$3-$4-$5-$6-$7-$8-$9 and charge you nothing for the service. That's foolish math even I can believe in.
Gill O’Teen ✝✡
gill.Oteen07041776@gmail.com
Celebrate Galt Day 1/20/2010
Don’t Tread on Me!!

Mister Jacks| 1.4.10 @ 12:51PM

As long as you count out 10 singles, you cal call them Fred, Bill, Bob, Joe, etc - 10 singles is 10 singles.

Don't try that funny-munny pyramid scheme with me!

Al Adab| 12.28.09 @ 1:04PM

Sorry sir:
Centuries end in the years 100, 200, and so on. No amount of "Faith" or belief on your part can change that fact. The first year of each new century ends in "1". Do not yourself become a Leftist or ideologue through adherence to belief over reality.

Ray| 12.28.09 @ 2:00PM

"I agree that the new day begins at midnight as that is how military time is calculated"

Using a 12-hour clock, the "new" day doesn't begin untill 1:00:00 AM. (The first hour of the day) The day ends at 12:59:59 AM. Just because the 12 is at the top position of a 12 hour clock, it doesn't mean that it signifies the start of the day.

On a 24 hour clock, the day begins at 00:00:00 and ends at 24:59:59.

Gill O’Teen ✝✡| 12.28.09 @ 2:56PM

Ray, if you’d bother to do some research you might discover that 00:00:00 in military time is equal to midnight and that there is no 24:59:59. Their latest time is 23:59:59.99. Your system might work on a 25 hour clock, but I don’t think those are in common use.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24-hour_clock

You might also like to know that Wiki states that, “Midnight marks the beginning and ending of each day in civil time throughout the world. It is the dividing point between one day and another.” And “With 12-hour time notation, most authorities recommend avoiding confusion by using "midnight", "12 midnight", or "12:00 midnight".” Finally there is this little gem:”Digital clocks and computers commonly display 12 a.m. for midnight.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midnight
Gill O’Teen ✝✡
gill.Oteen07041776@gmail.com
Celebrate Galt Day 1/20/2010
Don’t Tread on Me!!

JR| 12.28.09 @ 1:10PM

I'm guessing you got beat up on the playground a lot.

Nobody's forgotten -- but there's general agreement that nobody cares. So when somebody tries to be special do this kind of "a-ha!" correction, he just looks very foolish.

Ray| 12.28.09 @ 2:07PM

I'm guessing you beat up a lot of people on that proverbial playground. When someone tries to be special by issuing his own "a-ha!" "correction" ("nobody cares") he looks rather childish.

TVHall| 12.28.09 @ 4:05PM

This line of reasoning is only accurate when referring to the 20th , 21st, etc. century. Since the definition of a decade is ten years, the definition of a century is one hundred years, and the definition of a millenium is one thousand years, every year is the beginning of a new decade. Just as every year is the beginning of a new century and a new millenium. The same can be said of each and every new day.

Now, if these nimrods really want to be precise then they need to wrap their minds around that fact. As for myself, I will be content to recognize the difference between the 21st century and the century of the 2000's. As I will also note the difference between the decade of the 60s and the 196th decade.

One final note, when one of these individual's children turns one year old, do they celebrate that child's second birthday, or its first birthday? Or do they insist on calling them anniversaries, since no one has more than one birthday.

Rich Rostrom| 12.28.09 @ 7:52PM

Let's also consider the fact that until 1752, the New Year began on March 25 in England (and its colonies). In old New England cemeteries, one can see tombstones for dead infants that read (say) "Born June 18 1722 / Died January 6 1722".

buy neopoints| 12.28.09 @ 8:48PM

Radegunda| 12.29.09 @ 10:41PM

When the calendar turned to the year 2000, many people who thought themselves clever were chortling that it was mathematically ignorant to say the new millennium had begun, and they made an argument similar to Mr. Hannaford's.

What those people did not realize is that nobody was counting "year 1, year 2," and so on, during the time we now locate those years. Nobody said, "Well, now that the baby Jesus is born we need to start a new calendar."

That didn't happen until more than five centuries later, when a monk named Dionysius Exiguus counted back from his time to the year (on the Roman calendar) in which he thought Jesus was born. (And if it was actually on Dec. 25, then did year 2 begin before he was a week old?) Historians say the Exiguus monk must have gotten it wrong, based for one thing on the fact that King Herod is known to have died a few years before the year he pinpointed.

So the whole question about when the year count actually began is rather pointless. And besides, astronomers use a year zero. The only truly meaningful measure of when the new decade begins is when that third digit changes (or the second digit for centuries and the first digit for millennia).

Poptropica | 4.8.10 @ 10:55PM

I’ll have a Poptropica full written walkthrough very soon, but in the meantime, here are some answers to some of the frequently asked questions about Mythology Island. Having trouble? Post a question in the comments and I’ll try to answer it!
Getting Hercules to Help You

Hercules won’t help you until you have all five items from Zeus’ quest. Once you have the five items, bring them to Athena. Zeus will appear and steal them. The big jerk! Once this happens, talk to Athena and she will tell you that Hercules will help you. You’ll need to have the magic mirror from Aphrodite because Hercules doesn’t want to have to walk. He’s so lazy!
Getting the Hydra Scale

You can see how to do this in the videos, but basically you need to jump up when the Hydra is about to strike. He will rear one of his heads back to attack and his eyes will bulge out. When this happens, jump up in the air and then try to land on top of his head. That head will get knocked out. When all five heads get knocked out, the Hydra will be asleep and you can click on him to get one of the scales. Poptropica