55
If we counted the years from 753BC (the founding of Rome) like the Romans did, then it would be the year 2,777.
(self.casualconversation)
this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2024
55 points (98.2% liked)
Casual Conversation
1679 readers
195 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling
- Keep the conversation nice and light hearted
- Encourage conversation in your post
- Avoid controversial topics such as politics or societal debates
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc.
- Respect privacy: Don’t ask for or share any personal information
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
serious question: do we know for a fact that that's when recording started for some reason or is it just the assumption based on what we have discovered so far?
We don't.
Writing was invented in the range of 3300-3400BCE and the earliest coherent texts of any kind we have are from 2600BCE at the earliest. We only have archaeological evidence of anything that happened before that, and there's nothing special about 4241BCE in that record. (The nature of archaeology makes dating prehistoric things with that level of precision risible anyway.)
the reason I ask is that if we were to implement this date as a stating point for our calendar, further discovery of earlier records could make it just an arbitrary point. in which case, all the trouble that goes into implementing this change will be rendered pointless. I think it would be better if we picked a starting point that we're certain of. any significant historic event would do, as long as we know the date wouldn't change.
It's most likely an assumption, but if it is, it would be an assumption that's almost impossible to break, since this involves the self-awareness of records in an area known to have the first records and where those records wouldn't have as much of a reason to be obscured. The fact that an exact date can be given also gives reason to wonder if there's a good reasoning behind the date.