Millennium

george9252 george9252 at EMAIL.MSN.COM
Sun Jan 2 12:54:12 EST 2000


No, you are right.  I was wrong.  (Sometimes I feel so stupid!)

George Cronk

----- Original Message -----
From: D.K.PRINTWORLD <dkprint at 4MIS.COM>
To: <INDOLOGY at LISTSERV.LIV.AC.UK>
Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2000 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: Millennium


> I agree with you that 01/01/0001 was the first day of the first
> millennium. As such 01/01/1001 was the first day of second millennium.
> And accordingly 01/01/2001 should be the first day of third millennium.
> I may be wrong!
> Susheel K. Mittal
> D. K. Printworld, New Delhi
>
> george9252 wrote:
> >
> > But if we imagine (not a "Year Zero") but a "Point Zero" between 1 BC
and 1
> > AD -- so that the "1st millennium" began on 1/1/1 AD -- then wouldn't
the
> > year 1999 AD be the last (2000th) year of the 2nd millennium (just as
the
> > year 9 AD was the last -- 10th -- year of the 1st decade of the 1st
> > millennium)?  If so, then 1/1/2000 AD would be the first day (and 2000
AD
> > the 1st year) of the 3rd millennium.
> >
> > George Cronk
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Miroslav Rozehnal <mirek at MS19.HINET.NET>
> > To: <INDOLOGY at LISTSERV.LIV.AC.UK>
> > Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2000 1:32 PM
> > Subject: Re: Millennium
> >
> > > I know it is off-topic and all but allow me just a short remark:
> > > The new millenium begins on 1.1.2001, not 1.1.2000. There was not a
"Year
> > > Zero", the year 1 B.C. was followed by the year 1 A.D.
> > > So, happy new year 2000, the last year of the 20th century and the 2nd
> > > millenium to all worthy scholars! ;-)
> > >
> > > Miroslav Rozehnal



More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list