Lanky_Pomegranate530@midwest.social to Memes@midwest.social · 7 months agolegendary timesmidwest.socialimagemessage-square51fedilinkarrow-up11arrow-down10
arrow-up11arrow-down1imagelegendary timesmidwest.socialLanky_Pomegranate530@midwest.social to Memes@midwest.social · 7 months agomessage-square51fedilink
minus-squareAwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·edit-26 months agoYes, but first century is 001-099, not 100-199. 100 is 2nd century. Zero index!
minus-squarethreelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·6 months agoIf 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?
Yes, but first century is 001-099, not 100-199. 100 is 2nd century. Zero index!
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?