Revise the Gregorian calendar

BRJ Front Page

It's time to revise the Gregorian calendar

It's just good sense

December 2021
(Slightly revised from the original of December 2006)

Abstract:
As the year ebbs, a proposal for a change in our Gregorian calendar that makes good sense for several reasons.

For over a thousand years, the common calendar used in western countries has centered on the birth of Jesus of Nazareth, called the Christ. The calendar years before the presumed year of his birth have been indicated, in the English language, as "Before Christ", or "B.C.", while years after his birth have been indicated as "Anno Domini" (Year of the Lord), or "A.D." In recent years, in an effort to reduce the evident Christocentrism of these designations, many users have changed these terms to "BCE" ("Before Common Era") and "CE" ("Common Era") respectively. These new terms have now become fairly common; the transition has been eased both by the fact that the change doesn't make any practical difference to most people, since the numerical year is unaffected, and as a consequence of an increased awareness of and sensitivity to the multiculturalism of the modern world. Direct reference to the birth of Christ as the centerpiece of time now seems chauvinistic, especially to those from non-Christian cultures.

So have we achieved multicultural accommodation with this little touch-up, or is it rather what it seems, a clumsy attempt to cover up a provincial and perhaps offensive ethnocentrism? Rather the latter, I would say. It's an illusionist's parlor trick, a bit of verbal hocus-pocus that leaves all as before. The calendar is still a Christian calendar, the "Common Era" begins at the presumed birth of Jesus, and no one is fooled into thinking otherwise. We would truly be better served by leaving the traditional designations alone to remind us of the need to make a meaningful revision of the calendar that can be accepted by all cultures. I will suggest one such below.

There's no end to the revisions that have been proposed to the Gregorian calendar now in use in the west and increasingly throughout the world. I won't review them here, because most don't touch on the issues I'm posing. Such other proposed revisions have dealt mostly with within-year and among-year consistency, such as equality of months and weeks, predictability of weekdays and holidays, etc. Some of these contain good ideas, and we might benefit from making some such changes in our calendar. But the proposal below is of a different kind.

Three awkward points should strike us about the Gregorian calendar:

Its now-awkward religious ethnocentrism, discussed above.
The clumsiness, not only for children and students in school, of calculating time spans within its descending and ascending time scales from the "BC" to the "AD" eras. There's no good reason to erect that kind of unnecessary hinder against our youth's learning of history. "Is there a year zero?" is a typical puzzle. This clumsy duality of time scale is unworthy of a modern calendar, though it may have made sense to medievals.
The lack of historical continuity which the Gregorian calendar suggests. One can get the notion from this calendar that we are entering the 2022^nd year of something. We are not. The calendar's suggestion of a hiatus or a crisis in the middle of the run of time is of course thoroughly unhistorical, and it prevents us from understanding the flow of history as we should. The history of our civilization has been continuous for many thousands of years; it may at times have stuttered, but it is not broken into "before and after" eras as the Gregorian calendar would have it.

How much more convenient and sensible it would be if the calendar started with year "one" at a far earlier time in history. At a time early enough that essentially all our historical time would fit within the span since that time. No more counting down and then up. No more loss of sense of continuity. No more identification with the symbols of a particular religious faith. But what date to choose?

The ancient Egyptian calendar appears to be the earliest calendar of which we have a record, and the earliest date in it is given in various sources as 4236 "BCE" in Gregorian calendar terms. (Here's one source on the web: http://webexhibits.org/calendars/calendar-ancient.html#egypt .) So there's an idea: Starting our calendar count with this ancient Egyptian date would acknowledge the primacy of this our forebear civilization in the middle east, not just throw them the sop of the "BCE/CE" hoax. Under this revised calendar we are now entering the year 6258. See how good that feels? We suddenly have a longer history! A more correct history.

It will be objected that 4236 "BCE" is not the beginning of human history, not even of advanced human civilization. We may yet find earlier calendar dates. After all, by the time the Egyptians made the calendar that has come down to us, thousands of years of civilization lay behind them. So an earlier date for the beginning of our calendar is indicated if we want to include all or most of the history of human civilization (typically taken as the time of the first agricultural settlements).

In the end we may have to consider the difficulty of our electronic equipment making the conversion to a new calendar, like the "Y2K" problem at the end of the previous millennium. It turns out convenient that the known history of settled agricultural human civilization goes back about twelve thousand years. That's where we find the beginning of the current Holocene geologic period, with the end of the most recent glacial period and the beginning of the Neolithic agricultural revolution, particularly in the acknowledged cradle of modern civilization in the Mesopotamian "fertile crescent" of modern Iraq. Therefore, I propose that we quite simply add 10,000 years to our current calendar, which merely adds the digit "1" before our calendar year and places us now at the end of year 12,021, a number that more closely reflects the age of our civilization.

We are not likely to need dating to the precise year prior to 12,000 years ago. To refer to yet older dates, we would retain the system that has long been in use by archaeologists, anthropologists, and palaeontologists, i.e., "13,000 YBP" for Years Before Present (or 24 MYBP for Million YBP).

Such a simple and sensible revision of our calendar will resolve all three of the concerns outlined above: It acknowledges our ancient roots in the Middle East, without any cultural or religious ties – giving us a calendar for all mankind; it avoids the silly, difficult and unnecessary up-and-down arithmetical gymnastics of our current "white elephant"; and it resets for us the true history of our civilization as it should be: A single long and unbroken flow of a single humanity.

That's a lot to gain from a mere digit.

**********************

Postscript:

Fifteen years after writing this piece I have discovered that "my" calendar has already been proposed. The first known proposal was by the French sociologist Gabriel Deville in 1924, and the most recent push has been by US oceanographer Cesare Emiliani in 1993. (See Wikipedia under "Holocene calendar" for a brief summary.) I find this history discouraging; not because it's no longer "my" calendar, but because this good idea has been on the table for nearly 100 years without being adopted. We are approaching the centennial of Deville's proposal; 2024 will be an appropriate year for its adoption.

BRJ Front Page See all Essays Send a Comment