A few weeks ago, I read an item in the press that reported a change in the way in which histiory was to be taught in schools in Australia; the terms 'BC' and 'AD' were to be replaced by non-denominational alternatives such as 'BCE', 'CE' and 'BP', whatever these mean.
My initial reaction was to throw my arms in the air and scream. Then I stopped and thought for a few minutes.
Why is it that the calendar of the world, a minority of which is Christian, should be governed by calendrical terms that are inherently Christian ? Indeed, why should any of us be governed by any calendar other than the one that is determined by the sun, moon and stars ?
Logically, there needs to be a starting point so that we can calibrate our historical chronology, but different cultures already have these. It is only the relatively recent predominance of the Christian religion that has led to the majority of the world's nations being forced to accept the accompanying Christian calendar.
The Australians are both right and wrong in their proposed changes. They are right to identify that Christian era dates are anachronistic and need replacing. They are wrong in simply seeking to replace these with nebulous concepts that either mirror the Christian dates but use different terminology, or with dates that simply have no meaning to most people.
It would be far preferable if all nations and cultures could agree on a common date as the starting point for modern civilisation and use that as 'Year 1'. The original date would, inevitably, be a date already recognised in a calendar, Christian or otherwise, but it shouldn't be beyond the wit of man to find an accommodation that would see this date as being the agreed starting point for all nations and all cultures.
No comments:
Post a Comment