09-26-2016, 06:33 AM
(09-25-2016, 10:08 PM)Nathan Ross Wrote:(09-25-2016, 06:40 AM)MonsGraupius Wrote: serious researchers go back to the older classic which were written before the PC nonsense
Depends on your definition of 'serious' I guess: Edward Luttwak was using BCE/CE back in the 70s in The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire.
(so maybe it depends on how many years BPC ('Before PC') you want to go?)
It does seem to be on the wane a little nowadays, at least in English; most recent works using BCE/CE appear to be in the fields of Middle Eastern or particularly Jewish studies. For obvious reasons, perhaps...
Here's quite a lengthy debate on the subject from a few years ago:
Dating Systems
It's just an observation, that when I've searched for dates, I've seldom found the information I need using CE or BCE. I think it may be that when I search this way, I'm looking for raw data - and people who use AD/BC tend to be those who are keen to give the "raw data" ... "warts and all" and without personal interpretation ... whereas those who use BCE/CE tend to be "PC" ... are the type of people who often change or edit the information for no particular reason except to suit what is currently PC.
Personally, I can't see the point of wasting time putting the "E" onto the end of BC ... because the E is redundant (and a waste of time) and all that adding the 'E' to BC does, is to make it potentially ambiguous between 12BCE and 128CE.
Oh the grand oh Duke Suetonius, he had a Roman legion, he galloped rushed down to (a minor settlement called) Londinium then he galloped rushed back again. Londinium Bridge is falling down, falling down ... HOLD IT ... change of plans, we're leaving the bridge for Boudica and galloping rushing north.
