January 19th 2022
In the year 525AD or, “after death,” referring to the life of Jesus Christ (*the messiah of the Christian faith) a monk named Dionysius Exiguus calculated the birth year of Jesus Christ and the Vatican then adopted this year as, "year 0," which we now know as, "the Anno Domini Calendar," and the universal standard of Western time keeping. In fact, before this time... the ancient Roman's inaugural year was roughly 753bc which was allegedly when the Brother's Romulus and Remus fought to the death when founding the Italian Capital of Rome. Nevertheless, today how many people even question this concept of, "year 0?" And is this system of time keeping based upon the birth year of Jesus Christ, which is now referred to as the, “Anno Domini Calendar,” becoming outdated?
Whereby, in my opinion this calendar is outdated and also gives a certain, “twist,” to some of histories greatest stories with an over (and under) emphasis on the greatness of cultural icons such as; Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Augustus Caesar and Christ himself.
But to elaborate, Alexander The Great's birth year is approximately 356BC or 356 years before the birth of Christ and in my opinion when titled as "356bc" this date feels pre-historic in nature when it's really more akin to modern times than ancient history. Whereby, the earliest known civilizations of Egypt date back to sometime around 5000-6000BC and encompass a more, “truly pre-historic root,” in my opinion. Furthermore, some Chinese culture dates back to 10,000bc and sometimes even as far as 12,000bc which makes "year 0" at 2026 years ago feel a bit more like a modern history marker than, "year 0." More specifically... when we think about Alexander The Great today, who in many ways is the most prominent figure of the Mediterranean region albeit a controversial icon in the Middle East, we think of his conquests in terms of pre-history or BC. Yet, the first Egyptian Pharaoh’s lived roughly 2,900 years before Alexander’s time and to frame Alexander as "pre-history" is almost an unfair perspective considering how much history occurred before him. Whereby, Alexander’s lifetime was actually closer to modern times than the first Egyptian city's if the year 0 were to be, in fact, at the dawn of civilization based upon Egyptian history and the first farming civilizations.
Or to outline this concept more frankly… when Alexander was born in 356bc the year would’ve actually been more like 4,200 if the year 0 were dated back to the earliest hunter gatherers of the Nile River Valley. However, I suggest picking a more meaningful date to recalibrate the calendar around the first "marriage ceremony's" recorded in Egyptian history, which occurred sometime around 2650bc just before Pharoah Khufu began to build The Pyramids of Giza. And this change in perception also gives us a more MODERN TWIST pertaining to the wars fought from what we now know to be the years 600BC-0AD, if those years were instead labeled something like 2200-2800... "post marriage," also making this year 4,676... "post marriage."
In fact, labeling the early BC calendar as, “pre-history,” around the time of Greek and Roman culture just feels wrong to me, particularly when those periods are more akin to modern history vs pre history. Whereby, in Alexander’s time those years would’ve been more like 4,200 since the days of the first farmers in Egypt. Furthermore, when time keeping began in ancient Egypt there were 36, 45 minute hours and time was started over after the death of many Pharoahs muddying the concept of history entirely up until the formation of Ancient Rome. And while the birth of Christ gives Western historians a semi-agreeable time set, it's really not the clearest perception of ancient history. Whereby, if one was to date the first calendar at 4,500BC as, "year 0," when the first Egyptian city states began large scale farming on the Nile River Valley than Alexander would’ve actually been born around 4,150 "post Egyptian city states." However, to pinpoint history with the year 0 at the turn of those specific civilizations, or the transformation from hunter gatherer societies to the earliest farming city states, is still entirely too arbitrary in my opinion compared to, "the first marriage ceremony's." Where in comparison the first royal marriage ceremony (Rahotep and Nufret) and the ancient world from which they came is still a modern, “never never land,” but it at least gives us a less, "westernized," viewpoint of the past. Henceforth, due to modern archeology (*not present when Anno Domini crafted his Christian calendar in what we now know as 525AD) we can today properly assess that the first hunter gatherer’s evolved into farming civilizations sometime around the year 6,000-4,500BC… and that Rahotep and Nufret constituted the first prominent royal marriage around 2650bc, whereas 100-1000 years ago those dates were lesser known and MORE arbitrary than they are today.
And this changes the entire perception of Western history in itself because in that context, from the dawn of time so to speak, when the first hunter gatherers took to farming in 4,500BC and with that change bringing the advent of calendars themselves… we now do have a rough estimate of the beginning of, “modern times.” Nevertheless, despite time keeping dating back to around 5,000BC I also find that this date is also somewhat arbitrary in that although archeological discoveries now show the earliest city states springing up all over the world around this time, give or take 1,000-2,000 years, hunter gatherers at this time had existed in some form for 50-100k years prior to that date with no biological changes to modern human DNA according to modern genetic research. Meaning, that the human species did not change genetically since around the year 100,000BC according to genetic research, however, the evolution of farming itself occurred sometime around 10,000-6,000BC with no real historical accuracy surrounding that exact evolution of human behavior or the transition to modern farming. More simply put; crop sharing, clothing, advanced weapons and grain storage can only be roughly approximated to around 5,000-12,000BC without any hard evidence to support any exact date. Nevertheless, it’s assumed by most historians today that this is the time when most of the Mediterranean and the Nile River Valley took to creating the first Egyptian city-states of human civilization. So, knowing that and without getting too arbitrary with my own time keeping, that step of early farming and the first calendars were thus created between 10,000 and 5,000BC according to MOST historians today but that time period doesn't fit a perfect starting point for modern history. Whereby, multiple Pharoah's, Kings and Chieftains would call different era's of pre-history, "year 0," but in many ways this was all forgotten after the creation of today's Anno Domini calendar. Or more simply put, a lot of that era between 6000bc-2650bc when the first marriages began, roughly 150 years before The Great Pyramids were built... is arbitrary in nature, but the first royal marriage is not arbitrary and is well known by tombs and historical records in the year 2,650bc, as well as the creation of Khufu's Pyramids in 2500bc.
So, with regards for concrete facts… and without rambling on too much... in the year 525AD when the Anno Domini calendar was first accepted… this argument surrounding, “the dawn of time,” was of great philosophical importance that is rarely discussed in today’s culture. In fact, before 525AD the year 0 was changed several times and was often stated as the birth year of the newest Roman Emperor or Pharoah before that (*who at that time was given divine status). Whereas, during this time (roughly 1000bc-1000ad)… entire years were often extended and shortened based upon the Roman Senate’s decrees. In other words because of early historians lack of knowledge about Astronomy and things like the leap year, entire months and weeks were often added and subtracted from the earliest calendars (*before the Anno Domini calendar) and in some instances entire years are absent from the prehistoric record. Whereby, at this time (*roughly 1000BC-1000AD) there were likely several occurrences of entire years being lost to histories early tyrants. Furthermore, it can now be deciphered with some certainty that the earliest calendars were restarted several times over both during and before the reigns of Emperors; Caesar, Augustus and Nero, whom often proclaimed a new "year 0" in accordance with their own birth year, often muddying some of these dates several times over and essentially using the pre-historic calendar as an early tool of economic control, much like interest rates today.
A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON HISTORY
In conclusion,, I’d like to see 2,650BC... "the year of the first wedding ceremonies recorded in Egyptian history," become the new, "year 0." Furthermore, I’d also like this change to occur predominately because I find that Christ is over-emphasized for a variety of reasons in Western culture today and because; Alexander, the Greeks, Julius Caesar and even Augustus Caesar really did their, “best work,” in the years 2,300-2,700 POST MARRIAGE or "P.M." if the year 0 was in fact reset to the time of the first wedding ceremonies. Whereby, under this new form of time keeping Alexander the Great (356-323BC) would then have conquered Persia around the year 2,300PM or POST MARRIAGE, a more modern twist to Western history and a more accurate portrayal of those events.
Case in point… I find that 2,650BC should be labeled as the new, "year 0," due to modern archeological findings and specifically the excavation of the Egyptian’s Rahotep and Nufret, as the first truly, "wed," couple… because this date marks the conception of the first marriage ceremonies in Egyptian culture and because this change to the calendar would then place a lot of key Western figures at more TELLING DATES OF TIME. Whereby… by the way… that would then also place this current year at 4,672PM and not 2,022AD.
-William Larsen, CiviliansNews.com