In Reply to: Link didn't work. Here's the text. posted by George on July 25, 2004 at 08:41:09:
Hi George,
I couldn't help but notice the following statement in your very educational report:
"Before calendars turned over at midnight in 1999, the word “millennium” was used quite a lot in the media."
I know it's commonly believed that new centuries and millenniums begin when the year turns to 100, 200...1000, 200... but this is really not correct.
In reality, the 21st Century did not begin until Janurary 1, 2001. If you ask most people (including ex-presidents and news people) they will tell you that the 21st Century began on Janurary 1, 2000, so it's understandable how this myth is so widely believed
I subscribe to Popular Science magazine, and even they perpetuated this myth. I wrote the editors, taking them to task for repeatedly refering to 1999 as the final year of the 20th Century. They responded, admitting I was correct, but said they were just going with the flow.
Both the web sites of the U.S. Naval Observatory and the Royal British Observatory had reports which explained the reasons why the 21st Century actually began on Janurary 1, 2001. I doubt they still have those reports posted on their web sites, but you might search there. Basically, we would be shorting the 20th Century if we said it ended on Janurary 1, 2000, because there was no year zero in the Gregorian calendar, and 1999 doesn't equal 2000. It's just common sence, but I guess it's not all that common among the masses.