In last week's Wall Street Journal, there was an entire section dedicated to revisiting the end of the first decade of the 21st century. But, on this one, the WSJ has it wrong: they're a year too early.
The first century (A.D.) began in year 1 and ended in year 100 (thus, the end of the first century or first 100 years). The second century began 101 and ended 200 (the second century's conclusion). Fast forward: the 19th century began in 1801 and ended in 1900 (the 19th 100 years). And, the 20th century began in 1901 and concluded in 2000, not 1999! Yes, I know that MANY, MANY people thought that they welcomed in the new millennium January 1, 2000 but they were a year early as the 21st century began January 1, 2001. Therefore, the first decade ends December 31, 2010, not December 31, 2009 as the WSJ (and unfortunately, others) are trying to persuade us to believe.
Time marches on quickly enough without our news media trying to rush it along even faster.
p.s., Think I may be wrong on when the new millennium began? Check this out (towards the bottom)! Looks pretty official to me!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In the 12/28/09 issue of the Journal, we learn that "decades" are defined as the 40s, 50s, 60s, ... 00s. Granted, we speak of being "born in the 50s," for example, but I don't recall seeing decade comparisons this way before. Oh, well.
ReplyDelete