things that make me happy
I sat in Paleography, listening to Prof. Mantello lecture:
"...and this style reaches its perfection in 112-113 A.D. with the Column of Trajan...oops. I guess I should correct that..."
I cringe. Because this has been done probably a million times in a thousand schools in the past 10 years: a professor says "such-and-such A.D." and catches himself, and changes it to the politically correct "such-and-such CE." It's happened even more in books, articles, and scholarly writings of all kinds: Anno Domini is out, and the Common Era is in--though they trace their origins to the same event. It's stupid. I hate CE.
"...I guess that should be..."
I roll my eyes. Here it comes.
"A.D. 112-113."
This correction, on the other hand, has probably been made less than a dozen times in the world in the last 10 years. Apparently, Dr. Mantello is no more a fan of CE than I am. But he is a stickler on Latin and, I assume, all other forms of grammar, and Anno Domini 112 is correct, while 112 Anno Domini is a little unseemly.
And this makes me happy.
posted by Anonymous @ 4:40 PM
2 Comments:
What the heck does Common Era really mean in the first place? What is so common about the era we are living in now. Is it any less common than the era in which what´s his name was carrying around a sheep goad, or when Joseph was yelling at his brothers from the bottom of a big pit? Or did they add another definition to the word common so they wouldn´t have to reference the Truth (and I don´t mean Elkhart´s newspaper, that would be The Truth) anymore. (that capitalization is just for you, Ben). The weak little smart idiots.
Hey Regg, show some respect. It was an 'oxgoad' and his name was Shamgar....
Post a Comment
<< Home