Newsgroups: sci.lang,sci.classics,soc.history.moderated
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!MathWorks.Com!udel!princeton!phoenix.Princeton.EDU!glhewitt
From: prec@midway.uchicago.edu ()
Subject: Re: Why AD Latin, BC English?
Message-ID: <1994Sep26.160615.11936@Princeton.EDU>
Originator: news@nimaster
Sender: news@Princeton.EDU (USENET News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: phoenix.princeton.edu
X-Submissions: soc-history-mod@bcm.tmc.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
X-Admin: history-mod@netcom.com
References: <35sgje$gt1@news.u.washington.edu> <mccombtmCwLEI5.MA6@netcom.com> <mccombtmCwM5zs.EGL@netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 13:43:43 GMT
Approved: glhewitt@phoenix.princeton.edu
Lines: 11
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.lang:31475 sci.classics:4653

In article <mccombtmCwM5zs.EGL@netcom.com> tth@dhruva.caltech.edu (Thomas Hamilton) writes:
>>
>The adoption of the birth of Christ as the zero point on the calender
>was made by the Catholic Church around 520. 

> I have no idea when the styling A.D. was adopted or what the
>church may have used previously.  The calender, however, was definitely
>promulgated by Rome, not by any English monk, no matter how Venerable.

I have a reference to the A.D. system originating in the sixth century,
credited to one Dionysius Exiguus ("Dionysius the Cheap").
