CE and BCE

CE and BCE

by Justin Durand

I use CE and BCE rather than AD and BC. Surprisingly, that causes some people pain. They seem to have the idea it’s somehow an assault on Christianity. I don’t have time to argue. I roll my eyes and move on. I first encountered CE and BCE as an undergraduate in the 1970s. I didn’t need anyone to unpack it for me. It made intuitive sense.

We know the AD/BC calendar is wrong about the birth of Jesus, but even if it were right we’ve moved out of our parochial past where it seemed like the whole world is Christian. Then, looking at the calendar and calendar reforms many years later, it turned out the AD/BC calendar isn’t all that old anyway.

I knew if I waited long enough, there would be something easy to cite for the whole history and shape of the modern CE/BCE dating system. Not just “it’s too late to re-date all of history, so let’s just suck it up”. And here it is.

“In recent years, a persistent criticism has been leveled against the use of the BCE/CE system (Before the Common or Current Era/Common or Current Era) , rather than BC/AD (Before Christ/Anno Domini or ‘Year of Our Lord’), in dating historical events. This designation, it is claimed, is nothing more than an attempt to ‘remove Christ from the calendar’ in keeping with the ‘subversive’ effects of political correctness. The use of BCE/CE, opponents claim, is offensive to Christians who recognize time as dated up to, and away from, the birth of Jesus. Further, it is claimed that BCE/CE makes no sense because it refers to exactly the same event as BC/AD. Those who oppose the use of the ‘common era’ designation also seem to feel that the use of BC/AD is actually stipulated by the Bible or in some way carries biblical authority.

“There is no biblical authority for BC/AD; it was created over 500 years after the events described in the Christian New Testament and was not accepted usage until after another 500 years had passed. The use of BCE/CE certainly has become more common in recent years but it is not a new invention of the ‘politically correct’ nor is it even all that new; the use of ‘common era’ in place of A.D. first appears in German in the 17th century CE and in English in the 18th. The use of this designation in dating has nothing to do with ‘removing Christ from the calendar’ and everything to do with accuracy when dealing with historical events.“

Read more:

Genealogy Requires Actual Research Skills

Genealogy Requires Actual Research Skills

by Justin Durand

I like this article by James Tanner. Actually, I like most articles by James Tanner, but this one in particular.

In a nutshell, “I am not denigrating genealogy in any way, I just think that the subject of doing genealogical research needs to be upgraded from a pastime to a serious pursuit on the same level as any other academic study such as engineering, linguistics, or medieval studies.“

Maybe I’m just feeling a little virtuous here.

“The fact is that doing research of any kind is a technical, learned activity. Some people have innate talents that assist them in being “good” researchers but the only way someone learns how to do research is by doing it. Some schooling, including advanced university degrees in just about any subject, will help but competency in research is a bundle of skills that are learned over time. You may see a child prodigy who can play the piano at age three or four, but you will not see a child prodigy who can manage a major research project like those commonly encountered in searching historical documents for your ancestors.“

This has been an unacknowledged problem on some of the collaborative websites where I’ve been working the last 10 years. I keep running into a general attitude, “My opinion is just as good as yours”. (No. No, it’s not. You took history in high school, and now you’ve read some pseudo-history. I have 40+ years of actual research in primary sources, a bachelor’s degree in the stuff, and a significant amount of graduate work, albeit with a J.D. rather than an M.A. in History.)

I’m tired of arguing with idiots. When the mood passes, I’ll be back doing real research.

Christian Identity

Christian Identity

by Justin Durand ♥ 0 Leave a Comment

The Christian Identity movement has its roots in British Israelism. Amazing. So does Herbert Armstrong’s Worldwide Church of God. And so do some of the ersatz genealogies connecting medieval Europe to the Bible.

“The history of the Christian Identity movement reveals its startling foundations — which posit that both Christians and Jews are God’s chosen people.

“The acidly anti-Semitic religion driving much of today’s extreme right first gained a following as a Victorian curiosity, a benign British eccentricity propounded by the son of a radical Irish weaver. Born as British Israelism, the belief system now recreated as Christian Identity saw Jews as the long-lost brothers of Anglo-Saxons, the fellow elect of God.“

The short version of British Israelism is that some religious fundamentalists, particularly in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, developed the idea that the Anglo-Saxons (and other northern Europeans) are descendants of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. That means they are God’s “Chosen People”.

There is no evidence, except wishful thinking.

More Information

Revised Nov. 3, 2019 to add link.

DNAPainter

DNAPainter

by Justin Durand

So. I was using Genome Mate. It was a lot of work for not much result. There was an update. Always more work. I never got around to doing it, and never went back.

So now I’m looking at DNAPainter. Worth taking a shot, or will it just be extra useless work?

Roberta Estes says, “DNAPainter is one of my favorite tools because DNAPainter, just as its name implies, facilitates users painting their matches’ segments on their various chromosomes. It’s genetic art and your ancestors provide the paint!

“People use DNAPainter in different ways for various purposes. I utilize DNAPainter to paint matches with whom I’ve identified a common ancestor and therefore know the historical ‘identity’ of the ancestors who contributed that segment.”

I wonder. Painting is fun, but I’m more just a genealogist. Cousins are fun, but they’re not the entire game. I’m going to always lose interest in any tool that doesn’t help identify new ancestors.

Holy Grail, Holy Fraud

Holy Grail, Holy Fraud

by Justin Durand

Honestly, nothing makiies me crazy quite like supposedly serious genealogists taking data straight from books like Holy Blood, Holy Grail and others of that ilk that should be just entertainment. I often think I should take on a systematic study and create a website devoted to the subject. Not going to happen, so I’m happy to find this article by Jason Colavito.

“The claim that the Knights Templar are the secret guardians of the Holy Grail, identified as the Holy Bloodline formed by the children of Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene, is of very recent vintage, but due to its promotion in Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code (2003) and on TV shows like America Unearthed (2012-present), the idea, first proposed in 1982, has become an industry, gradually subsuming other medieval “mysteries” of equally dubious provenance, particularly the claim that a Scottish noble named Henry Sinclair discovered America in 1398. There is not one single authentic medieval document that (a) confirms a Holy Bloodline of Jesus, (b) links Henry Sinclair to the Knights Templar, or (c) documents any voyage by Henry Sinclair to anywhere outside of Europe. How the myth formed is an astonishing story on its own.“

Related Post

  • Swanstrom, Justin. “Holy Grail.” Swan Knight <yellacatranch.com>, Jan. 1, 2000. Retrieved Oct. 29, 2019.

Revised to update link.