To be CE or AD, that is the question.

[cinzia8]

Hi all:

 

I'm looking for opinions as to whether I should use CE or AD in my historical novel. It has been suggested to me that the average reader will understand AD easier than CE. Ex. Gaul 451 A.D. rather than 451 CE. I've been using CE. Any thoughts are appreciated. I hope this question hasn't strayed too far from the military aspects of the forum.

 

Cinzia

[Bryaxis Hecatee]

The forum is far from military and such questions are always apreciated ! I'd say that it would not really matter. AD is indeed better known, as the older and more widely used form, but is 1) christian oriented 2) based upon a false assumption (since the Christ's birthdate was wrongly computed). If historical precision is of more interest to you then use Common Era (CE) and Before Common Era (BCE) without qualm. After all any reader nitpicking on that will do so only if he has nothing else to bicker about and we all know that readers always complain

[Kosmo]

I personally dislike CE because it's clearly AD with only a name change. I think that for a roman historical novel the latin Anno Domini sounds better then the newspeak Common Era especially if the novel is set in the christian Late Empire like the example you gave.

If not maybe using AUC with clarifying footnotes?

[Ursus]

CE is more ... politically correct .... for people who aren't Christians. I tend to use this myself in conversations on this forum.

 

However, as Kosmo said, if you're writing a historical novel, it doesn't make sense to use CE as the characters would not think in such terms.

[Ludovicus]

On the other had, Christians didn't begin to use Anno Domini until about the 7th Century CE. So Late Roman Christians would have used AUC, Ab Urbe Condita (Since the founding of Rome).

[Ludovicus]

See:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anno_Domini

 

Three other dating schemes existed in the late empire:

Diocletian Era, Consulship, and Olympiad.

[Viggen]

...for example in the german speaking world, everyone understands AD (Anno Domini) but no one CE , just saying.... and if your novel is based around ancient rome its a bit weird not to use the latin term, right?

 

cheers

viggen

 

p.s. to be politicaly correct in archaeology is the oxymoron of oxymoron. BC and AD are just fine. I am so sick and tired of this argument with people who have too much time on their hands. 2000 years from now will not be the common era of today but it will be 4000 years AD

[cinzia8]

...for example in the german speaking world, everyone understands AD (Anno Domini) but no one CE , just saying.... and if your novel is based around ancient rome its a bit weird not to use the latin term, right?

 

cheers

viggen

 

p.s. to be politicaly correct in archaeology is the oxymoron of oxymoron. BC and AD are just fine. I am so sick and tired of this argument with people who have too much time on their hands. 2000 years from now will not be the common era of today but it will be 4000 years AD

 

Viggen: I thought CE was a world wide academic term now used by scholars. How interesting that this might be an English language term.

[cinzia8]

On the other had, Christians didn't begin to use Anno Domini until about the 7th Century CE. So Late Roman Christians would have used AUC, Ab Urbe Condita (Since the founding of Rome).

 

Ludovicus: I just learned something. I never heard of AUC. Are there historical documents that use this reference?

 

I'm afraid the historical novel reader wouldn't understand AUC even if it's the most accurate.

 

Cinzia

[cinzia8]

...for example in the german speaking world, everyone understands AD (Anno Domini) but no one CE , just saying.... and if your novel is based around ancient rome its a bit weird not to use the latin term, right?

 

cheers

viggen

 

p.s. to be politicaly correct in archaeology is the oxymoron of oxymoron. BC and AD are just fine. I am so sick and tired of this argument with people who have too much time on their hands. 2000 years from now will not be the common era of today but it will be 4000 years AD

 

Viggen: Now that I think about, you're right. I use Latin in my story, so AD would be more harmonious with the tone of the novel.

[cinzia8]

These are great viewpoints!! This CE or AD question was bothering me. I use Latin in the story and I think I will change back to using AD. I originally started with AD and then after doing research on my topic, I thought to be accurate, I should use CE. Then when someone questioned my use of CE over AD, it got me thinking again. I should have come here first!

 

Thanks, guys!

Cinzia

[Ludovicus]

...for example in the german speaking world, everyone understands AD (Anno Domini) but no one CE , just saying.... and if your novel is based around ancient rome its a bit weird not to use the latin term, right?

 

cheers

viggen

 

p.s. to be politicaly correct in archaeology is the oxymoron of oxymoron. BC and AD are just fine. I am so sick and tired of this argument with people who have too much time on their hands. 2000 years from now will not be the common era of today but it will be 4000 years AD

 

Viggen: Now that I think about, you're right. I use Latin in my story, so AD would be more harmonious with the tone of the novel.

 

It would be entirely appropriate for the modern narrator or you, speaking as author, to use AD. However, characters or narrators true to their time environment would use the names of the two consuls to identify the year. The other options include reign of Emperor, etc. I did a little research in regard to AUC. It was used, but not as frequently as the year of Consul X and Consul Y. Good luck!

 

Does this help? :

http://www.absolutea...Ab_urbe_condita

Edited June 24, 2011 by Ludovicus

[Maty]

If you wanted to be absolutely correct, you need to use the name of the consuls who gave their name to the year.

 

Thus a totally correct date would be something like 'in the year of the second consulship of Chronologicus and the first consulship of Tempus in the four hundred and fifth olympiad, nine hundred and fifty years from the founding of the city.' (This is to give the form. The actual date is erroneous.)

 

As a stylistic note, remember that AD comes before the numeral, and BC after. So it's AD 451 (The year of the Lord 451) and 451 BC (451 years before Christ).

 

While AD was only used from the seventh century, CE (Common Era, though what the heck is 'common' about most of it I have no idea) only dates from 25 PCE (politically correct era).

Edited June 25, 2011 by Maty

[Melvadius]

If you feel that you wish to use 'correct' terms for the period then I would personally go with the consulship etc options above but put in an author's note/ glossary somewhwere eplaining what it is in terms of AD.

[Kosmo]

Did they kept using the consuls name for the year during the empire? Did they used only the names of the 2 'elected' consuls? With all the suffex consuls a year had too many consuls to be practical.

I thought that during the empire they also used a chronology focused on the titles given to the emperor like this fictional examples - In the year when the divine Trajan held tribunician power for the third time... or - the year when the divine Trajan received his second triumph.