Why does Firaxis still use BC and AD?

[Chasethemage]

Why not the Holocene calendar?

 

[PhilBowles]

I'm a filthy atheist too, and I don't really care (not that all atheists are filthy, it's probably just me). Seems as logical as the next system, unlike inches, feet, and whatnot vs. the metric system. The BC/AD stuff is sometimes used even in highly respected scientific journals like Nature or Science, e.g. https://www.nature.com/articles/nplants2016194
I have noticed a general shift towards using the terms BCE/CE, though, but like I said, don't really care.

Some of the American journals have switched, but as BC/AD still the accepted convention globally journals in general avoid making a change that isn't widely-held and might be seen as political. Nature specifically is British, where the BCE/CE thing never took off.

 

[Ryika]

It's the closest thing there is to an international standardization at this point - BC/AD are increasingly rare; you won't see them in most textbooks nor virtually any history books made in the past decade - it will get to the point that BC/AD are not recognized by younger people.

Yes, that may be the case (I'll just have to believe you here), and once we arrive at that point, I might have to argue that BC/AD should stay as a cultural reference.

But for now this is where we are:

"BC / AD"
About 563.000 results (0,61 seconds)

"BCE / CE"
About 125.000 results (0,53 seconds)

(I know, pretty silly way to quantify those, but still. )

Moreover, for a game that is more than nominally about history, diversity and representation it is odd to use abbreviations explicitly tied to a particular religion and set of predominantly European cultures - especially when those abbreviations are no longer appearing frequently in books, articles and other media.

I'm from Germany, here BC/AD is still used just about everywhere in the general public. That may be different in English speaking countries, because Germany is lagging behind quite a bit when it comes to the whole social justice nonsense, but for now, BC/AD is in dominant use here. From my perspective - and again, I can only speak from the German perspective here - it's a case of what another user already mentioned.. perception bias.

 

[Arianrhod]

it will get to the point that BC/AD are not recognized by younger people

And we can have this discussion when it actually reaches that point. Most people right now are familiar with BC/AD and are taught BCE/CE, which at the end of the day is a largely unnecessary and pointless obfuscation (as setting the calendar in this year inherently carries religious overtones, and BCE/CE does nothing to change this, arguably makes said overtones even more sweeping if you bother to think about it, and frankly accomplishes little of value) I do not recall the general population ever actually agreeing on as the poll seems to indicate.

Never mind the fact that for most of the time period covered in game where this calendar system was used (by the people who used it, anyhow), BC/AD was the standard and not BCE/CE. Even if the idea of BCE/CE has technically existed for a while, it seems odd to me that the same community who fights persistently against any country that didn't before 1600 and any leader that was born before 1900 is trying to force in a calendar notation that's mostly taken off in popularity since around the 1980s over one that's been around for a very very long time.

Admittedly it's a bit silly to base the idea of an in-game calendar around Jesus at all when Christianity isn't necessarily important in any given game of civ, so I really do like the 'culture-based calendar' idea tossed around in this thread. But ultimately the in-game dates exist more for the sake of player convenience (i.e. to relate the turn count to an approximate time period in reality) and I don't think they're really intended to mean anything in-universe, Civ 5 Mayans notwithstanding. And in the real world -- that is to say, not in history books -- most people use BC/AD and not BCE/CE. The poll, likely, is a reflection of this reality, and I doubt you'd get more favorable results if you took it outside of this board where people are likely to be less knowledgeable about history and other cultures.

 

[PhilBowles]

Yes, that may be the case (I'll just have to believe you here), and once we arrive at that point, I might have to argue that BC/AD should stay as a cultural reference.

But for now this is where we are:

"BC / AD"
About 563.000 results (0,61 seconds)

"BCE / CE"
About 125.000 results (0,53 seconds)

(I know, pretty silly way to quantify those, but still. )


I'm from Germany, here BC/AD is still used just about everywhere in the general public. That may be different in English speaking countries, because Germany is lagging behind quite a bit when it comes to the whole social justice nonsense, but for now, BC/AD is in dominant use here. From my perspective - and again, I can only speak from the German perspective here - it's a case of what another user already mentioned.. perception bias.

Wikipedia's summary of contemporary usage of the term suggests he's heavily overstating his case - there have been some moves to officialise it in exactly two territories: the US and the UK (Australia's suggested adoption being optional), and in a small subset of academic fields in the humanities (including history, which is admittedly pertinent in this case - possibly moreso than my examples from science):

"Some academics in the fields of theology, education and history have adopted CE and BCE notation, although there is some disagreement.[50]

More visible uses of Common Era notation have recently surfaced at major museums in the English-speaking world. Furthermore, several style guides now prefer or mandate its usage.[51] Even some style guides for Christian churches prefer its use: for example, the Episcopal Diocese Maryland Church News.[52]

In the United States, the usage of the BCE/CE notation in textbooks is growing.[46] Some publications have moved over to using it exclusively. For example, the 2007 World Almanac was the first edition to switch over to the BCE/CE usage, ending a 138-year usage of the traditional BC/AD dating notation. It is used by the College Board in its history tests,[53] and by the Norton Anthology of English Literature. Others have taken a different approach. The US-based History Channel uses BCE/CE notation in articles on non-Christian religious topics such as Jerusalem and Judaism.[54]

In 2002, England and Wales introduced the BCE/CE notation system into the official school curriculum.[55]

In June 2006, in the United States, the Kentucky State School Board reversed its decision to use BCE and CE in the state's new Program of Studies, leaving education of students about these concepts a matter of discretion at the local level.[56][57][58]

Also in 2011, media reports suggested that the BC/AD notation in Australian school textbooks would be replaced by BCE/CE notation.[59] The story became national news and drew opposition from some politicians and church leaders. Weeks after the story broke, the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority denied the rumour and stated that the BC/AD notation would remain, with CE and BCE as an optional suggested learning activity.[60]"

The one thing that surprises me here is the UK usage, but then I haven't been involved in the UK school curriculum for somewhat longer than that and the notation isn't widely-used in the UK at this stage. Still, we're looking at a total of three countries that have adopted it in some form, and there not necessarily widely and in no cases exclusively. It certainly isn't legally mandated as the earlier poster asserts.

 

[God of Kings]

I believe that Canada adopted the BCE/CE system as well.

 

[pgm123]

It’s useful because it solved the leap year problem. Ancient calendars tended to drift.

It's good. Not as accurate as the Iranian calendar, but good. It's modern, of course.

The Gregorian calendar is 0.002% improvement on the Julian calendar. Both are solar calendars. The lunar calendars typically add a leap month. There are quite a bit of apocrypha texts that advocated the Jewish calendar be replaced with a solar one.

Still, that's really irrelevant to the dating of a calendar to 1 AD. That's a convention that's no better than any other convention.

Side note, Common Era is a term distinguishing the dating system from the Regnal Era. Instead of dating to the specific king, you date to the common era, i.e. Anno Domini.

Another side note: Years in AD should actually be written with the AD first. AD 1. AD 100. AD 10000. That is to say, it adopted the conventions of BC because the actual words don't hold significance anymore. CE is typically written as the Common Era, as it has the longest history that way, but it's also the Christian Era and the Calendar Era. Common Era has little meaning, Christian Era is not secular, and Calendar Era is redundant. But I digress.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Definitely would be happy with just turn numbers. Even move speed vs alleged date make the whole parallel between reality and game instantly off.

 

[nzcamel]

Change it so it shows the year for each civilization relative to the 'birth' of the great prophet of the majority of religion in their civ?

I think shaking it up general might be a good idea with the number of complaints about how the date doesn't match the 'progress' of the game.

I think that would be a cool option to add

If they have time, giving people various options is fine by me or creating different calender's for different markets too. But if there is only one, Civ is still played mostly by Westerners who are mostly familiar with BC/AD and that is what they should stick to.

 

[PhilBowles]

I believe that Canada adopted the BCE/CE system as well.

When they teach it, does the C stand for Canadian Era?

 

[God of Kings]

When they teach it, does the C stand for Canadian Era?

It's still the Common Era though.

Here's evidence of the Canadian Encyclopedia using the BCE/CE system: http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/collection/archaeological-sites/

 

[Ivan Hunger]

I am surprised at the poll results - I expected CE/BCE to be preferred given the widespread interest in history by posters here.

There may be fewer posters here who are interested in history than anecdotal observation would lead you to expect.

The history enthusiasts are possibly just louder, as they always seem to be complaining about some perceived historical inaccuracy or another.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

I suspect a lot of the people saying 'BC/AD are still the norm' were taught BC/AD at school and tend to have friends of similar age who were also taught BC/AD. Perhaps you would get a different view if you were to spend more time with 12 year olds. I don't know, most likely it depends on the country, but if BCE/CE is becoming the standard in school curriculums, it won't be long until it is far more prevalent, regardless of what you and your friends were taught.

Of course, unless you fancy doing a massive survey of the world's population, it's quite difficult to say for certain which is the norm anyway.

 

[Ryika]

I don't think 12yo's are a particularly good measurement for what is "the norm" in public discourse. It may become the norm if 12yo's are indeed taught one way, and not the other - especially if the other thing is demonized as that culturally insensitive thing that older people do by some overzealous teachers - but for now, it is not the norm.

And there is no big request for this change either, that's not only evidenced by the fact that almost all people voted to keep it as it is (I suspect most people would be open to a system where you can choose though), it's also evidenced by the fact that there's no mod that changes the format in either Civ 5 or Civ VI, even though it would be really easy to do. Can't find it as a requested mod either.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

You miss the point. You think it's the norm because you and your friends were taught it. If 12 year olds are taught the opposite, that is their norm. In other words, what we consider the norm is almost always anecdotal.

 

[Ryika]

I did not miss your point, I just don't think it's relevant in any way. What is the norm in certain subgroups of society does not have any bearing on what is the norm in society as a whole. To see what is being used in society, you look at mass media, and places where public discourse between people from different backgrounds takes place.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

I'm not sure I'm being clear, sorry. In my opinion, 'society as a whole' doesn't exist, there are many small overlapping societies but no global whole. In UK academic society the norm may be BCE/CE, in UK mass media, the norm may be BC/AD. You could do a massive scientific study and conclude that 75% of the world's population use BC/AD but that has no bearing on what is the norm in academic society. I therefore think it is meaningless to claim that BC/AD is the global norm.

 

[Basileus Rhomaion]

As an agnostic atheist I don't have any problems with the current system either, but I just want to point out that singling out the dating system in terms of eurocentrism or christian-centrism (if that's even a word) wouldn't accomplish much. The entire game mechanics-wise is geared for a very "western" understanding of the progression of history. "Classical" and "Renaissance" eras don't mean anything outside European history unless we take them as indirect indicators for the corresponding periods in other cultures, in which case one could make the same argument about the BC/AD system. For example, a Chinese person has as much of a cultural connection to the dating system as with the Renaissance, yet it's an entire era of the game.

If you ask me, I'd prefer a varying dating system and era system to add historical flavour to each civ individually, but that's generally unlikely so I don't see a point in cherry-picking what is more culturally inclusive or not since the game fundamentally both is and isn't in many ways.

 

[Ryika]

I'm not sure I'm being clear, sorry. In my opinion, 'society as a whole' doesn't exist, there are many small overlapping societies but no global whole. You could do a massive scientific study and conclude that 75% of the world's population use BC/AD but that has no bearing on what is the norm in academic society. I therefore think it is meaningless to claim that BC/AD is the global norm.

Society as a whole is just the sum/average of the parts that make up society. If 75% of the world's population use BC/AD, then that's the norm in greater society, and whether academics use another standard is entirely meaningless to that statement. A "norm" does not imply universality, quite the opposite, it implies less frequent, alternative uses.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

Society as a whole is just the sum/average of the parts that make up society. If 75% of the world's population use BC/AD, then that's the norm in greater society, and whether academics use another standard is entirely meaningless to that statement. A "norm" does not imply universality, quite the opposite, it implies less frequent, alternative uses.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree then.

In my opinion there's no point worrying about what the so called 'global norm' might be, there are different norms for different contexts.

They are functionally the same thing anyway, it really doesn't matter! I use both BC/AD and BCE/CE depending on the situation so they are both normal to me!