The Irish standard., 1904-12-31
is THIS A. D. 1911 &?
Birth Year of the Messiah-A
Very Remarkable
Chronological Error Where Are
We in New Century.

CHRONOLOGICAL rPOP- Wnepe are
We in New Century.
y vast amount of learning was fool
ishly squandered some three years
gone by in ludicrous controversy
commonly known as the Century
question says the Glasgow Star. The
point of issue was momentous one,
viz: the precise time at which the
passing of the nineteenth century
actually took place. Some held that
it passed into history a jmidnight on the
31st of December, 1899; others were
Of the opinion that we lived in the
Century of Science until midnight
the following 31st December. Like
many other controversies, much was
said on both sides without either side
being right. 1t completely escaped the
notice of all the intellectual heavy
weights" who entered the lists on that
occasion that the present, or Christian
era, contained fundamental error of,
ut the very least, four years. The
birth of the Savior, as every one is
fware, is the great historical land
mark, from which the Christian era is
reckoned. But it is most significant
to note that it was not until the sixth
century, A. d., that the present system
of chronology was instituted by the
monk, Dionysius, from which it derives
its name. For more than five hundred
years after the birth of Christ the old
Roman method Of computation re-
NAMED in use; that is to say. time
was still counted Alb urbe condita
(from the founding of Rome). Dionysius
had, therefore, to go back over a period
of five centuries and locate the exact
position of his great starting point as
measured from the founding of Rome.
To us of the twentieth century the task
at first sight would seem a ridiculously
easy one, would appear so simple in
fact as absolutely to preclude the pos
sibility of error. But we must not
overlook the fact that circumstances
have changed since the sixth century.
The world did not then enjoy the bles-
sing, or perhaps, the curse, which
accompanied the advent Of the print
ing press. True, there were records of
the past, but these were inaccessible
so far as the masses were concerned.
1t was only after the invention Of the
printing chine that it became possible
for those of humble means to read for
themselves the history of the times
passed away. Up to that time all
records, including the sacred writings,
We're kept in MSS. The latter were
very few in number, and proportionate-
ly high in price. Indeed, those who
were fortunate enough to possess
copy of any of the rare MSS. regarded
it rs a sort of sacred heirloom, which
money could not buy. Thus we see
the difficulty which was even present
in the early centuries, when there was
a question of acquiring and retaining
reliable historical information. But it
may be reasonably urged that the in
dicated difficulty could not apply to
Dionysius, since, being monk, he had
free access to all the old MSS, the
latter being almost invariably pre-
served in the monasteries, or places
of seclusion. Quite So We must
assume that he had abundant manu-
script matter at his disposal; but when
we direct our attention for a moment
to the manner in which the MSS. were
produced, we shall see wherein pre-
cisely lay the possibility of error, even
though he had several of them before
him during his great work. In the first
place, paper as we understand the az
ticle did not exist. The writings We're
executed upon various substitutes
calculated to withstand the ravages
Of time, but by no means so easily
written upon as is the modern produc-
ton. Two of the substances employed
were parchment and what was known
us papyrus. The latter was prepared
from an Egyptian sedge of that name,
and was anything but an ideal paper
for writing purposes. With large roll
of parchment or payrus before Lin the
amanuensis unrolled the original MS.
! and began his laborious work of copy
ing. Before proceeding very far he en-
countered. in all probability, some
word or date blurred or illegibly writ
ten. The amanuensis had no time to
lose, consequently he makes guess
at the word, or date, as the case may
be, and passes to the next word. He
himself, perhaps, leaves some careless
ly written words and dates which a
| subsequent copyist in turn will guess
at and pass over. Thus as time went
on inaccuracies were multiplied. MSS.
| were hopelessly mixed up, and after
the lapse of few centuries it was next
to impossible to distinguish the genuine
original from the adulterated and in
terpolated copies. The only reliable
means of extracting historical gertrude
from such chaotic mass of fire.
Quently contradictory writings was
| to gather together as many as possible