When is the beginning of the new millennium? Some say it is January 1, 2000 and others January 1, 2001? Who is

Question

When is the beginning of the new millennium? Some say it is January 1, 2000 and others January 1, 2001? Who is correct?

Answer 1

1/1/2001 is technically correct.
There was no year "0." So the end of the first century was the last day of the 100th year. The first day of the next century, therefore, was the first day of the 101st year.

Answer 2

Technically, January 1, 2001 was the first day of the new millennium. The reason is simple. There are 1000 years in a millennium. The first year of the millennium was Year 1; there was no Year Zero. So, the first 1000 years would have been Years 1 through 1000, inclusive. 999 AD would have been the 999th year, and obviously 999 years is not 1000; you are 1 year short. Therefore, 1000 AD would have been the last year of the First Millennium. The Second Millennium would encompass years 1001 through 2000, inclusive, and the Third began January 1, 2001. (Notice that even though this set of numbers begins with a "2", this is the THIRD MIllennium, NOT the SECOND. What most people just DO NOT SEEM TO GET, aside from the number change from 19 to 20, is that there was NO Year 0. The timeline went from One Year Before Christ to Christ the event, to Year 1 After Christ; there was no year called Zero. The First Millennium began the day Christ was born (supposedly, if you believe in these things, although some say it was AD 4, which is a whole other ball of wax and beyond the topic of this discussion). A thousand years comprised Year 1 through Year 1000, NOT Year 1 through Year 999, because that would have only been 999 years. People who cannot reason things out or grasp the simple logic of this will look at the numbers and say, well, 2000 is the first year of the new millennium because the date changed from 1999 to 2000, which is a different set of numbers entirely, and so, lacking the understanding, think this marks the new millennium, which is just plain wrong. Another way to look at it is like this: suppose you go to a car dealer and buy a brand new car that has zero miles on it; in effect, the car was just born (i.e. Christ). When you drive it out of the lot and the odometer hits 000001, how many miles have you gone? ONE. (The key to understanding here is that when you drive the car off the lot you are driving within the first mile, but you HAVE NOT gone one mile yet. The odometer is still showing 000000 even though you are driving in the first mile.) When it hits 000002, how many miles then? TWO. When it hits 0000099, how many miles then? NINETY-NINE. It has not gone one hundred miles until you get to the END of mile 100 and the odometer changes to 0000101. When the odometer finally changes to 0000999 have you gone 1000 miles yet? NO. The instant the odometer changes to 999 you have only gone 998 miles and are at the very BEGINNING of mile 999 (A mile later you would be at the end of mile 999). You will not have gone 1000 miles until the END of mile 1000 when the odometer changes to 1001. The instant the new 1 pops up at the end (1001), this marks the end of the first 1000 miles and the beginning of the second 1000 miles. It is the same thing with dates. The END of 2000 (11:59:59:59 December 31, 2000) marked the END of this string of 1000 years. The NEXT instant (00:00:00:01 January 1, 2001) Marked the very beginning of the SECOND thousand years; the beginning of the Second Millennium. The millennium that just ended spannned then years 1901 thought the END of 2000. The first year of the new one was 2001. Simple logic defies understanding.

Answer 3

The common Western calendar, i.e. the Gregorian calendar, lacks a year numbered zero and begins instead with the year 1. Accordingly, each period of 1000 years concludes at the end of a year with three zeroes, e.g. the first thousand years in the Western calendar included the year 1000. However, there are two viewpoints about how millennia should be thought of in practice, one which relies on the formal operation of the calendar and one which appeals to other notions that attract popular sentiment.

There was a popular debate leading up to the celebrations of the year 2000 as to whether the beginning of that year should be understood (and celebrated) as the beginning of a new millennium. Historically, there has been debate around the turn of previous decades, centuries, and millennia.

As a side-note to the debate on timing of the turn of the millennium, the arbitrariness of the era itself can be raised. Firstly, the Gregorian calendar is a (secular) de facto standard, based on a significant Christian event, the birth of Jesus; thus the foundation of the calendar has little or no meaning to any non-Christian celebrants. Additionally, the calendar is one amongst many still in use and those used historically. Secondly, adjustments and errors in the calendar (such as Dionysius Exiguus's incorrect calculation of A.D. 1) make the particular dates we use today arbitrary.

However, given that the Gregorian calendar is an accepted standard, it is valid to discuss the significant dates within it, be it the timing of religious festivals (such as the moving date of Easter which Dionysius Exiguus was involved in calculating) or the delineation of significant periods of time, such as the end of a millennium.

Those holding that the arrival of new millennium should be celebrated in the transition from 2000 to 2001 (i.e. December 31, 2000), argued that since the Gregorian Calendar has no year zero, the millennia should be counted from A.D. 1. Thus the first period of one thousand complete years runs from the beginning of A.D. 1 to the end of A.D. 1000, and the beginning of the second millennium took place at the beginning of 1001. The second millennium thus ends at the end of the year 2000.

Arthur C Clarke gave this analogy (from a statement received by Reuters): "If the scale on your grocer's weighing machine began at 1 instead of 0, would you be happy when he claimed he'd sold you 10 kg of tea?". This statement illustrates the common confusion about the calendar.

If one counts from the beginning of A.D. 1 to the ending of A.D. 1000, one would have counted 1000 years. The next 1000 years (millennium) would begin on the first day of 1001. In other words, the calendar is not 'cheating' anyone out of a year.

In other words, the argument is based on the fact that the last year of the first two thousand years in the Gregorian Calendar was 2000, not 1999.

The "year 2000" has also been a popular phrase referring to an often utopian future, or a year when stories in such a future were set, adding to its cultural significance. There was also media and public interest in the Y2K bug. Thus, the populist argument was that the new millennium should begin when the zeroes of 2000 "rolled over", i.e. December 31, 1999. People felt that the change of hundred digit in the year number, and the zeros rolling over, created a sense that a new century had begun. This is similar to the common demarcation of decades by their most significant digits, e.g. naming the period 1980 to 1989 as the 1980s or "the eighties". Similarly, it would be valid to celebrate the year 2000 as a cultural event in its own right, and name the period 2000 to 2999 as "the 2000s".

Answer 4

January 1, 2001 new style

Answer 5

Neither, or both.

In the 1500's, the Gregorian calendar was introduced to replace the Julian calendar. It wasn't adopted in the UK and the USA, however, until 1752, and at that time we were forced to skip 11 days (2 September was followed by 14 September). The point, though, is that whichever calendar you prefer to think in terms of -- Julian or Gregorian -- neither 1/1/00 or 1/1/01 lands on the end of a proper 1000-year period.

Which just means that, really, our calendar system is entirely arbitrary and arguments about when "the" new millennium begins are pointless because a new millennium is starting as we speak. And oh, look, here goes another new millennium... and another... :)

Answer 6

January 1, 2001. This is because there was no 0 AD. Otherwise, it WOULD be 2000.

Answer 7

January 1, 2001 is correct.

But most parts of the world held huge New Year Countdown celebrations on the night of December 31, 1999 to celebrate the new millenium which to them it begins on January 1, 2000.

Answer 8

there was no year 0000. So a century ends in 100 and starts again with 101 , so 1-1-2001 is the beginning of the new year.

Answer 9

Year numbers are actually ordinal numbers. Year 0 was the first year, year 1 the second year, etc. That is why you will read in some old documents something like "in this, the xxxth year of our Lord" Therefore 2001 is the first year of the millenium, 2000 years after the first year, the "2001st year of our Lord".

Answer 10

if there's a year 0 then 1/1/2000 is correct but if it starts with 1AD 1/1/2001