Re: Standardized World Chronology, Holocene anyone?

Mark Whitaker's reminder of his previous suggestion does present one
possibility for a starting date for a new uniform time framework; however,
I pose the following queries and comments:

Wallerstein, likens the "rupture" in the 16th century A.D. historical
process to the "so-called neolithic or agricultural revolution" which
Carlo Cipolla dates from the eight millenium B.C.E. (Wallerstein,
1974, p. 3; Cipolla, 1962/1964, p. 29).  This early agricultural
revolution thus has some resonance amongst folks.  Whitaker's Holocene era
(HE) dating system he locates around 10,500 B.C.E. though others, for
example Brad Jones, locate the Early Holocene period between 10,000-8,000
B.P. (i.e. Before the Present)
<http://archnet.uconn.edu/regions/northeast/72163/neaa.htm>. Still the
question remains, where should we begin a universally applicable dating
system?  Should we date a universal time system based at the height of
hunter-gatherer groupings or the emergence of sedentary social formations
and the development of agriculture or perhaps on the retreat of the 
glacial ice-sheets?  Also, are any of these events so significant as
to generate scientific and popular support for such a dating system?
Moreover, can there be any real agreement on where to draw the line so as
to have a launch date for a univeral time system (e.g. 10,500 BCE, 10,000
BP, or 8000 BP)?

My own view is that 1) the significance of such events will not be
generally shared for 2) there will be little agreement as to where to
place the beginning date for 3) some will want to place it around early
sedentary social formations while others place it around the retreat of
the glaciers, etc. and 4) such dates ultimately will have to be
somewhat arbitrary in their initial starting points.  In addition, besides
the arbitrariness of such a possible dating/time system, I contend it
lacks universality for, at best, it is earth-centric and has little
applicability beyond the confines of this planet.  

At a time when human planetary travel appears to be a distinct possibility
in the not-so-distant future, it strikes me that we should limit the
dating of our knowledge to events peculiar to one planet in one solar
system in one galaxy.  Let be the local time conventions!  They were
necessary constructions allowing people to make sense of their world, a
reflective mechanism which allowed them to structure events and catalog
past from present and future.  Before us, however, is a new
problematic--a new world, a new horizon which beckons us to look beyond
the earth proper to a new framework by which to catalog the passage of
time and the events associated with it, a framework applicable to earth,
our solar system, the milkyway galaxy, and beyond.  Is such a framework
possible?  If so, I contend its utility will be primarily practical.  

Certainly we begin to tread a path previously broached by Gene Roddenberry
and others who wrote science "fiction", but perhaps now, or in the
not-so-distant future, such fictional technicalities--such as
"stardate"--will indeed need to be worked out.  Is science up to the task?
And its practioners?  At the very least, I contend the need exists.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colin S. Cavell                        But the life of mind is not one 
University of Massachusetts            that shuns death, and keeps clear
Department of Political Science        of destruction; it endures death
Thompson Tower                         and in death maintains its being.
Box 37520                              It only wins to its truth when it
Amherst, MA  01003-7520                finds itself utterly torn asunder.
VOICE:  (413) 546-3408                 It is this mighty power, not by
INTERNET:  cscpo@polsci.umass.edu      being a positive which turns away
http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~cscpo   from the negative, as when we say
                                       of anything it is nothing or it is
                                       false, and, being then done with 
                                       it, pass off to something else: on
                                       the contrary, mind is this power 
                                       only by looking the negative in the
                                       face, and dwelling with it.
                                       --G.W.F. HEGEL, The Phenomenology
                                         of Mind (1807)
==============================================================================

_________________________________________________
On Wed, 14 Feb 2001, Mark Douglas Whitaker wrote:

> I believe I have suggested before on the H-WORLD list several years ago
> basing this on HE (Holocene era), which is actually the contextal envelope
> (and abberation) in climate that has led to a great deal of human expansion
> around the world. That would be around 10,500 BCE on present estimates. 
>       HE would bring about an environmental historiography context of the
> variations in human history and human expansion. Though Colin Cavell's
> caveats are well taken: epistemological senses of a society's sense of
> 'where temporally it is at' prefer a rather normative base of measurement
> based on their own 'private' histories, instead of based on world history's
> more ecumenical interactions between different societies. 
>       HE is the metric that I would promote.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> Mark Whitaker
> University of Wisconsin-Madison
> 
> 
> At 05:24 PM 2/13/01 -0500, you wrote:
> >
> >Timothy,
> >
> >Wonderful suggestion!  I've been interested in this line of inquiry for
> >some time now, though you have articulated it publicly.  There is already,
> >as far as I know, at least one other suggested framework for
> >reconstructing how we view the passage of time, see:
> ><http://simpleage.com/>.  As well, there is an interesting article about
> >time at the following URL <http://205.160.244.10/~vnn2/TIME_ht.htm>.
> >
> >Displacing the current hegemony of the Christian time framework is perhaps
> >unthinkable within the next 100 years or so, at a minimum (barring some
> >major catastrophe of worldwide significance). As such, a more positive
> >tactic would be to create an alternative time framework and see if it
> >gains adherence by sheer momentum of its logic and scientific use.
> >
> >Creating such an alternative could proceed by means of a separate
> >listserv dedicated to analyzing alternative proposals.  At the very least,
> >such communication regarding time and its passage would at least determine 
> >if there are better, more useful, alternatives to pursue.  I would think
> >that a minimum of 10-20 years of discussion would be necessary before
> >sufficient agreement on an alternative frameword could be formulated and
> >then presented publicly; though I may be persuaded otherwise in the
> >course of time.
> >
> 
>>______________________________________________________________________________
> >Colin S. Cavell                        "The absence of romance in my history
> >Department of Political Science        will, I fear, detract somewhat from 
>its
> >Thompson Tower                         interest; but if it be judged useful 
>by
> >Box 37520                              those inquirers who desire an exact
> >University of Massachusetts            knowledge of the past as an aid to the
> >Amherst, MA  01003-7520                interpretation of the future, which in
> >INTERNET:  cscpo@polsci.umass.edu      the course of human things must
> resemble
> >VOICE:     (413) 546-3408              if it does not reflect it, I shall be
> >http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~cscpo   content.  In fine, I have written my
> >                                       work, not as an essay which is to win
> >                                       the applause of the moment, but as a
> >                                       possession for all time."
> >
> >                                       --Thucydides, c. 471-400 B.C.E.,
> >                                       "The History of the Peloponnesian War"
> 
>>==============================================================================
> >
> >__________________________________________
> >On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Timothy Comeau wrote:
> >
> >> As someone who likes to occasionally dabble in the study of ancient 
> >history, I 
> >> find all of those BC negative numbers immensensely annoying. It robs me
> >> of an ability to appreciate the time spans of things, in the way that I
> >> can appreciate the 1000 year difference between the end of the Roman
> >> empire and the stirrings of the Italian Renaissance. In BC terms 1000BC
> >> and 1AD is a muddled confusion, since there is that invisible border
> >> arbitrarily imposed, and as we all know, incorrectly, by the Catholic
> >> church. 
> >> 
> >> Why can't the academic historians get together and work out some kind of 
> >> standardized world chronology? Something that would cast ancient history
> >> into a positive scale of order. I've done research into this myself, for
> >> example, using the Roman Chronology, or the Egyptian in order to "get a
> >> feel" for the stretches of human history.
> >> 
> >> What I'd like to see is historians getting together at a conference and 
> >> deciding on a particular day in ancient history when our international
> >> chronology could be established. Civilization is what, 10, 000 years old
> >> approximately? Shouldn't we keep this in mind, have some form of
> >> reminder, have an academic chronological system that would make this the
> >> 12th of February in the year 10,876 for example (I just made that up to
> >> illustrate)? 
> >> 
> >> This is the year 2755 in the Roman chronology.
> >> This is the year 6242 in the Egyptian chronology.
> >> This is the year 5762 in the Jewish chronology.
> >> This is the year 1421 in the Islamic chronology (changes over to 1422 on 
> >> February 25th). 
> >> 
> >> Using the Egyptian model as an example:
> >> 
> >> Socrates would have lived from 3771-3840
> >> Julius Caesar would have lived from 4141-4197.
> >> 
> >> The first atomic explosion would have occurred in the year 6186.
> >> 
> >> As well, I realize that there are considerations that would make it
> somewhat 
> >> inaccurate regarding the Gregorian and  all that, however, what I'm
> >> proposing is a sort of Kelvin scale for chronologies - we all use
> >> Imperial or Celsius in our daily lives, but scientist use Kelvin to
> >> gauge the relative values in the scale. I can't imagine the Christian
> >> chronology disappearing anytime soon, since it has achieved a world wide
> >> infiltration (last weeks Israeli elections had a 2001 graphic instead of
> >> a 5762 one). And we all know that the Jewish and Islamic calendars are
> >> lunar, so they don't cross over very well into the solar.
> >> 
> >> So, in conclusion, what do you all think? Is this do-able?
> >> 
> >> TIMOTHY COMEAU
> >> 
> 
>