Eurocentrism: The BC and AD system is rooted in Christian religious traditions and assumes that the birth of Jesus Christ is a pivotal event that divides history. This can be problematic as it privileges Christian history and places it at the center of the narrative, while neglecting other cultural, religious, and regional perspectives.
Inaccuracy: The exact date of Jesus' birth is uncertain and disputed among historians. The traditional date of 1 AD was proposed by Dionysius Exiguus in 525 AD, based on calculations of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. However, there is historical evidence that suggests Jesus may have been born a few years earlier or later than 1 AD.
Cultural Bias: The use of the BC and AD labels can perpetuate the bias that the history of the world is primarily shaped by events in Christian-dominated societies. It overlooks or downplays the significance of historical developments and achievements in other regions and cultures.
Alternative Systems: To address the limitations of the BC and AD system, some historians propose alternative dating systems. For example, the "Common Era" (CE) and "Before the Common Era" (BCE) are secular terms that are inclusive and do not reference any specific religious tradition. Other proposals include using the term "Anno Mundi" (AM), which refers to the year since the creation of the world according to the Hebrew calendar.
Promoting Inclusivity: Rejecting the BC and AD labels can be seen as a step toward promoting inclusivity and acknowledging the diverse historical experiences of different cultures and civilizations. It allows for a more comprehensive and unbiased understanding of world history.
However, it is important to note that the use of the BC and AD system is still prevalent in many historical contexts and academic publications due to its widespread recognition and familiarity. Shifting away from these terms entirely may cause confusion and require significant effort in rewriting and revising historical texts.