Last time, they celebrated in 1901. ISTR.

I’m not a betting man. I wish I was. (If I was, I would have made a few quid on those foolish offers from the betting sites.)

When London’s local paper, the Evening Standard, reprinted its 1900 edition for the pseudo-millennium, it had no mention of a new century. And I do remember accounts of celebrations in 1901 - and “what they said last time” reprints in some paper or another which reprinted 1/1/1901 editorials.

So much for universal education …

If this is connected to one of Cecil’s columns, could you please post a link to it? Thanks!

(Just copy and paste the URL into the Reply window and the vB will do the rest. Leave a carriage return before the URL so the link makes.)

I suspect our original poster refers to this column:

The millennium approacheth. Will it start Jan. 1, 2000, or Jan. 1, 2001?

your humble TubaDiva
Administrator

Specifically, it appears that it was meant to be in the thread Re: What to call the class of 2000?, in response to a comment I made:

Of course, I didn’t check any century-old newspapers when I posted that, and if iankevinmcdonald has, and can say otherwise, then I grant him the bet.

I have seen a reprint of a Times of London editorial where the paper stated (in 1899) that the new century, according to the Times, was going to start January 1, 1901 and that was the end of the discussion.

So, people thought about this issue, but it was nowhere near as big a deal as it was for 2000 because of the “Odometer Effect.”