# Numbers buffs: What do you call 250?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/numbers-buffs-what-do-you-call-250/98909>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [March 18, 2002, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/numbers-buffs-what-do-you-call-250/98909 "2002-03-18T18:58:04Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 11\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gorgon\_Heap](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f475e1/32.png) [@Gorgon\_Heap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorgon_Heap)\
**Post date:** [March 18, 2002, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/numbers-buffs-what-do-you-call-250/98909/1 "2002-03-18T18:58:04Z")

</div>

We’ve been trying to figure this out in our office for months.

A 150th anniversary is a Sesquicentennial. 200th is Bicentennial.

What the heck do you call a 250th anniversary?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![mok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/edb3f5/32.png) [@mok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mok)\
**Post date:** [March 18, 2002, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/numbers-buffs-what-do-you-call-250/98909/2 "2002-03-18T19:08:03Z")

</div>

[http://www.sls.lib.il.us/reference/por/features/97/annivers.html](http://www.sls.lib.il.us/reference/por/features/97/annivers.html) discusses this ad nauseam.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gorgon\_Heap](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f475e1/32.png) [@Gorgon\_Heap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorgon_Heap)\
**Post date:** [March 18, 2002, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/numbers-buffs-what-do-you-call-250/98909/3 "2002-03-18T19:44:43Z")

</div>

Holy monkees! Look at those things!

Well, thanks a lot, **mok**.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\
**Post date:** [March 18, 2002, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/numbers-buffs-what-do-you-call-250/98909/4 "2002-03-18T20:02:19Z")

</div>

Umm…that page is neat and all, except that every single entry on it is wrong. They are all shifted off by one row. So be careful using the information on it.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gorgon\_Heap](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f475e1/32.png) [@Gorgon\_Heap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorgon_Heap)\
**Post date:** [March 18, 2002, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/numbers-buffs-what-do-you-call-250/98909/5 "2002-03-18T20:37:19Z")

</div>

Eh? How so? Better double check!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![dtilque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dtilque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtilque)\
**Post date:** [March 18, 2002, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/numbers-buffs-what-do-you-call-250/98909/6 "2002-03-18T21:33:47Z")

</div>

I note that their proposed word for a 6 year anniversary uses the Greek word for 6 rather than Latin like all the others. What do they have against sex???

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![caveman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/caveman/32/7242_2.png) [@caveman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/caveman)\
**Post date:** [March 18, 2002, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/numbers-buffs-what-do-you-call-250/98909/7 "2002-03-18T21:39:16Z")

</div>

I’ve alwyas fancied sesquibicentennial…would that be technially correct usage?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![RM\_Mentock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e274bd/32.png) [@RM\_Mentock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RM_Mentock)\
**Post date:** [March 18, 2002, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/numbers-buffs-what-do-you-call-250/98909/8 "2002-03-18T21:39:39Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Anthracite \*  
> \*\*Umm…that page is neat and all, except that every single entry on it is wrong. They are all shifted off by one row. So be careful using the information on it. \*\*

When I looked at it, it seemed to line up OK. It says that the 200th anniversary is the “Bicentennial”, so that checks out–as does all the rest, according to my rudimentary Latin.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\
**Post date:** [March 18, 2002, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/numbers-buffs-what-do-you-call-250/98909/9 "2002-03-18T21:47:10Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by RM Mentock \*  
> \*\*  
> When I looked at it, it seemed to line up OK. It says that the 200th anniversary is the “Bicentennial”, so that checks out–as does all the rest, according to my rudimentary Latin. \*\*

[Spock]Fascinating[/Spock] In IE 6.0, the table appears to have an error in it that makes it misalign. So it may appear correct in some browsers, incorrect in others. Just be careful reading it then.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gorgon\_Heap](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/f475e1/32.png) [@Gorgon\_Heap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorgon_Heap)\
**Post date:** [March 19, 2002, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/numbers-buffs-what-do-you-call-250/98909/10 "2002-03-19T00:22:15Z")

</div>

Ah. I see where we got mixed up. No prob. Looks good and that’s still a big help for us.

Yay!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\
**Post date:** [March 19, 2002, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/numbers-buffs-what-do-you-call-250/98909/11 "2002-03-19T00:55:31Z")

</div>

What’s curious is that the “table” isn’t completely a \<TABLE\>. What they did was have a \<TABLE\> with a single row of three \<TD\> elements, each of which is the column of text, lined up by means of explicit \<BR\>'s. Which seems like a clumsy and error-prone way of doing it to me. For one thing, it’s going to break if displayed on a small enough browser window that any of the text wraps within its column - which I just caused to happen by shrinking my browser window, and may be what you observed. I wonder why they did it that way.
