Comments on: Azed 1962

By: Daron F

Daron F — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 12:39:24 +0000

30 down in the Observer paper is given as spas, not upas?

By: nmsindy

nmsindy — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 22:21:22 +0000

I don’t think the absence of a year zero comes into it. Those designations of dates were created long after those events. Yes, the third millennium did not start till 1 Jan 2001 but you could see why people celebrated when 1999 turned into 2000. Decades are a bit different tho ie they are a period of ten years. Hard to argue that eg the 1950s is anything other than the years 1950 to 1959. Similarly the ‘noughties’ are 2000 to 2009. Did not tackle the puzzle so not sure if the ‘second decade of the 21st century’ is specifically relevant to it.

By: Tom_I

Tom_I — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 16:43:58 +0000

Thanks, Andrew. As ever, looking through the blog it all seems very straightforward, which makes me wonder why it has taken me all week to complete this puzzle. Even then I didn’t understand the wordplay in a couple of clues (31a, 30d), so thanks for the explanations.

By: Radler

Radler — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:15:25 +0000

Paul B – I assume Andrew is referring to the fact that there wasn’t a year zero AD. Therefore the first hundred year was years 1 – 100 and the 20th century was therefore 1901 – 2000. Similar comments were made around the Millennium’s being celebrated at the start rather than the end of the year 2000.
Of course, a decade is any set of ten years, though most of us generally regard a change of decade as being when then ten’s digit changes in the year number. By that definition 2010 is the second decade of the 21st century even if we accept that only nine years of the previous decade fell within that century

By: Paul B

Paul B — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 12:04:48 +0000

0-9 is ten, no?