Duh

In writing "The Great 1000-year Cycle" chapter of my book, I reached a dilemma.  After deriving what might be the correct analytically derived sub cycles, I was challenged with finding the proof of the cycle and sub cycles.  Gann "proves up" the 1000 and 100 year cycles by looking back at those cycles in history to find repetition.

Fair enough.  But he also says the cycle must have the correct starting point.  He compares the period of 1914-1920 to the period of 916-912.  And then he defers to Hans Delbruck regarding the comparable period 2000 years earlier.  Gann avoids naming the period 2000 years earlier, that being 86 BC or so.

I don't have a Hans Delbruck who might help me avoid the comparison.

I tried the same thing.  War seemed to be a recurrent theme, I could look to the 2001 sneak attack or the 2003 kickoff of the Iraq war.  What of great significance might have occurred 2000 years before 2001?

I didn't find a war but the answer was pretty obvious.  AD began with 1 AD; December 25, 0001.  There wasn't a 0 AD.  There was a 1BC nor a 1AD, but there isn't a 0 either way.  Duh, I knew that.

Turn the comparison upside down, like the inversion of the 9 on page 69 or in Robert Gordon's birthdate.

Do we know if there has been an event in 2001 comparable to 0001 AD?  Or will we not know for some years to come; what, of importance, happened in 2001?

Perhaps the answer will become obvious to the extent one dwells on the question.

Where is the starting point?

Jim