ECLIPSES OF THE SUN MENTIONED IN HISTORY--CHINESE.
This is the first of several chapters which will be devoted to
historical eclipses. Of course the total eclipse of the Sun of August 9,
1896, observed in Norway and elsewhere, is, in a certain sense, an
eclipse mentioned in history, but that is not what is intended by the
title prefixed to these chapters. By the term "historical eclipses," as
used here, I mean eclipses which have been recorded by ancient
historians and chroniclers who were not necessarily astronomers, and who
wrote before the invention of the telescope. The date of this may be
conveniently taken as a dividing line, so that I shall deal chiefly with
eclipses which occurred before, say, the year 1600. There is another
reason why some such date as this is a suitable one from which to take a
new departure. Without at all avowing that superstition ceased on the
Earth in the year 1600 (for there is far too large a residuum still
available now, 300 years later), it may yet be said that the Revival of
Letters did do a good deal to divest celestial phenomena of those
alarming and panic-causing attributes which undoubtedly attached to them
during the earlier ages of the world and during the "Dark Ages" in
Western Europe quite as much as during any other period of the world's
history. No one can examine the writings of the ancient Greek and Roman
historians, and the chronicles kept in the monasteries of Western Europe
by their monkish occupiers, without being struck by the influence of
terror which such events as eclipses of the Sun and Moon and such
celestial visitors as Comets and Shooting Stars exercised far and wide.
And this influence overspread, not only the unlettered lower orders, but
many of those in far higher stations of life who, one might have hoped,
would have been exempt from such feelings of mental distress as they
often exhibited. Illustrations of this fact will be adduced in due
course.
It has always been supposed that the earliest recorded eclipse of the
Sun is one thus mentioned in an ancient Chinese classic--the _Chou-King_
(sometimes spelt _Shou-Ching_). The actual words used may be
translated:--"On the first day of the last month of Autumn the Sun and
Moon did not meet harmoniously in Fang." To say the least of it, this is
a moderately ambiguous announcement, and Chinese scholars, both
astronomers and non-astronomers, have spent a good deal of time in
examining the various eclipses which might be thought to be represented
by the inharmonious meeting of the Sun and the Moon as above recorded.
To cut a long story short, it is generally agreed that we are here
considering one or other of two eclipses of the Sun which occurred in
the years 2136 or 2128 B.C. respectively, the Sun being then in the
sidereal division "Fang," a locality determined by the stars [Greek:
beta], [Greek: delta], [Greek: pi], and [Greek: rho]Scorpii, and which
includes a few small stars in Libra and Ophiuchus to the N. and in Lupus
to the S. How this simple and neat conclusion, which I have stated with
such apparent dogmatism, was arrived at is quite another question, and
it would hardly be consistent with the purpose of this volume to attempt
to work it out in detail, but a few points presented in a summary form
may be interesting.
In the first place, be it understood, that though it is fashionable to
cast ridicule on John Chinaman, especially by way of retaliation for his
calling us "Barbarians," yet it is a sure and certain fact that not only
have the Chinese during many centuries been very attentive students of
Astronomy, but that we Westerns owe a good deal of our present knowledge
in certain departments to the information stored up by Chinese observers
during many centuries both before and after the Christian Era.
This, however, is a digression. The circumstances of this eclipse as
regards its identification having been carefully examined by Mr. R. W.
Rothman,[19] in 1839 were further reviewed by Professor S. M. Russell
in a paper published in the proceedings of the Pekin Oriental
Society.[20] The substance of the case is that in the reign of
Chung-K'ang, the fourth Emperor of the Hsia Dynasty, there occurred an
eclipse of the Sun, which is interesting not only for its antiquity, but
also for the dread fate of the two Astronomers Royal of the period, who
were taken by surprise at its occurrence, and were unprepared to perform
the customary rites. These rites were the shooting of arrows and the
beating of drums, gongs, etc., with the object of delivering the Sun
from the monster which threatened to devour it. The two astronomers by
virtue of their office should have superintended these rites. They were,
however, drunk and incapable of performing their duties, so that great
turmoil ensued, and it was considered that the land was exposed to the
anger of the gods. By way of appeasing the gods, and of suitably
punishing the two State officials for their neglect and personal
misconduct, they were forthwith put to death, a punishment which may be
said to have been somewhat excessive, in view of the fact that the
eclipse was not a total but only a partial one. An anonymous verse
runs:--
Here lie the bodies of Ho and Hi,
Whose fate though sad was visible--
Being hanged because they could not spy
Th' eclipse which was invisible.
It appears beyond all reasonable doubt that the eclipse in question
occurred on October 22, 2136 B.C. The preliminary difficulties to be
got over in arriving at the date arose from the fact that there was an
uncertainty of 108 years in the date when the Emperor Chung-K'ang
ascended the throne; and within these limits of time there were 14
possible years in which an eclipse of the Sun in Fang could have
occurred. Then the number was further limited by the necessity of
finding an eclipse which could have been seen at the place which was the
Emperor's capital. The site of this, again, was a matter of some
uncertainty. However, step by step, by a judicious process of
exhaustion, the year 2136 B.C. was arrived at as the alternative to the
previously received date of 2128 B.C. Considering that we are dealing
with a matter which happened full 4000 years ago, it may fairly be said
that this discrepancy is not perhaps much to be wondered at, seeing what
disputes often happen nowadays as to the precise date of events which
may have occurred but a few years or even a few months before the
controversy springs up.
Professor Russell says that:--"Some admirers of the Chinese cite this
eclipse as a proof of the early proficiency attained by the Chinese in
astronomical calculations. I find no ground for that belief in the text.
Indeed, for many centuries later, the Chinese were unable to predict the
position of the Sun accurately among the stars. They relied wholly on
observation to settle their calendar, year by year, and seem to have
drawn no conclusions or deductions from their observations. Their
calendar was continually falling into confusion. Even at the beginning
of this dynasty, when the Jesuits came to China, the Chinese
astronomers were unable to calculate accurately the length of the shadow
of the Sun at the equinoxes and solstices. It seems to me therefore very
improbable that they could have been able to calculate and predict
eclipses."
I am not at all sure that this is quite a fair presentation of the case.
I do not remember ever to have seen the power to predict eclipses
ascribed to the Chinese, but it is a simple matter of fact that we owe
to them during many centuries unique records of a vast number of
celestial phenomena. Their observations of comets may be singled out as
having been of inestimable value to various 19th-century computers,
especially E. Biot and J. R. Hind.
The second recorded eclipse of the Sun would seem to be also due to the
Chinese. Confucius relates that during the reign of the Emperor Yew-Wang
an eclipse took place. This Emperor reigned between 781 B.C. and 771
B.C., and it has been generally thought that the eclipse of 775 B.C. is
the one referred to, but Johnson doubts this on the ground that this
eclipse was chiefly visible in the circumpolar regions, and if seen at
all in China must have been of very small dimensions. He leans to the
eclipse of June 4, 780 B.C. as the only large one which happened within
the limits of time stated above.
An ancient Chinese historical work, known as the _Chun-Tsew_, written by
Confucius, makes mention of a large number of solar eclipses which
occurred before the Christian Era. This work came under the notice of M.
Gaubil, one of the French Jesuit missionaries who laboured in China
some century and a half ago, and he first gave an account of it in his
_Traité de la Chronologie Chinoise_, published at Paris in 1770.[21]
The _Chun-Tsew_ is said to be the only work really written by
Kung-Foo-Tze, commonly known as Confucius, the other treatises
attributed to him having been compiled by disciples of his either during
his life-time or after his decease. The German chronologist, Ideler, was
acquainted with this work, and in a paper of his own, presented to the
Berlin Academy, remarked:--"What gives great interest to this work is the
account of 36 solar eclipses observed in China, the first of which was
on Feb. 22, 720 B.C., and the last on July 22, 495 B.C."
In 1863 Mr. John Williams, then Assistant Secretary of the Royal
Astronomical Society, communicated to the Society in a condensed form
the particulars of these eclipses as related in Confucius's book,
together with some remarks on the book itself. The _Chun-Tsew_ treats of
a part of the history of the confederated nations into which China was
divided during the Chow Dynasty, that is between 1122 B.C. and 255 B.C.
The particular period dealt with is that which extended from 722 B.C. to
479 B.C. It was during the latter part of this interval of about 242
years that Confucius flourished. But the book is not quite a general
history for it is more particularly devoted to the small State of Loo
of which Confucius was a native, where he passed a great portion of his
life, and where he was advanced to the highest honours. It contains the
history of twelve princes of this State with incidental notices of the
other confederated nations. The number of the years of each reign is
accurately determined, and the events are classed under the years in
which they occurred. Each year is divided into sections according to the
four seasons, Spring, Summer, Autumn, Winter, and the sections are
subdivided into months, and often the days are distinguished. The name
_Chun-Tsew_ is said to have been given to this work from its having been
commenced in Spring and finished in Autumn, but Williams thinks that the
name rather refers to the fact that its contents are divided into
seasons as stated. The style in which it is written is very concise,
being a bare mention of facts without comment, and although on this
account it might appear to us dry and uninteresting, it is much valued
by the Chinese as a model of the ancient style of writing. It forms one
of the _Woo-King_ or Five Classical Books, without a thorough knowledge
of which, and of the _Sze-Shoo_ or Four Books, no man can attain to any
post of importance in the Chinese Empire.
The account of each eclipse is but little more than a brief mention of
its occurrence at a certain time. The following is an example of the
entries:--"In the 58th year of the 32nd cycle in the 51st year of the
Emperor King-Wang, of the Chow Dynasty, the 3rd year of Yin-Kung, Prince
of Loo, in the spring, the second moon, on the day called Kea-Tsze,
there was an eclipse of the Sun." This 58th year of the 32nd cycle
answers to 720 B.C. Mr. Williams in the year 1863 presented to the Royal
Astronomical Society a paper setting out the whole of the eclipses of
which I have cited but one example, converting, of course, the very
complicated Chinese dates into European dates.
These Chinese records of eclipses were in 1864 subjected to examination
by the late Sir G. B. Airy,[22] with results which were highly
noteworthy, and justify us in reposing much confidence in Chinese
astronomical work. Airy remarks:--"The period through which these
eclipses extend is included in the time through which calculations of
eclipses have been made in the French work entitled _L'Art de vérifier
les Dates_. I have several times had occasion to recalculate with great
accuracy eclipses which are noted in that work (edition of 1820), and I
have found that, to the limits of accuracy to which it pretends, and
which are abundantly sufficient for the present purpose, it is perfectly
trustworthy. I have therefore made a comparison of the _Chun-Tsew_
eclipses with those of _L'Art de vérifier les Dates_. The result is
interesting. Of the 36 eclipses, 32 agree with those of the _Art de
vérifier les Dates_, not only in the day, but also in the general track
of the eclipse as given in the _Art de vérifier_, which appears to show
sufficiently that the eclipse would be visible in that province of China
to which the _Chun-Tsew_ is referred." Airy then proceeds to point out
that, with regard to the four eclipses which he could not confirm, there
cannot have been eclipses in April 645 B.C. or in June 592 B.C. It
appears, however, from a note by Williams, that the date attached to the
eclipse of 645 B.C. is, in reality, an erroneous repetition (in the
Chinese mode of expressing it) of that attached to the next following
one, and in the absence of correct date it must be rejected. In the
record of 592 B.C., June 16, no clerical error is found, and there must
be an error of a different class. The eclipses of 552 B.C., September
19, and 549 B.C., July 18, to which there is nothing corresponding in
the _Art de vérifier_, are in a different category. These occur in the
lunations immediately succeeding 552 B.C., August 20, and 549 B.C., June
19, respectively, and there is no doubt that those which agree with the
_Art de vérifier_ were real eclipses. Now there cannot be eclipses
visible at the same place in successive lunations, because the
difference of the Moon's longitudes is about 29°, and the difference of
latitudes is therefore nearly 3°, which is greater than the sum of the
diameters of the Sun and Moon increased by any possible change of
parallax for the same place. These, therefore, were not real eclipses.
It seems probable that the nominal days were set down by the observer in
his memorandum book as days on which eclipses were to be looked for.
Airy conjectured that the eclipses of 552 B.C., August 20, and 549 B.C.,
June 19, were observed by one and the same person, and that he possessed
science enough to make him connect the solar eclipses with the change
of the Moon, but not enough to give him any idea of the limitations to
the visibility of an eclipse.
On a subsequent occasion Mr. Williams laid before the Society a further
list of solar eclipses observed in China, and extending from 481 B.C. to
the Christian Era. He collected these from a Chinese historical work,
entitled _Tung-Keen-Kang-Muh_. This work, which runs to 101 volumes,
contains a summary of Chinese history from the earliest times to the end
of the Yuen Dynasty, A.D. 1368, and was first published about 1473. The
copy in Mr. Williams's possession was published in 1808. The text is
very briefly worded, and consists merely of an account of the accessions
and deaths of the emperors and of the rulers of the minor states, with
some of the more remarkable occurrences in each reign. The appointments
and deaths of various eminent personages are also noticed, together with
special calamities such as earthquakes, inundations, storms, etc. The
astronomical allusions include eclipses and comets. Amongst the eclipses
are also all, or most of those which are recorded in the _Chun-Tsew_ as
having occurred prior to 479 B.C. Though no particular expressions are
used to define the exact character of the eclipses, it is to be presumed
that some of them must have been total, because it is stated that the
stars were visible, albeit that seemingly in only one instance is a word
attached which specifically expresses the idea of totality. Here again
all the dates were expressed in Chinese style, but, as published by
Williams, were rendered, as before, in European style by aid of
chronological tables, published about 1860 in Japan. Mr. Williams, in
his second paper, from which I have been quoting, states that he brought
his published account down to the Christian Era only as a matter of
convenience, but that he had in hand a further selection of eclipses
from the _Tung-Keen-Kang-Muh_, the interval from the Christian Era to
the 4th century A.D. yielding nearly 100 additional eclipses. This
further transcript has not yet been published, but remains in MS. in the
Library of the Royal Astronomical Society. Mr. Williams died in 1874 at
the age of 77, one of the most experienced Chinese scholars of the
century.
It is remarkable that none of the Chinese annals to which reference has
been made include any mention of eclipses of the Moon; but the records
of Comets are exceedingly numerous and, as I have already stated, have
proved of the highest value to astronomers who have been called upon to
investigate the ancient history of Comets.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 19: _Memoirs_, R.A.S., vol. xi. p. 47.]
[Footnote 20: Republished in the _Observatory_ Magazine, vol. xviii.
p. 323, _et seq._, 1895.]
[Footnote 21: A good deal of information respecting Chinese eclipse
records, so far as known up to the beginning of the 19th-century,
will be found in Delambre's _Histoire de l'Astronomie Ancienne_.
Paris, 1817.]
[Footnote 22: _Month. Not._, R.A.S., vol. xxiv. p. 41.]