Re: Historical Events Database
I've been thinking about it some more, examining the comets, messing around with re-dating each apparition of Halley's and then correcting for each period from one Halley to another, and it's really strange. It's like a few years get added each period, but then in a couple of periods, a few years are dropped so by the time you get to 1 AD, there's only 22 years difference at that point. So it does not "accumulate" as AI pointed out, but I had to work through it year by year to "get it". When we get to our period of concern, there's only 13 years difference.
In any event, doing this ends up with the Chinese comet of 520 being actually dated to 536 which fits with Baillie's tree-ring thing. I notice that we only have shijing's entry for that one and Kronk's is much more interesting. I would prefer to replace all of the comet entries with the text from Kronk, if possible. Anyway, it says:
520 - Chinese texts report a "broom star" visible in this year which was to have been as bright as a flame and which was seen in the east. There is, however, a contradiction in the date. The Wei shu (572) says the comet was seen on 520 October 7, while the Sui shu (636) says the comet appeared on October 1. The comet was probably in the morning sky.
The Italian text Anonymous Valesianus (527) reports an object seen during 519 or 520. It is described as a "fearful star" and as "a star like a little torch." The object remained visible for 15 days and sxhibited a tail pointing westward.
Several Byzantine texts mention this comet. John Malalas' Chronicle (565) says, while discussing the beginning of the reign of emperor Justin I, "At the beginning of his reign there arose in the East a tremendous star, named a comet which sent out a beam pointing downwards. People called it Bearded and they were afraid." Malals said the emperor's reign began in 518. The Byzantine text Chronicon Paschale (628) says that in 519 "there rose on the far side in the east a fearsome star, called a comet, which had a beam issuing downwards; some called it bearded; and men were afraid." An almost identical statement place in the same year also appears in the Byzantine text Chronographia (813). {Obviously, Chronicon Paschale and Chronographia were copying from Malalas.}
This was probably the comet involved in the dust veil event which preceded the "END EVENT" by a number of years and could have involved fragments exploding in the atmosphere and/or volcanic eruptions. As it happens, there is another comet listed in 501 that probably belonged to 517, that would fit the comet seen at the beginning of the reign of Justin I.
The point is, I think, that some few years have been added to the chronology here and there, but what is mainly going on is the mis-dating of cosmic events and this is due to the adding of a few years here and there in the chronology by the ancient redactors who were trying to do a cover-up for religious reasons but did not feel entirely comfortable with deleting "God's actions" from the chronicles altogether. The cumulative copying errors and deliberate falsifications of historical events for "religious reasons" all add up, however.
501 - The Chinese text Nan shih (670) gives details of a couple of celestial objects detected early in 501. First, a "long tailed star" was seen on February 13. It is described as stretching across the heavens. A few pages later, it is noted that a "broom star" was seen on April 14 which also stretched across the heavens. J. Williams (1871) first suggested the two objects might be the same comet. Ho Peng Yoke (1962) listed the two objects separately, but also suggested they could be the same comet.
The Wen hsien t'ung k'ao (1308) is the only other text to mention this object. The February object, however, is referred to as a 'comet-like banner" and is said to have occurred on a 'jen-hsu day' in the second month of 501, which was not possible in that year.
The above sounds much more like what Malalas was describing for the beginning of the reign of Justin I which, based on my corrected comet dating, would have been 517, close enough to what Malalas said: 518 and also "at the beginning of his reign" which would have been early in the year (see the paper I attached some posts back about ancient regnal year dating.)
So, if this is the case, we have a comet directly associated with 536 (using comet dating to correct), and then there comes Halley in 543, erroneously dated by historical methods to 530.
Now, we have the issue of the item reported by Greg Bryant in his article:
The Dark Ages: Were They Darker Than We Imagined?: Universe, September 1999 issue. He writes:
Chinese historical records of AD 540 say : "Dragons fought in the pond of the K'uh o. They went westward....In the places they passed, all the trees were broken. "
If we add our 13 years for that period between Halley appearances (which is the difference between historical dating and retrocalculation), we arrive at 553 for the Chinese dragon event. That matches darn close with the date that was the last event recorded by the Chinese for 21 years: the comet of "539" with the corrected comet-dating: 552.
539 - C/539 W1 Closest to earth, 26 November 539
The Byzantine historian Procopius of Caesarea wrote "History of the Wars" around the mid-6th century. He said that in the 13th year of the reign of the emperor Justinian I "the comet appeared, at first about as long as a tall man, but later much larger. And the end of it was toward the west and its beginning toward the east, and it followed behind the sun itself. For the sun was in Capricorn and it was in Sagittarius. And some called it 'the swordfish' because it was of goodly length and very sharp at the point, and others called it 'the bearded star'; it was seen for more than forty days."
The Chinese texts Wei shu (572) and Sui shu (636) are the oldest Chinese texts to report this comet. They say a "broom star" was seen on 539 November 17. The comet appeared in Nan-Tou {Sagittarii}. The date and location indicate an evening observation, implying a UT of November 17.4. The comet was over 1' long and pointed toward the southeast. The Chinese texts add that its length gradually increased to over 10' and that it disappeared after it reached Lou {Arietis}. Unfortunately, there seems to be some confusion as to in which month this final observation was actually made. The texts give the day as "i-mao", but are ambiguous as to the month. Some researchers have assumed it was the 11th month which results in a date of December 1, while others have said it was the 1st month of the following year, which indicates a date of January 30. Finally, the Wei shu gives one more piece of information by noting the comet passed by Venus at a distance of about 3' around the end of November. Interestingly, this last observation has not always been included in the investigations of astronomers.
A.G. Pingre (1783) said the Venus passage occurred on 540 January 1, and that the comet was last seen on January 30. J.K. Burckhardt (1800) said the final observation occurred on December 1, and computed an orbit with a perihelion date of 539 October 21.1. J. Williams (1871) and Ho Peng Yoke (1962) also derived a final date of December 1 from the Chinese texts, but neither acknowledged the passage by Venus. I Hasegawa (1979) went back to the January 30 interpretation and computed an orbit with a perihelion date of 539 November 6. This orbit allows the comet to pass close to Venus on November 24. Finally, D. K. Yeomans (1991) said the comet was last seen on December 1.
Combining the accounts of Procopius and the Chinese would seem to solve the problem. As the comet was apparently rushing out of evening twilight when first seen by the Chinese on November 17, it is probably safe to assume the comet appeared in Europe around the same time. Procopius said the comet was seen for more than 40 days, and if 40 days is added to November 17, the resulting date is December 27. This information indicates that the January 30 date of the Chinese makes more sense than the date of December 1. The Chinese were careful observers, and it seems almost nothing got past them. Because of their astrological beliefs, once the Chinese saw a comet they tried to follow it until itw was no longer visible to the naked eye. The Europeans, on the other hand, usually only noticed comets that were exceptional, and seemed to stop observing them when they were no longer an impressive sight. If Procopius reported that this comet was visible more than 40 days, and if this is taken as an accurate statement, then it is doubtful the Chinese would have ceased to see the comet on December 1.
Unfortunately, as reasonable as the above argument might seem, it is not perfect. Hasegawa's orbit is given {in the book} and he accepted the final observation as January 30. If it is assumed that the comet was observed until it was too faint to be seen, the Author has estimated the absolute magnitude as 0.5. Assuming no abnormal changes in brightness, the comet should have been a naked-eye object during September and could have remained visible even in twiight until late October. It would then have been in the morning sky moving from Leo into Virgo. So the question arises, why was the comet not seen then?
Another account exists, but it provides no additional information to help solve the question above. The text Chronica Andraea Danduli (1280) says a comet was seen in Gaul. ...
So, if we have all that business going on in 552, then that means that THE EVENT must have been 553 and may have been related to this comet and its debris trail into which the Earth might have passed the following October. That is,
17 October 553, that the Chinese recorded as:
Dragons fought in the pond of the K'uh o. They went westward....In the places they passed, all the trees were broken.
And then, soon after, the pestilence struck and the Chinese went silent.
But the Dragons traveling westward began to break up in the sky and bombard Gaul, Italy, etc., a Shoemaker-Levy type event. And very shortly after that, pestilence beginning with cholera and finally "The Plague of Justinian" arriving from the East.
