Chronologies and Calendars/Chapter 12

by James C. MacDonald

Chapter XII.

Kindred Sciences.—Astronomy, History, and Paleography.

HAVING now reviewed the principal chronologies which have originated in the process of time, it will be well, before giving a summary of the volume in the following chapter, to devote several sections to the important subject of those kindred arts and sciences which have been, and are, most closely allied to chronology.

108. Taking them in their natural order, astronomy may claim attention in the first place. It is worthy of notice that, to 'the ancients, Saturn was the outermost planet of the system, nothing beyond it being known. Nor, indeed, was it to be assumed that any more could possibly exist, because Mercury, Venus, the Earth, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn, with the Sun, made seven celestial bodies of prime importance; and seven was the number of perfection.'^[1]

109. It is also an impressive fact, which Sir Robert Ball mentions, that 'the stars have been studied, and some great astronomical discoveries have been made, untold ages before those to which our earliest historical records extend.' In those practically pre-historic times, the motion of the moon was the primary, and the apparent progression of the sun, the secondary part of the enquiry. Thereafter, observations more complete were attempted, whereby planetary conjunctions, solar eclipses, and the visibility of comets came to have special reference to B.C. and A.D. events, Even now another authority assures us 'the Royal Observatory, at Greenwich, is beseiged, whenever Venus happens to shine brightly in the morning sky, by enquiries as to whether this is not the star of Bethlehem come once more.'

110. Quite recently, however, astronomers made intricate calculations in regard to the eve of the Advent conjunction of Venus with the planet Jupiter—the two brightest stars in the visible heavens. These two stars, astronomers averred, formed the compound temporary star which marked the Incarnation; and these two were actually in conjunction, the computations showed, on what we now call the 8th of May, B.C. 6.^[2] This abnormal conjunction, being to the west of the sun, would be therefore visible as one constellation in the east shortly before sunrise on the day in question. The logical conclusions therefore are, (a) that the star was not one star, (b) that the phenomenon was non-supernatural, and (c) that its being accessory before the fact of the nativity, was accidental. The coming of the Logos is not to create human chronology, but to re-create humanity.

111. The eclipse^[3] recorded as synchronous with the night of some of Herod's major atrocities, has been astronomically calculated (being a lunar eclipse) to have taken place on the 13th of our March, in the 4th year before the Christian era. But, as has been previously remarked, the whole chronology of Josephus is in a condition of suspended animation. There have been interpolations in his MSS. Even the adherents of the Jerusalem Talmud cannot gainsay the fact. How much more, then, must those who hold the Talmud as pro non scripto doubt the conclusions of both works.

112. But events much older than these have been fixed in a similar manner. Thus Sir Henry Rawlinson was able, from the occurrence of an eclipse of the sun, B.C. 763, to fix the order of the Assyrian dates indicated in, or arising from, the translation of ancient terra-cotta tablets. Again, the battle between the Median and Lydian kings long remained in history without any exact date, until Bailly, in the last century, calculated the solar eclipse which indirectly put an end to the battle; and he found that the date corresponded with our 30th September, 610 B.C.

113. Coming nearer modern times, the Norse invasion under Haco is mentioned in the Norwegian Chronicle as having taken place in one summer when 'a great darkness drew over the sun, so that only a small ring was bright round the orb.'^[4] Thus unconsciously, as Tytler points out, there is afforded to modern science the date for dating Haco's great expedition, and the needful calculations show that the time was 5th Aug., 1263.

114. Of course these and the former figures, it should be stated, are given on the chronological, not the astronomical, basis, for astronomers look upon the solar year next immediately preceding our era as 0, and the year before that as 1, so that B.C. 1 to chronologers is equal to B.C. 0 among astronomers. This peculiarity will often meet difficulties as to dates, at least such dates as are commonly received by historians in connecting pre and post Advent events.

115. Passing from stars to comets, it must be admitted that the want of precise regularity renders them of less account. Still the years in which they have been specially prevalent, or in which a notable one has recurred, are known as the 'Comet Years,' and it is not uncommon to hear observant folk refer to some event—its years having escaped them—as having taken place in the year, say Hally's comet, or of Donati's comet. 'It may be taken as a fact (though in no proper sense a rule) that a bright and conspicuous comet comes about once in ten years, and a very remarkable comet every thirty years. Thus we have had during the present century bright comets in 1811, 1825, 1835, 1843, 1858, 1861, 1874, and 1882, whereof these of 1811, 1843, and 1858 were specially celebrated. Tested then by either standard of words, "bright and conspicuous," or "specially celebrated," it may be affirmed that a good comet is now due.'^[5] 'It is fortunate,' Sir John Herschell remarked, 'for astronomy that the confusion of dates and the irreconcilable contradictions which historical statements too often exhibit when confronted with the best knowledge we possess of the ancient reckonings of time, affect recorded observations but little. An astronomical observation of any striking and wellmarked phenomenon carries with it, in most cases, abundant means of recovering its exact date.'

116. The true place of astronomy in chronology is neither so high as that which Herschell claims for it, nor so insignificant as to be neglected with safety; but midway between these two points. Chronology, without the aid of astronomy, is only an abstract science; and astronomy, severed from history or from chronology, reveals records of phenomena which are cabilistic and useless. On the ground therefore, of utility alone, the two sciences are well and appropriately yoked together, as the examples mentioned prove.

117. The position of chronology as at the Middle Ages has been tersely put by the learned compilers of Le Grand Dictionnairé Universel. 'Chronology,'^[6] they declare, 'as a science was till then (Scaliger's time, 16th century,) unknown. People wrote ancient history without any criterion, copying the dates, as everything else, from the authorities immediately under their notice, without so much as troubling themselves to reconcile the differences in these records, or indicating principles upon which the counting of years should be placed.' And who can tell what erroneous conclusions, founded upon errors in dates, have arisen and flourished?

118. It is noteworthy that the 'Father of History' as a title arose from the researches of Herodotus, who flourished in the fifth century B.C. In other words, his having existed would be as substantial to Julius Cæsar as the historic verity of the Julian calendar was to Dionysius the Little, when he invented the Christian era. Herodotus^[7] opens his treatise in a manner worthy of all commendation, 'This is the publication,' the rubric runs, 'of the researches of Herodotus of Halicarnassus, in order that the actions of men may not be effaced by time.' But when he slips into chronology, one is amazed to find that he approves of the data of Solon, who had 'put the terms of man's life at 70 years; these 70 years then gave 25,200 days, without including the intercalary month, and if we add that month^[8] to every other year in order that the seasons arriving at the proper time may agree, the intercalary months will be 35 more in the 70 years, and the days of these months will be 1,050.'

119. This method of calculating time is just another instance of how wayward would be all history without chronology. And yet what do we find? Chroniclers in every country in its infancy have devoted themselves to the task of spinning out fables, and passing these to posterity as immaculate records. I do not say that history, and accurate history, cannot be written without a chronological basis, but I do affirm that the neglect of chronology has plunged many histories otherwise meritorious into much confusion as to the origin, potency, and extinction of epochs.

120. Scaliger^[9] is known as the father of chronology. He lived and died before the science of paleography was thought of. Paleography is likewise of assistance in Chronology, and is the science of deciphering, writings, especially those of ancient times, and of deciding upon their age, their authenticity, and present value. It is sometimes known as diplomatics. These three sentences will suffice to show that the great Scaliger must have wrought under serious disadvantages.^[10]

121. In this science—so helpful towards accuracy in chronology—France led the way, in 1681, with Mabillon's de re Diplomatica; and in Scotland a treatise appeared in 1739. Thereafter Greece, Italy, and Germany were severally the objects of paleographic research; and in 1803 a similar service was performed for England, It was not, however, till 1873 that a Paleographical Society was formed in London.

122. Nowadays writings are placed under one or two classes, viz., genuine or spurious. Thus, a writing is spurious if it is not the production of the person whose name it claimed as author, or, when anonymous, it is held to be spurious if it has not sprang from the time and place of pretended origin, Again, any writing is genuine which is really the work of the author thereof, or whose name belongs to the period and place alleged for the first appearance of the MS.

123. Paleography is not specially concerned with the ethics revealed, but tells us the genuine from the spurious in writings on sun-dried bricks, oyster shells, slabs, tiles, papyri, parchment, medals, bones, coins, metals, paper, ivory, bark, leather, lead, wood, or other substance used for recording the thoughts of mankind. The necessity at the moment, or the ingenuity of man, has often shown itself by the strangest methods of chronicling events.^[11]

124. Chronology, when founded on paleography, becomes a more exact science; and, consequently, the elaborate tables of dates which in the last century were looked upon as perfectly accurate, have been relegated to the limbo of the effete. A copy—perhaps a copy of a tenth copy—of a writing was too often regarded as the original, and dateless documents were accorded a startling antiquity.^[12]The paleographist, perusing,^[13] observe, however, that the

	WRITINGS IN	KNOWS THEY ARE	OF THE
1	Hieroglyphics	Egyptian	IX. to XXI. dynasties: the best about 3000 B.C.
2	Cuneiform	Assyrian or Persian	200 to 230 B.C.
3	Sanskrit	Ancient Indian	To about 300 B.C.
4	Uncials	Hebrew, Latin, Grecian	1 to 800 A.D.
5	Cursive	The same, or Saxon	From 900 A.D.

earliest uncial of precise date is found in the record of sale by Didymus and his wife to Miccalus of a date in the first century, now specified 3rd June, 88 A.D. (British Museum MSS., Case A, No. 6), the A.R. (7th) of Domition being given.

125. In regard to printing, it is important to bear in mind that in 593 A.D. the Chinese Emperor Wan-ti ordered a collection of the syllabic texts with the view to their being officially printed; but there was no great use of printing in China until the tenth century of the Christian era.

126. Printing in Europe was, however, much later; and the following table shows the Western progress of the art:—

At Mentz (Mayence) a printing press was set up in 1454
At„ Mentz (Mayence)Rome a printing press„ was set„ up in 1467
At„ Mentz (Mayence)Paris a printing press„ was set„ up in 1470
At„ Mentz (Mayence)Westminster a printing press„ was set„ up in 1477
At„ Mentz (Mayence)Edinburgh a printing press„ was set„ up in 1507
At„ Mentz (Mayence)Wilna (Russia) a printing press„ was set„ up in 1525
At„ Mentz (Mayence)Dublin a printing press„ was set„ up in 1551^[14]

There is no doubt that the invention of printing was opportune, and was most favourable to progress in chronology. It stood ready at the behest of such masters as Scaliger and Gregory, and their efforts in this connection acquired a speedy publicity which, under a merely manuscript mode of promulgation, would have been slow, partial, and not so accurately done. But it was when printing gave us the daily press that it did the chief service to chronology. Every newspaper is headed with the day, month, and year, according to the different eras in vogue in different nations.

127. The water-marks in paper—naming the mill and giving the year—are further modern means of preventing the spurious from being palmed off as genuine. And the stamp laws (requiring embossed stamps for deeds) have been of special service for detecting fabricated dates.

1. Solar System, p, 148.
2. Compare section 114 supra as to difference in astronomical and chronological calculations of B.C. years.
3. Mentioned by Josephus, p. 469, Whiston. The precise date is claimed to be March 13th, 4710, of the Julian era.
4. Tytler, vol. i, p. 11.
5. Solar System, p. 163.
6. Grand Dictionnaire, under chronologie.
7. Cary's Translation.
8. If the first number 25,200 was correct, it follows that the year was 360 days; if the number of intercalary days 1050 in seventy years, there will he altogether , which will give 375 days to the year, so that in spite of the precaution the seasons will become confused.
9. He lived between 1540 and 1609.
10. He invented the Julian cycle. See section 55 supra.
11. Specimens of writings on all the substances mentioned are in the British Museum.
12. A writing was once foisted upon the public as being of the tenth century. Externally it seemed to be valid, but the little pronoun ‘its’ occurred on the text, and modern paleography rightly held the document to be spurious, for this pronoun is a post—Restoration one.
13. This list, compiled by myself, does not pretend to be exhaustive.
14. The dates are as given by the British Museum authorities.