From: Tak To <takto@alum.mit.edu.->
Subject: re: Calendar (Re: Caucasoid Turks/Bulgars)
Date: 24 Mar 1999 00:00:00 GMT
Message-ID: <36F92889.C8987948@alum.mit.edu.->
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: <369E3BE1.5C45@sbu.ac.uk> <77li2j$qi0$1@whisper.globalserve.net> <369F52FE.2B6@sbu.ac.uk> <77rc86$auj$1@brokaw.wa.com> <36A444B3.F3B70F1C@alum.mit.edu.-> <7827sb$269$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <36A52D70.9E372DD2@alum.mit.edu.-> <36A556AB.9927BD29@montclair.edu> <36a63533.58309714@news.yale.edu> <7866ud$i9m$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <36cdb21e.883120019@news.wxs.nl> <36A7FCC8.79790A6B@earthlink.net> <36d77e23.1000882888@news.wxs.nl> <36a8d455.81661202@news.yale.edu> <78pl3c$84o@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <36b0dc2f.3434839@news.yale.edu> <78v30o$vl6@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <36b34d7c.60430113@news.yale.edu> <794e84$4iq@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <3744d12a.1873763068@news.wxs.nl> <796m95$eq2@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <375c0ea6.1954957123@news.wxs.nl> <79fo99$qkl@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <36f597c8.18429910@news.yale.edu> <7d546l$1ev@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> <36f85cea.1078314464@news.yale.edu>
X-Accept-Language: zh,zh-CN,zh-TW,ja
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net
X-Trace: news.rdc1.nj.home.com 922298549 24.3.176.102 (Wed, 24 Mar 1999 10:02:29 PDT)
Organization: @Home Network
MIME-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 10:02:29 PDT
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology,sci.anthropology,sci.lang

Cluster User wrote:
CU> [...]
CU> I assume that the apparent poistion of jupiter does too. now it
CU> would indeed be unreasonable to expect their calenders to be
CU> following the apparent position of jupiter two millenia
CU> *later*. the chinese calender still continues because people
CU> have forgotten about it, just as contemporary (I can't call it
CU> "modern") horoscopes depend on the apparent position of the sun
CU> in babylonian times (such things like the "age of aquarius"
CU> refer to the precession phenomenon).

Uh?? I have not been following this thread and I am confused.
Does the above says that the Chinese calendar is (still) based
on the movement of Jupiter?  Well, it is not.

CU> [...]
CU> apparently the new year starts when the sun enters pisces.
CU> thus the calender is siderial (i.e. dependant on the zodiac).
CU> one has to take into account precession as well as the orbital
CU> motion of the earth. this is the chinese calendar as well and
CU> apparently the chinese were celebrating the new year based
CU> upon the sun's entry into pisces since 260 BCE (this does not
CU> seem to be the current practice of "chinese new year, vietnamese
CU> "tet" etc., I'll have to clear up this point). I assume that
CU> this was based upon the fact that the vernal equinox, the
CU> beginning of spring was in pisces at the time, as it still is.

Uh? At vernal equinox 260 BCE, the sun should be in the
constellation of Aries.

The Chinese lunisolar calendar is not based on the constellations
but on 24 solar terms (<jie2qi4> big5:節氣）, of which the solstices
and equinoxes are 4.  (Does this make the Chinese calendar sideral?)
Although the definition of the new year varies throughout history,
it is always in the form of "three months before vernal equinox"
or "two months after winter solstice", etc.  As such, the Chinese
new year is not "affected" by the zodiac precession.

CU> I am however partially taking back my comment about precession.
CU> this calender would not be affected by precession, but the
CU> luni-solar calendars of the near-east would.

Vassil Karloukovski wrote:
VK> [...]
VK> [The starting year of the bulgar calendar was also probably was
VK> that of somor (mouse), as the turkic s@chkan and the chinese
VK> shu were, and they correspond to [...]

CU> the starting year of chinese calendars (at least civil ones)
CU> was simply the year corresponding to the beginning of the
CU> emperor's reign.  the animal cycle provided continuity. this
CU> may be the bulghar calendar as well, based upon the way the
CU> nominalia is worded.

I think it would be clearer to say that the Chinese year has
two sets of nomenclature: a civil one which comprises a sequential
number following a "reign name" chosen by the Emperor/government;
as well as an astrological one which has a 60 year cycle.  The
Emperor can change the "reign name" at any time.

The astrological name is in the form of <T><D>, where <T> is
one of the 10 <tian1gan1> (big5:天干) or celestial stems, and
<D> is one of the 12 <di4zhi1> (big5:地支) or earthly branches.
Note that in China, the usage of the 12 animals associated with
<di4zhi1> for calendrical references was much less wide spread
than among the Tibetans and Altaic cultures.  (Actually, I have
always been bothered by the supposed Sinitic origin of the 12
animal cycle.)
 
VK> [...]
VK> And in the chinese variant of the saka calendar the year of
VK> 2637 BC was taken as the starting point of the cyclic chronology
VK> (it was connected with the legendary emperor Cin Shi-Huandi).

Uh? <Qin2 shi3huang2di4> (big5:п宎銘著) or The First Emperor
of <Qin1> did not rule until third century BCE.  In any case, the
date of 2637 BCE IMHO is probably not a reliable historical fact
but only a wishful thinking of later calendar designers.

Tak
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tak To                                            takto@alum.mit.edu.-
--------------------------------------------------------------------^^
[taode takto ~{LU5B~}]       NB: trim the .- to get my real email addr