Egy érdekesebb szegmens, valószínű meg is érted, ha elolvasod;
125 CE lunar eclipse; 125-04-05; BM 45745 or LBAT 429; The dating is clearly Arsaces 175, which is equal to the SE 239 year. The back calculation of the LSS – 53 is not perfect (wrong)! (Traditional BC 136-03-31)
125 CE lunar eclipse; 125-04-05; of Ptolemy; “In the ninth year of Hadrian, Pachon 17/18; Delta T = 10350 sec…”; (F. Richard Stephenson, p. 372) Delta T according Robert R. Newton 2.53 h…) misidentification, see below; lunar eclipse 321-03-30
125 CE solar eclipse; 125-04-21; BM 45745 or LBAT 429; The dating is clearly Arsaces 175, which is equal to the SE 239 year. The back calculation SSS – 79 is not accurate. ERC is about 1000 sec. (Traditional BC 136-04-15)
130 CE lunar eclipse; 130-01-12; Clay tablet LBAT 1448; The back calculation of the LSS – 65 is not perfect (wrong)! (Traditional BC 67-01-19)
131 CE lunar eclipse; 131-12-21; Clay tablet LBAT 1450; The back calculation of the LSS – 85 is not perfect (wrong)! (Traditional BC 66-12-29)
133 CE lunar eclipse; 133-05-06; of Ptolemy. ”In the seventeenth year of Hadrian, Pauni 20/21…” Delta T = 1.83 h (Robert R. Newton, AAO p. 228) misidentification, see below; lunar eclipse 329-04-30
134 CE solar eclipse; 134-04-12; Clay tablet BM 34753 and LBAT 520; (SH III p. 512-5) The back calculation of the SSS – 60 is not perfect (wrong)! (Traditional BC 63-05-18)
134 CE lunar eclipse; 134-10-20; of Ptolemy. “In the nineteenth of Hadrian, Choiak 2/3…” Delta T = 2.21h (Robert R. Newton, AAO p. 228) misidentification, see below; lunar eclipse 330-10-13
136 CE lunar eclipse; 136-03-06; of Cicero. (Ginzel 30) The back calculation of the LSS – 54 is not perfect (wrong)! (Traditional BC 63-05-03)
136 CE lunar eclipse; 136-03-06; of Ptolemy. “In the twentieth year of Hadrian, Pharmouthi 19/20…” Delta T = 1.58h (Robert R. Newton, AAO p. 228) misidentification, see below; lunar eclipse 332-02-28
138 CE solar eclipse; 138-01-28; of Julius Obsequens c. 62 (Ginzel 29/2); The back calculation of the SSS – 62 is not perfect (wrong)! (Traditional BC 60-03-16)
145 CE solar eclipse; 14-09-04; of Dio Cassius/Caesar (Ginzel 31/1); The back calculation of the SSS – 66 is not perfect (wrong)! (Traditional BC 51-03-07)
151 CE Julian calendrical reforms; “Year of Confusion,”
152 CE The starting year of the Julian calendar; (Traditional BC 45)
153 CE solar eclipse; 153-04-11; “Death of Caesar”; (G. 31/2); The back calculation of the SSS – 70 is not perfect (wrong)! (Traditional BC 44)
154 CE Octavianus, Antonius and Lepidus, the proconsul of Gallia made the second triumvirate. (Traditional BC 43)
164 CE sol. ecl.; 164-09-04; “The year of Poplicola and Nerva.” (Chronicon Paschale, BC 36)) The back calculation of the SSS – 76 is not accurate.
164 CE solar eclipse; 164-09-04; of Sosigenes; (Schove, p. 28) misidentification, see below; solar eclipse 359-03-15
166 CE Roman convoy reached the Chinese capital Luoyang. (In the 9th year of Jen-hi period of Hau Huan-ti emperor). The convoy was sent by An-tun [Antonius], the Roman emperor…
168 CE solar eclipse; 168-12-17; of Chronicon Paschale, BC 31); The SSS – 83 is not accurate. ERC ~ 2 h
178 CE solar eclipse; 178-11-27; China/Luoyang; “Emperor Ling of Han, 1st year of the Guanghe reign period, 10th month, day bingzi, the last day of the month. There was an eclipse of the Sun; at 4 du in JI” (EAST ASIAN ARCHAEOASTRONOMY, p. 34) The back calculation of the SSS – 74 is not perfect (wrong)!
186 CE solar eclipse; 186-12-28; “at Rome in the reign of Commodus…A comet appeared.” (Ginzel 42 and Schove, p. 29-30); misidentification, see below; solar eclipse 386-04-15
191 CE The beginning of the Christian chronology Traditional BC8/BC6 or AD 1…
193 CE solar eclipse; 193-02-19; China/Luoyang; “Emperor Xian of Han, 4th year of the Chuping reign period, 1st month, day jiayin, the first day of the month. There was an eclipse of the Sun at du in YINGSHI. a Yuan hong ji annotation reads; the eclipse was at 1 mark in the hour of fu [LT = 15-17h].” (EAST ASIAN ARCHAEOASTRONOMY, p. 34) The back calculation of the SSS – 72 is not perfect (wrong)!
194 CE The hypothetical year of the birth of Jesus Christ. (Traditional BC 5/3)
195 CE lunar eclipse; 195-01-13; of Herod the Great; (Ginzel 32); The back calculation of the LSS – 66 is not perfect (wrong)! Traditional (BC 4-03-13)
197 CE solar eclipse; 197-06-03; of Dio Cassius/L. Cornelius Lentulus (Ginzel 33). The back calculation of the SSS – 79 is not accurate. (Traditional AD 5)
197 CE solar eclipse; 197-06-03; FALSE DATE FOR THE ECLIPSE OF TERTULLIAN; (Schove, p. 30) misidentification, see below; solar eclipse 393-11-20
212 CE solar eclipse; 212-08-14; “Death of August in Nola.” (Ginzel 34); The back calculation of the SSS – 87 is not accurate. (Traditional AD 14/17)
213 CE lunar eclipse; 213-01-24; of Tiberius, (Ginzel 34); The back calculation of the LSS – 66 is not perfect (wrong)! Traditional AD 14-09-27
218 CE solar eclipse; 418-07-19; of Macrinus…the comet was seen…” (Ginzel 44, Schove, p. 36); misidentification, see below; solar eclipse 418-07-19
221 CE solar eclipse; 221-08-05; China/Luoyang; “Emperor Wen of Wei, 2nd year of the Huangchu reign period, 6th month, day wuchen, the last day of the month. The Sun was eclipsed during the hour of wei [LT = 13-15h].” (EAST ASIAN ARCHAEOASTRONOMY, p. 34) The back calculation of the SSS – 68 is not perfect (wrong)!
221 CE lunar eclipse; 221-08-20; China; “Emperor Wen of Wei, 2nd year of the Huangchu reign period, 7th month, 15th day guiwei. While the Sun was at the hour of ren (LT =2h), the Moon was eclipsed at azimuth wei.” (EAA, p. 63) The back calculation of the LSS – 80 is not perfect (wrong)!
222 CE solar eclipse; 222-01-30; China/Luoyang; “Emperor Wen of Wei, 3rd year of the Huangchu reign period, 1st month, day bingyin, the first day of the month. The Sun was eclipsed a little past the hour of shen [LT = 15-17]” (EAA, p. 34). The back calculation of the SSS – 73 is not perfect (wrong)!
223 CE lunar eclipse; 223-01-04; China; “Emperor Wen of Wei, 3rd year of the Huangchu rein period, 11th month, 15th day yisi. While the Sun was at the hour of chou (LT =2h), the Moon was eclipsed at azimuth wei.” (EAA, p. 63) The back calculation of the LSS – 57 is not perfect (wrong)
223 CE solar eclipse; 223-01-19; China/Luoyang; “Emperor Wen of Wei, 3rd year of the Huangchu reign period, 11th month, day gengshen, the last day of the month. The Sun was eclipsed during the hours of wei [LT = 13-15h] and shen (LT = 15-17)” (EAA, p.35) The back calculation of the SSS – 83 is not accurate. ERC = 1.77 h
228 CE solar eclipse; 228-03-23; of Plegon, “CRUXIFIXION”; (Ginzel 35); The back calculation of the SSS – 62 is not perfect (wrong)! (Traditional AD 29-10-24)
228 CE lunar eclipse; 228-04-07; of Mark XV, “CRUXIFIXION; (Ginzel 36); The back calculation of the LSS – 74 is not perfect (wrong)! (Traditional AD 33-04-03)
240 CE solar eclipse; 240-08-05; of Dio Cassius/birthday of
