Japanese Chronological Tables

[Ross Bender]

Over the years there have been many attempts at producing accurate Japanese Chronological Tables for translating dates in the traditional calendar to Julian and Gregorian dates. The earliest I can find is that of Ernest Mason Satow, (Yedo 1874), now reproduced in a Nabu public domain edition. Next is that of William Bramsen (Tokio 1880), reproduced by University of Michigan. These are of historical interest, but not for practical use.

Paul Yachita Tsuchihashi, S.J. (Sophia University, 1952)  is what I have used since I first acquired it in 1973. Apparently there are more recent editions, although I'm not sure whether these are actual new editions or merely newer reprints.

Now there is one titled "New Japanese Chronological Tables" by Piero Corradini (Rome, 2007 - www.aracneeditrice.it), which I bought through Amazon. Corradini cites a number of websites, many of which either no longer exist or were misspelled, including one from Tuebingen University, which was inaccessible. Those that are available, such as that on Wikipedia, are simply lists of era names, with approximate Western dates. He cites R. Zoellner, Japanishe Zeitrechnung -- Ein Handbuch (Munich 2003). I have not yet had a look at this, and may not bother, since Corradini says "the calculation to find the correspondence of a day is very hard and complicate. [sic] Therefore they are not easy to use."

Corradini rightly criticizes Tsuchihashi's tables since "they do not take into account the above mentioned fact that the year-name was changed during, and not at the beginning, of a solilunar year."

However, oddly enough, Corradini does not follow Tsuchihashi in designating the short (29-day) and long (30-day) months.  Tsuchihashi uses gothic type to mark the long months, and roman type to mark the short. 

I compared Corradini with Tsuchihashi for the years 748--752 ( roughly, Tempyou 19 -- Tenpyo Shouhou 3). Corradini is much better in showing at a glance that Tenpyou 19 was actually 747/748, Tenpyou 20 was 748/749, Tenpyou 21 was only the first four and a half months of 749, Tenpyou Kampou was only about 4 months of 749, Tenpyou Shouho 1 straddled 749/750, Tenpyou Shouho 2 straddled 750/751, Tenpyou Shouhou 3 straddled 751/752. Corradini is also careful to depict intercalary months with italics.

In this way Corradini is much clearer than Tsuchihashi. However, in his table for 748/749 alone there is one glaring typo, showing the 4th month of Tenpyou 20 beginning on May 2, 748 [Julian] and the 5th month on May1, 748 -- (should be June 1, as in Tsuchihashi.)

Corradini thus has many advantages, but I still find it necessary to keep Tsuchihashi at hand for quick reference to long and short months, and to cross-reference for errors. 

And, in fact, to get accurate conversions to Julian dates, as for example in my translation of Shoku Nihongi -- Tenpyou Shouho 1 (PMJS Papers), I found it necessary to construct my own spreadsheet for easy reference. 

While Corradini does cite the Sakuin seiji keizai dainenpyou, Toyou Keizai Shinposha (Tokyo 1971), this is a four volume work and not necessarily a quick check.

What I really desire is a prepared spreadsheet showing the corresponding dates (eg TPSH 2.1.10 = February 20, 750 Julian) for every possible date. If anyone out there knows of one and is willing to share, or could give tips on a way to more easily construct my own, I would be most grateful.

Ross Bender

http://rossbender.org/japan.html

[David Spafford]

Dear Ross,

I have always used Uchida Masao's Nihon rekijitsu genten (Yūzankaku, 1975). I think it does all the things you mention you need. I don't have it in front of me, but I'm pretty sure it takes into account when, during the year, each new era began.

Best,

-David

David Spafford
Assistant Professor
East Asian Languages & Civilizations

University of Pennsylvania
847 Williams Hall
255 S 36th Street
Philadelphia, PA  19104-6305

--
You are subscribed to PMJS: Premodern Japanese Studies.
To post to the list, send email to pm...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe, send email to pmjs+uns...@googlegroups.com
Visit the PMJS web site at www.pmjs.org
Contact the group administrator at edi...@pmjs.org

[Kristina Troost, Ph.D.]

The Tuebingen site has moved: http://www.yukikurete.de/nengo_calc.htm

This site provides online and offline tools for the conversion of Japanese dates into their Western equivalents. The calculation is based on tables from Tsuchihashi and Zöllner. A short introduction to the pre-modern calendar system in Japan can be found here (text in German).

Kristina Troost

--

[Ross Bender]

Thank you, thank you. I knew that in this day and age such a tool must exist. And it's downloadable! Copyright by Matthias Schemm, 2006.

Ross Bender

[Joseph P. Elacqua]

The online resources I tend to use for calendar conversions are:
-- http://www2s.biglobe.ne.jp/~yochicaz/ (太陽暦を太陰暦へ(CGI))
-- http://authority.ddbc.edu.tw/time/

Unlike some, I prefer converting to the proleptic Gregorian calendar
rather than the Julian. The first site does both, so that makes it
very useful. Neither of these really delve much into BCE dates, but
for CE dates, I've yet to find any errors.

Thanks, everyone, for talking about other resources as well. I'll be
sure to look into them too. If anyone happens to have a handy
resource (especially electronic) for converting BCE lunar dates (think
India, China, etc.) to BCE Julian or proleptic Gregorian dates, please
let me know.

-- Joseph P. Elacqua

[Anatoliy Anshin]

There is a chronological table by Nojima Jusaburo, although it covers only the period from 1582 to 1872. Just in case:

 

野島寿三郎編『日本暦西暦月日対照表』、日外アソシエーツ、1987年。

 

 

Anatoliy Anshin

 

2012/8/31 Ross Bender <rosslyn...@gmail.com>

Ross Bender

http://rossbender.org/japan.html

--

[William Wetherall]

I've been using the following site for several years, also because it
gives Gregorian and Julian dates for all years.

http://maechan.net/kanreki/

It allows conversions in all directions -- at least for the Yamato
court. 慶長9年閏8月1日 or 慶長9-閏8-1 are examples of how to enter an
intercalary year. Dates correspond with those I have cross-checked with
interpolations using Tsuchihashi.

No accommodation of Chinese, Indian, Korean, or other calendars. It
handles 神武1-1-1 for those who wish to compute Gregorian BC (BCE) 紀元
前660年2月11日 (土曜日), the day it all began, but of course no 和暦
dates for 紀元前660年2月10日 or earlier. Apparently the Great Founder
was a true role model who worked weekends, before there were weeks much
less ends, not a time clock in sight between Takachiho and Yamato, and
eons before legendists gave him his most familiar name. "Jinmu who?" he
would have said.

Modern Koreanists take note that 南朝元号 and 北朝元号 on the "Maechan
kanreki" converter do not refer to the founding of ROK or DPRK, though
ROK once represented its establishment on 15 August 1948 as "Tan'gi 4281
nyon" (檀紀4281年) according to the now hybernating Tan'gun (檀君)
calendar.That's "Kigen 2608 nen" in the Yamato Jinmu 紀元節 scheme or
reckoning years.

Where are such national heroes when we most need them?

Bill Wetherall

[Peter Kornicki]

Am I missing something? I cannot understand the need to convert precise
Japanese dates into any other calendar EXCEPT to coordinate items of
documentary or epigraphic evidence relying on different calendrical
traditions (eg, Portuguese and Japanese in the 16th century, or Japanese
and Korean [small differences] in the 17th). It seems to me as pointless to
convert, say, an early Heian-period date to any European calendar as to
convert it to a Zoroastrian calendar. Japanese scholars of European
medieval history do not convert European dates into the Kamakura-period
equivalents: should we not simply be using the Japanese dates according to
the calendrical system that generated them, representing them in some such
form as Genroku 1[1688].4.7?

Peter Kornicki

On Aug 31 2012, Anatoliy Anshin wrote:

>There is a chronological table by Nojima Jusaburo, although it covers only
>the period from 1582 to 1872. Just in case:
>
>野島寿三郎編『日本暦西暦月日対照表』、日外アソシエーツ、1987年。
>
>
>Anatoliy Anshin
>
>
>
>2012/8/31 Ross Bender <rosslyn...@gmail.com>
>
>> Over the years there have been many attempts at producing accurate
>> Japanese Chronological Tables for translating dates in the traditional
>> calendar to Julian and Gregorian dates. The earliest I can find is that
>> of Ernest Mason Satow, (Yedo 1874), now reproduced in a Nabu public
>> domain edition. Next is that of William Bramsen (Tokio 1880), reproduced
>> by University of Michigan. These are of historical interest, but not for
>> practical use.
>>
>> Paul Yachita Tsuchihashi, S.J. (Sophia University, 1952) is what I have
>> used since I first acquired it in 1973. Apparently there are more recent
>> editions, although I'm not sure whether these are actual new editions or
>> merely newer reprints.
>>
>> Now there is one titled "New Japanese Chronological Tables" by Piero
>> Corradini (Rome, 2007 - www.aracneeditrice.it), which I bought through
>> Amazon. Corradini cites a number of websites, many of which either no
>> longer exist or were misspelled, including one from Tuebingen
>> University, which was inaccessible. Those that are available, such as
>> that on Wikipedia, are simply lists of era names, with approximate

>> Western dates. He cites R. Zoellner, *Japanishe Zeitrechnung -- Ein
>> Handbuch* (Munich 2003). I have not yet had a look at this, and may not

>> in my translation of *Shoku Nihongi -- Tenpyou Shouho* 1 (*PMJS Papers*),

>> I found it necessary to construct my own spreadsheet for easy reference.
>>

>> While Corradini does cite the *Sakuin seiji keizai dainenpyou*, Toyou

>> Keizai Shinposha (Tokyo 1971), this is a four volume work and not
>> necessarily a quick check.
>>
>> What I really desire is a prepared spreadsheet showing the corresponding
>> dates (eg TPSH 2.1.10 = February 20, 750 Julian) for every possible date.
>> If anyone out there knows of one and is willing to share, or could give
>> tips on a way to more easily construct my own, I would be most grateful.
>>
>>
>> Ross Bender
>> http://rossbender.org/japan.html
>>
>> --
>> You are subscribed to PMJS: Premodern Japanese Studies.
>> To post to the list, send email to pm...@googlegroups.com
>> To unsubscribe, send email to pmjs+uns...@googlegroups.com
>> Visit the PMJS web site at www.pmjs.org
>> Contact the group administrator at edi...@pmjs.org
>>
>
>

--
Peter Kornicki
Department of East Asian Studies
University of Cambridge
Sidgwick Avenue
Cambridge CB3 9DA
UK

[William Wetherall]

Scholars shouldn't need even parenthetic Gregorian (or Julian) years.
Just write Genroku 15-12-14. Genroku 15 is the 15th year of Genroku, and
12-14 is the 14th sun of its 12th moon. Since the spread the solar
calendar in the Meiji period, people have been celebrating that day's
fateful moonlit snowy night on 14 December. Most will recall it was a
Genroku year, some that it was Genroku 15. The TV guides today will
remind them if they've forgotten. But just in case, and in the spirit of
internationalization, one could write Genroku (1702) 12-14. Or Genroku
(1703) 12-14. Or perhaps Genroku (1702-1703) 12-14. Or maybe just get it
done with and write Genroku 15-12-14 (30 January 1703). It's that kind
of tradeoff -- between a predictably full moon and the possibility of
snow. It's also like telling kids the rabbit on the moon is actually on
the sun. It spoils the fun and creates a new kind of confusion.

Bill Wetherall

[Scheid, Bernhard]

The tool has been existing quite a while but has changed its location (link address) quite often, so be aware of further changes…

 

Best

 

Bernhard Scheid

[Lee Butler]

I too am rather bemused by the level of interest shown in converting Japanese dates into precise Julian and Gregorian equivalents.  However, I have found reason to think about the issue somewhat differently in recent years as the focus of my research has shifted, and I actually expect to include some equivalent dates in a forthcoming study, something I wouldn’t have considered for previous work.  Where my work focused on the imperial court, with life and ceremony tied so closely to the traditional calendar, it was of course imperative to provide the traditional dates, and there was no reason to add anything else.  However, I’m now working on an early sixteenth century village/community study and though the traditional dates certainly still matter where culture and ceremony are concerned, they don’t provide much help when I’m trying to chart days of planting, transplanting, and harvest, etc., for a given year.  In this case, I don’t care greatly about precision, but I do want a firm idea of the season.  Clearly where the climate and weather can affect history, whether in the lives of farmers or the actions of warriors, there is reason to know these dates. 

Lee Butler

[Joseph P. Elacqua]

Peter and Bill,

I've recently been interested in just seeing how traditional Japanese
dates translate to the Gregorian/proleptic Gregorian calendar because
isn't that the purpose of the unit called a "year"? To help us
categorize the events of the past according to standard units that
consist of 365.25 days? I'm sure that everyone here knows well how
lunar dates diverge strongly with Gregorian dates, so the lunar years
cannot simply be taken for granted. I feel that we should certainly
note what solar dates they convert to because otherwise, the concept
of a "year" as a categorical unit loses a good chunk of its meaning.
The year unit becomes an approximation rather than an accurate
estimate.

The Genroku 15 date mentioned is actually very appropriate because it
hinges on two solar years. Without conversion, how are we to know
exactly when it actually happened (that is, in relation to the system
we use now)? If someone were planning, say a 325th anniversary of the
event, then they might want to know to hold it in January rather than
in December. There was some point in history where BC/BCE was
invented to similarly categorize everything that happened prior to the
Common Era, so that it could all be handled on one mostly accurate
calendrical system, and I see the conversion of these dates as
contributing to this accuracy. This is all, of course, strictly my
own opinion, and it doesn't even have anything to do with
internalization. I also do NOT mean in any way to imply that we
should totally replace lunar dates with solar ones. Just that I think
posting both dates rather than just the lunar date is extremely
important. Of course, this isn't standard, but I'm starting to think
that it's a good thing to do.

I guess this all started for me when I sought to visit a certain place
in response to the anniversary of a certain historical figure's death.
He happened to have died in (lunar) November or December, and I
wasn't able to make it to the place in question until after that. I
was somewhat disappointed that I wasn't even able to be there sometime
during the correct year of this figure's anniversary. Only a few
years ago, I discovered that by solar reckoning, he actually died in
January of the following year. Despite thinking I had arrived "late,"
I happened to have been ironically right on time.

Just my own thoughts/rationale. I hope it helps.

-- Joseph P. Elacqua

[Ross Bender]

In translating Shoku Nihongi, which of course is a chronicle focused on the imperial court, I decided early on to convert dates. This was in part to remind myself that when the chronicle says "Spring, the first day", it might mean any number of things in the Julian calendar. Also, as Lee Butler says, it is useful in trying to chart days of planting and harvest, etc. Shoku Nihongi provides a rich record of drought, famine, harvest, etc. Just to give a quick example of how such data might be important to someone someday, look at Tables 7-9, pp. 53-55 in Wayne Farris' Daily Life and Demographics in Ancient Japan. Table 7 is "Famine Records, 670-110", Table 8 is "Famine Years, Their Extent and Causes, 1100-1500", Table 9 is "Climatological Trends, 700-1200" The data for the Nara period comes from Shoku Nihongi, and while Farris does not do date conversion, it may be of use to someone to see quickly what times of year in the Western calendar are being referred to in the chronicle.

On a less pedantic and more poetic note, I was just reading the following preface to a poem by the Nara scribe Karakuni no Muraji Hitonari in Bryan Lowe's excellent new dissertation, Rewriting Nara Buddhism: Sutra Transcription in Early Japan:

“These are the fine days of early autumn and the refreshing season of the seventh night. The cool air begins to rise, as singing cicadas clamor in the willows of the courtyard. White dewdrops start to form, as golden fireflies fly around the grass of the stone steps. At such a time, the learned gentlemen pour one another unfiltered wine on this auspicious day. The fair maidens thread the needle on this fine night. How can I take up a brush at this moment? Each person selects their rhyme and composes two verses.”

The poem is a tanabata poem, seventh day of the seventh month. Sitting here at the end of August in hot and steamy Philadelphia, when finally the temperatures have begun to lower and the noise of the cicada is heard in the land, heralding the golden autumn, I had to remind myself that it might puzzle some student to read that description of the weather in Nara on July 7.

In sum, calendrical issues, perhaps particularly in ancient Japan, are of more than casual interest, since as Michael Como has reminded us, the "Chinese festival calendar", whatever exactly that might have been, was being imported to Japan. Lowe discusses the Buddhist calendar, especially in reference to abstinential days, but here again it is extremely unclear what those days were, even if they could be mapped onto the "Japanese traditional calendar." Then of course there is the fact that, for example, the Chinese Dayan calendar was coming into use during the reign of the Last Empress, but it is not at all clear exactly when, as for example Hosoi Hiroshi's 2007 Kodai no Tenmon Ihen to Shisou shows.

Ross Bender

http://rossbender.org/japan.html

On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Lee Butler <leebu...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Alex Vesey]

Good evening to all.

There was a major earthquake off the Philippines only an hour ago, which prompts this comment:
There are certain branches of astronomy, geology, physics, history of science and so forth in which the ability to make exact conversions of years/months/days across cultures is an important tool for accurately analyzing data pertaining to pre-modern natural events.

Just another perspective to consider.

Sincerely,
Alex Vesey

On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:05 PM, Ross Bender <rosslyn...@gmail.com> wrote:

In translating Shoku Nihongi, which of course is a chronicle focused on the imperial court, I decided early on to convert dates. This was in part to remind myself that when the chronicle says "Spring, the first day", it might mean any number of things in the Julian calendar. Also, as Lee Butler says, it is useful in trying to chart days of planting and harvest, etc. Shoku Nihongi provides a rich record of drought, famine, harvest, etc. Just to give a quick example of how such data might be important to someone someday, look at Tables 7-9, pp. 53-55 in Wayne Farris' Daily Life and Demographics in Ancient Japan. Table 7 is "Famine Records, 670-110", Table 8 is "Famine Years, Their Extent and Causes, 1100-1500", Table 9 is "Climatological Trends, 700-1200" The data for the Nara period comes from Shoku Nihongi, and while Farris does not do date conversion, it may be of use to someone to see quickly what times of year in the Western calendar are being referred to in the chronicle.

On a less pedantic and more poetic note, I was just reading the following preface to a poem by the Nara scribe Karakuni no Muraji Hitonari in Bryan Lowe's excellent new dissertation, Rewriting Nara Buddhism: Sutra Transcription in Early Japan:

“These are the fine days of early autumn and the refreshing season of the seventh night. The cool air begins to rise, as singing cicadas clamor in the willows of the courtyard. White dewdrops start to form, as golden fireflies fly around the grass of the stone steps. At such a time, the learned gentlemen pour one another unfiltered wine on this auspicious day. The fair maidens thread the needle on this fine night. How can I take up a brush at this moment? Each person selects their rhyme and composes two verses.”

The poem is a tanabata poem, seventh day of the seventh month. Sitting here at the end of August in hot and steamy Philadelphia, when finally the temperatures have begun to lower and the noise of the cicada is heard in the land, heralding the golden autumn, I had to remind myself that it might puzzle some student to read that description of the weather in Nara on July 7.

In sum, calendrical issues, perhaps particularly in ancient Japan, are of more than casual interest, since as Michael Como has reminded us, the "Chinese festival calendar", whatever exactly that might have been, was being imported to Japan. Lowe discusses the Buddhist calendar, especially in reference to abstinential days, but here again it is extremely unclear what those days were, even if they could be mapped onto the "Japanese traditional calendar." Then of course there is the fact that, for example, the Chinese Dayan calendar was coming into use during the reign of the Last Empress, but it is not at all clear exactly when, as for example Hosoi Hiroshi's 2007 Kodai no Tenmon Ihen to Shisou shows.

Ross Bender

http://rossbender.org/japan.html

On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Lee Butler <leebu...@gmail.com> wrote:

--
Alexander Vesey　アレキサンダー・ヴィーシィ

Associate Professor

Department of Global and Transcultural Studies 国際キャリア学科

Faculty of International Studies  国際学部

Meiji Gakuin University 明治学院大学

Tel: 045-863-2200

ave...@k.meijigakuin.ac.jp

[Kristina Buhrman]

I thought I might very quickly attempt to pull some thoughts together, as calendars are central to my own recent and on-going research. I apologize for any rambling, but I am quickly adding my thoughts before class.

My personal position has been fairly close to Lee Butler's. When working on organizing political or ritual dates, the Japanese-style date is usually the most important (although for some rituals, particularly in the middle Heian Period, knowing which day of the sexagenary cycle the day falls on is just as important, and this information is often omitted by us western scholars).

For agriculture, however, the solar dates are just as important. We scholars could decide as a group to move towards using the solar periods of the Japanese calendar (which were noted in official and many unofficial calendars), but that would provide little extra utility for a huge barrier for entry. (And I'll note that although in terms of climate impact it is negligible, our modern Gregorian+IAU calendar does "wobble" a little, with the equinoxes and solstices falling on different calendrical dates and times year to year.) Exactly how important the variation between the lunisolar calendrical year and the solar year were for our understanding of climate, drought, and famine is I believe an open question. I personally wish Farris had converted his dates, but as the "wobble" in the correspondence between the lunisolar calendar and the solar year was controlled by intercalary months (the frustrating 閏月), it's possible that in the long-term these deviations were not particularl
y significant.

(Personally, I find it hard to believe that agricultural specialists planted by the calendar year as opposed to by seasonal cues. However, I do remember a study of agricultural yields in the Edo Period that argued that years with intercalary months--that is, longer years--produced statistically better crops. Which would imply some variation in planting or harvesting based on the calendrical year.)

And of course, if one is working on other astronomical materials, the Julian dates are absolutely vital, whether or not you're doing cross-calendrical comparisons.

I do have to caution, however, against trusting these conversion tools--awesome as I find Uchida Masao's work to be--too blithely. All of these rely on a certain amount of reconstruction for those years we do not have full calendrical information for. Uchida's calculations, if you read his notes in the reference, also show places where the documented calendar "deviates" from the reconstructed one. Those are only the deviations we know about--there are the potential for more.

Furthermore, and this particularly is true for the Nara Period, the standard reconstruction itself remains in debate. I refer you to Yuasa Yasuo's recent Koyomi to tenmon no kodai chuseishi, where he takes another scholar to task about how to interpret historical sources that use references to "30th-day" in months which are generally considered to have been short. Hosoi's book referenced earlier in this thread also discusses how dates in the official chronicle were sometimes "corrected" to fit new calendrical systems.

This problem is not limited to the Nara Period or earlier either. The first "deviant" calendar was distributed in the 1030s, even though it was not used to regulate court affairs. By the time of the Mishima-goyomi near the end of the Kamakura Period, however, there was a widely-use calendar that could and did deviate from "official time." This gap was up to three days at times (in the early 17th century). There's also evidence that calendars in use in Kyoto itself might have differed from each other in the fifteenth century, if not before. The non-court calendars are much less attested to in surviving examples, making attempts to determine the actual degree of such "gaps" in time-reckoning across regional or social differences much more difficult.

The end result is that any attempt at converting Japanese dates to a standard calendar needs to consider variation, uncertainty, along with plain error and forgery for the dates listed. (Here, I will point out that all guchureki calendars that I have seen or are aware of through 1500 are signed and dated for the 1st day of the 11th month, even when we know that the presentation might occur later than that from diary and chronicle sources. In other words, documentary formulas also influenced how dates were recorded.)

I certainly find myself often wishing that authors were more aware of the seasonal or solar-year aspects of the dates involved. (And that the full moon was not always on the 15th, no matter how convenient that short-hand is.) Particularly in environmental history. But also in literary, political, and cultural works--any time references to "nature" or "seasons" can be found.

But just as much, I wish to caution against treating these tools as too authoritative. I myself use Casio's keisan.casio.jp site for quick conversions and Uchida's reference when I need more details (and more specific references when looking for cosmological information for particular dates). And I think we should start letting readers know, when appropriate, that the dates we use are not always set in stone. (Even when using the Japanese-style dates, for the forgery and variation reasons stated above.) It would also be nice if we can do away with the traditional interpretation of that particular Kokinshu poem (the seasonal "spring" often began in the previous year), although as an interpretation it has its own history.

(As an aside, right now, I'm working on how aware the Heian nobility were of all of the time information that was available to them in the guchureki almanacs and through other sources. Momo Hiroyuki did write a nice piece on Michizane's awareness of seasonal time versus calendrical time in a little pamphlet that came out with the Yomei bunko edition of Mido kanpakuki--thus, unfortunately, a little hard to get a hold of in that format, although I haven't checked to see if it is also within his collected works.)

Long story short, starting to look at calendrical and seasonal time can easily lead you down a rather technical rabbit-hole. (Even if I've found the trip to be rather fascinating myself.)

Kristina Buhrman buhr...@missouri.edu
Visiting Assistant Professor for East Asian Religions

[William Wetherall]

Joseph and Kristina and all --

Some very interesting themes.

SEASON AND CLIMATE

The "seasonality" of dated observations can be significant. Take the
Tabidachi account in Oku no hosomichi dated 弥生も末の七日 or 3-27
(Genroku 2). That ended up "March 27" in some early translations. More
recent translations convert this into "May 16" (1689).

Lunar 末の七日 (27) -- allowing for the sort of aberrations Kristina
mentions -- is supported by Basho's observation of the light of the moon
at dawn. His observation of the 谷中の花の梢 also comes as no surprise
in relation to lunar "3-27". Both observations provide foundation for ゆ
く春は. Obviously "May 16" makes more sense than "March 27" as a time to
lament the "passing of spring" and wonder if one will ever again see the
blossoms at Yanaka.

Basho wasn't monitoring "sakura zensen" reports on NHK. But it would
have varied from year to year in Edo circa 1689 as it does today -- and
would depend on the variety and locality of the sakura et cetera. More
important are the general climatic conditions that would have
characterized a "typical" year in Edo at the time, in contrast with the
sort of conditions that people experience today. Such minutiae may not
be important in the case of the Tabidachi account, but translators
should at least be prepared to raise such technical questions.

Ditto for considerations of agricultural activities. But it's not just a
matter of knowing the "solar" date for a "lunar" date. Other matters
need to be factored in -- including what might be known about
contemporary climatic conditions. And a few centuries -- never mind a
millennium or two -- is ample time for significant local, regional, and
even global changes. We witness this today. It is nothing new.
Environments would continually change even without the accumulated
impacts of human "civilization". So all manner of historical
geographical, geological, and meteorlogical information has to be
collated with considerations of "time" and "place" and "species".

This is probably the most "wobbly" aspect of imputing meaning to
"natural" and "cultural" events recorded in historical literature.

CELEBRATIONS

If one is to celebrate Genroku 15-12-14 -- what, specifically, is to be
celebrated? The 12? the 14? Both have "lunar" significance. The attack
on Kira's residence came on a night that would predictably (with some
"wobbling") be moonlit (think of the significance of 7/7 tanabata and
7/15-centered o-bon). And it came shortly before the end of the lunar
year -- which affected the "court calendar" so to speak. 14 December has
no "lunar" significance, but at least it comes before the end of the
secular solar year. Celebrating the "12/14" attack on "December 14"
rather than on "January 30" at least preserves the "12/14" as a sort of
"lunar fossil" embedded in the "solar sand".

Of course, one could use a solar/lunar calendar and, each year, "peg"
12/14 lunar to its solar equivalent for that year -- as is done with
with 1/1, hence a different solar "Chinese New Year" each year. Ditto
for 3/3, 5/5, 7/7, and kyu-o-bon 7/15 et cetera. Celebrating these lunar
dates on a different solar date each year would truly make life
interesting. The "moon" would be happy to get its "customary" attention.
Solar/lunar calendars would make a comeback.

The opposite problem would arise if a lunar calendar were adopted to
replace all solar calendars. The significance of all manner of "dates"
remembered as "numbers" -- 2/26 -- 12/8 (a Monday in Japan), 12/7 (a
Sunday in Honolulu), 8/6, 8/9, 8/15 -- and 9/11 and 3/11 -- would be
"preserved" simply by transposing them into the same numbers on the
lunar calendar. I suppose this is what Meiji people had in mind when
they marked lunar 12/14 as December 14 on their solar calendars. In
short, there may be times when tradeoffs justify "mis" or at least
"mixed" translation.

Bill Wetherall