University of Virginia Library

Appendix I

THE CONJUNCTION OF THE FIVE PLANETS IN TUNG-CHING

HS 1A: 18b reads, "In the first year, in the winter, the tenth month
[Nov. 14-Dec. 12, 207 B.C.] there was a conjunction of the five planets
in [the constellation] Tung-ching."

Dr. J. K. Fotheringham of Oxford has very kindly calculated this
conjunction. According to his results, this conjunction cannot have
been correctly recorded for 207 B.C., inasmuch as at that time,
although the planets were within about 41° of longitude of each other,
"Mercury and Jupiter were on one side of the sun, visible as morning
stars, and Venus, Mars, and Saturn were on the other side, visible as
evening stars." In 206 B.C., Mars was far away from Jupiter.

The date of closest approach for these planets was on May 30, 205
B.C., when the planetary longitudes were as follows: Mercury and
Jupiter at 88.3° right ascension, Saturn at 90.7°, Mars at 98.4°, and
Venus at 111.3°. The total range in right ascension was thus 23°.

But at that time all the planets were not in the constellation Tung-ching.
The right ascensions of the stars in that constellation are calculated
for 205 B.C. by Dr. Fotheringham as follows: μ Gemini as 62.8°,
ν as 64.9°, ε as 67.3°, γ as 67.8°, ξ as 70.5°, ζ as 73.3° and λ as 77.7°.
Tung-ching is however stated by Chinese authorities to contain 33
Chinese degrees, which is about 32.5° in European measurement. The
next constellation in the Chinese zodiac is Kuei [OMITTED], whose constituent
stars ranged at that date from 95.3° to 98.8° R.A. This constellation is
said to contain 4 Chinese degrees (about 3.9° in our measurement).
Hence "it is clear from this that the space between one asterism in the
list of zodiacal constellations and the next was reckoned to the preceding
asterism. At least this was so with" Tung-ching. Then Tung-ching
extended from 62.8° to 95.3° R.A. Even so, on May 30th, Mars was in
Kuei and Venus in the next constellation, Liu.

Dr. Fotheringham has however calculated that on May 16th, 205 B.C.,
when Mercury was first opposite the first star in Tung-ching, being at
62.8°, the other planets were located as follows: Jupiter at 85.0°, Mars at
88.8°, Saturn at 88.9°, and Venus at 95.9°. They were thus spread over
33.1° of longitude. The first four planets were in Tung-ching, and
Venus was just over in Kuei. Venus had last been seen in Tung-ching

on May 14th, two evenings previous. But Kuei is usually mentioned
together with Tung-ching in the HS; the two were grouped together
as the constellation Shun-shou [OMITTED] (lit., "the head of the quail").
Chinese astronomers thus had no difficulty in giving "the conjunction
the benefit of any doubt." We may then take the middle of May 205
B.C. as the date of this conjunction.

How did this conjunction get dated in November 207 B.C. in the
HS? That date was the result of a misunderstanding on the part of
the author. The earliest extant statement about this conjunction is
found in the SC 37: 40a, "When the Han dynasty triumphed, the five
planets appeared in conjunction in [the constellation] Tung-ching."
[Cf. Mh III, 407. Chavannes adds a note that this conjunction
happened in 200 B.C., on the authority of Ssu-ma Cheng's So-yin. But
the So-yin gives that date, not to this conjunction, but to the event
mentioned next, the siege of Kao-tsu at P'ing-ch'eng, for the note comes
after the sentence recounting the siege. Elsewhere the SC (Mh. II,
389, 390) gives this date for the siege.]

The date when "the Han dynasty triumphed" may be variously given.
Kao-tsu dated his accession from the time he received the surrender of
Tsu-ying in November 207 B.C., but Hsiang Yü was not killed until
January 202 B.C., and Kao-tsu did not ascend the throne as emperor
until Feb. 22, 202 B.C. It might also be said that the triumph occurred
when Kao-tsu returned from Han and conquered the three Ch'in successor
states—June 206 B.C. He however first actually assumed
imperial prerogatives when he did away with the Ch'in dynasty's
gods of the land and grains and substituted his own—on March 5, 205
B.C. About the time of the conjunction in May 205 B.C., Kao-tsu did
triumph over Hsiang Yü, when he entered P'eng-ch'eng, Hsiang Yü's
capital, but he was severely defeated immediately afterwards. Perhaps
this conjunction actually helped to keep up his courage after that defeat
(cf. 1A: 33b). It was thus quite natural that Kao-tsu's assumption of
imperial prerogatives in March 205 should have been linked with the
conjunction in May, and that the conjunction should have been said to
have happened when the Han dynasty triumphed.

The astrological interpretation of this conjunction also assisted in
bringing about the statement in the HS. The ancient Chinese allocated
the various regions of the sky to various states, just as was the case
in the ancient Mediterranean world. According to Cheng Chung
(ca. 5 B.C.-83 A.D.), Shun-shou, which includes Tung-ching and Kuei,
was allocated to Ch'in. Since Kao-tsu had possessed himself of this
territory, it is natural that the conjunction should have been interpreted

with reference to his dynasty. Ying Shao remarks that this conjunction
indicated that a new emperor of a new dynasty would conquer by his
righteousness.

Because of this astrological interpretation, when the exact date of the
conjunction had been forgotten, it was natural to have put this conjunction
at the beginning of the Han dynasty's reign. Liu Hsiang (80-9
B.C.) wrote, "When the Han [dynasty] entered [the region of] Ch'in,
the five planets appeared in conjunction in [the constellation] Tung-ching."
In SC 89: 9b (repeated in HS 23: 6b, 7a) we find a further
detail: "The old gentleman Kan said, `When the King of Han [Kao-tsu]
entered the pass [Oct. 207 B.C.], the five planets appeared in conjunction
in [the constellation] Tung-ching. Tung-ching is the portion [of the
heavens allocated to] Ch'in. Whoever reached [that place] first should
have been made its king.' "

With the foregoing statement before him, it is quite natural that
Pan Ku should have written as he did and dated this conjunction at the
official beginning of the Han dynasty in November 207 B.C. He
evidently had no exact record of the conjunction except the foregoing
passages and was not sorry, in his record, to glorify the dynasty under
which he was writing. [Reproduced by permission from the Jour.
A. O. S., Sept. 1935, vol. 55, pp. 310-3.]