Fig. 2.9 The triad of eclipses described by the "ancient" Thucydides: 1133,1140, and 1151 A.D. The solution was found by N. A. Morozov. One sees the lunar shadow tracks for the first two eclipses and the zenith visibility point for the lunar eclipse of 1151. Taken from , Volume 4, page 509.
ond triad (the Xl-century one), the umbral shadow of the moon was at the central point of the trajectory at about 11:15 GMT. The coordinates are 7 degrees of Eastern longitude and 45 degrees of Northern latitude (Turbo-Sky).
N. A. Morozov made the following justified remark regarding the full eclipse of 2 August 1133 in the XH-century triad: "The sun appeared to rise in total occultation on the southern coast of the Hudson Bay, it had been matutinal in England as well, came to Holland at noon, to Germany, Austria, the vicinity of the Bosporus, Mesopotamia, and the Gulf of Arabia, and set in complete darkness in the Indian ocean" (, volume 4, page 508). The eclipse was full and its phase maximal, everything went dark, and one could naturally see the stars in the sky.
Thus, the XH-century triad discovered by N. A. Morozov can be seen as follows:
1) The first total eclipse of the sun occurred on 2 August 1133 a.d. and happened in the following manner:
The central point of the lunar shadow trajectory on the surface of the Earth was passed between about 11:15 and 11:17 GMT (see fig. 2.9; also see , Volume 5, page 122).
2) The second full eclipse happened on 20 March 1140, as follows:
The central point of the lunar shadow trajectory on the surface of the Earth passed at approximately 13:40 GMT (Oppolzer s canon; see , Volume 5, page 123, and fig. 2.9).
3) The partial lunar eclipse of 28 August 1151 a.d. had the maximal phase value of 4" at 23:25 GMT. The zenith visibility of the moon concurred with the point whose geographical coordinates were 8 degrees of Eastern longitude, and 7 degrees of Southern latitude (, Volume 5, page 51).
This Xll-century triad is ideal in all respects. The second eclipse really occurred in March, as one should have expected from the text of Thucydides.
The Xl-century triad discovered by A.T. Fomenko:
1) The first solar eclipse, of 22 August 1039 a.d., happened in the following way:
The central point of the lunar shadow trajectory on the surface of Earth was passed at about 11:15 GMT (see fig. 2.9; also see , volume 5, page 118).
2) The second solar eclipse (partial) of 9 April 1046 a.d. occurred as follows:
The central point of the lunar shadow trajectory on the Earth surface was passed about 5:46 GMT (Oppolzer canon; see , Volume 5, page 123 and fig. 2.9).
3) The partial lunar eclipse of 15 September 1057 a.d. had the maximal phase value of 5" at 18:09 GMT. The zenith visibility of the moon concurred with the point whose geographical coordinates were 86 degrees of Eastern longitude, and 1 degree of Southern latitude (, Volume 5, page 49).
The Thucydides eclipse triad is a very substantial argument proving that the History of the Peloponnesus War by Thucydides couldn't have been written earlier than the XI century a.d. It is most improbable that the triad is a fantasy of the author, since in that case a fitting astronomical solution would most probably have been nonexistent. It is also hard to consider the eclipses an apocryphal part of the "ancient" text, since they fit the consecutive and detailed narration incredibly well.
N. A. Morozov appears to have been correct in writing that "the book of Thucydides isn't ancient, it isn't mediaeval, it is [from] the thirteenth century of our era at least, the Renaissance epoch" (, Volume 4, page 531).
2.4. The eclipses described by the "ancient" Titus Livy
Let us give a few more examples. Omitting the details this time, we shall just report that the eclipse from the History by Titus Livy (XXXVII, 4,4) that the modern chronologers ascribe to 190 b.c. or 188 b.c., also fails to satisfy the description of Titus Livy. The situation with the eclipses of Thucydides is repeated yet again. It turns out that an independent astronomical dating yields just one precise solution in the interval between 900 b.c. and 1600 a.d.: 967 a.d. ().
The situation with the lunar eclipse that Titus Livy describes in his History (LIV, 36, 1) is exactly the same. The Scaligerian chronologers suggest that Livy is referring to the eclipse of 168 b.c. However, analysis shows that the characteristics of this eclipse do not fit the description given by Livy. The eclipse that he describes could really have happened on one of the following dates:
• Either in 415 a.d., at night between the 4th and the 5th of September;
• In 955 a.d., at night between the 4th and the 5th of September;
• Or in 1020 a.d., at night between the 4th and the 5th of September.
This pattern of false dating goes on and on. A list of such examples includes all the ancient eclipses that have detailed descriptions. We shall present the whole picture of this effect of moving ancient eclipse dates forward in time, below.
Was this article helpful?