Chūnqiū cháng lì 春秋長歷
The Long Calendar of the Spring and Autumn Annals by 陳厚耀 (撰)
About the work
A complete reconstruction of the lunisolar calendar across the 242 years of the Chūnqiū (722–481 BCE) in 10 juǎn by Chén Hòuyào 陳厚耀 (1648–1722), explicitly intended to repair, supplement, and correct Dù Yù’s lost Cháng lì 長歷. The work is divided into four parts: (1) Lì zhèng 歷證, an evidentiary anthology citing the standard histories from Hàn shū through Yuán shǐ, the Zuǒ zhuàn zhù shū, Chūnqiū shǔ cí, Tiānyuán lì lǐ, and Zhū Zàiyù’s 朱載堉 Lì fǎ xīn shū, on the various points of calendrical disagreement; (2) Gǔ lì 古歷, applying the ancient zhāng cycle (19 solar years = 1 章) to set the yuán of the canon; (3) Lì biān 歷編, the year-by-year reconstruction of new-moon dates, intercalations, and large/small months across the 242 years; (4) Lì cún 歷存, the comparative variants and adjustments versus Dù Yù.
Tiyao
Imperially edited Sìkù quánshū, Classics, Chūnqiū category. Chūnqiū cháng lì in 10 juǎn. Composed in the present dynasty by Chén Hòuyào, zì Sìyuán, native of Tàizhōu. Kāngxī bǐngxū (1706) jìnshì; held office as Education Inspector of Sūzhōu prefecture, then on the strength of his mastery of mathematical computation was specially admitted to the Inner Court, transferred to the post of Examination Editor (檢討), and ended his career as Right Adjutant Tutor (右諭德). The book is intended to supplement Dù Yù’s Cháng lì and is not divided into named juǎn-blocks.
It comprises four parts. (1) Lì zhèng: a wide-net anthology of references and refutations covering successive divergences in calendrical reckoning. The citation of Dù Yù’s argument on solar–lunar discrepancy from Chūnqiū shǔ cí is one not preserved in the zhù shū tradition; the citation of one section of the Dàyǎn lì yì on Chūnqiū lì kǎo is also not registered in the Táng zhì — both especially valuable as evidence. (2) Gǔ lì: the ancient method takes 19 years as one zhāng; at the head of each zhāng he calculates the Zhōu-calendar new-moon of the first month and the winter solstice; the calculation is laid out, then the 12 ducal reigns are tabulated horizontally in four zhāng and vertically by duke, building up to a master table for finding the calendrical yuán. (3) Lì biān: he goes year by year through the 242 years of the Chūnqiū, computing new moons and intercalations and large/small months, with the gānzhī dates from the canon and zhuàn as cross-evidence — restating Dù Yù’s reckoning and adjudicating it. (4) Lì cún: by ancient method, the new moon of Lord Yǐn 1 first month is gēngxū 庚戌, but Dùshì Cháng lì gives xīnsì 辛巳 — i.e. ancient method gives the new moon of the previous year’s 12th month — meaning Dù dropped one intercalation prior to year 1, as one can see by tracking the canon-and-tradition gānzhī sequence. Chén Hòuyào holds against Dù: although Dù’s reckoning across years 1–7 is largely correct, it cannot be made to agree with the gēngchén of year 2, 8th month, nor with the wùshēn of year 3, 12th month; further, the solar eclipse on the jǐsì new moon of Lord Yǐn 3, 2nd month, and the solar eclipse on the rénchén new moon of Lord Huán 3, 7th month, are both lost. So before year 1 the problem is not a missing intercalation but an added intercalation; the cure is to retract the calendar by one month, fixing Lord Yǐn 1 first month new moon as gēngchén 庚辰 — two months retracted from Dù’s Cháng lì. From there forward to Lord Xī 5, the new moons and intercalations agree with Dù’s calendar exactly, so they are not re-recorded. Dù’s book simply runs through the gānzhī sequence and adjusts it by inserting small intercalary months where convenient; Chén knows the calendar science and so his computations are tighter than Dù’s. He has not only filled the lacuna; he has corrected the slips. For evidential learning this is highly serviceable. No student of Chūnqiū can do without this book. Submitted on the Qiánlóng 46th year, 10th month (= 1781, November). Editors-in-chief: Jǐ Yún, Lù Xīxióng, Sūn Shìyì. Chief proofreader: Lù Fèichí.
Abstract
Chūnqiū cháng lì is the defining work of Chūnqiū calendrical reconstruction in the Qing and the most ambitious mathematical-astronomical engagement with the canon since Dù Yù. Chén Hòuyào’s strategy is to take the gānzhī dates of the canon and zhuàn as the empirical anchor and to back-fit a calendrical table compatible with all of them; he treats Dù’s Cháng lì (recovered in fragments through the Yǒnglè dàdiǎn program) as the working reference but corrects it where necessary. The fundamental discovery, registered in the Sìkù tiyao, is that Dù’s calendar errs by one intercalation prior to Lord Yǐn 1, requiring a two-month retraction of the entire opening-of-canon date scheme. Chén supports this not by mathematical argument alone but by appeal to the two solar-eclipse records (Yǐn 3, 2nd month, jǐsì; Huán 3, 7th month, rénchén), whose gānzhī dates are checkable against modern astronomical retro-calculation.
The work was composed during Chén’s Kāngxī-court period; the Sìkù tiyao gives 1706 (bǐngxū) for his jìnshì, but CBDB and Wikidata place this earlier — 1701 (xīnsì) — followed in our person note (陳厚耀). The catalog gives 1648–1722 throughout. The Cháng lì must postdate his special promotion to the Inner Court (mid-1710s) and predate his death in 1722. Wilkinson (Chinese History: A New Manual, p. 511, 706) cites Chén’s Cháng lì as the standard pre-modern Chinese reference for the Chūnqiū lunisolar calendar.
Translations and research
No substantial Western-language secondary literature located. The standard modern Chinese reference is Zhāng Péiyú 張培瑜, Sān qiān wǔ bǎi nián lì rì tiānxiàng 三千五百年曆日天象 (Hénán jiàoyù, 1990), which provides updated retro-calculations for the Chūnqiū but cites Chén throughout for comparison. For Chén’s astronomical work see also the chapter in Bó Shùrén 薄樹人, Zhōngguó tiān wén xué shǐ 中國天文學史 (Wénwù, 1981).
Other points of interest
Chén’s preserved citations of Dù Yù’s Chūnqiū shǔ cí on solar–lunar discrepancy (not in the Zhèng yì) and of the Dàyǎn lì yì (not in the Táng zhì) are independently valuable as fragmentary witnesses to lost Táng calendrical literature. The two-month retraction of the calendar’s anchor point is a discovery later confirmed by modern astronomy and remains the locus classicus of Qing evidential calendrical philology.
Links
- Wikidata: Chén Hòuyào — Q47125000
- Wilkinson, Chinese History: A New Manual (2018), §§ 36, 51
- ctext.org: Chūnqiū cháng lì (Sìkù WYG facsimile)