Democratic Sentinel, Volume 3, Number 43, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 5 December 1879 — HISTORICAL SUN HARKENINGS. [ARTICLE]

HISTORICAL SUN HARKENINGS.

Diminished Light of the Sun Not Caused by Eclipses. In 536, 567 and 626 we find mention of long periods of diminished sunlight. Schnurrer records that, in 733, a year after the Saracens had been driven back beyond the Pyiences, consequent on their defeat at Tonrs, “the sun darkened in an alarming manner on Aug. 19; there appeared to be no eclipse by the moon, but rather an interruption from some meteoric substance.” Thero was an eclipse of the sun, annular, but nearly total, on the morning of Aug. 14; it is mentioned in the “Saxon Chronicle,” which tells us that “the sun’s disk was like a black shield.” The near coincidence of date suggests, in this case, a connection between darkness and the eclipse. In 931, according to a Portuguese historian, the sun lost its ordinary light for several months; and this is followed by the doubtful statement that an opening in the sky seemed to take placo, with many flashes of lightning, and the full blaze of sunshine was suddenly restored. In 1091, on Sept. 29—not 21, as given in some of the translations of Humboldt’s “ Cosmos ’’—Schnurrer relates that there was a darkening of the sun which lasted three hours, after which it had a peculiar color, which occasioned great alarm. A century later—or v jn June, ll 91, according to Schnurrer —the sun was again darkened, with certain attendant effects upon nature. Here the cause is easily found: On June 23 there was a total eclipse, in which the moon’s shadow traversed the continent of Europe from Holland to the Crimea. The eclipse was total in this country between the coasts of Cumberland and Yorkshire.

Erman refers to a , sun darkening on Feb. 12, 1106, which was accompanied by meteors, and we read in the cometographics that on the 4th—or, according to others, on the sth—of February, in this year, a star was seen from the third to the ninth hour of the day, which was distant from the sun “only a foot and a half.” Matthew Paris and Matthew of Westminster term this star a comet, and we may take it to have been the same which, later in the month, was observed in China under the sign Fisces, aud which at one time was supposed to be identical with the great comet of 1680; this body, however, probably was not sufficiently near the earth, and even on the assumption of a denser composition than usual with comets, to account for a diminution of the solar rays by its intervention. On the last day of February, 1206, according to a Spanish writer, there was complete darkness for six hours. Iu 1241, “five months after the Mongol battle of Leignitz,” the sun was so obscured and the darkness because so great that the stars were seen at the ninth hour about Michaelmas. In this case, again, the darkness referred to was undoubtedly due to the total eclipse of Oct. 6, of which Prof. Schiaparelli has collected a full account from the Italian writers. Lastly, in 1674, from April 23-25, Kepler relates, on the authority of Gemma, “The sun appeared as though suffused with blood, and many . stars were visible at noonday.” Schnurrer thought this phenomenon was wliat the Germans call a “ Hobemraucli,” notwithstanding the visibility of the stars. From the above brief summary of what have been considered sun darke (tings we see that in several cases the diminution of light has been due to the ordinary effects of a total eclipse, while it is clear that there are no grounds in the historical evidence for any prediction of a period of darkness. The nervous in these matters, and it would really appear that such exist, may take consolation therefrom. —Nature.