Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
The problem with the theory of Marshall is, that most up-to-date scholars date the battle of Mueh 1045 BC, but I like his solar eclipse reading of hexagram 55, so I have made this little reseach:Remember the Duke of Zhou spent his young adulthood in the shang Court . I think we can reasonably assume he was studying all facets of the Yi.. he may have had written some line statements and/or copied them down to take with him back to his home.
The source of Marshall is probably "Atlas of historical eclipse maps", where all total and annual solar eclipses (862 events) from 1500 BC to 1900 AD are plotted on computer-drawn outline maps of East Asia.I missed this part in Marshall, where is it?
In his young adolthood the Duke of Zhou was sent to Anyang in late 1070's BC to learn how to read, write and divine. He was first class educated at the Shang court. The situation described in "the Metal-Bound Coffer" tells, that he was the only son of the king Wen, that mastered the tortoise divination method.If its just an eclipse why place it in the Zhouyi at all?
I presume, that the solar eclipse of hexagram 55 was in 1070BC and the subject of the meeting with the Lords of the west was primary to demonstrate the superior leadership of the Zhou. The shift of Mandate is connected with a five planet conjunktion May 28 1059BC similar to the conjunktion March 5 1553BC when the Mandate shifted from Xia to Shang. So I read the hexagram 55 as "a proof", that the Duke of Zhou was in Anyang both during the meeting and when king Wen arrived in Anyang in 1068BC and was prisoned seven years.and King Wen wants to make sure that his chosen heir does indeed take the throne
I think that Sima Qian could have dated the Contest by his:Sima Qian was unable to date the year that the Zhou began their sweep down the Wei River to ultimately defeat those two states (Lu and ??) and ultimately the Shang. One scholar (Han Dynasty) dated this at 1122 BC. One set of the Bamboo Annals (discovered in a grave says the campaign began 1027)
Another version of the Annals, often suspected as a fake, sets the date of the actual conquest at 1045 BC or close to it.
Hexagram 7
I think, as agreed with charly in memorizing 29.4, that a line of Yi often tells more stories. That's too how I read hexagram 7. The first line tells both of the first departure of the army, that was not in order (misfortune threatens), and the second departure in order. I too read the fourth line in two ways. "The army retreats. No blame." concerning the first campaign and "The army camp at left. No blame" concerning the second campaign, when the army did cross the river at Ford of Meng. The lines two and six look rather simple to read concerning the leadership of king Wu.Who is the youngest son? Certainly not the heir-presumptive Cheng? Actually when you think about the battle of Mu its anticlimactic, a rout, all the good work being done in advance. I hope they didn't carry the corpse with them. I mean....
I think that king Wen was actually a loyal vasal to the Shang king untill the morning of December 20 1059, when the five planet conjunction occured. Such a conjunction only occur every 500 years and had occured before the beginning of the Xia dynasty and the Shang dynasty. His son Dan was a well educated diviner and I think that they together divined the meaning of the conjunction and kept the divination records of the conjunction topsecret:Where I cannot get any input from anyone is the significance given to the eclipse and Marshall's conclusion that this event bestowed a Mandate upon the Zhou rather than it being a death omen, no doubt supported by astrologers for King Wen.
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).