The Princeton union., 1880-02-11
SUN DARKENINGS.
Diminished Light Of the Sun Not Caused bv
Eclipses. l'E&''

NATURE
IN 556, 567 and 626 we find mention of
long periods of diminished sunlight,
Schnurrer records that in 1888, a year
after the Saracens had been driven back
beyond the Pyrenees, consequent upon
their defeat st Tours, "the sun darkened
IN an alarming manner on August 10Th:
there appeared to be no eclipse by the
moon, but rather an interruption from
some meteoric substance.' There was an
eclipse OF the sun, annular, but nearly
total, on the morning of August 18th; it
Is mentioned in the Saxon Chronicle.
which tells us that ''the suns disc was
like black shield" The near co1nci-
dence of date suggests, in this case. a
connection between darkness and the
eclipse, In 934, according to a Por
tuguese historian, the sun lost It's or
binary light tor several months, and
this is followed by doubtful statement
that an opening in the sky seemed to
take place, with many flashes of light
ming, and the full blaze OF sunshine was
suddenly restored. In 1891, on Septem.
Der 29th-not 21st, as given in some OF
the translations of Humboldt's "Cosmos"
-ochnurrer relates that there was dark
ening of the sun which lasted three hours.
after which it had a peculiar color, which
occasioncd great alarm. A century later
tor In June, 119l, according to Schnurrer),
the sun was again darkened, with GER
tam attendant effects upon nature. Here
the cause is easily found: On June 23d
there was total eclipse, in which the
moons shadow traversed the Continent
OF Europe from Holland to the Crimea.
The eclipse was total in this country be-
tween the coasts OF Cumberland
and Yorkshire. Erman refers to
sun n-darkening on February 10, 11O6,
which was accompanied by meteors, and
we read in the cometographics that on
the 4th-or according to others, on the
9th of February, in this year, star was
seen from the third to the ninth hour of
the day which was distant from the sun
onl y foot and half. Matthew Paris
and Matthew of Westminster term this
star comet, and we may take it to have
been the same which later in the same
month was observed in China under the
sign Pisces, and which at one time was
supposed to be identical with the great
comet OF 1888; this body, however, would
not appear to have been sufficiently near
the earth, and even on the assumption of
denser constitution than usual with
comets, to account 1r a diminution of
the solar rays by its intervention. On the
last day of February, 1906, according to
a Spanish writer, there was a complete
darkness for six hours. In 1241, five
months after the battle of Lelgnitze, the
sun was SO obscured and the darkness be-
came 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 October 9th, of which Profess
sor Schiaparelli has collected full ac-
count from the Italian writer's. Lastly,
in 1874, from April 23-25th, Kepler re-
'iates, on the authority of Gemma:. 'sThe
sun appeared as though difused with
blood, and many stars were visible at
MONDAY" Schnurrer thought this phe-
nomenon was what the Germans call
"Hobernrauch,' = notwithstanding the vis~
ibility of the stars. From the above
summary of what have been considered
sun-darkenings, we see that in several
cases the dimunition of light have been
due to the ordinary effects OF total
eclip 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 1t
would really appear that such exist, may
take consolation therefrom: