At a glance
- Key fields
- Epoch, anchor year, count, inclusivity
- Data type
- Traditional counting convention
Definition and terminology
Accumulated years identify a target year within a chosen count. Manuals may use remote primordial Jia-Zi epochs and different era schemes, reflecting numerical cosmology. Such counts do not establish continuous records from that date or an archaeologically verified beginning of civilization. Identify the epoch and inclusive-count convention before interpreting the number.
Structure and rules
Start with an edition’s anchor count, advance by the year difference, then divide by the relevant cycle, era or epoch length. Specify zero-remainder handling. Era names, BCE/CE without a year zero and year boundaries complicate conversion. Different counts may reflect different starting conventions or additions rather than simple arithmetic mistakes.
Worked reading
Assume a teaching anchor count of 1,000. The next year is 1,001, three years later 1,003; division by a hypothetical sixty-year cycle leaves 43. Neither anchor nor cycle is asserted as this manual’s actual epoch. A real study should record era name, converted year, original count and conversion rationale together.
Context and limits
Volume one criticizes earlier schemes and proposes calculations; the Siku account notes passages extended into the Song period. The text is therefore not seamless data from one date. Check editions and preserve discrepancies among numerals, reign years and stems. A large accumulated number proves neither antiquity nor predictive credibility.
References & further reading
Historical sources document ideas and rules of their time, not empirical proof of predictive accuracy. Source notes identify the nature and scope of each reference.
- 《太乙金镜式经》卷一Primary / tradition source
Public-domain text for accumulated counts and temporal calculations; epoch values require edition-specific checking.
- 《太乙金镜式经》（四库全书本）Primary / tradition source
Public-domain Taiyi text; editorial account notes later additions and historical criticism.