Eclipse

The word eclipse, εκλειψις, signifies failure, namely, of light. An eclipse of the sun is caused by the intervention of the moon, at new, or in conjunction with the sun, intercepting his light from the earth, either totally or partially. An eclipse of the moon is caused by the intervention of the earth, intercepting the sun’s light from the moon, when full, or in opposition to the sun, either totally or partially. The reason why the sun is not eclipsed every new moon, nor the moon at every full, is owing to the inclination of the moon’s orbit to the plane of the ecliptic, or earth’s orbit, is an angle of about five degrees and a half: in consequence of which, the moon is generally too much elevated above the plane of the ecliptic, or too much depressed below it, for her disk to touch the earth’s shadow at full, or for her shadow, or her penumbra, to touch the earth’s disk at new. An eclipse, therefore, of either luminary can only take place when they are within their proper limits, or distances, from the nodes or intersections of both orbits. And because the limits of solar eclipses are wider than those of lunar, in general there will be more eclipses of the sun than of the moon. In any year, the number of eclipses of both luminaries cannot be less than two, and these will both be of the sun, nor more than seven: the usual number is four; and it is very rare to have more than six. But though solar eclipses happen oftener, lunar are more frequently observed in any particular place. For an eclipse of the moon is visible to the inhabitants of half the globe at the same instant; whereas, an eclipse of the sun is visible only within that part of the earth’s surface, traversed by the moon’s total shadow, and by her penumbra, or partial shadow. But her total shadow, when she is nearest to the earth, cannot cover a space of more than a hundred and fifty-eight geographical miles in diameter, nor at her mean distance more than seventy-nine, and at her greatest distance may not touch the earth at all. In the two former cases, the sun will be eclipsed in the places covered by the shadow totally, or by the penumbra partially: in the last it may be annular, but not total. Without the reach of the shadow, and within the limits of the penumbra, which cannot cover more than four thousand five hundred and fifty-two miles of the earth’s surface, there will be a partial eclipse of the sun, and without these limits no eclipse at all. Hence lunar eclipses are more frequently noticed by historians than solar; and Diogenes Laertius may be credited when he relates, that, during the period in which the Egyptians had observed eight hundred and thirty-two eclipses of the moon, they had only observed three hundred and seventy-three of the sun. In the midst of a total lunar eclipse, the moon’s disk is frequently visible, and of a deep red or copperish colour. This, in the poetic language of sacred prophecy, is expressed by “the moon’s being turned into blood,” Joe 2:31. This remarkable phenomenon is caused by the sun’s lateral rays in their passage through the dense atmosphere of the earth, being inflected into the shadow by refraction, and falling pretty copiously upon the moon’s disk, are reflected from thence to the eye of the spectator. If the earth had no atmosphere, the moon’s disk would then be as black as in a solar eclipse. A total eclipse of the moon may occasion a privation of her light for an hour and a half, during her total immersion in the shadow; whereas, a total eclipse of the sun can never last in any particular place above four minutes, when the moon is nearest to the earth, and her shadow thickest. Hence it appears, that the darkness which “overspread the whole land of Judea,” at the time of our Lord’s crucifixion, was preternatural, “from the sixth until the ninth hour,” or from noon till three in the afternoon, in its duration, and also in its time, about full moon, when the moon could not possibly eclipse the sun. It was accompanied by an earthquake, which altogether struck the spectators, and among them the centurion and Roman guard, with great fear, and a conviction, that Jesus was the Son of God, Mat 27:51-54.

Eclipses, says Dr. Hales, are justly reckoned among the surest and most unerring characters of chronology; for they can be calculated with great exactness backward as well as forward; and there is such a variety of distinct circumstances of the time when, and the place where, they were seen; of the duration, or beginning, middle, or end of every eclipse, and of the quantity, or number of digits eclipsed; that there is no danger of confounding any two eclipses together, when the circumstances attending each are noticed with any tolerable degree of precision. Thus, to an eclipse of the moon incidentally noticed by the great Jewish chronologer, Josephus, shortly before the death of Herod the Great, we owe the determination of the true year of our Saviour’s nativity. During Herod’s last illness, and not many days before his death, there happened an eclipse of the moon on the very night that he burned alive Matthias, and the ringleaders of a sedition, in which the golden eagle, which he had consecrated and set up over the gate of the temple, was pulled down and broken to pieces by these zealots. This eclipse happened, by calculation, March 13, U.C. 750, B.C. 4. But it is certain from Scripture, that Christ was born during Herod’s reign; and from the visit of the magi to Jerusalem “from the east,” απο ανατολων, from the Parthian empire, to inquire for the true “born King of the Jews,” whose star they had seen “at its rising,” εν τη ανατολη, and also from the age of the infants massacred at Bethlehem, “from two years old and under,” Mat 2:1-16. It is no less certain, that Jesus could not have been born later than B.C. 5, which is the year assigned to the nativity by Chrysostom, Petavius and Prideaux.

An eclipse of the sun is caused by the intervention of the moon when new, or in conjunction with the sun, intercepting his light from the earth, either totally or partially. An eclipse of the moon is caused by the intervention of the earth, intercepting the sun’s light from the moon when full, or in opposition to the sun, either totally or partially. An eclipse of either luminary can only take place when they are within their proper limits, or distances, from the nodes or intersections of both orbits. A total eclipse of the moon may occasion a privation of her light for an hour and a half; during her total immersion in the shadow; whereas a total eclipse of the sun can never last in any particular place above four minutes, when the moon is nearest to the earth, and her shadow thickest. SEE SUN; SEE MOON.

No historical notice of an eclipse occurs in the Bible, but there are passages in the prophets which contain manifest allusion to this phenomenon. (Compare Lucan, 1:540 sq.; Virgil, Georg. 1:466; Curt. 4:3; Evang. Nicod. c. 11.) They describe it in the following terms: "The sun goes down at noon, the earth is darkened in the clear day" (Amo 8:9), "the day shall be dark" (Mic 3:6), "the light shall not be clear nor dark" (Zec 14:6), "the sun shall be dark" (Joe 2:10; Joe 2:31; Joe 3:15). Some of these notices have been thought to refer to eclipses that occurred about the time of the respective compositions: thus the date of Amos nearly coincides with a total eclipse which occurred February 9, B.C. 784, and was visible at Jerusalem shortly after noon (Hitzig, Comm. in Proph.); that of Micah with the eclipse of June 5, B.C. 716, referred to by Dionys. Hal. 2:56, to which same period the latter part of the book of Zechariah has been assigned by some. A passing notice in Jer 15:9 nearly coincides in date with the eclipse of September 30, B.C. 610, so well known from Herodotus’s account (1:74, 103). The Hebrews seem not to have philosophized much on eclipses, which they considered as sensible marks of God’s anger (see Joe 2:10; Joe 2:31; Joe 3:15; Job 9:7). Ezekiel (Eze 32:7) and Job (Job 36:32) speak more particularly, that God covers the sun with clouds when he deprives the earth of its light by eclipses. These passages, however, are highly figurative, and the language they present may simply be borrowed from the lurid look of the heavenly orbs as seen through a hazy atmosphere. Yet, when we read that "the sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood," we can hardly avoid discerning an acquaintance with the appearance of those luminaries while under eclipse. The interruption of the sun’s light causes him to appear black; and the moon, during a total eclipse, exhibits a copper color, or what Scripture intends by a blood color. SEE ASTRONOMY. The awe which is naturally inspired by an eclipse in the minds of those who are unacquainted with the cause of it rendered it a token of impending judgment in the prophetical books. SEE EARTHQUAKE.

The plague of darkness in Egypt has been ascribed by various neologistic commentators to non-miraculous agency, but no sufficient account of its intense degree, long duration, and limited area, as proceeding from any physical cause, has been given. SEE PLAGUES OF EGYPT.

Josephus mentions (Anst. 17:6, 4 s.f.) an eclipse of the moon as occurring an the night when Herod deprived Matthias of the priesthood, and burnt alive the seditious Matthias and his accomplices. This is of great importance in the chronology of Herod’s reign, as it immediately preceded his own death. It has been calculated as happening March 13, B.C. 4. SEE HEROD (THE GREAT).

The darkness ἐπὶ πᾶσαν τὴν γῦν of Mat 27:45, attending the crucifixion has been similarly attributed to an eclipse. SEE CRUCIFIXION (OF CHRIST). Phlegon of Tralles, indeed, mentions an eclipse of intense darkness, and, beginning at noon, combined, he says, in Bithynia, with an earthquake, which, in the uncertain state of our chronology (see Clinton’s Fasti Romani, Olymp. 202), more or less nearly synchronizes with the event. Nor was the account without reception in the early Church. See the testimonies to that effect collected by Whiston (Testimony of Phlegon vindicated; London, 1732). Origen, however, ad loc. (Latin commentary on Matthew), denied the possibility of such a cause, arguing that by the fixed Paschal reckoning the moon must have been about full, and denying that Luk 23:45, by the words ἐσκοτίσθη ὁἣλιος, means to allege that fact as the cause. The genuineness of this commentary has been impeached, nor is its tenor consistent with Origen adv. Cels. page 80; but the argument, unless on such an assumption as that mentioned below, seems decisive, and has ever since been adhered to. He limits πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν to Judaea. Dean Alford (ad loc.), though without stating his reason, prefers the wider interpretation of all the earth’s surface on which it would naturally have been day. That Phlegon’s darkness, perceived so intense in Tralles and Bithynia, was felt in Judaea, is highly probable; and the evangelist’s testimony to similar phenomena of a coincident darkness and earthquake, taken in connection with the near agreement of time, gives a probability to the supposition that the former speaks of the same circumstances as the latter. Wieseler (Chron. Synop. page 388), however, and De Wette (Comment. on Matthew) consider the year of Phlegon’s eclipse an impossible one for the crucifixion, and reject that explanation of the darkness. The argument from the duration (three hours) is also of great force, for an eclipse seldom lasts in great intensity more than six minutes. The darkness in this instance, moreover, cannot with reason be attributed to an eclipse, as the moon was at the full at the time of the Passover (q.v.). On the other hand, Seyffarth (Chronolog. Sacs. pages 58, 9) maintains that the Jewish calendar, owing to their following the sun, had become so far out that the moon might possibly have been at new, and thus, admitting the year as a possible epoch, revives the argument for the eclipse as the cause. He, however, views this rather as a natural basis than as a full account of the darkness, which in its degree at Jerusalem was still preternatural (ib. page 138). The pamphlet of Whiston above quoted, and two by Dr. Sykes, Dissertation on the Eclipse mentioned by Phlegon, and Defense of the same (London, 1733 and 1734), may be consulted as regards the statement of Phlegon. Treatises on the phenomenon in question have been written in Latin by Baier (Regiom. 1718), Engestrom (London, 1730), Fleischer (Viteb. 1692), Frick (Lips. 1692), Lauth (Argent. 1743), Pasch (Viteb. 1683), Posner (Jena, 1661), Schmid (Jena, 1683), Sommel (London, 1774), Topfer (Jen. 1678), Wiedeburg (Helmst. 1687), Ziebich (Viteb. 1741), and in German by Grausbeck (Tubing. 1835). SEE DARKNESS.

ECLIPSE.—See Sun.

ē̇-klips´. See ASTRONOMY.