How far can a case's identity and birth information be verified?

A name and office in an old case, together with a same-named official in external history, do not verify all birth information. We examine one locatable small-type example, separating its printed record, a candidate person and independent birth evidence. Missing fields stay missing; neither a modern calculator nor age at death fills them.

The Qin Shen'an/Wenming witness is catalogued as 1926, NLC94145, juan 8, scan 268, printed page 2. The example sits near the Jia–Shen day/Jia–Zi hour group under 六甲日甲子時斷. [1][4] Its identity and dates are not presumed verified before being used to claim prediction accuracy.

Establish what the page actually supplies

The small type reads 癸亥, 己未 and 李綱丞相: Gui–Hai, Ji–Wei and “Li Gang, prime minister.” [1] Name/office, the printed stem–branch pairs and the surrounding day/hour grouping are different kinds of book information. The author has viewed the local image; this establishes what this witness prints at that location.

“Located in the Jia–Shen day/Jia–Zi hour group” differs from “external history confirms that person's birth on that day and hour.” Grouping identifies the compiler's organization, not an independent birth registration. We neither mechanically rearrange the example into a verified complete four-pillar table nor supply Gregorian date and modern time zone.

Keep the small-type example distinct from the surrounding large-type discussion too. An official's name illustrating an entry does not independently prove every preceding condition occurred in his life or that the compiler possessed a traceable birth record.

Songshi supports a candidate, not every field

Songshi juan 358, Li Gang's upper biography, opens 李綱，字伯紀，邵武人也，自其祖始居無錫. Our translation: “Li Gang, courtesy name Boji, was from Shaowu; from his grandfather's time the family lived in Wuxi.” Its Gaozong-accession section records appointment to 尚書右僕射兼中書侍郎 and explicitly discusses his service as a chief minister. [2]

This supplies name, courtesy name, geographical identifiers and office for a candidate. The case prints only name and prime minister, not Boji, Shaowu, Wuxi or tenure dates. Additional fields available in external history are not all fields already matched in the case.

Agreement in name and office makes the Song figure a reasonable candidate, but this bounded check does not independently establish a unique identification. Record the candidate's grounds rather than declare sameness first and let every missing detail become certain.

We use the publicly transcribed ancient upper/lower biographies, without collation against Songshi's old printed images. Historical text and online transcription remain distinct; this is not a newly located contemporaneous birth register. Necessary old-text excerpts and our translations do not copy modern commentary.

Death sequence and age cannot become a quoted birth record

Juan 359 follows the Shaoxing ninth-year account with 次年薨，年五十八, “He died the next year, aged fifty-eight.” [3] Death sequence and age have evidential value. They do not directly state birth month, day or hour, or independently substantiate the example's Gui–Hai and Ji–Wei.

Back-calculating a year from age would require declared era conversion and traditional age-counting assumptions. A derived result would still differ from a birth year directly recorded in the history. We have not promoted such a calculation into “verified birth year” or used it to complete four-pillar dates.

The inspected relevant biographies do not supply birth month, day or hour. No independent direct birth-year record was obtained here either; all remain blank. This bounds the selected material and present check, rather than claiming no possible source will ever supply information. New evidence would require its own source and reasoning.

A source cannot independently validate its own inputs

If birth fields are first supplied from the fortune-calculation example, then its official-status prediction is compared with historical appointment, those inputs still come only from the material needing verification. The biography confirms office, not the inputs. Agreement does not automatically demonstrate successful prediction.

Unique identity and full birth information are also unestablished, with no complete sample, failed cases or outcome standard. We calculate no accuracy rate and do not make one prominent official's career a model validation.

The distinction still supports substantial reading: where the example is grouped, how a name and office illustrate the text, which field external history supports, and which is merely a modern completion. Insufficient evidence does not prevent that analysis.

A general addition judgment cannot date this example

The earlier Siku assessment attributes some late-Ming officials' examples to later commercial additions. That is the assessors' judgment about their inspected copy, not our case-by-case establishment of inclusion dates. Presence in a later witness does not prove this example was added in a particular printing; the candidate's Song-era life does not prove it was present from initial compilation.

Dating its transmission would require a corresponding example in earlier, securely identified witnesses, comparing presence and wording. That work has not been completed, and the uncertain 1578 downloads are not used to supply a date.

Preserve missingness explicitly

Separate direct printed wording, direct external record, identity candidate, calculation assumption and information not obtained. The book's name/office and the biography's appointment each have a source. Linking them as one person remains a candidate relationship; birth gaps and inclusion date remain null.

The record does not aim to make every cell look complete. It tells readers which kind of evidence would be needed, rather than how existing words can be rearranged to resemble a chart.

Table, diagram and explanations are original and cover one bounded example. Complete birth data, predictive accuracy and the transmission of all cases are not established. Source images and research crops are excluded from the package, with no copied modern commercial commentary.

Sources and related reading

1. Qin Shen'an/Wenming Sanming tonghui, NLC94145, juan 8, scan 268, printed page 2: Gui–Hai, Ji–Wei and 李綱丞相 near the Jia–Shen group. Page layer and grouping are not independent birthday evidence. View the example's position

2. Songshi juan 358, Li Gang upper biography: opening identifiers and Gaozong-accession appointment. Ancient text via public transcription, not newly collated old-print images. View identity and office

3. Songshi juan 359, lower biography: next-year death and age following the Shaoxing ninth-year account, not complete birth fields. View the historical sequence

4. NLC94145 catalogue, 1926, Qin Shen'an/Wenming. Catalogue, imprint and inclusion-date claims remain separate. View the catalogue

Preceding: sampling day/hour entries. For compilation and additions see twelve juan and attribution layers; modern inputs are explained in methodology. Continue with restoring conditions behind mnemonics.