Previously, this webmaster gave the dates validated by Han Dyansty historian Sima Qian to be under superscript denotion of 1. Per Sima Qian, chronology was validated to the year of 1134 B.C. for the start of Zhou Dynasty. In lieu of Sima Qian's SHI JI, this website now used THE BAMBOO ANNALS for the dates of Xia, Shang and Zhou dynasties with superscript denotion of 1. The raw data dates from THE BAMBOO ANNALS for the first Xia king Qi was 1978 B.C.E. or 1991 per adjustment by Prof Zhu Yongchang of Purdue. The raw BAMBOO dates for the year of demise of Xia was 1559 B.C.E. The raw BAMBOO dates for the year of demise of Shang was 1050 B.C.E. (See Zhou Dynasty for a list of Zhou kings.) Professor Zhu Yongchang of Purdue adjusted the records by evening out the different imperial mourning years that were in conflict with the stem-branch years, and synching up with NASA's astronomical data etc. (Professor Zhu of Purdue University also believed that there were some minor differential errors by a few years in the "contemporary" version of THE BAMBOO ANNALS. The basis that Professor Zhu used was about the same as Li Xueqing's fake Chinese research project, namely, matching the recorded astronomical events with the NASA data.)
 
Prof Zhu Yongchang of Purdue, having pointed out that the Heavenly Stems and Earthly Branches in THE BAMBOO ANNALS could be latter-day add-ons - just as Sima Qian's Shi-ji might have similar add-ons of the Heavenly Stems and Earthly Branches - used the NASA data to rebut the errors by folks like David Pankeniers et al. Prof Zhu believed that THE BAMBOO ANNALS was correct from last Xia King Jie up to the records of Xia King Shaokang, with all astronomical events matched with the NASA data. With data from the "Stalman and Gingerich Solar and Planetary Longitudes for Years 2500 to 2000", Professor Zhang Peiyu's "Five Planets Conjunction 2500 – 1500 BC", "NASA Espenak's Solar Eclipse Paths: 2004 World Atlas of Five Millennium of Solar Eclipse Paths (2000 BCE to 3000)", Prof Zhu adjusted the Xia years with three full mourning years, adjusted the year for King Shao-kang's restoration, and synched up THE BAMBOO ANNALS records with the Solar Eclipse, Crisscross of Five Planets, and Conjunction of Five Planets in a Cluster.
 
Chronology with superscript denotion of 2 was the result of Li Xueqing's Chinese research project which, started in 1995, had been reported to have pushed the exact date to the year 2070 BC as the starting point for Xia Dynasty. Do note that "Chinese Research Project" was heavily influenced by politics and government than a serious academic research.
 
Chronology with superscript denotion of 3 was from China The Beautiful, which was basically the commonly-accepted but non-validated years. Note that the year 1122 BC, a number derived by Liu Xin, was commonly treated as the year when Shang Dynasty ended. Using the first full year as the reign for a new dynasty, Zhou Dynasty counts 1121 BC as the first year of existence. In the ancient times, two derivations had been used to determine the exact year Shang Dynasty ended. Ancient Scholar Liu Xin derived 1122 BC, while some others, including Seng Yixing's version in "New History of Tang Dynasty", derived 1111 BC instead. (Liu Xin, not fully understanding the Jupiter's sidereal effect and synodic periods, assumed that it took 144 years for the planet to exceed one chronogram. Since the Jupiter took 11.86 years to make one revolution, not 12-year, it would be every 84.71 years for the planet to exceed one chronogram. As a result of applying the 144-year formula, Liu Xin derived the year 1122 B.C. for Zhou King Wuwang's campaign against the Shang dynasty, with the future astronomers, like Seng Yixing of the Tang dynasty, adopting a similar approach to derive equally wrong years. As seen in the book WU-XING ZHAN ("Astrology/Divination on the Five Planets") that was excavated in 1973 from the Mawangtui Mausoleum in Changsha, speculated to be that of Li Xi with the title of Marquis Dai4-hou, son of Li Cang (?-185 B.C.) the prime minister for Wu Chen the former king of Changsha, there was rudimentary description of the synodic periods of Jupiter or the year star (planet), with a seemingly detailed account of the planet’s motion over the course of one synodic period during the first month of Qin Emperor Shihuangdi, without the sophistication of detecting or calculating the differential from the 11.86-year versus 12-year sidereal effect. That is, China, in the early Han dynasty, had not found a way to calculate the number of years it would take the planet to exceed a chronogram, with ZUO ZHUAN atributing the planets' missing the sector division of the ecliptic to some bad omen, namely, something to be explained by hemerology or by the sorcerers.)
 
The so-called "Xia-Shang-Zhou Dynasties' Project" of the late 20th century was a Communist China forgery just like the fake consumer products that China manufactured in the last few decades. The raw data from THE BAMBOO ANNALS pointed to the date of 1978 B.C.E. as the start reign of first Xia king Qi. Professor Zhu Yongchang ([Yongtang]; John Y.D. Tse]), who matched THE BAMBOO ANNALS's astronomical events with NASA data, adjusted the Xia lord Qi's date to 1991 B.C.E. and Lord Yu's reign to 2002-1995 B.C.E with rule of 8 years and life of 100 years. Though, you could not have the best of two worlds, i.e., the precise year from the Stellarium/NASA data and the selective use of the years and events in THE BAMBOO ANNALS, namely, the so-called ancient Chinese dilemma in the singular choice of either fish or the bear's paw, or either a person's life or the righteousness in MENCIUS. For example, should you buy the five planets' conjunction in 1059 B.C., then THE BAMBOO ANNALS would give you the year 1038 B.C. for the Zhou's overthrow of Shang, not 1046 as the forgery Xia-Shang-zhou project said. See this webmaster's discourse in the Zhou Dynasty section. There was no definition as to how wide a celestial range should be for defining the conjunction, criss crossing or one line alignment of the five planets, i.e., a subjective call, not to mention the name or type of the comets as recorded in ancient China. This webmaster's point was that the usage of astrological and astronomical records in China's prehistory was unscientific, something that would contradict all the established records on the coherent and sequential events that happened during all kings and lords' reign years.