If you didn't read the article, the headline could be misunderstood: records have been kept since 812, and the previous record was in 1409.
As an aside, it's pretty incredible to have 1200 years of data for this.
As an aside, it's pretty incredible to have 1200 years of data for this.
Even for cherry blossoms, they put off pollen, so you could probably do something similar. It'd be tricky to get a fine enough resolution (I'd be impressed if you could even get estimates as specific as month-level). Though the millenium of data would be awesome for verifying the proxy.
> Cores are drilled with hand augers (for shallow holes) or powered drills; they can reach depths of over 3.2 km, and contain ice up to 800,000 years old.
> The physical properties of the ice and of material trapped in it can be used to reconstruct the climate over the age range of the core. The proportions of different oxygen and hydrogen isotopes provide information about ancient temperatures, and the air trapped in tiny bubbles can be analysed to determine the level of atmospheric gases such as carbon dioxide.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core (edited for SI units preference)
> In January 2006, after falling on difficult times, it became a subsidiary of the Takamatsu Construction Group.
The oldest one that still operates independently appears to be still from Japan, though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nishiyama_Onsen_Keiunkan
To me that reads like 1409 had an even earlier blossoming, and still holds the record, whereas what's actually reported is this is a new earliest since records began. Granted, it's not much difference between 26th and 27th, (and the peak must surely be at least a little bit subjective?) but if we're disambiguating, why not 'earliest peak since records began, in 812' or similar. At least that's consistent with what's being reported.