You are sort of throwing out the generational theory here. What you are not considering (and which S&H did not carefully think about) was how does the generational cycle work? Look at my first post at the beginning of this thread. There I outline a method to derive one generation from the previous one using the concept "history creates generations and generations create history".
An eventful period in history imprints those age 22 during that period into a certain kind of generation. Later in life, when they occupy a majority of the top positions of societal institutions (i.e. when they become "history makers") they create history.
Thus, history creates a generation out of those coming of age (age 22) and later this generation creates history when it is age AL, and in turn forges a new generation of their same type (i.e. a dominant gen "begets" a new dominant gen and recessive gen a new recessive gen). This means the spacing between a pair of even-numbered turnings/dominant generations are spaced AL-22 years apart. The same is true for odd-numbered turnings/recessive gens.
To see how this works I note the value of AL in the early 1960's was 56. The spacing between the start of the 2T then and the previous 4T would then be 56-22 or 34 years. If you add 34 to 1929 you get 1963, pretty close.
By 2008 AL had risen to 61. This gives a spacing of 39 years. If you add 39 to the last social moment over 1967-1980 you can project a secular crisis social moment (the core of a 4T) for about 2006-2019. I would say a secular crisis social moment began in 2008. The actual 4T would be this core plus some cusps. It would then begin no later than 2008, but it could be earlier, we won't know until its over.
Now the previous secular crisis was 1932-45 and was the core of the 1929-46 4T. In the early 1930's AL was 58, giving a 36 year spacing. If we subtract 36 from the start of the 4T we get the previous 2T starting in the 1890's, not the 1880's as S&H have it. AL then was 55 giving a 33 year spacing. So if we subtract 36 and then 33 from 1929 we can estimate when the previous 4T should have started. The result in 1860, when S&H have it--and NOT a decade earlier. The theory works and it places constraints on when you can draw turning boundaries. One may think it makes sense to date the Civil War 4T earlier, but doing that is inconsistent with all the turnings that come after, according to S&H's theory.
An eventful period in history imprints those age 22 during that period into a certain kind of generation. Later in life, when they occupy a majority of the top positions of societal institutions (i.e. when they become "history makers") they create history.
Thus, history creates a generation out of those coming of age (age 22) and later this generation creates history when it is age AL, and in turn forges a new generation of their same type (i.e. a dominant gen "begets" a new dominant gen and recessive gen a new recessive gen). This means the spacing between a pair of even-numbered turnings/dominant generations are spaced AL-22 years apart. The same is true for odd-numbered turnings/recessive gens.
To see how this works I note the value of AL in the early 1960's was 56. The spacing between the start of the 2T then and the previous 4T would then be 56-22 or 34 years. If you add 34 to 1929 you get 1963, pretty close.
By 2008 AL had risen to 61. This gives a spacing of 39 years. If you add 39 to the last social moment over 1967-1980 you can project a secular crisis social moment (the core of a 4T) for about 2006-2019. I would say a secular crisis social moment began in 2008. The actual 4T would be this core plus some cusps. It would then begin no later than 2008, but it could be earlier, we won't know until its over.
Now the previous secular crisis was 1932-45 and was the core of the 1929-46 4T. In the early 1930's AL was 58, giving a 36 year spacing. If we subtract 36 from the start of the 4T we get the previous 2T starting in the 1890's, not the 1880's as S&H have it. AL then was 55 giving a 33 year spacing. So if we subtract 36 and then 33 from 1929 we can estimate when the previous 4T should have started. The result in 1860, when S&H have it--and NOT a decade earlier. The theory works and it places constraints on when you can draw turning boundaries. One may think it makes sense to date the Civil War 4T earlier, but doing that is inconsistent with all the turnings that come after, according to S&H's theory.
