25-07-2026, 09:07 AM
(25-07-2026, 01:15 AM)NosDa wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Sure, fair. Yes, approach has been consistent for millennia. Secondly, yes, possible to predict. Most of the work is understanding the behaviour of planetary bodies, it would have no predictive value otherwise.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean exactly by "possible to predict"? It certainly wasn't possible to predict if the eclipse would be visible in Europe, the math for this was only developed in the XVIII century, as far as googling suggests. And I'm still not sure "invisible" eclipses really were considered important, do you have a quote for this? We have a lot of extant astrological works from the time, do they contain something like the chart/table of all the eclipses?
(25-07-2026, 01:15 AM)NosDa wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.With regards to contemporary mentions, there are a few points. Astrology almost disappeared in Europe following the 5th century, and when it was revived in the 12th century it relied heavily on Latin translations of Arabic texts. The Arabic texts contained what little had survived from the Hellenists. Many of these Arabic manuscripts were systematically destroyed during the 13th century during the reconquest of Spain. Some astrological works don't fare well in history, at some point they become contentious at best, and heretical at worst.
I think it's very simple, if we are still talking about the Voynich MS. Either European astrologers were well aware of the eclipse of April 1419, for which we have no proof so far, or it's not very likely this eclipse is referenced in the Voynich MS.