The 'Chinese' Theory: For and Against

[Jorge_Stolfi]

Thank you for the clarification. I am glad we can agree that there is no classical text dividing a solar term into 15 parts.

To be precise, we agree that we do not know of any such text.

Medieval and early Renaissance Europe already had a highly developed and sophisticated astrological system based on Ptolemy, Arabic translations, and the Alfonsine Tables (as eggyk mentioned earlier).  If the Author wanted to enlighten Europeans about Chinese medicine, he might copy a herbal. But why would he abandon his familiar Ptolemaic astronomy and try to translate an official Chinese astronomical treatise

For the same reason that he would have wanted to copy the herbal.  For the same reason that Europeans in the 1300s translated the element theories of Caliphate alchemists like Geber -- even thought they had the theory of Aristoteles.  Because it was different, and therefore probably contained ideas, facts, methods etc. that might be better than those known in Europe.

(Geber's books made just a few tiny contributions to European alchemy, like distillation and the sulfuric, hydrochlorc, and nitric acids; and aqua regia, the first substance besides mercury that could dissolve gold.  Geber's element theory was an elaboration of Aristotle, and implied that one could transmute one metal into another by a suitable chemical manipulation.  I think that aqua regia and this theory were the reason why the transmutation of base metals into gold became such a common goal of European alchemists after 1300 or so.)

Note that the Author was creating the VMS some 100-150 years after Marco Polo.  The book of Marco's travels was still a best seller, and must have raised interest for more information about China. 

The VMS Zodiac section is undeniably European in its visual structure (Aries, Taurus, etc.)

  

The only thing in that section that relates to European astrology is the figures at the center of each diagram.  Even the names are those of months, not of the signs depicted in them.  The Author presumably wanted to show the approximate correspondence of those 12 or 24 divisions to the European Zodiac and Calendar.

If the Author brought back Chinese astronomy, why is there not a single Chinese constellation (like the 28 Mansions) visible?

Well, the diagram on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. has 28 "logs"...

Anyway, the Scribe had very little sensibility for geometry; he could not even divide a circle into four equal parts, and in many Zodiac diagrams he miscalculated the space and ended up drawing nymphs and labels outside the diagram to make up the required 30.   The Author himself probably did not have the time to understand Chinese star charts, even if they were explained by a native scholar.   Given these shortcomings, if they tried to copy a star chart, the result would probably be like f68r1 and f68r2: just a bunch of stars with labels in random positions.

Also, a different way to partition the stars into constellations would have no interest or utility in Europe.   What would attract more interest would be a different way to cast horoscopes.  Like the Solar Terms...  An Astrologer might get an advantage by advertising his services as "Horoscopes Cast While U Wait by the Arcane Chinese Method"...

All the best, --stolfi