- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
f68r: eclipse from 1419?
- f68r: eclipse from 1419?
-
RE: f68r: eclipse from 1419?
bi3mw > 24-07-2026, 11:09 PM
The only celestial events observed around the time of the VMS that I was able to find in Schedel’s World Chronicle were the Comet 1351 and the total solar eclipse on May 5, 1361 (Black Sea region). This eclipse was so full that an eye-witness claimed he could see the stars in the sky.
Quote:„Ein comet erschine im M.ccc.li. iar in dem december monat in der mitternachtlichen gegent. darnach komen schwere wind. vnd man sahe einen vornen prinnenden palcken von himel fallen. Vnnd man sagt das vor babst Innocencij des sechsten tod ein größere vinsternus der sunnen gewesen dann dauor ye gesehen worden wer.
“A comet appeared in the northern sky in December of the year 1351. Afterward, strong winds blew, and people saw a burning beam fall from the sky. And it is said that before the death of Pope Innocent VI, there was a solar eclipse greater than any that had ever been seen before.”
Schedel's World Chronicle, Liber chronicarum, Nuremberg, December 23, 1493
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
-
RE: f68r: eclipse from 1419?
NosDa > 24-07-2026, 11:27 PM
(13-07-2026, 08:39 AM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(12-07-2026, 05:34 PM)mgvtheus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This is all, let me know what you think! I'm 100% NOT professional in this field, so I don't know if there are serious flaws here. Thank you!!
I'm not an expert in eclipses either, but looking at the map of the eclipse I assume the red band is the total eclipse and the blue lines denote various levels of partial eclipse (75%/50%/25%?), with Europe being mostly in 15-35% eclipse zone. The first solar eclipse I ever experienced was a 30% one, and without special glasses I guess I would have hardly noticed it at all. The general daylight became somewhat less bright, but about the same as when you have the sun blocked by the thinnest of clouds. 70% of the sun uncovered is still broad daylight, there were no stars visible and the sky was as blue as normal. If I didn't know there was supposed to be an eclipse, I wouldn't have noticed it even if I was outside at the moment. To actually see the stars during the eclipse of 1419 one would have to be in central Africa or somewhere in the east, within the red band on the map.
To perhaps explain a misconception: Eclipses don't have to be total, nor planetary bodies visible in order to have astrological importance. They have a global impact. These systems were created ideologically, after observation, but observation is not a required component for efficacy. In this, the underlying behaviour of the wandering stars doesn't stop because we don't see them currently. If we know that the two luminaries are due to be meeting at a node, that dynamic is happening regardless of whether we witness it. We anticipate the movements of the planets before they happen, due to prior understanding of their cycles. The astrological effects of such an event are still taking place, and still need recording.
I noted to the OP that the Pleiades obtained significance partly because of the heliacal risings that those fixed stars make. However, they also have use as seasonal markers for that reason, if you're attempting to mark something like an eclipse. -
RE: f68r: eclipse from 1419?
oshfdk > 24-07-2026, 11:38 PM
(24-07-2026, 11:27 PM)NosDa Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.To perhaps explain a misconception: Eclipses don't have to be total, nor planetary bodies visible in order to have astrological importance. They have a global impact. These systems were created ideologically, after observation, but observation is not a required component for efficacy. In this, the underlying behaviour of the wandering stars doesn't stop because we don't see them currently. If we know that the two luminaries are due to be meeting at a node, that dynamic is happening regardless of whether we witness it. We anticipate the movements of the planets before they happen, due to prior understanding of their cycles. The astrological effects of such an event are still taking place, and still need recording.
Can you show any mention of this 1419 eclipse in the contemporary sources? -
RE: f68r: eclipse from 1419?
NosDa > 24-07-2026, 11:53 PM
(24-07-2026, 11:38 PM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
(24-07-2026, 11:27 PM)NosDa Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.To perhaps explain a misconception: Eclipses don't have to be total, nor planetary bodies visible in order to have astrological importance. They have a global impact. These systems were created ideologically, after observation, but observation is not a required component for efficacy. In this, the underlying behaviour of the wandering stars doesn't stop because we don't see them currently. If we know that the two luminaries are due to be meeting at a node, that dynamic is happening regardless of whether we witness it. We anticipate the movements of the planets before they happen, due to prior understanding of their cycles. The astrological effects of such an event are still taking place, and still need recording.
Can you show any mention of this 1419 eclipse in the contemporary sources?
I am not arguing that folio 68r shows the 1419 eclipse. I am informing the forum about common astrological practice. In the astrology sub-forum. -
RE: f68r: eclipse from 1419?
oshfdk > Yesterday, 12:14 AM
I think my question is still important, because I'm not sure if you are referring to the modern astrological practices (which may be not very relevant) or the astrological practices of the XV century. If we assume that 1) eclipses were very important visible or not and 2) it was possible to predict this particular eclipse, then the lack of mentions seems strange. I would probably think that it was impossible to predict this particular eclipse and for various reasons (weather, time of day) it went largely unnoticed. -
RE: f68r: eclipse from 1419?
oshfdk > Yesterday, 12:28 AM
Let me put it this way: if anyone suspected that there would be an eclipse in April 1419, then computing the exact time of the eclipse up to an hour would be trivial for contemporary astrologists. So, missing it would be impossible at least for some observers in Europe. From which I think follows that astrologists in Europe just couldn't predict this particular eclipse and missed it altogether, or maybe partial eclipses weren't that important? -
RE: f68r: eclipse from 1419?
bi3mw > Yesterday, 01:01 AM
If the solar eclipse of 1419 had been observed in Europe (or beyond), it would certainly have been mentioned in Schedel’s World Chronicle in the chapter on the Sixth World Age. As is mostly the case, it could have been linked to a historical event (the death of the King Wenceslaus IV).
edit:
According to the NASA catalog, there were two solar eclipses in 1419:
March 26, 1419: annular, center at 24°N/28°E (eastern Mediterranean/Middle East)
September 19, 1419: total, center at 19°S/72°W (South America)
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
None of them were visible in Europe or just beyond its borders. -
RE: f68r: eclipse from 1419?
NosDa > Yesterday, 01:15 AM
(Yesterday, 12:14 AM)oshfdk Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think my question is still important, because I'm not sure if you are referring to the modern astrological practices (which may be not very relevant) or the astrological practices of the XV century. If we assume that 1) eclipses were very important visible or not and 2) it was possible to predict this particular eclipse, then the lack of mentions seems strange.
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 am not sure that our author did his predictions himself though, if any of these turn out to be charts (horoscopes). Many people have pointed out the sloppiness of his technical drawing, I agree, it looks like my first study notebook. All the circles with missing chunks, overlaps, or terribly uneven angles. They could be teaching diagrams, though.
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.
Eclipses happen often enough and with enough diversity, that each must be appraised on its own merits. A handful every year. Each of them carries a different interpretive meaning. It could have been something mundane and routine, such as a fortuitous eclipse for sowing crops. It could have been personal, such as the eclipse that predated our author's birth. Without knowing what the text says, we are guessing at it, though the 1419 chart can be assessed of course, for whatever good that would do. If You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. is personal, local work or student practice then I'm not sure we would find many other examples.
Anyway, truly not married to the idea of it being 1419. Just wanting to pitch in. -
RE: f68r: eclipse from 1419?
NosDa > Yesterday, 01:32 AM
(Yesterday, 01:01 AM)bi3mw Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.If the solar eclipse of 1419 had been observed in Europe (or beyond), it would certainly have been mentioned in Schedel’s World Chronicle in the chapter on the Sixth World Age. As is mostly the case, it could have been linked to a historical event (the death of the King Wenceslaus IV).
There are interpretive principles we use to assess what that effect of an eclipse will be, and the ones associated with leaders are the ones usually written about widely. People were still interested in their own lives and communities, as we are today, and would use astrology to that end.
I don't know if this folio is that particular eclipse from 1419, but I also don't see any way to rule it out based on a lack of reflection in contemporary material. -
RE: f68r: eclipse from 1419?
oshfdk > Yesterday, 09:07 AM
(Yesterday, 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?
(Yesterday, 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.