VMs: RE: Astrological volvelles in VMS

["GC" <glenclaston@xxxxxxxxx>]

> What other outside explanations are being discussed? I'm merely
> putting calendar dates to the apparent 360 degree chart
> provided.

I was actually referring to my own vast personal speculations, and
my need to remind myself to stay focused on the target.  Sorry.


> ...Okay, so Askham dealt with leap years - I assume
> that means he
> commonly accepted the 365 day year plus a leap year -- and how
> would he have put that into a 360 degree table exactly?

This section is not a suggestion on calendar reform, rather a view
of the "true" year from an astrological point of view.  Common
sense on his part would point out the unacceptability of any such
scheme, but his preference for the ancient Egyptian calendar, from
a purely astrological point of view, is made clear.  It simply
points out that something closer to the "science of astrology",
and fully departed from the religious year, may be behind the
astrological volvelles.

> Backwards only in that the zodiac would lose sync with
> the seasons and
> I would be surprised if anyone dealing with calendars
> didn't want to line
> up the vernal equinox with springtime.

This may be a tendency to return to the teachings of the ancients,
in my view.  After a dissertation on when the day starts for many
different countries and cultures, he states twice that the
astrological day begins at noon, as was done by the ancient
Egyptians and the early Greeks. All his stated preferences are in
line with the Egyptian calendar, including the beginning of the
year being the longest day.  His treatise is directed more toward
explaining the underlying causes of calendar problems and calendar
reform, without drawing any conclusions, other than to state his
view of the year as a professional astrologer.

I consider this a very good look into medieval astrology,
primarily because few if any printed books from this time differ
much from the Ptolemaic viewpoint, but here we see a working
understanding of several ancient systems.  This is also one of the
earliest treatises I've seen that takes into account time
variances between longitudes, with fairly detailed calculations.
If anything this demonstrates a surprisingly high degree of
working knowledge of the mathematics involved in astrological
calculations.

The bottom line for me is that it becomes clear that more than
just the prevailing systems were studied, so it becomes necessary
to understand what was available to the medieval astrologer in
order to ascertain what school of thought is behind the
astrological volvelles in the VMS.  Understanding that an
astrological year may well not have 365 days, or adhere to a
strict monthly calendar, might just lead to a match between the
volvelles and some system.  That would be a big help!

As for February with 29 days, Askham says that under the Roman
system, February had 29 days and August 30, until the Senate,
wishing to honor Emperor August, took a day from February and
added it to August.  True or not, this is the first I'd ever read
of this.

GC