§ 14. [6]. but 2 degrees. Suppose the sun's midday altitude is 49°, in latitude 52°. Then the co-latitude is 38°, and the sun's declination 11° North. This corresponds nearly (roughly speaking) to the 1st degrees of Taurus and Virgo. Which is right can 'lightly' be known by the time of year, for the sun cannot be in Virgo if the month be April. Compare sect. 15.
§ 17. This conclusion, as pointed out in the footnote, is not correct in theory, but can be made nearly so in practice, by taking the two altitudes very near the meridian. This is directly implied in the words 'passeth any-thing the sowth westward,' i.e. passes ever so little westward of the south line; cf. note below to 38. 10. Consequently, the first observation must also be taken very near the meridian.
[25]. site, situation. Late copies, sight. This proves that the word site is Chaucerian, and clears up the reading in Ho. Fame, 1114.
§ 18. Instead of reckoning a star's right ascension by referring it to the equator, it was reckoned by observing the degree of the zodiac which southed along with it. This is expressed in the first 'Table of fixed stars' in MS. Camb. Univ. Lib. Ii. 3. 3 (fol. 70, back) by the phrase 'cum gradibus, quibus celum mediant'; the other co-ordinate of position was the star's declination from the equator, as in the modern method. The ancients also used the co-ordinates of longitude and latitude of a star, the longitude being reckoned along the ecliptic, and the latitude along great circles through the poles of the ecliptic; as appears from the second Table in the same MS.
§ 19. [6]. equinoxial. This, as explained in the footnote, should be 'ecliptik'; but I can find no MS. authority for the alteration, though the correction is practically made in l. 13.
§ 22. [13]. place. Late copies and old editions, planet; absurdly. Latitudes of several places are given in old Latin MSS. They are frequently incorrect.
§ 23. [3]. The star A is shewn by the numbers to be the Pole-star, and is obviously the one to be observed in order to find the altitude of the Pole. What the star F is, is of no consequence. The numbers used in other copies are different, and much less satisfactory. That the star A is the Pole-star or some star near the pole in this 'conclusion' is rendered probable also by the wording of the next 'conclusion'; which extends the working of it to the case of any other star, provided it be a star that never sets.
§ 25. [19]. When Chaucer says that the latitude of Oxford is 'certain minutes less,' he probably means no more than that the latitude of Oxford was 51 degrees and 50 minutes, as in the text. For I suspect the original reading of the passage made the sun's altitude 38 degrees only, and the latitude 52 degrees; indeed, the passage stands so in MSS. C and P, both good authorities. But he added the statement that the latitude of Oxford was less than 52 degrees. It is probable that, on second thoughts, he put in the number of minutes, and forgot to strike out the clause 'I sey nat this,' &c., which was no longer necessary. Minutes were seldom reckoned otherwise than by tens; 'a few minutes less than 50' (say 47) is a refinement to which the ancients seldom attained. Hence the amount of 10 minutes is vaguely spoken of in l. 31 as 'odde Minutes.' Minutes were clearly not much considered. In the present case, we are assisted by Chaucer's express statement in sect. 22. l. 6. The true latitude of Oxford is between 51° 45′ and 51° 46′.
§ 26. [8-11]. It is singular that this sentence, obviously wanted, should appear only in one MS., and has, accordingly, been omitted in all previous editions. There can be no doubt about the genuineness of it, as it so exactly gives the right sense, and happily supplies the words 'right orisonte' in l. 11; thus enabling the author to say, as in l. 21 he does say—'this forseid righte orisonte.'
[16]. this figure. Here occurs, in some of the MSS., a diagram representing a circle, i.e, a disc of the astrolabe, with straight lines drawn across it from left to right.