[400] Daer van wy wel anders versekert zijn—with respect to which we well know the contrary. [↑]
[401] This makes the date to have been the twenty-fifth of January. On the 24th, the sun was only in the fourth degree of Aquarius. And all the details furnished by the author concur in proving, that, in spite of his assertion of extreme precision as to the date, the conjunction of the moon and Jupiter,—and, inferentially, the first appearance of the sun also,—took place on the 25th of January, instead of the 24th, as stated.
On January 25th, at midday, when the sun’s longitude was 305° 25′,1, or 5° 25′,1 of Aquarius, its declination was—18° 57′,4: consequently, its centre was 4° 42′,4, and its upper edge 4° 26′,4, below the horizon. The mean refraction at the horizon cannot, however, be estimated at more than 34′9, or, with an assumed temperature of -8° Fahren., 39′,3; so that the extraordinary and anomalous refraction amounts to no less than 3° 49′. [↑]
[402] Ons eerste gissinghe—our first calculation. [↑]
[403] That is to say, till February 6th. But on that day, the sun’s declination being—15° 56′,4, it was 1° 41′ below the horizon in 75° 45′ N. lat., and therefore still invisible there. In lat. 76° it would have been as much as 1° 56′.
In 75° 45′ N. lat. the sun’s upper edge would have been properly first visible on February 9th, when the sun was in 10° 29′,2 of Aquarius, or longitude 319° 29′,2; its declination then being—15° 0′,5, with an assumed refraction of half a degree. [↑]
[406] Josephus Schala. The title of the work here referred to, as given in [[146]]De Lalande’s Bibliographie Astronomique, p. 120, is “Josephi Scala, Siculi, Ephemerides ex Tabulis Magini, ab anno 1589 ad annum 1600 continuatæ, una cum introductionibus Ephemeridum Josephi Moletii. Venetiis, 1589, 4to.” It is not in the library of the British Museum, nor in that of the Royal Astronomical Society. This is, however, of no moment; as Mr. Vogel, to whose kindness I am indebted for so much valuable assistance, has calculated the time of the conjunction at Venice, and makes it differ only 57 seconds from Scala’s computed time. [↑]
[407] In the astronomical reckoning of time, the date was certainly January 24th; but, then, “one in the night time” of that day—which would correctly be called January 24 days 13 hours—corresponds with 1 o’clock in the morning of January 25th, in the civil reckoning of time. [↑]