For doubt that the instruments now in
the Observatory garden at Peking are those which were cast aside by Father
Verbiest[16] in 1673 (or 1668); which Father Ricci saw at Peking at the
beginning of the century, and of which he has described the duplicates at
Nanking; and which had come down from the time of the Mongols, or, more
precisely, of Kublai Khan.
Ricci speaks of their age as nearly 250 years in 1599; Verbiest as nearly
300 years in 1668. But these estimates evidently point to the
termination of the Mongol Dynasty (1368), to which the Chinese would
naturally refer their oral chronology. We have seen that Kublai's reign
was the era of flourishing astronomy, and that the instruments are
referred to his astronomer Ko Sheu-king; nor does there seem any ground
for questioning this. In fact, it being once established that the
instruments existed when the Jesuits entered China, all the objections
fall to the ground.
We may observe that the number of the ancient instruments mentioned in the
popular Chinese account agrees with the number of important instruments
described by Ricci, and the titles of three at least out of the four seem
to indicate the same instruments. The catalogue of the new instruments of
1673 (or 1668) given in the native work also agrees exactly with that
given by Lecomte.[17] And in reference to my question as to the
possibility that one of Verbiest's instruments might have been removed
from the terrace to the garden, it is now hardly worth while to repeat Mr.
Wylie's assurance that there is no ground whatever for such a supposition.
The instruments represented by Lecomte are all still on the terrace, only
their positions have been somewhat altered to make room for the two added
in last century.
Probably, says Mr. Wylie, more might have been added from Chinese works,
especially the biography of Ko Sheu-king. But my kind correspondent was
unable to travel beyond the books on his own shelves. Nor was it needful.
It will have been seen that, beautiful as the art and casting of these
instruments is, it would be a mistake to suppose that they are entitled to
equally high rank in scientific accuracy. Mr. Wylie mentioned the question
that had been started to Freiherr von Gumpach, who was for some years
Professor of Astronomy in the Peking College. Whilst entirely rejecting
the doubts that had been raised as to the age of the Mongol instruments,
he said that he had seen those of Tycho Brahe, and the former are quite
unworthy to be compared with Tycho's in scientific accuracy.
The doubts expressed have been useful in drawing attention to these
remarkable reliques of the era of Kublai's reign, and of Marco Polo's
residence in Cathay, though I fear they are answerable for having added
some pages to a work that required no enlargement!
