Skyscript Astrology Forum

Steve's posting contains references which (in my mind) support my previous post in which I expressed my opinion regarding the 6000+ years ago "golden age" of exact, advanced astrological knowledge; these ancients had precise astronomical knowledge, and in addition understood the meaningfulness behind it (what we would refer to today as "astrological understanding")

In addition to the excellent Cruttenden book Steve references, may I direct the attention of those interested in this subject, to astrophysicist Thomas Brophy's "The Origin Map", which goes into an analysis of evidences of advanced astronomical knowledge (dating prior to 7500 BC) at the Nabta Playa site, in the Libyan Desert near Egypt. If even only 1/3rd of the observations in the Brophy book are valid this would mean a revolutionary new understanding of the high degree of astronomical knowledge possessed several millenia earlier than the Egyptian Old Kingdom era.

The idea of a golden age is always a subjective one, and according to one's preferences. To many, astrology really started with Dane Rudhyar, to others the Hellenistic period was the golden age.

I think Atlantean's idea of the golden age lying in the future is a positive one encouraging to look forward. Likewise in life there is a danger of idealizing a period in your past as 'the best time of my life'.

I think we can lear a lot of Bruce Lee, yes the martial artist:

Bruce Lee wrote:Before I learned martial arts, a punch was just a punch and a kick was just a kick. When I studied martial arts, a punch was no longer just a punch and a kick was no longer just a kick. Now I understand martial arts, and a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick.

http://lopsa.org/node/1655 The webpage continues: "This quote can be associated with most anything in life, not just systems administration. What Lee is saying is that when we first start something, it often seems very simple and we concentrate on the basics. As we learn more about it, we focus on the details and forget the basics. Once we know something, we ignore the details and go back to the basics again."

The Babylonians first had a crude astrology with only the conjunction and the full moons and planetary oppositions to the Sun. Later the zodiac signs came and the trine with them and oppositions between planets. Then a massive growth came with dodekatemoria, terms, 16 Vargas/divisional charts of the Indian astrologers. To many this may have been confusing. Kepler didn't use these divisions and retained the aspects. Perhaps this introduces the return to the basics astrology.

We could even go further. Before the Babylonians established the technical parts of astrology the planets/planet-gods already had their divine status with their influences on the different fields of life of people. This veneration is perhaps not astrology in the real sense but the connection with people was already there. Lately I've been reading about gnosticism which rather than worshipping them or applying their influence, tried to escape the determinism through becoming conscious. To the gnostics matter was evil and so were the planets. The influence of the planets was rather something to be liberated of and this could only be done by getting knowledge. So rather than the modern rejection of any possible influence of planets a future view of astrology could consist of an acknowledgement of the influence of the planets, like recognizing Saturnine, Mercurial or whatever quality in oneself and trying to cope with this. However this would automatically lead to the insignificance of astrology and the end of its practice.

The idea of a golden age is always a subjective one, and according to one's preferences. To many, astrology really started with Dane Rudhyar, to others the Hellenistic period was the golden age.

I agree the matter is a subjective one based on ones preferences. Although from an existential perspective that is not a bad description of life itself.

Lee Lehman has argued the idea of a golden age is myth for this reason. Personally, like human history I tend to see astrology as having various golden moments rather than one single golden age.

I think Atlantean's idea of the golden age lying in the future is a positive one encouraging to look forward. Likewise in life there is a danger of idealizing a period in your past as 'the best time of my life'.

While I am sure we would all like the future to take things forward I do think contemporary western culture is rather locked into a linear evolutionary mind set. We act on the basis that progress is almost inevitable when in reality there is no guarantee that our civilisation will not go into a steep decline. Many other cultures, have seen history as cyclical rather than linear. For all we know this could be a fleeting renaissance of astrology before a new dark age.

Various things could happen such as a cataclysm based on a Cometary/Asteroid impact, nuclear war, global warming, the rise of religious fundamentalism etc. The myth of progress is an implicit creed in much of western culture. Ben Dykes brings out this point very well in his free introductory Logos and Light lecture.

Sorry to sound so doom and gloom but I just felt the philosophical counterpoint was required vs optimistic futurism. As I see it the myth of a golden age in the past is the other side of the coin as the myth of progress.

None of this means I discount the view that various periods of history and their astrological traditions are highly worthy of our time and effort to understand and learn from. I find inspiration in Babylonian, Hellenistic Medieval and Renaissance astrology.

dr.farr wrote:
If even only 1/3rd of the observations in the Brophy book are valid this would mean a revolutionary new understanding of the high degree of astronomical knowledge possessed several millennia earlier than the Egyptian Old Kingdom era.

Right on! Cyril Fagan came to the same conclusions near the end of his life (1971)-- after an intense study of Egypt?s old kingdom from an astronomical/astrological perspective. Modern day Scholars who are very knowledgeable in astronomy are correlating the same conclusions?it?s a huge mystery but solvable only to the astronomer/ astrologer. More astronomical evidence is being correlated with the ancient?s monuments and megaliths that indicates there was a high knowledge of astronomy predating the Egyptian Old Kingdom era.

?One of the great enigmas presented by the ruins of many of these ancient cultures , most notably Egypt, is that they seem to have arisen very quickly out of nothing. The Great Pyramid is supposed to have been built near the beginning of this mysterious civilization. As author and rebel Egyptologist John Anthony West states, ?The evidence for these advanced civilizations is almost universal in the sense that the all seem to be at their height near the beginning?practically all of them have deluge myths, practically all of them talk about earlier times, Golden Ages when people lived longer and were much more enlightened and advanced.? ?Lost Star of Myth and Time? pg 26.

West is indisputable correct with his historical observation that Egypt?s and other civilizations was at there height near their beginning. Stop and think about this for a moment?how can this be? As astrologers we need to ask ourselves the question-- could something cosmically be CAUSING THIS? As far as I am concerned, ?Lost Star of Myth and Time? answers and solves this glaring question/mystery beautifully. It is the astronomy of the Precessional Cycle that is causing the rise and fall of civilizations. And when the Earth enters the Sidereal Ages of Leo, Taurus, Aquarius, & Scorpio, Golden Ages appears--- and when the earth slowly leaves these Ages-- these same civilizations slowly Fall. As an astrologer, this means to me it?s the fixed stars of these constellations that are the agents which are causing these Golden Ages, which obviously has something to do with the consciousness/intelligence of humans, particularily with astrologers/astronomers. Does not our own Sun (Star) hold supreme importance with our consciousness? I also think the long perigee cycles of Earth and our Solar System with Sirius is the spiritual agent that also is responsible for one?s consciousness/intelligence. ?Lost Star of Myth and Time? is an important book for all astrologers?it?s a book far ahead of its time.

Regards, Steve

Being an Italian obviously I vote for Renaissance.

It is well known by Saxl and before him Warburg, that Arabs had little interest other than for exactitude of calculations.

Writes Jean Seznec in the famous book "The Survival of the Pagan Gods: Mythological Tradition in Renaissance Humanism and Art" talking about astrology books :

"Hence it arises, as a first result, that the locations, sizes, and
groupings of the stars, often neglected by Western illustrators, are scrupulously reproduced, and if need be rectified, by the Arab copyists, whose principal concern is to determine the exact forms of real constellations. But another and no less logical consequence then follows: aside from their scientific value, the Hellenistic sky figures offer no interest to the Arabs."

It was just with Renaissance- especially in Italy, we have here so many samples- that astral myths came back to the light, even inside Churches, where surely they should no be so welcomed. And in fact all the astrology books printed were sold as bestsellers.

Astrologers lived in the court of the kings, at Papal courts, even Luther had Melanchton at his side (Luther was very skeptic, I know)- nothing could be done without consulting an astrologer.

Hardly compare this with the present

margherita

Hi Margherita,

Being an Italian obviously I vote for Renaissance.

Ah so its a test of national allegiances now is it? Well Scotland hasn't got much to offer so I better plump for the medieval period when we at least had Michael Scott.

even Luther had Melanchton at his side (Luther was very skeptic, I know)-

Yes thats true. Something most evangelicals conveniently ignore. I would point it out more often if I could figure out how to pronounce Melanchton

Luther attitude to astrology seems a bit hard to fathom. On the one hand he closely colaborates with his astrologer lieutenant Melanchton?

However, I found this from a web article about Luther's attitude to science:

Luther accepted astronomy as a science, but rejected astrology as a superstition because it cannot be confirmed by demonstration. Astrology, according to Luther, is idolatry and violates the first commandment. He was both amused and distressed by Melanchthon's interest in astrology, a belief system that was widely accepted at the time [8]. Instead, for example, Luther was ready to accept the conclusion of the astronomers that the moon is the smallest and lowest of the "stars." He interpreted the Scripture that called both the sun and the moon "great lights" as accommodating itself to the appearance of the phenomena [9]. Had this principle of accommodation based on interpreting the Bible in a phenomenological way been maintained after Luther's death, the tragic conflict in the modern era between science and biblical literalism could probably have been avoided.

The paradoxical thing is that Luther had no qualms about accepting the predictive power of phenomena such as comets and 'monstrous births'. When it came to these occurences Luther was content to accept that this was a prophecy that the Roman Catholic church was headed for decline. I can only assume he distinguished these as natural omens in contrast to astrology which is the product of human divination.

Astrologers lived in the court of the kings, at Papal courts, even Luther had Melanchton at his side (Luther was very skeptic, I know)- nothing could be done without consulting an astrologer.

Hardly compare this with the present

Indeed its sounds tempting. It must have been great to live in a period when astrology commanded general respect rather than ridicule. I dont know about Italy but in the UK I am very careful who I mention my interest in astrology to. One acquaintance said after I told her 'but you seem such a sensible, level headed person?' The implication being that no sane, rational person could possibly accept astrology today!

MarkC wrote: When it came to these occurences Luther was content to accept that this was a prophecy that the Roman Catholic church was headed for decline.

eehmmm.....

Let's say that Luther for what I know- there is a wonderful essay in Aby Warburg about Luther and his horoscope where Warburg explains how Luther used astrology as propaganda - if you remember we were under the war of pamphlets about who was more corrupted.

But he never believed to astrology- He wrote somewhere (now I don't remember where I took the quote) "I was born under evil stars, maybe under Saturn. When I ask others to do something for me, nothing is done...tailor, shoemaker, bookbinder, my wife, all make me wait the more is possible "

I guess that when Melanchton invited Gaurico- the astrologer of the Pope - in Wittemberg he should not be very happy...

margherita

Let's say that Luther for what I know- there is a wonderful essay in Aby Warburg about Luther and his horoscope where Warburg explains how Luther used astrology as propaganda - if you remember we were under the war of pamphlets about who was more corrupted.

Thats consistent with Luther and Melanchton's pamphlets on 'monsters' and comets which were clearly propaganda pieces. As the ancient Greek dramatist Aeschylus wrote 'In war, truth is the first casualty'. The same kind of thing happened during the English civil war.

I was born under evil stars, maybe under Saturn. When I ask others to do something for me, nothing is done...tailor, shoemaker, bookbinder, my wife, all make me wait the more is possible "

Nice quote

there is a wonderful essay in Aby Warburg about Luther and his horoscope where Warburg explains how Luther used astrology as propaganda - if you remember we were under the war of pamphlets about who was more corrupted.

Sounds fascinating. Although I dont know if there is an English translation of his work. Still I did find this piece:

http://starsandstones.wordpress.com/200 ... in-luther/

Mark

Gjiada wrote:I guess that when Melanchton invited Gaurico- the astrologer of the Pope - in Wittemberg he should not be very happy...

Gaurico "convinced" Melanchthon that Luther's year of birth was 1484 (in fact, Luther's mom was sure about the right day, but not about the year)...

Richard Vetter wrote:

Gjiada wrote:I guess that when Melanchton invited Gaurico- the astrologer of the Pope - in Wittemberg he should not be very happy...

Gaurico "convinced" Melanchthon that Luther's year of birth was 1484 (in fact, Luther's mom was sure about the right day, but not about the year)...

Not like that.
Melanchton was freaked to cast the birthchart of his friend Luther, and eventually invited Gaurico in Wittemberg.
There Gaurico presented the version Melanchton found the more convincing option, more than the one of Reformed astrologers - and evidently more than Luther's one (Melanchton should think that Luther temperament did not fit with the date he insisted).

Gaurico was a very skilled astrologer, he lived in the Papal court because he predicted his election to Peters' throne and was the astrologer who elected time of foundation of St. Peter Church. Evidently his rectification for Luther sounded very good to Melanchton.

margherita