It would be interesting to know where they put the number of the years for all the planets, and why firdaria have different number of year than Greek chronocrators.

In every case astrologers used whatever. Giuntini mentions both, one after the other, without any hesitation. Even the interesting method Petr mentioned could be in several variants, the order of the house rulers, the order of planets in the chart and I guess many others.

margherita

margherita wrote:It would be interesting to know where they put the number of the years for all the planets, and why firdaria have different number of year than Greek chronocrators.

You mean where they get the numbers from? For Jupiter it seems clear I think, 12 years is the period through the zodiac. Venus' 8 years is 5 synodical periods. Mercury's 13 years is 41 synodical periods. You can have a look at the solar returns of the 8 and 13 years in your own birth chart. While in Ptolemy Sun gets 19 years, the period of the Metonic cycle, I think that in the Firdar Sun gets 10 and Moon 9. Added up is 19 and the Metonic cycle is a luni-solar calendar, but here I'm guessing.

Note that like the goal years of Babylonian astronomy are not perfect but there are always more exact ones. Mars for example has period of 15 and 17 years but better is (15+17=) 32, (32+15=) 47 or (32+32+15=) 79 years etc. Venus is 8 years but there's a bigger cycle of 243 years in which Venus' node is at the same place as Venus in inferior conjunction and when she moves before the Sun visible from Earth as in 2004 and 2012. http://www.lunarplanner.com/HCpages/Venus.html I believe that the big Yuga periods of 4,320,000 years and more of Indian astronomy/astrology have Babylonians origins. These are based upon the greater periods of repeating of astronomical positions.

Although a fascinating subject, the problem for me is that there are so many timelord systems. Perhaps it's best to focus on one system when it is used in combination with other techniques of the same author. The Indian astrologers also have dozens of systems of which Vimshottari is the most used. Some of the other systems there depend on the position of Ascendant and therefore can't be applied to all people. However, although I use mainly transits, I sometimes feel I lack things to indicate long periods.

astroart wrote:So we may be have a proof that this doctrine is older than Sassanian period and the roots are in Hellenistic time.

Hi Dimitar,

the text published by Weinstock in CCAG 5.4: 133-152 has been republished as Appendix II of On Solar Revolutions by Ab? Ma?shar in Pingree Albumasar: 245-273. In fact, this text was written by Isidore Cardinal of Kiev who had the possession of Vaticanus gr. 191, a codex which was bound together from three older codices around 1302. The original possessor of this omnibus codex is believed to have been Gregory Chioniades, and while the first part (folia 2-172) is the primary manuscript of Vettius Valens, the third part (folia 229-286) contains some Hellenistic material mixed with translations from Arabic, especially from Ab? Ma?shar.
Now, there is a text on planets which ultimately stems back to Valens I 1, and was published as Appendix II in Pingree Vettius Valens: 390-392, using Berolinensis gr. 173, folia 144v-145v. As this codex contains something on folia 139-144v which appears to be an original Rhetorius text, and on folia 145v-146v one may find the preface of Epitome IIIb of Rhetorius, it may have also been from Rhetorius. Previously it was believed to have come from Teucer of Babylon because a version of the original Rhetorius fragment in Vindobonensis phil. gr. 108, folia 249-258 attributes it to him. Nevertheless, it is unfounded, but nearly nothing sure can be said about the text on planets until the long-awaited publication of Rhetorius by Heilen, which is postponed to 2011.
Another version of this text appears on folia 232v-239 of Vaticanus gr. 191, that is, in the segment of various origin. When Isidore made his recension from On Solar Revolution, he also made use of this planetary text but in this case he appended the theory of fardar?ya from Ab? Ma?shar. This is Appendix II, which can be found in two manuscripts, on folia 79-81v of Parisinus gr. 2507 and on folia 86-104 of Vaticanus gr. 1698, both copied by Isidore himself, and the latter one is that Weinstock published and which he made his speculations on. This is, therefore, not a proof that the system of fardar?ya is older than Sasanian times, however, it is certainly based on Hellenistic and/or Indian time-ruler theories.

Levente

I think that I found the root text for fardar?ya who used all later authors like al-Andarzaghar, Masha'allah, Abu Mashar and others.The book is in Arabic and the name of the book is "Kitab al-Fard?r?t".According to the manuscript the author of the book is Hermes(Harmis in arabic).The book is partly preserved in only 4 pages and is kept in Teheran.According to the Italian orientalist Carlo Alfonso Nallino this book is about " the cycles of the years in the human life which are under the influence of one or another planet"(Nallino, EI, I, 516).

Unfortunately the Arabic astrological Hermetica is very poorly investigated.

astroart wrote:

I think that I found the root text for fardar?ya who used all later authors like al-Andarzaghar, Masha'allah, Abu Mashar and others.The book is in Arabic and the name of the book is "Kitab al-Fard?r?t".According to the manuscript the author of the book is Hermes(Harmis in arabic).The book is partly preserved in only 4 pages and is kept in Teheran. According to the Italian orientalist Carlo Alfonso Nallino this book is about " the cycles of the years in the human life which are under the influence of one or another planet"(Nallino, EI, I, 516).

Thanks thats very interesting. When is this text thought to be dated from?

Mark

Hello Dimitar

quote="astroart"]The book is partly preserved in only 4 pages and is kept in Teheran.According to the Italian orientalist Carlo Alfonso Nallino this book is about " the cycles of the years in the human life which are under the influence of one or another planet"(Nallino, EI, I, 516).
[/quote]

It seems to remember I read that Nallino was interested in astrology, anyway I could be wrong, I should search where I read, and if I remember well.
Which is the reference for Nallino? What is EI?

Anyway thanks for the update, I'm going to save it.


margherita

Thanks thats very interesting. When is this text thought to be dated from?

This manuscript who is kept in Teheran is a copy made in X Century from older manuscipt.When exactly this book was written is a disputable theme.But I will quote Kevin van Bladel, expert of Arabic Hermetica:

"Nallino, Kunitzsch, and Pingree have already proved that a number of scientific books were translated from Greek into Middle Persian in the Sasanian Persian Empire and then were later translated from Middle Persian into Arabic in the early Abb?sid period (second half of the eighth century to the early ninth century). All the Middle Persian versions of these texts have been lost, along with most of the literature of that language, but some survive in Arabic translation."(Kevin van Bladel, Arabic Hermes, Oxford, 2009, p.27)

Which is the reference for Nallino? What is EI?

EI means Encyclopaedia of Islam- volume I.

It seems to remember I read that Nallino was interested in astrology, anyway I could be wrong, I should search where I read, and if I remember well.

One Italian source:
essay from C.A. Nallino,"La Colcodea d'Avicenna e T.Campanella" in Giornale Crittico della Filosofia Italiana, No6, 1925, pp.84-91

"Colcodea" means al-Kadkudah(arab.) or Alcocoden(latin).

Thanks thats very interesting. When is this text thought to be dated from?

Because I think that this is a very important question I will continue with citations from Kevin van Bladel:

"Ibn Nawbaht was a member of the second generation of Abb?sid court astrologers, and he is explicitly described as a translator of books from Persian into Arabic. His father (Nawbaht) was one of the same group of astrologers mentioned in the previous section: Umar ibn al-Farrukh?n, M???'all?h, al-Faz?r?, and Theophilus. The son took his father?s place before the end of al-Mans?ur?s reign in 775, and he continued in the service of the caliph ar-Ra??d (r. 786?809), working in ar-Ra??d?s library.
Ibn Nawbaht offers the most important testimony about exactly when works of Hermes were translated from Greek into Middle Persian. According to him, this happened already in the third century, by the order of the Sasanian emperor ??pur I (r. ca 240?271). The specific claim, made in a passage also constituting the earliest known history of science in Arabic, deserves careful investigation. The history appeared in Ibn Nawbaht?s now lost Kit?b an-Nhmt?'n, surviving excerpts of which, reported in the Fihrist of an-Nad?m (wr. 987), are summarized briefly here. Ibn Nawbaht?s history is based almost entirely on older Iranian traditions."

Hi astroart,

It?s interesting to me that you mention Ibn Nawbaht?s son, as I?ve recently been researching the influence of Ibn Nawbaht, and his connections with Masha?allah and Sahl. The ?history of science? text that Kevin van Bladel refers to is almost certainly the Fihrist of Al-Nadim a 10th century Arabian text. If you are able to locate a copy I strongly recommend Bayard Dodge?s translation (alas, out of print, 1970), because it is loaded with interesting snippets of information about the lives and works of the names that are starting to become familiar to us again. Unfortunately, the interesting facts take some mining as the text is large and covers many topics. I?ve noticed that some very interesting ?facts? from this text are dismissed because they present a picture that we are not used to seeing ? for example, the report that Valens was known as the author of several works, including a text on horary astrology ? what are we to make of that? If Bladel gave a page reference I can probably locate the passage to check what is covered there.

It might be relevant to your post that (although there are misleading reports that Masha?allah came from Basra) all of these early astrologers and translators were natives of Khorasan in Persia. They were brought to Baghdad to help develop the city and its House of Wisdom, after the empire came under the rule of the Abysid caliphs ? which happened *because* of the military support of the Persians in Khorasan. Sahl, for example, is reported as having first served ?al-Husayn the one-eyed?, the general who led the siege of Baghdad for Al-Mamun. So we need to be wary that the Persian influence was driving what we refer to as ?Arabic astrology? from the start.

Again, relevant to your point, the capital of Khorasan lay on a trade route from Alexandria, and is known to have acted as an outpost for Hellenism in the centuries beforehand. We probably shouldn?t forget that much of the knowledge that was taken to Alexandria came from regions like this in the first place. There is a moving report on p.574 of the Fihrist of Al-Nadim where the astrologer I think you are referring to here (Abu Sahl al-Fadl ibn Nawbakht) tells how Alexander, following his conquest over Darius, destroyed the Persian texts to leave that area bereft of its scientific records - but only after copying the material he wanted to keep for the Greeks, which was obviously then sent to Alexandria!

Because of these kinds of reports I doubt that the history of astrology is anywhere near as ?linear? as it is often made out to be, but probably involved cycles of emphasis returning to certain prominent regions. Khorasan, and especially its capital Mawr (now known as Merv or Mary - 37? 42' N / 61? 54' E - in modern Turkmenistan), the birth place of Masha?allah and Salh, seems to have been a particularly important location over several periods of history, although its influence is largely ignored at the moment. I got side-tracked into all this after chasing a simple fact for a footnote in a paper on aspects. The footnote took on a life of its own and became almost as big as the original paper ! (I now realise that, interesting as I find it to be, none of this background history is actually relevant to the point I was making .)

I also suspect that there is something ?in the air? at the moment, which is moving our astrological attention towards the Persians through the work of various individuals, such as Ben Dykes and others who are publishing the Persian texts.

Good luck in your explorations, and sorry I can't offer anything specific on the matter of Firdaria
Deb

Deb wrote:If you are able to locate a copy I strongly recommend Bayard Dodge?s translation (alas, out of print, 1970)

There seems to be a 1998 edition still available.

Valens was known as the author of several works, including a text on horary astrology ? what are we to make of that?

Considering all the spurious texts which are routinely attributed to Ptolemy, perhaps we should be careful not to make too much of it.

Because of these kinds of reports I doubt that the history of astrology is anywhere near as ?linear? as it is often made out to be, but probably involved cycles of emphasis returning to certain prominent regions.

This reminded me of a statement by Pingree which I read the other week: 'In fact, what is wrong about Ab? Ma?shar's history [of astrology] is that it is too simple, representing the transmission as being linear when in fact the celestial sciences were constantly being transmitted in appropriate circles, revolving back and forth between the peoples whom he mentions.' Appropriate indeed!

Deb wrote:

Valens was known as the author of several works, including a text on horary astrology ? what are we to make of that?

Martin wrote:

Considering all the spurious texts which are routinely attributed to Ptolemy, perhaps we should be careful not to make too much of it.

Yes but if this was true it would overturn the predominant view epoused by people like Robert Schmidt and Chris Brennan that horary did not exist in hellenistic astrology. That would be something very significant indeed. Does this text still exist? Or are we relying on references from other sources? In which case this is a bit of a dead end. There is a point that the interpolations of later Byzantine scholars does seem a problem. For example in his translation of Porphyrys Introduction to the Tetrabiblos James Holden identifies sections which clearly come from Sahl. I know Levente has previously argued here that several commonly accepted texts have suffered similar treatment or even outright forgery by some later Byzantine collaters.Still, if the text is still existent couldn't a comparison of the writing style be carried out with The Anthology?

Mark

I hope that aside doesn't turn the focus of this thread. It's also possible that something got lost in translation into English - my point was mainly to say that there are some interesting references in this text, which are currently unable to be substantiated elsewhere, but it has a lot of value because it is quite contemporary to the material.