Mithra6 wrote:What is the likelihood that Riley's translation isn't exactly accurate? Not trying to start an argument, but it seems to have been made more in the spirit of experimentation.
More accurate than what? While Mark Riley himself says his translation is provisional, Riley's provisional is a lot better worked out than anything I have seen from the astrologer-translators. I suspect people are taking Riley's "provisional" and using it for an excuse to not look at his actual work. In other words, ignorance is being used merely to start an argument. (Just what Skyscript needs.)
As a member of the academic community (along with Pingree, Neugebauer and many others) Riley worked to very high, generally agreed-upon standards. He wasn't working alone, he wasn't experimenting and he wasn't just guessing. He had a great deal of previous experience, as well as access to the best minds in the field. As I myself am fluent in French, I have traveled a little ways down this road myself. A translator's goal is not only to be accurate, but also to be literate. Many of the astrologer-translators I have read to date (please do not make me name them, I don't need the enemies) have failed in this critical regard. Their work reads like gibberish. When asked, they always say, "well, that's how it was in the [Latin] [Greek] original." Which, among professionals will get you laughed at. I am very sorry to say this. Translation is a struggle, it requires experience as well as a certain genius. A famous 12th century translator gave us "sunbeam". I assure you that term was not in the original. The translator created it whole cloth, and we have thanked him ever since. This is what translation is.
On the very first page of Book II, Riley gives the word, "Triangles". I queried him. Shouldn't that be "triplicities" - ? No, the reply came back. The word in the text was triangle. Which made me realize that astrologers use "triplicity" for two very different meanings. Thirds of a sign, and thirds of the zodiac. Casual use can be confusing. It might be time we sorted that out. "Triangles" did just that.
There was the matter of "houseruler". Which is how Riley gave it. I immediately changed that to "house ruler" (two words), though I may change it back. But what did it mean? In an obscure corner of the text I learned it meant, "ruler of the term of the ascendant, given certain conditions." Because that's how Riley translated it, as "term".
Turns out, everyone else has translated "term" as "bounds". Where did "bounds" come from, as it's not in Valens' text?
More importantly, WHY is the word "bounds" being used? If bounds = terms and terms = bounds, then as the word terms is already established, why do we need another? I see something similar in Schmidt's work, where he gives us Zeus and Aphrodite. The generally accepted words are Jupiter and Venus. Well, yes, but Jupiter and Venus are Roman, don't you know? Yes, and Thursday is Norse. What was your point? Valens is not writing mythology. We are translating into our language, not some invented neo-Greek one. This is what I mean by standards. I assure you: Mark Riley is a very, very picky translator.
In setting Riley's text, I have been forced to refer to a vast number of secondary sources. Literally every.single.detail in the text must be queried. One must observe carefully, one must consider and weigh what Valens is saying, and why. It really takes more than just a translator to make sense of the Anthologies. Initially I wanted the help of an experienced Hellenist, but when one of the leading ones declined, I set myself the task of doing it myself. What has emerged is very different from what I read elsewhere.
As for the question, was Riley qualified as an astrologer?, I've looked closely at his Introductory Survey. I hate to tell you, but he has a better grasp of the astrology than many of the Hellenists. So did David Pingree, by the way.
When I get it published, get a copy and rip it to pieces. You will be doing all of us a favor. I will be most happy to incorporate all useful changes. Valens will be a work in progress for many years to come.
