Skyscript Astrology Forum

Thanks to Roz Park for bringing this to my attention. Alexander Jones and John M. Steele's report of the discovery of two cuneiform astrological tablets in the British Museum which provide the "first evidence for Babylonian knowledge of the so-called "doctrine of the Terms" of Greco-Roman astrology".

Unfortunately, the date of composition of the tablets is not known. The presence of the zodiac indicates that they must date to after the development of the zodiac in the late fifth century B.C.,4 and the scribe?s use of the "old" form of the number 9 (written with nine vertical wedges stacked in three rows of three) alongside the later cursive form (written with three winkelhaken placed in a diagonal line) is suggestive of a date in the fifth or fourth century B.C., but a later date cannot be ruled out.

The paper is here:
http://dlib.nyu.edu/awdl/isaw/isaw-papers/1/

Awesome.

Chris Brennan wrote:Awesome.

Indeed it is! Thanks, Deb.

Wow!

The astrological sensation of the year if not the decade.
Christmas has come early!

Thanks to Deb and Roz for sharing this really important research.

Mark

A beautiful present for Christmas. Thank you Deb.

Greetings,

Of course one is pleased to see the discovery of ancient documents pertaining to astrology.

However, might a drop of bitter make the brew taste even better?

Were the ancient Babylonians or others immune to human error? Have we, as a reaction against 'modern = good', assumed an equally questionable attitude of 'ancient = good'?

We see that there are some differences between the bounds as reported in the new texts compared to the usual 'Egyptian' bounds. Sound research might ensue. Dr H at Regulus Astrology has done considerable research comparing results obtained with Ptolemaic and 'Egyptian' bounds but not including 'Chaldean' bounds, diurnal and nocturnal, to date. The plot thickens.

If we were able to transfer ourselves to ancient Babylon, might we encounter different astrological opinions, practices, schools, etc. similar to later times? And, extending our travels to all of ancient Mesopotamia, might we perhaps find significant regional differences in astrological theory and practice?

Having discovered that the practice of scepticism in the ancient Hellenistic sense helps navigate or avoid the often stormy seas of astrological and other controversies, may i entertain doubts about the very existence of a 'one true ancient revealed original astrology' sometime, somewhere in the hoary days of yore?

To all best wishes for a Happy Solar New Year beginning tomorrow, 22 December 2011, at 5h31 UT in the northern hemisphere.

lihin

I was recently informed that Alexander Jones [one of the Terms paper authors] was the prize student of David Pingree. I never knew there was a connection between these two scholars. John Steele, the co-author of the paper, has done an extra-ordinary job revitalizing the ancient near east studies department at Brown. Those of you with a taste for such 'wretched subjects' are advised to go cyber drool over the course offerings there. The article's innovative formatting of the terms table is reason enough to download it. Many thanks, Deb, for posting this article here and bringing it to the attention of Those with a Need to Know More. Thanks to Tom as well for posting a link on HASTRO. What will surface next?

I've got this one in my files!

One thing it points out is that the astrologers of antiquity were sometimes mistaken about their own heritage. Something to keep in mind before literally interpreting their statements about astrology's foundations.

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned the obvious: The Babylonian zodiac was fixed to the stars. Thus, if the terms originated in Babylonia, there is no question that they were sidereal. Should they ever have been applied to the tropical zodiac?

It's significant that Jones and Steele write:

[The terms] obviously presume not merely an astrology based on the uniform zodiac but one in which precise longitudes of heavenly bodies in degrees were available and regarded as significant...

Which may be one reason that scholars such as Rumen Kolev religiously pursue the identification of the precise boundaries of the ancient Babylonian signs.

Hello Therese,

Happy New Year to you!

I hadn't noticed you had joined Skyscript. Good to have you on board here. Also nice to be able to address you as Therese rather than the rather stiff Ms Hamilton as on the ACT forum.

I know you are a convinced siderealist and never miss a chance to make a case for the adoption of that particular zodiac. That is fair enough.

However, lot of Skyscript members dont regularly check into the News part of the forum. If you want to debate this topic or discuss the Babylonian zodiac in general I think you would get a better response on the traditional forum.

regards

Mark

Thank you, Mark. I thought this was the traditonal forum. I followed the link that Rumen Kolev gave from ACT. Yes, I don't much care for Robert Schmidt's "Mr." and "Ms." And he seems to have disappeared!

I'm not really qualified to discuss Babylonian astrology. But the terms were an interesting discovery. Thanks for the welcome! I had planned to join some of the discussions, but time seems to evaporate lately.

Therese wrote:

I thought this was the traditonal forum. I followed the link that Rumen Kolev gave from ACT.

Hello Therese,

Here is a direct link to all the forum areas:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/index.php

Alternatively just click forum on the top left of the Skyscript home page. http://www.skyscript.co.uk/

Look forward to seeing more from you here!

regards

Mark