lihin wrote:
One reads phrases like 'unfaithfulness', 'cheated on him' in various places in this thread. These are moralistically judgemental expressions. Are they appropriate in an objective astrological context? To what extent do they reflect patriarchal and / or theological prejudices?
In what sense are the not objective? If you live in a monogamous relationship, and the expectations of monogamy are understood at the beginning of the relationship by both sides, which is the 'norm' of relationships these days, then for someone to pretend to be monogamous with their partner but is in fact sleeping with someone else or has done so, then in what sense is not an objective reality to state that this purpose has 'been unfaithful'. It is not a theological prejudice. It in no way pertains to matters of god. It is a social construct that has been breached.
Now in addition to the fact that a spouse has cheated on his/her partner, there can often be judgemental expressions, but that is a separate matter.
Do most readers share the opinion that Mediaeval astrology is simply a continuation of Hellenistic?
I don't know, but I do not. I would say that it is an evolution or elaboration of the hellenistic astrology, but it is not simply a continuation of what was already in the hellenistic tradition. For example we see a great deal on horary in the medieval tradition - we have scant sources if any in the hellenistic tradition (by which I mean horary itself rather than the consultation chart, it's probable roots). We also have developments where the north node takes on benefic qualities in the medieval tradition whereas both nodes are more or less unfavourable in the hellenistic tradition. Sect's importance in Hellenistic astrology was focused upon whether a planet was of the sect of the chart, ie whether a day or night chart, but later in the medieval period an increased focus on sect became whether a diurnal planet was above the horizon, whether by day or night.
It is not therefore simply a continuation any more than modern astrology is simply a continuation of traditional astrology, though the modern example may be more extreme.
Do the heavy warps and censorship inflicted by Abrahamic religious theologies (e. g. the interpolations in the texts of Dorotheus of Sidon; the elimination of all references to The Goddess, House of The Goddess, Goddesses) upon Heathen Tradition in Mediaeval astrology go unnoticed?
Heathen Tradition? Is this meant to mean hellenistic astrology? If so it is a gross misnomer if it is meant to mean that the hellenistic astrology was pagan. Authors like Firmicus Maternus are still within the hellenistic period but were not forever pagan (if this is what you mean by heathen?), Maternus of course converted to christianity.
I'm afraid I can only guess what you mean by "Heathen Tradition".
Nevertheless, both Indian and Hellenistic astrologies offer a clearer transmission of unfettered original Heathen Tradition than Mediaeval astrology.
Define 'original' in this context?
