Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 In a message dated 06/05/2004 05:55:33 GMT Standard Time, eastwest writes: > but it's historical fact that these come from Mesopotamia and > were general areas of the constellations, and not the position of the > planets on a certain date. > But at a later date they were associated with specific degrees that have passed down to us, so this isn't such a big deal that previous to Fagan's exaltation date they did not. Or perhaps there was a less precise positioning that was a ?cult/'trade'' secret before then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2004 Report Share Posted May 6, 2004 Therese Hamilton wrote: > > Steve, I found the pages I printed out from Dr. B's site, but can't > find > the reference to Regulus, which happens to be at the center of today's > > Magha lunar mansion today. I have only the first 9 of 38 pages. Could > you > give the Regulus quote if you have it? Hi Therese, Wishing you well with your teeth, from one whos' entire mouth is root canals and crowns (praying for better 2nd house karma in my next life). The quote is from Sanskrit-the important words are " ayanam magha mey " (found on page 31), which are underlined by Dr.Balakrishna. Ayana magha refers to the Dakshina Ayana, or the Summer Solstice being coincident with Magha. Balakrishana takes Regulus as the principle star of Magha, assuming that the brightest star would be the most obvious choice. The secondary star for Magha would be Algieba at +2.61 magnitude. Regulus at +1.35 of course is much brigther. In a similar way he attempts to date the Jyotish Shastras (Vedangas?) at approximately 400 BCE. In these texts Aswini is mentioned as the first nakshatra. If the same technique was still being used i.e with reference to the single brightest star in the group, then the Vernal Equinox was coincident with the +2.01 magnitude star Hamal at this time. The Uttara Ayana, or the Winter Solstice was similarly mentioned in the Jyotish Shastra as occuring at Makara (Capricorn). Balakrishna takes the brightest star here in the nakshatra of Uttara Shadha as the star Geidi. The above approx date, (if correct), appears to correspond fairly closely to the beginnings of Hellenistic astrology. > > > Steve, I'd like to know where Fagan's idea came from in the first > place, > because in all the reading I've done, I can't find any reference to > Aldebaran/Antares being at exactly 15 degrees except the Liber > Hermetis > text which puts most of the other stars in the L-K framework. Fagan defined Aldebaran/Antares with reference to the first magnitude star Spica or Chitra (as it is known in India). Mr. Fagan outlines this in his " Zodiacs Old and New " pages 31/32. Fagan states: " When I first discovered that Spica was the original fiducial or marking star of the ancient zodiac, I naturally assumed that it was placed diametrically opposite to the initial point of the zodiac, Aries 0.00*, that is, in Libra 0.00*, especially so as in the Soma, Surya, Vriddha-Vashita and Brahma siddhantas (the ancient Sanskrit works of astrology) Chitra's longitude is given as 180*. " " But the graph indicates that the longitudes of the autumnal point for the dates of the Hypsomata, Naburiannu, Kiddinnu ,the mean position of the autumnal point for the Babylonian Planetary Texts, and that for the Stobart Demotic Texts make it abundantly clear that Spica's longitude is assumed to be 29* (179 *). This associates better with the tradition which always associated the " spike of corn " as being in the agricultural sign of Virgo. Nowhere in the literature of antiquity is Spica associated with Libra. " Donald Bradley (aka Garth Allen) in attempting to rectify this point further with his own statistical work, re-defined this point to 29 Virgo 06 05.(thus the difference between the Fagan and Fagan/Allen ayanamsa) According to Fagan, it was not then realized (and therefore not a contrivance) that Allens slight correction had placed the longitude of Aldebaran the Bull's Eye (when measured with reference to Spica) at exactly 15. 00.00 Taurus. I believe this is it in a nutshell. As far as I know, *all* Indian ayanamsa's place Spica at 0.00 Libra or greater and therefore the Bull's Eye is taken to be 15.53 Taurus at minimum. > > > >Whatever we are talking about-- in degrees or less than a degree, how > > >does that invalidate the drawing of the Ezna zodiac on the ceiling of > > >theTemple in Khnum? > >Fagan states from " Astrological Origins " : " Here they denoted the > first > >half of the zodiac commenced with the constellation Taurus and the > >second half with Scorpio. These winged creatures had nothing to do > with > >Aries the Ram. They could not possibly represent the equinoctical > point > >for on October 4, 137 BC, the date of the zodiac, these were in Aries > 5* > >and Libra 5* respectively " > > What page is this on? Pages 25/26 and 83/84. > > > Fagan states in many places as fact that the zodiac came from an > Egypt. > (Which he believed would have predated the Mesopotamian zodiac > material, > had he known about it.) But there is nothing out there to support his > conjecture. he talks about the exaltations originating from a certain > date > in Egypt, but it's historical fact that these come from Mesopotamia > and > were general areas of the constellations, and not the position of the > planets on a certain date. Cyril Fagan uses Babylon as the location for the dating of the hypsomatic longitudes (the degrees of planetary exaltation). The date is April 3rd, 786 BC at First Nisan or the appearance of the first thin crescent of the Moon just after it's conjunction with the Sun at sunset. The Sun, Venus and Moon attain their respective degrees of exaltation on that day and the remainder of the planets attain their degree's at their heliacal rising or setting during the remainder of the year 786/85. Cyril states from " Zodiacs Old and New " : " The odds against the Sun, Moon and all the planets known to the ancients being in their hypsomatic longitudes on New Year's Day or on the dates of their heliacal phenomenom, during any one year is so enormous as to defy calculation.... " This is the best and perhaps the only explanation for the exaltation longitudes--and I am deeply indebted to Cyril Fagan for this brilliant piece of research. If Mesopotamian texts show these as general areas of the constellations, then the degrees have come from elsewhere, but where.......? Certainly not from India, where Saturn's exaltation occurs in Aries (it's debilitation) in the all important navamsaa chart. > > > >....This temple was built during the reign of Ptolemy Euergetes II, > 23rd > >dynasty, 144-115 BC. " > >Three separate festivals for the new year are apparenty inscribed on > the > >walls of the temple and dated by Fagan as all occurring in either 137 > or > >136 BCE. > > > >Is the above incorrect by modern scholarship? > > I'm not sure what this has to do with trying to show that the zodiac > began > with Taurus. I'm a bit fuzzy on the connection. Maybe you can try to > explain this again? According to Fagan, the zodiac inscribed on the ceiling at the temple of Khnum shows clearly Taurus leading the zodiac. The zodiac is dated as 137 BCE by dates of 3 festivals inscribed on the walls. Fagan states in Astrological Orignis page 26: " Obviously, therefore as late as 137 BC, this Greco-Eqyptian zodiac of the Ptolemaic period commenced with the constellation Taurus. " This date corresponds to the vernal point at 5 Aries--therefore there seems to be a zodiac, made up of 12 signs, with a beginning of Taurus not constructed during the Taurean Age and ,if a remnant of the Taurean Age, then its memory persisting for nearly 2000 years after that age had ended. The point being here that Fagan did not make up the idea of Taurus as the beginning sign of the zodiac and that this at least is one record in stone that such a zodiac did in fact exist. Best, Steve > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2004 Report Share Posted May 7, 2004 Therese Hamilton wrote: > > It all more or less comes together, then doesn't it? Hi Therese, Some more, some less....... > > However, this doesn't 'prove' that Spica should be at exactly 29 > degrees of > Virgo in a sidereal zodiac. Fagan established that Spica was at 29 Virgo--if it turns out a little bit less or more than this, I personlly don't have a problem with it. The most significant thing was the association of the 'spike' of corn with Virgo, rather than Libra and the very close connection measuring from there to the center of the Bull's Eye. > > It's abundantly clear in the translated texts that the measurement of > stars > shifted around by a degree or so in relation to the the observational > techniques that were used. Again, I personally don't have much of a problem with this > > > In summary, we have: > (1) Fagan's interpretation of his studies without verification from > ancient > translations You speak here as if Fagan made up everything he stated in his books, despite his many references to authoritative texts of the times. > > > (2) Records from ancient texts which give us a fuzzy zodiac in terms > of > degrees, but still within about degree and a half of the popular > contemporary zodiacs. Again no contest here........ > > > (2) Rob Hand's statement that it's up to us moderns to settle the > zodiac > question. This means our own research results. Even if we had very > precise > positions of the stars recorded in ancient texts, this wouldn't prove > anything until we somehow could show that this was the ONLY sidereal > zodiac > that really works in modern times. For this we'd have to devise some > kind > of precise mathematical research. Does Hand offer any suggestions in this regard? > > > > Note that the above quote says, " therefore there SEEMS to be a > zodiac...with a beginning of Taurus.... " The " seems to be " are my words along with the rest the paragraph.. Fagan's words are in quotations. > > > Wouldn't the mathematical star positions given in old tablets have > more > meaning than an interpretation of a diagram of the zodiac with no > numerical > notation? Also Rob Hand has pointed out that Fagan mistakingly placed > astrology in Egypt at a much older time period than when it actually > appeared there. I think both are important and obviously so did Fagan, who had much more knowledge than myself on this. There were older dates mentioned I think by Fagan, but 137 BC is not one of these. The temple at Esna belongs to the Greco Roman period. Hand points out: Although academic historians have not uncovered much concrete information about the evolution of astrology after the early Babylonian charts, there is considerable internal evidence for the place of origin in the earliest texts. Many of these old texts are contained within this volume (referring to the Project Hindsight volume). According to these texts the birthplace of astrology as we know it is Egypt. This would not have been a surprise to Cyril Fagan. He maintained almost alone that Egypt had been the birthplace of horoscopic astrology. The trouble with his theory however is that he believed that horoscopic astrology came into being in the Egypt of the pharaohs. For this there is very little evidence outside of Fagan's own somewhat questionable interpretations of the evidence. It was a later Egypt that gave birth to horoscopic astrology, an Egypt that had made close contact with the ideas of the Babylonians " . > > > Note that the ancient occult traditions DO give symbolic priority to > the 4 > fixed signs/constellations of the zodiac. This may have an unknown > spiritual correlation that has nothing to do with the practical use of > an > astrological zodiac. Yes one wonders about that....and so my fascination with this subject. Symbolically at least, the representations of the fixed signs form the great axis of life in my opinion . Taurus/Scorpio as the life/death axis of the 1st/7th houses and Leo/Aquarius forming the heart,home/community,service to humanity axis. A simple overlaying of Taurus as the natural beginning of the zodiac, brings about many revelations regarding the house meanings of the Hindus, who do not claim to derive their house meanings from the natural zodiac starting with Aries, and assign instead 'karakas' or planetary significatiors for each house. Best, Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 10, 2004 Report Share Posted May 10, 2004 Therese Hamilton wrote > Hi Steve, > > Did you check out the Swiss Ephemeris link that Francois gave? Hi Therese, Yes, a very good site. > And then when Nick Kellerstrom studied > ancient horoscopes he found that the positions actually fit zero Libra > better. Yes the author here (who is the author by the way?) points out: " Maybe, Spica was chosen as an anchor star for reasons of more convenience, but it was not originally meant to be located precisely at 0 Libra " > > [TH]Taurus/Scorpio are the two zodiac signs that align with the parts > of > the body with openings into the body, the mouth and anus/sex organs. > There > has to be significance to this in terms of spiritual development, but > then > above the mouth is the cranium (Aries). I have a different view of > Leo/Aquarius than you do. After I've posted these two signs on the > Lost > Zodaic site, I hope we can discuss their meanings here. OK, look forward to it. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > >[steve] A simple overlaying of Taurus as the natural beginning of the > zodiac, > >brings about many revelations regarding the house meanings of the > >Hindus, who do not claim to derive their house meanings from the > natural > >zodiac starting with Aries, and assign instead 'karakas' or planetary > > >significatiors for each house. > > How about elaborating on this?? I'm sure we'd all be interested! I'll > have > to find Schmidt's analysis of the houses from Hellenistic texts, and > how he > reasoned them out. I'm planning on developing this on a future web site but will include ideas like this from Hindu: 2nd natural house and Gemini rules speech and the palate, 3rd house and Cancer rules tenacity, determiniation and creativity, 4th house and Leo rules the center of self and confidence, fixed possessions, heart, 5th house and Virgo rules intelligence and discrimination, 6th house and Libra rules legal affairs, health through balance, 7th house Scorpio rules sex and death, 8th house and Sagittarius longevity, inheritance and wealth, 9th house and Capricorn rules foreign countries, higher institutions of learning, meditation and dharma, 10th house and Aquarius rules service to humanity, 11th house and Pisces rules gains, fulfillment of desires (dreams hopes and wishes), and 12th house and Aries, passions, imprisonment, self undoing, debt etc. I won't elaborate on this any further, but I think it's easy to follow this general scheme of house meanings using Taurus as the natural first house. Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.