Mathematics of the ancient zodiac - about Arcturus

[Guest guest]

Please pardon my late reply ... the topic of Arcturus as a measuring

point, as inspired by Cayce, is an interesting one. Indeed, Arcturus

is a star with one of the largest proper motions, but it's primarily

oriented latitudinally, more perpendicular to the Ecliptic.

Longitudinally, it's more stable than Spica. I ran the numbers on my

current generation Excel sheet, and found that between the years 2000

and 3480, Arcturus shifts a full degree in Ecliptic latitude (beta),

but only about 28 arc-seconds in Ecliptic longitude (lambda) in the

same period. Comparatively, Spica shifts about 66 arc-seconds along

the Ecliptic. Arcturus could work decently well as a fiducial, though

it's 30º44' distant from the Ecliptic at epoch 2000.0. Using that

logitude as the beginning point of Libra would give an ayanamsha of

almost exactly 24º14' (J2000.0), implying that Sidereal and Tropical

zodiacs were identical in early July of 258 CE. It's worth

considering. The chart at the bottom of this page:

 

http://www.phys.uu.nl/~vgent/babylon/babybibl_fixedstars.htm

 

shows a linear regression of data from late Babylonian and Greek

birth charts (Kollerstrom, 2001). The real story is the wide

variation in coordinate systems used by ancient astrologers. For what

it's worth, the mean value is closest to that derived from using

Deneb Algedi as the end point of Capricorn.

 

There are a few stars directly on the Ecliptic which are extremely

stable in longitudinal position: Rho Leonis (Shir to the Persians)

was one of the thirty marker stars noted in Akkadian texts. It's very

distant and very luminous, so proper motion is minimal. Lambda

Aquarii (Hudor in Greek) is the noteworthy star of the Shatabisha

nakshatra, notably " fixed " relative to such prominent markers as

Aldebaran, Regulus, Spica, and Antares.

 

I've not made up my mind on the question of which ayanamsha is best

(and possibly never will, if you've seen my birth chart) but it's fun

to explore the mythos of the individual stars. It does appear that

when the Virgo/Libra boundary is drawn between the longitudes of

Spica and Arcturus, there is a nice synergy of rashi and navamsha

lords in relation to several major stars, e.g., Antares falls in the

Scorpio navamsha, Spica in that corresponding to Virgo, and the feel

of those seems to accord well with attributed meanings.

 

 

 

, " Don Ridgway " <scribe

wrote:

>

> Hi, Therese (Teresa?);

>

> Speaking of ayanamsas, do I recall you quoting Edgar Cayce on

> astrology? I studied his writings and came away with the impression

> that the Sidereal Zodiac is the more accurate, and what's more that

> Arcturus a Bootis was the center of our galaxy. So I used Arcturus

> as my ayanamsha for years. Has anyone else heard this or used

> Arcturus in their studies? And why are Tropical charts used in

Cayce

> books?

>

>

> , eastwest@ wrote:

> >

> > > Francois wrote:

> > > Thank you for your time. I think I sometime believe I can

> > > find " scientific " results from what was observed with the naked

> eye.

> > > I remember you citing Rob Hand were ?we have to find by

> ourselve? the

> > > ayanamsha used in the past...

> > -------------------------------

> >

> > No, that isn't quite what I meant. Rob Hand said, and I agree,

> that's it's up

> > to us to decide *today* what ayanamsa is the most valid. We know

> that there was

> > no one exact zodiac in ancient times. So we can't 'discover' a

> zodiac that

> > didn't exist. We know only that the first zodiac was sidereal,

but

> it was not

> > an exact to-the-minute zodiac. This is because it wasn't possible

> to compute

> > planets to the minute. There were no computers, and much was

> based on

> > observation.

> >

> > Well...at least an exact ancient zodiac hasn't been disoovered by

> scholars yet

> > if one actually existed. That's why I put two articles on my web

> site that

> > lists the positions of the planets from old texts.

> >

> > Therese

> >

> > ------------

> > This message was sent using SnowCrest WebMail.

> > http://www.snowcrest.net

> >

>

[Guest guest]

At 06:57 AM 1/20/07 -0000, Julia Cybele wrote:

 

>Please pardon my late reply ... the topic of Arcturus as a measuring

>point, as inspired by Cayce, is an interesting one. Indeed, Arcturus

>is a star with one of the largest proper motions, but it's primarily

>oriented latitudinally, more perpendicular to the Ecliptic.

 

>Longitudinally, it's more stable than Spica. I ran the numbers on my

>current generation Excel sheet, and found that between the years 2000

>and 3480, Arcturus shifts a full degree in Ecliptic latitude (beta),

>but only about 28 arc-seconds in Ecliptic longitude (lambda) in the

>same period. Comparatively, Spica shifts about 66 arc-seconds along

>the Ecliptic. Arcturus could work decently well as a fiducial, though

>it's 30º44' distant from the Ecliptic at epoch 2000.0. Using that

>logitude as the beginning point of Libra would give an ayanamsha of

>almost exactly 24º14' (J2000.0), implying that Sidereal and Tropical

>zodiacs were identical in early July of 258 CE. It's worth

>considering. The chart at the bottom of this page:

>

>http://www.phys.uu.nl/~vgent/babylon/babybibl_fixedstars.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Hi Julia,

 

Thanks so much for your post and for clearing up the details of proper

motion for Arcturus and Spica. The article you referred us to also clears

up the earlier discussion here about the sidereal zodiac being used by

astrologers up to the 6th century CE. Here is the relevant quote from the

article link you gave us:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

" Although Hellenistic astronomers based their measurements and theories on

a tropical zodiac (longitudes measured from the First Point of Aries),

Hellenistic astrological tables and horoscopes indicate that the sidereal

zodiac was employed up to the end of the 5th century AD. "

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

>...shows a linear regression of data from late Babylonian and Greek

>birth charts (Kollerstrom, 2001). The real story is the wide

>variation in coordinate systems used by ancient astrologers. For what

>it's worth, the mean value is closest to that derived from using

>Deneb Algedi as the end point of Capricorn.

 

If Arcturus were used as the primary measuring point, then the difference

between Arcturus and Deneb Algedi would be about 19 minutes. We are at

least close! The Krishnamurti ayanamsa places Deneb Algedi at 29 CAP 47 and

Arcturus at 0 LIB 28. The navamsa chart would be changed by about 6 degrees

if Arcturus were the main zodiac marking star. Then we'd have to adjust the

Dasa dates. Definitely worth researching!

 

Julia, you have a number of pertinent facts and notations in your post. I

hope others will print and save the post as I have. It's also very

worthwhile to keep a permanent record of the web site you referenced above.

 

Therese