Mr. Johnson has just raised a point about the lamentable lack of theoretical statements/justifications in Indian astrological texts. I must say the same is true of the surviving Hellenistic texts as well, especially from the founding era. With the exception of Ptolemy, who is in no way representative of the early tradition and appears to be going off on a tangent, all we have are practical texts and manuals.
However, I believe that the underlying principles can be ferreted out of the practical texts by paying careful attention to the technical vocabulary and the overall organization of the Hellenistic system. I wonder if you harbor the same hope.
And while we are on the subject, perhaps either you or Mr. Wilhelm could inform us of the concrete meaning of the various Sanskrit words for the planets and fixed stars in general.
Regarding the subject of zodiacal fixed stars versus extra-zodiacal ones, I have a strong suspicion that the Hellenistic astrologers regarded the extra-zodiacal stars as higher in deific rank than the ecliptic ones, as opposed to your statement about the Indian texts, although perhaps not quite so immediately useful or relevant in the study of natal charts.
Robert Schmidt
