Antiochus- Cumon versus Pingree

[Rumen_Kolev]

Pingree says Antiochus lived in around 100 AD-200 AD !~
A contemporary of Valens and Ptolemy !
Is this right ?

Also Pingree tells us which chapters from the treatises by Antiochus in the manuscripts are from him and which are not...
very good.
however Pingree seems to be very weak on the evidence !

Pitty that, as it seems to me, Schmidt (Robert) beleives him.
Because Pingree's interpretation of almost everything is totally wrong.
Not only wrong, but also un-ashamedly arrogant.

His editions of Greek and Latin and other texts are fine ! Great ! Bravo !
His interpretations however are idiotic, misleading, confusing and dark !

To cut all this short I will only say that another scholar: FRANZ CUMON who thrived 100 years ago, wrote an article on Antiochus where he absolutely adamantly prooved that Antiochus must have lived around 150 BC.
What has Pingree (and all who follow him) have to say on this ?
Nothing...
They just sit and hope that somehow the article by Cumon will be forgotten ( as indeed many valuable articles by the pan-Babylonians published in the 'Orientalische Literatur Zeitung' were taken out of the sight of the main body of researchers...)

Well, Cumon will not be forgotten because I am resurrecting his research and opinion on Antiochus now.
***
Cumon and other real good scholars also were of quite different mind (from Pingree) of what has survived from Antiochus.

Pingree just without any explanation rejects the authorship of Antiochus over many many chapters including the famous Calendar of Antiochus (heliacal calendar of the 12 months)- something that Boll wrote about.

***
It is hi time to put Pingree's interpretations where they should be- in the dustbin.
Only free from his confusion we can start doing good science.

[Therese_Hamilton]

Pingree says Antiochus lived in around 100 AD-200 AD !~
A contemporary of Valens and Ptolemy !
(...)
Pitty that, as it seems to me, Schmidt (Robert) beleives him.
Because Pingree's interpretation of almost everything is totally wrong.
(...)
To cut all this short I will only say that another scholar: FRANZ CUMON who thrived 100 years ago, wrote an article on Antiochus where he absolutely adamantly prooved that Antiochus must have lived around 150 BC...

Dear Mr. Kolev,

In DEFINITIONS AND FONDATIONS (p. 19) Robert Schmidt specifically mentions Cumont and his dating of Antiochus. Although Mr. Scmidt stated that Cumont's arguments weren't especially convincing, he does agree with Cumont's early dating for other reasons which he discusses on page 20. Mr. Schmidt is often critical of David Pingree's commentary.

Therese Hamilton

[Rumen_Kolev]

Yes, I know.
Schmidt does not agree quite with Pingree on the dating of Antiochus and thinks he is around 150 BC.
This is true.
However Schmidt translates ONLY those chapters by Antiochus that PINGREE says are by him !

This is not the problem.
The problem is that Schmidt does not EVEN mention about the other writings by Antiochus that were rejected by PINGREE... of course absolutely without any basis....
Pingree rejected several chapters by antiochus only on the basis that the word 'shabat' was used !!!!

Also neither Pingree nor anyone of his followers discuss the CUMON dating.
And believe me, CUMON's article is adamant (in French).

How could the view of PINGREE about Antiochus dated to 100-200 AD be imposed WITHOUT detailed analysis and rejection of Cumon's reasons ????
Well- not anymore...

What concerns the OTHER CHAPTERS and MANUSCRIPTS by Antiochus (that very few people know about), I will prepare a systematic research on this and publish it in the next volume of my 'History of Astrology Research Bulletin'

There I will enumerate and describe the writings by Antiochus that Schmidt did not even mention.
Some are published in CCAG, but many are ONLY in MANUSCRIPTS !
SOme of them are not even described in the CCAG (as usually is the case).

So, the only way to learn what are they about, is to open the manuscripts...

[Rumen_Kolev]

In CCAG 7 there are many chapters allegedly by Antiochus that are not mentioned by Schmidt.
Schmidt did a tremendous work translating all this vast material on Antiochus and others of course.

However the story on Antiochus is not full if we do not have a description at least of all chapters that are attributed to him- even if some to be found erroneously so....

Again, I believe that the manuscripts should be the next stage of our research- of all astrologers who can read Greek.

If we do this then we will be independent from the official 'temple-scholars' and their editions which we always should take with a grain of salt...
Not that they will falsify texts but rather that they will choose what to include and what not to ...
Even today W.Lilly is cut short of his last hudred pages of his Christian Astrology by well-meaning astrologers-editors-publishers. Then what do you think would the materialistic and positivistic astrology-critical scholars do ?!!

[Therese_Hamilton]

...What concerns the OTHER CHAPTERS and MANUSCRIPTS by Antiochus (that very few people know about), I will prepare a systematic research on this and publish it in the next volume of my 'History of Astrology Research Bulletin'

There I will enumerate and describe the writings by Antiochus that Schmidt did not even mention.
Some are published in CCAG, but many are ONLY in MANUSCRIPTS !
SOme of them are not even described in the CCAG (as usually is the case).

So, the only way to learn what are they about, is to open the manuscripts...

I hope the wait won't be too long for your published "systematic research" on further Antiochus writings. Please let us know when this work will be available...in English, hope. There are echoes of Antiochus in Benjamin Dykes' newly released PERSIAN NATIVITIES (Masha'allah, also Abu'ali).

Therese Hamilton

[Rumen_Kolev]

Hi everyone who happens to reads this !

I was informed by Dimityr Kojuharov about an article by Giuseppe Bezza available in the INTERNET.
The article is about ANTIOCHUS.

http://www.cieloeterra.it/autori/antioco.html

This article is written by probably the best modern translator of Astrology from Ancient Greek- Giuseppe Bezza.
He is an academic scholar and an astrologer at the same time as most of you probably know.

Bezza writes on the DATING of Antiochus and says that it was in fact NEUGEBAUER OTTO who thought Antiochus to have lived around 200 AD and not Pingree David as I wrote earlier here.

[ No wonder, though, as Pingree was a personal student and follower and admirer of Neugebauer.
Both of them made their best to make a big mess and to impose on the world their falsified picture of the History of Astrology ]

One of their 'achievements' was to convince the other scholars (and especially those who have short memory and do not read French) that Antiochus lived around 200 AD.
This is the more scandalous when we take in consideration that the great French scholar Cumont has written an excellent study on Antiochus several decades earlier !

Bezza writes in his article about Cumon, Neugebauer and Antiochus leaving no doubt of who's dating is the correct one.

[Abd-Allah Meyers]

Greetings to all,

Yet another thread to kiss awake?

I have just read about 3/4 of Franz Cumont's "L'Égypte des Astrologues" that is set in very nice typefaces, well bound and in print, e. g. here:

http://www.amazon.fr/LEgypte-astrologue ... 403&sr=1-3

An excellent book, especially for those who can read all of the copious footnotes in original ancient Greek and Latin, although the basic text is already very good, in clear, pleasant French. Although Cumont was a 20th century academic philologist who stated at the beginning of his book that astrology is a "pseudo-science" (probably obligatory for an academic in his time and still in ours), the book is interesting to read and quite valuable for those researching Hellenistic astrology.

The intent of the book is to place the reader in the social, political, economic, religious, etc. context of Egypt at the time when Hellenistic astrology arose, in Cumont's view the work of Hellenised Egyptians most probably with priestly backgrounds, antedating e. g. Antiochus. He also mentions that the "Corpus Hermeticum", most of which in his view also antedates Antiochus, is rather indispensable not only to understand Hellenistic astrology but especially to correct numerous errors of copying Greek and of mistranslations into Latin.

One can scarcely avoid the impression, as Dr. Rumen Kolev has indicated, that current English language scholars involved in refurbishing Hellenistic astrology have not yet been sufficiently diligent in studying the works of some of their continental European predecessors like Franz Cumont and André-Jean Festugière. It appears that, for example, Antiochus, even including the additional texts Dr. Kolev has mentioned, may not be an early enough source to serve as ground base for refurbishment without explicit references to prior texts.

Best regards,

Abd-Allah Meyers

[Rumen_Kolev]

Cumont was a 20th century academic philologist who stated at the beginning of his book that astrology is a "pseudo-science" (probably obligatory for an academic in his time and still in ours)

Obligatory !??
Maybe obligatory for the "scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!" ! Woe to them !

I believe, though, that Cumont was really sincere and really thought what he wrote. I think he was a real scholar.
He wrote what he thought and would not hide or deform facts as many 'scholars' in Babylonian Astral Sciences did and still do!
If you want some first-hand information of what is really going on, download and read this interesting story:
http://www.babylonianastrology.com/inde ... &Itemid=41

You are absolutely right.
The philosophy of the Neo-Platonics and the Hermetics during the Hellenism, should be studied very carefully by anyone who wants to understand ancient Astrology. Corpus Hermeticum.
There is a vast, very vast material in Arabic (manuscripts) that actually has preserved probably the entire ancient knowledge intact.
No-one works on these manuscripts now though- neither from among the mainstream 'academic' scholars nor from among the astrologers-scholars like Hand, Zoller, Schmidt or Dyke.

[Abd-Allah Meyers]

Dear Dr. Kolev and all,

Thank you, Rumen, for the additional information. Your experiences with some of them seem to have tarnished your respect and admiration for German professors. Hopefully you will have ample opportunity to publish your rebuttal of the late Prof. Dr. Koch's arguments concerning the antiquity of Babylonian astronomy.

One should in my humble opinion always bear in mind, when studying Hellenistic astrology in particular, that most of those who have transmitted it and other ancient doctrines do not share Hellenistic religions, mystery schools, etc., but are usually confirmed believers in one or another Abrahamic proselytic 'monotheistic' religion, above all Christianity and Islam. They often have more or less hidden missionary agendas and, alas, have not hesitated to leave out, substitute or 'comment' texts of Hellenistic astrology with clear heathen underpinnings, e. g. references to 'The Goddess', and / or choose biased, misleading words for translation, e. g. 'To Hen' (The One) as 'God'.

Therefore, even if one obtains access to many additional astrological manuscripts in Arabic, one must be prepared to face such issues in additional to copying and translation errors. Perusal of the late David Pingree's translation of Dorotheus of Sidon's "Carmen Astrologicum" shows many such examples including frequent interpolations of typical Islamic expressions like 'In the Name of G, the Beneficent, the Merciful' and 'G willing'. The text we have in English seems at least to me highly unreliable concerning the supposition that it faithfully renders Dorotheus' original ancient Greek work.

Dr. Benjamin Dykes' transliterations of Arabic words are usually excellent as far as I can see, far better than average and MUCH better than the typical mediaeval Latin transliterations. Perhaps he might kindly inform us here concerning his fluency in Arabic.

Where are the Arabic manuscripts you mention located? Are they accessible to scholars?

Interesting in this context are the 'Epistles of the Pure Brethren of Basra', available on line in Arabic but, until now, never fully translated into a modern European language. One should bear in mind that, parallel to many 'Christian' cultural environments, fundamentalist, literalistic forms of Islamic theology predominate in many countries including e. g. the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Esoteric doctrines are, due to possible persecution, usually underground and veiled.

Best regards,

Abd-Allah Meyers

[Rumen_Kolev]

Oh AbdUllah!,

The Truth is pervading everything, even the most dogmatic Christianity, Judaism and Islam!
All they have their own paths to the 'One' possible.
In the end it does not matter how they would translate a word or even in what theological doctrines and details they believe in, but whether their hearts are filled with hatred or kindness.
In this way, I believe that all ancient astrological-esoterical-mystical doctrines may be 'translated' correctly into any 'new language' used by any 'new' religion.
(Of course, the 'translation' may be very incorrect too)
An example would be with the belief in the existence of that spiritual being that serves as personal 'adviser' and helper to any human born- from some time before the birth to some time after the death.
This so called by the Hellines 'daimon' is known also by the Sumerians and the Babylonians and the Christians (Guardian Angel) and the Moslems because reality is one and the same. This 'Guardian Angel' existed not only when the Hellines existed but always when man existed and always will.
But this being will be called differently by the different cultures.
This 'daimon' or 'Guardian Angel' exists also in the birth-charts of different people, used and computed by the astrologers.
It is there. It is in the sky (most often) since it is (most often) one of the (spirits-principles-powers of the) heavenly bodies.
However it may be also something else (in rare cases).
Look in Ennead III
As I wrote in other places, there are rules astrologically to find out Who is the 'daimon-Guardian Angel' in any chart.
The Oikodespotis- the one who rules the very Life of the native. Plotinus says the same.
Some authors say that it is possible also that in some charts there is no Oikodespotis. Or maybe it cannot be found in the sky.