Research Studies: Tropical vs. Sidereal & Related

[Therese_Hamilton]

Dear Rumen Kolev,

I would like to reply to specific parts of your posts of November 27 and 29. To begin, the research of Kugler and Huber is old and somewhat out of date. We now have programs that can compute exact planetary positions and compare these longitudes to those given in ancient texts. The "fixed Babylonian zodiac" that you refer to places Aldebaran and Antares at 15 degrees of Taurus and Scorpio, and Spica at 29 degrees of Virgo.

However, as I have pointed out in a previous post above, and as Dimityr Kojuharov also posted under Babylonian Astrology (the Sidereal vs. Tropical topic, 18 May 2009) we know that the planetary positions taken from ancient texts align more closely with Spica at 30 degrees of Virgo rather than the 29 degree position in your "Babylonian fixed zodiac." (Today known as the Fagan-Bradley sidereal zodiac.) Dimityr Kojuharov quotes Nick Kollerstrom:

"....It seemed to me that Neugebauer [Greek Horoscopes] was not well able to reach a conclusion as to what zodiac framework was in the use in these charts-merely because computing these things was so much harder then than it is today. About one-fifth of his charts have zodiac longitudes specified for the planets and have reliable-known times for which they were cast. I took these, and also two or three others I managed to glean from other sources, and plotted their ayanamsa against the year of their composition, as shown in the diagram below.

'The graph shows that in the 1st century AD, planetary longitudes were about 3 degrees greater than would be expected if they were using the tropical zodiac, while in the 5th century they were 2 degrees less than would be expected from using the tropical zodiac.

"Siderealists such as Cyril Fagan argued that the ancients used a star -zodiac defined by Aldebaran at 15 degrees Taurus, and this ayanamsa is shown by the line in the graph with triangles on it. It doesn't fit. Instead, a line taking Spica as 30 degrees Virgo (sidereal) goes quite nicely through the data..."
viewtopic.php?f=35&t=139

So I ask: If the "fixed Babylonian zodiac" was universally accepted, why isn't this reflected in recorded longitudes taken from ancient horoscopes?

There are some questions about the star longitudes from your November 27 post:

(1) Aldebaran: Although the LH 25 text specifically states (under Taurus) that "the brilliant star of Orion" is opposite Antares placed in the 15th degree of Scorpio, you have changed this Orion star to Aldebaran in Taurus. Further on the text states "In the 16th degree and 6 minutes there rises the brilliant star of the Hyades, of the nature of Mars and Venus." As Rob Hand points out in a footnote, this star is Aldebaran.

(2) You have placed Altair in Taurus, which must be an error as Altair is in Capricorn. I didn't find a star in LH 25 with the longitude of 6:36, so perhaps that must be on another page and not under Taurus.

You state: "The precision is around one degree." This isn't close enough to give support for a precise zodiac, especially since the majority of star longitudes in LH25 are much closer to the Krishnamurti/Lahiri values. However, that fact seems strictly to be a coincidence. You have pointed out that "....there are several star positions computed by adding 3 d. 26 min. to the positions in Ptolemy"....and then...."These positions though are few. Hubner, the scholar expert on paranatellonta, even thinks that these are paranatellonta."

In fact, the great majority of star longitudes in LH 25 are converted from Ptolemy's tables by adding 3 deg 26 min. I remembered that I had a copy of Gerd Hrassoff's "The History of Ptolemy's Star Catalogue" which has lists of Ptolemy's stars. Every star is listed in an appendix, but I worked with a shorter table labled "Gundel's List of Hipparchan Stars."

I counted 29 star longitudes in LH 25 (not including those listed as "co-rising" as I remember in counting...). There are 15 stars on Gundel;s list that are also in LH25. Every one of these stars longitudes were obtained by adding 3 deg 26 min to Ptolemy's positions. There is no reason that this conversion doesn't also apply to the remaining 14 stars in LH 25. (I can check Ptolemy's tables, but have to dig out the 14 stars from the complete list of 1022.)

I don't believe we have any real evidence that a very precise "Babylonian fixed zodiac" existed that was used by most or all astrologers. The evidence is that the ancient zodiac was surely sidereal, but the beginnings of signs were imprecise, perhaps within a range of 1 degree 30 minutes. The most precise longitudes of stars were tropical and computed from Ptolemy's tables. We know that these tables were in error, so the "precise" star longitudes are also in error by today's measurements. In LH 25 we have what on the surface appears to be a dead on match for the Krishnamurti/Lahiri zodiacs (with the exception of a few stars such as Antares), but we know this is only an illusion since the stars are tropical longitudes adjusted from Ptolemy's tables.

As usual, because this post was pasted from a word processor, I cannot add italics and bold fonts as I would like. When I try the text jumps all over the place and doesn't allow editing.

Therese Hamilton

[Rumen_Kolev]

Dear Therese,

Kugler and Huber discovered the exact origin of the Babylonian fixed ecliptic.
And it puts Aldebaran in 15 Taurus.
The cuneiform tablet- star catalogue with 6 stars- also puts Aldebaran in 15 Taurus.

This is the Babylonian fixed ecliptic.
The Greeks took it over.

The evidence of this ecliptic is indeed in the horoscopes too.
In the period 00 - 72 AD the mean difference (between the positions in the text and the computed tropical positions) is +3 because then the equinox was in the third degree of fixed Aries. A planet in 18 fixed Aries = 15 tropical. +3
In AD 370 - AD 442 it was in the 28th of Pisces. A planet in 18 fixed Aries = 20 tropical. -2

The standard deviation of the positions in the horoscopes is around 3-4 degrees and this limits our ability to ascertain the exact position of the ecliptic used.

However this is only if you limit yourself to the horoscopes.
They are indeed next stage from the ephemeris and because of this much inprecise.

But the data we have in the horoscopes, clearly shows that the horoscopes used the Babylonian fixed ecliptic.

=====

Altair should be in Capricorn.

I'd like to see this list with 15 stars obtained by adding 3: 36 to Ptolemy.
I found 2-3 so far.

But there is also that other layer that comes from the Babylonian fixed ecliptic.

-------------------------Babylonian fixed zodiac--------Liber Hermetis 25
Aldebaran ------------------- 15 Tauri---------------------15 Tauri ---- Constant
(Tauri ... 15 gradus ... stella splendida Orionis, opposita stellae Antaris)

Altair-------------------------6 : 36 Capricorni-------------------7 : 16 Capricorni

Antares-----------15 : 03 Scorpio (in 760 BC) -----------15 Scorpio
14 : 59 Scorpio (year 2011)

Regulus------------------------- 5 : 16 Leonis ----------- 5 : 50 Leonis
Castor -------------------- 25 : 35 Geminorum -----------25 Geminorum
Zubeneschamali ----------- 24 : 40 Librae ----------- 25 : 30 Librae
(Babylonian stellar catalogue gives this star in the 25th degree)

Vega ---------------------- 20 : 21 Saggittarii------------------ 20 : 46 Sagittarii

========================================

[Therese_Hamilton]

Ruman, I will post the entire list of stars from LH25. I'll look up the others (to make a total of approximately 27-29) on Ptolemy's list in Grasshoff's book (from the Almagest).

Why do so many of the longitudes in LH 25 end with a "6"? It's because most of Ptolemy's star longitudes end in zero, so the conversion has a 6 at the end for the minutes. This puzzled me for a long time until I learned of the 3 deg 26 min conversion from Ptolemy's figures. Since this forum doesn't allow tables (or I don't know how to make one!), I may place the conversion table in HTML format on my web site and post a link.

I am curious about the remaining 14 stars myself, so I should really look them up. The 27-29 number is approximate because I'm working from my notes that are several years old, and I don't know how precise my methodology was back then. But I will take Ptolemy's figures directly from Grasshoff and use my notes from LH25. I do have Robert Zoller's translation of LH25.

Therese Hamilton

[Rumen_Kolev]

No doubt there is this layer with the 3:36 added to Ptolemy. I found it also in De stellis beibeniis (Hermes, untranslated).
SOmeone in late antiquity.
I see in LH 25 the same I see in some Akkadian texts: several layers of information coming from times flung thousands of years apart!

The Greek horoscopes show deviations usually of around 3 to 7 degrees from the mean.
We cannot argue for one (Aldebaran=15 Tauri) or another close by ecliptic (Aldebaran=16 Tauri === Spica=30 Virginis ).
But the chances are that it lies in this band within 3 degrees from the mean. Probability more than 50%.
This is what we can squeeze out from the charts.
But from many other texts we know exactly where is this fixed Babylonian ecliptic.

New types of texts (LBAT1499 and likes) say which dodekatemoroia of which sign is rising in the East when this or that star culminates in the Meridian.
From this information we can find the exact borders of the fixed signs.
E.g.:
text A3427 (translated by Rochberg 2004: 59 page 'A Babylonian Rising-Times Scheme...'):
"20 minutes after the 'HEAD of the LION' ( epsilon Leonis) culminates, the beginning of Scorpio rises"

Here we have the exact border in mathematical-astronomical formula. If we compute or look in a planetarium we will see that the border given here is exactly the beginning of the fixed Babylonian Scorpio
(computed [with Aldebaran=15 Tauri] for latitude of Babylon, 800 BC:: 00: 15 Scorpio and 200 BC:: 00:01 Scorpio).

[Therese_Hamilton]

Rumen, it is possible to find texts to support different views of the ancient zodiac. For me the strongest statement is in the horoscopes themselves given in Rochberg and other modern translations. I have shown on my web site that Babylonian texts note beginnings of signs that are not exactly 30 degrees from each other. http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/AMesoStars.htm

Also, does it matter what zodiac(s) were used in ancient times? What matters to astrologers is which zodiac gives the truest results today for prediction. The proof falls on the doorsteps of today's sidereal astrologers who use the "vargas" or subdivisions of signs. This is the Jyotish system of astrology.

Over the years I've tested the various ayanamsas, and I know that the Fagan-Allen (Bradley) zodiac does not work for varga charts.

Even if this zodiac perhaps was once the "fixed Babylonian zodiac" it does not work for today's astrologers. The methods used by western sidereal astrologers of the Fagan school don't usually involve the stars, and are essentially timing devices. Even zodiac signs are not emphasized by the Fagan school today.

So it seems that you agree that many star longitudes in LH25 reflect the conversion from Ptolemy's tables of 3 degrees 26 minutes?

Therese Hamilton

[Rumen_Kolev]

I have shown on my web site that Babylonian texts note beginnings of signs that are not exactly 30 degrees from each other. http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/AMesoStars.htm

Which are these texts? I do not think there are such text.

Huber uses the special ephemeris (Babylonian) for the ingresses of the planets in the images-signs.
Note that these have been computed by the Babylonians.
There is of course an error here always. The error of the computation of the position of Venus.

This is why, you can assess the borders between the images only with that same precision that underlies the Babylonian algorithm for computation.

But even with this, it is enough to see where have been these borders- if only with these types of texts. They point again to what Kugler found in 1900 (Aldebaran = 15 Tauri).


The Babylonian Almanach says: Venus reaches fixed Cancer on 6th of Abu, year 189 of the Seleucid Era.
(Huber 194 page, 'Ueber den Nullpunkt..." 1958)

Here is below the chart for 26 July -122, Babylon, 6 Abu 189 Seleucid Era

screen_Venus_ingress_fixed_Cancer_-122_Jul_26_Abu_6_189_Seleucid.gif (213.64 KiB) Viewed 766 times

There was a fixed Babylonian ecliptic. Its beginning and end are known and evidenced in all Akkadian astro text (resulting in Aldebaran = 15 Tauri).
This is what Assyriology has come to in the last 150 years.
It was Kugler and Epping, not Fagan who discovered this.

***

As I said, LH 25 contains data from several eras as it is a compilation from different authors.

The Babylonian fixed ecliptic has a major presence in LH 25. (look at the list in the previous post)

***

The Ancient Astrology is important as the source of the rivers and the swamps, is important, for the rivers and the swamps.
And as Jesus is important for the christian more than the katehisis.
So, the original revelation of Enmeduranki.

Ancient Astrology was something very different from anything we have known so far.

[Therese_Hamilton]

This is Huber's research (as per above link).

See Huber and Hunger/Pingree (Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia, Brill 1999) for full references and details.

[Rumen_Kolev]

Dear Therese,

I have these works by Huber and Pingree.

I do not think that Huber and Pingree say that the Babylonians did not know where were the borders between the images or that these images were not 30 degrees each.
(And even if someone says such a thing- he (she) would be very wrong. As demonstrated by all texts- several quoted in my posts on the topic here))

Huber wanted to find out the borders between the images by analysing Babylonian almanacs where is stated THE DAY of ingresses of planets in images-signs. (as in the example for 189 Seleucid era Abu 6 when Venus according to the Almanac enters Cancer).
Huber takes several such ingresses.
Then he finds the mean and the deviation.

Everyone knows that the so found border will be in the form: mean +- deviation.
The deviation comes from accumulated error (of the Babylonian planeltary algorithms + errors of the scribe + ...)

I checked all 5 ingresses of Venus in Taurus trough Virgo given by Huber and will recommend to do this everyone interested.

Date =========== Venus reaches Image-sign ======== Position of Venus in the Babylonian fixed ecliptic [Aldebaran=15 Tauri]
189 SE, -122
11-III (June 3)===Venus reaches Taurus ================ [29d. 16min. Aries]
10-IV (July 1)===Venus reaches Gemini================ [00d. 43min. Gemini]
6-V (July 26)===Venus reaches Cancer================ [00d. 02min. Cancer]
2-VI (Aug 21)===Venus reaches Leo ================ [01d. 24min. Leo]
27-VI (Sep 15)===Venus reaches Virgo ================ [02d. 13min. Virgo]

This is computed with the Babylonian theory for Venus and matches good with the actual fixed Babylonian zodiac.

Do not forget also the texts that exactly tell you where are these borders. As with the Babylonian House-Tables. (look in previous post with the text talking on WHEN does rise on the eastern horizon the beginning of Scorpio. [20 minutes after culmination of e Leonis])

============

Also, the Babylonian algorithms for computations of planetary longitudes, were based on 12 signs, each in 30 degrees.
From texts from the Seleucid era this is evident.
It is in the basis of all algorithms (involving longitude).
But the idea of 12 equal 30-degrees signs-divisions of the ecliptic is present even in MUL.APIN which is from 1300 BC.

[Therese_Hamilton]

Ruman Kolev wrote:
"But the idea of 12 equal 30-degrees signs-divisions of the ecliptic is present even in MUL.APIN which is from 1300 BC."

Rumen, I have in my files your internet article I printed some time ago dating the Babylonian Astrolabe to 5,500 BC. I would agree with you that on that date (and earlier dates) knowledge was far more advanced than scholars believe. I would say that knowledge has deteriorated from older times, and this involves our knowledge of astrology and the zodiac. (The Indian Yuga theory describes more advanced ages prior to our current age.) Could you elaborate on the concept of 12 equal 30-degree divisions of the ecliptic reflected in MUL.APIN? I'm sure many readers would be interested in your comments on this topic.

Thank you,
Therese Hamilton

[Rumen_Kolev]

Dear Therese,
Our modern knowledge of Mesopotamia is very argued and jungle-like.
In MUL.APIN (1300 BC) is described the ideal year which divides the year in 12 months and places the equinoctia in the middle of Nisan and Teshrit (1st and 7th months).
The same with the solstices in the middle of Tebet (10) and Du'uz (4).

We want to keep the 12 divisions (of the year) equal and the cardinal points in the middle of 1, 4, 7 and 10 'months'.

If we divide the time (year) in 12 equal portions, this will not do because the time-sections between the cardinal points are NOT equal.
The only way is to divide the solar path through the sky in 12 equal arcs.
This will satisfy all conditions of the 'ideal year' in MUL.APIN.

I do not know whether they (who wrote MUL.APIN) had divided the solar path in the starry sky in 12 equal arcs with exact coordinates and so on, but clearly they formulated it.