Astrology roots?

[theabbot 7]

Where did astrology come from?



My belief is that enki aka ptah created this. I want some thoughts, educated or not on how you think this all came about. I need a massive power sleep. I hope i see some good info to build on when Im back.

[night_gaunt]

On wikipedia it gives a synopsis, but wikipedia is not a reliable source.
I'm going to make an informed guess after looking over it for a few years that it is a medieval, expired belief. The planets are named after Roman gods. If an astrologer tells you that your 'house' or 'sign' is in Venus, for example, they will tell you that you are passionate and sexual. This would be following mythology. When i look at Venus, i don't think of the goddess of love unless i use the connotation associated with 'Venus'.
The constellations that the zodiacs are named after are actually interpretated depending on the culture. In fact, the only constellation i agree with and can make out is the big dipper.
The Earth also rotates on its axis, and so the 12 zodiacs cannot always apply. I noticed only some astrologers use 13 zodiacs, because the superstition holds them back to tradition. My horoscope changes to Leo with the Earth's tilt.

[valens]

Originally Posted by night_gaunt

On wikipedia it gives a synopsis, but wikipedia is not a reliable source.
I'm going to make an informed guess after looking over it for a few years that it is a medieval, expired belief. The planets are named after Roman gods. If an astrologer tells you that your 'house' or 'sign' is in Venus, for example, they will tell you that you are passionate and sexual. This would be following mythology. When i look at Venus, i don't think of the goddess of love unless i use the connotation associated with 'Venus'.
The constellations that the zodiacs are named after are actually interpretated depending on the culture. In fact, the only constellation i agree with and can make out is the big dipper.
The Earth also rotates on its axis, and so the 12 zodiacs cannot always apply. I noticed only some astrologers use 13 zodiacs, because the superstition holds them back to tradition. My horoscope changes to Leo with the Earth's tilt.

You're entitled to your opinion but you are way off base here, just plain wrong. Astrology is far older than the Medieval period. We even have translated texts from the ancient Hellene world which we know are round 2000 years old and those containing a fully-formed methodology of astrology; this implies it is at least a couple of hundred years older but I believe that it is far older.

You say it would be following mythology but perhaps the mythology follows the astrology? We just don't know. All you have done is take "Western" astrological terms and said that none of them work because other cultures have different names and systems of explaining the same thing i.e. the nature and quality of linear time experienced on this plane. Is it truly so outrageous to think that different cultures see things in different ways? Languages are a prime example of that. Each culture has a word for "love" which has connotations and implications unique to its view and experience of the archetype.

As per the bolded part, that is a gross over-simplication and something not even remotely true. If an astrologer is making definite statements about your character like that, I would steer well clear. As for the names, the reason they are Roman dominated is because we were dominated by the Romans. You do realise that every culture names them differently and not always after gods. Indian astrology has named Venus "Sukra" which has some meaning towards the semen (I can't remember the literal translation) as Venus, in the astrology I have studied, has significations not only of the sexual act but also the act of creation and giving of energy in general (the archetype).

As for your axis problem, since the degrees given are projected onto the Ecliptic and since the zodiacs have starting points not dependant on any constellation, there is no problem. The "zodiacs" as you put them are 12 equal divisions of 30 degrees starting from the Spring Equinox (for Tropical zodiac) and from a certain star (various Sidereal zodiacs). The fact your "horoscope" is Leo would be a derivation of the standard Western measuring system being based upon seasons and not stars and the fact that not everything sits on the Ecliptic when in the sky. It is also a well-known issue since we astrologers are very aware of differing rising times at differing latitudes, in fact it is central to a method used to time combinations presnt in a chart.

"I noticed only some astrologers use 13 zodiacs, because the superstition holds them back to tradition."

I have mentioned here recently that not in one of the older Indian, Perso-Arabic or Greek texts is there 13 signs mentioned. Perhaps you could point that one out to me? It seems to me that is not tradition at all (at least not Western/Indian) but a modern invention.

As for the OP, it is impossible to say when or how astrology was brought into being. We have tablets dated to around 400 - 500BC which depict an old Babylonian tradition of looking to the horoscope of the King to tell how the country will fare in the year but it was based solely on visible phenomena like planets making moring and evening appearences, conjunctions etc. Some Indian scholars believe that their astrology goes way back, even before the beginning of the Kali Yuga which they claim begun in 3000BC. Truth is, no-one knows.

[night_gaunt]

These are my observations after looking over everything related to astrology. As you said, the Roman beliefs were dominating and affected the names of the planets. That does not imply that the planets hold the characteristics of the gods.
The 13 horoscopes are not tradition, the 12 are. That is why astrology is outdated, because the 13th will not be included due to superstition. I have observed that birth charts will tell you that your personality is dependent on the planets your houses are in. They base this off the personifications they give the planets and western mythology.
Not to mention, astrology likes to be so general to not be wrong. But it is hardly ever accurate.

[valens]

Originally Posted by night_gaunt

These are my observations after looking over everything related to astrology. As you said, the Roman beliefs were dominating and affected the names of the planets. That does not imply that the planets hold the characteristics of the gods.
The 13 horoscopes are not tradition, the 12 are. That is why astrology is outdated, because the 13th will not be included due to superstition. I have observed that birth charts will tell you that your personality is dependent on the planets your houses are in. They base this off the personifications they give the planets and western mythology.
Not to mention, astrology likes to be so general to not be wrong. But it is hardly ever accurate.

That's good you have studied enough to feel confident in giving such an all-encompassing view on astrology!

You haven't observed anything, mate, astrology is far more than a drawing board for your "personality". A cursory glance at any pre-1800 text will illustrate that. What you find in later forms bears little resemblance to the older forms which the OP asked about.

The reason there are not 13 signs is because 12 signs is a system of thought, philosophy and practicality applied to an ancient art-form - adding another sign for the sake of it ruins that system's characteristics and its efficiacy.

I am interested to know of your sources for your claims and I would love to see your findings on all those observed birth charts you spoke of. It would be nice to see why you think the way you do especially since it is so different to my own experiences.

[theabbot 7]

do you think it came from the ancient egyptians?

[valens]

Originally Posted by theabbot 7

do you think it came from the ancient egyptians?

A lot of the Greek astrology did, especially the significations of the differing houses but it gets very foggy as you go further back. I started studying Greek astrology and have since started Indian, and there are many similarities but the Indian seems older somehow; more rich and deep. Those two schools are intertwined though - the significations are very similar. Truth is, I don't have an absolute answer becasue there isn't one.

[rapunzel]

Originally Posted by theabbot 7

do you think it came from the ancient egyptians?

No, the ancient Egyptians were not all that interested in constellations although they took a great interest in the sky so they could tell the time at night. The constellations they recognised, apart from Orion, were completely different to the ones the Babylonians had and quite different to what we recognise as the Zodiac today.

So no, they didn't have a Zodiac and astrology until the Greek introduced in the 3rd cent BC.

[valens]

Originally Posted by rapunzel

No, the ancient Egyptians were not all that interested in constellations although they took a great interest in the sky so they could tell the time at night. The constellations they recognised, apart from Orion, were completely different to the ones the Babylonians had and quite different to what we recognise as the Zodiac today.

So no, they didn't have a Zodiac and astrology until the Greek introduced in the 3rd cent BC.

Well first, "astrology" as you label it is more than the horoscopy you identify it as being. Its nature is to map linear time, horoscopy is but a branch of that.

As we find more evidence, your above claim is becoming more and more inaccurate. For instance, there was found on a coffin text on decans (the Egyptian equivalent of the 12 signs) mentions of places where the "gods" (planets) were at points of maximum potency in producing effects according to their own nature. These were equivalent (as in the same parts of the sky) to Hellene exaltations and Babylonian "Places of Secret" but actually pre-dated both and the Babylonian by 1000 years

The article is here for anyone interested in reading it:

http://independent.academia.edu/Joan...tary_Hypsomata

There is no straight lines and boundaries, shades of black and white, saying Egyptians did this and nothing else, Greeks did this and that is that. Each culture added their own slant to astrology as thgey knew it as linear time unfolded towards us. The methods and traditions of all of these cultures was constantly altering the way astrology was practiced and for what ends. The Egyptians used it very much in a religous sense while the Hellenes used it for timing events and auspiscious times in a person's life. This does not mean "astrology" is only what the Hellenes used it for just because that is the form which survives today in our culture.

There are many techniques in Greek horoscopy attributed to more ancient Egyptian authors just as the later Arabs and Persians attributed much of their work to the more ancient Hellenes. Astrology, like everything else, is a living, evolving understanding (or attempted) of our reality and shouldn't be viewed as being only one aspect of its use.

[rapunzel]

Originally Posted by valens

Well first, "astrology" as you label it is more than the horoscopy you identify it as being. Its nature is to map linear time, horoscopy is but a branch of that.

I used the word ‘astrology’ in the sense that most people, (not Astrologers) use it today, in that it means the study of the position of the stars and planets within the Zodiac for predictive and analytical purposes and how the patterns in the sky correlate with the patterns in our lives. That is how the majority understand it and that is the meaning I gave it. The difference between Astronomy and Astrology is perfectly clear today but in the ancient past that was not always so.

As we find more evidence, your above claim is becoming more and more inaccurate. For instance, there was found on a coffin text on decans (the Egyptian equivalent of the 12 signs) mentions of places where the "gods" (planets) were at points of maximum potency in producing effects according to their own nature. These were equivalent (as in the same parts of the sky) to Hellene exaltations and Babylonian "Places of Secret" but actually pre-dated both and the Babylonian by 1000 years

The article is here for anyone interested in reading it:

http://independent.academia.edu/Joan...tary_Hypsomata

I have read a number of Joanne Conman’s articles and I disagree that ‘my claim’ is becoming more and more inaccurate. Joanne Conman states quite unequivocally that:

“Neugebauer's theory on the decans is demonstrably wrong.” (Source: http://thenewtimesholler.com/ARCHIVE/joancon.html) and she likes to pontificate on the fact that she is the only one to see it and that everybody follows the Neugebauer “unquestionably”. as in “Otto Neugebauer thoroughly misunderstood the Egyptian decan system, and because of that, he –- and all who follow him unquestioningly –“

(Source: http://www.kepler.edu/home/index.php...gyptian-legacy)

This is not true. First of all she uncritically follows the Carlsberg Papyrii as if they are an unaltered copy of the much older Book of Nut when clearly they are an “improved” copy i.e. updated and secondly she is wrong when she tries to assert that all Egyptologists follow Neugebauer “unquestionlingly”. They do not as a glance at this paper “Ancient Egyptian Star Tables and the Decans” by Herbert Chately from The NASA Astrophysics Data System”. The article starts on page 121 and the piece in question is at the top of page 123.

In speaking of the Decan of Kher Khept Kenmut the author clearly lists a group of people who disagree with Neugebauer and after showing Neugebauer’s theory says:

“but there are other possibilities”.

So Conman is in error when she says:

“Additionally, most of those who study Egyptian religion have already been indoctrinated by Neugebauer so that they are certain astrology has no foundation in Egypt and no place in Egyptian culture until the Late Period. Coupled with the fear, ignorance, and distaste for astrology that is advocated and even celebrated by academics, it’s not surprising that little headway has been made into any serious exploration of astrology’s Egyptian origins.”

Source: http://www.kepler.edu/home/index.php...gyptian-legacy

Of course she is the only one to make any headway and she’s not even an Egyptologist! What a huge ego the woman has. These are not the only errors she makes. She tells us, as you have mentioned in your post, that:

“In particular, at certain times in the Egyptian calendar, particular Egyptian deities were believed to be in a special state of power. Those times were associated with the festivals for those deities. The times of the festivals were determined by priests who kept track of the risings of the decan stars.”

Source: An Interview with Joanne Colman”

http://www.kepler.edu/home/index.php...n-legacy#_edn4

And

“In the Egyptian language, the word At means a moment or instant of maximum force or power. The word refers to a point in time when a person or deity reaches his greatest effectiveness. Egyptians understood gods and the king to have moments when they manifested in a state of being in which they could produce or develop an activity.[4]”

Source: “Egyptian Origins of Astronomy” by J Conman

http://www.kepler.edu/home/index.php...n-legacy#_edn4

I followed up her link marked (4) in J R Ogden “Studies in Ancient Egyptian Magical Writing” and the note referred to says that when used in magical texts (my emphasis) “At” means “just moment/instant” and “striking power” and is referring to a spell warding off snakes.

So the word as used in the link doesn’t apply in the context she wants it to apply to.

The word “At” certainly means “moment” and “ami at” means a “supreme moment” According to Faulkner the word can mean “striking power of a God” but this doesn’t mean the God has reached “his greatest effectiveness” since in the 40 years I have been studying Egypt I have never come across an instance where a God’s power increases in a particular moment and then decreases. The God’s “striking power” is always there and does not ebb or flow.

If you have any links to suggestions that this is not so I would be interested in seeing them as there is always the possibility that I am wrong.

She makes more error, in fact I will go so far a to call it what it is – a lie- when she says:

“[1] It is clear that the Egyptians divided the sun’s apparent path into 36 sections rather than the 12 the Babylonians used in the zodiac that was adopted by the Greeks. The Egyptian zodiac used many of the same stars used by the Babylonians and the Greeks. Greek and Roman authors were quite right in attributing some of what was incorporated into astrology from the Egyptians.

The Greeks contributed a number of original ideas to astrology, especially concerning the nature of fate. Yet the fact remains that there are core beliefs in astrology that are remarkably similar to long-held Egyptian ideas. Why should anyone question that these concepts came from anywhere but Egypt? Why is there such reluctance to accept the Egyptian contributions to Western astrology?” (my emphasis)

Source: ”Origins of Astrology; the Egyptian Legacy”

http://www.kepler.edu/home/index.php...gyptian-legacy

But lets see what Neugebauer and Parker, Conman’s bête noir, say about this very question.

“the decans originated in Egypt as a means of dividing the night into hours………………..but the deans did survive into Ptolemaic times and eventually became incorporated into the Graeco-Babylonian zodiac, three to a sign so that each covers 10 percent of the full circuit of the heavens. In this rejuvenated form the decans became an important component of the Hellenistic-Roman and later astrology known in India and the Islamic world, in medieval astrology and finally in the European Renaissance”

Source: “Egyptian Astronomical Texts Vol 3, Decans, Planets, Constellations and Zodiacs” by Neugebauer and Parker

How odd! She claims no one is accepting the Egyptian contributions to western Astrology yet here we have Neugebauer and Parker doing exactly that! Why is she lying? Why does she want to pretend, saying:

“It’s not so much that academics do not understand, though some don’t; the fact is that many will not understand. They simply refuse. They tend to cringe at the mention of astrology. Beliefs incorporated in it are generally not considered worthy of study and are not recognized as having arisen in ancient religion. The few scholars who have written anything on ancient astrology seem to feel compelled to defend their interest in the subject, while proclaiming as loudly as possible that astrology is silly or superstitious because it is not science. They go to great pains to reassure readers that they are far too intelligent to believe astrology themselves. When they do explore ancient astrology, their bias tends to lead them to focus on what is easy to dismiss as irrational, e.g., omen reading.”


Source: http://www.kepler.edu/home/index.php...gyptian-legacy

I have seen this happen so many times, usually from alternative historians who lambast the orthodox historians as stick in the mud, sticking to the party line etc, etc, when the reality is that no such thing is happening. Conman seems to be trying to take the same route putting herself forward as a beacon of reasonableness against these horrid Egyptologists. Why should I give any credence to a scholar such as her who has made so many mistakes and has been reduced to lying, but to cap it all she appears to be back tracking a little when she admits:

““But there is no evidence that the Egyptians used the kind of astrology that either the Babylonians or the Greeks used so many centuries later. That said, it does seem quite likely that some Egyptian religious and philosophical ideas were incorporated in later astrology.”

Source: http://thenewtimesholler.com/ARCHIVE/joancon.html

I have no problem with that comment whatsoever.

There is no straight lines and boundaries, shades of black and white, saying Egyptians did this and nothing else, Greeks did this and that is that. Each culture added their own slant to astrology as thgey knew it as linear time unfolded towards us. The methods and traditions of all of these cultures was constantly altering the way astrology was practiced and for what ends. The Egyptians used it very much in a religous sense while the Hellenes used it for timing events and auspiscious times in a person's life. This does not mean "astrology" is only what the Hellenes used it for just because that is the form which survives today in our culture.

There are many techniques in Greek horoscopy attributed to more ancient Egyptian authors just as the later Arabs and Persians attributed much of their work to the more ancient Hellenes. Astrology, like everything else, is a living, evolving understanding (or attempted) of our reality and shouldn't be viewed as being only one aspect of its use.

As I’ve said before in other contexts “no religion stand alone, they all influence each other in various ways”. Undoubtedly what we know as astrology was influenced by what the Egyptians had done but I stand by my statement that the Egyptians did not have a zodiac and astrology. I am using the commonly understood meaning of ‘zodiac’ and ‘astrology’ here because many of the poster here are not Astrologers. Even Conman agrees with me.

Just a comment on your remark “there are many techniques in Greek horoscopy attributed to more ancient Egyptian authors”. It has been pointed out by many scholars that in late Egyptian times the word “Egyptian” meant someone who was living in Egypt and was not an ethnic designation. So a Greek, Roman, Persian, Babylonian would be spoken of as an “Egyptian” if they were living there.

Sorry this reply is such a long one but I wanted to make sure I covered as many of the points raised as I could, which meant a long search through my notes.

[valens]

Originally Posted by rapunzel

Sorry this reply is such a long one but I wanted to make sure I covered as many of the points raised as I could, which meant a long search through my notes.

That's fine, thanks for taking the time to reply.

You've left me with some interesting thoughts, though I have no desire to defend someone else and I'm sorry that the author of the article I linked to gives you such a case to denounce her. I thought her view an interesting one, that's all.

The timelines proposed here are, as I have said, muddy at best. The timeline quoted by you (Greek - Indian - Medieval etc.) would be considered incorrect by a lot of people, including myself. There are elements of Indian astrology not found anywhere else, and after studying three forms (Indian, Hellene and Perso-Arabic) I feel I can discern what has come from where out of the three. There is no doubt the Hellenes influenced Indian astrology but the majority of the techniques and philosophy used is definitely not Greek. We also have techniques and ideas used in Greek which are definitely not Greek, so that begs the question: where did they come from? The fact that you and Otto Neugebauer disagree with this woman's view on decans does not change that they mirror the Hellene exaltations and the Babylonian places of secret. That in itself was my point; that the cultures mixed much of what they knew from previous astrologers as well as their own observations. I find it hard to believe that the Hellenes and Babylonians "invented" astrology in 700BC and that was that. Did they one day just decide to track the Moon and go from there? How would it begin?

I know that Robert Schmidt, for example holds a similar view, but to think that the Greeks "invented" such a rich and complex system of astrology over the course of a couple of hundred years is absurd to me. In my view the techniques must have come from somewhere and from what we know, they didn't come from Babylonia. The Hellenes themselves attribute a lot of their work to a certain (perhaps mythical, as it is thought was Hermes Trismegistus) Nechepsos and another, Petosiris though it is known that ancient authors used to attribute their work to a more ancient authority to give it more status.

As for what other people class as astrology, I think instead of tailoring our own usage of the word to the common misconception, we should try to show the true/intended meaning of the concept. From what I gather, you don't disagree that the Egyptians used astrology religiously but only disagree that they used it for predictions? If so, that's fine. I'm not sure they had a full form of astrology, I'm just claiming that they had a hand in its formation either directly or inadvertently.

Actually, the more I read your post, the more I think I can see what irked you. When the other poster said "ancient egyptians" I presumed he meant those who directly preceeded the Hellenes and not what you obviously mean by the term. Believe me, I understand that..

[simbi_laveau]

Astrology,in its infancy,began probably in ancient Sumeria....were talking 4000 BCish .It was later enhanced upon by the ancient Babylonians.
The twelve signs eventually emerged from this ,probably 400 BCish,which is just about the same times the Chinese developed their own system of 12 animals.
It sounds like it,as a system,traveled from place to place ,and spread that way . The silk road and spice trade routes probably lent itself to this.
Modern astrology ,seems to be very reminiscent of the Chinese zodiac. No one likes to admit it,but we stole it all from them,including the 4 elements. They use five elements,which goes back 5000 years at least . We stole it,and simplified it. We stole the pentagram from them too,but Shhhhh....its a secret.

[valens]

Originally Posted by simbi_laveau

Astrology,in its infancy,began probably in ancient Sumeria....were talking 4000 BCish .It was later enhanced upon by the ancient Babylonians.
The twelve signs eventually emerged from this ,probably 400 BCish,which is just about the same times the Chinese developed their own system of 12 animals.
It sounds like it,as a system,traveled from place to place ,and spread that way . The silk road and spice trade routes probably lent itself to this.
Modern astrology ,seems to be very reminiscent of the Chinese zodiac. No one likes to admit it,but we stole it all from them,including the 4 elements. They use five elements,which goes back 5000 years at least . We stole it,and simplified it. We stole the pentagram from them too,but Shhhhh....its a secret.

The Indians use 5 elements also: the four standard elements and "ether". Thing is, the Hellene "triplicites" (elements) were based upon the winds, so I don't think it is as cut and dried as one group taking straight from another.

[simbi_laveau]

Well its interesting,because I have always felt there's a direct connection somewhere,between the native Americans,and especially the Japanese .Their ....basic concepts of family ,honour,and how they live with nature,are very similiar .
Native Americans even have a form of primitive acupuncture,that they did with porcupine quills.

[valens]

Originally Posted by simbi_laveau

Well its interesting,because I have always felt there's a direct connection somewhere,between the native Americans,and especially the Japanese .Their ....basic concepts of family ,honour,and how they live with nature,are very similiar .
Native Americans even have a form of primitive acupuncture,that they did with porcupine quills.

That is interesting but by Indian, I meant the guys from India.

[kblood]

Originally Posted by theabbot 7

Where did astrology come from?



My belief is that enki aka ptah created this. I want some thoughts, educated or not on how you think this all came about. I need a massive power sleep. I hope i see some good info to build on when Im back.

Duh... it comes from astronomy. What else do you want to know?

[rapunzel]

Originally Posted by valens

That's fine, thanks for taking the time to reply.

You've left me with some interesting thoughts, though I have no desire to defend someone else and I'm sorry that the author of the article I linked to gives you such a case to denounce her. I thought her view an interesting one, that's all.

I am only denouncing her because I caught her out in a lie. Before that I was quite willing to investigate her conclusions in more depth.

The timelines proposed here are, as I have said, muddy at best. The timeline quoted by you (Greek - Indian - Medieval etc.) would be considered incorrect by a lot of people, including myself. There are elements of Indian astrology not found anywhere else, and after studying three forms (Indian, Hellene and Perso-Arabic) I feel I can discern what has come from where out of the three. There is no doubt the Hellenes influenced Indian astrology but the majority of the techniques and philosophy used is definitely not Greek. We also have techniques and ideas used in Greek which are definitely not Greek, so that begs the question: where did they come from?

The time lines I quoted were not my idea of how astrology developed but were a direct quote. Personally I believe that Indian astrology was developed long before the Babylonians and probably in isolation from the Mesopotamian region although there were doubtless trade connections. As I don;t know anything about Indian astrology I can't really say any more.

The fact that you and Otto Neugebauer disagree with this woman's view on decans does not change that they mirror the Hellene exaltations and the Babylonian places of secret. That in itself was my point; that the cultures mixed much of what they knew from previous astrologers as well as their own observations. I find it hard to believe that the Hellenes and Babylonians "invented" astrology in 700BC and that was that. Did they one day just decide to track the Moon and go from there? How would it begin?

But the point is: do they mirror the Hellene exaltations and the Babylonians ‘places of secret’? I have already explained her misuse of an Egyptian word to suit her context. She was also using as evidence a text produced in Roman times. Has anyone else checked her findings? I should really like to know. Her knowledge of ancient Egypt is not comprehensive, and she has made a few other errors, but that doesn’t stop her making assumptions with quite a lot of 'probablies' and 'must haves' in her text.

Of course astrology wasn’t invented in 700 BC but that is the date usually given for the birth of the astrology that is used today together with the current Zodiac. Have you ever seen the Mul Apin tablets? The evidence we have on the Babylonian constellations is on two tablets that were a 7th century BC copy of a text thought to go back to at least 1000 BC. The Babylonians had been star watching for millennia and recording their observations. The Venus Tablets of Amissaduga are thought to go back to 1675 BC. I’ve not investigated how the Babylonians used this information in an astrological fashion but I’m sure there is plenty of evidence on the net.

I know that Robert Schmidt, for example holds a similar view, but to think that the Greeks "invented" such a rich and complex system of astrology over the course of a couple of hundred years is absurd to me. In my view the techniques must have come from somewhere and from what we know, they didn't come from Babylonia.

Now I’m confused – how do you know the techniques didn’t come from Babylonia? All the information was there. The Mul Apin list the constellations, many of which are the same as the 12 constellations in the current zodiac. The Sumerians before them were very much interested in mapping the stars as well.

The Hellenes themselves attribute a lot of their work to a certain (perhaps mythical, as it is thought was Hermes Trismegistus) Nechepsos and another, Petosiris though it is known that ancient authors used to attribute their work to a more ancient authority to give it more status.

Hermes Trismegistos as you say was probably mythical and Nechepsos was a 26th Dynasty Egyptian king from the 7th century BC and Petosiris was a High Priest of Thoth who lived under Persian rule in the 4th century BC. And yes, in those days attributing one's sources to a more ancient authority was not uncommon.

As for what other people class as astrology, I think instead of tailoring our own usage of the word to the common misconception, we should try to show the true/intended meaning of the concept

Good luck with that!

From what I gather, you don't disagree that the Egyptians used astrology religiously but only disagree that they used it for predictions? If so, that's fine. I'm not sure they had a full form of astrology, I'm just claiming that they had a hand in its formation either directly or inadvertently.

The Egyptians certainly used the stars for religious purposes as well as for secular purposes and their religion was as much a star religion as a sun religion, for after all their life after death was to take place in the stars. So I wouldn’t say they ‘used astrology religiously’ because I don’t know what you mean by that. They also believed that some days were ‘unlucky’ and also that dreams could be interpreted.

Actually, the more I read your post, the more I think I can see what irked you. When the other poster said "ancient egyptians" I presumed he meant those who directly preceeded the Hellenes and not what you obviously mean by the term. Believe me, I understand that..

I have always seen the Egyptian culture before 1000 BC, as ‘ancient’ From that period onwards Egypt was ruled by foreign kings and her great days of glory were passed. She then came under Babylonian and later Greek domination and I consider that period to be ‘classical’. That’s purely my own feelings in the matter, so I wouldn’t class an Egyptian living in, say the 7th century BC, as an “Ancient Egyptian”

While I would still disagree with the statement that Astrology was invented in Egypt they undoubtedly, along with the Sumerians and Babylonians. laid the foundations for how we understand Astrology now. I think we can both agree with that.

[valens]

Originally Posted by rapunzel

But the point is: do they mirror the Hellene exaltations and the Babylonians ‘places of secret’? I have already explained her misuse of an Egyptian word to suit her context. She was also using as evidence a text produced in Roman times. Has anyone else checked her findings? I should really like to know. Her knowledge of ancient Egypt is not comprehensive, and she has made a few other errors, but that doesn’t stop her making assumptions with quite a lot of 'probablies' and 'must haves' in her text.

I believe so. I haven't see the original coffin texts myself but the decans do match the places of exaltations in the Hellene tradition.

Originally Posted by rapunzel

Of course astrology wasn’t invented in 700 BC but that is the date usually given for the birth of the astrology that is used today together with the current Zodiac. Have you ever seen the Mul Apin tablets? The evidence we have on the Babylonian constellations is on two tablets that were a 7th century BC copy of a text thought to go back to at least 1000 BC. The Babylonians had been star watching for millennia and recording their observations. The Venus Tablets of Amissaduga are thought to go back to 1675 BC. I’ve not investigated how the Babylonians used this information in an astrological fashion but I’m sure there is plenty of evidence on the net.

They ring a bell, I think I read of them in a book I have on Babylonian astrology, I would have to look at it again to make sure.

Originally Posted by rapunzel

Now I’m confused – how do you know the techniques didn’t come from Babylonia? All the information was there. The Mul Apin list the constellations, many of which are the same as the 12 constellations in the current zodiac. The Sumerians before them were very much interested in mapping the stars as well.

I'm not talking about the construction of the zodiac but the actual techniques used in interpreting the chart. There are techniques used in the Greek tradition which are not found in what we know of the Babylonian tradition nor the Indian tradition. The Greeks themselves credit older Egyptian sources for their invention though we have already covered the attributing of things to older authorities.

Originally Posted by rapunzel

The Egyptians certainly used the stars for religious purposes as well as for secular purposes and their religion was as much a star religion as a sun religion, for after all their life after death was to take place in the stars. So I wouldn’t say they ‘used astrology religiously’ because I don’t know what you mean by that. They also believed that some days were ‘unlucky’ and also that dreams could be interpreted.

I meant that they used it to time religous practices.

Your last statement there could do with a bit of clarification for my end. Who were these days unlucky for and in what context? What did they do with this information when found?

[rapunzel]

Originally Posted by valens

I believe so. I haven't see the original coffin texts myself but the decans do match the places of exaltations in the Hellene tradition.

I’m not sure about that and I’ll have to reserve my judgment so lets not argue about it.

I'm not talking about the construction of the zodiac but the actual techniques used in interpreting the chart. There are techniques used in the Greek tradition which are not found in what we know of the Babylonian tradition nor the Indian tradition. The Greeks themselves credit older Egyptian sources for their invention though we have already covered the attributing of things to older authorities.

As for the techniques in constructing a chart I know nothing about that at all so must bow to your obvious knowledge.

I meant that they used it to time religous practices.

Your last statement there could do with a bit of clarification for my end. Who were these days unlucky for and in what context? What did they do with this information when found?

Here is a link to the Cairo Calendar which lists every day in the year as either lucky or unlucky. The days are often linked to the festival days of different Gods or historic events. How much they were used is not known but possibly only by the more leisured class and the priests. There are a number of days that warn “do not go out” or “do not do any work” and that would be impossible for the peasants working the fields and for those in the towns carrying out their routine business, unless these days were regarded as rest days like the Jewish Sabbath when everyone stopped work.

There is also a command for the 4th day of the 2nd month of Shomo which is “do not shout at anyone”. We could do with that in our world now. Imagine a day every year where people were nice to each other.

http://www.angelfire.com/falcon/wily/calintro.html
http://www.angelfire.com/falcon/wily/cal.html

[dr steam]

Originally Posted by rapunzel

No, the ancient Egyptians were not all that interested in constellations

Are you serius ...and/ or have you reviewed your opinion since you wrote this


Cheers