Jenny Dusky Considerations

Porphyry once pointed out the fact Tetrabiblos [Greek: Apotelesmatiká; Latin: Quadripartitum – 4 Parts] lacks of other important astrological fundamentals, and astrologers forward in time here and there discussed the treatise, adding information as we continue to gather more data and new translations of very ancient texts. As you go through the Chapters with me, you will also realize the same difficulty with the books, theories and systematization, but one that can overcome with further knowladge from many others ancient sources that cared to learn and pass on manuals to completed systematizations. One of these astrologers that went on further the discussion was the philosopher Porphyry [born around the year 234 C.E. a century after Claudius Ptolemy (100 C.E.)], which I will also refer once in a while in this project. Now, Pingree later on informed the astrological society that Porphyry was original but he was also an antagonist, he took parts of Orion’s book, an unknown, or, behind the scenes astrologer cited by Vettius Valens [which whom also discussed the system in Anthology (III)], and it was also noted that Porphyry cited texts of Paris Epitome from Antiochus and perhaps others astrologers, but in the end will may never known because Porphyry’s material on the subject were never fully recovered.

Valens once said to his pupil Marcus “…When you visit many nations/cultures and climes of the world to display your talents there, you …will be glorified among the people as worthy of this heavely art, and when you have laid a foundation of on the abundance of your knowledge, you will attain the status of treatise writer yourself” (359.14-20). 

Ptolemy saw the system as a “cause & effect” and theorized astrology pretty much as a science instead – The intakes, reviews and discussions on Tetrabiblos are many to cite throughout astrological history, and they continue to rise as he is known [equivocally], the father of “Western” Astrology. Nevertheless, the antagonist Ptolemy pulled out a great discussion on astrology in quite an unusual approach (for us at least) that is largely quoted until these days – In an encyclopedic text format and elegant order, Ptolemy explained the dynamics of a fixed Zodiac “board”, which it mostly used in the western world, the Tropical System.

Ptolemy expects(ed) you to understand what he was/is writing and won’t mediate words neither paragraphs where it should had been there, as well as topics that weren’t right divided and listed, giving the future astrologers to dedicate their own time of doing their own observations and tables along Ptolemy’s line of thought from each chapter. Those Books of Ptolemy still hold prestige and are famous for he presented the field the tropical system; but make no mistakes, many information from this treatise were forgotten or even mistakenly practiced until nowadays, with no intellectual cure as we can tell. You can only read the whole book and truly understand such conclusion I went on and on in my mind while discussing the whole Tetrabiblos. Although for the first timers the texts may seem random, Ptolemy’s translations are quite linar in a single paragraph, plus, once your being to divide by yourself (or simple read it in another format), you can see how smart and intelligent the scientist was being. 

I still find his dividing of the topics quite eccentric but I trust the great compilation of  Ptolemy and his systematization of astrology, although many were the questions mark I had put throughout the Quadrapartitum – you can observe that Ptolemy goes with the writtings as if they were annotations; also, according to (Syrian) Porphyry, the compilator is said to have had Egyptian as native language, therefore the difficulty of translators overtime to understand his Greek writtings, as it as his second language while trying his best as we could tell. 

If you think astrology has no “order” or sequence in prediction, and things are predicted out of nothing, I invite to read the whole thing again and discuss what you think afterwards because you didn’t exactly understood what is to predict. Ptolemy in his  astronomical manual Almagest (the first Books before tetrabiblos), writes that “…it is impossible to achieve theoretical understanding of the universe without instruction”;  while in the end of Tetrabiblos (last chapter of Book IV), the antagonist set up a sequence of prediction in genethliacal charts. 

All bracelets attached to the quotes are mine observations and info which otherwise would be harder to read/grasp in contemporary times.

Introduction

At the short introduction, Ptolemy establishes the conceptions between astronomy and philosophy (+ intuition), which when united, astrology is “born”, and although he knew there were two different matters to delve with, astrology can’t be used if not by science at its root [planetary positions etc] firstly and firmly and yet, not limiting there, once we are able to think, feel the experience and observe the system about rather than just point out astronomical facts alone. Thus, astronomy is independent of astrology, but astrology depends on astronomy as background. In astrology we need trigronometry in order to determine the aspects among the stars, and thus to predict from there. Astrology then makes science seem rather poetic & somewhat magickal (for the invisibility of things) while somehow truly relational to all spheres of life. 

Follow the Astros: “Of the means of prediction through astronomy, O Syrus [know one seems to know exactly why he cites such name in his books], two are the most important and valid. 

1st: One, which is first both in order and in effectiveness, is that whereby we apprehend the aspects [and Conjunctions] of the movements of Sun, Moon, and Stars [Planets & Fixed Stars] in relation to each other and to the [planet] Earth, as they occur from time to time [applying and separating; retrograde or direct]; 

2nd: …the second is that in which by means of the natural character of these aspects themselves we investigate the changes which they bring about [operate] in that which they surround [Earth – cause and effect principle].”

Trigonometry (self-completes): “The first of these, which has its own science [it self-completes], desirable in itself even though it does not attain the result given by its combination with the second [not self-complete], has been expounded to you as best we [Ptolemy and the ancients] could in its own [astrological] treatise by the method of demonstration. [mostly disucussed in Almagest astronomical manual]

“As Above, So Below” (not self-complete): “…We shall now give an account of the second and less self-sufficient method in a properly philosophical way, so that one whose aim is the truth might never compare its perceptions with the sureness of the first [only thinking mathematically but not stretching it foward the next possible content?], unvarying science, for he ascribes to it the weakness and unpredictability of material qualities found in individual things, nor yet refrain from such [forever state of] investigation as is within the bounds [and maximum] of possibility, when it is so evident that most events of a general nature draw their causes from the enveloping heavens.”

The Combination: “…But since everything that is hard to attain is easily assailed by the generality of men, and in the case of the two before-mentioned disciplines the allegations against the first could be made only by the blind [that can’t literally see/gaze or simple won’t – denying existence], while there are specious grounds for those levelled at the second – for its difficulty in parts has made them think it completely incomprehensible [skepctcism], or the difficulty of escaping what is known [only seeing and not explore the correspondences] has disparaged even its object as useless – we shall try to examine briefly the measure of both the possibility and the usefulness of such prognostication [astronomy and philosophy together] before offering detailed instruction on the subject [in encyclopedic form]. First as to its possibility [go to The First Chapter of Book I].”

Conclusion

Through astronomical tables and the visibility of our skies, we can begin to speculate what the day will be like, and that won’t stop there at mundane, it goes personal. They saw astrology as some sort of astronomical prediction practices. The thing is that both Astrology and Astronomy were tagged alone, astronomy and astrology, thus the confusion text to read in our contemporary times, yet, simple as it sounds it is, they knew the exotic differentiation between them. I also think Ptolemy talked about empirical observations, and because humans find themselves full of possibilities once the planets ‘surround us’ and thus patterns repeat, the sky could indicate the nearest quality as possible as in the past, but it will never be the same again in the same exactly order and manner, once things outside had/will change(d), and as result, the difficulty of certainty is then unpredictable – anything can happen according to the position of the planets, but trigonometry and specifics can/shall be pointed out before it actually happens – and as result such correspondences ought to be discussed.

We also have the divergences of Astrology, which are the 2 systems mostly known to us, the Tropical and Sidereal, yet each does not offer a threat to the other, to the contrary, they can both be used simultaneously, perhaps mostly considering fixed stars and Lunar mansions? The first is said to be the system mostly practiced in the Western countries of the world. Western or not, in the end the subject it is simple one single term: Astrology, which already means a lot, and we begin from there. 

—

References

Tetrabiblos Ptolemy’s four books of the influence of the stars [or the Quadripartite Mathematical Treatise] translated from the Greek paraphrase of Proclus by j. m. Ashmand – [London, Davis and Dickson; 1822]

Ptolemy. Tetrabiblos. Translated by F. E. Robbins. Loeb Classical Library 435. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1940.

Porphyry The Philosopher – Introduction To The Tetrabiblos & Serapio Of Alexandria; Astrological Definitions (Translated from the Greek by ] James Herschel Holden, M.A.)

Theoretical and Practical Astrology: Ptolemy and his Colleagues by Mark Riler (California State University, Sacramento); PDF

Ptolemy’s Almagest Translated and Annotated by G. J. Toomer (1984)