CA vol I: ch.19 - aspects
Part VI of Deborah Houlding's annotated edition of Lilly's Christian Astrology, covering pages 105-114 |
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Paul
Moderator
Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Posts: 818
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2012 8:36 am Post subject: Re: What is 'traditional' astrology? |
 |
|
| lihin wrote: |
But what exactly is 'traditional' astrology? Is e. g. Babylonian astrology, that differs from Hellenistic in several important respects, 'traditional'?
What about Renaissance innovations?
Etymologically, 'tradition' means transmission by saying, diction, mostly by word of mouth. Some would include transmission by writing but this might exclude a living chain from teacher to pupil.
|
Lihin
Have you read the sticky thread at the top of the forum, entitled: "Please read before posting in this forum"
http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1877
In it, Tom addresses some of these questions. In particular:
| Tom wrote: | “Traditional astrology” is a pretty broad topic, so we’ll offer a rough definition as follows: the type of astrology practiced prior to 1700 and everything between 1700 and Alan Leo is close enough to count as traditional with a few exceptions. This type of astrology uses the table of dignities, planetary strength, and is somewhat more involved with events in the native’s life than with motivation for behavior.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lihin
Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 419
Location: Mount Kailash
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:46 pm Post subject: Babylonian and Hellenistic excluded? |
|
|
Good day,
| Quote: | | This type of astrology uses the table of dignities ... |
If i have understood correctly, both Babylonian and Hellenistic astrologies would be excluded by this definition, as neither includes tables (which would be 'the' table?) of dignities, such systems with allotment of points having been introduced, to the best of my feeble knowledge, during the Mediaeval period.
So, for the purposes of this section of the forum, is 'traditional astrology' limited from Mediaeval until say W. J. Simmonite whilst excluding late 19th century astrologers subject to a pervasive influence of Mme Blavatsky's theosophism?
Best regards,
lihin
_________________
Non esse nihil non est. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul
Moderator
Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Posts: 818
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:09 pm Post subject: Re: Babylonian and Hellenistic excluded? |
|
|
| lihin wrote: | Good day,
| Quote: | | This type of astrology uses the table of dignities ... |
If i have understood correctly, both Babylonian and Hellenistic astrologies would be excluded by this definition, as neither includes tables (which would be 'the' table?) of dignities, such systems with allotment of points having been introduced, to the best of my feeble knowledge, during the Mediaeval period. |
Well what are you considering the hellenistic period to be? Would you accept Ptolemy as being part of the Hellenistic period rather than the Medieval period? If so surely you would accept Ptolemy's Table of dignities? Whilst it's true that there is no 'THE' table of dignities, I think we can all understand what Tom is getting at, which is to distinguish a traditional approach from a modern or psychological one which tends to not use the dignities (other than domicile and from time to time throwing in exaltation).
These examples of using dignities etc, are just that, examples, or as Tom puts it, a guideline. It's possible that you have still not read that post in its entirety. I've already posted what Tom and the forum consider to be tradition, but for the sake of clarity I'll do it again:
| Tom wrote: | | “Traditional astrology” is ...the type of astrology practiced prior to 1700 ... the accuracy of this definition is not important; it is only a guideline. |
So anything pre-1700 can be considered more or less traditional, which isn't to say that this tradition isn't rich and complex and evolving and changing from one period to another. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lihin
Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 419
Location: Mount Kailash
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2012 6:29 pm Post subject: Appropriate? |
|
|
Good evening,
Should Babylonian astrology, then, be excluded from 'traditional' due to a missing table or tables of planetary dignities?
In the introductory post we also read:
| Quote: | | The accuracy of this definition is not important; it is only a guideline. If anyone disagrees with it, and wishes to make a case, feel free. |
One can define many concepts in many ways. The word 'tradition' is often abused, i.e. for customs or habits, for new age religious spin-offs, etc. As long as one attempts to remain coherent with oneself, any definition can be proposed.
The usefulness and validity of applying brackets of 'traditional' to astrologies from (perhaps) Babylonian to pre-modern suggest an underlying unity of doctrine, viewpoint, method, etc. that simply does not and never has existed. One simple example: the commonly used 'Dorothean triplicities' are based on Stoic elements, Ptolemy's "Four Books" on Aristotelian ones.
Not only in modern times but also in the past one seldom finds a unity of opinion on many if not most astrological questions. Example: day-only definition of the Lot of Fortune by Ptolemy, different formulae according to night or day 'sect' by other Hellenistic authors.
Therefore, in my heretical opinion, the notion of 'traditional' astrology deserves to be abandoned altogether because it is invalid and misleading. Rather, one might use classifications like Babylonian, Hellenistic, Mediaeval, Renaissance and theosophistic.
Best regards,
lihin
_________________
Non esse nihil non est. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mjacob
Joined: 17 Nov 2011
Posts: 37
Location: Gravesend, Kent
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2012 7:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Never having had the time to read all of the Secret Doctrine or Isis Unveiled
I cannot say with authority that there is no such thing as
Theosophicist Astrology but if there was it is about 175 years too late to be
Traditional.
As for heresy I tend to think of brave principled people standing against a powerful establishment not mere contrarians.
Matthew |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tzadde
Joined: 07 Apr 2011
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2012 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lihin wrote: | | one might use classifications like Babylonian, Hellenistic, Mediaeval, Renaissance and theosophistic. |
Without Arabic astrology, there would be no Mediaeval or Renaissance astrology... and this is what I am practicing. It is like classical music in my opinion, without it there would be no modern music.
Matthew, good point about Theosophical astrology, it is not traditional in any stretch of the word.
_________________
Amor ordinem nescit.
Love does not know order.
- Saint Jerome - |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
Skyscript on Facebook