17
Caveat: Riley states:
What you find here is a preliminary translation completed in the 1990?s and not perfected since. It is based on Wilhelm Kroll?s 1908 edition (page numbers of this edition are marked with bold-faced K in my pdf) and on David Pingree?s 1986 edition (page numbers marked with P), a great improvement on his predecessor?s. The angled brackets (< >) indicate words added in the translation for clarity or (sometimes) to correct errors in the text .My studies in ancient mathematical literature, and (more important) in the Syriac and Arabic copies of Valens did not proceed far enough to put the finishing touches on this translation. Moreover I have moved on to other work. (See here.) So there are no guarantees of accuracy. You might also find some typos. Use at your own risk. In addition I am not prepared to answer questions about the translation. You are on your own
Still free is free.

18
What we can rely on is that fact that Mark Riley is a cautious scholar who is not likely to publish something that is disreputable or unreliable as a whole. But this is a very wise statement in my opinion. All translations of works of this nature ought to carry something similar, even those that claim to be above such inadequacies.They are all works in progress.

19
I hope my note wasn't perceived as an indication that the translation was disreputable or unreliable. I don't have the background to determine that. I posted for informational purposes only.

20
I suggest every one who downloads it, send Mr. Riley a thank-note by mail?

I 've done so myself just now. I have no idea how many students of the tradition are roaming about in cyberspace; but to play safe and avoid Mr. Riley getting submerged with expressions of gratitude, one might think of sending it "some time" later ... 8)

(I should mention that I replied to this part of Deb's post:
"I hope Mark Riley realises how many astrologers will appreciate his work.")
Herman

http://www.hervaro.be

21
hervaro wrote:I suggest every one who downloads it, send Mr. Riley a thank-note by mail?

I 've done so myself just now. I have no idea how many students of the tradition are roaming about in cyberspace; but to play safe and avoid Mr. Riley getting submerged with expressions of gratitude, one might think of sending it "some time" later ... 8)

(I should mention that I replied to this part of Deb's post:
"I hope Mark Riley realises how many astrologers will appreciate his work.")


Since we don't know Riley's personal views about astrology, having a bunch of astrologers send him emails probably isn't a good idea if we want the translation to stay up. Like many academics he may not think very highly of the subject, and so he may not react well to a bunch of astrologers emailing him.

This is historic for everyone in our community though, and I'm very grateful towards Riley for what he has done.
My website:
http://www.chrisbrennanastrologer.com

22
Chris Brennan wrote: Since we don't know Riley's personal views about astrology, having a bunch of astrologers send him emails probably isn't a good idea if we want the translation to stay up. Like many academics he may not think very highly of the subject, and so he may not react well to a bunch of astrologers emailing him.

This is historic for everyone in our community though, and I'm very grateful towards Riley for what he has done.
Well, we can always disguise ourselves as students of antiquity and philosophy (supposing that we aren't already - de facto)!
Anyway, I got a short and nice respons from Mr. Riley, expressing his hope his work is useful.
Herman

http://www.hervaro.be

23
I 've got a mail from Mr. Riley:
You might have noticed that the page numbers were in disorder. I have corrected this and posted an updated versions of Vettius Valens.
Sorry for the errors.
Mark Riley
Time to download again, if you rely on the page-numbering for your work and/or studies!
Herman

http://www.hervaro.be

25
This translation of Valens seems to indicate the reverse for calculating the lot of fortune to what is expected:

Pg 26, section 3: The Lot of Fortune and its Houseruler

?Next in order, it will be necessary (for day nativities) to count accurately
the distance from the sun to the moon, then to measure off in the opposite direction an equal distance from the Ascendant, and to inspect the resulting place: which star is its ruler and which star or stars are at this point and all the square or trine asterisms of this place."

If I take my chart as example, it says to take the distance from the Sun (13 Leo) to the Moon (9 Gemini) and measure off in the opposite direction an equal distance from the ascendant so since we were going backwards against the order of the signs, now it says to go forward in the order of the signs and the ascendant is 1 Sco, so this gives 5 Cap, which is where I thought the lot of spirit was. Any thoughts on this?
Curtis Manwaring
Zoidiasoft Technologies, LLC

27
astrojin wrote:Hello,

I am pretty sure that you know what it means as you would also have Schmidt's translation.
I do. But I figured that since many here seem to think that Schmidt's translations are questionable, that maybe someone would have an explanation for the difference between what Schmidt says and what this translation says. If Schmidt did it wrong, then it should be pointed out here with an explanation of why this translation is better.
Curtis Manwaring
Zoidiasoft Technologies, LLC