Was Astrology Invented By The Greeks?

[Guest guest]

Dear All, The following is an article present at: http://www.astroconsulting.com/FAQs/did_the_greeks_invent_astrology.htm Love and regards,Sreenadh==============================

Was Astrology Invented By The Greeks?

Edmond H. Wollmann

Kepler College: Astrology in Ancient Civilizations

Demetra George advising

First term, August 10, 2000

The word Astrology, means star (aster) discourse or theory (logos). Traditionally, this "star-discourse" or theory is based on the idea that there is an effect or influence from stars or celestial bodies, which can be studied systematically. Thus, astro-logic, would be the workings of this system of influence of celestial bodies on human affairs. In this most strict sense, the aspect of astrology in terms of its specific definition of system, would favor the Greek rendering of astrology as an invention as a "star-theory" or a logical derivation based on the Greek perspective of cause and effect; something outside of us that works with or without our input. In the broader sense with the recognition of the synchronistic corroboration between humans with their earthly affairs and celestial bodies as an omen star discourse, the "invention" clearly belongs to Mesopotamian culture. Astrology as the west has come to define it is a blending of two cultural perspectives that originate in Greek thought and Oriental thought. Therefore, the question is not which peoples invented astrology, but to what extent of the body of knowledge now considered astrological, were the inventive contributions of each civilization and their perspectives, techniques, and observations.

Individualist and Collectivist(1)

 

 

 

 

Collectivist

People are born into extended families or clans who protect them in exchange for loyalty.

Identity is based in the social system and given by one's group.

People are encouraged to adjust and restrain the self in order to be a better "fit" with the social group.

People are socialized to be emotionally dependent on organizations and institutions.

Emphasis is on belonging to organizations, and membership is the ideal. Expertise, order, duty, and security are provided by the larger social system.

Trust is placed in group decisions.

*Trust is placed in the whole as a critical element and force in organizing the parts.

 

Individualist

Everybody is supposed to take care of himself/herself and his/her immediate family. Identity is based in the individual and achieved by one's own striving.

People are encouraged to express and validate the inner attributes of the self.

People are socialized to be emotionally independent of organizations and institutions.

Emphasis is on individual initiative and achievement, and leadership is the ideal.

Autonomy, variety, pleasure, and individual financial security are sought within the larger social system.

Trust is placed in individual decisions.

* Trust is placed in the parts as a critical element and force in organizing the whole.

In "Babylonian Astrology: Its Origin and Legacy in Europe" (Campion, extracted from Astronomies Across Cultures) are cited several sources that delineate the history of the subject. All of them assume different origin points based on technical applications, increase in popularity, or the state of the body of knowledge at the time in which the definition fits. But the origin of the Astral Religion or re-ligio (to relink to spiritual source) of man to his celestial environment was clearly established at least 4000 years ago in ancient Mesopotamia. As with most societies subscribing to the Anima Mundi (soul of the world), spirit was immaterial but inseparable from matter, and gave to matter its form and movements; inanimate objects were considered to contain spirit or soul. This trust in the environs as indicative of the collective or personal state is what allowed the Mesopotamians to recognize celestial bodies as potential omens (Latin for signs) (Cumont, 1912, Barton, 1994). From this perspective, astrology was invented in many cultures (including the native American tribes) with this trust in the environmental omen divination, a product of the strongly held beliefs of these early cultures. The environment, whether celestial or earthly, was the vessel by which the Gods communicated their desires, intentions, and instructions to the civilizations on earth. This was a natural psychological recognition, e.g., that humans were one with the system in which they moved; that they were the environment it appeared they existed within, the both celestial and earthly environs were one system. This was an instinctive knowingness that was not yet unlearned by these early cultures, and not yet encoded and programmed by modern societal demands that are instilled by technological "shoulds." This perspective is now regarded as purely superstitious, and has evolved via a constricted discounting of that knowingness of connection. Societies are now having to confront the devastating results in our eco-systems of such a separative negative view of our place in the natural world. Specifically, divination using celestial phenomena appears to have been primarily the product of the early Mesopotamian cultures, a blend of observation (empiricism), and trust of this connection to nature.

In "A History of Western Astrology" (Tester, 1987), the author broadens (or narrows, depending on how you view it) the definition of astrology thus:

 

 

Astrology is the interpretation and prognostication of events on earth, and of men's characters and dispositions, from the measurement and plotting of the movements and relative positions of the heavenly bodies, of the stars and planets, including among the latter the sun and moon.(2)

He goes on to state that because astrology "depends on the charting of the movements and positions of the planets, it could not arise until after the growth of mathematical astronomy." Tester argues that the real mathematical theoretical astronomy developed late in the 5th century B.C.E. and hence the real science of astrology was the achievement of the Greeks. How quickly we move from the recognition of astral connection and divination, to science and separation. This is because science seeks to reduce and separate as a mode of investigation rather than expand and integrate the "something" that drives the inquiry (parts organizing the whole), whereas the myth takes the opposite side of the dimension;

 

 

"The myth brings us into a level of consciousness that is spiritual . . . there is a condescension on the part of the infinite to the mind of man, and that is what looks like God."(3)

Employing modern psychological orientation and theoretic understanding of individualist societal perspectives, dispels the "logic" behind the arguments of the superiority of weighing critical thinking to this side of the consciousness dimension; revealing the psychological reason for many astrologers' need to make astrology a Greek science. First and foremost, is the elevation of the commonly accepted (and fallacious) definition of modern science as equaling "truth" in some way, rather than a construct to allow us to understand the phenomena we label reality. The secondary reason for embracing Greek philosophical approaches as more developed, is the personally utilitarian perspective of the Greeks that reinforces self-validation and reinforces ego. This approach allowed them to begin to transform astrology (and other paradigms) from a religious and political tool, to a personal tool of understanding by relating it to a personal reality experience that can be agreed upon to validate that personal experience.(4) Hence, the subjective albeit realistic view that man is the measure(er) of all things. Like all Greek inventions, astrology took on a more specific or personal perspective that served the individual instead of the collective alone. Specificity and realism therefore become important factors unlike the Oriental collective perspective which trusts the whole to organize the parts, the Greeks sought to organize the whole through understanding and manipulation of the parts.

For example, in art, the Greeks developed the realism and perspective notion to a high degree. Artists in the post-modern era recognize however, art is a lie not unlike photography, in that the concept of perspective and what we see--although a personal reality experience-- is an illusion none-the-less. This personal view may be an accurate description of the reality of the experience of say, a vanishing point,(5) but not a description of the reality. Parallel lines never "really" converge. Never-the-less, the development of this realism of perspective by the Greeks, is hailed as an advance of clarity and leap in human consciousness. From a more fair and balanced view, it is more reflective of a psychological orientation rather than a qualitative factor to be assigned values of better or more true.

It is clear from historical records that oriental cultures relied on a more collective social psychology and perspective, whereas the western cultures emphasize the uniqueness of the individual experience. The Early Mesopotamian culture bridged the perspectives of both east and west and acted as an interface between them, which is far more spectacular of a developmental process and advance than was the Greek acceleration of the personal experience of identity.

The earliest culture of the Sumerians described their origin as lying in the East "where the sun rises" (Patterson, The Essentials of Ancient History, 1990) which implies a movement from the far east to the near east as a possible explanation of origin. Hence, this collective view and social psychological orientation we know as Oriental, was merged with the west in a climate that allowed spectacular celestial observation because of the desert climate and lack of heavy cloud (Patterson, The Essentials of Ancient History, 1990) and lead to the art of celestial divination. In essence, the Oriental view was a balancing prerequisite for a populace to first have a faith in stellar divinities, that they exerted an influence as the extension of the collective consciousness organizing power of the whole, and finally to determine and observe the nature of this influence (co-fluence). This view is neither wholly eastern or western but a brilliant blending of the two. All aspects of this approach can be achieved without Greek geometry or reliance on the mathematical and theoretical astronomy of the Greeks as asserted by Jim Tester (1996). The Greek view allowed an individualistic service in refinement. But because of the power of science as the gateway to "truth" in post-modern society, critical thinking may be clouded by the need for social approval and validity by those otherwise insightful enough to see the obvious logic of the astrological premise. Thus, removing one's paradigm out of the collectivity's perceived realm of the superstitious is believed to add power to the thrust of the argument for validity. But does it? Even the language we use in astrology is "an English translation, of a Latin translation, of a Greek translation of a Babylonian nomenclature." (Cumont, 1912, page 27, Babylon and Greece). The power of the concept is evident in the survival of the nomenclature itself. Scientific constructs are the fruit of the Greek culture.

Let us examine some of the current requisites of scientific constructs, and it will be seen that the Babylonians and Greeks alike both contributed scientific elements to the body of astrological knowledge extant.

Current scientific approach commonly involves and incorporates;

 

 

1) Empirical verification.

2) Operational definition.

3) Controlled observation.

4) Statistical generalization and empirical confirmation.

Empirical verification can be as simple as observation of the lunar cycles which the Babylonians clearly excelled with as far as data compilation is concerned. The mean synodic, sidereal, anomalistic, and draconic lunar periods were laid down in cuneiform tablets by the Babylonians and are not far off from modern astronomical calculations (Cumont, 1912, page 36, Babylon and Greece). This is clearly empirical observational science on the part of the Babylonians, an important part of the scientific aspect of astrological knowledge. An operational definition is simply the values assigned to the variables we wish to measure in an experiment. Defining what we are measuring: The theory of effect that determines what our consciousness will focus on to observe or create an atmosphere to observe. This was also instituted by the Orientals by the postulate of astral bodies having an effect on the lives of men. That is the operational definition of astrology. Thus, this early, the scientific aspect of astrological foundation has already been established by two factors in Mesopotamia. Therefore, the Greeks were not the originators of science or astrology per se, but responsible for the distillation of an approach from a personal perspective separate from religious or beliefs in the omen filled environs as implicate causation. Controlled observation in astronomic topics is difficult and can be achieved for example, by measurements of a star's location, such as the "bent light effect" hypothesized by Einstein to demonstrate theories of gravitational effect on light particles. Because of the scarcity of -- and limitations with -- observational equipment in these periods, there was little ability for control, and a hit and miss theoretical approach would be a more accurate description of the observation/hypothesis process. Additionally, the Mesopotamians were less concerned with the mechanics of how it worked and more concerned with the observation of patterns to allow them to predict; to understand the star discourse.

The Greeks were clearly more astute at geometries than the Babylonians and Chaldeans, but astrology and astronomy were, from our best evidence at this time, "invented" in Mesopotamia. But even the geometry is questionable. In "A History of Horoscopic Astrology", James Holden asserts that the Babylonians had already grouped the signs into Trigons or triplicities that were adopted by the Greeks. This is basic geometry. None of it (other than the observational aspects) would fit the clear definitions of astronomy. Astrology is more accurately a blending of astral religion and astronomic observation. There was no such thing as astronomy until the late 17th century when the connection to nature and the remnants of the collective psychology of the Orientals was completely severed from the study of celestial mechanics, and the completion of the re-separation of east and west cultures with the west embracing deus ex machina (deity separate from the machine) as its final theological perspective. Thus, astrology lost respectability because of western materialistic ego-centrism and complete removal of the archetypal or spiritual environmental omen aspect, resulting in a collective materialistic delusion of grandeur. The decline was not because of any intellectual deficiency inherent in the astrological premise. It was the effect of a defective philosophical perspective of the collective that brought this about and threatens ecological destruction of earthly resources at this time in which we live. This is partly why the Platonic view was more conducive to the astrological premise, because the initial "cause" was still from a non-physical source. The material focus brought us great technological accomplishment, at the cost of philosophic and spiritual advance. Now societal conflicts are increasing with reference to ethical and belief structure reformations in overcompensation to this unconscious collectively recognized imbalance.

The (begging the question) question "Was Astrology Invented by the Greeks" begs for precise operational definitions of astrology itself. As evidenced by the disagreement regarding the differing perspectives of astrological origin cited by Nicholas Campion in "Babylonian Astrology: Its Origin and Legacy in Europe" are themselves testimony of the difficulty in operationalizing a definition of astrology clearly. The reason for this is essentially the attempt to take a concept that arose from the recognized collective oneness of the universe that was blending with a more objective data collection methodology, and force it into only materialistic scientific parameters. Even Thomas Kuhn (1970) recognized the limits of this approach;

 

 

Normal science research is a strenuous and devoted attempt to force nature into the conceptual boxes supplied by the professional education. Anomalies are disregarded because they do not articulate the paradigm." Thomas Kuhn, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions."

The art/science of astrology can never be assigned as originating in either wholly east (collective) or west (individuation) social conceptual boxes, because astrology itself was born from the ingenious wedding of the two.==============================