Babylonian Measurement

[Guest guest]

Hi Therese,

 

I agree with all you said, except for the part about me being wrong.

 

I still feel the best primer on the matter is Gleadow's " Origin.. " ,

and that book is still available for 12.95 as a Dover reprint. It

should be in the possession of anyone interested in ancient

astrology. Don't worry, he likes to cite Fagan a lot.

 

- Ed K

 

 

 

, Therese Hamilton

<eastwest@s...> wrote:

> Getting back to a past topic (approximately March 14-16):

>

> From my reading I thought it was very clear how the Babylonians

observed

> the movement of bodies in the sky, so I was surprised to read:

>

> " Sidereal motion, back then, was also a matter of pole stars,and

thus the

> grid of right ascension. As for the equinox, all one needed to do

was

> measure when the sun rose or set due east or west... " (Ed K) March

14

>

> " If you are saying that Fagan found that the Babylonians used an

> 'ecliptic,' you are surely mistaken. " (Ed K to Ken Bowser)

>

> " With regard to the Babylonians having " no concept of the plane of

the

> ecliptic, " it's important to note that they were EXCLUSIVELY

ecliptic

> oriented having no concept of equatorial corrdinates as did the

Chinese,

> for example... " (Ken Bowser, March 15)

>

> There's a a little diagram on page 25 of Koch-Westenholz'

MESOPOTAMIAN

> ASTROLOGY that clearly describes the Babylonian observation of the

skies.

> The Babylonian horizon was divided into three side-by-side 'paths'

or arcs

> (Anu, Enlil and Ea) with the equator roughly marking the middle

point of

> the middle path. These were the 'paths of the Moon through which

the Sun

> and planets also moved.

>

> In the diagram these three nightly paths are marked simply by

perpendicular

> lines to the horizon, the two equinox points. Constellations were

observed

> within and without the equinox boundaries (the three paths).

>

> The equator reference remains stationary and cuts the horizon at an

angle.

> There was no measurement of stars and planets related to the

equator. The

> ecliptic, sun and planets moved across the horizon in the course of

the

> year, moving from one wide path to the next. However, this doesn't

mean the

> Babylonians knew what the ecliptic was. The Moon and planets simply

teneted

> different areas in relation to the horizon at different times of

the year.

>

> Observing that the Sun, Moon and planets rise at different points

along the

> horizon during the year may in fact be declination, but there was no

> concept of an equator in Mesopotamia. There was no 'grid of right

> ascension' as there is today. As the planets stay in the vacinity

of the

> ecliptic, this means that in fact, astronomers were noting the

ecliptic as

> it 'moves' along the horizon during the year. The truth is that the

three

> paths of ancient Mesopotamia were not specifically related to

either the

> equator or ecliptic as precise circles in space. Rather, the

Mesopotamians

> dealt with AREAS of the sky, which is not the same thing.

>

> So it seems to me that neither of the above views (Ed and Ken) is

entirely

> right or entirely wrong, at least the way they were stated. The two

equinox

> points marked the boundaries between the three paths, but the

> constellations beyond those boundaries were utilized. As the Moon's

> latitude varies throughout the year, the Moon did not stay within

the

> horizon boundaries of the equinox points and had no particular

reference to

> an invisible equator.

>

> Therese

[Guest guest]

> There was no measurement of stars and planets related to the

equator.

> Therese

 

This is an important point at which astrology meets astronomy.

Without knowledge of a spherical earth and heliocentric solar system,

the concept of an equator is precluded. The Babylonians worked with

what they had.

(BH)

 

 

*

[Guest guest]

, " brianrhiggins2003 "

<brianrhiggins@e...> wrote:

> > There was no measurement of stars and planets related to the

> equator.

> > Therese

>

> This is an important point at which astrology meets astronomy.

> Without knowledge of a spherical earth and heliocentric solar

system,

> the concept of an equator is precluded.

 

This statement is simply wrong. Anyone can see the sphere of heaven

rotating around the earth with a polar axis. This is one of the

earliest astronomical understandings.

 

 

 

> The Babylonians worked with

> what they had.

 

Stating the obvious is safe. Good job.

 

 

 

 

> (BH)

>

>

> *