[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
VMs: Re: Libro de Astromagia
This is a request to Jim Gillogly if he still takes care of the maintenance.
Please change my email address from perakh@xxxxxxxxxxx to perakh@xxxxxxxxxxx
. Thanks, Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rene Zandbergen" <r_zandbergen@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Voynich Ms. mailing list" <voynich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 8:56 AM
Subject: VMs: Re: Libro de Astromagia
> Dear all,
> Rafal wrote:
> > It is general but based on three works - one other
> > MS from the turn of the 15th/16th c. which shows
> > the _figurae_ by themselves (ie. without circles
> > or spheres) and an inclunabul printed in 1488
> > which shows the _figurae_ each in the centre of
> > the square horocopic diagram giving the boundaries
> > of the houses but no planets (and - as you said
> > - with the degree for which the _figura_
> > is represented being on the ascendent).
> This 1488 book is probably either in Latin or in
> German, and reflects the work of Pietro D'Abano,
> is that correct? It is worth leafing through
> Saxl's "Verzeichnis (etc), 1915", where this is
> also discussed.
> > > These refer
> > > to stars (or small groups of stars, like eg.
> > > the flies) that rise at the same time as the
> > > degree of the zodiac. It is therefore strictly
> > > valid for one latitude and for one period of 70
> > > years. Typically, the latitude is that of
> > > either Alexandria or Rhodos, but in the ME
> > > other catalogues were also set up. This one
> > > predates that, but post-dates Al-Sufi's work,
> > > which would have been known in Spain at that
> > > time. All this would be discussed in the
> > > reference hinted at by Rafal.
> > Well, I would argue that this scheme was as
> > unchanging as the Zodiac itself - ie. it was
> > equally "tropical".
> > The proof is the fact that all the sources quoted
> > above,
> > which differ by over 200 years, as well as some even
> > earlier
> > sources quoted in the book (Peter of Abano), assign
> > the same _figurae_ to the same degrees of the
> > (tropical) Zodiac.
> > Thus they were moving away from the original
> > constellations to which they refered and cannot
> > be used to date the work where they appear - just
> > the rough date when the system was "frozen".
> Hmmm, that's a pity. Really, the system has stopped
> being used, perhaps just because it became too
> obvious that the star 'Regulus', which is right
> on the ecliptic, did not rise at the same time
> as its 'degree'. Because these one-degree
> mini-constellations are in most cases individual
> stars. The above reference (Saxl) helps in
> tracing back which mini-constallation refers to
> which star and even manages to trace some obvious
> Arabic to Latin translation errors.
> There is a further comparison to the Palazzo della
> Ragione in Padova (which has the crayfish-as-cancer
> painting, which also includes all 360 figures
> (or at least did - they may not all survive).
> Best wishes, Rene
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! News - Today's headlines