Re: Re: VMs: Modern Astrology vs. Traditional Astrology

[Pamela Richards <spirlhelix@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi, Nick

Thanks for your patience and support.  I suppose it
becomes obvious that an astrologer's perspective and a
historian's don't always coincide.

As much as I am enjoying the discussion, I have to
admit that earlier, Jan brought up a point that I
suppose we can't dance around forever:  the dating of
the VMs.

If the VMs was written some time after 1480, it is
altogether possible that the concepts and astrology of
Ficino would have been accessible to the VMs writer,
regardless of how "modern" we historians or
astrologers think he is or isn't.

Since Ficino was the translator of Plato and a number
of neoplatonists into the language of academia
(Latin), if the VMs predates 1480 and yet resonates
with Platonic or neoplatonic concepts (specifically I
am talking about star- spirit- human life
correspondence), perhaps the fact tells us something
about the provenance of the VMs.  It would likely have
been written by someone who had access to these ideas
before their translation into Latin by Ficino; they
must have been gleaned from the original Greek, or
some other, old source language which preserved these
concepts.     

I am learning a great deal from this discussion, too,
so again thank you for your patience with me.  Ioan
Couliano--is he the source of the belief that Ficino
originated "modern psychological" astrology?  Because
if he predates the twentieth century, although he may
have been impressed with Ficino's "new" concepts or
emphasis, somehow I don't think he used the words
"modern psychological astrologer" to describe Ficino. 

Again, kudos for your patience, and many thanks for
expanding my understanding!

Warmly,

Pam


--- Nick Pelling <nickpelling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
> 
> I've learnt a tremendous amount from this thread
> (especially from Pamela's 
> most recent posts), and so don't think it's quite
> time to take it off-list 
> (sorry Elmar).
> 
> FWIW I think of "modern astrology" as Ficino onwards
> and (say) 
> "contemporary astrology" as roughly 1850 onwards,
> but that is informed by a 
> literature (primarily historian-driven, and more
> specifically historians of 
> ideas) quite parallel to the literature (primarily 
> practising-astrologer-driven) on which Pamela is
> relying. Essentially, 
> "modern" is one of those
> words-that-mean-what-you-want-them-to-mean (as per 
> Humpty Dumpty), so we should be careful with it.
> 
> This is particularly important if we want to relate
> the VMs to the 
> literature(s) of history of astrology - we have to
> know *which tradition* 
> we're talking about.
> 
> I also completely take Pamela's point per Jung and
> alchemy (IIRC, he bought 
> a book on alchemy and had a dream, and that's where
> his ideas basically all 
> came from) - very much like the enneagram, Wicca,
> and numerous other 20th 
> Century inventions. I need to think about this more.
> 
> Pamela: (as mentioned above) I do believe that our
> readings are from quite 
> two parallel literatures. Which is why your kitten
> is ~fairly~ safe (though 
> I'd predict that Ioan Couliano did practise some
> medieval predictive 
> astrology - he did lecture on a mixture of
> predictive techniques at his 
> university). :-/
> 
> Cheers, .....Nick Pelling.....
> 
> 
>
______________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx
> with a body saying:
> unsubscribe vms-list
> 


=====
"I'd rather learn from one bird how to sing, than to teach ten thousand stars how not to dance."


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 
______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list