O Micro-Zodíaco e a Interculturalidade da Tradição Astrológica Antiga: Exemplo Textual

Monroe, M. Willis, 2016, "The Micro-Zodiac in Babylon and Uruk: Seleucid Zodiacal Astrology" in The Circulation of Astronomical knowledge in the Ancient World, 121.

Looking at the various fragments of the micro-zodiac both from Uruk and Babylon one can begin to see how such a descriptive text was compiled and used. An analysis of texts over time and space allows for the creation of a model of textual transmission specific to the extant texts but applicable to a wider tradition. Martin Worthington in his book on Akkadian textual criticism has noted that the study of variants in texts can inform us of the “geography of textual transmission in antiquity.” While Worthington is primarily concerned with “reconstructing the original wording of a composition” (what he terms textual or lower criticism), many of his methods still apply when working with larger aspects of text, revealing historical and geographical traces of transmission. Collecting these divergent patterns or traditions reveal patterns in the way texts were worked with and recopied in new contexts. In the case of the micro-zodiac the evidence is sparse at best, but two distinct geographical locations allow for some recognition of textual traditions. In this case, the difference between texts from Babylon and those from Uruk. At the same time the different formats of the micro-zodiac including a tabular layout, as well as other unique formats give hints at the production and conception of the text in its scholarly context. The unknown question with all of this late material in Mesopotamia is to what degree Hellenistic theoretical thought influenced the work of Babylonian scholars. Certainly many of the ideas that the scribes working with the micro-zodiac used quickly found currency in Greek astrology: the zodiac, triplicities, and hypsomata among other concepts. In regards to the new texts written during this period and their associated novel concepts and formats, Koch attributes some of this creativity to the development of mathematical astronomy during this period. Certainly, more accurate predicative methods allowed for the creation of horoscopes and other texts.

 

Monroe, M. Willis, 2016, "The Micro-Zodiac in Babylon and Uruk: Seleucid Zodiacal Astrology" in The Circulation of Astronomical knowledge in the Ancient World, ed. J. M. Steele, . Leiden/ Boston: Brill.

A Construção Antiga de um Sentido para o Termo "Astrologia": Exemplo Textual

 Pérez-Jiménez, A., 2015, "La Astrología, Un Método Científico de Adivinación" in Adivinación y Astrología en el Mundo Antiguo, 49-50.

Pues bien, durante casi toda la Antigüedad los términos ἀστρονομία y ἀστρολογία, lat. astronomia y astrologia, designaban nuestra ciencia “astronomía”, no la “astrología”. De hecho, el único nombre atestiguado antes de Platón para la “astronomía” era ἀστρολογία; después de él se utiliza uno u otro indistintamente, aunque por lo general el de ἀστρονομία queda vinculado a la filosofía platónica. Y, si bien ya en los primeros siglos de nuestra Era se percibe cierta diferenciación entre los dos términos latinos, habrá que esperar hasta el siglo IV (san Jerónimo) para encontrar una distinción más tajante; el primer autor que define claramente astronomia como “astronomía” y astrologia como “astrología” es san Isidoro de Sevilla. En cuanto a los términos griegos, Sexto Empírico conserva el nombre de ἀστρολογία para la “astronomía” y la “astrología” y reserva el de ἀστρονομία para la “astrometeorología ”. Hasta Simplicio y Olimpiodoro, en el siglo VI, no encontraremos una oposición en sentido moderno. Pero, si esto era así, ¿cómo se referían los griegos y romanos a los astrólogos y su doctrina?

En todas las épocas, cuando quería designarse la astrología, frente a la astronomía, se añadía a los términos anteriores el adjetivo γενεθλιακή (de γενέθλη = “nacimiento”) o ἀποτελεσματική (de ἀποτέλεσμα = “efecto”, por la creencia en que los astros producían efectos determinados sobre el mundo sublunar) o bien se empleaban estos adjetivos solos con el artículo o con el sustantivo τέχνη. A partir de ellos se formó el sustantivo γενεθλιαλογία o γενεθλιολογία, genethliologia. En relación con tales nombres, a los astrólogos se los llamaba ἀποτελεσματικοί, γενεθλιακοί, genethliaci. Como es obvio, estos términos tienen que ver con el ámbito de actuación principal de la astrología (la fijación del horóscopo en el momento del nacimiento) y con la esencia misma de este arte, el cumplimiento en la tierra de los efectos que producen las configuraciones planetarias y/o zodiacales.

Otra forma para referirse a la astrología fue el uso restringido de los términos μαθηματική τέχνη, mathematica y μάθησις, mathesis, para la profesión y μαθηματικοί, mathematici, para los astrólogos, que tienen que ver con el prestigio adquirido en determinada época por estas prácticas o con su relación inicial, fundamentos y método compartido con la astronomía, una ciencia matemática cuya base es la aritmética, la geometría y, luego, la trigonometría.

Por último, el nombre más popular a partir del siglo III a.C. en que, según la tradición recogida por Vitrubio, la astrología fue divulgada en Grecia por Beroso y sus discípulos Antípater y Aquinápolo, fue el de χαλδαική o Χαλδαίων τέχνη, ars o doctrina Chaldaeorum, de forma que, a partir de este momento, χαλδαῖος, Chaldaeus, pierde casi por completo su sentido étnico para designar al profesional de este arte, al astrólogo.

Pérez-Jiménez, A., 2015, "La Astrología, Un Método Científico de Adivinación" in Adivinación y Astrología en el Mundo Antiguo, ed. J. A. D. Delgado & A. Pérez-Jiménez, 45-76. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria: Fundación Mapfre Guanarteme.

Os Eclipses e as Observações de Gregos e Babilónios: Exemplo Textual

Steele, J. M., 2000, Observations and Predictions of Eclipse Times by Early Astronomers, 95-6. 

There has been much debate over the years concerning the source for the Babylonian observations in he Almagest. As I have suggested above, Ptolemy probably obtained them from Hipparchus. But how did Hipparchus come to possess them? Did he travel to Babylon himself and persuade a Babylonian astronomer to translate the records for him, as has been suggested by Toomer (1988: 359)? Or was knowledge of Babylonian astronomy widespread among Greco-Roman astronomers? Certainly, Babylonian mathematical astronomy must have been known fairly widely. The Oxyrhynchus papyri show that astrologers both used and understood Babylonian ACT methods, and there is nothing to suggest that the Oxyrhynchus material would differ from that which would have been found in any other medium size city had the conditions for survival of papyri been as good. But the transmission of actual observations is a different matter. To be of any value in determining, say, some parameter of a lunar theory, not just any lunar observation will do. Eclipses, of course, are the most useful, but even then what one really needs are eclipses fulfilling tions. Furthermore, these conditions certain condiare in part dependent upon the theory that one is developing. Thus, a Greek astronomer wanting to use Babylonian eclipse observations would probably have to obtain a long run of records, from which he could select certain ones at a later date. 

The Babylonian records described by Ptolemy range in date from 721 BC to 382 Be. Even if these represent the earliest and latest reports available to him, Ptolemy must have had access to records covering a period about 350 years. Furthermore, this list of eclipses must have been fairly complete. It has generally been supposed that the original source for these records was the Babylonian Astronomical Diaries. However, there are good reasons for doubting that this was the direct source from which Hipparchus made his compilation. A typical Diary covers a period of six months, during which there will be one, or occasionally two, lunar eclipse possibilities (i.e., observations or predictions). In compiling a collection spanning 350 years, therefore, one would have to consult about 700 tablets. It seems unlikely that a Babylonian astronomer would read through all of these tablets, even if they were all preserved, and then explain them at the request of a visiting Greek. There is, however, another ready-made source which would have been of much greater use to Hipparchus: the large compilation of eclipse records, preserved in part on LBAT * 1414, LBAT 1415 + 1416 + 1417, and LBAT *1419.

Steele, J. M., 2000, Observations and Predictions of Eclipse Times by Early Astronomers. Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.

Astrologia Helenística - Os Três Contributos Babilónicos ("Caldaicos"): Exemplo Textual

Rochberg, F., 2010, In the Path of the Moon: Babylonian Celestial Divination and Its Legacy, 143.

In the scientific literature of the Hellenistic period, references to “Chaldeans” in connection with astrology and astronomy are numerous. The implications of such references, for the history of astrology, however, depend on a closer assessment of the nature and extent of the Babylonian contribution to that branch of Hellenistic science, but an assessment based on cuneiform sources. Three elements which re demonstrably Babylonian in origin yet form basic and integral parts of Greek astrological doctrine provide the focus of discussion here. They are: l) planetary exaltations, 2) the micro-zodiac, and 3) trine aspect. The differences between the Babylonian and Greek use of these three elements are exemplary of the fact that despite the incorporation of Babylonian elements at the inception of Greek astrology, the overall character and rationale of Greek astrology remains entirely a Hellenistic Greek product.

Rochberg, F., 2010, In the Path of the Moon: Babylonian Celestial Divination and Its Legacy. Leiden/Boston: Brill.