On the question of decans in astrology, I find the difference in attribution intriguing. This story of chaldean rule seems a little inconsistent if one looks at the oldest records among the egyptians, who measure the stars for the night hours.
According to the article below that I found on the Skyscript forum, the egyptians calculated night hours using constellational asterisms. This obviously influenced the establishment of a religious calendar that coincided with the measure of 36 decans.
Each decan was measured at 45 minutes of arc, as opposed to the babylonian standard of 60 minutes per hour. Each group of stars became visible every 70 days, when they would give way to another group, according to the criterion of heliac ascension.
With the precession of the equinoxes throughout the dynasties, this system lost its use, so it was reformed for a second group of 36 decans based on transits, so that this adopted measure would correct the deficiencies in the calendar of religious festivities in some cities.
This leads to some interesting points:
- The attribution of Chaldean rule of decans may have been later and of hellenistic influence, as well as the establishment of the so-called "planetary hours";
- The attribution of Chaldean rule of decans may have been later and of hellenistic influence, as well as the establishment of the so-called "planetary hours";
- The measurement of asterisms for calculating night hours is more constellational than zodical, so it would not be exactly coincident with the 30 ° signs of the sphere;
In this sense, some interesting options are presented:
- Investigate which were the original fixed stars (and there are two groups, one by heliac ascension, the other by transits) of each decan and observe which were the planetary regiments in the light of some treaty, +
- Investigate which were the original fixed stars (and there are two groups, one by heliac ascension, the other by transits) of each decan and observe which were the planetary regiments in the light of some treaty, +
such as those of Ptolemy and the Arabs' later opinion;
- Or assign the division of each sign by 3 according to the rulers of the triplicities, disregarding the original context of the deans, which is to measure the hours from the stars;
- Or assign the division of each sign by 3 according to the rulers of the triplicities, disregarding the original context of the deans, which is to measure the hours from the stars;
And in that sense, "fractal" sub-divisions like Jyotish's drekkana seem more logical. The problem is that the type of sect and ascendant of Natividade that will determine how the sub-division of signs would be classified by 3,+
since there are schools with different views from the "Division Letters", which in the West are very confused with the "Letters Harmonics ". Either that, or to investigate to which stars the planetary rulings of the Chaldean could be attributed to confirm this attribution system
Threads I used for questioning:
@foxstrology and decans:
@foxstrology and decans:
https://twitter.com/foxstrology/status/1321972979736088577?s=20
@threadreaderapp please unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
