About the rest corners.
Of course, we can't be sure about anything in the VMs. As for me, the "lunar" diagonal seems to be simplier for explanation. Possibly, only the left bottom corner needed the t/o scheme to show influential quarter-positions of the Moon. If the right top corner depicts the monthly quarters of the Moon (the Full Moon, the New Moon and the two crescents), it seems that there is no need in the t/o map.
The "solar" diagonal supposes its corners to denote the solar aspects in causing tides. I'm not sure that the author implies (if he does) the same kind of tides. It looks like exactly atmospheric tides. The shapes behind the suns remind clouds.
We already know that the Sun plays its role causing the neap and spring tides (four times a year, wholly). Obviously, there is no monthly division of the solar tides, so, maybe, the author considered the daily influence of the Sun on humors, as well. I'm not sure which view and school it can be, but, perhaps, the left top corner represents three "stations" of the Sun above the horizon: its rising at the East, its meridian and the dawning at the West. Of course, it is strange: if the daily lunar tides include positions of the Moon below the horizon, why are the only three solar points above (or at) the horizon counted?
Maybe, the matter is in the power which is considered by the author to cause those effects, and in different kinds of tides.
Well, the classical Western astrology all derives from Ptolemy, as well as astronomy, if I'm not mistaken.
The VMS has a look of a book of practice, not a treatise of abstract science for the sake of science, so I would expect it to be imbued with astrological notions and concepts. All this is definitely waiting some historian of astrology to look into.
This is an article which promises to be interesting (requires free registration):
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
(12-05-2020, 08:42 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The VMS has a look of a book of practice, not a treatise of abstract science for the sake of science, so I would expect it to be imbued with astrological notions and concepts. All this is definitely waiting some historian of astrology to look into.
I agree with you, Anton, in general, tides are not that subject that kept interest of many astrologers /astronomers in that time. It was rather an exception than a rule.
As for the practical use, I mentioned a possible one (blood-letting). I can imagine a healer with his own approach and healing system, no problem. While at the first glance it seems unbelievable to see such things as tides in the VMs, but I think - not impossible.
I would be glad to know opinions of astronomers and historians of astrology.
What we now call astrology was a very practical practical aspect of medicine in the course of the middle ages.
A cure for a disease could consist of three aspects:
- saying a specific spell
- eating or drinking a coction
- observing the time to do this from the stars
In case of urgency, one could leave out one or the other.
While we now know (or think) that only the second part was actually effective, this was not so at that time.
They did not know that a particular herb had healing power because of its chemical composition. It was suspected (for example) from the shape of the herb.
Astrology was a very 'real' part of medicine.
I don't know if this was true for all universities, but when I was looking into course requirements at some of the major universities in the 15th century, astrology was a required course for medical students.
Probably, I need to clarify. On my view, the VMs contains pages with astrological context, but not f67v2.
Anton, I couldn't understand what you mean under the "rulers of the water", because it is not correct. All the planets are the rulers of a certain Sign of the Zodiac and the rulers of Triplicities (in elemental divizion of the Zodiac). It doesn't mean that Venus or Mars rule over the water or over the tides, they are rulers of the water Signs (Scorpio, Cancer, Pisces). Obviously, f67v2 must contain, at least, one of those signs to make any sense. As for me, I don't see any evidence that f67v2 contains something that relates to the water zodiacal signs and their ruler.
Actually, I was and am interested in astrology, while I'm far from the rank of expert, I'm familiar with the main points and even composed natal charts for myself and my relatives. I tried to check whether it works or not. And I was impressed with some results. Moreover, I went to a local astrologer just to check my success. It was a little disappointment, as my interpretation was better. Of course, I know my life better, and this fact gives me an advantage, but I hoped he will tell me more.
In the end, I made a conclusion that astrology has its piece of true, but the rest is either a myth or a lack of knowledge of astrologers.
(13-05-2020, 10:14 AM)Searcher Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.On my view, the VMs contains pages with astrological context, but not f67v2.
I see it in different light. I think there are no "astrological" vs "non-astrological" pages in the VMS. Rather, all pages and topics are imbued with astrology, have some reference or connection to celestial bodies.
(13-05-2020, 10:14 AM)Searcher Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Anton, I couldn't understand what you mean under the "rulers of the water", because it is not correct. All the planets are the rulers of a certain Sign of the Zodiac and the rulers of Triplicities (in elemental divizion of the Zodiac). It doesn't mean that Venus or Mars rule over the water or over the tides, they are rulers of the water Signs (Scorpio, Cancer, Pisces). Obviously, f67v2 must contain, at least, one of those signs to make any sense. As for me, I don't see any evidence that f67v2 contains something that relates to the water zodiacal signs and their ruler.
I'm no expert in astrology, it was never my professional field nor hobby. I just refer to what's written in Wikipedia, where Triplicities are closely associated with Elements, in fact these notions are almost used interchangeably there. Maybe it's technically correct to say that Planets are Rulers of Triplicities (not of the Elements), but since Triplicities are Zodiacal signs grouped under Elements, this gives quite tense association of Elements with Planets.
Wikipedia contains many errors, so this of course might be just erroneous representation. Maybe someone can consult Ptolemy directly and report what's the real case.
About the faces. I think the author wanted to emphasize the change of order of the faces (or, actually, of what's meant by the faces), the change of their positions in respect of each other (and possibly of the Earth). In the upper left corner there are three faces, not four, because two of them are aligned.
I don't think the wiki article is wrong. If one say "the Element of fire" ("стихия огня"), we already understand that the phrase has a philosophical or astrological meaning. So, the Element of Fire for any astrologer always means the fiery Signs. The elements in astrology are designed to describe a character and abilities of a person or an event.
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.