Fixed star interpretations

1
In the Preface of The Fixed Stars & Constellations, Robson claims to have used all available sources of information on the subject, a complete list of which would cover some 200 books; but he mentions only seven by name (the Tetrabiblos and six modern works). Does anyone know if Robson actually used any pre-19th century sources at all, and if so, which ones?

Regardless of whether Robson used them or not, I should be grateful for references to any useful sources on fixed star interpretations before the 19th century (outside the Tetrabiblos and the Anonymous of 379). Greek and Latin works are fine.

As a final, specific question, Robson says of Scheat (beta Pegasi): It causes extreme misfortune, murder, suicide, and drowning. I'm curious to know the origin of this interpretation.

Thanks in advance for any help!
https://astrology.martingansten.com/

2
Hi Martin,

almost all the older texts I know stem back to either Ptolemy or the source of Rhetorius (possibly Julian of Laodicea, according to Rhetorius Epitome 4 2.1). This latter tradition is where the so-called Anonymous of 379 (as dated by the consuls mentioned in "Palchus" 135, forged by Eleutherius Zebelenus) belongs to. Both of these traditions seem to be Hipparchean on the ground that in Julian the stars of the first two magnitudes are represented. It also appears in many variant texts, most of which are (well or badly) edited or even translated. I can compile you a list if you would like me to.

The only early tradition I know which stands apart is Persian in origin, surviving in Arabic, but (at least according to Pingree) is based on a 3rd century Greek source. It is a chapter on fixed stars in Book of Nativities by "Zaradusht", published by Paul Kunitzsch, "The Chapter on the Fixed Stars in Zaradusht?s Kitab al-mawalid", Zeitschrift f?r Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften 8 (1993), 241-249, reprinted in Paul Kunitzsch, Stars and Numbers. Astronomy and Mathematics in the Medieval Arab and Western Worlds. Abingdon, 2004, Article XVIII.

3
Thanks for this, Levente. I'll see if I can find that Kunitzsch article. A list of works such as you mention would be very welcome, if you have the time and inclination.

My interest at the moment lies primarily in (the history of) the interpretations of the fixed stars. Saying that a star is of the combined nature of, say, Mars and Jupiter is an interpretation, of course, but a very brief and general one. I'm curious to know how far back the much more specific interpretations given by Robson et al. (often negative: drowning, shipwreck, poisonous bites...) can be traced.
https://astrology.martingansten.com/

4
A list of works such as you mention would be very welcome, if you have the time and inclination.
I'll post it soon. However, the texts contain the usual very brief interpretations.
I'm curious to know how far back the much more specific interpretations given by Robson et al. (often negative: drowning, shipwreck, poisonous bites...) can be traced.
As a random selection I opened Jerome Cardan's On the Judgment of Genitures, and in its Chapter 3 (p. 436 of the 1663 edition) I found some interpretations, such as the three 3rd magnitude stars near the arrow of the Sagittarius can produce murderers and so on. It clearly suggests a tradition of more specific interpretations must have existed in the 16th century but their origins are unknown to me at the moment.

7
While I'm still working on my list (which, sadly, will take quite a long time), I have some observations regarding how the lore of fixed stars developed in the centuries, resulting in colorful depictions like the one by Robson.

There seem to be several stems of different origins, like:
  • * the description of stellar powers with the nature of planets, obviously based on the similarity of color;
    * the assertion that clouds and clusters (later called 'azemena' degrees) cause harm for the eyes or general impediments;
    * the lore of various degrees (full and empty etc.), which I think is originally based on where stars of the constellations are found and where not;
    * the nature attributed to zodiacal and extra-zodiacal constellations, which is also the topic of co-rising degrees; and
    * the lore of Egyptian decans.
The streams of information are sometimes transmitted virtually unaltered (like the description of the 30 bright stars or the Arabic listings of degrees) but sometimes meet, resulting in a new synthesis (such as the one found in Liber Hermetis). However, there's virtually no practical application of stars in the extant horoscope interpretations (save for some later sources), which suggest this lore has always been somewhat theoretical in nature. That would also explain why the development of novel ideas is nearly absent.

9
I do not want to advocate this author's conjectures and conclusions, but there are many texts cited (both ancient Sanskrit texts and fixed star texts from around a hundred years or so ago - which in themselves may also contain references to older texts(?)) in this text which may prove fruitful for this research. This particular text is not exactly what you are looking for but it could help as a reference text to other texts.

Here is an excerpt showing the detailed reference nature of the entire text titled: Studies on Rigvedic Deities: Astronomical and Meteorological by E. Ghosh.
Ekendranath Ghosh wrote: 1. Aja Ekapat. The name of the deity occurs six times [all chapters and verses are from the rg veda unless otherwise specified] (II.31.5; VII.35.13; X.64.4; X.66.11). He has been invoked five times with Ahirbudhna, thrice with the sea, twice with the earth, and once with several other deities, as the sun, fire, Prsni, Brhaspati, river, sky, roaring cloud, Sindhu, Rhbus, Apa, and Sarasvati. In one passage (X.65.13) he has been called a roarer and one provided with the thunderbolt (pavirabi).

The name also occurs in the White and Black Yajurvedas. In Vajasaneyi Samhita (5.35) Aja Ekapat and Ahirbudhna have been designated as garhapatya Fire, but in Taittiriya Samhita (1,3.3) Aja Ekapat has been so called and Ahirbudhna as daksina (southern) Fire.

In Atharvaveda (XIX.11.3) we are told that Rohita (the sun) gave origin to the heaven and earth and that Aja Ekapat was placed there.

The name of the deity also occurs in the Brahmanas. In Taittiriya Brahmana (3.1,2,8) the sun has been called Aja Ekapat and in two other places of the same work (1,5.1,5; 3.1,2,9) we are told that Prosthapada is placed on the east of Aja, Ekapat and Ahirbudhna on the north of Prosthapada. In Satapatha Brahmana (8.2,4.1) we are told that the goat climbed up after having become one-footed.

In Mahabharata (I.121) Aja Ekapat, Ahirbudhna, and Mrgavyadha have been counted amongst the eleven Rudras.

Yaska in his Nirukta (12,30) says that Aja Ekapat is one who walks with one leg or one who protects or drinks with one leg. The author of Nighantu (5,6) regards him as a deity.

In Yajusa-jyotisa (Sl.10) and Arca-jyotisa (Sl.9) we get the names in place of the asterisms Purva-prosthapada and Uttara-bhadrapada. Again Aja Ekapat has been regarded as the lord of Purva-bhadrapada (same as Purva-prosthapada) and Ahirbudhna as that of Uttara-bhadrapada. In Pitamahasiddhanta (an old astronomical work) we find the names of Aja and Ahirbudhna after Dhanistha in the list of asterisms with a north latitude (that is, placed north of the ecliptic). In Vrddhavasistha-siddhanta (Ch. 8, Sl.8) we are told that the two Ajapadas are placed on the north, evidently referring to Aja Ekapat and Ahirbudhna. In another place (Ch. 8, Sl.20) we find that Ahirbudhna does not disappear under the sun's rays (that is, it is placed higher up from the path of the sun). In Soma-siddhanta (4,6,32) and Surya-siddhanta (8,16) we find the two Bhadrapadas mentioned in place of Aja Ekapat and Ahirbudhna.

Roth and Boehtlingk (in their Worterbuch) thinks Aja Ekapat as the one-footed lord of the storm. Bloomfield, Victor Henry, and Wallis (in his Cosmology of the Rigveda, p.54) take him as the sun. The view must have been derived from the Taittiriya Samhita. Hardy calls him the moon. Bergaigne thinks him some isolated, hidden or unintelligible dweller on land. Macdonnell regards him as the personification of lightening (Vedic Mythology, pp. 73,74).

Considering what we find in the above mentioned works, I am unable to accept any of the above views and from the evidences we have in the Brahmanas and the astronomical works I am led to the view that the two dieties in question represent two stars.

We see that, at the time when the Yajusa-jyotisa and Arcajyotisa were composed (or compiled), Purva-bhadrapada and Uttara-bhadrapada were respectively known as Aja Ekapat and Ahirbudhna.

In Taittiriya Samhita (4,10,13) and Maitrayani Samhita (2,15,20) two asterisms named Prosthapada are mentioned in their list; in Kathaka Samhita (39.13) the two asterisms are named Prosthapada and Uttara-prosthapada. Again in Taittiriya Brahmana we find mention that Prosthapada is placed on the east of Aja Ekapat and Ahirbudhna on the north of Prosthapada. The two Prosthapadas, according to the later astronomical works, are the Purva- and Uttara-bhadrapadas. Each of the two asterisms consists of two principal stars, one of which forms the junction-star. The junction-star of the Purva-bhadrapada is [alpha] Pegasi; it is placed on the south; the other star is [beta] Pegasi, placed on the north. The two stars of the Uttara-bhadrapada are [alpha] Andromedae (on the north) and [gamma] Pegasi (on the south). The Purva-bhadrapada, again, is placed on the east of Uttara-bhadrapada. If the four stars of the two asterisms are joined together we get a four-sided figure. Following the view of Taittirya Brahmana, we consider Aja Ekapat as [alpha] Pegasi. The Prosthapada of the same work, viz. [gamma] Pegasi, is placed on the east of [alpha] Pegasi. [alpha] Andromedae, placed on the north of [alpha] Pegasi, is Ahirbudhna.

I shall now try to explain the meaning of the name of Aja Ekapat. We know that the sign Aquarius is partly formed by three-fourths of Purva-bhadrapada and the whole of Uttara-bhadrapada [...]

[This area is the same area of the sky as the question about Scheat or beta Pegasi located in Pisces and attributing these stars to Aquarius necessarily affects the author's interpretation of Pegasi.]
One would need to be careful of the author's conjectures as I have found a number of them to be false, without much doubt.

10
Hi Martin,

I know it was really ages ago when I promised to compile a list from the literature on the fixed stars. Eventually I had to realize that even the briefest substantial survey on the available text would easily grow to the size of a lengthy article, so I put the project aside, but so as not to let it go into oblivion, I?ve decided to publish the raw data.

The constellations co-rising with the zodiacal signs (?paranatellonta?) and their notable fixed stars: ?Teucer II? (edited by Boll in Sphaera pp. 41?52); Manilius 5.39?709; Firmicus 8.6?17. See also the references in Valens 1.2; the Berlin fragment of Rhetorius (see below); Rhetorius 6.7 = Rhetorius, Epitome IIIb 30 (a version is edited by Boll in Sphaera pp. 57?58 ). Later authors include John Camaterus (the relevant passages from Introduction to Astronomy are edited in Sphaera pp. 25?30 but one might also consult the critical edition by Weigl) and non-astrological authors, listed in Sphaera pp. 45ff. A valuable Arabic source is Ab? Ma?shar, Greater Introduction 6.1 (edited by Dyroff in Sphaera pp. 482?539).

Individual fixed stars: Antigonus in Hephaestio 2.18 (the nativity of Hadrian); Firmicus 6.2 and 8.31. Allusions only: Manilius 5.710?745; Valens 1.2. It may be the source of the Arabic listings of the degrees ?increasing fortune? such as Ab? Ma?shar, Greater Introduction 6.22 and Abbreviation 7.70.

Cloud-like stars and clusters: Dorotheus A 4.1.108?111; Ptolemy 3.13.8 (= Hephaestio 2.13); Valens 2.37; Firmicus 6.31.88 and 7.20.4; Hephaestio 1.1; the Berlin Rhetorius; Rhetorius 5.6 = Rhetorius, Epitome IIa 6, referring to 5.61?62 = Rhetorius, Epitome IIIb 19; Rhetorius, Epitome IV 4 = ?Anonymous of 379? in ?Palchus? 137. (Note that Cumont?s edition of the Rhetorius chapters in CCAG 8.4: 118ff. is a hybrid version from Epitomes III and IV, and it was subsequently used by Holden in his translation.) Apparently, this theory is represented in the Arabic lore of zam?na degrees, attested in a great number of texts.

Fixed stars, described according to planetary mixtures: for Ptolemy?s system, Ptolemy 1.9 (= Hephaestio 1.3?5); for ?Zar?dusht?, see the Kunitzsch article referenced earlier. The classification of stars into lucky and unlucky ones might be the originator of later material like Ab? Ma?shar, Report 5.1?14 (still inedited, but translated into Latin as The Flowers, chapter [9] in Holden?s translation in Five Medieval Astrologers), of which a fuller account seems to have survived in Bonatti 8.107?110; for one tradition of 30 bright fixed stars (attributed to Julian of Laodicea in Rhetorius, Epitome IV 2, first edited by Cumont in CCAG 5.1: 219?226), listing the first and second magnitude stars according to the similarity of their natures to that of the planets: Rhetorius 5.11 = pseudo-Porphyry 48 = Rhetorius, Epitome IIa 11 = Rhetorius, Epitome IIIb 9, referring to 5.58. This chapter was translated to Pahlav? as On the Bright Fixed Stars, ascribed to ?Hermes?, surviving in a single defective manuscript of the Arabic translation and a full Latin translation by Salio of Padua. The Pahlav? version was used by M?sh??all?h in his ?Book of Aristotle? 3.2.2 and Ab? Ma?shar in his Genethlialogy 9.1. ?Hermes?, Ab? Ma?shar and a Hebrew translation was edited by Paul Kunitzsch and Fabrizio Lelli in Hermetis Trismegisti astrologica et divinatoria, Hermes Latinus 4.4 (2001). I also suppose this same chapter accounts for ?Anonymous of 379? in ?Palchus? 135, while the original end matter is appended to ?Palchus? 137, closing the section of the perhaps imaginary 4th century astrologer. The Greek version was further reused by Theophilus in Apotelesmatics 17 for catarchic purposes, edited by Cumont in CCAG 5.1: 214?217. For the other tradition of the bright fixed stars, listed according to the succession of the zodiacal signs see the Berlin Rhetorius. This text, which bears the authorship of Rhetorius, is found in Berolinensis gr. 173, fols. 139ff., but there exist a reworked version, in Vaticanus gr. 191, fols. 232vff. anonymously but in Vindobonensis phil. gr. 108, fols. 249ff. ascribed to Teucer. A hybrid version was edited by Boll in CCAG 7: 194?213 with Teucer?s false authorship (hence its scholarly name, ?Teucer I?), which is translated in Holden?s Rhetorius as Appendix 2. A shortened version, which focuses on the bright and cloud-like fixed stars, appears in fol. 283 of the same Vindobonensis phil. gr. 108, now ascribed to a pseudo-Ptolemy, edited by Boll in Antike Beobachtungen der farbiger Sterne pp. 77 and 82. (This article is also the fullest treatment of the history of colourful and cloud-like fixed stars in Greek astrology and in its predecessor.) The peculiarity of the text is that here the bright stars have the nature similar to only one planet, not a pair of planets, which is the usual procedure. Finally, Isidore Cardinal of Kiev in the 15th century, it seems, produced a further supplemented version of the already expanded text, using Sassanian and Arabic material, which is preserved in Vaticanus gr. 1698, fols. 73ff.; he ascribes his compilation to the Egyptians. The various readings of Isidorus? compilation are recorded by Weinstock in CCAG 5.4: 123??133.

Lecherous signs and degrees: Rhetorius 5.5 = Rhetorius, Epitome IIa 5, referring to a detailed treatment, which is 5.67, reworked in Epitome IIIb 20 (this latter one edited by Boll in CCAG 7: 112?113). A curious fact is that there appears another chapter, 5.76, on the lecherous images, partly different from 5.5. This is also reworked in Epitome IIIb 22 and Epitome IIIc 6 (here ascribed to Antiochus of Athens, without any foundation), and this is also edited in CCAG 7: 115?116. These two chapters are discussed together in Epitome IV 7, whose various readings can only be found in the apparatus of Cumont?s edition of Book V, and seem to be cast into a single, yet sometimes self-contradictory chapter in the ?Anonymous of 379? in ?Palchus? 136. Anyway, this version is the only one referring to the dimmer fixed stars in the lecherous images as being responsible for such an indication.

References to fixed stars in later literature: passing references in a number of texts, e. g. al-Khayy?? 6; Ibn al-Kha??b passim; al-D?ya, Commentary to the Fruit of Ptolemy 28?29, 36 and 95?96 (only the aphorisms are translated by Holden; see also the later commentaries by George of Trebizond and Giovanni Gioviano Pontano); al-Isr???l?, Propositions to Caliph al-Mans?r 27 and 37; al-B?r?n?, Elements 157?158, 387, 512 and 522; Ibn Ab? al-Rij?l 4.11. The more complete accounts vary from author to author but they basically repeat the same information, e. g. ?Liber Hermetis? 25 utilizes ?Teucer II?, the Berlin Rhetorius and Ptolemy; Kushy?r ibn Labb?n 1.8 (with further references in other chapters) lists 30 bright stars but also remarks which can act as a destroyer, which may be a reminiscence from the tradition of ?Zar?dusht?; Ibn Ezra, The Beginning of Wisdom 2 (with many other references in his other works) is mainly based on Ptolemy, Ab? Ma?shar and a source on paranatellonta. Finally, there is a certain level of possibility that some tables of zodiacal degrees in various Arabic works are originally based on fixed stars. For Byzantine astrology, see e. g. the list of 30 bright fixed stars, recalculated to various position is found in three manuscripts belonging to John Abramius, published by Pingree, The School of John Abramius pp. 209?210. The Medieval and Renaissance authors mostly copy older material: see Ibn Ezra in John of Seville, The Epitome of the Whole Astrology 1.1?12; Ab? Ma?shar in Bonatti (reference above); Ptolemy 1.9 in e. g. Leopold of Austria (b6v?b7v in the 1489 edition) and John of Ashenden 6.1?3 (using the Ibn Ridw?n commentary); Ptolemy appears virtually in all later literature.

Renaissance authors: Cardano ? large and heterogeneous material is found in his various works, especially in Aphorisma astronomica, where Francesco Giuntini copies a handful of aphorisms (Compendium de stellarum fixarum observationes in Speculum astrologiae vol. 2, pp. 942?944; one of them refers to Johannes Sch?ner, but I?ve been unable to locate it so far), omitting several; see also Liber de septem erraticis stellis (pp. 428?429) and De iudiciis geniturarum 3 (pp. 436?437). This latter is Book III of De supplemento almanach, which contains a handful of other interesting material. Giuntini ? in his monumental Compendium de stellarum fixarum observationes (Speculum astrologiae vol. 2, pp. 933ff.), he first draws on the scattered information given by Ibn al-Kha??b, then cites the observations of Cardano (from Aphorisma astronomica 7, pp. 942?944), Jean Stade (from Ephemerides pp. 122?126, with some omissions; some refer to Cardano; pp. 944?945), Firmicus 8.31 (p. 945) and 8.6?17 (pp. 945?949), Bonatti 8.107?110 (pp. 949?953) and ?Hermes? (the translation of the Pahlav? Rhetorius, pp. 953?955). Gaurico ? in his Isagoge in astrologiam 2.8.1 (Opera omnia [1575] vol. 2, p. 930) he describes the 15 bright fixed stars with individual natures, which comes from De quindecim stellis, attributed to Hermes, an astrological-magical text in Latin. Gartze ? the Astrologiae methodus (1576) p. 249 gives the 7 royal fixed stars and p. 366 the 4 violent fixed stars. Later authors seem to refer to one or another of these sources but I haven?t done any systematic research on the literature of this era.

That?s I?ve been able to collect so far. I hope it?ll be somewhat helpful.

12
Hi Levente,

Thanks for the list. Very impressive. Your future article will be eagerly anticipated by fixed star buffs like myself!

We can obviously see some star lore stemming from the Greek myths of the constellations themselves. We surely see this in texts like the Astronomica of Manilius.

Regarding the Mesopotamian or Egyptian constellation lore influencing hellenistic astrology it is possible some of our key sources are now simply lost. For example, the 1st-century BCE the Roman senator and astrologer Nigidius Figulus (circa 100-45 BCE), wrote his 2 books (now lost) on the Sphaera Barbarica and the Sphaera Graecanica.

The Sphaera Barbarica dealt with the pre-Greek nomenclature of the stars and constellations, mostly Mesopotamian and Egyptian in origin.

It is quite possible Nigidius Figulus dealt with two "barbaric" constellation schemes, a Mesopotamian one and an Egyptian one.

It is thought that Nigidius' work on the Sphaera Barbarica was probably derived from the like-named work of Asclepiades of Myrlea.

We find fragments of the Sphaera Barbarica scattered throughout the astrological tradition (e.g Teucer, Valens, Firmicus etc)

Mark
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly