本帖最后由 多乙光 于 2009-10-22 21:59 编辑
11. Concerning the Length of Life According to theTruth and Ptolemy
Thediscussion concerning the years of life, Ptolemy says, goes before the eventssubsequent to birth,
since it isfirst requisite to know the years to he lived (concerning which this inquiry ismade), and then to adapt the particulars of the effects accordingly. Thisheading is entirely dependent upon the places that pertain to releasing andupon those that are capable of having releasers in relation to life, and againupon those capable of destroying. And each of these is decided upon as follows.
He markedout as places for releasing those in one of which it is requisite for the starassuming the releasing to he: the twelfth-part around the Horoskopos, from fivedegrees toward the rear part pre-ascending the hour-marking degree up to theremaining twenty-five degrees post-ascending this degree, and right hexagonalsto these 30 degrees, of（＊1） theGood Spirit; and [right] squares, of the Midheaven above the earth; and fright]triangulars, of the so-called God; and diametricals, of the Descendant. Hecalled the hexagonals and squares and triangulars "sides" and not"zoidia" because the Midheaven does not always fall on the 10th zoidionfrom the Horoskopos, nor the Good Spirit on the 11th; nor the onecalled God on the 9th.（＊2） Andthrough these he hinted（＊3） thatit was not always necessary to give 30 degrees to the three places around theMidheaven, but rather sometimes it is requisite to make more than the 30degrees, and again sometimes less, applying to each differently in proportionto the degrees between the two pivots. If then the degrees of the quadrantshould be more than 90, he would augment the degrees by just as much as theyshould be greater, while if they are less than 90 degrees, he would lessen themproportionately.
＊1：It is hard to know how to interpret the genitive here andin the upcoming parallel passages. It is preceded by no relative pronoun(although most of the Ptolemaic manuscripts have such a pronoun preceding thegenitive). One possibility is that there is an implicit "the placeof" here and in the parallel passages, in which case Ptolemy would betransferring the traditional place names for the whole-sign houses to his ownequal house system. Another possibility is that we are being instructed to takethe hexagonal "sides" that are part of the 11th zoidion from theHoroskopos (the Good Spirit), for instance, or belonging to it. But this would makethe places of releasing the intersections of the first, ninth, tenth, andeleventh signs with the first, ninth, tenth, and eleventh "houses" ofthe Ptolemaic division. This is certainly a baffling text!
＊2：This sentence might also be translated as follows: "Hecalled the hexagonals and squares and triangulars 'sides' and not zoidiabecause they do not always fall on the 10th zoidion from the Horoskopos, or theMidheaven; nor on the 11th, or the Good Spirit; nor on the 9th, which is calledGod." Under this alternative translation, the traditional names for thehouses would be retained by the signs of the whole sign system of housedivision and not transferred to the new houses created by the Ptolemaicdivision. Compare Valen's treatment of the Porphyry system of dynamical housedivision (Bk III, 2). However I have not favoured this translation becauseHephaistio clearly transfers these names to the new house divisions in the nextparagraph.
＊3：Here we see that the modified "Alchabitius" stylehouse system that will soon he discussed may have been an interpretation (andin my opinion a misinterpretation) of this passage, based on the suppositionthat Ptolemy was partly concealing his true intentions.
Let there bean illustration of what has been said. Let someone be supposed to have theHoroskopos in the very 25th degree of Aquarius; it is clear that the Horoskoposis taken from the fifth degree of those pre-ascending [degrees], that is, fromthe 20th degree of Aquarius up to the 20th degree of Pisces; and from the 20thdegree of Aquarius backward to the 20th degree of Capricorn will he the 12thand Evil Spirit (if we should find some releaser in these degrees, we do notaccept it); and likewise from the 20th degree of Capricorn to the 20th degreeof Sagittarius will be the 11th; and from the 20th degree of Sagittarius to the20th degree of Scorpio will be the 10th, Midheaven; and from the 20thdegree of Scorpio to the 20th degree of Libra will be the 9th;and from the 20th degree of Libra to the 20th degree ofVirgo will be the 8th, unconnected to the Horoskopos (and we dismissit for releasing); and from the 20th degree of Virgo to the 25thdegree of Leo will be Descendant, and the other 5 pre-descending degrees up tothe 20th degree of Leo.
Most peopledivide the releasing places thus, but Pancharios, the commentator on thistopic, did not always approve, as we have said, of giving 30 degrees to thethree places around the Midheaven, but rather he did as follows: For since theHoroskopos is at the 25th degree of Aquarius and the Midheaven isapproximately at the 5th degree of Sagittarius. I count from the 5th degree ofSagittarius up to the 25th degree of Aquarius, and the 80 degrees found arelacking from 90 degrees by 10 degrees, which are a ninth part of those 90degrees. I arrange 13 1/3 degrees (which are themselves lacking from 15 degreesby a ninth part) from the Midheaven degree on the side of the Ascendant,instead of 15 degrees (half of the zoidion), and it comes down to 181/3 degreesof Sagittarius. And similarly, I arrange the thirty degree [part] of the GoodSpirit [to be lacking] by 3 1/3 degrees,' which is from the 18th and 1/3 degreeof Sagittarius up to the 15th degree of Capricorn. Again, we likewise countfrom the setting horizon up to the culminating degree; I find 100 degrees,which are again more than 90 degrees by a ninth part of them. Therefore, fromthe 5th degree of Sagittarius backwards to the 20th degree of Scorpio are 15degrees (half of the zoidion); they come to 16 degrees, 40 minutes; for I againmade the ninth part of these 15 degrees, for 16 degrees, 40 minutes, and theycome down to the 18th and 1/3 degree of Scorpio. The ninth part likewiseexceeds by 3 1/3 degrees, and it comes down from the 18th and 1/3 degree ofScorpio to the 15th degree of Libra.
It isrequisite, then, to make the 5 places of releasing with precision in thismanner in order that the releaser should never escape our notice, as he says,by falling out in an idle place, and in order that we do not set a planet thatis upon the Midheaven in an idle place, or ascertain it to be in another placewhen it is not truly so.
And letthese things have been said for the sake of clarity; for, one must not shrinkfrom extending this subject just because it is a multi-partite and notoriousstudy. We have the 5 places of releasing marked off in this manner, and of theones preferred even among these [places] for the power of predomination arefirst the [degrees] according with the Midheaven above the earth, then thoseaccording with the Ascendant, then those according with the post-ascension ofthe Midheaven, then those according with the Descendant, finally thoseaccording with the precedent of the Midheaven. For one must properly refuse thewhole hemisphere under the earth so great an authority, except only thosedegrees coming into the light along with the post-ascension itself, and thedegrees pre-descending,（＊） while of the whole hemisphereabove the earth, it is not fitting to accept the part unconnected to theHoroskopos (which is the 8th), nor the twelfth, since the stars in them, inaddition to declining, also have the thick and misty exhalation from themoisture of the earth as an impediment, in relation to the efflux from them tothe earth, by which the stars do not appear to have their natural colours ormagnitudes.
＊：The Ptolemaic text does notmention these pre-descending degrees.
After theplaces of releasing, he distinguished the releaser by day if it is indeed inone of the places of releasing: the Sun; but if it is not, the Moon; and if theMoon should not be found in one of these places, the star capable of having thefive relationships of rulership to the Sun and to the prenatal conjunction andto the Horoskopos, not so that [the star] should necessarily have therelationship of rulership to the three (for this is impossible unless theconjunction should be upon the Horoskopos), but rather even if to one of these(such as the Sun or the prenatal conjunction or the Horoskopos), and even if totwo of these (for example to the Sun and the conjunction), and even if to thethree. And that it is not necessarily to the three Ptolemy himself makes clearin the following when he says "whenever, there being five places ofrulership, it should have three to one or even more" (not places ofreleasing but rather the releasers themselves, by which I mean the Sun and theprenatal conjunction and the Hour)—whenever, then, some star should be found tohave more relations of rulership in the five ways (of domicile, trigon, bound, exaltation,phase or configuration), as he was saying, to the Sun or the conjunction or theHour, and this star was in one of the places of releasing when the Sun was notso,
then we will use it for thereleaser; but if no star should likewise be found in a place of releasing, wewill finally do the releasing from the degree marking the hour.
And while wedo these things in the case of children born in the day, in the case of thoseborn at night it is necessary to take the Moon as the first releaser if she isbe in one of the places of releasing; but if not, the Sun (it is clear that hemay not be found in a place of releasing at night except only in those 25degrees of the post-ascension under the earth close to the horizon, and the 5degrees that have pre-descended); but if he should not chance to be in a placeof releasing in this manner, one must take the star having the relation ofrulership to the Moon and the prenatal full moon and the Lot of Fortune, whichis by night a distance equal to that of the interval from the Sun to the Moon,from the place of the Horoskopos; for in a certain fashion he wishes it toserve the purpose of the Horoskopos, as Ptolemy himself says, that as the Sunis related to the oriental horizon, so the Moon is to the Lot of Fortune. Also,that the ancients around Nechepso and Petosiris gave hints for positioning itthe same way, because they project the interval from the Moon to the Sun in thereverse manner in the case of those born at night (that is, projecting it fromthe Hour in the direction of the preceding zoidia).（＊）
＊：Pingree has had to do a fairamount of text restoration on this passage so that this reading must remainconjectural. However, the point seems to be that in nocturnal nativities, ifthe interval from the Moon to the Sun is projected backwards from the Ascendantdegree, this will give the same position as projecting the interval from theSun to the Moo forward from the Ascendant; thus, the position of the Lot ofFortune would be the same both day and night. The question is whether this wasreally their intention of Ncchepso/Petosiris, since other Hellenisticastrologers read their account and concluded that the calculation of the Lotshould be truly reversed by day and by night.
HerePancharios says, why is this worthy of attention only for the star having arelation to the prenatal full moon and not for the one having a relation to theprenatal syzygy simply? For perhaps, whenever a conjunction has preceded birth,it would be unconvincing, in the case of those born at night, to evaluate theruler of the full moon as though it were alienated [born its own nature]. Yetin the case of those born diurnally, if the prenatal full moon syzygy should beclosest, it does not seem absurd to have recourse to the conjunction as theinitiating syzygy. But perhaps, he says. Ptolemy has recourse to the full moonby night because the conjunction of the Moon is unilluminated, and yet hemanifestly seeks the closest syzygy in the following [topics]. Perhaps, then,he is intimating that if the prenatal syzygy chances to be a full moon, it ismore reasonable for the master of it to be taken, but in general he desires thenearest syzygy to be taken, from the next words he gives; for he says that ifthe ruler should not be found in the places of releasing, it is necessary tomake use of the Lot of Fortune as releaser if the prenatal syzygy should be afull moon, if the Lot should be in the places of releasing; but if it isconjunctive, it is necessary to use the Horoskopos.
And if ithappens, he(*Pancharios) says, that the Sun and Moon are upon places ofreleasing, and also the ruler of the appropriate sect (that is, by day theruler of the Sun or the [prenatal] conjunction or the Horoskopos, by night theruler of the Moon or the full moon or the Lot of Fortune), we must then examinewhich of them possesses the more powerful place and has more relations ofrulership, and we must additionally avail ourselves of that one in the accountsof releasing.
Others gavethe following explanation: If it should happen that the lights and the rulerwith regard to sect are in the places of releasing, [we must take] the one inthe more authoritative place anyhow, according to the order that wasdistinguished; but then we must give preference to the ruler only when alongwith being present in the more authoritative place, it also has a relation ofrulership to those sects.
＊：This is the same as Ptolemy’saccount. I am not sure why it is attributed to “others.”
With（＊1）the releaser distinguished, we must furthermore assume two modes of releasing:that in the direction of the succeeding zoidia alone, subject to the so-calledhurling of rays, whenever the releaser should be in the region of the castwind, (that is, in places from the Midheaven to the Horoskopos); and that notonly in the direction of the succeeding zoidia, but also that in the directionof the preceding zoidia in accordance with the so-called horimaia whenever thereleaser should be in places declining from the midheaven.（＊2）
＊1：Hephaistio resumes his direct quoting from Ptolemy here.
＊2：It is not clear whether in this second mode of releasing weare supposed to use both procedures all the time, or the one of them that isappropriate depending on the position of the releaser. As we will see laterPancharios read the passage in this latter manner in order to take account ofreleasers in the five degrees just under the Descendant.
With thesethings being so, destructive degrees for the releasing in the direction of thepreceding portions of the zodiac become only that of the setting horizon, sinceit makes the lord of life disappear. The degrees of stars thus meeting orbearing witness only take away or add years to the total years up until thesetting of the releaser, and they do not destroy, on account of their not beingcarried to the place of releasing, but rather that place is being carried tothem. Also, the benefic stars add, while the malefic stars take away, with thestar of Hermes again being attached to whichever of them he is configured with.The number of the addition or the subtraction is contemplated through thedegree-position in each case. For, as many as are the hourly times of eachdegree—diurnal times when it is day, nocturnal times when it is night—just somany will be the complete multitude of years. And we must reckon this verymultitude when [they] are upon the orient; then we must subtract in proportionto their separation [from the orient] until at their setting the [number] comesdown to nothing.
Ptolemycalls the place from the zoidion of the Midheaven up to the zoidion of theHoroskopos "subject to the hurling of rays" and"succedent," while that from the decline of the Midheaven (that isfrom the 9th) up to the Descendant he names "precedent" and"hourly."（＊1） Iftherefore some releaser should be found in this place, not only, he says, doeshe take the releasing in the direction of the succeeding zoidia, but also inthe direction of the preceding aoidia; but conversely, in the former he doesnot take the releasing in the direction of the preceding zoidia. But if thereleaser should be in the degrees that have declined from the Midheaven, hewill also reckon it as up to the descending degree, which he calls destructive:for he says that it threatens and that the releaser, which is the lord of life,is made to disappear, so that when rays or stars are themselves additionallypresent between the degree of releasing and the descending degree, they arethus not capable of destroying that releaser when they are destroyers, or ofpreserving it as benefics, but rather the latter add, the former subtract fromthe whole array between the releaser and the descending degree, and they arecapable of subtracting or giving just as many years as there arc hourly timesascribed to the degree of each [star] (that upon which it is) in theappropriate zone—by day the times laid down for the degree of each one, bynight those laid down for the diametrical degree. However, [he says] that thesetimes are powerful as wholes when the [stars] should he upon the Horoskopos,but when they are distant from it, they subtract [such twelfths] from the hoursin accordance with the quantity of seasonal hours of the interval between; forwe do so until at the twelfth hour [the years] come down to nothing, whence hecalls such a method of releasing "horimaic."（＊2）
＊1：Pingree has reconstructed the word tetartemorion here (which means 'quadrant') on the basis of a fewnearly legible letters. However, it would be just as possible to restore thesemissing letters as te horimaion,literally,'and horimaic' (or pertaining to the hour), which makes more sense.
＊2：This adjective is properly descriptive since the methoditself uses the hourly times horiaioi chronoi of the degrees. We have also seenthis method occasionally cited in Valens.
For example,let someone have the Horoskopos at the 10th degree of Aries, the Descendant atthe 10th degree of Libra in the zone through the Hellespont, and let the releaserbe found at the 8th degree of Sagittarius. The whole distance of lifeexpectancy of nearly 75 years is totalled from the 8th degree of Sagittarius upto the 10th degree of Libra. For by introducing into the canon of ascensions ofthe zone through the Hellespont the 8th degree of Sagittarius, I find lyingnext to it 266 times, 37 minutes; and next to the 10th degree of Libra I find191 times, 40 minutes. And by subtracting the lesser times of Libra from thetimes of Sagittarius, I find 74 ascensional times [57 minutes], which I assumeto be nearly 75 years.（＊）
＊：Here we will append thefollowing scholium of Leon the Philosopher to the horimaia; it seems to bereferring to the very same example above.
"With this example and with this fault, Porphyry too wasguilty of unintelligence, indeed far from the thought of the great Ptolemy. Forthe releaser in Sagittarius does not arrive at the Descendant through 75diurnal times, but through 40. For the canon of the 5 zones does not containthe descensions of Sagittarius and Libra, but clearly the ascensions. Then if10 Aries is at the Ascendant in the first position and 5, 40 ascensional timesare laid alongside it, when 8 Sagittarius is setting in the second position, 8Gemini has to be at the ascendant, having 45, 45 times. The excess is not 75times, but 40, 5 minutes."
I think that Leon is correct in his criticism. Everythingthat Ptolemy says about direction later in this chapter would indicate thatoblique descensions should be used here instead of ascensions.
With thisbeing found, let Ares be at the 10th degree of Aries at the same degree as theHoroskopos. I go to the same zone and find 15 hourly times and 7 parts of anhour（＊1） lying next to（＊2）the 10th degree of Aries; they become 15 years, 7 months. Since then Ares ismarking the hour,（＊3） itsubtracts 15 years and 7 months from the 75 years, and the remaining 59 years 5months are left over if no other malefic should subtract years or no beneficadd them. And if Ares should be at the 10th degree of Libra, it neither addsnor subtracts anything. And if it should be upon the degree of the Midheaven,（＊4）clearly it subtracts half of the 15 years and 7 months (that is, 7 years, 9months, and 15 days). And for the remaining distances from the point of rising,it is necessary to subtract proportionately until, as the star or its raybecomes more distant, [the years] should come down to nothing. And the beneficsadd years in a similar fashion.
＊1：The Greek text simply has 15 hours, 7 finer [times]. The 7can hardly be minutes, however, in view of the upcoming equation of thesehourly times to 15 years, 7 months. Thus I assume here that the finer divisionsof the hour are twelfths, instead of sixtieths.
＊2：That is, in the table.
＊3：And capable of hurling a trine ray between the releaser andthe Descendant.
＊4：And capable of hurling a sextile ray between the releaserand the Descendant.
We know theproportion in relation to the hours, and how the hours [are found] that [thestars] are distant from the oriental horizon as follows: Taking the degreesbetween the star or ray and the Horoskopos, we compare by day the hourly timeslaid down for the degree of the natal Sun, by night those laid down for thediametrical [degree]; and as many hours and parts of hours as should turn out,we know the star or ray to be so many hours distant from the oriental horizon.When the releaser is upon the so-called God, it is as we said; if it is uponthe Horoskopos, we do the releasing in the direction of the preceding [zoidia];and if, with the releaser chancing to be upon Descendant, see, Pancharios says,that if we do not do it in this manner (that is, in the direction of thepreceding [Media] from the degree nearest the descending degree, which he callsdestructive), the lord of life will be lacking in time. This, he says, eitherescaped Ptolemy's notice, or else, if it did not escape his notice, he omittedit, whence he judges that if the releaser should be found upon the occidentalhorizon, we do the releasing of it in the direction of the succeeding [zoidia].For in this manner,[ the part] that has ascended before [the occidentalhorizon] will be in accord with the releasing, not only in the direction of thesucceeding [zoidia], but also in the direction of the preceding ones. For inthe case of the 5 degrees before the descending degree, nothing will be indispute; it is only necessary, he says, for it to be the case that we carry thereleaser to the setting degree itself in the direction of the succeeding[zoidia], but it will equally be the case that if this same descending degreeis destructive, the nativity will be short-lived. For we have often found byexperience, he says, that the releaser can be upon these degrees and upon thosenext to the descending degree and the nativities have not become short-lived.Concerning, then, the zoidion in relation to God and the occidental horizon,and concerning the releasings from them, let such things have been said.
Ptolemy,having changed over to the other place of releasing, that from the Midheaven upto the Horoskopos also says the following things himself: For the releasing inthe direction of the succeeding portions of the zodiac, the places of themalefics, Kronos and Ares, destroy, either when they go forth to meet bodily orwhen they bring a ray to bear from anywhere any time they are square ordiametrical; and sometimes also when hexagonal upon on the zoidia of hearingand seeing due to their equal power; and the square to the place of releasingfrom the succeeding [zoidia] itself [destroys], and sometimes too the hexagonupon the twelfth-parts of long ascension when afflicted, but the triangle onthe twelfth-parts of short ascension.
In the caseof a releaser that lets the releasing begin in the other place from theculminating zoidion up to the zoidon marking the hour, one must observe, hesays, the .bodily encounters of the
maleficsKronos and Ares in the same zoidion or even in the next, or the square ordiametrical rays that are brought to bear from anywhere, though likewise in thedegrees after the releaser, for he supposes the releaser to be immoveable,while the destroyer comes to the releaser and in this manner destroys it.
The squareand diametrical figures, then, we accept as destructive, the triangular assympathetic, and the hexagonal likewise, though weaker. Sometimes, he says,destruction also occurs from these, though not simply nor in an ordinary way,but rather as a hexagon when upon the zoidia hearing and seeing in accordancewith equal power. And they say that zoidia equidistant from the equipartitezoidia hear one another. And it does not seem to Thrasyllus that the twoequipartite zoidia themselves hear, Aries Libra or Libra Aries, nor that theysee one another, because the equipartite zoidia inspect the circle of the earth(which [is also the case] for the two remaining tropical zoidia). And they saythat the zoidia equidistant from the tropical zoidia, and the tropical zoidiathemselves, see [one another]. And hexagons are equal in power in two zoidiawhenever the distance should be sixty degrees. For example, let the releaser bein the 1st degree of Pisces, the destroyer in the 30th degree of Aries; thishexagon becomes destructive because they [the degrees] are equidistant from theequipartite [circle]（＊） (that is, in zoidia that hear oneanother), and they have a sixty degree distance. Similarly for the zoidiaseeing one another, if the releaser should be in the 1st degree of Gemini,while the destroyer is in the 30th degree of Cancer. And hexagonal figures occurringin this manner destroy.
＊：This is a name for equatorial circle.
And again hesays: sometimes when the hexagon is corrupted upon the zoidia that take a longtime [to rise] (when it has clearly stretched out nearly to the side of asquare), it also destroys; and again, when the triangle is corrupted upon thezoidia that take a short time [to rise] (that is, when it is likewise drawntogether by the zoidia of short ascension almost to side of a square), it alsodestroys. This is what was also said by Ptolemy concerning the said degrees.
Panchariosspeaks from the beginning about the exact Midheaven, in the course of which hedemonstrates it,（＊1） andthere he intimates that it is not always necessary to give to the three placesaround the Midheaven a thirty degree interval; and places are destructive bymeans of what has been said, he said, and the square itself to the place ofreleasing; for, it is impossible to overstep the side of a square apart from amalefic.（＊2）
＊1：I am not sure of the construction.
＊2：No matter where the malefics are (*situated) relative tothe releaser, there will be square or diametrical rays from the maleficsomewhere in the quadrant following the releaser.
Next Ptolemywrites: When the Moon is releasing, the place of the Sun also destroys. For,the encounters in such a releasing also have the power to destroy and preserve,since these are themselves brought to the place of releasing. However, one mustnot at all times suppose that these places always destroy, but only wheneverthey are afflicted. For they are prevented [from destroying] if they fallwithin the bound of a benefic, and if one of the benefics should bring its rayto bear in square, triangularly or diametrically either toward the destructivedegree itself, or in the direction of the degrees succeeding it (for Zeus notbeyond 12 degrees, for Aphrodite not beyond 8 degrees), and if both the starreleasing and the one encountering it are bodies, [it is prevented fromdestroying] when the latitude of the two is not the same.
Whenever,then, there should be several from each class—some succouring and contrariwisesome destroying—one must inquire as to which of the two forms predominates,both in accordance with the multitude of those contributing to each side, andin accordance with their power; in accordance with their multitude, wheneverthe ones are sensibly more than the others, but in accordance with power,whenever some of the succouring or destroying stars should be in their familiarplaces, others not, especially when some are oriental, and some occidental.For, in general, one must not take any of those which are under the beams to beeither for destruction or for succour, except that when the Moon is thereleaser, the place of the Sun itself destroys if it is turned in thatdirection by the presence of a malefic and is not freed by any of the benefics.
With theMoon releasing, he says, the solar place can also destroy, especially if shouldbe turned by the presence of a malefic and is not freed by any benefic, andagain it can preserve when it has the opposite [conditions]. And over and abovethese things, he brings up that the same cause is observed for the power of amalefic if they should fall in the bounds of a benefic or if one of thebenefics should jointly bring its rays to bear in square or triangularly ordiametrically, either with the same degree as the destructive degree itself, orelse in the direction of the [zoidia] succeeding it (in the case of Zeus, notbeyond 12 degrees, and in the case of Aphrodite, not beyond 8 degrees);however, if the destruction comes about bodily, it is necessary to examine ifthe destroyer and the releaser should be running at the same latitude (inaccordance with the same wind); for if they should be so, destruction willoccur. And [he also adds] that the stars under the beams are weak for thepurpose of either destroying or preserving. And he says in addition that itwill be necessary to compare which kind have authority, whether those thatsuccour and those that harm, from the multitude and power of each [class] ofthem in relation to the intensification or relaxation of [each of them].
Having giventhese precepts, he passes on to the account of the intervals, that is, how itis necessary to reckon the life expectancies, by explaining and censuring atthe same time that it was not reasonable for those before him to make use ofascensional times only, but rather he says that it is necessary to make use ofthem only when the releasing comes about from the Horoskopos or from one of thestars present upon it; but in the case when the releaser is upon the Midheaven,it is necessary to make use of the co-culminations upon the right sphere; andin the case of the occidental horizon, it is necessary to make use of the descensions(that is, the ascensions of the diameters); and in the case when the releaseris in the places between these, proportionately to its position relative to thetwo pivots enclosing it. He wishes to say this concisely, since, when heintroduces it, he explains the reason for the inequality of such a passage ofthe times in the pedagogical manner of a good scholar.
Well, wewill also add to this part. The equipartite times, （＊1）he
says, pass uniformly through both thehorizon and the meridian of the right sphere; for, the zoidia both rise and setand culminate in same number of times, from all quarters, and for this reasonhe supposes these [times] to be useful for the matter before us.（＊2）And since no other is proposed, [the task] is now to see after how manyequipartite times the putative destructive degree comes to be beside the placeof the releaser, and since the times do not pass uniformly in every zone asupon the right sphere (for those of the rising are different, those of theculminating are different, and those of the setting are other, the differenceof which is found in the canons of ascension), for this reason, if the releasershould be found between the pivots, it is necessary to know here also after howmany equipartite times the destructive degree comes to this position; for it isnecessary that there be a certain difference in the times of the transit pastthose in the pivots.
＊1：That is, the times along the equator.
＊2：Because it makes sense to use them as a measure andreference.
How there isa difference and in what manner is clear from these things. For, a similar andsame place is one having on the same side a similar position in relation toboth the horizon and the meridian together. This happens most nearly to thoseplaces lying on one of the semicircles drawn through the intersections of themeridian and horizon, of which each makes, throughout that same position, anearly equal seasonal hour. And should [each semicircle] be described aroundthe said intersections, in just the manner that it goes over the same positionas the horizon and the meridian while making the times of the passage of thezodiacal [section] [over] each unequal, it likewise renders the transits forthe positions of the other distances in times unequal to [the former].（＊）
＊：The Hephaistio textis essentially identical to the Ptolemaic in this important passage. We willsee in later Project Hindsight translations on the Latin track howmisinterpretation of this passage gave rise to both the Placidus and Regiomontanusschemes of direction and house division.
Again,Pancharios explains this place as follows: just as we said, he says, in regardsto the obliquity of the zodiac relative to the equatorial circle, a place issimilar and the same that has a similar position on the same side relative toboth the horizon and the meridian together. And if the degree of the releaserupon the zodiac should be between the pivots, it has the same position on thesame side, if the obliquity should be present relative to the northern orsouthern [sides] of the equipartite [circle],（＊） andit has a similar position in respect to the meridian and the horizon. And this
results, hesays, if by making a semicircle from the intersections of the horizon and themeridian (these sections themselves are the [meridian] height of the sphere andits diameter), and by turning it around, we should pass through this degree ofthe zodiac; and we seek another point of the zodiac equally remote from themeridian, until with the said semicircle having been carried around the sphere,it makes nearly the same seasonal hours from the meridian as those of theoriginal position. And just as, he says, when the turning is done, it was thesame position (as we said) in regard to the pivots (that is, in regard to themeridian and the horizon), while the passages of the zodiac are unequal foreach, so also, if the position is between these (that is, between the horizonand the meridian), the passage through them will be through unequal times.
＊：The equatorial circle.
Inexpressing this reason he makes use of this method. For, he says, taking theculminating degree and that of the releaser (which he calls the precedentdegree) and the destructive degree (which he calls the succedent degree), heexamines how many seasonal hours distant from the meridian the precedent degreeis. This is done as follows (for it will be necessary to set out the methodmore clearly since in the entire exposition Ptolemy makes use of this method inthe most precise manner). We make the number of hours distant from the meridianas follows. We will see how many degrees of ascension on the right sphere arelaid down（＊） for the Midheaven itself, and how many are laid downfor the releaser, and after subtracting the lesser number of degrees from thegreater, we will divide the remaining degrees by the hourly magnitude that islaid down for the degree of the releaser in the appropriate zone if it is abovethe earth, but if it should be below the earth (that is, in the degrees aroundthe horizon), the hourly magnitude that is laid down for its diameter, and wewill have from this the [divided] hours (or parts of hours) that the releaseris distant from the Midheaven.
Then we seewhat sort of position the succeeding place has in relation to the Midheaven,again by knowing what is laid down for it upon the right sphere and bycomparing it to those degrees of the
Midheaven whichwe have (that is, by subtracting the lesser from the greater). Having theremaining degrees of its position, then, and again knowing what is laid downfor the degree of the succeeding destroyer itself in the appropriate zone ifthe succeeding place should be above the earth, but if under the earth, what islaid down for the degree diametrical to it, and multiplying the hours that thereleaser (the precedent) is distant from the Midheaven into this hourlymagnitude, and comparing the resulting number to that of the position of thesuccedent, which we have, (that is, we subtract the lesser from the greater),and we will have the remaining times after which we will say that the succedentplace comes to the precedent, which times we will make equal in number toyears. The method itself is general and most precise; he finds it accuratelywith the releaser in every position.
＊：That is, laid down or listed inthe tables.
For Ptolemy, the circuit from the aforesaidcause has been accomplished; for, having inverted it, he says that since thesections of the zodiac distant from the meridian by the same seasonal hourscome to be along one and the same of the said semicircles, it will also benecessary to find after how many equipartite times the succeeding section alsowill be distant from the meridian by seasonal hours equal to the preceding.When we have determined these, we will also investigate by how many equipartitetimes the succeeding degree at its original position was distant from thedegree of the same Midheaven, again by means of ascensions on the right sphere.[And we will investigate] how many seasonal hours it made to the preceding bymultiplying them into the number of hourly times of the succeeding degree(again, if the comparison of seasonal hours was in relation to a Midheavenabove the earth, multiplying it into the number of diurnal hours, if inrelation to a Midheaven under the earth, into the number of nocturnal hours).And by taking the result from the excess of both of the intervals, we will havethe number of years in question.
In thesepassages, as I said, he has manifestly inverted the argument in order that itshould provide the same position for the succedent place that the releaser had,by seasonal hours equal to those that the preceding place was distant from theMidheaven, and finding the multitude of times from places left over.
In orderthat what is being said should be made dearer, he says, let an illustration belaid down. And let it be supposed that the releaser is upon the beginning ofAries, and the succeeding place upon the beginning of Gemini (*in) the zonebeing that through lower Egypt. Ptolemy makes use of different position: First,that the releaser is marking the hour: and since this is six hours distant fromthe Midheaven (for the Horoskopos is 90 degrees distant from the degree at thepeak, and the magnitude of the hourly times has 15 degrees, by which the 90degrees are divided, making 6 hours), and he also takes the hourly times in thesucceeding degree (that is, in the beginning of Gemini) in the same zone, whichare approximately 17, and he multiplies the 17 times into the six hours, andthey come to 102 times. Again, it is necessary to take the original position ofthe succedent (at the beginning of Gemini) in relation to the Midheaven (thatis, in relation to the beginning of Capricorn), and finding the first degree ofGemini in the right sphere to be in 148 times, and subtracting the 102 times ofthe 6 hours, he had the remaining times of the interval, which very times aretotalled from the ascensions of Aries and Taurus in the 3rd zone.
After this,he again supposes that the releaser culminates; since it is at the very placeof the culminating degree, he makes use only of the position of the succedentupon the right sphere, and the beginning of Gemini is distant from that ofAries by 58 times.
Thirdly, hesupposes the releaser to be setting, distant from the culminating degree by 6hours. Again he multiplies these into the 17 times of the succedent, and theybecome 102 degrees. Since, then, the beginning of Cancer now culminates forthis arrangement, while the beginning of Gemini is distant from Cancer in thepreceding direction by 32 times, for this reason, after having subtracted thesetimes from 102 times, 80 times are the remainder. And the same number is foundin the case of the descensions of Ares and Taurus, that is, for as many timesas the diameters (that is, the Scales and Scorpio) ascend.
And afterthe differentiating of the 3 pivots, he supposes that the releaser is betweenthe meridian and the occidental horizon, and he sets it out that the 18thdegree of Taurus culminates. Since therefore the beginning of Aries has 15hourly times, while the 18th degree of Taurus is distant by approximately 45times on the right sphere, having divided these times by the number 15, hefinds the releaser to be 3 seasonal hours distant from the Midheaven. Andmultiplying these into the hourly magnitude of the succedent (that is, into thenumber 17), 51 results. But the beginning of Gemini is distant from theMidheaven by 13 times in the succeeding direction, which I collect togetherwith the 51 times, and approximately 64 results.
Nevertheless,it does not appear consistent with this example that he made use of theaforesaid. For it was necessary, since he supposed the releaser to be in the9th place, to investigate when it will come to the setting degree, which hecalls destructive, which he sought when the succeeding place came to thereleaser (that is, the beginning of Gemini to the beginning of Aries).
He says thatanother method is simpler, that if the releaser is found between the pivots(say, now, between the Midheaven and the Descendant), it is requisite to takethe culminations and the descensions, as in the case before us, 58 culminationsand 70 co-descensions. Then, after learning, as it is prescribed, how manyseasonal hours the releaser is distant from either one of the pivots, howevergreat a part these should be of the six seasonal hours of the quadrant, just sogreat a part of the excess of both sums we will add or subtract from the pivotsbeing compared.
For example,since of the 70 and 58 mentioned above, the excess is 12 times, while the precedingplace was laid down to be three equal seasonal hours distant from each of thepivots, which are a half-part of the six hours, by also taking half of the 12times and either adding to the 58 times or subtracting from the 70 times, wewill find the [result] to be 64 times.
Though if itwas removed from either of the pivots by two seasonal hours, which are athird-part of 6 hours, we will again take one-third of the 12 excess times,that is, 4. And if the distance of two hours had been laid down to be from theMidheaven, we would have added to the 58 times; but if from the Descendant, wewould have subtracted from the 70 times.
Such are themethods of life expectancy that Ptolemy set out. And for the rest, he adds thatit will be necessary to examine with precision, with the dispositions likewisefound for the years（＊1）,whether [the encounters] are terminally destructive if in addition to theencounter being afflicted, the ingress of the [time-lords]（＊2）is found to be harmful in relation to these places themselves; or whether [theencounters] are only subject to crisis if (as was said before) one of the natalbenefics should be helpful at the time of the encounter (for when the ingressof [the benefic time-lords] is more powerful than that of the [malefics], itprovides aid); but when all are benevolent, one must suppose only torpor ormischief. Nevertheless, he said that nothing prevents [us], if the releasing isin doubt from the fact that these things have happened before, from havingconfidence for future events in those [releasing] that are more in accord withthem; nor is there anything to prevent us by way of observation from retainingall [the releasings] due to the equality of what has been found, while makingan examination of them with respect to more and less.（＊3）
＊1：From context and acomparison with the Ptolemaic text this seems to refer to the establishing ofthe time-lords concurrent with the directed encounters.
＊2：Assuming that thegenitive pronoun autori here refersback to the time-lords, since Ptolemy makes it clear at the end of histreatment of the division of the times that it is the transits of thetime-lords that are most significant.
＊3：In other words, if according to the putative releaser thenative should either have died or had a major crisis, yet he manifestly didnot, we may not have selected the correct releaser. Ptolemy says that there isnothing wrong with trying to work backwards and see if there is a releaser thatdoes account for the times of the crisis in the native’s life, yet does notpredict crises or death when it does not occur. Alternatively, he says that wemay regard all the releasers as being equally entitled, and examine whathappened during the times when the concurrent time-lords were transiting theplaces of releasing.
For allthese reasons, Ptolemy gives us leave to consider the difficulties in regard tothe foreknowledge of the completion of the expected term of life; for, manyqualifications are dubious. And after the life has come to an end, it is easyto find the contrary dispositions, though it is difficult while the native isalive, and especially if someone chances to be unreflective of the ingresses ofthe remaining stars in accordance with the procession of years. Nevertheless,in the case of those nativities for which the releaser and the destroyer arenot in doubt, and with the ingresses and positions of the stars in accordancewith the procession of years being known, it is possible, I believe, to showeasily the completion of life. And Manetho says nearly the same things in hisverses concerning the length of life. |
狗仔卡
发表于 2009-10-17 00:44:25
提升卡
沉默卡
喧嚣卡
变色卡
显身卡
楼主
发表于 2009-10-28 10:20:43