Тетрабиблос Клавдия Птолемея: История и влияние астрологии

Book by Claudius Ptolemaeus

Tetrabiblos (Τετράβιβλος, ), also known as Apotelesmatiká (Ἀποτελεσματικά, ) and in Latin as Quadripartitum , is a text on the philosophy and practice of astrology, written by the Alexandrian scholar Claudius Ptolemy in Koine Greek during the 2nd century AD ( AD 90– AD 168). Ptolemy's Almagest was an authoritative text on astronomy for more than a thousand years, and the Tetrabiblos, its companion volume, was equally influential in astrology, the study of the effects of astronomical cycles on earthly matters. But whilst the Almagest as an astronomical authority was superseded by acceptance of the heliocentric model of the Solar System, the Tetrabiblos remains an important theoretical work for astrology. Besides outlining the techniques of astrological practice, Ptolemy's philosophical defense of the subject as a natural, beneficial study helped secure theological tolerance towards astrology in Western Europe during the Medieval era. This allowed Ptolemaic teachings on astrology to be included in universities during the Renaissance, which brought an associated impact upon medical studies and literary works. The historical importance of the Tetrabiblos is seen by the many ancient, Medieval and Renaissance commentaries that have been published about it. It was copied, commented on, paraphrased, abridged, and translated into many languages. The latest critical Greek edition, by Wolfgang Hübner, was published by Teubner in 1998.

Ptolemy is referred to as "the most famous of Greek astrologers" and "a pro astrological authority of the highest magnitude". As a source of reference his Tetrabiblos is described as having "enjoyed almost the authority of a Bible among the astrological writers of a thousand years or more". Compiled in Alexandria in the 2nd century, the work gathered commentaries about it from its first publication. With the translation of the Tetrabiblos into Latin in the 12th century, "Ptolemaic astrology" became integrated by Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas into medieval Christian doctrine. This theological acceptance encouraged the teaching of Ptolemaic astrology in universities, often linked to medical studies. This, in turn, brought attention in literary works, such as Dante's, which helped shape the moral, religious and cosmological paradigm of Western Europe during the Medieval era. and was a necessary textbook in some of the finest universities of Renaissance and early modern Europe. At this time, the contents of the Tetrabiblos started to draw stigmatisation as part of "a diabolical art of divination". One 17th century critic was to write of its subject: "no superstitious art is more fitted to forward the aims of the devil than the astrology of Ptolemy". The intellectual standing of astrology collapsed rapidly at the end of the 17th century, but the historical impact of the Tetrabiblos upon world culture continues to engage the attention of scholars of classical philosophy and the history of sciences in antiquity. It also maintains its position as an influential textbook for practitioners of modern western astrology, and English translations of the text were published by astrologers in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. The early 20th century Humanist astrologer Dane Rudhyar reported that the astrology of his era "originated almost entirely in the work of the Alexandrian astrologer, Claudius Ptolemy". Even 21st century astrological textbooks have described the Tetrabiblos as being "without a doubt, indispensable for any serious student of astrology". The work's enduring significance is attributed to several factors: Ptolemy's reputation as one of the greatest philosophers and scientists of the ancient world, the text's astrological importance as one of the oldest complete manuals on that subject, and the unprecedented order and quality of Ptolemy's astrological explanations. The "outstanding mark of Ptolemy’s astrology" is described as "informed by the philosophical and scientific spirit of his age". Ptolemy wrote at a time when "physics" was defined by philosophy, and his account of stellar effects was expressed in terms of the four Aristotelian qualities (hot, cold, wet, and dry) set against the philosophical notion of universal unity and cosmic harmony. His objective was to explain the rationale of astrology in such terms, so the work is also notable for its dismissal of astrological practices which lack a direct astronomical basis:
As for the nonsense on which many waste their labour and of which not even a plausible account can be given, this we shall dismiss in favour of the primary natural causes; we shall investigate, not by means of lots and numbers of which no reasonable explanation can be given, but merely through the science of the aspects of the stars to the places with which they have familiarity. The book opens with an explanation of the philosophical framework of astrology which aims to answer the arguments of critics who questioned the subject's validity. Ptolemy was not responsible for originating the astrological techniques he presented in the Tetrabiblos. The historical importance and influence of the Tetrabiblos is attested by the many ancient, Medieval and Renaissance commentaries published about it, as well as the many translations and paraphrased editions that aim to reproduce its content in an accessible manner. The Greek text has undergone transmission into Arabic, Latin and many modern languages. The first English translation did not appear until the 18th century, but by the end of the 19th century the American astrologer Luke Broughton reported he had at least half a dozen different English translations in his possession.

The commonly known Greek and Latin titles (Tetrabiblos and Quadripartitum respectively), meaning 'four books', are traditional nicknames for a work which in some Greek manuscripts is entitled Μαθηματικὴ τετράβιβλος σύνταξις, 'Mathematical treatise in four books'. Frank Eggleston Robbins, editor of the Loeb English translation published in 1940, considered it likely that this was the title used by Ptolemy himself, although he acknowledged that many other Greek manuscripts use the title Τὰ πρὸς Σύρον ἀποτελεσματικά, 'The prognostics addressed to Syrus'. Alexander Jones, editor of the Springer publication Ptolemy in Perspective (2010), considers that Ptolemy's own title remains unknown, but agrees that the term Apotelesmatika is "a credible guess". Evidence within the Almagest reveals that the astronomical work could not have been completed before about 145 AD, which demonstrates that Ptolemy wrote the Tetrabiblos towards the end of his life, sometime between completing the Almagest and his death, generally reported to be around 168 A. D.

The text begins with Ptolemy's address to "Syrus", an unidentified character to whom all Ptolemy's works are dedicated. In this Ptolemy differentiates between two types of astronomical study: the first (astronomy proper) which discovers the astronomical cycles and movements; the second (astrology) which investigates the changes these movements bring about. He states that each has its own science and the former is desirable in its own right "even though it does not attain the result given by its combination with the second". Although the terms astronomia and astrologia were used interchangeably in ancient texts, this also demonstrates the early definition of two differentiated subjects which were discussed at length by Ptolemy in two separate works.

In chapter three Ptolemy argues that astrological prediction is both natural and beneficial. The translation of these ideas into Latin in the 12th century are described as being "of critical importance" to the adoption of a favourable attitude towards astrology within Christianity than it was in the European Dark Ages in the Medieval period. Ptolemy first proposes that it is not "useless" to create predictions of what is likely to happen, even if the predictions do not provide the means to avoid impending disaster. This was one of the well known classical criticisms that had been brought to prominence in Cicero's text De Divinatione, in the argument that no good comes from warnings of imminent disasters when they offer no means of escape. Ptolemy gives a more positive view of divination in his assessment of astrology as a subject "by which we gain full view of things human and divine", which, he argues, gives a better perception of "what is fitting and expedient for the capabilities of each temperament". Ptolemy's comments counter the criticism by proposing that whilst the celestial cycles are entirely reliable and "eternally performed in accordance with divine, unchangeable destiny", He sees an individual as unable to resist the greater cycles of change which happen to the wider community, so even a man whose horoscope indicates gain may perish at a time that his community is struck by natural disaster or pestilence. However, Ptolemy also maintains that disastrous events will only follow a natural course if no counter action is taken to avert the problem, as when "future happenings to men are not known, or if they are known and the remedies are not applied". Chapter four, for example, explains the "power of the planets" through their associations with the creative humoral qualities of warmth or moisture, or the reductive qualities of cold and dryness. Hence Mars is described as a destructive planet because its humoral association is excessive dryness, whilst Jupiter is defined as temperate and fertilising because its association is moderate warmth and humidity. These associations are based on the arrangements of the planets with regard to the Sun, as perceived from the geocentric perspective, by which their orbits are measured is if they are centred upon the Earth. Uniting these Aristotelian principles with a prevalent Greek philosophy employed by Zeno of Citium and the Pythagoreans, the next three chapters arrange the planets into pairs of opposites. Since these humoral associations derive from configurations with the Sun, chapter eight describes how they are subtly modified according to the phase of each planet's synodic cycle with the Sun. Chapter nine discusses the "power of the fixed stars". Here, rather than give direct humoral associations, Ptolemy describes their "temperatures" as being like that of the planets he has already defined. Hence Aldebaran ("called the Torch") is described as having "a temperature like that of Mars", whilst other stars in the Hyades are "like that of Saturn and moderately like that of Mercury". At the end of the chapter Ptolemy clarifies that these are not his proposals, but are drawn from historical sources, being "the observations of the effects of the stars themselves as made by our predecessors". Chapter ten returns to the humoral theme more explicitly, clarifying that the zodiac is aligned to the seasons and so expressive of the shifting emphasis through moisture, warmth, dryness and cold, (as brought about by spring, summer, autumn, and winter). Similarly, the four angles of the chart present an humoral emphasis through association with the effects of the four cardinal winds that blow from their aligned directions. The remainder of book one (up to the final two chapters which concern the planetary phases and aspectual applications), presents the rulerships, divisions, and configurations of the zodiac signs, most of which are related to astronomical definitions, seasonal effects, physics and geometry. Geometrical principles are used to define the favourable or unfavourable quality of astrological aspects, based on the angular relationship of planets and signs with ecliptic degrees. This determines the seasonally based tropical zodiac which takes its name from the Greek word τροπικός tropikos: ‘of the turning’, because it is set by the turn of the seasons and, being subject to precession, experiences a slow and gradual revolution through the visible constellations. For the same reason, the signs that mark the Sun's summer and winter solstice points (Cancer and Capricorn) are described as the 'tropical signs', since these are the places where the Sun 'turns' its direction in celestial latitude, (thereby defining the terrestrial circles of latitude known as the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn). Whereas other ancient astrological writers gave their emphasis to the astrological interpretation of such definitions (for example, in describing how tropical signs are indicative of quickly changing situations), Ptolemy's focus is notably different; given to the astronomical and philosophical factors that underlie the definitions rather than their astrological meaning in practice. Ptolemy explains that the definitions of the zodiac are not his own, but present "the natural characters of the zodiacal signs, as they have been handed down by tradition". His approach finds elegant expression where he is demonstrating the logic of schematic arrangements (such as the philosophical principles behind the planetary rulership of signs), but is noted to convey detachment in regard to the elements of astrology that are not so obviously plausible. This can be seen in the way that Ptolemy avoids going into detail on the facets of astrology that rely on mythological, or symbolic associations, and how he is willing to outline the reasoning behind conflicting astrological proposals without revealing any personal preference for one scheme over another. Some commentators have viewed Ptolemy's comparatively dispassionate approach towards points of astrological contention as reason to suppose he was more interested in the theoretical principles than the actual practice of astrology. On the other hand, the objective tone that marks his style; his assertion that the subject is natural (by which he makes no demand for oaths of secrecy from its students as some contemporaries do); and the way he shows respectful reference to alternative views without vilifying authors whose practices might differ from his own, all helped to secure the text's historical reputation as an intellectually superior one. Classics scholar Mark Riley raised these points in his assessment that Ptolemy approached the subject of astrology with exactly the same theoretical inclination that he applied to astronomy, geography and the other sciences on which he wrote. This distinctive style of approach led Riley to conclude: "The respect shown to Ptolemy’s work by all later astrologers was due, not to its usefulness to the practitioner, but to his magisterial synthesis of astrology and science". The second chapter gives a broad generalisation of how differences in physical traits occur between the inhabitants of the various climes (a demarcation based on latitude). Communities that live close to the equator, for example, are described as having black skins, small statures, and thick woolly hair, as a protective response to the burning heat of that location. By contrast, communities that have settled in high northern regions are defined by their colder environment and its greater share of moisture. Their bodily forms are paler, taller, with finer hair, and in their characteristics they are described as "somewhat cold in nature". Both types are described as lacking civilisation because of the extremes of their environment, whereas communities that live in temperate regions are medium in colouring, moderate in stature and enjoy a more equable lifestyle. The several regions are similarly defined according to the mix that arises within this kind of analysis. Ptolemy explains that such considerations are only dealt with summarily, as a background consideration for what follows. He also makes clear that such traits are to be found "generally present, but not in every individual". Ptolemy extends the logic given in ancient Babylonian texts where the four quarters of the known world are attributed to the four triplicity arrangements of the zodiac. The attribution is based on association between the planets that govern the triplicities and the directions and winds those planets are affiliated with. For example, the 'Aries triplicity' (which includes Aries, Leo and Sagittarius) is chiefly dominated by Jupiter and assisted by Mars. Jupiter rules the north wind and Mars the west wind; therefore this triplicity governs the north west quarter of Ptolemy's "inhabited world": the area known as Europe. Again, these divisions are general, and specific rulership of each nation is modified by location and observed cultural distinctions. For example, in Europe, only those regions that lie to the north west extremes are fully attributed to Jupiter and Mars, since those that lie towards the centre of the inhabited area incline towards the influence of opposing regions. In this way, the "inhabited region" experiences a drift of astrological correspondence rather than sharp divisions within its quarters, and independent nations are variously affiliated with the signs of each triplicity and the planets that rule them. Ptolemy names Britain and Spain as two nations appropriately placed in the north west quarter to accept the rulership of Jupiter and Mars. Such nations are described as "independent, liberty loving, fond of arms, industrious", based on characteristics attributed to those planets. Being predominantly governed by masculine planets they are also "without passion for women and look down upon the pleasures of love". the chapter builds into an extensive association between planets, zodiac signs and the national characteristics of 73 nations. It concludes with three additional assertions which act as core principles of mundane astrology:
Each of the fixed stars has familiarity with the countries attributed to the sign of its ecliptic rising. The time of the first founding of a city (or nation) can be used in a similar way to an individual horoscope, to astrologically establish the characteristics and experiences of that city. The most significant considerations are the regions of the zodiac which mark the place of the Sun and Moon, and the four angles of the chart – in particular the ascendant. If the time of the foundation of the city or nation is not known, a similar use can be made of the horoscope of whoever holds office or is king at the time, with particular attention given to the midheaven of that chart. supplemented by examination of the 'stations' of the superior planets: Saturn, Jupiter and Mars. Although eclipses are deemed relevant to any nation affiliated with the zodiac signs in which they occur, Ptolemy's scrutiny is reserved for regions where they are visible, which he argues will manifest the effects most noticeably. The period of obscuration determines the endurance of the effect, with each hour proportioning to years for a solar eclipse and months for a lunar eclipse. The location of the eclipse with relation to the horizon is then used to judge whether the effects are most prevalent at the beginning, middle or end of the period, with times of intensification identified by planetary contacts to the degree of the eclipse which occur within this period. Chapter 7 begins the examination of what type of event will manifest. This is judged by the angle of the horizon which precedes the eclipse in the chart set for the location under scrutiny and the planet(s) that dominate this angle by rulership and powerful aspectual connections. Whether the predicted effect is beneficial or destructive depends on the condition of these planets, whilst the type of manifestation is judged by the zodiac signs, fixed stars and constellations involved. The resulting prediction is of relevance to nations, but Ptolemy points out that certain individuals are more resonant to the effects than others; namely those have the Sun or Moon in their horoscopes in the same degree as the eclipse, or the degree that directly opposes it. Within his Almagest Ptolemy explains that he had access to eclipse records kept for 900 years since the beginning of the reign of king Nabonassar (747 BC). In chapter 9 of the Tetrabiblos he shows knowledge of the Babylonian lore that accompanied these records in detailing the omens based on visual phenomena. The colours of eclipses and "the formations that occur near them, such as rods, halos, and the like" are considered along with the astrological significance of comets, in whether they take the form of "'beams', 'trumpets', 'jars', and the like". Meaning is derived from their position relative to the Sun and assessment of "the parts of the zodiac in which their heads appear and through the directions in which the shapes of their tails point". It is noted that here Ptolemy uses principles that fall outside the neat theoretical logic he presents in book I, being explicable only in terms of the mythological and omen tradition inherited from his ancient sources. He also defends the subjective nature of the analysis involved, asserting that it would be impossible to mention the proper outcome of all this investigation, which calls for enterprise and ingenuity from the astrologer creating the judgement. The remaining chapters of book II are dedicated to meteorological matters. Chapter 10 specifies that the new or full Moon preceding the Sun's ingress into Aries can be used as a starting point for investigations concerning the weather patterns of the year. Lunations which precede the Sun's ingress into any the other equinoctial and solstice signs (Cancer, Libra and Capricorn) can also be used for seasonal concerns, and within these "monthly investigations" bring more particular details based on lunations and the conjunctions of the planets. The recorded weather effects of the fixed stars in the zodiac constellations are systematically discussed, concluding with the relevance of generally observed sky phenomena such as shooting stars, cloud formations and rainbows. These final considerations are expected to add localised details to the original exploration of eclipse cycles. Ptolemy's theme throughout the book is that charts of this nature cannot be judged in isolation, but are to be understood within the pattern of cycles to which they belong, and where there are strong connections between the degree points involved; for:

In every case one should draw his conclusions on the principle that the universal and primary underlying cause takes precedence and that the cause of particular events is secondary to it, and that the force is most ensured and strengthened when the stars which are the lords of the universal natures are configurated with the particular causes. With the astrologer expected to have knowledge and awareness of the mundane cycles that outline the background principles of the personal horoscope, Ptolemy closes this book with the promise that the next will supply "with due order" the procedure which allows predictions based on the horoscopes of individuals.

Despite Ptolemy's prominence as a philosopher, the Dutch historian of science Eduard Jan Dijksterhuis criticizes the Tetrabiblos, stating that "it only remain puzzling that the very writer of the Almagest, who had taught how to develop astronomy from accurate observations and mathematical constructions, could put together such a system of superficial analogies and unfounded assertions."

No original manuscripts of the text have survived; its contents are known from translations, fragments, paraphrased copies, commentaries and later Greek manuscripts. Astrological researcher Deborah Houlding, in an analysis of how specific points agree or vary between different editions, suggests that areas of conflicting details have been affected by three main streams of transmission: manuscripts that have passed through Arabic translation; those based on a paraphrased edition, and manuscripts that are dated four centuries later than the Arabic ones, but which have not undergone translation out of Greek.

The oldest extant manuscript is an Arabic translation compiled in the 9th century by Hunayn ibn Ishaq. This was first translated into Latin, in Barcelona, by Plato de Tivoli in 1138 and became influential as the first complete introduction of Ptolemy's astrological work in Medieval Europe. It survives in at least nine manuscripts and five Renaissance printings. Other Latin translations made from Arabic sources include an anonymous (unpublished) work compiled in 1206 and another of the 13th century by Egidio Tebaldi (Aegidius de Thebaldis). Typically, the Latin translations made from Arabic texts were circulated with a commentary compiled by Ali ibn Ridwan (Haly) in the 11th century. Egidio Tebaldi's translation was first published by Erhard Ratdolt in 1484 together with Haly's commentary and a "pseudo Ptolemaic" list of aphorisms known as the Centiloquium. This has been described as "the creature of late fifteenth century Italian presses". The content of the Paraphrase is close to that of manuscripts of the Tetrabiblos, but it uses simplified text with the aim of providing what Heilen calls "a more easily understandable version of the difficult original work". Allatius' Latin translation was used as the source of all English translations of the Tetrabiblos prior to the Robbins' edition of 1940.

Although no copies of Ptolemy's original manuscript remain, there are other ancient works, such as Hephaistio's Apotelesmatics I, which describe or reproduce some of its passages. These have been used to help verify disputed areas of content. In the 'Introduction' to his 1940's translation, Frank Eggleston Robbins reported the existence of at least 35 manuscripts containing all or a large part of the Tetrabiblos in European libraries. The first printed edition was made in 1535 with an accompanying Latin translation by the German classical scholar Joachim Camerarius. This was reprinted in 1553 and is "notable for offering the first Latin translation based upon a Greek rather than Arabic source". In 1994 the 'Boll Boer' edition became the basis of a serialised English translation by Robert Schmidt, published by Project Hindsight. The 'Translator's Preface' was critical of Robbins' understanding of some of the "conceptual issues involved" and argued the need for a new English translation which recognised the "probable superiority of the Teubner text edited by Boll and Boer in 1940". The most recent critical edition of the Greek text was made by the German scholar Professor Wolfgang Hübner, and published by Teubner in 1998. Based on 33 complete and 14 partial manuscripts, Hübner also incorporated the unpublished notes of Boer and the reasoning given in the Robbins and Boll Boer editions.

The Centiloquium 'one hundred (sayings)' was the common Latin title of a collection of 100 important astrological aphorisms. It was also known in Latin as Liber Fructus (Arabic: Kitab al Tamara; Hebrew: Sefer ha Peri) 'Book of the Fruit'. The latter reflected the belief that this offered a summation of Ptolemy's key astrological principles, and therefore presented "The Fruit of his Four Books". It began, as all Ptolemy's works did, with a dedication to "Syrus", which helped support the assumption of the work's Ptolemaic authenticity. Ultimately, the historical assumption that the Centiloquium was part of Ptolemy's astrological legacy gave it widespread influence in the medieval period, by which it became established as an important text within the astrological tradition.

.
.