Astrology in European Religious History: Its Philosophical Foundations through the Ages [1 ed.] 3631897162, 9783631897164

Citation preview

This treatise on religious studies traces the European tradition of astrology from its oriental beginnings to the present day. The aim is to get a view of the different mythological, philosophical and theological ideas of the cosmos (especially with Platonic and Aristotelian borrowings), which astrology has repeatedly reformulated and carried through all epochs. However, it seems as if astrology had lost its plausibility with the overcoming of the geocentric world view by Copernicus and Kepler and could only continue to exist as an “intellectual regression” (Theodor Adorno). This view is countered by the thesis, founded here, that astrology has been able to survive the changes in world views unscathed because it designs philosophical (holistic) patterns of reasoning into the relationship between cosmos and humans, which in a Platonic sense understand the cosmos as an intelligent and vital organism.

The Author Gustav-Adolf Schoener attained his Doctorate from the Institute of Philosophy at Leibniz University in Hanover, and further achieved his habilitation at the Institute of Religious Studies. His primary areas of research and teaching revolve around religions, worldviews, and esotericism as manifested in antiquity, early modern times, and modernity in the history of European religion. Moreover, he is a language teacher for Latin and Ancient Greek at the Institute of Theology within Leibniz University.

Gustav-Adolf Schoener

Astrology in European Religious History

Astrology in European Religious History

Gustav-Adolf Schoener

Gustav-Adolf Schoener

Astrology in European Religious History Its Philosophical Foundations through the Ages

ISBN 978-3-631-89716-4

9 783631 897164

9783631897164_cvr_eu.indd All Pages

18-Sep-23 17:09:39

This treatise on religious studies traces the European tradition of astrology from its oriental beginnings to the present day. The aim is to get a view of the different mythological, philosophical and theological ideas of the cosmos (especially with Platonic and Aristotelian borrowings), which astrology has repeatedly reformulated and carried through all epochs. However, it seems as if astrology had lost its plausibility with the overcoming of the geocentric world view by Copernicus and Kepler and could only continue to exist as an “intellectual regression” (Theodor Adorno). This view is countered by the thesis, founded here, that astrology has been able to survive the changes in world views unscathed because it designs philosophical (holistic) patterns of reasoning into the relationship between cosmos and humans, which in a Platonic sense understand the cosmos as an intelligent and vital organism.

The Author Gustav-Adolf Schoener attained his Doctorate from the Institute of Philosophy at Leibniz University in Hanover, and further achieved his habilitation at the Institute of Religious Studies. His primary areas of research and teaching revolve around religions, worldviews, and esotericism as manifested in antiquity, early modern times, and modernity in the history of European religion. Moreover, he is a language teacher for Latin and Ancient Greek at the Institute of Theology within Leibniz University.

9783631897164_cvr_eu.indd All Pages

Gustav-Adolf Schoener

Astrology in European Religious History

Astrology in European Religious History

Gustav-Adolf Schoener

Gustav-Adolf Schoener

Astrology in European Religious History Its Philosophical Foundations through the Ages

24-Nov-23 18:01:19

Astrology in European Religious History

Gustav-Adolf Schoener

Astrology in European Religious History Its Philosophical Foundations through the Ages

Berlin - Bruxelles - Chennai - Lausanne - New York - Oxford

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress.

Bibliographic Information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data is available online at http://dnb.d-nb.de.

ISBN 978-3-631-89716-4 (Print) E-ISBN 978-3-631-89717-1 (E-PDF) E-ISBN 978-3-631-89718-8 (EPUB) DOI 10.3726/b20563

© 2023 Peter Lang Group AG, Lausanne Published by Peter Lang GmbH, Berlin, Deutschland [email protected] - www.peterlang.com All rights reserved.

All parts of this publication are protected by copyright. Any utilisation outside the strict limits of the copyright law, without the permission of the publisher, is forbidden and liable to prosecution. This applies in particular to reproductions, translations, microfilming, and storage and processing in electronic retrieval systems.

Contents Introduction ........................................................................................ 9

a) Astrology in the Present Day ................................................... 12



b) Astrology Historically and Critically ....................................... 17



c) Religion –​ Science –​ Astrology ................................................. 24 What Is ‘Astrology’? ................................................................ 26 What Is ‘Religion’? .................................................................. 26 What Is ‘Science’? .................................................................... 29 Structure and Reasoning .......................................................... 33 Selecting and Restricting Sources ............................................. 36

1 The Structure of Astrology I:  An Analogy between the Cosmos and Humans ..................... 41 1.1. Astrology in the Geocentric Model .......................................... 43 1.1.1. Mesopotamian Omen Astrology ................................... 45 1.1.2. Astrology in the Early-​Modern Period .......................... 52 1.2. Astrology in the Heliocentric Model ........................................ 65 1.2.1. Johannes Kepler ........................................................... 65 1.2.2. Isaac Newton ............................................................... 69 1.3. Carl Jung and Thomas Ring’s Psychological-​Symbolic Reinterpretation of Astrology .................................................. 73 1.3.1. Carl Jung ...................................................................... 73 1.3.1.1. Carl Jung’s ‘Case of Synchronicity’ .................. 76 1.3.2. Thomas Ring ................................................................ 79 1.3.2.1. Thomas Ring’s ‘Revision of Astrological Thought’ ......................................................... 89

6

Contents

2 Astrology and Science in the Present Day ............................... 95 2.1. From Knowledge of ‘Divine Wisdom’ to Excluding Mythical Worldviews ............................................................... 95 2.2. Astrology as a ‘Science of Space and Time’ –​Jean Claude Weiss ....................................................................................... 98 2.3. The Fukushima Nuclear Reactor Accident from an Astrological Perspective ......................................................... 101 2.4. Critical Objections to Astrology ............................................ 106 2.4.1. Karl Popper ................................................................ 106 2.4.2. Theodor Wiesengrund Adorno ................................... 111 2.4.3. Paul Feyerabend ......................................................... 112 2.5. The ‘Experience’ Argument in Astrology ............................... 117 2.5.1. Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker .................................... 118 2.5.2. The Evidence Argument in the Past and the Present Day ................................................................ 119 2.5.3. Empirical Studies: The ‘Mars Effect’ ........................... 123 2.5.4. Digression: Empirical Methods in Mesopotamian Omen Astrology ......................................................... 135

3 The Structure of Astrology II:  Celestial Deities and Intelligible Nature ................................ 143 3.1. Property Names and Deity Names for Planets from the Sumerian to the Roman Period .............................................. 145 3.2. Plotinus’ ‘One’ and the World Soul ........................................ 147 3.3. Intelligible Cosmos and Celestial Deities in Twentieth-​ Century Esoteric Astrology .................................................... 149 3.4. Thomas Aquinas and the Stars’ ‘Spiritual Substances’ ........... 152 3.5. Philipp Melanchthon and the Vital Cosmos ........................... 153 3.6. Martin Luther and Celestial Beings Contrary to the First Commandment ...................................................................... 154 3.7. Father Gerhard Voss and the Divinely Infused Cosmos ......... 157

Contents

7

3.8. Digression: How Religious Is the Astrological Worldview? In Search of a Suitable Transcendent Term ....... 159



3.9. The ‘Divinity’ of Spaces: The Zodiac in the 360º Sphere of the Ecliptic ...................................................................... 162 3.9.1. The Primacy of the Tropic over the Sidereal Zodiac . 165 3.9.2. The Mythological and Intelligible Interpretation of the Sections of the Ecliptic in the Ancient World and the Modern Period .................................. 168 3.9.2.1. Origins ....................................................... 168 3.9.2.2. Constellations and Signs of the Zodiac in the Modern Period .................................. 171 3.9.2.2.1. Alice Ann Bailey ........................ 172 3.9.2.2.2. Carl Jung ................................... 172 3.9.2.2.3. Fritz Riemann ........................... 176 3.9.2.2.4. Thomas Ring ............................. 177

3.10. Conclusion .......................................................................... 178

4 Astrology as a Misunderstood Science .................................. 181

4.1. John David North and the Physical Premises of Astrology ... 182 4.1.1. Aristotle’s Meteorology ............................................ 187 4.1.2. Aristotle’s Ether and Celestial Souls .......................... 189 4.1.3. Elements and Qualities in Greek Natural Philosophy ................................................................ 192 4.1.4. Stoic Meteorology .................................................... 197

5 Astrology in the Context of Modern Societies ..................... 201

5.1. Astrology’s Hermeneutical Principle .................................... 202



5.2. Astrology and Individualised Construction of Meaning in the Present Day ................................................................ 204

Bibliography ................................................................................... 209 Reference Books and Encyclopaedias ........................................ 235

Introduction Even in today’s daily horoscopes in magazines and newspapers, we can still see traces –​albeit only faint ones –​of astrology’s almost 4000-​year history:  An all-​ encompassing worldview that depicts humans and the cosmos as tightly linked. The movement of celestial bodies, their ascents and descents, and their alignments in the sky during a solar eclipse are interpreted as an expression of a divine guiding hand that lends meaning and orientation to humans’ lives. This link between the cosmos and humans –​ ‘above’ and ‘below’  –​forms the foundation from which astrologers of all ages have striven to glean knowledge about humans and society. It has survived to the present day with a language that since its Mesopotamian beginnings has been as symbolic as it is vivid. Yet the worldviews that supported astrology have shifted:  Celestial deities became celestial intelligences (Aristotle), these celestial angels (Aquinas) then morphed into ‘living forces’ (virtutes animales) that reside in celestial bodies (Kepler), and finally into ‘archetypes’ as psychic forces (Jung). From its beginnings to the present day, astrology and its worldview have taken various guises without ever losing sight of its principal concern –​assigning human action a meaningful place in the cosmos. This cultural and religious study is an analysis of astrology as part of European tradition. It is not intended as a new ‘History of Astrology’ from its beginnings in Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt to the present day, but as a way of comprehending the various philosophical foundations on which astrology has been based throughout its history. As it is not possible to include every stage in astrology’s history, prominent periods will be selected to showcase astrology’s respective foundations in how they took shape in their different religious and cultural contexts. On the one hand, this approach assumes a core inventory of continuity that makes it possible to use the term ‘astrology’ in a general, overarching way to encompass an array of teachings and practices that correlate humans and the cosmos. On the other hand, it is assumed that this history of astrology will also present discontinuities which, as worldviews changed, constantly provided new astrological teachings for shifting conceptions of religion, nature and

10

Introduction

society. Nevertheless, key components of one collective ‘astrology’ are retained throughout the ages and its many transformations. In terms of religious history, this study aims to comprehend these features of continuity as types of astrology and their cultural backgrounds shifted. Priority is therefore given to the most important turning points in astrology’s history with their respective theoretical and practical foundations. The key to a historical understanding of the European astrological tradition lies in Mesopotamia. It was here that the unity of the cosmos and humans as well as the cosmos and nature was first fundamentally recognised, systematised, and put into practice on the basis of precise astronomical calculations. This Mesopotamian basis, often referred to as omen astrology in present-​day Oriental studies,1 reached its full theoretical and practical expression in the Hellenistic period in Ancient Greece. If the origins of European astrological tradition lie outside Europe, in Mesopotamia (and to a certain extent in Ancient Egypt), the European tradition being discussed here is made more open and relative. Strictly speaking, it would be more appropriate to discuss an Oriental-​European tradition that also comprises elements of Ancient Egyptian astrological teaching. Academics generally concur that Mesopotamian calculation techniques and divinatory interpretation of the planets and the signs of the zodiac were the direct basis for Greek  –​and therefore European  –​astronomy and astrology from the sixth century BCE onwards. This is laid out, or at the very least assumed, in all standard works on the history of astronomy and astrology. Starting from its arrival in Greece, however, it is possible to trace specific European forms of astrological teachings from the Hellenistic period and the Latin tradition, so this will be referred to as a European tradition. A second key turning point is the contemplation and application of astrology in the early-​modern period as part of a gradual shift away from the geocentric model. On the one hand, astrology’s foundations up to that

1 The term ‘omen’ (‘sign’) generally refers to the interpretation of atmospheric phenomena and animals’ behaviour, such as hepatoscopy and other natural phenomena. ‘Omen astrology’ provides interpretations based on the visible appearances of celestial bodies and their constellations. Brown (2000), 108 and 246 (2). Brack-​Bernsen (1997), 8.

Introduction

11

point were updated, while on the other, they assumed new foundations and fresh momentum thanks to the protagonists of the new worldview. This update to astrology that accompanied the switch from the geocentric to the heliocentric model was followed by the third historical period to be studied –​from the nineteenth century to the present day. This period is particularly interesting, less as part of a new popular sense of religion and spiritualism, and much more (albeit appreciated much less in both scientific and public debates) as the subject of discourse on the theory of science, philosophy, and psychology. Not only did –​and do –​researchers on religion take an active part in this discourse, but also –​as will become clear in the course of this study –​renowned philosophers, psychologists and social scientists. Such discourse puts astrology into the context of contemporary religious culture, not least because the topic of astrology helps understand modern, individualised religious trends. The study of religions is traditionally divided into two main directions –​ the history of religions and the classification of religions. This study focuses on classification, contemplating the different forms of astrology as embedded in their respective cultural contexts and uncovering their essential structures. Early Mesopotamian cultures, the early-​modern period, and the modern period in Europe all have their own religious, philosophical, epistemological and practical explanatory model, each lending its own different framework to the relationship between the cosmos and humans assumed in astrology. However, it remains possible to trace a consistent basic structure across different cultural contexts; one that lends an unmistakable continuity to different astrological teachings and practices. Astrology’s significance as part of the religious and cultural history of the ancient world is also widely recognised and for the most part has also been thoroughly investigated in the historical disciplines that deal with Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome, the Middle Ages in Europe, and the Renaissance. The same is not true of the modern period. This may owe to the fact that, since the shift away from the geocentric model, astrology has lost all serious underlying rationale, making it appear unsuitable as a research topic. Scientific publications therefore often associate astrology with a diffuse way of interpreting the world, usually under the umbrella of ‘parasciences’ and ‘pseudosciences’ or ‘pseudoreligions’ (Wunder 1997, 125f; Zinser 2006, 1792). A key focus of this study is to

12

Introduction

establish why and in what way astrology remains a plausible and self-​ consistent system for interpreting the world, one which belongs to the field of discourse comprising modern religiousness and that can exist alongside any other religious interpretation system with its own foundational arguments. However, one limitation does need to be made: As set out previously, the European astrological tradition began outside Europe, in Mesopotamia. This applies to both the calculation methods and the key elements of a specifically astrological perception of the relationship between the cosmos and humans and between the cosmos and nature, which also includes identifying the cosmos as inhabited and animated by gods and godlike forces. Along with the westward direction that Mesopotamian astronomy and astrology took, it also underwent an eastward expansion into Asian cultures, particularly India and China. This history of astrological teachings’ expansion and reception would require a separate analysis and is not to be taken into account in this study. The aim of this study is to represent astrology as part of European religious history and its significance in modern religiousness in European and European-​influenced societies.

a) Astrology in the Present Day First, it is important to point to some noteworthy developments and events that emphasise astrology’s topicality in modern-​day religious culture in European societies. It is crucial to establish that astrology is not only accepted as a marginal societal phenomenon –​it reaches far into the heart of society, just as with other esoteric disciplines. Modern astrology certainly lost the significance and the power to shape society that it had in the Greek and Roman or early-​modern period long ago, but in the present day it remains a factor that is not to be overlooked and that assumes a greater unseen significance than commonly assumed in a society that considers itself enlightened and rational, including at society’s turning points and in its decision-​making processes. Astrology’s permanent presence in magazines and television shows has made astrology widely popular in recent decades. It is not always easy to account for its position within modern religiousness because the relationship

Introduction

13

between the cosmos and humans remains unexplained and often raises associations with misunderstood sciences. This impression changes when reading specialised magazines on astrology that consider themselves academic journals and consciously showcase ancient worldviews, hermetical philosophy, early-​modern esotericism, modern theosophy and analytical psychology as its traditions. In the German-​speaking world, these are principally ‘ASTROLOGIE HEUTE’ (‘ASTROLOGY TODAY’), which calls itself a ‘Journal of Astrology, Psychology and Esotericism’ (Weiss 1984–​), and ‘Meridian  –​Fachzeitschrift für Astrologie’ (‘Meridian  –​Academic Journal for Astrology’, Jehle 1991–​). Even if the religious context appears somewhat fragmented here, it is unmistakably present. The psychology and esotericism represented here place themselves in the tradition of Carl Jung and theosophical teachings; horoscope analyses are frequently referred to as ‘karmic horoscope analyses’. This astrology oriented towards esotericism and depth psychology states its aims as ‘self-​knowledge’ and ‘release from determinism’. A considerable proportion is devoted to current issues in politics, economy and science, however, which are interpreted esoterically and astrologically. It may come as a surprise, but astrological interpretations of ‘mundane’ –​political and economic –​events are not solely the preserve of professional astrological circles; astrology was and is used in the world of politics too. Its presence in politics in the course of the twentieth century is not unknown. There is comprehensive and extensively researched literature on the study of astrology among leading Nazis, including Adolf Hitler himself, as detailed by British historian Ellic Howe in his comprehensive analysis titled Urania’s Children:  The Strange World of the Astrologers (Howe 1995). For obvious reasons, it is difficult to ascertain the extent to which astrological analyses are consulted in making important political and geopolitical decisions. Astrology remains the hallmark of an unenlightened view of the world:  sources are hard to find, and information is sparse and often only comes in the form of revelations. But the fact that, even in Western countries, astrology has increasingly found its way (back) across the political spectrum –​increasingly so in the second half of the twentieth century  –​cannot be overlooked. French president François Mitterrand and Spain’s King Juan Carlos I both called on French astrologer Elisabeth

14

Introduction

Teissier to advise them on many important political discussions, including during operations in the Gulf War (1990–​91) and when setting the date for the Maastricht Treaty in 1991 (Teissier 1997, 25 and 81). Likewise, American astrologer Joan Quigley liaised with Nancy Reagan to exert considerable influence on important political decisions made by former US president Ronald Reagan during his time in office. The rapprochement with the Soviet Union and the disarmament talks with Mikhail Gorbachev, for example, took place based on astrological advice. Not only has this been recorded in detail by the astrologer herself in her book What Does Joan Say? My Seven Years as White House Astrologer to Nancy and Ronald Reagan (Quigley 1990, 122ff), but also in no less detail and at a critical distance by the former US Treasury Secretary and White House Chief of Staff, Donald Regan. In his memoirs on his time as Chief of Staff between 1985 and 1987, Regan writes that all important political and personal decisions only took place in consultation with Quigley (Regan 1988; Seaman 1988). As Chief of Staff, Regan was repeatedly confronted with situations in which his advice was not followed because Joan Quigley’s astrological advice contradicted it. During the Iran–​Contra affair, Regan advised the president to go public in order to defend his position more aggressively. The president understood but acted differently. Donald Regan writes the following on the matter: The frustration of dealing with a situation in which the schedule of the President of the Untited States was determined by occult prognostications was very great  –​far greater than any other I had known in nearly forty-​five years of working life. I thought that the President should go out to meet the world, and kept telling him so. The First Lady’s Friend in San Francisco had predicted on the basis of astrology that harm would come to Reagan if he went out of the White House –​or even, on certain days, outdoors. All press conferences were also subject to the Friend’s approval. ‘Maybe your Friend is wrong,’ I would suggest. Mrs. Reagan did not think so: her Friend had predicted the Hinkley assassination attempt nearly to the day2, had foreseen the explosion of a bomb in a luggage compartment of the TWA plane that was damaged in flight over Greece3, and had

2 John Hinkley’s attempted assassination of US president Ronald Reagan on 30 March 1981. 3 This refers to a TWA plane that was hijacked and damaged by a group associated with Hezbollah on a flight from Athens to Rome on 14 June 1985.

Introduction

15

been right about other things as well, including a premonition of the ‘dire events’ in November and December 1987 –​that is the Iran-​Contra scandal.4

Prior to Donald Regan’s appointment, Deputy Chief of Staff Michael Deaver had been tasked with including the horoscopes Joan Quigley delivered in the president’s appointment calendar and categorising days as ‘good’ and ‘bad’. This applied to all public and private appointments, particularly where the president’s health was concerned (Regan 1988, 28, 68ff, 289). However, astrological advice is also widespread at the lower levels of local politics. In October 2008, prominent Norwegian politician Saera Khan tripped up on astrological advice –​which she first denied and later admitted –​regarding her political work and which she had paid for with official expenses while a member of Oslo’s city council between 1999 and 2005. By this time, Khan had become a member of Norway’s national parliament, but stepped down from her seat at the next elections following the scandal (Wolff 2008). It is telling that, in all of the above cases, the politicians involved attempted to keep this practice from the public, which would suggest that the actual extent of astrological advice in politics is significantly greater. Venturing into less public and more private lives, dealings with astrology are more open. According to an ISSP (International Social Survey Programme) study in 1998, 41% of Germans (in the former West Germany) believed that ‘a person’s star sign and birth chart have an influence on the course of their life’ (Wunder 2005, 292). By 2008, only 25% agreed with the statement in another ISSP study, but the figure remained over or only slightly under 40% in other European countries including Switzerland, Austria, Russia and the Czech Republic. In particular, however, the 2008 study showed that, in most European countries investigated, approval of astrology decreased with age:  In Germany in 2008, the figure

4 This appears to be a mistake in specifying the year. The Iran–​Contra affair involved the sale of weapons to Iran and support for the Contras in Nicaragua funded by the proceeds from these arms sales. The scandal was triggered by a report in the Lebanese newspaper Ash-​Shiraa on 3 November 1986. Reagan was confronted with the problem directly in the weeks that followed, and was forced to make a public statement on 13 November (Busby 1999, 79–​97).

16

Introduction

was approximately 33% in the 18–​27 age group (55% in Switzerland), while it was only 16% (28% in Switzerland) in the 68−77 age group. If the doctrine of a traditional religious community were approved of by between 25 and 40% of the European population, this would be comparable to a major denomination of a religion like Christianity or Islam. This level of acceptance of astrology in Western societies is also reflected in the level of organisation in professional and umbrella associations. Many European states saw a tendency in the twentieth century  –​and particularly following the Second World War  –​to found national umbrella associations. The German Astrologers’ Association (‘Deutscher Astrologen-​ Verband’, DAV) was founded on 16 October 1947 at the astrologically calculated time of 10:06 a.m. In 1950 it had around a hundred members, which had risen to a thousand by the year 2000, and its number of members remains around this level to this day. The umbrella association comprises eight independent schools of astrology, representing different directions within modern astrology. The schools offer training programmes for professional astrologers, including an ‘ethically compulsory professional oath’, and also publish journals. The Swiss Astrologers’ Union (‘Schweizer Astrologenbund’, SAB) was founded in 1983, while the Austrian Astrologers’ Association (‘Österreichische Astrologenverband’, ÖAV) was not founded until 2003. These umbrella associations also frequently organise congresses. This selection from the German-​ speaking world reflects a general trend that has frequently been addressed by the study of religions in recent years: Namely, that individualised ‘religious interpretation’ –​which includes astrology  –​is not diminishing but increasingly perceived as an option. For the time being, at least, this trend refutes the secularisation theory, which postulates that religion and religiousness are diminishing in modern societies. According to Hubert Seiwert, the secularisation theory is ‘the self-​image of a modernity that wants to be free from religion’ (Seiwert 1995, 99; Stark/​ Finke 2000, 57–​ 79)5. That religious convictions and

5 See also Rodney Stark/​Roger Finke: „Let us therefore, once and for all, declare an end to social scientific faith in the theory of secularization, recognizing it as a product of wishful thinking.“ (Stark/​Finke 2000, 78)

Introduction

17

activities are predominantly expressed in individualised forms in modern societies owes principally to the transformation that Western societies have undergone since the 1960s. An individual religious dynamic has developed in parallel with the tightly organised, traditional church-​based structures; the former inhabits the realm of esotericism and spirituality with its almost or complete lack of organisation (Luckmann 1993; Knoblauch 2009, 41). This realm of heterogeneous new religiousness and spirituality is also home to astrology.

b) Astrology Historically and Critically In terms of religious history, it is possible to ascertain that astrology does not have well-​developed, historical institutions like traditional religions and denominations do. There is indeed a broad body of astrological texts from Ancient Greek and Roman times (Gundel/​Gundel 1996), but not in the sense of a canon designed to demarcate it to any extent. Despite its heterogeneous origins with isolated authors and schools as well as different teachings and practices, this astrological literature does have a particular way of interpreting the world that maintains a certain level of uniformity and continuity across the millennia. These astrological teachings and practices with their Mesopotamian and Ancient Egyptian roots have accompanied European history to the present day. As explained previously, this study aims to trace astrology’s unmistakable continuity in the different periods of Europe’s cultural and religious history, and its persistence into the present day, beyond the informal understanding of it as an imprecise way of fortune-​telling using the stars. This therefore implies carving out the core components of a structure of astrological teachings and practice that is plausible and self-​consistent, and that –​despite all internal and external transformations –​has been able to endure the shift in cosmos and world views, the shift in religious and social circumstances, and the shift in scientific methods. In this sense of a consistent cultural phenomenon, the term astrology is as reasonable and generally applicable as it is to speak of one Christianity, one Islam or one Buddhism despite all of their historical changes and denominational fragmentations over such long periods of time.

18

Introduction

The continuity hypothesis depicted here has been frequently contested in the scientific community. Since the beginning of the twentieth century, representatives of different specialisations have taken the stance that modern-​day astrological teachings and practices are an irrational imposition that go against the spirit of the Enlightenment and lack any rational foundation. This lack of foundation is said to have arisen with the shift from the geocentric to the heliocentric model. This assumes that the physical conditions bound to the geocentric model formed the basis for astrological teachings and that the geocentric model has been increasingly undermined since Copernicus’ discoveries. This paradigm shift in viewing the cosmos could therefore only be a watershed, delegitimising what previously were perfectly legitimate foundations for astrological teachings and practices. One of the key figures in this physical and geocentric paradigm is British philosopher and science historian John David North (1934–​2008). North’s nuanced assessment of astrology from ancient physical concepts is examined in depth in Chapter 4. At this point, it is worth presenting a selection of contributions from disciplines in the humanities and natural and social sciences. An opening address for the Nacht der Astronomie (‘Night of Astronomy’) on 13 November 2009 as part of the International Year of Astronomy in Hanover claimed that scientific astronomy in past eras, when the geocentric model was still dominant, was defined by ‘superstition about the power of the stars’, but that now –​since Copernicus and Kepler –​astronomy was free from this superstition. This brief statement is representative of the aforementioned critical view of astrology that has been taken by many orientalists, historians and scientists since the beginning of the twentieth century. German assyriologist Hugo Winckler (1863–​ 1913), founder of the Panbabylonian School, not only considers Mesopotamian astral religion the origin of all religions with its ‘eastward and westward transmission’, but also the origin of astrological teachings and practices that were able to exist for as long as the geocentric model remained accepted. Winckler writes: Humanity believed in the stars as heralds of divine will and rule until the dawn of the new age. Not until Copernicus’ and Kepler’s discoveries was astrology’s reign toppled (Winckler 1901, 10).

Introduction

19

Winckler generally assumes a continuity of astrological interpretation conditioned by ‘stars as heralds of divine will’ from its Mesopotamian beginnings to the early-​modern period and ending there. Old Testament specialist Jürgen Ebach (1945–​) took up this line of argument and continued it through the prism of religious history. Ebach follows the historical tradition from ancient astral religion to the early-​modern period as described by Winckler and uses the term astrology in the singular for this era, lending the entire period a level of continuity. Ebach explains the rupture with modern times in a more nuanced way than Winckler, however. In the period in which the geocentric model was dominant, the relationship between the stars and divinity formed astrology’s justification: The relationship between deities and the stars may [...] be considered a prerequisite of astrology. This relationship may therefore be thought of as a classification or even identification of deities and the stars. Even if the limits cannot be defined precisely, it is only possible to speak about astrology when the stars’ movements and constellations are assumed to affect life on Earth (Ebach 1990, 83).

Astrology loses its legitimacy when the relationship between the stars and divinity is lost and the geocentric model supplanted: If an interest in carefully observing the heavens first arises to interpret celestial events, astronomy then develops to the same extent as an independent science when it is no longer interested in identifying relationships between explanation and effect in studying the stars, which leads to the old (geocentric) model being replaced. In this sense, astronomy leaves astrology behind as a residual (pseudo-​ )science, specifically one that is essentially bound to the geocentric model, albeit without the latter disappearing despite its prerequisites having been refuted (ibid.).

It is notable that this article bases astrology’s legitimacy in religious history, but then explains its delegitimisation as a consequence of the development of scientific methods. Astrology is represented as ‘essentially bound to the geocentric model’, providing a foundation to link the ‘relationship between deities and the stars’ to particular ‘relationships between explanation and effect’. The loss of its geocentric perspective would see ‘its prerequisites... refuted’. Copernican astrology would therefore represent –​ and here Ebach quotes Theodor Adorno –​an ‘intellectual regression’ (ibid. 88f). Ebach’s definition does not consider the theosophical or psychological/​symbolic context that largely defines modern astrology. It should be

20

Introduction

noted that astrology’s ‘intellectual regression’ assumed in the present day contradicts the handbook’s intention to comprehend religions in their cultural contexts as ‘systems of communication, interpretation and symbols’ (Gladigow 1988, 32–​38). This criticism of astrology, founded in history and basing its legitimacy on the persistence of the geocentric model and its illegitimacy since the shift to the heliocentric model, has frequently been repeated (Pingree 1973, 118; North 1986; Fischer 1988, 194) and can also be seen when surveying key specialised dictionaries of natural science and cultural sciences as well as theology. There are conflicting perceptions here, however. While the majority of entries in specialised dictionaries of natural science and sciences position astrology in a geocentric model and consider it delegitimised by the shift away from the geocentric model, a few do also refer to the existence of a modern application of astrology in psychological counselling that takes astrology’s system of symbols as its basis –​often with reference to Carl Jung’s analytical psychology  –​without providing more reasons for astrology’s continued existence beyond the geocentric model. Astrology’s practical use will be explored later; at this point, it is important to first examine astrology’s historical dimension and its fracture point in the early-​modern period. A very widespread (but nonetheless false) argument put forward by multiple dictionaries is the reference to astronomer Johannes Kepler (1571–​1630). In these cases, Kepler is considered an advocate for astrology being delegitimised with the shift away from the geocentric model. Franz Austeda’s Lexikon der Philosophie (‘Lexicon of Philosophy’), for example, states that astrology is an ‘attempt to read the fate of the world and people from the stars without any scientific basis [...] Kepler calls it “astronomy’s foolish daughter”.’ (Austeda 1989, 26). This description –​‘foolish daughter’ –​comes from Kepler’s text Tertius Interveniens (1610) and is in no way a rejection of astrology. Quite the contrary, in fact: the text’s subtitle, Warnung an die Gegner der Astrologie (‘Warning to Astrology’s Opponents’), indicates Kepler’s general inclination towards astrology. ABC Astronomie by Zimmermann/​Gürtler purports that astrology is a ‘falsehood without any scientific foundation, in which phenomena in the heavens are said to be somehow related to events on Earth. Even Johannes

Introduction

21

Kepler occasionally made astrological predictions without being convinced of their truthfulness to scrape a living’ (Zimmermann/​Gürtler 92008, 16f). More than almost any other early-​modern scientist, it was Kepler who vehemently defended astrology from its critics using Platonic ideology and in line with Christian tradition as well as from his own experience. Alongside the aforementioned Tertius Interveniens, another text also provides ample information in this respect: De fundamentis Astrologiae Certioribus (‘On Astrology’s Secure Foundations’) (Kepler 1990). A careful reading of these texts shows that Kepler attacked ‘foolish’ use of astrology, but also attacked dismissing it out of hand; he argued for an astrology with an empirical basis and philosophical foundations, leading to the title of his work:  Tertius Interveniens, meaning ‘The Third Intermediary’. The article on Astrologie in Jürgen Mittelstraß’s Enzyklopädie Philosophie und Wissenschaftstheorie (‘Encyclopaedia of Philosphy and Science Theory’ also points this out, in contradiction to other dictionaries (Mittelstraß 22005, 267–​269). Misleading quotes that depict Kepler as an opponent of astrology are to some extent the key to criticism of astrology and its ‘inexplicable’ resurgence in modern times. The geocentric hypothesis is refuted by the mere fact that Kepler and other key figures of the new, scientific model continued to grapple with astrology to a greater or lesser extent. Copernicus was at least well aware of and accepted astrology thanks to his student Georg Joachim Rheticus (Kirchhoff 1990, 58), Galileo produced his own horoscopes (Favaro 1881, 99–​108), and Isaac Newton dealt with astrology in depth as part of his alchemical and esoteric studies (Gebelein 1991, 305ff). It is notable that these key figures of the modern, scientific worldview incorporated their affirmative inclination towards astrology into esoteric, (neo-​)Platonic and religious worldviews. Galileo and Kepler, for example, did not consider the Sun a dead object, but a body infused with vital, spiritual energy as the living centre of an animate universe (Kepler 1971, 75f/​No. 51; Garin 1997, 28ff). Newton’s religious outlook, which also comprised his teachings on gravitation and optics, as well as his extensive research on alchemy and astrology, particularly evident from his written legacy, make clear how interwoven he considered science and spirituality –​ even in a heliocentric perspective (Newton 1988, 226–​230).

22

Introduction

Astrology’s survival among the sciences in the heliocentric model is also sometimes explained away as stubborn thinking habits that live on despite scientific facts contradicting them. The linguist Hubertus Fischer writes:  ‘Western history’s worldview woven into the stars percolates lazily through the ages. The storms of progress may ripple its waves, but that does not slow its flow.’ (Fischer 1988, 194f). This explanation is not sufficient to explain astrology’s continued existence, however. Rather than stubborn habits, it consciously reflected religious and philosophical thought as well as personal, practical experiences that gave astrology a new structure and guaranteed its survival to the present day. The problem is the following: If one follows the geocentric paradigm with its fundamentally scientific interpretation of astrology, the phenomenon appears to be finished with the shift from the geocentric to the heliocentric model, leaving it with nothing more than historical value. If it is incorporated in a broader sense into religious ideas and experiences, however, the question of its validity is no longer based on scientific requirements. Its presence in modern-​day religious culture is plausible and not extraordinary, or at least no more extraordinary than the presence of any other religious way of interpreting nature and the world. A further fracture point in astrology’s history lies further in the past, namely in the shift from Mesopotamian and Ancient Egyptian astral religion and the interpretation of the stars as divine omens to Greek astrology, which was based on scientifically calculated elements including the stars, their ascents and descents, their angular relationships, the Moon’s crossings of the ecliptic, and precession. Should Mesopotamian and Ancient Egyptian astral religions, with their interpretation of symbols, not be distinguished in principle from astrology based on scientific calculations? How do a religious belief in stars and a scientific observation of nature –​ and their conclusions –​fit together? Some orientalists and historians take the view that Oriental astral religion and Ancient Greek astrology are totally different developments. They consider the former mostly unrelated to astrology because it explains the relationship between humans and celestial bodies as mythical rather than natural. The latter, meanwhile, is designated astrology because it assumes a physical basis for the natural influence of celestial bodies on life on Earth. This ‘Philhellene’ astrology (Pingree 1992, 554ff) neglects both the natural

Introduction

23

and religio-​philosophical foundations for Greek (Platonic, neo-​Platonic, Aristotelian, Stoic) philosophy, and also ignores the observation and calculation of celestial bodies in order to interpret the stars in Mesopotamian times.6 It is also important to note that the shift from Mesopotamian omen astrology to Greek natural science included continuities relating both to the observation and calculation of movements in the sky and their religious interpretation. Mesopotamian omen interpretation already included precise empirical observation (see Section 2.4.4). Ancient Greek astrology took this up to develop a complex mathematical and physical system of relationships between celestial bodies and geometric spaces and points, but the foundations of these had already been laid in Mesopotamia and Egypt. Conversely, however, Ancient Greek philosophy considered the cosmos animated and divine, just like its Mesopotamian predecessors. Celestial deities and the cosmos were now infused with philosophy, but celestial bodies and the cosmos remained animated and divine. ‘Everything is full of Gods’, wrote Thales of Miletus, whose teachings are generally considered the beginning of Greek natural philosophy. Plato saw celestial bodies as the homes of divine beings, while Aristotle  –​whose scientific methodology was a cornerstone of the medieval scholarly world into the early-​modern period –​considered nature, celestial bodies, and the cosmos as a whole to be divinely animated, and believed that visible celestial bodies were embodiments of intelligible beings. Ancient and medieval astrology, undoubtedly considered a scientific discipline in these periods, was based on calculation and interpretation and grounded in both the Platonic and Aristotelian tradition. There is no doubt that astrology’s emergence exhibited a level of continuity from its Mesopotamian origins to Ancient Greek and later Roman times. Some specialised dictionaries do assume this continuity, even if they do not explain it, including the entry on astrology in the Dictionary of Gnosis & Western Esotericism (Gijsen 2005, 109ff). As the title of the dictionary implies, astrology is placed in the context of Western esoteric movements here, tracing a lineage from Mesopotamian via ancient (Astrology II)

6 John David North argues in the same ‘Philhellene’ vein. See Chapter 4.

24

Introduction

and medieval astrology (Astrology III) to the modern period from the fifteenth to nineteenth centuries (Astrology IV) and the twentieth century (Astrology V). The connecting line drawn between the eras named is the religious character that equates the cosmos and terrestrial phenomena.7 The modern astrology of the twentieth century, then, unlike its depiction in the geocentric paradigm, is closely related to previous eras and shares with them the assumption that there is a correlative relationship between humans and the cosmos, or between celestial and terrestrial phenomena.8 This form of representation refers to this study’s key concern  –​tracing the stages of astrology’s philosophical and religious foundations from its origins to the present day. What this dictionary of gnosis and Western esotericism fails to mention, however  –​and which also falls outside of its scope –​is the discussion regarding the relationship between astrology and science in the modern age. This aspect will form an important part of this study.

c) Religion –​ Science –​ Astrology As explained above, the objective of this study is to understand astrology in the respective eras both as part of religious worldviews and as part of a scientific understanding of nature and the world (or rather, as part of a knowledge base founded on certain rational and empirical methods). This includes a critical analysis of modern assessments of astrology that seize on one or both of these aspects and challenge it for various reasons. The conclusion that astrology can be interpreted as both a religion and a science is not new, as an observation by orientalist Franz Boll (1867–​ 1924) highlights. In his text Sternglaube und Sterndeutung (‘Belief in and Interpretation of the Stars’), first published in 1926, Boll establishes the

7 “Throughout the ages, the astrological view of the universe and of the nature of the relation between celestial and terrestrial phenomena has been essentially religious in nature, and it still is”. (Van Gijsen 2005, 110). 8 “The similarities between older and contemporary forms of astrology typically concern the generalities of this class of divination. Thus, older and newer astrologies share the assumption that there is a correlation between celestial and terrestrial phenomena”. (Hammer 2005, 137).

Introduction

25

‘Sinn der Astrologie’ (‘Meaning of Astrology’), which is the title of his fourth chapter: Astrology wants to be a religion and a science at the same time –​that is what defines it. (Boll 1926, 72)

Boll’s overarching definition principally applies to astrology in the ancient world and the Renaissance. For him, astrology is typically: the idea of a great unity of the universe, which also comprises human life. It finds its purest and most consistent expression in the pantheistic worldview of the ancient Stoa, which therefore had to be astrology’s great guardian because its entire conception of physics coincided with it. In this view of the world, a divine hand designs and animates the entire universe. (Boll 1926, 77)

This definition from Boll includes the idea that astrology fits the worldviews of all ancient cultures that assume a cosmos animated by divine beings and forces, an assumption that first took on a unified philosophical character in Plato’s cosmology and then reached its zenith in the Stoa. Boll notes that even Goethe’s plea for astrology in Poetry and Truth still rests on a pantheistic worldview (Boll 1926, 67ff). Building on this, modern astrology’s main branches can also be examined as to the extent to which they aspire to be a science and a religion at the same time. Not only that, determining the dividing line between religious and scientific fields of discourse essentially marks the conflict lines in discussions about astrology from the nineteenth century to the present day. The correlation between religion and science is not only an element constituting ancient astrology: part of modern astrology’s identity is its attempt to reconcile religious (spiritual, transcendent) interpretations of the world with scientific methods to the greatest extent possible. When Franz Boll also presents the framework for a further study here, naturally using the terms astrology, religion and science requires more precise clarification from a perspective of the study of religions. For him, astrology is the expression of the unity of the universe; religion is presented as a theistic worldview (of which the pantheistic worldview is a variety); and science is an ancient philosophical understanding of physics, which in this case is Stoic. In line with Boll’s definitions, then, all three terms are contained in Ancient Greek worldviews, but stretch as far as the Renaissance period. The following will attempt to explain the sense in which

26

Introduction

these three key terms are to be understood in order to incorporate modern astrology too. On the one hand, this means satisfying each term’s respective scope of interpretation by era and cultural embedding. On the other, these three key terms –​astrology, religion and science –​need to remain articulate and illustrative in a meaningful way without descending into sterile conceptual relativisations and discourses of interpretation. The key terms in question, then, need to be clarified in a way that makes them discernible as substantial, delimitable cultural achievements while continuing to protect them from too prescriptive and singular an objectification.

What Is ‘Astrology’? The collective term astrology comprises all teachings and practices that calculate the movements of visible celestial bodies, their visible characteristics (brightness, colour, size, trajectory, etc.) and use the spaces, points and time scales calculated from celestial bodies’ movements (signs of the zodiac, constellations, decans, boundaries, monomoiria, ascendent, Medium Coeli, lunar nodes, house systems, etc.) to create a causal relationship with human life, either as an individual biography or a community, as well as with events in history and nature, and that understand this relationship as the work of divine will or spiritual forces. This includes astrological teachings and practices from all cultures, but this study is restricted to the European tradition.

What Is ‘Religion’? There have been countless attempts to define religion, and this study will not add to them. It is more important to understand religion as a substantial concept as well as a broad field of discourse against the background of existing definitions. This means that, on the one hand, the term ‘religion’ –​just like the term ‘astrology’ –​has specific characteristics that are identified as religious. Without such characteristics, any discussion of religion would be nothing more than empty rhetoric. Attempts within the study of religions to tie the term religion down to a term with specific characteristics fail immediately because the discipline designates itself the study of religions. On the other hand, these characteristics need to be general enough to comprise different forms of religion. The task here is to

Introduction

27

comprehend the relationship between astrology and religion in individual historical periods with their respective cultural framework conditions. This connection to a general concept of religion simultaneously exhibits a continuity that accompanies astrology to the present day. This study’s historical approach makes it necessary, then, to bring together different religious worldviews from different periods of European and non-​European religious history under the term religion. This includes early polytheistic cultures in Mesopotamia, Greece and Rome, the religious philosophies of Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus and the Stoa, Judeo-​ Christian and Islamic theologies in the medieval and the early-​modern period with their Aristotelian and neo-​Platonic elements, and modern forms of theosophical and religio-​psychological religion and spirituality in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. All of the above religious worldviews assume transcendental beings and forces with which humans can interact via certain practices. These two characteristics –​the assumption of transcendental beings and forces, and an effort to contact these forces –​form the framework for the definition of religion used here. Religion is therefore broader than Franz Boll’s (pan)theistic definition supposes. The restriction, however, lies in the connection to transcendental cosmic beings and forces forming the basis to label ‘religion’ as such. One such broad yet specific concept of religion in recent years was presented by Martin Riesebrodt, a sociologist of religions, in his text Cultus und Heilsversprechen. Eine Theorie der Religionen. (The Promise of Salvation: A Theory of Religion. in English). Riesebrodt’s intention is to oppose the discussions that cause relativisations and reservations about a Judeo-​Christian prejudged concept of religion with a definition of religion that is as simple as it is comprehensive. Winckler writes: Instead of asking whether Hinduism and Confucianism are religions, we should ask whether these traditions include systems of practices that can be considered “religious” in that they include contact with supernatural powers. (Riesebrodt 2007, 34f.)

This statement regarding Hinduism and Confucianism can also be applied to astrology. Riesebrodt provides the following definition: Religions are practices based on a belief in supernatural powers that can bring and prevent salvation and damnation. (ibid.)

28

Introduction

The connection with astrology is provided in the following explanation remarks: The ‘supernaturalism’ of these forces consists in their being ascribed influence or control over dimensions of individual and social life and the natural environment [...]. Religious practices generally involve culturally prescribed means of establishing contact with these forces or gaining access to them. The meaning of contact or access depends on the respective [...] social and cultural forms of accessibility (Ibid. 113).

For Riesebrodt, this ‘establishment of contact’ or ‘access’ includes ‘divination’, which generally comprises any interpretation of symbols or prophecy aimed at illuminating the meaning and direction of events guided by supernatural forces, which also includes astrology.9 (Gladigow 1990, 226–​228). An exception to this are foundations of astrology based on purely physical effects of celestial bodies (see Chapter 4). Riesebrodt’s definition of religion makes sense in that it contains the entire bandwidth of astrological reflections on celestial deities and cosmic forces that have been discussed throughout astrology’s history. This concept of religion focused on supernatural powers and practices forms a framework to relate astrology through the ages to religion. At the same time, the framework of discourse created in this way opens up the possibility of absorbing additional characteristics from the discourse around a viable concept of religion. This includes the term transcendence, which is elucidated in Chapter 4. This concept of transcendence, oriented towards Thomas Luckmann and expanded on by Niklas Luhmann, is of pivotal importance in understanding modern and particularly psychological-​ symbolic astrology, but it can also be applied to religio-​philosophical and polytheistic worldviews on which astrology is based. Certain existential questions and their answers can also be assigned to this concept of religion. For the most part, there is consensus in research on religions today that the concept of religion is philosophically oriented towards the contingency problem as a field of reference.10 Astrological interpretation

9 Ibid. 113f. Very similarly, Detlef Pollack: “it (the definition of religion) must be so broad that it is able to refer not only to the historically developed religions, but also to pseudo-​religious phenomena such as astrology”. (Pollack 1995, 182). 10 Pollack 1995/​2, 184. Luhmann 2000, Ch. 1, II; 1, IX; 2, I, 4, I; 4, II.

Introduction

29

hence gives answers to questions about the meaning and randomness of existence. In this perspective relating to the philosophy of life, astrological interpretation therefore aims to manage the contingency problem or attempts to manage contingency, with religious implications in each case. This definition, oriented towards Martin Riesebrodt, provides a substantial concept of religion that describes a broad but not arbitrary field of discourse into which astrology is embedded and has been and continues to be discussed.

What Is ‘Science’? The term science is also to be understood in this twofold sense, with its methodological characteristics on the one hand and, on the other, the framework of what science is and what science is not or no longer is. Immanuel Kant understands science as ‘any teaching that is envisaged as a system, i.e. a single entity arranged according to principles. These principles [can] be tenets with either an empirical or rational connection to findings.’ (Kant 1997, 3f). Science is therefore fundamentally an endeavour for knowledge according to certain rules of experience and reasonable transparency, though Kant’s definition would have to be expanded in a modern sense to comprise a certain level of reproducibility and probation of methods and their results, as well as a certain level of consensus among researchers. These general characteristics produce a concept of science that, despite all necessary relativisation, spans cultures and has not lost its validity to the present day. Without the provisions empirical and rational, any scientific methodology and the term science itself would be arbitrary and inoperable, just as the terms religion and astrology would be inoperable if they had no concrete characteristics. This general definition of science as empirical and rational makes it possible to scientifically examine astrology as a historical phenomenon as well as with regard to its own inner logics –​that is, the philosophical and religious foundations that it has assumed as worldviews have shifted. However, what Kant describes as ‘rational and empirical connections’ varies depending on the cultural space and the historical era. Empiricism and rationalism diverge most in terms of the limits of science or knowledge acquisition. Franz Boll references ancient Stoic physics to assume a concept

30

Introduction

of science native to the ancient context that describes a very special, normative epistemology in which the empirical and rational methods that characterise the modern concept of science also involve metaphysical and religio-​philosophical evidence. Such a vast knowledge base also applies to other eras and cultural spaces that can be considered here. Different cultural backgrounds and schools of thought relocate the boundaries drawn on what science (or knowledge acquisition) is, and what belongs to the knowledge base and what does not. Both empirical and rational methods were used to find and protect knowledge in Mesopotamia, Ancient Greece and Rome, and in the medieval and early-​modern periods. At the same time, however, mythological, metaphysical and theological evidence also comes into play and draws the boundaries of the knowledge base differently in each case. In the modern period too, however, subject to the conscious disqualification of metaphysical assumptions from scientific methods, where to draw the line between scientific and non-​scientific remains a source of controversy: Ludwig Wittgenstein distinguishes between ‘meaningful’ and ‘meaningless’ evidence (Wittgenstein 1969, 4003) –​evidence that is tested and proven and therefore earns scientific recognition, and evidence that is not proven and therefore rejected as arbitrary assertions. This problem of demarcation is also evident in the disputes around the topic of ‘experience’ and concrete empirical research into astrology that have been and continue to be led since the twentieth century up to the present day. (See Sections 2.3 and 2.4). Generally, but also in view of the very broad historical framework here, science is envisaged as a wide field of communication. As for Franz Boll’s conclusion that astrology aspires to be a science as well as a religion, this assumed relationship is to be understood as a culturally specific attempt to teach and practise the astrologically interpreted human–​cosmos or nature–​ cosmos relationship through empirical and rational methods as knowledge that is verified and can be applied again and again. This book cannot pivot, then, on examining the scientific validity of astrological interpretations, but rather that astrology discusses and (re-​)negotiates their scientific nature, and in what way it does so. This applies both to astrology’s own empirical and rational requirements –​which in modern astrology in particular are deemed greatly varied and contradictory –​as well as views from outside, which also come to different conclusions about astrology.

Introduction

31

Most significant advocates of astrological teachings, from its origins to the present day, have stated that experience is the principal reason for their engagement with astrology:11 This is a good reason to deal with this point separately and in greater detail in Section 2.4. This is mostly linked to the question of the importance ascribed to experience in justifying astrology. Here, the breadth of the discussion stretches from subjective evidence of astrological interpretation to pronounced empirical methods. While the argument for evidence establishes a subjective coherence in a chart reading, for example, empirical methods are used to measure the astrological significance (or insignificance) of statements. Here, too, though –​and this should be made clear once again –​this book on the study of religions does not aim to either prove or disprove, but rather understands experience as astrology’s inner logic, whether as subjective affirmation or an empirical/​statistical result. This does not require any decision on whether these experiences are true or false, and applies as much to astrology as to any personal experience that is part of a religious confession. This study principally aims to explore the rationales behind astrology throughout its history. This basis makes it possible to understand astrology within the contemporary religious culture of European-​influenced societies as a particular form of expressing religious interpretation of the world, just as this has naturally long been the case with other religious teachings and confessions. System-​theoretical approaches, often used to identify social and psychological processes scientifically nowadays, play a role to the extent that astrology can be understood as an autopoietic system as set out by Niklas Luhmann. With its fundamental tenet of finding meaning, astrology could be considered a special case within the system of religion. Luhmann describes ‘key differences’ that set each system apart from other systems. For astrology, these would be only slightly modified from the ones that apply to religion –​the two concepts of immanence and transcendence. As attractive as this system-​theoretical approach is, it does not help at all in answering the question of whether astrology holds true or not. Do celestial

11 Ptolemy 1980, I, 1–​2, pp. 2–​19. Manilius 1990, I, 58–​65. Kepler 1971, 66, 99. Ring 1972, 160f.

32

Introduction

bodies reflect empirical ‘real’ reality or not? Is there a real correspondence between astrology and a war that actually broke out? This takes the question back to the relationship between astrology and science, and the simple question of empirical verifiability and rational justification. As far as astrology’s conceptual definition throughout extended periods of European religious history is concerned, the different linguistic characteristics and designations –​for individual celestial bodies, for example –​ need to present similarities that are discernible despite their differences. The Mesopotamian Inanna/​Ištar, the Greek Aphrodite, and the Latin Venus are all associated with completely different stories in their respective local narratives. However, they also contain similar key characteristics –​sexual love, vegetative fertility, and a need for balance and harmony, which persisted throughout the ages with only few modifications. Astrology relies on these key characteristics. A conceptually viable similarity between the mythical figures of Inanna/​Ištar via Aphrodite to Venus can therefore establish kinships, described as ‘family resemblances’ by Ludwig Wittgenstein.12 This also applies when the narratives around mythical figures from Mesopotamia are completely different in late antiquity because the key characteristics remain the same, and the same goddesses are assigned to the same physical planet (which today we call Venus). With these definitions of astrology, religion and science as a basis, this study aims to showcase astrology both in a linear way throughout its history (diachronically) as well as lingering on focus points for its philosophical and religious foundations in the respective discourse of different times and spaces. This opens up the possibility of finding an answer to the continuity hypothesis provided here: That is, why astrology was able to exist throughout European cultural and religious history from its origins to the present day –​not just as a diffuse popular belief, but as a system of teachings and practices with its own inner plausibility that continues to endure even in educated circles. In a more general sense, the aim is to understand astrology as a fascinating, multifaceted cultural phenomenon that has significantly influenced this European cultural and religious history –​more than

12 Wittgenstein 1953, §§ 64–​71. Wittgenstein refers to a ‘network of overlapping and intersecting resemblances’ (§ 66).

Introduction

33

its scant regard in modern study of religions and public opinion would suggest. As an intersection between scientific and philosophical, anthropological and social, religious and psychological topics, astrology was and remains a way of posing and re-​answering key questions about human existence. This also applies to modern-​day discussions, often subject to heated debate, in which astrology often marks the limit of rationality and a way of taking responsibility for one’s own life.

Structure and Reasoning This study is divided into five main chapters. Chapters 1 and 3 form the crux of its argumentation. Chapter 1 explores astrology’s two key structural elements  –​the analogous relationship of correspondence between the cosmos and humans and between the cosmos and terrestrial nature. Chapter 3 is dedicated to the second key structural element –​a belief in the divinity of celestial bodies and the cosmos as a whole. Following on from Chapters 1 and 3, Chapters 2 and 4 include critical discussions of astrology’s assumptions from scientific perspectives that refer to these structural elements (Chapter 2) and with regard to the question of astrology’s origins and foundations in order to highlight completely different features (Chapter 4). The analogous system of correspondence (Chapter 1) was first developed in Mesopotamian omen astrology. It endured into the early-​modern period against the background of a geocentric model (Section 1.1). While the shift away from this geocentric model brought a shift in the perspective of the spatial relationship between the cosmos and humans/​nature, the counterpart system in astrology endured, as Johannes Kepler’s contributions corroborate (Section 1.2). In modern, twentieth-​century astrology, the work of Carl Jung and its application to practical astrology by Thomas Ring provided cosmic-​spatial correspondence with an additional psychological and symbolic element that leans heavily on the astral mythology of the ancient world (Section 1.3). These three historical periods and their worldviews regarding the relationship between the cosmos and humans/​nature also exhibit culture-​based discontinuities, but they apply this analogous counterpart relationship to an extent as a continuum and a

34

Introduction

sine qua non of astrology in the respective new perspectives on the cosmos, humans and nature. It becomes clear from these three central eras in the foundations of astrology that the theoretical concept of counterparts is very often backed up with an allusion to experience. Linking this theory with experience also suggests that astrology was the subject of scientific discourses in the modern period. Chapter 2 is dedicated to this topic. Numerous renowned philosophers and science theorists have commented on astrology in response to the theoretical and experience-​ related foundations that astrology claims. Selected contributions from Karl Popper, Theodor W. Adorno and Paul Feyerabend are presented and commented on critically (Section 2.3). The discussion of empirical approaches must be treated separately. Mesopotamian omen astrology already developed empirical processes designed to verify the theory of analogous counterparts (Section 2.4.4), but only in the twentieth century was this empirical focus taken up again. The bulk of the discussion material was and is provided by Michel Gauquelin and Françoise Schneider-​Gauquelin’s study. First presented in 1956, this study aimed to provide statistical arguments for the theory of astrological correspondence, provoking a discussion that is still ongoing (Section 2.4.3). The argument for experience is made in every era without any empirical requirement, and was also put forward in the modern period by non-​astrologers such as physicist Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker to confirm the analogous correspondence between the cosmos and humans/​ nature (Sections 2.4.1 and 2.4.2). The third chapter expands on the second fundamental structural element  –​how the system of analogous correspondence is embedded in vital, intelligible and religious concepts of the cosmos, humans and nature. These broadly religious concepts form astrology’s second sine qua non from its origins to the present day. The most important characteristic in this spiritual basis of astrology is the belief in the ‘divinity’ of celestial bodies (if we generally understand vital, intelligible forces to be ‘divinity’). The different forms that this belief can assume are first represented using several examples from the ancient, medieval, early-​modern and modern periods (Sections 3.1–​3.7). These statements do not begin with concepts of astral and natural religion in Mesopotamian omen astrology, but in late antiquity with Plotinus’ cosmology, as celestial bodies’ polytheistic,

Introduction

35

personified divinity can be taken for granted in the ancient cultures around the Mediterranean and need not be explained specifically. On the contrary, Ancient Greece and Rome were also familiar with religio-​and natural-​philosophical concepts of the cosmos that provided astrology with additional foundations for a relationship between the cosmos and humans interpreted in the philosophy of nature and religion alongside the mythological concepts. Along with others, Plotinus specifically gave religio-​ philosophical arguments for the foundations of (his) astrological teachings in contrast to popular astrological practice (Section 3.2). As the history of religious cosmologies progressed, personal (anthropomorphic), religio-​ and natural-​ philosophical concepts of the divinity of celestial bodies and the cosmos shifted, but not in the sense of a degree of abstraction increasing linearly, but mixed in perspective depending on the occasion and the individual exponents’ ideological backgrounds. These different forms of intelligible concepts of celestial bodies also include the ‘divinity’ of ‘empty’ spaces (including the signs of the zodiac) and geometric points (including the Midheaven), which are key to astrology. It can be seen here that astrology, alongside ancient astral mythologies, has also produced its own concepts of the vitality and intelligibility of the cosmos (Section 3.9). The range of religious interpretations of the cosmos once again throws up the question of a concept of transcendence for the study of religions. This concept may also apply to these discussions about the divinity of celestial bodies (Section 3.8). Chapter 4 considers a completely different foundation for astrology that is almost antithetical to Chapters 1 and 3, presenting philosophical concepts that aim to either prove (Claudius Ptolemy) or disprove (Pico della Mirandola, John David North) the astrological relationship between the cosmos and humans through a physical effect of celestial bodies. Here, too, the lineage stretches from ancient times via the early-​modern period to the present day. It is particularly interesting here to look at the difficulties that arise in justifying astrology through physical effects starting from ancient times, then in the early-​modern period, and above all in modern times. Philosopher and science historian John David North’s scientific criticism is particularly significant for modern astrology. He exclusively considers astrology’s origins and foundations at the periphery of a physical observation of nature and, to some extent, as a misunderstood science.

36

Introduction

North bases this on astrological texts tied to Aristotelian meteorology that therefore suggest the end of astrology grounded in science. Chapter 4 is intended to be a critical analysis of the scientific and finally geocentric paradigm, and attempts to uncover this paradigm’s reductionist flaws. Finally, Chapter 5 places astrology in the context of modern societies. It starts by considering the structural elements from Chapters 1 and 3 to explore astrology’s social forms, its hermeneutical principle (Section 5.1) and its connection to modern forms of religious interpretation (Section 5.2).

Selecting and Restricting Sources This book aims to justify the continuity hypothesis that astrology has remained justified for such a long period of time, in particular beyond the shift away from a geocentric model, to the present day. This raises the question of the appropriate sources that plausibly and substantially corroborate this thesis without the sheer quantity of sources becoming chaotic. The aim is not to simply add up as many sources substantiating astrology’s continuity as possible, but to paradigmatically highlight selected, significant examples from the most important turning points in its history. The following criteria inform the selection of sources: –​ As high a degree as possible of reflection on the relationship between humans/​nature and the cosmos; –​ As high a degree as possible of well-​considered embeddedness in existing religious, scientific and social worldviews; –​ Authors whose impact and prominence in their respective periods is as great as possible; –​ A pronounced history of reception within astrological tradition; –​ As broad appreciation as possible in today’s discourse both on astrology and cultural studies. The above framework aims to limit the quantity of sources selected. While necessary, this does mean that some sources that might expect consideration will be excluded. Only one source will be consulted, however, if other sources from the same period also exhibit similar arguments. The medieval and early-​modern periods, for example, present an array of astrological texts with a Jewish, Christian (reformatory and Roman Catholic) and Islamic background, most of which are blended with and

Introduction

37

embedded in Hermetic, neo-​Platonic or Aristotelian cosmologies and natural science. There are similarities, however  –​both between the quantity and characteristics of celestial deities, and in the extent to which they are respectively embedded in monotheistic theology. The celestial deities’ characteristics are equivalent in each case because they were adopted from Greek and Roman traditions; celestial bodies are assigned to a specific god in a structurally equivalent way. If Thomas Aquinas, for example, understands the spirituales substantiae (spiritual beings) that control the corpora caelestia (physical celestial bodies) (Section 3.1.3) as instruments of God’s will and justifies astrology in this way, then these ‘spiritual beings’ are equivalent to celestial angels or celestial intelligences in Jewish and Islamic astrology, which are also based in monotheism. Modern Christian astrology as put forward by Benedictine monk Gerhard Voss, for example, also falls under this equivalence of celestial beings (see Section 3.7). Even Carl Jung’s theory of archetypes as a basis of a modern psychological astrology also belongs to this sphere of equivalent celestial beings when he borrows the archetypes from Platonic tradition and considers them ‘ideas of God’ (see Section 1.3.1). The same applies to Thomas Ring’s ‘principles of organic being’, which take effect in the cosmos and are linked to Plotinus via Friedrich Schelling’s concept of a ‘world soul’ (see Section 1.3.2). To borrow Wittgenstein’s phrase, these equivalent interpretations of celestial bodies have already been described above as ‘family resemblances’. The aim is not to suggest that Thomas Aquinas’ ‘spiritual beings’ are the same as Jung’s ‘archetypes’ and Ring’s ‘principles’. Carl Jung and Thomas Ring would not describe celestial bodies as God’s angels. However, there is consensus on the idea that visible celestial bodies display characteristics of a specific intelligence derived from ancient mythological descriptions. From an astrological perspective, the celestial bodies are related to one another in their different forms and languages. Wittgenstein’s ‘family resemblances’ match astrology’s key concepts excellently, particularly in their historical development and evolution. The sources selected in Chapter 3 (Celestial Deities and Intelligible Nature) follow this pattern of ‘family resemblances’ to comprehend astrology’s underlying continuity across a long period of time despite all the discontinuities in the details. These ‘family resemblances’ apply just as much to the texts that use an ‘analogy between the cosmos and humans’

38

Introduction

(Chapter 1) as a theoretical foundation for astrology. There are certainly discontinuous developments here, particularly when the spatial analogy of below and above (humans and the heavens) is complemented by a psychological perspective of inside and outside, but the basic analogous structure remains intact. Texts that aim to prove or disprove astrology via a ‘physical effect of celestial bodies’ form a sub-​group of their own (Chapter 4). The ‘family resemblances’ in this group of texts lie in the scientific approach and its establishment of causal physical effects. The respective understanding of nature varies depending on the era, however. Ancient teachings on the four elements’ cosmic influence are indeed compatible but not congruent with modern concepts of the influence of sunlight or the Moon’s gravitation. These relationships are linked by the equally causal physical influence of celestial forces. Modern astrology presents a different kind of problem in selecting sources: While the psychological-​symbolic reinterpretation of astrology in the twentieth century can clearly be recognised as a perpetuation of the European tradition, the not-​insignificant influence of esoteric astrology in the sphere of theosophical teachings would imply that modern astrology can be attributed to a great extent to an influence from Indian sources, forming a new, independent form of interpreting the world and life astrologically. It is necessary here, however, to precisely differentiate the sources that provide the basis for the theosophical astrologers working in the European sphere (particularly Alice Ann Bailey and Alan Leo). In the context of astronomy and horoscopes, the British astrologers Alice Ann Bailey and Alan Leo cited in this study (Section 3.3) focus entirely on sources from the European tradition. This applies to the naming and astrological meaning of the planets (Leo 1997, I, 1, 34), the calculation and meaning of the houses (ibid. I/​5f), the classification and meaning of the zodiac (ibid. I, 7 and III, 20–​22), the calculation and meaning of the planets’ aspects (ibid. I, 8), and Ancient Greek teachings regarding the elements (ibid. I, 9). Even the criteria for more nuanced astrological interpretation are taken from the European tradition: applying aspect, rising sign, hard aspect, soft aspect, angular houses, stellium, dignity, debility, retrograde (ibid. III, 23), etc.

Introduction

39

Terms like ‘logos’/​‘logoi’, ‘planetary logoi’ and ‘solar logos’ are even more critical here, and lean on Greek philosophy and cosmology. It should be underlined that this Greek designation for the spiritual beings and the animation of celestial bodies and the cosmos is used far more often than the Indian term deva, which is also used indiscriminately for planetary deities in astrology with a theosophical influence. Helena Petrovna Blatavsky, co-​founder of the Theosophical Society, and her texts relating to astrology present a similar case. Blatavsky names Chaldean, cabbalistic, Ancient Egyptian and Ancient Greek sources especially often and, in relation to the intelligibility of celestial bodies, she almost exclusively provides sources from the European tradition. In Volume III of The Secret Doctrine, the chapter The Souls of the Stars solely refers to ‘planetary archangels’ in the Jewish and Christian tradition, and names key astrological texts including Ancient Egyptian sources written by Hermes Trismegistus and Petosiris and Nechepso, Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos, the Babylonian astrologer Berossus, who worked in Greece, and Thomas Aquinas, as proof of a belief in planetary deities (Blavatsky o.J., III, 332–​ 344). Blavatsky’s Law of Correspondence is also a bedrock of astrological interpretation and a ‘hermetical rule’ originating in Ancient Egyptian tradition. She only includes Indian sources to explain major cosmic cycles as part of Hindu and Buddhist tradition, but these are not relevant to the philosophical foundation and practical application of astrology. (Blavatsky II, 1–​11 and 321ff). Blavatsky’s preference for the Oriental-​European astrological tradition is evidenced by the following quote: Primitive Occult Astrology was on the decline when Daniel, the last of the Jewish Initiates of the old school, became the chief of the Magi and Astrologers of Chaldea. In those days even Egypt, who had her wisdom from the same source as Babylon, had degenerated [...]. Still, the science of old had left her eternal imprint on the world, and the seven great Primitive Gods reigned for ever in the Astrology and in the division of time of every nation upon the face of the Earth. (Blavatsky III, 342).

In terms of teachings on karma and rebirth, which play a key role in esoteric astrology, Blavatsky deviates from a recourse to the Oriental-​European tradition and principally refers to Indian sources, which she links to the Jewish Kabbala. (Blavatsky I, 621; II, 118). This is a new, complementary addition to twentieth-​century astrology.

40

Introduction

This astrology, with its theosophical influence, is therefore embedded in cross-​cultural ‘esoteric knowledge’. Astrology’s particularity lies in the fact that it was mostly preserved in early Oriental and European cultures, from which it came to justify astrology’s European tradition. This makes esoteric-​theosophical astrology part of the European tradition, simply expanded with its reception of teachings on karma and rebirth.

1 The Structure of Astrology I:  An Analogy between the Cosmos and Humans A frequent objection to modern astrology’s credibility is that its foundations are bound to a geocentric model. As is to be expected, modern astrologers are resolute in retaliating against what they consider a reductionist assumption. To explain the relationship between the cosmos and humans within the framework of modern astronomical understanding, they either provide spiritual foundations from Platonic or theosophical teachings or they do without theories and simply refer to an analogy of symbolic forms as laid out in ancient celestial mythologies. Physical theories  –​as far as can be seen, at least  –​have only rarely been provided since the start of the twentieth century and are mostly abandoned as unfeasible. British librarian and astrologist Richard Garnett (1835–​1906) called for limiting the search for physical causes to justify astrology, but this call was never heeded. Garnett writes:  ‘Astrology is a physical and verifiable science or it is nothing.’ (Knappich 1988, 304; Stuckrad 2003, 301). The end of the nineteenth century saw a great many reflections on whether astrology could be explained via a magnetism operating in the cosmos. At the start of the twentieth century, too, hypotheses were also presented that aimed to reduce the relationship between celestial bodies and human life to electromagnetic and other physical forces (see Section 4.3). All of these theories aiming to provide scientific explanations were not convincing because there were not enough empirical or theoretical grounds to substantiate these hypotheses for the foreseeable future. The remote effect of the outer planets on an individual person’s destiny makes such hypotheses highly improbable within the knowledge base of science, which is why most present-​day astrologers choose to focus on their practical application instead of scientific explanations. German astrologer Michael Roscher, for example, writes: ‘I do not think [...] that a scientific explanation of astrology [...] is tenable.’ (Roscher 1989, 33). Another German astrologist, Thomas Ring, observes that: ‘The belief in celestial influences (meaning physical effects) contradicts everything we know

42

Astrology in European Religious History

about celestial bodies and their effectiveness.’ (Ring 1972, 179). If there are no scientific explanations, astrology should not establish any facts but instead use mythical images. This is the sense in which astrologist Ernst Ott writes: ‘Interpreting horoscopes is not an exact science. It’s an art, a symbolic language and a creative method. Astrology never describes what exists and what is happening, but rather the inner meaning of goings-​on.’ (Ott 1996, 132). However, this focuses on coherence between astrological statements that are experienced subjectively and are possibly also comprehensible empirically, but nonetheless lack a theoretical foundation. Most present-​day astrologers are not particularly optimistic about the chances of finding a scientifically viable theoretical foundation to explain the interdependency between humans and the heavens. For this reason, modern astrology falls back on a model that has described the interaction between the cosmos and humans in different variations since ancient times  –​the analogy of humans and the cosmos.13 In theory, this analogous human–​ cosmos relationship is not taken any further. In practice, it points to experience, which would provide sufficient grounds to do so. For the most part, there is consensus regarding this in modern astrology, as was the case with astrology’s origins in Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt. As opposed to causality, analogy means that celestial bodies and their movements do not have an influence on people and events, but that people’s traits and events’ characteristics reflect the traits and characteristics that correspond to celestial bodies’ mythological and natural-​philosophical descriptions, making the relationship between the cosmos and humans/​nature a mirror image. At first sight, this explanation is not necessarily plausible. It appears unfounded due to aspects that, owing to their combination, seem unrelated, like whether the planet Mars in a particular position is associated with the outbreak of a war. War is a characteristic of human action that has no causal relationship with the characteristics of the planet Mars except in name. The picture is different if a system of correspondence is used as an analogy. Returning to the ancient astrological sources, it becomes clear that this analogy between humans/​nature and the cosmos is embedded in a mythological nomenclature and worldview. The upper level of the

13 For example: Ring 1972, 106. Roscher 1989, 33–​36. Hürlimann 51989, 17.

The Structure of Astrology I

43

cosmos is inhabited by divine beings which operate there; humans act as these beings’ reflections on the lower level, Earth. If the planet Mars, for example, is considered the home of the Roman god of war, then the planet’s outer characteristics (movement, position, colour) make the deity’s ‘behaviour’ analogous to humans’ behaviour. Oriental and ancient cultures connected the two levels of reality –​the upper (divine) and the lower (human) level –​in this way. The analogous correlation between celestial bodies and humans is key to understanding modern astrology. A prerequisite for this analogy is its embedding in polytheistic, religious worldviews from ancient times. If this system of correspondence also applies to the cosmos and humans in modern astrology, these are also bound to concepts that require intelligible celestial bodies. The question now is how this link between analogy and intelligible concepts of celestial bodies can be justified today under modern astronomical and anthropological conditions. It is necessary to look at astrology’s Mesopotamian beginnings to provide clarification here. These were the basis for this analogous system founded on Mesopotamia’s polytheistic cosmology. The way this analogous correlation between the heavens and Earth applied into the early-​modern period and all the way to the time of the radical shift from the geocentric to the heliocentric model remains to be explained. Only then will it be possible to explore the question of which models of interpretation modern, nineteenth-​and twentieth-​ century astrology has to offer.

1.1. Astrology in the Geocentric Model The first question to answer is how the analogous system of correspondence was structured within the geocentric model and how it was embedded into certain religious concepts. As the geocentric model remained dominant from astrology’s Mesopotamian origins to the early-​modern period with Nicolaus Copernicus and Johannes Kepler, it is sufficient to depict astrology’s beginnings and its offshoots in the sixteenth century. Academics concur that the origins of later European astrology lie in the ancient cultures of Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt. Opinions differ on the weighting that corresponds to the two traditions. In ancient times, Egypt’s contribution was considered preeminent: Many ancient astrological

44

Astrology in European Religious History

writers, including an array of texts signed Hermes Trismegistus and Nechepso-​Petoiris, considered Egypt the birthplace of astrology. Actual findings are sparse, however, and mostly date to Greek and Roman times, making their actual authorship unverifiable. In his work Tetrabiblos, one of the most influential astrologers of the Roman Imperial period in the second century CE, Claudius Ptolemy, refers to both the Egyptian and the ‘Chaldean’ (Mesopotamian) tradition (Ptolemy 1980, I.20, 90–​97 and I.21, 98ff). This is not the case with sources that indicate authorship in Mesopotamia. The wide range of clay tablets found, which date back to Sumerian times, provide an exceptionally clear and comprehensive picture of astrology and astronomy’s emergence. Both traditions indicate a geographical division in which humans and nature form the lower level, and the cosmos –​inhabited by celestial bodies and deities  –​forms the upper. They emphasise different features, however:  the Egyptian tradition divides what appears to be the Sun’s orbit into sections that are the basis of ‘decans’, or sectors measuring 10º each. The planets then travel through these physically empty spaces. In contrast, Mesopotamian tradition deals more with the planets and systematically calculates their movements and angular relationships to one another. However, both traditions consider both the ‘empty’ spaces in the heavens and the celestial bodies themselves to be inhabited by deities. Ancient philologist Wilhelm Gundel discusses a ‘deification of spaces’ in the Egyptian tradition, where not only are the decans spaces inhabited by deities, but also the well-​known twelve signs of the zodiac, which measure 30º each and overlap with the decans. Decans and signs of the zodiac are overlapped in turn by ‘terms’ (from the Greek for ‘limit’, τὸ ὅριον) with different dimensions and the special characteristics of certain gods. The 360 individual degrees of the ecliptic, called ‘monomoiria’, are also governed by gods of fate. The celestial sphere that is the ecliptic is therefore divided up in this way into sectors that are inhabited by gods with certain characteristics. (Gundel 1936, 135f). The Mesopotamian tradition is also familiar with this spatial division of the heavens, namely into the well-​known signs of the zodiac representing 30º sections on the ecliptic. Here, though, the focus is on systematically calculating the planets.

The Structure of Astrology I

45

Both traditions consider spaces and planets the manifestations of divine beings. Above and below are levels of reality that are spatially and spiritually correlated: The gods act above, and humans and nature’s animated beings act correspondingly below. What happens above also happens below. ‘As above, so below’ is a Hermetic dogma of Egyptian origin and can be found in the medical discipline of iatromathematics, a compound of the Greek terms for ‘medicine’ (ὁ ἰατρός –​ho iatros) and ‘astronomy (‘mathematics’). This discipline divided the human body from head to toe into different regions corresponding to the 36 decans in the sky, while internal organs corresponded to the planets. If the Sun, Moon or one of the planets crossed through a decan and activated its characteristics, this simultaneously activated the corresponding regions of the body to trigger illnesses or lead to recovery. In the sixteenth century, Paracelsus applied this medical practice, based on the analogy between the cosmos and humans for his natural healing. The correspondence between the cosmos and humans/​nature applies equally to Mesopotamia, where a broader range of sources permits a deeper insight.

1.1.1. Mesopotamian Omen Astrology The current state of research makes it impossible to overlook the more comprehensive body of astrological sources found from Mesopotamia. Astrological omen collections are especially abundant. The most significant of these is the Enuma Anu Enlil collection. This material also shows that the development of astrology is almost impossible to separate from that of astronomy. At the same time, the enormous significance of calculating astrology in Mesopotamia can also be seen in its spread beyond Babylon’s borders into Egypt and the entire cultural sphere of Ancient Greece and Rome. Mesopotamian astrology, then, characterised the entire ancient world. The oldest known text on the systematic observation of the planets over an extended period of time is the Venus tablet of Ammisaduqa, a cuneiform text mainly containing astronomical observations of Venus along with divinatory interpretations of them. The particularities of this tablet include its meticulous, unbroken collection of information about the positions and

46

Astrology in European Religious History

visibility of Venus over the 21 years of the reign of Ancient Babylonian king Ammisaduqa (1646–​1626 BCE) and for each observation noted also names the event that corresponds astrologically to this position.14 This Venus tablet belongs to the larger complex of the astrological series Enuma Anu Enlil (EAE), which comprises 70 astrological omen tablets and a total of 7,000 astrological omens. (Brown, 2000, 107; Brack-​Bernsen, 1997, 9). The 70-​tablet series is widely available in many transcriptions and often only in part in libraries around the East. The complete EAE can be found at Assyrian king Ashurbanipal’s (669–​627) comprehensive library of clay tablets in Nineveh. (Rochberg-​Halton 1988, 6; Brown 2000, 17ff). The Venus tablet in the omen series –​number 63 –​has been translated and commented on frequently since its discovery as it contains valuable information on the early history of astronomy and astrology, as well as precise dating of Ancient Babylonian history. It was first translated in 1870 by Henry C. Rawlinson and George Smith.15 The following excerpt comes from a more recent translation, by Erica Reiner and David Pingree in 1975. In the month of Šabatu (in the ninth month) on the fifteenth day, Venus (Ninsianna) disappeared in the west; it remained invisible in the sky for three days. On the eighteenth day of the month of Šabatu, Venus (Ninsianna) became visible in the east again: springs will open, Adad (the god of rain) will bring his rain, Ea (the god of the earth) will bring his floods, messages of reconciliation will be sent from king to king. In the month of Arahsamna (in the eighth month) on the eleventh day, Venus (Ninsianna) disappeared in the east. She remained invisible in the sky for two months and N days. In the month of Tebeti (in the tenth month) on the Nth day, Venus (Ninsianna) became visible in the west: The harvest of the land will prosper. (Reiner/​Pingree 1975, 29)

In the Sumerian tradition, the goddess Inanna is called Ninsianna when referring to the planet Venus. The visible, physical planet is also distinguished from Ninsianna in many texts and called Dilbat (the Herald).

14 Reiner, Erica/​Pingree, David: ENUMA ANU ENLIL. Tablet 63: The Venus Tablet of Ammisaduqa, Malibu: Undena Publications 1975. 15 Rawlinson, Henry/​Smith, George: Tablet of Movements of the Planet Venus and their Influences, London: British Museum 1866.

The Structure of Astrology I

47

Dilbat represents the purely physical manifestation or the home of the goddess Inanna. (Edzard 1965, 81). This draws a textual and conceptual difference between the spiritual being and her visible appearance as a celestial body, and this distinction between the deity and visible celestial body also applies to other celestial deities. The fifth tablet of the Enuma Elish, which describes creation in the epic, reports how Marduk made the planet Jupiter his home and also created ‘celestial locations’ for the other gods.16 This distinction between physical celestial bodies and divine beings is most significant when the astrological effect of the planet Venus or Jupiter is not bound to their physical appearance but ascribed to an expression of divine will. The Latin designation for the planet Venus is used to this day as the home of the goddess of the same name and corresponds to the Sumerian designation Ninsianna/​Inanna (Akkadian: Ishtar) in the omen texts. Both cases are the names of goddesses related by similar characteristics and ascribed to the same planet in their respective mythologies. The goddesses’ key characteristics are fertility, blossoming nature and love, and ambivalently fluctuate between peacemaking and bellicose aspects. The goddess Venus’ warlike side, however, was only a background concern in Roman descriptions. Now to explain the two texts: Their structure is mostly the same, beginning with an astronomical observation in the first part and followed in the second part by events that are considered analogous to the astrological observations. The mathematician and historian Bartel van der Waarden highlights how the schematisation of the omens led to universalised conditional statements. These statements are worded as follows: Text 1: ‘If in the month of Šabatu…: then springs will open’. Text 2:  ‘If in the month of Arahsamna ….:  then the harvest of the land will prosper’.17

The conditional statements’ protasis (condition) and apodosis (conclusion) form a clamped-​down correspondence between the events observed.

16 Lambert 1994, 587, Tablet V, 1–​8 and 593, Tablet VI, 39–​44, see also 583, Tafel IV, 11. 17 Van der Waerden Vol. 2, 1966, 35.

48

Astrology in European Religious History

In this form, they represent a general pattern that described the observation at hand and could also be applied to new observations. Back in 1911, the Assyriologist Carl Bezold explained the emergence and structure of these conditional omen statements as follows: We can conceive of the emergence of these texts as follows: Numerous observations of the sky [...] and at the same time or immediately afterwards, telluric and then also political occurrences and events led to a causal relationship between the two, as well as them being generalised and written down. ‘If (whenever) Subject S has Attribute A in the sky, the corresponding Subject S on Earth will have Attribute A.’ (Bezold 1911, 37)

There have been many new findings and translations of omen texts since Carl Bezold, and these all demonstrate the structure of correspondence between the events observed. Science historian Lis Brack-​Bernsen from the University of Regensburg describes the structure of omens very similarly to Carl Bezold: ‘If Sign A occurs, the following event B will happen.’ (Brack-​ Bernsen 1997, 9). British assyriologist David Brown (1968–​) also explains this in the same way: They [omens] are made up of two parts, a protasis and an apodosis: ‘If x, then y’. The protasis is usually introduced by ‘If’ and describes some celestial event. The apodosis gives the prognostication for the land, the economy, the king, or the people. (Brown 2000, 108)

Astrology’s origins therefore clearly draw an analogous relationship between celestial bodies, humans and nature, from which it is possible to extract predictions of political events in the broadest sense. Assyriologist Francesca Rochberg-​Halton (1952–​) also expressly highlights that such predictions were not based on a perceived influence of celestial bodies on terrestrial events, but an analogous correlation between celestial and terrestrial events: In Mesopotamia, prediction of future events from celestial phenomena was obtained not on presumption of stellar influence, but rather, celestial phenomena were thought to indicate or warn of mundane events. Predictions were linked to signs, in accordance with specific principles whereby mundane events were simply associated or correlated with the occurrences of natural phenomena. (Rochberg-​Halton 1988, 8 und 145)

The Structure of Astrology I

49

This analogous thinking is a thread through all of the Enuma Anu Enlil omen texts, which forms a canon spanning almost 2,000 years that has frequently been copied, commented on, added to, and used for predictions. The crucial point for the religious aspect of these omen texts is the following: When Carl Bezold describes ‘subjects’ on both levels –​the celestial and the terrestrial –​here, he is referring to spiritual substances: On the one hand, celestial deities and, on the other, humans and divine beings operating in nature. This correspondence therefore describes spiritually motivated communication on both levels, in line with the Greek and Latin meaning of the term ‘ana-​logia’ as agreement in a speech act. The actions of Insianna/​Inanna as the goddess of fertility and peace correspond to the actions of the natural deities that take care of fertility on Earth, Adad and Ea. The actions of this peacemaking goddess also corresponds to the actions of the kings who exchange messages of peace. The analogy is therefore related to the actions of spiritual beings, also manifested parallelly in natural phenomena and humans’ social behaviour. The temples of many celestial deities –​known as ‘ziggurats’ –​were also used as towers to observe the movements of celestial bodies, making clear that this analogous relationship was a parallelism of events, guided by gods.18 This analogy between the heavens and Earth, related to the actions of the gods, becomes even more striking if the mythological background of Sumerian and Babylonian religion is taken into consideration. The Enuma Elish, recorded on seven clay tablets, is the most significant epic poem of Babylonian times, and describes the creation of the cosmos and humans in this analogous way. The end of Tablet IV and Tablet V describe the god Enlil/​ Bel’s creation of the visible cosmos and how the gods received their homes in celestial bodies and sections of the sky. Lastly, Tablets VI–​VII report how the head god Marduk, whose planet was Neberu (Jupiter), decided to create humans to serve the gods: ‘I want to create a being that will be called “human”, I want to create humans, on whom the gods’ hardships will be laid.’ [...] He created humans from the blood

18 One example is the step-​shaped temple of the moon god NANA in the Sumerian city of Ur, built at the time of King Ur-​Nammu in the 21st century BCE.

50

Astrology in European Religious History and put it at the service of the gods, liberating the gods.19

The creation of humans and human society now reflects the community of gods. The hierarchy of the gods, with Marduk acknowledged as the head god, corresponds to the hierarchy of human society with a king at its head. The society of the gods is a model and ideal, and human society is a faithful image of it that also includes nature. This creation account represents the divine and human level as a relationship that points directly to dependent social behaviour. The analogous, correlative relationship between the heavens and Earth is described here in a divine act of creation from which the function of omen interpretation in Babylonian society is derived. These omens were primarily directed at kings as advice. Normally, the only topics dealt with regarding events on Earth were a king or prince’s policy, the workings of a state or its population, and natural phenomena relevant to agriculture. Most omens are labelled at the end of the text with the name of the astrologer who wrote the text. In many cases, a direct warning note is included for the king. One text, for example, which links an observation of the full moon with the approach of an enemy, closes with the sentence: ‘May the King know and consider this, from Rashi-​ilu, Servant of the King, the Elder!’ (Jastrow 1912, 480). Such celestial omens were therefore daily reports to the king or city lord to allow them to prepare for certain political and meteorological events and take any precautions possible. While the events were indeed given through signs from above, precautions could be taken In this respect, the analogous relationship between heaven and Earth also allowed margin for free choice. To understand modern astrology, at this point it is essential to emphasise analogous correlation from a sociological perspective. As above, so below double events in which the protagonists were the gods above can be understood sociologically –​if we only consider the direction of the action –​as a reflection from below towards above. In this perspective, the level of the celestial deities reflects occurrences in nature and society in the visible sky, or assigns human stories to celestial bodies. Following the logic of Ludwig Feuerbach’s projection theory, which is critical of religion,

19 Lambert 1994, 592, Tablet VI, 6–​8, 33–​34.

The Structure of Astrology I

51

omen interpretation could be a projection of societal circumstances on a secondary, imaginary level of reality, placed and fulfilled in mythical images –​the level of celestial bodies and their deities. However, this is only the case if it describes the reversibility of the direction of action. Omen astrologers believed in the opposite direction of communication:  from above to below. As will be shown, this change of perspectives is fundamental in understanding an astrology that has existed from Copernicus to the present day. However, it is also crucial that both perspectives –​from above to below as per the creation myth, and the sociological from below to above –​ retain the analogous, correlative structure. All that changes is the respective direction of the being that is the primary actor. This causes the withdrawal of an influence of celestial bodies conceived physically in the sense of an effect from heat, light, gravitation, etc., before the spiritual act of communication between both levels. This thinking in analogous, correlative levels that form the basis of omen texts can already be considered astrology in this form. It continues without changing its basic structure in Greek and Roman astrology, albeit with deeper philosophical and cosmological reflection. The correlation of deity figures above and humans/​nature below receives a theoretical foundation through Plato’s image/​ideal theory, which is abolished in a cosmos considered homogeneous. Francesca Rochberg-​Halton also rightly points to this: Whereas Greco-​Roman astrology set up an opposition between the celestial and sublunar realms, the Babylonians seem to have reviewed the realms of heaven and earth not as dualistic opposites, but as counterparts that could be freely associated with each other within a unified view of the universe. (Rochberg-​Halton 1988, 8).

The contrast between heaven and Earth justified by Plato as a theory of ‘image’ and ‘ideal’ finds its space modified in Aristotle’s teachings on the planetary spheres, where the celestial bodies are now layered on top of each other, and the planets’ physical influence receives more weight. This is reflected especially in Claudius Ptolemy’s astrology (second century CE). Nothing changes, however, in the communication process between above and below, as Aristotle continues to consider the planets the physical embodiments of ‘celestial intelligences’ that communicate with

52

Astrology in European Religious History

animated nature and rational humans in a certain way (see Chapter 4). Marcus Manilius’ Stoic-​influenced astrology (first century CE) and Plotinus’ neo-​Platonic-​influenced astrology (third century CE) are again tied to the Platonic analogy of counterparts in a spiritually united cosmos. The analogous, correlative structure developed in Mesopotamian omen interpretation therefore remains intact from the ancient world and medieval period into the early-​modern period.

1.1.2. Astrology in the Early-​Modern Period In the early-​modern period, astrology had a preeminent role as a means of interpreting societal developments, religions and confessions, politics, an understanding of nature, and practical day-​to-​day matters. First, a summary of the sources available:  Early-​modern astrology followed the tradition of Ancient Greek and Arabic-​Islamic astrologers from the medieval period. Philipp Melanchthon obtained the Latin-​Greek edition of the Tetrabiblos by ancient astronomer and astrologer Claudius Ptolemy in 1553, which became hugely significant and a standard reference text at many universities.20 The standard texts that circulated at all major European universities also included two texts by the Arabic astrologer Abu Ma’shar from Baghdad (787–​886 CE). The first text  –​Introductorium maius in astronomiam (Introduction to Astrology) –​was translated from Arabic into Latin by John of Seville in 1133 and by Herman of Carinthia in 1140. Herman’s translation was printed in 1489 and in Venice in 1495 and 1506, exhibiting the growing interest in astrological texts in the early-​ modern period. The content of Abu Ma’shar’s Introduction to Astrology (as with Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos) was significantly influenced by Aristotelian natural

20 Ptolemaeus, Claudius: De Praedicationibus Astronomicis cui titulum fecerunt Quadripartitu, Grece et Latine, Libri IIII, Philippo Melanchthone, Basilea: Ex officina Ioannis Oporini 1553. Greek-​English: Ptolemy, Claudius: Tetrabiblos (Greek-​ English), ed. and transl. by Frank Egleston Robbins, Cambridge/​ Mass.: Harvard University Press 1980. German: Ptolemy, Claudius: Tetrabiblos, ed. by Reinhardt Stiehle, Mössingen: Chiron 1995, reprint of the edition by M. Erich Winkel (transl.), Berlin: Linser 1923, translation of the edition from 1553 ordered by Philipp Melanchthon.

The Structure of Astrology I

53

science. In this way, it seems it did not aim to justify astrology using an analogous relationship between the cosmos and humans/​nature, but via celestial bodies’ physical movements, which are propagated from the ethereal sky through the atmosphere, from above to below. In this way, they have an impact on even the most subtle natural occurrences and societal processes. Strictly speaking, this physical influence of celestial bodies only forms the outer framework of what, in essence, is an analogous communication system. This is because nature below has an innate tendency to ‘recognise’ the nature of above and to shape its own movements according to the principle of similarity in Abu Ma’shar’s astrology. This process of recognition is the foundation of teachings on the four elements and temperaments in which an element below recognises its like element above and imitates it to an extent. The basis of this natural-​philosophical astrology is that the celestial bodies above consist of ‘intellect’ and body, while nature and humans below are also ‘intelligent’ in addition to their corporeality. A detailed justification of this analogous natural philosophy follows in Chapter 4. Here, the focus is first on the general use of astrology in the early-​modern period. Abu Ma’shar’s second text, De magnis coniunctionibus (On the Great Conjunctions), is more relevant to the practical application of astrology on society and history than his Introductorium. It draws on key aspects from Jewish astrologer Mashallah from Basra (740–​815 CE) and Arabic astrologer Al-​Kindi from Baghdad (800–​873 CE). (Loth 1875, 265). Abu Ma’shar’s revised edition, however, was the one translated into Latin by John of Seville, becoming a standard astrological text at the European universities of the medieval and early-​modern periods. This text appeared in print at the same time as the Introductorium in 1489 in Augsburg, and then again in 1515 in Venice.21 What was special about this eighth-​and ninth-​century Arabic astrology was that it applied the conjunctions of the two slow outer planets Jupiter and Saturn to historical events, known as great conjunctions.

21 Houtsma 1987,100. On the translation and dissemination of both Ma’shar’s writings in Europe, cf. Lemay 1962, 3–​39 and 425–​427. On Arabic astrology, cf. Sezgin 1979, 98–​199. Masha’allah ibid. 102–​108, Al Kindi ibid. 130–​134, Abu Ma’shar ibid. 139–​151.

54

Astrology in European Religious History

Mesopotamian omen astrology and the ancient world were already familiar with mundane astrology, which dealt with interpreting peoples, states, natural disasters and other major events. Arabic astrologers’ interest in mundane (terrestrial) events was more nuanced, however, and was focused on the lifetimes of dynasties and power relations, social institutions like the foundation dates of major cities, and in particular the development, duration and downfall of cultures and religions. Mashallah is said to have established the foundation date for the city of Baghdad in 762 CE on behalf of Caliph al-​Mansur in this way. A prophecy can be traced back to Al-​Kindi, Abu Ma’shar’s astrological teacher, regarding the length of Arabic hegemony in Persia, which he estimated at 693 lunar years –​37 years from the actual end of Arabic rule over the Persians, according to Fuat Sezgin.22 The birth and Hijrah of the prophet Muhammad, as well as the return of the Mahdi, were also the subject of astrological interpretation in this vein. Jewish astrologers later built on the foundations of this Arabic astrology to calculate the coming of the Messiah, and Christian astrologers the coming of the Antichrist:  In 1414, Pierre d’Ailly announced that the Antichrist would appear in the year 1789 in his text Concordantia astronomiae cum theologica. The text appeared in print in Augsburg in 1490.23 The aim of these methods from Arabic astrology, then, was to

22 If one calculates the Arab domination beginning with the fall of the last Sassanid ruler Yazdegerd III in 651 until the fall of the Abbasid caliphate in 1258 in Baghdad by the Mongols, then according to Fuat Sezgin a period of 656 lunar years results for the Arab domination, from which the deviation of the prediction from the real events is then 37 lunar years (Sezgin 1979, 130. Cf. Loth 1875, 270, 283–​308). 23 Alliaco, Petrus de: Concordantia astronomiae cum theologica. Concordantia astronomiae cum historica narratione. Et elucidarum duarum precedentium, Augsburg:  Erhard Ratdolt 1490, capitulum IX. Cf. Smoller, Laura:  History, Prophecy and the Stars. The Christian Astrology of Pierre d’Ailly, 1350–​1420, Princeton:  Princeton University Press 1994, 101–​107. Carion, Johann: Prognosticatio und Erklärung der grossen Wesserung, auch anderer erschrockenlichen Würchungen/​so sich begeben nach unseres lieben herrn geburt funffzehenhundert un xxiiii jar, Leipzig: Wolffgang Stöckel 1522, fol. Aiii –​ Bi.

The Structure of Astrology I

55

understand events in world history by way of analogy with certain cyclically occurring planetary positions. Islamic historian Ibn Khaldun (1332–​ 1406) provided an astronomical summary of the great conjunctions in the second volume of his main work, al-​Muqaddimah (Ibn Khaldun 1967, II 186ff), producing the following image of a three-​stage cycle: The first stage is the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn, which according to their mean motion recurs every 20 years.24 This ‘small’ great conjunction recurs cyclically twelve times every triplicity, meaning within the three trigonally connected signs of the zodiac with the same element. If a conjunction takes place in the fire sign Aries, then, the next will be in the fire sign Sagittarius, and the one after in the fire sign Leo. An approximately three-​ degree deviation in the trigonal movement causes the Jupiter-​Saturn conjunctions to change element after 240 years and to take place twelve times (another 240 years) in the earth signs Taurus, Virgo and Capricorn. 240 years later, they will move into the three air signs and finally into the three water signs. This type of 240-​year cycle is called a ‘medium’ great conjunction, but even this medium cycle of 240 years (though it only lasts 200 years in mean motion) is subordinate to another: Every 960 years (or every 800 in mean motion), the conjunction returns to its starting point in a greatest conjunction that completes a cycle of conjunctions between Jupiter and Saturn. Ibn Khaldun summarises the astrological interpretation of these three astronomical cycles as follows:  Small conjunctions may indicate the appearance of a political or religious rebel or demagogue or the downfall of a city or urban culture. Medium conjunctions indicate larger-​scale changes such as political upheavals or a change of leadership in an empire. Great

24 These conjunctions among the slow-​moving planets were already known in Babylonian astronomy and astrology. Since about the 4th century B.C. it was possible to make predictions of the planetary cycles of Jupiter and Saturn and to interpret them astrologically (d’Occhieppo 2003, 31, 52, 111–​115). But it was not until the Arab astrologers of the 8th and 9th centuries that the differentiated doctrine of the Great Conjunctions was formed from this.

56

Astrology in European Religious History

conjunctions indicate a fundamental renewal and replacement of political and religious relations with the emergence of new dynasties or peoples. Other planetary constellations, in particular the position of Mars (like in the above example of Arabic hegemony over Persia) and cyclically recurring solar/​lunar eclipses and the individual signs of the zodiac in which the conjunctions took place are often incorporated into the interpretation of Jupiter-​Saturn conjunctions. This produces Jupiter-​Saturn conjunctions, which can be considered more or less significant depending on their character. This parallelisation of planetary cycles with historical events alone makes clear that Arabic astrologers based their astrological interpretation of history on an analogous principle. It was possible to use these large intervals of time to apply the semantic correlation of celestial bodies’ characteristics and events on Earth to expected incidents in the distant future, involving astrology in theological concerns regarding salvation too. However, the religious motivation of the interpretation, which was already characteristic of Mesopotamian omen astrology, can also be found in Arabic astrology. Although Richard Lemay emphasises the Aristotelian and therefore nature-​philosophical influence on Arabic astrology in his text Abu Ma’shar and Latin Aristotelism in the Twelfth Century (Lemay 1962), the essential religious and analogous content is unmistakable. The Latin text De magnis coniunctionibus was originally titled ‘Indications of Superior Personalities’ (Garin 1997, 38), which unambiguously refers to spiritual substances as ‘inhabitants’ of celestial bodies. Spiritual substances above indicate what is manifested below as a human-​ made historical event. If it is possible that polytheistic elements entered Arabic-​Islamic astrology, it can also be established that Islamic as well as Jewish and Christian astrologers were able to easily incorporate this astrology into their own monotheistic religions:  Ancient celestial deities are viewed as part of creation –​as spiritual substances, angels or demons that indicate and execute God’s will. The (aforementioned) text with the telling title ‘Concordantia astronomiae cum theologica. Concordantia astronomiae cum historica narratione’ (‘The Concordance of Astronomy with Theology. The Concordance of Astronomy with Secular History’) builds on Abu Ma’shar’s De magnus coniunctionibus, which was widespread in the Latin-​speaking

The Structure of Astrology I

57

Western world. This Christian astrological interpretation of the future, which was widely read and commented on around Europe, was written by Pierre d’Ailly, chancellor of the Sorbonne and co-​initiator of the Council of Constance from 1414 to 1418. The text’s title already indicates the social interpretation of astrology in the early-​modern period. Its programmatic title is targeted at the astrological interpretation of Christian society and sets out two analogous levels –​ astronomy above, and Christian salvation history or secular history below. The text’s content is a historical retrospective from the creation of the world to the emergence of Moses and the birth of Jesus until the date of its first publication, in 1414 CE. D’Ailly also looks ahead with a historical prognosis of religious development from 1414 to 1692 and finally 1789, which he interpreted as a gradual development of the Christian end time. Its primary concern is the emergence of the Antichrist, established in the Bible as signalling the beginning of the end time. Following on from previous forecasts of the end time, it considers the Antichrist’s emergence bound to a previous schism in the Church, lending particular apocalyptic resonance to the Council of Constance, which began in 1414 and was aimed at resolving the Western Schism. It was not until 1692 and 1789, however, that the end time was to be heralded by the birth and public appearance of the Antichrist.25 This historical outline from the beginning of the world to its end forms the below, terrestrial level, which corresponds to the above, heavenly level

25 The crucial passage on the coming of the Antichrist is the following: ‘And after that, the fulfilment of Saturn’s ten circulations will occur in the year of our Lord 1789, and that will occur after the mentioned conjunction (of 1692) in the course of around 97 years [...] In the light of the above, we can say that, if the world continues to exist then, which only God knows, many great and wonderful changes will take place in the world –​mostly related to law-​making and sects [...] From this one can conclude in all probability that the Antichrist will come at this time with his law and his damnable sect, which will be extremely hostile to and opposed to the law of Christ. It is not possible to have absolute certainty regarding the moment of his coming in human form, however one can state that he will come around this time.’ D’Ailly 1490, Ch. 60. See Smoller 1994, 105 f Anm. 12–​18. The Antichrist is named in the New Testament in 1 John 2:18, and his eschatological coming in 2 Thessalonians 2, 3f.

58

Astrology in European Religious History

with its periodically recurring movements of Jupiter and Saturn, which indicate divine will. Essentially, there are three levels here: God and His plan of salvation for humankind constitute the uppermost, transcendental level; the celestial bodies as signs and markers of the plan of salvation form the middle level; and the terrestrial, historical level –​where salvation will take place –​is at the bottom. D’Ailly’s text shows just how deeply astrology’s analogous thinking had penetrated cultural and theological thinking and political struggles in the Church in the early-​modern period. The astrological symbolism of the great conjunctions provided a metalanguage that could be read as an analogy to theological developments and historical events. Astrology in the early-​modern period gained enormous significance in educated circles on this basis. It also achieved an importance that is almost impossible to overestimate through the rapid spread of pamphlets or ‘flyers’. These annual forecasts for agriculture and medical, political and religious issues began to circulate from the end of the fifteenth century, and intensified dramatically in the first decades of the sixteenth century. These flyers, called almanache, calender, practica or prognostica, were mostly limited to just a few pages and focused on day-​to-​day issues. They were particularly widespread in Germany and Italy, but also appeared in all other European countries. Flyers resulted from Johannes Gutenberg’s invention of the printing press in Mainz around 1440. They differed from books in that they were printed with movable letters and had a small number of pages –​generally between three and twenty –​meaning a high circulation volume could appear in a short period of time: some flyers reached a circulation of 3000–​ 4000 copies. The majority were printed in vernacular languages with an appellative, cautionary and evocative tone in order to reach broad sections of the population. Flyers were not only used by astrology; it was possible to propagate reformatory thinking in particular, but also important social topics, in this way.26 Of the astrological flyers, the most noteworthy were those that drew on teachings about the great conjunctions to deal with events with crucial

26 For journalism using flyers, see also Köhler 1986, 153–​175.

The Structure of Astrology I

59

significance for society. The hotly discussed small conjunction in Scorpio in 1484 seems to have portended such a significant event, made all the more explosive by the fact that six of the seven classical planets were simultaneously passing through the same sign of the zodiac. This conjunction was said to indicate a rebel –​a minor prophet –​who would unsettle the Church and radically reform it.27 The great conjunction of 1524 in Pisces, with all seven planets in the same sign, signified a further crucial forecast. Following its first publication by the mathematician, astronomer, and later rector of the University of Tübingen, Johannes Stöffler (Philipp Melanchthon’s teacher) and the astronomer Jakob Pflaum in 1499, this ‘flood forecast’ was made and debated again and again until 1524 in an array of sensational flyers, sometimes furnished with woodcut titles and text illustrations. More than 60 authors were involved in this movement, publishing over 160 flyers.28 Flyers on the ‘flood forecast’ and the ‘Minor Prophet’ were the subject of intense debate at all major European universities, noble courts and bishoprics. They also occupied the Imperial Diet in Trier as well as humanists and clerics, from Philipp Melanchthon in particular and even Martin Luther himself on the reformatory side to influential Roman Catholic astrologers including Luca Gaurico, professor of astrology at the Vatican’s Sapientia University. Astrology was therefore a key cultural component in every stratum of early-​modern society.29 Some woodcuts make the reference levels above and below particularly distinct. These woodcut titles outlined the topic of the forecast, as in the following illustration related to the ‘flood forecast’ for 1524.

27 Middelburg, Paulus von:  Prognostica ad viginti annos duratura, Coloniae:  Koelhoff 1484. Lichtenberger, Johannes:  Die weissagunge des Johannis Lichtenbergers, mit einer Vorrede D. Martini Luthers, verdeutscht durch Stephanum Rodt, Wittenberg: Hans Lufft 1527. A list of the many prints and HSS by Johann Lichtenberger in: Kurze 1960, 81–​87. A list of the woodcuts in: Talkenberger 1990, 473ff. 28 For a list of prints and manuscripts on the flood forecast, see Talkenberger 1990, 433–​471. 29 Fischer 1988, 188–​ 205. Warburg 1920, 81ff. Zambelli 1986, 239–​ 263. Talkenberger 1990, 154–​335.

60

Astrology in European Religious History

Figure 1:  Leonhard Reynmann: Practica for 1524.

The Structure of Astrology I

61

The above is the title page of a practica, an astrological forecast written by mathematician and astrologer Leonhard Reynmann in 1523 and printed in Nuremberg.30 The topic of the image, and the flyer as a whole, is the coming together of Jupiter and Saturn along with the remaining five planets in Pisces. This concentration of planets lent extra explosive significance to the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn. The two reference levels are clear in this woodcut, where the top half of the image depicts a fish, symbolising Pisces. A slender human figure lying down at the back of the fish symbolises one of Pisces’ key astrological characteristics, poverty. The seven planets can be seen coming together at the front of the fish: in classical astrological teachings, each planet represents a social class or profession: The Sun is the emperor, Jupiter is the pope and ecclesiastical rule, and Saturn represents the peasantry. An armed band of peasants in the bottom-​left of the image is moving towards the emperor, pope and clergy in the bottom-​right, and the war drum is being beaten on the hill in the background. The centre of the image shows a flood-​like flow of water destroying a town. This woodcut makes the analogous relationship between heaven and Earth clear to see: The planetary deities collide in the upper part of the image, while the lower part shows the collision between the social classes assigned to the respective planets. As Pisces represents poverty above, it is the poor people below who take the initiative in this uprising. As per ancient teachings on the elements, Pisces above is also a water sign, which is why there will be a flood below, the result of the planets’ cumulative force activating the water. This interpretation of 1524’s great conjunction was the subject of all flyers in one way or another. The public character of these discussions from the very beginning is revealing: there were many reactions in Italy and Germany starting from 1499, first from scholars, nobles and clerics, and later among the masses too. The first publication was followed by a chain reaction of reprints and additional practicae by many mathematicians and astrologers from

30 Reymann, Leonhard:  Practica über die grossen und mannigfeltigen Coniunction der Planeten die im Jahr M.D.XXiiij erscheinen un ungezweifelt vil wunderparlicher ding geperen werden. Marck Lötigs Golts, woodcut 13,3 x 12,6 cm. 4°. Nürnberg: Hieronymus Höltzel 1523.

62

Astrology in European Religious History

almost every renowned university in Europe. These were frequently dedicated to popes, emphasising the importance attributed to this forecast. In 1512, the Imperial Diet dealt with the problem so intensively that Elector Louis V demanded additional assessments of Italian papal astrologer Luca Gaurico’s forecast by German astrologers Johannes Stöffler and Virdung of Hassfurt. The forecasts differ in the severity of the events predicted, but not in their essential message: Radical changes were imminent in both society and nature.31 Leonardo da Vinci, Albrecht Dürer and others were impressed.32 Dürer had furnished his watercolour ‘Dream Vision’ with an additional comment in which he expressed his great fear of a flood. As far as the events prophesied are concerned, the ‘Great Deluge’ never did occur in 1524, but the German Peasants’ War did break out in this year. Looking at this forecast against its historical backdrop, it becomes clear that it came at a time where the prevailing mood was generally apocalyptic. It was a period of political unrest throughout Europe, partly due to the expansion of the Ottoman Empire. Peasant revolts had already occurred in several European countries in the fifteenth century and at the start of the sixteenth century. The Church had been in turmoil since at least 1517 with the onset of Reformation, while the spiritual world had been turned on its head more widely by Nicolaus Copernicus’ discoveries, the invention of the printing press, and Christopher Columbus finding America. Astrological flyers and their interpretations accompanied and propelled these developments, and also gave them the character of an overarching celestial will. Principally theological interpretations were decisive for applying this analogous configuration of celestial bodies and events to events that were either feared or already afoot. Actual events, and those indicated in the stars, were inserted into the theological context of Christ and the Antichrist. Celestial bodies provide signs for repentance and reversal, and should be understood as signalling the end time within Judeo-​Christian salvation history, a message implied in almost all commentaries on the flood forecast, such as Johann Carion’s (1499–​ 1537) more in-​ depth

1 Fischer 1988, 196–​225. Talkenberger 1990, 154–​169. 3 32 Sheets 12378 and 12383 of Da Vinci’s Codex Windsor. See Fischer 1988, 206.

The Structure of Astrology I

63

forecast. Carion was the court astrologer to Elector Joachim I of Brandenburg. He interpreted the great conjunction very similarly to Pierre d’Ailly’s concordantia, sometimes even verbatim. His 1522 text was titled: Prognosticatio und Erklärung der Großen Wässerung: Auch anderer erschrockenlicher würckungen/​so sich begeben nach Christi unseres lieben Herrn Geburt 1524/​Durch mich Magistrum Johannem Carion von Buetikheym/​Churfürstlicher Gnaden zu Brandenburg Astronomum/​mit fleissiger arbeit zusammengebracht/​ganz erbermlich zu lesen/​In nutz und warnung aller Christgläubigen menschen. (‘Prognosticatio and Explanation of the Great Deluge:  Also Other Terrible Effects to Befall the Year of Our Lord 1524, by me, Magistrum Johannes Carion of Bietigheim, Astronomer by the Grace of the Elector of Brandenburg, Diligently Compiled, Deeply Miserable to Read, to Aid and Warn All Christian People’, Carion 1522, title page). The title already provides a clue to the text’s apocalyptic nature. Carion refers to prophecies by Hildegard of Bingen and Joachim of Fiore, the Biblical end-​time figures Enoch and Elijah, the New Testament and the birth of the Antichrist, and the Second Coming of Christ, as well as admonitions to turn back and pray, tracing a theological and historical thread that is accompanied by the great conjunctions. Surveying the discussions and the texts in circulation with their woodcuts, it is clear that the forecast events were by no means understood at an academic level as purely natural events subordinated to a physical influence in the way the Sun influences the seasons and the Moon the tides. No physical influence could cause developments of historical importance, trigger reforms and revolutions, herald the Antichrist and deliver ‘true’ Christianity. Aristotelian cosmology and natural science are also a component of all astrological prognostica and practicae, but only as an outer framework inside which spiritual forces are at play and propel social, cultural and religious developments. Here, the actors are ‘celestial intelligences’ and ‘intelligent’ nature. Hubertus Fischer’s following conclusion on the forecasts in early-​modern flyers is therefore a misunderstanding:  ‘The key premise of astrology was constituted by Aristotelian teachings on the physical influences of celestial bodies on sublunar bodies.’ (Fischer 1986, 194). The issue of a sociological perspective is even more apparent in early-​ modern astrology than Mesopotamian omen interpretation and the sources

64

Astrology in European Religious History

and knowledge available regarding the early-​modern period are much more comprehensive, permitting a more nuanced image. The woodcut by Leonard Reynmann in Figure 1 alone suggests that events either already afoot or feared or hoped for in the future on the level of social reality were being projected onto the heavens, that is, from below to above. The astrologers of the early-​modern period therefore appear to have been diagnosticians of current events, just like the omen advisors of Mesopotamia. As scholars, they were simultaneously mathematicians and often theologians and humanists who saw the necessity to reform church and society or, like Catholic astrologer Luca Gaurico, they positioned themselves in opposition to ‘false’ reformist endeavours, where they believed they had to identify the signs of a collapse of faith.33 In this sociological sense, the prognostica can be viewed as a public relation and externalised self-​observation of ongoing and expected processes in society. This diagnosis is externalised in that the level of celestial bodies serves as a meta-​plane from which past, ongoing and predicted (those arousing fear as well as hope) events are placed in a transcendental, Christian horizon. The astrologers, therefore, are part of a society that observes itself to a certain extent through its theological and social developments and interprets itself in a framework of astrological symbolism. The perspective of theological and spiritual interpretation of societal processes from below to above naturally does not apply to the astrologers’ perspective. It is not the great conjunctions and myths about celestial bodies, ascribed to social classes, that are projections of terrestrial events, but rather the opposite: Societal events are mirror images of cosmic, transcendental actors, illustrations of spiritual beings’ volition. Human actors do not act themselves; they merely re-​act to cosmic volitions. Or, to put it in theological terms: Celestial events are the agents and transmitters of God’s work of salvation, and the actions of humans, determined by sin, are correlated to them.

33 In 1525, in a letter to Pope Clement VII, Gaurico had predicted Martin Luther’s downfall as a heretic from his birth chart („Luteri perfidiam pessumdabis”). Cf. Warburg 1920, 16, notes 23 and 24.

The Structure of Astrology I

65

Astrology’s justification in the early-​ modern period, then, can be described as follows: The forces in action on both levels –​the celestial and the terrestrial –​are spiritual forces that manifest themselves above as celestial bodies and below as humans, who in turn act as part of a cosmic whole analogously to spiritual and divine forces. If humans act against God’s work of salvation, they are called to order by natural disasters; when they accede to the tide of salvation, they are carried along. Nature, too, is drawn into this spiritual work and considered a living organism that is also subject to spiritual-​divine forces. In line with astrological thinking, the entire history of humanity and nature is a tide of events accompanied by and, to a certain extent, controlled by spiritual forces in the cosmos, which astrological forecasts can do nothing but comment on. In this sense, astrology aims to understand the interplay of the cosmos and humans first as analogous and correlative, and secondly as controlled by spiritual and vital forces. That this cosmos model had no problem in existing for millennia, from its Mesopotamian beginnings to the early-​ modern period, can be traced principally back to its system of correspondence founded in mythology and theology. It was also made more plausible by the geocentric model, in which the relationship between above and below was very easy to comprehend spatially. This therefore makes it almost inevitable that the question should arise of how this analogous two-​level relationship behaves when the spatial distribution is no longer that of above and below. Does this not put an end to the analogy principle and, with it, astrology as a whole? As demonstrated above, modern criticism of astrology indicates this. However, even early-​ modern astrologers, already contemplating the new heliocentric model, were conscious of this problem. None other than Johannes Kepler paved the way for a modern, post-​Copernican astrology.

1.2. Astrology in the Heliocentric Model 1.2.1. Johannes  Kepler In his text Tertius Interveniens, Johannes Kepler (1571–​1630) asks how astrology might remain valid in a heliocentric model. He answers the question of whether the shift from a cosmos considered geocentric to heliocentric had put an end to astrology as follows:

66

Astrology in European Religious History This doubt  –​whether it is the sky or the Earth that moves  –​does not make astrology suspect because it does not concern astrology. It is sufficient for an astrologus to see how rays of light first come from the Orient, then the centre of the sky and finally the Occident before disappearing. It is enough to know when two planets are seen together and when they face each other [...]. What interest is it to the astrologus –​or rather to natura sublunaris (sublunar nature) –​how this happens? In truth, as little as the farmer wonders how summer turns to winter but nonetheless orients himself to the seasons. (Kepler 1971, 65, No. 40)

Kepler therefore justifies astrology as a framework of reference between celestial bodies and the Earth independently of whether the Earth below is at the heart of the cosmos. Whether in a geocentric or a heliocentric model, celestial bodies’ positions with respect to Earth are the same. The contemplated angles of the planets in relationship to one another and to the Earth are critical to astrology, lending crucial importance to the sunlight reflected by the planets as carriers of information. The key objection –​that astrology is linked to the geocentric model –​is invalidated for the time being, making it possible to understand why astrology was able to endure beyond the shift away from the geocentric model and why both Galileo Galilei and Isaac Newton worked with astrology without seeing any contradiction with new astronomical findings. This theory of rays of light, overcoming the spatial distribution into one part above and one below, appears to nullify the classic analogy principle. This is only true to an extent, however. The analogous relationship is now justified with an allusion to Aristotle as a spiritual-​mental analogy and participation in which geometry and light as species immateriata (immaterial qualities), in particular, convey information to the material world. Johannes Kepler, convinced that Christian teachings, astrology and astronomy were compatible, established three mutually connected cosmic levels. As for the geometry of dividing the circle, he wrote: From this comes a wonderful enigma –​that nature is God’s image and geometria archetypus pulchritudinis mundis [geometry is the archetype of the world’s beauty]. (Ibid. 91, No. 59)

God, the geometrically structured cosmos, and nature have an analogous relationship to one another. When Kepler refers to celestial bodies as ‘God’s image’, he has the ‘beauty’ or ‘excellence’ (pulchritudo) of their geometric arrangement in mind. He sees the rational, geometric arrangement

The Structure of Astrology I

67

of the cosmos as representative of innate spirituality. Kepler unmistakably follows in Plato’s tradition here, in which geometry arbitrates between God and physical nature. This is the core of the ideology explained by Plato and others through the analogy of the divided line. The harmonious laws of geometry are the ideas of the higher, spiritual world. At the same time, geometry is necessary to acquire knowledge of the higher world and God as ‘geometry compels us to look at intrinsic being’ and is ‘knowledge of the ever-​unchanging being’ and as such ‘a nursery for a scientific head to orient soul activities towards the celestial’.34 Conversely, physical nature in its objectivity –​as represented in the five ideal Platonic bodies –​is a replication of geometry as understood spiritually.35 To an extent, geometry is something spiritual that is inherent to physical bodies, producing a three-​layered correlation between God, the idea of God in geometry, and geometrically structured, physical nature. It is not merely geometry that spiritualises the cosmos, though. The Sun, the physical centre of the planetary system, also has a living force: The Sun itself has a virtutem animalem (living force) through which it provides information. (Kepler, No. 51)

The other planets, however, which only reflect sunlight, also possess immaterial qualities that constitute their characteristics: Each of the five circulating stars, alongside the Sun and the Moon, has an inner light that emanates species immateriata, and they cause a warmth where they meet, though different depending on the various characteristics that flow from their corporis. (Kepler, No. 32).

Kepler considers species immateriata to include qualities and properties that emanate from physical bodies and are absorbed by them. These include light, magnetism and Aristotle’s primary qualities corresponding to the four elements:  warmth, cold, dryness and wetness. These species immateriata therefore build on ancient natural philosophy.

34 Platon Timaeus 527 A–​B. 35 Ibid. 45 A. and 53 A − 56 D. In his early work Mysterium Cosmographicum of 1596, Kepler attempted to determine the distances of the planetary orbits via the five Platonic solids, with the erroneous assumption that the planetary orbits were circular. He later corrected this and developed Kepler’s well-​known laws.

68

Astrology in European Religious History

But what is the relationship between these immaterial forces of celestial bodies and events on Earth? Light is what carries that species immateriata, and Kepler calls it a ‘messenger and vehiculum’: Different inner dispositions and characteristics […] unfurl from the planets and stars and therefore come down to us so that this earthly creature might perceive them, supposing that these characteristics need light as their messenger and vehiculum, or that they come down on their own alongside light, sine tempore (without a specific time). (Kepler, No. 29).

However, the species immateriata do not flow down from the sky as forces to physically affect life on Earth. Kepler’s thinking to explain the relationship between the planets and Earth is consistent with Platonic ideology. The planets can only have an effect through their angular relationships with Earth. Reflected light from the Sun hits the planets and, seen from Earth, creates the perception of certain angles between the planets. These are the aspects that form the basis of astrology. They possess certain qualities that can be harmonious or discordant. In order to be able to record the planet’s characteristics, formed spiritually by geometric angles and driven out of the planets to a certain extent, the Earth also has spiritual characteristics of its own. This lower world or globe has a spiritual nature, capable of geometry, which refreshes itself in the geometric and harmonious connections of rays of celestial light ex instinctu creatoris sine ratiocinatione (by the instinct of the creator without calculation) and stimulates and propels itself to use its powers. (Kepler, No. 64).

The relationship of the planets with Earth can therefore be understood as a kind of communication system based on a spiritual and mental similarity. What applies to the design of the Earth also applies to humans. Just as Earth’s spiritual nature as a whole is stimulated by the cosmos’ spiritual nature, the same goes for each individual human in the formation of their personality: In the first ignition of their lives, when they first live of their own accord and can no longer remain in the womb, humans receive a characterem and a reproduction of the heavenly constellation, which stays with them to the grave. (Kepler, No. 65)

With regard to the pre-​Copernican analogy between humans and celestial deities, representing an analogy of spiritual beings on two different

The Structure of Astrology I

69

levels, essentially nothing has changed. Kepler considers the spatial distribution into ‘above’ and ‘below’ irrelevant because astrology does not primarily place physical bodies and their effects in a causal relationship, but rather understands these bodies’ spiritual structure as analogous. This is a crucial step in providing post-​Copernican astrology with a theoretical justification.

1.2.2. Isaac  Newton In the course of astrology’s development, the understanding of the cosmos also evolved further immediately after Kepler, as made clear by Isaac Newton’s (1642–​1726) cosmology. Newton famously gave a crucial boost to the mechanistic interpretation of nature and the cosmos, but his considerations on natural philosophy also provided a theoretical and simultaneously esoteric-​theological foundation on which a modern astrology, adapted to scientific developments, can be based. It was clearly not Newton’s express intention to justify astrology theoretically. His intensive work with astrology, as with alchemy, was motivated more by practical concerns. It is worth mentioning three points from Newton’s natural-​philosophical considerations here, which he explains in the closing chapter of his main work, Philosophiae naturalis Principia mathematica. The first point is on the relationship between God and creation. Winckler writes: It is the dominion of a spiritual being which constitutes a God [...] and from his true dominion it follows that the true God is a living, intelligent, and powerful being [...] he governs all things, and knows all things that are or can be done. He is not eternity or infinity, but eternal and infinite; he is not duration or space, but he endures and is present. He endures for ever, and is omnipresent; and by existing always and everywhere, he constitutes duration and space. (Newton 1988, 227).

Space and time are the real, created conditions for the physical cosmos, in which God’s ‘spiritual existence’ is always present. God constructs the cosmos with its celestial bodies and laws in this space-​time image of himself. This most beautiful system of the Sun, planets and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful being. And if the fixed stars are the centres of other similar systems, these, being formed in

70

Astrology in European Religious History accordance with a similar plan, must be all subject to the dominion of one; especially since the light of the fixed stars is of the same nature with the light of the Sun, and from every system light passes into all the other systems. (Newton, 226).

The leap from the geocentric to the heliocentric system of planets had to some extent robbed Earth of its central importance. Now, this idea is decentralised even further with Newton’s assumption of a multitude of similar solar systems in the vastness of the universe. All the same, this cosmos continues to be organised and guided by the ‘spiritual existence’ of an omnipresent God, so that all parts are connected. This multitude of celestial bodies in the oneness of the divine leads to a second point for Newton:  The connection between God and natural phenomena is considered so narrow that God and humans/​nature must be similar: For all our notions of God are taken from the ways of mankind by a certain similitude, which, though not perfect, has some likeness, however. And thus much concerning God; it certainly pertains to natural philosophy to make statements about God based on the appearance of things. (Newton 229)

This means that divine being is reflected in the ‘ways of mankind’, while the ‘appearance of things’ mediates. Or the contrary –​what can be seen in the ways of mankind and in nature has its counterpart in God’s spirit. God and humans/​nature are therefore related as an ideal and image. The question remains of whether the ‘appearance of things’ (celestial bodies) can provide information about human relationships. Both  –​celestial bodies and humans –​do indeed share in the same ‘spiritual existence’ of God: the same divine quality moves both. The similarities between God and nature can therefore also be distinguished between nature and humans as far as their ‘spiritual being’ is questioned. Newton does not explore this question of counterparts in nature directly. The homogeneous spiritual basis of the physical celestial bodies, humans and their life circumstances is a pillar of astrology, however, so it is not surprising that Newton also dealt intensively with astrology.36 A third point that supports a theoretical and esoteric-​theological foundation of astrology is Newton’s immaterial explanation of gravity. God’s

36 Berman 1985, 124–​143. Gebelein 1991, 304–​321.

The Structure of Astrology I

71

perpetual, guiding presence cannot exist ‘solely through its capacity to have an effect’, but rather must also be represented ‘by its substance too’ because ‘the whole world is moved in it’.37 Newton assumes this effective substance to be in gravitational force, which he had earlier explained physically. Now he also gives it an immaterial meaning. This gravity that ‘pieces through to the hearts of the planets’ can certainly be understood in its visible effects, but that does not yet explain its ‘cause’. In pursuing its causes, Newton reaches the final point of his esoteric-​theological explanations: And now we might add something concerning a certain most subtle spirit which pervades and lies hid in all dense bodies; by the force and action of which Spirit the particles of bodies mutually attract one another at near distances, and cohere, if contiguous; and electric bodies operate to greater distances, both repelling and attracting the neighbouring corpuscles; and light is emitted, reflected, refracted, inflected, and heats bodies; and all sensation is excited, and the members of animal bodies move at the command of the will, namely, by the vibrations of this Spirit [...]. But these are things that cannot be explained in a few words, nor are we furnished with that sufficiency of experiments which is required to provide an accurate determination and demonstration of the laws by which this electric and elastic spirit operates. (Newton 1988, 230f)

This final sentence ends the book. Both Newton himself and critics of his theory did not reach a conclusion of how this gravity was to be understood:  in the sense of a ‘metaphysical’ or ‘physical’, an ‘occult’ or ‘mechanical’ force. It also makes sense to consider this force in the Newtonian sense as both spiritual and physical, however, given that it mediates between spiritual and physical existence. This final sentence, then, does not mean that the immaterial force relationship between the Sun and planets only pervades these bodies, but also ‘excites sensations’ and ‘moves the members of animal bodies’. The correspondence between God and humans/​nature as well as within nature gains a theoretical explanation of how the information transfer between analogous levels might occur in a natural as much as an esoteric and physical way. Newton’s keen interests in esoteric philosophy, alchemy and astrology only become fully known with the written legacy acquired and published

37 Newton 1988, 228.

72

Astrology in European Religious History

by John Maynard Keynes in 1936. Keynes comments on this interest as follows: Newton saw the entire universe and everything that exists in it as a secret that can be unravelled by applying pure thinking to what appears beyond doubt, to certain mystical clues that God has scattered across the world to permit a philosophical treasure hunt for esoteric fraternity. He believed that these clues could be found in part in signs in the heavens and the qualities of the elements […]. He saw the universe as a cryptogram of the Almighty.38

It is curious that Newton’s scientific and esoteric-​theological interest does not refute astrology, but rather lends it new impetus within the framework of scientific developments. Even if astrology is only mentioned explicitly in Newton’s written legacy and not in his Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, the mechanical and esoteric-​theological explanations of the cosmos nonetheless provide enough information to explain Newton’s interest in astrology. Newton provides an analogous system of correspondence between humans, cosmos and God, as well as a spiritual explanation of gravitational force. These may no longer be systematised, but nonetheless form a coherent foundation of astrology that can exist independently of a geocentric perspective. As is well known, our image of the universe has also developed since Newton: new planets have been discovered and conceptions of space and time have changed dramatically. However, astrologers also attempted and attempt to stay abreast of these changes by building on Johannes Kepler’s Platonic perspective. If early-​modern astrology considered the analogous, correlative system of correspondence as spatial, astrology since the nineteenth century has taken two paths. The esoteric direction continues the spiritual-​divine interpretation of the cosmos as adopted by Kepler. In contrast, a psychological direction justifies astrology based on the works of Carl Jung and others as a psychological-​symbolic analogy, and to a certain extent as a correlation of mental forces inherent to both personality and empirical nature.

38 Quoted by Berman 1985, 124 f. See also Gebelein 1991, 305.

The Structure of Astrology I

73

1.3. Carl Jung and Thomas Ring’s Psychological-​ Symbolic Reinterpretation of Astrology 1.3.1. Carl  Jung Spatial-​external astrology’s modern reinterpretation as psychological and symbolic can largely be traced back to Carl Jung’s (1875–​1961) teachings on archetypes and the collective unconscious. For Jung, the symbols and images of the collective unconscious –​or archetypes –​are unique to each individual human as a wealth of their own experience, but are also the common property of humankind. Jung describes this collective unconscious as follows: I have chosen the expression collective because this unconscious is not individual but communal in nature –​unlike the personal psyche, it includes contents and behaviour patterns that, cum grano salis, are the same everywhere and in all individuals. In other words, it is identical in itself and forms a general mental foundation that is transpersonal and present in everyone […]. The contents of the personal unconscious are for the most part ‘affective complexes’ […]. The contents of the collective unconscious, on the other hand, are ‘archetypes’. (Jung GW 9/​1 51983, 13f).

Carl Jung took the term archetype, which he explains later, from early Christian and Platonic tradition, where the term archetypus referred to Platonic ideas that the Christian authors considered contents of God’s consciousness.39 The theological frame of reference is the Imago Dei doctrine  –​that humans are made in the image of God. Here Jung refers to Philo of Alexandria, who believed that the archetypus was predisposed in humans as the ‘image of God’. Archetypes can therefore be understood in the Platonic and early Christian tradition as ideas that exist as content of consciousness in both God and humans. In terms of intellectual faculty, then, God and humans have an analogous relationship. This is the consequence of Judeo-​Christian teachings on the image of God in humans. The theological aspect does not play a role in Jung’s psychology at first –​the archetypes are simply contents of the human unconscious that

39 Jung here quotes extensively Augustine, Irenaeus, Dionysus Areopagita and the Corpus Hermeticum, in which the Platonic ideas (eidos) are understood as the contents of divine intelligence (divina intelligentia) (Jung GW 9/​1, 51983, 14).

74

Astrology in European Religious History

change into different forms and take the shape of myths, fables, and religious symbols. All kinds of religious symbols are ultimately expressions of the contents of the collective unconscious. This applies as much to the earliest forms of religious nature worship as the ‘Christian doctrine of the Trinity’, the ‘virgin birth’, ‘Indian gods’ and ‘Taoist philosophy’. Supernatural beings are therefore mirror images of collective human experiences. These include the deity figures connected to the stars, which are ascribed certain characteristics. This is how Mars, with its red glow, becomes a projection of the human experience of violence, aggression and force, therefore the god of war. Venus is radiant in the evening and morning sky, hence perceptions of beauty, harmony and art are projected onto it. Jupiter, the largest planet visible in the sky, becomes a symbol of priestly rule, and so on. As for the nature-​oriented religions of early cultures, which derived spiritual forces from their contemplation of the planets, Jung writes the following: It is not enough for primitive people to see the Sun rise and set; this external observation also needs to simultaneously be a mental occurrence –​the Sun and its transformation need to represent the fate of a god or hero that essentially lives nowhere but inside the human soul. All mysticised natural processes, like summer and winter, changes of the Moon, rainy seasons, etc., are [...] symbolic expressions of the soul’s inner, unconscious drama, made tangible to the human conscious through projection –​that is, mirrored in natural events. (Jung GW 9/​ 1, 51983, 16).

In other words:  If these projections had not been endowed with mental content, there would be no external form of religion, no institutions, no doctrines and practices, and no astrology. By manifesting themselves externally, unconscious content becomes conscious and perceptible. In the course of their historical development, religions understood the external, linguistic-​symbolic manifestations as the source of their teachings. The purely ‘mental’ character of these teachings went unrecognised precisely because this psychic unconscious is  –​by its very nature  –​unconscious. This is why it took thousands of years to recognise this error and separate the external object from the ‘mental events’ or, in other words, to return religious teachings to their mental images. It was especially difficult for this process to distinguish between the object and subject in astrology as a special form of projection:

The Structure of Astrology I

75

In the case of astrology, this ‘intuitive science’ was pilloried because it was not possible to separate psychological characterology from the stars. And anyone who today still believes in astrology, or believes in it again, in turn falls into the superstitious assumption of celestial influences, even though anyone capable of calculating a horoscope ought to learn that the vernal equinox at 0º Aries has gradually shifted to the beginning of Pisces as a result of increasing precision. (Jung, ibid.)

Astrology’s symbols are therefore  –​as with all myths and religions  –​ nothing but the content of the human psyche at first. Jung quotes Friedrich Schiller’s Wallenstein with the words ‘In thy breast are the stars of thy fate’ by the astrologer Seni, who directs them at astrology-​obsessed Wallenstein. Jung notes that ‘all of astrology would be sufficient if only we knew something about this mystery of the heart.’ (Jung, ibid. 17). In tracing the celestial bodies’ ‘characteristics’ back to human characteristics, Jung initially appears to be critical of traditional astrology, standing in a long line of religion-​critical projection theory as Ludwig Feuerbach prejudged it for the modern world. The mythologisation of the planets and their ‘behaviour’ in relationship to one another in certain angular relationships, the construction of an ecliptic to a circle divided into twelve houses, and the signs of the zodiac inhabited by living things (zodion) are all a projection and a construction of the contents of human consciousness  –​or rather, as-​yet unconscious contents of human consciousness. It appears that Jung uses this projection theory to write off classical astrology, which inversely attempts to glean events from the stars. Yet it is Jung himself who gives fresh impetus to this traditional astrology. The theoretical prerequisite to astrology as justified anew by Carl Jung is the emphasis on archetypes as contents of collective consciousness. Archetypes are not contents of subjective experience supplanted a posteriori, but a priori principles innate to human individuality. They are practically gratuitous in the human experience, without it being possible to assimilate them through experience or conscious effort. This also applies to astrology’s symbols. The critical question to understand astrology generally is whether Jung’s archetypes have to be understood as forces that reside in levels of human consciousness and are innate to natural objects. This conclusion only springs up because, as shown above, Jung borrows the term archetypus

76

Astrology in European Religious History

from Christian and Platonic tradition. Platonic ideology is set apart from its transcendental understanding of ideas as spiritual ideals of their empirical images. The Christian-​Platonic interpretation likewise considers this attributes of God as transcendental. For Jung, though, these ideas would only transcend the individual plane if empirical indicators could be found for this.

1.3.1.1. Carl Jung’s ‘Case of Synchronicity’ Jung is more precise in his empirical investigations into astrology. He published two texts on the topic in 1952, Synchronicity:  An Acausal Connecting Principle40 and On Synchronicity,41 in which he explains an ‘astrological experiment’ through which he aimed to test out the aforementioned analogous system of correspondence between planets and events on Earth as a psychological reality. If this were successful, it would provide a clear argument that the archetypes really are supra-​individual forces. He took great efforts to devise and conduct the experiment himself with the help of scientists from various disciplines. Its foundation was the hypothesis that there could be a ‘coincidence between horoscope structure and character traits’. As the structure of a horoscope merely depicts the planets’ positions and aspects in relation to Earth, Jung was interested in the analogy between the planets’ mythical descriptions and human personalities. To be able to test out this coincidence, he chose an ‘undoubtable fact’ for the otherwise ‘uncertain character diagnosis’, which he believed was represented by the ‘marital union between two people’. As per astrological tradition, he identified the marital union of two people with the classic astrological union of the Sun and Moon as well as Mars and Venus. The connection between the Sun and the Moon generally represents the archetype of the marital union between a man and a woman; Mars and Venus represent the archetype of sensual love as the sexual dichotomy of male and female. Gendering the Sun-​Moon and Mars-​Venus relationships is nothing more than a projection of the archetypal gender relationship onto external natural objects.

40 Jung GW 8, 41982, 457–​553. 1 Jung GW 8, 41982, 555–​566. 4

The Structure of Astrology I

77

Jung formulates his aim concretely as follows: ‘It would be worth investigating whether married people’s horoscopes feature a greater number of coinciding Sun-​Moon or Mars-​Venus aspects42 than unmarried people’s’ (Jung, ibid. 495). The experiment, featuring a total of 483 marriages and 32,220 unmarried people,43 is not of any further importance at this point, nor is the question of the results’ validity under the rules generally applied to statistical methods today. Jung himself considered the number of cases investigated too small to represent a scientifically proven statistic, but this comparative investigation nonetheless makes clear that significantly more married couples exhibit Sun-​Moon aspects than unmarried ones. As the resulting size was not insignificant, Jung concluded that: If someone had wanted to fabricate this result in order to reconcile it with tradition, they couldn’t have done so any better. (Ibid. 509).

He continues: Our case can be understood as a case of synchronicity:  A combination of coincidences occurs in the statistical material that is not only practically but also theoretically unlikely and that coincides in a striking way with the traditional astrological expectation. Such a coincidence happening at all is so unlikely and therefore so unbelievable that no one would dare predict such a thing. (Ibid. 513f).

The investigation examined a total of 483 married couples, first comparing 180, then 220 and finally 83 married couples with unmarried, random couples. Despite the positive results for astrology, it did not escape Jung that the results from the three segments of the investigation contained curious differences. In the first block, which resulted from entering the statistical material randomly, Sun-​Moon conjunctions were significantly higher for the married couples than the unmarried ones. The second block was dominated by Moon-​Moon conjunctions, and the third by Sun-​Venus-​ Mars aspects. Jung was sceptical and expanded the investigation to include

42 As aspects, Jung only examined the angular relationships conjunction (0°) and opposition (180°). In addition, Jung includes the aspects of the named planets to the horizon axis, because the Ascendant and Descendant play a major role in traditional astrology for “I-​Thou” attachments (Jung GW 8,, 41982, 495). 43 The number 32,220 „results from the number of possible combinations of the horoscopes of married persons taken as a basis” (Ibid. 499).

78

Astrology in European Religious History

a new variant, dividing the horoscopes of all unmarried people into two blocks –​male and female. 300 men and 300 women were then drawn and ‘partnered’ at random. Even these partnerships drawn at random, however, produced a significantly higher proportion of classical Sun-​Moon aspects than the mean value of 32,200 unmarried people that was to be expected statistically. This expanded investigation was modified several more times without any significant change in the results. How can this striking correlation of marriages with constellations be explained if the correlation differs so greatly depending on the test series? Jung concludes that the results suggest the statistical material was manipulated or contrived, which both he and his colleague stress was not done consciously. He does confess to a certain positive expectation, though, and considers this the key to the conspicuous coincidence. According to Jung, there is a correspondence between the material and the psychological condition of the psychologist in expecting a correlation with the stars. The astrologer’s unconscious (in this case, the psychologist Jung and his colleague) ‘contrives’ the coincidence of marriage with the constellations of planets as passed down by tradition because the unconscious harbours this expectation. For Carl Jung, then, this implies that even ancient astrologers applied this expectation to their mythologisation of celestial bodies, bringing about a collective unconscious as a continuum that transcends space and time. (Ibid. 514). For Jung, the key concept to explain this coincidence between expectation and material is synchronicity:  A correspondence between events that are not linked causally but through their ‘concordance’ across long distances and periods of time. This not only applies to astrology, by the way, but to any case of random coincidence: If the analogous coincidence or ‘cross-​connection’ of events cannot be explained causally, the connection is in the parallel events’ concordance. (Ibid. 518)

This coincidence cannot be scientifically proven, even for Jung, so finding a hypothesis that can explain the connection between such non-​ causal relationships remains ‘reserved for subjective measurement’. Jung chooses a hypothesis that ‘the philosophical spirit [named] a mysterious correspondentia of natural events, so a reasonable connection, since time immemorial’. (Ibid.). What he means is an analogous system of

The Structure of Astrology I

79

correspondence that links two events without any causal relationship. If the unconscious constructs the arrangement, the result is that ‘the psyche cannot be pinpointed spatially, or the space is psychologically relative. The same applies to the temporal determination of the psyche or for time.’ (Ibid. 566). The collective unconscious and its archetypes therefore have a character that transcends spatial and temporal bounders of personality and so can operate in the cosmos to an extent. Jung considers this hypothesis a possibility for inner (psychological) circumstances to correspond to external (visible) things, like celestial bodies, producing a common system of information. Jung’s new approach to astrology paves a path that is in no way scientifically confirmed, but that Jung considers convincing enough to see astrology and the synchronicity of events in general as effective. He closes his study by stating that ‘psychology above all cannot afford to overlook these existing experiences’ (ibid. 519). Jung’s approach of taking up the traditional analogy principle in astrology, separating it from the spatially geocentric perspective, and relocating it as an analogy of a picture to psychological content internally was the foundation from which a modern form of psychological astrology was able to develop. Jung himself did not become an astrologer –​the ‘astrological experiment’ was only a tool for him to corroborate the synchronicity of events as a general human experience and to establish it as a property of the human psyche.

1.3.2. Thomas  Ring In the German-​speaking world, it was painter and poet Thomas Ring (1892–​ 1983) who re-​established astrology as an independent discipline based on experiences in its teachings and practice, and went on to work principally as an astrologer himself. His best-​known texts, including Astrologie ohne Aberglauben (‘Astrology without Superstition’, Ring 1972) and in particular his four-​volume Astrologische Menschenkunde (‘Astrological Anthropology’),44 made him perhaps the most important and influential astrologer in the German-​speaking world in the second half of the twentieth century. His modernised approach to a psychological astrology has

44 Ring Vol. I, 61990, Vol. II, 51985, Vol. III, 71989, Vol. IV, 31985.

80

Astrology in European Religious History

been incorporated into the statutes of the German Astrologers’ Association (DAV), the Swiss Astrologers’ Union (SAB) and the Austrian Astrologers’ Association (OEAV). Ring aimed to re-​establish astrology in modern times, doing away with an outdated, deterministic vision of astrology. To do this, he coined the term ‘revised astrology’ (Ring 1972, 261ff). This aspiration to fundamentally revise astrology led Ring to explore the possibilities and ‘limits of assertion’ of astrological interpretations, taking the contemporary state of psychology, sociology, biology and cultural sciences into account. Revised astrology needs to resolve two problems. The first, as has already been addressed, is the shift from the geocentric to the heliocentric model, connected with the question of whether and in what way astrology’s theoretical foundation is affected by it, whether astrology’s justification can survive this shift and, if so, why. (Ring 1972, 91ff). The second problem area concerns Carl Jung’s archetypes, which he considered suitable for re-​ establishing astrology after Copernicus. An essential key in this new basis is the question dealt with but not conclusively answered by Jung –​whether the description of the celestial bodies was actually ‘just projection or more’ (ibid. 15). First, a foundation needs to be established for how astrology was able to survive the shift from the geocentric to the heliocentric model. Here, as above, Thomas Ring points to the fact that ‘the founders of modern science –​Regiomontanus, Copernicus, Tycho Brahe, Galileo, Kepler and Georg Joachim Rheticus –​all pursued astrology, and that (with the exception of Regiomontanus and Brahe) these were among the first advocates of the new heliocentric model.’ (ibid. 94): In order to understand this adherence to astrology despite the reinterpretation of the cosmos, it is important to do away with conventional but long-​obsolete conceptions of astrology that have been presented by both astrologers and non-​astrologers since Copernicus’ time. Ring prescribes expressly rejecting ‘the belief in the effects of celestial bodies that have an impact on the course of humans lives [...]. If there is a connection between stars and humans, it should not be conceived of in this way.’ (Ibid. 16). If astrology’s hypotheses are to be valid, they cannot be explained –​not alone, at least –​through physical effects. For Ring, such a justification of astrology would not have been tenable beyond the shift away from the geocentric model. It would also be impossible to

The Structure of Astrology I

81

explain why the above proponents of the heliocentric model continued to practise astrology. What are these other, non-​physical foundations, then? In searching for an answer, Thomas Ring points to astrology’s origins. These demonstrate that, from the very beginning, there were two lines of reasoning that were often not clearly distinguishable. Deeper analysis shows that the two lines of reasoning follow very different trajectories: Belief in the stars dates to a time when humans did not yet dare consider themselves authors of their own thoughts. Crucial information was provided by the gods, either intuitively or via oracles [...] They saw celestial bodies as an expression of the cosmos. The relationship between the two could be understood through the allegory ‘as above, so below’, as an analogy, or seen as an effect from above that assigned a fate. The stars could be either indicators or effectuators. (Ibid. 106).

Effects of the stars and analogies are the two divergent theoretical foundations, both dating back to the ancient world, that lend astrology plausibility and justify practising it. In each case, the aim was to understood individual fate in relation to divine beings and forces. However, the two justifications have different anthropological conditions. In the case of assumed effects from the stars, all humans were subject to physically conveyed compulsions: ‘One had to reluctantly accept one’s lot or endure it as a fate willed by God’. In the case of an analogous relationship between the cosmos and humans, there was no determining compulsion, but a free interaction between spiritual beings that communicated with one another. ‘One could choose one’s own fate’, especially ‘if [...] the present [could be] improved with a view to a future life’ (ibid.). Ancient astrology was therefore familiar with both: Effects from the stars with the consequence of being subject to a determined fate, and analogies with the scope to live freely.45

45 Thomas Ring’s reference to the two strands of reasoning has already been mentioned several times in chapter 1. With varying weight for one argument or the other, Claudius Ptolemy in the Aristotelian tradition and Marcus Manilius in the Stoic tradition emphasise the determining influence of the heavenly bodies, without therefore dispensing with analogies. As a representative of the Platonic tradition, Plotinus, on the other hand, explicitly emphasises the principle of analogy and human freedom of will, but also admits secondary determinant

82

Astrology in European Religious History

Both of these theoretical models that relate to humans and the cosmos were familiar to the proponents of the heliocentric model named above, and both were fiercely contested in the astrology of the Renaissance. Astrology was a means of placing free human action in a broad frame of reference that comprised scientific and spiritual issues. This included the question of astrology’s borders, which Johannes Kepler in particular dealt with in detail. Thomas Ring provides a wealth of citations and references to show that the question of the geocentric or heliocentric model hardly played a role in these complex discussions. On the contrary, if anything it was proponents of the heliocentric model who justified and practised astrology, as the above (first) quote on Johannes Kepler made clear. On the other hand, it was often traditionalists who clung to the geocentric model and emerged as opponents to astrology, such as (at times) Martin Luther. Evidently –​and Thomas Ring is completely right in this case –​the discussion about astrology was largely independent of the question of how the Sun revolved around the Earth or vice versa. Ring refutes the conception that astrology’s continued existence since the early-​modern period can be explained as a force of habit. Old Testament specialist Jürgen Ebach and medievalist Hubertus Fischer made comments along these lines:  As noted in the introduction, Fischer claimed that the ‘worldview woven by the stars’ trickled ‘lazily through the ages’, practically unaffected by ‘the storms of progress’. In Fischer’s opinion, the astrological tradition had been so deeply anchored in European thinking since ancient times that it did not disappear once its preconditions had been refuted. Jürgen Ebach also endorses this view when he writes that astrology is ‘tied at its core to the geocentric model [...] without disappearing with the refutation of its precondition.’ (See also Introduction, b)). Complex theories and experiences, anthropological and psychological questions about freedom, and determinism of will provide astrology with a basis to continue existing beyond the geocentric model. What useful information can be derived from these multifaceted discussions about astrology and its continued existence beyond the shift

influences (Ptolemy 1980, I 2, pp. 4–​19. Ptolemy 1995 [1553], 13–​23. Manilius 1990, 12/​13. Plotinus 1960, 52, II 3, 247).

The Structure of Astrology I

83

in worldviews for a revised astrology commensurate to the requirements of the twentieth century, though? The foundation for this is a modern conception of humans, which Thomas Ring derives substantially from Carl Jung’s individual psychology and which he supplements with social-​ psychological aspects. His first concern is to establish the anthropological conditions that meet the requirements of a modern psychological conception of humans as well as astrology. Ring summarises that the two explanations cited from astrology’s origins –​the belief in effects from the stars and an analogous system of correspondence  –​are simultaneously correct and incorrect. The ‘handed-​down view of influences from the stars’ is to be rejected as much as the belief derived from this in an ‘absolutely inevitable fate’. (Ring 1972, 107f). For Ring, this belief in effects from the stars that predetermine events and make them predictable are signs of a ‘vulgar astrology’ or a ‘feature of primitivity in its fundamental view’. (Ibid. 123). On the other hand, there is no dispute that free human behaviour has to meet the needs of external circumstances and is subject to limitations. There is therefore no such thing as ‘absolute free will’. This anthropological contingency between free responsibility and limited freedom to act ultimately brings together astrology’s two lines of reasoning. Over the course of the millennia, astrology correctly identified that both factors underlie all human action. At the time Ring was writing, in the twentieth century, it was possible to state that ‘compulsion and freedom [exist as] a correlative pair of concepts’. Humans’ ‘reality of character’ includes the experience of taking responsibility for one’s actions as well as the experience that this responsibility is conditioned by ‘determined structures’ which themselves can be adapted by environmental influences. (Ring 1972, 108). Modern astrology, Ring concludes, can only be founded on this anthropological basis. This then leads to the second problem. Thomas Ring builds directly on Carl Jung in his understanding of astrology’s symbols, which describe ‘basic mental substance’, as a reflex of human consciousness embedded in a social and natural environment, making astrological symbols essentially human experience projected onto the sky. (Ibid. 15). Thomas Ring considers this projection theory a key reason why astrology plays a significant role in contemporary religious culture in modern societies and why it is not only present, but has even gained greater acceptance.

84

Astrology in European Religious History

If astrological symbolism is an expression of general human experience, Ring considers that this explains ‘the disposition towards astrology often encountered independently of level of education’. (Ibid.). This new interest is primarily triggered by the fact that astrological symbolism addresses certain patterns of personal, mental experience that all humans have in common, meaning that merely the astrological terminology, the symbols and the knowledge of one’s own sign of the zodiac peddled in mass media, which hardly anyone can escape in today’s society, touches on and activates ‘basic mental substance’, arousing interest in the truest sense of the word. However, this interest is mostly vague and is satisfied by unthinking and contradictory daily prognoses. Thomas Ring draws a clear distinction here: The market that satisfies the search for rapid orientation in daily horoscopes, the search for assurance in day-​to-​day life, the wish to know when something will take place, is part of ‘vulgar astrology’. Rooting out symbols through painstaking analyses elucidates a level of basic mental substance. In this way, a general early interest in astrology often leads to a genuine need for insight into actually existing structures, behaviour patterns, and events. Going back to the anthropological conditions of astrology, Thomas Ring aims to go beyond the project theory detailed above. The human experience is more likely astrology’s starting point than the influence of the stars, but it constitutes more than projection. If it were merely projection, it would not be possible to read explanations of individual events and circumstances inversely from the stars. Now, though, experience teaches us that it is indeed possible to inversely discern typical traits and features that characterise a person or event from the movements of celestial bodies. This is the conclusion reached by someone ‘who has been convinced by their own experience that astrological thinking is not a fantasy, but grounded in a reality.’ (Ring: 1972, 179). This kind of reading can be experienced through a horoscope, which is no different from a diagram of the planets’ positions and their angular relationships at the time of a person’s birth in a particular place. The term horoscope comes from the Greek terms hora, meaning ‘hour’, and skopein, meaning ‘observe’ or ‘check’. Thomas Ring changes the classical term horoscope to survey image to highlight its mathematical foundations and analogous interpretation.

The Structure of Astrology I

85

It is only based on this experience that the question arises of how such a projection that assigned the planet Mars to the god of war 4000 years ago can make any reasonable statement today about an individual’s disposition towards ‘impulse, urge, self-​assertion, belligerence’ or even ‘war’ as a collective occurrence based on the planet’s position in the ecliptic. Projection theory assumes that ‘impulse, urge, self-​assertion, belligerence [...] embody the mythological figure’ and were then assigned to the planet by ancient astrologers. (Ibid. 15). Now astrology needs to explain what relationship the position of the planet Mars has inversely to the time a person was born today. Essentially, this can only be explained through the planet Mars somehow sharing in the collective archetypes that Carl Jung set out for humanity’s collective unconscious. The planet should therefore have the same archetype and its own ‘collective unconscious’, just like every human and humankind as a whole. As absurd as it may sound, if Thomas Ring’s theory is correct, it is the only feasible way of relating humans and events with the planet Mars in a collective, mental way. The same applies to every other celestial body and every natural object and event. All natural objects have to share in the collective archetypes if it is to be possible that celestial bodies can provide any information about events or fate. The mere internal logic of this argumentation makes clear that there can hardly be a causal-​ mechanical explanation for these ‘discernible’ relationships between celestial bodies and human affairs. Thomas Ring writes the following: To start with, we have before us a puzzle. How is it possible to conceive of any relationship between a celestial body and a human being? [...] Religious and occultic explanations are possible, of course, but these lead away from scientific explicability. There is no going back to the mind’s mythical infancy.

Thomas Ring finds a solution to this problem in a kind of working hypothesis that he borrows from biology and system theory, and which attempts to explain how life is organised in the first place. Through all changes, the organism exists in itself and is created as a form not from outside but from itself, in accordance with the laws of life and by autonomous creative forces. The shape of the part comes from its function in relation to the whole. (Ibid. 179).

86

Astrology in European Religious History

In this way, our planetary system becomes an organic whole. The planets are part of this whole, and the Earth and its natural diversity are also part of the whole. In Ring’s hypothesis, whether the cosmos exists as an overarching whole beyond our planetary system is relevant because the planetary system can be viewed as a whole both physically, with the Sun at its centre, as well as in a perspective of its relationship to Earth. Ring explains how this planetary system can be understood as an ‘organism’ in the first chapter of the first volume of his four-​ volume Astrologische Menschenkunde (‘Astrological Anthropology’). He first deals with reinterpreting the relationship between physical planets and their mythical circumlocution in a contemporary way:  the content circumscribed in the myth corresponds to a ‘principle’ (from the Latin for ‘basis’): ‘We understand a principle to be a series of natural and mental processes without having to correlate these’ (Ring 61990, 3). This could refer, for example, to the principle of ‘impulse, urge, self-​assertion, belligerence’ described above, which was embodied by the mythological figure of the god Mars. These principles can be generalised and understood as follows: They are principles of organic being [...], expressions of innate forces of the living [...]. We can therefore speak of ‘holistic forces’ –​all that is living together. However different organisms may be in type, form, and mode of existence, they nonetheless have the same principles in their structure, their conservation, and their changing realisation as a whole. In this way, we can find countless apparitions aggregated under one and the same principle. (Ring 61990, 3).

This statement is crucial to Thomas Ring’s theoretical foundation of astrology as it (hypothetically) explains the relationship between planet and human in a way that is conceivable today or that is at least consistent. In this perspective, the planetary system is permeated by principles that Ring understands as ‘living forces’ which invisibly permeate the entire cosmos to connect all of its parts to a living whole. Astrology becomes possible as these forces create a kind of communication system via which information can be exchanged. The principles, dressed up in celestial myths, form a kind of cosmic lingua franca. Similarly to Jung’s ‘collective unconscious’, this living planetary system brings everything together in a whole, and the parts –​planets, individual, natural objects –​interact with each other in an analogous relationship. In traditional astrology, this was explained as a

The Structure of Astrology I

87

correspondence between above and below. Today, this vertical dimension is no longer valid: the spatial perspective has shifted, but not the analogous relationships at work in the space. Thomas Ring’s explanation revives associations with magical worldviews in which there are also invisible forces that produce an interdependency between objects that are not related in a causal or mechanical way. Ancient conceptions of an all-​permeating ether or pneuma can also be perceived here. Ring’s ‘holistic forces’ are not least linked to the concept of an anima mundi or ‘world soul’, an idea that stretches from Plato and Plotinus via the Christian medieval world (Augustinus, Nicholas of Cusa) to the early-​modern period (Johannes Kepler) and German idealism (Friedrich Wilhelm Schelling). There is some evidence that Thomas Ring developed his idea of principles based on Schelling’s text The World Soul.46 Unfortunately, Ring’s works do not include bibliographical references, and Schelling’s name does not appear in the index. However, both the choice of words and the content bear a striking resemblance to Schelling. Like Ring later, Schelling attempted to explain the ‘unity of principles’ through diversity in inorganic and organic nature. He first explains this in his foreword: Contemplating general natural changes [...] leads the natural scientist to a common principle that fluctuates between inorganic and organic nature and contains the primary cause of all changes [...] because it is present everywhere, it is nowhere, and it is everything, can neither be determined nor particular, and hence does not have actual description in language [...]. But the unity of principles is not satisfactory if it does not return to itself in an endless manifoldness of individual effect [...]. As soon as our mere contemplation rises up to the idea of nature as a whole, the contradiction between mechanism and organism disappears. (Schelling 1907, 443f.)

Schelling explores this core idea in the first chapter, making his spiritual orientation explicit. This makes a ‘powerful drive towards individuality’ just as recognisable in ‘inanimate nature’ with its ‘metals and stones’ as in ‘plants and vegetation, in every flower that unfurls its leaves [...] all the

46 Schelling: On the World Soul. An Hypothesis of Higher Physics for Explaining Universal Organism. (Orig.: Von der Weltseele. Eine Hypothese der höheren Physik zur Erklärung des allgemeinen Organismus, 1907).

88

Astrology in European Religious History

way to animal organisms’. And this drive to isolate existence is founded on a common ‘principle’ that ‘leads into nature’s holy Sabbath, where reason rests from its ephemeral works and recognises itself. For, to the extent that we silence ourselves, it speaks to us.’ (Ibid. 474). Schelling also refers directly to ancient conceptions of a world soul: As this principle of continuity maintains the inorganic and organic world and links all of nature to one common organism, in it we can recognise the being that the oldest philosophy saluted as the common soul of nature and that some physicists of that age considered one with the shaping, moulding ether (the share of the most noble natures) (ibid. 665).

It is clear how Schelling attempts to understand nature’s outer diversity as an animated organism from its inner unity, which is guided by a ‘principle’ that permeates the entire cosmos, so when Thomas Ring then speaks of ‘principles of organic being’ and ‘holistic forces, common to all living things’, the connection to Schelling is unmistakable. Against the backdrop of this religious interpretation of nature by Schelling, the question arises of whether Thomas Ring’s principles are really so far removed from ‘religious and occultic explanations’, which he expressly wishes to avoid. What are ‘principles of organic being’ as ‘living forces’, then, if not a kind of anima mundi, in the way they are presented by Schelling? It is unmistakable that Thomas Ring’s principles not only lean on Schelling’s natural science conceptually, but also reflect his spiritual implications. If Thomas Ring’s astrological worldview evinces characteristics of a spiritual understanding of nature, then, the question arises as to astrology’s scientific explicability, which Ring demands in contrast to religious and occultic explanations. To what extent does Ring’s conception of astrology meet the minimum requirements of science? Or is Ring only postulating a hypothesis that does not claim to be scientific but which can at least coexist consistently alongside scientific standards? It is not possible to answer this question conclusively. Ring, at least, addresses the question in a summary concluding his text Astrologie ohne Aberglauben (‘Astrology without Superstition’).

The Structure of Astrology I

89

1.3.2.1. Thomas Ring’s ‘Revision of Astrological Thought’ Thomas Ring outlines what a ‘revision of astrological thought’ entails in a summary. The key premise for him is the experience that ‘astrological thought is based on a reality’ (Ring 1972, 179). Ring answers the question of what exactly is experienced with a reference to the concordance of a ‘living model in comparison with the survey image [horoscope].’ (Ring 31985, VII). Experience teaches that precise observation of a person’s individual situation and circumstances correspond to the astrological ‘principles’ from the positions of celestial bodies at the time of the person’s birth (ibid.). Experience also teaches that the ‘basic mental substance’ and its concordance with the symbols of astrology has remained mostly unchanged since these symbols were established, in Ancient Greece at the latest. The result is that experience is not simply a subjective impression, but that it is replicable and therefore can be tested intersubjectively. This experience provides two prerequisites for a modern form of astrology. Firstly:  ‘The factor that is permanent in astrology is based on symbols that describe basic mental substance.’ And secondly: ‘However, the conception of how a relationship can come about between celestial bodies and human beings, what it is based on, did change with the shift in worldviews. Today, this is determined by science. The question arises of whether and how astrology fits into our modern-​day scientific worldview.’ (ibid.). To guarantee consistency with the modern-​day view of humans and the world, there needs to be ‘concordance [of astrological statements] with psychology and social psychology’. Like in psychology (meaning therapeutic methods of psychology in this case), in a broader sense astrology aims to uncover a person’s possibilities and limits based on their individual situation and their social and cultural environment. Alongside a psychological observation, astrology also contributes statements about ‘innate structures’ obtained from comparative observation. These innate structures, however, cannot be understood as an ‘imposed fate’ as was often the case in traditional astrology: ‘limits of assertion’ also have to be formulated. The ‘innate structures’ do not provide any information about ‘inheritance, environment, gender, level, good and evil, “good” or “bad”

90

Astrology in European Religious History

horoscope’. The structures provide topics, but not the solution to them. (Ring 1972, 265ff). Despite this limitation, Thomas Ring does not consider astrology at all dispensable. After all, astrology and its ‘innate structures’ provide a scope that psychology cannot grasp with the same level of precision, or only with protracted observation. But what are ‘innate structures’? What is the scope of a personality? It is necessary to be familiar with the astrological principles to understand Thomas Ring’s concerns better. Ring presents these principles as ‘forces’ of human experience in the first part of the first volume of Astrologische Menschenkunde. Kräfte und Kräftebeziehungen (‘Astrological Anthropology. Forces and Force Relationships’). The Moon, for example, symbolises ‘the dreamlike’, Mercury ‘the intelligent’, Venus ‘the aesthetic’, the Sun ‘the life-​creative’, Mars the ‘compulsive and impulsive’, Jupiter ‘the meaningful’ and Saturn ‘the physical and boundary-​setting’. (Ring 61990, 117–​244). These principles are astrology’s basic inventory when the planetary deities are stripped of their myths. These are evidently core characteristics of human experience and behaviour  –​the basic structure of the human character. Ancient astrologers’ more or less conscious intention to sketch a general outline of the individual human experience through planetary forces is recognisable.47 The individual solution is provided through the different relationships of the forces starting from this general personality structure. In the second part of the first volume, Thomas Ring describes these relationships as aspects, meaning specific angles that can be drawn between two or more planets in relation to Earth. The basis for this are teachings on aspects developed in ancient astrology and expanded on by Johannes Kepler in Tertius Interveniens. Ring considers these angular relationships as ‘force relationships’. Ancient astrology had characterised these aspects as the behaviour of the planetary deities, which could be considered ‘friendly’ or ‘hostile’. Thomas

47 In addition to these „principles” of the seven classical planets, there are other astronomical data (sign of the zodiac, decan, rising and setting, etc.), which also reflect the „investment structures” of the human being when reinterpreted as „principles”.

The Structure of Astrology I

91

Ring sees ‘principles of basic mental substance’ clad in these mythological descriptions –​that is to say, the identification of a relationship between mental forces. 90º and 180º angles between two planets, for example, depict conflictual tension between the two forces. Other angles –​such as 0º, 60º and 120º –​may represent harmony between the forces in question. The relationship between the ‘intelligent’ (Mercury) and the ‘compulsive and impulsive’ (Mars), for example, can be conflictual or harmonising, which can be seen in the power of judgement combined with determination. In the third volume of Astrologische Menschenkunde. Kombinationslehre, Thomas Ring explains each individual combination of forces as ‘synthetic’ (harmonic), ‘analytic’ (tense) and as a ‘conjunction’ (variable depending on the planet). (Ring 61990, 254ff). Ring writes that the harmonic connection between Mars and Mercury named above is characterised by an ‘enterprising spirit, well-​thought-​out determination in words and deeds’. Conflictual aspects between both forces, meanwhile, show ‘the same ‘enterprising drive, but hastier and quicker-​tempered, seeking out conflict and active confrontation.’ (Ring 71989, 302f). The aspects therefore show how the forces named are related to each other. Alongside the combinations of planets, Ring also presents the links between planetary forces and ‘zodiac principles’ in the same volume. The signs of the zodiac are also ‘principles’ that reflect ‘mental forces’, but which Ring understands in a more general sense as basic tendencies. The connection between planet and sign of the zodiac is produced by the planet’s apparent motion along the ecliptic. A planet’s motion through a certain sign of the zodiac combines the respective forces symbolised. If Mercury is in Gemini in a birth chart, for example, ‘the intelligent’ (Mercury) will evince an ‘analytical expression’ (Gemini). If Mercury is in Sagittarius, however, it will demonstrate a disposition towards ‘generalising, universalising thinking’. (Ring Vol. III 71989, 208ff). These references may well be sufficient to mark out the field in which Thomas Ring considers it possible to locate the ‘innate structure’. It is clear that the symbolic connections demonstrate a framework of force relationships, which in turn describe the structural elements of a personality and, to an extent, the starting conditions for a human life at the time of birth. Astrology is therefore a very nuanced combination doctrine of symbolised force relationships that show the respective ‘innate structures’.

92

Astrology in European Religious History

Thomas Ring considers this revised astrology –​a combination of personality forces with the mythical descriptions of the celestial bodies –​in line with modern-​ day scientific framework conditions, for which he presents three default positions: 1. The experience that refers to the respective individual examination of the extent to which a birth chart matches the person. (The number of cases that Thomas Ring examined is not known but, given the number of references in his texts, would appear to be several hundred if not several thousand). 2. The analogous concordance between the celestial principle and ‘living model’, refuting all theories on the influence of celestial bodies and making astrology consistent with modern astronomy. 3. The ‘limits of assertion’ in the practical interpretation of a birth chart leave scope for free decision-​ making, self-​ responsibility and self-​ realisation in line with modern individual and social psychology. This means that ‘innate structure’ should not be seen as ‘complete characteristics’ but as ‘open problems’. (Ring 1972, 162 and 266f). Thomas Ring’s aim with this modern astrology is to revise traditional, mythological astrology and reformulate it consistently within the context of modern-​day scientific methodologies. Rather than a ‘refuge for religious needs’ (ibid. 265), its place should be within a scientifically proven understanding of reality. This can be seen to a certain extent as a manifesto to demythologise astrology. Thomas Ring’s revised astrology –​from a theological point of view –​ is therefore part of an agenda proposed from the end of the nineteenth century until the mid-​twentieth century, particularly by the History of Religions School in Göttingen and its successors for the Christian tradition along with other religious traditions. New Testament specialist Rudolf Bultmann, in particular, used his text Neues Testament und Mythologie (‘New Testament and Mythology’) to recommend demythologising ‘mythical statements about deities, demons and miracle cures’. At the same time, he demanded a new interpretation of faith adapted to modern humans’ scientific and existential requirements. He describes these existential requirements following Martin Heidegger’s existential philosophy as experiences of unavailability in one’s own life, fear of death, need for

The Structure of Astrology I

93

redemption, and more. From a contemporary and cultural-​historical perspective, Thomas Ring’s attempt to revise astrology fits in this way into a series of attempts to generally reformulate mythical traditions. Both initiatives, however  –​the revision of astrology and the demythologisation of Christian faith –​are not free from critical questions. Bultmann himself ends by posing the question: ‘We attempted to carry out a demythologisation. Was there any mythology left over?’ (Ibid. 63). His answer is an emphatic ‘no’, but that was not sufficient for many theologians and researchers on religion. Historian of religion Karl Kerényi answers as follows: ‘Anyone who says “God in Greek”, so theos, remains inside the myth –​even the Greek philosopher remains there.’ (Kerényi 1963, 36). This context raises the question of whether Thomas Ring’s revised astrology actually liberates it from its mythological link without leaving any residual mythology behind. In line with Kerényi, it is possible to state that anyone speaking of ‘holistic forces, common to all living things’, meaning the connection of celestial bodies and human beings, remains inside the myth, even if they switch up the terminology and use the philosophical term ‘holistic forces’ instead of ‘celestial deities’. At its core, revised astrology remains tied to ancient mythology. Thomas Ring’s attempt to consistently embed astrology in a modern, scientific understanding of the world is not only limited to theoretical considerations on the relationship between celestial bodies and human beings. Based on his personal experiences ‘that astrological thinking is not a fantasy’ (Ring 1972, 179), he aims to practically harmonise the observations from the horoscope (or ‘survey image’) on a ‘person examined psychologically and whose biographical data is known’ with the results of psychology. This presents difficulties, however, as both astrological and psychological statements are not easy to convert into empirically testable data that can be examined for concordance. Subjective factors play too great a role in both disciplines. ‘Who makes such statements and what method they use’ (ibid. 265) is pivotal. As far as astrology is concerned, ‘limits of assertion’ include gender, environment and inheritance. A birth chart also provides information about innate character structures, but not about changes that will take place in the course of a person’s life owing to freely made decisions. There are undoubtedly concrete concordances between horoscope interpretation and psychology, but a concordance

94

Astrology in European Religious History

commensurate to a scientific process is not possible. There are nonetheless significant characteristics for a consistent coexistence between insights gleaned from astrology and psychology. To summarise, astrology is justified as an experience-​based analogy between a celestial principle and personality structure. This analogy replaces astronomy’s presumed causality as a theoretical model. The theory of the principles of organic being, borrowing from Schelling, can be used to further justify the analogy principle. This theory’s potential validity depends on the respective understanding of science, which itself differs according to philosophical position. This problem has come up in different ways in modern epistemological discourse. However, epistemological reflections on astrology have only started to recognise the validity of a theory free from all metaphysical presumptions since the twentieth century at the latest. This will be dealt with in the following chapter.

2 Astrology and Science in the Present Day The historical trajectory pursued so far, particularly the shift from the geocentric to the heliocentric model and the development of the sciences, has put the focus on the question of the scientific character of astrological statements. The shift from a cosmic-​spatial to a psychological-​ symbolic astrology changed the mythical view of the cosmos, which was demythologised in part, but without being able to do away entirely with mythical principles. The mythological deity figures used to explain astrology no longer apply as real beings in psychological-​symbolic astrology, but as real basic principles that, like the deities before them, are innate to nature and accessible to experience. This mythical residue has also accompanied modern astrology and challenged certain scientists in the second half of the twentieth century to either reject astrology as a paradigm of a retarding consideration of nature or to see it as a possibility to transcend the limits of natural experience valid to date. In any case, astrology remains the object of epistemological commentary in the present day, of which a selection will be presented below. First, however, comes the question of what actually brought about the break from the mythical worldviews that justified astrology in previous centuries.

2.1. From Knowledge of ‘Divine Wisdom’ to Excluding Mythical Worldviews Even in the early-​modern period, it was considered self-​evident that astrology was a science. Only later did an understanding of science develop that excluded all mythical, esoteric and theological evidence from the field of scientific enquiry. It was at this point that astrology, too, became suspect. A typical early-​modern advocate for regarding, or continuing to regard, astrology as a science was humanist and theologian Philipp Melanchthon (1497–​1560). He commences the foreword to his German translation of Claudius Ptolemaeus’ Tetrabiblos by explaining the connection between ‘science’ and ‘wisdom’.

96

Astrology in European Religious History Wisdom (sapientia) and science (intellectus numerorum, ordo et discrimen) eloquently bear witness to divine being and providence. This is why the sciences are to be celebrated, not only for their value to human life, but also because they prove the existence of God to us and allow us to recognise His being [...]. This is why Plato so beautifully said that we can uncover God in the most diverse way in the sciences.48

Melanchthon’s connection of science and wisdom is almost sufficient on its own to make knowledge of nature the same as knowledge of God, His existence and His characteristics too. Ptolemy comes to address astrology later: The science of astrology (doctrina de motibus) is valuable and truthful –​it is a crown on humankind and its entire venerable wisdom is a testimony of God […] It determines the conditions of the human soul and all of its consequences from the position of the stars. (Ibid.)

To this extent, astrology enjoys an excellent position among the sciences as an explanation of the unity of the cosmos from the perspective of a divine order. The celestial bodies represent both the mental and the physical side of the macrocosmos, in opposition to the physical and mental human being as a microcosm that reacts to its effects. Scientific knowledge affects both the physical and the mental aspect of the cosmos. This understanding of a scientific astrology and of science as a whole, in which knowledge of nature and God form an inseparable unit, stretches from Melanchthon (with reference to Plato) to the eighteenth century with Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and Friedrich Schelling. The break between natural sciences on the other hand, and theology, nature mysticism, and spirituality on the other, took place gradually in the course of the eighteenth and nineteenth century. This is illustrated by a well-​ documented conversation between the astronomer Pierre Simon Laplace (1749–​1827) and Napoleon Bonaparte, at least according to British mathematician and historian Walter W. Rouse Ball, who claims that Laplace wanted to give the emperor a copy of his book on celestial mechanics. Napoleon responded: ‘I have been told that you wrote this great work on the universe without once mentioning its Creator!’ Laplace is said to have

48 Claudii Ptolemaei (Latin) 1553, 3f. Ptolemäus (German) 1995, 277.

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

97

countered bluntly: ‘Your Royal Highness, I have no need for such a hypothesis’.49 This brief conversation is symptomatic of the conclusive –​or seemingly conclusive –​division between science, focused purely on physical processes, and esoteric and theological interpretations of the cosmos and nature. Celestial bodies and their movements no longer house vital, intelligible forces; everything is the result of mechanical forces. This would appear to undermine the astrological worldview –​but only for Laplace’s acolytes. The chemist Robert Boyle (1626–​1691) had already cast doubt on the intelligible interpretation of nature in the seventeenth century, rejecting both the existence of the four ancient elements (fire, earth, air and water) and the existence of alchemy’s three principles (‘tria principia’). (Gebelein 1991, 304). In the alchemy advocated for by Paracelsus and others, nature consists of a mixture of the three principles of material (salt), soul (sulphur) and spirit (mercury). Boyle challenged this and presented the alternative theory that nature consisted solely of mechanical masses. In doing so, he separated chemistry founded on mechanical principles from alchemy’s spiritual view of nature, just as Laplace later untied astronomy from all forms of theology. However, neither Isaac Newton nor Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz adhered to Boyle’s materialistic conception of nature. Boyle, too, remained a religious person in private. Only in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries did a purely mechanical understanding of nature prevail among a majority of scientists, characterising a concept of science that distanced itself more and more clearly from mythical and metaphysical statements, instead focusing more and more precisely on empirical, rational methods. Today, philosophers like Karl Popper and Theodor Adorno declare astrology scientifically invalid. However, some astrologers present a scientific astrology in opposition to this criticism, even providing results from quantum physics as evidence. The following section will deal with this controversy of scientific astrology against scientific criticism.

49 Ball, Walter William Rouse: A Short Account of the History of Mathematics, New York: Dover Publications 1960, 417f. Vgl. Carl B. Boyle: A History of Mathematics, New York: Wiley 1989, 538.

98

Astrology in European Religious History

2.2. Astrology as a ‘Science of Space and Time’ –​Jean Claude Weiss While Thomas Ring, as shown above, aimed to cleanse astrology of mythical explanations and reformulate it in a way consistent with social psychology, biology and astronomy, there are also astrologers who consider astrology an actual science. Jean Claude Weiss, a Swiss astrologer and founder of the company Astrodata AG in Zurich, published a book titled Astrologie –​eine Wissenschaft von Raum und Zeit (‘Astrology: A Science of Space and Time’), in which he outlines an understanding of science that not only explains the outer structure of reality, as is conventional. For Weiss, science should also comprise subjective contemplation. After all, observing an object tells us nothing about its objective state. When we observe something, we transfer our perspective to it and shape it as such. This close connection of subjective perception and object is the foundation for humans linking celestial bodies with mythical images. Jean Claude Weiss therefore forms part of a scientific tradition from Immanuel Kant to Nils Bohr. Weiss considers Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason –​re-​released in a second, expanded edition in the original German in 1787 –​to be crucial. Kant’s premise on the theory of knowledge that ‘we do not see reality as it is, but as it is structured’ (Weiss 87, 65) leads to the astrological premise that the celestial bodies are shapes structured by humans with their mythical descriptions. Because we create the mythical descriptions from our consciousness, inversely it is possible to observe the mythically described planets to recognise ourselves as well as external events. Key to Kant’s critique of knowledge is that space and time are not objective conditions outside of us, but are a preconscious disposition inside us. We do indeed receive messages from objects via our senses, but these sensations only provide us with the raw material: for inexplicable reasons (that is, transcendentally) our consciousness is able to perceive things as spatial and temporal. We therefore provide things with a space-​time structure, which occurs directly and immediately when we see, hear, feel or touch something. We do not know what the things actually are (what they are a priori).

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

99

For Claude Weiss, this intimate connection between human consciousness and external objects is the starting point for understanding astrology. After all, here too the observer structures external events in a certain way. When people in early cultures ‘saw’ certain operative deities in certain celestial bodies, these people then structured the celestial bodies’ raw material –​their physically visible form –​with living forces. Early astrologers created these living forces from themselves. When the material planet Mars was linked to the god of war, the human capacity for aggression was imposed on the planet. If Venus represents the capacity for life, meanwhile, this is a capacity imposed on the planet Venus. Claude Weiss’ interpretation makes it possible to transfer Kant’s approach to astrology. Kant’s critique of knowledge provides astrology with another argument too, however. The insoluble connection of space and time to space-​time has its astrological counterpart in ‘time quality’. Borrowing from Carl Jung, time quality describes events that occur on Earth simultaneously and evince very similar characteristics without having any causal relationship. To a certain extent, these events form family bonds with each other. The similarity of events on Earth is in turn astrologically related to a simultaneous celestial position that symbolises these characteristics. Claude Weiss provides the following example:  If more boys are born than girls during wartime, it is not a causal consequence of the war, but instead represents a time quality in which the Mars-​accented (masculine) element has a greater effect. This time quality is then reflected in a prominent position of the planet Mars. (Weiss 21986, 7). The role of the observer is of utmost importance in this interplay of time quality with its non-​causal relationships. What is the proportion of a human’s consciousness when they observe events on Earth and in the heavens? Claude Weiss not only sees similarities with Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason here, but even more so with modern quantum physics and the role of the observer in quantum-​mechanical processes. Essentially, Weiss’ philosophical reasoning can be summarised as follows: He draws a line from Kant’s critique of reason via Einstein’s theory of relativity that again ‘relativises’ space and time and formulates it as a unified, four-​dimensional quantity, and it continues to Werner Heisenberg’s and David Bohm’s quantum physics. Both theories of physics –​the theory of relativity and quantum theory –​have in common that space and time

100

Astrology in European Religious History

can only be conceived of as one unified space-​time. Unlike the theory of relativity, quantum theory also explains space-​time’s dependence on the observer of a process. One can consider one point where quantum physics and astrology come into contact. According to Werner Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, the location and the impulse (direction and speed) of an elementary particle cannot be accurately determined at the same time, meaning the location or impulse of a particle can only be located with a certain probability. The more precisely a particle’s location can be determined, the less definite its direction and speed, and vice versa. This uncertainty can also be seen in astrology when a constellation with a certain quality does indeed correspond to events on Earth, but these events cannot be pinpointed in advance and can only be determined in their symbolic significance, not in detail. What is more important, however, is that the particle appears to react to the measuring process of an observer. Not only that, other particles that are not directly measured but are physically involved in the particle observed react to the measurement of the one particle. As quantum physicist David Bohm established, this is demonstrated in the behaviour of a spin-​zero particle that disintegrates into two spin-​1/​2 particles (an electron and a positron). Both particles move in opposite directions. If the choice of measurement falls on the rotation of the one particle in a certain direction, this choice immediately influences the behaviour of the other particle, which will begin to spin in the opposite direction  –​even if the two are located light years apart. How does one particle know about the other? How does one particle inform the other with no measurable time interval, that is, without a perceivable causal relationship? The physical answer to this question remains open. This is where quantum physics and astrology come into contact. Both cases are analogous events bound by a kinship but with no discernible causal link. In the case of the Spin-​1/​2 experiment, these are the kinships between the elementary particles electron and positron. In astrology, the kinship between events on Earth and in the heavens has the same symbolism. There is a crucial difference, however: One event only occurs at a microcosmic quantum level, and the other at the level of human sensory experience.

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

101

The role of the observer is crucial here. In quantum physics, the observer appears to determine the event. In astrology, too, the observer can establish astrological events if certain principles are ‘read’ from the stars and can then be determined in terrestrial events of the same quality. Following Claude Weiss, both the unity of space-​time and the role of the observer are then key requirements in which quantum physics and astrology meet, even if the levels of experience are not congruent. If these two contact points –​astrology and quantum physics –​are combined, they form a close connection between physics and psychology. It is precisely this connection between physics and psychology that plays a major role in scientific criticism of astrology. As is to be expected, however, this criticism does not go into the link to quantum theory as Claude Weiss demands. Instead, Karl Popper and Theodor W. Adorno based their criticism on a ‘classical’ understanding of causality. If astrology were ‘real’, it would have to prove a causal relationship between celestial bodies and human life. First, though, a practical example that makes astrology’s justification more understandable using an analogy –​here with reference to quantum theory. What does an astrological diagnosis look like when the analogy between heaven and Earth is taken as a basis, then? One topic widely discussed in astrology was the nuclear reactor accident in Fukushima, Japan in 2011.

2.3. The Fukushima Nuclear Reactor Accident from an Astrological Perspective At 14:46 local time (05:46 UTC) on 11 March 2011, an extraordinarily violent earthquake measuring 9.0 on the moment magnitude scale took place off the coast of Japan, followed by the Fukushima nuclear disaster. Just a few hours before, the planet Mercury had entered Aries and, just a few hours after the earthquake, the planet Uranus did the same. These astronomical events, particularly Uranus entering Aries, had been linked to astrological expectations weeks and even months before the event. On 6 March, for example, the weekly forecast for 7–​13 March on the Swiss astrology website Astrodata AG included the warning that the two planets entering Aries would unleash ‘energies of awakening and renewal’. It goes

102

Astrology in European Religious History

on to speak of ‘surplus energies’, the risk of ‘overloading as a consequence of short-​circuits’, of ‘powerful forces expressed in an unbridled, unrestrained way’, and ‘unexpected accidents involving electronics’.50 Other websites also speak of the ‘explosive force’ linked with Uranus entering Aries.51 Subsequent analyses and commentaries primarily dealt with similar analogous events like the earthquake in Kyoto on 17 January 1995 and Pluto entering Sagittarius on the same day, or the reactor disaster in Chernobyl on 26 April 1986 with a Uranus-​Pluto aspect. Such general predictions are derived from the symbolism of the planets concerned and primarily affect the entire globe. The ‘imprecision’ of astrological diagnoses means that the forecast neither affects a specific region on Earth nor a concrete local event. However, all astrological commentaries assume that this local event in Japan is an expression of the relationship between Uranus and Earth. Many astrologers have associated the global repercussion of this local event with consequences including the radical change in Germany’s nuclear energy policy. Criticism of astrology focuses on an assumed effect from the distant planet Uranus, just about visible to the naked eye, on this disaster in Japan. To explain this, astrologers point first to experience, which teaches that this relationship simply exists, and multiple similar cases that exist beyond this individual event. The question remains, however, of what this experience is based on and what exactly is experienced. The astrological answer is the following: Experience teaches that there is a characteristic analogy between the assignment of mythical names like Uranus and Aries and the characteristics of the events named. This analogous relationship should not be understood as a physical-​causal relationship between planets and an event, but primarily as a semantic analogy made by human consciousness. The analogy is semantic to the extent that people in ancient times created linguistic (mythological) images from a consciousness that operated in the entire cosmos. These images are the basis of the names given to the planets and

50 www.astrod​ata.ch. Last accessed on 06/​03/​2011. Weekly forecast for 07–​13/​ 03/​2011. 51 www.astrof​i re.net/​explos​iv_​​-​_​uranu​s_​im​_​wid​der_​​ab_​2​011.html. Last accessed on 04/​03/​2012.

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

103

the signs of the zodiac and, at the same time, correspond to certain physical events on Earth. The observation process and the physical event therefore form a synthesis. At this point, the difference appears that distinguishes a scientific understanding, based on causality, from astrological justifications. The astrological justification for the analogous relationship between a planet and an event assumes that the analogy, as described in Sections 1.3.1 and 1.3.2, is derived from the mythological images from which humans took the names that they gave to the planets. According to Hesiod, in Greek mythology Uranus is the oldest celestial deity, an archetypal principle of creation and upheaval. (Hesiod 1991, lines 126–​187). Wilhelm Herschel gave the planet its name when he discovered it in 1781. From astrology’s perspective, Herschel consciously or unconsciously projected the archetype (Jung) or the living principle (Ring) of creation and upheaval onto the planet he had discovered in choosing the name Uranus. He named something that had long existed as an archetype, that is, in humanity’s collective unconscious. Herschel’s unintentional ‘service to astrology’, then, beyond his astronomical discovery and the name he gave it, was dis-​covering an astrological principle that had been unidentified in classical astrology until that point, regardless of whether Herschel accepted this astrological interpretation or not. What is crucial for astrology is that it sees an equivalence of meaning in the name equivalence, regardless of whether the name was chosen consciously or unconsciously. This is not yet the end of the chain in the Uranus-​Fukushima analogy, though. In 1789, the chemist Martin Heinrich Klaproth discovered an element that, as he underlines in the introduction to his report for the Berlin Academy, he named uranium in a conscious allusion to Herschel’s Uranus.52 As an element used in obtaining nuclear energy, it has the same relationship to the archetypal principle of ‘creation’ and ‘upheaval’ as the planet Uranus.53

2 Bugge 1965, 337. 5 53 On the astronomical, mythological and astrological significance of the planet Uranus, cf. Hürlimann 1988, 196–​201. Roscher 1989, 141–​143. Weiss, vol. I 21986, 121–​129.

104

Astrology in European Religious History

Modern astrology sees a similar analogy in the discoveries and names of the (former) planet Pluto and the element plutonium. The mythological figure Pluto (Pluton or Hades in Greek) is the god of death, the realm of the dead, and rebirth. The planet was discovered in February 1930, and the element plutonium was discovered in 1941. The discovery of Pluto was also accompanied by events referred to by astrology –​the global economic crisis from October 1929 and the rapid ascent of Nazism in Germany from September 1930. Back to the Uranus-​ Aries symbolism, however:  Following astrological argumentation, the semantic analogy between the planet Uranus and the reactor accident in Fukushima also acquires a factual analogy for 11 March 2011 owing to Uranus entering Aries on that day. Since ancient times, the sign Aries has been associated semantically with ‘new beginnings’ and ‘actions’ as well as the characteristics ‘rash’, ‘pioneering’ and ‘impulsive’.54 If Uranus enters Aries, the characteristics of both are added together and to all intents and purposes become the ‘unrestrained forces’ described above, which are also ‘expressed’ analogously on Earth. Astrologers today therefore deduce analogies to the events of 11 March 2011 in Japan from the story of how Uranus and Aries were discovered and named, provided that astrology is based on the experience that this relationship is simply obvious. Some scientists critical of astrology cite two problems here. Firstly, there is widespread (albeit not complete) consensus in modern-​day sciences that metaphysical assumptions –​and that would include a consciousness that operates in the entire cosmos with the characteristics of planets and signs of the zodiac  –​are not accepted as scientific theory. This is the practically the self-​evident result of a modern-​day understanding of science with tightly drawn boundaries. Secondly, experience in the astrological sense has to be distinguished from a concept of experience as used by empirical scientists and applied as a method of empirical research. Astrology expands the boundaries of valid experience. Firstly, as in day-​ to-​day experiences, there is a subjective feeling of what is correct and incorrect. The assessment of whether analogies between Uranus/​Aries and

54 Ring 51985, 167ff. See Roscher 1989, 69f. Hürlimann 1988, 111ff.

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

105

Fukushima are valid or not is subjective. Empirical evidence in the scientific sense is therefore difficult because the astrological principles are symbols with an additional interpretation frame and are therefore difficult to assign to statistical data. Symbols have to be understood as images that comprise a spectrum of facts. Experience, then, is essentially an understanding of symbolic figures. The concept of experience in most modern scientific disciplines is related to facts that can be verified and replicated in statistical processes. The fact that the catastrophe took place in Fukushima but not elsewhere gives ‘logical probability’ (Karl Popper) a spread width that would also make other events possible in other locations. This scientific concept is limited to measurable objects, in opposition to an astrological concept of experience that places objects in a system of symbols. The example of the events in Japan also applies at a very personal level. Every interpretation of a birth chart attempts to draw analogies between planetary properties and an individual person. The process is always the same in principle: The more or less broad symbolism of planetary constellations in a birth chart is seen as an analogy for an equally broad event frame related to a concrete person. The spread width of the ‘logical probability’ that a symbol will concretely occur is just as great as the example of Fukushima demonstrated. This means that evaluating an astrological statement relates to whether and how an event fits the symbol. However, this requires both extensive knowledge of astrological symbols and all of their possible analogies and a subjective openness to consider such a relationship between planetary constellations and people possible. What does it mean in general for astrology’s validity in the ranks of modern-​day sciences? In appealing to experience, astrology today has very little chance of being recognised as a science. There are indeed advocates, such as physicist Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker or Johannes Kepler, who claim that ‘experience [is] so clear that it cannot be denied to astrologers’ (Kepler 1971, No.66). However, such prominent cases are not sufficient for astrology to be generally accepted as a science. Distrust of subjective experience judgements is too deep-​seated, and the willingness to seriously grapple with this art –​often considered inferior –​is too small. As the discussions below will demonstrate, the appeal to experience is also insufficient when it is present in empirical studies that aim to turn

106

Astrology in European Religious History

these experiences into valid results –​not even when such studies appear significant. Some expert statisticians do not even know where the error is in the experiment’s make-​up or whether it includes an error at all. American astronomer George Abell examined perhaps the most hotly contested astrological study by French statistician Michel Gauquelin (1928–​1991) from Sorbonne University and did not find any errors.55 He summarised: ‘I (nonetheless) have a strong suspicion that Gauquelin’s results will prove erroneous in the end. But if by some coincidence, which I consider fantastic, they prove to be correct only in part, it would be an enormous milestone in science.’56 The following chapter will provide three examples of how the discussion around astrology might unfold in modern-​day epistemology.

2.4. Critical Objections to Astrology There are notoriously two baselines of scientific methodology, which have taken shape and become more nuanced since the time of Immanuel Kant and David Hume. The two lines differ in the main priorities laid down for scientific research. The first line starts by pursuing an empirical approach and draws general theories from experience, while the other line uses general theories and singular propositions to draw confirmation based on experience. For both baselines, however, theory construction and experience are among the basic tools in scientific research. This is common to the twentieth century’s two basic epistemological tendencies: logical empiricism and critical rationalism.

2.4.1. Karl  Popper Sir Karl Popper’s (1902–​ 1994) observations in his texts Logic of Scientific Discovery (1934)57 and Conjectures and Refutations 55 Gauquelin, Michel: Cosmic Influences on Human Behavior, London: Futura Publications 1976. 56 Hans-​Jürgen Eysenck/​David Nias:  Astrology Science or Superstition? London: Maurice Temple Smith 1982. (German: Astrologie –​Wissenschaft oder Aberglaube? München: List 1982, 289. 57 Popper, Karl: Logik der Forschung, Tübingen: Mohr, 1984 [1935]. (Engl.: Logic of Scientific Discovery, Routledge 1959).

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

107

(1963)58 are crucial to understanding astrology’s claim to scientific validity. Popper did not deal with astrology directly in the former, but instead handled fortune-​telling more generally, and then named astrology directly in the latter text. In Logic of Scientific Discovery, he writes: One of the reasons why we do not accord a positive degree of corroboration to the typical prophecies of palmists and soothsayers is that their predictions are so cautious and imprecise that the logical probability of their being correct is extremely high. And if we are told that more precise and thus logically less probable predictions of this kind have been successful, then it is not, as a rule, their success that we are inclined to doubt so much as their alleged logical improbability: Since we tend to believe that such prophecies are non-​corroborable, we also tend to argue in such cases from their low degree of corroborability to their low degree of testability. (Popper 1984, 125).

Popper breaks his argument into two parts. In the first, he rejects the scientific validity of fortune-​telling techniques as the spread width of their statements is too broad, making positive reinforcement highly likely in experience. In the second part, he completely concedes the accuracy of special predictions but questions what is special about them; that is, the precise formulation that would make it possible to test them precisely. He deals with astrology directly in his later text, Conjectures and Refutations, owing to the testability of theories in modern physics. Einstein’s gravitational theory was barely possible to test satisfactorily at first without suitable measuring instruments, but at the same time it was possible to confirm or refute Einstein’s theory practically. Popper was most interested in the possibility of refuting (‘falsifying’) a theory to identify it as scientific. The opposite is true of astrology, which stubbornly opposes the falsifiability of its data, making it incompatible with science: Astrology did not pass the test. Astrologers were greatly impressed, and misled, by what they believed to be confirming evidence –​so much so that they were quite unimpressed by any unfavourable evidence. Moreover, by making their interpretations and prophecies sufficiently vague they were able to explain away anything that might have been a refutation of the theory had the theory and the prophecies been more precise. In order to escape falsification they destroyed the testability of

58 Popper, Karl:  Vermutungen und Widerlegungen. Das Wachstum der wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnis, Tübingen: Mohr 1994 [1963]. Engl.: Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge, Routledge 1963.

108

Astrology in European Religious History

their theory. It is a typical soothsayer’s trick to predict things so vaguely that the predictions can hardly fail –​they become irrefutable. (Popper 1994, 52).

Here it is even clearer that the theory, which is far too vague and consciously kept vague, causes astrology to collapse as a science. These pronouncements on astrology can only be understood in the context of Popper’s general epistemological direction. By his own admission, Popper had already stumbled on astrology in his initial period contemplating general issues on the theory of knowledge. Since 1919 he had grappled with the issue of ‘how one can distinguish a genuinely empirical method [...] from a seemingly empirical method [...]. My aim was to distinguish, as much as possible, between the principles of empirical sciences and all other principles, whether religious, metaphysical or simply pseudo-​ scientific in character’. He found the first example of a ‘seemingly empirical method’ in ‘astrology with its astonishing accumulation of empirical evidence based on observations –​on comparing horoscopes and biographies’. Here, astrology is part of a line of other ‘pseudo-​sciences’:  ‘Karl Marx’s theory of history’, ‘Freud’s psycho-​analysis’ and ‘Alfred Adler’s individual psychology’. (Popper 1994, 47 and 55). In their own way, all four fields are ‘fortune-​telling techniques’ that cannot withstand scientific examination. (Ibid. 52f). Nonetheless, today all of the other fields named are considered legitimate topics of university teaching and research. When Popper locates kinships between astrology and other disciplines with an interpretative and therefore pseudo-​scientific character, the question must be asked of what a testable, valid scientific statement is. In a nutshell, Popper identifies three key steps that he considers conditions: 1. A general theory or idea is formulated as a universal or general principle. Such general principles are indeed based on knowledge from previously known research but go beyond merely applying previous knowledge. This leads to a new theory, essentially through ‘creative intuition’, ‘inspiration’, ‘temporarily unfounded anticipation’, ‘hypothesis’, etc. 2. In a second step, general principles are made into special, verifiable statements, which Popper also calls ‘prognoses’. These are ‘singular principles’ that need to be practically testable, which in turn means that they admit the possibility of being verified or falsified and answered

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

109

with a yes or a no. The possibility of falsification is most important to Popper, as only here can the limits of assertion be drawn precisely. 3. If a unique statement can be answered with yes through empirical examination, and this confirmation also implies the possibility of answering no, the theory has ‘proven’ itself, and the theory is then provisionally valid and scientific. (Popper 1984, 8–​14). In the first step, any idea is permitted on the basis of previous knowledge. The transfer to testable principles and the subsequent empirical examination, however, provide the first indication of whether it is a scientific theory. Fortune-​telling also belongs to the array of possibilities, but its scientific validity founders in the second step because the prognoses’ assertions are not special enough to be answerable with an unambiguous yes or no. Divination’s almost impossible ‘falsifiability’ as an indispensable ‘differentiation criterion’ in particular is sufficient to deny it its scientific validity. The example of Uranus in Aries –​Fukushima above fails in its claim to scientific validity in that the occurrence of the reactor disaster at the same time as Uranus entered Aries, compared with the number of other nuclear reactors around the world that were not affected, is incapable of confirming or refuting the analogy assumed. However, that would also apply if similar cases were to be replicated multiple times –​they would always represent a small number of all possible cases confirming the theory, while a larger number of cases do not confirm the theory: verifiability and falsifiability therefore cancel each other out. The same, though, also applies to astrological statistics that deal with larger quantities of data, the results from which appear to confirm divinations. Astrological statistics do not err because of the results but because of the imprecise and therefore untestable singular statements. If they do not provide a clear, testable theory, it is also impossible to deliver a clear yes/​no result. Popper, at least –​as shown above –​is doubtful that such processes are possible. Even if an event predicted through some fortune-​telling technique occurs many times, and experience appears to confirm the prediction, it is not yet possible to speak of an empirical confirmation as long as there is no possibility to specifically falsify the prediction.

110

Astrology in European Religious History

It is not entirely clear how intensively Popper dealt with astrology, particularly its comparative and statistical processes, such as statistician Michel Gauquelin’s hotly discussed and frequently tested study, Cosmic Influence on Human Behavior. A second quote from Conjectures and Refutations at least suggests that there must have been a ‘test’. It is possible that Karl Popper discovered Michel Gauquelin’s study of astrology in the time following his retirement but nonetheless some years before the final German edition of Logic of Scientific Discovery (1984) and before the second German edition of Conjectures and Refutations (1994). Popper taught at the University of London between 1949 and 1969, where Hans Jürgen Eysenck also worked from 1955 to 1981. As an advocate for statistical methods, at the end of the 1970s Eysenck had examined and defended Gauquelin’s study of astrology at the Institute of Psychiatry (IOP) at King’s College London, which is part of the University of London. Eysenck also published his defence of Gauquelin in 1982 with the London-​based publisher Maurice Temple Smith. Popper’s eighth edition of Logic of Scientific Discovery was published in 1984  –​like the other editions since its first publication in 1934, it included additions and corrections. Eysenck’s examination of Gauquelin’s study was reported on in all media in the early 1980s, so Popper must have heard of it before it was published. Popper did not react publicly, however, and even the quote above remained unchanged in the eighth edition compared with the first edition from 1934. The wording about astrology in Conjectures and Refutations from the first edition in 1963 also remained unchanged in the 1994 edition. Even if Karl Popper’s criticism of fortune-​telling techniques –​and astrology in particular  –​can only be understood from his peculiar epistemological approach that he himself calls ‘critical rationalism’, the comprehensive influence of his scientific theory in forming modern-​day theory and opinion as a whole cannot be underestimated. The rejection of astrology as a science was largely characterised by an understanding of (natural) science formulated by Karl Popper for the second half of the twentieth century, which enjoys widespread academic consensus today. Karl Popper is not the only opponent of ‘astrology as a science’, however. The opposite epistemological position to Popper’s concept is the Vienna Circle’s logical empiricism, which emerged publicly from 1929 onwards, and likewise concludes that divination techniques fall short of

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

111

minimum epistemological requirements. If one were to follow the principles of logical empiricism, unlike Karl Popper, and proceed inductively to carry empirical data over to rational concepts and finally general theories, comparative astrology would still lack a theory to explain the data collected rationally and grant it the distinction of ‘scientific’. Provided that there were empirical data confirming astrological assertions, in line with logical empiricism these would remain theoretically unexplained and left to chance.

2.4.2. Theodor Wiesengrund Adorno Epistemological scepticism about an astrology that considers itself a science reflects a broad sentiment against astrology among scientists of different disciplines. Theodor W. Adorno (1903–​1969), for example, points to still-​unexplained but alleged relationships that he considers symptomatic of astrology’s scientific invalidity. He wrote the following regarding the astrology column in the Los Angeles Times: The ‘mystery’ of astrology, in other words, the elements of irrationality and, incidentally, the sole element that accounts for its mass appeal, is the way these two ‘unrelated’ realms are related to each other. There is nothing irrational about astrology except its decisive contention that these two spheres of rational knowledge are interconnected, whereas not the slightest evidence of such an interconnection can be offered […]. It is in fact this very unrelatedness, the irrationality in the relations between astronomy and psychology, for which there is no common denominator, no ‘rationale’, which affords astrology with the semblance of justification in its pretence to be mysterious, irrational knowledge itself. The opaqueness of astrology is nothing but opaqueness prevailing between various scientific areas which could not meaningfully brought together (Adorno 1957, 84).

Adorno does not choose to deal with astrology out of a primarily epistemological interest, but a social-​psychological one. He is most interested in how astrology comes to enjoy such massive acceptance in the present day. Although his assumption is not entirely accurate, he finds the answer in a complete lack of theoretical foundation for the relationship between celestial bodies and humans, between astronomy and psychology. The experience argument does not appear once in Adorno’s explanations, and his argument has the overall intention of inferring that experience can only be taken into consideration once a plausible theory exists. As this is lacking,

112

Astrology in European Religious History

the entire enterprise of astrology becomes a force. Astrology’s very hallmark is that its irrationality makes it attractive: Thus people even of supposedly ‘normal’ mind are prepared to accept systems of delusions for the simple reason that it is too difficult indeed to distinguish such systems from the equally inexorable and equally opaque one under which they actually have to live out their lives. This is pretty well reflected by astrology as well as by the two brands of totalitarian states which also claim to have a key for everything, know all the answers, reduce the complex to simple and mechanical inferences, doing away with anything that is strange and unknown and at the same time fail to explain anything. (Adorno 1957, 82)

Similarly to Carl Jung, to a certain extent Adorno also advocates for a projection theory based on psychology. These are not manifest contents of the collective psyche projected onto the sky, however. On the contrary, it is the unclear, apparently unsolvable aspect of life that searches for a way out and obtains solutions ‘in the sky’ that are not solutions at all. For Adorno, this represents astrology’s anti-​scientific, anti-​Enlightenment objective. These two examples from the scientific discussion around astrology may be sufficient to comprehend the critical points regarding astrology as well as the weaknesses in criticism of it. As long as astrology is insufficient for the minimum requirements of coherent theories and empirical probation (Popper) set out by natural and social sciences, it will win scant majority recognition as a scientific discipline. Nonetheless, there has also been some epistemological criticism of the criticism itself, as the following example demonstrates.

2.4.3. Paul Feyerabend This criticism was not entirely unchallenged within epistemological discussions, however. Epistemologist Paul Feyerabend (1924–​1994) not only criticised the very principles of the modern conception of science, but also expressly defended astrology –​along with other disciplines often labelled ‘pseudo-​sciences’ –​as fields of knowledge worthy of research. His main charge against the modern, empirical-​rational conception of science is that it originates from dogmatic doctrine in the same way that church fathers used dogma in their claim for truth and against divergent teachings. Science is our religion. Everything within the boundaries of this religion is suitable for headlines. Everything outside them is heathen nonsense. What did church

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

113

fathers say about gnosis? They called it ‘irrational superstition’. What do the church fathers of the sciences say about astrology, acupuncture or Taoism? It is also important to add that the old church fathers studied their opponents much more seriously than scientists their opponents today. (Feyerabend 2010, 14).

In a reversal of intention, here Feyerabend takes Adorno’s accusation of irrationality and uses it against the proponents of epistemological demands. ‘Irrational’ is the unfounded rejection of teachings or practices without seriously examining them or even considering them worthy of examination. Paul Feyerabend presents a classic example of faith and heresy in the sciences –​a statement opposing astrology signed by a circle of reputable scientists including several Nobel laureates. This statement makes clear to Feyerabend just how dogmatically biased and condemnatory even Nobel laureates can be with astrology, abandoning all of their scientific principles. The statement was motivated by philosopher Paul Kurtz of the State University of New York and his work against the ‘assertions of paranormal phenomena’. At his initiative, 186 prestigious scientists, including 18 Nobel laureates (among them behavioural scientist Konrad Lorenz, physicians John Carew Eccles and Francis Crick, and chemist Linus Carl Pauling), signed a statement opposing astrology in 1975. It appeared in the September edition of The Humanist, a journal edited by Paul Kurtz, under the title Objections to Astrology: A Statement by 186 Leading Scientists. The statement said: It should be apparent that those individuals who continue to have faith in astrology do so in spite of the fact that there is no verified scientific basis for their beliefs, and indeed that there is strong evidence to the contrary. (Kurtz 1975, 4ff).

Sociologist Marcello Truzzi of the Eastern Michigan State University first collaborated with Paul Kurtz, but later broke off the collaboration and assessed the statement against astrology as follows in an interview: Paul Kurtz had drafted a statement against astrology and persuaded 186 scientists and academics, who all claimed to be experts on the matter, to sign it. The statement declared that there was no scientific basis for astrology and affirmed –​erroneously –​that there was no scientific research in favour of astrology.59

59 Marcello Truzzi Talks About: The Crusade Against the Paranormal, Interview by Gordon Melton/​Jerome Clark in: Fate, Part 1 Vol. 83, no. 9, 70–​76, Part 2.

114

Astrology in European Religious History

Paul Feyerabend comments on the statement and its content at length, and adds: When the document was published, a representative of the BBC wanted to set up a discussion between astrologers and some Nobel laureates. Some of the Nobel laureates informed him that they had no idea about astrology: they had no idea about something that they were happy to publicly condemn. (Feyerabend 1979, 156ff. Ders. 2010, 21).

This raises the question of what Paul Feyerabend understands to be scientific methods. To start with, it is important to clarify that Feyerabend does not aim to abandon science and reduce all research to arbitrariness. However, he considers it appropriate to relax the criteria for research as much as possible so that any idea, teaching and practice put forward by humans can be investigated in an unbiased way, making equal space for it in the history of human ideas. He writes in Wider den Methodenzwang (‘Against Methodological Constraints’): Facts alone are not strong enough to base acceptance or rejection of scientific theories on them, and they leave too wide a scope for thinking, while logic and methodology eliminate too much and are too narrow. Between these two extremes is a constantly evolving wealth of human ideas and desires, and a more precise analysis of successful steps in science does indeed demonstrate that there is plenty of scope demanding a variety of ideas and permitting the application of democratic processes (discussions and votes). (Feyerabend 1976, 403).

Research roams around this broad scope of experience and ideas as a free thought experiment. For Feyerabend, the task of investigating astrology as a theory and system of rules also results from the history of science, more specifically the ‘so-​called scientific revolution’, which branded many fields of knowledge ‘pseudo-​sciences’ and unjustly declared them heresies. The huge rise in physical knowledge as part of the ‘scientific revolution’ was only possible at the expense of doing away with other fields of knowledge. Older explanations of humans and nature ‘were pushed aside and considered irrelevant, often even as non-​existent.’ With regard to spiritual ideas, he continues: ‘In this way, everything related to witchcraft, possession by ghosts, the existence of the devil, etc., along with the “superstition” that

Vol. 83, no. 10, 87–​94), in: Wunder 4/​1999, 13ff.

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

115

had once confirmed it, was pushed aside’. As a consequence, human psychology was driven out of science –​so forcefully, in fact, that psychopathology was entrusted entirely to the Church and its pastoral teachings and practices, taking it further and further away from the scientific study of medicine. Physical knowledge made progress, then, while ‘knowledge of humans fell back to a more primitive stage.’ (Ibid. 146). Astrology suffered a similar fate. Just as the investigation of the relationship between medicine and human psychology was sacrificed in favour of one-​sided progressive thinking, the same applied to the investigation of the relationship between astronomy and biology, which in earlier ages of humanity had been explained using concepts of cosmic myths. Quoting August Comte, Feyerabend writes: In the human spirit’s earlier stages of development, the connections between astronomy and biology were investigated from very different perspectives, but at least they were investigated and not disregarded [...]. At the basis of the chimaera of old philosophy and the physiological influence of celestial bodies was an emphatic, albeit confused, knowledge of truth –​that the facts of life were somehow dependent on the solar system. Like all primitive thought on the human spirit, this feeling needed to be rectified by positive science, but not destroyed. (Ibid. 146).

What Paul Feyerabend represents as astrology here –​that is, a causal relationship between astronomy and biology –​contradicts the primary intention of the argumentation so far, which considers the foundation of astrology to be an analogous system of correspondence. That is not important here, though, and Paul Feyerabend’s focus is also not on a theoretical explanation of astrology, but on a general attitude towards research. What he demands is an expansion of the concept of science, which ought not to consider any taboos concerning the investigation of human ideas. Feyerabend calls for more respect for concepts that have their origins in seemingly more primitive periods of human culture, and that these concepts’ causes and issues be examined seriously, not simply dismissed. Feyerabend dedicates an entire article to the relationship between science and astrology: Über die Methode. Ein Dialog (‘On Methods. A Dialogue’).60 In the article, he explains that astrology has a special place

60 Feyerabend, in: Schendel 2010 (Licensed edition from Anderson/​Radnitzky 1981, 175ff).

116

Astrology in European Religious History

among the ‘heresies’ in a modern-​day understanding of science, as well as why this is so. In terms of its assessments of true and false, he claims that modern science behaves just as dogmatically ‘as a religion’. (Ibid. 22f). He does not believe that it is rejected because of insufficient theory or empirical foundations –​the different fields of knowledge and scientific disciplines have comparable difficulties here –​but because it is simply not believed in. In this way, astrology is one of a series of other ‘pseudo-​sciences’ that Paul Feyerabend explores as an array of alternative teachings and methods in his article. He describes the deeper reason behind the rejection on principle of alternative teachings by taking the example of acupuncture: What is the most important criticism of acupuncture? That its ‘meridians’ cannot be determined anatomically or physiologically. Why is that considered criticism? Because it is assumed that the human body is only home to anatomical or physiological processes, that is, material processes in a very simple sense. Has this assumption ever been examined? Not at all. People rely instead on the fact that there are anatomical and physiological processes [...] plus a naive materialism that has not been investigated further. It is this materialism that eliminates the alternatives. (Ibid. 25f).

This strikes the core of what Feyerabend claims excludes acupuncture, just like astrology and any other ‘pseudo-​science’, from the circle of sciences and does not look likely to recognise it in the foreseeable future. For Feyerabend, the non-​materialistic conditions of these disciplines cause them to be ostracised. As far as astrology is concerned, it is metaphysical ‘principles of organic being’ (Thomas Ring), the ‘reality of the soul’ (Jean Claude Weiss), and especially any religious assumption of a ‘world soul’ or intelligible celestial bodies that block its entry into today’s sciences, defined on a materialistic level. Paul Feyerabend also includes Karl Popper and Theodor W. Adorno’s criticism, as theory and empiricism are linked to a materialistic reality in both cases. Ever since Pierre Simon Laplace excluded the ‘God hypothesis’ from astronomy and Robert Boyle eliminated ‘mental-​spiritual principles’ from physical nature, disciplines that imply metaphysical principles as their preconditions have forfeited their right to be recognised as sciences. Here Paul Feyerabend critically establishes something  –​namely, that the suspicion of metaphysics is sufficient to exclude an idea from the context of subjects worthy of scientific investigation –​that enjoys self-​evident

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

117

consensus in most scientific disciplines. The same applies to the study of religions, that is, that subjects of the study of religions, as Günter Kehrer states, ‘cannot be defined religiously.’ (Kehrer 1998, 424). As long as this remains the majority opinion, astrology will not enjoy any recognition as a scientific discipline. It is here, and not in a lack of theory or data, that astrology finds itself unable to be a science. Astrology requires principles outside the theoretical and empirical limits commonly agreed on today, just as is true of all religious teachings. However –​and this is crucial in the study of religions –​astrology, just like any other spiritual or religious tradition, is most likely subject to its scientific investigation simply because it is a cultural phenomenon that historically has been and continues to be discussed to the present day. The following section will shed light on this critical relationship between science and transcendental requirements in astrology from another perspective. The argument of experience is a factor from an internal perspective that plays a central role in every religious interpretation of the world. That also applies to astrology, but in this case with the additional demand not only that it reflect subjective experiences from an internal perspective, but also, as shown in the Uranus-​Fukushima example, that it change subjective experiences into testable data with empirical verifiability. Although astrology runs into scientific criticism in this way, a fair number of astrologers consider empiricism an adequate way to justify astrology as a science. However, the discussions on this also show that theoretical explanations are not possible without metaphysical implications. As determined by Franz Boll at the outset, this in turn leads astrology to operate in a grey area between science and religion. Evidently, part of modern astrology’s identity is to attempt to reconcile transcendent interpretations of the world with scientific methods to the greatest extent possible and in a correlative way.

2.5. The ‘Experience’ Argument in Astrology In Tractatus Logico-​Philosophicus, Ludwig Wittgenstein closes with the remark that the depiction of reality in the logical structure of sign and principle does not comprise reality at all, but merely delimits subjects of science. Something else ‘shows’ itself beyond the limit of principles: ‘There

118

Astrology in European Religious History

is the unspeakable, however. This shows itself, it is the mystic.’ (Wittgenstein 1969, No. 6.522). The concept of experience is therefore divided into a scientific and a subjective aspect. The latter cannot fulfil the demand for scientific –​that is, intersubjectively testable –​statements. However, there are also subjective experiences that claim to be ‘real’. Immanuel Kant branded subjective experiential judgements outside of valid scientific knowledge ‘aesthetic judgements’ and declared these valid in his third critique, Critique of Judgement. Even today it is self-​evident that many scientists have experiences that they themselves see as religious, spiritual or metaphysical. If this were not the case, no scientists would define themselves as religious.61 Some scientists also make affirmative judgements regarding astrology, as the following example demonstrates.

2.5.1. Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker In a radio show on Süddeutscher Rundfunk on 7 January 1976, physicist Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker (1912–​2007) spoke about his experiences with astrology. He claimed to have taken part in astrology courses imparted by perhaps the most influential German-​speaking astrologer of the twentieth century, Thomas Ring (1892–​1983), in Strasbourg in 1943, and also stated that he had produced 60 horoscopes for famous people following Thomas Ring’s method. To quote Weizsäcker: As a physicist, I approached astrology with a great deal of scepticism. As a physicist, to this day I do not give a second thought to what would hold true if astrology were empirically real. I have gained the impression, however, simply from dealing with astrology, that there is something empirical to it. To be sure, I am sceptical of astrologers, but I am also sceptical about the opinion of physicists that only the things they already understand can possibly be true.62

When Weizsäcker says ‘empirical’ here, he clearly means a quantity of cases he considers significant, that is, the 60 he analysed. He does not mean to say that it is a scientifically proven process. Astrology’s validity remains a personal impression. The lack of a plausible theory (‘I do not

61 On religiosity among scientists, cf. Stark, Rodney/​Finke, Roger: Acts of Faith. Explaining the Human Side of Religion, Berkeley: University of California Press 2000, 52f. 62 Interview from 07.01.1976, SWF II, in: Niehenke 1987, 22.

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

119

give a second thought’) is not sufficient to unsettle his affirmative impression. Weizsäcker affirms an evidential experience, expressing a conviction from his personal work in this field without being able to carry this over to a scientific foundation –​or not yet, at least.

2.5.2. The Evidence Argument in the Past and the Present Day Weizsäcker’s evidence argument is noteworthy in that it is typical of the apologetic attitude of modern-​day astrologers. The term evidence argument is the most commonly used and is the principal argument for astrology’s validity today. This can be seen both in websites dedicated to astrology and in introductory remarks in astrological literature that not only deal with the practice of producing horoscopes, but also aim to clarify fundamental issues. The former president of the German Astrologers’ Association (DAV), Christoph Schubert-​Weller, writes the following in his book Philosophische Fragen der Astrologie (‘Philosophical Issues in Astrology): I have been working in astrology for over three decades and have had my evidential experiences. I take for granted that astrology is ‘true’ and ‘works’. (Schubert-​ Weller 2011, 21)

Some authors consider the evidential experience the principal reason that made them convert from critics to staunch proponents of astrology. Benedictine pastor Gerhard Voss, for example, writes the following in his book Astrologie christlich (‘Astrology from a Christian Perspective’), which has been published multiple times: My reason for dealing with astrology was also not least a psychotherapeutic analysis as I was shocked to actually see myself in my horoscope and then discovered that one thing or other that had seemed entirely self-​evident to me until then could actually be different and was different for other people too.63

These evidential experiences are fundamentally tied to the relationship between astrology and psychology, as already described by Carl Jung and Thomas Ring. They form a conviction, gleaned from ‘many individual experiences’ (Voss) and often over a long period of time, that astrological

63 Voss 1990, 14. Hans Bender writes in the preface to Thomas Ring’s Astrologische Menschenkunde that „quite a number of psychotherapists deal practically with the natal constellation as a diagnostic tool.” (Ring 61990, IX).

120

Astrology in European Religious History

symbols in a birth chart correspond to a human’s personality structure. Gerhard Voss calls this correspondence a ‘“kinship” between the “image” of the constellation of planets in the sky and the essence of the person’. The sum of experiences of such ‘kinships’ finally produces a ‘carved-​out system’ that constitutes astrology. If such a system exists, astrology can also be considered a science. Winckler writes: Astrology is [...] essentially impossible to get to grips with through a scientifically testable causal relationship [...]. Nonetheless, it will be possible to call astrology a science in that it is a system carved out of many individual experiences with a logic that verifies itself again and again, principally from a depth-​psychology perspective. (Ibid.)

Carl Jung attempted to expand this evidential experience of concordance between the birth chart  –​based on the mythological description of the planets and signs of the zodiac  –​and personality structure to an intersubjectively testable method to an extent. In his astrological experiment, presented above and detailed in his texts Synchronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle and more briefly in On Synchronicity, he took a ‘similarity between psychological and physical processes’ for granted. It is true that these ‘could not be proven scientifically’, but ‘they simply exist’. To highlight the persuasiveness of his experiment and the weight of evidential experiences in general, Jung writes: ‘It certainly takes quite a thick skin to not be impressed by the fact that the results are showcased that astrological traditional typically considers.’ (Jung 41983, 514). It is striking that the argument of experience is often named first in astrological literature when discussing astrology’s foundations. This is as true of traditional, pre-​Copernican astrology as it is of early-​modern, post-​Copernican astrology and the astrology of the present day. Johannes Kepler already pointed to the long astrological tradition, which does indeed include many baseless and false claims. Kepler nonetheless considers astrology correct in principle and possible to trace back to experiences: Many nature-​lovers have concluded that many effects are (or must be) ascribed to the stars and are not fabricated, but have proven themselves through prolonged experience. (Kepler 1971, No. 12)

His work with astrology also finally brought him to the personal conviction that astronomy and the shaping of character are closely related:

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

121

Firstly, I can truly proclaim the experience that, in the first ignition of their lives, humans receive a personality and an image through the heavenly constellations, which they retain until the grave. (Kepler 1971, No. 65)

Even as far as astrological details are concerned, Kepler restricts his judgement to experience and not theoretical considerations on whether and why the cosmos and humans are interdependent. On the ‘directions’ –​a horoscope technique that aims to determine certain events chronologically based on the analogy of a day (the planets’ onward movements) and a year (the events in a human life) –​Kepler writes: I have often thought nothing would come of directionibus because you have to go so far back to find the cause. I must confess, though, that the experience is so clear that it cannot be denied to the astrologers. (Kepler: 1971, No. 66)

The extent to which Kepler prioritises experience becomes particularly clear when he does not hesitate to declare certain parts of astrological tradition invalid if experience does not confirm them. He categorically rejects the allocation of the planets to the twelve signs of the zodiac, a practice from Ancient Greek tradition that assigns the Sun to Leo and the Moon to Cancer, for example: ‘I consider the allocation of the twelve signs of the zodiac to the seven planets to be a fable.’ It is unclear from this statement whether Kepler likewise rejects the equal distribution of the ecliptic into twelve signs of the zodiac. Essentially, his concern is ‘to refute some parts of astrology, to confirm some, to improve some’, depending on what can be justified by experience and what cannot. (Ibid. No. 23 and 65). Even prominent exponents of ancient astrology cite experience as a crucial argument in favour of astrology even though the Ptolemaic worldview in ancient thinking could have provided sufficient theoretical justifications. Roman astrologer Marcus Manilius (31 BCE–​37 CE) considers the development of astrology the result of rigorous comparative observations of the planets’ movements in comparison with the course of human lives: These [priests and astrologers] were the first to see that destinies are in the thrall of the planets [...] and they used continuous research to measure long aeons –​the course of days of birth and life cycles, the conditions of fate provoked by individual hours, and the vast difference triggered by the smallest movement. Once every celestial phenomenon had been recorded, [...] experience through repeated practice produced a doctrine. (Manilius 1990, 13).

122

Astrology in European Religious History

Claudius Ptolemy also considered celestial influence self-​evident, as he explains in the introduction to Book One of Tetrabiblos, which is dedicated to a certain Syrus. Ptolemy starts by distinguishing between astronomy and astrology. While astronomy is demonstrable and therefore unproblematic, astrology certainly presents problems as, similarly to philosophy, it is not based on such secure notions as astronomy. The number of events rooted in celestial origins remains self-​evident to him, however. (Ptolemy 1980, I,1; Ptolemy 1995, 12f.). The imprecision Ptolemy discusses here is repeatedly emphasised in a great many texts on astrology, and it remains a problem in astrology today that complicates the practice of astrological interpretation. In his text Kritische Astrologie (‘Critical Astrology’, Niehenke 1987), the long-​time president of the German Astrologers’ Association, Peter Niehenke, tackles the problem in a chapter titled ‘Deceptive Evidential Feelings’. He describes how astrological-​psychological counselling constantly produces situations in which ‘client and astrological counsellor have the impression that the interpretation of the horoscope is coherent and also helpful’ (ibid. 86f), but it is later found that widely inaccurate dates of birth were accidentally used. He describes one case where the date of birth used was around 20 years out. Niehenke does not consider this grounds to question ‘evidential experiences’ and therefore astrology as a whole. For him, ‘countless counselling situations’ provide enough credible evidence, which he gained for the most part from ‘blind assessments’.64 Instead it is a reason to qualify the requirements for evidence and explore the question of whether it is possible to measure the person’s characteristics dealt with in astrology in an intersubjective way. The final remark demands empirical scientific methods that, assuming significant results, could prove astrology as a scientific fact rather than mere subjective affirmation. For Niehenke, this would only be possible for psychologically oriented astrology if ‘the human psyche is a kind of “object”’ and if it were possible to deconstruct a person’s characters into

64 Niehenke 1987, 98. In „blind expert opinions” an astrologer describes a personality only on the basis of the horoscope without knowing the person. An examination then takes place only after the expert opinion has been completed.

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

123

objectively measurable parts. Niehenke considers that such attempts are ‘doomed to fail’. After all, without ‘introspection’ and ‘holistic contemplation of humans’, it is impossible to reach a ‘reasonable description of a human’s personality structure. (Ibid. 78ff). This leaves the evidential experience, the ‘impression between the client and astrological advisor that the interpretation of the horoscope is coherent’, which is to be examined self-​ critically over and over again (ibid. 86f). At the end of the text, submitted as a doctoral thesis, Niehenke writes: I cannot be ‘dissuaded’ from perceiving a coherence to horoscope interpretations in my work as an astrologer; I do not wish to doubt my senses in general [...]. I follow my own innate common sense, which cannot be frivolously led astray by the results of scientific research on astrology. I take both ways of perceiving reality seriously –​the naive ‘lay’ approach and the ‘scientific’ one. (Ibid. 194).

2.5.3. Empirical Studies: The ‘Mars Effect’ Despite the justified ambiguity of astrological statements, spanning from Claudius Ptolemy all the way to Peter Niehenke, recent decades have seen at times incredibly elaborate attempts to examine the evidential argument through statistical results. Carl Jung’s 1952 study on the concordance of marriages with the classic planetary symbols has already been explored in Section 1.3.1.1, but the first comprehensive study in the German-​ speaking world was carried out in 1926 and was presented by physician Herbert Freiherr von Klöckler (1896–​1950). In his text Astrologie als Erfahrungswissenschaft (‘Astrology as an Empirical Science’, Klöckler 1989), he examined the allocation of planets to signs of the zodiac and the planets’ aspects with regard to particular biographical events including death in early childhood, suicide, accidents, divorce, as well as the planetary constellations with regard to certain professions such as painters, sculptors, poets, doctors and lawyers. Both Carl Jung and Herbert von Klöckler considered their results’ concordance with astrological tradition to be a compelling confirmation of astrology, but they conceded that the smaller quantities of material used as a basis were not sufficient to classify them as scientifically proven findings. These endorsements may have reinforced astrology’s evidence, but they were not confirmed within the narrow boundaries of scientific, empirical research.

124

Astrology in European Religious History

This provides the problem of whether modern-​ day sciences set their boundaries too narrowly to validate astrology or whether astrology is too flexible in its understanding of reality. The latter is linked to the fact that Herbert von Klöckler was a member of the Masonic lodge Minerva zu den drei Palmen in Leipzig, which meant he had an understanding of reality beyond purely physical explanations. Klöckler explains astrology’s mechanism very theosophically, too, through ‘mental’ and ‘spiritual’ components in nature and humans. Carl Jung’s psychology of a ‘collective unconscious’ points in a similar direction. There are also studies, however, that endeavour to set narrow, empirical standards. The most well-​known and to this day the most widely discussed investigation of this kind is Cosmic Influences on Human Behaviour, published by Michel Gauquelin and Françoise Schneider-​Gauquelin first in 1956 and definitively in 1976. The study provides a representative insight into the scientific discussion of astrology and the quantifiability of data in this field. Discussion around this study has continued to this day and is not least a dispute about drawing the boundaries between scientific and transcendental explanations. The principal concern of the Gauquelins’ study is proving the profession hypothesis, according to which the positions of certain planets in a birth chart correspond to certain occupational groups in accordance with the traditional descriptions of the planets. The most striking part of this study is the discovery of the ‘Mars effect’, according to which the planet Mars very often appears just after its rise (ascendent) or shortly after its culmination (Medium Coeli) in the birth chart of thousands of elite athletes. (Gauquelin 1983, 56). A similar phenomenon appears with prominent scientists and their Saturn position; high-​ranking members of armed forces with a Mars-​Jupiter conjunction; politicians, actors and journalists with a less pronounced but nonetheless significant Jupiter position; and authors with the Moon shortly after its rise or culmination. (Ibid. 57f). The Mars effect, in particular, subsequently prompted numerous investigations and discussions at an international level, involving scientific institutions and individual scientists from various disciplines, but

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

125

principally psychologists, statisticians and astronomers.65 The Gauquelins’ results were examined as early as 1956 by the astrology-​critical Belgian Comité Para (CP)66 and compared with the committee’s own compilation of elite athletes as well as comparison groups. The committee set itself the task of refuting the Gauquelins’ study but in 1967, after years of research, found that its results provisionally confirmed the study. Most of the committee’s members considered a statistical confirmation of astrology too implausible, so years went by without the result being commented on. After several years, during which sources of possible errors were sought out, in 1976 the Comité Para published a conclusive report that rejected the Gauquelins’ results because of the possibility of ‘imaginary demographic errors’.67 Suitbert Ertel claims that even the committee’s president, astronomer Jean Dommanget, was convinced that the data and findings were genuine at first. From this perspective, the conclusive report with its negative verdict based purely on suspected errors  –​called ‘complicated’ and ‘contradictory’ by Suitbert Ertel –​takes a fundamentally sceptical position towards astrology without presenting sources of any concrete errors. In the years after 1976, the American Committee for Sceptical Inquiry (CSI) corrected the design of the experiment and examined the Gauquelins’ results.68

65 A detailed documentation of the discussion about the Mars effect in: Ertel, Suitbert/​Irving, Kennth:  The Tenacious Mars Effect, London:  The Urania Trust, 1996. 66 The Comité Para (Comité Para pour l’investigation scientifique des phénomènes réputés paranormaux) was founded in 1949 and had set itself the task of subjecting paranormal phenomena to scientific scrutiny (Abell/​Kurtz: The Abell-​ Kurtz-​Zelen ‚Mars Effect’ Experiments: Repraisal, in: Skeptical Inquirer, 7 1983, no. 3, 77–​82). 67 Comité Para:  Consedérations critiques sur une recherche faite par M.M. Gauquelin dans le domaine des influences planétaires, in : Nouvelles Brèves, Nr. 43, 1976, 327–​343. Quoted from Ertel, Suitbert/​Irving, Kenneth: The Tenacious Mars Effect, London: Urania Trust 1996, Appendix 2, 6. 68 The CSI was founded in 1976 by the American philosopher Paul Kurtz, first under the name Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP). Here, too, the aim was the critical examination and, if necessary, rejection of claimed paranormal phenomena.

126

Astrology in European Religious History

The CSI’s results appeared to be confirmable at first, but were later contradicted. Individual members of the CSI published articles in the journal The Humanist. A Magazine of Critical Inquiry and Social Concern.69 The French Comité Français pour l’Etude des Phénomènes Paranormaux (CFEPP) waited several years before publishing its comparative study, which changed the requirements for selecting groups of test subjects and came to results that significantly contradicted those reached by the Gauquelins. Psychologist and statistician Hans Jürgen Eysenck (1916–​1997) of the Institute of Psychiatry at King’s College London attracted attention when he examined the Gauquelins’ study and, after investigating all possible objections, concluded that it was highly reliable. He said the study was among ‘the best carried out in psychology, psychiatry, sociology or any other social science’. Eysenck published his results in 1982 under the title Astrology: Science or Superstition?.70 The fierce dispute regarding the Mars effect unfolded in part through countless articles in specialised journals, including The Humanist. A Magazine of Critical Inquiry and Social Concern, as mentioned previously, in the CSI’s The Skeptical Inquirer, The Zetetic Scholar, founded by sociologist Marcello Tuzzi, and the Journal of Scientific Exploration published by the Society of Scientific Exploration, which was founded in 1982. The dispute often had an ideological or religious character, distinguished by frequent accusations and references to personal conversations71 that are impossible to substantiate today, as well as the self-​assurance with which both the original study’s detractors and defenders claimed the same results as a confirmation of their approval or rejection.

69 Founded by Edwin Henry Wilson (1898–​1993). Cf. Ertel/​Irving 1996, Appendix 2, 5 ff. Eysenck/​Nias 1982, 17–​21. 70 Eysenck, Hans-​Jürgen/​Nias, David:  Astrology Science or Superstition? London: Maurice Temple Smith 1982. German: Astrologie –​Wissenschaft oder Aberglaube?, Munich: List 1982, quote 306. 71 For example, the contribution by astronomer Jean Dommanget: The ‚Mars Effect’ as seen by the PARA Committee, in: Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 11, 1997, no. 3, 275–​295.

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

127

Given that this conflict augured the fundamental scientific confirmation or rejection in principle of an aspect of astrology (the planetary effect), it is no surprise that the dispute was and remains so fiercely contested. After all, acknowledging the empirical findings without being able to provide a theoretical-​physical explanation for this planetary effect could also imply accepting transcendental assumptions and paving the way for spiritual interpretations of nature. The serious implications that acknowledging the Gauquelins’ study would have for scientific understanding of nature and humans can also be seen in the more mediatory but somewhat helpless summary provided by George Ogden Abell (1927–​1983), an American astronomer and member of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, who establishes that ‘methodologically no errors can be found’ in the Gauquelins’ work (Müller 1986, 88) while also remarking that: ‘I have a strong suspicion that Gauquelin’s results will prove erroneous in the end. But if they proved to be correct only in part, it would be an enormous milestone in establishing cosmic influences on humans.’72 The most active participants from the German-​speaking world were the aforementioned psychologist and astrologer Peter Niehenke (1949–​), psychologist Arno Müller (1930–​2005) of the Saarland University Medical Center in Homburg, and psychologist Suitbert Ertel (1932–​) of the University of Göttingen. Interestingly, the three drew different conclusions from the Gauquelins’ study, while possible transcendental assumptions also play a far from insignificant role here. Their different conclusions are the following: On the one hand, Peter Niehenke appears sceptical about statistics that aim to make a person’s astrological character traits objective (the character trait method). On the other hand, he is optimistic about the profession hypothesis, which examines the concordance between occupational groups and planetary positions. As far as the profession hypothesis is concerned, Niehenke is convinced that it is possible to establish a relationship between birth constellation and a person’s life as a ‘scientific fact’ using

72 Abell, George Ogden: One Astronomer’s View, in: The Humanist. A Magazine of Critical Inquiry and Social Concern, Washington DC: American Humanist Association, 1976, (quoted: Eysenck/​Nias 1984, 289 f).

128

Astrology in European Religious History

recognised empirical processes, just as statistical processes are used to establish scientific facts in other social sciences. He justifies this as follows: What is astonishing about Gauquelin’s results is that the symbolic meaning of the planets found in the occupational groups closely corresponds to aspects considered typical for the respective occupation. To put it more simply, to a great extent the Gauquelins confirmed the medieval planet-​child typology by statistical means (Niehenke 1987, 12).

Niehenke finds a theoretical explanation for the relationship between planetary symbol and occupational group in Carl Jung’s archetypes detailed in Section 1.3. Unlike Niehenke, neither Arno Müller nor Suitbert Ertel were astrologers, but psychologists and statisticians at university institutions. Müller studied the Gauquelin effect intensively for many years and examined it in the 1980s with his own tests on doctors. His results were very similar to those found by the Gauquelins: The birth data of 1288 prominent doctors exhibited a significant mass of Mars and Saturn positions in the zones of the birth chart established by the Gauquelins’ study, shortly after the rise (ascendent) and shortly after the culmination (Medium Coeli). (Müller 1986, 88ff). Müller came to a slightly different conclusion in a new study at the start of the 1990s that appeared to invalidate one assumption in his own previous study and the Gauquelins’. The ‘eminence effect’ suggested that the Gauquelin effect –​the assignment of planets to occupations in birth charts  –​rose in line with the prominence of the subjects tested. In his study, however, it was not possible to prove that with ‘very eminent women and men’. The result was a methodological discussion with Suitbert Ertel on the value of this ‘eminence hypothesis’ (Müller 1995, 28ff), but it did not affect his acceptance of the profession hypothesis in principle. In his 1994 study Der Gauquelin-​Effekt –​Eine kritische Bilanz (‘The Gauquelin Effect:  A Critical Summary), Müller brought all control studies on the Gauquelin effect together in a table. There had been a total of ten control studies at that point, excluding the studies by the Belgian Comité Para and the American sceptic movement CSICOP because of ‘ambiguity regarding data collection’. Müller came to the following conclusion: The control studies on the Gauquelin effect conclude that it can be considered statistically proven in the usual sense. Some elements do have to be deducted from

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

129

the findings originally presented by the Gauquelins, but a hard core of findings remains. (Müller 1994, 152).73

The question remains of what this result means for an astrology that, to borrow Franz Boll’s somewhat outdated expression, wishes to be ‘a science and a religion at the same time’ or, to put it in more modern terms, an astrology that leads to assumptions about an intelligible cosmos. Arno Müller’s statements suggest that the empirically ‘proven’ planetary effect could be traced back to explanations that, in theory, are purely scientific. Müller does not wish to go this far, however, as the planetary effect established covers only part of traditional astrology, that is, the link between occupation and person, not the aspect of a comprehensive personality analysis and certainly not astrological predictions. However, this sub-​aspect cannot yet be bluntly labelled scientific –​the empirical finding continues to lack any theoretical explanation that could support it. Müller is conscious of the situation’s explosive nature:  Allusions to transcendence crop up very quickly in the absence of a plausible scientific-​ theoretical explanation. Perhaps this close proximity to transcendental explanations for empirical findings is the main reason why many scientists reject the Gauquelin effect: Despite Michel Gauquelin presenting comprehensive data corresponding to 25000 prominent individuals over the decades, his thesis is still not generally recognised scientifically. And this is despite his findings being backed by greater significance and more extensive material than is customary in social sciences. (Müller 1994, 132f).

Müller, meanwhile, does not consider this statistical certainty to be in any way a confirmation of astrology founded in spiritualism, or at least not yet. He does indeed recognise the Gauquelin effect but explains at the same time that, for all their statistical soundness, ‘the Gauquelins’ findings can only be considered proof with some reservations’. (Ibid. 141). Theoretical explanations to date included ‘too speculative elements’ that too quickly assumed ‘transcendental influences’ (ibid. 318f).74 In the final Chapters 9 3 See also the justification of ‘statistically highly significant deviation’, ibid. 146. 7 74 The term „transcendental” used by Müller is here probably to be understood in the sense of transcendent. Certainly he does not mean the categories of judgments derived from Immanuel Kant’s transcendental deduction, to which,

130

Astrology in European Religious History

and 10 of the study, Müller focuses on this problem more intensively. He starts by making the case for the following procedure: All attempts at an explanation should first be tied to the proven facts of our scientific worldview; only when these efforts have been fully exhausted could attempts at a resolution be made on a new basis. (Ibid. 152f).

According to Müller, the possible explanations within the framework of scientifically recognised facts are:  The factor of ‘coincidence’, ‘astronomical-​demographic influence’ and ‘the preference for certain birth constellations owing to socio-​demographic factors’, as well as the limited amount of data, which unavoidably leads to control studies also leaning in part on the Gauquelins’ material. In Müller’s opinion, all of these possible explanations, including the possibility of conscious or unconscious artefacts in the Gauquelins’ selection of data, had been thoroughly investigated and discussed as much as possible, but none had produced a satisfactory result, leaving ‘much to the judgement of the beholder’. (Ibid. 159). This unsatisfactory situation leads Müller to the conclusion that more large-​scale studies are required, despite the effect being demonstrated statistically.75 As long as no new findings were available, ‘the question of whether there is something more to the Gauquelin effect than methodological errors or astronomical-​demographic factors should remain open’. (Ibid. 160). This ‘more’ refers to the transcendental influences already mentioned. What is the conclusion, then? Müller considers a scientific planetary effect in line with astrological tradition to be provisionally proven. If not

after all, causality belongs (cf. Kant, KrV, 1998, Die transzendentale Analytik § 10, 156, B 106/​A 80). ‚Transcendent’, on the other hand, would be an influence coming ‚from beyond’ that cannot be explained. Kant himself made this distinction (Kant, KrV, 1998, The Transcendental Dialectic, Introduction 406 f, B 352 f/​A 296 f). 75 The difficulty of such additional studies is that they require a great deal of effort and that the Gauquelins, through their decades of work, “have already grazed the field to a considerable extent” (Müller 1994, 155). In a reply to Suitbert Ertel’s criticism of his statement, Müller proposes a study of 1,000 famous writers and their significant lunar positions that would offer opportunities for final clarification (Müller 1995, 31). To my knowledge, such a sample has not yet been done.

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

131

entirely, this would make astrology a science in a key part of its teachings. He does not rule out a transcendental aspect conclusively, but does rule it out until all efforts to find scientific elucidation have been exhausted. The clearest explanations of both the validity of the Gauquelin effect and the high probability that transcendental explanations would be necessary can be found in numerous articles by psychologist Suitbert Ertel (Ertel 1984, 104ff). He summarised this in his 2007 article Die neo-​astrologischen Entdeckungen Gauquelins. Rückblick auf fünf Forschungsjahrzehnte (1955–​ 2005), (‘Gauquelin’s neo-​ astrological discoveries. Looking back on five decades of research’), in which he both brings together and comments on all of the arguments in the discussion around the Gauquelin effect. (Ertel 2005/​ 2006/​2007, 182–​207, in particular 202f). Based on his own analyses, the many control studies, and critique of the objections raised by Arno Müller, Geoffrey Dean and others, Ertel not only considered the planetary effect substantiated, but also criticised the approaches of the committees (Comité Para and Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal) that, in his opinion, set out to refute the study and practised a ‘strategy of stifling inconvenient findings’. (Ibid. 195). He believed that this strategy was motivated by the fact that ‘the content –​not the methods –​of Gauquelin’s model was utterly incompatible with established scientific teachings’ (Ertel 1984, 109). According to Ertel, the critics were less interested in whether the methods and the collection and evaluation of the data were correct or incorrect, but more in the principle of setting science apart from astrology (assumed to be) based on superstition. The majority of committee members considered the latter so far removed from the realm of scientific possibility that recognising it was not an option, even if the measurement methods had been flawless. Suitbert Ertel calls the Gauquelin effect a ‘particularly substantiated basic finding on the relationship between planets and birth’, which could not be denied validity or ignored simply because of a lack of convincing scientific explanations. He considered a ‘new creative leap forward in the research process’ necessary to find plausible explanations. For Ertel, the most likely explanations for the planetary effect are clearly to be found in

132

Astrology in European Religious History

the field of ‘parapsychological phenomena’ (psi-​phenomena).76 He points to the link between such phenomena and geomagnetic states, which in turn had been proven to be the effects of solar activity, making parapsychological phenomena occur more frequently ‘in hours with little geomagnetic activity’. These and other parapsychological, geomagnetic and astronomical relationships would act as a ‘cosmic window [...] delivering a bridge between conditions that can be described astronomically and the spiritual world of consciousness’ (Ertel 2005/​2006/​2007, 203f). What does this mean for the relationship between science and religion (always in its broadest sense) in astrology? Suitbert Ertel concludes that the empirical result proves the relationship between the planets and birth to be scientific with no concessions –​more clearly than Arno Müller. In all probability (and here Ertel is even further from Müller’s conclusion), theoretical explanations are only conceivable outside of conventional scientific theories and can only be found in the field of transcendental teachings. If religion is understood to assume a fundamental link to something transcendental, Suitbert Ertel’s scientific and empirical planetary effect is related to religious explanations as Franz Boll indicated with his definition of astrology wishing to be ‘a science and a religion at the same time’. However, Ertel also distinguishes his position from that of Peter Niehenke who, as a practising astrologer, brought together empirical findings and religio-​psychological explanations (Jung). While Niehenke takes subjective evidence to consider the connection of empirical-​scientific findings and mythological-​ psychological theory as a given to a certain extent, Ertel pursues a stricter scientific approach. For him, the parapsychological explanations named above are a hitherto untapped field of research that it is possible to explore using scientific methods. Here, Ertel advocates for a spiritism that defines itself as scientific, with a tradition that comprises the Zeitschrift für Parapsychologie und Grenzgebiete der Psychologie (Journal for Parapsychology and Frontiers of Psychology), founded by Hans Bender and cited on multiple occasions here.

76 While Arno Müller uses the term „transcendent”, Suitbert Ertl considers „parapsychological phenomenon” as appropriate term. This distinction does not change the assumption of a transcendent, physically (yet) not explainable effect of the planet effect.

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

133

Alongside the three German protagonists of the discussion around the Gauquelin effect, it is vital to add a final position that most clearly highlights the conflictual correlation between religion and science in modern astrology. As detailed previously, Hans Jürgen Eysenck of the Institute of Psychiatry (IOP) at King’s College (University of London) carried out extensive analysis and his own control studies before reaching a conclusion that was unambiguously in favour of the Gauquelins’ study. In 1986, Eysenck gave an in-​depth interview for a psychology conference at the University of Göttingen and answered the question of whether his statistical examination of the Gauquelins’ study had led him ‘closer to esotericism or modern-​day spiritual movements’ as follows: No, I don’t think so. You know, it doesn’t have any real appeal for me. It repels me if anything, and I wish it weren’t true. I’d be much happier if parapsychological phenomena and the Gauquelin effect didn’t exist but, if I look at the body of evidence, I can’t deny that they exist, so we have to recognise them, and we’ve got the obligation to look at them in more detail. (Ertel 1986, 139).

It is notable that Hans Jürgen Eysenck makes no concessions in considering the Gauquelin effect empirically proven despite his own distant stance from ‘spiritual movements’ and ‘parapsychological phenomena’. Not only that, he positions himself against Popper in including the entire astrological tradition and considering it generally verifiable: Just remember that Popper rejected astrology, Freudian doctrine and Marxism with the same justification:  They do not make verifiable predictions. I believe he was mistaken on all three counts [...]. Every astrology textbook includes thousands of predictions, there is no lack of predictions, and the findings are verifiable [...]. It is possible to carry out a completely objective test. To this extent, astrology is outstandingly scientific. (Ertel 1986, 139f).

Further on in the interview, the question arises as to the role of theoretical explanations in the first place to be able to recognise an empirical finding as scientific. Eysenck vehemently opposes the often-​asserted need for a theory to obtain scientific results: People always ask why the first priority isn’t the theory. I consider that a completely unscientific and rather foolish point of view. We have had a conception of gravitation for 300 years, we know a great deal about it, but we still don’t have a theory for it, or at least we’ve got several different theories [...], so I think, from a scientific point of view, it’s completely wrong to start with the question of a theory when we don’t even know what the facts are that are supposed to explain

134

Astrology in European Religious History

it. We want to have significantly more facts before we can even try to find a rational theory for the possible meaning of these facts. (Ertel 1986, 155).

Hans Jürgen Eysenck therefore rejects all stances that, like the Comité Para or American astronomer George Ogden Abell, consider the empirical findings to be methodologically correct but nonetheless reject the results on the assumption of as yet unidentified errors. Eysenck therefore advocates for the validity of the Gauquelin effect, even if it can only be explained through parapsychological teachings. Eysenck has been heavily criticised for this clear stance and its openness to parapsychological explanations, but he considers many scientists’ ruthless rejection of the Gauquelin effect –​despite a lack of reliable evidence pointing to sources of errors –​to be a less objective and more emotional reaction to a borderline-​scientific topic. Eysenck said: I’m certain that many advocates of what they call strict scientificity would prefer to burn Gauquelin at the stake. It’s a shame that we like to consider scientists open and objective, yet they’re nothing of the sort. They react just as emotionally as anyone else. (Ertel 1986, 153).77

Following the discussion up to this point, it becomes clear how closely the planetary effect (as part of astrology) is linked to a correlation between science and transcendence. The different stances in terms of methodology and content show that the complicated question of methods and data collection and evaluation is grounded in metaphysical, transcendental explanations and has a major influence on this discussion. It appears that astrology’s empirical aspects –​if it is possible to discuss them at all in any way –​cannot be addressed without incorporating transcendental elements into the discussion. Against this background, it is possible to define three main stances. While some scientists accept the empirical findings and even recognise transcendental implications beyond scientific methods (Suitbert Ertel, Hans Jürgen

77 The German astrologer Michael Roscher reports in the introduction to his textbook of astrology Das Astrologie Buch (1989) that the psychologist Wilhelm Franz Angermeier of the Psychological Institute of the University of Cologne explained Eysenck’s opinion for the Gauquelin study without submitting his own examinations by the fact that the latter had „in the meantime also become old and senile” (Roscher 1989, 14).

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

135

Eysenck), others reject the empirical findings because of unspecific  –​or as-​yet unidentified –​errors. However, it is possible to recognise here that the possibility of transcendental explanations is the main cause of scepticism (Comité Para, CFEPP, George O. Abell). A third group does recognise the empirical findings but refuses to recognise transcendental implications, preferring to leave the question of theoretical explanations open (Arno Müller). This discussion is therefore guided more by fundamental issues of ideology and conceptions of science setting it apart from metaphysical, transcendental explanations. How narrowly or broadly the definition of science  –​and likewise the definition of religion and transcendence  –​is drawn, determines whether empirical findings are only considered valid with a theoretical explanation or also without one, and therefore how the Gauquelins’ planetary effect is assessed. It is also clear, however, that even astrology’s empirical data will not suffice for current scientific methods as long as it remains interlocked with transcendental assumptions. This is precisely what makes astrology so problematic for many scientists in modern-​day discussion. It is not a given, though, that these interlocked empirical demands and transcendental options mean astrology ‘has hardly any chance of being researched further in larger-​scale projects in our society’ (Ertel 1986, 204). Astrologers remain convinced that this study is at least intersubjective if not scientific proof of astrology. The topic of astrology’s empirical methods combined with transcendental teachings is by no means restricted to the twentieth and twenty-​first centuries, however, when astrology was subjected to scientific scrutiny. Even in its Mesopotamian origins, empirical evidence was consciously sought out and incorporated into prevalent mythological worldviews. Again it is possible to note a continuity in astrology, as a digression into Mesopotamian omen astrology will elucidate.

2.5.4.  Digression: Empirical Methods in Mesopotamian Omen Astrology Empirical methods in Mesopotamian omen astrology are not significantly different from modern methods in their structure or objectives, having also gathered a selection of astronomical observations and terrestrial events

136

Astrology in European Religious History

that occurred parallel to them, examined their recurrence, and established whether there really was a relationship in order to correct the data. However, neither the quantity of data nor the substantiation of the methods comply in any way with modern-​day scientific standards, making any retrospective examination of validity superfluous. It is much more important to recognise these empirical methods as Sumerian, Babylonian and Assyrian scholars’ belief to transfer the relationship between celestial phenomena and natural and political events on Earth into statements based on experience and applicable again and again. The use of empirical methods for a period of around 2000 years has already been detailed in Section 1.1.1 with the 70 clay tablets Enuma Anu Enlil collection (EAE) comprising approximately 7000 astrological omens. As already indicated, these are records of lunar eclipses and planetary positions observed and events on Earth observed analogously to them. The planets were understood as the homes of the gods, and their visible appearances as providing information about the gods’ moods and wills. Events on Earth were considered analogous manifestations of these gods’ volitions. These were only events that affected all of society, like war and peace, kings, famines and prosperity. Individual events do not play any role in these texts. As explained previously, the omen texts express this correspondence in conditional sentences with an ‘if A, then B’ relationship between celestial appearance and terrestrial event. To measure the full significance of this empirical methodology, it is necessary to look at the history of the tradition and its use in different periods of Sumerian and Babylonian culture. Modern consensus considers the Enuma Anu Enlil collection a canonical collection of texts mostly compiled near the end of the Ancient Babylonian period, probably during the reign of the Kassites (1595–​1157 BCE).78 The term canon means that these omen texts have been consciously maintained in their original form without adding anything new of note. They provide binding guidelines and rules with enduring validity. This means: the astronomical observations established and the terrestrial events established at

78 Reasoning in: Rochberg 2010, 65. Rochberg-​Halton 1988, 8. Brown 2000, 156–​160, 254. Hunger/​Pingree 1999, 15, 20.

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

137

the same time were noted, collected, and would then also apply to later periods if the celestial phenomenon occurred again. Francesca Rochberg provides the following criteria for ‘canonisation’ –​the standardisation of the texts, their serialisation, and their authority or authorship.79 The canonisation process for the EAE omen texts comes to the following conclusion:  the astrological omen texts that are probably oldest include interpretations of lunar eclipses and refer back to the Sumerian period around 2300–​2000 BCE. (Brack-​Bernsen 1997, 8). The first systematic collections of lunar-​eclipse omens date back to the Ancient Babylonian period from 1950 BCE. Orientalist David Brown points to the existence of solar-​eclipse and weather omens at around the same time, inferring that there were already ‘proto-​EAE collections’ in Ancient Babylonian times. (Rochberg-​Halton 1988, 19ff; Brown 2000, 248 (5)–​(7)). The omen collections from before the Kassites’ reign in the Middle Babylonian period (1595–​1157 BCE) were expanded to the canonical 70 tablets with 7000 omens, and apparently paying attention to their completeness –​ all possible omens were to be retained. This ‘standard form’, titled Enuma Anu Enlil, was ‘copied, expanded and sent abroad from generation to generation’ in the following centuries (Brown 2000, 159). The EAE canon now used was a general handbook and reference work for interpreting celestial phenomena. According to Ernst Friedrich Weidner, there were five versions of the EAE collection in the Neo-​Assyrian period between 750 and 612 BCE, each one dating back to the respective different schools, including Nineveh, which contains the best-​preserved version in Ashurbanipal’s (669–​ 627) library. There were also other copies in the Late Babylonian, Persian and Ancient Greek periods. In the third or fourth century BCE, tablets 1–​41 (more than half of the EAE) reached India, where they were translated and incorporated into Buddhism’s Pali Canon, the Digha Nikaya collection, and into Hindu texts, the Garga Samhita. There are also copies

79 Rochberg explains the difference to the original application of the term canon to the Hebrew or Christian Bible as follows: „It did not result in a single edition, but rather in several parallel editions each with varying details, depending upon the source” (Ibid. 66 f). The canon of omen texts thus allows somewhat more leeway for associated texts than the canon of Holy Scriptures.

138

Astrology in European Religious History

in Anatolia and Egypt. The most recent copy in the EAE collection is dated to 194 BCE, in the Ancient Greek period.80 This development and expansion of the EAE collection and its prototypes diachronically through 2000 years of Mesopotamian cultural history and synchronically through its export into neighbouring cultures as far as India proves the fundamental importance attached to omen astrology and the high regard this practically applicable system of interpretation enjoyed far beyond the frontiers of Mesopotamian culture, while the level of diffusion also demonstrates well-​developed intercultural exchange. This use of the same omen texts for multiple centuries is only conceivable if the people using them were convinced that the ‘if A, then B’ formulas were empirically proven to be true. It can be assumed that there was a minimum number of matches in which events were diagnosed correctly. Answering this question now leads more specifically to the empirical character of omen interpretation. Mathematician and stochastician Peter Jost Huber of the University of Bayreuth assumes that it is possible to trace omen astrology back to actual historical events. Huber dealt with the oldest lunar-​eclipse omens in parallel to historical events from the Ancient Babylonian and Sumerian periods in two texts.81 These lunar-​eclipse omens observed not only the lunar eclipse itself, but also the day of the month, the duration of the eclipse, the orientation and progression of the shadow, the colour, the stars in its immediate vicinity, the positions of the other planets, and accompanying events on Earth including wind and earthquakes. Not every detail is always recorded, but this observation structure often makes precise dating possible. Lis Brack-​Bernsen summarises Huber’s research results as follows: Some lunar eclipses occur between 2300 and 2000 BCE. In one case, a lunar eclipse in the month of Nissan is described along with its characteristics in the ‘if A, then B’ formula: A describes the eclipse, and B infers that ‘the king of Akkad will die and his son will assume the throne’. A comparison between the years of Akkadian kings’ reigns and lunar eclipses in the

0 Brown 2000, 159; 255 (21). Rochberg-​Halton 1988, 33–​35. 8 81 Huber, Peter:  Astronomical Dating of Babylon I and Ur III, 1982. Huber, Peter: Dating by lunar eclipse omina, with speculation on the birth of omen astrology, 1987.

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

139

month of Nissan with these characteristics showed that ‘an Akkadian king died no less than three times after the occurrence of a lunar eclipse, and in all three cases he was succeeded by his son’. Lis Brack-​Bernsen concludes from this that: ‘This incredible coincidence led to [...] the development of omen astrology’. 82 The astronomical dating that Peter Huber takes as his basis is not without controversy, but to this day remains ‘methodologically exemplary in every way’. (Brown 2000, 246 (2)). This provides an important piece of evidence of omen astrology’s empirical methodology. The omens’ ‘if A, then B’ structure first asserts a concrete conditional relationship between a celestial event and one on Earth. However, this concrete omen also has general validity. Every time the celestial event is repeated, the event on Earth is also repeated. This is why omens provide entire lists of individual observations in the older collections and in the EAE, which are then used as a template for similar observations.83 Carl Bezold points out that a current observation is often added to this formulaic omen, generally concluding with the syllable ‘-​ma’ or ‘-​ša’. The syllable -​ma means ‘and indeed’ or ‘and in fact’; the syllable -​ša means ‘it was indeed the case that’. (Brown 2000, 108). Carl Bezold provides the following example: If the Moon (Šin) and the Sun (Šamaš) have come into opposition on the fourteenth day of the month, then the king of the country will have a long ear (be wise); the king’s throne will have a firm foundation. And indeed, on the fourteenth day of the month, the two celestial bodies were seen together. (Bezold 1911, 38f).

Such omens are essentially reports from scholars of astronomy to the king. The text that this omen belongs to begins as follows: On the very first day of the month [new moon], I wrote to the king: On the fourteenth, the Moon (Šin) will be seen together with the Sun (Šamaš). (ibid.).

82 Brack-​Bernsen 1997, 8. Two cases are close in time: Maništušu (reign Middle Chronology 2299-​2284 BCE), Naram-​Sin (2218-​2193 BCE), another case is from later times. Cf. Brown 2000, 246 (2). 83 Cf. the listing and translation of the lunar eclipse omina of plates EAE 15–​22 made by Francesca Rochberg-​Halton (Rochberg-​Halton 1988, 67–​272).

140

Astrology in European Religious History

This introduction is followed by three different versions of the omen that differ slightly in terminology but whose content asserts the same as the quote above. The three versions evidently come from different schools and serve to verify the accuracy and integrity of the prophecy. The writer therefore appears very concerned with substantiating his omen prophecy with the authority of tradition. It is notable, however, that in this case the corroborating statement ‘and indeed’ only relates to the astronomical event, not to the following sentence regarding the king. This conclusion is evidently left to the king to make. The citation of multiple sources, albeit all within the EAE collection, appears to demonstrate the writer’s conviction that the protasis and apodosis –​the condition and the conclusion –​ are grounded in experience, have been corroborated multiple times, and are therefore trustworthy. Carl Bezold summarises the meaning of these ‘and indeed’ sentences as follows: It was naturally of the greatest value, then, that the users of these collections, their contemporaries and their successors could verify the texts’ usefulness and reliability using further observations and examinations. The results of such examinations were added to the affected sentences:  The collections were expanded with the statement ‘and indeed (according to our observation), Subject S corresponded to Attribute A.’ (Ibid. 1911, 37).

It can be stipulated, then, that the development of astrology was accompanied by a pronounced empirical methodology, as proven by the if A, then B sentence formation and its practical application in omen texts. This sentence formation is based on a primary experience, as may have been the case in the lunar eclipses described by Peter Huber. Repeated examination and recording corroborated the primary experience as an event that was confirmed repeatedly and therefore empirically proven, making it applicable as a basic pattern for predicting future events. The growing quantity of data was then brought together in collections (of which the EAE collection is the largest) that were widely used across different cultures. Modern-​day Oriental studies recognise this empirical character with various modifications. Giovanni Manetti attempts a linguistic analysis of the if A, then B construction and how it occurred. He distinguishes three possible forms of the sentence conjunction, of which the most important is a ‘divinatory empiricism’ –​‘the protasis and the apodosis record events which really occurred in conjunction in the past.’ (Manetti in: Rochberg

Astrology and Science in the Present Day

141

2010, 400). Francesca Rochberg responded that it is unnecessary to assume empirical observations of history that produced this logical relationship of a protasis and apodosis. On the contrary, she sees the if A, then B construction firstly for what it is, a ‘logical relationship’ between perceived phenomena. This is no coincidence  –​it is an expression of wishing to understand the cosmos, nature and human behaviour analytically, consider phenomena in relationships, produce systematisations, and acquire knowledge and information about reality. (Rochberg 2010, 409). Empirical observations are also part of this process but need not be the cause of systematisation. However, even if the logical relationship between the cosmos and humans were to have been the primary concern, as Rochberg describes, the endeavour for empirical confirmation remains unmistakable. With Rochberg’s approach, omen astrology formally fulfils all of the criteria set out by Karl Popper for scientific methodology. A general principle (If A, then B) is made into a verifiable particular particle (If the Moon (Šin) and the Sun (Šamaš) have come into opposition on the fourteenth day of the months, then the king of the country will have a long ear). The conclusion ‘and indeed on the fourteenth day of the month, the two celestial bodies were seen together’ proves the particular principle. This is only formally the case, though. Popper would argue that modern-​day epistemological requirements would not recognise the omens’ statements as ‘proven’ statements because the delimitation criteria are too broadly defined and therefore difficult to falsify. As with the research around the Mars effect, an empirical finding recognised by ‘insiders’ is not necessarily accepted by ‘outsiders’. It should also be noted that Mesopotamian omen astrology as ‘divinatory empiricism’ and its logical-​ empirical structure were firmly anchored in a polytheistic, animistic worldview, which is what brought Franz Boll to note, as already cited on multiple occasions, that ‘astrology wishes to be a science and a religion at the same time’. The analogous system of correspondence and the certainty of intersubjectively verifiable experience are only made plausible and cohesive in a transcendental worldview. Looking at the last two explanations of the empirical process on the Mars effect in the present day and omen interpretation in Mesopotamian times, it is possible to note a structural continuity that evinces astrology’s presence both historically and phenomenologically across a period of over

142

Astrology in European Religious History

4000 years. Although the intervening time between Ancient Greece and the early-​modern period also made many modifications to astrology’s theoretical and philosophical explanations, thinking in analogous relationships and a foundation on experience –​developed in Mesopotamian omen astrology  –​continue to define the European astrological tradition to the present day, even if this empirical approach is not sufficient for modern standards. The question remains of how modern astrology solves the problem of a suspected transcendental influence on its analogies. While ancient astrology was able to use its respective mythological and philosophical reflections to make the analogous correspondence of planets and symbols of the zodiac with terrestrial events plausible, this does not apply to modern explanatory models.

3 The Structure of Astrology II:  Celestial Deities and Intelligible Nature As has already been demonstrated, two principal characteristics set astrology apart:  the divinity of celestial bodies and the analogous correspondence between the cosmos and humans/​nature. The two elements are intertwined. The following section will outline the divinity of celestial bodies both as a tradition and through examples from selected authors. A certain continuity remains palpable for all the different historical and cultural factors influencing authors’ reflections on the cosmos. Notably, even criticism of astrology such as that made by Martin Luther is based on a religious interpretation of the cosmos. Astrology became intellectual and reflected in the Ancient Greek and Roman periods, so the religio-​philosophical and theological reflections that form astrology’s foundations are also linked to mythical descriptions of celestial bodies. The anthropomorphic, polytheistic view of the cosmos now shifts towards a perspective in which intelligible, vital principles inhere in the celestial bodies and affect the entire cosmos. This does not replace the mythical descriptions of the celestial bodies, but instead reshapes them into metaphysical principles. The view of the cosmos changes its perspective, something that can still be seen in modern astrology. Mythological perspectives are traded with religio-​philosophical and theological ones so that not only ancient astrological teachings but also modern forms of astrology comprise mythological, religio-​philosophical and theological perspectives. Often one author will advocate multiple views at the same time. Nonetheless, astrology’s basic structure is maintained –​namely that the analogous correspondence between the cosmos and humans/​nature demands that celestial bodies and the cosmos have an intelligible character. The celestial bodies and signs of the zodiac are both mythological and philosophical manifestations of an intelligence that permeates and guides everything, described both in a personalised sense and as a spiritual principle or anima mundi, or as an impersonal, vital principle. The following examples start with a brief outline of the tradition of the planets’ deity names from Sumerian and Akkadian to Roman times. The

144

Astrology in European Religious History

Latin names and properties of the gods have remained codified to the present day (something also seen to a lesser extent in the names of the days of the week). Concrete examples from individual authors refer to Plotinus’ Are the Stars Causes?84 No other ancient text so consciously incorporates the structure of astrological teachings into a religio-​philosophical idea of cosmology without consequently doing away with personified images of gods. The following example from modern astrology represents a contrast to this. The theosophical astrology of Alice Ann Bailey85 and Alan Leo86 remains influential to this day and demonstrates that the belief in personalised celestial beings residing in cosmic space remains unbroken to the present day. The four following examples are Christian theological reflections on the celestial bodies:  Thomas Aquinas represents medieval Christian-​Aristotelian cosmology; Melanchthon and Luther two (contrary) early-​modern perspectives; and Father Gerhard Voss a modern Christian cosmology. Each has a distinctly monotheistic approach that takes the divinity of the cosmos for granted, albeit assessed in different ways. Carl Jung’s archetypes and Thomas Ring’s principles are closely connected to neo-​Platonic cosmology, but have already been explored sufficiently in Section 1.3, so they will only be taken into consideration again in the conclusion to this chapter. Finally, the different ways in which the celestial bodies and the cosmos have been described as vital and intelligible will be explored as an expression of a transcendental worldview that is specifically astrological, as well as clarifying what the term transcendence actually means.

84 Plotinus: Are the Stars Causes (Περὶ τοῦ εἰ ποιεῖ τὰ ἄστρα), Enneads II, 3, 1–​18, German: Ob die Sterne wirken, Hamburg: Meiner 1960. 85 Bailey, Alice Ann: Esoterische Astrologie Bd. III. Eine Abhandlung über die sieben Strahlen, Genf: Lucis 2. Aufl. 1970. Engl. Orig.: Esoteric Astrology Vol. III. A Treatise on the Seven Rays, Geneva: Lucis 2nd ed. 1970. 86 Leo, Alan: Esoterische Astrologie. Eine Abhandlung über die sieben Strahlen, Berlin: Ullstein 1997. Engl. Orig.: Astrology for All (1899), Casting the Horoscope (1912), How to Judge a Nativity (1904).

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

145

3.1. Property Names and Deity Names for Planets from the Sumerian to the Roman Period A further key development in religious history needs to be considered in order to understand the relationship between celestial bodies and transcendence. In a very comprehensive article, Wilhelm Gundel sets out the planets’ mythological meanings and their historical tradition in a diagram that summarises the planets’ ‘property names’ and their respective deity names in the Sumerian/​Babylonian, Ancient Egyptian, Greek, and Latin periods.87 Gundel’s work makes clear that the property names were derived from the planets’ visible characteristics as early as the Sumerian period. These characteristics were used to assign certain vital characteristics to the celestial bodies. These perceived characteristics are considered characteristics of the gods who reside in the celestial bodies, making the visible celestial body the home or physical manifestation of each god. Consider a selection of examples (taken from: Gundel, Wilhelm: Planeten, in: RE Bd. XX, 2, 1950, 2027f): A line can be traced from the Sumerian goddess Inanna/​Ninsianna (Akkadian: Ištar) with the visible planet Dilbat (property name: the Herald) as her home all the way to the Roman Venus (see Section 1.1.1). This line also includes multiple Semitic variants on the Akkadian name Ištar, including the Syrian-​Aramaic Astarte, and this goddess from Mesopotamia was identified as Aphrodite and her star Eosphoros (Ἑωσφόρος, Dawn) as her home, now called ‘Aphrodite’s Star’ (ὁ τῆς Ἀφρροδίτης ἀστήρ). The Latin goddess Venus and Vesperugo (evening star) were taken in turn from Greece. As in the Sumerian period, the physical planet is not Venus herself, but a star of Venus (stella Veneris). The goddesses’ characteristics correspond to the planet’s visible appearance in the sky at dawn and dusk. Its brightness made the planet Venus a particularly impressive and beautiful object in the sky at both dawn and dusk in every period. The planet was connected to the named goddesses’ jurisdiction which, aside from minor changes, remained unchanged from Sumerian to Roman times: Fertility; blossoming nature; beauty and love; peacemaking. Only Inanna/​

87 Gundel, Wilhelm: Planeten, in: RE Vol. XX, 2, 1950, 2027f. The ancient Egyptian names listed by Gundel are neglected here, but fit into the line of argument.

146

Astrology in European Religious History

Ištar’s warlike nature, reflected in the ambivalence of the evening and morning star, moved into the background in later descriptions. Modern astrology picks up Venus’ characteristics and perpetuates them as principles or archetypes of the ‘aesthetic’, a ‘sense of beauty and harmony’, ‘sensual love’, ‘peacemaking’ and more. (See Ring 71989, 82ff). To take a second example:  The Sumerian celestial deity Amar-​utuk, considered a relation of the sun god Utu, became the creator god Marduk in Akkadian and Babylonian times. His functions were creator of humans, ruler of the gods or father of the gods, and his planet was Dapinu, the terribly bright, star of Marduk. The planet is particularly present thanks to its distinct brightness when (unlike Venus) it appears at its zenith, outshining and dominating the rest of the night sky. In Greece, Zeus was identified with the same characteristics as Marduk and his planet was Phaethon (the luminous one), Zeus’ star (ὁ τῆς Διὸς ἀστήρ). In Rome, the deity became Jupiter, and the planet Phaethon, Jupiter’s star (stella Jovis). All mythologies name him as the leader of gods and humans, creating and supervising religious, priestly order, guaranteeing justice and ruling with wisdom. This also demonstrates a continuity that modern astrology perpetuates as a principle or archetype of wise rule, success and tolerance, generosity and benevolence, but also conceit and high-​handedness, to cite just a few characteristics from astrology textbooks. (Ring 71989, 102ff). Marduk/​Jupiter share this claim to dominance with the Sun as a symbol of kingly power. In astrology, this division is reflected as early as Ancient Babylon, as can be seen in the Code of Hammurabi, a text on civil and criminal law passed down on several diorite steles in which King Hammurabi I (1792–​1750 BCE) describes his role as a ruler. In the prologue, the king declares: ‘When Marduk tasked me with guiding humans, I set the following laws’ (Lambert, in: Kaiser 1994, 40–​44). The prologue also includes a note ‘that I light up the land like Utu/​Šamaš (the sun god)’ (ibid.). The head of the stele preserved depicts King Hammurabi receiving the tablets of commandments before the throne of Utu/​Šamaš: Hammurabi is subordinate both to the power of the creator god, Marduk, and that of the sun god who dictates the tablets of commandments for civil law to him. This division of power between Marduk/​Jupiter and Šamaš/​Sun continues into early-​modern astrology, where the Sun represents secular, imperial power and Jupiter religious power.

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

147

The other planets also demonstrate this continuity in the outside appearance of the physical body, the associated properties, and the deity names, continuing as far as their psychological and religio-​philosophical reformulation in modern astrology. The planet’s visible appearance is assigned to a god with similar characteristics, although there are also individual shifts in meaning. Kaimanu (the constant one) is the star of Ninib/​Chronos/​Saturn and is barely visible as the slowest and outermost of the seven classical planets. It symbolised age, death, time in general, and all that was difficult and laborious. Nergal/​Ares/​Mars, with its red glow, associated with blood, represented war, violence and conflagration. Nabu/​Hermes/​Merkur stands closest to the Sun at an elongation of 27° at most and appears to shuttle back and forth within these boundaries, and it has the Sumerian property name GUD.UT (the leaping one). Its Greek name was Stilbon (Στίλβων), the ‘shimmering’ or ‘shining’ one. Being visible only briefly before sunrise and after sunset, the planet was identified with the extravagant messenger god Hermes, the god of knowledge and information and of the word and writing in general. These definitions of the planets with vital properties and deity names were broadly preserved, demonstrating a transcendental process taken from their physically visible appearances. The celestial bodies as empirical objects were expanded and their boundaries dissolved with regard to their vital, intelligible aspects. This is a process through which humans create a divine cosmos, described by religious sociologists Thomas Luckmann and Peter L. Berger as transcending (see Section 5.2). In Niklas Luhmann’s definition of transcendence, this also produces a model of the cosmos that takes the celestial bodies’ property names, acquired through experience (immanence) to ‘question’ the celestial bodies and that acquires answers ‘from beyond’ –​that is, from stellar deities –​through astrological interpretation (transcendence). In this sense, any astrological interpretation can be understood as a religious interpretation taken from an analogy of ‘this side’ (the world) and ‘beyond’ (stellar deity).

3.2. Plotinus’ ‘One’ and the World Soul In his astrological text Are the Stars Causes? (Enneads II, 3, 1–​18), Plotinus explores how the stars ‘indicate’ (semaínein) terrestrial events and do

148

Astrology in European Religious History

not ‘cause’ them (poiein). He takes Plato’s teachings on the stars, Timaeus, to illustrate this, but interprets it through his cosmological doctrine of emanation. Explaining how celestial bodies can indicate ‘philologists’ and ‘rhetoricians’, for example –​intellectual gifts of certain humans –​or even wealth and poverty is only possible against a backdrop of the relationship between the pan-​cosmic One to the Many. All things must be connected together, and not only must [...] there be a uniform binding trace in every individual being, but first and above all in space. A uniform source makes the universe one organism that is ‘one-​many’ and ‘from all, one’. And, as with individual beings each part was assigned its own task, the beings in space also each have their task, and to an even greater extent than on Earth because they are not only parts, but wholes and entities. In this way, each individual acts with a common motivation and does its own task, but all contribute to one another because they are not separate from the whole.’ (Plotinus 1960, II, 3, 7).

It is the one that produces the connection between individual things in the cosmos. The fact that this one is the basis that supports the world can be seen from the holistic concept of emanation and especially the doctrine of the soul that it contains (Enneads IV, 2; IV 8f). Later in Are the Stars Causes?, Plotinus takes the doctrine of creation from Plato’s Timaeus to declare that the soul (psyché) is the first thing to emerge from the one, taking the place of the source and finally allowing all individual things to emerge (Enneads II, 3, 8). This world soul is therefore the unifying bond that joins individual things in one living organism and finally makes it possible for occurrences in one part of the organism to indicate occurrences in other parts, where they can be ‘read’ (Enneads II, 3, 7). However, Plotinus’ concept of astrology also includes physical effects of the physical celestial bodies because, just as humans consist of a body and soul, ‘the Sun and the other stars are also twofold’. For Plotinus, these physical effects only play a subordinate role, though, and have no astrological importance because the physical forces emitted by celestial bodies are subject to constant change from other natural forces –​both conducive and counteractive –​on their way to Earth. Astrological reading from the celestial bodies, on the other hand, can only rely on ‘the soul’: it [the soul] pervades our universe. Just as individual beings are pervaded by their prevailing principle that forms each being’s individual parts and harmonises them with the whole of which they are parts, the universe is ruled by the whole of its

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

149

forces, and in part only to the extent represented by the being of the individual. (Enneads II, 3, 9 and 13).

This explanation of astrology –​that ‘the course of the stars indicates individual things’  –​consciously places a different focus than an astrology that believes that ‘the course of the stars causes all things as the majority perceives it’.88 Here, Plotinus clashes with an astrology that –​also influenced by Aristotelian cosmology –​purely assumes a physical influence of celestial bodies for their astrological statements, but he does offer an astrology that takes effect on an intelligible, psychological level.

3.3. Intelligible Cosmos and Celestial Deities in Twentieth-​Century Esoteric Astrology Alice Ann Bailey (1880–​ 1949), member of the Theosophical Society Adyar, writes the following on the composition of the cosmos in her book Esoteric Astrology: Space is an entity and the entire ‘vault of heaven’ [...] is the phenomenal appearance of that entity [...]. In esoteric astrology we are, therefore, dealing with the life and lives which inform the ‘points of light’ within the universal life. Constellations, solar systems, planets, kingdoms in nature and microscopic man are all of them the result of the activity and the manifestation of energy of certain lives [...]. Esoteric astrology deals with the life of this entity and with the forces and energies, the impulses and the rhythms, the cycles and the times and seasons. (Quoted from the German edition, Bailey 1990, 19–​21)

William Frederick Allan (1860–​1917), also a member of the Theosophical Society Adyar, wrote under the pseudonym Alan Leo89 and is more important for modern esoteric astrology and its practical application. In fact, it is almost impossible to overestimate Leo’s influence on esoteric astrology’s reinvigoration in Europe and North America.90 In his text Esoteric Astrology: A Study in Human Nature, he describes the structure of the solar system from a theosophical perspective. He refers to the stellar deities using the terms logos (singular) and logoi from Ancient Greek religious

8 Plotinus begins the treatise with this important statement (Enneads II, 3, 1, 237). 8 89 The pseudonym refers to his birth under the sign of Leo. 90 In Germany it was the Theosophical publishing house Vollrath in Leipzig that distributed Allen Leo’s writings.

150

Astrology in European Religious History

philosophy. Alternative labels from Judeo-​Christian tradition would be angel or archangel: The solar system as a whole may be looked upon as a body of the logos. Every plane of it, from the lowest physical to the highest spiritual, is energised and animated by this life and consciousness [...]. From Him as the one Father of all are sent forth seven great beings, called archangels or planetary logoi, inferior only to Himself, but superior to all other beings within the solar system [...]. These seven beings are the real ‘seven rulers’, and not the globes that are often referred to on the physical plane. They are mighty spiritual intelligences who derive their energy, life and consciousness from the great central one life of all, the solar logos [...]. Each of the seven planetary logoi has within his charge thousands of millions of souls at all stages of development, some still in the elemental, mineral, vegetable, or animal stage; some human such as ourselves; and others far beyond the human. (Quoted from the German edition, Leo 1997, 44).

Later in the book, he states: The planetary spirits are the players, and the principal actors in the great world drama. The zodiac is, for our earth, the stage on which all the scenes are constantly changing, and from this stage the strong limelight is reflected upon the lives of men and women who perform their parts in miniature upon the stage of daily life. (Quoted from the German edition, Leo 1997, 179).

In the following chapter, he introduces the ‘host’ of angels that mediate between planets and humans. Even if the terms ‘logos’ and ‘logoi’ make the influence of religious philosophy unmistakable, these ‘celestial intelligences’ are indeed personal beings, just as they are depicted in polytheistic religions. The term angel indicates this very personified concept of the cosmos. To summarise, esoteric (theosophical) astrology has survived the shift from the geocentric to the heliocentric model almost unscathed. The reason for this is the continuity that results from the astrological worldview, the animated cosmos and personal celestial intelligences. Plotinus’ reception in esoteric-​theosophical astrology is even unmistakable in its terminology (‘logoi’). The line from Plotinus’ cosmology to Carl Jung’s archetypes is less clear but nonetheless discernible. When Carl Jung defines the intelligible cosmos as individual psychological dream images, he appears to bid farewell to a Platonic conception of an outer intelligible cosmos. In incorporating collective archetypes into the psychological experience, however,

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

151

and consciously borrowing the term ‘archetype’ from Platonic ideology (as shown above), he takes the individual psyche to return to the intelligible cosmos and Plotinus’ conception of a world soul after all. Thomas Ring’s principles of organic being take a similar approach, incorporating Schelling’s ‘world soul’, as shown above. Jung and Ring, impressed by the Copernican revolution, both choose to follow individual experience, which then stretches across the entire cosmos and finally –​just as in Platonic tradition –​reanimates the cosmos. Theosophy represents a seamless continuity of the ancient belief in a cosmos inhabited by personal beings, and psychological astrology seeks to go around this with individual, psychological images, but finally returns nonetheless to the idea of an intelligible cosmos. The discontinuity in the outer perception of the cosmos that finds its expression in the shift from the geocentric to the heliocentric model simultaneously demonstrates a continuity in the ‘inner’ perception –​in the cosmos’ basic spiritual, vital order. This applies to both branches of astrology –​psychological and esoteric. Unlike esoteric astrology, the psychological school shifts the view of the cosmos to a psychological perspective contingent on the Copernican revolution. Nothing has fundamentally changed in the astrological worldview. The breadth of interpretation of the intelligible cosmos between polytheistic conceptions and principles from psychology also obtains an additional variant through theological reflections as part of Christian, monotheistic doctrines. In the course of the history of theology, some Christian theologians have discussed and finally accepted astrology against the background of monotheistic and Christocentric requirements. This applies as much to Early Christian theology, early-​modern theology, and the modern theology of the twentieth and twenty-​first century. Even in the medieval period, scholastic theologian Thomas Aquinas dealt extensively with the issue of understanding the divinity of celestial bodies and the cosmos with Christianity’s doctrine of the one creator. This also applies to a lesser extent but with a similar goal to Reformation theologian and humanist Philipp Melanchthon, with a critical inclination to Martin Luther and, in the present day, to Benedictine monk Gerhard Voss.

152

Astrology in European Religious History

3.4. Thomas Aquinas and the Stars’ ‘Spiritual Substances’ Thomas Aquinas (1225–​1274) was one of the most influential theologians and philosophers of scholasticism and Catholic theology as a whole, following on from his teacher, Albertus Magnus (1193–​1280), in dealing extensively with celestial bodies’ astrological influence on human lives. In Summa Theologica, he describes celestial bodies and physical bodies (corpora caelestia) moved by spiritual substances (spirituales substantiae). In the 110th question of the first part of Summa Theologica, titled How Angels Act on Bodies91, he invokes Plato, Aristotle, Avicenna and Augustine, who all took the view that independent ‘immaterial substances’ (substantiae immateriales) act on all natural bodies. However, Aquinas notes that only Aristotle correctly assessed the effect of the beings that guide celestial bodies, as these could only use their grandeur to affect sublunar life (see Section 4.1.3). Aquinas concurs and describes these spiritual substances’ effect as follows: The spiritual substances, that move the celestial bodies, do indeed act on corporeal things by means of the celestial bodies; but they act immediately on the human intellect by enlightening it. On the other hand, they cannot compel the will. (Aquinas 1951, Book I, 115, 4, to 1, 253).

These ‘spiritual substances’ that guide the celestial bodies and therefore influence human life are ‘angels’ in the Christian sense, as the title of the 110th question implies. With this statement, Aquinas also provides a subtle anthropological explanation for how these spiritual substances act on humans via celestial bodies and where this influence ends. Aquinas’ line of thought can be summarised as follows:  The celestial bodies are guided by spiritual substances –​God’s angels. As visible objects, celestial bodies are the physical embodiments of these spiritual substances. The spiritual substances affect human passions through these celestial bodies. This occurs through the celestial bodies’ properties in line with ancient teachings on elements, qualities and temperaments. However, the angels can also affect the human intellect directly  –​without the mediation of

91 Aquinas, Thomas von: Conservation and Government of the World, in: Summa Theologica, vol. 8, Salzburg: Pustet 1951, I. Book 110,1, 149.

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

153

celestial bodies –​by enlightening it. As a result, human passions are generally subject to the influence of the celestial bodies, while human will is free in principle and can only be influenced indirectly by enlightening its intellect and via its passions. This limitation on free will leads Aquinas to conclude: The majority of men follow their passions, [...] in which movements of the celestial bodies can cooperate, but few are wise enough to resist these passions. Consequently astrologers are able to foretell the truth in the majority of cases [...]. Wherefore the astrologers themselves are wont to say that ‘the wise man is stronger than the stars’ (Aquinas 1951, Book I, 115, 4, to 3).

Thomas therefore justifies celestial bodies’ effects through natural philosophy on the one hand using the doctrine of the elements and their physical qualities. On the other hand, he also recognises an influence that plays out spiritually on a communicative level between celestial intelligences and human intelligence. This separation of celestial bodies into a material and a spiritual part was already handed down from Mesopotamian omen astrology (see Section 1.1.1 on the distinction between Inanna and Ninsianna for the planet Venus). Aristotelian tradition is also familiar with this separation of celestial bodies and celestial intelligence (see Section 4.1.3), but focuses on physical nature more than Platonic tradition does. That is why astrological texts from Aristotelian tradition often use the elements to emphasise the physical influence of the celestial bodies. This can be considered a kind of astrology grounded in science, especially when this astrology is principally applied to medical and agricultural issues. This natural-​philosophical astrology was most widespread in the annual calendars, practicae and almanacs of the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

3.5. Philipp Melanchthon and the Vital Cosmos Philipp Melanchthon (1497–​ 1560), one of astrology’s most renowned advocates in humanistic scholarly circles around the time of the Reformation, builds on the natural-​ philosophical explanation of astrology described above and considers astrology a part of physics in his 1538 treatise De dignitate astrologiae because astrology teaches about ‘the effects

154

Astrology in European Religious History

that stars’ light has on simple and compound bodies and the mixtures, changes and tendencies it brings’92 Judging from the fact that he allocated astrology to the field of physics, it would appear that Melanchthon was not familiar with the stars’ intelligible indwelling. Upon further analysis, however, it becomes clear that the classic elements, qualities and temperaments are not to be understood purely as physical substances but as a vital foundation of nature (see Section 4.1.4). Melanchthon gives a different impression in the foreword to his edition of Claudius Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos, which he translated from Greek into Latin.93 Here, Melanchthon represents astrology as part of an intelligible creation. Plato and the Alexandrian School, then, very carefully pursued this ‘old divine wisdom’ (astrology) and referred to the ‘harmony of above and below’ and the ‘forces residing in the stars’ as a ‘testimony of God’ (ibid. 278 and 281). Against this background, the ‘position of the stars’ could ‘determine the structures of the human soul’ (ibid. 279). Astrology here expresses an analogous harmony between an ideal and an image, as represented by Plato’s ideology and hermetic tradition with its model of ‘as above, so below’. When Melanchthon embeds astrology in a Platonic conception of a spiritual cosmos in this foreword, it appears that he considers it more part of physics in the sense of a correlation between physics and metaphysics. Intelligible beings in the stars are not named directly, but the Aristotelian doctrine of the four elements implies a vital, ‘animated’ cosmos (see Section 4.1.4).

3.6. Martin Luther and Celestial Beings Contrary to the First Commandment Martin Luther (1483/​84–​1546) responded directly to Melanchthon’s fascination with astrology to reject it for principally theological reasons, as can

92 Melanchthon, Philipp:  Oratio de dignitate astrologiae dicta in promotione Magistrorum a Iakobo Milchio, Halae Sueuorum: Brubachius 1538. 93 Melanchthon: Claudius Ptolemaeus. De Praedicationibus Astronomicis, Grece et Latine Basilea 1553, Microfiche edition of the Herzog-​August-​Bibliothek Wolfenbüttel 1992. Preface in German in: Ptolemäus 1993, pp. 277–​282.

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

155

be seen in many of Luther’s table speeches and letters, at times derisively. Luther’s most important statement against astrology is grounded in the core of Christian doctrine: Credere astris est idolatria, quia contra primum praeceptum. [Believing in the stars is idolatry; it goes against the First Commandment].94

Luther’s argumentation is clear:  The one Biblical God (understood in a monotheistic sense) does not tolerate any other (celestial) gods. This criticism is a continuation of that made by Old Testament prophets who decried the worship of astral deities and the interpretation of symbols, such as in 2 Kings 21:2–​12. Luther’s insistence on the First Commandment can be seen from the perspective that assigning the stars intelligence and a guiding hand in destinies constitutes a relapse into polytheistic beliefs. At the same time, however, he may also have rebuffed astrology in its role as a system for interpreting fate because it was directed against the Christian doctrine of salvation. Luther wrote:  ‘If astrology teaches that evil and its consequence –​death –​can be traced to effects from the malefic planets Saturn and Mars, this contradicts the teaching of original sin and Christ’s justification and redemption.’95 Philipp Melanchthon nonetheless continued to offer Luther astrological advice, but that will not be explored here. It is notable that Luther considered astrology a direct attack on key theological articles of faith but never questioned its application in medicine. Later in his life, however, Luther assumed that the stars had a signalling function, as seen in the preface to a new edition of Johannis Lichtenberger’s astrological divination, published in 1527 at Luther’s own suggestion.96 Here, Luther explains astrology in analogy to the role of angels and Biblical prophets, who can provide humans with direct signs as warnings. God provides warnings through the stars in the same vein:  ‘With such signs, he threatens the godless and shows lords and lands future misery by way of warning’ (A III). The stars, then, become instruments of God.

94 Luther: Table Talk WATR 1, 1026 und WATR 1,678. Cf. Lämmel 1984, 300 und 301. 95 In Lämmel 1984, 305, and the literature references to the WATR. 96 Lichtenberger 1527, Vorrhede Martini Luthers auff die weissagung des Johannis Lichtenberger, Wittenberg: Hans Lufft 1527, A II-​A IV.

156

Astrology in European Religious History

Divination either occurs ‘through God’s holy people who spoke compelled by the Holy Spirit (A I), or it occurs as a false prophecy through Satan (A II) or through the signalling stars. Johannes Lichtenberger first prophesied the ‘coming of a minor prophet’  –​to occur in November 1484  –​in Latin in 1488, and later in German in 1492. He took this prophecy almost verbatim from a prognosis made by Italian astrologer Paul of Middelburg in the summer of 1484.97 Although nothing of the sort happened in 1484, the prophecy regained prominence in 1517 following Martin Luther’s 95 Theses as it was noted that Luther may have been born in 1484. Lichtenberger’s text was now republished in an array of new editions and commentaries, and even Luther himself did not elude the discussion. In 1527, he obtained a new edition, now with an astrology-​friendly tenor. Luther maintained his distance, however: ‘Christians ought not to enquire about such divination for they have given themselves to God and have no need for such threats’ (A IV). On the other hand: ‘I consider the motivation behind his [Lichtenberger’s] art of astrology to be correct, even if the art is imprecise [...]. He also got many things right, particularly with his images [woodcuts] more than with his words’ (A II). It is apparent that Luther provides theological arguments both in his criticism of astrology and in his ‘placet’ in favour of astrology in the preface to Lichtenberger’s treatise in order to either reject the ‘divinity’ of celestial bodies or to integrate them into Biblical belief. Both cases relate to which spiritual power controls the cosmos and human destinies –​ the Biblical God alone or other spiritual forces subordinated to this God. Luther’s erratic argumentation demonstrates a theological struggle for a strict, Christocentric monotheism. Melanchthon and Luther’s statements on astrology from a theological perspective should be viewed against the backdrop of the geocentric model that was only very slowly giving way to the heliocentric perspective. As with astrology, Luther had also used theology to dispute Copernicus –​‘the new astrologer who speaks of the movement of the Earth’ –​stating ‘ego

97 Paulus von Middelburg: Prognostica ad viginti annos duratura, Coloniae 1484, bes. Cap. IV.

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

157

credo sacrae scripturae, nam Iosua iussit solem stare, non terram’ (I believe in the Holy Scriptures, for Joshua commanded the Sun to stand still, not the earth’ (Lämmel 1984, 305. Luther was referring to the Bible passage Joshua 10:13). Since Martin Luther, there has been hardly any Christian theological reflection on astrology, which remained in annual calendars until the eighteenth centuries. (Herbst 2022). Only since the last decades of the twentieth century have there been attempts to discuss astrology from a Christian theological perspective. This rediscovery of astrology in the Christian theological sphere was caused firstly by astrology’s spread and popularisation in the context of modern forms of Western esotericism and Carl Jung’s analytical psychology in the second half of the twentieth century. One example of this, mentioned previously, is Benedictine monk Gerhard Voss of Niederaltaich Abbey. After undergoing a psychotherapeutic analysis in which the psychotherapist used his birth chart, Voss decided to deal with astrology in more detail and wrote his book Astrologie christlich (‘Astrology from a Christian Perspective’). (Voss 42003). Steyler missionary and pastoral theologian Hermann Kochanek published a small anthology titled Horoskop als Schlüssel zum Ich (‘Horoscopes as the Key to the Ego’), explaining in the introduction that Carl Jung’s analytical psychology motivated him to reflect on astrology theologically. (Kochanek 1995, 7–​11). Gerhard Voss also provides historical grounds to broach the issue of astrology from a theological perspective: He found a horoscope chiselled into a foundation stone of the church towers at Niederalteich Abbey, furnished with a brief description of the time the abbey’s foundation stone was laid. This gave Voss extra impetus to interpret the horoscope astrologically and classify it theologically (Voss 42003, 62–​72). The finding indicates that Christian theology has a long astrological tradition.

3.7. Father Gerhard Voss and the Divinely Infused Cosmos Benedictine monk Gerhard Voss (1935–​), rector of the ecumenical institute at Niederaltaich Abbey, can be considered one of the most prominent advocates of an expressly Christian conception of modern astrology, as reflected in the title of his book, ‘Astrology from a Christian perspective’.

158

Astrology in European Religious History

‘Christian’ for Voss separates an ‘approach to astrology in line with Christianity’ from an ‘ideologically appropriated’ astrology ‘around the New Age movement’ (Voss 42003, 7), making clear that a ‘divinity’ of celestial bodies can only be accepted within the theology of creation. Christian astrology, then, is based on the ‘belief in God’s word through which everything came into being’. This ‘interwovenness of all creation by its divine origins’ comes from the prologue to the Gospel of John (John 1:3). This belief in a ‘universal harmony’ and longing for ‘universal reconciliation [and] unification with the All-​One’ also exists outside of Christianity, but mostly in esoteric movements that claim secret knowledge (ibid. 20). This cosmos interwoven with divinity in the theology of creation is made specifically Christian by its ‘profession of Jesus as the Son of God who appeared concretely in human history’ (ibid. 22). This profession rejects any non-​ Christian search for salvation and reconciliation, marking a clear theological boundary within which astrology can find its place. Gerhard starts by affirming that ‘astrology is essentially religious from its very origins. Astrology reflects humans’ attitude towards the universe and its ultimate driving forces’ (ibid. 20). This leads to the actual justification of Christian astrology in the theology of creation: ‘Astrological wisdom’s exclusion from the Church is symptomatic of the loss of the cosmic dimension of church life in theology, liturgy and preaching’ (ibid. 23). There is a palpable regret that Christian churches (in this case, the Roman Catholic one) have lost sight of esoteric teachings. As a specialist in the New Testament, Gerhard Voss justifies this return to a ‘divinity’ of the cosmos using multiple passages from the New Testament, particularly the ‘Christology hymn’ in the letter to the Colossians (Col 1:15–​20), which he quotes in full and comments on (ibid. 110–​115). Here, Christ is ‘the firstborn of all creation, for by him all things were created, in heaven and on Earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities –​all things were created through him and for him.’ (Ibid. 111). There is consensus in New Testament exegesis that the ‘thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities’ named here are to be understood as types of spiritual beings and angelic forces.98 In contrast to gnostic cosmology, however, Gerhard

98 In Walter Bauer’s Dictionary of the New Testament, the classes of supernatural

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

159

Voss emphasises Christ’s absolute dominion: ‘All forces are subordinate to Him: The letter-​writer evidently wanted to highlight that in particular by additionally listing the different forces’ (ibid. 112). Based on this theology of creation, Gerhard Voss sees astrology as the ‘key to the reality of unity between humans and the cosmos’ (ibid. 36). Its practical application, then, is in counselling, which uses horoscopes as meditation images:  ‘It takes self-​knowledge to find oneself. Horoscopes can help with this: A horoscope has its value as a meditation image, as an aid to finding oneself’ (ibid. 18). In developing ‘astrology from a Christian perspective’, Voss shows that the ‘divinity’ of celestial bodies can find its place in a Christian monotheistic perspective without questioning the one-​god faith. This is achieved by understanding the cosmos as a whole and all of the forces and beings acting in it as creatures and instruments of God. From the point of view of the study of religions, this spiritual cosmos in a Christian sense makes it possible to recognise an expansion and diversification of the monotheistic field of vision, something that can also apply to other monotheistic religions.

3.8. Digression: How Religious Is the Astrological Worldview? In Search of a Suitable Transcendent Term Different attempts to interpret the cosmos and celestial bodies intelligibly or religiously raise the question of how this spiritualised embedding of the cosmos can be understood in the study of religions. It has been demonstrated that, since its very beginnings, astrological discourse has included both a belief in personal stellar deities and angelic beings and a belief

beings are explained with reference to the Letter to the Colossians: Thronoi as a class of supernatural beings, (cf. Bauer 1971, 720) Kyriotés and Archai are angelic powers (911 and 223), Exousiai as rulers of the spirit realm (551). The majority of New Testament exegetes understand the text of Colossians as hierarchies of spiritual, divine beings in the sense of gnosis (likewise Gal 4:3–​ 10). There is disagreement, however, as to whether these powers are evaluated as positive or negative with regard to a cultic service (Schenke/​Fischer 1978, 158–​163).

160

Astrology in European Religious History

in undefined intelligible and/​or vital principles, including the four elements and qualities, which are interpreted vitally. This question is especially pertinent against the backdrop of a dualistic conception of religion that distinguishes between a transcendental and an immanent world. A geocentric model can be used to understand this division as a spatial above (beyond the world) and below (within the world). The heliocentric model resolved this spatial division, which can now be understood as inside and outside. Outside refers to the physical world, and inside a hidden, mysterious action in the human consciousness and in physical bodies. However, this inside can only serve as a metaphor to describe a qualitative other that transcends the physically tangible aspect. If celestial bodies’ intelligibility or ‘divinity’ is related psychologically to images of the human soul, the question arises of how to explain this dualistic concept of immanence and transcendence. Carl Jung’s archetypes no longer make clear where the boundary between immanence and transcendence lies. For Jung, archetypes are only realised in images of personal experiences. While they do transcend the boundaries of the individual plane as collective images and also incorporate empirical objects like the celestial bodies, they only make sense in the imagery of individual experience. Hubert Knoblauch’s definition of transcendence and Niklas Luhmann’s model of transcendence and immanence are useful at this juncture. Sociologist Hubert Knoblauch (1959–​) dealt with the conventional conception of religion within modern, individualised spirituality. (Knoblauch 2009, 38–​80). His analysis concludes that the classic distinction between a holy and a profane space is no longer sufficient. In The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, Émile Durkheim described the development and existence of religion as a distinction between a sacral and a profane space. Hubert Knoblauch contrasts this with a conception of transcendence borrowed from Thomas Luckmann. Winckler writes: To understand transcendence, it is crucial to not see it as part of a binary distinction [...] The concept of transcendence is broader, it overcomes this distinction [...] Non-​binary transcendence, as I understand it here, does not require an opposite. The Latin ‘transcendere’ means ‘to go over’ or ‘to cross’, but the term in no way requires a distinction between two fixed areas. Instead of distinguishing them, he designates the removal of the boundaries as exceeding and overcoming what is considered the limit or difference. (Ibid. 55f).

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

161

Carl Jung’s archetypes and Thomas Ring’s principles could be considered examples of this ‘exceeding’, as could Plotinus’ conception of the soul. The celestial bodies do not represent an established ‘beyond’ as opposed to an established ‘this side’, but rather descriptions of subjective and collective perceptions. Hubert Knoblauch consciously takes up Thomas Luckmann’s very broad definition of transcendence, extensively details it and defends it from misunderstandings. This will not be explored further here, however. All that is crucial here is how the definition of transcendence removes boundaries. Mythical images, gods, archetypes and principles express a removal of boundaries that transcends everyday life, making the astrological worldview more open and more than simply a juxtaposition of stellar deity and human. It is possible to question, however, whether this concept of transcendence presented by Hubert Knoblauch can really withstand the lack of distinction between transcendence and immanence. After all, exceeding normal day-​to-​day experiences demands something ‘other’ than physical space. Niklas Luhmann rightly pointed out that the intention of religious questions –​that is, the intention of questions of meaning, which includes questions regarding the ‘divinity’ of celestial bodies and their meaning for humans in general  –​cannot take empirical objects as their aim, but something outside of it.99 To this extent, experiencing the ‘divinity’ of celestial bodies (considered divine beings, archetypes or principles) exceeds the limit of empirical objects. Transcendence is the meaning that can be infused into empirical objects through mythical descriptions and read out of them through astrological interpretation. There is therefore a possibility of understanding the astrological worldview of modern astrology as religious in this sense, opening up a window to a broad conception of transcendence that relaxes and expands the classic juxtaposition of transcendence and immanence, of stellar deity and human, but does not do away with it. A concept of transcendence from the perspective of the study of religions can therefore apply to astrology

99 Luhmann, Niklas: Die Religion der Gesellschaft, Frankfurt/​M.: Suhrkamp 2000, Chapter 2, VI, especially 77.

162

Astrology in European Religious History

both before and after Copernicus, one that involves transcending everyday experience both religiously and spiritually.

3.9. The ‘Divinity’ of Spaces: The Zodiac in the 360º Sphere of the Ecliptic Since its beginnings, astrology has not only comprised the visible celestial bodies, but also the spatial division of the ecliptic into clearly defined sectors not tied to visible celestial bodies. These spatial sectors of what appears to be the Sun’s orbit are particularly complex and sometimes overlap multiple times in Ancient Greek astrology. Their origins are shared between the Mesopotamian and Ancient Egyptian traditions. The most important segments are the twelve signs of the zodiac, which divide what appears to be the Sun’s orbit (the 360º ecliptic) into equal 30º sectors starting from the spring equinox via the summer solstice and autumn equinox. These sectors are given names and assigned divine beings and divine forces. The Greek term zodiakos kyklos (ζῳδιακὸς κῦκλος  –​‘circle of living things’) already indicates that these signs are represented as living, intelligible spaces. These signs of the zodiac, alongside the planets, have remained the key factors in astrological interpretation all the way into modern astrology. Each sign of the zodiac is divided into three subordinate decans measuring 10º, bounds or sectors of a sign with different dimensions, dodekatemoria (twelve fractions of each sign, each measuring 2.5º and assigned twelve signs of their own so that each sign of the zodiac has twelve subsections), and monomoiria (360 individual degrees).100 Some texts even consider the 60 individual minutes of each degree crucial to destiny.101 Just like the zodiac, each sector is assigned to certain divine beings or forces that are believed to determine human destinies and natural events

100 Ptolemy 1980, I, 20f, 91–​107. Ptolemäus 1995, I, 62–​71. Here Ptolemy presents the different systems of the Mesopotamian and Egyptian traditions and criticises unfounded assumptions. 101 For the division of the zodiac, see Gundel 1972, 505ff. Ders. 1965 [1949], 1222. Manilius 1990, IV, line 294ff, II 408ff and 693ff.

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

163

additionally and with more nuance. It is possible to perceive a certain celestial hierarchy from greater to lower divinity, but this does not take away from the respective influence on human life that is assumed. The signs of the zodiac, however, constitute the foundation and –​in modern astrology in particular –​are much more important than all other divisions. Decans, too, play a certain part, though, and the following section will focus on both the signs of the zodiac and the decans. Firstly, it is essential to note a modern misunderstanding regarding the calculation of the twelve signs of the zodiac, where modern astrology is frequently but unjustly accused of viewing the cosmos falsely. This criticism will be dealt with more closely as it is key to both the internal logic of modern astrology and its spiritual worldview. Since Ancient Greek astrology, the twelve signs of the zodiac have been measured and counted to precisely 30º each starting from the spring equinox. The twelve signs are divided following what appears to be the Sun’s orbit from the vernal equinox to the summer solstice (the Sun’s highest point in the northern hemisphere), the autumn equinox (when day and night are equally long in the autumn) and the winter solstice (the Sun’s lowest point), and then back to the starting point. These four turning points of the Sun constitute cardinal starting points for dividing space into the three subsequent signs.102 This division into twelve is called the tropical zodiac, as opposed to the sidereal zodiac, which consists of groups of stars with different dimensions, the constellations. The constellations are found along the entire ecliptic, both to the north and south of it, and complete the whole celestial globe. The constellations that cut the ecliptic or lie near it were used in Ancient Greek times to give names to the signs of the zodiac. Ancient astrology was aware of this distinction between the tropical and sidereal zodiac, and it was described in detail by astronomers including Eudoxus of Cnidus (397–​338 BCE) and Hipparchus von Nicaea (190–​120 BCE). Interestingly, both astronomers list the twelve signs of the zodiac

102 The older Egyptian circle begins at 0° Cancer, since the year of the Nile flood began in summer. A later Roman variant sets the beginning of the year at 0° Capricorn. Cf. Hübner 2002, 555 f. In both cases, however, they are the cardinal solstices, as in the case of 0° Aries.

164

Astrology in European Religious History

but only 11 constellations with the same name: Libra exists as a sign of the zodiac, but is missing from the constellations. Instead, the stars forming Libra are called the Scorpion’s Pincers, part of the constellation Scorpio. This would suggest that the tropical zodiac with its twelve signs is older than the sidereal zodiac, which only reached the number twelve later and was established more or less in correspondence to the tropical zodiac. The tropical zodiac comprising twelve turning points has been prominent since the fifth century BCE and has been used by all astronomers since then. Alongside Eudoxus and Hipparchus, Claudius Ptolemy (100–​176 CE) also names the eleven constellations at the same time as the twelve tropical signs of the zodiac.103 It is therefore incorrect to assume that ancient astrologers meant the constellations when they referred to the twelve signs of the zodiac. It is also false to assume that the twelve signs of the zodiac were only the twelve constellations schematised at around 30º of the ecliptic each, with dimensions ranging from 15º (Aries) to 45º (Virgo). Firstly, it is important to note that there are two different circles. In Ancient Greek times, the cosmographic situation of the constellations and the signs of the zodiac was around the same, albeit incongruent owing to the constellations’ unequal dimensions. The constellation Aries, for example, measures 15º, and the sign of the zodiac Aries 30º. This similar cosmographic classification led to the constellation and the sign of the zodiac receiving the same name. At the time of Hipparchus of Nicaea (190–​120 BCE), who (re-​)discovered precession (it was probably known in Mesopotamian astrology. Winckler 1901, 30f), the vernal equinox (0° Aries) was located around the first star in the constellation Aries. The precession movement describes the earth axis in a spinning motion around the polar axis and has caused the vernal equinox (and the entire tropical zodiac with it) to shift around 23º so that today it no longer lies at the start of the constellation Aries, but in the constellation Pisces. This does not change the fact that the sign of the zodiac Aries commences with the vernal equinox. Modern astrology is often criticised on the assumption that astrologers to this day have failed to consider the shift in the vernal equinox. However,

103 Ptolemy 1980, I, 9, 47–​53. Ptolemäus 1995, I, 39–​41.

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

165

this objection assumes that modern astrology takes the constellations into account in its interpretations. Since the Sun does not enter the constellation Aries on 21 March and in fact is still in the first part of the constellation Pisces, babies born on 21 March would be Pisces instead of Aries. Modern astrologers nonetheless stick to Aries characteristics, even though these babies, it is claimed, ought to have Pisces characteristics.104 The counter-​criticism, whether in the study of religions or historically, is related to modern astrological practice. As explained above, ancient astrologers were familiar with precession, something also described in detail in textbooks of modern astrology (Hürlimann 51988, 13f). To summarise, ancient astrologers knew about precession, but used the tropical zodiac regardless; modern astrologers are familiar with precession and respond to this criticism with the argument that the constellations do not play any role in astrological interpretation because they use the tropical zodiac. The above raises two questions:  Firstly, how to explain the independence of the tropical zodiac from the sidereal zodiac in the development of astronomy and astrology, and secondly, how to understand that the purely geometric signs of the zodiac separated from the constellations can have an influence on events on Earth.

3.9.1. The Primacy of the Tropic over the Sidereal Zodiac German ancient philologist Franz Boll (1867–​1924) made a significant contribution to answering the first question in his work Sphära (‘Sphaera’, Boll 1976), basing his research on astronomical and astrological texts in Greek, particularly texts by Babylonian writer Teucer from the first century CE. Teucer’s texts give an overall view of all stars and constellations in the visible sky, as well as their respective positions on the ecliptic. Franz Boll’s central hypothesis is that, in Ancient Greek –​but also Babylonian –​ astronomy and astrology, the line of the ecliptic (the Sun’s apparent orbit) and its 360º classification provide the basic systematic structure for the

104 In this sense also Jürgen Ebach 1990, 85; Friedrich-​Wilhelm Haack 51988, 17. the news magazine Der Spiegel 4/​1995, 197 with the remark: ‘They (astrologers) still work with the celestial position of the mummy time.’

166

Astrology in European Religious History

entire visible cosmos. Ancient literature therefore tended to represent the constellations cosmographically in three parts related to the ecliptic in the following order –​northern constellations, ecliptic constellations, and southern constellations. Franz Boll uses Teucer’s division into three in his own classification. The ecliptic’s astronomical and astrological significance results from designating large individual stars and all constellations as paranatellonta (‘rising at the same time’, from the Greek verb paranatellein (παρανατέλλειν)).105 Stars and constellations that rise simultaneously to and alongside a sign of the zodiac, decan or individual degree are therefore called paranatellonta, and visible celestial bodies can be used to precisely determine the invisible sectors of the ecliptic. Teucer’s texts not only use the paranatellonta to establish simultaneous ascents in the eastern sky, but also simultaneous culminations and descents. The ecliptic is given priority because only its regular structure –​ derived from the course of the Sun and Moon on the ecliptic  –​makes it possible to determine units of time including days, months and years accurately. The sidereal zodiac and the constellations to the north and south of the ecliptic are then only used as an aid in determining the tropical zodiac, and not the other way round. The division into the twelve 30º sectors of the zodiac (and the 10º decans and 1º monomoiria) was therefore more important than the arrangement of visible scattered stars into constellations, which can only permit an irregular way of ordering the cosmos. Because ‘the zodiac and its twelve signs, decans and degrees [... was] even more important for astrologers than astronomers’ (Boll 1967, 76), however, the division of the ecliptic always took precedence over the constellations in astrology. The history of their development also demonstrates the ecliptic and the tropical zodiac’s primacy over the sidereal zodiac. Franz Boll notes that the tropical zodiac with its twelve signs is of Babylonian origin and must therefore have been developed completely independently of the sidereal zodiac.106 There are multiple reasons for this. Boll first cites the

105 Boll 1967, 76. Another term is Synanatellonta (συνανατέλλοντα) the “fellow ascenders”. (Ibid.) 106 This is not the case with Hans Gundel, who assumes Egypt as the origin (Gundel 1972, 408ff). However, Wolfgang Hübner also points out that the

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

167

sidereal zodiac’s irregular classification and then the gaps between the constellations, which are sometimes wide and sometimes so close that they ‘permeate and confuse’ (Boll 1967, 185). If the constellations had been envisaged for the zodiac from the outset, it would have been possible ‘to very easily arrange groups of stars, twelve groups of stars with more or less the same dimensions corresponding to the same number of parts of the ecliptic and arranged symmetrically along this circle.’ (Ibid.) This considerable congruence makes it appear almost impossible that ancient astrologers equated the influence of the signs of the zodiac with that of the constellations. Nevertheless, Franz Boll considers it likely that the names given to some of the twelve signs of the zodiac were initially different from the names of constellations or parts of constellations to the north or south of the ecliptic used today. The sign of the zodiac Aries, for example, may initially have been equated with the more visible Triangulum, and Sagittarius with Aquila, which is situated on the equator and equally easy to make out. (Ibid. 186). From an astrological perspective, then, constellations are nothing more than variable namesakes of the signs of the zodiac. However, Boll finds the most important indicator of the tropical zodiac’s primacy over the sidereal zodiac and its independent development in the distinction between the eleven constellations and the twelve signs of the zodiac as explained above and drawn by Greek-​speaking astronomers and astrologers all the way to Hipparchus of Nicaea and Claudius Ptolemy. The missing constellation up until that point was Libra, ‘an ingredient only penetrated later [...], which evidently only aimed to make the number of constellations equal to the twelve signs of the zodiac, which is why a very fitting symbol for the autumn equinox was invented’. (Ibid. 186f). The logical conclusion is as simple as it is persuasive: ‘If for a long time there were only eleven constellations in the zodiac, then, the ecliptic’s division into twelve parts has nothing to do with the quantity and dimensions of the constellations initially’. (Ibid. 187f).

oldest individual representations of zodiac images can be traced to Mesopotamia (Hübner 2002, 555).

168

Astrology in European Religious History

Franz Boll convincingly demonstrates that the tropical zodiac –​the circle of the ecliptic separated into twelve equal places –​could not have been derived from constellation groups. Even ancient astrologers used the twelve signs of the zodiac for their astrological interpretations, and modern astrology also uses the tropical zodiac. However, Ptolemy also lists individual fixed stars, which are similar to the planets, along with their effects. Modern astrology sometimes takes note of these individual fixed stars, but they do not represent constellations, invalidating the criticism that modern astrology apparently uses constellations in its interpretations. Despite these critical objections, then, if the twelve signs of the zodiac form the basis of modern astrology, this still does not explain how these ‘empty’ 30º geometric sectors can influence events on Earth.

3.9.2. The Mythological and Intelligible Interpretation of the Sections of the Ecliptic in the Ancient World and the Modern Period It is plausible to an extent that fixed stars and planets may have an effect –​ after all, physical bodies (which celestial bodies are) have an effect through heat, light and gravitation. What ‘effect’ can an abstract segment of space have, though? As already dealt with in this study, the justification for this lies in a spiritual and vital understanding of these segments and space in general.

3.9.2.1. Origins If the signs of the zodiac are to be understood as ‘spatial segments’ of the ecliptic, that also implies ‘time segments’ because these spatial segments traverse the entire 360º sky as they appear to orbit the Earth every 24 hours, including certain cardinal points: ascent, culmination and descent. As time segments, they also measure the cycles of the Sun, the Moon and the planets. Hans Gundel considers that the ‘division of time’ (used to guide seafarers along with the division of space) could have been the main reason for giving the ecliptic a regular structure (Gundel 1972, 500), providing the possibility of making accurate calendar calculations. For a religious or spiritual and vital interpretation, this means that, if the spatial segments are assigned to divine beings, the same applies to time

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

169

segments: the rulers of specific spaces are also rulers of specific times. They can only take ‘effect’ when the Sun, Moon or one of the other planets crosses the spatial segment or when the spatial segment touches one of the cardinal points (ascent, culmination, descent). For Hans Gundel, establishing divine beings as rulers of periods of time and initial points is an older phenomenon historically than the geometric classification of the ecliptic segments into signs of the zodiac, decans and more. (Ibid. 509f). The division of the ecliptic into segments of space and time was therefore originally inseparable from religious conceptions. Gundel considers that, ‘as the most complete geometric entity and centre line of the zone of the zodiac’, the orbit of the ecliptic may have been the foundation for the religious interpretation of it. The religious significance of the number twelve may also have played a role in the division. (Ibid. 545). As mentioned previously, the idea that the signs of the zodiac are ‘animated’ spatial segments of the ecliptic comes from the Greek term zodiakos, sometimes translated as ‘circle of animals’ (from zodion, ‘animal’). This is not entirely accurate, though, because not all of the signs are animals (Gemini, Virgo, Libra, Aquarius). The etymology of the word ‘zodiac’ is in he zoé (ἡ ζωή), meaning ‘life’ and to zodion (τὸ ζῷδιον), meaning ‘living thing’ or ‘small creature’. The correct English translation, then, is ‘circle of living things’. The older, Babylonian term is not known. The term decan (Greek) or decade (Latin) has this link to divine beings, too, and was originally a military rank in Egypt that commanded ten soldiers. In astrology, a decan god ‘commands’ the ten gods of the individual degrees. Older descriptions included ‘the 36 gods’, ‘powerful rulers’, ‘lords of worlds’, ‘36 world elements’ and ‘custodians of space’. (Gundel 1958, 118). The generalising description of ‘divine beings’ is as appropriate here as the rather impersonal ‘world elements’, understood as ‘divine forces’. The religious significance of the ecliptic segments applies to all ‘imaginary entities of the degrees, fields, houses and twelfths of the zodiac that were elevated to deities’ (Gundel 1949, 1215). In the mythologies of all cultures, divine beings do not necessarily have to be bound to visible bodies. Incorporeal beings can indeed be embodied, but there is generally a distinction between body and spirit. This distinction between divine beings and physical appearances (celestial bodies) also applies to astrology. The divine beings in the ecliptic segments and

170

Astrology in European Religious History

their effects are indeed represented in bodies, but these are not corporeal manifestations, but pure shapes, purely geometry. As far as the different sizes of the spatial segments on the ecliptic are concerned, the beings assigned to them form a hierarchy of spheres of action that overlap and mix together. The beings in the zodiac are superordinate to the decans, which in turn are superordinate to the individual degrees. In the history of astrology, this assumption that the signs of the zodiac and the decans are ‘divine’ has differed as much as that of the planets. The oldest demonstrable link between ecliptic segments and divine beings is Egyptian in origin and dates back to the late third century BCE. (Gundel 1972, 505). The 36 decans of the ecliptic are given the names of certain demons based on the constellations which, as described above, rose or culminated alongside them as paranatellonta. Stars and constellations were nothing but namesakes, however, and played no role in the decans’ effects: The demons behind the names do not exert their influence from an actual star and constellation. Instead, it is a moving chain of pseudo-​asterisms that are self-​ activating or, in the older view, activated in combination with the Moon. (Gundel 1972, 505).

Decans do not have an effect through individual stars and constellations, then, but either on their own or only when the Moon, Sun or another planet crosses through the sectors or when a decan passes the cardinal points. As Greek magical papyri testify, the Moon therefore assumes the ‘form’ of decan gods (or zodiac and star gods) when it passes through the field. The connection between the twelve zodiac sectors and the divine beings assigned to them work very similarly –​albeit with a more obscure historical development process, which is more contentious in academia. Egyptian tradition sees the twelve zodiac images as ‘guiding gods’ closely connected to the planets.107 Just as the decans’ effect is mediated by the phases of the

107 Astronomically, this connection results both from the phases and months of the moon and from the orbit of Jupiter. Already in Babylonian times it was known that Jupiter travels almost exactly 360° in twelve years and 30° annually on the ecliptic (Gundel 1972, 508).

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

171

Moon, that of the signs of the zodiac is mediated by the Sun’s movement. Wolfgang Hübner writes that ‘in the signs of the zodiac, the Egyptians saw metastases and changes in the sun god’. (Hübner 2001, 559). The signs of the zodiac have their effect when the Sun crosses through this field, forming humans’ personalities through the positions of the Sun. In Ancient Greek times, individual zodiac symbols were also used as talismans and amulets, giving the signs of the zodiac the character of protective gods.108 (Gundel 1972, 545) These explanations may be sufficient to prove the mythological and spiritual or vital character of the ecliptic signs of the zodiac and decans in Babylonian, Ancient Egyptian and Ancient Greek times. It should be added that the individual fixed stars and constellations formed by them are also assigned divine properties, which lost relevance –​in favour of the planets –​ in astrology after Ancient Greece. (Hübner 2001, 970). They only retain a certain astrological importance as paranatellonta, companions to signs of the zodiac and decans.

3.9.2.2. Constellations and Signs of the Zodiac in the Modern Period The question now is how modern astrology confronts this ‘divinity’ of spatial segments. Building on the concept of transcendence explained above, there is also a certain level of continuity here from ancient to modern astrology. It is worth returning to Johannes Kepler for a historical perspective and a bridge to modernity. In Book IV, Chapter VII of Weltharmonik (‘World Harmonics’), Kepler writes that ‘the earth soul contains the idea of the zodiac’, which is why it is also able to receive ‘archetypical harmonies’. The same applies to individual horoscopes: ‘Because the vital faculty is a kind of zodiac as long as the life lasts and its being consists of energy [...], the figure of the entire sensory zodiac flows into it’. For Kepler, the

108 The pictorial representation results from the names of the signs: In Aries and Taurus the frontal view of the head is clearly visible (♈ ♉). Gemini (♊), Cancer (♋), Libra (♎), Sagittarius (♐), Aquarius (♒) and Pisces (♓) are also more or less clearly explained by their names. It is obvious that the hardly or not at all recognisable symbols for Leo (♌), Scorpio (♏) and Capricorn (♑) are also derived from the names.

172

Astrology in European Religious History

zodiac comprises ‘ideas residing in the spirit’ and ‘images of these ideals residing in souls’. (All quotations: Kepler 2006, 256ff).

3.9.2.2.1. Alice Ann Bailey The following quote (also above) from theosophist Alice Ann Bailey applies to esoteric astrology: ‘Space is an entity and the entire “vault of heaven” is the phenomenal appearance of that entity.’ (Bailey 1970, 19f). The signs of the zodiac, individual spiritual ‘beings’ and all spatial segments in ancient astral-​religious and astrological texts  –​including individual fixed stars like Sirius and Spica and constellations like the Great Bear and the Pleiades  –​are all embedded into this space. 26). Esoteric (theosophical) astrology turns this into a cosmic hierarchy of spiritual substances and their energies, which emanate from these constellations and groups of stars and ‘find their way [...] into our planetary life and produce definite effects upon individual man and humanity as a whole’ (Bailey 1970, 26). The 30º sectors of the tropical zodiac, like the constellations and planets, are manifestations of divine beings that convey the influence of the fixed stars’ spiritual substances to our planetary system and even into the formation of humans’ personalities. (Bailey 1970, 39f). In this esoteric astrology, the ‘divinity’ of celestial bodies is essentially the same as that developed in Ancient Greece, formulating an astrology that requires no theoretical justification through interdependencies.

3.9.2.2.2. Carl  Jung Carl Jung’s psychological astrology also seizes on the distinction between constellations and signs of the zodiac. However, Jung clearly distances himself from an outer, physical effect of stars and constellations, something he considers solely supported by precession (the shift in the vernal equinox). Precession had shifted the signs of the zodiac with respect to the constellations, meaning that babies born in Aries, for example, would theoretically be influenced by the constellation Pisces today. The signs of the zodiac, however, are imaginary segments whose effectiveness cannot be explained through outside influences. Instead, the descriptions in the names of the constellations and signs reflect a collective psychological reality. This expressly applies to both the constellations and the signs of the zodiac, which are archetypal images projected onto the sky that convey

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

173

different psychological concerns. Carl Jung points out that not only were ancient scholars familiar with the precession of the vernal equinox, but that it was also discussed with regard to the impact of the zodiac. Christian writer Origen (184–​254 CE) distinguished a zodiac ‘conceived by the mind’ (quae mente conciptur) from one that is ‘suggested by sensation’ (quae quasi sensu informatur). Jung says that the first was related to the division of the ecliptic into 30º sectors, and the last to the visible constellations. (Jung 51983, 90). In Carl Jung’s interpretation of Origen, both divisions reflect a certain spiritual and religious knowledge. The conception of the constellations, in conjunction with the knowledge of the precession of the vernal equinox, would distinguish an archetypical consciousness of history that Jung credits the astrologers of the ancient world with having with regard to the development of Christian Europe. Jung understands the conception of the signs of the zodiac as a blueprint for the development of individual personalities. Carl Jung explains the conception of the constellations in detail in various texts using the example of the constellation Pisces109 because of its special significance for European religious history to the present day. He says that astrologers of antiquity fashioned the constellation from prophetic knowledge placed in the collective unconscious in such a way that the slow precession of the vernal equinox made it possible ‘to predict –​to some extent –​the dates and events of the course of our religious history and with it a significant part of psychological development’ (Jung 1983, 104). The constellation Pisces was constructed from a number of fixed stars to draw two fish that intersect to form a cross –​one from south to north, the other from west to east –​and produce a picture that expressed early Christianity’s archetypal concerns and the Christian history that was to be expected. The vertical fish indicates the spiritual dimension of the Christian age, while the horizontal one indicates its materialistic dimension. Both are an expression of the myth of Christ (spirit) and the Antichrist (material). The vernal equinox moving from Aries into the constellation Pisces would mark the beginning of the vertical Christian age, around the

109 Cf. Jung 51983, Chap. VI: The Sign of Pisces and Chap. VII: The Prophecy of Nostradamus.

174

Astrology in European Religious History

time that Christianity came into being. The continued movement of the vernal equinox, starting through the vertical fish, would describe the era of a vertical (spiritual) Christianity emphasising revelation. When the vernal equinox reached the first star of the horizontal fish in the sixteenth century, this symbolically described the dawn of the materialistic age with its ‘horizontal movement, namely the conquest of the Earth and master of nature [...] and its anti-​Christian direction’ (Jung 51983, 104). For Jung, the fact that the year 1789 was highlighted as the ‘coming of the Antichrist’ in the tradition of Christian astrological interpretation of history is historical proof of the approximate correspondence between the archetypal construction of the constellations and Europe’s actual development. Parisian cardinal Pierre d’Ailly (1350–​1420) predicted the ‘advent of the Antichrist with his law and his abominable sect’ in the year 1789 in his text Concordantia astronomiae cum theologica, written in 1414.110 Later, in 1558, Michel Nostradamus also prophesied the coming of the Antichrist and a persecution of the Church starting in 1792 in a letter to Henri II. The leading proponents of the Panbabylonian School, assyriologist Hugo Winckler and Old Testament specialist Alfred Jeremias, supported the view that the precession of the vernal equinox through the constellations had a long tradition for interpreting history religiously in Babylon and Ancient Egypt, as seen in the worship of bulls and rams in parallel to the ages of Taurus and Aries, respectively. The constellations along the ecliptic are therefore part of astrology’s religious worldview and a means for interpreting history religiously.111

10 Alliaco 1490, ch. 60. Cf. Smoller 1994, 105f. 1 111 According to Winckler, the ancient Egyptian calendar places the beginning of the world with the sign Cancer, i.e. with the time when the vernal equinox passed through the sign of Cancer around 5,000 BCE. On the other hand, the records of the Babylonian calendar calculation place a beginning when the vernal equinox passed through the sign of Gemini. The division into epochs is supported by archaeological evidence of bull and ram cults in Babylonia and Egypt. These point to an age of Taurus and Aries, when the vernal equinox passed through these signs (Winckler 1901, 32–​40). Finally, with Christianity and the vernal equinox in Pisces, the Piscean Age began (first advocated by Alfred Jeremias, cf. Bochinger 1994, 330).

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

175

According to Carl Jung, the Age of Pisces, defined by spiritual Christianity and then materialism conquering the world, would be followed by the Age of Aquarius when the vernal equinox entered the constellation Aquarius. (Jung 51983, 103). In the present day, this religious interpretation of the Age of Aquarius is especially important for many new religious and esoteric currents related to the New Age movement. On the other hand, Jung considers the conception of the signs of the zodiac with its twelve equal 30º sectors to have an individual rather than cultural and historical significance as an expression and goal of character development or ‘individuation’. For Jung, the ego is more important than the self and comprises both conscious and all unconscious aspects of personality. It is ‘the central archetype’ or ‘archetype of order’ and represents the ‘wholeness of the individual’. The aim of life is the self, and the process of unconscious parts becoming conscious brings the ego closer to the self. This is related to historical religions in that ‘Christ [is] a symbol of the self’. (Jung 51983, 46–​80). The same applies for the Buddha, and probably ‘Indian holy men’ in general. (Jaffé 1997, 278f, 283). Jung stresses that the zodiac, with its four groups of three signs each, reflects the self as the goal of all character development. (Jung 51983, 240). This is demonstrated in that the zodiac contains the most important geometric symbols used to express the self: the circle, the square, and the quaternity (a group of four) in the form of cross.112 Like a ‘rationally conceived’ circle (Origen), this functions in such a way that its division into twelve represents personality aspects coming together in a unified self: Each of the four classical elements is repeated three times in the order fire, earth, air, water, and each one assigned a quality in the cross pattern –​cardinal, fixed and mutable. Building on Hippocrates of Cos’ (c. 460–​377 BCE) teachings on the four elements and Claudius Galenus’ (131–​201 CE) teachings on the four

112 Carl Gustav Jung sees basic geometric forms of the self, similar to the signs of the zodiac, above all in „mandala symbolism”, as it is common in the Buddhist tradition, but also in Christian and especially in alchemical representations, and also in modern forms of painting geometric basic forms of the self similar to the signs of the zodiac. (Jung 51983: Die Struktur und Dynamik des Selbst, 241–​280, Über Mandalasymbolik, 373–​414. Zur Empirie des Individuationsprozesses, 309–​372).

176

Astrology in European Religious History

temperaments (choleric, sanguine, melancholic and phlegmatic), Carl Jung developed four basic psychological types corresponding to the four elements  –​ intuitive (fire), sensing (earth), thinking (air) and feeling (water). (Jung 141981, 552; 560f). Combined with the zodiac qualities cardinal, fixed and mutable, these produce twelve basic personality types. For Jung, all components of astrology –​the constellations constructed from fixed stars and the imaginary signs of the zodiac, including the four elements assigned to them –​simply become psychological factors projected onto the sky. As an expression of a collective unconscious of all of humanity, the constellations and signs of the zodiac are powerful reflections of human history and individual predisposition. Jung believes that these projected celestial images produce an endeavour of individual and societal completion that is found in the collective psyche. To summarise Carl Jung’s thought, the signs of the zodiac and the constellations are not objective spaces replete with qualities of ‘divinity’ or ‘divine forces’ in themselves. This was the view of ancient astrology, but also theosophical esoteric astrology. Nonetheless, it should not be overlooked that Jung places transcendental forces in the signs of the zodiac and the constellations. The term archetype (see Section 1.3.1) itself implies that these collective ideals have a certain transcendental existence of their own. If constellations and signs of the zodiac are projected onto the sky, providing the possibility of gleaning interpretations from these images, this assumes that the archetypes are effective throughout the entire cosmos. The transcendental content of Jung’s astrology has been deconstructed in this way to then re-​establish it in images of the sky using collective psychological and, at the same time, cosmic forces.

3.9.2.2.3. Fritz Riemann With this individual and collective psychological interpretation of the zodiac, Carl Jung created the prerequisite for the horoscope and the tropical zodiac to enter the field of psychoanalysis. Psychoanalyst and co-​founder of the Munich Academy for Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy, Fritz Riemann (1902–​1979), saw the interpretation of horoscopes –​and the signs of the zodiac in particular  –​as an important addition to psychotherapeutic methods. Riemann sees the signs of the zodiac as ‘twelve ideals or ideas’ that correspond to ‘twelve different ways of existing in the world’

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

177

psychologically. Certain signs of the zodiac are ‘located inside us as objectives or models’. Riemann considers the signs of the zodiac applicable to psychoanalysis owing to the experience, ‘always perceived as a gap’, where a therapist ‘does not know his patients’ “primary nature”’ (Riemann 2005, 53ff). In their ‘fundamental descriptions’, the signs of the zodiac show ‘chances and dangers in our primary structure which, if understood correctly, become a task that only the person in question can solve’ (Riemann 2005, 56). Signs of the zodiac, alongside other factors in a horoscope, are therefore a useful tool in uncovering the personality’s ‘primary nature’ and purposes or goals. There is no mention of the spatial segments’ ‘divinity’ here, but the fact that the sign of the zodiac is a fundamental pattern of psychological disposition ‘somehow’ attached to the ecliptic and readable from there remains implicit. If religious questions (or questions of meaning, in line with Niklas Luhmann) are not aimed at empirical objects, so not solely environmental factors that shape the psyche, but at an outside beyond the horizon of physical circumstances and if this provides answers that reflect each person’s personality structure, then the signs of the zodiac are transcendental factors –​a religious port of call that can be invoked and that provides answers.

3.9.2.2.4. Thomas  Ring Thomas Ring also emphasises experience first when explaining the significance and primacy of the 30º signs of the zodiac over the constellations. The measuring circle for the signs of the zodiac continues to calculate from the vernal equinox. Using the traditional zodiac names makes clear that segments measuring 30º each are intended, which are not equated with the constellations of the same name. We need to look at the contents independently of the constellations […]. Astrological experience proves the divisions between the twelve sections to be more or less sharp breaks. (Ring Vol. II 51985, 48).

Ring continues by explaining how to understand the nature of the signs of the zodiac if they do not correspond to any visible, physical celestial body. Just like the names of the planets, the signs of the zodiac are to be seen as ‘symbols of organic creative forces’ and ‘spiritual ideals’ (Ring 51985, 26). ‘That which lies in the area over Earth [the signs of the zodiac] corresponds to oppositions inherent to our interior. This was the source of ancient

178

Astrology in European Religious History

peoples’ great analogy concept, “as above, so below”’ (Ring 51985, 44). For Ring, the signs of the zodiac, developed 2500 years ago, remain valid because of the experience that draws comparative conclusions from the interaction between the astrologer and their client. The correlation with astrological tradition, the ancient doctrine of the elements and humoral pathology shows that the zodiac’s internal structure comprising twelve parts also corresponds to modern humans’ personality structure. Thomas Ring does not go beyond the description ‘symbols of creative forces’, but the same nonetheless applies here as above: If the signs of the zodiac are genuine segments on the ecliptic whose position can be used to read psychological factors, this assumes a transcendental meaning in line with Niklas Luhmann. After all, these ‘symbols of creative forces’ are aimed at something outside empirical objects and draw answers from there.

3.10. Conclusion It is evident that, even in the modern day, astrology with its celestial bodies and signs of the zodiac still requires a transcendental aspect. Hubert Knoblauch and Niklas Luhmann provide an appropriate framework for defining transcendental and religious for the purpose of studying religions. It has been demonstrated, however, that embedding astrology in this transcendental way has two particular expressions. On the other hand, visible natural objects (the planets and fixed stars) are inhabited by something transcendental. This was the understanding in ancient mythology with its stellar deities all the way to Thomas Ring’s modern astrology with his ‘principles of organic being’. Indeed, new terms were developed for this ‘divinity’ of the planets as worldviews began to shift, but this did not change the transcendental character of the celestial bodies’ characteristics. On the other hand, the formal, abstract mathematical definitions of space and time express an intelligible, transcendental definition. As explained previously, this applies above all to the imaginary zodiac made up of 30º signs on the ecliptic The explanations regarding Johannes Kepler have also shown that the stars’ angular relationships to one another can be understood as transcendental ideas or spiritual ‘archetypes’ in a Platonic sense. (Section 1.2.1). Geometry therefore becomes a background of ideas against which astrology becomes effective, and this transcendental foundation of

The Structure of Astrology II Celestial Deities

179

astrology remains fundamentally consistent throughout the different eras and cultural contexts. Astrological tradition also includes essential scientific features in its justification, but these are unable to prevail. Modern research takes this physical tradition, which is often practically inseparable from transcendental concepts, to conclude that astrology as a whole has constituted a misunderstood science ever since its origins. Instead of a religious or intelligible interpretation of the cosmos and nature, these approaches to research point to the emerging science that is said to be the birth of astrology when Greek natural philosophy first brought astrology into being. The following chapter pursues this scientific interpretation of astrology in line with historian John David North and others.

4 Astrology as a Misunderstood Science Multiple astrological texts from late antiquity and the medieval period take a physical influence of celestial bodies as a basis alongside the intelligible, analogous relationship between the cosmos and humans. This physical approach stems from Aristotelian-​influenced texts including Claudius Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos. Stoic natural science also indicates a natural, physical influence of celestial bodies alongside the logos (spirit) and pneuma (breath of the soul), or at least appears to at first glance. These physical approaches in astrology have been invoked again and again throughout history when the aim was to refute them. Renaissance philosopher Pico della Mirandola (1463–​1494) dismisses any influence at all from celestial bodies in his extensive anti-​astrological work De astrologia disputationum113 because their (supposed) physical justifications allegedly refute themselves. Pico was a staunchly esoteric philosopher with a cabbalistic, neo-​Platonic and hermetic cosmology,114 which logically might include astrology. This was not the cause, however. In the text mentioned, Pico battles astrology both in general as a holistic concept and with regard to its deterministic forecasts.115 Astrology, then, goes astray because its physical assumptions are wrong. In remarkable contrast to his other –​ cabbalistic, neo-​Platonic –​doctrines, Pico conceives of the celestial bodies as physical bodies not inhabited by any divine beings or forces. He writes ‘occultas vires coelestibus non inesse’116 (‘the stars do not contain any occult forces’). In Pico’s line of thought, the unanimated, purely physical

113 G. Pico della Mirandola:  De astrologia disputationum Lib. XII, in:  Opera Omnia, Hildesheim 1969. Reprint of the Basel 1557 edition, Vol. I, Lib V, 411–​732. 114 Especially in the writings Oratio de hominis dignitate (1486) and 900 Tesis de omni re scibili /​Conclusiones philosophicae, cabalisticae et theologicae nongentae in omni genere scientiarum (1486). Cf. also Thumfart 1996. 115 Pico gives some examples of predictions that did not come true, Pico 1969, Lib. V, Cap. In his Oratio de hominis dignitate, Pico radically opposes deterministic statements with the ‘freedom of choice’ (cf. Thumfart 1996, 344ff). 116 Ibid. Lib. III, Ch. XXIIII, 510.

182

Astrology in European Religious History

celestial bodies give reason to dismiss astrology entirely:  An astrology based on physical and causal justifications can only fall flat. This physical approach to astrology also led to the assumption in modern-​day historical analyses that astrology was tied solely and inextricably to physical observations of nature and the geocentric model. As a consequence, astrology would lose all foundation after the shift away from the geocentric model and, if it continued to exist, could only be understood as a ‘residual pseudo-​science’. (Ebach 1990, 83). Philosopher and science historian John David North interprets astrology in this way in an essay with the programmatic title Celestial influence –​the major premiss of astrology (in: Zambelli 1986, 45–​100). North’s main intention is to understand astrology’s transcendental and religious justifications in Ancient Greece and late antiquity as subsequent additions. In this line of thinking, secondary vital, spiritual and religious assumptions have been derived from observations of the sky that were originally physical. A look at the history of religion and philosophy renders this assumption invalid.

4.1. John David North and the Physical Premises of Astrology For John David North, the scientific foundation for astrology is to be found above all in Aristotle’s natural science. North names two texts in particular that he says astrology in late antiquity and the medieval period drew on: De generatione et corruptione and Meteorologica. He also cites the contribution of Stoic philosophers Cleanthes (301–​232 BCE) and Chrysippus (281–​208 BCE) in deducing from physical circumstances that the cosmos was to be understood as animated. North argues that the two above texts by Aristotle uncovered an astrology based on misinterpreted celestial mechanics: Those who wrote about celestial action were rather like those who wrote about the unicorn –​that is to say, they were more concerned with its behaviour than with existence. As to the question of existence, just as there were traces of the animal of legend (in the forms of authentic horns), so there were signs that one of the planets at least, namely the Sun, produces changes on the Earth (North 1986, 45).

Astrology as a Misunderstood Science

183

This means:  just as unicorns only exist in the imagination of fairytales, the effects of celestial bodies also belong to the realm of fantasy. However, just as unicorns have their roots in real animals with authentic horns, the imagined effects of celestial bodies can be traced to the authentic influence of sunlight and heat on the climate and on vegetation. Astrology after Aristotle, particularly in Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos, transferred these obvious effects of the Sun (heat, vegetation, etc.) to all other planets, and later to the fixed stars and signs of the zodiac. According to North, following the physical theories in the two texts named makes clear how nuanced this recourse by Ptolemy and other astrologers to Aristotle’s texts was in order to give astrology a ‘scientific’ (Aristotelian) foundation. In his text Physics, Aristotle had set out that movements in nature as a whole were the primary cause of all changes on Earth. In De generatione et corruptione he goes on to explain changes in sublunar nature more precisely and finds the principal cause in the Sun’s two annual movements along the ecliptic:  The upward and downward motion related to the ecliptic between the winter and summer solstice and the Sun’s (apparent) annual cycle along the ecliptic. North observes that Aristotle’s intentions were not astrological at all; instead, he found the answers to difficult questions by deducing the role of the Sun’s movements in genesis and decay in nature. For example, Aristotle was concerned with how the element fire, continually moving upwards, had not simply evaporated from the Earth’s surface –​assuming the endless existence of the sublunar world. (North 1986, 46). He believed he had found the answer in the friction between the spheres resulting from the Sun’s two different movements, which would cause a circulating interaction between the four elements (fire, earth, air and water) in the sublunar world and so, despite fire constantly striving upwards, it would continuously be thrown back to the lower strata. Air, water and earth would also be mixed up continuously, coming together to bring about the processes of genesis and decay. In this way, all life on Earth is essentially bound to the movements of the celestial spheres and the four elements. This, for North, brought astrologers to the erroneous conclusion that all celestial bodies exerted an influence on life on Earth.

184

Astrology in European Religious History

The first book of Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos includes some introductory remarks that at first support North’s thesis: A very few considerations would make it apparent to all that a certain power emanating from the eternal ethereal substance is dispersed through and permeates the whole region about the earth, which throughout is subject to change, since, of the primary sublunar elements, fire and air are encompassed and changed by the motions in the ether, and in turn encompass and change all else, earth and water and the plants and animals therein. For the sun, together with the ambient is always in some way affecting everything on the earth, not only by the changes that accompany the seasons of the year to bring about the generation of animals, the productiveness of plants, but also by its daily revolutions furnishing heat, moisture, dryness and cold in regular order and in correspondence with its positions relative to the zenith. (Ptolemy 1980, I, 4–​7).

The same that can be said of the Sun’s visible influence on vegetation can also be applied to the Moon’s influence, although Ptolemy expands its spectrum of effects far beyond pure physics: The moon, too, bestows her (!) influence effluence most abundantly upon mundane things, for most of them, animate or inanimate, are sympathetic to her and change in company with her; the seas turn their own tides with her rising and setting, and plants and animals in whole or in some part wax and wane with her.117 (Ptolemy 1980, I, 6/​7)

Ptolemy not only assumes a physical influence of the Moon, then, but also expands it to include animals’ growth and behaviour. And now a reference to the effects of the remaining celestial bodies: Moreover, the passages of the fixed stars and the planets through the sky often signify hot, and snowy conditions of the air, and mundane things are affected accordingly. Then, too, their aspects to one another, by the meeting and mingling of their dispensations, bring about many complicated changes. (Ptolemy I, 6/​7f).

Ptolemy cites two key elements of astrological interpretations here:  The effects of the celestial bodies (Sun, Moon, planets, fixed stars) and the angular relationships between the planets (aspects), to which he also assigns an effect. It appears, then, that Ptolemy genuinely moves seamlessly from

117 The influence of the moon on the tides was recognised by Seleucus of Seleucia in the early 2nd century BCE. (Hockey 2007, 1042. North 1997, 58).

Astrology as a Misunderstood Science

185

physical effects from the Sun and Moon to physically inexplicable effects from planets, fixed stars, and aspects. In this line of thinking, North seems to be correct in establishing Aristotle’s physics as the origin of Ptolemy’s astrology. However, this direct line from Aristotle to Ptolemy is in no way astrology’s only foundation, neither historically nor philosophically nor considering the whole of Tetrabiblos beyond its introduction. North’s argumentation pays as little attention to the mythological and religious foundations of astrology in the Mesopotamian and Egyptian tradition as it does to the natural-​philosophical characteristics of the ‘divine ether’ (Aristotle) and the analogous relationship between celestial bodies and events on Earth. In multiple chapters of Tetrabiblos, Ptolemy explains astrological relationships as analogous relationships with repeated references to Ancient Egyptian tradition. This is the case with analogous temporal relationships, for example, which are applied from the duration of solar and lunar eclipses to the duration of their effects on Earth.118 Ancient Egyptian medicine, known as iatromathematics, was also based on analogies and assigned individual humans organs and regions of the body to a planet or sign of the zodiac. This concept, called melothesia, was therefore based on a system of correspondences.119 Ptolemy clearly draws on both foundations –​causal and analogous –​as required. At no point does he explain whether and how the celestial bodies’ physical influence through their forces flowing down to Earth can be reconciled with the analogous relationships between the cosmos and humans. The reason he considers both variants valid only becomes apparent when the spiritual and material character of the ether as a ‘divine substance’ and

118 In the second book of the Tetrabiblos, Ptolemy explains that the effect of a solar eclipse on the earth lasts as many years as it lasts hours. Similarly, the effect of a lunar eclipse lasts as many months as the eclipse lasts in hours. This means that the time units of the observed constellations are analogous to the time units of the effect on Earth (Ptolemy 1980, II,6, 165ff. Ptolemäus 1995, 101). 119 The course of the moon and the planets through the signs of the zodiac then provides information about causes of illness and healing methods. (Ptolemy 1980, I, 3, 31ff. Ptolemäus 1995, 31).

186

Astrology in European Religious History

the whole metaphysical and theological context of Aristotle’s cosmology are taken into consideration. Returning to John David North’s text, however, the introductory reference to a brief extract from the Book of Job alone shows how problematic it is to reduce astrology to physical thinking. For North, this Bible passage is typical of the ancient world’s meteorological thinking. When Job demands an explanation for the suffering inflicted on him, God answers with an array of questions that make clear how powerless and ignorant Job is in comparison with the size of creation. North quotes: Canst thou bind the sweet influence of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion? (North 1986, 45).

North interprets this passage meteorologically in the sense that the writer of the Book of Job assumed an ‘in-​flowing of something’ from celestial bodies, drawing on the Latin meaning of the terms influentia and influere (North 1986, 45). For North, the phrase ‘the sweet influence’ (the in-​ flowing of substances) is key to understanding ancient meteorology and, with it, the key to the development of astrology. This ancient thought assumes that, just as rain, heat and light come from above, other substantial effects must also come from above  –​perhaps from the Pleiades or Orion. It is important to add here that a translation of verse 31 from the Hebrew text goes as follows: ‘Do you bind the cords of the Pleiades or do you loose Orion’s arrow?’120 Martin Luther’s translation goes along the same lines: ‘Can you tie the cords of the Seven Sisters or unravel Orion’s belt?’ (Job 38:31). The standard translation into German follows the Septuagint in Greek and is also very similar: ‘Do you knot the cords of the Pleiades, or do you loose Orient’s bands?’121 Even the Latin Vulgate does not contain any reference to North’s interpretation, as would be expected. The translation from Latin is: ‘Are you perhaps able to bind the sparkling stars of the

120 Biblia Hebraica, 1962, 1140, Iob 38, 31 (translation by the author). North himself refers to this Hebrew text version, which differs from the English quotation, in a note, but does not see any consequences for his interpretation (North 1986, 45 note 1). 121 Septuagint, vol. II, 91935, 336 (translation by the author).

Astrology as a Misunderstood Science

187

Pleiades, or scatter Arcturus’ cycle?’122 The Vulgate may diverge from the wording of the Hebrew Bible and the Septuagint, but it retains the sense of a physical influence from celestial bodies.123 None of the sources in ancient languages, then, includes a term corresponding to the Latin influentia, which does appear in the English translation from the original King James Bible. This is the source of the term ‘influence’ that North draws on.124 More recent versions of the King James Bible, like the New King James Version (1975), correctly replace ‘influence’ with ‘cluster’ in line with the original Hebrew and Greek texts.125 It therefore appears entirely implausible that the Book of Job’s writer(s) meant a physical influence from celestial bodies that might have been perpetuated in astrological thinking.

4.1.1. Aristotle’s Meteorology John David North has no doubt that astrology’s origins lie in observing the physical influence of the Sun and its two movements, with Aristotle receiving the role of an unintentional mediator but not founder of astrology. Once this assumption has been established, it is also possible to distinguish other references to astrology’s physical development theory. John David North finds these in a parenthetical observation in Aristotle’s Meteorologica. In this text, Aristotle deals with the upper regions of the sublunar world to explain the origin of wind, rain, thunder, and light phenomena, as well as comets, which would prove crucial in later astrology. For North, his introductory but somewhat parenthetical note at the start of Meteorologica is a made-​to-​measure template for the assumption that all

122 Vulgate, Vol. I 21975, 762: ‘numquid coniungere valebis micantes stellas Pliadis aut gyrum Arcturi poteris dissipare?’ (translation by the author). 123 The fact that in the Vulgate the very visible fixed star Arcturius is named instead of the constellation Orion, as in the Hebrew Bible and the Septuagint, is not significant here. 124 Holy Bible. King James Version:  National Publishing Company 1978, Job 38:31. 125 Holy Bible. New King James Version, Edinburgh: Thomas Nelson Publisher 1975, Job 38:31.

188

Astrology in European Religious History

celestial bodies exert an influence on Earth. North reproduces Aristotle’s text almost word for word: Near the beginning of the work there is the casual remark that ‘we must assign causality in the sense of the originating principle of motion to the influence of the eternally moving bodies’ (North 1986, 46).

The idea of ‘causality in the sense of the originating principle’ provided attentive astrologers in late antiquity and the medieval period with a general theoretical foundation for astrology. If it is possible to trace a causal effect in principle from celestial bodies to their movements, it is also possible to derive an effect on the most inconspicuous processes in nature and human life. North notes that Aristotle uses the plural for ‘endlessly moving bodies’, leaving later astrologers in no doubt that Aristotle meant a physical influence of all planets and celestial bodies on the movements of the spheres. The Moon has a particularly marked importance here. In ancient, medieval and early-​modern astrological texts, the Moon had a prominent influence on states of mind, health, and even plants’ blossoming. The tides’ dependence on the course of the Moon (and, to a lesser extent, on the Sun) had been suspected by Aristotle as well as Seleucus of Seleucia as early as the second century BCE, so this was a physical phenomenon that astrologers were familiar with. John David North now suspects that the Moon causing tides to go up and down brought astrologers to conclude that its influence in humans’ moods going up and down as well as establishing critical days in the progression of an illness. Since the tides could be linked physically and causally to the Moon’s movements, this suggested that human temperament was also induced by such a physical and causal relationship ‘thanks to the quasi-​tidal behaviour of the humours’ (North 1986, 46). Intermittent tides, then, have the same cause as humans’ intermittent moods and humoral phenomena. This justification is easy to comprehend from Ptolemy’s introductory comments as the wording does in fact imply this breadth of the Moon’s physical influence. Ptolemy seamlessly transfers the Moon’s influence on the tides to the growth of plants and then to humans’ character structure. (Ptolemy 1980, I, 6/​7).

Astrology as a Misunderstood Science

189

However, it is important to consider that the link between the Moon’s phases and the tides has only been known since Aristotle and Seleucus of Seleucia at the earliest. The parallelisation of changing lunar phases with humans’ moods, meanwhile, forms an analogy that dates back to Mesopotamian omen interpretation and Egyptian melothesia, making the analogisation of the Moon and moods older than the knowledge of a relationship between the Moon and the tides. This suggests that the astrological relationship between the cosmos and humans was not derived from the physical causality between celestial bodies and the Earth developed by Aristotle. Instead, the causality between celestial movements and Earth was incorporated into astrology retrospectively. Originally, as explained above (see Chapter 1), the relationship between the cosmos and humans was based in mythology. Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos, still a standard work of astrology until the early-​ modern period, provides an unclear coexistence of physical (Aristotelian) and analogous (Mesopotamian and Egyptian) explanations. It is also very significant that physical explanations of cosmic influences on Earth in line with Aristotle and subsequent astrology did not conceive of physics in a modern sense as a vacuous, ‘dead’ process, but as an expression of a cosmos that comprised animate, intelligible substances and beings. Either John David North completely neglects this vital, spiritual-​theological aspect in Aristotelian and Stoic cosmology or he attributes it to physical processes like heat and light. This will be explained in greater detail below.

4.1.2. Aristotle’s Ether and Celestial Souls An intelligible, theological definition of the cosmos becomes especially clear when Aristotle explains the relationship between the ether and celestial bodies. Philosopher Harold Cherniss explored the ether, taking the visible celestial bodies into account, in Unbewegter Beweger und Gestirnseelen in ‚De Philosophia‘ (‘Motionless movers and celestial souls in “De Philosophia”’)126 and convincingly demonstrated that Aristotle

126 Cherniss, Harold: Unbewegter Beweger und Gestirnseelen in ‚De Philosophia‘, in: Paul Moraux (ed.): Frühschriften des Aristoteles, Darmstadt 1975 (Wege der Forschung CCXXIV), 81–​95.

190

Astrology in European Religious History

understood the ether and the cosmos in the context of metaphysical and theological explanations. Aristotle describes the universe permeated by the ether as ‘divine’ (theion) and ‘animated’ (empsychon) on multiple occasions. (Cherniss 1975, 87). In De caelo (On the Heavens), Aristotle explores the problem of understanding the universe and its celestial bodies in detail. The ether fills the entire space above the lunar sphere and therefore is generally divine and animated (Ibid. 83). All visible celestial bodies, planets and fixed stars, though, consist of a kind of concentrated divine ether. Aristotle comes to the conclusion ‘that the celestial bodies are complexes comprising soul or intellect and body, and the body consists of the fifth element [the ether]’. (Cherniss 1975, 87). The ether is therefore a divine substance that is not physical but does have a kind of corporeality in a concentrated form, inhabited in turn by intelligences (deities). Aristotle’s ether is not to be understood as a material substance, then, but as an element with a certain substantiality between physical substance and spirit.127 In astrology influenced by Aristotle, every visible celestial body is crucially the corporeal manifestation of a celestial intelligence or a stellar deity, raising the question as to the relationship between celestial bodies and the sublunar world in polytheistic cosmology. As Aristotle considers the celestial bodies to be ‘living divine bodies and more divine than humans comprehend’ (Cherniss 1975, 87), there is a similarity between celestial bodies and humans with regard to their intelligibility, even if the celestial bodies are superior. Alongside the movement of the spheres with their physical and causal influence from above to below, then, there is also an intelligible,

127 Cherniss 1975, 94. Incidentally, for astrology it is of no importance that ancient authors besides Aristotle determine the physicality of the planets differently. The descriptions here fluctuate in their assumptions between a ‘supersensible’ nature of the planetary bodies and mixed forms of the four earthly elements or special aggregate states of the elements, for example, when there is talk of ‘delicate fire’ (Gundel, Wilhelm: Planeten, in: RE Bd. XX, 2, 1950, 2102). Plato also comes to a different conclusion than Aristotle after him. According to him, the planets consist of all four elements, but mostly of fire, whereby the different colour and brightness is determined by the different mixing ratio (Plato: Timaeus, 2010, vol. III, 110 f, 32B. For a detailed discussion of the ancient theory of the planets, see Gundel 1981, 127–​166).

Astrology as a Misunderstood Science

191

analogous system of correspondence between the living things above and the living things below. The idea of animated celestial bodies furnished with intelligence as proposed by Aristotle is not new –​in fact, it is self-​evident in astrology. Alongside the Mesopotamian and Egyptian stellar deities whose characteristics of course form the foundation for the entire European tradition of astrology, Plato also described the celestial bodies as the homes of the gods before Aristotle did and understood humans as beings created by the gods that were mortal but nonetheless akin to their creators. In Timaeus, Plato describes the stars’ genesis as ‘homes of living beings’. (Plato 2010 Vol. III, 117 f, 38 B –​39 A). He goes on to explain the genesis of the four elements –​air, water, earth and fire –​as the four ‘basic shapes of veritable living beings’ (ibid. 119, 39 E). Finally, the gods create mortal humans and assign them the different characteristics of the celestial bodies. If a person lives their life according to the characteristics assigned to them, their soul will return to the celestial body related to them. (121–​123, 41 B –​43 B). This relationship between celestial bodies and humans forms the theological (polytheistic) foundation for astrology, which is expressed most clearly in Plotinus’ Are the Stars Causes? (see Section 3.1), while Aristotle was the first to introduce the doctrine of movement in the intelligible cosmos with its effects on the upper spheres of the sublunar world. What is meant by the ‘down-​flowing forces’ mentioned by Claudius Ptolemy, though? These are also ethers in the Aristotelian sense. This is where astrologers of late antiquity and the medieval period differ from Aristotle and lean more closely on Plato’s cosmological four elements. For Aristotle, the four elements and their four qualities only fill the sublunar area, and the ether takes effect above the lunar sphere, but now the four elements are distributed around the entire cosmos. The physical celestial bodies and even the signs of the zodiac are now understood as mixtures of the four elements and the resulting four qualities. (Ptolemy 1995, 32–​35). Plus, ancient natural science and astrology both assign great importance to understanding these four elements not purely as material –​they are simultaneously vital principles. This vital principle inherent to the elements follows a certain logic in astrology: When the forces ‘flow down’ from the heavens in Ptolemy’s understanding, these are not purely swirling physical substances, but a process in which like elements attract one another and

192

Astrology in European Religious History

unlike elements repel each other through their respective qualities (dry-​ warm, dry-​cold, wet-​warm, wet-​cold). This is not only crucial for a physical understanding of astrology, but also a vital and spiritual one, which is why it will be explored in more detail in the following section.

4.1.3. Elements and Qualities in Greek Natural Philosophy Pre-​Socratic philosopher Empedocles (483–​424 BCE) was the first to understand the four elements simultaneously as basic substantial shapes and mythical forces of nature and cosmos. This was the source of the vital view of the elements. Aristotle writes that ‘each of elements, for Empedocles, is also soul’.128 This aspect is expressed in that they constitute all natural objects and all living things through the forces of attraction and repulsion, or love and hate. Medical schools after Empedocles formulated this relationship of like and unlike in their doctrines on the four qualities, which led in turn to doctrines of the four temperaments as basic types of individual character disposition. This provided a somatic, psychological and mental personality model that was applied in an effort to diagnose and treat illnesses and health.129 As mentioned above, Plato also saw the four elements as spiritual, or as ‘basic shapes of veritable living beings’ (Böhme/​Böhme 2004, 100ff) with reference to the entire cosmos. Meanwhile, as explained above, Aristotle understood the elements’ qualities as aggregate states in the combination of warm and cold and dry and wet. The element fire, then, has the qualities warm and dry, while air is warm and wet, water cold and wet, earth cold and dry (ibid. 115). Aristotle nonetheless believes that the qualities are spiritual representations of the elements. This becomes clear when he

128 Aristotle: De anima, 404 B 12, quoted after: Böhme/​Böhme 2004, 97. Empedocles had also assigned gods to the elements; he called the element fire ‘shimmering Zeus’ and the element earth ‘Hera’ (Böhme/​Böhme 2004, 96). On the compilation of the assignment of the elements to Greek gods in pre-​ Socratic philosophy (cf. Schöner, Erich:  Das Viererschema in der antiken Humoralpathologie, Wiesbaden: Steiner 1964, 9–​11). 129 Böhme/​Böhme 2004, 97. That this system remained unchallenged as the basis of European medicine for over 2000 years is only a side note here.

Astrology as a Misunderstood Science

193

describes the qualities as forces (δύναμεις, dynameis) that permit living things to perceive anything at all. Gernot Böhne adds: ‘In his teachings on perception, Aristotle follows the thinking [...] that like is perceived through like’. (Ibid. 116) If this is translated to human organisms, it means that we perceive outside warmth when we are warm inside, and we perceive cold when we are cold inside. Corporeal contact with a warm object can therefore be understood in a physical, causal way. Warmth, however, is a vital quality that, if it operates in both bodies, is superordinate to these physical bodies. It is the basic principle that binds all bodies considered warm. Aristotle writes that fire causes ‘like to come together’ and ‘extracts unlike’. Böhme points to these parts of De generatione et corruptione when he writes: ‘Warmth brings kin together and drives out what is different, while cold brings things together, both like and unlike’ (ibid. 118). Warmth, then, is the overarching principle that brings different warm bodies together. This makes it possible to understand how ‘like’ recognises and attracts ‘like’, while ‘unlike’ is repelled. This also explains illnesses as an imbalance in the qualities. Temperaments too, though –​human personalities –​are also qualities that demonstrate a certain excess of one quality and scarcity of another. Humans’ decisions  –​like their choice of profession, for example –​also become an activity where like and like come together. What does this mean for the astrology of late antiquity and the medieval period that John David North refers to, then? Firstly, as explained above, it is important to establish that astrologers since late antiquity, unlike Aristotle, understood celestial bodies not as ether but as a mixture of the four elements and qualities. This assigns specific characteristics to each celestial body, which can also be seen in that celestial body’s colour and brightness.130 The elements and qualities are combined to correspond to the characteristics, both good and bad, of the stellar deity in question. Mars, with its red glow, is therefore the planet assigned to the god of war with the qualities warm and dry, while the barely visible Saturn is cold and dry. Some planets also assume mild, agreeable intermediate states, like

130 Ptolemy 1980, I, 4. Ptolemäus 1995, 32–​35. The assignment of the heavenly bodies to elements and qualities in the Stoa and in Neoplatonism has been compiled by Wilhelm Gundel (Gundel, Wilhelm: Planeten, in: RE Bd. XX, 2, 1950, 2101 f).

194

Astrology in European Religious History

Jupiter  –​ considered moderately warm but more warm and moderately wet  –​while Venus is moderately warm but less warm than Jupiter and moderately wet but more wet than Jupiter. Planets can also change their quality depending on their position, or find their quality altered slightly by certain aspects (angular relationships). Fixed stars are also assigned qualities in this way, so this model of four represents an incredibly nuanced system of qualities. (Ptolemy 1980, I, 9. (Ptolemy 1995, 35–​74). In line with the Aristotelian doctrine of spheres, then, the planets’ effects on the earth occur via planetary movements that are propagated downwards. The planets’ qualities flow from above the lunar sphere to lower nature, always seeking out like qualities through attraction and repulsion, and therefore influencing natural processes like plants’ growth. Human destinies are also affected by this. The celestial bodies’ qualities ‘seek out’ elements similar to them that constitute a human’s bodies and personalities. This is how they form the person’s basic corporeal, psychological and spiritual disposition at birth, producing an individual personality, qualifying the person for a particular profession, or promoting illness and health.131 Clearly it is not sufficient to comprehend this astrology based on elements and astrology as a purely physical process. It is primarily the vital and spiritual forces that reside in the elements, providing the foundation for astrology’s influence. Crucially, the physical influence  –​‘heavenly forces flowing down’  –​only provides the framework for a vital process in this justification. The planets’ vital forces (their qualities) interact analogously with a human’s psyche and spirit. Mars’ warm, dry fire, for example, follows the law of attraction between like and like to ‘seek out’ the place in a person’s spiritual disposition that forms their volition and characterises it in line with the planet’s quality. The qualities therefore interact analogously between like and like. Closer inspection shows, then, that astrology since late antiquity may well assume a physical influence from celestial bodies in line with the Aristotelian doctrine of movement,

131 Ptolemy principally deals with this individual astrology in the third and fourth books of the Tetrabiblos (Ptolemy 1980, III, 1–​14 and IV, 1ff. (Ptolemäus 1995, 133–​275).

Astrology as a Misunderstood Science

195

but it understands it as an outer, physical framework of an analogous vital and spiritual doctrine of attraction. This astrology of elements and qualities also incorporates ancient humoral pathology. Two students of Empedocles in particular, the physicians Hippocrates of Kos (c. 460–​377 BCE) and Claudius Galenus (131–​201 CE), took this doctrine to explain and treat physiological and psychological processes. Gernot Böhme stresses that the tradition from Hippocrates to Galenus signified ‘half a millennium of contradictory medical experience and systemic philosophical efforts’. (Böhme/​Böhme 2004, 164). As the practical and theoretical foundations of this medicine developed further, this was carried over to a ‘micro-​/​macrocosmos analogy’, or a relationship between the cosmos and humans. (Böhme/​Böhme 2004, 166). In this way, mixing ratios in humoral pathology were brought together analogously with the qualities of the planets’ positions. This humoral pathology, complemented by astrology, defined the medicine of late antiquity and the medieval and early-​modern periods, stretching all the way into modern astrology. Chapter 5.2b referred to Carl Jung’s four basic psychological types, which he developed based on the four elements –​ intuitive (fire), sensing (earth), thinking (air) and feeling (water). (Jung 141981, 552 and 560f.). As well as Carl Jung, all of modern astrology seizes on the ancient model of four elements and qualities to formulate four temperaments as basic psychological types, mostly in their original form as developed by Galenus  –​ the choleric temperament, corresponding to the element fire; sanguine (air); melancholic (earth) and phlegmatic (water). Additional terms are often used to make this model more comprehensible through colloquial language. The choleric temperament is described as ‘irritable’, sanguine as ‘cheerful’, melancholic as ‘mournful’, and phlegmatic as ‘easygoing’. (Ring 51985, 56). Updated explanations of the four temperaments grounded in new psychological knowledge can be found in almost every modern astrology textbook. These textbooks also provide explanations in line with tradition from late antiquity and medieval times for how the model of four is pre-​figured in the zodiac, the planets and their aspects, as

196

Astrology in European Religious History

well as the distribution of the houses as an overarching cosmic system for individual personality.132 In summary, John David North’s objection that astrology in late antiquity and the medieval period stemmed from the physical cosmology and meteorology of Aristotelian and Stoic texts provides too narrow a perspective. Erroneous conclusions arise from the fact that astrology’s development from mythological, polytheistic worldviews in Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt is excluded entirely, while the vital and spiritual aspects of Aristotelian cosmology are not given consideration. This also excludes the principle of drawing analogies, which is a crux of astrology, particularly when vital and spiritual meanings are to be related to one another. As for the issue of the genuine traces of the legendary ‘unicorn’, as raised by North, a change in perspective is required: It is not about searching for actual physical influences that served as a model for astrology’s development, but analogous structures that evince a spiritual and vital structure, to find answers to humans’ crucial questions like health and illness, occupation and family, and life and existence. Astrology’s origins can only be located by exploring the entire cultural setting –​including religious, philosophical, social and medical conditions –​in which astrology occurs as an existential system of interpretation. John David North’s reduction of astrology to misunderstood physical processes is comprehensible in that attempts have been and continue to be made to justify astrology physically. Hypotheses continued to be produced to this effect in the twentieth century, with astrologer Albert Kniepf (1853–​ 1924) assuming electromagnetic effects, physicist Rudolf Tomaschek (1895–​1966) and astronomer and theologian Max Erich Winkel (1894–​ 1973) gravitational forces, and astronomer Theodor Landscheidt (1927–​ 2004) effects from the rotation of the Earth (Ring 1972, 140–​144). None of these theories was convincing, however, even if physicist Max Knoll (1897–​ 1969) established a relationship between the planetary aspects of classical astrology conjunction, opposition and square and the Sun’s proton radiation. (Knoll 1952, 413–​430). Carl Jung considered Knoll’s conclusions ‘an unexpected perspective for a possible causal foundation

132 Details will not be given here. For a detailed account see: Ring 51985, 81 ff.

Astrology as a Misunderstood Science

197

for astrology’ (Jung 41982, 498). These theories far from justify a relationship between the cosmos and humans in line with astrological tradition, though.

4.1.4. Stoic Meteorology However, John David North also pursues another aspect to return astrology’s origins to purely physical observations:  Stoic meteorology. Since late antiquity, many astrological texts have not only referred to physical effects, but have also taken a world soul, or anima mundi, as the basis of the cosmos supporting celestial bodies and their movements. This concept expands the physical cosmos with the addition of a spiritual and vital quality. Here too, however, North attempts to reduce the key concepts of the world soul –​ether and pneuma –​to physical origins. North argues that astrological ideas about a world soul lead to the cosmology and meteorology of Stoic philosophy. Cleanthes (301–​ 232 BCE), a student of Zenon, the founder of the Stoa, was the first to expand his teacher’s doctrine with the idea of a soul operating in the cosmos. This reason acts in the cosmos as a logos that is both god and spirit, and produces the physical cosmos from itself. Cleanthes adds an intermediary ‘fire’ that permeates the entire cosmos and animates the physical cosmos as a breath (pneuma). The cosmos is therefore intelligible (through its logos as a spirit), animated (through fire as a world soul) and physical (material) from inside to outside. Cleanthes identifies this world soul as fire and warmth –​a living warmth to an extent. This warmth acts inside the Sun but also stretches through the entire cosmos and all living things as their soul. The Stoic philosopher Chrysippus (281–​208 BCE) later adopted warmth as a pneuma that permeates everything. (North 1986, 47). North concludes that the assumption of a world soul can essentially be reduced to physical warmth, which in turn is taken from the experience of the Sun’s warmth. In essence, the Stoics’ pneuma is related to Aristotle’s ether.133 North notes that later astrological texts did not directly reference

133 The use and the natural philosophical meaning of the term ether go back to pre-​ Socratic philosophy. For astrology, however, the differentiated aether theory of Aristotle, which is bound to the cosmos, is decisive.

198

Astrology in European Religious History

the Stoic concept of pneuma but did continue to use Stoic language. North finds an indication of this in Claudius Ptolemy, who speaks of a ‘certain force’ (τις δύναμις, ‘tis dynamis’) that descends from the endless ether.134 Medieval astrology carried this explanation forward and used the Latin term anima mundi to explain the celestial bodies’ effects. North considers that the idea of the world soul came from observing sunlight and the Sun’s warmth. As a side note, the philosophical concept of logos as a ‘world reason’ and ‘world soul’ as used by Heraclitus and in Plato’s Timaeus is not considered at all in North’s scientific explanation. For North, bringing together the concepts of ether and pneuma into one ‘descending force’ is a clear indication of how Aristotelian and Stoic cosmology and meteorology merge and assert celestial bodies’ influence, which again can be reduced to the experience of the Sun’s physical warmth. Later on, North draws Arabic-​Islamic astrologer Abu Ma’shar (North 1986, 52ff.) and his reference to Aristotle’s texts into this argument, as well as Roger Bacon (ibid., 70ff) and Thomas Aquinas (ibid., 74ff) all the way to the early-​modern period with Johannes Kepler’s anima mundi doctrine, Isaac Newton’s idea of subtle spiritual particles that shape vegetation and minerals, and finally the physicist Robert Hook, who around the year 1700 prompted the Royal Society to investigate more closely how a hole in a man’s head made it possible to observe the peculiar phenomenon of the brain enlarging during a full moon and shrinking during a new moon (ibid. 99ff). The array of details that John David North provides to buttress his theses need not be explored in any further detail here because his base assumption on the explanation of astrology is clear:  Astrologers since late antiquity have taken Aristotelian and Stoic cosmology and observed the movements of celestial bodies and descending warmth and light to produce the concept of a world soul to explain the astrological interdependency between celestial bodies and the most minor events on Earth. North therefore places astrology since late antiquity in the context of scientific thinking that was only subsequently animated by life and spirit. The genuine ‘horn’ in this analogy  –​the physical influences of the Sun

134 North 1986, 50. The Greek term in: Ptolemy 1980, I, 4.

Astrology as a Misunderstood Science

199

and Moon –​became the fantasised ‘unicorn’ that is astrology. As literary scholar Hubertus Fischer sums up, ‘the key premise of astrology rests on the physical influences of celestial bodies’. (Fischer 1986, 194). The explanatory approach taken by John David North contradicts the line traced by this book. Mesopotamian omen interpretation, and Ancient Egyptian astrology with their polytheistic worldviews as well as the connection to the Platonic, Aristotelian, Plotinian and Stoic philosophy, show that  –​alongside empirical arguments  –​astrology consciously linked its foundations to a vital and spiritual understanding of the cosmos. This tradition stretches from the astrology of late antiquity with Ptolemy and Marcus Manilius to Arabic astrology, Thomas Aquinas and Kepler and Galileo, who both considered the Sun the spiritual centre of the planetary system, Newton, who saw the cosmos as a ‘cryptogram set by the Almighty’, all the way to modern psychological and esoteric astrology. Both in its historical development through the ages and in its modern forms, then, astrology is a way of eliciting life’s structure and orientation in a broad sense, incorporating all kinds of physical processes but by no means limited to them. Astrology’s different forms through the ages have always questioned to the meaning and objective of things and events, placing it in the broader context of religious questions.

5 Astrology in the Context of Modern Societies As noted in the introduction, the term ‘astrology’ should be understood as an array of comparable teachings and doctrines with origins outside Europe and that have since accompanied European cultural and religious history. It was also noted that astrological teachings and practices spawned few institutional forms comparable with ancient religions and their structures or with today’s more nuanced religious systems. Even in the ancient world, astrology was fundamentally tied to the individual writers of astrological texts and their allegiance to philosophical schools or religious traditions. Part of what makes astrology unique is that its structural elements can be implemented into polytheistic and monotheistic religions, mystery religions and religio-​philosophical speculation. A key reason for this is that astrology makes the natural, visible cosmos the foundation for its vital, spiritual worldview, producing a foundation for its teachings and practice that crosses cultures and religions. In principle, it can be adapted to all forms of religion, even monotheistic religions, as long as the cosmos and nature with their transcendental forces are understood as a creation of the one god. Its ancient manifestations essentially make astrology an individualised way of understanding humanity and interpreting the world that spans societies. Flexible and fluid ways of interpreting the world astrologically come about when astrology is adapted to existing worldviews and societies, such as when astrological teachings claim a firm foundation in neo-​Platonic and Stoic religious philosophy, while other manifestations lay claim to Aristotelian cosmology and natural philosophy and have nonetheless found their way into Jewish and Christian thinking. Astrology’s unique structure and its adaptability have sustained it through European cultural and religious history as far as the present day. The same applies to modern forms of astrology as it did for early astrological teachings and practices. Astrology’s worldview has been transferred to an extent so that it now also belongs to individualised interpretations of meaning including New Age, esotericism, occultism and fluid

202

Astrology in European Religious History

religion. This array of disparate movements is characterised by its lack of an institutionalised core, but astrology has nonetheless produced institutional forms in its schools and professional and umbrella associations, which all lean on traditions from various ancient schools of philosophy or even traditions from the Far East. Just as in ancient times, modern astrology proves adaptable to more institutionalised religions in that it is a key component of theosophical teachings. There are theological rationales and practical applications in major Christian denominations that can be linked to the structures on which astrology is based. However, describing modern astrology’s social connection to spiritual movements and schools does not do justice to its full significance. Astrology does not originate from social forms but from a need to find answers to existential questions –​the same need that religions generally aim to fulfil. Astrology assumes that every individual person and every individual event have a particular meaning that stretches beyond empirical physical and social connections. This results in its idiosyncratic doctrine that places humans and the cosmos in an analogous system of correspondence involving both physical nature and a transcendental aspect. When astrologers through the ages claim experience as proof of this doctrine, this analogisation of the cosmos and humans becomes a hermeneutical principle of astrology, used by astrologers to explore an event’s ‘true’ substance, importance and meaning. As far as the study of religions is concerned, astrology in its present forms belongs to the context of modern, individualised religiousness.

5.1. Astrology’s Hermeneutical Principle Astrology’s structure comprises both the analogous correspondence of the cosmos and humans and the intelligibility of the cosmos, as described in Chapters 1 and 3. Analogising the cosmos and humans (or humans and the cosmos) is a methodological approach to interpret human life in its individual and social forms as guided by transcendental forces and beings. The divinity of the cosmos is the transcendental aspect from which answers to existential questions are derived. Both structural elements merge to form astrology’s religious worldview. The construction of analogies is based on ancient mythological descriptions of celestial bodies. Astral mythical

Astrology in the Context of Modern Societies

203

images were transferred from the Mesopotamian mythologisation of celestial bodies to Ancient Greek and Latin times, though the semantic interpretations ascribed to the respective celestial bodies remained mostly unchanged. This basic concept remains as valid in modern forms of astrology. The intelligible character of the celestial bodies is therefore the prerequisite for constructing an analogy between the cosmos and humans/​nature. Just as European astrology throughout the ages assumed celestial bodies’ animated, intelligible character, humans and nature are also assumed to be intelligible and animated, and therefore ‘relatable’ to the stars. Because constructing analogies places human nature in a relationship with celestial bodies on the basis of transcendental forces, modern astrology also sees the reality of vital, intelligible principles as a part of physical nature that is autonomous in its action.135 This was the reason that Johannes Kepler highlighted in his apologia Tertius Interveniens that the Earth, humans and nature were equipped with an intelligible soul and capable of ‘geometry’, giving them a ‘kinship with the sky’ that in turn permitted them to receive an ‘impulse’ (instinctus) of divine reason via the stars.136 This transcendental character of the analogy between the cosmos and humans (or between nature and the cosmos) is therefore the basis for astrology finding meaningful messages about humans, society and nature in the positions of the stars. Astrological statements can therefore be understood as divination, a ‘religiously conceived form’ in which transcendental forces ‘show’ themselves and are converted into practical action.137 In the

35 See Section 2.1 on Jean Claude Weiss. 1 136 Kepler 1971, No. 64: ‘There is a spiritual nature in this lower world or globe.’ 137 According to Burkhard Gladigow, divination is ‘a generic term for all religiously conceived forms in which the existence or an action of gods, of God, the “holy” is recognised and captured in rituals. Such a “grasping” is possible because the gods “show themselves”, because they “give signs” to people, or because people can recognise the gods in special places and situations. Manticism in the narrower sense, moreover, stands in the context of an evaluation and assessment process that determines proximity, contacts and information and constructs concrete religion from them as a system of mutualities.’ (Gladigow: Divination, in: HrwG Vol.II, 1990, 226). The mantics referred to by Gladigow is the adequate term derived from the Greek mantiké for the Latin divinatio. Hartmut

204

Astrology in European Religious History

sciences, it is causality that explains natural relationships rationally. Astrology, meanwhile, sees a relationship in the analogy of characteristics that is only valid and only works through the transcendental character of the astrological worldview. Horoscopes reflect this analogy as a cosmic diagram –​an image of celestial bodies’ positions at a certain time in relation to a certain location. The vital and intelligible forces of the celestial bodies and signs of the zodiac form the cosmic level, and horoscopes highlight terrestrial nature’s vital forces using the system of twelve houses.138 In the comparative study of religions, this construction of analogies is significant because it is frequently applied beyond astrology both in European religious history and in non-​European religions to associate concrete forms of transcendence and immanence. These analogies, which will not be explored in detail here, appear in the most diverse cultures: In Ancient Egyptian pyramid-​building, Greek and Roman mythology (Hübner 1985, 114), the magical thinking of indigenous culture (Frazer 1994, 15–​18), high forms of religion like Taoism (Reiter 2002, 62–​72), Aristotle’s metaphysics –​where it is called paronymy (παρώνυμος) (Seidl 1989, 123f u. 340) –​and in Christian theology (Aquinas 1934, 13, 1.2). All use analogous patterns of thought to correlate transcendental principles. Astrology is just one of many attempts to structure statements about transcendence and immanence in an analogous way and thus lend them plausibility.

5.2. Astrology and Individualised Construction of Meaning in the Present Day Finally, the question of the extent to which astrology contributes to religion maintaining its place in modernity, as present-​day discourse in the

Zinser also includes astrology among the mantic disciplines (Zinser: Mantik, in: HrwG Bd. IV, 1998, 110). 138 The latter designates twelve sections on the earth’s surface, calculated from the ascendant in the direction of the sun’s course and corresponding to the characteristics of the signs of the zodiac from the first to the twelfth house. The houses are the ‘event plane, the ground on which man stands.’ (Hürlimann 1988, 99).

Astrology in the Context of Modern Societies

205

study of religions and social sciences establishes over and again:139 In what way can astrology be part of ‘religious construction of meaning’ in modern times (Seiwert 95/​1, 100)? Its presence in politics, psychology and esoteric movements in modern European societies, as well as its presence in major Christian denominations, testify to its belonging to individual religious construction of meaning. The question remains as to what extent it can actually construct meaning as a potentially consensual concept of religion. Peter Ludwig Berger stated that ‘religion […] is the human endeavour to construct a divine cosmos’ (Berger 1973, 26), which could be a reason to understand astrology as a religious construction of meaning due to both its historical development and its direct reference to the cosmos. Astrology is practically prototypical of the construction of religion described by Berger, receiving its meaning as a reflection from the cosmos. Berger writes: Whenever the socially established nomos has obtained the quality of certainty, its meaning is blended with what is considered the fundamental inherent meaning of the universe. Nomos and the cosmos appear to stretch as far as each other; their respective meanings appear interchangeable. In archaic societies, nomos is a microscopic reflection, and the human world is an expression of the universe’s meanings. In modern society, this archaic ‘cosmicisation’ of the social world tends to appear more in the form of ‘scientific’ theses about ‘the nature of humans’ than ‘the nature of the universe’. (Berger 1973, 25).

For astrology, the ‘inherent meaning of the universe’ is the result of this very cosmos’ concretely formulated transcendental character. Mesopotamian omen astrology (Section 1.1.1) and early-​modern astrology (Section 1.1.2) demonstrate that the ‘nomos’ was ‘a microscopic reflection [...] of the universe’ in ancient societies. If religion appears in modern societies ‘more in the form of “scientific” theses about “the nature of humans”’, this comprises psychological-​symbolic astrology (Section 1.3). Peter Ludwig Berger’s very broad definition of religion, incorporating ‘“scientific” theses about the “the nature of humans”’, should not be problematic here. Even a narrow definition of religion that places transcendence beyond empirical boundaries would also be capable of classifying Carl Jung and Thomas

139 Seiwert, in: ZfR 95/​1, 91–​101. Habermas 2001, 9–​31. Auf die vielen Beiträge, die der klassischen Säkularisierungsthese widersprechen, soll hier nur allgemein verwiesen werden.

206

Astrology in European Religious History

Ring’s collective psychological approaches with their concepts of ‘archetype’ and ‘principles of organic being’ as forms of transcendence. The question remains as to astrology’s concrete meaningful proposition. The argumentation outlined so far assumes that astrology –​and modern astrology in particular  –​belongs to the context of individual religiousness. In this context, astrology is a reflex response to existential questions in which birth and death are probably the most significant parts of the human experience. Astrology provides specific answers to the mystery around these two events, both considered random. If the term religion is tied to the contingency problem, as is commonly the case in humanities and social sciences today,140 then the problem also applies to astrology. A contingent experience implies that humans experience their lives as coincidental, fateful or beyond their control. Birth and death appear to occur randomly; happiness and suffering need not be but are often experienced as random. This may be accompanied by additional existential questions, like:  Why am I living in the twenty-​first century? Why was I born at this latitude and longitude? Why in Europe and not Africa or Siberia? Why this social class and this family? These experiences that appear beyond our control are often described as a contingency experience or a contingency problem.141 Human action is generally goal-​and target-​oriented, but the goal and target of action are usually not death and also not purely existence in itself. Instead, humans’ objectives are always partial and achievable, making these existential questions a search for meaning. The answers to these questions are not necessarily religious; the sciences can also provide answers. If answers are sought outside the range of empirical experience, however, the question arises as to a transcendental meaning. An answer from outside is a religious answer (Luhmann 2000, 77), and it becomes a religion when it assumes fixed cultural forms. Astrology takes up the key points of the contingency experience in its own unique way. The questions above –​why a person was born at this location, at this time, in this family with this concrete social sphere and with

40 Pollack 95/​2, 184. Luhmann 2000, 4, II 150 f. 1 141 Wuchterl 1982, 30. Pollack 95/​2, 184.

Astrology in the Context of Modern Societies

207

certain dispositions  –​are key in astrology. Birth or event charts are the starting point in the attempt to answer these contingency questions. The positions of the planets and signs of the zodiac are calculated for the exact time, latitude and longitude, and mapped out as a horoscope. This image of the cosmos is intended to provide information about the transcendental force relationships named above, whether these are conceived of as divine beings or collective psychological forces. ‘Observing the moment’ (from the Greek hora and skopein) –​the place and time of a person’s birth (or another event) –​reflects a transcendental meaning produced by the interplay of force relationships. The experienced randomness of existence is then embedded in a cosmic, transcendental meaning. The answers that astrology aims to provide about lives and events vary depending on astrological school with different margins for free will, but they always point to an inherent meaning to the universe. In this sense, astrology is no different in principle from other religious conceptions, which all attempt to grapple with the contingency experience through religious interpretations in their own ways. How successful astrology is in providing answers and whether astrology is true or not is just as irrelevant to the study of religions as whether the strategies for coping with contingency offered by Buddhismus, Christianity, Islam or any other spiritual doctrine are true or not.

Bibliography Abell, George O.: One Astronomer’s View, in: The Humanist. A Magazine of Critical Inquiry and Social Concern, 36/​1 (1976), pp. 33–​36. Abell, George O./​ Kurtz, Paul:  The Abell-​ Kurtz-​ Zelen ‘Mars Effect’ Experiments: Reapraisal, in: Skeptical Inquirer, 7/​3 (1983), pp. 77–​82. Abell, George O./​Zelen, Mavin: Results of the U.S. Test of the ‘Mars Effect’ Are Negative, in: Skeptical Inquirer, 4/​2 (1979/​80), pp. 19–​26. Adorno, Theodor W.: The Stars Down to Earth: The Los Angeles Times Astrology Column. A Study in Secondary Superstition, in: Jahrbuch für Amerikastudien 2 (1957), pp. 19–​82. Al-​Biruni: In den Gärten der Wissenschaft, übers. v. Gotthard Strohmaier, Leipzig 1991. Alliaco, Petrus de:  Concordantia astronomiae cum theologica. Concordantia astrononomiae cum historica narratione. Et elucidarium duarum precedentium, Johannes Ange-​ lus (ed.), Augsburg:  Erhardt Ratdolt 1490. Anrich, Elsmarie: Groß göttlich Ordnung: Thomas von Aquin, Paracelsus, Novalis und die Astrologie, Tübingen: Hohenrain 1989. Antes, Peter: “Religion” Einmal Anders, in: Temenos: Nordic Journal of Comparative Religion, 15 (1978), pp. 184–​197. Antes, Peter:  Grundriss der Religionsgeschichte. Von der Prähistorie bis zur Gegenwart, Stuttgart:  Kohlhammer 2006 (= Theologische Wissenschaft 17). Antes, Peter:  Monotheismus  –​Polytheismus  –​eine Scheinalternative?, in:  Hamid Reza You-​ sefi (ed.):  Wege zur Religion. Aspekte  –​ Grundprobleme  –​Ergänzende Perspektiven, Nordhausen:  Traugott Bautz, 2010. Aquin, Thomas von: Erhaltung und Regierung der Welt, in: Vollständige, ungekürzte deutsch-​lateinische Ausgabe der Summa Theologica, Vol. 8, transl. on Dominicans and Benedictines of Germany and Austria, (ed.): katholischer Akademieverband Salzburg, Regensburg: Pustet  1951. Aquin, Thomas von: Gottes Dasein und Wesen, in: Vollständige, ungekürzte deutsch-​lateinische Ausgabe der Summa Theologica, Vol. 1, transl. on

210

Bibliography

Dominicans and Benedictines of Germany and Austria, (ed.): katholischer Akademieverband Salzburg, Regensburg: Pustet 1934. Aquino, Thomas de:  Sancti Thomae Aquinatis Opera Omnia, T. 22: questiones disputatae de veritate, Vol. 1, QQ 1–​7, Rom:  di San Tommaso 1975. Aristoteles:  Meteorologie. Über die Welt, transl. by Hans Strohm, in:  Ernst Grumach (ed.):  Werke in deutscher Übersetzung, Vol. 12, Berlin: Akademie-​Verlag  1970. Aristoteles:  Nikomachische Ethik, transl. by Franz Dirlmeier, in:  Ernst Grumach (ed.):  Werke in deutscher Übersetzung, Vol. 6, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft 1974. Aristoteles: Über die Bewegung der Lebewesen, transl. by Jutta Kollesch, in: Ernst Grumach (ed.), Werke in deutscher Übersetzung, Vol. 12, Teil III, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft 1985. Aristoteles: Über den Himmel, transl. by Alberto Jori, in: Ernst Grumach (ed.), Werke in deutscher Übersetzung, Vol. 12, Teil III, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft 2009. Aristoteles:  Über die Seele, transl. by Willy Theiler, in:  Ernst Grumach (ed.):  Werke in deutscher Übersetzung, Vol. 13, Berlin:  Akademie-​Verlag  1983. Aristoteles:  Über Werden und Vergehen, transl. by Thomas Buchheim, in: Ernst Grumach (ed.): Werke in deutscher Übersetzung, Vol. 12, Part IV, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche uchgesellschaft 2010. Astrologie –​Alles Blödsinn: Schock für die Sterndeuter, in: Der Spiegel, edited by Rudolf Augstein, Hamburg: Spiegel-​Verlag Rudolf Augstein GmbH & Co KG, 4/​1995, p. 197. Austeda, Franz: Lexikon der Philosophie, Wien: Hollinek 1989. Aveni, Anthony:  Rhythmen des Lebens. Eine Kulturgeschichte der Zeit, Stuttgart: Klett-​Cotta  1991. Bailey, Alice Ann: Esoterische Astrologie, Vol. III: Eine Abhandlung über die sieben Strahlen, Genf: Lucis 21970. Engl. Orig.: Esoteric Astrology Vol. III. A Treatise on the Seven Rays, Geneva: Lucis 2nd edited 1970. Ball, Walter William Rouse:  A Short Account of the History of Mathematics, New York: Dover Publications 41960 [1908].

Bibliography

211

Bara, Joelle-​Frédérique:  Astrology II:  Antiquity [article], in:  Wouter Hanegraaff (ed.):  Dictionary of Gnosis & Western Esotericism, Leiden: Brill 2005, pp. 110–​119. Barz, Ellynor: Götter und Planeten. Grundlagen archetypischer Astrologie, Zürich: Kreuz 1988. Beierwaltes, Werner: Über Ewigkeit und Zeit (Enneade III,7), Frankfurt/​ M.: Klostermann 52010. (=Klostermann Rote Reihe 36). Benski, Claude: Review of the ‘Mars Effect’. A French Test of over 1.000 Sports Champions, London: Prometheus Books 1996. Berger, Peter Ludwig:  Zur Dialektik von Religion und Gesellschaft. Elemente einer soziologischen Theorie, Frankfurt/​M.: Fischer 1973. Berman, Morris: Wiederverzauberung der Welt. Am Ende des Newtonschen Zeitalters, Reinbek: Rohwolt 1985. (Engl. Original: The Reenchantment of the World, Cornell: Cornell University Press 1981). Bezold, Carl:  Astronomie, Himmelsschau und Astrallehre bei den Babyloniern, in:  Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-​ historische Klasse, Abhandlung 2, Heideberg: Carl Winter’s Universitätsbuchhandlung 1911. Bibel:  nach der Übersetzung von Martin Luther  –​standard edition. Revised version of 1984, edited by Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft 1984. Bibel: Einheitsübersetzung, edited by Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk and Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft 1981. Biblia Hebraica, Rudolf Kittel (ed.), Stuttgart:  Württembergische Bibelanstalt 1962. Blavatsky, Helena Petrovna: Die Geheimlehre, Vol. I: Kosmogenesis, Vol. II: Anthropogenesis, Vol. III: Esoterik Den Haag: Couvreur n.y. Bochinger, Christoph:  “New Age” und moderne Religion. Religions-​ wissenschaftliche Analysen, Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus 1994. Böhme, Gernot/​ Böhme, Hartmut:  Feuer, Wasser, Erde, Luft. Eine Kulturgeschichte der Elemente, München: Beck 2004. Böhringer, Siegfried: Astrologie heute –​eine umstrittene Form der Daseins-​ Interpretation und ihre Bedeutung für die Grundsituation unserer Zeit, EZW-​Texte, Berlin:  EZW 1986 (=Evangelische Zentralstelle für Weltanschauungsfragen 97).

212

Bibliography

Böhringer, Siegfried:  Menschheit und Kosmos:  über die wahren Herausforderungen der Astrologie, in: EZW-​Texte, Berlin: EZW, 1997 (= Evangelische Zentralstelle für Weltanschauungsfragen 138). Boll, Franz: Sphära, Hildesheim: Olms 1967. Boll, Franz: Sternglaube und Sterndeutung. Die Geschichte und das Wesen der Astrologie, Leipzig: Teubner 1926. Boot, Martin:  Das Horoskop. Einführung in Berechnung und Deutung, München: Knaur 1988. Borchers, Dörte:  Hieroglyphen, Alphabete, Schriftformen. Studien zu Multiliteralismus, Schriftwechsel und Orthographieneuregelungen, in: Lingua Aegyptia 2001 (= Studia monographica 3). Borger, Rykle:  Der Codex Hammurapi, in:  Otto Kaiser (ed.):  Texte aus der Umwelt des Alten Testaments (TUAT), Vol. 1:  Rechts und Wirtschaftskunde. Historisch-​chronologische Texte, Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus 1985, pp. 39–​80. Bouché-​Leclercq, Auguste:  L’astrologie grecque, Aalen:  Scientia 1979 [1899]. Boyle, Carl B.: A History of Mathematics, New York: Wiley, 1989. Brack-​Bernsen, Lis:  Zur Entstehung der babylonischen Mondtheorie. Beobachtung und theoretische Berechnung von Mondphasen, Texte und Abhandlungen zur Geschichte der Mathematik und Naturwissenschaften, Stuttgart: Steiner 1997. Brown, David:  Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-​ Astrology, Groningen: Styx 2000 (= Cuneiform Monographs 18). Brünig, Volker Fritz:  Bibliographie der Kometenliteratur, Stuttgart:  Hiersemann 2000 (= Hiersemanns Bibliographische Handbücher 15). Bugge, Günther: Das große Buch der Chemiker, Vol. 1: Von Zosimos bis Schönbein, Weinheim: Verlag Chemie 1965 [1929]. Bultmann, Rudolf:  Neues Testament und Mythologie. Das Problem der Entmythologisierung der neutestamentlichen Verkündigung, München: Kaiser 1985. Busby, Robert: Reagan and the Iran-​Contra-​Affair, New York: St. Martin’s Press 1999.

Bibliography

213

Cancik, Hubert:  Esoterik [article], in:  Hubert Cancik (Hg.):  Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe (HrwG), Bd. II, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer 1990, pp. 345–​346. Capelle, Wilhelm (ed.):  Die Vorsokratiker. Die Fragmente und Quellenberichte, Stuttgart:  Alfred Kröner 1968 (= Kröners Taschenausgabe 119). Carion, Johann: Prognosticatio und Erklärung der grossen Wesserung, auch anderer erschrockenlichen Würchungen/​so sich begeben nach unseres lieben herrn geburt funffzehenhundert un xxiiii jar, Leipzig: Wolffgang Stöckel 1522. Carnap, Rudolf: Der logische Aufbau der Welt, Hamburg: Meiner 41974. Caspar, Max/​Dyck, Walter von (ed.): Johannes Kepler in seinen Briefen, Vol. 1, München: Oldenbourg 1930. Cherniss, Harold: Unbewegter Beweger und Gestirnseelen in ‚De Philosophia‘, in: Paul Moraux (ed.): Frühschriften des Aristoteles, Darmstadt 1975 (= Wege der Forschung CCXXIV), S. 81–​95. Cicero, Marcus Tullius: Über die Wahrsagung. De Divinatione, lat.-​german edition, Christoph Schäublin (ed.), München: Artemis & Winkler 1991. Cicero, Marcus Tullius: Vom Wesen der Götter, lat.-​german edition, Olof Gigon (ed.), Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft 1996. Clark, Jerome/​ Melton, Gordon:  The Crusade against the Paranormal, in: Fate, 32/​9, 10 (1979), S. 70–​76, S. 87–​94. Codrington, Robert Henry:  The Melanesians. Their Anthropology and Their Folklore, Oxford: Clarendon 1969 [1891]. Colpe, Carsten:  Über das Heilige. Versuch seiner Verkennung kritisch vorzubeugen, Frankfurt/​M.: Hain 1990. Colpe, Carsten: Weltdeutungen im Widerstreit, Berlin: de Gruyter 1999 (= Theologische Bibliothek Töpelmann 100). Cumont, Franz: Astrology and Religion among the Greeks and Romans, New York: Dover Publication 1960 [1912]. Cumont, Franz: Die Orientalischen Religionen im Römischen Heidentum, after the 4th French edition based on Gehrich’s translation, Stuttgart: Teubner 1989 [1931]. Davie, Grace: Religion in Britain Since 1945. Believing Without Belonging, Exeter: Blackwell 1994.

214

Bibliography

Deutscher Astrologenverband (DAV):  URL:  www.astrol​ogen​verb​and.de. Last retrieval date 12.03.2014. Dilthey, Wilhelm:  Einleitung in die Geisteswissenschaften. Versuch einer Grundlegung für das Studium der Gesellschaft und der Geschichte, in:  Karlfried Gründer (ed.):  Gesammelte Schriften Vol. I, Stuttgart: Teubner 91990. Dommanget, Jean:  The ‘Mars-​Effect’ as Seen by the Commitee PARA, in: Journal of Scientific Exploration, 11/​3 (1997), pp. 275–​295. Durkheim, Émile: Die elementaren Formen des religiösen Lebens, Frankfurt/​M.: Suhrkamp  1981. Ebach, Jürgen:  Astrologie [article], in:  Hubert Cancik (ed.):  Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe (HrwG), Vol. II, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer 1990, pp. 82–​90. Ebeling, Florian: Das Geheimnis des Hermes Trismegistos. Geschichte des Hermetismus von der Antike bis zur Neuzeit, München: Beck 2005. Ecklund, Elaine H./​Scheitle, Christopher P.:  Religion among Academic Scientists. Distinction, Disciplines, and Demographics, in: Social Problems 54/​2 (2007), pp. 289–​307. Edzard, Dietz Otto:  Mesopotamien. Die Mythologie der Sumerer und Akkader, in: Hans Wilhelm Haussig (ed.): Wörterbuch der Mythologie, Erste Abteilung: Die alten Kulturvölker, Vol. I: Götter und Mythen im Vorderen Orient, Stuttgart: Klett-​Cotta 1965. Eichhorn, Werner:  Die Religionen Chinas, Stuttgart:  Kohlhammer 1973 (=Die Religionen der Menschheit 21). Ellermeier, Friedrich:  Sumerisches Glossar, Vol. 3 Part 2:  Sumerisch-​ Deutsches Kurzglossar in Umschrift und Keilschrift, Hardegsen:  Selbstverlag Ellermeier 1998 (= Theologische und Orientalische Arbeiten aus Göttingen 4). Endres, Klaus-​Peter/​Schad, Wolfgang: Biologie des Mondes. Mondperiodik und Lebensrhythmen, Stuttgart: Hirzel 1997. Ertel, Suitbert:  Die neo-​ astrologische Entdeckung Gauquelins  –​ Rückblick auf fünf Forschungsjahrzehnte, in:  Hans Bender/​Eberhard Bauer:  Zeitschrift für Parapsychologie und Grenzgebiete der Psychologie, 47/​48/​49 (2005/​2006/​2007), pp. 182–​207.

215

Bibliography

Ertel, Suitbert:  Interview mit Hans Jürgen Eysenck über die Grenzgebietsforschung, in:  Zeitschrift für Parapsychologie und Grenzgebiete der Psychologie, 28 1/​2 (1986), pp. 136–​155. Ertel, Suitbert:  Wissenschaftliche Qualität und progressive Dynamik im Gauquelin-​Paradigma, in:  Zeitschrift für Parapsychologie und Grenzgebiete der Psychologie, 28 1/​2 (1984), pp. 104–​135. Ertel, Suitbert/​Irving, Kenneth: The Tenacious Mars Effect, London: Urania Trust 1996. Evans-​Pritchard, Edward Evan: Hexerei, Magie und Orakel bei den Zande, Frankfurt/​M.:  Suhrkamp 1978. (engl. Orig.:  Whichcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande, Oxford: University Press 1937). Evans-​Pritchard, Edward Evan: The Nuer. A Discription of the Modes of Livelihood and Political Institutions of a Nilothic People, Oxford: Oxford University Press 1940. Eysenck, Hans-​Jürgen/​Nias, David:  Astrologie  –​Wissenschaft oder Aberglaube?, München: List 1982 (engl. Original: Astrology Science or Superstition?, London: Maurice Temple Smith 1982). Faivre, Antoine:  Esoterik im Überblick. Geheime Geschichte des Abendländischen Denkens, Freiburg/​ Br.:  Herder 2001 (french Orig.: L’Ésotérisme, Paris: Universitaire de France 1993). Falkenstein, Adam: Das Sumerische, in: Handbuch der Orientalistik, Erste Abteilung, Zweiter Band:  Keilschriftforschung und Alte Geschichte Vorderasiens, Erster u. zweiter Abschnitt:  Geschichte der Forschung, Sprache und Literatur, Lieferung 1, Leiden: Brill 1959. Falkenstein, Adam:  Sumerische und Akkadische Hymnen und Gebete, Zürich: Artemis 1953 (= Die Bibliothek der Alten Welt: Reihe Der Alte Orient). Favaro, Antonio:  Galileo astrologo secondo ducumenti editi e inediti, in: Mente e Cuore 8 (1881), pp. 99–​108. Feuerbach, Ludwig: Das Wesen des Christentums, in: Werner Schuffenhauer (ed.): Gesammelte Werke, Vol. 5, Berlin: Akademie-​Verlag 1973. Feyerabend, Paul:  Erkenntnis M.: Suhrkamp 1979.

für

freie

Menschen,

Frankfurt/​

Feyerabend, Paul: Über die Methode. Ein Dialog. Eine Verteidigung der Astrologie, edited by Volker Schendel, Tübingen: Chiron 2010 (licensed

216

Bibliography

edition from:  Gunnar Anderson/​Gerard Radnitzky:  Voraussetzungen und Grenzen der Wissenschaft, Tübingen: Mohr 1981, pp.175–​254). Feyerabend, Paul: Wider den Methodenzwang. Skizze einer anarchistischen Erkenntnistheorie, Frankfurt/​M.: Suhrkamp 1976. Fischer, Helmut: Schnellkurs Christentum, Köln: DuMont 32005. Fischer, Hubertus:  Grammatik der Sterne und Ende der Welt, in:  Hans-​ Georg Soeffner (ed.): Kultur und Alltag, Göttingen: Schwartz 1988 (= Soziale Welt, Sonderband 6). Frietsch, Wolfram:  Newtons Geheimnis. Wissenschaft und Esoterik  –​ Zwei Seiten einer Medaille, Gaggenau: Scientia Nova 2006. Frazer, James George: Der Goldene Zweig. Das Geheimnis von Glauben und Sitten der Völker, transl. by Helen von Bauer, Hamburg: Reinbek 1994 [1928] (Engl. Orig.: The Golden Bough (abridged edition), New York: Macmillan 1922). Garin, Eugenio: Astrologie in der Renaissance, Frankfurt/​M.: Campus  1997. Gauquelin, Michel: Kosmische Einflüsse auf menschliches Verhalten, Freiburg/​Br.: Baur 1983 (engl. Orig.: Cosmic Influences on Human Behavior, London: Futura Publications 1976). Gebelein, Helmut: Alchemie, München: Eugen Diederichs, 1991. Geertz, Clifford: Dichte Beschreibung. Beiträge zum Verstehen kultureller Systeme, Frankfurt/​ M.:  Suhrkamp 1987 (= suhrkamp taschenbuch wissenschaft 696). Geiger, Angelika: Wallensteins Astrologie, Graz: Akademische Druck-​u. Verlagsanstalt 1983. Gelb, Ignace Jay:  Von der Keilschrift zum Alphabet. Grundlagen einer Schriftwissenschaft, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer 1958. Gijsen, Annelies van:  Astrology I:  Introduction [article], in:  Wouter Hanegraaff (ed.):  Dictionary of Gnosis & Western Esotericism, Leiden: Brill 2005, p. 109 f. Gladigow, Burkhard:  Divination [article], in:  Hubert Cancik (ed.):  Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe (HrwG), Bd.II, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer 1990, pp. 226–​228. Gladigow, Burkhard:  Gegenstände und wissenschaftlicher Kontext von Religionswissenschaft, in:  Hubert Cancik (ed.):  Handbuch religions

Bibliography

217

wissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe (HrwG), Vol. I, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer 1988, pp. 32–​38. Goethe, Johann Wolfgang:  Napoleonische Zeit. Briefe, Tagebücher und Gespräche 1805–​1816, Teil II:  1812 bis zu Christianes Tod, Rose Unterberger (ed.), Frankfurt/​ M.:  Dt. Klassiker-​ Verlag, in:  Johann Wolfgang Goethe: Sämtliche Werke. Briefe, Tagebücher und Gespräche, forty volumes, edited by Karl Eibel, Vol. 7/​34. Gong, Yushu: Die Namen der Keilschriftzeichen, Münster: Ugarit 2000 (= Alter Orient und Altes Testament. Veröffentlichungen zur Kultur und Geschichte des Alten Orients und des Alten Testaments 268). Gundel, Hans:  Zodiakos [article], in:  Georg Wissowa (ed.) in:  Paulys Realencyclopädie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaften (RE), Vol. X A, Stuttgart: Druckmüller 1972, columns 462–​709. Gundel, Wilhelm:  Dekane [article], in:  Georg Wissowa (ed.) Paulys Realencyclopädie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaften (RE), Vol. Suppl. VII, Stuttgart: Druckenmüller 1958 [1940], columns 116–​124. Gundel, Wilhelm:  Neue astrologische Texte des Hermes Trismegistos. Funde und Forschungen auf dem Gebiet der antiken Astronomie und Astrologie, München:  Verlag der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 1936/​ 12 (= Abh. der Bayrischen Akade-​mie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-​historische Abteilung). Gundel, Wilhelm: Paranatellonta [article], in: Georg Wissowa (ed.): Paulys Realencyclopädie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaften (RE), Vol. XVIII, 3, Stuttgart: Druckenmül ler 1965 [1949], columns 1214–​1275. Gundel, Wilhelm:  Planeten [article], in:  Georg Wissowa (ed.):  Paulys Realencyclopädie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaften (RE), Vol. XX, 2, Stuttgart: Druckenmüller 1964 [1950], columns 2017–​2185. Gundel, Wilhelm: Sterne und Sternbilder im Glauben des Altertums und der Neuzeit, Hildesheim: Olms 1981 [1922]. Gundel, Wilhelm/​Gundel, Hans Georg: Astrologumena. Die astrologische Literatur in der Antike und ihre Geschichte, Wiesbaden: Steiner 1966 (= Sudhoffs Archiv, Beihefte 6). Haack, Friedrich-​Wilhelm:  Astrologie, München:  Evangelischer Presseverband für Bayern, 51988 (Dept. Schriftenmission). Habermas, Jürgen: Glauben und Wissen, Frankfurt/​M.: Suhrkamp 2001.

218

Bibliography

Habiger-​Tuczay, Christa:  Magie und Magier im Mittelalter, München: Eugen Diederichs 1992. Hameter, Wolfgang (ed.):  Ideologisierte Zeit. Kalender und Zeitvor-​ stellungen im Abendland von der Antike bis zur Neuzeit, Insbruck: Studien Verlag 2005. Hammer, Olav: Astrology V: 20th Century [article], in: Wouter Hanegraaff (ed.): Dictionary of Gnosis & Western Esotericism, Leiden: Brill, 2005, pp. 136–​141. Harder, Richard (ed.):  Plotins Schriften, Vol. V:  Die Schriften 46–​ 54 der chronologischen Reihenfolge, geek-​ german edition, Hamburg: Meiner 1960. Hemleben, Johannes:  Kepler, Reinbek bei Hamburg:  Rowohlt 1971 (= rm 183). Herbst, Klaus-​Dieter:  Gottfried Kirch (1639–​1710). Astronom, Kalender-​ macher, Pietist, Frühaufklärer, Jena: Verlag HKD 2022. Hermann, Joachim:  Großes Mosaik, 1980.

Lexikon

der

Astronomie,

München: 

Hesiod:  Theogonie. Werke und Tage, edited and transl. by Albert von Schirnding, München: Artemis & Winkler 1991. Hockey, Thomas (Hg.):  Bibliographical Encyclopedia of Astronomers, Vol. 1 u. 2, New York: Springer 2007. Holy Bible. King James Version: National Publishing Company (ed.) 1978. Holy Bible. New King James Version, Edingburgh:  Thomas Nelson Publisher 1975. Homer: Homerische Hymnen, in: Dietrich Ebener (ed.): Griechische Lyrik, Weimar: Aufbau 21980. Horn, Christoph: Plotin über Sein, Zahl und Einheit, Stuttgart: Teubner 1995 (=Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 62). Hossfeld, Frank Lothar:  Der Astralglaube im Raum alttestamentlicher Offenbarungsreligion, in:  Hermann Kochanek (ed):  Horoskop als Schlüssel zum Ich. Leipzig: Benno 1995, pp. 39–​42. Houtsma, Martijn Th.:  First Encyclopedia of Islam 1913–​1936, Vol. I, Leiden: Brill 1993 [1927], Reprint: The Encyclopedia of Islam. A Dictionary of Geography, Ethnography and Biography of the Muhammadan People, Leiden: Brill 1913–​1938.

Bibliography

219

Howe, Ellic:  Uranias Kinder. Die seltsame Welt der Astrologen und das Dritte Reich, edited and transl. by Franz Isfort, Weinheim:  Beltz Athenäum, 1995 (engl. Original:  Urania’s Children and the Strange World of the Astrologers, London: Kimber 1967). Huber, Peter J.:  Astronomical Dating of Babylon I und Ur III, Malibu, Cal.: Undena Publ. 1982 (= Occasional Papers of the Near East). Huber, Peter J.: Dating by Lunar Eclipse Omina, with Speculations on the Birth of Omen Astrology, in: John Lennart Berggren (ed.): From Ancient Omens to Statistical Mechanics. Essays on the Exact Sciences to Aasger Aboe, Kopenhagen: University Library 1987 (= Acta Historica Scientiarum Series No. 39). Hübner, Kurt: Die Wahrheit des Mythos, München: Beck 1985. Hübner, Wolfgang:  Die Begriffe „Astrologie“ und „Astronomie“ in der Antike. Wortgeschichte und Wissenschaftssystematik, Stuttgart: Steiner 1989 (= Akademie der Wissenschaften und Literatur, Abh. der Geistes-​ und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse). Hübner, Wolfgang: Die Dodekatropos des Manilius (MANIL. 2, columns 856–​ 970), Stuttgart:  Steiner 1995 (= Akademie der Wissenschaften und Literatur, Abhandlungen der Geistes-​und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse). Hübner, Wolfgang:  Hipparch, in:  Wolfgang Hübner (ed.):  Geographie und verwandte Wissenschaften, Stuttgart: Steiner 2000, pp. 93–​101 (= Geschichte der Mathematik und Naturwissenschaften in der Antike 2). Hübner, Wolfgang:  Manilius als Astrologe und Dichter, in:  Hildegard Temporini/​Wolfgang Haase (ed.): Aufstieg und Untergang der römischen Welt, II. 32.1, Berlin: de Gruyter 1984, pp. 126–​320. Hübner, Wolfgang:  Mythische Geographie, in:  Wolfgang Hübner (ed.):  Geographie und verwandte Wissenschaften, Stuttgart:  Steiner 2000, pp. 19–​32 (= Geschichte der Mathematik und Naturwissenschaften in der Antike 2). Hübner, Wolfgang: Sternbilder [article], in: Hubert Cancik (ed.): Der Neue Pauly. Enzyklopädie der Antike, Vol. 11, Stuttgart: Metzler 2001, pp. 965–​971. Hübner, Wolfgang:  Tierkreis, in:  Hubert Cancik (ed.):  Der Neue Pauly. Enzyklopädie der Antike, Vol. 12, 1, Stuttgart:  Metzler, 2002, pp. 553–​563.

220

Bibliography

Hunger, Hermann/​ Pingree, David:  Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia, in:  Hartwig Altenmüller (ed.):  Handbuch der Orientalistik, Erste Abteilung: Der Nahe und der Mittlere Osten, Leiden: Brill 1999. Hürlimann, Gertrud I.:  Astrologie. Zürich: M&T 51988.

Ein

methodische

Lehrbuch,

Ibn-​Khaldun, Abd-​ar-​Rahman Ibn-​Muhammad: The Muqaddimah. An Introduction to History, Vol. 2, translated by Franz Rosenthal, Princton:  Princton University Press 1967. Jastrow, Morris: Die Religionen Babyloniens und Assyriens, Vol. I: Gebete und Hymnen, Giessen:  Töpelmann 1905, Vol. II:  Omina, Giessen:  Töpelmann 1912. Jaffé, Aniela:  Erinnerungen, Träume, Gedanken von C. G. Jung, Zürich:  Walter 101997 [1971]. Jehle, Markus/​ Garms, Martin (ed.):  Meridian. Fachzeitschrift für Astrologie, Freiburg/​Br.: Ebertin 1991. Jung, Carl-​Gustav: Aion. Beiträge zur Symbolik des Selbst, GW Vol. 9/​2, edited by Lilly Jung-​Merker, Olten: Walter-​Verlag 51983. Jung, Carl Gustav:  Das Grundproblem der gegenwärtigen Psychologie, in: Marianne Niehus-​Jung (ed.): GW Vol. 8: Dynamik des Unbewussten, Olten: Walter 41982, pp. 371–​391 (Kap. XI). Jung, Carl Gustav:  Psychologische Typen, in:  Marianne Niehus-​ Jung (ed.):  GW Vol. 6, Psychologische Typen, Olten:  Walter 141981, pp. 552–​567. Jung, Carl Gustav: Studienausgabe in 20 Bänden, Vol. 5: Wirklichkeit der Seele, Lizenzaus-​gabe für den Buchclub ex libris, Zürich: Buchclub ex libris 1972. Jung, Carl-​Gustav: Synchronizität als ein Prinzip akausaler Zusammen-​ hänge, in:  Marianne Niehus-​ Jung (Hg.):  GW Vol. 8:  Dynamik des Unbewussten, Olten: Walter 41982, S. 457–​553 (Kap. XVIII). Jung, Carl-​Gustav:  Über die Archetypen des kollektiven Unbewussten, in:  Lilly Jung-​Merker (ed.):  GW Vol. 9/​1:  Die Archetypen und das kollektive Unbewusste, Olten: Walter 51983, p. 11–​51 (Ch. I). Jung, Carl-​Gustav:  Über Synchronizität, in:  Marianne Niehus-​ Jung (ed.): GW Vol. 8: Dynamik des Unbewussten, Olten: Walter 41982, pp. 555–​566.

Bibliography

221

Kant, Immanuel:  Kritik der Urteilskraft, edited by Heiner F. Klemme, Hamburg: Meiner 2001 (= Philosophische Bibliothek 507). Kant, Immanuel: Kritik der reinen Vernunft, edited by Jens Timmermann, Hamburg: Meiner 1998 (= Philosophische Bibliothek 505). Kant, Immanuel:  Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft, edited by Konstantin Pollok, Hamburg: Meiner 1997 (= Philosophische Bibliothek 508). Kehrer, Günter:  Religion [article] in:  Hubert Cancik (ed.):  Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe (HrwG), Vol. IV, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer 1998, pp. 418–​425. Kepler, Johannes:  Astronomia Nova, in:  Walther von Dyck (ed.):  Gesammelte Werke, Vol. 3, München:  Bayrische Akademie der Wissenschaften 1997 (= Berichte der Keplerkommission 6). Kepler, Johannes:  Harmonice Mundi, in:  Walther von Dyck (ed.):  Gesammelte Werke, Vol. 6, München:  Bayrische Akademie der Wissenschaften 1990 (= Berichte der Keplerkommission 1). Kepler, Johannes:  Mysterium Cosmographicum, in:  Walther von Dyck (ed.):  Gesammelte Werke, Vol. 1, München:  Bayrische Akademie der Wissenschaften 1997 (= Berichte der Keplerkommission 8). Kepler, Johannes:  Tertius Interveniens. Warnung an die Gegner der Astrologie, edited by Fritz Krafft, München: Kindler 1971 (Orig.: Frankfurt/​M.: Godtfriedt Tampach, 1610). Kepler, Johannes:  Von den gesicherten Grundlagen der Astrologie, edited by Reinhardt Stiehle, Mössingen:  Chiron 1999. lat.-​ german edition in: Walther von Dyck (ed.): Gesammelte Werke, Vol. 4, München:  Bayrische Akademie der Wissenschaften 1990 (= Berichte der Keplerkommission 13). Kerényi, Karl: Theos und Mythos, in: Hans-​Werner Bartsch: Kerygma und Mythos, Vol. IV/​1:  Entmythologisierung und existentiale Interpretation, Hamburg-​Bergstedt: Evangelischer Verlag 1963, pp. 28–​37. Keul, István:  Indien (Subkontinent) [article], in:  Metzler Lexikon Religion. Gegenwart Alltag Medien, Bd. 4:  Text-​und Bildquellen, edited by Christoph Auffahrt, Stuttgart: Metzler 2005, pp. 271–​281 (special edition). Kieckhefer, Richard: Magie im Mittelalter, München: Beck 1992.

222

Bibliography

Kippenberg, Hans Gerhard:  Magie [article], in:  Hubert Cancik (ed.):  Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe (HrwG), Vol. IV, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer 1998, pp. 85–​98. Kippenberg, Hans Gerhard/​ Luchesi, Brigitte:  Magie. Die sozialwissen-​ schaftliche Kontroverse über das Verstehen fremden Denkens, Frankfurt/​ M.: Suhrkamp 1978. Kirchhoff, Jochen: Kopernikus, Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt 1990 (= rm 347). Klöckler, Herbert v.:  Astrologie als Erfahrungswissenschaft, München:  Diederichs 1989 [1927]. Knappich, Wilhelm:  Geschichte der Astrologie, Frankfurt/​M.:  Kloster-​ mann 1967. Knoblauch, Hubert:  Populäre Religion. Auf dem Weg in eine spirituelle Gesellschaft, Frankfurt/​M.: Campus 2009. Knoll, Max:  Wandlungen der Wissenschaft in unserer Zeit, in:  Eranos–​ Jahrbuch 20/​1951, pp. 387–​436. Koch-​Westenholz, Ulla:  Mesopotamian Astrology. An Introduction to Babylonian and Assyrian Celestial Divination, Kopenhagen:  Museum Tusculanum Press 1995. Kochanek, Hermann (Hg):  Horoskop als Schlüssel zum Ich. Leipzig:  Benno 1995. Köhler, Hans-​Joachim: The Flugschriften and their Importance in Religious Debate. A Quantitative Approach, in:  Paola Zambelli (ed):  ‘Asrologi halucinati’. Stars and the End of the World in Luther’s Time, Berlin: de Gruyter 1986, pp. 153–​175. Kurtz, Paul:  Objections to Astrology. A Statement by 186 Leading Scientists, in:  The Humanist. A Magazin of Critical Inquiry and Social Concern, edited by American Humanist Association, 35, 1975/​5, pp.  4–​6. Kurze, Dietrich: Johannes Lichtenberger. Eine Studie zur Geschichte der Prophetie und Astrologie, Lübeck: Matthiesen 1960. Lambert, Wilfred G.:  Akkadische Mythen und Epen. Enuma Elisch, in:  Otto Kaiser (ed.):  Weisheitstexte, Mythen und Epen, Texte aus der Umwelt des Alten Testaments, Vol. III/​ 1:  Weisheitstexte I, Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus 1990. Vol.III/​4: Mythen und Epen II, Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1994.

Bibliography

223

Lämmel, Klaus:  Luthers Verhältnis zu Astronomie und Astrologie (nach Äußerungen in Tischreden und Briefen), in:  Lutheriana. Zum 500. Geburtstag Martin Luthers von den Mitarbeitern der Weimarer Ausgabe, edited by Gerhard Hammer, Köln: Böhlau 1984, pp. 299–​312. Larsen, Lars Steen/​Michael, Erik/​Rasmussen, Per Kjaegaard:  Astrologie. Von Babylon zur Urknall-​ Theorie, transl. by Ursula Strauß, Wien: Böhlau 2000. Leeuw, Gerardus van der:  Phänomenologie der Religion, Tübingen:  Mohr 41977. Leicht, Reimund: Astrologumena Judaica. Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der astrologischen Literatur der Juden, Tübingen: Mohr 2006. Lemay, Richard: Abu Ma’Mashar and Latin Aristotelism in the Twelfth Century. The Recovery of Aristotele’s Natural Philosophy through Arabic Astrology, Beirut: American University of Beirut, Publ. of the Faculty of Arts and Science 1962 (= Oriental Series 38). Leo,Alan: AstrologischeLehrbücher,Vols.1–​5,Lorch: Karl-​Rohm-​Verlag  1950. Leo Alan: Esoterische Astrologie. Vom Wesen des Menschen, Berlin: Ullstein 1997 [1927]. Li, Wenchao:  Wozu Wissenschaft? Anspruch und Wirklichkeit eines Leibniz’schen Ideals, Hannover:  Wehrhan 2012 (= Hefte der Leibniz-​Stiftungsprofessur  14). Lichtenberger, Johannes:  Die weissagunge des Johannis Lichtenbergers, mit einer Vorrede D. Martini Luthers, verdeutscht durch Stephanum Rodt, Wittenberg: Hans Lufft 1527. Loth, Otto: Al Kindi als Astrolog, in: Morgenländische Forschungen, Commemorative volume for Heinrich L. Fleischer, Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus 1875, pp. 261–​308. Lüddeckens, Dorothea/​ Walthert, Rafael (ed.):  Fluide Religion. Neue religiöse Bewegungen im Wandel. Theoretische und empirische Systematisierungen, Bielfeld: transcript 2010. Luckmann, Thomas:  Die unsichtbare Religion, Frankfurt/​M.:  Suhrkamp 1993.

2

Luhmann, Niklas:  Die Religion der Gesellschaft, Frankfurt/​M.:  Suhrkamp 2000. Malinowski, Bronisław:  Magie, Wissenschaft und Religion und andere Schriften, Frankfurt/​M.: Fischer 1973.

224

Bibliography

Manetti, Giovanni:  Theories of the Sign in Classical Antiquity, Bloomington: Indiana University Press 1993. Manilius, Marcus:  Astronomica  –​ Astrologie, lat.-​ german edition by Wofgang Fels, Stuttgart: Reclam 1990 (= Universal-​Bibliothek 8634). Mebert, Joachim: Die Venustafeln des Ammi-​saduqa und ihre Bedeutung für die astronomische Datierung der altbabylonischen Zeit, Wien: Institut für Orientalistik 2010. Melanchthon, Philipp  :  Claudius Ptolemaeus:  De Praedicationibus Astronomicis, greek.-​lat. edition, Basilea 1553, Microfiche edition of the Herzog-​August-​Bibliothek Wolfenbüttel 1992. Melanchthon, Philipp: Oratio de dignitate astrologiae dicta in promotione Magistrorum a Iakobo Milchio, Halae Sueuorum: Brubachius 1538. Middelburg, Paulus v.:  Prognostica ad viginti annos duratura, Coloniae:  Koelhoff 1484. Miers, Horst E.: Lexikon des Geheimwissens, München: Goldmann 1993. Mittermeyer, Catherine:  Altbabylonische Zeichenliste der sumerisch-​ literarischen Texte, in:  Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis, Göttingen:  V&R 2006 (special edition). Moraux, Paul:  Einige Bemerkungen über den Aufbau von Aristoteles’ Schrift ‚De Caelo‘, in: Die Naturphilosophie des Aristoteles, edited by Gustav Adolf Seeck, Darmstadt:  Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft 1975, pp. 93–​101 (=Wege der Forschung CCXXV). Müller, Arno: Der Gauquelin-​Effekt: Antwort auf Ertels Stellungnahme, in: Bender, Hans/​Bauer, Eberhard: Zeitschrift für Parapsychologie und Grenzgebiete der Psychologie, 37 1/​2 (1995), pp. 28–​31. Müller, Arno: Der Gauquelin-​Effekt: Eine kritische Bilanz, in: Hans Bender/​ Eberhard Bauer: Zeitschrift für Parapsychologie und Grenzgebiete der Psychologie, 36 (1994), pp. 131–​162. Müller, Arno:  Ist die Character-​ Trait-​ Hypothese Gauquelins endgültig widerlegt?, in:  Hans Bender/​ Eberhard Bauer:  Zeitschrift für Parapsychologie und Grenzgebiete der Psychologie 38 3/​4 (1996), pp. 136–​157. Müller, Arno:  Lässt sich der Gauquelin-​ Effekt bestätigen? Untersuch-​ ungsergebnisse mit einer Stichprobe von 1288 hervorragenden Ärzten, in: Zeitschrift für Parapsychologie und Grenzgebiete der Psychologie, 28 1/​2 (1986), pp. 87–​103.

Bibliography

225

Nasr, Seyyed Hossein: An Introduction to Islamic Cosmological Doktrines, Albany: State University of New York Press 1997. Nestle, Eberhard/​ Aland, Kurt:  Novum Testamentum Graece, Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft 281963. Neugebauer, Otto: A History of Ancient Mathematical Astronomy. Studies in the History of Ancient Mathematics and Physical Sciences, Vol. 1–​3, York: Springer 1975. Neugebauer, Otto: Astronomical Cuneiform Texts, 1: Introduction –​ the Moon, 2: The Planets –​Indices, 3: Plates, New York: Springer 1983. Newton, Isaac:  Mathematische Grundlagen der Naturphilosophie. Philosophiae naturalis. Phrincipia matematica, edited by Ed Dellian, Hamburg: Meiner, 1988 (=Philosophische Bibliothek 394). Newton, Isaac:  Mathematische Prinzipien der Naturlehre. Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica, edited by Jakob Philipp Wolfers, Darmstadt: Wiss. Buchgesellschaft 1963 [1872]. Niehenke, Peter: Astrologie –​eine Einführung, Stuttgart: Reclam 1994. Niehenke, Peter:  Kritische Astrologie. Zur erkenntnistheoretischen und empirischen Prüfung ihres Anspruchs, Freiburg/​Br.: Aurum 1987. North, John David: Celestial Influence –​the Major Premiss of Astrology, in: Paola Zimbelli (ed.): ‘Asrologi halucinati’. Stars and the End of the World in Luther’s Time, Berlin: de Gruyter 1986, pp. 100–​145. North, John David: Viewegs Geschichte der Astronomie und Kosmologie, transl. by Rainer Sengerling, Wiesbaden: Vieweg 1997. North, John David: Horoscopes and History, London: The Warburg Institute University of London 1986. Occhieppo, Ferrari K. d’:  Der Stern von Bethlehem in astronomischer Sicht. Legende oder Tatsache? Gießen: Brunnen 42003. Österreichischer Astrologenverband (OEAV):  URL www.astrol​ogen​verb​ and.at. Last retrieval date 12.03.2014. Ott, Ernst: Astrologie ist keine Wissenschaft, in: Skeptiker. Zeitschrift für Wissenschaft und kritisches Denken, 4/​1996, 132. Otto, Bernd-​Christian:  Magie:  rezeptions-​und diskursgeschichtliche Analysen von der Antike bis zur Neuzeit, Berlin:  de Gruyter 2011 (= Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorar-​beiten 57).

226

Bibliography

Otto, Bernd-​Christian/​Stausberg, Michael:  Defining Magic. A Reader, Sheffield: Equinox 2013. Panofsky, Erwin:  Saturn und Melancholie. Studien zur Geschichte der Naturphilosophie und Medizin, der Religion und der Kunst, übers. v. Christa Buschendorf, Frankfurt/​M.: Suhrkamp 1990. Peukert, Will-​Erich: Astrologie, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer 1960 (= Geschichte der Geheimwis-​senschaften 1). Pico della Mirandola, Giovanni:  De astrologia disputationum Lib. XII, in: Opera Omnia, I, Hildesheim: Olms 1969 [1557]. Pico della Mirandola, Giovanni: 900 Tesis de omni re scibili/​Conclusiones philosophicae, cabalisticae et theologicae nongentae in omni genere scientiarum (1486), lat.-​ german edition:  Neunhundert Thesen, Hamburg: Meiner 2018. Pico della Mirandola, Giovanni: Oratio de hominis dignitate. lat-​german editin, Stuttgart: Reclam 2009. Pingree, David: Astrology, in: Philip Wiener (ed.): Dictionary of the History of Ideas, Vol. 1: Studies of Selected Pivotal Ideas, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons 1973. Pingree, David:  Hellenophilia versus the History of Science, in:  Isis 83 (1992), pp. 554–​563. Pingree, David:  Piatrix. The Latin Version of the Gayat Al-​ Hakim, London: Aby Warburg Institute 1986. Pingree, David/​ Hunger, Hermann:  Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia, in:  Hartwig Altenmüller (ed.), First Dept.:  Der Nahe und Mittlere Osten, 24, in: Handbuch der Orientalistik, Leiden: Brill 1999. Platon:  Sämtliche Werke in drei Bänden, edited by Erich Loewenthal, Darmstadt: Lambert Schneider 2010 [1940]. Plotin: Das Wesen der Seele (Enneaden IV, 2), Der Abstieg der Seele in die Körperwelt (Enneaden IV, 8), Die Einheit der Einzelseele (Enneaden IV, 9), in: Richard Harder (ed.): Plotins Schriften, Vol. 1: die Schriften 1–​21 der chronologischen Reihenfolge, Hamburg: Meiner 1956. Plotin: Ob die Sterne wirken (Enneaden II, 3, 1–​18), in: Richard Harder (ed.): Plotins Schriften, Vol. 5: die Schriften 46–​54 der chronologischen Reihenfolge, Hamburg: Meiner 1960. Pollack, Detlef: Was Ist Religion? Probleme der Definition, in: Zeitschrift für Religionswissenschaft (ZfR) 02/​1995, pp. 163–​190.

Bibliography

227

Popper, Karl: Logik der Forschung, in: Erik Boettcher (ed.): Die Einheit der Gesellschaftswissenschaften. Studien in den Grenzbereichen der Wirtschafts-​und Sozialwissenschaften, Vol. 4, Tübingen:  Mohr 1984 [1935]. Popper, Karl:  Vermutungen und Widerlegungen. Das Wachstum der wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnis, Vol. I: Vermutungen, in: Erik Boettcher (ed.):  Die Einheit der Gesellschaftswissenschaften. Studien in den Grenzbereichen der Wirtschafts-​und Sozialwissenschaften, Vol. 86, Tübingen: Mohr 1994 [1963]. Engl.: Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge, Routledge 1963. Popper, Karl:  Vermutungen und Widerlegungen. Das Wachstum der wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnis, Vol. II:  Widerlegungen, in:  Erik Boettcher (ed.): Die Einheit der Gesellschaftswissenschaften. Studien in den Grenzbereichen der Wirtschafts-​und Sozialwissenschaften, Vol. 97, Tübingen: Mohr 1997 [1963]. Engl.: Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge, Routledge 1963. Porphyrios:  Plotins Leben und über die Ordnung seiner Schriften. Text, Übersetzung, Anmerkung, edited by Richard Harder, Hamburg: Meiner 1958. Ptolemaeus, Claudius:  De Praedicationibus Astronomicis, cui titulum fecerunt Quadripartitu, Grece et Latine, Libri IIII, edited by Philippo Melanchthone, Basilea:  Ex officina Ioannis Oporini 1553. Microfiche edition of the Herzog-​August-​Bibliothek Wolfenbüttel 1992. Preface in German in: Ptolemäus 1993, pp. 277–​282. Ptolemaeus, Claudius:  Ptolemy’s Almagest, transl. by Gerald James Toomer, London: Gerald Guckworth 1984. Ptolemäus, Claudius:  Tetrabiblos, edited by Reinhardt Stiehle, Mössingen:  Chiron 1995, reprint of the edition by M. Erich Winkel (transl.), Berlin: Linser 1923, translation of the 1553 edition by Philipp Melanchthon. Ptolemy, Claudius: Tetrabiblos (greek-​engl.), edited and transl. by Frank Egleston Robbins, Cambridge/​Mass.: Harvard University Press 1980. Quigley, Joan:  What Does Joan Say? My Seven Years as White House Astrologer to Nancy and Ronald Reagan, New York: Carol Publishing Group 1990.

228

Bibliography

Rawlinson, Henry Creswicke/​Smith, George: Tablet of Movements of the Planet Venus and Their Influences, in: The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, Vol. III: A Selection of the Miscellaneous Inscriptions of Assyria, London: British Museum 1866. Regan, Donald T.: For the Record. From Wall Street to Washington, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich 1988. Reiner, Erica: Celestial Omens Tablets and Fragments in the British Museum, in: Stefan M. Maul, Stefan (ed.): Festschrift für Rykle Borger zu seinem 65. Geburtstag am 24. Mai 1994, Groningen: Brill 1998 (= Cuneiform Monographs 10), pp. 215–​302. Reiner, Erica: Šurpu. A Collection of Sumerian and Akkadian Incantations, Osnabrück: Biblio 1970. Reiner, Erica/​ Pingree, David:  Babylonian Planetary Omens, Part 1–​ 4, Leiden: Brill 1998. Reiner, Erica/​ Pingree, David:  Babylonian Planetary Omens, Part 1: Enuma Anu Enlil, Tablet 63: The Venus Tablet, Malibu/​Cal.: Undena Publications 1975. Reiter, Florian C.:  Religionen in China. Geschichte, Alltag, Kultur, München: Beck 2002. Reynmann, Leonhard:  Practica über die grossen und mannigfeltigen Coniunction der Planeten die im Jahr M.D.XXiiij erscheinen un ungezweifelt vil wunderparlicher ding geperen werden. Ausz Röm. Kay. May. Gnaden und Freihaiten huet sich menigklich diese meine Practica in zwayen jaren nach zutrucken bey verlierung. Marck Lötigs Golts, woodcut 13,3 x 12,6 cm. 4°. Nürnberg: Hieronymus Höltzel 1523. Riesebrodt, Martin:  Cultus und Heilsversprechen. Eine Theorie der Religionen, München: Beck 2007. Riemann, Fritz:  Lebenshilfe Astrologie. Gedanken und Erfahrungen, München: dtv 2005, [1976]. Ring, Thomas:  Astrologische Menschenkunde, Vol. I:  Kräfte und Kräftebeziehungen, Freiburg/​Br.:  Baur 61990, Vol. II:  Ausdruck und Richtung der Kräfte, Freiburg/​Br.:  Baur 51885, Vol. III: Kombinationslehre, Freiburg/​Br.: Baur 71989, Vol. IV: Das lebende Modell, Freiburg/​Br.: Baur  31985. Ring, Thomas:  Astrologie ohne Aberglauben. Können wir unser Leben selbst gestalten oder ist es vorbestimmt? Düsseldorf: Econ 1972.

Bibliography

229

Rochberg, Francesca:  Babylonian Horoscopes, in:  Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia:  American Philological Association Book 1998. Rochberg, Francesca: In the Path of the Moon. Babylonian Celestial Divination and Its Legacy, Leiden: Brill 2010. Rochberg-​Halton, Francesca: Aspects of Babylonian Celestial Divination. The Lunar Eclipse Tablets of Enuma Anu Enlil, Horn: Ferdinand 1988 (= Archiv für Orientforschung Bei-​Heft 22). Rochberg-​Halton, Francesca: Astrology, Astronomy, and the Birth of Scientific Inquiry, in: Bulletin of the Canadian Society for Mesopotamian Studies, 19, 1990, pp. 25–​33. Roscher, Michael:  Das Astrologie Buch. Berechnung  –​Deutung  –​ Prognose, München: Knaur 1989. Rüpke, Jörg:  Zeit und Fest. Eine Kulturgeschichte des Kalenders, München: Beck 2006. Sakoian, Frances/​Acker, Louis: Das große Lehrbuch der Astrologie, übers. von Eva und Matthias Güldenstein, München:  Knaur 1997. (Engl. Orig.: The Astrologer’s Handbook, London: HarperCollins 1973). Sasportas, Howard:  Astrologische Häuser und Aszendenten, transl. by Bettine Stenner, München:  Knaur 1987. (Engl. Orig.:  The Twelve Houses, London: Thorsons 1985). Schelling, Friedrich Wilhelm:  Von der Weltseele. Eine Hypothese der höheren Physik zur Erklärung des allgemeinen Organismus, in:  Otto Weiß (ed.):  Schellings Werke, selection in three volumes, Vol. 1, Leipzig: Eckhardt 1907, pp. 443–​674. Schenke, Hans-​Martin/​Fischer, Karl Martin: Einleitung in die Schriften des Neuen Testaments, Vol. I: Die Schriften des Paulus und Schriften des Paulinismus, Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt 1978. Schischkoff, Georgi:  Philosophisches Wörterbuch, Stuttgart:  Kröner 221991 (= Kröners Taschenausgabe 13). Schoener, Gustav-​Adolf:  Weissagungen und Reformation in der Flugschriftenpublizistik, in: Zeitschrift für Religionswissenschaft (ZfR), 01/​2002, pp.  71–​92. Schöner, Erich:  Das Viererschema in der antiken Humoralpathologie, Wiesbaden: Steiner 1964.

230

Bibliography

Schubert-​Weller, Christoph:  Philosophische Fragen der Astrologie, in:  Volker Schendel (ed.):  Astrologie und Erkenntnis, Vol. 2, Berlin: Books on Demand 2011. Schulz, Karlheinz:  Goethe. Eine Biographie in 16 Kapiteln, Stuttgart: Reclam 1999 (= Universal-​Bibliothek 9745). Schulze, Winfried: Deutsche Geschichte im 16. Jahrhundert: 1500–​1618, Frankfurt/​Main: Suhrkamp  1987. Schweizer Astrologenbund (SAB), URL: www.ast​rolo​genb​und.ch. Last retrieval date 12.03.2014. Seaman, Barrett: Good Heavens! An Astrologer Dictating the President’s Schedule?, in:  TIME May 16th 1988. URL:  http://​ www.time.com/​ time/​magaz​ine/​arti​cle/​0,9171,967​389,00.html. Last retrieval date 06.04.2013. Seek, Gustav Adolf: Über die Elemente in der Kosmologie des Aristoteles. Untersuchungen zu ‚De Generatione et Corruptione‘ und ‚De Caelo‘, München: Beck 1964. Sefrin, Dieter:  mana [article] in:  Hubert Cancik (ed.):  Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe (HrwG), Vol. IV, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer 1998, pp. 98–​103. Seidl, Horst (ed.): Aristoteles’ Metaphysik, geek.-​german edition, books I (A) –​VI (E), Hamburg: Meiner 31989. Seidl, Ursula:  Die Babylonischen Kudurru-​ Reliefs. Symbole Mesopotamischer Gottheiten, Freiburg/​CH: Universitäts-​Verlag  1989. Seiwert, Hubert: Religion in der Geschichte der Moderne, in: Zeitschrift für Reöigionswissenschaft (ZfR), Marburg:  diagonal, 01/​ 1995, pp. 91–​101. Septuaginta. Id est Vetus Testamentum graece iuxta LXX interpretes, Volumen II:  libri poetici et prophetici, edited by Alfred Rahlfs, Stuttgart: Württembergische Bibelanstalt 91935. Sezgin, Fuat:  Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums, Vol. 7:  Astrologie, Meteorologie und Verwandtes bis ca. 430 H., Leiden: Brill 1979. Smoller, Laura Ackerman: History, Prophecy and the Stars. The Christian Astrology of Pierre d’Ailly 1350–​1420, Princeton/​NJ: Princeton University Press 1994.

Bibliography

231

Smolinsky, Heribert:  Deutungen der Zeit im Streit der Konfessionen. Kontroverstheologie, Apokalyptik und Astrologie im 16. Jahrhundert, Heidelberg: Winter 2000. Sørensen, Jesper: Magic Reconsidered: Towards a Scientifically Valid Concept of Magic, in:  Bernd-​Christian Otto/​Michael Stausberg (ed.):  Defining Magic. A Reader, Sheffield: Equinox 2013. Stark, Rodney/​Finke, Roger: Acts of Faith. Explaining the Human Side of Religion, Berkeley: University of California Press 2000. Steinmetz, Max:  Johann Virdung von Hassfurt, sein Leben und seine astrologischen Flugschriften, in:  Paola Zambelli (ed):  ‘Asrologi halucinati’. Stars and the End of the World in Luther’s Time, Berlin: de Gruyter 1986, pp. 195–​214. Stolz, Fritz: Grundzüge der Religionswissenschaft, Göttingen: V&R 32001 (= UTB Theologie Religion 1980). Stückelberger, Alfred:  Klaudios Ptolemaios, in:  Georg Wöhrle (ed.):  Geschichte der Mathematik und Naturwissenschaften in der Antike, Vol. 2:  Geographie und verwandte Wissenschaften, edited by Wolfgang Hübner Stuttgart: Steiner 2000, pp. 185–​208. Stuckrad, Kocku von:  Frömmigkeit und Wissenschaft. Astrologie in Tanach, Qumran und frührabbinischer Literatur, Frankfurt/​M.:  Peter Lang 1996 (= Europäische Hochschulschriften XXIII). Stuckrad, Kocku von: Geschichte der Astrologie. Von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart. München: Beck 2003. Stuckrad, Kocku von: Das Ringen um die Astrologie. Jüdische und christliche Beiträge zum antiken Zeitverständnis, Berlin: de Gruyter 2000. Stuckrad, Kocku von: Was ist Esoterik? Kleine Geschichte des geheimen Wissens, München: Beck 2004. Talkenberger, Heike:  Sintflut. Prophetie und Zeitgeschehen in Texten und Holzschnitten astrologischer Flugschriften 1488–​ 1528, Tübingen:  Niemeyer 1990. Teissier, Elizabeth:  Sous le signe de Mitterand, sept ans d’entretiens, Paris: aux Editions Edition no 1 1997. Thumfart, Alexander:  Die Perspektiven und die Zeichen. Hermetische Verschlüsselungen bei Pico della Mirandola, München: Fink 1996 Unger, Eckhard: Keilschrift-​Symbolik, Berlin: Herbert Witting 1940.

232

Bibliography

Ungnad, Arthur:  Die Venustafeln und das Neunte Jahr Samsuilunas (1741 v. Chr.), Osnabrück:  Zeller 1972 [1940] (= Mitteilungen der Altorientalischen Gesellschaft XIII, 3). Voss, Gerhard: Astrologie christlich, Regensburg: Pustet 42003. Vulgata. Biblia Sacra. Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, Tomus I:  Genesis –​ Psalmi, edited by Robertus Weber, Stuttgart: Württembergische Bibelanstalt 21975. Waardenburg, Jacques: Religionen und Religion. Systematische Einführung in die Religionswissenschaft, Berlin: de Gruyter 1986. Waerden, Bartel L. van der: Erwachende Wissenschaft, Vol. 1: Ägyptische, Babylonische und Griechische Mathematik, Basel:  Birkhäuser 21966, Vol. 2: Anfänge der Astronomie, Groningen: Noordhoff 1966. Warburg, Aby:  Heidnisch-​ antike Weissagung in Wort und Bild zu Luthers Zeiten, in:  Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberge Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philologisch-​historische Klasse, Vol. 19, 26. Abh., Heidelberg: Carl Winters Universitätsbuchhandlung 1920, pp. 3–​102. Weidner, Ernst Friedrich: Der Babylonische Fixsternhimmel: Beiträge zur ältesten Geschichte der Sternbilder, in: Handbuch der Babylonischen Astronomie, Vol. I, Leipzig: Zentralantiquariat der DDR 1976 [1915]. Weidner, Ernst Friedrich:  Die astrologische Serie Enûma Anu Enlil, in: Archiv für Orientforschung, 14, 1942, pp. 172–​195 and 308–​318. Weigert, Alfred/​ Zimmermann, Helmut: Brockhaus ABC Astronomie, Leipzig: Brockhaus 31971. Weiss, Claude (ed.):  Astrologie heute. Zeitschrift für Astrologie, Psychologie und Esoterik, CH-​Elgg: Bruderer, Juni 1984. Weiss, Jean Claude: Astrologie –​eine Wissenschaft von Raum und Zeit, Wettswil: Edition Astrodata 1987. Weiss, Jean Claude:  Horoskopanalyse, Vol. I: Planeten in Häusern und Zeichen, Zürich: M&T 21986. Weiss, Jean Claude:  Horoskopanalyse, Vol. II: Aspekte im Geburtsbild, Zürich: M&T, 21986. Weizsäcker, Carl Friedrich v.:  Interview in:  Sammelsurium, broadcast by SWF II, 07.01.1976, in: Peter Niehenke:  Kritische Astrologie. Zur erkenntnistheoretischen und empirischen Prüfung ihres Anspruchs, Freiburg/​Br.: Aurum 1987, p. 22.

Bibliography

233

Werner, Helmut: Lexikon der Esoterik, München: Orbis 1991. Winckler, Hugo: Himmels-​und Weltenbild der Babylonier als Grundlage der Weltanschauung und Mythologie aller Völker, in: Der Alte Orient. Gemeinverständliche Darstellung, 3, 1901, 2/​3. Windelband, Wilhelm: Lehrbuch der Geschichte der Philosophie, Tübingen:  Mohr 1935. Wittgenstein, Ludwig:  Philosophische Untersuchungen (= Philosophical Investigations), Frankfurt/​M.: Suhrkamp 1967 (Oxford 1953). Wittgenstein, Ludwig: Tractatus logico-​philosophicus. Tagebücher 1914–​ 1916. Philosophische Untersuchungen, Frankfurt/​M.: Suhrkamp 1963, in: Wittgenstein: Schriften, Vol. 1, after 2nd edition of the engl.-​german edition, London: Routledge & Kegan 1933. Wolff, Reinhard:  Sterngläubige Politiker, in:  taz. die tageszeitung, 14.10.2008. URL:  http://​www.taz.de/​1/​arc​hiv/​digi​taz/​arti​kel/​?ress​ ort=tz&dig=2008%2F10%2F14%2Fa0​ 1 00&cHash=7cb ​ 2 cb9 ​ 3 57. Last retrieval date 06.04.2013. Wuchterl, Kurt:  Philosophie und Religion. Zur Aktualität der Religion-​ sphilosophie, Stuttgart: Haupt 1982 (= UTB 1199). Wunder, Edgar (ed).:  Der Kreuzzug gegen das Paranormale. Ein Interview mit Marcello Truzzi, in: Forum Perspektiven, Newsletter der Gesellschaft für Anomalistik 4/​1999, pp. 13–​17. (Engl. Original: Marcello Truzzi Talks About:  The Crusade Against the Paranormal, Interview by Gordon Melton/​Jerome Clark in: Fate, Part 1 Vol. 83, 9, pp. 70–​76, Part 2 Vol. 83, 10, pp. 87–​94). Wunder, Edgar:  Kritische Astrologie-​ Forschung. Anforderungen, Fragestellungen, Forschungsstand, Präsentation auf der Tagung der Wirtschaftskammer Wien (WKO):  Tag der Astrologie. Astrologie und Wissenschaft, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, 21. März 2011 (Author was present). Wunder, Edgar: Parawissenschaft –​Was Ist das?, in: Skeptiker. Zeitschrift für Wissenschaft und kritisches Denken, 10, 1997, pp. 125–​130. Wunder, Edgar:  Religion in der postkonfessionellen Gesellschaft. Ein Beitrag zur sozialwissenschaftlichen Theorieentwicklung in der Religionsgeographie, München: Steiner 2005.

234

Bibliography

Wunder, Edgar/​ Herrmann, Dieter:  Astronomisches Wissen und astrologischer Glaube  –​gibt es Zusammenhänge?, in:  Sterne und Weltraum, Zeitschrift für Astronomie 1/​1998, p. 37. Zambelli, Paola (ed): ‘Asrologi halucinati’. Stars and the End of the World in Luther’s Time, Berlin: de Gruyter 1986. Zeller, Eduard:  Sternglaube und Sternforschung, Freiburg/​Br.:  Karl Alber 1953. Zimmermann, Helmut/​ Gürtler, Joachim:  ABC Astronomie, Heidelberg:  9 Spektrum  2008. Zimmermann, Helmut/​Weigert, Alfred: Brockhaus ABC Astronomie, Leipzig:  Brockhaus 1971. Zinser, Hartmut:  Mantik [article], in:  Hubert Cancik (ed.):  Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe (HrwG), Vol. IV, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer 1998, pp. 109–​113. Zinser, Hartmut: Pseudoreligion [article] in: Hubert Cancik (ed.): Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe (HrwG), Vol. IV, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer 1998, p. 359. Zinser, Hartmut:  Pseudowissenschaften/​Parawissenschaften [article] in:  Hans Dieter Betz:  Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart (4RGG) Vol. 6, Tübingen: Mohr 2006, columns 1792 f.

Reference Books and Encyclopaedias Auffahrth, Christoph/​Bernard, Jutta/​Mohr, Hubert: Metzler Lexikon Religion. Gegenwart Alltag Medien, Stuttgart: Metzler 2005. Bauer, Walter: Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, Berlin: de Gruyter  1971. Betz, Hans Dieter/​Browning, Don S. (ed.):  Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Handbuch für Theologie und Religionswissenschaft (4RGG), Tübingen: Mohr 41998. Cancik, Hubert/​Gladigow, Burkhard/​Kohl, Karl-​Hainz (ed.):  Handbuch religionswissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe (HrwG), Vols. I–​ V, Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1988–​2001. Cancik, Hubert/​ Kuhlmann, Peter/​ Schneider, Helmuth (ed.):  Der Neue Pauly. Enzyklopädie der Antike, Stuttgart: Metzler 1996. Eliade, Mircea:  The Encyclopedia of Religion, New York:  Simon & Schuster Macmillan 1995. Freytag, Kurt (ed.): Fremdwörterbuch Naturwissenschaftlicher und Mathe-​ matischer Begriffe, Köln: Aulis 1982. Gesenius, Wilhelm: Hebräisches und Aramäisches Handwörterbuch über das Alte Testament, Berlin:  Springer 1962, unchanged reprint of the Edition of 1915. Gialures, Nikolaos:  Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae (LIMC), Zürich: Artemis 1981. Hanegraaff, Wouter (ed.): Dictionary of Gnosis & Western Esotericism, Leiden: Brill, 2005. Hörz, Herbert (ed.):  Philosophie und Naturwissenschaften. Wörterbuch zu den philosophischen Fragen der Naturwissenschaften, Berlin:  Dietz 1991. Kaspar, Walter: Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche (LThK), 31993–​2001, Freiburg/​Br.: Herder  2006. Kilian, Ulrich:  Der Brockhaus Naturwissenschaft und Technik, Mannheim: Brockhaus und Spektrum Akademie Verlag 2003. Klauser, Theodor/​ Schöllgen, Georg (ed.): Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum. Sachwörterbuch zur Auseinandersetzung des Christentums mit der Antiken Welt, Stuttgart: Hiersemann 1950.

236

Reference Books and Encyclopaedias

Mittelstraß, Jürgen (ed.):  Enzyklopädie Philosophie und Wissenschafts-​ theorie, Stuttgart: Metzler 22005. Müller, Gerhard/​Krause, Gerhard (ed.): Theologische Realenzyklopädie (TRE), Berlin: de Gruyter 31977. Roscher, Wilhelm Heinrich: Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie, Hildesheim: Olms 1965. Wissowa, Georg/​ Ziegler, Konrat (ed.):  Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft (RE), Stuttgart: Druckenmüller 1988 [1893].