The Third Heaven: Biblical Arguments for Astrology,
as Presented by King Vakht’ang VI and
by the
Anonymous Author of Saet’lo Xiromant’ia (Q-867)
Timothy P. Grove, Biola University
Published
in A Collection of Scientific
Papers Dedicated to the
70th Anniversary of the Academician Roin Metreveli
(Tbilisi: Artanuji Publishers,
2010).
Personal
Information:
Timothy P. Grove, Biola University, La Mirada, California,
U.S.A. timothy.grove@biola.edu
Mr. Grove is an Assistant
Professor, and has taught English at Biola’s English Language Studies Program
and Talbot School of Theology since 1997. He has also taught English in Myanmar and has conducted
graduate research in the Republic of Georgia. He is currently pursuing a Ph.D in Intercultural Studies
under Dr. Douglas Hayward. His
research interests include Neo-Latin literature, the Western astrological
tradition, and the history, literature, culture, and folklore of Georgia and
the Caucasus (17th-18th centuries).
Title:
The Third Heaven: Biblical Arguments for Astrology, as
Presented by King Vakht’ang VI and by the Anonymous Author of Saet’lo Xiromant’ia (Q-867)
Abstract:
An examination of the
prefaces to two Georgian astrological texts, Saet’lo Xiromant’ia (circa
1670) and Vakht’ang VI’s Kmnulebis Codnis
C’igni (1721) reveals both similarities and differences in their use of the
Scriptures to validate the study of astrology. A comparison of these texts to various contemporary Western
defenses of astrology demonstrates some interesting parallels, suggesting that
these Georgian texts fit within a larger rhetorical tradition.
The
opening section of Saet’lo Xiromant’ia
cites six different biblical passages in support of chiromancy and various
astrological and cosmological ideas; one of these (II Corinthians 12:2, “such a man was caught up to
the third heaven”) is cited in a similar context in the Cursus Philosophicus of the Jesuit Rodrigo de Arriaga (1632), an
author whom the writer of Saet’lo
Xiromant’ia mentions twice by name and whose discussion of the nature of
the heavens he briefly summarizes.
This is just one of numerous indications that Saet’lo Xiromant’ia was compiled using a variety of Western
European sources, perhaps with the collaboration of Italian missionaries.
Kmnulebis Codnis C’igni is a
translation of the Risala fi’l-Hay’a
of ‘Ali Qushji of Samarqand (1393/94-1474), and provides a detailed description
of the Ptolemaic system used in erecting horoscopes. The present paper includes an English translation of
Vakht’ang VI’s preface to this work, including three biblical references which
the king uses to develop an argument for the study of astrology.
Both
of these works begin with an appeal to scriptural authority, and both writers
are clearly seeking an accommodation between Christian doctrine and the
practice of astrology.
These texts were
products of a period of national revitalization which involved the
incorporation into the Georgian Weltanschauung
of an array of cultural influences from both East and West.
The Third Heaven:
Biblical Arguments for Astrology, as Presented by King Vakht’ang VI and by the
Anonymous Author of Saet’lo Xiromant’ia (Q-867)
Timothy P. Grove, Biola University, La Mirada, California,
U.S.A.
Introduction
This paper
examines how two Georgian astrological texts from the early modern period seek
to resolve the tension between Christianity and the practice of astrology.
The first of these
is the anonymous manuscript known as Saet’lo
Xiromant’ia (Q867, also known as the “Star Book”), which appears to have
been written around 1670; the other work considered here is Kmnulebis Codnis C’igni, printed by king
Vakht’ang VI in 1721.
These two texts
differ markedly in their contents and in their concerns, yet both fall squarely
within the same rhetorical tradition. Each of these works begins with a highly
interesting preface which makes use of scriptural passages to establish the
validity of astrological ideas.
Astrology and the Church
Throughout the
history of the church, astrology has been highly controversial—sometimes
condemned as a form of sorcery, idolatry, or fatalism; sometimes condoned as a
legitimate science and an essential part of God’s natural revelation to
mankind. While the Scriptures
themselves nowhere explicitly forbid the practice of astrology, the Church
Fathers were nearly unanimous in their condemnation of it. The Didache
(which may well be the earliest extant Christian text apart from the New
Testament) forbids astrology in clear and explicit terms: “My child, do not be
a diviner, for that leads to idolatry. Do not be an enchanter or an astrologer
[mathematikos] or a magician.
Moreover, have no wish to observe or heed such practices, for all this breeds
idolatry” (3:4).[1]
The
Synod of Laodicea (circa 365) decreed
that “They who are of the priesthood, or of the clergy, shall not be magicians,
enchanters, mathematici or astrologi, nor shall they make what are called amulets, which are
chains for their own souls. And those who wear such, we command to be cast out
of the Church.” (Canon 36).[2] The use here of two different terms for
astrologers is highly interesting; possibly the term mathematici was used to designate learned professional astrologers,
while the astrologi were common
fortune tellers.[3]
As a consequence
of this, astrology was driven underground, and its practitioners were
frequently prosecuted as sorcerers.
In Western Europe, technical knowledge of astrology practically
disappeared; in the Byzantine Empire, however, Hellenistic astrology managed to
survive and was eventually transmitted to the Arabs. Astrology flourished among the Arabs, who not only
translated and preserved several important Hellenistic treatises on the
subject, but also produced many original astrological works of their own.
Ironically, it was
the Scriptures themselves (especially the account of the Magi in Matthew 2—a
passage which contains several technical astrological expressions and has been
construed by some as a validation of astrology) that kept the idea of astrology
alive in the West, as demonstrated by Tertullian’s comments on that passage: Sed magi et astrologi ab Oriente
venerunt. Scimus magiae et
astrologiae inter se societatem.
Primi igitur stellarum interpretes natum Christum annuntiaverunt, primi
munaverunt. . . . At enim scientia ista usque ad Evangelium fuit concessa, ut,
Christo edito, nemo exinde nativitatem alicujus de caelo interpretaretur (De idolatria 9.1).[4]
[“But the magi and the astrologers came from the East, and we know that magic
and astrology were closely associated.
Now it was these interpreters of the stars who were the first to
proclaim the new-born Christ, and the first to bring Him gifts. . . . But this
science was permitted up to the time of the Gospel, so that once Christ was
proclaimed, no one should thenceforth subject anyone’s birth to astrological
analysis.”] As Jim Tester
observes, “there is here no suggestion that astrology is mistaken, that it does
not work, that it is empty superstition: only that it is no longer allowed. . .
. The idea, at least, of a potentially valid science of astrology was kept
alive by the very authorities who condemned it.”[5]
The 12th
century was the age of the Arabists—a small group of translators who used
Arabic sources to produce Latin versions of many works from classical antiquity. In its way, this was an intellectual
revolution of equal significance to the Renaissance of classical learning which
occurred a couple of centuries later.
The translations of the Arabists included a number of astrological
works, culminating in Gerard of Cremona’s translation of the Almagest (1176).[6] These translations led to a revival of
astrology in the West. During the Renaissance, astrology was regarded as a
legitimate and creditable field of study. Major universities had chairs of
astrology, and no necessary conflict was perceived to exist between astrology
and Christian faith. Indeed, the period from 1450 to 1650 may be characterized
as the Golden Age of Astrology.
This was the age of the great astrologers, including Cardanus, Gauricus,
Naibod, Junctinus, Argolus, Montulmo, and Nostradamus, to name just a few. The
reformer Philipp Melancthon (1497-1550) occupied the chair of astrology at the
University of Wittenburg. Joachim
Camerarius (1500-1574), also an famous astrologer, was a professor at Tubingen
and later at Leipzig. The
annotations of Joseph Justus Scaliger (1540-1609) to his edition of the Astronomica of Manilius (1579) are
justly regarded as one of the greatest achievements in the history of classical
scholarship. The astrologer John Dee set the date and time for Queen
Elizabeth’s coronation based on astrological considerations.[7] Both Tycho Brahe and Johannes Kepler
cast and interpreted horoscopes for kings and statesmen. The autobiography of
Diego de Torres Villarroel (1743), who taught astrology for many years at the
University of Salamanca, demonstrates that astrology was still held in high
regard during the 18th century.[8]
Numerous
astrological treatises, manuals, almanacs, ephemerides, and collections of
nativities were published. These
works very often began with some sort of Defense or Apology—a collection of
scriptural, theological, and philosophical arguments seeking to justify
astrology as a Christian practice. Among the more notable defenses were those
published in works by Junctinus (Speculum
Astrologiae, 1583), Sir Christopher Heydon (A Defence of
Judiciall Astrologie, 1603), William Ramesey (Astrologia Restaurata, 1653), and Morinus (Astrologia Gallica, 1661).
Among the biblical texts most commonly cited in defense of astrology
were Genesis 1:14, Psalm 19:1, and Romans 1:18-20. Ramesey, in his Astrologia
Restaurata (1653), presents the following very interesting argument: “for
as [God] hath made the Heavens for the ordinary administration of nature, so he
can whensoever it is his good pleasure, as in the days of Joshuah [sic], Hezekiah, and at the death of our
Saviour Jesus Christ, alter their course; but since these were miracles, and
thus to do were miraculous, and that we read but of these three times he thus
did work since the Creation, it is not therefore to be ordinarily or frequently
seen, neither ought it then to be objected, since as long as God doth continue
the order of nature, it must needs follow that the effects of the Stars, by
which nature is upheld, have very much of certainty and truth, . . . and [God]
leaveth the effecting of all things to the influence of the Heavens and Stars,
which [are] . . . next under him the sole cause of all mutations and blessings
here on earth, . . . (I.10, pp. 21-22).[9]
Making use of a simple argumentum ad
absurdum, John Partridge seeks to dispose of the alleged scriptural
condemnations of astrology: “And whatever your Assertions are of its being
forbidden in Sacred Writ, they are really false, and do not any more prohibit that,
than the Command given to the Prophet Hosea to Marry a Whore, did justify
Whoredom; for what is said there against it, doth only reprove the Pretenders
abuse of it and the Peoples superstitious dependance [sic] thereon” (Opus
Reformatum, “To the Readers,” viii-ix).[10]
The Opening Chapter of Saet’lo Xiromant’ia (circa 1670)
Saet’lo Xiromant’ia (Q 867), a unique manuscript at the National
Centre of Manuscripts (Xelnac’erta
Erovnuli Cent’ri) in Tbilisi,[11]
presents a fascinating miscellany of information on a number of subjects. The manuscript comprises 126
quarto leaves, beautifully written in black and red ink, and contains numerous
hand-drawn illustrations which successfully employ shading and
characterization. The work has been described and its contents discussed
by Irakli Simonia.[12] The title Saet’lo Xiromant’ia ("horoscope
chiromancy") was assigned to the work by its cataloguers, and was
apparently suggested by the first illustration (on page 10 verso), of a human hand labeled with the principal lines used in
palmistry, along with their planetary associations; indeed, the third chapter
(10r – 13v) is a short treatise on astrological chiromancy. Since no
title appears either on the binding or at the beginning of the text, and since
most of its chapters discuss astronomical and astrological topics, Dr. Simonia
prefers to designate this manuscript as the “Star Book.”[13]
Internal evidence suggests
that this manuscript was compiled around 1670 with the collaboration of an
Italian speaker (perhaps one of the Capuchin missionaries who were dispatched
to Georgia in 1661).[14] It appears that several sources from
Western Europe were used in this compilation, most notably the Almanacco Perpetuo of Ottavio Beltrano
(first published at Naples in 1639, and itself based upon the earlier Almanacco Perpetuo di Rutilio Benincaso (1593). The text and illustrations of several
sections of Saet’lo Xiromant’ia are
drawn directly from Beltrano’s work, including the series of eclipses (31r –
35r), the Tables of Houses (48v – 54r), the horoscope for 21 June 1635
(58v – 59r), and the
Perpetual Almanac (60v – 74r). The
Perpetual Almanac section was updated twice by gluing strips of paper over the
original dates, suggesting that the book was in constant use throughout the
eighteenth century and probably into the nineteenth.
The opening chapter of Saet’lo Xiromant’ia (1r – 5r) begins with an allusion to Job 37:7
(“He seals the hand of every man”), which the author connects to the practice
of palmistry—codinaroba romelsa
ec’odebis latinurad k’iromancia (“the knowledge which is called Chiromancy
in Latin”). Here we have the first
indication that parts of this work are based on Western sources.
The
writer goes on to argue that the birth of every human being is marked by unique
planetary influences, a fact which should lead us to examine the correlation
between celestial phenomena and human affairs.
The
writer now proceeds to a very interesting discussion of the structure of the
heavens. He quotes three biblical
passages in support of the plurality of the heavens: Psalm 148:4-5 (“Praise
Him, highest heavens, and the waters that are above the heavens, let them
praise the name of the Lord”); Ephesians 4:10 (“He who ascended far above all the heavens”); and II
Corinthians 12:2 (“such a man was caught up to the third heaven”). From these testimonies, he concludes
that the heavens are indeed manifold.
The
writer next (1v) cites a certain “astrologer” (munajibi) named “Ariaga,” who he says was “of Arabian race” (romeli iq’o arabi guarita), and who is supposed to have
addressed various questions as to the number, nature, and composition of the
heavens. This person was none
other than the Jesuit Rodrigo de Arriaga Mendo (1592-1662), a professor at
Valladolid and Salamanca, and at Prague from 1625.[15] In light of this, the Georgian writer’s
comment that he was “of Arabian race” is quite puzzling. Arriaga’s Cursus Philosophicus (Antwerp, 1632) was extremely
influential. Arriaga was one of
the first philosophers to take cognizance of Galileo’s telescopic discoveries
and to examine their philosophical implications: non multis autem ab hinc annis propter quorumdam Mathematicorum &
Astronomorum diligentes observationes, quas, novis exquisitisque instrumentis
adiuti, invenerunt, & praecipue tubi optici subsidio, caelorum structura
penitus a nonnullis inverti coepit. (Disputatio
Unica Caelestis, sectio iii).[16] (“not many years ago, because of the
careful observations of a number of astrologers and astronomers which they made
with the aid of excellent new instruments, especially the telescope, some began
to completely overturn the structure of the heavens”). This statement accords very well with
the known concerns of the writer of Saet’lo
Xiromant’ia, who makes reference to Galileo’s telescopic discoveries in
chapter eight (21v).[17] Arriaga
refers to a number of recent scientific discoveries, including the four
satellites of Jupiter (iii.3.25), sunspots (iii.3.28), and the diurnal
visibility of stars from the bottom of a mineshaft (vi.68). In the 5th edition of his Cursus Philosophicus (1669), Arriaga
describes how he replicated Galileo’s experiments with falling bodies by
dropping heavy objects from the cupola of the Prague Cathedral and from the
parapets of Karlstein Castle.[18]
The
specific passage referenced by the writer of Saet’lo Xiromant’ia is the Disputatio
Unica Caelestis, found on pages 497-508 of the 1632 edition of Arriaga’s Cursus Philosophicus. Here, Arriaga
addresses a number of questions: the composition and uniformity of the heavens,
their number and their motions, whether the heavens are animate or inanimate,
whether they are corruptible or incorruptible, and whether they are solid or
fluid.[19] These correspond more or less to the
questions inventoried in Saet’lo
Xiromant’ia and attributed to “Ariaga”: whether the heavens are composed of
four elements, whether they are spiritual, whether they are perfect, whether
they are solid, whether they are self-illuminated, and whether they are
manifold.
Both
Arriaga and the writer of Saet’lo
Xiromant’ia frequently quote the Scriptures to support their ideas. One of the verses cited in Saet’lo Xiromant’ia (II Cor. 12:2) is
also cited by Arriaga in the section entitled De numero caelorum (iv.1.48), in connection with the opinion of St.
Ambrose and others that there are three heavens. Arriaga ends by rejecting this opinion, concluding that the
heavens number not three or eleven, but nine (iv.2.52). Still, it seems likely that the writer
of Saet’lo Xiromant’ia was following
Arriaga in bringing this passage to bear on the same question.
After
this reference to Arriaga comes a fascinating but difficult passage, in which
the writer seems to be stating that the celestial spheres are self-similar in
the same way as an object and its reflection in a mirror. Thus, the earth is like a mirror which
reflects the heavens, and hell lies in the depths of this same mirror. Hell is located at the center of the
earth, and comprises four concentric circles, the outermost circle being
designated as Abraham’s Bosom (abrahamis
c’iaghi, cf. Luke 16:22-23), the second as Limbo (limbo, the abode of unbaptized infants—a Roman Catholic idea which
again suggests Western influence), the third as the Mercy Seat (salxinebuli, cf. Ex. 25:17) or Purgatory
(gansac’mendeli), and the innermost circle
as Eternal Hell (sauk’uno jojoxeti). The writer proceeds to delineate the
precise diameters of each of these circles in Georgian leagues (aghaji), beginning with Eternal Hell and
measuring outward from the center of the earth. He then gives the diameter of the earth itself, according to
“the earth-measurers who in Latin are called Cosmographers” (kueq’nis mzomelni romelsa ec’odebis
latinurad k’ozmograpini).
There follows a
discussion of the spheres of the four elements. The author argues that the sphere of water lies at the root
(dziri) of the other three, citing
two passages from the Psalms in support of this idea: Psalm 103:10 (104:10)
(“[the waters] flow between the mountains”); and Psalm 135:6 (136:6) (“Him who spread out the earth
above the waters”). Again, he
gives precise measurements for the diameter of the sphere of fire (the
uppermost of the four elements). Next comes a discussion of the dimensions of
the sphere of the moon, which, again, is likened to a mirror. For this the writer suggests several
alternate values, “but we concur with Ariaga the Arab that the moon is
one-third the size of the earth.” (3v:
magram chven vimoc’mebt ariaga arabsa rom mtovare ars kueq’anis mesamedis odeni). In fact, while Arriaga does touch
briefly on this idea, which arises from the apparent size of the earth’s shadow
during a lunar eclipse (v.55), he considers it highly problematical, and leaves
the question open.
This opening chapter
concludes with a discussion of the dimensions of the spheres of Mercury, Venus,
the Sun, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn (3v-5r). There is no indication of how or by whom all these curious
measurements were derived.
It will be seen that this
preface incorporates six different quotations from the Scriptures. However, unlike the defenses of
astrology current in Western Europe, Saet’lo
Xiromant’ia shows little interest in engaging in a polemic about astrology;
rather, it cites biblical texts to support specific claims and ideas as they
arise. In this sense, the Georgian
writer’s use of the Scriptures is very similar to Arriaga’s. The writer of Saet’lo Xiromant’ia apparently saw no need to justify the
fundamental assumptions of astrology, nor did he recognize any conflict between
astrology and Christian thought. It
is in his opening remarks about chiromancy that this writer comes closest to
the approach of the Western defenders of astrology—here, a single passage from
the book of Job is used to legitimate the highly dubious practice of palmistry,
an argument which is then immediately generalized to include astrology as well.
Vakht’ang VI’s Preface to Kmnulebis
Codnis C’igni (1721)
Kmnulebis Codnis C’igni (“Book of
knowledge of creation”), a treatise on spherical geometry and geocentric
astronomy, was published by Vakh’tang VI in 1721. It was one of only 17 titles printed on the press brought
from Wallachia by Mihail Isvanovici (known in Georgia as Mikheil
St’epaneshvili). These were the first books printed in Tbilisi, and were
published between 1709 and 1723, when a Turkish invasion put an end to the
king’s publishing operation. They
included portions of the Georgian Bible, as well as the first printed edition
of Vepxis T’q’aosani (1712). Kmnulebis
Codnis C’igni must have been seen as a valuable and important book, to be
found in such select company!
Kmnulebis Codnis C’igni is a translation
of the Risala fi’l-Hay’a (“Treatise
on Geometry”) of ‘Ali Qushji of Samarqand (1393/94-1474), and includes a
preface written by Vakht’ang VI. Kmnulebis
Codnis C’igni (note how the king has Christianized the work’s title) was
translated from the Persian by the king himself with the aid of Persian
scholars, including one Mirza Abduriza Tavrizeli. Between 200 and 300 copies of
this book were printed.[20] Its
contents have been discussed by Tamar Abuladze[21] and by
Irakli Simonia.[22]
Kmnulebis Codnis C’igni is a long and
difficult text. Its complex
scientific language has been carefully analyzed by Tamar Abuladze.[23] The work begins by explaining the most
fundamental concepts of geometry (the point, the line, the plane), and proceeds
from there to explain the principles of celestial mechanics, especially the
complex cycles of the Moon and its nodes.
As far as I have been able to discover, Kmnulebis Codnis C’igni contains no material pertaining
specifically to prognostication or horoscopic interpretation.
Kmnulebis Codnis C’igni is 151 pages in
length, and is illustrated with 29 hand-drawn diagrams in red and black ink; in
several cases, one can still see the hole left by the illustrator’s
compass! I have examined two
copies of this work at the National Parliamentary Library (Sakartvelos P’arlament’is Erovnuli Biblioteka) in Tbilisi—one of
them hand-illustrated, the other with spaces left for illustrations which were
never added.
Kmnulebis
Codnis C’igni presents a geocentric model of the universe, the same as that
described by Claudius Ptolemy in the second century A.D. Was this because Vakht’ang VI was
unaware of the Copernican revolution?
Not at all—it was because calculations based on a geocentric model were
(and still are) used to cast horoscopes. Kmnulebis
Codnis C’igni presents in compact form a geocentric but phenomenologically
accurate description of the motions of the heavenly bodies, with a view to its
practical use in casting horoscopes. Thus, while its emphasis is more upon the pure
mathematics of erecting a horoscope, Kmnulebis
Codnis C’igni is still an astrological work.
I here provide a
transcription and translation of the king’s preface, which as far as I know has
never before appeared in English.[24]
It'q'vis
c'inasc'armet'q'veli davit: me tkvi gank'virvebisa chemsa rame tu q’oveli k’aci
cru ars: da tvit upali brdzanebs aravin ars saxier garna mxolo ghia: ara
tu amistvis ars brdzaneba ese vitarmed q'ia k’aci cru ars nu iq’opin:
aramed vervis malucs tvinier mis mier movlinebulta: sc’orebit cnobad sakmeta
uplisata: da arca vin ars
ch’eshmarit’ebit mcnobel amisa romel ara ip’ova ama shina sicrue: aramed
ravdenta misca sibrdzne da gulisxmis q’opa: da mat c’q’aloba igi p’at’iosani
up’at’iota zeda sakmeta ara ishromes: da raodenta dzalumles misve kmnulta
mic’domad dashures: da gamchart’nes pilosoposta mraval mecnierebani da matni
sc’avlani: da eseca varsk’ulavt rac xva erti matganive ars: da sakartvelo mravl
gzis mt’ertagan mok’rebul iq’o da arghara da shtomil iq’o kartulsa enasa zeda
sc’avla ese pilasopta: da sxvata enisa k’acni kartvelta ek’icxoden: da ac’ me
mepeman mepetaman vaxt’ang es sp’arsuli aiati romel ars kmnulebis codnis
c’igni: ziji tala masala da sxva
okmebis c’ignebi vtargmne: mirza abduriza tavrizelis c’ignis k’itxvita da tana
shec’evnita: da st’rolabic kartulad gamovighe: nu uk’ue isc’avon da c’adier
iq’vnen pilosoposobisad: da inebon da sheasrulon kartulisa enita pilaposoba da
gamoighon: da chemtvisac shendobis mokene var rametu sakmetagan sacnaurars
vitarmed mravalni ch’irni misaxvan ama c’ignta zeda: da arca tu mepobisa
msaxureba damik’lies.
“The prophet David says, ‘I said in
my alarm that every man is a liar,’[25]
and the Lord himself says, ‘Nobody is good except God alone.’[26] This is why there is a command—since
every man is a liar, do not separate.[27] But nobody except those He has chosen
can correctly recognize the deeds of the Lord, and neither can anyone recognize
the truth, without finding the lie in it. But to many He gave wisdom and
understanding, and He who is honorable gave them mercy, that they might not do
dishonorable deeds, and they worked hard, and made haste to understand what He
created, and discerned the many sciences and studies of philosophers—and the
study of the stars is one of these.
Now
Georgia has been ravaged by enemies many times, so there has been no study of
philosophical learning in the Georgian language, and for this reason Georgians
have been ridiculed by those who spoke other languages.
And
now, I, Vakht’ang, King of Kings, have translated this Persian “Aiati,”[28]
which is the Book of the Knowledge of Creation, and the Zij-i Tala[29]
material, and books of other documents, using Mirza Abduriza Tavrizeli’s
analysis of the book and his collaboration. And I have also explained the (use of the) astrolabe in
Georgian.[30]
Should
not those who wish to do so read and study philosophical subjects, and freely
pursue and discourse upon philosophy in the Georgian language?
As
for me, I too am in need of forgiveness, as these endeavors make clear—for I
have faced many troubles because of these books, though I have tried my best to
be a good king.”
The
king’s preface is an austere and beautiful literary work in its own right. In marked contrast to the discursive
energy of Saet’lo Xiromant’ia,
Vakht’ang VI holds himself aloof from any discussion of disputed details,
opinions, or philosophical alternatives.
He makes no direct reference at all to the theological or philosophical
difficulties associated with astrology. Instead, the king approaches the
question deductively, confining himself to the presentation of a single elegant
argument founded upon the Scriptures. That is part of the king’s genius—he
manages to establish his position without even entering into the debate, by means
of a deductive argument which all but compels assent! His reasoning may be
summarized as follows: since “every man is a liar,” it follows that all human
sciences are a mixture of truth and error. This is true of astrology as it is of other philosophical
subjects. However, with God’s help
we may hope to distinguish truth from lies. Therefore, we are justified in studying this subject as long
as we look to God for the wisdom to make these distinctions. The king concludes with true Christian
humility, acknowledging the possibility that he himself may have strayed from
the truth in preparing this treatise.
Vakht’ang
VI clearly recognized that astrology was problematical, but was willing to
concede that there might be truth in it. Indeed, it appears that
the king had a very high regard for this “mixed” science, since it was one of
only two secular works that he published (the other being his edition of Vepxis T’q’aosani). It is interesting to
note that, of the three references to Magi (magoi)
which appear in the New Testament, the Magi (“Wise Men”) of Matthew 2 are
described very positively, while the other two (Acts 8, Acts 13) were heretics
and sorcerers. In light of this,
the king’s reasoning closely parallels that of John Gadbury: “Abusum non tollit usum, is the Lawyer’s
Rule: The abuse of a thing ought not to abrogate or impeach the lawful use
thereof” (Genethlialogia, 1658, “To
the Reader”).[31]
Several passages
in the king’s preface raise interesting questions. When he states that “there
has been no study of philosophical learning in the Georgian language, and for
this reason Georgians have been ridiculed by those who spoke other languages,”
could this be a veiled reference to the earlier Saet’lo Xiromant’ia? It is my hypothesis that Saet’lo Xiromant’ia was prepared in collaboration with Roman
Catholic missionaries, using sources in Latin and Italian. Moreover, its tables
of houses (48v-54r) were copied directly from those found in Ottavio Beltrano’s
Almanacco Perpetuo, and while they
are more or less accurate for latitudes in the Caucasus, the tables in Saet’lo Xiromant’ia are characterized by
a number of grievous mistakes which Vakht’ang VI (who himself compiled such
tables based on his own astronomical observations)[32]
would have recognized immediately if he had ever perused that work.
It is also
interesting to speculate as to the nature of the “troubles” which the king
experienced because of these books—did the Persians object to his publishing Christian books
despite his nominal conversion to Islam?
Was he referring to difficulties associated with the task of publishing
them? Or does this statement pertain specifically to the king’s work with
astronomical and astrological books?
Concluding Observations
There
is a close verbal similarity between the openings of these two works: Saet’lo Xiromant’ia begins with the
words c’mida iob bdzanebs (“Blessed
Job says”), while the preface to Kmnulebis
Codnis C’igni begins with the words it’q’vis
c’inasc’armet’q’veli davit (“The prophet David says”). Clearly, these works share in a common
rhetorical tradition in which the opening appeal to Scripture is of the
greatest importance to all that follows.
Apart
from Saet’lo Xiromant’ia’s citation
of II Corinthians 12:2, which closely parallels Arriaga’s use of the same
passage, the Scriptures cited by these Georgian writers are different from
those typically used by the Western defenders of astrology, and are used to
construct unique and highly original arguments.
The
procedure of the writer of Saet’lo
Xiromant’ia is similar to Arriaga’s, using biblical passages inductively to
validate various specific philosophical and cosmological ideas; in contrast,
Vakht’ang VI uses the Scriptures very cautiously as the basis of a deductive
argument, avoiding any discussion of specific details.
These texts were
products of a period of national revitalization which involved the
incorporation into the Georgian Weltanschauung
of an array of cultural influences from both East and West. A study of these books and
the sources they used reveals several lines of cultural transmission, a process
closely associated with the phenomenon of cultural revitalization. Vakht’ang VI alludes to the fact that
“Georgia has been ravaged by enemies,” and it is paradoxically this same
intercultural dynamic which gave rise to the “Silver Age” of Georgian culture
during the closing years of Georgia’s national independence.
Works Cited
Abuladze, Tamar. Vaxt’ang
Meekvsis Mtargmnelobiti Moghvasheoba. Tbilisi: Mecniereba,
1998.
Adnan Adıvar,
Abdülhak. “‘Ali b. Muhammad
al-Kushdji.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New Edition. Leiden: E.J.
Brill, 1960.
Arriaga, Rodrigo de. Cursus
Philosophicus. Antverpiae: Ex
Officina Plantiniana Balthasaris
Moreti, 1632. Universidad de La
Rioja. Biblioteca Digital de Derecho.
http://biblioteca.unirioja.es/digibur/obras/228826_0.html
(accessed March 14, 2009).
Bjornstad, James, and Shildes Johnson. Star Signs & Salvation in the Age of Aquarius. Minneapolis:
Dimension Books, 1971.
Dear, Peter Robert. Discipline & Experience: The
Mathematical Way in the Scientific Revolution
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995.
Gadbury, John. Genethlialogia
or, The Doctrine of Nativities, Containing the Whole Art of
Directions and Annual Revolutions. London: Printed by James Cottrell for Giles
Calvert, William Larnar, and Daniel White, 1658. Paolo Alexandre Silva. Astrologia
Medieval. http://www.astrologiamedieval.com/tabelas/John_Partridge_Opus_Reformatum.pdf
(accessed September
29, 2008).
Grant, Edward. Planets,
Stars and Orbs: The Medieval Cosmos 1200-1687. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1996.
Karloutsos, Father Alexander. “Astrology is Astrolatry.” Greek
Orthodox Archdiocese of
America, 2009. http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith7066
(accessed January 15, 2009).
Lake, Kirsopp, trans. The
Apostolic Fathers, volume 1.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press, 1977.
Migne, Jacques-Paul, ed. Patrologiae
cursus completus: omnium SS. patrum, doctorum scriptorumque
ecclesiasticorum; sive latinorum, sive graecorum. Patrologia Latina, vol. 1. Turnhout, 1844.
New Advent. “Synod of Laodicea (4th Century).” http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3806.htm (accessed
March 19, 2009).
Partridge, John. Opus
Reformatum: or, a Treatise of Astrology. London: Awnsham and John
Churchill, 1693). Paolo Alexandre Silva. Astrologia Medieval. http://www.astrologiamedieval.com/tabelas/John_Partridge_Opus_Reformatum.pdf
(accessed October
18, 2008).
Ramesey, William. Astrologia
Restaurata; or, Astrologie Restored: Being an Introduction
to the General and Chief Part of the Language of the Stars. London: Robert
White, 1653. Paolo Alexandre
Silva. Astrologia Medieval. http://www.astrologiamedieval.com/tabelas/Astrology_Restored_by_William_R msey.pdf (accessed
September 29, 2008).
Simonia, Irakli. “Little
Known Aspects of the History of Georgian Astronomy.” Journal of
Astronomical History and Heritage 4(1) (2001): 59-73.
Spruit, Leen. Species
Intelligibilis: From Perception to Knowledge. Leiden: Brill, 1995.
Tester, Jim. A History
of Western Astrology. Woodbridge, Suffolk: The Boydell Press, 1987.
Torres Villarroel, Diego de. The
Remarkable Life of Don Diego; being the Autobiography
of Diego de Torres Villarroel.
Translated by William C. Atkinson. London: The Folio Society, 1958.
Torres Villarroel, Diego de. Vida
de Diego de Torres Villarroel.
Edited by Russell P. Sebold. Madrid: Taurus Ediciones, 1985.
Toumanoff, Cyril.
“Georgia, Church in Ancient.” The New Catholic Encyclopedia,
2d ed. Detroit: Thomson Gale, 2003.
[1]Kirsopp Lake, trans., The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 1
(Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1977), 312-13.
[2]New Advent, “Synod of
Laodicea (4th Century)”, http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3806.htm
(accessed March 19, 2009).
[3]Jim Tester, A History
of Western Astrology (Woodbridge, Suffolk: The Boydell Press, 1987), 55. It is interesting to note that
this canon is now interpreted by the Eastern Orthodox Church as necessitating
the excommunication of “people who make, sell, buy or
wear the zodiac signs” (Father Alexander Karloutsos, “Astrology is Astrolatry,”
Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, 2009, ¶6, http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/ourfaith7066
(accessed January 15, 2009).
[4]Migne, Patrologia Latina I.672
[5]Tester, 126.
[6]Tester, 152.
[7]James Bjornstad and Shildes
Johnson, Star Signs & Salvation in
the Age of Aquarius (Minneapolis: Dimension Books, 1971), 87.
[8]Diego de Torres Villarroel, Vida de Diego de Torres Villarroel, ed. Russell P. Sebold
(Madrid: Taurus Ediciones, 1985).
This work is available in English as The
Remarkable Life of Don Diego; being the Autobiography of Diego de Torres Villarroel, trans.
William C. Atkinson (London: The Folio Society, 1958).
[9]William Ramesey, Astrologia Restaurata; or, Astrologie
Restored: Being an Introduction to the General and Chief Part of the Language
of the Stars (London: Robert White, 1653), 21-22. Paolo Alexandre Silva, Astrologia Medieval, http://www.astrologiamedieval.com/tabelas/Astrology_Restored_by_William_Ramsey.pdf
(accessed September 29, 2008).
[10]John Partridge, Opus Reformatum: or, a Treatise of Astrology
(London: Awnsham and John Churchill, 1693), viii-ix. Paolo Alexandre Silva,
Astrologia Medieval, http://www.astrologiamedieval.com/tabelas/John_Partridge_Opus_Reformatum.pdf
(accessed October 18, 2008).
[11]I am extremely grateful to
Dr. Buba Kudava, Director of the National Centre of Manuscripts, for allowing
me to study this manuscript, and providing me with digital reproductions of
substantial parts of it.
[12]Irakli Simonia, “Little
Known Aspects of the History of Georgian Astronomy,” Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage 4(1) (2001), 59-73.
[13]Simonia, 68-70.
[15]Leen Spruit, Species Intelligibilis: From Perception to
Knowledge (Leiden: Brill, 1995), 327-30.
[16]Rodrigo de Arriaga, Cursus Philosophicus (Antverpiae: Ex Officina Plantiniana
Balthasaris Moreti, 1632), 499.
Universidad de La Rioja.
Biblioteca Digital de Derecho. http://biblioteca.unirioja.es/digibur/obras/228826_0.html
(accessed March 14, 2009).
[17]Simonia, 69.
[18]Peter Robert Dear, Discipline & Experience: The
Mathematical Way in the Scientific Revolution (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1995), 85.
[19]Arriaga’s cosmological ideas
are discussed by Edward Grant in Planets,
Stars and Orbs: The Medieval Cosmos 1200-1687 (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1996), 349-52.
[20]Simonia, 70.
[21]Tamar Abuladze, Vaxt’ang Meekvsis Mtargmnelobiti
Moghvasheoba (Tbilisi: Mecniereba, 1998), 29-35.
[22]Simonia, 70-71.
[23]Abuladze, op. cit.
[24]I am indebted to Nino
Khonelidze for substantial parts of this translation.
[27]This is perhaps an allusion to Matthew 13:28-29:
“The slaves
said to him, `Do you want us, then, to go and gather them up?' But he said,
`No; for while you are gathering up the tares, you may uproot the wheat with
them.’”
[28]This curious
word is simply a Georgian transliteration of the Arabic hay’a(t), meaning “geometry,” as Tamar Abuladze kindly pointed out
to me. Because the bulk of the
text and illustrations of Kmnulebis
Codnis C’igni pertain to the motions and cycles of the Moon, I first
assumed that the work was a translation of ‘Ali Qushji’s Hall ashkal al-Qamar (“Explanation of Lunar Phenomena”). For ‘Ali Qushji’s works, see The Encyclopaedia of Islam, New Edition
(Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1979), I.393.
[30]One of Vakhtang VI's
astrolabes may still be seen at the Georgian History Museum, Tbilisi (Simonia,
71).
[31]John Gadbury, Genethlialogia or, The Doctrine of
Nativities, Containing the Whole Art of Directions and Annual Revolutions
(London: Printed by James Cottrell for Giles Calvert, William Larnar, and
Daniel White, 1658). Paolo Alexandre Silva. Astrologia Medieval. http://www.astrologiamedieval.com/tabelas/John_Partridge_Opus_Reformatum.pdf
(accessed September 29, 2008).
[32]Simonia, 71.
No comments:
Post a Comment