Bior 58 1 2015707

You might also like

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 10

41 ASTRONOMY - ASTROLOGY IN MESOPOTAMIA 42

am I not urging every Philistine to read Astral Sciences?


Because, so much more could have been done in a book like
this to dispel many of the popular myths still circulating about
cuneiform astronomy-astrology. There is no escaping the fact
that these two wonderful scholars have chosen still to impose
upon the textual material categories better suited to contem-
porary European celestial endeavours, and in so doing, I
argue, ensure that the lay reader will in some cases be pro-
foundly misled. It is for this reason that the Philistine must
keep away. They have, in effect, scanned the ancient sources
for elements akin to Western science, passing over in virtual
silence the context in which these achievements were made.
ASTRONOMY - ASTROLOGY IN MESOPOTAMIA*) It is the approach which, perhaps of necessity, characterised
the early years of decipherment and the positivism of the
When Schumann reviewed Chopin’s Op.28 The Preludes on mid-twentieth century, but I cannot hide my disappointment
their first publication in 1839, he remarked: “Philistines must at the belligerent conservatism of this methodology here. No
keep away!” The same could be said of Hunger and Pin- history of Greek astronomy would nowadays shy away so
gree’s Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia. Only after some years comprehensively from issues such as “authorial intent, or
of immersion in the intricacies of cuneiform language, and anti-positivism” (do all the texts looked at really form part
of wading through the difficulties of the mathematical meth- of the same endeavour), or “commensurability” (has the best
ods employed, can some understanding of the Mesopotamian effort been made to present each text in its own context,
astral material be gained. And if these documents are to be according to local categories, and not necessarily to ours).
appreciated not only in their own terms, but in terms of their Dangers exist in generalising about any culture, and
rôle and importance when first written, prolonged exposure Mesopotamia is no exception. Where are we introduced to
to what is known of ancient Mesopotamian culture is all- the particular groups of scribes and experts who wrote these
important. None of this is remarkable for so esoteric a disci- texts — what were their intentions? Were the questions they
pline as Assyriology. It is, however, still noteworthy so far were approaching really the same as those we address in the
as Mesopotamian astronomy, in particular, is concerned, and 21st century?2)
goes to the heart of the problem lying behind Astral Sciences. In due course, I shall return to these criticisms, particularly
Descriptions of cuneiform astronomy and astrology made by in the light of the authors’ own comments in the introduc-
scholars who know little of the discipline because they have tion, and of the “handbook” nature of the HdO series. Before
been unprepared even to go to the effort of reading the bet- that, I must come clean and admit that my own
ter secondary sources, let alone the primary ones, appear in Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-Astrology (MPAA) has
every third rate “history of science” book. There are in effect recently been published, and it too deals with the cuneiform
two Mesopotamian astral sciences — the one that exists in astral material, but with wholly different methodological
the opening chapters of these general histories, and which approaches, and arrives at some starkly different conclusions.
relies on regurgitated interpretations of the excellent, but now That work derived from my Ph.D., a copy of which was sent
dated, Science Awakening 2: The Birth of Astronomy (1974) to Hermann Hunger in 1998. Professor Hunger and I remain
by B.L. van der Waerden, or even O. Neugebauer’s (1957) in cordial contact on a number of issues connected to
The Exact Sciences in Antiquity (2nd edition) - and the one cuneiform astronomy. David Pingree, I have not met. These,
guarded by Assyriologists and a very few historians of astron- then, are the personal agendas, if any, behind this review.
omy. There is much to recommend Astral Sciences in
Just as C.B.F. Walker and J. Britton’s article “Astronomy Mesopotamia, and it will undoubtedly find its place amongst
and Astrology in Mesopotamia” in Astronomy before the the better secondary sources. The presentation of the mater-
Telescope (1996) ed. C.B.F. Walker, pp. 42-67, does, so ial is in general lucid, and important new contributions of a
Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia will serve in part to bridge technical nature are made periodically. The book begins with
that gap between the popular, largely Eurocentric, and dated a dedication to earlier scholars, in particular to Otto Neuge-
comprehension of Mesopotamian astronomy-astrology, and bauer, and a useful list of the dates of kings, month names,
the one gradually emerging from within the field of Assyri- units, formulae and so forth. The introduction once again
ology, for it is aimed at non-specialists and specialists alike, cites Neugebauer, and explains that the book attempts to
but is written by two of the most expert scholars in the field “cover the astronomical material found in the tablets of both
— one whose widespread knowledge of ancient astronomy omen texts and purely astronomical texts.” Here the prob-
and astrology is well known, and the other whose control of lems start, for a fuller understanding of both the schemes in
the particular cuneiform sources is unparalleled1). Why then, the omen texts and the predictive methods used in the “purely
astronomical” cuneiform texts emerges only when the astrol-
ogy in which both are embedded is analysed. Taking the
*) Based on a review of Hermann Hunger and David Pingree’s book
schemes out of the omen series assigns to them a purpose not
“Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia”. (Handbuch der Orientalistik, 44). E.J. supported by the evidence of the texts themselves. It makes
Brill Publishers N.V., Leiden, 1999. (24 cm, XVIII, 303). ISBN 90 04
10127 6; ISSN 0169-9423. Nlg. 176,-/$104.00. them appear as if their aim were to make accurate astro-
1
) Hunger and Pingree, sometimes together, have published widely on
the divinatory material, and on the so-called non-mathematical astronomi-
cal texts. Their expertise on the technical aspects of the mathematical
2
Ephemerides and related texts has not, to my knowledge, been checked in ) On the “anti-generalisation” and “anti-piecemeal” approach see, for
print before. example, G.E.R. Lloyd Adversaries and Authorities CUP 1996, pp. 3-6.
43 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LVIII N° 1-2, januari-april 2001 44

nomical predictions. I show in MPAA that the schemes found non-specialist reading this section of their book would be
in the celestial divination series were instead astrological in misled.
purpose. I also demonstrate that even the most sophisticated The authors list the principle publications of cuneiform
of Ephemerides employ simplifications drawn from a back- celestial omens, “proto-horoscopes” and other “astrological”
ground radiation of celestial divination and ideas as to the texts dating from OB to Hellenistic times in chapter 1 (pp. 7-
construction of the universe. Privileging the latter with names 31), indicating the general contents of the known composi-
such as “purely astronomical” or “theoretical” associates the tions. As they admit in their introduction, they have not
efforts of their authors with those of contemporary attempted to deal with this material exhaustively, citing the
astronomers. Such a parallel is again misleading. I discuss enormous number of unpublished texts, and referring readers
these alternative interpretations of the cuneiform astral mate- to Koch-Westenholz’s book. They propose that a successor
rial in brief below, but for a fuller exposition the reader must “handbook” should in due course treat the material more
consult MPAA. fully, thereby anticipating that their unhappy division of
Hunger and Pingree, perhaps inadvertently, ensure that cuneiform astral concerns into the modern “astrological” and
future scholars, particularly non-Assyriologists, will consider “astronomical” categories will continue in the future. The
it legitimate to impose on the cuneiform material a unidirec- fact is, more than enough “astrological” material has already
tional advancement in “level of astronomical knowledge” been published to make it apparent that it and cuneiform pre-
(Astral Sciences p3) from the OB period to the Hellenistic, dictive astronomy should be studied together. Both formed
from “primitive astronomical schemes” to non-mathematical part of one “discipline” so far as the particular ancient scribes
predictions to “theoretical”, mathematical Ephemerides with- of Mesopotamia were concerned.
out ever addressing the issue that each of these text groups For example, the early period “astronomy” treated in
may have been quite different in purpose. That this interpre- Chapter 2 A (pp. 32-112) is almost all to be found within
tation will be employed in generalisations as to the “evolu- compositions that are explicitly called “astrological” by mod-
tion of science” is sadly very likely, and I am not convinced ern scholars (e.g. within the celestial omen series known as
that assisting this is wise. Enuma Anu Ellil), or in compositions that also contain omens
This Handbook, as with others in the Handbuch der Ori- (e.g. the series known as Mul.Apin — called “astronomical”
entalistik series, attempts to encompass a field, almost as an by its modern editors, though this merely reflects their inter-
extended, commentated bibliography might. This can be very pretations of its contents). I argue in MPAA that none of this
useful, but there exists the possibility that a book like this so-called “early” or “primitive” astronomy is “astronomi-
will serve to define the parameters of the discipline itself. cal” as we would understand the meaning of the word — the
This is a danger particularly when a consensus is not present attempt to predict celestial behaviour, to know when and
within the field, and yet two leading lights collaborate as if where a given phenomenon will next occur. Of course, one
there were. might point to the etymology of astro-nomos to argue that a
For example, Hunger and Pingree pp. 5f advocate what I mere star list constitutes “star ordering” and thus astronomy,
term in MPAA pp. 109f the “weak empiricist” model of the but a difference of textual intent is implied by modern com-
origin of omens — a sign in the sky, say, was observed to mentators who call Enuma Anu Ellil “astrological” and
precede an event on earth, and when seen again was assumed Mul.Apin “astronomical” even though each contains near-
to anticipate, but without causing, the same event on earth identical schemes of lunar behaviour. Merely because
again. They write: “while there was an empirical basis for Mul.Apin contains many such schemes and a few omens
assuming a connection between sign and following event, this hardly makes it “astronomical”. Equally, Enuma Anu Ellil is
does not imply a notion of causality”. I find it hard to believe not “astrological” only because the reverse is true. I demon-
that basic encodings that underpin the vast majority of omens, strate in MPAA that the so-called “primitive” astronomical
such as “a bright Mars bodes ill”, just as “right bodes well” schemes were instead designed to elicit prognostications on
could ever have derived from observation. Certain heavenly the basis that observed behaviour corresponding with that
bodies and phenomena were assigned values on the basis of anticipated by the scheme boded well, and the reverse boded
the perceived personalities of the associated deities, on the ill. They were astrological in purpose — designed to make
basis of metaphor (e.g. haloes “pen in”, eclipses “wipe out the repetitive behaviour of the heavenly bodies, as much as
the brightest being on earth”), or on the basis of the internal their irregular behaviour, amenable to interpretation by the
logic of creating an omen series (e.g. through paralleling, or diviners. The potential of schemes such as the lunar visibil-
finding opposites), and so forth. “Impossible protases” in ity/invisibility scheme of Enuma Anu Ellil Tablet 14 (EAE
omens — in this case celestial events that could never occur 14) and Mul.Apin (see Astral Sciences pp. 44-50), or the
— indicate that omens could be wholly invented, and as I Venus scheme of Enuma Anu Ellil Tablet 63 §II, to predict
show in MPAA Ch.3 and App.3, the vast majority of celes- heavenly behaviour should not be confused with the actual
tial omens were invented with little or no empirical input. intention of those compositions. Simply because prediction
Those that appear to describe specific, observed celestial interests us, does not mean that it interested the authors of
and/or terrestrial happenings probably reflect the record of EAE or Mul.Apin. Just such an activity did emerge in
events that corroborated the existing interpretation of the sig- Mesopotamia, only later, in the 8th and 7th centuries BC.
nificance to the earthly plane of a particular celestial config- Again, I argue this in MPAA.
uration, thereby reversing the empiricist model. Similar crit- Hunger and Pingree’s discussion of Enuma Anu Ellil
icism was published by Koch-Westenholz in her Tablet 63 will outline what is at stake here. They state (p.
Mesopotamian Astrology (1995) pp. 13-19. Hunger and Pin- 38): “the most interesting part of the Venus Tablet (= EAE
gree’s view as to the origin of omens, an issue not without 63) for the historian of mathematical astronomy is section
significance when it comes to the understanding of cuneiform II”. In this section a scheme operates in which the visibility
predictive astronomy, hardly represents a consensus, then. A intervals of Venus in the West and East are said to be 8
45 ASTRONOMY - ASTROLOGY IN MESOPOTAMIA 46

months and 5 days long, and the invisibility intervals 7 days months last 30 days, and I do not therefore consider the
and 3 months respectively. These intervals are expressed in inscription of 30 days for a lunation to be “astronomy”4).
omen protases (the “if” clauses). The total synodic period of Neither do I consider the writing down that Venus is visible
Venus according to this scheme lasts 19 months and 17 days. for approximately 8-9 months, and invisible either for some
If we moderns extrapolate from this, we can discover that by 3 months or a few days to be “astronomy”, unless we choose
treating each “month” as 30 days a period of 587 days for to include under that rubric all writing on the phenomena of
Venus’s “synodic period” (p. 39) emerges. This is not too the heavens. The Venus scheme is hardly “mathematical
far from reality, and can be compared with a Mayan scheme astronomy”, as implied by Hunger and Pingree in the quote
in which the invisibility period in the East is coincidentally cited above. Such knowledge of Venus’s behaviour was with-
90 days. This is how Hunger and Pingree proceed. However, out doubt current for centuries, if not millennia before 1000
this scheme is not “astronomical” as we would understand BC, but not until later were accurate predictions of the
the meaning of that word. Months are not all 30 days long. planet’s behaviour recorded in clay.
About half last 29 days. The actual “synodic period” implied Instead, in EAE 63 §II, and in the other parts of EAE in
by 19 months and 17 days is some 5671⁄2 days, well short of which such ideal schemes are recorded, the knowledge of
reality. If Venus actually rose on a date noted for heliacal ris- planetary periodicity was employed by celestial diviners to
ing in the scheme, the “predicted” dates for its subsequent elicit prognostications from the unexceptional and repetitive
setting and rising would not be close to those in the civil cal- behaviour of the heavenly bodies. While in EAE 63 §II the
endar on which Venus actually set and rose again. Is this just apodoses of the omens relate only to the months in which
poor astronomy? No. Venus was ideally to rise, and not to each day of the year
Let us look again at the numbers used in the scheme. They (itself a fact worth noting), other evidence gathered in my
are either round (8m + 5d, 3m), or significant (7d). In other MPAA shows that so far as Enuma Anu Ellil and related texts
parts of Enuma Anu Ellil different numbers are used for some went, planets being observed to behave according to that
of these intervals. Both 8 and 9 months are attested for the anticipated by the ideal schemes boded well, and vice versa.
lengths of the visibility periods — other round numbers. By studying the Venus scheme of EAE 63 §II in context, one
Hunger and Pingree note this on pp. 40-1, but extraordinar- is thereby able to see in it something at once removed from
ily argue that the 9 month interval represents 2651⁄2 days, astronomy as we know it, and at the same time more sophis-
extrapolating this length not from the 30-day month that ticated — an embellishing of (probably) common knowledge
suited their aims in EAE 63 §II, but from the mean length of about the broad behaviour of the heavenly bodies with round
a month, namely 291⁄2 days, thereby making the 9 month and significant numbers in order that their dates of rising and
interval appear more accurate and so more astronomical. setting be encoded for the purposes of divination (without the
They even suggest that the 9 month visibility interval repre- need to construct hundreds of omens, one for each heliacal
sents “an extreme” (p. 41) rather than a “mean” value. Such event and for each day of the year). Nowhere to be found is
is the speculation that is consequent on seeking elements akin the intention to make that behaviour predictable to the point,
to modern science in ancient sources. Also, what was the pur- say, where it need not be observed at all (a service provided
pose of comparing the EAE 63 §II scheme with a Mayan to us by modern astronomy). On the contrary, the schemes
scheme, the context of which is not explained at all? Are the meant that not only had the month of rising or setting, the
authors suggesting that such schemes represent a universal colours and concomitant meteorological effects to be noted
stage in the evolution of predictive astronomy? If this is the by the diviners, but the date of rising or setting had to be
model of astronomical advancement they are laying upon the remarked. So, despite the prognoses of the omens in EAE 63
cuneiform material, they should state as much. depending solely on the month of appearance, this, I suggest,
I propose that these schemes in Enuma Anu Ellil represent explains why a day to day record of Venus observations was
idealisations of Venus’s periodic behaviour. Firstly, arguing made during king AmmiÒaduqa’s reign. The dates of rising
on p39 of Astral Sciences that the evidence of EAE 63 §II is and setting were not directly ominous, but indirectly so once
that “the periodicity of Venus’s phenomena was already compared to those anticipated by the ideal scheme. I further
recognised by about 1000 BC” rather understates the case. I argue in MPAA that the significance of planets behaving
would suggest that such a recognition was made at least as according, or not according, to ideals outlined in the divina-
early as it was known that the morning and evening star were tory schemes provided the motivation for recording the dates
one and the same heavenly body, and that was probably of heliacal events and luni-solar phenomena in the astro-
known by the early 3rd millennium BC3). Secondly, equating nomical Diaries and related texts (see below), and that under
the prediction of phenomena with an awareness of their peri- the particular conditions imposed on the area by the rule of
odicity in the line on p. 40: “an awareness of the pre- the last Assyrian kings so systematically was this undertaken
dictability (or periodicity) of planetary phenomena”, unjus- that it made possible the discovery of periodicities in that
tifiably imposes on the material a modern conception of the database that in due course made real astronomical predic-
use of such an awareness. It would be like saying that the tion possible.
ancient scribes of Mesopotamia predicted that all months My criticisms of pp. 32-84 of Astral Sciences are similar.
would be 30 days long simply because this was the ideal, On p42 ina la minâti could be as well translated “not accord-
round number they assigned to that phenomenon. I hardly
think it could have passed unnoticed that barely half of all 4
) A lunation is a celestial phenomenon whose periodicity is immedi-
ately apparent, but whose length cannot be predicted merely on the basis
of a knowledge of such periodicity. Not until the records of other associ-
3
) An early 3M BC seal from the former Erlenmeyer collection states ated phenomena were made did it become possible to predict the lengths
in a series of five Sumerian signs “festival Inana evening/morning star”. of months. Lunar behaviour indicates how the heavens could be recognised
See Archaic Bookkeeping: Writing and Techniques of Economic Adminis- as periodic, and yet be considered unpredictable, in complete contrast to
tration in the Ancient Near East ed. H. Nissen, 1993 p17. Hunger and Pingree’s supposition quoted above.
47 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LVIII N° 1-2, januari-april 2001 48

ing to its count” as “not at the calculated time”. To follow arû — a term which I argue in MPAA refers to “mathemat-
this with “there is no indication… of how the calculation was ical elaboration”. Variant elaborations were entertained, as
made”, will surely mislead the non-Assyriologist into think- K.90 (discussed Astral Sciences pp. 49-50) shows, and “num-
ing that mathematically-based eclipse predictions were being ber play” of this sort also exemplifies HS 245 (discussed
made at this early time. The “count” may just as well have Astral Sciences pp. 53-4). Mathematical elaborations on ideal
been compared to numbers of an astrological nature. Equally, approximations do not constitute astronomy, despite superfi-
when noting on p43 that “it is clear that certain characteris- cial similarities. It is more closely related to the kind of
tics of the last visibility of the Moon, such as Venus’s enter- numerical speculation that characterises the rest of
ing into its crescent, were believed to signify that a lunar i.NAM.gis.Ìur.an.ki.a, and significantly the planet section of
eclipse would occur in the next month or several months Mul.Apin ii I 38-67 — discussed Astral Sciences pp. 73-5,
later”, it would assist the non-astronomer to add that there is in which various periods of visibility and invisibility are
no astronomical basis for such assertions. They are in effect derived through simple multiplying and dividing.
“astrological” predictions of eclipses. An example of the authors’ unjustified positivism5) is pro-
Hunger and Pingree remark on p47 that the 2:1 ratio of the vided on p62, where a comparison between a description of
longest to the shortest daylight employed in EAE 14, star paths in Mul.Apin and Enuma elis is made. Having
Mul.Apin and elsewhere is “incorrect” for Mesopotamia. argued that in Mul.Apin the star paths describe strips of the
When judged according to the demands for accuracy made sky that encircle the heavens, delimited in width by arcs of
by modern astronomy this may be true, but from a divinatory the eastern horizon, they suggest that the description in the
point of view a 2:1 ratio, and other small-number ratios, were creation epic of Marduk assigning gates along the horizon
perfectly correct — ideal in fact. For my comments on tim- through which the stars pass, and his placing of Nebiru
ing in a divinatory context see now Brown, Fermor and between Ellil and Ea, is earlier. They proceed to argue that
Walker “The Water Clock in Mesopotamia” in the recent this provides a terminus ante quem for Enuma elis’s compo-
AfO volume. Incidentally, text BM 17175+ referred to on p50 sition. Aside from the obvious criticism that Enuma elis is a
does not use minas, as implied by Hunger and Pingree. It literary text whose aims were very different from those of
might just as well refer to US (*60). Mul.Apin, I’d say that “gates” were a fair description of
Hunger and Pingree’s closing comments on the lunar vis- “arcs on the horizon”. Incidentally, the star paths are attested
ibility/invisibility schemes of EAE 14 and Mul.Apin on p50 in KUB 4 47:43f, a composition of MB date at latest. This
summarise their view: “It is clear from this review of the ele- text should have been noted by the authors. I would suggest,
ments of astronomy found in Enuma Anu Enlil that by the then, that the star paths, very much as used in Mul.Apin, were
end of the second millennium BC…the inhabitants of probably current in late OB times (see MPAA App.1 §13).
Mesopotamia recognised the periodicity of many celestial They are but one of many elements of Mul.Apin with OB
phenomena and had devised methods to predict them…..In precursors. Hunger and Pingree maintain (p. 58) that
particular, some periodic deviations from mean time-inter- Mul.Apin “was composed in Assyria in about -1000” on the
vals were being described by linear zigzag functions, some basis of their retrocalculations of star positions. I am unable
of which were modified by the intrusion of non-linear ele- to comment on the susceptibility of their conclusions to vari-
ments”. I refer the reader to my comments above, and note ations in latitude or era, but while accepting that an Assyrian
that “inhabitants of Mesopotamia” may be a shorthand for redaction of c. 1000 BC undoubtedly existed, I believe it to
“specialist cuneiform Scholars from Mesopotamia”, but is be more likely that a complete version of the text was com-
still unfortunate. It implies a sharing of knowledge with the posed first in the south, precisely because Mul.Apin drew so
populace that is unwarranted. More importantly, anyone not heavily on Babylonian sources. See also MPAA pp. 115-20
familiar with actual lunar behaviour would believe that the and p259, and BM 77054 edited in A. George’s review of
“zigzag functions” and “non-linear elements” of EAE 14 in Hunger & Pingree’s edition of Mul.Apin in ZA 81 (1991) pp.
some way rendered lunar behaviour “predictable”. They did 301-6 — a reference missing from Astral Science’s excellent
not. The lunar scheme referred to was based on a few, basic, bibliography. Again, the authors comment on p63 that “the
ideal assumptions — namely, that the month lasted 30 days, person who composed (in this case section 3 of Astrolabe B)
the year 12 such months, that lunar opposition occurred on totally misunderstood the nature of his source (already in —
the 15th of each month, and the longest to the shortest days 1000!) and unfortunately misled several scholars of this cen-
were in a ratio of 2:1. The remainder of the scheme is little tury”. Such positivism is, of course, unwarranted. This sec-
more than a mathematical elaboration. Mostly, linear inter- tion of Astrolabe B may be “meaningless as an astronomical
polation was used to generate numbers for the other days of document” precisely because that was the intention of its
the month, but in one case a geometric gloss was added. Nei- author all along.
ther the linear nor the geometric embellishment generated When discussing Mul.Apin’s various intercalation schemes
values for the length of lunar visibility or invisibility that on pp. 75-9, the authors repeatedly emphasise the accuracy
were particularly close to reality, based as they were on ide- or otherwise of the results of these methods for providing the
alisations and a false assumption about lunar behaviour, and “scribes” with the necessary criteria to determine when to
not on observations beyond those needed to formulate the
most basic comprehension of lunar behaviour — namely that
the Moon waxes for the first half of the month and wanes for 5
) Note J. Black’s comments in Reading Sumerian Poetry (1998) pp. 6-
the second. The schemes were perfect, however, for produc- 7 in “Near Eastern scholarship — the positivist approach ….treats ‘literary
ing ideal values for these intervals, which could then be com- texts’ exactly as any other form of ‘historical text’, discarding …any attempt
pared with observations and interpreted accordingly — num- to account for precisely those distinctive qualities that make literature ‘lit-
bers that were useful to diviners. In i.NAM.gis.Ìur.an.ki.a erary’…The result has been that literary works have been trawled for evi-
dence of social conditions or historical facts, as sources for the history of
(pp. 83-4) a scheme of this kind is indeed referred to as an thought or religion.”
49 ASTRONOMY - ASTROLOGY IN MESOPOTAMIA 50

add in an additional month, and so keep the lunar and solar Manual9) answers this, for it describes just such a scheme
calendars more or less synchronised. It has become a com- and explains that it provides the Namburbu, or the means by
monplace in studies of cuneiform astral science to argue that which to avert prognosticated evil. By intercalating, an event
the regulation of the calendar provided one of, if not the, anticipated or observed to occur in one month can be made
prime motivation for the creation of mathematical astron- to occur in another, often with a different prognosis. This
omy6). Hunger and Pingree argue that the intercalation accounts for why in the 7th century BC Report10) Asaredu
schemes in Mul.Apin served just this purpose. I disagree. The writes: “the lord of the kings will say: the month is not (yet)
calendar was regulated at least as far back as the third mil- finished, why do you write to me good or bad (boding
lennium BC, as the existence of month names connected with omens),” the implication of which is that not until the month
seasonal activities indicate. The basic rule of thumb, that one end were omens sent to the king, and that they could vary
additional month every three years or so would keep the sea- from good to bad. I suggest that this was precisely because
sons and the lunar calendar together, was without doubt of the possibilities afforded by intercalation for changing the
known long before the composition of Mul.Apin. Similarly, prognostication. More on this in MPAA pp. 121-2.
the broad correspondence of the astrolabes with reality shows Hunger and Pingree have misunderstood the texts they dis-
that months were associated early with the rising of particu- cuss on pp. 32-84. They are not “early astronomical”, for in
lar stars. (The small difference between the solar and side- all cases I assert that these documents were instead numeri-
real year was not of relevance). Not until the very latest peri- cal elaborations (as the authors accept, incidentally, for HS
ods was the civil calendar regulated in a systematic fashion. 245, the shadow table section of Mul.Apin, and describe
Kings determined when intercalary months should occur, and without comment for AO 6478 on pp. 54, 80 and 85-6,
with some notable exceptions they kept more or less to the respectively), drawing on traditional and basic information
rule of thumb. A mere count of the number of intercalary about the broad behaviour of the heavens. This information
months inserted over the past few years, perhaps combined was expressed in terms of categories of constellations, direc-
with the observation that some bright star was rising in the tions, orientations, heliacal phenomena, and included a recog-
wrong month, would have been more than adequate to regu- nition of the planets, and an awareness that their phenomena
late the calendar. were periodic without necessarily being predictable.
In the astrolabes, for example, the (probably common- Assigned to certain of these recurring phenomena were
place) data on star and month associations served to embell- round-number or “ideal” values, such as 30 days to a month,
ish a scheme of very little calendrical significance, but of div- 360 to a year, 9 months to Venus’s visibility period, 1 inter-
inatory import. The various versions of this scheme provided calation to every 3 years, and so forth. The source of the
the diviners with information on the month in which a round numbers that lie behind the ideal schemes is to be
star/constellation should ideally rise. If it did rise then, this found in indigenous ideas as to nature of the universe, a field
boded well, and so forth7). The astrolabes formed part of the explored in MPAA Ch.5. The usefulness of the ideal schemes
divinatory tradition. Their close relationship to Enuma Anu to the diviners is clear, for it permitted them to encode the
Ellil is well known. Some modern descriptions of them, how- repeating behaviour of the heavens with meaning, and assign
ever, would make one feel that these documents were prac- value to the temporal component of an event, just as certain
tical aids to calendar regulation8). I am sure that it would be of the planets, constellations, directions, orientations and
pretty clear to farmers and overseers when the lunar year was events were encoded as either benefic or malefic. Just as the
in need of an additional month, without their needing to con- preserved celestial omens represent the textual elaborations
sult the authors of the astrolabes. I should imagine that the of these encodings, so the ideal schemes are the numerical
aspiration of modern academics to be consulted by govern- elaborations on the associated round numbers, and were
ment underlies such views. The intention of these texts has encoded with the idea that behaviour according to the ideal
again been confused with their potential, as we moderns bodes well, otherwise it bodes ill. It is little wonder, then, that
might see it. The same applies to the intercalation schemes the ideal schemes are to be found embedded within the omen
of Mul.Apin. Whether based on stars or on the movement of corpus. Isolating them, as have Hunger and Pingree, makes
the Moon, they are again elaborations, sometimes numerical, them appear astronomical when they are not. There is no evi-
drawn from commonplace star lore and the simple rule of dence that the ideal schemes were used to make accurate
thumb stated above for the purposes of divination. They are astronomical predictions, and plenty of evidence that they
not attempts at regulating the calendar. All this is explained were used for the purposes of divination. When astronomi-
more fully in MPAA, pp. 115-6, 118-20. The reader may be cal prediction is first attested in texts dating to the 8th and 7th
curious, though, as to how a scheme designed to elicit evi- centuries BC it is both in its infancy, and different from what
dence that intercalation was necessary could have been of use could have been achieved using the ideal schemes. To the
to a diviner. The text known as The Babylonian Diviner’s best of our knowledge, it therefore represents an innovation
of that period, as I assert in MPAA.
From pp. 84f the authors discuss the ziqpu lists and so-
6
) E.g. Chadwick BSMS 24 (1992) p15: “… most Assyriologists and called Gu Text, which is related. Both probably played an
historians of science….maintain that the real impetus for the development astronomical rôle in the late NA period and thereafter. Small
of astronomy came from the need to develop a reliable and workable cal- but important improvements in the understanding of these
endar”. compositions have been made, for which the authors are to
7
) Exemplified by the omens quoted in Reiner & Pingree Enuma Anu
Enlil, Tablets 50-51, BPO2 (1981) pp. 56-61. be thanked. The analysis of W 22281a as a precursor to the
8
) E.g. W. Horowitz Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography (1998) p164:
“it was essential that farmers had access to an accurate means of deter-
9
mining dates for farming tasks….it is probable that the earliest astrolabes ) A.L. Oppenheim JNES 33 (1974) pp. 197-220.
10
were intended, in part at least, to help farmers determine the optimum dates ) H. Hunger Astrological Reports to Assyrian Kings = (1992) ARAK
for farming activities.” No. 338:4
51 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LVIII N° 1-2, januari-april 2001 52

Gu Text on p99 is very interesting. The authors also bring care to make possible the use of these periods for astronom-
into relief for the first time the complex links between the Gu ical prediction, and most importantly predictions were indeed
Text, the Antagubba/Antasurra texts and the astrolabes — being made, albeit quite elementary ones. This in itself serves
(pp. 55, 99-100), and successfully demolish Koch’s interpre- only to show that astronomy, as we define it, was is in its
tation of the obscure dalbanna texts (pp. 100-111). infancy in the 7th century BC, making the “astronomical”
On pp. 116-38 Hunger and Pingree discuss the observa- aspect of the ideal schemes of the earlier divinatory tradition
tions recorded, largely in the form of omens, in the Reports even less likely.
and Letters sent to the Assyrian kings mostly in the 7th cen- On pp. 139-59 the authors describe the so-called “Astro-
tury BC. They quote extensively, but summarise briefly on nomical Diaries”, or “Diaries” for short. They argue that
p138 stating: “what they recorded, however, being undata- these documents were “intended, as far as the celestial obser-
ble and imprecise with respect to time and longitude, was vations are concerned, for astronomical purposes”, and were
useless for the purposes of constructing mathematical mod- not “intimately connected with the Mesopotamian practice
els.” They seem to ignore the important fact that what celes- of reading celestial omens” (p. 139). Indeed they argue (p.
tial information is preserved in this correspondence is mostly 144) that “almost all the phenomena regarded as ominous in
in the form of protases. So as not to have to generate omens Enuma Anu Enlil (exceptional are haloes…) and constantly
for every day of the year, every US of the heavens, every observed, recorded, and interpreted for the court at Nineveh
colour tone, and so forth, the ominous categories were delib- were assiduously ignored” in the Diaries. Again the authors
erately broad. The Reports and Letters were never intended seek a division between an astronomical intention and an
to provide the database from which astronomical parameters astrological one, attempting to find what is a modern
could be derived for the purposes of prediction. Why should dichotomy in the ancient material. The describe on pp. 139-
the authors be surprised then not to find many examples of 40 some differences between the data recorded in the royal
accurate recording? This is not a reason, however, to suggest correspondence and those in the Diaries. There will, of
that the authors of the Reports and Letters were not them- course, be differences between texts composed in Babylonia
selves interested in accurate astronomical prediction or were probably for the use by temple personnel, and those com-
not capable of undertaking it. Despite the intention of this posed largely in the north, in Letter or Report format and
correspondence being primarily divinatory, enough clues intended for the eyes of the king. This can hardly be used to
remain in these documents to suggest that in Assyria, just as suggest, as do Hunger and Pingree, that the Diaries were not
in Babylonia, accurate recording and early astronomical pre- primarily composed for the purposes of assisting celestial
dictions were being made in the 7th century BC. Full details diviners in their work, and that they somehow do not form
can be found in MPAA pp. 189-206, but some highlights part of the same astronomical-astrological tradition as Enuma
include: Anu Ellil.
“[Last year], it (Jupiter) became visible on the 22nd of On pp. 97-103 of MPAA I demonstrate in detail that the
month II in [Perseus], it disappeared in month I of the [pre- Diaries were in fact fundamentally influenced by the divina-
sent] year on the 29th” (Parpola, Letters from Assyrian and tory tradition (and indeed to some extent vice versa), with-
Babylonian Scholars (1993) = LABS no. 362:3’f, see also no. out suggesting that the Diaries merely provided the raw celes-
100:5). tial data from which the diviners drew prognostications. They
“Mars which stands inside Scorpius is about to move out; also came to serve a new purpose, namely the eliciting of
(not) until the 25th of (month IV?) will it move out of Scor- periods between recurring phenomena, which in due course
pius” (Hunger ARAK no. 387:3). made astronomical prediction possible. I indicate, however,
“Mars was sighted in month V; now it has approached that there is no evidence that from the beginning the Diaries
within 21⁄2 spans (u†u/ru†u) of Libra” (LABS no. 172:4’). were intended to produce these parameters. Rather, the pro-
The first shows that the precise dates of earlier heliacal duction of a continuous record was all important, and it was
events were recorded by the authors, no doubt so that they the desire to fill in the gaps in the data-record caused by bad
could interpret the visibility and invisibility periods accord- weather, or missed sightings, that led to the discovery of peri-
ingly. The last two examples show that the constellation odicities. This in turn led to astronomical prediction, but I see
boundaries were well defined, and that the rough rate at the latter not as a primary aim (as if all ancient peoples had
which Mars, and no doubt the other planets, move after a sta- the same desire as us), but as a by-product of the exercise of
tionary point was known. The distances between the planets keeping a continuous record of significant phenomena. Per-
and the constellations were carefully measured in fingers and haps, in due course, some phenomena not subject to regular
spans, and perhaps also in US since this unit is used to mea- recurrence were eliminated from this record as its usefulness
sure a celestial distance in the so-called Mercury Observa- to the diviners, for whom astronomical prediction provided
tion Texts also found in Nineveh and dating to the late NA them with a small advantage when it came to currying royal
period. These texts are mentioned by the authors on p139. favour, became apparent. Importantly, the oldest Diary
The reason I suggest that the unit used therein measured dis- attested was written at least a century after the programme
tances and not time is because of the use of the phrase “gub began, so much (but not all, see below) of this elimination
…gar-ma”, “stood to the left” when describing the interval would have already occurred before the mid-7th century BC.
in US between Mercury and the Sun. Hunger and Pingree These various points are closely argued in MPAA, and evi-
treat it as a time unit. See further my “The Cuneiform Con- dence provided accordingly. My conclusions do not emerge
ception of Celestial Space and Time” Cambridge Archaeo- from an assumption about an alleged universal interest in
logical Journal 10:1 (2000). astronomical prediction, but from the sources themselves.
Also, evidence from Nineveh indicates that a number of For example, the Diaries record luni-solar intervals known
characteristic periods for the planets were known in the 7th now as the “lunar six”. Remarkably, periodicities in certain
century BC, that the calendar was regulated with sufficient sums of these intervals recur after 223 and 229 months. The
53 ASTRONOMY - ASTROLOGY IN MESOPOTAMIA 54

periodicities could not have been discovered before an So, while the Diaries performed a different rôle to that of
extended record of the magnitudes of these intervals had been the celestial omen series, the Ninevite Letters or Reports, they
made. The question arises, then, as to why such intervals were part of the same astronomical-astrological tradition, and,
were recorded in the first place. They were not in themselves I suggest were authored by the same scholars. Indeed as much
obvious parameters to record for the purpose of eliciting was indicated by the diviner in LABS no.160:40 who stated
astronomical parameters, but neither were they directly omi- that he has read Enuma Anu Ellil and “made astral observa-
nous. However, just such intervals were those predicted by tions”, a phrase which probably refers to work rather like that
the ideal lunar visibility/invisibility schemes of compositions connected with the compilations of the Diaries. In later times
such as EAE 14, Mul.Apin, and i.NAM.gis.Ìur.an.ki.a. It was the authors of the mathematical astronomical texts dating to
these that made the “lunar six” important, and accounts for last centuries BC sometimes called themselves “scribes of
their record in the Diaries. Incidentally, the oldest Diary does Enuma Anu Ellil”, attesting to the continued intimacy, at least
not record any lunar six values, but preserves in line 6 a as far as the scribes themselves were concerned, between
phrase, used commonly in omens to describe the good-bod- celestial divination and compositions whose purpose was
ing occurrence of the Moon and Sun on opposite horizons at astronomical prediction. The relationship between the Diaries
Sunrise: “on the 14th, one god was seen with another”. In the and the mathematical astronomical material is close. Indeed
next attested diary, dating to 568 BC, in line 4 this same the author of the Diary dating to 322 BC composed the text
phrase is repeated and immediately followed by “4 NA”, ACT 816, a Procedure Text for Mercury, and a descendant of
where NA is the lunar six value corresponding to the inter- his copied Mul.Apin11).
val between Sunrise and Moonset, and 4 US is its magnitude. On p144 Hunger and Pingree note the reasons for suppos-
Thereafter, in the Diaries NA is used without the divinatory ing that the Diaries and the associated observation pro-
phrase. This shows most clearly the intimate relationship gramme began in the first year of Nabonassar, 747 BC. The
between what was recorded in the Diaries and the tradition well-known evidence they cite demonstrates only that we
of celestial divination, and also suggests how the terminol- should not expect to find such records dating to a period
ogy in the former was tightened up over time, probably as before that date. I note in MPAA pp. 201-2 and 205 that the
the success of predictability was realised, and the usefulness lunar eclipse calculated to “pass by” 60 (US) after day break,
of these discoveries to the diviners made apparent. and datable to 731 BC in LBAT 1414:Iif, if not a retrocalcu-
The same applies to the dates of heliacal setting and rising, lation, but a prediction, perhaps relied on the characteristic
the record of which provided the means by which long and period of 223 months, or 6585 days + c.1,50 US, known as
accurate periods after which the same phenomena recurred in the Saros. Indeed, I tentatively suggest that the obscure fig-
the same place could be determined. Dates of heliacal rising ures of 1,40 and 1,50 at the beginning of LBAT 1413:Ii (a
were not in general directly ominous, but dates were recorded later copy of a record dating to 747 BC) and LBAT 1414:Ii
in order that the actual invisibility or visibility intervals could respectively, may have referred to the US part of the Saros
be determined and compared with those anticipated by the period. Without myself seeking too hard for elements akin to
ideal schemes, and interpreted accordingly, as noted above. astronomy, I would say that there is fairly good evidence that
The dates of these heliacal events, just as were the dates and an observation programme leading to the discovery of the
magnitudes of the lunar six, were indirectly ominous, and this Saros period preceded 747 BC, at least by some 18 years!
accounts for why they were recorded. The authors provide on pp. 159-81 a very useful discus-
These are but two examples of how the divinatory mater- sion of the Normal Star Almanacs, the Almanacs, the Goal
ial can help explain the shape of the so-called “astronomi- Year Texts and the Planet Records in the light of the phe-
cal” material in the Diaries. It also gives the lie to Hunger nomena recorded in the Diaries, and where possible in the
and Pingree’s comment in point 6 on p140 that periodic phe- light of the dates and locations calculated for those phenom-
nomena were not ominous, because they are computable. ena in the preserved Ephemerides. Much of this material,
This is a largely western conception, that omens should be aside from the Diaries and Ephemerides, is not yet available
surprises. It is not true universally, for anticipated solar to the non-specialist. On pp. 172-3 the authors summarise:
eclipses can still bode ill in some parts of the world even “no one (of the Almanacs, Normal Star Almanacs or Goal
today, and in Mesopotamia, in particular, predicted events Year Texts) derives from another nor, because of their com-
still had to be observed for the associated, non-predictable pleteness, from our Diaries”, and reveal that records other
weather and so forth added to their overall interpretations. than the preserved Diaries must have been present in Baby-
More importantly, the regular running of the universe, and lon. Equally, they show that the Planet Records were com-
not merely its anomalies, was encoded with meaning by the piled from Diary-like records, but even when Diaries and
celestial diviners who composed in cuneiform. A day, or Planet Records from the same years are preserved, the latter
month reaching its “normal” length boded well. Events contain more or different data from those in the relevant
occurring according to the ideal construction of the universe Diaries. The Diaries, therefore, constitute but a part of the
boded well. In 1978, p634, Oppenheim also wrote that “after record of celestial observations made in Babylon and Uruk.
experience had taught (Mesopotamian man) to recognise a The reference on p162 to Hunger’s unpublished study of the
pattern in the sequence of certain events and in the pre- dates derived from Goal Year Texts and those recorded in the
dictable features of specific phenomena, he considered any Almanacs, indicates that we must continue to refine our sup-
deviations and irregularities to be endowed with meaning…”, positions about the interrelationships of the so-called non-
but was similarly incorrect as to the significance of regular mathematical texts. We await Hunger’s publication or repub-
and non-deviant behaviour in the skies. Thus a view as to lication of the Planet Records, as these bear significantly on
basis for omens significantly affects one’s view as to the basis
for astronomy in Mesopotamia, a point with which I began
this critique of Astral Sciences. 11
) A. Slotsky The Bourse of Babylon (1997) p101.
55 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LVIII N° 1-2, januari-april 2001 56

the development of predictive astronomy in Babylonia after when and where to look, for, as noted, even predicted events
the 7th century BC. had to be observed for their full interpretation to be gleaned.
On p180 the authors remark that the discrepancies between If retrocalculations, the “solutions” provided the diviner with
the times and positions recorded for various celestial events sufficiently accurate data with which to draw up a “horo-
in the Diaries (the result of a mixture of observations and cal- scope”, or equivalent. It is a modern conception that the more
culations designed to produce completeness in the record) accurate solutions will be favoured over the less accurate, that
and those in the Ephemerides “does not prove that the accuracy alone will make some solutions more “legitimate”
authors of the Diaries never used the Ephemerides, but it does than others. In the absence of any checking of the fine details
show that there was some distance between the observers and of predictions, and providing all the solutions were “good
compilers of Diaries and the men who computed the enough” according to the criteria noted above, they would
Ephemerides”. This “some distance” reflects rather a mod- all remain legitimate if they adhered to old forms, and to the
ern attitude towards the value to be assigned to mathemati- prevailing underlying conception of the nature of the universe
cal astronomy, as opposed to astronomy based directly on (see MPAA Ch.5.1.3). Such is even the case for some mod-
period relations, or perhaps even the distance between those ern astrologers, for as I was recently witness to, the latest
modern scholars who have mastered the intricacies of the refinements to the “clock error” DT had still not impinged
Ephemerides and those who have not. Since both means of on those I saw drawing up ancient horoscopes. The inaccu-
astronomical prediction coexisted in Babylon and Uruk at racy of their retrocalculations concerned them not at all. For
least until the demise of cuneiform itself, and in the light of the Babylonian astrologers, more information was better than
the scribe cited above who authored both Ephemerides (or at less, and a diviner would have used solutions from all types
least the Procedure Texts lying behind them) and Diaries, of “legitimate” texts to prove his point.
such a “distance” between some observers/compilers and The same point can be made of Hunger and Pingree’s com-
“men who computed” was not present at that time. ment on p184 that because some of the 7th century BC
It is not known to what extent computed times and loca- authors of the Reports and Letters looked for an eclipse over
tions were used for events in the past, and thus could be com- three or four consecutive months (presumably employing a
pared with the many records of observations (rather as is “solution” to eclipse prediction we would consider elemen-
done in historical astronomy), or for events in the future. Cer- tary, but which no doubt provided the diviners with better
tainly, at least from NA times eclipses and some planetary terms of employment), this meant that the “Saros” was not
events were predicted in advance, and this no doubt contin- known back then. In fact, on p205 of MPAA I argue that
ued through to Hellenistic and later times. However, the com- ARAK no. 502 and the predicted eclipses in LBAT 1414:Iif
piling of “horoscopes” meant that there were also good rea- (noted above), both provide some evidence that the Saros
sons to calculate celestial configurations in the past, even if period was known by the 8th century BC. Ignorance of evi-
the Diary-like record was complete. Unfortunately, we still dence in not evidence of ignorance.
know so little of the context in which the preserved texts were As a corollary to this, the authors suggest on p187 that 41-
written. Allusions to writing boards of “short” Diaries (Astral month and 47-month periods could have been used by the
Sciences p176), the recognition that observational records scholars employed at Nineveh, although no direct evidence
other than Diaries must have been present in Babylon and (despite what they assert on p194) for their later use exists.
Uruk, and the existence of the still poorly understood “Pro- I consider this to be an unwarranted extrapolation, based pre-
cedure Texts” show only that what has survived is but a tiny sumably on the assumption that 41-month and 47-month peri-
fraction of what was produced at the time, and probably an ods are more elementary than the 223-month Saros period,
unrepresentative fraction at that, since what was written on and therefore must belong to an earlier stage of the evolution
clay (and therefore could survive) was perhaps deliberately of astronomy in its unidirectional journey towards today!
conservative, and closest to the ancient traditions of celestial The remainder of Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia (Chap-
divination and its philosophy as to the structure of the uni- ter C: Theoretical Texts) outlines the many and various meth-
verse — in other words “legitimate”. I suggest in MPAA that ods employed by the astronomer-astrologers to predict celes-
all the surviving “solutions” to the question of the time and tial phenomena. It begins with a discussion of eclipse
location of a heavenly event were “legitimate” in this sense, prediction using the Saros cycle, then treats functions
whether they were observed, calculated from period relations expressed as columns of numbers in non-ACT, often “early”
and early observations, or calculated from a mathematical mathematical astronomical texts. These include a discussion
scheme dependent on but one earlier observation. Even the of column F, and the eclipse magnitude columns. The dis-
most sophisticated of such mathematical schemes adhered to cussions are often terse, and consequently very hard to fol-
age-old techniques and forms, rendering them “legitimate”, low without constant resort to the original publications. Inci-
despite superficial similarities to modern approaches — see dentally, the reference to Britton (1990) on p. 197 is missing
MPAA pp. 173-89. All the solutions were “good enough” if in the bibliography. See J.P. Britton “A Tale of Two Cycles:
they predicted the correct day (more or less), the location to Remarks on Column F” in Centaurus 33 (1990) pp. 57-69.
the nearest few degrees, and did not fail to anticipate eclipses. In their brief study on pp. 197-8 of the unit used to measure
The precise times and positions predicted in the Ephemerides both time and celestial distances known as the US, (often
were in large part a by-product of the techniques used, and called a “time-degree”) the authors neglect to mention that
did not reflect their actual accuracy. The extent to which pre- the unit is apparently used to record a celestial distance in
dicted longitudes could be judged against those observed was the 7th century BC Saturn Record published by C.B.F.
limited in the pre-telescopic era, and predictions to the near- Walker, and see my comments above on the use of this unit
est fractions of a tithi in planetary Ephemerides were appar- to measure a distance in the 7th century BC Mercury Records
ently rounded to the nearest day. If predicting future events, from Nineveh. The use of US to measure celestial distances
these “solutions” provided the diviner with sufficient data on prior to its use in this manner in the zodiac is of some impor-
57 ASTRONOMY - ASTROLOGY IN MESOPOTAMIA 58

tance in the history and evolution of units. See further my was predicted by System A for Jupiter and Systems A and B
article in the Cambridge Archaeological Journal, cited above. for Mars with what actually occurred, and then compares this
On pp. 203-5 the authors discuss the oldest evidence pre- with what would be predicted using a scheme dependant on
served that pertains to the characteristic periods after which data derived from the record of the times of heliacal rising
the planets repeat their heliacal phenomena (and/or longi- and disappearances. He finds a better fit with the extant
tudes), exemplified by the Goal Year Periods in the so-called Ephemerides than with Swerdlow’s reconstruction. Swerd-
Goals Year Texts. They neglect to mention the text DT 72 low attempts to remedy this discrepancy in a new paper enti-
(BM 92684) + DT 78 (BM 92685) + 81-6-25,136 (BM tled “Acronychal Risings in Babylonian Planetary Theory”
41523), a cryptic, astrological-astronomical series which pre- AHES 54 (1999) pp. 49-65..
serves a colophon reading: “of Assurbanipal, king of Indeed, throughout Chapter C, Hunger and Pingree make
[Assyria]”, and in lines 56’-66’ the names of the planets fol- no comments on the accuracy or otherwise of the various
lowed by (in broken context) the lengths of their character- schemes employed in the Ephemerides. Aside from a rich and
istic periods. I see no reason not to date the composition of detailed description of their contents, they barely comment
this document to the 7th century BC, meaning that it preserves on the underlying structure of these remarkable compositions,
the oldest evidence yet known for a knowledge of such peri- which plays an important part in their accuracy. They do note
ods. See MPAA pp. 193-5. briefly (e.g. pp. 229 and 268) that ease of computation played
From pp. 212-270, the authors describe, sometimes in great a part in determining which numbers made up certain criti-
deal, the Ephemerides. The bibliographical section (pp. 212- cal parameters, but they fail to mention how in the case of
220) is particularly useful, and the authors are to be congrat- column F of System B of the lunar Ephemerides ascending
ulated for the comprehensiveness of their description of the numbers end in 0;0,10, while descending numbers end in
mathematical methods employed in these compositions, and 0;0,0. The values are thereby distinguishable at a glance. In
especially for placing all the recent publications in the con- a similar way, values for full moons are easily distinguished
text of O. Neugebauer’s Astronomical Cuneiform Texts from those for new moons in these documents. These char-
(1955). They correctly observe on p265 that “a fundamental acteristics depend on the initial value chosen, and show that
problem for the mathematical planetary astronomy of the not only observation, but ease of use determined which value
Babylonians is that of the method(s) by which they derived was taken. Finally, the authors do not discuss the very impor-
the rules and the parameters of their Systems from the obser- tant way in which forms and units employed in celestial div-
vational data available to them”, but devote only 5 pages to ination are preserved in the Ephemerides. I discuss this at
this field. For some reason they choose not to outline Neuge- length in MPAA Ch.4.1.2 and Ch.5.1.1, pointing to how the
bauer’s convincing description in 1968 of the source of the 360-day ideal year is preserved in the 360 US of the ecliptic
parameters for System B of the Planetary Ephemerides, through which the Sun moves every year, and how the ideal
despite referring to it twice on pp. 236 and 269. Instead they 30-day month persists in the 30 tithis in a day in the plane-
devote several of these pages to a critique of Swerdlow’s The tary Ephemerides. The 3:2 ratio of day lengths survives, as
Babylonian Theory of the Planets (1998). Part of the criti- does the linear interpolation of intermediate values (albeit in
cism centres around Hunger and Pingree’s view that the a more refined way). Even the traditional 12 fingers assigned
Diaries were not connected with omens, and that the to a full eclipse remain in the Ephemerides, although by the
Ephemerides were not designed to predict ominous events, latest periods of cuneiform writing a finger corresponded to
assertions made by Swerdlow with which I concur. I have a celestial distance subtending 1/12°, giving a value for the
commented above on the connection between the data diameter of the Moon and Sun twice reality.
recorded in the Diaries, and what was considered ominous. Astral Sciences concludes with an Appendix that lists the
The lunar Ephemerides calculated eclipses, month length, and literal translations of the Akkadian and Sumerian star names
the “lunar six”, and the planetary Ephemerides predicted the against their modern equivalents, some of which have a ques-
times and longitude of heliacal rising, disappearances, sta- tion mark following. The list draws on earlier work by Pin-
tions, and acronychal rising, where appropriate. Of these, all gree and J. Koch in particular, but without references I am
were either directly or indirectly ominous. Eclipses, month unclear whether or not every modern equivalent cited with-
length, heliacal rising and disappearances were directly omi- out a following query is recognised by all scholars to be cor-
nous. The stations indicated when and where retrogression rect. The list’s usefulness is thereby somewhat diminished.
would occur, and acronychal rising occurred during the mid- Hunger and Pingree have put together a very comprehensive
dle of this ominous phase. The lunar six were indirectly omi- bibliography, although for some reason J. P. Britton’s work
nous, as were the dates of heliacal rising and disappearance. is under-represented. In addition to the two absences noted
Hunger and Pingree argue that the “precision” of the above, his 1987 paper “The Structure and Parameters of Col-
Ephemerides was irrelevant to omens, but was it irrelevant umn F” in the Aaboe Festschrift, From Ancient Omens to
to diviners? I would not say that the Ephemerides did not ful- Statistical Mechanics pp. 23-36, eds. J. L. Berggren and B.
fil functions other than the prediction of ominous phases, but R. Goldstein is missing. The author’s subject index usefully
it seems ridiculous to argue that they were not intimately includes the names of various scribes, and a table of tablet
linked to celestial divination. numbers cited ends the typescript.
Surprisingly, in their discussion of Swerdlow’s book,
Hunger and Pingree ignore the more significant criticism pub- Most of what is presented in Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia
lished by J. Britton in his review in JHA 1999, who notes that is, of course, published elsewhere, but many new contribu-
“the System A theory for Jupiter and both theories for Mars tions are made. Highlights include on pp. 63-5 the translation
reflect quite accurate synodic arcs which are inconsistent with of the unpublished text MLC 1866. This is useful, and I await
(those derived by Swerdlow) from even crude measurements the publication of the images. Also, their analysis of the num-
of synodic times.” In other words, Britton compares what bers of minas in AO 6478 as in large part multiples of 5/6 is
59 BIBLIOTHECA ORIENTALIS LVIII N° 1-2, januari-april 2001 60

most interesting (demonstrating as it does the continued


importance of numerical play in the purportedly practical
ziqpu tradition), as is their discussion of the dalbanna texts.
The discussion of the interrelationships of the non-mathe-
matical texts is most important. References to and extracts
from forthcoming publications by Hunger of the records of
planetary phenomena are mouth-watering. I agree with the
authors’ restorations of the reverse of BM 37266 on p206.
The authors suggest on p43 that surinnu refers to the lunar
crescent on the next to last day of the month.
The authors have a particular agenda with regard to the
stages of evolution of predictive astronomy, but fail to state
this. They seek elements of astronomy in divinatory mater-
ial, and in so doing misunderstand it. They judge texts dif-
ferent in purpose by the same astronomical criteria, for exam-
ple, the Letters and Reports, as if they were intended to
record phenomena as accurately as were the Diaries, say.
They resort to an ad hoc explanation with regard to the 41
and 47-month eclipse periods. They even appear to argue (p.
184) that predictions were interposed into the record of obser-
vations at a much later date — a date which merely corre-
sponds with their view as to the predictive capabilities of the
scribes. They appear uninterested in the underlying forms of
the Ephemerides which show their close relationship to the
divinatory traditions, imposing instead on this material the
modern opposition between astrology and astronomy. Despite
all this, the presentation of the material in each section is
comprehensive and lucid, and I personally will use Astral Sci-
ences in Mesopotamia as a first reference tool. Like Schu-
mann and Chopin’s Preludes, I feel that I can appreciate this
book, but unlike Schumann I am not concerned that the
Philistine will not recognise its value, but feel rather that it
is likely to be misused by the lay reader.

Wolfson College David BROWN


Oxford, March 2000

You might also like