Talk:Decan/Archive 1

Archive 1

WTF

I'm sorry, but WTF is going on with this article? Someone has dropped in a tab-delimited table (which of course doesn't render correctly), containing, as far as anybody can tell, complete gibberish. Besides that, the one substantive paragraph starts by talking about groupings of stars, and proceeds to talk about days. What's the connection? Can anybody out there clear this piece o' crap up? Thank you. Rocinante9x 01:30, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, it's gibberishy. I'm moving the anonymous edit to this page (in case there is any salvagable material) while removing it from the article. There are a number of images associated with decans Egyptian (obviously), Hellenistic, Medieval, Indian and others. Some of the ones below look familiar, but I don't recall the source. I think this is an Indian version. Zeusnoos 02:09, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Edit made on June 30

Balinese 35 = 36 dekanoi Bali Hermes Trismegistos Occult Philosophy by Corn. Agrippa Vr.hat Jataka by Varaha-mihira Kemetian dekanoi

1. # #

1 "the carrying away of dead bodies" 13 vulture & jackal [as corpse-devourers]; lamentation for the dead 25 jackal 4 sun 23 sun 7 horse 14 horse 10 "shifting of one's faults" 17 account of receipts & disbursements 21 ape 14 ape 14 wild hound 6 hound 23 hounds biting 21 hog 34 swine 28 hog 29 2 women woman musician 25 quail 31 vulture 26 headless body 28 headless man 27 gooseberry bush 32 silk-cotton trees 28 crab 22 crab 34, 35 at sea 29 rice-barn 5 grain 30 jar 32 head 20 head 31, 32 man's head 33 elephant 10 elephantine composite 34 divorced woman 18 woman 11 woman 35 overladen boat 12 ship C&CB, pp. 151-153 D&D, pp. 160, 166, 172 OPh & D&D, pp. 165, 171, 175 "I&ADZ", pp. 367-373 D&D, pp. 18-21 (depicted in D) the Hellenistic Aiguptian and older Kemetian run backwards C&CB = R. Friederich (tr. by Ernst R. Rost): The Civilization and Culture of Bali. 1887. D&D = STUDIEN DER BIBLIOTHEK WARBURG, XIX = Wilhelm Gundel: Dekane und Dekansternbilder. J.J. Augustin, Glu:ckstadt und Hamburg, 1936. OPh = https://www.tarot.org.il/Decans/ & https://www.tarot.org.il/decans.html "I&ADZ" = "On the Indian and Arabian Divisions of the Zodiack." In:- Asiatick Researches, Vol. 9. London, 1809. D = http://sethy1.free.fr/decan1a.html

37

By f.ex. Aantekeningen bij de Bijbel and LES DECANS the number of "decans" were originally 37, not 36. We may guess that this has something to do with the Egyptian year being 365 days (exact!), not 360, and that the Egyptian decans being originally used for time measurements, not astrological divinations nor other fuzzy person analyses. ... said: Rursus (^mbork³) 12:06, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Actual star list?

It would be great to have a list or table of the actual stars in question (linked to their respective wiki pages). This could provide a fascinating connection for stargazers who are also interested in ancient history and anthropology, and old ways of doing things. Hammerquill (talk) 08:15, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Wrong planets in Lilly's table of faces

Some highly confusing stuff in the "table of faces (or decanates)" attributed to Lilly. He wrote in the 17th century, and yet this table shows Pluto, Neptune, Ceres and so on as being rulers of certain decanates. This is just plain wrong.

BristolChris (talk) 16:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

'Modern astrologers almost entirely ignore them'(?)

Looking at the sparsity of references, there is some basis for this comment, but the list of references is, at the time of writing, incomplete, and it seems to condemn Vedic astrologers as non-modern, despite their use of the sidereal (astronomically up-to-date) zodiac. I may add to the list of refs, now.--83.151.230.51 (talk) 19:32, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Have now added the refs without spelling them out. What they seem to indicate is a huge gap in the astrological literature between ancient, extreme, zany and brief expositions of the decans, and Sasha Fenton's recognisably modern, less judgmental, but therefore seemingly 'out-of-nowhere' work on the subject.--83.151.230.51 (talk) 18:17, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

How can being ignored by astrologers be anything but a good thing? Wikipedia buys into pseudoscience now?137.205.183.109 (talk) 14:19, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Should move to Decan

Having a different landing for singular and plural is abnormal, and this strikes me as a key concept in history. The Decan disambiguation page leads to a town with a slightly different name and Decan (astrology) which is a very restricted topic compared to this main article. Therefore I plan to move this to Decan and move Decan to Decan (disambiguation).

I went ahead and did this recently. Wnt (talk) 06:59, 2 November 2017 (UTC)