ravenest said:
Not astrology as most see it here. I am looking at a different application where a 12 neat balanced system may not apply.
I do see the problem here. The Sumerians, influenced the Babylonians who seem to have developed the 12 sign Zodiac. The Babylonians in turn contributed to mainstream Greek Astrological thought both through normal trade and through Alexander's conquest.
From Alexander onwards we have something of an Astrological Imperialism. Greeks influence Romans, Romans influence Europeans and Arabs. Europeans take this culture with them through colonisation to much of Africa, the Americas and Australasia.
OK that is much over simplified but it does account for the prevalence of the 12 Sign approach. As I pointed out above the 360 degree circle, itself a Babylonian development has determined the co-ordinate approach for both Astrology and later on, Astronomy.
In the exported Western culture the Astrology that is most practiced and followed is the horoscopic one and that is therefore naturally reflected in the posts here.
The very sad thing, which you are absolutely right to draw attention to, is that other traditions have been lost or overwhelmed or simply ignored. Even traditions within Europe that are not of Romano-Greek origins have been pushed out. Celtic Astrology is largely lost and only a New Age imitation now exists.
The trouble is now that unless there are experts in other traditions who visit such sites as this, the imbalance is likely to remain. So I hope that as you look at developing new systems you will share the ideas with us.
One last point. back on the topic. We are assuming that the zodiac had 12 clear constellations which determined it's number of signs. It's also possible to argue that the number system used by the Babylonians - based on 60, was itself derived from pre-Sumerian systems of counting based on 12 and 5.
That is the Babylonians took 12 signs because it fitted their numeral preconceptions, rather than because of 12 clear constellations. They then named the signs conveniently after constellations. The base of 12 in turn is likely to be based on the number of lunations in a year.
OK I know it's not precisely 12 lunations, but then the first stabs at measuring a 'year' could well have been on the basis of counting lunations and later generations refined it to our current state of knowledge.
If the above conjecture is correct then we might have had a 10 sign Zodiac if the Babylonians had used a decimal system or an 8 sign Zodiac if the Babylonians had used the octal system (indeed I have seen references to an 8 sign zodiac!)
