GirolamoZorli wrote:Ooops, Huck, you are right. The universe, i.e. the deck, is 78,not 76. Sorry for the stupid typo.
1. subtracting one from the universe (78). 77 is also a 7x11.(Somehow 7 is taken as the "basic" or "divine" number or so).
2. Another factor is obtained by 4 and divine 7 = 28 less the individual one = 27. (May be he discussed 27 somewhere else. It definitively is 3x3x3.)
3. Finally, by putting together 27 and 7 you get the equal number = 189.
I am not sure of this interpretation, but I guess it is not far from the good one. To double check, I would search for the meaning of 189. 189 is a 7x3x3x3. Does it ring any bell ?
(1+2+3+4+5+6+7) - 1 = 27
... 7 planets
(1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11+12) - 1 = 77
... 12 zodiac signs
(1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11+12+13+14+15+16+17+18+19) - 1 = 189
... 19 astrological symbols
0, 2, 5, 9, 14, 20, 27, 35, 44, 54, 65, 77, 90, 104, 119, 135, 152, 170, 189, 209 ... etc.
(1-7) ... 28-1 = 1x27 = 27
(1-10) ... 55-1 = 2x27 = 54
(1-16) ... 136-1 = 5x27 = 135
(1-19) ... 190-1 = 7x27 = 189
[(1-27) ... 378 = 14x27]
(1-28) ... 406-1 = 15x27 = 405
Meton of Athens approximated the cycle to a whole number (6940) of days, obtained by 125 long months of 30 days and 110 short months of 29 days. In the following century Callippus developed the Callippic cycle of four 19-year periods for a 76-year cycle with a mean year of exactly 365.25 days.
mjhurst wrote:Hi, Marco,
You mentioned Horace and Petrarch along with the lottery, so I have to bring up an illustration from my favorite emblem book, Q. Horatii Flacci Emblemata (1612) by Otto Vaenius. I reproduced the picture a few years ago, and the post includes a link to one of the many copies of Emblems of Horace that are available online.
A Pair of Emblems
http://pre-gebelin.blogspot.com/2008/05 ... blems.html
In 1632 the lottery image was borrowed and combined with a Wheel of Fortune in an illustration for one of the many German versions of Petrarch's De Remediis. It is a great double image.
Trostspiegel in Glück und Unglück
http://www.virtuelles-kupferstichkabine ... natur=8379
marco wrote:I have posted on Tarotpedia an English translation of D'Oncieu's passage:
http://www.tarotpedia.com/wiki/D%27Onci ... orum_Decas
It is heavily based on Girolamo's translation and comments: Girolamo, thank you once again for giving us a chance of making sense of this complex text!
SteveM wrote:I wonder if one should stick to a literal translation or for ease of understanding replace the literal with terms such as 'suit(s)' and 'deck' where appropriate? e.g.:
sed Quaternum illud uniforme in suo quaterno duabus admixtis diversis partibus, scilicet altera, quae sit triumphorum 21. postrema unius tantum figurae fatui sub effigie, videtur eo quaternum ternum:
Quaternum = deck of cards; suo quaterno = seed quarters, pip cards, four suits;
The suits of this deck [the tarot] are the same [as an ordinary deck of playing cards], to which are added two other parts, one of which is composed of 21 trumps and the other a single figure portrayed as a fool, thus it is a deck with three parts.
(But then the play he makes on the number four is lost, but may be noted?)
SteveM wrote:Re: 27 being a quaternary number, I read it in the sense of being a cube number - 1,3, 9, 27 (rather than 4x7-1) as per the pythagorean tetractys you illustated (with the cubes of 2+3). As I mentioned in a previous post I thought it might be connected with this but I hadn't found that page with the illustration so wasn't sure.
In connection with pythagorous we may note that as well as the emphasis on 3 & 4 he also brings in the quintessense, number 5 - as in the 3,4,5 pythagorean triangle? (also 3,4,5 = 12, and the sum of 1-12 = 78).
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 5 guests