Martin Gansten

Ars, techne, sastra, 'ilm: What's in a name?

Abstract

The designation of astrology as an art raises some simple but fundamentally important historical questions. How old is this designation, and, given that earlier generations of astrologers wrote in different languages, what words did they use that we translate as 'art'? What are the connotations of those different words in their historical contexts? What other designations than 'art' would have been possible, and were such alternative labels used as well? Was astrology ever practised in cultural contexts where distinctions like that between 'art' and 'science' were not made? And if calling astrology an 'art' was not originally a question of aesthetics, was there still an aesthetic dimension to the practice of astrology, and how might we define or understand that dimension?

Biography

Dr Martin Gansten is a Sanskritist and historian of religion specializing in astrological and divinatory traditions as well as in Indic religions. He received his doctorate from Lund University, Sweden, where he is now docent. He has published on the history of astrology in several cultures and epochs, from Hellenistic Egypt to modern Europe, in addition to various aspects of Hinduism. His current research deals with the medieval and early modern Indian reception of Perso-Arabic astrology and related knowledge systems.