Predictions

The desire to know the future is as old as the idea of tomorrow. The ancients warned that inquiring of oracles would inevitably lead one to misinterpretation in any case. And if one could speak the future plainly, like Cassandra, one would be ignored then, too. Their conclusion seems to be that you don't get to know what will happen until it does.

Here, Vega lists, somewhat exhaustively, the ways ancient (and, I suppose, some contemporary) people tried to suss out the future. She also does not speak of tarot cards, palm reading, Ouija boards, tea leaves, horoscopes, or crystal balls, but of more esoteric methods.

Many involve reading the behavior of animals-- "by mice," "by fishes," "birds." Fire-- from the flames themselves, to their "smoke," and even their "ashes"-- is another popular prognostication device. Water, from a "fountain," or its interaction with "hot wax," has been tried. As has light, often in reflection from a "mirror" or even "nails reflecting the rays of the Sun."

Natural objects, like "salt" and "pebbles drawn from a heap," have been consulted. Man-made objects, too, like a "suspended ring" or a "balanced hatchet," and even the rising "dough of cakes" have been investigated.

Human behavior is popular as well, from "walking in a circle," to simply "laughing," and of course "dreams." One's "features" can be read, so perhaps this is an allusion to palm reading, but more likely these features are facial.

But perhaps the largest category she lists is markings made by people. From "dots made at random," to the dots of "dice," or the "numbers" they represent. And "letters," too, and words, even whole "passages in books."

Do any of these methods... work? "One of these things will tell you something," she assumes.

A pattern emerges from these methods. A person must begin by saying "I will now set this random process in motion. Once it occurs, I will see how the elements are placed, and by their arrangement-- which I caused but did not control-- I will see what is to be."

It's a combination of intent and instigation by the clairvoyant on the one hand, and the random result of their action upon the object(s) in question on the other. Then the seer explains the result, to either the glee or chagrin of the client.

The interpretation, naturally, will differ depending on the "skills" of the soothsayer consulted, which may not only include the saying of sooth, but the reading of the client's body language, clothes, and political power.

The whole exercise is moot, of course. We cannot foretell the future, since no-one has won the lottery every month or even predicted the Super Bowl winner every time.

It's all about trying to find patterns in the randomness. The scattered ashes or salt grains stand for the randomness of human events and interactions. The prophet tries to see patterns-- mostly gathered from what the client has said while drinking his tea, not from the tea leaves left in the bottom of his cup after.

There are two problems with this. One is that events often are random, with no pattern. The other is that, to the extent that there are patterns to events, no two people will agree entirely on what they are.

This disagreement extends to events in the past, as well. No two historians, even reading over the same evidence, will come to the exact same conclusion. And police officers will tell you that there are as many opinions about a car accident that just happened as there are people at the scene.

It also is true that almost all of the cultures that used these methods are gone. For all of their supposed ability to foresee events, they did not see the plague, drought, volcano, or conquering force arriving from over the hill or ocean that was to eradicate their civilization.

"One of these things will tell you something"? They all will. And all of it worth "dots made at random on paper."


Next Song: Fifty-fifty Chance