View Full Version : The Prenatal Epoch

Arian Maverick

01-13-2008, 12:25 AM

For fear of getting off-topic again, you may also wish to explore a concept that is often used to rectify the Ascendants of natal charts; unfortunately, I cannot remember the exact source from which I got this information, nor the exact wording it used, but there was a special two-way relationship between the position of the Moon during the exact moment of conception and the child's Ascendant.

EDIT: I found the site through a Google search; it was actually pretty easy, as it was one of only five that links appeared when I searched for the Tritune of Hermes. I hope nobody minds that it's from a Rosicrucian site...

The Prenatal Epoch (https://www.mega.nu/ampp/ancient/rosicrucianism/fellowship/pamen034.htm).

For summary, let us restate the fundamental principle of the Prenatal Epoch known as the Tritune of Hermes: "The Ascendant at birth is the place of the Moon at a certain Epoch, ant the Ascendant or its opposite point at Epoch was the place of the Moon at birth."

I bring it up here because I believe it is yet another idea to explore to understand the profound workings of the Universe in "assigning" a specific Ascendant to a child.

If anyone is interesting in discussing this further, I will create another thread. Now, back to the topic ;)

Arian Maverick

athan

01-13-2008, 01:35 AM

wow Arian!

I just scrolled the PreNatal Epoch article and allthough I'm a bit confused about pre Epoch and Epoch I was amazed by Law no3. I have a waning moon above horizon and I was born 9 months PLUS a week after the day I was due..

Do you know how I can compute my conception day?

I'm going back to the article now!!!

thank you Arian

Arian Maverick

01-13-2008, 01:50 AM

I think I should probably create a thread about the Prenatal Epoch ;)

I've always found the Tritune of Hermes to be a bit more complicated than the Animodar Method of Rectification, for some reason, but I think this is because I had a bad first experience with Hermes; I actually attempted to construct a calendar and manually count backwards 273 days from my birth!

This became much easier when I discovered Date calculator: Add to or subtract from a date (http://www.timeanddate.com/date/dateadd.html).

Anyway, I don't want to further gravitate away from the topic of this thread...

EDIT: I have created a new thread in Other branches of astrology (http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=10) titled The Prenatal Epoch (http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?p=57551). I apologize to SiderealSupastar and the others for the interruption! :o

Arian Maverick

Arian Maverick

01-13-2008, 01:53 AM

I have created this new thread to continue the discussion that was begun in Your Rising Sign and Your Mother's Moon (http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?p=57549) about the Prenatal Epoch (https://www.mega.nu/ampp/ancient/rosicrucianism/fellowship/pamen034.htm).

I believe this is primarily a concept used for chart rectification, but I thought it would be interesting to discuss the relationship that possibly exists between the Moon at the exact moment of conception and the Ascendant at birth.

For anyone who is unfamiliar with this concept, this is the summary given at the site:

For summary, let us restate the fundamental principle of the Prenatal Epoch known as the Tritune of Hermes: "The Ascendant at birth is the place of the Moon at a certain Epoch, ant the Ascendant or its opposite point at Epoch was the place of the Moon at birth."

Arian Maverick

athan

01-13-2008, 01:55 AM

I don't want to deviate the tread either but it's so interesting I cannot resist. So 273 are the days I must count backwards for the conception date or does this apply only to your birth?

Please Arian help this poor old man out....!

Arian Maverick

01-13-2008, 01:56 AM

Meet me in The Prenatal Epoch ([url=http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?p=57551); I'll try to help you there ;)

Arian Maverick

athan

01-13-2008, 01:59 AM

hi there

ok this thread was born about 4 minutes ago but it was conceived.... when?

Arian Maverick

01-13-2008, 02:39 AM

ok this thread was born about 4 minutes ago but it was conceived.... when?

Oh goodness, don't even get us started on that! :eek:

I think this theory only applies to humans, but I could be wrong...

Alright, let's see if I can possibly apply the Prenatal Epoch to your chart, and possibly rectify your Ascendant in the process. It's getting late in my time zone, so I may make a few mistakes, but I'll try to double-check my work tomorrow ;)

Here are the Four Laws of the Epoch:

Four Laws of the Epoch

1. When the Moon at birth increases in light, it will be on the ascending degree of Epoch, and the Moon at Epoch will be on the ascending degree at birth.

2. When the Moon at birth decrease in light, it will be on the decreasing degree at Epoch, and the Moon at Epoch will be on the descending degree at birth.

3. When the Moon at birth is (a) increasing in light and below the horizon, or (b) decreasing in light and above the horizon, the period of gestation is longer than the norm.

4. When the Moon at birth is (a) increasing in light and above the horizon or (b) decreasing in light and below the horizon, the period of gestation is shorter than the norm.

Your natal Moon meets the qualifications of #4; is is increasing in light (i.e. after the New Moon phase--the exact conjunction of the Sun and the Moon--but before the Full Moon phase--the exact opposition of the Sun and the Moon) and above the horizon (i.e. above the Ascendant-Descendant axis, or in the seventh through twelfth houses).

Here are the Four Orders of Epoch:

Four Orders of Epoch

1. Moon above horizon and increasing

in light.......... 273 days minus x.

2. Moon above horizon and decreasing

in light.......... 273 days plus x.

3. Moon below horizon and increasing

in light.......... 273 days plus x.

4. Moon below horizon and decreasing

in light.......... 273 days minus x.

Your natal Moon meets the qualifications of the first order because, as we established before, it is above the horizon and increasing in light. Therefore, we shall use the formula 273 days minus x.

The reasoning and application of this formula is described in the following paragraphs (I hope I'm not violating too many copyright laws here...):

It is to be understood that the 273 days referred to in the above table is the normal period of gestation, or nine solar or ten lunar months. This normal period is increased or decreased in accordance with the distance of the Moon from either the Ascendant or Descendant, and "x" is a certain number of days corresponding to this distance obtained by dividing the distance in degrees by thirteen degrees, the latter being the average daily motion of the Moon.

When making the count, count to the Ascendant (AC) when the Moon is increasing in light, and to the Descendant (DC) when the Moon is decreasing in light. Another more definite way of stating this would be: In orders Nos. 1 and 4 the distance in degrees of the Moon from the horizon last crossed (AC or DC), divided by thirteen, gives "x", or the number of days by which this period is decreased; and in orders Nos. 2 and 3 the distance of the Moon in degrees from the horizon which it is approaching, divided by thirteen, gives the number of days by which this period is increased.

Things start getting trickier here, as you may have foreseen while reading these two paragraphs.

I try to keep things as simple as possible and first count back 273 days from your birthday. This is quite easy using the link I provided in the thread Your Rising Sign and Your Mother's Moon (http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?p=57549)--Date calculator: Add to or subtract from a date (http://www.timeanddate.com/date/dateadd.html); I enter 4 by the month, 25 by the day, and 1977 by the year, click the arrow next to the drop down box and select subtract, enter 273 in the box next to days, and click Calculate new date! The resulting date is Monday, July 26, 1976.

Now, this part gets a bit trickier because all of the formulas given refer to the period of gestation--not to the exact date of conception, although this is what you are trying to deduce by plugging numbers into the formula.

The most important thing to remember while "playing" with the date is this:

If the formula is 273 days minus x, as it is for your chart, decrease the number of days of conception by moving the "standard" date (i.e. the one you received by subtracting exactly 273 days from your date of birth) forwards.

If the formula is 273 days plus x, increase the number of days of conception by moving the "standard" date (i.e. the one you received by subtracting exactly 273 days from your date of birth) backwards.

This may seem like a simple enough concept, but you'd be surprised how easy it is to get confused while working with numbers, especially while using a "guess-and-check" method.

Arian Maverick

athan

01-13-2008, 03:01 AM

ok so now we substruct 99(the degrees between moon and ASC)divided by 13?

Arian Maverick

01-13-2008, 03:05 AM

Hold on, you're getting ahead of me here! :p

ok so now we substruct 99(the degrees between moon and ASC)divided by 13?

This sounds correct, but I'll have to reread through this paragraph again to make sure.

It is to be understood that the 273 days referred to in the above table is the normal period of gestation, or nine solar or ten lunar months. This normal period is increased or decreased in accordance with the distance of the Moon from either the Ascendant or Descendant, and "x" is a certain number of days corresponding to this distance obtained by dividing the distance in degrees by thirteen degrees, the latter being the average daily motion of the Moon.

When making the count, count to the Ascendant (AC) when the Moon is increasing in light, and to the Descendant (DC) when the Moon is decreasing in light. Another more definite way of stating this would be: In orders Nos. 1 and 4 the distance in degrees of the Moon from the horizon last crossed (AC or DC), divided by thirteen, gives "x", or the number of days by which this period is decreased; and in orders Nos. 2 and 3 the distance of the Moon in degrees from the horizon which it is approaching, divided by thirteen, gives the number of days by which this period is increased.

Since your Moon is increasing in light, yes, we would count the distance of the Moon to the Ascendant and then divide this number by thirteen degrees.

We're not quite home free yet, though, because next we have to convert your Ascendant and Moon into absolute degrees (i.e. the 360-degree system).

I'll make a list to make this easier:

Aries: 0-29

Taurus: 30-59

Gemini: 60-89

Cancer: 90-119

Leo: 120-149

Virgo: 150-179

Libra: 180-209

Scorpio: 210-239

Sagittarius: 240-269

Capricorn: 270-299

Aquarius: 300-329

Pisces: 330-359

Lucky for us, your Moon is located at almost exactly 25 Cancer, which I believe is associated with 115 degrees. Unfortunately, the 0 that begins each sign always confuses me, because if a planet has just entered a sign, it probably has not yet reached the first degree of this sign. Therefore, I'm never sure how to include this space between 0 and 1 within my calculations...but enough obsessing on this detail for now. The last time I checked 90+25=115, so I'm keeping with this! :p

Now, let's calculate the absolute degree for your Ascendant, which is approximately 4 Scorpio 15. The absolute degree of the first degree of Scorpio is 210, so if we add 4 degrees and 15 minutes to this, we receive 214 degrees, 15 minutes.

Here's the second tricky part--at least, it's always been tricky for me.

I don't think you have a problem here, but sometimes you need to add 360 to a number to make it large enough to subtract the originally larger number from it. So the next important question is: which number do we subtract from which number?

We know that we want the result to be greater than 90 degrees because the Moon is located before the point that is exactly perpendicular to (i.e. exactly 90 degrees from) your Ascendant, thus increasing the Moon's distance from the Ascendant.

I'll do the most logical thing first--subtract the smaller number from the larger number, but remember that this doesn't work when Pisces transitions into Aries someplace between the Moon and the Ascendant/Descendant. Remember that whether you measure the distance in degrees between the Moon and the Ascendant or between the Moon and the Descendant depends upon whether the Moon is increasing or decreasing in light.

So I take away 115 degrees from 214 degrees, 15 minutes. In order to do this math, first I must convert 214 degrees, 15 minutes into a convertible form (i.e. a fraction)

214 degrees, 15 minutes = 214 15/60 = 214 1/4

214 1/4 - 115 = 99 1/4

There's no need to convert 99 1/4 back into minutes and degrees because we have to do more math.

Next, we divide the distance in degrees--99 1/4--by 13, which is the average daily motion of the Moon.

(99 1/4) / 13 = 7 33/52.

Now, what on Earth do we do with this strange number, you may ask?

This normal [gestation] period [i.e. 273 days] is increased or decreased in accordance with the distance of the Moon from either the Ascendant or Descendant.

So the average 273-day gestation period is decreased by 7 33/52 days, since the Moon is above the horizon and increasing in light.

I'm going to pull up the handy little guideline I posted before:

If the formula is 273 days minus x, as it is for your chart, decrease the number of days of conception by moving the "standard" date (i.e. the one you received by subtracting exactly 273 days from your date of birth) forwards.

If the formula is 273 days plus x, increase the number of days of conception by moving the "standard" date (i.e. the one you received by subtracting exactly 273 days from your date of birth) backwards.

So, we decrease the number of days of conception by moving the "standard" date (i.e. July 26, 1976, which we received from that nifty little calculator a while back) forwards.

July 26, 1976 + 7 days (ignore the fraction for now) = August 2, 1976. I could try converting that fraction into some usable form, but I am completely worn out...

According to the article, "Every Epoch must conform to four separate and distinct conditions," and "unless, therefore, an Epoch conforms strictly to these four conditions, it may be regarded as a fictitious one." Unfortunately, I'm not experienced working with the Law of Sex. Funny name, isn't it? :38:

I'd probably stop laughing once I tried to deal with the Sex or "Critical" Degrees and the Sex Quadrants, though...

Does anyone else wish to continue where I left off?

Arian Maverick

athan

01-13-2008, 03:17 AM

ok. so far I am with you!!!

...except the reason for the conversion in absolute degrees but you'll explain later on don't mind me for now...

Arian Maverick

01-13-2008, 03:59 AM

ok. so far I am with you!!!

...except the reason for the conversion in absolute degrees but you'll explain later on don't mind me for now...

I suppose you don't have to convert the sign and degree into absolute degrees, but it makes the math easier.

If you don't mind counting, you can skip this step.

Now, let's go back to the quote at the very beginning of this thread:

For summary, let us restate the fundamental principle of the Prenatal Epoch known as the Tritune of Hermes: "The Ascendant at birth is the place of the Moon at a certain Epoch, ant the Ascendant or its opposite point at Epoch was the place of the Moon at birth."

According to the information in your signature, your Ascendant is 4 Scorpio 15; therefore, the Moon should be at or around this degree.

Conversely, the Ascendant or its opposite point (i.e. Descendant) at the Epoch should at or around 25 Cancer--the degree of the Moon in your natal chart.

What I usually do next isn't very scientific at all; I create a conception chart for noon on the day indicated and play around with it until I find a conception time that fits these guidelines. If nothing works, well...then I try again.

Fortunately, the Moon was in Scorpio on this possible conception day, which makes me very happy indeed; even if I do all of the math correctly, this doesn't always work so nicely.

So now, I shall fiddle around with the chart until the Moon is at 4 Scorpio 15; then, I will check the Ascendant yielded by this time.

The Moon was at 4 Scorpio 15 around 2:07 PM, and the Ascendant at this time was 11 Scorpio 42--clearly, this didn't work :(

I don't understand why, though; I created an Epoch Chart for myself a while ago and was able to arrive at a date and time in which the Ascendant was the degree of my natal Moon and the degree of the Moon was the degree of my possible Descendant.

EDIT: I just thought of something else; perhaps I should have looked for the time in which the Ascendant matched the degree of the natal Moon rather than the time in which the degree of the Moon matched the degree of the Ascendant? The Ascendant changes degrees and signs much more quickly than the Moon, after all...

Arian Maverick

athan

01-13-2008, 04:14 AM

Does anyone else wish to continue where I left off?

Arian Maverick

ok. you are worn out indeed. you are a true warrior I must confess!!! It is real late,the sun is up here in Greece, it's a better idea to take a raincheck for tomorrow.

LOADS of thanks but...

we're not done. I'll come back to torture you some more :D

Thank you for your time :D

Conceptionally (as Tim would say)

Athan

Arian Maverick

01-13-2008, 04:27 AM

I need to ask you one more question before I retire for the night--how certain of you of the accuracy of your time of birth? Is it possible that it could be off by a few minutes?

Also, how do you feel about having a late Libra Ascendant...?

The Tritune of Hermes isn't 100% accurate, but I think I did find a time on this conception date in which the Ascendant corresponded with the exact degree of your natal Moon, and the Moon was within five degrees or so of your given Ascendant--not too bad.

The exact conception time I received is 5:19:25 AM on August 2, 1976 if you want to create the chart yourself.

The only problem is that since Scorpio is a slower-moving Ascendant in the Northern Hemisphere, you would have had to be born at approximately 7:34 AM to have a late Libra Ascendant; this would be a 26-minute inaccuracy, which seems unlikely unless the time of birth you're using now is an estimate.

Arian Maverick

Talibr_sagi

01-13-2008, 05:28 PM

Hallo Arian!

I have read this thread and the others you have posted about finding your real ascendant - including the usage of solar arcs etc -and most recently your posts about Prenatal Epoch in which you have included a link from Skyscript. I am uncertain too about the exact degrees of my ascendant..I know it's Libra but I am not so sure if the degrees are correct :confused: ...

I haven't understood how I can find the movement of the Moon :o...I can't figure out which one of the four orders fits the day I was born. I was born near a full moon....and my moon is in Taurus...so this means that my Moon is above and decreasing or I've just uttered something real stupid :34:?

athan

01-13-2008, 08:50 PM

hi there Arian,

Oh my God!!! ascendant Libra????????? Oh my God.

the hour of birth is not exact but it should be 10 minutes plus or minus. I don't have a birth certificate with time on it it's from my mother. she could be half an hour off but knowing my mother I doubt it. I think we''ll have to find out using the epoch chart...

Arian Maverick

01-13-2008, 11:23 PM

hi there Arian,

Oh my God!!! ascendant Libra????????? Oh my God.

the hour of birth is not exact but it should be 10 minutes plus or minus. I don't have a birth certificate with time on it it's from my mother. she could be half an hour off but knowing my mother I doubt it. I think we''ll have to find out using the epoch chart...

As I mentioned before, I don't know if this is the correct Epoch chart. Remember these quotes?

"Every Epoch must conform to four separate and distinct conditions," and "unless, therefore, an Epoch conforms strictly to these four conditions, it may be regarded as a fictitious one."

There was also something called the Law of Sex to work with, which unfortunately I don't have experience with, and it is possible that this is an "Irregular Epoch."

So don't panic yet.

Talibr_sagi,

Could you possibly post your natal data here or send me a personal message? It'll be a lot easier for me to help you if I can actually see the chart.

I was born near a full moon....

Were you born slightly before or slightly after the Full Moon? This is a key detail that we must know to determine if the Moon was increasing in light or decreasing in light.

Before Full Moon = Increasing in Light

After Full Moon = Decreasing in Light

As for whether the Moon was above or below the Earth, simply tell me what house it is located in.

1st - 6th houses = Below the Earth

7th - 12th houses = Below the Earth

Arian Maverick

athan

01-13-2008, 11:51 PM

I was born near a full moon....and my moon is in Taurus...so this means that my Moon is above and decreasing or I've just uttered something real stupid :34:?

Hi there Talibr_sagi

I don't have your chart but if your asc is Libra and your moon in Taurus then it is certainly above the horizon. If you were born after a full moon then your moon is above and decreasing in light and if you are born before the full moon then you are above and increasing.

I think I got it right :cool:

athan

01-14-2008, 12:00 AM

hi there Arian.

First of all thanks again for the help, I appreciate it a lot!!!!

I am studing the chart you generated and I''ll try to see whether the 4 conditions are satisfied or it's a fictitious chart. I am sure I''ll have questions ....so be en garde.

Thank you

Athan

Arian Maverick

01-14-2008, 02:24 AM

I'm learning this myself, but hopefully we'll be able to work through the directions together :)

I think we should look into this in particular:

The law of sex is based upon the Hindu subdivision of the zodiac into twenty-eight mansions or "asterisms" of 12 6-7 degrees each, which gives the following:

I've heard of lunar mansions, but I'm not sure they are related to these Hindu subdivisions.

According to In Pursuit of Sacred Science, Part V (http://www.borobudur.tv/survey_5.htm):

The Hindu astronomy texts divide the celestial plane of the ecliptic into either 27 or 28 asterisms called "nakshatras." The star Beta Arietis in the constellation Aries--which is located at the tip of the Ram's "nose"--is the junction star of the first Hindu asterism called Ashvini. During the early ninth century CE at Borobudur, the sunrise on April 2nd each year occurred in close proximity to the termination point on the eastern horizon for the long axial pathway that connects Borobudur to the nearby temples of Candi Pawon and Candi Mendut. This was the very day each year that marked the first day in the annual solar cycle in which the Sun had crossed the celestial longitude of Ashvini's junction star Beta Arietis.

I researched nakshatras a bit when I attempted to study Vedic astrology, but I don't remember genders associated with them, although it makes sense as the signs in western astrology are similarly either masculine or feminine.

So I suppose the next step is to find the names of these nakshatras and determine if each is masculine or feminine...

Arian Maverick

athan

01-14-2008, 03:59 AM

I found the mansions but nothing yet on the male/female aspect :confused:

The Twenty-seven Constellations or Lunar Mansions

Name Position Location Ruler

Ashwini 1st 000d00' - 013d20' Ketu Dasra

Bharani 2nd 013d20' - 026d40' Venus Yama

Krittika 3rd 026d40' - 040d00' Sun Agni

Rohini 4th 040d00' - 053d20' Moon Bhrama

Mrigashira 5th 053d20' - 066d40' Mars Chandra

Ardra 6th 066d40' - 080d00' Rahu Rudra

Punarvasu 7th 080d00' - 093d20' Jupiter Aditi

Pushya 8th 093d20' - 106d40' Saturn Jeeva

Ashlesha 9th 106d40' - 120d00' Mercury Sarpa

Magha 10th 120d00' - 133d20' Ketu Pitar

Poorvaphalguni 11th 133d20' - 146d40' Venus Bhaga

Uttaraphalguni 12th 146d40' - 160d00' Sun Aryama

Hasta 13th 160d00' - 173d20' Moon Ravi

Chitra 14th 173d20' - 186d40' Mars Tvashta

Swati 15th 186d40' - 200d00' Rahu Vayu

Vishakha 16th 200d00' - 213d20' Jupiter Sakragni

Anuradha 17th 213d20' - 226d40' Saturn Mitra

Jyeshtha 18th 226d40' - 240d00' Mercury Shakra

Mula 19th 240d00' - 253d20' Ketu Niriti

Poorvashadha 20th 253d20 - 266d40' Venus Apa

Uttarashadha 21st 266d40' - 280d00' Sun Vishwadeva

Shravaha 22nd 280d00' - 293d20' Moon Govinda

Dhanishtha 23rd 293d20' - 306d40' Mars Vasu

Satabhisha 24th 306d40' - 320d00' Rahu Varuna

Poorvabhadrapada 25th 320d00' - 333d20' Jupiter Ajaikacharna

Uttarabhadrepada 26th 333d20' - 346d40' Saturn Ahirbudhya

Revti 27th 346d40' - 360d00' Mercury Pusha

ok.according to the above the moon in my conception chart is libra 29d03' that corresponds to the 16th mansion ruled by Jupiter. But is it male or female???

The ''quadrant'' part is easy.... The moon is in the second quadrant so it is male!

Talibr_sagi

01-14-2008, 03:17 PM

Hi Arian & Athan!! Thank you for you help!!

I was sure about the above the horizon part, but I wasn't sure about the increasing or decreasing...

I was born before the full moon...so it must be increasing...but just to be on the right side, here's my natal chart:

http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/4553/astrologicalchartbn2.th.gif (http://img166.imageshack.us/my.php?image=astrologicalchartbn2.gif)

If you need any additional data...please tell me so!

Thanks again guys!! :)

athan

01-14-2008, 04:37 PM

yeap Talibr you are right.

Moon is above and increasing in light.

So in your case Laws no1&4 are applied just as in my case. Just follow Arian's steps in the post above and you'll get to the point that we are....trying to figure out the gender of the lunar mansions that is. Any insight about the topic is more than welcome and if you need any help just ask!

Athan

athan

01-14-2008, 05:15 PM

YES!!! found about nakshastra gender.

www.marlenesniche.tripod.com/metaphysics/id113.html

got to run for work now I''be back 05:00 AM greek time

cheers

Talibr_sagi

01-14-2008, 06:02 PM

OK Athan thank you!

I have counted the distance between the Moon and the Ascendant...the number I came up is 142...divided by 13 gives us 10,9 which means 11 days....so 24 February 1977 plus 11 = 7 March 1977....

"The Ascendant at birth is the place of the Moon at a certain Epoch, ant the Ascendant or its opposite point at Epoch was the place of the Moon at birth."

When I looked for the moon's position so as to be at the degrees of my ascendant - 4.8 of Libra - the ascendant of the epoch was in Capicorn...although the cusp of the 4th house was in Taurus but it's too early....only 3.24 while my natal moon is 12.51.

For the second one:

I checked up the ascendant to be in Taurus near the 12.51 degrees...the position of the moon was in 7.35 (Libra)....but that doesn't mean that the degrees of my ascendant are in 7.35 degrees right?

Because from what I understood both of conditions have to be applied.

If there's something else to try....I would be very interested to do so!! :)

Arian Maverick

01-14-2008, 06:17 PM

Awesome, athan! :cool:

Hopefully, we're on the right track here, because the article didn't mention anything about nakshatras or how they could be employed to determine if the Epoch chart is valid and meets all of the necessary qualifications, including indicating the sex of the native.

EDIT: This isn't fair; I received an error message when I tried to click on the link :(

Talibr_sagi,

When I looked for the moon's position so as to be at the degrees of my ascendant - 4.8 of Libra - the ascendant of the epoch was in Capicorn...although the cusp of the 4th house was in Taurus but it's too early....only 3.24 while my natal moon is 12.51.

For the second one:

I checked up the ascendant to be in Taurus near the 12.51 degrees...the position of the moon was in 7.35 (Libra)....but that doesn't mean that the degrees of my ascendant are in 7.35 degrees right?

Because from what I understood both of conditions have to be applied.

Did you just look at the noon chart for the conception day?

Sometimes this method requires a bit of fiddling around with; you probably saw in my previous post how I did not originally get a good match with athan's chart and had to look for the degree of the Ascendant at the Epoch first before looking at the degree of the Moon at the Epoch.

I don't know if this is what you're supposed to do, but it seemed to work! :p

Arian Maverick

P.S. If you don't feel comfortable posting your natal data here, perhaps can you send me a personal message? I'm trying to construct the Epoch chart, but I need to know the location you were born in order to do so. I'm having difficult imaging what the Epoch chart looks like...

Talibr_sagi

01-14-2008, 06:30 PM

So Arian this means that my ascendant's degrees are 7.35 and it's ok if only one of the above conditions apply? But then if the time we were born isn't correct....the position of our natal moon isn't accurate also...so how can it helps find out the correct ascendant :confused:?

I think I haven't fully understood what I have to do :(...anyway I'll experiment a bit with it.

Sorry, I haven't seen your PS...The location is Athens, Greece & time around 2:34 AM and it's a female chart...I didn't have the full chart handy at the time posting it...that's why it was without location and time...sorry for the omision!

Arian Maverick

01-14-2008, 06:31 PM

Are you certain that you have the correct day of the Epoch? It's really easy to make a mistake with the counting; did you use the calculator I linked to?

So Arian this means that my ascendant's degrees are 7.35 and it's ok if only one of the above conditions apply? But then if the time we were born isn't correct....the position of our natal moon isn't accurate also...so how can it helps find out the correct ascendant ?

I think I haven't fully understood what I have to do ...anyway I'll experiment a bit with it.

No, both of the conditions have to apply--but I believe that you can try one of two things to have both of the conditions apply; you can either set the Epoch chart so that the natal Ascendant equals the Epoch Moon degree, or you can set the Epoch chart so that the natal Moon degree equals the Epoch Ascendant.

I originally tried to the time in which the degree of the Moon at Epoch matched the degree of the Ascendant before looking for the time in which the Epoch Ascendant matched the degree of the natal Moon; this second approach gave me a result that more closely matched the positions of the Moon and Ascendant in athan's chart.

For example, athan's natal Moon is located at approximately 25 Cancer and his original Ascendant was located at 4 Scorpio 15. After I calculated the Epoch date, I attempted to find the time at which the Moon occupied 4 Scorpio 15, but the Ascendant yielded by this time was not 25 Cancer; I do not remember exactly what it was, but I believe it too was in Scorpio, which is a trine (120 degrees) away from Cancer.

I then tried the opposite approach and attempted to find the time at which the Epoch Ascendant was at 25 Cancer, the degree of athan's natal Moon; I then looked at the position of the Moon and saw that it was in late Libra, only about five degrees away from the natal Ascendant's position at 4 Scorpio 15.

So, using the information from the chart you provided us, you can either look for the time in which the Epoch Moon is at 4 Libra 08 and see if the Ascendant degree is around 12 Taurus 51, or you can look for the time in which the Epoch Ascendant is at 12 Taurus 51 and see if the Moon is around 4 Libra 08.

If neither of these work, it is likely that this may be an irregular Epoch chart, and unfortunately, the article doesn't explain well how to work with those...

Arian Maverick

Talibr_sagi

01-14-2008, 06:38 PM

Yes, I have used the calculator!

I have added my data in my previous post...because I didn't see your PS!

EDIT:

I must be loosing my mind...my birthday is on the 24th of November 1977...I just saw I haven't added it!

Arian Maverick

01-14-2008, 08:05 PM

I'm sorry about that--I have a bad habit of editing my posts perhaps half a dozen times before I'm satisfied, so it's very likely that I was editing while you were typing the information for your own post.

Arian Maverick

athan

01-16-2008, 03:41 AM

Hi there Arian & Talibr.

sorry, yesterday I was trying to log in but I had problems with my computers connectivity....

OK. According to nakshastras both my epochal asc and moon are male so the second of the 4 Conditions is satisfied.

If I get it right I think that also the 1rst condition is ok...

CONDITION No1

It(the epoch chart) must confirm the time of birth within the limits of an ordinary observation.

''..within the limits of an ordinary observation'' could mean that there isn't let's say a huge distance between natal and prenatal asc? If that is the case then the difference between 4 scorpio(natal) and 29 libra(epoch) is indeed ordinary.

OK according to you guys what rule is implied with the 1rst condition?

cheers

athan

01-16-2008, 03:43 AM

Awesome, athan! :cool:

EDIT: This isn't fair; I received an error message when I tried to click on the link :(

sorry Arian. but you did manage. :D did you?

Talibr_sagi

01-16-2008, 04:17 PM

sorry, yesterday I was trying to log in but I had problems with my computers connectivity....

Same here Athan...mine hasn't been fixed yet...so I am using a back up connection which is extremely slow...I will try to come up when it's fixed cause this one is so slow!

Arian Maverick

01-16-2008, 07:53 PM

EDIT: Please disregard what was previously written here; I believe I did all of the math correctly, but I had accidentally clicked on Modify the current calculation instead of New calculation with Thursday, February 24, 1977 as starting point, and thus, I ended up with a date that was after your birth!

I'm going to try this once more...

I applied the math to the (hopefully correct) conception date, and the Moon was placed at approximately 7 Libra 35, which indicates this should be your Ascendant. I find it a bit strange that your time of birth would be later rather earlier than the time recorded, especially by more than fifteen minutes...

I'm thinking that I don't like this rectification method much anymore :(

Arian Maverick

Talibr_sagi

01-17-2008, 02:50 PM

Arian,thank you for your help!

I find it a bit strange that your time of birth would be later rather earlier than the time recorded

I wondered why you found it strange. That's not the time recorded...I don't have an official document with birth time. That's the time my mother have told me for which she wasn't very certain...she has told me that it was between 2:34 and 2:50 AM...but she couldn't remember exactly when.

So for me it's not a surprise the time is later than the one I thought.

I experimented with this time span to find out where is my exact ascendant...and I kept 2:34 AM as more suitable since my natal chart for that time was more like me...but still I wasn't certain if it was the right one and I had a lot of doubts. If I was sure I wouldn't be trying to find the correct one.

In any case, with this method the 7.35 Libra ascendant is at 2:50 AM, so it has to be the right one for me.

Arian Maverick

01-17-2008, 05:56 PM

I wondered why you found it strange. That's not the time recorded...I don't have an official document with birth time. That's the time my mother have told me for which she wasn't very certain...she has told me that it was between 2:34 and 2:50 AM...but she couldn't remember exactly when.

So for me it's not a surprise the time is later than the one I thought.

I experimented with this time span to find out where is my exact ascendant...and I kept 2:34 AM as more suitable since my natal chart for that time was more like me...but still I wasn't certain if it was the right one and I had a lot of doubts. If I was sure I wouldn't be trying to find the correct one.

In any case, with this method the 7.35 Libra ascendant is at 2:50 AM, so it has to be the right one for me.

Ah, that would explain it then! I had assumed that since you had a birth time that wasn't "right on the hour" or "right on the half-hour" that you had documentation or other verification of your birth time being 2:34 AM because people generally round to the nearest five minutes or even to the nearest ten or fifteen minutes.

I'd play around with other rectification methods as well and perhaps construct transit charts for the times of significant events to see if any planets were conjunct the angles or the other house cusps; you can also use less "scientific" methods such as looking up each of the Sabian symbols (http://www.sabiansymbols.com/article-detail.asp?id=1453) of the possible Ascendants for the range of time you have been given; remember to always round up to the nearest degree.

I don't know if this is coincidence or not, but like I mentioned earlier in this thread, I had done a Prenatal Epoch for myself many months ago when I was trying to determine whether I had a late Pisces Ascendant or an early Aries Ascendant, and although I don't think I'll ever be 100% certain, the degree yielded by the Prenatal Epoch chart was about 28 Pisces 35, and this gives me a Sabian symbol that I particularly resonate with:

Pisces 29:

Light breaking into many colors as it passes through a prism.

This approximate degree was also yielded by an alternative method, so this is the Ascendant I'm keeping for now :)

How do you resonate with this symbol?

Libra 8:

A blazing fireplace in a deserted home.

Fortunately, Libra is a sign of slow ascension in the Northern Hemisphere, so even a relatively large range of time will not have too many degrees.

Here are the Sabian symbols for the other three possible degrees your Ascendant could be:

Libra 5:

A man teaching the true inner knowledge of the new world to his students.

Libra 6:

A man watches his ideals taking a concrete from before his inner vision.

Libra 7:

A woman feeding chickens and protecting them from the hawks.

I'd post the Sabian symbol for you possible Midheaven degree as well, but I fear I have already gone a bit off-topic...

Best of luck in determining your true Ascendant!

Arian Maverick

Talibr_sagi

01-18-2008, 03:49 PM

Hi Arian!

Thanks for posting the sabian symbols of my ascendant! My first reaction was the sabian symbol for Libra 5...but perhaps I am biased because of my Sagittarius sun hehe!

I'd post the Sabian symbol for you possible Midheaven degree as well, but I fear I have already gone a bit off-topic...

Don't worry, I have looked them myself in the link you've posted!

Thanks again for your help :) !!!

Arian Maverick

01-18-2008, 09:44 PM

Thanks for posting the sabian symbols of my ascendant! My first reaction was the sabian symbol for Libra 5...but perhaps I am biased because of my Sagittarius sun hehe!

Perhaps it is possible that your original time was correct after all--I believe this is the Sabian symbol that is associated with the 2:34 AM time of birth.

I'd say take the time yielded by this Prenatal Epoch chart with a grain of salt because other rectification methods may yield slightly different results.

The only bad thing about the Sabian symbols is that it's fairly simple to become biased towards the degree you like the best and become blind to other possibilities.

This may be because sometimes the symbols manifest through other people, although somehow I doubt the symbol of the Ascendant would do that since it's such a personal point.

Perhaps I should create another thread about the Animodar Method of Rectification; it's always fun to give another method a go and compare the results :)

Arian Maverick

Arian Maverick

02-17-2008, 11:33 PM

Wow, you do look like the Sagittarius man in this picture; the eyebrow shape is even the same! :eek:

I have been having difficulties with the Trutine method which did not seem to work out for me.

However I have just read a recent post by new member Sheila on the 'Your rising signs and your mother's Moon' thread, where she says

Look at the position of the Moon on the conception date because this will be located on or around, either the potential ascendant or descendant.

and this makes all the difference because then the trutine does work if I am using it to find the DC rather than AC.

Not only that but it fits in with the Animodar method too, where the planet with the most essential dignity at the first new or full Moon just preceeding my birth happens to be at 29 degrees.

I'll have to read the article about the Tritune of Hermes to refresh myself with the process, but if I remember correctly, you use it to find the Ascendant or the Descendant depending upon whether the Moon is increasing/decreasing in light and whether it is above or below the horizon.

Here are the Four Laws of the Epoch from the Prenatal Epoch (https://www.mega.nu/ampp/ancient/rosicrucianism/fellowship/pamen034.htm) site:

Four Laws of the Epoch

1. When the Moon at birth increases in light, it will be on the ascending degree of Epoch, and the Moon at Epoch will be on the ascending degree at birth.

2. When the Moon at birth decrease in light, it will be on the decreasing degree at Epoch, and the Moon at Epoch will be on the descending degree at birth.

3. When the Moon at birth is (a) increasing in light and below the horizon, or (b) decreasing in light and above the horizon, the period of gestation is longer than the norm.

4. When the Moon at birth is (a) increasing in light and above the horizon or (b) decreasing in light and below the horizon, the period of gestation is shorter than the norm.

Can you post your natal data here so I can determine which of these criteria your Moon meets? Then we will be able to proceed ;)

Not only that but it fits in with the Animodar method too, where the planet with the most essential dignity at the first new or full Moon just preceeding my birth happens to be at 29 degrees.

Was this planet closer to the Ascendant or the Midheaven of the syzergy chart? I ask because this determines whether you modify your natal Ascendant or Midheaven to this degree.

Arian Maverick

P.S. I don't know if the results of the Animodar Method of Rectification and the Tritune of Hermes always coincide, although they should in theory. However, I have done both rectification methods for my own chart and received similar results, although one method gave me an early Aries Ascendant while the other gave me a late Pisces Ascendant. At least I knew I was in the right ballpark, though.

Arian Maverick

02-18-2008, 01:16 AM

Your natal Moon could make this rectification somewhat difficult, since it would be tightly conjunct your Descendant if you have a late Sagittarius Ascendant. For now, I'm going to try the 4:15 PM chart and see what result it yields.

As you've mentioned, the Moon was decreasing in light and below the horizon, so these two laws will apply:

2. When the Moon at birth decrease in light, it will be on the decreasing degree at Epoch, and the Moon at Epoch will be on the descending degree at birth.

4. When the Moon at birth is (a) increasing in light and above the horizon or (b) decreasing in light and below the horizon, the period of gestation is shorter than the norm.

This is Order 4; therefore, we will use the formula 273 days minus x.

It is to be understood that the 273 days referred to in the above table is the normal period of gestation, or nine solar or ten lunar months. This normal period is increased or decreased in accordance with the distance of the Moon from either the Ascendant or Descendant, and "x" is a certain number of days corresponding to this distance obtained by dividing the distance in degrees by thirteen degrees, the latter being the average daily motion of the Moon.

When making the count, count to the Ascendant (AC) when the Moon is increasing in light, and to the Descendant (DC) when the Moon is decreasing in light. Another more definite way of stating this would be: In orders Nos. 1 and 4 the distance in degrees of the Moon from the horizon last crossed (AC or DC), divided by thirteen, gives "x", or the number of days by which this period is decreased; and in orders Nos. 2 and 3 the distance of the Moon in degrees from the horizon which it is approaching, divided by thirteen, gives the number of days by which this period is increased.

As the directions indicate, now we want to count the number of degrees from the Moon to the Descendant; according to the time of birth your mother gave you, this is about 9 degrees, 20 minutes or 9 1/3 degrees

273 - 9 1/3 = 263 2/3 days

According to Date calculator: Add to or subtract from a date (http://www.timeanddate.com/date/dateadd.html), 263 days, 16 hours subtracted from your date of birth yields a date and time of Thursday, December 24, 1959 at 8:00:00 AM.

If we want to get fancier and use your time of birth in this calculation, we receive a date and time of Friday, December 25, 1959 at 12:15:00 AM.

Now, let us go back to the second law of the Epoch:

2. When the Moon at birth decrease in light, it will be on the decreasing degree at Epoch, and the Moon at Epoch will be on the descending degree at birth.

The 8 AM time gives us 29 degrees on the Descendant, which is pretty darn close to the degree of your natal Moon; therefore, I'm not going to get fancy here and use the second calculation unless the first one doesn't work.

I will now adjust the Ascendant degree slightly to the exact degree of your natal Moon and see what happens. It's often impossible to get an exact match, so the closest I could get was 7: 58 :01 AM when the Descendant was at 28 Gemini 33'4"--only two arcminutes more than the degree of your natal Moon.

Unfortunately, this didn't quite work out; according to this chart, your Ascendant should be Aries, which isn't right at all.

So I suppose I'll have to try the "fancy" chart this time and see if it yields a more plausible result.

This didn't work either, so I suppose it's back to the drawing board :(

What we're looking for is an Epoch chart with Gemini on the Descendant and a Cancer Moon.

Arian Maverick

Arian Maverick

02-18-2008, 07:26 PM

Then what it proves is that 4.15pm is not my time of birth (which I don't think it is) but when you try it with the late Sag ascendant it does seems to work. Will you just check that for me please to make sure I have not made a mistake?

I'm not sure if I would jump to this conclusion yet, because I have performed the Tritune of Hermes on other charts in which the time of birth was more certain and arrived at nonsensical results, yet perhaps I will try the method again using the time providing a late Sagittarius Ascendant; this will change the formula because the Moon will now be above the Earth.

Isn't the rectification method supposed to show which is the right time by whichever time does work?

No, I don't think this particular method is meant to work this way, although other methods involving transits and progressions do.

I will know the right time of birth by finding the degree of the Moon in the Epoch chart and making this degree your Descendant in your natal chart.

Arian Maverick

P.S. I didn't originally notice when I was typing my last reply, but it seems that you have combined some aspects of the Animodar Method of Rectification with some aspects of the Tritune of Hermes. Perhaps you were describing the Animodar Method of Rectification in this post, but just in case, I wanted to point out that this does not have anything to do with the Tritune of Hermes.

The first new Moon above the horizon just prior to my birth occured on 22 August 1960 at 9.15am at 28o45' Leo. The planet in this chart that has the most essential dignity is the Sun at 29o13' Leo (+8), which is closer to the AC at 2o59' Libra than to the MC 3o53' Cancer.

Therefore I should put my natal AC at 29 degrees like the Sun.

Also, remember that the 273 days is either increased or decreased depending upon the number of degrees the Moon is from the Ascendant or the Descendant, depending upon where in the Moon's cycle you were born and if the Moon was above or below the Earth.

By the Trutine method the number of epoch days is 273, putting the date of conception at 15 December 1959 with the Moon in Gemini as in my natal chart.

Arian Maverick

02-18-2008, 07:34 PM

I was just about to try the method with the other time you suggested, but this presents one problem--the Moon is still below the Ascendant, so the formula won't change.

I'll try the method with this time of birth and if it doesn't work, I suppose we'll have to rectify your natal chart back even further so that your natal Moon is slightly above your Descendant.

Arian Maverick

Arian Maverick

02-18-2008, 07:55 PM

I don't want to complicate this too much unless I have too, so as I mentioned earlier, I'm going to try to use this birth time first and see if it gives a more accurate time.

We've already established that the Moon is below the horizon and decreasing in light, so we use the formula 273 days minus x.

EDIT: Hold on a second; I think I may have forgotten to divide the number of degrees the Moon was from the Descendant by thirteen in the last example! I'm going to try again and see if I get a different time/date...

If we divide 9 1/3 by 13 and subtract this number from 273 days, we receive 272 days 11/39. I couldn't get this to correspond to an exact number, but to the nearest second, this would be 264 days, 6 hours, 46 minutes, and 9 seconds before you date of birth.

Now I'm going to use the Date calculator: Add to or subtract from a date (http://www.timeanddate.com/date/dateadd.html) two ways--one, subtracting this number from your date of birth and the other, subtracting this number from your given date and time of birth.

Here's the first: Wednesday, December 23, 1959 at 5: 13 :51 PM

And here's the second: Thursday, December 24, 1959 at 9:28:51 AM

The first time still gives us a Libra Moon, which would give you a Libra Ascendant and therefore an Aries Ascendant; I don't know why we keep getting this.

The second time gives your that Libra Moon as well! Argh! :mad:

I suppose it's back to the original plan--use the earlier birth time and see what happens.

Arian Maverick

Arian Maverick

02-18-2008, 08:13 PM

I'm going to start afresh with a birth time of 3:41 PM.

The Moon is still decreasing in light and below the horizon, so we use the formula 273 days minus x. This time I need to remember to divide the number of degrees the Moon is from the Descendant by 13, the average daily motion of the Moon.

The Descendant is now at 29 Sagittarius 40 and the Moon is at 28 Sagittarius 16, so the Moon is 1 2/5 degrees from the Descendant.

1 2/5 divided by 13 gives a total of 7/65, which is approximately 2 hours, 35 minutes, and 5 seconds rounded up to the nearest second.

So now, we calculate 273 days before your birth and then take away 2 hours, 25 minutes, and 5 seconds. I'm too lazy to do the math separately! :p

Without taking your time of birth into account, we get a date and time of Monday, December 14, 1959 at 9: 34 :55 PM.

If we do use your time of birth, we receive Tuesday, December 15, 1959 at 1:15:55 PM.

The first chart gives us a Gemini Moon. This is getting better; we're looking for a late Gemini Moon and Gemini on the Descendant. I'm going to see if the second chart brings us closer to our goal.

This chart gives us a late Gemini Moon, but Libra is on the Desdendant. Unfortunately, moving the birth time back will only result in an earlier Moon, yet I feel awkward manipulating the method to get the desired results. How accurate would you say is the original time of birth; what do you believe is the margin of error? I generally do not like to rectify times so that they are more than a half-hour away from the given time of birth in any given direction, unless the individual knows that the margin of error of the birth time is very large--an hour or more.

If I go with this, the Moon is located at 24 Gemini 18'25", which would become the position of your Descendant in your natal chart. However, I'm not sure how accurate this result is since we have taken quite a few liberties with this method.

Arian Maverick

Arian Maverick

02-18-2008, 09:52 PM

The original time of birth is not really reliable. I do not have a time on the birth certificate and only when I was interested in having my chart done 18 years after my birth did I ask my mother. My sister's time was recorded and I noticed was 4.15 and that is too much coincidence. My brother remembers I was born in the afternoon, that is as close as it gets I think.

I can relate to this; I went six months studying astrology with the wrong birth time since my mother had told me I was born at 3:44 AM--the time recorded on my brother's birth certificate.

To give parents credit, I imagine it's difficult to keep the times of birth of various children straight in one's head--and of course, the mother had more important things on her mind at that moment.

Calculation is not my strongest point. AAARGHH!

My brain is turning to mush trying to follow it all!

I'm fairly decent at math, but these kinds of calculations are confusing because there is so much to keep track of--not to mention that the numbers rarely work out evenly.

At 15.41 the Moon is 1o21 from the DC (one and a third degrees approx), which converts to 1.33 for a decimal calculator.

Yes, this is correct.

If you divide 1.33 by 13 on the calculator you get 0.1 (so then is that 0.1 of a 24 hour day?) and 24 x 0.1 = 2.4

Is that how you get the 2 hours 35 minutes approx?

This gives a fraction of 4/39, but if you have a decimal calculator, it works out to 0.102564102--approximately 0.1 like you said.

Unfortunately, I've made so many calculations that I cannot find the one you are referring to, but I generally created an equation using x and then solved for the variable.

Generally, you have to determine the next unit of time that makes sense in your calculation, asking yourself, "What exactly is this a fraction of?" In the previous example, 4/39 is a fraction of a day, which is divided into 24 hours.

So first, I would have set up the equation 4/39. Therefore, I created the equation 4/39 = x/24, cross multiplied to receive 96 = 39x, and divided both sides by 39 to receive 2 6/13, or 2.461538462 using decimals.

So then we would have 2 6/13 hours. Hours are divided into sixty minutes, so I would drop the two and use the fraction 6/13 to set up another similar equation--6/13 = x/24. Again, I cross-multiplied to receive 13x = 144 and divided both sides by 13 to receive 11 1/13, or 11.07692308 using decimals.

So far, we have 2 hours and 11 minutes; now we want to determine the seconds.

Again, we drop the 11 and keep the fraction 1/13, setting up another equation; 1/13 = x/60. You cross-multiply again to receive 13x = 60 and divide both sides by thirteen to receive 4 8/13. Since the calculation program doesn't allow any units smaller than seconds, I simply rounded up to the nearest second.

Unfortunately, these numbers aren't matching up exactly with yours because I've been using a different calculator and only rounded at the end.

Part of the problem might also be that I calculated that there was a distance of 1 2/5 or 1.4 between the Moon and the Descendant; this number divided by thirteen gave me 7/65 or 0.107692307 to start my series of calculations. I can go over the exact numbers and calculations I used if it would be helpful.

After this I get completely lost. What do are you subtracting 2 hours and 35 minutes from?

Edit -

Wait, do you take away 2 hours 35 minutes from 15 December which is the 273 day? Then you would get late on 14 December 9.25pm, I think I got it.

It puts the Moon in Gemini which is good.

You've got it! ;)

I did one general calculation using midnight for the day you were born and another with the given time of birth, which alters the result by a few hours.

Now I have to gather my thoughts again for working out the next bit about the conception ascendant and how it relates to natal AC, I am not quite there with you yet because if you put the DC at 24 degrees in the natal chart the Moon is no longer below the horizon and the rules change that were used to make the calculation in the first place.

The main idea to remember is that the position of your natal Moon is the position of the Descendant in the Epoch chart, and the position of your natal Descendant is the position of the Moon in the Epoch chart. Since the Moon generally changes degrees and signs more slowly than the Descendant, I usually first calculate a chart in which the Descendant is at the same degree as the natal Moon and then look at the position of the Epoch Moon to determine the degree of the Descendant.

You don't have to worry about the Moon not being in the same position it was in your natal chart as long as the Moon equals the degree of your natal Descendant and the Descendant equals the degree of your natal Moon.

What is the calculation to get the time of 1.15pm on 15 December?

We divided 9 1/13 by 13 and subtracted this number from 273 days to receive 272 days 11/39, which corresponds to approximately 264 days, 6 hours, 46 minutes, and 9 seconds before you date of birth. I then used the date calculator to subtract this number from your date of birth--not from your exact date and time of birth.

This yielded a result of Wednesday, December 23, 1959 at 5: 13 :51 PM

This was still using the old birth time in which the Moon was about 9 1/13 away from the Descendant, though, which didn't yield a good result.

Arian Maverick

Arian Maverick

02-18-2008, 10:50 PM

Unfortunately, as much information as the article provides, it is at times confusing and vague in its description of instructions, so I have taken some liberty to use advanced calculations; please don't feel too bad about yourself, because the examples given rounded numbers from what I could observe.

I'd definitely go with this birth time; I trust the Animodar Method of Rectification more than I do the Tritune of Hermes, perhaps because it is easier to calculate, and the Sabian Symbols have never led me wrong before ;)

Usually it's a bunch of little clues that leads one towards one's true Ascendant, not just one method.

I'm curious about the Kepler method you have described; is this the feature of an astrology program in which you enter events and the program looks for activity around one of the angles?

Arian Maverick

Arian Maverick

02-19-2008, 01:29 AM

Thank you; I rather enjoyed your review and hope that the creators of the program will take your opinions into account when devising the latest version of your software. :)

As I mentioned earlier, the Animodar Method of Rectification gave me a late Pisces Ascendant and the Tritune of Hermes gave me a very early Aries Ascendant, yet the two times were within two or three minutes of each other--perhaps less.

I'm thinking about creating a new thread about how to rectify a natal chart using life events because this is the one method I really haven't tried yet. I much prefer techniques in which the steps are always the same, which isn't very Arian of me :rolleyes:

Anyway, I'm hoping this thread may help others who wish to rectify their natal charts using the Tritune of Hermes. Hopefully, members can learn from all of my mistakes so they don't make them themselves! :p

Arian Maverick

Arian Maverick

02-20-2008, 03:50 PM

I would be willing to help you by comparing the three birthtimes you have in my Kepler program and see which gets the highest score. Once we have some life events.

Thank you :)

However, a computer program is no substitute for an experienced Astrologer particularly skilled in rectification, that is if I could ever afford to pay one.

I can't even afford to buy books.

I can relate with you there, charmvirgo; I'm still in school and don't even have a part-time job yet, although I've started filling out applications.

I'm going to create the new thread now ;)

Arian Maverick

Arian Maverick

03-05-2008, 11:00 PM

I'm not sure if I'm the best person to try to help you with the instructions from the Antiquus Astrology site, but if I have time this weekend, I will try to read through the article. Please send me a reminder because I've been bogged down with notes and exams lately.

Arian Maverick

vBulletin® v3.8.2, Copyright ©2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.