Hellenistic delineations

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

For sure it is in Abu Mashar's "Great Introduction", and I think I remember it also from Paulus Alexandrianus; I do know that Maternus, Maximus, Paulus did make considerations re to angularity, and there is no mention in their works of trisection of arc (porphyry) restructuring of the chart to accomplish this (of course maybe they did use trisection of arc for this and simply didn't describe it, as Valens and later Rhetorius did describe it, and as Antiochus of Athens referenced it)
Thank you for that clarification dr. farr I appreciate your time spent in answering those questions :smile:
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

Good stuff JUPITERASC, thanks :)
That's OK Moog, glad to contribute - I learned these ideas mostly from Robert Schmidt's translations of Vettius Valens http://www.projecthindsight.com/ :smile:

Conditions relative to Sun then:


When a planet is in the interval from heliacal rising up to first station or from second station up to the heliacal setting, the planet is capable of appearing and therefore is in a place conducive to the conduct of its business .

The heliacal rising of a star (or other body such as the moon, a planet or a constellation) occurs when it first becomes visible above the eastern horizon for a brief moment just before sunrise, after a period of time when it had not been visible http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliacal_rising

When a planet is making a Station and/or phasis, it is not only capable of appearing but is also intensified [Schmidt says that Phasis means “making an appearance” or “sudden dramatic showing of something”. It can also mean “something that speaks” or we can say that it means “an appearance that speaks”].

Phasis describes a planet making a heliacal rising (rising before the sun) (standardized to 15 degrees by Hellenistic astrology) within 7 days before of after native’s birth. Rumen Kolev one of the few living practitioners of Ancient Babylonian Astrology based on his own observations of the skies, states that the 15[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]º[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] standardisation is obviously a variable dependent upon local conditions.[/FONT]

When any planet is “under the sun’s beams” i.e. within 15 ecliptic degrees of the sun, the planet is considered not capable of conducting its business due to being “drained or unempowered”. However, there are modifications to this such as if a planet is in its Exaltation, own terms or own bounds or dignity, then the planet is considered to be “in its own chariot” and therefore “protected and/or shielded” from the potential 'harm' of combustion.

When a planet is in the interval of first station to second station (i.e. retrograde), the planet is not fit to conduct its business because it is described as “walking backwards”.
 
Last edited:

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

FAQ SECT http://www.projecthindsight.com/

To be in Sect, the Sun must be above the horizon
The Sun can only be above the horizon in a Day/diurnal Chart

The Moon in a Night Chart may be in Sect either above or below the horizon

- that's because the Sun determines Diurnal/Nocturnal

(a) The Sun is always in Sect in a Day Chart

(b) The Moon is always in Sect in a Night Chart

ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

1.) In a diurnal chart you'd want the diurnal planets in the upper hemisphere with the Sun (hayz) as that would be more natural for those planets. The diurnal planets are Sun, Jupiter and Saturn.

If any diurnal planets in a diurnal chart are in the lower hemisphere/below the Ascendant/Descendant axis then although they are in sect, nevertheless they are considered slightly out of sect and more nocturnal in nature (halb).

If the nocturnal planets in a diurnal chart are below the horizon, although they are out of sect they are still in hayz and so more natural - but nocturnal planets that are above the horizon in a diurnal chart are situated contrary to their nature (halb).

2.) In a nocturnal chart you'd want the nocturnal planets in the upper hemisphere away from the Sun (hayz).

Any nocturnal planets in the lower hemisphere in a nocturnal chart are still in sect but are considered slightly out of sect and more diurnal in nature (halb).

If the diurnal planets in a nocturnal chart are below the horizon they are also hayz, so a little more natural but if they are above the horizon they are situated contrary to their nature nature (halb).

Just remember

(a) the Sun alone determines Day and Night.


(b) the Sun can only be above the horizon in a Day Chart

(c) the Moon is always out of Sect when the Sun is above the horizon (Diurnal/Day Chart)

(d) the Moon is always in Sect when the Sun is below the horizon (Nocturnal/Night Chart)

(e) therefore if the Sun is below the horizon it is a Nocturnal/Night Chart and

(f) therefore in a Nocturnal/Night Chart the Moon is in Sect whether above or below the Horizon

diurnal = day
nocturnal = night


(a) when above the horizon the Sun is in the upper hemisphere = Day/diurnal

(b) when below the horizon the Sun is in the lower hemisphere = Night/nocturnal

therefore

(c) the Moon is in Sect in a Night Chart irrespective of hemisphere and/or horizon

What if somenone has the Sun exactly on the Ascendant? Would their chart be neutral?
This is a question often debated :smile:

'Ascendant' is the name given to the Eastern section of the Great Circle of the Horizon


If the Sun were visible on the Eastern Horizon then one would define that as Day

Nevertheless there are a number of definitions for both Sunrise and Sunset
- one of which is 'apparent sunrise/sunset' - Due to atmospheric refraction, sunrise occurs shortly before the sun crosses above the horizon. Light from the sun is bent, or refracted, as it enters earth's atmosphere. This effect causes the apparent sunrise to be earlier than the actual sunrise. Similarly, apparent sunset occurs slightly later than actual sunset. However, it should be noted that due to changes in air pressure, relative humidity, and other quantities, no one can predict the exact effects of atmospheric refraction on sunrise and sunset time: this possible error increases with higher latitudes (closer to the poles).


Official times of Sunrise and Sunset may be found on various astronomical websites.


Hellenistic astrology states that the Sun is always in sect in a day/diurnal chart and obviously then out of sect in a night/nocturnal chart
link to an explanation of sect http://horoscopicastrologyblog.com/2008/11/25/the-astrology-of-sect/ :smile:
 
Last edited:

byjove

Account Closed
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

Some great work here, this is a great start for anyone wanting to learn this.

Dr. Farr, on that point of 15 degrees and angularity, I just spotted my Sun is angular in whole sign but about 24 degrees from the MC, so beyond the 15 degrees. I suppose it's a guide, like a noon birth placing the Sun in the 9th or 10th?

At what point in natal analysis does one consider planets 'seen' by the ascendant, signs of equal light and distance etc?
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

The discussion on that thread appears to be other than Hellenistic, whereas this thread concerns specifically Hellenistic delineations in particular.
this thread is clearly titled "Hellenistic Delineations" therefore Hellenistic Delineations are the topic of the thread. The other thread relates to a question "A night chart or a day chart?" :smile:

Mark on the thread over at skyscript that you earlier gave a link to and which you in fact started, clearly states:

QUOTE
"Historically, I think it fair to say that sect is very important in Hellenistic astrology but its influence diminishes significantly in medieval and renaissance astrology. With that decline went some of the basic understanding that went with it." http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6483&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

clearly therefore there is an important distinction between Hellenistic delineation of sect and medieval and renaissance delineation of the same topic.


USEFUL ADVICE FROM THE SAME SKYSCRIPT SECT THREAD
WHICH WAS STARTED BY SANDSTONE AT: http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6483&start=15 "Curtis Manwaring has delineated every planet by the opposing sect in each sign and house placement. Have some fun checking out your chart!
http://www.zodiac-x-files.com/signs/taurus-venus.html
Mark "
 
Last edited:

sandstone

Banned
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

does this mean we will need to make another distinction between whether it is hellenistic, or medival too? i can see all this fun subdivisions in the trad forum.. what next?
 

tsmall

Premium Member
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

Thank you JUPITERASC for the post on sect. All, I haven't forgoten about this thread. Holiday craziness... I need to spend more time reading, and I have a book or two to order....
 

sandstone

Banned
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

i like the fact you are also quoting from a thread on skyscript that i started... that is sweet!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

tsmall

Premium Member
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

does this mean we will need to make another distinction between whether it is hellenistic, or medival too? i can see all this fun subdivisions in the trad forum.. what next?

:lol::lol::lol: I don't think that will be necessary. :wink:
 

sandstone

Banned
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

i would like to point out jup asc provided a link earlier that is more medival then hellenistic in content.. the x-files site..

quote from the curtis manwarings site

These interpretations are more in line with medieval thinking than Hellenistic.

tjust think.. a new subforum!!! yum, yum..
one for hellenistic, the other for medival..
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

Thank you JUPITERASC for the post on sect. All, I haven't forgoten about this thread. Holiday craziness... I need to spend more time reading, and I have a book or two to order....
That's ok tsmall I posted those comments originally on Rebel Uranian's thread "Day or Night Chart" and then realized they did not belong there so I transferred them over to this thread because the "Day or Night Chart" thread seems more eclectic due to the mention of the use of Placidus houses. I noticed the link to Curtis Manwaring's individual delineations on sect for each planet posted on the thread originally started by sandstone over at skyscript: those particular delineations by Curtis Manwaring are the only ones of their kind freely available online so they make interesting and useful reading. :smile:
i like the fact you are also quoting from a thread on skyscript that i started... that is sweet!
Good :smile:
if we only had joseph cranes book as a free online thing, we could be cutting and pasting away too!
fwiw Vettius Valens died two thousand years ago whereas Joseph Crane is currently very much alive and obviously Joseph Crane needs to support himself so understandably it is unlikely he would provide a 'free online thing'! The Vettius Valens free online pdf is a most generous freebie courtesy of Professor Riley who has provided an interesting text for comparison with the Schmidt translations.
 
Last edited:

dr. farr

Well-known member
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

First, there are most definitely differences between the medieval/renaissance astrological applications and understanding of concepts, and the Greco/Roman (Hellenist)-an example of this I believe is the idea of the Sun being in sect ONLY in a diurnal chart. I believe this is a later concept which incorporates the "rejoicings" of the planets INTO the concept of sect: ie, Sun is always in sect but rejoices in a diurnal chart-this concept (I believe) transformed into the above (medieval) concept (ie that the Sun is ONLY in sect in a diurnal chart) So the later (medieval) astrologers equated rejoicing with sect, when originally sect and rejoicing were related but NOT equivalent concepts. I do know that Paulus Alexandrianus held to the concept of sect relative to the Sun which I have referred to as the "original" concept (that the Sun is always in sect but more influential when in a diurnal chart), and the concept of sect which I have elaborated in a post to the "other" sect thread (mentioned above by the link to the AW thread given by Sandstone)
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

First, there are most definitely differences between the medieval/renaissance astrological applications and understanding of concepts, and the Greco/Roman (Hellenist)-an example of this I believe is the idea of the Sun being in sect ONLY in a diurnal chart. I believe this is a later concept which incorporates the "rejoicings" of the planets INTO the concept of sect: ie, Sun is always in sect but rejoices in a diurnal chart-this concept (I believe) transformed into the above (medieval) concept (ie that the Sun is ONLY in sect in a diurnal chart) So the later (medieval) astrologers equated rejoicing with sect, when originally sect and rejoicing were related but NOT equivalent concepts. I do know that Paulus Alexandrianus held to the concept of sect relative to the Sun which I have referred to as the "original" concept (that the Sun is always in sect but more influential when in a diurnal chart), and the concept of sect which I have elaborated in a post to the "other" sect thread (mentioned above by the link to the AW thread given by Sandstone)
Chris Brennan worked with Robert Schmidt on Project Hindsight and says: :smile:

QUOTE:
An immensely important concept in the Hellenistic astrological tradition that did not survive into modern times is the concept of ‘sect’. The term ‘sect’ is a translation of the Greek word hairesis (αἵρεσις), which has a variety of meanings outside of its astrological usage, such as the act of ‘making a choice,’ or ‘a course of action,’ but it was also often employed to refer to ‘a school of thought,’ or ‘a philosophical or religious sect.’ This term was often used to refer to a group...

http://horoscopicastrologyblog.com/2008/11/25/the-astrology-of-sect/
[deleted quote over 100 words in one post against forum rules - Moderator]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

tsmall

Premium Member
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

I just want to see if I am understanding this correctly. Hellenistic (Greco/Roman) astrologers viewed the Sun as always being in sect, regardless of time of birth (day or night chart?) But the Sun "rejoices" or is happier in a day chart? Is the Moon similarly always considered to be in sect as well? And would rejoice in a night chart? This makes an enormous amount of sense, considering that we are looking at the luminaries in natal charts.
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

Relative to the Moon, no, it was not considered to always be in sect; it would only be in sect in a nocturnal chart when in the "night" hemisphere of the chart. Why the difference re to the luminaries (Sun always in sect, but Moon variable)? I think this was due to the Sol Invictus outlook of the Hellenists, which I believe they got from the Solar Dominant concept (the RA concept) of the earlier Egyptian civilization.
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

So, dr. farr when you wrote:
Relative to the Moon, no, it was not considered to always be in sect;
by 'it' you seem to be referring to 'the sun' Thus, the sun was not considered to always be in sect. In other words it seems that you would agree that the sun is sometimes out of sect :smile:
it would only be in sect in a nocturnal chart when in the "night" hemisphere of the chart..
when you wrote 'it' , the Moon seems to have been your intended reference
 
Last edited:

Rebel Uranian

Well-known member
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

Relative to the Moon, no, it was not considered to always be in sect; it would only be in sect in a nocturnal chart when in the "night" hemisphere of the chart. Why the difference re to the luminaries (Sun always in sect, but Moon variable)? I think this was due to the Sol Invictus outlook of the Hellenists, which I believe they got from the Solar Dominant concept (the RA concept) of the earlier Egyptian civilization.

Since your belief is just a belief (not trying to sound belittling but... oops :p) and I have a logical reason why the Sun is always in sect, I'll post mine:

A diurnal planet is always in sect when it is in the same hemisphere as the Sun. A planet is always in the same hemisphere as itself. The Sun is a diurnal planet. The Sun is always in the same hemisphere as itself. Since the Sun is a diurnal planet and it is always in the same hemisphere as the Sun (itself,) then therefore the Sun is always in sect.

@JUPITERASCENDANT - Why is my Moon considered in the upper hemisphere of the chart? It is quite clearly below the horizon, with my Aquarius Sun. Is the entirety of the 7th house in the upper hemisphere according to Hellenistic or medieval or whatever kind of mixed up trad you're using?
 
Last edited:

waybread

Well-known member
Re: Hellenistic deliniations

Is it too much to suggest that people who really want to learn Hellenistic astrology buy a few books? Honestly,I don't think it is something one can pick up on a thread without a lot of previous study. Which all takes time. If you have a good grasp of modern astrology; or better yet of neo-traditional astrology, you can see better how Hellenistic astrology was put together. But this takes years of study, not days or weeks.

Put differently you wouldn't take your drivers' license for a 16-wheeler until you've passed the basic driver's license test in a small automatic shift sedan. You wouldn't apply to law school prior to graduating from high school.

If it is too much to suggest that people begin a collection of astrology books, a good place to start is the Skyscript website, which has many articles and links. Or just google Chris Brennan or Robert Schmidt. A good recent textbook on traditional astrology is Avelar and Rebeiro. You can order it via amazon.com or try the American Federation of Astrologers' on-line book shop. Joseph Crane's books have been mentioned.

Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos is available in most university libraries. A major urban public library might have it. Your local library could get it for you via Interlibrary loan. Although he was possibly the modern astrologer of the 2nd century AD, his book is one of the easier ones to follow. If you are interested only in birth-chart interpretations, you can skip his material on weather prediction and mundane astrology.

Vettius Valens Anthologies is available for free on-line at the website of Mark T. Riley. I don't find Valens so easy to follow, and he spends a lot of time on length-of-life calculations, which don't interest me; but hey, it's free.

You can purchase copies of the following through amazon.com and possibly elsewhere: Dorotheus of Sidon, Firmicus Maternus, and Rhetorius the Egyptian. These are relatively easy to follow. Purists will criticize the Bram translation of Firmicus, but I wouldn't worry about it if you're just starting out. These may also be available to you through Interlibrary loan.

If you live near a university or college with a classics department, their library will probably carry these, and normally you can get a library card as a member of the community.

A couple of other sources have been translated into English, but so far as I can tell, they are harder to come by via a major Internet book-seller.

I am not particularly interested in practicing Hellenistic astrology, at least not so far, but I am very interested in astrology's historical origins.
 
Top