PDA

View Full Version : Prominent/Obscure and Dignities


Rebel Uranian
12-11-2011, 06:08 PM
This is a system I devised to tell prominence or obscurity of planets rather than dignity or debility, based on this (http://www.astrologycom.com/values.html) system of scoring dignities and debilities. Tell me if there's any obvious problem with this system.

In the sign of (planet) +5
In the exaltation of (planet,) only if in reception +4
In the triplicity of (planet) +3
In the terms of (planet) +2
In the face of (planet) +1 (IN YO FAIC!)
Conjunct any planet or angle (any reasonable orb) +5
Trine or opposite any planet or angle (any reasonable orb) +4
Sextile or square any planet or angle (any reasonable orb) +3

Anachiel
12-21-2011, 11:42 AM
What's more important is, why you are creating this system. What is it supposed to tell you or define for you?

Just curious.

Claire19
12-21-2011, 08:57 PM
What's more important is, why you are creating this system. What is it supposed to tell you or define for you?

Just curious.
I agree it says nothing. Every planetary aspect has its own strength and weakness and prominence and obscurity are not terms that I would use. I also dont use dignities, fall, exaltation etc. It is old fashioned terminology and really doesnt say much at all.

Rebel Uranian
12-21-2011, 09:08 PM
What's more important is, why you are creating this system. What is it supposed to tell you or define for you?

Just curious.

It's supposed to say how influential a planet is.

Anachiel
12-21-2011, 09:12 PM
It's supposed to say how influential a planet is.

Right, right but I mean, quite honestly without any criticism, what is it exactly you are trying to determine? Like how strong/weak a planet is or to break a tie in the event the testimonies of a chart are equal or are you trying to just simplify what appears to be a tedious shopping-list of things to check off for a planet or...?

Rebel Uranian
12-21-2011, 09:15 PM
It's the table of scoring Ptolemy's dignities but instead of looking for dignity on one planet it looks for the influence of a planet on another planet.

Anachiel
12-21-2011, 09:37 PM
Okay, so you are basically trying to see how active a planet is or how much attention it gets.

For example, if Venus was in yo faic, it would only get 1 point. But, if she had 1 conjunction and 2 trines and a sextile and was not in an angle, that would add an additional 16 points for a total of 17 points.

Compare this to say Saturn, in the same chart, that was in Capricorn on the Ascendant sextiling Venus. He would only get 13 points.

Do you really think Venus is stronger or more prominant than Saturn in this fictitious chart?

Rebel Uranian
12-21-2011, 09:47 PM
Yes. "In yo faic" (or "in your face") was a joke by the way :P

dr. farr
12-22-2011, 04:22 AM
Actually, the ashtakavarga system in Vedic astrology does this (as opposed to the planetary strength scoring system used by Parasara and mainstream Vedic astrology, which is a dignity/debility scoring system much like the Traditionalist and Hellenistic models used in the West) The ashtakavarga method totals up the influences of each planet upon every other planet, using the + influences, and uses this total (for each planet) to determine the net + or - influence of that planet in that chart. I use a related method called Bright Degree Activations for the same purpose (taken from Maximus and particularly from Thabit ibn Qurra) The ashtakavarga method (8 energies method) can be applied as well to the Western astrological model as to the Vedic model.

Rebel Uranian
12-22-2011, 09:10 PM
Can you please post a link to the Bright Degree Activations I keep hearing you mention but can't find on the Internet?

dr. farr
12-23-2011, 04:22 AM
Bright degrees (of signs) and their ramifications upon planets (or Lots) posited in them, have been described in Antiochus of Athens, Maximus, Rhetorius (among the Hellenists), Abu Mashar, Al-Biruni, Thabit ibn Qurra (estensively), and Ibn Ezra (among the Islamic transitional era authors) and Guido Bonatti and even as late as William Lilly, although by those later times they had largely fallen by the wayside.
In addition to being elevated or pitted, and being positive ("male") or negative ("female"), and being affinitive to planet qualities and zodiacal sign qualities (the planetary and sign monomoiria), degrees also have affinity to "light", and were called Bright (or luminous). dark, and mixed (or faint or void). It is to the quality of light relative to the degrees that the term Bright degree refers.

Several lists of these degrees are to be found in the literature (among readily available authors mentioned above you will find lists in Al-Biruni, Abu Mashar, Ibn Ezra, Bonatti and Lilly) I follow the list from Thabit ibn Qurra as most accurate (from my use of it), which is nearly identical to the list in Abu Mashar (and very close to the list in Al-Biruni) Over the next 2 days I shall post this list under a thread entitled "Bright Degrees" in the dignities forum.

tsmall
12-23-2011, 04:38 AM
Until dr. farr posts his list, the only mention of "bright" or light/dark/smoky dgrees I have ever been able to find is here

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/deginf1.html#note

and scrolling down to the bottom for an explination.

dr. farr, when you post your list, could you post a more comprehensible explaination of how these degree influences are actually applied?

dr. farr
12-23-2011, 05:13 AM
These later explanations (skyscript definitions) show the more limited application of the Bright/Dark degrees.
Originally (Anitochus, Maximus, Thabit ibn Qurra, Abu Mashar):
-Bright (luminous) degrees increase the benefic qualities of any planet in them, and largely if not completely neutralize the "malefic" influences (even of the so-called malefics Mars and Saturn)
-Dark (shadowed) degrees decreased the benefic qualities of any planet in them, and amplified malefic qualities (particularly of the so-called malefics)
-Mixed (smokey, void, faint) degrees had no modifying influences upon the qualities or expressions of influence of planets in them.

I follow these indications, rather than the application of the "light" effects to complexion, color, etc...although these other applications are mentioned in passing by Al-Biruni as also be used by astrologers of his time (11th century)

Moog
12-23-2011, 07:35 AM
Until dr. farr posts his list, the only mention of "bright" or light/dark/smoky dgrees I have ever been able to find is here

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/deginf1.html#note

and scrolling down to the bottom for an explination.

dr. farr, when you post your list, could you post a more comprehensible explaination of how these degree influences are actually applied?

Brilliant, I was looking for a table with M/F degrees in a while back, didn't find one. :smile:

Rebel Uranian
12-23-2011, 02:24 PM
That list also puts the Capricorn symbol for Leo and says that 7 Capricorn is a Pit (unless Deep means something else) when it isn't...

Edit: "Deep" and "IF" seem to mean something I didn't know about prior to reading. Also, what do masculine and feminine degrees do? I know they don't determine physiological sex of the native because almost all of my planets including the Sun, Moon, Ascendant, Mars, and chart ruler are in masculine degrees.

Moog
12-23-2011, 08:53 PM
That list also puts the Capricorn symbol for Leo and says that 7 Capricorn is a Pit (unless Deep means something else) when it isn't...

Edit: "Deep" and "IF" seem to mean something I didn't know about prior to reading.

I'm fairly sure that seep degrees and degrees of Increasing fortune are the same as pitted and elevated degrees.

I'm confused by the differences between the various lists :tongue:

Rebel Uranian
12-23-2011, 08:58 PM
IF and Deep don't appear to be the same as elevations and pits in a lot of places unless one or possibly both of these lists are wrong. (Hey, one was merely typed and the other has a Capricorn symbol for Leo, so likely it's both.)


List of elevations and pits:
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29126

Edit: 17 (or 16 in modern numbers) Aquarius is both IF and Deep, so no, it's not a list of elevations and pits.

Moog
12-23-2011, 09:04 PM
I suspect they are the same thing, just with discrepancies between the lists.

Rebel Uranian
12-23-2011, 09:05 PM
That's even more likely.

tsmall
12-23-2011, 09:05 PM
Isn't it likely that there is more than one list of "deep/IF" or pitted and elevated degrees, just as there is more than one table of terms? We have (at least) the Egyptian, Chaldean, and Ptolemy's. I imagine it would take experimentation to discover which work best, but at this point I would be most inclined to go with whatever dr. farr posts. He has, I believe, tried them all...

RU...typo's happen.

Rebel Uranian
12-23-2011, 09:06 PM
It seems that both lists have typos. dr. farr's list better be right.

dr. farr
12-24-2011, 03:04 AM
There ARE different lists in the literature (just as in the case of terms) For pits and elevations I have taken the list if Ibn Ezra, which is the same as given by Thabit ibn Qurra and is ALMOST the same as Al-Biruni's list and the list found in Abu Mashar. I follow what the Harranian ibn Qurra gives (as Ibn Ezra followed him) because of the extensive use Qurra made of pits and elevations (and bright/dark degrees)

Yes, "degrees of increasing fortune" MEANS the same as "elevated degrees", but there is some discrepancy among the lists of these (again I follow the Ibn Ezra/
Thabit ibn Qurra list for these degrees)

Note that I have corrected the degrees given to the modern chart numeration, that is, each degree is 1 degree PRIOR that the number given in the old lists, because they all (to Hellenist times) began signs at 1 degree and ended them at 30 degrees, whereas in contemporary numeration we begin signs at 0 and end at 29:59:59
I have followed this same rectification (to modern chart numeration) in the Bright and Dark Degree lists I will be posting.

"Male/Female" degrees have to do with the polarity (modern term) of each degree, its + or - polarity; another way to look at these qualities is by yin ("female degree") and yang ("male degree") Again, there are several lists of these in the literature; I follow the several authors (incuding Al-Biruni) who alternate these, beginning with the 1st degree of + signs being +, the second degree -, etc; and the reverse for -signs (ie, first degree is -, second degree +, etc)