PDA

View Full Version : Hellenistic delineations


Pages : [1] 2

tsmall
12-20-2011, 12:58 AM
I am not sure if this is the correct place to post this question (so if it needs to be moved?)

With all the current interest in Hellenistic methods, how exactly does one go about delineating a chart using Hellenistic astrology?

byjove
12-20-2011, 02:27 AM
Hi T! :smile:

There have actually been many threads on this area I'd say in the last year particularly. But you have come across a good point in that perhaps the info. is a little scattered. So we could take the chance to bring some basics here, in one place, if that's along the lines of what you had in mind? I think this is a perfectly good place - natal astrology!

JUPITERASC
12-20-2011, 03:05 AM
So what would you recommend then byjove regarding this question - Preliminary Natal Analysis perhaps?

So, while we're mulling over how to answer the question, you mentioned previous threads on Hellenistic astrology so I searched and I found these two on Sect http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30398&highlight=hellenistic and on Profections http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=41112&highlight=hellenistic and another thread, this time on Zodiacal Releasing http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27127&highlight=hellenistic :smile:

dr. farr
12-20-2011, 03:56 AM
I am not sure if this is the correct place to post this question (so if it needs to be moved?)

With all the current interest in Hellenistic methods, how exactly does one go about deliniating a chart using Hellenistic astrology?


Probably close would be Joseph Crane's book "Astrological Roots: the Hellenistic Legacy", followed by his "Practical Guide to Traditional Astrology", which includes a moderate amount of Hellenistic material.

tsmall
12-20-2011, 12:14 PM
Hi T! :smile:

There have actually been many threads on this area I'd say in the last year particularly. But you have come across a good point in that perhaps the info. is a little scattered. So we could take the chance to bring some basics here, in one place, if that's along the lines of what you had in mind? I think this is a perfectly good place - natal astrology!

Hi! This is actually what I was thinking. I thought it could be fun, and informative, if we looked at a chart and applied Hellenistic techniques, but wasn't sure if anyone else would be interested...

Moog
12-20-2011, 01:00 PM
I'm interested.

Can't really offer much in the way of info, I'm a nooob

byjove
12-20-2011, 03:53 PM
Well first thing first, is the houses. I suppose we should be very clear here which allows people new to this to catch on without being overwhelmed.

When viewing a natal chart in this system, you use Whole Sign houses. This means that the sign on the ascendant becomes the first 'house'. The ASC is an angle within that house. The second house begins at the next sign, and so on. Each house begins at 0 degrees and finishes at 29.9 degrees.

E.g. Ascendant Pisces of 15 degrees means Pisces is the whole of the first house, Aries is the whole of the second house, the whole of the sign of Taurus is the 3rd house and so on. The natal chart looks clearly divided into 12 segments of 30 degrees each.

The degree of the Pisces ascendant continues to be 15 degrees, and I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) the degree of the ascendant becomes the most sensitive point in each sign thereafter. So 15 degrees Taurus, Gemini etc. Planets conjunct this sensitive degree in any sign have amplified importance, it's stronger.

Continuing with the angles, ascendant 15 degrees Pisces means descendant 15 degrees Virgo, so that's angle 2.

Let's say the native has the IC at 12 degrees Gemini, this is angle 3.

Complete the angles with MC at 12 degrees Sagittarius. The MC at the 12th degree here is the most sensitive point for interpretation of the career. This MC point, or our 4th angle, can be found in a number of different houses at the top of the chart, most commonly 9th house, 10th house or 11th house. Finding the MC point in the 9th or 11th reveals more information about the native's career interests and possibilities. Finding the MC in the 9th often adds an international perspective to career possibilities, but can also mean ideas and beliefs are central to the career they choose. It can also tie in work with institutions associated with the 9th: higher education, religious or legal ones. You add this consideration to the 10th sign and any planets that may be found therein. Likewise you do the same if the MC is in the 11th. If it's found in the 10th, the concentration is in that sign then.

I'm attaching a chart of someone born at 12 noon today. I tried using one of my astro. programs but they take too long, are too complicated and ugly. So astro.com it is. The chart has MANY aspects but the 12 houses can be easily seen for now and that's what matters.

tsmall
12-20-2011, 04:13 PM
byjove, are you suggesting maybe making a hand drawn chart to look at? I was hoping we could use an astro chart. I have attached a new one. (in tropical, though I believe the jury is still out on what zodiac the Hellenists were using...)

I also believe that using this method, aspects can be made by sign position alone? Does anyone know if there is in fact an orb of influence?

edit to add: we seem to have had the same idea, lol. I think it would be important to keep the "outers" out of it, so to speak?

JUPITERASC
12-20-2011, 09:40 PM
byjove, are you suggesting maybe making a hand drawn chart to look at? I was hoping we could use an astro chart. I have attached a new one. (in tropical, though I believe the jury is still out on what zodiac the Hellenists were using...)

I also believe that using this method, aspects can be made by sign position alone? Does anyone know if there is in fact an orb of influence?

edit to add: we seem to have had the same idea, lol. I think it would be important to keep the "outers" out of it, so to speak?
thanks for the reminder on the 'outers' being 'out' tsmall, as I think we can all agree that it is safe to say that two thousand plus years ago there were no delineations for 'the outers' in astrology.

(a) Aspects are made by Sign alone - so any planets in the same house are also in the same Sign

(b) however, a distinction is made for planets that are within 3º orb of an aspect

(c) the aspects are conjunction, square, opposition, trine, semi-sextile. Note is taken of Disjunction - ie planets 150º apart

Adding to byjove's clarification of Whole Sign House Borders in relation to Whole Sign House Sensitive Points, any planetary ingress into a sign is an important consideration:

e.g. when any planet completes a transit of byjove's hypothetical ascendant Sign Pisces - from 0ºPisces to 29.9ºPisces - then that planet is ingressing (using byjove's foregoing example) the hypothetical Whole Sign 2nd house at 0º Aries: thus in Whole Signs, any planetary ingress into a Sign is also an ingress into a House. :smile:

MSO
12-20-2011, 10:42 PM
So the difference between newspaper astrology and Hellenistic astrology is using whole signs and not using the outers?

Surely there's a bit more to it than that. The vapours have always been my favorite part of traditional astrological philosophy. *nods*

JUPITERASC
12-20-2011, 11:42 PM
So the difference between newspaper astrology and Hellenistic astrology is using whole signs and not using the outers?

Surely there's a bit more to it than that. The vapours have always been my favorite part of traditional astrological philosophy. *nods*
You're right MSO - There is "a bit more to it than that" :smile:

tsmall
12-21-2011, 12:09 AM
I am assuming that the place to start would be by delineating each planet and the ASC, MC, IC and DC (as well as PoF and nodes) by sign position, as well as by degree. Would we need to look at a Porphyry at well to determine planetary strength? What "diginities" do we look at?

(btw, this chart is for someone not related to me, but whom I know very well, so we are looking at a real person.)

JUPITERASC
12-21-2011, 01:00 AM
I am assuming that the place to start would be by delineating each planet and the ASC, MC, IC and DC (as well as PoF and nodes) by sign position, as well as by degree. Would we need to look at a Porphyry at well to determine planetary strength? What "diginities" do we look at?

(btw, this chart is for someone not related to me, but whom I know very well, so we are looking at a real person.)
tsmall, I assumed that as well until I discovered that Robert Schmidt describes something he terms "Preliminary natal analysis" which consists not only of judging whether:

(a) a planet is able and/or planets are able - and/or unable - to conduct their business and/or businesses, as well as

(b) whether the natal planets are favorable or unfavorable to the native.

I discovered this in 2007 on an internet forum that is no longer accessible when one attempts to login

However there are other online sources of hellenistic information, such as http://www.astrology-x-files.com/x-files/ as well as forums - eg skyscript, tribenet and ACTastrology (which has a forum moderated by Schmidt himself) http://actastrology.com/viewforum.php?f=4&sid=ccfb9e07cf3c1c2d55a9a780ffaefcef :smile:

tsmall
12-21-2011, 01:21 AM
tsmall, I assumed that as well until I discovered that Robert Schmidt describes something he terms "Preliminary natal analysis" which consists not only of judging whether:

(a) a planet is able and/or planets are able - and/or unable - to conduct their business and/or businesses, as well as

(b) whether the natal planets are favorable or unfavorable to the native.

I discovered this in 2007 on an internet forum that is no longer accessible when one attempts to login

However there are other online sources of hellenistic information, such as http://www.astrology-x-files.com/x-files/ (http://www.astrology-x-files.com/x-files/) as well as forums - eg skyscript, tribenet and ACTastrology (which has a forum moderated by Schmidt himself) http://actastrology.com/viewforum.php?f=4&sid=ccfb9e07cf3c1c2d55a9a780ffaefcef (http://actastrology.com/viewforum.php?f=4&sid=ccfb9e07cf3c1c2d55a9a780ffaefcef) :smile:

Assumed which? That it would be necessary to start by looking at each planet, or that one would need a quadrant based chart in order to understand strength?

Thank you for the links. :smile:

JUPITERASC
12-21-2011, 01:36 AM
I am assuming that the place to start would be by delineating each planet and the ASC, MC, IC and DC (as well as PoF and nodes) by sign position, as well as by degree. Would we need to look at a Porphyry at well to determine planetary strength? What "diginities" do we look at?
(btw, this chart is for someone not related to me, but whom I know very well, so we are looking at a real person.)
tsmall, I assumed that as well until I discovered that Robert Schmidt describes something he terms "Preliminary natal analysis" which consists not only of judging whether: :smile:
Assumed which? That it would be necessary to start by looking at each planet, or that one would need a quadrant based chart in order to understand strength? Thank you for the links. :smile:
I have a little knowledge of Traditional Astrology which delineates amongst other considerations, by checking each individual planet by Sign as well as degree, as well as PoF, the four angles of the natal chart and therefore - until I discovered that internet forum in 2007, I assumed that Hellenistic astrology begins by doing that. However, I learned that Hellenistic astrology differs by analyzing a natal chart in a way that takes some getting used to as it is a complex procedure and based to a considerable extent on an individual astrologer's personal judgement :smile:


To quote Schmidt then:



"Some preliminary orientation for those unfamiliar with this technique. The first book of a lost writing by the Hellenistic astrologer Antiochus concluded with algorithms for determining two ruling planets in a nativity: the domicile master (oikodespotēs) of the nativity (the planet that takes the entire nativity as its home in the same manner that planets take certain images or “signs” as their domicile), and the lord (kurios) of the nativity. We know this from a Byzantine summary of this lost work and from extracts made from it by Porphyry.

[deleted quote over 100 words in one post - Moderator]

tsmall
12-21-2011, 01:56 AM
I have a little knowledge of Traditional Astrology which delineates amongst other considerations, by checking each individual planet by Sign as well as degree, as well as PoF, the four angles of the natal chart and therefore - until I discovered that internet forum in 2007, I assumed that Hellenistic astrology begins by doing that. However, I learned that Hellenistic astrology differs by analyzing a natal chart in a way that takes some getting used to as it is a complex procedure and based to a considerable extent on an individual astrologer's personal judgement :smile:

Ah, well, one step at a time then? Especially when working with a "noob?" To start, it appears that we first need to determine the chart sect? As in, whether the sun has precidence (day chart) or the moon (night chart?) In this instance, it would be the moon, as it is a nighttime chart? We then need to look to see which image (sign) houses the moon, and determine the trigon lord? And of course, next would be to explain what exactly trigon lords are. :unsure: I can see this is going to be a pretty big undertaking...


To quote Schmidt then:

"Some preliminary orientation for those unfamiliar with this technique. The first book of a lost writing by the Hellenistic astrologer Antiochus concluded with algorithms for determining two ruling planets in a nativity: the domicile master (oikodespotēs) of the nativity (the planet that takes the entire nativity as its home in the same manner that planets take certain images or “signs” as their domicile), and the lord (kurios) of the nativity. We know this from a Byzantine summary of this lost work and from extracts made from it by Porphyry. [deleted quote over 100 words in one post - Moderator]


Are you able to short-cut this? Otherwise, it could be after Christmas before I can make a thourough study...

JUPITERASC
12-21-2011, 02:43 AM
Ah, well, one step at a time then? Especially when working with a "noob?" One step at a time is a more sensible approach than leaping merrily over a chasm

To start, it appears that we first need to determine the chart sect? As in, whether the sun has precidence (day chart) or the moon (night chart?) In this instance, it would be the moon, as it is a nighttime chart? We then need to look to see which image (sign) houses the moon, and determine the trigon lord? And of course, next would be to explain what exactly trigon lords are. :unsure: I can see this is going to be a pretty big undertaking..
The following are basics of Hellenistic analysis from Valens as translated by Robert Schmidt

To find conditions relevant to the fitness and/or ability of a planet to conduct its business we would commence with assessing conditions that are relative to the horizon, so:

If a planet is in an angular or succedent Whole Sign house then the planet is in a place conducive to the conduct of its business.
Angular Houses = 1,4,7,10: Succedent Houses = 2,5,8.11

If a planet remains angular when using dynamic house system Porphyry then the planet is said to be 'goaded' towards more activity.

If a planet is in a cadent Whole Sign house, then the planet is in a place that is not conducive to the conduct of its business.
Cadent Houses = 3,6,9,12

If a benefic planet is in a cadent house, the beneficence of the planet is turned away from the native (or native’s agenda).

If a malefic planet is in a cadent house, the malevolence of the planet is turned away from the native (or the native's agenda).

Are you able to short-cut this? Otherwise, it could be after Christmas before I can make a thourough study...
Astrologers seem to have had more time available to them two thousand plus years ago... how fortunate they were!

Unfortunately however they lacked computers, so to send and receive messages took weeks, months, if not years, so on balance since we have an online forum, we are in a sense, fortunate! Good also that neither of us has to chisel ancient hieroglyphics onto stone. Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year :smile:

There is software that does all the donkey work available from astrology x files (Curtis Manwaring) http://www.zodiac-x-files.com/ and Rumen Kolev (one of the few living practitioners of Ancient Babylonian Astrology who also just happens to be a software programmer) has this extraordinary product on offer http://alabe.com/placidus.html :smile:

The next step according to Schmidt if anyone is interested is:

"The proposed algorithms for both of these ruling planets are not without their interpretive difficulties, although the determination of the lord of the nativity is stated in the Porphyry text itself to be especially difficult. The determination of the domicile master of the nativity is based on a predomination (epikratēsis) argument—that is, we first have to determine which of the two lights is better positioned in the nativity according to several specified criteria. The domicile master of the nativity is then taken as the domicile lord of the image occupied by this light..."

dr. farr
12-21-2011, 03:42 AM
One can estimate angularity without a porphyry overlay: in your whole sign chart, find the ascending, MC, descendant and IC degrees (not the houses, but the degrees): any planet 15 degrees before or after of the specific degree is angular (relative to the horizon/horizon MC/IC axes); a planet within 15 degrees flowing toward the specific degree is "more angular" ("stronger" relative to angularity) than the planet flowing away from the specific degree (alhtough still within 15 degrees of that specific degree) These considerations are seperate from the whole sign house placements and center only upon the consideration of planetary strength relative to angularity.

JUPITERASC
12-21-2011, 03:57 AM
One can estimate angularity without a porphyry overlay: in your whole sign chart, find the ascending, MC, descendant and IC degrees (not the houses, but the degrees): any planet 15 degrees before or after of the specific degree is angular (relative to the horizon/horizon MC/IC axes); a planet within 15 degrees flowing toward the specific degree is "more angular" ("stronger" relative to angularity) than the planet flowing away from the specific degree (alhtough still within 15 degrees of that specific degree) These considerations are seperate from the whole sign house placements and center only upon the consideration of planetary strength relative to angularity.
dr. farr, I am interested to ask you who originated this way of estimating angularity without a porphyry overlay and in what way does this method of estimating angularity differ from porphyry as well as is this a method used by any astrologers two thousand years ago? :smile:

dr. farr
12-21-2011, 04:05 AM
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)

JUPITERASC
12-21-2011, 04:10 AM
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:

Moog
12-21-2011, 12:15 PM
Good stuff JUPITERASC, thanks :-)

JUPITERASC
12-21-2011, 01:29 PM
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 15º standardisation is obviously a variable dependent upon local conditions.

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”.

JUPITERASC
12-31-2011, 09:37 PM
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:

byjove
12-31-2011, 10:30 PM
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?

sandstone
12-31-2011, 10:38 PM
cross over going on..

http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44199&page=2

JUPITERASC
12-31-2011, 11:25 PM
cross over going on..
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44199&page=2
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 "

sandstone
12-31-2011, 11:31 PM
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
12-31-2011, 11:32 PM
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
12-31-2011, 11:39 PM
i like the fact you are also quoting from a thread on skyscript that i started... that is sweet!

tsmall
12-31-2011, 11:41 PM
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
12-31-2011, 11:55 PM
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
01-01-2012, 12:21 AM
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.

dr. farr
01-01-2012, 01:19 AM
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
01-01-2012, 01:34 AM
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]

tsmall
01-01-2012, 01:36 AM
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
01-01-2012, 01:49 AM
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
01-01-2012, 01:58 AM
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

Rebel Uranian
01-01-2012, 03:11 AM
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?

waybread
01-01-2012, 07:50 AM
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.

waybread
01-01-2012, 08:07 AM
I might just mention a few gleanings.

1. The sun isn't so important in Hellenistic astrology. The really important "me" point" is the degree of the ascendant. Several of the authors cited above used it to calculate all kinds of "lots" (which came to be known as Arabic parts.) I would suggest that these sometimes seem more important than houses in determining areas of life.

2. Angularity gives a planet a huge amount of strength, notably if it's in the first or 10th house. The 9th, 5th, and 11th houses were also good news. The 7th and 4th houses are next in order of favourability. If you've got planets in the sixth, 12th, or 8th house, normally they're toast. And you might even be a wretched person.

3. Lords are really important to some of the authors, and they are calculated in several ways. One way that we use in modern astrology is identifying the so-called accidental house-cusp ruler: the planet that rules the sign on the cusp of the house in question. Its location says a lot about how the house in question functions. But they also looked at the lords of triplicities, which varied depending upon whether you had a day or night birth.

4. Because precise planetary positions were sometimes hard to calculate, the ancient astrologers tended to consider tenanted signs in aspect, not planets based upon degrees and orbs.

5. Neo-Hellenistic astrology gave whole sign houses a lot of cachet. But Porphyry, who developed a simple quadrant house system, was also a Hellenistic astrologer. Because a lot of the methods don't refer to houses, you can use either whole signs or Porphyry with a lot of them.

dr. farr
01-01-2012, 08:12 AM
RU: yes your Moon is below the horizon and therefore in the day hemisphere of the chart; some later authors considered th hemispheres not from the horizon but relative to the houses: thus houses 1-12-11-10-9-8 = one hemisphere and houses 7-6-5-4-3-2 = the other hemisphere; however we do not find this approach among the Greco/Roman authors, nor among the Islamic transitional-era authors.

It might be interesting to compare Vedic astrology's outlook in this matter: the classical jyotish authors (such as Parasara) did not give the same importance to the doctrine of sect as Hellenists did, however jyotish always included (what we know of as sect) in their estimations (calculations) of planetary strength: they gave (and still do give) points for planetary strength in their calculations according to the following model:

Vedic "sect" considerations:

+Sun gets strength if in the DAY part of a DAY chart (note that this is similar to what I have discussed above as a later development in Western astrology where the Sun became considered to be in sect only when above the horizon in a day chart)

+Moon gets strength only if in the night part of the chart (same as the Hellenists)

+Mercury gets strength in either hemisphere of the chart (same here as with the Hellenists)

+Mars gets strenth only if in the night part of the chart (same as the Hellenists)

+Jupiter gets strength only if in the day part of the chart( same as the Hellenists)

Now there are 2 reversals in the Vedic classical authors relative to the Greco/Romans:

+Venus gets strength only if in the DAY part of the chart (reverse of Hellenists)

+Saturn gets strength onli if in the NIGHT part of the chart (ditto)

Interesting that their is agreement relative to 5 of the 7 planets between the ancient Greco/Romans and the ancient jyotish seers; interesting too the reversal of Venus and Saturn.

JUPITERASC
01-01-2012, 08:22 AM
dr. farr your comment on another thread seems to be saying that the Sun is always in sect - however, to begin with, before considering any additional considerations such as (halb) the Sun is in sect when above the horizon and the Moon in sect when the Sun is below the horizon :smile:
Remember that the Sun is always in sect, but more "potent" in a day chart;

dr. farr
01-01-2012, 08:35 AM
Not for Paulus (at least): Sun was always in sect but its "value" as such only "counted" if it were above the horizon in a day chart. In my understanding of the literature, the Moon is in sect only when in the night hemisphere of a given chart; if in a night chart the Moon is in the day hemisphere, then not only is the Moon out of sect but also is out of sect in its period, which authors like Paulus (and other later authors like Abu Mashar and Al-kindi) stated made the Moon "powerless" in such a situation.

JUPITERASC
01-01-2012, 08:41 AM
Not for Paulus (at least): Sun was always in sect but its "value" as such only "counted" if it were above the horizon in a day chart. In my understanding of the literature, the Moon is in sect only when in the night hemisphere of a given chart; if in a night chart the Moon is in the day hemisphere, then not only is the Moon out of sect but also is out of sect in its period, which authors like Paulus (and other later authors like Abu Mashar and Al-kindi) stated made the Moon "powerless" in such a situation.
dr. farr, so when Chris Brennan writes an article on an Hellenistic Astrology website with the following declaration, what is your view on that :smile:

"Robert Schmidt points out that the notion of sect could by likened to the concept of a two party political system, as in the case of the United States where you have two political parties who are vying for control of the White House.

When the Sun is anywhere above the horizon, as demarcated by the ascendant/descendant axis, the chart is considered to be a diurnal or day time chart and the planets of the diurnal sect are considered to be the party in power, while the nocturnal planets have less power to push their own agenda. Conversely, when the Sun is anywhere below the horizon the chart is considered to be nocturnal, and thus the nocturnal sect is considered to be the party in power and it has the ability to push its own agenda, while the diurnal planets have their authority reduced somewhat.

Mercury is considered to be intrinsically neutral, as he often is in astrology, but he is usually said to ally himself with the diurnal sect when he is a morning star, or conversely he allies himself with the nocturnal sect when he is an evening star. Mercury is a ‘morning star’ when he rises before the Sun on the day of the native’s birth, and he is an ‘evening star’ when he sets after the Sun on the day of the native’s birth."
http://horoscopicastrologyblog.com/2008/11/25/the-astrology-of-sect/

JUPITERASC
01-01-2012, 08:50 AM
Not for Paulus (at least): Sun was always in sect but its "value" as such only "counted" if it were above the horizon in a day chart. In my understanding of the literature, the Moon is in sect only when in the night hemisphere of a given chart; if in a night chart the Moon is in the day hemisphere, then not only is the Moon out of sect but also is out of sect in its period, which authors like Paulus (and other later authors like Abu Mashar and Al-kindi) stated made the Moon "powerless" in such a situation.
Paulus understanding of the Sun and sect seems very similar and mostly in agreement with that of Valens dr. farr because if according to Paulus the "value" of the Sun is not "counted" unless the Sun is above the horizon in a day chart, then one might question the real difference

With reference to your comments of the moon, I earlier posted the following remarks :smile:
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).

JUPITERASC
01-01-2012, 08:56 AM
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..
To clarify, I have just received the following response from Zoidsoft whose website is the lost horoscope x files :smile:

I wrote this stuff back in the mid-90s after having been to one of Schmidt's lectures on Aristotle and Ptolemy. Ptolemy tried to rewrite the astrology of the time to fit with natural / physical causes in line with Aristotle's thinking.

This is the path that medieval astrologers took later on, but Aristotelianism originated during the Hellenistic period so it is not correct to call this kind of thinking "medieval" in origin because the medieval astrologers were trying to faithfully preserve Ptolemy.

However, I currently believe that such thinking is not an accurate representation of what the "founders" had in mind.

tsmall
01-01-2012, 01:04 PM
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.

Happy New Year! waybread, I am curious if your remakrs are directed towards me, the OP? If so, you might have missed this post


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....

I have Ptolemy, Valens, and Ben Dykes' Intro to Traditional Astrology, as well as seven or eight other books. The intent of this thread was to actually try to apply Hellenistic methods to delineate a real chart. Once the kiddos go back to school, I'll have more time to read, but I wanted to do this here because I thought it could be interesting for other members as well.

byjove
01-01-2012, 01:26 PM
Waybread, I'm a little surprised that you don't think hellenistic astrology is worth being studied here. Why study modern, medieval, Chinese and whatever else but hellenistic is the one we ought to go to a college library? I don't see anything so complicated here that I have only one choice and that is books. The OP for example seems to want to explore this from a relatively beginning point, and I would never advice Valens' or Ptolemys' works as starting material or self-guide at the start. The stickies have some great guides on modern astrology but until this thread there was a vacancy for hellenistic practices.

I'm no doubt I'm not alone in saying I've learned an incredible amount from modern astrology on here. The site allows a kind of interactivity where either finer points can be explored or indeed ab inizio. There seems to be good interest in this, looking at the participants alone (new and old to the site) and every time I come to the site I've found more people converting to hellenistic methods, they say so themselves.

On a minor technical point, planets in 12th in hellenistic astrology at least, I believe contain the energy in the sense that it's not directed at the individual. Benefics are swallowed here, they do little or no good, and so too for malefics - anyone correct me if I'm a little astray here, it's good to have the malefics in the 12th or the 6th because the malefic energy is not directed at the individual.

I thought it would be useful to put in the list of house associations. I note some differences between hellenistic and other considerations, one that shines here is that sex belongs to the 5th house here, whereas all of the modern books I've read to date have given that to the 8th (perhaps the Pluto link). Talking about sect and rulers placed, we're likely to hit on this anytime soon.

1st house: life, body, breath, physical appearance, health
2nd house: manner of living, possessions, substance, money
3rd house: siblings, cousins, neighbors, community, travel
4th house: parents, family, home, hidden matters
5th house: children, sex, good fortune, creative endeavors
6th house: illness, enemies, work, service, subordinates
7th house: relationships, marriage, spouse, other people in general
8th house: death, benefits from death, the possessions of others
9th house: foreign travel, foreigners, philosophy, astrology, religion
10th house: what one does, reputation, career, superiors
11th house: friends, allies, gifts, hopes
12th house: enemies, ailments, foreign countries, jails

http://horoscopicastrologyblog.com/2007/06/10/whole-sign-houses/


An interesting note on sign aspects:

"Signs are whole divine energies and should be treated as such. In Hellenistic astrology, the sign was more important than the planet. It created or adopted the planet for its own paticular expression. If a planet was destroyed or removed, another would take its place. Planets are expendable. Signs are not."

http://www.librarising.com/astrology/misc/wholesignaspects.html

waybread
01-01-2012, 06:59 PM
Sorry if I seemed grouchy (very early) this morning, people. After hosting a fun dinner party last night and washing up a kazillion glasses, &c., we determined that our dog had run away and was nowhere to be found. This is rather serious in our climate. I kept myself awake for several hours by trawling astrology threads, and calling her every 10 minutes, & finally went to sleep after 3:30. Fortunately she appeared at the back door around 7:30, exhausted but safe. I feel much nicer now.

So kudos to you bibliophiles out there who are buying books, like tsmall. I forgot to mention Manilius, one of the easier-to-find early sources. Some of today's Hellenizers don't like his work because it is so different from that of the client-oriented astrologers like Valens, but he comes from an older tradition of Greek star lore, so is kind of an interesting bridge.

I have to say, too, that Valens is loaded with mathematical techniques, so if this isn't your idea of a good read, I just found the others more accessible.

In terms of seeing a chart interpreted using Hellenistic techniques, book-buyers might also purchase Tamsyn Barton, Ancient Astrology. This is a history book, but she also interprets a chart using Hellenistic methods.

Byjove, I do think Hellenistic astrology is worth being studied here. I would just hope that participants have done some homework, first. And maybe this is my pet peeve, dragged in from entirely different threads, where people seem to want astrology tutorials without having done much to prepare themselves; or to jump into Astrology 401 before having passed Astrology 101. Lord knows my ignorance shines through gaping holes, however.

I do think books are extremely important. I attempted above to show people where they could find relevant books without having to pay a lot of money for them; i.e., via the Inter-library loan service of most public libraries. Of course, a lot of rubbish gets published in books, but the rubbish quotient on the Internet is far higher. For one thing, books published by an established reputable press run manuscripts through a serious review process before they agree to publish them. In contast, I could set up a website and post any misinformation I wanted with no prior sniff-test whatsoever.

Also, Hellenistic astrology is not merely a collection of techniques to be applied to a horoscope, with a 2012-vintage interpretation out the other end. Without reading some of the sources in the original, one can get some kind of neo-Hellenistic astrology that is distinctly modern in many ways. There's nothing wrong with hybrid astrology. I just wouldn't call it Hellenistic. Some of the astrology practiced in Hellenized Egypt was black magic in nature (see Betz, Greek Magical Papyri.) But nobody wants to give client reads today based on that material. Let's just prune it out of the Hellenistic family tree.

One reason why I don't think I want to practice Hellenistic astrology although I've been reading a lot of it lately, is because so many of the interpretations are just seem dire to the point of being silly. So how does one practice a reasonably authentic Hellenistic astrology without the sensationalistic interpretations? I mean, if your Mars and Saturn are vermisched, you are going to become a temple robber or total miscreant. Nor do I personally think it is ethical to do death predictions, although that was a huge concern back when the average life expectancy was under 30, and they wrote extensively on this topic.

The house meanings vary, depending upon the source. Which is why I think it is important to dig beneath the blogosphere. To some ancients, the 3rd was simply the house of the goddess, the moon, and brothers. The 9th was the house of God. And the 12th was a wretched house indeed to some authors. One author recommended that the astrologer pray, before casting a chart, that the client have no planets in the 6th, 8th, or 12th houses. Which is one reason why I think the idea of a coherent Hellenistic "tradition" is untenable.

I've gotta run now, but I will post more on this topic after my New Years skyping with relatives!

dr. farr
01-02-2012, 03:20 AM
Regarding my understanding of the issue of sect based on my insights into the old literature PLUS Hand's take on it:

-in the question of sect there is sect and period
-first, the period: its either Day (Sun above the horizon) or Night (Sun below the horizon)
-in a diurnal chart the Sun and the diurnal planets are in their period, ie, they are the "party in power"
-in a night chart, the Moon and the nocturnal planets are in their period, ie they are the "party in power"
-now, the question is, are the members of the party in power where they are supposed to be, ie, are they in the appropriate SECTION (Day or Night SECTION) of their power?
-if they ARE then they are in their period (in their power) AND in sect
-if they are NOT, then while their period is in power they are NOT where they should be to wield that power, ie, they are not in sect.

Example:
+ a nocturnal chart
+therefore Moon, Venus and Mars have the power because it is the PERIOD of their power (ie, it is night above the earth)
+now, Moon is below the horizon in the day part of the chart; Venus and Mars are both above the horizon in the night part of the chart (the period of the chart)
+now lets estimate the strength of the 3 nocturnal planets
Moon is in its period (night chart) = +1
Moon is NOT in its proper section (sect) because it is in the day part of the chart, under the earth = -1
Net sect power of Moon = 0

Venus and Mars are both in their period (night chart) = Venus+1, Mars+1
Venus and Mars are also in their proper section(sect) because they are in the night part of the chart (above the earth in a night chart) = Venus+1, Mars+1
So the net sect power of Venus is +2 and of Mars is +2

What about the diurnal planets in the above example? Let's say that Jupiter is above the earth, and the Sun and Saturn are below the earth:
Sun is NOT in its period because it is a night chart therefore Sun = 0
Sun is in its proper section (the day section) of the chart, under the earth = +1
Therefore the sect (related) strength of the Sun = +1

Saturn is not in its period because it is a night chart therefore Saturn = 0
Saturn is in its proper sect (the day section) of the chart, being under the earth = +1
Therefore the sect (related) strength of Saturn = +1

Jupiter is not in its period because it is a night chart, therefore Jupiter = 0
Jupiter is NOT in its proper sect because it is posited in the night section of the chart above the earth, therefore this = -1
The sect (related) strength of Jupiter, then, would be -1

In our hypothetical example, the final (net) sect/strength determinations for the planets in this nocturnal chart would then be:
Moon = 0
Venus = +2
Mars = +2
Sun = +1
Saturn = +1
Jupiter = -1
The sect/strongest planets would be the nocturnals Venus and Mars; the weakest sect planet would be Jupiter.

Now the above is how I understand the sect literature I have read; and this literature is from the older times (Paulus, and the early Islamic-era transitionalists who were still much influenced by the Hellenists, ie, Al-Kindi, Sahl, Abu Mashar) I might have totally misunderstood everything I read, and might be quite incorrect; but I don't think so, I think I have understood the material I have read in this regard.
But I won't argue the point! Especially so because, unlike the Hellenists and neo-Hellenists, I do not give enormous importance in delineation to the sect issue: I regard it merely as one of the determinants of relative planetary strength (like the Vedics do), and, although important, not moreso than the totality of testimonies in determining relative planetary strength.

JUPITERASC
01-02-2012, 03:55 AM
Waybread, I'm a little surprised that you don't think hellenistic astrology is worth being studied here. Why study modern, medieval, Chinese and whatever else but hellenistic is the one we ought to go to a college library? I don't see anything so complicated here that I have only one choice and that is books. The OP for example seems to want to explore this from a relatively beginning point, and I would never advice Valens' or Ptolemys' works as starting material or self-guide at the start. The stickies have some great guides on modern astrology but until this thread there was a vacancy for hellenistic practices.
byjove I would agree that until this thread there was a vacancy for specifically hellenistic practices and I also agree that since we do not insist that medieval astrologers have degrees in Latin and Greek or that Chinese astrologers are fluent in Pin Yin or any of the myriad Chinese dialects, then why indeed must we frequent college libraries in order to study Hellenistic? Unless of course we want to :smile:
I'm no doubt I'm not alone in saying I've learned an incredible amount from modern astrology on here. The site allows a kind of interactivity where either finer points can be explored or indeed ab inizio. There seems to be good interest in this, looking at the participants alone (new and old to the site) and every time I come to the site I've found more people converting to hellenistic methods, they say so themselves.
The interactivity is most useful I agree byjove
On a minor technical point, planets in 12th in hellenistic astrology at least, I believe contain the energy in the sense that it's not directed at the individual. Benefics are swallowed here, they do little or no good, and so too for malefics - anyone correct me if I'm a little astray here, it's good to have the malefics in the 12th or the 6th because the malefic energy is not directed at the individual.
I understand that
(a) planets located in ANY Cadent house direct their energies away from the native and towards others instead.

(b) planets located in ANY Cadent house produce few, if any events and/or are unlikely and/or less likely to produce many/if any events

(c) Cadent houses are the 3rd, 6th, 9th and 12th

Therefore any planets located in the 12th (or any other Cadent house) in Hellenistic astrology direct their energies away from the native. When considering the malefics, this is regarded - in a sense - as good for the native.

However, I assume that if the native then somehow causes harm to others in any way, then obviously the native suffers the consequences of their actions. Thus receiving consequences of the action of malefics in 12th or any other Cadent house

Configuration and/or aspects between domicile and exaltation lords of malefics in 12th would require additional study.

Benefics in 12th (or any other Cadent House) also direct their energies away from the native so this is regarded - in a sense - as not so good for the native.

However, the native may 'do good work for the benefit of others' and thus may receive some 'indirect' reward. There are additional considerations such as planetary aspect or configuration between domicile and exaltation lords.

Although the 9th house is a Cadent House it is configured to the Ascendant and thus my understanding is that any planets located in 9th are therefore potentially able to do business: the 3rd is also Cadent yet configured to the Ascendant although the extent to which planets are fit to do business when located therein requires more research as it seems likely to be yet another of those areas where, for excellent and interesting reasons, opinions tend to differ :smile:

I thought it would be useful to put in the list of house associations. I note some differences between hellenistic and other considerations, one that shines here is that sex belongs to the 5th house here, whereas all of the modern books I've read to date have given that to the 8th (perhaps the Pluto link). Talking about sect and rulers placed, we're likely to hit on this anytime soon.
Sex would certainly appear to be most 'creative' when one considers the creation of children byjove :smile:


1st house: life, body, breath, physical appearance, health
2nd house: manner of living, possessions, substance, money
3rd house: siblings, cousins, neighbors, community, travel
4th house: parents, family, home, hidden matters
5th house: children, sex, good fortune, creative endeavors
6th house: illness, enemies, work, service, subordinates
7th house: relationships, marriage, spouse, other people in general
8th house: death, benefits from death, the possessions of others
9th house: foreign travel, foreigners, philosophy, astrology, religion
10th house: what one does, reputation, career, superiors
11th house: friends, allies, gifts, hopes
12th house: enemies, ailments, foreign countries, jails
http://horoscopicastrologyblog.com/2007/06/10/whole-sign-houses/
thank you for those basic significations of the Hellenistic houses - obviously we shall discover numerous variations that are dependent upon the surviving writings from that time which are probably contested in various books! I understand there are more new translations to English in the pipeline from many hitherto untranslated manuscripts :smile:
An interesting note on sign aspects:
"Signs are whole divine energies and should be treated as such. In Hellenistic astrology, the sign was more important than the planet. It created or adopted the planet for its own paticular expression. If a planet was destroyed or removed, another would take its place. Planets are expendable. Signs are not."
http://www.librarising.com/astrology/misc/wholesignaspects.html
Makes sense byjove and very interesting

JUPITERASC
01-02-2012, 04:31 AM
Regarding my understanding of the issue of sect based on my insights into the old literature PLUS Hand's take on it:

-in the question of sect there is sect and period
-first, the period: its either Day (Sun above the horizon) or Night (Sun below the horizon)
-in a diurnal chart the Sun and the diurnal planets are in their period, ie, they are the "party in power"
-in a night chart, the Moon and the nocturnal planets are in their period, ie they are the "party in power"
-now, the question is, are the members of the party in power where they are supposed to be, ie, are they in the appropriate SECTION (Day or Night SECTION) of their power?
-if they ARE then they are in their period (in their power) AND in sect
-if they are NOT, then while their period is in power they are NOT where they should be to wield that power, ie, they are not in sect.

dr. farr, without arguing the point but instead to simply examine the historical data you have kindly provided, it is clear to me that the subtle difference between Paulus and Valens could well be stated as follows:

(a) for Paulus et al, in sect planets ("members of the party in power") are out of sect when those planets are not located where they would be able to wield that sect power EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE "THE PARTY IN POWER"

(b) for Valens et al, when in sect planets ("members of the party in power") are not located where they would be able to wield that sect power EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE "THE PARTY IN POWER" nevertheless, for Valens et al, at least, those planets are considered only slightly out of sect and not completely out of sect: their condition is instead described as being in 'halb'. Thus, planets in 'halb' are described by Valens as being in sect BUT 'situated contrary to their nature'.

the condition of being in 'halb' is described and earlier clarified as follows:

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).


Example:
+ a nocturnal chart
+therefore Moon, Venus and Mars have the power because it is the PERIOD of their power (ie, it is night above the earth)
+now, Moon is below the horizon in the day part of the chart; Venus and Mars are both above the horizon in the night part of the chart (the period of the chart)
+now lets estimate the strength of the 3 nocturnal planets
Moon is in its period (night chart) = +1
Moon is NOT in its proper section (sect) because it is in the day part of the chart, under the earth = -1
Net sect power of Moon = 0

Venus and Mars are both in their period (night chart) = Venus+1, Mars+1
Venus and Mars are also in their proper section(sect) because they are in the night part of the chart (above the earth in a night chart) = Venus+1, Mars+1
So the net sect power of Venus is +2 and of Mars is +2

What about the diurnal planets in the above example? Let's say that Jupiter is above the earth, and the Sun and Saturn are below the earth:
Sun is NOT in its period because it is a night chart therefore Sun = 0
Sun is in its proper section (the day section) of the chart, under the earth = +1
Therefore the sect (related) strength of the Sun = +1

Saturn is not in its period because it is a night chart therefore Saturn = 0
Saturn is in its proper sect (the day section) of the chart, being under the earth = +1
Therefore the sect (related) strength of Saturn = +1

Jupiter is not in its period because it is a night chart, therefore Jupiter = 0
Jupiter is NOT in its proper sect because it is posited in the night section of the chart above the earth, therefore this = -1
The sect (related) strength of Jupiter, then, would be -1

In our hypothetical example, the final (net) sect/strength determinations for the planets in this nocturnal chart would then be:
Moon = 0
Venus = +2
Mars = +2
Sun = +1
Saturn = +1
Jupiter = -1
The sect/strongest planets would be the nocturnals Venus and Mars; the weakest sect planet would be Jupiter.

Now the above is how I understand the sect literature I have read; and this literature is from the older times (Paulus, and the early Islamic-era transitionalists who were still much influenced by the Hellenists, ie, Al-Kindi, Sahl, Abu Mashar) I might have totally misunderstood everything I read, and might be quite incorrect; but I don't think so, I think I have understood the material I have read in this regard.
But I won't argue the point! Especially so because, unlike the Hellenists and neo-Hellenists, I do not give enormous importance in delineation to the sect issue: I regard it merely as one of the determinants of relative planetary strength (like the Vedics do), and, although important, not moreso than the totality of testimonies in determining relative planetary strength.
thank you for the above exposition of the subtle difference between the sect literature from the older times dr. farr. And I understand that not everyone gives the same great importance in delineation to the sect issue (as Hellenists such as Valens did) in determining relative planetary strength.:smile:

waybread
01-02-2012, 07:10 PM
Just a reminder that my "college libraries" comment was intended to help people who might wish to read the main Hellenistic astrologers (in English translation) if they can't afford to purchase the books. No doubt some people on this board are either university students anyway, or do live close to such a library. I also pointed out that Inter-library loan via one's nearest public library is also an option. Otherwise, on-line book-sellers await, happy to take your credit card information.

JUPITERASC
01-03-2012, 02:43 PM
"It's a good thing" for any planet that is of the sect in favor :smile:

If a planet is not of the sect in favor
then
it is the wrong time of day for the planet.

Saturn and Jupiter are not of the sect in favor in NIGHT charts
and Venus and Mars are not of the sect in favor in DAY charts.

Mercury as a morning star makes it a diurnal planet
so Mercury is not of the sect in favor in a NIGHT chart

Mercury as an evening star makes it a nocturnal planet
so Mercury is not of the sect in favor in a DAY chart.


Saturn and Jupiter are of the diurnal sect
whether or not that sect is in favour.
Saturn and Jupiter are the Sun’s co-sectarians.

Venus and Mars are of the nocturnal sect
whether or not that sect is in favour.
Venus and Mars are the Moon’s co-sectarians.


Mercury as a morning star is of the diurnal sect
whether or not that sect is in favour.
Mercury as a morning star is the Sun’s co-sectarian
along with Saturn and Jupiter.

Mercury as an evening star is of the nocturnal sect
whether or not that sect is in favour.
Mercury as an evening star is the Moon’s co-sectarian
along with Venus and Mars.

THUS

If the chart is a day chart

THEN
the diurnal sect is in favour
and the Sun is the sect leader
and Jupiter and Saturn are the planets of the sect in favour:
and IF Mercury is a morning star, then Mercury too is of the sect in favour.

If the chart is a night chart
then the nocturnal sect is in favour
and the Moon is the sect leader
and Venus and Mars are of the sect in favour:
and if Mercury is an evening star, then Mercury too is of the sect in favour


REGARDING THE HORIZON:

The diurnal planets are happier
if they are above the horizon in a day chart
and below it in a night chart.

Likewise, the nocturnal planets are happier
if they are above the horizon in a night chart
and below it in a day chart.

This is not really a condition of sect
—it does not define sect in any way.
This is only a way to further determine the strength
or mood of any particular planet.
And it’s only adding or subtracting mildly from the planet.

So for example:

In a diurnal chart the Sun is the sect light (the leader of the sect),
and Jupiter and Saturn are the planets of the Sect.
If Jupiter and Saturn are above the horizon they are happy.
BUT
If below the horizon in the diurnal chart
Jupiter and Saturn are still of the diurnal sect
—they are still of the sect in favour
—but they are not going to be as happy.

And in the same chart if Venus is below the horizon
although she is not of the sect in favour
Venus is happier, in this diurnal chart
than she would be if she was above the horizon.

waybread
01-03-2012, 05:45 PM
Regarding "happy planets" in day vs. night charts, it really depends upon whom you read. Some of the Hellenistic astrologers thought the 12th, 8th, and 6th houses were unfavourable regardless of your birth time, although there were mitigating circumstances if other chart bytes looked favourable.

Dorotheus of Sidon (Carmen Astrologicum, I:5, 1st century AD) ranked the houses in order of favourability: 1, 10, 11, 5, 7, 4, 9 are the best houses. The "not as good" houses in order are 3 and 8. The "worst of the worst" houses are 6 and 12.

Saturn in one of its own signs might actually do OK in the 12th in a day birth in terms of real estate but the native's health would be poor, he would be mediocre in life, his marriage would be unprofitable, and he would "leave his parents." (Not a good thing.) II:23.

Firmicus Maternus (Matheseos Libri VIII, 2: xvi-xx, 4th cent. AD) gave preference to the angular houses, followed by the 3rd, 9th, 5th, and 11th. Then, "The remaining four houses are all feeble and debilitated because of the fact that they are not aspected to the ascendant." He then ranked the houses within each pair of opposites, giving preference to the 1st, 11th, 9th, 2nd and 6th. He states that the 12th is the house of Saturn, who was a nasty character in Hellenistic astrology. The 6th is the house of Mars, who was also malefic. "Through these names and houses the character of the entire nativity can be found."

Maternus goes on to say, however, that you have to look at nocturnal (below horizon) and dirunal (above horizon) planets, and whether the planets are benefic or malefic or in aspect to benefic or malefic planets. If benefic planets conjunct, sextile, or trine a planet of interest, the affairs of the house should turn out well. But without a conjunction, trine, or sextile from a benefic planet, or if only malefics aspect the house, notably in conjunction, square, or opposition, "there is danger of frequent disaster and misfortune." If both a malefic and benefic are in aspect, they cancel each other out.

One interesting thing about Firmicus Maternus, is that he works with house cusp lords, or accidental rulers. This technique is used by modern astrologers today. Basically you look at the planetary ruler of the sign on the house cusp in question, and see whether it is "well located" or "dejected." If the lord is "well located" a planet will "share in its host's joy." If the ruler of a planet's sign is in a bad way, however, that planet will be "hindered" even if it is in a good house.

It gets more complicated than this. In a day-time nativity, the planets that "rejoice by day" and are located in an angular (favourable) house, then good things should follow. But the night-time rejoicers in important or cardinal houses in a day chart will bring about "undending misfortune and constant catastrophe." The situation reverses in night-time charts.

Oh, and BTW, if you have several planets in their own signs, you will be fortunate and blessed. If you don't have any, you will "forever be unknown, of low-born family, and doomed to a miserable life." (XXI)

That is just the way the celestial cookie crumbles.

Rebel Uranian
01-03-2012, 05:54 PM
I wonder what these guys would've said about a freaking complicated chart like mine. I've heard that the strongest planet is the Moon (which has nothing but bad aspects, including both malefics) and then the Sun (which is in detriment but has no bad aspects, unlike everything else on my chart) but I decided on Saturn (even though I have a night chart.) So... yeah. Getting famous sounds miserable enough, so I'll plan on that.

JUPITERASC
01-03-2012, 09:32 PM
unsurprisingly, two thousand plus years ago opinions differed - and continue to
Although the 9th house is a Cadent House it is configured to the Ascendant and thus my understanding is that any planets located in 9th are therefore potentially able to do business: the 3rd is also Cadent yet configured to the Ascendant although the extent to which planets are fit to do business when located therein requires more research as it seems likely to be yet another of those areas where, for excellent and interesting reasons, opinions tend to differ :smile:

Rebel Uranian
01-04-2012, 12:48 AM
I don't see what the issue with the 3rd house is. It sextiles the Ascendant. The 7th house is also overrated.

tsmall
01-04-2012, 01:11 AM
I wonder what these guys would've said about a freaking complicated chart like mine. I've heard that the strongest planet is the Moon (which has nothing but bad aspects, including both malefics) and then the Sun (which is in detriment but has no bad aspects, unlike everything else on my chart) but I decided on Saturn (even though I have a night chart.) So... yeah. Getting famous sounds miserable enough, so I'll plan on that.

I think, though as indicated I have lots more reading to do, that whether or not the Sun or Moon are the strongest will depend on a number of factors...the most important of which (as we are currently learning) is if the chart is nocturnal or diurnal, and then how sect will play a part. I find it curious, and gratifying, to see that byjove has indicated that the Hellenists gave more meaning to the signs than to the planets. And if we are using whole sign, making the signs themselves the houses, astrology is starting to make a lot more sense to me.

Rebel Uranian
01-04-2012, 01:18 AM
So what would you say is the strongest planet? I think you ignored the fact that I said it was Saturn and not the Sun or Moon after I analyzed my own chart :/ But that's fine with me because Saturn is cool and the Sun and Moon are both boring, even in comparison to Jupiter. ZZZzzzZZZzzz I also said that I have a night chart (which is quite unfortunate considering the wonderful state of the Sun, Jupiter, and Saturn and the terrible state of the Moon and Venus with a moderate Mars) but overall the Sun gets gender + hemisphere and the Moon gets gender + chart state so they both get equal sect...

tsmall
01-04-2012, 01:23 AM
I think it's your Moon still, but let's see what everyone else has to say.

Rebel Uranian
01-04-2012, 01:25 AM
Well I think it's Saturn because lunatics don't like science and are actually capable of having fun at parties. JK. I think it's Saturn because of calculations. I really needed a day chart. Really really really. :/ But it's not that big of a deal because sect is only a +1 dignity per sect type from what I understand. But man, Sun conjunct Jupiter both sextile Saturn. That's a great setup for a day chart. Whoever was born just after me is lucky except when it comes to houses.

Edit: Vedic astrology puts Saturn as a night planet and Venus as a day planet. But this is Hellenistic so forget what you just read. Wipe it from your memory. Now is that better?

dr. farr
01-04-2012, 02:23 AM
Regarding Waybread's post about Maternus: his quoted teachings are VERY close to classical jyotish, and pretty much most delineation in the various Vedic approaches uses the LORDS of the houses (bhavas), ie, the sign lords (accidental rulers in Modernist Western terminoology), as primary considerations.

As I said earlier I myself consider sect only as one consideration in determining a given planet's relative strength; however, I must say that if we look at the writings of the early Islamic transitional era authors (eg,Abu Mashar), at least at that time they were very adamant about the sect/period matter: the period for them was either day or night, and the sect for them was the planets of the given period being where they should be: so (for these authors) they said that if a planet in its period was not where it was supposed to be ("in sect") then that planet was "powerless"!! Quite different than the outlook that states that if a planet in its period is not where it whould be it is "a little" bit detrimented!! For these authors, if the period was night, and the Moon were "out of sect" (by being posited in the day hemisphere of the chart), then the Moon would be powerless (!) in such a nocturnal chart (as I have posted earlier in this thread, I myself do not follow this doctrine because I believe it is way too extremist, but you can read this doctrine in such authors as Abu Mashar, Al-Kindi, Al-Biruni, etc)

JUPITERASC
01-04-2012, 04:12 PM
Regarding Waybread's post about Maternus: his quoted teachings are VERY close to classical jyotish, and pretty much most delineation in the various Vedic approaches uses the LORDS of the houses (bhavas), ie, the sign lords (accidental rulers in Modernist Western terminoology), as primary considerations.

As I said earlier I myself consider sect only as one consideration in determining a given planet's relative strength; however, I must say that if we look at the writings of the early Islamic transitional era authors (eg,Abu Mashar), at least at that time they were very adamant about the sect/period matter: the period for them was either day or night, and the sect for them was the planets of the given period being where they should be: so (for these authors) they said that if a planet in its period was not where it was supposed to be ("in sect") then that planet was "powerless"!! Quite different than the outlook that states that if a planet in its period is not where it whould be it is "a little" bit detrimented!! For these authors, if the period was night, and the Moon were "out of sect" (by being posited in the day hemisphere of the chart), then the Moon would be powerless (!) in such a nocturnal chart (as I have posted earlier in this thread, I myself do not follow this doctrine because I believe it is way too extremist, but you can read this doctrine in such authors as Abu Mashar, Al-Kindi, Al-Biruni, etc)

The Hellenistic Concept of Sect: Sect is just one word for a group of people with a common interest forming a distinct unit within a larger group by virtue of certain refinements or distinctions of belief or practice. e.g. a political party or faction united by common interests or beliefs especially concerned with their own narrow interests . Some planets belong to one sect, and some to the other. The two sects are diurnal and nocturnal – i.e. day and night.

The Sun is the leader of the diurnal sect, and the planets in that sect are Saturn and Jupiter.

The Moon is the leader of the nocturnal sect, and the planets in that sect are Mars and Venus.

If Mercury rises before the Sun—if he’s a morning star—then Mercury belongs to the diurnal sect.

But if Mercury sets after the Sun—if he’s an evening star—then Mercury belongs to the nocturnal sect.

So, those are the two sects, their leaders, and their members. :smile:

What sect signifies
What is meant by “being in sect” or “being in the sect of favour” is simply that planets are happiest if they are in an area of a natal chart that is in sync with their sect

So, for example, a nocturnal Mars is not going to be too happy in a diurnal chart and a diurnal Saturn is not going to be too happy in a nocturnal chart.

Similarly, in politics, two sects such as the Republicans and the Democrats each want to be in power and are unhappy and could potentially cause disruption for the other elected opposition party.

In the booklet "Night & Day, Planetary sect in Astrology", Robert Hand writes on page 6, second paragraph: "Although no ancient writing ever states this explicitly, it would seem from these writings that the most important of these relationships is that a planet is of the same sect as the chart. Diurnal planets work best in diurnal charts and nocturnal planets in nocturnal charts. That the condition of the chart is the most important of these three sect factors can be inferred from the fact that many of the Greek texts only mention the charts diurnal or nocturnal status in relation to the sect of the planet. Little is said about the agreement of the sect of the planet with that of the sign or placement".

sandstone
01-04-2012, 07:20 PM
i am going to make one or two comments, but i am holding back from posting here as i find the back and forth tedious and time consuming.. i have other things i want to do, but i continue to follow comments and pick my spots..


first a response to a comment from jupiterasc:
unsurprisingly, two thousand plus years ago opinions differed - and continue to ...

this is true and needs to be emphasized!

it is fine to want to go back to study the roots or the 'tradition'.. if you do the reading you quickly realize the truth in jupiterasc's comment... there were many different views and their is no ''standardized'' method to a lot of the techniques and approaches that were taken..

here is an example..

dr farr quote :
I myself do not follow this doctrine because I believe it is way too extremist, but you can read this doctrine in such authors as Abu Mashar, Al-Kindi, Al-Biruni, etc..

these astrologers dr farr quotes lived somewhere between about 800-1200 ad... they differ in their perspective then the early hellenistic astrologers and as dr. farr has said, they are more extremist..

before one makes a decision to use the techniques based off a better understanding of the in's and out's of these same techniques they would benefit from doing many charts and working thru the different approaches one can take to these same techniques.. learning how to read charts is really what one is wanting to do in all this as i see it.. a fun exercise would be to take a chart of a well known person and try applying the technique to see if it holds true.. do it with a number of charts and see if you can find a pattern! buy some books and do some research..

happy trails - james

JUPITERASC
01-04-2012, 09:12 PM
The problem with famous people is we generally get the sanitised version and/or what their publicist tells us!

so IMO an even better option is to read the charts of significant others, family members and friends - people with whom one is familiar so one can immediately gauge the relevance/aptness or otherwise of Hellenistic (or any other) techniques. There is more to life than fame. For an 'ordinary person' transits involving planets ruling the MC as well as the house in which the MC is located may not mean winning an Oscar or achieving world wide fame, instead the planetary aspect could describe Graduation, passing an important examination or being promoted at work... possibly for some, achieving local recognition of some kind: many people who are locally well-known are not necessarily famous worldwide.

Even obscure people relocate! Studying planetary aspects involving planets ruling the IC and house in which the IC is located in the charts of friends and family is a simple, worthwhile and interesting way to check the validity of astrology, whether Hellenistic or otherwise.

Remember also that much has changed over the past two thousand years (it was during the 2nd Century that Valens faithfully chronicled the astrological techniques of astrologers who preceded him by three hundred years or more, so we are travelling far back in time) and obviously vocabulary, verbal style as well as meaning of words has changed - but it is not impossible to get the gist of the intended meaning.

waybread
01-05-2012, 02:11 AM
Actually, Vettius Valens (Anthologies) included a lot of "celebrity charts" of his day.... and I suspect he knew a lot less about these individuals than we do about our celebrities, in today's world of media saturation. Publicists don't control the investigative reporters, let alone the Peeping Toms with cameras. Valens gives horoscopic data on a lot of "governors" and other government administrators. He couldn't possibly have known all of them personally.

Valens in particular uses a lot of math, and oftentimes different techniques to calculate the same horoscope point or to answer the same question. I've not worked through all of his techniques, but perhaps someone here (like JupiterAsc) has, and can say if they give the same result. One of Valens's big concerns is how to calculate the length of life. Valens seemingly "fathfully" compiled a bunch of materials accessible to him, but if you trace what Valens says about house topics, for example, you will notice a lot of internal variety and how the same topic crops up in different places in the Anthologies-- which some might term inconsistency. To me it suggests that Valens compiled material, without necessarily synthesizing it to create a more linear narrative.

Valens also is one guy who loaded his text with a lot of sensationalist and dire predictions. Not my cup of tea, but somebody else might appreciate them.

Rebel Uranian
01-05-2012, 02:27 AM
Since Mercury is the imitator, could it have the same sect as nearby planets when there are any?

If my chart is a night chart, then why on earth do I see the most influential planets on it as the Sun, Jupiter, Mercury, and (especially) Saturn? Those guys are supposed to be out of sect. I know the astrologers dr. farr mentioned considered the night/day condition of a chart to be period rather than sect and that explains it from one point of view (all except Mercury are in sect after all,) but is there any way to explain it from a Hellenistic point of view?

P.S. The Hellenistic point of view makes so much sense and so little at the same time. Planets of the diurnal sect prefer to be with the Sun above the horizon, and planets of the night chart prefer to be away from the Sun (which is below the horizon) above the horizon. There is a massive bias towards above-the-horizonness here. It makes sense some-what considering that most people are extroverts, but it doesn't make sense in other ways because I can't see every planet as being most effective in an extroverted way.

dr. farr
01-05-2012, 03:54 AM
Well, your chart looked at as period/sect (late Hellenists like Paulus/Rhetorius and early Islamic transitional era authors like Abu Mashar) "works" well (is explained well) from that perspective, eg (using point totals) Moon = period+out of sect- = net 0; Sun = out of period 0 but in sect+1 = net+1; Jupiter = out of period 0 but in sect+1 = net +1; Saturn = out of period 0 but in sect = +1; Mercury = no period (points) but in sect (always in sect) = +1

However, what would be the Valens/era Hellenist explanation (as per the outline of sect given above in JUPITERASC's posts) of your own experience of the planets in your chart relative to this matter? While the concept and delineative application of sect was very important to the Hellenists of old, it was by no means their ONLY major consideration: other modifying considerations would have been angular vs cadent, the issue of combustion (and they used wide orbs up to nearly 9 degrees for this), the specific planet being in a pitted or elevated degree, the relative planetary elevations, and the dignity/debility totals for each planet: so I would say that in addition to their consideration of your chart relative to sect and the planets in and out of sect, they would also have brought these other considerations into their final delineation of the relative planetary influences in your chart.

JUPITERASC
01-05-2012, 04:22 PM
I think, though as indicated I have lots more reading to do, that whether or not the Sun or Moon are the strongest will depend on a number of factors...the most important of which (as we are currently learning) is if the chart is nocturnal or diurnal, and then how sect will play a part. I find it curious, and gratifying, to see that byjove has indicated that the Hellenists gave more meaning to the signs than to the planets. And if we are using whole sign, making the signs themselves the houses, astrology is starting to make a lot more sense to me.
The term sign is not used in Hellenistic astrology, because in the modern astrological sense, a sign has an archetypal association behind it, but a zoidion does not. Instead, the use of the zoidia seem to be primarily based on (a) duality, masculine/feminine: (b) triplicity, cardinal - the beginning of a season - fixed - the middle of a season - and mutable - the end of a season - and (c) quadruplicity, elemental quality of earth, fire, air, and water.

There is a distinct difference between the archetypal signs of modern astrology, and the zoidia of Hellenistic astrology. Therefore, it is important to distinguish between the two, by using different terminology because a zoidion is a section of the zodiac that provides the manner of emanation for a planets action.

Robert Schmidt wrote three pages in the Project Hindsight translator’s preface of Vettius Valens The Anthology Book I and on the word zoidion, he says that it means “place for life.”

The root word zoion has two meanings - living thing and picture: it is a transliteration of ζῷον, meaning 'living being' or 'animal'. It is thus the root of 'zoology' and all related terms.

The Greeks seem to have viewed the constellations of the zodiac as places in which the gods lived and they thought differently of the constellations from the way we do today.

Today, we view the constellations as random sets of stars that mankind anthropomorphized into human and animal shapes - but the Greeks believed that they were a kind of “celestial artwork, ” created by the gods as dwelling places. So, they are dwelling places, or pictures, of the living gods.

The word Zoion has a relation to human life as well as animal life and the Greeks believed these zoidion or places actually had a living force, soul or spirit within the constellations :smile:

JUPITERASC
01-05-2012, 04:34 PM
Well, your chart looked at as period/sect (late Hellenists like Paulus/Rhetorius and early Islamic transitional era authors like Abu Mashar) "works" well (is explained well) from that perspective, eg (using point totals) Moon = period+out of sect- = net 0; Sun = out of period 0 but in sect+1 = net+1; Jupiter = out of period 0 but in sect+1 = net +1; Saturn = out of period 0 but in sect = +1; Mercury = no period (points) but in sect (always in sect) = +1

However, what would be the Valens/era Hellenist explanation (as per the outline of sect given above in JUPITERASC's posts) of your own experience of the planets in your chart relative to this matter? While the concept and delineative application of sect was very important to the Hellenists of old, it was by no means their ONLY major consideration: other modifying considerations would have been angular vs cadent, the issue of combustion (and they used wide orbs up to nearly 9 degrees for this), the specific planet being in a pitted or elevated degree, the relative planetary elevations, and the dignity/debility totals for each planet: so I would say that in addition to their consideration of your chart relative to sect and the planets in and out of sect, they would also have brought these other considerations into their final delineation of the relative planetary influences in your chart.
During the 2nd century, practicing astrologer Vettius Valens thoughtfully chronicled the techniques of astrologers who had preceded him by three hundred and more years, with the intention that future astrologers would be able to benefit from their study. We have no idea who Valens did or did not know nearly two thousand years ago, any speculation is academic and ultimately a matter of opinion. What we do have are the more than one hundred charts he used in order to illustrate the techniques he also chronicled. :smile:

Rebel Uranian, Valens did not use a points system, so then according to the methods Valens did chronicle regarding sect:


Your chart is a night chart therefore, the nocturnal sect is in favor and irrespective of whether it is located above or below the horizon, your Moon is in the sect of favour and also sect leader of the two other nocturnal planets Mars and Venus
However, with respect to conditions relative to the horizon, your natal Moon is in a location contrary to its nature (just below the horizon) – that's because in a nocturnal chart you'd want the nocturnal planets in the upper hemisphere away from the Sun – so, although your moon remains in sect, your moon is not as happy as your moon would be if your moon had been located above the horizon. Simply because your moon is located in the same hemisphere as your sun, then your moon is considered slightly out of sect and more diurnal in nature
Your natal Mars and Venus are nocturnal planets and are therefore happier because they are located above the horizon in the upper hemisphere of your chart away from the sun.
Your natal Sun, Jupiter and Saturn are not of the sect in favour (out of sect) but although it is the wrong time of day for them, nevertheless because they are located below the horizon they are considered a little more natural.
Because your natal Mercury rises before the sun it is a morning star - and Mercury is a morning star that makes it a diurnal planet - so your natal Mercury is ‘out of sect’ in your night chart

waybread
01-05-2012, 07:46 PM
The ancient astrologers certainly did use signs, starting with the Babylonians!!!

There is a way that the past happened and that texts have come down to us.

It is correct to say that astrologers of antiquity used signs differently than modern astrologers use them today. In addition to the elements, they talked about whether signs were "crooked or straight" (Dorotheus V:2); "rough-skinned, leprous, mangy, or scurvy" or "licentious" (Rhetorius.)

Vettius Valens in book 1:2 has quite a list of these sign attributes. For example, Aries is: "the house of Mars, a masculine sign, tropic, terrestrial, governing, fiery, free, upward trending, semi-vocal, noble changeable, procuratorial, public, civic, with few offspring, servile, the Midheaven of the universe and the cause of rank, two-toned...unaspected and ecliptic."

What Valens means by being "born under" a particular sign is the rising sign, not the sun-sign. For more information about how this rising sign functions, we have to look at the "houseruler" (apparently Mars, as Aries is "the house of Mars") and how it is situated, notably with regard to Venus and Jupiter.

In Book 5 Firmicus Maternus has a whole "planets in signs" cookbook that, allowing for the differences in people's lives from the 4th century to today, has a surprisingly modern cookbook feel to it. For example, if your MC is in Cancer, lucky you. You will be noted for "famous deeds" and can look forward to wealth and prestige in your old age. If your MC is in Taurus, life will be mixed. Your marriage will be scandalous, but your career will be "in a public place or temple" and you will also receive riches and honours later in life.

Intriguingly, Schmidt's statement that "a zoidion is a section of the zodiac that provides the manner of emanation for a planets action" is precisely how most modern astrologers view signs' agency today.

It is also correct to say that ancient astrologers had different names for our word "sign", often calling a sign a "house", just to confuse matters.

JA wrote: The Greeks seem to have viewed the constellations of the zodiac as places in which the gods lived...."

Have you got a source for this? I've been studying mythology for a long time and have never come across it. There were 12 major gods on Mount Olympus, plus assorted minor gods up there. There was a celestial meaning to Olympus, but it wasn't in any particular contellations. Moreover, Pluto (Hades) lived in the underworld, together with his queen Persephone. Gods frequently traveled on the earth's surface, sometimes in disguise. Poseidon (Neptune) ruled the seas. Hermes (Mercury) was notable for being able to travel between the different realms.

The Greeks did put their folklore in the heavens, but these figures often related to Zeus memorializing an individual-- sometimes a mortal-- through the constellations. In this way we get a transmogrification of very ancient pre-Greek dieties for Aquarius to Gannymede, or of Virgo as Astraea. Yet the Greeks also believed in all sorts of minor deities who inhabited various parts of the landscape.

These can all be checked out on Wikipedia.

tsmall
01-08-2012, 03:05 AM
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?

I am bumping up this question because I don't think it's been addressed yet?

Thanks to byjove, dr. farr, JUPITERASC, waybread and sandstone for their contributions so far. This new kid is still reading, so I don't have anything intelligent to add. I did want to toss out an observation, and I cannot seem to locate the exact threads where it has been brought up...waybread, you have mentioned in the past the "sensationalism" in some of the interpretations of the Hellenists, especially with regard to their considerations, and wording, of certain chart placements. In other posts, dr. farr and JUPITERASC have suggested, I believe, that it would be necessary to try to apply those descriptions in today's language, and make it relevant, and that it is the technique and not so much the interpretation that would matter...I want to suggest that it is possible what we have extant of the ancient astrologers' writings are in fact the "cookbooks" of the times, much like those that exist today. Perhaps then, as now, it was always necessary to synthesize the entire chart to get an accurate understanding?

waybread
01-08-2012, 04:17 AM
tsmall, while I think that what you suggest is possible, we don't really end up with "Hellenistic astrology" but with a kind of modern astrology deploying a lot of Hellenistic methods.

Francesca Rochberg, in her book on cuniform Bablyonian astrology The Heavenly Writing, notes that the celestial omen-texts with which astrology got its start, were written as "if--then" propositions. IF a given event is observed in the heavens, THEN a specific human event will follow. This isn't because the planets cause anything, but because they signify what the gods (who do control things) intend.

You find "IF A--THEN B" constructions occuring a lot in Hellenistic astrology.

The "If A" part is reasonably easy to retain today provided one does the calculations and the author's meaning is clear. "If a benefic is in the 8th house, then...." "If in a day birth Mars squares the moon.... " and so on. Some of the calculations are a bit more advanced than others, but basically the "If A" part is feasible today.

The problem comes with the "then B" part of an interpretation. Unlike modern astrologers, the ancient astrologers were not concerned with one's inner life. The "then B" results of horoscopic placements have tangible, measureable results in the sense that they could be observed to happen or not to happen.

I've been reading about horoscopic house origins, so my copy of Vettius Valens Anthologies is turned to Book II where he discusses the effects of the houses with their planetary tenants. So how would we rescript the following? I say it can be done only with precisely the same kind of watering-down that traditionalists are apt to dislike in modern astrology. And the 10th house to Valens is one of the moderate ones!

"The X Place--Midheaven

Both benefics and malefics [i.e., "if A"] rejoice ["then B] in this place if [A] they have been assigned the Lot [of Fortune], the Ascendant, or Daimon [11th house.] If [A] any of the benefics are in it when rising, or if [A] they have contact with the moon, [B] tyrants and kings are born, governors of districts, men known by name in many places. The ruler of this Place, if [A] situated favourably, [B] makes vigorous/successful men; if [A] situated unfavourably, [B] it makes feeble/unsuccessful men. If [A] the ruler is setting and a malefic is in conjunction or in opposition to this Place, [B] it makes failures, as well as sterile or childless men."

So if we unpack this "cookbook" delineation; sure, some of it would work today. We could talk about men being successful or unsucessful. We could even predict men being sterile or childless. But tyrants, kings, governors? Vettius must have known this couldn't be true for everyone with favourable placements, even in his day. So do we say, as a modern astrologer might, "You have administrative ability and are a natural leader?" Valens wrote this material for men. Would it apply to women in the same way, now that women can be heads of state?

As I said, the 10th house is one of the easy ones. If we read further, say house 9, a well-tenanted 9th house makes someone a "prophet" who "will be obeyed like a god." "He will become a royal clerk from his middle years." If malefics get into the act, the person will be a "tyrant" who "sacks cities" and "pillages" them. A worse case would be the native having to seek sanctuary in temples.

I'm not sure how we would revise the predictions of the native being eaten by lions or dogs, or killed in a ship-wreck.

I don't think we can do Hellenistic astrology for the "then B" part of house 9 in the 21st century without seriously rescripting it to address modern sensitivities. But then we don't have Valens's astrology, we have revised-Hellenistic or modern-Hellenistic astrology.

If we look at Valens horoscope examples, a lot of them would today be considered clelebrity horoscopes, emphasizing (though not restricted to) political leaders. The modern-day equivalent would be basing our astrology examples on state governors or members of Congress.

Moreover, we could forget about astrology as a tool for self-awareness. The exterior biographical events are what matters.

sandstone
01-08-2012, 04:57 AM
excellent comments, insight and overview waybread.. thank you.. i think your post explains why some of us continue to follow a path of realism in regard boxing ourselves into a particular style of astrology and want to take the best of what the field has to offer.. some might disagree with this approach in so far as we are not being true to a particular school of thought, but as i feel you have really clearly pointed out here, no one practicing traditional astrology or hellenistic astrology is able to do it! it is neo-traditional, or neo-hellenistic astrology that those keen on using the old methods are really doing..

also, the cookbook analogy to valens is a very good analogy as i see it.. i get the impression valens is a complier of different astrological thought of his day and beyond.. sometimes he says how he differs from the old astrologers, such as in the area of health where the old astrologers based most of it off the houses of the lot of fortune, or the lot of spirit, whereas he worked off the nature of the planets and signs more based off the ascendant.. i am on page 54 right now, in the 170 page pdf file for this at mark rileys site.. cookbook is an apt description, after having read a few of them in my time over the years..

waybread hits a home run as i see it in making a clear distinction between the type of astrology practiced in older times, to that which has been practiced in more recent times... what does one do with the formulas offered by valens which come with hard and fast definitions of the results on a physical level when one wants to know if there can be more to it then just the physical experience? i am not putting it as well as i think waybread has, but you get the idea if you put the time into reading some of these older texts...

thanks also for your comments and encouragement tsmall!

dr. farr
01-08-2012, 08:52 AM
The ancients wrote within the context of their cultures and times; but there were principles involved, behind their techniques and also behind their interpretations, then as now-just as we today have principles at the root of our contemporary interpretations of the astological phenonema as determined by our techniques of delineation. What must be done is to understand the principles involved, to understand the fundamental objective of the particular technique (ancient technique, or, indeed, Modernist technique) being used (ie, what is the objective this technique is supposed to obtain?), and then to use our OWN understanding of what the result of that applied technique, shows, based upon our understanding of the meaningfulness of that result, which is ultimately based upon the principle (or symbol if you will) behind that result.

Otherwise, whether ancient or Modern, Vedic or Western, its just cookbook, which could be canned and spewed out by the proper computer program...

JUPITERASC
01-08-2012, 10:25 AM
I'm not sure how we would revise the predictions of the native being eaten by lions or dogs, or killed in a ship-wreck.IMO we are all capable of deciding for ourselves whether 'being eaten by lions' is something that only happened two thousand plus years ago. Lions prowl the jungles of today and often people are attacked by them and sometimes indeed consumed by them.

Ever consider a zoo? Worldwide, Zoos have millions of visitors and just two days ago January 2012, online media ran the story of a 3year old being hospitalized and currently in intensive care with serious head injuries, having being attacked by a lion in a zoo.

Lions are often the stars of the show and here is an example that occurred at a Las Vegas MGM a year ago when a trainer was attacked and narrowly escaped http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYjufpxSfPw&feature=fvsr and only two years ago a teenager survived being attacked by three lions http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNKZOZViUKU&feature=related Circus lions attack trainer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tU9pkFsdYpg&feature=related a surprising number of people own pet lions - lion attacks are not that rare :smile:
The ancients wrote within the context of their cultures and times; but there were principles involved, behind their techniques and also behind their interpretations, then as now-just as we today have principles at the root of our contemporary interpretations of the astological phenonema as determined by our techniques of delineation.
As dr. farr says the context of the cultures and the times is a necessary consideration. Just as there are those who disparage Valens et al, unsurprisingly the astrologers of 2012 may well be the subject of equal derision in the year 4012 :smile:
What must be done is to understand the principles involved, to understand the fundamental objective of the particular technique (ancient technique, or, indeed, Modernist technique) being used (ie, what is the objective this technique is supposed to obtain?),
(a) IMO Applying the ancient techniques is a useful and rewarding exercise

(b) - however, those who find Valens risible are not obliged to practice the astrology of Valens - if one prefers 'modern astrology' nevertheless, one may acknowledge one's considerable debt to Vettius Valens et al who chronicled those techniques that 'modern astrology' is founded upon and without which 'modern astrology' is nonexistent.

(c) I continue to encourage those who find Valens of interest to explore Valens valuable techniques for themselves in order to make up their own minds.:smile:
.........and then to use our OWN understanding of what the result of that applied technique, shows, based upon our understanding of the meaningfulness of that result, which is ultimately based upon the principle (or symbol if you will) behind that result.
Good idea :smile:
Otherwise, whether ancient or Modern, Vedic or Western, its just cookbook, which could be canned and spewed out by the proper computer program...
Well said :smile:

waybread
01-08-2012, 10:29 PM
Hey, thanks, sandstone!

JA, there is such a thing as a common-sense "sniff test."

There are also such things as data and reason. It should be possible for a lot of Hellenistic calculations, when considered side-by-side with an ephemeris, to consider roughly what percentage of today's population has a given placement for a manner-of-death prediction. We could easily translate that percentage into numbers of people (knowing today's population) and then see whether there's a match-up with the numbers of people who actually do get eaten by lions or dogs. I suspect that the numbers of people with the more sensationalistic particular placements/outcomes is far greater than the numbers affected by some of the stranger predicted outcomes.

As you know, too, from your readings, some of the other Hellenistic predictions get increasingly bizarre in historical context. We also have to account for major differences in culture between then and now.

For example, in Roman times, the astrologers' delineation of "children who are not raised" was a major concern. It was vastly different from the meaning today of children who didn't survive early childhood through no fault of their parents. Back then, unwanted babies were routinely exposed, often on garbage dumps. Even for babies in loving homes, infant mortality rates were staggering in Roman times. I would be very surprised if the Hellenistic delineations match up with the known infant mortality rates today in the developed nations.

Trafficking in human beings is an international scandal today, but chattel slavery on the scale that existed in Roman times (or even in the antebellum American South) just isn't something that the average person in the English-speaking world is going to encounter. Yet slavery, with various ramifications (including of one's parentage or spouse) was a major concern of Valens.

So there are all kinds of places where the "If A, then B" reasoning of astrological prediction runs into difficulties as current interpretation. Of course, we have to **modernize** Hellenistic astrology's predictions in order to make it work for consumers of astrology today.

Frankly, if anyone can wend his or her way through Valens's extensive mathematical techniques and determine that the predictions are actually accurate in chart-reading today, I take my hat off to you. Have you actually worked through them, JupiterAsc?

Dr. Farr, you interpretive methods sound sensible, but could you show how you would apply one of the wierder Hellenistic predictions in a sensible way to a contemporary interpretation, by way of example?

Frank
01-08-2012, 10:42 PM
Realize, please, that the delineations given in Hellenistic material for single factors were merely the most extreme examples - a teaching tool, as it were.

I see just as many general and fatalistic interpretations in some "modern" astrology texts.

Look at Ebertin. He's a modern astrologer, right?

waybread
01-08-2012, 10:58 PM
Frank, what is your evidence that the bizarre predictions were merely "teaching tools"?

Ptolemy seems a bit more textbook-like than the others, but why even put something implausible and wierd into an astrology text as a "teaching device"? As someone who taught adult students for over 30 years, pedagogically such a strategy would make no sense. Ancient astrology students would hardly appreciate a deliberate fluff factor, because their livelihoods would depend upon accurate predictions.

Moreover, pointing out the foibles of some modern astrology authors is no evidence that Hellenistic astrologers were thereby crafting accurate predictive delineations. Does not compute. They might have been, but then they would have to be assessed independently of whatever might be the matter with modern astrology.

sandstone
01-08-2012, 11:10 PM
frank,
i suppose you are trying to be funny comparing someone like valens to ebertin..

Frank
01-08-2012, 11:36 PM
Frank, what is your evidence that the bizarre predictions were merely "teaching tools"?

Ptolemy seems a bit more textbook-like than the others, but why even put something implausible and wierd into an astrology text as a "teaching device"? As someone who taught adult students for over 30 years, pedagogically such a strategy would make no sense. Ancient astrology students would hardly appreciate a deliberate fluff factor, because their livelihoods would depend upon accurate predictions.

Moreover, pointing out the foibles of some modern astrology authors is no evidence that Hellenistic astrologers were thereby crafting accurate predictive delineations. Does not compute. They might have been, but then they would have to be assessed independently of whatever might be the matter with modern astrology.

Do you think that Ebertin's delineations are less fatalistic and general than the Hellenistic authors?

sandstone
01-09-2012, 12:07 AM
i don't recall ebertin ever giving an astrological recipe for be-headings, something i read just recently in valens...

ebertins work is a bit dark sometimes but not on the same level... whether growing up in nazi germany, releasing his most well known book 'cosi; in 1940 had anything to do with it is open to conjecture... i suppose one could look at his chart's cappy rising with jupiter saturn and moon all in close proximity as having some bearing on his approach as well...

Frank
01-09-2012, 01:10 AM
Realize, please, that not only am I a classical/medieval/traditional/whatever astrologer, i'm also a Ebertin-style Cosmobiologist. But since Ebertin wasn't one enamored of rulership, I use what I use.

I discovered Lilly and Ebertin at the same time.

I preface my lectures saying: "If it were biologically and chronologically possible, I'd be the b_astard child of Lilly and Ebertin. Many say the same about me, but leave out the Lilly/Ebertin stuff - and just say I'm a b_astard."

waybread
01-09-2012, 03:40 AM
Do you think that Ebertin's delineations are less fatalistic and general than the Hellenistic authors?

Frank, a thread on Hellenistic astrology is not the place for a digression on Ebertin. Would you like to start a new thread on him? Again, problems with a modern astrologer do not constitute evidence in support of some other type of astrology.

Frank
01-09-2012, 03:48 AM
Frank, a thread on Hellenistic astrology is not the place for a digression on Ebertin. Would you like to start a new thread on him? Again, problems with a modern astrologer do not constitute evidence in support of some other type of astrology.


You asked.

sandstone
01-09-2012, 03:52 AM
frank, i was aware of your background prior to our conversation, but thanks for mentioning it again.. i like the last part!

JUPITERASC
01-09-2012, 05:27 PM
Frank, what is your evidence that the bizarre predictions were merely "teaching tools"?
What is your evidence that the "bizarre predictions" were not merely "teaching tools?"

Ptolemy seems a bit more textbook-like than the others, but why even put something implausible and wierd into an astrology text as a "teaching device"? As someone who taught adult students for over 30 years, pedagogically such a strategy would make no sense. Ancient astrology students would hardly appreciate a deliberate fluff factor, because their livelihoods would depend upon accurate predictions. You speculate

Provide evidence that what you consider "weird" was also considered "weird" two thousand plus years ago.

Provide evidence of what ancient astrology students appreciated.
Moreover, pointing out the foibles of some modern astrology authors is no evidence that Hellenistic astrologers were thereby crafting accurate predictive delineations. Does not compute. They might have been, but then they would have to be assessed independently of whatever might be the matter with modern astrology.
Conversely, what computes is the surviving corpus of Hellenistic predictive delineation techniques :smile:

waybread
01-09-2012, 07:57 PM
Sorry, Frank-- I asked what? Nothing about Ebertin.

JA: Were ancient astrology texts teaching devices? And if so, what kind? The answer is pretty complicated because you kind of have to work through each text individually.

One place to look for the answer is in the author's preface, if he gives one. What does the author say is the purpose of his book? We might call this direct evidence. Another place to look are in any major themes the author develops in his introduction if he's got one. More generally, who is the apparent audience for the book? The latter two questions are examples of indirect evidence.

If we take Firmicus Maternus Matheseos Librii VIII as an example, he essentially states in his introduction to Book I that he wrote his book to satisfy the curiosity of a well-educated Roman governor with whom FM was on friendly terms, surnamed Mavortius, also called Lollianus in the text. There are independent historical records of such a governor, so this is one point in the "plus" column that FM wrote for Mavortius. Then FM goes on to refute the critics of astrology, so this would seem to be another purpose. FM also states that he has slight knowledge of astrology! Whether he was merely being modest or he actually knew he didn't know much astrology is hard to say, as much of his work is taken from earlier sources.

Book II seems more directly to have been written for students of astrology. It is addressed to ""those who wish to learn" and Firmicus Maternus essentially says he has tried to simplify Babylonian and Egyptian material "For those who are in training in forecasting about human fate." Sec. 30 of Book II gives a kind of code of conduct to would-be astrologers. So, teaching device? It sure looks like it. However, Lollianus (Mavortius) is addressed personally in Book II, as well.

But notice the pedagogical hints dropped by FM. He isn't one of those ancient gate-keepers of esoteric lore who deliberately obfuscated their material to keep out non-initiates. Rather, FM says he is trying to simplify material, to make it understandable to students.

In Book III (preface), Firmicus Maternus gives more clues about his teaching style, including both Lollianus and would-be astrologers: "We propose to translate into propositions the entire literature of the Mathesis so that the system developed by the divine predessors may be fully introduced to eager students." These propositions are apparently the 4 elements, the divinity of the human spirit, homage to (mythological or legendary) predessors, the thema mundi, and then cookbook-like details about the planets.

In book IV, we get a slightly different take on Firmicus Maternus. He says in his preface that he resigned from his law practice in disgust, and essentially lives the life of a gentleman-scholar "freed from every care" and "so that I may apply myself to heavenly and divine thoughts." So he isn't writing an astrology textbook because he needs the money, or even because he feels a burning desire to be an astrology teacher. Indeed, in his day, lawyers came only from the privileged ranks of society.

We could go through the rest of the book this way.

We can also look for evidence outside the text itself. For example, the Latin author Cicero left many writings, some of them critical of astrology. Part of Ptolemy's project in his introduction to Tetrabiblos was apparently to address Cicero's criticisms, because these match up decently. www.astroconsulting.com/FAQs/arguments_against_the_astrologers.htm (http://www.astroconsulting.com/FAQs/arguments_against_the_astrologers.htm)

Similarly, it is obvious from even a casual reading of Tetrabiblos compared with the "science" of Ptolemy's day, that he was very concerned to put astrology on a more scientific footing. Were Firmicus Maternus saw astrology as religion, Ptolemy saw it as amendable to scientific knowledge and methods.

Ptolemy's highly stematic approach, however, in many ways does make it useful as a textbook, regardless of his primary purposes, however, because it is easy to follow.

My argument is not that, "what [I] consider "weird" was also considered "weird" two thousand plus years ago." Quite the contrary! People 2000 years ago believed all kinds of things that made sense to them in their social milieu that I would consider weird if applied in the context of society today, however.

We appear to be in agreement that (provided the author is sufficiently clear) that we can apply Hellenistic techniques to horoscopes today. What I think is far more problematic is applying the interpretations that the ancients derived from their techniques.

tsmall
01-10-2012, 03:49 PM
The ancients wrote within the context of their cultures and times; but there were principles involved, behind their techniques and also behind their interpretations, then as now-just as we today have principles at the root of our contemporary interpretations of the astological phenonema as determined by our techniques of delineation. What must be done is to understand the principles involved, to understand the fundamental objective of the particular technique (ancient technique, or, indeed, Modernist technique) being used (ie, what is the objective this technique is supposed to obtain?), and then to use our OWN understanding of what the result of that applied technique, shows, based upon our understanding of the meaningfulness of that result, which is ultimately based upon the principle (or symbol if you will) behind that result.

Otherwise, whether ancient or Modern, Vedic or Western, its just cookbook, which could be canned and spewed out by the proper computer program...

dr. farr, I agree.

I think we may have gotten a little off track of the intention of this thread, which was to discuss and hopefully apply Hellenistic techniques to chart interpretation. I don't think it's fair to say that because Valens for example delineated manner of death in a way that has statistically small chances of occuring in today's world means that we then need to completely disregard Hellenist astrology as no longer relevant. That particular discussion does have merit and is worth exploring, and I see waybread has started a new thread to do so. As dr. farr has suggested, the only way to see if the methods work is to try them out.

sandstone
01-10-2012, 04:24 PM
the fundamental objective


of any technique is to understand the chart better either in an analytical sense or in a predictive context. in this regard there is no difference between trad or mod.. what is typically missing in all of these conversations are specific examples based off specific charts where someone is highlighting the use of a particular technique.. one can see techniques applied on the read my chart section, although they might not be the techniques you want to see in use.. i suggest that until someone works with a specific chart and wants to try the techniques of hellenistic astrology it is all mostly a 'cookbook' discussion that never gets off the page and remains in some figurative land of speculation..

i think the most significant technique i pick up from hellenistic astrology is the use of sect.. i am reluctant to apply it in a complete sense to my reads on charts in the 'read my chart' section as i don't think my understanding of the technique is fully complete.. i am still in study mode on sect, but i do believe it might be the biggest technique i take from this period of astrology..

the other 'technique' if you can call it that is the use of whole sign houses.. my move towards something like ws houses has taken place over many years.. i have used equal house systems for a very long time, but i have never thought the beginning or cusp of the house was at the degree of the ascendant.. ptolemy wanted to tack 5 degrees back on the cusp of the ascendant, but i have always felt that the cusp is the crest of the house and really the center of the house.. now whether this was to do with the fact i liked keeping planets in signs together by house might have been an intuitive decision on my part, but since getting hands book on whole sign houses a number of years ago i have found much truth in using this type of house system..

those are the 2 big techniques i get from reading cranes book on hellenistic roots - sect and whole sign houses.. i have learned about how to view the part of fortune and the part of spirit better, but again i see no one applying these techniques on the board here.. i have in a minor way for rageypoo on his thread on the p of fortune.. that would be the 3rd technique i have a better understanding of.. i get this from reading valens as well.

i still think it would be interesting to read the posters here using these techniques directly.. this isn't what happens on these threads though! instead very often there are these crazy back and forth cross examination type exchanges that don't do a whole lot for me!

JUPITERASC
01-10-2012, 08:24 PM
dr. farr, I agree. I think we may have gotten a little off track of the intention of this thread, which was to discuss and hopefully apply Hellenistic techniques to chart interpretation. I don't think it's fair to say that because Valens for example delineated manner of death in a way that has statistically small chances of occuring in today's world means that we then need to completely disregard Hellenist astrology as no longer relevant. That particular discussion does have merit and is worth exploring, and I see waybread has started a new thread to do so. As dr. farr has suggested, the only way to see if the methods work is to try them out.
tsmall, more of the method follows, for those interested to experiment with applying the ideas to natal charts that are currently being explored :smile:


Another important consideration in Hellenistic Astrology is whether a planet is “able to conduct its business”


Conditions relative to the zodiac:


If a planet is in one of its own places – i.e. domicile, exaltation, bound/term – then that planet is able to conduct its business.


Note: If a planet is in a place of a sect mate i.e. if the planet's dispositor is another planet of the same sect and/or “political party”, then that planet has some fitness and/or ability to conduct its business - but it has to use the resources of its planetary sect mate.


For example, the diurnal sect planets are Sun, Jupiter and Saturn, so if Jupiter is in the domicile/exaltation/bounds of Sun or Saturn, Jupiter is able to conduct business but Jupiter has to rely on Sun or Saturn for support.


According to Schmidt, a planet in its own place i.e. in domicile, rulership, exaltation, bounds/terms is as if “travelling in a shaded chariot” - thus even if that planet is combust the planet can be effective/able to conduct its business.

Schmidt advises that, in today's terms, “travelling in a shaded chariot” is similar to travelling in a limo with the blinds drawn over windows that are made of dark shaded glass.

Rebel Uranian
01-10-2012, 09:29 PM
Does the same apply to any reception? Any dispositorship loop? (While we're on the topic, is a dispositorship loop a reception? I've heard mixed opinions.)

waybread
01-10-2012, 09:45 PM
I don't think it's fair to say that because Valens for example delineated manner of death in a way that has statistically small chances of occuring in today's world means that we then need to completely disregard Hellenist astrology as no longer relevant.

Gosh, is anybody saying this? Not me. But I do think that some Hellenistic astrology is not transferable (many, many more examples beyond the couple that I gave) as Hellenistic astrology. The parts that don't apply today can be modernized in order to be useful, but then you've got some kind of hybrid astrology. Which is fine, if that's what you want. And for sure, some ancient interpretations of chart placements are useful then as now.

So do you want the astrology of the ancient Greeks as they wrote it, or the 2012 edition?

JUPITERASC
01-10-2012, 10:19 PM
Does the same apply to any reception? Any dispositorship loop? (While we're on the topic, is a dispositorship loop a reception? I've heard mixed opinions.)
The mixed opinions could relate to the century from which the particular astrological technique originates. As time passed, astrological techniques morphed - dr. farr shall probably have some useful comments and I read on one of Frank's posts that he is a Medievalist who uses additional techniques and is also familiar with Hellenistic astrology :smile:

So far as Hellenistic astrology is concerned, the ability of a planet to conduct its business is assessed in specific ways: one of those assessments states that a planet can conduct business when in the place of a sect mate: Schmidt says that sect is a condition relevant to the sun

Conditions relative to Sun are:

When a planet is in sect, it is favorable to the native.

When a planet is out of sect, it is unfavorable to the native.

the Diurnal planets - Sun, Jupiter and Saturn - are favorable in diurnal charts and unfavorable in nocturnal charts.

The Nocturnal planets - Moon, Venus and Mars - are favorable in nocturnal charts and unfavorable in diurnal charts.

Schmidt says that the Hellenistic definition of sect is unlike the medieval definition of sect because Hellenistically, sect is simply determined from the chart itself -

i.e. for diurnal charts, Sun, Jupiter and Saturn are in sect and Venus, Moon and Mars are contrary to sect.

For nocturnal charts, Venus, Moon and Mars are in sect and Sun, Jupiter and Saturn are contrary to sect.

The other definitions of sect found in Medieval Astrology are the rejoicing conditions.

Good
The Benefic of the sect is good - i.e. Jupiter in diurnal chart and Venus in nocturnal chart

and the destructiveness of the Malefic of the sect can be used for the benefit of native rather than against the native - i.e against others = good for the native but not good for others

A Malefic contrary to sect is bad i.e. Saturn in a nocturnal chart and Mars in diurnal chart

A Benefic contrary to sect or "political party in power" cannot pursue its own agenda. Schmidt uses the analogy of its best function being that of "the loyal opposition"

There are other conditions governing whether the business conducted by the planets is favorable or unfavorable, these are

a) Conditions relative to the horizon:

If a planet in a whole sign house is configured to the ascendant/aspects the ascendant by whole sign - then the planet is said to manifest its favorable significations to the native. That means, if a planet is in house 1/3/4/5/7/9/10/11 then that planet can manifest its favorable significations to the native

If a planet is in a whole sign house in aversion to the ascendant - i.e. houses 2/6/8/12 - then the planet is said to manifest its unfavorable significations to the native.

Examples of how various combinations could work out when applied to a natal chart:

A planet in 8th house is fit to conduct its business but that business is unfavorable to the native as the 8th house is the Idle House in Hellenistic astrology.

A planet in the 7th house is fit and favorable but is more favorable to others rather than to the native because the 7th house is in opposition to the first house.

Rebel Uranian
01-10-2012, 10:59 PM
According to Hellenists, what about my chart ruler/lord of geniture being Saturn on a night chart? (I'm pretty sure it's still Saturn. I might have to check that...) Is that totally bad? It's in the 4th house under the horizon with (sextile) the Sun in a diurnal sign and in the terms (we're using Egyptian, right?), face, and triplicity of Jupiter.

A little off-topic (and originally not its own paragraph): My Sun, Jupiter, and Saturn are generally doing great and my Moon, Mars, and Venus are doing terrible (especially in relation to each other.) I wish I were born a few minutes later... Couldn't the doctors have been more patient? Oh, but then I'd have bad houses everywhere. Lose-lose for me. But Mars has always been terrible for me. Every time I use it and fight for myself something bad happens. When I shut up and follow rules and take on responsibility (Saturn) something good happens. Explain that please, Hellenists.

Edit: My Sun is rising by declination so maybe that means there was enough light for day and I have a day chart after all?

JUPITERASC
01-10-2012, 11:52 PM
According to Hellenists, what about my chart ruler/lord of geniture being Saturn on a night chart? (I'm pretty sure it's still Saturn. I might have to check that...) Is that totally bad? It's in the 4th house under the horizon with (sextile) the Sun in a diurnal sign and in the terms (we're using Egyptian, right?), face, and triplicity of Jupiter.

A little off-topic (and originally not its own paragraph): My Sun, Jupiter, and Saturn are generally doing great and my Moon, Mars, and Venus are doing terrible (especially in relation to each other.) I wish I were born a few minutes later... Couldn't the doctors have been more patient? Oh, but then I'd have bad houses everywhere. Lose-lose for me. But Mars has always been terrible for me. Every time I use it and fight for myself something bad happens. When I shut up and follow rules and take on responsibility (Saturn) something good happens. Explain that please, Hellenists.

Edit: My Sun is rising by declination so maybe that means there was enough light for day and I have a day chart after all?
Apparent sunrise is different from actual sunrise - and not just because of the Equation of Time - I recall a thread where dr. farr writes how he went out to view the sunrise and it was eight minutes later than expected - I then posted an illustration of the idea.:smile:

Meanwhile, Hellenistic astrologers, having determined the information previously posted on this thread would have continued to analyse your chart using the following criteria (they had more time two thousand years ago, life was slower I guess)

Hellenistic natal charts have several primary rulers - each of which performs a different function.

The 1st primary ruler of the natal chart is known as the predominator of a chart and is the planet that represents the life of the Native so it is probably the most important.

TheTrigon aka Triplicity Lords of the predominator rule sections of the natives life. The first Trigon aka Triplicity Lord = first part of life, second Trigon aka Triplicity Lord = second part of life and The Third Trigon lord is the co-operating Trigon Lord.

How to Determine the Predominator of a chart:
The predominator of a chart is the Light of the Time - i.e. Sun by day or Moon by night - provided it is not cadent.

The cadent houses are 3/6/9/12

In a diurnal or day chart, if the sun is cadent then the moon is predominator.
In a nocturnal or night chart, if the moon is cadent, then the sun is predominator.

If both the sun and moon are cadent, then the ascendant is the predominator.

Unsurprisingly, there was some disagreement when some Hellenistic astrologers thought that if the domicile ruler of the ascendant is also cadent, then the Lot of Fortune should be the predominator.


As soon as the predominator had been found, astrologers then proceeded to determine the 2nd Primary Ruler or “oikodespotes” of the natal chart.

Determination of the Oikodespotes
Oikodespotes is a Greek word Schmidt says means “domicile master” e.g. Mars is Oikodespotes of Aries and Scorpio, Venus is Oikodespotes of Taurus and Libra, Mercury is Oikodespotes of Gemini and Virgo, Jupiter is the Oikodespotes of Sagittarius and Pisces, Saturn is Oikodespotes of Capricorn and Aquarius, Sun is Oikodespotes of Leo, Moon is Oikodespotes of Cancer.


Venus is the domicile master aka Oikodespotes of Taurus and Libra because Venus claims those signs as her dwelling place.


The Oikodespotes aka domicile master of the whole chart is the domicile ruler of the predominator's sign and is the planet that claims the entire chart as his/her dwelling place. The Oikodespotes aka domicile master is the one who sets the agenda/policy in native’s life.

The bound - aka term - ruler of the predominator is the “overseer” who sets any restrictions over the domicile master - aka oikodespotes - of the chart.

In natal chart delieneation, Hellenistic astrologers wanted
(a) the domicile master aka Oikodespotes of the predominator to aspect the predominator and

(b) the bound ruler of the predominator to aspect - aka 'be configured' to - the domicile master aka oikodespotes of the chart. The Hellenistic astrologer would also assess whether those planets are “favorable” or “unfavorable” to the native.

Rebel Uranian
01-11-2012, 01:09 AM
I tried that for my chart and it makes no sense. Maybe I'm just doing it wrong.

tsmall
01-11-2012, 01:56 AM
tsmall, more of the method follows, for those interested to experiment with applying the ideas to natal charts that are currently being explored :smile:



There is so much really great information in this, and your subsequent posts! Thank you!

waybread
01-11-2012, 02:03 AM
Possibly one other thing to keep in mind is that today must of us go by sunrise times in our time zone. If you live on the eastern edge of your time zone, sunrise is going to be earlier than on the western edge. Then there's daylight savings time, which shifts the MC point away from noon. Another problem is if you live in a hilly or mountainous region, where clock sunrise will be earlier than when you actually see the sun appearing over the hills.

I haven't tried this yet, but maybe somebody has. If you've got your birth data up on Astrodienst, try moving your birth location further west, but on the same latitude within your time zone, and see if it shows your GMT (universal time) birth time changing. If not, then the time zone problem pertains.

The primitive clocks of antiquity were not synchronized. The ancients also knew that day length times varied as you go north or south, and had some formulas to calculate the length of time it took a sign to rise at different latitutdes.

Rebel Uranian
01-11-2012, 02:06 AM
Yes, but there is also a difference between the Sun being visible over the horizon, and the Sun actually being over the horizon, which means hypothetically a day chart could have the Sun in the lower hemisphere if I understand correctly. I made a thread about sunrise times and I'm not sure sunrise is a uniquely Hellenistic phenomenon.

tsmall
01-11-2012, 02:53 AM
Gosh, is anybody saying this? Not me. But I do think that some Hellenistic astrology is not transferable (many, many more examples beyond the couple that I gave) as Hellenistic astrology. The parts that don't apply today can be modernized in order to be useful, but then you've got some kind of hybrid astrology. Which is fine, if that's what you want. And for sure, some ancient interpretations of chart placements are useful then as now.

So do you want the astrology of the ancient Greeks as they wrote it, or the 2012 edition?

waybread, I didn't mean to suggest that you were saying that the techniques were not relevant. I did notice that some consideration was given to whether or not the native could be eaten by lions (guess what, even here in NH that is a possiblilty for this native. We don't have lions as yet in our zoo, but several small, predatory cats that can inflict serious damage. If anyone wants to look at my chart and tell me if I need to be wary...:wink:)

It is quite evident that you are much more knowledgeable than I am on all things astrological (and probably about everything else in the world) and the research you have been doing, and sharing with us here on the forum is very much appreciated. I am unclear on what you mean about what kind of astrology we are looking for. I can almost see your point that using the ancient techniques, but interpreting them to our current society/culture/times will lose a little something in the translation of the judgements, or delineations of the charts, but wouldn't that be the case when anyone tries to interpret methods written several hundred (Lilly, and horary) or several thousand years ago? Does interpreting the techniques with a decidely "modern day living" slant automatically make all of today's astrology based on any traditional method hybrid?

dr. farr
01-11-2012, 03:22 AM
Relative to Hellenistic astrology, as an eclectic (and therefore not either a Modernist nor Hellenist) in answer to Waybread's question, I'll definitely take the 2012 edition:biggrin:!

And, as an eclectic, you can add to my nicknames that of "Dr. Hybrid":w00t:

Many of the concepts JUPASC has mentioned in the above posts, are identical the the practices and attitudes found in classical jyotish (Vedic) astrology, only that different words/names are used to describe them.

What I myself have taken as most valuable from the Greco/Roman authors is, of course whole sign, but also use of duodenary considerations (sign /12ths), profection (especially that of later Hellenists, ie, Paulus Alexandrianus), monomoiria-for me, as a preferable alternative to the Egyptian terms (again the later authors like Paulus), the dodekatemorion concept and technique, pitted and elevated degrees, and the Lots; there are many examples of my use of Lots in posts I've made in the Horary forum here on AW.

sandstone
01-11-2012, 04:24 AM
waybread has been busy writing a fascinating overview for everyone on a thread he started earlier today so i am going to dive in a give a response to tsmall and hopefully waybread doesn't mind...

thread mentioned above here : http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44736


>>I can almost see your point that using the ancient techniques, but interpreting them to our current society/culture/times will lose a little something in the translation of the judgments, or delineations of the charts, but wouldn't that be the case when anyone tries to interpret methods written several hundred (Lilly, and horary) or several thousand years ago? Does interpreting the techniques with a decidedly "modern day living" slant automatically make all of today's astrology based on any traditional method hybrid?<<

yes it will but i think what waybread is suggesting is the type of astrology people today practice is a neo-medieval or neo-hellenistic, as opposed to a medieval or hellenistic astrology... i think that is the distinction waybread is making.. we can't really go back and think we are recreating what they were practicing as we live in the 21st century with exposure to a different world that informs us differently..

waybread
01-11-2012, 04:39 AM
tsmall, thanks (I guess) for the acknowledgement. I am not trying to wow anybody (certainly not Dr. Pharr, who knows pharr more than I do about traditional astrology.) I am stating an opinion, that I think a lot of Hellenistic astrology's interpretation of planetary placements has to be reinterpreted for our era. Not all of it, mind you-- some of it seems eminently sensible as-is in today's context.

Your zoo sounds fascinating. If you can itemize its occupants, I can see if there are any planetary combos indicative of being eaten by them.

More generally, according to Rhetorius the Egyptian (sec. 77) you are in danger of being killed by "wild beasts" if your Mars is the ruler of the sign (i.e., Scorpio or Aries) of the 8th house and the house is "impedited" (??)without being aspected by Jupiter or Venus or if Mars is aspected by the sun. With a Mars-sun contact, you are also in danger of being crucified or beheaded, so watch it.

Hmmm....this sounds a lot like my 8th house, and I live in bear (black and grizzly) country..... Uh, oh.

tsmall
01-11-2012, 05:16 AM
tsmall, thanks (I guess) for the acknowledgement. I am not trying to wow anybody (certainly not Dr. Pharr, who knows pharr more than I do about traditional astrology.) I am stating an opinion, that I think a lot of Hellenistic astrology's interpretation of planetary placements has to be reinterpreted for our era. Not all of it, mind you-- some of it seems eminently sensible as-is in today's context.

Your zoo sounds fascinating. If you can itemize its occupants, I can see if there are any planetary combos indicative of being eaten by them.

More generally, according to Rhetorius the Egyptian (sec. 77) you are in danger of being killed by "wild beasts" if your Mars is the ruler of the sign (i.e., Scorpio or Aries) of the 8th house and the house is "impedited" (??)without being aspected by Jupiter or Venus or if Mars is aspected by the sun. With a Mars-sun contact, you are also in danger of being crucified or beheaded, so watch it.

Hmmm....this sounds a lot like my 8th house, and I live in bear (black and grizzly) country..... Uh, oh.

This is the best thing I have read all day. :w00t: Thanks! I needed the laugh. Live long, prosper, and don't feed the bears! (we don't have any of those...yet...)

JUPITERASC
01-11-2012, 03:13 PM
One reason why I don't think I want to practice Hellenistic astrology although I've been reading a lot of it lately, is because so many of the interpretations are just seem dire to the point of being silly. So how does one practice a reasonably authentic Hellenistic astrology without the sensationalistic interpretations? I mean, if your Mars and Saturn are vermisched, you are going to become a temple robber or total miscreant. Nor do I personally think it is ethical to do death predictions, although that was a huge concern back when the average life expectancy was under 30, and they wrote extensively on this topic.
an example of 'dire to the point of being silly' modern astrological interpretation describing - en masse - 'the Pluto in Cancer generation' as follows::smile:

QUOTE:
“For the Pluto-in-Cancer generation, the 'devil' took the form of the Twisted Parent, quietly inflicting horrible destruction on anything 'cute'. Under the umbrella of face-saving silences, horrors multiplied: keeping the 'dangerous' world safely outside the shell allowed what is within to fester, to grow strange and unnatural.


These darker, secretive aspects of Pluto-in-Cancer's passion for safety breed monsters that reside in Cancer territory - The home! The Family is where we now enter the realm of real darkness.

In the darker Plutonian corners of the human spirit, the ancient beast was plotting... and in this case, it was against the very creatures who needed nurture.

There was a silent, unmarked epidemic of child abuse, sexual, physical, and psychological, during the years that the Pluto-in-Cancer generation of people was raising its families."
ENDQUOTE
source: Skye Alexander

JUPITERASC
01-11-2012, 03:20 PM
And, as an eclectic, you can add to my nicknames that of "Dr. Hybrid":w00t:

A Mutable Ascendant perchance :smile:

Rebel Uranian
01-11-2012, 08:34 PM
Back to the topic: Hellenistically speaking, what does a well net dignified Saturn in the 4th on a night chart do for the native?

waybread
01-11-2012, 09:13 PM
an example of 'dire to the point of being silly' modern astrological interpretation describing - en masse - 'the Pluto in Cancer generation' as follows::smile:

QUOTE:
“For the Pluto-in-Cancer generation, the 'devil' took the form of the Twisted Parent, quietly inflicting horrible destruction on anything 'cute'. Under the umbrella of face-saving silences, horrors multiplied: keeping the 'dangerous' world safely outside the shell allowed what is within to fester, to grow strange and unnatural.


These darker, secretive aspects of Pluto-in-Cancer's passion for safety breed monsters that reside in Cancer territory - The home! The Family is where we now enter the realm of real darkness.

In the darker Plutonian corners of the human spirit, the ancient beast was plotting... and in this case, it was against the very creatures who needed nurture.

There was a silent, unmarked epidemic of child abuse, sexual, physical, and psychological, during the years that the Pluto-in-Cancer generation of people was raising its families."
ENDQUOTE
source: Skye Alexander



What is this, JR? The "two wrongs make a right" school of philosophy?

Dumb material by either party is not thereby a validation of anything else.

Rebel Uranian
01-11-2012, 11:10 PM
certainly not Dr. Pharr, who knows pharr more than I do about traditional astrology.

"In Iran the aura (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aura_%28paranormal%29) is known as farr or "glory": it is depicted in association with Zoroastrian kings."

That might not be the real reason, but it helped me remember.

What is this, JR? The "two wrongs make a right" school of philosophy?

Dumb material by either party is not thereby a validation of anything else.

"Two Wrongs Make a Right is a fallacy in which a person "justifies" an action against a person by asserting that the person would do the same thing to him/her, when the action is not necessary to prevent B from doing X to A. This fallacy has the following pattern of "reasoning":


It is claimed that person B would do X to person A.
It is acceptable for person A to do X to person B (when A's doing X to B is not necessary to prevent B from doing X to A).

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because an action that is wrong is wrong even if another person would also do it."


"Description of Hasty Generalization
This fallacy is committed when a person draws a conclusion about a population based on a sample that is not large enough. It has the following form:


Sample S, which is too small, is taken from population P.
Conclusion C is drawn about Population P based on S. "

Frank
01-11-2012, 11:14 PM
"Two Wrongs Make a Right is a fallacy....

Two wrongs don't make a right - but three lefts do.

Rebel Uranian
01-11-2012, 11:21 PM
Two wrongs don't make a right - but three lefts do.

"Equivocation is classified as both a formal and informal logical fallacy. It is the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning or sense (by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time). It generally occurs with polysemic words."

But seriously, equivocation can be hilarious. Seriously hilarious.

JUPITERASC
01-11-2012, 11:48 PM
Two wrongs don't make a right - but three lefts do.
Three lefts? When did they go?:smile:

Rebel Uranian
01-12-2012, 12:11 AM
They joined the right wing a while back.

JUPITERASC
01-12-2012, 12:15 AM
They joined the right wing a while back.
Winging it :smile:

tsmall
01-12-2012, 12:20 AM
Winging it :smile:

Aren't we all...:joyful:

Rebel Uranian
01-12-2012, 12:27 AM
Well, we isn't.

Edit: Now how about we (actually plural this time) get back to business, because although joking is also serious business, I'd like to know how on earth it makes sense that I'm an exceptionally lunar person. Here's irrefutable proof that I'm not:

"Memory is seated in the hinder cell of the brain, it is the great register to the little world; and its office is to record things either done and past, or to be done. It is quality cold and dry, and melancholick, and therefore generally melancholick men have the best memories, and [are] most tenacious in every way. It is under the dominion of Saturn, and is fortified by his influence, but purged by the luminaries."
([I]Pharmacopoeia Londinensis, Culpeper)

"The Moon is ALWAYS security seeking by nature - if its needs aren't met then you're definitely going to have some insecurity issues there."

(http://boards.elsaelsa.com/topic/what-rules-insecurity-in-astrology)

1. The luminaries purge the memory.
2. The Moon is a luminary.
3. The Moon purges the memory.
4. The Moon, being the fastest planet and making frequent sign changes and aspects, does everything it does frequently.
5. The Moon frequently purges the memory.
6. The Moon needs security.
7. A need specifies a lack.
8. The Moon is insecure.
9. People of the Moon (aka lunatics) have the traits associated with the Moon.
10. Lunatics are insecure.
11. Lunatics have frequent memory purging.
12. Frequent memory purging = bad memory.
13. Lunatics have bad memory.
14. People who are insecure and have bad memory do not enter memorization contests.
15. Lunatics do not enter memorization contests.
16. I once entered a pi memorization contest.
17. I am not a lunatic.

JUPITERASC
01-12-2012, 02:01 AM
Well, we isn't. Edit: Now how about we (actually plural this time) get back to business, because although joking is also serious business, I'd like to know how on earth it makes sense that I'm an exceptionally lunar person. Here's irrefutable proof that I'm not:

"Memory is seated in the hinder cell of the brain, it is the great register to the little world; and its office is to record things either done and past, or to be done. It is quality cold and dry, and melancholick, and therefore generally melancholick men have the best memories, and [are] most tenacious in every way. It is under the dominion of Saturn, and is fortified by his influence, but purged by the luminaries."
([I]Pharmacopoeia Londinensis, Culpeper)

"The Moon is ALWAYS security seeking by nature - if its needs aren't met then you're definitely going to have some insecurity issues there."

(http://boards.elsaelsa.com/topic/what-rules-insecurity-in-astrology)

1. The luminaries purge the memory.
2. The Moon is a luminary.
3. The Moon purges the memory.
4. The Moon, being the fastest planet and making frequent sign changes and aspects, does everything it does frequently.
5. The Moon frequently purges the memory.
6. The Moon needs security.
7. A need specifies a lack.
8. The Moon is insecure.
9. People of the Moon (aka lunatics) have the traits associated with the Moon.
10. Lunatics are insecure.
11. Lunatics have frequent memory purging.
12. Frequent memory purging = bad memory.
13. Lunatics have bad memory.
14. People who are insecure and have bad memory do not enter memorization contests.
15. Lunatics do not enter memorization contests.
16. I once entered a pi memorization contest.
17. I am not a lunatic.

Interesting irrefutable proof Rebel Uranian :smile:

Hellenistically then - some preliminary analysis:

If your given TOB is correct then, irrespective of 'twilight' your chart is nocturnal – ie you have a night chart so the Moon is Sect Light

Your Moon is located in the natal 7th wholesign house and is not cadent so far as whole sign houses are concerned. Therefore your natal moon, located just below the horizon (using dynamical house division) is Predominator and 1st primary ruler of your chart

Your Moon is also Oikodespotes aka domicile master of the whole chart and is the planet that claims the entire chart as her dwelling place and sets the agenda/policy in your life and is the 2nd primary ruler of your chart

The bound aka term ruler of the Predominator is the “Overseer” who sets any restrictions over the Domicile Master aka Oikodespotes) of the particular natal chart.

Using Egptian Bound (Term) rulers, your “Overseer” is Venus in Capricorn located above the Ascendant in the first whole sign house

Remember that in Hellenistic natal chart delieneation, one would want the following:

(a) the domicile master aka Oikodespotes of the Predominator to aspect the Predominator (for you Rebel Urainian Predominator and Oikodespotes are one and the same) and

(b) the bound ruler of the Predominator to aspect aka 'be configured' to the Domicile Master aka Oikodespotes of the chart.

Bound ruler Venus is opposed by Predominator and Oikodespotes Moon and is therefore configured to the Domicile Master aka Oikodespotes of the natal chart.

tsmall
01-12-2012, 02:14 AM
So Rebel, you asked me

So what would you say is the strongest planet? I think you ignored the fact that I said it was Saturn and not the Sun or Moon after I analyzed my own chart :/ But that's fine with me because Saturn is cool and the Sun and Moon are both boring, even in comparison to Jupiter. ZZZzzzZZZzzz I also said that I have a night chart (which is quite unfortunate considering the wonderful state of the Sun, Jupiter, and Saturn and the terrible state of the Moon and Venus with a moderate Mars) but overall the Sun gets gender + hemisphere and the Moon gets gender + chart state so they both get equal sect...

and I replied

I think it's your Moon still, but let's see what everyone else has to say.

And JUPITERASC posted this illuminating (and really thourough, thank you! :smile:) response

Interesting irrefutable proof Rebel Uranian :smile:

Hellenistically then - some preliminary analysis:

If your given TOB is correct then, irrespective of 'twilight' your chart is nocturnal – ie you have a night chart so the Moon is Sect Light

Your Moon is located in the natal 7th wholesign house and is not cadent so far as whole sign houses are concerned. Therefore your natal moon, located just below the horizon (using dynamical house division) is Predominator and 1st primary ruler of your chart

Your Moon is also Oikodespotes aka domicile master of the whole chart and is the planet that claims the entire chart as her dwelling place and sets the agenda/policy in your life and is the 2nd primary ruler of your chart

The bound aka term ruler of the Predominator is the “Overseer” who sets any restrictions over the Domicile Master aka Oikodespotes) of the particular natal chart.

Using Egptian Bound (Term) rulers, your “Overseer” is Venus in Capricorn located above the Ascendant in the first whole sign house

Remember that in Hellenistic natal chart delieneation, one would want the following:

(a) the domicile master aka Oikodespotes of the Predominator to aspect the Predominator (for you Rebel Urainian Predominator and Oikodespotes are one and the same) and

(b) the bound ruler of the Predominator to aspect aka 'be configured' to the Domicile Master aka Oikodespotes of the chart.

Bound ruler Venus is opposed by Predominator and Oikodespotes Moon and is therefore configured to the Domicile Master aka Oikodespotes of the natal chart.

Hey, maybe winging it until we learn more isn't so bad? :smile:

JUPITERASC
01-12-2012, 02:21 AM
So Rebel, you asked me
and I replied
And JUPITERASC posted this illuminating (and really thourough, thank you! :smile:) response
Hey, maybe winging it until we learn more isn't so bad? :smile:
That's ok tsmall! Definitely interesting to explore these ancient methods :smile:

Rebel Uranian
01-12-2012, 10:05 PM
That's ok tsmall! Definitely interesting to explore these ancient methods :smile:

The most important thing in life is to learn the rules. Do what you want with the rules afterwards, but first respect and learn them. That's what all the successful people do.

OK, I guess I could be more lunar than I thought based on my experiences. I love darkness (the Moon = ruler of the night.) I love fear and angst and darkness (oh, here's what I'm listening to (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UqQl0CNNCY&feature=related) :innocent:,) and that's not exactly rational or conscious. I wear black and grey all the time. Black jacket, black jeans, black nail polish (mixed with other colors so people don't think I'm goth.) I'm usually so fearful for myself or something/one else that I lose objectivity (due to emotions aka fear) and become inflexible and unreceptive, or possibly "crabby." I'm not particularly proud of of that. Inflexibility in certain places is good, and I'd say it's not a crime as long as you're open minded (which I obviously am.) I distort what people are intending all the time (aka unreceptivity,) also due to emotions/fear. I don't tell lies, I just interpret things wrong and act and talk based on it. A member once told me something like "don't continue to mistake genuine caring for pity." That's hard but I'll keep trying. I also can't quite figure out myself no matter how much introverted (the Moon is cold/introverted) and isolated contemplative introspection I do. I'm currently under the false conviction that I can be, do and have anything I want if I work for it. That's not exactly rational either but it's never done me any harm. But if you want to see how unintentionally deceived I am about myself, go search for the posts where I'm like "I'm a Gemini-type" and a different one that's like "I'm a Scorpio-type" when obviously I can't be both.

sandstone
01-12-2012, 10:43 PM
gee rebel u, i think this is the most personal note i have ever read from you! thanks for sharing..

you might enjoy edgar varese a composer that really introduced this type of style that penderecki sounds like he is coming out of... varese was a big influence on zappa and of course zappa was doing some very modern compositions too before he passed away..

you might enjoy looking at the planetary placements for some of these folks too... penderecki has saturn and moon in aquarius not far from your sun position...

JUPITERASC
01-12-2012, 10:51 PM
The most important thing in life is to learn the rules. Do what you want with the rules afterwards, but first respect and learn them. That's what all the successful people do.

OK, I guess I could be more lunar than I thought based on my experiences. I love darkness (the Moon = ruler of the night.) I love fear and angst and darkness (oh, here's what I'm listening to (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UqQl0CNNCY&feature=related) :innocent:,) and that's not exactly rational or conscious. I wear black and grey all the time. Black jacket, black jeans, black nail polish (mixed with other colors so people don't think I'm goth.) I'm usually so fearful for myself or something/one else that I lose objectivity (due to emotions aka fear) and become inflexible and unreceptive, or possibly "crabby." I'm not particularly proud of of that. Inflexibility in certain places is good, and I'd say it's not a crime as long as you're open minded (which I obviously am.) I distort what people are intending all the time (aka unreceptivity,) also due to emotions/fear. I don't tell lies, I just interpret things wrong and act and talk based on it. A member once told me something like "don't continue to mistake genuine caring for pity." That's hard but I'll keep trying. I also can't quite figure out myself no matter how much introverted (the Moon is cold/introverted) and isolated contemplative introspection I do. I'm currently under the false conviction that I can be, do and have anything I want if I work for it. That's not exactly rational either but it's never done me any harm. But if you want to see how unintentionally deceived I am about myself, go search for the posts where I'm like "I'm a Gemini-type" and a different one that's like "I'm a Scorpio-type" when obviously I can't be both.

The assessment continues and now involves determining the Kurios aka Lord of the Nativity - i.e. Kurios is the Executor of the agenda that Oikodespotes aka The Domicile Master holds. Kurios is equally important in the overall rulership of the natal chart aka nativity :smile:


How to Determine Kurios: Schmidt says it is as if there are candidates that must be assessed in order to determine the Kurios

LIST OF CANDIDATES ELIGIBLE FOR POSITION OF KURIOS
1. Ascendant sign. Any planet(s) in the Ascendant sign AND bounds of the ascending degree.

2. Domicile Lord of Ascendant.

3. Moon and its Domicile Lord

4. 10th sign from ascendant and its Domicile Lord

5. The Lot of Fortune and its Domicile Lord.

6. Any planets that make a phasis in the chart. Include planets that make a first or second station 7 days before or after the nativity. (Phasis previously explained in earlier posts)

7. The bound lord of the pre-natal lunation.

The Kurios aka Lord of the nativity is determined using the preceding hierarchy AND must also be fit to conduct its business. (Fitness to conduct business explained previously in earlier posts)

tsmall
01-12-2012, 11:06 PM
The assessment continues and now involves determining the Kurios aka Lord of the Nativity - i.e. Kurios is the Executor of the agenda that Oikodespotes aka The Domicile Master holds. Kurios is equally important in the overall rulership of the natal chart aka nativity :smile:


How to Determine Kurios: Schmidt says it is as if there are candidates that must be assessed in order to determine the Kurios

LIST OF CANDIDATES ELIGIBLE FOR POSITION OF KURIOS
1. Ascendant sign. Any planet(s) in the Ascendant sign AND bounds of the ascending degree.

2. Domicile Lord of Ascendant.

3. Moon and its Domicile Lord

4. 10th sign from ascendant and its Domicile Lord

5. The Lot of Fortune and its Domicile Lord.

6. Any planets that make a phasis in the chart. Include planets that make a first or second station 7 days before or after the nativity. (Phasis previously explained in earlier posts)

7. The bound lord of the pre-natal lunation.

The Kurios aka Lord of the nativity is determined using the preceding hierarchy AND must also be fit to conduct its business. (Fitness to conduct business explained previously in earlier posts)

This is wonderful (reaches for notebook, oh, wait, hits print.) I have a question, is a planet making a phasis both when it is stationary before going retrograde and when it is stationary going direct? Or am I misunderstanding that part?

Rebel Uranian
01-13-2012, 12:21 AM
I'm sorry if I refer to my own chart too much here. I'm just a really practical person when it comes to learning things. I have some other real person charts I can use if I'm being annoying, the only problem being that they're not real persons I know.

The assessment continues and now involves determining the Kurios aka Lord of the Nativity - i.e. Kurios is the Executor of the agenda that Oikodespotes aka The Domicile Master holds. Kurios is equally important in the overall rulership of the natal chart aka nativity :smile:


How to Determine Kurios: Schmidt says it is as if there are candidates that must be assessed in order to determine the Kurios

LIST OF CANDIDATES ELIGIBLE FOR POSITION OF KURIOS
1. Ascendant sign. Any planet(s) in the Ascendant sign AND bounds of the ascending degree. (Planets: Merc, Venus, ?Jupiter. Bounds: Most likely Mars, could be Saturn)

2. Domicile Lord of Ascendant. (Saturn)

3. Moon and its Domicile Lord (Moon, Moon, or simply, two Moons)

4. 10th sign from ascendant and its Domicile Lord (Venus)

5. The Lot of Fortune and its Domicile Lord. (The Sun)

6. Any planets that make a phasis in the chart. Include planets that make a first or second station 7 days before or after the nativity. (Phasis previously explained in earlier posts) (Venus?)

7. The bound lord of the pre-natal lunation. (Venus)

The Kurios aka Lord of the nativity is determined using the preceding hierarchy AND must also be fit to conduct its business. (Fitness to conduct business explained previously in earlier posts)

So let me guess: Kurios is also the Moon? I guess that makes me totally lunar. Or are there other things that I need to be looking at?

JUPITERASC
01-13-2012, 12:25 AM
This is wonderful (reaches for notebook, oh, wait, hits print.) I have a question, is a planet making a phasis both when it is stationary before going retrograde and when it is stationary going direct? Or am I misunderstanding that part?
Explanation of 'phasis' according to Schmidt :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 15º standardisation is obviously a variable dependent upon local conditions.

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”.

Rebel Uranian
01-13-2012, 12:42 AM
Is there a point system for Kurios so I can count up the points and see what it is on a given chart easily? I know mine's either Moon, Venus, or Saturn, but if the rising bounds is Saturn then I'm lame, which I'm not, so...

JUPITERASC
01-13-2012, 12:52 AM
I'm sorry if I refer to my own chart too much here. I'm just a really practical person when it comes to learning things. I have some other real person charts I can use if I'm being annoying, the only problem being that they're not real persons I know.

So let me guess: Kurios is also the Moon? I'm totally lunar, so I guess I should use these descriptions:

"Physical descriptions offered: Generally fair stature, white (pale) complexion and colour, round face, grey eyes, and a little louring [21] (http://www.skyscript.co.uk/moonatt.html#21) ; much hair both on the head, face, and other parts; usually one eye a little larger than the other; short hands and fleshy, the whole body inclining to be fleshy, plump, corpulent and phlegmatic: if the Moon is impedited by the Sun in the nativity or question, she usually signifies some blemish in, or near the eye: if she be impedited in succeedant houses;[22] (http://www.skyscript.co.uk/moonatt.html#22) in the sight if she be unfortunate in angles and with fixed stars, called nebulosae.

Manners when well placed: Composed manners, a soft, tender creature, a lover of all honest and ingenious sciences, a searcher of, and delighter in novelties, natural propensity to flit and shift habitation, unsteadfast, wholly caring for the present times, timorous, prodigal, and easily frightened, however loving peace, and to live free from the cares of this life. If a mechanic [23] (http://www.skyscript.co.uk/moonatt.html#23) , the man learns many occupations, and frequently will be tampering with many ways to trade in.

Manners when badly placed: A mere vagabond, idle person, hating labour, a drunkard, a sot, one of no spirit or forecast, delighting to live beggarly and carelessly, one content in no condition of life, either good or ill."

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/moonatt.html
Rebel Uranian, being practical, you realise that we can only question and test the rules after we have mastered them :smile:

Assuming that 27 Capricorn is Ascending degree (and it would be if astro.com corrects automatically for the Equation of Time) then:

Planet in the Bounds of the ascending degree is Jupiter
Ascendant degree Capricorn domicile ruler is Saturn
Ruler of the Bounds of the Ascendant degree is Mars (Egyptian Bounds)
Moon is in Cancer domicile lord is Moon
Domicile Lord of 10th sign from the Ascendant Venus
Domicile ruler of Lot of Fortune in Leo is the Sun
Venus is making a Heliacal Rising and Mercury could be in phasis - dependent upon local atmospheric conditions - Rumen Kolev says 'standardising' to 15º before the sun is too arbitrary. So your Mercury is arguably in Phasis

Venus is the (using Egyptian Bounds) bound lord of the pre natal lunation (New Moon before birth at 18º Capricorn)

Venus located in the first whole sign house is angular and therefore fit to do business as well as being of the sect in favour (nocturnal). thus Venus wins the competition! Venus is Kurios

It's not a points system it seems to be a 'totaling system' i.e. the planet that gets the most mentions and is also fit to do business is the Kurios

Dispute as necessary to check correctness:smile:

JUPITERASC
01-13-2012, 01:26 AM
Rebel Uranian, Hellenistically speaking then:

Moon is Predominator

Moon is Oikodespotes

Venus is Overseer

Venus is Kurios

Schmidt says Greek astrologers used metaphor to convey the idea of the functions of the various planets based on the Greeks being a seafaring nation who two thousand years ago navigated the oceans using sailing ships

NAUTICAL METAPHOR

The ship itself is the native’s life as represented by the Predominator – for you, the Moon

The first and second Trigon aka Triplicity Lords of the Predominator are the Winds that carry the ship to its destiny.

The third Trigon aka Triplicity Lord symbolizes the oars that move the ship.

Oikodespotes aka Domicile Master of the chart is the ship owner and sets the agenda or destiny for the native BUT under the restrictions set by the bound ruler of the Predominator. Your Oikodespotes is your Moon whose bound ruler is Venus

Kurios aka Lord of the nativity is the Captain of the ship aka Executor aka the one responsible to bring the ship to the destination set by Oikodespotes aka Domicile Master. Your Kurios is Venus


The Ascendant sign is the “helm” of the ship and represents the physical life.

Domicile Lord of the Ascendant – Saturn – is the Helmsman or the First Officer of the ship.

Lot of Fortune represents everything that befalls the native that is not of his or her own doing.

Domicile Lord of the Lot of Fortune – the Sun – represents the man on the prow of the ship aka Second Officer who is on the look out for things/events that are going to befall the native.

It is important that the Lord of the Lot of Fortune – in this case the Sun - be able to communicate with the Domicile Master – Moon – and the Ascendant/Helmsman – Saturn - Lord of the nativity aka Kurios – i.e. Venus.

Can they communicate? Well, Sun opposes Moon: Moon and Venus are squared by Saturn. Sun and Saturn are sextile by Sign. There is communication :smile:

tsmall
01-13-2012, 01:32 AM
Can they communicate? Well, Sun opposes Moon: Moon and Venus are squared by Saturn. Sun and Saturn are sextile by Sign. There is communication :smile:



Is there a way, or a need, to tell if the communication is argumentitive (mutiny) or harmoinious? Would the quailty of that communciation give insights into the life of the native, or does it matter?

JUPITERASC
01-13-2012, 01:42 AM
Is there a way, or a need, to tell if the communication is argumentitive (mutiny) or harmoinious? Would the quailty of that communciation give insights into the life of the native, or does it matter?
Exactement. Of course it matters - it is crucial that the communication is such that the ship stays on course, avoiding the metaphorical scylla and charybdis i.e. hidden rocks and whirlpools/undertows of life:smile:

Rebel Uranian
01-13-2012, 01:50 AM
Sun in Aquarius and Moon in Cancer don't make a by-sign aspect. Would that mean no communication between some members of the crew?

Also, Moon and Venus. :lol: "Why don't I feel like a girl?" "I like black." "There is no way on earth or anywhere else that I'm a phlegmatic." Other people: "I thought you were belligerent..." "Well I must admit, that I was a little reserved because of your powerfull energy. You radiate it, but actually it's a good thing."

^ That paragraph makes me think that the planets stood for other things than what they do now back in older times...

tsmall
01-13-2012, 01:55 AM
Exactement. Of course it matters - it is crucial that the communication is such that the ship stays on course, avoiding the metaphorical scylla and charybdis i.e. hidden rocks and whirlpools/undertows of life:smile:

So now we need to understand how the Hellenists defined and used what we know as reception?

tsmall
01-13-2012, 02:02 AM
Also, Moon and Venus. :lol: "Why don't I feel like a girl?" "I like black." "There is no way on earth or anywhere else that I'm a phlegmatic." Other people: "I thought you were belligerent..." "Well I must admit, that I was a little reserved because of your powerfull energy. You radiate it, but actually it's a good thing."

^ That paragraph makes me think that the planets stood for other things than what they do now back in older times...

Good questions. Thing is, other than not feeling like a girl, and being considered phlegmatic, I can also identify with what you say. I like black (most women wear it a lot. It's slimming.) As I have mentioned elsewhere, people often thought me belligerent until I got older, and still find me quite intimidating in person (though not apparently here. :biggrin:) My height has not changed in many years, and I mostly maintained my same weight, but I often get told that people remember me as "bigger." I think it's my personality, lol.

Which leads me to the bonus question...Rebel, what happens if we try to apply Hellenistic delineations to your chart in sidereal?

sandstone
01-13-2012, 02:06 AM
black - saturn - boring and depressing as all hell, lol...

the sidereal won't change it... actually it will put her moon 6th house and sun rising with the ascendant although below the horizon... all cappy - goes with black... moon to gemini.. mercury/venus in 12th.. mars 9th, saturn 3rd..

not a bad idea in some respects... change it, lol....

dr. farr
01-13-2012, 02:11 AM
One could use a numerical system of points: give 1 point for every "mention".

JUPITERASC has replaced Bob Zemco as "director for instructional material on ancient methods" here on AW:biggrin: (although of course many continue to miss Mr Zemco's participation on our site)

tsmall
01-13-2012, 02:15 AM
JUPITERASC has replaced Bob Zemco as "director for instructional material on ancient methods" here on AW:biggrin: (although of course many continue to miss Mr Zemco's participation on our site)

I agree! I wonder if it would be possible, since this thread is now many pages long, to pull the "instructional" posts out and make them a sticky...

(we do continue to miss Mr Zemco..)

dr. farr
01-13-2012, 02:22 AM
Yes I think they would make an excellent sticky, the first one for this Traditional Astrology forum. Let the Moderators know!

JUPITERASC
01-13-2012, 02:33 AM
Good questions. Thing is, other than not feeling like a girl, and being considered phlegmatic, I can also identify with what you say. I like black (most women wear it a lot. It's slimming.) As I have mentioned elsewhere, people often thought me belligerent until I got older, and still find me quite intimidating in person (though not apparently here. :biggrin:) My height has not changed in many years, and I mostly maintained my same weight, but I often get told that people remember me as "bigger." I think it's my personality, lol.

Which leads me to the bonus question...Rebel, what happens if we try to apply Hellenistic delineations to your chart in sidereal?
dr. farr, you are the expert on ancient astrology and as for BobZemco - NO ONE CAN REPLACE BobZemco! We have his many posts but 'twould be most refreshing if he returned :smile:

tsmall, on the subject of sidereal, Robert Hand, in the introduction to Project Hindsight’s translation of Vettius Valens The Anthology, Book I, asks “Were the zodiacs really tropical or sidereal? Did the fixed stars move (tropical) or stand still (sidereal)?

Hand then says “with Valens we do not know”

Interestingly, in a footnote, on page 83 of The Anthology, Robert hand, referring a chart says that “Valens has the Mars in Cancer while Neugebauer gets Gemini. However, if one corrects for Valens’ use of the 8° Aries tropical zodiac, Mars would be in Cancer.”

Schmidt has a Hellenistic forum at ACTastrology on which there has been much discussion regarding Sidereal versus Tropical - however the forum is not as active as it once was http://actastrology.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=153

Rebel Uranian
01-13-2012, 02:41 AM
black - saturn - boring and depressing as all hell, lol...

the sidereal won't change it... actually it will put her moon 6th house and sun rising with the ascendant although below the horizon... all cappy - goes with black... moon to gemini.. mercury/venus in 12th.. mars 9th, saturn 3rd..

not a bad idea in some respects... change it, lol....

Well, not bad in many/most respects. I like my 4th house Saturn and 1st house Mercury fine, as they're both in Joy and I mostly relate to Saturn and Mercury. Also, my Mercury would be in detriment in the 12th house. Sag is the worst of all Mercury signs. Capricorn is the best non-mutable. That's based on statistics. But... Most of the Cappies would turn to Sags... :tongue: ...houses might or might not change.

Good questions. Thing is, other than not feeling like a girl, and being considered phlegmatic, I can also identify with what you say.

I do "feel like a girl" now, but not in the conservative sense that the Moon and Venus imply at all. Those things I said were related to my "Moon/Venus LOL" statement.

JUPITERASC
01-13-2012, 02:48 AM
Sun in Aquarius and Moon in Cancer don't make a by-sign aspect. Would that mean no communication between some members of the crew?

Also, Moon and Venus. :lol: "Why don't I feel like a girl?" "I like black." "There is no way on earth or anywhere else that I'm a phlegmatic." Other people: "I thought you were belligerent..." "Well I must admit, that I was a little reserved because of your powerfull energy. You radiate it, but actually it's a good thing."

^ That paragraph makes me think that the planets stood for other things than what they do now back in older times...

Interesting observation Rebel Uranian! As Robert Schmidt of Project Hindsight http://www.projecthindsight.com/ explains: :smile:

The Sun’s nature is to select

The Moon’s nature is to gather and include

Mercury’s nature is to contest and to destabilize

Venus’ nature is to reconcile and to unify

Mars’ nature is to sever and to separate

Jupiter’s nature is to confirm and stabilize

Saturn’s nature is to reject and exclude

tsmall
01-13-2012, 02:55 AM
black - saturn - boring and depressing as all hell, lol...

the sidereal won't change it... actually it will put her moon 6th house and sun rising with the ascendant although below the horizon... all cappy - goes with black... moon to gemini.. mercury/venus in 12th.. mars 9th, saturn 3rd..

not a bad idea in some respects... change it, lol....

I'm not suggesting change it so much as try it both ways and then see which fits better...or if they both fit. Which, I believe, is what the conversation on the ACTastrology forum JUPITERASC provided the link to implied would be the best course for study.

dr. farr
01-13-2012, 03:15 AM
Problem for me with sidereal/rashi, is the ayanamsa factor; I really can't go with the Fagan-Bradley or Lahiri, but the almost unknown Hipparchus ayanamsa*, and the completely unknown (by "outsiders") Alycone/Krittika ayanamsa** of the tantric jyotish adepts (such as those of Ponmudi Forest in Kerala), seem to "make more sense" in their results, in my experiments regarding this matter.


*0 Aries @ 109 BC
**0 Aries @ 149 BC = current ayanamsa 2012 = slightly over 30 degrees

JUPITERASC
01-13-2012, 03:33 AM
Problem for me with sidereal/rashi, is the ayanamsa factor; I really can't go with the Fagan-Bradley or Lahiri, but the almost unknown Hipparchus ayanamsa*, and the completely unknown (by "outsiders") Alycone/Krittika ayanamsa** of the tantric jyotish adepts (such as those of Ponmudi Forest in Kerala), seem to "make more sense" in their results, in my experiments regarding this matter.

*0 Aries @ 109 BC
**0 Aries @ 149 BC = current ayanamsa 2012 = slightly over 30 degrees
Hipparchus ayanamsa? That probably works! I shall experiment with these ideas dr. farr - many thanks:smile:

Rebel Uranian
01-13-2012, 08:25 PM
Hipparchus ayanamsa? That probably works! I shall experiment with these ideas dr. farr - many thanks:smile:

I second that. I sort of think Hellenistic astrology is supposed to be sidereal because I haven't reconciled with or included certain ideas here yet, in favor of contesting and excluding them. :bandit:

Quick Q: Is Mercury melancholic in Hellenistic or only medieval? I find that interesting as it being dry semi-justifies my "Mercury is a malefic" idea (malefic planets = dry planets) but it makes no sense since generally cold and dry is associated with slow, deep contemplation and reserve, which are not attributes normally given to Mercury.

waybread
01-13-2012, 09:49 PM
Babylonian astrology was sidereal. By the time the Greeks picked up astrology, probably in the 2nd century BC, they could still make a case for the spring equinox in Aries as consistent with sidereal charts. However, Ptolemy definitely promoted the tropical zodiac, an opinion which (rightly or wrongly) carried the day in western astrology.

Rebel Uranian
01-13-2012, 10:25 PM
Ptolemy's methods are pretty consistent with the tropical zodiac from my observations. However, Ptolemy was most likely less of a practicing astrologer than I am :surprised:

waybread
01-14-2012, 04:34 AM
Ptolemy's zodiac was explicitly tropical.

The idea that Ptolemy "was not a practicing astrologer" really has to be unpacked. Most "practicing astrologers" of antiquity didn't write books. We have no idea, 1800 years later, whether Ptolemy read horoscopes or not. I can point you to modern astrology books by practicing astrologers that contain no horoscope readings. Even if not, we can't just blow off Ptolemy's signal contribution to astronomy and astrology, as though his not being a "practicing astrologer" actually means anything. Vettius Valens does appear to have been a practicing astrologer, but good luck using his techniques to actually make his horoscope delineations!

JUPITERASC
01-14-2012, 06:36 PM
I second that. I sort of think Hellenistic astrology is supposed to be sidereal because I haven't reconciled with or included certain ideas here yet, in favor of contesting and excluding them. :bandit:

Quick Q: Is Mercury melancholic in Hellenistic or only medieval? I find that interesting as it being dry semi-justifies my "Mercury is a malefic" idea (malefic planets = dry planets) but it makes no sense since generally cold and dry is associated with slow, deep contemplation and reserve, which are not attributes normally given to Mercury.

Hellenistic astrology says: "Mercury’s nature is to contest and to destabilize" (Robert Schmidt project Hindsight http://www.projecthindsight.com/ ) :smile:

Moog
01-14-2012, 06:45 PM
The original Uranus :wink:

Rebel Uranian
01-14-2012, 09:44 PM
Here's Lilly's description of Mercury (http://www.skyscript.co.uk/mercury_att.html#2).

Edit: Where is the Hipparchus ayanamsa? I looked and couldn't find it. I really want to try it because I bet it'll give results that exactly match my predictions. (Yes, I'm predicting astrology rather than astrology predicting me.) I tweaked my predictions for myself based on interviewing other people. ("Do I talk too much or not enough?" "Not enough.") And I'm going to try the charts for people if I'm certain the rising sign is right. Hellenism doesn't place much value on degrees.

JUPITERASC
01-14-2012, 10:11 PM
Problem for me with sidereal/rashi, is the ayanamsa factor; I really can't go with the Fagan-Bradley or Lahiri,but the almost unknown Hipparchus ayanamsa*, and the completely unknown (by "outsiders") Alycone/Krittika ayanamsa** of the tantric jyotish adepts (such as those of Ponmudi Forest in Kerala), seem to "make more sense" in their results, in my experiments regarding this matter.


*0 Aries @ 109 BC
**0 Aries @ 149 BC = current ayanamsa 2012 = slightly over 30 degrees
Rebel Uranian, dr. farr tells us that the Hipparchus ayanamsa* is linked to *0 Aries @ 109 BC :smile:

Rebel Uranian
01-14-2012, 10:39 PM
So:
2012 + 109 = 2121
30/2000 = .015
.015 * 2121 = 31.815

Move the Zodiac back 31.815 degrees?

JUPITERASC
01-14-2012, 10:59 PM
So:
2012 + 109 = 2121
30/2000 = .015
.015 * 2121 = 31.815

Move the Zodiac back 31.815 degrees?
The idea is to move the zodiac back by a certain number of degrees, or forward by a certain number of degrees, in this case I would say
149 - 109 = 40
therefore the more ancient Alycone/Krittika ayanamsa predates the Hipparchus ayanamsa by 40 years
If the rate is one degree every 72 years then the difference between the two is less than a degree
And IMO one would subtract less than a degree from, (rather than add 1.815 degrees to) the 30 degree Alycone/Krittika

however we can check the math with dr. farr as neither of us might be completely accurate :smile:

waybread
01-15-2012, 05:11 PM
If the Hellenistic astrologers used a sidereal zodiac, there should be some evidence of it in the texts that have come down to us. I don't think you'll find it, but I will happily stand corrected if someone can quote it.

The Babylonians used a spring equinox point of 8 or 10 degrees Aries, depending upon the source.

There is also extra-astrological evidence in the ancient world. So much of their religious beliefs were tied up with the stellar, lunar, and solar calendars. There is archaeological evidence of worship focused on cattle back when the spring equinox was in Taurus from places like modern-day Turkey and Crete. There is archaeological and textual evidence indicating the importance of sheep in religious belief when the equinox was in Aries.

For example, Orion is arguably the most visible constellation in the winter sky. The Babylonians called it the "shepherd of Anu" after their supreme father god. The Old Testament is loaded with references to good shepherds, such as the patriarchs of Genesis, Moses, David, and even God. The ram-headed Egyptian god Ammon was a minor figure in their pantheon until the equinox was demonstrably in Aries, then he became one of their most important gods.

The New Testament is really interesting, because it dates from the period when the equinox was demonstrably precessing into Pisces. We have passages calling Jesus "the lamb of God": the equinox was well-represented by a lamb rather than a full-grown ram in the spring. Then we have other materials in the gospels focusing on very Piscean sounding Jesus befriending fishermen, walking on water, multiplying loaves and fishes, and calming the waves. These two schools sort of duke it out in Revelation, the final book of the NT (Protestant versions) with the lamb (Aries) motif prevailing. Which parallels the fixing of the equinox in Aries in the tropical zodiac.

All these cultures plus the Greeks and Romans were inter-mixed in the Egyptian city of Alexandria, where horoscopic astrology probably got its start. By the send century AD when Valens and Ptolemy were writing, astrology was pretty much focused on signs given in ephemerises, rather than on observed constellations, anyway. If you focus on signs vs. constellations, it doesn't much matter where you settle the equinoxes, so long as you are consistent.

waybread
01-15-2012, 05:17 PM
tsmall-- are you still here?

My neighbours recently informed me that there have been several cougar sightings close to my house. (I live in the Canadian Rockies.) I am going to double-check those old predictions about death by lion attacks.

Rebel Uranian
01-15-2012, 06:07 PM
@waybread - back then they didn't have to think about whether their zodiac was sidereal or tropical since they gave the exact same results, much like how presently we don't have to differentiate between the Sun and the nearest star since they give the exact same results. "The nearest star is the source of light and heat." "No Alpha Centauri is not!" "The nearest star is the Sun..."

JUPITERASC
01-15-2012, 06:32 PM
tsmall-- are you still here? My neighbours recently informed me that there have been several cougar sightings close to my house. (I live in the Canadian Rockies.) I am going to double-check those old predictions about death by lion attacks.
Good idea to double-check waybread - you and tsmall both have pressing reasons to investigate those ancient predictions. :smile:

Just how serious is the threat from those cougars and what protection do you and your neighbors have? - The Rockies are built on a grand scale so I'm wondering how far away those neighbours are...

meanwhile if one of Valens apparently dire predictions is discovered to be a significant factor natal chartwise, there is yet time to ponder evasive action e.g. "Captain's Log, star date current... cougars sighted... beam me up Scotty... out"

tsmall and family have cougars close by that are kept in the zoo managed by her husband.. I wonder what those cougars eat? I'm glad that budget is one I don't need to balance... Zoos are likely expensive to maintain

tsmall
01-15-2012, 10:53 PM
tsmall-- are you still here?

My neighbours recently informed me that there have been several cougar sightings close to my house. (I live in the Canadian Rockies.) I am going to double-check those old predictions about death by lion attacks.

I'm still here. Haven't been devoured yet! Although with the cold spell we've been having freezing to death is not out of the question.:smile: The Arctic foxes are loving it.

I am enjoying reading the discussion, and haven't had anything intelligent to contribute...keep going, though.

JUPITERASC, no cougars, just a bobcat and an African Serval.

JUPITERASC
01-15-2012, 11:01 PM
I'm still here. Haven't been devoured yet! Although with the cold spell we've been having freezing to death is not out of the question.:smile: The Arctic foxes are loving it.
I am enjoying reading the discussion, and haven't had anything intelligent to contribute...keep going, though.
JUPITERASC, no cougars, just a bobcat and an African Serval.
tsmall, what's their favorite fodder?:smile:

tsmall
01-15-2012, 11:08 PM
tsmall, what's their favorite fodder?:smile:

I love tangents! :smile: Horsemeat, and rabbits. Cats are strictly carnivores, unlike canines.

To keep this quasi-astrology related, is there anything Hellenistically that would indicate living in a zoo? Would we look at natal charts, or a combination of natal and profections?

The Serval is named Isis, the bobcat Conan. :smile:

Rebel Uranian
01-15-2012, 11:14 PM
Good idea to double-check waybread - you and tsmall both have pressing reasons to investigate those ancient predictions. :smile:


I'm still here. Haven't been devoured yet!


So, how will we tell when you die by getting devoured by "lions?"

Although with the cold spell we've been having freezing to death is not out of the question.:smile: The Arctic foxes are loving it.


Cold is awesome. I have no reason to have typed that but time is so valuable I have no reason to erase that or any of this now.

tsmall
01-15-2012, 11:22 PM
So, how will we tell when you die by getting devoured by "lions?"

I'll leave instructions for someone to come here and post to the thread regarding my demise. Or, if I suddenly disappear from the forum, there may be cause for speculation.



Cold is awesome. I have no reason to have typed that but time is so valuable I have no reason to erase that or any of this now.

Cold is awesome until the first (and hopefully last) time you survive hypothermia. It is not a pleasant experience. (Been there, done that.)

Rebel Uranian
01-15-2012, 11:24 PM
I'll leave instructions for someone to come here and post to the thread regarding my demise. Or, if I suddenly disappear from the forum, there may be cause for speculation.


Well, I don't trust that, but OK.


Cold is awesome until the first (and hopefully last) time you survive hypothermia. It is not a pleasant experience. (Been there, done that.)

Well, I'd rather freeze than burn at the same speed. I'm not trying to say your situation is any better because of my own preference...

P.S. "awesome" (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/awesome)

P.P.S. Back to Hellenism. Subtracting 28* (when in doubt, round down), and everything is looking quite Mercury and Saturn based with some Jupiter influence and general diurnality and masculinity of planets. It's actually pretty cool. I'll edit this post more with the whole analysis of it. The only thing that doesn't make too much sense is that I'd say Saturn is the boss and Mercury is the one carrying out orders, not vice versa. Edit: It doesn't even appear to be vice versa. Hmm...

Sect light: Moon 10* Gemini - not cadent
Oikodespotes: Mercury 9* Sagittarius
Overseer: Jupiter 1* Capricorn

Now for Kurios:
Asc planets: Mercury, Venus; Asc bounds: Saturn
Asc domicile ruler: Jupiter
Moon lord: Mercury
10th sign: Mercury
Fortune: Moon
Phasis: Venus
Lunation bound: Saturn

Venus: 16* Sag
Saturn: 4* Pisces

Mercury is in its own face but it's in detriment. Saturn is in its own face, not in detriment, and in mutual reception with Jupiter. Venus doesn't have anything.

tsmall
01-15-2012, 11:59 PM
P.P.S. Back to Hellenism. Subtracting 28* (when in doubt, round down), and everything is looking quite Mercury and Saturn based with some Jupiter influence and general diurnality and masculinity of planets. It's actually pretty cool. I'll edit this post more with the whole analysis of it. The only thing that doesn't make too much sense is that I'd say Saturn is the boss and Mercury is the one carrying out orders, not vice versa.

I think I missed a step. 28* why? (If it works, maybe we can call it the Rebel Uranian ayanamsa?)

Rebel Uranian
01-16-2012, 12:03 AM
JUPITERASC said he thinks the Hipparchus ayanamsa subtracts something over 29* so I just rounded it down to the nearest integer (nearest integer is always down, "floor function") so I wouldn't have to do a bunch of research on what the exact value is in the meantime. Are we adding a negative or subtracting a positive? You're always supposed to round down your profits and round up your expenditures so yes, that detail does matter...

JUPITERASC
01-16-2012, 12:12 AM
I love tangents! :smile: Horsemeat, and rabbits. Cats are strictly carnivores, unlike canines.

To keep this quasi-astrology related, is there anything Hellenistically that would indicate living in a zoo? Would we look at natal charts, or a combination of natal and profections?

The Serval is named Isis, the bobcat Conan. :smile:
Apparently the constellations aka zoidiac or zoodiac are a kind of zoo area :smile:


QUOTE
When confronted with the history of the evolution of Western Astrology it is difficult to understand how astrology could possibly work now. So many of the details are so at odds with so much of what we now regard as "traditional" knowledge. And yet, it is not as if the ancient theory, at least as currently understood and articulated, is necessarily more self-consistent and therefore theoretically sound. In trying to make sense of the situation now, as well as then, several possible insights have emerged which seem to have the potential to be efficacious. The first is may be a re-exploration of the Tropical Zodiac from first principles, but in light of modern theories of wave form and resonance modes.


Robert Hand and Robert Schmidt findings in Project Hindsight present two new and startling bits of information causing rethinking of the meaning of the Zodiac.

First, Robert Hand’s discussion of the meaning of "Zoidion". And second, the insight that the Greeks apparently did not differentiate the Zodiac into twelve distinct "Signs" as we do, but rather they divided the ecliptic into six pairs of Zoidia. The idea that opposite Signs have opposite natures is nothing new to modern astrologers, but the idea that the Greeks understood the Zoidia primarily as six axes of paired opposites rather than twelve individual Signs was a revelation to many.

This is also apparently difficult to reconcile with the understanding of Zoidion which Robert Hand so eloquently expurgated as "little bit (quanta) of (animal) aliveness." He further explained that his current understanding of this apparently baffling term is that it described a figure standing out against the ground of the general background aliveness. The idea being that the Greeks saw everything as alive and differentiated the twelve Zoidia with a diminutive word for animal which could also mean face.

Both of these ideas made a strong impression on the writer, along with a third implicitly related idea: The Greeks apparently thought of the Zoidia (Signs) as discrete discontinuous entities. To the Greeks what we would call a Sign cusp, or boundary, was actually a discontinuous break between one Zoidion and another. http://www.esoterism.ro/english/tropical-zodiac.php

Rebel Uranian
01-16-2012, 12:21 AM
As interesting as that this, nope that's equivocation.

dr. farr
01-16-2012, 03:09 AM
So:
2012 + 109 = 2121
30/2000 = .015
.015 * 2121 = 31.815

Move the Zodiac back 31.815 degrees?


Here is how to figure these ayanamasa relative to dates of 0 Aries:

2012 + 109 (that's for 109 BC and the Hipparchus ayanamsa)
=
2121, multiply by 50.25 (speed of precession) then divide by 3600 (number of seconds in a degree)
This gives the ayanamsa number, which then is subtracted from the positions found in the tropical based chart.

Therefore, the Hipparchus ayanamsa for 2012 = 29degree36minutes, so all placements would be moved "back" by that degree, for 2012 charts.
In the case of RU's birthchart in 1997, the Hipparchus would be 29degrees26 minutes (so 29 degrees would be subtracted, in rounding off): that would make RU's ascendant Sagittarius, take the Sun out of detriment in Aquarius and place it squarely in Capricorn; with a 29 degree change, the houses (as whole sign houses) would remain the same as in the tropical chart, but the sign/placements would change; Moon would still be angular (7th) and in the "day period" part of the chart, but would move out of its domicile in Cancer, back into Gemini; also, the pivots of the chart would change from tropical cardinals to "sidereal" mutables; Saturn would shift into Pisces, Mars into Virgo.

Rebel Uranian
01-16-2012, 02:58 PM
Wasn't it 29*36', which would be rounded to 30*?

I also think it makes more sense if the Moon is considered out of sect, because then the chart listens to the Sun's Oikodespotes, Saturn (aka why I'm always isolated and depressed) and its Overseer, Venus (art,) rather than the Moon's Oikodespotes, Mercury (according to people I ask, I talk a lot [/sarcasm]) and its Overseer, Jupiter (I'm a real jovial person [/alsosarcasm].) But I can't just go around changing things according to what I think makes sense... :whistling:

JUPITERASC
01-16-2012, 06:10 PM
Wasn't it 29*36', which would be rounded to 30*? I also think it makes more sense if the Moon is considered out of sect, because then the chart listens to the Sun's Oikodespotes, Saturn (aka why I'm always isolated and depressed) and its Overseer, Venus (art,) rather than the Moon's Oikodespotes, Mercury (according to people I ask, I talk a lot [/sarcasm]) and its Overseer, Jupiter (I'm a real jovial person [/alsosarcasm].) But I can't just go around changing things according to what I think makes sense... :whistling:
dr. farr I understand from your clarification that my rough estimate of “subtracting less than a degree” from the 30º (ergo Hipparchus ayanamsa = 29º + less than a degree) although arguably 'in the ball park' was simply too inexact!:smile:

Rebel Uranian your feelings of isolation and depression are a big clue as to which planetary effects you are currently experiencing

– IMO a consideration of the Hellenistic significations of the planets (as explained by Robert Schmidt's translations from Ancient Greek and Latin http://www.projecthindsight.com/ ) goes some way towards solving the mystery

Mars’ nature is to sever and to separate

Saturn’s nature is to reject and exclude

Rebel Uranian
01-16-2012, 06:32 PM
Yes, but I'm always isolated and depressed, as stated in the quote. I'm actually fine and sometimes even happy with being isolated and depressed most of the time for some odd reason. I don't see Mars or Saturn playing a massive role in my chart in Hellenism, and even Mars as it is is much more extroverted, thus Hellenism (or at least what I've seen so far) cannot be correct. I mean, go ask someone who has known me for a few years and complains that I go off by myself too often and normally don't talk enough. If I make a joke and deliver it like a joke, initially people expect me to be about to say something profound or the likes. I just can't think of anything to say most of the time :/ and usually, as I think I implied, I don't really want to say anything anyways.

JUPITERASC
01-16-2012, 06:47 PM
Yes, but I'm always isolated and depressed, as stated in the quote. I'm actually fine with being isolated and depressed most of the time for some odd reason. I don't see Mars or Saturn playing a massive role in my chart in Hellenism, and even Mars as it is is much more extroverted, thus Hellenism (or at least what I've seen so far) cannot be correct.
Perhaps not :smile:

Planets are happiest if they are in a chart that is “in sect, ” or “in the sect of favour.” Mars is in sect:smile:


However Saturn is out of sect and a diurnal Saturn in a nocturnal chart, is not going to be too happy.

Schmidt advises us that Mars and Saturn being the two malefics, are probably of some cause for concern to us when looking at sect - because if they’re out of sect, depending on house placement and aspect, they have the potential of being rather unpleasant, mean and nasty. In contrast, the problems caused by out of sect benefics are not as unpleasant as the kinds of problems caused by the malefics.

waybread
01-16-2012, 07:30 PM
@waybread - back then they didn't have to think about whether their zodiac was sidereal or tropical since they gave the exact same results, much like how presently we don't have to differentiate between the Sun and the nearest star since they give the exact same results. "The nearest star is the source of light and heat." "No Alpha Centauri is not!" "The nearest star is the Sun..."

Astrologers back-when did know about precession. The Egyptians had started to realize that their temples were getting out of alignment within 300 years of construction. If Ptolemy realized that the Babylonians were using 8 or 10 degrees Aries as their equinox point (and he did have Babylonian materials at his disposal) then his putting the equinox at 0 degrees Aries also indicates knowledge of the backwards slippage caused by precession.

JA, mountain lion sightings are not rare in rural/wild western Canada, although this is the first one I've heard of so close to our house. Due to knee troubles I'm not snow-shoeing or hiking in the hills behind our house as I have in the past. Otherwise, the sensible plan is to go with a group, make noise, and stay close together. The word out here is, don't let your cats outside, and don't keep your dog chained by the house, however, as cougars will go after small pets. Smart people don't leave messy barbecue grills outside, either, as the smell attracts them. Bears are common out here, and people who expect that they might encounter them generally take bear spray.

My road is well-settled, but there are kazillions of miles/km of forested mountains in two other directions from my house.

You know, while death by animal attacks in the wild might have happened in late antiquity, I wonder if those death forecasts refer to something like Christians or convicted criminals having to fend off lions in the Colosseum. (cf. Androcles and the Lion.)

Stay warm, tsmall!

Rebel Uranian
01-16-2012, 07:34 PM
@JUPITERASC - Well, how about you read these to think about what I think of my sect malefic vs. my out-of-sect malefic. Some of these from months ago, and almost none of these are from when I knew about the whole "sect malefic" concept.

I'm actually fine and sometimes even happy with being isolated and depressed most of the time for some odd reason.

I don't like Mars one bit. I would do a great lot to make my Mars as weak and obscure as possible (assuming astrology is correct.) ... [I'm] terrified of making mistakes and Mars is the planet ruling accidents. Mars is also totally useless. Fighting gets you nowhere. I hate it when Mars beats Saturn and I break something out of clumsiness or argue in a non-sophisticated manner or something. I wish I wasn't capable of doing such. ...


...Mars is just annoying to me. ...Lack of all limits in everything is the worst possible scenario. ...

For a few years when I was very young, I was basically trained to do bad things, be explosive and belligerent, and generally make a scene because that was the only way I could get the people in charge to stop picking on me so much, or at least feel like they're not in control. [/confession] Now I finally undid all of my bad conditioning and everything's great. It was a little [/understatement] depressing, sure... but better late than never.

I also have a deleted post where I complained about how Aries people are the most irritating the in the world. I'll go get some of my praises for Capricorn for you if you want to see them. If it's the case that I should dislike Saturn and like Mars, then astrology is just pure nonsense. I was always terrible at sports as a kid and would rather sit and contemplate things, or work on useful things. I asked to do "karate" for several years, primary because I wanted to be involved in that kind of cool discipline and tradition (according to you, no one should like martial arts, they're like Mars and Saturn combined.) I once was talking to someone saying "I want freedom" and they were like "Actually, it sounds like you want responsibility" and I was like "Oh... yeah, it does." I asked for more responsibility and it worked. My favorite colors are consistently black, metallic colors (including silver but discluding gold and bronze,) grey, rust colors, dark purples and occasionally blues (for when I need real colors.) I can't stand orange or yellow one bit - ask someone I know! I always wanted to move to the mountains or possibly desert (but deserts are too hot,) I have a massive collection of rocks, I don't want to invent my own job, I hate chemistry and biology, I like building things and buildings, I'm psychologically diagnosed as being fear-based and perfectionistic, I usually dress up and I almost never wear T-shirts, I'm subject to being overly rational (as opposed to "subject to no reason (http://www.skyscript.co.uk/marsatt.html)")...

Edit: More later

JUPITERASC
01-16-2012, 07:45 PM
Astrologers back-when did know about precession. The Egyptians had started to realize that their temples were getting out of alignment within 300 years of construction. If Ptolemy realized that the Babylonians were using 8 or 10 degrees Aries as their equinox point (and he did have Babylonian materials at his disposal) then his putting the equinox at 0 degrees Aries also indicates knowledge of the backwards slippage caused by precession.

JUPITERASC, mountain lion sightings are not rare in rural/wild western Canada, although this is the first one I've heard of so close to our house. Due to knee troubles I'm not snow-shoeing or hiking in the hills behind our house as I have in the past. Otherwise, the sensible plan is to go with a group, make noise, and stay close together. The word out here is, don't let your cats outside, and don't keep your dog chained by the house, however, as cougars will go after small pets. Smart people don't leave messy barbecue grills outside, either, as the smell attracts them. Bears are common out here, and people who expect that they might encounter them generally take bear spray.

My road is well-settled, but there are kazillions of miles/km of forested mountains in two other directions from my house.

You know, while death by animal attacks in the wild might have happened in late antiquity, I wonder if those death forecasts refer to something like Christians or convicted criminals having to fend off lions in the Colosseum. (cf. Androcles and the Lion.)

Stay warm, tsmall!
One's location would have some bearing (no pun intended) - relevant to being at risk of being attacked by wild beast

Valens chronicled the writings of astrologers preceding him by at least three hundred years who may well have originated from other parts of the globe where animal attacks were of more concern, so it is unsurprising those delineations appear in his Anthology.

Astrologers practicing Hellenistic methods in South America, India, Africa, Spain, the list is endless would think attacks from wild animals not unusual. Of course, in the West there are countless zoos and safari parks whose combined visitor intake is in the millions and wild animal attacks are not that rare. Also many people worldwide keep wild animals as pets.:smile:

JUPITERASC
01-16-2012, 08:01 PM
@JUPITERASC - Well, how about you read these to think about what I think of my sect malefic vs. my out-of-sect malefic. Some of these from months ago, and almost none of these are from when I knew about the whole "sect malefic" concept.

I also have a deleted post where I complained about how Aries people are the most irritating the in the world. I'll go get some of my praises for Capricorn for you if you want to see them. If it's the case that I should dislike Saturn and like Mars, then astrology is just pure nonsense. I was always terrible at sports as a kid and would rather sit and contemplate things, or work on useful things. I asked to do "karate" for several years, primary because I wanted to be involved in that kind of cool discipline and tradition (according to you, no one should like martial arts, they're like Mars and Saturn combined.) I once was talking to someone saying "I want freedom" and they were like "Actually, it sounds like you want responsibility" and I was like "Oh... yeah, it does." I asked for more responsibility and it worked. Edit: More later
Mars is separating from an exact opposition of Saturn, however (Tropically speaking) since Mars in Libra occupies Saturn's Exaltation and Saturn in Aries is occupying Mars domicile then the two planets can be of help/assistance to each other BUT this could be a difficult alliance because Mars is in sect but Saturn is unhappy being out of sect:smile:

Culpeper
01-16-2012, 08:22 PM
From my study of the ancient world, being thrown to the lions was a common form of execution for criminals and political prisoners. After all if you have lions around, you have to feed them some way and they eat expensive food.

The greatest danger outside a city was being attacked by packs of rabid dogs. Astrology has many aphorisms about dog bites. I think more people died of dog bits than from the lions. However, if you were at all in politics better ask your astrologer about those lions.

Rebel Uranian
01-16-2012, 08:43 PM
Mars is separating from an exact opposition of Saturn, however (Tropically speaking) since Mars in Libra occupies Saturn's Exaltation and Saturn in Aries is occupying Mars domicile then the two planets can be of help/assistance to each other BUT this could be a difficult alliance because Mars is in sect but Saturn is unhappy being out of sect:smile:

What does that have to do with what I wrote? That just says Mars will help lift Saturn up. It doesn't say why I'm terrified of people showing anger and deeply admire people showing control. It's a proven fact that most adults act like children. It's really admirable to see and adult that actually acts like an adult, which means that they show self-control. Also, the sect light should be more beneficial to me than the out-of-sect light, right? Fact: I got along with my dad much better than with my mom. Of course, we shouldn't use our own experience to tell if astrology does or doesn't work, considering some arbitrary system of interpreting planets that disagrees with other arbitrary systems of interpreting planets knows more about us than hours of introspection (aka what I do for entertainment "are you bored?" "no") can ever tell us...

P.S. Shouldn't I be an optimist according to my chart?

We were all Elvis in our last life. The aliens are always coming, and the world is already over and yet it's ending again. Nothing new ever happens.

That response to astro50 was meant entirely seriously in an ironic way. I view the world as being in a constant post-apocalypse. It's dead and now it's just decaying.

JUPITERASC
01-17-2012, 01:07 AM
What does that have to do with what I wrote? That just says Mars will help lift Saturn up. It doesn't say why I'm terrified of people showing anger and deeply admire people showing control. It's a proven fact that most adults act like children. It's really admirable to see and adult that actually acts like an adult, which means that they show self-control. Also, the sect light should be more beneficial to me than the out-of-sect light, right? Fact: I got along with my dad much better than with my mom. Of course, we shouldn't use our own experience to tell if astrology does or doesn't work, considering some arbitrary system of interpreting planets that disagrees with other arbitrary systems of interpreting planets knows more about us than hours of introspection (aka what I do for entertainment "are you bored?" "no") can ever tell us...

P.S. Shouldn't I be an optimist according to my chart?
That response to astro50 was meant entirely seriously in an ironic way. I view the world as being in a constant post-apocalypse. It's dead and now it's just decaying.
Rebel Uranian, what factors cause you to think that you 'should' you be an optimist? :smile:

Hellenistically speaking then:
Your natal Aries Saturn - already unhappy due to being out of sect - is also in Fall and a planet in Fall just doesn’t have the resources necessary for it to act according to its nature - and that causes frustration.

Your natal Libra Mars is in detriment - a planet in detriment, is in a domicile that is destructive to its nature - a fact that continually annoys the planet - even though it is of the sect in favor

Rebel Uranian
01-17-2012, 01:12 AM
I should be an optimist because I'm nocturnal and I have a totally happy Venus. Venus is the author of mirth and jollity.

That bit about detriment vs. fall was quite informative and interesting.

My chart basically has a left-wing prime minister and a right-wing everything else, or at least that's how it comes across to me.
(Left is nocturnal due to how some Vedic astrology-based crystal healers/jewelrymakers specify which hand rings should go on. Night chart = left, day chart = right.)

JUPITERASC
01-17-2012, 01:18 AM
I should be an optimist because I'm nocturnal and I have a totally happy Venus. Venus is the author of mirth and jollity.
Venus is only one planet amongst seven others (classically speaking):smile:

That bit about detriment vs. fall was quite informative and interesting.

My chart basically has a left-wing prime minister and a right-wing everything else, or at least that's how it comes across to me.
(Left is nocturnal due to how some Vedic astrology-based crystal healers/jewelrymakers specify which hand rings should go on. Night chart = left, day chart = right.)
Good analogy - Democrats have won the Election but the Republicans have a majority in the Senate

Rebel Uranian
01-17-2012, 01:27 AM
...Except I'm not sure the analogy entirely applies to me. My nocturnal planets are all fighting with each other while my diurnal ones (except Mercury) are all happily sextiling each other. Minus sect, Saturn is in a (generally much) better state than Mars, Venus vs. Jupiter depends on what sign Hellenists think Jupiter is in, and the Sun may not be happily placed by sign but at least it's not "getting the snot beat out of it" [/quote] by malefics.

JUPITERASC
01-17-2012, 01:40 AM
...Except I'm not sure the analogy entirely applies to me. My nocturnal planets are all fighting with each other while my diurnal ones (except Mercury) are all happily sextiling each other. Minus sect, Saturn is in a (generally much) better state than Mars, Venus vs. Jupiter depends on what sign Hellenists think Jupiter is in, and the Sun may not be happily placed by sign but at least it's not "getting the snot beat out of it" by malefics.[/QUOTE]
The malefics are not only both bleeped off for one reason or another but are also in opposition to each other - disagreeing aka fighting - with each other. Mutual mixed reception means Mars and Saturn are able to assist each other... although not much if they are continually busy fighting on the floor of the House or in debates when its time to vote for laws being passed :smile:

tsmall
01-17-2012, 02:00 AM
JA, mountain lion sightings are not rare in rural/wild western Canada, although this is the first one I've heard of so close to our house. Due to knee troubles I'm not snow-shoeing or hiking in the hills behind our house as I have in the past. Otherwise, the sensible plan is to go with a group, make noise, and stay close together. The word out here is, don't let your cats outside, and don't keep your dog chained by the house, however, as cougars will go after small pets. Smart people don't leave messy barbecue grills outside, either, as the smell attracts them. Bears are common out here, and people who expect that they might encounter them generally take bear spray.

waybread, keep an eye out for snowy owls. There have been many, many reported sightings in your area due to lack of food in their usual arctic habitat. They are beautiful! Also, if the cougars are hungry enough, and have young to feed they could well become aggressive. :pinched: We have no bears at the zoo, but NH is full of them. There was one wandering around downtown last spring...


You know, while death by animal attacks in the wild might have happened in late antiquity, I wonder if those death forecasts refer to something like Christians or convicted criminals having to fend off lions in the Colosseum. (cf. Androcles and the Lion.)

Stay warm, tsmall!

It was 26* today. A heat wave! Seriously, though this will probably turn out to be nothing more than the not-intelligent musings of a total noob, I wonder if some of the Hellenistic forcasts were not metaphorical in intent? Or possibly could be re-interpreted as such today. Though we have been joking here about the likelihood of being consumed by wild beasts, being thrown to the lions could indicate someone who is made a martyr, or patsy, for other's deceptions...? I think I am not being thourough in describing what I mean, but I hope the gist of what I am saying gets through? Then, as now, not everyone with the eaten by lions aspect would die that way...but how else could we ascribe death to the similarity of being eaten by lions? Heart attack brought on by stress from fending off ones personal/political/professional attackers?

byjove
01-17-2012, 02:01 AM
dr. farr, I agree.

I think we may have gotten a little off track of the intention of this thread, which was to discuss and hopefully apply Hellenistic techniques to chart interpretation. I don't think it's fair to say that because Valens for example delineated manner of death in a way that has statistically small chances of occuring in today's world means that we then need to completely disregard Hellenist astrology as no longer relevant. That particular discussion does have merit and is worth exploring, and I see waybread has started a new thread to do so. As dr. farr has suggested, the only way to see if the methods work is to try them out.

Indeed! I was hoping to avoid debates and arguements at all costs...the educational stickies don't tolerate them...it's about learning only, not debate.

I was going to ask this when I read this anyway ^^; how is everyone getting on? Anyone you came to learn more about Hellenistic deliniation, how's the absorbtion going?

As for the planets 'being seen by the ascendant' I think I got that info. from Chris Brennan. Perhaps someone else knows more about this concept?

Also, did the Hellenists use the concept of dexter and sinister aspects? If so...I haven't seen it introduced in this thread yet. :biggrin:

tsmall
01-17-2012, 02:20 AM
Indeed! I was hoping to avoid debates and arguements at all costs...the educational stickies don't tolerate them...it's about learning only, not debate.

I was going to ask this when I read this anyway ^^; how is everyone getting on? Anyone you came to learn more about Hellenistic deliniation, how's the absorbtion going?

As for the planets 'being seen by the ascendant' I think I got that info. from Chris Brennan. Perhaps someone else knows more about this concept?

Also, did the Hellenists use the concept of dexter and sinister aspects? If so...I haven't seen it introduced in this thread yet. :biggrin:


Hi byjove! Your post is appropriate, as this thread has wandered far and wide of our original intent (it has been fun, so that isn't a bad thing.) I did send a pm about proposing sticky status, but only for those posts which included actual instruction.

I second your two questions, about planets being seen by the ASC, as well as dexter and sinister aspects, and eagerly hope someone can answer.

dr. farr
01-17-2012, 08:52 AM
Ancients gave a great deal of attention to dexter or sinister aspects, considering dexter to be more effective/"stronger"; this view continued even into Islamic transitional era times.

Just as in jyotish to this day, the ancients considered planets being "visible" to the ascendant, of much significance: hence their attitude about planets which cannot be "seen" by the ascendant (ie, the ascending sign), ie, planets in the 2nd, 12th, 6th and 8th houses (also why they referred to planets in these places as "disjunct", which is perhaps the origin of the much later use of the "inconjunct" aspect, ie, the 150 degree aspect, and its "reputation" in Modernist astrology of indicating problems, difficulties, etc)

sandstone
01-17-2012, 04:54 PM
dr farr - i am reading dorotheus of sidon - carmen astrologicum at present. it has a nice section on aspects which i have come to where the discussion goes into the aspect relationships between all the planets saturn to mercury.. dexter and sinister are not words that dorotheus uses very much.. perhaps this is due the translation by pingree, i don't know... i think the best way to understand these words is to think of either planet as the ascendant cusp... one of the planets will be in a 4th house position to the one on the ascendant... and the other will be in a 10th house relationship when you put the other on the ascendant... what comes out are issues connected to 4th or 10th house/sign in many of these interpretations i am reading thru....

at least this is a good way for me to understand it, as i am not used to the words dexter and sinister... here is an example from ca mentioned above.. " if mercury is in quartile( square) of the moon in the tenth place, then it indicates that this native well be good in his opinion, good in his words, a reasonable man, but he will worry ab out the affairs of his city; if the malefics overpower mercury in its quartile of it(the moon), then it indicates that this native will be insignificant, cold, and shameless, without having any satisfaction in anything or any trust in his heart or his speech.."

not the use of the word - 10th place.... if the aspect were reversed it would be the 4th place... dexter is 10th, sinister is 4th... i think it is helpful to understand what these words mean in astrological terms..

here is a quick present day example - uranus and pluto are square one another at present.. uranus is in the sinister position (4th to pluto in cap), while pluto is in the dexter position(10th to uranus in aries).. it was the reverse in the dirty 30ths, the last time these 2 were in square with one another..

JUPITERASC
01-17-2012, 09:52 PM
We agreed at the outset of this thread that Hellenistic delineations exclude the outer planets:smile:


A present day example of Dexter versus Sinister follows, using the two classical planets Sun and Saturn, currently in square aspect for the next few days.


(a) Sun in Capricorn is in the Sinister position (in 4th from Saturn in Libra)


(b) Saturn is in the Dexter position (in 10th from Sun in Capricorn)


dexter - adj.
1. Of or located on the right side.
2. Heraldry Situated on or being the side of a shield on the wearer's right and the observer's left.
3. Auspicious, favorable.


sinister - adj.
1. Suggesting or threatening evil: a sinister smile.
2. Presaging trouble; ominous: sinister storm clouds.
3. Attended by or causing disaster or inauspicious circumstances.
4. On the left side, left.
5. Heraldry Situated on or being the side of a shield on the wearer's left and the observer's right.
6. Archaic (of signs, omens, etc.) unfavourable

Rebel Uranian
01-17-2012, 09:55 PM
I've read verbatim "Ah....Dexter and Sinister are applying and separating , got it! This is traditional astrology term coined by William Lilly. Thanks." I don't think this is true. I don't think my Mercury is functioning now, so can anyone explain please?

Frank
01-17-2012, 10:16 PM
I've read verbatim "Ah....Dexter and Sinister are applying and separating , got it! This is traditional astrology term coined by William Lilly. Thanks." I don't think this is true. I don't think my Mercury is functioning now, so can anyone explain please?

Dexter and Sinister do not equal applying and separating.

Rebel Uranian
01-17-2012, 10:26 PM
Are there any pictures? I haven't found any yet.

sandstone
01-17-2012, 10:29 PM
apparently people who sign on to this forum agree to not harass other members as well for trivial ****..

JUPITERASC
01-17-2012, 10:39 PM
Application & Separation.

Remember that an aspect is said to be made by the faster of two planets, to the slower.

So, Mercury at 5°30'Aries is applying in sextile to Jupiter at 9°20' Gemini.

Mercury would not apply to the Moon, though, because the Moon is faster. The Moon, being the fastest planet, almost always applies to all the other planets. Exceptions to this rule occur in the case of retrograde planets. It is best to check an ephemeris to see when and if a planet is slowing down, especially if you typically use a computer to calculate charts. It is very possible that what appears as an applying aspect in the computer-generated aspectarian will not reach perfection.

'Perfection' is most often applied when using Horary astrology:smile:

Rebel Uranian
01-17-2012, 10:43 PM
So an aspect where the planets themselves are separating is considered stronger due to the movement of the planets relative to the horizon?

By the way, the Moon does always apply to the other planets unless it's separating from the other planets, because the Moon can't retro.

tsmall
01-17-2012, 10:52 PM
Application & Separation.

Remember that an aspect is said to be made by the faster of two planets, to the slower.

So, Mercury at 5°30'Aries is applying in sextile to Jupiter at 9°20' Gemini.

Mercury would not apply to the Moon, though, because the Moon is faster. The Moon, being the fastest planet, almost always applies to all the other planets. Exceptions to this rule occur in the case of retrograde planets. It is best to check an ephemeris to see when and if a planet is slowing down, especially if you typically use a computer to calculate charts. It is very possible that what appears as an applying aspect in the computer-generated aspectarian will not reach perfection.

'Perfection' is most often applied when using Horary astrology:smile:


Just so I can be clear (RU, I find visual aids to be helpful also. I often will draw my own) whether or not the aspect is dexter or sinister will be determined by the faster planet? So, if the faster planet is to the left, the aspect is sinister, and if the faster planet is to the right it will be dexter? Also, does the speed of the planet correlate to it's position in the solar system? Moon orbits Sun, so is fastest, Earth we don't count (as we are here), then Sun, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and lastly Saturn? (This is the traditional forum, so I leave out the rest...) Retrograde will change this, I imagine...

Just as a side note, isn't it funny (in a not so funny way) that "sinister" correlates with the left? I wonder if the "left" is considered "bad" because of astrology, or if the "sinister" or "left" = the devil came before...

Rebel Uranian
01-17-2012, 11:00 PM
I thought the faster planet was on the opposite side due to the rotation of the Earth, or on the left in dexter and on the right in sinister.

Kaiousei no Senshi
01-17-2012, 11:02 PM
Just so I can be clear (RU, I find visual aids to be helpful also. I often will draw my own) whether or not the aspect is dexter or sinister will be determined by the faster planet? So, if the faster planet is to the left, the aspect is sinister, and if the faster planet is to the right it will be dexter?

Yes. There is an added twist that whatever planet that is in the dexter position of an aspect dominates the aspect regardless of speed.

Just as a side note, isn't it funny (in a not so funny way) that "sinister" correlates with the left? I wonder if the "left" is considered "bad" because of astrology, or if the "sinister" or "left" = the devil came before...

Sinister aspects aren't bad. They're just less obvious.

Rebel Uranian
01-17-2012, 11:14 PM
I drew a picture. The Sun is running away from Saturn, or, more correctly, Saturn is running away from the Sun due to rotation of the Earth, so I don't quite understand. I thought it had to do with "upper" and "lower" aspects.

I do think this is a sinister aspect, since the slower planet is in the dexter position, but I could be wrong on that too.

Kaiousei no Senshi
01-18-2012, 12:19 AM
Yes, the Sun would be applying/separating a sinister Square to Saturn in that picture, but Saturn dominates it by being in the Dexter position.

Rebel Uranian
01-18-2012, 12:55 AM
What happens with grand crosses, then?

Frank
01-18-2012, 01:02 AM
What happens with grand crosses, then?

"Grand Crosses" are a Modern Astrology construct. Look at the individual aspects.

Rebel Uranian
01-18-2012, 01:09 AM
I know that, but that'd make each planet in a dexter aspect to the one next to it, so there would be no single dominant planet in the (non-Hellenistically-used) pattern.

Kaiousei no Senshi
01-18-2012, 01:21 AM
What Frank means is that the overall pattern of a Grand Cross doesn't mean anything. It's the individual aspects and how they effect the planets involved that matter.

Rebel Uranian
01-18-2012, 01:27 AM
Do dexter and sinister apply to oppositions and conjunctions? Oppositions and conjunctions are seldom exact to the second, so I think they do. I think that would mean Mars 5* Virgo departing Saturn 3* Pisces -> Saturn dexter, right?

Kaiousei no Senshi
01-18-2012, 01:46 AM
No, there's not a dexter or sinister conjunction or opposition. You can't be right or left of something if you're on top of it.

dr. farr
01-18-2012, 02:04 AM
Just a personal note (for what its worth): although the concepts of dexter and sinister were very important considerations within the Greco/Roman astrological model, I myself do not take account of these considerations in chart delineation-here I join with later Traditionalist, Modernist and also Vedic astrology in this matter.

Rebel Uranian
01-18-2012, 08:36 PM
No, there's not a dexter or sinister conjunction or opposition. You can't be right or left of something if you're on top of it.

Yes, but when are you ever exactly on top of it?

waybread
01-18-2012, 09:18 PM
Yes, but when are you ever exactly on top of it?

In most Hellenistic astrology, so far as I know, the signs aspect one another. It doesn't go by the planets' degrees. So a planet anywhere in Leo would oppose a planet anywhere in Aquarius.

Kaiousei no Senshi
01-18-2012, 10:26 PM
Yes, but when are you ever exactly on top of it?

The exactitude isn't the issue with this particular example. Mostly it's due to the nature of the conjunction. Just know that conjunctions are only applying and separating, and they don't take dexter and sinister positions into account.

Rebel Uranian
01-18-2012, 10:30 PM
A planet can be dexter or sinister to another planet without even being in aspect if I understand correctly, but it won't have any real effect.

byjove
01-20-2012, 12:23 AM
Well the dexter and sinister that I learned is exactly as JupiterAsc explained, and I learned with an image near identical to the one that this member posted. There have been a number of posts since which referenced to other features, which, insofar as my limited knowledge on it, have no connection to dexter and sinister. :w00t: I strongly advice going back to JA's post on this (a page back or more recent) explains it well.

Q. Dexter and sinister conjunctions/oppositions don't exist.
Q. I learned it from a modern astrologer...a modern astrologer using dexter and sinister! Eclectic indeed! And aspect degrees are important in how I was taught to use it, not by signs.
Q. About effects, it indicates strength of an aspect and some of the effects...I was taught that a sinister trine for example can be less stable in it's production of positive effects, less reliable, sometimes as a matter of luck or chance and not inate ability.

It's up to the individual as always which features 'make sense' to them. I admit the anti-leftist connotations to this feature raise questions for me, it may have been acceptable in the past to tie anything left with the devil or evil (such as in Catholicism) but very few of us would accept that today.

JUPITERASC
01-20-2012, 12:55 AM
Rebel Uranian, Deborah Houlding of Skyscript has this to say:

QUOTE
Lilly says "Observe the dexter aspect is more forcible than the Sinister" (CA.,p.109). Astrological philosophy recognises a planet's daily movement through the sky, from east to west, as a more fundamental movement than its progress through the zodiac: dexter literally means 'of the right' and sinister 'of the left'.

As a sign rises, its gaze is said to be directed towards the signs that rose before it, so that Aries looks forward towards Aquarius by sextile, Capricorn by square and Sagittarius by trine. A dexter aspect, because it follows the diurnal motion and is therefore more direct, is stronger than a sinister one and more likely to produce favourable results. A sinister aspect, because it is issued against the natural movement of heaven and has to 'look backwards', is weaker and somewhat debilitated. In ancient symbolism the direction right was often considered to be a positive influence, whilst the direction left was associated with enemies and weakness. ENDQUOTE

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/gl/dexter.html

Then by scrolling down this link http://www.skyscript.co.uk/aspects.html#sd one finds even more in depth detailed explanations and comments :smile:

Moog
01-20-2012, 01:03 AM
Do you consider whether an aspect is dexter or sinister, JUPITERASC?

JUPITERASC
01-20-2012, 01:18 AM
Do you consider whether an aspect is dexter or sinister, JUPITERASC?
As Deborah Houlding explains on the link I just posted, the dominating planet is made much use of by Valens and other Hellenistic astrologers, therefore I also give serious consideration to the matter

I enjoy learning as much as I can find on Hellenistic astrology - I began reading the subject approximately six years ago. In fact, I currently have been viewing a video I have that was recorded by Robert Schmidt in which he discusses what he considers are historical errors that occurred as a consequence of mistranslation of numerous ancient astrological texts. :smile:

Chris Brennan
01-20-2012, 11:26 PM
You guys should just say "right" and "left" instead of "dexter" and "sinister". It makes it a lot easier.

Here is a diagram I made for my course in order to help clarify the concept:

http://www.hellenisticastrology.com/images/right-vs-left.pdf

Rebel Uranian
01-20-2012, 11:42 PM
Dexter and sinister has more cultural significance. All (trad planet only) aspects with Saturn in the dexter position are sinister aspects. Sinister aspects are also more "ominous" because they're indirect and often considered weaker and all that.

tsmall
01-20-2012, 11:43 PM
You guys should just say "right" and "left" instead of "dexter" and "sinister". It makes it a lot easier.

Here is a diagram I made for my course in order to help clarify the concept:

http://www.hellenisticastrology.com/images/right-vs-left.pdf

Very helpful. Thank you!

Frank
01-20-2012, 11:53 PM
Dexter and sinister has more cultural significance. All (trad planet only) aspects with Saturn in the dexter position are sinister aspects. Sinister aspects are also more "ominous" because they're indirect and often considered weaker and all that.

No, Dexter and Sinister merely mean right and left in Latin. The word Sinister recieved its negative connotations later.

Moog
01-20-2012, 11:58 PM
Very helpful. Thank you!

Agreed, thanks Chris!

Coincidentally, I happened to be listening to your latest radio show about house division right as I opened this thread... Spoooky

Rebel Uranian
01-21-2012, 12:15 AM
No, Dexter and Sinister merely mean right and left in Latin. The word Sinister recieved its negative connotations later.

I know that, but I think it was partly because of astrology. Never mind me and my speculations.

Frank
01-21-2012, 01:03 PM
One small request please? Can the OP or a moderator please correct the spelling of delineation in the title? It hurts my copy-editor eyes every time I see it. :lol:

tsmall
01-21-2012, 01:20 PM
One small request please? Can the OP or a moderator please correct the spelling of delineation in the title? It hurts my copy-editor eyes every time I see it. :lol:

The OP hit enter too fast, both here and on another thread. :sick: She can't fix it (tried) unless you know how?


I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing. I have a correspondent whose letters are always a refreshment to me, there is such a breezy unfettered originality about his orthography. He always spells Kow with a large K. Now that is just as good as to spell it with a small one. It is better. It gives the imagination a broader field, a wider scope. It suggests to the mind a grand, vague, impressive new kind of a cow.


Mark Twain :smile:

Frank
01-21-2012, 01:36 PM
If you go into your original post, click on "Edit", then "Go Advanced", you can edit the title.

The OP hit enter too fast, both here and on another thread. :sick: She can't fix it (tried) unless you know how?

tsmall
01-21-2012, 01:42 PM
If you go into your original post, click on "Edit", then "Go Advanced", you can edit the title.

Yes, it will change the title for that particular post, but not for the thread itself. :sad:

Frank
01-21-2012, 01:45 PM
Yes, it will change the title for that particular post, but not for the thread itself. :sad:

Oh, well. Then I suppose a moderator would have to do it.

tsmall
01-21-2012, 01:56 PM
Oh, well. Then I suposse a moderator would have to do it.

I'm really sorry. I promise to spell check all thread titles from now on. It's actually quite embarrassing.

Frank
01-21-2012, 02:07 PM
I'm really sorry. I promise to spell check all thread titles from now on. It's actually quite embarrassing.

No worries. I make mistakes myself sometimes - as seen above (no automatic spell check on Internet Explorer on this computer I'm using today. :whistling: )

tsmall
01-25-2012, 03:14 AM
No worries. I make mistakes myself sometimes - as seen above (no automatic spell check on Internet Explorer on this computer I'm using today. :whistling: )

Check it out, Frank. Vista fixed it. :biggrin:

JUPITERASC
01-25-2012, 04:30 AM
Oh, well. Then I suppose a moderator would have to do it. You can as well Frank, if you want to. You can change the particular posts you personally have made by clicking on Edit and then clicking on 'advanced'.

The 'advanced' mode in Edit makes the thread Title alterable.

To avoid having to Edit each post after it is made, then each person has to alter the spelling each time a post is made though :smile:

tsmall
01-25-2012, 04:45 AM
Yes, well as it turns out, Vista thankfully fixed the title so it no longer harms anyone's eyes (or phyche) but there is no "trickle down" effect...take that, Reganomics...meaning that all subsequent posts apparently still need to have the title changed by the poster. Oh, well, so it is with technology...

JUPITERASC
01-26-2012, 05:43 AM
If the Hellenistic astrologers used a sidereal zodiac, there should be some evidence of it in the texts that have come down to us. I don't think you'll find it, but I will happily stand corrected if someone can quote it.

The Babylonians used a spring equinox point of 8 or 10 degrees Aries, depending upon the source.

There is also extra-astrological evidence in the ancient world. So much of their religious beliefs were tied up with the stellar, lunar, and solar calendars. There is archaeological evidence of worship focused on cattle back when the spring equinox was in Taurus from places like modern-day Turkey and Crete. There is archaeological and textual evidence indicating the importance of sheep in religious belief when the equinox was in Aries.

For example, Orion is arguably the most visible constellation in the winter sky. The Babylonians called it the "shepherd of Anu" after their supreme father god. The Old Testament is loaded with references to good shepherds, such as the patriarchs of Genesis, Moses, David, and even God. The ram-headed Egyptian god Ammon was a minor figure in their pantheon until the equinox was demonstrably in Aries, then he became one of their most important gods.
FWIW The well known Western Sidereal Astrologer Cyril Fagan declares:

"Proof the Babylonian Zodiac was the original astrological zodiac was established 14 May 1949 when the mysterious origins of traditional exaltation degrees of planets in the zodiac (hypsomata) was solved. The figures proved to be sidereal longitudes of planets at their heliacal risings and settings for lunar year 786 BC, the mean value of the ayanamsa being 14.5 degrees. This reduced to the epoch -100 (101BC), equated to 4.6 degrees, thereby agreeing with what was determined from Babylonian and Egyptian records. The fact the ayanamsa for the hypsomata agreed with that from these ancient records set the seal of authenticity on its discovery."

Source: Primer of Sidereal Astrology by Cyril Fagan :smile:

sandstone
01-28-2012, 10:01 PM
one has got to love cyril fagan... since we are talking hellenistic delineations, here is a good quote from him.

>>so the Dodekotopos (http://cura.free.fr/docum/02fagan.html) is, in fact, a Hellenic rendition of an Egyptian original, which rendition violates at every point the archetypical fitness of things.<<


he had a lot of interesting insights and opinions..


here are a few quotes (http://www.radical-astrology.com/irish/fagan/bowser.html) that i think are worth sharing - one on the place of the exaltation degrees for the planets and the other on there originally being 17 as opposed to 12 constellations in use in babylonian astrology..

>>It is established that during the second millennium B.C. the Babylonians used seventeen unequal sidereal constellation: the twelve we use now but with Pisces split into two, the eastern and western fishes as well as Orion, Auriga, Perseus and the Pleiades.<<

>>In 1949, Fagan made what many consider his greatest discovery. There is a tradition in astrology about certain parts of the zodiac, called the exaltations, that have special significance for particular planets. Already in Ptolemy's time their origin was lost. There are certain degrees associated with these places as well. The exaltation of the Sun is 19° Aries, the Moon is exalted in 3° Taurus, Mercury in 15° Virgo, Venus in 27° Pisces, Mars in 28° Capricorn, Jupiter in 15° Cancer and Saturn in 21° Libra. These places represent the optimal positions for the expression of the intrinsic natures of the respective planets. Fagan discovered that these positions are the heliacal phenomena for the planets Mercury, Mars, Saturn and Jupiter for the parallel through Babylon for the lunar year 786 - 785 B.C.; the Sun. Moon and Venus degrees are the positions at the first of Nisan, the first Babylonian month, April 3rd, 786 B.C. Julian at Moonset. These positions were not duplicated either tropically or sidereally during the first or second millennium B.C. The exaltations represent the ''hiding places'', i.e. the places where planets appear for the first time after having been invisible for weeks or months, or their longitudes at last appearance before becoming invisible. Horizon phenomena were more important to the Babylonian the meridian transits.<<

i wonder where the exaltations degrees are now? it is interesting when you think about how much of the older astrologers might have relied on this data to arrive at different conclusions on astrology.. i am presently thinking about how certain points are gotten in hellenistic delineations based off these exaltation degrees and how they are different today, not to mention they are different in tropical then sidereal all along..

Kaiousei no Senshi
01-28-2012, 11:41 PM
it is interesting when you think about how much of the older astrologers might have relied on this data to arrive at different conclusions on astrology..

I think it's important to remember that the way we use astrology and the way the Babylonian's used it is very different. They used more observational and omen-based astrology. Our is...more refined one could say.

i am presently thinking about how certain points are gotten in hellenistic delineations based off these exaltation degrees and how they are different today

The exaltation degrees are not used. Mostly because no one is really sure why those degrees are the exaltation degrees. At least, that was the last bit of news I had heard about this matter.

sandstone
01-29-2012, 12:10 AM
perhaps the exaltation degrees (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exaltation_%28astrology%29) form the basis for the idea of certain planets being exalted in a particular sign? i think they do (http://mithras93.tripod.com/lessons/lesson7/index.html)!

about babs astrology - indeed... but if we want to bong someone over the head with the idea that sidereal is really the really really true system to use, we have to be creative!

Moog
01-29-2012, 12:43 AM
I read there was an astronomical basis for the exaltation degrees, but jiggered if I can remember why. I think it was Ptolomy from this board was telling me about it.

I thought it was worth looking for;

http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showpost.php?p=348511&postcount=12

sandstone
01-29-2012, 01:01 AM
moog - the poster ptolemy has an interesting theory.. perhaps it isn't his... i would go with fagans theory which i shared up above.. i think it is based on something quite concrete..

here is a quote from ptolemy in the link you provide
"To my knowledge these extreme points of Perihelion/Aphelion do not change very fast,in fact so slowly that i doubt that the exaltation's will ever move to different signs."

i am looking in my heliocentric ephemeris right now..
in jan of 1901 saturns perihelion is 1 cancer 20.. in december of 1999 it is 1 cancer 04.. during the 100 years, saturn perihelion point was in gemini for a certain length of time as well... of course cancer and capricorn are connected, but not based on the exaltation of saturn, so much as the rulership of capricorn theme we all know..

another quote from ptolemy in that link
"The Exaltation of planets takes place when they are at maximum distance from the Earth"

the perihelion of a planet is where it is closest to the sun... not sure if this automatically means if it is closer to the sun, it is therefore also at its closest to the earth, but that would be my first guess... this would imply that saturn is exalted in capricorn or sag, and that doesn't sound quite right does it?

i think the heliacal phenomena is a much more likely connection... these positions change as well which would really throw out the idea of exaltation degrees and/or the idea of exaltation of planets in certain signs as well as i understand all this..

Kaiousei no Senshi
01-29-2012, 02:32 AM
There's a much better article about the origin of exaltations over on SkyScript, but the webpage appears to be down at the moment.

The theory that I recall about the exaltation degrees is that that was where the planets were located at the building of a particularly important temple. When SkyScript comes back I'll link you to it. I only vaugely remember it...

Frank
01-29-2012, 03:15 AM
As far as Exaltation in general and Exaltation degrees specifically go, you might want to take a look at this thread on Actastrology:

http://www.actastrology.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=108

For the degrees, take a look at Kyle Pierce's post at the end of page 2 and the subsequent discussion.

dr. farr
01-29-2012, 03:41 AM
I have to make one observation: all the exaltation and fall degrees given in all the various tables, are using the old numeration of signs as 1-30 degrees; our modern numeration of signs is 0:00:00 to 29:59:59-so as far as our contemporary sign numeration is concerned, the exaltation and fall degrees given in the tables must go back by 1 degree (if you are constructing horoscopic charts in modern sign numeration), eg, the exaltation of the Moon (in contemporary sign numeration) is 2 Taurus (NOT 3 Taurus as given in the uncorrected literature), and so for the rest...

Frank
01-29-2012, 03:57 AM
I have to make one observation: all the exaltation and fall degrees given in all the various tables, are using the old numeration of signs as 1-30 degrees; our modern numeration of signs is 0:00:00 to 29:59:59-so as far as our contemporary sign numeration is concerned, the exaltation and fall degrees given in the tables must go back by 1 degree (if you are constructing horoscopic charts in modern sign numeration), eg, the exaltation of the Moon (in contemporary sign numeration) is 2 Taurus (NOT 3 Taurus as given in the uncorrected literature), and so for the rest...

That issue is addressed in that thread.

sandstone
01-29-2012, 04:19 AM
hi frank,
i just finished reading the thread with link that you provided... the position of the posters is inconclusive and i must have missed them pointing out what dr. farr pointed out, as i didn't see it.. however, i can be accused of skipping over every piece of info when i read sometimes...

back to cyril fagans position on the exaltation degrees being based on the helical positions of the planets - to quote from my link in the post "Fagan discovered that these positions are the heliacal phenomena for the planets Mercury, Mars, Saturn and Jupiter for the parallel through Babylon for the lunar year 786 - 785 B.C.; the Sun. Moon and Venus degrees are the positions at the first of Nisan, the first Babylonian month, April 3rd, 786 B.C. Julian at Moonset."

do you or any here have any thoughts on this conclusion fagan makes? one could see how a planets strength would be captured symbolically in its heliacal position (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliacal_rising).

these times would be different on an ongoing basis depending on the cycle of all of these planets in connection with the sun.. thoughts anyone?

dr. farr
01-29-2012, 08:46 AM
Well, relative to the Fagan estimations, certainly its possible, but we also run into exaltation degrees in Vedic astrology; some are the same as Hellenist, others though are different; and also the Vedic consider a secondary exaltation area of degrees (moolatrikona they call it) around the exact exaltation degree, which they have always considered very important in estimating relative planetary strength-so, why the differences (especially when we consider that the development of jyotish was significantly influenced by Hellenistic astrological concepts during the period of about 100 BC through c. early 600's AD)

Without having made much of a study of the exaltation/fall degree matter, I really don't have any substantial ideas to add to this discussion; in the thread referenced by Frank, I find the Thema Mundi theory seemingly making the most sense to me (as an esotericist I am very familiar with the Thema Mundi); concepts that these degree points (and also, terms) were founded upon specific astronomical observations made at certain locations, at certain specific times in the ancient world, and then became "locked in" to PRACTICAL astrological doctrine (relative to making delineations), just does not seem to ring true to me-but that's just my (current) opinion on it!

tokyo.lights
02-08-2012, 12:57 AM
Well first thing first, is the houses. I suppose we should be very clear here which allows people new to this to catch on without being overwhelmed.

When viewing a natal chart in this system, you use Whole Sign houses. This means that the sign on the ascendant becomes the first 'house'. The ASC is an angle within that house. The second house begins at the next sign, and so on. Each house begins at 0 degrees and finishes at 29.9 degrees.

E.g. Ascendant Pisces of 15 degrees means Pisces is the whole of the first house, Aries is the whole of the second house, the whole of the sign of Taurus is the 3rd house and so on. The natal chart looks clearly divided into 12 segments of 30 degrees each.

The degree of the Pisces ascendant continues to be 15 degrees, and I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) the degree of the ascendant becomes the most sensitive point in each sign thereafter. So 15 degrees Taurus, Gemini etc. Planets conjunct this sensitive degree in any sign have amplified importance, it's stronger.

Continuing with the angles, ascendant 15 degrees Pisces means descendant 15 degrees Virgo, so that's angle 2.

Let's say the native has the IC at 12 degrees Gemini, this is angle 3.

Complete the angles with MC at 12 degrees Sagittarius. The MC at the 12th degree here is the most sensitive point for interpretation of the career. This MC point, or our 4th angle, can be found in a number of different houses at the top of the chart, most commonly 9th house, 10th house or 11th house. Finding the MC point in the 9th or 11th reveals more information about the native's career interests and possibilities. Finding the MC in the 9th often adds an international perspective to career possibilities, but can also mean ideas and beliefs are central to the career they choose. It can also tie in work with institutions associated with the 9th: higher education, religious or legal ones. You add this consideration to the 10th sign and any planets that may be found therein. Likewise you do the same if the MC is in the 11th. If it's found in the 10th, the concentration is in that sign then.

I'm attaching a chart of someone born at 12 noon today. I tried using one of my astro. programs but they take too long, are too complicated and ugly. So astro.com it is. The chart has MANY aspects but the 12 houses can be easily seen for now and that's what matters.
Great informative post! Thank you:smile:

JUPITERASC
02-23-2012, 03:03 AM
An excellent illustration of the necessity of attention to detail by those translating Ancient Greek manuscripts was posted on you tube on 22 February 2012 - the video graphically illustrates the value of clear audio visual presentation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7j_5y0C3kg&feature=youtu.be :smile:

– the video is a response from Andrea Gehrz http://www.moirapress.org/Site/Home.html to some very interesting dialogue initiated by Sidereal astrologer Therese Hamilton on a thread entitled “Valens: Schmidt, Riley and Gehrz” http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6546&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

On that interesting thread Therese Hamilton encourages some useful dialogue on a comparison of the translations of

(a) Professor Riley's free online translation of Vettius Valens pdf http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/Vettius%20Valens%20entire.pdf

with

(b) Robert Schmidt's detailed, scholarly translation of Vettius Valens at a price from http://www.projecthindsight.com/index4.html

and

(c ) Andrea L. Gehrz's Vettius Valens of Antioch, Anthology, Book 1 (Portland, OR, USA, The Moira Press, 2011)

a discussion entitled "An Entirely New Valens" can be found on this thread http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6514

As recently as 30 January 2012 Andrea Gehrz accepted a personal invitation from Deborah Houlding and joined the skyscript community of astrologers who post on that forum :smile:

tsmall
04-07-2012, 03:08 AM
waybread, this one's for you. Hope you appreciate it, lol.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5038/6906361232_f8e2fdd606_m.jpg

Who says modern people can't potentially be consumed by wild beasts? In case you can't quite read it (the image is small) that binder is my sheet protected copy of Valens' Anthologies....:joyful:

btw, yes, that is a 50 lb African crested porcupine under my desk.

MSO
04-07-2012, 09:01 AM
I think it's important to remember that the way we use astrology and the way the Babylonian's used it is very different. They used more observational and omen-based astrology. Our is...more refined one could say.

Yes.

Warning: I'm most likely ill-informed. Do not read if you're looking for factual information.

From what I can tell, the Babylonians' astrology was very primitive. I may be wrong, I'm just going by a pretty faint memory of what I've read right now (it's 5a.m. and I've been up since 10am yesterday), but the only thing I can say came from Babylonian astrology is the decanates. I don't think they really even used signs, I remember reading they basically clocked the motion of the Moon and some stars that moved quite frequently, and how they relate to the Moon's movements. They used a system of coordinates based on approximate 10 degree sections, leading to the decanates we use today, instead of "signs."

waybread, this one's for you. Hope you appreciate it, lol.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5038/6906361232_f8e2fdd606_m.jpg

Who says modern people can't potentially be consumed by wild beasts? In case you can't quite read it (the image is small) that binder is my sheet protected copy of Valens' Anthologies....:joyful:

btw, yes, that is a 50 lb African crested porcupine under my desk.

:w00t:

Also, I have to admit I'm very impressed by the professionalism going on in this thread (and section). You guys are awesome. While the rest of the forum toils endlessly about the all-encompassing power of Pluto, we're actually debating something that matters. Bravo!