Current Sign Ruler Influence On Transiting Moon Did Ancients use Tropical or Sidereal

[david starling]

Knowing the Ayanamsa to their satisfaction, Tropical Astrologers are quite capable of locating the Tropical Signs relative to the Constellations. Same then as now, except we have the ephemeris to save us having to do that, under these adverse modern conditions.

 

[JUPITERASC]

So, are you saying ALL practicing ancient Astrologers were using Sidereal for Chart readings? No exceptions?

Nothing prevents you from researching this matter for yourself

 

[david starling]

Nothing prevents you from researching this matter for yourself

You implied it. Either you can't back up the implication, or you don't want to offend Tropical Traditionalists by proving it. That's assuming you've done the research yourself already. It's quite an unusual generalization that all ancient Astrologers used a Sidereal setting. No such thing as a practicing, Tropical Astrologer, especially given the importance of Hipparchus to the Alexandrian-Greek Astrological community, would seem unlikely. Even if you assert that Hipparchus wouldn't have approved.

 

[JUPITERASC]

You implied it. Either you can't back up the implication
or you don't want to offend Tropical Traditionalists by proving it.
That's assuming you've done the research yourself already.
It's quite an unusual generalization that all ancient Astrologers used a Sidereal setting.
No such thing as a practicing, Tropical Astrologer
especially given the importance of Hipparchus to the Alexandrian-Greek
Astrological community, would seem unlikely.
Even if you assert that Hipparchus wouldn't have approved.

You imply the contrary, without proof
Apparently the linking of the humors with elements occurred after Aristotle
and this development has made its way into tropical astrology.
Here is a quote from a site on Greek medicine:

"Aristotle's most important contribution to the theory of Greek Medicine
was his doctrine of the Four Basic Qualities
Hot, Cold, Wet, and Dry.
Later philosopher-physicians would apply these qualities
to characterize the Four Elements, Four Humors, and Four Temperaments.
The Four Basic Qualities are the foundations for all notions of balance
and homeostasis in Greek Medicine."
http://www.greekmedicine.net/whos_who/Aristotle.html

So Aristotle's four basic qualities are hot, cold, wet and dry
and its these that I suggest can help to explain the foundation of the sidereal trigons.

Then later philosopher-physicians linked the four elements to the humors and temperaments
and tropical astrology has incorporated these into its sign trigons.
These don't transfer to the sidereal zodiac
just as the four qualities can't be transferred to the tropical zodiac.
We can see, however
that the tropical elements don't follow Aristotle's pattern
where Fire is opposite Water and Air is opposite Earth.
In the sidereal zodiac the four qualities are in correct opposition
to each other.
(hot-cold and wet-dry)
Aristotle's elements are made up of combinations of the four qualities
so these have very different meanings than the basic qualities themselves.
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm

 

[david starling]

Sidereal Astrology doesn't intrinsically have the four qualities. You can add them on though.

 

[david starling]

You imply the contrary, without proof
Apparently the linking of the humors with elements occurred after Aristotle
and this development has made its way into tropical astrology.
Here is a quote from a site on Greek medicine:

"Aristotle's most important contribution to the theory of Greek Medicine
was his doctrine of the Four Basic Qualities
Hot, Cold, Wet, and Dry.
Later philosopher-physicians would apply these qualities
to characterize the Four Elements, Four Humors, and Four Temperaments.
The Four Basic Qualities are the foundations for all notions of balance
and homeostasis in Greek Medicine."
http://www.greekmedicine.net/whos_who/Aristotle.html

So Aristotle's four basic qualities are hot, cold, wet and dry
and its these that I suggest can help to explain the foundation of the sidereal trigons.

Then later philosopher-physicians linked the four elements to the humors and temperaments
and tropical astrology has incorporated these into its sign trigons.
These don't transfer to the sidereal zodiac
just as the four qualities can't be transferred to the tropical zodiac.
We can see, however
that the tropical elements don't follow Aristotle's pattern
where Fire is opposite Water and Air is opposite Earth.
In the sidereal zodiac the four qualities are in correct opposition
to each other.
(hot-cold and wet-dry)
Aristotle's elements are made up of combinations of the four qualities
so these have very different meanings than the basic qualities themselves.
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm

In lieu of actual proof that you provide, I'll ignore your implication. You're entitled to your opinion though.

 

[JUPITERASC]

In lieu of actual proof that you provide, I'll ignore your implication. You're entitled to your opinion though.

You're entitled to an opinion based on no study of the topic such as simply reading this thread

Ancients (between about 2000 BCE and the early centuries CE) astrology did not differentiate between zodiacal constellations (sidereal astrology) and tropical signs because, during that long period of time, when all the astrology we now know about came into being, the CONSTELLATIONS AND THE TROPICAL SIGNS WERE THE SAME (constellations were in the tropical signs bearing their names)...

The ISSUE of sidereal zodiacal constellations versus the SIGNS of the zodiac, did not arise until after 300 CE when, due to precession, the sidereal zodiacal constellations began to displace from the tropical SIGNS bearing their names.

 

[david starling]

You're entitled to an opinion based on no study of the topic

If you, yourself had studied the topic thoroughly, you wouldn't be cherry-picking a few examples that back up your implication--you're entitled to an opinion based on a cherry-picking expedition. But, generalizations are fun, even though they're generally unreliable.

 

[JUPITERASC]

If you, yourself had studied the topic thoroughly, you wouldn't be cherry-picking a few examples that back up your implication--you're entitled to an opinion based on a cherry-picking expedition. But, generalizations are fun, even though they're generally unreliable.

those cherry picked implications you just commented
are unreliable, albeit fun

 

[david starling]

Tropical Astrology came in with Hipparchian Astronomy, c.150 B.C.E., and the First Point of Aries marked by the Sun at the beginning of Spring. The Zodiacal constellations were fitting the Tropical Signs from then until about 300 A.D.

 

[muchacho]

Vedic seems to be tied to the Hindu religion. Which is fine--I'm already fairly familiar with it, and know people who adhere to it. I'm usually a quick study, if the subject interests me enough. The Hindu words are a bit strange, but once I know what they mean, should be fine. With this Ayanamsa, I'll still be Pisces Sun.

You can use this software, it's free and has a ton of ayanamsas: http://www.vedicastrologer.org/jh/

Yes, sometimes there isn't any significant change. But vedic astrology relies heavily on divisional charts, that's where you will see the differences. You'll also see a huge difference in distribution of planetary strength (Shadbala), strength of houses (Bhava bala), general auspiciousness and yogas, of course.

What you have to keep in mind when working with divisional charts is that there are certain charts that represent you on a different (higher) level. The birth chart (or Rasi chart or D-1) represents you on the physical level. The Navamsa chart (D-9) represents you on the astral level. The Nakshatramsa chart (D-27) represents you on the causal level etc. Since you are more spiritually inclined, you may actually identify yourself much more with the Navamsa chart (inner self) than the birth chart (outer self and body). This is also how you can rectify your birth time.

 

[JUPITERASC]

It is clear that both sidereal and tropical astrologers use 30 degree markings for the twelve constellations.

The major difference provable by direct personal observation
is that when one views the heavens as ancient astrologers did
without the aid of computers
but by actually looking at skies visually
and making notes and observations
the difference between Sidereal and Tropical is rather obvious

Ancient as well as modern astrologers viewed/may view the wandering stars
sun and moon in the foreground of constellations that are visible
and so
it is possible
for those who wish to and who have the ability to go outdoors
and so
confirm for themselves
directly in person
which constellaiton is actually rising on the Eastern horizon just before sunrise.

In contrast, for modern astrologers
although the Tropical zodiac looks fine on the computer screen
it is in fact totally out of synch with the reality of what is seen in the skies
by anyone wishing to go outdoors and check.

The constellations
or actual physical groups of stars associated with Images in the Sidereal Zodiac
are much more closely aligned than are the Tropical 'signs'.

This is merely an observation of a fact that is easily verified by any individual

by the way
Before Copernicus:
850 C.E. – Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Kathīr al-Farghānī (Alfraganus)
gives values for the obliquity of the ecliptic
the precessional movement of the apogees of the Sun

1150 – Indian mathematician-astronomer Bhāskara II, in the Siddhanta Shiromani
calculates the longitudes and latitudes of the planets
lunar and solar eclipses, risings and settings
the Moon's lunar crescent, syzygies
and conjunctions of the planets with each other
and with the fixed stars
and explains the three problems of diurnal rotation

1150s – Bhaskara calculates the planetary mean motion, ellipses,
first visibilities of the planets, the lunar crescent, the seasons
and the length of the Earth's revolution around the Sun to 9 decimal places.

~1350 – Ibn al-Shatir anticipates Copernicus
by abandoning the equant of Ptolemy in his calculations of planetary motion
and provides the first empirical model of lunar motion
which accurately matches observations

 

[david starling]

Excellent information, Muchacho. Thanks!

 

[muchacho]

1150 – Indian mathematician-astronomer Bhāskara II, in the Siddhanta Shiromani
calculates the longitudes and latitudes of the planets
lunar and solar eclipses, risings and settings
the Moon's lunar crescent, syzygies
and conjunctions of the planets with each other
and with the fixed stars
and explains the three problems of diurnal rotation

1150s – Bhaskara calculates the planetary mean motion, ellipses,
first visibilities of the planets, the lunar crescent, the seasons
and the length of the Earth's revolution around the Sun to 9 decimal places.

That's where Raman got his ayanamsa based on what I have read.

 

[david starling]

Aristarchus of Samos is given credit for proposing the Heliocentric system in the 3rd Century B.C.E. This was known to many Greek Astronomers, including Hipparchus.

 

[david starling]

I translate the "Earth" Element as meaning the material world. The three states of Matter are solid, liquid, and vapor. The Earth itself consists materially as three environments, Earth's crust, Earth's waters, and Earth's atmosphere. "Fixed-earth" relates to Terra firma, and is depicted as the solid, land-dwelling ox, or bull; "Cardinal-earth" is about Earth's waters, and is symbolized as the Seagoat; and, "Mutable-earth" involves Earth's surrounding atmosphere, which corresponds to Virgo as a winged-maiden. All three states can be hot or cold. Mutable-earth and Fixed-earth can be dry or damp.

 

[JUPITERASC]

JA, that's interesting. Dorotheus has about a dozen charts in his book.
So after reading your post I've just tested it with his first chart.
And it didn't work with tropical
however, it did work with sidereal (Raman again, not Lahiri)!
I've got April 12, 268 BC as the exact date.
The best guess Pingree could provide in the appendix was
May 2, 29 AD (with Mars in the wrong sign!).
So yeah, sidereal seems to be the original thing, not tropical.

Exactly

 

[david starling]

This is from gregoryrozek.com
"But, if you'd inspect 'the Anthology of Valens' clearly, you'll see that he regards the zero degrees Aries as placed at 8 degrees before the Vernal Point. This was a very popular view in the early Hellenistic astrology, and it comes directly from the Babylonian sources."

 

[JUPITERASC]

This is from gregoryrozek.com
"But, if you'd inspect 'the Anthology of Valens' clearly, you'll see that he regards the zero degrees Aries as placed at 8 degrees before the Vernal Point. This was a very popular view in the early Hellenistic astrology, and it comes directly from the Babylonian sources."

read Valens ANTHOLOGIES yourself
http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/vettius valens entire.pdf
and then
keep in mind dr. farrs historical note

Ancients (between about 2000 BCE and the early centuries CE) astrology
did not differentiate between zodiacal constellations (sidereal astrology) and tropical signs
because, during that long period of time, when all the astrology we now know about came into being
the CONSTELLATIONS AND THE TROPICAL SIGNS WERE THE SAME
(constellations were in the tropical signs bearing their names)...

The ISSUE of sidereal zodiacal constellations versus the SIGNS of the zodiac
did not arise until after 300 CE when, due to precession
the sidereal zodiacal constellations began to displace from the tropical SIGNS bearing their names.

 

[petosiris]

For another ancient tropical astrologer, see the poet Manilius, Astronomica, 1st century CE. 3:644ff:

''Some ascribe these powers to the 8th degree, some hold they belong to the 10th nor was an authority lacking to give the 1st degree the decisive influence and control of days
...the Bull brings forth in his sixth degree the Pleiades, sisters who vie with each other's radiance.'' - Manilius
''From its first degree to 6° (the section of the Pleiades)'' - Valens

Both Manilius and Valens (and many others like Thrasyllus) define the equinox from the 8th degree of Aries, but it appears both used a Babylonian zodiac, because only that zodiac has the Pleiades rise at 6th degree (ordinal numbers) in their respective timeframes.

Also note that the equinox was much closer to 1° - 2° at the time of Valens, yet his charts are very accurate according to Neugebauer. How do you explain that?

For me this definitely means that the equinox was a secondary reference point that changed with time, and they measured the zodiac primarily with fixed stars.

Obviously a problem arose when it got to 0°, because all seasonal stuff had to change to Pisces, which is why tropical originated in the first place. Equinoxes were very hard to measure compared to fixed stars. It was not until the Arabs came that tropicalists realized that precession was not 1° per century, but per 72 years and even they got it wrong with a few years initially (iirc they thought it was around 66). See also -
https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showpost.php?p=857396&postcount=25 .

You can call Manilius and Valens pseudo-tropical at best, but they are not tropicalists. I do not say they were siderealists either, but the calculations of the earlier astrologers agree much more closely with the sidereal framework, not tropical. Most likely they did not make the difference between the two, yet the empirical data and calculations they were using matter the most to me.

(And yes I am aware that some wrongly used antiscia with that framework, but seriously does antiscia, meteorological astrology (which is self-contradictory with the Southern and Northern Hemisphere problem) and equal rising signs matter more than 25° of the zodiac?)

JA, if you want to do sidereal astrology, do sidereal astrology. But you will have to drop your affiliation with western tropical astrology of the past 2000 years to do that.

Your call.

Then tropicalists have no affiliation with more than 2000 years of western astrology BC and a large part after AD - Babylonian, Egyptian, Hellenistic (many charts were using sidereal frame well into the 6th century*), even some medieval astrologers like Mashaallah or the modern Fagan school.

* - ''Abundant evidence exists that when Ptolemy’s tables were used for astrological purposes during the third and fourth centuries, the tropical longitudes obtained from the tables were generally converted to sidereal by adding 8° minus one-eightieth of a degree for every year since 158 BCE, a formula explicitly reported by Theon of Alexandria as employed by the “astrologers of old.”'' - http://dlib.nyu.edu/awdl/isaw/isaw-papers/12/
That means that some people when became more aware of precession, still used deliberately sidereal measurements, as did the old astrologers.

See also graphs for Hellenistic charts - http://www.astrozero.co.uk/astroscience/documents/nick_kollerstrom_star_zodiac_of_antiquity.pdf or Greek Horoscopes by Neugebauer and Hoesen.