Your progressed Midheaven is not your progressed Midheaven!

FraterAC

Well-known member
Most likely, the Midheaven you are using on your progressed chart is NOT a progressed Midheaven, but another predictive method grafted onto the progressed horoscope. It may be the default of the software you are using, or it might be one of a number of options the software offers, but it’s probably NOT the progressed MC.

The choices most software offer for calculating the progressed Midheaven include calculating it by
1. the Right Ascension of the Mean Sun (RAMS), which is the Naibod rate of 59’08” in Right Ascension;
2. the Naibod rate in longitude;
3. Solar Arc (ie the actual motion of the progressed Sun) in longitude;
4. Solar Arc in Right Ascension

None of these represent the progressed Midheaven.
 
Last edited:

FraterAC

Well-known member
At this point all I am saying is that these options are not consistent with how the other elements of the chart are progressed. They are "other predictive method(s) grafted onto the progressed horoscope."
Yes, the progressed horoscope itself must be Bija-corrected.
What do you mean by "Bija-corrected progressed Midheaven?"
 

Humanitarian

Well-known member
The Bija-corrected progressed Midheaven is a progressed Midheaven that is progressed in sidereal days, and not solar days, and sidereal days are approximately 23 hours 56 minutes, while solar days are 4 minutes longer.
 

FraterAC

Well-known member
The RAMS, the Naibod rate in Right Ascension, used to be the default measure for advancing the progressed Midheaven for many astrologers, and in some software, but is arguably the worst choice. It is based on the Naibod rate of 59’ 08”, which is correct exactly two days a year. The actual daily motion of the Sun in Right Ascension, ie along the equator, varies from 53’ 30” to 66’ 45”. Most days of the year, the average daily solar motion in Right Ascension as represented by the Naibod arc varies from its actual motion by a considerable amount.

So one issue with the RAMS, using the Naibod rate, is that it is an average, but the actual advance of the Sun in Right Ascension varies by day, by time of year.
 

FraterAC

Well-known member
The Naibod rate in Longitude is also correct only two days a year. The daily solar motion in the Zodiac, ie, in longitude, ranges between 57’ 11” and 61’ 08”.
This rate in longitude is not used as often as Naibod in RA, but it is still available in some software. It's a purely symbolic measure, meaning, it is unrelated to any actual celestial motion.
 

FraterAC

Well-known member
The Naibod rate in longitude is used in the Radix System, originally put forward by Sepharial and popularized by Vivian Robson.
It was a system of directing, similar to Solar Arc directions, but with a different rate for the Moon.
Note: it was a system of directing, not progressing, the horoscope. That is to say, every element of the chart was advanced by a fixed amount (the Naibod rate), not according to their individual celestial motion.
 

Humanitarian

Well-known member
The RAMS, the Naibod rate in Right Ascension, used to be the default measure for advancing the progressed Midheaven for many astrologers, and in some software, but is arguably the worst choice. It is based on the Naibod rate of 59’ 08”, which is correct exactly two days a year. The actual daily motion of the Sun in Right Ascension, ie along the equator, varies from 53’ 30” to 66’ 45”. Most days of the year, the average daily solar motion in Right Ascension as represented by the Naibod arc varies from its actual motion by a considerable amount.

So one issue with the RAMS, using the Naibod rate, is that it is an average, but the actual advance of the Sun in Right Ascension varies by day, by time of year.
And that Naibod 59'08" rate is only right in the equinoctial dates (vernal equinox and autumnal equinox).
 

FraterAC

Well-known member
And that Naibod 59'08" rate is only right in the equinoctial dates (vernal equinox and autumnal equinox).
That's what one might expect, but it does not seem to be the case. There are two factors at work here, the fact that the orbital speed of the Earth around the Sun (which is on the ecliptic) is not constant, and the obliquity of the ecliptic in relation to the equator. Remember, we're talking about Right Ascension here.
Also:
My mistake; it's right four dates, not two.
In 2021, the year I could find a table for, the Naibod rate was (closest to) right Feb 10, May 11, July 26, and Nov 3.
It's an average, not an extreme value.
At the Vernal and Autumnal Equinoxes the RA rate was about 54'45" and 54'00" respectively.
 
Last edited:

FraterAC

Well-known member
Solar Arc (ie the actual motion of the progressed Sun) in Longitude is a very common option for progressing the Midheaven in current software. It is the progressed arc of the Sun (which in this writer’s opinion should be Bija corrected) added to the longitude of the natal Midheaven. Its advantage over the techniques using Naibod is that it is consistent with actual celestial motion.
Charles A. Jayne writes in Progressions and Directions (page 8) “Since it is based on the true motion of the Sun, and not on the fictitious mean motion – the measure of Naibod or 0° 59’ 08.33” – or the equally fictitious one degree a year of Ptolemy, it has a sound astronomical basis in fact.”
This method of progressing the Midheaven is also recommended in the research of the Church of Light and David Cochrane, among many others.

But is it progression?

In fact, this method is really just directing the Midheaven by Solar Arc. Does that make it invalid? No. But it is another technique grafted onto the practice of progressing the horoscope. It is not the progressed Midheaven.
 

FraterAC

Well-known member
Jayne writes further, in Progressions and Directions (page 10) “Indeed, this motion of the Midheaven (advanced by solar arc), as will later be explained, is the real basis for this whole solar arc method of direction. We cannot possibly recommend this method of direction too strongly.”
 

FraterAC

Well-known member
The Solar Arc in Right Ascension – using a day for a year, this technique advances the Midheaven by the solar arc measured on the Equator, ie by the difference in Right Ascension between the natal and progressed Sun. As with the progression of the other chart elements, it’s currently recommended the sidereal, rather than the solar, day be used.
As with the use of the Solar Arc in Longitude, this is essentially direction, rather than a progression of the Midheaven.

As Charles A. Jayne wrote, “Charts are directed, as to their Midheavens, by both this right ascensional (true) arc, which is added to the R.A.M.C. of the chart, and also by the longitude of the Midheaven to which is added the (true) solar arc in longitude.”

Edward Johndro and Charles Jayne are recommending the Midheaven be directed using both methods; from Progressions and Directions (page 37).
Both methods have proven their worth, and are highly recommended.
But they do not represent progressing the horoscope at “a day for a year,” whichever day one may choose.
 
Last edited:

FraterAC

Well-known member
Being based on Right Ascension, and therefore the rotation of the Earth, the primary motion of the heavens, the RAMS (Naibod arc in RA), and Solar Arc in RA methods of “progressing” the Midheaven (options 1 and 4, above), are both related to the Primary methods of directing. In both, approximately one degree of RA is equated to a year of life.

The Naibod Arc in longitude, and Solar Arc methods of “progressing” the Midheaven (options 2 and 3 above), are actually methods of directing the Midheaven borrowed from the Radix System and the Solar Arc system of directing, respectively.

So what would really represent a progressed Midheaven?
 

FraterAC

Well-known member
To cut to the chase, the short answer is a Midheaven resulting from some kind of Quotidian advancement of the chart’s angles.

Cyril Fagan and R. C. Firebrace argue in Primer of Sidereal Astrology (1971) pages 23-24, that if we take “a day for a year” as the basis for the (Secondary/Major) progressed horoscope, we must acknowledge that a “day*” is 24 hours, 03 minutes and 57 seconds of sidereal time, not the 03 minutes and 57 seconds assumed in directing the Midheaven in most current practice. The time interval of 03:57 is approximately the amount of time it takes to advance the Midheaven the 59’08” of the Naibod Arc.

If we do the progressions for a 6 month old infant, they argue, has the Midheaven advanced 01 minute 58 Seconds (half of 03:57), as most astrologers would currently calculate, or 12 hours, 01 minutes 58 Seconds (half of 24:03:57), as Fagan suggests? Roughly speaking, has the Midheaven advanced 30 minutes of celestial longitude, or 180 degrees?

Twenty six years later for this native, has the Midheaven advanced 26:32 degrees or 9693:19 degrees (26 complete rotations plus) of Longitude?

In general, a Quotidian calculation advances the (Secondary/Major) progressed Midheaven at a rate of about one degree of longitude per day, and calculates the resulting Ascendant per the birth location of the native. Therefore, 26 days after birth the Midheaven is advanced 26 degrees of longitude; 180 days after birth, 180 degrees; 9,693 days after birth, 9,693 degrees. It corresponds to actually casting a chart for the day and time of day for the progressed positions of the planets desired.

So how exactly is this calculated?


*As for the somewhat thorny question of what a day is, check out the thread Forums | General Astrology | Predictive Astrology | You are using the WRONG DAY!
 
Last edited:

FraterAC

Well-known member
The way this writer recommends calculating the Secondary/Major Quotidian progressed angles is to use the solar arc of the transiting Sun. The progressed Midheaven is advanced such that the arc between it and the transiting Sun remains constant. In this way, the Midheaven progresses exactly one full revolution per year throughout the life at the rate of approximately one degree per day.
The Ascendant is calculated from the position of the progressed Midheaven and the location of the native at birth. The Ascendant is NOT calculated directly by solar arc.

As an example, the chart of Sharon Tate, Secondary/Major progressed to 12:30 am August 9, 1969, the time of her transition as one of the victims in the Cielo Drive murders perpetrated by members of the Manson family.

The chart below represents Ms. Tate's radix on the inner wheel, the Secondary/Major progressed positions as of August 9 on the outer wheel, with the progressed Quotidian angles and transiting Sun written in the outer margin.

1701900731943.jpeg


Using this method, the Quotidian progressed Midheaven is at Libra 21:30 and the Quotidian progressed Ascendant is Capricorn 03:23. Note that the arc between the transiting Sun at Leo 16:31 and the progressed Midheaven is two signs, plus 04:59, and the arc between the radical Sun and radical Midheaven is the same at two signs plus 04:59. The progressed Ascendant is taken from the Table of Houses for the birthplace using the progressed Midheaven.

The Quotidian Secondary/Major progressed Midheaven so derived makes the following aspects:
Progressed Quotidian Midheaven square radical Ascendant (02’), the Ascendant ruling the physical body
PQ Midheaven sesquiquadrate rad Saturn (49’) and 2nd/Maj progressed Saturn (47’). Saturn is co-ruler of the 8th house.
PQ Midheaven trine Venus (47’); Venus is in the 8th house, the closest planet to the cusp
PQ Ascendant is trine the 2nd/Major Moon, ruler of the 1st house
PQ Ascendant at Capricorn 03:23 is on the radical Midpoints of Sun/Vertex at Capricorn 03:59 (36’) and Mercury/Vertex at Capricorn 03:49 (26’).

The Secondary/Major progressed Quotidian angles as described above are calculated in the Church of Light software Horoscope2020 when one selects View Transits under the Tools | Progress Chart menu option.

There are other software products available that do similar calculations. How do they do it and what results do they get?
 
Last edited:

FraterAC

Well-known member
The obvious advantage of some kind of Quotidian rotation of the progressed angles is that it allows the possibility of determining progressions to the day.
 
Last edited:

FraterAC

Well-known member
Here are four calculations of Quotidian angles for Ms. Tate’s chart progressed to the same date.

QuotidianMCAsc
Transit Solar Arc Longitude Church of LightLib 21:30Cap 03:23
Halloran Std QuotidianLib 25:19Cap 06:47
AstroSeek ARMC 361 Quotidian (spoofed* for Bija correction)Lib 23:47Cap 05:24
Calculated TimeLib 24:19Cap 05:53

The transiting solar arc calculation used by the Church of Light has been described and illustrated above.

The calculation from John Halloran’s AstroDeluxe is computed using the “Midheaven rotated according to the fraction of the year since the birthday.” I assume this is using a fraction of the increase in Sidereal Time in one solar day. The progression was Bija corrected.

The administrator of the AstroSeek site, with its free software many members of this forum use, was not particularly clear on how their site does the calculation.
*Note AstroSeek does not have a Bija correction option, so the progressions were run for 07/13/1969, ie 26.54 days before the desired date of 08/09/1969.

I’ll describe the calculated time option in another post.
 
Last edited:

DavidMcCann

Active member
Let's stop and ask what a progression is. The technique (invented in the 17th century by Placidus) involves using positions x days after birth to make predictions for x years after birth — a day for a year. So the progressed Sun moves about 1° every year because the Sun moves that distance in a day. So how far does the progressed MC move? Obviously the MC moves about 361° a day, so the progressed MC moves about 1° in a day, not in a year. What most people call a progressed MC is actually a directed MC — the misnomer is down to Alan Leo, whose so-called progressed horoscope was a composite of progressed planets and directed houses (easy to produce for cheap mail-order horoscopes!).

Directing the MC simply involves moving it at a steady rate in right ascension, as Ptolemy pointed out. But at what rate? Ptolemy used 1° per year. Medieval astrologers, like al-Qabisi, pointed out that the degree is an artificial measure, approximating to the number of days in the year, and they replaced it by dividing the circle by the number of days in the year to give 59’08”— the so-called Naibod method. In the Renascence, both John Dee and Tycho Brahe used the distance moved by the Sun on the day of birth. This gives very different results for those born at solar apogee or perigee. Antonio Magini tested it and found it failed. Placidus used the distance in right ascension covered by the progressed Sun. It's not easy to test this against the medieval method, as the longer you live the closer they are. Placidus's method seems difficult to explain, though, and I find the 59’08” increment reliable.
 
Top