Well, another heated debate about astrology
How familiar
I am indeed interested in the techniques/methods of those who do practise rectification since they do seem to use all kinds of different methods. It would indeed be interesting to see if they would all run a test on their rectifications to see if results would be similar on a certain person that has many known life events that are recorded to the day and hour and maybe even to the minute.
I would like to ask of those of you who do practise rectification and have done so for years, so some experience is already there:
Do you use the EP as well? (I've seen it becomes extremely important in higher latitudes, but I rarely see people in astrology forums actually using it)
Are you familiar with the Orient point? *(see footnote)
Do you use the relocated axis in case people have moved from their birth place?
Do all of you use the appearance/facial features of the individual to verify the ASC? (I guess the placement of the luminaries can also be a factor in appearance).
*
"the publication of Recent Advances in Natal Astrology: A Critical Review 1900-1976, by Dean and Mather. On pages 181-182, they mention the work of one Joseph Frederici. There, they mention a point Frederici calls the "Orient." Actually, Frederici came up with two distinct points he dubbed "Orient" but it's the second that got my attention." ...
"In his culminating article The "Universal Domification System" Frederici asks us to imagine how astrology might have developed if it had originated in the far north instead of at lower latitudes. He notes that a hypothetical Hyperborean astrologer would have seen the planets a being near the horizon all the time, and this would not have been given much significance. More important would have been the passage of the planets through the Prime Vertical and the Meridian. He suggests that something like the Zenith house system would have been developed. As astrology moved south, in his scenario, astrologers would have encountered difficulties transposing the Zenith system to their new environs, ultimately having to recognize the importance of the Ascendant. (This is a very short and inadequate summary of his narration.)
Frederici then has an insight which I did not have, or if I did, forgot about. The Zenith system and Regiomontanus system are complementary systems, when Zenith is cast at the Poles, and Regiomontanus is cast at the Equator. With this, he goes on to construct his UDS. He states "...since the Zenith and Regiomontanus Systems are complementary, would it not be possible to find a general system of which the two be particular cases, fit for the extreme situations prevailing at the Pole and at the Equator? ... Reasoning along these lines I have devised a completely new House System which sums up all my work in this field up to date."
Though stated in different terms, Frederici pursued and solved the same question I'd pondered earlier.
Before going on to the technical formulas, let me pause here and give a brief bibliography and summary of the articles Joseph R. Frederici published in The Astrological Journal, insofar as I know of them.
Vol. XVI No. 3, Summer 1974
"The Lost Ascendant" Part 1
Frederici begins his exploration of the houses with two assumptions: 1. Houses are analogous to the signs structurally. Thus his inquiry begins with identifying which features of each are properly analogous. 2. A proper house system has to be applicable everywhere on Earth.
Vol. XVII No. 1, Winter 1974/75
"The Lost Ascendant" Part 2
Frederici continues his study in Part 1. Emphasis is on a comparison of several systems, by way of the principle "If a House System is not universally applicable - i.e. applicable to all places and all times - then it should be rejected."
Vol. XVII No. 3, Summer 1975
"The Lost Ascendant" Part 3
Frederici examines the characteristics of his "Lost Ascendant," his first "Orient" point.
Vol. XVII No. 4, Autumnr 1975
"The Meridian System of Houses"
A consideration of same, with thoughts on the difference between "cusps" (edges or boundaries) of houses and "apices" (peaks of strength) of houses.
Vol. XIX No. 4, Autumn 1977
"The 'Universal Domification System' "
The primary focus of my essay here.
Beyond this, I do not know anything of Mr. Frederici's work, nor of Mr. Frederici himself. He obviously put a lot of thought and care into the question of houses. I think his work deserves more attention than it has gotten (that is, almost completely lost and forgotten). Agree or disagree with his conclusions, his work is painstaking and done with care about the topic from a technical approach. "
"Now, we come to the really technical part of the UDS, the dreaded math!
The first part is easy. The Tenth House is the Midheaven, and by the logic of the system this is where the meridian (the one you are on, from one Pole to the other) intersects the ecliptic.
While usually formulas are presented first and the explanations of the abbreviations are given later, I'll reverse the process and list the abbreviations and their definitions first. I've always thought that the standard way was sure to induce anxiety and incomprehension upon those unfamiliar with the conventions.
T = RAMC in degrees
E = obliquity of the ecliptic (given precisely by Solar Fire)
S = 0 for the MC
= 30 for the 11th cusp
= 60 for the 12th cusp
= 90 for the 1st cusp
= 120 for the 2nd cusp
= 150 for the 3rd cusp
H = geographic latitude
B = tan^-1 (tan H sin S)
A = tan^-1 (tan E sin B cos B sin (T + S))
R = T + S + A
L = tan^-1 (tan R / cos E)
= celestial longitude of the cusp
Apply the SVP to L to get the sidereal longitude.
When creating a spreadsheet or program to do this, remember that is it is often (as with Excel or Open Office) to convert the degrees to radians first, and vice versa when necessary. "
(the source is a thread in solunars.net)