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

This thread discusses the MOON
within the context
of the SEVEN VISIBLE CLASSICAL PLANETS
i.e.
Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn


EDIT
to clarify that Ancient includes
whether Ancient Astrologers from the earliest recorded beginnings of astrology
or more recent Ancients such as Vettius Valens
were using Tropical measurement
or
Sidereal observation of the seven visible planets
is a perennial discussion amongst many astrologers

tracking the fastest moving planet our MOON
which transits each sign and/or constellation one a month aka Moonth
may lead to more insight regarding the evergreen sidereal-tropical discussion


A YEAR ON EARTH IS MEASURED BY ONE COMPLETE TRIP AROUND THE SUN
seems simple enough

BUT
the issue is
a year is measured Tropically OR Sidereally
as the Video explains with visual and voice overs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-DYgGFjI&feature=related


IF the ancients were using Troppical measurement
then
MOON is currently transiting in the Sign of Tropical Sagittarius
and is in applying square to Tropical Virgo Jupiter

Sagittarius is the house of Jupiter, masculine, fiery, upward-trending, vocal
moist because of the constellation Argo
noble, winged, changeable, bicorporeal, two-natured, mysterious
with few offspring, half-finished <=childless?>
governing, kingly.
Men born under this sign are noble, just, great-hearted, judges, generous,
loving their brothers and their friends.
They lose much of their original possessions but gain them back.
They are superior to their enemies, seek a noble reputation
are benefactors, prominent, and act mysteriously http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/Vettius%20Valens%20entire.pdf THE ANTHOLOGY VETTIUS VALENS


HOWEVER


IF
the ancients were in fact using Sidereal measurement
then
current MOON transit is in Sidereal Scorpio
in applying square to Sidereal Leo Jupiter

The way I see it is that the Full Moon lit up the sky - showed you everything on earth. The New Moon allowed the stars/sky to be seen. Back when there was no light - this meant everything.

People developed keen eyes and senses and attributed pending changes by the moon's position.

At first, it was probably scary - "the end is near" -

ancients:

"hey, everytime i see that big fat planet near the moon, good things happen"

"man oh man, that little red star up there, every time it shows up near the moon, there's always trouble"

and so on.

the more people noticed the planets' position to the moon - the more followed.

the sun is probably what gave people the strength to wonder and learn, knowing that it always shows up - inspite of clouds and lightening and thunder and drought and such.

"yo dude, what's with that fuzzy grey **** covering everything? i can't see sh*it."

and so on.

But that being said - the thread title is odd - "influence on transiting moon" because moon influences everything by transit, even if for a few days and is never influenced by transits of other planets. Moon tells the ruler gangsters how it's going down.

Kitchy said:

The way I see it is that the Full Moon lit up the sky - showed you everything on earth. The New Moon allowed the stars/sky to be seen. Back when there was no light - this meant everything.
People developed keen eyes and senses and attributed pending changes by the moon's position.
At first, it was probably scary - "the end is near" -
ancients:
"hey, everytime i see that big fat planet near the moon, good things happen"
"man oh man, that little red star up there, every time it shows up near the moon, there's always trouble"
and so on.
the more people noticed the planets' position to the moon - the more followed.
the sun is probably what gave people the strength to wonder and learn, knowing that it always shows up - inspite of clouds and lightening and thunder and drought and such.
"yo dude, what's with that fuzzy grey **** covering everything? i can't see sh*it."
and so on.

But that being said - the thread title is odd
- "influence on transiting moon"
because moon influences everything by transit,
even if for a few days
and is never influenced by transits of other planets.
Moon tells the ruler gangsters how it's going down.

Click to expand...

On the contrary
Traditional natal astrology states that
the SIGN location of the MOON
DOES impact the MOON

for example
currently MOON is in Tropical SAGITTARIUS
and
as the linked PLANETARY DIGNITIES TABLE illustrates http://gregoryrozek.com/en/astrology/astrological-tables/
MOON in SAGITTARIUS is PEREGRINE
with the EXCEPTION OF 10 to 20 degrees Sagittarius where MOON has dignity by FACE

and

since JUPITER ruler of SAGITTARIUS is located currently in Tropical VIRGO
that's not so good for the MOON
because
Moon is PEREGRINE in VIRGO
unless it is a night chart
in that case
MOON is night triplicity ruler of VIRGO

AND
keep in mind that

JUPITER in VIRGO is PEREGRINE
with the exception of degrees 17 - 21 VIRGO



IF the ancients were using Sidereal measurement
then
current Sidereal SCORPIO Moon is FALL
and square
JUPITER in Sidereal LEO
JUPITER in LEO has nocturnal triplicity rulership
as well as dignity by TERM in first six degress of LEO
and
dignity by FACE in degrees 10 - 20 of LEO

Both Ptolemy and Valens used the tropical zodiac. Ptolemy explains putting the spring equinox at 0 Aries in his book Tetrabiblos. Valens in his Anthologies gives several verbal descriptions of horoscopes that are detailed enough to work out the charts. I did work out several of these following and somewhat modifying the dates in Neugeberger and Van Hoesen's monograph Greek Horoscopes. These scholars set out the problem of dating ancient horoscopes based on the planetary positions mentioned in ancient texts and archaeological findings. They assumed a tropical zodiac, which worked well for their dating methods. I forget whether this was the Julian calendar, but I believe so. I used whatever Astrodienst used for ancient times.

Some of the other ancient authors don't mention the tropical/sidereal problem and didn't publish any horoscopes. For the ones that did, you could probably find them dated in Neugebauer and Van Hoesen's Greek Horoscopes, and work out the charts from them.

JA, as you know from reading Tetrabiblos and Valens's Anthologies, both contain material on astro-meteorology. In the climatic section you cited, this interest in fixed stars stems from a much older Greek and Egyptian custom of using rising constellations, stellia, or fixed stars as a big celestial calendar, so that farmers could predict when to plow, plant, and so on. With the Greeks, this natural calendar goes back to Hesiod (Works and Days) and Aratus (Phenomena). Back before calendars were standardized and printed, (or most people could read, for that matter,) the stellar calendar was vital for both farmers and sailors. With the latter, the shipping season pretty much ended with the autumn onset of rough weather on the Mediterranean, and began again in spring. With the ancient Egyptians, their decans stars were used to time religious and agricultural events like the timing of the Nile floods.

You might enjoy reading: Daryn Lehoux, Astronomy, Weather, and Calendars in the Ancient World: Parapegmata and Related Texts in Classical and Near-Eastern Societies (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2007.) He's a classics professor at Queens University in Canada.

In the case of nativities, of course some Hellenistic astrologers used fixed stars along with the tropical zodiac. Today a fixed star would be in its accustomed position within a constellation, but it is likely to be in an adjacent astrological sign than the one named for the constellation, due to precession. (27 degrees off, but it sort of depends how it's calculated.)

Hellenistic astrology is kind of interesting, in the way they blended fixed stars and constellations with signs. Manillius gave quite a fanciful catalogue of rising constellations, some of them well off the ecliptic, and the impact they would have on the native.

Ptolemy is clearly a tropical astrologer. Check out Tetrabiblos I:10, where he says,

"....although there is no natural beginning of the zodiac, since it is a circle, they ['our predessors'] assume that the sign which begins with the vernal equinox, that of Aries, is the starting point of them all..." He's got a lot of stuff on planets and winds as hot, cold, dry, or moist in typical Aristotelian fashion. Then in section 11 he discusses the solstitial and equinoctial signs, clarifying that these relate to maximum solar positions and equal night-and-day lengths, respectively.

Precession was known prior to Ptolemy's day. It is believed to have been discovered by Hipparchus in the 2nd century BCE.

Ptolemy was an astronomer, mathematician, and geographer
but not a practicing astrologer as VALENS was

Ptolemy was a real polymath, and we actually do not know whether he read natal charts or not. As you pointed out in your previous posts, astrology was more broadly defined in the 2nd century CE to include weather forecasting. Also political events based on eclipses. Our definition of astrologer is narrower today than it was then.

Whether or not he read natal horoscopes for people, Ptolemy's subsequent influence upon professional astrologers who did was just enormous. It is hard to think of any single astrologer whose influence was greater.

Statements in Valens ANTHOLOGY mention
that Valens passed on material
from the school of practice of which he was an exponent

In contrast
Ptolemy specifically tells us in the lead in to his discussion of natal astrology
that he is NOT passing on the prevailing astrological doctrines

but Ptolemy is instead introducing us to something entirely new
of his own invention
and any material deriving from other sources
is reworked into the system Ptolemy presents us with.
Ptolemys interest is scientific
and not from the perspective of a practising astrologer using proven techniques
unlike Vettius Valens who left us with more than one hundred astrological charts
Ptolemy provided NOT EVEN ONE natal chart example



'......Vettius Valens' Anthologiae is the longest extant astrological work from antiquity.
It is unique in several respects: the author was a practicing astrologer
the work includes more than 100 authentic horoscopes of Valens' clients or associates, including his own
which is used as an example many times throughout the work
the work also includes tables and the description of algorithms used by astrologers and mathematicians....'
Professor Mark T Riley http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/Vettius%20Valens%20entire.pdf


Clearly
Professor Mark T Riley is of the opinion that
Valens is unique
in being a practicing astrologer whose work is the longest extant astrological work from antiquity

How does your latest post relate to your OP? Tropical or sidereal?

What Ptolemy said was that there was a lot of nonsense in the contemporary practice of astrology, which he was trying to systematize. Valens also says there was a lot of nonsense in the practice of astrology, notably the work of (pseudo) Petosiris. Really, if you looked for their similarities rather than their differences, you would find many commonalities. Ptolemy was especially concerned to contextualize and align astrology with Aristotle's proto-science, which was a widespread paradigm in his day. Aristotle wasn't new in any chronological sense, as he lived in the 4th century BCE and was highly influential. Ptolemy's work remained far more influential, than Valens, but the Anthologies certainly have their fascination as a compendium of techniques in his day. Have you seen this article by Riley?
http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/PDF_folder/VettiusValens.PDF

Incidentally a footnote in Tetrabiblos (Loeb Classical Library edition) cites Ptolemy's Almagest as another source where he describes the tropical western system.

Well, be your guest in calling a system in error that has been the norm in traditional western astrology for over 1500 years.

Jupiter, to be utterly pragmatic here - how does it work out in horaries?

keep in mind that
Ptolemy did not observe Australian skies

and so
did not factor in
that Aries
for Southern Hemisphere
heralds Autumn

Nor did Ptolemy consider people living on the Equator.
The crux is, do signs to derive their meanings from the seasons or from the stars.
Both have their problems
and
Ptolemy has done nothing but confuse the issue

by the way
Newton, Supervisor of the Applied Physics Laboratory at Johns Hopkins University.
is known for his book
THE CRIME OF CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY
in which he declares his view that
Ptolemy was "the most successful fraud in the history of science".


THE CRIME OF CLAUDIUS PTOLEMY by NEWTON http://www.jwstudies.com/Newton_Crime_Ptolemy.pdf

WAS PTOLEMY A FRAUD? DEFENCE BY GINGERICH http://www.caeno.org/pdf/Gingerich_A... Ptolemy.pdf

FURTHERMORE

Robert A Powell has explained thoroughly
in "History of the Zodiac"
an in-depth exploration of the origins of the Babylonian Zodiac
and its location in the ecliptic
that the division of the ecliptic into tropical astrological signs
was originally a derivation of Euctemon's tropical Calendar of Seasons (432 B.C.)


AND SO

the device currently described as 'The Tropical Zodiac'
was originally used by astronomers as a calendar
and not 'a Tropical zodiac'
from which the first day of Spring
or Vernal Equinox was inferred
- the twelve 30º demarcations of which thereafter
were intended as simply demarcations of the twelve months of the year
and not intended to be construed as 'star signs of The Tropical zodiac'.


QUOTE

"...dividing the solar year into twelve equal months commencing with the vernal equinox
in which each solar (tropical) month is named after one of each of the twelve signs
based on the Vernal Point
and developed at Athens by the astronomers Meton and Euctemon
which was gradually merged over the centuries with Hipparchus astrologically orientated map of the sky
which had also based itself on the Vernal Point
As time passed, the original calendar months merged with
and/or were replaced
by the twelve signs of the zodiac...' Dr Robert Powell HISTORY OF THE ZODIAC available on amazon currently

also keep in mind
Hipparchus 190 BC – 120 BC compiled a catalogue of 850 fixed stars
and then
compared his catalogue with star catalogues of two earlier observers Timocharis and Aristillus
which detailed observations covering the previous 150 years.
Timocharis and Aristillus had created their own different methods of keeping track of the sky:

Hipparchus realized
that in order to compare data
and/or
discuss observations with others
- as well as pass accurate observations to later generations -
there was a need for a common or conventional map of the sky

i.e.
The most fundamental point on a map is the “Origin” – the (0) location.

Hipparchus then selected the Vernal Equinox
as the Origin for his map of the sky
and fixed it at 0º Aries
even though he did observe
and also recorded
that the Vernal Equinox was drifting very slowly westward
being at the time of Hipparchus at approximately 12º Aries or thereabouts

Hipparchus noticed as well
that all the stars seemed to continually change their places with reference to his Origin (0) point
– the Vernal Equinox -
but he offered no written explanation.


Hipparchus
and others
undoubtedly conjectured that an explanation was that our Earth must have moved
- but all clearly refrained from mentioning that officially -
for fear of the old testament-style biblical organized religion retribution
which, almost two thousand years ago
- would have punished them with death/exile/persecution
for challenging the Status Quo