Firdaria in nocturnal charts

[TonyLouis]

Those of us who use firdaria are aware of the controversy about where to place the Moon's nodes in nocturnal charts. Robert Zoller felt that the nodes should go in the same order in both day and night charts. Rob Hand argued that the nodes should always come at the end of the cycle and govern the ages from 70 to 75. My own gut feeling was that Rob Hand was correct because it is a method of planetary periods and the order of the planets is of primary importance, the nodes being added on the round out the total period of 75 years.

I recently read an article by Steven Birchfield that gives historical support to Rob Hand's argument. Birchfield points out that the firdaria were introduced into astrology by Abu Ma'shar (787-886) and there is no reference to them prior to him. Abu Ma'shar spelled out his technique in detail in his book on Solar Revolutions, which was not translated until after Bonatti wrote his text that Robert Zoller quotes. Bonatti was relying on partial explanations of the technique found in translations of other works of Abu Ma'shar. He did not have access to the detailed explanation.

It may be that Bonatti correctly understood the original technique, however, since he does not spell out or give examples of firdaria in nocturnal charts. Bonatti writes: "“But if the nativity is nocturnal the disposition will begin from the Moon which is the nocturnal luminary and will be in all respects as was explained when it began from the Sun both regarding the participation of the planets with the Moon and regarding the succession of them in the order of the circle." Here it is ambigous when Bonatti says "in all respects" whether he is including the nodes or just referring to the planets. Ma'shar clearly meant that the order of the planets was the same but that the nodes came at the end of the sequence in both day and night charts. Robert Zoller interprets "in all respects" to include the nodes in the ordering of the firdaria. Rob Hand understands it to mean that the planetary order is preserved and the nodes come at the end.

Here is the relevant quote from Ma'shar's book on Solar Revolutions:
“…but in a peculiar manner, the Ascending and Descending Nodes, since they do not further participate with any star, assume the management only after the completion of the years of the seven stars and after the native has completed seventy years, because they do not have domiciles… And in the case of diurnal nativities, the nodes distribute after Ares; but in the case of nocturnal nativities, after Hermes.” He uses Ares for Mars and Hermes for Mercury.

Now that Birchfield has identified the original source, the controversy appears to be settled. The Moon's North Node rules ages 70-73 and South Node, ages 73-75 for all of us, whether we have day or night births.

Does anyone know whether Robert Zoller has changed his views in light of Birchfield's finding of the detailed original method in the writings of Ma'shar?

[steven]

Hi Tony,

Perhaps I can try and answer your question. I first must say that I do not presume to answer for Robert. What his "official" stance on the question is, he will have to clarify himself. However, I will say that I had several written exchanges with Robert on this subject while I was his student. We discussed a couple of example charts, my own and Christopher Reeves.

This exchange occurred in January 2005 so I cannot answer definitively for Robert's present opinion on the matter. I can perhaps share a couple of <snips> from our correspondence and discussions at that time.

Robert emphasised at that time that he was clearly aware of the ambiguity in Bonatti's texts;

<snip>
"For some time I have been quietly comparing Abu Mashar's nocturnal firdaria series (which is also Alchabitius's as well as other's) with my reading of Bonatti's presentation of the same material. I am by no means comfortable with disageeing wit the tradition. It is possible that I have misinterpreted Bontti's intent. It is also possible that Bonatti's own statement is sufficiently ambiguous to justify an erroneous interpretation such as inserting the two lunar nodal periods between Mars and the Sun in the noctural series of the Firdaria. Because I have always been aware of this prblem, I have made a point of pointing out that there is this ambiguity in the written material so that they might (as you have) look into it on their own and come to their own conclusions (as you have). I call attrention to this problem very time I lecture on the subject and in print, most recently in my publishd delineation (the long version) of Heinrich Rantzau's nativity."
<end>

Robert made it pretty clear that he would continue to look closely at both possibilities;

<snip>
"For myself, I plan to continue looking at both interpretations of the nocturnal firdaria since over the years I have had a great many reports from people with nocturnal charts that ages 42-44 have been disasterous. This is what you would expect if the Cauda ruled those years."
<end>

As I discussed with Robert, there are probably just as many people with diurnal births who have equally had disasterous periods at the age of 42 to 44 <g>. In fact I have several diurnal examples of clients I have. It is not just nocturnal births that suffer from 'middle age crisis' <g>.

Perhaps the following comment by Robert to me, best sums up his opinion at the time of this exchange;

<snip>
"I have seen too many examples of this sort of thing to shrug off the possibility that there is validity to my interpretation of Bonatti's nocturnal firdaria. I also entertain the possibility (in fact, at the moment I favor this idea) that some other astrological factor explains those instances I have attributed to the Cauda firdar...there is the fact that 42 is half of 84 (Uranus' cycle) and also 3.5 Jupiter cycles. It is the 7th house profecting the Asc and relates to the Saturn-Mars conjunction cycle and the nominal 2 year cycle of Mars oppositions. 42-43 has long been assciated with "Mid-life Crisis". So, the work goes on. Slowly we learn."
<end>

The best I can say, is that I think that Robert realises that his understanding of the ambiguity in Bonatti may be a mistake and that he is seriously considering other factors that could result in this mid-life crisis!

One other consideration that Robert does not list above but I shared with him was the "Ages of Man". In fact, Abu Ma'shar discusses these quite in depth in the same text, On Solar Revolutions, and has some interesting things to say.

The 5th Age of Man is ruled by Mars and begins at 41 up to 56. It rules 15 years (its least planetary years). This is the period of the most pitched conflict(s) in life. In modern corporate terms, it is the “make it or break it” age; the period of the “mid-life” crisis. Abu Ma'shar himself writes concerning this period;

«Mars, afterwards, assumes the fifth age and governs fifteen years and has therefore the principle of mature age. In truth, Mars <is> placed over the circle of the Sun. Therefore, in that age men compete in the world and experience haste and sufferings and are overwhelmed from worries and hard work and distresses and abandon the greater part of the pleasures.»

The delineation of this period was specific,

«In each of these seven ages, each star reveals its own nature then its accidental disposition and its disposition in that time in which it assumes the government of the ages. If its disposition is good in both times, it will indicate many advantages. If in both times it is bad, it will indicate many damages. And if the two times, the radical and the future, do not agree, then they will be mediocre with both advantages and damages.»

Every individual's life then, has a period that is in the larger context ruled by Mars. How that period plays out depended on the factors Abu Ma'shar lists in the previous quote and I can recap simply as follows:

Look at the age ruler in the nativity;
1. Its zodiacal condition
2. The house it is posited in
3. The house(s) it rules
4. The testimonies of the other planets to it (aspects)

Look at the Age Ruler in the SR of the year it assumes its lordship:
1. Its zodiacal condition
2. The house it is posited in
3. The house(s) it rules
4. The testimonies of the other planets to it (aspects)

Compare the two testimonies:
1. If both are good, it indicates great advantage and profit
2. If both are bad, it indicates great disadvantage and upset
3. If they do not agree in testimony, the ruler indicates only mediocre advantage and disadvantage; many ‘ups and downs’.

This for example, is just one other possibility to explain the events that have been attributed to the Nodes in the nocturnal series. It doesn't have to be the nodes at all, and in fact, there are many other possibilities <g>

Again, I dare not presume to answer for Robert but can only share what he has said to me personally in our discussions!

Best regards,
Steven Birchfield AMA

[yuzuru]

Hi, Steven
Glad to see you here :-)
Would you like to contribute to the dorophyry discussion, please ?
:-)

[TonyLouis]

Steven,

Thanks for your response. It was very enlightening as was your article about the nocturnal firdaria.

Tony