Strange method of directions in Opus Reformatum?

1
Has anyone else read and puzzled over ? perhaps even understood? ? the following paragraphs, occurring towards the end of Partridge?s preface to his Opus Reformatum?

[...] there is a Treatise come to my hand from Padua, written by one Antonius Franciscus de Bonattis, in which he gives us a new Method of Directions, but not by him (he says) invented, but by his Master Confalonerius [...] therefore I will give you one Operation in the Protector Cromwell?s Nativity, according to his method [...] And it is of the Sun to the Body of Saturn at the time of his Death, in his Method and Operation, and to that end you must know that Cromwell lived 59 Years, 4 Months, and 8 Days.

The Sem. Noct. Ark of the Radix, is 4162, which gives the Suns distance from the Fifth House 2045. The Sem. Noct. Ark of the Direction, is 3417, hence it gives the distance of the Sun from the Fifth House, 1679, or 27 d. 39 m. which added to the place of Direction, leaves the Cusp of the Fifth House in 7 degrees 19 minutes of Leo [...] and indeed this Direction agrees to the time of 59 Years, 4 Months, and odd days.


To illustrate, Partridge gives a chart which appears to be (close to) that of the secondary directions/progressions for Cromwell?s death. The data he uses for Cromwell?s birth chart are 25 April, 1599 (OS), 01:04:56 (!) LMT. Partridge gets an Asc of 26Cp19 for this; recalculation gives 24Cp09.

I am quite in the dark as to what Master Confalonerius?s suggested method of direction involves. What part does the fifth house play? (Neither Saturn nor the Sun occupies it.) Any suggestions?

4
Thank you, Fran?ois. I know how to work secondary directions/progressions, and so, of course, did Partridge; but he still considered the Bonattis method an entirely new one, so I don't think it is quite as simple as that. And I don't see how he gets the Sun to the body of Saturn at 59 yrs 8 mos, or what the fifth house has to do with any of this. Any light you are able to shed on this would be much appreciated.

5
Martin,

I have check the technique in Bonatis' work on directions and it is the way I wrote:

(1) progress planets one day for a year;
(2) keep the same quotient DM/AD (meridian distance/diurnal arc) of the Sun for the progression of the angles;
(3) Gadbury must have used the fifth house cusp BECAUSE of uses Regiomontanus system and the DM/AD quotient is placidean.

The differences between ours and his calculation must have to do with the tables he used and/or the latitude he used. This is the way Bonatis progressed a horoscope.

Now the same technique can be used for daily horoscope. It is called "in mundo" daily horoscope (and it keeps the same planetary hour for the Sun as in the radix, whether it is progression or daily horoscope). I cannot explain it better than this... Sorry though... But if you read french, I still have Bonatis' book on pdf available ;-)

Here is an example of a correct progressed chart (PM Brown for 2008). The Sun has the same planetary hour in the progressed chart than in the radix. In other words, it keeps the proportional distance in both charts.

http://cf.geocities.com/carriere.francois/BROWN.JPG
Regards,
François CARRIÈRE

6
Fran?ois,

Thanks again. I used to be able to read French, albeit slowly, some twenty years ago, so please do send me the pdf and I shall have a go. I'll contact you off the forum.

Partridge (not Gadbury) used Placidus houses, so the fifth house business is still a mystery, as is the arc of direction for the Sun to the body of Saturn...

Bonatis angles progressions

7
Hello,

For those who wish to understand how Bonatis progressed the angles, here is a copy a the email I sent to Martin with the example Jean Hi?roz (who used it) took (French President Joseph Caillaux). You then progress the planets as usual.
Here is Antonio-Francisco Bonatis' text on Secundary directions. It was formerly published in Alexandre Volguine's ?Cahiers Astrologiques?, #53, if I remember well. Bonatis' work is Astrosophia Naturalis. Also, Jean Hi?roz, in ?L'astrologie selon Morin de Villefranche, quelques autres et moi-m?me?, Omnium Litt?raire, Paris, 1962, clearly explains how Bonatis calculated the angles, pp. 171ff.
Le lieu du Monde o? le Soleil se trouve au moment de la naissance a une grosse importance et chaque fois que, au second jour ou aux jours suivants, il repassera sur ce point (LES ARCS ETANT PROPORTIONNELS) il r?veillera la qualit? donn?e par la premi?re position et il la poussera ? se manifester en rapport ? ses aspects et ? ceux des autres plan?tes. C'est pourquoi il doit toujours ?tre gard? dans les directions ? la m?me POSITION MONDIALE [i.e "in mundo" (F.C.)] pourvu qu'il y parvienne d'un mouvement naturel et apr?s une ou plusieurs r?volutions diurnes [Universa Astrosophia Naturalis, 1687, page 38].
Hi?roz then explains:

?Donc Bonatis, il n'y a aucun doute, proposait d'?riger le th?me dirig? comme nous l'avons propos? deux si?cles et demi plus tard [i.e ?same solar hour?]. Mais Bonatis faisait fi des directions primaires, et le calcul dirig? que nous exposons ci-apr?s ne lui doit que sa division du monde.? (Hi?roz, ?L'astrologie selon Morin de Villefranche?, p. 174).

Here is the method to progress the angles, as explained by Jean Hieroz, using Joseph Caillaux example. He extrapolated the principle of the progressions of Bonatis to the Primary Directions, and called it Directions primaires Hi?roz-Bonatis. It is clearly placidean. Joseph Caillaux is born on march 30, 1863, Le Mans (0E12, 48N00), France, at 9h LMT (TZ. 0h0m48s E). Hi?roz progresses the radix to 1898, which is may 4, 1863.
M?THODE DE CALCUL DES DIRECTIONS PRIMAIRES HIEROZ-BONATIS ET DES DIRECTIONS SECONDAIRES BONATIS

Cette m?thode consiste ? ?tablir le th?me du n ?me jour pour le n ?me ann?e ? l'heure ancienne du Soleil [Note: Les Anciens divisaient le jour en 12 heures diurnes quelle que soit la dur?e du jour], d'y porter les plan?tes ? leur positions radicales en maisons et de comparer ces positions aux positions natales.

Le calcul des th?mes ainsi dirig?s est extr?mement simple.

1. Dans la table des maisons placid?ennes, vous prenez en maison X l'heure sid?rale de culmination du Soleil natal de Caillaux ? 9?B?lier: 24h36m
2. en maison I son heure sid?rale de lever: 18h20m
3. la diff?rence vous donne son semi-arc diurne natal: 6h16m (SAD)
4. D'un autre c?t?, vous soustrayez de l'heure de culmination: 24h36m
5. l'ARMC du th?me: 21h29m
6. la diff?rence vous donne sa DM (distance m?ridienne) natale: 3h7m, d'o? DM/SAD = 3h7m/6h16m = 0.5.

Pour placer les maisons dirig?es du 4 mai [1863. That is, the progressions for 1898] vous relevez de m?me pour le Soleil du 4 mai ? 13?Taureau:

7. Culmination: 26h43m
8. Lever: 19h32m
9. soit un semi-arc diurne: 7h11m

En multipliant ce semi-arc diurne par le DM/SAD natal, vous obtiendrez le DM du th?me dirig?: 0.5 * 7h11m = 3h35m
Ce DM soustrait de l'heure sid?rale de culmination: 26h43m
Vous donne l'ARMC du th?me dirig?: 23h08m
Vous ?tablissez alors vos maisons dirig?es pour cet ARMC et vous prenez
leurs ?tendues [...]
The example Caillaux, by Hi?roz, is available here:
http://cf.geocities.com/carriere.francois/CAILLAUX.JPG
Regards,
François CARRIÈRE

8
carriere.francois wrote:...
Now the same technique can be used for daily horoscope. It is called "in mundo" daily horoscope (and it keeps the same planetary hour for the Sun as in the radix, whether it is progression or daily horoscope). I cannot explain it better than this... Sorry though... But if you read french, I still have Bonatis' book on pdf available ;-)
I call these "ascensional daily solar returns". I figure they're what "diurnal" charts are attempting to be, since diurnals are about the only charts we do based on civil time rather than one or more astronomical cycles.

Thanks for revealing the mystery, Francois.

- Ed

9
Ed,

The way you describe the technique lead me to believe that you may be confusing the technique. Which I doubt, of course. The you describe it, I understand that you keep the same distance, in right ascension, between the Midheaven and the Sun. Which I think is the way Sepharial used daily horoscope. It is not the right way for Bonatis progressions. The Bonatis' technique keeps the same mundane position of the Sun when it is progressed. Here is another example, with G.W. Bush. He is 62 years old, so we progress to sept. 6, 1946. For New Haven, CT, we have:

(1) Bonatis' progression will be: sept. 6, 1946, 8h07 EDT (12h07 GMT);
(2) Sepharial daily horoscope will be: sept. 6, 1946, 7h20 EDT (11h20 GMT).

By the way the later daily horoscope should probably be the right way to progress the horoscope, since it takes into account the equation of time...

Hope it is clearer. And mek sense (well, that's another story ;-)
Regards,
François CARRIÈRE

11
Hi, Francois, thanks for the explanation. I always tought that Bonnatii used only primary directions !
I understand that you keep the same distance, in right ascension, between the Midheaven and the Sun. Which I think is the way Sepharial used daily horoscope.
Yes, it is.

Ed,
since diurnals are about the only charts we do based on civil time rather than one or more astronomical cycles.
Yes, and I also tought that is so strange that so many astrologers swear by the efficiency of diurnals, when they lack clear astrological symbolism. What is the meaning of civil time ? None at all. And there also no clear way to calculate something like this. Should we use savings time ? Why not ? In the summer, the day arc can be so small, that a person that has a natal sun in the 12th, can, in some months, have the diurnal sun in the first or second house ! So, 8 am in the summer is NOT the same as 8am in the winter.

The definition of Sepharial is, at least, technically based, but I dont think it solves the problem of the chart bouncing between day and night. So, I got the idea from your post, of not only taking the arc in RA from sun to MC (RAsun -RAmc) but to calculate the PPA (RAsun-RAmc/AD), so we always have a proportional arc.

What do you think ? Is that already made ? Does it make sense ?
Meu blog de astrologia (em portugues) http://yuzuru.wordpress.com
My blog of astrology (in english) http://episthemologie.wordpress.com

12
Yuzuru,

What I do is maintain the proportional position of the sun along its semiarc, much like one would do to calculate a primary direction.

I really do think this is what diurnals are supposed to be trying for.

As far as people swearing by diurnals, what can I say? It's not the only formally inconsistent method in astrology. But astrologers largely don't go in for formal consistency as an evaluative consideration for our methods.

- Ed