Primary directions in William Lilly vo. 3 1 by Tzu Jan I've noticed that Lilly list several tables for timing directions starting around pg. 708 One is take one year for one degree using the oblique ascentions for the Asc and right ascentions for the equator. One is to use a table by Magimus which accounts for the true equatorial motion of the Sun at birth. The 3rd is Naiboid's table. Has anyone had any success with any of these or tried them out? Tzu Jan Quote Sat Aug 29, 2009 4:34 pm
2 by yuzuru Hi, Tzu If you look in the archives, I am pretty sure that MarkF made a deep discussion about this 3-4 years ago, with some examples. It may be what you are looking for... best regards Y Meu blog de astrologia (em portugues) http://yuzuru.wordpress.com My blog of astrology (in english) http://episthemologie.wordpress.com Quote Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:18 pm
3 by mattG http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... ght=#14549 Is this the one that Yuzuru is thinking about? Matt Quote Sun Aug 30, 2009 9:45 am
4 by margherita matt23z wrote:http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... ght=#14549 Is this the one that Yuzuru is thinking about? Thanks so much, I tried to find that thread this morning without any success. In every case I believe that there is no right method. Lilly says that Naibod key "it is the most exactest measure that hath been found out." In CieloeTerra- in their site there are many examples - they just use Placido's key together with Placido's "under the pole"and mundane directions and they say that they are "the most exactest" too. I believe both are true because they start from different premises. margherita Traditional astrology at http://heavenastrolabe.wordpress.com Quote Sun Aug 30, 2009 1:20 pm
5 by Eddy Edit monday 6:20UT: Since I felt I might give this thread give a twist in another direction I moved my initial reply to the 'How many Astrological Methods do we need?' thread in the Philosophy section because it would be better in its place over there. But I have another question which others perhaps have an answer to. Since I base the directions on the solar day the difference with Naibod is ca. 361 : 360. So 361 : 365 in stead of Naibod's 360 : 365. Was this also done by traditional astrologers or is this modern and did most use the sidereal time day as a basis? I believe the secondary progressions at least were based upon the solar day. Quote Sun Aug 30, 2009 3:10 pm