Sue,

Hoping to catch you before you go. Can you direct me to any source on the history of secondary progressions and the first Astrologers to advocate their use?


Kevin

It's an interesting question. I've just got one lead to offer. Looking at some manuscript journals of Henry Coley (William Lilly's apprentice & heir) in the British Library, I came across this:

"...and the Ascend to the square of Mercury at the very same time according to (?) this (?) way of Direction us'd by Placidus de Titus a monk - about the year 1655."

This occurs in Sloan Ms2280 p.5 - the context is a chart interp. which begins at p.3, "The nativity of Madam Eliz. Hope don by Dr Oznoy Anno 1690" It's handwritten, so the question marks are words which I couldn't figure out.

It seems likely (given the title) that this isn't by Coley himself, but Dr. Oznoy (whoever he was) whose chart interp Coley has for some reason kept in his journal. The significant thing really is that it seems that, so far as these guys were concerned, Placidus was the Daddy of secondary progressions.

Garry,

Very interesting quote, but I'm not following you directly. Are you saying that

"...and the Ascend to the square of Mercury at the very same time according to (?) this (?) way of Direction us'd by Placidus de Titus a monk - about the year 1655."

is an example of secondary progression? I am unfamilliar with the context of this quote.


Kevin

Hi Kevin:
As GarryP infers from the quote he presents, secondary progressions were invented by Placidus (Placido de Titis) and introduced by him in a book in 1647. He did however, as the name implies, definitely consider them to be secondary to primary directions as can be seen in the thirty examples Placidus provides in his later and better known book "Primum Mobile" (published in 1657). That secondaries were to be considered as a suppplement to primaries seems to have been understood by astrologers until the beginning of the 20th century, the emphasis continuing to stay with primary directions. That and much else changed when Alan Leo appeared.
The first English astrologer to make extensive use of secondaries seems to have been John Partridge (1644-1715).
Cheers
Cenned

Cenned,

Excellent information. So you are saying that the thirty examples of secondary progression in Placidus' Primum Mobile and introduced in 1647 are the first historic examples of secondary progressions as far as we know? Does Placidus in his introduction provide basis or reasoning behind these progressions or simply state them as evident?


In much appreciation, Kevin

Anyone interested in this topic might be interested in an observation made by James Holden in his book, A History of Horoscopic Astrology (AFA).

On page 164 he says:

[Kepler] is also said to have considered that the number of days after birth that the Sun took to reach a natal planet was equivalent to the number of years of the native's life that would lapse before the indicated influence would manifest itself. This is the earliest instance I have encountered of the use of what we would call a secondary direction

Then on page 169 he says:

The suggestions made by Ptolemy for another method of directions most likely referred to what are now called profections or symbolic directions (which were in common use by the Greek astrologers but which are not based on the actual motion of the planets following birth) , rather than to the "day for a year" method of directions invented by Placidus, which he called "secondary progressions." ...

It is important to note that while Placidus calculated secondary directions and took them into account, they were definitely considered to be secondary to primary directions -- in other words an adjunct or supplement. This was understood by his 17th, 18th, and 19th century readers, and the emphasis remained on primary directions, but as we shall see below, things changed when Alan Leo came on the scene.

From this we can see that Holden's research credits Kepler with the germ of the idea for secondary progressions, and Placidus for developing and naming the technique. It is also interesting that Placidus considered secondary progressions not as a stand-alone technique as it is more or less used today (obviously it is used in conjunction with the birth chart), and the "secondary" seemed to mean to him, secondary in importance.

I recall that 19th century astrologer A.J. Pearce hated secondary progressions largely on the basis that they were too simple to calculate.

I don't quite understand Holden's reference to profections as symbolic directions. That isn't exactly what profections are, but it is certainly true that profections are not associated with the natural or actual "movement" of the sky at all. He didn't cite the reference by Ptolemy. If someone knows it, I'd like to have it.

Tom

A quote from Placidus follows

Kevin:

The following, reproduced from the translation by John Cooper of the Third Book of Primum Mobile by Placidus de Titus, sections 65 and 66, may go some way to answering your questions.

"65. Authors are divided, as to measure in direction; for some take the whole degree of the equator, for all and every one of the years; others, the Sun's motion of the natal day: some, the Sun's mean motion; whilst many more vary in their computations. But we, to the first year after the natal, take that part of the equator in which the Sun ascends in a direct sphere, by the motion of the first day following the nativity; to the second year, that which ascends by the second day's motion; to the third, that which he ascends the third day after the nativity; and thus of the other subsequent ones: for we would have the directional motion successive, and always formed towards the succeeding places, and the Sun's motion each day to be referred to, as the cause and rule to every year, as to their effects, in the same order and number.

66. But because the primary and principal motion of direction is derived from the motion of the Sun on the days following that of the nativity, as has been said, it consequently happens, that by some secondary means, the aspects that are made to the luminaries and angles on those days, jointly assist the significators of the primary directions; for this reason, we say, that the days whereon these aspects happen are very powerful in those years, which answer to those days, and on which they depend. From those motions, in preference to the rest, appears the true, real, and hitherto unknown, foundation of the critical or climactrical years; for the Moon, almost every seventh day, is placed in the critical place with respect to her place in the nativity; and (which is very important) experience wonderfully proves the truth of it; as may be seen in the examples extracted from Argol and Maginus. We call these motions the secondary directions, to distinguish them from the primary and principal; and we are of opinion, that Ptolemy, speaking of annual places, is to be understood of the places of those motions, and when of the menstrual, hints at the places of the progression."

Hi,

I may be wrong (as often happens of course!) but isn't there some kind of reference to this in the Bible? Now don't ask me which book - but I'm sure I read something about words to the effect of 'and unto each year He giveth one day' kind of stuff.

Hi Tom,

Part of the confusion on the issue of "directions" stems from the fact that ancient and medieval astrologers used the word to refer to a number of techniques, including:

1. Primary directions
2. Profections
3. Delineating by triplicity rulers

These three techniques are totally different, but you can find authors calling any one of them (and probably others) "directions." Maybe the reason profections are "symbolic directions" is that you are skipping around the zodiac house by house, calling each house a year -- so that you are not using primary directions proper, but "as if" primary directions.

Ben

Hi Ben,

Nothing is easy. For the record, when I refer to directions, from now on, I mean primary directions. If I want to reference solar arc directions I will so specify.

Primary directions have enough variety to keep one busy for a few years. I strongly recomend the three booklets by Rumen Kolev on Primaries. He really seems to know the subject. In the US they can be purchsed from astroamerica.com or from Kolev directly at
http://home.comcast.net/~babylonian_astrology/.

Tom