skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Godfather of Modernity: The Alan Leo Legacy Vol. One - Early Astrological Journals 1890-1912, compiled by Philip M Graves
Reviewed by Deborah Houlding
Lilly's Considerations
compiled by D. Houlding
Book II of Carmen Astrologicum by Dorotheus
translated by David Pingree
Compiled by Deborah Houlding
The Babylonian Astrolabe: the Calendar of Creation, by Rumen K. Kolev
Reviewed by Gill Zukovskis

Skyscript Astrology Forum

sect
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 1809
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2011 12:39 am    Post subject: sect Reply with quote

i read hands book quite a while ago.. more recently i read joseph cranes book - astro roots - the hellenistic legacy.. even more recently i have been reading rhetorius the egyptian translated by holden..

what this has to do with sect is i have noticed some inconsistencies and the way that is said to be and so going back to hands book i notice he makes a distinction between what appears to be the arabic verses greek concept of sect... please don't ask me to cite the passages, as i am not willing to do so.. i do want to understand the concept but i see inconsistencies in how it is sometimes applied.. has anyone else seen this? does anyone have more knowledge on this topic with additional distinctions being made depending on who is doing the work? if i find the passage from rhetorius, i will quote it later, but i thought when reading it that it didn't make sense.. this was a few days ago..

now an example for greater clarity on what seems to be the issue for me.. the sect of mars in a night chart if it is below the horizon verses above it is? the sect of the chart is a night chart, so mars is in sect.. however a distinction seems to be made with regard to whether it is above or below the horizon while still in sect as it remains a night chart no matter where mars is with regard to the horizon line..

thanks for any input on this.......
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tanit



Joined: 01 Aug 2008
Posts: 1118
Location: California, USA

Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi sandstone, does this link on hayz/halb help?

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1371
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 1809
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2011 5:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thanks tanit - that was interesting to read, and sort of went into what i am interested in.. after i made this post, i went and re-read a chunk of hands book and here are the distinctions he makes..

first it is a diurnal or nocturnal chart and this defines whether the diurnal planets - sun, jupiter and saturn are in or out of sect, while simultaneously concluding the same on the nocturnal planets moon, venus and mars.. mercury can swing either way depending on whether it is ahead or behind the sun and whether it is a d or night chart..

then there seems to be some confusion as to the next layer of being in or out of sect.. if the diurnal planets are all above the horizon line during the day that is the best, but if any are below, they are slightly out of sect.. same in reverse for the nocturnal planets - all above at night is the best, and any below at night are slightly out of sect..

then there is the consideration of whether the planets are in masculine or feminine signs.. diurnals in the masculine and nocturnals in the feminine makes them also in sect... the one exception aside from my leaving mercury out of all this is there was some question over mars being better in the masculine signs, although it seems to be thought of as nocturnal..

if i find the references from rhetorius, or the joseph crane book, i will revisit this again..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4193
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2011 7:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sandstone wrote
Quote:
first it is a diurnal or nocturnal chart and this defines whether the diurnal planets - sun, jupiter and saturn are in or out of sect, while simultaneously concluding the same on the nocturnal planets moon, venus and mars..


Quite a few hellenistic sources simply mention whether the chart is day or night in discussing sect. Although sources like Valens do give us the additional criteria of position above/below horizon and in a feminine/masculine sign. Another factor that seems to have been linked to sect is solar phase since the nature of the planets is modified by their relationship to the Sun. To put it simply the nocturnal sect are better rising after the Sun (occidental) while the diurnal sect are better rising before the Sun (oriental). The logic being that the planets are more forceful in expression if oriental of the Sun.

Mars is preferable oriental as it is a masculine, superior planet like Jupiter and Saturn. Being being oriental to the Sun increases its moisture which mitigates its hot dry nature and mitigates its potential for malefic expression.

Because the nature of Mercury is 'common' its sect is largely determined by its solar phase. Hence Mercury is considered diurnal when in its oriental phase and nocturnal when in its occidental phase to the Sun. Generally, the occidental phase is considered preferable for Mercury. Part of the reason for this seems to be that at it superior conjunction Mercury, like Venus, is direct and fast in motion while it at its inferior conjunction it is retrograde and comparitively slower in motion. Others factors relate to its proximity to the earth and its height relative to the earth in terms of its cycle to the Sun.

Deb made a very useful comment on the forum some time ago regarding Venus in this regard which could be applied to Mercury too:

Quote:
In traditional terms, the superior conjunction occurs when Venus is at apogee - its highest (ie, superior) position above the Earth within its own cycle. This occurs when Venus is on the other side of the Sun. The inferior conjunction occurs when Venus is at the lowest point in its own cycle, when it is closest to Earth (so between the Earth and the Sun). It is traditionally termed inferior because it is at its lowest position.

At the superior conjunction Venus is high in its cycle, direct in motion and moving swiftly. It is traditionally conceived as being closer to the purer realms of heaven, so its influence is then assumed to be most subtle and soul-like.

At the inferior conjunction Venus is low in its circle, retrograde and slow in motion. Being closest to the Earth and lingering in its effects it has its strongest influence over mundane things, but its virtue is then tainted with baser influences and inferior passions (jealousy, lust, etc).


An example of a planet completely out of sect would be Venus in a day chart, above the horizon, in a masculine sign and oriental of the Sun.

I find it interesting several of the famous 20th century film industry 'sex goddesses' have a strongly out of sect Venus. Marilyn Monroe had this in her natal chart where Venus ruled the MC/10th and was in a day chart, above the horizon, in a masculine sign (Aries) and oriental of the Sun. Brigit Bardot also has an out of sect Venus -ie in a day chart, above the horizon and oriental of the Sun. Venus is also the MC ruler in her chart although in this instance it falls in a feminine sign (Virgo). Sophia Loren has Venus in a day chart, above the horizon, oriental of the Sun. Again it is MC ruler and in Virgo. Jane Mansfield had Venus in a day chart, above the horizon, Venus combust Sun, in a masculine sign (Aries). In all these charts Venus is either in its detriment (Aries) or its fall (Virgo).

In regards the Moon its waxing phase was seen as preferable to its waning phase. A major reason for this is that the Moon is increasing in light while waxing and decreasing in light while waning. However, another factor is that in its waxing phase the Moon has its occidental vespertine rising which means it is seen in the evening sky after the Sun has sunk below the horizon. In its oriental or waning state the matutine Moon is rising before the Sun. Since the Moon is the chief planet of the nocturnal sect it is seen as preferable for it to rise at night rather than in the daytime.

The Moons phase was was also seen to vary its compatbility with other planets. The waxing phase was seen as more masculine while the waning phase was seen as more feminine. Hence the Moon was seen as preferable in aspect with planets from the diurnal sect while waxing and the nocturnal sect whilst waning.


Sandstone wrote:
Quote:
...now an example for greater clarity on what seems to be the issue for me.. the sect of mars in a night chart if it is below the horizon verses above it is? the sect of the chart is a night chart, so mars is in sect.. however a distinction seems to be made with regard to whether it is above or below the horizon while still in sect as it remains a night chart no matter where mars is with regard to the horizon line..


Its clear enough in hellenistic astrology. Mars is in sect in any night chart. Its just that the testimony is strengthened with the additional criteria cited above. That is the general view although like anything one can trawl up a text that seems to muddy the water.

The Arabs seem to have been confused by the fact Mars is a masculine planet but finds its joy by domicile in a feminine sign (Scorpio). It is the only planet where this is the case. This may be a partial explanation why the understanding of sect changed in Arabic and later medieval astrology.

Indeed there are some medieval sources such as one translation of a text by the Jewish medieval astrologer Ibn Ezra suggesting Mars is feminine!

Here are a couple of other threads picking up this problem:

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5770&sid=b35e17dfbe8a9168ac79b91256621be3

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5285&start=60

On whether Venus or Mars should be day triplicity ruler of the water signs:

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=691&sid=a251f27d3911030522bffa891ade904c


Mark
_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus


Last edited by Mark on Thu Dec 29, 2011 7:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 1809
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thanks mark for your articulate and helpful post.. i enjoyed reading on venus out of sect in the charts of well known women.. that is an interesting observation.. i see elizabeth taylor doesn't fit that mold.. i suppose using this technique to understand a chart better can only go so far, but i find the idea of sect to be the most interesting technique i have read about in the past few years different from all my earlier reading of astrology.. i have always thought there would be a big difference between a night chart and a day chart, but not until i was made aware of this idea of sect did i see it discussed..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
margherita



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 1311
Location: Rome, Italy

Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mark wrote:
One might conclude Mars is preferable oriental too as it is a masculine, superior planet like Jupiter and Saturn. However, being oriental to the Sun increases its basic hot and dry nature therefore increasing its potential for malefic expression.


That's not true.
A planet when rising is moist. If dry like Mars, is less dry.

"The planets, in oriental aspects only, are more productive of moisture from rising to their first station," Quadripartite, I,8.

Anyway that's true that some authors prefer Mars when is oriental (as the other superior planets) like Ibn Ezra definition of authority.

Quote:
At the superior conjunction Venus is high in its cycle, direct in motion and moving swiftly. It is traditionally conceived as being closer to the purer realms of heaven, so its influence is then assumed to be most subtle and soul-like.

At the inferior conjunction Venus is low in its circle, retrograde and slow in motion. Being closest to the Earth and lingering in its effects it has its strongest influence over mundane things, but its virtue is then tainted with baser influences and inferior passions (jealousy, lust, etc).


I agree. Venus and Mercury are in better position when vespertine and direct.



Quote:
I find it interesting several of the famous 20th century film industry 'sex goddesses' have a strongly out of sect Venus. Marilyn Monroe had this in her natal chart where Venus ruled the MC/10th and was in a day chart, above the horizon, in a masculine sign (Aries) and oriental of the Sun. Brigit Bardot also has an out of sect Venus -ie in a day chart, above the horizon and oriental of the Sun. Venus is also the MC ruler in her chart although in this instance it falls in a feminine sign (Virgo). Sophia Loren has Venus in a day chart, above the horizon, oriental of the Sun. Again it is MC ruler and in Virgo. Jane Mansfield had Venus in a day chart, above the horizon, Venus combust Sun, in a masculine sign (Aries). In all these charts Venus is either in its detriment (Aries) or its fall (Virgo).

Marilyn Monroe has both a masculine Venus and Mars by phase and Sun, Moon and Venus are in masculine signs.

Sophia Loren has Mars masculine by sign and phase, Venus when invisible is very, very moist, Moon is masculine and Sun feminine. (In fact Sophia Loren is not famous for flirts, she had one husband and she never left him)

Jane Mansfield has a very moist Venus, Sun, Moon in a masculine sign. She is very famous for her lovers, a different one every night.

(See Ptolemy chapter on the diseases of the soul)

margherita
_________________
Traditional astrology at
http://heavenastrolabe.net
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4193
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Margherita wrote:
Quote:
That's not true. A planet when rising is moist. If dry like Mars, is less dry.


Yes I know. That was a silly slip I was hoping to edit before you spotted it. Very Happy I have now edited the post accordingly. Just in case anyone is wondering where you got that quote from!

Certainly if we use Ptolemy as the guide on this Mars is preferable oriental.

Deb put this very well (as usual) in an old post in regards the superior planets and in particular Mars and Saturn:

Quote:
As the planets open up from the Sun, they all have a repletion of moisture (this is the Aristotelian philosophical life-giving quality associated with youth – so don’t worry about the fact that the Sun is not ‘wet’.) So actually Mars is more tempered in its oriental phase, and because moisture is a creative quality, all the planets are ‘full of the vigour of youth’ when they are in this stage, which is why they get the increased dignity score. As Mars moves more towards the opposition of the Sun, the heat becomes emphasised; so it is in this period that it becomes intemperate. But because its extreme quality is dryness, it is most destructive after opposition up to the last phase, because this is when Mars has been thoroughly warmed and the extreme dryness is further exaggerated. Hence, if you were to split this into just two periods, then the oriental phase is definitely preferable to the occidental phase.


It has to be said this is a distinctly Ptolemaic understanding of phase heavily influenced by the Aristotlean definition of qualities. Other hellenistic astrologers may have differed. For example, Stoic influenced astrologers may well have had a totally different conception of qualities linked to the triplicities. Chris Brennan has been commenting on this recently on his Traditional Astrology podcast. However, the Ptolemaic approach certainly dominated later medieval astrology with some modications by the Arabs.

Margherita wrote:
Quote:
Marilyn Monroe has both a masculine Venus and Mars by phase and Sun, Moon and Venus are in masculine signs. Sophia Loren has Mars masculine by sign and phase, Venus when invisible is very, very moist, Moon is masculine and Sun feminine. (In fact Sophia Loren is not famous for flirts, she had one husband and she never left him) Jane Mansfield has a very moist Venus, Sun, Moon in a masculine sign. She is very famous for her lovers, a different one every night.


I wasn't setting out to do a full delineation of their charts. Shocked Just giving some examples for people here to explore. Its obviously relevant that Bardot and Loren have Venus in a feminine sign while it fell in a masculine sign in the charts of Monroe and Mansfield. Still, they all had Venus in masculine phase which makes it more forceful in expression. Good point about Venus being very moist in conjunction with the Sun. Ptolemy makes it clear that moderate warmth and moderate moisture are the life-enhancing qualities, whilst intemperance or imbalance (not enough or too much heat or moisture) destroys.

Although helpful the straightforward oriental/occidental definition is probably too simplistic as we should really be giving attention to the planets in their different stations:

"
Quote:
The planets, when matutine, and from their first emerging until they arrive at their first station, are chiefly productive of moisture; from their first station until they rise at night, of heat; from their rising at night until their second station, of dryness; and from their second station until their occultation, they produce cold." Claudius Ptolemy, Tetrabiblos, I, 8


Margherita has a really useful article on her excellent blog on this topic:

http://heavenastrolabe.net/the-sun-and-heliacal-phases-of-the-planets/

Relating this to the Moon and its synodic cycle we get the following:

New Moon-First Quarter: cold and moist (Ptolemy),
First Quarter-Full Moon-moist and hot (Ptolemy)
Full Moon-Last Quarter: hot and dry (Ptolemy)
Last Quarter-New Moon: cold and dry (Ptolemy)

Here are some previous discussions of planetary phase and its effect on the inferior planets:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3722&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0.

And the Moon

William Lilly seems to support a different approach to the lunar cycle and how it relates to the hot, cold, moist and dry qualities.

In essence:

New Moon-First Quarter: hot and wet (Lilly)
First Quarter-Full Moon-hot and dry (Lilly)
Full Moon-Last Quarter: cold and dry(Lilly)
Last Quarter-New Moon: cold and moist (Lilly)

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5465&sid=84268784f19fb7f6f422c8ffb0d2e06b

Mark
_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 1809
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mark, thanks for the link to margherita's article which i read...
i don't think folks have forgotten about the phase of planetary cycles.. perhaps it's connection to temperament is something that has been generally forgotten though.. this really seems to be the basis for much of margheritas article - a tie in with planetary cycles and temperament..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
margherita



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 1311
Location: Rome, Italy

Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 8:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mark wrote:

It has to be said this is a distinctly Ptolemaic understanding of phase heavily influenced by the Aristotlean definition of qualities. Other hellenistic astrologers may have differed. For example, Stoic influenced astrologers may well have had a totally different conception of qualities linked to the triplicities. Chris Brennan has been commenting on this recently on his Traditional Astrology podcast. However, the Ptolemaic approach certainly dominated later medieval astrology with some modications by the Arabs.

In my opinion it's not just something connected with temperament.
The problem is Mars rises when is oriental, like Jupiter and Saturn.
Venus which is the other night planet, rises direct when it is occidental, as you wrote earlier. On the other hand when Mars is occidental to the Sun is setting, so it is not so strong as when rising.
So it is the different epicycle which makes the things messy, I believe.

Quote:

I wasn't setting out to do a full delineation of their charts. Shocked Just giving some examples for people here to explore.

Its obviously relevant that Bardot and Loren have Venus in a feminine sign while it fell in a masculine sign in the charts of Monroe and Mansfield......
Although helpful the straightforward oriental/occidental definition is probably too simplistic as we should really be giving attention to the planets in their different stations:


They are different chapters about different subjects. Ptolemy gives specific rules for every significator he writes about.
The chapter about quality of the soul is focused on Moon , Mercury and their ruler(s), the excess in sex has other significators and rules.

You know, Bezza is an adept to Ptolemy and his prophets, so I am used to keep the different chapters distinct.


Quote:
New Moon-First Quarter: cold and moist (Ptolemy),
First Quarter-Full Moon-moist and hot (Ptolemy)
Full Moon-Last Quarter: hot and dry (Ptolemy)
Last Quarter-New Moon: cold and dry (Ptolemy)

William Lilly seems to support a different approach to the lunar cycle and how it relates to the hot, cold, moist and dry qualities.

In essence:

New Moon-First Quarter: hot and wet (Lilly)
First Quarter-Full Moon-hot and dry (Lilly)
Full Moon-Last Quarter: cold and dry(Lilly)
Last Quarter-New Moon: cold and moist (Lilly)



again, not so sure. Lilly copies word by word Ptolemy in the assessment of temperament. That in Christian Astrology is not Lilly method, is Ptolemy one.

And about the Moon, Ptolemy deals with the Moon as for the other superior planets.

For in its waxing from new moon to first quarter the moon is more productive of moisture; in its passage from first quarter to full, of heat; from full to last quarter, of dryness, and from last quarter to occultation, of cold.

But I believe that Galen arranges quadrants as you mentioned, and many astrologers then prefer Galen rather than Ptolemy.

margherita
_________________
Traditional astrology at
http://heavenastrolabe.net
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4193
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sandstone wrote:
Quote:
mark, thanks for the link to margherita's article which i read...
i don't think folks have forgotten about the phase of planetary cycles.. perhaps it's connection to temperament is something that has been generally forgotten though.. this really seems to be the basis for much of margheritas article - a tie in with planetary cycles and temperament..


Hi Sandstone,

I think Margherita was probably referring to the loss of the traditional understanding of solar phase aka planetary synodic cycles to the Sun. I don’t deny there is some discussion of planetary synodic cycles to the Sun or solar phase in modern astrology.

The prime example would Dane Rudhyar’s famous book ‘The Lunation cycle’. However, Rudhyars 8 fold division of the lunation cycle bears little relationship to how ancient, medieval or renaissance astrologers viewed this.

Here is an article by Joseph Crane that discusses Rudhyar’s approach on the lunation cycle in comparison to Ptolemy.

http://www.astrologyinstitute.com/Articles/cycles.htm

The article is a quite old now and in his book on ‘Astrological Roots: The Hellenistic Legacy’ Crane has clearly been studying a lot more of the traditional understanding of solar phase. I highly recommend this book in general.

Undoubtably influenced by Rudhyar a few modern astrologers have certainly discussed solar phase in some depth.

For example the late astrologer Robert Blaschke devoted an entire book to the subject entitled: Astrology: A Language of Life; Volume V - Holographic Transits. Other modern astrologers have also written on this subject such as Bob Makransky, and Gary Caton.

http://actastrology.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=5
http://actastrology.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=17
http://actastrology.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=26

I do think it is a very healthy development that astrologers are again taking an interest in this subject. Apart from anything else we are often staggeringly ignorant of the basic astronomy going in these synodic cycles! I don’t exclude myself in that statement. I think that basic astronomical ignorance may also be what Margherita was referring to as it spans both modern and traditional astrology. So whatever, our astrological stance I think it is important we take more time out to study this subject more.

However, its fair to say that what Rudhyar, Blaschke , Makransky and Caton propose often relies on very recent theories they have developed to give a psychological or philosophical underpinning to solar phase. This is based on fundamentally different principles from how ancient, medieval or renaissance astrologers viewed this. As a result they often delineate the different stages of the synodic cycles in a totally different way. That will not be of concern to those only interested in innovating and creating new theories. However, for those interested in our astrological heritage and in traditional techniques these new approaches can create a lot of confusion and misunderstanding.

One example, is the synodic cycle of Venus and Mercury where some modern authors present the inferior conjunction as the start of the cycle. However, there were basic astronomical reasons why the ancient and medieval astrologers saw it very differently. See the comments I quoted above by Deb.

If you haven’t got it already I highly recommend Deborah Houlding’s article ‘The Beauty of the Venus Cycle’ which appeared in the Mountain astrologer in early 2010 -TMA Feb/Mar 2010.

Deborah Houlding is preparing a book on the whole subject of solar phase in traditional astrology. When it appears I am sure it will do a lot to illuminate this subject for the astrological community.

The evidence we have is that planetary phase was very important in ancient astrology. Indeed Robert Hand has suggested it was regarded rather like a 5th dignity along with things like domicile rulership, exaltation, triplicity , and term/bound. Face was not universally adopted until the medieval period.

So it is fair to say that this subject is much larger than a discussion of planetary sect. Solar phase was used in all branches of traditional astrology ie mundane, natal, electional and horary.

Quite simply the different phases modified the nature of a planet. The Moon is intrinsically cold and wet. However, this nature is modified somewhat by its phase. Hence at Full Moon the it is at its hottest. If you doubt this theory check out where the Moon is when the most dramatic forum squabbles break out! I have found its more often than not during the Moon waxing to its full phase. The effect of the full Moon is obviously recorded everywhere. I will not patronise anyone by seeking to prove that to astrologers. Very Happy

As a person with a particular interest in political and natural events I am also exploring phase in these charts. For example looking to see if traditional notions of when Saturn should be more destructive due to phase work out. More heretically for a traditionalist I am even looking at the modern outer planets too in terms of solar phase.

Sorry I have rather wandered off the topic of sect your original post with all this discussion. Hope you still found it an interesting digression.

Mark
_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus


Last edited by Mark on Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:54 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4193
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 11:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Margherita wrote:
Quote:
again, not so sure. Lilly copies word by word Ptolemy in the assessment of temperament. That in Christian Astrology is not Lilly method, is Ptolemy one.


I am a bit short for time so I will not dig out the texts to debate this one. Being a lazy phlegmatic Laughing I will simply refer you on to another authority on this subject. In her book Temperament , Astrology's Forgotten Key, Dorian Greenbaum argues the approach of the medieval astrologers to qualities in the Lunar cycle is slightly different to Ptolemy. She uses Lilly as a representive example. I know you possess this book so I simply refer you to page 80-83 where you can study her argument for yourself.

Margherita wrote:
Quote:
But I believe that Galen arranges quadrants as you mentioned, and many astrologers then prefer Galen rather than Ptolemy.


I would really like to study Galen more but it appears most of his relevant works to astrology ( such as his work on temperaments) has never been translated into English! Is the situation any better in Italian?

Mark
_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4193
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sat Dec 31, 2011 10:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Margherita wrote:
Quote:
Lilly copies word by word Ptolemy in the assessment of temperament. That in Christian Astrology is not Lilly method, is Ptolemy one.


Hello Margherita,

Greenbaum doesn't cite a reference in Lilly's Christian Astrology, However, I have tracked it down in Book III chapter CVI (106) in his chapter on temperament

Quote:
‘The Moon
From Conjunction to 1st quarter-hot and moyst
From thence to Full-hot and dry
Full Full to her last quarter-cold and dry
From Last quarter to new Moon-cold and moyst’
Christian Astrology, Book III, Chapter CV1


This is clearly different from Ptolemy in Book I, Ch 8 of the Tetrabiblos:

Quote:
For in its waxing from new moon to first quarter the moon is more productive of moisture; in its passage from first quarter to full, of heat; from full to last quarter, of dryness, and from last quarter to occultation, of cold.


So I dont see how you get to the position that Lilly and Ptolemy are identical on this issue.

Mark
_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
margherita



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 1311
Location: Rome, Italy

Posted: Sat Dec 31, 2011 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mark wrote:

So I dont see how you get to the position that Lilly and Ptolemy are identical on this issue.


Because Ptolemy follows a same model for everything, which he describes in the chapter you mentioned for planets and Moon, and precises in the chapter about the shape of the body about the seasons:

"In general terms, once more, the quadrant from the spring equinox to the summer solstice makes the subjects well-favoured in complexion, stature, robustness, and eyes, and exceeding in the moist and warm. The quadrant from the summer solstice to the autumn equinox produces individuals with moderately good complexion and moderate height, robust, with large eyes and thick and curly hair, exceeding in the warm and dry. The quadrant from the autumn equinox to the winter solstice makes them sallow, spare, slender, sickly, with moderately curling hair and good eyes, exceeding in the dry and cold. The quadrant from the winter solstice to the spring equinox produces individuals of dark complexion, moderate height, straight hair, with little hair on their bodies, somewhat graceful, and exceeding in the cold and moist."

Bezza quotes Aristotle (to whom Ptolemy is deeply debtor
http://www.cieloeterra.it/articoli.luna/luna.html

" The Sun produces summer and winter in the yearly cycle, the Moon in the monthy cycle"

and Porphirius in fact comments Tetrabiblos talking on the Moon (Holden, pages 3-4):

"the Sun running through the Zodiac in its entirety in a year, the Moon from its growing bright and taking a run, moves in nearly 29 1/2 days..... From its first appearance to the first quarter it is like Spring, and thence down to the Full Moon like Summer, and down to the Second quarter like Autumn, next in order down to its disappearance like Winter."


Let's say Ptolemy does not write plainly but reading Ptolemy, if we want to follow his logic and his teacher Aristotle we should read like that.

In every case I meant that Lilly copies Ptolemy in every thing, not just about the Moon. Compare Ptolemy's qualities of planets in III,11 with Lilly table.
margherita
_________________
Traditional astrology at
http://heavenastrolabe.net
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4193
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sat Dec 31, 2011 2:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Margherita wrote:
Quote:
Because Ptolemy follows a same model for everything, which he describes in the chapter you mentioned for planets and Moon, and precises in the chapter about the shape of the body about the seasons.


Ok. I see your point now. Looking at the section you quoted from Tetrabiblos:

Quote:
"In general terms, once more, the quadrant from the spring equinox to the summer solstice makes the subjects well-favoured in complexion, stature, robustness, and eyes, and exceeding in the moist and warm. The quadrant from the summer solstice to the autumn equinox produces individuals with moderately good complexion and moderate height, robust, with large eyes and thick and curly hair, exceeding in the warm and dry. The quadrant from the autumn equinox to the winter solstice makes them sallow, spare, slender, sickly, with moderately curling hair and good eyes, exceeding in the dry and cold. The quadrant from the winter solstice to the spring equinox produces individuals of dark complexion, moderate height, straight hair, with little hair on their bodies, somewhat graceful, and exceeding in the cold and moist."


However I note you omitted the first sentence:

Quote:
Likewise their places, as we have said, take an important part in the formation of the bodily characters and temperaments.


The English translator Robbins states in his footnote that this section is referring to the Sun. Understandably so as when did the Moon or other planets have an equinox?

I accept though that this does seem to be the approach Lilly has adopted to both the Sun and the Moon in its quarters. Hence, standard medieval temperament analysis also includes the solar season in assessing temperament. I suppose the two quotes from Ptolemy can be reconciled if we see the the first quarter starting predominantly moist but moving to increasing warmth. The second quarter being warm but moving to increasing dryness. The third quarter moving from dryness to cold. Finally the last quarter moving from cold to increasing moistness.

So is this also the source of the tradition that assigns the angles as seasons too? In other words the ascendant as spring, the Midheaven as summer, the descendant as Autumn and the IC as winter?

You do have an additional problem though in arguing Lilly simply follows Ptolemy. There is no reference in the Tetrabiblos to the elements. So the linkage of elements to triplicities isn't found in the scheme set out by Ptolemy.

I agree that Ptolemy is strongly influenced by Aristotleanism. His technique is systematic, rigorous and in its own way empirical. However, studying the Tetrabiblos I have been surprised that I haven't found a reference to the Aristotlean qualities linked to signs,

Just to recap the Aristotlean system would assign the following:

Fire-Hot and Dry
Air-Hot and Moist
Water-Cold and Moist
Earth-Cold and Dry

It seems that one of the main influences in disseminating this approach astrologically was Galen not Ptolemy. We know that Galen was strongly Aristotlean in his approach. By the time of Abu'Mashar this approach seems to have entered in basic astrological teachings. Hence it was fundamental to subsequent medieval and renaissance astrology,

Going back to Ptolemy though we find a quite different approach of assigning qualities to signs. Its clearly influenced by Aristotlean naturalistic philosophy but Ptolemy develops his own approach to the signs which is principally motivated by planetary rulerships and solar season.

Quote:
The planets also have familiarity with the parts of the zodiac, through what are called their houses, triangles, exaltations, terms, the like. The system of houses is of the following nature. Since of the twelve signs the most northern, which are closer than the others to our zenith and therefore most productive of heat and of warmth are Cancer and Leo, they assigned these to the greatest and most powerful heavenly bodies, that is, to the luminaries, as houses, Leo, which is masculine, to the sun and Cancer, feminine, to the moon. In keeping with this they assumed the semicircle from Leo to Capricorn to be solar and that from Aquarius to Cancer to be lunar, so that in each of the semicircles one sign might be assigned to each of the five planets as its own, one bearing aspect to the sun and the other to the moon, consistently with the spheres of their motion and the peculiarities of their natures. For to Saturn, in whose nature cold prevails, as opposed to heat, and which occupies the orbit highest and farthest from the luminaries, were assigned the signs opposite Cancer and Leo, namely Capricorn and Aquarius,with the additional reason that these signs are cold and wintry, and further that their diametral aspect is not consistent with beneficence. To Jupiter, which is moderate and below Saturn's sphere, were assigned the two signs next to the foregoing, windy and fecund, Sagittarius and Pisces, in triangular aspect to the luminaries, which is a harmonious and beneficent configuration. Next, to Mars, which is dry in nature and occupies a sphere under that of Jupiter, there were assigned again the two signs, contiguous to the former, Scorpio and Aries, having a similar nature, and, agreeably to Mars' destructive and inharmonious quality, in quartile aspect to the luminaries. To Venus, which is temperate and beneath Mars, were given the next two signs, which are extremely fertile, Libra and Taurus. These preserve the harmony of the sextile aspect; another reason is that this planet at most is never more than two signs removed from the sun in either direction. Finally, there were given to Mercury, which never is farther removed from the sun than one sign in either direction and is beneath the others and closer in a way to both of the luminaries, the remaining signs, Gemini and Virgo, which are next to the houses of the luminaries. Tetrabiblos, 17. Of the Houses of the Several planets.


Reducing these to qualities I get the following possible arrangement:

Cancer/Leo -Hot
Capricorn/Aquarius-Cold
Aries/Scorpio-Dry
Taurus/Libra-Moist
Sagittarius/Pisces-Warm and moist
Gemini/Virgo-warm?

I am speculating that the masculine/feminine signs operate differently. Hence a nocturnal sign like Pisces would be less warm than a diurnal sign like Sagittarius where Jupiter is in sect. Similarly, a nocturnal sign like Capricorn is colder since it is a nocurnal sign where Saturn is less compatible. I wonder about Cancer though. I suppose it is warm and moist like the Moon? It is notable that Ptolemy doesn't state the Moon is moist and cold but rather moist and mildly warming.

Of course using the section you presented above we could adopt an entirely different approach of the signs linked to qualities. Aries would be warm and moist with Gemini indicating increasing warmth etc. I note Ptolemy also links this approach to the angles with a reference to the four winds although in that scheme the ASC is linked to dryness. Confused

Quote:
Similarly, too, of the four regions and angles of the horizon, from which originate the winds from the cardinal points,the eastern one likewise excels in dryness because, when the sun is in that region, whatever has been moistened by the night then first begins to be dried; and the winds which blow from it, which we call in general Apeliotes, are without moisture and drying in effect. The region to the south is hottest because of the fiery heat of the sun's passages through mid-heaven and because these passages, on account of the inclination of our inhabited world, diverge more to the south; and the winds which blow thence and are called by the general name Notus are hot and rarefying. The region to the west is itself moist, because when the sun is therein the things dried out during the day then first begin to become moistened; likewise the winds which blow from this part, which we call by the general name Zephyrus, are fresh and moist. The region to the north is the coldest, because through our inhabited world's inclination it is too far removed from the causes of heat arising from the sun's culmination, as it is also when the sun is at its lower culmination; and the winds which blow thence, which are called by the general name Boreas, are cold and condensing in effect. The Terabiblos, Book 1, Ch 10.


Earlier in Book 1, Ch 10 Ptolemy does seem to propose the signs can be linked to the seasonal quarters:

Quote:
For this reason, although there is no natural beginning of the zodiac, since it is a circle, they assume that the sign which begins with the vernal equinox, that of Aries, is the starting-point of them all, making the excessive moisture of the spring the first part of the zodiac as though it were a living creature, and taking next in order the remaining seasons, because in all creatures the earliest ages, like the spring, have a larger share of moisture and are tender and still delicate. The second age, up to the prime of life, exceeds in heat, like summer; the third, which is now past the prime and on the verge of decline, has an excess of dryness, like autumn; and the last, which approaches dissolution, exceeds in its coldness, like winter
.

So Ptolemy is organizing the signs here not by triplicity but by solar quadrant. This clearly represents the seasons in the northern hemisphere.


Have I missed a reference somewhere in Tetrabiblos to the classic arrangement of the Aristotlean qualities to the triplicities? I haven't seen it myself. Although I am sure it must have been spotted and commented on by someone before.

I think this does pose a problem if we are arguing the medieval approach is synonymous with Ptolemy on temperament.

Mark
_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus


Last edited by Mark on Sat Dec 31, 2011 9:56 pm; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
margherita



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 1311
Location: Rome, Italy

Posted: Sat Dec 31, 2011 3:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mark wrote:


Have I missed a reference somewhere in Tetrabiblos to the classic arrangement of the Aristotlean qualities to the triplicities? I haven't seen it myself. Although I am sure it must have been spotted and commented on by someone before.

I think this does pose a problem if we are arguing the medieval approach is synonymous with Ptolemy on temperament.

Mark


Which are the significators of the temperament for Lilly?

The ruler of Ascendant and the Moon.

Compare with Ptolemy.

We must, then, in general observe the eastern horizon and the planets that are upon it or assume its rulership in the way already explained; and in particular also the moon as well; for it is through the formative power of these two places and of their ruler and through the mixture of the two kinds, and furthermore through the forms of the fixed stars that are rising at the same time, that the conformation of the body is ascertained; the ruling planets have most power in this matter and the special characters of their places aid them.

then compare planetary qualities given by Ptolemy after these words with Lilly, do you find any difference?

About the qualities of the seasons I have already quoted them ...

Obviously Lilly is not Ptolemy in his way of writing and between the two they had Galen and Avicenna, but it's the same scheme arranged for XVII century readers.

p..s about the temperament of the Ascendant I had a very long discussion with Deborah Houlding in this forum.
In every case my idea - especially at the light of that thread- is Ptolemy is talking about something else, of the cardinal points on a map. Don't ask me why, I'm not sure I could explain even in Italian

margherita
_________________
Traditional astrology at
http://heavenastrolabe.net
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated