primary directions verses solar arc directions

1
i find sa data (solar arc directions) really informative.. it is not foolproof, but i don't know if any predictive tool in astrology is.. i have spent much less time looking at primary directions and i know there are a number of different ways you can arrive at them, as is being discussed on another thread here...

for anyone who has worked with both at length, i am wondering if you could offer your views on the pros and cons to either, or even better if you feel like saying why you use one over the other.. thanks in advance. james

2
I used to use Solar Arcs extensively (based on Tyl's Solar Arc presentation), but had become less and less enthralled with them through time. Now, I don't use them at all.

I do use Topocentric Primary Directions.

Why? Because, with a correct birthtime, the Primary Directions (including relevant cusps!!!) will be activated at major events with GREAT reliability and with very, very tight orbs. (Under 0? 11' for the conj/opp and under 0? 6' for the other aspects)

With Solar Arcs, every person that I had read that put forth a method had suggested such large orbs so that the aspects they were symbolically relating to the events were tied to each other even though the event and aspect partile were up to a year from each other. Knowing that other systems (Topocentric Primary Directions, Secondary Progressions, Progressed Sidereal Solar Returns) act with very tight (ie. low orbs) precision makes it hard to swallow what, to me, appears (at best) a very sloppy system.

Additionally, depending on whose "brand/presentation" of Solar Arcs you are using, there has been much added onto the system in order for it to appear to work. On another website, which I won't name since we both know which one I mean, I have even seen Solar Arcs referenced (in terms of events) in which the symbolism was COMPLETELY WRONG, but due to them ruling the (believed) relevant Houses were put forth as relevant. Jupiter-Mercury does not "spell" Death of Father. Saturn-Moon does not "spell" lottery win... no matter what houses are ruled!

The disadvantage to Topocentric Primary Directions is that they require a very, very accurate birthtime in order to function. This is both their strong point (since they generally will be able to lead you to that exact birthtime) and their weak point (stringent rectification is necessary).

One other note: This is generally a traditional astrology forum...the primary directions, that they are normally speaking of, are very different from the Topocentric variety of which I have written. (major differences are TPD's always, always have very tight orbs AND the cusps (including intermediate) are HOT SPOTS. ie. birth of Brothers/Sisters showing dramatic activity with Cusp of 3rd... issues of Death showing dramatic activity with Cusp of 8th, etc.) Additionally, this system is not in any way limited to the old promissor/signficator ideas which are limiting. Use the inherent symbolism of the bodies involved and all will be okay!

As examples, using OUT-OF-SAMPLE events in my life...

The ONE time in my life when Neptune (mourning) could form an inconjunct by Primary Direction to my Sun (important men in my life), my Grandfather died.

The ONE time in my life when Pluto (death/transformation) could conjoin my Node (associations, family ties, especially maternal ones), my Grandmother died.

The ONE time in my life when my 8th House cusp (issues of death) could square my Mercury (r. 3rd, Siblings); I got a call from my Brother that my step-Father had died. [By the way, my Natal Mercury sits at the cusp and also rules my 12th House...so any negative primary direction to it can result in undermining and/or profoundly sad things]

The ONE time in my life when my Moon (important women in my life) could form an inconjunct to my 8th House cusp (issues of death), my ex-Wife died.

If you look at all these aspects, they are to scant minutes of arc!

If you'd like, I'd be happy to share my birthdata and event data and you can see for yourself that the Solar Arcs are not particularly noteworthy...certainly NOTHING nearly so dramatic as the (Topocentric) Primary Directions.

Hope this helps in answering your question. ;)

Peace

Atlantean

3
hi atlantean,

thanks for your comments! i use solar arc directions with 1 degree orb or less and i use them extensively with midpoints.. without the midpoint data or the tight orb, i would be seeing too much. i also use a set of aspects based on the even series.. essentially i am doing something akin to the cosmobiologists and ebertin's work.. i have found them very informative and of course i am not using house cusps as i found there are more house cusps using different house systems then a person would want to shake a stick at.. in this regard i am also following a path laid down by ebertin and company..

i have heard you discuss this issue before, but i can always hear it again!

i think the best way to see the relevance of the data, regardless whether it is solar arc, or primary is to see it thru an example chart for yourself.. at least that is what i find the most rewarding.. another astrologer can always point to different astro factors at work, but unless i am interested to try these tools out myself, it is mostly data that i don't really appreciate to the fullest degree...

how another astrologer arrives at their conclusions is really good to know.. i always find myself asking more questions then not, such as what orb are you using, what aspects and etc. etc. etc. it is helpful to know all this, but ultimately i have to be the one doing it myself, while keeping my mind open to the fact i do or don't see the connections between solar arc or primary direction data.. this is actually why i bring this up.. i can go back to events in my own life with specific dates, but not see the astro connections on the level of primary directions.. i could immediately blow them off, or i could ask myself - what am i not looking at, or failing to consider? primary directions can be done a few different ways, as can solar arc directions.. these are pieces to the puzzle of why something might or might not work for someone..

thanks for your comments..

4
Hello james m

You are welcome!

One comment... re: "i use solar arc directions with 1 degree orb or less"

Just realize that that brings into consideration for an event every Solar Arc that happened up to a year before and after.

The implication is that my car accident in July was "foretold" by an aspect that was partile last August. That is a hard idea for me to swallow, frankly.

Just to contrast that with Topocentric Primary Directions, as per your original question...

Malefics with the 3rd cusp or especially Uranus with Mars (or Uranus & Mars simultaneously with a natal point), in Primary Direction, are very normal for accidents. If the malefic w/ 3rd or a Uranus-Mars Primary Direction are partile conjunctions or oppositions in July, then the connected event(s) will be from May to September. If the aspects were OTHER than conj or opp, then the connected event(s) will be between June and August.

Alexander Marr mentions the "overlap method" of analysis, with the idea that, if there are several simultaneous aspects symbolic of the event (which happens often in TPD's) that the event will transpire in the period where all of those aspects are still within orb. This often helps to specify a much tighter timeframe.

Take care and good luck with your studies!

James

6
i suppose it is difficult for folks to want to comment on a topic that may mean more to me then it does to them!

i did want to point out that while reading the thread on primary directions from a few days ago i happened to note that isaac starkman offered some comments that i found very helpful and i am going to share them here in the thought that while some might not be so diligent to read old threads looking for answers for there questions, i happened to see something that was like an indirect response to my question, so i am sharing it for anyone still interested..

>>Martin didn't find secondary directions helpful (p.140). I have found them very effective and in many cases, they are more important than the primary directions! But one should use the Solar Arc in Right Ascension for direction MC. <<

you can find isaac starkmans comment on page 6 of this thread if you want to see the specific post of his. http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... highlight=

7
Hello james m,

Good point... you just throw the information out there and those that find a need will (hopefully) take note.

Re: Progressions

Yes,...what you wrote (quoting Starkman) is a fundamental point. Progressing the MC by the Sun's Right Ascension (not longitude) is incredibly important. The fact that I couldn't get Kepler to do exactly that is what caused me to drop Kepler, an otherwise useful and feature-filled program.

Of course, it's recommended that others check this statement out for themselves. If someone is using the longitude for the progression, then it is no wonder that some found them not so useful.

Thanks for bringing up this point... hopefully some will take the ball and run with it. ;)

If not; hey, you did what you could! :)

Peace

James

8
thanks james!

isaacs comments are helpful in that he makes a comment on something that i think is of interest to anyone working with these different techniques...

here is another one - i have found secondary progressions not nearly as useful as solar arc directions in spite of the popularity of sps from when i first started astrology many years ago..

i was just reading on morin and placidus that either one or both of them didn't find working with profections useful... to me info like this is interesting to ponder if you are going to take the time to learn these systems...

really i would like feedback on any predictive technique, but i am most interested in hearing from those who work with primary directions as it is something i have only casually looked at in the past few years... prior to this, i was never able to examine them as i never understood how to arrive at them on my own... in that regard not much has changed and one could say i have been dumbed down with astro software, but the way i see it is not everyone has the aptitude for mathematics in the same way... i am passionate about doing astrology either way and this won't stop...

thanks for your comments
james

9
James_M wrote:
I have found secondary progressions not nearly as useful as solar arc directions in spite of the popularity of sps from when i first started astrology many years ago..
I agree. That has been my experience too. Solar arcs are one of the most useful predictive techniques in modern astrology.

James_M wrote:
I was just reading on morin and placidus that either one or both of them didn't find working with profections useful... to me info like this is interesting to ponder if you are going to take the time to learn these systems...
With all due respect to my esteemed predecessors..they were completely wrong if that was what they said! :D

Profections certainly do work. In fact they are one of the most useful techniques in predictive astrology. In the medieval approach these would be combined with primary directions and solar returns.

Its actually been suggested that Placido developed secondary progessions through a misunderstanding of Ptolemy's description of profections.

I dont really have time to get into profections here but there was a very extensive discussion of them in the English riots thread:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... bc01a74544

The profections discussion starts on page 3 of the thread. As you will see in the thread there are two different kinds of profections. I utilise them both.

Like you I haven't really had the opportunity to get into primaries. Largely , due to lack of adequate software. I am not very good on the mathematical side of things. Moreover I have had real problems downloading the highly rated free Morinus software. Equally, I simply cannot afford the delux Placidus software of Rumen Kolev, However, its now at the top of my to do list to get this issue resolved. Martin Gansten's book makes primaries more comprehensible than any other book on the subject. However, Rumen Kolev's booklets are good too in terms of example charts. Kolev uses outer planets but Gansten adopts a strictly traditional approach and leaves them out.

Mark
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

10
thanks mark,

i will examine that thread you have shared...

page 140 of martin ganstens book,
"having rejected both profections and, for all practical purposes, revolutions( solar returns and such i suppose), Placidus was in need of another auxiliary technique. As discussed in Chapter 2, he found it in his secondary directions, familiar to most present-day astrologers as(secondary) progressions and calculated by the simple formula 'a day for a year'."

not sure what Morin was or wasn't doing, as i am still waiting for book 21 to arrive in the mail and looking forward to reading it too based on some of the comments i have read.. he seems like he had an independent mind and wasn't afraid to buck tradition if needed.. have to admire a guy like that! he appears to have the same mercury/uranus conjunction aq that alfred witte had...actually just looking now - witte had a close opposition but the 2 charts bear some strong resemblance which is interesting.. both sun/saturn in pisces and etc. etc.

it is interesting a day for a year, verses a degree per year... i sometimes wonder about these distinctions and whether something got lost in the translation... i don't completely discount sec progs, but overall they suck compared to solar arc directions...

11
Anyone happen to know whether and how Placido "progressed" the angles and cusps? This is on the assumption that he was the inventor of secondaries as stated above.

Thanks,

- Ed

12
Ed F wrote:Anyone happen to know whether and how Placido "progressed" the angles and cusps? This is on the assumption that he was the inventor of secondaries as stated above.
He was; but to him they were strictly an auxiliary technique, dependent on the primary directions. The angles, having no secondary motion, cannot be directed using secondary directions (which is what Placidus called them); and as Placidus accepted only the five Ptolemaic significators, he was left with only the Sun and Moon to direct in this fashion. He may perhaps have considered the secondary directions of some other planet in the relatively rare instances where such a planet would qualify as hyleg according to Ptolemy's criteria; but I can't recall seeing an instance of this (perhaps Margherita would know?).

As far as I am aware (although I'm no expert on the modern period), the current practice of combining the primary directions of the angles with the secondary directions of all the planets into a 'progressed horoscope' originated with Alan Leo (whose grasp of the traditional technique was shaky to say the least).