spear bearing / keeping guard / doryphory

1
i would like to share something from adrea l. gehrz's translation "An Introduction to the Tetrabiblos of Ptolemy" by Porphyry of Tyre.

this is from section 29 "Keeping Guard" last paragraph page 28
" The planets can also keep guard by sect. The diurnal planets can keep guard over the nocturnal planets, or vice versa. But nevertheless, if a planet keeping guard is a benefic planet, then the nativity will be no means be unremarkable."

i am curious if anyone is able to explain this little tidbit that i read last night as i believe it is the first i have read of planets of one sect keeping guard over planets of the other sect! feedback or thoughts welcome..

actually it turns out i had read it before in joseph cranes book, but had forgotten. in cranes book page 166 "astrological roots: the hellenistic legacy"
crane quotes antiochus 3 examples on spearing bearing by planets of opposite sect :
1. saturn in cap casting its rays onto venus in libra. (venus is the principal; saturn is the spear bearer.)
2. mars in cap casting its rays onto saturn in libra. (saturn is the principal;mars is the spear bearer.)
3. jupiter in sag casting its rays onto venus in libra. (venus is the principal;jupiter is the spear bearer.)

to go back to the comment 'keeping guard by sect' - this seems to run exactly counter to keeping guard by sect.

2
Hello James,

What Gehrz refers to as 'keeping guard' is the doryphory which are more commonly translated as spear bearers (Robert Schmidt) or attendants. Although I quite like the term 'keeping guard' as I tend to think of these planets a bit like body guards.

There are clearly several approaches to the doryphory. By far the most common and popular is that based on the doryphory or attendants to the luminaries. However, sources like Antiochus or Porphyry do offer us other approaches to doryphory.

In the quote from Gehrz you have taken a short concluding comment out of a much longer section. Basically, in s29 Porphyry, like his predecessor Antiochus, suggests there are 3 different types of doryphory. This discusses the 3rd definition and suggests planets (not just luminaries) can have other stars as their attendants (doryphory) if the first planet is angular and in the 1st or 10th house. Moreover, the luminaries themselves can act as doryphories for stars that are angular like this. In his third definition ,which Porphyry discusses here, he finishes off with this passing comment suggesting that even a benefic of an opposing sect can act as a doryphory. The logic seems to be that that even when of an opposing sect a benefic still has inherent good to offer the other planet. This is clearly a very general maxim that needs to be assessed in each chart.

Here is James Holden's translation of this same passage:
The doyphories become out-of-sect whenever the diurnal (stars) are doryphories to nocturnal ones, or the nocturnal ones to diurnal ones; but nevertheless, if doryphory is made by benefics , not even in this case will the nativity be undistinguished.
As you can see his translation is somewhat different to Gehrz. There have been previous discussions of the tightness of Gehrz's translation style in the thread on Valens's Anthology.

So in the quote you have given us from Gehrz the positive judgement of a doryphory of opposing sect seems limited to those with the benefics involved.

Thanks

Mark
Last edited by Mark on Wed Feb 13, 2013 7:05 am, edited 2 times in total.
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

Re: spear bearing / keeping guard / doryphory

3
It may be better to read translations that stay closer to the text. I recommend those by James Holden. In its context, the point made is a simple one: when one planet attends ('keeps guard over', literally 'is a spear-bearer for') another, it is generally better if they are of the same sect, but an attendant planet of the opposite sect can still have a positive effect, particularly if it is a benefic.
https://astrology.martingansten.com/

4
mark and martin,

thanks for the feedback on this. i see gehrz translation is not viewed as positively as holdens, but i don't recall reading the thread on valens anthology, so i missed that.

it sounds as though this dynamic only can happen with a planet in the ascendant or midheaven.. of the 3 ways - are the other 2 considered more effective then the one i have brought to your attention?

i am curious to know how one would interpret a planet in the ascendant/midheavan that has another planet acting as a bodyguard or assistant?

i was reading last night - same book i am presently reading - persian nativities 1- and happened to land in a section discussing this same topic - page 28/29/30 "on the dusturyyah of the stars". the word ''assistant'' is used as opposed to bodyguard or spear-bearer.
3 different examples of dusturyyah are given. according to dykes footnotes, masha'allah appears to be pulling from a few sources - porphyry, rhetorius and perhaps dorotheus on this topic.

masha'allah makes a comment that i would be curious for more feedback on from others here as well. he seems to say something to the effect that certain aspects are more helpful for dusturyyah then others.. to quote bottom of page 29 "And the trigonal spear-bearers are better than the tetragonal or oppositional ones, while the hexagonal ones are weakest."

i am not used to these descriptions of aspects, but i assume then to mean trines are better then squares or oppositions while sextiles are the weakest.

perhaps giving examples that we could discuss the use or not of dusturyyah would be helpful. lets go back to julia roberts chart which was discussed by Ile at length in another recent thread.
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Roberts,_Julia

saturn retro is the only planet that is in either of the angles ascendant or midheaven. it is out of sect, but in a square aspect with mars which is a part of the nocturnal set, in capricorn.. would this qualify as dusturyyah, or doryphory? obviously mutual reception is going on and one wonders how these ideas overlap. the issue of sect seems to take a back seat in this situation where planets out of sect are being assisted by planets in sect.. thoughts, or feedback on any of this anyone?

5
You bring up something which intrigues me, James. I wouldn't expect to see someone like Julia Roberts with a greatly eminent chart since she isn't all that powerful, as far as I know. It seems her influence would come more from great wealth and fame rather than influence such as you would expect the head of the CIA or a large corporation, fro example. I would expect the "Hollywood mogul" who hires and fires her to be of more eminence even if s/he is less famous.

I have recently purchased Robert Zoller's course and, if I am understanding him correctly, he suggests to use the Dorphory as a basis for where the native begins in life (along with significations of a servile birth) and then to use the state of the luminaries' dispositors among other things to judge a rise or fall. I am yet to test this out fully but I am getting some good results with it.

Just a cursory glance at her chart, I notice the ASC ruler is appying to a dignfied Jupiter placed in the 2nd house in the same sign as (and pretty close to) the Lot of Fortune. This would suggest a good level of moveable wealth. In fact, both benefics are in the same sign as Fortune while Saturn is turned away and Mars is in trine.
http://www.esmaraldaastrology.wordpress.com

6
hi konrad,

i get the impression that this astro technique is a hellenistic one.. by the time that the medieval ages came along it had gone into a long hiatus. my impression of zoller is that he is more focused on the medieval period, but someone will correct me if i am wrong!!

thanks for pointing out how mutual reception doesn't look quite the same in sidereal. in roberts example mars would no longer be in an angle either! i gave roberts as an example(on retrograde planets), but she was the 3rd one after queen elizabeth and pope john paul 11.. as you point out power and influence is relative. on the one hand the hollywood moguls have a big say, but then so does the public who will go to see a movie based on the line up. your comment motivated me to see if i could find a chart for a hollywood mogul. there is no definite birth time for harvey weinstein, but there is an AA listing for steven spielbergs chart.
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Spielberg,_Steven

looking at his chart with my limited understanding of doryphory i can't see how the idea has a lot of merit with his chart. one can put mars/sun in the western angle by switching zodiacs, but that angle is not considered as central as the ascendant or midheaven and would probably be bypassed in a casual glance looking for a chart of 'significance'.

what i would like is for someone who uses this technique to comment on either chart, or alternatively to give an example where it can be put to use.

7
Hi James,

I didn't mean literally that the movie producer would have a more powerful chart, I was merely emphasising that it is their influence on society being examined and not their visibility.

As for the use of Dorphory, I don't believe the technique fell into disuse as time went on. If I may suggest it, looking for a chart which fits the profile given in the texts is going to be almost impossible since we are talking of true leaders of the people here and those people are awfully rare.

You referenced Masha'allah there in using the aspects of the attendants to help decide the power of the native. This method is ideally done with angular Lights and attendants but most charts aren't ideal just as most lives aren't. It is like a sliding scale. Instead of doubting whether this or that works, I would suggest learning the principles and just looking yourself to 15 - 20 charts of people of varying social levels and see what the charts of powerful people look like as opposed to the normal joe. The examples in the texts are, as always, examples of extremes to teach the principles. It is up to us to figure out the application.
http://www.esmaraldaastrology.wordpress.com

8
thanks konrad,
i am already doing that, but that doesn't mean i can't ask questions on others experience which is how i often use this forum. as i was saying, perhaps someone with more experience would like to chime in on how this technique is applied, or some of the nuances that i am not getting from the numerous books where it is discussed that i have made some mention of here.
cheers james

9
james_m wrote:there is an AA listing for steven spielbergs chart.
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Spielberg,_Steven

looking at his chart with my limited understanding of doryphory i can't see how the idea has a lot of merit with his chart. one can put mars/sun in the western angle by switching zodiacs, but that angle is not considered as central as the ascendant or midheaven and would probably be bypassed in a casual glance looking for a chart of 'significance'.
Spielberg's chart looks like a very good example of doryphory to me, with the sect light succedent and conjunct both benefics, which are occidental of the Moon. In the sidereal zodiac which I use, the benefics are in dignity (Venus particularly so) and the Moon is out of its fall.
https://astrology.martingansten.com/

10
martin,

spielbergs chart looks quite different in sidereal, i agree. it does have some of the characteristics that i associate with doryphory - venus and mars occidental to the moon - the sect light. venus in the same sign, and mars a sextile by sign away. i wonder how different this concept of doryphory is when thinking of more standard ways i learned how to view astrology before finding out about this technique.. having the venus/jupiter conjunction in the same sign of the moon would seem to represent some of the 'assistance'.. i don't know if this is all that different from planets by sign with benefics.. does anyone thinks it is different, or unique in some way in this instance?

the way doryphory is initially presented is the planet or light has to be in the ascendant or the midheaven.. when it isn't, other criteria is possible. how does this differ from basic concepts around aspects is what i am questioning/trying to understand here.

spielbergs moon is in a challenging situation applying to the square of saturn, and having left a sextile to mars. i don't think that qualifies as a type of besiegement, but the initial feel of that doesn't seem pleasant. he could probably benefit from any help his moon could get!

so, can doryphory apply to any planet, or specifically the sect light in any position within the 6 houses, or does it have to be somewhere favourable? would it work for spielberg if we were looking only at it from the tropical angle with moon in scorpio in the 5th house?

11
Doryphory is not essentially different from a general concept of assistance from other planets (mainly the benefics, but including the malefics under favourable conditions), but rather constitutes particular subsets of that concept. Doryphory is specifically connected with honours and status, the attending ('spear-bearing') planets being a sort of guard of honour. Therefore, in the ideal situation, it involves the luminaries (who naturally signify honours) dignified in the main angles (the most powerful places) and attended by planets of their own sects located on the appropriate side; but most or all of these factors can be altered to form a sliding scale of dignities. However, Saturn cadent and attended only by Mars, or vice versa, would hardly count as a doryphory in anyone's book.

I would say that the concept of doryphory works in Spielberg's chart even with the tropical zodiac, although it is more powerful in the sidereal (where there is also a strong mutual reception between the Moon and Saturn).
https://astrology.martingansten.com/

12
I find the different viewpoints interesting. Martin, you said "located on the appropriate side". There is a different form of spear-bearing which requires the planet to be occidental of the Sun to guard him:
Moreover, with the Sun and the Moon (in the Ascendant or the Midheaven, even if) established outside of their domiciles and kingdoms, but under the regard of the stars which we called "at rest" above [such that the planet bodyguarding for the Sun aspects the degree rising before the Sun; but for the Moon, the degree after the Moon], another kind of dusturiyah occurs. [And the trigonal bodyguards are better than the tetragonal or oppositional ones, while the hexagonal ones are weakest. ITA p 208, Dykes
Benjamin Dykes then goes on to say in his commentary:
In this type, only a luminary is bodyguarded, and without regard to dignities (unlike type 1)...In addition, this type explicitly states "striking with a ray" or "hurling a ray". ITA p214
He then goes onto explain that he interprets "striking with a ray" as that the bodyguard has to be ahead of the luminary in the order of the signs. Obviously this would mean that Jupiter and Saturn would have to be occidental of the Sun to bodyguard for him.

As I said, I have been reading Zoller's lessons on this and he suggests to take the aspects of the oriental planets to the Sun and the occidental ones for the Moon and judge from both the luminaries' condition and the condition of the guards to ascertain the native's Rank of Fame. Does anyone know how he came to this conclusion as I read Ptolemy differently than he seems to?
http://www.esmaraldaastrology.wordpress.com