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:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

giving one year to every degree
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 3512
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Mon Jul 29, 2013 5:10 pm    Post subject: giving one year to every degree Reply with quote

if you read ben dykes book 2 of persian nativities you will keep bumping into this idea presented by abu bakr.. umar al-tabari might have mentioned it too in the first part of this volume 2 book, but i am on page 276 and beyond the shorter section on umar al-tabari's work. this idea has been mentioned quite a bit in this particular book.

-giving one year to every degree sure seems like use of the idea "one degree= one year" or general solar arc direction theory. comments?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Konrad



Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 685

Posted: Mon Jul 29, 2013 5:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you look up the word tasyir in Ben Dykes' Arabic/Pahlavi volcabulary (http://bendykes.com/reviews/arabicvocab.pdf), you will see:

Quote:
tasyir (Lat.attazir), “setting out, dispatch,” the Arabic term
for primary directions or releasing, which translates the Gr.aphesis. From the Ar.sayir, “to set out, get going, march.”


So no, nothing to do with Solar Arc Directions. Nice try though.
_________________
http://www.esmaraldaastrology.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 3512
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Mon Jul 29, 2013 7:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thanks konrad. nice to see you back at skyscript.

i have had the conversation with martin on tasyir here before and actually we had a thread on it some time ago.. nothing in the quotes i have read countless times in volume 2 along the very same lines as the quote i have given here give further descriptions which include the word tasyir.. nice try on your part, lol!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Martin Gansten
Moderator


Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1268
Location: Malmö, Sweden

Posted: Mon Jul 29, 2013 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A degree for a year is one of the most ancient ideas in horoscopic astrology, though the degrees are typically equatorial (in right ascension) rather than ecliptical (in the zodiac). The word used for 'equatorial degree' in Greek can even mean 'year' (the basic meaning is just 'time'). The idea is then repeated again and again in various contexts and by various authors, Greek, Arabic and Latin.

Solar arcs (which are not, strictly speaking, based on a degree for a year!) go back to Kepler and no further.
_________________
http://www.martingansten.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Konrad



Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 685

Posted: Mon Jul 29, 2013 8:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

james_m wrote:
thanks konrad. nice to see you back at skyscript.

i have had the conversation with martin on tasyir here before and actually we had a thread on it some time ago.. nothing in the quotes i have read countless times in volume 2 along the very same lines as the quote i have given here give further descriptions which include the word tasyir.. nice try on your part, lol!


I'm sorry, James, I am not understanding what point you are trying to make. The section on p276 talks of various combinations of planets meeting each other by tasyir producing a marriage for the native. If you know of any other author who speaks of Solar Arc directions at or before Abu Bakr's time then post the references. Otherwise even if tasyir is not explicitly stated, it is safe to assume 'degree for a year' is indicative of Primary Directions or at least Circumambulations, and not a technique which did not exist at that time and one which really makes no sense.
_________________
http://www.esmaraldaastrology.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
johannes susato



Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 1464

Posted: Tue Jul 30, 2013 11:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Martin Gansten wrote:
Solar arcs (which are not, strictly speaking, based on a degree for a year!) go back to Kepler and no further.

. . . but are nevertheless referring to the equator, are they not?

Do you know, who 'invented' the ecliptical solar arc direction or who was the first to use it - supposedly some English of the late 19th century?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 3512
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Tue Jul 30, 2013 3:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thanks for sharing your perspective martin. that is interesting!

konrad, here is where i am going with this. 'one degree per year' reminds me of 'one sign per year' - profections. if astrologers of the past decided there was some relevance in 'one sign per year' then making a jump to 'one degree per year' isn't too difficult for me to grasp. i don't really care if a person thinks one degree or the solar arc of the sun per year is the method to use. i enjoy knowing the history on this too which martin seems well versed in. i don't know if any astrologers from the past tried this, but reading the words verbatim off ben dykes books makes me think about this.

primary directions are more complicated then profections, or moving the whole chart one degree per year.. they share something in common in being all 'symbolic' means of attempting to predict the future.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Konrad



Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 685

Posted: Tue Jul 30, 2013 4:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

james_m wrote:
thanks for sharing your perspective martin. that is interesting!

konrad, here is where i am going with this. 'one degree per year' reminds me of 'one sign per year' - profections. if astrologers of the past decided there was some relevance in 'one sign per year' then making a jump to 'one degree per year' isn't too difficult for me to grasp. i don't really care if a person thinks one degree or the solar arc of the sun per year is the method to use. i enjoy knowing the history on this too which martin seems well versed in. i don't know if any astrologers from the past tried this, but reading the words verbatim off ben dykes books makes me think about this.

primary directions are more complicated then profections, or moving the whole chart one degree per year.. they share something in common in being all 'symbolic' means of attempting to predict the future.


They are also based upon units of time in the Sumerian calendar. I am running out now, but look up the gesh and beru to see Primary Directions and Profections respectively.
_________________
http://www.esmaraldaastrology.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Martin Gansten
Moderator


Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1268
Location: Malmö, Sweden

Posted: Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

johannes susato wrote:
Martin Gansten wrote:
Solar arcs (which are not, strictly speaking, based on a degree for a year!) go back to Kepler and no further.

. . . but are nevertheless referring to the equator, are they not?

Not as far as I recall; but I am no expert on Kepler.

Quote:
Do you know, who 'invented' the ecliptical solar arc direction or who was the first to use it - supposedly some English of the late 19th century?

I'm afraid I don't, off-hand. These topics have been discussed before on Skyscript, though, so you may find something in the archives.
_________________
http://www.martingansten.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
astrojin



Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 469

Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 2:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello (esp. to james_m):

The following may be not be directly related to the original discussion but I think it merits some discussion. It is actually a small thing that I prepared for my students on the topic of advancing the natal chart to get a glimpse of the native’s future.

If we look to the Hellenistic and Medieval sources, there are basically three types of “advancing” a natal chart in order to make future predictions:

1. Advancing from planet to planet.
2. Advancing from sign to sign.
3. Advancing from degree to degree.

Each method has its own idiosyncrasies and also its own method of analysis. In each method, we need to know the starting planet or sign or degree and the jumping pattern. Then, we have to assign the time unit for each jump of the planet or sign or degree.

1. Advancing from planet to planet
The most famous medieval method seemed to be the Firdaria. Planet you start with = the luminary of the sect. Jumping pattern = Chaldean order. Major time unit is unequal given by the planet itself which has their own unique numbers e.g. Sun = 10, Moon = 9, Mercury = 13, … in years (1 year = 365.25 days).

Another method is the Decennials. Planet you start with = the planet that first rises in the east following birth (usually, not always). Jumping pattern = the following planet in the order of the zodiac of the natal chart (because these planets will take turn in rising in the east through diurnal motion). Major time unit is equal i.e. 129 months in years or 10 years and 9 months per planet (1 year = 360 days).

In both cases, I am skipping the second level periods.

We could actually list out other planet-planet jump techniques that fall under this category.

2. Advancing from sign to sign.
The most famous method in both Hellenistic and Medieval is the Profection. Sign you start with = usually sign of the ascendant. Jumping pattern = signs following the zodiac in the natal chart (because these signs will take turn in rising in the east through diurnal motion). Major time unit is equal i.e. usually one sign per year.

3. Advancing from degree to degree.
The most famous method is the circumambulation or primary direction. Degree you start with = usually degree of the ascendant. Jumping pattern = the degrees following the zodiac in the natal chart (because these degrees will take turn in rising in the east through diurnal motion). Time unit = one equatorial degree is equal to one year (not ecliptical degree!!!).

Observe that I have made the above categories according to the way that the jumping or advancement is made (planet to planet, sign to sign and degree to degree). All other advancing methods seem to fall into one of the above categories.

I suspect that the ancients have set out (may be not so clearly) as to the reason for these “symmetries”. Perhaps the jumping from planet to planet sets the general themes and it is made more specific by jumping from sign to sign and degree to degree. Or perhaps it is the other way round! One can’t help thinking that these methods have a rhythm of its own i.e. there are different sets of rules in interpreting each of the above advancing methods and they tell about different things in a native's life.

I will outline the way that I do this:

1. Advancing from planet to planet:

Taking Firdaria or decennial as an example, I don’t think that we should consider the placement of the planet itself in the natal chart as being the primary indicator of the times governed by the planet and empiricial studies seem to bear this out. Imagine that sun is the indicator of the time period (the first ten years of a day born child in Firdaria method). If sun is in bad condition, it doesn’t really mean that life would be difficult for the native (at least not directly). I would look into the planets that aspects (together with planets in the same sign of the sun) and their receptions and give them priority in delineating the times governed by the sun.

2. Advancing from sign to sign:

Taking profection of the ascendant as an example: in this case I would look into the conditions of the profected sign, planets in the profected sign as well as the domicile ruler of the profected sign.

3. Advancing from degree to degree:

Taking primary direction (or circumambulation) as example: in this case I would look into the conditions of the advanced degree, planets in the degree, planets that aspect the advanced degree as well as the term/bound ruler of the advanced degree.


We see that the ancients did not look (at least not that much) into the sign (or domicile ruler) of the advanced degree – they looked into the term/bound ruler instead, maybe because the term/bound ruler is closer to “degree” ruler. But when they advance sign to sign, then naturally they looked into the sign (domicile) ruler. The Persians even had specific names for them: the advanced sign ruler = salkhudhah (Lord of the Year) and the advanced term/bound ruler of the advanced degree = jharbhaktar (divisor, algebuthar).

What I am trying to point out here is that the three jumping methods have different methods of delineations (and they seemed to bear out in practice).

The Hellenistic and medieval (esp. the Persian arabs) somehow combined all advancing methods above into a wholistic reading of the derived or renewed chart.

The medieval arab astrologers seemed to favour Firdaria (in the planet to planet advancing method), profection of the ascendant sign (in the sign to sign advancing method) and equatorial degree method i.e. primary direction (in degree to degree advancing method). They took the Firdaria planet of the year in question, the salkhudhah (the lord of the year) and the jharbhaktar and they looked at their conditions in the renewed chart (i.e. the solar return chart). So, they took each method of the above three advancing methods and marry them with the annual solar return chart. We could say that they were trying to find the workings of all of the three different advancing methods in the solar return chart.
Lastly, we have the hits methods (transits, eclipse hits, etc.) for which they consider as being the last in the hierarchy of prediction.

Now, giving one year to one degree in Solar Arc technique:
This is a modern technique and quite famous among modern astrologers because it is easy to do! The one degree = one year is used as space to time conversion which is also used by the ancients. However, they would say one equatorial degree = one year.
The solar arc technique cannot be categorized as being one of the three advancing methods mentioned above. If we say that it belongs to degree to degree advancing method, no ancient astrologers advanced degrees by ecliptical degrees. In fact, if we look at all of the above three jumping techniques, they are all related to the diurnal motion (directly or indirectly). Why diurnal motion? Because the effects of the planet or sign or degree will only come to the native when these points “touch” the ascendant (which is the most personal point of the native), through the diurnal motion which is viewed as the way that destiny reaches the native.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Larxene



Joined: 22 Sep 2012
Posts: 312

Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 5:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Intriguing, astrojin!

I like the way you organized the techniques. It's really orderly.


"I don’t think that we should consider the placement of the planet itself in the natal chart as being the primary indicator of the times governed by the planet..."

Much like how if we were to use a planet to signify a person, for that specific interpretation the planet "loses" many of its significations, except those used to describe the individual.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 3512
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 1:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

astrojin wrote:
Hello (esp. to james_m):

The following may be not be directly related to the original discussion but I think it merits some discussion. It is actually a small thing that I prepared for my students on the topic of advancing the natal chart to get a glimpse of the native’s future.


thanks astrojin.

your posts are always a joy to read! i like how you've created a cohesive system for these traditional predictive techniques that seem to be the focus of so many today who want to practice traditional astrology.

it would be great to see it put into practice and perhaps some astrologers do apply a similar system that you advocate here, but usually what i see is only a part of the system devoid of primary directions. the trad astrologers want to lay claim to the technique of primary directions but they don't want to make any predictions based on them publicly. perhaps they are worried about just how well they understand them. that's my impression at this point.

i would like to ask you about a few ideas you've mentioned here.. to say the reason solar arcs are popular is becuase they are easy to use would be like saying traditional astrology is easy to use because the ''modern'' software is easy to use.. i just don't think it is based on that so much as it is based on the viewpoint of the astrologers using any of these techniques - new or old - that they have merit. perhaps i misunderstood you here and if so please elaborate - thanks!

i see no fundamental difference between the arbitrary methods of either profections - sign per year - and solar arc - 1 approx zodiac degree per year.. they are both symbolic methods of making a prediction on the future that have a degree of abstraction to them that i think are very similar.. you mention all these methods including profections having a connection to the diurnal motion directly or indirectly.. i don't see that.. can you explain? how do they have some type of connection to the diurnal motion while the solar arc directions don't?

while is it true primary directions are based on the diurnal motion which is an astronomical 'reality' as opposed to being purely 'symbolic' i don't think one can say the same about terms, bounds, firdaria, decennials and etc.. these predictive techniques and tools may have merit, but they do not have the same direct connection to astronomy that goes with primary directions.. for this reason i continue to believe primary directions are in a category of there own, but i note the great variety of options for arriving at a definitive conclusion on the use of them as i was pointing out on the royal baby thread from a few days ago. until traditional astrologers make use of them in a more public context by making predictions into the future i mostly see traditional astrologers giving lip service to their value and little more..

thanks for your comments astrojin. it is always great to see you post here at skyscript and i really appreciate how you have explained a system of prediction using traditional astrological methods. i have printed it for future reference!

astrojin wrote:
If we look to the Hellenistic and Medieval sources, there are basically three types of “advancing” a natal chart in order to make future predictions:

1. Advancing from planet to planet.
2. Advancing from sign to sign.
3. Advancing from degree to degree.


astrojin wrote:
3. Advancing from degree to degree.
The most famous method is the circumambulation or primary direction. Degree you start with = usually degree of the ascendant. Jumping pattern = the degrees following the zodiac in the natal chart (because these degrees will take turn in rising in the east through diurnal motion). Time unit = one equatorial degree is equal to one year (not ecliptical degree!!!).



astrojin wrote:
Now, giving one year to one degree in Solar Arc technique:
This is a modern technique and quite famous among modern astrologers because it is easy to do!...


astrojin wrote:
In fact, if we look at all of the above three jumping techniques, they are all related to the diurnal motion (directly or indirectly). Why diurnal motion? Because the effects of the planet or sign or degree will only come to the native when these points “touch” the ascendant (which is the most personal point of the native), through the diurnal motion which is viewed as the way that destiny reaches the native.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 3512
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2013 6:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

astrojin,

one other comment you've made seems to suggest the solar return chart is the main filter when applying the different methods you've listed below. this would appear to place the solar return at the top of the chain of considerations with all other predictive techniques of lesser importance. i am curious to know your thoughts on this. i wonder if this is a development of arab astrologers that didn't exist previously. i don't know the starting point for the use of solar return charts but i believe it is an arabic invention if i am not mistaken.

thanks! james

astrojin wrote:

The medieval arab astrologers seemed to favour Firdaria (in the planet to planet advancing method), profection of the ascendant sign (in the sign to sign advancing method) and equatorial degree method i.e. primary direction (in degree to degree advancing method). They took the Firdaria planet of the year in question, the salkhudhah (the lord of the year) and the jharbhaktar and they looked at their conditions in the renewed chart (i.e. the solar return chart). So, they took each method of the above three advancing methods and marry them with the annual solar return chart. We could say that they were trying to find the workings of all of the three different advancing methods in the solar return chart.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
astrojin



Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 469

Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello again,

james_m:
Quote:
your posts are always a joy to read! i like how you've created a cohesive system for these traditional predictive techniques that seem to be the focus of so many today who want to practice traditional astrology.

Thank you!

james_m:
Quote:
i would like to ask you about a few ideas you've mentioned here.. to say the reason solar arcs are popular is becuase they are easy to use would be like saying traditional astrology is easy to use because the ''modern'' software is easy to use.. i just don't think it is based on that so much as it is based on the viewpoint of the astrologers using any of these techniques - new or old - that they have merit. perhaps i misunderstood you here and if so please elaborate - thanks!

I am sorry I didn’t make myself clear on the solar arc technique “being easy”. To do a solar arc the “proper way” is definitely not easy. However, when a new student is exposed to the technique, they are usually taught the shortcut method where we just move the sun (and all the planets in the natal chart) the number of degrees where one degree is equivalent to one year (which is actually a tertiary progression). Some (like Noel Tyle) would also apply a certain correction factor that is easy to remember (correction factor that depends on the month one is born). The students are then instructed to look to the conjunctions (including other aspects) of the advanced planets to the natal planets (and house cusps, and…). This is the common technique (though as I mentioned before, it is not the “correct” procedure but is famous among newbies). Of course the correct procedure is to calculate the degrees that progressed sun has advanced…

james_m:
Quote:
i see no fundamental difference between the arbitrary methods of either profections - sign per year - and solar arc - 1 approx zodiac degree per year.. they are both symbolic methods of making a prediction on the future that have a degree of abstraction to them that i think are very similar..

Indeed, there is no difference between profection and solar arc when we look in terms of the scaling method (one degree or one sign to a year) but see below.

james_m:
Quote:
.. you mention all these methods including profections having a connection to the diurnal motion directly or indirectly.. i don't see that.. can you explain? how do they have some type of connection to the diurnal motion while the solar arc directions don't?

If we fix one finger on the degree of the ascendant and let the chart turn according to diurnal motion, the next degree rising would be the next degree in zodiacal order. This gives rise to the advancing from degree to degree. If we fix one finger on the sign of the ascendant and let the chart turn according to diurnal motion, the next sign rising would be the next sign in zodiacal order. This gives rise to the advancing from sign to sign. If we fix one finger on the degree of the ascendant and let the chart turn according to diurnal motion, the first planet rising would be the first planet ruling the native and the next planet would be the second planet that rules the native (and so on and so forth). This gives rise to the advancing from planet to planet according to the decennials. (This is one of the reasons that I do not use Firdaria! The Firdaria method does not resonate to me theoretically as well as empirically).

Solar arc direction (including secondary progression) uses the motion of the “other” or planetary motions along the zodiac (as opposed to the above which uses the motion of the “same” or diurnal motion).
The Hellenistic astrologers did not use Firdaria (this seemed to have originated from the Persians) but they definitely used profection with solar return (see below on the reference from Valens). It is logical to use profection (which has a cycle of a year) with solar return whose cycle is also a year. The combination of Firdaria, profection and also direction with solar return seems to be the arab innovations (though I am not sure about this!).

james_m:
Quote:
one other comment you've made seems to suggest the solar return chart is the main filter when applying the different methods you've listed below. this would appear to place the solar return at the top of the chain of considerations with all other predictive techniques of lesser importance. i am curious to know your thoughts on this. i wonder if this is a development of arab astrologers that didn't exist previously. i don't know the starting point for the use of solar return charts but i believe it is an arabic invention if i am not mistaken.

From Valens’ Anthology Book IV, Chapter 11 (PP29 – 30, Schmidt’s translation):
Though the divisions are diverse, if one pays attention he will not go wrong. For when the same handings over are signified in a twelve year period, they will not [always] possess the same operation of the effects, but different. Whenever we will find a handing over after one or more [years] in a certain cycle, we will examined the renewed nativity for that year…

Equivalent translation from Riley (/168P/ Book IV Chapter 11, Pg 79):
The same transmissions are indicated every 12 years. They will, however, not have the same causative influence, but different. Wherever we find a transmission in one cycle, (whether from one or from many), we examine the horoscope recast for that year, …

This is the reference where Valens instructs the astrologer to marry the profection system with the renewed nativity (which is the solar return).

We could say that the solar return is the door by which the indications promised in the natal chart are to be manifested.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lihin



Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 470
Location: Mount Kailash

Posted: Tue Aug 06, 2013 8:40 am    Post subject: Time fractals? Reply with quote

Good morning,

As for example Dr. med. Rumen Kolev has demonstrated in his astrological books, one can consider the various methods discussed in this thread as time fractals. 4 minutes (average) -> 1 degree; 24 minutes (average) -> 1/60th, 1 confine; 40 minutes -> 1/36th, 1 decan; 120 minutes (average) -> 1/12th, 1 sign, etc. Such are 'natural' divisions used to seek correspondences amongst celestial and terrestrial events. 360 is quite close to the mean between a solar and a lunar year. Obviously, the day is an equatorial phenomenon and thus measured in right ascension and declination. The resulting values may be translated into ecliptic longitude and latitude.

With the 'discovery' and applications of 'true solar arcs' measured in ecliptic longitude to all points, Mr Noel Tyl in his book Solar Arcs - Astrology's Most Successful Predictive System in superlative language, supported by anecdotal evidence, extolled the virtues of this method, employed for example in the German Hamburg and Aalen Schools since the early 20th century.

Concerning astrological works written up to and including the Renaissance (ex. gr. Placido di Titi), one might do well to keep in mind that calculations were, compared to today's accuracies, off by an average of 3 degrees of ecliptic arc, 6 for Mercury. This means that only beginning with decans were placements more likely than not correct, with confines as likely correct as incorrect (incorrect for Mercury) and with still smaller subdivisions like dodecatemoria more likely false. Within 3 degrees of sign or constellations borders the values reported in old books were as likely correct as not. Reports of 'partile' conjunctions or aspects are more likely incorrect.

Best regards,

lihin
_________________
Non esse nihil non est.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
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