4
In context the Moon is considered better to start matters when movable or fixed as a rule so we cold summise it is not so good when in a double-bodied signs.

I have checked some equivalent works like Sahl but cannot more a more explicit reference.

Can anyone else assist us?

Matthew

ps See also page 167 in the same book
Last edited by Mjacob on Sat Mar 22, 2014 3:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Matthew Goulding

6
Page 5 of Deborah's online Carmen is on natal not election so but it has reference to double (ie even) and then two-bodied sign in the same paragraph so they must be different definitions but no explanation added in the notes
Matthew Goulding

8
The text might be referring to a concept that comes up in some other authors where they say that a planet is "declining in a bad place". It involves combining the concept of the cadent or declining places as being negative with the concept that the places that are in aversion to the ascendant are also negative. These are two separate concepts that overlap with the 6th and 12th houses, since they are both declining and in aversion to the Ascendant, which is why they are considered to be the two worst houses. Maybe this is the idea that the text is awkwardly trying to convey as a 'doubly bad place'.

It is either that or it is saying that it is bad when a planet is in a declining house and a double-bodied (mutable) sign.

Or it just means cadent house, and that's it, in which case the double reference could indicate some equivalence between the signs and houses, like the modern 12 letter alphabet.

Unfortunately it is hard to know when you are dealing with a corrupt translation of a text that is three times removed from its original language.

9
Chris Brennan wrote:

Unfortunately it is hard to know when you are dealing with a corrupt translation of a text that is three times removed from its original language.


Indeed - but thank you for you for your valued opinion

Matthew
Matthew Goulding