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:
The Life & Work of Vettius Valens
by Deborah Houlding
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 zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Sinister and the dominating planet
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Jogi



Joined: 27 Aug 2008
Posts: 56
Location: Germany

Posted: Sat Sep 26, 2009 8:13 pm    Post subject: Sinister and the dominating planet Reply with quote

Hello all,

I still ponder on the effects of dexter and sinister aspects and the dominating planet.

I`d like to relate to the example of Deb in her explanation of the topic:
http://www.skyscript.co.uk/aspects.html#28

In the example chart from Valens there is Saturn in Aquarius in the 7th dominatet by Venus in Libra in the 3rd by trine. When I understood the doctrine of dexter and sinister right, Venus is at the same time making a sinister trine to Saturn. The same is true for the square from Jupiter to Saturn.

But a sinister aspect is descriped as weaker, distorted, inverted or somewhat debilitated. How can Venus (or Jupiter) dominate over Saturn while casting a sinister aspect? Where is my error in reasoning?

I would appreciate your help very much, thank you.

Jogi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
astroart



Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 149
Location: Varna, Bulgaria

Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 4:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Jogi!

Quote:
Where is my error in reasoning?


There is no error in your reasoning.The error is in the article.The teaching of dominant/dominated planet is presented correct, but the teaching of left/right aspect-not.There is an error in the meaning of left/right aspects.

According to the hellenistic tradition the left-hand aspects are good, strong and the right-hand aspects are bad, debilitated.They called left-hand aspects or the aspects in the direction of the signs -Aries, Taurus, Gemini and etc. -еφοραω(looking ahead or to look upon) and right-hand aspects- ακτινοβολια(hurling of rays or striking with a ray).

Therefore in Valens' example Venus(a benefic) in Libra which aspects Saturn(a malefic) in Aquarius with left-hand aspect dominate Saturn and the meaning of this position is good.Same for the Jupiter in Scorpio.


Last edited by astroart on Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:45 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jogi



Joined: 27 Aug 2008
Posts: 56
Location: Germany

Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you Astroart!

I don`t know that much about Hellenistic Astrology.

But I found that I made another mistake: in the above mentioned example Jupiter is the dominating planet - and not Venus. Because Jupiter is in the 10th sign from Saturn.

So, regarding dexter and sinister I never heard it the way you explained it.
Now, who is right Confused - the Hellenistic authors or all the others?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
astroart



Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 149
Location: Varna, Bulgaria

Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:54 am    Post subject: regarding elevation Reply with quote

Quote:
But I found that I made another mistake: in the above mentioned example Jupiter is the dominating planet - and not Venus. Because Jupiter is in the 10th sign from Saturn.


You are right with one small note-the correct astrological term in this case is "elevation"(χατυπερτερησις-old greek, elevatio-latin).One planet is elevated over other when the first one is in the tenth sign from the second one .For example-a planet in Aries is elevated over the planet in Cancer, and a planet in Cancer is elevated over the planet in Libra(see Bouche-Leclercq"L'astrologie grecque"1899, Paris, page 250).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 4132
Location: England

Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Jogi and Astroart

I checked this and see no error in the article. The point is only briefly touched upon and this probably needs a more expansive explanation, but it is quite an old article and will be replaced soon when some of my more recent research has been published. I am currently preparing for a flight to Australia, so don't have much time to elaborate now, but I will say that I disagree with you Astroart where you state:

Quote:
According to the hellenistic tradition the left-hand aspects are good, strong and the right-hand aspects are bad, debilitated.They called left-hand aspects or the aspects in the direction of the signs -Aries, Taurus, Gemini and etc. -еφοραω(looking ahead or to look upon) and right-hand aspects- ακτινοβολια(hurling of rays or striking with a ray).


One thing we can be sure about – major points of art don’t suddenly change to present opposite meanings as astrology moves from ancient sources to later authors, and this is not a case of a Hellenistic principle being different to what we find recorded by later traditional authors.

There are two principles involved here. One is elevation (or dominance) by mundane position. For example, in the Valens example Jupiter is the dominating planet over Saturn by position. That, in itself, means one thing. We will forget about the aspect from Venus to Saturn because Jogi mentioned that by mistake. Let’s stick with Jupiter – since Jupiter is a faster moving planet than Saturn, if it were applying to aspect Saturn from that position it would do so by a sinister square. This demonstrates the fact that the relationship between Jupiter and Saturn is in a waning phase, and they are closing in to their conjunction to complete the cycle between them – it is for this reason that the sinister aspect is considered less effective and more ‘feminine’ (it is associated with decline rather than growth).

It is the same principle which causes the Moon’s waning square to the Sun to be considered weaker and less ‘effective’ than its waxing square – in fact it is easier to conceptualise the principle if you think of the luminaries. The Moon could still dominate the Sun in that mundane position, but the aspect would be the sinister, waning square, by which the Moon moves towards the Sun from its left side to close its cycle (the application being in the order of the signs). It then emerges from the right side of the Sun to create a dexter sextile/square/trine (against the order of the signs). From a dexter position, the Moon gives associations of active growth and strength – hence you can start to understand the shift of terminology from when the Moon is able to ‘hurl’ to the Sun from the active dexter aspect, to when it ‘looks ahead’ whilst in the declining sinister aspect.

Sorry I don’t have time to add more detail or respond further if this thread develops. Others, I am sure may have their own ways of understanding and describing these principles. But if you can accept that a waxing-phase aspect always has, and always will be interpreted as more effective than a waning-phase aspect, then I think you will see that a dexter aspect always has, and always will signify a more forceful influence. Also, my ideas developed from a study of classical sources so I can assure you that there really is no contradition between ancient texts and the statement of principle given in traditional works from later periods.

Regards
Deb
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
astroart



Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 149
Location: Varna, Bulgaria

Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here I will put quotations from 3 different authors-one modern, one greek and one medieval.The first one is from R.Schmidt's one not so much known book-R.Schmidt, PHASE Watch Fancy, volume I, The Golden Hind Press, 1998, p.80-81:

"THE HELLENISTIC CONCEPTION OF ASPECTS
The Hellenistic astrologers use two classes of words for aspecting.The first class has to do with the activity of seeing, and second class basically consists of a word that means 'to testify' or 'bear witness' and certain variants of this word."

Little later he continues:

"The seeing words should probably be understood within the context of Greek(Empedoclean) optical theory, where vision consists of a ray emanating from the eye(the visual ray) and a ray(or efflux) thrown off by the body seen.The joining of these two rays is vision.It seems likely that the visual provides the "formal" component and the efflux from the body , which is allways associated with color , the "material" component of vision.(I have put formal and material in quotation marks because this is not Aristotelean optical theory at all).If this is the case , it is the ray thrown forward in the order of the zoidia that is the visual ray, and the ray thrown backwards that is the efflux.This analysis seems plausible to me bacause the Greeks commonly refer to the backwards aspect as the "hurling of rays"(aktinobole).
I must mention here that I am not at all sure if the Greeks ever use backward aspects or the hurling of rays in any other context than in directions.It seems that all their aspects are really understood to be cast forward in the order of the zoidia."

Next quotation is from Hepastio of Thebes, Apotelesmatics, book I, page 34:

"CONCERNING THE HURLING OF RAYS

Every star which is following in figurations on the left hurls its rays at
a star which is preceding in figurations on the right. For example, a star
in Aries hurls its rays at a star in Capricorn in a square on the right;
similarly also at a star in Sagittarius in a triangle on the right.
But the preceding planet looks at the following planet, and when
it is carried towards it, it is superior to it, though it does not hurl its
rays. For, of every beam, the look is carried forward, the ray backward.
The one superior and the one [tithing] are the same. For, a planet in
Aries is superior to, and tithes, a planet in Cancer".

Reminiscences of Hellenistic conception of aspects we can find in Bonnati(Guido Bonatti, Book of Astronomy, volume I, 2007, p.63):

"For example, of all the aforesaid aspects, let it be put that some planet is in the first degree of Aries. Then he aspects one who would be in the first degree of Gemini ahead of him, and the aspect is said to be an anterior sextile or "from the face." And he aspects one who would be in the first degree of Aquarius behind him, and that aspect is said to be posterior sextile, or "from the back."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Andrew Bevan



Joined: 20 Dec 2005
Posts: 4676
Location: Oslo, Norway

Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you are looking into the effect of sinister and dexter aspects you might find interesting some work and observations I have collected at astronor.com. You will find material on aspects cast through signs of long and short ascension in the same article:
http://www.astronor.com/sinister.htm
_________________
http://www.astronor.com


Last edited by Andrew Bevan on Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:20 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 4132
Location: England

Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A brief response, Astroart, as this is something for which I have more interest than time right now. On this point of dexter and sinister, you seem to see it as essentially connected to the principle of being elevated/dominant/superior, whereas I don’t (hence I don’t see a contradiction in the quotes you presented because there are different elements to be considered in the process of two planets ‘making an aspect’). The definition of dexter and sinister appears to originate from the philosophy of planetary phases and connects to the principle of which planet is pushing. So in the diagram referred to at the start of this thread, we have Jupiter dominating Saturn by square, but we also have Saturn dominating the Moon by square. The former involves a sinister application, the latter a dexter application. This is my point, that dominance by mundane position is considering something different to the sense of where the application is coming from.
Where is mundane positioning more relevant than in the subject of directions? You may be right about the terminology being aligned to that issue. That would make a lot of sense.
Regards
Deb
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GR



Joined: 14 May 2005
Posts: 451
Location: USA

Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi astroart,

I'd have to point out that Bob Schmidt would say he (along with pretty much everybody else who asserts it) was wrong about this idea that all 'well-named' sinister configurations are the 'striking of rays'. Striking of rays can be in either direction, as it involves the slower moving planet in the configuration being ahead of the faster moving planet by degrees within its own sign, i.e. Jupiter in 5 degress Aries in a tetragonal figure with Saturn in 10 degrees of Cancer. Jupiter would be overcoming Saturn as Saturn strikes Jupiter with a ray, and consequently maltreats Jupiter. My general interpretation of that would be that the significations of Jupiter would take the place of Saturn's matters or become more important in the life of a native, but not without being damaged by Saturn's signified matters, events, or topics.
_________________
Gabe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
yuzuru



Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 1395

Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi, GR

Quote:
My general interpretation of that would be that the significations of Jupiter would take the place of Saturn's matters or become more important in the life of a native, but not without being damaged by Saturn's signified matters, events, or topics.


Would you mind to expand this point?
_________________
Meu blog de astrologia (em portugues) http://yuzuru.wordpress.com
My blog of astrology (in english) http://episthemologie.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
margherita



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 1369
Location: Rome, Italy

Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 4:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't know about Schidmt, but from what I understand of Giuseppe Bezza he agrees with Astroart.

A malefic which is in the preceding signs, especially the square from the tenth house damages a lot - this is predominance, a special case of aspect from right.

On the contrary- as the case mentioned by Gabe Rosas, Jupiter is preceding in respect to Saturn so it protects from Saturnian negative effecs.

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



Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 149
Location: Varna, Bulgaria

Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Deb!

Here we have two possible scenarios:
-the dominant/elevated position of one planet over other is on the basis of mundane position of the planet and is closely related with the phase between the planets
-the dominant/elevated position is based and closely related with the aspect between planets.

There are authors who support the first scenario.For example Serapion(CCAG, VIII.4, p.226-227):
"And portional cases of overcoming come about in this fashion :whenever two stars chance to occupy the same image, and the one possessing fewer portions overcomes the one possessing more portions.For example, let it be the case that the star of Hermes is around the 10th portion of the Ram, while te star of Kronos is around the 25th portion of the same image;it is clear that the star of Hermes overcomes the star of Kronos portionally."(Schmidt's translation)
According to this scenario because Mercury is eastern to Saturn and rises before, Mercury dominates over Saturn.

I found today an author who support the second scenario and the name of this author is Rethorius.He wrote:
"There is decimation and overcoming whenever a star situated in the tenth place assumes a tetragonal figure in relation to [a star] on the left.The Crab will be the Hour-Marker.The stars in the Ram, then, overcome the one in the Crab.There is said to be another overcoming(χατυπερτερησις) whenever some star that is in a place on the right beholds(επιθεωρεω) a star in the trigonal, tetragonal, or hexagonal[place] on the left."(Schmidt's translation).

In the text with bold letters Rethorius used a word επιθεωρεω(epitheoreo) which is synonym of the word еφοραω(eforao) and which means looking ahead in the direction of the signs or sinister aspect in medieval/renaissance terminology.Here , I think, the connection between the sinister aspect and dominant position is very clear.
Very interesting thing in that passage is that Rethorius distinguished two types of domination(χατυπερτερησις-kathuperteresis):
-first type-based on the mundane position of the planet
-second type-based on the aspect in the direction of the signs

I think both types of domination have their place Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cor scorpii



Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 578

Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 10:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
In the text with bold letters Rethorius used a word επιθεωρεω(epitheoreo) which is synonym of the word еφοραω(eforao) and which means looking ahead in the direction of the signs or sinister aspect in medieval/renaissance terminology.Here , I think, the connection between the sinister aspect and dominant position is very clear.


Hello, Astroart.

I wouldn't agree that the connection between sinister aspect and domination is clear from this quote - because sinister/dexter aspect depends wholly upon the relationship of the applying/applying to planet; dominance is another kind of principle(whenever a planet is in the 9th, 10th or 11th sign away from another, but this refers especially to the 10th) regardless of the kind of aspect they are connected with - be it sinister or dexter.

If, for instance, a planet that is in Aries(Mars) applies to a planet in Capricorn(Jupiter), it would be by dexter square, right? And that simultaneously means that the planet in Capricorn is the dominating one.
If it were the other way around, and planet from Capricorn(Mars) applied to another, more ponderous in Aries(Jupiter), we would have a sinister square, but the applying planet would again dominate the applied to planet(ten signs away from him.)

In medieval times they considered a sinister aspect weaker(I like the way Andrew explained the difference on his site Thumbs up ) and dexter more forceful; Deb also mentioned the connection to the Sun/Moon cycle, where Moon loses its power when waning(sinister aspects). So whereas sinister/dexter is about the force of an aspect, its ability to perform, dominance is all about 'who is the boss' between the two. Hence, these two principles are not mutually dependent - at least, that is my current level of understanding concerning this matter.

Goran
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
astroart



Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 149
Location: Varna, Bulgaria

Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 4:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi cor scorpii!

Quote:
I wouldn't agree that the connection between sinister aspect and domination is clear from this quote - because sinister/dexter aspect depends wholly upon the relationship of the applying/applying to planet


According to the opinion of Robert Schmidt in Hellenistic times the teaching of application(sunaphe)/separation(aporroia) was different from that of the aspect teaching.He says that in arabic astrology these two teachings have been mixed together.A quote from Schmidt:

"However, application and separation between planets can take place across the boundries of the zoidia, so that these concepts must be distinguished from aspect proper."(R.Schmidt,PHASE Watch Fancy ,1998,,v.1, p.80)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
margherita



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 1369
Location: Rome, Italy

Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 5:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

astroart wrote:
Hi Deb!

Here we have two possible scenarios:
-the dominant/elevated position of one planet over other is on the basis of mundane position of the planet and is closely related with the phase between the planets
-the dominant/elevated position is based and closely related with the aspect between planets.


I don't see any difference between these two cases. At least Bezza in his "Commento al primo libro del Tetrabiblos" (Comment to the first book of Tetrabiblos) put them together.

The planet which rises before the other it's stronger and more powerful in every case.
Then what you call a second scenario, it's just a particular application of the first, ie the square from the tenth- the planet in the tenth is in the preceding signs in respect of the one which follows in the first.

Or at least I understand so from what I read.

margherita
_________________
Traditional astrology at
http://heavenastrolabe.wordpress.com
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 -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 1 of 7

 
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