13 by Tom only weirdest thing is the 6th house position). I'm the administrator on a Face Book page devoted to Morinus and I posted the same chart and asked the same question over there. The difference is that over there we're limiting the answers to Morinus' methods. As of late last night (Eastern US time) no one had picked up on the 6th house issue. Devotees of Morinus would be expected to either ask about or include the 6th house placement because he would have said, "Venus does one thing in one house and another thing in another." In other words, her house placement cannot be ignored using his system. I didn't have an answer when I posted the chart there or here and kind of hoped someone would point one out. In the meanwhile I read a little about Dylan's life. I don't know much about him. Given my age it might be a little bit surprising that I was never really a fan of his or his music. One of the reasons that I liked my own question (heh, sorry) is that it doesn't matter if we like, dislike, or are neutral about Dylan's abilities, the fact is that he is famous and that's what we're looking for. But how do we get fame with the lady of the MC in the 6th with decent essential dignity, but less than decent accidental dignity? I now think I have an answer to the 6th house question, but some might consider it a bit of a stretch. We'll see when I post it. But for now, does anyone else have any ideas about the 6th house placement of the ruler of the MC?
14 by fleur I would immediately look for fame from the Moons Nodes aspecting (no trines, orbs less than two degrees) the chart angles. This is just my observation, and there may be other indications I haven't noticed. Moons Nodes to chart angles seems to be the classic hallmark of fame. What is curious in Bob Dylan's chart is that his converse Solar Arc Midheaven axis is conjunct his Moons Nodes, at about the age of 19, in 1960 when he met Woody Guthrie. Just an observation. I have been thinking about this chart a bit and am curious about your question too. I don't know if Solar Arcs or the Moons Nodes are part of traditional astrology, but am guessing they have a chance of being. I will resist the temptation to mention outer planets. Whereas the Moons Nodes aspecting the chart angles shows fame, aspects and transit to Saturn represents worldly and financial success.
15 by Tom Just an observation. I have been thinking about this chart a bit and am curious about your question too. I don't know if Solar Arcs or the Moons Nodes are part of traditional astrology, but am guessing they have a chance of being. I will resist the temptation to mention outer planets. Outer planets are OK but many here would object, in principle, to using them as sign rulers. Many contemporary traditional astrologers use them, albeit not to the extent that moderns use them. Traditionalists (some of them) tend to use the outers in the same way they might use fixed stars. Solar arcs are modern and converse solar arcs might be considered a head scratcher. But I know one traditionalist who uses them to validate what he sees with primary directions. No less an authority than Placidus himself used secondary progressions that way. I once attended a lecture whose topic was the birth chart of the Roman emperor Nero and he was demonstrating how ancient Roman astrologers would have looked at it. He put the chart up (circular, too) sans Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto. The audience, 99% modern astrologers, stared at it as though it came from outer space. They were completely lost. We don't want to get to that level of expectation from the outers.
16 by Konrad Tom wrote:Just an observation. I have been thinking about this chart a bit and am curious about your question too. I don't know if Solar Arcs or the Moons Nodes are part of traditional astrology, but am guessing they have a chance of being. I will resist the temptation to mention outer planets. Outer planets are OK but many here would object, in principle, to using them as sign rulers. Many contemporary traditional astrologers use them, albeit not to the extent that moderns use them. Traditionalists (some of them) tend to use the outers in the same way they might use fixed stars. Solar arcs are modern and converse solar arcs might be considered a head scratcher. But I know one traditionalist who uses them to validate what he sees with primary directions. No less an authority than Placidus himself used secondary progressions that way. I once attended a lecture whose topic was the birth chart of the Roman emperor Nero and he was demonstrating how ancient Roman astrologers would have looked at it. He put the chart up (circular, too) sans Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto. The audience, 99% modern astrologers, stared at it as though it came from outer space. They were completely lost. We don't want to get to that level of expectation from the outers. So the use of the outer planets, which is most certainly not traditional, is allowed, while use of the sidereal zodiac, which most certainly is part of the tradition, is not? This is the case because 'many contemporary traditional (neo-traditional?) astrologers' use them, but even though some traditional astrologers use the sidereal zodiac, it is not allowed. Interesting, is this a textbook definition of 'traditional astrology', tom, or is it your own creation? http://www.esmaraldaastrology.wordpress.com
17 by Tom ;So the use of the outer planets, which is most certainly not traditional, is allowed, while use of the sidereal zodiac, which most certainly is part of the tradition, is not? This is the case because 'many contemporary traditional (neo-traditional?) astrologers' use them, but even though some traditional astrologers use the sidereal zodiac, it is not allowed. Interesting, is this a textbook definition of 'traditional astrology', tom, or is it your own creation? This is the last time I"m going to address this topic or answer any silly "gotcha" questions. Solar arcs, midpoints etc are TECHNIQUES. The sidereal zodiac is a fundamental difference. Outer planets were never forbidden and, as I said other traditional astrologers use them. There are gray areas between traditional and modern astrology. I can assure you if I saw astrologers getting loopy over Neptune as moderns are wont to do, it would have been stopped. The sidereal zodiac is fundamentally and philosophically different than what the vast majority of traditional astrologers use or what is mentioned in the vast majority of traditional texts. Siderealists have a place where they can discuss that difference or anything pertaining to the sidereal zodiac or any of them. The purpose of having a traditional forum was to create a place where traditional astrology could be discussed without having to get into arguments with moderns over which one is best. Sidereal astrology will only lead to just that because it always does. Just like it is now. I answered this question: "Thought I would ask first before posting, but would you welcome comments from a Tajika point of view. Tajika is mostly western traditional astrology, but from a sidereal viewpoint. It does have a distinct eastern flavor though. " I have no idea what a Tajika point of view is, but regardless of zodiac it isn't traditional western astrology. Now any other remarks or arguments on this thread concerning anything but the topic of the thread will be deleted without comment. I answered a question. That was not an invitation to continue to beat a dead horse.
18 by SteveGus I also looked at antiscia, but the only one I found that related in any way to tenth house business was that of Mars, which is weakly conjunct the MC. I generally want closer hits or unusual patterns from antiscia before I give them too much significance. I would interpret this as another indication that Mr. Zimmerman is not all that fond of his public persona or celebrity status. Le grand crier sans honte audacieux / Sera esleu gouverneur de l'armee. La hardiesse de son contentieux / Le pont rompu, cit? de peur pasmee. - Nostradamus, Centuries 3:81
19 by james_m further to my comment on thursday april 13th - 403am post... picture uploadcertificity.com
20 by Tom Let's look at this 6th house thing. We're looking for fame. The MC is fame and the MC is empty. We look for the ruler of the MC, Venus, and find she is in the 6th, one of the malefic houses. So how do we get from here to fame? Using my muse Morinus, Venus has no analogy with fame, she acquires an analogy with fame by virtue of her conjunction with the Sun who does have an analogy with fame. But they are both in the 6th house. The 6th is most often associated with illnesses, and moderns use it as labor. Old texts often associate it with servants, and although when they used the word "servants," they were most often thinking of domestic servants, today we would think of anyone we hire or who does work for us, e.g. an auto mechanic, a plumber, etc. The 6th does have, in Morinus' view' a connection to the 10th. If we cast a trine from any house to two houses forming a grand trine, we will have one, cardinal, one succedent, and one cadent house. A trine from the 10th goes to the second and the sixth. A man's honors, fame, status, etc will produce personal wealth (house 2) and benefits those who work for him (6th house). Here's the stretch. Dylan's fame originated with others singing his songs or performing his work. In fact they benefited from a result of his work or his work added to their fame. In the beginning he didn't perform. That's more of a 10th house activity. It's the nature of this business that the performers gain the fame and a song writer has to put together a string of hits before people begin to notice. In fact in today's pop music business, it is often assumed that whoever does the performing is also the writer. "Covers" are looked down upon. If we go back in pop music's history, we find that song writers rarely performed, e.g Cole Porter, Irving Berlin, Johnny Mercer. Tony Bennet sang Cole Porter's I've Got You Under My Skin; he didn't "cover" Frank Sinatra's song. By Dylan's time there were very few songwriters who didn't perform their work, so when Peter Paul & Mary sang Blowin' in the Wind, a lot of people, i.e. the consumers, assumed they wrote it. Dylan's fame would emerge after people like PP&M sent his songs to the top of the chart. Over on the Morin site on FB, Nina Gryphon suggested the Moon-Jupiter conjunction in the 5th as having to do with Dylan's fame. She makes a good point. The Moon is exalted, and Jupiter is the ASC ruler. The Moon has an analogy with fame in night charts like this one.
21 by mwastrology Tom wrote:Sorry to have touched a nerve. I should have known better, I was warned that you were all pretty tightly wound here. I will mind my etiquette better in the future. Sorry again to have gotten you so angry. A. What makes you think I was angry? You asked a perfectly legitimate question and I answered it and even thanked you for taking the trouble to ask about the guidelines. No anger was intended or implied. You do come across wrongly sometimes, and your reply to him could've been phrased in a more welcoming and friendly way. Your thanking him could easily be taken as irritable or sharp and patronising. MW "As thou daily conversest with the heavens, so instruct and form thy minde according to the image of Divinity" ~ William Lilly
22 by Tom our thanking him could easily be taken as irritable or sharp and patronising. And it could have been taken as intended. I don't want to be the topic here. My writing style and how it affects others is not the topic either. But it seems that the legitimate topic has been exhausted, so I'll lock it. To keep things from going off track.