I agree with you on this Martin,

To add to your comments, if you look at Gauquelin research, the peak is oftentimes found around the House cusp and it does not drop to 0, it fades.

Atlantean,
I am sure your Venus at the ASC did not happen overnight. You entered a 'space' of love even before you got married. When Christopher Reeves's PD Venus hit his ASC and Lord of his MC, he played in 2 Superman movies. The whole period was Venusian for him.

Considering what Robert Hand said about parans being linked to diurnal rhythms, I decided to check out parans by looking at the Z-Analogue Diurnal Arc Charts.

I don’t look at the parans that Robert Hand looks at - the ones devised by Oblique Ascension,Oblique Descension,Right Ascension that are in Solar Fire and most other Astrology programs.

I look at parans based on the body motion with true altitude. That is how Bernadette Brady’s Starlight program does parans.



An example is from a paran article at Kate’s Ambient Astrology site:

The above image is a "paran clock;" a tool which allows us to visually experience any paran relationship (mundane square) between two planets. Notice the exact angular relationship (though it looks like a conjunction) between Venus and Pluto - located at the top of the chart @ 10:30am PDT. Venus is culminating, "M" stands for Meridian, while Pluto is rising in the East, "E." Notice in the chart below Venus is culminating, but Pluto is not very angular by ecliptic degree. You can see below how the two-dimensional chart breaks down; it can't capture the actual spatial relationship between planets, it only captures them by zodiacal degree.

In the image below you can see Pluto is clearly on the horizon while Venus is culminating (at the MC). The horizon is the Ascendant, and is what astrologers refer to as the rising sign. Pluto's true relationship to the horizon isn't accurately portrayed in the chart above. Pluto isn't even in the Ascending sign in the chart above, but it is on the horizon.

I think this phenomenon, Pluto on the horizon while Venus culminates, would have been exceptionally important to the ancients, just as stars on angles were. Of course Pluto is invisible to the naked eye so they wouldn't have actually made this specific observation. But a paran can occur between many planets (and planets with fixed stars) and are visual statements that cannot be denied. Today we often miss seeing these truly angular relationships, because we view everything as if it were on the ecliptic (the Sun's path). It's good to jump off the ecliptic once in awhile...

http://ambientastrology.com/articles/20 ... faced.html



I generated the Z-Analogue Diurnal Arc chart of Kate’s Ambient Astrology paran chart in article which highlights the Venus Culminating, Pluto Rising Square Paran.


There is an exact Venus square Pluto in the chart with Pluto Rising and Venus Culminating in the Z-Analogue Diurnal Arc.


https://divergentastrology.blogspot.com ... urnal.html

Raymond Scott wrote:I don’t look at the parans that Robert Hand looks at - the ones devised by Oblique Ascension,Oblique Descension,Right Ascension that are in Solar Fire and most other Astrology programs.

I look at parans based on the body motion with true altitude. That is how Bernadette Brady’s Starlight program does parans.

I haven't read what Rob Hand says, or Brady for that matter, but if one body is rising while another is culminating, the OA of the former will always be 90 degrees ahead of the RA of the latter. Those are two ways of saying the same thing.

Martin Gansten wrote:

Raymond Scott wrote:I don’t look at the parans that Robert Hand looks at - the ones devised by Oblique Ascension,Oblique Descension,Right Ascension that are in Solar Fire and most other Astrology programs.

I look at parans based on the body motion with true altitude. That is how Bernadette Brady’s Starlight program does parans.

I haven't read what Rob Hand says, or Brady for that matter, but if one body is rising while another is culminating, the OA of the former will always be 90 degrees ahead of the RA of the latter. Those are two ways of saying the same thing.

Robert Hand and Kenneth Bowser work with parans that are tied to the Equator.

The parans that Bernadette Brady use are tied to the Horizon.
I have her two books on fixed stars and her Starlight software, and so I am very familiar with them.
https://zyntara.com/tutorials/


Here is Robert Hand's article about them
https://www.alabe.com/text/Dineen-AstofPlace.html

I have his book Essays on Astrology which includes information on parans.


here is Kenneth Bowser's article about them
https://keplercollege.org/index.php/art ... s-in-mundo

his youtube video
Mundane Aspects in Astrological Interpretation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaoIxIyF3ao

I have his books Introduction to Western Sidereal Astrology and The Western Sidereal Astrology Interpretation Workbook.


BTW I prefer to work with mainly the parans tied to the Equator now.

I was just posting from my blog post.




Right Ascension of the Midheaven (RAMC) is the Local Sidereal Time (LST)


An object conjunct the Midheaven in Right Ascension is an object Culminating.

An object conjunct the Imum Coeli in Right Ascension is an object Anti-culminating



In regards to parans tied to the Equator


Conjunction parans:

Objects Rising together is Oblique Ascendant conjunct Oblique Ascendant

Objects Setting together is Oblique Descendant conjunct Oblique Descendant

Objects Culminating together is a conjunction in Right Ascension

Objects Anti-culminating together is a conjunction in Right Ascension


Opposition parans:

Object Rising while another object is Setting is Oblique Ascendant oppose Oblique Descendant

Object Culminating while another object is Anti-culminating is an opposition in Right Ascension


Square parans:

Object Rising while another object is Culminating is Oblique Ascendant square Right Ascension

Object Rising while another object is Anti-culminating is Oblique Ascendant square Right Ascension

Object Setting while another object is Culminating is Oblique Descendant square Right Ascension

Object Setting while another object is Anti-culminating is Oblique
Descendant square Right Ascension

Raymond Scott wrote:Robert Hand and Kenneth Bowser work with parans that are tied to the Equator.

The parans that Bernadette Brady use are tied to the Horizon.

Objects rising or setting are on the horizon; objects culminating or anticulminating are on the meridian. At least one of those circles needs to be involved in defining paranatellonta ('parans') in a broad sense. You can't do it with just the equator.

In this context, the equator is just a sort of measuring device, used to define when (= with what degree on the equator) an object will rise, culminate, etc. The RA of an object is the equatorial degree with which it will culminate; its OA, the degree with which it will rise. Either may be expressed in time (90 degrees corresponding to 6 hours).

Martin Gansten wrote:

Raymond Scott wrote:Robert Hand and Kenneth Bowser work with parans that are tied to the Equator.

The parans that Bernadette Brady use are tied to the Horizon.

Objects rising or setting are on the horizon; objects culminating or anticulminating are on the meridian. At least one of those circles needs to be involved in defining paranatellonta ('parans') in a broad sense. You can't do it with just the equator.

In this context, the equator is just a sort of measuring device, used to define when (= with what degree on the equator) an object will rise, culminate, etc. The RA of an object is the equatorial degree with which it will culminate; its OA, the degree with which it will rise. Either may be expressed in time (90 degrees corresponding to 6 hours).

Kenneth Bowser mentioned they're parans tied to the Equator, and so that's why I mentioned that.
Thank you for explaining though

Parans involving Rising and Setting that Brady uses are different from the parans that Solar Fire uses.

The parans that Brady uses stay the same throughout the whole day.
The parans that Solar Fire uses change throughout the day.

This goes especially for the Moon

in my own astrological nativity

October 29, 1971
San Francisco, California
3:20 AM


Solar Fire method

Moon Rise 16:44:19 in sidereal time
Mars Rise 16:45:45 in sidereal time
in Rise conjunction paran very close

12 hours later

Moon Rise 17:00:19 in sidereal time
Mars Rise 16:45:18 in sidereal time
too far apart to be in paran

Using the method that Brady uses, but including midnight to midnight as the day (Brady prefers the Roman/Egyptian day which is sunrise to sunrise according to her Starlight program settings)

Moon Rise 15:40:51 in civil time
Mars Rise 15:21:33 in civil time
not in a conjunction paran

12 hours later, there is no change.

so everybody born with the same birthdate and same birthplace as me have the same parans with the Brady method regardless of time of birth
that's not the case with the Solar Fire method
I prefer the Solar Fire method parans because they're more personal.


In David Cochrane's Sirius Astrology program, The Speculum lists the Oblique Ascension, Oblique Descension, and Right Ascension

Moon Oblique Ascension in 341.081 degrees
Mars Oblique Ascension in 341.189 degrees

so Sirius shows that their Oblique Ascensions conjunct and so Moon and Mars are in a Rising conjunction paran


With Brady's method, I noticed that objects can culminate together without them being in Right Ascension.

for example

I have

Moon Culminate 21:35:33 in civil time
Fomalhaut Culminate 21:34:30 in civil time
in conjunction paran


Moon's RA 22hr43m37s
Fomalhaut RA 22hr56m08s
not in conjunction




According to Starlight program

Brady's method includes body motion and observation
Solar Fire method doesn't include body motion nor observation