.

Yes perhaps contacting Janus.
Maybe link to this thread for simplicity showing the problem and the discussion ?


Anyway, here is the Janus settings and the result in the speculum.

Donald Trump
14 jun 1946
10:54 Queens, NY








.

Stefan wrote:Anyway, here is the Janus settings and the result in the speculum.

Mathematically it seems all right; astrologically I'd consider many of these directions meaningless. In addition to using 'converse' directions based on the heavens turning in the wrong direction, an aspect point can't be a significator, so Mars would have to be the significator here, affected by the opposition of the Moon.

Thanks for elaborating Martin.

I guess the question about using converse primary directions is controversial among astrologers. Some like Dr H on Regulus Astrology use them. I have his books for study.
( But I know that you don't tend to agree with his aproach )

And I might add that when Luis Ribeiro in his course had a session about how to set up different astro programs for Primary directions, which is what shown above. Except for the Converse ones which he did not seems to use.
Or not generally recommend for beginners ( I don't know his final take on that).

Don't know about another expert like Rumen Kolev how he is doing in that question. I have taken one webinar with him only about rectification, don't remember how he did with converse directions ?

Anyway it is a fascinating study !

It's not really controversial as such; it's more that some people know the historical facts and others don't. Anyone can verify them by going back to astrological sources from the 17th century and earlier and recreating the converse directions found there. With the exception of an isolated instance in Gaurico's Tabulae de primo mobili (1557), which I believe was a mistake, I haven't found any that were made by moving the sphere the wrong way. That's why Morin wrote in his Astrologia Gallica XXII (Holden's translation, my emphasis):

All astrologers expound a twofold [method of] direction. The first is said by them to be direct, or according to the succession of the signs [...] The second is called converse, or against the succession of the signs [...] since in both there is the same motion o fthe primum mobile and the same method of finding the arc of direction, it seems that this should not be considered to be a twofold direction, but a single one.

Of course, it is possible to regard the subsequent misunderstanding as an unintentional discovery of a new and true principle. It would perhaps have been better to invent a new term for such directions, though, so as to avoid confusion.

Janegca wrote:

.

Hi Stefan,

I feel your pain with Janus primaries, gave up on them ages back. And I really wish their speculum, parts list, and a few other things were in tables and not just a mass of text

I love Janus. But some doubts have set in
I normally use Solar Fire but tends to use Janus more and more since I heard that the Traditional module is strong. And I have studied this branch of astrology for awhile.

Asc is in the bounds of Mars in Scorpio and will meet Fortune's antiscion at 1 Scorpio around mid-September 2023. Mars has been sharing by conjunction with the Ascendant since roughly June 2, 2022 and as given him quite a ride:

Yes Mars as term ruler and also as partner gives a strong Mars theme in the Distributions it seems. Tropical measuring.
This seems to breed conflict for him and may contribute legal problems.
He is in a fighting mode attacking every person within his radar it seems.
What about Mars natal aspect squaring the MC/IC axis ? So it is also about.Problems with his reputation and office. As it is now it seems like he is using the presidency as a means to get free from legal charges.



Janegca wrote:
"Jun-Jan 1
Mars opp Moon – public (Moon) legal battles (Mars rules 9th), a fairly safe bet given his history, perhaps over the documents case as radix Moon is in the 4th (home) and in the profected 11th (administration)

November – December
The Lot of Kingship will move from being conjunct Moon to conjunct the South Node while the Lot of Honors turns critical at 29 Virgo; a fall from grace, public (Moon) turns against him or more problems for his reputation because of women, wife (Moon)?

Approx Dec thru January

The directed South Node will conjunct radix Mars on or around December 8 across the profected 7th-1st; with the Mars/Moon opposition active at the same time, possibly marriage problems.[/img]




Yes these are the directions I mentioned as well. Involving Mars again.
If they are relevant (which Martin doubt) so if they count it seems not positive for Trump)
Especially I think in terms of the timing of the south node to Mars around the election if he is the runner ?

His chart is super busy with a number of planets changing degrees, curious to see how it all plays out.

Yes Watching the news is perhaps the best entertainment these days.

Trump tropical Solar return 2024




Don't seems good.
A prominent saturn in a T-square with the lights sun and moon (asc ruler).

saturn squaring sun mercury in 12th house.

Saturn is LOY.

Mars who seems so actualised now is in the SR in Taurus detriement in 11th.
Trouble through his associations maybe. And possible less support from the masses ?

In transit saturn in the solar return is squaring his natal nodal axis with sun and moon ( natal total fullmoon eclipse in chart).

Hi Stefan,

Don't know about another expert like Rumen Kolev how he is doing in that question. I have taken one webinar with him only about rectification, don't remember how he did with converse directions ?

In Kolev's Primary Directions I he says "To calculate a direct direction of a certain planet to the ascendant, for example, is to calculate how many minutes after the birth, this planet will rise on the horizon (of the birthplace). If we want to calculate a converse direction of a planet to the ascendant, its meaning is to find out how many minutes before the birthtime, this planet has been exactly on the horizon."

"If we move the promissor with the rotation of the celestial sphere, the direction is direct; otherwise it is converse." (p29)

In describing the significator and promissor he says "The significator stays pinned on the celestial sphere. The promissor is the point that we direct (move). (p28)

In an example from Hitler's chart Saturn is in the 10th and he directs it to the MC calling it a "direct" direction. The resulting arc gives the time when the two will meet after his birth.

In the same chart, Pluto is in the 8th, he takes the arc between Pluto and the MC and calls it a "converse" direction which gives the time the two met before Hitler's birth.

I think this is essentially the same as Martin's take.

janegca wrote:I think this is essentially the same as Martin's take.

No, what Kolev is doing here is the modern version, what I call 'neo-converse' (defined as a direction against time/against the primary motion). To the best of my current knowledge, it is not something you find in ancient, medieval, or early modern sources (with the one exception I mentioned before, a probable mistake by Gaurico).

Hi Martin,

Apologies, did not mean to misrepresent what you meant.

Just to get this clear in my head; the problem with the use of "direct" and "converse" in the old texts is that both terms were used to describe one and the same motion.

For example, say you had the Asc at 5 Aries, Sun at 7 Aries, and Jupiter at 9 Aries. As the earth turns the zodiac turns clockwise (primary motion) and the position of the Asc, Sun, and Jupiter appear to change.

The zodiac degrees act as position labels, so we can say, for example, the Sun now has a new label, 9 Aries which looks, to us, as if it moved from 7 Aries to 9 Aries according to normal zodiacal or "direct" motion.

Or, we could say Jupiter's body, at 9 Aries, was carried by the heavens to the position of the Sun, against the order of the signs, in the "converse" direction

Either way, "the body" of Jupiter was said to be directed to the Sun. If 9 Aries was imprinted with the square of Jupiter we would say the "square ray" of Jupiter was directed to the Sun.

In essence, the planets appear to have moved but really it is the zodiac that turned and a new "label" was applied. Under no circumstances would Jupiter actually move backwards in the zodiac; it cannot legitimately be re-labelled as occupying 7 Aries.

Is this the "error" that was made in the early 1900's? Older astrologers understood that "converse" meant the heavens carried the planet against the order of the signs but newer astrologers confused it with actual motion in the zodiac? Hence, Kolev's description of directing Pluto in the 8th to the MC is neo-converse as no older astrologer would have moved it in that fashion? The fact that a measurement is taken in OA rather than zodiac degrees does not automatically mean the motion is primary?

Hope that is not muddled thinking.

janegca wrote:The fact that a measurement is taken in OA rather than zodiac degrees does not automatically mean the motion is primary?

Well, it's a sort of hypothetical primary motion, based on the notion of the sphere turning the opposite way, or of going backwards in time. I can see why people think that's what 'converse' should mean. It just isn't how the term, and its corresponding designations in Greek and Arabic, were used for the first 2,000 years or so.

Sometimes things are so simple that we can't grasp them until we unlearn the convoluted ideas we've been taught. An example of this is the fact that significator means a point that signifies something, and promissor means a point that promises something (for the matter signified by the significator). They're nothing to do with moving or not moving. In traditional parlance, it's always the significator that is directed, irrespective of what is being moved by the primary motion.

It's easiest to think of directions in two stages, the first symbolic and the second astronomical-mathematical. If you have the Sun in Aries (on the ascendant, let's say, for simplicity's sake), and it is your significator, you can direct it by direct motion to a point in Taurus (for instance), or by converse motion to a point in Pisces. This is the symbolic stage of the process, and what makes a direction direct or converse: on what side of the significator is the promissor located?

But in the mathematical stage, when we want to calculate actual arcs, only the natural motion of the sphere was ever employed. So the point in Taurus would rise and cross the natal position of the Sun: that would give the arc of the direct direction. And the Sun itself (or rather its natal degree and minute) would rise and cross the natal position of the point in Pisces: that would give the arc of the converse direction. Astronomically, everything moves the same way, and that is why Morin wrote that 'in both there is the same motion of the primum mobile and the same method of finding the arc of direction'.

Apologies for not using your exact example in my reply, but I thought this might make things clearer.

Hi Martin, thank you so much for your patience and your detailed response. That makes it much clearer. Hopefully I’ll remember to think in that two step fashion in future.

I am working very hard on a new theory: 'converse transits'. And looking 'forward' to have it accepted by the community.

Question for you Martin
When a planet is retrograde, does it have an influence on the primary motion.
For it appears from Earth that both the promissor and the significator are moving towards each other.
Say for example, 2 planets very close to each other with one being retrograde. We can calculate that they will culminate at 40 years old and by that time the retrograde planet will already have made a conjunction to the prograde planet.
Does it make a difference or am I stretching on something that makes no difference?

Thank you,
Ouranos