Hello everyone. I've been reading an article here by Christopher Warnock http://www.skyscript.co.uk/astrology_law.html and I have also read what is listed by Lily as to the directions signified by the planets and Signs on his webite. What confuses me is in this article he says "Sagittarius indicates a southeastern direction ... Leo indicates a northeastern direction." But Lily has given both the East. At first I though maybe he added the north-south according to where they were in the charts he was referring to but they are both in the Northern Hemisphere. Then I thought perhaps he was combining the planet's direction with that of the sign, but that isn't the case either, so I'm confused. He seems to be quoting Lily here. Can anyone shed any light on this because I'd like to test the directions with some research I'm doing.

Thank you
Connie

I've just read this very good article: http://www.skyscript.co.uk/wit.html and it makes more sense than the other but I'm still left with some confusion. It states that, for example, Leo is East by North even though it is naturally in the North West of the chart. It does say the 5th house is N-N-W so I'm confused.

Also, I need to be sure I understand the meanings. Does East by North mean North East? Sorry if my questions seem silly.

Aquarianessence,

No question is silly. Logically North by East would mean 'North Easterly Direction' or am I incorrect here. We would head North veering to the East? So North East?

If we were travelling to Chadstone by Sea we would travel to Chadstone then go to the sea?

Julie K

** Chadstone is fictitious**

Thanks Julie. Nice to run into you again. You are my same Julie K I enjoy so much? I thought so, just wanted to make sure.

I'm still confused a to why, for example, Leo would not be NNW rather than east. Hopefully Deb can explain when she gets a minute. If I need to reverse my natural way of thinking then I must understand why. And I can't make it work with a chart I know the direction of.

I hit a deer last December driving home and noted the exact time. The chart clearly shows me and the 3 dear at the ascendant. But Sagittarius is given East by South and that doesn't fit, the way I am looking at it. Sag naturally sits in the SSW of the natural zodiac rather than SE. I was headed north with the deer passing in front of me moving west toward east. I clipped the 3rd one.

There is one way I could look at this that will fit. I was only a mile or so away from home and this happened SE of my home. I could also look at the incident as a collision with a car coming from the south with the deer headed east, then I would have SE. But this would be addressing my past location and their furture destination. I just have to understand this.

Thanks again,
Connie

Hi Connie and Julie,

The detail of each sign rests mainly on the association between triplicities and locations. That is:

Fire ? East
Water ? North
Air ? West
Earth ? South

So it is true that all the fire signs are mainly related to the direction east, but within each triplicity, the cardinal direction is attributed to the cardinal sign of that triplicity. (That is, the cardinal direction east, or ?true east? is associated with cardinal fire sign: Aries). The easiest way to keep this in mind is to think of the natural association between signs and the quarters of a chartform:

Asc - East ? Aries = true east
IC ? North ? Cancer = true north
Desc ? West ? Libra = true west
MC ? South ? Capricorn = true south


Of the remaining fire signs, Leo and Sagittarius, one will point east veering towards the north, and the other will point east veering towards the south.

To know which does which, imagine a chart wheel with the cardinal sign of the triplicity (Aries) on the ascendant. Now consider the angle that the planet moves towards by primary motion ? this will either be the southern angle (MC) or the western angle (Desc). Therefore the sign that falls in the upper hemisphere will add the adjective south or east, whichever is appropriate. When we imagine Aries on the ascendant this will be Sagittarius, so this describes east by south. Leo, in the lower hemisphere, describes the opposite ? east by north.

Another example: all the water signs relate to the north, and Cancer relates to true north. So imagine Cancer on the ascendant. The water sign in the upper hemisphere when Cancer is on the ascendant will be Pisces and this will describe north by west (because of the association by primary motion with the western angle ? we dismiss the southern angle because this would generate the nonsensical description: north by south). Scorpio will fall in the lower hemisphere when Cancer is on the ascendant, relating to north or east, east being the relevant adjective here. Hence Scorpio describes north by east.

The steps are:

1) Become familiar with the association between cardinal directions and cardinal signs
2) Imagine the cardinal sign on the ascendant
3) The sign that is now placed in the upper hemisphere veers south or west; that placed in the lower hemisphere veers north or east.


If you work through the signs for the air and water triplicity in the same way, you will get the list of directions that Lilly records in his first list on p.365 of CA. The second list is almost the same, but the definitions are not quite so clear as the first list, which I prefer.

What you might find is that some texts, like this second list, come close in the description of the direction, but they don?t express the underlying principle properly. So they might describe Leo as ?north east? rather than ?east by north?, thinking that the small difference doesn?t matter - but it does, because there is a principle behind the association of east by north which is lost if Leo is described as north by east! The benefit is that once you understand this principle you can recall it anytime you need to without referring to textbooks.

I hope this answers your question.
Deb

Ptolemy said in Tetrabiblos:

... the one which consists of Aries, Leo, and Sagittarius is northwestern... That which is made up of Taurus, Virgo, and Capricornus is south-eastern... The one consisting of Gemini, Libra, and Aquarius is north-eastern... The triangle of Cancer, Scorpio, and Pisces is south-western...

Ptolemy?s association hasn?t really been taken up by mainstream tradition. It works on a different principle which is credible in its own right, and can be traced back to ancient Babylonian texts. This association between triplicities is mainly based upon the directions (or winds) associated with planets as the triplicity rulers. These are:

Jupiter ? North
Mars ? West
Venus - South
Saturn ? East

Of the five planets (excluding the Sun and Moon) Mercury is always taken as the planet that shares a mixture of qualities.

I like the association of planets and directions but I think it would be too confusing to try to work with Ptolemy?s scheme and that of later tradition. I think people have to choose one or the other.

Yes Deb, thank you so much. You're quite a good teacher. So one way I could look at it to help me visualize is: Sagittarius seeks his eastern destination by way of the Southern road and Leo seeks the same goal taking the northern road.

This description of Sagittarius does fit this partial herd of dear. They make there home, sleeping quarters, south of my home just as I was coming from the south to go home. They were headed east for their morning feast when we met at cross purposes, 90*, although it was really a conjunction. My line up of bodies was Jupiter 4Sag, Mars 5 Sag in the 12th, asc. 9Sag with Mercury just 12' from rising. If my clock was one minute off then Mercury was exact on the ascendant. Then Sun 22, Pluto 26 with Venus at 4Capricorn which is my Mars degree all in the 1st.

Mars and Mercury were only 6' from exact paralell so I think they must represent the deer I hit and me. At least that's what I'm guessing makes sense. Looking at the chart though, it looks like Mars and Jupiter alone in the 12th would be the 1st two that crossed and the ascendant/Mercury would be me with the poor victim, Mercury being dual. Maybe that's the right way to look at it.

Thank you very much for your wonderful explanation.

Connie