Hello,

Bonatti's Book of Astronomy, Treatise 3 - Planets, (Page 170 of Ben Dyke's translation, top page):-

And Venus works coldness and moisture through her own nature, with a moderate mixture

Tom,

Thank you for taking the time to look up the references I find them quite interesting. Something that caught my eye was the fact that Ptolemy & Morin, rather than using the extreme quality word, used a moderate word instead. For example, instead of using the term "Hot & Moist" the used the term "Warm & Moist". When describing the other Planets do they use similar terms? (Warm or Cool). What copy of Ptolemys Tetrabiblos are you using? Do you have the original Latin text by Morin or an English translation? Since the standard was to use Hot and Cold, I am unsure whether this was purposeful or a fault of the translator. This strikes me as odd because Ptolemy would know that the qualities were Hot and Cold not Warm and Cool (being a Greek) so I see it somewhat strange that he would use that specific term. Let me know your thoughts on this.

I wish I had the time to answer these questions in depth, i.e. with references, links etc. They are highly relevant, but I can answer some of them. Oh and it is good to be back online. We lost the forum for a bit.

Something that caught my eye was the fact that Ptolemy & Morin, rather than using the extreme quality word, used a moderate word instead.

This brings up two points that are worth pondering. I'm a little sloppy and I use "hot" at times and "warm" at other times as well as using "cold" and "cool," "wet" and "moist" interchangeably. A little consistency is probably in order as English is a very versatile language. What I believe to be true is that the traditional authors were consistent in the languages they wrote in, and people like me are just sloppy about it. However it should be noted that there are degrees of warmth and coolness, moisture and dryness. Mars, for example, is considered hotter and drier than the Sun. Jupiter is considered temperately warm and moist or if we follow Morin temperately warm and dry. The same is true of Venus. She is temperately warm and moist or cold and moist depending on how we use her, whereas the Moon is not temperately cold and moist. These little fine points are more than just semantics, and therefore, the astrologer should be judicious when describing the planets that way.

Yet another point is that I recall, vaguely, that we are not simply talking about temperature and humidity as we physically experience them. Saying Saturn is cold and dry is not just saying Saturn is below freezing and low in humidity. Saturn destroys because the quality of coldness and dryness breaks bonds. Pre-Enlightnement folks would have grasped this subtlety almost instantly, and our poor 21st century brains need an explanation.

We all know people who are "cold," yet we also know their body temperature is no colder than normal. Ditto people who are warm. We are all aware of a "dry sense of humor" and phlegmatic or "wet"people. The descriptions of the planets are meant that way, too.

I do believe Alan might be asking for some consistency, and I tend to agree with that sentiment, despite being one of the worst offenders.

What copy of Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos are you using?

I have both Robbins and Ashmand. I don't have Schmidt's. I tend to use Ashmand more on the grounds he was an astrologer and Robbins was not. It's also true that the typeface is bigger in Ashmand's translation - a growing consideration.

Do you have the original Latin text by Morin or an English translation?

I would love to have the Latin original and I suppose there are some out there. Old Astrology books used to be cheap, but one of the less pleasant (for the buyer) unintended consequences of the traditional revival is that booksellers suddenly realized there was a market for these old things and the prices jumped. I use the translations available from AFA. The translators are Baldwin, Holden, and most recently Anthony LaBruzza aka Tony Louis of Horary Astrology Plain and Simple fame. I also own Lucy Little's translation of volume 21. This is a handsome volume, hardbound, and contains some extras that make it more attractive than Baldwin's translation which AFA just stapled together. But Baldwin's is considered the better translation as he worked with the original Latin, and Little translated from a French translation which doesn't seem to be of the same quality as Baldwin's translation into English. It's still good though.

However for those who wish to dabble in Latin, here is a full page by page photographs (zoomable) of Astrologia Gallica in its original glory:

http://www.vkol.cz/~petros/astrol/morin.htm

Free, too.

Happy New Year.

Tom

In my experince Mars makes married live uncomgftable if badly placed especially for Taurus and libra natives.

Kannan

astrojin wrote:Hello,

Reminds me of Schnidt's Lecture on Meanings of Planets in Hellenistic astrology. Mars generally represents cutting and severing of all things and not just marriage.

Aries and Scorpio (both rule by Mars) are opposite to Libra and Taurus (both rule by Venus) AND their nature also also opposite (Venus - benefic, Mars - malefic), hence Venus and Mars have really opposite meanings.

Venus: principle of unification and pleasures (marriage being both of these amongst others)

Mars: principle of severing and sundering, hence means anything that cuts like sword, or divorce (sundering of relationship).

Hi, Astrojin and All!

Hello!

Valens, in the book II/III of his Anthology, says in page 6 ( translation of R. Schmidt) that another way of see the marriage is to look at the place of the marriage that is found in male and female nativities in a different way.
As the 7th place is opposite to life and is still the marriage house, Valens says that we can find the marriage place for male from Sun to Aphrodite ( because Aphodite is the destroyer of the Sun and the ruler of Libra, where the Sun has his fall), and equal amount from the AS.
To find women marriage?s place we take the distance from the Moon to Mars, since the Moon is depressed in Mar?s sign, Scorpio.
I think Valens is a genius and lived ages before Sartre the existentialist philosopher who said " my hell is the other". Valens seems to say: my dead is the otherm when he choose the opposite planet of both luminaries exaltation to represent the trigger.
Quoting him:
page 6
" For men, from the Sun to Aphodite and an equal amount from the Horoskopus;for women, from the Moon to Ares. For, Aphrodite and Ares are destroyers of both the lights because though the Sun is exalted in Aries it perishes in Libra and causes the days to lessen, and though the Moon is exalted in Taurus it is depressed in Scorpio and causes a subtraction in of its light cosmically. Aphrodite, then. will be the marriage indicator for men, while Mars will in general be the indicator for women"

best

Clelia

Clelia Romano wrote: Valens, in the book II/III of his Anthology, says in page 6 ( translation of R. Schmidt) that another way of see the marriage is to look at the place of the marriage that is found in male and female nativities in a different way.

Dear Clelia, you really read in my mind!
Yesterday evening I was reading from Firmicus Maternus:

"27. If you wish to find the house of the wife, measure from the degree of Saturn to the degree of Venus and, beginning from the ascendant,
distribute the number among the signs. In whatever sign the last degree falls in a diurnal chart, that is the house of the spouse.......
32. If you wish to find the house of the husband in a woman's chart, if it is diurnal you must measure from Mars to Venus, in a nocturnal from Venus to Mars. Then from the ascendant distribute the number of degrees to the following signs and in whatever sign the last degree falls, that is the house of the husband. You can discover the kind of husband in the same way as the kind of wife. You must remember that in general Venus shows the wife and Mars the husband."

For the point 27. it is a method well known, but what about point 32? You have ever heard about it? I could not find it in Albiruni list. Do you have some idea from which Firmicus is taking it? For the rest he repeats Vettius Valens you quoted.
Gjiada

Gjiada wrote:

Clelia Romano wrote: Valens, in the book II/III of his Anthology, says in page 6 ( translation of R. Schmidt) that another way of see the marriage is to look at the place of the marriage that is found in male and female nativities in a different way.

Dear Clelia, you really read in my mind!
Yesterday evening I was reading from Firmicus Maternus:

32. If you wish to find the house of the husband in a woman's chart, if it is diurnal you must measure from Mars to Venus, in a nocturnal from Venus to Mars. Then from the ascendant distribute the number of degrees to the following signs and in whatever sign the last degree falls, that is the house of the husband. You can discover the kind of husband in the same way as the kind of wife. You must remember that in general Venus shows the wife and Mars the husband."

For the point 27. it is a method well known, but what about point 32? You have ever heard about it? I could not find it in Albiruni list. Do you have some idea from which Firmicus is taking it? For the rest he repeats Vettius Valens you quoted.

Gjiada

Hello, Gjada!

There is a general agreement between the ancients respecting the marriage part.
Firmicus, Al- Biruni , Paulus Alexandrinus and Olympiodorus gave the same formula for the Part of Marriage for Men :Venus-Saturn+ASC by day and and Saturn-Venus+ASC by night .
The reverse for women.
Dorotheus ( Pentateuch,ii,2-3) is the only one saying the first one is for women and the second for men.
About your quote 32 I never read it in other source than Firmicus, but it seems Valens? influence modified, because Valens gave importance to Mars even if only in female?s marriage .
This matter of casting Lots is a very long one so that one might think there is no end to it. I prefer to use few lots and only those which the authors are in agreement.
The important thing here is that Mars has a very old traditional source, Valens, linking it with female marriages.
My experience when I worked as a modern astrologer was that Mars was supposed to aspected the ASC or MC by secondary progression in female marriages. And I found this aspect several times.
I abandoned it as " modern stuff" when I attended Zoller?s full course. He didn?t use Mars
So I became surprised to read this statement in Valens.

Thank you for Firmicus? quote !
Clelia

Clelia Romano wrote: About your quote 32 I never read it in other source than Firmicus, but it seems Valens? influence modified, because Valens gave importance to Mars even if only in female?s marriage .
This matter of casting Lots is a very long one so that one might think there is no end to it. I prefer to use few lots and only those which the authors are in agreement.

This is strange, which source could have Firmicus other than the rest of astrologers? Yesterday I stood up from my bed to check Albiruni, and I could not find it.

In the journal of Cida, the Italian Astrological Association I found an article about sinastry according Ptolemy, better according CieloeTerra and there they use some lots for marriage, especially Venus/Saturn one.
Tomorrow I will see my friend (the one who made the research about dead children) and I'll try to ask him; I'm not even sure which source they follow for lots, I'm not sure Ptolemy talks about Part of Marriage.
But I was curios about the one from Firmicus because I discovered a strange coincidence.
Ciao,

hello

The method given to locate the houses of wife and husband in a chart forms interesting reading. Can any one of the above explain this phenomenon with a practical example for a better understanding

Kannan

kannan wrote:hello

The method given to locate the houses of wife and husband in a chart forms interesting reading. Can any one of the above explain this phenomenon with a practical example for a better understanding

Kannan

Firmicus and the other astrologers just consider the lot of Marriage accoding several formula they give, see for example here:
http://www.noendpress.com/pvachier/arab ... /index.php

Firmicus explain it very clearly:

When you have found the house of the wife, first look at the sign, whether it is fixed, double, or tropical. Next observe in what house the ruler of the sign is located. Third, observe this same house: who is the ruler of its terms and to what extent it is aspected by benefic or malefic planets. For when benefic planets, located in favorable houses, with no debility, following the power of their condition possess that same house, they willjoin the natives in harmonious bonds with wives who are rich and famous.

On the other hand in Professor Giuseppe Bezza group, they follow mostly Ptolemy, so they use Moon for the wife and Sun for husband, according Tetrabiblos. In sinastry they consider too Part of Fortune for men and Part of Spirit for women.

Thanks for the site. But the problem is which of the planets , Sun and Moon or Mars and Venus , should be considered for arrivimg at the location of the house. Unless we are specific prediction of an event will meet with difficulties.

Kannan

kannan wrote:Thanks for the site. But the problem is which of the planets , Sun and Moon or Mars and Venus , should be considered for arrivimg at the location of the house. Unless we are specific prediction of an event will meet with difficulties.

Kannan

I think just every astrologer had his favourite one.