Anyone tried diurnals? I'm still vaguely confused over those. Your birth time relocated to the date and place you are now?

yuzuru wrote:"In fact, I've often found that events occur just prior to a new "handing over" at the end of the period rather than at the beginning."

John Frawley also said that, and after some testing, I also found that to be very reliable. Even the secondary progressed sun, when in the ending of a egyptian term, usually shows an important moment, but more with the directed angles.

. . . but Frawley sticks to Ptolemaic terms [The Hororary Textbook, p. 49: "This one works."], or does he suggest explicitly to use Egyptian terms in nativities and events?

johannes susato wrote: . . . but Frawley sticks to Ptolemaic terms [The Hororary Textbook, p. 49: "This one works."], or does he suggest explicitly to use Egyptian terms in nativities and events?

I believe Yuzuru was refering to the transition. About the terms itself, I guess it's a personal choice of his to use egyptian (and so is mine) but Frawley does stick to the Ptolemaic ones.

Now, I find this to be one of the most informative treads in the forum. I never though that a primary event could be seen as a flow of events, rather than a event in itself. In a sense, it contradicts the notion of retification, still, if you think that a real retification has to use transits, solar returns, secondary progressions, firdaria and so on, it does make sense. Still, if the shift from one to the other shows an important event or rather a culmination, one would have to be carefull in understanding which is which.

And Debora, about these techniques in the use of transits, is there any good writen source to learn those or are them your own?

I believe Yuzuru was refering to the transition. About the terms itself, I guess it's a personal choice of his to use egyptian (and so is mine) but Frawley does stick to the Ptolemaic ones.

yes, correct, he uses ptolemaic, I wasnt implying otherwise.
I was just saying that I started to pay attention every time a significator is about to change terms, but I use the egyptian, as it was used by Abu Mashar, and even with the seconary progressed sun I have seen that usually it shows an important transition moment, ok ?

PFN wrote:
I believe Yuzuru was refering to the transition. About the terms itself, I guess it's a personal choice of his to use egyptian (and so is mine) but Frawley does stick to the Ptolemaic ones.

Hi PFN, my intention was not at all to criticize Yuzuru's (nor your's now!) choice of terms and I think he knows that or else I would abologize.

Only I think it to be very important to know the basics of an experience. Whether or not Yuzuru's given and Frawley's quoted experiences had the same basics regarding the terms - that to learn was my intention.

And Debora, about these techniques in the use of transits, is there any good writen source to learn those or are them your own?

Hi Johannes
I'm sure it's nothing original, and I don?t think there is a formal source to what I wrote, it's just the understanding that I have picked up from a host of different sources. I do remember having that sense of things after reading the PH booklet ?Teachings on Transits? years ago, but I?m not sure if there was any one point in that book that prompted the realisation. (I am having a theme of not being able to find my books at the moment - I?ve obviously had a ?tidy up?! ? so I can?t check, unfortunately ).

I was also struck by the timing element when I researched the Moon?s effects. I completely connect with the theory that the inferiors communicate the influence of the superiors, and that the Moon brings the daily activation and triggers (this was my observation in financial trading too). So on the one hand we have a filter effect of the inferiors bringing the larger affairs of the superiors into focus, and on the other, we have the funnel effect of the broad details and ?periods of emphasis? being narrowed down into tightly activated dates; it should never be done the other way around, which is what would happen if we try to use transits alone. So for example, the maximum affect of, say, a Jupiter-Saturn aspect is not when they are closest together, but when they are closest together with an inferior planet being able to transmit the influence to a personalised point.

It's the same with Primary Directions. For example, (putting all the controversy to one side) Gaurico?s supposed prediction about the death of Henry II was that he was in danger in the 41st *year* because of a primary direction in force at that time. The astrologer didn't try to make the timing tighter than that. Posthumous analysis of Henry?s death shows a perfect collection of deathly transits, which confirms the astrology, and might have been used to narrow down the period of danger within the 41st year, but which would be utterly meaningless without it. In the same way, no one could have predicted Diana?s death from all the classic accidental-death and 8th house type transits that were in force at the time because using transits alone, without the constraining influence of a theme identified by something like Primary Directions, the possibilities for manifestation are endless.

And of course Tom is right - solar returns and other techniques fit into the ?scheme? of things too. I didn't mean to leave an impression otherwise

johannes susato wrote: Hi PFN, my intention was not at all to criticize Yuzuru's (nor your's now!) choice of terms and I think he knows that or else I would abologize.

Oh, I did not feel you were criticizing at all. Actually, if it sounded like that, sorry, I'm no native speaker, and sometimes I use harsh terms for lack of "soft" ones in my lexical "bag".

. . . it did not sound like that really. But me too being no native speaker, I for my part didn't want to 'overlook anything' perhaps harming . . .

Martin Gansten wrote:

My attraction to primary directions can be compared with falling in love with a very attractive mysterious woman. Unfathomable and giving me doubts if she's the good one to rely on. Often giving it up, trying to forget her and going for the transits only.

This made me laugh. Don't throw yourself away on the transits; they will break your heart, rarely turning up when they promised to, and not delivering the goods when they do show up. The mysterious lady will prove more rewarding in the end.

Thanks Martin for the encouragement. I will keep trying to understand Lady Primary . However I do strongly agree with Deb on the real effect of transits. On the other side I agree with you that often transits don't give what they seem to promise. But on this I can comment that this seems to be the same with other prediction techniques like secondary progressions.

Deb wrote:Like an artist drawing a picture you start with the broad outlines (firdaria & planetary periods), then you get the main details (primary directions, profections, etc) and then when you have a year that shows a particular theme, you narrow down the timing by transits, lunations or progressions.

In some cases I can find some 'accumulation' of 'hits' in different techniques when an important period in my life started.

I'll come and take transit lessons with you, Deb!

It will have to be a 2-day course - the calculation is so complex

If one has to calculate transits without an ephemeris and only with the (Keplerian) planetary theories, the Primary directions will turn out to be the easy calculable method.