Good morning Mark, Eddy (please don't study too much and talk with us) and all

MarkC wrote: So in McCann's proposed system rulership/detriment dignities are reversed but not exaltations etc. So in a chart for Sydney, Australia which has Sun in Aquarius and Moon in Taurus McCann suggests the Sun would be in its sign of rulership while the Moon would still be exalted in Taurus.

A key issue is what we decide to do with the exaltations and minor dignities. In a simple reversal of signs there is no disconnection between traditional symbolism of the signs or planets. When you reverse dignities you have the challenge of the Moon being in its sign of rulership in Capricorn or the Sun being in its sign of rulership in Aquarius. This contradicts the traditional meaning of the signs and planets in a way that reversing the signs does not..

This is not true, especially for exaltations.

Because exaltations depend on the Sun (as 99,9% of astrology in Ptolemy) and seasons:

THAT which is termed the exaltation of the planets is considered by the following rules:

The Sun on his entrance into Aries is then passing into the higher and more northern semicircle; but, on his entrance into Libra, into the more southern and lower one: his exaltation, therefore, is determined to be in Aries, as, when present in that sign, he begins to lengthen the days, and the influence of his heating nature increases at the same time. His fall is placed in Libra, for the converse reasons.

Saturn on the contrary, in order to preserve his station opposite to the Sun, in this respect, as well as in regard to their respective houses, obtains his exaltation in Libra, and his fall in Aries: since, in all cases, the increase of heat must be attended by a diminution of cold, and the increase of cold by a diminution of heat.

and so on...

http://www.sacred-texts.com/astro/ptb/ptb25.htm

So because in Southern hemisphere seasons are reversed we should reverse exaltations too.

And the same for triplicities because they depend on the domicile of planets, for example Fire triplicity is ruled by Sun (from Aries) and Jupiter (from Sagittarius).

So we can have the doubt just for terms and decans.

At this point is it not obvious preserve the dignity table as we know, trying to change the less we can? This was the Renaissance thought - even if with different methods, reversing in the Italian astrologers, not reversing in the French one.

margherita

Because exaltations depend on the Sun (as 99,9% of astrology in Ptolemy) and seasons:

THAT which is termed the exaltation of the planets is considered by the following rules:

The Sun on his entrance into Aries is then passing into the higher and more northern semicircle; but, on his entrance into Libra, into the more southern and lower one: his exaltation, therefore, is determined to be in Aries, as, when present in that sign, he begins to lengthen the days, and the influence of his heating nature increases at the same time. His fall is placed in Libra, for the converse reasons.

Saturn on the contrary, in order to preserve his station opposite to the Sun, in this respect, as well as in regard to their respective houses, obtains his exaltation in Libra, and his fall in Aries: since, in all cases, the increase of heat must be attended by a diminution of cold, and the increase of cold by a diminution of heat.

and so on...

So because in Southern hemisphere seasons are reversed we should reverse exaltations too

Hi Margherita,

I suppose if you see Ptolemy as the final arbiter in every astrological discussion that is a reasonable position to adopt. Ptolemy always seeks to find a rational naturalistic solution to any question. Ptolemy therefore applies Aristotlean logic to this issue like everything else. Not least because the exaltations were possibly already a mystery in his time.

However, I note that many hellenistic astrologers are more attracted to the aspect connections in the Thema Mundi chart to explain the exaltations.

Unless we take the radical stance that the exaltations were entirely a Greek creation we surely have to refer back to earlier Mesopotamian sources to answer the question of what their original basis was. This in itself is a controversial subject. I am aware that some Mesopotamian scholars do consider it possible that they had a seasonal basis. However, this is merely a hypothesis rather than an established fact.

Moreover at the risk of becoming a total bore on this point I still insist that a reversed zodiac (with the dignities following suit) is fundamentally different from just reversing all dignities (but not zodiac). In a reversed zodiac the Sun still rules Leo and Mars rules Scorpio. When you reverse dignities ( but not zodiac) we have the Sun ruling Aquarius and Mars ruling Taurus. In a southern hemisphere chart with reversed dignities (but not the zodiac) you fundamentally change the relationship between signs and planets. How are we to understand the nature of Taurus ruled by Mars or Venus ruling Aries? I accept you dont advocate this approach yourself as you seem to favour a straightforward switchover of zodiac and dignities. As is the norm I am sure you will claim it is not your opinion but simply following Ptolemy!

Good evening Mark,

Hi Margherita,

I suppose if you see Ptolemy as the final arbiter in every astrological discussion that is a reasonable position to adopt. Ptolemy always seeks to find a rational naturalistic solution to any question. Ptolemy therefore applies Aristotlean logic to this issue like everything else. Not least because the exaltations were possibly already a mystery in his time.

About Ptolemy I know there is the old debate which is better Ptolemy or other hellenistic astrologers?
I don't have any answer to this.

What it is sure that astrology was so much linked with Ptolemy version of Aristotle, that when Aristotle was put in discussion, astrology died.

But I don't have any particular preference.
Just it's easier to find some astrological input about the way to use some determinate rules in whatever Tetrabiblos comment (Lilly included) than in other texts.

We have several Greek texts translated now, but what a line of explication? At least when we take into consideration Ptolemy we can trust on the notes of astrologers like Argoli and Giuntini and Cardano and Lilly and Morin....

The point is not what Ptolemy writes but that the greatest minds of Renaissance explained and gave examples of him, not about the rest . About the rest we know very little.

For me I take everywhere, I consider different strategies when I read a charts.

Moreover at the risk of becoming a total bore on this point I still insist that a reversed zodiac (with the dignities following suit) is fundamentally different from just reversing all dignities (but not zodiac). In a reversed zodiac the Sun still rules Leo and Mars rules Scorpio. When you reverse dignities ( but not zodiac) we have the Sun ruling Aquarius and Mars ruling Taurus. In a southern hemisphere chart with reversed dignities (but not the zodiac) you fundamentally change the relationship between signs and planets. How are we to understand the nature of Taurus ruled by Mars or Venus ruling Aries?

A reversed zodiac means that if you are born on the 15th August, at 6 AM signifies having the Sun in the 12h house in Aquarius because you are in the midst of winter.
So your Sun will be in detriment and ruled by Saturn. Which difference if we call Leo but then say that the reversed Leo is ruled by Saturn and it is the detriment of the Sun?
It's exactly the same.

I accept you dont advocate this approach yourself as you seem to favour a straightforward switchover of zodiac and dignities. As is the norm I am sure you will claim it is not your opinion but simply following Ptolemy!

I learned I should not trust even people I was sure to know very well, so I don't trust nobody, especially people I never met like Ptolemy

For me, the main point is that astrology is a cultural product of a certain area of the world, and adapting in other places is very difficult.
There are many contradictions and many open problems, and I don't think we can have an easy answer.

margherita

Gjiada wrote:Good morning Mark, Eddy (please don't study too much and talk with us) and all

Ok Margherita, after my Wednesday training I usually don't study anyway.

Mark wrote:I hate to be stubborn here ( who me?) but I still disagree with you both because I believe you are neglecting some of the practical implications here.

No problem with stubbornness Mark, I'm stubborn too, but only when I'm right .
I don't get this idea of McCann. I'd say either everything is flipped over or nothing. Why not the exaltations? On page 139-140 in this print version of Gavin White's 'Babylonian Star-Lore', he clearly relates Jupiter's exaltation with his benevolence and royal character to the northernmost (declination) position of the ecliptic. Malevolent Mars get's the southernmost position. So to get the same symbolism in Australia, the exaltations too should be reversed.

The Babylonian symbolism is much more concerned with height than with the seasonal view of Ptolemy. In the thread I referred to in an earlier post I also believe in another symbolic explanation than Ptolemy's seasons approach. If I may quote myself again:

The seven ?lights? in this order, Moon, Sun, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn was one of several ideas of orders of planets. This one (moon being closest to earth) was called the ?Egyptian? order. There was also a version with Mercury and Venus swapped. The more known ?Chaldean? order was, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Sun, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn. (Jim Tester, ?A History of Western Astrology p.166). I believe that there are some links of the Egyptian (rulerships) order with some other ancient Greek thoughts. In Richard Hinckley Allen?s ?Star Names, Their Lore and Meaning?, Cancer ?according to Chaldean and Platonist philosophy, it was the supposed Gate of Men through which souls descended from heaven into human bodies p. 107. The opposed sign Capricornus was the ?Gate of the gods? through wich the souls returned after death, p.136.

I was being a bit brief in this summarized version of an earlier post, but I meant to say that I believe that the symbolism of the ascent of the soul of man in and after life is depicted through the rulerships from Cancer to Capricorn. The descent is depicted in the rulerships from aquarius to Moon again. This is just my assumption (I have no proof) but it could be related to the mysterycults of two millennia ago in which reincarnation also played a role. The ascending soul but returning to Earth because still being 'attached' to the worldly things. If this is true then the exaltations are also related to 'highest' and 'lowest' and thus should also reverse in Australia.

This still leaves us with the mess that would occur in the tropics if the reversing theory should be applied. Finally a tropics problem, usually the pole problem is discussed in astrology, but it has been cold long enough huh?

Dr. Farr's points on the elements is also interesting. Ptolemy used the Moist-Hot-Dry-Cold sequence to which Air-Fire-Earth-Water can be related.
The usual order is indeed a bit strange. Kepler also mentioned this"

Kepler wrote:4-7 I do not wish to be understood to have said that I wanted to abandon this ancient division [i.e. the Zodiac]; for I did add, that one must of necessity keep it for the sake of the memory. Much less did I attack it as aesthetically displeasing, or as cumbersome; but rather, I wished to express this idea: Although nature prepared the way for the division, it was human reason alone that created it, and in such a way that it always commenced from a certain starting point; it also did not have to refer to the natural properties that the signs are supposed to distinguish from each other. Although the sun, as it moves through the twelve signs, changes the seasons on earth according to the four qualities, this does not take place in that sequence [which was created by the astrologers]...
(Response to Dr. R?slin ..., Op. cit., 1609)

(I made part of the text bold)
Patrice Guinard's article http://cura.free.fr/25avazod.html mentions that there were two systems for the four systems in relations to the elements. First the Mesopotamian, the one mentioned above and used by Ptolemy), and the Egyptian. Fire-Water-Air-Earth. These correspond with the elements of the cardinal signs. I'm not sure when the division over the signs took place but on p. 47 of Jim Tester's 'A History of Western Astrology', here, Vettius Valens is mentioned of doing this. It seems that nature and physics were made symbolical, but in those days there wasn't really that difference. Nowadays it's entirely symbolical, perhaps humans have adapted to it (see Kepler quote in post of 14 february 12:25PM).

Maybe I'm just a maladjusted non-conformist for not adapting, but now perhaps there are maybe more people who might feel for abandoning this use of signs, come one guys, just kicking out a dozen signs with their rulerships and exaltations can't be that bad, dare to take that step, look at all the advantages, no hemisphere problems, no equatorial troubles, what could one desire more?

Good morning

Eddy wrote: In Richard Hinckley Allen?s ?Star Names, Their Lore and Meaning?, Cancer ?according to Chaldean and Platonist philosophy, it was the supposed Gate of Men through which souls descended from heaven into human bodies p. 107. The opposed sign Capricornus was the ?Gate of the gods? through wich the souls returned after death, p.136.

the famous Gates..Homer, Odyssey XIII

"Now there is in Ithaca a haven of the old merman Phorcys, which lies between two points that break the line of the sea and shut the harbour in. These shelter it from the storms of wind and sea that rage outside, so that, when once within it, a ship may lie without being even moored. At the head of this harbour there is a large olive tree, and at no distance a fine overarching cavern sacred to the nymphs who are called Naiads. There are mixing-bowls within it and wine-jars of stone, and the bees hive there. Moreover, there are great looms of stone on which the nymphs weave their robes of sea purple- very curious to see- and at all times there is water within it. It has two entrances, one facing North by which mortals can go down into the cave, while the other comes from the South and is more mysterious; mortals cannot possibly get in by it, it is the way taken by the gods."

Yes, they were obviously linked with solstices and in Rome in January was celebrated Janus, the enigmatic God of the Doors ianua, ae- from which the month takes the name.

It's difficult putting aside seasons when we consider ancients' ways.

Maybe I'm just a maladjusted non-conformist for not adapting, but now perhaps there are maybe more people who might feel for abandoning this use of signs, come one guys, just kicking out a dozen signs with their rulerships and exaltations can't be that bad, dare to take that step, look at all the advantages, no hemisphere problems, no equatorial troubles, what could one desire more

No, it's difficult turning upside down the Zodiac, I'm very happy I was born on the shores of Mediterranean sea.

margherita

Hi Eddy, Margherita, Mark, et all

Eddy, it is very difficult to briefly summarise these complex points without either leading to misunderstandings in what we are trying to say, or spending hours of time that we don?t have to spare (and then leaving misunderstandings in what we are trying to say ? ). I worry that I spend too much time here too, so I will try to keep this brief even though I have a lot that I want to say ?

Going back to the earlier post about the equatorial framework of ancient astrology ? let?s assume that the path of Anu is based upon the equator as many scholars say (although the reality is that they are speculating about a path which is not very well understood but known to be loosely around the middle of the extremes), this still does not undermine the value of the ecliptic as a seasonal tool, because this creates the essential underlying framework which needs to be developed first in order for the ecliptic to be traced upon it. I?ll try to explain that better.

Imagine we had to recreate the entire astronomical system. The first task would be to get a relative position of all the visible stars from top to bottom of the sphere. Knowledge of the equator *presents itself*, but not by looking towards the middle regions of the Earth as we do with the eclipic, but by noticing that this whole celestial bowl appears to make a circular turn around a north-south axis everynight, causing the stars to spin around. The equator is not an observed path, but a mathematically derived plane that is based upon being central to the poles. Although the visual observance of the rotation of stars around the poles was used from ancient times, knowledge of the equatorial circle was not as essential to our practical needs as that of the polar axis, and our ability to tell time from the stars was very rough until we were able to develop a good understanding of the ecliptic (time, the calendar, the seasons, are all one).

first there was the perception of Sun, Moon, planets and stars moving along lowest, middle and highest respectively. These paths are equator oriented, only later the ecliptic was going to be used as reference.

Although the scholars refer to the 'paths' of Enlil, Anu and Ea, I think it must be misleading to do this. Regions or areas would be better. The region of Enlil goes up to the north pole, Anu covers the middle and Ea, what is known of the South. In my opinion the reason for this alignment is to demonstrate the expression of Anu ? the great God- through the Sun. I admit that is speculative (there is a lot of speculation going on in the authoritative texts too, BTW) but what is factual is that the visual observations of the Sun, Moon and planets were based upon the quest to discover the ecliptic because it is not just the path of the Sun, but the centre of movement for the Moon and other planets too.

You mention Pluto, which is the one 'planet' to which the rule doesn?t apply well, but this is why I agree in the demotion of Pluto ? it doesn?t fit the usual pattern. In any case, it was of no consequent to ancient observers.

In case I lost you there I'll say it in another way: the attempts to monitor the Moon against the background constellations were also attempts to discover the ecliptic, because the Moon never moves more than 6 degrees above or below it. The Moon's cycle is tied to the ecliptic, just as the cycle of eclipses is tied there too. All of the most important planetary activity - including that of all the visible planets - takes place in this one belt of the sky which (prior to Pluto) the zodiac covered entirely by being defined as a region that extends 8 or 9 degrees from the ecliptic. Above this, the stars do not move around in relation to each other.

That?s why astrology is so much dependent upon the zodiac - because it holds the planetary movements. By comparison, an ?equatorial? astrology system is missing out on all of this, being focused on a plane that is only expressive of the movement of the framework.

With regard to the exaltations, at this time what we know about that topic is just enough to generate confusion. But there is a relevant point that I think you are overlooking Eddy. The association with Jupiter with the north, the ?higher? region, feeds into the principle that the north, where the Sun culminates in Cancer, was associated with the cooling and fertile north wind; Mars, exalted in the South, in the region of lowest descent in Capricorn, was associated with the hot, burning and destructive south wind. The quality of the wind is seen to be important even in the most ancient astrological references, but the idea of a cooling north wind, or a hot south wind, or a dry east wind / wet west wind, links again to the regional and seasonal origin of astrological signification.

In my opinion it would be impossible to eliminate the seasonal underpinning of astrological symbolism. It wouldn?t only mean an inversion of the zodiac signs or dignities, but a a rehash of planetary symbolism too (much of Saturn?s theme is based on this being the lord of winter, for example).

But I don?t think it is a case of modern astrologers not wishing to deal with the issue. The earlier quotes show that is has been contemplated and philosophically answered already.

Oops I see that this ended up being anything but brief, after all,

Deb


PS - I made a case recently, in a study of the pole stars, that the symbolism of ascent and descent (of the 'gates) was originally applied to the poles themselves, later associated with the corresponding zodiac points. I don't want to go into the full argument of that but you can consider how Enlil's governorship of the region up to the north pole readily associates with Jupiter's exaltation in Cancer.

In case I lost you there I'll say it in another way: the attempts to monitor the Moon against the background constellations were also attempts to discover the ecliptic, because the Moon never moves more than 6 degrees above or below it. The Moon's cycle is tied to the ecliptic, just as the cycle of eclipses is tied there too. All of the most important planetary activity - including that of all the visible planets - takes place in this one belt of the sky which (prior to Pluto) the zodiac covered entirely by being defined as a region that extends 8 or 9 degrees from the ecliptic. Above this, the stars do not move around in relation to each other.

Hello Deb,

Yes this is what we find in many cultures across the world. The Arabic and Indian Lunar Mansions ( Nakshatras) are good examples but there as numerous others. This method along with the rising and setting of certain fixed stars throughout the year were probably our earliest form of calendar. It took much longer before cultures acquired the sophisticated knowledge to plot the exact position of the Sun.

That?s why astrology is so much dependent upon the zodiac - because it holds the planetary movements. By comparison, an ?equatorial? astrology system is missing out on all of this, being focused on a plane that is only expressive of the movement of the framework.

I think its interesting to compare the Mesopotamian approach to the Chinese system of astrology. The most startling difference between Chinese and Western astrology is the method or system the Chinese used to track the planets throughout the night sky. Each civilization was able to distinguish planets from the other stars located in the sky, but the reference points found in the sky are much different. The Western (Mesopotamian-Babylonian-Hellenistic-etc...) stellar positions are found by reference to the ecliptic, known to the Chinese as the Yellow Path, that is, an imaginary line through the heavens traced by the Sun. The Chinese locate heavenly bodies with respect to the celestial north pole and the celestial equator (called the Red Path by the Chinese) rather than with respect to the ecliptic.

As a consequence of the two different observational systems, two kinds of astrological interpretation sprang up. In Chinese astrology, the "lunar mansions " has prime importance. In this the sky is divided into 28 segments, each one representing a day of the moon's path through the sky. These are completely different from the Arabic or Indian Lunar Mansions which are focused exclusively on the ecliptic. Instead, the Chinese divide the sky equatorially into 28 segements calculated from the celestial pole and equator. This leads us to the fact that in Chinese astrology there are many stars and constellations of importance that are quite peripheral in western ecliptic centred astrology.

The very existence of the Chinese system challenges assumptions that the ecliptic based approach to astrology adopted in the Mesopotamian-Babylonian-Hellenistic cultures is the inevitable appproach a system of astrology must adopt.

In this the sky is divided into 28 segments, each one representing a day of the moon's path through the sky. This leads us to the fact that in Chinese astrology there are many stars and constellations of importance to the Chinese astrology that are irrelevant in Western astrology.

This sounds like the equivalent of the Moon's mansions (if it is tracing the Moon's path then it also connects more directly to the ecliptic than the equator for the reasons I made above). But am I mistaken? Are you talking about something essentially different from the lunar mansions? I don't know much at all about the Chinese astronomical methods but they surely had the same time-concerns as other ancient civilizations - they were all primarily interested in developing their calendars by astronomical knowledge, and keeping their calendars in synch with the seasons. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that a famous Chinese astronomer lived at the same time as ptolemy and was equivalent for doing many of the things he did, and that he helped to improve their working knowledge fo the ecliptic (but I am trying to remember where I read this, and right now my mind is going to bed )

Deb wrote:

first there was the perception of Sun, Moon, planets and stars moving along lowest, middle and highest respectively. These paths are equator oriented, only later the ecliptic was going to be used as reference.

Although the scholars refer to the 'paths' of Enlil, Anu and Ea, I think it must be misleading to do this. Regions or areas would be better. The region of Enlil goes up to the north pole, Anu covers the middle and Ea, what is known of the South.

Yes this is more correct Deb. The Babylonians divided in areas rather than paths as a line and in a zodiacal year scheme the path of Anu (at spring) would cover the months 12, 1 and 2, the equinox falling in the middle of the first month. This was in the Mul Apin text of ca. 700 BC. It would be interesting to have the zodiacal signs like this, it also brings more harmony in the exaltation schemes. Sun, Jupiter, Saturn and Mars on the colures. Sun with Moon and Venus on both sides. This trinity dates from much earlier times. And Saturn with Mercury on his side. I fond the place of Mercury a bit strange but when I saw in Gavin White's book on google on p. 174 that the Babylonians also gave the Sun an exaltation in Libra it becomes more clear. Venus with a "second exaltation or 'secret place' in the Lion" (White. p.141) also becomes more clear. Sun can really be in Libra and Venus in Leo when at greatest morning elongation. Note that these exaltations of Mercury and Venus are in the morning elongation positions, the more propitious ones.

I'm not sure if the Babylonians attempted to discover the ecliptic, it simply occurred. Perhaps we don't differ so much in the opinion of the ecliptic and equator, concurring opinions but with the same result.

With regard to the exaltations, at this time what we know about that is issue is just enough to allow us to be completely confused by it. But there is a relevant point that I think you are overlooking. The association with Jupiter with the north, the ?higher? region, feeds into the principle that the north, where the Sun culminates in Cancer, was associated with the cooling and fertile north wind; Mars, exalted in the South, in the region of lowest descent in Capricorn, was associated with the hot, burning and destructive south wind. The quality of the wind is seen to be important even in the most ancient astrological references, but the idea of a cooling north wind, or a hot south wind, or a dry east wind / wet west wind, links again to the seasonal element.

I was aware of Ptolemy's view but I think this is a later 'scientification' of something with an originally cultural meaning. Same is with the exaltations which can (and are by Ptolemy) be explained in a weather way or in a mystery cult religious way (the 'gates') on which I speculated in the post before. Perhaps this is one of the issues where traditional astrologers of our days differ in opinion about the importance of Ptolemy. Maybe other astrologers of Ptolemy's days felt more attracted to the religious symbolic view and others to the more scientific and natural views.

Gjiada wrote:About Ptolemy I know there is the old debate which is better Ptolemy or other hellenistic astrologers?
I don't have any answer to this.

What it is sure that astrology was so much linked with Ptolemy version of Aristotle, that when Aristotle was put in discussion, astrology died.

(.....)

The point is not what Ptolemy writes but that the greatest minds of Renaissance explained and gave examples of him, not about the rest . About the rest we know very little.

In Jim Tester's A History of Western Astrology page 210 it is said that in the Renaissance period "the more learned astrologers were themselves worried about this", i.e. the divisions of the zodiac in terms, novenarii, decans etc. So there was often this division between natural and judicial, which grew as modern science emerged.

By the way, in the countries at the North Sea, the North winds aren't not so gentle as in the area of Ptolemy (Alexandria). Moreover the South winds at the North Sea are the more pleasant and fertile instead of destructive hot and dry Martial winds of the desert. So the Ptolemean view should urge us to give other exaltations in Northern Europe. I still find Ptolemy's view a bit strange, the highest place is dedicated to the cool winds of the North because of being closest to the north, however when the Sun is over there, it's Summer and thus hot, and vice versa with the Mars position.

This sounds like the equivalent of the Moon's mansions (if it is tracing the Moon's path then it also connects more directly to the ecliptic than the equator for the reasons I made above). But am I mistaken? Are you talking about something essentially different from the lunar mansions? I don't know much at all about the ancient Chinese methods but they surely had the same time-concerns as other ancient civilizations - they were all primarily interested in developing their calendars by astronomical knowledge, and keeping their calendars in synch with the seasons.

In some respects the term 'Lunar mansions' is somewhat misleading for Chinese astrology as it brings up inevitable comparison to the Arabic or Indian Lunar Mansions. However, the Chinese system is fundamentally different. Most of the asterisms used in the Indian or Arabic systems are reasonably close to the ecliptic. This is especially the case in the Arabic Lunar Mansions as the Indian Nakshatras do include a few asterisms well outside the ecliptic. The Chinese system divides the whole sky up from the celestial pole to celestial equator so that any asterism in that segment is included. Thus stars in a particular equatorial segment could have completely different declination. Another clarification I should have made is that the Chinese mansions are not equal in size. The ancient Chinese divided the sky into four mythical animals. (ie Azure Dragon, Black Tortoise, Red Bird, White Tiger). These relate to the four quarters and seasons. Hence Azure Dragon =East/Spring, Red Bird=South/Summer, White Tiger=West/Autumn, Black Tortoise=North/Winter. Burial remains as far back as the Neolithic has identified images of these four mythical animals related to burial tradition. It seems the North direction was associated with winter and death. Later on these quarters or 'super-constellations' were divided into 'lunar Mansions'. However, the quarters have mansions within them of unequal size. So the mansions do not equate that closely to the daily motion of the Moon. As I noted the Chinese were fully aware of the ecliptic which they called the 'yellow path' representing the passage of the Sun.

The issue of how this astronomical knowledge was used practically for time keeping and calendrical purposes is interesting but not something I am probably that qualified to answer. I will take a look at Derek Walters book though to see if he has anything on this. What is clear is that the Chinese system was lunisolar. In that sense it has similarities with many other cultures. The equatorial calculations would have assisted the calculation of Solstices and Equinoxes as the ecliptic on its own tells us nothing of the sun's seasonal declination.

Here is a useful Wikipedia article which goes into considerable detail on the history of the Chinese calendar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_calendar

It has to be said there is a lot of confusion on what the asterism boundares of the mansions were. The system is clearly very ancient as evidenced by the fact that meanings of some mansions seem to be out of order with the current asterisms that are situated there. This is probably due to the original asterisms shifting location due to precession.

Hi Eddy

The symbolic concepts of the winds are ancient Babylonian in origin, not Ptolemaic, although Ptolemy does include reference in them. I?ll dig out some refs tomorrow and send them by PM.

I don?t think I?ll be back on the forum for a couple of days so I just want to make a point, in case I?ve given the wrong impression about something.

I believe that the Mediterranean / Near East origins; the Hellenistic developments, the Arabian refinements and the Medieval European embellishments of what we?ve come to call the ?traditional western system? has created a wonderful system which could be applied in many regions. But I suspect that the ethnic origins of astrologers in the Southern hemisphere gives them an openness to this system; in the same way that an astrologer trained in Chinese methods could move anywhere in the world and would still feel most attached to that system, (although aware of the need to factor in some geological contradictions).

When I talk to the astrologers I have met in Australia and New Zealand I forget I am in a different continent. Maybe they are especially obliging to international guests but they follow the logic without any complications that I have ever been made aware of. However, in private conversation many have confessed to having a particular or personal interest in learning more about the indigenous myths of the southern skies. I know at least a few who are hoping to be able to study Aboriginal star-myths in greater depth, with a view to being able to integrate some of that logic into the Australian system. If I lived there that is what I would want to do too, so I really support that kind of attitude. Although it probably won?t happen in our lifetimes my feeling is that southern hemisphere astrology will eventually morph into something more uniquely suited to that locality that will allow the astrologers there to feel the connections between the symbolism and the seasons in the same way that we do here. The way it will happen is by integrating the existing traditions - not by taking a northern hemisphere system and turning bits of it on its head.

I think most of us here agree that different astrological systems work well when they are kept cohesive. So regarding the question of an event that happens near the equator, I don?t personally feel it matters where on Earth something happens, it only matters who is judging. An Indian astrologer will get good results using Indian astrology, and so forth, and so forth.

Like Margherita, I'm happy to stay in my own comfort zone ...

Hello

Eddy wrote: In Jim Tester's A History of Western Astrology page 210 it is said that in the Renaissance period "the more learned astrologers were themselves worried about this", i.e. the divisions of the zodiac in terms, novenarii, decans etc. So there was often this division between natural and judicial, which grew as modern science emerged.

But this is not because of science, better not because of astronomy or new discovers of physics. It was not Copernicus who put into discussion Medieval astrology.
It was philology.
Because astrologers saw that translations of Greek texts were interpolated by Arabs, they were not true to the originals.
Renaissance astrologers came back to Ptolemy rather than dismiss him, see for example Cardano who from aphorisms in Medieval fashion arrived to the Comment of Tetrabiblos.


margherita