13 by Jogi Hi Martin, in chapter XIII in Morin's 'Astrologia Gallica - Book 21' he talks shortly about the relationship of planets in a chart to significators in an another chart. Jogi Quote Sun Nov 06, 2011 7:01 pm
14 by Martin Gansten Jogi wrote:in chapter XIII in Morin's 'Astrologia Gallica - Book 21' he talks shortly about the relationship of planets in a chart to significators in an another chart. So he does; thanks for reminding me. I suppose we must call Morin a traditional source, although he flouted many older teachings. Quote Sun Nov 06, 2011 8:56 pm
15 by Jogi There's also a smal part in Johannes Schoener's "On the Judgment of Nativities" - Chapter 14: Conercerning the Native's Friends and Enemies. There he also gives some hints about signs of firm love or discord between two people. Quote Sun Nov 06, 2011 9:27 pm
16 by Tom I suppose we must call Morin a traditional source, although he flouted many older teachings. Yes, but he applied his ideas, where they differed, in the same manner to the same end as all other astrologers of his era and before. He didn't switch gears into "character analysis" or define Algol as "feminine fury." He did offer a different triplicity system but used triplicity rulers the same way as those who used the older system(s). He disregarded the terms and faces, famously dismissing them as "Arab fictions," but in fact his real reason for dismissal was their inconsistency with his ideas of natural philosophy. He challenged, as did Cardan, the idea of general significators, but so what. He was trying to produce more precision into delineation. He also wasn't the first astrologer to disagree with his ancestors, but he is the only one whose traditional credentials are challenged from time to time. Yet there isn't a modern astrologer who would call him his own. Every astrologer from Manilius on did not agree on everything until Morinus took up the subject. Nor did they all treat their peers and competitors with genteel grace. He was more flamboyant perhaps, but that is style, not substance. He was traditional by any sensible definition. Quote Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:25 pm
17 by Eddy Not really about synastry but about heredity and from not really a traditional astrologer however not born yesterday, Kepler: Kepler wrote:I believe that at the birth of children, and particularly of the first-born, the planets as well as the Ascendant and Midheaven usually are in the same zodiacal degree areas, or in square or opposition to those areas, as at the birth of the father, or (especially) of the mother. I believe also that the same or similar aspects occur... I was born when the Moon was short of an opposition to the Sun by forty degrees. With my first-born the Moon was short by the same amount of a conjunction with the Sun. With the second child the Moon had passed the opposition to the Sun by the same number of degrees. With the fourth child the Moon was 38 degrees from the opposition to the Sun. With the third child it was not much different, for the Moon was at a separation of 40 degrees from the Sun plus one day of lunar motion: the birth was expected the previous day. I pass over further examples that agree with these. source: Kenneth G. Negus: Kepler's Astrology http://cura.free.fr/docum/15kep-en.html All rights reserved ? 1987-2001 Kenneth G. Negus Assuming that children inherit from both parents, I think that both parents often might have positions that are similar and attract eachother. The use of hereditary resemblance may therefore also apply to synastry. Quote Mon Nov 07, 2011 4:01 pm
18 by OculusTauri Tom wrote:If I was going to be called on this, I should have expected it on Skyscript. Still to be fair to me, I never said no one ever mentioned it before the modern era. I just said it isn't considered a traditional topic: and it isn't. Look through the traditional forum and how often do we see it? Lilly missed it too. Hey Tom, I recently stumbled upon a reference in Lilly's CA III that no one seems to have mentioned yet. The segment is called "Whether there may be Concord or Unity between two" (pp. 637-639 in the Astrology Classics edition). It is located in the chapter about friends and 11th house matters. For example, Lilly states: "When in the Nativities of two, the places of the Fortunes or Lights are commutated with Fortunes, so as one has Venus, where the other has the Moon, a sure friendship may from hence be expected." (p.638) Lilly obviously does not restrict himself to male/female relationships like many modern astrologers do. Furthermore, his synastry is not limited to two persons only, but even interaspects in groups of people are considered: "When the places of the Infortunes are opposite in several men's Nativities, the Natives contend for mutual Lucre, as Advocates, Merchants, Lawyers and physicians." (p.639) Apart from that small segment, I have as yet not found other references to synastry in Lilly's writings. Quote Wed May 22, 2013 7:26 am
19 by Tom Good job. You are the first person I recall citing this chapter in CA and sure enough it is about what we would call synastry. Like virtually all of Lilly, he crams a great deal of information in a short space. Pages 637-639 is a course on traditional synastry. It also jarred my memory. While criticizing modern synastry, Frawley, in The Real Astrology, beginning on page 151 discusses the subject in some depth noting the differences in the way moderns do it from the way it would have been done in the past. He discuses the use of temperament in making this kind of judgment. Lilly mentions this, too in the pages cited above. Frawley didn't mention Lilly in this chapter, either. Well done. Quote Wed May 22, 2013 11:14 am
20 by OculusTauri No need to be fussy, but for the sake of completeness I now see that Lilly has added two short paragraphs just three pages later. So I regard it necessary to update my previous statement. Whose Friendship the Native must avoid, p. 642: "The Native must avoid his Friendship whose Lord of the ascendant is an Infortune, with Cauda or a fixed star of ill influence, or whose Nativity agrees not with his own; for he will offend thee, though he have no mind to it. If the Luminary of one's Geniture afflict with square or opposite places of another's, it argues, those two will be perpetual enemies; he of the two Enemies overcomes who has the more in number, and the more evident Significators of Victory and Fortune." Seems as if Lilly is done with synastry after these paragraphs. Quote Wed May 22, 2013 3:27 pm