Mark have you checked De-Vore's Encyclopedia of Astrology - I think copies are easily accessed via the web. If it is mentioned in that book (1947) then at least we know that it wasn't something that someone like Rudhyar invented.

Marc Edmund Jones?

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/aspects2.html

Ah, that's interesting. Here is the comment from Nicholas Campion in the article Margherita linked to:

The general location of planets in the chart has long been an important consideration, but it was only in this century that certain patterns were formally identified and labelled, initially by the American astrologer Marc Edmund Jones. Examination of the chart shape forms a very useful part of any basic reading of the horoscope.

Mark, might be worth emailing Nick to see if he still has his reference for that remark.

Thanks Margherita/Deb,

Funnily enough when I asked the person displaying the Yods who first proposed them he suggested Marc Edmund Jones too.

However, I think there is a bit of confusion here between aspect patterns and planetary shapes.

The former are the Grand Trine, Grand Square, T Square, Yod, Kite, Mystic Rectangle etc. The latter were definitely proposed by Marc Edmund Jones. These are the Splay, Splash, Bundle, Bucket, Locomotive, and See-Saw. The planetary shapes proposed by Marc Edmund Jones are not based on aspectual relationships between the planets. They are purely visual. In contrast aspect patterns rely on such connections.

Marc Edmund Jones first set out his ideas on planetary shapes in his book The Guide to Horoscope Interpretation which was first published in 1941.

The search for the origin of aspect patterns goes on....

Mark

I am sure you are right Mark - just trying to find a benchmark to start working backwards. So what is the earliest reference to the yod that you know of currently?

Deb wrote:

I am sure you are right Mark - just trying to find a benchmark to start working backwards. So what is the earliest reference to the yod that you know of currently?

To be honest Deb I only starting seriously looking into this yesterday so I can hardly claim to have researched this much yet.

I have taken a look at both the Karen Hamaker-Zondag and Joan Kellogg books on Yods on google books but neither appear to discuss the specific historical origin of the Yod. Somewhat surprising for books devoted to the topic!

However, in her book, Karen Hamaker-Zondag does discuss the revolution in aspect theory initiated by Johannes Kepler. Karen Hamaker-Zondag clearly identifies Kepler as the originator of the quincunx which is an important element in how the Yod developed.

Karen Hamaker-Zondag (writing in the year 2000) seems to think the quincunx 150? 'aspect' only gained prominence in astrology in the last few decades.

It is remarkable that this aspect was simply was not studied, or was considered to be minor for so long, although this has fortunately changed over the last decades. This aspect is not new. Johannes Kepler referred to the 150 degree aspect and describes it as 'cutting sharply'. Koch, who analysed Kepler's study of aspects describes the aspect as a ''clearly splitting tendency that sets both possibilities in a clear cut opposition to each other''. In his view it indicates limitations and disappointment, because the situation insists on a decision. With the quincunx we would tend to only look at the opportunity that was missed and not at the one that was realized. The Yod Book, Karen Hamaker-Zondag (2000)

Karen Hamaker-Zondag references the work of the German astrologer Walter Koch who wrote a work on Kepler's aspect theory in 1952 entitled Aspektlehre nach Johannes Kepler.I have found an earlier edition of the work from 1950 too. Koch is of course best known in the astrological community for the house system that carries his name.

I took a look at Nicholas De Vore's Encyclopedia of Astrology (1947)

While the Grand Trine and Grand Cross get a mention the Yod doesn't. Indeed De Vore seems to be operating from a fairly traditional approach to the Inconjunct. Hence, De Vore states:

Inconjunct, Dissociate. These are terms sometimes applied to the Semisextile and the Quincunx aspects, as indicative that no relationship can exist between adjacent signs and houses, or between those which are one sign or house less than an opposition.

I would like to take a look at Sakoian and Acker's book The Inconjunct-Quincunx The Not so Minor Aspect which was published in 1972. This may have been influential on US astrology.

Mark

I'm not sure about the Yod particularly but if we look at aspect patterns more generally then I think at the very least Rudhyar mentions them.

Rudhyar - Person Centred Astrology (1972), p205
This is following descriptions of Jones' chart patterns, Rudhyar moves onto chart patterns in which the planets are clustered into trines. Rudhyar moves on to talk about the 'tripod' pattern.

The foundation of such a pattern being the trine aspect, this type of distribution of the planets around the chart normally emphasizes all the characteristic figures of that aspect. Sri Aurobindo's chart is most characteristic. It contains two grand trines: one, in fire signs, links the rising broad conjunctions of Jupiter and the Sun in Leo, to Neptune in Aries (ninth House) and to the Moon in Sagittarius (fifth House) - the other, in earth signs, links Mercury in Virgo (second House) to Saturn in Capricorn (sixth House) and to Pluto in Taurus (tenth House).

Rudhyar then goes on to discuss other chart patterns which implies that he sees the Grand Trine aspect pattern as a chart pattern, or, rather, that the grand trine derives from the chart pattern philosophy of Jones. I don't have Jones' books so I've no idea if he describes this tripod pattern. Rudhyar mentions other aspect patterns such as the T Square but I am not sure if he mentions the Yod.


Regarding James Lewis' Heavenly Influences, I am not sure when this was printed, I have a digital version of this but it is copyrighted to 2003 as a second edition, I am not sure when the first edition was published or whether Yods etc. were mentioned in the first edition. Deb, is the version you have a first edition?

EDIT:
On page 745 Lewis mentions regarding the Yod that

The term ?yod,? as well as the other, more dramatic names for the pattern, originated with Carl Leipert, a student of history and comparative religion. This con- figuration has been intensively studied by Thyrza Escobar and Dane Rudyhar.

Paul wrote:

On page 745 Lewis mentions regarding the Yod that
The term ?yod,? as well as the other, more dramatic names for the pattern, originated with Carl Leipert, a student of history and comparative religion. This con- figuration has been intensively studied by Thyrza Escobar and Dane Rudyhar.

Thanks Paul!

That is very helpful. I hadn't heard of Carl Leipert or Thyrza Escobar before so thanks for this steer.

As I stated above Nicholas De Vore's Encyclopedia of Astrology (1947) mentions both the Grand Trine and Grand Cross. I seem to recall, reading a Charles Carter book referring to a Grand Trine in a book written before WWII. I will try to find the reference later.

Mark

From what I have have been able to gleam so far Carl Leipert (who appears to be the originator of the term Yod) was an astrologer in pre-WWII Germany. Thyrza Escobar-Jones (no connection to Marc Edmund Jones) wrote a book entitled ''The Star Wheel? a golden seal research book (copyright 1965). It seems to have built upon Carl Leipert's theory of spiraling cycles in a measured rhythm. I assume the Yod is discussed in the book at length although I haven't personally verified that. Thyrza Escobar appears to be a significant source in the transmission of the idea of the Yod to North American astrology.

Mark

Mark wrote: As I stated above Nicholas De Vore's Encyclopedia of Astrology (1947) mentions both the Grand Trine and Grand Cross. I seem to recall, reading a Charles Carter book referring to a Grand Trine in a book written before WWII. I will try to find the reference later.

Mark

Hi Mark, so you have a 1947 edition?

You mentioned Charles Carter so I thought I'd take a look in the only Charles Carter book I own.

The Principles of Astrology pg32

The Grand Trine

It sometimes happens that two bodies are in trine and a third body is in trine with each. Such a configuration was considered very evil by medieval writers and unfortunately this view appears to be often correct. Often there seems to be too great dependence upon others

What's interesting to me is the slant that the grand trine is negative, the very opposite of what most people write about it these days. Of course laziness has long been seen as a disadvantage of the grand trine and I think the gist of this 'resting on your laurels' idea can be found here by Carter, but it's interesting that it is the main, or indeed, sole, focus of the aspect.

As for dating, the original edition was published in 1925. The version I have is a third edition published in 1939 in which he says he makes only minor additions and that "on the whole, however, the book remains unchanged".

Thanks Paul,

I knew Carter mentioned grand trines somewhere!

What I find especially interesting is Carter's statement:

Such a configuration was considered very evil by medieval writers and unfortunately this view appears to be often correct.

I am not aware of any traditional source discussing 'Grand Trines' in natal astrology. I wonder what source(s) Carter had in mind? Nearly, all traditionalists regard the idea of aspect patterns as a technique of modern astrology. Are we wrong?

Paul wrote:

What's interesting to me is the slant that the grand trine is negative, the very opposite of what most people write about it these days.

To be fair some modern astrologers do teach that grand trines are not necessarily that positive. Indeed, Noel Tyl teaches they reflect a 'self defence mechanism' and can create a 'closed circuit' which cuts the person off due to their particular elemental comfort zone.

http://www.hniizato.com/2008/04/grand-t ... ense/.html

Mark

[quote]"someone like Rhudyar" [quote]

I like that, one of history's most infamous butchers, of the English language (to say nothing of the language of Astrology).
I don't recall if I first read about the yod in Mark Edmund Jones book of aspect patterns or Meyers Handbook. I acquired them both during the same month, shortly after I began encountering people whose charts had so many aspects over laying each other, they made me feel as confused as the current US president (Reagan) looked. I am grateful to Jones for helping me through that period of confusion, though I haven't looked at a wheel and seen a locomotive in many years.
About the finger of god, I recall that the point directly opposite the planet catching the two quincunxes was where the finger of god was pointing, I even used that information in a couple readings, where yods were being transited, but never did find out of the information was useful of prediction accurate.
The only quality of the quincunx I can speak to from my own experience is that it is an aspect that occurs disproportionately in the nativities of police informants.


[/quote]