I had forgotten to note that Victoria's ascendant is a degree from Aldebaran, and the Lot of Fortune is in the degree of Aldebaran just below the ascendant. This will be true in any zodiac, but a sidereal astrologer would automatically note the degree as it remains the same through the centuries.

Konrad wrote:

Well, the culminating Jupiter acting as spearbearer to the Sun will surely have something to do with the length of her reign, as would the rising luminaries.

Are you considering orbs here? Victoria's MC is all the way over near the 9th equal cusp, and Jupiter is 14 degrees from that point and more than a trine away from the Sun. I was under the impression that spear bearing happened in adjacent signs. (But I'm now a little rusty on Hellenistic concepts, having too much to think about...)

Anyway, I'll try to find ADB charts with the luminaries rising and Jupiter in a 9th house trine to the east of the M.C.

Without even looking at their essential dignity, we could say that this particular combination of those three would lead to a "royal" nativity. Basically, you have the light of the time rising supported by powerful sect-mates rising before him.

For the benefit of readers, could you define "light of the time" and "sect mates?"

This is a potent configuration. It is interesting too that with Saturn in fall (exalted in the sign before the one you would recognise) ruling this Jupiter...

You have lost me here. I think you might have to provide an illustration of the chart you are delineating. I can provide the sidereal chart, but that's not the chart you are using.

Second to that is the fact that Venus is beneficially configured....

Please explain "beneficially configured" for the benefit of readers.

...but in the 12th sign of isolation and bondage - it was her marriage partner dying that sent her into that mode of living.

Venus in the 12th will certainly describe the loss of a loved one, but from studying many hundreds (thousands?) of charts, the 12th doesn't check out as a house of isolation and bondage. It's a very externally active house.

But how are you measuring the 12th house? I use the Raman-Vehlow house system, though it isn't traditional. But there are suggestions of this type of measurement in Dorotheus.

I think you have to begin your delineations by defining the basics you are using. (Sorry, I'm a trained teacher, and principles have to be clearly defined at the start as they won't be clear to everyone trying to understand a thread.)

Konrad wrote:

In short, I am precessing the domicile rulerships and the exaltations.

Are you saying that you don't believe they apply as set in the sidereal zodiac? So you are trying to make them fit in the tropical zodiac??

Since these don't work well in the tropical zodiac, tropical astrologers have defaulted to psychological generalities.

Insulting. But its an all too familiar refrain from you. I will leave you guys to it. I am clearly wasting my time here.

Mark

Therese Hamilton wrote:Konrad wrote:

Well, the culminating Jupiter acting as spearbearer to the Sun will surely have something to do with the length of her reign, as would the rising luminaries.

Are you considering orbs here? Victoria's MC is all the way over near the 9th equal cusp, and Jupiter is 14 degrees from that point and more than a trine away from the Sun. I was under the impression that spear bearing happened in adjacent signs. (But I'm now a little rusty on Hellenistic concepts, having too much to think about...)

Orbs for what, culminating? If yes, then no, I'm not. A planet in the sign of and approaching the MC is powerful regardless of how far away it is.

Anyway, I'll try to find ADB charts with the luminaries rising and Jupiter in a 9th house trine to the east of the M.C.

Great, that will be good.

For the benefit of readers, could you define "light of the time" and "sect mates?"

Light of the Time is the luminary of the sect: sun by day, Moon by night. Each has two other sect mates. For the Sun, that is Jupiter and Saturn. For the Moon, Mars and Venus. Mercury can be either depending on if he is rising before the sun in the morning (then he is Diurnal). Rising after he is nocturnal.

You have lost me here. I think you might have to provide an illustration of the chart you are delineating. I can provide the sidereal chart, but that's not the chart you are using.

Well, it actually is the chart I am using. As I have said, I have merely moved the domicile and exaltation rulerships back one sign, so Mars rules Pisces, Venus Aries and so on.

Please explain "beneficially configured" for the benefit of readers.

In her own sign without the ray of a malefic. A lack of malefic regard is one of the signs of bonification outlined in Porphyry, as is having a benefic placed in the 10th sign from a planet. Victoria's Venus being bonified and lording the Lot of Marriage which is in the same sign, so is similarly influenced by the lack of malefics and Jupiter's overcoming, shows her healthy marriage to one man, but also that Venusian things, and marriage in particular, will bring her (Victoria) 12th house significations. Added to this is Saturn's natural significations (isolation etc.) and with him being in fall (one who is shunned or ignored according to Dykes' translations of the Arabic texts) means that anything he rules will have this sort of material to work with. He rules Jupiter, who is acting as spearbearer and is thus important to her social standing. So with Jupiter's own power, he is able to bring social standing, but with Saturn providing for him (Jupiter is not in anyof his own dignities), the eventual receding of Victoria from public affairs is shown. If Saturn was out-of-sect, we could expect that she would be shamed out of power, or removed forcibly. For me, this is a well-placed, well-supported, but debilitated, in-sect malefic giving something, yet at a cost.

Venus in the 12th will certainly describe the loss of a loved one, but from studying many hundreds (thousands?) of charts, the 12th doesn't check out as a house of isolation and bondage. It's a very externally active house.

Well, I'd have to disagree there. The 12th house is not a friendly place, and doubly so in Victoria's chart with it also being the 12th house from Fortune.

But how are you measuring the 12th house? I use the Raman-Vehlow house system, though it isn't traditional. But there are suggestions of this type of measurement in Dorotheus.

Whole-sign houses, but I am also experimenting with counting houses from Fortune to modify the significations somewhat. In this chart, they are one in the same, soit doesn't matter.

I think you have to begin your delineations by defining the basics you are using. (Sorry, I'm a trained teacher, and principles have to be clearly defined at the start as they won't be clear to everyone trying to understand a thread.)

Keep me right and I'll explain what I need to.

Therese Hamilton wrote:Konrad wrote:

In short, I am precessing the domicile rulerships and the exaltations.

Are you saying that you don't believe they apply as set in the sidereal zodiac? So you are trying to make them fit in the tropical zodiac??

No, I am keeping the rulerships static relative to each other (the Sun and Moon rule conjoining signs, with Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn fanning out as normal), but moving the starting point back to match the movement of the Equinox through the Sidereal signs.

Mark wrote:

Since these don't work well in the tropical zodiac, tropical astrologers have defaulted to psychological generalities.

Insulting. But its an all too familiar refrain from you. I will leave you guys to it. I am clearly wasting my time here.

Mark

Just ignore it, Mark. I'd appreciate it if you at least engaged with me here. I understand if you don't want to know though.

Konrad wrote:Well, Martin, if you do in fact see the whole rulership scheme based upon the position of Regulus, then we both find each other's argument flimsy.

I don't know where you got that from; I don't think I mentioned Regulus once (though, now that you mention it, it is the only star actually named 'King' that I can think of, off-hand). What I have mentioned several times is the symbolism of the entire constellation of the Lion (Leo) and its natural homology with the King and therefore with the Sun.

I'd like to leave my role in this part of the discussion there as I don't have the inclination to try and convince you I am right.

Of course. The arguments have probably all been set out, or failed to be set out, by now anyway.

Ha ha, a pleasure as always, Martin. If you have the time to contribute to our practical discussions, that would be good.

Konrad wrote:Ha ha, a pleasure as always, Martin. If you have the time to contribute to our practical discussions, that would be good.

Meaning no offence, I don't think that would serve much purpose. When participants disagree on so many fundamental principles, discussions rather tend to take the form of several parallel monologues.

Martin Gansten wrote:

Konrad wrote:Ha ha, a pleasure as always, Martin. If you have the time to contribute to our practical discussions, that would be good.

Meaning no offence, I don't think that would serve much purpose. When participants disagree on so many fundamental principles, discussions rather tend to take the form of several parallel monologues.

I understand, I actually have the same reservations, but we'll see how it goes.

Konrad wrote:

Well, it [the sidereal chart] actually is the chart I am using. As I have said, I have merely moved the domicile and exaltation rulerships back one sign, so Mars rules Pisces, Venus Aries and so on.

O.K., now I think I finally get what you are doing. But it's way too much to wrap my head around--changing rulerships from a system that has been set perhaps far back in pre-recorded history. If tropical astrologers have this much trouble (as I'm having with this new rulership system), then I fully sympathize with their difficulty in perceiving signs sidereally.

I just don't see the need for adjusting rulerships in this way. If your goal is to incorporate seasonal symbolism, there are easier ways to do that.

Thank you, Konrad, for taking the time to explain the particulars of your delineation. Now I'll try to find similar charts to Victoria's in ADB. (The two lights rising and Jupiter to the east of the M.C. or perhaps Jupiter conjunct the M.C.) As I understand it, you don't believe that the signs of these planets are particularly important?

Therese Hamilton wrote:Konrad wrote:

Well, it [the sidereal chart] actually is the chart I am using. As I have said, I have merely moved the domicile and exaltation rulerships back one sign, so Mars rules Pisces, Venus Aries and so on.

O.K., now I think I finally get what you are doing. But it's way too much to wrap my head around--changing rulerships from a system that has been set perhaps far back in pre-recorded history. If tropical astrologers have this much trouble (as I'm having with this new rulership system), then I fully sympathize with their difficulty in perceiving signs sidereally.

I just don't see the need for adjusting rulerships in this way. If your goal is to incorporate seasonal symbolism, there are easier ways to do that.

Thank you, Konrad, for taking the time to explain the particulars of your delineation. Now I'll try to find similar charts to Victoria's in ADB. (The two lights rising and Jupiter to the east of the M.C. or perhaps Jupiter conjunct the M.C.) As I understand it, you don't believe that the signs of these planets are particularly important?

No, I do. I'm just saying that whether the Moon is exalted or not at Victoria's birth won't affect the point that this chart is one of high standing as the Sun is so powerful and supported by his sect-mates. The rulerships add a little more detail and a depth of quality that wouldn't be there otherwise though.