Even without astrology I`d be surprised if he lost to Miliband. I don`t think he`s the sort the British on the whole take to

But note that Mercury is going R soon

Hi...

I wanted to post something on houses from Book I of Dorotheus' Carmen Astrologicum, but can't find the link to Book 1 on Skyscript. I only see the link to Book III. Can someone point me to the link? Thanks.

therese

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/dorotheus1.pdf

found towards the bottom of this page

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

under reviews and reprints..

Thank you, James. Long page!! No wonder I couldn't find it.

There are at least two places in Dorotheus where a 15 degree orb from cusps is mentioned. This mention may be a precursor to the concept of cusps as the centers of equal houses. The first reference is in Book 1:7 on the upbringing of natives:

A chapter. The upbringing of natives...
Now I will tell you the matter of natives, and for whom there will be a good upbringing and for whom an upbringing will not be known. This is known from what I wrote for you without trouble and without pain. Look concerning this at the seven places [about] which I informed you that they are the strongest of them - the four cardines, the triplicity of the ascendent, and the eleventh place. If the nativity is diurnal and you find diurnal planets in one of these places, he will be brought up. If the nativity is nocturnal and nocturnal planets are in one of these places, it indicates similarly concerning the matter of upbringing. If a benefic is in one of these places, it is beneficial. If you find a planet [such that there are] fifteen degrees between it and the ascendent, then, even if it is in the second sign from the ascendent, reckon its power as if it were in the ascendent. But if it goes beyond this, it has no strength in the ascendent and it is an indication of those who will have no upbringing.

The second reference is in Book 1:26:

A chapter. The magnitude of fortune and property.
Now I will show you the magnitude of fortune and property. Look at the lord of the triplicity of the sign in which is the shining luminary. If you find it in one of these four cardines in [such a way] that there are fifteen degrees [or less] between it and the cardine, then predict about him that he will be most perfect in fortune and property. If it is in the second fifteen degrees, then predict concerning him the second fortune, which is what is available of what I told you in the beginning, as the nearer it is to the degree of the cardine, the higher it is for his rank in eminence and fortune. If that planet which is the lord of the triplicity of the shining [luminary] is in the third fifteen degrees, then the owner of this nativity will not be known, but according to this he will be middling in property and fortune.
-----------end Dorotheus quotes-------------

From a personal viewpoint, I'd rather the equal house system under discussion be called "Raman-Vehlow" rather than "Vehlow-Raman." This is because what is known as the Raman system has been commonly used for many decades in India. I think maybe it was Mark who first drew our attention to the same house system used by Vehlow. B.V. Raman has been the most popular champion of the astrology of his country whereas Vehlow was more of a singleton astrologer whom we have only recently learned about.

However, it's fascinating that these two men settled upon the same house system in their work as the most accurate. Taking the clue from Raman, I've used this system in my work since the 1970s When I first began to study India's astrology, Raman's books were the only texts readily available in the United States at that time except for Robert DeLuce's Constellational Astrology. DeLuce preferred the Sripati house system.

Mark wrote:Actually, I thought I was the first person to coin the term Vehlow-Raman or Raman-Vehlow house system but maybe not!

I most likely learned this term from you then and stored it anonymously in my internal astro glossary.

Mark wrote:From my admitedly crude reading of Vehlow thanks to google translate and some basic High school German I thought he especially emphasized the solar connection and the 15 degree orb of the sun either side of the ASC. He also mentions Egyptian solar mysticism somewhere too I think.

If we want to think of house cusps as aspects to the ASC, then the Vehlow concept is the most intuitive one.

Since Vehlow's time there has been lots of research into early house systems. While the question is by no means resolved a lot of astrologers seem to think whole sign houses was the likeliest candidate as the earliest template for all later house systems. Advocates of this view include Robert Hand, Robert Schmidt, Ben Dykes, Chris Brennan etc.

For a long time, many astrologers took for granted that Equal Houses was the one and only system used by ancient astrologers. Of course we now know this to be incorrect. Now WHS is in vogue in traditional astrology. It will be interesting to see the next turn of the wheel (no pun intended).

However, there does seem some evidence of early use of both Porphyry and Equal houses too. So the reality may have been more complex. Deborah Houlding researched some interesting evidence from Vettius Valens (2nd century CE) which seemed to show he may have used all three systems. The logic of an equal house sector 30 degree from the ASC also seems to be expressed by Dorotheus (1st century CE). He stated the influence of the ASC extended 30 degrees from the ASC zodiacally. Nevertheless, I haven?t seen any support for the idea that Vehlow?s system was around in ancient astrology.

In addition I am not aware that the Thema Mundi assumes the ASC must fall in the middle of Cancer. I think it is actually all the planets that fall at 15 degress in the Thema Mundi. At least according to the Roman astrologer Firmicus Maternus. Its usually presented in a whole sign manner. I would be interested what sources Vehlow looked at that seemed to suggest this.

Vehlow may have been led astray by relatively modern illustrations that didn't take WHS into account (hardly known at his time).

Therese Hamilton wrote:

There are at least two places in Dorotheus where a 15 degree orb from cusps is mentioned. This mention may be a precursor to the concept of cusps as the centers of equal houses. The first reference is in Book 1:7 on the upbringing of natives.

Thanks very for digging those quotes up Therese! I was aware Dorotheus talks about the influence of the ASC extending well beyond the ASC as I had read Ben Dykes bringing this up. But I didn't follow the reference up and was sure he had referred to the influence extending 30 degrees from the ASC. I better go back and look at his book to see if he is referring to the same section as you. It sounds like it.

Dykes suggests this was an alternative system of assessing planetary strength to the early use of Porphyry. It clearly not a house system as Dorotheus talks about this influence extending to the 2nd house (whole sign?)

Its not quite the same as the Raman-Vehlow system though as Dorotheus only seems to see the influence extending zodiacally from the ASC and not diurnally.

Still, as someone that likes a traditional basis for my techniques I find this a useful steer in encouraging me to explore Raman-Vehlow houses further. Although for now I am thinking of it more as a planetary strength tool to back up whole sign houses.

Therese wrote:

From a personal viewpoint, I'd rather the equal house system under discussion be called "Raman-Vehlow" rather than "Vehlow-Raman." This is because what is known as the Raman system has been commonly used for many decades in India. I think maybe it was Mark who first drew our attention to the same house system used by Vehlow. B.V. Raman has been the most popular champion of the astrology of his country whereas Vehlow was more of a singleton astrologer whom we have only recently learned about.

I have tended to alternate the terms depending on context. Most western astrologers know this as the Vehlow system while in India today its often attributed to B.V.Raman. Although I have seen at least one Indian astrologer suggest the system is much older. When I researched this topic a couple of years ago I couldn't find any hard evidence to support your assertion that Raman was using the system first. In terms of written sources at least the conclusion one would likely take is that both EH Bailey and Vehlow were probably using the system before B.V.Raman. Although, as I acknowledge later here that doesn't mean your necessarily wrong about the age of this system in India. Its simply that old chestnut of finding the hard evidence...

To recap some information from my thread on the Indian forum I will quote myself here!

The earliest reference to the system in writing I have seen is not either from either Vehlow or Raman but a British astrologer which Vehlow acknowledges in his book:

Vehlow does quote an English astrologer called EH Bailey who had written two articles in the ''British Journal of Astrology" from 1928 who advocated equal houses with central cusps. Bailey himself does attribute the idea to 'Hindu astrology' and quotes the astrological text of Sripati. At present he appears to be the first astrologer to propose this system in writing.

The important point here is that Sripati houses are not equal but a variation on what we know in western astrology as Porphyry with the cusps in the centre rather than beginning of houses. So it seems EH Bailey may have improvised this variation of equal houses based on the inspiration from Sripati houses he read about in an Indian astrological text. As I said in the older thread:

Moreover, E.H. Bailey had previously collaborated with Alan Leo who advocated an Equal House variant with the ASC as the 1st house cusp from the turn of the century. So it wouldn't have been an immense leap for E.H. Bailey to have developed the idea quite independently of B.V. Raman.

Bailey seems to suggest he had used this variant on equal houses for several years. This means Bailey was probably using the system before B.V Raman even took up astrology.

Nb: B.V. Raman was only born in 1912!

What about Vehlow's first use of this system?

The issue remains when did Johannes Vehlow first propose the system that carries his name in the west? Vehlow wrote a piece specifically on this house system in 1931 entitled , Das H?userproblem in der Astrologie (AsBl, 13.Jhg., Hefte 6, 8-9) (The House Problem in Astrology (ASBL, 13.Jhg., Notebooks 6, 8-9)

He also wrote earlier astrological works on the German Republic (1922) and President Paul Von Hindenburg (1925). I dont know if Vehlow was using the middle cusp Equal House system as early as this or not. I have contacted the Vehlow Society in Germany to try to track down his earliest mention of this system.

Sadly, I never got a response from the Vehlow Society in Germany on this. However, now we have people who can read Vehlow's works in German here perhaps we can track down his first reference to the system in writing? In particular Vehlow's articles before he published Das H?userproblem in der Astrologie Das H?userproblem in der Astrologie in 1931.

However, I think your point Therese is not that B.V. Raman first used the system but was rather that he is the most famous representative of a much older Indian astrological house system? Is that a fair synopsis of why you propose to call the system Raman-Vehlow rather than the other way around?

Although my research was by no means exhaustive I did find one modern Indian astrologer appearing to support the antquity of this system. Another quote from my thread:

I have been reading the book ?Predictive Astrology of The Hindus? by Pandit Gopesh Kumar Ojha. The copy I possess is a reprint of the 1972 first edition. One thing thing I like about this author is that he frequently cites a traditional text for where he derives a technique. Something you don?t see in most of the popular ?Vedic astrology? books today!

In chapter 7 Ojha discusses the astrological houses. He spends a few pages discussing house systems. He mentions the well known whole sign or rasi system. He also discusses the Porphyry house system but states this is not authentically Indian in origin. Although one could argue the same for whole sign houses! He does though acknowledge a variation of the Porphyry system with centralised cusps which is mentioned in the paddhati by Sripati.

Intriguingly though Ojha comes out in support of the Vehlow-Raman system on the grounds of both its efficacy and its antiquity within India.

Oijha states:
Quote:
'But as we consider the equal house division more scientific and the older Hindu method we are using it in this book.?

Unfortunately, we hit a total dead end in trying to find any evidence to support such statements in Indian astrological texts. Martin Gansten the moderator on the Indian forum and an authority on Indian astrological texts concluded there was no firm evidence to support the idea of Ojha that this system of was old and dated from antiquity. Martin has emphasized the traditional importance of whole sign houses in India and from the medieval period the Sripati system.

I am open to the possibility this system is much much older than we realise. I just await some hard evidence to confirm it!

Its possible at the very least that B.V. Raman learned this system from his grandfather who was also an astrologer. So that would place the system in that family back to the 19th century.

A more sceptical view could be that astrologers have been so influenced by B.V. Raman in India they associate any of his ideas with antquity. B.V.was an immensely influential Indian astrologer. Indeed he was arguably the most well known Indian astrologer in the 20th century. And India has a strong tradition of venerating the past. Astrological ideas are usually assumed to be ancient when sometimes the evidence indicates otherwise.

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

I am trying not to close down any line of enquiry here. So I invite astrologers to send me any information they have either here or by PM . If you find evidence Vehlow was using his system in the early 1920s do let me know. For example what house system was Vehlow using in his article on President Paul Von Hindenburg in 1922?

Equally, if you find any Indian astrological text supporting the use of the 'Raman system' before the work of EH Bailey or Vehlow appeared in writing do let me know!

Thanks

Mark

Mark wrote:

Still, as someone that likes a traditional basis for my techniques I find this a useful steer in encouraging me to explore Raman-Vehlow houses further. Although for now I am thinking of it more as a planetary strength tool to back up whole sign houses.

Mark, reading through all you wrote here, I don?t think we?ll ever have an answer as to who used the Raman-Vehlow house system first. It?s more interesting that it appeared in print around the same time from different sources. Astrology and invention are like that. A particular idea suddenly attracts our notice as brought to the surface by different people who may even live in different parts of the world. I suspect many inventions have followed this pattern.

In India this house system may have evolved over time in the personal practice of individual astrologers. Prior to B.V. Raman and his grandfather?s published books, much astrological knowledge was kept within families and transmitted orally. There are probably many thousands of useful astrological tidbits that are lost to us due to these practices. And terminology changes as well. We?ve just now changed ?Indian Equal House? to Raman-Vehlow or Vehlow-Raman!

This house system is really a map of aspects to the angles. Every cadent or succedent house forms a trine aspect to an angular cusp or cardine. This is why houses that are trine to one another reflect some similar ideas as Morin and others have pointed out. So planets close to cusps in every house have the opportunity to be expressed externally due to this relationship to cardines. (Also the 27 lunar mansions tie into the cuspal trine idea.)

In India a modern system has been developed by V.K. Choudhry, Systems Approach. In this system the greatest importance is placed on planets in the ascendant degree in all 12 houses. Choudhry writes: ?The rising degree in the ascendant is known as the most effective point (MEP) in all the houses...Any planet conjunct within 5 degrees in that house would be influencing the significations of the house in question in a pronounced manner depending on the functional nature of that planet...? (Systems Approach for Interpreting Horoscopes, p. 14)

In my own work I?ve always considered that any planet close to an equal cusp (on either side of the cusp) will in some way play a prominent role in a person?s life. This places the M.C. in another perspective as it often doesn?t appear near the zenith or 10th house cusp in an equal house system measured from the ascendant.

However, I think your point Therese is not that B.V. Raman first used the system but was rather that he is the most famous representative of a much older Indian astrological house system? Is that a fair synopsis of why you propose to call the system Raman-Vehlow rather than the other way around?

Yes, that?s the reason, plus as Rohiniranjan was quoted on the other thread as saying: from the time she first studied astrology in India 40 years ago, she can never remember when that house system wasn?t used. So at least among some Indian astrologers, it?s in common use today. I don?t think Raman invented the system, as he said it was only one of the house systems he tested.

When I look at sunsrise in my Stellarium software it makes a lot of sense to start 1st house about an hour before the Sun rises,and of course the cusp or sunrise is the strongest point.

Just my gut feeling

The only way is to look at charts of famous people,but I haven`t got a software that switches celebrity charts from placidus to Vehlow

astrocorreia wrote:The only way is to look at charts of famous people,but I haven`t got a software that switches celebrity charts from placidus to Vehlow

All you need for Vehlow is to set your charts up as equal house, and visualize house lines as the centers of houses. That works very well as you can see which planets are near the lines, and thus important in the chart. I often make a small mark 15 degrees from the ascendant and write the degree by the mark to remind me where each house ends and the next begins. These "between house degrees" are weak for planets.

Therese Hamilton wrote:

astrocorreia wrote:The only way is to look at charts of famous people,but I haven`t got a software that switches celebrity charts from placidus to Vehlow

All you need for Vehlow is to set your charts up as equal house, and visualize house lines as the centers of houses. .

i agree therese... since i have worked with astro software and selected the equal house option, i continue to use my imagination to know what whole sign houses reveals, and one can do it the same for this.. funny thing about the imagination how it can do these sorts of things!! but then software is always trying to catch up.. i like that too!