Skyscript Astrology Forum

Lihin wrote:

By the way: Who, based on what authority, determines what and whom are 'mainstream?

My use of the term 'mainstream'was simply based on the fact that Morin proposed several fundamental reforms of the astrological tradition preceding him. Morin made these proposals on his own but was not followed by the rest of the astrological community of his time. So the term 'mainstream' is quantitative not qualitative. This term was not intended as a value judgement on the validity or not of Morin's ideas which everyone needs to determine for themselves.

In Hellenistic astrology ha?r?sis , a reflection of the most evident astronomical phenomenon of night and day, was a major, if not overriding principle of horoscopic astrology with two major schools of elemental rulerships by sect that have survived in practice: Dorotheus of Sidon and Klaudios Ptolomaios, one major difference between the two concerning the planet Mars, focus of this thread.

It is not clear the triplicity rulers were originally derived entirely on sect criteria. From some provisional research I think the idea of planetary rulers of the triplicities was Babylonian in origin and connected to the four winds. However, the Babylonians only seem to have had a single planet connected to each triplicity or direction. Clearly, though there was a reformulation of the idea by hellenistic astrologers.

Moreover, there were nuances on how the sect doctrine was presented in several hellenistic sources.

Mark

Good morning,

I agree with Mr Mark's last post. It again underscores the plurality of authors, opinions and schools present in Hellenistic and other astrologies. The intent of my last post was to give a simple, condensed overview.

Best regards,

lihin

Good morning,

As some other members have written, there was, accordingly to documents available to date, no uniform theory of elements underpinning Hellenistic astrology. Some of the systems available were:

1. winds and their directions (meteorological astrology was important), hot from south, cold from north, dry from east, moist from west

2. Stoic (fire - hot, air - cold, water - moist, earth - dry)

3. Aristotelian (fire - hot and dry, air - hot and moist, water - cold and moist, earth - cold and dry)

Within the framework of 2, the elemental lordships proposed by Dorotheus of Sidon and mostly used throughout Mediaeval astrology, make excellent sense. However, Mediaeval astrologers generally claimed to adhere to the Aristotelian paradigm. Thus, part of the Mediaeval system might appear inconsistent.

Perhaps Professor Dr Jean-Baptiste Morin was not an innovator of a new system of elemental planetary rulerships including ha?r?sis, but rather eliminated an inconsistency of Mediaeval astrology by applying consequentially the Aristotelian paradigm, number 3 above, and the Mediaeval order of essential dignities excluding confines and decans, for which he found no astronomical evidence. Klaudios Ptolomaios had stated domicile, exaltation and elemental rulerships in the same order.

The article linked above at Altair Astrology concludes that, based on Morin's premises, his conclusions are valid, hardly surprising. Alas, it contains only anecdoctal evidence, above all the author's own geniture.

Best regards,

lihin

Good evening,

Perhaps Mr Morning Sun may appreciate the following quotation from Signor Placido di Titi's Primum Mobile, on page 8 of an English translation by Mr John Cooper (my copy is from Amazon Deutschland and cost ? 30, emphasis added):

"Leaden and fiery colours, such as are in Saturn and Mars, shew an intemperature, cold and dry in Saturn, hot and dry in Mars. Saturn is more cold and dry and therefore masculine ; Mars more dry than hot and therefore feminine."

Placido apparently used the Aristotelian qualities:

• Heat and Coldness active, masculine;
  
  Dryness and Moistness - resultants - passive, feminine.

Astrological authors from Hellenistic times onward generally have not followed Aristotle here, although often if not mostly, especially in Mediaeval astrology, claiming to be based on his work. The text indicates that the Renaissance author Signor Placido di Titi studied Aristotle and gave the questions of planetary qualities their well merited attention.

Best regards,

lihin