Skyscript Astrology Forum

Right: can we please have less (and by less I mean none at all) sneering comments about 'traditional astrology' and 'traditional astrologers' on the Skyscript forum generally, and especially here in the Traditional forum?

All labels and definitions without exception can be problematized, but we do need them, or we won't be able to communicate at all. If anyone has a genuine question on the meaning of a term, and/or suggestions on how current usage may be improved, that's fine. Likewise, if someone who has actually read William Lilly's CA (and perhaps other writings) carefully would like to bring attention to, ask questions about, or raise discussion on, how Lilly used the houses (etc.) in practice, that would be very welcome.

The fact that Lilly lived and worked at the end of the early modern period, and made use of some techniques and ideas that had been formulated in his own lifetime, is old news.

it's a two way street martin... modern and 'modern traditional', which is my new name for traditional circa 1990 forward.. cheers james

If by 'two way street' you mean that others are using the same sort of tone in their posts as you have been using in yours of late, James, then no, I don't think they are. I will take the opportunity here to direct everyone's attention to the very first paragraph in the Forum policies:

Most important: be respectful to other members. Remember that most of this board is public and do not post comments that could cause offence or be construed as objectionable in content or insulting in tone. Memberships are suspended and then cancelled if this foremost policy is ignored.

Having said that, differences between what you call 'modern traditional' astrology (which we could also call reconstructionist astrology, in that it tries to a greater or lesser extent, and more or less successfully, to reconstruct a tradition that has in fact been wholly or partly lost) and actual ancient or medieval practice (as found in the textual evidence) are a very relevant topic to this forum, and I for one would welcome discussions on it.

martin

you've already derailed this thread once, and now you are doing it again... if you want to know what i mean by 'two way street', i am happy to continue in a private message format.. otherwise, do me a favour and delete your interrogation posts here.. thanks...

Lilly and Regiomontanus

Why are 90% (or even more ?) of horaries based on Regiomontanus? Because Lilly used Regiomontanus. Why did he do so? Because nearly everybody used this house system then. Had Placidus been in use those days Lilly would have relied on that system. - Using Regiomontanus nowadays seems to be a kind of poorly reflected automatism.

james_m wrote: Tue Jan 14, 2025 11:29 pm martin

you've already derailed this thread once, and now you are doing it again... if you want to know what i mean by 'two way street', i am happy to continue in a private message format.. otherwise, do me a favour and delete your interrogation posts here.. thanks...

No, it is obvious to me that the reminder of forum policy is necessary, so I'm going to let it stand. Nobody is derailing your thread, and you are not doing much yourself to keep the original topic going (such as demonstrating the modern-style sign/house equation that you apparently want to attribute to Lilly). Conversations take different turns, and when Astrophilus (not I) asked a more general question in this thread and you objected to myself and others answering it, I split the thread to oblige you, overlooking for the time being your aggressive and discourteous tone. But my patience is wearing thin.

lunlumo

it is an interesting comment and i don't know the history on it, but perhaps the tables available to make charts were in regio, not placidus?? hard to know..

--------------

the reason for the thread was to draw attention to the issue of the 12 houses, with william lilly making a direct connection between the 12 houses and the 12 signs - what he refers to as the 'cosignifactors' of the houses... first house cosignifactor is aries, the first sign and on and on for the 12 houses/signs... i think this is what ed referred to as the alphabet approach to astrology.. also, the observation that the houses and the signs don't have any difference when it comes to the parts of the body addressed... someone on this thread had mentioned a word for this - i can't remember the word...

ouranos shared a few posts from anthony louis which tried to address this topic of what lilly meant by the cosignifactors, but he avoided or was unable to address this parallel between the 12 houses and 12 signs which lilly supports in his chapter 7 of christian astrology...

no one has addressed this in any effective way as i see it.. i have been given the impression this was some 'modern' astrology invention, i thought i'd point out the discrepancy, given what lilly says in his christian astrology book... it looks like it was a 'traditional' astrology invention based on reading chapter 7 of lilly..

As far as I know the equations 1st Houe=Aries, 2nd= Taurus etc. became familiar with the revival of astrology in the late 19th century. But indeed: 12th house = Pisces?? 12th house means imprisonment and the like - and Pisces has nothing to do with prisons. It means vastness, leaving borders behind etc. - I've never found a convincing argument for "1st house= Aries".