Thanks everybody for your feedback!

I just started learning about this, and could use the practice - would Mercury be alcoccoden (the planet in the greatest dignity in the degree of the Sun), even though it is not actually conjunct Sun but in the same sign (they are not in aversion)? Or do you go with Venus, one of the trip rulers in aspect?

Also, how would you find a hyleg for someone like actress Natasha Richardson? Her diurnal Sun doesn't work, and neither does the Moon. On the day of her death, the transit Moon was conjunct her natal, and she had a Venus return too (which has greatest dignity at the degree of her diurnal Sun and the 8th house ruler). She was 49, which is close to the middle Venus age (if it's alcoccoden, it's in detriment but angular +/- aspects to Moon/Mars).

It is a preventional chart I think, so maybe the part of fortune. But it is conjunct Sun, and Venus again doesn't aspect, nor do any other rulers. Can you use the ASC trip rulers for a preventional? Would she just be a type three differentia?

http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Ric ... 2C_Natasha

Tanit wrote:I just started learning about this, and could use the practice - would Mercury be alcoccoden (the planet in the greatest dignity in the degree of the Sun), even though it is not actually conjunct Sun but in the same sign (they are not in aversion)? Or do you go with Venus, one of the trip rulers in aspect?

Also, how would you find a hyleg for someone like actress Natasha Richardson? Her diurnal Sun doesn't work, and neither does the Moon. On the day of her death, the transit Moon was conjunct her natal, and she had a Venus return too (which has greatest dignity at the degree of her diurnal Sun and the 8th house ruler). She was 49, which is close to the middle Venus age (if it's alcoccoden, it's in detriment but angular +/- aspects to Moon/Mars).

It is a preventional chart I think, so maybe the part of fortune. But it is conjunct Sun, and Venus again doesn't aspect, nor do any other rulers. Can you use the ASC trip rulers for a preventional? Would she just be a type three differentia?

http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Ric ... 2C_Natasha

if Natasha Richardson's birth time is correct ( i suspect not with an even time) I would choose the Moon as Hilaj and Saturn as Kadukhadah. The Moon is in a "Hyglecial" place in a nocturnal chart (many ancient authors allowed for a 3rd house Moon, I accept the Masculine sign placement) and is in aspect to her Term/Decan/Triplicity Ruler. Saturn is in domicile and a "good" house, though in nasty aspect to a peregrine Mars and an 8th house Sun. Regardless, I would give Saturn his greater years (57) for being in Domicile.
Venus aspects from an angular house (received by her ruler), she gives her lesser years 8, while Mars subtracts his lesser years (15).
That gives a total of 50 years. I would suspect a violent accident based on the severe impediment of the malefics to an 8th house Sun. She was in her Saturn firdar period. Saturn is the exaltation ruler of the Ascendant as well. Under a rough calculation of her primary directions she had the 8th sign Sun and Mercury within a few degrees of her Asc.

I think, there are some mistakes.
One by the age of Natasha Richardson. And the second by the explanation of the Horoskop/Hyleg on the basis of the wrong age.

Natasha Richardson died in the 46 year of age! (1963-2009)

Wolfgang

I think, there are some mistakes.
One by the age of Natasha Richardson. And the second by the explanation of the Horoskop/Hyleg on the basis of the wrong age.

Natasha Richardson died in the 46 year of age! (1963-2009)

Yes, they seem to have two different ages down in the biography! She died before her birthday, so she was 45. Sorry about that. The birth date is unchanged, they just had her age calculated incorrectly.

I would suspect a violent accident based on the severe impediment of the malefics to an 8th house Sun.

Yes, especially Algol.

Thanks! If you have more examples available, I'd greatly appreciate it. This one wasn't a great example, except that it was difficult for me to assign a hyleg, and I didn't know you could use the Moon when masculine. The transit Moon being conjunct her natal at her death does seem to suggest it has some sort of hyleg/alcoccoden connection?

i would never use the Kadukhadah as the precise determination for age of death. that's silly
however, to illustrate a point on a chart that I don't really care about, 50 years to 46 is about as close as your going to get with this method. combined with other techniques that determine similar matters you can get an approximation on "danger" years.
would I have told a client about their imminent doom?
give me a correct birth time, and a reason to look and I would have not given this chart a long and healthy life.

Tanit wrote: This one wasn't a great example, except that it was difficult for me to assign a hyleg, and I didn't know you could use the Moon when masculine. The transit Moon being conjunct her natal at her death does seem to suggest it has some sort of hyleg/alcoccoden connection?

You can't always be so static with the "rules" most authors shun a Masculine placed Moon, I don't always. The Moon always has testimony to health and body. I don't think this is necessarily a difficult chart, it just has multiple testimonies toward an early accidental death, that when coupled together, show more detail.

i would never use the Kadukhadah as the precise determination for age of death. that's silly

But it gives you the roundabout number, right? And then you can use other methods (transits, progressions, etc.) to figure out when the greatest cause of danger might loom around that figure? I'm sure it must be pretty difficult to get the number right on the dot all of the time, but at least you might know an age range of say 50-60 vs. 20-30. Are your methods pretty consistent in their accuracy?

It can give you an approximate number all things being equal, but it won't over-ride nasty directions, especially if they line up with nasty SRs and profections.

E.g., I have an exalted unafflicted Venus as alcocoden. I assure you it will not give me 82 years.

I nearly died at the age of 2, and it's reflected perfectly in my chart. Slow Moon in Taurus in 6, ruling 8 (moon is my sect light) was nearly conjunct Algol, and headed to a partile square of Mars which was exactly square Algol when I was born.

When I was a little over 2 years of age, the Moon hit Algol spot on and at the exact moment it also squared Mars. We could also note that Mars squaring a planet in its (Mars's) debility is not a nice square.

To add a little more fuel to the flame, my Ascendant had just gone from a Venus term into a Mercury term, and Mercury is easily the most afflicted planet in my chart.

Had it not been for modern medicine, I would have died of the mastoid ear, tonsilitis, infected adenoids, seizures, and 107 degree fever. I did flatline. I no longer have a copy of it, but my obituary was actually printed. Yikes!

No way would I have lived to tell the tale in the medieval period.

And looking at the directions, profections, and SRs upcoming, as well as having a terminal genetic illness, safe to say that Venus (coincidentally my 6 ruler) strong as it is, is not strong enough to prevent an early death.

Just using my chart because the progressions were so absolutely striking - everything came together in a matter of moments, and it really reflected here on earth.

Tanit wrote:

i would never use the Kadukhadah as the precise determination for age of death. that's silly

But it gives you the roundabout number, right? And then you can use other methods (transits, progressions, etc.) to figure out when the greatest cause of danger might loom around that figure? I'm sure it must be pretty difficult to get the number right on the dot all of the time, but at least you might know an age range of say 50-60 vs. 20-30. Are your methods pretty consistent in their accuracy?

you've essentially got the method right as far as it is taught.
more than an accuracy range, I use the Kadukhadah as an indicator to a short or long life.
Essentially, If you can't find a competent Kadukhadah with testimony toward greater years, you probably have a shorter life.
It is an extended view of the "differentia", as you need life giving planets and places to be strong and unafflicted.
The Years of the Planets just give you a finer brush stroke of accuracy in your overall picture.

Can someone explain how one establishes the Kadukhadah? It's not listed in skyscript glossary.

Thanks.
Tara

Hello Tara,

As it is sometimes called, http://www.skyscript.co.uk/gl/alchocoden.html

Of course it doesn't quite explain it, and there is some debate in the tradition. For instance, Ptolemy doesn't use it at all, but it is attested by Valens and others, and also used up until the recent centuries.

What I would do is, unless the Sun or Moon are in their domiciles or exaltations and thus are themselves the Alcocoden, take the confine ruler of whichever is the predominator, unless it is in the 12th or 6th; in that case I'd choose going down from domicile lord, exalted lord, tripilicity, and whoever closely aspects it.