Thanks Atlantean for you?re your sincere supportive post. I am familiar with Unique Astrology work with progressed Lunar Returns and if my memory is still properly serving me (I am an old fart too), I think he does have some contacts with astrological programmers. I will try and get this topic before his eyes and see where it takes me-- Excellent idea! If I get any solid leads I will PM you?thanks.

Regards, Steve

Hello Steve,

You are very welcome!

When we all help each other, then we ALL move forward!

Good luck...

Atlantean

Hello Steve,

I have a question for you if you dont mind? At the beginning of this thread you mentioned that using parans was an innovation of Cyril Fagan. I have a few books by Fagan and I was just wanting to follow up where he discussed them? Could you refer me to the source of Fagan's ideas on parans?

Thanks

Mark

Mark asked:
I have a few books by Fagan and I was just wanting to follow up where he discussed them?

There are only two books that I know of where Fagan very briefly discusses Parans.

1:?Solunar Handbook,? page 101, Fagan states:

?Should the reader take his own horoscope and put each of his natal planets in turn on each of the four angles, for the place of birth or for that of the place of residence, he will be astonished to find a surprising number of potent parans in his nativity which he never suspected existed; and which give a totally different complexion to the significance of his natal chart. Such parans, being mundane, are more powerful and significant than mere zodiac configurations.?

Solunar Handbook consists of some select Fagan columns taken by the editor of American Astrology magazine and put in book format, after Fagan passed away. Fagan wrote a monthly column called ?Solunars? from 1953 to 1970 for American Astrology magazine. I have been told by earlier siderealists that the bulk of Fagan?s astrological knowledge was passed-on to the few astrologers who seriously read and studied Fagan?s ?Solunar? columns. I suspect but can?t confirm there were other columns devoted exclusively to Parans. At one point in my life I tried to purchase from AA magazine all of the back issues of Fagan?s columns from 1953-1970, but was told these back issues did not exist.

2: ?Primer of Sidereal Astrology,? page 93, Fagan states:

?When two or more planets are simultaneously on the same , adjacent or opposite angles they are said to be in paranatellonta. This is the most powerful of all configurations. Natal planets may enjoy no mutual zodiacal aspect but may be in paranatellonta at certain times of the day. To find whether planets are in this formation the student is referred to a section of the Primer. Such configurations are particularly important when they fall on the angles of a return map whether cast for the birthplace or for the place of residence. A change of residence can alter the formation of paranatellonta.?

The word ?paranatellonta? may have it?s origins with the Greeks but I don?t really know where the ?source? of this word comes from. Again, I suspect Fagan explained the ?source? of the word ?paranatellonta? in one of his lost Solunar columns. What I find strange?if the word/source ?paranatellonta? comes from the Greeks-- then it stands to reason this word and its meaning should have appeared in at least one of Project Hindsight translations associated with astrology. I have scanned some of the works of Project Hindsight but have not seen this word ?paranatellonta? or any astrological association. Has anyone else seen this word/astrological association with the many recent translations that have come out??

Mark asked another good question.
Could you refer me to the source of Fagan's ideas on parans?

As far as the ?source of Fagan?s ideas on parans,? the only clues/speculations I have; is the fact Fagan did a tremendous amount of ?fact finding tours? pertaining to ancient Egypt?s astronomy/astrology and Fagan was an accomplished Egyptologist, the only serious professional astrologer I know of, past or present, who was an Egyptologist. Does anyone else know of a career professional astrologer who was an Egyptologist? My other clue/speculation is the fact the ancient astronomers/astrologers correlated their astrological sight/work mainly by OBSERVATIONAL ASTRONOMY. This means as long as the astronomer/astrologer knew by sight where the heavenly bodies rose, culminated, and set (and they did know these angles) they could easily see when a Paran formation was occurring and correlated this formation was the most potent astrological configuration. All I really know--I have proven to myself that a Paran is the most potent configuration in astrology?it causes events! Yet we astrologers today, for the most part, are completely un-aware of the types Paran formations that occur in our lives with our various Maps. One day a specialized computer program solely devoted to Paran configurations will happen?I just hope it happens in my lifetime. I think it will absolutely ROCK the astrologer?s mind in a revolutionary way!

Regards, Steve

Steve wrote:The word ?paranatellonta? may have it?s origins with the Greeks but I don?t really know where the ?source? of this word comes from.

It is the neuter plural nominative of the present participle of the Greek verb parana-tell?, meaning 'to rise/appear beside'. In other words, it means '[things] rising together', 'co-rising'.

Steve wrote:This means as long as the astronomer/astrologer knew by sight where the heavenly bodies rose, culminated, and set (and they did know these angles) they could easily see when a Paran formation was occurring and correlated this formation was the most potent astrological configuration.

When a planet rises and another is culminating this is a square "in mundo"....

margherita

Here is the definition of 'paran' from the skyscript glossary:

Paran

Paranatellonta are stars or star groups that fall upon angles at the same time that a significant constellation or planet is also upon the angles. They are viewed as attendants. In ancient astrology the term was also applied to the constellations that ascended with the zodiacal decans.

In modern astrology the term Paran (short for Paranatellonta) is generally used to describe stars or planets that are angular as a planet hits the ascendant, MC, Descendant or IC. For example, the parans of Mercury would be those stars or planets that were rising, culminating, descending of located upon the IC at the same time that Mercury is in any or those positions. Thus if the fixed star Regulus culminates on the Midheaven as Mercury rises on the ascendant it is referred to as a paran of Mercury and considered to have an influence upon its meaning.

It does seem that western sidereal astrologers like Cyril Fagan have been quite influential on modern astroogy in this area. Does any traditional literature talk about exclusively planetary parans?

The other point I wonder about is whether the term paranatellonta can be correctly applied in traditional terms to planets and stars on different mundane angles or whether it should be exclusively reserved for star and constellations in mundane conjunction with angles/planets?

Martin's definition is interesting:

It is the neuter plural nominative of the present participle of the Greek verb parana-tell?, meaning 'to rise/appear beside'. In other words, it means '[things] rising together', 'co-rising'

I am keen to follow up this definition offered by Martin.This is very similar to how Robert Schmidt interprets the term. I accept there are classical sources like Anonymous of 379 that consider stars and planets as astrologically connected on different angles. However, would it be reasonable to state that this is a different technique from the normal Greek use of the term paranatellonta?

Mark

MarkC wrote: It does seem that western sidereal astrologers like Cyril Fagan have been quite influential on modern astroogy in this area. Does any traditional literature talk about exclusively planetary parans?

This thing sounds - but don't know anything about Fagan and these planetary parans - as mundane aspects. And Martin Ganstein too put paranatellonta and mundane aspects together at page 89-90 of his book.
This is obvious for me, because paranatellonta and mundane aspects (as stars in cieloeterra teaching) are taken by the motion of the primum mobile.

A paranatellonta star is in fact a star which rises (ie with its oblique ascension) with whatever degree of Zodiac or culminates (with its right ascension).

Now, mundane aspects are aspects taken by the same motion of the sphere.
When a planet is rising at the Ascendant and another is culminating they could not be in a square by longitude, but surely they are in exactly square by the motion of the sphere.
This is what Steve calls a paran- I call a mundane square.

As Martin explains very well in his book, in mundo aspects come mostly from Placido - by his reading of Ptolemy (I quote from Martin book)

"And sometimes also among the signs that ascend slowly in the sextile aspect destroys when it is afflicted, and again among the signs that ascend rapidly the trine".

I am keen to follow up this definition offered by Martin.This is very similar to how Robert Schmidt interprets the term. I accept there are classical sources like Anonymous of 379 that consider stars and planets as astrologically connected on different angles. However, would it be reasonable to state that this is a different technique from the normal Greek use of the term paranatellonta?

I'm not familiar with Schmidt interpretation of the word, but for me stars traditionally can be at different angles (BUT JUST AT THE VERY MOMENT OF THE BIRTH, not during the day).

An example of this is the famous Astrolabium Planum (which can be downloaded in my blog - it was translated in English by Gadbury).

In Astrolabium Planum - the original text was written around 1300 by Pietro Abano- the small sentences for every degree are based on several stellar catalogues- especially the pages from Albumasar liber VI, which in turn were based on Teucer list of stars sphera barbarica (I'm cutting short a very long story here).

But the stars linked with each degree can be indifferently to one of the four angles.
The same does Manilius when mentions between paranatellonta of Aries, Argo Navis which does not rises with Aries, she culminates when Aries rises.

According Simonetta Feraboli - for me the greatest expert of stellar catalogs, it was Franz Boll in Sphaera (1903) who showed how angles were linked in stellar catalogues.

So it's evident in all the variants of Anonymous 379/Liber de stellis beibenie (here I'm taking from Dr. Dykes' Liber Aristotles): for example Spica, Vega, Fomalhaut rising with Mars at the Descendant makes a refined natural philosopher, here this is case of paranatellonta in my opinion.

But because the native is born with that configuration, not 2 hours after, at midday, in the evening, those cases I call a transiting mundane aspect (if something like that can exist, I don't know)

margherita

Mark, with your additional informative input on Parans, I think we can conclude any star Paran, especially with our Sun combined with a Natal Planet would have a major symbolic and causative influence on our souls/lives. For example: In my Natal Chart I was born with a partile zodiacal 90 of Sun-Uranus. I have learned and know that partile aspects ?reign supreme;? but, with my Sun (Rising) in Paran formation with my Natal Uranus (Culminating)?Fagan teachings tells me this is the most dominating/potent aspect in my Natal Chart?and it is!. This Natal Paran offers even more potency because it is in formation with the Ascendant and MC?the two most powerful points on any Map. Fagan?s astrology was unique and innovating and the ?cornerstone? of his system of astrology dealt with angularity?the circle & cross?the grand symbol of the ancients. Paran formations epitomize this grand symbol. I can now (being old) look back on my life and see where this Star Paran with my Natal Uranus has completely dominated my soul/life. First, my ego is wrapped around my passion for studying astrology. Second, I was born a true rebel and revolutionary and strongly identify with the word Freedom & Individually. My business life has offered me much freedom and luxury of time to study astrology. I love to tinker with computers and programs that are associated with astrology. I am constantly on the look-out for any new innovations related to technology, particularly with astrology. There is never a dull moment in my life; Uranus/Astrology always keeps my life jazzed-up. As you can see, these are keywords for the symbolism of Uranus. This Natal Star Paran completely dominates my individual life being. It is the causative spirit/agent in my Natal Chart that allowed me to DISCOVER the obscured, out of print and miss-understood writings/teachings of Cyril Fagan. Fagan teachings eventually becomes a true ?understanding? on a heart level; which, has to be seriously studied by crunching hundreds of charts (mainly Solunar) in order to prove to the astrologer that his teachings hold much astrological substance pertaining to the essence of the TIMING of things. Isn?t astrology the true an only science of TIME? Many astrological answers can?t be answered without a serious experienced study. As far as I am concerned, we astrologers will not be able to get our Paran answers until a specialized Paran computer program is developed. There are so many pet theories and derivatives in the field of astrology that a new student to the field of today?s astrology is completely overwhelmed where to start one?s studies. Fagan?s astrology is based on the rock solid foundation of the natural laws of astronomical/mathematical motion with the celestial circles that are in the heavens and with the intrinsic meaning of the planets (also natural laws) in our Solar System. Why would the astrologer want to devote the majority of their study time to systems of astrology that deviated from these Natural Laws of Astronomy; particularly when the astrologer now has the use of the greatest magical tool ever invented for the astrologer?the Personal Computer? This great magical tool computes all the complex math associated with astronomical natural laws. I sincerely think that after the fall of the Egyptian empire, astrologers/astronomers lost the refined art of observational or calculated astronomy and therefore had to invent new systems of astrology. I am not saying these new systems of astrology are without merits?only they deviate from the purity of our Natural Laws of Astronomy. I think this great astrological deviation from pure astronomy/astrology occurred with the Greeks. We now have the computer monitor that has brought back to the astrologer the purity of observational astronomy, even much better than the ancient?s observatory astronomy. Let us astrologers put this great magical tool (PC) to its greatest use for monitoring what I deeply believe to the most potent astrological configuration of them all?Parans!

Thanks for your constructive and informative post Mark.

Regards, Steve

So it's evident in all the variants of Anonymous 379/Liber de stellis beibenie (here I'm taking from Dr. Dykes' Liber Aristotles): for example Spica, Vega, Fomalhaut rising with Mars at the Descendant makes a refined natural philosopher, here this is case of paranatellonta in my opinion.

Thank you Margherita,

A very instructive post! Lots to do follow up research on. I was especially interested in the approach of hellenistic astrology to parantellonta as this is the cultural root of the idea. I believe Vettius Valens discusses this but I dont possess a translation of his work. Still I will go back and look at Manilius. It does seem rather vague of Greek astrologers to use an identical term for two different techniques relating to primary motion. Firstly a star and planet co-arising exactly together in terms of declination and right asccension in local space. Secondly, a star or planet jointly co-arising simultaneously but on different angles. Its interesting that Joseph Crane does separate out these two techniques in his description of working with fixed stars in The Hellenistic Legacy. I keep coming back in my mind to Martin and Schmidt's translation of parantellonta which emphasizes a planet/star both co-arising AND rise/appear beside'. In other words, it means '[things] rising together', 'co-rising' That definition sounds like an in mundo conjuction rather than an in mundo aspect. However, maybe I have just misinterpreted what the term means in the Greek. Martin are you able to comment any further? I would really like to clear this issue out in my head once and for all.

Irrespective of this point I agree that these techniques based on primary motion have far less significance if they are generalised daily parans that form several hours before or after someones birth. This is my main problem with Brady's technique in her Book of Fixed Stars.

The weird thing with these mundane aspects is that they indeed change during the day. For example the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction of the year 2000, in a relatively extreme situation, could also appear as a sextile, square, trine or even an opposition just in one day.

If in mundane astrology an ecliptical Jupiter-Saturn conjunction has a special meaning like entering a new era, then I believe that these diurnal changes in mundane aspects have a secondary meaning while the ecliptical conjunction is the 'main theme'.

MarkC wrote:It does seem rather vague of Greek astrologers to use an identical term for two different techniques relating to primary motion. Firstly a star and planet co-arising exactly together in terms of declination and right asccension in local space. Secondly, a star or planet jointly co-arising simultaneously but on different angles.

I don't have the exact quote from Boll but Feraboli teaches Greek at university and spent most of her career on Greek stellar catalogues. If she writes like that, it is SURE in my opinion.
Maybe my friend Lucia is going to invite her for her next astrology congress, in the case I will torment her
I can't read German but Saint Chris Brennan put Boll's Sphaera in his site, so maybe some gentle soul - there are some philologists in this site- can tell us more.

http://www.hellenisticastrology.com/texts.html

In every case examples from Astrolabium Planum for me are satisfying, whatever is good to extract the meaning of a star.
For example 6 degrees of Aries, a crowned King
is referring not to the stars rising with the 6th degree of Aries but with Corona Borealis culminating at 3 Capricorn.
on the other hand if we open Liber Hermetis, chapter XXV

"from the 11th to 14th degree of Capricorn rises Corona Borealis..."

Ancient thought is very twisted, is not like us.

Its interesting that Joseph Crane does separate out these two techniques in his description of working with fixed stars in The Hellenistic Legacy. I keep coming back in my mind to Martin and Schmidt's translation of parantellonta which emphasizes a planet/star both co-arising AND rise/appear beside'. In other words, it means '[things] rising together', 'co-rising' That definition sounds like an in mundo conjuction rather than an in mundo aspect.

It's not so different as you see above.

And I agree, Joseph Crane chapter on fixed stars is very nice, easy to understand but traditional

Irrespective of this point I agree that these techniques based on primary motion have far less significance if they are generalised daily parans that form several hours before or after someones birth.

About these daily parans I never saw an example in any book I read in my life.
If I can say they are like rapt parallels, we can call them rapt aspects they are not based on the natal chart

margherita