Skyscript Astrology Forum

Eddy wrote:Didn't Ptolemy just mean that the sextile of Venus to the Sun was by two signs rather than by exactly 60 degrees?

Of course he did! Placidus tried to foist off all sorts of new-fangled inventions on Ptolemy: mundane aspects, secondary directions, etc...

margherita wrote:For example very recently Marco Fumagalli using profections calculated as they were directions

Do you mean, in effect, primary directions with ever 30 degrees of RA corresponding to 1 year?

Martin Gansten wrote: Do you mean, in effect, primary directions with ever 30 degrees of RA corresponding to 1 year?

with the rules of primary directions, RA for MC, OA for ascendant, mixed ascensions for the rest of planets.

An example of calculation - but Fumagalli article is more beautiful ))) because it's newer - is given here in CieloeTerra site:

http://www.cieloeterra.it/articoli.prof ... zione.html

margherita

margherita wrote:An example of calculation - but Fumagalli article is more beautiful ))) because it's newer - is given here in CieloeTerra site:

http://www.cieloeterra.it/articoli.prof ... zione.html

Thank you. I does look very interesting, but I'm afraid my Italian isn't up to it. I don't suppose either Bezza or Fumagalli has written on this in English? I really should learn Italian properly, at least to read; but there never seems to be time...

Timely thread. I got two natal charts this week and both people were born with the Sun technically in six - conjuncting the descendant by less than a degree.

I still really amn't sure if they're day charts or night charts.

Hello Olivia,
yes, agree. I was born at sunset/dusk. Is this day, or night?
A hellenistic astrologer responds: if the sun is above the horizon, it is day.

Olivia:

compare the two sets of firdaria. Something should appear.

Martin Gansten wrote: I does look very interesting, but I'm afraid my Italian isn't up to it. I don't suppose either Bezza or Fumagalli has written on this in English? I really should learn Italian properly, at least to read; but there never seems to be time...

It's a very old article. t's a pity they don't translate in English because the site is very beautiful, even is just the tip of the iceberg of what CieloeTerra does.
The method looks sophisticated but it can be easily done with the usual spreadsheet. Many did in fact.

In the example chart rises 2.24 Taurus (OA 18?54')
Bezza says that in moving houses we should use their proper motion, which is the motion of the primum mobile.

So we should add to the Ascendant OA 2 temporal hours for every house, ie for every year.
The temporal hour of 2?24' Taurus latitude 0 - Saint Morinus software - is 16.88375
Now 1 year is 2 hours so the first year is 16.88375*2= 33.7675---> 33?46

now 18?54'+33?46=52?40' which is the OA of the Ascendant for the first year.
Obviously the MC will be 52?40-90? +360=322?40 AR.

I hate calculations, but in CieloeTerra they always have results with their method.
I know you are skeptical about Placido aspects, but in CieloeTerra they use and they always find something even when there is nothing by zodiacal directions.
They write very little in the site, but they do many things they don't share in the net.

margherita

Martin Gansten wrote:Of course he did! Placidus tried to foist off all sorts of new-fangled inventions on Ptolemy: mundane aspects, secondary directions, etc...

So Placidus did some wishfull thinking? Nothing wrong with new inventions/experiments but often people feel tempted to attribute them to a remote past.

Martin Gansten wrote:I don't suppose either Bezza or Fumagalli has written on this in English?

http://translate.google.nl/translate?hl ... zione.html

this is the google translation of Bezza's text, probably not perfect fur such a specialized text but perhaps of some help for an overview.

Eddy wrote:So Placidus did some wishfull thinking? Nothing wrong with new inventions/experiments but often people feel tempted to attribute them to a remote past.

The problem is we don't know because Martin says this and Bezza says the opposite and others have their idea too about Placido and Ptolemy.
This matter is not so evident for me because I read tons of articles from both sides and both have their reasons.

The truth to me is that Ptolemy was very unclear about what he had in his head and let open many readings of his words- and in fact famous and learned University professors have different ideas about the subject. This means something to me which I'm skeptical by nature

margherita

Steven wrote:According to Ptolemy's laws of refraction, the sun would not completely rise above the horizon (the ascendant) until it passed 5 ecliptical degrees of longitude.

This sounds interesting and seems rather astronomical. Can you tell where Ptolemy wrote or explain this, was it in the Almagest? Are you sure it's about (athmospheric) refraction? I always thought that it was Tycho Brahe who was the first to theorize on this.

The problem with this five degree rule as I see it is that it would be different for planets. Their size in the sky is neglectible and they appear as a point. In case that the planet would be exactly on the ecliptic there would then be no several degrees of difference.

I heard another version of the Arab rule from a muslim who did ramadan. If one can discern a white thread from a black thread then it's getting twilight and in ramadan days one isn't allowed to eat from that moment. However, I'd say this would be before sunrise or even before the top of the Sun touches the horizon, thus a sort of 'reversed' 5 degree rule. I will try this out.

margherita wrote:The problem is we don't know because Martin says this and Bezza says the opposite and others have their idea too about Placido and Ptolemy.
This matter is not so evident for me because I read tons of articles from both sides and both have their reasons.

This doesn't need to be a big problem though. If in an unclear case we don't know what was meant by the author, we still can examine the different theories/interpretations of a method to find out more about them.

yuzuru wrote:Olivia:

compare the two sets of firdaria. Something should appear.

I talked with one of them last night, and I'm fairly satisfied he's a day birth - we pinpointed three major events (I wish there were more, but he's young), and by firdar it matches to day much better than to night. Either that or he'd have to have the worst Jupiter in the world, and in fact it's in Cancer on the cusp of the 5th. So for now I'm going to look at it as a day chart and see if it continues to hold - thank you.

Steven, I like the Arab idea a lot, too, but that's pretty much where I live astrologically. Both the practicality and the compassion have always drawn me to it - and it works. It doesn't hurt that my own background is middle-eastern, so I usually grasp their writings more easily. It's so strange to think that the Jewish astrologers writing then studied so many of the same texts I did. They were way smarter than I'll ever be, but the common educational foundation and theology may have something to do with it.