GR wrote: Yes, it does help to see what is going on. I avoid the calculation, and my concern is the temptation to substitute arithmetic with judgment, though also the procedure itself reduces all lordships to simply degrees of the same, and I don't believe that is true. I admit to over-reliance on the math in the past. You just use it as a starting point, then you have to judge the planets accordingly.

Yes, I agree with you, myself I don't use exactly this method but with Morinus software I should not write by hand- which I hate.

Anyway this is Renaissance original, I took from a XVI century geniture the Italian astrologer Grazia Bordoni sent me. But here "all lordships are NOT reduced to simply degrees of all the same", these are the planets disposing Mercury and the Moon, the significators of the soul (adding the Ascendant degree). They were accurately chosen by me according whatever Renaissance text.

There are no other methods, which I know. Anyway, yes, it is the astrologer who should put information together according the positions of planets, the houses, the aspects, scores are not enough.
margherita

Hi Margherita,

margherita wrote: Anyway this is Renaissance original, I took from a XVI century geniture the Italian astrologer Grazia Bordoni sent me. But here "all lordships are NOT reduced to simply degrees of all the same", these are the planets disposing Mercury and the Moon, the significators of the soul (adding the Ascendant degree). They were accurately chosen by me according whatever Renaissance text.

I'm afraid I wasn't clear, and I honestly should have been. I certainly did not mean that you were doing something wrong, according to the procedure.
I do think the procedure is flawed, in that, by attempting to quantify the various manners of lordship, in effect to say that domicile lordship is to exaltation as 5 is to 4, is what is flawed.

More concisely, it is wrong, in my opinion, to say that all various forms of lordship are all various species of the same genus, that they are in fact distinct and unique relationships, and I feel that the weighted and unweighted almuten systems can work too well in obscuring that fact.

I do think something useful can be taken from them, and that is to use the listings as a sort of ranking procedure, similar to how the kurios to derived (in Porphry, I believe) and then to see who by rank and placement in the chart can be most effectively in charge of the matter under consideration.

Hi all,
Thank you, GR, it is very interseting to read about Lovecraft's life. Tania: there is an interesting article on the site of Darrelyn Gunsburg where she explores the use of antiscia in relationships. She uses an orb of 5 degrees and that is what I do as well. So in this example the Moon is within 1 degree orb on the contra-antiscion of Saturn and Venus is within 2 degrees on the contra-antiscion of Mercury. Although that mercury seems to be unconnected to other planets in his horoscope, through this contra-antiscion relationship there is a powerful interaction with the lord of his MC and with the lord of his ascendant. Not always easy, but powerful!
That does explain, to my opinion, why that Mercury was so important in his life.
And isn't the 12th house the place "Where the wild things are"? That was the title of a lecture by Joy Usher of Astromundi and I think that is a lovely expression here.
regards,
Tienka

Hello Gabriel

GR wrote: I'm afraid I wasn't clear, and I honestly should have been. I certainly did not mean that you were doing something wrong, according to the procedure.
I do think the procedure is flawed, in that, by attempting to quantify the various manners of lordship, in effect to say that domicile lordship is to exaltation as 5 is to 4, is what is flawed.

Don't believe I don't agree with you, I don't use scores too. Just I see which planets have more rights on the significators.

As you told, the score system was just the Arab reading of the hellenistic texts - it's just a shortcut, anyway not meaningless, if we consider the reference texts.

your chart was very interesting, I liked it very much, thanks.

margherita

I love adding 'em up and find much value in it ? as a starting point. I strictly consider it a beginning, keep an eye on where the shortcomings lie, and leave it at that. It's a helpful beginning. It at least provides a way to begin. We get the usual admonishments and warnings about it, as if we were dull-witted or something. But, truth be told, there's no avoiding it ? some of us indeed are.

I use the weighted system for house Almutens and in this case I felt like Saturn's rulership of the Ascendant would play a key factor, especially in a subtle delineation like physical features. My first inclination was to say male ballet dancer or a male actor who dressed as a women (as was the fashion in earlier times). When the ascending sign has two rulers I always see who is Almuten by the weighted system. It was the way I learned the Almuten method and it has never failed me. As with most Traditional and Ancient methods their validity shouldn't be gleaned from their connection to historical record but rather from experience, either gained personally or from someone who has tested these ideas in a thorough fashion.
Interestingly enough, when I saw such a strong first house and rising sign I was intrigued to delineate physical features and presence. Saturn's involvement as an ascendant ruler (who is more elevated than the co-ruler Venus) would manifest in things like gait and height, a long face and thick eyebrows, contributions of Saturn. Venus is evident in her placement though, you cannot deny her influence on the Ascendant, so I would expect to see smooth skin, bright eyes and an ageless look.
Lovecraft did indeed have a youthful look about him, when you see his picture, though was not what i would consider "attractive" (of course that is a personal perspective).
Again, it is the stress between the malefics as well as Mercury's hindered placement that seem to me overwhelming signs of adversity. Melancholy and anxiety are the contributions of Mercury's afflictions when situated with the 12th house.

p.s.- Excellent choice for a Mystery Chart! There are many nuances to this chart that are very intriguing upon closer inspection of the native's bio-

Estebon_Duarte wrote: Again, it is the stress between the malefics as well as Mercury's hindered placement that seem to me overwhelming signs of adversity. Melancholy and anxiety are the contributions of Mercury's afflictions when situated with the 12th house.

For me Mercury is not so awful, it's in 12th house, true, but it is in western side- the best side- and fast, and so it "gives swiftness and aptitude to everything", and it is in its sign.

margherita

As with most Traditional and Ancient methods their validity shouldn't be gleaned from their connection to historical record but rather from experience, either gained personally or from someone who has tested these ideas in a thorough fashion.

Hello all,

I've remembered that we aren't supposed to provide criticism in these mystery threads, and I shouldn't have opened the door for it. :O Especially when it comes to the falsity of "empirical" testing in astrology ...

i wasn't talking about empirical testing. I was talking about the passing of tried techniques from one Astrologer to another Astrologer. And not taking our "opinions" as approval or dis-approval of any method.

margherita wrote:

Estebon_Duarte wrote: Again, it is the stress between the malefics as well as Mercury's hindered placement that seem to me overwhelming signs of adversity. Melancholy and anxiety are the contributions of Mercury's afflictions when situated with the 12th house.

For me Mercury is not so awful, it's in 12th house, true, but it is in western side- the best side- and fast, and so it "gives swiftness and aptitude to everything", and it is in its sign.

margherita

indeed, it is not "so awful", the man used ingenuity in his creative writing. But his thoughts were morose and his writing style was often critiqued as clumsy and antiquated.