margherita wrote:The translator did what she could, so forgive her, especially because Bezza writes in a very peculiar Italian, very elaborate.

Yes, I noticed. I read both articles (in your translation!), Bezza's several times, but I still wonder: when you say,

What I would say that in combining the different techniques - directions, revolutions, transits, each other they firstly mark the profection on the natal chart

-- what date is that profection for? If I had my birthday in April and it is now October, and I want to look at current trends, would they enter the profected positions for April or for October?

Sorry if I am being slow!

On the correct method of calculating profections, we now have three suggestions: a sign for a year, a house for a year, and Bezza's two temporal hours for a year. Frankly, until there is software to calculate this latter variety, I for one haven't the patience to try it out...

Martin Gansten wrote:Sorry if I am being slow!

I'm sure nobody believes!

-- what date is that profection for? If I had my birthday in April and it is now October, and I want to look at current trends, would they enter the profected positions for April or for October?

The articles explain different methods.

Bezza explains the general method, where we move according Ptolemy one sign for year (first table) and then his method (second table).
But in his method too "two hours profections" are given for the birthday, so in the case of the girl

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

from the 18th to 19th birthday the profected ascendant moves from 6 Libra to 2 Scorpio. That portion of zodiac is the profected space of the Ascendant.
So the profection is calculated for birthday.

Then in the last lines of the article he mentions monthly profections and solar returns, which are 13 in a year according Ptolemy (Quad. IV,10).


In the second article Fumagalli mentions another method (I found it for eample in Giuntini who uses it in order to rectify his own chart).

Fumagalli
http://www.cieloeterra.it/articoli.inco ... ontri.html

starts from Bezza example. In the solar return for 1975 the return Venus is in the Ascendant profected space, because return Venus is at 12 Libra; so Venus has a rulership of the year. This Bezza says, because she is the ruler of the Profected Ascendant and return Venus is in the Profected Ascendant space.

Fumagalli now considers the profected Venus from birthday to birthday: she moves from 29 Aries to to 22 Libra.
If now we consider that she does not jump from Aries to Libra, but she moves along this portion of zodiac, we will see that at the end of the year between two birthdays, she will arrive on natal Mars, which is indicative for the event.

What I mean is that the profection is always from birthday to birthday and then in order to pinpoint some peculiar events you can "direct" it or use monthly profections.

On the correct method of calculating profections, we now have three suggestions: a sign for a year, a house for a year, and Bezza's two temporal hours for a year. Frankly, until there is software to calculate this latter variety, I for one haven't the patience to try it out...

All the things taught in Cieloeterra work, because they are not scholars, they always use in practical work.
Obviously they have their software and this can be done with a spreadsheet too (they did) but I'm like you, i do just what I can do with a software, I hate hand calculations.

margherita

So the profection is calculated for birthday.

Thanks, Margherita; that's what I wanted to know. I would say Bezza is definitely a scholar, but his methods may still work! When you say:

In the second article Fumagalli mentions another method (I found it for eample in Giuntini who uses it in order to rectify his own chart).

-- do you mean to say only that Giuntini used what we may call 'gradual' profections (2?30' per month, or 5' per day), or do you mean that he actually used the method proposed by Bezza and Fumagalli on the basis of Ibn Ezra? (The latter would surprise me very much.) In either case, if you have the Giuntini reference handy, I should like very much to see it.

Martin Gansten wrote: I would say Bezza is definitely a scholar, but his methods may still work!

Yes, obviously Bezza is a scholar.
I meant just that Cieloeterra methods are practical, they work on real charts and teach their students to do the same.

-- do you mean to say only that Giuntini used what we may call 'gradual' profections (2?30' per month, or 5' per day), or do you mean that he actually used the method proposed by Bezza and Fumagalli on the basis of Ibn Ezra? (The latter would surprise me very much.)

No, Giuntini mentions the "gradual" profection.

In either case, if you have the Giuntini reference handy, I should like very much to see it.

Very easy, some time ago I wrote a post on it re-doing Giuntini calculation

http://heavenastrolabe.net/profections- ... ification/

It's the chapter of Speculum Astrologiae dedicated to the comment of Quad. III,2

margherita

margherita wrote:Yes, obviously Bezza is a scholar.
I meant just that Cieloeterra methods are practical, they work on real charts and teach their students to do the same.

Very right, too. Usus optimus magister.

Very easy, some time ago I wrote a post on it re-doing Giuntini calculation

http://heavenastrolabe.net/profections- ... ification/

Excellent! Thank you.