Posted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 1:01 am
I was pleased to see this important distinction in Robert Schmidt's translation of Antiochus. I have never been comfortable with the notion that essential dignity can make a planet completely immune from the effects of combustion. To me the two ideas are like apples and pears. For example, the new Moon in Cancer may be in its domicile. However, it also cannot be considered without examining its synodic phase in relation to the Sun.This was part of a composite concept "fitness relative to the lights" (a planet that is visible and direct in motion). Fitness relative to the zodiac includes "being in one's own chariot" which is a separate area and separate consideration. Then there is "fitness relative to the horizon" which is a terrestrial concept: in this case whether the planet is angular succeedent or cadent. In this way the organization looks at planets at the level of the stars/zodiac (primum mobile), at the level of the planets (lights) and then at the level of the earth (sublunary sphere).
This topic of combustion seems to endlessly fascinate astrologers as it comes up repeatedly here on Skyscript. While its important to acknowledge the hellenistic contribution to the notion of combustion or under the beams there are older Babylonian and Egyptian antecedents for the concept that make it amongst the most ancient in astrology. This point reminds me of a very interesting post made by Deborah Houlding several years ago that still seems highly relevant here:
It would be misleading to consider the Greeks as the originators of the concept. The symbolic interpretation that we apply to a combust planet was firmly established in early Babylonian astrology and oriental star lore. It?s probably the oldest and one of the most consistent astrological principles ? that a planet (or star) loses its strength and power as its visibility is lost in the Sun?s light, that it is stripped (and purified) through conjunction with the Sun, and that as it emerges from the conjunction its reappearance symbolises the tentative renewal of vitality and a new cycle of experience.
The earliest existing nativity is a Babylonian cuneiform text recording a horoscope drawn on the 29th April 410 BC. This mentions Mercury as invisible because it had ?set?, (ie., entered its heliacal setting, where it cannot be seen by day or night because of its closeness to the Sun). Where planets had set, they were not considered capable of exerting an influence. The Egyptian integration of the symbolic principles of ?combustion? can be identified as early as 1278 BC by reference to an inscription found upon the tomb of Seti I, but it probably extends much further back in history. The inscription, (which states that as a star dies it is purified in the house of Duat, from where, after 70 days of invisibility, it is reborn), was used by Neugebauer (The Exact Sciences in Antiquity), to show that the 70-day ritual used in Egyptian funeral rites was based upon the 70-day period of invisibility that Sirius endured when it ?set? into the Sun. The re-emergence of Sirius coincided with the summer solstice and the annual inundation of the Nile during the period of the development of the calendar, so was used as a signal to start the New Year festivities.
The ancient Egyptian astrological perspective differed from that of Hellenistic Greece because by comparison there was much less emphasis upon the planets in favour of the stars and constellations. But the principle of death, weakness, lack of strength and inhibited freedom that is traditionally ascribed through combustion perpetuates a viewpoint that appears to originate from their philosophy. At the moment it looks that way, though earlier undiscovered or unexploited references may well exist elsewhere.
Since the use of the symbolic significance of union with the Sun predates the development of the zodiac, there is of course the argument that in its original form ?combustion? derives from observational astrology in which sign cusps play no part.
