Skyscript Astrology Forum

Last night tried different programs. It seems to me that Planetdance gives the closest PDs compared to Morinus. Yet it is limited, only oppositions and conjunctions.

Btw, there is pages listing all major computer programs in astrology, dated 2020: https://astroapex.com/astro-software/ and less so: https://listoffreeware.com/open-source- ... e-windows/

Could be ver good idea to create new thread for programs and their evaluation/comparison. Thanks in advance!

Hi there - the planetdance primary directions module is a prototype at the moment. I'm glad the calculations seem ok. They are based on the methods outlined in Martin Gansten's book.

The plan is to add in the other aspects but I have been working on other modules since I released the primary directions script. Planetdance is always a work in progress. Jean and I (and the other collaborators) devote a lot of time to software, but most of us can only give a certain number of hours to the project.

I keep users up to date with my input to the project at the forum at:

https://jcremers.com/forum/

All the best. Ed

astralwanderer wrote:Hi there - the planetdance primary directions module is a prototype at the moment. I'm glad the calculations seem ok. They are based on the methods outlined in Martin Gansten's book.

The plan is to add in the other aspects but I have been working on other modules since I released the primary directions script. Planetdance is always a work in progress. Jean and I (and the other collaborators) devote a lot of time to software, but most of us can only give a certain number of hours to the project.

I keep users up to date with my input to the project at the forum at:

https://jcremers.com/forum/

All the best. Ed

And if you use a different methodology, will the obtained values match? It seems to me that in this case it is necessary to compare different methodologies and, by comparing the result, to deduce a single system. Because if everyone speaks their own truth, we will not receive accurate data on which we can rely in the future.

I have a copy of an old book from Henri J. Gouchon "Les Directions Primaires Simplifiees" (Simplified Primary Directions) published in 1977, modified from his first release in 1937 as Book 2 of his 'Astrological Dictionary', inspired by Morin de Villefranche.

Here is a summary of some of his observations (free translation).
1) Variations according to the birth time will be more noticeable for the ASC and the MC, less for the planets.
2) Directions from planets to planets can still provide useful informations even with approximate birth times. Note: This can be helpful to rectify a chart.
3) Directions of a planet in Gemini-Cancer and Sagittarius-Capricorn will be minimum, not more than 1 year on a 50 years lifetime.
4) Directions in the other signs, nearer to the Equinoxes, will produce larger variations, more so above Latitudes 40 degrees and up than between 0 to 30 degrees latitude.
5) As for the House System, he gave prevalence to Regiomontanus giving better timings with Placidus also giving fair results.
Note: The House System would be more important for intermediate House cusps, otherwise the Angles will be the same in all systems with some exceptions.
6) If you use the Converse Directions, do not use the conjunctions and the oppositions because they are already given by the Direct ones. Use sextiles, squares and trines for converse.

In another book "Les Previsions a longue Echeance' published in 1980, he gives a delineation for every direction between the Planets and the Angles.

My own personal experience is that I have found Primary Directions to be more reliable to describe the nature of the events in our life. Even a directed sextile from the ASC to Mars will tell you a story in your life.
A couple years ago, I broke my ankle. By secondary directions, I had the Progressed Moon over Mars but with the Primary Directions, it was Moon and Saturn conjunct Mars.

As Martin Gansten pointed out, "The directions formed to the natal chart within six hours of birth will then correspond to a full 90 years of life'.
Here lies our destiny written in the stars in a short Earth's rotation.

Kind regards,
Ouranos

I haven't seen Gouchon's book, but from the description, his approach sounds fairly representative of the period and similar to that of Kühr and others.

It is true that directions between two planets are much less time-sensitive than directions of the angles. That being so, I am not sure how the former would be useful in rectification work.

Note: The House System would be more important for intermediate House cusps, otherwise the Angles will be the same in all systems with some exceptions.

If, as I suspect, Gouchon matched his method of directing to his house system (nearly all modern authors do/did), then it will affect all directions not involving the angles (including planet-to-planet ones). The difference between Regiomontanus and Ptolemaic/Placidean directions can be several years.

I realize that this topic probably doesn't belong in the News forum, but I'm happy to discuss varieties of directions elsewhere if there is an interest.

In his first book, which consists mostly of a Table of ASC for Northern Latitudes given for every 30 minutes of Latitude, he based all his calculations on the natal sidereal time of the ASC. For the MC position, he substracted 6h from that ASC.
Thus, he started with these 2 axis.
For the intermediate House cusps in Regiomontanus, he found the Pole (or Polar height) of each House cusp from the geographical Latitude, as if they were ASC
Note: the Pole is different depending on the House system adopted. For example, for Campanus, the difference was up to 20 degrees for House XI.
And from his table, he did not solve the problem of Pluto which can have a high Latitude.
For example, let's say you have Mars at 19 Capricorn, you find in his Table for a geo Latitude given the corresponding sidereal time and you substract it from the Natal sidereal time (again always worked from the ASC).

His approach and calculations were based on the ASC of which everything else was calculated and I think the tedious work involved is what prevented astrologers to use Primary Directions over the centuries.
Using Planetdance calculations has given me good results. The only thing I would reccommend is to set the initial Birth Chart using UT and choosing Other by entering manually the Time Zone difference manually instead of using UT and Time Zone, mainly because you can come up with the ASC being off during changes of Standard and Daylight Times.
Once your Primary Chart is set up, you can progress it at any point in time with the buttons Years, Months and Days.
Solar Fire lacks the visual of a Full Chart, it's more like a report of directions.

Appreciate the great work you have done over the years Martin to debunk Astrology from ashes.
I was lucky enough to have been raised here in Canada with an eye on European and American astrologers. Back in the 70's, I had a teacher who showed me the value of Profections and Primary Directions. Unfortunately, when he died, he brought with him all his knowledge . His name was Henri Gazon and he was living next door to late Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau. His reputation was similar to Evangeline Adams here in Quebec.

Kind regards,
Ouranos

Thanks for your kind words.

Note: the Pole is different depending on the House system adopted. For example, for Campanus, the difference was up to 20 degrees for House XI.

But to the best of my knowledge, this was not a method taught by Campanus himself. (If anyone has a link to his astrological work[s], that would be appreciated.) The idea that every house system has a corresponding method of primary directions built into it is a 20th-century invention. Prior to that (again, as far as I know), there were a number of house systems but only two systems of direction based on position circles and their poles: that of Regiomontanus and that of Placidus.

there were a number of house systems but only two systems of direction based on position circles and their poles: that of Regiomontanus and that of Placidus.

As far as I know, it validates what Gouchon is saying. He used Regio (more accurate) and said Placidus gave fair results.
And it makes sense because Regiomontanus has great circles drawn from the North point through these segment points to the South point, which aligns with the Pole of the Planets, while Campanus has divisions into twelve segments happening on the 'prime vertical', i.e. the great circle that runs through the East point, the zenith, the West point and the nadir. Joining the East point with the Poles seems a bit odd here.


On this link here
http://cura.free.fr/decem/10delbo2.html
Use Google translate or any other tools.

This is a short study of a few cases (not an extensive one) but nevertheless to compare some theories and it seems that according to Regiomontanus method and especially that according to Placidus show expiry orbs that approach the events.

Study comparison of:
** 4 ° = 1 year, which is the process that Ptolemy used
** The constant Naibod 0.98 which represents the mean step of the sun in longitude;
** The step of the Sun in Right Ascension (AR)
** The step of the Sun in longitude, on the day of birth, recommended by Henri-Joseph Gouchon;

As far as I know, it validates what Gouchon is saying. He used Regio (more accurate) and said Placidus gave fair results.

But did he also give 'Campanus poles' to be used in directions, as a third system? That was what I understood your earlier post to suggest (and it is a common idea nowadays).

Study comparison of:
** 4 ° = 1 year, which is the process that Ptolemy used
** The constant Naibod 0.98 which represents the mean step of the sun in longitude;
** The step of the Sun in Right Ascension (AR)
** The step of the Sun in longitude, on the day of birth, recommended by Henri-Joseph Gouchon;

These are different equations of time (or 'keys'), which is a separate matter from the method used to derive the arc of direction. (Just to be clear, Ptolemy and other ancient authors used 1° = 1 year, with 1° rising in just under 4 minutes of clock time.)

But did he also give 'Campanus poles' to be used in directions, as a third system?

Sorry for the confusion. No he did not nor did he recommend.

Ptolemy and other ancient authors used 1° = 1 year, with 1° rising in just under 4 minutes of clock time.)

The 1 degree = 1 year of life as you know refers to a symbolic degree similar to the Solar Arc and it is closer to that measure closer to the Equator.
Gouchon, and I agree with him on this, used the true motion of the Sun similar to Secondary Progressions because it is a measure on the Ecliptic.

Other factors to consider:
1) Short ascension (Capricorn to Gemini) or Long ascension (Cancer to Sagittarius) will produce different gaps in time.
2) Life duration. The older you get, the more gap you create.
3) The 1 degree = 1 year does not take into account the Latitude of the birth. It is as if everybody was born on the Equator.
4) In Ancient Greece, they said the life expectancy was 35 years. So 1 degree a year seems a good approach from Ptolemy.

The method I have set in Morinus is
PDs Zodiacal any type with latitude of the significator.
Aspects of Promisor to Significator
PDs in chart --Celestial-- From the planets

Which method is best? It is like asking me if Secondary Progressions are better than Solar Arcs. I would say that younger people will see less difference, and closer to the Equator, and if their Sun's motion is closer to 1 degree a day and if their chart is off by 4 minutes and so on.
You can see that there are good reasons for me to leave it open for debate.

Thank you again! Appreciate the exchange with you.

Ouranos

Thanks for clarifying Gouchon's views.

The 1 degree = 1 year of life as you know refers to a symbolic degree similar to the Solar Arc and it is closer to that measure closer to the Equator.
Gouchon, and I agree with him on this, used the true motion of the Sun similar to Secondary Progressions because it is a measure on the Ecliptic.

It sounds to me as if you are conflating two distinct processes: first, finding the arc of direction; second, equating that arc to time. The arc of direction is always measured along the equator (or, if we want to be pernickety, along a circle parallel to the equator). After that, Ptolemy and other ancient (and medieval) authors simply equated the number of equatorial degrees with solar years; but starting in the early modern period, a number of more complicated procedures were invented.

For example, Placidus wanted to add the arc to the RA of the sun at birth, see how many days it took the sun to reach the resulting RA, and then equate that number of days with years. Later, others simply 'transmuted' the RA into longitude (although the arc itself is never measured in longitude); from your description, it sounds as if Gouchon belonged to this school.

Other factors to consider:
1) Short ascension (Capricorn to Gemini) or Long ascension (Cancer to Sagittarius) will produce different gaps in time.

I am not entirely sure what you mean by this. The different rising times of the signs are already built into the procedures for determining the arc of direction.

2) Life duration. The older you get, the more gap you create.

If you mean the gap between different systems of equating arcs with time, then some lead to a cumulative difference, but others (like the Placidus method) are variable.

3) The 1 degree = 1 year does not take into account the Latitude of the birth. It is as if everybody was born on the Equator.

No, this is not correct. The latitude of the birth place is a major factor in determining the arc of direction itself. The subsequent equation of 1 degree with 1 year is purely symbolic (as, of course, is the equation of 1 day with 1 year).

4) In Ancient Greece, they said the life expectancy was 35 years. So 1 degree a year seems a good approach from Ptolemy.

I don't quite follow this logic, but the 35-year idea is a bit of a myth: life expectancy in the purely statistical sense (that is, as an average) may have been low due to high infant mortality, but most adults didn't suddenly drop dead in their mid-thirties. Remember that in Ptolemy's scheme of planetary ages, the last stage (Saturn) starts at 68. Here is a short article of relevance.

Incidentally, this seems like a good time to mention that I have just finished updating my Primary Directions Diploma course:
https://astrology.martingansten.com/primary-directions/