Hello Eddy,

Eddy wrote:But this confuses me a bit. As far as I had understood in last few days, I thought that tradition used inferior conjunction as the 'starting' moment. If inferior conjunction Venus is moist according to tradition, doesn't it mean that she is then at the beginning of a cycle, since moist is usually set as starting moment?

I was not taught like that. And I am not always in agreement with Deborah- for example we had very different experiences with David Juste - but she is the one I understand better, many in the Anglosaxon world follow Zoller or others, who teach things which often are not like the ones I studied in CieloeTerra.

I believe there was some mess in ancient astrologers in what was "oriental" and what "occidental."
In every case for what I understand a vespertine Venus (and Mercury) is moist both in the superior and in the inferior phase, but the quality of their actions is different, maybe because in the inferior phase they are retrograde. So their effects are distorted.

For both conjunctions there is something to say for. Morning appearance resembles appearance as a outer planet. Evening appearance resembles appearance as the new moon.

It's not like I understood. Vespertine rising is like the appearance of a outer planet. It's because the different motion of inner and outer planets, the first ones are faster than the Sun, the second ones are slower.
Anyway I understand that it's quite difficult even for me, who I heard these things a million time in CieloeTerra. The epycicle is not easy, I'm happy to know it's a fake

Margherita

There is a great little document on the astrolabe site, which gives the dates and positions of the Venus Phase Cycle up to 2050. The link is:
http://www.alabe.com/VeCycle-1.pdf

I am not sure who authored this, (so whoever it was, thank you!) However, this document also assumes that the cycle begins with the inferior conjunction, and I think this is simply a mistake that is getting thoughtlessly reproduced. (Exactly what happened to me last week when I was rushing, and not thinking). I would like to demonstrate by reference to a very clear traditional statement, but I don?t have that ? what we have is a lot of implied suggestions that make logical sense of things that don?t make sense otherwise. We also have little pointers such as the fact that Paulus of Alexandria describes the cycle in an order which begins with the evening rising. As far as I?m concerned the traditional evidence shows that the cycle begins with the superior conjunction, but I would be extremely interested in *any* traditional reference that suggests otherwise.

With regard to the visible reappearance of Venus ? she is ?supposed? to become visible again at around 15 degrees from the Sun, and she is already 19 degrees, but of course her latitude and the observer?s latitude influences things. I?m very interested to know how much it influences things ? which is why I think it will be a great idea to get feedback from various localities. Tomorrow I will try to set the alarm !

With regard to the visible reappearance of Venus ? she is ?supposed? to become visible again at around 15 degrees from the Sun, and she is already 19 degrees, but of course her latitude and the observer?s latitude influences things. I?m very interested to know how much it influences things ? which is why I think it will be a great idea to get feedback from various localities. Tomorrow I will try to set the alarm !

This is the first time that a Lady ever was late, I am sure!

The question of when a planet first becomes visible is a difficult one. Conditions are only optimal at the equator where the angular distance between the planet and the Sun are at their greatest in terms of gaining the observational benefits and contrasts of dusk and twilight. Thus, Venus may rize but 7 degrees separate the Sun, however, the Sun still lying 7 degrees below the horizon. Sun conditions are not acheived in either Britain or Norway.

From what I understand ? from a variety of traditional texts ? Venus begins to appear at optimal conditions and location, at around 8 degrees of separation. But 15-20 degrees separation is supposed to be the distance at which its new appearance is most widely observed. But yes, you need a good viewing location and clear skies. The sky here is cloudy today, so I wouldn?t have seen anything even if I had risen with the Sun

I am speculating that Dane Rudhyar was the one who set the fashion for thinking of the inferior conjunction as the point of the 'new cycle'; in his Astrological Study of Psychological Complexes and Emotional Problems, 1966. (online at http://www.khaldea.com/rudhyar/aspc/aspc_c8.shtml - this chapter is especially relevant).

If anyone knows of an earlier authority than Rudhyar, please let me know.
Deb

[quote="Gjiada]The epycicle is not easy, I'm happy to know it's a fake [/quote]? wonder what the Renaissance astrologers thought when heliocentricity came.

Andrew Bevan wrote:

With regard to the visible reappearance of Venus ? she is ?supposed? to become visible again at around 15 degrees from the Sun, and she is already 19 degrees, but of course her latitude and the observer?s latitude influences things. I?m very interested to know how much it influences things ? which is why I think it will be a great idea to get feedback from various localities. Tomorrow I will try to set the alarm !

This is the first time that a Lady ever was late, I am sure!

The question of when a planet first becomes visible is a difficult one. Conditions are only optimal at the equator where the angular distance between the planet and the Sun are at their greatest in terms of gaining the observational benefits and contrasts of dusk and twilight. Thus, Venus may rize but 7 degrees separate the Sun, however, the Sun still lying 7 degrees below the horizon. Sun conditions are not acheived in either Britain or Norway.

Deb wrote:From what I understand ? from a variety of traditional texts ? Venus begins to appear at optimal conditions and location, at around 8 degrees of separation. But 15-20 degrees separation is supposed to be the distance at which its new appearance is most widely observed. But yes, you need a good viewing location and clear skies. The sky here is cloudy today, so I wouldn?t have seen anything even if I had risen with the Sun

This time it's a bit different. This superior conjunction occurred with Venus ca. 8? latitude north of the Sun. Morning visibility of Moon/Planets in Spring is the more difficult one but still with this Venus position she definitely should have been visible one week ago. I 'lost' her 6 days before at 10? elongation. I'm sure that I would have seen her the evening after the last time but it was cloudy then. So especially the inhabitants of the northern hemisphere are in the good position. Norway may have a bit too long dawn but with such abright planet as Venus still a good chance to find her in an early stage. Now she's at 20? elongation. Perhaps we should give Randi's million to the first one who sees her .

I am speculating that Dane Rudhyar was the one who set the fashion for thinking of the inferior conjunction as the point of the 'new cycle'....

Rudhyar is not really my cup of tea. In a sort of way I 'can't' read his writing. However, his point is clear, to him inferior conjunction is the 'start'. Isn't there a mistake in that scheme? The last point under 'geocentric' should be 'waning' crescent.

the astrolabe site article wrote:Five Venus phase cycles take almost exactly eight years.
At the end of every five cycles, we have inserted an extra line
space. This marks the beginning of a new series of five cycles. The
new series traces a similar pentagram, but everything is displaced
approximately two degrees earlier.

This interesting cycle was known in old times and called 'Pentagramma Veneris'. Those two degrees/days cause the slight change. Moreover Venus' orbital eccentricity is very small, which makes her movements very regular. Mars' and Mercury's orbits are quite eccentric and therefore their (re)appearances are quite irregular. Venus is a very 'reliable' planet. Perhaps another reason why she was considered a benefic.

Perhaps we should give Randi's million to the first one who sees her

It was me! I saw her this morning, I just didn?t realise it was Venus until, well ? just a few moments ago ?

Quote:
I am speculating that Dane Rudhyar was the one who set the fashion for thinking of the inferior conjunction as the point of the 'new cycle'....

Rudhyar is not really my cup of tea. In a sort of way I 'can't' read his writing. However, his point is clear, to him inferior conjunction is the 'start'. Isn't there a mistake in that scheme? The last point under 'geocentric' should be 'waning' crescent.

Rightly or wrongly I have convinced myself that Rudhyar shows why the inferior conjunction is believed to start the scheme according to modern accounts. It is the influence of heliocentricity. As he explains it (according to heliocentricity) looking at Mercury or Venus from the viewpoint of the Sun would see the inferior conjunction as the one in which the planet is aligned with the earth ? so naturally this will be likened to the ?New Moon? stage. But traditional astrological concepts are geocentric not heliocentric in their origin; it is how they appear from the earth that matters (or as I frequently assert, astrology is a heliocentric philosophy, as originated from a geocentric viewpoint). I can see how Rudhyar?s view would be persuasive, but it does not account for the traditional application of the cycles. Of course, I may be wrong, and maybe Rudhyar was following someone else, but according to one of the footnotes that David McCann made in his translation of Firmicus, it was Rudhyar who kept knowledge of the heliacal phases alive in the 60s and 70s ? at least he deserves credit for that.

I appreciate your astronomical knowledge in this. I am currently constructing diagrams for this cycle for one of my course tutorials, which is why I am suddenly so ?engaged? in this thread. One thing that occurred to me today ? and you may be able to help me out on this- is that I am not sure how astrologers can tell when Venus moves from an inferior position to a superior position. This may be a silly question, but I am not sure if our usual software covers this, or what form or measurement is used to establish how near or far a planet is in its stages between aphelion and perihelion. In the end I used common sense to decide that these ?pivot points? had to be established by the degrees of maximum elongation. If you have anything to add on that please do, because I have spent the better part of today trying to find a confirmation of my belief, but nobody really seems to go into this.

Deb wrote:

Perhaps we should give Randi's million to the first one who sees her

It was me! I saw her this morning, I just didn?t realise it was Venus until, well ? just a few moments ago ?

Ah, my pocket torch on a balloon hanging over the Netherlands to mislead the English worked .

did Randi say in which currency this million is to be given? Turkish Lira perhaps .

In that case Rudhyar indeed deserves credit.

It is the influence of heliocentricity. As he explains it (according to heliocentricity) looking at Mercury or Venus from the viewpoint of the Sun would see the inferior conjunction as the one in which the planet is aligned with the earth ? so naturally this will be likened to the ?New Moon? stage.

In that case when Mars Jupiter or Saturn is in opposition with the Sun, they are in conjunction with Earth from heliocentric view. Do you happen to know if he considered the oppositions as start too?

One thing that occurred to me today ? and you may be able to help me out on this- is that I am not sure how astrologers can tell when Venus moves from an inferior position to a superior position.

I'm sorry but now I'm getting kicked out of the university library...no more time. I hope I can find a place tomorrow to look at the thread again. I'm not sure if I've totally understood your question. I'd say the inferior conjunction Venus/Mercury is always retrograde and the superior is always direct.

I'll have a look at it later....

Hello Deborah,

Deb wrote: is that I am not sure how astrologers can tell when Venus moves from an inferior position to a superior position. This may be a silly question, but I am not sure if our usual software covers this, or what form or measurement is used to establish how near or far a planet is in its stages between aphelion and perihelion. In the end I used common sense to decide that these ?pivot points? had to be established by the degrees of maximum elongation. If you have anything to add on that please do, because I have spent the better part of today trying to find a confirmation of my belief, but nobody really seems to go into this.

I'm not sure what you mean, so maybe this is a stupid answer.
By inferior and superior phase do you mean retrograde and direct phase?

Inferior planets start their cycle with vespertine rising, when they are strong and swift in motion, than the planets start to slow, then it stops and becomes retrograde, and after some time it is hidden by the Sun, i.e. it is the vespertine setting.

The same on the other side, when inner planets are in their matutine rising, still retrograde.
I believe there are astronomical formula to measure when a planet is doing its phases to the Sun.
In CieloeTerra they surely have something, because they always give the list of phases for the season in their site for all the planets, inner and outer, they don't use orbs in fact, but the true astronomical phenomena.

Margherita

Hi Margherita

Thank you for your response ? what I am seeking is a confirmation of the point when the planet moves from being between the Earth and the Sun, to beyond the Sun (as seen from the Earth); and vice versa. In other words, we know that what the traditional texts refer to as the ?direct conjunction? is what we call the ?superior conjunction?, because at this point the planet is further away from the earth than the Sun; and that what they called the ?retrograde conjunction? is what we call the ?inferior conjunction? because this occurs between the Sun and the Earth ? but what system of measurement do we use to calculate where a planet is within its own ?epicycle?? What is the precise moment that an inferior planet shifts between the inferior and superior halves of its cycle around the Sun? Common sense tells me that the alternating points have to be at the positions of maximum elongation from the Sun, but I have struggled to find an official confirmation of this.

I believe there are astronomical formula to measure when a planet is doing its phases to the Sun.

This sounds like what I am looking for ? but then we have to hope that the formula is simple to obtain, and even simpler to understand

Best wishes
Deb

PS - Eddy - I don't know what Rudhyar's position was on the superior planet cycles - I only briefly skimmed the section on Mercury to verify that his approach is not using the same symbolic perspective as the older authors.

I just had written something in a document but with this computer I don't manage to copy paste. I'll try later.


do you mean a formula like this 1: (1:orbit period A - 1:orbit period B) mutual conjuntion period. for venus earth 1: ( 1:225 - 1:365) = 584days

or Jupiter Saturn 1:12 - 1:30 = 30:360 - 12:360 = 18:360
1: (18:360) = 360:18 = 20 years when mutual Jupiter Saturn positions occur.


I hope you managed to see Venus. I had set the alarm clock but again I couldn't get up and go out to the countryside. I blame Saturn for my laziness.

Hi,

Deb wrote
Since the conjunction with the Sun is the start of the new cycle, I thought I would add that this occurred at 7Aries15. It would be interesting to get information of when Venus becomes visible again, according to different locations.

Yes, the new Venus cycle started at 7?15? Aries on March 27 at 19h23m UT with the Inferior Conjunction. At least Kolev starts with the inferior conjunction. Here are the last and the current Venus cycles: Interestingly, its first appearance in the morning (MF, Morning First) was on March 22, its last visibility in the evening (EL, Evening Last) was on March 26! This is for London ? as all examples here - and varies of course with geographical latitude.

Deb wrote
From what I understand ? from a variety of traditional texts ? Venus begins to appear at optimal conditions and location, at around 8 degrees of separation. But 15-20 degrees separation is supposed to be the distance at which its new appearance is most widely observed.

I?m afraid this is incorrect or at least an oversimplification. The visibility doesn?t depend on zodiacal longitude, but
- Altitude or position above/below the horizon (too obvious! )
- Atmospheric Refraction
- Magnitude or brightness of the planet or star
- Intensity of daylight (Sun?s Halo)
- Azimut distance from the sun (point of the compass)

Perhaps it helps to explain some terms that you see on the picture from Rumen Kolev?s astro-software SUMER.

IC = Inferior Conjunction
MF = Morning First
ME = Morning Elongation
ML = Morning Last
SC = Superior Conjunction
EF = Evening First
EE = Evening Elongation
EL = Evening Last

Mag = Magnitude (brightness) of the planet

AV = Arcus Visionis (feel free to Google). This is the position of the Sun below the horizon, measured in Altitude. It determines the daylight intensity, and together with the Magnitude and the Azimut distance (point of the compass along the horizon) of the planet from the Sun?s halo one can find out if the planet is visible or not. (I leave out Refraction because it depends on temperature, and it makes only a difference of less than a degree in altitude)

So why was Venus still visible in the evening when it was already visible in the morning? Is it a good omen that for a few days it could be seen in the morning and in the evening?

It would be too hard for me to put this into words since English is not my native language. So here are some pictures.

Morning First on March 22, 2009 at 05h21m UT in London. The Arcus Visionis is -6.0?, so the Sun has to be 6? of Altitude below the horizon. Venus appears in the morning sky for a very short moment. Its Magnitude is -4.2. It is retrograde so it moves from left to right in the picture while Sun and Mercury move from right to left.
(Pictures made from ?Cartes du ciel?, a free astronomy programme. Great programme, highly recommend it!)
http://astrosurf.com/astropc/cartes/
The previous morning, on March 21, when the Sun was 6? below the horizon, it looked like this
Evening Last on March 26, 2009 at 18h58m UT in London, looking west. The Arcus Visionis is -5.5?. Venus? Magnitude is -4.2. Venus can only be seen for a very short time as it gets darker.
The following evening, March 27, looking west, the sun is also -5.5? below the horizon, Venus is not visible any more. So was this a good omen that Venus was for a few days visible on the morning and in the evening? ? While there is nothing recorded about Venus, the Babylonians thought it was a very bad omen when this happened to the Moon. Hitler was born during such a month.

Venus stands also for matters of money and wealth. The G20 summit in London took place shortly after that Venus phase. Although it was widely praised as a success, I think the effects of creating an even greater credit bubble (by governments, this time) will perhaps help in the short term, but will be disastrous in the long run. To me, it?s like trying to cure a junkie on cold turkey with more heroin. Sure, he will feel better for a few hours.
Then, more or better regulation of financial markets? ? There is already opposition.
And then ? as a side remark from a bashed Swiss ? there was a great hypocrisy regarding tax havens. China (with Hong Kong and Macao), the Channel Islands, Delaware, Nevada, Montana all on the white list!
So the whole meeting and the effects of it will turn out to be a Monster-Flop. Let?s hope for all of us that this conclusion is wrong.

Ren?

Thanks to Astrologix, a German Astrology Forum, for providing server capacity for the pictures.
http://www.astrologix.de/cgi-bin/forum/forum.cgi