But I may be wrong. I will think about it.

I remember one person with the Sun in early Virgo and Saturn in Late Leo under the beams, Saturn conjunct Leo ascendant to the degree. It makes for chameleons because one of Saturn's significations is "feigned appearance" (appearing to be something you're not). Even though it is not visible (sort of like feigned appearance) it is in a phasis state because it will have a heliacal rising within 7 days. If a planet is close to that 15 degree range of the Sun's position where it is about to go from visible to invisible or about to make first appearance, this is a phasis "an appearance that speaks" as Schmidt would say. A planet can be more powerful in this state because it grabs attention. It does so because a first appearance grabs attention (stronger - like when a student late for class enters the classroom and everybody turns to see the interruption) or when going into the beams (weaker), it is furiously active before death.

But you're taking us in a different direction! We're leaving combustion. Some may applaud the move.

Kirk wrote:The Sun in Cancer is far north of the equator up north, but that doesn't work for the folks down south of the equator, so it tends to be hemisphere specific. I need to think about that one.

Remember it's not just about the Sun, it has to do with Saturn's strength as well. Saturn is in fall in Aries, in detriment in Leo and Cancer, but Saturn is in it's covered chariot in Libra, Capricorn or Aquarius where it is protected from sunburn, so it can effect from its own significations, restraint being one of them. This is why I said to look to see if Saturn was in its own bounds earlier.

Oh right (he slaps his head). Saturn in detriment in Cancer. I didn't even think of that. I was only thinking of the Sun. Thank you.

I'm signing off now for a while.

Hi Kirk, if you are not still head-slapping, this may or may not help before I sign off too (from this thread, for all time ?). The Sun generates and illuminates, but it also receives back. In medieval philosophy on the distribution and descent of celestial light, for example, celestial virtue is considered to be generated by the Sun and then expressed outwards to the planets, each of which has its own essential quality (largely deriving from its relationship to the Sun within the cosmic scheme as it centres upon the earth). So the celestial light that emanates from the Sun is characterised differently as it filters into the celestial influence of each planet. (Celestial light, BTW, is considered to be spiritually imbued and so penetrates into the planet and its body (orb), which is distinct from physical sunlight, which simply bounces off the surface).
This then creates the planetary virtues/influences which intermingle with each other and are brought to each by the focussing power of the Moon. This accepts that synodic conjunctions acts like creative cosmic recharges for planetary energies, and that the Sun acts in a centrally creative role. However, the Sun is still within the cosmic scheme and so not oblivious to the influences that are brought back to it. It?s all about the recycling and dispersion of energy, and it stands up within its own philosophical outlook because this derives from ancient astronomy and became the scientific worldview of medieval natural philosophers. It still holds up if you envisage the scheme from their outlook and world view, but there is obviously much more to this that I can begin to express here, which makes me reluctant to try to defend it outside of its own internal logic. But I do think this is something that astrologers have to get more informed about in order to understand the logic that is built into many other, dependent astrological schemes ? the effects of combustion being only one small part of this.


By the way, this is only a minor point of disagreement that I have with Curtis but I don't personally subscribe to the notion of planets being protected from combustion or synodic effects within their own 'covered chariots'. A few ancient astrologers spoke about this prospect but many others didn't and it was clearly controversial. The sign rulerships and detriments, exaltations and falls, etc, are developed upon the principles of the synodic cycles, and the synodic cycles of the planets were the first point of astrology, established prior to the 12 sign zodiac. I just thought I would put this on record as I don't intend to contradict those who do accept and use this principle.

Deb wrote:
By the way, this is only a minor point of disagreement that I have with Curtis but I don't personally subscribe to the notion of planets being protected from combustion or synodic effects within their own 'covered chariots'. A few ancient astrologers spoke about this prospect but many others didn't and it was clearly controversial. The sign rulerships and detriments, exaltations and falls, etc, are developed upon the principles of the synodic cycles, and the synodic cycles of the planets were the first point of astrology, established prior to the 12 sign zodiac.

The first part of this is a little vague because I wouldn't either if it has to do with visibility issues. This is part of the problem: that the concept of combustion is a composite concept and many astrologers don't separate the 2 main components of this idea in their minds.

I believe that the correspondences found in the chart of the Thema Mundi predate the text in bold otherwise it couldn't have fit the exaltations by house so elegantly (with the good and bad places) as well as other concepts such as the joys. This could not be by chance. It would be like a Rubic's cube falling together with all the same colors neatly on one side before understanding the concept of cubed 3's.

Not chance Curtis, I agree - but an extension of it; so it follows the philosophy and is part of it, extending from it rather than predating it. But that's a big subject and I only have little time, so I was a little vague deliberately I'm just flagging my disagreement to the point whilst knowing I can't properly justify my disagreement at this time, so that I don't feel obliged to express my disagreement whenever the principle gets discussed in the forum. Hope you understand.

By the way, this is only a minor point of disagreement that I have with Curtis but I don't personally subscribe to the notion of planets being protected from combustion or synodic effects within their own 'covered chariots'. A few ancient astrologers spoke about this prospect but many others didn't and it was clearly controversial. The sign rulerships and detriments, exaltations and falls, etc, are developed upon the principles of the synodic cycles, and the synodic cycles of the planets were the first point of astrology, established prior to the 12 sign zodiac. I just thought I would put this on record as I don't intend to contradict those who do accept and use this principle.

Are there links around to anything you've written on this topic?

Thanks,

- Ed

I don't think so Ed - there is a lot of material that is going to start filtering out now (for example in journal articles) and I'll be releasing bits on the site over upcoming months, but nothing substantial or particularly informative that I can think to point you to right now.

Thanks Deb. I'll just keep my eyes open.

- Ed

My head hurts.

Thank you for the reply, Deb. I know you have signed off from this thread but I will quote you anyway, with some added emphasis:

The Sun generates and illuminates, but it also receives back. In medieval philosophy on the distribution and descent of celestial light, for example, celestial virtue is considered to be generated by the Sun and then expressed outwards to the planets, each of which has its own essential quality (largely deriving from its relationship to the Sun within the cosmic scheme as it centres upon the earth). So the celestial light that emanates from the Sun is characterised differently as it filters into the celestial influence of each planet. (Celestial light, BTW, is considered to be spiritually imbued and so penetrates into the planet and its body (orb), which is distinct from physical sunlight, which simply bounces off the surface).

This then creates the planetary virtues/influences which intermingle with each other and are brought to each by the focussing power of the Moon. This accepts that synodic conjunctions acts like creative cosmic recharges for planetary energies, and that the Sun acts in a centrally creative role. However, the Sun is still within the cosmic scheme and so not oblivious to the influences that are brought back to it. It?s all about the recycling and dispersion of energy, and it stands up within its own philosophical outlook because this derives from ancient astronomy and became the scientific worldview of medieval natural philosophers.

So I see no problem with the idea of the Sun getting news from the planets, as I wrote earlier. With that news comes insight for the Sun, and in receiving the news and insight from the planet the Sun is influenced. The planets are sent out from the synodic conjunction and through the experience of the orbit they, as messengers, have their own experiences and insight which they bring back to the Sun. In receiving the messages and reports from the planets the Sun is influenced ? and that means that in some way the Sun has been changed. But the Sun is in control by controlling the orbit of the planet, sending the planet out and accepting it back.

For me this means that combustion isn't always as strong as it's made out to be. Horary works easily with an almighty Sun ? and horary is your focus. What really confuses things is that in a natal chart a Sun-planet conjunction is nearly universally accepted as a description of the chart native's personality and qualities ? the planet influences the Sun and alters it. Yet with that same natal chart we can say that the Sun consumes and weakens the planet, and therefore the Sun will have a weakening effect on the houses ruled by that planet. A combust lord of the natal 2nd or 7th house will have a negative effect on those houses, even though the person himself has the qualities of that planet due to the conjunction.

Natal delineation has us going both ways with the Sun. In looking at the personality of the native we tend to see a conjunction with an influenced Sun. In looking at the house rulers we tend to see combustion with a weakened planet.

It looks like the combustion battle is between those who focus primarily on horary and those who spend a lot of time on natal delineation. That's my impression, anyway.