Skyscript Astrology Forum

Lihin writes:

Mr Graham Fox has stated, using the death event and primary directions to rectify the chart might assist our understanding of the nativity and has been common practice amongst astrologers who work with primary directions.

This is indeed true, where directions to the angles are concerned, but in fact the point I was trying to make was that regarding the directions Martin used in the case of Abigail, rectification wouldn't seem to be a relevant issue: with interplanetary directions as here, small (10-15 minutes) rectifications will only make a few days difference, and as PDs are not supposed to be timed to the day, I felt that to bring up rectification in this case was a bit of a red herring.
Best wishes
Graham

Hello Tom
Could we clarify: if we make no reference to tropical or sidereal placements (for example, as in Martin's analysis of Abigails directions using "natural" qualities of the planets only and not drawing on house rulerships), we can post in this forum. I we base an analysis exclusively on sidereal considerations, and partciularly if we want to "push" a sideral agenda, a new thread should be created in the sidereal forum. But what if we mention sidereal rulerships in a discussion not centred on that and also mentionaing tropical ones? If Martin had wanted to draw on rulerships for Abigail's case, would he have had to change forum? Which forum should a case dating back to say 300AD fall in (probably no need to mention which zodiac one were using, unless to get into detail). And is not the question of house systems a similar problem? If you work with whole sign houses (as more and more traditional and Hellenistic astrologers seem to be doing), this will give very different dispositors and house positions than Placidus or Alcabitius, for example (ruler of 1 in 12 in the latter can often be conjunct the ascendant in the fomer, which makes a big difference). Should there also be a whole-sign forum? For example; Lihin has given an example in tropical/whole sign on the one hand and sidereal Hipparchos/"classical fields" on the other (not sure what "classical" means, nor why the sidereal example didn't also get whole signs, or vice versa, but never mind). I'm not tryng to be difficult, but I've found it so useful studying traditional techniques set out by tropical astrologers (here in the forum, or in the books of Joseph Crane for example) and simply doing my own little conversions into sidereal, that I don't want to miss out on these. If we want to join in, do we have to stay in the closet?
Yours hopefully
Graham

Fair enough, Tom.
I've posted some sidereal considerations on this new example on the Sidereal forum.
But I do not consider sidereal per se to be "non-traditional".
Graham

Good evening,

For once, exceptionally, i agree with our Moderator Mr Tom. Further, no demonstration is known to me to date that for example 'Western' (including the Near East) Mediaeval astrological authors worked with primary directions in connexion with other zodiacs than the tropical zodiac of the northern hemisphere, although, as has been mentioned, if the key used is the same there should be no differences in the arcs in RA. If there are such really conclusive demonstrations, i should like to know about their exact sources.

Although i much esteem his published work and fully respect his right to opinions and practices different from others, i lack the conviction requisite to sincerely fulfil Professor Martin Gansten's terminological request concerning 'so-called sidereal (equal sign) zodiacs' and / or 'sidereal' zodiacs for reasons already given.

Since in my feeble knowledge the determination of the Epikratetor (al-Hilaj, Hyleg) is a central technique leading to selection of appropriate primary directions indicating length of life, i (obviously) concur with Professor Gansten's use of it. However, important differences of opinion existed already amongst Hellenistic authors concerning the determination of the Epikratetor, not only of the Kurios, 'Lord of the Nativity'. In my humble experience the Placidus-Porphyrius Magus software developed by Dr Rumen Kolev has been greatly useful to understand these methods.

However, i have another specific question to Professor Gansten and / or to other knowledgeable fellow forum members to help better understand his delineation of the chart:

What are reference sources for Saturn as natural significator of death by drowning, please?

Best regards,

lihin

lihin wrote:Further, no demonstration is known to me to date that for example 'Western' (including the Near East) Mediaeval astrological authors worked with primary directions in connexion with other zodiacs than the tropical zodiac [...]

Arabic-language astrologers used both Indian (sidereal) and Byzantine (tropical) z?jes. This would naturally affect directions through the terms. But why begin only with the medievals? Greek-language astrologers were working directions (at least in oblique ascension) long before Ptolemy, in a zodiac that did not begin with the equinox, whatever you want to call it.

What are reference sources for Saturn as natural significator of death by drowning, please?

Why, Ptolemy for one! See Tetrabiblos 4.9. You will find the same in any number of standard works from the antiquity up to the 19th century at least.

Martin Gansten wrote:
William Gustafson's nativity
I have only had time to glance at it, but it seems to me the ascendant must be hyleg. There doesn't seem to be a lot going on by primary direction at the time of his death, though I think the converse direction of the ascendant to the trine of Mars that year has some relevance. But this merits further investigation.

For what it's worth, some earlier authors state that the deaths of young children are due to radical positions rather than directions. I don't know what the age limit would be for considering the effects of directions on that view.

thanks for the feedback on this chart martin. if you can explain the rationale for using the ascendant as the hyleg, i would be curious..

i know primary directions are not meant to time events, but i am curious how you would process the converse direction of the ascendant to the trine of mars in the context of it's distance in time to the event itself. the event is 6 1/2 months after the timing of that primary direction, unless one wants to alter the ascendant a wee bit. i take it you would not include any of the other directions which i've given off the smaller aspects - 30 and 45, or with the outer planets in this example. i suppose this is part of the reason i wanted to explore pds more fully with others, as some examples are much more obvious then others, this being a case in point as i see it.

as for the age limit and your last comment, if you find out something on that, let us know.. for me it doesn't make a lot of sense.. thanks!

james_m wrote:thanks for the feedback on this chart martin. if you can explain the rationale for using the ascendant as the hyleg, i would be curious..

From a Ptolemaic point of view, the luminaries are both below the horizon; the Moon might conceivably be assigned to the first house, but is disjunct from the ascendant. The Lot of Fortune is likewise disjunct (has no aspectual relationship with the ascendant). There are no planets in hylegiacal places. That only leaves the ascendant.

i know primary directions are not meant to time events,

Well, they are, but only to the year (according to most traditional usage).

but i am curious how you would process the converse direction of the ascendant to the trine of mars in the context of it's distance in time to the event itself. the event is 6 1/2 months after the timing of that primary direction, unless one wants to alter the ascendant a wee bit.

I would still see that direction as operational. I consider it a weak argument, but that has more to with it being a converse direction and a trine than with the time difference.

i take it you would not include any of the other directions which i've given off the smaller aspects - 30 and 45, or with the outer planets in this example.

No, I wouldn't.

as for the age limit and your last comment, if you find out something on that, let us know.. for me it doesn't make a lot of sense.. thanks!

I think the idea is simply that if someone has a radix that threatens an early death, a lack of powerfully fatal directions early in life is not enough to keep him/her alive.

Martin Gansten wrote: From a Ptolemaic point of view, the luminaries are both below the horizon; the Moon might conceivably be assigned to the first house, but is disjunct from the ascendant. The Lot of Fortune is likewise disjunct (has no aspectual relationship with the ascendant). There are no planets in hylegiacal places. That only leaves the ascendant.

Martin Gansten wrote:I think the idea is simply that if someone has a radix that threatens an early death, a lack of powerfully fatal directions early in life is not enough to keep him/her alive.

thanks martin. my solar fire software is saying the hyleg is the pof according to however the program has been written. see the pic below...

does anyone have any thoughts on how williams chart might signify an early death? obviously it is not something that many if any, would consider when looking at a chart, myself included..


free image hosting

james_m wrote:my solar fire software is saying the hyleg is the pof according to however the program has been written.

Yes, that nicely demonstrates the danger in relying too much on software.

absolutely, lol...

getting back to the chart however, one would be remiss not to point out how the pd data and the transit data is nowhere near as nice a fit as your first example! i thought i might be able to make it work by seeing the connections in the solar return chart to this pof, but alas even that has now been blowin' away.. if primary directions are going to gain any momentum in the astro community, they are going to have to make sense even in examples such as williams case, as i see it.. we can leave aside the fact the transit data for the event is thin, as transits don't typically form much of a basis for the trad astro approach.. however, sr and pd data is supposed to..