Skyscript Astrology Forum

tarnia wrote:
Looks like the Moons meanings have shifted considerably over the years.

Would you expect this type of behaviour from anyone with the Moon in the 1st in Libra, going to be an awful lot of people with this!?

I wouldn't say anything about anyone with blanket astrological statements. What I wrote was a basic "Traditional" delineation based on some basic planetary dispositions.

the First House or Rising Sign is indicative of the native's drive and direction, having a Cardinal sign rising will incline one to be initiating or expressive with their drive and directions they take. The Moon is our thoughts and emotions (I am not aware of how Modern Astrologers view the Moon's indications) and is also our appetites. Libra is a Masculine-Cardinal-Air sign, which makes for a drive or direction that is prone to leading by example or inclining one's drives to be verbally expressive and initiatory. The First House is also the most "Angular" of the houses as it contains the First Angle, the Ascendant. Angular planets produce what they promise. The Moon (thoughts/emotions) in a Masculine-Cardinal-Air sign (Libra/Verbally Expressive-Creative) produced through the First House (personal drive and inclinations) would show a native that is prone to expressing thier thoughts and emotions through an outgoing creative medium or outlet.
The Moon here is peregrine (without dignity) and aspected only by the Sun though she separates from her ruler, Venus and applies to the Sun in Leo/11th. A somewhat specific disposition of planets.

The Moon is our thoughts and emotions (I am not aware of how Modern Astrologers view the Moon's indications) and is also our appetites.

I won't pretend to represent the entire spectrum of opinion held by 'modern astrologers' but I'd have thought they would conceptualise all the planets as talking about peoples thoughts and emotions dependent on the thought or emotion being considered.

The Moon tends to be linked to satiation, hunger and contentment which may be similar to your 'appetites', you would need to expand on this 'appetites' idea for further clarification.

Where there may be more of a seperation in perspectives is linking the Moon with more conscious cognitive processes as it tends to be more associated with instinctual responses, i.e it's more non-verbal and not particulary associated with language.

Tarnia
I'm a little confused because in the second post you made in the forum you described yourself as a 'modern' astrologer. But then why come into a thread in the traditional section and dwell upon the differences between modern and traditional approaches? There seems to be a trend in your posts for making short comments that are expected to be taken as read, but the lack of explanation of your viewpoint is making your posts seem unecessarily challenging.
I don't want to misrepresent your position, but recently this forum has suffered from one or two unfathomable individuals who join up under new pseudonyms deliberately to cause division within the astrological debate. I want to make sure this is not happening here, so I will correspond with you privately about this.

Deb

PS - GR, sorry for not commenting following the revelation of the identity. I haven't had time to catch up with the thread yet. I'm not sure how embarrassed I should be, but I've never heard of this man, and haven't found time to read the wiki page yet. But surely Mercury in sign and exaltation in Virgo on the square of the node in Gemini is enough to explain the profusion of letters, even though it is in the 12th house? It is a rising Mercury and so relates to the 'calling' as I understand that technique. I'm also thinking of my own chart because I have Mercury in Gemini in the 12th, in square to the Moon in Virgo. I seem to spend a lot of my time writing, writing, writing. Some of it never seems to see the light of formal publication, and some of it is probably best kept hidden, but there's still a lot of writing and scribbling going on here. I seem to spend my entire life surrounded by paperwork - it sometimes feels like being 'imprisoned' by it ! ...

Hi Deb!

Deb wrote: ... I haven't had time to catch up with the thread yet. I'm not sure how embarrassed I should be, but I've never heard of this man, and haven't found time to read the wiki page yet.

Well, you've been busy, and I figure Lovecraft maybe isn't your thing?

Deb wrote: I'm also thinking of my own chart because I have Mercury in Gemini in the 12th, in square to the Moon in Virgo. I seem to spend a lot of my time writing, writing, writing. Some of it never seems to see the light of formal publication, and some of it is probably best kept hidden, but there's still a lot of writing and scribbling going on here. I seem to spend my entire life surrounded by paperwork - it sometimes feels like being 'imprisoned' by it ! ...

I'd point out that the antiscion of Mercury is also the ascending portion of Cancer in your chart, which I'd think would definately make it more active then normal. The imprisonment fits the 12th sign, and Mercury is also being enclosed by the malefics (sep. trigon from Saturn, app. hexagon to Mars) without any other planet breaking the enclosure. But then again this isn't the poke at Deborah Houlding's chart thread.

Tienka Atema wrote:

there is an interesting article on the site of Darrelyn Gunsburg where she explores the use of antiscia in relationships. She uses an orb of 5 degrees and that is what I do as well.

I am still intrigued by people using such wide 'orbs' ( I know it not the right word but what is?) for antiscia both from a traditional and pragmatic perspective. From Manilius and Lilly I had formed the impression this had to be a degree or at most 3 degrees. Personally, I feel 3 degrees either side of a planet is pushing things a bit. Still, there is the hellenistic tradition of aspects being activated within 3 degrees of application. I must say though that 5 degrees sounds very generous to me, No wonder I dont find lots of relevant antiscions! Isn't there a danger as with too many parts/lots the chart is going to be littered with possibilities? I can understand what Gabe said about whole signs reflecting on to each other in a broad sense. However, what is the traditional basis for using 5 degrees? Just interested.

Mark

Hi Mark,
I only use 5 degrees at the most, when I compare relationships, not in natal or horary. I do not think there is a classical reference to orb in regards to antiscia, but I am not sure. Relationships comparison is a very complex matter and using the antiscia is very useful, at least to my opinion:)
regards,
Tienka