In another thread Mark C brought me back to this topic with:

Also it could be argued that sect is less important for Mercury because of its common nature. In his short bookelet on planetary sect Robert Hand expresses the view several times that Mercury does not appear to be strongly influenced by sect. Many traditional sources focus on the nature of Mercury changing according to its aspectual connections and that of its dispositor.

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... 5&start=15


I do have a tendency to persist. . . sometimes. As I said, Mercury and Jupiter are the sole domicile lords of all 4 MUTABLE signs. The little prince of adaptability is in league with the big benefic guy running the 4 signs of change, flux and adaptability. Jupiter is the Head Honcho of moderation and moderation is all about blending in order to prevent the extreme of a dominating element or factor. Think 'temperance' (and Temperance for you Tarot fans). Getting back to the topic ? Once again, I think Mercury can come up to a Jupiter sign. He may trip over his feet but he does OK. Jupiter doesn't benefit so well when he descends to a Mercury sign, because, well, he's a lot bigger than Mercury.

In his chapter on the quality of mind Ptolemy mentions Mercury and the Moon and then next moves on to the quadruplicities, the modes. Of course, he doesn't say very nice things about the Bicorporeal/Common/Mutable signs, but then how many of those guys ever did. The fact is, he found those categories to be important. So far I don't see him saying anything about the elements in relation to the quality of mind. It seems to be the case with those old guys ? they don't talk about elements so much as the modes. The element thing looks to be modern (Darn you, Jung!) I've mentioned around here before that I don't find much in element emphasis or lack, but a few years back I started noticing that emphasized or poorly represented modes were very interesting and meaningful in a chart.

So, if the modes are so important then it sure looks meaningful that only two planets are so closely tied with one of them and create an order not shared by the other two modes. It's kind of fascinating that the order and symmetry involves moderation, adaptability, mutability and the unloved and under-appreciated Common mode.

Hi Kirk,

Of course, he doesn't say very nice things about the Bicorporeal/Common/Mutable signs, but then how many of those guys ever did.

I dont know about that. Sounds like you need to drop Ptolemy for Valens. For example, Valens is positive about Gemini and Sagittarius but lays into the fixed signs Scorpio and Aquarius!

Notwithstanding the traditional lack of dignity Mercury has in the Jupiter ruled signs the two planets are always presented as generally very positive in aspectual relationship.

Jupiter and Mercury are good, harmonious, administrative; they produce managers of things, those who become trustees or financial managers, those who are fit to be guardians, those who make their living from arguments and calculations, and those who are distinguished in education, but dear to many and easy to befriend, those who are deemed worthy of reward and stipend. And if they should be found in profitable signs, they also produce finders of treasures and those who are helped in loans [by deposits). The Anthology, Vettius Valens, Book 1, Chapter 2

Mark

I dont know about that. Sounds like you need to drop Ptolemy for Valens. For example, Valens is positive about Gemini and Sagittarius but lays into the fixed signs Scorpio and Aquarius!

Notwithstanding the traditional lack of dignity Mercury has in the Jupiter ruled signs the two planets are always presented as generally very positive in aspectual relationship.

I'm not so much interested in who wrote what but in working with the complex yet elegant symbolic system that was given to us. If we understand the dynamics of Cardinal initialization, Fixed stabilization and Mutable change, if we have a feel for the activities and styles of Mercury and Jupiter, then it seems only natural that we should be able to run with it and use the symbolism without relying too heavily on written sources.

Mercury is at home with information gathering and sharing, rhetoric and oratory, analysis, categorization, etc. Jupiter belongs with morality and ethics, religion, dreams, visions and prophecy, etc. It seems to me that we should be able to see that they are complementary to a certain extent and together go far in describing human speech, learning, mental function and the religious or spiritual urge. Humans are reasoning, self-aware animals that communicate through complex language and have spiritual urges. Mercury/Jupiter and the Mutable signs. I can't rest with a simple '2 planets, 1 mode ? How interesting!' To me it's telling us about something that is built into the structure, it's telling us about those elements of the structure. It's telling us that we need to put down the old sources a little more often and work as artists utilizing a symbolic language. To me merely listing who has Mercury in detriment or fall or analyzing yet another chart to see whether or not such people are idiots is a waste of time, doing and saying the same things that have been done and said many times before. Worse than that, we aren't putting away the training wheels and pedaling off into the sunset on our own.

I don't think we need chart analysis or more old sources to tell us that Mercury in Sagittarius or Pisces is smart enough to function reasonably well in the world; the symbolic structure does tell us that Mercury placed in those signs is rather easily inclined to attempt to work in areas that aren't appropriate to him. He's still on the sign polarity axis so he just needs to get himself back on track and over to where he belongs. He's got the Big Benefic as his mode partner, so he has qualified help. It's not like he's trying to be a Venus sex goddess (but he just might be able to pull that one off), a Mars killing machine or a Louis XIV Sun king.

This discussion is particularly eye-opening for me because several times I've almost written (or have I already?) that around here we are among the astrologers in high-gear Mercury mode, with their reading of old sources, historical facts, chart analysis, detailed discussions, and bickering ? Mercury as the planet of astrology is quite at home here. To simplistically talk signs: Gemini and Virgo. What is lacking is Jupiter's vision and reaching for a larger picture, both mental and spiritual, using symbols as 'visions' for interpretation. Sagittarius and Pisces. You've got to be tough at these sites, have your facts straight, and be able to quote some primary sources. Maybe this type of site is best geared toward the first group ? the Mercury group ? but we don't seem to be getting very far along. In fact, this forum site, like others that are so cerebrally astrological, seems to be quieting down and drawing fewer new members. It's not that we should ditch Mercury, but welcome Jupiter.

Hello Kirk

Kirk wrote: that around here we are among the astrologers in high-gear Mercury mode, with their reading of old sources, historical facts, chart analysis, detailed discussions, and bickering ? Mercury as the planet of astrology is quite at home here. To simplistically talk signs: Gemini and Virgo. What is lacking is Jupiter's vision and reaching for a larger picture, both mental and spiritual, using symbols as 'visions' for interpretation. Sagittarius and Pisces. .

I told many times here and in my country, for me I have no interest in whatever visions and symbols of whatever. I come from modern astrology and I don't want to repeat the experience.

Moreover I find Cieloeterra method of reading a birthchart- which is based on the old quotes you don't like - very satisfying and true to the nature of native, what Ptolemy called the soul.

It is true that sometimes we give just an overview- at least me- but it is just because it takes a lot of time to me to cast a chart in details.

You see how Jupiter works? It has always great plans and visions with it, but many times it lacks the essence of things because too busy in the Great Work
margherita

Hi Margherita,

You see how Jupiter works? It has always great plans and visions with it, but many times it lacks the essence of things because too busy in the Great Work

Yes. He needs to work with his Mutable mode partner, Mercury. They look at each other from across the way on the Gemini-Sagittarius and Virgo -Pisces sign axes. They belong together. They are complementary.

We work with astrology, therefore we work with symbols. Symbols can be analyzed but they don't exist for analysis.

deleted

Let's have some balance or close this thread. I didn't feel lectured by Kirk, in fact I've been surprised throughout the thread that comments I found quite interesting (maybe only because they triggered a thought) have been seen as critical attacks. Mercury is now combust in Cancer and the Sun has only just spit it out. I mentioned earlier that I had a feeling this thread was going to be difficult, no matter what, and so far we've managed to have a new disagreement on every page of it.

I think we are in need of a chart challenge - I'll give that some thought.

Kirk's point was clearly stated:

I'm not so much interested in who wrote what but in working with the complex yet elegant symbolic system that was given to us.

The response:

You do know this is the traditional forum right? You make people using traditional sources, historical context and analysing charts sound like they are on a lower level of consciousness than yourself.

Is inappropriate, unfair and as condescending as it accuses Kirk of being. Kirk didn't lecture anyone. He stated clearly that the name of the author is not important to him, but what is written is what matters. Instructing Kirk to give up one author in favor of another is lecturing.

I"m going to close this thread. If anyone wants to continue on any topic feel free, but let's do so with more respect.

Tom