Yes dry, and more masculine on the ascendant, moist and feminine on the descendant, absolutely.

The beginning of the planetary cycle is not the rising on the ascendant but the rising (or emergence) from synodic conjunction - that's when each planetary temperament is moderated towards more moisture. It's the synodic cycle which goes through the phases of moister - warmer - dryer - colder. Ptolemy explains that in the case of the Sun, which has no synodic rising, its seasonal cycle is used, but even then the Sun's humoral cycle is reflected in the signs, not the angles.

Its all integrated logic. To see the underlying harmonhy consider how all of the masculine planets, who are naturally drier in influence and effect, make their synodic risings on the ascendant, whilst only the moist feminine planets Venus and Moon, or Mercury which is adaptable, can make their heliacal risings from the descendant after sunset. Venus and Mercury are more masculine and drier when they arise from inferior conjunction and make their appearance in the morning. I argue that this (amongst other things) is what has given us the planetary definitions by gender.

Best wishes
Deb

Deb wrote:

Its all integrated logic. To see the underlying harmonhy consider how all of the masculine planets, who are naturally drier in influence and effect, make their synodic risings on the ascendant, whilst only the moist feminine planets Venus and Moon, or Mercury which is adaptable, can make their heliacal risings from the descendant after sunset. Venus and Mercury are more masculine and drier when they arise from inferior conjunction and make their appearance in the morning. I argue that this (amongst other things) is what has given us the planetary definitions by gender.

Hi Deb,

I know you are planning a book on the subject of planetary phase. Is that still on for this year or is it more likely in 2012 now?

Mark

Eddy wrote:I personally would find it more 'natural' according to climate to apply flip over. North being equalized with winter on both the northern and southern hemisphere gives me some trouble, not to speak of what to do in the tropics where there's no winter.

According to climate it would appear more 'natural' to flip over the signs for Southern hemisphere (SH). No, question about that.
But as you point out, it would lead to very difficult questions what to do near the equator and in the topics.

Instead of looking at the differences between SH and NH. I prefer to look at what is the same on both halves, because that can give me a fixed point to build on, a fixed perspective.
So what remains the same on NH and SH and on the equator?
Here is my fixed point: the Sun (and the planets) always rise in the East, regardless whether I am on NH or SH or on the equator.

So I connect East, morning, to Aries and then take it from there.
Then everything falls into place easily.
Now, if we look at a map then we typically have North on top, South down, East to the right and West on the left. We move clockwise through it when we apply our compass degrees. That's the normal orientation we are used to.
Putting Aries in the East, and moving on clockwise with the signs , you will automatically get the mapping that I called 'a logical way to do it'.
As I have been telling all along, anyone who takes a piece of paper and tries, is likely to see where I am coming from.

So what about the 'tradional' directions that put Cancer in the North and Capricorn to the South? That is nothing but the counter-clockwise mapping if you fix Aries in the East.

Some people wonder why I am insisting on using the clockwise direction mapping rather than the tradional (counter-clockwise) order?
That is a question of the 'heaven map' vs 'earth map' concept I have been trying to explain.

Clearly, the early astrologers did not use computers, they looked into the sky.
So what did they see?
We could go out in the night, but an easier way is to use a program like stellarium (stellarium.org), which shows us the movements in the sky.
Turning on the star signs and names and taking a NH location like Paris, we can see the movement of the zodiac signs when facing South.
Speeding up the time we see that stars move in a clockwise direction, rising East and setting West, but the zodiac signs themselves appear in the counter-clockwise direction.
This is completely similar to how we draw a horoscope, the signs are displayed in counter-clockwise direction, while the forward movement is clockwise. This causes planets to rise in the East(left) after passing through the IC.

The signs appearing counter-clockwise in the sky, tells me that they have to be in clockwise direction on the ground. Because it is a change of perspective.
That's why I am using clockwise order of signs on the ground-map.

***

If you do this excercise for a SH place like Sydney, now facing North, then you will notice that stars move counter-clockwise, while the signs appear in clockwise order (but still rising from the East and setting in the West).

So what you would flip over in the SH if you want to reflect reality is the direction of the signs. You would display the signs in clockwise order, like they do in vedic charts of South India style. It is not a coincidence that clockwise chart is found in that part of the world, because South India is far enough inside the topics for them to be able to see the zodiac appear in its clockwise order.

Eddy wrote:There?s indeed some logic in this proposed order. With the, as above as below and vice versa, association with the day as the small year and the year as the big day, equaling Capricorn, the place where (in northern hemisphere) the Sun is lowest, with the north or midnight is very attractive in a natural sense. Spring-Morning, Summer-Noon, Autumn-Evening, Winter-midnight. So applying East, South, West and North respectively sounds not so bad.

That is proper symbolic thinking.
Capricorn is naturally connected to winter on the NH, so that makes it fit to North for us. On the SH Capricorn is summer, but in that part of the world summer is related to North because the Sun sits in the North for them. To the South they have a very cold place called Antarctica.
So the way I am doing it provides the best match with our symbolical and natural understanding.

Eddy wrote:In some sense it has always bothered me that in Tetrabiblos I-10 (Robbins) Ascendant is associated with dryness and Descendant with moist, while in analogy with the seasons it should be mirrored. Ptolemy?s division (rarely used by traditional astrologers) in four quarters of elements in the order of Moist, Heat, Dryness and Cold would feel better when equally applied to the angles/compass- directions.

At the least this already tells us that there is more than one logical way to connect signs to compass directions.
Each of these ways can be usefull depending on the perspective in which it is used. And that has been my point all along.
To blindly apply 'tradition' without fully looking into all implications, that's like pouring fuel into the radiator and hoping that the car will drive.

Eddy wrote:For this reason I would flip over the system when using it in Australia, Argentina etc, where north is the ?warm? direction and Capricorn the Summer sign. Still leaves us with the question what to do on the Equator.
Another way is to entirely leave the whole concept of applying directions and climate issues to angles and cardines and view the whole of it as mathematical constructs with geometrical meaning. Somewhat ?dry? view perhaps and not really a subject to be discussed here, yet an interesting view to ponder on.

Flipping the system would have more merit if the Sun and the planets were rising in the West on the SH.
Now, we are always with something that appears to contradict nature in that part of the world.
There is not much that can be called spring or autumn on the equator. So to link seasons to signs will always have its weakness.

Hello FourPillars

Whilst I agree with some of your statements, and I'm not heavily wedded to tradition for the sake of it (if it doesn't work, it doesn't work no matter how traditional it is, whereas if it does work, then it does work no matter how newborn it is), I can't go along with all your statements because I think your reasoning has steps in it that I think aren't right in my view. For instance, what you said about clockwise and anticlockwise, and taking those terms down from the observed 3D sky to a flat map, I just don't think you're right in the way you're doing it. I do agree with you that the reliance on seasons can lead down a dead end road, and I tend to think that seasonal explanations are post hoc rationalisations, rather than the origination of a system.

I understand your frustration but honestly, I don't think that it's out of some kind of misguided weddedness to tradition that people aren't agreeing with your ideas. I can see how it reads that way, but the way I see it is that people already have methods that work, and whilst they're open-minded enough to consider alternatives, there has to be a significant incentive to spend the necessary time and effort, rather than a 'here's a different way, why not try it?' There has to be a compelling reason(s) to spend time testing it. When people are busy and already have methods that work, then 'why not try it?' is very easy to answer.... i.e. 'I'm busy, and the methods I already use are solid and effective'.

I think if people were dissatisfied with current methods -- whether traditional or not -- they would be hungrier to try out alternatives and the expenditure of time and effort would be calculated as worth it.

I see it that what's coming out in this thread as the weight of tradition(s) is really a statement about the effectiveness of those traditional arrangements than about weddedness to tradition per se, or intellectual stubbornness. Let's face it, after thousands of years of astrology in different parts of the world we have various systems, methods, arrangements etc to choose from, and when studying and practising astrology people tend to gravitate towards what suits them and their purposes. If it works reliably, it's understandable that they afterwards are inclined to stick with what's already working for them.

I doubt that that's discouraged you (or other people) from trying out your ideas, and I think that it shouldn't discourage you. We're all free to choose and experiment.

Regards

H.

Ditto - though I'd like to add that I've read more than enough comments like the one below:

To blindly apply 'tradition' without fully looking into all implications, that's like pouring fuel into the radiator and hoping that the car will drive.

Throughout this thread there has been insinuations from Danny that anyone who takes the trouble to understand how this has been taught traditionally, and discusses the matter in those terms, is a flat-earth thinker, or rigidly sticks to what someone else said without thinking the matter though. This is the reason why, like Yuzuru, I no longer want to comment in this thread. It?s insulting and unnecessary, and if there are any more comments like that, then if Mark doesn't delete them, I think I will.

Deb

Deb wrote:

Throughout this thread there has been insinuations from Danny that anyone who takes the trouble to understand how this has been taught traditionally, and discusses the matter in those terms, is a flat-earth thinker, or rigidly sticks to what someone else said without thinking the matter though. This is the reason why, like Yuzuru, I no longer want to comment in this thread. It?s insulting and unnecessary, and if there are any more comments like that, then if Mark doesn't delete them, I think I will.

I certainly echo Deb's concern on that point. Its really not helpful or instructive to keep making such comments. The same would apply to someone making generalised comments on modern astrology. If that kind of commentary continues I may need to consider locking the entire thread as it is clearly provocative and insulting to those working from a traditional perspective. Its already led two members to pull out of this thread.

Another point is how fixated the thread has become on one particular approach to astrological directionology. Its a big topic and I had hoped to have a more rounded discussion on various techniques and ideas that have been used in astrology. I would therefore invite a wider discussion on this topic from other perspectives too.

Handn for example made the point that the existing techniques s/he had used were very effective. It might be interesting to discuss such techniques too if they have application to mundane astrology.

Mark

Deb wrote:
Its all integrated logic. To see the underlying harmonhy consider how all of the masculine planets, who are naturally drier in influence and effect, make their synodic risings on the ascendant, whilst only the moist feminine planets Venus and Moon, or Mercury which is adaptable, can make their heliacal risings from the descendant after sunset. Venus and Mercury are more masculine and drier when they arise from inferior conjunction and make their appearance in the morning. I argue that this (amongst other things) is what has given us the planetary definitions by gender.

Best wishes
Deb

That's not exactly Prof. Bezza's reading, or at least what I understand from it.

I will be very happy to read your book about phases, I like very much putting together knowledge from different teachers.

margherita

Maybe not, but it's the right one

Mark wrote:So how could stars associated with spring time be linked to the autumnal season today? The answer is of course due to the effects of precession. The precession of the equinoxes means that these associations might have developed at a time when this super constellation was prominent in the night sky around spring time. However, for this to be the case the tradition would need to date back to at least 10,000 BCE near the beginning of the neolithic period in ancient China.

I think that there's an easier explanation for this. There are two main factors. Since the stars in conjunction with the Sun aren't visible there is a kind of logic in looking at the opposite stars, as in the 'risings' (in the sense of visibility direct after sunset, not in the sense of diurnal rising over the horizon) of the stars. Another element is the importance of the Moon in ancient calendars. In ancient Hindu calendars the sign/constellation/nakshatra (or rather some selected Nakshatras) where the full Moon is placed in determines the name of the month. For example the month Chaitra occurred in March/April, but the name is clearly derived from the Nakshatra Chitra (Spica) on the opposite side of the ecliptic.

Deb wrote:Associating the angles with the natural zodiac gives us:

Aries (asc) cardinal sign of the fire triplicity - due east
Capricorn (MC) cardinal sign of the earth triplicity - due south
Libra (desc) cardinal sign of the air triplicity - due west
Cancer (IC) cardinal sign of the water triplicity - due north

While I understand the logic of this approach, I never particularly liked the (Valens??) division of the elements in triplicities which is not as ?smooth? as Ptolemy?s natural one. Kepler too once remarked this: ?Although the sun, as it moves through the twelve signs, changes the seasons on earth according to the four qualities, this does not take place in that sequence [which was created by the astrologers]...? (quoting from my hobby horse article again) http://cura.free.fr/docum/15kep-en.html ? 4.7 Kenneth G. Negus: Kepler's Astrology http://cura.free.fr/docum/15kep-en.html

However Ptolemy applies the climatological meanings from the south-east Mediterranean area, where North winds are pleasant/fertile ? Jupiter, Cancer and
Southern are hot/dry ? Mars, Capricorn. For people around the North-Sea the North winds are not always pleasant (although I enjoyed the fresh clean blue skies with a 15? C about a month ago, ideal weather for sports running) and the South winds give warmth and some humidity. It all depends on the area and I think that if the signs/angles/compass directions are to be related with elements or climatological issues then we have to look at the local circumstances and create a type of zodiac or element system according to the particular region. Moreover Ptolemy did the same yet didn?t seem to build his ideas on the Mesopotamian symbolic approach but gave a scientific swing to it.

margherita wrote:But still there is something disturbing here, because what if a planet is at the Ascendant? Which is its temperament, dry?

We know from the rest of the work, especially the first book, that everything starting is moist....

When looking in terms of what occurs in nature perhaps both Asc and Desc can be moist. Since at both sunrise and sunset there is dew. However the morning dew is often said to be more powerful (in terms of natural and herbal medicine). I?d say from a natural point of view that the morning dew is a more warm moist and the evening dew more cold moist, but it?s difficult to express this in an astrological way. It is said that washing your face in morning dew has a beautifying. Especially in May, so just a week left now.

Fourpillars wrote:

Eddy wrote:Instead of looking at the differences between SH and NH. I prefer to look at what is the same on both halves, because that can give me a fixed point to build on, a fixed perspective.
So what remains the same on NH and SH and on the equator?
Here is my fixed point: the Sun (and the planets) always rise in the East, regardless whether I am on NH or SH or on the equator.

So I connect East, morning, to Aries and then take it from there.
Then everything falls into place easily.

This solution too places me for some problems. If the signs should reflect the seasons then the Spring sign in SH would be Libra. And this still would keep me bothering about the Equator, where Aries is as good as equal to Libra (from a climatological perspective). In both these signs the Sun is at highest during the yearly path. A possible approach could be that every sign retains something of the opposite sign in it, increasing when near the equator. However this would place the use of the exaltation-detriment contrast for a problem. Especially in the tropics.

Eddy wrote:
However Ptolemy applies the climatological meanings from the south-east Mediterranean area, where North winds are pleasant/fertile ? Jupiter, Cancer and
Southern are hot/dry ? Mars, Capricorn.

It's very easy arrange planets in Ptolemy's map, which is I believe Eratosthenes' one. If the East is dry it takes Saturn.
On the opposite side, the lunar one, Mars takes the West. Jupiter is at North and Venus at South.

At this point quadrants are done: Mars-Jupiter occupies NW (Europe) and rule the Fire triplicity, Jupiter-Saturn occupies NE (Northern Asia) and rule the Air triplicity, Saturn-Venus occupies SE (Southern Asia), and Earth triplicity, Venus-Mars, SW (Africa) and Water.

See article in Italian from Cieloeterra:
http://www.labirintoermetico.com/07Geom ... emaica.htm

I?d say from a natural point of view that the morning dew is a more warm moist and the evening dew more cold moist, but it?s difficult to express this in an astrological way. It is said that washing your face in morning dew has a beautifying. Especially in May, so just a week left now.

It is not exactly like that in the Mediterranean area: morning is very moist and there is dew but around 5-6 p.m. we have the most of the hot because the Sun warmed Earth all day.

And in every case this is not the point. Ptolemy declares for planetary phases:

Now, mark you, likewise, according to their aspects to the sun, the moon and three of the planets experience increase and decrease in their own powers. For in its waxing from new moon to first quarter the moon is more productive of moisture; in its passage from first quarter to full, of heat; from full to last quarter, of dryness, and from last quarter to occultation, of cold. The planets, in oriental aspects only, are more productive of moisture from rising to their first station, of heat from first station to evening rising, of dryness from evening rising to the second station, of cold from second station to setting; and it is clear that when they are associated with one another they produce very many variations of quality in our ambient, the proper force of each one for the most part persisting, but being changed in quantity by the force of the stars that share the configuration.

And in the same way seasons and quadrants are moist, hot, dry and cold, in the very same order. So - I'm surely wrong- but if the first quadrant, from Asc to MC is moist and warm, how the Ascendant could be dry?

In my opinion Ptolemy here was trying to put together different things, the part about chorography works very well, but I would not say the same about temperament, because here he breaks his own logic.

margherita

Eddy wrote:

I think that there's an easier explanation for this. There are two main factors. Since the stars in conjunction with the Sun aren't visible there is a kind of logic in looking at the opposite stars, as in the 'risings' (in the sense of visibility direct after sunset, not in the sense of diurnal rising over the horizon) of the stars.

There are obviously different opinions on this. It really depends how long these associations go back historically. According to Derek Walters the Azure Dragon was composed of 7 uneven lunar mansions running from Spica (the horn of the dragon) to the edge of the constellation of Sagittarius. The brightest stars in this sector were Spica (horn of the Dragon), and Antares (heart of the dragon). Walters thinks Arcturus may very well have originally been been included in the scheme of the Azure Dragon too making it the 'large horn' and Spica the 'little horn' of the Dragon.

He states:

If the Spica is regarded as 0 then allowing for the precession of the equinoxes of about 1 degree every 72 years , Spica would have marked the equinoctial position about the middle of the sixth century of the present era, and it is reasonable to suppose a change might have been made in astronomical calculations about this period. Arcturus , on the other hand , would by the same reackoning , have denoted the equinoxes in the middle of the fifth century BC, about the middle of the Chou dynasty.

The Dragon is often associated with rain and floods , and it may have its calendrical appearance at a rainy season with prompted this belief. It was said that when Chio (Ta Chio), the symbol of creation and the begining of spring , appeared , birds and beasts began to breed and buds burgeoned. Therefore it was held to preside over growth, creation , birth, gardening and agriclture. The Complete Guide to Chinese Astrology, by Derek Walters, p90.

Clearly, this interpretation might seem to support your view. However, others have speculated that the sidereal images of the four quarters have a much older origin. For example the astronomer Bradley Schafer has floated this idea.

There is some useful information on this from Garry Thompson's website:

The Shangshu (Book of Documents) contains a paragraph concerning 4 cardinal asterisms and is generally agreed to record the observation of stars before the 21st-century BCE. Also, a similar reference appears in the Records of the Grand Historian by Sima Qian (life dates: circa 145-90 BCE, Prefect of the Grand Scribes in the Han government, and astrologer) describing the Xia dynasty circa 2000 BCE.

Some of the inscriptions on the oracle bones (mainly fragments of turtle/tortoise shells (carapaces) and mammalian bones (i.e., the scapulae of oxen) discovered at Anyang, and which date to the Shang Period (circa 16th- to 11th-century BCE), contain some star names. (The fragments of carapaces or mammalian bones were subjected to heat and the paths made by the resulting cracks were interpreted to answer questions about current or future events.) The star names plausibly indicate the existence of a scheme for dividing the sky along the equatorial circle into 4 main divisions was being developed at the time. It is generally accepted that at least 4 quadrantel hsiu were already known in China in the 14th-century BCE. The discovery of the Shang Oracle bones makes it possible to trace the gradual development of the system of Chinese lunar mansions from the earliest mention of the 4 quadrantel asterisms.

http://members.westnet.com.au/gary-davi ... 11-24.html

However, recent finds indicate the whole notion of four super constellations may be much older than even these records. In the 1987, a tomb assumed to be that of a King was found at Xishuipo in Puyang, Henan Province. There were some clam shells and bones forming the images of the Azure Dragon, the White Tiger and the Northern Dipper. It is believed that the tomb belongs to the Neolithic Age, approximately 7,500 years ago.
I think this discovery and the other sources cited above pose difficulties for the theory you (and Derek Walters) propose. Since we now have firm evidence the Chinese idea of the Azure Dragon , White Tiger , Pole star etc dates back to the neolithic it is not unreasonable to assume that their directional associations do too. Strictly speaking there are 'five palaces' in this Chinese directional system with the pole star forming the central palace.

I would suggest this evidence challenges the idea that these sidereal quarters were seasonally prominent when the Sun was in the opposing part of the sky as you suggest. For example, Spica was in the middle of tropical Cancer at the time when this grave site was estimated to have been first laid out around 5,500 BCE. I know Derek Walters and will sound out his view on this.


Eddy wrote:

Another element is the importance of the Moon in ancient calendars. In ancient Hindu calendars the sign/constellation/nakshatra (or rather some selected Nakshatras) where the full Moon is placed in determines the name of the month. For example the month Chaitra occurred in March/April, but the name is clearly derived from the Nakshatra Chitra (Spica) on the opposite side of the ecliptic.

I have never read of the ancient Chinese developing a calendrical system based on the full moon linked to the four quarters or the 28 lunar mansions. One reason for this is that the ancient Chinese quarters and 28 lunar mansions are all unequal in size. The Chinese lunar mansions tracked the movement of the Moon on a monthy basis as it would travel through all 28 mansions in that period. That would include roughly 7 days in each quarter each month. I may be wrong but I am not aware of any seasonal connection regarding the Moon in this instance myself. However, the earliest system of Chinese astrology was based on the Chinese lunar mansions and people would have their fate delineated based based on the mansion the Moon was placed in at birth similar to Indian astrological use of the Nakshatras today. Systems such as Four Pillar or Nine Star Ki are much later developments in Chinese astrology.

Incidentally, where do you get your explanation for the name of the Nakshatra Chitra. Could you provide a source please?

Thanks

Mark

Hi Margherita,

I'm not sure if you realise this, so sorry if you do and I'm pointing out the obvious. Where Ptolemy says:

The planets, in oriental aspects only, are more productive of moisture from rising to their first station,

By 'oriental' he doesn't mean near the ascendant but 'rising' (or emerging) in the opening stage of a new heliacal cycle - it's comparable to the Moon between New Moon and first quarter Moon.

Where you write:

And in the same way seasons and quadrants are moist, hot, dry and cold, in the very same order. So - I'm surely wrong- but if the first quadrant, from Asc to MC is moist and warm, how the Ascendant could be dry?

If you read the passage from 1.10 onwards, note that it is only the quadrant of the ecliptic that is defined in that way, meaning that these are qualities attributed to the signs, to reflect the Sun's seasonal cycle. These qualities are not (I believe, but until now haven't had reason to check closely) attributed to the quadrants of the chart by Ptolemy. After talking about the cycle of the zodiac he goes on to say:

Similarly, too, of the four regions and angles of the horizon, from which originate the winds from the cardinal points, the eastern one likewise excels in dryness because, when the sun is in that region, whatever has been moistened by the night then first begins to be dried; and the winds which blow from it, which we call in general Apeliotes, are without moisture and drying in effect. The region to the south is hottest because of the fiery heat of the sun's passages through mid-heaven and because these passages, on account of the inclination of our inhabited world, diverge more to the south; and the winds which blow thence and are called by the general name Notus are hot and rarefying. The region to the west is itself moist, because when the sun is therein the things dried out during the day then first begin to become moistened; likewise the winds which blow from this part, which we call by the general name Zephyrus, are fresh and moist. The region to the north is the coldest, because through our inhabited world's inclination it is too far removed from the causes of heat arising from the sun's culmination, as it is also when the sun is at its lower culmination; and the winds which blow thence, which are called by the general name Boreas, are cold and condensing in effect.

So the humoral cycle in the quadrants (following diurnal motion) is: dry > hot > moist > cold because it is based on how the prevailing quality of air moderates the planetary effect, whereas the planetary synodic cycles are like life-cycles for the planets, so it's in the synodic phases that the planetary temperaments are modified by the influences of moist > heat > dryness > coldness, in exactly the same way that the Moons phases are moderated, since the lunar cycle is a synodic cycle too.

Regards
Deb