Skyscript Astrology Forum

SteveS wrote: ↑Mon Dec 13, 2021 11:33 am

Jim, out of curiosity, did Fagan or Bradley mention mundane aspects in any of their writings?

Jim Eshelman responded:

Yes. Bradley would occasionally print a mundoscope as an example, though I think his use all involved angular planets. Fagan, though, often mentioned them, though without ever giving a printed example I can recall. He frequently said the only aspects worth considering usually were the conjunction, opposition, and [words to the effect:] "the square when it approximates the mundane square," which sounds to me like he was saying, "only mundane conjunctions, oppositions, and squares." Somewhere around here I posted (a few months ago) a Fagan quote clarifying he meant aspects in the mundoscope. (He's often interpreted as meaning parans, but that's not what this one explicit quote said.) I'll see if I can find it.

Ah, wait, here it is in the current thread: https://solunars.com/viewtopic.php?f=16 ... 690#p40690

Steve, thanks for this historical overview of the mundoscope. So Fagan and Bradley left us an 'infant' technique for study, development and research. And this particular technique caught the attention of Jim Eshleman who now uses it extensively.

Therese wrote:

Steve, thanks for this historical overview of the mundoscope. So Fagan and Bradley left us an 'infant' technique for study, development and research. And this particular technique caught the attention of Jim Eshleman who now uses it extensively.

You are welcome Therese. Jim has done extensive research with close mundane aspects, particularily the 0,90,180, and sees em valid as another tool for our tool bags. What little personal research I have done with em seems a valid tool.

What we call In Mundo aspects or projections on the Ecliptic were used by the Ancients under a different label.

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6506
Here, Martin Gansten says...
"What the ancients used (when they used them) seems to have been aspect angles calculated by oblique ascension. If the point on the celestial equator rising with planet A was 120 degrees distant from the point on the celestial equator rising with planet B, then, by this reckoning, planets A and B were in an ascensional trine.

Much later, in the 16th century, Magini suggested calculating aspect angles in right ascension. I don't know if he was the first, and I don't believe it ever caught on. In this method, the planets' positions are projected directly onto the celestial equator, and if two such projections happen to be 120 degrees apart, then the planets in question are considered to trine each other.

The method most in vogue today (among the few who use non-zodiacal aspects at all) is the one invented by Placidus in the 17th century, which is based on proportional semi-arcs. Every semi-arc is equated to 90 degrees, so that if planet A is exactly on the ascendant, and planet B has gone one-third of the way from the midheaven to the descendant, then planets A and B are considered to form a mundane trine."

https://tonylouis.wordpress.com/2012/01 ... t-a-trine/
Here Anthony Louis says...
"Ptolemy refers to aspects in signs of long and short ascension in the Tetrabiblos (p. 283, Loeb edition): “And sometimes, also, among the signs that ascend slowly the sextile aspect destroys, when it is afflicted, and again among the signs that ascend rapidly, the trine??? [because it acts like a square].
Dorotheus of Sidon in the 1st century CE spoke of straight and crooked signs: straight because they rose fairly upright to the horizon (long ascension) and crooked because they rose obliquely (short ascension)."

Further on skyscript Mark and Deborah discuss the above with Anthony Louis
http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1742

For a good example on how they are used in Profections and Primary Directions (You can Google translate) by Giuseppe Bezza
http://www.cieloeterra.it/fra/fra.artic ... zione.html

Linchi, a short time ago you said you are refusing to read my posts. What changed your mind??

Linch wrote:

I assume you know what "Part of Fortune" is.

I write here what "Part of Fortune" is.

I’m wondering why you find it necessary to use what sounds like an insulting and condescending tone here and in other places on this forum? (With Ouranos and myself and perhaps others that I don’t remember.) Martin has already censored you once. Perhaps because English is a second (or third) language for you, you don't realize how you sound to others?

I have been studying astrology since the year after you were born, 1965. Hmmm...seems I remember something called the “Part of Fortune.??? Maybe I should look it up on the Internet just to be sure??

I have seen the Part of Fortune (Fortuna) act in many different ways in various charts. According to classical doctrine, the planetary sign dispositor is extremely important in analyzing Fortuna. So Fortuna must be studied in conjunction with its planetary dispositor.

On the aspect lines you have placed on my chart:

(1) In my opinion and experience, ascendant as midpoint between natal Moon and Saturn doesn’t apply to lunar returns. As per Fagan, we need to be looking at planets close to angles (Or as I add to this principle, planets that very closely aspect the Ascendant or another angle.)

I follow the ancient doctrine of the primary importance of the ascendant in all charts. This is why I use equal cusps in return charts, but I follow the foreground-middleground-background doctrine of the Fagan school of sidereal astrologers. This is exactly how Indian astrologers determine prominence in a chart-–the area surrounding both sides of angle degrees (and they add other cuspal areas as significant points).

(2) The Saturn-Moon-Uranus configuration is not especially significant as it doesn’t touch chart angles. And transiting Saturn is still approaching the Moon. This aspect becomes exact in a later lunar for Elizabeth.

(3) Transiting Sun square Uranus: I don’t see as important because this aspect is past exactness, and it isn’t exactly on an equal chart cusp. However lunar Sun square Mercury is significant because radix Mercury is on the 7th house cuspal degree. I would interpret that as the Sun stimulating Mercury’s concepts for the month in question. Mercury on the 7th cusp: Communication, interchange with others.

Ouranos, what astrological program do you use?

steve S and ouranos

i am very curious about your input here, but thinking it would be better to talk about it on a different thread then linchis queen elizabeth thread!

steve - thanks for drawing my attention to eshelmans comments.. i was able to figure out how to get the charts he is using in solar fire... if you have solfire 9 - they are under the harmonic/ransform option - z-analogue prime vertical... it will produce what he is calling ''mundane'' aspects and etc... i was looking at this stuff a few years ago, based off some of what ouranos mentions - martin ganstens work and etc. etc... here is a comment from a link if you are using solfire software..
Z-Analogue Prime Vert - Zodiacal analogue of prime vertical. The prime vertical of each point is expressed as a longitude. This chart is also known as a Campanus Mundoscope.

https://www.esotech.com.au/SFHelp/?cast ... _chart.htm

Ouranos, what astrological program do you use?

SolarFire 9 like what James mentions except I use Z-Analogue Diurn Arc which corresponds to Placidus Mundascope which falls within 1 degree to Topocentric
Talking about Sidereal, Martin Gansten in his book on Primary Directions says he uses Mundane conjunctions and oppositions and forget about sextiles, squares and trines. Giuseppe Bezza also showed that parallels of declinations are worth looking at. And I would add that parallels are similar to midpoints when equidistant from each other.

Also
Morinus 8.1.0 and Planetdance

I have to admit that I have not reached a final conclusion on the best system, partly due to not being able to find the right program Every program gives you a partial solution. I know the program Aureas is suppose to be one largely used in Europe with good feedback from users.
It is a work in progress....

Therese Hamilton wrote:Linchi, a short time ago you said you are refusing to read my posts. What changed your mind??

Because you addressed me in my thread.

I’m wondering why you find it necessary to use what sounds like an insulting and condescending tone here and in other places on this forum?

I forgot that you studied psychology, right? You're dragging the others into it too, pretending to be a victim. I was just asking a question, not insulting you. You feel insulted and condescended to. That is something different and to be examined psychologically.

(With Ouranos and myself and perhaps others that I don’t remember.)

I have never argued with Quranos. That is simply not true.

Martin has already censored you once.

That's another one of your psychological tactics. But I like the word "censored". You call Martin to your aid as if I had insulted you.

Perhaps because English is a second (or third) language for you, you don't realize how you sound to others?

English is my fourth language. Now you're being really condescending. You can do it, right ?

I have been studying astrology since the year after you were born, 1965. Hmmm...seems I remember something called the “Part of Fortune.??? Maybe I should look it up on the Internet just to be sure??

I thought to myself and that is why I asked the question, because you think you know. Part of Fortune is only one factor in a planetary picture, as in Hambur School, of four factors that depend on each other.
This is the second time you get upset when you don't like my questions and can't answer them. And I wonder why you still write in my thread when you don't like my language. You can also show your wisdom somewhere else. You can also write there how miraculous and God's last word Fagan School is.

I have seen the Part of Fortune (Fortuna) act in many different ways in various charts. According to classical doctrine, the planetary sign dispositor is extremely important in analyzing Fortuna. So Fortuna must be studied in conjunction with its planetary dispositor.

I don't think you realise what you are writing here, because you exclude research and scientific astrology with your "must".

james_m wrote:

i am very curious about your input here, but thinking it would be better to talk about it on a different thread then linchis queen elizabeth thread!

Thank you, james.

I was debating with myself whether to say something when I saw the post where Linchi asked whether Therese knew what the Part of Fortune is. I decided not to, but now that things are escalating, I feel I must. There is no need to phrase comments in a personal way. If you want to make a point about the PoF or any other astrological topic, just make that point. Please let's have no more ad hominem remarks in any direction.

Z-Analogue Prime Vert - Zodiacal analogue of prime vertical. The prime vertical of each point is expressed as a longitude. This chart is also known as a Campanus Mundoscope.

Thanks James,
Will check this one as well and compare.

And here is my lazy approach to Right Ascension
In Planetdance > Horoscope > Data
I look at the column RA to see the longitude in RA

Martin Gansten wrote:I was debating with myself whether to say something when I saw the post where Linchi asked whether Therese knew what the Part of Fortune is. I decided not to, but now that things are escalating, I feel I must. There is no need to phrase comments in a personal way. If you want to make a point about the PoF or any other astrological topic, just make that point. Please let's have no more ad hominem remarks in any direction.

Why a question should be an insult is not clear to me. I can't know what Therese knows or doesn't know because I don't know her personally. Although we have previously argued, she has continued to post in my thread and challenged me. What is she doing in my thread after we have argued, when we know we can't learn anything from each other ? Is she trying to annoy me? But why ? Was that normal for you Martin, what she did ?

Therese Hamilton wrote:

So far two different ways of looking at Elizabeth's 19 January 2022 lunar return. Will Linchi give a third?