Deb wrote:The symbolic concepts of the winds are ancient Babylonian in origin, not Ptolemaic, although Ptolemy does include reference in them. I?ll dig out some refs tomorrow and send them by PM.

This reminds me that somewhere I read that in Babylonian prediction it was important from which direction the wind came from during an eclipse.

In the very early beginnings of omen texts weather and astrology were mixed. http://www.classicalastrologer.com/Assy ... rology.htm gives some examples of halos (

When a halo surrounds the moon and Jupiter (SAG.ME.NIG) stands inside it, the king of Akkad will be shut in (by siege).

Gjiada wrote:Hello

Eddy wrote: In Jim Tester's A History of Western Astrology page 210 it is said that in the Renaissance period "the more learned astrologers were themselves worried about this", i.e. the divisions of the zodiac in terms, novenarii, decans etc. So there was often this division between natural and judicial, which grew as modern science emerged.

But this is not because of science, better not because of astronomy or new discovers of physics. It was not Copernicus who put into discussion Medieval astrology.
It was philology.
Because astrologers saw that translations of Greek texts were interpolated by Arabs, they were not true to the originals.

Ah. I always thought that people like Kepler and Morin rejected several issues in astrology as 'Arabian superstition', perhaps because also of the rejection of Islamic religion.

Gjiada wrote:Renaissance astrologers came back to Ptolemy rather than dismiss him, see for example Cardano who from aphorisms in Medieval fashion arrived to the Comment of Tetrabiblos.

But this is also what Jim Tester stated. Sorry if my quote of Tester was too brief or incomplete but the "more learned astrologers" where those who followed Ptolemy. The text continues:"...and reacted into attempts to become more 'scientific', more Ptolemaic." So I think here we both meant the same.

Eddy wrote:[Ah. I always thought that people like Kepler and Morin rejected several issues in astrology as 'Arabian superstition', perhaps because also of the rejection of Islamic religion.

Well, it is not impossible.
But it was more than this, it was the beginning of modern science.
For the first time Greek and Latin (from Arab) translations were compared.
Pontano in his comment to Centiloquium writes " the Chaldean translators added much, which are not Greek texts."
And Cardano if I remember well, was sure that Centiloquium was not Ptolemy work.

margherita

Eddy wrote:

Ah. I always thought that people like Kepler and Morin rejected several issues in astrology as 'Arabian superstition', perhaps because also of the rejection of Islamic religion.

Margherita wrote:

Well, it is not impossible. But it was more than this, it was the beginning of modern science. For the first time Greek and Latin (from Arab) translations were compared. Pontano in his comment to Centiloquium writes " the Chaldean translators added much, which are not Greek texts." . And Cardano if I remember well, was sure that Centiloquium was not Ptolemy work

.

Eddy does have a point though. Actually the two points are interlinked.
Some astrologers sought to adapt to the more scientific age by blaming elements less easy to justify in the new empiricism as Islamic additions.

Such prejudice was quite central to Morin's thought. His hostility to what he perceived as Arabic accretions is undeniable. Ironically, much of what he understood as 'Arabic' was in fact Hellenistic! Still like everyone he was only a child of his time. Although its interesting that Lilly didn't seem to fall into such thinking. He clearly had more respect for these sources.

John Partridge (1644-1714) the last traditional astrologer of any real significance in the 17th century England, developed a similar hostilty to 'Arabic supersititions'. Although he trained in the tradition of Lilly and Gadbury he became a 'born again Ptolemaist' and sought to rid astrology of what he saw as the corruption of Islamic astrology. He set out his ideas in his book 'Opus Reformatum' and like an Old Testament prophet advocated a return to the pure astrology of Ptolemy. Not surprisingly horary found little support in this puritanical, rationalist vision of astrology. As the last astrologer of significance from the 17th century Patridge's ideas were probably quite influential on 19th century astrologers in England.

Patridge unlike Lilly or Gadbury was having to cope in a world where the intellectual elite were increasingly less open to the tenets of traditional astrology. Indeed his famous ridicule by the writer/satirist Jonathan Swift was symptomatic of the increasing hostility and contempt to astrology amongst the educated elite. One might argue therefore that Morin and Partridge ( like Kepler before them) are the earliest approaches seeking s to reformulate traditional astrology in an attempt to come to terms with the modern scientific age.

Deb wrote:

Although it probably won?t happen in our lifetimes my feeling is that southern hemisphere astrology will eventually morph into something more uniquely suited to that locality that will allow the astrologers there to feel the connections between the symbolism and the seasons in the same way that we do here. The way it will happen is by integrating the existing traditions - not by taking a northern hemisphere system and turning bits of it on its head.

The main factor though, as you rather suggest, is that 'Southern Hemisphere astrology' cannot really draw on one set of coherent myths and traditional symbolism in the same way as we can in the north. Australia makes up about 3% of the population of the southern hemisphere. While astrologers there are inevitably drawn to Aboriginal myths and symbols their colleagues in New Zealand, southern Africa, Latin America, or Indonesia will need to develop a completely different approach. So any such developments will lead to more of an astrological mosaic than the uniformity found in northern hemisphere tropical astrology. Moreover, in many places such as Latin America the traditional starlore has been largely wiped out in the process of colonization. Still, it would be truly fascinating to come back in 100 years to see what had happened 'down under!'. Pity my Time Machine is out of commission right now.

While astrologers there are inevitably drawn to Aboriginal myths and symbols their colleagues in New Zealand, southern Africa, Latin America, or Indonesia will need to develop a different approach.

Well, the Northern hemisphere has different systems - European, Indian, Chinese, etc. It is necessary because different regions have different ways of expressing their values, and this is partly created by their regional environment. The Chinese region is surrounded by Chinese symbolism which I respect, but I don't personally relate to it because I don't personally understand it.
Last year I watched in marvel as a well known and well travelled Tibetan astrologer explained his system. I recognised very strong parallels, but lots of symbolism too that was all new to me, but old knowledge to him. I like the idea of localised traditions. I don't believe that astrology should all meld into one universal system. That's actually why I try to keep Skyscript themed on the traditional western system; to uphold the distinction of something that I believe will soon be completely dominated on the web by an overwhelming number of Vedic sites, or various hybrids.

(You do realise, I hope, that everything I have said in my last two posts, is all pure speculation on my part!).

Hello Deb,

Of course I accept the astrological diversity you describe across the entire Northern hemisphere. However, I had thought we were discussing tropical astrology specifically in relation to northern vs southern hemisphere.

One of the areas that will assist the process you suggest is the work of cultural Astronomers studying traditional Star lore.

In relation to Africa for example I was fortunate to see the film documentary 'Cosmic Africa' presented by the South African astronomer Thebe Medupe at last years Edinburgh Film Festival. The film involves Thebe Medupe travelling across Africa from his home in South Africa to Namibia, Mali and Sudan. He looks at some surviving popular star lore from each culture. Its visually stunning and there are some real magical moments.. Our group showed this at our Christmas meeting and it was a warming and uplifting antidote to a freezing Scottish night! I believe it can be still be ordered as a DVD. I highly recommend it.

For those seeking a more academic approach to the subject the following book seems worth the investment:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/African-Cultura ... 1266603656

As I noted the Chinese were fully aware of the ecliptic which they called the 'yellow path' representing the passage of the Sun.

Perhaps we all (the Chinese as well) should 'follow the yellow brick road', after all it took Dorothy back home didn't it ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INpR7GRzFNc

Gjiada wrote:But it was more than this, it was the beginning of modern science.
For the first time Greek and Latin (from Arab) translations were compared.
Pontano in his comment to Centiloquium writes " the Chaldean translators added much, which are not Greek texts."
And Cardano if I remember well, was sure that Centiloquium was not Ptolemy work.

I often tended to neglect the scientific development of comparing litterature. (Probably because I'm mainly focused on the developments in astronomy etc.) But I remember to have recently read that the 17th century Casaubon saw in the Corpus Hermeticum elements of around the beginning of the Christian Era instead of the belief that the CH was of the same age or before the time of Moses.

Perhaps we all (the Chinese as well) should 'follow the yellow brick road', after all it took Dorothy back home didn't it ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INpR7GRzFNc

But what of the 'red path' followed in Chinese astrology?

For the ecliptic based ( ''yellow path'' )astrologer we have no better wisdom to reflect on than the immortal words of Master Yoda from Star Wars:

''Once you start down the dark path ( aka red path) , forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will..."

Mark

Returning to this topic, I'd like to present some opinions regarding this matter:

I gave a lot of thinking to the why in this regard, and at first, I was ready to allow that, put simply, the order of the zodiac represented an archetypical model, that then, we should use in order to access meaning for different locations. Simply put, we would get the original model (or "perfect chart", if you prefer) created from observation of the cosmos, and compare it to our localized charts in order to see how things develop. For example, if you cast an Aries ingress chart for the northernmost city you can think of, you see that it's likely the Sun will not aspect the AC (I did this a couple of times) and that is descriptive that the Sun's light will not have access to the AC for some time even in spring's beggining. That's why sometimes different climates strike near regions, cause through accidents they acquire different AC degrees in different signs and likely affinities. Just like a person, regions have different cycles and dates to be "born" that follows certain patterns. But that's not the only conclusion I came to...

Let's take a look at what causes seasons to happen. First, we have precession of the equinoxes. According to some researches, Hipparchus already had knowledge of this (150 B.C), so it's difficulty to allow that this concept was not integrated into tropical astrology, even with understanding of some of it's implications, if they really wanted/needed to. But as a matter of fact, it was to the best they could, in my humble opinion. I'll drop this for the moment and let's see the other movement that causes seasons, the secondary one (that also have fit symbolism):

According to Wikipedia:

Seasonal weather differences between hemispheres are further caused by the elliptical orbit of Earth. Earth reaches perihelion (the point in its orbit closest to the Sun) in January, and it reaches aphelion (farthest point from the Sun) in July. Even though the effect this has on Earth's seasons is minor, it does noticeably soften the northern hemisphere's winters and summers. In the southern hemisphere, the opposite effect is observed.

Now, imagine precession does not exist, and let's take the thema mundi and the classical order of the zodiac. According to the thema mundi, the world begun in Cancer. According to the classical order, Cancer is placed in the bottom of the zodiac, where Earth finds its aphelion.

Now, what is precession? Is it not derived from primary movement? And is it not, from a geocentric perspective, derived from an opposite movement to the secondary one? So, the problem here, is to reconcile one type of movement with the other.

Now, the summer quarter (from Cancer on) heats by essential significance in secondary movement (it begins from the coldest point and up) and by accidental cools down (as the Sun will find its highest position in the sky in Cancer and can only go down from there, now precession allowed). So follows autumn. But that's for the northern hemisphere. For the southern, the summer quarter still heats up by secondary essentially, but by accidental the Sun will also heat up, and then, spring follows for us. Let's jump to the winter quarter now: is it not true that by essential significance this quarter cools down, as the Earth reachs it's perihelion, and then it can only go downwards in terms of heat untill it can start heating again at aphelion? Maybe the joy of the Sun in 9th (close to its strongest point) and it's exaltation in the 19? of Aries (10th sign from Cancer) are related to these...

All in all, the differences felt in opposite hemispheres are related to how primary movement and consequently precession affects the positions of the angles in a chart (if there was no precession, there would be no seasons? I can surely tell that would not be the case, although the differences between them would be minimal). So, in relation to the ecliptic, it can not be shifted, simply because, it's correctly fixed in the equator, an area that is the least one subject to the accidents caused by mundane position.

As a side note, the creation of divisions should have come from this very problem (and that's also why division is a Tropical Astrology tool, since it would not be very usefull in a sidereal vedic enviroment. At the same time, it gives us more to work with, which is good!). The differences from one hemisphere to the other, or even from one latitude to another in the same hemisphere, are not so radical as to provoke a full inversion, what occurs is a variation (up to 23,5?) due to the earth's rotation that creates angles in a chart diverse to the ones natural to zodiacal signs (The Cancer and Capricorn tropics receive this name cause that's when the Sun achieves the zenith in their respective hemispheres, but they are not fixed in the zodiac at all). So, these strong seasonal qualities are more related to the primary movement than to the secondary one (although this secondary movement has relevance). Also, this may point how accidental signification can be really important, since it's strength affects seasonal cycles a whole lot more than the essential one... But, the framework against this "accidental quality" still retains its universal meaning! That's why we still get good results down south.

Also, the focus I put on precession does not mean I advocate precession correction for return charts, since that would kill the symbolism of the degree marked in secondary movement.

Ps: if I said anything absurd or incorrect from a technical perspective, I ask forgiveness. I'm not very well versed neither in math nor astronomy, and to grasp certain concepts take me hours sometimes. I'll gladly erase the post if any huge mistake have been made in my statements.

Hi Paulo

Thanks for giving this matter such a lot of thought and sharing with us.

Deb

Interesting Post Paulo!

Paulo wrote:
All in all, the differences felt in opposite hemispheres are related to how primary movement and precession affects the positions of the angles in a chart.

Precession also ?affects the position of the angles? in return charts, which when researched, provides the key for seeing a true astronomical cause for certain events with return charts. Precession must be accounted for in order to RETURN the Sun to the exact same astronomical position for either zodiac-- it held when striking a nativity chart. Computer technology allows the astrologer easy mathematical computation for returning the Sun to its same astronomical nativity position to within 1 second of arc. Although this post is not directly related to the seasonal issues for this topic, I feel it is important for the astrologer to understand how precession affects the TIMING for RETURNING the Sun/Moon to its same astronomical nativity position for RETURN charts. When we don?t account for precession in the tropical zodiac (seasonal zodiac), we get a false astronomical (timing) position for returning the Sun to its exact nativity position. This is critical in the correct mundane position of the return angles and correct zodiac position of the solar moon for an accurate timed Solar Return. It is our personal return angles and correct position of our solar moons (mundane & zodiac) that is key in seeing our personal cosmic dances that are taking place with our lives.

Regards, Steve

Thanks for the info on precession Steve, and also thanks for the encouragement Deb.

As a follow-up to my own post, where I pointed - in a not very original way, since I believe a lot of fellow skyscripters already have this in their minds, and other's posts have shown much more discernement than my own - the relation between the order of the zodiac, which is fixed in the ecliptic, with the yearly cycles of the Earth around the Sun, I re-state that if you just reversed the zodiac in the sourthern hemisphere, this connection would simply be lost, but also, I'd like to present some other hypothesis that could be a solution, to an extent, for the problem we get in the autumnal and vernal points (as I'm aware that my post did not completely propose a solution for this).

Before that, I'd like to say that I'm under the impression that the domicile lords were not primarily acquired based on the shift of seasons due to precession, but on their paths around the Sun, which is still seasonal in essence (and the division between superiors and inferiors, as Mercury is closer to the Sun, then Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn).

Since the Sun's disk is smaller when at aphelion, it represents it's weakness/death, so, "as in a synodical cycle", when it gets to Leo, this means it's disk starts to wax in size after a period constantly diminishing, and that's universal, not related to precession. That the esplendor of the Moon is in the place opposite to the Suns own can be explained by the fact that when the Sun is at perihelion, the Moon is not even able to entirely cover its disk in a solar eclipse, so, with Sun at aphelion the Moon is at the peak of its exerted power over the Sun. This is shown in the classical chart where Aries rises (also marking the great conjunction of Saturn/Jupiter in a cardinal fire sign) and Capricorn culminates.

But no more of this, and lets get to the equinoxes. There we see Aries and Libra. And their exaltation lords, Sun and Saturn. But for the moment, lets drop the exaltation lords. These are not hellenistic in nature according to some, and rather, were integrated into the zodiac set in the hellenistic bloom (although from a northernly point of view, they make a lot of sense). From here on, I suggest to work with triplicity lords and sect, cause these does seem to relate to precession and to the diurnal movement of the earth. And here, we have room for maneuver, cause their power and qualities change according to certain situations, like day and night, water to wine.

Now, imagine the chart, thema mundi or better yet, the classical chart from Aries on, has its own above and below "the horizon halves", as a "universe" chart, where a year is like a day.

When we get to the spring in the northern hemisphere, around 21 March, we could consider that it's a day chart, the dawning after a long night (and we do experience this more accutely in the polar regions). So, the triplicity lord is the Sun in sect. But in the south, Jupiter would gain this honor as triplicity ruler in sect, and as he is moderate in its heat, contrarywise to the Sun, that is stronger in that department (as per Al-Biruni), we could have an explanation to how similar seasons, although not exactly equal, came to be, with a still upholding decent analogy (summer in the south is nowhere like summer in the north, and this is partially because the north has more land mass). An scheme for each of the signs would be as follows:

Aries: north/spring - Sun; south/autumn - Jupiter
Taurus: north - Venus; south - Moon
Gemini: north - Saturn; south - Mercury
Cancer: north/summer - Venus; south/winter Mars
Leo: north - Sun; south - Jupiter
Virgo: north - Venus; south - Moon
Libra: north/autumn - Mercury; south/spring - Saturn
Scorpio: north - Mars; south Venus
Sagittarius: north - Jupiter; south Sun
Capricorn: north/winter - Moon; south/summer - Venus
Aquarius: north - Mercury; south - Saturn
Pisces: north - Mars; south - Venus

I did not consider the out of sect ruler and participating one to make things easier to grasp, but I'm not saying they should be disconsidered (although they are weaker than the ruler, otherwise my argument would be pointless). Anyway, if you look carefully at the zodiac wheel, you will see that the diurnal/nocturnal signs are arranged in an order that favors differences in the seasonal effects, but also, some equality. Lets look deeper:

Aries and Libra marks spring/autumn: for the north, the Sun in aries rules the triplicity of spring's beggining, for the south, Saturn. Both belong to the fire triplicity. For the autumn we see that Mercury marks it in the north, and for the south, Jupiter. Both belong to the air triplicity. How very fitting that Saturn rules spring down south, since this period is hotter than summer itself, being devoid of rain! And Jupiter is much more fitting to describe our autumn than Mercury is!

Going on, Cancer and Capricorn marks summer/winter: Venus rules the summer water/earth triplicity for both hemispheres, but she comes from a different triangle for each of them. The Moon rules the tropical sign marking winter in the north and Mars rules this in the south, again, common triplicities rulers.

This all have to be synthesized with the signs humoral qualities, but also with the Suns path and place both from secondary perspective as from the earths slowly tiping over it. No completely logical/perfect system could be derived from so many factors.

Still this triplicity relations should be obvious when one understands that the order of the signs follows a symmetry of diurnal/nocturnal, but by no means the triplicity/sect system allows the "one size fits all" reduction to happen. At first, we look to the temperament of the signs and think that they do fit a view of how seasons go in the north, but I do not think that's the case, it's more an adaptation to convey a plethora of analogies the best way it could.

The exaltation system still do present a problem though, but for this I have nothing to say than that we should take it by heart (understanding that all oracular systems share common ground and their analogies are just a basis) or then, just reversing the exaltation dignities, but only those. Since there was, as already mentioned, a secret exaltation for the Sun in Libra, if more about this is discovered, we could have a foundation for shifting those, or even for not shifting them at all.