Hallo,
As the topic is how the solar return should be calculated with or without precession, I found a very good example in the comments to Paulus Alexandrinus by Olympiodorus ( VI C.E.) a.k.a Heliodorus, which shows unequivocally that during the Helinistic Era the astrologers have used solar return WITHOUT PRECESSION. Below you can see the cover page of the critical edition of the Olympiodorus' comments ( Heliodori, ut dicitur, in Paulum Alexandrinum, ed Emelie Boer. Leipzig:Teubner,1962):
Olympiodorus in Chapter 30 writes ( Late Classical Astrology:Paulus Alexandrinus and Olympiodorus, translated by Dorian Gieseler Greenbaum, ARHAT, 2001, p.132) :
"
Chapter 30. Concerning a Year
For example:let someone have Leo as the
Horoskopus, and let him be 27 years old .We want to know how the 27th year will pass, whether good or base.We provide the first year to the
Horoskopus, that is to say, to Leo, the second to the post-ascension to the
Horoskopus, that is, to Virgo, the third to Libra and so until the twelve years[have] the twelve
zodia.Again the 13th year we give to the
Horoskopus, Leo, the 14th to [Virgo], and so on in order up to the 24th year.The 25th year we provide again to the
Horoskopus , Leo, the 26th to Virgo, the 27th to Libra, and we say that the last belongs to Aphrodite, since Aphrodite is the master of Libra."
Here Olympiodorus explains how to calculate the Lord of the Year by the yearly profection of the Natal Ascendant.
On p.168 of Olympiodorus' translation by Dorian Greenbaum the two charts from the above example are published- the natal ( for the year 537 ) and the solar chart ( for the year 564 ) for the his 27th year:
As we can see from the chart graphics, the Sun has the same positions both in the natal as welll as in the solar chart.
