Skyscript Astrology Forum

I can't comment on the school and childcare arrangements in 19th-century Lincolnshire, but I believe Worsdale used the word 'return' without thinking. Saturn hadn't squared its radical position before. (With the Sun in the next sign, Saturn couldn't have been recently retrograde.)

The baneful stations of the Enemies afflicting the Moon are most probably the trines of Mars and Saturn, as Tom says. It's worth noting that no other planets aspected the Moon by classical aspect on that day.

if you look at the first chart i provided on page 4 of this thread that is based on a rate of 12.37 per year you'll note saturn is square its natal position. as a matter of fact - the whole chart is square it's natal position.. perhaps this is the same type of progression worsdale was referring to when he made the comment 'saturn to the square of saturn'.

james_m wrote:as a matter of fact - the whole chart is square it's natal position.. perhaps this is the same type of progression worsdale was referring to when he made the comment 'saturn to the square of saturn'.

No, that's not it. Truth to tell, I didn't look at the charts you posted before (all those purple stars and different-coloured planets make my head spin), but I see that what you've done is simply to 'profect' the radix by 12?37?/year. There is a double error here: first, as you yourself said, 365.24 divided by 29.531 = 12.37, not 12?37?. But much more importantly, this is not at all what Placidean progressions are!

Yours is a symbolic motion, something that Placidus rejected. What you need to do is to multiply the native's age in years by 12.37 and look that many days ahead in the ephemeris. For instance, 7.1 years x 12.37 = 87.827 days. So the planetary positions (by natural, secondary motion) almost 88 days after birth would, according to Placidus, indicate events at the age of 7.1 years.

thanks for explaing all that martin. it was entertaining and informative!

the options on solar fire for a dark chart come with the silly stars. if i could pull them out - i would.. maybe a later edition will give that option.. it is easy to make your head spin, lol.. i know some folks like to get their digs in on modern astrologers ( the alan leo comment earlier), but i suppose it is fair to take pot shots at the software that doesn't conform to the haughty standards here as well!! i am interested in the astrology and hopefully there will continue to be a place for that here..

"7.1 years x 12.37 = 87.827 days." i think i see what i did wrong their. i converted years to years.. for approx 88 years. this formula you offer is similar but not quite the same as the tertiary progressions.. perhaps these are based on a month but not a 'synodic month'. 88 days forward of june 6 gives sept 2 1817.. one can look at the transits to see what they conform with. i will spare you the purple stars, lol..

Martin Gansten wrote:

james_m wrote:as a matter of fact - the whole chart is square it's natal position.. perhaps this is the same type of progression worsdale was referring to when he made the comment 'saturn to the square of saturn'.

No, that's not it. Truth to tell, I didn't look at the charts you posted before (all those purple stars and different-coloured planets make my head spin), but I see that what you've done is simply to 'profect' the radix by 12?37?/year. There is a double error here: first, as you yourself said, 365.24 divided by 29.531 = 12.37, not 12?37?. But much more importantly, this is not at all what Placidean progressions are!

Yours is a symbolic motion, something that Placidus rejected. What you need to do is to multiply the native's age in years by 12.37 and look that many days ahead in the ephemeris. For instance, 7.1 years x 12.37 = 87.827 days. So the planetary positions (by natural, secondary motion) almost 88 days after birth would, according to Placidus, indicate events at the age of 7.1 years.

Martin Gansten wrote:

Yours is a symbolic motion, something that Placidus rejected.

one other quick question.. what is the difference between a symbolic motion and a placidus progression? isn't all of this symbolic, whether it be tied to 1 year equals one month or one month = 1 year, or 1 day is equivalent to 1 year? i am not completely understanding what isn't a symbolic motion when you start using these types of charts..

james_m wrote: the options on solar fire for a dark chart come with the silly stars. if i could pull them out - i would.. maybe a later edition will give that option..

Just right-click the chart, then choose Color Scheme/Background color


margherita

Well, I would agree that astrology is chiefly symbolic, but to Placidus and many others it wasn't; it was just a branch of physics (remember that his magnum opus was called Physiomathematica) and dealt with cause and effect. For some reason (and I'm not sure Placidus explained how he perceived the details of this, though perhaps he did), on this view, the real motions of the planets at certain times after birth cause various types of real events to take place at certain (later) times in life. It thus becomes important to understand and use only these physically real motions in astrological prediction, as only the real motions of real bodies can be real causes of real events. Pretending that everything moves around the zodiac at a uniform rate is thus unacceptable to Placidus.

On the other matters: yes, Placidean progressions are close to so-called tertiaries (I think I said this once already), but the latter use a sidereal (or tropical?) month rather than a synodic one. And I think we're all interested in astrology here. To the extent that I have it in for Alan Leo and his ilk (and I admit that I do), it is because I think he was a sloppy, ill-read, half-baked astrologer who did the art an enormous disservice. Perhaps that means I'm haughty, though I prefer to think of it as having Standards. To quote Monty Python, I know these views aren't popular, but I have never courted popularity.

My dislike for charts with purple stars on a black backdrop, however, is largely a practical matter (though a certain aesthetic sensibility may come into it). I just find them difficult to scan. The first thing I do with a new piece of astrological software is generally to set it to black-on-white display if at all possible. No doubt that reveals all sorts of fascinating things about my mental setup, but I don't think it makes me haughty.

margherita wrote:

james_m wrote: the options on solar fire for a dark chart come with the silly stars. if i could pull them out - i would.. maybe a later edition will give that option..

Just right-click the chart, then choose Color Scheme/Background color


margherita

hi margherita,

thanks. i know how to change the background colour. it is the background graphic that i didn't know how to get rid of until now.. i just went back and hit the clear button under the 'background graphics' which leaves me with the black colour without the background graphic that had included the stars. my next chart will come without the stars.. thanks..

Martin Gansten wrote:Well, I would agree that astrology is chiefly symbolic, but to Placidus and many others it wasn't; it was just a branch of physics (remember that his magnum opus was called Physiomathematica) and dealt with cause and effect. For some reason (and I'm not sure Placidus explained how he perceived the details of this, though perhaps he did), on this view, the real motions of the planets at certain times after birth cause various types of real events to take place at certain (later) times in life. It thus becomes important to understand and use only these physically real motions in astrological prediction, as only the real motions of real bodies can be real causes of real events. Pretending that everything moves around the zodiac at a uniform rate is thus unacceptable to Placidus.

On the other matters: yes, Placidean progressions are close to so-called tertiaries (I think I said this once already), but the latter use a sidereal (or tropical?) month rather than a synodic one. And I think we're all interested in astrology here. To the extent that I have it in for Alan Leo and his ilk (and I admit that I do), it is because I think he was a sloppy, ill-read, half-baked astrologer who did the art an enormous disservice. Perhaps that means I'm haughty, though I prefer to think of it as having Standards. To quote Monty Python, I know these views aren't popular, but I have never courted popularity.

My dislike for charts with purple stars on a black backdrop, however, is largely a practical matter (though a certain aesthetic sensibility may come into it). I just find them difficult to scan. The first thing I do with a new piece of astrological software is generally to set it to black-on-white display if at all possible. No doubt that reveals all sorts of fascinating things about my mental setup, but I don't think it makes me haughty.

hi martin
haughty was in reference to my impression given the alan leo comment and the background stars on the chart.. it would seem that alan leo hasn't had the same type of availability to these traditional texts that as i understand it have only been made available in more recent times. now i am sure i have said something else to quibble about here, but it is fine for someone to criticize alan leo, or ceo carter or any other astrologer from the past 100 years for any number of reasons, but a part of me sees this as fairly short sighted and not respectful of what they were working with at the time.. obviously some are going to see this differently too.

back to the astrology.. unfortunately i am unaware of being able to get placidus de titis books all that easily to be able to read what he actually said! i am interested in astrology and - i am not a scholar well versed in latin, italian and etc.. to my knowledge none of his books are readily available in english were one actually interested in reading what he has to say.. i actually looked to see if i could find a copy of his book prime mobile or something to that effect and seem to recall seeing something with a fairly high price tag on it.. in a quick search on abebooks i note one of his books - the only one available at the moment on abebooks - is going for 695$ which is slightly out of my price range!!
http://www.abebooks.com/book-search/aut ... y-m-sibly/

regarding the teritairy progressions - i believe it would be a sidereal month that is being used then.
"A sidereal month lasts 27.322 days, while a synodic month lasts 29.531 days." http://www.sumanasinc.com/webcontent/an ... ereal.html
i see no reason why one would suggest a tropical month other then to suggest solarfire is a bit of a joke in the progression options they offer astrologers to use. quoting monty python is appropriate given all this, but yea - i too am still primarily interested in the astrology only..

Sorry for colluding to derail this thread, Tom. If I may just offer a few more brief comments before I withdraw:

james_m wrote:it would seem that alan leo hasn't had the same type of availability to these traditional texts that as i understand it have only been made available in more recent times.

Yes, well, I'm not criticizing him for not reading the books that weren't available to him; only for not reading (or understanding) the ones that were -- and for distorting what he had read. So did several of his astrological contemporaries, including A. J. Pearce.

a part of me sees this as fairly short sighted and not respectful of what they were working with at the time..

I have great respect for what Leo had to work with, and practically none for how he in fact chose to work with it.

unfortunately i am unaware of being able to get placidus de titis books all that easily to be able to read what he actually said!

Well, there is a facsimile of Cooper's English edition of Primum Mobile available for $75 from Sacred Science Institute (I just checked). Not much, but better than nothing.

regarding the teritairy progressions - i believe it would be a sidereal month that is being used then. [...]
i see no reason why one would suggest a tropical month other then to suggest solarfire is a bit of a joke in the progression options they offer astrologers to use.

A joke I truly don't get, then. A sidereal month is 27.321661 days, a tropical month is 27.321582 days. It's a matter of what zodiac you use. The only astrologers I've known who have used tertiaries were/are siderealists (notably the late Rick Houck).

The only astrologers I've known who have used tertiaries were/are siderealists (notably the late Rick Houck).

Noel Tyl used to teach his students to use them particularly the tertiary progressed Moon. I don't know if he still does. Tyl, as we know, uses the tropical zodiac

see edit notes on the bottom as i have updated this post a few times.

sorry martin,

tropical month and i was thinking calendar month as it was the only way your non astro comment made sense.

tom and martin,

one thought i immediately had when you mentioned saturn to the square of saturn was how the saturn cycle - 29.45 divided by 4 gives a square, opposition, square and return a bit less then every 7 1/2 years. one can get this without generating a chart as it is a simple reference point to the cycle of saturn divided by 4 which ends up being the square points to it's cycle, or opposition and return around 15/30 years of age.

another thought that i have based on what little i am able to intuit on traditional astrologers approach is in regard to the concept and approach to '''time'''. it seems they weren't so obsessed with managing it down to the micro-second and instead took a broader view. this is one of the ways that i can understand how 'primary directions' apply for a year and more generally how worsdale may have been referring to the square of saturn to saturn at approx 7 and a bit years as something he would be able to do off the top of his head without examining an ephemeris for everything.. the beautiful thing about having an expert like martin here is that he might want to give some feedback on this idea that i have been entertaining for some time now regarding how traditional astrologers or people from the past may have viewed time..

regarding the use of various different 'symbolic' progressions and directions, i have a book by r.c. davison first written in 1955 that goes into the use of these various progressions as well, so aside from tyl who would have picked them up from others like davison probably, i don't imagine they were completely ignored in favour of 'secondary' progressions only. interestingly r.c.davison was also president of the astrological lodge of the theosophical society, a fate he shared/suffered with alan leo, ceo carter and a few others as well, so perhaps he is due a thrashing from martin as a consequence of this as well!


images

tom - above are the transits for july 12 1824, the day for kents death. i can generate all of this off solar fire, so if you have solar fire you might like to do the same by clicking ' dynamic' and then animate the biwheel feature which will give you this same chart.. i have removed the stars to relieve everyone including myself that annoying feature. thanks again margherita for encouraging me to go look yet another time to see what had to be done to remove the graphic background.

edit note - tom, i have changed the chart to 9pm with the angles for this moment showing as well. the 3pm chart would have had the sun/jupiter above the horizon line. however this 9pm chart would have the moon very close to a conjunction to the ascendant as mentioned in your latest post and with the sun/jupiter below the descendant. if you'd like me to put it back to 3pm, let me know. sorry for a minor quirk in this program that displayed it without the moving angles for 3pm in my previous chart in this post..

2nd edit note - i have included the tertiary progressions which works out to one synodic month per year.. i found this out after asking some questions to technical support at solar fire earlier today. this chart below is a triple wheel which helps to show a stronger focus of the 2 malefics in the area of the i.c. point.. i seem to recall a connection with saturn with drowning, but can't recall the source. also, i seem to recall a connection with the i.c. point and death by drowning, but maybe i am just remembering poorly. thoughts welcome. this goes with my idea that a few dynamics have to line up to be more suggestive of an actual event taking place. i don't believe primary directions are stand alone predictive technique, but need to be used in conjunction with other charts. perhaps doing this with solar returns was the standard procedure in the past with placidus and worsdale wanting to explore other ways of supporting the pd data.

photo hosting sites