Skyscript Astrology Forum

Posted: **Mon Jul 17, 2006 7:59 pm**

I am just learning to do classical astrology ( have already studied modern astrology and some vedic over the past several years) and I wanted a good recommendation for the least amount of elements needed for a good reading. What are the least amount of: fixed stars to be considered, midpoints, arabic parts, profections, directions, etc. Even with just 7 traditional planets, there are a great many of the fore mentioned elements and it would be too easy to be over whelmed.

Right now I have Lilly's CA 1, 2, and 3 comming from Amazon, along with Classical Astrology for Modern Living (Lee Lehman), and Mundane Astrology (Carter, Greene, Raphael).

Thanks

Posted: **Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:27 am**

What are the least amount of: fixed stars to be considered, midpoints, arabic parts, profections, directions, etc. Even with just 7 traditional planets, there are a great many of the fore mentioned elements and it would be too easy to be over whelmed.

Being overwhelmed is very possible if you try to take notice of everything. But it is very much a personal choice. I wouldn't worry too much about the fixed start, Arabic Parts, etc. to begin with and just concentrate on the basics. I remember John Frawley showing in a lecture that a horary can be read by using two planets only - the main significators. Something about a lost cat if I remember correctly.

He does, however, recommend the use of 7 Arabic Parts if using them at all but I cannot remember which seven they are. If you are interested in Arabic Parts Robert Zollar's book on the Arabic Parts is well worth getting. It is certainly worth knowing and there is a lot of good information in the book. The books you have mentioned will keep you busy for awhile, particularly Lilly.

There are hundreds of fixed stars and it is impossible that they all, or even some of them, play a part in every chart. If using them, I would stick to learning about a few of the well known ones. Generally, I would only use them if they feature prominently in the chart. That is, I would only take note if they were conjunct the main significators or on an angle and perhaps relate to the topic at hand. I tend to take more notice of fixed stars in mundane charts. Bernadette Brady suggests orbs of no more than half a degree for fixed stars.

Good luck with the classical astrology. It opens up a whole new world of thinking and is a fascinating area of study.

Posted: **Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:08 am**

Is Classical considered the same as Medieval? Is there somewhere a breakdown/defining list of terms? Is this a stupid question?

Posted: **Wed Jul 26, 2006 11:36 pm**

It's a good question. The problem is the lack of a concise answer and a general agreement among those who study this. What follows is rough, very rough, and is not intended to be definitive or even hint at it. It is little more than a timeline.

1. Hellenistic astrology - Western astrology stems from the Hellenistic Greeks who organized what they learned from the Babylonians and their own contributions. This is the area that Robert Schmidt at Project Hindsight specializes in. It is very rational and structured. Think Ptolemy, Valens, and Paulus Alexandrinus.

2. Medieval astrology - this gets broken down into two groups Arabic and Latin. Arabic coming from the middle east and the Latin from the West. Think Al Biruni and Al Khayyat for Arabic, and Bonatti for Latin. Monotheistic religion is becoming part of Greek astrology in both cases.

3. Renaissance and Classical - Jerome Cardan is the astrologer we usually think of first when we think of the Renaissance, and I don't think there is an enormous difference between Renaissance and Medieval, but you might find really knowledgeable people objecting to that. I'm speaking in general. Classical would be the period after the Renaissance until the time of astrology's demise as an acceptable subject in about 1700 or the death of William Lilly. After that things really change.

Now each successive period took from the period(s) before so there is a lot of overlapping and in my opinion, almost all of it is simply developing Greek astrology, although I've heard on argument that Greek astrology is pagan and "traditional" astrology is monotheistic, I'm not persuaded that the twain doesn't meet in ancient Greece. Ptolemy is the basis of Western astrology all through the period up to 1700 and arguably even today. Whether that is a good or bad thing is debatable.

Add to all of this that there are occasional iconoclasts (Morin), frauds, and a lot of misinformation floating around prior to 1700 (prior to the 1970s really) we get an awful lot of schools of thought.

I know this doesn't give you much to work with, but the topic of the differences in periods is complex and the timeline is a good place to start.

See Holden's History of Horoscopic Astrology for some detailed information

Tom

Posted: **Thu Jul 27, 2006 1:46 am**

Thank you Tom, very good to know!

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Best Minimum for Beginning Classical Astrology

Best Minimum for Beginning Classical Astrology