Skyscript Astrology Forum

This forum is called "traditional and ancient techniques".
According to Tom "traditional" means: the time after (about) 1600. One may agree there.
But what does "ancient" mean? This necessarly has to refer to the astrology as it was practiced by the "ancients" 2000 or 3000 years ago. And that means that one has to accept the fact that there were no Campanus houses at that time, no Johannes M?ller (also known as Regiomontanus), no Placidus houses etc ....
At that time the ascendent was not the beginning of the first house, it was the centre. the first house began 15 degrees before the AC, it ended 15 degrees after the AC. All the subsequent houses were 30 degrees each - so e.g. with a 10 degrees AC in Aries the first house began in 25 degrees Pisces, the second house started at 25 degrees Aries -etc. (However MC and IC were included - but integrated into the system of equal houses.)
When I look at my chart I must accept the fact that the ancients were right.
From an astronomical point of view there are no house cusps as they were calculated by Placidus - the Pacidus house cups actually refer to nothing, there is nothing corresponding to astronomic realities.
All this was put forward in detail by Johannes Vehlow, a German astrologer about 75 years ago. (He is now being re-discovered.) And the more I read and study his texts the more I feel: he was right.

Any "ancient" astrology cannot ignore these facts, can it?.
Ll

Hello Lunlumo,

According to Tom "traditional" means: the time after (about) 1600. One may agree there.

If I wrote that it is a typo or it was written under the influence of a fine Cabernet. I probably wrote that "traditional" is the astrology that was practiced before 1700 (roughly) and that the date was arbitrary. Some fine tradtional astrology appeared after that date, and some challenges to the astrology of the day occurred before it.

But what does "ancient" mean? This necessarily has to refer to the astrology as it was practiced by the "ancients" 2000 or 3000 years ago

What is probably more accurate is to call this forum traditional horoscopic astrology. As you say, astrology was practiced before there were charts. But note that the word "ancient" is in parenthesis in the forum title and therefore it would be considered distinct from traditional western horoscopic astrology which is a mouthful to say and cumbersome to write. Therefore, we use the term "traditional" and everyone seems to grasp the intent. Discussion of Babylonian or other forms of astrology that are genuinely ancient are welcome here, too, but it is also true that most members are less familiar with that than they are with horoscopic astrology.

From an astronomical point of view there are no house cusps as they were calculated by Placidus - the Placidus house cups actually refer to nothing, there is nothing corresponding to astronomic realities.

No line of division of the celestial sphere, whether it be house cusps, sign lines, the celestial equator, MC, horizon et al, has any material manifestation in astrology or astronomy. They are techniques of division for purposes of delineation. And house cusps were determined long before Placidus (17th century). Valens used them in the 2nd century AD.

Johannes Vehlow,a German astrologer about 75 years ago. (He is now being re-discovered.)

Anything in English? Please post the work regardless of the language it is written. There may be some interest in it.

Tom

http://www.sternwelten.at/werke_vehlow.shtml

Here are all the Vehlow books - free.

In German - it has never been translated - as far as I know.
Thanks for responding - I'll answer as soon as I'll have a free hour.
Ll

But what does "ancient" mean? This necessarly has to refer to the astrology as it was practiced by the "ancients" 2000 or 3000 years ago.

Yes, but bear in mind that even the zodiac (as we know it) is an unproven element of the astrology practiced 3000 years ago. We do have texts that are almost 2000 years old which definitely show the use of quadrant house division.

At that time the ascendent was not the beginning of the first house, it was the centre. the first house began 15 degrees before the AC, it ended 15 degrees after the AC. All the subsequent houses were 30 degrees each - so e.g. with a 10 degrees AC in Aries the first house began in 25 degrees Pisces, the second house started at 25 degrees Aries -etc. (However MC and IC were included - but integrated into the system of equal houses.)

This sounds like a factual statement but unless you have found some new historical evidence, I can?t see why it should be taken seriously. At best you might argue that this appears to have been done somewhere, but against that you will encounter a great wall of evidence that it was not standard practice. There is a much stronger argument in support of the ?whole sign? approach but even this is blighted by contradictions and calls for accuracy by those astrologers who appeared to use it - enough, I think, for it to be considered a convenience rather than a ?system?.

Many of the well known house systems, BTW, are known to have had a much older history than those people who are supposed to have invented them.

We still don?t know very much about the ancient division of houses, but one thing we do know, is that texts that can be dated to the early centuries of this era, prove that quadrant systems were employed in classical (a.k.a. ancient) astrology.