Skyscript Astrology Forum

To refine things somewhat, I have asked 7 multiple choice questions which concern fundamental life issues such as occupation, health and relationships. Obviously, it is expected that posters will give an astrological explanation for picking an answer, no matter how brief or detailed that explanation is. The natal chart is shown in the tropical and sidereal zodiacs and the Alcabitus house system is used but of course posters can choose their own (traditional) house system to delineate the chart.

I will reveal the person's identity and the answers to the questions in five days time (Friday the 15th). If anyone wants clarity about something related to the natal chart or the questions, then I'll gladly reply.

Tropical zodiac: Sidereal zodiac (Lahiri):
Basic information about native and birth data

The chart is that of a male who is no longer living. The chart is not listed on Astrodatabank or any similar website. I would consider the birth time to be 'AA'.

The Lots

Lots shown are Fortune, Spirit, Exaltation, Eros (also Basis in this figure) and Necessity.

Planetary motion

No planets are retrograde or stationary.

Planetary bounds or terms

Dorotheus bounds are shown.

The Questions:

Occupation

1. What was this man's occuption?

a) Surgeon.
b) Police Officer.
c) Priest.
d) Artist.
e) Journalist.

Fame/Eminence

2. Was he famous?

a) No.
b) Only briefly.
c) He was a legend in his own lifetime.
d) Yes, for the manner of his death.
e) Only posthumously unrelated to the manner of his death.

Marriage and Children

3. What best describes this man's marital status?

a) Never married and rarely if ever dated.
b) Never married but dated frequently.
c) Multiple marriages and infidelities.
d) Happily married for life.

4. Did he have children?

a) No.
b) Yes, only one.
c) Yes, two to four.
d) Yes, five or more.

Health, Longevity and Manner of Death

5. Which of the following best describes his health status?

a) Very healthy and fit all his life.
b) Sickly and frequently ill for most of his life.
c) Very accident prone and numerous injuries on account of this.
d) Afflicted by serious mental illness in the second half of his life.

6. Which best describes this man's longevity (for the era and economic status of the country in which he lived)?

a) premature death (as a young adult or in middle age).
b) about average (55 - 69).
c) above average (70 - 84).
d) exceptional longevity (85+).

7. Did he die violently?

a) Yes.
b) No.

**End of Questions**

Stellarium wrote: 1. What was this man's occuption?

a) Surgeon.
b) Police Officer.
c) Priest.
d) Artist.
e) Journalist.

journalist - writer type. moon oriental to the sun. ruler of the midheaven in 3rd sign from the ascendant with mercury and conjunction pof. moon in the pof 10th. north node is gemini as well.. sun/moon sextile which is reflected in the pof and pos position. mercury and venus in the pos 5th while in the first of the pof.. cardinal cross with relief found in the 3rd.

Stellarium wrote: 2. Was he famous?

a) No.
b) Only briefly.
c) He was a legend in his own lifetime.
d) Yes, for the manner of his death.
e) Only posthumously unrelated to the manner of his death.

c) he was a legend in his own lifetime. jupiter on the midheaven and in the solar 10th.. pos conjunct midheaven/jupiter - thanks sun/moon sextile and angle of the midheaven here..

Stellarium wrote: 3. What best describes this man's marital status?

a) Never married and rarely if ever dated.
b) Never married but dated frequently.
c) Multiple marriages and infidelities.
d) Happily married for life.

don't know.. mars/saturn in the 5th is an inhibiting combo for romantic liaisons... mercury seems isolated in no close aspect to any other planet, and ruled by the saturn in 5th.. my guess is -> a) with the caveat that jupiter in the 11th reflects back on this house, although not the 'house of marriage, it might have great bearing.

Stellarium wrote: 4. Did he have children?
a) No.
b) Yes, only one.
c) Yes, two to four.
d) Yes, five or more.

my guess is a) for the saturn/mars combo in the 5th. jupiter in the 11th might change this, but i will go with a).

Stellarium wrote: 5. Which of the following best describes his health status?

a) Very healthy and fit all his life.
b) Sickly and frequently ill for most of his life.
c) Very accident prone and numerous injuries on account of this.
d) Afflicted by serious mental illness in the second half of his life.

saturn/mars square onto the sun doesn't look favourable for avoiding accidents. however sun in capricorn and squares to saturn show up in the charts of long lived people in some of the research i have witnessed.. i will go with c) for the mars/saturn square sun. mars in aries is more impulsive and potentially accident prone tied up in the jupiter/saturn opposition.

Stellarium wrote: 6. Which best describes this man's longevity (for the era and economic status of the country in which he lived)?

a) premature death (as a young adult or in middle age).
b) about average (55 - 69).
c) above average (70 - 84).
d) exceptional longevity (85+).

based on my earlier comments on the sun in capricorn square saturn in the solar 4th i am going to go with d).. perhaps jupiter ruler of the ascendant on the midheaven is really the astro reason, but d) is my guess..

Stellarium wrote: 7. Did he die violently?
a) Yes.
b) No.

b) i don't believe he did. i see no connections with the mars/saturn conjunction to the 8th which is what i would be looking for.. jupiter ruler of the ascendant casts a favourable light on this chart.

Hello Stellarium,

I have an organizational question: would you not agree with me that it would be a lot easier to follow your very interesting and diiferentiated questions, if you could split this thread into two parts, i.e. threads here on this classical forum, the one containing the tropical chart and the second containing the siderial chart?

Thus the orientation following your questions by writing or reading the coming texts in this then two threads would be a lot easier and more interesting and this without loosing the siderial part to another forum.

Johannes

artist moon and its lord in 5 both in sect aspecting onde another

no children or only one and sick, mars lord of 12th, native spent a lot of money with his illness(saturn lord of 2)

Married to wealthy wife

Sickly and frequently ill for most of his life

Premature death(lord of 8th in 12th)

Not violent but maybe public(lord of IC in MC

Tom
I thought this was already your position. But please specify if we are allowed to say here that we've posted there?
Graham
p.s. I of course recognise your right to exclude whatever techniques, house systems, dignites etc you like from this forum, but please don't say that sidereal is a "modern" technique. It may possibly be wrong, tropical may possibly be an improvement, but sidereal is not more "modern". See numerous articles on this site by Deborah Houlding etc.
You could avoid this whole issue if you just called this forum "Traditional and Ancient technique (tropical)", things would be clear. Otherwise this is going to keep happening as new people arrive who don't know about the ban.

Tom: I do understand your concern, but like it or not, traditional and ancient astrology is not all tropical. In fact, it was largely non-tropical (meaning that many/most astrologers didn't use the Ptolemy/Hipparchus zodiac) until well into the Middle Ages -- say, 9th or 10th century. Even in the 16th century you get people like Giuntini (Junctinus) arguing for precession-corrected revolutions! If someone today wants to do astrology Persian 7th-century-style, or revolutions Giuntini-style, or Hellenistic astrology Valens-style, are you going to ban them from posting in the Traditional & Ancient forum?

I do traditional astrology (I've never done any other kind), I teach traditional astrology, I read traditional astrological texts in three classical languages, I've written a fairly respected book on a traditional astrological technique of prediction and a number of scholarly papers on traditional astrology; and yet I have never used the Ptolemaic zodiac. If this forum goes exclusively tropical by decree, it (and Skyscript as a whole) will definitely lose much of its attraction for me. And what would be the point? Imposing a standard of orthodoxy that didn't exist for half of horoscopic astrology's history?

In short, traditional and sidereal are not mutually exclusive categories. If anyone (myself included) wants to analyse a chart using strictly traditional techniques in a sidereal zodiac, then I suggest that they should be allowed to do so in the Traditional forum and/or the Sidereal forum as they see fit. I don't see that this would be any more inconvenient than allowing, as we do, a free choice between the multiple traditional house systems. (Naturally, such posts shouldn't degenerate into squabbles over which zodiac or house system is better.)

On the whole I dont see this being a problem when we are discussing traditional concepts or historical points. Its only when we get to practical chart examples of a technique this becomes potentially controversial.

The Mystery chart exercises have brought this issue to the forefront. I have already stated I dont see why charts cant be displayed in a sidereal zodiac here. I presume part of Tom's concern is that beginners might confused with the focus on conflicting zodiacs. However, as long as people are clear what zodiac they are discussing it shouldn't be an issue. Traditional astrology is bigger than one zodiac. Plus why should a separate zodiac be a particular confusion for beginners? We happily discuss the complex intricacies of primaries and zodiacal releasing without letting that worry us. If we worried about putting off beginners as a criteria for threads we would be left with a pretty slim forum. Judging by the quality of many posters here I dont think we should understimate our members.

I suppose one issue we do have is that a disproportionate number of the siderealists here are traditional in focus. Not really surprising considering this is Skyscript! Hence if you look at the sidereal forum on Skyscript it operates de facto as a mini traditional sidereal forum. Not because of any decree by Martin but simply reflecting the inclination of members here.

So I suppose the feeling of some tropicalists might be that siderealists here want to have their cake and eat it. They have a de facto traditional forum where they can discuss traditional astrology from an exclusively sidereal perspective, yet they expect the traditional forum to incorporate both zodiacs.

On the other hand I think Martin's points above are very strong. Plus potentially any kind of siderealist can post in the sidereal forum.

The really difficult one is what is traditional? Is including Indian techniques pushing the limits of this forum too far? Possibly it is. We do have a separate forum for Indian astrology.

Like all difficult issues I dont think the arguments are all on one side. What I do feel is that this is a fundamental issue regarding where Skyscript goes as a site. I think most would agree the traditional forum is the heart of Skyscript. Normally, I would always leave a forum moderator to make their own decision on policy and leave it at that.

However, I think this issue is so fundamental to the future of Skyscript I suggest all the moderators should try to reach a collegiate view on this. If we cant agree I think we may need to give Deborah Houlding the final say on this controversial issue.

Mark

Mark wrote:So I suppose the feeling of some tropicalists might be that siderealists here want to have their cake and eat it. They have a de facto traditional forum where they can discuss traditional astrology from an exclusively sidereal perspective, yet they expect the traditional forum to incorporate both zodiacs.

Speaking only for myself, although I accepted moderatorship of the Sidereal forum when it was offered, I didn't ask for it to be created and don't feel very strongly about it; but I would hate to lose the Traditional forum. And I do think the reason several 'sidereal traditionalists' post there rather than here is that they have been warned off this forum. To me, that's a real shame.

Mark wrote:The really difficult one is what is traditional? Is including Indian techniques pushing the limits of this forum too far? Possibly it is. We do have a separate forum for Indian astrology.

I agree. Of course traditional Indian astrology is, well, traditional; but it has developed in ways that make it significantly different from the 'greater tradition' of horoscopic astrology (the exception being Tajika, or Indianized Perso-Arabic astrology).

the way i see it, there are about maybe 15 or so regular posters here, with some occasional posters that post very infrequently.. if someone actually takes the time to read any of the posts, it quickly becomes clear whether they are working in sidereal or tropical.. i don't get wound up if someone uses a different house system then myself, and i see no reason to get out of joint over whether it is sid or trop either! but really - it is so easy to see all of this without needing to create more walls to help those who don't really want to read something that doesn't fit their idea of something.. - we already have the categories - traditional verses general.. i think most of the regulars here respect this already.. if someone doesn't they usually get told about it quickly too! i see no problem given all these reasons and more..

Martin Gansten wrote: If this forum goes exclusively tropical by decree, it (and Skyscript as a whole) will definitely lose much of its attraction for me. And what would be the point? Imposing a standard of orthodoxy that didn't exist for half of horoscopic astrology's history?

Martin and others, who work sidereally, have been posting interesting contributions in this forum on a very wide range of topic (primaries, lots, terms and triplicities...). It would be a shame to lose these contributors. They may not wish to be forced to stay in their own little corner, which is not very active. Skyscript and this forum would be poorer without their contributions.

Mark wrote:

On the whole I dont see this being a problem when we are discussing traditional concepts or historical points. Its only when we get to practical chart examples of a technique this becomes potentially controversial.

That's actually why I posted my replies to the mystery charts in the sidereal forum, and simply indicated in this one that I'd posted. When I asked for a sidereal version once I didn't realise that this was a faux-pas. I did not intend to post any sidereal analysis here, so I was in fact already following Tom's rules. Then Tom brought up a sidereal versus tropical point, about Mars being in detriment sidereally, and I responded by indicating that I had mentioned something about this in my reply in the sidereal forum.

But on reflection, I really don't see why we should be forced into this rather absurd "don't ask, don't tell" position, where we can discuss theoretical points about techniques that sometimes date back to pre-tropical times but have to remain discreet about what we're actually doing. And we should be careful of losing one or two people who are really useful to have around!
Graham