Question on John Worsdale's Choice of Words.
Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2015 4:03 pm
Over on this website:
http://far.orgfree.com
If you scroll down a bit you will come upon John Worsdale's First book, Genethliacal Astrology, (1798) not to be confused with the 1828 book of the same name. (NOTE: there are two pdf files associated with him on this row and one of them has nothing to do with him). I'm having a bit of difficulty with some of his phrases.
Worsdale, as ever, is talking about predicting death. I'm sort of working on the idea that the same technique can be used to predict other things with some accuracy. He says on page 113
Then on page 114 he states:
I know he used parallels of declination in his 1828 book, perhaps this is what he means. Anyone? Anyone?
http://far.orgfree.com
If you scroll down a bit you will come upon John Worsdale's First book, Genethliacal Astrology, (1798) not to be confused with the 1828 book of the same name. (NOTE: there are two pdf files associated with him on this row and one of them has nothing to do with him). I'm having a bit of difficulty with some of his phrases.
Worsdale, as ever, is talking about predicting death. I'm sort of working on the idea that the same technique can be used to predict other things with some accuracy. He says on page 113
Well what about an abundance of good or middling testimony? That's for later. In his discussion of things to look out for he makes this statement on also on page 113" ... those, who by reason of abundance of evil (in the chart - tc) must speedily perish. "
What is the figure of equal sides?"If one of the luminaries is angular, and that luminary is the giver of life, and one malefic is joined (conjunct - tc) or opposite or be distant in longitude partily (I believe he means a partile aspect) and according to the figure of equal sides none of the benefics aspecting. ...
Then on page 114 he states:
Worsdale apparently did not like to repeat the same words over and over for reasons of style, but the synonyms and/or metaphors he used as substitutes could be obtuse, and this is the sense I'm getting here. I'm guessing the second part of this sentence has to do with the malefics aspecting the lights, but "equilaterally configurated," and "irradiate the places of the luminaries" seems a bit over the top. Could these phrases simply mean "in aspect to" or "in hard aspect to?" Any thoughts on these phrases?And if they be not equilaterally configurated (sic), but the two malefics nearly irradiate the places of the luminaries, hurting either of the lights or both, whether the malefics be succeedent or opposite ..."
I know he used parallels of declination in his 1828 book, perhaps this is what he means. Anyone? Anyone?
