skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Using Whole Signs or Placidus for Natal
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 9, 10, 11  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
zoidsoft



Joined: 10 Feb 2006
Posts: 966
Location: Pulaski, NY

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 3:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

margherita wrote:
I'm strangely in agreement with Mark Smile and I would say that we don't know exactly what Greek astrologers used and how.


Well over 90% of everything that was ever written on the subject is lost, so debating what they did is probably an exercise in futility. There were astrologers of different opinions on the subject, but from the available evidence surrounding the founders, whole signs seems to be the default for topics.

We see Valens giving the MC to praxis and saying that if it falls outside of the 10th sign that this sign also participates in the determination with regard to what one does. It is important to realize that Valens is probably 300+ years removed from the founders he is fond of quoting.

At this point though I have more faith in someone who knows Greek hashing out the texts than those who don't. That would be James Holden and Robert Schmidt. Mark Riley's translation is a "first draft" not checked for consistency (Riley says so) so I would not be inclined to use it against a more scrutinized translation such as Schmidt's for serious research.
_________________
Curtis Manwaring
Zoidiasoft Technologies, LLC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
margherita



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 1368
Location: Rome, Italy

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

zoidsoft wrote:


At this point though I have more faith in someone who knows Greek hashing out the texts than those who don't. That would be James Holden and Robert Schmidt.


But what about Giuseppe Bezza? He knows ancient Greek, Latin, Arab and he taught in one of the most important Italian Universities for classical studies.

He is inside academical world and he is a traditional astrologer since the '80.

If he is not so known in the traditional astrology world is because he does not care to write in English. (The difference is I can read English works by Schmidt, Holden or Hand and the rest, but English mother tongue people cannot read Bezza and compare)

So if Schmidt says something and Bezza's something else, to me it means that there is no real evidence on the subject, otherwise both would be in agreement.



margherita
_________________
Traditional astrology at
http://heavenastrolabe.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
zoidsoft



Joined: 10 Feb 2006
Posts: 966
Location: Pulaski, NY

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 5:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

margherita wrote:
zoidsoft wrote:


At this point though I have more faith in someone who knows Greek hashing out the texts than those who don't. That would be James Holden and Robert Schmidt.


But what about Giuseppe Bezza? He knows ancient Greek, Latin, Arab and he taught in one of the most important Italian Universities for classical studies.

He is inside academical world and he is a traditional astrologer since the '80.

If he is not so known in the traditional astrology world is because he does not care to write in English. (The difference is I can read English works by Schmidt, Holden or Hand and the rest, but English mother tongue people cannot read Bezza and compare)

So if Schmidt says something and Bezza's something else, to me it means that there is no real evidence on the subject, otherwise both would be in agreement.

margherita


I'm focusing on English translations primarily here. There are a few others as well like Rumen Kolev, Demetra George and Dorian Greenbaum to name a few. My omission is not meant to say there is no one else familiar with Greek. How many years has Dr Bezza been translating the Greek texts? Has he finished Valens 8 and 9, if so, if you could translate those to English for us we would be grateful. The Riley text needs more work. I've spotted a few errors and pointed them out here in this forum.
_________________
Curtis Manwaring
Zoidiasoft Technologies, LLC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Eddy



Joined: 04 Feb 2009
Posts: 922
Location: Netherlands

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Question to Margherita and Martin:

I assume that you both don't use the whole sign houses.
What house system(s) do you use then? Alchabitius?

I don't ask for a explanation/justification for the use
of a certain system, I'm just curious.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
margherita



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 1368
Location: Rome, Italy

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eddy wrote:
Question to Margherita and Martin:

I assume that you both don't use the whole sign houses.
What house system(s) do you use then? Alchabitius?


I use Placidus, but I am NOT at war with other systems. For example, for horary I've always used Regiomontanus.

But Placidus fits very well with semiarc primary directions method Smile so with natal astrology.

As I showed in my blog in the short article already quoted above in fact, 5 out of the 6 Ptolemy's examples of semiarc method fall on a "Placidean" cusp. In fact quoting from my article:

"Up to this point we see that of the six examples of directions inTetrabiblos, in three of them the significator is on the axes (Asc, MC and Descendant); of the other three ones, two are on a Placidean house cusp and one is in the middle of the quadrant."

http://heavenastrolabe.net/ptolemy-and-placidus-primary-directions/

where obviously middle of quadrant is 3 hours.

It means (to me) at least that Ptolemy knew very well Placidean hours. (or viceversa, Placido knew very well Ptolemy Smile ).

This does not mean obviously that Ptolemy uses for sure Placidean houses, just they fit very well with Ptolemy.

margherita
_________________
Traditional astrology at
http://heavenastrolabe.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Martin Gansten
Moderator


Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1268
Location: Malmö, Sweden

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eddy wrote:
Question to Margherita and Martin:

I assume that you both don't use the whole sign houses.
What house system(s) do you use then? Alchabitius?

I don't ask for a explanation/justification for the use
of a certain system, I'm just curious.

I won't explain myself then, Very Happy but simply say that I use Alcabitius cusps (while also paying attention to signs/aspectual relationships).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Eddy



Joined: 04 Feb 2009
Posts: 922
Location: Netherlands

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 6:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks both to you Margherita and Martin.

In Margherita's article Ptolemy is quoted about not to work in "accordance to the usual systems". I know Martin once explained this but I don't remember well. Were the 'usual systems' based on the arithmetical method of calculating the rising times of signs (as in my example a few posts ago) or on Antiochus method of mundane aspects?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
margherita



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 1368
Location: Rome, Italy

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eddy wrote:
Thanks both to you Margherita and Martin.

In Margherita's article Ptolemy is quoted about not to work in "accordance to the usual systems". I know Martin once explained this but I don't remember well. Were the 'usual systems' based on the arithmetical method of calculating the rising times of signs (as in my example a few posts ago) or on Antiochus method of mundane aspects?


I believe the method of ascensional times, you explained above.

margherita
_________________
Traditional astrology at
http://heavenastrolabe.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Martin Gansten
Moderator


Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1268
Location: Malmö, Sweden

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

margherita wrote:
Eddy wrote:
Thanks both to you Margherita and Martin.

In Margherita's article Ptolemy is quoted about not to work in "accordance to the usual systems". I know Martin once explained this but I don't remember well. Were the 'usual systems' based on the arithmetical method of calculating the rising times of signs (as in my example a few posts ago) or on Antiochus method of mundane aspects?


I believe the method of ascensional times, you explained above.

margherita

Yes, directing only by rising times or oblique ascension.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Eddy



Joined: 04 Feb 2009
Posts: 922
Location: Netherlands

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks again, the both of you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chris Brennan



Joined: 22 Sep 2005
Posts: 193
Location: Denver, Colorado, USA

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Martin Gansten wrote:

As you mention my name: my point is that there is a logical inconsistency either way, because it seems obvious (to me, anyway) that aspectual relationships are only one part of the matter, and that some major house significations are based on things like culmination and anti-culmination (and approaching or falling away from culmination, etc). The 10th place wouldn't be invested with certain powers if it were not for the fact that it was supposed to be culminating, and so forth.



Yes, sorry, I understood your original point and didn't mean to hijack it for my own purposes. I just mentioned your name since you had already alluded to the relationship between the houses and the ascendant earlier in the thread.

On that topic though, you made an important observation earlier that ancient authors tended to work in an idealist mindset, so that while they may have known that the actual point of culmination is not always in the the 10th whole sign house, they would still tend to adopt the idealized whole sign position anyways due to this mindset. Wouldn't the logical inconsistency you mentioned be rendered not as inconsistent from an ancient perspective if this was the mindset that (some) early astrologers adopted? Obviously that doesn't really help us much when it comes to having this debate amongst practitioners today, but as far as understanding how it was conceptualized during the early part of the tradition, it seems to explain how angularity could have been understood in a purely whole sign framework.
_________________
My website:
http://www.chrisbrennanastrologer.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ed F



Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 301
Location: Ipswich, MA USA

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good observations about the idealist orientation, and of raising the question of its relevancy to contemporary practice.

- Ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Eddy



Joined: 04 Feb 2009
Posts: 922
Location: Netherlands

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Many issues in astrology can be considered as 'idealisations', whether in ancient or contemporary astrology: the signs as idealisations of the lunar months, the degrees as idealisations of the days. The division of the four elements. The planets as rulers over certain sectors in the ecliptic, etc...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
waybread



Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 937
Location: Canada

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks, everyone, for such an informative thread!

Just to tackle authors one at a time, though.... what happens if we start thinking "orthogonally" (as Ed F put it) and come to the house problem with a fresh pair of eyes?

I recently read Tetrabiblos cover-to-cover, and was amazed at how little Ptolemy uses houses at all. So to say that he used whole signs (or for that matter, some other) houses really seems to be a stretch to me.

He names only five houses, and seems to draw them in collaterally, in a discussion of another topic.

So if we ask why Mr. Pt says so little about houses, I think the answer is because topical houses (sensu Schmidt) do not fit into Ptolemy's larger project of systematizing astrology according to his basic foundational principles.

In Tetrabiblos, entities are hot, cold, moist, or dry. They refer to solstices and equinoxes. They might be angular, or affected by principles of nature. Once we recognize Ptolemy's basic "elements of astrology" framework, it is hard to see how topical houses would flow directly from them, other than the 10th and the 1st--and then these are angular, anyway.

In fact, you could do 98% (or thereabouts) of Ptolemy's astrology with no reference to topical houses at all.

So why should we assume that this synthesizer, systematizer, and explicator must have meant something that he chose not to say?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ed F



Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 301
Location: Ipswich, MA USA

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 9:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eddy wrote:
Many issues in astrology can be considered as 'idealisations', whether in ancient or contemporary astrology: the signs as idealisations of the lunar months, the degrees as idealisations of the days. The division of the four elements. The planets as rulers over certain sectors in the ecliptic, etc...


Yes, and we know your personal preference for the geometrically ideal when assessing alternatives. No harm, just a bias to be recognized in ourselves like so many others we may have.

- Ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 9, 10, 11  Next
Page 3 of 11

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated