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

John Lennon
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3509
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 1:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
People seem to commonly want to make him a peace-loving Venusian artist. He was a world-famous showman with a pushy wife. He wrote songs, was usually stoned out of his mind, and made a lot of money. The adoration and adulation is very odd.


Ha! Wish I had said that Leery

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3509
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Apologies to anyone who read what I previously wrote in this spot, but the more I thought about it the more I hated it, so I deleted it.

Let's start anew. It is fairly common to the point of cliche that the 5th house rules creativity, yet this seems to be a fairly modern idea, but with some traditional roots. I searched Lee Lehaman's Book of Ruelrships, and "creativity" is not defined or explained. But Lennon was a musician. Music is a Venus ruled subject according to everyone listed by Lehman. The only minor exception was Gadbury's reference to musical propensity as ruled by Moon in the 9th house.

The problem then is we are left to believe, more or less that a strong Venus gives a strong musica or other artisticl talent and a weak Venus gives us a weak artistic talent. Venus in her fall would give no musical talent or should the native pursue such a career, the result would be dreadful.

However, if we leave this at this level, we create some pretty serious problems for our astrology. I don't now what kind of musician Michelangelo was, but he was undoubtedly a serious and brilliant artist and his Venus is in Aries (detriment). Beethovan's Venus in Capricorn disposed by Saturn in Leo (by Tyl's rectification) may remind us of the 5th Symphony, but is hardly what we would expect in one of the greatest of all musicians. In popular music we have Frank Sinatra's Venus in Capricorn disposed by Saturn in Cancer. Clearly, Venus alone is not going to tell us about sucess or failure in artistic endeavors.

Where else can we look? The best place is the 5th house, but I'm not even sure this is enough. None of Lehman's sources associated the 5th with music, but more with fun (and children obviously, but that is beside the point of our search.) Besides ale-houses and taverns (I'm not sure of the difference but Sinatra referred to himself as a "saloon singer") Lilly tells us the 5th is the house of pleasures and pastimes. Well that's what music is and in fact that is what art is. It is pleasureable, it appeals to the senses.

Using the 6:30 pm birth time, Cancer is on Lennon's fifth house (Placidus) ruled by the Moon in Aquarius in the 11th. Morinus tells us:


Quote:
"... a planet ruling one house but placed in another foretells at the very least a combination of the meanings or each house at some future time."


He also tells us:

Quote:
"And any house also has the same meaning by dint of the opposition itself, ..."


Now with the Moon not only ruling the 5th, but being placed in opposition to the 5th, we may combine the meanings of the two. The first thing that suggsests itself is popularity through 5th house things, i.e, pastimes (saloon singing?) or the more modern "creativity." THe Moon is also in a strong mixed mutual reception with Saturn, ruler of the 10th and 11th, so career and popularity. It is also interesting to note that perhaps what is Lennon's best known song Imagine would be ruled bythe Moon (imagination).

The Moon, I believe is also the ruler of all intoxicants. Being opposite the 5th this strongly suggests recreational drugs, and as Kirk noted above, Lennon was stoned a lot.


Quote:
" ... the opposition of a planet [i.e.e the house oppostite the one a planet is posited in] always indicates difficulty in attaining the good shown by that house while it promotes the evil of that house." -Morinus Book XXI Chapter V


The evil, of course is the heavy use of drugs. The Moon is not essentially strong in Aquarius. In fact she is peregrine, and therefore exemplifies the evil of the 5th house. Whether the Beatles or Lennon's popularity came easy or not is best left to those more familiar with the Beatles history than I am.

Venus does work her way in vit the Saturn - Jupiter conjunction that she disposits, and Saturn is the dispositor of the Moon. She is sextile Mercury, and the Moon is in a mutual reception by triplicity with Mercury in addition to being in square.

I think this shows the artistic component of Lennon's life. As I've said above, the value judgment as to whether his accomplishments are long lived or a passing fancy will be made by others.

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Annushka



Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 15
Location: Ukraine

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 8:30 am    Post subject: John Lennon Reply with quote

Tom, thank you a lot for such a detailed reply!
First I`d like to name the sourse where I`ve got that birth data from. It`s Steinbrecher Astrological Data Collection. And for I`ve also read some publications where this bith time was used I considered it for usable.
Well actually the point I was trying to illustrate with Lennon`s chart is that we rarely have a direct relation between strong planets and great success in life. Surely it`s a matter of taste when we say that Lennon`s music was great or not. As for me I`m also not a big fan of Beatles, but the fact that Lennon has three debilitated planets in his chart (the very mentioned Venus, Mars and Sun in Libra) but managed to become a celebrity and moreover a legend, a person who still influenses the people`s minds enven after his death. When you see it from the modern point of view, than it`s easy to explane. The very idea of working on your planets, developing your horoscope belongs to the psychological astrology. The traditional astrology sees it much more strictly. In every ancient sourse when they speak about success they mention strong planets. So there is a little contradiction...
Is there really a sextile there (Venus, Mercury)? The aspect is very unexact (Venus 3 degrees, Mercury 8 degrees), plus, this aspect is falling apart. Mercury who is faster has gone away from the exact aspect. I also doubt the possibility of reception between these two planets. It`s anyway very weak when we have a right aspect.
_________________
Best regards
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
###



Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 1380

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 11:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Well actually the point I was trying to illustrate with Lennon`s chart is that we rarely have a direct relation between strong planets and great success in life. ... the fact that Lennon has three debilitated planets in his chart (the very mentioned Venus, Mars and Sun in Libra) but managed to become a celebrity and moreover a legend, a person who still influenses the people`s minds enven after his death.

It does make a person wonder if the return to traditional astrology has over-played the essential dignities at the expense of other delineation methods. And then there is the question of which combination of Ptolemy/Lilly or Dorothean triplicities, and Egyptian or Ptolemy terms to use. And maybe, as I have mentioned before, debilitated planets can actually be quite strong – It’s just that they may bring the bad with the good. As a larger-than-life ‘cult’ figure he was murdered, after all. And then the drugs and pushy wife...

Of course it doesn’t matter what our personal opinion of him is – they’re just opinions. The fact is his name will be around a long time. That makes such an astrological investigation worthwhile.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3509
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 1:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
When you see it from the modern point of view, than it`s easy to explane. The very idea of working on your planets, developing your horoscope belongs to the psychological astrology.


I thought this is where we might be going. Sorry I can't agree with this at all. Modern astrology promotes flattery of the client and little else. The premise of this remark assumes that essential dignity is everything in the traditional reading. That is manifestly incorrect. We did not touch on Lennon's temperament or the significator of the manners, both of which play a major role in determining the kind of person is shown in the chart. We did it the modern way, with planets in signs and houses and aspects only.

A full traditional reading would include, by necessity, a discussion of the temperament and the significator of the manners. These would show us how the chart is expressed. There is nothing in modern astrology that is similar to this concept with the possible exception of Noel Tyl's idea of hemisphere emphasis, which doesn't come close to the traditional manner in depth and precision. We would also go into directions, progressions or other predictive techniqes to show how the life unfolds.

You said the modern pespective makes Lennon's success easy to explain, yet you didn't explain it beyond saying he worked on his planets. This is circular reasoning. If you work on your planets you succeed if you don't you fail therefore modern astrology works best. What if a person has a strong chart, i.e. lots of essential dignity? Does that person always succeed, or if not, do they have to deliberately "work against their planets" in order to fail? If they do work against their planets, why? Free will? We have to be able to do better than that or there is no point in this study at all.


Quote:
Is there really a sextile there (Venus, Mercury)? The aspect is very unexact (Venus 3 degrees, Mercury 8 degrees), plus, this aspect is falling apart.


Yes. Lilly gives an orb of 7 degrees to both Mercury ad Venus. Therefore each has a moiety of 3.5 and the distance between Mercury and Venus in Lennon's chart is a little more than 5 degrees. While five degrees may be beyond the taste of some, it isn't unreasonable.

Yes the aspect is separating as Mercury is moving a little faster than Venus on this date. However, no school of natal astrology that I am aware of claims that separating aspects are not aspects. Traditional astrology might treat them a bit differently than applying aspects, but moden astrology does not.


Quote:
I also doubt the possibility of reception between these two planets.


What is to doubt? Venus is in Virgo, a Mercury sign, and they are well within an acceptable orb (moiety really) for a sextile. There is reception.

Quote:
The traditional astrology sees it much more strictly. In every ancient sourse when they speak about success they mention strong planets. So there is a little contradiction...


There is always a problem when we read traditional texts from a modern viewpoint. The reader assumes that the perspective of the tradtional writer is pretty much the same as the perspective of the modern reader. This isn't true. The older texts do speak at length of planetary strength and weakness, but we have to be careful when reading the descriptions. When Lilly describes, say, a debilitated Saturn, he is describing Saturn, he is not describing the personality of the person with the debilitated Saturn. Modern astrology sees the entire chart as a reflection of the character and personality of the person. Traditional astrology gets most of that from temperament, significator of the manners, and the ASC and its Lord. A debilitated Saturn describes what Saturn rules. So if Saturn rules the 3rd it describes the native's siblings. If Saturn rules the 7th it describes the native's wife, etc. Therefore a perfectly wonderful native with a debiliated Saturn ruling the 3rd is a perfectly wonderful person with rotten siblings.

Rob Hand suggested that many of the older works are not so much textbooks (Lilly's is of course - Hand was referring to several of the Arab works), as they were some kind of study guide to be used with a teacher not as a stand alone work. Most American students and former students will understand that some are more like Cliff notes than an actual text, i.e. a short synopsis and explanation with the depth being left to discussions between the teacher and the student. We should not read everything in those works as absolutes. We should not read those works the way we would read a text written by a Noel Tyl or Stephen Forrest to name two. We should understand the differences before we level the cirticisms.

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3509
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 1:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
When you see it from the modern point of view, than it`s easy to explane. The very idea of working on your planets, developing your horoscope belongs to the psychological astrology.


I thought this is where we might be going. Sorry I can't agree with this at all. Modern astrology promotes flattery of the client and little else. The premise of this remark assumes that essential dignity is everything in the traditional reading. That is manifestly incorrect. We did not touch on Lennon's temperament or the significator of the manners, both of which play a major role in determining the kind of person is shown in the chart. We did it the modern way, with planets in signs and houses and aspects only.

A full traditional reading would include, by necessity, a discussion of the temperament and the significator of the manners. These would show us how the chart is expressed. There is nothing in modern astrology that is similar to this concept with the possible exception of Noel Tyl's idea of hemisphere emphasis, which doesn't come close to the traditional manner in depth and precision. We would also go into directions, progressions or other predictive techniqes to show how the life unfolds.

You said the modern pespective makes Lennon's success easy to explain, yet you didn't explain it beyond saying he worked on his planets. This is circular reasoning. If you work on your planets you succeed if you don't you fail therefore modern astrology works best. What if a person has a strong chart, i.e. lots of essential dignity? Does that person always succeed, or if not, do they have to deliberately "work against their planets" in order to fail? If they do work against their planets, why? Free will? We have to be able to do better than that or there is no point in this study at all.


Quote:
Is there really a sextile there (Venus, Mercury)? The aspect is very unexact (Venus 3 degrees, Mercury 8 degrees), plus, this aspect is falling apart.


Yes. Lilly gives an orb of 7 degrees to both Mercury ad Venus. Therefore each has a moiety of 3.5 and the distance between Mercury and Venus in Lennon's chart is a little more than 5 degrees. While five degrees may be beyond the taste of some, it isn't unreasonable.

Yes the aspect is separating as Mercury is moving a little faster than Venus on this date. However, no school of natal astrology that I am aware of claims that separating aspects are not aspects. Traditional astrology might treat them a bit differently than applying aspects, but moden astrology does not.


Quote:
I also doubt the possibility of reception between these two planets.


What is to doubt? Venus is in Virgo, a Mercury sign, and they are well within an acceptable orb (moiety really) for a sextile. There is reception.

Quote:
The traditional astrology sees it much more strictly. In every ancient sourse when they speak about success they mention strong planets. So there is a little contradiction...


There is always a problem when we read traditional texts from a modern viewpoint. The reader assumes that the perspective of the tradtional writer is pretty much the same as the perspective of the modern reader. This isn't true. The older texts do speak at length of planetary strength and weakness, but we have to be careful when reading the descriptions. When Lilly describes, say, a debilitated Saturn, he is describing Saturn, he is not describing the personality of the person with the debilitated Saturn. Modern astrology sees the entire chart as a reflection of the character and personality of the person. Traditional astrology gets most of that from temperament, significator of the manners, and the ASC and its Lord. A debilitated Saturn describes what Saturn rules. So if Saturn rules the 3rd it describes the native's siblings. If Saturn rules the 7th it describes the native's wife, etc. Therefore a perfectly wonderful native with a debiliated Saturn ruling the 3rd is a perfectly wonderful person with rotten siblings.

Rob Hand suggested that many of the older works are not so much textbooks (Lilly's is of course - Hand was referring to several of the Arab works), as they were some kind of study guide to be used with a teacher not as a stand alone work. Most American students and former students will understand that some are more like Cliff notes than an actual text, i.e. a short synopsis and explanation with the depth being left to discussions between the teacher and the student. We should not read everything in those works as absolutes. We should not read those works the way we would read a text written by a Noel Tyl or Stephen Forrest to name two. We should understand the differences before we level the cirticisms.

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
GR



Joined: 14 May 2005
Posts: 451
Location: USA

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The traditional astrology sees it much more strictly. In every ancient sourse when they speak about success they mention strong planets. So there is a little contradiction...


Usually, when these older text talk about a planet being 'strong', what is meant is whether the planet is angular(preferably) or succedent. A planet with good essential dignity is usually referred to as 'fortunate', though this also implies it is not afflicted by stuff like hostile aspects from malefics or combustion. So a planet that is 'fortunate and strong' is one that has much essential dignity, free from afflictions, and is angular.
_________________
Gabe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
granny_skot



Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 1635
Location: California, USA

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 7:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would also like to suggest you consider Lennons chart in conjunction with the group, the beatles, and by itself. Paul and Ringo both seemed to me to do better post beatles than did Lennon. He remains famous, but I dont recall him accomplishing much of note without his bandmates, some people do better in a group than alone. Fleetwood Mac is another example of this. Mick Fleetwood, without Stevie nicks or Lyndsey Buckingham or the McVees is hardly known, yet, the other bandmates seem to do fairly well on their own to one degree or another.

Okay just some things to consider. I realize others may disagree with me on this point.

Granny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sue



Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 945
Location: Australia

Posted: Mon Nov 13, 2006 8:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
He remains famous, but I dont recall him accomplishing much of note without his bandmates,


Only if you discount two of the biggest selling albums of all time that reached number one in both the UK and US and all of his others reaching the top 10. At least one more of his albums reached number one in the US. John Lennon had huge success after the Beatles. I am not particularly a fan one way or the other but I do enjoy some of his music and to say he was nothing without the Beatles is simply not true. At the time he was still alive he was as successful as Paul McCartney and had much more success than either of the other two Beatles.

Tom, you often mention the significator of manners along with temperament as being the essential ingredients to describe an individual. However, I rarely see significator of manners used in delineations or in the traditional texts. Who would you consider to be the main authorities on this?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
granny_skot



Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 1635
Location: California, USA

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

what albums are those? except for his beatlees work I've not heard of him doing much.

Certainly dont recall any songs that were hits without beatles.

Edit: looked up lennon stuff and the only thing I see that one would call a hit was "Woman", though as I had to look it up says something about the song I think. definitely did not do his best work alone, IMO. but I am rather biased where he is concerned.

if he were still among us I'm sure he'd cry all the way to the bank, just because I didn't like him... as my mother used to say.

Granny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3509
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 2:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Tom, you often mention the significator of manners along with temperament as being the essential ingredients to describe an individual. However, I rarely see significator of manners used in delineations or in the traditional texts. Who would you consider to be the main authorities on this?


Ptolemy. See Book Three Chapter 13 The Quality of the Soul (Robbins) or Book III Chapter 18 The Quality of the Mind (Ashmand). Also see CA Chapter 17 page 534 Of the Manners of the Native or Child:

Quote:
"We may not doubt, but that the manners and motions of the mind, and the greatest part of our principal human actions and events of life, do accompany, or are concomitant with, and acted according to the quality of the Temperature and inclinations; for the accidents of the Mind are twofold, some rational, others irrarional or more proper to the Sensitive power. - CA p. 534.


Cheers,

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sue



Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 945
Location: Australia

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 3:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, I have seen these references but I haven't seen it discussed very much, nor have I seen it put into practice very often. And it seems a bit too simplistic to me. I don't believe you can leave something as important as the quality of the soul down to temperament and significator of manners. There is still no real agreement on how to work out the temperament even if some of them are quite close. It seems that these things are supposed to convey the real essence of the person but, as I said, it just seems a little simplistic to me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
AlexMc



Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 55
Location: USA

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Annushka writes
Quote:
Is there really a sextile there (Venus, Mercury)? The aspect is very unexact (Venus 3 degrees, Mercury 8 degrees), plus, this aspect is falling apart. Mercury who is faster has gone away from the exact aspect.


Hi Annushka,

In order to properly answer your question about this sextile there are a few additional traditional techniques that need to be applied. I will be paraphrasing from an analysis of Lennon’s chart taught to me by Acelia McIvor (with her permission).

Traditional astrologers look to see if an aspect “perfects”. IOW, does the Mercury-Venus aspect come to a perfect sextile? Yes, it does, therefore Mercury has not “gone away from the exact aspect” as it might appear. Instead, the exact aspect has yet to occur.

In the days before Lennon was born, Mercury began slowing down (it is still extremely fast which is a plus for Lennon’s quick wit and intelligence) and Venus continued to speed up. The conditions for Venus to catch Mercury were in place when Lennon was born. By secondary progression, which is a traditional technique, within days after Lennon’s birth the sextile of ‘Mercury separating from Venus’ shifted to ‘Venus applying to Mercury’, as Venus then had more speed than Mercury, all the while remaining within traditional orb (Tom explained the importance of the orb moieties earlier). Progressed Venus catches progressed Mercury, thus perfecting the sextile, at 27Virgo-27Scorpio, corresponding to 1962 when John was 21 to 22 years of age, the year of the Beatles first hit, “Love Me Do”.

Even stronger than a progressed planet to a progressed planet is a progressed planet to a natal planet, especially from a luminary or angle. In 1957, when Lennon’s progressed Sun sextiled natal Venus (Sun’s dispositor) he formed the band “The Quarrymen” (very important milestone in his musical career again involved Venus). The Quarrymen mostly performed in Hamburg (Venus cadent). Over the next six years (while the progressed Sun traveled from its sextile to natal Venus forward to conjunct Mercury) Lennon added George, Paul, Ringo and changed the name to the Beatles. Beatlemania began (1963 and 1964 worldwide) with the progressed Sun (acclaim, angular) conjunct natal Mercury (angular) and progressed Venus entering Libra. In addition, the progressed ascendant was square natal Venus.

The rest is history – astrologically the Venus-Mercury sextile is powerfully configured in Lennon’s musical development every step of the way! Great success came when the prog ascendant and Sun illuminated the musical sextile planets (and because the natal Sun comes from a conjunction with the descendant in Venus’ sign). As has already been said, Venus is a key dispositor.

Earlier Papretis and Tom emphasized the importance, not just of the Mercury-Venus sextile and angularity, but also the reception. I would add the reception is extra good because when Mercury gives virtue to any planet in Virgo, it is the sign of both its domicile and exaltation. If you or anyone have questions about reception, there are good articles on this site.

When traditional astrologers say a natal planet is weak they mean weak in dignity, either essential and/or accidental. To be weak or lacking in essential dignity means lacking dignity in the eyes of the dominant culture. Lennon’s art and music was viewed as degenerate by the dominant culture (Venus in fall, fallen from its exalted position in Pisces, thus many view him with disdain). For example, compare to Celine Dion’s popular clean cut music. Dion has Venus in Pisces. Artistically, she never went against the grain. Venus is also a significator of marriage. Compare Lennon’s marriages to Dion’s. He was regularly unfaithful to both of his wives and they experimented with drugs together (lacks dignity in the eyes of the world). Dion is seen as devoted, faithful and drug free (Venus has essential dignity and society’s approval). The concept is that if the world is against your ideas then it is difficult to be successful (without other aspects). It does not necessarily mean weak in talent or creativity, just weak in society’s approval (dignity).

Astrologically, artistic talent, fame and money are three different things. Many talented artists may never get recognition or earn a living through their art (the chart will show which). Lennon’s chart happens to have all three traditional indicators of talent, fame and fortune - I will try to get back to these when I have more time. ITMT, I hope this helps clarify some of the traditional perspective.

Papretis writes
Quote:
What happens when the dispositor receives a planet in detriment or fall (like Lennon's Venus in Virgo)? Does debilitation get cancelled, like Indian astrologers say, or does the debilitated planet use the virtue it has got for misbehaving more efficiently, or does the dispositor suffer, or something else?


I wonder if Lennon’s televised ‘bed-ins for peace’ qualify for “misbehaving more efficiently”. Lala Happy They have my vote – they led to “Give Peace a Chance” becoming a world wide anthem. Very efficient misbehaving. Thumbs up

Also, I am not aware that the debilitation gets cancelled, nor that the dispositor suffers, however Deb says,
Quote:
A planet in the exaltation of another may feel overwhelmed by their dispositor, or through contact with them may experience a personally exalted state.
http://www.skyscript.co.uk/dig6.html


Regards,
AlexMc
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3509
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Yes, I have seen these references but I haven't seen it discussed very much, nor have I seen it put into practice very often.


I believe Gadbury did it when he wrote about the nativity of King Charles I and back in my head I have Cardan rattling around as using this, but I cannot recall where I would have read that. It is true it isn't used often, but that shouldn't disqualify its value.

Quote:
I don't believe you can leave something as important as the quality of the soul down to temperament and significator of manners.


"Soul" is Robbins word. "Mind" was Ashmand's word. There is a link there and maybe Ptolemy had yet another concept in mind. I don't know any ancient Greek so I can't say. Perhaps "character" is a closer contemporary English word. When I read Ptolemey that is the word that comes to my mind.

Quote:
There is still no real agreement on how to work out the temperament even if some of them are quite close.


That's correct, but there are lots of things in traditional astrology that are not unanimously agreed upon. I wonder if the lack of agreement isn't really closer to a lack of full understanding of what these earlier astrologers were trying to do (not by you, but by all of us). I agree with you; I think they are trying to describe the essence of a person, but even that definition falls short.

Quote:
It seems that these things are supposed to convey the real essence of the person but, as I said, it just seems a little simplistic to me.


It isn't simple. As for temperament the add 'em up style is simple, but in my opinion it isn't as revealing. Frawely's modification of Lilly is, I think, better, but it isn't easy much less simple. And there are other methods.

Unless there is a planet in the first house close to the ASC or a planet in tight aspect to both Mercury and the Moon, determining the significator of the manners can be quite difficult.

Using Fawley's method for Lennon I get choleric temperament with some melancholy. Using Dorian Greenbaum's I get an even split of Choleric and melancholic. So hard driving and persistant. There are no planets in the first house or any planet tightly aspecting both Mercury and the Moon, so we have to determine which planets most engage Mercury and the Moon. There are several candidates, so the choice is subjective, but I like the Jupiter Saturn conjunction as they are in the exaltation of the Moon and in aspect to Mercury, therefore they impact the rational and irrational (imaginative) mind, and probably more than any other planet or planets.

Lennon was not the militaristic or even athletic kind of choleric. His body type is more sanguine. But with Mars (ASC ruler and rule of the choleric temperament) in Libra and the significators of the manners in Taurus, his choice of a Venus Career Capricorn on the MC is not indicative of music, and whether we like his music or not, there is no question that he was a musician by profession.

Some of Ptolemy's words when Jupiter and Saturn rule the manners or soul (I'm cherry picking, I admit it) are: noble minded, helpful, critical, fond of possessions, of good intentions, philosophical, superstitious, frequenters of shrines, hiding within doors. Now there are others in that selection that obviously don't fit. Lennon was not "mad" or "unambitious." But Ptolemy is trying to convey an overall idea not just a list of characteristics. At least I think he is.

Also this is rough work. We are not really into particulars with the nativity at this stage. This is a broad overview. No one is the same way about anything 100% of the time, so these descriptions are intended to be general and should be used that way. We can get into particulars, say his drug use, later on in the delineation.

Without going into any detail I think this does a rather nice job of explaining the man and perhaps the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction being the significators of the manners explains or partly expains his connection to a generation.

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Papretis



Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 346
Location: Finland

Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AlexMC and Tom, thanks for your comments. I think this has evolved a fine discussion about traditional natal methods.

Quote:
When traditional astrologers say a natal planet is weak they mean weak in dignity, either essential and/or accidental. To be weak or lacking in essential dignity means lacking dignity in the eyes of the dominant culture. Lennon’s art and music was viewed as degenerate by the dominant culture (Venus in fall, fallen from its exalted position in Pisces, thus many view him with disdain). For example, compare to Celine Dion’s popular clean cut music. Dion has Venus in Pisces. Artistically, she never went against the grain. Venus is also a significator of marriage. Compare Lennon’s marriages to Dion’s. He was regularly unfaithful to both of his wives and they experimented with drugs together (lacks dignity in the eyes of the world). Dion is seen as devoted, faithful and drug free (Venus has essential dignity and society’s approval). The concept is that if the world is against your ideas then it is difficult to be successful (without other aspects). It does not necessarily mean weak in talent or creativity, just weak in society’s approval (dignity).


This is how I see it too. One must remember that those ancient rules / concepts are based on a different culture and values than our own. Now we live a time of individuality and in a certain sense the more you differ from the prevalent culture, the more you're admired, because that means that you are a "self-actualised individual" and not a "mass person". But in the past to be faithful to your social group, to your family and country and to put the needs of the group you belong to first, was a good and admirable thing to do (in Asian countries it’s mostly still so).

The debilitated Venus in Lennon’s chart probably describes among other things his substance abuse, unfaithfulness, jealousy – and Venus rules the 7th house, so it tells us also about his wife, and Yoko Ono was not accepted by his environment at all.

The fact that Lennon’s Ascendant ruler is in the 7th house in detriment (I use whole sign houses in topical matters and quadrants in evaluating strength) tells about his depedency on Yoko Ono and for me it’s one of the things that testify the validity of the birth time. Also the Sun is in fall in Venus’ sign – both purely masculine planets are debilitated in this chart, on mercy of Venus, the 7th ruler – but Venus doesn’t receive them, she doesn’t save them! Or she doesn’t give and commit her virtue, nature and disposition to them. And Saturn, the exaltation ruler, doesn’t receive them either.

This is what Ibn Ezra says about Venus in the Beginning of Wisdom:
Quote:
“…of human nature [she denotes] cleanliness, friendship, laughter, playfulness, merriment, dance, pleasant talk, love, adultery, playing dice, generosity, excessive lust for everything, false testimony, tendency towards drunkenness, natural and unnatural sexual intercourse, love for children, fondness of the marketplace, and in general love of justice and of places of worship. Of the trades [she denotes working with] anything that is dyed and in sewing, She indicates all eating and drinking, the mother, daughters, and the younger sister.”


An Lilly says in CA I, Chapter XII:
Quote:
“[MANNERS AND QUALITY WHEN MIRTH, WELL PLACED]. She signifies a quiet man, not given to Law, Quarrel, or Wrangling, not Vitlous, Pleasant, Neat and Spruce, loving Mirth in his words and actions, cleanly in Apparel, rather Drinking much then Gluttonous, prone to Venery, oft entangles in Love-matters, Zealous in the affections, Musical, delighting in Baths, and all honesty merry Meetings, of Maskes and Stage-Players, easie of Belief, and not given to Labour, of take any Pains, a Company-keeper, Cheerful, nothing Mistrustful, a right vertuous Man or Woman, oft had in some Jealousie, yet no cause for it.

[When ill.] The he is Riotous, Expensive, wholly given to Loosenesse and Lewd companies of Women, nothing regarding his Reputation, coveting unlawful Beds, Incestuous, an Adulterer, Fennatical, a meer Skip-jack, of no Faith, no Repute, no Credit, spending his Means in Ale-houses, Taverns, and amongst Scandalous, Loose people; a meen Lazy companion, nothing careful of the things of this Life, of any thing Religious; a meer Atheist and natural man.


So I think Lennon’s Venus was debilitated indeed, but Mercury helped him to make art and music from all that by reception. Lennon has three debilitated planets in his chart - he was a talented and successful musician, but was his life generally happy or balanced in the traditional moral / religious sense - no, I don't think so.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
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