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

Sign boundary query

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Mr Stellium



Joined: 14 Jul 2008
Posts: 8

Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2009 10:35 am    Post subject: Sign boundary query Reply with quote

I came across the following quote from Bernadette Brady in a 1997 paper on castle besiegement (to predict contests):
Note: A zodiac sign is considered to be from 1 to 30 degrees. Thus a planet is not in a particular zodiac sign until it has reached 1 degree 00” of that sign. Thus Jupiter at 00 15’of Capricorn would be considered as 30 degrees 15’ Sagittarius and thereby still in rulership.
Prior to reading this I always considered the boundary to be "black and white" - i.e when a plant crosses 0.00 into the "new" sign then that is considered to be the planets sign. This is of particular interest to me as I have two planets in such a situation (Sun 0.27 Aquarius, Mars 0.40 Taurus). What do members of the forum consider as the sign boundary? Is there a source such as Bonatti or Valens?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yuzuru



Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 1392

Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2009 11:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bernadette Brady is a modern astrologer who uses traditional astrology, as you can see her comment that traditional astrology is based on "right wing" thinking... Specially in writings from that time, I would not follow to the letter what she said about the tradition, many waters have passed the bridge since then.

A Zodiacal sign is NOT considered from 1 to 30. It is considered, traditionally from first degree to 30th degree, what may be the source of confusion. There were several discussion on the topic very recently, you can see the forum archives.

So the first degree of Aries would be from 0d 0m 01s to 1d (including).

There are sources that say that a planet in the last degree of a sign and in the first degree of another are afflicted, weak, etc. But affliction is very different to say that "they are still in Sagitarius". This is modern thinking that says that sign boundaries have "orbs", mixed with traditional sources.

A planet is either in a sign or in another. If a planet in the first degree was still in the previous sign, the ancients could easily have changed the boundaries to fix this!
_________________
Meu blog de astrologia (em portugues) http://yuzuru.wordpress.com
My blog of astrology (in english) http://episthemologie.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
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