16
Deb wrote:
I took the implication from this comment. After talking about Ptolemy's views you say:
Mark wrote:
This point seems to be quite explicit in James Holden?s recent translation of Rhetorius were there are numerous references to the superiority of an oriental Mercury. Then there are Hellenistic techniques like spearbearing where it seems only an oriental Mercury in a day chart would seem appropriate for this supportive role. An occidental Mercury rising after the Sun could never fulfil that role. Although it could be a spearbearer for the Moon in a night chart.

Still, in astrology there are always differing views. For example, Paulus Alexandrinus seems to prefer a vespertine phase for both inferior planets.
I did omit three important words in my reference to Rhetorius which should have ended my sentence i.e. 'in a day chart'. The comment about Paulus Alexandrinus was a bit unguarded as it was influenced by a comment by Joseph Crane in his book. In reality the ideas of Paulus contain complex astronomical awareness of planetary phases clearly built on the astronomical ideas received from Ptolemy. His ideas are quite complex and such statements probably do not do him any justice. Moreover, reading your post above I can see the issue is quite different to the way it is typically discussed by traditional authors.

Also it could be argued that sect is less important for Mercury because of its common nature. In his short bookelet on planetary sect Robert Hand expresses the view several times that Mercury does not appear to be strongly influenced by sect. Many traditional sources focus on the nature of Mercury changing according to its aspectual connections and that of its dispositor.

I am just going to have to be patient and await the appearance of your book. It should help clear away lots of mental cobwebs and restore planetary phase to its important place in traditional astrology :lala

Any idea when your book might be appearing next year?

Mark
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

17
Any idea when your book might be appearing next year?
Hi Mark

I just did a horary to answer that question, and based on Jupiter's applying sextile to the MC I would say in 0.44 degrees :)

(I went with that because MC-ruler Mercury looks completely stuffed - in fact, I almost wish I hadn't seen the chart now)

18
worrying indeed !
mercury combust in a watery sign and conjunct south node. Moon recently eclipsed and now Void.
Mars in a Nodal degree and saturn in mercury sign.
Too much of mental karmic intensity.
Take care

PD

19
Oh no - I hadn't even noticed Mercury was eclipsed and now void. I'm tempted to scrap the whole idea ...
I'm just hoping that the horary wasn't very radical - when I first worked out the timing it pointed to ten past 8 last Tuesday morning (but then I remembered that we're supposed to mix discretion with art, so I decided to go back to my original estimate of sometime soon (hopefully) after the New Year (if I'm lucky) (and don't keep wasting time writing silly and completely unnecessary, off-topic posts in this forum).

Cheers PD!

20
Thomas Jefferson and Bill Clinton are regarded as the most intelligent Presidents to occupy the White House - both have Mercury Oriental in a diurnal nativity greater than 20 degrees from the sun. Jefferson has Mercury in Pisces in bounds of Mars. Mercury is partile sextile Uranus.
Clinton has Mercury in Leo sextile Mars within a degree.

I have compiled a list of Mercury's position relative to the Sun for all 43 Presidents here: http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5446
What would be the reasoning behind wanting it 20 degrees or more? Aren't the Sun's beams 17 degrees (according to Lilly anyway)? I say this as someone with oriental diurnal Mercury 18 degrees from Sun. :D