if you read ben dykes book 2 of persian nativities you will keep bumping into this idea presented by abu bakr.. umar al-tabari might have mentioned it too in the first part of this volume 2 book, but i am on page 276 and beyond the shorter section on umar al-tabari's work. this idea has been mentioned quite a bit in this particular book.

-giving one year to every degree sure seems like use of the idea "one degree= one year" or general solar arc direction theory. comments?

If you look up the word tasyir in Ben Dykes' Arabic/Pahlavi volcabulary (http://bendykes.com/reviews/arabicvocab.pdf), you will see:

tasyir (Lat.attazir), ?setting out, dispatch,? the Arabic term
for primary directions or releasing, which translates the Gr.aphesis. From the Ar.sayir, ?to set out, get going, march.?

So no, nothing to do with Solar Arc Directions. Nice try though.

thanks konrad. nice to see you back at skyscript.

i have had the conversation with martin on tasyir here before and actually we had a thread on it some time ago.. nothing in the quotes i have read countless times in volume 2 along the very same lines as the quote i have given here give further descriptions which include the word tasyir.. nice try on your part, lol!

A degree for a year is one of the most ancient ideas in horoscopic astrology, though the degrees are typically equatorial (in right ascension) rather than ecliptical (in the zodiac). The word used for 'equatorial degree' in Greek can even mean 'year' (the basic meaning is just 'time'). The idea is then repeated again and again in various contexts and by various authors, Greek, Arabic and Latin.

Solar arcs (which are not, strictly speaking, based on a degree for a year!) go back to Kepler and no further.

james_m wrote:thanks konrad. nice to see you back at skyscript.

i have had the conversation with martin on tasyir here before and actually we had a thread on it some time ago.. nothing in the quotes i have read countless times in volume 2 along the very same lines as the quote i have given here give further descriptions which include the word tasyir.. nice try on your part, lol!

I'm sorry, James, I am not understanding what point you are trying to make. The section on p276 talks of various combinations of planets meeting each other by tasyir producing a marriage for the native. If you know of any other author who speaks of Solar Arc directions at or before Abu Bakr's time then post the references. Otherwise even if tasyir is not explicitly stated, it is safe to assume 'degree for a year' is indicative of Primary Directions or at least Circumambulations, and not a technique which did not exist at that time and one which really makes no sense.

Martin Gansten wrote:Solar arcs (which are not, strictly speaking, based on a degree for a year!) go back to Kepler and no further.

. . . but are nevertheless referring to the equator, are they not?

Do you know, who 'invented' the ecliptical solar arc direction or who was the first to use it - supposedly some English of the late 19th century?

thanks for sharing your perspective martin. that is interesting!

konrad, here is where i am going with this. 'one degree per year' reminds me of 'one sign per year' - profections. if astrologers of the past decided there was some relevance in 'one sign per year' then making a jump to 'one degree per year' isn't too difficult for me to grasp. i don't really care if a person thinks one degree or the solar arc of the sun per year is the method to use. i enjoy knowing the history on this too which martin seems well versed in. i don't know if any astrologers from the past tried this, but reading the words verbatim off ben dykes books makes me think about this.

primary directions are more complicated then profections, or moving the whole chart one degree per year.. they share something in common in being all 'symbolic' means of attempting to predict the future.

james_m wrote:thanks for sharing your perspective martin. that is interesting!

konrad, here is where i am going with this. 'one degree per year' reminds me of 'one sign per year' - profections. if astrologers of the past decided there was some relevance in 'one sign per year' then making a jump to 'one degree per year' isn't too difficult for me to grasp. i don't really care if a person thinks one degree or the solar arc of the sun per year is the method to use. i enjoy knowing the history on this too which martin seems well versed in. i don't know if any astrologers from the past tried this, but reading the words verbatim off ben dykes books makes me think about this.

primary directions are more complicated then profections, or moving the whole chart one degree per year.. they share something in common in being all 'symbolic' means of attempting to predict the future.

They are also based upon units of time in the Sumerian calendar. I am running out now, but look up the gesh and beru to see Primary Directions and Profections respectively.

johannes susato wrote:

Martin Gansten wrote:Solar arcs (which are not, strictly speaking, based on a degree for a year!) go back to Kepler and no further.

. . . but are nevertheless referring to the equator, are they not?

Not as far as I recall; but I am no expert on Kepler.

Do you know, who 'invented' the ecliptical solar arc direction or who was the first to use it - supposedly some English of the late 19th century?

I'm afraid I don't, off-hand. These topics have been discussed before on Skyscript, though, so you may find something in the archives.

Hello (esp. to james_m):

The following may be not be directly related to the original discussion but I think it merits some discussion. It is actually a small thing that I prepared for my students on the topic of advancing the natal chart to get a glimpse of the native?s future.

If we look to the Hellenistic and Medieval sources, there are basically three types of ?advancing? a natal chart in order to make future predictions:

1. Advancing from planet to planet.
2. Advancing from sign to sign.
3. Advancing from degree to degree.

Each method has its own idiosyncrasies and also its own method of analysis. In each method, we need to know the starting planet or sign or degree and the jumping pattern. Then, we have to assign the time unit for each jump of the planet or sign or degree.

1. Advancing from planet to planet
The most famous medieval method seemed to be the Firdaria. Planet you start with = the luminary of the sect. Jumping pattern = Chaldean order. Major time unit is unequal given by the planet itself which has their own unique numbers e.g. Sun = 10, Moon = 9, Mercury = 13, ? in years (1 year = 365.25 days).

Another method is the Decennials. Planet you start with = the planet that first rises in the east following birth (usually, not always). Jumping pattern = the following planet in the order of the zodiac of the natal chart (because these planets will take turn in rising in the east through diurnal motion). Major time unit is equal i.e. 129 months in years or 10 years and 9 months per planet (1 year = 360 days).

In both cases, I am skipping the second level periods.

We could actually list out other planet-planet jump techniques that fall under this category.

2. Advancing from sign to sign.
The most famous method in both Hellenistic and Medieval is the Profection. Sign you start with = usually sign of the ascendant. Jumping pattern = signs following the zodiac in the natal chart (because these signs will take turn in rising in the east through diurnal motion). Major time unit is equal i.e. usually one sign per year.

3. Advancing from degree to degree.
The most famous method is the circumambulation or primary direction. Degree you start with = usually degree of the ascendant. Jumping pattern = the degrees following the zodiac in the natal chart (because these degrees will take turn in rising in the east through diurnal motion). Time unit = one equatorial degree is equal to one year (not ecliptical degree!!!).

Observe that I have made the above categories according to the way that the jumping or advancement is made (planet to planet, sign to sign and degree to degree). All other advancing methods seem to fall into one of the above categories.

I suspect that the ancients have set out (may be not so clearly) as to the reason for these ?symmetries?. Perhaps the jumping from planet to planet sets the general themes and it is made more specific by jumping from sign to sign and degree to degree. Or perhaps it is the other way round! One can?t help thinking that these methods have a rhythm of its own i.e. there are different sets of rules in interpreting each of the above advancing methods and they tell about different things in a native's life.

I will outline the way that I do this:

1. Advancing from planet to planet:

Taking Firdaria or decennial as an example, I don?t think that we should consider the placement of the planet itself in the natal chart as being the primary indicator of the times governed by the planet and empiricial studies seem to bear this out. Imagine that sun is the indicator of the time period (the first ten years of a day born child in Firdaria method). If sun is in bad condition, it doesn?t really mean that life would be difficult for the native (at least not directly). I would look into the planets that aspects (together with planets in the same sign of the sun) and their receptions and give them priority in delineating the times governed by the sun.

2. Advancing from sign to sign:

Taking profection of the ascendant as an example: in this case I would look into the conditions of the profected sign, planets in the profected sign as well as the domicile ruler of the profected sign.

3. Advancing from degree to degree:

Taking primary direction (or circumambulation) as example: in this case I would look into the conditions of the advanced degree, planets in the degree, planets that aspect the advanced degree as well as the term/bound ruler of the advanced degree.


We see that the ancients did not look (at least not that much) into the sign (or domicile ruler) of the advanced degree ? they looked into the term/bound ruler instead, maybe because the term/bound ruler is closer to ?degree? ruler. But when they advance sign to sign, then naturally they looked into the sign (domicile) ruler. The Persians even had specific names for them: the advanced sign ruler = salkhudhah (Lord of the Year) and the advanced term/bound ruler of the advanced degree = jharbhaktar (divisor, algebuthar).

What I am trying to point out here is that the three jumping methods have different methods of delineations (and they seemed to bear out in practice).

The Hellenistic and medieval (esp. the Persian arabs) somehow combined all advancing methods above into a wholistic reading of the derived or renewed chart.

The medieval arab astrologers seemed to favour Firdaria (in the planet to planet advancing method), profection of the ascendant sign (in the sign to sign advancing method) and equatorial degree method i.e. primary direction (in degree to degree advancing method). They took the Firdaria planet of the year in question, the salkhudhah (the lord of the year) and the jharbhaktar and they looked at their conditions in the renewed chart (i.e. the solar return chart). So, they took each method of the above three advancing methods and marry them with the annual solar return chart. We could say that they were trying to find the workings of all of the three different advancing methods in the solar return chart.
Lastly, we have the hits methods (transits, eclipse hits, etc.) for which they consider as being the last in the hierarchy of prediction.

Now, giving one year to one degree in Solar Arc technique:
This is a modern technique and quite famous among modern astrologers because it is easy to do! The one degree = one year is used as space to time conversion which is also used by the ancients. However, they would say one equatorial degree = one year.
The solar arc technique cannot be categorized as being one of the three advancing methods mentioned above. If we say that it belongs to degree to degree advancing method, no ancient astrologers advanced degrees by ecliptical degrees. In fact, if we look at all of the above three jumping techniques, they are all related to the diurnal motion (directly or indirectly). Why diurnal motion? Because the effects of the planet or sign or degree will only come to the native when these points ?touch? the ascendant (which is the most personal point of the native), through the diurnal motion which is viewed as the way that destiny reaches the native.

Intriguing, astrojin!

I like the way you organized the techniques. It's really orderly.


"I don?t think that we should consider the placement of the planet itself in the natal chart as being the primary indicator of the times governed by the planet..."

Much like how if we were to use a planet to signify a person, for that specific interpretation the planet "loses" many of its significations, except those used to describe the individual.

astrojin wrote:Hello (esp. to james_m):

The following may be not be directly related to the original discussion but I think it merits some discussion. It is actually a small thing that I prepared for my students on the topic of advancing the natal chart to get a glimpse of the native?s future.

thanks astrojin.

your posts are always a joy to read! i like how you've created a cohesive system for these traditional predictive techniques that seem to be the focus of so many today who want to practice traditional astrology.

it would be great to see it put into practice and perhaps some astrologers do apply a similar system that you advocate here, but usually what i see is only a part of the system devoid of primary directions. the trad astrologers want to lay claim to the technique of primary directions but they don't want to make any predictions based on them publicly. perhaps they are worried about just how well they understand them. that's my impression at this point.

i would like to ask you about a few ideas you've mentioned here.. to say the reason solar arcs are popular is becuase they are easy to use would be like saying traditional astrology is easy to use because the ''modern'' software is easy to use.. i just don't think it is based on that so much as it is based on the viewpoint of the astrologers using any of these techniques - new or old - that they have merit. perhaps i misunderstood you here and if so please elaborate - thanks!

i see no fundamental difference between the arbitrary methods of either profections - sign per year - and solar arc - 1 approx zodiac degree per year.. they are both symbolic methods of making a prediction on the future that have a degree of abstraction to them that i think are very similar.. you mention all these methods including profections having a connection to the diurnal motion directly or indirectly.. i don't see that.. can you explain? how do they have some type of connection to the diurnal motion while the solar arc directions don't?

while is it true primary directions are based on the diurnal motion which is an astronomical 'reality' as opposed to being purely 'symbolic' i don't think one can say the same about terms, bounds, firdaria, decennials and etc.. these predictive techniques and tools may have merit, but they do not have the same direct connection to astronomy that goes with primary directions.. for this reason i continue to believe primary directions are in a category of there own, but i note the great variety of options for arriving at a definitive conclusion on the use of them as i was pointing out on the royal baby thread from a few days ago. until traditional astrologers make use of them in a more public context by making predictions into the future i mostly see traditional astrologers giving lip service to their value and little more..

thanks for your comments astrojin. it is always great to see you post here at skyscript and i really appreciate how you have explained a system of prediction using traditional astrological methods. i have printed it for future reference!

astrojin wrote:If we look to the Hellenistic and Medieval sources, there are basically three types of ?advancing? a natal chart in order to make future predictions:

1. Advancing from planet to planet.
2. Advancing from sign to sign.
3. Advancing from degree to degree.

astrojin wrote:3. Advancing from degree to degree.
The most famous method is the circumambulation or primary direction. Degree you start with = usually degree of the ascendant. Jumping pattern = the degrees following the zodiac in the natal chart (because these degrees will take turn in rising in the east through diurnal motion). Time unit = one equatorial degree is equal to one year (not ecliptical degree!!!).

astrojin wrote:Now, giving one year to one degree in Solar Arc technique:
This is a modern technique and quite famous among modern astrologers because it is easy to do!...

astrojin wrote:In fact, if we look at all of the above three jumping techniques, they are all related to the diurnal motion (directly or indirectly). Why diurnal motion? Because the effects of the planet or sign or degree will only come to the native when these points ?touch? the ascendant (which is the most personal point of the native), through the diurnal motion which is viewed as the way that destiny reaches the native.