5
Konrad wrote:I use your second option, and I'm not sure anyone else does.
sidereal pisces is ruled by mars- this is like saying John who is a male will be called Suzy who would be addressed as "he".

In this case, it would be worthwhile re-analyizing the chart while ignoring signs altogether and just go by : Mars in 7th house squared by Saturn from 10th.
If this gives you the same analysis as a sidereal pisces mars in 7th squared by Saturn in sidereal Gemini in 10th, then your analysis technique is more planet, house and aspect driven.

There is a version of chart analysis like this in the system of Lal Kitab.
Draw the chart as usual,place the planets in them and then erase the signs and alot aries to ascendant and so on.

PD

6
pankajdubey wrote:
Konrad wrote:I use your second option, and I'm not sure anyone else does.
sidereal pisces is ruled by mars- this is like saying John who is a male will be called Suzy who would be addressed as "he".
Not if you think the assignation of sign rulership and sign quality is derived from the position of the Tropical Cross, which I believe it is. I have no problem seeing Aries as being managed by Venus since I believe the planets preceded the signs and are therefore not wedded to them. So really, if you take your own methodology and try to shoe-horn mine into it, it is going to lead to an illogical state of affairs. I'm not doing that though.

7
Konrad wrote:
Not if you think the assignation of sign rulership and sign quality is derived from the position of the Tropical Cross, which I believe it is. I have no problem seeing Aries as being managed by Venus since I believe the planets preceded the signs and are therefore not wedded to them. So really, if you take your own methodology and try to shoe-horn mine into it, it is going to lead to an illogical state of affairs. I'm not doing that though.
Intriguing. So you take the line that the sidereal rulerships need to relate to the shifting tropical cross?

So since sidereal Pisces is now the the sign that currently contains the equinox it is assigned a Mars rulership? Does your domicile rulership scheme relate to the following?

Pisces=Mars
Aries=Venus
Taurus=Mercury
Gemini=Moon
Cancer=Sun
Leo=Mercury
Virgo=Venus
Libra=Mars
Scorpio=Jupiter
Sagittarius=Saturn
Capricorn=Saturn
Aquarius=Jupiter

This is arrangement of rulerships is obviously weird looking to most astrologers but I must concede it does have its own internal logic. For example, it does seem most likely that the exaltations originally derive from a combination of tropical/seasonal criteria combined with sidereal signs:

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/exaltations.html

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

8
Exactly right, Mark. It was in fact the idea of the Exaltations that drove me to try and reason why Sidereal Leo would be ruled by the Sun, and I couldn't answer that question to myself, so I experimented and I am pleased with the results. I still use the bounds in the Sidereal measurement, so Venus rules the first 12 degrees of Pisces and so on, and I am thinking through the triplicities at the moment.

EDIT: I'd like to add that it was Rumen Kolev who first got me thinking along those lines with the exaltations, the domiciles then seemed like the next logical step for me.

9
Konrard wrote:
EDIT: I'd like to add that it was Rumen Kolev who first got me thinking along those lines with the exaltations, the domiciles then seemed like the next logical step for me.
Ok. But I doubt Kolev developed this idea that the the exaltations derived from seasonal alignments himself. Scholars have supported this idea for some time. For example, Ulla Koch-Westenholz, in her book Mesopotamian astrology (1995).

Does Kolev go as far as to suggest new sidereal signs the planets exalt in?

I also wondered how you viewed cardinal, mutable and fixed signs in your approach? Do you see these as tied into seasons or do you view these associations as separate from seasonal considerations?

It occurs to me that despite the different sign names your results are more likely to have common ground with tropicalists than other siderealists since so much of tropical Aries is now in sidereal Pisces. So the domicile rulers you use will often be the same as that used by tropicalists.

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

10
Mark wrote:Konrard wrote:
EDIT: I'd like to add that it was Rumen Kolev who first got me thinking along those lines with the exaltations, the domiciles then seemed like the next logical step for me.
Ok. But I doubt Kolev developed this idea that the the exaltations derived from seasonal alignments himself. Scholars have supported this idea for some time. For example, Ulla Koch-Westenholz, in her book Mesopotamian astrology (1995).

Does Kolev go as far as to suggest new sidereal signs the planets exalt in?

I also wondered how you viewed cardinal, mutable and fixed signs in your approach? Do you see these as tied into seasons or do you view these associations as separate from seasonal considerations?

Mark
No, I don't suggest that Rumen Kolev did invent this idea, merely that it was his influence that initiated it in me. I'm not entirely sure what he is doing in his own practice at this time, so I wouldn't like to speak for him.

Tentatively, I view them as seasonal, but I'm not certain on that, I really need to experiment more. Again, I can't justify them being tied to the constellations, though I am aware that means little outside of my own head. I'm open to whatever the case ends up being.
It occurs to me that despite the different sign names your results are more likely to have common ground with tropicalists than other siderealists since so much of tropical Aries is now in sidereal Pisces. So the domicile rulers you use will often be the same as that used by tropicalists.
Yes, this occured to me too though the time-lords will be different when releasing the Hyleg. It was through the lord of the year via the profected ASC that I conducted my most stringent testing as it is its ingresses, transits and stationings/phases that time events in the life of a person.

11
konrad - that is a pretty fascinating and unusual approach!

pankajdubey - i don't know if the cosmobiologists ignore signs, but they don't appear to give them the same importance found in most other astrological circles. i don't recall reading anything about planets ruling signs.. aspect relationships in combination with midpoint pictures are of primary importance in this particular school of astro-thought.

12
Hi James,
pankajdubey - i don't know if the cosmobiologists ignore signs, but they don't appear to give them the same importance found in most other astrological circles. i don't recall reading anything about planets ruling signs.. aspect relationships in combination with midpoint pictures are of primary importance in this particular school of astro-thought.
I didn't see Pankajdubey explicitly mention Cosmobiology here. But I know it interests you a lot!

It seems that Alfred Witte and his so called Hamburg school were the originators of the idea of midpoints which was later repackaged as Cosmo-Biology by Ebertin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamburg_Sc ... _Astrology

Personally, I would like to keep the focus here on Konrad's rulership scheme which looks genuinely unique. We can discuss cosmobiology on the general form.

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