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

profections from the Lots
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Levente Laszlo



Joined: 03 Nov 2006
Posts: 169
Location: Budapest, Hungary

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2018 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Martin Gansten wrote:
I think that may be overstating the difference between Ptolemy and the others, as he unambiguously uses the conventional terminology of the places (the 11th is the Good Daemon, the 9th is the God) (...)

I still don't think he's introducing a topical system, at least not for this chapter on length of life calculations. Yet it's true that the traditional place names are being used by him, which is basically the same approach as Firmicus's, as our Petosiris has pointed out.

petosiris wrote:
Valens also uses the same terminology for Porphyry houses in Book III and for equal houses in Book IX as he does for whole signs.

I reckon you mean the "Egyptian" terminology like "Good Daemon", "God" etc., but then your statement isn't wholly correct. Valens 3.2.16 associates the 2nd "Porphyry house" with the succedent of the ascendant and Goddess (which is the diameter of God), whereas the power of the 11th "Porphyry house" is rightly associated with Good Daemon. Unfortunately, there's only one extant manuscript of this passage, which is also rather corrupt in some places, so I don't think we can know at the moment if the passage is genuine or there's some muddling here.

petosiris wrote:
There is something very strange about Nechepso and Petosiris. They constantly talk and emphasize places and configurations by sign, but despite that they are the originators of ray-casting length of life, which obviously requires degrees. Why are they working with degrees, but not using or emphasizing them in this case is probably in favor of the theory that the Lots were originally places.

I warmly welcome the recognition of this strange phenomenon, which is exactly what I've been considering for a while. To add more flavor: συναφή and ἀπόρροια, two obviously degree-based concepts, also go back to Nechepso-Petosiris. But even if one perceives a sort of contradiction here, it's easily explained by the fact that the various passages or concepts attributed to this legendary duo weren't necessarily developed by the very same authors, as any kind of eponymous attributions might have occurred.

petosiris wrote:
And Valens does mention calculating the Lots by degrees while talking about Nechepso.

Could you give which passage you mean?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
petosiris



Joined: 08 Oct 2017
Posts: 17

Posted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Levente Laszlo wrote:
I reckon you mean the "Egyptian" terminology like "Good Daemon", "God" etc., but then your statement isn't wholly correct. Valens 3.2.16 associates the 2nd "Porphyry house" with the succedent of the ascendant and Goddess (which is the diameter of God), whereas the power of the 11th "Porphyry house" is rightly associated with Good Daemon. Unfortunately, there's only one extant manuscript of this passage, which is also rather corrupt in some places, so I don't think we can know at the moment if the passage is genuine or there's some muddling here.


I just noticed, yeah that looks out of place.

Levente Laszlo wrote:
I warmly welcome the recognition of this strange phenomenon, which is exactly what I've been considering for a while. To add more flavor: συναφή and ἀπόρροια, two obviously degree-based concepts, also go back to Nechepso-Petosiris. But even if one perceives a sort of contradiction here, it's easily explained by the fact that the various passages or concepts attributed to this legendary duo weren't necessarily developed by the very same authors, as any kind of eponymous attributions might have occurred.


I agree, there are all sorts of Petosiris people.

Levente Laszlo wrote:
Could you give which passage you mean?


That would be Book 2.36 when he is speaking of the angular places after the melothesia he gives. I do not work with manuscripts, but it is in the Kroll Edition. It could be related to whatever work of Lot melothesia he is using, but I though it is strange and somewhat suggestive that he mentions this immediately after quoting Nechepso.

Thank you for everything you do.
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
Page 2 of 2

 
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