martin ganstens book - annual predictive techniques

1
Image


not sure how this looks, until i post it...

this is example I in martin ganstens book taken off page 72 with the information given in the appendix 4 at the back of the book... i have followed what i believe to be the primary direction options shown in appendix 3 and am using the ptolemy key for these directions as well... for the age of 18 i am getting ascendant 28 sag 47 for his 18th birthday.... these details are found on the outside circle of this layered chart...

martin, i am curious if i have these details correct... i am responding to the information on page 72-73 of your book and would like to stop and get a response from you before i go further... thanks...

3
Martin Gansten wrote:
As primary directions never really made it to India, this question would perhaps be more suited for the Traditional forum. If the thread develops, I could try moving it there.
I was thinking the same thing, and wondered why James put his post on the Indian forum. I also wonder whether Indian astrologers purposely rejected primary directions. Dasa systems seem to be a substitute.
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm

5
hi martin,

thanks... feel free to move it where ever you'd like... i am interested in understanding your process.. in the first example, it is as you note in the book specifically an example only using primary directions and it seems to have a strong emphasis on the egyptian terms.. also you make a distinction between zodiac and mundane primary directions saying you only consider mundane pds if it involves an opposition or conjunction... i am a bit mystified of the use of the language - latitude, or no latitude... this is applicable only to the mundane primary directions - correct?? in morinus they don't list whether anything does or doesn't have latitude, but you mention it a number of times.. i can only guess this is a feature of mundane aspects, but i have to ask you here directly... thanks..

on a different note, i have been listening to your interview with chris brennan - Tajika: Medieval Arabic Astrology in Sanskrit
https://theastrologypodcast.com/2020/08 ... -sanskrit/

at about 50 minutes in you mention much of the approach of tajika was centered in the northwest corner in the area of gujarat.... i was fortunate to visit this area and stayed in a place called bhuj in 1998 before the time of the earthquake in 2000... so much of the fascinating art work - textiles and etc - all hand made in this area, are seen in more touristy places in rajastan.... i liked what you said about it being hard for modern astrologers having a hard time unlearning what they have learned over the course of their time in astrology... i think this is very true..

one final question which i have to ask - feel free to take a pass on my questions as well... who do you think is a present day author on tajika in india who is doing good work that you would recommend? i have mentioned dr. charak a number of times here at skyscript.. are you familiar with his work and if so, what do you think of it?? thanks james

oh and here is a list of the primary directions i get for the chart in my first post age 0-25... does this look similar to what you generate?? is this the speculum you refer to? thanks..

Image

6
martin,

thanks.. perhaps you can delete this comment along with thereses and yours where the location of where this thread ought to be has now been resolved and we can stay focused on the topic at hand.. thanks..

7
It seems I successfully moved the thread to what I think is a more appropriate forum for questions on primary directions. :)

The matter of latitude is treated on pp. 68-70 of the book. To summarize this very briefly, no, zodiacal aspects with latitude are not the same as mundane aspects (the latter invented by Placidus), except for conjunctions and oppositions, which do coincide. So a mundane trine, a zodiacal trine with latitude, and a zodiacal trine without latitude are all different; but a mundane opposition and a zodiacal opposition with latitude are identical in practice.

I don't use mundane aspects at all, and I only consider latitude when dealing with conjunctions and oppositions, which can be described as two planets occupying the same horizon (and thus as a species of paranatellonta, broadly aspeaking).

The primary directions setup in Morinus includes latitude options for zodiacal aspects. And yes, that is the speculum I referred to, and yes, it looks right to me (though missing the terms).

I'll reply to your T??jika question separately in the Indian forum.
https://astrology.martingansten.com/

8
thanks martin..i can't seem to find any option on morinus for the latitude question... is this within the primary direction options?? i am not finding it.. i have version 6.2 of morinus..

10
thanks martin... i did see the page in the page of the book on settings, but no mention of latitude... you use the term latitutde, with latitude and etc, a fair amount in the book... i see it is part of the primary direction option on the use of the prommisor.... thanks..

11
martin,

why are primary directions involving mercury and midheaven not included in your overview for example J in the 20 years of age time period? this doesn't show in direct, or converse PDs.. chart below is direct PDs.. i suspect it has to do with the setting options you have made, but i do believe this particular direction of midheaven to mercury, or mercury to midheaven is quite relevant given exmple J's honours and awards gotten at an early age... below is a picture of a chart comparison for the year late 2000.

ultimately i am trying to appreciate why you are choosing the primary directions you are choosing and noticing how some data that i personally would consider very relevant, is missing... thanks james

Image

12
It's encouraging to see you really engaging wth the book, James. I hope other readers do the same. The direction you ask about is a converse one (in the traditional sense of that term), where the point natally on the MC (the significator) is moved with the primary motion until it meets Mercury (the promissor) rather than vice versa. Converse directions can be important, but have traditionally been considered less powerful than direct ones. More importantly from a practical point of view, they add a layer of complexity which I wanted to avoid at this stage. But well spotted!
https://astrology.martingansten.com/