Traditional Astrology For Today

Minderwiz said:

However Ibn Ezra uses a very convoluted system, which looks at the degrees of the Sun, Moon, Ascendant, Part of Fortune and pre-natal szygy. For each one of these five degrees we award points for rulership, exaltation, triplicity, terms and face - so planets who rule these degrees or who have them as a dignity begin to accumulate points. The planetary hour ruler and the planetary day ruler get scores as well, then each planet gets a score for its house placement,etc. At the end of the point scoring we tot up the points for each planet and the winner (Almuten) is the Almuten of the Chart. This process is not identical to the essential and accidental dignities and includes additional considerations and ignores others.

Morinus does not use Ibn Ezra's method, though this is by far the most common method quoted.

Click to expand...

As always, your thoroughness is appreciated. I don't necessarily want to DO it by hand (I'm delighted to leave that to the computer), I just want to know WHAT it's doing so I can make sense of the result. If it means getting familiar with more convoluted methods, so be it. Can you point me to a reliable source to get started?

I see what you're saying about the dispositor chain being more likely to complete with fewer variables in the chart. Let me try my chart to see what happens:

Jupiter in Sagittarius (in it's sign of rulership but dispositing nothing)
Saturn in Leo dispositing Moon in Capricorn
Moon in Capricorn dispositing Sun, Mercury and Venus in Cancer
Mercury in Cancer dispositing Mars in Virgo
Sun in Cancer dispositing Saturn in Leo

This one is a bit of a "closed loop" (what the software coders used to call a "do-loop" that has Saturn doubling back on itself) with Jupiter left out in the cold. It could also start with Sun or Moon and create the same kind of loop excluding Jupiter.

Here's a random thought, based on nothing but idle conjecture since I've never seen anything written on it. I was wondering whether a planet's sign of exaltation might bring it into the dispositor mix. For example, Jupiter is dignified (exalted) in Cancer, which would give it sway over Sun, Mercury and Venus in Cancer, Sun covers Saturn in Leo, Saturn covers Moon in Capricorn, and Mercury covers Mars in Virgo. You mentioned earlier that Jupiter is more important in my chart that it seems at first. Saturn and Moon are in detriment, Mercury and Venus are combust and Mars (although it rules the Ascendant) is peregrine, leaving Jupiter in a relatively positive position. However, Morinus gives chart almuten to Mars with Venus second, followed by Moon. Jupiter and Saturn are about even with Sun and Mercury completely out of the running. It must be all of that convolution you described .

EDIT: Here's some input from the "other" traditional astrologer I communicate with.

"A planet which disposits, disposes of, or rules another because the other is in one of its areas of dignity. For example, when Jupiter is in Taurus, Venus, the planetary ruler of Taurus, disposits Jupiter. Planets can also be disposed by the lesser dignities, so the dispositor of Jupiter by exaltation is the Moon which is naturally exalted in Taurus.

The last sentence seems to answer my question about whether Jupiter can "disposit by exaltation." If it can, that ties it in to everything else through its exaltation in Cancer.

Example (sort of)

Let's look at an example. The chart is for Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, which we used in an earlier thread (for different purposes).

I've attached her natal chart as Camilla Dignities, as I've put in the Terms (bounds) and Faces using the 'usual' Ptolemaic measures. Now a lot of the literature uses Egyptian (Hellenistic Alexandria) but the Ptolemaic terms are the more easily found.

The first thing is the sole dispositor. In this chart we have four planets in Cancer in the twelfth - Moon, Mercury, Venus and Sun plus the Part of Fortune. The Ascendant is in Leo and Saturn is in Leo in the first Hoouse. Mars is in Gemini and Jupiter is in Virgo.

The first point is that we have a sole dispositor which is the Moon (confirmed by Solar Fire) which rules Sun, Venus and Mercury and Mercury rules Mars and Jupiter and the Sun rules Saturn. So the Moon scores on essential dignity and as sole dispositor of the chart. However the Moon is in the twelfth and waning.

Now let's look at the Almuten of the Chart using Ibn Ezra. For this we need to identify the following positions by zodiacal degree:

Moon
Sun
Ascendant
Part of Fortune
Pre-natal Syzygy

And award points, using the usual scores, for Ruler, Exaltation, Triplicity, Terms and Face to the planets that have dignity at those degrees. Where a planet has more than one dignity we add the scores together. So we have 5 degrees to look at and each of the seven planets is eligible for points at each degree.

Starting with the Moon, at 10 Capricorn 02 - We score 5 to the Moon (sign ruler), 4 to Jupiter (Exaltation ruler), 3 to Venus (Day Triplicity ruler), 2 to Jupiter (Terms ruler) and 1 to Mercury (Face ruler). If Egyptian Terms are used, then Venus would get the two points.

So for the Moon's position, Jupiter scores 6, the Moon 5, Venus scores 3 and Mercury 1.

We repeat the process for each of the next 3 places using the natal chart. that gives:

Sun: Moon 6 (Ruler+Face) Venus 5 (Triplicity+Terms) and Jupiter 4 (Exaltation
Ascendant: Sun 8 (Ruler+Triplicity) Jupiter 2 (Terms) Saturn 1 (Face) (no Exaltation Ruler)
Part of Fortune: Moon 6 (Ruler+Face) Venus 5 (Triplicity+Terms) Jupiter 4 (Exaltation)

We need a separate chart for the pre-natal syzgy (preceding Full Moon). The Moon is at 10 Capricorn 39.36 giving:

Saturn 5 points, Mars 5 points (Exaltation+Face) Venus 3 (Triplicity) Mercury 2 (Terms)

Addling the points for each planet we get:

Moon - 17
Mercury 5
Venus - 17
Sun - 8
Mars - 5
Jupiter - 16
Saturn - 7

So now Moon and Venus look the strongest followed by Jupiter.

The Ibn Ezra method now adds 7 points for the Day ruler and 6 for the Hour ruler - for Camilla both of these are Jupiter, so Jupiter's score increases to 29.

Lastly we add points for House placement. These are:

First - 12
Second - 6
Third - 3
Fourth - 9
Fifth - 7
Sixth - 1
Seventh - 10
Eighth - 4
Ninth - 5
Tenth - 11
Eleventh - 8
Twefth -2

That adds 2 points to the scores of Moon, Mercury, Venus and Sun; 8 points to Mars, 9 points to Jupiter and 12 points to Saturn. giving final scores of

Jupiter 38, Moon, Venus and Saturn 19, Mars 13, Sun 10 and Mercury 5.

So on this scoring Jupiter is the Almuten of the Chart.

Now I've tried this on Morinus and found an error in the programming. When I set the Terms for Egyptian it actually uses the Ptolemaic Terms in the calculation and setting for Ptolemaic actually causes it to use the Egyptian Terms - try it and see.

In the next post I'll try and evaluate what value (if any) this is for evaluating planetary strength.

Evaluation

So we have

Moon with greatest Essential dignity but loosing power through placement in the twelfth and being in it's last quarter. It's also under the beams, as is Venus and Mercury is combust.

Jupiter Almuten of the Chart (whichever Terms are used) - it's not strong essentially (scores 2 through a mutual reception with Venus by Terms) but is angular in the fourth. It is also stationary Direct, and Occidental. So apart from it's angularity it's not really got a lot going for it. Much of Jupiter's Almuten score comes from being both Day and Hour ruler and these are not features which play a great role in natal Astrology.

Saturn is also angular in the first and trines the MC and is conjunct the Ascendant. Saturn is in detriment, though he has dignity by Face. He is also under the beams and occidental

Mars on the other hand has low essential dignity (by Face) but is well placed in the eleventh, direct, free from the Sun's beams, oriental and reasonably fast. It's also the most elevated planet.

It's possible to argue that there's no clear winner and that the sole dispositor calculation and the Almuten of the Chart calculation both disguise weaknesses in both Moon and Jupiter and that there are other possible contenders and indeed other features to look at first.

Without looking at Temperament, we would probably say the main feature of the chart is that collection of planets in the twelfth and in Cancer - a behind the scenes person - indeed given that there is a Moon Venus conjunction under the beams it's a good descriptor of someone who was a royal mistress)

Following that is angular Saturn and angular Jupiter (though less angular being in the next sign from the House cusp).

The scoring systems -and indeed any scoring system - can only give so much information and we always run the risk of over relying on it. I don't use the Almuten of the Chart, mainly because I think the emphasis on the day and hour ruler is far to much. The pre-natal syzgy has limited but specialised use. It can be used in rectification but it's main use is in determining the length of life - something extremely important in an age with high mortality rates, especially in infancy but not as important today.

As you're also following Dave's method of Solar Returns you may well find the original Camilla thread interesting:

http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=123055

Minderwiz said:

Now I've tried this on Morinus and found an error in the programming. When I set the Terms for Egyptian it actually uses the Ptolemaic Terms in the calculation and setting for Ptolemaic actually causes it to use the Egyptian Terms - try it and see.

Click to expand...

I spent quite a bit of time working through the almuten calculations using your instructions and my chart. At first I was very confused until I discovered that I had the "Triplicities" setting on "Dorothean." When I switched it to "Ptolomaic," everything was in agreement except the triplicity rulers. And when I stitched to "Morinus" they changed again. It appears that "Dorothean" has Venus as the "day" ruler of both the Water and Earth triplicities, Ptolomaic has Mars as the "day" ruler of Water and Venus as "day" ruler of Earth, and "Morinus" has Jupiter as the "day" ruler of Water and Mercury as "day" ruler of Earth. I don't know enough yet to tell which of these is "Egyptian," but they are all clearly different and change the planetary scoring by 3 points for each variation. Also, the house position scoring for all three is different from your list, giving 5 points for the 8th House instead of 4 and 4 points for the 9th House instead of 5. Note that I had the triplicity setting in the Almuten option set to "One Ruler (Day/Night}" rather than "Use All Three" and I had the "Use Exaltation" turned off. Beyond that I couldn't figure out why the Grand Totals were quite different for each type, even though all I could see moving around in the tables were the triplicity scores.

EDIT: I just noticed that the triplicity rulership values for all three can be changed to whatever I want, but I'm not quite sure what to change them to until I look at the different source material. Also, there are settings for "Sun Phase" strength but I can't see how they affect the calculations shown in the tables.

I'm bringing this old thread back to life to give another enthusiastic thumbs-up to this book.

Traditional Astrology for Today is exactly the book I've been looking for. As an overview of the field, a primer on the philosophical background of the tradition, and an intro to a few techniques one can use to begin to interpret a chart, it's invaluable. I also really appreciated his examples, which made the interpretive process less intimidating.

Books can speak to people for various reasons, and I found this one struck the right chord in my brain at this moment in time. For anyone else who may have a similar personality or mindset, or similar difficulties in their astrological studies, I'll describe why I think it might be an especially good choice.

My perspective is that of a person newer to traditional methods and who is not well trained in technical astrology of any sort. I'm just a lifelong student and natural researcher. I often feel I "can't see the forest for the trees" when I immerse myself in too much detail without getting a broad overview first. I love knowing and understanding the details, especially as a perfectionist who desires to know "the right (or best) way" to do everything, but this can mean that I never feel I know enough to actually begin.* Getting to the point of putting the multitude of traditional methods to practical use seemed so far off!

I was reading On The Heavenly Spheres before, and it's great, but I stalled out after feeling again that I was continuing to collect information without a clear plan for how to use it. Traditional Astrology for Today gave me a practical starting point to get up and running, and now I'm eager to apply some of it and then get back to finish Spheres. So yes, it's a slim little guide, and one may wonder if it's worth getting or if you should just dive right into something meatier and more complete. I say that depending on your learning style and personal quirks it might be just the perfect thing.

I also think Ben strikes the right tone in educating the modern astrologer or student about the traditional mindset without badmouthing the modern practitioners. He demonstrates that the traditional perspective can still be compassionate and constructive, and isn't incompatible with a counseling approach. He also doesn't make one feel guilty if one still wants to incorporate the outer planets in their work.

Sorry if this gushes a bit -- it's just that I'm high on this feeling of "NOW I'm ready to go!"

-Nicole (kalliope)

*Why yes, I'm an INTP (sometimes INXP) per the Myers-Briggs -- how did you guess??

Minderwiz said:

Ben Dykes, who is one of the leading experts on medieval Astrology, Has just published an Introductory book called Traditional Astrology For Today. It's quite short, 130 pages all in, and is aimed at the 'curious modern astrology student or practising professional'

It's designed to :

Provide an introduction to the area before there's any major outlay on books or courses
Enable current practises to be supplemented by traditional techniques
Provide a quick guide to terms, vocabulary and names and works of the old Astrologers
Provide an up to date reference guide to the best current works available in English
Provide some answers to objections against Traditional techniques.

I've only just received my copy but I'll be posting a review on the book in the near future.
The obvious immediate conclusion is that this is not a rival to Avelar and Ribeiro's book -
http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=152043

- it's a brief introduction, not an extensive treatise, but given the standing of the author, one that should prove enlightening

Edited to add:

Having now read it -

It isn't a rival to Avelar and Ribeiro, and isn't meant to be - it's very much a complement to it. It's an excellent slim guide to the theory and practice of an approach which is as relevant today as it was 2,000 years ago and equally relevant to the practise of Astrology today.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the review Nicole it really exhudes your enthusiasm and enjoyment for the book. Its definitely worth reading for newbies and experienced Astrologers alike.

Minderwiz said:

Thanks for the review Nicole it really exhudes your enthusiasm and enjoyment for the book. Its definitely worth reading for newbies and experienced Astrologers alike.

Click to expand...

By "newbies," are we talking about people with a basic but clear understanding of the principles of astrology, or are we really talking about absolute newcomers to the field? I'm toying with the idea of studying astrology, but I only have fragmentary knowledge of the 12 zodiac signs, the houses and the planets. I know almost next-to-nothing about chart interpretation and I know literally nothing about chart calculation. And I know LESS than nothing about prediction! What I know is basic astrological/esoteric correspondences that I apply to my Tarot readings.

There just seems to be such an avalanche of stuff to know in this field - asteroids and nodes and a zillion planetary aspects and all kinds of other stuff I've read about but can't remember because there's just SO MUCH of it - that quite frankly, I'm intimidated. Fascinated, but intimidated.

So. Is this book a good starting point for ANYONE, I guess is what I'm wondering.

Thanks for any comments.

Lokasenna said:

By "newbies," are we talking about people with a basic but clear understanding of the principles of astrology, or are we really talking about absolute newcomers to the field? I'm toying with the idea of studying astrology, but I only have fragmentary knowledge of the 12 zodiac signs, the houses and the planets. I know almost next-to-nothing about chart interpretation and I know literally nothing about chart calculation. And I know LESS than nothing about prediction! What I know is basic astrological/esoteric correspondences that I apply to my Tarot readings.

Click to expand...

This isn't meant as a textbook on Astrology, it's a brief overview of the Traditional Approach. In so far as it assumes any previous knowledge it assumes that you are aware of, and may be very familiar with the modern approach. However, the point of the book is to introduce you to something different. As far as the tradition is concerned, it assumes that you know nothing.

There's nothing on chart calculation, and what there is on interpretation is based on what is covered in the book. But this is brief - the book is 100 pages plus appendices. It's purpose is to introduce you to the ideas, not make you a competent Astrologer, still less an expert. If you like the ideas there are recommendations for further reading.

The chapter on prediction is only 6 pages and again is more an overview of traditional methods than a detailed coverage. Most of the intended readers will no virtually nothing about the methods mentioned. The book is not trying to teach you how to make a prediction but to give you an idea of how predictions used to be made.

Lokasenna said:

There just seems to be such an avalanche of stuff to know in this field - asteroids and nodes and a zillion planetary aspects and all kinds of other stuff I've read about but can't remember because there's just SO MUCH of it - that quite frankly, I'm intimidated. Fascinated, but intimidated.

So. Is this book a good starting point for ANYONE, I guess is what I'm wondering.

Thanks for any comments.

Click to expand...

It doesn't look at asteroids, or nodes (though they are briefly mentioned) the only aspects used are the major ones. Things that you will not have heard of before are the planetary dignities, but these are not used in modern Astrology, apart from rulerships and even there there is an effective difference in the basis. The book is not intimidating but there are challenges - the main one being the nature and basis of Astrology itself. The first 37 pages are concerned with the philosophic basis of Astrology and its methods. It's purpose is to make you think.

The remaining 63 pages look at signs, planets, houses, the Greek Lots and a brief introduction to chart interpretation and it is 'brief'. I don't think you need any previous knowledge to get something out of it. You are of course welcome to post any questions here on the material covered, if there's something that you don't understand.

Whether it will help you with esoteric Astrology is another matter. It's not a book that looks at the esoteric in any sense of the word., unless you treat Astrology as being 'esoteric' by definition. It might help you to get your ideas clearer, even if that's by rejecting some or all of the ideas in the book.

If you are just interested in 'What is Astrology?' and 'How does an Astrologer work?' as general questions then this is very helpful in terms of just one of the approaches. In that sense it's a book that anyone can read and make sense of. But it doesn't answer all questions on Astrology or on other approaches.

Hi Minderwiz, and thank you so much for your thorough review, it really helped a lot.

I don't think of astrology itself as being esoteric. Frankly, I don't think of the Tarot as being esoteric either. I just used the first word that crossed my mind.

I guess what it really boils down to is that I find that by comparison to the Tarot, which for me is a largely intuitive thing, astrology is, well.. not. And I think that's what, well.. not exactly what baffles me, but boggles my mind in terms of figuring out a not-too-overwhelming place to start. Honestly, I'm sorely tempted to pick up a "Dummies" or "Idiots" book just to have SOME place to start.

With Tarot, it's largely "whatever works for you." And I don't get the feeling that astrology is like that (should it be like that?), seeing as it was science for centuries. There is a sense of method and order to it that Tarot doesn't have. Though I suppose that point could be argued depending on one's approach...

I realize that not one single book can contain everything one needs to know about the subject, or any subject, really. I'm just trying to determine where to start. I don't like spending hours on end reading websites, it really strains my eyes. Plus I like holding an actual book in my hand.

Lokasenna said:

Hi Minderwiz, and thank you so much for your thorough review, it really helped a lot.

I don't think of astrology itself as being esoteric. Frankly, I don't think of the Tarot as being esoteric either. I just used the first word that crossed my mind.

Click to expand...

Thanks for that. There is a branch of Astrology that describes itself as 'esoteric' so I wasn't sure whether you had come across it and had some interest. I don't look on Astrology or Tarot as 'esoteric' either so, one potential problem has evaporated LOL

Lokasenna said:

I guess what it really boils down to is that I find that by comparison to the Tarot, which for me is a largely intuitive thing, astrology is, well.. not. And I think that's what, well.. not exactly what baffles me, but boggles my mind in terms of figuring out a not-too-overwhelming place to start. Honestly, I'm sorely tempted to pick up a "Dummies" or "Idiots" book just to have SOME place to start

With Tarot, it's largely "whatever works for you." And I don't get the feeling that astrology is like that (should it be like that?), seeing as it was science for centuries. There is a sense of method and order to it that Tarot doesn't have. Though I suppose that point could be argued depending on one's approach...

Click to expand...

I totally agree with your comment on Astrology - it's not that intuition plays no part but it only plays a minor part, the framework and methods are structured. As a student gets more into the science, they develop an instincitve feel, in terms of which methods to use and what particular planets signify in particular circumstances - rather like driving a car becopmes partly instincitve. However the mechanics and laws relating to driving don't go away and the methods and approaches of Astrology don't go away - it's definitely not 'free form'.

Where you start is something of a personal issue. Both Dave and I started out with the standard 'psychological approach but both of us have ended up discarding large sections of it, and gone off to explore other approaches. I wanted to get back to 'unadulterated' Astrology and then move forward. I've found that there's no such thing as 'pure' or 'correct' Astrology but learning it's history and why and how it developed I find fascinating. This book is very interesting, even for the lay reader because it explores these issues, if only in general terms. It's purpose is to be thought provoking, so in that sense it will help you decide where to start, even if it's 'not from here'. There are plenty of other places to visit but as you've got to start from somewhere, this iss as good a place as any.

Lokasenna said:

I realize that not one single book can contain everything one needs to know about the subject, or any subject, really. I'm just trying to determine where to start. I don't like spending hours on end reading websites, it really strains my eyes. Plus I like holding an actual book in my hand.

Click to expand...

As I said, you have to start somewhere. The book is short but very informative. If you like what you read then you can explore further, both in depth and by looking at other branches. At worst you will have read something and said - this is not for me but part of the learning process is to find what you don't like as well as what you do.