Guest guest Posted December 19, 2002 Report Share Posted December 19, 2002 I've found another reference to masculine and feminine signs in a text that predated Ptolemy. It's in Dorotheus of Sidon's CARMEN ASTSROLOGICUM where he talks about masculine and 'double' (even or feminine) signs, and also these same sign divisions in the 'dodecatemorion' or 12th part of the signs. Masculine signs begin with a masculine ddt and feminine signs begin with a feminine ddt. Then they alternate masculine and double (even) through the signs. (I 18, p. 167) He uses these to predict the gender of children. Calling the even numbered signs 'double' supports the idea that the feminine signs were considered as perhaps diverse or changeable. (Like us women, of course!) Dorotheus' concepts came from Mesopotamia and Egypt. I think that perhaps the main reason we only have older astrological records from Mesopotamia rather than Egypt is that in Egypt astrology was probably considered a sacred subject and kept to the initiates in the temples, whereas astrology was more public (or at least kept in written records) in Mesopotamia. So the knowledge of astrology in Egypt (say from 10,500 down to the first century C.E.) died out with the initiates and the sacred temples. The priests of Egypt may have known a great deal about astrology, but except for references to one or two ancient texts, they took the knowledge with them when they died. Could be that Cyril Fagan was right about some of his conclusions, even if there is no real historical evidence for them. The important path for us today is to figure out what actually works and not worry or argue too much about the source of ancient doctrines. We have the tools today (computers and translated texts) to make really important astrological re-discoveries. Terese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2002 Report Share Posted December 19, 2002 Terese - this is so interesting for a Sidereal beginner - what books on sidereal are relatively easy to purchase (if any) - I'll try to order a few texts - what should I ask and look for?..... and thanks to those who answered my question on the house systems that you are using - " Octopus " ? and someone said they are using Krishnamurti etc! Would have thanked you sooner but just couldn't seem to believe the messages that were being posted - So then if I construct a sidereal chart and then return it, I should get the best Solar Return? Previously, I was doing Tropical Astrology chart but precessing the Returns to see whether they made sense..... Shamira M - Terese Hamilton Thursday, December 19, 2002 12:23 PM Egypt and Astrology I've found another reference to masculine and feminine signs in a text that predated Ptolemy. It's in Dorotheus of Sidon's CARMEN ASTSROLOGICUM where he talks about masculine and 'double' (even or feminine) signs, and also these same sign divisions in the 'dodecatemorion' or 12th part of the signs. Masculine signs begin with a masculine ddt and feminine signs begin with a feminine ddt. Then they alternate masculine and double (even) through the signs. (I 18, p. 167) He uses these to predict the gender of children. Calling the even numbered signs 'double' supports the idea that the feminine signs were considered as perhaps diverse or changeable. (Like us women, of course!) Dorotheus' concepts came from Mesopotamia and Egypt. I think that perhaps the main reason we only have older astrological records from Mesopotamia rather than Egypt is that in Egypt astrology was probably considered a sacred subject and kept to the initiates in the temples, whereas astrology was more public (or at least kept in written records) in Mesopotamia. So the knowledge of astrology in Egypt (say from 10,500 down to the first century C.E.) died out with the initiates and the sacred temples. The priests of Egypt may have known a great deal about astrology, but except for references to one or two ancient texts, they took the knowledge with them when they died. Could be that Cyril Fagan was right about some of his conclusions, even if there is no real historical evidence for them. The important path for us today is to figure out what actually works and not worry or argue too much about the source of ancient doctrines. We have the tools today (computers and translated texts) to make really important astrological re-discoveries. Terese " How can Pluto be in Sagittarius when it's so close to Antares? " ----- Post message: Subscribe: - Un: - List owner: -owner Shortcut URL to this page: / Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2002 Report Share Posted December 19, 2002 , " Shamira " <shamira@p...> wrote: > Terese - this is so interesting for a Sidereal beginner - Shamira, I agree!! I hope that Terese does not leave the fold. Please stay, both of you! - Ed K what books on sidereal are relatively easy to purchase (if any) - I'll try to order a few texts - what should I ask and look for?..... > and thanks to those who answered my question on the house systems that you are using - " Octopus " ? and someone said they are using Krishnamurti etc! Would have thanked you sooner but just couldn't seem to believe the messages that were being posted - So then if I construct a sidereal chart and then return it, I should get the best Solar Return? Previously, I was doing Tropical Astrology chart but precessing the Returns to see whether they made sense..... > Shamira > M > - > Terese Hamilton > > Thursday, December 19, 2002 12:23 PM > Egypt and Astrology > > > I've found another reference to masculine and feminine signs in a text that > predated Ptolemy. It's in Dorotheus of Sidon's CARMEN ASTSROLOGICUM where > he talks about masculine and 'double' (even or feminine) signs, and also > these same sign divisions in the 'dodecatemorion' or 12th part of the > signs. Masculine signs begin with a masculine ddt and feminine signs begin > with a feminine ddt. Then they alternate masculine and double (even) > through the signs. (I 18, p. 167) He uses these to predict the gender of > children. > > Calling the even numbered signs 'double' supports the idea that the > feminine signs were considered as perhaps diverse or changeable. (Like us > women, of course!) Dorotheus' concepts came from Mesopotamia and Egypt. > > I think that perhaps the main reason we only have older astrological > records from Mesopotamia rather than Egypt is that in Egypt astrology was > probably considered a sacred subject and kept to the initiates in the > temples, whereas astrology was more public (or at least kept in written > records) in Mesopotamia. So the knowledge of astrology in Egypt (say from > 10,500 down to the first century C.E.) died out with the initiates and the > sacred temples. > > The priests of Egypt may have known a great deal about astrology, but > except for references to one or two ancient texts, they took the knowledge > with them when they died. Could be that Cyril Fagan was right about some of > his conclusions, even if there is no real historical evidence for them. > > The important path for us today is to figure out what actually works and > not worry or argue too much about the source of ancient doctrines. We have > the tools today (computers and translated texts) to make really important > astrological re-discoveries. > > Terese > > > " How can Pluto be in Sagittarius when it's so close to Antares? " - ---- > > Post message: > Subscribe: - > Un: - > List owner: -owner > > Shortcut URL to this page: > / > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2002 Report Share Posted December 19, 2002 At 03:54 AM 12/19/02 -0000, Ed K wrote: >I agree!! I hope that Terese does not leave the fold. Please stay, >both of you! Thanks, Ed, but you all are going to have to clean up your language and stop the attack tactics. This is not what astrology is all about and not what this discussion forum is for. If you were a pack of trained pit bulls, I could understand, but we're human beings, no? We're supposed to have divinity within us. Why behave like animals that have been trained to maul each other? (A pathetic crime in itself...) Terese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2002 Report Share Posted December 19, 2002 , Terese Hamilton <eastwest@s...> wrote: > At 03:54 AM 12/19/02 -0000, Ed K wrote: > >I agree!! I hope that Terese does not leave the fold. Please stay, > >both of you! > > Thanks, Ed, but you all are going to have to clean up your language and > stop the attack tactics. Ahhh, so, now it's me with the foul language and attacks? I'd go back and check out the records on this, where you will see me doing nothing of the sort. If anyone has been attacked with viciousness it has been me for daring to challenge the Godliness of sidereal zodiacs. Let's do get real. Very best, Ed K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 20, 2002 Report Share Posted December 20, 2002 --- " Ed Kohout <crumpo " <crumpo wrote: > , Terese > Hamilton > <eastwest@s...> wrote: > > At 03:54 AM 12/19/02 -0000, Ed K wrote: > > >I agree!! I hope that Terese does not leave the > fold. Please > stay, > > >both of you! > > > > Thanks, Ed, but you all are going to have to clean > up your language > and > > stop the attack tactics. > > Ahhh, so, now it's me with the foul language and > attacks? I'd go > back and check out the records on this, where you > will see me doing > nothing of the sort. Ed... If you look back on the messages you will find that it was you that posted the foul language. You could have dealt with Damon directly but you chose to trash this forum twice. Discussing astrology with you at that point became of secondary importance. I found your handling of the situation insensitive and disturbing and told you so in so many words. When you write above that you believe you have done " nothing of the sort " , I find your actions irresponsible and void of character. If anyone has been attacked > with viciousness it > has been me for daring to challenge the Godliness of > sidereal zodiacs. > > Let's do get real. > Is it your style or your substance that is being questioned? You imply that we attack: could it be that we have been positioned into defending attacks? I(we) welcome challenges and I enjoy sharing what I've learned. I suggest we take civility to its greatest artform to develop instead of destroy. > Very best, > Ed K > > Jivio PS: In a previous post you seemed to question the use of the Vertex/Anti-Vertex. In my experience with angles I've repeatedly found hightened activity occured at these sensitive points as well as the square to these points. > > > " How can Pluto be in Sagittarius when it's so close > to Antares? " ----- > > Post message: > Subscribe: > - > Un: > - > List owner: > -owner > > Shortcut URL to this page: > / > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 20, 2002 Report Share Posted December 20, 2002 , Juan Oliver <jivio> wrote: > Ed... > If you look back on the messages you will find that it > was you that posted the foul language. Jiv, I challenge you to find such messages. When you realize you cannot, your apology will be forthcoming, hopefully, if you are of any respectability. > You could have > dealt with Damon directly but you chose to trash this > forum twice. Discussing astrology with you at that > point became of secondary importance. But, your posts that had no astrology were perfectly acceptable. More of the pot calling the kettle...... > I found your > handling of the situation insensitive and disturbing > and told you so in so many words. When you write above > that you believe you have done " nothing of the sort " , > I find your actions irresponsible and void of > character. I think the situation is rather that you find it hard to refute my criticisms of your belief system, and thus have turned your frustration into anger. > > > > If anyone has been attacked > > with viciousness it > > has been me for daring to challenge the Godliness of > > sidereal zodiacs. > > > > Let's do get real. > > > Is it your style or your substance that is being > questioned? You imply that we attack: could it be that > we have been positioned into defending attacks? I(we) > welcome challenges and I enjoy sharing what I've > learned. I suggest we take civility to its greatest > artform to develop instead of destroy. A wonderful epiphany for you, I agree totally. > > > > Very best, > > Ed K > > > > > > Jivio > PS: In a previous post you seemed to question the use > of the Vertex/Anti-Vertex. In my experience with > angles I've repeatedly found hightened activity > occured at these sensitive points as well as the > square to these points. I think that the formula for the Vertex is a big pile of nonsense, but we'll save that for another list. - e Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 20, 2002 Report Share Posted December 20, 2002 Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:17:47 -0000, Ed Kohout <crumpo kirjoitti: >I think that the formula for the Vertex is a big pile of nonsense, >but we'll save that for another list. This is very interesting, Ed. Many astrologers have been observing, though, that if MC and IC define the South and the North of the Zodiac, the VX and AVX similarly define the Zodiacal West and East. And if South and North are important (as cardinal compass directions), so should West and East be - according to the argument. Sure, South and North also represent the directions in which planets and stars culminate and anticulminate. But then, East and West directions demarcate planets' positions either behind you or in front of you. As I see it, this may have significance, but you seem to be sure it does not. I would be most thankful if you could elaborate a little bit on what's wrong with the Vertex formula, as you see it. BTW, sorry about my language! English is a foreign tongue to me, a Finlander. Thanks, Risto V Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2002 Report Share Posted December 21, 2002 Hi Risto, Let me take that back. I am not averse to the Vertex defined as such: **The point where the Ecliptic intersects the Prime Vertical.** It is basically a local-space node, and definitely valid! Thanks, Ed K , Risto Vartiainen <risto.vartiainen@d...> wrote: > Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:17:47 -0000, Ed Kohout <crumpo@e...> > kirjoitti: > > >I think that the formula for the Vertex is a big pile of nonsense, > >but we'll save that for another list. > > This is very interesting, Ed. Many astrologers have been observing, > though, that if MC and IC define the South and the North of the > Zodiac, the VX and AVX similarly define the Zodiacal West and East. > And if South and North are important (as cardinal compass directions), > so should West and East be - according to the argument. > > Sure, South and North also represent the directions in which planets > and stars culminate and anticulminate. But then, East and West > directions demarcate planets' positions either behind you or in front > of you. As I see it, this may have significance, but you seem to be > sure it does not. I would be most thankful if you could elaborate a > little bit on what's wrong with the Vertex formula, as you see it. > > BTW, sorry about my language! English is a foreign tongue to me, a > Finlander. > > Thanks, > > Risto V Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2002 Report Share Posted December 22, 2002 , " Ed Kohout <crumpo@e...> " <crumpo@e...> wrote: > , Juan Oliver <jivio> > wrote: > > > Ed... > > If you look back on the messages you will find that it > > was you that posted the foul language. > > Jiv, > > I challenge you to find such messages. When you realize you cannot, > your apology will be forthcoming, hopefully, if you are of any > respectability. > Your challenge is to refute posting threads 1307 & 1308. When you realize you cannot, your apology will be forthcoming, hopefully, if you are of any respectability. > > > > If anyone has been attacked > > > with viciousness it > > > has been me for daring to challenge the Godliness of > > > sidereal zodiacs. > > > > > > Let's do get real. > > > > > Is it your style or your substance that is being > > questioned? You imply that we attack: could it be that > > we have been positioned into defending attacks? I(we) > > welcome challenges and I enjoy sharing what I've > > learned. I suggest we take civility to its greatest > > artform to develop instead of destroy. > > A wonderful epiphany for you, I agree totally. > Being civil is not an epiphany for me. I was surprised though when I read thread 1303. You weren't first with the foul language simply the reactive second and the third with the gasoline can. Since we are here to develop instead of destroy and since I trust that you agree with this principle totally what credence do you put into the " strength " of the angles? Do you consider them to have the " strength " of a planet? of a midpoint between planets? Jivio Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 23, 2002 Report Share Posted December 23, 2002 , " jivio <jivio> " > > > Ed... > > > If you look back on the messages you will find that it > > > was you that posted the foul language. > > > > Jiv, > > > > I challenge you to find such messages. When you realize you > cannot, > > your apology will be forthcoming, hopefully, if you are of any > > respectability. > > > > > Your challenge is to refute posting threads 1307 & 1308. When you > realize you cannot, > your apology will be forthcoming, hopefully, if you are of any > respectability. Jiv, I was not the author of the foul language, but I guess you have me on a technicality. /////////// > Since we are here to develop instead of destroy and since I trust > that you agree with this principle totally what credence do you put > into the " strength " of the angles? I take them very seriously. > Do you consider them to have > the " strength " of a planet? No, as they are measurements of the Earth's motion at the location of the event. > of a midpoint between planets? No, for the same reason. I'm sorry. - Ed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 23, 2002 Report Share Posted December 23, 2002 On 23 Dec 2002, at 2:18, Ed Kohout crumpo wrote: > , " jivio <jivio> " > > /////////// > > Since we are here to develop instead of destroy and since I trust > > that you agree with this principle totally what credence do you put > > into the " strength " of the angles? > > I take them very seriously. > > > > > Do you consider them to have > > the " strength " of a planet? > > No, as they are measurements of the Earth's motion at the location of > the event. > > > > of a midpoint between planets? > > No, for the same reason. > > I'm sorry. > > - Ed The closer a planet or planets is (are) to angles, the greater will be their strength for well or woe. The sweep of angles over the place of the planets is a measurment of both time and space. Bert W. Fannin Western Sidereal Astrologer Location and Timing Astrology LTD www.ltastrology.com you may download my PGP Public key off the MIT Keyserver at http://pgp.mit.edu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.