Primary directions (again), and rectification
SeaGtGruff
and received many excellent replies. I didn't actually get into the
calculations at that time, but I bought Rumen Kolev's "Placidus" program from
John Halloran at UAC this summer, and have been getting into primary directions
since then.
One thing I absolutely hate about primary directions (just kidding, or am I?)
is that there are so many different methods and "keys." (For those who don't
know, the "keys" are the rates of motion used to translate an arc into a period
of time.) To maintain my sanity, I'm sticking to one key-- Ptolemy's (4
minutes of sidereal time, or 1 degree of right ascension, per year)-- and
looking at only directions of the chart angles to the natal planets (in the
normal direction of motion).
Assuming that primary directions should be kept very, very close, I'm thinking
I may finally be able to rectify my time of birth. Right now I've got my natal
Mars on my primary-directed MC, which was exact on November 15, 2002 (I get the
wee hours of November 16, 2002 using Astrolog, but I'll just use whatever
Placidus says). If I move my time of birth back a bit, that date moves
forward.
Before this, the last primary direction I had (directed angle to natal planet)
was my natal Uranus on my primary-directed Ascendant. This was on November 15,
1994 if I use my officially-recorded time of birth, but that direction actually
seems to fit better with events that took place during 1995, which suggests
that I was born a little bit before my recorded time of birth. Unfortunately,
there were a few events during 1995 that could fit, so it's difficult to say
which one was "it," and thus it's tough to pick a rectified time that gives an
exact hit.
Right now I don't feel that my Mars-MC direction has truly "hit" yet, but it
feels like it's going to hit Real Soon Now, because events seem to keep nudging
me to take decisive action with regard to my career path. So I'm thinking that
if or when I do take action, it may help me to narrow down a rectified birth
time.
Of course, the choice of "key" will affect the dates, as well as whether I use
the natal planet on the directed angle, or the directed planet on the directed
angle. (I'm of the opinion that using the directed planet with the directed
angle makes as much or more sense as using the natal planet, but in this case--
Mars-- the difference in timing is only 7 days.)
Does anyone here who uses primary directions have any strong opinions about
which "key" to use, and whether directed planets on directed angles are as good
as-- or better or worse than-- natal planets on directed angles? And what type
of time frame should I allow for an acceptable orb?
Michael Rideout
PMD
Are there any Rapt parallels in your directions?
I understand they are reasonably accurate way of rectifying.
Directions in mundo come next.
http://www.canopusbookshop.com/pdf/sepharial.zip
Pankaj
"SeaGtGruff" <seagt...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021217005920...@mb-fd.aol.com...
Dan Barkye
that 4 min of time on 1 deg of movement will be a fair replica of the skies
in our charts, since all revolves in a circle.
What on what - directed to natal; but, why angles only? I can understand
it's very potent, but the other traditional significators are as good,
aren't they? At least the P of F, the nodes, Sun and even Mer. I don't mean
to distract you from the sub of msg, though...
Orbs - the tightest, no discounts.
Dan
"SeaGtGruff" <seagt...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021217005920...@mb-fd.aol.com...
SeaGtGruff
> Are there any Rapt parallels in your directions?
> I understand they are reasonably accurate way of rectifying.
> Directions in mundo come next.
>
> http://www.canopusbookshop.com/pdf/sepharial.zip
>
> Pankaj
Yes, "Placidus" includes rapt parallels, but I'm not looking at them yet,
mainly because I'm taking things one step at a time, but also because I have no
rapt parallels right now.
Michael Rideout
SeaGtGruff
> Key - looks to me from what little I know about time/celestial distance,
> that 4 min of time on 1 deg of movement will be a fair replica of the skies
> in our charts, since all revolves in a circle.
> What on what - directed to natal; but, why angles only? I can understand
> it's very potent, but the other traditional significators are as good,
> aren't they? At least the P of F, the nodes, Sun and even Mer. I don't mean
> to distract you from the sub of msg, though...
> Orbs - the tightest, no discounts.
> Dan
My main reason for staying away from planet-to-planet directions just yet is
that they would vary according to the method used, whereas the angle-to-planet
directions are the same for all methods-- although there is the choice of mundo
or zodiacal.
Michael Rideout
Dan Barkye
-- Thanks. Would you care to say a few words about rectification? I know
almost nothing about it, don't do it, never (although I know the imp of
it...); for ex., AFA demands a proved knowledge of the sub in applying for
membership. I have abook on the sub, but never cared to look at it... So
shameful!!... :-)
Dan
>
> Michael Rideout
>
>
Christine
SeaGtGruff <seagt...@aol.com> schreef in berichtnieuws
20021217005920...@mb-fd.aol.com...
> Many months ago, I asked for instructions/comments about primary
directions,
> and received many excellent replies. I didn't actually get into the
> calculations at that time, but I bought Rumen Kolev's "Placidus" program
from
> John Halloran at UAC this summer, and have been getting into primary
directions
> since then.
>
> One thing I absolutely hate about primary directions (just kidding, or am
I?)
> is that there are so many different methods and "keys." (For those who
don't
> know, the "keys" are the rates of motion used to translate an arc into a
period
> of time.) To maintain my sanity, I'm sticking to one key-- Ptolemy's (4
> minutes of sidereal time, or 1 degree of right ascension, per year)-- and
> looking at only directions of the chart angles to the natal planets (in
the
> normal direction of motion).
>
> Michael Rideout
Hello Michael,
I have never read an explanation of primary direction calculation that I
could understand, let alone fathom!
Using Ptolemy, are you saying that 4 mins. sidereal time correlates to one
year of life progressive, which can then be reduced into months, weeks and
days, if necessary? i.e. 1 minute = 3 months, 20 seconds = 1 month?
Such a calculation would imply that one's whole life could be more or less
seen within 5 hours following birth (15x4mins =1hr. x 5 hrs = 15x5 = 75
years progressive), or am I looking at this the wrong way?
Although I can follow the principle of the movement of the angles effecting
the natal chart progressively, planetary movement except the Moon, and to a
limited extent the Sun, is going to be very minimum. It would therefore seem
that the role and effect of transiting planets will be emphasised.
Christine
Christine
Hi again, Michael.
If the primary directed Ascendant was conjunct Uranus, does not the question
of the chicken and/or the egg arise?
Are you aware of a personal change taking place as a result of something
that occured ' around 15 Nov. 1994', OR, did an inner change of some kind
begin around 15 Nov.1994 that precipitated the outer change event that took
place in 1995?
> Right now I don't feel that my Mars-MC direction has truly "hit" yet, but
it
> feels like it's going to hit Real Soon Now, because events seem to keep
nudging
> me to take decisive action with regard to my career path. So I'm thinking
that
> if or when I do take action, it may help me to narrow down a rectified
birth
> time.
You would be looking at only the conjunction to Mars, and not the completing
square to Uranus; just as the primary directed Ascendant will also have
squared natal Mars to influence any oncoming decision-making?
> Of course, the choice of "key" will affect the dates, as well as whether I
use
> the natal planet on the directed angle, or the directed planet on the
directed
> angle. (I'm of the opinion that using the directed planet with the
directed
> angle makes as much or more sense as using the natal planet, but in this
case--
> Mars-- the difference in timing is only 7 days.)
>
> Does anyone here who uses primary directions have any strong opinions
about
> which "key" to use, and whether directed planets on directed angles are as
good
> as-- or better or worse than-- natal planets on directed angles? And what
type
> of time frame should I allow for an acceptable orb?
>
> Michael Rideout
Christine.
PMD
I used progressed MC opp Saturn in mundo to rectify.
1 degree RAMC= 1 year
and used the same for the rest.
2nd confirmation with rapt parallels.
I was doing manual calculations at the time and all directions were not
fitting in the slot.
i thought all of them would never fit so gave up on further rectification.
There may be a good and a bad Primary direction operating at the same time
with a parallel in zodiac or mundo which operates for years together.
I can't see how one can be as precise as you are trying to be even with the
computerized software.
Pankaj
>
> Michael Rideout
>
Ray Murphy
----------
In article <atuob8$950$1...@reader11.wxs.nl>, "Christine"
<a.h...@planet.nl> wrote:
>
>SeaGtGruff <seagt...@aol.com> schreef in berichtnieuws
>20021217005920...@mb-fd.aol.com...
>> Many months ago, I asked for instructions/comments about primary
>directions,
>> and received many excellent replies. I didn't actually get into the
>> calculations at that time, but I bought Rumen Kolev's "Placidus" program
>from
>> John Halloran at UAC this summer, and have been getting into primary
>directions
>> since then.
>>
>> One thing I absolutely hate about primary directions (just kidding, or am
>I?)
>> is that there are so many different methods and "keys." (For those who
>don't
>> know, the "keys" are the rates of motion used to translate an arc into a
>period
>> of time.) To maintain my sanity, I'm sticking to one key-- Ptolemy's (4
>> minutes of sidereal time, or 1 degree of right ascension, per year)-- and
>> looking at only directions of the chart angles to the natal planets (in
>the
>> normal direction of motion).
>>[..]
>
>>
>> Michael Rideout
[....]
>I have never read an explanation of primary direction calculation that I
>could understand, let alone fathom!
RM: I used to play around with Primary Directions many years ago, but
never bothered with anything other than progressing the Angles in both
directions.
I remember one chart I was attempting to rectify which worked
perfectly for *so many* events, but ONLY if Adelaide was about 4 miles
North of it's geographic location. The MC events were fine, but the
ASC directions were all slightly out-of-whack -- in fact I rang Martin
(who now visits aamod) to ask if it was possible for latitudes for
locations to change over a period of time.
I must add that I struck a very strange phenomena while doing Primary
Directions -- that was a few occasions where the "possible chart"
worked beautifully but ONLY if the person was born at a location 22.5
degrees North of their real location.
It might have been just one of those quirks that happens occasionally,
but it has always bothered me -- not knowing why that happened.
Another interesting thing I found while attempting a rectification for
a well known local astrologer was that if the (rectified) MC was
directed forward to make - MC = 150 SU, the mother died (+/- 6 days)
-- and when the MC was directed backwards to make - MC = 150 MOON (+/-
6 days) the father died. Besides this, for both sad occasions Saturn
had gone from one side of Uranus to the other with the SAME angular
separation for those two deaths which were perhaps 5 - 10 years apart.
All of this may just have been coincidence, but I thought it was worth
mentioning.
>Using Ptolemy, are you saying that 4 mins. sidereal time correlates to one
>year of life progressive, which can then be reduced into months, weeks and
>days, if necessary? i.e. 1 minute = 3 months, 20 seconds = 1 month?
>Such a calculation would imply that one's whole life could be more or less
>seen within 5 hours following birth (15x4mins =1hr. x 5 hrs = 15x5 = 75
>years progressive), or am I looking at this the wrong way?
RM: Approximately 1 degree per year for 90 degrees = 90 years, and 1
minute of arc (1/60th of a degree) = 1/60th of a year = about 6 days.
Don't take any notice of Primary Directions until you have some pretty
compelling evidence in front of you to show that the Angles are
working on time occasionally -- usually within a few minutes of arc,
or a few weeks.
[....]
>
>Christine
Ray
jaf10263
3e033...@news.chariot.net.au...
[...]
> I remember one chart I was attempting to rectify which worked
> perfectly for *so many* events, but ONLY if Adelaide was about 4 miles
> North of it's geographic location. The MC events were fine, but the
> ASC directions were all slightly out-of-whack -- in fact I rang Martin
> (who now visits aamod) to ask if it was possible for latitudes for
> locations to change over a period of time.
An answer to this phenomena might be the latitude of the planets which
changes and influences the date of a direction. French astrologers calls the
position of a planet in house according to its latitude a "domitude", but I
don't know the proper english translation.
Gustave-Lambert Brahy used to rectify charts only with the progressions of
the AS and MC.
--
Regards
François