Hellenistic Astrology

Barkey Foreman said:

Those two quotes above are from two online astrologers claiming to practise traditional and should make what I meant clearer when I stated modern and even many traditional astrologers state Lots need power from planets (via aspects) to even have an effect.



A question-one traditional astrologer stated spiritual life and religion can be determined using ARabic Parts specifically Part of Spirit. I already know you stated the traditionals did not view spirituality in this way but there is so much stuff I don't know where to begin.

Click to expand...

Obviously they've never read any traditional texts! Lots are only calculated if you need to know something in more detail. Most of them (with the exception of the Hermetic Lots, plus Basis and Exaltation) are Topic based. You have a Lot of the Mother in your chart. Most people would consider it important to know something about your mother, they wouldn't dismiss your mother as being irrelevant because the Lot of the Mother ws not aspected.

You have a Lot of Marriage in your chart. Again most people would consider it important, even if it shows your chances of marriage are low. I repeat what I said in the post above. Lots are not active. They are used to identify the planets that signify those topics. The position of the Lot in your chart will have relevance through it's relationships to the Ascendant and the Lot of Fortune.

Lots may or may not be aspected. They don't get power from the aspects, though they do get bonified (made more favourable) or malefied (made less favourable).

Some Lots will be totally irrelevant even if they are hard aspected by every planet. For example the Lot of Barley never have any importance to you - unless you become a trader in Barley.

Barkey Foreman said:

Last but not least did the Greeks view the signs in stages?

In Sun Sign astrology, there are stages for each sign.

For example in Scorpio; Lizard-evil sadistic cruel, Scorpion-struggling survival, Phoenix-Saint and embodiment of virtue

Pisces-downward Fish is a criminal of the worst type, middle ground is trying to overcome addictions, upward Fish is a Saint and matyr.

This is not just limtied to Sun Sign astrology, even modern natal astrologers emphasize things such as the "Phoenix stage of Scorpio",etc for Sun Signs and I seen some people who blend in traditional and modern astrology state the Ascendant is you and is in stages (one such hybrid astrologer told me to arise from the ashes and grow into the Phoenix in this lifetime).

Did the Greeks even believe in different stages for signs?Some moderns extend it to 10 or mroe!

Click to expand...

Hellenistic Astrologers certainly did subdivide signs, the main divisions used were the Bounds and Decans that I have already referred to. There are also duodecatemoria, or a twelve part division. As far as my studies go up to know, I've not seen any of these described as a stage of life. Those are usually examined through the triplicity lords - indeed by the early Medieval period that had become three stages of life, rather than the two of the Hellenistic period.

Some more on Scorpo

I've found a couple of passages that might help you.

Firstly from Vettius Valens (2nd Century)

Scorpio is the the home of Mars.....it is a feminine sign, firm and fixed and extremely fertile. Scorpio natives tend to have an abundant supply of seed within. They can however be inclined towards destruction. The sign itself is watery and is thus inclined downwards. Its natives are not vocal. The sign itself is connected to slavery and is unchangeable. If the planet in Scorpio is retrograde at the moment of birth then the native could have a tendency to be foul smelling. If the sign were involved in an eclipse then the native would be extremely prolific and capable of putting forward many great works'.

Firstly a Scorpio native is a person with Scorpio on the Ascendant, not someone with the Sun in Scorpio. Much of the interpretation is derived from Scorpio being a fixed, feminine, water sign. The destructive reference is because Mars is its ruler. Foul smells are something that was associated with Scorpio for a long time. I think that lies in it being fixed water, and thus stagnant water became associated with it. All water signs were seen as fertile.

Secondly from Firmicus Maternus (4th Century)

The signs of the Zodiac can have great power in forecasting....even when bare of planets. But this effect is found only on the angles.....

Those who have the Ascendant in Scorpio are clever, bad tempered and active in early youth but encounter many kinds of misfortune in life. But afterwards, if Jupiter is in aspect in any way they will attain fortune, power and happiness. ....By their own wish they will travel into another region or state....They will be elevated in mind, sharp witted and eloquent. Variety will always be pleasing to them.

This is much less related to the nature of the sign than Valens' treatment. Though the 'misfortune' is a clear reference to Mars and the 'active in youth' is a clear refrence to Scorpio as a fertile sign. I can only think that the refrence to travel is from Cancer being the Ninth Place and the Moon is an obvious symbol of speed and travel.

Note that again, signs become significant in their own right only when on an angle. That is the Ascendant, MC, Descendant and IC.

Question on the thing about the Ascendant-there is a branch of modern astrology that is freewill. They state stuff like "Capricorn ascendant live hard lives" are nonesense and they don't believe in such linear interpretation. In fact they believe such interpretations are useless because they are only focusing on one element of the chart.

Also even modern astrologers believe that the signs are not important even when on the angles. Particularly the ascendant which is only believed to be a social mask in the mdoern systems. They believe those angles are no more important than any aspects (esp. the ascendant) unless they aspect planets themselves.

Barkey Foreman said:

Question on the thing about the Ascendant-there is a branch of modern astrology that is freewill. They state stuff like "Capricorn ascendant live hard lives" are nonesense and they don't believe in such linear interpretation. In fact they believe such interpretations are useless because they are only focusing on one element of the chart.

Also even modern astrologers believe that the signs are not important even when on the angles. Particularly the ascendant which is only believed to be a social mask in the mdoern systems. They believe those angles are no more important than any aspects (esp. the ascendant) unless they aspect planets themselves.

Click to expand...

the issue of Free Will v Fate is one that you started a thread on, so I'll simply refer you to that for a more in depth response. One can go to extremes either way. At one end That you can be born deaf blind and dumb in a shanty town in Georgia of destitute parents without education and your chances of becoming President are exactly the same as if you were born the child of a a Millionaire Senator from Massachusetts - that you have total control over your destiny. At the other, than what ever you do your fate was written the day that you were born and you can't change one jot or tittle of it.

The reality is that life's a balance between what the environment throws at you and your own efforts to cope with and influence your environment. We are not all equally dealt the same hand by the environment, not have we all the same capacity for self help. You will find Astrologers from the year dot, that take one or other of these positions.

The angles of a chart have always been the most important part of the chart. Denying that the Ascendants is more important than the sixth house is basically to say that chart's lack any order or structure. Astrology becomes chaotic.

Traditional Astrology says the Ascendant is you, the rest of the chart relates to your family and the world around you. Psychological Astrology says that the chart relates entirely to your mind. Therefore the Ascendant cannot purely be 'you', it must be some feature of you - the mask you wear, how you project yourself to the outside world. The problem here is that if only your mind is real, how can you be sure that the Astrologer you're consulting is not just a figment of your own imagination?

Sorry about asking the same questions over and over but astrology in general is so full of contradicting stuff like one modern astrologer stated, its hard for a beginner to decipher right from wrong stuff. I'll try not to reask the question but some statements such as the ascendant just being a social mask and so forte are so repeated its hard not to take them off your mind when you talk about astrology (unless you are a traditional one).

I agree imo what moderns say about the asc because to begin with it already contradicts modern astrology's claim that the whole chart matters and placement representing different parts of your personality.

Sure he may be charmy but is it truly because of his Libra ascendant? Or is it because the girls he is with are pretty?

Sure he may be very social in public with people he just met... But is it really the Aquarius asc? I mean he is 11th house dominant and Aquarius is his second dominant? I know Aquarius asc who are secretive and avoid social interactions. They are more Scorpio or Earthy even in public and introverted.

Sure he may be brash and hot-tempered when you meet the local jock at school. But is it really his Aries asc? Or is it because he's having problems with the family and is at his boiling point?

Nevermind external factors. She's about as conservative and feminine as Cancer's description goes when you meet her at the market. But the culture she comes from is very sexist and forces women to dress fully covered! Is it really Cancer asc or is it society's standards?By that standards would all Amish women be Cancer asc?

Thats why I call the concept of social mask (not just Ascendant in modern western astrology but similar placements in other forms of astrology) REALLY RIDICULOUS and STUPID!

I'll stop here because I'll go ona tantrum. But I just think the concept of a social mask is a SLAP IN THE FACE against human nature!


So that means the MC, Dsc, and IC are more important than any planets?

These angles don't get much importance in modern astrology other than their specific points (MC career, Dsc marriage, IC home life,etc)? Even taken into account they're just seen akin to mask (unlike social mask as Asc but specific to other life aspects MC is career mask, Ic is home life mask,etc), they are not seen important by their own.

I'd like to know more ont he other Hermetic lots specifically courage, nemesis, and necessity.

How did the Greeks view orbs?

Lot of Death

If possible can you give me a brief summary of this lot?

Mine is in Aries. Does that mean I will die a violent death perhaps in a street fight or in war,etc.

Minderwiz said:

In terms of which is your strongest, it depends on the criteria you use. Saturn is in its own sign and in an angular house with no major debilities at all, except for a mild affliction from Mars by conjunction. Mars suffers more here, because it is less malefic than Saturn and because Saturn is earlier in the zodiac. Saturn is the stronger.

On a Medieval basis, using Ibn Ezra's calculation for Almuten (winner) of the chart, Mars comes out first and Saturn is third or fourth! Personally I'd take Saturn as the strongest planet in your chart.

Click to expand...

What is Almuten? And since I'm MArtian what does that say according to Ibn Ezra's system? Does that explain why I had almost a Naziesque obsession with the military in my youth?

And you said aspects are based on signs sitting and seeing each other. So how would say Leo see Aries and Sagittarius? What exactly does viewing in trine bring positive stuff as opposed to square and opposition? You said opposition means its the sign in front of you. Why would seeing Aquarius directly bring conflict? Where would Aries and Sagittarius sit in front of Leo's PoV and why is their location direction a positive one? If Aries sat in front of Leo would that bring conflict according to the round table philosophy?

And how do squares bring conflict? HOw would Scorpio seeing Aquarius to its right bring negative interaction?