***Please Read Before Posting On This Board***

[Osamenor]

This is the Traditional Astrology forum. Out of all the different boards in this forum, this one is the home for traditional astrologers. It was created so that traditional astrologers can discuss traditional astrology with each other, without having to justify it to non-traditionalists or be interrupted by people disagreeing with traditional perspectives. Traditional astrologers, welcome home! You already know what to post and what not to post, so you may go ahead and post without reading further.

If you are not a traditional astrologer, you are welcome as a guest. Good guests respect the rules of the house. In this house, the main rule is that all posts must stick to traditional astrology only. Please read the rest of this and make sure that everything you post here is strictly traditional. If your post is not traditional, it belongs on one of our other boards, not here.

Your post is not traditional if it includes any of the following:

- Pluto, Neptune, or Uranus. Planets discovered with the telescope are not used in traditional astrology. If your post treats any of them as astrological planets, it belongs in either Modern Astrology or any of the other boards. If you want to post to ask why traditional astrologers don't use those planets, do so anywhere but this board or Modern Astrology, or search the other boards for an existing discussion on that. It is not respectful to come into someone's house and demand why they don't do things your way.

- Centaurs, such as Chiron, or asteroids. Again, nothing discovered with the telescope is used in traditional astrology. Only the sun, moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn are used as planets.

- Non-Ptolemaic aspects--biquintiles, quincunxes, semisquares, etc. In traditional astrology, the only aspects considered are the trine, sextile, square, opposition, and conjunction. All other aspects are modern astrology.

- Treats the sun sign as equivalent to the person (I'm a Leo, my sister's a Libra, my best friend's a Pisces, I always wind up dating Geminis, etc.) and/or equates sun sign with personality (he's stubborn because he's a Taurus, she's picky because she's a Virgo, etc.). While the sun's placement is important in traditional astrology, it's not treated as an abbreviation for the person or the primary determinant of personality. That kind of view of the sun sign is part of modern astrology.

- Western sidereal astrology. That's a variant of modern astrology.

- Vedic astrology. Posts about Vedic astrology belong on the Vedic astrology board.

If you want to post about any of those things, take it to another part of the forum. If you genuinely want to learn about traditional astrology, and will keep your posts on this board strictly traditional, welcome... go ahead and post!

 

[Osamenor]

Traditionalists: if you see anything I forgot on the list of not traditional, or anything that needs correction, please point it out. Would be much appreciated!

 

[waybread]

Osamenor, I hope you will consider the following modifications to your sticky. I write them based on my participation in Skyscript's traditional astrology forum, and also my observations of the history of astrology, as well as astrologers' opinions on-line and in-print.

1. Some astrologers do use the modern outers, but as supplementary data points, not as sign rulers or as fitting into the schemes of essential dignities and debilities.

A good example is Olivia Barclay, Horary Astrology Rediscovered. She was the primary interpreter of William Lilly in her day. She had a huge impact on reintroducing horary into what was then "modern psychological astrology," yet her book shows multiple examples of using modern outers.

2. Modern astrology really only got its start around 1900, so both Uranus and Neptune were discovered when traditional astrology was all that existed in the West, despite its "big sleep" from around 1700-1900. See, for example: http://skyscript.co.uk/ur_aq.html

3. There is also a debate about "naked eye" vs. telescopic astrology.

The invention of the telescope probably dates to 1608, well within the period of traditional western astrology. Galileo taught astrology at the University of Padua, yet is famous for his discovery of Jupiter's moons through the telescope. He wondered whether or how they could be included into astrology. Johannes Kepler (1571-1630) was probably the most famous astrologer-astronomer. http://www.skyscript.co.uk/kepler2.html

If practicing astrologers weren't upset about telescopes and astronomy in the 17th century, I don't see a clear logical argument for denying them today.

Again, the main argument against using modern outers and asteroids is really that they cannot be shoe-horned into the standard tables of essential dignities and debilities.

4. The origins of the quintile, bi-quintile and sesqui-square are also attributed to Kepler. He claimed their validity was based upon his own extensive observations. Granted, they are little used in traditional western astrology today, but neither is it accurate to think of them as distinctively modern.

5. The determinants of personality get really tricky, because prior to modern psychology, people had very different ideas about it. However, Hellenistic astrology had all kinds of planetary determinants of what I would call character or temperament.

The ascendant was the principal "me" point, but all of the planets got taken into account in describing someone's moral character, chances for success in life, religiosity, friendships, upbringing, and so on. Saturn was usually but not always a negative influence; Venus was normally beneficial although in a man's chart she might make him soft and "effeminate" [sic] or overly fond of luxury, for example. Sometimes the moon was seen as highly influencing the quality of one's "soul." Some of the "lots" or Arabic parts also had a lot to say about character: the lot of the spirit, for example.

I've mostly restricted my study of the history traditional astrology to the Hellenistic period, but it had a big influence on what came later. But some good ancient "cookbooks" with a lot to say about character were Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos, Valens, Anthologies, and Firmicus Maternus.

Then there were different traditional personality types based upon the distribution of elements in the chart: sanguine, melancholic, choleric, and phlegmatic (air, earth, fire, water.) This had a lot to do with medical beliefs in the 4 humours. See for example, Dorian Greenbaum's Temperament: Astrology's Forgotten Key.

6. I don't know if you wish to include Babylonian astrology, which clearly had a big impact on Hellenistic horoscopic astrology.

Obviously, within the boundaries of traditional western astrology today there are many points open for debate, just as there were in centuries past. The ancient, medieval and renaissance astrologers did not all agree with one another, just is there is debate among practitioners today.

 

[Osamenor]

[Deleted reference to a post that has now been moved to a new thread. - Osamenor, Moderator]

Waybread,

Thank you for your feedback. My point in making this sticky wasn't to parse apart the finer points of what is and isn't traditional astrology, but to redirect the off topic posters who've been posting on this board all too often lately. Recently, it seems that we've been moving as many thoroughly non-traditional threads from this board as there have been traditional threads posted. Obviously, the blurb isn't enough--all too many people ignore it. My hope is that the sticky will get their attention and let them know that no, you may not post another topic about Pluto in here. Or use this board to ask what the difference is between a square and a semisquare--take that to modern or to the general section.

Outer planets are definitely not traditional astrology. Fair point about my wording on sun sign and personality. I'll see if I can tweak it. [Edit: I just did.] The point I'm making is that it's not a traditional topic if you're making sun sign shorthand for personality, as in, "I'm an Aquarius, should I consider dating a Taurus or Scorpio?" (I moved a couple of topics in that vein from this board in the last month or so).

What I listed was the clear violations of the traditional only rule I've been seeing on this board (not sure I've seen Vedic astrology over here, but someone did think modern sidereal astrology was traditional... so it's only a short step from there to Vedic).

 

[petosiris]

Osamenor, I like everything in the sticky. The only thing I am concerned about is the following ''The focus is less on what would be considered modern psychological chart interpretation and more on prediction''. It will be nice to know whether it is permissible to be outright skeptical about prediction of fortune, marriage, career, children, siblings, or the most controversial length of life.

I am not saying there should not be criticism of techniques, I am saying it should be made with astrological chart examples and defenses, not outright being skeptical of it, which might be more suited for another board (some board suited for ethics or philosophy). I don't see that methodology contributing anything to traditional astrology.

 

[Osamenor]

Osamenor, I like everything in the sticky. The only thing I am concerned about is the following ''The focus is less on what would be considered modern psychological chart interpretation and more on prediction''. It will be nice to know whether it is permissible to be outright skeptical about prediction of fortune, marriage, career, children, siblings, or the most controversial length of life.

My concern here is with all the people who've been posting decidedly non-traditional topics on the Traditional Astrology board. A topic dedicated to pure psychological astrology would be non-traditional. A debate among traditional astrologers over the accuracy of predictions or the validity of traditional methods of prediction, or the ethics of making certain kinds of predictions in the first place, would still be a traditional astrology topic.

You're getting that from the forum blurb, not the sticky. I didn't mention the predictive/psychological part because that's not what I've been seeing in the off topic threads on this board. If they do delve into psychological astrology, they're also talking about outer planets or equating the person with their sun sign--which I've already covered in my other points.

 

[waybread]

I just caught the two posts by Petosiris.

I think it's fine to have lively debates on this board, as we've done in the past.

I am very clear on my historical facts.

As Petosiris may be thinking, however, there is so much more historical thought on what today simply passes for "naked eye astrology." To call something "naked eye" is almost a misnomer, compared with how the old trads conceptualized light.

My primary concern, however, is that there is actually less orthodoxy today on what constitutes traditional western astrology than some authors would have us believe: just looking at what our contemporary trads write is sufficient to make my case. Which I can do. I have also seen the negative effect of certain self-appointed gate-keepers of this forum on any kind of nuanced discussion.

Osamenor, I do think a sticky with ground rules is valuable: I thought tsmall had written one, but maybe I'm mistaken. I just don't think it should rule as out-of-bounds (no pun intended) themes as being "modern" that actually originated in centuries past, prior to modern astrology's introduction. And, as with the line on the ascendant as the "me point" vs. astrology's rich lore on character and temperament, I think a sticky should be accurate.

Hopefully this discussion here will produce that mutually appreciated objective.

 

[IleneK]

All, shall we show some respect for Osamenor's request?

This thread isn't the place to respond to previous posters. I considered locking it once I made it sticky, but left it open only so that people could help me out in case I missed something. Your post is all about debating waybread. Please do that somewhere else.

 

[waybread]

All, shall we show some respect for Osamenor's request?

Osamenor, once you have closed modifications to your sticky, perhaps you could move the extraneous posts to a new thread. They have generated some interesting discussion.

 

[Osamenor]

Osamenor, once you have closed modifications to your sticky, perhaps you could move the extraneous posts to a new thread. They have generated some interesting discussion.

All,

I have done exactly that. The discussion that started on this thread can now be found here.

I am closing this thread now, since it doesn't seem possible to leave it open without inviting a big off topic debate. I am still open to suggestions, if anyone thinks the wording of the sticky needs any clarification or modification, but please post them in the other thread, or start a new one if that one gets big.

To be clear, I am not saying traditional astrologers can't debate the finer points of what is and isn't traditional astrology, or can't voice disagreements. That was never the intention. The list of don'ts here is intended for people who come to this board not knowing what traditional astrology is and post thoroughly non-traditional topics. If you're not someone who does that, you're not the target of that list.