Solunars by Aldebaran Sidereal Academy

Fellow astrologers I focus primarily on planetary combos with much less emphasis on sign significations other than ownership, exaltations and falls. However I have become very interested in the attributions of the triplicities and quaternities in terms of the sidereal zodiac.

Mutable signs are bicorpereal, and this is reflected in the sky (allowing for the Virgin's wings), but other than phases of the tropical seasons how do you use cardinal and fixed sign significations?

What I'm getting at is whether the quaternities were introduced by tropical astrologers in the West, or whether the signs had these significations in an ancient sidereal context.

Sorry if this has been covered before, please do point me to relevant threads.

Thanks in advance,

Felix

Felix, welcome to solunars.com!

This thread covers the subject of your question from practical perspective:
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=36

On the history, whether the signs had these significations in an ancient sidereal context, I'm not sure.

Felix wrote: Tue Aug 21, 2018 9:50 am What I'm getting at is whether the quaternities were introduced by tropical astrologers in the West, or whether the signs had these significations in an ancient sidereal context.

They exist in early first millennium works, such as those of Manilius, Firmicus, and Ptolemy. (Is this what you wanted to know? I'm a little unclear what you mean by "sign significations.")

Thanks for the reply Jim.

I'm familiar with those authors from the beginning of the common era, when the sidereal and what has become the tropical zodiacs closely overlapped.

My query lies in whether the signs were attributed the significations of the quaternities before Aries solar ingress marked the beginning of spring. This is a knotty problem - when the vernal equinox was in Taurus, was Aries considered a cardinal sign? Evidence one way or the other is buried in the avalanche of time, but you see my point?

Are the quaternities descriptors of the seasonal cycle or inherent in the signs?

As for the significations of the quaternities, I mean the stolid, perseverance of fixed signs, the versatility and wavering nature of mutable signs, and so on.

Danica has kindly pointed out a very interesting thread which I'm looking at, which qualifies these significations from a Western sidereal point of view. Still I wonder!

Incidentally, I think it is natural for our minds to examine any collection of things and divide them into fractal sub-groupings, so if the quaternities do turn out to be exclusively tropical in origin (to my satisfaction) then new meaning must naturally be found, and the hub, spoke and rim model is as good a place as any to start!

Currently I think that the quaternities predate the tropical zodiac, based mainly on the bicorpereal images of the mutable signs - the virgin's wings notwithstanding.

Sorry to go on

I can't vouch for how old these are. Of course, we are discovering new things all the time (e.g. the ways of progressing solar returns surely weren't known to the ancients either).

One place where we have something like the quadruplicities - at least one quadruplicity - can be found in the Babylonian boundary stones where images of their equivalent of what we call the Hub constellations were used to mark field perimeters. (However, it was expressed in terms of Babylon's equator-based proto-zodiac.) I'd have to dig out my Gleadow to review the details, but it's pretty old.

Felix wrote: Wed Aug 22, 2018 3:32 am My query lies in whether the signs were attributed the significations of the quaternities before Aries solar ingress marked the beginning of spring. This is a knotty problem - when the vernal equinox was in Taurus, was Aries considered a cardinal sign? Evidence one way or the other is buried in the avalanche of time, but you see my point?

I se your distinction but I don't really see what it matters one way or the other.

As a point of semantics, the Rim constellations weren't considered "cardinal" until they were cardinal, i.e., related to the cardines (or colures: equinoxes and solstices - and the cardinal directions of the compass). That's just a label, though.

Are the quaternities descriptors of the seasonal cycle or inherent in the signs?

On that I can give you a clear answer: No, there is no reason to suspect this since the entire history of solar distribution studies has shown that the boundaries of sign-like effects are where the Sidereal boundaries are, not anywhere linkable to the seasons. The few truly seasonal distributions of sign traits (the famous "scientists born mid-winter, artists born early fall" results) flip 180° when you cross the equator - they're truly seasonal. But pretty much everything else that has been studied hasn't followed tropical boundaries.

As for the significations of the quaternities, I mean the stolid, perseverance of fixed signs, the versatility and wavering nature of mutable signs, and so on.

FWIW I don't take "stolid perseverance" as Hub traits - sounds too much like someone is trying to describe the driven stubbornness of Rims using a Tropical framework. (I think Fagan was overly influenced by the British war view of Churchill &c.) But for Spokes, yes, the trait matches. But notice that it matches groups that were born mostly in the early weeks of a new season, i.e., Sidereal Spokes.

I think what you're trying to do here is risky because it's primarily a thought exercise. Your approach tries to logic out how it should be instead of pursing evidence of what's so. Thought exercises are useful as brainstorming, as long as we don't take them too seriously as representing anything real.

...if the quaternities do turn out to be exclusively tropical in origin (to my satisfaction) then new meaning must naturally be found, and the hub, spoke and rim model is as good a place as any to start!

Considering that there is no substantial evidence to support the existence of the Tropical zodiac, it seems silly to me to bother.

Jim Eshelman wrote: Wed Aug 22, 2018 7:48 am I think what you're trying to do here is risky because it's primarily a thought exercise. Your approach tries to logic out how it should be instead of pursing evidence of what's so. Thought exercises are useful as brainstorming, as long as we don't take them too seriously as representing anything real.

Worthy of enshrining on an embroidered pillow.

I've had a look at the hub - spoke - wheel material and am intrigued. I'll test it on some charts and come back.

Rather than how things "should" work, or brainstorming I'm interested in when the ecliptic was divided into equal signs, when the lunar mansions came into being, and this from an Indian perspective. Specifically I wonder about pre Hellenic Indian divisions, whether the 12 signs were a western import, or from a common source.

I just got a book today thru the post, "Pre-siddhantic astronomy - a Reappraisal". When I've read it I will feed back if you like.

Thanks for your input and enthusiasm.

Felix wrote: Tue Aug 28, 2018 12:47 pm Rather than how things "should" work, or brainstorming I'm interested in when the ecliptic was divided into equal signs

I can trace this at least to around 2800 BC. AFAIK there is no point in the history of Egyptian astrology that it wasn't true, though logic says there was some ancient, primitive "sorting out: period.

when the lunar mansions came into being

I'd have to dig back in my Gleadow. I don't remember. Definitely later that the constellations, and varying between systems of 28 and 27 depending on geography.

and this from an Indian perspective.

Oh, well, that's pretty late. I don't think there's nothing in Indian astrology traceable to earlier than the first few centuries AD, although there had to be some Greek seeds planted by Alexander's invasion 4th C BC.

Specifically I wonder about pre Hellenic Indian divisions, whether the 12 signs were a western import, or from a common source.

To the best of my knowledge, there's no such thing. India appears to have gotten the beginnings of its astrology 100% from the Greeks.