posted November 03, 2006 04:28 PM              

The Hearthstone Star of My Life:
Castor - One of the Twins of Gemini, with Saturn in Foundation

STARS THAT ARE LINKED TO MY PLANETS:
(the only star of my youth) - Alnilam - The Belt of Orion, with Saturn

(stars of my prime) - Antares - The Heart of the Scorpion, with Venus (this star happens to by Arising Lying Hidden)

Bellatrix - The Left Shoulder of the God, with Mercury in Prime

Castor - One of the Twins of Gemini, with Saturn in Prime

(star of my latter years) - Alcyone - The Pleiade, The Third Eye, with Sun

Bellatrix - with Sun

(my Angle star) - Sadalmelek - Lucky one of the King

If someone can analyze this following information for me:

Heliacal Setting Star:
Mirach - The Receptive Feminine
Prime Star: Antares - The Heart of the Scorpion - With Venus - "Arising Lying Hidden" (only prime star of mine emphasized as specific)
(arising lying hidden stars have a more fated manner and are expressed more powerfully & bluntly)

Can anyone tell from this information if my possible fame (spica,etc) could have something to do with an extreme (arising lying hidden) expression of sexuality, sexual values, relationships, etc (antares-heart of the scorpion with venus, mirach)??

(i do have Pluto opposition Vesta*)

posted November 04, 2006 11:59 AM              

quote:

---

But after this, they go on and talk about the stars of my prime, latter years and foundation. The trouble is the stars THEY say influence me are not forming any aspect with my planets (most of them; some are, but within a wide orb). What's going on here?

---

I know its our natal fixed star report and with some people theyll get so excited that they only read the parts that talk about love,money,success,etc. But if you read it from Start to finish, it helps. Because in mine, (trying to use it as an example), it gives a sort of "stars" introduction, then it gives me my Heliacal rising star, then my heliacal setting star, then it gives me, then there will be this section that says "some stars are arising lying hidden, some stars are circumpolar, etc), and then after your Heliacal Stars there should be a page that states the stars connected to your Angles (your Ascendant/Descendant - IC/MC axis), i hope this helps.

posted November 05, 2006 01:40 AM            

The paran method is based on horizon meridian coordinate system. it's a visual based system and it's location sensitive. That means if you put in a different location like a different country,all your parans would change. It's seeing the sky from a different point of view.

Paran system was the ancient Egyptian way of looking at the stars.

Conjunctions to stars is mainly projecting stars on the ecliptic. The zodiacal placements is actually the ecliptic longitude coordinates. Many stars aren't even on the ecliptic as they are in constellations that are off the ecliptic.

If an astrologer works with a star's projected ecliptical degree,when a star is in the same degree as the Ascendant for a particular chart, it bears no visual connection to the actual location of the star. The star may have risen hours earlier or may not be due to rise for some hours to come.

The actual separation of a star and planet that are in conjunction in ecliptic longitude tend to be much greater that they aren't in a true conjunction. True conjunctions tend to be occulations which are they conjunct and they parallel. I have Moon conjunct and parallel Ancha, a star in constellation in Aquarius. According to ecliptic longitude,my Moon is conjunct the stars,Fomalhaut and Sadalmelik too. My Mercury is conjunct Zuben Hakrabi and Zuben Eschamali. My Venus is conjunct Unukalhai. None of those stars are actually the planets. Fomalhaut(Pisces Australis) is not even in the same constellation as my Moon(Aquarius). Unukalhai(Serpentis) is not in same constellation as my Venus(Libra). I don't view them as conjunctions,and they might not have much of an influence like the parans do.

Bernadette Brady come up with a more appropriate term for conjunctions in the ecliptic. She uses the word,alignments.

I have her book, Brady's Fixed Stars. It's all about parans,heliacal rising star,and heliacal setting star.

She explains the mythology of the stars too. She believes to understand the star, you have understand the mythology of the star. She didn't like the fatalistic,dark interpretations that astrologers assigned for stars..especially when it didn't fit in with the mythology of the stars. She considers mythology of many cultures.

posted November 05, 2006 02:12 AM            

A paran between a planet and a fixed star occurs when the planet and
fixed star are rising, setting, culminating, or anti-culminating.
For example, if Mercury is rising (or setting, culminating, or
anti-culminating) and the fixed star Regulus is culminating (or
rising, setting, or anti-culminating), then a paran occurs. A planet
that is rising or setting is on the horizon plane. A planet that is
culminating or anti-culminating is on the meridian plane. Therefore,
another way to define a paran is that a paran occurs when both the
planet and fixed star are on the horizon or meridian planes.

Parans occur periodically throughout the day and in a birth chart,
very often no parans occur. However, planets are in paran
relationship with many fixed stars. By "paran relationship" is meant
that if the sky were rotated so that the planet is on the meridian
or horizon plane, the fixed star would also be on the horizon and
meridian plane. The planet and fixed star are in paran relationship
even though they are not physically on the horizon and meridian
planes at the given time. When two celestial objects are in paran
relationship but not actually on the horizon and meridian planes,
they can be called "rotated parans".

One must decide how to measure the orb of the rotated paran. Because
parans do not occur in relationship to the zodiac and the ecliptic
plane, the usual way of measuring astrological orbs as a difference
in zodiacal degrees does not work for calculating the orbs of parans
and rotated parans.

In the list above, the orbs are calculated as follows:

If both celestial objects are on the meridian plane (both
culminating, both anti-culminating, or one culminating and one
anti-culminating), then the orb is calculated as the difference in
right ascension. This method of calculating orbs makes sense because
an orb calculated in this way is the arc which separates the planets
from being precisely on the meridian plane with no orb.

Note that if two planet are conjunct in right ascension, then they
culminate together and they anti-culminate together. Another term
for "culminate" is "conjunct the MC in right ascension". Another
term for "anti-culminate" is "opposition the MC in right ascension".
In the listing above, two celestial objects that are conjunct in
right ascension will culminate and anti-culminate together. If the
two celestial objects are listed as opposition in right ascension,
then as one celestial object culminates, the other anti-culminates
and vice versa.

If one celestial object is on the meridian plane and the other is on
the horizon plane, then the sky is rotated to place one celestial
object precisely on the meridian plane, and the angle of the other
object from the horizon plane is given. This angle is the direct
angle of the celestial object perpendicularly measured to the
horizon plane. This angle is known as the altitude of the planet,
which is either north (above the horizon) or south (below the
horizon).

Similarly, if both celestial objects are rising or setting together,
then the sky is rotated so that one planet is precisely on the
horizon and the altitude of the other planet serves as the orb.

An alternative way to measure orbs of parans and rotated parans is
to measure the amount of time taken for one celestial object to
reach the meridian or horizon plane after the other celestial object
has reached the meridian or horizon plane, but this form of
measurement can produce odd results, such as a birth chart in
northern Sweden, Finland, or Canada, with a planet almost precisely
on the horizon, but not regarded as being on the horizon because at
these high geographic latitudes it can take hours for this planet to
reach the horizon. For this reason, the measurement of orbs as
described above is used, although there is not universal agreement
by astrologers on how orbs of parans and rotated parans should be
measured.

posted November 05, 2006 02:35 AM            

As soon as precession was recognized, it acted as a catalyst on the human mind. The puzzle of it teased the human mind into awareness,logic,numbers,maths,and eventually science. This puzzle that longed to be solved concerned the nature and rate of movement of precession. By the time of Ptolemy (100-173 C.E.,approximately)the question was still largely unanswered and so attracted a great deal of his attention.

Ptolemy was primarily an astronomer. He was really more interested in the mathematics of the sky than its symbolic meaning. His main logistical problem was that two sets of data were required to answer the question on precession:the accurate position of stars for one period in time; and the position of the same list of stars, measured for a later period. By comparing the two lists and knowing the time period between the two, the rate of precession could be found.

The method of locating a star in the sky,in use by the early astronomers before Ptolemy, was to note the date and time of lunar cycles,along with the Moon's degree of longitude and latitude,then to mark its orientation to a star. This was a cumbersome method which the following excerpt from Ptolemy's Almagest describes:

"Again, Timnicharis says he observed in Alexandria that in the year 36 of the First Callipic Period exactly at the beginning of the tenth hour,the moon appeared to overake with its northern arc the northern star of those in the Scorpion's forehead. And this date is the year 454 of Navonassar, Egyptian wise Phaophi 16-17, 3 seasonal hours after midnight and 3 2/5 equatorian hours,because the sun was 26 degrees within the Archer,but 3 1/6 hours with respect to regular solar days. At that hour the true position of the Moon's centre was 31 1/4 degrees from the autumn equinox and 1 1/3 degree north of the ecliptic."

Ptolemy proceeded to repeat the situation,found the position of particular lunation for his current date, and then calculated the star's movement. But it was tedious and not all that accurate,so Ptolemy decided to develop a better system of recording the position of the stars. His logic was that if he could clearly lay down a technique for measuring stars and use that technique for measuring "as many stars as we could up to those of the sixth magnitude," then he could produce a list of stars that could be used by future generations of astronomers to check his estimates of the rate of precession.
His method was simple. He first developed an instrument which would enable him to make the measurements needed. He found the poles of the ecliptic and then he projected every star onto the ecliptic via the lines of longitude from these poles. The point where the projected star cut the ecliptic was carefully measured,as well as the star's latitude north or south of the ecliptic. He measured 1022 stars and published this list in his Almagest.
It was an ingenious system. It meant that the position of a star could be accurately and simply recorded. It could be reproduced in years to come so that any change in the ecliptical position of the star could be easily noted. It was a huge advancement for astronomers and placed Ptolemy among the giants of astronomy. However,it seems to have altered the way in which astrology worked with fixed stars. Until that time the evidence suggests that the predominant method for working with stars in astrology was via their risings,culminations,and settings. However,within several hundred years,astrologers had taken Ptolemy's convenient list of stars with their ecliptical degrees and were applying it to their trade,forsaking the more tedious,older methodologies. Ptolemy had developed the list as an astronomer, for astronomical needs. He was, after all, an astronomer,and the book where he published this listing was not his book on astrology,Tetrabiblos,but his great astronomical work,The Almagest. Later astrologers,however, swayed by the eminence of his name, chose to use Ptolemy's star list of ecliptical projected degrees as the preferred methodology for working with fixed stars astrologically.
This was a slow transition,for in 379 C.E., "The Treatise on Bright Fixed Stars,'' written by an unknown author, talks of using stars which are close to the ecliptic in the above fashion but uses stars that are away from the ecliptic to work with the "pivot points" of the chart. This is known today as working in parans.