posted June 21, 2016 10:47 AM            

I had to look it up:

quote:

---

Most powerful indeed, then, is the midpoint of the Sun and Moon relationship. This is an additional analytical appreciation of the “Lights” themselves. A planet square, opposed, conjoined or quindecile with the Sun/Moon midpoint (note: the “ / “ means midpoint) will dominate the life. A powerful other component is added to the core-significant Sun-Moon polarity by relating to the Sun/Moon midpoint.

---

Tyl is the one who popularized the quindecile (as you probably already know), so I'm not really surprised he's promoting it in this context...but it just looks random and odd to me. If he's going to deviate from the standard, using something other than conjunction, opposition, and square....why not also include the semisquare, sesquisquare, septile...?

posted June 22, 2016 10:32 AM            

Also Tyl may be the most prominent promoter of quindeciles but he is not the only one mentioning them. Blashke does, so too, as does Cochrane.

However they belong to the 24th harmonic family; the basic angular distance in this is 15° - quindeciles are thus the 11th member of the family (11x 15 = 165° ).

The question is now why single out that aspect, but neglect the other members of the family?

Well most ARE being considered already (conjunction, semisextile, semisquare, sextile, square, trine, sesissquare, quinkunx, quindecile, opposition).

But it leaves two members of the family which are being neglected: 75° and 105°.

Michael Rosher, a German astrologer, considered the 75° aspect to be pretty important actually, as well as the 105° aspect, calling them "Bilin" and "Trilin" (he also mentions the quindecile under the name "Tao" btw).

he considered them being obsessive, and sometimes leading to a fixation that could in some instances be selfdestructive, especially in aspect to angles.

Also, he put most emphasis on these as "triggering" events (hence in predictive astrology) - apparently related to karmic events (and not always the pleasant kind!) or intervention of fate.

BTW Even Kepler used those aspects already, so it`s not a new invention in our century, just maybe a re-discovery.

Interestingly Mr Sag`s Pluto has a bilin to my Venus with an orb of only 16 minutes (well the orbs need to be very close, but even that is pretty close to exactness).

It always struck me that we both have natally the square between Venus-Pluto and in the composite as well (even the Davison has an exact quinkunx), so it just never made sense that there would not be a synastric aspect. Well it`s a minor aspect, but we could say our synastric Venus-Pluto-connection resonates to the vibration of the 24th harmonic.

"24th Harmonic: The 5/24 aspect is a hybrid of the square and
sextile aspect, the 7/24 aspect is a hybrid of the square and
trine aspect, and the 11/24 aspect indicates an unrelenting
headstrong determination, with disruption and upheaval.
(Godefrey). The 24th harmonic indicates resources available
to the person. The person is motivated to develop these
resources but not with the intensity of the hard aspects. The
meaning of hte 24th harmonic aspects is strongly influenced
by the numerator, and the 5/24 aspect is more subtle and
creative than the 11/24 aspect which is intensely motivating.
The 7/24 aspect is a bit constrained, introverted, and focused
(Cochrane). The 11/24 aspect indicates a tendency towards
being obsessive-compulsive (Ricki Reeves, Noel Tyl)."

the 11/24 is the quindecile.

"our" bilin is the 5/24 aspect, so more "subtle and creative".

BTW just had a fleeting glance at our 24th harmonic synastry and well, and Jeez

Of course it contains ALL 24th harmonic aspects as conjunctions, so pretty much all increments of 15° within 1 degree orb together, or even less orb.

But still seeing something like that stellium of
his Sun-Jupiter falling onto my Venus-Mars

or his Pluto

on my Venus-Vertex (they are quindecile in my chart

(just the ones that stood out to me) certainly gives an interesting image.

But anyway, I do think the quindeciles in particular can be just like Tyl sais they are, not sure I would give them major aspect status though. And I have to prioritize, that is why I don´t focus on these too much, not when I want to get to the "basics".
The connections in these harmonics will appear elsewhere in other ways, too. So I have never used them with midpoints, maybe I should though.

BTW Kannon also mentioned the aspect series of 15° in an article I believe.

https://kannonmcafee.wordpress.com/2015/09/02/15-degree-aspects-in-the-progressed-chart/

It might be worth a look, however personally I would not base my interpretations alone on this, at least not until I am fully convinced. In fact I tend to rely mostly on the 4th armonic aspects in event-astrology (no, scratch that I rely on them SOLEY), and am even not sure about squares to midpoints (direct midpoints ALWAYS work big time), but I am not yet ready to give up on the squares, cause at least in my natal and also progressed charts they have been very valid, I am not yet sure how the distinction to direct ones is though. Maybe it`s more fraught with tension, like something coming from the outside, triggering a reaction, while the diret midpoints work like fusion or instinctively. They just "are".

posted June 22, 2016 11:34 AM            

quote:

---

Well most ARE being considered already (conjunction, semisextile, semisquare, sextile, square, trine, sesissquare, quinkunx, quindecile, opposition).

---

Relative to midpoints? I've just never seen that, and it seems overwhelming to the point of maybe diluting the significance of the midpoint in a huge sea of potential aspects to it.

You know what I mean?

posted June 22, 2016 01:09 PM            

I use all quindeciles, which is to say all 15-degree aspect increments that have been left out of the aspectarians (15, 75, 105, 165). I calculate them mentally as I work. The meaning of the term quindecile is 5+10 or "fifteen." Quin=5; decile=10.

I think its a real stretch to spend time on such aspects to midpoints when there are declinations and other major chart factors to look to for solid major influences. Some interesting and probably useful information can be gained from any such aspects involving the midpoint of the luminaries since they are the energy propulsion of a chart.

However, I do not agree that such aspects to that midpoint will "dominate" the life. Such a statement is given without qualification of the greater specifiers an individual's chart may have. It also is a statement that seems to assume a singular such planet. What if there are multiples creating that aspect condition? The whole notion of dominance then falls apart.

The examples Tyl uses:

- Bill Clinton's Neptunian matters is far better explained by the fact that Neptune is conjunct his Asc in early Libra;

- Barbara Hutton's chart shows a Venus-Pluto opposition creating a t-square to her Aries Asc, so of course she had numerous marriages; also had Venus-Mercury-Moon in parallel out of bounds at 25° south declination;

- JFK had Saturn parallel Sun and MC;

- Schwarzenegger's chart has a number of strong parallels in his chart including Venus and Mars parallel Asc, and Mars parallel Pluto; a quindecile relationship of the Asc to Sun/Moon midpoint, simply has no real bearing on 'body' protection matters by comparison.

Summary

ALL quindeciles (15, 75, 105, and 165°) are minor aspects of lesser importance than declinations (parallels and contra-parallels), especially in aspect to a phantom point like a midpoint. Therefore no certainty of meaning or importance can be given to such quindeciles and midpoints until declinations are thoroughly integrated into the astrologer's practice. In 1999 Tyl was not using declinations to my knowledge. Declinations did not even come onto the radar of modern popular astrology until Steven Forrest published his book 'Book of the Moon' in 2010.

Astrologers who write and perform astrology for a living often attempt to make discoveries that will allow them to stand out, to distinguish themselves from the crowd, because it is very difficult to make a living at astrology. It is even harder than trying to make a living as a writer. But when you are researching and theorizing with only a partial, flattened view of the sky without its north/south dimension, it is too easy to over-emphasize small discoveries to explain what you sense is intuitively there, but are missing because you are not looking at that north/south dimension -- the declinations.

posted June 22, 2016 01:55 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
So thorough!

Relative to midpoints? I've just never seen that, and it seems overwhelming to the point of maybe diluting the significance of the midpoint in a huge sea of potential aspects to it.

You know what I mean?

I am such a Capricorn traditionalist sometimes ....give me a conservative diet of conjunction, opposition, square, and I'm happy with that.

---

No, no, no, not with midpoints. Beware!!!

Well the traditional midpoint astrology uses conjunction, opposition (the direct midpoints), square, sesisquare and semisquare.

Personally I find even THAT too much most of the times. I exclude the semisquare and sesisquare. And only check the direct ones and the square, though I am always hesitant about the square. But seriously.

some of my tightest midpoints:

Moon square Mercury/Pluto
Moon square Sun/Pluto
Venus square Sun/Saturn
Venus square MErcury/Saturn

just feels very very fitting, esp. the Moon= Mercxury/Pluto-picture and that is not being found in any traditional aspects.

I mean my Mercury is conjunct Sun and parallel Venus (And possibly Sun), being placed in Sag and in 1st house.

Where on earth does that almost mental obsession with going deep into analysis from?

(Mercury and Sun are also conjunct Jupiter/Pluto, but I am not sure this would explain it any better).

posted June 22, 2016 02:08 PM            

Personally am very comfortable checking squares, oppositions, conjunctions, semi- and sesquisquares to midpoints as a matter of course. I find it always reveals interesting information and is not too much or too many aspects. So possibly another one could be welcomed. It would be fun to explore anyway but I'm a sucker for shiny new things.

Still though... there is great beauty in the harmony and consistency of the square/opposition/conjunction and the semi and sesquisquares... introducing another element is in keeping with descriptions of the quindecile itself which i have come across... a bit out there!

posted June 22, 2016 02:13 PM            

But then again, in a circle we deal with a midpoint-axis, and the square actually fall at the point where the midpoint axis has its midpoint.

However if we do that and then divide again to reach the semisquare/sesisquare we might simply water it down too much. as we are not even dealing with the midpoint of two planets anymore but with midpoints between midpoints. When does it begin to become just nonsense or theoretical play?

posted June 22, 2016 02:17 PM            

Lol exactly. I hear ya.

As to

"When does it begin to become just nonsense or theoretical play?"

Well... it's a legitimate question we must always be asking as astrologers... but if it's been checked thoroughly by other reputable astrologers then I tend to take it in stride and give it the benefit of the doubt. It's the only way I've been able to learn... some days honestly it ALL seems like air and vapour... especially when I'm scared or have had too little sleep!

posted June 22, 2016 02:30 PM            

14 Sag
14 Gem
14 Pisces
14 Virgo

29 Cap
29 Cancer
29 Libra
29 Aries

I know it seems like a lot but it's definitely possible to have that many points in the 360 degree wheel which can potentially trigger any given midpoint. Those points are touched for me by my partner's Juno at 14 Pisces and his Pluto at 29 Libra. The Pluto thing is valid for sure.

My Ceres 17 Pisces is just shy of squaring it, but I think even this just-shy-ness has its symbolism. I'm just shy of really REALLY identifying as a mother. But i *do*. I am. Honestly i don't consider Ceres in aspect to my Sun/Moon midpoint but what's interesting is my NN at 11 Pisces... so the Sun/Moon midpoint squares the Ceres/NN midpoint and very nearly touches both those points. This makes perfect sense in terms of the arc of my life, my identification with my role as mother, and my interest in developing myself further in that direction... as the NN there implies there is a learning curve for sure... as with gardening... as with eating/cooking... all Ceres things I'm very sure. And my Sun/Moon midpoint really helps it all along. I know todd works with midpoints square midpoints and on midpoints and i can really see why from many angles. I don't think just because something is a point in space that it doesn't have great significance. I'm not a materialist at all though. Our scientific minds struggle with phantom points but in my opinion they're just as real as things we can land spacecraft on.

Like other matters of orb i don't think in terms of "is" or "is not" in orbit absolutely... even with midpoints. Might sound wishy washy and maybe it is but that's my way, exploratory

For instance, my ascendant is at 2 Scorpio--wide I know, but still resonating, I personally believe, with my Sun/Moon midpoint contact point at 29 Libra... given the importance of these three points specifically in the horoscope especially. But it's not as strong as if it were more exact. I do feel a sense of comfort in my own skin in keeping with the symbolism of this resonance. I keep it tight though with the semi and sesquis.. I'm not making the best case for them here with my wide orb ramble!!

posted June 22, 2016 03:34 PM            

I might keep an eye on the 8th harmonic, but they can nowwhere be as strong as direct midpoints, no matter who said that.

Cause for every reputable astrologer (what is that anyway?) who swears by them, there will be another one who genuinely thinks it`s all bull and child`s play.

Also if you read the literature carefully even those astrologers who claim to use the semisquare/ sesisquare with midpoints, will only do so in support of other, usually direct midpoints.
I don´t mean to downplay the importance of the 8th harmonics, as ASPECTS they are interestingly strong (which makes sense actually if you consider the lunar cycle), but midpoints are already some kind of abstraction (nevertheless a surprisingly telling one), and the semisquares just feels like overdoing the thing. At least if you see it all equal. It`s not. There IS a difference in quality of the direct midpoints vs. aspects to midpoints, even though midpoint astrologers tell you to treat them the same (just to add in a footnote or 2 or 3 that the intensity of a semisquare and sesisquare is of course reduces as compared to the conjunction and opposition and even square - so there is decidedly a lack of consistency in most astrologers there. Claiming one thing in theory but then in actual analysis doing another thing).

And you said that there are not too many aspects. I beg to disagree. From a certain amount of aspects on the picture starts getting muddled, foggy and the main theme is not able to be discernced from the "added spice" anymore.

On the othr hand, usin too little, and vital sketches of the picture might go missing and distort the overall meaning.

posted June 22, 2016 03:41 PM            

And i hear you re: the inconsistencies and appreciate your approach. And indeed questioning what constitutes a reputable astrologer is wise. Noel Tyl and Reinhold Ebertin though are reputable because they have a reputation. That's what I mean. I don't agree with everything they say and probably would be more inclined to agree with YOUR methods over theirs lol... but nevertheless I do take cues from other astrologers and the semi and sesqui square shall remain in my tool box

posted June 22, 2016 04:07 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by yungang_grotto:
I think that may honestly be at the root of the inconsistencies in terms of these astrologers approaches. Although they identify a difference in terms of the intensity of the conjunction/opposition to the midpoint and the other aspects, because they're workingwith a huge amount of charts regularly and have found the other aspects to be very valid and useful--if not AS intense--they simply use that 90 degree dial and don't always have time to distinguish which is which..

---

But that is the thing, they don`t. Not really. The semisqure/ sesisquare always ever gets mentioned in addition to direct midpoints, never as a sole one.

I was like you though some years ago, I would incorporate semisquares as well, without making a distinction, but after checking many charts, this was rather misleading after all. While the direct midpoints ALWAYS resonated strongly, the semisquares OCCASIONALLY did. Occasionally is not good enough for me and actually a hint that I needed to look elsewhere for the answer (very often in declinations, Kannon is definitely right about that).

posted June 22, 2016 04:07 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by yungang_grotto:
"(which makes sense actually if you consider the lunar cycle),"

Tell me more?

---

I am lazy tonight, I just quote my own thread

posted June 22, 2016 04:19 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceridwen:
But that is the thing, they don`t. Not really. The semisqure/ sesisquare always ever gets mentioned in addition to direct midpoints, never as a sole one.

I was like you though some years ago, I would incorporate semisquares as well, without making a distinction, but after checking many charts, this was rather misleading after all. While the direct midpoints ALWAYS resonated strongly, the semisquares OCCASIONALLY did. Occasionally is not good enough for me and actually a hint that I needed to look elsewhere for the answer (very often in declinations, Kannon is definitely right about that).

---

I trust your experience of it to be accurate. It makes sense to focus on the direct midpoints first. I am guilty of checking declinations as a side note and sometimes not at all, mostly due to the extra work involved especially with chart comparisons.. but as with midpoints the extra work is definitely worth it (and not really THAT much!)--and very telling where otherwise we would have huge gaps.

posted June 22, 2016 04:21 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceridwen:
I am lazy tonight, I just quote my own thread

http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum24/HTML/219137.html

---