Wet/Dry

[Guest guest]

At 01:41 PM 6/27/05 +0300, Sari wrote:

>Hello Mark and Therese and thank you for the useful comments.

 

>Interesting correlations. I made a quick test and found a friend with a

>Taurus Mercury in the 12th and she talks all the time and a lot... so

>maybe this rule is not entirely decided yet :oD.

 

Obviously it's not decided yet, Sari! Maybe aspects to Mercury in 12th?

Quiet Man's Mercury has no strong aspects. No major aspects at all if you

don't count the backwards sextile from Jupiter-Moon or the wide square from

Uranus. In the two examples I gave Mercury was in so-called 'mute' signs.

This classification isn't used much anymore, and I don't know if it works.

(The fact that we don't know for sure what astrological factors make a

talker or a quiet person shows how little we know about astrology.)

 

>I see, lots of movement here. I hesitate a bit to put equal marks

>between signs and houses at this point, but who knows? Maybe it works

>that way after all.

 

A valid hesitation, especially since we're not sure how to measure houses.

 

>...Yes, you're right. A medieval astrologer would say that Venus receives

>Mars and gives power to it in otherwise hostile environment - Mars is

>kind of " safeguarded " by Venus.

 

Sari, you're the first person on this list who seems to have a really good

background in the different astrologies. I really appreciate that.

 

>This is from AstroDatabank [sergio Leone]: 3 Jan 1929 00.30 MET -1 Rome,

Italy. Rating

>is AA. LEO-ne ). Too bad he has only Neptune in sidereal Leo ). Then

>we have Robert Redford (18 Aug 1936 20.02 PST +8.00 Santa Monica,

>California) who has five planets in sidereal Leo, and his breakthrough

>role was SUNdance Kid. Now he runs SUNdance Institute which sponsors the

>SUNdance Film Festival.

 

Very interesting...

 

>...It's from Ptolemy. Different authors have different opinions about Venus

>being warm or cool (the benefics are generally considered to be

>pleasantly warm or cool, not extremely hot or cold), so I don't know

>about that. I would say that Venus is cool, it cools your hot Martian

>anger down.

 

Looking at it in that way, yes.

 

>Robert Hand describes this dry/wet concept very illustratively -

>naturally from a tropical point of view - in an interview by Garry

>Phillipson in The Mountain Astrologer 4/03 or 6/03 (the interview is in

>two parts), so they're not my own invention! I just think they *might*

>make sense sidereally, maybe even more than tropically.

 

I've never really looked into the wet/dry concept. Do you think they might

apply to the planets even more than to zodiac signs? In Jyotish, Venus is

water, Mars is fire, Saturn is air and Mercury is earth. The only way

Mercury-earth makes sense is that there's a correlation there with the

lowest chakra in the spine. I don't know why Mercury is given to the lowest

center. (Have to look up my referrences here.)

 

Do you know if Rob Hand's article in on the internet?

 

>...Let's think about air and earth for example. The traditional definition

>of air is wet, increasingly hot. " Wet " means " looking for similarities,

>connecting things " .

 

Is this from Rob Hand and/or Ptolemy? (I have Schmidt's Ptolemy

translation, but you would know off the top of your head.)

 

>But now in the modern textbooks the element of air

>is defined as analytical, maybe even specifying or classifying. But

>these are not " wet " terms, they are distinctively " dry " .

 

This is fascinating!

 

>Lo and behold,

>most planets today that tropically are in the wet air are sidereally in

>the dry earth. It's the sidereal earth that is analytical, specifying

>and classifying (especially Virgo).

 

And this is Mercury, whose primary and exaltation sign is Virgo!

 

It would be very interesting to pursue this a little further. If you have

time, can you list the characteristics of hot-dry...etc.? Or refer us to an

article on the web?

 

I'm very happy to see someone who is considering the different historical

astrologies in light of the two zodiacs. I haven't seen anyone else do

this. Everyone seems to be either considering only one zodiac within only

one system (Fagan-sidereal, Jyotish-sidereal or Rudhyar-psychological, or

classical-Lilly etc.)

 

So if you have time, please continue to post your thoughts and research

here, Sari. I don't remember reading the characteristics of the categories

you mentioned above. (But my memory isn't the best either.) It would be

interesting if the qualities do indeed relate to sidereal signs as well as

planets. I'd really like to look at this.

 

Many thanks,

Therese