Medieval Traditional Chart - Tabbed Format

[starsgaze]

Hi
Laptop is not in front of me now, but I recall checking the help tab of your aspects section in medieval trade module, the orbs indicated inside is the same as what I'm using.
I use the mean orbs in the main orbs settings. Let me know if there are differences with your aspects chart

[ABer]

Thanks. I've done some work on this but the terminology is very confusing. One of the things I have to consider is the usability of the module for others. I need to give some thought how I can balance your needs and the needs of a more general user.

I'm sorry to keep asking you for clarification, but I need to have your terminology explained in terms of something I understand.

Does your terminology (generosity, reception) map in any way on to my mutual and mixed reception. I can't see where the two sets of terminology correlate.

You will see what I have done below. This is Trump's chart.

One source of confusion is identifying the added value in showing that `Mars is received by the Sun as ruler` if the pair are already shown as being in two forms of mixed reception. It just seems to obtuse to me, and not particularly helpful, particularly for users who may be less well versed in medieval methods and terminology.

I can add a check box to eliminate mutual/mixed receptions that are not in aspect if that would be helpful. I also have a way of eliminating the listing of a 'simple reception' if the pair are already identified as being in a mutual or mixed reception.

Any clarity you can add would be helpful.

Ed

[ABer]

Hi again - looking again at Trump's chart, I can see the following:

Venus/Jupiter in generosity (mixed reception - my term) but not in aspect
Moon/Saturn in generosity (mutual and mixed receptions) but not in aspect
Jupiter/Saturn (mutual reception - agree)
Moon/Jupiter (simple reception)

If you could shed light on Sun/Mars that would be helpful. Ed

[ABer]

OK - this is where I've got to:

On the screenshot below, you will see under mutual receptions, the Jupiter/Saturn reception is identified as (O-lap) - overlapping moieties.
The Moon/Saturn reception is identified as (Gen.) - generosity.

The first pair are in aspect, albeit weak; the second pair are not in aspect, but in each other's face/decan.

Is this helpful?

This could be replicated for the mixed reception column.

Ed

[starsgaze]

Thanks. I've done some work on this but the terminology is very confusing. One of the things I have to consider is the usability of the module for others. I need to give some thought how I can balance your needs and the needs of a more general user.

I'm sorry to keep asking you for clarification, but I need to have your terminology explained in terms of something I understand.

Does your terminology (generosity, reception) map in any way on to my mutual and mixed reception. I can't see where the two sets of terminology correlate.

You will see what I have done below. This is Trump's chart.

One source of confusion is identifying the added value in showing that `Mars is received by the Sun as ruler` if the pair are already shown as being in two forms of mixed reception. It just seems to obtuse to me, and not particularly helpful, particularly for users who may be less well versed in medieval methods and terminology.

I can add a check box to eliminate mutual/mixed receptions that are not in aspect if that would be helpful. I also have a way of eliminating the listing of a 'simple reception' if the pair are already identified as being in a mutual or mixed reception.

Any clarity you can add would be helpful.

Ed

Great! The listing on the "simple receptions" is very helpful.
As you said, Sun and Mars are already being shown in the mixed receptions column.
For this , need to go back to exactly what's the definition behind the mixed/mutual reception columns. It is if planet A is in B's any dignity, and B is also in A's any dignity, regardless whether they are in aspect.

If one is going to use Masha Allah's method of horary, or say, any natal interpretation of the medieval techniques,seeing whether a planet is being received will be quite prominent. And in this case, the use of reception often implies being in aspect.

Hence the checkbox you mention, option should be exclude those that are in aspect. If you exclude those that are not aspect, planets that are in generosity/exchange will not be shown.

For the Sun Mars, though they appear in the mixed receptions column, hence the question is there a need to be under the new column, they are different. The mixed reception main purpose is the exchange of dignities, or generosity if one indicate check box to omit those in aspect. Because Mars do not receive Sun.

Also, under the column of 'simple reception', there should also be two lines which Jupiter received by Saturn, and Saturn received by Jupiter.

Actually I think the mixed and mutual receptions column can be combined into one, as they indicate the exchange of dignity.
Then the other column simply called receptions.

[starsgaze]

OK - this is where I've got to:

On the screenshot below, you will see under mutual receptions, the Jupiter/Saturn reception is identified as (O-lap) - overlapping moieties.
The Moon/Saturn reception is identified as (Gen.) - generosity.

The first pair are in aspect, albeit weak; the second pair are not in aspect, but in each other's face/decan.

Is this helpful?

This could be replicated for the mixed reception column.

Ed

Hi,
I think your suggestion of the checkbox will be better. Else in this case, does the 'gen" indicator have to appear for all moon Saturn listings in the mixed reception column?

[starsgaze]

Hi Ed,
Can i confirm the current rules used for the column under Mix Receptions and Single Receptions:
1. they are regardless whether the planets have or do not have an aspect between them, as long as there are exchange of dignities, they will appear in this column.

2. For the single receptions column, only domicile rulership is being considered currently.

Also, for the Traditional Module, the aspects for this module does not include out of sign aspects? e.g. Moon 3 degrees Aquarius, Sun 27 degrees Taurus.

Thank you

[ABer]

Hi Stargaze - thanks for the message.

All aspects are within sign.

I tried to work out some code to deal with receptions and aspects, but I found it mighty complex. I think I reverted to just showing receptions by dignity. I will try again some time, but this is a low priority I'm afraid.

Thanks. Ed

[starsgaze]

Hi Stargaze - thanks for the message.

All aspects are within sign.

I tried to work out some code to deal with receptions and aspects, but I found it mighty complex. I think I reverted to just showing receptions by dignity. I will try again some time, but this is a low priority I'm afraid.

Thanks. Ed

Hi Ed,
can there be option to include out of sign aspects in your module like what it is currently for the default module?

As for the reception listings, thank you for the effort nevertheless. Atm, I use another free online s/w for this.
I look forward to your electional module.

Thank you

[ABer]

Hi there - no problem. I have put these items on the to-do list again, but I'm afraid will be a low priority.

I am focussing on the electional module at the moment. Ed

[devaljoshi]

I noticed that the accidental dignities vary from lillys table

for example free of the beams gains 4, but on lilly's table its 5. Square with saturn in -3 but in lilly's table its -4 conjunct regulus is 6 for lilly, but 5 from the software. Am I missing something obvious

[ABer]

Hi Devaljoshi - thanks for the post. I'm not sure why this variation occurs. I might have used an alternative source for the table, but unfortunately I don't have a note of this if I did. I will take a look at the feasibility of making the changes you have identified.

Thanks again. Ed

[ABer]

Hi there - I've taken a look at the code. I've amended the score for 'free of beams' to 5.

The scores for aspects to benefics, malefics and fixed stars are varied from Lilly according to the orb. I've amended the help to reflect this:

Scores for aspects to benefics, malefics and fixeds stars are varied from Lilly's traditional table by taking account of the exactness of the orb between the two points.

If the orb is within one degree, the maximum/minimum score is given, and then reduced by one for each additional degree of orb.

I hope this explains the rationale. Ed

[ABer]

Hi again Devaljoshi - Jean will be releasing an update for this module today:

Horoscope - Medieval - Medieval Traditional Chart: v.10.49 - minor revision of planetary scores table - see https://forum.jcremers.com/index.php/topic,568.0.html

I've updated the help for the tab as follows:

Scores for aspects to benefics, malefics and fixeds stars are varied from Lilly's traditional table by taking account of the exactness of the orb between the two points, measured in whole degrees.

If the aspect is partile (same whole degree), the maximum/minimum score is given, and then reduced (or increased if initial score is negative) by one for each additional degree of separation. The maximum separation considered is 3 degrees.

Thanks for getting in touch. Any more questions do let me know. Ed

[devaljoshi]

I really appreciate how responsive you are ; thank you