Considerations

Already on the title of Chapter 13 Of the Aspects of the Signs, Ptolemy made clear that the Aspects are between Zodiac Signs, and thus such dynamics are Sign based to Degree-to-Degree (depending on the aplication – If Zodiacal or “in Mundo”,or, ” in the World” – the Mundane Aspects). There must be something that should be mutual among the signs, a certain interaction that would prevail among only showned by the Aspects.

Of the Aspects of the Signs 

Note that in the text, Ptolemy didn’t even bored to describe a conjunction because he knew Conjunctions are not a form of Aspect. He simple knew Zodiacal Aspects are the study of the relationship of the signs which each other, therefore it would be impossible to read conjunction as if it was an aspect. Altough the efficacy of Conjunctions are described a lot in the treatise, Ptolemy dealt with no same manner as an Aspect but an integration of stars, a joint, many planets becoming a single note.

He then begins the chapter with the most difficult Aspect, the Oppositions, the connection where all parts are “diamitrically distant from each”. Ptolemy writes:

“Of the parts of the zodiac those first are familiar one to another which are in aspect [looking at]. These are the ones which are in Opposition, enclosing two right angles, six signs, and 180° degrees; those which are in Trine, enclosing one and one-third right angles, four signs, and 120° degrees; those which are said to be in quartile [Square], enclosing one right angle, three signs, and 90° degrees, and finally those that occupy the Sextile position, enclosing two-thirds of a right angle, two signs, and 60° degrees.”

In the end of the chapter, he explained the reasons behind the disharmonious and harmonious signs looking at each other than the obvious and substratal figures they form when put in their right distances based on ratios. 

To Remember: To make it easier to remember – the Trine Aspect has always Signs of the same Element; Sextiles has always the same Sex; while Squares & Oppositions are always connected by the Signs of the same Modality (ex. cardinal signs with cardinal signs, or, mutable with mutable etc.).

The corruption of the signs whether harmony or disharmony are also seen by their sex and modalities; in opposition two males or two females will dispute for the final “line”, whereas in a trine and in a sextile, they are all the same sex but each on their own final “lines” or “corners”; and finally a square is when signs of different sexes are seeing each other and dislike that. Read it how the author puts it:

“We may learn from the following why only these intervals have been taken into consideration. The explanation of opposition is immediately obvious, because it causes the signs to meet on one straight line. But if we take the two fractions and the two superparticulars most important in music, and if the fractions one-half and one-third be applied to opposition, composed of two right angles, the half makes the quartile and the third the sextile and trine. Of the superparticulars, if the sesquialter and sesquitertian be applied to the quartile interval of one right angle, which lies between them, the sesquialter makes the ratio of the quartile to the sextile and the sesquitertian that of trine to quartile. Of these aspects trine and sextile are called harmonious because they are composed of signs of the same kind, either entirely of feminine or entirely of masculine signs; while quartile and opposition are disharmonious because they are composed of signs of opposite kinds.”

When you put a male and female signs looking at each other, you will have a square or at least, an aversion. Two realms very distinct and different from each that are kept integral in the wheel. 

To be considered a harmonious aspect, the signs must be looking at each from the same sex but of different modalities [trine and sextile].

Why not “Conjunction” ?

Ptolemy actually didn’t even bother to describe “Conjunctions” of Aspects among the Zodiac signs simple because he knew that such are not Aspects. Therefore, there are only 4 Major Zodiac Aspects in astrology, and a “Conjunction” is not one of them.

– Read all the 13^th Chapter (Book I) about the Sign Aspects 

– Read all the 8th Chater (Book I) about the Planetary Aspect

– Read all Abu Mu’shar version on the Lords of Days and Hours [7 days of the week]

It is very clear to me that the Ptolemaic Classical Aspects are only 4 and he takes the Moon in Aspect to the Sun to demonstrate them. Now, the number of the relationships can increase to 2 and from this another number is extracted forming the known 7 days of the week where then planets were attributed days; You can have only one opposition among the signs, but each sign can/will square/trine/sextile two signs in the Zodiac, resulting 7 total aspects relationship possible for each sign, and like the 7 aspects of the Moon to the Sun (hence Lunations) until it is back to its meeting point (conjunction) once again.

If you really read well the whole Book I of the quadripartite, you will come to conclude that there are two facets of Aspects, those which are Zodiacal, and those which are “in the World”, and I think he put the chapters far distance from each on pourpose. 

When he talks about the (“in the World) Planetary Aspect (click here) he does point to the Conjunction, having an example of that of the Sun and the Moon, as somehow a Zero (0) point (and thus, not an Aspect), as the ancient counted the 7 aspects or Phases of the Moon, counting the meeting point as 0 and not 1, resulting in the 7 lunar phases:

 

For this example, Imagine the Sun/Moon are at 0 degree Aries.

1 Opposition

2 trines

2 squares

2 sextiles

Before number (#) 1 (one), we forget there is a 0 (zero), perhaps because #1 shows quantity and #0 shows nothing. Conjunctions can’t look to each other because they are merged at some point of intrest in the ecliptic. Simply put, a Conjunction is the meeting of two to more points (planets) in the radix, therefore not an Aspect (or, nothing to look at). 

Think of a piano and one note and only, and no matter how many planets conjunction, it is still then a single note, as opposed to the same note but in higher of lower cords and others combinations (opposition) you can make from there (trine, square, sextile) etc. But amazing as they sound, metaphors are just this: methaphors. Aspects are not piano, and houses of the Zodiac are not real houses or rooms, and indeed conjunctions can be points of intensification, that’s why it is then important to talk now about the Orbs of the planets. 

The Orbs of the Planets are the extracted from the result of planetary interaction with the solar system. We tend to associate Orbs only to degrees these days. However, when you being talking about the Orbs of the planet, you are actually pointing out first their influence or simple participation over/with others’ bodies and then you can begin discussing numbers. To give you another clue, see for yourself the original translation [page 19th of original translation by j. m. Ashman & paraphrase of Proclus] of Chapter 4 of Book I, it was actually titled “The Influences of the Planetary Orbs” as opposed to the popular modern transtlation which omits the Orbs (“Of the Power of the Planets”), and again, the degrees are not discussed, but only the planetary operation and their basic associations to earthly affairs and their magnitutes, comparing the meeting point of the Sun to how further it gets from it. 

–Read all the Chapter 4 (Book I)

It is also worthy to remind at this point of the intervention/auxiliation of the Polygons & Ratios:

– read more on Abu Mu’shar version on Aspects

Conclusion

Isn’t it curious that an Aspect to be harmonious they must be of the same sex? Ptolemy was all gay now with the Zodiac and didn’t realize that astrology won’t judge but the astrologer. 

Binary Astrology System: How nice is that to know that the foundation of true harmony is actually not an integration of sexes but that of the same? – This is perhaps the part where astrology could really be “LGBTQA” in terms of sex and genre. 

The final wheel is/can be actually quite gay but utimately versatile in terms of sex and genre after all.

Important to observe and bear in mind that, the Opposition, Trine, Square and Sextile, are the only aspects Ptolemy said to be accepted by the ancients and briefly explained why. If you want to know more, go to my 2 articles Aspects In Astrology – Discussion On Degrees & Polygons; Agreement of the Signs & Attempted Symmetry.

—

References

Go back to Ptolemy’s Way and read the references