Primary Directions Truth Card: Field-Plane Directions

Status

• doctrinal family: partly attested, partly software-conventional
• Moira status: not implemented
• role in Moira: research family requiring decomposition before admission
• likely future classification, if partially admitted before full doctrine is recovered: doctrine_loss_reconstruction

Identity

Field-plane directions appear to be a family of latitude-bearing or latitude-conditioned zodiacal directions rather than one uniformly defined historical method.

Moira should therefore treat field_plane as a doctrine family label, not as a single computational option.

Mathematical Basis

Direction Space

• Field Plane

This appears to denote a space that is neither:

• purely mundane
• nor purely zero-latitude zodiacal

The best current doctrinal reading is:

• zodiacal or aspectual points are directed with retained, assigned, or conditioned latitude

Geometric Basis

• aspectual or zodiacal points are not reduced to bare ecliptic longitude alone
• some latitude model remains in force

Motion Basis

• still directional and primary-motion based
• not a separate timing family

Key Basis

• keys are still orthogonal to the direction space
• modern software commonly allows many keys here, but that does not define the method itself

Latitude Basis

• latitude doctrine is the heart of the family
• without explicit latitude policy, field_plane has no stable meaning

Interpretive Meaning

Field-plane directions seem to preserve zodiacal aspect meaning while refusing a flat zero-latitude reduction.

Interpretively, that suggests a family that claims:

• zodiacal relations matter
• but the spatial or embodied condition of the point also matters

This makes field-plane directions potentially important, but only if defined explicitly enough to avoid becoming a black-box label.

Historical Standing

• the term is real in current software
• Kolev's discussion suggests historical roots in zodiacal aspectual directions with latitude
• the exact doctrinal boundaries remain unclear

This means:

• the family is not imaginary
• but the label is not yet sharp enough to admit as one method

Distinguishing Features

Field-plane differs from zodiacal directions by:

• refusing a pure zero-latitude ecliptic reduction

Field-plane differs from mundane directions by:

• still being aspectual or zodiacal in orientation rather than purely bodily in the world-frame

Main Ambiguities

1. What Defines the Plane

Unresolved possibilities include:

• promissor-based latitude
• significator-based latitude
• aspect-specific latitude rules
• a projected relation plane rather than a simple inherited latitude

2. How Aspects Acquire Latitude

Some historical discussions imply that aspects inherit or derive latitude in specific ways. This is not a settled uniform doctrine.

3. Whether the Label Is Historical or Retrospective

It is not yet clear whether "field plane" names one stable inherited doctrine or is a later umbrella label for several related practices.

Moira Admission Policy

Moira should not implement field_plane as a single menu option until it has been decomposed into explicit policy components:

• latitude source
• projection rule
• aspect latitude rule
• relation measurement rule

Only after that decomposition should Moira decide whether one or several field-plane doctrines are admissible.

Constitutional rule:

accepted label does not override explicit doctrine.

Moira may acknowledge historically accepted or software-accepted labels, but it admits only the mathematically explicit subset it can define, test, and defend.

Companion rule:

where the tradition is composite, Moira decomposes before it admits.

This is why field_plane is still treated as a doctrine family above the currently admitted branches rather than as a premature runtime switch.

Current Moira boundary:

• a retained-latitude zodiacal branch is now admitted explicitly
• it uses in_zodiaco with promissor_native latitude retained
• explicit zodiacal aspect-point promissors may now also use aspect_inherited latitude
• this branch is not being named field_plane
• field_plane remains a distinct, unresolved doctrine family above that branch

Current doctrinal judgment:

• these admitted branches likely cover part of what some software groups under field_plane
• especially where the family means "zodiacal directions that keep latitude in force"
• but they still do not settle whether field_plane names one separate space doctrine or a bundle of retained-latitude zodiacal variants

If Moira ever admits a partial field_plane branch before the full governing law is recovered, it should be marked explicitly as one of:

• experimental
• doctrine_loss_reconstruction

and not presented as if the whole family had been recovered intact.

Implementation Consequences

Field-plane should be treated as a research frontier and possible place for Moira to exceed existing software.

But the only responsible way to exceed the field is:

• by making the doctrine more explicit
• not by hardcoding a mysterious modern label
• not by guessing at the missing law because a familiar label exists

Research Sources

• Rumen Kolev, William Lilly and the Algorithm for His Primary Directions: https://www.babylonianastrology.com/downloads/Lilly2.pdf
• AstroApp primary directions help: https://astroapp.com/help/1/returnsW_53.html
• AstroApp forecasting overview: https://astroapp.com/de/forecast-tools-15
• AstroWiki, Primary Direction: https://www.astro.com/astrowiki/en/Primary_Direction