Proper House System for Traditional Astrology

[mystic777]

Hi All,

Since I am becoming more interested in traditional astrology (as opposed to Modern) I would like to know which house system is the one most used by traditionalists. Which one did Morin actually use? Ptolemy? Lilly? For a long time I have relied on Koch. I never really got into using the Placidus and equal house systems (well maybe a long time ago). I am thinking along the lines of natal charts rather than horaries.

mystic

[Kaiousei no Senshi]

Different authors had their favorite picks. Personally, I've always found Pladicus to be quite useful and the fact that it's the only time-based house system makes it even more appealing to me as it heralds back to the hourly watchers of ancient Egypt. I didn't really care for Morin's system as it attempts to differentiate the Ascendant and the First house, which seems awkward to me as the rising of stars over the Ascendant has always been used as symbolism for the First house. I know for a fact that Al-Biruni used the Campanus system, Lilly used Regiomontanus, Ptolemy and Ezra used Pladicus, there was also a famous astrologer who used Alcabitius, but his name escapes me.

[Claire19]

I use placidus and equal house systems. But for me they are both nearly the same and dont have the dilemma that others do. The transits and progressions will tell what is right for you. As the planets come along to aspect the natal ones you will see what area of life is being most affected.
i.e. One system has Jupiter in 5th house but near 6th cusp whilst another system would place it in the 6th. When a transit comes along to aspect it, which house is affected? Is it the 5th house of speculation, children, recreation, leisure, romance or work situation, work mates, health issues, your pets, your everyday concerns and services with clothing, shelter and food.

This is an example only but you see what I mean, I hope.

[Culpeper]

All astrology before the very recent psychological astrology is called traditional. It is important to know which traditional astrology you are using. There is the astrology of the nineteenth century which is actually a revival but not very good; before that is renaissance astrology then medieval astrology and finally classical astrology of the Greeks and Romans. There is probably more astrology before that time, but the records are too incomplete.

The Placidus house system was developed in the 1600s by Placidus de Tito an Italian astrologer and mathematician. However, the histories I have claim that it is based on a mistaken interpretation of brief remarks made by Ptolemy. Nevertheless, Placidus claimed it was the lost system of Ptolemy and published books promoting it. Most of the renaissance astrologers except John Partridge rejected it and used the Regiomontanus system.

During the eighteenth century, astrology was suppressed and the books and tables needed to construct charts became hard to obtain. At the end of the 1700s Manoah Sibly translated Placidus's tables into English, and they were the only tables available, so everyone used them until recently.

During the Medieval period several house systems appear to be used. Mathematicians may have been in competition to invent new ones. In the earlier centuries, the Arabs were still using the whole sign system which is also known today as the Vedic house system.

The Greeks and Romans used the whole sign system for most purposes. They may have used the Porphyry system at times for predictive work especially to predict the time of death.

After trying Placidus, Regiomantanus and Koch houses and finding that my chart did not make much sense with these systems, I went to the whole sign system. Every traditional planet changed houses, and my chart finally indicated real life events. I have been converting all the other charts I work on to that system and find it gives good results.

[mystic777]

Originally Posted by Culpeper

All astrology before the very recent psychological astrology is called traditional. It is important to know which traditional astrology you are using. There is the astrology of the nineteenth century which is actually a revival but not very good; before that is renaissance astrology then medieval astrology and finally classical astrology of the Greeks and Romans. There is probably more astrology before that time, but the records are too incomplete.
....
The Placidus house system was developed in the 1600s by Placidus de Tito .

So, are we are saying is that Placidus is the current favourite with Regiomantus and whole sign coming up on the inside, so to speak?

Claire19, but isn't that the crux of the problem concerning the houses? 5th or 6th house? 5 degree before cusp means planet in next house never made any sense to me, and when is it true or not true, apart from being a hit orr miss affair?

Culpeper, are you using sidereal calcs for your Vedic whole house, or just transplanting the tropical signs into whole houses and not changing planetary positions,i.e. precessing them? Thank you so much for your very informative history of the houses. Could you give me a clue as to how to calc. death using Porphyr houses? I vaguely remember Charles Carter perhaps mentioning in one of his textbooks a system using symbolic directions but have completely forgotten it.

Kaiousei no Senshi, it would seem that Placidus apparently used Ptolemaic system rather than Ptolemy using Placidus, agreed? As an aside, I gather from other threads that there are Egyptain tables for the terms and faces. Do you know where I might find these?

Thank you to everyone!

With very best wishes for Peace Profound,

Mystic

[Kaiousei no Senshi]

Kaiousei no Senshi, it would seem that Placidus apparently used Ptolemaic system rather than Ptolemy using Placidus, agreed? As an aside, I gather from other threads that there are Egyptain tables for the terms and faces. Do you know where I might find these?

No, it's both, really. There is evidence to suggest that Ptolemy used the Pladicus houses as Ezra used them, and Ezra saw fit to use "none other than Ptolemy and his guides", so it would be very, very strange for him to say this and then use a house system that Ptolemy did not use. Pladicus did not invent the house system, just like most people whose names are attached to house systems did not invent them. Pladicus just made them extremely popular by creating the necessary tables for it. Just like Campanus did for the system that bears his name, etc, etc.

Claire19, but isn't that the crux of the problem concerning the houses? 5th or 6th house? 5 degree before cusp means planet in next house never made any sense to me, and when is it true or not true, apart from being a hit orr miss affair?

I know this wasn't directed at me, but I thought I should answer it anyway. It's a rule in traditional astrology that planets within five degrees of the next house cusp are in that house. All the time, everytime. It's not hit and miss at all. Even modern astrological websites like astro.com base their readings on this as well, they interpret my Luna as being in the Sixth house, but she's "really" 3° away from the Sixth house cusp in the Fifth house.

Concerning the Egyptian terms, they're included in Tetrabibilios

[mystic777]

Originally Posted by Kaiousei no Senshi

No, it's both, really. There is evidence to suggest that Ptolemy used the Pladicus houses as Ezra used them, and Ezra saw fit to use "none other than Ptolemy and his guides", so it would be very, very strange for him to say this and then use a house system that Ptolemy did not use. Pladicus did not invent the house system, just like most people whose names are attached to house systems did not invent them. Pladicus just made them extremely popular by creating the necessary tables for it. Just like Campanus did for the system that bears his name, etc, etc.

All I was suggesting was that since Placidus was born many years after Ptolemy (unless I've got my history all wrong) Placidus effective inherited Ptolemy's system of houses and then as you said popularised it.

Originally Posted by Kaiousei no Senshi

I know this wasn't directed at me, but I thought I should answer it anyway. It's a rule in traditional astrology that planets within five degrees of the next house cusp are in that house. All the time, everytime. It's not hit and miss at all. Even modern astrological websites like astro.com base their readings on this as well, they interpret my Luna as being in the Sixth house, but she's "really" 3° away from the Sixth house cusp in the Fifth house.

Concerning the Egyptian terms, they're included in Tetrabibilios

I am not dismissing it, I recognise it as an interpretative approach/technique but as I said I didn't understand the reasons behind it. Could you tell me the philosophical and mathematical reasons for deciding the rule? With regard to house systems, will it never be the case that some bodies will be within 5 degrees of the cusp in some systems and beyond 5 degrees in others? I am not sure. If, there are cases when this is the case then we have a problem of interpreting, unless we stick with one house system permanently.

I am also wondering whether a planet will be stronger if exactly on the cusp just before it, or in the house from a traditionalist perspective.

I am grateful for your advice about the Tetrabiblios. Thank you.

Best wishes for Peace Profound,

Mystic

[Kaiousei no Senshi]

All I was suggesting was that since Placidus was born many years after Ptolemy (unless I've got my history all wrong) Placidus effective inherited Ptolemy's system of houses and then as you said popularised it.

I apologize, I misunderstood. I blame it on fatigue. I went on a canoe trip today and I feel just "bleh". Yes, you do have an interesting point here and I do wonder if that is how it indeed turned out. Histories Mysteries (I love that show).

Could you tell me the philosophical and mathematical reasons for deciding the rule?

Non-luminous objects get a 5° orb. That includes the house cusps and the outer planets.

With regard to house systems, will it never be the case that some bodies will be within 5 degrees of the cusp in some systems and beyond 5 degrees in others? I am not sure. If, there are cases when this is the case then we have a problem of interpreting, unless we stick with one house system permanently.

Yes, and this is another good point. Some house systems will throw planets around enough to technically be in other houses. You'll never get astrologers to all sit down and pick one house system. I suggest you read The Houses: Temples of the Sky by Deborah Houlding (you'll see me recommending this book a lot), in it she includes an essay that discusses each of the popular (and some I had never heard of beforehand) house systems, how they are calculated, their strengths and their weaknesses. It was very enlightening and is what led me to choose the Pladicus system.

I am also wondering whether a planet will be stronger if exactly on the cusp just before it, or in the house from a traditionalist perspective.

Planets closer to a cusp have a more prominent effect in the house.

I downloaded a copy of the Tetrabiblos and he discusses the terms on pages 31-36. Another copy may be different.

[Claire19]

I do not subscribe to the 5 degree distance for a planet meaning it is in the next house. It doesnt make any sense. I have Saturn in the 5th very close to the 6th and it operates as a 5th house Saturn but of course it is in Leo which somewhat obscures the picture. That it has aspect to a planet in the 6th gives it a connection there but not in it.

[Claire19]

My comment that the Placidus and Equal system doesnt make any difference to me is that it just that my chart is so configured that it doesnt make any difference. This would not be and is not true for other people.

[Culpeper]

Coming back to this interesting thread, I see there were a few questions. First I always use the tropical system with western astrology including whole signs.

The Porphyry system was used when finding the ascensional times of the signs. The ascensional times were used in directions when finding the length of life of the native and other important events in life. This was the method of directions in the classical and medieval periods. By the time of William Lilly additional directional methods had been devised(often attributed to Ptolemy).
If you do a search for all posts by Culpeper, you will find an example of how to calculate one of these ancient directions. It is not too far back and in a thread about George W. Bush.

And a few more words for Placidus, he was a distinguished professor of mathematics and contemporary with Lilly and the other astrologers who left us books in English. He also devised new predictive systems including the use of transits to the natal chart and secondary progressions. He has had a great influence on astrology.

valete

[Claire19]

I find that Placidus system valid and use it and sometimes the equal house system with all my chart erections.

Interesting background information on him, thank you.

[Girl_from_Jupiter]

Interesting topic ... When I first started learning astrology I was using Placidus. But this was for no particular reason. Back then I simply wasn't aware that other house systems even exist. But after I became more familiar with the subject I switched to Koch. However, in my case, Koch worked even worse than Placidus did (Koch changed the house placement of my Saturn from the 7th to the 8th ... I can relate a lot more to Saturn in the 7th). So, eventually I switched back to Placidus. For a short while I also tried Equal and Porphyry but neither one of those systems work for me. This holds particularly true for the Equal system, as it changes the house positions of my Sun, Saturn and Pluto to houses where they simply don't belong. Right now I am using Regiomontanus with excellent results. It's the only system that puts ALL my planets in the houses they actually make most sense without creating houses that look completly wacky (like Campanus does).

Out of all the house systems I tried, I found the Equal system to make the least sense of all. I don't like how it basically puts equal importance on all houses (ie areas of life). This doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

[mystic777]

Originally Posted by Claire19

I find that Placidus system valid and use it and sometimes the equal house system with all my chart erections.

Interesting background information on him, thank you.

Is it not important to accept a single house system that works and reject all the others permanently? The reason I say this is because, I'm coming to a point where I'm looking to synthesise everything I've looked at over the years and make a judgement on it, accepting what is true and rejecting what is untrue. In so doing I am trying to harmonise all the branches of Knowledge I have into one system of Wisdom. I know from experience that they all have strands of truth but sometimes it is difficult to say where these intersect and support one anotther.

What I'm finding is that I am finally going back to go forward so to speak so that the traditionalist perspectives are ringing more true to me. If Placidus truly 'works' then let it be the gold standard, and the only standard that you accept in the Work, and reject the others. Surely to pick and mix systems as and when we choose, almost as though we're chosing a type of desert for the day, we do not experience genuine understanding. To use the Elder Brothers of Alchemy term, we become as 'puffers';we achieve nothing or very little. One of the problems astrology has faced in terms of expressing its truths to the common scientists for so long is that we use so many models there is no rallying point, no startng point which can be considered a definitve model that needs to be explored by others.

If it is true for humans it must also be true for natural things too. One of the reasons why I've come back to astrology after a number of years is to truly understand Alchemy, and to understand that I am realising I need to understand the old tools and methods that the medieval alchemists used in Their Work which includes the house system. It seems to be more philosophically and mystically correct, especially coming from a Qabbalistic background.

Which house system truly reflects the above and the below. In the end that I feel is what counts otherwise we end up, in our minds, going in circles and achieving no genuine understanding of the Science of Astrology.

Sorry for the rant.

Wishing you all very best wishes for Peace Profound,

Mystic

[Claire19]

Originally Posted by Girl_from_Jupiter

Interesting topic ... When I first started learning astrology I was using Placidus. But this was for no particular reason. Back then I simply wasn't aware that other house systems even exist. But after I became more familiar with the subject I switched to Koch. However, in my case, Koch worked even worse than Placidus did (Koch changed the house placement of my Saturn from the 7th to the 8th ... I can relate a lot more to Saturn in the 7th). So, eventually I switched back to Placidus. For a short while I also tried Equal and Porphyry but neither one of those systems work for me. This holds particularly true for the Equal system, as it changes the house positions of my Sun, Saturn and Pluto to houses where they simply don't belong. Right now I am using Regiomontanus with excellent results. It's the only system that puts ALL my planets in the houses they actually make most sense without creating houses that look completly wacky (like Campanus does).

Out of all the house systems I tried, I found the Equal system to make the least sense of all. I don't like how it basically puts equal importance on all houses (ie areas of life). This doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

It is very good to investigate house methods. I feel that in certain geographical areas equal house method may not be appropriate, e.g. the polar regions, north ande south. If you have found the right one for you that is great. The house question is a vexed one until you become more experienced and as a strongly Libran person I lean to the equal house method for myself and my cusp degrees are all pretty much the same anyway. I have only Saturn to consider as it is on the 5/6th cusp and seems to pertain to both houses as it aspects planets in the 6th, giving a connection. Saturn is also in Leo and that gives weight to the 5th house placement.

Cheers

[byjove]

In my studying of the last few weeks I've found astrologers heralding that Ptolemy used Whole Sign, Equal and Placidus for interpretation. Each group of astrologers swear by one system attributed to him and say all others are wrong.

The only solace I've found is in Debra Houlding's perspective. She analyzes Tetrabiblos, and if something is clear shes discusses it, and where something is unclear she does not pick her favourite interpretation and preach to others about it. I find her work honest and un-biased. She concluded that some parts of Tetra esp. houses are simply unclear and those of us looking to the ancients for guidance here are largely unlucky in that we won't find the true answers given the ambiguity.

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/houprob6.html

That said, Ptolemy aside, who next? We can look to others in my opinion. Is there unanimity of what (for natal interps) Lily, Erza etc. used? Are there any other scholars or great contributers we could look at?

[tikana]

Originally Posted by mystic777

Hi All,

Since I am becoming more interested in traditional astrology (as opposed to Modern) I would like to know which house system is the one most used by traditionalists. Which one did Morin actually use? Ptolemy? Lilly? For a long time I have relied on Koch. I never really got into using the Placidus and equal house systems (well maybe a long time ago). I am thinking along the lines of natal charts rather than horaries.

mystic

Regio

Tik

[BobZemco]

Originally Posted by byjove

In my studying of the last few weeks I've found astrologers hearlding that Ptolemy used Whole Sign, Equal and Placidus for interpretation.

Ptolemy used Whole Sign, however it is crystal clear in his dissertation on the Prorogratory Places that he is using a House System and I believe it to be the fore-runner to the Porphyry House System that Porphyry co-opted and claimed to be his own later (and Ptolemy might have actually developed it).

In terms of mathematics, Porphyry is something Ptolemy might have used, because all that's done is the arc between the Ascendant and Midheaven is trisected and then the arc between the Ascendant and Imum Coeli is trisected.

The criteria that Ptolemey sets forth regarding the Prorogators bars the possibility of using Equal House or Whole Sign, at least when examining the Progrogators (that's are the Arabic Hilaj transliterated into Latin as "Hyleg").

I know Robert Pelletier claims Ptolemy used Equal House, but I'm certain Pelletier misread the texts.

Ptolemy could not have used the Placidean System since Placidus wasn't born until a few centuries later.

Originally Posted by byjove

That said, Ptolemy aside, who next? We can look to others in my opinion. Is there unanimity of what (for natal interps) Lily, Erza etc. used? Are there any other scholars or great contributers we could look at?

Lily used Regiomontanus which is basically Placidus without the lap dance.

Aside from that does it matter?

The 8th Sign from the Ascending Sign is the 8th Sign and the fact taht the 7th Sign might be on the 8th House Cusp doesn't alter the fact that the 8th Sign is still the 8th Sign and it is the 8th Sign that is inconjunct to the Sign of the Ascendant, not the 7th Sign (which opposes the Ascendant).

Likewise the 10th Sign is the 10th Sign regardless of House.

Due to a variety of astronomical factors, the Midheaven can be the 9th Sign, or the 10th Sign or the 11th Sign.

How can you ignore that?

I mean you're looking at a trine (9th), square (10th) and sextile (11th) to the Ascending Degree/House.

The Greeks and Romans viewed the MC/IC as a pivot/stake and a region of power. To me, someone with an MC in the 9th Sign might have their Honor and Dignity, and their Career based on ideas, faith or philosophy (whether those ideas are good or corrupted), while someone with the Midheaven in the 11th Sign has their Honor and Dignity and their Career centered around their friends and allies and professional groups or organizations that support them. And a Midheaven in the 10th Sign would be in opposition to 4th Sign, the Parents, Father and Family, so the impetus for their Honor, Dignity and Career is perhaps maintaining or keeping the family tradition, or perhaps doing better or exceeding what the Parents, Father or Family were able to achieve.

I believe the Houses are based on the Signs, not the Signs based on the Houses. The 6th House is Health in part because you have little control over that and the fact that the 5th Sign might be on the Cusp of the 6th House doesn't alter the fact that the 5th Sign trines the Ascendant while the 6th Sign makes no aspect to the Ascendant.

So I would pay more attention to the Signs than to the actual Houses themselves.

[byjove]

I have to list this so as not to miss important points...

1. Bob, do you think it matters who used what? Or do you think it's better to concentrate on what works in the here and now? I just hate seeing how the tiniest things influenced the development of what are very popular practices which are either ignorant of wisdom of the past or silly by the sheep-following-sheep idea, to me. I think I'm in the astrology game too long now to rely solely on others, hence the much-needed research.

2. Propogators? What are they? I've seen Hyleg but not much. Are they the rulers of the houses?

3. As for Placidus, I read many times that he never invented that, he, like so many others was ... knowingly or not re-popularizing creations of others in the past...so I guess it would be better to say, some consider Ptolemy to have used what was later to be known as Placidus, but that's ruled out now.

4. If I understand you correctly Bob, and I'm not erroneously using the terms, I think you're referring to the 'places' (signs, no such concept as houses, really) and what the ASC 'sees' - hence the Ptolemic aspects to it. Did the ancients count those aspects only with the ASC or also with the bodies? (sign aspects) E.g. The chart ruler two 'places' away from Venus, is that a sextile regardless of degrees? Or only what the ASC 'sees' - regardless of aspect, given that not being seen was the worst (2nd, 6th, 12th).

5. Is it widely-believe that Ptolemy used at least one system for assessing planetary strength and at least another for interpretations?

I have to say I'm really enjoying the re-read of Lily's work, I think I'm in a better place to absorb it now. And his framing of people based on a body being strong in a native's chart, whether dignified or not is very accurate. Does anyone know how important planets on the angles were considered? If at least as far back as the Romans the AC/MC were highlighted, then surely so. And perspectives on undignified planets? Not even face or term?

[BobZemco]

Originally Posted by byjove

I have to list this so as not to miss important points...

1. Bob, do you think it matters who used what? Or do you think it's better to concentrate on what works in the here and now? I just hate seeing how the tiniest things influenced the development of what are very popular practices which are either ignorant of wisdom of the past or silly by the sheep-following-sheep idea, to me. I think I'm in the astrology game too long now to rely solely on others, hence the much-needed research.

I suppose it comes down to the question which came first, the Signs or the Houses?

Obviously, the Signs. You can look at like the Houses are the stage, and the Signs are the scenery, back-drops and props, and the Planets are the actors.

You don't really need a stage. Sure you can shoot scenes for a tele-play or screen-play at Pinewood Studios, but you can also shoot them out-doors with no stage, just the scenery and props.

I think if you're going to follow specific doctrines, like Lily, then you should use Regiomontanus. Most people have ready access to Lily's Christian Anthology and it's a good starter, but he uses Regiomontanus and so should you if you're using Lily.

If you're going to follow Bonatti, then you should use Alcabitius. If you're into some of the early Persians and Jews, then probably Placidus or Porphyry.

From what I've seen, House Cusps only come into play with certain Greek Lots, namely the Lots of Wealth (Substance), Death and Enemies (Hermes), and then in Mundane Ingress Charts, because the Chart Ruler is the Planet that has the greatest Dignity in certain House Cusps and is also conjunct the Cusp.

Originally Posted by byjove

2. Propogators? What are they? I've seen Hyleg but not much. Are they the rulers of the houses?

It's the Planet or Chart Point that rules your "Life Essence" (for lack of a better word) and determines (in part) when you die.

It's a Planet or Lot of Fortune in the 7th, 9th, 10th or 11th Signs. If a Planet is in one of those Signs and it's a Day Chart, then the Planet that has the most Dignity in the Sun, Ascendant and pre-Natal New Moon is pitted against the Sun and Moon to see which of those three is the most powerful. If none are, then you look at Sun and Moon, and if they aren't in the 7th, 9th, 10th or 11th Houses then you automatically take the Ascendant.

In a Night Chart, you look at the Planet in the 7th, 9th, 10th or 11th Signs to see which has the most Dignity in the Moon, pre-Natal Full Moon and the Lot of Fortune, and pit that against the Moon and Sun to see which is the most powerful. If no Planets are in those Signs, or none qualify, then you look at Moon and Sun and if they aren't in those Signs, then if the chart is Conjunctional, you take the Ascendant, and if it is Preventional, you take the Lot of Fortune.

Then once you find the Hyleg you Direct it to see how long the Native will live. If the Hyleg is in the 2nd Quadrant, a Feminine Quarter (the 7th, 8th and 9th Houses) you Direct it to the Descendant and that's how long the Native lives, and you modify that by how long it takes the Benefics and Malefics to make aspects to the Descendant, which will either shorten or lengthen the Native's life span.

I've got charts on here that show that with all the math and stuff.

Originally Posted by byjove

3. As for Placidus, I read many times that he never invented that, he, like so many others was ... knowingly or not re-popularizing creations of others in the past...so I guess it would be better to say, some consider Ptolemy to have used what was later to be known as Placidus, but that's ruled out now.

You have to look at the math that they might have been capable of doing at the time. No doubt with better math (and better math skills) and different theories about the Earth (being round or not) and such you can devise different schemes.

Porphyry is easy, because all you do is count the degrees between the Ascendant and the Midheaven (going clock-wise) and then divided by three and that's your 11th and 12th (and 5th and 6th) House Cusps, then count the degrees between the Ascendant and Imum Coeli (going counter clockwise) and then divide that by three.

For everything else you start getting into mathematical acrobatics, trisecting arcs and then projecting various types of Great Circles on to different points of the Ecliptic.

It's a lot of math. A lot of math.

Originally Posted by byjove

4. If I understand you correctly Bob, and I'm not erroneously using the terms, I think you're referring to the 'places' (signs, no such concept as houses, really) and what the ASC 'sees' - hence the Ptolemic aspects to it. Did the ancients count those aspects only with the ASC or also with the bodies? (sign aspects) E.g. The chart ruler two 'places' away from Venus, is that a sextile regardless of degrees? Or only what the ASC 'sees' - regardless of aspect, given that not being seen was the worst (2nd, 6th, 12th).

They used Signs.

A Planet that is inconjunct to the Sign it rules, or an Almuten that is inconjunct to the House/Sign it has dominion over or a Planet inconjunct a House/Sign has not control over it. That would be like an actor that is still in the dressing room and neither on-stage nor off-stage.

For example, I have Scorpio-rising and ruler Mars is in Aries but Cadent in the 6th Sign, meaning Mars is inconjunct the Ascendant. Likewise, the Chart Ruler and for both ibn Ezra and my variation on his method gives Sun, who is in Gemini and therefore inconjunct the Ascendant.

I have zero control over my life. I basically spent most of my life reacting to situations created by others, or waiting for others to do what they're supposed to do so that I can move forward. If I'm not waiting on some bureaucrat to fill out forms and grant approval (or denial) then I'm waiting on some hack at a bank or some business to do their job.

Perfect example is on the first night of classes, I'm commuting to Miami University (Oxford Ohio about 1 hour 15 minutes one way) and I stopped because a car in front of me stopped to turn and then the guy behind me hits my car knocking it into the car in front of me, and then some woman hits him knocking him into my car again and into the car in front of me. So the police cited the other two drivers at fault, but that's little comfort, because my car has to be towed and is non-operational.

Do I get a hired car? No. The two insurance companies can't agree on who should pay if I rent a car. My insurance company says the other two should pay.

So by the time I realize this is not going to be resolved, and I have no car and cannot travel to attend classes, I withdraw from the class, but I lose 25% of the tuition I paid and my graduation is delayed for an entire year, because I needed that class in order to take another class.

So it took nearly 3 months to get my car repaired, I had to pay for it, although my insurance company sued the other two and recover, that took nearly 2 years.

And that's a small sample of what I have to put up with on an almost weekly basis every year of my life.

You see people "totally out of control" a lot, I can almost guarantee the Almuten of Intellect is inconjunct Moon by Sign.

Almuten of Wealth inconjunct the 2nd Sign/House they have no control over their wealth. If they'll have wealth, they'll get it, but they won't have control over how they get it, nor would they have control over how they lose it (if that happens to be the case).

You want the Planets to make aspects to the Signs they rule. The Moon is particularly bad in Sagittarius, because it is inconjunct to both Cancer and Taurus, it's Sign and Exaltation.

A Pisces or Virgo Sun is also bad because it is inconjunct to both Aries and Leo (its Exaltation and Sign).

Originally Posted by byjove

5. Is it widely-believe that Ptolemy used at least one system for assessing planetary strength and at least another for interpretations?

I don't know. You got me on that one.

Originally Posted by byjove

I have to say I'm really enjoying the re-read of Lily's work, I think I'm in a better place to absorb it now. And his framing of people based on a body being strong in a native's chart, whether dignified or not is very accurate. Does anyone know how important planets on the angles were considered? If at least as far back as the Romans the AC/MC were highlighted, then surely so. And perspectives on undignified planets? Not even face or term?

You'd probably like Gadbury as well.

Angular Planets are strong, but they are stronger in the order 1st, 10th, 7th and 4th.

Same with Succedent Planets. They are stronger in the 11th, 5th, 2nd and 8th.

Cadent Planets are stronger in the order 9th, 3rd, 6th and 12th

A Peregrine Planet is weak, but it can be strengthened if in aspect to Sun, Venus or Jupiter by sextile or trine.

[dhundhun]

Traditional Western Astrology developed during 13th to 17th century. It was sort of best during William Lilly's days and we still find his work (books) to be one of the finest books of Western Astrology.

Work during that period extensively used Regiomontanus house system. In fact Lilly also used extensively, with emphasis of five degrees cusp rules. In 17th century, then Placidus took over Regiomontanus and sort of de-facto house system used in Western Astrology - probably this answers your question.

In fact traditions set very sound footing with:
1. Natal,
2. Horary,
3. Electional and
4. Mundane

====== Modern ======
Perhaps that time world became complicated and needed more planets, asteroids and concepts. Western Astrology sort of disappeared in 18th century. Modern Astrology picked up in late 19th and 20th century, probably through efforts of Alan Leo, Vivian Robinson. Now it is very much different due to:
~ Additional bodies: Uranus, Neptune, Pluto, Chiron and several asteroids
~ Use of Planet Patterns
~ More Analytical Approach
~ Newer House Systems
~ Using Nodes
~ Perhaps Synastry developed more

====== Issues ======
However, it became sort of too complex. Mostly astrologers use Modern Astrology for Psychology and Synastry. It lacked precision of prediction of traditional. It becomes more obvious in horary astrology, where traditional is more favored for accuracies.


Hope that information provided is useful to you.


Also, please note that prior to 13th Century (in AD), period of Astrology is called Medieval Astrology. This was time for Arabian Astrology. Use of Arabic Part's (such as Par Fortuna) developed those days.

For good examples of Traditional Horary Astrology, pay attention to replies by "tikana" http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/member.php?u=8. In my opinion, her readings best matches traditional interpretations.

[dr. farr]

Remember that the term "house" was not used at all by the Greco/Roman (writing in Greek or Latin) They all used the term "loci" or "locus" (place or places) NOT "domus" (house)-they thought in terms of places/locations relative to the circle of the sky, not in terms of enclosures-that developed later.
Vettius Valens and Paulus Alexandrianus are important sources-rivalling Ptolemy and even surpassing him in importance among astrologers, during the Greco/Roman astrological period (through around 600 AD) They used Whole Sign in horoscopic delineations.

I think Mr Zemco has pretty well outlined the matter in his recent posts, and I largely agree with what he has written there.

Relative to what dhundhun has posted, there are 4 periods in the history of Western astrology: original Greco/Roman (using either Whole Sign or sometimes Equal House for most horoscopic delineations; sometimes Porphyry for certain special purposes) followed by the Islamic astrological period (using Alchabitius house system-as did the famous European adept Guido Bonatti, sometime also Porphyry), then the Renaissance/Reformation period introducing Regiomontanus (which, unlike all other quadrant house systems, bases itself on the Equator rather than on the Ecliptic), Campanella and (during Lilly's time) Placidus quadrant house systems;
Placidus dominated through the Modern astrology period, with further house system introductions during Modern times such as Koch and topocentric and a reintroduction (by Carter and the London school of astrology from the 1930's through the 1960's) of Equal House, which brings us to today, where we find a reintroduction of the "lost" Whole Sign format beginning in the late 1990's.

[byjove]

Thanks all, there is a good collection of knowledge which is then open for others to learn, it's very useful and interesting.

Bob,

Do you mean you calculate your chart ruler to be something other than the ruler of the ASC? It's been a while since I read about that. Is it a question of dignity, rulership over other houses, contact with benefics/malefics? Do you use degree-based aspects only or also sign-based? And for effects in one's life - aspect to ASC, houses from ASC or Plac/Porp/Regio house? And if you haven't written a book yet, you should.

Dhundhun,

Thanks for the info. - I really needing to tidy up the development of astrology better in my head. As for modern astrology, I wonder what the ancients would have thought about our 'newer' planets? What would have been the process of determining their place? I read that when astronomers found Pluto, they were very disapppointed because they say whatever is affecting planetary orbits out that far is far, far, bigger than Pluto - so that something is left to be found. But I hear crazy-types claiming this would be the 'true', 'long-lost' ruler of Virgo etc. so many people desperate to re-arrange things...given the amount of time put into everything up until Lily's time, I don't see the sense in RUSHING assign and define, even before things are found... So ancient, medieval, then modern.

Dr. Farr,

I believe you know Whole Sign quite well and as you say you've been happily using it for many years. By any chance do you know (I thought I read it on my travels into Whole Sign) that astrologers around Ptolemy's time used Whole Sign for interpreatations and another systen (quadrent) for assessing planetary strength? Where might I find info. on Vettius Valens and Paulus Alexandrianus? I'd like to look into that too.

[JUPITERASC]

Originally Posted by byjove

By any chance do you know (I thought I read it on my travels into Whole Sign) that astrologers around Ptolemy's time used Whole Sign for interpreatations and another systen (quadrent) for assessing planetary strength? Where might I find info. on Vettius Valens and Paulus Alexandrianus? I'd like to look into that too.

I'm not dr.farr but nevertheless I shall respond to your question

http://www.hellenisticastrology.com/...logy-released/ has this to say: Published on December 15, 2010 by Chris Brennan in Translations "A full translation of the Anthology of the 2nd century astrologer Vettius Valens was released online yesterday for free. The translator is a retired classics scholar named Mark Riley, who posted a PDF of the translation on his website (here is a direct link to the PDF)http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/...s%20entire.pdf"

and for what it's worth, I think the Ancients used Porphyry along with Whole Signs

[byjove]

Thank you JupiterASC, I shall indulge in some late-night astro research...very kind of you!