PDA

View Full Version : Question on Dispositors


Osamenor
07-10-2015, 08:19 PM
I just learned about final dispositors and am trying to figure out my own. I have two planets in their native signs: sun in Leo and Mercury in Virgo. The sun doesn't disposit anything but itself, because I have nothing else in Leo. Mercury is apparently the final dispositor for everything else, with two branches in its tree: it disposits both Mars in Gemini and Venus in Virgo. Venus's line peters out at the next level, with Uranus and Pluto in Libra, neither of which disposits anything (Aquarius and Scorpio are empty, unless you count my north node in Scorpio). The Mars branch ends with Saturn, which disposits my Capricorn ascendent but nothing else.

So do I have two final dispositors? Or none at all? Does one take precedent over the other in some way? Would the sun be considered stronger because it's a singleton dispositor? Or would Mercury, because it has a long chain of command, including the ruler of my ascendent? Or are both of them equal in that respect?

JUPITERASC
07-10-2015, 08:25 PM
I just learned about final dispositors and am trying to figure out my own. I have two planets in their native signs: sun in Leo and Mercury in Virgo. The sun doesn't disposit anything but itself, because I have nothing else in Leo. Mercury is apparently the final dispositor for everything else, with two branches in its tree: it disposits both Mars in Gemini and Venus in Virgo. Venus's line peters out at the next level, with Uranus and Pluto in Libra, neither of which disposits anything (Aquarius and Scorpio are empty, unless you count my north node in Scorpio). The Mars branch ends with Saturn, which disposits my Capricorn ascendent but nothing else.

So do I have two final dispositors?

'Final' means 'Final'
i.e. ONE FINAL DISPOSITOR
not two :smile:

Or none at all?
Does one take precedent over the other in some way? Would the sun be considered stronger because it's a singleton dispositor?
Or would Mercury, because it has a long chain of command, including the ruler of my ascendent?
Or are both of them equal in that respect?

Many charts have no final dispositor

Osamenor
07-10-2015, 08:59 PM
'Final' means 'Final'
i.e. ONE FINAL DISPOSITOR
not two :smile:

Many charts have no final dispositor

That answers my question, thanks!

I do have a few more questions, however. If there's more than one planet in its own sign, do those planets share a certain level of strength? If I draw a dispositor chart for my planets, Mercury is the ultimate dispositor of everything except the sun. Does that put Mercury, say, on a par with my sun and chart ruler? Might it be even more influential than my chart ruler, since Saturn rules my ascendent but is in detriment in Cancer?

JUPITERASC
07-10-2015, 09:52 PM
That answers my question, thanks!


That's ok


I do have a few more questions, however.
If there's more than one planet in its own sign, do those planets share a certain level of strength?

Not necessarily ~ dependent on their essential dignity when located in a particular sign :smile:

HOW TO READ THIS TABLE http://www.skyscript.co.uk/dig2.html

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/im/dignities2.gif


http://www.skyscript.co.uk/im/2014/egyptianterms.gif


If I draw a dispositor chart for my planets, Mercury is the ultimate dispositor of everything except the sun.
Does that put Mercury, say, on a par with my sun and chart ruler?
Might it be even more influential than my chart ruler,
since Saturn rules my ascendent but is in detriment in Cancer?

There are a number of traditional techniques that determine the ALMUTEM FIGURIS of a natal chart http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49000



Almutem Figuris is an old doctrine where one planet according to certain calculations applied, receives the honors to be the Ruler or Lord of the Chart.

Robert Zoler had applied the therm AlmuteM instead of AlmuteN in order to differentiate the Lord of the Chart from the Lord of certain house or place in the natal chart such as Almuten Domus (Ruler of a House).

The word Almutes is an Arabian word which means 'Winner'.
Because, the planet is the Winner of all the 'life giving' places. Or the places which are most sensible and important in the natal figure.

The method which we'll use here I call Ezra/Zoller method.
Arabian Astrologer Ibn Ezra (1089 1164) was the first (as far as we at this moment are aware) to explicitely wrote about calculating the Almutem Figuris.

In his writings Zoller trace the beginnings of this Almutem Figuris and he found it in the writings of Iambichus (c. 245c. 325) who was Syrian neo-platonic philosopher who wrote also about Astrology in his writings.
Iambicus in his work "Theurgy or on the mysteries of Egypt" speaks about the thing how one can change his fate. He speaks that he can do that through Theurgy and through personal relationship with the Lord of the Geniture of which he (Iambichus) only says that can be known through Astrology, but he didn't explained the method.
Zoller, tracing back the Ibn Ezra's ancestry, through the Sabaeans and his teachers (Mashallah and other) all the way to the first centuries where this doctrine was thought. Because of that line Zoller thinks that the Lord of the Geniture of which Iambichus speaks in his writings is in fact the Almutem Figuris of the Ibn Ezra.

Iambichus speaks (through the name of Porphyry) about the Peculiar Daimon, that is some kind of an Guardian Angel and it is conected to the personal soul but its not the same
Here's what Iambichus says in his Theurgy:
This [daimon] therefore is present as an exemplar before the souls descend into the realm of generated existence. As soon as the soul chooses him for leader the [daimon] immediately comes into charge of completing of its vital endowments and when it descends into the body it unites with the body and becomes the guardian of it common living principle. He likewise directs the the private life of the soul and
whatever the conclusions we may arrive at by inference and reasoning he himself imparts to us the principles."

Zoller about the Almutem Figuris says that it is equally as powerful as all the other planets taken together."

Benjamin Dykes (great student of Zoller) says about Almutem Figuris:
"Almutem Figuris, a powerful planet in the natal figure whose spirit or angel acts as the native's special link to the Divine. The Almutem Figuris is a spiritual astrological delineation, similar to but not the same as Lilly's the "Lord of the Geniture." But like Lilly (and Plato), the Almutem Figuris was taken to affect the native's thoughts, beliefs and character. Spiritual enlightenment can demand that we open our eyes to this particular planet and use it to access the Divine. Significantly, this is a function that many modern astrologers now attribute to the sun sign." (In his article on Happiness).

The method of calculation

1. Find the Essential Dignities (the 5 dignities, apply 3 points to all 3 triplicity rulers), in the Degree of the:
- Sun
- Moon
- Ascendant
- Part of Fortune
- Syzygy (the prenatal lunation, the one that came last, i.e. after which the birth follows - New or Full Moon).

2. Add 7 points for the Day ruler and 6 points to the Hour ruler.

3. Add accidental dignities scores.

For the planet in 1st house you add 12 points.
10th house = 11 points
7th house = 10
4th house = 9
11th = 8
5th = 7
2nd = 6
9th = 5
8th = 4
3rd = 3
12th = 2
6th = 1

The planet which has most points in the aforesaid places is the Almutem Figuris of the chart!

Don't forget to apply the 5 degrees ruler for the planet near the cusp of the houses. For example, if Saturn is at 15 Scorpio in 4th, but the 5th house cusp is at 19 Scorpio, you will calculate that Saturn already in the 5th, and you will give him 7 points instead of 9 as he would took if he was in 4th house. This can make big difference.

The free traditional astrology software - Morinus (google it), calcualte the Almutem Figuris. You can find this option by typing F3. But I should warn you that in that calculation is included some adding of points according to the planets phases. Zoller did not mention any kind of phases calculation so at this moment I'm not aware why the author of the software did included that.

But the best way and more enjoyable is to calculate it with your own hand. You will be familiar with the chart more deeply if you do this calculations with your own hand as the older astrologers did.
And if you must use the Morinus software than subtract the phases scores and you will get the Almutem Figuris right. All else is the same calculation as the Ezra/Zoller method.

Zoller gives short discriptions for every planet being Almutem Figuris:

Sun:
"If the Almuten figuris is the Sun, the native will want to lead, express his creative power and be recognized."

Moon:
"If the Moon, s/he will want to care for, be cared for, eat and make love, dream"

Mercury:
"If it is Mercury, s/he will be diligent in the sciences, business and communications"

Venus:
"Id it is Venus s/he will be a lover of beauty, of music, of men and women etc."

Mars:
"If it is Mars, s/he will fight in order to dominate"

Jupiter:
"If it is Jupiter, s/he will philosophize and teach"

Saturn:
"If it is Saturn he will retire from society, investigate hidden things and suffer adversity.""

Osamenor
07-11-2015, 04:01 AM
Okay... that's very complex, and it will take me a while to figure it out. I guess I asked for it! (should know by now nothing in astrology is that simple! :tongue:)

One more question I want to toss out, and this one is for people who use the outer planets in astrology (including planetoid Pluto!) and consider them to share rulership of certain signs with the traditional rulers. If one of the planets in a co-ruled sign is in its own sign but the other is not, does the co-ruler that's out of sign disposit the planet in its native sign, which also disposits itself? For example, suppose a chart has Pluto in Scorpio and Mars in Libra. Pluto disposits itself, but is it also disposited by Mars?

Or suppose it's the other way around: Mars is in Scorpio and Pluto is in Libra. Is Mars disposited by Pluto, in addition to dispositing itself?

Oddity
07-11-2015, 04:09 AM
Okay... that's very complex, and it will take me a while to figure it out. I guess I asked for it! (should know by now nothing in astrology is that simple! :tongue:)

One more question I want to toss out, and this one is for people who use the outer planets in astrology (including planetoid Pluto!) and consider them to share rulership of certain signs with the traditional rulers. If one of the planets in a co-ruled sign is in its own sign but the other is not, does the co-ruler that's out of sign disposit the planet in its native sign, which also disposits itself? For example, suppose a chart has Pluto in Scorpio and Mars in Libra. Pluto disposits itself, but is it also disposited by Mars?

Or suppose it's the other way around: Mars is in Scorpio and Pluto is in Libra. Is Mars disposited by Pluto, in addition to dispositing itself?

I don't use the outer planets, nor final dispositors, but it's basically a logic problem.

If you take Pluto to be the ruler of Scorpio, and Pluto is in Scorpio, then it disposits Mars, and would do even if Mars were also in Scorpio. Nothing would disposit Pluto. That's the meaning of 'final' dispositor.

Sun in Leo cannot be disposited.
Mercury in Virgo or Gemini cannnot.
Moon in Cancer cannot.
Venus in Taurus or Libra cannot.
Jupiter in Sag cannot, nor in Pisces unless you take Neptune as ruler of Pisces.
Saturn in Capricorn cannot, and Saturn in Aquarius is in traditional rulership, but if you use modern, it's disposited by Uranus.

Make sense?

Osamenor
07-11-2015, 04:15 AM
If you take Pluto to be the ruler of Scorpio, and Pluto is in Scorpio, then it disposits Mars, and would do even if Mars were also in Scorpio. Nothing would disposit Pluto. That's the meaning of 'final' dispositor.

Sun in Leo cannot be disposited.
Mercury in Virgo or Gemini cannnot.
Moon in Cancer cannot.
Venus in Taurus or Libra cannot.
Jupiter in Sag cannot, nor in Pisces unless you take Neptune as ruler of Pisces.
Saturn in Capricorn cannot, and Saturn in Aquarius is in traditional rulership, but if you use modern, it's disposited by Uranus.

Make sense?
That would make sense if each sign had only one ruler, but that's not the question I asked. Some astrologers consider Scorpio, Aquarius, and Pisces to be co-ruled by their traditional and modern rulers. I was asking based on the idea that those three signs are co-ruled. If a sign has two rulers, can the traditional ruler disposit the modern one, or vice versa?

Oddity
07-11-2015, 04:26 AM
That would make sense if each sign had only one ruler, but that's not the question I asked. Some astrologers consider Scorpio, Aquarius, and Pisces to be co-ruled by their traditional and modern rulers. I was asking based on the idea that those three signs are co-ruled. If a sign has two rulers, can the traditional ruler disposit the modern one, or vice versa?

You're not the first person to wrestle with that one.

waybread
07-11-2015, 05:09 AM
Okay... that's very complex, and it will take me a while to figure it out. I guess I asked for it! (should know by now nothing in astrology is that simple! :tongue:)

One more question I want to toss out, and this one is for people who use the outer planets in astrology (including planetoid Pluto!) and consider them to share rulership of certain signs with the traditional rulers. If one of the planets in a co-ruled sign is in its own sign but the other is not, does the co-ruler that's out of sign disposit the planet in its native sign, which also disposits itself? For example, suppose a chart has Pluto in Scorpio and Mars in Libra. Pluto disposits itself, but is it also disposited by Mars?

Or suppose it's the other way around: Mars is in Scorpio and Pluto is in Libra. Is Mars disposited by Pluto, in addition to dispositing itself?


I suppose western astrologers break down 3 ways on this: traditional planets only, modern planets only, or the use of both. I use both, so I will answer in that way.

I hope I understand you correctly. In your first example, Pluto is domiciled in Scorpio. Mars in Libra is disposited by Venus. In your second example, it would seem that Mars is domiciled in Scorpio, and Pluto is disposited by Venus, the ruler of Libra.

You can continue the chain, depending upon how Venus is situated.

waybread
07-11-2015, 05:15 AM
One other technique to consider is mutual reception. I have Mercury in Aquarius, Saturn in Virgo, and Uranus in Gemini. So Saturn is the traditional ruler of Aquarius, and Mercury is domiciled in Virgo. If I go modern, Uranus is the modern ruler of Aquarius and Mercury rules Gemini. Theoretically, these planets help each other.

Osamenor
07-11-2015, 06:33 AM
I hope I understand you correctly. In your first example, Pluto is domiciled in Scorpio. Mars in Libra is disposited by Venus. In your second example, it would seem that Mars is domiciled in Scorpio, and Pluto is disposited by Venus, the ruler of Libra.

That is exactly what I was asking! So if a planet is domiciled in Scorpio, Aquarius, or Pisces, the co-ruler of its domicile doesn't disposit it?

Osamenor
07-11-2015, 07:13 AM
One other technique to consider is mutual reception. I have Mercury in Aquarius, Saturn in Virgo, and Uranus in Gemini. So Saturn is the traditional ruler of Aquarius, and Mercury is domiciled in Virgo. If I go modern, Uranus is the modern ruler of Aquarius and Mercury rules Gemini. Theoretically, these planets help each other.

That's what I was going to ask about next: multiple dispositors for the same planet. In this example, would you say Mercury is disposited by both Saturn and Uranus? Obviously, it has mutual reception with both planets. Suppose you had Saturn in Leo and Uranus in Cancer, with that Mercury in Aquarius. Then Mercury would not be in mutual reception with either of those planets, but would they both disposit Mercury?

JUPITERASC
07-11-2015, 08:09 AM
That's what I was going to ask about next:

multiple dispositors for the same planet.

In this example, would you say Mercury is disposited by both Saturn and Uranus?

Obviously, it has mutual reception with both planets.

Suppose you had Saturn in Leo and Uranus in Cancer, with that Mercury in Aquarius.
Then Mercury would not be in mutual reception with either of those planets, but would they both disposit Mercury?


dr. farr a self-styled 'eclectic astrologer' with more than five decades of experience
and a detailed knowledge of astrological history
has posted the following very helpful comment on this very issue :smile:



no, I do NOT consider Neptune, Uranus or Pluto to be dispositors ("rulers") of any sign

- but yes I do consider them to be affinitive to certain signs

and

dissonant with other signs:

for me, if X planet is in, say, Aquarius, then I consider SATURN to be dispositor of that planet,

PLUS

I consider Uranus to have a relationship to that planet as well
(because of the affinity of Uranus with Aquarius),

but NOT at the same level (the level of dispositorship) that Saturn has.

waybread
07-11-2015, 09:30 PM
Just a refresher here for anyone unclear about domiciles (planet rulerships of signs. These go way back to ancient times.)

Aries: Mars
Taurus: Venus:
Gemini: Mercury
Cancer: moon
Leo: sun
Virgo: Mercury
Libra: Venus
Scorpio: Mars (traditional) and Pluto (modern)
Sagittarius: Jupiter
Capricorn: Saturn
Aquarius: Saturn (traditional) and Uranus (modern)
Pisces: Jupiter (traditional) and Neptune (modern)

That is exactly what I was asking! So if a planet is domiciled in Scorpio, Aquarius, or Pisces, the co-ruler of its domicile doesn't disposit it?

No, you wouldn't get this if you look at both modern and traditional rulers, as I do. But let's take a different example, and assume you use modern rulers, only. Conceivably you could get a longer chain, with Mars in Libra, Venus in Scorpio, and Pluto in Scorpio. This way a domiciled Pluto disposits Mars and Venus. Or you might see Jupiter in Aries ruled by Mars in Pisces, ruled by Neptune in Pisces.

In traditional natal astrology, reception between planets could include exaltation or the lesser essential dignities such as terms. Modern astrologers tend to stick to domiciles (sign rulerships), perhaps adding detriment (opposite sign from domicile,) exaltations, and falls (opposite sign from exaltation.)

These matter more in horary astrology, where a planet in the sign of its detriment or fall is definitely seen to be weakened.

That's what I was going to ask about next: multiple dispositors for the same planet. In this example, would you say Mercury is disposited by both Saturn and Uranus? Obviously, it has mutual reception with both planets. I tend to look at it that way, just knowing how my mind works! Again, a traditional astrologer would count only the Saturn-Mercury mutual reception. A modern astrologer might count only the Mercury-Uranus mutual reception. But what we have in mutual reception is that none of the planets is domiciled (in the sign it rules.) However, unless the planets are weakened in some way, they generally help each other out.

An example would be something like a couple who love to travel. He hates the booking details and hassles, but she's good at it. She can't speak a foreign language enough to order a meal or ask directions, but he speaks several languages. Together they take wonderful trips to Europe. Each makes up for what the other one lacks.

Suppose you had Saturn in Leo and Uranus in Cancer, with that Mercury in Aquarius. Then Mercury would not be in mutual reception with either of those planets, but would they both disposit Mercury? You can get a 3-way repetitive cycle with dispositors, but I'm not sure your example does it, unless I'm missing something.

Saturn in Leo is disposited by the sun.
Uranus in Cancer is disposited by the moon.
Mercury in Aquarius could be disposited by Uranus in either Gemini or Virgo (modern) or by Saturn in Virgo or Gemini.

So somehow we need links to the sun and moon. But try this one:

Saturn in Leo is disposited by the sun. The sun in Cancer is disposited by the moon. The moon in Capricorn is disposited by Saturn. Saturn in Leo......

Osamenor
07-12-2015, 02:43 AM
You can get a 3-way repetitive cycle with dispositors, but I'm not sure your example does it, unless I'm missing something.

Saturn in Leo is disposited by the sun.
Uranus in Cancer is disposited by the moon.
Mercury in Aquarius could be disposited by Uranus in either Gemini or Virgo (modern) or by Saturn in Virgo or Gemini.

Mercury is the dispositor of any planet in Gemini or Virgo. Planets in Gemini or Virgo do not disposit Mercury, unless they happen to be the ruler of the sign Mercury is in. If Mercury is in Aquarius, its dispositor is the ruler of Aquarius, no matter which sign the ruler of Aquarius is in. But Aquarius has two rulers. So can Mercury in Aquarius be disposited by both Saturn and Uranus? Or does it have to "choose" one or the other?

In your chart, Mercury is in mutual reception with both Saturn and Uranus, so it's a moot point. But what if Mercury were still in Aquarius but not in mutual reception with either of those planets? Which one would be its dispositor? Or would it be both of them?

JUPITERASC
07-12-2015, 06:24 AM
Mercury is the dispositor of any planet in Gemini or Virgo. Planets in Gemini or Virgo do not disposit Mercury, unless they happen to be the ruler of the sign Mercury is in. If Mercury is in Aquarius, its dispositor is the ruler of Aquarius, no matter which sign the ruler of Aquarius is in. But Aquarius has two rulers. So can Mercury in Aquarius be disposited by both Saturn and Uranus? Or does it have to "choose" one or the other?

In your chart, Mercury is in mutual reception with both Saturn and Uranus, so it's a moot point. But what if Mercury were still in Aquarius but not in mutual reception with either of those planets? Which one would be its dispositor? Or would it be both of them?


Traditionally, Aquarius has one domicile ruler and that's Saturn

and so

Mercury in Aquarius is disposited by Saturn :smile:


I think if we look to the astrologers of the beginning of the 20th century etc. then you see that they were relating back to the tradition.
They didn't invent terms like "domicile" they simply inherited them and tried to work out what they mean.
All we need to do now is check what they said and refer back to the tradition they thought they were emulating and see if they got it right
- we can do this when they couldn't because we have greater access to our tradition.

When we do this we see that they are wrong.
They didn't always understand it.
They didn't appear to even attempt to understand triplicity term or face.
Sect? No chance.

As a result modern astrology is not in a position to say much of anything at all about dignity as it is not a part of their tradition -
except in such ways as they tried to borrow it from the greater tradition and messed it up.

So modern astrologers and dignity/debility - they don't use them so can't have much to say about it. I challenge anyone here to prove me wrong if they wish to, I always welcome being corrected and they can do this by finding me a modern author* who makes regular interpretive use of the difference of planetary dignity which includes domicile, detriment, exaltation, fall, triplicity, term, and face.

Interpretive difference would be in recognising debility as well as dignity such that an interpretation of a planetary placement would differ explicitly based on whether that planet has dignity or not in that sign placement.

Having read many modern astrology books I can think of a sum total of absolutely ZERO.

Of course if modern astrologers want to invent new meanings about what domicile means or exaltation they are of course free to do so
and when they later assert, as we've seen by some here, that they do not work
then I for one will do nothing but agree with them
- yes, the new and invented meanings of domicile and exaltation etc do not work.

The reality is that after astrologer emerged from its post-enlightenment little sleep
it did so slowly and with great confusion,
the astrologers of the time making regular mistakes about what a particular term meant,
but that they used those terms at all is a testament to the fact that they were trying to bridge a gap back to their tradition.
It is just that they often made mistakes doing it.
We can see this with anyone from the likes of Alan Leo to Ivy Goldstein Jacboson.

(*by which I mean one who is not an astrologer discussing the tradition obviously, there are many neo-traditional astrologers and anyone alive today has the right to be called 'modern', these are not the people I mean)


PS
It's worth clarifying, when we say dignity we mean only essential dignity because that is what it is in the actual tradition. Dignity was not used to refer to the angles of the chart or the 'accidental dignities' that we, as neo-traditionalists, might use. It's a sloppiness on the part of the neo-traditional astrologer. Really we should be talking about dignity in term of the essence of the planet, and the 'accidental dignities' as being accidental fortitudes/strengths. The former is qualitative, the latter is quantitive.

waybread
07-12-2015, 07:00 AM
Mercury is the dispositor of any planet in Gemini or Virgo. Planets in Gemini or Virgo do not disposit Mercury, unless they happen to be the ruler of the sign Mercury is in. If Mercury is in Aquarius, its dispositor is the ruler of Aquarius, no matter which sign the ruler of Aquarius is in. But Aquarius has two rulers. So can Mercury in Aquarius be disposited by both Saturn and Uranus? Or does it have to "choose" one or the other?

In your chart, Mercury is in mutual reception with both Saturn and Uranus, so it's a moot point. But what if Mercury were still in Aquarius but not in mutual reception with either of those planets? Which one would be its dispositor? Or would it be both of them?

Now my head is spinning.

Just follow the chain of domiciles/rulerships. I would distinguish between a dispositor, as the next-in-line, and a final dispositor, which you would get with a domiciled planet. Some people (like me) have no domiciled planets in our charts. http://www.aquariuspapers.com/astrology/2011/05/astrology-class-what-is-a-dispositor-and-what-is-mutual-reception-between-two-planets.html


If you've got an actual chart in mind that is causing this quandary, perhaps you could post it. Otherwise, if you just do a bicycle tour through a dozen or so charts, you should get the hang of it. (Again, after you decide if you want to use traditional sign rulers only; modern sign rulers only for Scorpio, Aquarius, and Pisces; or a mix of both.)

A final dispositor for Mercury in Aquarius could be Saturn in Capricorn or Uranus in Aquarius. Otherwise it is hard to answer your question about the next-in-line dispositor because charts lend themselves to so many long and short chains of rulerships.

Osamenor
07-12-2015, 04:16 PM
Now my head is spinning.

Just follow the chain of domiciles/rulerships. I would distinguish between a dispositor, as the next-in-line, and a final dispositor, which you would get with a domiciled planet. Some people (like me) have no domiciled planets in our charts. http://www.aquariuspapers.com/astrology/2011/05/astrology-class-what-is-a-dispositor-and-what-is-mutual-reception-between-two-planets.html


If you've got an actual chart in mind that is causing this quandary, perhaps you could post it. Otherwise, if you just do a bicycle tour through a dozen or so charts, you should get the hang of it. (Again, after you decide if you want to use traditional sign rulers only; modern sign rulers only for Scorpio, Aquarius, and Pisces; or a mix of both.)

A final dispositor for Mercury in Aquarius could be Saturn in Capricorn or Uranus in Aquarius. Otherwise it is hard to answer your question about the next-in-line dispositor because charts lend themselves to so many long and short chains of rulerships.
I asked a simple theoretical question. If Mercury is in Aquarius, can it have two dispositors? Or does it have to be just Saturn or just Uranus?

I didn't ask about final dispositor, just the dispositor.

The way you originally answered that question, you said Saturn or Uranus would have to be in Gemini or Virgo to disposit Mercury. That can't be right. Those planets would have to be in Gemini or Virgo to have mutual reception with Mercury in Aquarius, but they could disposit Mercury in Aquarius from any sign. The only question I'm asking is whether they could both disposit a planet in Aquarius even if they're in different signs with different rulers, such as Cancer and Leo.

Osamenor
07-12-2015, 04:22 PM
Traditionally, Aquarius has one domicile ruler and that's Saturn

and so

Mercury in Aquarius is disposited by Saturn :smile:

JUPITERASC, I appreciate your efforts to contribute, but please read the question before you answer! I'm not asking about traditional rulers only. I'm asking from the perspective of using both modern and traditional rulers for Aquarius, Pisces, and Scorpio. Just saying there's only one traditional ruler isn't an appropriate answer because that has nothing to do with my question.

If you yourself use only traditional rulers, that's fine, but please don't horn in on questions that require a different approach.

waybread
07-12-2015, 08:40 PM
Osamenor, I've spent a fair bit of time on your questions-- and possibly your continuing confusion means the answer is not as straightforward as you wish. You seem to confuse dispositors with final dispositors.

With the Gemini-Virgo examples, I believed we were referring to my chart. Not any or all charts.

I hope you are clear on planet-sign rulerships (domiciles.) These have been set since ancient times, with the addition of modern planets in the 19th and 20th centuries.

Someone else can put me out of my misery if I'm wrong, but I learned that:

1. A dispositor is the planet ruling the sign in which the planet is found. Consequently, any planet with Uranus or Saturn in its sign can dispose/disposit Mercury in Aquarius. If Saturn or Uranus is in Libra, then Venus disposits Mercury.

Obviously you can run through a chain or loop of dispositors: suppose Mercury in Aquarius is ruled by Saturn in Sagittarius. Saturn is ruled by Jupiter in Taurus. Venus is ruled by Jupiter in Capricorn. Capricorn is ruled by Saturn. Repeat. Repeat.

2. If you have a planet in the sign that it rules (also called domiciled) the chain stops. This planet is called the final dispositor. Not all charts have a domiciled planet. Mutual reception is a special case, where two planets exchange domiciles. (Example: Venus in Cancer ruled by the moon, moon in Taurus ruled by Venus.)

If you are a traditional astrologer, Saturn in Capricorn is the only final dispositor of Mercury in Aquarius. If you are a modern-only astrologer, Uranus in Aquarius is the only final dispositor of Mercury in Aquarius. If you use a mix of both, only Saturn in Capricorn or Uranus in Aquarius is the final dispositor of Mercury in Aquarius.

But please-- play around with a dozen or so charts. I think you'll see how this works.

Osamenor
07-13-2015, 12:40 AM
With the Gemini-Virgo examples, I believed we were referring to my chart. Not any or all charts.
I didn't mean your chart when I asked that question. I was trying to use a different hypothetical example.

I hope you are clear on planet-sign rulerships (domiciles.) These have been set since ancient times, with the addition of modern planets in the 19th and 20th centuries.
I know which planets are domiciled in which signs.

1. A dispositor is the planet ruling the sign in which the planet is found. Consequently, any planet with Uranus or Saturn in its sign can dispose/disposit Mercury in Aquarius. If Saturn or Uranus is in Libra, then Venus disposits Mercury.
But if Mercury is found in Aquarius, that makes Saturn and/or Uranus its dispositor. I'm not talking about dispositors further up the chain of command. For the purpose of that question, I was only talking about the immediate dispositor. Not the dispositor's dispositor. Not the final dispositor.

The dispositor's dispositor is only relevant at the next level, and that's where I'm confused. In your chart, Saturn and Uranus are both in mutual reception with Mercury, so the chain of dispositors ends there, if you would even call them dispositors. If Saturn and Uranus both have the same dispositor, or both have the same final dispositor, it doesn't really matter which one disposits Mercury (or any other planet that happens to be in Aquarius) because either way, the lineup is the same. If, say, Saturn and Uranus are both in Libra (I don't think they ever were within the last century, but just for simplicity's sake) they're both disposited by Venus, so it shouldn't matter.

But what happens if Saturn and Uranus are both arguably dispositors for a planet in Aquarius, and they're in different signs and have different dispositors? That's where the example of one of them being in Cancer and the other in Leo comes in. Suppose Mercury is in Aquarius, Saturn is in Leo, Uranus and the moon are both in Cancer, the sun is in Pisces, and (to keep it simple, though this is impossible in the chart of anyone currently living) Jupiter and Neptune are both in Sagittarius. Uranus's final dispositor is the moon and Saturn's is Jupiter... so are the moon and Jupiter both final dispositors of Mercury? Or is it one or the another?

But please-- play around with a dozen or so charts. I think you'll see how this works.

I have played around with a few charts, and come up with some interesting webs! If two planets can disposit the same sign at once, it gets even more tangled.

waybread
07-13-2015, 03:52 AM
Have you got a particular chart in mind? That might enable us to cut to the chase. I'm having difficulty in understanding what more I can say to you. Sometimes a person asks about "A" when the way astrology works doesn't deal much if at all with "A"-- it deals with "B" and "C". Maybe someone else reading this thread can do better than I did.

It's OK if I don't answer your questions to suit your liking, incidentally.

But once more, with feeling.

First of all, in reading a natal chart, it's fine to have more than one dispositor-- this happens with more than one domiciled planet, or for folks who use both modern and traditional sign rulers. Planets in mutual reception? (My chart example.) No problem. We end up with a dynamic duo. Because in a natal chart, what we are looking for is areas of relative strength. Not necessarily the Big Cheese Who Stands Alone. There are various ways to measure planetary strength, and even a domiciled planet can be weakened in a difficult position.

Sometimes a chart will give ambiguous or conflicting testimonies even where only one sign ruler is of concern.

It is different in horary astrology, where it's best to use either the modern OR the traditional ruler. If you use both at all, use the designated non-ruler as supplementary (and often helpful) collateral information. Horary, as you know, plays by different rules, and if you let two planets signify the quesited or querent, it can become problematical, because they can yield different answers.

I do some horary astrology, but I assumed (perhaps wrongly?) that your question was about modern natal chart interpretation.

But what happens if Saturn and Uranus are both arguably dispositors for a planet in Aquarius, and they're in different signs and have different dispositors? That's where the example of one of them being in Cancer and the other in Leo comes in. Suppose Mercury is in Aquarius, Saturn is in Leo, Uranus and the moon are both in Cancer, the sun is in Pisces, and (to keep it simple, though this is impossible in the chart of anyone currently living) Jupiter and Neptune are both in Sagittarius. Uranus's final dispositor is the moon and Saturn's is Jupiter... so are the moon and Jupiter both final dispositors of Mercury? Or is it one or the another? If you use your example, I would suggest both. But that's only if you use both traditional and modern rulers. In a natal chart with a domiciled moon and Jupiter, each could easily be the end-point for several planets, anyway.

Let's take a real example. I've attached Barack Obama's chart. He has two domiciled planets: sun in Leo and Saturn in Capricorn. But let's start with Jupiter in Aquarius. With a domiciled Saturn in Capricorn next door, that's pretty much it. If we look for Uranus, we get Uranus in Leo, ruled by that domiciled sun.

We can track all of the other planets in that fashion. I just did a quick 'n' dirty run-through, but it seems to me that the sun is actually a more important planet so far as dispositors go, thanks to the trail through Mercury in Leo.

Osamenor
07-13-2015, 04:20 PM
Have you got a particular chart in mind? That might enable us to cut to the chase. I'm having difficulty in understanding what more I can say to you. Sometimes a person asks about "A" when the way astrology works doesn't deal much if at all with "A"-- it deals with "B" and "C". Maybe someone else reading this thread can do better than I did.
No, no particular chart, just trying to figure out the general rule here. You've answered my question in this post.

It's OK if I don't answer your questions to suit your liking, incidentally.

But once more, with feeling.

First of all, in reading a natal chart, it's fine to have more than one dispositor-- this happens with more than one domiciled planet, or for folks who use both modern and traditional sign rulers.

That is exactly what I was asking, thanks! And thanks for being so patient through all that communication struggle. :smile:
Planets in mutual reception? (My chart example.) No problem. We end up with a dynamic duo. Because in a natal chart, what we are looking for is areas of relative strength. Not necessarily the Big Cheese Who Stands Alone. There are various ways to measure planetary strength, and even a domiciled planet can be weakened in a difficult position.

Sometimes a chart will give ambiguous or conflicting testimonies even where only one sign ruler is of concern.
Thanks for those details! I thought that was probably so, but good to hear confirmation from someone much more experienced than me.

It is different in horary astrology, where it's best to use either the modern OR the traditional ruler. If you use both at all, use the designated non-ruler as supplementary (and often helpful) collateral information. Horary, as you know, plays by different rules, and if you let two planets signify the quesited or querent, it can become problematical, because they can yield different answers.

I do some horary astrology, but I assumed (perhaps wrongly?) that your question was about modern natal chart interpretation.
No, your assumption was correct. I didn't mean horary at all. Isn't horary a traditional astrology technique? I would expect it to use traditional indicators.

If you use your example, I would suggest both. But that's only if you use both traditional and modern rulers. In a natal chart with a domiciled moon and Jupiter, each could easily be the end-point for several planets, anyway.
True enough.

Let's take a real example. I've attached Barack Obama's chart. He has two domiciled planets: sun in Leo and Saturn in Capricorn. But let's start with Jupiter in Aquarius. With a domiciled Saturn in Capricorn next door, that's pretty much it. If we look for Uranus, we get Uranus in Leo, ruled by that domiciled sun.
I think Obama exemplifies a combination of Saturn and Aquarius, so both rulers sound perfect. The whole "change we can believe in" slogan that helped get him elected in the first place is very Aquarian, but he's also been very Saturnian.

We can track all of the other planets in that fashion. I just did a quick 'n' dirty run-through, but it seems to me that the sun is actually a more important planet so far as dispositors go, thanks to the trail through Mercury in Leo.
Interesting. I'll have to look at it more.

Thanks again for all your help! If there were multiple thanks buttons, I'd click them!

JUPITERASC
07-13-2015, 11:11 PM
[deleted trolling comment - Moderator]
what's your perspective on Eris and Sedna as dispositors of Aquarius and Pisces :smile:


Today, I read this radical alteration of astrology: the "New" planetary rulerships for the new age (the Aquarian age), because Eris and Sedna should be considered rulers of signs Aquarius (Eris) and Sedna (Pisces).

http://www.secretlyobvious.com/11-planet-rulerships.html

Then it's only an opinion of the blog author, and I doubt this version will be popularized by most astrologers. I would treat the "New" planetary rulers more like co-influences, and IMO, the dwarf planet Ceres could influence Cancer (the Moon remains on the list). Both the Moon and Ceres are symbolic of fertility, maternity and children in western astrology.

Osamenor
07-13-2015, 11:19 PM
what's your perspective on Eris and Sedna as dispositors of Aquarius and Pisces :smile:

I've never heard of Eris or Sedna as a dispositor of anything before.

JUPITERASC
07-13-2015, 11:22 PM
I've never heard of Eris or Sedna as a dispositor of anything before.


Modern astrology has many new ideas ~ always changing :smile:

Osamenor
07-13-2015, 11:34 PM
The table in that article uses some rulerships that don't make any sense to me. It calls Pluto the ruler of Capricorn and Jupiter the ruler of Virgo, for instance. I don't think either of those planets fits very well with either of those signs.

For Sedna and Eris to be rulers of any sign, there would have to be a reasonable degree of consensus about what those planets mean and do astrologically and which signs best fit with their messages. That might happen in the future, but right now our knowledge of those dwarf planets is too new for that. I wouldn't think of either of them as any sign's ruler without knowing a lot more about them.

Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto have been on the radar long enough for astrologers to determine what kind of effect they seem to have astrologically, and figure out that those energies match up very well with particular signs. That's why I would consider them as sign rulers. Since the signs they rule already had rulers, I don't think the traditional rulers get unseated. No reason sign rulership can't be shared. I wouldn't rule out the possibility that Eris and Sedna might have affinities for certain signs, but we need to know more.

JUPITERASC
07-14-2015, 09:41 AM
The table in that article uses some rulerships that don't make any sense to me. It calls Pluto the ruler of Capricorn and Jupiter the ruler of Virgo, for instance. I don't think either of those planets fits very well with either of those signs.

For Sedna and Eris to be rulers of any sign, there would have to be a reasonable degree of consensus about what those planets mean and do astrologically and which signs best fit with their messages. That might happen in the future, but right now our knowledge of those dwarf planets is too new for that. I wouldn't think of either of them as any sign's ruler without knowing a lot more about them.

Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto have been on the radar long enough for astrologers to determine what kind of effect they seem to have astrologically, and figure out that those energies match up very well with particular signs. That's why I would consider them as sign rulers. Since the signs they rule already had rulers, I don't think the traditional rulers get unseated. No reason sign rulership can't be shared. I wouldn't rule out the possibility that Eris and Sedna might have affinities for certain signs, but we need to know more.


It's not unusual for astrologers to not be able to make sense of the astrological opinions of other astrologers
modern astrology is continually changing literally day by day
so frequently the debate remains unproven :smile:

waybread
07-16-2015, 10:26 PM
Thank you Osamenor!

For Sedna and Eris to be rulers of any sign, there would have to be a reasonable degree of consensus about what those planets mean and do astrologically and which signs best fit with their messages. That might happen in the future, but right now our knowledge of those dwarf planets is too new for that. I wouldn't think of either of them as any sign's ruler without knowing a lot more about them.

Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto have been on the radar long enough for astrologers to determine what kind of effect they seem to have astrologically, and figure out that those energies match up very well with particular signs. That's why I would consider them as sign rulers. Since the signs they rule already had rulers, I don't think the traditional rulers get unseated. No reason sign rulership can't be shared. I wouldn't rule out the possibility that Eris and Sedna might have affinities for certain signs, but we need to know more.


I agree.
A very few modern astrologers like to re-arrange the furniture of the horoscope. I think that Aquarius and Pisces already have modern rulers that work very well: Uranus and Neptune, respectively. These have been in use since the early 20th century, so there is at least a century of experience in working with them.

I note that traditional astrologers in the past didn't all agree on the same procedures, either. Hence discrepancies like Babylonean (Chaldean) and Egyptian terms; or different ascriptions for the 12 houses.

A lot of work needs to be done on Eris, Sedna, and the other trans-Plutonians before they can be assigned modern rulerships, if any. A sign ruler has a lot of work to do in a horoscope, so it is more than a simple planet-sign affiliation with respect to just a few characteristics.

Mythological Eris was the sister of Mars, and she personified discord and strife, as Mars did. She might be a candidate for a modern rulership of Aries-- but this is only a hypothesis. I note that the orbit of Eris sometimes swings inside that of Pluto.

Mythological Ceres was associated with Virgo and perhaps the Virgo/Libra interface. This is probably why Virgo rules grain stores and some types of grain. Ceres was the grain goddess.

graay ghost
07-16-2015, 11:29 PM
I wonder.

Am I the only one who thinks that assigning rulership or even much astrological significance to Eris and Sedna kind of ridiculous? Sedna's orbital period is over 500 years, and Sedna's is estimated at 11,400. To give you an idea of how long that is, 11,400 years ago is pretty close to the beginning of the Holocene period -- the end of the last ice age. The time period of the Neolithic revolution -- humans were domesticating sheep, cattle, pigs, and figuring out agriculture on a mass scale.

While Sedna is extremely interesting astronomically, I mean, it kind of seems like astrologically, with such a scale, well, astrology no longer has meaning...

I'm rather surprised with all the foot-dragging with Ceres, though. Aside from Virgo (which was my first instinct), I've also heard Taurus suggested? Vesta and Virgo also seem like they might go together, but that's probably too obvious, lol.

Osamenor
07-17-2015, 01:32 AM
I wonder.

Am I the only one who thinks that assigning rulership or even much astrological significance to Eris and Sedna kind of ridiculous? Sedna's orbital period is over 500 years, and Sedna's is estimated at 11,400. To give you an idea of how long that is, 11,400 years ago is pretty close to the beginning of the Holocene period -- the end of the last ice age. The time period of the Neolithic revolution -- humans were domesticating sheep, cattle, pigs, and figuring out agriculture on a mass scale.

While Sedna is extremely interesting astronomically, I mean, it kind of seems like astrologically, with such a scale, well, astrology no longer has meaning...
Maybe not a meaning with noticeable relevance to individual human lives. I read something online that associated Sedna with the progression of the equinoxes and the "ages" of history that, for instance, the Mayan calendar worked with.

If our lifespans matched those of mice, and yet we had still developed astrology, most of the planets' orbits would be insignificant in terms of individual human lives. There would be two or three solar returns in our lifetimes--about comparable to the number of Saturn returns we get with the lifespans we have. Mars, meanwhile, would be a generational planet. Jupiter and Saturn would work more like Sedna and Eris in terms of how many transits they made in a lifetime. Yet the planets would probably still play some part in our lives, even if we couldn't perceive it.

I'm rather surprised with all the foot-dragging with Ceres, though. Aside from Virgo (which was my first instinct), I've also heard Taurus suggested? Vesta and Virgo also seem like they might go together, but that's probably too obvious, lol.

I agree that Ceres as a modern ruler of Virgo makes lots of sense. Or co-ruler of Libra? Maybe the signs' periods have some distinctive overlap that we don't identify. Kind of like the Chinese recognize five seasons--the fifth is later summer--while Westerners only recognize four.

graay ghost
07-17-2015, 02:17 AM
I agree that Ceres as a modern ruler of Virgo makes lots of sense. Or co-ruler of Libra? Maybe the signs' periods have some distinctive overlap that we don't identify. Kind of like the Chinese recognize five seasons--the fifth is later summer--while Westerners only recognize four.

But seriously, why not Taurus? The Romans sacrificed cows to Ceres, and Taurus is when the weather finally takes a turn for the better. I'd imagine around Taurus would be around the time when Ceres got her daughter back to the surface, with spring flowers up in full force, and Scorpio would be around when she returns to Pluto, and the months become darker and colder as Ceres's grief deepens. The sign Ceres rules opposite the sign Pluto rules... you don't get a chance for such symmetry often. I'd say take it.

waybread
07-17-2015, 02:45 AM
I've done a lot of research into mythological and astrological Ceres, and I still don't have a good handle on how it works astrologically. Mythological Ceres (Greek=Demeter) was primarily the goddess of grain and agriculture; and also of the Eleusinian mysteries, one of the major religious cults of Antiquity. She was also known as the Law Giver, because the Greeks believed that the settled, non-nomadic lifestyle enabled by agriculture was a necessarily pre-condition for a "civilized" society's legal system.

A super source on Greek mythology is www.theoi.com (http://www.theoi.com) .

In the Mediterranean climate of ancient Greece, the flowers didn't return in the spring so much as in late winter, and at the end of the long summer drought, with the onset of the autumn and winter rainy season.

I think there will be a category of modern (dwarf) planets beyond Pluto, where we don't even think of them as "generational planets," but as symbolizing much longer time periods. Whether they will ever rule any signs is another question.

Osamenor
07-17-2015, 05:42 AM
I'd imagine around Taurus would be around the time when Ceres got her daughter back to the surface, with spring flowers up in full force, and Scorpio would be around when she returns to Pluto, and the months become darker and colder as Ceres's grief deepens.

The current sun sign is always the same everywhere on earth, but seasons and climates are different. May is Taurus month and November is Scorpio month in Alaska and Patagonia and everywhere in between. Yet the northern and southern hemispheres have opposite seasons, and within hemispheres, the seasons are vastly different. I spent a year in western Texas, and summer felt like the dead time because of the heat. In the fall, when it started to cool down, I felt myself come alive. But go just a few hundred miles north and you get frigid winters and lovely summers. You don't even have to go that far, really--the Sangre de Cristos of New Mexico are not that far away, and they get subzero temperatures in the winter.

In ancient Greece, Persephone was considered to descend to the Underworld as summer heated up and things withered, and return in the fall with the rains. But when the myth got co-opted and retold by people accustomed to the seasonal traditions of northern Europe, that got reversed.

Anyhow, the sun's passage through the signs reflects seasons of the whole earth, not the climactic season in any individual part of the earth. Same could be said, really, of all the planets' passages through signs.

graay ghost
07-17-2015, 11:41 AM
Ceres's relationship to Pluto still stands.

Anyway I'm loaded with crazy, stupid ideas. Like that Chiron should be more related to Cancer than Virgo. (People seem really eager to give stuff to Virgo.)

Osamenor
07-17-2015, 04:20 PM
Ceres's relationship to Pluto still stands.
And as waybread pointed out, it takes much more than just an affinity for a sign to make a planet its ruler. I'm not sure what all it takes... perhaps you could fill in, waybread?

Anyway I'm loaded with crazy, stupid ideas. Like that Chiron should be more related to Cancer than Virgo. (People seem really eager to give stuff to Virgo.)

I think Chiron works well in any sign. As the wounded healer in a birth chart, it shows the kind of karmic wound you have and how it can be brought into service of healing. Don't know much about Chiron transits. I wonder if there's more info on that somewhere around here.

graay ghost
07-17-2015, 05:29 PM
For giggles, as a Taurus Asc, I looked at a bunch of significant dates for me for transits... My chart ruler doesn't seem to do much. Only once did something aspect to Natal Venus pop up, and it was moon and Jupiter in hard aspect to Venus, which is odd. Venus conjunct natal Vesta and Lilith might mean something, but I don't know.

Most important aspects that kept popping up were with Saturn, Descendant/Ascendant, Vertex,and, weirdly, Pallas, Vesta, and yes, Ceres.

waybread
07-17-2015, 09:08 PM
If you work with house cusp rulers, the planet ruling a sign is important. The principle is that, "The house over which a planet rules serves the purposes of the house in which that planet stands." This is a really helpful rule for untenanted ("empty") houses. If you have an untenanted 10th house, for example, the situation of the ruler by its own house and aspects will give clues to an ideal career for someone.

In horary astrology, sign rulerships are really important. Horary is a technique where you especially look at the planets ruling the first house (the querent) and the house representing the matter of interest (the quesited.) Then you see what, if any, relationship they have with one another.

CapAquaPis
07-29-2015, 12:30 AM
Well, I came to my senses each one of the sign must have 3 most influential planets or celestial bodies: a ruler, co-ruler and "influence" (a strong or minor dispositor). This may appear radical, unorthodox or heretic to many of you, but modern astrology tries to discover imbalances and connections of natal charts and horoscopes. Here is my own definite list.

ARIES: Mars, Pluto, the Sun.
TAURUS: Venus, Eris, Mercury.
GEMINI: Mercury, Eris, Venus.
CANCER: Moon, Sun, Ceres.
LEO: Sun, Moon, Mars.
VIRGO: Mercury, Ceres, Jupiter.
LIBRA: Venus, Ceres, Saturn.
SCORPIO: Pluto, Mars, Uranus.
SAGITTARIUS: Jupiter, Neptune, Chiron.
CAPRICORN: Saturn, Uranus, Pluto.
AQUARIUS: Uranus, Saturn, Eris.
PISCES: Neptune, Jupiter, Sedna.

There are exaltations, joys, detriments, falls, weaks, peregrines and affinities for each sign of the astrological zodiac. But let's stick to a ruler...or add a co-ruler...or look into the "influence" dispositors in case it need be. I do know the Sun serves as a detriment for Aquarius (my sun sign) and the Moon does the same in Capricorn (my moon sign is also Aquarius, but I feel Capricorn-ish).

JUPITERASC
07-29-2015, 08:23 AM
Well, I came to my senses each one of the sign must have 3 most influential planets or celestial bodies: a ruler, co-ruler and "influence" (a strong or minor dispositor).
This may appear radical, unorthodox or heretic to many of you,
but modern astrology tries to discover imbalances and connections of natal charts and horoscopes.
But let's stick to a ruler...or add a co-ruler...or look into the "influence" dispositors in case it need be.
I do know the Sun serves as a detriment for Aquarius (my sun sign)
and the Moon does the same in Capricorn (my moon sign is also Aquarius, but I feel Capricorn-ish).


Not at all "radical" or "heretic" :smile:
in fact traditionally:

Aries ruler is Mars, Exalted ruler is Sun
Taurus ruler is Venus, Exalted ruler is Moon
Gemini ruler is Mercury
Cancer ruler is Moon, Exalted ruler is Jupiter
Leo ruler is Sun
Virgo ruler is Mercury
Libra ruler is Venus, Exalted ruler is Saturn
Scorpio ruler is Mars
Sagittarius ruler is Jupiter
Capricorn ruler is Saturn, Exalted ruler is Mars
Aquarius ruler is Saturn
Pisces ruler is Jupiter, Exalted ruler is Venus

CapAquaPis
07-30-2015, 03:09 AM
Not at all "radical" or "heretic" :smile:
in fact traditionally:

Aries ruler is Mars, Exalted ruler is Sun
Taurus ruler is Venus, Exalted ruler is Moon
Gemini ruler is Mercury
Cancer ruler is Moon, Exalted ruler is Jupiter
Leo ruler is Sun
Virgo ruler is Mercury
Libra ruler is Venus, Exalted ruler is Saturn
Scorpio ruler is Mars
Sagittarius ruler is Jupiter
Capricorn ruler is Saturn, Exalted ruler is Mars
Aquarius ruler is Saturn
Pisces ruler is Venus, Exalted ruler is Jupiter

Correction on Pisces: Jupiter is its ruler, Venus is exalted (just a reminder). In modern astrology, Exaltations are Gemini: Pluto, Cancer: Neptune, Leo: Uranus, Virgo: Saturn, Libra: Jupiter, Scorpio could be Chiron (the wound healer) or even Ceres, Sagittarius has Makemake (dwarf planet named for creator god in Polynesian cultures), and Aquarius might be Mercury (similar to Leo according to some astrologers). Modern astrology hasn't made up their mind, unlike their traditional counterpart going back farther in time had carefully analyzed planetary influences of each sign of the zodiac

CapAquaPis
08-02-2015, 03:52 PM
Take a look at the wiki article on domiciles and planetary rulerships. The ruler planet has a "dignity" over a sign in the astrological zodiac.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domicile_(astrology)

The detriments are opposite of ruling a sign: i.e. Mars rules Aries and a detriment of Libra, Venus rules Taurus and detriment of Scorpio, etc.

And the five essential dignities of a planet ruling a sign is further explained.

Osamenor
08-27-2015, 11:50 PM
One more question about dispositors, also meant for anyone who would use both traditional and modern rulers where applicable:

If the traditional ruler of a co-ruled sign is domiciled in that sign, while the modern ruler is in the traditional ruler's other domicile, would you consider that to be mutual reception? Examples: Saturn in Aquarius and Uranus in Capricorn, or Jupiter in Pisces and Neptune in Sagittarius. (Mars in Scorpio and Pluto in Aries would also work, but we'll have to wait another 53 years or so to see that!)

waybread
08-29-2015, 09:03 PM
I would-- the main thing being how a planet is strengthened when it gets a little help from its friends.