Gauquelin sectors - Is it true for you?

Carris

Well-known member
Michel Gauquelin (November 13, 1928 – May 20, 1991) was a French psychologist and statistician. Along with his wife he conducted statistical research to analyze astrology by studying various correlations using very large samples of birth data.

The Gauquelins analyzed some basic tenets of astrology and found a correlation amongst birth planetary positions of a person, his psychological character and the career or vocation or success in it.

After research over several decades, Gauquelin was very critical of certain widely accepted beliefs in astrology, particularly the zodiacal signs, which he extensively tested without finding results: "It is now quite certain that the signs in the sky which presided over our births have no power whatever to decide our fates, to affect our hereditary characteristics, or to play any part, however humble, in the totality of effects, random or otherwise, which form the fabric of our lives and mould our impulses to action."

Instead he found that planets and angles were more indicative. “Subsequent results only confirmed and amplified my initial discovery about the physicians. On the whole, it emerged that there was an increasingly solid statistical link between the time of birth of great men and their occupational success. ... Having collected over 20,000 dates of birth of professional celebrities from various European countries and from the United States, I had to draw the conclusion that the position of the planets at birth is linked to one's destiny.

Significant results involving 5 planets and 11 professions first found in French data were replicated by the Gauquelins with data from other European countries and the U.S. Several of their findings have also been replicated independently by others.

Gauquelin's findings demonstrate some fundamental astrological principles: Planets positions in the chart, especially near the angles and their individual planetary character are most important in affecting an individual. Whereas the zodiac signs have no discernible effect at all.

The Gauquelin sectors are around the astrological angles – the Ascendant and Midheaven (the most powerful zones) and the Descendant and IC (slightly weaker). However, instead of angular 1st and 10th house, the key sectors are the cadent 12th and 9th houses. Certain planets in 12th and 9th showed the following professions:

Saturn – scientists, physicians, doctors
Mars – doctors, sports, scientists, military, executives
Moon – writers, politicians
Jupiter – actors, journalists, playwrights, politicians, military, executives

Do you find this to be true in your experience? Do 12th and 9th planets indicate career, vocation or interests of a person?
 

Anachiel

Well-known member
Wasn't there something about the sectors being a bit off of the actual Angles and that some adjustment needed to be made to correct that??

I thought someone had mentioned that on here before and that it was the reason the difference between Angles and the Gauquelin research.

I hope that question made sense.
 

Carris

Well-known member
Wasn't there something about the sectors being a bit off of the actual Angles and that some adjustment needed to be made to correct that??

I thought someone had mentioned that on here before and that it was the reason the difference between Angles and the Gauquelin research.

I hope that question made sense.
Do you mean the house method they used - whether placidus or whole house system? I'm not sure - I didn't find anything like that mentioned. But if Gauquelin found that zodiac signs do not have much significance maybe he would not have used the whole house sytem.
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
These experimenters did NOT use (test) whole sign house format, nor did they test equal house; their expriments were with the commonly used systems back in the mid 20th century in Modernist European astrology (Koch, Placidus), etc, where they came to the conclusion that house systems were useless (as far as statistical significance is concerned) Thus they abandoned them in favor of their "sectors" (they also ultimately abandoned the use of signs in astrology as well, and also dropped considerations of Sun, Mercury, and the outer planets; their system of astrology is called "Neo-Astrology", and there are a couple of books on this method)

I consider the failure to test especially whole sign, a major flaw in the research-however, they cannot be blamed for this oversight because whole sign was entirely forgotten (in Western astrology) during the time period in which they did their research-so, they (and no others in Western astrology) even knew there was such a house format as whole sign (which format was not re-discovered until the later 1980's) In whole sign, the first house is the entire sign in which the ascendant is to be found (first house starts at 0 of that sign and ends at 29:59 of that sign) A very significant proportion of these researchers' findings-of planets which they considered to be in the "cadent" 12th house- WERE IN FACT IN THE 1ST HOUSE using the ancient (original house system, actually) whole sign house format.

For example, in my own case:
I am a doctor of medical science in homeopathy; my ascendant is @ 25 Virgo, so in whole sign the entire 1st house is the sign of Virgo; I have both Saturn and Mars rising above the ascending degree in Virgo: so in whole sign I have Saturn and Mars in the 1st house; but in the quadrant house formats studied by the researchers, this would put Mars and Saturn in the "cadent 12th house", and thus in their "sector". So the question is, what in fact is the "actual" effective house format? In the ancient whole sign format my Mars and Saturn are in the 1st house; but testing only the quadrant house systems (which is what these researchers did), these planets would be in "cadent 12th house", and thus not significant according to "astrological doctrine"-hence the researchers rejection of that doctrine and their development of their "sector" method to replace houses. But whole sign would have said those planets were very significant because they are in the WHOLE SIGN FIRST HOUSE!!
 
Last edited:

Carris

Well-known member
These experimenters did NOT use (test) whole sign house format, nor did they test equal house; their expriments were with the commonly used systems back in the mid 20th century in Modernist European astrology (Koch, Placidus), etc, where they came to the conclusion that house systems were useless (as far as statistical significance is concerned) Thus they abandoned them in favor of their "sectors" (they also ultimately abandoned the use of signs in astrology as well, and also dropped considerations of Sun, Mercury, and the outer planets; their system of astrology is called "Neo-Astrology", and there are a couple of books on this method)

I consider the failure to test especially whole sign, a major flaw in the research-however, they cannot be blamed for this oversight because whole sign was entirely forgotten (in Western astrology) during the time period in which they did their research-so, they (and no others in Western astrology) even knew there was such a house format as whole sign (which format was not re-discovered until the later 1980's) In whole sign, the first house is the entire sign in which the ascendant is to be found (first house starts at 0 of that sign and ends at 29:59 of that sign) A very significant proportion of these researchers' findings-of planets which they considered to be in the "cadent" 12th house- WERE IN FACT IN THE 1ST HOUSE using the ancient (original house system, actually) whole sign house format.

For example, in my own case:
I am a doctor of medical science in homeopathy; my ascendant is @ 25 Virgo, so in whole sign the entire 1st house is the sign of Virgo; I have both Saturn and Mars rising above the ascending degree in Virgo: so in whole sign I have Saturn and Mars in the 1st house; but in the quadrant house formats studied by the researchers, this would put Mars and Saturn in the "cadent 12th house", and thus in their "sector". So the question is, what in fact is the "actual" effective house format? In the ancient whole sign format my Mars and Saturn are in the 1st house; but testing only the quadrant house systems (which is what these researchers did), these planets would be in "cadent 12th house", and thus not significant according to "astrological doctrine"-hence the researchers rejection of that doctrine and their development of their "sector" method to replace houses. But whole sign would have said those planets were very significant because they are in the WHOLE SIGN FIRST HOUSE!!
Thank you Dr Farr - its very helpful to know your example - it perfectly illustrates the Gauquelin findings - mars and saturn already risen over the eastern horizon as you were born - have made you a doctor/scientist.

So it looks like it has to do with planets risen and already visible over the eastern horizon - even if by sign they might be counted as the first.

In my case I have saturn at 15* gemini while my asc is 5* cancer - so saturn was 20* above the eastern horizon at the time of my birth - definitely in the 12th house. My education is in a science/engineering field and my work too does involve research and study.

Btw, I have a lot of faith in homeopathy, have read about it quite a bit and rely on it completely for most ailments. In some cases it works much better for me than conventional medicine.
 
Last edited:

JerryRR

Well-known member
"The privileged sectors are those that correspond to what traditional astrologers call the ninth and twelfth houses,if you count the houses in the same direction as the signs.For the attentive reader who is conscious of the apparent rotation of the celestial sphere,due to diurnal movement,it is painfully obvious that the planet in question is dominant when it has just risen.....the houses must be counted clockwise,that is in the opposite direction to that of the signs."

Source "The Clockwise House System." by Jacques Dorsan.

Check out Leon Lasson.

J.R.
 

JerryRR

Well-known member
I recommend,"The Spheres of Destiny." -Your personality and the planets.
by, M.Gauquelin.(Dent 1980).Includes quizzes,exercises and astronomical tables.How to calculate the ruling planet.
Charts available at Astrodienst.

J.R.
 

Moog

Well-known member
The Gauquelin sectors are around the astrological angles – the Ascendant and Midheaven (the most powerful zones) and the Descendant and IC (slightly weaker). However, instead of angular 1st and 10th house, the key sectors are the cadent 12th and 9th houses. Certain planets in 12th and 9th showed the following professions:

Saturn – scientists, physicians, doctors
Mars – doctors, sports, scientists, military, executives
Moon – writers, politicians
Jupiter – actors, journalists, playwrights, politicians, military, executives

Do you find this to be true in your experience? Do 12th and 9th planets indicate career, vocation or interests of a person?

I have Mars in the 9th, but I'm not any of those.
 

Carris

Well-known member
"The privileged sectors are those that correspond to what traditional astrologers call the ninth and twelfth houses,if you count the houses in the same direction as the signs.For the attentive reader who is conscious of the apparent rotation of the celestial sphere,due to diurnal movement,it is painfully obvious that the planet in question is dominant when it has just risen.....the houses must be counted clockwise,that is in the opposite direction to that of the signs."

Source "The Clockwise House System." by Jacques Dorsan.

Check out Leon Lasson.

J.R.
Thanks JR

Yes exactly! It makes more sense this way. The anticlockwise houses are revealed on the eastern horizon one by one in the hours only after the infant's birth.

There are some things I wasn't able to understand about the key sectors, such as: "When Jupiter and Saturn are both significant for a given profession they are significant in opposite directions, and that Mars often shows significance in the same direction as either Jupiter or Saturn, but not with both at the same time." Would you know what this means?
 
Last edited:

Carris

Well-known member
I have Mars in the 9th, but I'm not any of those.
Moog

I think you actually have saturn and sun near your MC. Your chart is of whole signs instead of placidus - that is why mars seems to be directly overhead even when it was not really. Do you have any of the professions of saturn (discipline, structure, responsibility, definition, research, depth, time, patience, hard work) or sun (authority, leadership)?

I think you have saturn and moon, perhaps jupiter in your 9th. You also have uranus just risen in the 12th - maybe this would make you an astrologer. Saturn and moon are in sextile with uranus - so that could mean a scientist and writer and astrologer in the field of astrology.
 
Last edited:

Moog

Well-known member
Moog

I think you actually have saturn and sun near your MC. Your chart is of whole signs instead of placidus - that is why mars seems to be directly overhead even when it was not really. Do you have any of the professions of saturn (discipline, structure, responsibility, definition, research, depth, time, patience, hard work) or sun (authority, leadership)?

I have been in positions of authority before, but I don't like it much :lol:

Unfortunately my Saturn is pretty whacked, and the discipline, structure, and responsibility parts of my life seems to be AWOL. And that's because planets in signs DOOO have an effect (as well as other factors)

The rest would apply

I think there is a Gauquelin zone chart in my charts selection if you want to look at that.

http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=789&pictureid=4046

I think you have saturn and moon, perhaps jupiter in your 9th. You also have uranus just risen in the 12th - maybe this would make you an astrologer. Saturn and moon are in sextile with uranus - so that could mean a scientist and writer and astrologer in the field of astrology.
I see them all as being in my 10th. Uranus in 1st. I attribute the astrological interest to Rahu, but who knows.
 

JerryRR

Well-known member
Hi Carris,
Gauquelin suggests four zones of high intensity.
1 When a planet is rising
2 When it is at its upper culmination for the day
3 When it is setting
4 When it is at its lower culmination

1 & 2 Zones of high intensity
3 & 4 Zones of high intensity,but not as high as 1 & 2.

In the book I recommended,he explains his ideas behind complex planetary temperaments.
In the chapter Jupiter and Personality,he demonstrates scientists as well as sportsmen can have a Jupiterean personality.

J.R.
 

Carris

Well-known member
Hi Carris,
Gauquelin suggests four zones of high intensity.
1 When a planet is rising
2 When it is at its upper culmination for the day
3 When it is setting
4 When it is at its lower culmination

1 & 2 Zones of high intensity
3 & 4 Zones of high intensity,but not as high as 1 & 2.

In the book I recommended,he explains his ideas behind complex planetary temperaments.
In the chapter Jupiter and Personality,he demonstrates scientists as well as sportsmen can have a Jupiterean personality.

J.R.
Thanks JR, I'll try to find the book.
 

Carris

Well-known member
Some interesting discussion on Gauquelin's work in the latter pages on this thread;

http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=43020
Moog

Thanks for the link - I'll try to read it but there's a lot of back and forth stuff there. Why do you say that your saturn is whacked because it is in virgo? Wouldn't it function well in a sign that likes order, analysis and perfection?

The gauqeulin sectors also show up in president obama's chart:

Ascendent at 18 aquarius with jupiter (0 aquarius) and saturn (25 capricorn) in 12th house. Jupiter probably made him a lawyer and politician since it is closest to the ascendent. Saturn probably provided the discipline, endurance and patience.

The sun (12 leo) in 6th house is conjunct the descendent (18 leo) - this could have made him a leader, given him leadership and authority. The moon (3 gemini) is conjunct the IC (28 taurus) but in the 4th house - this probably also made him a politician along with jupiter.
 
Last edited:

princess valhalla

Well-known member
In Placidus I have Venus and the Moon (on the cusp of the tenth really) in the 9th house. In whole signs I only have Venus but venus is at 28 degree capricorn, almost in 10th and Moon 2 degrees Aquarius. They didn't study Venus from what I know anyways. I also have pluto in the 6th house (libra) in both placidus and whole signs but again, I don't think they studied pluto either.

I like their interpretation of Moon in the 9th . . . writer! :smile:
 

Carris

Well-known member
In Placidus I have Venus and the Moon (on the cusp of the tenth really) in the 9th house. In whole signs I only have Venus but venus is at 28 degree capricorn, almost in 10th and Moon 2 degrees Aquarius. They didn't study Venus from what I know anyways. I also have pluto in the 6th house (libra) in both placidus and whole signs but again, I don't think they studied pluto either.

I like their interpretation of Moon in the 9th . . . writer! :smile:
They did study venus and found it for painters and musicians but the results were tentative. Are you a writer?

I'm not sure how they correlated placements with careers and vocations - was it with the qualities and professions as signified by the planets or whether it was the degree of success in a particular career. I haven't read the book written by them.
 
Last edited:

Moog

Well-known member
Moog

Thanks for the link - I'll try to read it but there's a lot of back and forth stuff there. Why do you say that your saturn is whacked because it is in virgo? Wouldn't it function well in a sign that likes order, analysis and perfection?

yeah, there is a lot of too and fro there.

I prefer a sidereal zodiac, which puts Saturn in Leo, Saturn's sign of detriment.
 
Top