Planetary Strength

Hello, everyone!

I’ve been studying Traditinal Astrology as a hobby for a little bit now, but I suppose I wanted to venture out, and see whether anyone can help me understand the subject better.

I’ve tried using my own Natal chart to understand planetary strength much better, but am stumped. I don’t necessarily agree with the strength I’ve managed to delineate, but I wonder if it’s my interpretation that is off. In any case, I was hoping if anyone could shine light on what the strength of my planets are, based on traditional astrology.

Here is my chart, linked:

https://imgur.com/PZGevMz
 
Last edited:

waybread

Staff member
You might start with the essential dignities:

Venus domiciled in Libra, Mars domiciled in Scorpio, Saturn domiciled in Aquarius.

Then think about accidental dignities: planets in angular houses, esp. the first.

Planets in other favourable houses, like the 5th (traditional house of good fortune,) Mercury joys in the first house

Aspects: trines, sextiles.

Mars looks extra-strong: domiciled, in the first house, and in a partile trine with the moon.

There's more to get to, but do you feel you've mastered this much, already?
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Hello, everyone!
I’ve been studying Traditinal Astrology as a hobby for a little bit now, but
I suppose I wanted to venture out, and see whether anyone can help me
understand the subject better.
I’ve tried using my own Natal chart
to understand planetary strength much better, but am stumped.
I don’t necessarily agree with the strength I’ve managed to delineate, but
I wonder if it’s my interpretation that is off.
In any case, I was hoping if anyone could shine light
on what the strength of my planets are, based on traditional astrology.

Here is my chart, linked:

https://imgur.com/PZGevMz
'.....The art of synthesizing chart factors in the process of analysis
calls us to consider many factors. One of the most important is
to consider the strength and dignity of the planets.
The 'benefics' are not constant sources of good fortune,
the 'malefics' are not always damaging
nor is it fair to assume that all planets express an equal importance
at all times...'
COMPLETE FREE GUIDE TO UNDERSTANDING PLANETARY STRENGTH :smile:
at http://www.skyscript.co.uk/dignities.html
 
You might start with the essential dignities:

Venus domiciled in Libra, Mars domiciled in Scorpio, Saturn domiciled in Aquarius.

Then think about accidental dignities: planets in angular houses, esp. the first.

Planets in other favourable houses, like the 5th (traditional house of good fortune,) Mercury joys in the first house

Aspects: trines, sextiles.

Mars looks extra-strong: domiciled, in the first house, and in a partile trine with the moon.

There's more to get to, but do you feel you've mastered this much, already?

Yeah, I’ve gotten the gist of which planets are strong, and which are not based on their relative positions in my chart. I struggle with drawing inferences from these positions, though. Like, being able to interpret the data that I see.

For example, I know Mars is domicile in Scorpio, in the 1st house, and deposits my ASC, Sun and Mercury, but I don’t know how to interpret that data correctly.
 
'.....The art of synthesizing chart factors in the process of analysis
calls us to consider many factors. One of the most important is
to consider the strength and dignity of the planets.
The 'benefics' are not constant sources of good fortune,
the 'malefics' are not always damaging
nor is it fair to assume that all planets express an equal importance
at all times...'
COMPLETE FREE GUIDE TO UNDERSTANDING PLANETARY STRENGTH :smile:
at http://www.skyscript.co.uk/dignities.html

I apologize for double-posting, on my phone, haha. In any case, I’ve read over articles from Skyscript before. It”s helped me understand some factors, but others elude me, especially drawing interpretations after determining planetary strength.

For example, Venus is domicile in Libra, but in the 12th House, unaspected, so does Venus draw power from herself, or? Stuff like that, since the only connection she has to other planets is as a depositor.
 

waybread

Staff member
Yeah, I’ve gotten the gist of which planets are strong, and which are not based on their relative positions in my chart. I struggle with drawing inferences from these positions, though. Like, being able to interpret the data that I see.

For example, I know Mars is domicile in Scorpio, in the 1st house, and deposits my ASC, Sun and Mercury, but I don’t know how to interpret that data correctly.

So Mars sounds like a real powerhouse in your chart. Are you "martial" in some way: athletic, aggressive, or a take-charge kind of person?

Do you want to post your chart? It's hard to say a lot without seeing it.
 

Rhys

Well-known member
So Mars sounds like a real powerhouse in your chart. Are you "martial" in some way: athletic, aggressive, or a take-charge kind of person?

Do you want to post your chart? It's hard to say a lot without seeing it.

Here is a link to his chart, Waybread: https://imgur.com/PZGevMz

I'll wait to hear GrignardReagent's response to your question about H1 Mars before saying anything of substance, but one general thing that comes to mind is this: when I first came to traditional astrology as a modern astrologer, I found it very difficult to break the habit of interpreting the entire chart psychologically. And to be honest, I still find myself falling into this bad habit.

I find that it is helpful to remember that in traditional and Hellenistic astrology, we are making use of a topical approach. And that the only house we use to describe a person's psychology would be the first house. All the rest have to do with the topics they concern.

I'm looking forward to hearing the response to your Mars question.
 
Last edited:

petosiris

Banned
I find that it is helpful to remember that in traditional and Hellenistic astrology, we are making use of a topical approach. And that the only house we use to describe a person's psychology would be the first house. All the rest have to do with the topics they concern.

That is not Hellenistic at all. Almost all authors seem consider the Moon to have some effect on character (perhaps equal since it is the rising sign of conception). Ptolemy does not focus on the rising sign except to some degree for temperament, instead he primarily uses predominating planets over Mercury and Moon - http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Ptolemy/Tetrabiblos/3D*.html#13

Valens, Firmicus and Rhetorius mention the Master of the Nativity influencing character. This seems to go back to Petosiris, here is how Riley translates it ''Petosiris seems to have defined the place perfectly, even though he spoke in mystic riddles: “The beginning, the end, the controller, and the measurement standard of the whole is the houseruling star of each nativity: it makes clear what kind of person the native will be, what kind of basis his livelihood will have, what his character* will be, what sort of body <=health and appearance> he will have, and all the things that will accompany him in life. Without this star nothing, neither occupation nor rank, will come to anyone.”'' - https://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/Vettius Valens entire.pdf

* - τρόποις - way, character
 
Last edited:

waybread

Staff member
Thanks, Rhys.

GR, you actually have what I would consider to be a strong chart. 3 domiciled planets (Venus, Mars, Saturn.) I would think of your sun as in the 12th house, though one traditional astrologer told me that he uses a 5-degree rule, where the influence of a cuspy-planet is primarily felt in the next house. Even without the sun, you have 3 angular planets, and the 5th is the traditional house of good fortune.

I see you as assertive, and probably a devastating critic.

Mars-Saturn is one of the troubling aspects, but there are very few "vanilla" charts out there. I don't think you'd actually want your life to be all nicey-nice, anyway.

Jupiter in the 12th trine Saturn can mean that you actually enjoy working behind the scenes.

Please let me know if you disagree. That way I learn more astrology.
 
Thank you everyone for your responses. Also, I want to preface by apologizing by responding to everyone in such a general manner. Quoting by phone is proving to be a challenge.

In any case, to answer the first question, I’m not really athletic or aggressive in my mannerisms. Truth be told, I’m more emotional, or sad by nature, but not always. I usually go with what my emotions feel like. For example, if I don’t feel particular in taking an exam, I’ll skip it, even if I know it’ll effect me adversely later down the line.

Nonetheless, I actually corrected my chart ever so slightly to 7:21, because my birth time was at 7:15, but this places my Sun on the ASC making it difficult to ascertain whether it’s above or below the horizon. I picked 21, cause it’s my favorite number.

I feel more like I chase after the idea of love, and romanticize the notion of meeting someone special, but when I do, I get bored and move on. It’s hard to describe, to be honest.

Nonetheless, what can be said about an unaspected planet in traditional terms? Some articles state that the planet internalizes this energy, and being in the 12th house, I feel like Venus should be really weak, yet I feel her presence is strong.
 
Last edited:

Rhys

Well-known member
I feel more like I chase after the idea of love, and romanticize the notion of meeting someone special, but when I do, I get bored and move on. It’s hard to describe, to be honest.

Nonetheless, what can be said about an unaspected planet in traditional terms? Some articles state that the planet internalizes this energy, and being in the 12th house, I feel like Venus should be really weak, yet I feel her presence is strong.

Thanks for your response, Grignard Reagent!

Venus is definitely strong in terms of her being in domicile.
However, what do we think about, Venus, the ruler of the twelfth place, being in the twelfth place, traditionally speaking? Also bearing in mind that Venus is also the ruler of the seventh place in GR's chart?
 
Last edited:

Rhys

Well-known member
That is not Hellenistic at all. Almost all authors seem consider the Moon to have some effect on character (perhaps equal since it is the rising sign of conception). Ptolemy does not focus on the rising sign except to some degree for temperament, instead he primarily uses predominating planets over Mercury and Moon - http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Ptolemy/Tetrabiblos/3D*.html#13

Valens, Firmicus and Rhetorius mention the Master of the Nativity influencing character. This seems to go back to Petosiris, here is how Riley translates it ''Petosiris seems to have defined the place perfectly, even though he spoke in mystic riddles: “The beginning, the end, the controller, and the measurement standard of the whole is the houseruling star of each nativity: it makes clear what kind of person the native will be, what kind of basis his livelihood will have, what his character* will be, what sort of body <=health and appearance> he will have, and all the things that will accompany him in life. Without this star nothing, neither occupation nor rank, will come to anyone.”'' - https://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/Vettius Valens entire.pdf

* - τρόποις - way, character

Hi Mr P ! Interesting points, thanks!

And just to make sure I'm understanding you correctly, your position is that Hellenistic astrology is primarily psychological, and not topical, correct?
 

petosiris

Banned
Hi Mr P ! Interesting points, thanks!

And just to make sure I'm understanding you correctly, your position is that Hellenistic astrology is primarily psychological, and not topical, correct?

No, not all. I get what you are saying, modern astrology does not try to predict events (if that is what you mean by ''topics'') as much as it does states of experience.

However, it is very shortsighted to say that psychology is missing from traditional astrology, or that it is limited to analysis of the rising place. In fact, descriptions of character in astrological textbooks can be compared to modern methods of personality assessment in psychology. Ptolemy discusses the quality of the soul extensively in 3.13 - 14.

Traditional astrology is just more serious about it in its treatment, compared to the pop psychology variant that is usually found in modern astrology.

And in psychology, many people have been critical even on serious personality tests such as MBTI, Big Five, 16PF, projective tests such as Rorschach, with some calling them ''junk science'' because of the flaws each one of those tests possesses. Some have questioned the objectivity and validity of some of those tests with the Forer effect, a criticism that is frequently thrown at astrology as well.

What is striking for me personally, is the length and the detail that Ptolemy, Pythagoras and other astrologers go about predicting psychology. They also tried to combine that with other sciences at the time, such as physiognomy. They mostly focus on particular details that most people would find agreement on (full objectivity might be impossible in relation to intelligence and personality) such as consistency, happiness, intelligence, agreeableness, religion etc. What I am saying is that if I wanted to study psychology, I would no go to a modern psychological book, but that is my opinion. One of the most appealing factors of Hellenistic astrology for me is that the aim is an astrology ''not with a multitude of words, but with brevity leading to the truth'' - https://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/Vettius Valens entire.pdf
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your response, Grignard Reagent!

Venus is definitely strong in terms of her being in domicile.
However, what do we think about, Venus, the ruler of the twelfth place, being in the twelfth place, traditionally speaking? Also bearing in mind that Venus is also the ruler of the seventh place in GR's chart?

Yeah, Venus deposits herself in the 12th house, a Cadent house that does not see the 1st house. Therefore, her power is limited, confined, including 7th house matters.

She is direct, free of combustion, and in her house, but I don’t know if that means anything. Unaspected, so she’s restricted to her own house, unless you count depositorship as a means of connection with other planets.

She deposits Jupiter and my Moon, so maybe affects the houses ruled by those planets. I wish Venus aspected any planet so I can better interpret this data.

It’s funny, because, Mars and Saturn are so much stronger, yet I feel my personality resonates with Venus so much more, with love being my self-undoing more than anything else.

Traditional Astrology is difficult, because there’s so many small rules that come into play, such as degrees, triplicities, almutens, etc.

Edit: I read that the Chaldeans regarded Venus as joyful in the 12th house, or something like that. This confuses me more, and makes me wish that older astrologers could agree on most matters.
 
Last edited:
Where did you read that? According to tradition, Saturn has its joy in the 12th house.

I believe it’s the Chaldean Order of the planets, with Saturn in the 1st, Jupiter in the second, and so forth based on their speed relative to the Sun.

According to Skyscript, Lilly also said this about Saturn in the first:

‘Associated Planets:
Mercury has its joy in the 1st; Lilly notes: "because it represents the head, and he the tongue, fancy and memory: when he is well dignified and posited in this house, he produces good orators".
Aries and Saturn are cosignificators: "for as this house is the first house, so is Aries the first sign, and Saturn the first of the planets; and therefore when Saturn is but moderately well fortified in this house, and in any benevolent aspect of Jupiter, Venus, Sun or Moon, it promises a good sober constitution of body, and usually long life"’
 
Last edited:

petosiris

Banned
I believe it’s the Chaldean Order of the planets, with Saturn in the 1st, Jupiter in the second, and so forth based on their speed relative to the Sun.

According to Skyscript, Lilly also said this about Saturn in the first:

‘Associated Planets:
Mercury has its joy in the 1st; Lilly notes: "because it represents the head, and he the tongue, fancy and memory: when he is well dignified and posited in this house, he produces good orators".
Aries and Saturn are cosignificators: "for as this house is the first house, so is Aries the first sign, and Saturn the first of the planets; and therefore when Saturn is but moderately well fortified in this house, and in any benevolent aspect of Jupiter, Venus, Sun or Moon, it promises a good sober constitution of body, and usually long life"’

Oh yeah that system, you are right. I will just say it is Chaldean based on the order, but it certainly originates in the Medieval tradition, being absent from the Hellenistic tradition, and the ''Chaldeans'' most probably did not even have seven-zone/heptazone (the original name of the chaldean order) much less houses, but those misnomers might be wholly other topic.
 
Oh yeah that system, you are right. I will just say it is Chaldean based on the order, but it certainly originates in the Medieval tradition, being absent from the Hellenistic tradition, and the ''Chaldeans'' most probably did not even have seven-zone/heptazone (the original name of the chaldean order) much less houses, but those misnomers might be wholly other topic.

It’s difficult to follow a set of rules, especially when the rules tend to bend depending on whose interpretation to use for delineating or inferring data. Assessing planetary strength properly, and inferring what any two points, aspects or dimensions to use is proving difficult.
 
Top