Hmmm Nearly half the signs have nothing attributed to them.
Nearly half the signs show nothing in them, but that does not mean they have nothing attributed to them...
If you follow the link in the thread provided with the image, or if you just click here
You can read about the origins of sign rulerships, aspect theory...and all this information is valuable to astrologers no matter what "branch" of astrology they prefer. At the very least, it allows a frame work for all the speculation and new ideas that seem to crop up. Rather than dismiss something out of hand, building on the foundational logic is always better than making things up as we go along.
The Thema Mundi graphic is my
restatement of a Hellenistic teaching tool
showing the underlying interrelationships
between planets, signs, houses and aspects. ~Douglas Noblehorse
I always figured it was pretty clear that the Ascendant is attributed to Aries, being the 1st house and all.[/QUOTE]
Aries as the 1st house has to do with the start of the ancient calendar and the vernal equinox. If you consider the horoscope to be a calendar, Aries is the first month. That's why it corresponds to the 1st house.