The Manilius Decans

dr. farr

Well-known member
(Note: the following Table is presented in response to a request from an AW member and is intended only as an item of general information)


THE MANILIUS DECANS


ARIES
0 - 9:59 = Aries
10 - 19:59 = Taurus
20 - 29:59 = Gemini

TAURUS
0 - 9:59 = Cancer
10 - 19:59 = Leo
20 - 29:59 = Virgo

GEMINI
0 - 9:59 = Libra
10 - 19:59 = Scorpio
20 - 29:59 = Sagittarius

CANCER
0 - 9:59 = Capricorn
10 - 19:59 = Aquarius
20 - 20:59 = Pisces

LEO
0 - 9:59 = Aries
10 - 19:59 = Taurus
20 - 29:59 = Gemini

VIRGO
0 - 9:59 = Cancer
10 - 19:59 = Leo
20 - 29:59 = Virgo

LIBRA
0 - 9:59 = Libra
10 - 19:59 = Scorpio
20 - 29:59 = Sagittarius

SCORPIO
0 - 9:59 = Capricorn
10 - 19:59 = Aquarius
20 - 29:59 = Pisces

SAGITTARIUS
0 - 9:59 = Aries
10 - 19:59 = Taurus
20 - 29:59 = Gemini

CAPRICORN
0 - 9:59 = Cancer
10 - 19:59 = Leo
20 - 29:59 = Virgo

AQUARIUS
0 - 9:59 = Libra
10 - 19:59 = Scorpio
20 - 29:59 = Sagittarius

PISCES
0 - 9:59 = Capricorn
10 - 19:59 = Aquarius
20 - 29:59 = Pisces
 

piscesascendant

Well-known member
Looks like someone beat me to it.

At any rate, here's the rest of what I was going to post:

There are a few systems of Decanates, and the one system I've seen used so far is called "The Oriental System of Decanates from the Church of Light Lessons".

(All of the following, as well as what was written above, comes from "Decanates and Dwads" by Stephanie Jean Ennis (ISBN: 0866902392), pgs. 1 through 5.

The Oriental system "divides each sign into three parts and names rulership of each subdivision to remaining signs within the triplicity" (pg. 1)

In another system called the Manilius System of Decanates, "the decanates follow the arrangement of the signs... the first ten degrees of each sign are cardinal in nature; the second, fixed; the third mutable. Aries begins with Aries and Pisces ends with Pisces. (pg. 3)

"Further examination of the Manilius pattern reveals that cardinal and mutable signs contain a ruler which is conjunct or opposite the sign itself, while fixed signs contain a decanate ruler in square aspect to the sign ruler. Fixed signs of the zodiac provide the most rigid structure and the most stable condition; square aspects cause the most rigid tests and obstacles to overcome. Here again, a sense of pattern is fulfilled.

"The Manilius system gives rulership of the first decanate to a cardinal sign, the second to a fixed, and the third to a mutable. Each sign has one decanate ruler which is of its own element... The first ten degrees of each sign are ruled by a compatible sign, offering opportuity for its purest expression. Giving rulership of the first decanate to a cardinal sign emphasizes the active, primary mode of any sign. Fixed rulership of the second decanate shows the stable, steady activity found in middle degrees. Mutable rulership represents a refinement of potential which looks into the future, planning for new activity.

"This [Manilius] decanate system also suggests the greater visibility of planets in earlier degrees of a sign, due to the primary nature of cardinal activity. Such an active, energetic expression manifests in the material world in an obvious way. The middle degrees, with fixed rulers, demonstrate persevering, stable qualities and will, by their nature, be somewhat less visible. The planning disposition of the later decanate makes planets placed there less visible. This does not imply less value or energy; it only indicates less visibilitiy, as thoughts are less visible than actions." (pg. 4)
 
I have been taught about decanate that for example --

Aries 0-10' = aries/aries
10-20' = aries/leo
20-30' = aries/sagitarrius

therefore staying in the elements, I haven't heard of this idea before of going 'out of elements' way of interpreting. so rather odd :whistling:
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
There are actually 2 traditional decanate systems which don't take the elemental affinities into account. The elemental affinity decan system (historically) was originally developed in "Hindu" astrology (mentioned as such-as the "Hindu" decanate system, by Al-Biruni, around 1000 AD)-where it continues today as the one and only type of decanate system in jyotish-and this system entered the West via the Arabs and medieval astrologers, reviving strongly around the beginning of the 20th century due to the influence of Alan Leo and those influenced by him. However, the "Egyptians and Babylonians" (Al-Biruni's words) never applied the element-affinitive decans, instead using a (non-elementally based) planetary cycle (the Chaldean order, originating at least by 200 BC) for the decans, which they referred to as "faces": here Aries 0-9:59 is affinitive to Mars, Aries 10-19:59 is affinitive to the Sun, but Aries 20-29:59 is affinitive to Venus;Taurus 0-9:59 is under Mercury, Taurus 10-19:59 under the Moon, Taurus last decan under Saturn; etc, etc. This planetary-face decan system dominated what today is referred to as "traditional" (Western) astrology, but fell out of favor (at least in the English speaking astrological world) in the early 20th century, due largely to Alan Leo's influence and support of the in-element decan system (only Sepharial emphasized the planetary-face decan system in the 20th century, among English-language authors)

The Manilius decans-based neither on element affinity nor planetary order-but rather on a spinning interior "little" zodiac within the larger (30 degree) signs-of-the-zodiac wheel, is the first recorded decan system (at least which we have any remaining record of), and is similar in many respects to the ancient Egyptian 36 "signs" subdivision of their zodiac. However, as I have mentioned in an earlier post (actually on Astro.com, now that I think of it!) the Manilius system had largely (if not entirely) been forgotten even by 400 AD (Greek/Persian/Roman astrologers of that time using the face-planetary order decan system), and the Manilius decan system has not played any role in practical astrology for the past 1600+ years. However, a couple of modern astrologers have experimented with it, as I have over the past few years, and, I personally have largely come to adopt it (I also sometimes apply the face/planetary order decan system as well)
 
Last edited:

Amy Vir Sn Ari Mn Pis Ris

Well-known member
I lean toward the Chaldean faces.

Here's a link

http://www.luckymojo.com/esoteric/occultism/divination/ny200401tarotandastrology.txt

and the specific info from it

Face
# a planet being in the decan in which it is strong of a sign.
# Each sign is divided into three faces or decans of ten degrees.
# This is the weakest of all the dignities
#
# Degrees: 00-09 10-19 20-29
# Aries Mars Sun Venus
# Taurus Mercury Moon Saturn
# Gemini Jupiter Mars Sun
# Cancer Venus Mercury Moon
# Leo Saturn Jupiter Mars
# Virgo Sun Venus Mercury
# Libra Moon Saturn Jupiter
# Scorpio Mars Sun Venus
# Sagit Mercury Moon Saturn
# Capric Jupiter Mars Sun
# Aquarius Venus Mercury Moon
# Pisces Saturn Jupiter Mars
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
There is nothing to prevent using both (which I often do)
The Faces show us a related planetary influence...
The Manilius decans show us a related zodiacal influence
Combining them can add a lot of additional insight.
 

Claire19

Well-known member
Thank you for this info.
My feeling is that the decans are always connected to the element.
They are not terribly important in the scheme of things except when dealing with the ascendant, Moon and Sun......and are just an undercurrent or subtle influence really but having said that they can explain why twins for instance born close together can be different.
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
The elemental decans (the ones we are most familiar with in Western astrology), -which I consider to be a valuable delineative model-were introduced and popularized in Modernist astrology by Alan Leo at the beginning of the 20th Century. They were first mentioned in the 11th century by Al-Biruni, as an import to the West from Vedic astrology (in his book Al-Biruni described them as the "Hindu Decans") and in fact our elemental decans are identical with the decans (drekkana) of Vedic astrology.

Until the introduction of elemental decans in the West by Alan Leo, all Western astrology (from at least the time of Ptolemy) used the "Chaldean Planetary Order" (dating from approximately either 700 BC or 400 BC, depending upon the authority consulted) for the decans (the very concept of decans itself deriving from early Egyptian-civilization times) These were (and are, among contemporary traditionalist practitioners) called the "Faces" of the signs, and connect each 10 degree sign area with a planetary influence.

Apparently the use of the "original" decanate system (the Manilius decans) ended in the Greco/Roman tradition certainly by the early 2nd century, being totally replaced by the Chaldean Planetary Order decanate system (the Faces of the signs) There is some anecdotal historical information that the Manilius decan system developed in Alexandria during the time of that city's rise to world prominence, and that it was the original system, taken from the Egyptians (Alexandria is in northern Egypt) and forming the basis of the "sub-Zodiac Wheel" used in the earliest systemization of Greek astrology-however, there is no definite literature or archeological evidence supporting this anecdotal conjecture, so the only thing we know for certain is that the Manilius decanate system is the oldest of the known decan systems, its description and application being in the oldest extant Western astrological book, the "Astronomica" (14 AD) of Manilius...
 
Last edited:

Claire19

Well-known member
That decans are always connected to the element of the planet concerned i.e. Sun in Leo.....26 degrees has the Aries undercurrent. Makes sense to me and feels right. Otherwise we are going way out and losing connection. They are only a minor influence and subtle and I dont use them with any other than ascendant, Moon and Sun and they can point to health problems at times along with other major influences to back it up...
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
There are a number of sound, effective approaches to astrological delineation. Some give little or no attention to decans. Others give them substantial attention. In my own experience I have found consideration of the decans to be an important, significant part of delineation, and the additional examination of the implications of the duodenaries (sign 1/12ths) I also have found of importance in obtaining even deeper insights: in this outlook I follow the Greco/Roman tradition (Vedic- astrology also gives much attention to the decans-which them call drekkanas-and even to the duodenaries, which they call dwadashamas) For a long time I used only the elemental decans-I certainly recognize the elemental decan model as both valid and effective (the elemental decan system is the one used in Vedic astrology) However, over the past several years I have found the original decanate system (the Manilius decans) to yield clearer results and often unexpected connections, so, for ME, I have chosen them as preferable (in most cases-not always-but usually) to both the Chaldean Planetary decanate Faces, and to the elemental decan system.
 
Last edited:

Lin

Well-known member
Astrologer 50- yes, that is the traditional method of using decanates...
and through the years I've found it works.
*******************************************

Aries: Mars, Sun, Jupiter
Taurus: Venus, Mercury, Saturn
Gemini: Mercury, Venus,Uranus
Cancer: Moon, Pluto, Neptune
Leo: Sun, Jupiter, Mars
Virgo: Mercury, Saturn, Venus
Libra: Venus, Uranus, Gemini
Scorpio: Pluto, Neptune, Moon
Sagittarius: Jupiter, Mars, Sun
Capricorn: Saturn, Venus, Mercury
Aquarius: Uranus, Mercury, Venus
Pisces: Neptune, Moon, Pluto

Symbolically, you would say, for, let's say, the 2nd decanate of Sagi, "Jupiter-Mars"- different from 1st decanate - Jupiter-Jupiter.
When you say it that way you get a symbolic picture that extends the definition.

So let's say that a person has several planets in the 3rd (Uranus) decanate of Gemini. That is quite different from someone who has several planets in the first decanate. When you do this for all the planets (and angles, etc.) you get a LOT of delineation to think about.
LIN
 
Last edited:

Amy Vir Sn Ari Mn Pis Ris

Well-known member
Now when you say traditional - does that typically include the outer planets or is that considered more modern than traditional?

These are the threads I love most btw......and off I go to test them s'more. lol.

It also helps when delineating the differences between twins who seem so different tho born minutes apart.
 

Lin

Well-known member
I use all the 'planets' in our solar system (and the Sun and Moon) - and I use Pluto as a planet because it has always "worked" as a planet for me.
I don't use asteroids or hypothetical planets as I have never needed them.
For me, simple is easier.
And of course I use the nodes of the moon.
LIN
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
There are actually 2 traditional decanate systems which don't take the elemental affinities into account. The elemental affinity decan system (historically) was originally developed in "Hindu" astrology (mentioned as such-as the "Hindu" decanate system, by Al-Biruni, around 1000 AD)-where it continues today as the one and only type of decanate system in jyotish-and this system entered the West via the Arabs and medieval astrologers, reviving strongly around the beginning of the 20th century due to the influence of Alan Leo and those influenced by him. However, the "Egyptians and Babylonians" (Al-Biruni's words) never applied the element-affinitive decans, instead using a (non-elementally based) planetary cycle (the Chaldean order, originating at least by 200 BC) for the decans, which they referred to as "faces": here Aries 0-9:59 is affinitive to Mars, Aries 10-19:59 is affinitive to the Sun, but Aries 20-29:59 is affinitive to Venus;Taurus 0-9:59 is under Mercury, Taurus 10-19:59 under the Moon, Taurus last decan under Saturn; etc, etc. This planetary-face decan system dominated what today is referred to as "traditional" (Western) astrology, but fell out of favor (at least in the English speaking astrological world) in the early 20th century, due largely to Alan Leo's influence and support of the in-element decan system (only Sepharial emphasized the planetary-face decan system in the 20th century, among English-language authors)

The Manilius decans-based neither on element affinity nor planetary order-but rather on a spinning interior "little" zodiac within the larger (30 degree) signs-of-the-zodiac wheel, is the first recorded decan system (at least which we have any remaining record of), and is similar in many respects to the ancient Egyptian 36 "signs" subdivision of their zodiac. However, as I have mentioned in an earlier post (actually on Astro.com, now that I think of it!) the Manilius system had largely (if not entirely) been forgotten even by 400 AD (Greek/Persian/Roman astrologers of that time using the face-planetary order decan system), and the Manilius decan system has not played any role in practical astrology for the past 1600+ years. However, a couple of modern astrologers have experimented with it, as I have over the past few years, and, I personally have largely come to adopt it (I also sometimes apply the face/planetary order decan system as well)

Since the Manilius system is 1600+ years old I would assume that it was originally intended to work with the Classical Rulerships which designate Mars the rulership of Aries and Scorpio, Jupiter rulership of Sagittarius and Pisces while Saturn rules Capricorn and Aquarius
- thus obviously excluding the newly discovered planets Uranus, Neptune and Pluto.

Are your experiments with the Manilius system such that they include the outer planets Uranus, Neptune and Pluto? Furthermore, if that is so, then in order to include the outer planets, I would assume that Mars, Jupiter and Saturn have been deprived of their Traditional rulerships of Scorpio, Pisces and Aquarius and if that is so, since these are individual experimental observations, then your experiments may well have differing results from those of the couple of modern astrologers you have mentioned - as well as being considerably modified by the exclusion of each of the planets Mars, Jupiter and Saturn from one of their respective traditional rulerships

Furthermore, when using the outer planets on an experimental basis and because experimental results are subject to change, it then follows that there is (as yet) no totally reliably working "Modern Manilius system" as such. :smile:
 
Last edited:

dr. farr

Well-known member
No-when using the M decans I exclusively use the traditional "rulerships", same when I use the zodiacal sign monomoiria as well.

(Note: the Manilius decans date to the time of Manilius-actually probably much before his time, but we don't know that for certain; Manilius was active around 14 AD, so the Manilius decans are at least 2000 years old)
 

Claire19

Well-known member
(Note: the following Table is presented in response to a request from an AW member and is intended only as an item of general information)


THE MANILIUS DECANS


ARIES
0 - 9:59 = Aries
10 - 19:59 = Taurus
20 - 29:59 = Gemini

TAURUS
0 - 9:59 = Cancer
10 - 19:59 = Leo
20 - 29:59 = Virgo

GEMINI
0 - 9:59 = Libra
10 - 19:59 = Scorpio
20 - 29:59 = Sagittarius

CANCER
0 - 9:59 = Capricorn
10 - 19:59 = Aquarius
20 - 20:59 = Pisces

LEO
0 - 9:59 = Aries
10 - 19:59 = Taurus
20 - 29:59 = Gemini

VIRGO
0 - 9:59 = Cancer
10 - 19:59 = Leo
20 - 29:59 = Virgo

LIBRA
0 - 9:59 = Libra
10 - 19:59 = Scorpio
20 - 29:59 = Sagittarius

SCORPIO
0 - 9:59 = Capricorn
10 - 19:59 = Aquarius
20 - 29:59 = Pisces

SAGITTARIUS
0 - 9:59 = Aries
10 - 19:59 = Taurus
20 - 29:59 = Gemini

CAPRICORN
0 - 9:59 = Cancer
10 - 19:59 = Leo
20 - 29:59 = Virgo

AQUARIUS
0 - 9:59 = Libra
10 - 19:59 = Scorpio
20 - 29:59 = Sagittarius

PISCES
0 - 9:59 = Capricorn
10 - 19:59 = Aquarius
20 - 29:59 = Pisces

The decans have to be in the same element.

i.e.

Pisces 0-10 Pisces or Neptune ruled
Pisces 11-20 Cancer or Moon ruled
Pisces 21-30 Scorpio or Pluto ruled
 

Claire19

Well-known member
Astrologer 50- yes, that is the traditional method of using decanates...
and through the years I've found it works.
*******************************************

Aries: Mars, Sun, Jupiter
Taurus: Venus, Mercury, Saturn
Gemini: Mercury, Venus,Uranus
Cancer: Moon, Pluto, Neptune
Leo: Sun, Jupiter, Mars
Virgo: Mercury, Saturn, Venus
Libra: Venus, Uranus, Gemini
Scorpio: Pluto, Neptune, Moon
Sagittarius: Jupiter, Mars, Sun
Capricorn: Saturn, Venus, Mercury
Aquarius: Uranus, Mercury, Venus
Pisces: Neptune, Moon, Pluto

Symbolically, you would say, for, let's say, the 2nd decanate of Sagi, "Jupiter-Mars"- different from 1st decanate - Jupiter-Jupiter.
When you say it that way you get a symbolic picture that extends the definition.

So let's say that a person has several planets in the 3rd (Uranus) decanate of Gemini. That is quite different from someone who has several planets in the first decanate. When you do this for all the planets (and angles, etc.) you get a LOT of delineation to think about.
LIN
After all the decans are only a flavouring and not to be too fussed about. The ascendant decan is important to delineate looks and body image, as is the Moon and SUn but I wouldnt bother with the other planets. For twins for example when they are born minutes apart you can see the subtle differences in the decans often. I agree about what you say above.

"Jupiter-Mars"- different from 1st decanate - Jupiter-Jupiter.
When you say it that way you get a symbolic picture that extends the definition.
 
Last edited:
Top