late degree rising in nativities

waybread · Jul 6, 2016

The whole signs house system is really popular in traditional western genethliacal astrology; although I note that any house system (like Placidus) developed prior to about 1850 is traditional.

My feeling about house systems is that I will usually go with whatever someone posts when I read charts on this forum, but that if I want to spend a lot of time with a natal chart, I will often run it through multiple house systems to see which one seems to be the best fit with the person's life. (See: https://www.scribd.com/doc/6495552/An-Astrological-House-Formulary )

Further, I view different house systems as analogous to photographs of a person's head. You will get a different view if you take a frontal portrait, a left profile, a right oblique view, &c; yet each is still a picture of the same person's head. Each picture is still legitimate as a photograph of the person.

Also, all house systems have difficulties with high latitudes. Quadrant houses skew the houses in those nativities; but even an equal house system falls apart for a birth above the Arctic Circle-- or close to it--at the solstices. This thread isn't intended as a debate about that.

One of the biggest differences I've noted between whole signs and Placidus is with a late degree rising. It makes a huge difference, notably for traditional astrology, whether the native has an emphasis in the first or twelfth houses, or in the 5th or the 6th. This issue is brought to my attention by my late degree of Virgo rising, but notably for the chart of Hillary Clinton.

Her birth time is unknown, but I've worked with the Astrodienst AstroDataBank's Rodden DD 8:00 am, and I think it's pretty accurate. Even if not, it's a good illustration of the difference in interpretation a late degree rising can make in house placements.

This thread isn't intended as a debate about Hillary Clinton's personal strengths or character flaws, but rather as an illustration of a well-known celebrity with dramatic horoscope differences between Placidus and whole signs.

I'd love to read about your experiences with this problem.

tsmall · Jul 27, 2016

waybread said:
One of the biggest differences I've noted between whole signs and Placidus is with a late degree rising. It makes a huge difference, notably for traditional astrology, whether the native has an emphasis in the first or twelfth houses, or in the 5th or the 6th. This issue is brought to my attention by my late degree of Virgo rising, but notably for the chart of Hillary Clinton.

I just remembered this thread. I'm not sure exactly where you are going here, would you be willing to clarify further? I can say that somewhere (honestly, I'd have to go back through many books to find the astrologer/quote) it was noted that if the ASC were to be late in its sign, it was necessary to consider the second sign as well for first house topics.

waybread · Jul 27, 2016

Thanks, tsmall.

It's really about how a late-degree rising sign changes dramatically between whole signs and Placidus, where tenanted 9th and 12th houses in a quadrant system shift to much stronger 1st and 12th house placements in whole signs. This shift gives a significantly different reading to the chart.

tsmall · Jul 28, 2016

waybread said:
Thanks, tsmall.

It's really about how a late-degree rising sign changes dramatically between whole signs and Placidus, where tenanted 9th and 12th houses in a quadrant system shift to much stronger 1st and 12th house placements in whole signs. This shift gives a significantly different reading to the chart.

I think I must be dense tonight, lol. It sounds less like you are interested in talking about late degree rising so much as the difference between a planet being pivotal by house (any quadrant based system) vs. being pivotal by sign. And I completely agree with this:

waybread said:
Also, all house systems have difficulties with high latitudes. Quadrant houses skew the houses in those nativities; but even an equal house system falls apart for a birth above the Arctic Circle-- or close to it--at the solstices. This thread isn't intended as a debate about that.

waybread · Jul 28, 2016

Did you take a look at the Hillary Clinton charts I posted? It makes a big different to her chart interpretation whether her Leo-Scorpio planets are in the 9th-12th or 1st-10th houses; at least if angular house placements mean very much. There is hardly a bigger difference in traditional house interpretation than between the first and the 12th.

Planets often shift house placements between house systems, including between different quadrant systems. But the differences in Clinton's chart are striking.

(And no, I didn't intend to start a discussion about Clinton's personality or candidacy: the charts are posted by way of example.)

Kitchy · Jul 28, 2016

the chart of "hillary" is not accurate, because nobody has confirmed he birth time.

i'm sure she studied nancy reagan in hear early/pre white house days, though.

waybread · Jul 28, 2016

Kitchy, the 8:02 am birth time is from the Astro-DataBank, listed as Rodden DD. However, there have been many discussions and rectifications of Clinton's birth time across a lot of astrology web sites, given the upcoming presidential election. I've read a bunch of them, and have worked extensively with Clinton's chart. I'm pretty convinced the birth time is correct.

But this is beside the point. As I said, Clinton's chart is posted here merely as a good illustration of how dramatically one's choice of house system can affect a chart interpretation. This doesn't matter quite so much in modern astrology because the 12th house doesn't have the traditional connotation of the house of the "bad spirit." It does matter more in traditional western astrology, where angularity is important.

waybread · Jul 28, 2016

Here's a different example. Thomas Merton was a famous Catholic theologian, who lived much of his life in seclusion as a monk. Arguably his life style was consistent with a 12th house emphasis. Placidus puts his sun-Mars-Uranus in the traditionally fortunate 11th "house of the good spirit," and his moon in the traditional house of "good fortune."

Whole signs shifts his 11th house planets to the 12th, his moon to the 6th (traditional house of bad fortune,) and puts his Venus in the angular 10th house.

This makes a big difference to chart interpretation. Arguably, however, the biggest difference would be in the shift from a 12th to a 1st house emphasis for someone with a stellium just above a late degree rising.

Kitchy · Jul 28, 2016

I only offer that one's dramatic choice of a house system is different to everyone's.

Sometimes astrologers go with what is comfortable to them and not the facts at hand.

Call it what you will.

Late rising, however, in ALL astrology, as I know it, means things will change.

RisingSag · Jul 29, 2016

I have a late rising Sag and I defnitely feel Capricorn impacts. I have more of a serious and ambitious edge. I have an Aries sun, and I think my sun/rising combo is that of someone who seeks endless fun. I seek fun up to a point and then want to be serious.
Physically speaking I occasionally feel pain in my hips and have large scarring on my thighs from accidents, including two separate dirtbike crashes. One bring a burn from contact to the exhaust pipe. So physically speaking, my Sagittarius rising definitely has full impact over Capricorn.

CapAquaPis · Jul 30, 2016

Two family members: a half-sister from my father was born on Dec. 21, 1970 (either a Sag or Cap) and my mother born Apr. 29, 1951 has a Sag-Cap rising, not sure where it falls. And about Hillary Clinton's chart, she barely is a Scorpio rising, although she has a Scorpio sun, how much Scorpion influence does she have?

petosiris · Feb 9, 2018

waybread said:
The whole signs house system is really popular in traditional western genethliacal astrology; although I note that any house system (like Placidus) developed prior to about 1850 is traditional.

My feeling about house systems is that I will usually go with whatever someone posts when I read charts on this forum, but that if I want to spend a lot of time with a natal chart, I will often run it through multiple house systems to see which one seems to be the best fit with the person's life. (See: https://www.scribd.com/doc/6495552/An-Astrological-House-Formulary )

Further, I view different house systems as analogous to photographs of a person's head. You will get a different view if you take a frontal portrait, a left profile, a right oblique view, &c; yet each is still a picture of the same person's head. Each picture is still legitimate as a photograph of the person.

Also, all house systems have difficulties with high latitudes. Quadrant houses skew the houses in those nativities; but even an equal house system falls apart for a birth above the Arctic Circle-- or close to it--at the solstices. This thread isn't intended as a debate about that.

One of the biggest differences I've noted between whole signs and Placidus is with a late degree rising. It makes a huge difference, notably for traditional astrology, whether the native has an emphasis in the first or twelfth houses, or in the 5th or the 6th. This issue is brought to my attention by my late degree of Virgo rising, but notably for the chart of Hillary Clinton.

Her birth time is unknown, but I've worked with the Astrodienst AstroDataBank's Rodden DD 8:00 am, and I think it's pretty accurate. Even if not, it's a good illustration of the difference in interpretation a late degree rising can make in house placements.

This thread isn't intended as a debate about Hillary Clinton's personal strengths or character flaws, but rather as an illustration of a well-known celebrity with dramatic horoscope differences between Placidus and whole signs.

I'd love to read about your experiences with this problem.

The difference between early and late degrees in whole sign houses would be in the placement of the Lots and any wandering or non-wandering star that happens to be on the pivots (ecliptic or co-rising). If you do not use Lots or Hour-Marker degree with whole sign houses, you will have an astrology that changes on average every 2 hours (or you can use Lots in that case, but only calculate them by signs not degrees - that is how the majority of horoscopes were done in Hellenistic times).

I use whole sign houses with nonagesimal MC, because the meridian MC often falls into inoperative places and I like my angular places in square and diameter. Trying to use both whole signs and quadrants always leads to contradictory results (just as using both tropical and sidereal would do, they are two frameworks and have nothing to do with approaches to astrology).

You can do a lot (no pun intended) with Hellenistic astrology with just stars and signs, but you can also do a lot more with degrees.

late degree rising in nativities

waybread

Well-known member

Attachments

tsmall

waybread

Well-known member

tsmall

waybread

Well-known member

Kitchy

Banned

waybread

Well-known member

waybread

Well-known member

Attachments

Kitchy

Banned

RisingSag

Well-known member

CapAquaPis

Well-known member

petosiris

Banned