Chiron as the Ruler of Virgo

KnS, do you refer the the following traditional scheme of planet/sign rulerships?

Click to expand...

Yep, that's the one.

Your visualization, while accurate, shouldn't be confused with the whole of the reasoning behind the scheme. Not saying you said that, but people generally seem to see patterns and think "that's it?".

So for modern astrologers, this scheme doesn't mean you couldn't tag on a modern ruler, as well; as was done when Pluto, Neptune, and Uranus were discovered.

Click to expand...

While it may be something modern astrologers are able to do, the problem with it is it's disingenuous at best. Though, that's the reason you have the whole "great debate" and whatnot.

(seems flame wars are common on Chiron threads -- irony), it just seems to me that an affinity is pretty blatant proof of a rulership. If I may use the example, it's like parenthood, if a child (sign) is adopted by a parent (ruler), though the two might be different in many ways but the pairing seems to work out in a way that is beneficial or if good enough rationalizations are made, then of course the child will see the adoptive parent as its 'rightful' parent. But this isn't quite the case. As the child grows, suppose it starts showing behaviors and resemblances similar to its biological parent (affinity/modern ruler)? Just because that parent wasn't there doesn't mean that the person never made any contribution to that child's life, since, obviously, this is where these traits come from. It can't just be a coincidence when you have a sign and a planet that are a carbon-copy of one another.

As for traditional rulerships, well, they aren't perfect. If they were astrology probably wouldn't have become such a detested thing by people who'd consider themselves "science-minded". Many ancient theoretical theories like bounds have fallen to the wayside because they just don't really seem to work. Triplicities were assigned just making use of what they had, how much since does it make to assign the water signs exclusively to Mars? They make all sorts of justification of it, and yet ultimately the truth is Mars was all that was left. Who knows? The moderns might have more than just domicile and exaltation dignity after all, the traditional dignities weren't just put together overnight, it took time and many different cultures contributed to them.

Waybread said:

I agree. When Chiron conjuncted my 5th house Mercury in Aquarius, I broke my ankle while hiking. [Mercury rules walking and Aquarius rules the ankles.]

Click to expand...

Aren't broken body parts a Mars/Saturn/Uranus issue? And walking also since it requires muscles? But yeah, the 3rd house is sometimes called the "House of short-distance travel" I think.

Kaiousei no Senshi said:

I can really only think of one planet who has something that could be considered "affinity" with its signs or rulership...

...Gemini and Virgo were given to Mercury for the same reasons, so saying Mercury no longer fits with Virgo means it no longer fits with Gemini, since the same reasoning was given for both assignments. If that's the case, then Mercury isn't fit to rule anything, and should just fall off the map entirely. Hope that makes sense.

Click to expand...

And which ruler would that be?

There's no black and white, only darker and lighter shades of gray. Kai, the reason modern/psychological astrologers even use different techniques is because we're not afraid to think differently than the old authors. At any rate, explain to me what it is you think these 2 reason for the assignations are and why they should essentially mean we've got no choice but to throw rulership schemes out the window.

C1 said:

And thank you, Waybread, for your comment re: ancient astrologers assigning affinity, and suggesting modern rulership of Virgo by Ceres...

wouldn't others agree here?

Click to expand...

Nope, I disagree. I'm not impressed by mythological names and I don't think labels are a good way to decide what goes where. We know the names that the Greek and later the Romans gave the planets, but differing cultures gave them names of different Gods who stood for different things. Using names to understand the planets is like deciding whether you like a person or not because of their name -- you can't judge a person by their name, you need to 'get a feel' for who that person is, their essence, get to know them, see how they work and what they do from your own experience, not decide what kind of person they are because of their name. There's an asteroid Pallas, an asteroid Athene and an asteroid Minerva. These are all essentially the same deity, but I'd bet a million dollars if I had it that they all work differently in astrology, probably even differently than their myths would lead you to believe. While I'm sure it does work a little bit some times, exalting myths and labels as astrological evidence seems misleading and disreputable to me, but I know you guys aren't going to change.

As for Ceres, it seems to me that her main myth, or maybe the one that people who have neglected mythology would know is more about the fact that she tore up Heaven and Hell to find what happened to Persephone when she was kidnapped than the fact that she was the goddess that ruled plant life. She was never considered a goddess of health or work, though, so as far as that she doesn't seem to have a 6th house connection. I doubt any astrological connection between Ceres and Virgo far less than the supposed one of Chiron and Virgo, and that's A LOT of doubt.

C1 said:

By the way, is it only my opinion that Chiron does not signify causality of wounds? Chiron is doing so much in the present triple conjunction with Jupiter and Neptune...it's deep and healing!

Thanks for many insights and illuminations, Shining Ray!
Are you the astrologer at the fairgrounds, and
how do I get there for a reading?

Seriously, these points you make are well-taken and your thoughts and words shine. Merc/Virgo
energies and qualities of organization, clarity and mind/body balancing are delightful insights: Mercury illuminates.

And thank you, Waybread, for your comment re: ancient astrologers assigning affinity, and suggesting modern rulership of Virgo by Ceres...

wouldn't others agree here?

Anyway, thanks so very much.

C1

Click to expand...

Ha ha the astrologer with a crystal ball at the fairground. These are just thoughts, and any one of us could be wrong. None of us can claim to be an authority on Chiron, that doesn't mean we can't play around with ideas, but no-one is an authority on Chiron on this thread just many heads with lots of input.

As for traditional rulerships, well, they aren't perfect. If they were astrology probably wouldn't have become such a detested thing by people who'd consider themselves "science-minded".

Click to expand...

We're getting back into this? Who says they aren't perfect? The people who want to change them to fit what they think is right? Keep in mind that these people probably don't understand why the rulerships were given in the first place, but think they were for affinity.

you attempt to blame the entirety of the scientific community's bad view of astrology on traditional rulerships. considering most scientists who have a bias against astrology probably don't even know what those are.

Many ancient theoretical theories like bounds have fallen to the wayside because they just don't really seem to work.

Click to expand...

Curious about this statement, since I and every other horary astrologer in the world uses the Terms.

Triplicities were assigned just making use of what they had, how much since does it make to assign the water signs exclusively to Mars?

Click to expand...

Stopping this one here. There are two versions of the triplicity scheme, one that makes sense and follows the rules and one that doesn't. The one that makes sense doesn't give the Water triplicity to Mars all the time.

And which ruler would that be?

Click to expand...

Mars

There's no black and white, only darker and lighter shades of gray.

Click to expand...

Talk about irrational. I would have thought by now we would have all agreed that astrology was completely black and white.

Kai, the reason modern/psychological astrologers even use different techniques is because we're not afraid to think differently than the old authors.

Click to expand...

And because they're mistaken before they even get out of the gate. I know you're not implying that modern/psychological astrologers knew of traditional techniques and then tried them and augmented them to come up with their own techniques. If that's the case then I'm going to have to ask to check your timetables because around the time psychological astrology was really kicking off there were only three traditional books that had been translated and published, and one of those books was second edition of another that had been released. So no, it's not that they weren't afraid to think differently, but because they didn't realize there were really rules in the first place and had to play it by ear.

At any rate, explain to me what it is you think these 2 reason for the assignations are...

Click to expand...

I'm not wasting my time explaining the domicile scheme again. It's probably on this forum about a billion times now and it's on the web in countless websites that don't discuss affinity.

and why they should essentially mean we've got no choice but to throw rulership schemes out the window.

Click to expand...

So, because it's old, you don't quite get it, and it doesn't have to do with affinity it's got to go out the window? I would say it's the lack of a structural core of rules that makes the scientific minded shun astrology, not the old ways of doing it, but that's just my opinion. Astrology has gotten rather chaotic and when you hear people talking about souls and karma and whatnot when discussing astrology, it becomes a lot like religion and a lot less like science. it was back then when traditional astrology was really strong that astrology was in the university, not now when pop astrology has all but tried to take over.

The lesson to get here is "if it's not broke, don't fix it"

Um, WB,

In terms of mythology, Ceres works far better for me as the modern ruler of Virgo, as the links were made explicit by some of the classical authors like Manilius.

Click to expand...

...sounds good to me.

I hear you, SR; imho your thinking is right on!:

These are just thoughts, and any one of us could be wrong. None of us can claim to be an authority on Chiron, that doesn't mean we can't play around with ideas, but no-one is an authority on Chiron on this thread just many heads with lots of input.

Click to expand...

lol yes, chiron/virgo/ceres energy is roiling!

Pallas-trine-Mars, as I tried to explain in my previous posts (and apparently, not too well!) I don't think "affinity" alone is sufficient to assign a modern ruler. First off, the entire concept of affinity is pretty big and complex to the point of being messy, with lots of overlap. For example, we get the concept of Virgo and the 6th house as concerned with health. Yet if one really delves into medical astrology, all of the different body parts and illnesses have their own planetary, sign, and/or house rulers. If I have a headache, for example, that's a Mars, Aries, and/or Mercury matter because Mars and Aries rule the head. I can't look to Virgo or the 6th for this matter. Similarly, Virgo and the 6th rule all kinds of things that don't seem at all "Chirotic", such as grain stores, servants, and dogs.

Affinity between a planet and sign can never be 100%, so to me it is a question of looking to the best fit.

One of the most eye-opening insights in my own (now) 18+ years of studying astrology, which came pretty late in the day for me, was the study of planetary rulerships as they are identified with most phenomena. My steady desk companion is Rex E. Bills, The Rulership Book (American Federation of Astrologers). This catalogue is still in print, though somewhat out of date as it was published in 1971, at a pre-Chiron research period. He includes Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto. Deborah Houlding's traditional astrology book, The Houses: Temples of the Sky is also really good on rulerships.

I don't wish to start a big debate over the meaning of "rulers" here--at least 3 different meanings are in very common usage in astrology: (1) planet/sign affiliations, (2) the planet ruling a house cusp ("lord"), and (3) planet/phenomenon affiliations. But just about anything you can think of has a planet, sign or house ruler; and some of these go back to classical times.

Modern astrologers don't seem to use catalogues of planetary rulers a whole lot unless they are involved with horary, mundane, or electional astrology; but I wouldn't just discard them because I have found them to be really helpful, including in natal chart interpretation. For example, if someone wants advice on his best career choice, you have to know which careers are ruled by which planets, signs, and houses.

But a rulership really has to work across the spectrum of astrological practice. So if I work with "accidental" house cusp rulers (#2, above) I need more than just a general correspondence between a planet and a sign. I need to know that the planet ruling a house cusp is really going to say something about the house in question via the ruler's own house and aspects.

I think mythology is very important in astrology even today. Certainly the astrologer-psychologists like Liz Greene use it. But in ancient times, planets took on their meanings and rulerships in relation to the narratives about the gods that were their namesakes. For example, in modern astrology I associate Mars with aggression, initiative, and anger. Well, Mars as the god of war personified these qualities in Roman times. The young god Mercury was a bit of a liar and trickster in Graeco-Roman mythology, and astrologers ascribed these qualities to the planet that bears his name.

So it would be a huge break with astrology's intellectual heritage to separate its planets and asteroids from the myths that surround them. A few astrologers tried to make this rupture [Ruperti, Cycles of Becoming, for one] but not too successfully, in my opinion.

I used to pretty much ignore Chiron until I had that hiking accident, described above. It was the one blatant transit that correlated with my broken ankle. I think Chiron's physical wounds are very real. Psychological wounds are very real to individuals experiencing them. In mythology I believe the centaur Chiron's wounds were also very painful.

For example, we get the concept of Virgo and the 6th house as concerned with health. Yet if one really delves into medical astrology, all of the different body parts and illnesses have their own planetary, sign, and/or house rulers. If I have a headache, for example, that's a Mars, Aries, and/or Mercury matter because Mars and Aries rule the head. I can't look to Virgo or the 6th for this matter. Similarly, Virgo and the 6th rule all kinds of things that don't seem at all "Chirotic", such as grain stores, servants, and dogs.

EXACTLY. That is a very clear and succinct explanation for WHY we cannot just throw out said rulership and replace it with a new one, just like that. When people say " I AM a Virgo, and I really FEEL that the ruler is Chiron not Mercury", it really bugs me. I think it takes WAY more than that personal anecdote to change hundreds of years of an assigned rulership. I think Frank made a very important point as well, when he suggested people look to hundreds of past horary charts with known outcomes, and replace the significators of mercury with chiron, and see if they still work.

I truly dont understand what's so hard to figure out here. There are 12 signs, Mercury already rules a sign, he's the undisputed ruler of Gemini. No arguing there.

But why wouldn't a Virgo's testimony not hold any weight? Who is anyone to tell a Virgo how they're supposed to feel? That's like going to a doctor because you FEEL sick, and him telling you, well you don't LOOK sick, so you're not. Who's anyone to tell anyone else how they feel?

Chiron was multitalented, he was not only a healer, he was a teacher of many different sciences, as well as a trainer for warriors. He represents one of service to mankind in any way he could. That's what the 6th house is about. Chiron also taught astrology, and in many ways, an astrologer is like a doctor who uses mental analysis to pinpoint or diagnose the problem in someone's life. This falls in line with Virgo's association with critical analysis. t definitely takes a lot of Mercury's intelligence and precision to be a doctor, but having a healing touch takes more than cerebral power.

Why make this complicated? Just look at as many Virgo sun signs as you can, and see if you can find the common link. (I will post a link at the end of this). I find it interesting that Lance Armstrong, who beat CANCER(which modern medicine paints as an incurable wound) to come back and win so many times is a Virgo. Also, in the myth of Chiron, he was abandoned by his parents, that was one of his wounds. A Virgo with childhood wounds that never healed, does Michael Jackson ring a bell? (r.i.p.) It's interesting to note how many singers and authors are listed here, including Roald Dahl famous for writing children's books. I see a link here with the healing power of words through music(Gloria Gaynor, Bruce Springsteen,Ray Charles, Julio Iglesias) or words through comedy("laughter is the best medicine"-Dave Chapelle, Jimmy Fallon, Bill Murray).

Just check the list, and you'll see none of these Virgoes are strictly Mercury archetypes. As a Gemini, I will stand up and say leave Mercury to Gemini and give Virgo its own ruler. It can co-rule it since words have such healing/wounding power, but the fact that people can't see how Chiron, the Healer can't rule the 6th house of Health irks me to no end. The 6th house rules servants and service and all healers provide a service, some in multiple areas. Chiron also rules alternative medicine and herbal remedies, herbs which are harvested from the earth, and Virgo is an earth sign. The mind-body connection etc is represented physically by Chiron being a centaur, a man with a horse's lower body. So many of these Virgoes listed fit the archetype in the sense that they use the knowledge of their wounds to heal others, whether it be through music, writing, entertaining, not to mention people like my Virgo cousin, who decided in high school she wanted to be a doctor and became one.

Seriously people, keep things simple, and things will be easier to understand. I personally think Chiron rules the gut, right where the Chinese call the tan ti chien, the source of chi. Sometimes the answer is right in your gut, where you can reach into from personal experience, and this gut instinct is different from the brain's mercurial logic. If Virgoes themselves are going with their gut instinct that Chiron is their ruler, maybe we should listen.

http://www.saidwhat.co.uk/quotes/star_sign/virgo

Also, look at house rulerships, and how they flow in descending order down the body, and see where the 6th would fit somewhere in the middle of the body, like 6 is halfway towards 12.

1-head
2-throat
3-arms,shoulders, hands
4- breasts,womb
5-heart
6*-"gut"
7-kidneys
8-genitals
9-hips,thighs
10-knees
11-ankles
12-feet

Ironically, Chiron the Centaur's human top half, meets his horse bottom half where? Right in the middle, right where the 6th house is in the house system.

But why wouldn't a Virgo's testimony not hold any weight? Who is anyone to tell a Virgo how they're supposed to feel? That's like going to a doctor because you FEEL sick, and him telling you, well you don't LOOK sick, so you're not. Who's anyone to tell anyone else how they feel?

Click to expand...

Because each Virgo would have their own personal anecdotes to tell about. What if there's another Virgo here who disagrees with you? What are we supposed to do then? Explode due to the paradox of a Virgoan disagreement on Virgo?

Chiron was multitalented, he was not only a healer, he was a teacher of many different sciences, as well as a trainer for warriors. He represents one of service to mankind in any way he could. That's what the 6th house is about. Chiron also taught astrology, and in many ways, an astrologer is like a doctor who uses mental analysis to pinpoint or diagnose the problem in someone's life. This falls in line with Virgo's association with critical analysis. t definitely takes a lot of Mercury's intelligence and precision to be a doctor, but having a healing touch takes more than cerebral power.

Click to expand...

Did you just use two Mercurial significations as evidence of Virgo's supposed Chirotic connection?

As a Gemini, I will stand up and say leave Mercury to Gemini and give Virgo its own ruler.

Click to expand...

I've said before, you can't do this because Gemini and Virgo were originally given to Mercury for the same reasons. You can't separate one sign from Mercury while trying to keep one sign with it.

Just check the list, and you'll see none of these Virgoes are strictly Mercury archetypes.

Click to expand...

You'll also find several Virgos who are really good Mercurial archetypes, just like you'll find Leos who aren't really good solar archetypes, but that doesn't mean the sun and Leo are no longer a rulership pair. You can't use a person (who is the manifestation of an entire chart) to exemplify the differences between a sign and its planet of rulership, plus, we all know that there are always differences between a sign and the planet that rules it because they are separate entities and are entitled to their individualities.

The 6th house rules servants and service and all healers provide a service, some in multiple areas.

Click to expand...

So does anyone else who has a business that doesn't trade in goods. I don't understand the point in picking at one distinct profession when others that are similar don't fit so well. The sixth house rules servants and service, so does Chiron also have connections with waiters, maids, plumbers and electricians who offer us their services?

Chiron also rules alternative medicine and herbal remedies, herbs which are harvested from the earth, and Virgo is an earth sign.

Click to expand...

Mercury rules medicine, and aren't most - if not all - medications herbal in some respect? I'm pretty sure that all medications contain a chemical that was originally harvested from some plant. Saying that Chiron rules alternative medicine and herbal remedies really creates a two-tiered system that really doesn't need to be there. Considering that Mercury was deemed the ruler of medicine when our now called "alternative medicines" were the only medicines. Before we had medicated mouthwash to fight gingivitus, we had mint and cloves to act as medication, which was Mercury way back when neither that mouthwash or Chiron existed.

...not to mention people like my Virgo cousin, who decided in high school she wanted to be a doctor and became one.

Click to expand...

Which, again, is very Mercurial as Mercury rules doctors, medicine, and even is symbolic of the life force itself in medical astrology. Seriously, almost everything you said about the Chiron/Virgo connection could just be used to justify Mercury/Virgo.

Seriously people, keep things simple, and things will be easier to understand.

Click to expand...

I completely agree.

Ironically, Chiron the Centaur's human top half, meets his horse bottom half where? Right in the middle, right where the 6th house is in the house system.

Click to expand...

That's also the place where we digest the grain that Virgo symbolizes...

dhundhun said:

In most of the pictures, Chiron and Sagittarius look alike with minor differences: first one carries spears and the other one carries a bow and an arrow.

However, by this similarity, I am not concluding anything.

Click to expand...

@keiousei

Did you just use two Mercurial significations as evidence of Virgo's supposed Chirotic connection?

Click to expand...

My argument is that Mercury is still co-ruler of Virgo, the same way Mars is still co-ruler of Scorpio. Here's what I said

It definitely takes a lot of Mercury's intelligence and precision to be a doctor, but having a healing touch takes more than cerebral power.

Click to expand...

I suggest you read all my posts on the subject before responding, because I tend to be very thorough with my arguments, and as purely logical as a Gemini can get. Again, Mercury is a very cerebral planet, ruling an air sign, and the upper part of the body, which represents the heavens. The actual healing of the body, deals with the lower,more physical, earthly elements.

Mind you, I am a person born with Mercury conjunct Chiron in my 10th house. I speak from experience. That conjunction deals with Mental Health. My father(Saturn rules the 10th house) is a Mental Health Practitioner. I personally witnessed and worked in this field, and know how destructive these drugs have been, and I know how keeping it simple, eating healthy, exercising, and abstaining from all drugs can cure people of depression, anxiety, addicion, etc.

Again, I have my natal Mercury conjunct Chiron, born in 1978, 7 months after Chiron was discovered. It rules alternative medicine, herbal medicine, as opposed to all the manufactured, processed, poisoned pills which ended up killing Virgo Michael Jackson. Virgo needs a new ruler, a modern ruler for these modern times. I know how Mercury and Chiron work hand in hand. But the same way Mars rules Aries, and co-rules Scorpio since Pluto came along, so it is with Mercury co-ruling Virgo. Mercury still fits in many ways, but Chiron as a full archetype, the embodiment of health and service to mankind is its best representative.

My argument is that Mercury is still co-ruler of Virgo, the same way Mars is still co-ruler of Scorpio.


Divine G,
That is a notion I am open to. I think there are arguments that are valid and are open to needed debate.

My negative reaction came from a previous poster who said that mercury was in NO way connected to Virgo and should be wholly replaced by Chiron, end of story. And her reasoning was that she was a Virgo so she should know. That really bugged me to no end. However , a co-rulership is highly possible and I predict it will come to pass.

My argument is that Mercury is still co-ruler of Virgo, the same way Mars is still co-ruler of Scorpio. Here's what I said

Click to expand...

Perhaps you should read all of my post before you go on about how I haven't read yours. I've already said multiple times that the co-ruler system cannot work, amazing how it is continually repeated as if that's all you know how to say.

It rules alternative medicine, herbal medicine, as opposed to all the manufactured, processed, poisoned pills which ended up killing Virgo Michael Jackson.

Click to expand...

I've already pointed out to you have Mercury rules medications of all kinds. Mercury was the appointed ruler of medication when herbal remedies and alternative medicine was all there was. Before the days of those "processed, poisoned pills", when we gathered our medicinces from the plants that grew right beside our food plants, Mercury was all there was for medication. Your idea that somehow Mercury no longer has hold over the exact same thing that he did 500 years ago baffles me. The argument that Mercury shouldn't rule the herbal medications that astro-physician Nicholas Culpepper proscribed for his patients is absurd. Just like your apparent assertion that herbs can't kill people if they take too many of them, unlike the medicines of modern medical science. If anything, Chiron would rule the newly discovered modern medicines because they seem to have more in common.

If anything, Chiron would rule the newly discovered modern medicines because they seem to have more in common.

Click to expand...

Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. And I'm tired of repeating myself sir. My whole last post said repeatedly that I believe Mercury co-rules Virgo. The same way Mars co-rules Scorpio(Pluto being a higher octave of Mars), is the same way Chiron's use of his hands and cerebral power as a healer is a higher vibration of Mercury and more in-tune with the earth sign of Virgo.

Saying the co-ruler system cannot work is like saying 2 different people can't co-own a house, like 2 people can't rule a country as President and Vice-President. If it makes you feel better to have just one ruler, fine, Chiron is the ruler of Virgo, and Mercury was ruling it in its absence. Chiron doesn't render Mercury's affinity with Virgo null and void, it's just a more complete fit. Mercury already rules the 3rd house, it doesn't need to rule the 6th exclusively, especially in light of the fact that it rules an air sign. The myth of the twins is that they both left earth to be in heaven together, the same way many Geminis neglect their physical body for more cerebral pursuits. Chiron also wanted to leave earth, so there is an affinity there, but he was more of a service-oriented figure to earth than the light-hearted playful twins. Again,Chiron doesn't render Mercury's affinity with Virgo null and void, it's just a more complete fit.

Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. And I'm tired of repeating myself sir.

Click to expand...

LOL!!! That was most certainly NOT what you were saying! Let's go to the board.

Chiron also rules alternative medicine and herbal remedies, herbs which are harvested from the earth, and Virgo is an earth sign.

Click to expand...

It [Chiron] rules alternative medicine, herbal medicine, as opposed to all the manufactured, processed, poisoned pills

Click to expand...

So, you say those things, but then act as if you've been saying that Chiron rules modern medicine this whole time? Now you've lost me.

Saying the co-ruler system cannot work is like saying 2 different people can't co-own a house, like 2 people can't rule a country as President and Vice-President.

Click to expand...

Okay, well let me stop you here. This isn't law and democracy, this is astrology. They're different and your analogy doesn't work. Astrology has its own rules and co-rulers can't logically be a part of that for several reasons.

If it makes you feel better to have just one ruler, fine, Chiron is the ruler of Virgo, and Mercury was ruling it in its absence.

Click to expand...

No...Mercury would rule Virgo because there's no good reason for Mercury to not rule Virgo or for Chiron to rule Virgo.

Chiron doesn't render Mercury's affinity with Virgo null and void, it's just a more complete fit.

Click to expand...

No, you're under the impression that the domicile scheme was assigned due to affinity, which it wasn't, and (as I've said plenty of times) Mercury was given rulership of Gemini and Virgo for the EXACT same reasons. You can't say there's a better candidate for the Virgo rulership and it not also being a better candidiate for the Gemini rulership because they are based on the exact same logic.

Mercury already rules the 3rd house, it doesn't need to rule the 6th exclusively,

Click to expand...

That's only the case in modern astrology, in traditional astrology Mercury is only related to the First and Sixth houses, so your logic there doesn't work. You'll also note that those houses are the houses of health and illness, coincidence? No, not really.

Your whole argument seems to be centered around the idea that Virgo is health-obsessed and you're using that to force a connection with Chiron. I'd counter and say that Virgo isn't health obssesed, most astrologers would agree that Virgo's "mission" is about perfection. She wants the perfect work and living space which is why she's so clean, ordered, and organized. She wants to submit the perfect work which is why it's all reviewed, analyzed, and edited if needed. She wants the perfect lover, which oftentimes leads her to unrealistic expectations and turns her nitpicky. She wants the perfect body, so she tries her best to be in perfect health. This is also why people who a Virgoan influence fall into destructive habits like bulimea, anorexia, and anything else you can think of, because they strive for perfection in a society that focuses on unrealistic stereotypes.

So, again, you seem to be focusing only the health-related parts of Virgo, and when inspecting the cause (the want for perfection) instead of the symptom (being health and body-minded due to striving towards that perfection) you'll find that Virgo and Chiron really aren't very related at all.

Ok, I'm through responding to you. There's a wealth of information supporting what I'm saying, so don't act is if I made this theory up. I will draw the line here, I have better things to do than argue with people.

Lol, and there's a much larger well-spring of information spanning centuries upon centuries of astrological lore that's supporting what I'm saying. I'm not acting like you've made the theory up, I'm acting like the theory doesn't make any logical sense when compared with the rest of astrology. It sounds fun to say "Chiron must rule Virgo", but it doesn't make sense and doesn't work out that way.

Response to Kai

We're getting back into this? Who says they aren't perfect? The people who want to change them to fit what they think is right? Keep in mind that these people probably don't understand why the rulerships were given in the first place, but think they were for affinity.

you attempt to blame the entirety of the scientific community's bad view of astrology on traditional rulerships. considering most scientists who have a bias against astrology probably don't even know what those are.

Click to expand...

Kai, anyone with any passion for astrology will run into the atheistic meatheads who don't see how astrology isn't the same as a religion and are indeed biased against it for fear that the ultimate concept of it is that they don't have control of their own lives (considering how ultimately stupid and powerless every living creature is compared to the universe, a pretty arrogant way to approach life in my view since really we have very little control of any major thing in our lives). Now, don't make the mistake of getting hostile with me as if I just shoved you. I said I believe ancient astrology isn't perfect, I didn't insult you, so I hope you're capable telling the difference between a personal attack and someone disagreeing your views? Anyway, you seem to somewhat agree with this according to this quote:

Stopping this one here. There are two versions of the triplicity scheme, one that makes sense and follows the rules and one that doesn't. The one that makes sense doesn't give the Water triplicity to Mars all the time.

Click to expand...

So some traditions work and others don't. You agree, case closed.

Curious about this statement, since I and every other horary astrologer in the world uses the Terms.

Click to expand...

At any rate, I say they're not perfect. I believe that after assigning houses and exaltations things STILL didn't explain things enough, so they made up things like the terms and triplicities to try to rectify the issue. The Egyptians made a terms system then Ptolemy DISAGREED WITH THEM and wrote his own. I tried to find out a justification for them, but the best I could find was something on RenaissanceAstrology.com about giving the non-luminary planets a certain amount of degrees in each sign according how much dignity they have in that particular sign? What patent nonsense.

Mars

Click to expand...

Ok, I'd like you to explain that or give me some links to some posts where you do, because I strongly disagree. The way I see it all of the ones that do have a strong following modern and ancient have scary similar affinities. Take Saturn and Capricorn, both are melancholic, cold and dry, in humour, weather and personality. Both instill in the sign/house they should transit or the planets within it that one should be skeptical, understand and play 'by the rules' and that "if you want a job done right you can't depend on anyone else to do it for you." A Venus personality and Libra seem to work the same way: Very vivacious, extremely socially and romantically-inclined, sympathetic and just, a lover of subtle discussion and yet insensitive, narcissistic and fickle at times. Neptune and pisces both involve alcohol and drugs, extreme idealism and sensitivity, secrets and at times lost in some delusion..

Talk about irrational. I would have thought by now we would have all agreed that astrology was completely black and white.

Click to expand...

...Is that supposed to be funny?

And because they're mistaken before they even get out of the gate. I know you're not implying that modern/psychological astrologers knew of traditional techniques and then tried them and augmented them to come up with their own techniques. If that's the case then I'm going to have to ask to check your timetables because around the time psychological astrology was really kicking off there were only three traditional books that had been translated and published, and one of those books was second edition of another that had been released. So no, it's not that they weren't afraid to think differently, but because they didn't realize there were really rules in the first place and had to play it by ear.

Click to expand...

I'm not playing "mine is bigger than yours" with you over whose system did what. I approach astrology from a psychological perspective because of my own experiences with astrology. I'm not part of astrological gang that's at war with medieval astrology, nor will I defend people who don't check into methods of supposedly experienced people who've practiced it their own way, nor will I maintain something old just for the sake of maintaining it.

I'm not wasting my time explaining the domicile scheme again. It's probably on this forum about a billion times now and it's on the web in countless websites that don't discuss affinity.

Click to expand...

Well, I guess that's how much you care about your claim then. Rudeness will not win you any debates with me.

So, because it's old, you don't quite get it, and it doesn't have to do with affinity it's got to go out the window? I would say it's the lack of a structural core of rules that makes the scientific minded shun astrology, not the old ways of doing it, but that's just my opinion. Astrology has gotten rather chaotic and when you hear people talking about souls and karma and whatnot when discussing astrology, it becomes a lot like religion and a lot less like science. it was back then when traditional astrology was really strong that astrology was in the university, not now when pop astrology has all but tried to take over.

The lesson to get here is "if it's not broke, don't fix it"

Click to expand...

Oh please. You know I've studied astrology vigorously, I'm no newbie. And I certainly don't care to maintain some old standard just because some people are afraid of change. What you consider "rulership" and "dignity" is different than what I consider them to be. Yeah, I'm sure you're going to tell me I'm wrong and that your way is the only way without even considering why that makes people less likely to want to discuss things with you, but I want to hear that about as much as I want to hear that astrology is imaginary by from skeptic of equal stubbornness. As far as modern astrology being chaotic and complex, well, get used to it, that's life. There's is no perfection or perfect order anywhere, Pluto's affinity with Scorpio in spite of the pretty order of olde demonstrates that pretty clearly. If the universe were simple we wouldn't need the shrinks that Chiron probably rules.

I've already pointed out to you have Mercury rules medications of all kinds. Mercury was the appointed ruler of medication when herbal remedies and alternative medicine was all there was. Before the days of those "processed, poisoned pills", when we gathered our medicinces from the plants that grew right beside our food plants, Mercury was all there was for medication. Your idea that somehow Mercury no longer has hold over the exact same thing that he did 500 years ago baffles me. The argument that Mercury shouldn't rule the herbal medications that astro-physician Nicholas Culpepper proscribed for his patients is absurd. Just like your apparent assertion that herbs can't kill people if they take too many of them, unlike the medicines of modern medical science. If anything, Chiron would rule the newly discovered modern medicines because they seem to have more in common.

Click to expand...

If you're talking mythologically or because of its glyph, we already discussed this, you're thinking of Asclepius. Mercury never ruled medicine in mythology or astrology, just as a proxy through Virgo, the sixth house and that thema mundi-based assignment of the 12 houses by the 7 traditional planets.

I'm in agreement with you that Chiron neither rules Virgo, the 6th house or medicine, though for different reasons. But (and this goes out to anyone who isn't a Virgo but has an opinion about this, esp. you, Kai and Katydid) you just don't understand. You don't understand what it's like to be a Virgo and come to the realization that the planet every non-analytical self-appointed astrologer doesn't influence you and is clearly of a stronger connection with it's other sign. I feel we have no ruler (accept maybe when Mercury turns retrograde, really the only time I find a direct impact on my life by Mercury) and I understand what it means when someone says "I'm a Virgo and I feel that *insert celestial body here* is my ruler..." Almost every other sign has some planet to call its ruler, I feel we just have Mercury because there isn't really anything else for certain yet or because we're having Mercury forced on us by ultra-traditionalists who don't have our best interests or expanding the knowledge of the nature of Virgo in their hearts at all.

And how dare you claim you know the sign Virgo and what it's like to be under a Virgo influence better than someone who is?

I'd counter and say that Virgo isn't health obssesed, most astrologers would agree that Virgo's "mission" is about perfection. She wants the perfect work and living space which is why she's so clean, ordered, and organized. She wants to submit the perfect work which is why it's all reviewed, analyzed, and edited if needed. She wants the perfect lover, which oftentimes leads her to unrealistic expectations and turns her nitpicky. She wants the perfect body, so she tries her best to be in perfect health. This is also why people who a Virgoan influence fall into destructive habits like bulimea, anorexia, and anything else you can think of, because they strive for perfection in a society that focuses on unrealistic stereotypes.

Click to expand...

I like this, I don't totally agree with it but I like it, good describing, you should try thinking for yourself more often. However I must point out that Mercury doesn't rule order, even Shining Ray's post on page 2 agrees, Mercury is a restless energy. And I don't think eating disorders are Virgo issues, I think that falls under Venus' domain considering that we usually hear about young women succumbing to them; being socially accepted and being seen as "pretty" is furthermore a Venus issue and then considering that Venus is in Fall in Virgo it would seem that such issues are diminished in Virgo. Remember also, Virgo is a sign of intelligence, common sense and prudence and one that's "used to not fitting in". I don't think Pink and Rachael Ray would ever have an eating disorder to be popular (both have Sun and Venus in Virgo).

Also, Virgo is no more wounded than any other sign. The water signs are considered shy and secretive, Capricorn is considered chronically depressed and solitary, the air signs are thought to have commitment and attention issues...

Re: Response to Kai

...about giving the non-luminary planets a certain amount of degrees in each sign according how much dignity they have in that particular sign? What patent nonsense.

Click to expand...

Patent nonsense? Right, because a logically assembled system is nonsense? Now you're sounding like you make me sound. Throwing out anything and everything that doesn't agree with what you think should be. And you should also know that the Egyptians were using Terms and Faces before the domiciles were really ever straightened out in the way we know them now.

Well, I guess that's how much you care about your claim then. Rudeness will not win you any debates with me.

Click to expand...

Hehe, I must have missed you discussing your love of endlessly repeating yourself.

Take Saturn and Capricorn, both are melancholic, cold and dry, in humour, weather and personality. Both instill in the sign/house they should transit or the planets within it that one should be skeptical, understand and play 'by the rules' and that "if you want a job done right you can't depend on anyone else to do it for you." A Venus personality and Libra seem to work the same way: Very vivacious, extremely socially and romantically-inclined, sympathetic and just, a lover of subtle discussion and yet insensitive, narcissistic and fickle at times. Neptune and pisces both involve alcohol and drugs, extreme idealism and sensitivity, secrets and at times lost in some delusion..

Click to expand...

Yes, they may share similar characteristics, but so too do Aquarius and Saturn have similarities like Venus and Taurus do. I'm not saying that the signs don't mimic some characteristics of their ruling planet, I'm saying that those similar characteristics are not a part of the philosophy of domiciles and shouldn't be confused with the idea of "linked through affinity".

...Is that supposed to be funny?

Click to expand...

Hehe, is that response supposed to be funny?

Oh please. You know I've studied astrology vigorously, I'm no newbie. And I certainly don't care to maintain some old standard just because some people are afraid of change.

Click to expand...

Oh please. Of course not, because you don't care if you willy-nilly away anything that you don't quite understand and doesn't fit into your own view of what it should be regardless of the logic utilized on either side.

What you consider "rulership" and "dignity" is different than what I consider them to be.

Click to expand...

Which is about like saying you don't "believe" tylenol and advil are painkillers.

Yeah, I'm sure you're going to tell me I'm wrong and that your way is the only way without even considering why that makes people less likely to want to discuss things with you, but I want to hear that about as much as I want to hear that astrology is imaginary by from skeptic of equal stubbornness.

Click to expand...

Hehe, what makes people less likely to discuss things with me is I like to play rough and don't take **** answers. After I've depleted their list of "proofs" with answers of why and how things can't work that way, they just go on and repeat themselves, like you're currently doing with your affinity thing. Am I stubborn? Well, yeah, but I'm open-minded to things that make sense philosophically and logically. Like you, I too was against the Ptolemiac Triplicity scheme because it doesn't make sense, however, then I found Dorotheus's scheme and realized that it was the better Triplicity system of the two and have used it since with great results.

As far as modern astrology being chaotic, well, get used to it, that's life.

Click to expand...

LOL! So, I'm expected to just "get used to it" when you can't get used to an astrological philosophy and tradition that's been around for like 1900 years? Hm.

There's is no perfection or perfect order anywhere, Pluto's affinity with Scorpio in spite of the pretty order of olde demonstrates that pretty clearly.

Click to expand...

Not at all, it just proves that Pluto is a carbon copy of Scorpio, which is what I've believed all along. They aren't in "affinity" - or whatever the correct grammatical structure of that statement would be - they're the SAME THING!