i use Whole Sign for Topics
Alcabitius for planetary strength
You do realise that most of the topics' significations have to do with strength?
i use Whole Sign for Topics
Alcabitius for planetary strength
i use Whole Sign for TopicsNot trying to hijack the thread, but do you use Whole Sign and Alcabitius together?
I thought I remember you using Whole Signs, but wasn't sure.
you do realise I'm no expertYou do realise that most of the topics' significations have to do with strength?
You do realise that most of the topics' significations have to do with strength?
I don’t find this concept of strong or weak houses coherent or reflective of the different interests, tasks, or characteristics of either the planets or the way they would operate together in a horoscope. Planets are in community with each other, not all trying to act “strong.”
Strong, weak, better, worse, exalted, debilitated etc. These concepts are real, though have fallen out of fashion in modern astrology.
Is living a cardboard box on the street better or worse than living in a mansion with servants attending to your every need?
If there is better or worse in real life then there should also be better or worse in the chart, unless astrology is unable to reflect real life.
HoldOrFold, you raise an interesting point (meaning I've wondered about it myself.)
One of my occasional pet projects is trying to learn the origin of the thematic meanings of houses in ancient times.
It's pretty clear that houses themselves (vs. signs) are of Egyptian origin. (Micah Ross & Dorian Greenbaum, "The Role of Egypt in the Development of the Horoscope" https://www.academia.edu/7451388/Th...velopment_of_the_Horoscope_with_D._Greenbaum_ )
Also, are you familiar with Chris Brennan's book Hellenistic Astrology? Highly recommended.
In reading the most prominent Hellenistic astrologers in English translation, I'm struck by the problem that they seemed to draw on different sources. There is overlap, but they are not identical.
A big difference is the system of evaluating house strength based on angularity, vs. one that relies more on whether the houses make a traditional major aspect with the ascendant. Namely, the sextile, square, trine, or opposition. In the first system, cadent houses are weak (see Manilius)
but in the second system, the unfortunate houses are
the inconjunct (semi-sextile or quincunx aspect)
houses (12, 8, 6) with somehow the 2nd house having a more indifferent strength.
We have to acknowledge that Egyptian mythology long predated Hellenistic horoscopic astrology. The Babylonians didn't use houses until very late in the day, and this might have been a backwards diffusion from the Hellenists.
If you can find Otto Neugebauer and his associates' research papers on demotic (Roman-era Egyptian) horoscopes in the archaeological record, these use names from Egyptian mythology for some of the houses. The 4th is the "dwat" or "duat," Osiris's judgement hall of the dead. The 5th is the house of Hathor, described as the Egyptian Venus. The evil god Seth (Set) attacks the sun as it emerges in the morning with sandstorms that reduce its visibility.
The genius of the rationalist Greeks was to try to put these mythical materials into mathematic rationales. Nevertheless, a palimpsest of older narratives peeps out.
Because we also have Hellenistic names for some of the houses. The 12th is the house of the bad spirit. The 11th is the house of the good spirit (Jupiter, probably seen as equivalent to the Egyptian creator god Khnum.) Then we have opposite parallels with the 5th (good fortune, cf. benefic Venus) and 6th (bad fortune, cf. malefic Mars.)
Like the 12th, the 6th house of dusk also symbolized a time what the sun's light was dimmed.
Anciently the 3rd was the house of the goddess moon, while the 9th was the house of the sun god. This works out by Hellenistic sect, as well, with the greater malefic Saturn joying in the 12th and the greater benefic Jupiter joying in the 12th and 11th, respectively.)
Although the Egyptian scribe god Thoth was originally a moon god, the Hellenists assimilated him to their scribe god Hermes/Mercury, the psychopomp who leads the souls through the afterlife. Thoth was often depicted on the prow of Ra's sun boat. An ancient name for the first was the prow or the rudder. (Because Egyptian boats on the Nile had to be able to navigate both up and down the current, sometimes a rudder on the prow worked better.)
There is more material on Skyscript on the topic of planetary joys.
One thing the rationalist Ptolemy did not much care for were houses. This is a wee clue to astrological houses having a more mythological origin.
You’re not trying to understand the point which is that a merely polar concept obscures qualitative and “scope of work” differences. Can Nature be exploited by the stronger? Of course. But she gets him in the end.
Or, let's talk about whether planets "behold" or "regard" the ascendant.
But that's just me and I have a lot of work to do before I can really say once and for all that I'm doing with using house meanings. I can just see how traditional delineation can be done without them.
A big difference is the system of evaluating house strength based on angularity, vs. one that relies more on whether the houses make a traditional major aspect with the ascendant. Namely, the sextile, square, trine, or opposition. In the first system, cadent houses are weak (see Manilius) but in the second system, the unfortunate houses are the inconjunct (semi-sextile or quincunx aspect) houses (12, 8, 6) with somehow the 2nd house having a more indifferent strength.
That is exactly where this system ends up, isn’t it? So
reductionist as to be nonsensical.
I think that this and angularity are more important and consistent than the meanings attached to the houses. Planetary aversion seems to be key in determining if a planet is going to help the native, harm the native, or performing in a bumbling manner.
I'm increasingly skeptical of how applicable the meanings of the houses are in delineation because I often find that when it comes down to actual chart work, we're required to stretch to make the planets fit the houses. I'm not quite at the point where I think that house meanings are all irrelevant nonsense, but I'm certainly beginning to appreciate just using planetary regards to the Asc and angularity when it comes to delineation. The planetary symbolism is rich enough that you can say quite a bit with just that. Often times I find that house meanings just make things confusing.
But that's just me and I have a lot of work to do before I can really say once and for all that I'm doing with using house meanings. I can just see how traditional delineation can be done without them.
However, houses are essential in horary astrology, which is also part of traditional astrology. Houses are also basic in traditional medical and mundane astrology so perhaps it depends upon the type of astrology undertaken.
Are we reading the same Tetrabiblos? Ptolemy explicity talks about houses only with respect to one method, calculating length of life in III. 10. Then he doesn't even mention all of the houses by number or name.
I agree that we can sometimes infer houses from Mr. Pt's discussions having to do with angularity, oriental/occidental, or the order of signs.
I have the sources you mention, but I don't read them to replicate the techniques.
Sneaky!