conspiracy theorist
Well-known member
This is an essential dignity that can be found in Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos, whereby a planet is in proper face when it is in the same positional relationship to another planet as the signs that they rule. Example - Mercury in Scorpio and Moon in Sagittarius. These planets are in their proper faces because the placements of both mirror the zodiacal relationship between Gemini and Cancer.
Note that proper face is not the same as "face/decan".
Another thing to note is that Ptolemy saw the various essential dignities as equal to one another, which is in contradistinction to the popular tables of dignities and debilities, which places a hierarchy on planetary dignity.
Another distinction that I would like to highlight is that the concept of detriment was absent from his works (and in fact from the whole of Hellenistic astrology) while the concept of peregrination was seen as a dire state for a planet to be in. For a planet to be peregrine it must have no dignity at its location of the zodiac, so that Mars in Gemini isn't automatically peregrine if it happens to be placed in its bound, or if Saturn is in Virgo (Mirror Relationship of Scorpio and Aquarius - proper face)
Some things then become apparent based on this information from Ptolemy -
1. Proper Face, although ignored in the current day, was an important dignity alongside domicile, exaltation, triplicity and term.
2. It was in equal standing to other dignities, so that Jupiter in Leo could be a more essentially dignified placement than Jupiter in Sagittarius due to picking up 3 dignities (triplicity,term, proper face)
3. Lack of a detriment concept with more focus on peregrination means that it takes more work to deem a planet essentially debilitated, which will result in a less automatic and more nuanced interpretation as opposed to deeming a planet debilitated where the outcome of the life flies in the face of that interpretation. (Example: Fyodor Dostoyevsky - his Mercury in Sagittarius is in "detriment" which would mean a weakening or an atypicality if the concept of detriment holds. Yet his Mercury is in proper face it's one sign ahead of his Scorpio Sun - Mirroring the relationship to Leo and Virgo. It is also one sign behind Venus which hearkens to the relationship of Virgo and Libra)
Obviously, such an operations style with the.dignities is at odds with what is seen as "standard traditional astrology", and flies in the face of many of the contemporary conventions.
My question to all is, do you have any experience with the use of proper face in chart interpretation? What about the other ideas touched, do you see the validity or at least the plausibility in them? If you find them in any way disagreeable then it would be interesting if you elaborate on why you hold that view.
Note that proper face is not the same as "face/decan".
Another thing to note is that Ptolemy saw the various essential dignities as equal to one another, which is in contradistinction to the popular tables of dignities and debilities, which places a hierarchy on planetary dignity.
Another distinction that I would like to highlight is that the concept of detriment was absent from his works (and in fact from the whole of Hellenistic astrology) while the concept of peregrination was seen as a dire state for a planet to be in. For a planet to be peregrine it must have no dignity at its location of the zodiac, so that Mars in Gemini isn't automatically peregrine if it happens to be placed in its bound, or if Saturn is in Virgo (Mirror Relationship of Scorpio and Aquarius - proper face)
Some things then become apparent based on this information from Ptolemy -
1. Proper Face, although ignored in the current day, was an important dignity alongside domicile, exaltation, triplicity and term.
2. It was in equal standing to other dignities, so that Jupiter in Leo could be a more essentially dignified placement than Jupiter in Sagittarius due to picking up 3 dignities (triplicity,term, proper face)
3. Lack of a detriment concept with more focus on peregrination means that it takes more work to deem a planet essentially debilitated, which will result in a less automatic and more nuanced interpretation as opposed to deeming a planet debilitated where the outcome of the life flies in the face of that interpretation. (Example: Fyodor Dostoyevsky - his Mercury in Sagittarius is in "detriment" which would mean a weakening or an atypicality if the concept of detriment holds. Yet his Mercury is in proper face it's one sign ahead of his Scorpio Sun - Mirroring the relationship to Leo and Virgo. It is also one sign behind Venus which hearkens to the relationship of Virgo and Libra)
Obviously, such an operations style with the.dignities is at odds with what is seen as "standard traditional astrology", and flies in the face of many of the contemporary conventions.
My question to all is, do you have any experience with the use of proper face in chart interpretation? What about the other ideas touched, do you see the validity or at least the plausibility in them? If you find them in any way disagreeable then it would be interesting if you elaborate on why you hold that view.