Isn't square aspect suppose to make Saturn more malefic, therefore restrict the capacity of Mercury?
Doesn't the fact that both good and bad aspect of Saturn and Mercury connected to the genius people indicate their aspect has actually nothing to do with their being genius?
Isn't it more what house the planets are in, and their dignity which affect the point?
Most astrologers says that a square is simply bad and a trine is simply good, but some like Frawley do not agree.
A trine is an aspect telling that the energies of two planets are working in harmony, they could also harmoniusly work together to bring a person in taking drugs or simply can easily "hurt each other", it is not necessarily a good aspect (ask someone with Moon trine Mars, at least when with bad reception).
A square gives the necessity of more hard work on what is represented by the planets, could even stimulate a person in taking extra efforts on a matter or can give more discipline and self-control, in this case Mercury square Saturn could push someone for a more in-depth and structured study of a matter not satisfied with the explanations he received.
The different aspects of Mercury-Saturn in geniuses' charts simply can indicate a different expression of their genius.
And naturally one can even be a genius without any aspect between Mercury and Saturn.
Maybe I badly expressed myself at the beginning of this thread giving the idea of giving an exagerated importance of Saturn on intelligence.
I wanted simply to say that the situation of Saturn in a chart (even if not in aspect with Mercury) can affect the intelligence (or maybe it is better to say the expression of the intelligence), more than the other planets, so I thought that in the past Saturn had received less consideration than it deserved on this matter.