Do you agree with this? (House Positions = Sign Placements)

david starling

Well-known member
I don't think this is the issue. I consider "my" astrology to be modern western, but few years ago I decided to learn traditional and horary. Now I am a lot more eclectic, but hopefully the field as a whole will become more diverse. Today, in an interesting reversal, some trads tend to see modern psychological astrology as yesterday's school. (John Frawley, anyone?)

So far as my posts here go, sometimes its easier to dismiss a particular method if we do not know the historical reasons behind it. Learning the reasons, maybe we can see the logic in them.

To y'all:

As I've said a few times here, I think some planet-sign-matches work a lot better than others. Jupiter-Sagittarius-and the 9th are a much better match than Mars-Aries-and the 1st house, unless one happens to have Aries rising or Mars in the first. If someone has Pisces rising with Saturn in the first house, than that "first chord" conflation is really inappropriate. Medical astrology is a special exception.

Moreover, we lose a lot of the valid and alternative meanings of the houses and signs, because we would have to toss out whatever does not fit whatever it is that we think a given planet, sign, or house actually signifies.

Then we're in danger of morphing Pisces to fit the 12th house, or Venus to fit the 2nd house, or vice versa. Maybe you can read a nativity this way, but I think you'd run into difficulties with horary, which isn't about the querent's personality in most cases.

Once you make up your mind to conflate signs and houses, then you sort of have to trim out the 12th house rulerships of large livestock, hospitals, and prisons if these do not fit with your pictures of dreamy, sensitive Pisces.

I have Jupiter in Capricorn in the 4th house in Placidus (Sagittarius on the cusp) and so long as we confuse the 4th house with Mom due to a moon-Cancer-4th confusion, you'd never get my interests in genealogy (family history,) restoring old houses, or certain types of history. None of these are Mom-related, and in my case, my actual mother had zero interest in these topics. These topics do come up in the more comprehensive listing of 4th house affiliations that do not muddle it up with Cancer.

My feeling about whether the MC or IC represents Mom or Dad, is to reflect back on your experiences of these people. See which is the best fit for you. But if you had a stay-at-home Dad while Mom joined the Air Force, we can throw the gender stereotyping of Cancer out the window.

Deborah Houlding, in her book Houses: Temples of the Sky takes the second house as an example. If you translate the second house as Taurus, then presumably you get Venus as the ruler of second house matters like money. But Venus doesn't rule money. Mercury is the planetary ruler of currency and trade. Venus does rule luxuries like jewelry, which are financial assets to some people, but here you'd want to look at the actual situation of Venus. If the native has Venus in Leo in the first house, she's more likely to love wearing expensive gold jewelry than if she's got Saturn in Taurus in the 9th or Venus in Aquarius in the 7th house square Mars.
Waybread, you're setting up a straw man example, because you're not making a distinction between CONFLATING Sign and House, and COMPATIBILITY of Sign and House. With the numbering pattern, Venus is ruler of the Sign, Taurus, but that DOESN'T automatically make Venus the ruler of the 2nd House. That would be the case ONLY if Venus were actually IN Taurus in H2.
 
Last edited:

waybread

Well-known member
There's a basic STRUCTURE to the Astrological systems. We accept that as a given. (Tropical is the structure that appeals to me, personally, and the one I know the most about, so I'll focus on that.) This Thread involves that foundational framework, because, Tropically, we're in agreement that there are 12 equal Sign-divisions measured along the Ecliptic (objectively Earth's orbital path, subjectively the Sun's). And, we're in agreement that the first points of the Cardinal-signs are located at the Sun's position at the beginning of each of the 4 Seasons. But, were NOT unanimous in numbering Aries as Sign #1 through Pisces as Sign #12. Those of us who do (I even use basic numerology to obtain information about the numbered Signs), have no problem connecting a Sign to the House of the same number. In which case, there's a PATTERN as to which Signs are most compatible with which Houses: Besides being most effective in the House of the same number, using the agreed-upon Elements for the Signs, we can also say a Sign is more effective in any House connected by number to a Sign of the same Element. For anyone who DOESN'T accept the numbering of the Signs, this pattern doesn't work. I think that's the crux of the matter. Numbering the Signs is a Modern idea, as I understand it, although it does receive some oblique Traditional support from the use of the First Point of Tropical Aries as a marker for the Sidereal Ayanamsa.

Well, yeah, David. I don't accept this in its entirety.

We sometimes learn of beginning astrologers getting just overwhelmed by the mass of detailed data (12 signs x 12 houses x 10 modern planets, not counting aspects and sensitive points.) And which of us has not felt that way? You sometimes see experts who don't like asteroids because one cannot possibly deal with all 20,000-plus for which we have ephemerides, some of them the size of a baseball. How many of us have mastered fixed stars?

My feeling is, that astrology is complex. Let's get used to it. Trying to over-simplify astrology in order to cope with its complexity just doesn't help us once the training wheels come off, IMO.

I don't have a problem in seeing Aries as sign #1. That idea has been around ever since Hellenistic astrologers decided that (a) you had to start somewhere in a "circular" map of the heavens; and (b) spring in the northern hemisphere had some seasonal correlations with new beginnings.

Where I have a problem is in assuming that sign number one and house number one mean much the same thing. They do not.

There is no question of compatibility or incompatibility of signs and houses. They fall where they might, and have done so every since their ancient invention. We only find them incompatible if we are so used to defining them according to one another's attributes that we lose sight of their core meanings.

Once we begin to read charts in an even moderately classical way, this just doesn't hold up.

So Aries is the cardinal fire sign, ruled by Mars. The first house gives your outward personality and body. If you have Virgo rising with Venus in the first house, you are not going to come across as Arian, fiery, or martial. So what good is saying that the first sign is much like the first house?

Or take the 7th house. It rules committed partnerships such as marriage, but also open enemies and litigation. If you have an Aries sun and Mars in this house, notably with hard oppositions to Mars, you might come across as extremely confrontational; not as the gracious, diplomatic, indecisive Libra.

Where the astrology-by-the-numbers really gets ******* up is with books or articles that delineate "Venus in Aquarius or in the 11th house," or "Jupiter in Virgo or in the 6th house" as though it made no difference which was which.

In these examples, what happens if you have Venus in Aquarius but it's in the 8th house? Do we then flip to the page on "Venus in Scorpio or in the 8th house?" Well, Scorpio and Aquarius are very different signs, and the 8th and 11th houses don't mean the same thing at all. Then suppose the person has Virgo rising and Aquarius on the 6th house cusp. Again, the 1st and the 6th mean something very different, just as Virgo and Aquarius are not to be confused. Then with Aquarius on the 6th house cusp, does this loop us back to the 11th? But it's already spoken for with an 8th house emphasis. Or is it?

Crazy-making, no?

I'm totally confused by this approach, maybe you are not!
 

waybread

Well-known member
Waybread, you're setting up a straw man example, because you're not making a distinction between CONFLATING Sign and House, and COMPATIBILITY of Sign and House. With the numbering pattern, Venus is ruler of the Sign, Taurus, but that DOESN'T automatically make Venus the ruler of the 2nd House. That would be the case ONLY if Venus were actually IN Taurus in H2.

I'm not confusing this one bit, David. To the contrary.

Surely you work with house cusp rulers? (i. e., the planet ruling the sign on the house cusp.) This is the basis for moonrise attributing lunar qualities to the 4th house.

There is no inherent compatibility or incompatibility between any sign or house. Can you give an example of what you mean?
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
For the ancient and medieval astrologers, astrology was a faith? :)
The divination comes down from the God, and astrology is a tool for it?
Ancient and medieval astrologers PREDICTED :smile:
for example
Willliam Lilly used Horary for prediction
Modernist astrology is "psychologically" oriented
Traditional astrology is Predictive
 

sylph

Well-known member
So Aries is the cardinal fire sign, ruled by Mars. The first house gives your outward personality and body. If you have Virgo rising with Venus in the first house, you are not going to come across as Arian, fiery, or martial. So what good is saying that the first sign is much like the first house?

Or take the 7th house. It rules committed partnerships such as marriage, but also open enemies and litigation. If you have an Aries sun and Mars in this house, notably with hard oppositions to Mars, you might come across as extremely confrontational; not as the gracious, diplomatic, indecisive Libra.

Where the astrology-by-the-numbers really gets ******* up is with books or articles that delineate "Venus in Aquarius or in the 11th house," or "Jupiter in Virgo or in the 6th house" as though it made no difference which was which.

In these examples, what happens if you have Venus in Aquarius but it's in the 8th house? Do we then flip to the page on "Venus in Scorpio or in the 8th house?" Well, Scorpio and Aquarius are very different signs, and the 8th and 11th houses don't mean the same thing at all. Then suppose the person has Virgo rising and Aquarius on the 6th house cusp. Again, the 1st and the 6th mean something very different, just as Virgo and Aquarius are not to be confused. Then with Aquarius on the 6th house cusp, does this loop us back to the 11th? But it's already spoken for with an 8th house emphasis. Or is it?

Crazy-making, no?

I'm totally confused by this approach, maybe you are not!

I don't fully know what my opinion is regarding this, so I'm not trying to get in on the debate(s); but I just have to say that my experience with certain planets in the houses is actually in alignment with medical astrology's. For example, Mars in the 1st; my mother has this but it's in Pisces. She has come off as a dreamy, 'spiritual' Pisces rising -- but she also exhibits a great deal of aggressive, domineering Martial/Arian energy. People don't want to go up against her and she's pretty determined to get her way at all costs. I feel that this overshadows her Pisces rising. There are other things in her chart that might suggest such a temperament, but I don't see why, based on their house placements, she would so strongly come off this way. Could it be Saturn in Scorpio in the 9th (her most elevated planet)? That's a stretch for me, as I see this as dictating her philosophy/outlook/beliefs (making her authoritative and controlling in this area). It simply doesn't explain why she makes a certain first impression.

If, in medical astrology, the first house represents the head, could it be that the planets in the first house actually direct the person's thinking -- and therefore their actions -- thus making them appear much more in alignment with the planetary influence than the sign's influence?

Of course, it's a bit more difficult when we're talking about something like the 8th house. With my Moon there, I think it'd be pretty erroneous to say that my emotions are driven by my genitals. On the other hand, if we take a more spiritual approach to the body and equate "genitals" with "sacral chakra" or "sacral energy," then it becomes an entirely different story. I know this is probably too much for some of you, as it has no basis in tradition (not even Vedic astrology as far as I know) -- but with the head, for example, what use is it unless you have a brain inside of it to think with? The underlying purpose of a head is the brain, and therefore, thought. The underlying purpose of genitals is survival/reproduction/creativity.

The point is, my Taurus Moon in the 8th is not grounded, calm and comfortable; it is easily affected by things that other people don't see (hidden streams of energy). I almost feel like I am JUST an 8th house Moon and the sign is irrelevant. If you take into account my square from Saturn and opposition from Pluto, I guess you can explain why I don't feel like a Taurus Moon. But there are other people on this forum and beyond who don't at all identify with some of the signs their planets are placed in. What does one do about that?
 

Freya39

Well-known member
This is how I see it:

Ex. A person has Aries Venus in the 12th house. They'll act like an Aries in a relationship but their romantic relationships may have 12th traits. (Secretive, Spiritual, Forbidden, Unavailable Partners)

Why? Because the sign would be how you experience the energy and the house would be where.

But I've seen a lot of people do this:

Ex. Venus In Pisces/12th House > Description, pretty much saying the 12th house and Pisces are the same.

I personally don't agree with this method but I'm still new to this and I could be wrong. Do you think it's acceptable to interpret it that way?

In very simple words the sign is the land and the planet is the car. The car always moves around. Many times we have to drive through a specific zone (land), which may be own by one or two people (for instance Pisces = Jupiter & Neptune). If you are driving in New York City you have to respect the law of that city (speed limits, etc.). For this reason, a planet always works under sign influences.
 

waybread

Well-known member
Traditional astrology has looked at personality since Hellenistic times. Generally it was defined as "temperament" and based on the distribution of planetary elements. (Sanguine=air, phlegmatic=water, melancholy=earth, choleric=fire.) They didn't psychologize about temperament, but they had lots to say about whether people had this or that character trait-- and in markedly moralistic terms. See the opening paragraphs of Vettius Valens on the influence of signs on personality. Too bad if you're heavily influenced by Aquarius or Capricorn!

sylph, you make some interesting observations. Surely the head does say a lot about one's personality and body!!

Re: your mother, it would be interesting to see her chart. A planet in aspect to the ascendant can give it a very different flavour. For example, I have Virgo rising, but my ascendant closely squares Uranus, so there is no way I am going to come across as neat and tidy. As in, my hair never behaves, and I can have buttons pop off even when I'm sitting still. With Mom's Pisces rising, we'd also want to look at the situation of her Neptune (modern ruler) and Jupiter (traditional ruler.)

I suggested above that Mars in the first house will make the Aries-first house match up seem like a better fit (due to Mars ruling Aries.)

The 8th house can mean sexuality, or more properly, one's genital and eliminative organs. But strongly 8th house people seem to be very private, and to think about death more than most people. The 8th also rules "shared resources" like investments or proceeds from a marriage. Modernly, the 8th rules occult studies. This latter attribution seems in keeping with your post.

But here again, we'd want to look at your chart as a totality. What about aspects to your moon? Pluto opposite your moon is going to "plutonize" it, just as Saturn is going to "saturnize it." As much as you might hope to feel calm and undisturbed, with these two heavies in your moon's life, it just isn't going to happen. What about Venus, as planetary ruler of Taurus, your moon's sign? Is Taurus on your 8th house cusp, or is it Aries?

Oftentimes a chart will reveal patterns. I just don't happen to think the sign-house match-up is one of the truly helpful ones in most cases. Again, some sign-house-planet match-ups work better than others.

I am starting to wonder how many people on this thread work with house cusp rulers. I find them indispensable. They have a lot to say about the affairs of a given house.
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
In very simple words the sign is the land and the planet is the car. The car always moves around. Many times we have to drive through a specific zone (land), which may be own by one or two people (for instance Pisces = Jupiter & Neptune). If you are driving in New York City you have to respect the law of that city (speed limits, etc.). For this reason, a planet always works under sign influences.
It is important that the VEHICLE suits the terrain as well
for example
when driving in a war zone a tank is a good plan
then switch to a
2008-2016 Toyota Land Cruiser for desert regions
then when crossing the seas or oceans a seaworthy boat is imperative

HOWEVER
neither a tank nor an ocean-going liner are appropriate transport for New York City streets :smile:
and so on

 

sylph

Well-known member
Traditional astrology has looked at personality since Hellenistic times. Generally it was defined as "temperament" and based on the distribution of planetary elements. (Sanguine=air, phlegmatic=water, melancholy=earth, choleric=fire.) They didn't psychologize about temperament, but they had lots to say about whether people had this or that character trait-- and in markedly moralistic terms. See the opening paragraphs of Vettius Valens on the influence of signs on personality. Too bad if you're heavily influenced by Aquarius or Capricorn!

This is super helpful, thanks; I am going to read up on this!

sylph, you make some interesting observations. Surely the head does say a lot about one's personality and body!!

Re: your mother, it would be interesting to see her chart. A planet in aspect to the ascendant can give it a very different flavour. For example, I have Virgo rising, but my ascendant closely squares Uranus, so there is no way I am going to come across as neat and tidy. As in, my hair never behaves, and I can have buttons pop off even when I'm sitting still. With Mom's Pisces rising, we'd also want to look at the situation of her Neptune (modern ruler) and Jupiter (traditional ruler.)

I could PM the chart if you were interested, but her Neptune is in Libra in the 8th and Jupiter in Virgo in 7th (opposite Mars). Saturn squares the ASC and Pluto opposes it (both are out-of-sign aspects).

I suggested above that Mars in the first house will make the Aries-first house match up seem like a better fit (due to Mars ruling Aries.)

Ugh, I know, I didn't realize until after I made the post that you already said this!

The 8th house can mean sexuality, or more properly, one's genital and eliminative organs. But strongly 8th house people seem to be very private, and to think about death more than most people. The 8th also rules "shared resources" like investments or proceeds from a marriage. Modernly, the 8th rules occult studies. This latter attribution seems in keeping with your post.

But here again, we'd want to look at your chart as a totality. What about aspects to your moon? Pluto opposite your moon is going to "plutonize" it, just as Saturn is going to "saturnize it." As much as you might hope to feel calm and undisturbed, with these two heavies in your moon's life, it just isn't going to happen. What about Venus, as planetary ruler of Taurus, your moon's sign? Is Taurus on your 8th house cusp, or is it Aries?

There is nothing you've said here that I disagree with. Equating the 8th house with Scorpio was my (maybe mentally lazy) way of understanding my Moon. For some reason, it's far easier for me to do that than to be like, "I have a Taurus Moon but it doesn't act like a Taurus Moon because it's constantly getting messed with by Saturn and Pluto." However, I want to be accurate and have a true understanding of how astrology works rather than take the easy way out. So I am just going to have to get used to the idea that aspects can greatly affect the way a planet feels/expresses itself.

I have Aries on the 8th house cusp. Venus in Libra in the 1st.

Oftentimes a chart will reveal patterns. I just don't happen to think the sign-house match-up is one of the truly helpful ones in most cases. Again, some sign-house-planet match-ups work better than others.

I am starting to wonder how many people on this thread work with house cusp rulers. I find them indispensable. They have a lot to say about the affairs of a given house.

I am more and more starting to rely on house cusp rulers, but interpreting their meanings is something I don't feel confident about yet. I know it's very simple, and pretty much exactly like interpreting anything else in the chart, but I have this issue with wanting to focus on the sign that is taking up the most space in the house. So with my 8th, it begins in the later degrees of Aries; even though I know that the sign on the cusp is so important, my mind just feels drawn to zero in on the fact that there is "more Taurus" in the 8th than Aries.
 
Last edited:

ynnest

Well-known member
I agree! I am inclined to think of astrology as a system of divination and character analysis using prescribed methods. These methods vary between schools of thought (modern, Vedic, Chinese, &c,) and even between individuals within the same school.

I don't think anyone would consider the disciplines of history or the law to qualify as sciences. Yet a lot of their research is highly empirical (based upon observation.)

I'm starting to use a new (to me) word: proto-science. The work of Aristotle or even Galileo wouldn't seem so scientific today, yet historians of science would claim them as contributing to the body of scientific theories, laws, and information that constitute science today. Of course, a lot of Aristotle's ideas do not hold up to scientific scrutiny, like there being four elements instead of the periodic table. Galileo, in discovering the moons of Jupiter, speculated whether they had astrological meaning. But both men confronted the religious orthodoxies of their day.

In the second century CE, the "new" astrology promoted by Ptolemy did fit within the "scientific" parameters of the Hellenistic world. But not all astrology did. Vettius Valens, in his Anthologies, for example, includes the work of a now-lost astrologer Petosiris. He was supposedly an ancient Egyptian scribe, although the person writing under his name was probably a more recent Hellenized Egyptian (or Egypt-ized Greek.) Valens critized Petosiris and others of his genre for speaking in "mystic riddles," vs. the applied techniques that Valens used himself. Firmicus Maternus (4th century, Mathesis) drops a lot of hints that portions of astrology came out of the ancient Egyptian religion and were considered secret information to the priests.

Because of the major impact of Ptolemy (cf. also his Almagest) on subsequent astrology we may think of ancient astrology as more scientific than a survey of it at the time would have revealed.

This is a useful site for anyone interested in the history of ancient astrology. http://www.hellenisticastrology.com/


If I understand you correctly your belief is that astrology is a spiritual science in of it self but that there are false methods and teachings that fogs the perception of our collective consciousness about this fact?
 

waybread

Well-known member
This is super helpful, thanks; I am going to read up on this!

I could PM the chart if you were interested, but her Neptune is in Libra in the 8th and Jupiter in Virgo in 7th (opposite Mars). Saturn squares the ASC and Pluto opposes it (both are out-of-sign aspects).

Thanks. So Mom's dream-fish ascendant has been mightily Plutonized with an opposition, and Saturnized with a square. Since the ascendant is one of the "me" points in the chart, I imagine she feels a sense of mortal combat when someone opposes her, as well as the need to stay in control of the situation. It sounds like Saturn and Pluto are squared, so dominating a situation (Pluto) to stay in control (Saturn) becomes extra-important.

It is fascinating that the moon gives one's experience of the mother in a chart, and your moon also has a Pluto opposition and Saturn square. This sounds like a T-square.

There is nothing you've said here that I disagree with. Equating the 8th house with Scorpio was my (maybe mentally lazy) way of understanding my Moon. For some reason, it's far easier for me to do that than to be like, "I have a Taurus Moon but it doesn't act like a Taurus Moon because it's constantly getting messed with by Saturn and Pluto." However, I want to be accurate and have a true understanding of how astrology works rather than take the easy way out. So I am just going to have to get used to the idea that aspects can greatly affect the way a planet feels/expresses itself.

I have Aries on the 8th house cusp. Venus in Libra in the 1st.

I think aspects are very important. If you couldn't do houses because you didn't have a birth time, or were perplexed about the difference between the sidereal and tropical zodiac, you could still use aspects. The tighter the orb, the more you are likely to feel it.

If you work with declinations, parallels count like conjunctions and contra-parallels act like oppositions. http://goodvibeastrology.com/parallel-aspects/ You may find that you have a wide conjunction that is actually a tight parallel, as I do with moon-Pluto. (You can find these on the extra tables on the Astrodienst free charts construction pages.)

I am more and more starting to rely on house cusp rulers, but interpreting their meanings is something I don't feel confident about yet. I know it's very simple, and pretty much exactly like interpreting anything else in the chart, but I have this issue with wanting to focus on the sign that is taking up the most space in the house. So with my 8th, it begins in the later degrees of Aries; even though I know that the sign on the cusp is so important, my mind just feels drawn to zero in on the fact that there is "more Taurus" in the 8th than Aries.

Well, you might feel more at home with whole signs houses. (One sign=one house.) Of course, we can and should look at planets' sign rulers. However, I've come across two ways to look at house cusp rulers (lords.)

(1) "The house over which a planet rules serves the purposes of the house in which that planet stands." (Karen Hamaker-Zondag)

(2) The planet ruling the sign on the house cusp really wants to help out the affairs of that house. Whether it can do so effectively or weakly depends upon the house ruler's own situation. (Demetra George)

So, for example, to get a better handle on your money, look at the ruler of the second house. If it's in the 10th, you are most likely to make money through your career. If it's in the 8th house, maybe through investments. If the ruler is Saturn, and Saturn squares Pluto, watch out for bankruptcy. If it's a domiciled Jupiter trine Mercury, lucky you.
 

waybread

Well-known member
If I understand you correctly your belief is that astrology is a spiritual science in of it self but that there are false methods and teachings that fogs the perception of our collective consciousness about this fact?

I wouldn't call astrology a "science." Having worked around actual scientists during my career, I don't find much that is scientific about astrology. (Empirical, in part; but not scientific.) I do see astrology primarily as a system of divination. Divination does have the same root as "divine" and in past centuries astrologers would pray to their god (or God) to aid them in their interpretation. I don't know how many astrologers would do that today.

There are different schools of thought or practice concerning astrology. Some of these are very old, yet they give different results. (Cf. Vedic vs. modern western astrology.) My feeling is that if they give accurate interpretive results, then one isn't false and another correct, but that they simply operate by different rules.

But astrology does have rules and principles. In this way, it is like an academic subject. A student wouldn't walk into an economics class and expect the professor to make up theories and data about economics as she went along. There is a deposit of information and principles that appear in textbooks, for example. You would get a different sort of course, however, if it were taught by a Marxist or a Libertarian.

If someone wants to make up a new way of doing astrology, then I think it is incumbent upon him to show that it gives accurate interpretations. If he can do that, fine.

I just happen to find the sign-house conflation to be unhelpful, compared with some of the slightly more sophisticated methods out there on sign-house interactions, like house cusp rulers (lords.) Aspects have a major effect on the affairs of a house, as well.
 

david starling

Well-known member
Well, yeah, David. I don't accept this in its entirety.

We sometimes learn of beginning astrologers getting just overwhelmed by the mass of detailed data (12 signs x 12 houses x 10 modern planets, not counting aspects and sensitive points.) And which of us has not felt that way? You sometimes see experts who don't like asteroids because one cannot possibly deal with all 20,000-plus for which we have ephemerides, some of them the size of a baseball. How many of us have mastered fixed stars?

My feeling is, that astrology is complex. Let's get used to it. Trying to over-simplify astrology in order to cope with its complexity just doesn't help us once the training wheels come off, IMO.

I don't have a problem in seeing Aries as sign #1. That idea has been around ever since Hellenistic astrologers decided that (a) you had to start somewhere in a "circular" map of the heavens; and (b) spring in the northern hemisphere had some seasonal correlations with new beginnings.

Where I have a problem is in assuming that sign number one and house number one mean much the same thing. They do not.

There is no question of compatibility or incompatibility of signs and houses. They fall where they might, and have done so every since their ancient invention. We only find them incompatible if we are so used to defining them according to one another's attributes that we lose sight of their core meanings.

Once we begin to read charts in an even moderately classical way, this just doesn't hold up.

So Aries is the cardinal fire sign, ruled by Mars. The first house gives your outward personality and body. If you have Virgo rising with Venus in the first house, you are not going to come across as Arian, fiery, or martial. So what good is saying that the first sign is much like the first house?

Or take the 7th house. It rules committed partnerships such as marriage, but also open enemies and litigation. If you have an Aries sun and Mars in this house, notably with hard oppositions to Mars, you might come across as extremely confrontational; not as the gracious, diplomatic, indecisive Libra.

Where the astrology-by-the-numbers really gets ******* up is with books or articles that delineate "Venus in Aquarius or in the 11th house," or "Jupiter in Virgo or in the 6th house" as though it made no difference which was which.

In these examples, what happens if you have Venus in Aquarius but it's in the 8th house? Do we then flip to the page on "Venus in Scorpio or in the 8th house?" Well, Scorpio and Aquarius are very different signs, and the 8th and 11th houses don't mean the same thing at all. Then suppose the person has Virgo rising and Aquarius on the 6th house cusp. Again, the 1st and the 6th mean something very different, just as Virgo and Aquarius are not to be confused. Then with Aquarius on the 6th house cusp, does this loop us back to the 11th? But it's already spoken for with an 8th house emphasis. Or is it?

Crazy-making, no?

I'm totally confused by this approach, maybe you are not!

All right, Venus in Aquarius--since Venus rules both an Air-sign and a Fixed-sign, I consider it "well-placed" in Fixed-air Aquarius.,But, neither Sign ruled by Venus is a Water-sign, and H8 is most compatible with Water-signs, Scorpio in particular. And, since Scorpio is the opposite Sign to Taurus, in this case the Fixed-sign compatibility of H8 is cancelled out, and therefore Venus in Aquarius in H8 is "weak", in that Area of Life. But, H11 is ideal for the transmission of Aquarian qualities to ANY Planet located in Aquarius, making Venus in Aquarius "strong" in that Area of Life, especially because Venus is well-placed in Aquarius. H8 is ideal for the transmission of Scorpionic qualities to ANY Planet, but Venus isn't a good match for Scorpio. So, Venus in Scorpio in H8 loses something in the translation, and isn't a "strong" influence in that Area of Life, even though it's in "Scorpio's House".
I'm using the numbering pattern, along with Sign-rulership and Elements+Modalities. I see same-Modality as an indication of compatibility between a Sign and the Sign(s) a Planet rules, except for opposites. (It's a different situation from Aspects, where 2 Planets in same-Modality Signs are Squared.)
Just to be clear, the numbering pattern DOES NOT require that a Planet in a Sign be considered in any way the "same thing" as that Planet in a House. But, you're right--people are (unfortunately) conflating them. I see it as two separate issues: 1) How well-matched is the Planet to the Sign it's in?; and, 2) How well-matched is the Sign it's in to the House it's in? Definitely not a Traditional approach! For example, in this paradigm, Saturn in Pisces would NOT "find Joy" in H12--it would be struggling just to keep its head above Water! :lol:
 
Last edited:

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
In very simple words the sign is the land and the planet is the car.
The car always moves around.
Many times we have to drive through a specific zone (land), which may be own by one or two people
(for instance Pisces = Jupiter & Neptune).
If you are driving in New York City you have to respect the law of that city (speed limits, etc.).
For this reason, a planet always works under sign influences.
Good point well made
All right, Venus in Aquarius
--since Venus rules both an Air-sign and a Fixed-sign, I consider it "well-placed" in Fixed-air Aquarius.,
But, neither Sign ruled by Venus is a Water-sign,
and H8 is most compatible with Water-signs, Scorpio in particular.
And, since Scorpio is the opposite Sign to Taurus,
in this case the Fixed-sign compatibility of H8 is cancelled out,
and therefore Venus in Aquarius in H8 is "weak", in that Area of Life.
But, H11 is ideal for the transmission of Aquarian qualities to ANY Planet located in Aquarius,
making Venus in Aquarius "strong" in that Area of Life, especially because Venus is well-placed in Aquarius.
H8 is ideal for the transmission of Scorpionic qualities to ANY Planet,
but Venus isn't a good match for Scorpio.
So, Venus in Scorpio in H8 loses something in the translation,
and isn't a "strong" influence in that Area of Life, even though it's in "Scorpio's House".

I'm using the numbering pattern, along with Sign-rulership and Elements+Modalities.
I see same-Modality as an indication of compatibility between a Sign and the Sign(s) a Planet rules, except for opposites.
(It's a different situation from Aspects, where 2 Planets in same-Modality Signs are Squared.)


Just to be clear, the numbering pattern DOES NOT require that a Planet in a Sign
be considered in any way the "same thing" as that Planet in a House.

But,

you're right--people are (unfortunately) conflating them.

I see it as two separate issues:

1) How well-matched is the Planet to the Sign it's in?;

and,

2) How well-matched is the Sign it's in to the House it's in?

Definitely not a Traditional approach!
On the contrary :smile:
Traditionally, planetary DIGNITY analyses in detail how well-matched PLANET is to SIGN

and then
the the strength of a planet to act is dependent on how well-matched to SIGN


i.e.
as I mentioned

It is important that the VEHICLE suits the TERRAIN
for example
when driving in a war zone a tank is a good plan
then switch to a
2008-2016 Toyota Land Cruiser for desert regions
then when crossing the seas or oceans a seaworthy boat is imperative

HOWEVER
neither a tank nor an ocean-going liner are appropriate transport for New York City streets :smile:
and so on

and
with the example offered below


For example, in this paradigm
Saturn in Pisces would NOT "find Joy" in H12
--it would be struggling just to keep its head above Water!
:lol:
Saturn "Joys" in Misery
and a
12th House Pisces Saturn "finds Joy" with MISERY of
"just struggling to keep its head above water"
 
Last edited:

david starling

Well-known member
Good point well made

On the contrary :smile:
Traditionally, planetary DIGNITY analyses in detail how well-matched PLANET is to SIGN

and then
the the strength of a planet to act is dependent on how well-matched to SIGN


i.e.
as I mentioned

It is important that the VEHICLE suits the TERRAIN
for example
when driving in a war zone a tank is a good plan
then switch to a
2008-2016 Toyota Land Cruiser for desert regions
then when crossing the seas or oceans a seaworthy boat is imperative

HOWEVER
neither a tank nor an ocean-going liner are appropriate transport for New York City streets :smile:
and so on

and
with the example offered below


Saturn "Joys" in Misery
and a
12th House Pisces Saturn "finds Joy" with MISERY of
"just struggling to keep its head above water"

Yes, I meant this is a MODERN way of assigning the equivalent of Traditional "Dignities and Disabilities" using Modern Sign-rulership and the Sign/House numbering matchups including Elements and Modalities. Assessment of a Planet's ability to act is, as you say, a very important feature of Traditional-astrology. Psychological-astrologers should take note of your assertion that Saturn is a sadomasochistic influence! How about Venus in latex and leather as Saturn's dominatrix!
 
Last edited:

david starling

Well-known member
I thought you said this was easy! ..Right? It's not easy, it's **** loopy. Just like life (if you're able to notice it). Inside a natal wheel every element sends you to another element that is connected to other elements and so on, and on, and on.. it never stops. And all the elements are connected and related. That's the circle of life, the zodiac, and then how could it be simple? From outside it looks so, you have 12 of this and that here and there, it's simple!, X means this and X1 means that, yey! Alright, that's all good and that's all true (and life is simple too aha)... but connect the pieces. How can you even make a reading without relating all the pieces? How you fail to see the similarities between signs and houses is beyond me. The examples you brought up made me wonder on the over simplistic ways YOU use to analyze wheels... do you really stop there? What's exactly the meaning of the 7th house, for the case of the Aries Sun and Mars in there that you brought up? Do you just overlook houses?

It's the function of Signs to IMPART qualities such as Element and Modality. It's the function of Houses to LOCATE the Area of Life wherein those qualities will be expressed by a Planet. So, for example, even a Stellium in H11, the House most compatible with Aquarius, won't impart Aquarian qualities to a Chart unless those Planets are actually IN Aquarius. If they are in Aquarius in H11, there is a STRONG Aquarian influence on the Chart. So, to answer the question of the Thread: No, House Positions DO NOT "equal" Sign Placements.
 

AppLeo

Well-known member
What's the different between:

Sun in the 10th house
Sun in Capricorn
Saturn in the 5th house
Saturn in Leo
Leo MC
Capricorn 5th house cusp
Sun conjunct Saturn
Sun opposite Saturn
Sun trine Saturn
Sun sextile Saturn

I think they're kind of all the same.

They all have the same hidden theme behind it. Which is a slow, but structured approach to creating happiness or achieving goals.
 
Last edited:

tripleooo

Well-known member
What's the different between:

Sun in the 10th house
Sun in Capricorn
Saturn in the 5th house
Saturn in Leo
Leo MC
Capricorn 5th house cusp
Sun conjunct Saturn
Sun opposite Saturn
Sun trine Saturn
Sun sextile Saturn

I think they're kind of all the same.

They all have the same hidden theme behind it. Which is a slow, but structured approach to creating happiness or achieving goals.

My understanding of it:

Sun in the 10th house – you receive your general life energy through work and productive actions.

Sun in Capricorn – your opinion of yourself is realistic, organized, well-structured and serious.

Saturn in the 5th house – you might experience difficulties with being fun and creative.

Saturn in Leo – the more serious and responsible part of yourself is rather irresponsible and disorganized, you may acknowledge rules, but feel like you can sometimes get a pass if you really want to.

Leo MC – you always try to make your work creative and entertaining, though the position of the Sun should be taken into account.

Capricorn 5th house cusp – you take a structured and serious approach towards entertainment and fun, though the position of Saturn should be taken into account and overall I don’t think this placement will be very important on its own.

Sun conjunct Saturn – it’s hard for you to accept yourself for what you are and express your true abilities and talents, though the sign this conjunction takes place should be taken into account.

Sun opposite Saturn – whenever you try to express yourself, you feel a constant need to swing this back to find a balance between the side of you that requires organization and seriousness, you feel as if you can never express yourself responsibly and never be responsible creatively, though the signs this opposition takes place should be taken into account.

Sun trine Saturn – you have no trouble with being level-headed and creative at the same time, these qualities of you work in good synchronization with each other, though the signs this trine takes place should be taken into account.

Sun sextile Saturn – whenever you want to express yourself, you get supported and approved by the part of you that requires seriousness and responsibility, it works the other way too, though the signs this sextile takes place should be taken into account.

So no, in my opinion they're not really the same. There is a similar theme, but it is always expressed differently.
 

waybread

Well-known member
All right, Venus in Aquarius--since Venus rules both an Air-sign and a Fixed-sign, I consider it "well-placed" in Fixed-air Aquarius.,But, neither Sign ruled by Venus is a Water-sign, and H8 is most compatible with Water-signs, Scorpio in particular. And, since Scorpio is the opposite Sign to Taurus, in this case the Fixed-sign compatibility of H8 is cancelled out, and therefore Venus in Aquarius in H8 is "weak", in that Area of Life. But, H11 is ideal for the transmission of Aquarian qualities to ANY Planet located in Aquarius, making Venus in Aquarius "strong" in that Area of Life, especially because Venus is well-placed in Aquarius. H8 is ideal for the transmission of Scorpionic qualities to ANY Planet, but Venus isn't a good match for Scorpio. So, Venus in Scorpio in H8 loses something in the translation, and isn't a "strong" influence in that Area of Life, even though it's in "Scorpio's House".
I'm using the numbering pattern, along with Sign-rulership and Elements+Modalities. I see same-Modality as an indication of compatibility between a Sign and the Sign(s) a Planet rules, except for opposites. (It's a different situation from Aspects, where 2 Planets in same-Modality Signs are Squared.)
Just to be clear, the numbering pattern DOES NOT require that a Planet in a Sign be considered in any way the "same thing" as that Planet in a House. But, you're right--people are (unfortunately) conflating them. I see it as two separate issues: 1) How well-matched is the Planet to the Sign it's in?; and, 2) How well-matched is the Sign it's in to the House it's in? Definitely not a Traditional approach! For example, in this paradigm, Saturn in Pisces would NOT "find Joy" in H12--it would be struggling just to keep its head above Water! :lol:

David, this is just getting "curioser and curioser." It's OK to make up astrology as you go along, but then without a backlog of worked-out horoscopes, there is no rational reason to accept your novel system.

Each traditional planet except the luminaries rules two signs. Each of the signs has a different element and modality. But so what?

In classical astrology each planet is domiciled in two signs and exalted in one. That's 3 good sign placements. Each planet is in detriment in two signs and falls in one sign. That's a total of half of the zodiac with a definite judgement about their sign placement. With the other half of the zodiac you'd look at the other essential or accidental dignities (traditional) or aspects (modern) which are situational. Frankly, in modern astrology you might not consider any sign placement good or bad, just different.

So Venus in Aquarius is neither here nor there. It makes no difference at all what other signs Venus rules or what they're like. If you disagree, then please "show me the money" with some worked out nativities.

You've also made a leap of faith that the 8th house is "most compatible with water signs." The 4th, 8th, and 12th are sometimes nicknamed the "water houses," but this does not thereby indicate an affinity. Moreover, Pisces is not Scorpio.

I couldn't follow the rest of your analysis. It's getting way to complicated for me. What exactly do you see as the problem with textbook astrology, whether traditional or modern?

If it's not broken, why fix it?
 

AppLeo

Well-known member
My understanding of it:

Sun in the 10th house – you receive your general life energy through work and productive actions.

Sun in Capricorn – your opinion of yourself is realistic, organized, well-structured and serious.

Saturn in the 5th house – you might experience difficulties with being fun and creative.

Saturn in Leo – the more serious and responsible part of yourself is rather irresponsible and disorganized, you may acknowledge rules, but feel like you can sometimes get a pass if you really want to.

Leo MC – you always try to make your work creative and entertaining, though the position of the Sun should be taken into account.

Capricorn 5th house cusp – you take a structured and serious approach towards entertainment and fun, though the position of Saturn should be taken into account and overall I don’t think this placement will be very important on its own.

Sun conjunct Saturn – it’s hard for you to accept yourself for what you are and express your true abilities and talents, though the sign this conjunction takes place should be taken into account.

Sun opposite Saturn – whenever you try to express yourself, you feel a constant need to swing this back to find a balance between the side of you that requires organization and seriousness, you feel as if you can never express yourself responsibly and never be responsible creatively, though the signs this opposition takes place should be taken into account.

Sun trine Saturn – you have no trouble with being level-headed and creative at the same time, these qualities of you work in good synchronization with each other, though the signs this trine takes place should be taken into account.

Sun sextile Saturn – whenever you want to express yourself, you get supported and approved by the part of you that requires seriousness and responsibility, it works the other way too, though the signs this sextile takes place should be taken into account.

So no, in my opinion they're not really the same. There is a similar theme, but it is always expressed differently.

I forgot sun square saturn oops...

But I guess I see what you're saying.
 
Top