Triplicity question...

eternalautumn · May 12, 2010

I've been looking at the Morinus triplicity system as of late, which is:

Fire: Sun, Mars, Jupiter
Earth: Mercury, Saturn, Venus
Air: Saturn, Venus, Mercury
Water: Jupiter, Moon, Mars

My question is, should planets get "points" for being in triplicity when they are in domicile or exaltation? For example, Sun in Sagittarius should get triplicity points, but should it get them in Aries, where it is already exalted? Jupiter in Scorpio should get them, but not in Pisces, right? I might be missing the point but this seemed to jump out at me and I thought I would ask you all...

Frank · May 12, 2010

I'm not all that familar with exactly how Morinus does it, but when Lilly is counting points, they are cumulative. For example, Mercury in 25 degrees Virgo would get 5 points for Domicile, 4 points for Exaltation, and 2 points for Term - a grand total of 11 points.

In your examples, Lilly would give both Exaltation and Triplicity points (in a Diurnal chart) to Sun in Aries.

However, Lilly gives the Water Triplicity to Mars by both day and night (mitigates Mars' excessive hot and dry nature), so Jupiter wouldn't be consided the Triplicity ruler by Lilly. Of course, with the major differences between Lilly and Morinus, mileage varies widely in these contexts.

eternalautumn · May 12, 2010

Well, Morin didn't use terms or faces, but I do.

I'm wondering, should this be cumulative when it comes to whole sign rulership? Like, Mercury is exalted and domiciled in Virgo, in your example. Does it make sense to give it +5 and +4? Why not just +6? And if it has triplicity in that sign, why give it a whole 'nother +3? You see what I'm saying? Triplicity, domicile, and exaltation all deal with the whole sign, not a specific degree/s. So why should those points be the same as ones for specific degrees?

It's more complicated with Morin's system as the triplicities are based off rulership and exaltation. So that's why I'm thinking that maybe planets shouldn't get double points in those situations.

The thing is, in this system, for a planet to be in triplicity it has a 2/3 chance of being in domicile or exaltation. So why should it be counted twice?

Sorry to go on and on, but the more I write and think about it the more it makes sense to me...

Claire19 · May 12, 2010

eternalautumn said:
I've been looking at the Morinus triplicity system as of late, which is:

Fire: Sun, Mars, Jupiter
Earth: Mercury, Saturn, Venus
Air: Saturn, Venus, Mercury
Water: Jupiter, Moon, Mars

My question is, should planets get "points" for being in triplicity when they are in domicile or exaltation? For example, Sun in Sagittarius should get triplicity points, but should it get them in Aries, where it is already exalted? Jupiter in Scorpio should get them, but not in Pisces, right? I might be missing the point but this seemed to jump out at me and I thought I would ask you all...

Where are the powerful Neptune, Uranus and Pluto in all this??

Claire19 · May 12, 2010

Frank said:
I'm not all that familar with exactly how Morinus does it, but when Lilly is counting points, they are cumulative. For example, Mercury in 25 degrees Virgo would get 5 points for Domicile, 4 points for Exaltation, and 2 points for Term - a grand total of 11 points.

In your examples, Lilly would give both Exaltation and Triplicity points (in a Diurnal chart) to Sun in Aries.

However, Lilly gives the Water Triplicity to Mars by both day and night (mitigates Mars' excessive hot and dry nature), so Jupiter wouldn't be consided the Triplicity ruler by Lilly. Of course, with the major differences between Lilly and Morinus, mileage varies widely in these contexts.

What of the point system?? HOw does it influence us??? THe aspects to a particular planet and its placement give it the power.

eternalautumn · May 12, 2010

Claire19 said:
Where are the powerful Neptune, Uranus and Pluto in all this??

These planets were not known in ancient times, as I'm sure you know. They were not included in the scheme of essential dignity. Also, they are not visible to the naked eye, which is why modern practitioners of traditional astrology have not invented a new scheme of rulership including them, because most, if not all, ancient authors make sure to remind us that something that does not give off light (invisible to the human eye) has no power, astrologically speaking.

Claire19 said:
What of the point system?? HOw does it influence us??? THe aspects to a particular planet and its placement give it the power.

I really didn't want to turn this into a "basic learning thread", but here you go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triplicity
http://www.skyscript.co.uk/triplicities.html
http://cura.free.fr/decem/09simei.html

For a basic tutorial explaining dignities and debilities, look here:

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/dignities.html

Kaiousei no Senshi · May 12, 2010

I'm wondering, should this be cumulative when it comes to whole sign rulership? Like, Mercury is exalted and domiciled in Virgo, in your example. Does it make sense to give it +5 and +4? Why not just +6? And if it has triplicity in that sign, why give it a whole 'nother +3? You see what I'm saying? Triplicity, domicile, and exaltation all deal with the whole sign, not a specific degree/s. So why should those points be the same as ones for specific degrees?

Because the very nature of the point system is accumulative, which means they all get added together. I don't understand the differentiation between sign and degree rulership points and why you don't seem to hesitate on giving accumulative points for those. You also have to realize that the triplicities are circumstantial. They don't apply all the time. My Sun in Leo doesn't get Trip points because I was born at night.

So...I don't know what else to say.

eternalautumn · May 13, 2010

I didn't mention anything about how I specifically award points to degree based dignities. I'm thinking about doing the same thing with terms and decans as I'm considering doing here.

And, I kind of totally forgot about the day/night change. I feel stupid.

But what about participating rulers? I guess they would be the only problem then. Since they count day or night, and we can postulate that they are weaker rulers, should they get less points for being in triplicity, in this system?

*I apologize if I sound crazy or anything, but thinking and talking about all this helps me immensely. Also, I'm not a professional, so don't think I'm running off with all my "crazy ideas" and using them on hapless victims.*

Kaiousei no Senshi · May 13, 2010

I didn't mention anything about how I specifically award points to degree based dignities.

You didn't have to. You specifically asked about whole sign rulerships as opposed to degree rulerships, which implies that you only have problems giving cumulative points to diginites based on whole signs.

But what about participating rulers? I guess they would be the only problem then. Since they count day or night, and we can postulate that they are weaker rulers, should they get less points for being in triplicity, in this system?

I can't think of any author (on the top of my head, mind you) who mentions participating rulers getting dignity points for being in the triplicity they are participating in. I threw up a chart in Janus of when Saturn was in Leo and the program didn't give it points in either a day or night chart. But Janus probably follows Lilly, who didn't use participating rulers, so who knows.

eternalautumn · May 13, 2010

You didn't have to. You specifically asked about whole sign rulerships as opposed to degree rulerships, which implies that you only have problems giving cumulative points to diginites based on whole signs.

No, it implies that I wasn't thinking of or asking about degree rulerships at that time. I don't think you're any more psychic than I am...

I can't think of any author (on the top of my head, mind you) who mentions participating rulers getting dignity points for being in the triplicity they are participating in. I threw up a chart in Janus of when Saturn was in Leo and the program didn't give it points in either a day or night chart. But Janus probably follows Lilly, who didn't use participating rulers, so who knows.

Then why have participating rulers in the first place? I will look for some sources and report back here.

eternalautumn · May 13, 2010

Well, I found this interesting discussion over at Skyscript:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2395

And, this extremely informative article by Steven Birchfield:

http://www.astrologiamedieval.com/Triplicities.htm

After closely studying the historical record of how the ancients used the triplicity rulers, I am not so sure Lilly’s definition is correct. With the exception of perhaps Ptolemy, the ancients considered all of the triplicity rulers fortunate when in their triplicities. The sect of the chart had nothing to do with whether or not a ruler had dignity! A good example of this is in Mâshâ’allâh’s text, “On Conjunctions, Religions, and Peoples”. The chart Mâshâ’allâh is interpreting is of the Great Conjunction indicating the shift in triplicities for the deluge (the great biblical flood).

So, is sect important? Should we beware as Lilly warns? There is no support for this in the record, where regardless of sect, the rulers all contributed their virtue to a chart. Neither is there support for this in the man who most influenced the return of Astrology to Europe in the middle ages, Guido Bonatti.

My conclusion based on the weight of evidence leads me to say that with all due respect, Mr. Lilly here has made a mistake in his understanding of the Triplicity Rulers. As I said in my foreword to the minor dignities, «…understanding the signification of these dignities helps us to understand the essential nature of those dignities».

Claire19 · May 14, 2010

Kaiousei no Senshi said:
You didn't have to. You specifically asked about whole sign rulerships as opposed to degree rulerships, which implies that you only have problems giving cumulative points to diginites based on whole signs.

I can't think of any author (on the top of my head, mind you) who mentions participating rulers getting dignity points for being in the triplicity they are participating in. I threw up a chart in Janus of when Saturn was in Leo and the program didn't give it points in either a day or night chart. But Janus probably follows Lilly, who didn't use participating rulers, so who knows.

Exactly my point. Giving points does not aid in any way interpretation of charts.....

Claire19 · May 14, 2010

eternalautumn said:
These planets were not known in ancient times, as I'm sure you know. They were not included in the scheme of essential dignity. Also, they are not visible to the naked eye, which is why modern practitioners of traditional astrology have not invented a new scheme of rulership including them, because most, if not all, ancient authors make sure to remind us that something that does not give off light (invisible to the human eye) has no power, astrologically speaking. 12 signs and 12 planets. That one planet rules two signs is just not right in many eyes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triplicity
http://www.skyscript.co.uk/triplicities.html
http://cura.free.fr/decem/09simei.html

For a basic tutorial explaining dignities and debilities, look here:

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/dignities.html

I dont need any tutorial and am a modern astrologer. However there were periods in ancient times when the outer planets were known and models have been found with all the planets depicted with perhaps slightly different names. It is only the limited knowledge of some astrologers that had no awareness of the powerful outer planets that have constructed that premise.

Kaiousei no Senshi · May 14, 2010

Exactly my point. Giving points does not aid in any way interpretation of charts.....

It does though. The points attributed to a planet show how powerful that planet is and how likely it is to manifest what it promises. Planets with low scores aren't likely to do this, while planets with high scores are.

I dont need any tutorial and am a modern astrologer. However there were periods in ancient times when the outer planets were known and models have been found with all the planets depicted with perhaps slightly different names. It is only the limited knowledge of some astrologers that had no awareness of the powerful outer planets that have constructed that premise.

That's actually not true, but I would be interested in reading your sources for this.

It might be a very enlightening read.

Claire19 · May 14, 2010

Kaiousei no Senshi said:
It does though. The points attributed to a planet show how powerful that planet is and how likely it is to manifest what it promises. Planets with low scores aren't likely to do this, while planets with high scores are.

That's actually not true, but I would be interested in reading your sources for this. It might be a very enlightening read.

What?? No knowledge of the outer planets you mean??? You can research material for yourself and in the times of Jesus for instance they were known. THe Essenes had knowledge as well as powerful telescopes. I think we have to keep our minds open and realise that ancient doesnt mean ignorant. A lot of astrological knowledge has only been re-discovered.

YOu can find evidence of a copper model of the solar system with centrifugal force and all the planet orbitting.
This was in a library in Egypt and has been there on exhibition. There is also a planet on the outer reaches called Juna. I will try find that link.

eternalautumn · May 14, 2010

First, why was the name of my thread changed? If I wanted to put "traditional astrology" in the title I would have done it myself...

I dont need any tutorial and am a modern astrologer. However there were periods in ancient times when the outer planets were known and models have been found with all the planets depicted with perhaps slightly different names. It is only the limited knowledge of some astrologers that had no awareness of the powerful outer planets that have constructed that premise.

Prove it.

wilsontc · May 14, 2010

title change, to autumn

autumn,

You said:

eternalautumn said:
These planets were not known in ancient times, as I'm sure you know. They were not included in the scheme of essential dignity...ancient authors make sure to remind us that something that does not give off light (invisible to the human eye) has no power, astrologically speaking.

I changed the title to include "traditional astrology". If that was not your intention to have a traditional astrology thread, I apologize for the misunderstanding and intervention. This post of yours in particular that mentions "ancient times" and "ancient authors" seemed to me to indicate you intended your thread to be focused on traditional astrology. So I changed the title to indicate that this thread is about traditional astrological questions and is not focused on modern astrology issues (such as using the outer planets Uranus, Neptune, or Pluto). That way it would hopefully attract more traditional astrologers to give their thoughts on this issue.

Trying to help,

Tim

eternalautumn · May 15, 2010

Re: title change, to autumn

Yes, that post in particular mentioned those things, because Claire19 questioned my omittance of any triplicity schemes that included the modern outer planets. I don't know of any, and she hasn't shared any of her knowledge on the topic, but that is not to say that there are none in existence. Just none that I know of.

Just the name "Triplicity question..." should be enough because no astrologer practicing "modern" or "psychological" astrology, that I know of, uses the triplicities in their delineation. They are a traditional form of rulership that is mostly known only to horarists. I appreciate you trying to help, but now the title just looks tacky, and I'd appreciate it if you would change it back. Thanks. :smile:

nordicsoul · Mar 25, 2011

eternalautumn said:
Well, Morin didn't use terms or faces, but I do.

I'm wondering, should this be cumulative when it comes to whole sign rulership? Like, Mercury is exalted and domiciled in Virgo, in your example. Does it make sense to give it +5 and +4? Why not just +6? And if it has triplicity in that sign, why give it a whole 'nother +3? You see what I'm saying? Triplicity, domicile, and exaltation all deal with the whole sign, not a specific degree/s. So why should those points be the same as ones for specific degrees?

It's more complicated with Morin's system as the triplicities are based off rulership and exaltation. So that's why I'm thinking that maybe planets shouldn't get double points in those situations.

The thing is, in this system, for a planet to be in triplicity it has a 2/3 chance of being in domicile or exaltation. So why should it be counted twice?

Sorry to go on and on, but the more I write and think about it the more it makes sense to me...

acording to moring (see book 18 strengh of the planets) you should NOT add points when they are already included in an exalted or domicile. it would be a double count.

nordicsoul · Mar 25, 2011

Frank said:
I'm not all that familar with exactly how Morinus does it, but when Lilly is counting points, they are cumulative. For example, Mercury in 25 degrees Virgo would get 5 points for Domicile, 4 points for Exaltation, and 2 points for Term - a grand total of 11 points.

In your examples, Lilly would give both Exaltation and Triplicity points (in a Diurnal chart) to Sun in Aries.

However, Lilly gives the Water Triplicity to Mars by both day and night (mitigates Mars' excessive hot and dry nature), so Jupiter wouldn't be consided the Triplicity ruler by Lilly. Of course, with the major differences between Lilly and Morinus, mileage varies widely in these contexts.

I wonder about mars in cancer. it is in fall, so you take -5 points? but... it has water triplicity, so I should add 3 points. it will be -2 points right?

Triplicity question...

eternalautumn

Frank

Well-known member

eternalautumn

Claire19

Well-known member

Claire19

Well-known member

eternalautumn

Kaiousei no Senshi

eternalautumn

Kaiousei no Senshi

eternalautumn

eternalautumn

Claire19

Well-known member

Claire19

Well-known member

Kaiousei no Senshi

Claire19

Well-known member

eternalautumn

wilsontc

eternalautumn

nordicsoul

Member

nordicsoul

Member