If you believe that Mercury, the planet of intellect, must bode well for the intellect in its own domiciles, Gemini and Virgo, then you are mistaken. The delineation of intellectual prowess is a matter that goes far beyond the sign placement of Mercury. Additionally, many ancient astrologers considered Mercury in a mutable sign, especially one of its own domiciles, to have a destabilizing effect on the mind. This is in contrast to what one may assume based on the level of “dignity” of Mercury in its own domicile.
Due to an over-reliance on sign-based dignity in delineation, there is a trend among today’s traditional astrologers to consider a planet in its own domicile as signifying that the natural significations of the planet are strong and beneficial. In the case of Mercury in its own domicile, it would have a dignity score of at least +8 by the most common scoring methods. By such an approach, the natural significations of Mercury in relation to the intellect, communication, cleverness, and quickness would all be accentuated in a beneficial way.
Dignity isn’t Dignified
For those who don’t know, I’m a strong critic of the over-reliance on dignity in traditional circles for matters of the strength and goodness of a planet. I do use “dignity” for rulership, pertinence, and various qualitative considerations including a type of prototypicality (a type of strength). However, I have made it a point to speak out against the use of dignity as a chief strength consideration, and especially for any matter of goodness, benefit, or “dignity” in the dictionary sense.
I completely avoid the use of dignity in that manner in my own work on the blog. I also frequently engage in polemics about the idiocy of heavy reliance on dignity. For instance, I’ve discussed the dignity problem in “The Curious Case of Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Turner” (and its sequel) and “Dignity: The Biggest Problem with Late Traditional Astrology“. Here I look at one particularly cogent error of the dignity approach, the belief that Mercury, the natural significator of the rationalizing mind, bodes well for the intellect in the signs where it is most dignified, its domiciles Virgo and Gemini.
Mercury in Virgo or Gemini Can Be An Indication of a Small Intellect
Both Masha’allah (On Nativities, c.f. Dykes trans., 2008, Section 5) and Abu’ali al-Khayyat (The Judgment of Nativities, c.f. Dykes trans., 2009, Ch. 5) discussed the signification of Mercury for thought and speech. One factor examined is its occurrence in sign of different quadruplicities. Signs come in three flavors of quadruplicity, cardinal (aka moveable/changeable), fixed (aka solid), or mutable (aka common). The “quad” in quadruplicity comes from the fact that there are 4 signs in each group.
Their comments take place in their discussion of delineating character, mind, and will in the chart. For that type of delineation, they both rely heavily upon the lord of the Ascendant and Mercury. Mercury indicates the manner of speaking (and also of intellect, to at least Abu’ali).
They seem to agree that Mercury in a cardinal sign (Aries, Cancer, Libra, Capricorn) indicates an enthusiasm, fast grasp of things, and even skill in speech. Mercury in a fixed sign (Taurus, Leo, Scorpio, Aquarius) indicates a deeper more serious search for truth and a giver of good advice. However, Mercury in a mutable sign, which includes Virgo and Gemini as well as Sagittarius and Pisces, is indicative of a small intellect quick to anger and slow to understand. Additionally, Abu Bakr, in a passage pertaining to indications of quickness to rage, noted Mercury in one of his own domiciles as an indication of instability. These passages are summarized below.
Mercury through the Quadruplicities
Mercury in a Cardinal/Moveable Sign (Aries, Cancer, Libra, Capricorn)
Masha’allah said, “…strong and in a moveable sign, it indicates he has a good way of speaking, and an honored one, and one fearing God” (Dykes, 2008, Section 5, p. 398). On Mercury in a cardinal sign, Abu’ali said, “…it signifies the intellect’s loftiness, easy grasp [of things], and [its] beauty, and love of the sciences, and religion” (Dykes, 2009, Ch. 5, p. 236).
Mercury in a Fixed/Solid Sign (Taurus, Leo, Scorpio, Aquarius)
Masha’allah said, “…it indicates he is going to be honored, and by means of truth and goodness and counsel in his life, and his advice will be most truthful in every way, and will free hindered advice from hindrances” (Dykes, 2008, Section 5, p. 398). On Mercury in a fixed sign, Abu’ali said, “…it signifies prudence, constancy, mercy [or pity], and the fulfillment of things undertaken” (Dykes, 2009, Ch. 5, p. 236).
Mercury in a Mutable/Common Sign (Gemini, Virgo, Sagittarius, Pisces)
Masha’allah said, “…it indicates he has little wisdom, and is liable to anger, and as a rule he does not believe the advice of another” (Dykes, 2008, Section 5, p. 398). On Mercury in a mutable sign, Abu’ali said, “…it signifies a small intellect with great speediness, and quickness to anger, and a scarce and small stability or perseverance in something undertaken, or advice, or business” (Dykes, 2009, Ch. 5, p. 236). Additionally, Abu Bakr noted, “If Mercury were in his own domicile, the native will be fearful and unsound” (Dykes, 2010, On Nativities, Book II, Ch. 1.2, p. 143).
Not Just About Mercury
The delineation of intellectual strength is not something to be taken lightly. Intellect cannot be delineated based on the quadruplicity of Mercury’s sign placement alone. Many of the quotes above were said to pertain to both Mercury and the Lord of the Ascendant, as both were relevant concerning the character. Additionally, the approach is based strongly on Ptolemy (2nd century) who also emphasized the quadruplicity of the significant personality factors. However, Ptolemy’s main factors were the Moon and Mercury (rather than Asc Lord and Mercury). In what follows, “solstitial” means cardinal and “bicoporeal” means mutable.
Of the signs of the zodiac in general, then, the solstitial signs produce souls fitted for dealing with the people, fond of turbulence and political activity, glory-seeking, moreover, and attentive to the gods, noble, mobile, inquisitive, inventive, good at conjecture, and fitted for astrology and divination. The bicorporeal signs make souls complex, changeable, hard to apprehend, light, unstable, fickle, amorous, versatile, fond of music, lazy, easily acquisitive, prone to change their minds. The solid signs make them just, unaffected by flattery, persistent, firm, intelligent, patient, industrious, stern, self-controlled, tenacious of grudges, extortionate, contentious, ambitious, factious, grasping, hard, inflexible. (Ptolemy, Book III, Ch. 13, Robbins trans., p. 335)
Quadruplicity is just one consideration, and a thorough consideration of quadruplicity should involve looking at the quadruplicity of not only Mercury, but also its twelfth-part, the Ascendant, the Ascendant lord, the Moon, and the Lot of Spirit. There have been great geniuses born with Mercury in each of the signs. Consider the following individuals with Mercury in mutable signs:
Gemini: Nikola Tesla, Karl Marx, Jean-Paul Sartre, etc.
Virgo: Leo Tolstoy, Howard Hughes, Claude Debussy, George Soros, etc.
Sagittarius: Isaac Newton, Noam Chomsky, Benoit Mandelbrot, etc.
Pisces: Copernicus, Bach, Charles Darwin, Thomas Jefferson. etc.
The Benefits of Mercury in Detriment or Fall
Many traditional astrologers today associate Mercury in detriment or fall with a “debilitated Mercury”. This debility means that Mercury is not able to express its true nature, being weakened by the contrary sign and overall less fortunate. However, Mercury is in detriment or fall when it is in one of the signs of Jupiter, the greater benefic. Rulership by Jupiter at least links Mercury with wisdom, philosophy and/or religion, and the search for greater truth. Rulership by Jupiter also links Mercury with gain and fortune.
Noam Chomsky and Christopher Hirata (child prodigy with a very high IQ who started work with NASA when 16), both have Mercury in Sagittarius. Both also have Mercury combust the Sun in Sagittarius, not regarded by its ruler Jupiter, but conjunct an angle and in a stake, with strong identification with Mercury as it is either in the first or ruling the first house in both charts. Copernicus too had Mercury ruled by Jupiter, this time in Pisces. Mercury is again with the Sun in a stake, with Mercury ruling the first house (Virgo), though he has Jupiter regarding Mercury.
In these cases, we see that the other factors are more important than dignity, quadruplicity, reception, and combustion. The link of Mercury with Jupiter by rulership, the prominence of Mercury by advancement, and the identification with Mercury shown through some important rulership of the Ascendant and/or position in the stakes are more important indications of notable intellectual prowess. Note that Mercury with the Sun may show additional public importance.
Traditional Emphasis
What is significant is that Mercury in a mutable sign, especially Mercury in its own domicile, was ever considered an indication of a weaker, more superficial, or more unstable intellect. It is also interesting that Mercury was given a relatively similar signification in all the mutable signs. These signs range from those where Mercury has negative dignity by scoring methods to those with very positive dignity.
This historic fact indicates that “dignity” was much less emphasized than it is today, while other sign features like quadruplicity were more emphasized, at least among some ancient astrologers. Today, dignity is too often treated as an over-riding factor for strength and benefit associated with a planet. In truth, it is just a planet ruling itself, one that’s become a little bit more hyper-prototypical and less tied to other planets. In the case of Mercury, this may not be a good thing.
Mercury’s Mercurial Enough
Mercury, as a significator of intellect and speech, moves from place to place and constantly connects things. It is like the syntax of language, chaining complex ideas together. Similarly, mutable signs are associated with back-and-forth between two things or parties. It would seem that a mutable sign accentuates the instability of Mercury, rather than directing it and stabilizing it. Furthermore, when he’s just working for himself, so to speak, Mercury is even more unstable. This seems to be particularly so in Gemini, which is additionally an air sign, accentuating the flitting quality of Mercury.
In my experience, I find Mercury’s quadruplicity to be a weaker indication of intellectual strength or its lack. I may address the delineation of intellect at greater depth in a future article. The main idea here is that Mercury in its own signs may be a counter-indication of intellectual strength. For this reason, and many more, we should not over-rely on the concept of dignity for strength or benefit.
Personal Note: Mercury in Fall
On a personal note, my daughter’s early and articulate language use has impressed me. She has Mercury in Pisces and combust, within 3 degrees of the Sun, though strongly advancing and in the 5th. Additionally, four of her seven planets are in Air signs, including a Gemini Moon. Jupiter, the ruler of Mercury, is cadent and retreating in the 12th, so it does not aspect Mercury. She was fluid and articulate in her speech from when she first began to speak. She has always been ahead of the curve both linguistically and mathematically. Teachers have raved to me about the depth of her story-telling and social abilities. She tells her stories with an unusual amount of detail and is not afraid to use big words.
Conclusion
My hope is that this article forces many astrologers to question their assumptions about dignity. A sign’s influence on the significations of a planet are more complex than dignity scoring would have one believe. The quadruplicity, triplicity, and nature of the ruler of a sign are important considerations. They can be obscured in an approach that emphasizes dignity. Additionally, the delineation of any matter, including the manner of speech and thought, involves more than just sign placement, and should involve multiple relevant factors.
This article was thoroughly edited and updated in late October of 2018 with additional content intended to clarify the main points.
Featured Image
Mercury with Fig Leaf (cropped) by Sputnikcccp at en.wikipedia. Photo taken by Sputnikcccp in the Vatican, May 25, 2003. (Transferred from en.wikipedia) [GFDL, GFDL or CC-BY-SA-3.0], from Wikimedia Commons
References
al-Tabari, U., & al-Hasib, A. B. (2010). Persian Nativities II: ’Umar al-Tabari and Abu Bakr. (B. N. Dykes, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: The Cazimi Press.
Bishr, S. ibn, & Masha’allah. (2008). Works of Sahl & Masha’allah. (B. N. Dykes, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: The Cazimi Press.
Masha’allah, & al-Khayyat, A. ’Ali. (2009). Persian Nativities I: Masha’allah and Abu ’Ali. (B. N. Dykes, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: The Cazimi Press.
In the polemical “The Curious Case of Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Turner“, I showed how dignity is not a good indicator of a planet’s tendency towards more positive or negative significations. The charts of Jeffrey Dahmer (4 planets in domicile) and Ted Turner (4 planets in fall or detriment) are cogent reminders of how inaccurate the use of dignity for beneficence can be. However, the question remains as to how one should judge beneficence and loftiness of character (moral disposition) and social status (eminence).
The delineation of character, morality, and eminence is complex. Of those, character is the easiest. Traditional methods will tell you far more in regards to character than modern psychological astrology. Eminence is a much messier can of worms. In the application of eminence techniques, I often find more relevance in terms of social mobility, than in terms of a pre-ordained hierarchical “rank of fame”, as some traditionalists describe it. Eminence will be explored at some later time.
Character Basics
Ascendant Lords, Mercury, and Dominant Planets
Abu’ali on the Lord of the Ascendant and Mercury: “these signify the matters of the soul, and the morals of the native, just as the Moon and the Ascendant signify the body” (The Judgment of Nativities, Dykes trans., 2009, p. 236). Abu Bakr on the other hand has us look at dominant planets in the chart, particularly those in the 1st or 10th. This is similar in spirit to the “victor of the chart” approaches which were popular in the later middle ages. Ptolemy looks at Mercury for the rational mind and the Moon for the irrational, mirrored in the modern-day notion of a conscious and unconscious mind.
Overall, in character analysis, I find the Ascendant Lord(s) and the dominant planet(s) to be the most important starting points of the delineation. All of the rulers of the Ascendant are of some significance for character, as all are connected in some way with the individual themselves (signified by the Ascendant). Prominent planets in the chart are a strong influence upon the life, so their impact will be felt, but if they have no rulership of the Ascendant then there is not likely to be an identification with the planet.
Fixed Stars
Powerful fixed stars conjunct the Ascendant, MC, Moon, and Mercury are very influential upon the character but will not be dealt with much here. Suffice it to say that Dahmer has the very martial star Pollux on his MC which the author of The Book of Aristotle (initially believed to have been Masha’allah) associated with Mars and a wrathful violent temperament, especially by day (Masha’allah, Ch. III.2.1, Dykes trans., 2009, p. 79).
Lots
There are some lots which are also relevant to character, especially the Lot of Spirit (but others as well). I will not being exploring the lots here.
Planetary Strength
Rather than using all strength/weakness and beneficence/maleficence conditions at my disposal in the literature, I’m going to restrict myself to those I find most important. They are the same factors I used in the series on faith and were discussed in the first article of that series.
Personally, I recognize at least 3 distinct types of strength: prominence, stability, and pertinence.
Volume
Volume or prominence pertain to the extent that a planet pours out its natural significations. A prominent planet influences many areas of life in a strong way, not just those associated with the houses it occupies and rules. Prominence is shown by advancing/retreating, stations, phasis, and apogees.
Prototypicality
Prototypicality and stability are less important than prominence. They are shown by various conditions of congruity. These include sign-based dignity, the joys, and gender conditions, among others. Stability has various forms. A stable planet is likely to signify what it signifies consistently in life. A planet in a fixed sign is more stable than one in a mutable sign, and one in a cardinal sign is least stable of all. Dignity, especially domicile, makes a planet more consistent and stable in its indications (for better or worse) because it is its own ruler. A planet ruled by another planet of a contrary nature is less stable as it is influenced by the ruler.
Pertinence
Pertinence is the relevance of a planet to a particular matter. For intance, a planet in the 1st or one of its stakes (especially the 10th) is pertinent to the character of the person. When a planet or point naturally signifies something, is in a place, rules a place, or regards a place (especially by opposition or the right side), it becomes pertinent to a matter.
Strength is not beneficence or maleficence. The benefit or harm associated with an indication pertains more to natural signification, sect, place, and planetary influence.
Jeffrey Dahmer: Malefics through the Moon and Venus
I recommend watching this fascinatingly candid interview with Dahmer in which he discusses the impetus of his actions.
Rulers of the 1st
The ruler of the 1st was commonly used because it is pertinent to the character by way of the accidental signification of the 1st house as the house of the individual. It was used for character and moral disposition by Masha’allah in On Nativities, and Abu’ali in The Judgment of Nativities, among others.
Jeffrey Dahmer’s Natal Chart
8th House Venus Overcome by Saturn
Venus, a natural benefic, pertaining to beauty, sensuality, and pleasure is made malefic by being out of sect and in the 8th place. She is regarded on the right-side most closely by Saturn (by trine) in the 4th. Saturn is the dominant planetary influence over Venus, as she is overcome by Saturn and in Saturn’s bound. The bound ruler of the Ascendant Lord is very important to Masha’allah in showing the native’s involvement in something. Saturn, planet of death and the macabre, is in the 4th which has significations related to the dead and buried things. Saturn, the 4th house, and the Saturn bound all reinforce the significations of death and harm of the 8th.
That Venus does not regard the Ascendant is significant. Venus is in a “dark” place. Venus puts the native in connection with hidden or dark elements of life. This in itself does not necessarily signify the native is immoral. It is common for instance for those involved in social reform, prisons, institutions, and so forth to have the ruler of the 1st in the 6th or 12th. Also, those involved in lending and insurance may have it in the 8th.
A Marriage of Saturn and Venus
The lack of aspect from Venus also prompts us to look more closely at the influence of other rulers of the Ascendant, especially Saturn. Saturn is the exaltation and first triplicity ruler. It is in the 4th, and retreating. Saturn’s retreat makes it less public and pervasive, but it is still very personally significant as it is in a stake. Saturn is in the bound of Venus, adding to the significant relationship between
Saturn and Venus. Saturn and Venus, and the 4th and 8th houses are central to characterizing the native’s personality. There is pleasure-seeking, associated with death and dirge, the macabre. Venus made bad, as an important personality significator, tends to pertain to shameless excess. Superficially, we would think that he’d seem gentle, possibly effeminate, somewhat depressive, and quite shy.
Malefic Venus, Alcohol, Sex, and Dead Things
In Dahmer’s case, the Venus tended toward abuse of alcohol (Venus as drinks, made malefic signifying intoxicants), compulsive indulgence, and difficult sexuality. He was considered a catch within the gay community and would manipulate men into positions where he could harm them. He would often drug his victims. His ultimate motivation was sexual attraction and a desire for sexual possession.
The associations of this Venus with death are very strong. Venus is not only in the 8th place of death, but is in a very close relationship with Saturn, lord of death and dead things.
Ages of Man and Developmental Venus
Venus becomes developmentally activated from the age of 14 to 22, roughly the ages of sexual development. During Dahmer’s adolescence he went from the Mercurial highly curious boy of Mercury in the 9th, to the withdrawn, secretive, Saturnine Venus in the 8th. This brought very vivid sexual fantasies of necrophilia.
Mercury
Mercury was used by many for the character and moral disposition, including Masha’allah, Abu’ali, and Ptolemy, among others.
Mutability and Confusion
Mercury is not necessarily strong for intellect in Virgo or Gemini. Mercury in a common (i.e. mutable) sign, such as Virgo or Gemini, was said to signify a small but quick intellect, liable to anger. It indicates an unstable mind, that has trouble with perseverance. This is in contrast to the extremely honorable intellect of Mercury in a fixed sign. It also differs from the confidence, quick grasp, enthusiasm, and good-speaking ability of Mercury in a moveable (i.e. cardinal) sign. This is a rather weak indication though, as there have been a number of great geniuses with Mercury in mutable signs (especially Sagittarius and Pisces as Jupiter connects gain to the intellect).
Out of Sect and Closely Aspected by Mars
Dahmer’s Mercury is out of sect, though in a somewhat good place (the 9th). It is applying to Mars, and scrutinized by Mars in a very close application in which Mars overcomes Mercury. There is a vast range with Mercury in terms of benefic thru malefic significations. Mercury is somewhat weakened though, particularly for intellectual activities from the mutability. There is also weakness due to its cadency and from combustion (it is under the Sun’s beams).
Deceitful Intentions
Dahmer was said to be a relatively good student as a youth. However, he didn’t pursue higher education and was not an intellectual. Overall, his intellectual abilities were capable enough to allow him to commit murder and cover his tracks over many years. He used his intellect in ways that were particularly maligned. His focus was on deceit, from drugging men at clubs to take advantage of them, to secretly raping, murdering, and even eating men. In a sense, the chart reveals Mercury to be most active as an accomplice of Mars, as it applies to Mars which overcomes it. Combustion may be signifying the way his intentions were kept “obscured”.
The Dominant Planet
The Setting Moon
The Moon happens to also be the dominant planet in the chart. She is strongly advancing in the same degree as the Descendant. Mars, Saturn, and to a much lesser extent, Jupiter, are also quite dominant by being in the stakes. However, the Moon is in a stake and generally strong, conjunct the angle.
The Moon is the planet signifying the irrational mind. This is the mind that later came to be called the subconscious. The Moon has an extremely strong influence in the life. It is as if she is broadcasting from a loudspeaker all over the life. This makes Dahmer particularly attuned to her very subjective, vivid, irrational influences.
Reflecting the Malefics
The Moon is co-present with Mars so her significations are mixed with Mars. According to Serapio, the planet in the earlier zodiacal degree is typically more influential when two planets are in the same sign (a type of overcoming). The Moon is also ruled by Mars so the Moon is strongly influenced by Mars.
The Moon is also in the bound of Mercury, but Saturn, which is dominating her from the 4th (within 3*) is a much more direct influence. Overall, the out of sect Moon is overwhelmed by the influences of Mars and Saturn. The irrational impulses are pulled along malefic violent and macabre dimensions.
Moon-Mars in the House of Partners
The Moon is in the 7th which pertains to encounters with others, especially romantic partners. Mars rules and occupies the place, while Saturn dominates the place. Both Mars and Saturn are in “stakes” and thus very strongly important to Dahmer. However, both are retreating, thus they are private, moving behind the scenes, avoiding any loud broadcasting of their significations. The Moon, in contrast, is blaring her peculiar lunar energy across the life. She is the vehicle through which Mars and Saturn find entrance into the life.
The Moon and Mom
Interestingly, some focal issues in Dahmer’s early life revolved around his mother’s anxiety and combativeness. This created a lot of stress in his home. His first murder happened just after high school at a time when his mother unexpectedly left him in the house alone for an extended period of time. The Mars-Moon has some symbolism regarding mental illness, particularly anxiety. His mother’s anxiety disorder is vividly symbolized as Mars shows an overload of energy. Mars-Moon also symbolizes Dahmer’s unconscious need (Moon) for violence (Mars) against partners (7th house).
Conclusion
Dahmer can be most strongly identified with a strong Venus-Saturn configuration between the 8th and 4th houses. A Venus made malefic showing a dark overly indulgent type. He was driven by a cold and macabre sense of sexuality and beauty.
Pulled by Venus into sensual indulgence, the strong lunar influence upon his life saw him embracing irrational impulses. The nature of the irrational mind and sense of beauty are colored predominantly by the malefics. Themes of violence and the macabre are particularly prominent.
The personality is overall phlegmatic and melancholic. He is somewhat feminine (through Venus), coolly frank (through Saturn), with a touch of joviality (through Jupiter).
Ted Turner: Aggressively Ambitious and Gregarious Mercury
Ruler of the 1st
A Very Benefic Jupiter
Jupiter is the ruler of the 1st and is the sect benefic. He is in the 3rd of siblings, communications, journalism, current events, and transportation. Jupiter naturally signifies a cheerful disposition, charisma, faith/positivity, and a desire to seek greater truth. He is natually benefic and here is also in sect and dominated by Venus. Therefore, this is a very gregarious and positive Jupiter indeed.
Ted Turner’s Natal Chart
A Connected and Choleric Jupiter
Jupiter is influenced by many planets. He is very closely dominated by the Sun, but also dominated by Venus, closely overcome by the Moon (trine), overcome by Mercury (sextile), and overcome by Mars (trine). Jupiter is in the bound of Mars and the domicile and triplicity of Saturn. Therefore, there is quite a lot going on with Jupiter, which is in a relationship with every planet in the chart.
Jupiter is most dominantly influenced by the Sun, then Mars, then Venus. In my opinion, this brings out a much more choleric or ambitious Jupiter but one with aesthetic dimensions. Jupiter is not particularly prominent (cadent, retreating). However, it is relevant to eminence through its close regard by the Lights. Its weakness is also counter-acted by the strong advance of Mars and Saturn, its rulers, in the chart.
The Popular Sibling
Overall, we expect a cheerful, gregarious, likable personality, but one a bit heated and geared toward power plays. He values style and sensuality. There is a particular connection to matters of communications and/or journalism (the 3rd).
The Dominant Planet
Mercury Rising
Mercury is the dominant planet in the chart. It’s strongly advancing towards the Ascendant and is in the 1st. Mercury is in its own bound, reinforcing Mercury’s natural significations relating to news and communications. It is also the natural significator of business and commerce and is in the sign of Jupiter.
Mercury is out of sect, and very closely overcome by Mars, so Mercury can pertain to malefic significations, despite position in the very good 1st place. There is a broad range of good and bad significations. Negative significations relevant to character are tied to Mars in the 11th of friends and popularity. This can pertain to a propensity for aggressive speech, words reflecting bad on one’s character or creating problems in friendships. It may even show deception. The most well-known manifestation in Turner’s life has been a propensity to put his foot in his mouth and make controversial public statements. There is both a Jupiterian casual humor and a bit of Mercury’s more mischievous side. Mars makes the mind very keen, intense, and aggressive. It may be difficult to turn off or control the chatter.
The Moon
The Moon is out of sect, in the bound of Mars, co-present with Mars, and opposed by Saturn. Therefore, the Moon can signify very difficult matters. The Moon is in the 11th, which is one of the most benefic places of the chart so there is a range, but the Moon can be difficult.
Overall the Moon is somewhat torn between the venusian Mars and the martial Saturn. Mars in Libra in the 11th showing an overt hot ambition, particularly for popularity, achievement, and sensual pleasure. Saturn showing heated obligations, restrictions, and responsibilities. The Moon, Mars, and Saturn are in the most benefic places in the chart, the 11th and 5th, but we expect difficulties in mental extremes from the malefics. There is a weight on a subconscious level and a choleric temperament of great restlessness. Most problematic from the influence of the malefics may be matters of friends, children, romance, and personal leisure.
Conclusion
Mercury plays a huge role in characterizing Ted Turner as someone constantly involved in media, analysis, and business. The role of Jupiter is also very strong and important to self-identification. Both are particularly choleric (ambitious, domineering).
We expect someone who is fast-thinking and busy. He is curious, mischievous, and aggressively ambitious, particularly when it comes to opinions, commerce, and technology. The identification with Jupiter bring an over-arching benefic sense to the personality of wanting to do good, help out, and expose truth.
The combination of Jupiter and Mercury makes for a very gregarious and humorous personality overall – a mix of the sanguine and the choleric. The tendency to domineering speech is shown by Mars overcoming Mercury and the sheer prominence of Mercury. However, as Mercury is in a mutable sign and ruled by a cadent retreating planet, there may be a tendency for more chatter than substance.
References
Masha’allah, & al-Khayyat, A. ’Ali. (2009). Persian Nativities I: Masha’allah and Abu ’Ali. (B. N. Dykes, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: The Cazimi Press.
Image Attribution
Cropped image of a derivative work by wikimedia user Zenman from an original image by user cliff1066. Image is of a mask by the Wee peoples, Côte d’Ivoire, Late 19th to mid-20th century.
There’s a lunar eclipse today. It seems like a good time to discuss the importance of solar and lunar phenomena in ancient mundane astrology. Honestly, despite my great interest in mundane astrology, I haven’t studied it thoroughly. Therefore, I avoid mundane prognostication.
I’m sure that if you search for “lunar eclipse December 10, 2011, astrology”, you’ll be inundated with mundane astrological predictions. I’m also pretty sure that most of the predictions will be vague and obvious. You’ll see people predict that some existing long-term crisis will be prolonged. You know, the type of crisis that always takes years to resolve anyway. 🙂
However, if you want to spot a change in the trends, then you should know the type of charts to look at. Let’s take a look at that.
Mundane Astrology
Mundane astrology is the study of astrological significations as they relate to the general world, including political, religious, cultural, and meteorological events. In many regards, there is simply a lack of high quality and clear Hellenistic and Persian mundane texts in English. By contrast, there are extensive works on natal astrology. Additionally, in the Persian medieval period, there is an outpouring of pivotal horary and electional material, but the mundane material is less pronounced.
Abu Ma’shar On the Great Conjunctions
Perhaps, the most comprehensive, and certainly the most influential, treatment of mundane astrology from the period that interests me (pre-1100 CE), came from Abu Ma’shar in the 9th Century CE. It is known as The Book of Religions and Dynasties, or On the Great Conjunctions, among many other names.
An English translation by Keiji Yamamoto and Charles Burnett was released in 2000. This translation can be a bit confusing, and at a price over $500 on Amazon, it can also be prohibitively expensive. College students should know that Texas A&M University has a copy available for inter-library loan.
This text should serve as something of a bible for traditionalists into mundane astrology, particularly for those who are fans of Abu Ma’shar. I’ve heard that Benjamin Dykes, who produces clearest and most thorough translations of ancient astrological texts available, has planned on translating the text at some point.
A 16th century Latin translation of Abu Ma’shar’s classic text of mundane astrology, On the Great Conjunctions.
Six Elements for Deducing Advanced Knowledge
One of the first issues that come up with mundane astrological work is deciding which charts matter most and how they fit together.
In Book I, Chapter 1, of The Book of Religions and Dynasties, Abu Ma’shar sets out the 6 levels of important mundane charts. These are hierarchically arranged in terms of the length of time for which they give significations. One of the more fascinating aspects of that exposition is that all of the charts are of lunar syzygies (New and Full Moons) and solar sign ingresses. The level of importance assigned to a specific ingress or syzygy pertains to its proximity in time to important phenomena. Here is the list of the six elements for deducing advanced knowledge (from Book I, Ch. 1, 12-21). You may find it helpful to use the handy tables of Jupiter-Saturn conjunctions and Mars-Saturn conjunctions supplied on Richard Nolle’s website.
1. Aries Ingress Preceding Great Conjunctionin Aries
A great conjunction is a conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn. Presumably, this is the first conjunction in Aries of the series in the fire triplicity. This occurs about every 960 years. The next 1st conjunction in Aries of the fire triplicity series would take place every 960 years ideally, but can actually be a much shorter or longer period. Currently, it’s the Aries Ingress of 1702.
2. Aries Ingress Preceding Great Conjunction in New Triplicity
Presumably, this is the 1st conjunction in a new triplicity marking the beginning of the series in that triplicity, even if there are one or two last bastion conjunctions after it in the series of the prior triplicity. This occurs about every 240 years. Again, it seems it could be applicable for quite a bit longer or shorter a period, depending on the particular length of time of the series. Currently, it’s the Aries Ingress of 1980 (great conjunction in air).
3. Aries Ingress Preceding Mars-Saturn Conjunction in Cancer
This occurs about every 30 years. Currently, it’s the Aries Ingress of 2004.
4. Aries Ingress Preceding a Great Conjunction
This occurs about every 20 years. Currently, it’s the Aries Ingress of 2000.
5. Three Quarterly Charts
A. Solar ingress into a cardinal sign (i.e. charts of the equinoxes and solstices – especially the Spring Equinox)
B. New Moon that precedes “A” (i.e. the New Moon preceding a equinox or solstice)
C. Full Moon that precedes “A” (i.e. the Full Moon that precedes the equinox or solstice)
The Aries ingress is the most significant of these and is the main chart used for predictions of the year.
6. Three Monthly Charts
A. Solar ingress into a new sign
B. New Moon
C. Full Moon
Typically B (new moon) was preferred when the lunation directly preceding the ingress was a New Moon, while C (Full Moon) was preferred when the lunation directly preceding the ingress was a Full Moon.
Solar Ingresses and Lunar Syzygies
This is the hierarchy of mundane charts presented by Ma’shar in Book 1. Many indications and predictive techniques, such as profections of the chart Ascendant, are derived from these charts for the relevant locations. There is much more to Ma’shar’s own mundane predictive system than just these charts, but this exposition gives a general sense of the fundamental role solar ingresses and lunar syzygies, including eclipses, played in traditional mundane astrology. Basically, all the mundane charts looked at were of one of these classes (i.e. either the moment of a sign ingress or the moment of a lunation).
Note on Mean Conjunctions and the Zodiac
Please note that I give the ingress chart date using the true conjunction in the tropical zodiac for each of the first four categories. However, many Persian astrologers (including Abu Ma’shar) used mean conjunctions and the sidereal zodiac instead. Mean conjunctions assume an idealized steady progression through the signs with a clean transition to each new triplicity, rather than the actual progression in which the length may vary. I feel strongly (and so did some medieval astrologers and most later astrologers) that the actual Jupiter-Saturn conjunctions in the tropical zodiac should be the point of reference.
References
Abu Ma’shar. (2000). Abu Ma’Sar on Historical Astrology: The Book of Religions and Dynasties on Great Conjunctions (Islamic Philosophy, Theology, and Science). (K. Yamamoto & C. Burnett, Trans.). Leiden and Boston: Brill Academic Publishers.
Image Attributions
Featured image of the painting Selene (1880) by Albert Aublet (cropped) is in the public domain.
Image of the 16th-century translation of Ma’shar’s On the Great Conjunctions is in the public domain.
It is my hope that the great heterogeneity among ancient astrologers is apparent on this blog. Ancient astrologers sometimes differed greatly in their preferred techniques and the way they employed them. This is especially so in the Hellenistic period, where we see even greater diversity than in the medieval period. I don’t adopt any single astrologer’s approach to reading a chart, but like to explore multiple approaches, compare and contrast them. Our job is to find the techniques that work best and point out those that seem less than promising.
However, there is a widespread misconception that the Hellenistic system is narrow. In this view Hellenistic astrology is a single system of techniques that is concise, simplistic, focally concerned with a person’s objective success/failure, and informed by a single deterministic philosophy.
The misconceptions are fed by both sides; those that would like to believe that Hellenistic astrology was that way, and those that dismiss Hellenistic astrology because they believe it was that way. I will explore this in greater depth in this and additional follow-up posts to my “Ancient Astrologers Didn’t All Agree” polemic. It needs to be addressed repeatedly and at length to overcome the hype frequently disseminated, both by marketers and detractors.
One Perspective Presented as the Perspective
The most succinct quick example of this misconception of a single homogeneous Hellenistic “system” or “paradigm” is from a Skyscript forum discussion. I stumbled upon a discussion, which you can view here, where the Hellenistic lord of the chart is discussed. This conversation is so illustrative of the problem on so many levels. I am not drawing attention to this conversation to put down the contributors on either side. It is a rather informal forum, and people are simply sharing knowledge and opinions.
The forum post is probably the best online explanation of this particular chart lord technique (specifically of Robert Schmidt) that you’re going to get on the web. I don’t want my criticism of these attitudes as being driven by misconception to imply that I think that people informally sharing their personal views, preferred techniques, and opinions about things are doing something wrong or merit critical evaluation and judgment. Rather, I think that the particular attitudes and debates there expressed are symptomatic of widespread views and attitudes about Hellenistic astrology. The forum thread simply serves as a very convenient and publicly accessible illustration of multiple facets of the issue in one place.
The One Approach to Chart Lords
In the post, someone presented THE method of finding various predominators used by Hellenistic astrologers. In fact, they are presenting a method mentioned by Porphyry (3rd century CE). Additionally, it’s not even clear Porphyry used the specific technique. Finally, the technique is among many varying chart-lord techniques discussed in the period
The Greek word for the ruler of the chart is transliterated as “oikodespotes”. There are various techniques for finding the lord of the chart, which is typically associated with either best characterizing the personality and life of the native or dealing with matters of longevity (or a little of both, c.f. Julius Firmicus Maternus). In Book III, Chapter XIX, Maternus noted a diversity of opinion in his day (4th Century CE), as did Porphry (3rd Century CE). Maternus presented four distinct methods for finding the ruler of the chart (oikodespotes), and stated a preference for the fourth method.
Many ancient astrologers didn’t put stock in a single ruler (or narrow set) of a chart. It tends to be overly reductionist, assigning too much signification to one planet. Many astrologers present and endorse varying viewpoints on the matter. There is no such thing as THE Hellenistic method for finding the chart ruler, widely endorsed by many, let alone most Hellenistic astrologers. This is obscured by the language in the post which is indicative of widespread adoption by Hellenistic astrologers. Additionally, we’re given the impression that Hellenistic astrologers had a systematic collection of chart rulers working in concert.
One, Simple, Clearly Explicated Method
The method is presented as if it is a clean and orderly method. However, in the actual discussion Porphyry clearly was referring to differing viewpoints and noted, “For there is much dispute about this, and almost all of it is very difficult [to understand]” (Holden, 2009, p. 25).
See the initial fearful and reactionary response in the thread. The responder talks of Hellenistic astrology as being smaller and more formulaic. It nicely illustrates the ready uncritical adoption of this viewpoint, The misrepresentation can become the focal point for the evaluation of Hellenistic astrology as a whole. If it’s ideologically and technically narrow then it is just a plaything for an ideological cause. It is no longer worth being explored and valued for what it is; a rich, varied, and valuable collection of astrological science, full of techniques and principles yearning for rediscovery, application, and evaluation. In reality, astrologers of the tradition, even in the Hellenistic period, represented a spectrum of philosophical beliefs about astrology.
A Single Authority to Appeal to
From what I’ve gathered, this version of the technique is not so much Porphyry as Robert Schmidt. Schmidt seems to have believed that this particular passage from Porphyry was drawn from Antiochus of Athens, as many of the passages in Porphyry have been. However, Porphyry drew on many astrologers, not just Antiochus.
Antiochus or Porphyry?
Considering the style of the passage and Porphyry’s note about differing views, it appears unlikely that the material is from Antiochus. In fact, in Schmidt’s original 1993 reconstruction of Antiochus, the passage is not included. If it were from Antiochus, that would be interesting, as it would suggest that there was widespread disagreement and confusion about the technique even in Antiochus’s day (1st to 2nd century CE).
This implicit appeal to Schmidt, and from Schmidt to Antiochus, is interesting. It is a means of avoiding the need to attribute the source as Porphyry. Porphyry is not particularly well-known for his astrological work and he was compiling differing views. It is convenient to attribute the material to someone other than Porphyry when looking to promote it as the “original” reconstructed method.
Antiochus and Reconstruction
Antiochus of Athens is often looked to as the representative of THE ONE Hellenistic system. He wrote a set of definitions that lays out such basic principles as aspect types and planetary configurations. Those attempting to “reconstruct” a Hellenistic system often look to him as someone close to the source. Most Hellenistic astrologers did not appear to employ all the features of his aspect doctrine. This bolsters the possibility that it was an original fuller doctrine.
However, we really don’t know if he was closer to the source than other early Hellenistic astrologers (such as Valens). Perhaps, he just had a greater concern with defining terminology than most. Additionally, the possibility that Antiochus may have added additional features to a more basic and widespread preexisting aspect doctrine is also plausible. The lack of clear dating for Antiochus further complicates the practice of using passages attributed to him in the reconstruction of a single original “Hellenistic system”. Porphyry is our early source for the Antiochus material. He is from the late 3rd century.
Might Antiochus have been a reasonable astrologer who wanted to lay out the various principles and techniques used by 2nd century Hellenistic astrologers into a more cohesive set of definitions? His particular set of definitions does not line up perfectly with those provided by other astrologers such as Serapio. There are numerous points of agreement, but some differences in terminology between them. It is possible that each Hellenistic astrologer of the age in which Porphyry lived may have presented a slightly different set of definitions had each taken up the task. It is likely there was already a diversity of opinion on some principles and configurations in the earliest foundational texts.
The Supposed Nautical Paradigm of Hellenistic Astrology
The technique is placed within a nautical paradigm. The nautical paradigm is presented as if it is THE metaphorical paradigm of Hellenistic astrology. However, there is no such paradigm with look-outs and these other details in Porphyry. There are a couple subtle nautical metaphors in the passage, but no explication or advocacy of any paradigm. Of course, metaphor is an important part of language. However, a metaphor used a little bit, in one passage, is very different from giving a paradigm by which the astrologer fully conceptualizes the technique, let alone the paradigm of Hellenistic astrology as a whole.
There is frequent use of various metaphors throughout ancient astrological texts. I recall a metaphor concerning horses or horse races in Valens. Metaphors are useful in conceptualizing something abstract in more concrete terms, but they rarely imply paradigms. It is important not to confuse one modern-day astrologer’s favorite metaphors for a systematic metaphorical paradigm underlying Hellenistic astrology (the so-called “grande paradigm underlying Hellenistic astrology“). The argument for a single metaphorical paradigm for Hellenistic astrology is a spurious one.
Take-Away
There are widespread misconceptions regarding the scope and diversity of Hellenistic astrology. Diving into the ancient literature, it becomes clear that astrologers have their work cut out for them. We must sift through, adopt, prioritize, and evaluate often-conflicting techniques and methods. Currently, in the traditional community, there is a tendency to cite a single authority, present it as the way it was done in traditional astrology, give one or two chart examples, and go on one’s way. This will not suffice, now that the full diversity of astrology, so rich in the Hellenistic period, has come to light.
Astrologers will have to actually develop their own art of astrology based on ancient fundamentals and resources. It is not enough to cherry-pick delineation that fit one or two examples. The literature is rich and varied. We can find whatever we are looking for in the chart if we look hard enough and have a large enough set of sources to cherry-pick from. That is not effective astrology. That is effective bullshitting.
Never before have astrologers had such access to accurate charts, calculators, researching tools, and astrological texts. This is a very important time for astrology and an exciting time to explore the beautiful, rich, ancient traditions. Hellenistic astrology does not provide a quick and easy fix on fate. It provides the principles and inspiration for an art of astrology of thre greatest accuracy and descriptive depth. Armed with thousands of pages of pointers from the ancient astrologers, we can get there. However, it’s going to take a lot of critical thinking, consistently applied principles, and an aversion to self-deception.
References
Porphyry, & Serapio. (2009). Porphyry the Philosopher. (J. H. Holden, Trans.). Tempe, AZ: American Federation of Astrologers.
Featured Image attribution: Mesopotamian Cylinder Seal image by Walters Art Museum [Public domain, CC BY-SA 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons
You don’t need expensive astrology software to do great astrology. In fact, expensive astrology programs are often loaded with various interpretive modules and default settings that make it harder to think for yourself. Some of these out-of-the-box setting turn the program into a bad astrologer, rather than a tool to help astrologers find the information they need.
I think that charting should be done with free software if adequate programs are available. It is even better if the software is open-source. Open-source software has freely available source code allowing astrologer-programmers to improve the program to their heart’s content. This type of free modifiable software is truly the software of the community, as it can be adjusted to fit the needs of particular astrological practices.
Morinus
I particularly advocate the use of Morinus, a free open-source astrology program with a plethora of settings. Morinus has the ability to do accurate primary directions. It also has different varieties, including a traditional version that cuts out some of the clutter. It is written in Python, which is itself a very popular open-source programming language. Python is so powerful and intuitive that it is the programming language used by NASA, CERN, Google, Yahoo!, and other big names. Nearly always, the charts on my blog will be from Morinus.
There is sometimes a slight learning curve with initial chart entry, compared with other programs, but they are continuously improving in this area. I’ve addressed installation and chart entry in a past article, which I urge the reader to check out.
A Morinus Chart: Marvin Gaye’s Natal Chart w/twelfth-parts
Astro-Databank
Additionally, I advocate the use of Astro-Databank for researching celebrity chart data. Astro-databank provides the birth data for tens of thousands of celebrities and notable persons. It also has the times and charts for many significant events. You can even quickly view a chart for the data, albeit with modern chart features. You are free to copy birth data into an astrological program like Morinus to see a traditional chart information.
On Astro-Databank, be careful of using anything that doesn’t have a Rodden Rating of A or AA (at least B). Furthermore, understand that the ratings are a bit subjective, so check the source notes. For instance, James Randi’s birth data came from James Randi who was quoting his birth certificate. It is still given a C, rather than an AA, because the people writing the entry just don’t want to believe him.
In conclusion, I advocate the use of Astro-Databank, but I caution against uncritically taking the rating and chart data at face value without reviewing source notes. In the next post in this series, I will show how to use Astr0-Databank as an aid for building up a chart database in Morinus.
NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab’s HORIZONS Interface
The HORIZONS web-interface is a generous offering by NASA. This is a great resource for generating ephemerides. It is of particular value to astrologers who use asteroids, but of less value to traditional astrologers. The reason it is so great for asteroid astrologers is that pretty much every asteroid with an identifying number and/or name can be found. Additionally, you can see the asteroid’s orbital dynamics and even generate ephemeride tables. These tables make it easy to find a planet or asteroid’s position on any given day and to pinpoint times of stationing.
Be sure to change the “Table Settings” such that #31 is checked, so that the table gives the Observational Ecliptic Longitude and Latitude of the planet. The observational ecliptic longitude is the position in the zodiac. A position of 270.5* is 270 degrees past 0 Aries, which is 270/30 signs into the zodiac. It has exactly traversed 9 signs already (1. Aries, 2. Taurus, 3. Gemini, 4. Cancer, 5. Leo, 6. Virgo, 7. Libra, 8. Scorpio, 9. Sagittarius), so it is at 0 degrees Capricorn, plus 1/2 a degree. Therefore, the position would be 0*30′ Capricorn. I won’t be working with this interface much on this site, but it can be very fun, particularly for those that work with asteroid.
Fun with Asteroids
As an exercise, try to find where asteroid Linux is today (9* Capricorn at the time of this writing). Next, try to find the degree of its last 1st (i.e. direct) station by changing the time settings to encompass a much larger past period and finding the day when longitude switches from descending to ascending (July 21, 2011 at 4* Sagittarius prior to this article).
One day, I spent hours installing Linux operating systems on about a half dozen computers for friends and family. I got a real kick finding out that asteroid Linux was conjunct my MC within a degree the whole day. Now go find out where asteroid 911 Agamemnon was on 9/11/2001. And where was the Sun on that day? Yes, there are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your traditional astrology – but you’ll find the traditional astrology (at least the Hellenistic and Persian varieties) most useful for prediction – trust me on this!
Astro.com
In addition to offering some of the worst new age chart interpretation packages available, Astro.com also offers a very cool online chart calculator and chart drawing module. You can also store a short database of charts on their website for easy retrieval from anywhere with internet access. I’ll address this at greater length in a future post on calculating and storing charts with their online software.
Another awesome resource on their site is the section with free ephemerides for 6,000 years. Every astrologer should print (or even buy) an ephemeris. It makes it easy to scan and track the planets, to observe when stations, eclipses, important aspects, and other such stuff occurs. Astro.com is also the host for Astro-Databank. Their contribution to providing free astrological resources to astrologers is a great one, for which I’m very thankful..
Others
Those above are just my most highly recommended free charting resources. There are many additional free resources out there for astrologers. The comments area is a great place to help draw awareness to other free resources that are out there. Thanks!
Featured image of an Apple II computer is in the public domain.
In this installment of the series on sign qualities, I’ll explore sign sect and sign sex. There was a diversity of opinion regarding the classifications of signs into diurnal (day) signs and nocturnal (night) signs (i.e. sign sect) expressed in the 1st century CE, particularly in the work of Manilius. However, the typical arrangement where masculine signs are diurnal and feminine signs are nocturnal was dominant. In that arrangement, fire and air signs are both masculine and diurnal while water and earth signs are feminine and nocturnal. After exploring some of the early diversity in characterizing sign sect and sex, we will look at some uses of both sect and sex in the early tradition.
Three Types of Sign Sect in Manilius
Manilius composed his Astronomica, the oldest surviving complete book of Hellenistic astrology, in the 1st century CE. In it he noted (Book II, lines 203-222) a diversity of opinion regarding the sect of the signs. He himself actually favored a sect classification that is no longer used by traditional astrologers.
Fail not to perceive and from true rule deduce what signs are nocturnal, and what diurnal: they are not those that perform their function in darkness or daylight (the name would apply to all alike, since at regular intervals they shine at every house, and now the nocturnal ones accompany the day, and now the nocturnal ones accompany the night), but those on which nature, mighty parent of the universe, bestowed sacred portions of time in a permanent location. The signs of the Archer and the fierce Lion, he who looks round on the golden fleece of his back [Aries], then the Fishes and the Crab and the Scorpion of stinging lash, signs either adjacent or spaced at equal intervals, are all under like estate termed diurnal. The others, identical in number and in the pattern of their spacing, for they are inserted into as many places, are called nocturnal [i.e. there is six of them opposite the six diurnal signs and with the same pattern]. Some have also asserted that the diurnal stations [signs] belong to the six consecutive stars [signs] which begin with the Ram and that the six from the Balance [Libra] count as nocturnal. There are those that fancy that the masculine signs are diurnal and that the feminine class rejoices in the safe cover of darkness. (Goold trans., 1977, p. 99-101; bracketed notes added by me)
Fire and Water Signs as Diurnal
We find that by the first century CE, there were already at least three different means of classifying the signs as diurnal or nocturnal. Manilius appeared to favor the one that didn’t survive at all. His favored classification is by triplicity, with two triplicities as diurnal, and two as nocturnal. The diurnal ones are those we associate with fire and water. The other two triplicities are nocturnal (those we associate earth and air). However, note that Manilius did not actually associate the triplicities with the four elements as we do today.
This scheme consists of two adjacent diurnal signs, followed by two adjacent nocturnal signs, and so forth; an alternation in pairs, starting with a Pisces-Aries diurnal pair. Note that these associations have a natural relation to the triplicities themselves (the subject of the last article). The cardinal members of the diurnal triplicites mark spring and summer, while those of the nocturnal ones mark fall and winter. One of the stranger consequences of this arrangement is the fact that both Cancer and Leo are diurnal by this method. Cancer is the home of the Moon, lord of the nocturnal sect. It seems strange to have her home as a diurnal sign. This arrangement did not catch on, and as far as I know is present only in Manilius.
Northern Celestial Hemisphere by Durer
Sect=Sex
The sect classification of the signs that came to dominate in Hellenistic astrology and through later strands of the tradition, is that which Manilius mentioned last. This arrangement matches sign sex with sign sect. Masculine signs are diurnal and the feminine signs are nocturnal in this scheme.
All ancient astrologers appear to agree that the masculine and feminine signs alternate through the zodiac; Aries masculine, Taurus feminine, Gemini masculine, and so forth. The association of odd numbers with the masculine and even numbers with the feminine is a Pythagorean one. The sex of the signs causes each of the five non-luminaries to have one masculine home and one feminine home. When this is extended to a sect distinction, each of the five non-luminaries has a day home and a night home.
This scheme also results in two day triplicities and two night ones. In this case fire and air are diurnal and masculine, while earth and water are nocturnal and feminine. A convenient way to remember which signs are masculine and which are feminine, is to know that fire and air have a propensity to stir and rise, while water and earth have a propensity to fall and settle. Similarly, fire and air are light like the day (diurnal) while water and earth are obscuring like the night (nocturnal).
Astrologers Using This Method
Manilius (1st century CE) noted this method among others. Most other Hellenistic astrologers simply only used this method. Those astrologers include Dorotheus (1st century CE) and Paulus Alexandrinus (4th century CE). Additionally, Ptolemy and Valens (both 2nd century CE) appeared to use this method, as did Porphyry (3rd century CE). Rhetorius (6th or 7th century CE) also used this method in the material on the signs attributed to Teucer of Babylon (~1st century CE), though some of that material was added by Rhetorius himself. There are other instances of astrologers associating benefit with diurnal planets in masculine signs and nocturnal planets in feminine signs as well (c.f. Serapio and Manetho discussed below).
Note on the Incongruity of Mars
The conflation of sect and sex is common, both today and in ancient astrology. However, this does create some odd conflicts. For instance, it was considered beneficial for a planet to be in a sign of the same sex and/or sect as itself, but Mars is a masculine nocturnal planet. It does not have a domicile that is both its same sex and sect, as each other planet does.
Unfortunately, none of the sect arrangements discussed by Manilius resolve this incongruity. In the sect arrangement favored by Manilius, the same situation holds for Mars, as both Aries and Scorpio become diurnal signs, while Mars is a nocturnal planet. In the second classification (discussed below), Aries is masculine but still diurnal, while Scorpio is nocturnal but still feminine.
I favor the third sect arrangement given by Manilius, in which sect and sex are conflated. My own approach to astrology is not strongly influenced by Manilius as he was not a very influential astrologer overall. It is my understanding that congruity with sect is more important than congruity with sex. It is often suggested (from Ptolemy, Book I, Ch. 7) that the sect of the malefics represent the fact that their extreme qualities are tempered and thus they are made more productive. Therefore, it may be that Mars runs so hot that his position in a nocturnal chart and/or in a nocturnal sign serves to cool him off and make him more productive.
Incongruity of Saturn?
Note that Saturn has been described as feminine and feminizing at times in ancient astrology. Dorotheus appeared to have described Saturn as feminine in Book I, Ch. 10 of Carmen. However, Dorotheus also associated Saturn with male family member rather than female ones. Additionally, Carmen has had some textual issues and errors due to transmission through a number of languages. It is unclear whether Dorotheus actually did consider Saturn to be a feminine planet. It doesn’t appear that other Hellenistic astrologers did so.
Nevertheless, whether masculine or feminine, Saturn is a cold and dark planet, yet a diurnal one. As with Mars, the contrasting quality of Saturn’s sect (diurnal in this case) helps to balance it and make it more productive. I would add that Jupiter, characterized as a moist and warm planet by Ptolemy, and as a fertile planet promising children by many Hellenistic astrologers, would seem to be a better contender for a feminine planet traditionally characterized as masculine.
Northern and Southern Signs
Manilius provided one additional classification. This one has the signs from Aries through Virgo as diurnal and those from Libra through Pisces as nocturnal. This is logical from the perspective of the tropical zodiac in the northern hemisphere. Aries begins with the Spring Equinox, a moment where the quantity of day increases over the quantity of night. Libra begins with the Autumnal Equinox, a moment where the quantity of night increases over the quantity of day. In other words, in this classification, the Sun is in diurnal signs when the length of the day exceeds that of the night, while the opposite is true when the Sun is in nocturnal signs. The converse situation holds in the southern hemisphere.
Equinoxes and Solstices from Space (courtesy of NASA)
In Persian medieval astrology, this is the classification of the signs as Northern or Southern (c.f. al-Qabisi, Dykes trans., 2010, p. 59). The passing of the Sun into Aries is also the point when the Sun passes north of the celestial equator (i.e. the north pole is inclined toward the Sun). Similarly, when the Sun passes into Libra, the Sun goes south of the equator (i.e. the north pole is incline away from the Sun). Some may not realize that this apparent passing of the Sun north and south of the equator, due to the tilt of the poles relative to the Sun, is what creates the seasons. The Earth is actually closest to the Sun (i.e. at perihelion) around January of each year, during winter in the northern hemisphere.
Friendship and Commanding Signs
The northern or diurnal signs in this arrangement were called the “commanding” signs in a fragment attributed to Dorotheus, while the southern or nocturnal ones were called “obeying” (Dorotheus, XVIII, #4, Dykes trans., 2017, p. 340). The same fragments attribute the Moon in these commanding signs with suitability for friendship. It is unclear whether this suitability pertains to a friendly person or to a good electional time to make friends, or possibly both. For more on the concept of commanding and obeying, see the article on sign symmetry relationships.
Sign Sect by Ruler? Not Exactly
Some early Hellenistic astrologers did not explicitly mention an inherent sect of the signs. For instance, I know of no such use of sign sect in Maternus, though he does mention sign sex. Additionally, Vettius Valens (2nd century CE) didn’t clearly delineate the sect of the signs but did associate being ruled by a sect mate as beneficial. This is worth a closer examination as some have taken it to imply that sign sect is determined by the sect of the sign ruler. Furthermore, some comments in Porphyry (3rd century CE; but text has additions) suggesting that sign sex can be determined by the sect of the sign’s ruler have been taken to support this view.
In such a scheme, both Aries and Scorpio are nocturnal as both are ruled by Mars, a planet of the nocturnal sect. Similarly, in this scheme both Capricorn and Aquarius are diurnal due to rulership by Saturn, a diurnal planet. However, I am not aware of any Hellenistic astrologers explicitly associating sign sect with the sect of the ruler, akin to the many references to sign sect from sign sex. A closer examination reveals that the confusion may arise due to the close relationship between sect and triplicity. Additionally, there are passages in both Valens and Pophyry which imply that they assigned sect to signs in the usual manner (masculine/feminine and pertaining to triplicity).
Inherent Relationship Between Sect and Triplicity
Water and earth signs always have nocturnal planets as triplicity rulers. Similarly, aside from Mercury as a triplicity ruler of air, fire and air signs always have diurnal planets as triplicity rulers. In fact, this is one of the reasons why the arrangement of masculine (fire and air) signs as diurnal and feminine (water and earth) signs as nocturnal makes so much sense. It is not just an association between sect and sex but it reflects the already existing association between sect and triplicity which was built into the system.
Valens on Sect Mate Rulership
Valens did not explicitly associate signs with sects in his exposition of the signs. However, he did sometimes speak of the sect of a sign as significant (Book I, Ch. 20P; Book VII, Ch. 41). Valens often mentioned triplicity and sect together, noting that planets of the same triplicity or sect can help each other out. In Hellenistic astrology, triplicity rulers are typically seen as supportive in a way that is suggestive of relatives. The planets of the same sect are similarly viewed as helping to support each other. By contrast, planets of the other triplicity or sect can exacerbate harm.
At one point Valens explicitly advised that astrologers should take note of the sect of the sign.
Is it the ruler of a lot, of the Ascendant, or of a triangle? Likewise with the sign in which the star appears: is it of its own or of another sect, and which other signs does it have in aspect? (Valens, Book I, Ch. 20P, Riley trans., 2010, p. 22)
Ruler: Domicile or Triplicity?
My impression is that Valens often refers to rulers of the same sect and rulers of the same triplicity interchangeably. This can lead to some ambiguity in the couple instances where Valens noted rulership by a sect mate as a positive thing. Traditional astrologers today, who stress domicile and ignore triplicity, are all too ready to interpret the ruler of the same sect as being the domicile ruler. However. Valens used the same terms, typically translated “ruler” or “houseruler” for both domicile and triplicity rulers. He also placed much greater stress on triplicity than most tradiitional astrologers today, discussing triplicity much more often than domicile (often specified as ruler of the sign). Furthermore, sign sect is intimately linked with triplicity for Valens, as we’ll see.
Triplicity Pertains to the Subdivision of the Zodiac into Sects
Valens made explicit the close connection between sect and triplicity in his chapter on triplicity which opens as follows:
1. The Triangles
When the zodiacal circle is subdivided according to similarities and differences, we find two sects, solar and lunar, day and night. The sun, being fiery, is most related to Aries, Leo, and Sagittarius, and this triangle of the sun is called “of the day-sect” because it too is fiery by nature. The sun has attached Jupiter and Saturn to this sect as his co-workers and guardians of the things which he accomplishes[…] (Valens, Book II, Ch. 1, Riley trans., 2010, p. 25)
Additionally, he closed the chapter on triplicities by noting that Mercury is common and works with both sects.
This chapter on triplicity shows how closely linked triplicity and sect are to Valens. Furthermore, the first sentence implies that Valens subdivided the zodiac by sect. The directly following discussion of triplicity implies that triplicity is the basis of this subdivision. Therefore, it is fairly safe to conclude that Valens did not have an alternate method of dividing the signs by sect but instead used the typical method, linking it strongly to triplicity.
Porphyry: Planetary Sect Determines Sign Sex?
The text of Pophyry has undergone some additions and possibly some corruptions on its way to us. For instance, it is well known that some later material was added by Byzantine compilers including chapter 53-55 which are from the Perso-Arabic astrologer Sahl. Sign sex is typically a non-controversial issue. Nearly every Hellenistic astrologer noted the sex of the signs and without variation. Porphyry notes the sex of the signs in a way consistent with those other astrologers but then has a particularly convoluted passage in the same section in which it is done another way. The passage is likely the result of corruption as it suggests that the sect of the ruler of the sign determines the sign’s sex. Note that while sometimes taken to support the view that the sect of the ruler determines the sect of a sign, the passage actually noted sign sex, not sign sect.
The [signs that are] masculine by sect are those of the Sun, Jupiter, and Saturn. And let [every other one of] the signs be masculine [starting] from Aries. The [signs that are] feminine [by sect] [are those] of the Moon, Mars, and Venus. Let every other one of the [signs] be feminine [starting] from Taurus. (Porphyry, Ch. 40, Holden trans., 2009, p. 30)
Interestingly, while giving two different definitions for sign sex concurrently, the passage continues by apparently walking back the assertion that sign sex is determined by sect of the ruler.
But choose individually [from] the feminine [signs] Capricorn for Saturn, Pisces for Jupiter; and of the masculine [signs] Aries for Mars, [and] Libra for Venus; but [in the case] of Mercury, choose [both] Gemini and Virgo, for it has those in common. (Porphyry, Ch. 40, Holden trans., 2009, p. 30)
Deconstructing Porphyry’s Treatment
There are two things of note here. The first is the fact that the Sun’s triplicity is associated with masculine signs while the Moon’s triplicity is associated with feminine signs. This can be explained by the fact that the passage confuses triplicity rulers with domicile rulers. Triplicity is linked with the sect and sex of the signs. However, the assertion that domicile rulers determine sex is incorrect and confuses the two types of rulers. Either Porphyry or one of his compilers got some wires crossed here.
The second thing to note is that Porphyry does provide the typical masculine/feminine distinction as well. He even goes out of his way to note that Saturn and Jupiter each have feminine signs that they rule, despite the fact that they’re diurnal planets. He does the same with the nocturnal planets and their masculine homes.
In conclusion, Porphyry’s text, like that of Valens, illustrates a close connection between triplicity and sect, but does not imply an alternate methodology of assigning sect to the signs.
The Hephaistion Alternative
Hephaistos (5th century CE) had an alternate method of assigning sect to the stars. It is unclear if he actually used it though. In the first chapter of the first book of his Apotolelsmatiks, he classified some signs as diurnal and some as nocturnal. His method of assignment appears to be unique among the Hellenistic astrologers. The assignments of Hephaistos imply that the signs from Leo through Capricorn are diurnal, while those from Aquarius to Cancer are nocturnal. This cleaves the zodiac into diurnal and nocturnal halves at the cusp between the homes of the Sun and Moon.
As Hephaistos didn’t seem to actually use this distinction in practice and actually did not even note the sect of 5 of the signs, I bring this distinction up for the sake of completeness only.
What is Sect Anyway?
Sect is the division of the planets into a day and a night group. The Sun leads the day sect and the Moon leads the night sect. Each group also has a benefic and a malefic in addition to its leader or luminary. The Sun, Jupiter, and Saturn are diurnal. The Moon, Venus, and Mars are nocturnal. Mercury is considered neutral. Some considered it diurnal when rising before the Sun and nocturnal when rising after the Sun (see orientality below) but there were other schemes as well. For instance, the anonymous author of the Michigan Papyrus (~2nd century CE) instructed that Mercury is simply always of the sect of the chart (Anonymous, Col. VIII, Robbins trans., 1936). Also, see below on the sect of the chart halves for the Valens variant.
Sect of the Chart
The most important consideration is the sect of the chart itself. If the Sun is above the horizon (i.e. by day) then diurnal planets become more benefic and less malefic, while the converse is true of nocturnal planets. When it is night (Sun below the horizon) then the opposite situation holds and it is the nocturnal planets which are in sect. In other words, your sect matters. If you are born during the day then you are diurnal, and he diurnal planets are like family. If you are born at night, then the nocturnal planets are like family.
Sect of the Signs; Sect of the Halves
The advice to consider the sect of the sign also may have merit and should be considered, perhaps in the way recommended by Ptolemy (see below). An additional consideration often noted is that diurnal planets want to be on the same side of the horizon as the Sun while nocturnal ones want to be on the opposite side. This was termed “halb” meaning half and is another consideration worth exploring. Is a diurnal planet that is in sect (i.e. by day) made less benefic if it is in a nocturnal sign and under the horizon? More work is needed in this area.
It is necessary to examine the sects of the stars: for day births the sun, Jupiter, and Saturn rejoice above the earth; for night births, below the earth. For night births the moon, Mars, and Venus rejoice above the earth; for day births below the earth. Mercury rejoices according to the sect of the houseruler in whose terms the star is located. Consequently for day births, if a nativity is found to have Jupiter, the sun, or Saturn favorably configured above the earth, this will be better than having them below the earth.
Likewise <for night births> it is advantageous if the nocturnal stars are found above the earth. (Valens, Book III, Ch. 5, Riley trans., 2010, p. 62)
Note that while this quote seems to imply that Valens chiefly considered halb, in practice he chiefly considered the sect of the chart. There are many examples in his text, but see for instance Book IV, Ch. 8, when he notes death being associated with Saturn in Sagittarius because Saturn is not in its own sect. The chart has Ascendant in Pisces and Sun in Cancer (V), so Saturn (in X) was above the horizon in a night chart, but still out of sect and difficult due to the fact that it was a night chart.
Aspects from Sect Mates
Aspects from sect mates were typically considered helpful in early Hellenistic astrology. By contrast, aspects from non-sect mates could be less helpful or more harmful. For instance, Valens noted in multiple places that difficult aspects were more difficult when planets were of opposite sect.
One must observe whether the stars of the night or of the day sect are configured with their sect mates. If they are, they will be more effective for good than the other stars and will be a cause of great good fortune at the times of their own transmissions and transits. If they are not so configured, they will prevent any advancement in rank and will hinder any benefits. (Valens, Book IV, Ch. 13, Riley trans., 2010, p. 81-82)
Similarly, in the length of life technique he allowed sect mates to add to the length of life indicated by the main significator.
The fellow-members of their sects, when in conjunction, in aspect, or in their own signs, add to the allotment, unless both sects in fact join in the allotment. (Valens, Book III, Ch. 11P, Riley trans., 2010, p. 69)
Use of Sign Sect
Note that all the uses of sign sect that I cite here seem to use the scheme where the sign sect is determined in the same way as its sex. This was the dominant scheme in Hellenistic astrology. Manilius (1st century CE) noted it as one scheme used by astrologers in his time. Dorotheus (1st century CE) also explicitly defined sign sect this way (Book I, Ch. 30), and not in any other. He also used it for a type of rejoicing condition (Book I, Ch. 1). It is typically inferred that Ptolemy intended this arrangement as well as he noted that the day is masculine and night is feminine (Book I, Ch. 7) and that planets are weakened when lacking any rulership of their position and in a sign of the opposite sect (Book I, Ch. 23). However, it is possible that Ptolemy was referring to rulership of the position by a planet of the same sect as the subject planet.
Rejoicing Conditions
As noted above, one use of sect was that a planet was said to rejoice in a sign of the same sect. For instance, Dorotheus noted that the planets rejoice in the domicile of the same sect: Saturn in Aquarius; Jupiter in Sagittarius; Mars in Scorpio; Venus in Taurus (Book I, Ch. 1). He also noted Mercury in Virgo, though that appears to relate more to Mercury being exalted there, as Mercury is said to be ambiguous as to sect. Other astrologers noted similarly regarding sign sect.
[..] diurnal stars rejoice in masculine signs and when oriental to the Sun; and those of the nocturnal sect rejoice in feminine signs and when occidental to the Moon. (Serapio, Holden trans., 2009, p. 68)
Note that in this passage the planets are identified by sect, not sex, but the signs are identified by sex. The implication appears to be that sect is the real consideration here, but by making reference to the sex of the signs it is certainly clearer which sense of sign sect is being used.
Sign-Based Strengthening
Ptolemy(2nd century CE) used sign sect in a way that is reflective of the rejoicing conditions. He noted that a planet is strengthened (maximally effective by sign) if it has at least two forms of rulership at its own position (see Tetrabilos, Book I, Ch. 23). This could be rulership by domicile, exaltation, triplicity, or bound. Ptolemy also noted two sign-based weakening conditions, which included fall, but not detriment. Detriment does not appear to have been part of the sign-based rejoicing conditions for any of the Hellenistic astrologers prior to the 6th or 7th century.
No, the other condition noted by Ptolemy is when a planet has no rulership in its position at all and also is in a sign of the opposite sect. Being in a sign of the same sect was considered by Ptolemy to provide a sort of indirect strength. This indirect strength could mitigate against the possible weakening and corruption of being in an alien position (a sign and bound where the planet had no rulership). In this scheme, Saturn in Leo would be strengthened by being in a sign of its triplicity and sect, but Saturn in Scorpio may be particularly weakened or corrupted if not in its own bound, as Saturn has no rulership and the sign is of the opposite sect.
They say they “rejoice”when, even though the containing signs have no familiarity with the [stars] themselves, nevertheless they have it with the stars of the same sect; in this case the sympathy arises less directly. They share, however, in the similarity in the same way; just as, on the contrary, when they are found in alien regions belonging to the opposite sect, a great part of their proper power is paralysed, because the temperament which arises from the dissimilarity of the signs produces a different and adulterated nature. (Ptolemy, Book I, Ch. 23, Robbins trans., 1940, p. 113, bracketed text is my correction of where the translation again says “signs”)
Use of Sign Sex
The sex of the signs were used in many practical applications in ancient astrology, typically pertaining to matters of gender and sexuality. I will only touch on a couple uses here. For more details see treatments of sexuality in the literature. Treatments of sexuality from sign sex tended to focus on indications from the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, and Mars. Other factors pertaining to sexuality, including some of the factors discussed further in this article were also considered.
Ease of Birth
Dorotheus (Ch. I.3) used the sex of the signs of the Sun, Moon, and Ascendant to assess the ease of birth. For a male, birth is easier if they are in male signs. For a female, birth is easier if they are in female signs. Additionally, he noted that Saturn in a stake can cause problems, especially if in a female sign (diurnal planet in a nocturnal sign). Also, that Mars can hasten birth along to be quick if in a stake, especially if in a female sign (nocturnal planet in a nocturnal sign). The sense is that male positions make things come easier for men, while female ones work best for women. Incongruity creates struggle.
Positive Character
Manetho also referred to sign sex, rather than sect, similar to the way it was used by Serapio. However, one of Manetho’s uses for sign sex is consistent with sect and pertains to benefit, a major association of sect congruity. Manetho attributed the lights in the signs of their same sex/sect with those that “easily accomplish deeds and tasks” (p. 235). To the contrary if both were in masculine signs then someone would be savage while if both were in feminine signs one would be subservient. Those with the Sun and Moon both in the signs of their opposite sex/sect would be socially awkward and unable to progress. Similarly, the sex of the person was important, as lights in masculine signs worked better for males than females, and vice-versa with feminine signs.
Predicting Sex
Twelfth-part sign sex, especially of the Moon, often figures heavily into prediction of the sex of someone who was born (yes, it’s easier and more accurate to just look). I addressed this in the article on the twelfth-parts. Both Dorotheus and Valens put a lot of stress on the sex of the twelfth-part of the Moon. Valens advised to also look at the sex of the sign of the ruler of the Moon’s twelfth-part. Dorotheus had a number of exceptions that pertain mainly to whether the Sun, Moon, and Ascendant are in male signs or a male planet is in the Ascendant.
Sex Beyond Signs
The early Hellenistic astrologers classified 4 planets as masculine (the Sun, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn), 2 as feminine (the Moon and Venus), and 1 as neutral (Mercury). This gender imbalance is notable. Ptolemy associated the feminine with moisture and the masculine with dryness which makes the gender imbalance all the odder as Jupiter is characterized by him as hot and moist. However, Ptolemy noted that planets can become masculine or feminine by way of their relationship with the Sun and their position by quadrant.
They say too that the stars become masculine or feminine according to their aspects to the sun, for when they are morning stars and precede the sun they become masculine, and feminine when they are evening stars and follow the sun. Furthermore this happens also according to their positions with respect to the horizon; for when they are in positions from the orient to mid-heaven, or again from the occident to lower mid-heaven, they become masculine because they are eastern, but in the other two quadrants, as western stars, they become feminine. (Ptolemy, Book I, Ch. 6, Robbins trans., p. 41)
Orientality
In a quote earlier in this article, the Serapio text contrasted stars oriental to the Sun (i.e. rising and setting before the Sun) as masculine, and those occidental the Moon as feminine. However, the contrast is typically between planets oriental or occidental to the Sun. The Serapio text is actually a late Byzantine compilation known to contain many errors and additions. This appears to be a distortion of the oft-cited instruction that oriental stars are given to the Sun while occidental (are given) to the Moon (c.f. Porphyry, Ch. 4). Planets rising before the Sun (i.e. visible in the morning before dawn) are oriental and masculine. By contrast, those rising after the Sun (i.e. visible at night after sunset) are occidental and feminine. Interestingly, Serapio associated this rejoicing condition with the sect rather than the sex of the planets (as did Paulus Alexandrinus in Ch. 4 of his Introductory Matters).
Quadrants
In addition to sign sex and orientality, there is an additional sex consideration. This is the consideration of masculine and feminine quadrants. Planets approaching a meridian (i.e in the quadrants from Asc to MC or Dsc to IC – clockwise) were considered to be masculine. By contrast, those approaching the horizon (i.e. from IC to Asc or MC to Dsc) were considered feminine. To remember this think that going vertical (toward the point at the top or bottom of the chart; MC or IC) is masculine while going horizontal (toward the horizon; Asc or Dsc) is feminine.
Conclusion
In conclusion, there were 3 methods of classifying the sect of a sign in Manilius. The method favored by Manilius has all but disappeared. The common method of conflating sign and sex was present in some of the earliest astrologers of the tradition. An additional method survives in the concept of northern and southern signs. For more on the relationship between northern and southern signs, see the article on sign symmetry and antiscia.
Sign sect is strongly related to triplicity and the notion of a support network. I recommend the use of sign sect in the ways noted by Ptolemy and Valens. Through sign sect, a planet can have a form of minor strength, especially if also aspected by a triplicity ruler.
Dorotheus of Sidon, & al-Tabari, U. (2017). Carmen Astrologicum: The ’Umar al-Tabari Translation. (B. N. Dykes, Trans.). Minneapolis, Minn.,: The Cazimi Press.
Ma’shar, A., & Al-Qabisi. (2010). Introductions to Traditional Astrology. (B. N. Dykes, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: The Cazimi Press.
Manilius, M. (1977). Astronomica. (G. P. Goold, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Loeb Classical Library.
Porphyry, & Serapio. (2009). Porphyry the Philosopher. (J. H. Holden, Trans.). Tempe, AZ: American Federation of Astrologers.
Astrological signs are organized into many different classes in ancient astrology. Some classes are complicated by the fact that various sign classifications pertain to associations with the “species” of things “imaged” in the constellations while others pertain to associations with the seasons. Horoscopic astrology originated during a time when the sidereal zodiac, relating to the “images” of the stars, was roughly aligned with the tropical zodiac, pertaining to the seasons. Sign associations in Hellenistic astrology sometimes align more with the tropical zodiac and at other times align more with the sidereal one.
A Rich History
On this site, I always try to stress the diversity of opinion, and richness that existed in Hellenistic astrology. The prevailing attitude in modern traditional astrological circles is of a more unified first tradition which later became more diverse, for better or worse. On the contrary, Hellenistic astrology is incredibly heterogeneous and robust. From our earliest surviving texts of the 1st century CE, astrologers are already noting a diversity of opinion and multiple approaches to many topics (see Ancient Astrologers Didn’t All Agree).
The Four Groups of Three
The many classifications of the signs that existed in the Hellenistic period are one example of its richness. These classifications will be addressed in this series of articles. To start, we will look at the origins of one of the more popular classifications of signs today. This is the four types of three signs each known by element as the fire signs, earth signs, air signs, and water signs. As each group of signs has three members which are in a triangular relationship with each other, each group was called a triplicity or triangle.
Triplicity without Elements
In a fascinating segment of a podcast by Chris Brennan ((Nov. 11, 2011; starting at minute 49:00), he discussed how the astrological signs were not originally associated with elements. In fact, as Brennan (2011) noted, in the majority of the surviving Hellenistic works, the elements are not associated with triplicity at all.
For those new to the concept of triplicity, it is the 4 groups of 3 signs each that are all in 120 degree relationships to each other. The triplicities are also called trigons or triangles, as the signs of a triplicity are trine each other, together forming an equilateral triangle in the zodiac. The trine is considered a relationship of perfect friendship. These signs were held to have a particularly strong harmonious relationship with each other.
Elements without Triplicity
Four Elements by Isidore of Seville
Today, we know these triplicities best by the elements. Fire signs include Aries, Leo, and Sagittarius. Earth signs include Capricorn, Taurus, and Virgo. Air signs include Libra, Aquarius, and Gemini. Water signs include Cancer, Scorpio, and Pisces. What is notable is that these four groupings of three signs were used in Hellenistic astrology prior to any association with the four elements.
It is not that astrologers didn’t associate some signs with water or earth though. Manilius (1st century CE; Book II, 223-233) noted that Cancer and Pisces are aquatic. He also noted that Aries, Taurus, Leo, and Scorpio are terrestrial. Similarly, Capricorn and Aquarius are amphibious. It is assumed that he regarded Gemini, Virgo, Libra, and Sagittarius as human signs, as many astrologers of the day did. These associations do not include all four elements. Nor do they pertain to the triplicities. Rather, these associations are based on the “images” of the signs.
Directions of the Winds
Instead of elements, the triplicities were associated with the four winds in some early texts. In one conception, the modern triplicity of Fire was associated with the east wind. Similarly, today’s Earth signs were associated with the south wind, Air signs with the west wind, and Water signs with the north wind. The association of the signs with these directions prevailed in the medieval period. For instance, both Abu Ma’shar (9th century) and al-Qabisi (10th century) associated the triplicities with these directions.
This us based on the directions of the cardinal sign of each triplicity relative to the northern hemisphere. The cardinal sign of each triplicity is the sign that starts with a point of an equinox or solstice (Aries for fire, Cancer for water, Libra for air, Capricorn for earth). Cancer (water) marks the point when the Sun is furthest north (summer solstice), while Capricorn (earth) marks its furthest declination south. Aries (fire) to the right of Cancer is east and Libra (air) to the left of Cancer is west. One can imagine also that Aries (fire), the first sign, is rising (eastern), which would see Capricorn (earth) culminating in the south, while Libra (air) is setting in the west, and Cancer (water) is northern.
Variation
This association of triplicities with winds is made explicit in Paulus Alexandrinus (4th century; see Greenbaum, 2001, p. 1-4). As noted, it also came to prevail in the medieval period. However, it is not a common association in Hellenistic texts. Most astrologers did not associate triplicities with winds at all. Additionally, some astrologers associated different directions with triplicities. Ptolemy (2nd century), assigned winds to triplicities based on the planets that rule the signs (see Robbins, 1940, p. 85-88). The earth signs are southern in Ptolemy’s reckoning also, but the fire signs are northern, the air signs are eastern, and the water signs are western (as far as characterizing winds). Additionally, Firmicus Maternus (4th century) followed the Ptolemaic association of winds and triplicities (Book II, Ch. 12).
Triplicity Lords
The more common early association of triplicity was simply with a special set of rulers which pertained to each group of signs. These triplicity rulers were usually examined as playing a supportive role in relation to the matters signified by the sign in a particular chart. They were also used to signify the beginning, middle, and end stages in a signification that may change over time. For more on the triplicity rulers, see the lesson on the signs.
The Four Elements
The establishment of the doctrine that there are four ultimate elements or roots which structure our world is attributed to the Greek philosopher, Empedocles, of the 5th century BCE. It became a facet of many later physics, including those of Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics. What is notable is that the Stoics and Aristotle differed in the basic primary quality that they assigned to each element. As Brennan (2011) noted, Aristotle contrasted hot Fire with cold Water, and wet Air with dry Earth. Though Interestingly, the Stoics contrasted hot Fire with cold Air, and wet Water with dry Earth.
However, this difference between Stoic and Aristotelian conceptions may have been a matter of emphasis only. Aristotle actually conceived of each element as an intersection of two qualities. Water is the intersection of cold and wet, Air of hot and wet, Fire of hot and dry, and Earth of cold and dry.
A Possible Stoic Emphasis in Valens
Brennan (2011) asserted that Valens’ conception of the elements is more Stoic than Aristotelian. He also insists that this is the most logical characterization of the elements for astrological usage. This conception places signs of opposite quality (hot/cold, wet/dry) in opposition to each other. In the Stoic conception, air is cold and fire is hot, so the cold air signs are in opposition to the hot fire signs. Similarly, water is wet and earth is dry by the Stoic reckoning, so the water signs, are opposite the dry, earth signs. Additionally, water is logically wet, and fire hot, while earth is dry without water and moving air is cooling.
From my reading of Valens, it appears that Brennan is referring to Book IV of Valens’ Anthology (Riley, p. 73). There is a predictively-oriented passage in which Valens has an aside about the logic of one sign handing off rulership of a time to the sign opposite it. He discussed contrasting and sympathetic qualities, such as earthy signs being dry and watery being moist. There are also hints regarding elemental qualities of the signs in Book I’s exposition of the signs, but no full association of elements with triplicities.
Hellenistic Elemental Triplicities
While an association of the elements with triplicities was not a part of early “mainstream” Hellenistic astrology, it was well-established by the time of Rhetorius (7th century CE). Rhetorius’ Compendium makes explicit an association of the elements with the signs. We also see it in Rhetorius’ included translation of Teucer of Babylon’s exposition of the signs (2nd century). Therefore, it is possible the association extends back to the 2nd century. However, Rhetorius added many elements to the Teucer text, including possibly the elemental associations.
An association of the elements with the triplicities may also be evident in Firmicus Maternus (4th century) but the evidence is inconclusive. Maternus noted Aries as fiery and Pisces as watery. However, due to corruption of the text, we don’t have his material on the associations of the other 10 signs.
Elemental Popularity
The association of elements with triplicity became an increasingly popular association through the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, right up to the present time. This was in part due to the growing prominence of Aristotelianism in the medieval worldview. Hence, the elements came to be the primary descriptor of the triplicities. Additionally, the elements themselves came to be associated with their Aristotelian qualities, in which Fire is hot (and dry), Earth is dry (and cold), Air is wet (and hot), and Water is cold (and wet).
Conclusion
The association of the elements to the triplicities may not be an essential or early part of Hellenistic astrology. By contrast, triplicity itself was an important consideration from the earliest texts. The introduction of the elements into astrology may have been Stoic physics in conception. However, in the later tradition it became dominated by an Aristotelian view. The four elements have an ancient Greek origin in Empedocles (5th century BCE). Their association with the triplicities was not immediate but became well-established before the end of the Hellenistic era of astrology. Because of their fruitful association with the elements, the triplicities continue to be among the most popular groupings of signs in astrology today.
Someone today mentioned a passage in Valens in which the Midheaven is associated with children. I hadn’t recalled any association of the Midheaven nor 10th House with children, apart from special techniques in which a planet in the 10th confers children. For instance, having a benefic (especially Jupiter) strong in certain enabling houses, including the 10th, free from the harm of malefics, can signify one will have children The 10th house (also known as the 10th place) is strongly associated with matters of profession, career, and social standing/rank, so it seems odd to me for it to also describe a child. However, in my quick review of about a half dozen different ancient authors, I discovered that a few of them do indeed associate the 10th with children. In such cases the 10th is also associated with marriage.
Additionally, the 10th is often associated with mothers and parents. This appears to relate to the fact that the 4th is the house of the father and origins, while the 10th is opposite the 4th (7th from 10th) and thus would signify the partner of the father.
Differing Viewpoints
Indeed, in looking into this matter of children, there are a lot of references to 10th house significations of children. Below are some of the conflicting viewpoints that exist in ancient astrology as concerns significations of children from the 5th and 10th places.
Hellenistic Astrologers
Early Hellenistic (1st-3rd centuries)
Manilius (see Astronomicon, Book II, 856-967): He associated the 1st house with children and the 10th with marriage. Manilius is an odd Hellenistic astrologer when it comes to these associations.
Valens (see Anthology, Book II, Ch. 16P; Book IV, Ch. 12; Book IX, Ch. 3P): In his initial list of place significations he associated the 5th with marriage, the 11th with children, and the 10th with actions and occupation. However, in his later list of place significations he gives many significations for each place and many places are associated with children. Furthermore, the 5th is specifically called the place of children in that section. The 4th, 10th, and 11th are also associated with children but secondarily, as the first significations given are rank, occupation, and friends, respectively. In Book IX, for predictive indications involving the lives of children, Valens advises to look at the 5th (step-children from the 11th).
Dorotheus (see Carmen Astrologicum, Book I, Chapter 5, Pingree, 1976): Dorotheus noted “[…] fifth from the ascendant which is called the house of the child […]” (p. 164). I was unable to find any reference to the 10th or 11th concerning children, but like Valens, Dorotheus is a messy text to sort through, and the index isn’t spectacular. The strength and beneficence of the first two triplicity rulers of Jupiter, as well as Jupiter itself, Venus, and the Moon, figure heavily in his special techniques for children.
Late Hellenistic (4th-7th centuries)
Paulus Alexandrinus (see Introductory Matters, Ch. 24, Greenbaum, 2001): Paulus very explicitly noted that the 5th “signifies the reckoning about children” (p. 46). He associated the 10th with actions , but added, “it becomes indicative of marriage and male children” (p. 48). Paulus does have a special technique for children, examining respectively: the 5th, 11th, 10th, 4th, Lot of Children, Jupiter, Jupiter’s triplicity, Venus, and Mercury. However, these places are relevant in so much as showing possible gateways or enabling factors, causing children to be more likely. Therefore, I get the sense in Paulus that only the 5th rules children, in the sense of describing them and events concerning them. Additionally, many houses pertain to whether one will have few, many, or no children.
Firmicus Maternus (see Mathesis, Book II, Ch. 14-19): He associated children with the 5th. Actions and the home were associated with the 10th.
Rhetorius (see Compendium, Ch. 57, Holden, 2009): Rhetorius mentioned “marriage and children and the substance of the parents” (p. 91) in the significations for the 10th place. His significations for the 10th do also include actions, i.e. occupation/calling. Rhetorius discussed Venus and the manner of rule as primary significations of the 5th. He does consider benefics and malefics in the 5th to reflect the condition of one’s children though, especially the “first children”. He gives a special technique for actions that is a fusion and development of Ptolemy and Paulus, with many additional special configurations.
Perso-Arabic Astrologers
Sahl (see The Introduction, Ch. 3, Dykes, 2008): He does not connect the 10th at all with children but does connect it with mothers. As might be expected, he does include in his significations of the 10th, “every profession [or mastery]” (p. 7). Love and children are the primary significations of the 5th in Sahl.
Abu Ma’shar and al-Qabisi (see I.13 of Dykes, 2010, Introductions to Traditional Astrology compilation): They both largely agreed in their basic house significations (though al-Qabisi gives more). The 5th is primarily about children and desires. The 10th is primarily about actions, authority, and the like. The 10th also pertains to mothers (but not children).
Al Biruni (see The Book of Instruction, #461, Wright, 1934): He associated the 5th primarily with children and pleasure. The 10th is primarily concerned with rule and profession. However, one of the significations for the 10th in a natal chart that is given is “well-behaved children” (p. 60).
Homogenizing
We’ve seen that a few Hellenistic authors make some association of the 10th with children. Rhetorius is believed to have drawn from older source material connected with Antiochus of Athens. Therefore, the different associations for the 5th and 10th may reflect earlier meanings assigned to those houses. In the later medieval tradition there is almost no mention of any association of the 10th with children. There is also less disagreement that the 5th is the primary house of children.
This is one of many instances in which we observe that ancient astrology moved from greater diversity to less diversity over time. Contrary to popular belief, astrology became more homogeneous with time, particularly through the Middle Ages. This is a matter I addressed in the earlier post, “Ancient Astrologers Didn’t All Agree“.
My Opinion
My opinion, as a father of two, is that the 5th place has the most pertinence to matters of one’s children. However, I do believe that in special techniques for the delineation of whether someone will have children, certain places have more relevance than others. In that regard I agree with Paulus. The 5th, 11th, 10th, and 4th places are relevant. The 5th associates with love, desire, and children themselves. The 11th is opposite the 5th, and connects with friends and networking. The 4th signifies family, origins, and the father. The 10th signifies mothers as well as social standing.
Therefore, I largely follow the opinion of Paulus in this matter, both in terms of house significations and in terms of his special techniques. The discussion about the 10th and children underscores the importance of special techniques in matters of the delineation of more specific topics. Topics such as whether someone will have children require special techinques. Often we attempt to read very specific things from the general basics of a chart. However, in ancient astrology these problems were the proper domain of special techniques that evaluated many factors relevant to the situation, such as various places and planets, lots, fixed stars, and other such things. Important areas of life should not be delineated from just the relevant house and its ruler.
References
Abu Ma’shar, The Abbreviation of the Introduction to Astrology, in Dykes 2010.
Al Biruni, The Book of Instructions in the Elements of the Art of Astrology, trans. R. Ramsay Wright (London, England: Astrology Classics, 2006).
Al-Qabisi, Uthman bin ‘Ali, Introduction to the Science of Astrology, in Dykes 2010.
Rhetorius of Egypt, Astrological Compendium, trans. and ed. James H. Holden (Tempe, AZ: American Federation of Astrologers, Inc., 2009) .
Dykes, Benjamin, trans. and ed., Works of Sahl & Masha’allah (Golden Valley, MN:The Cazimi Press, 2008).
Dykes, Benjamin, trans. and ed., Introductions to Traditional Astrology: Abu Ma’shar & al-Qabisi (Minneapolis, MN: The Cazimi Press, 2010) .
Paulus Alexandrinus, Late Classical Astrology: Paulus Alexandrinus and Olympiodorus, trans. Dorian Gieseler Greenbaum, ed. Robert Hand (Reston, VA: ARHAT Publications, 2001)
Rhetorius of Egypt, Astrological Compendium, trans. and ed. James H. Holden (Tempe, AZ: American Federation of Astrologers, Inc., 2009).
Sahl bin Bishr, The Introduction, trans. and ed. Benjamin N. Dykes, in Dykes 2008.
Featured image is in the public domain, cropped from Tacuina sanitatis (XIV century) 4-aspetti di vita quotidiana, canto in chiesa, Taccuino Sani.
It has some interesting insights into how mainstream definitions, and especially skeptic definitions, of astrology tend to mis-characterize it. Astrology does not require a belief that there is some sort of causal force emitted by planets that accounts for a set of astrological “effects”. He discusses how most ancient, and many modern, astrologers have viewed astrology in terms of signs and correlation rather than causation.
Of course, skeptics would like to believe that astrology necessitates physical forces emitted from the planets. Upon showing that there are no such physical forces sufficient enough to influence human affairs in such ways, they can claim they’ve “debunked” astrology. However, astrologers from the earliest strata of its practice in Babylonia tended to view it as “heavenly writing” akin to signs from a higher intelligence. Such as view does not require that planets cause anything. It is outside of the realm of physics and the opinions of physicists.
Mind and Body
Personally, astrology to me is no more or less mysterious than the mind-body problem, and is no closer to a real solution. I actually view the mind-body problem and the celestial bodies and their signs problem as not only being parallel, but probably the very same problem. Some have claimed to have bridged it, in both areas, but I think they are on very shaky ground. There is no necessary and logical reason that a certain physical electrical configuration through the brain should cause or even correlate with the non-physical thought about say, your investments or Barney the purple dinosaur. However, sure enough some physical happening will correlate with that thought at that moment.
It’s a great article with great insights! Check it out.
Featured image is a cropped portion of a page from „Ἀρχὴ ἐν βουλγαρίοις ριμάτον εἰς κῑνῆ γλότα ἐρχομένη”, a Bulgarian-Greek dictionary from the 16th century. Vat. Archivio San Pietro C 152, fol. 134v (public domain).
I was reading some of Tamsyn Barton’s (1994) work, “Ancient Astrology” last night. A passage at the end of her Chapter 5 on “Astrological Practice” spoke volumes to me. She discussed how there were a number of contradictory responses possible for any astrological situation. This made it hard, if not impossible, to known what a chart indicates from a text alone. Therefore, it was necessary for astrologers work out their own preferences in practice and in apprenticeship to experienced mentors (Barton, 1994). The passage is quoted below for you convenience:
To any one question, a large number of contradictory responses were available, and there were no clues as to how to choose between them. This finding demanded an explanation. (Barton, 1994, p. 141-142)
Furthermore, on analogy with other fields of knowledge, didactic texts were not the means of teaching, but rather of displaying knowledge. Secondly, I pointed to the importance of the institution of the ago¯n, or public debate, in Greco-Roman intellectual culture. (Barton, 1994, p. 142)
She also emphasized the possible role played by initiations, apprenticeships, and elaboration through debate (Barton, 1994, p. 142).
Not a Singular Set of Methods Passed Down
Anyone familiar with ancient Hellenistic and Persian astrological texts will note that there is quite a large range of variation in terms of techniques and special methods. Different astrologers did things a bit differently. Many astrologers communicated the same basic principles, but then stressed them differently in their chart work. For instance, in Valens and Maternus we find a strong stress on sect as an important force for evaluating goodness in all delineations. By contrast, in late Persian authors sign-based “dignity” becomes more prominent.
Emphasis: Prediction, Delineation, or Principles?
Different astrologers focused on different overall approaches to the chart as well. Valens was mostly interested in predictive techniques and longevity. He presented more example charts than are typical of Hellenistic texts. Maternus was mostly interested in natal delineation. Ptolemy wanted to re-invent astrology as part of Aristotelian physics. He evaluated topics based on the natural significations of the planets, and tried to avoid using houses and lots. Some astrologers, including Serapio and Porphyry, appear to have mainly focused on basic principles without examples of their use in delineations or prediction.
Special Technique Variety
When astrologers explored more complicated matters, such as occupation, fame, personality, or longevity, they often presented totally different special techniques. Paulus Alexandrinus evaluated the indicator of professional skill in a very different manner from Ptolemy. Persian astrologers tended to evaluate personality based on the ruler of the Ascendant (first house) and on Mercury. However, Ptolemy didn’t consider the first house, and instead looked to Mercury, the Moon, and their rulers. Maternus relied on a unique chart lord technique for the matter of personality. Maternus also cited 4 or 5 other ways that his contemporaries would find a chart lord which he found less effective.
Respect Plus Critical Thinking
The ancient astrologers were critical thinkers. Many of them were the premier natural philosophers of the age. For instance, Ptolemy’s modeling of the motions of the heavenly bodies and positions of the stars was very complex and the cutting edge for its day (2nd century CE). It was not superseded for over 1,300 years.
These natural philosopher astrologers had a strong duty to know their “science”, i.e. the body of knowledge. However, we can assume that they based their “art” (i.e. practice) on their own empirical work. In other words, they seem to have felt that prior astrologers, their “ancients”, had something important to say that should be studied and worked with, However, they didn’t feel one should just attempt to imitate them or that some “historically accurate reproduction” of their practice was a possibility. I feel that this contrasts sharply with both modern and traditional astrological practice in the modern era.
Modern Astrology’s Naïveté
Unfortunately, most modern astrologers are little interested in ancient science. They typically use concepts that were re-invented within the last couple centuries. It’s also common to see the use of modern astronomical definitions of what a “planet” is (based on orbital dynamics) rather than original astrological definitions of “planet” (a visible wandering star). Their techniques draw strongly on 20th century astrological inventors.
Disregard for Original Usage
This would be the astrology of the naive, where the origins of the science are of little importance. Astrology is almost completely re-invented to cater to modern disciplines like archetypal psychology. Of course, those modern astrologers that view astrology as more than mere entertainment may get involved in creating and testing hypotheses against charts. Many such astrologers are actively involved in organizations like the NCGR where research is important. However, overall there is a lack of respect for the ancients, the original authorities from which we inherited the system. Therefore, the basics used, and sometimes even tested, tend to have very little resemblance to Hellenistic astrology.
Critical Thought
Some positive attributes of modern astrologers include that they can be critical thinkers. Many disagree with authority are not afraid to tinker to improve something or come up with something better. If this group gets over their mistrust and misconceptions of ancient astrology, then some among them are likely to be the ones that can push it further. The opportunity exists for them to take the ingredients, together with today’s technology and abundant chart collections, infuse that with their critical thinking, creativity, and independent spirit, and produce truly amazing chart work.
I should add that the misconceptions modern astrologers have about traditional astrology are often the fault of a traditional community which has mis-represented traditional astrology as homogeneous in its basicelements, techniques, and philosophical outlook. The community has also given the impression of a fatalist fundamentalism though that fatalism is by no means a necessary feature of Hellenistic astrology.
Traditional Astrology’s Appeal to Authority
Many traditional astrologers today tend to view ancient astrology as having an orthodoxy. This correct way of doing things is arrived at not by empirical work but by appeal to the proper authorities. It is true that through the Middle Ages and the Renaissance astrology did become more homogenized. By following astrologers of this period verbatim, one has a ready appeal to authority. As these astrologers emphasized a subset of elements of earlier astrology, there is a tendency to cherry-pick from their earlier sources as if Renaissance astrologers practiced the same astrology as Hellenistic ones.
Rather than a respect for authority, like the ancient astrologers had, we see an appeal to authority. In debates about technique, they will tend to cite authority rather than supporting and contrasting examples. They seldom realize the richness of the earlier tradition. One can actually practice astrology very differently from the way that they do and still be completely relying upon ancient principles and techniques.
Late Tradition is Very Different from Early Tradition
There is a draw with this group toward a few astrologers whose work emerged over 1,000 years after the traditional began. Names like Bonatti, Lilly, Morin have come to be the primary authorities of “traditional” astrology. This characterization ignores the fact that the quadrant house systems, aspect doctrine, absence of sect, and dignity weighting doctrine are central features of only the later tradition. These key features of the later tradition are marginal or absent from the first thousand years of the tradition. It may be tempting to view later astrological work as part of a refinement of astrology in its march of progress. However, in my experience with charts, this is not so.
Reconstructions
Even among Hellenistic astrologers, there is often a need to stick with the interpretation of the tradition by a given astrologer. Particular astrologers advocate their own mix of preferred techniques, but too often it is represented as “the” Hellenistic astrology, rather than “a” Hellenistic astrology. This is clearest in reconstructions of the “the Hellenistic system”. Based on scant evidence an astrologer asserts that they can teach the original system, defining some terms and concepts along the way which were not widespread features of Hellenistic astrology. The implication is that Hellenistic astrology is already a corruption of another purer system, now lost, which they can teach you. These astrologers then become the new authorities to appeal to.
Developing an Art
To be a traditional astrologer you must be able to see through modern scientific triumphalist attitudes about knowledge and wisdom as well as religious fundamentalism. Therefore, it is somewhat surprising that traditional astrologers can so often be triumphalist and fundamentalist in their own approach. Do not confuse cherry-picking appeals to ancient authority with a respect for ancient astrology. There are countless means of approaching and assimilating the richness of traditional astrology. Simply appealing to a later approach does not do justice to the richness of the early texts. Nor does never moving beyond our teachers and authorities to explore the texts ourselves. Dig into source material, experiment with an open mind, and you’ll see the value of doing so.
Conclusion
I do much to characterize “many” and “most” astrologers of different schools, and perhaps this is an unfair straw man. I’d like to think so, but it’s going to take a new breed of astrologers to break me from my tendency to stereotype when it comes to these matters. My own appeal to authority is a simple one, do as the ancients did: study the foundational astrological texts, and think critically, rationally, and empirically. We should study ancient astrology thoroughly, and draw upon its rich set of vocabulary and techniques, but recognize that there is no single philosophical “right” understanding of astrology. We can distinguish a good practice of the art by its qualities of being consistent, coherent, and effective. It is separate from ancient science which is a vast pool of rich resources to draw upon.
Questions? Comments? Please add to the discussion.
References
Barton, T. (1994). Ancient Astrology. NY, NY: Routledge.
Featured image is Ornament for the month of January featuring the Roman god Janus by French illustrator Adolphe Giraldon (2014; public domain; cropped).
