skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

limits to house sizes and capacity (placidus)

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
fish
Guest





Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 8:18 am    Post subject: limits to house sizes and capacity (placidus) Reply with quote

obviously, there are limits to house sizes

having flicked through about thirty charts the biggest house i can find is about 66 and the smallest 14

are there limits? and apart from the obvious, does size matter?

what do we say about signs that are completely spanned with no house cusp? in the above example the ascendant is in pisces and the second house cusp in taurus

while we are in the subject, i am working on a chart with a 17 4th house and 5 planets crammed into it... what do we say in general about such phenomena?

jws
Back to top
Papretis



Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 346
Location: Finland

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi fish,

on this site there is an excellent (though one that requires deep concentration) article about the very thing you're asking about: http://www.skyscript.co.uk/polar1.html .

Of course there are no limits. I live in Finland, and now and then I encounter horoscopes like this owned by a friend of mine:
1st December 1972 at 2.08 PM (-2.00), Oulu, Finland 65N00 25E32. Note that we've not even crossed the Polar Circle yet.

This touches something that I've been thinking lately, the offset degrees for houses. Many astrologers consider a planet located near the cusp of the next house to be in that house. But what is the rule? Five degrees? What if you have a house that is less than five degrees by its whole size? You may have a situation where you have the 3rd cusp located in the 4th house if you give a five degree offset for the 4th house!

So that principle doesn't always work on the extreme (and even not that extreme) latitudes. Where has this practice come from? Could it be possible that the cusps actually mark the exact borders of the houses?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fish
Guest





Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 10:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

what a lonely little Chiron, lost in the nordic night gloaming!

my feeling is that offset should be a percentage. if a standard house is 30 degrees, then 5 degrees represents 16.6%

having considered it further, it strikes me as ridiculous that a planet in the 12th house of your friend's chart would be considered in the first house if it was <16.6% from the cusp (c. 20 degrees) - i am imagining a rule something like: 5 degrees or 1/6 of the house, whichever is smaller.

there must be some limits: there must be 6 houses in each hemisphere so the limit must be 180-(6*min)

i will read the article now

for most of my life i use whole signs and sidereal, so this issue does not arise
Back to top
Ed F



Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 301
Location: Ipswich, MA USA

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Points on the celestial sphere (obviously including planets) should be placed in houses according to their proportional progress along their semiarcs (declination circles) if you are using this method. Mike Wackford at least touches on this in his series.

- Ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MWackford



Joined: 25 Jan 2008
Posts: 14
Location: South Coast - UK

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 8:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fish,

The following article may better assist you and although it doesn't deal with Placidus, it does prepare the ground for part 3, which does.

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/polar2.html (or just click on "articles," above, and then select it.

The point is this: - Houses cannot be measured accurately with zodiac degrees. The inclination of the ecliptic skews the result. Placidian houses are measured in Right Ascension - ie along the Equator, where they ALWAYS measure an equal 30 degrees each.... at every latitude.

Mw
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MWackford



Joined: 25 Jan 2008
Posts: 14
Location: South Coast - UK

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Papretis,

The "five-degrees before the cusp" thing was recommended by Ptolemy. And those will be house degrees, not Ecliptic (see response to Fish, above)

Curiously enough - Gauqelin's findings appear to corroborate the practice.


Mw
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Papretis



Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 346
Location: Finland

Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 10:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MWackford wrote:
Curiously enough - Gauqelin's findings appear to corroborate the practice.

But were the Gauquelin peaks not in the middle of the cadent houses? At least in the diagrams I've seen, that's the case (for example The Spheres of Destiny, pages 20 and 21). The peaks are located quite exactly on the middle of the 12th, 9th, 6th and 3rd houses.

But if we are using Placidus houses and the five degree rule means house (Equatorial) degrees, that would mean measuring the offset with percents like fish suggested - and that would mean 16,6% of every house, regardless of how "big" it is. Interesting. Now we should only find a software that registers the planetary positions in this way Exclamation
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mattG



Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 345
Location: Greenwich UK

Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 11:19 am    Post subject: 5 degree rule Reply with quote

Yes I remember the power zones seem to go the "wrong" way. The five degree rule of Ptolemy is open to discussion anyway ( I think I read on this in Hand's "Whole Sign Houses") and was stated long before many of the house systems in use today were in invented.What I find odd is that we go to great lengths to calculate the house cusps and state that our system is best then admit that it is five degrees out - insert puzzled looking smiley face here
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Papretis



Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 346
Location: Finland

Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 11:48 am    Post subject: Re: 5 degree rule Reply with quote

matt23z wrote:
The five degree rule of Ptolemy is open to discussion anyway ( I think I read on this in Hand's "Whole Sign Houses") and was stated long before many of the house systems in use today were in invented.What I find odd is that we go to great lengths to calculate the house cusps and state that our system is best then admit that it is five degrees out - insert puzzled looking smiley face here

It is a bit odd. I've been slowly but steadily reading the Bonatti translation by Ben Dykes, and every time there is a gem or two. One thing I've been thinking in regard with the house cusps is the way Bonatti (and his predecessors) evaluated aspects: Bonatti stresses several times that as soon as the aspect is perfected, it's over. It may generate fear or hope (regarding of whether the aspect is from a malefic or a benefic), but that fear or hope doesn't actualize, the person avoids the thing signified by the aspect (sometimes at the last moment if the aspect is still close). (This fear/hope thing with separating aspects could serve us with a lot of psychological insights. And then they say that traditional astrology lacks psychological depth!)

Should we use the same principle with the house cusps? When a planet is in a house, it's applying the house cusp. But as soon as it has crossed the cusp, it's over, it doesn't apply the cusp any more. There may be some remnants left (on the mental level maybe), but the passing has happened and the planet has started to apply to the next cusp.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 4130
Location: England

Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Should we use the same principle with the house cusps? When a planet is in a house, it's applying the house cusp. But as soon as it has crossed the cusp, it's over, it doesn't apply the cusp any more. There may be some remnants left (on the mental level maybe), but the passing has happened and the planet has started to apply to the next cusp.


I think we have to come to some sort of consensus as to what is actually happening. Bonatti talks about planets exiting houses at the cusp as you have done, and astronomically this is what seems to happen in real time. Actually the cusp moves towards the planet, and I think it is more useful to think of the planet and cusp coming together.

If we work on the principle that each cusp is to each house what the ascendant is to the 1st house, then a planet on the cusp has come to the point of full manifestation of that house's concern, and I don't think this ends at the minute of exactness (as with aspects) because by annual revolution the planet is moving towards the cusp - so although the real time event is over, the symbolic union is just coming into effect.

But I should declare my prejudice - my own experience would never allow me to give up the 5 degree orb, because with horary I constantly see planets falling into the 5 degree orb of the house cusp of the quesited. So much so, that it is one of the ways that I recognise a chart as valid. But I extend this approach to natal charts too, and I am personally convinced that planets are more powerfully placed just before the cusp than actually inside the house.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mattG



Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 345
Location: Greenwich UK

Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 2:47 pm    Post subject: Cusp Reply with quote

I have heard John Frawley make a similar point. His example was that L7 close to your cusp of 1st house indicated defeat for you but if it was a few degrees into house 1 it lost its effect. I do not remember the exact degrees he uses but it is probably in his new book. I do not have that book nor Bonatti as Saturn won't let me buy any more astrology books.
Another writer points out that cusp means point so an orb around the cusp could be what was meant by the term.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
zuli



Joined: 19 Sep 2006
Posts: 83

Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Deb wrote:
But I should declare my prejudice - my own experience would never allow me to give up the 5 degree orb, because with horary I constantly see planets falling into the 5 degree orb of the house cusp of the quesited. So much so, that it is one of the ways that I recognise a chart as valid. But I extend this approach to natal charts too,

So, and what orb do you allow?

Deb wrote:
and I am personally convinced that planets are more powerfully placed just before the cusp than actually inside the house.

I'm not convinced. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 4130
Location: England

Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 3:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

zuli wrote:
Deb wrote:
But I should declare my prejudice - my own experience would never allow me to give up the 5 degree orb, because with horary I constantly see planets falling into the 5 degree orb of the house cusp of the quesited. So much so, that it is one of the ways that I recognise a chart as valid. But I extend this approach to natal charts too,

So, and what orb do you allow?


Five degrees. (I did say that didn't I?)

Quote:
Deb wrote:
and I am personally convinced that planets are more powerfully placed just before the cusp than actually inside the house.

I'm not convinced. Smile


It is your privilege, and your right, to be convinced by your own experience and not mine (though of course, this is a widely reported traditional principle, and not just my own opinion). But I will say this: if the Moon is sitting IN the 7th house, within 5 degrees of the 8th house cusp, this is not a good thing for relationships!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MWackford



Joined: 25 Jan 2008
Posts: 14
Location: South Coast - UK

Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Papretis

As I recall, Gauquelin's peaks were not in the middles of the Cadent houses but accrued nearer to the angles.

As to why this should be - well - I used to content myself with the idea that a planet had been soaking up a house's influence for 25 degrees, culminating with an additional charge as it passed over the angle. It would then take a few degrees for that 'influence' to wear off, so to speak.

These days I'm not so sure, so don't quote me, but otherwise I'm with Deb on this one and, despite what other correspondents think about him, Ptolemy must have got it from somewhere. It's not the sort of thing you just dream up.

As for establishing whether a planet is 5 house degrees prior to a cusp...
well that's rather easy under Placidus - a lot easier than calculating a Camp or Regio position.

Formula is as follows: - M(eridian)D(istance) divided by S(emi)A(rc) x 90 = the planet's true house position.

As for software to do this, you need look no further than a Casio programmable calculator, which is what I use for this sort of thing.

And if I could just find that tame programmer, we'd be in business (Deb has sent me some suggestions)

Mw
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ed F



Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 301
Location: Ipswich, MA USA

Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 4:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MWackford wrote:
Papretis
...
And if I could just find that tame programmer, we'd be in business (Deb has sent me some suggestions)

Mw


Janus provides these in its "rationalized semiarc" wheel. astro.com gives the Gauquelin sector positions (which are based on what Mike describes). My free application does these positions, and Placidus mundo and zodiacal primaries, but its based on a different approach than the semiarc method, and so deviates as geo latitude gets extreme. The deviations are very small at non-polar latitudes. http://mysite.verizon.net/vze6qirr/myindex.html. It's free speech and free beer software, runs on windows or can be built for various UNIX-like systems.

- Ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated