Hi all,

To answer the original question about which planet is a ruler, there are many answers how you define "ruler", but let's define for this topic "ruler" as "ruler of the horoscope", that is usually a difficult job to do. So my former answers were related only to the ruler of the horoscope.
And there I wrote that in order to be ruler of the chart, the planet MUST have aspects, otherwise it can never be a ruler. The ruler decides, it influences most in critical times, etc. so the ruler is of course the most important planet otherwise we should not have to call it the ruler.

A planet without aspects can never be the ruler of the horoscope. Who contradics that statement should do a re-study of astrology, that's my opinion.

Now of course a several horoscopes you will find planets that have no aspects. They will work nevertheless, because a planet will always work, that's his function, but in comparison with other planets it can never be more important, it will play a minor role.

Sure there can be many definitions of an unaspected planet. You can say you will only use major (Ptolemeic) aspects, but there is also a very large group of astrologers that use some of the minor aspects too, which is not per definition wrong to do.

Read Jean-Baptiste Morin, read Vehlow, no small astrologers, also used minor aspects, this is no crime.
I use the semi sextile, semi square, 135 and 150 as the only minor aspects with restricted orbs with a maximum of 1,5 degrees.

I don't use meteorites, Cheiron and the like. I never did and never will. I am quite reasonable when handling aspects, using ever conservative orbs. But from the beginning I used the modern planets Uranus, Neptune and Pluto and in my 1800 horoscopes and hundreds of clients I was always able to make predictions on those planets that worked with a few days difference. I can produce hundreds of examples of real clients having experienced events exactly on those dates of aspects.
But there will always be differences of view between all astrologers which also seems to be the case here.

Finally coming to the horoscope of Martin Luther King, I made the following: There you have all the aspects. Venus has 3, some planets have more, Uranus has none. Note that I also use parallels of declination as an aspect. You cannot ignore them, they also work, even with progressions, so each parallel counts as an aspect.
I would not say here that Venus is unaspected. Here role is not less than Mars' role. The fact that she is exalted and in a fortunate house says a lot.

Now here follows the horoscope with the progressions for 4-4-1968 the date of his unfortunate death. See how closely Venus squares the MC, she is working from the hidden 12th house from Aries (guns, shooting from hidden places). With a few minues extra time the square would be exact. You could not say that Venus did not work here, she represents his "life".

Now we should try to focus on the original question about the ruler and how to determine that. which is no easy task.