Do House Traits Reflect Tropical Signs?

61
I am very interested in this topic but I feel constrained at the moment to fully share my opinions. I have read Deb's book on houses and I have written an article on the houses associated to signs in a coming issue of the ISAR Journal coming out in August 2014. Until this is released, I cannot not share a link to the article until publication. I will say there is a definite association of signs to houses, it's just not the Aries House Count which is a 20th century creation. I used the Hellenistic Planetary Order as my underlying principle.

My first article on the assignment of planets to signs has been published by ISAR Journal last April 2014. Here is the link to my website if you don't get a copy of this American astrological journal. The two articles are really conjoined and very relevant to this discussion but at the moment, I can only share this first half.

http://www.learnastrologynow.com/learna ... _2014.html
Naomi Bennett
www.LearnAstrologyNow.com

62
Mark wrote:
I think we are more likely to get a better level of input on the traditional forum. Many of our more traditional members dont regularly read this forum. I do think the issue of sidereal vs tropical astrology should be basically irrelevant to the discussion of house meanings as I see it. To bring it into the discussion seems quite a stretch to me.
Mark, I don't know why a number of forum members keep putting the "vs" into the sidereal question. It's not versus so much as another zodiacal reference point. Any discussion of houses does reference the zodiac via house rulers and dispositors. We really need to start looking at the zodiacal question as two different reference points for viewing the same problems. There shouldn't be a "versus."

Chris mentioned the ascendant ruler in the 3rd house in his discussion. If we were looking at example horoscopes, in the majority of cases the sidereal ascendant lord would be different. This is actually a critical point. Always, the zodiacs need to be compared, if only for obtaining a comprehensive view. We have reached the time in the development of astrology where both zodiacs need to be considered in any question that involves the actual delineation of horoscopes.

Any discussion that remains only in the philosophical area (especially regarding houses) isn't of much practical value unless example horoscopes are used to illustrate placements. This is why (in my opinion, and I believe in Martin's opinion--as a moderator--as well) sidereal commentary should be allowed on the traditional forum. I believe a while back you mentioned that you were going to discuss this issue with Deb?
Last edited by Therese Hamilton on Wed Jun 11, 2014 4:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm

63
This may be a bit off-topic here but I agree we should do less "S vs T", for the same reason I wouldn't describe one house system versus another - better to see them as alternate approaches rather than competing ones. As far as I'm aware, any kind of commentary can be made anywhere, so long as it is relevant to the topic at hand and doesn't violate the main objectives of whatever forum is hosting the discussion.
Last edited by Deb on Thu Jun 12, 2014 2:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

64
Therese Hamilton wrote:
Mark, I don't know why a number of forum members keep putting the "vs" into the sidereal question. It's not versus so much as another zodiacal reference point. Any discussion of houses does reference the zodiac via house rulers and dispositors. We really need to start looking at the zodiacal question as two different reference points for viewing the same problems. There shouldn't be a "versus."
Ok. Point taken. Obviously, there are practical differences in perspective. That also applies to working with different house systems too. However, what is proposed is not some sort of research study comparing zodiacs in terms of houses. Such discussions usually get us nowhere in the context of a forum like this anyway with so many differing approaches in terms of zodiacs, rulerships and house systems. Its more suitable for a personal blog, article or personal thread like you have set up on the sidereal forum.

As I recall that kind of comparative examination of charts in the different zodiacs was precisely the kind of discussion Tom said he didn't want on the traditional forum. If Deb is now comfortable with that I think she better talk to Tom!

All I was proposing was primarily a historical discussion looking at the changing attribution of house meanings from hellenistic to medieval astrology. I also think a discussion of Indian house meanings is relevant too.

Therese Hamilton wrote:
Any discussion that remains only in the philosophical area (especially regarding houses) isn't of much practical value unless example horoscopes are used to illustrate placements.
Well maybe its not to your personal taste Therese but I think studying the historical and philosophical roots of the houses is genuinely fascinating!

Deborah Houlding's book on the houses doesn't seek to delineate particular charts but its still one my favourite books.

Once we start putting up charts and delineating them based on houses we start dividing people. Surely, we can all take inspiration from such an historical and philosophical discussion and then individually test out house meanings with our chosen zodiac, rulership scheme and house system?

Mark
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

65
Hello Naomi,

Thank you for your post. I have just reviewed your article in hard copy, as I have the ISAR Journal. There are several fascinating points in your article for discussion, but so as to not distract from the topic here, I will quote only one concept, which I plan to incorporate in my own forum post on Pluto: http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... 9&start=30 (Outer Planets and the Zodiac)

I'd be very happy if you could quickly read posts in the above link if you have time, and perhaps continue the discussion there. (Later today I'll add brief notes from your article.) Of course, Naomi, your article opens up new topics for discussion.

Naomi Bennett's article: http://www.learnastrologynow.com/learna ... _2014.html

"If we maintain this planetary order of average mean distance, then Uranus must be assigned to Aquarius, Neptune to Pisces and Pluto to Aries. This is not haphazard. This is beyond coincidence."

As his is off-topic here, I'll return to Mark's latest post.
Last edited by Therese Hamilton on Thu Jun 12, 2014 12:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm

66
Mark wrote:
Once we start putting up charts and delineating them based on houses we start dividing people. Surely, we can all take inspiration from such an historical and philosophical discussion and then individually test out house meanings with our chosen zodiac, rulership scheme and house system?
This pretty well highlights the problem with astrology today. Until astrologers learn to work and converse together without rancor, sharing ideas in harmony rather than working as individual units, astrology will remain a stagnant discipline. Philosophical discussion is fine, but it would be best if it served as a foundation for more practical group study and discussion. Where would the various scientific areas be if scientists never studied each other's work, but each went merrily on his way, looking straight ahead without any consideration of the work of others?

The transition of house meanings from Hellenistic to Medieval additions is a fascinating subject. But the "why" of this may sometimes hinge on the zodiac, such as the shift of kings and sovereignty from the 9th (Jupiter???) to the 10th. Is this because astrologers began to observe those themes in tropical Capricorn rather than Sagittarius? Or is the change unrelated to any concept of signs and domicile rulership?

So very many complex questions we have yet to study!
As I recall that kind of comparative examination of charts in the different zodiacs was precisely the kind of discussion Tom said he didn't want on the traditional forum.
I wasn't thinking of that so much as when a planet in a house is being discussed, I like to run the AstroDatabank program and call up that planet and house to see what the biographical information is for people with that placement. It's true, though, I always want to look at the practical picture along with philosophical or theoretical discussion. I wouldn't be surprised if a number of house placement beliefs might collapse altogether upon close examination. So it really is an exciting time in history to be an astrologer! We're learning how important it is to ask questions.
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm

Do House Traits Reflect Tropical Signs?

67
Therese,

I posted my link to this first article because the use of Hellenistic Planetary Order can be used for tropical signs related to House Traits. There is a link between signs and houses. One is clockwise and the other is counterclockwise.

I didn't want to dilute this thread by discussing the first article but by only referencing it since this principle of Hellenistic Planetary Order can be used by houses and signs.

The second article to be published in August 2014 is a direct answer/response to Temples in the Sky and the on-going issues of house meanings.

I will gladly create a link to this second article to this thread so the whole logic can be viewed soon.
Naomi Bennett
www.LearnAstrologyNow.com

68
Naomi Bennett wrote:
I didn't want to dilute this thread by discussing the first article but by only referencing it since this principle of Hellenistic Planetary Order can be used by houses and signs.

The second article to be published in August 2014 is a direct answer/response to Temples in the Sky and the on-going issues of house meanings.
Naomi, are you referring to Deb's book here, The Houses: Temples of the Sky? (One of my favorite oft-referred-to references along with House notes by Robert Schmidt from Phasewatch, 1997.)

Looking forward to your article, Naomi. In the meantime I have added a note from your first article to a thread on Outer Planets and the Zodiac:
http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... 9&start=30

If possible, please let me know if that note is acceptable to you.

Therese
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm

70
May I ask a question? since I am afraid of misunderstanding or missing something.

Who is the cause and who is the result?

Does the joy of planet deduce the significations or traits of the house ?

For example , the 3rd house is associated with a change and a short journey etc. because of the Moon being joy in this place?

71
The houses are representing areas of life which are also the objects of various professions. So if we compare a house and its (in my view) corresponding sign with each other, the sign should have well-fitting professions attached to it. Is this really the case? According to modern astrologers, it is - but I suspect that traditional astrologers might say they simply derived their opinions from the implications of the houses in the first place. So can it be demonstrated that these professions really correspond with the signs they are assigned to?

For starters, let's look at the 2nd house... It stands for money. So if the house/sign analogy holds true, we would expect to find Taurus prominent in the charts of people with professions strongly tied in with financial matters, such as bank directors. So I searched for bank directors in Astro-Databank. I neglected all the charts that showed up even though they don't belong to bank directors, moreover the ones which are not rated AA. These are the first ten charts that fulfill the requirements:

http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Scripps,_John_P. (ASC in Taurus)
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Calvet,_Jacques (Nonagesimal in Taurus)
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Laing,_Hector (Sun in Taurus)
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Sarcinelli,_Mario (IC in Taurus)
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Sindona,_Michele (ASC in Taurus)
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Dini,_Lamberto (IC in Taurus)
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Volcker,_Paul (DESC 29? Aries; perhaps in Taurus, really?)
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Ramphele,_Mamphela (ASC in Taurus)
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/McNamara,_Robert_S. (Ruler of Taurus in 1st)
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Key ... hn_Maynard (Nonagesimal, MC, and a stellium in Taurus)

Michael
Last edited by Michael Sternbach on Sun Jun 15, 2014 4:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

72
Using another approach, let's consider the 4th house. Traditionally, it stands for parents, and ancestry in general. Quoting from Deb's ?The Houses: Temples of the Sky?, p. 69: ?Everything that relates to our foundations and root.? Now, the sign Cancer is where the soul descends down to Earth from before physical incarnation, according to Porphyry. He calls it ?The Gate of Man.?

As for its opposite, the 10th house, I find among its traditional meanings: glory, distinctions, honours. Porphyry calls Capricorn ?The Gate of Gods?; it is where souls ascend to after physical incarnation and the path that potentially leads to immortality (in the sense that the Gods are immortal).

For those of you who wish to read more about Porphyry's outlook (which originated in the Mithraic Mysteries), see Thomas R. K?mmerer [ed.]: ?Studien zu Ritual und Sozialgeschichte im Alten Orient?, p. 40 (don't worry, it's in English!):

http://books.google.ch/books?id=14RHfqx ... ul&f=false: