Venus_Daily wrote:I'm just brimming with Astrological goodness lately, but I wanted to ask...
I don't know if this question has been adressed here or not, but I was just wondering..in the book solunars Fagan talks about the house/sign order afinity being reversed with Libra having a 1st house quality/assingment/afinity as opposed to Aries, Virgo having a 12th house quality, Pisces having a 6th so on and so forth. This reverse affinity seems to have originated pre-tropical possibly from the Egyptians.
I was just wondering does this actually work out?
Q&A and discussion on Houses including house models and domification systems.
5 posts • Page 1 of 1
Jun 29, 2012 8:50 pm
Jim Eshelman wrote:Oh, it works about as well as the other way aroundVenus_Daily wrote:in the book solunars Fagan talks about the house/sign order afinity being reversed with Libra having a 1st house quality/assingment/afinity as opposed to Aries, Virgo having a 12th house quality, Pisces having a 6th so on and so forth. This reverse affinity seems to have originated pre-tropical possibly from the Egyptians.
I was just wondering does this actually work out?
It is unquestionably the original model for the 12-house system. You can read the early Roman writers such as Manilius - those who still attributed Gods and not planets to "rule" signs - and discover that Diana, patron of Sagittarius, is associated with the 3rd house, and her twin brother Apollo, patron of Gemini, corresponds to the 9th. The glyph for Libra is a simplification of the Egyptian hieroglyph for "place of sunrise," and its ruler, Venus, has a glyph barely distinguiishable from the hierglyph ankh, "life," corresponding to the apheta, or "life-point," of the Ascendant; while Mars, ruling Aries, has a glyph resembling the hieroglyph khopet, "death," and corresponding to the anaereta, or "death-point," of the Descendant. And so on.
Also, this has been the prevailing model through most of the time houses have been part of the astrological model. I have a major astrology text book from the first part of the 19th century that displays a Libra-as-1st-house diagram as a basic illustration, even though houses are barely mentioned in the book. The model had survived suffciently in the literature to make it that long (primarily because of the long-term replication of teachings from Medieval astrology texts, being more or less copied). And I don't think I've seen an actual Aries-as-1st correlation in anything before the Alan Leo era of the late 19th century/ (I might have missed something earlier, of course.)
The real question you're asking, though, isn't about the history, but about the efficacy: Does it work?
The first question is: Do houses even work? The general trend among Sidereal authors is to answer that they do not. Fagan and Bradley were, at best, inconsistent. I do find them valid, but assign them to the lowest level of significance of any of the tradionally "major" factors. That is, they can be easily ignored without significant los of information (which usually leads to more accuracy than if one errs in the opposite direction).
So... going just with my impressions, and without anything of a statical nature to back it up, how would I answer your actual question? Well, I still have one more layer of caveat: Any arrangement that attempts to infer house meanings by analogies to sign meanings MUAST (necesarily) be imperfect for the simple reason that planets naturally flow through signs in one direction (call this "forward") and through houses in the opposiute direction (call this "backwards"). That is, the Sun and Moon (and, most of the time, all the other planets) progress through the signs in the sequence Libra, then Scorpio, then Sagittarius, whereas they progress through the houses in the sequence 1st house, then 12th, then 11th, etc. Soooo... unless we premise that there is no sequentiality in the meanings of the sign-set and house-set... they can't be very close analogues to each other.
OK. So, imperfect at best. But, given that it's imperfect, is there anything to ANY such sign-to-house match-up? And, if so, then which one works better?
You're going to hate me for this, but... I find the analogies "work," to some extent, both ways. You can run the arguement both ways. If anything, the Libra-1st model has an edge, but no way can I say it's definitive. I suspect this is because there is not really a sign-to-house correation but, rather, that there is a vague relationship between the two.
I may post more giving some examples, but that's my basic answer.
Jim Eshelman wrote:Let's look at some basic house meanings and see how it falls. This is all rhetoric - bringing logic and arguements to the matter - so don't confuse it with actual observation except where I occasionally allude to observation.
Is the "self" idea more a Venus or a Mars idea? Well, Mars is more egoic, and if you think of the "self" shown by the 1st as more "genuine" ego elements, then Mars sounds better; and, in any case, the Ascendant area seems to have more of a "behavior" or "self-in-expression" quality that, in its forth-flowing sense, is more marsy. OTOH I don't think of the Ascendant and 1st house so much "self" as "an image of the self," a facade, a face one wears. It's more "cosmetic" than anything else - how you dress up your behavior to interact with others in the world. And that starts sounding pretty darn Venussy!
There is also the symbolic point mentioned before: The Libra glyph is a hieroglyph for "the place of sunrise," and Venus = life just as the Ascendant is the traditional apheta.
If we focus on the money-property aspects, is this more of a Taurus or a Scorpio idea? Well, the easily observable traits of Tropical Taurus luminaries in this regard is really just a mistaking them or true (Sidereal) Aries luminaries. Mars is the force that drives business, acquisition, competition. (Note the Mars dominance in charts of business leaders and general executives). To me, it seems more of a Scorpio idea, a pure Mars expression. OTOH I see the "propety" elements of the 2nd as more of "proxy self," things we almost-but-not-quite bind to our egos as self-surogates. ("Our things.") This gives an interesting consideration of the "flip as convenient" theory, one where Venus-as-Libra is the 1st, and Venus-as-Taurus is the 2nd. (Remember: this is all rhetoric.)
The Greeks and Romans attributed sibling deities to Sagittarius (Artemis-Diana) and Gemini (Apollo). You can't get the "brothers" idea much more from one than from the other. You can argue that most Twin myths are about two brothers, and that's valid; but also that fraternity in the broader sense is a Sagittarian idea, as well as the slightly broader circle of "community." The 3rd does seem more Geminian to me overall than Sagittarian, because the primary thing I see chaeracterized here is the way that the mind works, and that's an easier Mercury-theme idea, all things considered - it's more "workaday" and ordinary than the institutional ideas structured in the 9th.
We hit the old "which parent is which end of 4th/10th" axis, and it's clear that ancient sources related the father to the 4th and the mother to the 10th. Also, the 4th is traditionally related to real estate and inheritance which, through most of thelast 2,000 years of history, as been a Dad-related them. In most senses, therefore, Saturn-ruled Capricorn most easily fits the traditional themes of the 4th House, and Moon-ruled Cancer (with Jupiter exalted) best fits the traditional themes of the 10th House.
I see the 5th as primarily expressing aliveness, freedom, and a spontaneous flowing forth of self in creative expression. It is lusty and unbridled. While this could be argued either for Sun or Uranus (on paper), and feels like some kind of mixture of the two, the libertine characteristic of the 5th (and of people with strong emphasis on the 5th) seems more Uranian to me. (Or, to take classic rulerships: Given that the 11th is patronage and dignity, the solar rulership seems to fit there better, while Saturn-ruled Aquarius makes sense governing the area of life most likely to result in scandal.)
Sickness and servitude? Let's make this easy: Pisces!
One can't argue against the Venus relationship to, well, relationship! OTOH the 7th is traditionally "cooperation or competition," both sides of the principle, and that alone tells us that sometimes Venus ideas prevail, while other times Mars ideas prevail. - The natural relationship of Mars to death (7th = anaereta) has already been mentioned. (And, of course, a Pluto rulership of Aries makes this even more powerfully on-target.)
A harder call, in part because the changing characteristics of the 8th through historty, and partly because of the confusion of Sidereal Libras for Tropical Scorpios. - I'm going to chicken out on analyzing this one and let you sort it out on your own rather than fill space with my own tedium. I probably would bottom-line it as saying that the inherent existentialism of the 8th is a major characteristic of Taureans. (The 8th doesn't refer to death per se, but to confrontation of the idea of death as part of a deeper existential relationship to life.) The essentially in-turned, self-searching, others-orientation of the 8th is much more a Venus (especially Venus as Taurus) idea than a Mars idea.
The whole "institutional, establishment" sense of the 9th seems far more Sagittarian to me than Geminian. (This also gives an interesting "Jupiter arc" around the Midheaven: Jupiter-ruled Sagittarius for the 9th, Jupiter-exalted Cancer for the 10th, and Zeus/JHove-patronized Leo [to the ancient Greeks and Romans] for the 11th.)
Mostly addressed in the discussion of the 4th House. Add Jupiter's exaltation in Cancer for the broad exaltation and eminence characteristics of the 10th, and the paired Moon-Jupiter patronage for the public face of the 10th.
Modern sources say this is "friends" and "hopes & wishes." In earlier centuries it dealt more directly with patronage and aspiration, ideas I see in 11th House emphases to this day. This seems to clearly fit the solar rulership of Leo, the regality of the lion, the nobility and aristocracy and sense of favor from the Jupiter rulership the ancient Greeks and Romans gave to the sign. OTOH the 11th House sense of what constitutes "community" does seem similar to what I feel from Sidereal Aquarius, especially in the "devoted to people but not persons" sense.
Well, as easy as it is to relate Pisces to the 6th, it's almost as easy to relate it to the most common modern assignments to the 12th. Make of that what you will.
Just one more theoretical thing to note here, though - about the 12th and 9th. I think it was Fagan who, in one of his earliest reactions to the Gauquelin professional research, noted that the prominence of characteristic professional planets in the 12th and 9th houses [the simplest interpretation of the Gauquelin graphs] went along with the Virgo and Gemini corresponding to these houses, and being ruled by Mercury - the planet of commerce, the merchants, and business. Again, make of that what you will.
Jim Eshelman wrote:Now, against all that theory, let's see if we can get any insight from looking at actual observations of behavior. What follows is based on my posted interpretations for luminaries in the houses. These were based on observations of people known to me. Let's see where this takes us.
Sun here is proud, authoritative, non-reciprocal. Strong and enthusiastic self-projection to environment. Sense of goal or direction. Vitality. Sounds more Mars-Sun (Aries).
Moon here is restless, moody, subjective, changeable, eager. Response to a given situation not dependable. Strongly responsive to environment. Emotional “feelers” extended; feelings prominent; eager to help a friend. Sounds slightly more Mars (Aries), but with elements of a Moon-Venus aspect (Libra).
Sun here has a keen sense of ownership; possessiveness; is self-identified with resources. Sense of power from harnessing resources. Sounds slightly more like Mars, and definitely more Sun in Scorpio than Sun in Taurus.
Moon here is strongly reliant on personal resources (women especially rebel against conventional domestic roles and hold their own in a professional sphere). Shrewd, tenacious. Enjoys life. Protective of “what is theirs.” Clearly pronounced Mars/Scorpio themes.
Sun here is vvacious, restless. Intellect illuminated. Intellectually agile, versatile, calculating, shrewd. Disseminating. Little ambition or objective sense of direction. Cagey, deceptive, in the sense of being indirect, manipulative. Mostly Mercury-Gemini themed, but the pronounced vivaciousness is so splendidly Jupiter.
Moon here fosters curiosity; active mind; information-exchange needs. Travel (unstable formative environment). Mobility, fluctuation. Feelings linked with intellect; subjectivity. Common sense. Emphatically Mercury/Gemini.
Sun here shows a strong parental (paternal) principle (root-conscious). Emphasis on family matters (domesticity). Pride in home. Striving for a secure basis. Could be either Capricorn or Cancer, with slight tip to the former. (Sun-Saturn blends have most of these traits, whereas Sun-Moon blends don't contribute it as such.)
Moon here needs emotional security. Emotionally attached to home, parents (mother), and heritage. Family-spirit, domestic. Nurtures, but needs nurturing. Powerful emotions mobilized protectively. Strongly sensitive to psychic tone of the environment and its occupants. Could be either, but feels slightly more Capricorn/Saturn tipped. (That is, lunar elements come from the fact that it's the Moon we're examining.)
Sun here is oriented to pleasure (own and others’), spontaneous self-expression, strong individuation needs, self-confidence, delightfulness. Often riveting charisma. Creative thrust. Ego identified with own creations (children). Could be either, but feels more Uranian than solar to me.
Moon here fosts a love of variety, self-expressive needs, many love affairs; strong libido; focus on pleasure. Ardent. The ardor etc. is a Sun-Moon blend, but the overall emphasis is Uranian.
Sun here emphasises work, service, and body/health concerns (body-conscious). Pride in personal achievements. Vitality not trustworthy. Determined worker. Could be interpreted partially as Mercurial, but these are known major characteristics of Sun in Pisces for the most part.
Moon here shows focus on service as mode of self-completion, emotional martyrdom in partnering (nurturing + service). Partnering with ‘institution cases.’ Hesitancy to freely respond to a situation (emotional repression?). Moody, frequent job changes, considerate of coworkers. Clearly more Piscean.
Sun here needs ego-validation from others (vain, narcissistic), desire to be an important person. Others-oriented, a “public personality.” Holds self above reproach (“holier than thou”). Ambitious, confident demeanor; opportunistic. Considerable vitality.
[NOTE: Many of these (but not hardly all) have an overt or shadow need to be in charge of other people. Among the famous, this appears in many striking cases, including Hitler and Himmler, Manson, several top tier directors, the only general I ever personally knew, and several matching examples from personal files.] With a tip to the potential vanity of Sun with Venus, these are, nonetheless, predominantly Aries traits!
Moon here shows a focus on relationships; companionship needs. Responsive to others, obliging. Nurturing and emotional interchange important in relationships; need for love and affection. Sociable, popular, attracts others’ attention easily. Ease of public expression. Easily pressured into taking sides or responding to “the issues.” Clearly a Venus/Libra preference.
Sun here is strong-willed. Illuminates and supports others’ resources. Contemplative, probes mysteries of existence (grand overview of life), need to solve problems. Physical passions important. Equally balanced Taurus vs. Scorpio, with slight preference to Taurus.
Moon here shows self-doubts, insecure (over-compensatingly brazen, aggressive, combative). Fascinated by death (self-destructive, taunts danger). Emotional distress, “victim complex,” motivated (or driven!) by deep psychological forces. A mix of Scorpio-Taurus that doesn't quite fit either, but at least tips toward the Mars/Scorpio side in outer behavior.
Sun here is drawn by the exotic (travel, “world-hoppers”). Enthusiasm. Sense of professionalism to provide self-vindication, validation, or status. Able to communicate own best assets. Need for importance. (The women are typically highly dependent on spouses with low assertion of individuality or independence; the men are usually “peacocks.”) Much stronger for Jupiter/Sagittarius.
Moon here is intellectually “uppity.” Focus on philosophy, abstract thought, and academics. Idealistic. Imagination, receptive mind. Love of travel. Earnest, sincere. Moody. Much stronger Sagittarius expression, with just a tip toward Gemini.
Sun here shows awareness of authority within self and others (paternal bias). Achievement-oriented, responsible, managerial. Proud. Probable success in career. Capricorn biased, though not badly represented by the Moon-Jupiter components of Cancer.
Moon here needs notice and recognition, loves receiving attention (colorful characters). Ambitious, takes job seriously, deeply committed to profession. Socially active. Mostly Cancer, i.e., Moon-Jupiter themes.
Sun here shows growth needs pronounced. Desire to do something specific. Strong need for appreciation. Gregarious; social ease; attractive to opposite sex. Great powers of observation, knowledge of human nature (helping-professions). Heavily Leo themed with no Aquarius themes outside of the last phrase.
Moon here Needs for appreciation and inclusion. Socially popular. Readiness to help (comes on strong, insistent). Uniquely personalized approaches, sense of “where they want to be,” goals, hopes and wishes. Self-satisfied, smug in their position, strong-willed. Good observation powers. Image of independent spirit. Mostly a strong Leo showing, though a few traits are shared by Aquarius and Leo (some of which are a tad more Aquarian).
Sun here shows privacy needs, secretive, prefers seclusion (loner, hermit). Moody, circumspect. Inhibitions; self-expression retarded. Most of these could be either Virgo or Pisces - the words selected rarely attach to one sign or the other, but the underlying "feel" could be present in either. [NOTE: I can't entirely escape the idea that "Hermit" is the name of the Virgo card in Tarot.]
Moon here is secluded (hermit). Difficult emotional complexes, inferiority feelings, moody; an “I’m not OK but you’re OK” syndrome, or “You’re probably better than I am.” Passive or defeatist attitude, drifting. Frustration of nurturing needs and emotional interchange. Vulnerable to pain. Arguably either or neither.
I am left with the conclusion that there is no firm sign-to-house relationship, but that the axes themselves (e.g., Leo-Aquarius axis and 5th-11th House axis) have a fairly good relationship - just that the traits/attributions are divided up differently between the two ends of the house polarity than they are between the two ends of the sign polarity.
This fits with my experience. Further, which sign is the more prominent will vary with the factor under consideration. For example, let's put a planet in the seventh house, unaspected in the middleground in a sign which it is neither dignified nor debilitated. Such a placement will make Venus subtly "more Venus" and Mars subtly "more Mars" while Jupiter is not subtly "more Jupiter". The effect is a considerably weaker version of the effect Mercury gets in Virgo.I am left with the conclusion that there is no firm sign-to-house relationship, but that the axes themselves (e.g., Leo-Aquarius axis and 5th-11th House axis) have a fairly good relationship - just that the traits/attributions are divided up differently between the two ends of the house polarity than they are between the two ends of the sign polarity.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests