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:
Lilly's Considerations
compiled by D. Houlding
Book II of Carmen Astrologicum by Dorotheus
translated by David Pingree
Compiled by Deborah Houlding
The Babylonian Astrolabe: the Calendar of Creation, by Rumen K. Kolev
Reviewed by Gill Zukovskis

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Joint Rulers
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Night Sky



Joined: 13 Sep 2008
Posts: 124

Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:03 am    Post subject: Joint Rulers Reply with quote

Since all but Sun and Moon have rulership of two signs, when one is ruler of two houses... what is the possibility, how is this considered?

Do you simply treat this as if you had a planetary conjunction of two house rulers?

Take Ascendant ruler = MC ruler. Wherever this is placed I take that the native would have as powerful an influence with 10th house affairs as if AC ruler were placed in house 10, or if house 10 ruler were placed in conjunction with AC ruler (two different planets).

To me in fact this dual rulership through one planet would be stronger and more natural than having two separate house rulers in aspect to one another.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sasha_i



Joined: 06 Apr 2005
Posts: 288
Location: Bucuresti

Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello,

Quote:
Do you simply treat this as if you had a planetary conjunction of two house rulers?


No need for such association. In your case there is one ruler for two house not two rulers in conjunction

Evident for me is that the two houses are determined by the same ruler, but this alone doesn’t create automatically a link between those two houses, in the manner presented by you.


Quote:
Take Ascendant ruler = MC ruler. Wherever this is placed I take that the native would have as powerful an influence with 10th house affairs as if AC ruler were placed in house 10, or if house 10 ruler were placed in conjunction with AC ruler (two different planets).



Why do say that simply because there is one ruler for ASC and MC, this fact alone is the same with having Asc ruler in 10 house?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Night Sky



Joined: 13 Sep 2008
Posts: 124

Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don´t think you get it.

Having one planet rule over two house means that the two houses are always going to be activated by transits to this one planet, hence the two houses are combined.

You need to learn astrology not me. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sasha_i



Joined: 06 Apr 2005
Posts: 288
Location: Bucuresti

Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quite aggressive for a night sky
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Night Sky



Joined: 13 Sep 2008
Posts: 124

Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, so you don´t have an argument to make then. You accept my explanation and take back your own assertion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PFN



Joined: 28 Dec 2008
Posts: 393
Location: Ouro Preto, Brasil

Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow, wow, let's calm down a bit here.

Nigh Sky, he's assertion was strong but not plain out rude, no need for this, it's a opinion like any other.

Anyway, I think that this notion presented has something to it, but first and most importantly, you have to have a clear understanding of the chart.

I believe there was a discussion some time ago saying that some arabic astrologers delineated in a way that goes more or less like this: "Aries rises, then Mars rule 8th, so the native has some participation in his own death". This is too simplistic, but might contain a degree of truth.

Anyway, what you suggest is that if, ie, I have Venus ruling 2nd and 7th, a transit to it will tie both houses together. That is true in my opinion, but not always important.

Let's see why: Venus may see 2nd, but not 7th. If that's so, Venus will almost have no say in 7th, more yet if there is no outlet through another planet and if there is a planet on 7th.

Now, I might be wrong on this take of mine, but there is a hierarchy in planets, of superiors and inferiors. I'm no transit expert, but if this works as much as Deb Houlding suggested, an activation of a superior to an inferior might affect one house and not the other, depending on the configuration they are in the chart, since you have to look at aspects by whole sign, position, rulership by exaltation, triplicity, aversion, orb, etc.

What I'm saying is that there are so many factors involved that sometimes it may greatly affect one house, but not so much the other, making one of the houses an unimportant secondary effect. Obviously sometimes that will not be the case, and both houses will be tied, so it's up to the astrologer to see when the thread is of importance or not.

A pratical example: suppose I'm married. Some bad transits triggers and I get divorced. Me and my spouse had joint finances. I'll lose money, but the ruler of my 2nd can see my 2nd, what does not happen to my 7th, And I have Jupiter sitting in my 2nd. So, the financial loss is not that important, but as a relationship matter, it may well be a disaster.


Last edited by PFN on Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:47 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Night Sky



Joined: 13 Sep 2008
Posts: 124

Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I love heated discussion. Laughing


Thanks for the engaging response.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3896
Location: England

Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2009 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nightsky have you read the forum guidelines? http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/templates/subSilver/read.php

You agreed to these when you joined the forum and the first point is this:
Quote:

Members should post in a way that is respectful of other members. Members undertake to make their comments freely available to a diverse range of visitors to the site, and so should avoid posting comments that could cause offence or be generally construed as objectionable in content or tone.


Maybe English is not your first language, so I’m not sure if you realise how cutting your response to Sasha was. I want to make you aware of this because otherwise I think people will hesitate before answering your posts.

Deb
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Night Sky



Joined: 13 Sep 2008
Posts: 124

Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2009 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Deb you are right, I felt a tinge of guilt after I clicked "sumbit" the message. I shouldn´t have done it in retrospect. So I appologise for my bad behaviour. I blame Pluto.

I didn´t read the rules, but I have done now. What was the argument even about in the first place? Who knows.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Night Sky



Joined: 13 Sep 2008
Posts: 124

Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2009 7:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What do you think of joint rulers Deb?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3896
Location: England

Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 8:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is a relationship, which the ancient astrologers called ‘like-engirdling’ but I’m not sure it would be considered strong enough to operate in the way that you suggest. My practical experience is more in horary than nativities, so I’m not the best person to ask. Perhaps there is someone here who knows more about how ‘like engirdling’ was practically used in Hellenistic astrology?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4171
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 10:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This notion of 'like-engirdling' signs was something I was thinking of posting about myself.

I recently had an electional chart I was looking at with Moon in Sagittarius and Sun in Pisces forming an applying square. I was trying to consider whether the fact Jupiter ruled both signs in some way mitigated the square aspect. However, I reached the personal conclusion that it would always depend on the condition of the planets involved and their dispositor. For example if the scenario above occured with Jupiter in Capricorn in the 12th house I wouldn't expect the joint rulership to be much use. In fact it would seem to make the negative dimension of the aspect more emphatic. However, this is just my pragmatic approach to this.

Of course this is a very straightforward example. What really intrigues me is the hellenistic idea that signs such as Aquarius/Capricorn, Scorpio/Aries, Taurus/Libra can be regarded as 'seeing each other' in a chart where no Ptolemaic aspect can be formed. At least in a strictly whole signs sense.

It leaves me wondering whether contrary to what we are often told that hellenistic astrologers did consider out-of sign-aspects on occasion. For example would they consider a sextile by degrees between a planet at say 1 Capricorn and 29 Aquarius or similarly a trine between a planet at 29 Scorpio and 1 Aries? Certaiinly, the 2nd century astrologer Antiochus of Athens does suggest that aspects can be formed in three ways; by sign, degree or in-mundo. Manilius, makes a similar point about the importance of aspect by degree.

I would appreciate an insight into the hellenistic perpective on such situations from someone who has worked with this technique in charts.
_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus


Last edited by Mark on Mon Mar 30, 2009 11:03 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4171
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 11:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
On another hand it is again described as a mitigation to aversion but in a slightly different manner. In this assertion, if Venus were in Libra she would not need an aspect to Taurus (or planets there) because when in one domicile she need not "see" the other; in other words she would nonetheless have a valid and strong testimony towards the other domicile she is in aversion to. But in this case also, it is relevant only to the ruler in one of its domiciles.


Hello steven,

First of all thank you so much for responding. Having someone with your degree of knowledge and experience around is a real asset to the forum. Thumbs up

I am probably being particularly slow on the uptake here but I am struggling to understand the distinction between the first and second examples you gave. I think I follow the first example. I just dont quite grasp the difference with the second one. Could you kindly unpack this a little bit more for the benefit of the more obtuse like myself? Confused

Thanks

Mark
_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Night Sky



Joined: 13 Sep 2008
Posts: 124

Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 4:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like the idea that it is designed in order to unite signs that do not "behold" eachother:

Jupiter Sag Pi = 90 degrees
Venus is 150
Mars is 150
Saturn is 30
Mercury is 90

How about that for a symmectrically designed system.

Sun and Moon to me are an interesting thing to look at because they, like Saturn are 30. Curious that neither has dignity in the others sign.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yuzuru



Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 1360

Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi, Mark C

Aversion, as you know, is when a planet is in a sign that doesn´t behold another planet or sign.

In the first case, a planet (any planet) in Libra wouldn´t be in aversion to any planet in taurus. E.g., mars in libra wouldn´t be in aversion to jupiter in taurus.

In the second case, the ruler of taurus, venus, when in libra, wouldn´t be in aversion to taurus, and whatever it may signify. E.g, if taurus is your second house, and venus is in libra, venus can still manage the matters of the second house without the problems of aversion.

At least this is what I understood :-)
_________________
Meu blog de astrologia (em portugues) http://yuzuru.wordpress.com
My blog of astrology (in english) http://episthemologie.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
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