Even more perplexing. John lists Venus occidental as simply moist in a cold dry sign like Taurus I don't see how one can get hot and dry.

Maybe because Frawley is not following Lilly there?
According Ptolemy inferior planets from the first station to the vespertine setting are hot and mostly dry.
Later, from the vespertine setting the planet tend to be colder and colder...
And the vespertine setting was on 29th April in 1889.

Then Venus is dry because it is quite near the seventh house - very dry.
Venus is applying to the sextile with Saturn - dry and cold planet in dry and hot sign.
Venus is in the second quadrant, hot and dry.

So i think it's true, Venus is very hot and dry.

I adhered to the method detailed by Luis Ribeiro as described in his paper "Judging Temperament: a study of the method," published in the first issue of "The Tradition." Interestingly, Gadbury does not tabulate the significators or make any sum of individual qualities; he simply lists the temperamental testimony of the significators.

As Culpeper notes of the melancholic temperament:

They retain anger long, and aim at no small things.

As Ribeiro states:

Lilly seems to be demonstrating to the student that the method proves to be less clear when dealing with combinations of opposite temperaments (Sanguine and Melancholic or Choleric and Phlegmatic). In these cases the mere sum of qualities at the end of the table is useless as they will be too close to obtain any conclusion ... So as with every mathematically scored system in Astrology, instead of giving exclusive attention to the quantities, we must look at the chart and to the qualities of each significator.

I would say that Frawley probably did a mistake when writing Hitler?s temperament in TRA. It is not the only mistake in the book. Everybody is human. Also his method in TRA is clearly a little different than in TRAA. Also there were little modifications from Fulsa conference to the most recent one (in Swissland, I think). People change, people?s thinking also change.

Also, is my experience that, as he said in TRAA, every element of the temperament can be see in separate, for example the sun and moon give a lot of phleugma, but the ASC, and asc ruler are choleric... This two elements will not "Blend in", they will fight and in some situations the person will be choleric and agressive, and others he will be phleugmatic and avoid confrontation.

Lilly seems to be demonstrating to the student that the method proves to be less clear when dealing with combinations of opposite temperaments (Sanguine and Melancholic or Choleric and Phlegmatic). In these cases the mere sum of qualities at the end of the table is useless as they will be too close to obtain any conclusion ... So as with every mathematically scored system in Astrology, instead of giving exclusive attention to the quantities, we must look at the chart and to the qualities of each significator.

While I agree that scored systems, or add 'em up" systems as I call them don't seem to work as well, I think he's trying to gild the lilly. The purpose of a system that does not add things up is to give the astrologer a broad base upon which to build without overcoming the influence of a particular planet or planets. Frawley gives the example of describing an effeminate man. No matter how many adjectives we use, he never becomes a woman. The same is true of the planets. Whatever a planet is at its most basic, we can only alter the intensity not change its elements.

Furthermore. once we start analyzing each planet we use in great detail we may well glean good information, but we are no longer dealing exclusively with temperament or at least how I understand temperament. Were into something else.

Tom

I think he's trying to gild the lilly.

Gild the Lilly!

As is my habit I also determined temperament using Dorian Greenbaum's method . In most, in fact almost all charts, these two methods give very similar results. The differences are usually one of degree and since temperament is rough work anyway, those difference aren't that significant. Hitler's is one of those rare charts (in my experience) that gives a significantly different result. I get sanguine and melancholy a close second with a little choler and no phlegm.

I've read Dorian Greenbaum's book and while I have great respect for the research that she did in arriving at her findings I have to say that I don't see the logic in ascribing twice the weight to a factor that remains fixed for three months in the year (the Sun's season) as to a factor that changes every week (the Moon's phase). In my opinion the lunar phase is a far more personal component of temperament and should therefore account for 20% of the temperament using Greenbaum's scoring system. Working with this hypothesis Hitler's Moon in Capricorn and at the Melancholic phase, along with Saturn as the Ascendant almuten accounts for 50% of his temperament, while Sanguine accounts for 30%, Choler and Phlegm having 10% each. (Saturn receiving the Moon from Leo and Venus, chart ruler, occidental).

I have to admit I like Greenbaum's result given that we know the outcome. In order to do the things Hitler did, one has to be cold to the point of heartlessness. Any social kindness he felt was directed at a mythological master race. It wasn't warm in the sense that we usually mean that word when describing human emotions. I don't think his cold streak is deniable.

I agree. Emotionally Hitler was very cold, solitary, even withdrawn and this is well shown by his Moon, which is completely melancholic.

Again with hindsight astrology, the most accurate kind, we realize that an individual has to somehow connect with the public. And Hitler did. Choler isn't going to do that easily. Although I don't speak German I have viewed films of Hitler's speeches and they appear choleric - at least to me. Ideally there is should be the sense of "He's talking to me" in order to win over the public. Choler is more "Get out of the way!" But "get out of the way" doesn't have to manifest in oratory. It can be hidden from the public, for a while.

Hitler was able to utilise his secondary Sanguine humour to make that public connection. Many who were close to him said that in private he could be charming, persuasive and quite personable. At a moment's notice however he could fall into a sombre, depressed frame of mind and retreat into himself. This is a perfect portrait of someone whose Sanguine side is culled from the Ascendant and Sun, and whose Melancholic side is gleaned from the Moon.

Now the significator of the manners is a whole different matter. We do see this; in fact it is impossible to miss. This is the planet that most engages Mercury and the Moon and I would argue that the planet in this chart that does that is Mars. Mars rules Mercury and is the exaltation ruler of the Moon, and in fact is in mutual reception by exaltation with the Moon. Venus may also play a role here, but I don't want to get into an in depth analysis.
We definitely see Mars in Adolph Hitler's public (7th house) speeches (Mercury). To say they were emotional (Moon) is to put it mildly.

Yes, this is where the choler comes from. Hitler's Mars is conjunct Ascendant ruler so he identifies closely with the warrior, the fighter, the aggressor. To have so much Melancholy and yet such a prominent Mars is a volatile mixture for sure! It would be interesting to see if we could find any other famous people with that combination, to get a sense of how it played out in their lives.

Pete

In my opinion the lunar phase is a far more personal component of temperament and should therefore account for 20% of the temperament using Greenbaum's scoring system.

Very interesting. This makes much more sense to me.

Film critic Paul Brenner, in his review of Hitler: The Last Ten Days, writes:

Alec Guinness plays against stereotype, imbuing his Adolf Hitler with an introverted solemnity in Ennio De Concini's Hitler: The Last Ten Days. Set almost entirely inside Hitler's Berlin bunker, the film chronicles the dying days of the Third Reich as the Allied armies close in on Berlin. Guinness's Hitler is an enclosed depressive who sinks slowly into madness, depression, and ultimately suicide as his 1,000-Year Reich collapses around him.

Fascinating.

Alec Guinness plays against stereotype, imbuing his Adolf Hitler with an introverted solemnity in Ennio De Concini's Hitler: The Last Ten Days. Set almost entirely inside Hitler's Berlin bunker, the film chronicles the dying days of the Third Reich as the Allied armies close in on Berlin. Guinness's Hitler is an enclosed depressive who sinks slowly into madness, depression, and ultimately suicide as his 1,000-Year Reich collapses around him.

Fascinating.

Indeed, and I believe Guinness nailed Hitler perfectly in that movie. An "enclosed depressive" sounds very like a man whose Melancholic Moon was being opposed by transiting Saturn!

Pete

Through a modern lens Hitler is strongly melancholic (earth) and has little or no phlegm(water). The lack of phlegm seems fitting as these people are seen to have unconscious and autonomous feelings which are intense, primitive, archaic and dark .

In itself this wouldn't describe or account for Hitler's psychopathology. He also had a potentially very difficult chart some of which has already been explained here such as the detriments. Some of the 'moderns' focus on the psychology of the chiron/moon opposition seeing his relationship with his mother as central to his subsequent dysfunctional behaviours.

Although it wouldn't change this type analysis much i've often wondered if he may have been born a bit earlier shifting venus and mars into the 8th and uranus nearer the ascendent?