Joint Rulers

1
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.

2
Hello,
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.

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?

3
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. :lol:

6
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.

8
Nightsky have you read the forum guidelines? http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/templates ... r/read.php

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

9
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.

11
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?

12
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.
Last edited by Mark on Mon Mar 30, 2009 11:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly