I have been trying different temperament techniques on my natal chart and I'm pondering which should take precedence, moon sign or phase? And are aspects and quadrant equally as important also?

My temperament is mostly choleric but I am pretty certain I have the secondary temperament of melancholy. The only method which seems to really indicate a streak of melancholy takes the moon's sign as the main 'qualifier' (as it's in a cold and dry sign but a hot/ moist phase). Even if I take into account aspects and quadrant, moist and to a lesser extent hot still win out.

Unless the significator of the manner being saturn is enough to 'add' melancholy or 'fool' me into thinking I am melancholic?

Any thoughts in general regarding moon in temperament delination?

Thanks in advance.

meredith - pick up ''temperament' astrology's forgotten key - by dorian gieseler greenbaum.

according to her both sign and phase are equally important as i recall.. i am not so sure the specific answer to all your questions.. my impression is everyone weighs these different factors in their own way. i think however that moon sign and phase are more significant then aspects and quadrant.. that is my understanding at any rate..

thanks for your reply, James.

I do have the Greenbaum book. I am a bit overwhelmed by looking at the appendix listing all the different methods... and at times unclear as how they are measuring - for instance, the essential nature of a planet (e.g. Saturn cold and dry) or its relation to the sun - (Saturn occidental - chiefly dry).

I guess I was pondering it all being as I would've expected moon phase to be more important than sign or somehow 'cancel each other out' - hot moist phase, cold dry sign... not very cold? Saturn is conjunct the AC in my natal.. perhaps this is enough to add enough cold to the preponderance of hot/dry to add my melancholic streak. But as said - a lot of the different techniques don't seem make clear which it is - occidental: chiefly dry or just the absolute - saturn is cold and dry. But if saturn is in leo in a day chart, surely that would reduce some of the cold... or is it the fact of it's debility in leo that is more important? When weighing all the factors, is the moon sign enough also to add a significant dash of 'cold' even though it is warmed up by aspect/quadrant also and supposedly in the hot/moist phase (close sextile to sun)?

I'm asking more questions here which probably is muddying the waters of an already complex subject!

Ah, in a few decades I may have got the hang of it

ETA: I just realised that there is a case also for the moon phases not being as cut and dried in terms of each quarter being exactly HM, HD, CD, CM.

hi meredith,

i find this topic difficult and not clear cut as well.. it seems like it is similar to interpreting a whole chart where everything is taken into account. my impression is the moon has more bearing on temperament then many of the other astro bodies.. in this regard the sign and phase may have greater bearing then other considerations for temperament. perhaps someone more knowledgeable will comment.. as i recall in greenbaums book, different astrologers weighed this question differently as well..

Thanks again, James.

I have started reading the book properly instead of skipping about!

Definitely not a clear-cut matter. And as I understand it, regards body type, we become more our intrinsic type as we get older too, so doesn't necessary help to just weigh up that.

I'm wondering if one can get a 'snap shot' of someone's temperament by looking at the nature of the AC and the moon sign.

And also later astrologers differed from Ptolemy regards the qualities of moon phase.

I used one method which showed an acquaintance as 100% sanguine. I tried another and she was largely melancholic!

I find temperament a fascinating topic!

hi meredith,

i agree it is a fascinating topic! trying to connect this old idea of 'temperament' to astrology has been the focus of many. i think making the moon phase and sign more central is part of it, while ascendant sign and it's ruler is another part of it.

people laugh when i comment on the computer program solar fire and how it scores charts, but it also gives a quick overview, or snap shot as you put it, to any chart.. solar fire uses 4 ingredients - sign of moon, phase of moon, ascendant, and ruler of ascendant.. that means they leave out season where the sun is found which i think is another factor.. also any planet rising very close to the ascendant may also factor in prominently.. i think it is best to read the book from cover to cover to get a more thorough viewpoint on temperament thru the use of astrology! cheers james

Hello Meredith. I am in the process of learning natal myself. From what I have seen, Season of birth,the moons phase,and the asc seem to be the big three, and personally I do think the LOG could play a significant part as well. Dorians methods are superb for most charts, as they provide a quick and dirty method, but for more complex charts I perfer Frawleys approach, although its certainly more rough.

Frawley uses Lillys method, but in a different way. None of the qualities cancel each other out, and they are not all simply added up and smooshed together. The asc sign, the season of birth,the moon phase, and the LOG, would be the base qualites, and any aspects within 5 degrees most seem to have the strongest effect. The planets in sign and aspect, act more as adjectives. Phase is used in this approach.

So if the season was summer, this would point to Choler. Hot and dry. Perhaps the sun is in a water sign so this would be a modifying factor, but would not cancel it out - simply modify it so: -Hot -dry. One would than continue, noting any planets in close aspect, with their intrinsic qualities, and the the qualities of the signs. Mercury occidental = Dry, and in a cold and dry sign so: --hot dry, with the negative value being removed from the dry, and another added to the hot.

Its similar with the moon. If shes in her 4th winter quarter the qualities of cold and wet would form the base, and be modifed for good or ill by the sign she is in, and any close aspects to other planets in sign.

The asc. would form the base with due regard to any planets in the 1st, and in close aspect to the asc degree, along with the asc lord. and its interplay with the, planets in sign.

The lord of the geniture would form the 4th base.

One would than compare these 4 base qualities, and their modifications to form a rough judgement of the interplay of the qualities and which were more dominant.

Most charts have qualities that jump out via Dorians method, but some seem to require Frawleys approach.

EDIT: Personally I find the easiest method is to simply note the body type if I can see the native in person. For example: Cholerics tend to have square shaped hands,prominent veins and tendons, good muscle tone, a broad jaw,sharp nose,high cheek bones, and sharp, angular features.

Cholerics tend to actually be rather compact and not naturally muscular, but this temperament does seem to have the easiest time of building muscle.

Hi Tyler, thanks for chiming in.

I should've probably said in my initial post, but it is by using JF's method that I come out as wholly choleric! Maybe even with a dash of sanguine if use LOG (mercury in gem). Though I love JF's articles on temperament, especially the piece of the Bosch painting 'Christ Mocked'

I will def have to read the DG book from cover to cover and then come back to it!

I find I always feel I'm going three steps forward two steps back with astrology.

I went through a phase of people-watching and assigning them a temperament based on their body type! Great fun, but not sure can be completely fool proof, because of phase of life, planets in the first house etc.

The other thing is getting a complete grasp of what temperament actually is and what it isn't. Can questionnaires tell one which temperament one is? They vary so much. When I do quesionnaires I tend to come out as melancholic first, then choleric but chart analysis - choleric first. I think perhaps because the descriptions are often based on behaviour, maybe temperament is our first instinct or somesuch instead, behaviour being dictated as much by conditioning and situation and other elements and significator of manners? So in my case, leo AC, early degrees closely conjunct leo saturn, mars also in leo in the later degrees. So saturn is my signifcator of manners and mars is out of sect, so maybe has a large influence on the way the temperament presents itself in me.

PS based on my walk - definitely choleric is my primary temperament!

hi meredith

saturn rising would give a melancholic flavour and that is my quick impression of you on the board here. in greenbaums book she discusses 2 temperament types a fair amount, so you definitely want to consider getting her book if you haven't done so already! i think the moon is an important consideration too. i would be curious to know your moon sign as i think you have to factor that in as well.

i don't recall greenbaum discussing sect - if born in the day - sun and heat are stronger, while if born at night - moon and coldness are more pronounced. that would be an interesting conversation that some might have some insights to share on.

i think a planet close to the ascendant or midheaven axis can strongly colour a persons temperament, and although it has been a few years since i read greenbaums book, i would imagine she discusses this some in her book - i just can't remember.

Hi James,

I'm going to take your advice and read the book from cover to cover

It's interesting you mention sun and heat stronger in day chart, as sun also stronger in summer and I was wondering briefly what this means for a summer nativity, if anything.

Sun is in cancer, moon in virgo. In its first quarter traditionally given the qualities hot moist... but that other article I mentioned, said the moon's main situation is increasing in moisture during that phase, rather than heat per se (I think)

I think I'm right in thinking that not all methods (including Greenbaum herself) take into account angular planets at all.

meredith,

greenbaum covers the seasonal factor and outlines the nature of the seasons like this as i recall - spring - sanguine, summer - choleric, fall - melancholic and winter - phlegmatic. someone might give greater emphasis to the signs associated with the season then someone else. the moon sign is considered more important, but the season one is born in obviously factors the suns seasonal position.. what is interesting is greenbaum doesn't appear to mention anything about whether a chart is diurnal or nocturnal, perhaps as her focus is more medieval.. the idea of sect seems more hellenistic.. i personally find this an interesting consideration and it's overlooked in her book. another thing that isn't considered are house positions as i recall.. if a person has a chart primarily eastern hemisphere, as opposed to western hemisphere one would think that would factor into temperament as well, but nothing is mentioned as i recall. i think the idea of whether it is a day or night chart is a big consideration.

if i was to break the quadrants of the chart down into temperament i would automatically think houses 12 to midheaven and i am going backward thru the circle here, or counter clockwise beginning at sunrise) would be sanguine, midheaven to descendant choleric, descendant to i.c. melancholic and i.c. to ascendant - phlegmatic. i don't know why i think this, but that is what i think at the moment. so if a particular quadrant was emphasized it might also have an impact on the ultimate temperament of the person.. it stands to reason, but these considerations haven't been included in anything i have read about temperament.. it all seems to focus on sign position while house position is given the short shrift, along with any talk of the sect of the chart!!

based on what you've shared on your chart it sounds like choleric is the dominant theme, with melancholic as a 2ndary backdrop..

thinking out of the box, why just have 1 or 2 out of the 4 types? it must be possible to be a mix of all 4, although that would imply a level of flexibility and adaptation that might be uncommon!

Hi James!,
Being of the Melancholic temperament,with Phlegmatic as secondary,in response to your query of a person having equal parts of all 4 humours,my daughter's ex boyfriend was of such Temperament. This is the only example I have seen.
Wishes SG.