I was looking at some old solar return charts of mine, and I noticed one chart (for a particularly busy year) that had a 29 virgo ascendant, with saturn at 3 degrees libra in the 2nd house. (I am using WSH btw) Now, if I was using placidus then I wouldn't hesitate to consider the ascendant being conjunct saturn in libra, however with WSH I am a little bit more hesitant about doing so. That being said, intuitively I feel like it should be no problem. Also, I have scoured this forum and found multiple posts implying that out of sign conjunctions between planets are acceptable in traditional astrology, so I think it should also apply to points in the chart as well right? Can anyone here vouch for using out of sign conjunctions when it comes to the angles??

Also more importantly, how would this affect the interpretation of the chart if using WSH? Assuming saturn at 3 degrees libra in the 2nd house is conjuncting 29 virgo ascendant, would that mean that the first and second house affairs are strongly involved with each other or something? (of course also considering the houses that saturn rules as well)

Good evening,

In my limited understanding, an out of sign conjunction or aspect is qualitatively different from one in sign, comparable to talking through a wall. In case of such a conjunction, the points involved are averse (do not see) each other. One should also investigate if, when, where and how the conjunction or aspect will perfect.

WSH are sometimes deemed 'static' (30 degrees each on the ecliptic) by some who perhaps forget their different durations of rising, quite a dynamic phenomenon. The Virgo-Libra border in a tropical zodiac rises quite quickly.

A solar return chart should methinks not be interpreted alone but in connexion with the root chart, for example a nativity, concerned. The isolated interpretation of a single element like 'Ascendant conjunct Saturn out of sign' will probably produce suboptimal results. One at least should consider the essential and accidental debilities and dignities of the planets involved as well as their configurations, beginning with those by sign.

The choice of year (ex. gr. tropical or sidereal) applied to erect the solar return chart will also significantly affect the house and often lunar positions.

Best regards,

lihin

Hello,

I am certainly not an expert on this--and someone please correct me if I am wrong here--but I believe that your 29 Virgo Ascendant and your Saturn at 3 Libra may have a relationship not by conjunction, but by 'contrantiscia'. This is an important feature of traditional astrology, but I am not certain if contrantiscia works with a point/angle like the Ascendant, but rather requires two planets.

Antiscia and contrantisica refer to planets (and maybe points and angles like Ascendants?) being within a VERY close degree of the house/sign boundaries or 'cusps'. In this case, you are looking at a very powerful point called the Aires Point, in which your Virgo ascendant 'commands' Libra's Saturn (though your Saturn is just a bit further along into Libra than necessary to make it rather exact). I believe it's called the Aires Point because the boundary of Virgo/Libra marks the opposition of where Aires is--and even more importantly, where the Sun begins to 'decline' in the sky, before marking the turn back 180 degrees later in Aires.

My understanding is that this has the affect of bringing together two signs--in this case Virgo and Libra--that would not ordinarily 'go together'--or 'see' each other. While not a 'conjunction', it is rather powerful. I think such a configuration is said to make the signs 'hear each other'--and this is important because traditionally, there is no connection between the signs like this. The contrantisica here makes that happen--again assuming the Ascendant can be a player.

So from a Hellenistic perspective, and perhaps a more general traditional view, this would not be a 'conjunction' just as Lihin says. But you should look up antiscia and contra-antiscia and consult with others to see if it may apply.

Again, I am not 100% sure on this, especially as one of the players here is not a planet, rather a point or angle (the Ascendant). But it might be something worth your exploring further!

If anyone can clarify whether a point like the Ascendant can be included in antiscia/contrantiscia, that would be great.

Hope this helps--or at least facilitates more discussion!

Good evening,

Thanks to Mr Pskyman for bringing up antiscia and contra-antiscia, known and used in Hellenistic astrology, explained ex. gr. in Senator Julius Firmicus Maternus' Mathesis.

Indeed, both were considered to establish relationships between the mirrored signs and to mitigate aversions.

The axes are generally held to be 0 Cancer and 0 Capricornus for antiscia, 0 Aries and 0 Libra for contra-antiscia, if i recall correctly.

Best regards,

lihin

for me it depends on what an astrologer wants to prioritize... either one makes the tropical zodiac signs (division of 12 to one rotation of the earth round the sun) a higher priority then aspects, or they make aspects a higher priority then the division of 12 which gives us the tropical zodiac signs.. all this will change if put in the sidereal zodiac!!

while someone might be emphasizing the tropical zodiac signs by going with 'whole sign houses' they still need to make a decision on it's relative importance in connection with aspects..

it is best if you have this set up in your own natal chart in some ways as it can help give more clarity on the situation. i have a planet about 5 degrees off my rising sign and in a different sign.. for me i still believe this planet acts like a planet conjunct my ascendant.. however i do believe it works in connection with the sign that it is in too which happens to be the 2nd sign from my ascendant.. essentially i take the view it is a watered down version of what it would be if it was in the same sign as the ascendant, but i feel it still works like a conjunction.. hopefully that makes sense! for me - the aspect of a conjunction is still going to function regardless of the 2 signs involvement... this runs straight in the face of signs not seeing each other.. maybe that is true on paper, but as for planets making aspects i tend to view that as more primary.. that is my 2c..

Tom wrote:Ibn Ezra and Morinus both approved of out of sign conjunctions and aspects and I'm sure there were others. Lilly, on the other hand, did not approve of out-of-sign combustion. But as you pointed out, when one uses whole sign houses, the reasoning behind the out of sign approval seems to fall apart. Saturn, in your example, is in the 2nd sign and influence on the ASC seems less likely to be felt, if it exists at all. The idea that "Well, it works but differently" seems to me like driving the proverbial square peg into the round hole.

yeah, I am trying to avoid making lame rationalizations for why an out of sign conjunction to an angle would be effective. OTOH it just occurred to me that if you take the concept of moiety into account (thus implying that planets radiate "auras"), then out of sign conjunctions to an angle would make perfect sense, as long as the angle is within the moiety of the planet. To me at least this seems like solid reasoning.

I stumbled across the answer to my question while reading ITA by ben dykes. On page 17 it states that any planets within 15 degrees of the ascendant (regardless of whether or not it falls in the next sign) is considered "co-busy" or "jointly busy". So to answer my own question, I suppose that yes, saturn does gain angularity by virtue of being within 15 degrees of the ascendant regardless of the sign saturn is in.