ot - regarding houses being analogous with signs - 12th house is similar to 12th sign - while this seems to be a modern astrology development i found it interesting reading morins views which i am only going to quickly summarize in how he looked at houses 4/8/12 as connected to the water element. i don't have the citation, but i recall him taking a similar line of thinking on this.

i think the big thing that deb continually emphasized in her book was the clockwise motion - while the house numbers go in an anti-clockwise manner. i personally think there are obvious parallels with some of the symbology. while the meaning of the signs is not the same as the houses, it is confusing to understand the basis for the symbolism and why there is so much cross over.. 2nd house - possessions - 2nd sign taurus.. call me thick, but i think ignoring the cross overs is dishonest. does one house flow into another? no matter which direction you focus on - clockwise or anti-clockwise movement of the planets - there is a cycle involved that implies a type of development of the idea captured in these cycles.

Hi James, re: yours Mon May 05, 2014 4:09 am

James wrote:

i think the 10th house cusp has more of connection to the personal due the square to the ascendant. the m.c. is different and less personal.

Hmm... In regard of this question, there are two different opinions en vogue now among the participants of this circle.

I, for one, tend to think of the MC as more personal than the Nonagesimal. This is also how Bernd A. Mertz was looking at the matter.

Another German astrologer, Reinhold Ebertin, described the MC as representing the ego and the life goal ? but then again, he didn't use houses at all!

But it is just a working hypothesis for me at the moment. I think there are good arguments for the other view as well, including yours.

In practice, it may not always be easy to draw a clear line here, anyway (as you suggest yourself).

i think the 10th house cusp represents some type of high point and some type of objective position, as opposed to the 4th which i view as more subjective. i think when people have the personal planets in the upper hemisphere and don't have them in the lower hemisphere, they are more oriented towards the 10th house cusp. i think it works the reverse too with a person having the personal planets in the lower hemisphere which is what it is in my case.

Right, it looks like these house cusps are really somehow colouring their respective hemispheres in toto.

for someone with an upper hemisphere emphasis they might like to think they can be objective or are being objective while they may be ignoring there own subjectivity because they are not in touch with it.

Hmm... In contrast, this could make somebody with a lower hemisphere emphasis ? inclined to be more subjective ? at the same time more aware of their own subjectivity, as well as of the inevitable subjectivity of others, which could result in increased objectivity. This really offers food for thought...

when i listen to music and it is an orchestra, or a number of people playing - all the elements converge into one whole. it is the same thing when we try to understand people. they are complex and it is not possible to separate all the parts or even understand how all the parts fit together.. we are constantly forced to weigh various factors, some more related then others - to form some type of picture of what it is we are looking at.. it is the same with listening to the orchestra..

Good analogy. I think of applied astrology not only as a science, it's just as much an art.

Thank you for sharing your profound reflections, James!

Regards
Michael

Ciao Larxene

Larxene wrote:

We do not need a consensus. We just need a clear scope to work within. We can change or modify our scope in subsequent trials, while still using the same sample of charts.

I like that. Good scientific thinking.

Michael, it seems that we are looking for two things here. First, we are searching for a person's internal motivations. Second, the kind or quality of profession that the person is attracted to as a result of his internal motivations.

That's a nice definition.

It is my proposed hypothesis that these two will often resonate with each other even if the Nonagesimal and the MC are in two different houses.

11th house for me refers to the social and financial support one receives from one's profession or actions. Specifically, it signifies our colleagues and subordinates, gifts from bosses and other benefactors one meets as a result of one's work, professional associations and organisations (like AFA for astrologers). IN A WORD, the theme is social support. (Yeah I know, I cheated.)

Not sure how you are connecting this with Hahnemann, exactly?

Plus, Samuel's 11th house lies in Libra, a human sign. If we follow Ptolemy's system, Libra is moist, so this accentuates the desire to work with people. Intriguingly, Libra is the sign of Venus, a moist planet and according to Schmidt, has the essence of reconciling and uniting; we can see elements of this in homeopathy, where "like cures like".

In summary, I would say that Sam-Sam's internal motivation is to provide support to people (11th house, human sign) so that they may live pleasant lives (sign of Venus).

I think, these are truly astute insights into Sam-Sam's character, as well as into the healing method he developed.

The kind of profession, however, can be found via the 10th sign. Being Mercury's sign, Virgo signifies, among other things, physicians and doctors. We may also want to use Ptolemy's method of determining profession to further verify this. Of course, there are other techniques by other authors as well.

Apply whatever you wish, Larxene!

Thanks
Michael

Paul wrote:

I was actually posting at the same time as Mark but then saw his post so didn't post the message I wrote up.

Maybe I should have, I offered a quote from Umar al Tabiri who links both and al Kindi who mentions the houses.

The crux of my post was that this is for other "body part" astrology such as parts of a ship as well. I can provide references, I'm just posting from my phone at the moment.

Hello Paul,

Yes, you should have posted that message.

Anyway, I'm greatly looking forward to your quotes and references!

Thanks
Michael

thanks michael,

regarding the ot comment on hemisphere emphasis and your response. yes, i think this can work too and it's reverse..

i want to come back to my comment which was triggered by the idea of houses and signs being treated in a similar fashion in some astrology circles usually classified as 'modern'.

one point that is regularly emphasized in literature on houses i've read is the ability for a planet to act when it is 'in' an angle. how this overlaps with whole sign houses or not is an issue for individual astrologers to take up, but how this applies to the topic here about the nonagesimal is how none of the literature i have read discuss how a planet square an angle is 'able' or 'not able' to act.. does a planet on the nonagesimal degree, or close to this degree, have the ability to act with power and expression? this is a question that i'd be curious to get some feedback from others on here.. my personal take is that they do have the ability to act, but within the context of being in a square with the ascendant which means the energy is more conflictual. i don't know how it would be different if the m.c. and nonagesimal were in the same approx position putting these planets in the same house, but i maintain they act on a persons life in the area of the house, but also thru the ascendant which means they have the power to 'act' in some way shape and form.. this runs contrary to the idea that a planet in a cadent house doesn't have the ability to 'act' or express itself with any strength...

as for my ot comments on the overlap on houses and signs - i doubt i will get much if any feedback on this here as i believe it runs contrary to what i perceive as traditional astrology doctrine and the views expressed by deb in her book.. perhaps if she is around, she'd like to comment. i am sure there are a large number of examples where the 12th house doesn't mean the same as the 12th sign, but overall i think there is a crossover that has some affinities too.. anyone want to take that up here on another thread perhaps?

Michael Sternbach wrote: Hmm... In contrast, this could make somebody with a lower hemisphere emphasis ? inclined to be more subjective ? at the same time more aware of their own subjectivity, as well as of the inevitable subjectivity of others, which could result in increased objectivity. This really offers food for thought...

Is there a HTML code or BBCode for hiding text/images here?

Here's another fun chart just as promised!
This is the chart of arguably the greatest inventor of the 20th century. There are some folks going as far as saying that Nikola Tesla even invented the 20th century, as we know it, to begin with, and I think, this is not too much of an exaggeration.

For one thing, Tesla invented AC (alternating current), making transmission of electrical energy over appreciable distances by wires possible for the first time. Then he went on to work out another method not using any wires at all!

Nikola had a family background of Serbian orthodox priests on the side of both parents; his father wanted him to become a priest like he was himself. The IC not being in 4th may indicate Nikola's deviation from the path laid out for him, in this case.

At age 14, Tesla was able to perform integral calculus in his head (maybe Larxene can relate to this?).

It comes as no surprise that 10th cusp is in Aquarius, indicating that the man was an inventor. Note that house ruler Uranus (for those of you who do accept modern domiciles) is in the 1st house.

The MC is in the 9th house. This can be seen reflected in the manner Nikola left his country early on to live and have his career in America.

Also in line with 9th, his work was carried by idealistic visions of an improvement of the human condition by means of technology. Certainly, other factors, like Neptune in his domicile in 11th, would play a role here, too.

In further accordance with 9th, Tesla had a keen interest in the universe big scale. By a device he had created, he detected the so-called cosmic rays decades before their official discovery by R. A. Millikan.

And let's not forget Tesla's vivid exchange with Swami Vivekananda which metaphysically inspired his vision of the universe.

The MC is also in Capricorn. Was Tesla ambitious? It's fair to say, yes. On Long Island, New York, he started building a system for worldwide transmission of wireless energy by a giant coil (the Wardenclyffe Tower). Tesla's sponsor J. P. Morgan lost interest when the construction started greatly exceeding its budgeted costs, and the project was never finished.

Tesla had a great interest in telecommunication, as well. Arguably, he invented radio (other inventors were working on the issue at the same time, however, so there is some debate about priority here). Tesla's interest in the transmission of information could be seen in the ruler of the MC (or of both the MC and the Nonagesimal, for the traditionalists) Saturn in 3rd and in opposition to the MC (by sign, anyway).

While there is a popular belief that Uranus/Aquarius rules technology, and Capricorn/Saturn science, of course, both sudden inspiration and the process of meticulous formulation are crucial in either field. Waybread reminded us of this not long ago on Mark's ?Is Uranus the Ruler of Aquarius? thread (on the general forum). Certainly we can assume that Tesla's Nonagesimal and MC strongly resonated with each other in all his endeavours.

The man keeps stirring people's imagination, and there is also a lot of BS about him circulating on the internet (such as that he abandoned Earth in order to live on Venus etc.).

For a wealth of reliable information all around Nicola, I recommend well-known Tesla researcher Gary Peterson's website:

http://tfcbooks.com/

The documentary ?Tesla ? Master of Lightning? is worth watching, too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViS4t8jye4c

Enjoy!

Michael

Michael, wouldn't it be better to use the chart of someone with a AA-rated birth time?

Konrad,

The problem is, the people I know and can tell you the most about are generally located a little further back in history, where 100% reliable birth times tend to be rare.

I know of certain endeavours to "rectify" Tesla's birth time, and we had a discussion regarding this not long ago on this forum:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... c&start=30

However, I do consider Tesla's birth time at least as reliable as my own since it was specified by members of his family as "at the stroke of midnight".

Yes, the village's church clock could have been off by a few minutes, but I don't think it would make a big difference for our purposes.

Also, bear in mind that we are not conducting a rigorous scientific study here.

But nice that we could talk about the issue, Konrad!

Most certainly, you are very welcome to present to us a chart of your own, next.

Michael

Perhaps there should be some sort of rigour applied if there is a definite aim of coming to a conclusion which, from my reading of this thread, seems to be the goal of those people posting.

I have been following the thread, and do have some ideas of my own, but I have refrained from posting partly because of my own commitments, though primarily because, as Mark says, there won't be a consensus of how to approach a chart in the first place. Personally, I don't see any real point in looking at the sign of the MC or its lord to try and decipher one's profession as this is not how I look at it in a chart, and most traditional astrologrs would be the same. In my own study of this issue, I used profections to see which of the signs profected - the 10th sign or the the sign containing the MC - was most descriptive of events relating to work and career for that year. Even here, though, there will be differences of method.

I didn't mean to ruin your fun though, it just occurred to me as I read your post. Personally, I looked up this chart a while ago as Tesla was a fascinating person. I was frustrated to find a B rating and didn't pursue it any further.

Konrad wrote:

Personally, I looked up this chart a while ago as Tesla was a fascinating person. I was frustrated to find a B rating and didn't pursue it any further.

Potentially, we will see if our various approaches can serve to verify the birth time as given so that it could be upgraded (at least for ourselves, if not for others).

Anyway, Konrad, thank you for your understanding.

We would welcome your delineations.

Michael

Michael Sternbach wrote:

Potentially, we will see if our various approaches can serve to verify the birth time as given so that it could be upgraded (at least for ourselves, if not for others).

As the Americans say Michael I dont mean to rain on your parade. I can see your really into this Tesla chart (which btw has its own thread already)

However, I have to concur with Konrad on the chart rating issue.

Bluntly, why even bother with an unverified time like this? In my experience family members are often unreliable..including Mothers. I remember one person telling me her Mother told her she was born 08:00am in the morning and it turned out to be 8.00pm on the birth certificate!

If we are going to knock ourselves out on chart delineation and trying to reach clear conclusions on the IC/MC wouldn't it be wiser to focus our energies on fully accurate birth times?

On that subject Scottish data is all AA (at least in theory) since we record time of birth on all our birth certificates.

I can put up charts of some famous Scots with differing 10th/MC if your interested?

Mark