Sun sign astrology debunked?

1
Sign interpretation (Sun sign astrology debunked?)-

In Hellenistic horoscopy there are no general sign-effects, but rather very specific and horoscope related effects and characteristics. These are based on the condition of the several rulers, says Vettius Valens.
That introduces some specific factors to the operation of each sign in a specific horoscope. Valens says this about the Ram (book 1). "Those who are born in this z?idion in accordance with the rulership relation, then, will be bright, notable, commanding, just, with a hatred of knaves, free, authoritative, bold in purpose, braggarts, great-souled, inconstant, irregular, haughty, up-in-the-air, threatening, quickly changing, well-off. When the rulers are well situated and testified to by benefics, the natives become kingly, powerful, and have the power of life and death."

Valens mentions an important principle of interpretation here. Certain qualities are filtered out of a sign, or rather called forth by specific conditions of the rulers (plural) of the sign. Here we have emphasized the planets as administrators of a sign. The administrators of a sign, by their position and condition in the horoscope, determine what qualities of character can manifest themselves and can develop. I even have the impression that if the favorable conditions of the rulers to sign are indeed valid, it seems as if the qualities and character of the exaltationplanet is highlighted. With the Ram Valens mentions typical solar properties "... the natives become kingly, powerful, and have the power of life and death."

Let's see if that assumption is correct. Valens says about Taurus. " Those born in this z?idion will be good, versed in a handicraft, hard- working, good at preserving things, pleasure loving, music loving, generous, while some of them will be husbandmen, planters, builders. And if the benefics should somehow incline? toward this place, or also, if the ruler should be well-situated, they will become archpriests, and gymnasiarchs, those who are deemed worthy of Crowns and purple, of images and statues, those who stand in the forefront of priests, notable, bright."
This again seems to indicate that the favorable conditions of the rulers emphasize the quality of the exaltationplanet of the Bull, Selene/Moon, to come into effect.

What does Valens say about Leo? " Those so born are notable, good, unchangeable, just, hating work, insubordinate, despising flattery, beneficent, puffed up with intentions. If the ruler should happen to be upon a pivot point or should he with benefics, they will become bright, esteemed, tyrannical, kingly."

After discussing Gemini Valens says. ?And all the things that the ruler is at times accustomed to produce by its own nature, whether good or base, or lesser or greater, each one of the z?idia will also produce according to whether the figure-description of its ruler is operative or unprofitable, in order that we should not to seem to be writing the same matters.?

So the signs do not have some sort of uniformly clear and unaltered character or nature. The more positive character traits can only emerge in varying degrees, depending on the ruler(s) The universal principles are differentiated, the general significations of each sign can only be judged in each individual horoscope. Then it is about YOUR zodiac, not THE zodiak. Individualized. Differentiated. The more favorable the dispositors the more the qualities of the exaltationplanet to come forward (I suspect). This implies that in unfavorable conditions perhaps the qualities of the planet that has its fall or exile in the sign might come forward stronger, probably more negatively.

Subtle concept.
Hermes

2
Hermes
That`s very interesting.I must have another look at Valens`s user-unfriendly book. My sun ruler is dignified and the exaltation ruler exalted. But the AC ruler is conjunct Saturn.
I`m going to testhis theory with friends and family.

3
Do you get the same AC sign using the method described by Valens below as when you use softwares?
Cause in my case I get the oposite of my AC sign?!!

"4. Finding the Ascendant.
Having determined accurately the sun?s degree-position at the nativity, note where the dodekatemorion
falls. The sign in trine to the left of this position will be the Ascendant, or the equivalent sign (i.e. either
masculine or feminine), providing you take into account the distinction between night and day births. For
example: let the sun be in Aquarius 22?. The dodekatemorion of this point is in Scorpio; the sign in trine
to the left is Pisces. If the birth was in the day, either Pisces or Taurus or Cancer must be the Ascendant.
If the birth was at night, one of the diametrically opposite signs <must>. Virgo would be in the
Ascendant in the first hour <of>.
Having determined accurately the degree-position of the sun, for day births add to this position the
rising time of the sign in which the sun is; then begin to count from the moon?s position at the nativity,
giving each sign one degree. The Ascendant will be <in> where the count stops, or (as mentioned
above) in the equivalent sign. For night births add the rising time of the moon?s sign and count from the
sun?s position at the nativity. Using the previous example again: the sun in Aquarius <22>, the moon in
Scorpio. I add the rising time <of>, 37, to 22? <the>, for a result of 59. I count
this off from the sun and stop at Virgo. The Ascendant is there.
/19P/ Find the number <of> from Thoth to the day of birth; multiply the hour/time <of> by
15 and add the result to the first number. For day births count from Virgo, giving 30 to each sign. For
night births, count from Pisces.

4
Hermes wrote:
In Hellenistic horoscopy there are no general sign-effects, but rather very specific and horoscope related effects and characteristics. These are based on the condition of the several rulers, says Vettius Valens.
That introduces some specific factors to the operation of each sign in a specific horoscope. Valens says this about the Ram (book 1).

"Those who are born in this z?idion in accordance with the rulership relation, then, will be bright, notable, commanding, just, with a hatred of knaves, free, authoritative, bold in purpose, braggarts, great-souled, inconstant, irregular, haughty, up-in-the-air, threatening, quickly changing, well-off. When the rulers are well situated and testified to by benefics, the natives become kingly, powerful, and have the power of life and death..."
With its Hellenistic inheritance, this is a principle that has never been forgotten in India. It's used daily in all interpretation of horoscopes. India never gave blanket psychological meanings to signs of the zodiac as has happened in the west after the time of Alan Leo. In Indian texts we still read ancient western sign associations such as the method of rising (termed 'head' or 'back' rising), appearance (ram, bull, etc.) , bodily parts (Aries rules the head, etc.), fruitful or barran, and so forth. Otherwise interpreting the horoscope defaults to the planets, depositors and the houses planets rule. A planet's sign position (exaltation, domicile, fall etc.) is critical to analyzing horoscopic factors. Also ruling planets must be well placed by house for benefic results.

Thus, paradoxically India has remained with Valens and other ancient western writers in emphasizing planetary rulership in their sidereal zodiac. I believe it's the planetary emphasis (as per Valens and others) that has spearheaded the relatively few astrologers who have transitioned from the tropical to the zodiac of India. It's India also that has preserved what has been called the "Vehlow" house system here on Skyscript.
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm