Hello again,

Before I go further into Hellenistic techniques, I would like to discuss the hellenistic concept of oikodespotes vs. the medieval concept of Almuten.

As mentioned in my previous installment, oikodespotes is the planet that has the greatest claim in a sign as its dwelling place. Usually, this is simply the lord/lady of the sign but sometimes it can be another planet. Practicing medieval astrologers would have recognized this as the Almuten (Almutem/Almubtaz).

In medieval astrology, the domicile ruler gets 5 points, the exalted ruler gets 4 points, the in-sect triplicity/trigon ruler gets 3 points (some medieval astrologers, like Robert Zoller, give all three triplicity rulers 3 points), the term ruler gets 2 points and lastly, the face/decan ruler gets one point.

As an example, let us determine the almuten of 15 deg Aries in a diurnal/day chart. Please note that I am using Dorothean Triplicities and Egyptian Terms. The domicile ruler is Mars (5 points), the exalted ruler is sun (4 points), the in-sect triplicity ruler is Sun (3 points but some medieval astrologers, like Robert Zoller, give all three triplicity rulers i.e. Sun, Jupiter and Saturn 3 points), the term ruler is Mercury (2 points) and face/decan ruler is Sun (one point). So, Mars gets 5 points, Sun gets 8 points, Jupiter and Saturn get 3 points each (if you follow Zoller) and Mercury gets 2 points. Hence, the Almuten is Sun.

We can also calculate the compound almuten (almuten for more than one place). For example, the compound almuten of father might be the compound almuten of Sun by day (or Saturn by night), the 4th house and the Part of Father. We then give the domicile rulers of these places 5 points, the exalted rulers of these places 4 points, and so on and so forth. Finally, we then calculate the planet that gets the highest points and name that planet the compound almuten of father. This planet becomes the specific significator of father for a particular chart. Different authors will give you slightly different places that one might consider for the calculation of compound almuten of father but usually the places will include the universal significator (in our example, Sun by day, Saturn by night), the local or house significator (in our example, the 4th house) and arabic part significator (in our example, the Part of Father).

The Greeks also had the concept of almuten which is the oikodespotes. They also had the concept of ?compound? oikodespotes (e.g. the oikodespotes of soul are the oikodespotes of the Moon and Mercury - Ptolemy). The steps are similar to the calculation of almuten except:

1. hellenistic astrologers did not give weightings to the different dignities. Hence, the planet that is repeated the most as dispositor is the oikodespotes.

2. hellenistic astrologers did not use the last dignity that medieval astrologers used i.e. the face/decan ruler. Instead, they take the planet that aspects the considered degree with smallest orb and able to conduct its business.

Using the same example of ascendant 15 deg Aries (diurnal/day chart), domicile ruler = Mars, exalted ruler = Sun, trigon ruler = Sun, term/bound ruler = Mercury. If there are planets aspecting ascendant ? take the planet that most closely aspects ascendant and is able to conduct its business (see my previous post) as the last candidate of oikodespotes.
The planet that is repeated most (amongst the five candidates) is the oikodespotes of the ascendant.

astrojin wrote:As an example, let us determine the almuten of 15 deg Aries in a diurnal/day chart. Please note that I am using Dorothean Triplicities and Egyptian Terms. The domicile ruler is Mars (5 points), the exalted ruler is sun (4 points), the in-sect triplicity ruler is Sun (3 points but some medieval astrologers, like Robert Zoller, give all three triplicity rulers i.e. Sun, Jupiter and Saturn 3 points), the term ruler is Mercury (2 points) and face/decan ruler is Sun (one point). So, Mars gets 5 points, Sun gets 8 points, Jupiter and Saturn get 3 points each (if you follow Zoller) and Mercury gets 2 points. Hence, the Almuten is Sun.

Hello,

I'm a very confused newbie and I am glad that I found your post. I've been trying to figure out about Almuten and have even more questions than when I started so I hope you can help me.

When you say 15 deg Aries, as you mentioned exaltation, is it correct to assume that you are talking about Sun rather than the cusp of a house?

Lets say, this time around 15 deg Sun in Aries in nocturnal chart and if you find Saturn posited in Aries (10 deg) as well.

The sign ruler is Mars (5 points)
The house ruler is Saturn (fall -4 in Aries but it is participating +3 therefore -4 points wins?)
Sun does not receive 3 points because it is now nocturnal chart but exalted so it receives 4 points plus 1 point for decan.

If this is the case, Mars (5 points) and Sun (5 points) are equal so should I be including aspects to see which one has more strength?
And would you say that Sun is debilited being conjuct with malefic and debilitated Saturn?

Is my logic correct?

astrojin wrote:1. hellenistic astrologers did not give weightings to the different dignities. Hence, the planet that is repeated the most as dispositor is the oikodespotes.

2. hellenistic astrologers did not use the last dignity that medieval astrologers used i.e. the face/decan ruler. Instead, they take the planet that aspects the considered degree with smallest orb and able to conduct its business.

Ben Dykes discusses this subject in the introduction for his Bonatti translation. He writes:

But of the four indentifiable types [a) equal point, "Hellenistic" almuten that astrojin talks about in #1, b) weighted-point, the so called medieval almuten, c) compound almuten and d) as a general term - my note], (a) medievals (and Bonatti) definitely use the equal point al-mubtazz, although Bonatti sometimes does not seem to realize his sources are using it. (b) The weighted-point al-mubtazz is exceedingly rare. (---) At this point I do not have confidence that practicing astrologers like Abu Mashar or Masha'allah or Sahl used it.

Dykes adds that Bonatti never explititly explains or uses the compound almuten. In general it's interesting how faithfully Bonatti follows the Arabic texts (which is apparent from the translation by Dykes). Both weighted almuten and compound almuten seem to be later inventions, they don't necessarily fully belong yet in Arabic/medieval astrology.