Tara wrote on another thread:

Thanks, Tom. I appreciate your taking the time to explain Morin's position. I take it he did subscribe to the essential dignities of the planets as far as rulership/detriment and exaltation/fall positions go? Robert Corre once said in a workshop that, according to Morin, planets in their fall were "as if benumbed." As a Libra Sun I was stunned/benumbed!

I don't know how this thread will pan out. Maybe it will wander all over but, that's OK, too.

Morin used the essential dignities except for the terms (bounds) and faces (decans). His triplicity rulers were different and so were a few other things we take for granted. The rules were: the day triplicity ruler was the planet with two dignities in an element. The night ruler is the domicile ruler of the cardinal sign in that element, and the participating ruler was the one left over. So

Fire: Sun (rules Leo exalted in Aries) is the day ruler. Mars is the night ruler (rules Aries the cardinal sign) Jupiter the participating ruler, he rules Sagitattarius which has not been mentioned yet. The whole list

Fire: Sun Mars Jupiter
Earth: Mercury Saturn Venus
Air: Saturn Venus Mercury
Water: Jupiter Moon Mars

Note this system is based on essential dignities whereas the Ptolemaic/Dorothean system is based on sect - an accidental dignity or condition. Morin's system also seems to give slight preference to day charts (in order to ruler the element in a day chart the planet needs two dignities).

Also it is a lot easier to be peregrine with Morin's system. Since triplicity is not that strong it isn't really possible to determine which system "works" better particularly since much of it works out the same as the older system.

Another variation of his is the elemental nature of Jupiter. All other authorities claim that Jupiter is warm and moist as these conditions are required for growth. But if we look at the scheme of things Jupiter alone is the one planet that does not rule a sign of its nature, if its nature is warm and moist. For example: The Sun is hot and dry and rules hot and dry Leo. The Moon is cold and moist and rules cold and moist Cancer. Mars is hot and dry and rules hot and dry Aries and cold and moist Scorpio (opposites) Saturn rules warm and moist Aquarius and Cold and dry Capricorn, etc. But Jupiter rules cold and moist Pisces and hot and dry Sagittarius. Therefore Jupiter cannot be in a sign of its nature when in rulership. Now Morin believed that the planets took their natures from the signs they ruled. Therefore, Jupiter cannot be warm and moist. So he made Jupiter warm and dry, like Sagittarius.

Some authorities would have the same issue with Venus as she is considered cold and moist by many. Morin treats her as warm and moist.

He's not just being a contrarian, either. The more I study Morin, the more I realize he was trying to develop a rational system of astrology that could produce great precision. It seems as though he was fighting the emerging "Enlightenment period" with natural science and trying to keep astrology in the loop. He claimed that astrology was derided because astrologers misunderstood their topic. He is not the first or the last astrologer to make such a claim. Lilly is one of the few that (more or less) kept his mouth shut on such issues. He did not attack his predecessors by name.

Morin not only attacked them, he attacked the grand high exalted mystic ruler himself: Claudius Ptolemy, and the things he says about Cardan rarely rise above out and out ridicule. Once in a while he will sneak in a compliment. But it is our responsibility to ignore or maybe secretly enjoy Morin's rather large ego and then get into his arguments. He stretches things a bit at times, but there is some truly outstanding astrology in his work. He deserves to be better known and understood.

Tom

I'll continue the wandering ? Morin is worth a ramble. In another thread Tom wrote:

Take Morin's position: Combustion is a hoax. In the newly released translation of Volume 16 of Astrolgia Gallica, Morin goes through his usual explanation of why a concept (in this case combustion) is promulgated and then explains why it is false. For example he argues that everyone recognizes the power of the new Moon yet the new Moon is combust except when it is cazimi and since cazimi is "in the heart of the Sun" a planet should be weakest not strongest.

From there he notes that if the lord of the ASC is powerless because it is combust, then there must not be a lord ASC in that chart. Also if any planet is combust, and therefore powerless, it cannot act as dispositor. Since none of these things make sense, then, to Morin, combustion makes no sense.

Notice he is accepting the definition of combustion as resulting in a planet being powerless, and that definition is consistent with the visual idea of the Sun obliterating a planet and canceling its light. If we are not ready to abandon the idea of combustion, perhaps the definition needs to be re-thought.

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... 2&start=15

Morin has a personal involvement in the matter that few of us can match: he has Venus, Jupiter and Saturn combust in his chart. Mercury too, if you include out of sign planets. The Moon has left combustion but is still under the beams. It makes a person wonder if he was under the common influence of one's chart and personal experience determining whether an astrological method or procedure is correct or not. Notice how he doesn't like the idea of power being taken away from the combust planet ? maybe he didn't like power taken away from himself. That would make for a lot of 'powerless' planets in his chart, which wouldn't be comforting to someone with Aries rising who was feisty, opinionated and frequently involved in squabbles.

Morin's chart: http://www.skyscript.co.uk/morinchart.html


Edited to add: With the 12th house placements was he fighting power-depleting combustion as his potential self-undoing, as the threat of hidden enemies or his own bewitching demons? One could go way over the top with psychological chatter about this, but it is hard to ignore (OK, for me, anyway).

It makes a person wonder if he was under the common influence of one's chart and personal experience determining whether an astrological method or procedure is correct or not.

He does reference his chart often as evidence of the correctness of his opinions (see page 51 of AG Baldwin translation, for example), and like a lot of us, he feels his experiences are universal. This is a common weakness all astrologers succumb to now and again. But since, as is common for his day, he is event driven, the examples he gives are usually events and they are good examples from which a student can learn, as opposed to a psychological concept that cannot be proved or disproved. If you have several planets in the 12th, you were either incarcerated or you weren't. But anyone can anything about something that is in their head and no one will know if it is true or not. "I have lots of planets in the 12th and I'm very spiritual."

I'm not going to delve into the psychological issues that may or may not influence his astrology. I have enough problems with my own psyche and don't wish to criticize his. However we also need to realize that Morin did not lack introspection. In the Baldwin translation beginning on page 70 he discusses "The Determination of the Planets by Exaltation and Triplicity." An interested reader might want to look at his chart and follow along.

And in my own life an almost constant desire for fame is shown in my own horoscope by Mars ruling the ascendant while located in the sign of Jupiter's exaltation, and all the other planets except Mercury in the sign of the exaltation of Venus, which is co-ruler of the first; but perhaps mainly through the exaltation of the Sun and Moon in the first house (i.e Aries and Taurus occupy the first - tc) referring of course to my character and temperament. As a result I am excessively inclined to consider myself superior to others on account of my intellectual endowments and scientific attainments, and it is very difficult for me to struggle against this tendency, except when the realization of my sins troubles me and I see myself a vile man and worthy of contempt. Because of all this my name has become famous throughout the world. And many similar examples can be found of this sort so that it does not seem idle to make a judgment of the affairs of a particular house from the consideration of both the planet ruling that house and also the planet which is exalted in the sign there.

Quite a mouthful. but in addition to the soul searching (or attempt at arousing sympathy from the reader) he shows the reader how to use exaltation in a natal reading. His Lord ASC is in the exaltation of Jupiter, a planet associated with fame. His first house hold the signs of exaltation of the lights, Aries and Taurus. He has many planets in the exaltation of Venus co-ruler of his first. All of which point to an individual who shamelessly seeks fame. Not bad astro-psychology for a 17th century man.

Tom