james_m wrote:mark - thanks for saying all that and for doing a good amount of research into this date too..

i am curious about the question morning sun is raising here as it is my understanding the concept of overcoming, (''overcomes''lol) the approach she is raising here about planets in the 10th or on an angle for example... i would like to know if some others here can offer some clarity on this, as my present impression doesn't change even if for example one of these folks is born around noon.. mars will still be in a dominant position to the sun and tropical leo planets in marks mystery chart example..

Yes, James, this is my position too. It is irrelevant where the planet is in the scheme of overcoming because we are not talking of what dominates the chart or the native's life, but what dominates the particular planet or point and its significations for the life. Theoretically, it would be worse to have a prominent planet dominated by a malefic than a cadent one since this powerfully expressed planet will bring with it the malefic's significations.

hi konrad,
thank for chiming in! i like what you say here in particular, so thanks for sharing that insight as well..

Konrad wrote: Theoretically, it would be worse to have a prominent planet dominated by a malefic than a cadent one since this powerfully expressed planet will bring with it the malefic's significations.

Well, we have to take what is REAL, rather than adhere to a theory that obviously does NOT pan out in REAL Life. The theory does not work in real life. Too many examples to show otherwise. And then there is the SUPERIORITY OF PLACES. The term superiority is used for a reason, it is superior to other placement or perhaps theories.

It does prove out in real life. So if someone wants to hang on to a theory that realisticaly is obviously not proved out in real life, then the interpretations of future charts will be skewed. Yes, No? I think yes.

Check out some of your charts or people you have done charts for, those with mostly planets in cadent houses, really are limited in their lives. As opposed to those with more angular planets in good positions, as well as the rulers of the house and triplicity rulers. It does make a difference in real life. Of course that is not discounting aspects also, but a good synthesis of all.

MorningSun wrote:Well, we have to take what is REAL, rather than adhere to a theory that obviously does NOT pan out in REAL Life. The theory does not work in real life. Too many examples to show otherwise. And then there is the SUPERIORITY OF PLACES. The term superiority is used for a reason, it is superior to other placement or perhaps theories.

It does prove out in real life. So if someone wants to hang on to a theory that realisticaly is obviously not proved out in real life, then the interpretations of future charts will be skewed. Yes, No? I think yes.

Check out some of your charts or people you have done charts for, those with mostly planets in cadent houses, really are limited in their lives. As opposed to those with more angular planets in good positions, as well as the rulers of the house and triplicity rulers. It does make a difference in real life. Of course that is not discounting aspects also, but a good synthesis of all.

I think you are misunderstanding the principle though. Overcome planets don't have less power to act, their significations are dominated by whatever overcomes them. This doesn't restrict them in performing their roles, it means that their significations are dominated by another planet. It has nothing to do with success or failure of a person but more to do with how the events in their lives transpire.

Thank you Konrad for an excellent explanation.

However, I do believe in the Hierarchy of the places, I put more emphasis on that. And I do believe in looking at these charts, of the Judge and Hockey player, that the stellium in the 10th, the power there cannot be overcome. Just my thoughts and looking at their life. Can you imagine what it must feel like to have all those planets in the 10th, all conjoined?

It was interesting to note the hockey player (second link James put up) became a psychologist. I can just imagine the energies that a person must feel with that stellium, rather larger than life.

I do not discount the ASC and ASC ruler will change with all the people who are born on the same day, and the placement of the ASC ruler would also be crucial.

Which is why, I am going through this debate within myself of house systems, because they are so important in pointing to the actual angles.

Its like being close, but no cigar. Reminds me of the chart Ile put up of the two women with Jupiter (discusssing their husband/boyfriend) The first woman had Jupiter nicely placed in the 7th. She was married to a wonderful husband who was very rich. The second woman, Jupiter, (now here is where I diverged) she was close but not cigar. Jupiter was in the 6th!! What cadent brings as opposed to angularity.

Now most of the comments were that the second Jupiter was in the 7th as it was close enough and house system, etc. I looked at it and really thought of that saying, close but no cigar, winner of the race. Her boyfriend, she did not have the benefit of marriage, and he was not rich of himself to provide for her but depended on his circle of friends to pretend to be rich and live the rich life.

To me, and I know most do not agree, but the real life situation did bear out what I believe. The second woman had Jupiter in the 6th, cadent and it gave her only up to a certain degree or level, quality of life. Lots of examples of close to angle but no cigar.

As in the examples of the rapist and Judge and other prominent people born on the same day. Different Asc, rulers in cadent or angular houses, planets in Angular or cadent houses so make a big difference in real life.

But I would really like to hear others opinion. What they have found in real life, again all about what really works, what will make us better at our determinations of a chart and the natives life.

Morning Sun wrote:

Reminds me of the chart Ile put up of the two women with Jupiter (discusssing their husband/boyfriend) The first woman had Jupiter nicely placed in the 7th. She was married to a wonderful husband who was very rich. The second woman, Jupiter, (now here is where I diverged) she was close but not cigar. Jupiter was in the 6th!! What cadent brings as opposed to angularity.

Now most of the comments were that the second Jupiter was in the 7th as it was close enough and house system, etc. I looked at it and really thought of that saying, close but no cigar, winner of the race. Her boyfriend, she did not have the benefit of marriage, and he was not rich of himself to provide for her but depended on his circle of friends to pretend to be rich and live the rich life.

To me, and I know most do not agree, but the real life situation did bear out what I believe. The second woman had Jupiter in the 6th, cadent and it gave her only up to a certain degree or level, quality of life. Lots of examples of close to angle but no cigar.

If you want to argue for quadrant vs whole sign houses thats fine. I am sure a majority of astrologers would agree with you.

However you are rather oversimplifying the two charts displayed by Ile. Yes Jupiter was in Pisces in the WS 7th in both charts. In chart 1 it was angular by sign division, while in chart 2 cadent by sign division.

Beyond this though you are ignoring some other very important differences that could alone explain the less effective nature of Jupiter in chart 2 displayed by Ile. Firstly, unlike chart 1, Jupiter in chart 2 was nocturnal and therefore out of sect. Thats an extremely important consideration the way I and many other astrologers see it. Indeed that is enough to explain how the different outcomes came about as far as I am concerned.

Secondly, Jupiter was direct in chart 1 and retrograde in chart 2. Retrograde motion is more likely to set up some delays, frustrations and overall operate more erratically and unpredictably. I dont think retrogrades are as totally debilitating as medieval sources present it but they dont make for a smooth, steady destiny either.

I have delineated many charts where quadrant systems indicate a planet is cadent and effectively 'out of the box' yet it seems to function ok due to WS angularity. I do think angularity by sign division is important but more to indicate how powerful or 'busy' a planet is likely to be. However, I suspect this is something we will not agree on so I guess I better leave it at that.

Mark

Hello Mark,

No I do not want to argue house systems. Everyone uses what they feel works for them. The big differences in the house systems as to angularity is a personal issue I am working with, not to cause a big uproar or debate with anyone. I find others comments on the house system they use quite informative and enriching. As a matter of fact that is what got me questiioning my use of Placidus. I was quite happy with it until I read others posts.

And yes, everything in your post I agree with. I agree that sect plays a very big part, and could bring the differences, Jupiter retrograde does withhold, and delay, and they could very well be the reason for the difference, no doubt.

I could have and should have worded it differently and included everything you included to say that it could also have been a cadent Jupiter that would bring the same stark differences.

I suppose it was not a good example, my point was more on angularity and cadency. The big differences in the material differences of a persons life. Angularity and Sect, in particular, planets and their rulers being angular.

Your last sentence, is not about agreeing or disagreeing in this respect, but examples and what it reflects in real life, I think that is the whole purpose for most of us.

Your stating that you have seen where a quadrant system indicates a planet cadent, yet it functioned quite well, is a very helpful statement to all. Yes they do function but can only go so far, middle mangement, and without the recognition, as an angular planet would get.

If I get a chance I will post a chart of such a person, and I am always open to being wrong, and learning something that is more accurate.

Morning Sun wrote:

Your stating that you have seen where a quadrant system indicates a planet cadent, yet it functioned quite well, is a very helpful statement to all. Yes they do function but can only go so far, middle mangement, and without the recognition, as an angular planet would get.

A good example of what I mean was our last mystery chart exercise here on Skyscript. The test pilot/astronaut had Saturn Rx in the 12th by quadrant but first by WS. The chart was Capricorn rising. I still thought that Saturn could be effective here as it was angular by WS, in its domicile (Capricorn) in sect and in a masculine quarter. However, astrologers using Placidus or other quadrant systems dismissed this planet as cadent and Rx.

My research indicates that when a planet is well dignified like that one the more negative associations of retrogradation dont necessarily manifest as much. Especially if its located in and rules a strong place with no negative associations such as the 1st or 10th. Hence I saw a Rx Saturn in that context leading to an unpredictable/unconventional outcome but not necessarily a negative one at all.

Its a very different point but Gaughelin's exhaustive data seems to challenge one of the basic assumptions of astrologers using quadrant houses. That is that planets above the horizon from the ASC show up disproportionately in famous individuals charts. This is the opposite of what most astrologers are taught. However, Gaughelin's data makes perfect sense using whole sign houses since planets linked to the 1st WS house are frequently rising well above the horizon. The medieval use of the 5 degree orb to house cusps was a way to slightly overcome this problem but in my opinion it doesn't go far enough.

Mark

Hello Mark,

I agree with you entirely regarding a dignified RX planet, it is very capable. And the discussion regarding WSH as well as the other posts discussing them and other house systems has me, personally wanting to start using some of the others. Just need more time to devote to it. Most times I post I am in a hurry, I post then go do what I have to do, then maybe come back later, let alone time to really pull up examples, compare and analyze.

MorningSun wrote:
Which is why, I am going through this debate within myself of house systems, because they are so important in pointing to the actual angles.

hi morning sun!

i liked what you said about posting in a hurry and then coming back to something you said later, maybe to have to clarify something or such.. it all reminded me of myself!!! perhaps it is the same with this quote that i have bolded that you made earlier too, but i'd like to talk about it anyway..

it is the angles that point to the houses and not the houses that point to the angles.. it might seem like a mute point, but the reason for all the kerfuffle on house systems has a lot to do with wanting to incorporate the two axis - the vertical one and the horizontal one, even if the vertical one isn't exactly so vertical.. that is the whole basis for all the house systems, excluding perhaps whole sign or equal which will still want to include the vertical (midheaven) axis as a sensitive point in the chart as well..

maybe i am using too many words to communicate something simple.. what is the break off point where a planet is no longer in an angle and is now clearly cadent to an angle? ptolemy mentioned the 5 degree rule which mark also mentioned today.. those of us who like whole sign and many who used to use equal in a similar manner - like the idea of keeping the planets in the sign in the same house.. this seems too simplistic for many, but i find a lot of merit to this way of looking at an astro chart. i know i am not going to convince you and you are too smart for that anyway!!! i never cared for the ''''houses as boxes''' approach for the longest time, but that might have to do with my personality as much as what i feel is true for me astrologically.. the ''it is either inside the box, or it is in another box - or - completely outside the box'' seems to be a popular approach to life as well, LOLOL!

someone a long time ago, and i can't remember who expressed the ascendant degree like the crest of a wave... i liked that imagery as well.. i do believe the degree of the ascendant is an important point in the chart, but i do think there is some affinity for planets held within the same sign too.. of course change the zodiac and it will change all this too, so i think astrologers are going to have to accept divergence and variety in the use of house systems..

i really just wanted to comment on the part of your comment i highlighted, but as usual got carried away with my typing abilities, lol..

James_M wrote:

so i think astrologers are going to have to accept divergence and variety in the use of house systems..

..., and zodiacs, sign rulerships, aspects, etc etc etc!

I think all we can honestly do is set out our own position and what makes sense to us and why.

Its nice if other people agree but usually its more interesting and stimulating to have a sincere debate and disagreement. I remember Deborah Houlding once saying she only genuinely debated with people she liked. Ideally, thats the way it should be although it can be difficult to live up to that kind of model approach. As the art is traditionally ruled by Mercury its hardly surprising we are a fickle lot at times.

Mark

Hi James!!

What do you mean you can't convince me? Au Contraire!! Reading all the comments regarding house systems makes me want to check them out. However as you know these software programs can be a pain when trying to get a new chart form. I used to be a real whiz at computers, long time ago, but now seems more of a pain and drudgery. Getting older i guess. Have to look up the directions how to do it, and I have lots of astrology programs. Then I probably wouldn't know if it were accurate or not. Time consuming I guess. I found a bug in Morinus I havent reported yet. Would not give me an accurate chart for a 12/28/1943 date of birth for Everett, WA, USA, was not using Pacific War Time, which all other programs used.

I digress, yes the angles are important and I did want to get back to that also!! You must be Psychic lol!! I thought everyone thought that planets and rulers in angles make a huge difference in a chart. Didn't think it would cause a controversy. But then again I think it makes a rather big difference as I mentioned earlier, maybe others don't. Nice to know what others think and how they interpret a chart.

Also wanted to get back to your comment regarding the rapist chart, you are right there has to be some other indicator. Perhaps that is where the free will comes in, morals, conditioning of values from family/society, etc, nature vs nurture debate. I would never have gotten he was a rapist from his chart, but never even thought of looking for that. An interesting chart for the reason of possibly defining the limits of what one can predict with astrology.

Thanks for your post above, I always find them great and enjoyable!!! I am rambling now, it's late and on iPad typing is so slow with one finger, when I am a fast typist on a keyboard. Love your comment about being impressed with your typing. Too funny, made me laugh, that's how I feel about this post.
Take Care, M.S.