Chris Brennan wrote: I'm still open to entertaining other rationales, and I have not really started moving in the direction of using the natural house significations again yet, but I'm entertaining the possibility that that may be necessary in the absence of a better alternative.

I should admit I share the same idea as Chris, if i well understand his.

For example Libra/7th house.
In Teucer (in Rhetorius) among the paranatellonta of sphaera barbarica there are many connected with death, like the Acherousian Harbour, the Ferryman, the Unseen, Mousa (ie Orpheus) playing Lyra....

And the seventh house is naturally connected with death because it is the place where the Sun set.

Happy to read someone else thinking like me....

margherita

Hi Margherita,

Happy to meet you here .

margherita wrote:
And the seventh house is naturally connected with death because it is the place where the Sun set.

Yes ,Manilius had the same idea too. But the successors connected death to 8th or 4th house.

Therefore , I am aware that the meanings or traits of the houses have been in a evolutional course or process, and I try to find out the logic in these connections.

For example , If we connect Death with 7th house ,that since the Sun is setting in 7th house as you mentioned before.

If Death with 8th house ,that because the 8th house is unfortunate and falling down into the Underworld (The house, temples of the sky . page 27)

If Death with 4th house ,that because it is the lowest place of the Sun , and Al-Biruni admitted that the 4th house was associated with what succeeds death and what happens to the dead.(ibid. page 11)

What?s your opinion? Thank you.

Best Wishes

Ming

MingWei wrote:Hi Margherita,


Yes ,Manilius had the same idea too. But the successors connected death to 8th or 4th house.

Yes in Manilius and in all the texts influenced by Teucer too.

that other astrologers read death in other houses is not so strange because the sphaera barbarica thread was an aside thread, different from others.

margherita

houses - daily motion of sun and signs - annual motion of sun - makes sense to me. if someone can find some authority for holding this view based on something said in some old astro literature - great.

if death is the 7th with the sun setting, the 1st is life with the sun rising. this might also explain why the ascendant is considered so important in every astro circle.. sun exalted in aries makes sense from this point of view too as the length of day becomes longer then the length of night beginning at the spring equinox ( northern hemisphere).. there are obvious parallels with houses and signs, especially if one considers the basis for them built up on the sun's journey daily, or annually.

On June 6 Chris Brennan wrote:

...The first was that I was having a hard time ignoring the fact that there seemed to be some general theme of what I can only describe as Mercurial-type significations associated with 3rd house placements, which came up over and over again in chart examples, especially when important planets were placed there, such as the ruler of the Ascendant.

Second, after I finished the exhaustive literature review I was surprised to find that there wasn't really any way to justify Mercurial-type significations as being associated with the 3rd house from a Hellenistic perspective, because I just couldn't find any evidence for much that was even remotely like that in the Hellenistic astrologers.

Wouldn't Mercurial significations for the third house be a natural development of the "Zodiacal Man" association of signs with the body which were (as far as I know) first mentioned in Manilius?

"Now learn how the parts of the human frame are distributed among the constellations, and how the limbs are subject each to a particular authority: over these limbs out of all the parts of the body, the signs exercise special influence. The Ram as chieftain of them all is allotted the head, and the Bull receives as his estate the handsome neck; evenly bestowed, the arms to shoulders joined are accounted to the Twins the breast is put down to the Crab...[etc.]"
Manilius, Astronomica, 2-453, p. 119 (Harvard University Press, 1977, trans. G. P. Goold)

I don't know when the "zodiacal man" was first used for medical diagnosis, but it seems that would have been the time when the houses began to be associated with significations of the planets, such as Mercury symbolism becoming attached to the third house. This would be related to Gemini rather than Virgo, so we have the concepts of messages and short distances for travel.

As with 20th century psychological concepts associated with the polarity and the trigons, could this have been an "underground" association of signs with houses (Aries: first house, the head, etc.) that was always there, but simply not recognized until the Medieval period? How much astrological knowledge is development as such, and how much is simply hidden concepts coming to light over the centuries?

P.S. note on long forum paragraphs: Older eyes cannot read those, but (as I had to do for Chris' post), they can be copied to a word processor or mail program and broken into short segments for easier reading if the topic is of interest.

Therese wrote:

I don't know when the "zodiacal man" was first used for medical diagnosis, but it seems that would have been the time when the houses began to be associated with significations of the planets, such as Mercury symbolism becoming attached to the third house. This would be related to Gemini rather than Virgo, so we have the concepts of messages and short distances for travel.

Gettings' Arkana Dictionary comments on this so-called melothesic man as follows:

The earliest melothesic descriptions go back to the first records on astrology, but the earliest melothesic image did not emerge in Europe until about the 12th century. Ptolemy was merely reporting an old tradition when he linked the planets and the signs to the human frame, and it is likely that West and Toonder are not being too imaginative in showing an ancient melothesia in early Egyptian architectural zodiac images.

The book referred to is Toonder, J. G., and West, J. A., The Case for Astrology, London, 1973. I don't have this book - maybe somebody else here has it?

I am also not aware of any earlier description than the one by Manilius.

However, the belief that Man, the microcosm, equals the macrocosm in structure can be found reflected in the myths of several very ancient religious systems.

The earliest source connecting the melothesic man with the Wheel of the Houses appears to be al-Kindi in The Book of the Nine Judges, pages 191 f. in Ben Dykes' edition (thanks again for the hint, Paul).

Hello Chris,

Interesting response. You have clearly been given this issue a lot of thought and have been conversing with other authorities on the topic.

I take your point that what you describe as the 'mercurial' associations of the 3rd house appear to be a medieval development.

Your dilemma it seems to me is not one derived from hellenistic astrology itself but a firm belief that the later 'mercurial' associations found in medieval astrology and afterwards are correct in your personal experience.

However, perhaps part of the problem is our medieval and subsequent associations for the planets?

Most medieval and modern astrologers might associate Mercury with travel. However, in Valens the Moon is described as the planet of travel and exploration. In particular 'voyages, travel and wanderings' . This fits very well with the Moon having its planetary joy in the 3rd house.

You have dismissed Egyptian associations for the Moon influencing the meaning of the 3rd house. However, if that is the case why does the astrological Moon fit so closely the description of the Egyptian Moon God Khonsu?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khonsu

In both Egyptian thought and Valens the Moon is the planetary 'traveller' not Mercury.

Perhaps this is also an association of the Greek Moon Goddess Selene with her sky chariot associated with travel.

Still, this doesn't address other Mercurial associations such as writing, and education. I have suggested the Thema Mundi as an alternative reference point.

But if you read my earlier post on the thread I made clear I dont think there is a silver bullet that explains the associations of the houses. Its a complex area which a variety of contributing factors.

I am not suggesting the Thema Mundi is some kind of magic wand that explains all the house associations. It clearly, is only a part of the jig-saw.

I do think your focus on posing 3rd house meanings to the natural zodiac tends to sideline how badly this approach fits many of the other houses. In that respect isn't this discussion totally lopsided? For example, why are we not discussing how totally off the mark Jupiterian associations are for the 12th house? And how do we match up a sterile sign Leo associated with the 5th house of children? How do Saturnian associations fit with the ancient meaning of the 11th house? They simply dont. Because of the natural zodiac modern astrology associates Venus with the 2nd house and links it to money rather than Jupiter.

The fact the 3rd house seems to have gained additional meanings in the transition from the hellenistic to the medieval period is hardly unique. In his article Facets of Fate , Robert Schmidt points out numerous examples of where the ancient association of the houses was altered in the medieval period:

In comparing the Medieval house assignments with the original Hellenistic ones, we find several transferences of topics from one house to another (e.g., King and Sovereignty to the 10th instead of the 9th, Mother to the 10th instead of the 4th, Enemies to the 7th instead of the 6th); much specification without precedent in the Hellenistic sources (e.g., Long-Distance Travel in the 9th versus Short-Distance Travel in the 3rd, Hidden Enemies in the 12th); and some topics entirely unrepresented in the Hellenistic lists (e.g., Communication and Messages in the 3rd). (The Facets of Fate: The Rationale Underlying the Hellenistic System of Houses by Robert Schmidt, The Mountain Astrologer, Dec./Jan. 1999-2000.)

Considering that the 3rd already had association with travels and voyages I dont see the later addition of writing, communication and education as that radical a leap as some other changes that took place in house meanings. Its certainly not half as dramatic as completely changing the association of enemies from the 6th to 7th house for example.

Moreover, these associations had to be incorporated somewhere. It could be said that the omission of this association from any houses was a gap in the hellenistic tradition that needed a solution.

I dont rule out that the natural zodiac influencing this thinking in medieval thought. As I pointed out earlier in the thread I have a pet theory that Claudius Galen was possibly the first source linking the Zodiac Man to the houses in the 2nd century CE. Until we have translations of all his voluminous astrological writings this remains an open question.

Still perhaps we need to cast our net a little wider? In many respects the Indian tradition has retained the hellenistic approach to the houses more closely than the medieval tradition. For example, Indian astrology like its hellenistic antecedent still regards the 6th house as the house of enemies.

Its instructive to study Indian sources to see how they approach this issue. In Indian astrology vidya or knowledge defines areas in houses meanings related to education, communication and teaching. This is associated with the 5th house in North Indian astrology whilst in South India it is linked to the 4th house.

So it seems to me there are numerous other approaches to this question than the rather stark way you present the issue. Most intriguingly perhaps exploring the contribution of the Indian tradition to this question.

I dont see why a hellenistic orientated astrologer has to slavishly follow notions from the Perso-Arabic period onwards. We do have other astrological options.

Mark

GR wrote:

Also, isn't Khonsu more the Moon god? Tehuti has that aspect, but I thought that was a very ancient association and not very emphasized in later periods.

The problem with any statement on Egyptian religion is that it needs to be qualified by geography and history. Associations of Gods often changed over time and local temple cults had their own attributions and focus.

But thanks for the reference to Khonsu! His cult did go on until the Ptolemaic Kingdom. In some traditions he is linked to Thoth. Although as Chris pointed out it seems the hellenistic Greeks associated Thoth with Hermes.

Mark

Margherita wrote:

And the seventh house is naturally connected with death because it is the place where the Sun set.

This fits well with the Thema Mundi with Saturn in the 7th. In hellenistic astrology the life cycle was linked the diurnal motion of planets. So Saturn's association with old age or death is very apt here.

Mark

Mark wrote:Hello Chris,
However, perhaps part of the problem is our medieval and subsequent associations for the planets?

Most medieval and modern astrologers might associate Mercury with travel. However, in Valens the Moon is described as the planet of travel and exploration. In particular 'voyages, travel and wanderings' . This fits very well with the Moon having its planetary joy in the 3rd house.

I think that it would be a mistake to rely only on Riley's preliminary rendering of these three words in order to make this argument. At one point I spent a while researching each of the words that Valens uses for the significations of the planets in the first chapter of the Anthology, and the three words that he gives in that passage under the Moon are "?????, ?????????, ??????," which to the best of my understand should more accurately be translated as "ships, living abroad, wanderings." After that Valens makes the parenthetical remark "since it [the Moon] does not hold straight through Cancer." That is to say, it signifies wanderings because the Moon rules the sign known as the Crab, which is a creature that walks sideways rather than in a straight line. So, the association of travel with the Moon in particular based on this passage seems a bit questionable, although it doesn't necessarily matter since I think that the 3rd house is capable of signifying travel without being associated with either the Moon or Mercury, because it is a decline.

Mark wrote: You have dismissed Egyptian associations for the Moon influencing the meaning of the 3rd house. However, if that is the case why does the astrological Moon fit so closely the description of the Egyptian Moon God Khonsu?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khonsu

I don't really see anything on that page that is very reminiscent of the way that the Hellenistic astrologers conceptualized the Moon. There is just the association with travel, but as I pointed out above travel does not necessarily show up as a signification of the Moon in Valens. I also don't think that it is really necessary for us to get too hung up on whether the Moon signifies travel, since all four of the declining places inherently signify travel in the Hellenistic tradition, regardless of what planet they are associated with.

Mark wrote: I do think your focus on posing 3rd house meanings to the natural zodiac tends to sideline how badly this approach fits many of the other houses. In that respect isn't this discussion totally lopsided? For example, why are we not discussing how totally off the mark Jupiterian associations are for the 12th house? And how do we match up a sterile sign Leo associated with the 5th house of children? How do Saturnian associations fit with the ancient meaning of the 11th house? They simply dont. Because of the natural zodiac modern astrology associates Venus with the 2nd house and links it to money rather than Jupiter.

I think that if we were to adopt the natural house associations and attempt to gain additional meaning from the houses based on them then the focus would not be on the planets that are the rulers of those signs, but instead it would primarily be on the natures or qualities of those signs themselves, which in some instances only reflect certain qualities of the ruler. So, instead of asking how is the 12th house like Jupiter, I think it would be more accurate to ask whether there are any similarities between the 12th house and Pisces, or the 5th house and Leo, or the 11th house and Aquarius. While I'm not personally fully interested in fully embracing that approach at this point, I could see how someone could have a stronger argument if they tried to frame the debate from this perspective.

Mark wrote: Considering that the 3rd already had association with travels and voyages I dont see the later addition of writing, communication and education as that radical a leap as some other changes that took place in house meanings. Its certainly not half as dramatic as completely changing the association of enemies from the 6th to 7th house for example.

The main point for me is just that I want to know exactly where the significations are being derived from symbolically or conceptually. For most of the traditional significations I think that you can do that simply by resorting to three key things: 1) angularity, 2) configuration to the Ascendant, 3) the joys. So you can say in each instance why a certain house signifies a certain thing based on a specific factor that is being interpreted in a symbolic way. This is actually one of the things that really appeals to me about traditional astrology. But this breaks down and does not necessarily hold true for the significations of writing, communication, and messages though, which were added in to the 3rd house later for reasons that are not clear.

Mark wrote: Still perhaps we need to cast our net a little wider? In many respects the Indian tradition has retained the hellenistic approach to the houses more closely than the medieval tradition. For example, Indian astrology like its hellenistic antecedent still regards the 6th house as the house of enemies.

Its instructive to study Indian sources to see how they approach this issue. In Indian astrology vidya or knowledge defines areas in houses meanings related to education, communication and teaching. This is associated with the 5th house in North Indian astrology whilst in South India it is linked to the 4th house.

So it seems to me there are numerous other approaches to this question than the rather stark way you present the issue. Most intriguingly perhaps exploring the contribution of the Indian tradition to this question.

I tried following up on the Indian possibility at one point to see if they had any Mercurial associations with the 3rd house in the earlier part of their tradition, but I was not able to find much, which seemed to reenforce what we already know about the Hellenistic tradition. Some of the more modern Indian astrologers associate the 3rd with communications now, but this seems to be due to influence from the Tajika and modern western traditions.

Mark wrote: I dont see why a hellenistic orientated astrologer has to slavishly follow notions from the Perso-Arabic period onwards. We do have other astrological options.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. I have generally only adopted a few of the significations added by the Medieval tradition, although I'm starting to see some evidence that maybe there a more significations that represent valid additions, and I would just like to figure out a consistent conceptual justification for incorporating those, rather than just taking it for granted. That's all.

I hope that you didn't take any of my earlier counter points to your arguments personally, as I didn't mean to reject your suggestions as if they were completely without merit, but I was just saying that I had considered many of those options already myself and found that they didn't seem fully satisfying to me.

I just remembered Gauquelin's work, and decided to take a look at it again in order to refresh myself on what profession he found to correlate with the Moon, to see if that might give us an alternate access point for this issue.

Interestingly, the main profession he found to correlate with the Moon when it was prominent in a birth chart was professional writers.

Now, I have some reservations about using statistics as the starting point in order to derive planetary significations, but I thought that I would throw this out there as food for thought. It seems like it could potentially be used as an alternate piece of evidence in favor of arguing for the Moon itself as being sufficient in order to explain the 3rd house significations that were introduced in the Medieval tradition, without needing to have recourse to the natural house scheme. Just something to think about.

Hi Chris,

Let me start out by saying that I have no personal ambitions to convince you, or anybody else, of the validity of the natural house approach that I have seen as appropriate for myself. But I hope that we (Mark, I, and others) can be of assistance, to some degree, by providing you with a mirror reflecting the voices fighting over your Soul in your head. That's a major purpose of a forum like this one, at least in my understanding.

First off, a suggestion:

In your post of Sat Jun 07, 2014 7:48 am you told us nicely how you started noticing some typical Mercurial traits in nativities with significant 3rd house placements (such as having the ruler of the ASC there). I wonder, did it occur to you to consciously and systematically look for this also in people with charts that have a comparable emphasis on other houses than 3rd?

I'm under the impression that you may be somewhat of a ?Mercurial type? yourself - so I could imagine that you are resonating with similar personalities strongly enough to allow your perceptions of these traits to bypass your previous believes. With some of the other types, the evidence may not show itself quite as readily, but you should be able to see it clearly enough if it's there, and if you look for it with a mind open to whatever the answer may turn out to be.

Moreover, may I suggest that we analyse some sample charts together on this thread?

I just remembered Gauquelin's work, and decided to take a look at it again in order to refresh myself on what profession he found to correlate with the Moon, to see if that might give us an alternate access point for this issue.

Interestingly, the main profession he found to correlate with the Moon when it was prominent in a birth chart was professional writers.

Now, I have some reservations about using statistics as the starting point in order to derive planetary significations, but I thought that I would throw this out there as food for thought. It seems like it could potentially be used as an alternate piece of evidence in favor of arguing for the Moon itself as being sufficient in order to explain the 3rd house significations that were introduced in the Medieval tradition, without needing to have recourse to the natural house scheme. Just something to think about.

Ha, so you are considering to refuse the scheme Medieval astrology (and from there onwards) offers - in favour of Gauquelin?! Gauquelin's research ?proved? almost all of traditional astrology in error, including the zodiac and the houses. Don't get me wrong, I don't consider Gauquelin's research as completely irrelevant. But I wonder why his observations on the Moon should have much say in the present context ? even beyond all the practitioners which do embrace our art's foundational principles, and yet find ?natural houses? confirmed in their daily practice. You can get support for any conceivable opinion ? if only you know where to look for it... Excuse my directness.

Consider that in Mayan astrology Venus was a Goddess of War!

Peace
Michael