Skyscript Astrology Forum

michael,

thanks for that! no one in anything i have seen has ever mentioned the venus connection to water and phlegmatic in anything i have seen.. it is an interesting idea to consider.. surely venus in pisces is phlegmatic, but the idea of venus being this way in general is interesting..

also - jupiter as sanguine - i can see that, however it rules a fire and water sign which makes that less obvious...

perhaps i am being misguided even thinking of the elements in all of this..

i think planetary phase matters.. i could see venus functioning differently as a planet rising before the sun, then as a planet rising after... also - perhaps the sect matters here too... generally - night chart - the planet would be more moist, whereas in a day chart - dryer?

as for jupiter as sanguine - oriental maybe.. i don't know about occidental... jupiter seems much more magnanimous then mars, even though both planets rule a water and fire sign - two elements i think of as being more generous generally speaking..

sanguine mystifies me on some level.. is jupiter detached like an air sign is supposed to be? isn't that the sanguine, happy go lucky nature and part of how it is able to glide thru life happily on some level? it is kind of the opposite of saturn and the association of saturn with melancholic...

part 2..

it was interesting for me thinking of the influence liz greenes work, in particular in that book 'star signs for lovers' - a title that is the byproduct of some overzealous book publisher, which would scare off any serious astrologer, but in fact - an excellent book as i recall... it is packed with jungian type thinking.. now, maybe jung and those who have studied him are all wrong, but in that book she lays out the idea that air and water are very opposite, while fire and earth are also opposites.. i am not sure if she says this directly, but that is what one gets from this book...

bottom line is the book was an important influence on how i viewed elements... coming into traditional astrology - this greene / jungian idea - is not in sync with what the teachings of the past suggest... however, just what dry, or moist, are exactly is fairly vague in everything i read... for example - greenbaums book on temperament - there is no basic description of what these terms are supposed to mean.. needless to say, she discusses greenes view on this, but doesn't say too much, other then to point out what i have already stated above..

so, i am left to question whether jupiter is sanguine or choleric or phlegmatic... it would seem to me a combo of sanguine and phlegmatic, but why is it jupiter doesn't rule any air sign if it is so sanguine? or maybe all the air signs aren't equal, just like all the other element signs are not equal either.. in other words, for example - maybe leo is more choleric then sag, while aries is more sanguine? see - i am not playing with the season emphasis for the signs, lol...

and round and round one goes trying to figure out just how much of what is what here..

i continue to believe a chart is guided by it's weaknesses, not it's strengths! thus, i continue to feel saturn is a key planet in understanding the chart, but of course all the other planets play into this in an important way too... it is just that if one could isolate what the weak link is - what seems to be missing in ones temperament - i think one could use this info to help overcome the imbalances that such a situation implies..

here's an idea.. aries are supposed to be good at starting things, but not bringing them to completion.. that could be viewed as sanguine as opposed to melancholic perhaps, in spite of aries association with the fire element..i suppose i am concluding favourably that a melancholic would finish what it starts! perhaps if they were phlegmatic - they wouldn't care in the least and just let it be the way it was and accept that..

then choleric comes along and wants to be seen to be successful! in order for that to happen, some discipline or melancholic temperament is required!

ultimately - we need all these different aspects of temperament working for us, if we are to move thru life in a rewarding way..

thanks for your post!

i think the term mask for the ascendant is a pretty good word to use for it.. it is what we see, but it can hide much more behind it, that it is impossible to know about..

I think it's terrible, but that's my opinion. "Mask" implies something is hidden, yet if a planet is on the ASC, it is nearly impossible to hide, e.g. John McEnroe's Mars conjunct the ASC. I think I know what the people who like this description are getting at, and I don't like that either. Deep down, they believe, you are your Sun sign, and if the rising sign is different, it masks the Sun. They like this because in the minds of some, the Sun is the ego. I don't buy any of that.

If you look at the old texts and you see the expression, "He was born under Aquarius (or any other sign)," it means that was the sign on the ASC- not the Sun. But by the time we get to the 20th century, we see the American popularizer of astrology, Evangeline Adams, using that phrase to describe the Sun sign. The ASC then becomes the "mask"

I also dislike the term "personality" the way it is used by astrologers. We tend to use it the way teenagers do, i.e. how the individual behaves in front of others. Meanwhile, psychologists use this term to describe everything a person is, his outer behavior, his inner character, his emotional state, etc - the whole enchilada, what can be seen and what isn't seen. One prominent psychologist uses the term "Being" with a capital "B" to indicate the psychologists' idea of personality, but we can't see capital letters in conversation.

I know a fine astrologer who says the ASC is 80% of the chart. That's pretty good, and we aren't using 80% or ourselves to mask the other 20%, My muse, Morinus, said the ASC tells us the native's character, health, temperament and to a point, moral values, although the Moon is better used for that, he claims. I think the older authorities had a much better handle on the ASC than moderns. Therefore, I think using the ASC only to determine how we come on to others is highly superficial since we can see that without a chart. Telling a person who is obviously nervous and excitable that he is nervous and excitable, isn't too helpful much less valuable.

hi tom,

well - we see it differently then! mars as mcenroes mask, but it doesn't tell us about the rest of the chart and in fact, if one goes with first appearances and overlooks the rest of the content in the chart - then the mask is just that - most all of what another person sees, missing the rest of the chart! your view on this is very different then mine! jeanne avery wrote a good book called - the rising sign, your astrological mask... if you want to think about it and get into a more nuanced view on it - start their..

i agree with much of what you say in your last paragraph, but as you note - i think that is all fairly self explanatory too!

Re: Liz Greene

it is packed with jungian type thinking.. now, maybe jung and those who have studied him are all wrong,

I wonder about astrologers' take on Jung and non-astrologer psychologists take on him. I don't know a lot about Jung, but have a read a little, and from what I understand, which I admit isn't much, maybe it's not apples and oranges, but it's not apples and apples either.

Quoting Wikipedia on "Four Temperaments":

Nicholas Culpeper (1616–1654), described the humours as acting as governing principles in bodily health, with astrological correspondences,[11] and explained their influence upon physiognomy and personality.[12] Culpeper proposed that, while some people had a single temperament, others had an admixture of two, a primary and secondary temperament.[13]

I find the parallel to Jung rather interesting, who stated that people for the most part incorporate one of four personality types, supported by a second type jumping in as helper if need be.

Not saying that the two systems are exactly congruent, nonetheless, this might offer some food for thought.

BTW, it may have been Dane Rudhyar who first made the link between Astrology and Jungian psychology. Though I don't always agree with Rudhyar, I am a great admirer of his work.

I know a fine astrologer who says the ASC is 80% of the chart. That's pretty good, and we aren't using 80% or ourselves to mask the other 20%

Lilly would say to look at the lord of geniture as the strongest influence, at least when he talks about complexion. Since the reason James asked about this topic is Frawley and Frawley is using Lilly as a source, I would recommend him just downloading Christian Astrology book III and looking at the source material. I studied it about 10 years ago and still remember it as useful info. It is easy to find through Google or through Skyscript's link: http://www.skyscript.co.uk/texts.html

Lilly describes using the oriental/occidental, humours, seasons, etc. in appearance and health especially but I believe he also implies they impact personality. The main idea I got when I looked at my own chart before was to weigh the influences he describes and come to an overall scheme. For example, I am primarily hot and dry (choleric) but I have some melancholic influences, which is similar to how modern would deduce my chart as mostly fire and earth. If someone used the ascendant as my complexion indicator alone they would get an entirely different conclusion about my appearance and health (and personality).

But keep in mind that in book III he talks about complexion, manners, the mind, etc. using different techniques for each one.

I don't know who wrote this article, but here is some applied info:
http://www.medievalastrologyguide.com/m ... ament.html

CA, book III regarding the humors in general but specifically his application to complexion

That Planet who hath most essentiall and accidentall dignities in the Figure, and is posited best, and elevated most in the Scheame, that he ought to be Lord of the geniture, and am confident the whole actions of the Native will more or lesse pertake of the nature of that Planet and so his Conditions, Complexion, Temperament and Manners shall be much regulated unto the properties assigned that Planet (consideratis, considerandis;) yet doubtlesse if any other Planet be very neer so strong as him whom we formerly mentioned, he shall much participate, and a kind of mixture must be framed according to the severall fortitudes each Planet hath, together with the aspects good or evill of the other Planets intervening: The Greeks did use to account that Planet Lord of Geniture who had most dignities in the place of the Moon or Mercury, for Mercury is the Lord, or hath dominion of the spirit and vigour of the mind, the Moon swayeth the body.

Significators of the Complexion are
First, The Signe ascending, and Lord thereof.
Secondly, The Planet or Planets placed in the ascendant, or the North Node or South Node or the Planets partilly aspecting the ascendant.
Thirdly, The Moon and Planets beholding her within Mediety of their Orbs. Fourthly, The quarter of the yeer or Signe the Sun is in.
Fifthly, The Lord of the Geniture.
The quality of the Significators and Signes wherein they are placed are to be orderly examined; wherein you must not forget, that if either Saturn or Mars behold the ascendant or the Moon with a malevolent aspect, they intermix their intemperate qualities to the temperature of the body, yea, though all other testimonies concur very well.

The Quality of the Planets.
Saturn Orientall Cold and moyst. Occidentall Dry.
Jupiter Orientall Hot and Moyst. Occidental Moyst.
Mars Orientall Hot and dry. Occidentall Dry.
Venus Orientall Hot and moyst. Occidentall Moyst.
Mercury Oriental Hot. Occidental Dry.
North Node is as Jupiter, South Node as Saturn and Mars.

Moon –
From Conjunction to 1st Quarter, Hot and moyst
From thence unto the
Full, Hot and dry
From Full to her last
quarter, Cold and dry.
From the last quarter to new Moon, Cold and moyst.

The Sunne is considered according to the Quarter of the Yeere.
Spring } Aries, Taurus, Gemini Hot & moyst.
Summer } Sun in Cancer, Leo, Virgo Hot & dry.
Autumne} Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius Cold & dry.
Winter } Capricorn, Aquarius, Pisces Cold & moyst.

Nature of the Signes.
Aries, Leo, Sagittarius – Fiery Triplicity, Hot and dry, viz. Cholerick.
Taurus, Virgo, Capricorn – Earthly Triplicity, Cold and dry, viz.
Melacholly.
Gemini, Libra, Aquarius – Ayery Triplicity, Hot and moyst, viz. Sanguine.
Cancer, Scorpio, Pisces – Watry Triplicity, Cold and moyst, viz.

Phlegmatick. Consider the qualities of the Significators and Signes, and collect the testimonies of every of the four qualities, viz. Hot, Moyst, Cold, Dry, according to the major testimonies, so judge of the Complexion. If Heat and Moysture overcome, the Native is of Sanguine Complexion: if Cold and Moysture, then he is Phlegmatick: if Heat and Drinesse, then cholerick: if Cold and Drinesse, then Melancholly

Consider the qualities of the Significators and Signes, and collect the
testimonies of every of the four qualities, viz. Hot, Moyst, Cold, Dry,
according to the major testimonies, so judge of the Complexion.
If Heat and Moysture overcome, the Native is of Sanguine Complexion: if Cold and Moysture, then he is Phlegmatick: if Heat and Drinesse, then cholerick: if Cold and Drinesse, then Melancholly.
You must deale warily in the collection of the testimonies of the four
Humours, of Heat, Humidity, Cold and Drinesse; for it may come to passe, that the qualities of the Planet and Sign may obtaine the same equall number of testimonies, and the one have as many testimonies of Heat, as the other of Cold, these being repugnant qualities, the one takes off the other, and they are not numbered or accounted: where there is no contradiction, these testimonies are accepted, when one Planet is Lord of the Geniture and Horoscope, you shall allow him in collection of the testimonies a three-fold vertue or influence in the Complexion: the Moon being in the ascendant, her testimonies shall be twice exhibited. The principall part hereof see in our subsequent Nativity.

Book III has a lot of useful info, such as how Mercury above the horizon tends towards oratory whereas below it shows a better artist. Again, he emphasizes planets above the earth being more extroverted and those below more introspective. These little tidbits I always found helpful. I like his paragraph on height and I think it even shows how I am tallest/thinnest in my family - the planet that beholds my ascendant ruler is Jupiter (tall), again in a choleric sign (more lean), although occidental (moderate height), so I am not very tall but above average, and especially given the height of my short family members (I am even taller than my father). One certainly would not come to this conclusion via my ascendant - Cancer, which would more likely make one think of a short, feminine and chubby person. One thing I always hear that I find funny is that we should have nice, large breasts and I have a flat chest, especially in comparison to my mother and three sisters, none of which have Cancer rising (I find it lucky since I don't have their back problems!). I am far too choleric (Mars in Aries oriental as Lord of Geniture to boot) to be that way and they are phlegmatic women. Cancer rising is also supposed to be moody, but Lilly says that when Mercury is stronger than the Moon, such as in my chart, reason rules. The ascendant has many limitations.

You can tell this information by looking at someone but sometimes we do read the charts of children and young people, and Lilly is saying you can predict things like height, weight, hair color, etc.