Thanks for the link James,
You just reminded me that I have the French copy. Just have to dig it from a box somewhere.
If I had to make a wish for 2025, it would be to find more in practice examples and less theory on Skyscript.
No, let me reformulate it. Theory in practice. We learn more from our mistakes than anything else. Searching for truth is more important and to be honest I have long learned that sharing my ignorance with other astrologers is what made me grow.
Ouranos

well said ouranos....

don't you want to come across as a pompous ass? lol... what is wrong with you, suggesting you have some holes in your thinking!!

i am with you in that... more practice and less pontificating...

Martin Gansten wrote: Thu Jan 09, 2025 8:16 am It is clear from the textual evidence that signs were often equated with houses in common practice. Personally I am not convinced that they were ever equated/conflated at a conceptual level, but you famously can't prove a negative. What we do know about the conceptual/theoretical view of houses in the early sources is that: (1) there are no passages explicitly teaching a doctrine of whole-sign houses (at least to my knowledge: again, you can't prove a negative); (2) there are passages (e.g. in Valens and Firmicus) that explicitly say that houses should be calculated by degree; (3) these 'houses by degree' seem often to have been what we would call equal houses (this is the case in Firmicus and Ptolemy, and in a section cited by Valens from 'Asclepius'), although quadrant houses also came into play at an early stage (cited by Valens from one Orion, and implied in several places of his Anthologies), perhaps influenced by the Egyptian practice of marking both rising and culminating decans.

Thank you. Personally I'm not invested too much in the historical Whole Sign vs. Quadrant debate, or which system is supposed to be more "original". I'm not a scholar and haven't read the sources in the original language, as you and others seem to have done.

However, I just wanted to naively remark that the emergence of "melothesia", or Aries = 1st house in the context of body parts, might be more easily explained when using Whole Sign houses: (whole) sign = (whole) house. The whole sign on the ASC is 1st house. Not only the part of the rising sign that happens to be below the horizon, but also the part above horizon.

Houses are a division of space.
You can ask 'Where is my car?'
And the answers can be...
My car is in a country, a province, a city, a neighborhood, a street or in front of a specific adress.
The answers are multiple and they are all right. It all depends what level of precision you need to locate your car.

The 4 great circles used in navigation, astronomy and astrology to measure the space are the horizon, ecliptic, equator and prime vertical.
When you start looking at your chart with the 4 great circles, you will discover more than a whole sign information.
It is as if the sign (if you use Whole sign) identifies the country but to get the specific adress of your car, you will need to use additionnal measurements.

Replace the houses in your mind for a moment with directions on the compass and think that "something" is happening at this point. Like when you look at the rooms in your house. For example, in my house, my living room is located South/East. In the morning, the Sun shines bright and warm. I can even open up the windows during winter time. Now, this S/E direction on the compass is also the location of my natal ASC here.
Having VE near the ASC, the philosophers would say that we bring the beauty to the Sun and I also have a piano and an antique cabinet where I store art books and precious love letters.
The best place to wake up in the morning and feel alive.
Local Space charts are a fun way to rediscover the space around you no matter what house system you use.

Ouranos

Ouranos wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2025 4:44 pm Houses are a division of space.

Houses are 12 divisions on the ecliptic. Just like the 12 signs of the zodiac.

The 4 great circles used in navigation, astronomy and astrology to measure the space are the horizon, ecliptic, equator and prime vertical.

You forgot the meridian. I'd say ecliptic (zodiac), horizon (ASC) and meridian (MC) are the Top-3 Great Circles in astrology.

When you start looking at your chart with the 4 great circles, you will discover more than a whole sign information.
It is as if the sign (if you use Whole sign) identifies the country but to get the specific adress of your car, you will need to use additionnal measurements.

Personal reference for a house system and the historical question of the "original" or oldest system are two different things. Which was my point.

You forgot the meridian. I'd say ecliptic (zodiac), horizon (ASC) and meridian (MC) are the Top-3 Great Circles in astrology.

Not really, the 3 systems are Ecliptic, Equatorial and Horizon.
See
https://www.astro.com/astrowiki/en/Coordinate_System

I have added the Prime Vertical although it is not considered one of the 3 major systems. The plane of reference in this system the East/West circle that is always 90 degrees vertical to the horizontal/horizon plane. Also known as Campanus or mundoscope.
The reason is that in this system there are four 90 degrees angles, two above and two below echoeing the Vernal Point and the square quality in Uranian astrology.

Personal reference for a house system and the historical question of the "original" or oldest system are two different things. Which was my point.

I never mentioned a House system.
I am talking about directions here.

Best to you,
Ouranos

Ouranos wrote: Sun Jan 12, 2025 4:12 pm Not really, the 3 systems are Ecliptic, Equatorial and Horizon.
See
https://www.astro.com/astrowiki/en/Coordinate_System

Astrology is mostly centered on ecliptic/zodiac. It's also one-dimensional, because you only see zodiacal longitude in the wheel chart. Latitude is usually ignored.

I have added the Prime Vertical although it is not considered one of the 3 major systems. The plane of reference in this system the East/West circle that is always 90 degrees vertical to the horizontal/horizon plane. Also known as Campanus or mundoscope.
The reason is that in this system there are four 90 degrees angles, two above and two below echoeing the Vernal Point and the square quality in Uranian astrology.

Don't you personally make use of MC and IC? I mean the two intersections of ecliptic and meridian, which denote the culminating and anti-culminating degree.

I heard the Uranians even invented a house system called "Meridian houses". Which gives cusps very similar to MC Equal system.

I never mentioned a House system.
I am talking about directions here.

The topic of this thread is the assumed analogy between the 12 signs and the 12 houses: Aries = 1st house, Taurus = 2nd house, etc. How did "melothesia" come about historically?

From the perspective of a "traditional" astrologer living today, who uses tropical zodiac and a quadrant house system, Aries = 1st house doesn't seem to make much sense.

I see a symbolic analogy between the ASC degree (sunrise) and 0° Aries (spring equinox). I also see an analogy between the MC degree (noon) and 0° Cancer (summer solstice). That's why I suggested reversing the direction of melothesia, starting from the ASC degree: Aries = 12th quadrant house, Taurus = 11th house, Gemini = 10th house, Cancer = 9th house etc.

Latitude is usually ignored.

Not in the Equatorial system where you can find a planet not at the same place on the ecliptic. Astrologers have made us aware of 'in mundo' aspects in Mundane astrology and in Primary directions.

Don't you personally make use of MC and IC? I mean the two intersections of ecliptic and meridian, which denote the culminating and anti-culminating degree.

These are the Ecliptic System coordinates. The MC is the point on the ecliptic where the celestial meridian and the celestial equator intersect in the southern direction. The IC is directly opposite at the same intersection but in the northern direction.

From the perspective of a "traditional" astrologer living today, who uses tropical zodiac and a quadrant house system, Aries = 1st house doesn't seem to make much sense.

Re-read Anthony Louis articles.

That's why I suggested reversing the direction of melothesia, starting from the ASC degree: Aries = 12th quadrant house, Taurus = 11th house, Gemini = 10th house, Cancer = 9th house etc.

Everything is possible in astrology. I have read for example some astrologers say that when the Profected ASC moves in the 2nd House, the natal ASC moves in the 12th House. If you consider a fixed and a moving chart. Whatever sense you can make of it in practice.

Ouranos wrote: Sun Jan 12, 2025 10:04 pm Not in the Equatorial system where you can find a planet not at the same place on the ecliptic. Astrologers have made us aware of 'in mundo' aspects in Mundane astrology and in Primary directions.

That's why I inserted the word "usually". There aren't many astrologers using non-zodiacal aspects in their practice.

These are the Ecliptic System coordinates. The MC is the point on the ecliptic where the celestial meridian and the celestial equator intersect in the southern direction. The IC is directly opposite at the same intersection but in the northern direction.

The equator isn't needed for the definition of the MC, it's just the culminating intersection of ecliptic and meridian. The MC can sometimes also be found in northern direction if you cast a chart for a tropical location. In a location southwards of the Tropic of Capricorn, MC will always be found in northern direction.

Re-read Anthony Louis articles.

I looked at the articles dealing with Lilly's usage (how?) of melothesia, but it doesn't explain the reasoning (why?) of sign=house analogy. Dr. Gansten had mentioned that melothesia dates back much farther than 17th century, into ancient times.

Everything is possible in astrology. I have read for example some astrologers say that when the Profected ASC moves in the 2nd House, the natal ASC moves in the 12th House. If you consider a fixed and a moving chart. Whatever sense you can make of it in practice.

I agree, that's a good thought there. There's two principal directions of motion in astrology that are opposed to each other: primary motion (westwards, against the usual order of zodiac signs) and secondary motion (eastwards, following order of signs). Those two opposite motions have to somehow be combined into one system.

Houses are mostly counted following in direction of secondary motion like zodiac signs, but they are actually more related to primary motion. Which suggests that you may want to try read them in both directions: Going down from the ASC degree, and going up from it .

Similarly for the signs of the zodiac. Planets move along the ecliptic following the order of the zodiac as long as they are direct, but when they turn retrograde they move into the opposite direction, westwards like primary motion. So retrograde planets don't move from Aries into Taurus, but from Aries into Pisces.

There comes a time when astrology is not very helpful.
Mars is retrograde Out of Bound.
Sorry, I really need to clean the garage!
No need to fact-check anything, Meta is taking care of it.

Haha, and we're also approaching a Full Moon right now. Maybe it's wiser to retreat and prepare for what's coming.

Astrophilus wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2025 8:59 am I just wanted to naively remark that the emergence of "melothesia", or Aries = 1st house in the context of body parts, might be more easily explained when using Whole Sign houses: (whole) sign = (whole) house. The whole sign on the ASC is 1st house. Not only the part of the rising sign that happens to be below the horizon, but also the part above horizon.

Sorry for the belated reply; I've been too busy for a few days to look in at the forum.

I think you can model a division (especially an equal division) of the ecliptic/zodiac into 12 houses on the division into 12 signs without those two divisions being coterminous. In fact, I believe that is exactly what happened historically.