Skyscript Astrology Forum

Martin Gansten wrote: Mon Jan 13, 2025 8:42 pm 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.

I view Equal houses (which you seem to be alluding to) as a mix, or compromise between Whole Sign and Quadrant.

However, the ASC is not the only possible starting point for Equal houses. I learned there's a variant called "MC Equal" which aligns the 10th cusp with the MC and instead detaches the 1st cusp from the ASC: 1st cusp is always in square with the MC. This house system can be used globally without any difficulty and is thus sometimes employed in charts cast for locations beyond the Arctic Circle.

Do you know if the ancients (who used to live in lower latitudes) ever cast Equal houses from the MC instead of the ASC? Or is MC Equal a modern idea?

Astrophilus wrote: Tue Jan 14, 2025 6:16 pm Do you know if the ancients (who used to live in lower latitudes) ever cast Equal houses from the MC instead of the ASC? Or is MC Equal a modern idea?

The descriptions found in Valens (citing 'Asclepius'), Ptolemy and Firmicus are all based on the ascendant degree.

Martin Gansten wrote: Tue Jan 14, 2025 9:27 pm

Astrophilus wrote: Tue Jan 14, 2025 6:16 pm Do you know if the ancients (who used to live in lower latitudes) ever cast Equal houses from the MC instead of the ASC? Or is MC Equal a modern idea?

The descriptions found in Valens (citing 'Asclepius'), Ptolemy and Firmicus are all based on the ascendant degree.

Interesting. I wonder who first came up with the idea of MC Equal, seems fairly recent.

People seem to align their house system with either ASC alone, or ASC and MC at the same time. But they rarely consider the third option of focussing on MC solely.