Skyscript Astrology Forum

The work of Alexander Jones has opened the door for the honest question: "Were early traditional techniques first used in sidereal charts?" This seems to be the case with the recently discovered evidence for Babylonian knowledge of the so-called "doctrine of the Terms." (News, Notices, Books, Links)

Because the natures of signs are so firmly entrenched in the western astrological mind, I'm going to begin with an introduction to Aristotle's principles that explain the four qualities of hot, cold, wet and dry that can be related to sidereal sign triplicities. Then I'll relate the planets and signs to charts in Dorian Gieseler Greenbaum's Temerament: Astrology's Forgotten Key, a book that has generated enthusiasm among traditional astrologers.

I'm not a scholar of Aristotle's philosophy, but have perhaps been able to gather a student's understanding of basics. If we have an Aristotelean scholar among us, please speak up!

Summary of Aristotle's principles that can be related to astrology:
Male and Female:
Reflecting the society in which he lived, Aristotle elevated the rational over the passionate or emotional. He discussed gender especially in the History of Animals. Aristotle observed the female to be softer in character, more easily moved to tears, more compassionate, but also more jealous and quarrelsome. (That is, the female displays emotion!) Aristotle respected the male characteristics of courage and rationality over emotional attributes which he considered to be inferior.

Active and Passive
Aristotle's active and passive don't resemble our contemporary astrological understanding of those terms. Instead, they are related to functions of intellect. However, commentators have disagreed on exactly how Aristotle defined the active and passive intellects. One understanding is that the active intellect relates to a fixed and stable set of concepts, a link to a universal mainframe (hard drive), so to speak, the mind of the universe which would be similar for everyone.

The passive has been said to relate to matter or the world of forms; the body. The passive intellect would relate to computer data files, but not the hard drive itself. (There is some similarity here to the Stoic Active and Passive.)

There is the suggestion that the active intellect is linked to the immortality of the soul, a universal constant. One commentator used the words "immutable mover," a link to Divine substance. A modern commentary states: "The active intellect...is more properly called the Agent Intellect, as it is the force...causing thoughts to pass from the potential to the actual." (Absolute Astronomy.com) [We might call this creative energy.]

So, however commentators and students of Aristotle wish to understand the active intellect, the general idea is that it's more central and universal than the passive. The passive is external to the active, and is related more to the outer world. (Thus, the usual astrological understanding of "active" is what Aristotle might term passive.)

Wet and Dry
Aristotle's Dry is said to be algebraic, object oriented, solid, rigid, clear, enhancing distinctions; we might relate these qualities to the rational mind as separate from emotional reaction.

Aristotle's Wet is spatial, geometric, liquid, able to assume the shape of the container, fluid, formless, ambiguous, blurring distinctions, "irrational" according to Aristotle. (Thus, related to what might be seen as feminine or emotional psychology.)

Now we can try relating Aristotle's four qualities to the Triplicities.

In modern times much has been written and observed about the tropical triplicities. Anyone who chooses to use the sidereal zodiac cannot ignore the observations of tropical astrologers over the past century. There is nothing comparable in sidereal or Jyotish literature. What are sidereal astrologers to do if they want to utilize the triplicities in psychological work?

My experimental solution (knowing that the signs beneath each tropical sign are the preceding sidereal signs---located in the same area of the ecliptic), is to accept tropical observations (true observations, not theory) and apply them to the preceding sidereal signs. Thus, tropical Pisces is similar to sidereal Aquarius, tropical Aries is similar to sidereal Pisces, and so forth.

In this way there is no tropical/sidereal controversy. Each segment of the ecliptic has similar energy, and an astrologer can use either the tropical or sidereal sign label. In a study of Aristotle's four qualities, some of them seem to be recognizable in the Tropical observation of triplicities. But first, another clue from Rob Hand: Under Ptolemy 6: Concerning Masculine and Feminine Planets, the text states:

Ptolemy via Schmidt: Again, since the primary genera of natures are two, the masculine and the feminine, while of the powers mentioned above, that of the wet essence happens to be especially feminine for in general this part is innate to greater degree in all females, but the others are more in males.), they have fairly handed down to us that the Moon and the star of Aphrodite are feminine because of having their excess in the wet. But the sun, the star of Kronos, and the star of Ares are traditionally masculine. And the star of Hermes common in both genera, in accordance of which he is productive equally of the dry essence and the wet essence. [Inserted note by Rob Hand follows:]

"The text does appear to be saying that Hot = Masculine, Wet = Feminine, Dry = Masculine, Cold = Feminine. If Ptolemy is completely in accord with standard Aristotelianism in which Hot and Cold are both active whereas Wet and Dry are both passive, then Ptolemy here classifies Hot = Active & Masculine, Cold = Active & Feminine, Wet = Passive & Feminine and Dry = Passive and Masculine. If this analysis is correct it has all manner of interesting symbolic consequences for astrology." (p. 17)

I am using the Arabic nature of the planets below from Ben Dykes' Introductions to Traditional Astrology: Abu Ma'shar and al-Qabisi.

(1) HOT: Active and Masculine: If we equate masculine with the predominance of mind over feelings, then we can assign Hot to the sidereal Aries trigon. [Tropical Earth] Active would suggest more a centering direction than a "going out" beyond the self to collect experience and information (as in a computer hard drive rather than the data files which are keyed in from the outside).

Aries = the secondary domicile of Mars (hot) and the exaltation of the Sun (hot)
Leo = house of the Sun (hot)
Sagittarius = house of Jupiter (hot and moist)
(Triplicity lords: Sun and Jupiter)

Sidereally this trigon would be one hundred percent masculine in rulership and energy. (Remembering that masculine here is a different concept than the popular tropical understanding of the word, and refers in part to solar qualities. [Tropical earth: direct, constant, self-motivating, relies on own perceptions, able to use will power to manifest events]

(2) COLD: Active and Feminine, symbolically is placed opposite Hot. Feminine = Of the feelings. Active: directs the attention within to the universal mainframe. This is the sidereal Gemini trigon. [Tropical Water]

Libra = exaltation of Saturn (cold)
Libra = domicile of Venus (cold and wet)
Aquarius = house of Saturn (cold)
Gemini----Mercury is variable
(Triplicity lords: Saturn and Mercury)

This trigon is masculine in the sense that it is internal and trusts its own perceptions (the centering function), but feminine in that It can sense undercurrents, and perception and experience have a feeling or intuitive base. These traits belong to the signs known as Tropical Water.

An interesting footnote to this trigon is that in Vettius Valens' Anthology as translated by Robert Schmidt, the Gemini trigon is noted to be Masculine, but also noted as "effeminate" (possessing feminine characteristics). It's doubtful that Valens was suggesting that males with female traits were born in this trigon more than others! Valens doesn't use that word (as translated by Schmidt) in relation to any other zodiac signs. Unless Valens was thinking of Aristotle's Cold (active and feminine), it's difficult to imagine why "effeminate" would be listed as a characteristic of Gemini, Libra and Aquarius. (The Anthology, Book 1, The Golden Hind Press, 1993, pp. 10-15)

(3) WET: Passive and Feminine: [Tropical Fire] Passive suggests a looking to the world outside oneself for stimulation and verification of one's feelings (the outer location of 'data files.') Feminine equates to of the feelings or emotions. This trigon of signs is wholly feminine.

Cancer = exaltation of Jupiter (wet, hot)
Scorpio = domicile of Mars (Mars is nocturnal; Ibn Ezra classifies Mars as feminine.)
Pisces = exaltation of Venus (wet, cold)
Triplicity lords: Mars (nocturnal) (Others add Venus and the Moon.)

An interesting note on Mars as a primary triplicity lord is that in the tropical zodiac this trigon (fire) is defined as fiery, active and spontaneous. Fellow triplicity lords, Venus and the Moon are emotional planets. Tropical Fire traits: unstable, changing, loves freedom, active and dynamic emotions, needs involvement outside the self. Aristotle termed wet irrational. "Wet' traits are emotional rather than rational. Natives with their primary planets in this trigon are not thinkers. They act spontaneously from instinct.

(4) DRY: Passive and Masculine: that is, open to outside influence (passive) and mind predominant over feeling (masculine). Since Dry is opposite Wet, this would be the sidereal Taurus trigon. [Tropical Air]

Capricorn = domicile of Saturn (dry as well as cold)
Capricorn = Exaltation of Mars (dry and hot)
Virgo = Domicile and exaltation of Mercury (Mercury partakes of both dry and wet.)
Taurus---- ?

This is the oddest of the four sidereal trigons using Aristotle's symbolism. The Triplicity lords are The Moon and Venus. These reflect the social and interactive qualities of this trigon, but don't align with the mental qualities of dryness. Though this trigon is intellectual, the correlation here seems to be poor. Yet, Venus and the Moon reflect the predominate sanguine temperament of this sidereal trigon. (Whereas the same cannot be said for Saturn, the diurnal lord of the tropical "sanguine" Air triplicity.)

Supporting note: How often have excessively mental people been called dry?
Tropical Air traits: abstract, logical, social, not emotionally intimate


The above is a suggested theoretical basis of a psychological understanding of the sidereal triplicities. It's based partly on the observed traits of the tropical triplicities adjusted to the underlying sidereal signs. In this system hot is opposite cold and wet is opposite dry.

I'm using this framework to look at Greenbaum's extreme temperament charts of children. I believe, however, that temperament is primarily in the planets. Yet, the sidereal signs reflect their ruling and exalted planets. Robert Schmidt points out that the planets exalted in signs were just as much a "ruler" of the sign as the domicile lord and sometimes were considered even stronger.

For a sidereal study we can begin with the most extreme case of melancholia in Greenbaum's book, the sad little child she calls "Fern." Fern's tropical chart is illustrated on pages 61 and 184. The description of Fern's temperament is on page 60. In part:

"Fern is an almost classic melancholic, according to her teachers. Thin, gangly and slightly stoop shouldered, she believes that life is a series of disappointments. She feels that no one understands her....During the 4th grade year, she cried almost every day because of one slight or another. She had no concept of empathy or how to be social..." (Anyone who has the book can read the full description.)

The traditional astrologer right off the bat is faced with a puzzle. This chart contains a stellium of planets in Scorpio, a sign ruled by hot, dry, choleric Mars. But that doesn't describe what astrologers have observed about Scorpio at all! As a matter of fact in Greenbaum's book Scorpio is considered to be cold and wet. A dilemma! Not so, say the most modern of astrologers. Scorpio is really ruled by Pluto, although this solution isn't accepted by traditional astrologers.

Fern's chart also has a pleasant looking Venus in it's own "sanguine" sign of Libra, and the Moon is in "choleric" Aries. But in spite of these placements Greenbaum has found a melancholic signature in the chart. If Fern's chart is changed to the sidereal, the mystery of sign rulerships completely disappears. The sidereal stellium moves to "cold" Libra. The bright sun is in its fall here, and the sign easily reflects the melancholic nature of Saturn's influence on Libra. (Tropical Scorpio can be quite dour!)

Robert Schmidt has noted that the Hellenistic astrologers considered three positions of primary importance in charts: (1) the domicile lord of the ascendant; (2) the domicile lord of Fortuna; (3) trigon lords of the sect light. So let's look at these in Fern's chart in the sidereal:

(1) Sagittarius rises (in the terms of Saturn), and Jupiter is in its fall in Capricorn, a sign of Saturn. "If you found Jupiter in a domicile of Saturn, it designates a heaviness and narrowness of the heart, and a multitude of sorrow..." (Ben Dykes' translation of Abu'Ali)

(2) The part of fortune is in Gemini; Domicile lord is Mercury with Saturn in an unfriendly sign for both: Scorpio. There is no sect or rulership affiliation for either planet in Scorpio.

(3) Trigon lords of the sect light, Sun: day lord Saturn in Scorpio ("He will have a heart of stone and little pity.") Dykes as above.

Night lord Mercury is in Scorpio with Saturn, as above for the domicile lord of Fortuna.

In addition Venus (dispositor of the Libra planets) is in its fall in Virgo (rather than that nice sanguine Libra as in the tropical chart), and within orb of squaring the ascendant.

The Moon is only half a degree from leaving Pisces and in the terms of Saturn.

The ascendant is in the terms of Saturn.

So with the sidereal chart there is a clear picture of melancholia. It's not necessary to bring in a number of diverse factors searching for a melancholic temperament. But most of all the principles of planetary falls (Jupiter in Capricorn, Sun in Libra, Venus in Virgo) operates in this chart. None of the other planets are in their own triplicity or sect. This child carries a heavy psychological burden. (I am not sure the terms have anything to do with temperament, but noted that the ascendant and Moon are in the terms of Saturn.)

With Fern's chart I rest my case with the sidereal zodiac. I have drawn up every chart in Greenbaum's book that reflects a single more extreme temperament. We can look at these charts later.

For those who don't have Greenbaum's book, I forgot to give the data for Fern. There is no data given in the book to protect the identity of the chilldren, but it's easy to look up the day of birth and then let an astrology program set the ascendant.

I simply chose "New Haven, CT for a location, found the correct ascendant degree, and then manually checked the Moon. This gave charts close enough to be used for the sidereal study. I made sure all the planets were in the correct (equal) house. I use the ascendant degree as the center of each house as per an old Indian house system.

I could also have manually added the correct ayanamsa adjustment to each planet.

Fern: October 27, 1985, 12:13 pm EST, New Haven, CT

(I'm not sure if Fern was even born in the U.S.)

Therese Hamilton wrote:For a sidereal study we can begin with the most extreme case of melancholia in Greenbaum's book, the sad little child she calls "Fern." Fern's tropical chart is illustrated on pages 61 and 184. The description of Fern's temperament is on page 60. In part:

"Fern is an almost classic melancholic, according to her teachers. Thin, gangly and slightly stoop shouldered, she believes that life is a series of disappointments. She feels that no one understands her....During the 4th grade year, she cried almost every day because of one slight or another. She had no concept of empathy or how to be social..." (Anyone who has the book can read the full description.)

If you lack empathy then you are unlikely to cry very much, if at all.
Here the relational neurobiology is underdeveloped, particularly the cortical areas of the brain which modulate the relational, social and moral regions and systems. In extreme, or known, cases a diagnosis of RAD (Reactive Attachment Disorder) may be provided.

It is hypothesised this is mainly due to a lack of affection or nurturing in childhood, i.e neglect or trauma. The person will be somewhat indifferent, callous, manipulative, preadatory, cold, narcissistic, sadistic, malicious, etc. (Is this the 'classic' description of the melancholic ?).

Is this yet another book written by an astrologer about Human Psychology (here Temperament) without the author bothering to study the subject first ?

I?m also struggling to understand why the ideas here are intrinsically associated with sidereal techniques but I?ll make a response on that in the other thread. Just a couple of quick comments here.

Re Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos -

[According to Hand's footnote]
"The text does appear to be saying that Hot = Masculine, Wet = Feminine, Dry = Masculine, Cold = Feminine.

It?s not that simple, but if it were made that simple then this wouldn?t be quite the right way to put it. According to Ptolemy it would be

Masculine = dry
Feminine = moist (I.6)

Diurnal = heating, (hence drying) and active, so masculine in effect
Nocuturnal = cooling (hence moistening) and inactive, so feminine in its effect. (I.7)

This generates in simplest terms: Masculine = dry, feminine = wet, diurnal = hot, nocturnal = cold. It?s a subtle rearrangement, but a better way to make sense of related principles discussed elsewhere in the book. The moisture of night is the associated effect of the fact that at sunset the Sun's heat is lost and moisture in the air precipitates. With regard to masculinity and femininity, the philosophical association is clearly given to the qualities of dryness and moisture in Ptolemy's work.

Re Valens

?it's difficult to imagine why "effeminate" would be listed as a characteristic of Gemini, Libra and Aquarius. (The Anthology, Book 1, The Golden Hind Press, 1993, pp. 10-15)?

I think the text means what it appears to say. Femininity is associated with moisture which is the element required to blend, bind and unite (we think of grains of sand or flour ? when it is dry it separates, when made moist it comes together). Moisture is also necessary for reproduction, and the free flowing of bodily functions and emotional expression. So as an astrological principle femininity is associated with the empathetic sharing of emotions and the ability to express them ? it is concerned with feelings whereas masculinity, as an astrological principle is not. Masculinity represents emotional self-containment (lack of tears), singularity of purpose, and the ability to take and subjugate without emotional concern (whereas femininity, as an astrological principle, does not). In ancient societies which prized the ability to conquer and ruthlessly defend with single-minded purpose, masculinity is valued and femininity is mistrusted through its association with hesitation, amongst other things. The suggestion that the air signs lean towards effeminate traits is based, as I see it, purely on the fact that they are the humane signs, civil and communicative, and so more subject to reasoned compassion and reasoned empathy, than the fire signs which are more associated with instinctive expression. Hence the fire signs all have a traditional reputation for brutality.

Nixx wrote:

Is this yet another book written by an astrologer about Human Psychology (here Temperament) without the author bothering to study the subject first ?

No this is another comment by someone who hasn't taken the trouble to study what they are posting about. Dorian Greenbaum's book is the definitive guide on the history of astrological temperament theory from the ancient Greeks down to the 20th century figures like Jung and Rudolf Steiner. She also proposes a practical method for assessing astrological temperament in charts. I dont agree with all her conclusions (for example excluding planets in the 1st house from temperament assessment) but anyone who takes the time to study this book will emerge immeasurably enriched.

You cant possibly assess these snippet comments of Greenbaum like this without doing her the courtesy of actually reading her book. I would be interested in your opinion after you have done that.

Mark

Mark wrote:

I am genuinely mystified why you have created yet another thread to discuss the application of Aristotlean qualities in traditional astrology.

That is not what I meant this thread to be about, Mark. I merely gave the introduction on the triplicities as a foundation for discussing traditional techniques in the sidereal. This was to try to avoid the confusion of sign meanings in the two zodiacs.

A while ago someone asked if traditional techniques had been tested in the sidereal. So I thought the word "sidereal" should have a separate topic. Is the Skyscript forum supposed to be only for tropical astrologers? If so, I can leave, and I'm sorry to disturb your perceptions of astrology.

Therese

Therese wrote:

That is not what I meant this thread to be about, Mark. I merely gave the introduction on the triplicities as a foundation for discussing traditional techniques in the sidereal. This was to try to avoid the confusion of sign meanings in the two zodiacs.

I see. Well fair enough. I do think my mystification was probably shared by many others reading the beginning of this thread.

A while ago someone asked if traditional techniques had been tested in the sidereal. So I thought the word "sidereal" should have a separate topic. Is the Skyscript forum supposed to be only for tropical astrologers? If so, I can leave, and I'm sorry to disturb your perceptions of astrology.

The whole issue of whether these traditions are meaningfully exclusively 'sidereal' in themselves is a debate in itself. However, this is not the place to discuss that. If you had started straight off on practical delineation I wouldn't have even commented in this thread. It was the similarity to the existing thread that I found unsettling not the desire to discuss sidereal charts. I am not personally intimidated or concerned by sidereal astrology in the least. Its not a way of working that personally resonates for me but that doesn't imply I have disrespect for sidereal astrologers. Indeed I have studied quite a lot of Indian astrology recently as a comparator to western traditional astrology. I am therefore unclear what astrological perceptions of mine you think you have disturbed?

Mark

Mark wrote:Nixx wrote:

Is this yet another book written by an astrologer about Human Psychology (here Temperament) without the author bothering to study the subject first?

No this is another comment by someone who hasn't taken the trouble to study what they are posting about. Dorian Greenbaum's book is the definitive guide on the history of astrological temperament theory from the ancient Greeks down to the 20th century figures like Jung and Rudolf Steiner. She also proposes a practical method for assessing astrological temperament in charts. I dont agree with all her conclusions (for example excluding planets in the 1st house from temperament assessment) but anyone who takes the time to study this book will emerge immeasurably enriched.


You cant possibly assess these snippet comments of Greenbaum like this without doing her the courtesy of actually reading her book. I would be interested in your opinion after you have done that.

Mark

It may be the definitive guide to some earlier astrological ideas about Temperament, I would not know much about this one way or the other.

What I do know is as regards empathy this author is mistaken and these sentences suggest she may, here and there, be out of her depth, having failed to do sufficient research into the terminology she chooses to adopt.

Google books have the first 50 pages and I did not see any repeat of this kind of nonsense. However, since the idea of human beings having a temperament astrological or otherwise is contentious her attempts to separate this concept from personality and character, which are also contentious ideas, are inevitably going to be problematic. However since these descriptive terms are, currently, seen as 'softer' psychology she can be allowed more leeway to propose certain ideas in this respect.

I'm wondering if there is a way of reconciling Philip Glass's music being ??cold and dry?? with some astrological conceptions of it being a Neptunian soundscape which hypnotises and creates a sense of transcendental well being, or even a psychological rapport with the Anima Mundi. Assuming Neptune is strong in the chart. Were we to discuss this book's ideas these are the kind of questions I would be exploring. I might be more surprised to find someone else here interested in these questions/types of discussions/reconciliations, than not.

Therese

Maybe you answered this already and I missed it, but I'm curious what any of this has to do with the sidereal zodiac that is exclusive to the tropical zodiac. In fact why mention the sidereal zodiac at all in other words?

Paul, I think she did explain that in her last post, but that might be more obvious after the response I'd like to make myself to Theresa.

Theresa, I think a problem with this thread was confusion over what you are looking for. By beginning with a question - whether traditional techniques were first used in sidereal charts? ? your post appeared to want to stimulate debate over this. As a question, your proposed ideas appeared to be one-sided in omitting the tropical perspective. Unfortunately there are certain astrological topics that get extremely controversial if not handled delicately (then they only get very controversial). One is the almost pointlessly silly discussion of what house system works best. I call this silly because it is oh soooo obviously Placidus. But although I don?t understand it, even after all our forum discussions this is still not accepted as an established fact. Were all those words I wrote in vain?

More seriously, perhaps one of the most valuable aspects of this forum is that it plays host to many stimulating and informative debates. Sometimes they get a little too lively and it?s a hard job to know where the championing of one perspective becomes disrespectful to another. Ultimately I think the forum should welcome multi-faceted debate because the bottom line is ?end of debate; end of investigative research?. God help us if we think we know all the answers yet on historical matters that are shrouded in points of confusion.

Reading your latest post I now believe that you weren?t looking to generate debate so much as promote discussion amongst those with a more purely sidereal focus. So to answer your question directly, that?s perfectly fine. Skyscript is not only for tropical astrologers and some of our most valuable contributors (and some of the astrologers I most admire personally) are siderealists. I suppose they have become accustomed to quickly glossing over a lot of points that are irritating to their perspective out of respect for an alternative view, so why shouldn?t tropical astrologers be expected to do the same? Discussion of sidereal perspectives are very welcome here, so please don?t feel the need to leave the forum as I would like to encourage you to keep up the posts. What might be helpful is to flag your interest in the exploration of sidereal concerns at the start of your posts, to make it clear that your focus is not on knowing what the tropical perspective has to offer, but on how the matters you are discussing impinge upon the sidereal perspective. Anyone can obviously still contribute but the shift of expectation will be clearer to us all.

Best regards
Deb