I am reading through Book 5 of Dorotheus, and I find no mention of dignities at all. Could it be that only angles are important in elections?

Larxene wrote:I am reading through Book 5 of Dorotheus, and I find no mention of dignities at all. Could it be that only angles are important in elections?

Larxene

I can't remember what Dorotheus says now, but I think what is true is that the planets which are accidentally fortified are those which are more ready to express themselves, and the essential dignity of a given planet will help tell us something about the essence or character of that planet's expression. I always think of planets which are angular etc. as being those which are more forceful in their expression or those which are more likely to manifest their symbolism, and the essential dignity telling us something about the quality of that expression.

So whilst both are important, I think that there is little point in making a planet essentially very dignified but tucked away in a cadent house, combust and in the 12th house (assuming you are not electing for something where being hidden or obscured is what you're after).

The essential dignity of the Moon can often be quite important in things like buying and selling though, where we might imagine that the Moon's essential strength is indicative of the value/price of a given commodity. So for example we might want to sell when we have the Moon fortified by being exalted in Taurus and, say, separating from a benefic. As this is indicative of the current value of that commodity, in other words it's very strong right and therefore worth a lot. Imagine we are trading in stocks and shares, which is how I always try to understand these things. We sell when the share price is very high and vice versa.

So I am not sure that we can say that dignities are not important in elections, though, as I say, I cannot recall what Dorotheus says about them.

I think like anything, there's multiple things of importance to look at, and in some situations we might need to focus on one, and at other times focus more on another and then weigh up the importance.


(Sorry this was a bit rambling)

What always helped me was thinking in the most simplistic terms first. I like to think of a tiger. It has plenty of stamina and resources at its disposal with muscle, claws, and fangs, but if it is locked in a cage then there is not much it can do.

I always viewed dignity in indicating resources at a planets disposal, its capacities, talents, quantity etc. as opposed to raw power in the sense of manifestation, although it does still seem to play a part.

Edit: I suppose what I am attempting to say is that the angles seem to denote active engagement? The angles might be emphasized because they are places in which the planets are the most active and engaged. It can indicate that the planet will be upfront and engaged bring the thing about and indicating the stability of the matter (all things being equal) but the over quality and effect might still depend on the dignity, sect, ect.

Hi,
electional astrology was supposed to be an practical science, and the ancients reflect that.
If you really do practice electional astrology, it is easy to see how long you will have to wait for even the most basic activities. If you use essencial dignity, the only conclusion is that you will not really elect, and as most astrologers do, will just let things happen.
The earlier we go in our sources, the least they concentrate in essencial dignities and rulers of hourses, and the most recent they got, we have more and more considerations that are not the little bit practical.

Hi Yuzuru,

could you recommend any literature on this kind of elections, please?

Thank you, Paul. I speculate that the ancients took things for granted and assumed their readers know that zodiacal dignities are always considered in every branch of astrology. Of course, it is just speculation on my part.



You do have a point about that, yuzuru. It would be especially difficult to dignify the Sun and the Moon, as they have no business with ruling the bounds, and they only have one domicile as opposed to the other planets.

However, I am still unsure; I think that at the least we should avoid placing the involved planets in fall or detriment.