- THE PROBLEMS OF HOUSE DIVISION
- Latest from our blog.
- House Systems
- Astrology Houses Calculator, Compare House Systems Online | jakubzidek.cz
In fact, there is good reason to believe that the science of Astrology that has been handed down to both East and West originated within the Arctic Circle, near the North Pole, before the last glaciation. So, what House Systems can be used? There are many variations: The Equal House System is nice and logical.
THE PROBLEMS OF HOUSE DIVISION
Human minds love symmetry. We use symmetry in order to measure space and time, and to build houses, bridges, and spaceships. However, Nature is not usually symmetrical. The Earth is slowing down slightly in its orbit around the Sun.
An individual crystal may resonate with a constant frequency, but another crystal with identical specifications has a slightly different resonant frequency thus, different accuracies of wristwatches. This tilt is actually what gives us seasons, the Arctic Lights, and many other delightful physical phenomena. It has also led to astrological confusion, because there are many ways of dividing the globe into orange-like sections.
Most of these methods draw Great Circles on the Earth, divide one of them into 12 equal sections, and then project those 12 points onto the Ecliptic to form the 12 house cusps. There are also problems with how to define conjunctions.
Some systems use divisions of time rather than space to form the house cusps. Many great minds have proposed solutions to this puzzle. It is easy to treat the question as one of geometry alone. We feel something special at sunrise. We feel something special when a planet is right overhead.
Latest from our blog.
We know—with feeling, not with physics—that planets at special places at a given moment have significance. Rigorous research has actually born out this significance. The best possible solution might be different than we expect.
It is important to heed the measurements that underlie our art, and also to heed our experience. A horoscope represents a 3-dimensional sky projected onto a 2-dimensional map. There are inherent limitations in collapsing data in such a manner, but yet, useful material has been gleaned from horoscopes for thousands of years and the best house system is worth pursuing.
Experiment is the test in science. When we have a theory, we subject it to a well-designed experiment. In Astrology, this means constructing a natal horoscope with various house systems, applying basic, simple and well-accepted interpretative principles, and then determining whether the results are accurate and reliable, for a large number of people.
We must test a house system using principles of natal Astrology first. Of what use is a house system that might explain many events for one person using a particular method of prediction, when it cannot even construct a natal horoscope for little Andrey?
Or for the millions of people who have been born above the Arctic Circle? Natal astrology is time-tested and universal, and is thus the best measurement tool for house systems. There is little point in testing predictive methods that utilize house cusps until we have house cusps we can trust.
It is indisputable that the Ascendant is of great significance in Astrology. The Ascendant is the most potent feature of the sky at any moment of time, and the zodiacal position is related to physical appearance and presentation in the world.
Prolific research has documented that planets near the Ascendant are significantly correlated with personality. It is impossible for any Equal House System to place both the Ascendant and Midheaven prominently in a chart unless the event occurs right at the Equator. If the Ascendant is at the cusp of the 1st house, the Midheaven is not at the cusp of the 10th, and vice versa.
In any Equal House System, at least 11 of the 12 house cusps do not depend at all on latitude. This is because the Ascendant takes an average of 2 hours to go through one sign, so the same signs will be on the house cusps. Every fraction of an hour a planet or two may change houses, but still, thousands of people have identical horoscopes when an Equal House System is used.
One needs to be not just an astrologer but a Prophet in order to draw individually meaningful interpretations and forecasts when an Equal House System is used. In addition, one must decide whether the pole of the house cusps is at the N-S Poles, the poles of the Ecliptic, or somewhere else. It is reasonable that a horoscope should depend on latitude.
Days and nights are of very different durations, again depending on latitude. The houses of a horoscope roughly follow the course of a day: At high latitudes when days are very short or long, it is not unreasonable that the houses of a horoscope be skewed, with some very large and some very small.
It did not take long to see that the 10th house in this System was not a very good indicator of profession and public impact, matters that have always been associated with the 10th house.
The Midheaven often appears in houses 8, 9, or 11 in this system. Although Placidus is simple in concept, the mathematical trigonometry behind it is complex, with cusp positions adjusted in a complicated technique based on the use of hour cycles. The fundamental differences lie in the way these projections are related to the ecliptic, by use of hour circles, vertical circles, or projection of the Ascendant.
Alcabitius, which uses vertical circles, bears the name of the 12th-century Arabian astrologer, Alchabitus, but it is unclear whether Placidus predates the Alcabitius system or vice versa. It is clear that those whose names have become celebrated as champions of techniques are not always reliable indicators of their first invention.
The Koch system, however, is generally accepted as being of modern development, introduced in the s by the German astrologer, Dr. Tables supporting its use became available in , and it is currently very popular in Europe, particularly with the Ebertin and Huber schools.
Koch uses projection of the Ascendant to formulate the intermediate house cusps, and its followers argue that it is the only system to fully recognise the Ascendant as the primary connecting thread between the ecliptic and the place of birth in the calculation of every cusp.
In theory, there are valid philosophical arguments that allow every house system to be perceived as most appropriate; in practice,- once we move beyond understanding whether our preference is to emphasise time or space, - most of us would find that our ability to prove one house system works is a great deal stronger than our ability to prove that another system doesn't.
In the article, " An Astrological House Formulary ," Michael Munkasey provides step-by-step instructions on the mathematical techniques needed to formulate the various systems of division.
This is an excellent guide that should allow anyone with enough interest to become capable of calculating cusps without relying on astrological software. One glance at this article will probably convince most astrologers that they don't wish to do this!
- Charts > House Systems.
- by Deborah Houlding!
- Azimuth - Astrology Encyclopedia.
For many of us, it will seem too complicated to fathom and work with on a day-to-day basis. This leads to an argument in support of the simpler systems; with these, at least, working astrologers can feel in control of their own calculations and thus place confidence in the associated symbolism that arises from their chosen system.
Most of the other main house systems work upon the principle that since planetary activity centers upon the path of the Sun, the ecliptic provides the ideal focus for dividing the chart into 'spheres of activity'. The simplest approaches, the equal-house and whole-sign methods, merely require knowledge of the ascendant or ascending sign, and an equal division throughout the rest of the zodiac eliminates the need for any complicated calculations.
Yet recent research into classical astrology has created a renewed interest in these simple techniques from a more scholarly perspective.
House Systems
The point of strength is that, regardless of the originating theory behind house division, in practice at least, classical astrologers tended to tie the houses to the signs, apparently concurring with Pelletier, who wrote in defence of the equal house method "It seems superfluous to demand mathematical or astronomical precision of a frame of reference for houses which are purely symbolic".
There is, however, a great deal of confusion regarding how the houses were used in ancient times and when quadrant systenis such as Porphyry and Placidus were introduced. Passages which were once thought to clearly demonstrate the equal-house method in practice are now taken to be more evident of the use of Porphyry or the whole-sign system; this creates some doubt about whether the equal-house system has any theoretical basis in classical astrology at all, except as a compromise by astrologers who were attempting to align the houses with the angles and either deliberately or ignorantly failed to observe any discrepancies.
Ptolemy's stance is often considered critical in matters relating to classical astrology, so his use of the houses is worth exploring in detail, particularly for those who have been persuaded that a return to the simple mechanics of the "whole-sign method" would be a return to the original and purest use of houses.
Ptolemy's Stance The use of houses in classical times is worthy of study, but bear in mind that classical astrology entailed a perspective and methodology of its own.
Astrology Houses Calculator, Compare House Systems Online | jakubzidek.cz
Ptolemy, in particular, exhibits a general resistance to techniques infused with symbolic mysticism; where they are used, he attempts to explain their potency through what he considers to be a more 'logical' approach, such as drawing an association with the aspects and planetary humours.
Whereas Manilius, 'the poet', endeavours to express the wonder and mystery of the heavens in majestic phases of poetic verse, Ptolemy 'the scientist' seeks to rationalise astrology and reduce it to first principles by sweeping away any elements that appear to be based on a mysticism older than that of the classical world - "as for the nonsense on which many waste their labour and of which not even a plausible account can be given, this we shall dismiss in favour of the primary natural causes; we shall investigate, not by means of lots and numbers of which no reasonable explanation can be given, but merely through the science of the aspects of the stars to the places with which they have familiarity" [12] - That aspects are themselves derived from symbolic numerological principles seems to Ptolemy, beside the point.
The Sun, for example, has a natural affinity with the signs that are hot and dry, or the areas of the chart that are masculine and diurnal.
Since the Sun rises in the east, it attributes to that cardinal the qualities of being masculine, dry, solar and diurnal. Conversely, the west is feminine, moist, lunar and nocturnal; " for it is always in the west that the Moon emerges and makes its appearance after conjunction ".
Although the houses are not entirely ignored in the Tetrabiblos , there is so little reference to them that the subject appears to be deliberately avoided. In his first book, Ptolemy sets out the general principles of astrology, explaining the power and nature of the planets, aspects, fixed stars, signs of the zodiac, rulership of the signs, triplicities, exaltations, terms and faces.
Though he offers some explanation of the four angles related to the seasons, in this vital introduction he fails to give a single reference to the use of the houses.
He does, however, place strong emphasis on relationships to the horizon and midheaven, and the correspondence between angles and directions. East, south, west and north, are noted as dry, hot, moist and cold, respectively; the orient, he tells us, signifies youth, the midheaven middle-age, the occident old age, and those who have died.
This inherent symbolism cuts through the entire work and can be demonstrated by the stress he places on the condition of being oriental or occidental: But whereas a working, predictive astrologer might dwell on the use of the symbolism in describing that condition of weakness, Ptolemy does not. Instead, there is the suggestion that we should ignore these areas in our investigation in favour of the powerful regions.
The midheaven is referred to as the most important angle of all and many spheres of life that we would assign to other houses are assessed by Ptolemy through the use of the culminating degree and the place that is succeeding to it. By this he means the 10th house, as the area that is rising by diurnal motion to the degree of the midheaven.
This area is representative of all our outward endeavours and accomplishments: Second in importance is the eastern horizon from which the bodily form, temperament, intellect and formative years are assessed. Consistency with later tradition is evident in Ptolemy's use of angularity as denoting strength and speed, and the denial of these qualities with cadency: Marriage, for example, is not determined from the 7th house, but from the place of the Sun for a woman, and the Moon for a man.
Matters relating to material wealth are not referred to the 2nd house, but the part of fortune. Friendships are not judged from the 11th house, but from the condition of the Sun, Moon, Fortuna and rising sign. Where he discusses the parents and the potential of patrimony, he does not recommend a consideration of the 4th house, but refers us to the place of the Sun or Saturn for the father, and the Moon or Venus for the mother.
There are few instances where Ptolemy appears to support our later tradition. In one, he directs us to the 12th house, 'The House of Evil Daemon', for matters of slavery because it is an 'injurious' position which declines from the horizon.
In matters of illness he also notes the need to consider the 6th house, saying: Most telling of all, however, is an obtuse reference to the influence of the lower midheaven, which we become aware of only through his description of the effect of planetary stations: Clearly Ptolemy regarded the houses with some irrelevance but the question of which method of house construction he was referring to has still managed to provoke great debate.
His constant overlapping of the words 'place' and 'sign', and the way in which he refers to the midheaven as 'the culminating sign' has been used to suggest that he considered the 'places' to be defined by the signs of the zodiac. There remains, however, one highly significant passage in which he offers a definition of the houses.
It is contained within his method of determining length of life and Ptolemy explains that for a matter of such importance, the planets from which we draw judgement must be located in the powerful places, which he describes as follows: In assessing its importance, the introductory comment on the 1st house is the one that is most pertinent: The same approach is used today by astrologers schooled in traditional techniques, so that if a planet is within 5 degrees of the next house cusp, it is considered to have its influence within the context of that house.
But on the basis of Ptolemy's comment here, some authorities have sought to formally recognize a new house construction method, the Classical house system, which is generally said to follow Alcabitius, but with the subtraction of 5 degrees from the Ascendant to find the 1st-house cusp.
This definition is misleading, because it is clear that the principle of recognising the five degrees preceding a house cusp is written into traditional technique, regardless of the house method in use, so this should be considered a principle of house interpretation rather than a method of division.
My intellectual objections could be overcome by the idea that there is a larger framework that is the persisting "single system," but, like a jewel examined from different sides, it sometimes emphasizes one framework and sometimes another.
- 6 february horoscope for taurus.
- Frequently asked questions?
- grace astrology gemini.
- .
Here are descriptions of each, and of the larger framework. I think you understand the terms Meridian, Horizon, and Prime Vertical, but, just in case you don't or somebody reading this doesn't , I'll review simply.
These three great circles are all mutually perpendicular: Visualize as I describe briefly: This is the Meridian. Where the ecliptic crosses it are the MC or IC. This would be the "equator" of the sphere that has Zenith straight up and Nadir straight down as its poles.
It is at right angles to the Meridian you just identified. Where the ecliptic crosses this circle are Ascendant and Descendant.
It rises due east, passes over head, sets due west, and passes under your feet. This is the Prime Vertical. Where the ecliptic crosses this are the Vertex and Antivertex. Each of these quadrants of the PV is divided into thirds. Great circles are drawn through the north and south points of the Horizon where the Horizon and Meridian, the other two circles, intersect through these division points to divide the whole sphere into 12 even "orange slices," which are the three-dimensional Campanus houses.
Where these dividing great circles cross the ecliptic are the house cusps. Each of these quadrants of the Horizon is divided into thirds. Great circles are drawn through the zenith and nadir where the Meridian and Prime Vertical, the other two circles, intersect through these division points to divide the whole sphere into 12 even "orange slices," which are the three-dimensional Horizontal houses.
Extra geeky optional paragraph: A third system - not yet identified or put into use by anyone - is theoretically possible from the final combination of these three great circles. It would divide the Meridian into equal parts.