On the Domification Problem

On the Domification Problem

by Bob Makransky

The basic problem of house division theory arises from the fact that a house system is an attempt to represent a three-dimensional situation in two dimensions. A house system isn't a pie, but rather a tangerine. The divisions between wedges aren't lines, but planes. The problem of house division theory lies in the fact that certain information which makes sense from a three-dimensional point of view becomes highly distorted when squeezed into two dimensions. Ideally, a house system should fulfill two conditions: 1) It should model the earth's rotation. That is to say, the diurnal motion of a planet should be constant - it shouldn't take more time to pass through some houses than others. 2) It should preserve the ASC, MC, DESC, and IC as house cusps. Another way of saying this is: both the horizon and meridian planes should delimit segments of the tangerine. We can only "see" the ASC as a cusp if we are "sighting down" the horizon plane (if our viewpoint lies on the plane of the horizon); and we can only see the MC as a cusp if we are sighting down the meridian plane (if our viewpoint lies on the plane of the meridian). Therefore, we can only see both the ASC and MC at once if both the horizon and meridian planes delimit segments of the tangerine. The basic problem of house division theory lies in the fact that these two conditions contradict each other; and all the different house systems known to man represent different people's ideas of how to resolve that contradiction. In fact, there is no way to resolve this contradiction (it is mathematically impossible to resolve it). In practice what different house systems do is either ignore condition 1); ignore condition 2); ignore both conditions; or make a pretense of satisfying both conditions and end up satisfying neither of them. Consider condition 1). In order for a house system to model the earth's rotation, the axis of the tangerine must be the earth's axis, and our point of view must lie upon it. We squash the tangerine down onto the plane of the equator (or some plane parallel to it). We are looking down from the viewpoint of the north celestial pole, so our viewpoint is stationary, and everything else rotates around us (at a constant rate). This is how the Meridian and Alcabitius systems are defined. The Meridian system is a perfect model of rotation. In Alcabitius, a body's rotation is constant east of the meridian, but at the meridian it "jumps the tracks" and rotates at a different constant rate west of the meridian. As we shall see later on, there is a similar discontinuity in rotation in the Placidus and Koch systems, except at the horizon. That is, in Placidus and Koch, a planet passes through the houses above the horizon at a different speed than it passes through the houses below the horizon.

The Campanus, Regiomontanus, Sunshine, Horizontal, and Porphyry systems make no pretense of fulfilling condition 1), and therefore they are not good models of rotation. This is because the tangerine axes in these systems are not the earth's axis, and therefore as the world turns these models "wobble" (rotate at varying rates rather than smoothly at a constant rate). In these systems our point of view is not stationary, but is itself rotating around the earth's axis. The Placidus system doesn't wobble per se because of a rather elegant geometrical trick. Placidus is the only house system in which the segments of the tangerine are not delimited by planes, but rather by curves. The edges of the tangerine segments are not flat, but have a wave to them, like potato chips. Because our line of sight along these edges "bends", it is possible to maintain a fix on both the ASC and MC at the same time. However, Placidus has the same rotational flaw as Koch: rotation is constant above the horizon, and rotation is constant below the horizon, but as a body crosses the horizon it either hits the accelerator or slams on the brakes. Now, just as the first condition (that rotation be smooth and constant) requires that our viewpoint be looking down from the north celestial pole, so too does the second condition (that the angles be cusps) require that our point of view be looking south from the north point on the horizon. In other words, condition 1) implies that the axis of the tangerine is the earth's axis; whereas condition 2) implies that the axis of the tangerine is the line formed by the intersection of the horizon and meridian planes (this line cuts through right where we are standing, and runs due north and south across the floor). The two axes intersect at an angle equal to our latitude on the earth. This is the reason why conditions 1) and 2) contradict each other: each one requires a different point of reference. The Equal House and Morinus systems resolve the problem by ignoring both of these conditions. In these systems the axis of the tangerine is the line joining the poles of the ecliptic (our point of view is the north ecliptic pole), so not only does the tangerine wobble, but also we can't sight down either the horizon or meridian planes in these systems because our point of view (the ecliptic pole), doesn't lie on either of these planes. The Equal House and Morinus systems, for these reasons, seem somewhat shameless in their pretensions to be considered house systems at all. Only from the point of view of the north point of the horizon (squashing the tangerine into the plane of the prime vertical) , where we can sight down both the horizon and meridian planes, can the ASC and IC be observed simultaneously. This is the viewpoint taken in the Campanus. Regiomontanus, and Sunshine House systems, and only these systems perfectly fulfill condition 2), while ignoring condition 1). Some house systems ignore condition 2) altogether. For example, the ASC is not a cusp in the Meridian and Horizontal systems, and the MC is not a cusp in Equals (the way it is usually defined). Other house systems use some sort of trick or gizmo to pull both angles in as cusps. The Porphyry system has a bit more shame than Equal House, but not much. It wobbles just as badly, but at least lip service is paid to preserving both angles as cusps. However the Porphyry system gives up on geometry, and solves the problem by waving a magic wand and pulling the MC out of a hat.

The Koch system is the only house system in which the tangerine lacks a central axis. The planes which divide segments of the tangerine are tilted, so instead of intersecting in a line they intersect in a point at the center of the tangerine, forming a double cone (Figure 1). The Koch house cusps are not the planes which intersect the double cone at the lines, but rather are the planes which are tangent to the double cone at these lines (i.e. they delimit the double cone). Our viewpoint in the Koch system is the center of the tangerine - the point where all planes (lines of sight) meet. If left to itself, this double cone would rotate smoothly around the earth's axis (and hence be a perfect model of rotation, as the Meridian system is). Unfortunately what happens is that be-cause all other house systems take a viewpoint located on the surface of the tangerine (the north celestial pole, north ecliptic pole, or north point on the horizon), we can "look down on" the whole tangerine at once. But if our point of view is the center of the tangerine, then we have to be looking either one way or the other - either up the double cone (north) or down it (south). We can't look both ways at once; so if we are looking at the ASC, we can never see the DESC. We can see the point P - the point on the double cone which lies directly across from the ASC, but this point is not the DESC (it's the ASC's antiscion - it has declination opposite to that of the DESC). Nor can we ever see the MC or IC, since the meridian plane is not tangent to the double cone (it cuts through it, see Figure 2 ). So the double cone had to be "split" at the meridian into two half-cones. Every time a body reaches the meridian, we have to shift our point of view from north to south (or the reverse) to keep it in sight. And at that precise instant, when we have to whirl around, we are able to steal a quick glance out to the side (down the meridian plane) and "see" the body transiting the meridian. This is the basic problem with the Koch house system (apart from the logical contradictions it engenders) - it just doesn't make any sense. The Campanus, Regiomontanus, Sunshine, Meridian, Porphyry, Horizontal, and Morinus systems all make some kind of sense. There's a logic to them, flawed though it might be. Even the Placidus system makes sense at first glance (but falls apart under close scrutiny). In all of these house systems there's a fixed point of view. We don't have to be jumping about and waving our arms and looking this way and that. We can just sit there peacefully and watch the thing rotate. One attempt to improve on the Koch concept of a double cone of rotation is the Topocentric house system, in which the cone is not a cone per se but rather a foil. Its crosssection isn't a circle, but a spiral; our line of sight is an Archimedean spiral which curls into the meridian, so we can see the IC as well as the ASC. The problem with the Topocentric system is that as the thing rotates our horizon keeps bobbing up and down, so we feel as though we are being tossed in a blanket (the angle between the the earth's axis, and the line through our feet north and south across the floor, keeps fluctuating between zero and our latitude). In view of all these problems, it is not surprising that some astrologers eschew the use of houses altogether. Unfortunately for the theoretically-minded astrologer, the houses have a undeniable ability to work symbolically in the natal chart: Bill Gates has Jupiter-Pluto conjunct Regulus in the 2nd, and so on. This is one of astrology's undoubted teasers. It makes one wish transits and directions to intermediate house cusps worked as well as transits and directions to angles do. However, for that a theory would be needed as to how to calculate

these cusps. Perhaps we're all just going about it completely wrong; but in over thirty years of thinking on this question I haven't found any new approach. Maybe you will.

MES DOMIFICATIONS PREFEREES Quand j’ai débuté en astrologie, il n’y avait pas d’ordinateurs et de logiciels d’astrologie. On devait « monter » le thème manuellement en utilisant Les Tables des Maisons pour les latitudes de 0 (Equateur) à 66°30 (le cercle polaire) en méthode Placidus ainsi que les régimes horaires pour le monde entier. La majorité des astrologues n'utilisant alors que cette méthode Placidus pour échanger, on devait bien s’y conformer ! Comme vous n’êtes pas sans l’ignorer, il existe deux grands groupes de domifications : celles dont les sections sont égales sur le cercle zodiacal et celles qui sont inégales. Les premières sont principalement à dimensions spatiales, c’est de la géométrie pure, tandis que les secondes sont principalement à dimensions temporelles. La méthode Placidus est la domification inégale sur le zodiaque, actuellement la plus utilisée ; elle remonte au XVIIème siècle. Elle s’est imposée parmi les autres domifications inégales du fait de la vulgarisation commerciale de ses Tables de maisons. La méthode divise en six parties égales la durée du jour et idem pour la durée de la nuit (notion d’arc diurne et nocturne). On peut se demander s’il est logique de découper l’espace zodiacal avec des divisions du temps ? Oui, répondent ceux qui estiment que l’astrologie est l’étude des rythmes et des cycles et qui de ce fait privilégient la notion de temps (de rythme) plutôt que la notion d’espace. Toutefois la grande faiblesse de cette domification est qu’elle n’est plus applicable à partir de 66° de latitude, maisons diurnes ou nocturnes disparaissant à certaines saisons de l’année.

Maarit en Placidus Or ma meilleure collègue de travail et amie Maarit est finlandaise, née à 62N36, donc très proche du cercle polaire. Et la connaissant bien, je ne pouvais cautionner un tel thème.

Les deux autres principaux systèmes de maisons inégales sur le zodiaque sont plus anciens que le Placidus (divisions égales temporelles) : ce sont les systèmes Campanus (divisions égales sur le Premier Vertical) (XIIIème siècle) et Régiomontanus (divisions égales sur l'Equateur) (datant du XVème siècle et le plus utilisé par les grands astrologues de cette période). Ces trois systèmes ont en commun la fixation des deux grands axes Ascendant/Descendant et Milieu du Ciel/Fond du Ciel, et le fait que le cercle des maisons n’est pas sur le plan de l’écliptique. Car la façon de découper chaque quadrant en trois arcs est différente. Toutes ces divisions deviennent inégales quand projetées sur l’écliptique. L’Ascendant et Milieu du Ciel sont au début de la maison 1 et 10. Danièle Jay nous avait fait remarqué qu’avant Placidus, la méthode inventée par l'astrologue arabe Alcabitius est le tout premier exemple de systèmes de division des maisons qui soit basé sur le temps. Le système Placidus consiste à « trisecter » en parts égales le temps que met un lieu écliptique pour aller de son lever à sa culmination et il ressemble beaucoup à celui d'Alcabitius, tout en étant un peu plus subtil.

Maarit en Alcabituis Denis Labouré nous a signalé que le système Alcabitius fut celui le plus longtemps utilisée (près d'un millénaire), qu’il est assez proche des cuspides placidiennes, mais qu’il peut y avoir 3 ou 4 degrés d'écart sous nos latitudes européennes. Ce fut la méthode des astrologues arabes et notre domification occidentale jusqu'aux XVe XVIe siècles. On doit se souvenir que le célèbre astrologue Bonatis l’utilisait en astrologie horaire. Yves Lenoble nous signale que cette méthode décrit tout simplement le mouvement du degré Ascendant au cours de la journée. Il s'agit de trouver la position (en signe et degré de signe) que prend l'Ascendant de deux heures en deux heures (deux heures à l'ancienne s'entend c'est à dire des heures temporaires qui durent un douzième d'arc diurne). Contrairement à la domification zodiacale (et à la domification Aequalis medium/Equal Medium) que nous verrons plus loin, la maison X coïncide avec le Milieu du Ciel. C'est sans doute pour cette raison qu'elle a été préférée par les arabes aux autres domifications. Alcabitius fut précédée par la domification zodiacale (époque grecque). Denis Labouré signale qu’Alcabitius fut suivie par Regiomontanus qui repose sur la même idée d'un découpage de l'équateur en douze parties égales : chez Alcabitius, c'est en temps (les heures planétaires) ; chez Regiomontanus, c'est en espace (sections de 30°).

Maarit en Campanus Rien ne change en utilisant d’autres domifications telles que Campanus, certaines Maisons sont encore plus étroites (domification que j’ai utilisé quand j’ai suivi la formation humaniste). Cette domification a été extrêmement peu utilisée.

Maarit en Regiomontanus Rien ne change en Regiomontanus. J’utilise plus facilement cette technique que Placidus car basée sur l’Equateur avec lequel je travaille pour les déclinaisons planétaires. Sous nos latitudes moyennes, elle montre peu de différence avec Placidus et je l’utilise pour ne pas trop choquer les placidiens !

Maarit en Topocentrique

J’avais eu espoir avec le système topocentrique Mais Denis Labouré nous dit qu’il s'agit d'une variante du système Placidus. Sous nos latitudes moyennes, les cuspides du système topocentrique ne s'éloignent jamais de plus de 1degré des cuspides placidiennes. La formule initiale semble avoir été élaborée par André Boudineau, mais le système lui-même a été développé par Nelson Page et Wendel Polich en Amérique du sud. De nombreux astrologues anglo-saxons ont utilisé le système topocentrique pour affiner leurs directions primaires et affirment en tirer des dates sans orbe…. Les maisons topocentriques (1961) sont une variante de la domification Placidus permettant d’affiner les directions primaires. Ce système topocentrique tient compte de la parallaxe qui ramène la position du centre de la Terre (position géocentrique) à la position occupée par l’individu sur la sphère terrestre (topocentrique) et il permettrait de ce fait de domifier au - delà du cercle polaire. Mais le thème de Maarit n’est pas plus probant dans ce système.

Maarit en Koch Citons parmi les systèmes récents, le système Koch, dit du « lieu de naissance », apparu vers 1960, et dont la division en maisons est basée sur l’angle écliptique/AS et les cuspides calculées sur l’Equateur. Il ne donne pas de meilleurs résultats sur le thème de Maarit.

Maarit en Equal Medium/Antique Comme Maarit et moi-même nous avons fait un magnifique voyage au Groenland, au-delà du cercle polaire et que nous avons rencontrés d’agréables Inuits, je ne peux penser qu’ils n'auraient droit qu'à quelques Maisons dans leur thème ! Oui, sous nos latitudes les maisons inégales selon Placide ou Regiomontanus fonctionnent très bien mais quel crédit apporter à un système qui n'est pas valable sous toutes les latitudes?

Sur ce blog, je vous ai édité mon mémoire RAO de 2000 concernant la domification Equal Medium, dite Antique dans certains logiciels, toujours avec l’exemple de Maarit. Et je dois dire qu’enfin je pouvais interpréter le thème de Maarit.

Maarit en Zodiacale Notons que la domification "Aequalis Medium", quelque soit son intérêt, n'avait jamais été employée dans l'histoire de l'astrologie occidentale avant notre XXe siècle. Plusieurs astrologues contemporains (dont Yves Christiaen, Maurice Nouvel, Michèle Raulin) ont pensé que la théorie des Maisons égales était la meilleure parce que c'est celle qui qu'englobe un maximum de possibilités. Ce type de domification Equal-Medium ne me convenait pas complètement concernant mon thème personnel car elle me met un Soleil en Maison 7 alors que ma vie a été celle d’un Soleil en Maison 6 ! Et un Jupiter en Maison 1 alors que ma vie est celle d’un Jupiter en Maison 12. Puis je me suis tournée vers la domification Maison=Signe, car comme l’écrivait Alain Soudeillette, « pourquoi changerait-on de type de domification suivant que l'on se situe en Norvège ou en France ? Car si l'on suit le précepte d'hermès trimégiste "tout ce qui est en haut est comme ce qui est en bas (maisons terrestres = maisons célestes (signes). » Le thème de Maarit en Maisons Zodiacales (la Maison 1 est celle de l’Ascendant : Maison = le signe) est la domification qui convient le mieux à l'interprétation de son thème ! Et à mon thème personnel également !

Maarit en Equatoriale Mais Robert et Francine Gouiran estimaient «qu’il est illusoire de proposer un système de maisons égales car lui non plus ne fonctionne pas bien dans ces régions polaires quoiqu'on en dise, car il reste basé sur un Ascendant qui près du pôle devient flou et évanescent, se déplaçant à grande vitesse en tout sens. Il n'y a qu'un point solide qui existe partout c'est le Milieu du ciel, c'est-à-dire l'intersection du plan méridien avec l'écliptique car il y a toujours un point méridien de culmination du Soleil, même si c'est sous l'horizon (sauf un jour aux pôles!). Il y a donc toujours un axe perpendiculaire Est-Ouest. D'où l'idée de découper la sphère locale à partir du méridien en douze secteurs de deux heures d'Ascension droite chacun et de former ainsi douze secteurs équatoriaux (ou maisons équatoriales), découpage à partir de l'Equateur céleste et qui est possible sous toutes les latitudes. Les significations astrologiques de ces douze secteurs leur sont propres et sont différentes des significations des autres domifications, mais elles se combinent bien avec elles. …En tenant compte du fait qu'il y a toujours un Milieu du ciel avec une ascension droite connue, on peut diviser le zodiaque en douze secteurs égaux de deux heures d'ascension droite à partir de ce MC. C'est ce que nous appelons la domification équatoriale qu'on peut effectuer à toutes latitudes. En retranchant six heures à l'ARMC (ou temps sidéral) on obtient une sorte d'ascendant équatorial (parfois appelé point EST, à ne pas confondre avec le point de l'Est). Astrid Fallon était « assez d'accord avec Robert et Francine pour l'utilisation de la domification équatoriale, de 12 quartiers égaux à partir de l'ascension droite du MC (ARMC). » Yves Christiaen écrivait : ne pas dire « le Soleil se lève à l’Est » mais « du côté de l’Orient ». Les 3 points situés à l’Orient liés à l’apparition du Soleil sont l’Ascendant, le point Est et le Point du Lever du Soleil. Définissons-les : Ascendant (10°31 CAP chez Maarit) : croisement de l’Horizon natal avec l’Ecliptique. Point de notre incarnation, notre point de contact physique avec la Terre à l’heure de notre naissance. Base du tempérament et du comportement général. Dit « point horoscope ». L’horizon représente: le potentiel, la puissance.

Point du Lever du Soleil (0°08 POI chez Maarit PLS) : point écliptique précis, point de jaillissement de la lumière, point plus spirituel que physique. Point vernal personnel car directement lié au premier temps de vie. Dit « point de l’heure » : importance sur notre être intérieur, sur notre « moi » profond. Retentissement profond sur notre ego par l’empreinte qu’il y mettra. Motivations profondes. Sur l’Ecliptique : ce qui est intensif. Point Est (4°40 POI chez Maarit E) : croisement de l’Equateur avec l’Horizon, à 90° du Méridien. Les instincts. Sur l’Equateur : ce qui est extensif. C’est l’équivalent de l’Ascendant dans cette domification équatoriale.

Chaîne individuelle Il y a aussi la domification Asc-MC (affichage des angles uniquement, sans maisons succédentes et cadentes) mais cela n’arrange pas l’interprétation dans les régions polaires. Par contre on peut faire un thème sans Maisons. C’est ce que nous sommes obligés de faire quand nous ne connaissons par l’heure de naissance. J’utilise alors les Chaînes planétaires individuelles et collectives.

Dans les deux figures, les chaînes présentent Mercure en tête de chaîne et Jupiter en fin de chaîne. Il y a cohérence entre l’individu et le collectif ! Mercure seule en tête de chaîne : tout passe par un raisonnement, tout est froidement intellectualisé ; la personne vient dans le monde avec un besoin d'échange, de communication. Jupiter en fin de chaîne : on cherche sa place, la reconnaissance sociale mais on a du mal à délimiter son territoire ; il y a perturbation entre soi et l'environnement dans les échanges avec pourtant une certaine capacité à s'intégrer.

Regardons la Signature du thème dépendant des planètes et de leur position zodiacale et non des Maisons, Maarit est Terre-Cardinal = Capricorne. Même sans tenir compte de son Ascendant en apex du T-carré à la conjonction Soleil-Saturne en Balance et Uranus en Cancer, on peut très bien faire un thème sans Maisons et même sans Ascendant en tenant compte des aspects du signe correspondant à la signature du thème (du Capricorne en carré par rapport aux deux autres signes du même mode vibratoire dominant, Cardinal, et à leurs planètes habitantes (à la conjonction Soleil-Saturne/BAL et carrée à Uranus/CAN) ! Sans négliger qu’Uranus est à 23°04 de Déclinaison donc proche de l’Hors-Limite. CONCLUSION : Il me semble que le système des Maisons Zodiacale (Une Maison=Un signe) est le plus applicable et interprétable à toutes latitudes. Je l’utiliserai à l’avenir le plus possible. Mais je continuerai également d’utiliser Regiomontanus car l’horoscope est proche de celui de Placidus et ne choque pas les placidiens. Et je ne négligerai pas la domification Equatoriale, quoique plus délicate à interpréter.

Écrire commentaire

Commentaires : 1 

#1 Liliane (vendredi, 27 décembre 2013 14:02) Je n'avais pas assisté au colloque annuel du RAO 2014. Je viens seulement de recevoir les actes de ce colloque. Mon sujet préféré est l'exposé de Franck NGUYEN: DOMIFICATION MERIDIENNE ET DESTIN SOCIAL. Ce que j'appelle Domification Equatoriale dans mon article ci-dessus est appelé Domification Méridienne par Franck et je m'y rallie tout à fait. La Maison 1 en domification méridienne (voir ci-dessus thème en équatoriale) montre une Maison 1 M dans le signe des Poissons, signe de la multitude et des organisations humanitaires internationales qui représente bien la réalisation personnelle et le personnage social de Maarit.

This article was written for the AA's research periodical Correlation in 2001. Many thanks to Mrs Pat Harris (Ed.) for permission to reproduce a revised version. The author was introduced to Correlation by Michael Edwards QHP, whose introduction to the series of articles is reproduced below.

Circumpolar horoscopy, though largely ignored, has long been the subject of quiet controversy and ill-informed debate. Perhaps no other field of astrological enquiry provides more depressing evidence of just how far practitioners have become removed from the real sky. Most current astrological software yields incorrect circumpolar charts - or none at all - while some programmes bypass the question of the MC altogether by defaulting to Equal houses at 67N. But even this does not guarantee a correct Ascendant. The problem is but one of perception, compounded over the years by prejudice; indeed some of the suggestions advanced seem to owe more to the need to draw a horoscope as we expect to see it than to any understanding of the real sky. One oft-heard view suggests that these things don't matter, because we "don't cast charts for up there," but of course it does matter if we are to care at all about consistent chart construction. In truth, correct orientation of the angles can and does vary according to the system of house division employed but such variance can never justify inconsistent results. In showing what happens to the angles beyond the polar circles, we aim to correct a few common misconceptions, so let us bear in mind that:

a) though we discuss charts cast for northern latitudes, the principles outlined will always apply globally. b) some references to 'houses' may not always apply to the pseudo quadrant systems (those that retain the MC while otherwise dividing the ecliptic alone: Porphyry, Alcabitius, etc.), and they will rarely apply to Equal or Sign/House. Systems that divide merely the ecliptic require separate discussion. c) the term 'great circle' signifies a line drawn round the inside or outside of a globe, which also constitutes a circumference of that globe. On Earth, for example, this applies to the Equator or to circles of longitude, whereas those of geographic latitude are known as 'small circles' since they do not constitute a circumference.

In all horoscopes cast for sub-arctic latitudes, we obtain the main angles from two great semi circles, both of which start from the local horizon at the point due south. The first semi circle, which produces the Ascendant, tracks the horizon from south to north, passing through the point due east. The second, which produces the Medium Coeli (MC), rises upwards from the south point of the horizon, passes directly overhead, and then descends to rejoin the horizon at the point due north. Their opposing semi circles, one to the west, the other passing from south to north underfoot, generate the Descendent and Imum Coeli (IC), respectively. The entire construction looks like a gyroscope lying on its side. As this is the arrangement adopted by most quadrant systems of house division, at all latitudes between the Equator and 66N, we must question procedures which, at 67N and beyond, obtain the Ascendant or MC from these opposing great semi circles. This is precisely what many have prescribed in advising us, for example, to obtain the MC from a degree which falls below the horizon. In fact, to switch semi circles is neither necessary nor desirable. As is fairly well understood, a rising degree seldom ascends exactly in the east. At whatever latitude we stand, the geographic point at which the ecliptic rises will swing north and south of due east. On the Equator, the swing extends about 23 degrees either way, but this increases the further north we go, with the geographic direction of the rising point sweeping further southwards and northwards on the local easterly horizon. Once we cross the Arctic Circle, the southerly drift of the ecliptic's rising point takes it ever closer to the south point of the horizon.

Simultaneously, the MC's ecliptical degree loses altitude in the sky as it sinks down its own great semi circle. Then comes that seeming awkward moment, known as Asc conjunct MC, when both cusps collide at the south point of the horizon, but let us first observe what happens next, which is of more concern. In the following moment, as the ecliptic disappears below the south point of the horizon, it pops up again at due north so that: i) the ecliptic continues to rise, but now at a point just east of due north; ii) the MC degree also re-appears to the north. Objections to this are discussed below. These exchanges occur because, above the Arctic Circle, a progressively increasing number of ecliptic degrees - fanning out on either side from 0 Capricorn - are ever found above the horizon. The angles' jump is an ecliptical consequence implicit in this limitation. Zodiacally, each angle has also flipped across 180 degrees, with Ascendant and MC now apparently the wrong way round in the horoscope. We say "apparently" as this is but an illusion that arises from the way we have chosen to draw our horoscopes. In reality nothing has changed; the physical houses all remain exactly where they were a few moments earlier, prior to the ecliptic's reversal of their cuspal degrees. Contrary to a common misconception that seeks to blame the houses or the houses' cusps for these reversals, it is in fact the local disposition of the ecliptic that causes the apparent 'problems'. This introduces the most important consideration of all. Although the MC degree has jumped to the north, the ecliptic itself still rises where it always does - on the eastern horizon - though in a different way. With a northerly MC, the ecliptic's orientation to that horizon is so inclined that we now see the zodiac signs in question ascending backwards, the ends of these signs rising before their beginnings. In moderate arctic latitudes this reverse rising does not persist for long since these signs rise very quickly. Moreover the geographic direction of the ecliptic's rising point moves from north to south much more rapidly than the first time. So before long we have a case of Asc opposition MC, at which moment everything flips again and all is back to 'normal'. The frequent assumption - that there is always some kind of reversal going on in the Arctic - is clearly wrong, and with most horoscopes cast for Polar regions, there is no need to reverse anything at all. We only ever need to reappraise matters when dealing with the interval that finds some of the ecliptic rising

backwards. We need first to understand more about this interval before we determine how to handle it in practice. The Ascendant: Tables of angles for high latitudes [1] will show the Ascendant turning retrograde after it flips from south to north and this may have led to some of the more overwrought theories. If the Ascendant moves backwards, must there not be something else, somewhere else, moving forwards? No, there is not. As the ecliptic rises backwards in the east, it is also setting backwards in the west, with the longitudes of the 1st and 7th cusps both diminishing. Those who suggest re reversing the Ascendant - to the ecliptic degree which occupies the western horizon - should understand that rising backwards is not the same as setting. In this regard, Robert Hand wrote that the cusp of the 1st house should be marked by the ecliptic's "ascending node".[2] No one can disagree with that but we shall never find any such phenomenon on the western horizon. Celestial objects, planets, stars, constellations etc. will always rise in the east, regardless of geographic latitude or hemisphere. To presume that the ecliptic can do otherwise is mistaken. Most astrological software makes this mistake, which is why most routines give the wrong rising sign. Culmination: Circumpolar MCs found to the north of the observer do not represent that which those to the south represent. The difference is inherent in the fact that one circumpolar day lasts up to six summer months, just as one night at a Pole will last all winter. The summer Sun, unable to set within the normal 24 hour period, swings all the way round the field of vision, passing over the 10th house semi circle not once but twice. It is highest in the sky when culminating to the south, and lowest when crossing the 10th again, to the north, where it dips closest to the horizon. Since the same is true of any zodiac degrees that cannot set in polar latitudes, how may we distinguish between their twice daily culminations? This question does not arise in horoscopes between the Polar Circles, where lower culmination always occurs below the horizon, at the IC, but within the Polar Circles any degree constantly above the horizon will mark the 10th house at each culmination. (Meanwhile, below the horizon, degrees that never rise cross the 4th cusp twice-daily.) The problem is not in this case due to the

local disposition of the ecliptic but to a failure of the houses themselves. Few quadrant systems will make the distinction between upper and lower culminations, within the Polar Circles, other than to present a 'retrograde' Ascendant when the MC is to the north. In practice, the MC is most frequently found where we usually find it, to the south. We need not consider reversing any cusps until that section of the ecliptic that ascends backwards - or end first - rises. This occurs in the interval between Asc conjunct MC and Asc opposition MC, and in that order. During this interval the MC is located to the north, so the degree found by the usual formula should be reversed. Since the Ascendant is always found to the east, no reversal need ever be made. The only real challenge arises when one tries to draw this state of affairs as an orthodox horoscope. With the Ascendant appearing 'behind' the MC, this cannot be done without cusps turning up in the wrong hemisphere. These include that MC which finds itself forced into the lower half of the chart, along with any planets that are, in reality, above the horizon. This leaves two options: 1) Do exactly as described above, which has obvious disadvantages but would show clearly that the degree on the MC is at its lower culmination, to the north. 2) Instead of mangling the houses, simply reverse the direction of the zodiac signs in the horoscope's outer wheel, drawing them clockwise instead of anti clockwise. The MC will then return to the upper half of the chart while the Asc remains to its left hand side. The intermediate cusps will also be returned to their usual hemispheres, and in their right order. Moreover, those planets which are above the arctic horizon will also be depicted above the horoscope's horizon. Those disturbed by this proposal might recall that it is the unacustomed behaviour of the ecliptic, not that of the houses, which presents us with this dilemma. Hence it seems quite fitting to look to the depiction of the celestial zodiac, rather than to that of the mundane sphere, in order to solve it. Example: Data: 00:00 UT, 13th June 2001, 0W00, 75N00, with intermediate cusps calculated according to the "rational method" ascribed post facto to Regiomontanus. Most computer programs, having calculated the RAMC (261 degrees) in the usual manner, present the following horoscope:

The problem here is that the presumed MC of 22 Sagittarius, with more than 23 degrees of south declination, is some 98 degrees south of the event, placing it 8 degrees below the horizon. So in fact it occupies the IC whilst 22 Gemini crosses the 10th house semi-circle, to the north of the observer. Because we now have a northerly MC, it is the backwards rising Aries - not Libra - that crosses the eastern horizon. Consequently we can see that every other house cusp has also been placed in the wrong sign. Moving Aries to the left of the chart will rectify this - but then the correct Gemini MC will remain where the IC is usually depicted. To counter this, we reverse the direction of the zodiac signs, drawing the true chart thus:

NB: In this horoscope, the Sun is low above the northern horizon and, at 22 Gemini, is on the "MC" even though it is midnight. Moreover, both the Sun and the same MC will again mark the 10th cusp just 12 hours later, but to the south and with each much higher in the sky. To further illustrate what actually happens in Polar skies, we find that an hour later (01:00) the MC has moved forward into Cancer but the Ascendant has moved backwards into Pisces:

Regarding the northerly reappearance of the MC degree, some insist on always looking south for the MC, even when this 'Midheaven' falls below the horizon. Quite apart from the obvious contradiction in terms, this can be achieved only by borrowing the great semi circle that in most other quadrant horoscopes produces the IC. Charts cast for most of Europe or North America always have an MC that is south of their geographic latitude, but it does not follow that all MC's necessarily lay to the south. Indeed our Equatorial region presents a more ambiguous picture, as with a horoscope cast for latitude 1N with an MC of 0 Cancer. Geographically this MC is north of the location of the chart.[3] Hence the southerly prescription for our circumpolar MC ignores the fact that charts cast within 23 degrees north or south of the Equator can and will have MCs to north or to south. Some house divisions try to incorporate this fact by supposing that the great semi circles responsible for MC and IC run from North to South Poles of the Earth, instead of from north to south points of the local horizon. Unfortunately - and because the latter are simultaneously expected to service the Ascendant and Descendant this means asking us to obtain 1st, 7th, and intermediate cusps according to the latitude of birth, but then to skip to the Equator for our 10th and 4th. More regrettably, we cannot expect the twodimensional plane that is a conventional horoscope to reveal the full implications of this scramble, so the idea usually escapes unchallenged. Suffice to say that in feigning a solution to one dilemma, it creates worse problems of its own, making the idea unworkable in practice.

We might run all house lines from North Pole to South Pole, by adopting either Meridian houses - which deprive us of our Ascendant by pretending that all events occur at the Equator - or the Alcabitius system, which poses technical and historical questions that reach beyond the scope of this paper. However it is clear that with either device, the real horizon is totally abandoned and, along with it, any true notion of "above and below".

The procedures outlined above apply in principle to Regiomontanus, Campanus, Koch, Porphyry and, in part, to semi arc houses. They may or may not serve some of the less common quadrant divisions such as Morinus, which its eponymous architect did not apparently take seriously enough to use himself. The authors of 'Topocentric' houses, on the other hand, took matters very seriously indeed, contriving quite separate and contradictory circumpolar procedures. None of these relate to the real sky, nor do they bear scrutiny.[4] The problem of what to do about a horoscope with Ascendant and Midheaven in conjunction or opposition is not as onerous as might appear. Nor is it dissimilar to that encountered upon the Polar Circles where, once a day and for an instant, there is no Ascendant at all because the ecliptic is found flat against the horizon. The chance of catching one of these fleeting moments in a real horoscope is even less likely than that of a birth occurring exactly at one of the Poles, where the only possible Ascendants are either 0 Aries or 0 Libra. All such charts are unlikely to the point of impossible but their theoretical occurrence does merit examination. This will follow in the subsequent articles in this series, within a more general inquiry into why many theories of domification can never serve, much less adapt themselves to, the Polar regions.

Notes & References: 1]

Schwickert, G., Aszendenten fur nordpolar Breiten, Neunkirchen (Saar). German pamphlet, date unknown. (Later reproduced as an appendix to the AFA's tables of Koch houses.) Back to text

2]

Hand, Robert. Essays on Astrology, Para Research, Inc., 1982. Back to text

3]

Geographic latitude and celestial declination are interchangeable co-ordinates. Thus when 0 Cancer culminates it is directly overhead at 23½N regardless of the observer's location/latitude. Back to text

4]

At time of writing (2001), the Topocentric system was yet promoted as "an improvement on Placidus" and "the only (quadrant) method that works" in the Arctic. Neither assertion could be further from the truth. Back to text

Michael Wackford hass studied astrology since 1976. For 11 years he studied and argued with the late Neil Gillings, a little known yet well-respected technical astrologer who was consulted by Ingrid Lind, Charles E. O. Carter, Roy Firebrace and others. The author has contributed articles to the AA Journal and the Traditional Astrologer and has also advised other astrologers.

Original Introduction by Michael Edwards QHP To justify their practice to sceptics of a scientific persuasion western astrologers fondly trace the roots of their Art back to times when, they believe, astrology and astronomy were one. Hence, they say, astrology merits the respect that most cultures accord their ancestors. Yet what higher respect could we accord our ancestors than to practise what we preach and to turn the precious gift of our eyesight, on which our Art depends, upwards to behold the sky before we don our spectacles to pore myopically downwards over numbrous formulae and tables, in order to compute and cast our charts of heaven? Why, on Earth, do we not first draw pictures of the real sky before we entrust our fate to numbers? In Ptolemy's day the sky above moved in the form of threedimensional spheres round our human mundo below, where we dance to the music of time. When Galileo turned his telescope upon

the night sky, deep space was born in all four of its glorious dimensions. Yet our task as horoscopic astrologers did not change: to represent accurately the three dimensions of the heavens above in two-dimensions here below for any single moment from any point of view, with the fourth dimension, all time past and all time future, implicit in the now of that horoscope. How to do this has for centuries generated a veritable Tower of Babel of debate, sometimes informed, but ofttimes of wilful ignorance such as Brecht's Galileo faced which, as he in vain pleaded, one look through his telescope would have instantly dispelled. If astrologers would but turn their eyes to the skies on every clear day and every clear night in every place they roam, they might see with their own eyes the simple, elegant, sacred mystery that Michael Wackford has seen in the geocentric union of the celestial sphere with the mundane sphere, which I have been privileged to see through his eyes. In this paper, the first of a series, he has condensed into a clear, concise and coherent account his many years of observation, study and drawing, applied here to the basis of the horoscope, the four angles, Ascendant/Descendant and MC/IC. At least we all agree these are the most sensitive points of the chart, those which square the circle. In defining them and describing how they are always seen to behave, he cracks that hoary old chestnut which has generated so much hot air and stale argument: what do we do about the ascendant and MC for events occurring within polar regions, what cusps need to be reversed or not, and when do we reverse them or not? The author's mastery of horoscopic principles was never computeraided. When I recently acquired the astronomical programme "Starry Nights", which shows the sky in motion from any horizon in the Solar System, we shared both delight and satisfaction at seeing all his conclusions proved correct. We also shared the disappointment of realising that astrological programmes in general use fail to portray polar horoscopes that precisely reflect the natural astronomy of true horoscopic principles. It is high time we astrologers put our house in order, and our houses. NB: The very word 'horoscope', from Greek horoskopos, meaning both 'watcher of the horizon' and 'watcher of the hour', unites space with time, but not without the observer. You are the observer. No telescopes are needed, but do watch this space. © Michael Wackford. Published online December 2007. This article was published in Correlation 19 (2) 2001; pp.54-61.

http://www.skyscript.co.uk

The Houses Temples of the Sky

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=msIch6wq38C&pg=PA101&lpg=PA101&dq=domification+extreme+latitude&source=bl&ot s=HmhuLMLRm5&sig=zyoioBihpBQEV2vTun9GLaw9Lo8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB 0Q6AEwAGoVChMI_JSIzsL6xgIVQuKmCh324wxh#v=onepage&q=domification %20extreme%20latitude&f=false

from pag 74

The Astrology of Polar Latitudes Andrew. J. Bevan, QHP, DMS Astrol. (c) 2009

Practicing Astrology North of the Arctic Circle Towards the North People who visit Oslo at 60°N during summer are impressed by the fact that it never gets dark. The same is of course valid for all other locations of the same latitude. At Summer solstice the Sun in Oslo sets at 22.44 CEST, only to rise 5 hours later at 03.53 CEST. For similar reasons the length of Daylight hours during the months of winter are greatly reduced. On December 21. the Sun will rise at 09.18 CT before it sets at 15.12 CEST. Beyond Daylight lies twilight. Astronomers say that twilight lasts as long as the slightest indication of day can be detected in the horizon above the Sun, which is as long as the Sun is less than 18 degrees below the horizon. Civil twilight is when the center of the solar disc is less than 6 degrees below the horizon. We can that these orbs are closely related to the orbs of ‘combustion’ and ‘being under the Sun’s beams’, and at the equator it may observed how they actually effect the visibility of the planets. At Oslo 60°N the inclination of the celestial equator in the sky is 90-60=30 degrees. With the inclination between the celestial equator and the ecliptic being 23°27’, this means that at midsummer the Sun will never be more than 6°33’ of arc below the horizon, so it never gets really dark. Astronomical observation is greatly impaired by twilight, unless observing bright objects like Mercury and Venus.

What happens in the Arctic? Moving beyond the Arctic Circle, there is the phenomenon of the Midnight Sun and Midwinter night. During the height of Summer the Sun will never set. During winter the Sun does not rise and may be gone for several months. At high latitudes beyond the Arctic Circle the celestial sphere of circumpolar stars extends south to include

areas of the zodiac that cease to fall below the horizon in the manner we are accustomed to. The periods of Midnight Sun and Midwinter Darkness are of equal duration * as the Sun moves through passages of equal length on either side of its solstice points. As the Sun reappears after being gone for several months during of Arctic winter, the local inhabitants celebrate its return with a festivity. * Due to refraction and the bending of light, the intervals of daylight are actually longer than the intervals of darkness. This also effects the intervals of the Midnight Sun and Midwinter night.

Through the years of 1987 and 1988 I was living in Sortland, Norway at 68N40, 15E20. This is 2 degrees north of the Polar Circle at 66N33. Assuming that the Sun is in its Summer Solstice at 0° Cancer, at midnight in Sortland the Sun will still be visible 2 degrees above the horizon in the north. Due to refraction, the bending of light caused by the Earth’s atmosphere and that is roughly 1 degree along the horizon, the Midnight Sun ‘appears’ to be 3° above the horizon. Due to an optical illusion that causes celestial objects to appear larger than they actually are when they move along the horizon, you would be subject to believe that the height and altitude of the Sun was even greater still. Due to the bending of light the midnight Sun can actually be seen South of the Arctic Circle, but for all practical purposes in astrology calculations are made in reference to the rational horizon and not the ‘apparent’.

The celestial equator and tropical circles at they appear at various latitudes

Fig 1. 0°North at Equator

Fig 2. 45° North

Fig 3. 60° North

Fig 4. 66N33 Arctic Circle

Fig 5. 75° North

Fig 6. 90° North Pole

Commentary to the above figures: O - is the location of the observer P - is the Celestial North Pole A - is the Celestial Equator B – is the Tropic of Cancer C- is the Tropic of Capricorn By following the figures is easy to work at the apparent height and path of the Sun at various latitudes when located on - a) the Celestial Equator b) the Tropic of Cancer c) the Tropic of Capricorn. In fig 3 – at 60°N notice how the Sun in Oslo barely sets during midsummer and only just creeps above the horizon in the midst of winter. In fig 6 - at 75°N it is easy to see how north of the Arctic Circle portions of the ecliptic do not intersect the horizon. Some degrees never rise and never set.

Astronomical peculiarities At the Artic Circle the inclination between the celestial equator and the local horizon is 23°27‘ and equal to the angular inclination between the celestial equator and the ecliptic. This means that once every day there will occur a moment when the ecliptic lies in parallel with the Great Circle of the local horizon. North of the Arctic Circle degrees of the zodiac that are equal distant of the tropical solstices 0° Cancer and 0° Capricorn will not intersect the local horizon according to the latitude of the location. Some degrees will never set and will ever be raised above the Earth (circumpolar), while others will never appear above the Earth and leaves what

remains to be a broken circle. When practicing astrology in the Arctic I made a habit of marking those degrees that didn’t cut the horizon in red in the outer rim of the chart. At Sortland the degrees between 6SG07 – 23CP53 would never rise but always be located below the rational horizon. The degrees between 6GE07 – 23CN53 would never set. Notice that Sortland is only 2° north of the Arctic Circle and yet it takes 48 days for the Sun to travel the distance down to the Capricorn solstice and up again. You have to imagine the tilting of the circle. The length of day and night changes most dramatically close to the Vernal and Autumn equinoxes. Most often the irregularities of the Arctic do not interfere our general experience of the Earth’s rotation upon it’s own axis. In the main, all celestial objects tend to behave just as we are used to in more hospitable climates, because the ‘Midnight Sun’ in the South during day is not a problem. It’s when the darn thing doesn’t go down in the evening that you are finding cardboard sheets to blackout the bedroom windows, and even then you can’t get off to sleep because the neighbor has decided to mow the lawn at 11 pm… Of nature, the people of the North are more likely to sleep less during the summer and then catch up during winter with some sort of semi-hibernation. From both an astronomical and astrological perspective the challenge of the Arctic is not due to the habits of the locals but due to a daily phenomenon that occurs when the Midheaven passes through the broken passage of the zodiac - those degrees that never rise above the horizon. The reason that the Sun can be seen at midnight north of that Arctic Circle is because it is accidentally located at the opposite side of the sky at the same point in time, i.e. the phenomenon of the Midnight Sun will only occur then the Midheaven is passing through its dark degrees at the same time as the Sun is moving through the equally sized passage on the opposite side of the zodiac. As the Midheaven moves through those degrees that never rise, the natural order of the signs of the zodiac collapses. I used to imagine the behavior of a twirling dish as it topples and collapses on the floor. It is a good image, not entirely correct, but it will serve its purpose. You have to get into your mind a picture of the remarkable nature of Arctic latitudes. North of the Arctic Circle the inclination between the ecliptic and the celestial equator is greater than the inclination between the celestial equator and apparent horizon - and at a point the signs of short ascension will topple ahead of themselves and backwards out of the eastern horizon. The crunch occurs as the Midheaven sets. At this point the MC and Asc come to

a conjunction but since the prospects of a rising degree is void in this point, the Ascendant jumps 180° from its position in a sign of long ascension to the opposite point in a sign of short ascension where it will retrograde with great pace backwards through the zodiac until it again joins with the MC as it emerges from hibernation. Then the Ascendant will jump back 180° again to a sign of long ascension and resume normal passage. The time it takes the Ascendant to retrograde through the signs of short ascension is equal to the number of degrees it takes the Midheaven to move through its sub-terrestrial passage in the south, with 1° of the ecliptic being converted into 4 minutes of time. At my location at 68N40 at Sortland the Midheaven is sub-terrestrial for a little short of 48°, which, multiplied by 4 minutes, equals 3 hours and 12 minutes.

Midheaven South DO NOT discard the Midheaven South. I say this explicitly. The celestial meridian is the Great Circle that surround the Earth and that intersects MC (south), IC (north), Zenith (above) and Nadir (below). The Midheaven is ever the culminating degree in on the celestial meridian and in the northern hemisphere this will always be towards the South. At the North Pole it is different. The North Pole is like another planet. Anyone traveling to the North Pole is due to have both their sense of direction and sense of belonging distorted, and they are probably attempting to live out a hard aspect between Saturn and natal Moon. If you are at the North Pole then you are on an expedition and not supposed to live there. At the North Pole everything is south, as the world revolves beneath your very feet. At the Pole point you may dance through the World’s time zones in rejoice over a cup of hot chocolate. You are likely to feel Super-human but running in rings at great speed around the Pole point ahead of the Sun does not allow you to travel backwards through time. The Superman trick does not work. Astronomically and astrologically, the Polar problem may be compared with the headaches to be provided by astronauts during space travel. They have all traveled beyond the rational world. As soon as babies are born in space capsules, astrologers will depart from charts with a terrestrial ascendant but move on to adopt another a different kind nodal axis that can be applied to prove the radicality and direction of the chart. But moving back to Earth, unless you behaved really bad in a previous like you are not likely to belong at the extremes of either

Pole. This is not home. I watched people on TV as they reached the North Pole on skies. They stood there crying and hugging each other and it was crazy. As soon as you get anywhere close to civilization again you are likely to forget all the dizzy emotions. You will find your head again and begin to relate normally to both south – and north! The Midheaven South marks the place of culmination for any degree when observed from the northern hemisphere. The sub-terrestrial passage of the Midheaven South traveling below the horizon may for the sake understanding the basic concept be compared with Via Combust although it behaves more in a fashion similar to like an intercepted sign. Here the angle is buried into the Earth. It is like a secret, a wish or a distant country, something not yet seen the light or been born into the world. The highest point of the zodiac above the horizon has never been the Midheaven (unless by coincidence). Astrologers tend to get this wrong. The highest point of the zodiac above the horizon is called the nonagesimal. The nonagesimal is the point of the zodiac that is 90° distant from the radical ascendant in the direction in opposite to the ascension of the signs. No degree of the zodiac culminates twice during a day. When 0° Cancer appears in the North at midnight this is when this degree appears at it’s lowest point, which is much contrary to it’s culmination in the South. However, every degree will pass the Great Circle of the Meridian twice a day, as these intersections are defined by the MC and IC. As the Midheaven moves through the sub-terrestrial path of the zodiac that takes it below the local horizon of the observer, the ascendant will move swiftly, and with retrograde motion, through the signs of short ascension. The nonagesimal will display a similar horrendous motion and move with great speed as it is constantly at a right angle and inseparably linked to the ascendant, but this motion is nothing else than a demonstration of all those degrees that lie in almost equal parallel to the horizon at that moment upon the toppling and clatter of the zodiacal dish. The ascendant is retrograde. So what? Are we supposed to run into hiding? No Interpret it! Stars do not fall down from the Sky and the Sun and the Moon do not reverse their motion. The zodiac is still the Great Circle that the planets follow in their passage around the Sun. Anything going on in the ascendant is nothing but a local side effect. Houses ‘appear’ to get crammed together as house systems ‘appear’ to collapse, but what have we been telling people through all times? Houses appear to be of different size but are all actually equally large and that it all is a matter of how the apple is divided into

slices. Astrology is a language and a matter of dialects. If one approach doesn’t work, we can always adopt and approach the problem from a different angle. If the chart doesn’t show houses, then maybe you didn’t need them for the chart, or the question wasn’t radical. One of the problems in astrology occurs when the querent wants to know everything at once. This is one of the challenges of natal astrology, and it also pops up when journalists call me and ask me what is going to happen in the next year. Their question and approach lacks focus and is void. The moment does not lack focus when it comes to mapping specific mundane phenomena. I must add the from the perspective of the North Pole 90°N the planet Pluto has through 2008-2009 transited the Winter solstice and lowest heaven at the same time at Saturn in 2009 has been in the Autumn equinox and descending degree. Look at what has been happening to the ice-masses. Nor is the Arctic void when applying the technique of horary astrology to answer specific questions. The moral is that no matter your art, sport or science – stay focused if you have any ambitions of success.

Horary example 1. Will our New Baby be Christened? This question was asked on July 24. 1988 at 22.03 CEST, Sortland, Norway, 68N40 15E20, and prior to the birth of my second child. The question occurs because the local priest had stalled on his heels with second thoughts regarding whether he wished to baptise our child and accept it as a member of his congregation. His reluctance and fear was due to my practice as an astrologer, which was in a sharp contrast and conflict with his personal convictions. Fig. A – the chart looks wrong when drawn by a computer

I am presenting two different drawings of this chart. The first one is drawn by a computer but shows it all wrong. The second is my hand-drawn chart that puts the MC in the south, as it should be, and the ascendant is located towards the north, as this the area along the local horizon where the ecliptic actually does rise. In the outer ring of the hand-drawn chart I have indicated those degrees that do not cross the horizon at that latitude in either south or north. There is no Midnight Sun in October, but it can be seen that the culminating degrees on the Midheaven are sub-terrestrial level and bellow the Earth. Hence, the celestial dish is performing its daily phase of topple.

Fig. B – When the chart is draw by hand, the astronomy of the moment appears in its actual fashion.

The ascendant is retrograde in the late degrees of Taurus, but these now become early due to the motion of ascension. The question is in fact early, since the child is not born at the time of asking. I took the ascendant conjunct the cluster of the Pleiades to be my significator, together with the Venus, ruler of the ascendant, who I found in Gemini on the cusp of the 4th. I am a home father at the time of the question. Still practicing astrology, but on the main I am at home looking after our first child while the mother was at work. Venus, ruler of the 1 st house is in the 4th house in the sign of Gemini. Our first child is a daughter born in the sign of Gemini. Regarding the Pleiades I believe this represents the Lamp of Aladdin that has a Genie with hidden treasures bottled up inside. I feel this deals with astrology that is a forgotten treasure that is having difficulty in getting out and being shared and appreciated in the everyday world. I am also represented by Jupiter in the 1st house who is in detriment, yet holds his own face in the beginning of Gemini. Much of my time in North Norway was spent writing astrological manuscript that never was published, yet in

parts. Note that Jupiter is Lord of the Midheaven that is hidden beneath the Earth. By moving to the north, I had chosen to postpone my own commercial interests and give priority to the professional opportunities of my spouse and my interest in our family. Our unborn child is represented by the cusp of the 5 th house at 22GE50 and its lord, Mercury at 21CN38. Mercury is in the sign of Cancer, as the mother is carrying the child within her. Later, on September 6, a health boy born in the sign of Virgo, ruled by Mercury. He did suffer from trouble with the eyes at birth (a bacteria and infection), later from close-sightedness and especially the left as indicated by the sign of Cancer. Pleiades on the ascendant does also have a reputation of disturbances to the sight. Lastly, there is the Moon, who is the dispositor of Mercury and cosignificator in the question. She is at 4SG38 and square the degree of the next Lunar eclipse at 4PI23. This is also an indication of obstacle and impediment. The Moon has several meanings in this chart. She is in an exact trine to Mars who is both in his own sign and own face at 4AR38. The ascendant needed 6 degrees to reach the opposition of the Moon and the sextile of Mars and the baby boy was born exactly 6 weeks later on September 6. 1988. The child was healthy and sound, but of my children – this was the most challenging of births. The mother was pushed to her limits and had to work hard. As for myself I almost fainted. The perfection of any aspect between the Moon and Mars, who are natural enemies, this will not occur without some trouble and labor but I hope the degree of the lunar eclipse had something to do with it, or else we are in trouble. I gave the cusp of the 7th house at 28SC34 to signify the clergyman of the church, since his function in the respect of this question, is nothing different than that of a physician or doctor. He is represented by the lord of the 7th, Mars in Aries, and the Moon in Sagittarius in the 7th house. Scorpio on the 7th shows him predisposed and suspicious, although with Mars in Aries – I am sure he also would have been considered a good Shepard. The Moon in Sagittarius indicates him to be an agent for the church, and although the Moon and Mars were in an amicable trine, the Moon was wearied by square the degree of her eclipse in Pisces. The priest was in the situation of a conflict in faith. The Moon is located at 4SG38 and needs no more than 1°30 to move into the dark degrees, but consider also that she has 5° of latitude south of the ecliptic. Her declination is 26S03 and her placement already 2°30 beneath the horizon. From this condition I judged the priest’s

reluctance and his wish to wane from the opportunity of introducing an astrologer to his church. The cusp of the 9th house, of the church, is also in the in subterrestrial degrees at 17SG19, as it is true that various authorities of the church have abandoned the teaching of astrology from the face of Earth. However, Jupiter, Lord of the 9th, 10thand dispositor of the Moon, is in my first house and in it’s own face. This is a condition that Lilly says with keep a person in dignity and out of trouble, so that he neither looses his pose nor gets thrown out of his place of residing. The priest consulted his colleagues and finally it was decided in advantage of the baptism, as we had wished. The Christening of Jonathan, our newborn Son, occurred on October 9. 1988, 11 weeks after the moment of the question. Mercury, lord of the 5 th and significator of the new baby, was directed 11° forward to the body of the Sun in Leo at the time of the event. Mars, lord of the 7 th, who was in a perfect trine to the Moon at the time of the question, had on October 9. by transit retrograded to 2AR07 and moved into perfect trine to the Sun in the horary and closed the gap of a grand trine involving the luminaries.

Horary example 2 Are we moving towards a New Ice Age? Now by casting this chart I am not trying to claim I have all the answers to question that concern the ultimate and destiny of Mankind and the Universe. It is simply me trying to pick up on the on the drift of things from the point of my personal interest and perspective as an astrologer. The chart is included because it demonstrates the technical variations of Arctic latitudes. For that it serves its purpose and the question can be regarded as a curiosity. It’s interesting to pull old charts out of the filing cabinet because it says something about how much our perspective of the world has changed over so relatively few years.

Fig C – Drawn by a computer - doesn't look right.

Fig. D – The chart places the MC in south and shows the ascendant diverting towards the south, as it does in reality.

As in the previous example I have chosen a chart that shows the Midheaven in sub-terrestrial degrees, but in his one the ascendant is leaning towards the extreme south. I am the querent, represented by the Aquarian ascendant and its lord, Saturn, who is retrograde and within one degree of Uranus in Sagittarius in the 8 th house. This makes sense as much of my efforts at the time were put into researching classical texts of astrology. Retrograde Neptune has recently culminated in the south in sub-terrestrial degrees. The question does very much address the fragile balance in nature and, noting that Neptune is kept out of sight, it shows how we tended to bury these issues and ignore our responsibility as a part of the Whole. The question of whether we are approaching an Ice Age is a climatic question, as if asking for a long-term weather forecast. These questions are judged according to the 4 th house. In the north of this chart is the sign Cancer, which describes our eco-system as it is vital to organic life. Mercury is on the cusp of the 6 th house according to Regiomontanus house cusps, but he is only 5 degree

off the IC and is due north in the matter of 20 minutes. He his significations as a weather barometer are interesting since he is located in circumpolar degrees and does not set below the horizon. Venus is also in circumpolar degrees of the zodiac, but since her latitude takes her 4° south of the ecliptic she is actually below the horizon. There is surely a lot of interesting astrology and astronomy in Arctic regions. Mercury is in the exaltation degree of Jupiter and thermally, the planet Earth is a pretty good place to live. Mercury is disposed by exaltation by Jupiter, which brings us to another interesting feature of the chart – that Jupiter is in the very last minute of Taurus; something is on the change. With Jupiter moving into Gemini there is a mixed reception between Jupiter and Mercury. Could this have something to do with an alteration of weather patterns. The Moon is lady of the 4th house and significator of the question. She is located at 27LI12 and is in the latter degrees of an air sign. This is convenient for a description of atmospheric changes. She moves from her sinister sextile to retrograde Saturn through signs of long ascension, to the sextile of retrograde Uranus. She is besieged by Saturn and Uranus, restless and out of balance as regards to what lies ahead of her. Uranus is in a fire sign and next follows her dexter square to the angular Sun through signs of long ascension. Neither of these applications indicate cold, on the contrary, the Moon’s application to the Sun setting in the north is an indication of warming. That is where we are today, two decades later, fighting global heating. The Moon needed two degrees to reach the Sun, and probably that can be converted into decades. The dexter square being cast through signs of long ascension could represent an opportunity to get hold of the situation and regulate it. There Sun is peregrine and unreliable, yet he receives the Moon in both her domicile and face. If the Moon is directed ahead yet another degree she enters Scorpio at about 2016. If the problem concerning global heating isn’t addressed and solved with pace then the consequences may get unpleasant as the Moon is directed to the degree of her fall at 3° Scorpio.

Return

Astrology in polar regions and on the southern hemisphere by Dieter Koch Traditional methods for calculating horoscopes and drawing charts unfortunately do not suit all geographic regions equally well. Especially birth places near and beyond the polar circles are problematic, that is on latitudes near 66°34 north or south and beyond. Birth places on the southern hemisphere, too, are prone to confuse astrologers, as soon as there are questions regarding the concrete view of the sky. The following topics will be examined briefly: 1. What are the polar circles? 2. Odd behaviour of the MC/IC in polar regions 3. Odd behaviour of the ascendant/descendant in polar regions 4. Births near the polar circle and births at geographic latitudes higher than 60° 5. Problems with astrological houses in polar regions 6. Horoscopes of the southern hemisphere 7. Links

1. What are the polar circles? For observers who do not live in equatorial regions, the sun rises much higher in summer and makes a greater arc than in winter. For observers of equatorial regions, the sun is seen at times in the north and at times in the south. The further one goes north, the less high rises the sun at noon, and the shorter becomes the diurnal arc. Especially around the winter solstice (21 December), the sun is seen only near the horizon and only for a short time. If one stands on the arctic circle around that date, the sun appears only around noon on the southern horizon and shortly thereafter disappears again. Around the summer solstice (21 June) it is the other way round. The further north one goes, the longer becomes the diurnal arc, and the nocturnal arc becomes shorter. On the arctic circle, the sun does not set even at midnight, but can be seen on the northern horizon as the so-called "midnight sun". The arctic circle (northern polar circle) is defined as the geographic latitude on which the sun does not rise at the winter solstice any more, and does not set on the summer solstice. This is the case at the latitude 66°34N. The southern hemisphere also has a polar circle, the antarctic circle, and one can observe the same phenomena there.

Strictly speaking, this theoretical definition of the polar circles is only approximately correct. Because of the strong refraction of the sun light near the horizon (atmospherical refraction), the midday sun is visible at the winter solstice even a little north of the polar circle. And the midnight sun can be observed at the summer solstice even a little south of the polar circle. A special situation exists exactly on the north or south pole. During the whole day, neither a rising nor a setting of the sun can be observed. The sun remains at nearly the same height for 24 hours. Around the summer solstice (21 June), it has an almost constant altitude of 23°26' above the horizon. Near the equinoxes (21 March and 23 September), again, it crawls along the horizon for 24 hours.

2. Odd behaviour of the MC/IC in polar regions North of the arctic circle, the sun does not rise on the winter solstice (at 0° Capricorn), but stays underthe horizon even at noon. From this it follows that an MC at 0° Capricorn, i. e. at the point of the winter solstice, is not above, but below the horizon. At he same time, accordingly, the IC must be above the northern horizon. As a matter of fact, for some time every day, the MC is below the horizon in polar regions, while the IC is above the horizon at the same time. That concept of Astrology, where MC = above = concious IC = below = unconcious/subconscious does not seem to work here all the time. In such cases, the whole lower half of the horoscope, i. e. the half from the ascendant to the descendant, is in fact above the horizon, whereas the whole upper half of the horoscope, from the descendant to the ascendant, is below the horizon. In chart drawings of Astrodienst, the two celestial hemispheres are labeled with "above the horizon" and "below the horizon" in such cases.

Figure: Astrodienst chart drawings indicate if the MC and the upper half of the horoscope are below the horizon. The question arises whether MC and IC should be switched here, making the MC the IC and vice versa. The dilemma is not easy to solve. Although an MC at 0° Capricorn is below the horizon, this point of the zodiac has reached its highest culmination in that moment. It just did not make it above the horizon. Likewise, the position 0° Cancer, although it is above the horizon at the same time, has reached its lowerculmination in that moment. Its highest culmination is reached 12 hours later, when it stands significantly higher in the sky in southern direction. Astrodienst decides depending on the selected house system whether or not MC and IC should be switched. The house systems of Campanus, Regiomontanus and Polich-Page, by their philosophy, seem to recommend it. Others do not (e. g. the Meridian or Azimuth system). With some house systems, the situation is ambiguous (Koch houses, Placidus, equal systems).

3. Odd behaviour of the ascendant/descendant in polar regions For hours during which the MC is below the horizon, traditional formulas yield an ascendant which is not on the eastern, but on the western half of the horizon. However, this result is not really correct. All celestial points that are on the western half of the horizon are, as a matter of fact, setting, whereas all points on the eastern half of the horizon are rising. As the ascendant is by definition the "rising" degree of the zodiac (from Latin ascendens) , it can not be on the western, but must be on the eastern half of the horizon. For this reason, we have to add 180° to the ascendant in that case.

Thus the ascendant jumps by 180° twice a day. Some Astrology software does not handle this case correctly, therefore sometimes yielding an ascendant which is 180° off. While the MC is below the horizon, the ascendant is also retrograde. The reason is that, in this case, the zodiac intersects the horizon not in southern, but in northern direction. This can be understood with the help of the following figure.

Figure: If the zodiac intersects the horizon in the „wrong“ direction, a retrograde ascendant results. The ascendant moves back from point Asc(t0) to Asc(t1). In addition, it turns out that the ascendant always changes its direction when it does the 180° jump. Furthermore, it turns out that precisely at this point, it forms an exact conjunction with the MC or IC. So the ascendant moves forward and backward, and it jumps. In fact, it does not reach all degrees of the zodiac. Consider this: On the summer solstice (21 June) the sun never sets. This means that the position 0° Cancer never reaches the horizon. And this holds true for the whole year. Thus north of the arctic circle there is never an ascendant near 0° Cancer. Equally there is never an ascendant near 0° Capricorn, because this region of the zodiac always stays below the horizon in polar regions. This can be understood from the fact that the sun never rises when it is near this point around the winter solstice. The movement of the polar ascendant can be illustrated with a concrete example (see figure below). As a point of observation we choose Longyearbyen, the capital of Svalbard, which is at 78° N. On 1 January 2000 at 3:21pm the ascendant is in conjunction with the IC at 29° Leo. In the following hours the ascendant moves in direct motion, until it reaches the MC (south) at 1° Scorpio at 7:07am the next day. Then it jumps by 180° to 1° Taurus (to the north) and becomes retrograde. At 3:16pm it reaches the MC again at 29° Aquarius. After that it jumps to the opposition again and returns to direct motion. The example shows, that for the latitude 78n there can be only ascendants in the range between 29° Leo and 1° Scorpio as well as between 29° Aquarius and 1° Taurus. The ascendants that are possible at this geographical latitude thus are in regions of ca. +- 31° around the equinoctial points (0° Aries and 0° Libra). In the range around the autumnal equinox (0° Libra) the ascendant goes in direct motion, in the range around the vernal equinox (0° Aries), however, it is retrograde.

Figure: Motion of the ascendant during 24 hours at the geographic latitude 78N (Longyearbyen) Generally speaking, ascendants tend to stay near the equinoctial points in polar regions, however a lot more often near the autumnal point (0° Libra) than near the vernal point (0° Aries). Incidentally, ascendants near the autumnal point are generally more frequent than ascendants near the vernal point. This can be understood from the fact that vernal zodiac signs rise rise gently, resulting in a fast rising of large parts of the the zodiac. On the other hand, the autumnal zodiac signs rise steeply, and as a consequence only a short part of the zodiac can rise in the same time. The situation is opposite on the southern hemisphere. There, the signs around 0° Aries rise more slowly, and the signs around 0° Libra faster. The range of possible ascendants (and descendants) becomes smaller the more north one goes. Near the north pole, the ascendant jumps to and fro between 0° Aries and 0° Libra, otherwise not moving at all. First it stays at 0° Aries for 12 hours, however wandering along the horizon from north to south; then it jumps to 0° Libra and stays there for another 12 hours, again wandering from north to south. However, since the cardinal directions are not defined exactly at the north pole and since south is in all directions, as it were, there is no meridian either and no MC. And since the ascendant and the descendant are neither rising nor setting points, they actually cannot be distinguished. Of course,

strictly speaking, this is true only for the mathematical north pole. And for even a minute deviation, south is already clearly defined. However, when one is actually standing on the north pole, then one probably imagines that one is there exactly.

4. Births near the polar circle and births at geographic latitudes higher than 60° Another interesting special case is given when one is born or lives exactly on the polar circle, i. e. at 66°34N, e. g. in Rovaniemi in Finland. There it happens once a day that the zodiac lies exactly on the horizon for a moment. In this moment, the ascendant is of course undefined; or one could say that the ascendant is "spread" over the whole eastern horizon. Another odd effect is the following: A bit north of the arctic circle, the MC is below the horizon only for a very short time, and during this very short time, the ascendant must move, with enormous speed, by 180° in backward direction. Also, a bit south of the polar circle, the ascendant moves very fast through the vernal zodiac signs, however in direct motion. In order to know one's ascendant in such a case with certainty, the birth time must be known with high precision. Generally speaking, for births at geographic latitudes between 60° and 70° and with ascendants in signs around the vernal point, it is very important to know the birth time with high accuracy. The nearer one is to the polar circle, the more important it is.

5. Problems with astrological houses in polar regions There are different methods to calculate the astrological houses. As is generally known, some of these methodes do not work for geographic latitudes beyond the bolar circle, or tehy work only partially. Even at latitudes north of 60°, some quadrants seem to become extremely small or large for some hours, and astrologers who work with unequal house methods do not feel comfortable with such horoscopes. Is it thinkable that astrological quadrants can be so different in size, and what does it mean, astrologically? Beyond the polar circles, the methods according to Placidus and W. Koch pose difficult problems. And incidentally, contrary to some astrologer's assertions, the Polich-Page (or "topocentric") method does have some problems, too. Detailed explanations are given in the Astro-Wiki: - Problems of the Placidus house system (in German, to be translated) - Problems of the Koch house system (in German, to be translated) - Problems of the Polich/Page house system (in German, to be translated) All other methods do not cause major problems, at least as far as the mathematical calculation is concerned.

One phenomenon still has to be considered more closely. As has been said, the special cases described above, where the MC is below the horizon and the IC above the horizon, raise the question whether the MC and IC should be switched, making the IC the MC. In the chart drawings of Astrodienst this is done if one of the house methods Campanus, Regiomontanus, or Polich/Page is chosen, because the philosophy underlying these house methods seems to require it. With other house methods, howerver, there is no theoretical reason to switch the MC and the IC. Furthermore, it must be noted that if the MC and the IC are switched, the order of the houses will be reversed. In the following chart, where the houses are calculated according to Regiomontanus, the houses are numbered in clockwise order, thus seemingly in the wrong direction. On the other hand, if a different house method is chosen, like Porphyrius or Meridian houses, then the MC remains in the south, and the houses are numbered as usual in counter-clockwise direction.

Figure: Polar horoscope with Regiomontanus houses in "reversed" direction (clockwise)

Figure: The same polar horoscope with Porphyry houses in seemingly "correct" order (counterclockwise).

6. Horoscopes of the southern hemisphere If one lives in the northern hemisphere and observes the planets, one will usually face towards south, because the Sun and the MC (the culminating degree of the zodiac) are always found in southern direction. Also, the planets are mostly found in the southern half of the sky. The observer may turn to east or west at times, but never to the north. On the other hand, if one lives in the southern hemisphere and observes the planet, the situation is reverse. The sun always culminates in northern direction, the MC is in the north, and the planets are mostly seen in the northern half of the sky. The observer will therefore usually face towards north and practically never towards south. For inhabitants of the southern hemisphere, the sun also rises in the east, but it will move over the sky from the right to the left. Also, it is obvious that the ascendant is usually found on the right hand side of the observer, not on the left hand side as is the case in the northern hemisphere. Furthermore, the zodiac runs in reverse direction, namely in clockwise direction and the zodiacal constellations are seen mirror-inverted. In contrast with these facts, even Australian, South African, and South American astrologers draw their birth charts in such a way that the ascendant is seen on the left side of the circle, the zodiac signs run in counter-clockwise direction, and no difference can be seen between a northern and a

southern birth chart. Thus, southern horoscopes are usually mirror-inverted and therefore not in agreement with visual perception. The ascendant would have to be drawn on the right side, and the zodiac signs would have to be shown in clockwise direction. The problem can be avoided however, if the observer lies on the ground having the head to the north and the feet to the south. Then the perspective would be roughly the same for inhabitants of both hemispheres. Current natal charts would then even be "correct" for the southern hemisphere. For births in tropical regions, i. e. between the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn or between the geographic latitudes 23°26S and 23°26N, the situation is a bit ambiguous or depends on the hour. The midday sun is found in northern direction for part of the year, and in southern direction for the other part. And the MC is in northern direction for some hours and in southern direction for the rest of the day. Since the seasons of the year are opposed to each other in the two hemispheres, some astrologers raised the question whether the zodiac signs should not be reversed, too, in birth charts of the southern hemisphere. E. g. some believe that a person born in March or April, thus in southern autumn, should not rather be considered a Libra than an Aries. As a matter of fact, however, Australian, South African and South American astrologers reject this idea. They are of the opinion that the same zodiac signs must be used for all geographic regions.

7. Links Interesting article on the same topic: Charts in arctic regions of the earth by Ivan Wilhelm

Charts in arctic regions of the earth Calculating charts for latitudes north of the northern arctic circle (66°23.5' northern latitude) and south of the southern arctic circle (66°23.5' southern latitude) makes it necessary to consider some odd behaviour of the horizon relative to the plane of ecliptic. I hope my contribution will help bringing a little more clarity to this issue and point to which user-options software developers has to put in the astrology software.

These regions of the earth are called the polar regions. The plane of ecliptic also might be named the plane of the tropical zodiac. 

In the polar regions some period of the year the sun never rise above the horizon, i.e. it is night all 24 hours of the day. At another period it's eternal day because the sun never is below the horizon, i.e. the sun is visible all 24 hours of the day (the phenomenon of the midnight sun).



During these periods the sun's degree of the zodiac never cross the horizon, and thus never will be the ascendant nor the descendant.



At certain times of the day the ascendant will be retrograde.



Twice each day the meridian will intersect the ecliptic at exactly the same points as the horizon, i.e. the Ascendant/Descendant axis and the MC/IC axises will coincide.



During the period of eternal day the sun will be seen on the meridian circle above the horizon twice each day. The first time it's culminating in the south at noon. The second time it is reaching its lowest point in the sky to the north at midnight.

The ascendant Most astrologers having pondered the problem of charts erected for polar regions agrees on what to do with the ascendant When the ascendant move forward through the zodiac and coincide with the MC/IC axis it becomes stationary and then reverse its direction of movement from direct to retrograde motion, i.e. the point of zodiac having ascendend will hover on the horizon and then slowly slip down below the horizon. On the opposite side of the zodiac the point having descended will begin to rise above the horizon. In the chart this is reflected this way: the ascendant has to "jump" to its opposite point in the zodiac.

When the ascendant is retrograde and coincide with the MC/IC axis it becomes stationary and reverse from retrograde to direct motion. In the chart the ascendant will "jump" to its opposite point in the zodiac. In reality no such jumps occur. To the eye the eclitiptic is making a seesaw motion in the heaven. It will rise with its zodiac signs in their usual order (first 2° Sagattarius rise, then 3° Sagittarius, etc). Then it will rise slower and slower until its doesn't move at all. After that it will move in the opposite direction (first 3° Sagittarius will fall below the horizon, then 2° Sagittarius, etc). Later it will again reverse its direction of movement. Twice each day this reversal of movement occur.

The MC There are two mutually exclusive opinions on what to do with the MC depending on how you define it: 1. MC is the intersection of the meridian circle with the ecliptic above the horizon. The advantage of this is that MC will always be above the horizon. During the period of the ascendant's retrogradation you will have to accept these two facts: - MC will be in the north on the other side of the north pole. - MC will be the point of the zodiac having reached its lowest point in the sky. In the chart the consequence of this is that the MC has to "jump" to the opposite point of the zodiac at the same time as the ascendant reverse its direction of movement (jumps to its opposite position in the chart). 2. MC is the point of the ecliptic culminating. This point always is the intersection between the meridian and ecliptic in the south. The advantage of this is that MC is the point of the ecliptic having reached its highest point in the sky, and it is always in the south. During the period of the ascendant's retrogradation you will have to accept one fact: - MC will be below the horizon, and IC above the horizon. In the chart MC will not "jump" to the opposite point of the zodiac when the ascendant turns retrograde. Which definition is to prefer? The ancient astrologers i Greece and the Middle East never had practical reasons to confront this problem because at their geographical latitudes a point on the ecliptic always culminate in the south and above the horizon. They were however aware of the special situation of certain parts of the zodiac always being above the horizon (this is clear from Almagest by Ptolemy). I assume they never met someone born i polar regions so they never had any practical reason to decide whether the MC derived its

symbolic meaning from the act of culmination or from intersecting the meridian above the horizon. When it comes to charts for polar regions we will have to make this decision because it is impossible to define the MC as both the culminating point and as a point above the horizon. Culminating is one thing, and being above the horizon is something else. Presently there are no hard evidence favouring either definition. So, until someone present such eveidenceas it's a matter of which definition the individual astrologer find most attractive. 

We can decide that MC receive its symbolic meaning from the fact that it is the point of ecliptic intersecting the ecliptic above the horizon. In that case we choose definition 1 and accept that MC at certain times will be the point reaching its lowest point, and that this point is in the north. We also have to accept that the point of the zodiac reaching its lowest point in the heavens is associated with the usual meanings of MC: aspirations, the goal we are striving towards, the career, ones position in the world, etc. Personally I find this a little hard to stomach, while I am at the same time attracted by a MC being above the horizon.



On the other hand we can decide it is the act of culmination that is giving MC its symbolic meaning. In that case we choose definition 2 and accept that MC at certain times will be below the horizon, while IC at the same time is above the horizon. We have to accept that a point below the horizon is associated with the usual meanings of MC. Unfortunately that cause a very annoying inconsistency in the symbolism, so it is not easy for me to accept that MC is below the horizon, while I at the same time find it appealing with a MC as the point of cumination.

The ancient doctrines of houses are intimately coupled with the symbolism of east (rising, life, strength), west (descending, death, weakness), above horizon (public life), and below horizon (private life, hidden life). Deborah Houlding in her comprehensive and elucidating book Houses - Temples of Heaven argues that the ancient Egyptian world view has influenced the meanings of the houses, because they begun to show up in horoscopes during the period when Alexandria was a vital centre of astrology. We still use some of this ancient symbolism, e.g. IC is the point of endings and beginnings because at that point below the horizon the sun-god died and was reborn. Will this symbolism still be appropriate when we are using definition 2 and are faced with an IC above the horizon? Or is this symbolism adhered to in a better way when we use definition 1 giving an IC always below the horizon? I am inclined to favour definition 1 because it sticks with the symbolism of above and below the horizon. Collecting horosocopes and character descriptions of people having retrograde ascendants might be a way to settle this issue.

As this is not an issue having a self-evident answer I suggest the software developers ought to supply both alternatives for the user to choose between. Now, let's look at some charts to see what happens. I have split them up on several pages to decrease your download time in case you have a slow internet connection (most pages are 70 Kb, some a little more than 100 Kb).

Three spheres are used to define the ascendant and MC: 

The earth and its axis and equator (shades of grey in the picture). It is the rotation of the earth around its axis that makes the MC and ascendant move through the zodiac. The rotation is counter-clockwise, i.e. from west to east.



The plane of the ecliptic and its axis. It is titled approximately 23°26.5' from the earth's axis. It is this plane that is divided into the twelve zodiac signs.



The heavens as seen by the observer on a specific point on the earth (shades of red in the picture). The inclination of the plane of the horizon depends on the geographical latitude of the observer. This picture is drawn for 70° northern latitud. As the earth rotate, the plane of the horizon will rotate and intersect the plane of the ecliptic at different points. These points are the ascendant and descendant.

The picture show the position of the plane of the horizon at the sidereal time 6:00:00. This plane intersects the eclitic at 0° Aries and 0° Libra. The rotation of earth will cause 0° Libra to rise above the horizon. Thus 0° Libra is the ascendant and 0° Aries the descendant. At this time the ascendant is exactly to the east. It will again be exactly to the east when it's 0° Aries. At other times it will be somewhere between south to north on the eastern side of the meridian circle. The culminating degree is one of the two intersections of the meridian circle with the ecliptic. At this sidereal time 0° Cancer and 0° Capricorn are intersected by the meridian circle. The MC is 0° Cancer because it is above the horizon. On sub-polar latitudes it will always be exactly to the south (on the northern hemisphere). The chart below is erected for a place at 70°00' northern latitude when the sidereal time is 6:00:00. Depending on the software you use the chart might have to be calculated for a time differing some seconds from 12:56:45 CET (11:56:45 UT).

The ascendant and the MC behave as usual: they are moving counter-clockwise through the zodiac. The house system of Alcabitius is used because it works in polar regions, while many other systems collapse at geographical latitudes north of the northern arctic circle and south of the southern arctic circle.

Since the previous chart the earth as rotated 30° thereby increasing the sidereal time by two hours.

MC has moved 27°55' while the ascendant only moved 14°50', i.e. the MC is moving twice as fast as the ascendant. The ascendant no longer is exactly to the east; it has shifted a little towards the south.

Two hours of sidereal time has passed since the previous chart. The ascendant now is closer to the south-east than to the east.

Another two hours later.

The ascendant is in the south-east and has begun to move very slowly. The last two hours of sidereal time it has moved only 13°17', while MC moved 32°11'.

One hour later MC only has 10° to go until it catches up on the ascendant. The ascendant is almost in the south and moves very slowly.

These two charts shows how MC is coming closer to the ascendant, while the ascendant is moving very slowly and soon will not move at all.

Houses 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, and 12 are becoming extremely small. This is even more visible 20 minutes later, and soon they will have zero extension.

The last 20 minutes the ascendant has moved only 0°30', while the MC moved almost ten times faster. The ascendant is almost exactly in the south.

This chart show the positions a couple of minutes after the reversal of movement.

12 minutes earlier 29°10' Taurus was below the horizon. Now it is rising above the horizon. The next degree to rise will be 28° Taurus. MC is moving counter-clockwise as usual, while the ascendant is moving clockwise and still is to the east of the meridian circle. Note that the order of the houses is reversed compared to the usual order, e.g. house 2 begins with its cusp at 27°52' Pisces and covers the zodiac to 26°59' Capricorn at which point house 3 has its cusp.

Another problem surface: The numbering of houses depends on whether they are defined by the horizon or the meridian. I will dicuss that on the next page, because there all houses are big enough so it will is easier to see what is the problem. Two hours later the ascendant again is exactly in the east. It is moving 1°24' per minute - a little faster than the average speed.

Mutually exlusive definitions on house meanings When the ascendant is retrograde we run into problems regarding the symbolic meanings of the houses. On sub-polar latitudes the houses meanings are derived from the symbolism of the horizon as well as from the meridian. At those latitudes no problems arise. At polar latitudes we are however forced to be quite specific about how we define MC, ascendant and the houses: 

Where we put them in the chart.



How we derive their symbolic meanings.

Some basic definitions For a start let's look at a chart set for a sub-polar latitude. In this chart everything about MC, the ascendant and houses is as we are used to.

1. Definition of the ascendant. 

Where in the chart: The point of ecliptic rising above the horizon. As a consequence it always is somewere to the east of the meridian.



Derived meaning: The ascendant gets its meaning from the symbolism of being the point where something from the invisible, private world climbs up into the visible, public world.

These definitions are firmly rooted in practice, tradition, geometry, and symbolism. As I see it, there are no alternatives. This fits with the above chart. 1

Definitions for MC. MC has two definitions, often used interchangeably. On sub-polar latitudes that will

cause no problems, because they will generate identical MC-positions. However, on polar latitudes they will at certain times give positions opposite to each other. A. Where in the chart: MC is the point of the ecliptic intersecting the meridian circle above the horizon. Derived meaning: The meaning of MC comes from the symbolism of being at an important intersection point above the horizon. Above = in the visible world, in the public life. Important intersection point = having an important position. B. Where in the chart: MC is the point of the ecliptic culminating. Derived meaning: The event of culmination leads to the symbolic meaning of being in the highest position in the public world. Those definitions fits with the above chart.

1

Definition of the house cusps. Because there are house systems not having the ascendant as the cusp of house 1, or MC as cusp of house 10, it is necessary to define what is the cusp of houses 1 and 7, and 10 and 4. These are the common definitions:



The cusp of house 1 is where the ascendant is. The cusp of house 7 is where the descendant is.



The cusp of house 10 is where MC is. The cusp of house 4 is where IC is.



The definitions of the remaining cusps depends on the house system used.

These definitions fits with the above chart.

1

Definition of the zodiacal areas the houses encompass.

A. The definition of houses is based on the symbolism of being above/below the horizon. Where in the chart: Houses 1 - 6 are below the horizon. House 1 is the part of the zodiac just about to rise above the horizon. Houses 7 - 12 are above the horizon. House 7 is the part of the zodiac just about to slip down below the horizon. Derived meaning: Houses 1 - 6 traditionally have a symbolism associated with being below the horizon. They all relate to private, individual matters, e.g. house 4 represents the home as the basis and centre of the private life. Houses 7 - 12 has a symbolism related to being above the horizon. They all have something to do with the

public life, e.g. house 10 repesents the career and the position in society as the focus of ones public life. This definition fits with the above chart. Lots of books teach the meanings of the houses by the symbolism of above and below the horizon. B. The definition of houses is based on their relationship with the meridian. 1. East / west symbolism. Where in the chart: Houses 1, 2, 3, 10, 11, 12 are to the east of the meridian. Houses 4 - 9 are to the west of the meridian and have meanings related to the symbolism of the the western hemisphere: the "You"-half of the chart. Derived meaning: Houses 1, 2, 3, 10, 11, and 12 all have meanings related to the eastern hemisphere: the "Me"-half of the chart. Houses 4 - 9 have meanings related to the symbolism of the the western hemisphere: the "You"-half of the chart. Example: house 2 represent mine money, while house 8 represent other people's money. This fits the chart above. 1

The symbolism of the direction of movement relative to the meridian. Where in the chart: House 10 is the part of the zodiac just about to cross MC (according to how MC is defined), while house 9 is the part of zodiac that just has crossed MC. The parts of the zodiac contained by houses 10, 11, 12, 1, 2, and 3 will cross MC in that order. The parts of the zodiac contained by houses 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 will cross IC in that order.

Derived meaning: House 10 represents career and the position in society because a planet in it is about to reach MC. House 4 is associated with the most peronal matter and profound issues in life because a planet in it is about to reach IC. This fits the chart above.

Some problems concerning the basic definitions at polar latitudes At polar latidues problems of one kind or another will arise no matter how the ascendant, MC, and the houses are defined. Let's look at our polar chart from the point of view of the two possible definitions of MC. 1. MC is the point of ecliptic intersecting the meridian circle above the horizon. This is definition 2A above.

Also use definition 3: The cusp of house 10 is where MC is, and the cusp of house 1 is where the ascendant is. The different definitions on what area of the zodiac the houses cover gives different charts. A. The definition of houses is based on the symbolism of being above/below the horizon. This is definition 4A above. Houses 1 - 6 are below and houses 7 - 12 above the horizon. The chart looks like this:

House 1 is the part of the zodiac just about to rise above the horizon. House 12 is the part of the zodiac just risen above the horizon. The same applies to houses 7 and 6 respectively, etc. What is odd in this chart is that MC is in the north, and house 10 is the part of the zodiac that already has crossed MC. Traditionally it is the part of the zodiac just about to cross MC. On the other hand the symbolism of above/below is maintained.

B. The definition of the houses is based on their relationship with the meridian. This is definition 4B above. 1. East / west symbolism. House 1 - 3 and 10 -12 are in the eastern hemisphere, and the other houses are in the western hemisphere. The chart will look the same as Chart 1A. 1

The symbolism of the direction of movement relative to the meridian. Houses 10, 11, 12, 1, 2, and 3 are about to cross MC in that order, and houses 4, 5, 6 , 7, 8, and 9 are about to cross IC in that order.

The chart will look like this:

What's really disturbing in this chart is that the part of the zodiac about to rise above the horizon is house 6, and that the part of the zodiac just risen above the horizon is house 7. Traditionally these parts of the zodiac are houses 1 and 12 respectively. This violates the profound definition of the ascendant and house 1 (definitions 1, 3, and 4A above). Because of this I guess it is hard for most astrologers to accept anything that generates Chart 1B.

In this case the traditional house definitions based on the meridian and the horizon becomes mutually exlusive in polar charts. So, when MC is defined as the intersection of the meridian circle with the ecliptic above the horizon, the house problems will be reduced by using these definitions: 

Houses 1 - 6 are below the horizon, and houses 7 - 12 above the horizon.



House 1 - 3 and 10 -12 are on the eastern hemisphere, and the other houses are on the western hemisphere.

However, we will have to accept that the part of zodiac about to cross MC is in house 9, and the house that already has crossed MC is house 10. The same applies to IC for houses 3 och 4 respectively. Also, we have to accept that MC is in the north.

1

MC is the point of the ecliptic culminating.

This is definition 2B above. Also try to use definition 3: The cusp of house 10 is where MC is, and the cusp of house 1 is where the ascendant is. The different definitions on what area of the zodiac the houses cover gives different charts. A. The definition of houses is based on the symbolism of being above/below the horizon. This is definition 4A above. Houses 1 - 6 are below and houses 7 - 12 above the horizon. The chart looks like this:

A very annoying property in this chart is that one side MC is bordering to house 4 and on the other to house 3. This violates the profound definition of house 10 (definitions 3 and 4B above). As MC is not the cusp of house 10 most astrologers probably will not accept this definition. This is another example demonstrating that the traditional house definitions based on the meridian and the horizon simetimes becomes mutually exlusive in polar charts. Thus, if MC is defined as the point of culmination, and the cusp of house 10 is defined as MC, then it is impossible to define the placements and meanings of the houses based on the symbolism of above/below the horizon.

B. The definition of the houses is based on their relationship with the meridian. This is definition 4B above. 1. East / west symbolism. House 1 - 3 and 10 -12 are on the eastern hemisphere, and the other houses are on the western hemisphere.

The chart will look like this:

What is disturbing in this chart is that houses 1 - 6 are above the horizon and houses 7 - 12 below. This is contradictory to their traditional symbolism based on houses 1 - 6 being below the horizon. In this case we will have to accept that the part of the zodiac about to rise above the horizon is in house 12, and that house 1 contains the part of the zodiac already risen above the horizon. Traditionally it is the other way around. We also have to accept that we can't use the above/below symbolism to derive neither the placements nor the meanings of the houses. 1

The symbolism from the direction of movement relative to the meridian. Houses 10, 11, 12, 1, 2, and 3 are about to cross MC in that order, and houses 4, 5, 6 , 7, 8, and 9 are about to cross IC in that order.

The chart will look like Chart 2B, and have the same advantages and problems.

What this boils down to We are left with two acceptable charts: Chart 1A and Chart 2B. Both use definition 1 for the ascendant and definition 3 for the house cusps. 

Chart 1A. Basically charts 1 is based on directions: east and west, and above and below. Thus, defining MC as the intersection between the ecliptic and meridian above the horizon (def 2A) works well together with defining the houses using the above/below symbology (def 4A) as well as the east/west symbolism (def 4B-1). It excludes the possibility to define the houses using the direction om movement relative to the meridian (def 4B-2).

During the period of retrograding ascendant the chart will have these characteristics: o

Houses 1 - 6 are below the horizon, and houses 7 - 12 above the horizon.

o

House 1 - 3 and 10 -12 are on the eastern hemisphere, and the other houses are on the western hemisphere.

o

Houses are reversed relative to the MC/IC-axis: house 10 contains the part of the zodiac that has crossed MC, and house 9 contains the part of zodiac about to cross MC, etc.

o

The culmination point is below the horizon.



Chart 2B. Defining MC as the point of ecliptic culminating (def 2B) works well together with defining the houses using the east/west symbolism (def 4B-1) and the direction of movement relative to the meridian (def 4B-2). It exludes the possibility to define the house using the above/below symbolism (def 4A).

During the period of retrograding ascendant the chart will have these characteristics: o

Houses 1 - 6 are above the horizon, and houses 7 - 12 below the horizon.

o

House 1 - 3 and 10 -12 are on the eastern hemisphere, and the other houses are on the western hemisphere.

o

Houses are reversed relative to the Ascendant/Descendant-axis: house 1 contains the part of the zodiac that has risen above the horizon, and house 12 contains the part of zodiac about to rise above the horison, etc.

o

The culmination point is below the horizon.

So, it's all about choosing the definitions leading to Chart 1A or the ones leading to Chart 2B. We can't have it both ways, or can we?



In Chart 1A the sun is in house 10, and ought to be interpreted by the usual house 10 meanings.



In Chart 2B the sun is in house 3, and ought to be interpreted by the usual house 3 meanings.

Suppose - just for the sake of argument - that both interpretations are valid. That leads us to houses having double meanings, that is house 3 is a mix of the traditional house 3 and 10 meanings, and house 10 is a mix of the traditional house 10 and 3 meanings. Further, house 1 will then be a mixture of house 1 and house 12 meanings, while house 12 will be a mixture of houses 12 and 1, etc. Does this imply that house 1 and 12 have identical meanings when the ascendant is retrograde? Well, I just don't know.

Two hours later the ascendant and IC are only a couple of degrees from each other. They will conjunct a little later.

Just before the reversal of movement direction This chart is erected for a fraction of a second before the MC/IC-axis and the Asc/Desc-axis coincide. Once more the ascendant is exactly in the south where it will become stationary and reverse its direction of movement.

The ascendant and IC are conjunct, thus making houses 1, 2, and 3 dissapear. The same happens with houses 7, 8, and 9.

Just after the reversal of movement direction This chart is erected for a fraction of a second after the MC/IC-axis and the Asc/Desc-axis have coincided. The zodiac's movement is reversed. The signs now ascends counterclockwise as usual. A short time before 0°43' Aquarius was ascending. Now that point is descending. Instead 0°43' Leo is ascending. The intersection between the meridian circle and the ecliptic above the horizon no longer is 0°43' Leo. Instead it is 0°43' Aquarius, which now becomes MC.

Both MC and ascendant are moving forward the zodiac. Eventually MC will catch up on the ascendant in the late degrees of Scorpio.

The chart below is erected for one hour later.

Page 14 This chart i calculated for two hours later.

Another two hours later.

And another two hours later.

In another two hours the sidearal time will be 6:00:00 and the MC, Asc, and houses will have the same positions as in the chart on page 1 (however, the planets will have moved a little because one day has passed).

Summing up

Summary of the behaviour of the ascendant at 70° northern latitude:  Direct motion from 0°43' Leo through Virgo, and Libra to 29°17' Scorpio. 

Jump to 29°17' Taurus.



Retrograde motion from 29°17' Taurus through Aries, and Pisces to 0°43' Aquarius.



Jump to 0°43' Leo.

Note that some areas of the zodiac never can cross the horizon. The more northen the geographical latitude the larger this area will grow. At this geographical latitude the ascendant never move in the areas 29°17' Scorpio - 0°43' Aquarius and 29°17' Taurus 0°43' Leo. Astrological software failing to reflect this behaviour of the ascendant in my opinion is of no use for astrologers wishing to calculate charts for polar latitudes.

Summary of the behaviour of MC at 70° northern latitude:  Direct motion from 0°43' Aquarius though Pisces, Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, and Libra to 29°17' Scorpio. 

Jump to 29°17' Taurus.



Direct motion from 29°17' Taurus to 0°43' Leo.



Jump to 0°43' Aquarius.

The points in the area 29°17' Taurus - 0°43' Leo cross the meridian above the horizon twice each day. It's the position of MC twice each day, when MC is defined as the intersection of the meridian circle with the ecliptic above the horizon.

On the other hand, defining MC as the point of ecliptic reaching its culmination not such jump occur but the MC just goes round and round the zodiac.

A plea to the developers of astrological software For users wishing to calculate chart for polar regions the software need to have the following functionality: 

When the ascendant reverse its direction of movement it must jump to the opposite point in the zodiac. There are no alternatives to this.



The user must have the option to select how he wish the MC to behave: 1. MC jumps to the opposite point of the zodiac when the ascendant reverse its direction of movement. Definition of MC: The intersection of the meridian circle with the ecliptic above the horizon. 2. MC does not jump to the opposite point of the zodiac when the ascendant reverse its direction of movement. Definition of MC: The point of zodiac culminating.

As I see it, the software developer doesn't need to take side in the issues of controversy between astrologers. The developers just has to put the different options in the program, and then the user can choose what he or she prefer. The popular freeware program Astrolog meets this standard regarding polar regions. You'll have to use the modified version of Astrolog found at Valja's astrology page (this page also has some articles discussing the problem of polar charts). To select which definition of MC the program shall use you select the menu Edit, and then Enter command line, and type YH for definition 1 above and -YH for definition 2 above.

Finally I hope my illustrations will bring some more clarity to the issue of charts for polar regions.

The Astronomy of Houses Graham Bates – December 2013 and March 2014 Introduction There is general agreement amongst astrologers about the signs and what they signify, and how to define in which sign a planet is located, except possibly for the dispute between using tropical or sidereal signs. Houses are much more controversial. There are many different ways to define the location of the house cusps, and so to determine in which house a planet is located. The houses of a chart serve two functions. On the one hand, they denote areas of life, and on the other, they determine the strength of a planet (planets in angular houses: 1 st, 4th, 7th and 10th, are stronger than those in succedent or cadent houses). Our understanding of the area of life corresponding to each house has changed over time, so the traditional descriptions found in Lilly [1], or Houlding’s recent book [2] differ in some respects from descriptions based on 20 thcentury ideas [3, 4, 5]. However, this article is not concerned with house meanings, but with how we define which house a planet occupies: how we calculate the house cusps. Planets in signs and houses operate on very different timescales. The sign a planet occupies depends on the date, with planets passing through all the signs in anything from 28 days (the Moon), to over 240 years (Pluto). The house a planet occupies depends on the time of day and location, with each planet passing through all twelve houses each day. As we will see, these very different timescales imply a very different basis for calculating a planet’s sign and for calculating its house position. Over time, many different methods of house division, or house systems, have been suggested, and a significant number of them are currently in use. Astrologers seem to have found it very difficult to decide which house system works best. Writers have pointed out the advantages of one and the deficiencies of another, but no consensus has emerged. This article will not be adding fuel to that debate! My aim is to suggest some reasons for different systems having been proposed in the past, and to make clear just how each system is constructed. If readers can understand how a particular system works in practice, how it relates to what is happening in the sky and the astronomy behind the house cusp calculations, they will be able to make a more reasoned choice of system for themselves. I should point out at the start that some astrologers have suggested that different house systems are appropriate for different purposes: one system for natal work, another for mundane, another for horary, etc. I will not be discussing this further but recommend the idea as worth further investigation. In explaining how the houses are constructed, I will be using some simple diagrams, but if you are not familiar with the celestial sphere and the relationship between the ecliptic, celestial equator and horizon, before continuing with this article you may wish to read another of my articles on this website: Charts are not flat. For those interested in more detail on house construction and some of the history I recommend the excellent book by R. W. Holden [6]. House Systems

No single classification of house systems adequately covers all the many possibilities; however, following Holden’s approach, we can distinguish three broad classes of house system: 

Ecliptic Systems: These divide the ecliptic itself. Some of the earliest house systems, such as Porphyry, are of this type.



Space Systems: These divide the volume of the celestial sphere and then determine how the resulting house cusps relate to the ecliptic. Regiomontanus and Campanus houses are of this type. 

Time Systems: These divide the daily (24 hour) rotation of the Earth, and the resulting house cusps are then related to ecliptic positions. Placidus houses are of this type.

Most house systems, such as Porphyry, Campanus or Placidus, produce houses of unequal size, when measured on the ecliptic. Another way to classify house systems is to distinguish quadrant and non-quadrant house systems. Quadrant systems divide the quarters (‘quadrants’) of the sky between the Ascendant, MC, Descendant and IC, treating these as the cusps of the First, Tenth, Seventh, and Fourth houses, respectively. They differ in where they place the intermediate house cusps. These quadrant systems give Angular, Succedent and Cadent houses. A planet in an Angular house, such as the first, tenth, etc. is considered stronger than one in a Succedent house, such as the second, fifth, etc., and a planet is weakest in its effects when in a Cadent house, such as the third, twelfth, sixth.

Figure 1

Whole Sign Houses Probably the oldest house system is the Whole Sign system (not to be confused with the similar Equal House system, discussed below). This is a non-quadrant ecliptic system. James Holden, who researched early systems of house division, particularly the early Greek systems, points out [7] that the system used in the Hellenistic tradition was whole sign houses, or what he called the “sign-house” system. Robert Hand in his booklet [6] is also of the opinion that Whole Sign houses are probably the earliest system. In this system, the first house is the whole of the sign that is rising; the second house is the next sign to rise, and so on. In figure 1 (which is shown with Placidus houses), the first house is from 0 Pisces to 30 Pisces, the second house the whole of Aries and so on. If we look at Uranus, by Placidus it is in the first house, by Whole Sign, it is in the second; similarly, Jupiter is in the first by Placidus, but in the third by Whole Sign. However, even with the Whole Sign system things are not quite that simple. Vettius Valens was a 2nd-century Hellenistic astrologer, and younger contemporary of Ptolemy. In his booklet, Hand [8] suggests that Valens used Whole Signs for determining the area of life a planet would affect, but used a quadrant system (probably Porphyry) to determine the strength of the planet. In most modern house systems, the same set of houses fulfils both functions: area of life and planetary strength. A problem with Whole Sign houses is that the house cusps cannot easily be used for timing events. As houses correspond to signs, a transiting planet conjunct the cusp of the first house is also sextile the cusp of the third, square the cusp of the fourth, trine the fifth, etc. In addition, when a transiting planet moves from one house to the next it is, at the same time, changing sign. Porphyry Houses The oldest and simplest of the quadrant systems is Porphyry. The four quadrants (the areas between the angles) are each divided into three equal parts to get the cusps of the intermediate houses. So, in figure 1 above, the distance from the ascendant to the IC is 4PI54 to 20GE02, which is 90 degrees (three signs) plus 15 degrees 8 minutes, which gives 105 degrees 8 minutes. This distance is divided by three and added to the ascendant to give the second cusp: 105 degrees 8 Minutes divided by three gives 35 degrees 3 minutes (less a third of a degree, which we will ignore). Thus, the second cusp is at 4PI54 plus 35 degrees 3 minutes, which gives 9AR57. Similarly, by adding another 35 degrees 3 minutes we get 15TA00, the third house cusp. This puts Uranus in the second and Jupiter in the third. Equal House Like Whole Sign Houses, this is a non-quadrant ecliptic system. In both systems, each house is 30 degrees long; however, in Equal House the ascendant is the cusp of the first house. Therefore, in figure 1, the second house starts at 4AR54, the third at 4TA54, and so on. One issue with this system is that, because all the cusps are at the same degree position in each sign, transits to house cusps are in fact aspects to the Ascendant: the third cusp is sextile the ascendant, the fourth cusp square the ascendant, and so on. The MC in Whole Sign and Equal House

Porphyry is a quadrant system, and so the tenth house cusp is the MC, but Whole Sign and Equal houses do not have the MC as the tenth cusp. Depending on the latitude, the MC can fall in the 8th, 9th, 10th, or 11th house. This is often seen as a significant problem with these nonquadrant systems. This takes us back to Valens; do we use the houses as indicators of planetary strength (as well as the area of life affected), or is strength determined by a planet’s placement in relation to the angles? Ecliptic, Equator, or Space Systems? There are only three common ecliptic based house systems: Whole Sign, Equal House and Porphyry. It can be argued that the ecliptic is the wrong thing to use in deciding the house of a planet. The sign a planet occupies determines how the principle represented by the planet will function, while the house it occupies determines in which area of life a planet will manifest its action. To use the signs or any other ecliptic based division to determine the area of manifestation seems inconsistent. It is often argued that the signs divide the Earth’s orbital plane into 12 equal segments and so by analogy, the houses should divide the Earth’s rotational plane (the equator, or time), or the celestial sphere, into 12 equal segments. We will consider this later. House Cusps Before considering non-ecliptic based systems, I need to say something about the idea of a house cusp. The cusps have two functions. Firstly, they determine the sign ruling the house and so the house’s ruling planet. Secondly, they determine the division between houses, but not necessarily the start of a house. What does that mean? In Christian Astrology [1], pages 33 and 151, Lilly refers to a 5-degree orb of influence that precedes the cusp of a house. Suppose the second house cusp is at 15 Taurus, and a planet at 11 Taurus. Lilly, and other early authors would view the planet as being in the second house, not the first. Thus, the start of a house is about 5 degrees before the cusp. The cusps determine the house divisions, but do not mark the start of each house, which is 5 degrees earlier. This traditional view of house cusps derives from considering the cusp as the most powerful point of a house’s influence. There is a further point to consider if we allow this 5-degree orb. If we use transits (or progressions) to house cusps for timing of events, which point should we use? Is it the transit to the cusp, or the entry of the planet into the ‘orb of influence’ that marks the transit? This is something that would benefit from further work. The Celestial Sphere In order to explain the different systems of house division and how they are constructed, I will need to use diagrams of the celestial sphere and show the various great circles, such as the equator, ecliptic, horizon, etc. A diagram with them all shown, along with the construction of the houses, can be very confusing, so first I will show some simple diagrams, and then add extra information as needed.

We start with the earth, showing the equator and the North Pole (Figure 2), this is then projected outwards onto the sky to form the celestial sphere. Note that the North Pole is at 90 degrees to the equator. In what follows, the point that at 90 degrees to any of the great circles will be called the pole of that circle. Just as the pole of the equator is at 90 degrees to all points on the equator, there is a pole of the ecliptic at 90 degrees to all points on the ecliptic, a pole of the horizon, and so on. This is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 2 Clearly, there are two poles, one above and one below the great circle, but it does not make any difference which we use in the construction of the houses. We will often use the pole of a great circle to ‘project’ points, usually onto the ecliptic. We want the position of the house cusps on the ecliptic. If the cusps are generated by dividing the equator into 12 sections (as will happen in the first system we look at below), we need to take lines from one pole to the opposite pole, crossing the great circle of the equator at right angles, and note where these lines cross the ecliptic. Think of the lines of longitude on the earth, going from the north pole, across the equator and on to the south pole. It is easy to get confused by this. Dividing a great circle, such as the celestial equator or the ecliptic and then taking lines from the pole of the circle being divided to cross it at right angles is like dividing the earth’s equator and taking lines from the geographic North (or South) pole to give lines of geographic longitude. However, geographic longitude is measured on the earth’s equator, whereas astronomical/astrological longitude is measured on the ecliptic.

Figure 3 Finally, note that often we will project from the poles of the circle being divided to get the ecliptic positions, but sometimes we will use another pole. More of that when we come to it. Meridian House System Perhaps the simplest of the space systems, the Meridian system (also known as the Axial Rotation system or the Zariel system) is based on the equal division of the celestial equator. The system was introduced in the early 20th century but has never achieved widespread popularity. Figure 4 shows the construction of the Meridian house cusps. The diagram contains two extra great circles. The horizon is simply the local horizon projected onto the celestial sphere. Its only purpose in this diagram is to define the Ascendant, which is where the horizon intersects the ecliptic. The other is the celestial meridian which is the great circle passing through the north and south poles of the celestial equator and through the zenith at the location of the observer (directly overhead). The meridian is perpendicular to the celestial equator and the horizon. The point where the meridian crosses the ecliptic is the Mid Heaven (MC). To create the meridian house cusps, we start where the meridian crosses the celestial equator and divide the equator into twelve 30-degree segments. These points on the celestial equator are then projected onto the ecliptic from the pole of the equator. Note, the first house cusp does not, in general, equal the ascendant, although the tenth cusp is the MC. The Meridian house cusps do not depend on birth latitude and so there is no problem in extreme latitudes.

Figure 4 Meridian houses have never become generally popular; however, the system has been used by the Uranian School. Perhaps the main justification for its use is theoretical. As the signs are derived from the movement of the earth around the sun, it is argued that the houses should be based on the daily rotation of the earth on its axis, and that this is best seen in the movement of a planet in relation to the celestial equator. As the Meridian system is constructed by division of the equator and projected from the pole of the equator, it has some claim to theoretical justification. In terms of our earlier classification, this is a non-quadrant system that can be described as both space- and time-based. Morinus House System The Morinus system, devised by Jean Baptist Morin in the 17th century, is very similar to the Meridian system. As with the Meridian system, we start with the local meridian where it crosses the celestial equator, and then divide the equator into twelve 30-degree sections. However, instead of projecting these celestial equator points onto the ecliptic from the pole of the equator as we did in the meridian system, we project them from the pole of the ecliptic. This is a non-quadrant system as the tenth Morinus cusp is not the MC, and the first Morinus cusp is not the Ascendant. Note that, as with Meridian cusps, the Morinus cusps do not depend on the birth location’s latitude. In addition, as we are projecting positions onto the ecliptic from the pole of the ecliptic, planetary latitude, the distance north or south of the ecliptic, has no effect. The house position of a planet depends only on its ecliptic longitude. Regiomontanus House System

This is the first of the non-ecliptic systems we will consider that has become reasonably popular. It was introduced by Regiomontanus (Johannes Muller) in the 15th century as a modification of the Campanus system (considered next). To understand its construction, we need to introduce another great circle: the prime vertical, which passes through the point on the celestial sphere directly above the observer (the zenith) and the points on the horizon due east and west of the observer (see figure 5). The poles of the prime vertical are the points on the horizon due north and south of the observer and are at 90 degrees to all the points on the prime vertical.

Figure 5 To construct the Regiomontanus house cusps we do not need the prime vertical itself, just its poles. In addition, we will once again use the Meridian and the celestial equator, as shown in figure 6.

Figure 6

As with the previous two house systems, we start with the equal (30 degree) division of the celestial equator (staring at the meridian) as shown in figure 7. We now project these points onto the ecliptic from the pole of the prime vertical.

Figure 7 In the Meridian system we projected from the pole of the equator, in the Morinus system we projected the same points from the pole of the ecliptic, and in the Regiomontanus we project the same points from the pole of the prime vertical. Because the meridian and the horizon are at right angles to each other, and the pole of the prime vertical is on the horizon, projecting from the pole of the prime vertical makes the MC the 10th house cusp and the ascendant the 1st house cusp. This is a great advantage over the previous two systems. Campanus House System The Campanus house system was introduced in the 13th century and, like Regiomontanus, has been popular at various times. It still has a significant following and Dane Rudhyar recommended the use of Campanus houses in his book The Astrology of Personality [9]. John Addey, a founder of the Urania Trust, also favoured the use of Campanus houses. To predict the winner of a horse race, he used the start of race chart and used the next planet the Campanus 5th cusp would aspect as indicating the name of the winning house [10]. This is still a popular method used by sports astrologers. We start from figure 5 above. We again take the meridian as our starting point, and now divide the prime vertical into equal 30-degree sections. These divisions are projected from the pole of the prime vertical onto the ecliptic, as shown in figure 8.

A practical advantage of Campanus houses, like Regiomontanus, is that the MC is the 10 thcusp and the Ascendant the 1st cusp. Because we are equally dividing the prime vertical, and then projecting from its pole, each house contains the same volume of the celestial sphere.

Figure 8 There is a potential issue when constructing Campanus cusps for locations at high latitudes. As we move away from the geographic equator, the angle between the prime vertical and the ecliptic becomes larger. Within the Arctic and Antarctic circles, they can be at right angles to each other making the construction of cusps impossible. Even in less extreme latitudes, there can be a large angle between the prime vertical and the ecliptic causing very distorted houses, with their sizes on the ecliptic varying greatly. Zenith or Horizontal House System The final space system I will consider was introduced in the early 20 th century but never achieved widespread popularity, although it is used by some North American astrologers. It has some advantages at high latitudes. In this system, it is the horizon that is divided into equal 30-degree sections (starting at the meridian) by great circles passing through the Zenith (giving the system its name), cutting the horizon at 90 degrees and continuing to the Nadir. The house cusps are where these great circles cross the ecliptic.

Figure 9 Note that, although the MC is the tenth house cusp, the cusp of the first house is not the ascendant. Where the prime vertical intersects the ecliptic is sometimes called the ‘Electric Ascendant’, and the ecliptic point opposite it (in the West) is called the Vertex. The Vertex is sometimes used in charts that use a different house system than the Zenith system. There is a certain naturalness about this system. If we go outside and look at the sky, the Zenith houses are equal volumes of space around us. Each house starts at the point above our head, takes in an equal sized section of the horizon, and continues to a point directly beneath our feet. In addition, whereas the Campanus system produces distorted houses at high latitudes, the Zenith system is the reverse. The ecliptic is low down, near the horizon in high latitudes, so a system that divides the horizon does not distort the house sizes on the ecliptic. On the other hand, near the equator, the ecliptic will be nearly at right angles to the horizon, and so the Zenith houses will have very distorted house sizes. Space Systems in Summary Before finishing our consideration of space systems of house division we should note that only a few of the systems that are theoretically possible have ever been proposed as practical house systems, and fewer still have become popular. To calculate the house cusps using space systems we could equally divide any of the great circles on the celestial sphere and then project these points onto the ecliptic from the pole of any of the circles. The four great circles we could divide are equator, meridian, prime vertical and horizon. (Dividing the ecliptic gives Ecliptic System houses.) These could be projected from the poles of the ecliptic, horizon, equator, prime vertical and meridian). Hence, 20 variants are possible. Because projection from the pole of the meridian produces very distorted cusps, only

16 are practical possibilities, and we have considered five. We should note that of these, three involve equal division of the equator. Time Systems Time systems calculate house cusps on a different basis to the space systems we have looked at above. I will discuss three systems: Alcabitius, Placidus and Koch. They all use the concept of “trisecting a semiarc”. The meaning of trisecting is simple enough: dividing something into three equal parts. A semiarc is the apparent movement of a specific point between the angles. Diurnal semiarcs are the ascendant to the MC, and the MC to the descendant. The nocturnal semiarcs are the descendant to the IC, and the IC to the ascendant. Time systems take the length of time for some specific point (which depends on the particular house system) to move between two angles: through a semiarc, and then divides this time into three equal parts to give two intermediate times. These two times are used to calculate the intermediate house cusps. The explanation may seem a little complicated, but specific examples, for each house system, should make the ideas clear. Alcabitius House System This is the earliest of the time systems of house division, named after the 10th century Arabic astrologer Alcabitius who wrote about the system (although the method was known from the fifth century and possible earlier). Alcabitius houses were popular in Europe until the introduction of the Regiomontanus system in the late 15th century. It is conceptually straightforward and the cusps are easy to calculate. Consider the point on the ecliptic that is the natal ascendant. As the earth rotates this point will rise until it is the MC. This time is the semiarc of the ascendant: the time for the cusp of the first house to become the MC, the cusp of the tenth house. This time can be trisected: divided into three equal parts. Technically, this is described as trisecting the semiarc of the ascendant. At the end of the first third of the semiarc time, a particular point in the natal chart will have moved to become the MC. This point is the Alcabitius natal eleventh cusp. Similarly, at the end of two thirds of the period, a different point in the natal chart will have moved to become the MC. This point is the Alcabitius natal twelfth cusp. Finally, in the whole period, a point in the natal chart will have become the MC; this is the Alcabitius first cusp: the ascendant. Alcabitius Example Consider the chart shown as figure 10 set for 1 December 2013 at 13:00:00 in London (51N30, 0W10) with Alcabitius cusps. The ascendant is 19PI00 at 13:00:00 and this position will be the MC at 18:37:07. The time for the ascendant to become the MC is 5h 37m 7s. Dividing 5h 37m 7s by three gives 1h 52m 22s, so the intermediate times are 13h 0m 0s + 1h 52m 22s = 14h 52m 22s and 13h 0m + 1h 52m 22s + 1h 52m 22s = 16h 44m 44s.

Finally, calculating the MC for 14:52:22 and 16:44:44 gives 21CP47 and 19AQ18, which are the twelfth and eleventh Alcabitius cusps shown in figure 10.

Figure 10 The second and third cusps are found in the same way but using the IC to Ascendant semiarc. We look back rather than forward and find when the natal ascendant position (19PI00) was the IC. This was at 6:39:04, which was 6h 21m ago (approximately). Dividing this by three gives 2h 7m, so we have 13h 00m – 2h 7m = 10h 53m and 13h 00m – 4h 14m = 8h 46m as the two times of interest. We now find the position of the IC (not the MC as we are using the nocturnal semiarc) at these times and get 25TA52 for the third cusp and 23AR28 for the second cusp, as shown in figure 10. One advantage of Alcabitius houses is that there is little distortion in the relative sizes of the houses. Although some houses are greater than 30 degrees wide and some less, there are no very wide or very narrow houses, something that happens in some other house systems. Using Campanus houses for example, a chart can have some houses 80 degrees wide and others 10 degrees wide, even at the latitude of London. The modern neglect of the Alcabitius system is somewhat surprising. Perhaps it is time for some research into the usefulness of Alcabitius houses, particularly into transits to the house cusps and their accuracy in timing life events. Placidus House System The Placidus system is undoubtedly the most widely used house system in modern practice; however, it can be rather difficult to grasp at first. It is named after the 17 th century mathematician Placidus de Tito but seems to have been known in the early 14th century, and possibly earlier. Its popularity may be due to the inclusion of Placidus tables in Raphael’s Ephemeris, the standard reference for generations of astrologers in the 19th and 20th centuries. Other house tables were

quite uncommon. Placidus claimed that this system matches Ptolemy’s rather obscure explanation of houses in the Tetrabiblos. The calculation of the cusps starts in the same way as Alcabitius: the time for a given position on the ecliptic to move from being the ascendant to being the MC is noted and this time trisected. The calculation then differs from Alcabitius. These intermediate times are the times at which the given ecliptic position will become the eleventh and twelfth house cusps. Note the important difference; we do not calculate the position of the cusps for the time of the natal chart. We calculate the time of a chart in which the given position will be the relevant cusp.

Figure 11 To calculate the position of these intermediate cusps in the natal chart, we need to find the time of an earlier chart whose ascendant position will become the relevant cusp at the time of the natal chart. If this sounds complicated, an example should help. Placidus Example Figure 11 is the same chart we used for Alcabitius, but shown with Placidus cusps. We know from the Alcabitius calculations above that the times from the trisection of the ascendant-MC semiarc are 14h 52m 22s and 16h 44m 44s. So, at 14:52:22 the Placidus twelfth cusp will be 19PI00 (the ascendant in figure 11). Similarly, the eleventh Placidus cusp at 16:44:44 will be 19PI00.

As is probably becoming clear, the calculation of Placidus cusps for a natal chart is not straightforward. To find the twelfth cusp, for example, we have to find the time of an earlier chart

such that the ascendant of that earlier chart will be the twelfth cusp of the natal chart at the time of the natal chart. The only way to do this is by iteration: trial and error. For the earlier chart, we find the ascendant-MC semiarc time and calculate one third of this. We add that to the time of this earlier chart, and see if the time is equal to the natal time. If it is equal, then the ascendant of the earlier chart becomes the natal twelfth cusp. If the time of the earlier chart plus the trisected semiarc time is after the natal chart time, we need to move the earlier chart back in time and try again; and if the time of the earlier chart plus the trisected semiarc time is before the natal chart time, we need to move the earlier chart forward in time and try again. Fortunately, tables of houses and computer software do all this for us, but the idea is not simple. The calculation of the other cusps (second and third) is similar to the Alcabitius calculation: instead of the ascendant-MC semiarc, we use the IC-ascendant semiarc. There is another way we can think about Placidus cusps that helps understand the idea behind the system. We start by thinking about the time a specific point on the ecliptic takes to get from its rising as the ascendant to its culmination as the MC. This time can be divided into three. For the first third of the time from ascendant to MC, the point is in the twelfth house. For the second third of the time, it is in the eleventh house, and in the last third of the time, it is passing through the tenth house. Obviously if a planet is not exactly on the ecliptic: if it has celestial latitude, it will rise north or south of the ecliptic’s rising position. The time it takes from rising to culmination will be less (north) or more (south) than that of the ecliptic. This will change the house cusp positions. I will consider this latitude problem later. Koch House System This is sometimes called the Birthplace house system and is a very recent development. Tables of Koch houses were not published until 1971. The Koch system is a variant of Alcabitius. To calculate the Alcabitius cusps we used the semiarc of the ascendant (how long it would take for the chart ascendant to become the MC). For Koch we start with the semiarc of the MC: working back from the chart’s time to an earlier time when the chart’s MC was the ascendant. We trisect this in the usual way and take the ascendants for these times as the house cusps. The easiest way to understand this is by an example of the calculation, which is very simple. In figure 12, the MC is 25SG45 at 13:00:00. We find the semiarc time by noting that 25SG45 was the ascendant at 09:12:11, so the MC semiarc is 13h 0m 00s – 9h 12m 11s = 3h 47m 49s. We divide this by three to give 1h 15m 56s. At 9h 12m 11s + 1h 15m 56s = 10h 28m 07s, the ascendant is 14CP25 this is equal to the eleventh cusp shown below. At 10h 28m 07s + 1h 15m 56s = 11h 44m 03s the ascendant is 10AQ18, equal to the twelfth cusp shown below.

Figure 12 It is worth noting that the difference between the positions of the Koch and Placidus cusps is often not very great, particularly when compared to some space systems, such as Campanus, that can produce very unequal house sizes on the ecliptic. In many ways, the Koch system is the simplest to calculate, although it does fail in polar latitudes as there can be points on the ecliptic that never rise/set, and so cannot be the ascendant. Topocentric House System This is the final system I will consider. It is another recent development, first published in 1961 by Wendel Polich and Nelson Page and is a refinement of the Placidus system. The Topocentric house cusps are usually within a degree or two (depending on geographic latitude) of the Placidus cusps. Polich and Page claim that Topocentric house cusps provide more accurate predictions for the timing of events, using primary directions, than other house systems. To get a feel for what the Topocentric house system is about, consider the Earth, turning on its axis as shown in Figure 13. To an observer everything in the sky appears to turn about an axis passing through the observer and parallel to the Earth’s axis. This axis is called the Topocentric axis. Topocentric means relative to (or centred on) a point on the surface of the Earth.

Figure 13 The Geocentric Horizon passes through the centre of the Earth, and is the horizon normally used in astrology. If we rotate the geocentric horizon about the Topocentric axis, we get a cone of rotation, as shown in figure 14. It is this cone that is used to construct the Topocentric house cusps.

Figure 14 The final stage is to take the circular top of this cone and mark-off lines from the centre to the edge at every 30 degrees of rotation. Figure 15 shows this, but only for half the circle to make the diagram manageable and less cluttered. We then trisect these radius lines: the first at the outer edge of the cone, the next one third of the way in, the next two thirds in, and the fourth at the centre of the cone’s base. We then move out again. Figure 15 shows the position of these divisions (the length of the arrowed lines is not relevant).

Figure 15 Having found the positions on the radius lines that trisect the cone’s radius, we draw lines at right angles to the radius lines, as shown by the arrowed lines. Where these lines intersect the ecliptic are the house cusps (as indicated). The mathematical calculations of the cusp positions is more complicated than for the other system I have considered in this article, and a full explanation would involve more mathematics than is appropriate here. For a detailed explanation, see Section 4 in Chapter 4 of Holden [6], or the 1964 article in Spica [11] by the developers of the system. To summarise, the main things to note about the Topocentric House system are that the cusps are very close to the Placidus cusps, the method of construction is based on the horizon as seen from the surface of the earth rather that the geocentric horizon, and that the cusps are claimed to give better timing of events (using primary directions) than other house systems. A Problem with House Division There is a potential problem with methods of house division that needs to be considered: planetary latitude. It is only occasionally that a body (apart from the Sun) is exactly on the ecliptic, usually planets have celestial latitude. For Ecliptic house systems: Whole Sign, Equal House and Porphyry, planetary latitude presents no problem as the houses are defined by division of the ecliptic and a planet’s ecliptic position is all that matters. However, if the houses are defined not by division of the ecliptic, but by division of some other great circle, then a planet’s bodily position may be in a different house to its ecliptic position. This is shown in figure 16 where the planet itself is on the twelfth house side of a house cusp line but its ecliptic longitude is on the eleventh house side. For this illustration I have used a house system that projects from the pole of the equator.

Figure 16 If a house system divides some great circle (such as the equator) and projects these divisions onto the ecliptic from the pole of a circle other than the ecliptic, then the dividing lines between the houses will not intersect the ecliptic at right angles. As in figure 16 the projection is from the pole of the equator, the house dividing lines are at right angles to the equator, but the planet’s body is on one side of the line and its ecliptic position is on the other side. This problem is particularly likely to occur when the planet’s ecliptic longitude is close to a house cusp. Of the space systems I have discussed, only Morinus projects from the pole of the ecliptic, and so this is the only space system that does not have this latitude problem. As the conceptual basis of the space systems is to equally divide the space of the celestial sphere, whatever falls within the space of a particular house should be considered as being in that house. The problem of planetary latitude cannot be avoided with these systems. However, this assumes that it is the planet’s bodily position that matters. A significant number of astrologers argue that it is not the physical position of a planet that matters but rather its ecliptic position, and so planetary latitude is not relevant. In other words, our astrology is based on ecliptic positions, so a planet’s house should also be determined by ecliptic position. For further discussion of planetary latitude, refer to my article on the Urania Trust website:Charts are not flat The Time systems of house division also have a latitude problem. When discussing the Alcabitus and Placidus systems, I have talked about the semiarc of a point on the ecliptic. If a planet is not on the ecliptic then its bodily rising will be earlier or later than that of its ecliptic position, and so its semiarc will be longer of shorter. The house cusps will be in different positions on the ecliptic for different planetary latitudes. Note, this is different to the problem with space systems where the ecliptic position of the cusp is the same for all latitudes, but the planet’s body may be in a different house: on the other side of a house boundary to its ecliptic position. The Koch system also has a planetary latitude problem. First, we calculate the MC semiarc, but the time at which a planet’s ecliptic longitude was the ascendant and the time the body itself was rising are different. In addition, given the two times from dividing the MC semiarc, we then

calculate the ecliptic position rising for these times. The usual problem occurs: the planet does not rise when its ecliptic position rises if the planet has latitude. In summary, if a planet has latitude then all the space systems except Morinus, and all the time systems have a problem defining a planet’s house position as it is not exactly on the ecliptic. Conclusion There is still no agreement on the ‘correct’ system of house division. Even if we accept the suggestion that different systems might be appropriate for different purposes, there is still no agreement on what they are. Many astrologers use either the method of house division they were first taught, or the default method of their computer software, without thinking too hard about the relative strengths and weaknesses of the various systems. I hope this description of the main methods that have been used to construct the houses will help astrologers make considered decisions about which method to use. Notes and Bibliography [1] Lilly, Christian Astrology, various modern editions such as Astrology Classics 2005. [2] Houlding, D (2006), The Houses: Temples of the Sky, Wessex Astrologer Ltd. [3] Hone, M, (2010), Modern Text-Book of Astrology, Astrology Classics. [4] Sasportas, H, (2007), The Twelve Houses, (revised edition), Flare Publications/London School of Astrology. [5] Pelletier, R. (1981) Planets in Houses, Whitford Press, USA [6] Holden, Ralph William (1977), The Elements of House Division, L. N. Fowler, Romford. Reprinted by The Faculty of Astrological Studies. [7] Holden, James (1982), Ancient House Division, The American Federation of Astrologers Journal of Research Vol. 1, Tempe, AZ, August 1982, pp. 19-29. [8] Hand, Robert (1999), Whole Sign Houses: The Oldest House System. (ARHAT Publications). [9] Rudhyar, Dane (1991), The Astrology of Personality, Aurora Press. [10] Addey, John (1960), Astrological Journal Vol 2, no 2, pp 16-18. [11] Polich W. and Nelson Page (1964), The Topocentric System of Houses, SPICA Vol 3, no 3, pp 3-10.

Aquirata

Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 1:33 pm

Post subject:

Astraea, Joined: 31 Mar 2006 Posts: 157 Location: Canada

I may not be able to explain what you're curious about, but wanted to draw your attention to an interesting work by Emma Belle Donath. Her book, Houses: Which and When, makes the case for using different house systems for different purposes, contrary to the philosophical underpinnings expounded by you and Papretis. Here is a summary of her premise: Sign-House - manner of accepting or rejecting personal karma, world conditions, and surrounding environment Equal House - heritage from family members, genetic defects or traits, one-to-one confrontations, and closeness in relationships Porphyry - clear division between body and soul, way of compartmentalizing spiritual and mundane matters Campanus - immediacy of mundane conditions and how they affect society, and a timing device Rational - cosmic views broken down into personal responses, an enhancement of the theory of "as above, so below" Morinus - path of individual involvement into physical, mental, and spiritual matters Placidus - goals of life, current psychological understanding, answering of horary and electional questions, and some timing M-House - manner in which public successes or failures validate selfimage Solar Equilibrium - each house represents a facet of the incarnating ego or personality Hamburg - Meridian = soul purpose - Ascendant = personal relationships - Node or Draconic = peer relations - Aries or Earth = world conditions - Sun = physical body and health - Moon = emotional responses Octoscope - expectation from mundane matters of the day, and an aging device Birthplace - past, present, and future goals, expected reactions to events and conditions Topocentric - mundane events, timing device She cites the Regiomontanus system by its other name, Rational. If you compare the description given there with Placidus, some of the words do

support your observation, although she gives the latter to horary usage. Let's hope that horary astrologers with plenty of experience in this subject will come out and explain this custom, if this is in fact how most of them use house systems. I don't have sufficient experience to be able to say that Regiomontanus or any other house system is accurate enough, and I've never seen any work that actually proved one system over the other. Regiomontanus, Placidus, Meridian, Eastern Point on 1st, and MC on 10th can be rationalized on technical grounds. Out of these, Placidus has an affinity with planetary hours (meaning it behaves differently in day vs night), the rest are indifferent in this respect. Deb Houlding deals with houses in her excellent book, but she doesn't treat the division problem in detail in the first edition (perhaps she does in the second?). The first article in Michael Whackford's series on the polar horoscope (originally published in Correlation) is posted athttp://www.skyscript.co.uk/polar1.html . He comes out in favour of Placidus in his earlier article originally published in The Traditional Astrologer, and posted here in its expanded version athttp://www.skyscript.co.uk/placido.html , because, according to the author, it doesn't fail in polar regions. This is news to me and I'll have to read both of his articles to see if he is in fact correct in this assertion. At any rate, this should be enough food for thought now. Hope the post raises relevant questions so that you will be able to answer your original query. _________________

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php? t=3048&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=0ea8dab175c3e3fdc72d0d590c09756e

IX- THE HOUSES IN POLAR LATITUDES Riyal will calculate houses for polar latitudes with mathematical rigour in any of the available systems except (1) Koch at all times and (2) Placidus when the Midheaven is below the horizon. In these cases the user is warned and the program changes to Alchabitius. In the case of the so-called “Topocentric” system, its arbitrary and artificial “solution” for the polar regions is used. It is said repeatedly that house systems cannot be used in polar latitudes. This is not true. The problem is not with the house systems but with the conventional methods or algorithms used to calculate them. All house systems work in polar latitudes, the problem is that “sometimes they don’t”. This ambiguity in the mechanics or geometry of polar houses is the cause of great and unnecessary confusion, and puts in evidence the poor treatment it has received in the astrological literature. Above 66,33 degrees --the Artic and Antartic polar circles-- the division of houses is taken to extremes, and houses are gradually deformed to the point where one begins to doubt the whole concept of houses. In these latitudes, the horizon can coincide with the ecliptic. When this happens the Ascendant is undefined, and all systems except the “Meridian” (Zariel) and that of J.B. Morin are useless. Right after this, the Ascendant “changes phase” and the Midheaven is below the horizon. When the Midheaven is in this situation, Riyal warns you with the message >. Press “Enter” for the calculation to end normally. Strictly the houses are inverted 180 degrees, but the program leaves them “normal” to avoid confusion. Please be aware that when the Midheaven is below the horizon the Ascendant must always be inverted. The optional inversion of all the houses is a separate operation. Additionally, complete sectors of the ecliptic can be circumpolar. This is not a mathematical or mechanical problem but a question of definition, since the fact that a diurnal circle never intercepts the horizon doesn’t stop us from trisecting it the way the Placidus system requires. The semiarcs will be exactly 180 and 0 degrees. Riyal supplements the definition of the Placidus house system by using circumpolar cusps, and indicates with “*” when it is proceeding this way.

With the supplementary definition mentioned, it is possible to calculate the cusps of Magini-Placidus without difficulty for most of the sidereal times at a given polar latitude, but during a certain period of the day it will not be possible to use the Magini-Placidus system. This “blank space” corresponds to the time when the Midheaven is below the horizon, and increases with the latitude from 1.6 hours at 67 degrees until it reaches 12 hours at the pole. It is worth mentioning, in passing, that the system “of Placidus” was not invented by Placidus. Giovanni Antonii Magini (1555-1617), professor of mathematics at the University of Bologna, in “Tabulae Primi Mobilis, quas Directionem Vulgo Dicunt” (1602), builds astrological charts with this method when Placidus had not even been born! Magini’s book was examined by Delhambre in “Histoire de L’Astronomie au Moyen Age” [Paris, 1819], who calls him “the clearest and most intelligible of all astrologers”.

http://www.expreso.co.cr/centaurs/riyal/readme.html