House System

[Alyssa Posoff]

I have been studying astrology for the last few years and creating
novice birth charts. I've been trying to expand my knowledge of the
natal chart by examining the significance in the degrees of the
planets as well as the houses. The only trouble is, I don't like the
equal house system of 30˚ per house.

I was trying to see if I could get any relief with the Campanus house
system, but I can't seem to find a mathematical way to determine the
size of degrees each house varies depending on time of year and day.

Does anyone have any suggestions or advice for me?

[Claude Latremouille]

*
On Sat, 9 Jul 2011 03:02:12 CST, Alyssa Posoff
<***@gmail.com> wrote:
*

Post by Alyssa Posoff
I have been studying astrology for the last few years and creating
novice birth charts. I've been trying to expand my knowledge of the
natal chart by examining the significance in the degrees of the
planets as well as the houses. The only trouble is, I don't like the
equal house system of 30° per house.
I was trying to see if I could get any relief with the Campanus house
system, but I can't seem to find a mathematical way to determine the
size of degrees each house varies depending on time of year and day.
Does anyone have any suggestions or advice for me?

*
The debate over the 'correct' House system is one of the first to
face the astrology beginner. When I began 'doing' astrology, I
was using the Placidus system but did not know that. Only after
having compared various systems did I realize what I was doing.
*
The question then became : why should that system be any better
than any other?
*
It appeared to me that the House system which best represents the
appearance of the sky at any latitude ought to be better than any
other. The Placidus system does represent the sky extremely well.
At high latitudes, at certain times of the year, the Sun almost
never sets, or almost never rises. The Placidus system takes this
into consideration when it gives us extremely wide Houses, or
extremely narrow ones.
*
It even produces twisted Houses where the Sun stays under the
horizon, even though it is Noon. In that case, the Midheaven is
below the Ascendant.
*
So, you are correct in doubting the Equal House system. It only
approximates the appearance of the sky near the Equator.
*
As to calculating mathematically Placidian Houses, it is quite
difficult to do, as it involves iterative calculations. If you
are mathematically inclined, it is fun do to, as the answer to
one problem becomes the problem to be solved in the next
iteration.
*
I hope this helps.
*
Claude Latrémouille
July 09, 2011

[unknown]

Post by Claude Latremouille
It appeared to me that the House system which best represents the
appearance of the sky at any latitude ought to be better than any
other. The Placidus system does represent the sky extremely well.
At high latitudes, at certain times of the year, the Sun almost
never sets, or almost never rises. The Placidus system takes this
into consideration when it gives us extremely wide Houses, or
extremely narrow ones.
*
It even produces twisted Houses where the Sun stays under the
horizon, even though it is Noon. In that case, the Midheaven is
below the Ascendant.
*
So, you are correct in doubting the Equal House system. It only
approximates the appearance of the sky near the Equator.
*

Good to see you again.
What bothers me about Placidus is that at high latitudes, as I understand
it, some areas of the Zodiac end up in no House at all. That represents the
Sun's daily movements nicely, I suppose, which is what Placidus is meant to
do, but it doesn't seem to take much account of the other planets. And
however do you interpret a planet in no House?

[~.^.Saba Gracile.^.~]

Post by unknown

Post by Claude Latremouille
It appeared to me that the House system which best represents the
appearance of the sky at any latitude ought to be better than any
other. The Placidus system does represent the sky extremely well.
At high latitudes, at certain times of the year, the Sun almost
never sets, or almost never rises. The Placidus system takes this
into consideration when it gives us extremely wide Houses, or
extremely narrow ones.
*
It even produces twisted Houses where the Sun stays under the
horizon, even though it is Noon. In that case, the Midheaven is
below the Ascendant.
*
So, you are correct in doubting the Equal House system. It only
approximates the appearance of the sky near the Equator.
*

Good to see you again.
What bothers me about Placidus is that at high latitudes, as I understand
it, some areas of the Zodiac end up in no House at all. That represents
the Sun's daily movements nicely, I suppose, which is what Placidus is
meant to do, but it doesn't seem to take much account of the other
planets. And however do you interpret a planet in no House?

You are correct, up here on 69 degree north, at some points during
the day, all axis clash together, into just one axis. No houses, or only
tiny 1st,2nd and 3rd houses. The Asc goes retro (like mine), and some
suggest to use porphyri or alcabitious houses, and reverse the houses
if Asc goes retro. I use both. But I can't put too much emphasis on
houses because of these uncertaintees. At least1st house and Desc
is correct, and planets close to them do have their expected effect.

Veronica

Post by unknown
--
A. B.
My e-mail address is zen177395 at zendotcodotuk, though I don't check
that account very often.

[[e-mail]]

Post by ~.^.Saba Gracile.^.~

Post by unknown

Post by Claude Latremouille
It appeared to me that the House system which best represents the
appearance of the sky at any latitude ought to be better than any
other. The Placidus system does represent the sky extremely well.
At high latitudes, at certain times of the year, the Sun almost
never sets, or almost never rises. The Placidus system takes this
into consideration when it gives us extremely wide Houses, or
extremely narrow ones.
*
It even produces twisted Houses where the Sun stays under the
horizon, even though it is Noon. In that case, the Midheaven is
below the Ascendant.
*
So, you are correct in doubting the Equal House system. It only
approximates the appearance of the sky near the Equator.
*

Good to see you again.
What bothers me about Placidus is that at high latitudes, as I understand
it, some areas of the Zodiac end up in no House at all.  That represents
the Sun's daily movements nicely, I suppose, which is what Placidus is
meant to do, but it doesn't seem to take much account of the other
planets.  And however do you interpret a planet in no House?

You are correct, up here on 69 degree north, at some points during
the day, all axis clash together, into just one axis. No houses, or only
tiny 1st,2nd and 3rd houses. The Asc goes retro (like mine), and some
suggest to use porphyri or alcabitious houses, and reverse the houses
if Asc goes retro. I use both. But I can't put too much emphasis on
houses because of these uncertaintees. At least1st house and Desc
is correct, and planets close to them do have their expected effect.
Veronica

Post by unknown
--
A. B.
My e-mail address is zen177395 at  zendotcodotuk, though I don't check
that account very often.

I decided to stop using houses
it works for Cosmobiologists

I also decided to stop using zodiac signs too
Magi Astrologers and Uranian Astrologers don't use them


I am mainly a geometrical,harmonic astrologer now



Raymond

[Claude Latremouille]

*

Post by unknown
Good to see you again.
What bothers me about Placidus is that at high latitudes, as I understand
it, some areas of the Zodiac end up in no House at all. That represents the
Sun's daily movements nicely, I suppose, which is what Placidus is meant to
do, but it doesn't seem to take much account of the other planets. And
however do you interpret a planet in no House?
--
A. B.
My e-mail address is zen177395 at zendotcodotuk, though I don't check that
account very often.

*
Which brings us back to the painful realization that astrology
was never intended to be practiced at these high latitudes.
Invented in Sumer, developed in Greece, Egypt, and that
neighbourhood, nobody at the time ever bothered to perfect a
system which would account for the skies in Northern Norway, for
instance.
*
Our House systems are relatively modern and do allow for the
oddities of a Sun which never sets or never rises. And if all
planets followed closely the Ecliptic, they would be treated in
the same manner. But they don't.
*
As to the Placidian system, even though it looks awful, it is the
one which betrays less than any other the appearance of the sky
at these high latitudes.
*
Interpreting a planet in no House can still leave a 'planet-in-
Sign' interpretation, a 'planet-in-transit' interpretation, so
the astrologer is not entirely powerless to give them meaning.
*
But I am glad to have been born at 45° N. :-)
*
Claude Latrémouille
July 13, 2011

=== ***@torfree.net ===
=== CLAUDE LATRÉMOUILLE ===
===========================

[Kjell Pettersson]

Post by unknown
What bothers me about Placidus is that at high latitudes, as I understand
it, some areas of the Zodiac end up in no House at all.  That represents the
Sun's daily movements nicely, I suppose, which is what Placidus is meant to
do, but it doesn't seem to take much account of the other planets.  

I think that we need to understand that the astrology we use was
created at latitudes where these considerations never popped up. Take
the thing with the Sun being gone for half a year or so, that
certainly warps the idea of having day houses and night houses. My
take on this is that it means NOT that astrology does not work if
going too close to the poles, but that living there is so different
from living anywhere else on the planet that our ordinary astrology is
not fit to describe it *in the same manner*.

It's a little bit like imagining life on other planets. They would
have their own astrology, working just as good as ours, but not in
quite the same way.

Post by unknown
And
however do you interpret a planet in no House?

I would be delighted if you could produce such a chart of an actual
person, living or dead. (I believe not all points in spacetime are
equal with regards to bringing forth life, so it would not do with a
constructed chart for a random time and place.) It would be very
interesting to try to make an interpretation.

Myself, I'll check and see if I can find the chart of the Icelandic
artist Bjork and see if it contains any exciting irregularities.

/Kjell

[Kjell Pettersson]

Post by Kjell Pettersson
Myself, I'll check and see if I can find the chart of the Icelandic
artist Bjork and see if it contains any exciting irregularities.

Interesting chart, but no extraordinarily strange houses.

http://www.astrotheme.com/portraits/8B49CTJDeDZ9.htm

/K

[[e-mail]]

Post by Kjell Pettersson

Post by Kjell Pettersson
Myself, I'll check and see if I can find the chart of the Icelandic
artist Bjork and see if it contains any exciting irregularities.

Interesting chart, but no extraordinarily strange houses.
http://www.astrotheme.com/portraits/8B49CTJDeDZ9.htm
/K

Here is a chart of Ann Margret's that show the houses
http://famous-relationships.topsynergy.com/Ann_Margret/AstroData.asp


Raymond

[Kjell Pettersson]

Post by ***@yahoo.com
Here is a chart of Ann Margret's that show the houses
http://famous-relationships.topsynergy.com/Ann_Margret/AstroData.asp

It looks a bit like my father's chart, he also had Ascendant and IC in
signs next to one another. You get a lot of intercepted signs with
that. What I was hoping to find was rather a chart with planets being
in no house at all, that A.B. spoke of. I haven't seen such a chart
and it would be very interesting to try to interpret it.

Regarding the not too infrequent case of intercepted signs, I answered
a question from Sharon on this earlier this year.

Question:
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.astrology.moderated/browse_frm/thread/d67f28790448c261/a1f42600c9b22c64?lnk=gst&q=intercepted#a1f42600c9b22c64
My answer:
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.astrology.moderated/browse_frm/thread/4348841e25d2b695/1ded7b8641cc42fb?lnk=gst&q=intercepted#1ded7b8641cc42fb

(Cut and paste if links get broken apart.)

Anyhow, thank you for posting the chart. As an example of an extreme
chart house-wise, it's a good example chart and it certainly fits in
the thread.

/K

[unknown]

Post by Kjell Pettersson

Post by ***@yahoo.com
Here is a chart of Ann Margret's that show the houses
http://famous-relationships.topsynergy.com/Ann_Margret/AstroData.asp

It looks a bit like my father's chart, he also had Ascendant and IC in
signs next to one another. You get a lot of intercepted signs with
that. What I was hoping to find was rather a chart with planets being
in no house at all, that A.B. spoke of. I haven't seen such a chart
and it would be very interesting to try to interpret it.

Somebody else told me about that, I may have misunderstood. I haven't tried
Placidus all that often myself, haven't had time.

[DJ]

It's always seemed to me appropriate that the far northern latitudes
have all the planets bunched into a couple of houses. Isn't it
necessary, after all, to stay at home for several months, then run
around and get a lot of things done in the couple months while the sun
shines?

[Kjell Pettersson]

Somebody else told me about that, I may have misunderstood.  I haven't tried
Placidus all that often myself, haven't had time.

In the second instalment of this article series, from the excellent
web site skyscript.co.uk, some strange examples of what might happen
to houses when you are above the polar circle.

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/polar1.html

I have not read the entire series, but it seems to provide quite good
information on "polar houses" and the like, surely sufficent as a
starting point for anyone wanting to delve further into the topic.

/Kjell

[[e-mail]]

Post by Kjell Pettersson

Somebody else told me about that, I may have misunderstood.  I haven't tried
Placidus all that often myself, haven't had time.

In the second instalment of this article series, from the excellent
web site skyscript.co.uk, some strange examples of what might happen
to houses when you are above the polar circle.
http://www.skyscript.co.uk/polar1.html
I have not read the entire series, but it seems to provide quite good
information on "polar houses" and the like, surely sufficent as a
starting point for anyone wanting to delve further into the topic.
/Kjell

I read that a long time ago.
It's one of the factors of my having problems using house systems

Ptolemy originally used whole sign house system. He used whole sign
aspects.
He used whole sign aspects with whole sign house system.

Astrology has completely diverged from Ptolemy.
even the house rulerships have been changed, and they don't follow
Ptolemy's reasoning.

Ptolemy's reasons for using the tropical zodiac completely disregards
the Southern Hemisphere.
If I was Australian, I'd be skeptical of zodiac signs.
Even Sidereal Zodiac doesn't have it altogether either. It's not the
same as the constellations. I have Sun in constellation Virgo even
though it is in Libra in Sidereal Zodiac. That's because I was born
when Sun was in the 2nd to last day of Virgo which is the largest
zodiac constellation.

There is too much relativity with house systems and tropical zodiac
signs, and so I don't wonder why Astrology is not recognized as a
science by mainstream scientific community.

I don't believe that Astrology will ever be recognized as a science
again , not with the use of zodiac signs and houses.
If it is to be recognized as science again, I believe that it will be
the actual geometry and harmonics that will factor.


Raymond

[unknown]

Post by unknown

Post by Kjell Pettersson

Post by ***@yahoo.com
Here is a chart of Ann Margret's that show the houses
http://famous-relationships.topsynergy.com/Ann_Margret/AstroData.asp

It looks a bit like my father's chart, he also had Ascendant and IC in
signs next to one another. You get a lot of intercepted signs with
that. What I was hoping to find was rather a chart with planets being
in no house at all, that A.B. spoke of. I haven't seen such a chart
and it would be very interesting to try to interpret it.

Somebody else told me about that, I may have misunderstood. I haven't
tried Placidus all that often myself, haven't had time.

Here's a very peculiar chart from my collection, though it hasn't got any
planets without houses. The Ascendant and MC are both in Scorpio. It's
for that spiral that appeared over Norway, the one everyone said was aliens,
but it might have been a missile test.

9th December 2009 08:45am Tromso, Norway
http://www.astro.com/cgi/chart.cgi?cid=eh5fileXIfZvh-u1311876789&lang=e&hsy=0
(I hope that will work)

[[e-mail]]

Post by Kjell Pettersson

Post by Kjell Pettersson
Myself, I'll check and see if I can find the chart of the Icelandic
artist Bjork and see if it contains any exciting irregularities.

Interesting chart, but no extraordinarily strange houses.
http://www.astrotheme.com/portraits/8B49CTJDeDZ9.htm
A
/K

Ann Margret's chart is the perfect example of very uneven houses

http://www.astrotheme.com/portraits/Lkh5kRf5x39a.htm



Raymond

[Kjell Pettersson]

Post by unknown
What bothers me about Placidus is that at high latitudes, as I understand
it, some areas of the Zodiac end up in no House at all.  That represents the
Sun's daily movements nicely, I suppose, which is what Placidus is meant to
do, but it doesn't seem to take much account of the other planets.  And
however do you interpret a planet in no House?

The horoscope is a representation of the reality of a specific time
and place, based upon the coordinates of time and place; or spacetime,
if you will.

Analogically, a compass shows the directions, as seen from where you
are. You adjust the compass to north, and then you know where you have
east, west and south. And north is a given, given by earth itself
(though in earlier times one used to think it was the Pole Star that
attracted the needle).

The compass, however, cannot be used all over the earth. It's
representational system does not work all the way.

This is what the magnetic field of the earth looks like:

http://www.unc.edu/depts/oceanweb/turtles/geomag.html

At extreme positions, the needle of the compass does not know where to
point. It may think that every direction is south, just spinning
around. This obviously goes against common sense, and it certainly
cannot be interpreted using the ordinary rules. BUT. The compass
needle is right. We may be in a place where all (or most) directions
may be south. *Really* south, not just seemingly or representatively
so.

I think that, as an analogy, this is a quite fitting way to describe
how house systems fall apart when close enough to the north (or south)
pole. We are, in some sense, halfway off the planet when beyond the
polar circle.

/K

[donh]

Post by Alyssa Posoff
I have been studying astrology for the last few years and creating
novice birth charts. I've been trying to expand my knowledge of the
natal chart by examining the significance in the degrees of the planets
as well as the houses. The only trouble is, I don't like the equal house
system of 30˚ per house.
I was trying to see if I could get any relief with the Campanus house
system, but I can't seem to find a mathematical way to determine the
size of degrees each house varies depending on time of year and day.
Does anyone have any suggestions or advice for me?

My teacher uses the Koch house system, tho she was able to teach the use
of other systems including the equal-house system.

Through extensive experimentation, I found the Placidus system to be most
useful to me. Although I have an extensive mathematical background, I
cannot give you a mathematical reason for the Placidus houses being
better for me - it is simply that they work better for the way I use
astrology. I may investigate the math some day, but don't hold your
breath!

[Kjell Pettersson]

On Jul 9, 11:02 am, Alyssa Posoff <***@gmail.com>
wrote:
---

Post by Alyssa Posoff
I don't like the
equal house system of 30˚ per house.

I'll second others and say that Placidus is fine and good. In my
experience even the intermediate house cusps are sensitive, and that's
about as much as you can ask for.

When it comes to calculation, I wouldn't bother with that but see to
that I had a program to do the calculations for me. I am NOT saying it
is irrelevant knowing the math behind the astrology, but in terms of
being time-efficient that can wait for later. Usually, people don't
get interested in astrology because of the math, so don't overinvest
in these aspects.

/Kjell

[dklugmann]

I always did my calculations with software so that is not a lot of help for you in calculating Campanus House systems.

I tend to like the Equal house system as it is as far as i know the oldest of all the house systems. It is also the most simple. House systems such as Placidus and Koch tend to give very odd results at extreme latitudes, although not many people live in those places.

http://www.myastrologycharts.com
The Houses - http://www.myastrologycharts.com/Astrology-Charts/Birth-Chart/houses.php