posted July 20, 2006 09:56 PM              

Well, the fact that i recommended Rebekka to use equal house, was because she asked me to look at her chart. Ever since i've started practicing astrology more than seven years ago, I've always been using the Equal House system.

All house systems have their own value, none is more superior to the other. However, I shall quote Linda as my reason for choosing Equal House over other systems (like Placidus, which is the default setting on numerous websites, including astro.com)

"... in answer to those may who have written to ask, I use the Equal House system of the ancients in calculating a horoscope myself, having tested and found the modern Placidian system not nearly so dependable or revealing. In my own experience, the Placidian 'intercepted houses', which claim to give more depth to astrological interpretation of the nativity, only serve to cloud the issues and to create ambivalence. Human nature is strange. People always tend toward the more "complicated" methods in any field, rejecting the simplistic -- when the fact is that "truth" is invariably is hidden within simplicity. To each their own, of course. And to each her own. The catholic-minded student should learn all the common systems, and then decide for himself or herself. I merely state here that my personal faith in the decided superiority of the Equal House system of the ancients for those who have inquired, and who have expressed an interest in my private preference. For me, the Placidian system results in many inaccuracies of interpretation. But if it works for you, by all means use it. The very finest technical explanation of why the Equal House system is more accurate and reliable is contained in the front section of Sydney Omarr's excellent book, MY WORLD OF ASTROLOGY."

-- Linda Goodman, Para 3, The Pilgrims Progress, Star Signs.

Look at the description she gives for the book when its listed in the reading list for a little more insight. And if possible, purchase the book for further explaination.

However, to each their own!

posted July 20, 2006 10:04 PM              

I'll try to piece this together, but if you want to offer any pointers, I would welcome it.

posted July 21, 2006 08:28 AM              

Well, there is an element of truth to the statement you made. There is a reason why Placidian Houses are most commonly used. A purely "political" one.

Placido Titi (the man who invented this system) had his loyalties with the Archduke Leopold-Wilhelm von Habsburg, the brother of the Austrian Emperor.

When he published his Tabulae Primi Mobilis, Placido had become connected to the highest ranks of European nobility. The same year, 1657, saw the death of the Emperor and Leopold-Wilhelm being offered the Imperial crown. It can be assumed from this connection that Placido was no stranger to the intrigues of European diplomacy and politics, and a brief look at the world of the Archduke may serve to throw some light upon that of Placido.

Add some egotrip, mixed with a new found air of snobbery, there was a unwritten law, which few remember now, yet followed by some groups and societies, that all written astrological journals must use the Placidian house system. In those days, when astrology was still considered dark, demonic, and all things devilish; Placido, with his "connections" did his best to promote his philosophies or systems.

However, I'm not saying its bad to use Placidus houses, nor am I saying they are wrong. They are valid, and do work. Just as well as Equal, Whole Sign, Regiomontanus, Meredian and all the others.

I'm merely stating that in my experience, and perhaps even Linda's. The Equal House system has always worked in every situation, especially where Placidus Failed.

However, to each their own.

*~*~*~*~*

Anyway, Here's a summary of some of the popular house systems, as well as, what makes them work. (source. Wikipedia)

Placidus
The most commonly used house system in modern Western astrology. There seems to be no particular reason for its popularity except that calculation tables have always been easily available. The system is based on a division of time rather than space as in most other systems. The times taken for each degree of the ecliptic to rise from the IC to the ascendant, and from the ascendant to the MC, are trisected to determine the cusps of houses 2, 3, 11, and 12. The cusps of houses 8, 9, 5 and 6 are opposite these.

The Placidus system is defined only for latitudes between 66°N and 66°S.

Equal

The ecliptic is divided into twelve divisions of 30 degrees each. As long as there is an ascendant, twelve equal houses can be measured from it, so this system works for all locations although there will be anomalies in charts for locations within the polar circles.

Whole sign

In the whole sign house system, the houses are also 30° each, but instead of beginning at the ascendant, the first house begins at zero degrees of the zodiac sign in which the ascendant falls. In other words, each house is wholly filled by one sign. This is the system used in Jyotish (vedic astrology), and Hellenistic astrology. It is believed to be the oldest system of house division.

Regiomontanus

The celestial equator is divided into twelve, and these divisions are projected on to the ecliptic along great circles that take in the north and south points on the horizon. Named after the German astronomer and astrologer Johann Müller of Königsberg.

Meridian

Similar to the above, except that the east point is taken as the ascendant.

Campanus

The prime vertical (the great circle taking in the zenith and east point on the horizon) is divided into twelve, and these divisions are projected on to the ecliptic along great circles that take in the north and south points on the horizon. It is named after Johannes Campanus.

Porphyry

Each quadrant of the ecliptic is divided into three equal parts between the four angles. This is the oldest system of quadrant style house division. Although it is attributed to Porphyry of Tyros, it appears that this system was actually first described by the astrologer Vettius Valens in his 2nd century work The Anthology.

Koch

A rather more complicated version of the Placidean system, but built on equal increments of Right Ascension for each quadrant. Like it, the Koch system is defined only for latitudes between 66°N and 66°S.

Topocentric

View 1: This is a recent system, invented in Argentina, that its creators claim to have been determined empirically, i.e. by observing events in people's lives and assessing the geometry of a house system that would fit. The house cusps are always within a degree of those given in the Placidus system, which would seem to corroborate that system. The geometry is somewhat complicated and the reader is referred to this site for an explanation.

View 2: Placidus house system computed by space division algorithm, instead of Placidus's original time based algorithm. Thus Topocentric house cusps positions differ by up to 1 degree from original Placidus, eliminating error introduced by time based alg., giving exact position of house cusps.

Explanation: Topocentricity mentioned in above linked article applies to objects like Sun, Moon and planets and their house positions. For house cusps positions there's no difference between topocentric or geocentric ones.

Krusinski

Recently published (1995) house system, based on great circle passing through ascendant and zenith (Medium Coeli). This circle is divided into 12 equal parts (1st cusp is ascendent, 10th cusp is zenith), then resulting points are projected to ecliptic through meridian circles (circles passing through equatorial north and south poles, perpendicular to equator, see: meridian (geography)).

This house system is also known under the name Amphora, frequently used in the Czech Republic. It was published by Milan Píša in czech astrological journal "Konstelace è. 22" under the title "AMPHORA - nový systém astrologických domù" (1997), and in the book "Amphora - algoritmy nového systému domù" (1998).

*~*~*~*~*

Another thing,

Isn't it always best to choose what would work for you, rather than blindly going with what's commonly used, and "automatically" done.

Think about it.

posted July 21, 2006 10:18 AM              

A very good question indeed. Which is the "real" one.

Well, the answer simply is, whichever "works" for you.

I know that's not a good enough answer, as it creates more confusion allover. So this is what i can suggest.

Take a few charts of people you know closely. Not celebrities, no matter how much you think you know about them, you should never ever take a celebrities chart, because many a times what we know about them courtesy E! News and imdb and the tabloids, how can we guarantee that its the ultimate truth?

Never try your own chart at first, because you'll be prone to be subjective. Hence take the chart of some people whom you know closely, and be very objective about the interpretation. Ask them which seem to work more.

If you are skilled enough, try taking the charts of people whom you know, but arent that close to, like a friendly acquaintance. Invite them over, and show them what you've interpreted, take their feedback and see for yourself which works.

I know i've opened up a whole new can of worms with some of you all. However, I feel that if we choose to practise/study/appreciate astrology, we shouldnt ignore the fact that there are other house systems and perhaps gain some light about their impact on a chart.

Once you've gained some confidence, try using different systems in your own chart, and with a purely objective (dare i say "scientific"), choose which one works best for you.

Technically, Equal and Whole Sign are the most ancient house systems and all other ones have been derived from them.

But then again, To each their own

posted July 21, 2006 07:24 PM            

The houses of the horoscope are shown in the chart wheel as "pie" shaped divisions.
The 12 houses in a chart are determined by the exact clock time of birth. The houses
represent a more physical plane area of of life, whereas the sign describes an approach.
For example: the 7th house is marriage and partners.
The sign Libra acts diplomatically and seeks fairness and justice.

There are at least a dozen or more house systems used by astrologers according to
personal preference. Given below are explanations for the most popular of these.
The following paragraphs are condensed explanations of the various house systems
offered at Sky View Zone.

Equal House System:

A simple, yet highly effective system, this was the method that the ancients used
before the various unequal houses systems developed. Any table of houses may be
used because once the ascendant degree is discovered, the divisions of the chart wheel are equally divided with the same degree as the ascendant on each house cusp. The signs on the cusps then follow in order around t he wheel beginning with the rising sign. There are no intercepted signs in equal houses and therefore each sign is represented on a particular house cusp. The Equal house system does not create very large or small houses that become even more pronounced the higher the northern or southern latitudes used to calculate the chart.

Placidus House System:

Developed by Placidus (c.1688) and long popular for it's intrinsic value, the Placidus house system came into wide favor because for a long time the Placidean Tables of Houses was most easily obtainable.
Placidus is an unequal house system. Depending on the latitude used, a Placidus chart may have entire signs contained in a house, known as intercepted signs. As with most unequal systems, charts drawn for higher latitudes often have houses that are either very small or very large, with
houses being more "equal" in size, the closer to the equator the latitude for the chart is.

Koch House System:

A house system developed by Dr. Walter Koch that is considered by many unequal house
advocates to generate the most accurate house cusps, especially for forecast timing using planet transits to the natal chart. First presented in 1964, Koch is one of the newest house systems quickly gaining favor with astrologers. The same intercepted signs and unequal divisions occur as with most unequal house systems. The difference between the various house systems is
mainly the actual degree and minute on the house cusps according to the Tables of Houses used to generate the calculations.

Sun-on-the-ascendant:

This house system is used when the time of birth is unknown. Rather than just creating
a natural chart beginning with Aries on the Ascendant which is basically a futile exercise chart-wise, the Sun-on-the-ascendant method simply uses the individual's Sun sign and degree as the chart starting point; in other words the cusp of the first house. The rest of
the planets are then placed into the resulting houses as usual. The information derived, is about 65% to 70% accurate with respect to the individual's life experience as far as the planet in house interpretations. All other planet in sign and the aspects interpretations remain the same as a regular chart reading as far as accuracy. The exact Moon sign and house placement is most at risk for being "off" when the birth time is entirely unknown,
because the Moon is by far the fastest moving factor and it's quite possible that it may have changed signs at some point on the date on birth. It is definitely better to use this system for unknown birth times with an awareness of the drawbacks, rather than create a false chart using one of the above house systems. The chart is then read mostly with an emphasis on the characteristics of the Sun, since the Sun is considered to be such a major chart factor, especially in western astrology.
http://www.skyviewzone.com/houseinfopop.htm

posted July 21, 2006 07:51 PM              

I'm glad you did your little research and shed more light about the various house systems. Keep it up, and perhaps study casting charts in the various systems to see which work best for you.

"Essentially, the unequal house systems take into account your location to a larger degree because the sky does not appear the same or move the same from every vantage point [location] in the world."

A valid point indeed.

However, so does the Equal House system. You see, in the equal house system, the MC doesnt always fall on/in the 10th house, sometimes it falls in the 9th, sometimes even the 11th. This may seem confusing at first, but it actually provides a key to numerous unanswered questions in a chart, especially to those regarding one's career among other issues.

EXAMPLE:- If the 10th house cusp is in Virgo, but the MC point is in the 9th in Leo. The person essentially would be drawn to more Virgoan ruled occupations, example, writing or medicine. However, the MC being in the 9th house, the house of religion and long distance travel among other things. Perhaps the person would write about religious/spiritual topics or a travel writer. Even perhaps writing about faiths of foreign lands. If in medicine, then perhaps more of a Holistic healer. The MC point being in Leo, would give the person a more "dramatic" flair to his writing. So you see, it does take into account the persons location in the world.

*~*~*~*~*~*

Hello Gemini Lover,

I understand your trouble, as even i faced it when i started using Equal Houses. See, irrespective of how low or great the degree of ascending is, that's your ascendant. Be it 0.02 degrees or 29.92 degrees, thats the ascendant sign. This is why the prescise time of birth has always been stressed by Linda, and many astrologers as well.

The same rule applies for all the other house cusps.

As for the planets changing house. Well, all I can say is that, interpret them with a clear objective mind. That is why, i mentioned to Triplecancer, that it is best to start with friendly acquaintances and people whom you dont know first. Then once you see which house system works after numerous trials, try your own or your man's chart. This way you learn to be more objective about it.

I hope I've been helpful.

posted July 22, 2006 02:00 AM              

Interesting discussion...and thanks for all the information.

Here's another one I posted awhile ago, which hopefully I'll get around to reading in its entirety this time:

Development of House Systems in Astrology after Classical Astrology

The development of Houses and Houses Systems since Classical times.

Houses and house systems seem to have taken a long and obscure road since the time of the early Classical Astrologers. Nowadays, some astrologers ignore houses completely as being too tainted by uncertainty to use. In this they follow the tradition of Claudius Ptolemy, the "Father of Classical Astrology", who in his seminal work, Tetrabiblos, appears to have had little time for houses at all. He ignores them, from which fact various astrological commentators have concluded that he considered houses meaningless mysticism. It is certainly true that houses are purely a symbolic description of the heavens, whereas the positions of the stars and the planets are measurable concrete things.

For others of us, houses remain very important. This presents us with a problem, as unfortunately, in modern times, three classes of house system exist: ecliptic-based, time-based and space-based and these yield at least twenty methods of calculating the astrological houses on the Zodiac Wheel. In these different house systems the planets can appear in different houses: the planets aren't moving but the placement of each house is different in the various systems. [See for example how the different choice of modern house system changes the spread of planets in houses for Prince William.] Hence for those of us committed to the modern houses, the choice of house system can radically alter a horoscope.

History: The most commonly used house system at present, the Placidus system was not that used by the Classical originators of astrology. In fact, it appears that there were three separate house systems in classical astrology: Temples Cardinal Points and Quadrants, and Lots.

Over the last two millennia the fashion in house systems has gone through Alcabitus, Regiomontanus and now Placidus. And sadly this appears to be little more than fashion. It is also unfortunately true that an astrologer's preference for a particular house system is often based on how good our own chart looks with that house system. And that our clients - given the choice - often pick their chart using the house system that gives them the best chart. Not a very rigorous, nor truthful, method of casting a horoscope. In fact the lack of a rigorous choice of house system is one of the most fundamental problems in modern astrology. I would add to this that the divergence of our house systems from those of the Classical astrologers, also gives great cause for concern.

Which System should you Use?: Who knows? It is rumored that one particular national meeting of astrologers descended into a fist-fight trying to resolve this question! I have yet to see a rigorous test of the house systems: no one appears to have done a study as to which gives the most accurate prediction. If you wish to choose based on popularity, Placidus, Koch and Equal House are the most common systems for modern Western individual astrology. All three start with the Ascendant on the cusp of the first house. In Placidus and Koch, the Midheaven is then the cusp [start] of the tenth house. But there is no requirement for this in the Equal House system. The Equal system has cusps which are generally completely dissimilar to Placidus and Koch. In turn, Placidus and Koch differ in the cusps of the second, third, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth and twelfth houses. In both Placidus and Koch some Zodiac signs may never appear on a cusp, because of the variable house size. The more northerly the latitude in which you were born the more likely this is to happen. In contrast for the Equal system all signs will appear on a cusp.

To be honest, the more I have studied house systems the more I think that none of the above should be used. I think we should return to the Temples, Cardinal Points and Quadrants and Lots system that we appear, inexplicably, to have moved away from over the centuries. Classical astrologers used these three systems - basing their work on several hundred years of astrology; by what right do we think we should be doing something different?

Newspaper Horoscopes: For these a variation of the Sun system is used. The Sun's position is used to mark the first house, with the first house being placed identically to the zodiac sign. The house sizes are equal. This is a completely invalid approach, only making even a poor approximation to a standard horoscope for the one-twelfth of people born in that sign with that sign as their Ascendant. Worthless... but fun...

House Systems:

Alcabitus [or Alchabitius or Alcabitius or Alcibitius or Alcabitius Declination]: [Time-based] [The standard house system in the late Middle Ages] This method of house division first appears in a treatise written by Rhetorius, the Egyptian (505 AD) entitled From the Treasury of Antiochus, an Explanation and Narration of the Whole Art of Astrology. The system was attributed to Abu al-Saqr al-Qabisi Abd al-Aziz ibn Uthman (d. 967) also known as Alcabitius [and variant spellings], the author of the Introduction to the Art of Judgments of the Stars (c. 916-967). Although this system was presented by various other Arabic writers of the time, Alcabitius' text was translated into Latin by John Seville in the 12th century and by Erhard Ratdolt in Venice in 1503, thus helping to popularize the method.

The Midheaven and Ascendant are respectively the 10th- and 1st- house cusps. The remaining cusps are determined by the trisection of the semidiurnal and seminocturnal arcs of the Ascendant. The houses are formed by the lunes created by the true house circles that pass through these cusps and the North and South points of the Horizon. This varies from other quadrant systems, in which the trisection occurs along the ecliptic. Unlike the Placidus system it works well in the polar regions. One author notes that the method is a "logical development from the Porphyry system" since that method trisects the semi-arc of the ecliptic while this one trisects the diurnal arc and projects it onto the ecliptic by means of hour circles.

The "Classical House" [Time-based] system is a variation on this, incorporating Ptolemy's five degree correction. The diurnal arc of the Ascendant is tri-sected and projected by hour circles onto the ecliptic to form the house cusps, but five degrees is subtracted from the Ascendant to form the first house cusp. This is a modern, slight correction to the Alcibitius Declination house system, despite its name.

Campanus: [Space-based] Named after Giovanni di Campani (1233-1296). The vertical great circle from east to west is divided into 12 equal parts and great circles are drawn through these divisions and the north and south points on the horizon. The intersection points of these circles with the ecliptic are the house cusps. Thought by some authors to be the same system as that used by Al-Biruni in the 11th century under the name 'the system of Hermes' and perhaps that used by Marcus Manilius in his work, Astronomica, dated 10 AD - though as this latter is a poem it makes interpretation highly problematical. Used by Dane Rudhyar and Charles Zane in modern times.

Equal: [Ecliptic-based] [Third most commonly used system in Western Astrology] The zodiac is divided into 12 houses of 30 degrees each starting from the Ascendant. Note that in this house system the Midheaven is not necessarily the cusp of the tenth house. This system is reputed to have the oldest pedigree, as some authors state that it is the system used by Ptolemy. Others state it dates back to the time of Petosiris (1st century, BC). This would be consistent with the lack of status for the Midheaven, which was not considered important in early classical astrology.

Earth House: Zero degrees of Libra is taken as the first house cusp and each house cusp is thirty degrees farther along in the zodiac.

Horizontal; The house cusps are defined by division of the horizon into 12 directions. The first house cusp is not identical with the Ascendant but is located precisely in the east.

Koch/GOHS: [Time-based] [Second most commonly used system in Western Astrology] This system is named for its advocate German astrologer Walter Koch (1895-1970) . It was invented by Fiedrich Zanzinger and Heinz Specht. In German-speaking countries, it is also called the "Geburtsorthäusersystem" (GOHS), i.e. the "Birth place house system". This name was coined by Walter Koch following his belief that the Koch system was more related to the birth place than other systems. He believed this, because all house cusps in this system are calculated with the same polar height, the "polar height of the birth place": this has the same value as the geographic latitude.

With the Koch system, the house cusps are in fact defined by horizon lines at different times. To calculate the cusps 11 and 12, one can take the time it took the Midheaven degree to move from the horizon to the culmination, divide this time into three and see what ecliptic degree was on the horizon at the thirds. Why Koch thought this procedure should be more related to the birth place remains obscure.

Midheaven: The Midheaven (Midheaven) is taken as the cusp of the tenth house and each house is thirty degrees further along in the zodiac. Note that in this house system the Ascendant is not necessarily the cusp of the first house.

Meridian or Vehlow-Equal or Zariel: The Meridian house system was proposed by the Australian astrologer Zariel (David Cope) in the early 1900s. It has never received much attention, but was investigated by American astrologers Bruce Lloyd and Garth Allen in the late 1950s. This system is also referred to as the "Axial Rotation System," a term which is somewhat misleading, as no rotation is involved, but derives from the use of the North and South Celestial poles for the construction of the great circles. Circles are drawn through the poles and twelve points that divide the equator equally, starting at the meridian. These points are then projected onto the ecliptic. The Midheaven is identical to the 10th house cusp. The Ascendant is not equal to the 1st cusp, but is equivalent to the so called "East Point" or equatorial ascendant. This system works in extreme latitudes [the poles]. The Meridian house system is most popular with Uranian astrologers.

Moon: The Moon is taken as the tenth house cusp and each house cusp is thirty degrees farther along in the zodiac. Note that in this house system neither the Ascendant nor the Midheaven are necessarily house cusps.

Morinus: [Space-based] Named after Jean-Baptiste Morin (1583-1656), known as Morinus. The Morinus system uses great circles that pass through the poles of the ecliptic and through points that are spaced at 30-degree intervals along the Celestial Equator, beginning with the intersection of the Celestial Equator and the East Point. The cusps are determined by the intersections of these great circles and the ecliptic. The houses are not of equal size. The Midheaven is not the same as the 10th cusp. The ascendant is not the same as the 1st cusp. This system is unusual in this respect, that it doesn't begin with the Ascendant but with true East. [The Ascendant is often not at true East.]

Natural Graduation: A complicated mathematical variation of the Porphyry House System, as described on pp. 46- 47 in "New Waite's Compendium" by Colin Evans.

Natural Hours: [Time-based] The times of sunrise and sunset are noted for the location and date of the horoscope. The degrees of the Ascendant at Sun rise and Sun set give the degrees of the Ascendant and descendant respectively. The hemispheres between the Ascendant and Descendant are divided into six sectors, each representing two 'hours' of time. These sectors also give the house cusps. Note that the Ascendant and descendant are no longer tied together as a pair in this system, and the Midheaven may fall in any house.

Octopos: The prime vertical is cut at forty-five degree intervals starting at the east point of the horizon, and these points are projected onto the ecliptic using house circles. This produces eight houses instead of twelve as by most other systems, and these are then numbered starting at the descendant and going counter-clockwise, so that the house placed at the seventh house is called the first house, and the house normally near the ninth house is the second house, etc. For those persons with a fear of the twelfth house, this is the one to use.

Placidus or Placidian: [Time-based] [Most commonly used system in modern Western Astrology, not through any particular merit but because, as is widely accepted, it was the one for which affordable data tables were available in the 19th century.] This system is named after the Italian monk Placidus de Titis (1590-1668) and was found in his work Primum Mobile. The cusps are defined by divisions of semidiurnal and seminocturnal arcs. The 11th cusp is the point on the ecliptic that has completed 2/3 of its semidiurnal arc, the 12th cusp the point that has completed 1/3 of it. The 2nd cusp has completed 2/3 of its seminocturnal arc, and the 3rd cusp 1/3. Some authors argue that this rather than the Equal house system is closer to the original Ptolemaic ideal. I find this unlikely as this is a time-based system whereas Ptolemy probably thought in terms of an ecliptic system. It may also be an attempt to justify is current dominant position by referring it back to the wellspring of astrology. However it is an elegant system.

Polich-Page or Topocentric: [Time-based] This system was introduced in 1961 by Wendel Polich and A.P. Nelson Page. The tangents of the polar height of the 11th house is the tangents of the geo. latitude divided by 3. (2/3 of it are taken for the 12th house cusp.) The philosophical reasons for this algorithm are obscure. Nor is this house system more “topocentric” (i.e. birth-place-related) than any other house system. (c.f. the misunderstanding with the “birth place system”.) The “topocentric” house cusps are close to Placidus house cusps except for high geographical latitudes. It also works for latitudes beyond the polar circles, wherefore some consider it to be an improvement of the Placidus system. However the striking philosophical idea behind Placidus (i.e. the division of diurnal and nocturnal arcs of points of the zodiac) is completely destroyed.

Porphyry: [Ecliptic-based] Attributed to a Neo-Platonist named Porphyry (233-c.304), a Greek philosopher and student of Plotinus. Porphyry is best known for his work Introduction to Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos, which is essentially an encyclopedic dictionary of astrological terms and techniques. In chapter 43 entitled Determination of the Angular, Cadent, and Succedent Houses to the Degree, Porphyry shows how the cusps are derived by trisecting the semi-arc between the Ascendant and Midheaven. The Porphyry system seems to be used in at least some 'Vedic' Jyotish Indian astrology.

After the Ascendant and Midheaven ecliptic positions have been calculated, the semi-arc between them is computed by subtracting one from the other. This semi-arc -- which represents one quadrant of the chart -- is then divided by 3 to determine the arc of each of the intermediate houses. This constant is then added to the Midheaven to yield the cusp of the 11th house, to the 11th to yield the cusp of the 12th, and to the 12th to confirm the Ascendant degree. The cusps of the 4th and 7th houses will be 180 degrees from the Ascendant and Midheaven respectively and opposite in Zodiacal sign. The same quadrant arc division process is applied to the northeastern, northwestern, and southwestern quadrants of the chart to yield the cusps of houses 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, and 9. Because this process yields the same constant in each quadrant arc division, house cusps 11 and 5; 3 and 9; 2 and 8; and 6 and 12 will be 180 degrees apart. Also houses 11 and 3, 9 and 5 will be 120 degrees apart; houses 12 and 2, 8 and 6 will be 60 degrees apart.

Some authors note that the first appearance of a description and explanation of this method is made by Vettius Valens (150-175 AD) in Book III, Chapter 2 of his Anthology entitled The Authentic Degrees of the Angles. Valens himself attributes this method to an otherwise unknown astrologer named Orion.

Regiomontanus: [Space-based] [The standard house system in the later Middle Ages, it supplanted the Alcabitus system.] Named after the Johannes Müller (called "Regiomontanus", because Müller came from Königsberg). The equator is divided into 12 equal parts and great circles are drawn through these divisions and the north and south points on the horizon. The intersection points of these circles with the ecliptic are the house cusps.(1436-1476).

Solar: The position of the Sun is taken as the first house cusp and each house cusp is thirty degrees farther along in the zodiac. Note that in this house system neither the Ascendant nor the Midheaven are necessarily house cusps. This system is commonly used when the Ascendant and Midheaven are not known. It is therefore commonly used in newspaper astrology where a horoscope is being produced for everyone of a certain Sun-sign.

Sun: The Sun is taken as the fourth house cusp and each house cusp is thirty degrees farther along in the zodiac. Note that in this house system neither the Ascendant nor the Midheaven are necessarily house cusps.

Topocentric: See Polich-Page.

Vehlow An equal house system promulgated by Johannes Vehlow ( b 1980 Germany).

Zariel: See Meridian.

Classical Astrology House Links:

01: The Twelve Houses of Classical Astrology
02: House Systems in Classical Astrology
(a): Cardinal Points and Quadrants
(b): Temples
(c): Lots
03: House Systems after the Time of Manilius
04: House System Examples for Prince William's Horoscope

© Dr Shepherd Simpson, Astrological Historian

posted July 23, 2006 02:31 PM            

I think my Moon makes more sense in the 5th as my mother is a Leo, I'm very creative, and I truly do love to be entertained.

posted July 27, 2006 12:16 AM              

....question is; which one do I go with? I feel it's more likely 'Libra' using the Placidus system because I'm just overly polite and friendly to everyone I meet. I would never criticise anyone or anything in front of anyone I only just met (something I read in a Virgo rising description).