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 jai dbut en astrologie, il ny avait pas dordinateurs et de logiciels dastrologie. On
devait monter le thme manuellement en utilisant Les Tables des Maisons pour les
latitudes de 0 (Equateur) 6630 (le cercle polaire) en mthode Placidus ainsi que les
rgimes horaires pour le monde entier. La majorit des astrologues n'utilisant alors que cette
mthode Placidus pour changer, on devait bien sy conformer !
Comme vous ntes pas sans lignorer, il existe deux grands groupes de domifications :
celles dont les sections sont gales sur le cercle zodiacal et celles qui sont ingales. Les
premires sont principalement dimensions spatiales, cest de la gomtrie pure, tandis
que les secondes sont principalement dimensions temporelles.
La mthode Placidus est la domification ingale sur le zodiaque, actuellement la plus
utilise ; elle remonte au XVIIme sicle. Elle sest impose parmi les autres domifications
ingales du fait de la vulgarisation commerciale de ses Tables de maisons. La mthode divise
en six parties gales la dure du jour et idem pour la dure de la nuit (notion darc diurne et
nocturne). On peut se demander sil est logique de dcouper lespace zodiacal avec des
divisions du temps ? Oui, rpondent ceux qui estiment que lastrologie est ltude des
rythmes et des cycles et qui de ce fait privilgient la notion de temps (de rythme) plutt que la
notion despace. Toutefois la grande faiblesse de cette domification est quelle nest plus
applicable partir de 66 de latitude, maisons diurnes ou nocturnes disparaissant
certaines saisons de lanne.

Maarit en Placidus
Or ma meilleure collgue de travail et amie Maarit est finlandaise, ne 62N36, donc trs
proche du cercle polaire. Et la connaissant bien, je ne pouvais cautionner un tel thme.

Les deux autres principaux systmes de maisons ingales sur le zodiaque sont plus
anciens que le Placidus (divisions gales temporelles) : ce sont les systmes Campanus
(divisions gales sur le Premier Vertical) (XIIIme sicle) et Rgiomontanus (divisions
gales sur l'Equateur) (datant du XVme sicle et le plus utilis par les grands
astrologues de cette priode). Ces trois systmes 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 nest pas sur le plan de lcliptique. Car la faon de dcouper chaque quadrant en
trois arcs est diffrente. Toutes ces divisions deviennent ingales quand projetes sur
lcliptique. LAscendant et Milieu du Ciel sont au dbut de la maison 1 et 10.
Danile Jay nous avait fait remarqu quavant Placidus, la mthode invente par l'astrologue
arabe Alcabitius est le tout premier exemple de systmes de division des maisons qui soit
bas sur le temps. Le systme Placidus consiste trisecter en parts gales le temps que
met un lieu cliptique pour aller de son lever sa culmination et il ressemble beaucoup
celui d'Alcabitius, tout en tant un peu plus subtil.

Maarit en Alcabituis
Denis Labour nous a signal que le systme Alcabitius fut celui le plus longtemps utilise
(prs d'un millnaire), quil est assez proche des cuspides placidiennes, mais quil peut y
avoir 3 ou 4 degrs d'cart sous nos latitudes europennes. Ce fut la mthode des
astrologues arabes et notre domification occidentale jusqu'aux XVe XVIe sicles. On doit
se souvenir que le clbre astrologue Bonatis lutilisait en astrologie horaire. Yves Lenoble
nous signale que cette mthode dcrit tout simplement le mouvement du degr Ascendant au
cours de la journe. Il s'agit de trouver la position (en signe et degr de signe) que prend
l'Ascendant de deux heures en deux heures (deux heures l'ancienne s'entend c'est dire des
heures temporaires qui durent un douzime d'arc diurne). Contrairement la domification
zodiacale (et la domification Aequalis medium/Equal Medium) que nous verrons plus
loin, la maison X concide avec le Milieu du Ciel. C'est sans doute pour cette raison qu'elle
a t prfre par les arabes aux autres domifications. Alcabitius fut prcde par la
domification zodiacale (poque grecque). Denis Labour signale quAlcabitius fut suivie
par Regiomontanus qui repose sur la mme ide d'un dcoupage de l'quateur en douze
parties gales : chez Alcabitius, c'est en temps (les heures plantaires) ; chez
Regiomontanus, c'est en espace (sections de 30).

Maarit en Campanus
Rien ne change en utilisant dautres domifications telles que Campanus, certaines Maisons
sont encore plus troites (domification que jai utilis quand jai suivi la formation
humaniste). Cette domification a t extrmement peu utilise.

Maarit en Regiomontanus
Rien ne change en Regiomontanus. Jutilise plus facilement cette technique que Placidus
car base sur lEquateur avec lequel je travaille pour les dclinaisons plantaires. Sous nos
latitudes moyennes, elle montre peu de diffrence avec Placidus et je lutilise pour ne pas trop
choquer les placidiens !

Maarit en Topocentrique

Javais eu espoir avec le systme topocentrique

Mais Denis Labour nous dit quil s'agit d'une variante du systme Placidus. Sous nos
latitudes moyennes, les cuspides du systme topocentrique ne s'loignent jamais de plus de
1degr des cuspides placidiennes. La formule initiale semble avoir t labore par Andr
Boudineau, mais le systme lui-mme a t dvelopp par Nelson Page et Wendel Polich en
Amrique du sud. De nombreux astrologues anglo-saxons ont utilis le systme 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 daffiner les directions primaires. Ce systme topocentrique tient compte de la
parallaxe qui ramne la position du centre de la Terre (position gocentrique) la position
occupe par lindividu sur la sphre terrestre (topocentrique) et il permettrait de ce fait de
domifier au - del du cercle polaire. Mais le thme de Maarit nest pas plus probant dans ce
systme.

Maarit en Koch
Citons parmi les systmes rcents, le systme Koch, dit du lieu de naissance , apparu vers
1960, et dont la division en maisons est base sur langle cliptique/AS et les cuspides
calcules sur lEquateur. Il ne donne pas de meilleurs rsultats sur le thme de Maarit.

Maarit en Equal Medium/Antique

Comme Maarit et moi-mme nous avons fait un magnifique voyage au Groenland, au-del
du cercle polaire et que nous avons rencontrs dagrables Inuits, je ne peux penser quils
n'auraient droit qu' quelques Maisons dans leur thme ! Oui, sous nos latitudes les maisons
ingales selon Placide ou Regiomontanus fonctionnent trs bien mais quel crdit apporter
un systme qui n'est pas valable sous toutes les latitudes?

Sur ce blog, je vous ai dit mon mmoire RAO de 2000 concernant la domification Equal
Medium, dite Antique dans certains logiciels, toujours avec lexemple de Maarit. Et je dois
dire quenfin je pouvais interprter le thme de Maarit.

Maarit en Zodiacale
Notons que la domification "Aequalis Medium", quelque soit son intrt, n'avait jamais t
employe dans l'histoire de l'astrologie occidentale avant notre XXe sicle. Plusieurs
astrologues contemporains (dont Yves Christiaen, Maurice Nouvel, Michle Raulin) ont
pens que la thorie des Maisons gales tait la meilleure parce que c'est celle qui
qu'englobe un maximum de possibilits.
Ce type de domification Equal-Medium ne me convenait pas compltement concernant mon
thme personnel car elle me met un Soleil en Maison 7 alors que ma vie a t celle dun
Soleil en Maison 6 ! Et un Jupiter en Maison 1 alors que ma vie est celle dun Jupiter en
Maison 12.
Puis je me suis tourne vers la domification Maison=Signe, car comme lcrivait Alain
Soudeillette, pourquoi changerait-on de type de domification suivant que l'on se situe en
Norvge ou en France ? Car si l'on suit le prcepte d'herms trimgiste "tout ce qui est en
haut est comme ce qui est en bas (maisons terrestres = maisons clestes (signes).
Le thme de Maarit en Maisons Zodiacales (la Maison 1 est celle de lAscendant : Maison =
le signe) est la domification qui convient le mieux l'interprtation de son thme ! Et mon
thme personnel galement !

Maarit en Equatoriale
Mais Robert et Francine Gouiran estimaient quil est illusoire de proposer un systme
de maisons gales car lui non plus ne fonctionne pas bien dans ces rgions polaires
quoiqu'on en dise, car il reste bas sur un Ascendant qui prs du ple devient flou et
vanescent, se dplaant grande vitesse en tout sens. Il n'y a qu'un point solide qui existe
partout c'est le Milieu du ciel, c'est--dire l'intersection du plan mridien avec l'cliptique car
il y a toujours un point mridien de culmination du Soleil, mme si c'est sous l'horizon (sauf
un jour aux ples!). Il y a donc toujours un axe perpendiculaire Est-Ouest. D'o l'ide de
dcouper la sphre locale partir du mridien en douze secteurs de deux heures
d'Ascension droite chacun et de former ainsi douze secteurs quatoriaux (ou maisons
quatoriales), dcoupage partir de l'Equateur cleste et qui est possible sous toutes les
latitudes. Les significations astrologiques de ces douze secteurs leur sont propres et sont
diffrentes 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 gaux de deux heures
d'ascension droite partir de ce MC. C'est ce que nous appelons la domification quatoriale
qu'on peut effectuer toutes latitudes. En retranchant six heures l'ARMC (ou temps sidral)
on obtient une sorte d'ascendant quatorial (parfois appel point EST, ne pas confondre
avec le point de l'Est). Astrid Fallon tait assez d'accord avec Robert et Francine pour
l'utilisation de la domification quatoriale, de 12 quartiers gaux partir de l'ascension droite
du MC (ARMC).
Yves Christiaen crivait : ne pas dire le Soleil se lve lEst mais du ct de lOrient
. Les 3 points situs lOrient lis lapparition du Soleil sont lAscendant, le point Est et le
Point du Lever du Soleil. Dfinissons-les :
Ascendant (1031 CAP chez Maarit) : croisement de lHorizon natal avec lEcliptique. Point
de notre incarnation, notre point de contact physique avec la Terre lheure de notre
naissance. Base du temprament et du comportement gnral. Dit point horoscope .
Lhorizon reprsente: le potentiel, la puissance.

Point du Lever du Soleil (008 POI chez Maarit PLS) : point cliptique prcis, point de
jaillissement de la lumire, point plus spirituel que physique. Point vernal personnel car
directement li au premier temps de vie. Dit point de lheure : importance sur notre tre
intrieur, sur notre moi profond. Retentissement profond sur notre ego par lempreinte
quil y mettra. Motivations profondes. Sur lEcliptique : ce qui est intensif.
Point Est (440 POI chez Maarit E) : croisement de lEquateur avec lHorizon, 90 du
Mridien. Les instincts. Sur lEquateur : ce qui est extensif. Cest lquivalent de
lAscendant dans cette domification quatoriale.

Chane individuelle
Il y a aussi la domification Asc-MC (affichage des angles uniquement, sans maisons
succdentes et cadentes) mais cela narrange pas linterprtation dans les rgions polaires.
Par contre on peut faire un thme sans Maisons. Cest ce que nous sommes obligs de faire
quand nous ne connaissons par lheure de naissance. Jutilise alors les Chanes plantaires
individuelles et collectives.

Dans les deux figures, les chanes prsentent Mercure en tte de chane et Jupiter en fin de
chane. Il y a cohrence entre lindividu et le collectif ! Mercure seule en tte de chane : tout
passe par un raisonnement, tout est froidement intellectualis ; la personne vient dans le
monde avec un besoin d'change, de communication. Jupiter en fin de chane : on cherche sa
place, la reconnaissance sociale mais on a du mal dlimiter son territoire ; il y a perturbation
entre soi et l'environnement dans les changes avec pourtant une certaine capacit s'intgrer.

Regardons la Signature du thme dpendant des plantes et de leur position zodiacale et non
des Maisons, Maarit est Terre-Cardinal = Capricorne. Mme sans tenir compte de son
Ascendant en apex du T-carr la conjonction Soleil-Saturne en Balance et Uranus en
Cancer, on peut trs bien faire un thme sans Maisons et mme sans Ascendant en tenant
compte des aspects du signe correspondant la signature du thme (du Capricorne en carr
par rapport aux deux autres signes du mme mode vibratoire dominant, Cardinal, et leurs
plantes habitantes ( la conjonction Soleil-Saturne/BAL et carre Uranus/CAN) ! Sans
ngliger quUranus est 2304 de Dclinaison donc proche de lHors-Limite.
CONCLUSION :
Il me semble que le systme des Maisons Zodiacale (Une Maison=Un signe) est le plus
applicable et interprtable toutes latitudes. Je lutiliserai lavenir le plus possible. Mais je
continuerai galement dutiliser Regiomontanus car lhoroscope est proche de celui de
Placidus et ne choque pas les placidiens. Et je ne ngligerai pas la domification Equatoriale,
quoique plus dlicate interprter.

crire commentaire

Commentaires : 1

#1
Liliane (vendredi, 27 dcembre 2013 14:02)
Je n'avais pas assist au colloque annuel du RAO 2014. Je viens seulement de
recevoir les actes de ce colloque. Mon sujet prfr est l'expos de Franck NGUYEN:
DOMIFICATION MERIDIENNE ET DESTIN SOCIAL. Ce que j'appelle
Domification Equatoriale dans mon article ci-dessus est appel Domification
Mridienne par Franck et je m'y rallie tout fait. La Maison 1 en domification
mridienne (voir ci-dessus thme en quatoriale) montre une Maison 1 M dans le
signe des Poissons, signe de la multitude et des organisations humanitaires
internationales qui reprsente bien la ralisation 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 23N
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 60N 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 Suns beams, and at the equator it may observed how
they actually effect the visibility of the planets. At Oslo 60N 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 2327, this means that at midsummer the Sun will never be
more than 633 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 Earths 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. 0North 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 60N 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 75N 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 2327 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 didnt 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 Earths rotation upon its
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. Its when the darn thing
doesnt go down in the evening that you are finding cardboard
sheets to blackout the bedroom windows, and even then you cant
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 Worlds 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 its lowest point, which is much
contrary to its 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
doesnt work, we can always adopt and approach the problem from
a different angle. If the chart doesnt show houses, then maybe you
didnt need them for the chart, or the question wasnt 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 90N 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 130 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 230
beneath the horizon. From this condition I judged the priests

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 its 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.
Its 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 Moons 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 isnt 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 6634 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 6634N. 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 2326' 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
6634N, 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 2326S and 2326N, 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 (6623.5' northern latitude)
and south of the southern arctic circle (6623.5' 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 2326.5' 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 7000' 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 2755' while the ascendant only moved 1450', 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 1317', while MC moved 3211'.

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 030', 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 2910' 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 2752' Pisces and covers the zodiac to 2659' 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 124' 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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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 043' Aquarius was ascending. Now that point is descending. Instead
043' Leo is ascending.
The intersection between the meridian circle and the ecliptic above the horizon no longer is
043' Leo. Instead it is 043' 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 043' Leo through Virgo, and Libra to 2917' Scorpio.

Jump to 2917' Taurus.

Retrograde motion from 2917' Taurus through Aries, and Pisces to 043' Aquarius.

Jump to 043' 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 2917' Scorpio - 043' Aquarius and 2917' Taurus 043' 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 043' Aquarius though Pisces, Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo,
Virgo, and Libra to 2917' Scorpio.

Jump to 2917' Taurus.

Direct motion from 2917' Taurus to 043' Leo.

Jump to 043' Aquarius.

The points in the area 2917' Taurus - 043' 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 Houldings 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 planets 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 Holdens 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 planets 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 Earths orbital plane
into 12 equal segments and so by analogy, the houses should divide the Earths 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 houses 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 houses 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 earths equator and taking lines from the geographic North (or South) pole to
give lines of geographic longitude. However, geographic longitude is measured on the earths
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 locations 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 Raphaels 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 Ptolemys 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 ecliptics 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 charts time to an earlier time when
the charts 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 Earths 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 cones 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 cones 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 planets 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
planets 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 planets
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 planets 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 planets 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 planets 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 planets 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 planets 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 planets 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 dont. 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 << Polar Ambiguity! >>. 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 doesnt 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! Maginis book was examined by
Delhambre in Histoire de LAstronomie 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