1. From homeopathy to astrology
I’m a medical doctor and classical homeopath since almost forty years and although I do not practice astrology professionally I have been interested very young, since I was reading my first book at the age of 13.
In 2000, I (with my wife Bernadette) conducted intensive researches connecting enneagram and homeopathy in order to improve homeopathic remedies diagnosis.
The Enneagram is a system of reading the personality in nine types. However, the global structure of the Enneagram was quite thin at that time, in any case too limited to be able to help me in my homeopathic practice.
I had to deepen the knowledge and as the Enneagram is not a “traditional” science as is astrology, it was necessary to somehow fend for oneself.
My method has been to compare Enneagram to other traditional sciences such as traditional Chinese, Indian and Tibetan medicine and many others traditions like astrology and also modern typologies like Jung’s.
These comparisons have enabled us to illuminate the enneagram and give it a new consistency allowing it to be applied in my homeopathic medical practice.
So in front of each patient I currently use the revised Enneagram to carry a diagnosis of constitution (1 to 9). For each constitution, I discovered certain categories of homeopathic remedies. This allowed me to increase my results in impressive proportions (validating my research retrospectively). The more my knowledge of enneagram types grow, the better the therapeutic outcomes are.
I have recently come to deepen the astrological symbolism into the enneagram. This brought me to review the astrological model in full. It is this research that I propose you to discover here.
In approaching the astrological system, we have two great choices: to adopt the Hellenistic system remaining with the 7 traditional planets or the modern system that integrates Uranus, Neptune and Pluto, bringing the system to 10 planets. As I am a researcher by passion it would have been impossible for me to ignore the three trans saturnian planets.
However, 10 planets for 12 signs is quite odd on a symbolical level. Moreover, the attribution of the new zodiacal rulerships did not respect in my opinion the inner logic of the Hellenistic system, which increases my dissatisfaction, but also stimulated my research and scientific streak.
The discovery of Uranus, Neptune and Pluto aroused a breath of creative air among astrologers, and the zodiacal rulerships attributions were quickly debated. The main attributions were : Uranus in Aquarius, Neptune in Pisces and Pluto in Scorpio. If the first two were unanimously accepted, Pluto’s rulership is always debated mainly between Scorpio and Aries, and we will see why.
What I propose in this article is:
2. The traditional system of planetary rulership
Traditionally in Hellenistic astrology each of the 7 traditional planets have rulerships on some zodiac signs, this is called the domiciliation system.
The Zodiac cycle
In the zodiacal cycle, the signs alternate by so-called positive and negative polarities that one goes in this article for sake of clarity naming Yang and Yin. Indeed, the words “positive “and “negative” too often evoke in our mind the good and the bad.
Yang signs have characteristics specific to light, activity, dynamism or heat. Yin signs have characteristics peculiar to night, rest, passivity or cold.
The Chaldean Order
The Chaldeans had established a system of logical control by establishing a horizontal symmetry determining six bands:
- Aries – Scorpio
In this perspective, they assigned to the first band the two luminaries, the Yang Leo sign for the sun and the Yin Cancer sign for the moon.
Then from the fastest to the slowest planet each governs a band: Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn.
One will notice that each planet rules a positive/Yang and negative/Yin sign (beside the sun and the moon).
Hellenistic astrologers said that a planet was in diurnal rulership in a Yang (positive) sign and nocturnal rulership in a Yin (negative) sign. This means that according to the polarity of the sign, the planet acquires a daytime or nocturnal quality. Thus, Mercury in diurnal rulership in Gemini is an extroverted Mercury whose thought borrows ideas to a very large extent in the outside, i.e. transmitted by tradition, education and instruction and its interest is more particularly focused towards concrete objects and the success of its objectives.
While in the nocturnal rulership in Virgo there is a more introverted Mercury whose thought arises from the subjective background. It seeks to deepen and not to widen. But the expression of his ideas and their confrontation with each other can be a source of anxiety. His style is heavier with doubts and scruples.
So we see that the double rulership of each planet in yin and yang signs allows a very interesting and meaningful characterization.
The double rulership
As this double rulership is the fundamental point to integrate to understand where it is going next, we need to deepen it a little.
When the sign is Yang this means that it has predominantly qualities of light, expansion, action, movement, heat, and extraversion. When it is Yin it has predominantly qualities of darkness, contraction, passivity, immobility, coldness, introversion.
However, according to the universal principle of the Tao, nothing exists by itself and everything manifests solely in dependence on its opposite, so the light exists only in relation to the shadow. So the Yang quality of a sign exists only in dependence of its Yin quality. In other words, each sign has Yin qualities and Yang qualities.
However, in the Yang sign the Yang aspect is predominant and conscious (persona) and the Yin aspect is less present and repressed in the unconscious (the shadow). Conversely for the Yin sign.
Persona is what we see, the apparent part of our being, what we show socially to others and that we also show ourselves to oneself, as the King reigns in his castle. However, in the shallows of the castle there are prisoners in the jails. And this represents all our parts in suffering that are repressed in what we can call our shadow. That’s the unconscious part of the sign.
To remember: in a sign, when the conscious is Yin, the unconscious is Yang, and vice versa.
In the example shown on the drawing:
- In the positive sign of Aquarius, Saturn is the diurnal ruler, it reigns over the conscious Yang/extrovert part of the sign.
- In the negative sign of Capricorn, Saturn is the nocturnal ruler, it reigns over the unconscious Yang/extrovert part of the sign.
We see that in both cases Saturn (which is a visible planet therefore Yang) presents an affinity for the Yang part of the sign: the conscious for Aquarius and the unconscious for Capricorn.
This means in this case that the diurnal Saturn of Aquarius has a concrete common sense (Saturn) that it puts at the service of an ideal (air sign) transmitted by a culture or tradition (extraversion).
Capricorn’s nocturnal Saturn is pushed back into the unconscious, which means it is active in another way. The common sense of the repressed Saturn becomes fixed ideas. As Capricorn is Yin/introverted, the unconscious is extroverted, meaning that the relationship to the object becomes a source of anxiety (instead in the case of Aquarius to be a positive source of investment). As Capricorn is a sign of Earth the orientation of the subject is centered on material and concrete objects.
To synthesize, Capricorn’s nocturnal Saturn has a tendency towards fixed ideas and obsessions with external and concrete elements (e.g. an obsession of lacking money money).
Understanding dual domicile
How to understand this duality, what does it mean?
” Mars which has its diurnal home in Aries and its nocturnal home in Scorpio is for the Mars of Scorpio a Mars of resistance, a Mars of reaction, and for the Mars of Aries, a Mars of action.” (Jean Carteret, Dignities and Debility). So in Aries, Mars is visible. In Scorpio, Mars is repressed. The individual Aries is identified with the archetype Mars an active and superficial energy that quickly depletes, the individual Scorpio presents a pent-up aggressiveness that manifests itself in a devious and indirect way.
This double rulership of a planet represents the foundation of the theory of rulership in Astrology.
What the Ancients did not know was that there were planets beyond Saturn.
That’s what we’re going to see.
3. The new planetary rulerships
With the arrival of the trans Saturnian planets (1781 Uranus, 1846 Neptune, 1930 Pluto), modern astrologers faced a challenge: to define new zodiacal rulerships.
Overall what can be said is that these attributions were not a long quiet river and that the opinions diverged for long enough to finally stabilize for Uranus and Neptune (although some are not convinced for Uranus) but on the other hand the opinions for Pluto remain divergent.
Astrologers apparently had two arguments for placing Uranus in Aquarius. On the one hand, this (seems to) follow a logical order, that of Chaldean domiciles.
A British astrologer (Sepharial 1864 – 1929) was the first astrologer known to have “assigned” Uranus to Aquarius and Neptune to Pisces. His reasoning was as follows: “If we look at the planets, in the Chaldean order, mercury governs Virgo, then Venus Libra, Mars Scorpio, Jupiter Sagittarius and Saturn Capricorn. The next planet if we follow this order must be Uranus in Aquarius and Neptune in Pisces.”
This reasoning, moreover, could just as well be applied counterclockwise, which would put Uranus in Capricorn, Neptune in Sagittarius and Pluto in Scorpio.
On the other hand, the social (revolutionary) context that coincided with the discovery of Uranus was inclined to associate it with Aquarius.
It made sense for Neptune to be assigned Pisces, and there was a broad consensus among astrologers.
When Pluto was discovered, there were lively debates that remained unfinished between Scorpio and Aries.
In 1897 a French astrologer Fomalhaut (Father Charles Nicoullaud )in his “Manual of Spherical and Judicial Astrology” attributed Uranus to Capricorn, Saturn to Aquarius, Neptune to Pisces, Jupiter to Sagittarius. He had a prophetic word: “The planet beyond Neptune exists, it is called Pluto….” which he attributed to Aries letting Mars in Scorpio.
- E. Thierens, a Dutch astrologer in 1911, spoke of a hypothetical planet that he recognized as Pluto that he assigned to Aries.
In the Veil Of Isis No. 73, January 1926, the famous Eugene Caslant (still a Frenchman) wrote an article “hypothetical planets” in which he announced Pluto and Proserpine without mentioning domiciles. But in the Astrological Almanac, in 1932 P. Genty said: “Uranus is in good celestial condition in the signs of Air, Neptune in the signs of Water, Pluto in the signs of Fire, and Proserpine in the signs of Earth. As for the rulership, Caslant gives them respectively the second half of Aquarius, Pisces, Aries, and Taurus….”. Again Pluto is attributed to Aries and we see that Proserpine is in Taurus.
Llewellyn George in 1930 in his book “How Planets Affect You” gives mythological reasons for attributing Pluto to the Scorpio; Idem the same year, for Frederick Thoresby in “Modern Astrology” magazine and in 1931 for Mabel Baudot (Astrologers’ Quarterly, Vol. V No. 3).
The majority of modern astrologers eventually opted for the Scorpio, but some did keep Aries (for example: Carl Payne Tobey, one of the most influential astrologers in America from 1930 to 1970).
Let us return to the famous logic that attributed Uranus to Aquarius, Neptune to Pisces and Pluto to Scorpio.
It seems that at the time of this discovery the astrologers did not make great case of the theory of the double domicile. Indeed, the logic was rather to assign a single rulership to a sign and gradually abandon the second rulership. Little is said today about the rulership of Mars for the Scorpio, Jupiter for Pisces and Saturn for Aquarius. The general tendency has therefore shifted towards the rulership of a single sign by a single planet without specifying whether it should be his diurnal or nocturnal domicile.
However there are two logical fallacies.
So we have a dilemma!
Double rulership of slow planets
If we consider the double rulership as a foundation of the system of domicile in Astrology, it follows that the trans Saturnian planets must necessarily also have a double rulership.
We will see that this allows us to get out of the dilemma.
We propose to still keep the domiciles as bequeathed by the Ancients: for the diurnal domicile Mercury in Gemini, Venus in Libra, Mars in Aries, Jupiter in Sagittarius and Saturn in Aquarius. For nocturnal domiciles we have Mercury in Virgo, Venus in Taurus, Mars in Scorpio, Jupiter in Pisces and Saturn in Capricorn.
And we’ll see how to assign a double rulership quite logically and meaningfully to slow planets.
Let’s first look at the geometric aspect
In this representation of the visible planets we observe:
- A zigzag line that connects the Yang Signs in the sequence: Lion – Gemini – Libra – Aries – Sagittarius – Aquarius determining the diurnal domiciles.
- A zigzag line that connects the Yin signs in the sequence Cancer -Virgin – Taurus – Scorpio – Pisces – Capricorn sequences determining nocturnal domiciles.
If we keep the Ptolemaic logic (Mercury – Venus – Mars – Jupiter – Saturn), we will add in order: Uranus – Neptune – Pluto – Proserpine/Haumea – Bacchus/Makemake (we have added to the system the two dwarf planets Haumea and Makemake that we have renamed Proserpine and Bacchus, see end note).
Since we were in an upward direction for the visible planets, let us continue with the invisible planets in a descending direction and we see that the nocturnal domiciles of the visible planets become the diurnal domiciles of the invisible planets and vice versa.
For diurnal domiciles, after Saturn in Aquarius, we find Uranus in Capricorn, Neptune in Pisces, Pluto in Scorpio, Proserpine/Haumea in Taurus and Bacchus/Makemake in Virgo.
For nocturnal domiciles, after Saturn in Capricorn, we find Uranus in Aquarius, Neptune in Sagittarius, Pluto in Aries, Proserpine/Haumea in Libra and Bacchus/Makemake in Gemini.
So our results unveil a system that integrates what modern astrologers had already discovered: Uranus in Aquarius, Neptune in Pisces and Pluto in Scorpio, but we bring the precision of diurnal and nocturnal domiciles.
So we don’t change anything, we just complete the pieces of the puzzle!
Thus, Aquarius remains the diurnal domicile of Saturn added by Uranus as its nocturnal ruler, Pisces remains the nocturnal domicile of Jupiter, added by Neptune as his diurnal ruler and Capricorn remains the nocturnal domicile of Saturn added by Uranus as his diurnal ruler.
Now let’s see the meaning.
What do we notice in this new rulership proposal?
Slow (invisible) planets take their diurnal rulerships not in yang signs but in Yin signs. Thus Uranus acquires a diurnal rulership in Capricorn, Neptune in Pisces, Pluto in Scorpio, Proserpine (Haumea) in Taurus and Bacchus (Makemake) in Virgo.
As there is a reversal of meaning (we go from the visible to the invisible), it makes sense that these planets have a diurnal rulership in Yin signs. The Yin is what is invisible or not yet visible, and the trans Saturnian planets govern the invisible. In this sense diurnal rulership means the sign where the power and strength of the planet is magnified. Pluto is magnified in Scorpio and restricted in Aries. It is therefore said that Pluto’s diurnal rulership is Scorpio, and its nocturnal rulership Aries.
End of Part 1.
In Part 2 we will analyze the dialectic Capricorn/Aquarius and Uranus/Saturn by integrating the meaning of new domiciles. In particular, we will return to the symbolism of Uranus from a pure mythological angle. Then we will talk briefly about the two dwarf planets we added (Haumea and Makemake) and the overall logic of the new system.