From: hughes@gloin.cis.udel.edu (John Hughes)
Subject: Re: House Systems (Was Re: what are "campanus" houses...)
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 01:49:07 GMT

In article <C1BH4r.84o@cs.mcgill.ca> pisces@cs.mcgill.ca (L. M. P. McPherson) writes:
>In article <1993Jan22.005306.29885@udel.edu> hughes@mercury.cis.udel.edu (John Hughes) writes:
>>It's important to understand these systems, I believe; I'm something of a 
>>purist and believe that only Campanus captures what most people think of when
>>they think of houses. I have suspected that Placidus was invented before much
>>was known about spherical trigonometry, and this dividing up rising times was
>>an attempt to approximate Campanus. But of course I cannot prove this.
>
>As a scientist, I believe in taking a more empirical approach
>to such questions. I know of (from Dean's summary in "Recent
>Advances in Natal Astrology") only one large-scale study of
>house systems. It was conducted by the Church of Light, and
>they found that the Placidus system worked best. Unfortunately,
>in keeping with their usual practice (one apparently deemed
>acceptable in the astrological community -- in general), 
>they failed to publish details of their methods and analyses.

Swell guys, those Church-of-Lighters.

>I look, therefore, to my personal experience. Here is one
>data point, based on very recent and very striking personal
>experience. I have conducted similar analyses in the past,
>but I don't have a record of them.

[description of a ninth-house Saturn transit with altogether appropriate
 life changes accompanying it]

>The only house systems which place my ninth-house cusp near
>these positions of transiting Saturn are Meridian, Morinus,
>Topocentric, and Placidus (i.e., Saturn is within 5 degrees
>of the cusp using these systems).

I've always tried to be rather scientific myself about these things. I learned
very early on in my astrological training the peculiar fury that accompanies
friendly discussions about the various merits and stupidities of using the
different house systems (and zodiacs...). My own conviction has been more or
less strengthened by watching the big planets, especially Jupiter and Saturn,
roll across my chart through the years. Especially around the time of puberty,
when life is very dramatic and shifting, these two planets crossed successive
Campanus cusps right on time, like clockwork, tracing my evolution into 
adulthood quite nicely, slicing my life up into interlaced one- and 
two-and-a-half-year acts.

>I have always used Placidus because I found it worked well 
>during transits with some obvious link to events in my life.
>The Topocentric cusps are virtually identical to the Placidus
>cusps, so I would have to understand their theoretical motivation
>before choosing between Placidus and Topocentric. 

As I recall, Topocentric houses are Placidus houses corrected for the fact
that births actually happen on the surface of the earth, not at its center
(a rather embarrassing oversight on the part of all other house systems).
I thought I remembered Dean extolling their virtues with a few other 
expermental results as well. If you have found success with Placidus, I would
strongly suggest you try your method on Topocentric cusps. Again, this is
the intuitivist in me speaking again. I would be delighted if someone would
work out similar corrections for Campanus houses-- my math degree has grown
ever so rusty...

>The above argument contains the hidden assumption that one
>and only one system is the "correct" one. In truth, I reject
>this assumption. [...] Houses calculated
>as divisions of the prime vertical (e.g., Campanus) may 
>well represent some other facet of existence. Each great
>circle may have its own domain of influence/coincidence.

This is altogether plausible, and I must admit it has a certain appeal (though
the most favored house systems, Placidus and Koch, are not to my knowledge
based on the division of any great circle, and in addition Placidus houses are
never exactly calculated but are approxiamted in a rather complicated scheme).
At the same time, it is alarming to me to face the prospect of adding yet more
points to the progressively hairier horoscope wheel; one is tempted to tune 
into the subtle variations this will add to an already rich map, though I 
suspect no one not born with a caul over his head would have much success!

I have always counselled beginners in the art that the only good, reliable
study is onesself. I don't believe anyone can teach the intuitions from third-
hand experience of a native who is not intimately known to the novice-- 
ubiquitous pedagogic analyses of Queen Elizabeth and Marilyn Monroe in 
popular texts notwithstanding. One really needs to feel the symbolism come
alive in onesself first, only later focusing the twelvefold lens on loved ones
and good friends, and then much later on the unsuspecting public. 

There is no telling what is going on in our minds when we form the critical
associations we use to decipher the horoscope wheel. I can't say why Ms.
McPherson has had such good luck with Placidus in her life, or why it should
do so poorly when I read my own. Perhaps *she* would have better luck, show me
things I never would have seen myself. And perhaps I and Campanus could 
surprise her as well. If it does indeed turn out the be the case that the
different time and space slices have subtle variations in meaning, we could
have something of an answer: I have learned to tune myself into the Prime
Vertical, to view the world as it looks due south, arcing over my head. And
Ms. McPherson reads in a universe where zodiac is best divided according to
natural divisions of potential energy. And others train themselves to see the
world along the thin disk of the ecliptic, sliced up like a flat pie, while 
others have been lying on their backs staring straight up into heaven all 
these years. Maybe this isn't such a peculiar way to proceed after all.


John
hughes@cis.udel.edu