A question pertaining to Saturn

Astrologers' Community

Help Support Astrologers' Community:

At what point in history was Saturn to have been considered exalted in Leo.
Dr. Lehman makes reference to this fact in her book "Essential Dignities". Also the question that comes to mind is why did that change; was it because of logical reasoning or from observation. In the Chaldean tables of essential dignities he is given the first six degrees of Leo (fire triplictiy) as all other planets exalted are given the first six degrees as well other signs. Would anyone be able to give a reference to any text that speaks to this historic marker? If so then please guide me.

I must profess that I misread what was written by Dr. Lehman. My apologies.
However I am glad that this happened, because I feel that Saturn is misconstrued by many and is worth the attention.
 
Tsmall,

"Saturn as a participatory ruler"; this is only when the domicile, exalted, and Ruling Triplicity ruler makes no aspect to the sign it rules, but only he makes an aspect to correct?
 
Tsmall,

"Saturn as a participatory ruler"; this is only when the domicile, exalted, and Ruling Triplicity ruler makes no aspect to the sign it rules, but only he makes an aspect to correct?

No. Saturn is the participatory ruler of the fire triplicity. This means that in the last third of the native's life (which can be sooner than 61 years, as you previously posted) he sets the tone of life if the sect light of the native's chart is in a fire sign.

Take a look at Dorotheus for some early writing on triplicity rulers plus chart examples, and Bonatti for later.
 
No. Saturn is the participatory ruler of the fire triplicity. This means that in the last third of the native's life (which can be sooner than 61 years, as you previously posted) he sets the tone of life if the sect light of the native's chart is in a fire sign.

Take a look at Dorotheus for some early writing on triplicity rulers plus chart examples, and Bonatti for later.

Thank you Oddity. I will do this now.
 
Last edited:
Hello,

thanks for this thread, very interesting.

And also, I am going to post what I used to use
wrt dignitaries, since I could imagine that there
are mistakes in it. Unfortunately I can't remember
where I got this from.


PLANET-----RULER-------DETRIMENT-----EXALTATION-----FALL
Mars-----Aries+Scorpio--Libra+Taurus-------Cancer-------Capricorn
Venus---Libra+Taurus----Aries+Scorpio------Pisces-----------Virgo
Mercury--Gemini+Virgo---Sagittarius+Pisces-----???-------------???
Moon-------Cancer---------Capricorn---------Taurus---------Scorpio
Sun---------Leo------------Aquarius----------Aries-----------Libra
Jupiter--Sagittarius+Pisces--Gemini+Virgo------Cancer--------Capricorn
Saturn--Capricorn+Aquarius--Cancer+Leo-------Libra------------Aries

So I would appreciate any feedback and corrections on this.

many thanks, Richard
 
Since you brought that up, I’ve always considered Mercury in Gem/Virgo to be both domiciled and exalted, and when in Sag/Pisc. both detriment and fall, but some authors (and members here) put Merc as exalted in Virgo rather than both. What? :whistling:
 
Mercury rules Gemini and Virgo, is exalted in Virgo, falls in Sag, and is in both fall and detriment in Pisces.
 
You were mistaken that Mercury is exalted in Gemini, is all.

Is that your question, or is it something else?
 
No. Saturn is the participatory ruler of the fire triplicity. This means that in the last third of the native's life (which can be sooner than 61 years, as you previously posted) he sets the tone of life if the sect light of the native's chart is in a fire sign.

Take a look at Dorotheus for some early writing on triplicity rulers plus chart examples, and Bonatti for later.

I have been reading Dorotheus for the last couple of days and I understand what you are speaking of now. I haven't started with reading any of Bonnati's work yet, without having done that, I am still curious as to how one can determine when a triplicity ruler starts to rule the next portion of life ahead of the 29 to 30 year mark. Can this be determined by the handing over to the next chronocrator in succession?
 
"Notice that Sun-Saturn is the only polarity in Common between the two groups: it is the greatest polarity. But how strange from our viewpoint, because we would think of pairing according to heliocentric astronomical qualities like speed."

(J. Lee Lehman PhD) Essential Dignities page 21-22

She is quoting Ramesey in the following:

"...when Jupiter and Venus have not two of the aforesaid dignities in the same sign, nor in the second, third, or fourth, they have seven degrees allotted to them for their term..."
(Pages 71-72, author's emphasis)

"...the planet which is the ruler by sign, exaltation,or triplicity tends to get the first term position most frequently."

(J. Lee Lehman PhD) Essential DignitiesnPp.133-134

[edited quote over 100 words against Forum rules - Moderator]

This is where I started thinking and I asked the question.
With the Ancients Awareness of Saturn's Detriment in Leo; why would he have been given the first terms in the Chaldean system of terms lest he held some sort of special significance. If he is but a participatory ruler in the triplicity then I don't see how that would signify his placement in the first degrees in which most exalted planets are given.

Any thoughts?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Notice that Sun-Saturn is the only polarity in Common between the two groups: it is the greatest polarity. But how strange from our viewpoint, because we would think of pairing according to heliocentric astronomical qualities like speed."

(J. Lee Lehman PhD) Essential Dignities page 21-22

She is quoting Ramesey in the following:

"...when Jupiter and Venus have not two of the aforesaid dignities in the same sign, nor in the second, third, or fourth, they have seven degrees allotted to them for their term..."
(Pages 71-72, author's emphasis)

"...the planet which is the ruler by sign, exaltation,or triplicity tends to get the first term position most frequently."

(J. Lee Lehman PhD) Essential DignitiesnPp.133-134

[edited quote over 100 words against Forum rules - Moderator]

This is where I started thinking and I asked the question.
With the Ancients Awareness of Saturn's Detriment in Leo; why would he have been given the first terms in the Chaldean system of terms lest he held some sort of special significance. If he is but a participatory ruler in the triplicity then I don't see how that would signify his placement in the first degrees in which most exalted planets are given.

Any thoughts?

I feel like I used to know the answer to this, but it escapes me at the moment. Something to keep in mind is that the Chaldean system is symetrical, and takes into consideration planetary hours (dang, I'm certain if I can put my finger on it the Chaldean terms relate to the table of hours...) as well as sect.

All of that said, every traditional astrologer practicing, writing, or learning that I know has adopted the Egyptian terms in their readings. Sometimes when we are first learning it is easy to get diverted trying to find the logic behind the system. The thing is, learn the system and get good at reading charts before exploring other ideas. That, then, is when you will become sucessful.
 
Back
Top