|Exegesis Volume 4 Issue #100
Exegesis Digest Mon, 20 Dec 1999
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 20:14:20 +0100
From: Patrice Guinard
Subject: THE 8 HOUSES SET
I've perpetrated the text below about the Set of the 8 Houses, that I've
called the Dominion.
(a sort of Christmas gift for a few: Sorry for the others)
I present here some extracts (without the diagrams and footnotes) of this text, available on my web-site at http://cura.free.fr/02domi-e.html
I would like to catch the attention on the 5 following points:
1. The Houses cannot nominate objects or persons of the external world: they mark only the quality of a link which the consciousness draws up with its environment, a more or less broad degree of opening to this environment. (It is by thinking about the Houses that Kepler wrote: " You will not find in the Sky your friends, your wife... ")
2. Firstly, the House is "topos", i.e. PLACE in Greek. In other words the Houses is related to SPACE, and not to Time. The compass card with its 8 directions. The Winds.
3. The 1st model of the houses was the OCTOTOPOS, the system of the 8 places. It is in the Alexandrian middles, Greek-Egyptians, that the Houses were folded back on the zodiacal cycle, and that an artificial system of analogies were set up (12/12), undoubtedly for the needs of the horarist practices.
4. From a historical point of view, I think having restored the old model of the octotopos, in its initial succession : 1 horoskopos, 2 agathos daimon, 3 mesouranema, 4 theos, 5 dysis, 6 kake tuche, 7 hupgeion, 8 aidou pule.
5. Finally I present a model of domification which solves at the same time the problem of the extreme latitudes and that of the disproportionate houses. (Although applying to the 8 Houses, it is easily adaptable to the 12 "traditional" houses). By hoping that a software designer of goodwill would want to introduce it into his options...
THE DOMINION OR SET OF THE EIGHT HOUSES (extracts)
By Patrice Guinard
The Dominion is not the familiar 12 Houses of mainstream tradition, nor even the Octotopos, an ancient 8-fold division of space, but a new model which approaches this last one some more. There are only eight Houses (The houses 3, 5, 8 and 12 of the twelve folded organization don't exist); they follow one another in the direction of the diurnal movement, because they represent the successive phases of the apparent course of the sun starting from its rising; finally they are centered on their "cusps". Moreover I believe to have found the ancient organization of the octotopos in its initial order: horoskopos, agathos daimon, mesouranema, Theos, dysis, kake tuche, hupgeion and aidou pule, the gate of dead which closes the daily cycle. I gave them less mysterious names and more in affinity with our practical sensitivity: the Communication, the Friendship, the Situation, the Harmony, the Couple, the Knowledge, the Mystery, and the Fame.
WHAT IS SPACE ?
Space is not a neutral, continuous, isotropic medium, an inanimate container of objects, or mere abstract context of motion : "There is not really a space, or 'the space', but there are distinct, heterogeneous spaces, endowed with singular properties. All that belongs to the one of these spaces is located as in a field of forces, and is penetrated, as by osmosis, of qualities which characterize this space. Instead of a neutral medium, homogeneous, kind of uniform background, there are areas, qualitatively determined, and which are also determining." [11a] Not more than time, space can't be measured: there is an infinitesimal "distance" between two distant places which belong to a same area, like there is an incommensurable "distance" between two contiguous places belonging to distinct areas. It is the speed, the activity and the displacement which are measured, and not the organic areas or domains formed of indivisible entities.
Paul Valery, commenting on Zeno the Eleate: "One can speak about half only after having considered the whole, i.e. to have crossed it, so that to prevent the movement from starting, one starts by splitting it, therefore to pose it. Space to be crossed is only one movement." [12a] What one commonly understands by space, when one observes an object "in space", it is the quantified and culturally given framework of a perceptive experiment, the field of mobility of a contingent motricity, convention necessary to the separability of the objects for perception. Then space is nothing any more by itself, if it is only the formal container of these discriminated forms. The traditional qualitative assignments, primordial ones, were replaced by quantitative measurements which are external for them. The 'wide matter' of Descartes marks this substitution explicitly. Each thing does not appear any more but through the quantifiable reports which define its otherness.
Space is neither the homogeneous extent of mathematics, ideal of a conventional and infinite divisibility, nor the heterogeneous and functional field, formless, of the practical needs and ends. [13a] Between the One and the Multiple, a place must be made with the Number, invaluable with the eyes of Plato. The loss of the qualitative membership of Space and the uprooting of modern consciousness, projected in a network of pragmatic and contingent relations, express its rupture with the Earth.
Space is the world, Cosmos and not either chaos, qualified, differentiated, directed, pre-organized, from which the various areas, in a limited number, have specific qualities, transmissible with the animated beings which are attached to them. Or rather: each field, each sector, each direction, each Orient, is a "organic being" whose separate entities which live therein are the apparent manifestations.
The world is habitat, symbolic field of exteriorisation of the alive one. Failing to acknowledge the dimension of quality in local environments confines consciousness to a basic level =96 even animals may be aware of that quality, having evolved to suit it. "Spaces measured by interior states presuppose primarily a space qualitative, discontinuous, whose each interior state is oneself measurement." [14a] Space is the field of projection of an interiority from which one will have learned how to recognize the various colourings. Thus the four directions of anisotropic space, associated with the seasons of the year, are recognized by colors and animals in ancient China (Dragon of azure (or green) / red Bird / white Tiger / black Tortoise) and from the Zuni Indians, or by winds from the Aztecs. The whole earth is subjected to this quaternary organization of which those who, in the primordial cultures, proclaim themselves "the men" or "the human beings", occupy the center, the region, city or house, Temple. And for each one, it is a question of finding its favorable place , its sitio, taking into account the overall distribution, his temperament, and his existential situation of the moment.(pgc)
ORIGIN OF DOMINION AND HISTORY OF THE 8 HOUSES
The navigators of Antiquity, untiring wanderers of the watery territories, were the first to think the form of space and of the Earth. Winds! The wind of West and the wind of South differ. One does not venture with impunity and without precaution in a direction without knowing the properties and qualities of them. Space is heterogeneous and alive. And it is the "Rose", that of the winds, the compass card, with its eight directions, which took form as a collective concept in the minds of these pioneers. 
The astrologers will inherit this octoadic design of space, probably at the proto-historical time of astrology. One preserved a proclamation of the sovereign assyrien Sargon II (721-705 B.C.): "Before and behind, in all the sides opposite to the eight winds, I opened eight great gates."  The Etruscans soothsayers, contemporaries of Sargon, also used a distribution by eight.  It is known that the triad sumerienne divine, cosmogonic, AN (Anu) / EN.LIL (Enlil) / EN.KI (Ea) had already been replaced by the Semitic planetary triad S=EEn (the Moon) / Shamash (the Sun)/ Ishtar (Venus) before the 14th century B.C., time to which appear their emblems. One recognizes the lunar crescent, the Venusian star with 8 branches and the solar disc with 4 axes and 4 rays intercalated, on a kudurru dating from the time of the Kassit king Melishipak (1188-1174). L.W. King observes : "The presence of the solar & lunar emblems, and the eight-pointed star of Venus at the head of the symbols on most of the boundary-stones suggests that an astral character underlies them." The representation of Venus and besides that of any star in general in the form of initials with 8 branches attests of a very old division of celestial space in 8 sectors, as seems to be shown in the only known mesopotamian planisphere, which divides the celestial sphere into 8 zones. The division of the local sphere in 8 sectors also existed in the first Chinese astrology, and the Manava-Dharma-Shastra (the Book of the Laws of Manu), resulting from the brahmanic tradition, mentions the 8 celestial areas.
Was this natural division of space integrated by Assyrians or Chaldeans into a proto-theory of the astrological Houses, or was this assimilation the result of a later speculation worked out by the first Greek astrologers? What is certain, it is the preexistence in Greece of an 8-house system prior to the 12-house system, suggested by the investigations of ancient horoscope specialist John North. Incorporation of the houses (8 or 12) very seldom appears in the Greek horoscopes which reached us: most significant go back to September 428 A.D. and October 497 A.D. !
The stoician astrologer Marcus Manilius (~ 48 B.C. - 20 A.D.) referred to this system of the eight places, to which the former astronomers would have given the name of octotopos. However Manilius seems to confuse the old system with the system of the 12 places, or at least tries to make a synthesis, the poetic character of its stating preventing him from entering in detail. It results from it an obscure text in two parts, the first presenting the 4 angles of the sky and the 4 intervals which separate them (ed. Alleau, p.160-163), the second describing the characteristics of the 12 houses (ed. Alleau, p.164-170). The comments of Rene Alleau on this passage are as obscure as the translation of the librarian of Sainte-Genevieve in Paris, and the London edition of 1697 is hardly enlightening.
In the same way, Firmicus Maternus, towards 335 A.D., devotes the fourteenth chapter of its second book to the eight loci (1 life, 2 hope [of richnesses], 3 brothers and sisters, 4 parents, 5 children, 6 health, 7 wife, 8 dead), before continuing by the analysis of the twelve houses. With book IV he enumerates the geniture places again: "That of the naturalness, the subsistence, the race, the parents, the brothers, the marriages, the descent or the last day of the life." Bouche-Leclercq suggested since 1899, in his polemical book, the anteriority of the octotopos (or oktotopos) to the dodekatopos: "There must have been a forsaken tradition which divided the circle of geniture into eight boxes, or in twelve boxes of which eight only were regarded as active, and (...) this system could not be understood neither by Manilius, nor by Firmicus, both tending to disfigure, but incompetent to invent." This anteriority of the system of the eight houses seems confirmed by the traditional significances allotted to houses I (life) and VIII (death). It is after the expiry of the eighth house that a new daily cycle could start again.
One still finds traces of the octotopos in the few rare fragments which remain to us of the writings of a disciple of Hipparchus, Serapio of Antioch (~ 125 B.C.), and of the astrologer of Tiberius, the famous Thrasyllus, and of the Athenian Antiochos (2nd A.D.). The famous Indian astronomer-astrologer Varaha Mihira (~505-585)= , heir to Greek astrology as well as Babylonian theories , preserved in his Brihat-Samhita the theory of the 8 districts, dependent on the 8 directions of space and corresponding to the Hindu divinities.
Wilhelm Gundel proposed in 1936 a theory of the evolution of the system of the astrological Houses in 4 stages: an initial organization in 4 quadrants defined by the cardinal points (running clockwise and symbolizing the 4 ages of existence), an organization in 8 sectors of 45° (quadrants and cardinal sectors), an organization in 12 sectors (also running clockwise), and finally the organization in 12 sectors (numbered counterclockwise), which have given birth to the system usually used today and of which Hermes Trismegistos could have been the inventor and "Nechepso-Petosiris" the legatee.
It could be possible that the model of 8 houses has been organized in relation to the system of Elements and of elemental values, at an epoch early enough to predate the first hermeticist astrological writings (~ 250-200 B.C.), perhaps in the stoical world of the beginning of the 3rd century B.C., which, taking again the Platonic succession of Elements (Fire, Air, Water, Earth) and ordering them in the direction of diurnal movement, may have incorporated the intermediate elemental values (dry, hot, humid, cold), markers of the 4 characteristic moments of the solar course (the rising, the upper culmination, the set, the lower culmination). This produces a model which would have been in competition with the elemental zodiacal model (Air = Spring, Fire = Summer, Earth = Autumn, Water = Winter), wh= ose symbols of the quarters follow one another in the opposite order of the diurnal movement. The two circular organizations, one running clockwise, the other in the opposite direction, agree if one logically superimposes noon with the summer solstice. This model could have been the prototype of a unified theory of the astrological Houses and zodiacal Signs.
There is a contemporary text, of 2nd century A.D., the essential text on the matter, written by an anonymous astrologer, which describes a system of 8 houses or places (loci) that is alloted to Asclepius: "From the horoscope one seeks all that relates to the life, from the second sector, while going to the top, one seeks the material life, from the third the brothers and sisters, from the fourth the parents, from the fifth the children, from the sixth misfortune and difficulties, from the seventh the woman, and from the eighth the fate and the death and term of life, according to those [the planets] which exert a dominant influence in their houses..."
The eight arcs of approximately 45 degrees, centered on the Angles for four of them, follow one another in the direction of the diurnal movement. In the dodekatopos the sectors are counted starting from the Angles, which define the four "cusps" of reference, and, illogically, in the opposite direction of the diurnal movement. This triple divergence between the two systems (the number of the Houses, their positioning, and their direction of succession) would be explained by their incomprehension of the initial system, from which results the relatively late development, by the Greeks, of a duodecimal distribution, copied on the zodiacal model. This contrived assimilation deprives local space of its specific nature and implies a redundancy of the zodiacal structure. The astrologer Cyril Fagan : "The Greeks made it [the Dodekatopos] synchronize with the signs of the zodiac, commencing with Aries 0°, notwithstanding the fact that the order of the houses runs from west to east, whereas the signs of the zodiac run from east to west. Hence, they are incompatible. One cannot pair off twelve signs and twelve houses when they run in opposite directions."
The lesson of the octotopos was not forgotten in the Renaissance: Tycho Brahe exposes in 1573 a system of 8 houses of 45°, divided from the first vertical. The octotopos is also used in medical astrology by Cardan, by Thomas Finck (1561-1656) in his Horoscopographia (Schleswig, 1591), by the pioneer of English astrology, Christopher Heydon, in his private journals, and by Nicholas Culpeper (1616-1654) who associates it with the lunar cycle and the theory of the " critical days " (7th, 14th, 21th and 28th of the lunar cycle). More recently, Doctor Hans Michel of Nuremberg presented a system of 8 houses based on the work of the geophysicist F. Lehner.
ORGANIZATION OF DOMINION
If local space is organized in directed field sectors, this provides a theory of astrological Houses. Uncertainties which remain in this disputed branch of astrology encouraged many astrologers to evacuate it, following Kepler's example. Indeed they agree neither on their localization, neither on their number, nor even on their nature, their function or their significance. Unlike the Zodiac or of the Planetaire, the Dominion is not to date the object of any convincing neurophysiological correlation, likely to guide the development of a model. It is possible that new scientific advances, in particular in the geomagnetic field, can contribute to clear up the imbroglio.
The zodiacs can be defined like geocentric and structuring cycles of the planets, whose zodiacal signs represent the successive phases: annual cycle for the Sun, "monthly" cycle for the Moon, 12 years cycle for Jupiter (essential in Chinese astrology), 165 years cycle for Neptune... The domification is a cutting of the celestial sphere, of the various phases of its daily rhythm, apparent rhythm due to the rotation of the earth on itself. It conceptualizes the space-time rooting of the organisms on Earth and allows the ordinance of the daily successive positions of planets for an observer located in a specific place of terrestrial surface. The Houses are topocentric divisions of the celestial sphere. It results from this that the delimitation of the Houses, dependent on the hour and of the birthplace of the native, "personalize" a native chart relative to many similar others on any given day.
The earth rotates, from West to East, in 24 sidereal hours, so it seems to move, for this period, from East to West, the whole of the celestial sphere, including the privileged actors of the solar system which are the planets, the star which maintains them in its field of attraction, and the terrestrial satellite. The apparent daily movement of these stars fits in a sinusoidal wave of 4 phases, similar to that which characterizes their zodiacal movement: from the Ascendant to the Midheaven, the star rises above the horizon, from the Midheaven to the Descendant it goes down again, always above the horizon, from the Descendant to the Anti-Midheaven it declines below the horizon, from the Anti-Midheaven to the Ascendant it rises, but below the horizon. These 4 phases define its diurnal and nocturnal semi-arcs.
The daily movement of a star crosses eight successive phases which delimit eight space portions, eight specific, diurnal fields (positive, open), then night fields (negative, closed), according to their localization above or below the horizon:
- 1. The star rises and passes the Ascendant. - 2. It rises in the East toward the meridian (at the left side of an observer turned towards the South). - 3. It reaches maximum elevation (culminating on the meridian at the Midheaven). - 4. It sinks toward the western horizon. - 5. It sets past the Descendant. - 6. It drops from the western horizon to the meridian. - 7. It reaches minimum elevation at the lower meridian. - 8. It rises from the lower meridian toward the eastern horizon.
The organization of the Dominion in 8 differentiated sectors follows from a double principle: the alternation of a diurnal Quaternary (houses 1, 2, 3 and 4) with a nocturnal one (houses 5, 6, 7 and 8), and the overlap of an angular Quaternary (houses 1, 3, 5 and 7) with an intermediary one (houses 2, 4, 6 and 8). In phases 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the daily movement, the star is above the horizon (diurnal sectors); in phases 5, 6, 7 and 8, it is below the horizon (nocturnal sectors). In phase 1, the star rises and becomes visible (Objectivation); in phase 3, it culminates (Individuation); in phase 5, it lies down and becomes invisible (the Diurnal join the Nocturnal: Alligation); in phase 7, it reaches its lower culmination (Participation). The angle AS marks the introversion (an attitude of spirit turned towards the interior), the angle MC marks the extraversion (an attitude of spirit turned towards outside), angle DS the exteriorization (a tendency to project outside what is inside), and angle IC interiorization (a tendency to bring back to the inside what is outside).
A formal logic underlies the organization of the Dominion. Indeed it admits a centre of symmetry which opposes the Alligation sectors to the Objectivation sectors and the Individuation sectors with the Participation sectors, and an axis of symmetry which opposes one more time the diurnal sectors to the nocturnal ones: Individuation to Objectivation and Alligation to Participation. Moreover the angular sectors (3, 5, 7, 1), like the intermediate sectors (8, 2, 4, 6) follow one another from the individuation to the objectivation, while passing by the alligation and the participation, in the direction of the apparent daily movement of the star.
The curves highlighted by statistical search of "the Gauquelin" illustrate this distribution. Indeed, except their doubtful interest as for their project to validate or invalidate astral reality, they show that the distribution of the angular native positions of certain planets of individuals who excelled in specific activities presents a characteristic curve, and in particular for Mars in the soldiers and the sportsmen, for Saturn in the scientists and Jupiter in the politicians. In spite of the exuberance of literature referring to the work of the French astro-statisticians, rare are those which only considered what is in my view the only true discovery, unconscious, of this work, namely the inscription of the eight astrological houses in the whole curves. With the graph which follows, extracted from one of the first works of Michel Gauquelin, I added the limits of the 8 sectors, such as they result logically from the layout of the 16 segments of the curve.
Eight sectors, the four angular zones and the four intermediate ones, fall under a design which could find its explanation in the terrestrial magnetism. I thought that the shift compared to the Angles which appears for sectors 1 and 3 could come owing to the fact that Gauquelin sampling contains a majority of approximate hours, often up to half an hour, and that the "natural" tendency of the parents was to declare with the marital status a birth hour posterior to the real one. However it seems to me now that the latitude of the sampling (northern temperate zone) is also concerned, and that it is necessary to call into question their angular location (see infra: The domification).
THE MEANING OF THE DOMAINS
It was noticed for a long time that the "meanings" allotted to the houses of Dodekatopos seemed to obey a certain logic and claimed to some extent a systematization: for example the houses 3 (brothers and sisters), 7 (wife) and 11 (friends), associated, artificially, with the zodiacal signs of Gemini, Libra and Aquarius, and more artificially still, with the element AIR, concerned a common category, that of the relations. Various attempts were elaborate, leading all to a similar correspondence. I found the same quadripartite diagram: in Alan Leo (1913), houses 1, 5 and 9 are associated with Fire and Ego (self), houses 2, 6 and 10 with Earth and Not Ego (not-self), houses 3, 7 and 11 with Air and relation, houses 4, 8 and 12 with Water and summation. In Marc Edmund Jones (1945), houses 1, 5 and 9 are associated with Ego, houses 2, 6 and 10 with the businesses and the objects (concern), houses 3, 7 and 11 with the relations, houses 4, 8 and 12 with the rewards and the results.
In addition to the fact that these distributions systematize, in my view, a null and void system of the Houses, that of the dodekatopos modelled on the zodiac  and whose elements follow one another in the opposite direction of the diurnal movement, they refer to an exteriority. How the objects of the sensory world could appear in the chart? Kepler, detractor of the classical theory of the Houses, points out that "The sky does not give to the man his practices, his history, his happiness, his children, his richness, his wife (...)"  No 'object' of the sensitive world could be registered in the chart of a native. Even if one states that the third house does not concern the brothers, but the report which one can have with them, remains then nevertheless an existing outside which has nothing to do with astral inside. It would be necessary for example that all the only sons had a kind of configuration similar in "the house of the brothers"! And why would the existence of the brothers and the sisters, random event of a biological nature, be registered in the chart of a native whose birth, in certain cases, is prior to this event?
The Houses cannot indicate plans of individual realization external to the consciousness; they do not refer to external objects, but to psychic states, interior incentives. The differentiation of symbolic space system presupposes various fields of organization of the impressionals. The astral Houses are for the consciousness the modes of subjective apprehension of its environment, the relational textures which it distinguishes in its environment. They translate the way in which it perceives its relation with what surrounds it, the way in which it feels implied in the world, its mode of existential insertion, its mode of being-in-the-world. Thus each one built his space through one or the other of these astral reinforcements.
The Dominion consists of four groups of two Houses, one diurnal and the other nocturnal. Each one of these groups marks a certain degree of opening of the consciousness to what surrounds it. I name them Individuation, Alligation (from latin ligare, to link), Participation and Objectivation. The opening of the consciousness is maximum in Objectivation, minimal in Individuation. One can define the conditional implications of these various relational modes which control the consciousness. Thus house 3 (nocturnal Individuation = house 10 of the dodekatopos) does not indicate the trade, the profession, nor even the career, the honors or the reputation, but the mode of integration of the consciousness in the world, the individuated mode, which encourages one to believe that the search for honors and for social gratification is the obvious value which justifies its existence, notwithstanding the effective results of the actions which it could initiate to carry out its ideals.
The Individuation houses  produce a tendency to separate, to acquire distinctive character and develop unique particular personal features, strengthening subjective reality in contrast to the objective environment. The Individuated feels confined: he fights and struggles in the arena of the competition.
The Alligation  houses produce a tendency to exteriorize, to open with others, to approach particular realities or people, to link itself with them in a spirit of reciprocity, to open out in the relation and in the transparency of the consciousnesss. The Alligated feels dependent: he is driven in the area of the interaction.
The Participation houses produce a tendency to interiorize the most various realities to achieve an interdependence with these realities, and to include oneself as an alive part of an inclusive and organic totality, in resonance with a multiplicity of beings and by an undefined receptivity with life. The Participated feels absorbed: he bathes in the sphere of symbiosis.
The Objectivation houses produce a tendency to be abstracted from reality, with focus on an exteriority which prolongs and diversifies the apprehended phenomena, to reduce one=92s sense of separat= e self until becoming the element, among others, of a relational complexity. The Objectivated feels enmeshed: he becomes abstracted in the network of incorporation.
The personal pronouns of the language illustrate this quadripartition. I (individuation) marks the insulation and the assertion of a separate subject facing an indistinct multitude. YOU (alligation) marks the connection with others, the setting in prospect for the otherness in the form of the dialogue, the exchange and the permeability of the consciousnesss. US (participation) marks integration with an organic unit which acts in unison, and not simple association for common interests. THEY (objectivation) marks the exteriority and the objectivity of the glance. These forms of address in literature and writing in general are often rather reliable indicators of the tendencies of the writer: the I of Augustinus, Montaigne or Descartes, the You of the dialogues of Plato, the Us of Heraclitus...
The pronouns known as "possessive" do not mark the possession invariably, but apply, according to situations, with one or the other of the four relational modes: if I evoke my pen, my cat which hums under the table, my health, or my text, the possessive one indicates, respectively, the property, the connection, the integration, or the incorporation. My pen is an object external to myself: I use it, I could exchange it, it only exists to be useful to me. My she-cat is a being with which I communicate a particular relation: it has got its wishes, its sudden changes of mood, its tricks, and I have mine. When I speak about my health, I imagine with difficulty to speak about other thing that of myself. Finally the text that I am writing is external to me, because I yield with multiple constraints, but it is also, such as I intend to carry out it, the reflection of my comprehension of a language and of foreign notions: by the act of writing, I always subject myself to the infrastructure of a language and of a mental universe that are existing before me.
The "individuated" character - which is precisely such, individual, only under this mode - seeks to increase its prestige and to acquire capacity on the world which it attends. It carries out its "ventures" for a substantial, material or social profit. Its mode of training is pragmatic: it seeks concrete results by its active transformation of the surrounding world. Its priority is the effectiveness of the action and the utility of the knowledge. The ontological difference between an individualand another, its competitor, is lived on the mode of the separation of minds. Ego is conceived itself as limited and blocked by Not Ego: Fichte. The consciousness feels alienated by any otherness or exteriority: Sartre.
Diurnal or open Individuation (Situation): muliplying experimental ventures in order to make an impression on things, assertion of the ego through the action, drawing upon one's capacity to use power to change circumstances, pursuing various strategies in order to attain goals. Is only real what force is improving.
Nocturnal or closed Individuation (Fame): safeguarding of its interests and closing on oneself, appropriation of the supplied energy in the surroundings, constitution and assertion of oneself in a univocal form, assimilation and egocentric reorganization of the exteriority. Intellect is an implement for the personal power.
The "alligated" character lives in symbiosis with others. It builds its personality through its meetings, by the dialogue and the exchange. It wakes up under the glance of the other and according to its reactions. Its mode of training is emotional: it grows in the confidence and warmth created by the presence of others. Recognising the other as somebody allows mutual transformation of consciousness. The ontological difference is felt like an insufficiency due to each being insulated, predisposing each to find its complementary. Sociability is only possible in the space of minds which are acknowledged: Rousseau. The reality immediately offered to the consciousness is not the Ego, but the Others: Scheler. 
Nocturnal or closed Alligation (Couple): providing a protective space, allowing privileged relations emotional bonding, visceral adhesion to the nearest, focus on what and who one likes, simultaneous effusion of consciousness, total cohabitation for best and worst. Equivalence of mine and yours.
Diurnal or open Alligation (Friendship): participation in a community field of which one preserves the integrity and in which one reserves oneself the function of organizer, creation of figures, roles and scenarios in a user-friendly space where each one finds place, development in the show of everyday life. Each one plays his role in the human comedy.
The "participated" character aspires to its essential being and is attentive to its feelings. Immersed in the indefinite mutability of the world, it takes part in its slightest variations, its most subtle vibrations. Its mode of training is ethical: it encourages with the realization of what claims the situation, in yielding to the time and by the acceptance of the consequences of its acts. The virtue results from a unselfish contemplation, animated by an interior requirement. The ontological difference is a prerequisite to the differential integration of each one to the whole. Each being expresses a particular prospect of an harmonious totality: Leibniz. Only the intersubjectivity is likely to fill the ditch which separates the Ego consciousness from the world: Husserl.
Diurnal or open participation (Harmony): immediate impregnation of the most subtle realities, becoming open to the possibilities of destiny, receptiveness to a climate favourable for development, integration in the immaterial atmosphere bathing reality, contemplation of its inexpressible beauty beyond appearances. The world is magic and alive throughout.
Nocturnal or closed participation (Mystery): dispossession of oneself by questioning of any formal identification of the Ego, attention to the improbable, capacity to change oneself within a restricted but concentrated field, spiritualization of the consciousness heightened of the inexpressible one. The world is unfathomable and is not what it appears to be.
The character "objectivated" searches for a knowledge which treats, by a unique logic, the external phenomena and those which control its intellect, and apprehends a knowledge likely to release it from the egoistic motives resulting from its existential rooting. Its mode of training is cognitive: it presupposes the adequacy of intellect and the language in the external world, and develops by abstraction and reasoning. The ontological difference is governed by general laws. Reality is rational in its totality: Hegel. Reality can be the object of an infinite logical analysis: Peirce.
Nocturnal or closed Objectivation (Knowledge): mastery of constraints and restrictions leading to transcend any materialist or existential dependence, elimination of the artifice calming any excitation, reasoned construction of oneself and world. Knowledge releases from ignorance and agitation.
Diurnal or open Objectivation (Communication): experimentation on oneself by improvising in a loom of abstract relations, diversifying one's mediating relations with the total environment, reduction of the ego and of the frustration caused by feelings of isolation. Knowledge brings people closer.
The 8 Houses fall under a rather logical succession.  In Communication and Friendship, the man seeks to overcome his isolation: he wakes up in the world, then binds to others. In Situation and Harmony, he seeks to overcome his impotence: he moves into the society, then he embraces life in all its diversity.  In the Couple and Knowledge, he tries to overcome his non-fulfilment: he withdraws with what he likes, then with what he knows. In Mystery and Fame, he reaches the term of its existence and seeks to transcend his destiny: he gives up all and discovers the ineffability of the world, then he is not there any more and bequeaths his heritage, his properties, and his name.
Greek designations of the astrological Houses (the Infernal Gate, the Evil Fortune, the God...) were abandoned and replaced by simple numbers, which seems to me to be a sign of the failure of the system of the symbolic meaning of the 12 Houses set. If one now compares the "meanings" of the 12 houses  with those which I propose in my interpretation of the octotopos, one observes a relative agreement:
1 (dodekatopos) life = 1 (octotopos) the Communication, awakening in the world 11 (dodekatopos) friends = 2 (octotopos) the Friendship 10 (dodekatopos) honors = 3 (octotopos) the Situation, the career, the honors 9 (dodekatopos) travel, revelations = 4 (octotopos) the Harmony, the spiritual experiment 7 (dodekatopos) marriage, wife = 5 (octotopos) the Couple 6 (dodekatopos) health, work, sorrow = ? 6 (octotopos) the Knowledge 4 (dodekatopos) parents, origins = 7 (octotopos) the Mystery 2 (dodekatopos) money, properties = 8 (octotopos) the Fame, th= e heritage
In addition, I am for a long time disconcerted by the incoherent coupling of Greek designations of the 12 houses: Good Fortune (Agath=EA tuche) and Misfortune (Kake tuche) of houses 5 and 6, Good Spirit (Agathos daimon) and Evil Spirit (Kakos daimon) of houses 11 and 12, God (Theos) and Goddess (Thea) of houses 9 and 3, the first two couples associating of contiguous houses, the third of symmetrical ones. I propose the following explanation: houses 5, 12 and 3 would have been added subsequently, as well as the house 8 whose Greek designation remains problematic besides. There would thus have been another model of the octotopos which did only include, in addition to the 4 angular houses, the houses 2 (Aidou pule = latin Porta inferna = the Gate of Hades), = 6 (Kake tuche = latin Mala fortuna = Misfortune), 9 (Theos = latin De= us = God) and 11 (Agathos daimon = latin Bonus daemon = the Good Spirit) o= f the later dodekatopos. This system is coherent for the following reasons: Mala fortuna (Kake tuche) and Porta inferna (Aidou pule) are found under the horizon (to be noted their female and negative character), Deus and Bonus daemon above the horizon; Mala fortuna is opposed semantically to Bonus daemon and Porta inferna to Deus;Porta inferna is logically the last house, that which marks the passage to death. Here thus the probably oldest Greek version of the octotopos, and its equivalence with the model of the Dominion:
1 the Hour-marker (Greek horoskopos) = AS = the Communication, the awakening in world 2 the Good Spirit (= House 11 of the dodekatopos) = the Friendship 3 Midheaven (Greek mesouranema) = MC = the Situation 4 the God (= House 9 of the dodekatopos) = the Harmony, the spiritual experiment 5 Descendant (Greek dysis) = DS = the Couple 6 the Misfortune (= House 6 of the dodekatopos) = the Knowle= dge 7 Anti-Midheaven (Greek hupgeion) = IC = the Mystery 8 the Gate of Hades (= House 2 of the dodekatopos) = the Fam= e, the heritage
The existence of an octotopos, organized in the diurnal direction, and running from the House 1 (vita) to the House 8 (mors) is attested (cf. supra). The existence of this other octotopos, organized also according to the diurnal movement, thus seems strongly probable to me: moreover it is completely compatible with the Dominion, such as I imagined it, intuitively, since 1982. It is probably earlier than the other octotopos, which would have appeared only after the assimilation of the twelve zodiacal signs with the twelve houses of Dodekatopos, according to the diagram which still guides, alas!, majority of the interpreters: Aries/life, Taurus/money, Gemini/brothers...
Let us take again the evolutionary diagram of Gundel, but now, in 6 stages:
1st: An initial system with 4 quadrants. 2nd: An organization in 8 sectors of 45°, very old in its Gree= k form (~ 350 B.C.?), and probably of Babylonian or Assyrian origin. 3rd: An organization in 12 sectors running clockwise, with addition of the 4 houses which one preserved the Greek names. 4th: The hermeticist organization in 12 sectors, running counterclockwise and copied on the zodiacal model (~250 B.C.). 5th: Assimilation of the names of both dodekatopos, running from now in the same direction. 6th: A octotopos former to Manilius (~ 100 B.C.), attested in 2nd century A.D., copied on the "zodiacal" dodekatopos from which one would have preserved only 8 houses, of which the eighth, death, seems to correspond to the Gate of Hades of the first octotopos.
About sixty systems of domification (i.e. of organization of the astrological Houses in the Celestial Sphere) have been invented. Theoretically one could imagine various others, according to a certain number of criteria: the number of houses, their situation compared to the points of location (houses counted starting from cusps, or centered on these cusps), their succession (direction of the diurnal movement or reverse direction), planes of division (ecliptic, equator, horizon, vertical, meridian), plus the projection or not of the points of the divisions on the ecliptic...
John North showed that the systems of domification allotted to Campanus (13th century), Regiomontanus (15th century) and Placidus (17th century) are older.  The great Al-Biruni (973-1049) recommended the "Campanus method". Geoffrey Dean distributed the methods of domification in three categories: those which directly divide the ecliptic (such as equal Houses), those which project on the ecliptic the points resulting from dividing another plane (such as Morinus, Campanus & Regiomontanus), those which result from the division of the diurnal and nocturnal semi-arcs (as the system allotted to Placidus, that of Walter Koch (1895-1970), and the topocentric method (1963) of Wendell Polich and Anthony Page).  Another original method, based on dividing several plans of the celestial sphere, was adopted by the Italian astrologer Aldo Lavagnini.
The systems of division which prove to be impracticable for the extreme latitudes seem to me disqualified (Placidus for example), like those which, for these same latitudes, present too strong disproportions between the Houses (like Campanus). Because of the inclination of the ecliptic compared to the equator, one observes unequal times for the rising of the zodiacal signs during one day. The principal difficulty of the techniques of domification result from their projection the Houses on the ecliptic. I will proceed to describe a new system of domification, adapted to the Dominion, rather near to that, ignored, of Lavagnini, while remaining convinced that it is not necessary to project the cusps of the houses on the ecliptic. Its interest is primarily practical.
I take initially into account the East Point (EP), i.e. "the equatorial Ascendant", in other words the zodiacal degree which rises for an equatorial birth, or the Eastern point of intersection between the plans of the horizon and the equator. Then I consider median point (M) between the AS and EP: this point M cannot move away of more than 45° of the MC or IC, even under extreme latitudes. Then I calculate angular difference (D) between M and the MC. House 2, the Friendship, is located at equal distance of the point M and the MC, but it is not invariably equal to 45°: its extent depends on D (which cannot be higher than 5,625, which avoids the disadvantages of the Campanus system). Two cases arise then.
If D 90°, then the extent of house 2 is 45° + (D = 90°) / 8 ;
if D < 90°, then the extent of house 2 (as that of house 6) is 45° - (90° - D) / 8.
I choose 8 because there are 8 houses. The reasoning is reversed for houses 4 and 8; the angular houses (1, 3, 5 and 7) have an extent of 45° each one. So the chart of Paul Valery: AS = 78°; MC = 321°; EP = 56° (approximate values).
78 - 56 = 22, hence M = 56 + (22 / 2) = 67°
D = (360 + 67) - 321 = 106°
D > 90° , from which derives the extent of House 2 = 45 + (106 - 90) / 8 = 47°
Medium of House 2 = (321° + 67° - 360°) / 2 = 14°
Beginning of House 2 = 14° + (47° / 2) = 37°30
Beginning of House 3 = End of House 2 = 37°30 + 360° - 47° = 350°30
Beginning of House 4 = 350°30 - 45° = 305°30
Beginning of House 5 = 305°30 - 43° = 262°30
Beginning of House 6 = 262°30 - 45° = 217°30
Beginning of House 7 = 217°30 - 47° = 170°30
Beginning of House 8 = 170°30 - 45° = 125°30
Beginning of House 1 = 125°30 - 43° = 82°30
78 - 56 = 22 from where M = 56 + (22 / 2) = 67° D = (360 + 67) - 321 = 106° D > 90° hence the extent of house 2 = 45 + (106 - 90) / 8 = 47°
Medium of the house 2 = 321 + 67 - 360 = 28°
Beginning of the house 2 = 28 + (47 / 2) = 51°30
Beginning of the house 3 = End of the house 2 = 28 - (47 / 2) = 4°30
Beginning of the house 4 = 4°30 + 360 - 45 = 319°30
Beginning of the house 5 = 319°30 - 43 = 276°30
Beginning of the house 6 = 276°30 - 45 = 231°30
Beginning of the house 7 = 231°30 - 47 = 184°30
Beginning of the house 8 = 184°30 - 45 = 139°30
Beginning of the house 1 = 139°30 - 43 = 96°30
Practically, it is the position of the Sun, then those of the Moon and a possible planetary cluster, which determine the sectoral quality of the native. Thus in Valery's chart, the Sun, in 7° of Scorpio, is in house 6 (Knowledge) and the Moon, in 4° of Gemini, is in house 1 (the Communication), the two houses of Objectivation. Generally, a nativity presents a principal house and a secondary one. Using a programme of evaluation and prioritisation of the astrological operators (planets, zodiacal signs and houses), which works under DOS, to which I've working since August 1983, and that I would perhaps let a day at the disposal of the readers of C.U.R.A., I sought for charts of writers who presented a particular evaluation with regard to planets and the zodiacal signs (in other words almost only one sign and one planet, which is rather rare) in order to illustrate the importance of the sectoral operator in the chart, and I found the following data, which "speak" about themselves:
- Baudelaire, born on April 9, 1821 at 15h, Paris: Aries, Mars, Diurnal Participation - Valery, born on October 30, 1871 at 19h, Sete (France): Scorpio, Mars, Nocturnal Objectivation - Freud, born on May 6, 1856 at 18h30, Freiberg (Moravia): Taurus, Uranus, Nocturnal Alligation.
I advocate that it is impossible to understand these charts without taking account of the Dominion. Baudelaire, author of "Du vin et du haschisch" (1851) and "Les Paradis artificiels" (1860) is a son of House 4. The author of "La Soiree avec Monsieur Teste" (1896) and of the "Cahiers", this colossal and singular experience of extended analysis, that for which, alas! (within sight of the world in which we live), the Stupidity was not the strong point, is a son of House 6. And the concepts of resistance and transfer play a driving role in this inter-relational therapy (House 5), which is the psychoanalysis.
End of Exegesis Digest Volume 4 Issue 100
[Exegesis Top][Table of Contents][Prior Issue][Next Issue]
Unless otherwise indicated, articles and submissions above are copyright © 1996-1999 their respective authors.