What this is. An impassioned and detailed critique of what the author perceives as a widespread lack of fundamental understanding with regard to methods of house division, particularly amongst contemporary professional practitioners (even software developers) that have written on this matter in the past. We argue that many, if not the overwhelming majority, irrespective of prestige, are blatantly misinformed about the mathematical and geometric principles that inform these varying methodologies for the ascertainment of ecliptic cuspal degrees. Also, that no one is obligated to respect lies. We are before an astronomical calculation, not faith, culture, or food preferences.

● How many of us can say that we can distinguish between the two primary spatial methods of house division, Campanus and Regiomontanus? More importantly, between the two primary temporal methods, Alcabitius and Koch, so as to not conflate either one with the only spatiotemporal (or temporally-simultaneous) method of house division, Placidus? Furthermore, how many of us can say that we understand what a house is (as opposed to a segment upon or of the ecliptic)? Does it regard a spatial notion or one of time? Is it a two-dimensional (2D) magnitude or a three-dimensional (3D) one? Are they areas or volumes? Were we taught this before being taught a particular method of house division? Did they teach us the mathematical or geometrical principle informing each one, in fact? That is, how each treats the relationship of time with space, or of space with time? So that we do not criticise or follow any one particular method of house division without first having had the opportunity of understanding it to the core.

● Most professionals, for example, cannot tell when a software such as Solar Fire Gold or Meridian—shamefully or shamelessly—draws a Porphyrian calculation of the chart when attempting to erect it for a polar region. Were it not for the advice on the screen, most would have assumed that the seat of birth had been reflected. It takes not a special kind of talent to discern the type of house division employed. It takes, alone, a good education in the basics or fundamentals of the volumes we regard as ‘houses’.

● I am no longer able to count the amount of times I have seen a description of Alcabitius or of Koch when the professional is convinced of describing Placidus. Listen (or read) carefully. The Placidus method of house division does not trisect the amount of time the ascensional degree (ASC) would have invested in moving from the horizon to the midheaven, ladies and gentlemen. Alcabitius does. Or that of the upper culminating degree (MC) in moving from the same place, the horizon, until it reaches the same place, the midheaven. Koch does.

● Placidus—simultaneously or in a simultaneously uninterrupted manner—measures the amount of time that all degrees would have invested in completing the journey aforementioned. Therefore, that of each degree responsible for a cusp, the reason for which six distinct or separate trisections would have taken place (not one in order to have three houses within a quadrant measure the same amount of time). The 12th house cusp is the result of the trisection of that cuspal degree alone. The 11th house cusp is the result of the trisection of that cuspal degree alone. The same is true to the 10th house cuspal degree, to the 9th house cuspal degree, to the 8th house cuspal degree, to the 7th house cuspal degree. Each cuspal degree represents or constitutes a trisection of its own seasonal or ascensional time, even when or if the cuspal degree of 10th house can be ascertained by a great circle called the local meridian (since all upper culminations take place therein, due south; or due north for the southern hemisphere), whereas the ASC, in turn, by the surface of the local horizon (since it is the only physical point of reference possible for its ascertainment, that is, for a geometrical ascertainment).

● However, again, each degree would have always invested a different amount of time in culminating or in rising. This constitutes the very reason for which everything is governed by time or motion, first and foremost, not space (i.e. time/motion is the primary source of truth). Let us get it right. Placidus enforces or applies the same physical principle (which any supporter of a particular method of house division recognises concerning the cusp of the first house, knowingly or not) to all ASCs impartially or equitably, that is, to all degrees that may be ‘dawning’ or ‘ascending’ over each volume or region (i.e. house). Because there is not a physical point of reference such as the local meridian or the surface of the horizon, it must rely upon the original author of those two points, that is, upon time (motion). As Abraham Ibn Ezra correctly portrayed it (pursuant to Shlomo Sela’s 2014 prestigious English translation), it is, indeed, “the method of rising times.” Therefore, it is also anything but sophisticated. It is natural or naturally exhaustive/spatiotemporal.

● Currently, as opposed to during Campano de Novara’s or Regiomontanus’s time, the necessity of resorting to an equipartite division of the celestial equator (Regiomontano) as the primary frame of reference from which to draw great circles in order to have them meet the ecliptic somewhere, or to that of the prime vertical (Campano) in order to proceed likewise with the same purpose, is no longer a necessity. It is a false necessity. There is also no need to grossly abbreviate the ascensional measurement described earlier by focusing upon one degree alone, the ASC (Alcabitius), or upon that of the MC (Koch). Today we are able to complete the exercise with ease. And yes, if you thought topocentric houses were the final touch Placidus needed, think again. It is actually the one method of house division completely unnecessary irrespective of the epoch or the state of trigonometry. (Must read this commentary by Michael Wackford in Skycript, and this one also.) The Placidus method of house division already enjoyed a trigonometric makeshift, it being the very one Giovanni Antonio Magini started (1604) and Placidus de Titis completed and divulged (1641). Seemingly, even bright Polich and Page were not aware of the method in its purest form (as employed by Claudius Ptolemy and Abraham Ibn Ezra). Placidus himself said as much in his Primum Mobile (Cooper translation, 1814): that it was the trigonometric version only, of a natural method of house division (primary motion or ascensional/seasonal times). Because of this, our great Charles E.O. Carter once argued—mistakenly—that Placidian cusps were not natural cusps (in accordance with a text provided by the greatest—astrological—librarian of our time, Philip Graves).

POST SCRIPTUM

● Please feel free to consult Michael Wackford’s articles in Skyscript and Correlation; Ralph W. Holden in The Elements of House Division (1977, repr. 2023); Deborah Houlding’s definition of planetary hours and its inherent Placidian relationship (Skyscript’s Glossary); Niel F. Michelsen’s Placidus tables of houses; Robert Powell’s History of the Houses; Otto A. Ludwig’s Ein Beitrag zum Hauserproblem (1930, Zenit journal), and Chris Brennan’s The Astrology Dictionary, amongst many other sources wherein one can confirm that the Placidus method of house division is being explained or described either (a) correctly (e.g. Powell, Wackford), (b) incorrectly (e.g. Brennan, Houlding), (c) incompletely (e.g. Holden, Powell), or (d) being grossly conflated with Alcabitius or Koch (e.g. Holden, Houlding).

● Should you continue to feel unsure, visit Aleksei Borealis’s utmost brilliant three-dimensional (3D) software or have yourself conduct the measurements upon a sheet of paper with the necessary tools.

● One thing is true: we cannot continue to remain so blatantly, willfully ignorant. It is concerning. We do not see physicians confusing MRI machines with X-Ray machines, do we? They are clear on the differences, even if it is their technicians the ones clear on the how. It is not even necessary to become the technician, but it will soon be if we continue to not fall in line with the facts of this case.