A couple of weeks ago a youtube/tik tok astrologer called whole sign users – including me – “lazy, non-abstract thinkers who can’t think outside of the box”. I dare to say it is ironic because people who use Placidus – a house system that is a default system in all astrology websites and software (aside from CHANI!) – are actually the ones leaning towards being lazy and unwilling to branch out and try something new. They are complacent in that regard. So that inspired me to talk about house systems in general and about why I personally find whole sign system the most accurate.
MY BACKGROUND
Like probably 99% of people, I’ve started my astrological journey with Placidus. It didn’t last long (although if you count the time I’ve been indirectly under my mom’s teachings then it’s about 15 years, lol) because after a couple of months of my independent deep dive on astrology I switched to equal house system, which I found a nice compromise between an equally-divided houses and the fact that the 1st house starts at the ascendant.
And honestly, it’s not like I jumped to the equal system just like that. I really didn’t want to at first because that’d mean I wouldn’t be able to be on the same page with everyone else – which still to this day is annoying sometimes when someone is showing a chart in Placidus and in my head I’m like “but this placement you’re talking about! It would fit perfectly if you switched to whole sign!”. But people refuse to keep their minds open and really stop and think about it. And I mean, really stop and think, not switch the system, look at it for 5 minutes, not really giving it a chance and then switch back to Placidus again.
So I’ve mentioned it ages ago but that deep dive into astrology started with synastry. I was looking at the bi-wheel of me and someone else and as much as I loved the thought of them having Venus in my 1st house, I just couldn’t find logic in it: how can a Pisces Venus be compatible with my Aquarius ascendant if it’s in a neighbouring sign and neighbouring signs have nothing in common??? It was a hard pill to swallow because I wanted it to be in my 1st, but it wasn’t. It’s two different energies, on paper Aquarius and Pisces shouldn’t work together, so why is this trying to force me into thinking they do?
This is how I ditched Placidus. Because of synastry.
And to be fair, I have my rising sign at 0° so equal and whole look pretty much identical in my case. So it’s not like a bit of Pisces could still be in my 1st house. But like I said, I thought that’d be a nice compromise.
But later on I’ve discovered ancient techniques and the most important and impactful of them all:
ANNUAL PROFECTIONS
So, in annual profections you basically use whole sign system. Helenistic astrologers had equal system and Porphyry at hand, yet they used whole sign exclusively for that technique. Even modern astrologers who use Placidus for everything will tell you: whole sign for profections. Because, just like with many things in life, there are certain tools for certain techniques and mediums. You know, you use acrylic paint for wood, not watercolor. Or, you won’t use the same paint for your walls as for your steel fence, right?
So I used profections. And they were spot on and continue to be. Therefore my conclusion was, it doesn’t make sense to constantly switch between houses – although, again, some people do that and that’s fine but I like consistency and going back and forth became a bit chaotic. Because if certain placements get activated during certain years with profections, then why would I read these placements differently on a day-to-day basis. You know?
One thing I will say though is that sometimes I will look if a planet is cadent or angular. I guess this is also just to see if it’s moving towards the angle or moving away from it.
MODERN APPROACH
So back to Placidus for a bit. Maybe this is beside the point cause we’re talking house system usage in and of itself but Placidus users often value the intricacies of a “personalised” chart, where every chart of, let’s say, an Aquarius rising isn’t divided the exact same way. They also like the intricacies of interceptions.
Yet they don’t mind using generational planets as rulers for every Scorpio, Aquarius and Pisces (wow, every Scorpio rising born between 1983-1995 has Pluto in Scorpio, how boring). They also often don’t use house rulers. I’ve yet to see a modern astrology book that teaches about house rulers except for the ascendant ruler. Heck, my certified astrologer mom was never taught that – and she went to school for that!
And, the horror, they resort to the notion of “1st house placement is the same as an Aries placement”. Which I despise bacause that is a thinking of a dummy and I have a separate article on it HERE if you want to give it a read.
Again, not all Placidus users but kind of following that default system and not looking for alternative points of view leads most of them to these ways of reading charts. Because Placidus has been closely ascribed to the modern approach.
And I think “personalising” a chart with things like traditional rulers, having MC-IC possibly fall into houses other than 10th and 4th and certainly using house rulers is far more superior than having things like interceptions, which I personally find to be a bit gimmicky.
And to quickly answer your question: interceptions are said to symbolize “blocked” energy, right? I find it a redundantly philosophical concept where you have to make up stuff in order for it to fit: and it either doesn’t or the answer can be found in a different spot in the chart. I did watch some of the stuff from that avid Placidus worshipper and they blamed intercepted Moon for themes of secrecy when the Moon was in Scorpio – a sign that is already secretive. So, was it an interception specifically that caused it?
HOUSE RULERS
Such an underrated thing yet so accurate. How many times have we all seen people ask “but what if my house is empty?”. Usually the answer is “look at the sign that rules that house”, when in fact it should be: “look at the house ruler!”.
And house rulers work best with whole sign houses. Profections are an amazing way of demonstrating that. Look at your chart or the charts of others and really pay attention to what planet rules your profection year: I can guarantee you that using whole sign you’ll see a massive difference between, for example, benefic-ruled years and malefic-ruled years. It’s like a night and day. Of course there’s a lot of factors and sometimes a Venus-ruled year might go south on you when it’s the year of Venus retrograde or Saturn is transiting your natal Venus. But that only proves that it is Venus being switched on that year, not another planet.
Or when your year is ruled by a planet that is exalted vs in detriment or in fall.
House rulers using Placidus? Or any quadrant system in general? A mess honestly. I was reading reddit, as I often do, and I’ve scrolled through a discussion on house systems. A user called StellaGraphia put it perfectly so I’m just going to quote them:
“house rulers are muddled in quadrant systems. There will often be a planet in a different sign than the sign on the house’s cusp, and the ruler of that sign is ruling the next house, not the one the planet is in. So who is that planet relying on? That planet’s whole condition, etc. in relation to who it is operating under is muddled.”
TRANSITS AND SAME ENERGY SITUATION
I think even transits can illustrate it in a good way. There’s a reason we have sign-based aspects because the same energies feel each other.
Let’s say someone has Sun in Pisces but using quadrant system Pisces takes up two different houses. Transiting Saturn goes into Pisces, the Sun’s going to immediately feel it – because it’s the same sign, the same energy. And let’s say that Sun is in the 3rd house and Saturn is still in the 2nd. How can it affect 2nd house issues if it’s already affecting the 3rd house Sun? Personally I just think it gets unnecessarily messy.
This is kind of simmilar to that synastry example I was talking about earlier.
WHY IS PLACIDUS *THE* SYSTEM ACTUALLY?
I think the topic of quadrant systems is messy in general because there’s so many of them and no one really is right in saying Placidus is better or Regiomontanus is better or Campanus or whatever. They’re all someone else’s idea of what a house division should look like, it’s all hypothetical and the only real thing there is is ascendant-descendant degree cause that’s a literal horizon and MC-IC degree cause that’s a literal meridian of the Earth. Everything else? Theories. So which one is right?
The goal of a lot of scholars throughout the years was to finally crack the code what kind of system was Ptolemy (2nd century) describing in his texts on astrology. A few astrologers tried to push their own theory on what it was, including Placidus whose interpretation was pretty detailed in calculations. And so this is exactly why it got popular – it had the advantage of being an appealing old concept (or so they thought) that could finally be put into practice thanks to the technological advancement that made it possible to calculate easily.
Funnily, much later it turned out that Ptolemy was most probably using some sort of equal house division and nothing really that complex to calculate.
And so at that time in the 17th century older systems have been pushed to the side because of the excitement surrounding a system that required more nuanced math. And more nuanced math meant more advancement – at least for astrologers of that time.
Whole sign system is, for obvious reasons, tidier and simpler (as in more direct) but that does not equal to “easier to read” or, how our Placidus bully said, “for the lazy”. Because there’s nothing easier or more difficult about reading one or the other. It’s just quadrant houses get more clunky if you want to read with house rulers and no, clunky does not mean more intricate. It’s just clunky.
It’s also more convenient if you don’t know someone’s exact time of birth but you know their ascendant. You don’t really need the exact degree to divide the houses. Same thing if someone has an approximate birth time – as long as the ascendant stays in the same sign you’re good to go. This is definitely an additional advantage of the whole sign houses that come in handy surprisingly often in my experience.
And earlier I said I used to find equal system a nice compromise. I think an equally (no pun intended) good compromise – if not slightly better – is Porphyry, which still retains quadrants but divides them into equal sections. So if you do like each of the axis to be the beginning of an angular house but like me, you find interceptions useless and like things to be more tidy, maybe give Porphyry a try!
So what I’m trying to say is, if someone wants to use Placidus – or any other quadrant system – then go ahead but don’t be silly and say crap about other systems, especially whole sign, when it’s a method that’s been the blueprint and despite its simplicity (or maybe because of it) it works like a charm and it’s been used by all the fathers of astrology and they didn’t need such convoluted system like Placidus.
Or heck, no one said you have to choose one and stick to it for the rest of your life. Test all of them, use whole sign parallel to a quadrant system – this is what astrologers did even back in the late hallenistic times. There’s a lot of options to explore when it comes to house systems.