When Planets are Combust or in their own Chariots
© 2010, April 14 Curtis Manwaring
In Schmidt's recent translation of Antiochus, definition 14, it states that stars in their own chariots are mighty, even if under the rays of the Sun. A planet in its own domicile, exaltation or confine (possibly trigon as well) is said to be in it's own chariot (Schmidt emphasizes "covered chariot") such that it is not blinded by the beams. It is still acting, but in a hidden capacity. What is interesting about combustion is that he says that the degrees in front of the Sun are the "impious degrees" and that the degrees behind the Sun are the "pious degrees" where the Sun has recently been; having purged those degrees of impurity. Venus, being the most pious planet, is allowed to leave the beams of the Sun before any other (because she is brightest). Venus gets her signification for rites of religious observance (such as cleanliness being next to Godliness) and aids the greater benefic Jupiter in this area. In todays world, Venus is the planet of beauty (adding makeup to cleanliness).
As to rulership of a given place, the medieval's had the idea that more than one planet might have control of a house. We have the idea of the almuten from this where in some cases Mars rules Capricorn based upon a weighting scheme. The Hellenistic literature expands this idea considerably, but not through a weighting, but through sect and the actual positions of the planets being able to testify or being called to witness for a given place. When a planet is in aversion, the other may take over (domicile or exaltation). What is going to shock most people, is that the exaltation lord is the preferred lord (according to Schmidt) because the domicile lord has the job of paying attention to or giving heed, and in most cases it has to pay attention to a planet of the opposite sect and lift it upon a pedistal against the wishes of his/her own party affiliation. This is why the joys of the planets are for the most part where there is no exaltation, because in such cases they don't have to share power. The exceptions to this are the feminine planets which like to cooperate and Mercury who is common to both sects and stays out of the power struggle by lifting himself up in Virgo.
In cases where neither the domicile or exaltation lord can witness it's own house, there is another doctrine on joint domicile masters that involves the trigons. Schmidt says that this appears to be prior to our understanding of the traditional trigon lords as we know them today.
In the medieval literature there is something called "peregrination" which is fundamentally the opposite to being in domicile, exaltation or any of own places. A peregrine planet is a "wanderer" - sort of like Valens' "being away from home lot" which is a harsh, Saturn / Mars lot, cast out into the desert where the Sun can get at it. When in its own domicile, it is in its own house and Schmidt says that it has its own resources along with it for protection. It does not seem consistent to me to ignore what peregrination means without also including the concept of domicile because in one case the planet is away from home, in another it is in the place of a sect mate where it has help from others, or it has no help at all (peregrine). These two concepts imply each other and if one is true then the other is as well because you can not have a "being away from home" without having a home. And if a home can't protect you, then what good is the concept of domicile? One has to be divorced from the anthropomorphic paradigm to think contrary to this.
