What exactly is the triplicity doctrine and how is it currently being used? A triplicity is essentially a fourth of the Zodiac. If we divide the Zodiac into four equal parts, we get 3 signs per part, or a triplicity. If we then connect those 3 signs in the circle as polygons, we get 3 equidistant, equilateral triangles. In antiquity, these triangles were called Trigons and some astrologers who currently use Hellenistic techniques, still refer to them as such today.
The first trigon is composed of the signs: Aries, Leo and Sagittarius; the 2nd of the signs Taurus, Virgo and Capricorn; the 3rd of the signs Gemini, Libra and Aquarius; and the 4th trigon is composed of the signs Cancer, Scorpio and Pisces. The more advanced students will know that these 4 triplicities are grouped according to classical element. That is, the 1st group is composed of the three fire signs, the 2nd group, of the three earth signs, the 3rd group, of the three air signs, and the last group of the three water signs. But this has not always been the case. I will return to the matter of the elements of the trigons again shortly...
The other thing you have to know about how this division of the Zodiac is used, is that it forms the basis of a type of dignity called a Triplicity (or Trigon. We use both names in our software dignity tables, depending upon whether we are applying a purely Hellenistic technique.) A dignity is simply a way in which particular planets govern over certain signs, or portions of a sign. There are 5 types of dignities that stipulate the specific planets and manner in which they govern over certain Zodiac signs, and Triplicity is one of those.
All of the Hellenistic and Medieval astrological sources that have come down to us contain the same basic triplicity doctrine, with minor variations. But basically, the three signs that each elemental grouping is composed of, are ruled by three planets that rotate in a specific order according the amount of daylight they are assigned to. Thus, for each triplicity of signs there is a diurnal ruler, a nocturnal ruler, and a "mixed", "co-mingling" or "participating" ruler. (The translation for the last category varies by author.) As an example, if we use the commonly accepted table of Trigon rulerships found in Dorotheus, the daytime ruler for the fire signs is the Sun, while the nocturnal ruler is Jupiter, and the mixed ruler is Saturn. The complete list of the rulers for each Triplicity (according to Dorotheus), looks like this:
You can see that each sign belonging to the same element contains a repeat of the same 3 rulers in the same order, according to time of day. For example, the fire signs are all ruled by the Sun, Jupiter and Saturn, in that order. The earth signs by Venus, Moon and Mars, in that order. Air, by Saturn, Mercury, and Jupiter, in that order. And water is governed by Venus, Mars and Moon, in that order. Therefore, let's say you were examining the condition of Mars in Taurus, you might note that it's in its own sign of triplicity, since Mars is one of the triplicity rulers of the earth signs in the last light condition. Traditionally, we are told to consider Mars to be "dignified by triplicity". (We'll leave aside the fact that a planet doesn't need to BE in its own places of rulership to rule over them. But that's a topic for another discussion.)
Ok. So far, this is unambiguous: the same three rulers together, govern all the signs of a given element. But a more important question then arises for the astute student: When do we use the different rulers by light condition for each sign? Since references in the ancient texts allude to the rulers changing according to the amount of daylight associated with each sign, the customary answer has been to assume that this doctrine has something to do with Sect. Since the fire and air signs are masculine, and the Sun is the symbol of daylight, masculinity and leader of the diurnal Sect, it's generally accepted that this is the reason the Sun and its diurnal sect-mates -- Jupiter and Saturn -- are given to the masculine signs of the fire and air triplicities. The same logic applies to the nocturnal Sect leader, the Moon and her sect mates -- i.e. Venus and Mars.
Sect is the study of how Day and Night affects the planets. The division of the signs into day and night categories has been understood to mean that each sign ruler governs over one of 3 portions of the whole day. But under which technical context does the "amount of daylight" variable in the three columns become relevant and how do we use it? The Hellenistic authors explain that you'd look at them as a sequence in the examination of a given topic, using the day ruler as the first in the sequence, if you were born during the day, and the other two as subsequent rulers afterwards. And if you are born at night, you'd use the night ruler first, and the other two, in their subsequent order. For example, Dorotheus said if you wanted to examine the general good or bad quality of a person's life, you'd look at the overall state of the triplicity lords of the dominant luminary. Therefore, for a daytime birth with the Sun in Aries, you'd examine the fire signs, making the Sun itself governor of the first part of the life, Jupiter the 2nd part of the life, and Saturn, the last part of his life. This follows the symbolic logic of "the day=a life" analogy.
So What’s the Problem?
Triplicity has fallen into disuse in modern times. Largely this may be because of a lack of clarity around its application in antiquity. The first problem that arises is that not all authors are in agreement about how many triplicity rulers to use. Ptolemy, for example, focuses on the day and night rulers, but mostly ignores the mixed rulers. The Medieval astrologer, William Lilly only uses the day and night rulers and ignores the mixed rulers altogether. Dorotheus and other Hellenistic authors, who do acknowledge three triplicity rulers, are however not clear on when the 2nd or 3rd parts of the life are supposed to commence. Some current traditional authors naturally confused by the doctrine, tell you to use the one that is dominant as the main ruler and the others as “supportive” rulers. So we are left with unclear instructions as to when in the life to switch triplicity rulers for the analysis of a given topic. Another problem – and this is my own pet peeve – is that triplicity IS a dignity. In all dignities, the rulers have a relationship to a sign or a portion of a sign. So how do we apply this doctrine where 3 rulers all have a relationship to 3 signs! If we understood why there is a division into three light conditions (Day, Night and Mixed), we might be able to better understand the relationship of the rulers to the triplicity and when or whether, they are supposed to change at all. However, when we read the ancient texts, the Greek authors do not themselves seem to know the rationale for this division of the Zodiac. Most don’t even attempt to explain it. Ptolemy is one of the few authors who actually attempts a theoretical explanation for how this dignity was constructed. According to him,
“The triplicity preserves accordance with an equilateral triangle, and the whole zodiacal orbit is defined by three circles, viz that of the equinox, and those of the two tropics: the twelve signs are therefore distributed among four equilateral triangles.”[1]
This appears to be in agreement with the Babylonian sources as far as the three parallels of latitude and it’s a fact that goes unacknowledged by modern authors. (We’ll come back again to this point later.) When Ptolemy attempts to explain the division of the Zodiac into fourths, he connects them, not to the four elements, but to the four cardinal directions and their winds. He has a whole chapter on how particular kingdoms of the earth are tied to these cardinal quadrants and their winds. Additionally, he says it’s the planets that cause the winds which prevail from those directions. For example, he states that the first triangle, or triplicity
“is principally northern, owing to the concurrent dominion of Jupiter who is fruitful and airy and expressly connected with winds preceding form the north.”
While this explanation of the direction associated with each triplicity as a whole and its principal ruler is congruent with the Babylonian sources that originate the doctrine, Ptolemy then becomes inconsistent in his rationale for attempting to explain the connection of quadrants to the other signs in the same triplicity. For example, he says there is an eastern influence in the earth triplicity because of Saturn’s rulership of Capricorn. I understand why he links Saturn to the east, but the fact is that Saturn is not any of the triplicity rulers of the earth triplicity.
The only other early Hellenistic astronomer to attempt to explain the rationale for the triplicity scheme, is Geminos, who explains each groups’ connection to the winds as a product of empirical observation. He says:
“The first triangle, the one beginning with Aries, is called northern, for if the north wind begins to blow while the Moon is in one of the three signs [of the first triangle], the same condition lasts for many days.”[2]
This reasoning for the triplicity groupings does not appear in any of the Mesopotamian texts. (…which is not unusual. They don’t typically explain their reasoning either.) The reason the first triplicity is called northern (or any of the other directions given for the other triplicities), has very little to do with any wind observations related to the Moon’s passage through any of the signs. Many of the Babyonian schemes are idealized, and only superficially grounded in observations.
So we are left without a clear understanding from any of the Greek sources, as to 1) why the Zodiac was divided into fourths; 2) why the light condition further divides each quarter into thirds, 3) where the specific rulers come from; and 4) when to use the different rulers of each light condition. A study of the earliest history of this doctrine has led me to believe that an error of interpretation in the transmission from its Babylonian origins might actually have taken place. In order to understand the current problem more deeply, (as well as how we may address it), we need to examine the earliest Mesopotamian sources concerning the divisions of the year into 4th and into 3rds.
The "Four Regions" and Their Winds
As stated, in traditional Hellenistic astrology, the triplicities represented quarters of the year arranged into groups of 3 signs by element: fire, earth, air and water. However, this was not always the case. The four classical elements only appeared in astrology after its transmission into the Hellenistic world, and sometime after Empedocles had developed his famous cosmogonic theory in the 5th century BCE. In that regard, Ptolemy is correct when he states that the triplicities were originally defined by the winds and not the elements.
We know from maps that have been uncovered, that the Mesopotamians perceived of the totality of the known world as circular, just as they did the sky. In addition, the Babylonians had the tradition of the kibrāt erbetti (the four regions), in which the surface of the earth was divided into four equal quarters or quadrants. These four earthly quadrants corresponded to cardinal directions and each one had a defining wind that originated in those regions. This tradition may date as far back as the Old Babylonian period, since its constituent regions are partially mentioned in a text known as The Sargon Geography. But it appears extensively later in the astrological texts of the Assyrians and Babylonians.[3]
These four quadrants and their corresponding winds/directions are named after the kingdoms that were known to reside in those regions. Thus, the first wind is identified as the south wind, and its quadrant is named Elam, after the Elamite people who lived beyond the Zagros mountains to the southeast. The north wind, which was called the "straight" or "appropriate wind" was named for Akkad, i.e. after the Babylonians themselves. Subartu - Gutium, were the names of the mountainous kingdoms lying on the upper Tigris, and therefore, represented the east wind and its quadrant. Later texts dropped Gutium and labeled the eastern quadrant simply as Subartu. Lastly, the west wind was given to the land of Amurru, a name which means "west" in Akkadian, and which was originally used to designate the kingdom of the Amorites (i.e. the name of the kingdom is synonymous with the name for “west”), who lived in the deserts to the west of Babylon. A diagram of the lands would have looked something like this:
Because of the mountainous topography to the north and east, the prevailing winds in Iraq are from the northwest to the southeast, along the Euphrates River. During the summer solstice, the Sun is seen to rise in the northeast location and to set in the northwest. To the Babylonians this region was north. During the winter solstice the Sun is seen to rise in the southeast and set in the southwest. To the Babylonians this region represented the south. Thus, the Mesopotamian cardinal points are displaced about 45 degrees from ours along the diagonal lines.[4] And the quarters representing the known world and their corresponding winds, form triangles rather than squares, inside the worldly circle. This then associates triangles in a circle with winds and their corresponding cardinal regions.
This fourfold division correlating wind directions with regions is also present in the lunar eclipses of the Enuma Anu Enlil (EAE)[5], which is a 70 tablet catalogue dealing with astrological omens. The EAE predates the Zodiac by about six centuries, although the observations in it were probably compiled much earlier, during the Kassite period (1500-1157 BCE). In the eclipse omens, attention is also paid to the month in which the lunar eclipse occurs and to the quadrant of the Moon that was cast into shadow. It was believed that the shadow over a quadrant of the Moon represented a shadow over the corresponding quadrant region on earth. Since the omens predate the Zodiac, the time of the year was expressed in terms of months that appear written as ordinal numerals, rather than as signs of the Zodiac. In tablet 20, the following list of regions and their respective wind directions appear listed as a triplicity division of the year: i.e. every 4th month is assigned to the same region and wind.[6] (To avoid confusion, the months have been translated by convention as Roman numerals.):
I, V, IX Akkad North
II, VI, X Elam South
III, VII, XI Amurru West
IV, VIII, XII Subartu +Guti East
The same intercalated scheme also appears on two Neo-Babylonian tablets collected by the British Museum.[7] Since these tablets appear to postdate the invention of the Zodiac in the 5th century BCE, we now find the signs being named instead of the months. Tablet BM36746 (Ca. 400 BCE) contains the winds and corresponding regions for each of the trigon signs. We can see below that the scheme is the same one found in the EAE.
The other tablet, BM47494, contains weather and economic omens that correlate three of the triplicity groups with their corresponding geographical regions: TAU, VIR, CAP with Elam; GEM, LIB, AQU with Amurru; and CAN, SCO, PIS with Subartu.
The Three Paths of Anu, Enlil and Ea
But why would the Mesopotamians divide the year into fourths by intercalating the months? Wouldn’t it make more sense climatologically to count 3 months sequentially into quarters, as we do in the seasons? This seems to be what was explicitly recorded in the Mul.apin, which was a compilation of Babylonian astronomical observations (dated to between 1000-700 BCE) containing catalogues of stars and 70 constellations.
In Tablet II of the Mul.apin the movement of the Moon, Sun and planets are tracked with regard to the risings of stars that are located in the paths of Enlil, Anu, and Ea, three regions or bands in the sky lying parallel to the equator. This practice of cataloguing the heliacal risings of stars by organizing them into 3 sections of the sky based upon where along the horizon they appeared, goes back even farther into the Astrolabes of the Old Babylonian period, whereby 3 stars, each one rising at a different place on the horizon, would be recoded as a marker for the month. These stars became the way in which the calendar was first calculated. Later, a shift occurs to the ecliptic, and the Sun’s path (the KASKAL) is tracked along these same 3 latitudinal bands. Thus, In the 2nd tablet, we read the following passage:
From XII 1 until II 30 the sun is in the path of those of Anu: wind and storm.
From III 1 until V 30 the sun is in the path of those of Enlil: harvest and heat.
From VI 1 until VIII 30 the sun is in the path of those of Anu: wind and storm.
From IX 1 until XI 30 the sun is in the path of those of Ea: cold.[8]
Building upon what had already been recorded in other star catalogues (known as the '3 stars each'), the Mul.apin also divides the year into four sections according to where the Sun crossed the paths of Ea, Enlil, and Anu. These were the three most important deities in the Sumerian pantheon and they had been designated in the creation myth, the Enuma Elish, to divide up the dome of the sky into three parallel bands of latitude that organized the heavens.
This diagram and its translation (courtesy of the Assyriologist Van der Wearden) indicates the months of the year, in which the Sun passes through the paths that contain each deity's stars. As indicated, Enlil's region lies in in the north, where the Sun reaches the Tropic of Cancer; Anu's in the equatorial center, and Ea's in the South, where the Sun traverses the Tropic of Capricorn. Therefore, in the course of the year, counting from month XII along the ecliptic line, the Sun would pass through the stars lying in these three paths in the following sequence: Anu - Enlil - Anu -- Ea - and Anu again, moving counterclockwise in the order of the months. It's also stated in the Mul.apin, that the equinoxes and solstices occurred in the middle of months I, IV, VII, and X (The pivot points in the circle), which themselves occur in the middle regions of each parallel of latitude. Each season also indicated a climatological condition that would have been experienced in Mesopotamia during that time of the year.
What we can conclude from this idealized schematization of the four seasons marked by the Sun's passage along its annual cycle are two important things: 1) the Sun passes through 3 months in one of the four quarters of the sky (North, East, West and South); and 2) it does so by crossing each of the 3 great circles of latitude: that of the two Tropics and the Equator, that demarcate the paths of Anu, Enlil and Ea. Since both luminaries trace their cycles along the ecliptic, Assyriologist, Wayne Horowitz states that: "The placement of the Sun in the three-stellar paths also demonstrates that the day sky as well as the night sky was divided into bands belonging to Anu, Enlil and Ea." [9]
Day, Night, or Mixed?
The Mesopotamian texts gives us evidence of an annual division of the months/signs by 4 (i.e. by quadrants) and by 3 (i.e. by paths). But we still don’t have a rationale for intercalating every 4th month/sign into the 3 paths. If the Hellenistic triplicities were following the Sun’s seasonal sequence, we’d have them grouped sequentially by quadrant. In other words, we’d see the seasonal monthly pattern that’s recorded in the Mul.apin: 12-3; 3-6; 6-9 and 9-12. Yet what we have in traditional astrology (and in the EAE and other Neo-Babylonian triplicity texts), are 3 signs per quadrant (expressed as elements), each one intercalated every fourth sign from a different path, which Ptolemy is quite clear in identifying as the “three circles: that of the equinox, and those of the two tropics.” So the threefold division of the signs is that of the Babylonian months according to the Paths of Enlil, Anu and Ea. The circle was divided, not in terms of a daily cycle – as was later incorrectly interpreted – but in terms of an annual one.
In this wheel of the Zodiac to the left, the first fire triplicity consisting of the signs of Aries, Leo and Sagittarius, can be drawn as a triangle by tracing it across the paths of Enlil, Anu and Ea, which have been demarcated by the bold lines. We can see that Ptolemy is correct when he says that Aries is in the equinoctial circle, (i.e. in the path of Anu); Leo is in the summer circle, (i.e. in the Path of Enlil), and Sagittarius is in the winter circle (i.e. in the Path of Ea).
If we accept that the triplicities are organized according to the annual cycle and not the daily cycle, then the “ruler by day” assertion would not refer to the planet that has rulership over the so-called “first part of the day”, but would refer instead to the ruler of the month in the northern part of the year, when the days are longer than the nights – hence “a day ruler”. This logic follows because the signs are monthly components of the year, and not of the day. Conversely, the so-called “ruler by night” would then refer to the planet that has rulership over the month in the southern part of the year, when the night predominates. The confusing third ruler, that Ptolemy and William Lilly prefer to ignore, or that other authors mistake for ‘co-operating’ rulers, are simply the planets ruling the equinoctial months of the year, where night and day are equal in the mount of light they possess – hence, “mixed” or “co-mingled”.
One ruler per trigon sign
Each triplicity therefore contains only one sign from each of the 3 paths. This re-interpretation of the doctrine also requires no change in the assignment of its rulers. We can simply plug in the current triplicity lords, as they have been handed down to us by Dorotheus, for example. That then means that each sign has only ONE RULER, NOT 3! The reinterpreted traditional rulership assignments, as given to us by Dorotheus (and arranged below by path color), would then go with each of their appropriate signs as follows:[10]
Aries Saturn (mixed, since it’s equinoctial)
Taurus Venus (day predominates)
Gemini Saturn (day predominates)
Cancer Venus (day predominates)
Leo Sun (day predominates)
Virgo Mars (mixed, since it’s equinoctial)
Libra Jupiter (mixed, since it’s equinoctial)
Scorpio Mars (night predominates)
Sagittarius Jupiter (night predominates)
Capricorn Moon (night predominates)
Aquarius Mercury (night predominates)
Pisces Moon (mixed, since it’s equinoctial)
It's difficult to say why such a mistake would have occurred in the transmission of the triplicity doctrine into Hellenistic Greece. However, having read David Brown’s excellent reconstruction of the EAE interpretative paradigm, one speculative scenario comes to mind. In it, he argues that the ‘EAE paradigm code’ reduced the universe into a set of manageable variables from which to make predictions. He states that “Each celestial event has to be assigned a location (“north”, “in front of” etc.), a date (implying a calendar month), a time (a “watch”, say), a colour … and so forth.” [11] A watch or “kapsu” was 1/3 of half of a Babylonian day. The day was divided into two, 12 hour halves: a daytime and nighttime, just as the year was divided into two seasons: summer and winter. (The Babylonians liked parallels from macro to micro, in their idealized schemes) A third of each half – or 2 hours -- was used as a unit of timekeeping for each half. Thus, during the night, there were “three watches”, during which astronomers observed the skies: a morning, an evening, and middle watch. If by convention, a celestial event required the evaluation of its location, its date, AND its time, (just as the birth of an individual does) then the “watch” or “third apportionment of the whole” would need to be an integral part of that evaluation. In the triplicity scheme, if the months (division into quadrants) represent the location and date variable of that code, then the paths (division into thirds) would have represented the time variable of that same code. Having understood that the time variable of the code was in a tripartite division which represented the amount of daylight available in a day, a scholar could easily have confused the 3 Babylonian watches of the night, for the 3 latitudinal paths. Thus, the three columns containing day, night and mixed rulers.
While the EAE predates the transmission of astrology into Hellenistic Egypt by over a millennia, there is evidence that its triplicity scheme may have found its way into the Greek world. The Demotic Papyrus of Vienna, a fragmentary demotic text dating to the 6th century BCE, contains lunar and solar omina following the Babylonian triplicity scheme, wherein the geographical regions have been adapted to reflect the geo-political reality of Egypt. So Akkad, Elam, Amurru and Subartu have become: Egypt, Crete, Syria and Amor (the Amorites being common neighbors to both cultures), with the monthly (no signs yet) triplicity scheme being identically intercalated according to the Egyptian equivalents for the Paths of Enlil, Anu and Ea. According to Egyptologist Richard Parker,
“its scheme is essentially Babylonian in origin and ..it is to be dated in composition to the 6th century B.C., perhaps even just subsequent to the Persian conquest. It is thus directly ancestral to the works of Nechepso and Petosiris of the 2nd century B.C. which in turn influenced the Greek world of astrology, as evidenced by Hephaestion of Thebes, and it is, as well, most important evidence of the predominance of Mesopotamia over Egypt as the primary source of Hellenistic astrology.”[12]
Endnotes
[1] C. Ptolemy. Tetrabiblos. XXI.
[2] James Evans and J. Lennart Berggren, Gemino’s Introduction to the Phenomena. p. 127.
[3] Wayne Horowitz. Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography. p. 90-91.
[4] Ibid. p. 200.
[5] F. Rochberg, "New Evidence for the History of Astrology", JNES, 43, (1984)
[6] David Brown. Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-Astrology, Styx Publications. 2000. p. 140.
[7] F. Rochberg, "New Evidence for the History of Astrology", JNES, 43, (1984).
[8] H. Hunger and D. Pingree. MUL.APIN, An Astronomical Compendium in Cuneiform. AFO. Bei 24. 1989. P.88-89.
[9] Ibid. p. 174
[10] There are two reversals of quadrant directions in Ptolemy and in his planetary rulerships. But for the sake of length, we’ll have to table the discussion about his possible reasoning for these changes, for another time.
[11] Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-Astrology. p. 139.
[12] Richard E. Parker. A Vienna Demotic Papyrus on Eclipse and Lunar Omina. Brown Univ. Press. 1959.
Comments