23.02.2006, Warszawa, Poland
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Welcome,
After more than 10 years after publishing house tables
for new house system (1995), I release to public domain source code
in C to calculate it (as patch to SwissEphemeris TM), accompanied
with some remarks that seem still important after more than
decade of its practical use.
It's definition is as follows:
"House system where great circle is passing through ascendant
and zenith ('Medium Coeli'). This circle is divided into 12
equal parts (1st cusp is ascendent, 10th cusp is zenith),
then resulting points are projected to ecliptic through
meridian circles."
In this definition:
- 'Medium Coeli' is assumed in its' original pre-ecliptic
definition as point directly overhead, located upper square
from ascendant, in modern times in astronomy called 'zenith';
- 'Meridian' is assumed as great circle passing through
the north and south celestial poles in equatorial
coordinates (perpendicular to equator).
Further background of this discovery:
In astrological literature and practice use of house systems
is mostly limited (with the exception of equal house system)
to those house systems where both 1st house on ecliptic
coincides with Ascendant, and 10th house cusp on ecliptic
coincides with MC.
So it is widely assumed that Asc and MC are basis for house
system formulation and it's correctness must be judged with
conformation to this constraint.
Rectangular coordinate systems are widely taught at schools,
and sadly spherical are not. That's why it is diffcult
to grasp even for person well educated in mathematics that
Thales of Miletus' theorem about "two parallel lines cut
with two more lines" from rectangular coordinate systems
do not exist in spherical coordinate systems.
And more, forcing its use in spherical coordinates leads to
drastic errors. Like composite MC from midpoint MC when someone
first wanted it from RAMC but assumed that both will be the
same... and because there is no Thales' theorem here, they
are not the same.
The same rule applies to house system formulation.
Mathematics strictly applied postulates that from point of
view of such a constraint, if great circle is not running
through all four house cardinal points, then house cusps
projected into ecliptic could have at most only four
mathematical points on such circle correct, all the others
are wrong.
So as any house system is correct from its own point of view,
only one correct great circle can exist when we apply
constraint that two chosen cardinal points are to be the base
for its formulation. But when using 'Medium Coeli' as point
on ecliptic there is no such great circle, where two cardinal
axes would be always 90 degrees apart. I resolved this
difficulty by returning to original definition of "Middle of
Heaven" as point directly overhead, located always 90 degrees
from any point on horizon, so from ascendant too.
For projecting house cusp onto ecliptic I could find only one
possible way. As discovery of Van Allen's belts and later
exploration of near space proved, two main types of magnetic
lines of field (as it suggest also other fields can follow
this pattern) are connected with two planes - ecliptic and
equator. So I followed the equatorial path for houses.
Contrary to former house system formulation attempts, I do not
follow path "simple astronomical coordinate system". Why?
For ecliptic, when we account for parallax to center of
coordinate system (sun) even on Earth's poles declination
is about few arc seconds - so it always could be perfectly
approximated with simple coordinate system - ecliptic.
When we switch to Earth rotation coordinate system, since
it's center is in the center of Earth, declination can be
in full range of <-90,90> degrees.
So definitely these two systems - ecliptic and houses - are
quite different, and the second must be viewed as related
to equatorial coordinates. But as astrology postulates that
also relation to ecliptic must be included in house system
'somehow', two rotations from view of the equator must be applied,
as is the case in formulation of this new house system.
From statistical comparison this house system is in the same
group as Placidus/Topocentric, Regiomontanus, Koch and Pophyry.
On ~5000 charts from my database it differs on average by 2 planets
per chart from Koch and 2,5 per chart from Placidus/Topocentric
and Regiomontanus. Campanus is 'in the other league' here because
it differs by considerably more planets per chart from
those four systems.
From limited number of charts I've found that gives useful
clues, their owners quite often choose this house system
that fits him best where its hosue cusps are closest on
discussed positions to the one in system presented here.
But in literature I found only one printed example,
from Robert Hand's 'Horoscope symbols'. He has chosen there,
with no suprise, the house system which had discussed cusps
- in range 1-2 degrees - from positions in this new one.
But number of such charts is very limited and they are
hard to find. It's not suprising, since a chart has about
30-40 main elements, and on average only 2.5 planets in
different houses (from comparision of 5000 charts) constitutes
about 5-8% of the average chart. But usually two
astrologers from two different schools agree at best on 50%
percent on the same chart. So resolution with such usage is
usually lower than needed to positively differentiate two
house systems applied for the same chart.
So later in my reserach I switched to studying the effect of
ecliptic transits to house positions. As tropical transits
work as arcs from equinox to planet, so on historical
charts neglecting equinoctical shifts (on 1000 years as great
as 15 degrees) yields the best results. So neglecting longer
arcs should also be workable. And in this way natal planet's
house position can be compared with ecliptic tropical transits.
As side effect (when you rectify asc to +- 1/4 degree),
the resolution increases about sixty times compared to
traditional "planet in house" method, and average difference
between position of the same planet in two hosue systems grow
to about 10 degrees for Placidus and Koch both compared to
themselves and to this new hosue system.
So with this technique it becomes much easer to make research
which hosue systems work best. Anynone who has extensive notes
from rectfication can do it in short time.
And my research shows this is the first house system where its'
ten planet points deliver positive results in studying former
events and making new forecasts from ecliptical transits.
I publish modified sources for Swisseph v. 1.67, so it can be
added to any software that is using this library, and anyone can
by herself/himself conduct easily such a research.
You can get all files as single archive at
http://www.urania.pl/sehouses/sehouses.zip
or you can download them as individual files
http://www.urania.pl/sehouses
Source (swehouse.c) was tested on MS Visual C++ 2003 Std,
BDS 2006 Pro and gcc 3.3.3 under Cygwin. Modified 'swetest.exe'
utility with compiled in this new house system is also included
for quick start.
Description of files:
swehouse.c - modified source of Swisseph v. 1.67 with added
Krusinski houses, either traditionally as points
on ecliptic or as exact planet house positions
swehousediff.c - differences only as to be applied to original file
with description where to put them in original file
swehouse167.c - original source saved for reference
swetest.exe - compiled utility with new house system inluded,
its code letter is 'u'
h.bat, hp.bat - examples how to call swetest.exe to get
'Krusinski' ('u') houses with ecliptic house
cusps (h.bat) and exact planet's house position (hp.bat)
Original Swissephemris can be downloaded at
http://www.astro.com/swisseph
---
Best regards
Bogdan Krusiński
bogdan@astrologia.pl
http://www.astrologia.pl
--------------------------------