Oy vey, where do I start. Actually, I won’t start - you do some reading, instead. Start with William Lilly’s Christian Astrology, and then look at John Frawley’s Real Astrology Applied.

Warmly,
Nina

This is a most interesting explanation (I never thought of Blake’s zoas and Jungian personalities as similar, but you do make the case very well), and I hope you are going to post this on a more permanent/searchable platform. I would certainly love to see how you work with the model, as well as any interesting results you would obtain. Good luck with your blog!

Warmly,
Nina

He also held that the aspects which were dominant in the conscious mind mirrored and were complementary to those in the unconscious. In his Four Zoas, William Blake held that the perfect human maintains a harmonious balance between four functions of the psyche: Imagination, Reason, Passion, and Sensation, which he personified as Giants named Los, Urizen, Luvah, and Tharmas. Man’s Fall, and all evil, arose because these functions warred against each other; in particular Urizen tried to usurp power over the rest.

There are other components to the model, such as the auxiliary humours that balance the inferior humours, that I cannot include here for reasons of space. Thank you again for the opportunity to share some of this with you and your readers; I will eventually attempt one or more horoscope analyses using this model on my own blogsite, once it is actually up and running …

Ex astris,

Andrew

That is very interesting, though perhaps more research is needed as to how this bears out in practice. Don’t forget that the ideal temperamental man was one who had all four temperaments in balance, which in the above model would be rather unhealthy.

Warmly,
Nina

In my own work, I have extended the application of temperament theory into psychological type in the manner indicated below:

If the dominant humour is phlegmatic, then the inferior humour is melancholic.
If the dominant humour is sanguinic, then the inferior humour is choleric.
If the dominant humor is choleric, then the inferior humour is sanguinic.
If the dominant humor is melancholic, then the inferior humour is phlegmatic.

In the temperament assessment of Paul Newman, his primary humour is phlegmatic and his secondary humour is melancholic; since his dominant humour is phlegmatic, his inferior humour is melancholic. Note that these have the cold quality in common.

However, in the temperament assessment of Adolf Hitler, his primary humour is sanguinic and his secondary humour is melancholic; since his dominant humour is sanguinic, his inferior humour is choleric. Note that these have no quality in common.

The inferior humour manifests without conscious intention and attempts to overwhelm or possess the dominant humour. In the case of Paul Newman, this manifested in drink and depression, which led to his redemption; a quality in common. In the case of Adolf Hitler, this manifested in rage and resentment, which led to his destruction; no quality in common.

Ex astris,

Andrew

Thank you for that excellent temperament work-up. Your method certainly makes sense, and I hope you can keep me posted on its application to other hard-to-classify charts.

Warmly,
Nina

Ascendant sign (by element) = 2 points
Ascendant domicile ruler (by intrinsic quality) = 1 point
Ascendant exaltation ruler (by intrinsic quality) = 1 point
Moon sign (by element) = 2 points
Moon ruler (by sign) = 1 point
Moon phase (Lilly) = 1 point
Season of birth = 2 points

Note that I employ the ascendant exaltation ruler instead of the ascendant almuten: why? In medieval astrology, the domicile ruler is the primary ruler responsible for the ascendant, but Morin de Villefranche informs us that the exaltation ruler also influences the ascendant. Moreover, if one uses Egyptian terms and all three Dorothean triplicity rulers, then the almuten of any single position in the zodiac will always be either the domicile or exaltation ruler.

This approach dispenses with the need to use any of the four extant almuten systems, and is consistent with the results (with one or two exceptions) given in Greenbaum’s book.

The scores for Paul Newman: Sanguinic = 1, Choleric = 1, Melancholic = 4, Phlegmatic = 4.

We need a tie-breaker: as Greenbaum notes in her book, Blessed Ramon Llull (Doctor Illuminatus) assigns a hierarchy of dominance to the elemental cycle which rotates counter-clockwise, so that Air dominates Water, Water dominates Earth, Earth dominates Fire, and Fire dominates Air. Therefore, since Water dominates Earth, in my (completely idiosyncratic) modification of the Greenbaum temperament assessment formula, Paul Newman comes out as Phlegmatic/Melancholic rather than Melancholic/Phlegmatic (as indicated in Greenbaum’s book [p. 129]).

I thought I would share my approach with you and your readers in the event that anyone is interested in a little experimentation and further research …

Ex astris,

Andrew Carter

I have fixed the typo you pointed out - those darned typing elves went frolicking through my blog again. Thank you.

I only wish I had an army of people like you to read my blog and point out mistakes. Until then, the elves are running rampant, I fear.

Kind regards,
Nina