Temperament Assessment: Which is the Right Way?
July 10th, 2006 at 4:49 pm (Celebrity Astrology, Miscellaneous Astrology)
In light of Thomas’s quiz (see previous post), and my post on melancholy, the question came up: which is the right method for assessing temperament, anyway? Every traditional astrology has his or her pet method, none of which work 100% of the time. With people who are strongly tilted toward one or two temperaments, all of the methods will arrive at very similar if not identical conclusions. With individuals who are more balanced, and have only a slightly predominating humor or two, we will see a greater discrepancy with using various techniques.
Let us take the example of Paul Newman. I got interested in Newman’s horoscope while writing “Spiritual Direction in the Horoscope,” an article that will be published in the next issue of the Dutch traditional magazine Anima Astrologiae. Newman has a pretty balanced temperament, so the results will vary depending on the method we use.
Here is Newman’s horoscope:
Here is the result we get if we use Dorian Greenbaum’s method (discussed in her book on temperament) which she has developed by her study of various traditional sources (all of whom, in turn, had their own methods!):
- Ascendant sign element – Capricorn - Melancholic (2 points)
- Ascendant ruler intrinsic quality – Saturn - Melancholic (1 point)
- Ascendant almuten (defined as planet with most essential dignities in a given degree) intrinsic quality – Mars and Saturn are tied, so Choleric and Melancholic (1 point each) – we’ll pay attention to these if there is need for a tiebreaker.
- Moon sign element – Pisces – Phlegmatic (2 points)
- Moon ruler by sign – Jupiter in Capricorn – Melancholic (1 point)
- Moon phase (using Lilly’s method here) – 1st Quarter - Sanguine (1 point)
- Season of birth – Winter – Phlegmatic (2 points)
The grand total is: Melancholic (4.5), Choleric (.5), Phlegmatic (4), Sanguine (1 point). So according to Greenbaum’s method, we have a melancholic/phlegmatic, a hard-working, practical type with an emotional, self-protective tendency. This analysis gives us a very cold temperament, with some difficulty getting the heat going, both physically and emotionally.
Let’s use a different method to compare and contrast. John Frawley, in his Real Astrology Applied, goes through a temperamental analysis based closely on William Lilly’s method. Using the Frawley/Lilly method, Newman’s temperament would look something like this:
- Ascending sign: Capricorn - Cold - Dry - (a slightly melancholic Ascendant)
- Aspected by Mercury in Capricorn, oriental, Hot (Capricorn gives some Dry)
- Aspected by Venus in Capricorn, oriental (slightly Hot and Moist)
- Aspected by Saturn in Scorpio, oriental (and on the MC) (very Cold and Moist)
- Lord of the Ascendant: Saturn in Scorpio, oriental: Cold - and Moist +
- Aspected by Mercury in Capricorn, oriental (Hot and somewhat Dry)
- Aspected by Venus in Capricorn, oriental (slightly Hot and Moist)
- The Sun in a Winter Sign – Cold and Moist
- The Moon in Pisces in 1st Quarter – Hot – and Moist +
- The Lord of the Geniture – Mars in Aries, occidental – Hot (due to placement in Aries) and Dry + . Mars is the LoG, as it is the only strongly essentially dignified planet in the chart.
This gives us Cold-, Cold-, Cold, Hot-, Hot, Dry-, Dry+, Moist+, Moist, Moist+. Using Frawley’s method of combining the most frequent elements, we see that Newman is pretty well balanced, and gives us a slightly predominantly phlegmatic (cold and moist) temperament. So we still get a cold temperament, but one that is only a little cold, whereas Greenbaum’s method gives us a downright glacial temperament. We don’t know Paul Newman well enough to decide which is correct, but our guess is that the latter method describes him better. He is known for taking a relaxed approach to his career, and even his hugely successful charity food line, Newman’s Own ™, happened sort of by accident, as he tells it.
This is not to say that Greenbaum’s method is wrong – any solid method will succeed 85 or 90% of the time. However, nothing in our sublunary sphere is 100%, and astrology, or rather the astrologer, is the same. This is the point of traditional astrology – because we astrologers tend toward imperfection, we seek out methods that have passed to us from higher, more lasting spheres than our own.
To have your temperament analyzed with suggestions on how to better balance it, consider a professional astrological consultation with Nina Gryphon.
Other Related Posts:
Anonymous said,
July 15th, 2006 at 4:05 pm
Dear Nina,
I read your post about the assessment of temperament. I know very well the work of Dorian Gieseler Greenbaum and I have a doubt about what you wrote on your article.
If Choleric and Melancholic have more points than Sanguine, why did you choose the Melancholic/Sanguine Temperament for the native?
If I understood correctly, the Temperament according to Dorian would be Melancholic/Choleric.
I would really appreciate that you would clarify my doubt.
Kind regards.
Anonymous said,
July 15th, 2006 at 4:22 pm
Dear Nina,
Previously I sent you a comment about the Temperament Assessment but I didn’t intend to say Melancholic/Choleric, I intended to say Melancholic/Phlegmatic.
Sorry for this misunderstanding.
Kind regards.
Gryphon said,
July 15th, 2006 at 7:12 pm
Dear anonymous (you can use your real name - honest! I haven’t bitten a blog poster in years :-),
Thanks for catching that. I meant to say that Greenbaum’s method yields melancholic-phlegmatic. The rest of the paragraph talks about the extreme coldness of the temperament, which we would see in someone with a melancholic (cold and dry)/phlegmatic (cold and moist) nature.
My best,
Nina
Paulo Silva said,
July 16th, 2006 at 4:43 am
Dear Nina,
Sorry for the previous anonymous posts, I’m glad to know that you don’t bite.
Thank you for reassuring that my comment was correct, I was beginning to doubt my calculations.
Kind regards,
Paulo Silva
Gryphon said,
July 16th, 2006 at 4:16 pm
Dear Paulo,
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
Andrew said,
January 15th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
Here is my own modification (an elemental modification) of the Greenbaum temperament assessment formula applied to the nativity of Paul Newman:
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
gryphonastrology said,
January 16th, 2007 at 9:14 am
Hi 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
Andrew said,
January 17th, 2007 at 7:59 am
Thank you so much for your interest and encouragement. My academic and professional background is in the field of educational psychology and social science with a concentration in counselling skills and archetypal theory. I have come to believe that the analytical psychology developed by Carl Jung and his followers can best be applied to the elucidation of ancient and medieval rather than modern and contemporary astrological concepts. It sometimes seems that many astrologers who favour the use of traditional techniques often react against rather than reflect upon the ideas and insights of depth psychology. This, in my opinion, is unfortunate, as each can enrich the other.
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
gryphonastrology said,
January 17th, 2007 at 11:28 am
Hi 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
Andrew said,
January 18th, 2007 at 10:21 am
Thank you very much for your astute observation. The purpose of these distinctions is to convey the insight that opposites merge: they transform themselves into one another in the continuous process of synthesis and change. The model advanced by Jung describes a balance among four functions of consciousness and a dynamic polarity between opposites. If these functions are out of balance it could result in dysfunction (imbalance) within the individual, but he also recognised that it is common to have an imbalance in the first half of life which is then corrected in the second half. The transitional period, as later described in the term mid-life crisis, might be difficult. In any event, the purpose of individuation is to bring all four into balance. The “inferior humour” has been described as the sand that causes the oyster to produce a pearl. If there is sustained resistance to this process, one or more defense mechanisms inhibit the integration of this humour into the self.
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
gryphonastrology said,
January 18th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Hi Andrew,
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
lukmon said,
February 5th, 2007 at 12:03 pm
i’ll like to know how one can know horoscopes temperament
gryphonastrology said,
February 5th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
Hi Lukmon,
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
Temperament Assessment: Which is the Right Way? Astrology And Paul Newman by Nina Gryphon » AstroDispatch.com » Astrology Around The Web said,
September 27th, 2008 at 7:01 am
[...] Read the rest - Gryphon Astrology Blog [...]