Dignities and Debilities as Collected from a Variety of Sources

Introductory Comments

The following is an attempt to collect and organize scoring and weighting systems for both accidental and essential dignities from a variety of sources. While most authorities seem to agree concerning the essential dignities (namely, that planets in domicile get 5 points, in exaltation get 4, triplicity 3, bound or term 2, and face 1), there was a wide variety of systems for scoring the accidental dignities and debilities. What may surprise some readers is the complexity of these systems and detail into which they go. Readers familiar with Jyotish will also discover that in the Western tradition, contrary to widespread belief, there is a system corresponding to Shad Bala, the system use in Hindu astrology to measure a planet's strength.

However, I believe a caution is in order. Both Shad Bala and the system described here suffer from the same basic fault, a tendency to combine apples and oranges. We do not find any weighting system at all in the oldest surviving Greek texts. So far in the Arabic Era texts we have found only systems for weighting the essential dignities but none for the accidental dignities. This is also true in Hindu astrology. What scholars believe to be the oldest Hindu texts discuss each of the Balas as being a different kind of strength with a different facet of the planet's energy being strengthened or weakened. The same appears to be true of the Greek and Arabic Era texts.

The basic problem is that astrology has never explicitly (in written works at least) set forth the principles that make up each planetary energy that can be strengthened or weakened by placement in a sign or because of a planet's placement with respect to the houses or other planets. The nearest thing to this is to be found in Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos where he discusses the planetary virtues with respect to Hot, Cold, Wet, and Dry. Otherwise we do not really know what it means when we say that a planet is strong or weak. Is the strength that Saturn gets by being conjunct the Ascendant the same kind of strength that it gets by being in Capricorn, Aquarius, or Libra? I think that most would agree that these are not the same kind of strengths, but I also think that few of us could pin down exactly what the differences are.

Therefore, I offer the following with the strong recommendation that what I have said be taken into consideration as the reader studies the systems presented here.

Dignities and Debilities Weighting Systems from Various Sources

Schoener and Ibn Ezra use similar systems which have no debility, only less dignity. Lilly, Wilson, and Montulmo have both positive and negative scores. Given this fact their ranges of values are quite similar but there is much disagreement on the relative ranking of the houses. Schoener is unique in granting the tenth house more than the first. The other all make the first house either greater to or equal to the tenth. There is also disagreement about whether the sixth or the twelfth is the worst house, and Montulmo ranks the second as being one of the worse houses.

Schoener and Ibn Ezra recognize these as dignities and debilities but do not assign explicit scores to them. It should probably be assumed that they all have weights of +1 or -1, if weighting is appropriate at all.

Schoener and Ibn Ezra also recognize the dignities and debilities that are scored here as 0, but do not assign explicit scores to them. It should probably be assumed that they all have weights of +1 or -1, if weighting is appropriate at all.

Schoener and Ibn Ezra also recognize the dignities and debilities that are scored here as 0, but do not assign explicit scores to them. It should probably be assumed that they all have weights of +1 or -1, if weighting is appropriate at all.