Feeling a bit temperamental

...but at least I'm in my element

This is a longer — and, for probably the first time — monothematic post.

But I think it is necessary.

The temperaments may look like something completely arbitrary.

This is so because, if you think of it in modern medical/psychological terms, it is completely arbitrary.

Why do people tend to behave more or less like these four types? Why is it connected to diseases? Why is it connected to appearance?

And, the more important question: why does it seem to be real?

If we want to understand them, we must take a step back. And by a step back, I mean a few millenia (don’t worry, this is not a “historical account” of anything).

Anyway. A long, long time ago, before the periodic table of the elements was taught in school, before atoms were even though of, people had the weird habit of thinking about things.

But indulging in this strange vice, some of them came to realize that everything could be considered as being in a position along two continuous “axes of principles”, and that this explained something about how everything behaves.

First, when we think about how things existed in themselves, without taking into account their surroundings, or the interaction with other things, there seems to be a tendency to expand and a tendency to remain where they are, and that these two tendencies were a set of contraries.

That is, everything may have the propensity for expanding or moving, or the propensity for remaining still, and that there seemed to be levels to that. A certain gas expands more than a dog, that expands more than a tree, that expands more than a stone, etc.

This behaviour can be thought of, as I said, falling onto an axis, with two ideal principles at each end (neither of which is actually reached by anything created).

One of these principles was called coldness (sometimes, heaviness), the other heat (or lightness).

But things do interact, necessarily. The Cosmos is not an infinite collection of unconnected things, and because of heat, things eventually enter in contact with other things.

Some of them are ready to yeld when another thing reaches them. Others resist. This, again, is not absolute, and there are levels to these two tendencies, which — again — no created thing embodies perfectly.

So, there seems to be another axis, that cannot be reduced to the first, with the unattainable principles of resistance and yelding at the extremities.

The first principle was called moisture (or softness); the second, dryness (or hardness).

These four qualities: hot (light), cold (heavy), moist (soft), and dry (hard) can be combined in four ways.

Anything can be (relatively, of course) hot and dry, hot and moist, cold and dry, or cold and moist.

There are concrete things, material stuff, that seem to be nice symbols of these four sets of two qualities. These were used for naming these four principles.

Fire is hot and dry;

Air is hot and moist;

Water is cold and moist;

Earth is cold and dry.

These are, of course, the four elements of the Ancient World.

If you still think that the elements are just imperfect, or childish, versions of modern chemical elements, these two facts might help in convincing you:

1) Empedocles, the first one to name them, called them “roots”, “rhizomata”, and linked them to the two couples of Royal Kings, Jupiter, Hera, Hades, and Persephone.

2) Democritus, the first one to write about atoms, is way younger than Empedocles, who died when Democritus was around 26 years of age.

Now that we have this simple but important concepts, let’s move a bit forward.

If you are reading this, that’s because you have some interest in astrology. That means that the notion that everything is connected in different ways is not very strange to you. So, I’m not going to try and convince you of that.

So: everything is “made up” — stricly speaking, everything behaves according to — these four elements.

Human bodies, too. Moreover, there seems to be, in humans, four principles analogous to and in some ways connected to these elements.

There is a hot and dry principle, that is connected to action, to parts of the body related to action, such as muscle, and to the functions of breaking and consuming parts (both from the body and from ingested food and drink). This is analogous to fire, and was called choler or bile.

There is a hot and moist principle, that is connected to expansion, nutrition, generation, and to parts and substances involved in these activities (fat, cartillage, semen, milk, blood). This is analogous to air, and was called blood.

There is a cold and moist principle, connected to lubrication, moisturizing, change, motion along the body, and to functions and organs related to these (lungs, lymphatic system, spittle, tears, mucus). This is analogous to water, and was called lymph or phlegm.

And there is a cold and dry principle, connected to structure, stability, hardness, walls, keeping thing where they are, to weight and going downwards, and to parts and areas involved in these activities (bones, spleen, teeth, skin). This is analogous to earth, and was called black bile, black choler, or melancholy (which is just “black choler” in Greek).

The distinction between immaterial and material principles does not need to concern us. They were thought most of the time as both, but if this conflicts with your feelings (I mean, your very rational and well-researched knowledge of how the body actually works), you may think if them as merely immaterial.

These are the four humours, a cornerstone of a good chunk of what we call medicine in a good chunk of the world for a good chunk of time.

They are produced more or less in the same proportion in each of us, and this production does not change much over time. They keep the body funcioning, performing the needed operations and supplying the indispensable material — the body parts — which means that any drastic change would make life impossible.

But this is “more or less” in the same proportion, not exactly the same. That is, a bit of one or more of them may be in excess.

This excess has some effects in the body, making it a little more “like” the corresponding humour(s), in terms of appearance, more probable illnesses, and bodily behaviour.

When this excess is well-marked, we say the person has a temperament associated with the corresponding humour.

So, a choleric is someone with excess of choler; a sanguine is someone with excess of blood; a phlegmatic is someone with excess of phlegm; and a melancholic is someone with excess of melancholy.

This means a couple of things.

First, not everyone has a temperament. Many people have two of the humours in excess (if you prefer to call this temperament “hot”, “choleric-sanguine”, “sanguine-choleric”, or a word you have just invented for it, you can); some don’t have any distinguishable excess.

Second, they are not four different species, or four different races of men. We must strive not to forget it, replacing the silly division of people in twelve signs with a sillier division of people in four temperaments is… not a good option.

Third, and more important: they are in the body. They are related to your personality because they’re how your body behaves, and you’re not a small man sitting in the command chair of a robot. The human soul and the body are not disconnected.

So, cholerics are not always angry, some of them are almost never angry, while some very angry people are not cholerics. They’re always producing a bit more of energy than other people, and they must use it, and they tend to look like someone with lots of energy, and tend to have more heat-and-dryness related illnesses, and these things interfere in how they behave.

And the same is true for the other temperaments.

That’s it for now. I swear the next one will be shorter.

If you like it, as always, please subscribe and share.

****

Never again say silly things such as “we must take into account the third sign”, or “we should use tertiary direction”, or “sign and houses are the same things on different spiritual levels”.

Just buy it here.