The Rationale of Planets' Domicile Lord in Sidereal Zodiac

[Flat out ballin]

Greetings everyone,

I have some questions pertaining to historical basis of the zodia. For some reason, our tropicalist cousins explained their zoidia so eloquently with naturalistic thinking but from practical stand point I found Sidereal Zodiac is universally valid. However, I have problems to understand the rationale of the ancients Sumerian, Egyptian, and Greek when they assigned certain constellations as domicile house of certain planets. What exactly is the reason they did this? To my knowledge, they did not explain why Aries is the house of Mars, and so on. Really appriciate any helpful informations and thought to understand the rationale of domicile lord in Sidereal Zodiac. Thank you.

FOB

[Jupiter Sets at Dawn]

There are no records, written nor oral, from that far back, so nobody knows for sure. However, it was likely done by observation of similarities between the planetary influences and the sign influences.

[Jim Eshelman]

I agree with Jupiter Sets at Dawn's answer. Additionally, I think you're wanting to know if there is a theoretical framework for the rulerships and, yes, there is.

Leo and Cancer are given to the luminaries (Sun to the former, Moon to the latter). The other planets, going outward from Sun in both directions around the zodiac, provide the rest: Mercury to Gemini and Virgo, Venus to Taurus and Libra, Mars to Aries and Scorpio, Jupiter to Pisces and Sagittarius, and Saturn to Aquarius and Capricorn, - As other planets were discovered, the system then evolved further based on similarities of sign and planet natures.

This thread has diagrams that may help understand:
https://solunars.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=2316

[Flat out ballin]

Jupiter and Jim,

Thank you for prompt reply to my question.

Agree with JSAD pertaining to constellations' influences, although there are still unstatisfication explanationary. I'm pretty much aware of Thema Mundi which Jim has alluded, but it's good to refreshing the memory for a student like me anyway. Kind of get it now for why Morinus repeatedly saying and attacking, it's just Arabian sorcery (mistakenly to the fact it was Egyptian). Though, it doesn't mean Sidereal Zodiac is sorcery because the zodiac is in fact more valid to locate the actual position of planets and empirically Sidereal Zodiac is real. I would say it's even more sorcery or bogus to employ the zodiac that didn't recognize where I live. So this leave me out in my conclusion to rely on parans and quadrant house, previously whole-sign and Porphyry houses. Just feeling lucky to live in smooth infomational era and grateful for Fagan-Bradley's hard work.

Thank you everyone.