cool, do you have any book recommendation or any posts/website for learning more about the meaning of the terms?? I'd like to get more into it and start understanding how to interpret what it means to have the planets on x's planet's terms
If I'm not mistaken, the terms/bounds are so ancient that the reasoning for them is a little mysterious, maybe they were assigned some deeper cosmological meaning, but we can't know. They're just used as a type of essential dignity, but it's a minor dignity. For example, Saturn has even more dignity in Aquarius, i.e. more management over its own topics, when it's in the last 5 degrees of that sign in a day chart, because that's when Saturn is also in its own triplicity and terms/bounds, and there's almost no other planet's interests involved. If any other planet or point in the chart is in a Saturn dignity, that means Saturn has influence over how that planet or point behaves, but the influence is even stronger if Saturn itself is in its own dignity, because then Saturn won't have its own behavior modulated by other influences. In a practical way it mostly means there's less interference and you don't have to think harder on symbolic combinations. If Saturn is at 10° Scorpio, for example, to nail down the interpretation of the topics ruled by Saturn you have to think about how Saturn behaves in a Mars environment that has just a little bit of a venusian flair. But then, if Mars is in Capricorn they can exchange and have what we call a reception (in this case mutual), giving Saturn a little bit of dignity, being not as subjugated to its host's interests.
Basically it's another type of dignity you can use to make the interpretation more meaningful.
Like all dignities, the terms are used in calculations to determine things like the Almuten, Lord of the Nativity etc. And then also in a predictive technique we call Primary Direction with Distribution of the bounds. Firmicus Maternus also has a whole chapter dedicated to the bounds of the ascendant degree in the Liber Quintus of his Mathesis, saying that they're important to interpret a fate and character. But be careful about how you read Firmicus, his work is not to be read like an astrology app's report, it's a didactic book on astrological interpretation. He says shit like "if the ascendant is in the terms of Saturn the native is a mean person who will kill their siblings", which is a great symbol, a great analogy, but it's not supposed to be taken literally. If you're going to read Firmicus like it's a report think of what he says as a symbol, an image, like a tarot card maybe, Idk.
Now here are three more references on the terms:
Claudius Ptolemy (2nd century Alexandria): Tetrabiblos, book 1, chapter 23. The disposition of the terms. He's a little arrogant trying to put fault in the egyptians without knowing why they distributed the bounds the way they did, so I don't like it, but do read it, it's important.
Vettius Valens (2nd century): Anthologies, chapter 3. Valens gives interpretations for each of the 50 bounds around the zodiac, which I assume is to be read of the ascendant's terms. I'm not sure which divisions he's using, if it's egyptian or ptolmaic, so it's better to check that. It's a little bit silly in my opinion, especially when he gets specific, but interesting.
Guido Bonatti (13th century Italy): Liber Astronomiae Part II (Zoller's translation). He gives a method for interpreting dignities in length from chapter XI through XIX. I should also note that Chapter XIX "Concerning the fortitudes of any planets in each of his dignities" is an interesting one, because he explains an analogy for the dignities that gets used a lot by traditional astrologers today. I find that analogy less helpful and appealing now, but you could be interested in knowing it:
