These were first introduced to me by Lenore Tomson (She doesn't mention them in her book).
They are different from the John Beebe archetypes, though a few of them have the same names. Mother/Father, plus "Puer", which was renamed "Seeker".
Anima/Animus are not distinct archetypes here, but rather the relation of one to its contrasexual counterpart. (Mother is the anima of Father, and Father is the animus of Mother). "Shadow" was another single archetype of Jung's, that in Beebe's theory came to be divided into the four archetypes associated with the "unused functions" below the inferior. In this model, the shadow is the same gender archetype opposite of each archetype. The shadow of the Father is the Seeker. This makes sense considering as was stated; "Seeker" was originally the "Puer" (boy child).
While she does not really believe in Keirsey's temperaments, she believes these sort of parallel them (and thus hence, the temperaments are more social roles than any integral part of personality).
She had said she was a Mediatrix, and I recognized myself, as far as I understand these, as a Sage. Both of us are NT's, and the descriptions do sound like it. I think she does not hold them fixed to the Keirsey group however, so any type might be any archetype, and it would explain variations in behavior from the typical type expectation.
One thing I notice, is that in trying the Galen temperament on these, I see a fit between:
Warrior/Amazon: obviously sounds like Choleric
Seeker/Companion: fits Sanguine
Father/Mother: fits Melancholic
Sage/Mediatrix: other descriptions I have seen for it would possibly fit Phlegmatic.
These would maintain the shadows as the opposite temperaments (Melancholy as diametric opposite of Sanguine, etc)
Interesting as Keirsey said the NT was Phlegmatic, but I deduced it as better fitting Choleric with NF as Phlegmatic. But I doubt the Warrior/Amazon would fit NF. I'm not saying it is NT either. It sounds more like the Interaction Style of "In Charge" (EST/ENJ).
The tables suggest function combinations, with Sage as iNtuition and Thinking sure enough, but Mediatrix as just iNtuition. Most of the others fit general preferences such as "extraverted Judging".
What I'm thinking, is that if these social archetypes can be any type, then maybe they would correspond to the missing "need area" of Affection from the FIRO/APS system I talk about. So Interaction Styles would be Inclusion, Keirsey temperament would be Control, and these social archetypes would be Affection. That is really a deeper level of social skills.
It's a longshot, a Sage does seem to parallel my NT preference, with the descriptions of the archetype not sounding like they have anything to do with Affection, which is about deep personal relationships. But since these descriptions are focusing on outside behavior, maybe they do somewhow stem from Affection, which is described by one FIRO expert as the deepest level of our personality. (Though they believed the score groups could change; go figure).
I'm Supine in Affection (which I usually pair with Phlegmatic in the four-to-five temperament correlations), and I could see Lenore as being similar in that area. Hence, both NT and Sage/Mediatrix.
But I'm still not sure. Just what I'm looking into now.
So has anyone else heard of these? Do they fit the Keirsey group for you? For those who have participated in the Inclusion/Control/Affection discussion here, do they match Affection for you? Or something else?