Regarding the role of Mars, also,
The Antiscion of the Ascendant is Aries.
Regarding finances, also,
The Antiscion of Jupiter is Libra 9 degrees 10 minutes, conjunct Part of Fortune - not regarding Jupiter as the co-worker's significator in this instance (one query at a time, one set of significations at a time even when the various queries to the same chart are linked).
Ezra.

Can I suggest that this horary, and also the missing engagement ring horary, are posted to this thread:

Index of Horary Charts With Answers
http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4728

Then all the 'answered' horary questions are easy to find.

Hi Ye.

WARNING: Some untraditional techniques used below. Also, don't use Arabic Parts, Stars, and Asteroids because they not only don't work for me, they result in wrong answers.

Here is my take on this benefitting from the use of the Retroscope (as outcome has been published):

For significators, I used the Moon for the Querent to allow use of Mercury (L10) for the boss. The colleague is L7 Jupiter. The Work Environment is L6 Saturn Rx in 1. I noticed that this implies the question is destroyed but I went forth undaunted. Maybe this means the querent has really asked the wrong question.

Work environment: Saturn Rx and peregrine shows the current situation well. Neptune in 6 shows the involvement of drugs in the workplace. Approaching square between Neptune and Moon shows that this will continue to be a problem for querent.

The Boss (Mercury) actually has a good opinion of querent (Mercury exalts Moon), regardless of how she may or may not express that. This bodes well for her keeping her job.

The Colleague (Jupiter) hates the boss (Mercury) shown through Deteriment and Fall receptions. That's understandble based on what we know about the boss and what must be a conflict with the drugs. Nevertheless, Jupiter is in its rulership so I say he stays on the job but may decide to quit over his feelings for the boss.

Her career is also shown by L10 Mercury. It has some essential dignity and receptions to querent imply her employment there continues. However, Saturn approaches an opposition to Saturn (Lord of Work Env.) which shows an upcoming adverse change - the shift change.

Work Env. (Saturn) has approaching trine to Querent (Moon) which implies that the shift change will be beneficial to querent as it will improve the environment by removing contact with the strange colleague. Perhaps it will also insulate her from the boss so an adequate relationship can be maintained. The change itself (Uranus) approaches sextile to her (Moon) implying that it will be a good opportunity for her.

The Boss (Mercury) actually has a good opinion of querent (Mercury exalts Moon), regardless of how she may or may not express that. This bodes well for her keeping her job.

I would say that a planet should also describe the person, and Mercury in Taurus would not describe the manager, especially from the querent's and other employee's points of view. Taurus is a sign of Venus, who is a harmony-seeking planet and is socially adept, etc., especially since Venus as dispositor is well placed. The boss is socially awkward, unintelligent, a poor and combative leader, which doesn't seem to fit Mercury in a sign of Venus, even if it squares Mars. The querent astrologically as well as descriptively fits Mercury here. Her natal shows Mercury and Venus in Aquarius (a socially aware and intelligent individual), and a trine to Gemini Mars with an Aries sextile from Moon/Jupiter in the 3rd (opinionated).

Also, it has been shown by her behavior at this time and since that meeting that she does not hold a good opinion of the querent. The querent has been on excellent behavior since this event and is never late, etc. as to not excite any reason for her to fire her.

There is a superior above the manager that holds a good opinion of the querent, though, and he may be one of the reasons she is still around. Many people are fired at this company, and to me it seems rather angry/hostile. I have been on the grounds and do no like the energy of the place (I could not work in such an environment!). It has a malefic vibe, which may be in part Saturn here.

I would say that a planet should also describe the person, and Mercury in Taurus would not describe the manager, especially from the querent's and other employee's points of view. Taurus is a sign of Venus, who is a harmony-seeking planet and is socially adept, etc.

I disagree with this assertion. In Horary astrology, the planets used as significators are significators simply by virtue of ruling the houses associated with them. It is quite possible for Mars to be the significator of a docile female person and venus the significator of a violent, ugly man. In Horary, the houses are the primary thing. Planets are secondary and signs are tertiary. This ranking is very different than that of Natal Astrology.

John Frawley, in his excellent book "The Horary Textbook", addresses this topic quite well in the first three paragraphs of Chapter 4 on page 30. In the third paragaph, Frawley says "This is even so if the planet does not appear to describe that thing. ... The planets are the actors in the drama that is in the chart; when the casting-director is handing out the parts he evidently doesn't take much time choosing who gets which."

I have seen bosses that treat people like dirt in spite of the fact that they like their employees' work or even admire them. It's usually a "power trip" rooted in insecurity or envy. Sometimes they feel threatened by good employees. People are complex and their actions are often based on things that are not perceived by others.

Ultimately, you have the advantage of being able to dialogue with your client to test multiple possible interpretations and select the ones that best fit the situation. Perhaps a different significator would work better than the one I chose. However, that should be based on Horary astrology considerations.

Good luck and I hope that you follow-up later by telling us what ultimately happens to your client and the colleague.

disagree with this assertion. In Horary astrology, the planets used as significators are significators simply by virtue of ruling the houses associated with them. It is quite possible for Mars to be the significator of a docile female person and venus the significator of a violent, ugly man. In Horary, the houses are the primary thing. Planets are secondary and signs are tertiary. This ranking is very different than that of Natal Astrology.

Most traditionalists would disagree with Frawley here. Lilly is extremely specific about physical and character descriptions in horary. I always find them to be reliable in my own charts. That's one of the reasons people often have the same astrological themes in horaries, were they to ask multiple questions over time.

Ultimately, you have the advantage of being able to dialogue with your client to test multiple possible interpretations and select the ones that best fit the situation.

She's actually an elder sister! I only really read for family and friends. But I will of course be able to follow this much easier by being connected to the querent.

Lilly is extremely specific about physical and character descriptions in horary.

I dusted off my Lilly (CA) and did a scan. For example, I looked particularly hard at the area where he shows how to describe a thief. Lilly uses the accidental considerations the planet is found in and not the natural meanings of the planet to describe the thief. I looked elsewhere too and couldn't find where he uses natural meanings to describe people (other than perhaps the querent and his moles).

In my work I have found that the significator of a person would describe that person to the extent of that person's relevancy to the question at hand, or the facet that that person is expressing in the situation. If you look deeper, you may figure out that people will move and change their behavior patterns to fit their significator in a situation. Hard to do unless you already fit the profile of that significator, and a physical resemblance, if you will, can go a long way.
We can work backwards on this. Would it not stand to reason that if Mercury is prominent in one's natal chart, and the native fits Mercury's description--short, wiry, restless, angular features(I have even seen the Gemini ruled having hair feathered back), one would take this position in a horary, or have a strong connection to whatever Mercury rules or is connected to?? All horaries have their roots in the self and its motivations. More accurately, would it not stand to reason that one's motivation for asking a horary would stem from, for example, Mercury-related concerns?

To take another tack--I see the 1st House as ruling the principle of will. While this can be the querent's will in a particular situation, it can be someone else's will as well. In fact, it can be the principle of will of everyone involved, at the time at which the question is asked. When the querent asks the question, he takes this position, and others have to move to fit their respective significators, while the querent moves to fit his own. If you have to 'move' quite a bit, I'd say it's unlikely from the first that you will take that position in the first place, and you're not likely to fall in line with a particular significator. You might find that your true wants in a situation will match the significator which you resemble most in profile. The will that we state in a question often does not match our true will. Thus the querent's significator in a question though it rule the 1st House, may not reflect the querent's true position in the matter, only his will in the moment.

Horary, thus, can be quite complicated.

Peter_Fox

"I dusted off my Lilly (CA) and did a scan. For example, I looked particularly hard at the area where he shows how to describe a thief. Lilly uses the accidental considerations the planet is found in and not the natural meanings of the planet to describe the thief. I looked elsewhere too and couldn't find where he uses natural meanings to describe people (other than perhaps the querent and his moles)."

I don't know about Lilly but Bonatti certainly does use the planets to describe people.

I dusted off my Lilly (CA) and did a scan. For example, I looked particularly hard at the area where he shows how to describe a thief. Lilly uses the accidental considerations the planet is found in and not the natural meanings of the planet to describe the thief. I looked elsewhere too and couldn't find where he uses natural meanings to describe people (other than perhaps the querent and his moles).

I don't have my copy (I am at work), it's in Book I am certain but can't list the page numbers. He describes people by height, weight, general demeanour, etc.

Deb is the expert on Lilly (probably the most knowledgeable in the world in that area) and she lists Lilly's quotes throughout her website -
The planets
http://www.skyscript.co.uk/sun_att.html

Go to "physical descriptions," etc. It's all straight out of Lilly, most word-for-word.

The signs
http://www.skyscript.co.uk/leo.html

Oh, yes, he goes to great lengths throughout! He even talks about a cardinal sign rising and the ASC ruler in a cardinal sign showing specific characteristics in behavior, etc.

Other useful sources that list Lilly comprehensively are here:

http://www.astermatch.com/docs/PlanetsLilly.pdf
http://www.worldastrology.net/wp-conten ... riscti.pdf

I don't know about Lilly but Bonatti certainly does use the planets to describe people.

Lilly seems to have been much influenced by Bonatti, and would likely agree with him for the most part.

Handn wrote:

In late May Jupiter opposed Saturn and then changed signs, losing his dignified situation, and conjoined Uranus in June. I deduce from that that he was terminated (or had his role removed to somewhere where he could cause less trouble) around that time.

Yes, we can't forget the on-again, off-again Jupiter-Saturn opp and also the Uranus conjunction, and I did mention this to the querent during the reading (for some reason I think it got left out in what I told Deb). I told her in the short term he (the weird guy she asked about) will stay but he may be fired a while down the road (I don't remember giving a time frame, but I didn't think it would be that year). Mutability usually takes a bit longer and the orb is wide.

He was just this past month fired, as one might expect! Good call to mention this, Handn. The querent told her coworker friends about my reading and one of them came up to her today and mentioned that he had just been fired, a long while after the question, as her astrologer sister had predicted (they remembered the reading).

Thanks for the update Tanit. It's really interesting to read back through the thread knowing how things panned out further down the line. Very valuable learning experience.

Regards

H.