Greetings forum,

I know everyone is glad Merc R is over, and I've waited it out to address this piece of Lilly data:

I have found if you calculate the horoscope in Regio and copy the web address before you click on the chart with your mouse to enlarge it it stays on Forums, yet Not my emails.

http://www.astro.com/cgi/chart.cgi?lang ... r=1&nho2=1

Question: Will X pay back the money they owe?

Now this particular horary was very difficult to answer and this horary astrologer could not answer it yet consultants aided and Lilly's advice about a benific in the 8th and aspected held true; Venus trining Saturn.

However this is not the emphasis I'm interested in discussing.

Note: in CA I, chapter III, page 31, Lilly says:

"....we seldom use more aspects then Conjunction, Sextile, Square, Trine, Opposition: to these of late one Kepler, a learned man, hath added some new ones, as follow, viz."

Now we know that traditional horary uses only Ptolemaic aspects, but my question is by Lilly's use of the word 'seldom' is he telling us that very occasionally he finds Kepler's aspects helpful?

For in this particular horary, the lord of the 2nd, is indeed quincunx by the Moon in a very tight orb. And the readjustment of the loan sum was arrived at by the querant and the borrower is exactly what transpired.

I know this reasoning is out on a limb, but does Lilly suggest that we observe the minor aspects as he cites them in CA I and there is that word Lilly uses again 'seldom' which does not imply 'never'.

Clinton Garrett Soule

Signs which are in aversion but which have the same ruler are still able to work together. So as per this, the valid Non Ptolemic aspects would be:
1. Quincunx between a planet in Scorpio and a planet in Aries
2. Quincunx between a planet in Venus and a planet in Libra
3. Semi-sextile between a planet in Aquarius and a planet in Capricorn
Robert Hand mentions that he uses the above mentioned valid non-ptolemic aspects when the orb is very tight.

Now in the example chart provided, when the Moon perfects the quincunx aspect, it will be in the 27th degree of Sagittarius. The bound (term) ruler of the 27th degree of Sagittarius is Mars, using Egyptian bounds (I hope this is correct). Does this make the quincunx valid since the application is to the bound ruler itself? Might be worth considering...

Vasanth

Vasanth said:

Now in the example chart provided, when the Moon perfects the quincunx aspect, it will be in the 27th degree of Sagittarius. The bound (term) ruler of the 27th degree of Sagittarius is Mars, using Egyptian bounds (I hope this is correct). Does this make the quincunx valid since the application is to the bound ruler itself? Might be worth considering...

I've talked with a few horary artists on this very concept and they to have witnessed the effects; how relable they didn't say. But this 'bound ruler' concept makes some sense.

The only other way of testing this is to observe those quincunx aspects and how the horary plays out because of the influence.

Clinton Garrett Soule

Hi Clinton,

I would suggest that you check Lilly's example delineations and see if he uses them there as, if they are important, he would surely have used them himself. I don't recall there being any mention of them but it has been a while since I have thoroughly read CA.

i will share my thoughts on this and many astrologers using minor aspects
would hate me for this.

Aspect is offspring of geometry and astrology. It originated from hellenistic area and this is the time when geometry, mathmatics, philosophy and many discipliens and remnants of Greek world were incorporated into astrology.

starting with conjunction, it is a dot.
opposition is a line.
square is well square
trine is triangle
sextile is not a hexagon, but parallelogram.

these are the basic shapes since all the other shapes are composition of
these. Of course, zodiac is circle. Geometry was god's blueprint, so to speak.
All the objects of the worlds can be reduced to these shapes.
For example, your face is circle, nose is triangle, mouth parallelogram
your computer is square, the pencil is a line, flowers with five petals is
pentagram which is triangle sitting on top of a prallelogram.

Thus, these shapes, which are represented by square, triangle, parallelogram and circle (zodiac) compose of all the worlds and fundamentals. Thus i believe this is my rational for using ptolemaic aspects and none others.

sincerely

jun

Lilly pretty much mentions it once in the interpretation of a relationship chart. Sorry, don't know the exact page.:

"CHAP. LX.
If she should marry the man desired?

[...]
yet were both Significators in a Semisextile, and in good houses, from which I gathered hopes, that there was some sparks of love betwixt them; [...]"

Lilly talks also about semi-quadrate when it comes to sickness if I remember correctly. As in -- semi-quadrate is a half crysis and a full square/opposition is a full crysis.

Just two references and both depict them as a weak influence. I know he talks about the relationship in the quotation but IMHO 'some sparks' is a perfect description of a non-ptolemaic aspect.

And even though I kind of did not agree with Venus-Saturn thing at first but I'm pretty sure now it is the right answer after all.

Seiko wrote:Lilly pretty much mentions it once in the interpretation of a relationship chart. Sorry, don't know the exact page.:

"CHAP. LX.
If she should marry the man desired?

[...]
yet were both Significators in a Semisextile, and in good houses, from which I gathered hopes, that there was some sparks of love betwixt them; [...]"

Lilly talks also about semi-quadrate when it comes to sickness if I remember correctly. As in -- semi-quadrate is a half crysis and a full square/opposition is a full crysis.

Just two references and both depict them as a weak influence. I know he talks about the relationship in the quotation but IMHO 'some sparks' is a perfect description of a non-ptolemaic aspect.

And even though I kind of did not agree with Venus-Saturn thing at first but I'm pretty sure now it is the right answer after all.

Well found Seiko! I had a look at that chart and I think there are some other tesitmonies present in it: the planets were in relationship via antiscia and the Moon was also translating light between them. I would be interested to see if he would treat it in the same way without the antiscia or the excellent positions of the significators.

I seem to recall the medical use for them as being related to the phases of the Moon, I may be wrong on that though.

I'm not exactly sold on the whole aspect-to-antiscion thing. I think it's more of a where the contra/antiscion falls. Lilly says a planet is IN the antiscion (in the perfect antiscion of a malignant Planet etc).

So it is important where the antiscia fall -- in one example Lilly writes about the antiscion of Jupiter falling exactly on the cusp of the 2nd house which is great for the money matters etc Or the antiscion of the Mars falls "neer" Sun which afflicts the Querent's health and so forth. I'm not sure what "neer" exactly means bit I would guess it is a very tight orb.

I had a chart in my recent memory where the outcome was negative even though both significators promised good (mutual reception and so on) -- the antiscion of Mars fell exactly on the principal significator of the Quesited.

I don't believe that if L1 applies to a conjunction with the antiscion two-three or more ? away it would be of utmost importance. If the contra/antiscion falls on the sig, well, we should definately consider that.

Btw, I'm not talking about this specific chart from CA, I haven't even looked at it. Just some general ideas.

If we leave out that medical semi-square matter Lilly mentions, then we must say that there's only one vague reference to a semi-sextile in CA in a real-life example. And it didn't even matter because there was a translation of light etc that "brought the matter to passe".

So pretty much if we don't want to delve into some kind of horary micro-astrology, I believe non-ptolemaic aspects should not be used in horaries and we should stick to "the perfect geometry" junibus talked about. In my humble opinion. If someone wants to, well, that's his/her choice.

Seiko wrote:I'm not exactly sold on the whole aspect-to-antiscion thing. I think it's more of a where the contra/antiscion falls. Lilly says a planet is IN the antiscion (in the perfect antiscion of a malignant Planet etc).

So it is important where the antiscia fall -- in one example Lilly writes about the antiscion of Jupiter falling exactly on the cusp of the 2nd house which is great for the money matters etc Or the antiscion of the Mars falls "neer" Sun which afflicts the Querent's health and so forth. I'm not sure what "neer" exactly means bit I would guess it is a very tight orb.

I had a chart in my recent memory where the outcome was negative even though both significators promised good (mutual reception and so on) -- the antiscion of Mars fell exactly on the principal significator of the Quesited.

I don't believe that if L1 applies to a conjunction with the antiscion two-three or more ? away it would be of utmost importance. If the contra/antiscion falls on the sig, well, we should definately consider that.

Btw, I'm not talking about this specific chart from CA, I haven't even looked at it. Just some general ideas.

Well from what I've read, antisica is a way of mitigating aversion and also shows planets who will be activated conjunctly as time-lords in nativities. So I wouldn't judge a chart as perfecting based upon the significators being signs sharing an antisica or contrantisica relationship but I would say it shows a certain harmony between the significators which they would have lost otherwise by being in aversion to each other. I certainly would not use aspects to the antiscia as Frawley advocates.

Dear Forum Members,

As you know Lilly developed an elaborate point system as the first aspect to the lord of the quesited does Not always give the horary verdict.

Why else would Lilly even bring Kepler's minor aspects unless he had used them slightly in his practice?

As in his quate from:

Note: in CA I, chapter III, page 31, Lilly says:

"....we seldom use more aspects then Conjunction, Sextile, Square, Trine, Opposition: to these of late one Kepler, a learned man, hath added some new ones, as follow, viz."

As far as the Antiscions and Contrascions, I've been told by some good horary artists that when doing speaculation horarys, whether gambling or the stock market, one better check the aspects for one degree application.

I personally think many times Lilly spent all day working on a horary or sometimes several days weighing in all the factors.


Clinton Garrett Soule

Clinton Soule wrote:Why else would Lilly even bring Kepler's minor aspects unless he had used them slightly in his practice?

Hi Clinton,

the "old" world is replete with astrologers who pass on techniques and quirks that they don't believe work or don't use but only since it is like a duty to do so; to keep the tradition alive and growing.

I'm pretty sure Lilly does this many times throughout Christian Astrology, so again I'd look for the general trend of his examples rather than taking a single sentence or remark as a full outline of his practice. If you are just looking for some reassurances in using them yourself, why not just use them and see how you get on?