If I am correct, the chart has a very late ascendant (later than 29deg) and I probably wouldn't have proceeded with the delineation. I don't see translation of the Moon between Venus and Saturn. The Moon has recently separated from a square to Venus and will go on to trine the Sun. It then squares Saturn. The Moon and Venus are in mutual reception but these are his two significators and don't indicate reception between the two people involved.

Obviously no one is going to convince anyone here. Most of us have our strong views about this, which is fair enough. I have seen several astrologers use the 5th house in this way. However, Lee is the only person I have seen use it in this way who is known for being a traditional astrologer. I know Lee often stresses the importance of reading and understanding Lilly's Christian Astrology but he would never have used the 5th in this way. What it boils down to for me is that using the 5th house for the other person in a relationship chart has never been a traditional principle and never will be.

Most of us do our horary learning through one teacher. However, I think it is very important to read as widely as possible, particularly the traditional texts such as Lilly, Bonatti, Gadbury, Culpeper, etc. It is in my nature to always want to understand how traditions developed and why, so it is easy for me to want to do this. However, unless we really understand how these traditions came about, we won't understand why they must remain. This is one of the reasons Deb's book on the houses is so valuable. Not only does it explain the way it is but it explains how it got to be the way it is and how important it is to keep it that way.

Thank you, Sue... I appreciate your comments.

You are right: 29 degrees Scorpio was rising in the example chart I gave you and delineated. As Ivy Goldstein Jacobson said, the 29th degree of any sign is unfortunate: she called it a "weeping degree."

It also indicates a situation the querent can't do anything about! (And that's certainly true!) I know Lee Lehman is not opposed to reading a chart with a late ascendent, though she did say she would NOT read a chart where 0 degrees ascends. (She felt too much free will was at play there.)

It's interesting that there is not only dispute about using the 5th or 7th house for a new love affair, but that some astrologers say that planets in mutual reception actually "switch places" in both sign and degree . So in my example chart, the Moon at 18 Libra would "switch places" with Venus at 16 Cancer. (I personally am not all certain about doing this: not to mention, in some charts, "switching places" caused the Moon to be void or visa versa.)

In any case, as I said, using the 5th house for this question gave the right answer, and in this case, at least, using the 7th house would have proved wrong. But I agree that having a basis in traditional astrology is a very good idea and one that I am pursuing.

In any case, as I said, using the 5th house for this question gave the right answer, and in this case, at least, using the 7th house would have proved wrong.

It wasn't just the use of the 5th house that was wrong. Some of the reasons you gave for a yes answer weren't indicating this at all. Getting the ?right? answer was merely a co-incidence and not based on a correct reading of the chart. This is not uncommon. The fact that the ascendant degree was so late is indicating the potential that the chart will not give a clear answer. This turned out to be the case. I couldn't see anything in the chart that gave a definitive 'yes' to the question.

It's interesting that there is not only dispute about using the 5th or 7th house for a new love affair, but that some astrologers say that planets in mutual reception actually "switch places" in both sign and degree .

This makes even less sense than using the 5th house for love affairs. (I realise you are merely bringing this up for debate and not necessarily advocating it). Swapping places defeats the whole principle behind reception in the first place. Planets do not swap places. They confer their dignity onto another planet or they receive the dignity of that planet but they are not the other planet and never will be. They maintain their own nature. If you haven?t already, read through the recent discussion on reception and in particular the excellent explanations from Deb and Ben. Ben?s explanation based on a movie he saw puts a very clear perspective on reception.

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... 52&start=0

I'm not sure what you mean by saying that the "yes" answer to my example chart was arrived at by coincidence since I used the 5th house as the significator of the lover, instead of the 7th. (Because using the 5th made Venus and Saturn the significators for the two people involved and as you can see, they are applying to a conjunction. Using Mars and Venus -- the 1st and 7th, would not have given this result at all.)

But nevertheless, I have looked at the articles by Ben and Tom on mutual reception and that does help quite a bit. I frankly found it very confusing to "swap" the planets' positions, because in many cases, it gave completely contradictory answers than using the original planetary placements. But I do know that several seemingly reputatable astrolgers advocate doing this, though I never see examples of how this actually is put into place.

Hi Deb ,

if you want any references here it is - tonight I have seen an article written by Lee Lehman:

www.stariq.com/Main/Articles/P0001296.htm

I tend to agree more with the approach of W.Lilly .

LittleMermaid .

voyagergirl wrote:I'm not sure what you mean by saying that the "yes" answer to my example chart was arrived at by coincidence since I used the 5th house as the significator of the lover, instead of the 7th. (Because using the 5th made Venus and Saturn the significators for the two people involved and as you can see, they are applying to a conjunction. Using Mars and Venus -- the 1st and 7th, would not have given this result at all.)

I think what Sue means is that it is coincidence that using the rulers of the 1st and 5th is giving you the outcome that actually happened. Since the chart has such a late ascendant, I don't think it's fit to be judged at all, and therefore, it's a coincidence that it's giving you the right answer.

Regarding the late ascendant, I would question that in itself. Did you already know the answer to your question at the time that you asked it?

Sometimes, I have found a late ascendant appear in my charts for questions that I asked about two people whose relationship have no specific bearing on my life and are really none of my business; the universe is telling me that it's not my concern as to what the true answer is. You asked about the relationship of two people, and one of them was your friend, so you started from the 11th. It would be interesting to find out your reason for asking this horary; why did it concern you enough to ask it, or what is your "piece" or "role" in this question. Maybe the horary is telling you that it's really not your concern as to whether or not there will be romance between these two people by virtue of the late ascendant, thereby rendering this chart is unfit to be judged at all.

- Taurus7 -

Hi VG,

There?s a number of reasons why your example could be held up as questionable. Such a late ascendant raises alarm bells. One early example I did for a querent with a late ascendant concerned the need to make a choice between moving on to a much-needed larger property, or to take out a considerable loan and extend. I ignored the late ascendant and returned my judgement that it would be better to sell up and move - because the extension would bring a lot of unnecessary trouble and wouldn?t add any real value to the property. The querent was very disappointed. She went ashen actually and confessed that the decision had already been made, the extension work already started, and it was all going horribly wrong ? she had only asked the question to check that they she hadn?t made a big mistake. The chart showed she had, but it was too late to do anything about it.

This idea of things being too late is one interpretation for late ascendants, but also, (I?ve found), is the fact that the querent knows more than they are letting on. They are sometimes holding back valuable information that prevents the chart being read as it ought to be (just as my querent held back part of her knowledge of the situation from me). That?s why they are associated with trickery or an insincere question. Usually, querent?s don?t do this deliberately, but for some reason or another we are being given an astrological reminder that there is an association with corruption and unreliability or that the signification won?t work in the way it is being used.

I?m sure that many of us, like Taurus7, read your question and saw the late ascendant ? and then wondered why you would be asking such a question about a friend. After all, if the relationship between you and the man whose relationships you are asking about is purely based on friendship, you could just ask him if he has a girlfriend couldn?t you? If on the other hand you or someone else have a romantic interest in the man and want to know if he is free, then he didn?t ought to be defined as a ?friend? but as a potential candidate for a relationship with the querent. See how this goes ? Then we would be arguing that actually, the negative answer read from the 1st-7th house rulers doesn?t show the 7th house signification to be fallible, it describes it as accurate: the quesited is not available for a relationship with the querent.

Either way the late ascendant makes all of us wary of taking this horary too seriously in this discussion ? and that?s not because we don?t trust your sincerity or jump at any opportunity to label a chart with a conflicting approach invalid.

Littlemermaid wrote:

if you want any references here it is - tonight I have seen an article written by Lee Lehman:

www.stariq.com/Main/Articles/P0001296.htm

Thank you for that link, which was illuminating. I have seen very few examples of signification for the ?loved one? asked about being taken from the 5th house, rather than bringing the meaning of the 5th house into the judgment in a descriptive manner.

I notice that Lee writes:

There are two very important things to remember when working with horary astrology: Get a good question, and figure out how you?re going to delineate the chart before you sit down to do it??.
Astrologically, there are two choices in this case?the Fifth or the Seventh House?and the difference between them is pretty clear. A Seventh House relationship is one that is tied together legally (a marriage or partnership agreement), or where the two people are living together. A Fifth House relationship is what used to be called an affair?a liaison not sharing quarters.

I won?t dwell on the fact that I disagree with the last comment because traditional references point to the 7th house being used for signification of sweethearts, lovers, concubines or spouses. But what I noticed was that Lee?s introduction seemed very close to a passage in Marion March and Joan McEvers book, The Only Way to Learn about Horary and Electional Astrology (ACS 1995), where in the chart ?Is this relationship over?? (p.29) they write:

Relationships are traditionally 7th house, and her question pertained to the relationship, but questions about a lover can also be assigned to the 5th house. In a situation like this, it is wise to look at both. However, this is a decision that should be made before you look at the chart.

The way they both stress that the decision must be made before looking at the chart, suggests that the earlier ?Only Way? reference has been an influential source for Lee, (or else it?s a strong coincidence). Or maybe they both immediately realised how potentially confusing and destructive to judgement it will be to have flexible signification giving mixed signals in the judgment: the point I was making at the start of this thread.

I also said in an earlier thread

?If you want clear charts with unequivocal symbolism then you need to adopt a structured technique that constrains the possibilities of what the chart might mean. What you don?t want is a judgement that means one thing if you refer to the 5th house but something altogether different if you then decide to refer to the 7th.?

This doesn?t mean that I advocate inflexibility. Since astrological judgement is an art, not a science, we all need to be able to take the apparently rigid ?rules? and creatively sculpture them to fit the unique demands of each situation. But having firm principles and then being flexible with them is different from having weak and wavering principles in the first place, and then not knowing what to do with them.

In fact, the 5th house nearly always has a strong influence upon romantic-relationship questions; in the same way that the 2nd house nearly always has a strong influence upon professional or career problems. So of course we keep an eye on it and consider what is happening there.

I also give beginners the advice to work out their game-plan before looking at the chart. The reason is that many ? especially in their own relationship questions ? are looking at the chart with hopeful expectation of what they want or expect, and if they don?t see it they very quickly get tempted to change their symbolism, in the hope of finding it another way. Or they cast the chart aside as ?invalid? because it hasn?t described the situation as they thought they understood it.

Once an astrologer has built up confidence in horary and has learnt to get a reliable judgement by keeping their own emotional or professional expectations out of it, then the next step is to forget the game-plan approach and learn how to be just open and receptive to what the chart is trying to say to you. Astrology, when it is actually allowed to speak, usually knows what it is talking about.

If you consider the chart for the judgement Lee Lehman has referred to, her conclusion - that the relationship is not to be and doesn?t have a future - is easily seen through the use of the 1st and 7th house rulers as the main significators.
Chart is at http://www.stariq.com/Main/Articles/P0001336.htm

Lee explains that the question was asked by a man whose girlfriend (he is married and asking about his lover) has stopped talking to him.
The Moon is VOC. The 7th ruler has just entered a new sign showing recent changes which dissociate the girlfriend from past connections. There is no application or future connection between them, or between either of them and the Moon, from which we can judge reconciliation. As Lee points out, the 5th house cusp is also blighted by the presence of the South node showing the romance has been soured. Saturn, close to the 7th?ruler, governs the 5th so responsibilities have got in the way or the sense of romance has been lost.

It is interesting that Lee describes how the querent had taken a flippant attitude to the fact that the girlfriend had ceased talking to him. Mars, the 3rd ruler is combust, suggesting the ?talking? ended through an argument or an angry realisation. Mercury, the natural significator of communication, is retrograde and under Sun?s Beams, and the Moon is VOC in Gemini ? this shows that not only is the attraction lost, not only that the quesited has decided to move on with a new chapter in her life, but the communication between them has also been closed down with no promise of anything to get it going again.

Lee gives a good description of the chart; there is nothing to fault her for ? my point here is only that the chart proves nothing in regard to this discussion, except that pertinent horaries usually have a very strong message stamped all over them.

The ?only way? example of March and McEvers - which is the only other published horary I have seen that draws the main signification of the person of the lover from the 5th house, instead of considering the 5th house as a testimony to the romantic attraction - is also very interesting to consider, as a reflection of how the message is stamped all over the chart.
Despite the fact that the relationship is described as ?a serious romantic relationship? the signification of the 7th house is ignored because the authors take Uranus as the ruler of Aquarius on the 7th house cusp and note no connection between the Sun or the Moon with Uranus.
Yet the Moon is sitting on the 7th house cusp, testifying to the importance of 7th house matters in this chart. It is also immediately separating from a conjunction with retrograde Saturn which brings the chart to life in consideration of the authors? comment ?she still loved him, but felt he was backing away from her?. In addition, the two main significators (Sun and Saturn) are separating from trine.

It is very descriptive that the Moon next applies to the opposition of Jupiter, the 5th house ruler. The authors base their summary ?it looked as though it was over? on this, although the querent continued to pursue the doomed relationship for another two months. This is an important secondary factor, but if Jupiter was acting as the main significator for the lover, its presence on the ascendant would have described him making himself available to her, (just as the Moon on the descendant describes her thinking about him and emotionally willing to be with him).
I would say Jupiter on the ascendant describes the querent as heavily affected by the influence of her romantic desires. And because it is an afflicted and peregrine Jupiter, she has probably exaggerated his romantic interest in her. As in Lee?s chart, these two people worked together. The separation by trine of their main significators describes a friendly relationship in the past. With the more recent separation of the Moon from retrograde Saturn she has sensed him back away. As the Moon moves towards the opposition of Jupiter she will have to deal with the contraction of her own exaggerated romantic dreams and inclinations. The Moon then goes on to make a trine to the Sun so it will ultimately be a positive experience for her (she met someone else in the end). The Moon holds no promise of translation in this chart though, because it is unfortunate and accidentally debilitated as ruler of the 12th and meets the opposition of Jupiter first.

The ?Only Way to? book was hugely popular. Marion March once spoke to me about it and about the massive number of copies they had sold. But with 39 example horaries only one demonstrates this approach and remember they don?t suggest you rule out the 7th house ? they say that traditionally it would be a 7th house matter, but because it is about a lover it can also be assigned to the 5th ? providing you decide to do that beforehand. But what I suspect, is that they struggled to demonstrate the 7th house connection because they didn't use traditional rulers, and so ignored all the vivid symbolism that Saturn held. So they made a case for the 5th house ruler instead, because it was the only way (no pun intended) to give a relatively uncomplicated commentary on how the chart reflected what happened. But if you stick to the traditional approach, it gives you everything you need and accomodates the importance of both these houses.