The 1st house ruler in the 7th suggests the querent is the more ardent of the two. Conversely, the 7th house ruler in the 1st shows the quesited to be most keen.

Which is what I have always understood. Lilly says on p. 305 of CA:

The Lord of the seventh in the ascendant, the party desired loveth best: the Lord of the ascendant in the seventh, the Querent loveth best

So then why does he say this on p. 317 of CA?

Contrary to all the rules of the Ancients, I have ever found, that when the Lord of the seventh hath been in the ascendant, the querent hath loved most, and when the Lord of the ascendant was in the seventh, the quesited loved best.

I must be misinterpreting what he is saying but it seems to me he is saying two different things and in the second quote he is going against what the accepted rule is in this matter.

He is saying two different things and you have to make a judgement on this. But remember that emplacement is only one general rule. To decide if one party is keener to develop the relationship than the other, you really have to look at a number of factors.

Application - the swifter moving planet is usually the one that is making most of the moves to develop (or move away from) the relationship. Superior planets, as a rule, tend to exercise more control and independence of mind than inferiors.

Essential and accidental dignity is very important too. If one planet is clearly stronger than the other, it can bend the other under its will. And planets in their own signs are rarely reliant on anyone.

Reception is also useful in showing that attention is acknowledged and returned.

Placement by house: The normal rule is that if the 1st ruler is in 7th it shows their inclination to be with the quesited (and vice versa).

We usually take emplacement to indicate a will towards something. So for example in ?might I get the job?? type questions, the 1st house ruler in the 10th needs secondary support, because we know the querent is inclined towards the job, otherwise they wouldn?t be asking about it. It?s much more promising of them getting the job to see the ruler of the 10th in the 1st house ? that shows the job is inclined towards them.

So the general rule would be as Lilly explained it in your first quote. I can only make sense of his contradictory comment from the fact that the 7th house is the house of contractual partnership, so finding the ascendant ruler in the 7th could show that the relationship leads to marriage. I know that?s not a great answer but I personally give more credence to the rule of the ancients in this one ? but of course no rule is reliable on its own, only when it becomes part of a dominant theme.

Thanks for that comprehensive answer. When I first looked at the second quote some time ago I wondered if he was referring to something similar to reception in that if the ruler of the 7th is in the 1st then the querent is showing interest by receiving the quesited into his/her domicile.

I haven't seen this quote referred to anywhere else so I wondered if I was simply misunderstanding something.

Lee Lehman says that when a perfection occurs by opposition in a relationship horary, it shows the two are drawn to each other "like a moth to a flame, but it's a fatal attraction, that's somehow totally inappropriate."

And probably doomed, I might add.

Now that describes almost every relationship I've ever had! I guess I shouldn't be surprised! thanks for that insight!

Granny