Thanks for the suggestion, Clinton

I've already seen this done and thought of doing it myself, but I figured it would be better if the entire superfluous post would just be deleted entirely, leaving no traces

Goran

Clinton Soule wrote: I know it's often done using a planet posited in the first house, as called co-ruler or co-lord, but Paul could you cite a traditional source of where this is done?

And I know there are those Ultra-Trads, whom the Outers Do Not exist in any form or area in astrology, who the hair stands up on their neck when his name and work is mentioned. But as I understand unless it was the prior Moderator, that you study John Frawley devotedly as do many on this Forum, is there a Frawley citation that one may be aware of that one might post this method?

Hi Clinton

I've noticed a habit sometimes of assuming others are not following the tradition or are following modern astrologers (even if they themselves are influenced by the tradition). I do not know where this comes from. By the way, I never mentioned the word 'co-lord' or anything like that, simply that I was tempted by Jupiter so close to the ascendant, my main reason against it would be Jupiter being in detriment, but it is still interesting to me. I don't necessarily think we should use them instead of the house lords, but instead that such planets provide us sometimes with interesting information on the horary or the querent specifically, and, especially when this planet has some dignity there, may allow for perfections if a planet aspects them and not the house lord itself.

I have to say I'm curious why you asked when you also accept that Lilly himself used co-lords in his own work - therefore a traditional source. I'm going to assume you mean older than Lilly? If not I'm not sure what you are asking for. Or perhaps you are making an assumption that I, like the modern astrologers you mention, take co-ruler to be 'equal' ruler? If so this is very odd, as I have not actually used the word co-ruler myself, nor indicated or hinted that even if I did that it would be an equal ruler. For what it's worth he's two quick references to other astrologers who allow for a co-significator (other than the Moon).


(translations by Ben Dykes)

Umar Al Tabiri

"But generally if a star were in the east ... they present testimonies to the querent" - (regarding secondary significators)

"On the other hand, the lord of the question applying to any [star] in the east so that it would be in its own domicile, sovereignty, even bound, portends the same"

Sahl bin Bishr
"Should the significator itself (that is, the lord of the question) apply to one appearing in the east, so that [the star in the place] is a partner of something in that same place - it declares the certain effecting of the quaesited matter"

Clinton Soule wrote:Goran,

I recently found upon a thread/discussion, that if one posts again that one can edit a prior post or just add a letter or word like Deleted Post

Pass it on, save our Moderators from the chore!

Clinton

I don't mind doing some housework and deleting any posts if the poster edits it to simply say "Delete post" - making it bold will make it easier for me to spot.

I've done it a few times and it's no hassle to me. However I do not want to encourage this if it disrupts the natural readability of the thread - ie, I don't want to encourage people to change their minds and remove their posts a lot.