This may or may not be of any interest to traditional astrologers but I thought I would post the link simply because it is the most complete work up of an electional I think I've seen. Yes, the astrologer uses "modern" astrology and therefore the outers and no, there isn't a lot of theory here - but she apparently specialises in wedding electionals which are heavily reliant on the Moon. I think the premise she uses is firstly to choose the significators of the event - in the case of a wedding, Mercury (contracts)and Venus (marriage), then the Moon because

The next factor for you to consider is the aspects the Moon will make before it leaves its sign. Why is this important? Because a wedding chart will symbolically continue to unfold (as we follow progressions in a natal chart) as long as the marriage lasts...and often afterward! The moon, as the fastest moving body in the wedding chart, symbolizes how things will progress on a day to day level in the marriage.

Substitute whatever event you are electing for in place of the words wedding and marriage.

Anyway, if you haven't come across it before there may be some general pointers:

http://www.bigskyastrology.com/tutorial ... tdate.html

Her article on her own marriage "in the stars" also holds a few humorous reminders for those of us who can get carried away with relationship charts

http://www.bigskyastrology.com/articles/marriage.html

Elections are an art. You have to ask yourself a lot of questions, namely what is the time frame for choosing a time for the election, and equally important is whether you even have to do the thing you're considering. Another idea to keep in mind is practicality. If you want to plan on the best time for a business meeting, and the time you select is at 2:00 AM, you?re probably doing your business more harm then good. I made this mistake once myself, where I wanted to meet up with an old friend. The time I selected was 6:30 PM, which on the face of it was not an inconvenient time. But I was so fixed on this time, so insistent on it when he suggested moving it back to 7:00 PM, that the impression I left was that I was pushy and unreasonable. Rudeness outweighs good astrological timing.

That brings me to another point I hardly see mentioned when people talk about elections and that is how effective are they. If you take the case that I just gave, I would have been a lot better off if I had treated my friend with the respect and courtesy that he asked for instead of fixating on the best time for meeting with him. And a good election will not make you win a lawsuit where you don?t have a chance in the first place. At best I think a good election will make a matter that is likely to go in your favor, go even smoother and faster, but I don?t think it can change the outcome. So go into the process with a strong sense of what is possible.

In picking the time for an election you should keep in mind which factors are more important than others. I would accept a time when the Moon is peregrine but is translating light between my two significators over a time when the Moon is strongly dignified but is not translating light between them. The Moon is the light that binds the two significators together. Translation of light is more important than a fast or slow Moon, house position, etc. But a significator in combustion and retrograde with prevent almost anything from happening. The worst is when the Moon herself is combust. Stay away from times when your significators are in their detriments or fall. If I had these factors on my side, the Moon free from combustion and translating light between the two significators and my significators not in their detriments or fall, I?d accept almost any house placement, or seemingly bad final aspect, if this was a thing that I had to do and could not be postponed.

And don?t be afraid to look at all of the options and just say to yourself that it?s not the time to do this. I recently made a decision to do that and I felt better for having postponed what I planned.

About Joann Hampar, I would not take seriously the advice of someone who has done so little study that she still believes that Venus is the natural ruler of money. This is not just a difference in technique; this is a fundamental misunderstanding of the basic ideas.

But I do somewhat agree with her that whatever is in the chart, the good points and the bad, will participate in the election. What I question is how important these are. If you have chosen a time where the good things significantly outweigh the bad, then you have the chance that your outcome will be the same. You might want to consider another time if the Moon?s last aspect is an opposition with a debilitated Saturn, both in the angles, with Saturn ruling one of the key houses that govern the topic of your election. But this in itself would not necessarily ruin an otherwise spectacular election. But a simple aspect to Saturn, where the houses it rules are irrelevant to the subject at hand, to me at least, would not be a cause for alarm.

Mark,
Thank you for the ideas. With electional work I am looking for simplicity and clarity (Possible in astrology?). I think that is what you are also getting at. The Moon and its aspects, the Solar/Lunar relationship, and the significators of the matter are plenty to work with. Observing and working with the Moon appeals to me the most in electional work, which is the reason for this VOC question. I am convinced that good astrology can also be (somewhat) simple. The hard part is knowing what techniques and ideas to set aside. The even harder part is throwing away all the fussing and planning and just jumping in?the water may be unpleasantly cold.

I hate to keep bringing up Barbara Watter's book, "Horary Astrology and the Judgement of Events" but she's always referred to in somewhat reverent tones as "the great horary astrologer." So I'm giving credit where it's due.

I do recall her book advising readers that the Moon's last aspect determines a final outcome. And, she said that if the planet the moon last aspected was retrograde, things would be a bit disappointing.

But she didn't specifically mention the Moon's last aspect to an outer planet such as Pluto or Neptune, for example, two planets which may be retrograde for a long period of time. But I can definitely see if the Moon's last aspect was a conjunction, square or opposition to Uranus, things might turn out quite unexpectedly.

I guess it depends on what the chart is all about: i.e., a marriage or long-term relationship, or buying and selling a book.

This is where it really is a person's own technique. This is not a science with only one right answer. Everyone's technique will get them to the right answer, or should I say that the right answer will come to them. But it has to make sense to them as a person, and this particular technique of Barbara Watters doesn't to me so I don't use it. It's not something that is used by the majority of people doing horary either. But it's a perfectly valid option to try out. Why don't you look at some horaries that you've done in the past and see if you can use this to add some more information to your reading?

A fellow astroger put it to me this way, that as long as your technique does not do damage to the tradition, that we all can use slightly different techniques. Speaking for myself, I would say that if you use the outer planets to rule signs and be significators, that would do damage to the tradition. Or if you use the 8th house to represent sex as well. But really at the end of the day, it's your decision to make.

This is why reading the books of the old masters is so important - to put yourself fully into the tradition; to see that it is a system with it's own philosophy and logic. Once you're grounded in it, no one will stray too far from it, i.e., no "Dark Moon", no "Galactic Center", no "Vulcan". The same person I mentioned above also said that he notices that no one moves from traditional to modern, but they do move from modern to traditional, because one makes sense and is internally coherent.

The last aspect of the Moon in its current sign does come up in horary, so it would make sense to use it in electional. I?ve lately come across other authors using it, so it is widespread in electional. I don?t know how far back the usage goes, though. I haven?t jumped into Ramesey yet.

About the VOC Moon and the Outers: The traditional planets are visible and therefore are linked to us and our material world. They are involved in manifestation. They are the weavers, brick layers and butter churners (butter churners?). The outer planets spin around in the dark? not so impressive. Why should the Outers have anything to do with VOC? Their (rather rude) function seems to be to change, disrupt, dissolve, enlarge, melt down, and blow up the creations of the Trad Seven, so I won?t ignore them completely. But can they churn butter? Their function seems, rather, to be to turn the butter sour, thus giving some astrologers the chance to talk about opportunities for growth and personal empowerment.

So, back to my election example of some days ago: The Moon trines Jupiter and then opposes Uranus, followed by no more aspects from its current sign. I say that the trine to Jupiter is the last aspect before VOC. Now, I will assume that I have come up with a brilliant time and date for the election which gives me a victorious chart, and the final Moon-Jupiter trine is just the icing on the cake. I will get what I want. All is well. End of the matter.

But there is that final opposition to Uranus, so after I am able to purchase that antique vase at a great price a cheeky earthquake might knock it over a year later. If the last aspect had been a trine maybe there won?t be an earthquake; instead, I might find out that the thing is worth much more than I or the seller had realized, or it wasn?t made where and when we had thought, but is still valuable. If the last aspect had been an opposition to Neptune, issues of deception or scandal involving the article could arise later. And so on. Weak spots and strengths in the electional chart probably would have some say in these later developments

To sum up: The traditional planets represent principles of creation and formation in the world we inhabit. They are the makers and manifesters, so they receive the final lunar aspect and determine the VOC Moon. The outer planets, when engaged in a lunar aspect during the VOC period, have an influence which can alter the results and outcomes of the traditional planets.

Does this ring true for those of you with more experience? At least it has helped clarify my use of the outer planets.

I was hoping to not mention my own experience with setting a chart for my own wedding many years ago.

Since I was fairly inexperienced at electional and horary astrology (and probably still am) I set the chart so that the Moon and the Sun would be in the 7th house.

But what I didn't notice at the time was the Moon's only applying aspect was a trine to the retrograde Neptune.

Our marriage lasted 18 years, and I loved my ex-husband very much. In many ways, our marriage seemed truly ideal, but over time, I realized my husband had problems telling the truth... about anything.

Needless to say, our marriage came to a slow dissolve.

So, knowing what I know now, I would not set a chart so it aspected an outer planet. At least, not a retrograde outer planet. And, if the outer planets aren't used in the chart, then the Moon was technically VOC. (And I knew enough then, to not set a chart with a VOC! But I thought the outer planets "counted" so I picked that time.)

Mark,

If I'm not mistaken, Barbara Watters also says Venus rules money.

So what is the natural ruler of money? The Moon?

Just asking.

Mercury rules money. Mercury is all forms of communication, whether it's economic or linguistic. TV, radio, the Internet are all Mercurial.

I don't see how anyone can make a reasoned argument that Venus is money. Venus is expensive jewelry, clothing, furniture, but that's about as close as she gets to being involved with finance. Venus might like to spend money on a good time, but wouldn't be too good at making or saving it.

The confusion is a prevalent one in modern astrology, and this is caused because they don't get their foundations right. And the source of this particular problem is that they have confused houses with signs. I've been told by a modern astrologer that the houses are the signs. This is so far from the truth that words fail me. They have confused the 2nd sign, Taurus, with the 2nd house. The 2nd house rules a person's moveable possessions and their finances. It has no association with Venus. Taurus is the 2nd sign and it is ruled by Venus. It has no association with the 2nd house. But the modern astrologers have blended the two, and so Venus has come to be associated with money, and Taurus, which like Venus is properly associated with the love of luxury has been turned into the celestial cheapskate, a tightwad. This probably has come about from the fact that Taurus is a fixed sign, and they then confuse this with their incorrect association of Taurus and Venus with money. Venus has nothing to do with money, and Taurus is a pleasure loving, sensuous sign, but it is not a hoarder of money.

Venus has its joy in the 5th house. Look at any of the 5th house - associations, pleasure, music, games, sex, parties, etc. - none of them has to do with money.

Here's what Lilly associates with Venus:

She signifies a quiet man, not given to Law, Quarrel or Wrangling, not Vitlous, Pleasant, Neat and Spruce, Loving Mirth in his words and actions, cleanly in Apparel, rather Drinking much then Gluttonous, prone to Venery, oft entangles in Love-matters, Zealous in their affections, Musical, delighting in Baths, and all honest merry Meetings, or Maskes and Stage-playes, easie of Belief, and not given to Labour, or take any Pains, a Company-keeper, Cheerful, nothing Mistrustful, a right vertuous Man or Woman, oft had in some Jealousie, yet no cause for it.

Nothing even remotely concerned with money or finances.

Thank you, Mark. That's a very good explanation. I guess modern astrologers made the link between Venus and money for the very reason you suggested: Taurus as the second house ruler rules possessions, and maybe by extrapolation, the manner or method by which those things are purchased.

It hadn't occurred to me that Mercury rules money...

Well thanks to Deb because she is where I learned that. Her book, The Houses: Temples of the Sky is fantastic for explaining the houses and what areas they each cover.

But I don't think that Taurus rules possesions. The 2nd house covers possessions, not the 2nd sign, Taurus. Think of signs as the how of astrology, not the where. Signs modify a planet, making it better or worse, fixed or mutable, voiced or mute. So a sign like Taurus fixes a planet, makes it steady and strong, and since Venus disposits any planet in Taurus, Venus will always play a role on any planet in the sign. So any planet in Taurus will have an affinity for pleasure, enjoyemnt, sensuality and the rest. Taurus is also a bestial and feminine sign. Those qualities will take part in any planet positioned in Taurus. But again these are how a planet is expressed, not where it is expressed. It is the houses that express where a planet is expressed. I know this is way off where the topic started, but there it is.

Mark,

I just looked at Diane Stone's website and in her example chart regarding a querent's job at a bank, she also uses Venus to signify money.

Just thought it was interesting.

http://www.astrologyguild.com/horary15.htm