Geoffrey wrote:

A true Scot, you waste no chance to highlight the superiority of the reformed Scottish Church.

Oh Geoffrey if you only knew how far off the mark that observation was!

I suspected you knew far more about the question you were asking than I did and so it indeed appears

I am really no authority on Lilly or Christian Astrology. Its a question worthy of a true expert such as Deborah Houlding or Christopher Warnock.

However, we are fortunate to have these very useful articles here on Lilly's war horaries by David Plant. The first war chart he discusses is actually 'If His Excellency Robert Earle of Essex should take Reading..." He picks up the exact issue you raised above about the odd house assignation to the querant. If you scroll down to the bottom of each article you can see a link to Lilly's original judgement typeset for modern readers.

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/CA401.html

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/CA452.html

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/CA455.html

It seems clear the Earl of Essex is not the querant here. The querants relationship to the Earl of Essex is an interesting question. All we really know is that he is described as a 'man of honour' and he clearly strongly supported the Parliamentary side. He may well have been a prominent member of the Parliamentary cause.

The chart I highlighted 'If Presbytery Shall stand' is quite different in that here Lilly has no client and is asking the question himself.

Mark

Geoffrey, Goca, Mark, Paul, and other Forum artists who have not as yet joined in, this is definitely an 'out on the limb' topic as far as Elections go. As in the Fertile Cresent where Anthony Louis's first book points out is the first gleanings or usage of horary, and latter Europe there were no elections for Monarchs or any records of Roman or Greek Senator horarys on their election, nor is there possibly any horarys to note on elections to delegates in the House of Commons, or anywhere to our knowledge, perhaps because those possible records were burnt when the foolish leader destroyed the library in Alexandria.

Mark said:

"The way I was taught horary by Deb there ideally has to be real passion and personal connection coming from somewhere to make a question genuinely radical and likely to produce an accurate horary reading. Of course if people want to carry on regardless its their choice. I just think this kind of cavalier approach is very hit and miss. Moreover, when you are dealing with a hot potato like the US Presidency you can get into horary wars where people pull up different charts appearing to give opposing outcomes at times. In mundane astrology like an opening of poll or prior ingress we are dealing with objective events that cannot be subjectively plucked out at random choosing."

(The benevolent Forum will have to forgive my inability to quote Mark correctly today, I'm away from base, and this computer I'm using appears rather pre-historic in that I'm having a few problems getting the gal to co-operate!) Grin

Mark, you ought to know and others here that I deeply respect Deb's knowledge, wisdom, generosity in such a benevolent manner for the sake of a Divine science and art. I say Science because Lilly placed astrology within the 9th as a matter where he also put science, even if he calls it an art. And all the diligent horary students here who are in quest of horary excellence as if they were earning their Doctorates in the Holy Art.

Yet even that Taurean, Lilly, a mountain of horary wisdom, admitted to errors as in his reluctance of buying Master B's house with the matter's lord Rx. And Lilly did advocate a concept that has rocked the minds of the most devout Traditionalists in his method of 'a planet can perfect if within orb to a planet in another sign and bring about a matter's end'; something that most find Lilly was in error today. Which devoted artists have argued heavily years ago on Angelicus Merlin Horary Forum owned by Dorothy Kovach.

Paul within the medical profession they hypothetically believed the squat exercise was the culprit that damaged the knee back in the 70's when a noted physician presented his research upon the knee injurys. At present the Medical Profession has been pushing the concept that it was not the squat exersize yet the leg extension as it's an unatural movement. My point is they, the Medical profession like horary are practicing medicine, they are Not the Holy Jehovah that created the body nor are they the Heavenly Creator who justly handed out afflictions and benefic aspects in each native's natal horoscopes from earnings done in prior incarnations. In truth many times the physicians Do Not know as they are practicing medicine just as we are practicing astrology built upon the premises of the Masters or Ancients who laid our foundations.

When Siraxi, from Romania, cited my work in I believe the topic 'Do UFOs exist?', about 8 months after Bush's re-election via this Forum under Moderator MarkF as in:

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewt ... 11e1211ca6

7th SECTION DOWN, SIRAXI......


"siraxi

Joined: 05 Dec 2004
Posts: 96
Location: Romania
Posted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 8:29 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've seen a horary on the US presidential elections published on Oct 15 by an astrologer named Clinton Soule on the email list HoraryHour:

QUESTION: Will Bush be re-elected as President in 2004?
TIME: 5:44 pm PLACE: Reno, NV DATE: 10 / 14 / 2004

He delineated this horary chart correctly...

I asked a similar question last year on the presidential election in my country and the horary chart was accurate. I didn't delineate the chart at that time, only afterwards, but the chart was quite clear.

So there seem to be no problem in asking political horary questions as long as the interest is genuine. "

Having taken statistics 6 times and finally got my good grade, I'm well aware a few trials or even thousands Do Not nessasarily prove any hypothesis. And Forum forgive me if this sounds as Heresy in Traditionalism, but in that particular horary, cited above, the Moon(lord of the Election) was aspected adverse to Neptune showing the election's Fraud and Deception. And as documented on C-SPAN, U.S. Congresswoman Boxer of California, and Congresswoman Tubbs Jones of Ohio in their coalition brougth forth a hearing in Congress globally aired on television of the fraudulent actions by police and the voting polls simular to Bush's alledged tampering with ballots in the Florida election by Bush's brother the Govenor. In other words, even if I have Not studied the deviations of John Frawley who uses Outers in some fashion in what many of his students claim is a vein of Traditionalism should I shut my eyes when I see a horary manifest involving the Outers.

Yet in that horary, Chad Henry had pointed out to me, it's Not the election but will the President retain his position, or the 10th of that map. And the 10th is what transpired as Bush deceptively lost in a strong hypothesis demonstrated by Congress the election in Ohio which he needed the electoral votes, he thru dishonest means won the election simular to Henry the VIII's deception in having Ann Bolin executed when the facts are he definitely by the Christian precepts was an adulterer.

In the same way as the querant who was a citizen of England asked as in CA II, page 448, 'If one shall continue to the Office or Command he is in?' I have as a citizen who will be drastically affected by either President who is in office, as the present Transiting Pluto will perfect an Opposition to the USA's radical Sun in 2014. I and all of my nation's citizens and espeacially the Middle-East are are in a critical situation. Just as much as when Europe was under Charlemane in the VIII's century, or citizen's of France under Bonaparte, or when a brilliant leader became a gangster almost conquering Europe in the 40s, this office of President matters to me and the planet.

Clinton Garrett Soule

Wise men truly know how little they know

I hope my prior post did Not offend any Ultra-Trads, as I have met a few via this Forum and others that are quite sensitive to any mentioning of Outers or their use in Natal, Transits, or Progressions and Directions.

But just as when we have a horary about a relationship we do not consult the 5th as John Gadbury did, we use the 7th even if the couple may have no intention of marriage or co-habitation. In other words in this horary the Election is only to means and not the subject as political positions elsewhere are appointed or inherited rather than elected. The matter here follows Lilly's Tenth house question "If one shall continue in the Office or Command he is in?" Found in CA II on page 447-448.

Behold herein the Lord of the 1st and the 10th, and see if they be in any aspect, or neer to a corporall conjunction; and see if the more ponderous Planet of the two, that is, the receiver of the Disposition be in any angle but the 4th; say then, he shall not be removed from his Office untill his appointed time comes out: but if that Receiver of the Disposition be under the earth, or in the descending part of heaven, it imports he shall depart from his Office, or for a time loose it; but shall returne thither againe more confirmed in his Place: and if the receiver of the Disposition be received againe, then he returnes with more honour then before, and also very speedily.

In this horary it so happens the first and tenth are both ruled by Jupiter yet the Moon Squ Jupiter, Moon representing the querant we all understand and as noted the public. In reading this it seems to me that because Jupiter's depositor is Mercury and it has a separation of 6 minutes rather than the 3 minutes I had said earlier, and Lilly accepted a 7 minute separation, then Venus may still influence Mercury. and I thank Johannes for pointing out what Lilly said about the marriage horary with a one minute seapation; there had to be other factors within the horary that out weighed the other varibles.

Lilly's usage of the term 'disposition', is this meaning depositor or something else in that Old English that I'm missing?

Clinton Garrett Soule

Wise men know how little they know

If at all the Chapter (p. 445) "Of Government, Office, Dignity, Preferment, or any place of Command or Trust, whether attainable or not?" is applicable, this qoute (p. 445) seems to fit very well too:
"If the Lord of the tenth receive the Lord of the first or the MO
by any reception, or in any house, the matter will be effected
with much content and profit."

Johannes

Ya-but, the "one" referred to by Lilly in, "If one shall continue in the Office or Command he is in?" is the querent, so creating the necessary link to the 10th house, being the position of Office or Command that the querent currently enjoys.

Clinton, the only way this Lilly reference makes your chart valid is if Clinton Garrett Soule is actually a pseudonym or alter-ego of Barack Obama himself.... so now we know the truth.

Sir, if I was an American citizen, may I say that my vote would be for you.

Your humble servant

Geoffrey

That William Lilly seems to be not so strict as you, Geoffrey, concerning the querent's identity you have seen in your owm example (Essex in Reading). And if you cannot follow Mark's arguments that Essex very probably not has been the querent himself, please read this:

Lilly, CA, p. 151
"Whether one absent be dead or alive.
If a Question be demanded of one absent in a generall way,
and the querent hath no relation to the party; then the first
House, the Lord of that House and the MO shall signifie the ab-
sent party; [..]"

And in p. 156:
"Whether one absent be dead or alive, by the preceeding Scheame
of Heaven.

In the Figure abovesaid, let us admit the Question to have
been demanded for one absent:
The Ascendant li, JU therein, VE and MO are Significators of the
absent Party."

Johannes

Hello Johannes

Actually, it was me that argued that Robert, Earl of Essex was not the querent in that siege of Reading chart. Mark agreed with me.

With regard to your reference to Lilly on "Whether one absent be alive or dead", on page 151 of CA, Lilly is somewhat misleading here. Should we always use the ascendant and its lord for the missing person? Lilly talks of someone who is absent being asked for "in a general way" which might lead us to suppose we should - but we must be careful!

When reading Christian Astrology, I find it very handy to have Henry Coley's Key to the Art of Astrology (KAA) within easy reach. Henry Coley was Lilly's friend, student, and chosen successor and his book follows very much along the same lines as CA. One can look upon KAA as "CA re-written", but from a slightly different perspective, and so treat KAA as an authoritative commentary on CA by somebody who knew and studied with Lilly. When Lilly's explanation is absent or confusing, Coley often fills in the blanks and answers questions. This instance is a good example of what I mean.

If we turn to "Of the condition of an Absent Party" on page 151 of KAA, (the same page as CA...) it is worth quoting what Coley says.

"The rules of the ancients are briefly thus. If the party be related to the querent, take the house for the quesited that signified him or her, as if a brother or sister; the third house and its lord, of a husband or wife; the seventh house and Lord thereof, and so vary the houses according as the relation requires. But if the party enquired after be not related, then let the ascendant and moon signify the absent party. (I must confess, I should rather take the lord of the seventh, or the eleventh house if the party be an acquaintance, but if the question is asked in a general way, "What is the condition of the absent party?" And the querent is altogether a stranger to the quesited, then the ascendant and his lord and the moon may be accepted for proper significators.).....
..... My honoured friend Mr William Lilly affirms he has ever found in his practice the party alive, notwithstanding it were reported to the contrary, if he found the lord of the ascendant in the 9th, 10th or 11th houses, see Christian Astrology page 151...."*

We see here that Coley gives a much tighter constraint on the use of the first house for the quesited, and leaves us in no doubt that even then, he is not happy about it. Lilly's final trump card was, "It works!" so Coley goes along with it - but under protest.

Does this take us any further forward? Is Clinton in such a state of concern that he can think of nothing else but the outcome of the Presidential election? If he is, then we can consider the chart valid and Obama should be given the ascendant and its lord, not the 10th. (As it happens, Jupiter rules both in this case). But from what Clinton has told us, aside from general philosophical concerns about what past leaders in Europe have got up to when unchecked and the proximity of Pluto in the US chart, he does not seem to loosing any sleep over this matter!

Geoffrey

*I have gently edited the punctuation for easier reading.

Hi again,

I have also been discussing this topic on another traditional forum.

I thought some of you might be interested in the reply from I got from Lee Lehman, who is a noted authority on horary astrology:

I have been wondering for years: why is there this reluctance to admit that certain questions just aren't legal horaries? If you are not going to use horary to replace natal, or natal to replace horary, or natal to replace electional, or mundane to replace natal, why cant we simply agree that expecting a horary asked by one person among hundreds of millions (if US citizens) billions (the world) simply doesn't cut it for a global event? This isn't about your client not understanding the niceties of horary, this is about you explaining that when you want to dig a hole in the ground, you don't use a pie plate, and when you want to bake a pie, you don't use a shovel.

I prefer the word radical to legal but I go along with her logic.

Mark

Geoffrey wrote:Actually, it was me that argued that Robert, Earl of Essex was not the querent in that siege of Reading chart. Mark agreed with me.

Hello Geoffrey,

thank you for the Coley quote and sorry for confusing these sentences of yours:

Geoffrey wrote: The obvious answer to my quandry is that Robert, Earl of Essex, was himself the querent, so giving him the ascendant as of right.
[...]
It would seem most probable then that the querent was not Robert, Earl of Essex.

But as you gave in your point of view, that with this allotment of the significators (ascendant and Moon for a third person) "Essex in Reading" could only be an election or event, we should simply agree in the fact, that Lilly gives ascendant and Moon (!) to a third person who did not ask the question.
Incidentally Lilly's aproach is consitstent in itself and in accordance with my qouting him given above (CA, pp. 151, 156).

Geoffrey wrote:With regard to your reference to Lilly on "Whether one absent be alive or dead", on page 151 of CA, Lilly is somewhat misleading here. Should we always use the ascendant and its lord for the missing person? Lilly talks of someone who is absent being asked for "in a general way" which might lead us to suppose we should - but we must be careful!

We should always be careful! I fully agree with you, Geoffrey.
Your reference to Coley is very interesting and helpful indeed. But even though I do not see a real constraint in Coley's remarks, and in the end he accepts the teachings of Lilly as to this topic.

"It works!" this is as yet the only fundament of explaining the operation of astrology, isn't it?

Johannes

Geoffrey said:

When reading Christian Astrology, I find it very handy to have Henry Coley's Key to the Art of Astrology (KAA) within easy reach. Henry Coley was Lilly's friend, student, and chosen successor and his book follows very much along the same lines as CA. One can look upon KAA as "CA re-written", but from a slightly different perspective, and so treat KAA as an authoritative commentary on CA by somebody who knew and studied with Lilly. When Lilly's explanation is absent or confusing, Coley often fills in the blanks and answers questions. This instance is a good example of what I mean.

Fellow Forum members, set back and reflect upon the facts that so many Moderns have read Lilly and misunderstood him through the past few centurys. How grateful I am that Coley left such an imprint in Geoffrey that he avidly studies both CA and Coley. Praise God, Lilly had such a devout disciple to carry the torch!

Clinton Garrett Soule

Wise men know how little they know

Johannes said in the 'Will we win the Court Case"', a recent thread quoting Lilly:

It is this quotation of Lilly (CA, p. 299) which I just found and which I should like to add to my above text:
"13 A Retrograde Planet, or one in his first station, Signficator in
the Question, denotes ill in the Question, discord and much contra-
diction."

Johannes, I have been pondering this for several days and I must ask does this apply as Jupiter lord of the 10H and Asc. is in it's Station?

But what does Lilly actually mean by first station?

This query seems to be ringing Loudly as Lilly says "...denotes ill in the question, discord and much contradiction." In that look at the contention and disagreements we are having about whether one can even answer, or should answer such horarys and what house is actually President Obama!

I mean using the tenth for Obama, being Rx and in the degree of it's station, it doesn't look good for him. Or maybe it is only showing that if Obama wins, or retains his tenth house office that it will be a harder and rougher Presidency than the past four years with his blunders and trying to untangle what the Bush family and Reagan fostered in that thay gave the USA a stranglehold reputation on the Middle-East for Oil and illegal narcotics trade from that region, as if we were runner-ups to Nazi Germany's conquest in Europe or the former Sickle and Hammer invasions by the USSR, a threatening reputation for foreign policy! Consideration of that very opposition from Transiting Pluto to the U.S. Radical Sun being the culprit; Not a great time to be a President.

Anyone got any insights as to what Lilly means by 'Disposition' in the section cited? I am having trouble understanding his usage of the King's English, yet figure it is referencing 'the depositor'.

Clinton Garrett Soule
Wise men know how little they know

Clinton Soule wrote:Johannes said in the 'Will we win the Court Case"', a recent thread quoting Lilly:

It is this quotation of Lilly (CA, p. 299) which I just found and which I should like to add to my above text:
"13 A Retrograde Planet, or one in his first station, Signficator in
the Question, denotes ill in the Question, discord and much contra-
diction."

Johannes, I have been pondering this for several days and I must ask does this apply as Jupiter lord of the 10H and Asc. is in it's Station?

But what does Lilly actually mean by first station?

Sorry Clinton, that I overlooked your question - but let us meet in in the "Will we win the Court Case" thread to dicuss Jupiter's stations - hopefully tomorrow.

Johannes