Still, what Frawley and Lilly say makes sense, doesn't it? At least to me. If I have Cancer on a house cusp, my approach towards the affairs of that house would be cancerian and therefore the Moon will always rule them, no matter how many other planets I have there. The other planets will affect my cancerian nature, which, however, will always be the basis.

astropet wrote:Still, what Frawley and Lilly say makes sense, doesn't it? At least to me. If I have Cancer on a house cusp, my approach towards the affairs of that house would be cancerian and therefore the Moon will always rule them, no matter how many other planets I have there. The other planets will affect my cancerian nature, which, however, will always be the basis.

Actually both make sense when you think about it. The key is that you have to use the system you use to its full potential.

Reading along I was cheering for the planet located in the house as primary. It seems to make sense and also seems to be the most commonly practiced method. But the discussion took its inevitable turn to the horary practice of house ruler as primary.

In horary you often don't have a planet located in the house that you need to use for the question. Since you must use the 2nd house for money matters, for example, you will always have a significator if you use the 2nd house ruler. All these statements regarding the importance of planets located in the house might indicate the importance of using those planets as equally powerful co-significators in horary. If Mercury rules the 2nd in a money question and Mars is located in the 2nd this might be saying that Mars is much more than just an additional factor in the question, more than merely a spice adding some flavor. It might be an indication that Mercury and Mars are both are very much involved in the matter and that their relationship to each other is crucial. Mars in this case wouldn't simply be commenting on Mercury's matter, but would be actively going about its business for its own reasons ? possibly helping, possibly hindering.

I don't know. Maybe they are equal, and yet one is somehow primary ? coming first. This could work the same in natal and horary charts. It could be offering useful information regarding a starting point and that beginning's relationship to a future outcome. But I think I'm trying to work through vague memories of what I've read elsewhere in ages past. Stuffing too much into the brain, you know.

Hmm... John Frawley, I think, says that the house ruler is more important than the planet in a house. The house simply benefits or is afflicted by a planet's presence, but if we want to learn about the affairs of a house in general we should check its' ruler.

I'm not sure what he says, but I do think that using words like "more influential" or "more powerful" are a bit of a red herring and result in the astrologer ranking the planets instead of reading the chart. For example, Let's put Mercury, Lord 2 in 7. Let us then postulate a direction or progression to Mercury; let's say Saturn in 1 to the opposition of Mercury. Will the astrologer, upon seeing that say, "Let's look at the second house?" I don't think so. I think he will look to the 7th. Now Morin would look at the 7th but also include the 2nd; maybe a marriage (7th) break up (Saturn) over money (Mercury Lord 2). Still the effect is felt primarily in 7th house matters not the 2nd, although they are linked. If we then fall into an argument over which house is really more important in that scenario, then we are stepping into "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" territory. It's not important. Getting it right is important. And on this point at least, horary is different.

Tom

Natal gives you a little more wiggle room than horary. In natal, it's possible to look at ALL the rulers of a house and any planets posited inside. I know Zoller teaches the technique where if the ruler of the house is weak, you look at all the rulers of that degree - exaltation, triplicity (all 3), terms, and decan, until you find the strongest one. That planet will be the one that promises success in a house. It's almost like a plan B approach. I can't see that working in horary.