Skyscript Astrology Forum

From An Introduction to Astrology by William Lilly (Zadkiel ed., 1852):

If the disease be not chronic, you will find great alteration in the patient near those times when the Moon arrives at a distance from her first place, when the patient was taken ill, of 45, 90, or 135 degrees.

From Christian Astrology by William Lilly (1647):

... if the Disease be not chronic, but acute, you shall find great alteration in the Disease and party infirm, near upon those times when the Moon comes to be distant from that her first place, 45 degrees; so also when she is 90 degrees from that place; and again, when distant 135.

A modern astrologer cited these as evidence that traditional astrologers advocated the use of the semisquare and sesquisquare aspects; and that these aspects are primarily lunar in nature (i.e., in that they reflect the eightfold division of the lunation cycle).

I asserted that Lilly's remarks relate only to the critical days of an illness and apply only within that context, specifically in relation of the Moon to its own position, not to the position of any other planets, nor to the position of other planets to the Moon or any other bodies. One cannot, therefore, argue that Lilly advocated a general use of the semisquare and sesquisquare.

So: is my friend correct? Did Lilly advocate (or would he have advocated) the use of the semisquare and sesquisquare aspects as a matter of course, or were these measurements confined to the motion of the Moon in relation to its own place within the context of critical days in the course of an illness?

An interesting question (because I can see why the argument arises). I would say that you are correct, because as far as I know this is only tied to the comparison of the Moon to its position in a decumbiture chart, which highlights a critical period. On page 32 of CA Lilly explains all the aspects that one of his contemporary readers might find listed in an ephemeris. As well as the Ptolemaic aspects that are used in horary, and the semi-sextile and quincunx, he mentions the quintile, tredecile, and biquintile. But there is no mention of the semi-square or sesquisquare. I haven?t checked the natal volume and other works, but I can tell you that they don?t appear in his horary volume. This doesn?t mean that he could not have used them, because he considered minor aspects in natal work but not horary work, but I would be surprised. Since they are omitted on p.32, I think it is safer to conclude that they were not included amongst the minor aspects that Lilly knew about and used, unless or until someone is able to provide a chart example to demonstrate otherwise.

PS - The Zadkiel reference means nothing, because his work is just a paraphrase of Lilly's.

But there is no mention of the semi-square or sesquisquare. I haven?t checked the natal volume and other works, but I can tell you that they don?t appear in his horary volume

.

While Lilly seemed to work almost exclusively with the Ptolemaic aspects in his book 2 , in his Natal book 3 he does discuss several minor or 'Keplerian aspects'.

I refer you to Christian Astrology Book 3 , chapter 100, pages 507-512, entitled ' The Rectification of a Nativity by Accidents , & Framing of An Astrological Speculum' (Astrology Center of America edition)

In this chapter Lilly discusses the following aspects:

Semi-sextile (30)

Semi-Quintile (36)

Semi-Quadrate ( ie Semi-Square) (45)

Quintile (72)

Sesqui-Quintile ( Tredecile) (108)

Sesqui-Quadrate (135)

Bi-Quintile (144)

Clearly, Lilly was more flexible regarding minor aspects in natal astrology as Deb indicated.

To find this on google books simply type ''Christian Astrology Quintile'' to take you to an electronic version of the book and relevant pages.

I suggest we keep this to ourselves or people will be trying this stuff out on the horary forum

In terms of other astrologers Placidus De Titus comes to mind both as someone willing to embrace some of Kepler's ideas to the aspects in addition to introducing innovations of his own.

Placido followed Ptolemy in his use of the conjunction, sextile, square, trine and opposition aspects. To these he added the parallel, which he considered an aspect in its own right, and the 'new' aspects of 72? (quintile), 135? (Sesquiquadrate) and 144? (bi-quintile). A later thesis by Kepler included 30? (semi-sextile) and 45? (semi-square) but Placido specifically rejected them. The eight geometric aspects he used are related to ratios found in prominent musical resonances. It has recently come to light that Placido also composed music.

'Placido & The Semi-Arc Method of House Division' Michael Wackford.
Footnote.

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

Take a look at this selection from the Primum Mobile to see the range of astrological techniques that Placidus Di Titus used:

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

Thanks Deb and Mark for your helpful replies. I was particularly interested in whether Lilly would consider the semisquare and sesquare aspects as he did make mention of them but (as Deb pointed out) only in reference to the Moon in relation to its own position in a decumbiture chart. This makes sense; like the Moon at its bendings in relation to the nodes (aspects to which are not usually considered).

Yes I am familiar with Placido's elaboration of the aspects and their relation to musical harmonics but my own view is that he mixes apples with oranges. I can understand why some astrologers would choose to use the semi-sextile (and possibly the quincunx) but the broken (or transgressive) aspects seem to fall in another category altogether. There is the added consideration that planetary orbs of aspect cannot be used with the minor aspects because of orb overlap; in order to avoid this, one must assign an orb to each of the minor aspects, rather than to each of the planets and luminaries. The only exceptions of course would be to the semi-sextile and quincunx, each of which can accommodate the full extension of orb (say 13 and one-half degrees in the case of aspects between the Sun and the Moon).

I fail to find the reference in my cardex system, but there is a case in Christian Astrology where Lilly applies a semi-sextile as a sextile where the aspect is cast through the signs of long ascension. Just came to mind and I thought I'd mention it.

In my opinion the semi-square and sesquiquadrate would show (45) action/tension and (135) projection/anxiety, but not neccesarily perfection or denial. These aspects are not the focus of my attention in a horary, but may provide information or detail to what is going on.

Another reference by Lilly to minor aspects comes on page 830 of CA:

''In the Directions , where though findest Q it Signifies Quincunx, a new aspect , consisting of 150 degrees; the Semiquintiles, Quintiles, Sequiquintiles and Biquintiles, in judgement are of the nature of the Sextle and Trine, but operate not all out so strongly: the Semiquadrate and Sesquiqudrate participate in the nature of the square aspect. ''
Christian Astrology Book 3, p830 (Astrology Classics Ediition)

From this I conclude Lilly did use the Semi-Square and Sequiduatrate aspects in his natal work.

Hi Mark,

From this I conclude Lilly did use the Semi-Square and Sequiduatrate aspects in his natal work.

That seems a reasonable assumption, but I would still like to see a reference in a chart - there are so many of his charts, that hopefully it won't be a hard task to find the aspects mentioned (if he used them). I'll keep an eye out next time I am going through his work, but don't have time to check right now.

My only reservation is that although Lilly included minor aspects in his Introduction, his comments make it clear that he didn't approve of their use in horary. It is quite possible that he was including knowledge of the Semi-Square and Sequiduatrate for the sake of completeness, without personally approving of their use. (I'm no longer leaning towards that theory, just keeping an open mind for now).

It is quite possible that he was including knowledge of the Semi-Square and Sequiduatrate for the sake of completeness, without personally approving of their use. (I'm no longer leaning towards that theory, just keeping an open mind for now

.

Hi Deb,

I would like to believe that. However, using the civil test of the 'balance of probablilities' that seems rather unlikely. I would be much more willing to accept that if Lilly had not described the effect of the new aspects. However he clearly does and makes no qualifications regarding his view on this. That seems strange if he didn't rely on them at all and was just presenting them theoretically. He also doesn't state others attribute these effects but seems to imply this is his view?


Still just before he mentions the new aspects Lilly's notes make clear he was going a very traumatic time just at this point:

?Behold now this nativity judged, which if thou art courteous, thou has reason to accept kindly of, being it leads thee to do the like upon any: It had appeared more exquisite , but the angry Angel of God visited my house with the Plague, even at the time perfecting the latter part of my Book, and also in this nativity?

Maybe, that explains why he doesn't provide us with more worked examples of the new aspects? Certainly the reference on page 830 looks more like an addendum. As you state we really need worked examples to reach a firm view on this. It may be though that these are simply not there in Book 3 . In which case we will be forced to a tentative position on this issue from Lilly's limited references.

I would be more willing to accept that if Lilly had not described the effect of the new aspects. However he clearly does and makes no qualifications regarding his view on this.

I'm not against the view, but suggesting there is reason to keep an open mind and check this further. Lilly does seem to qualify his reference to the minor aspects in his Introduction on p.32 where he says:

We seldom use more aspects than the conjunction, sextile, square, trine, opposition: to these of late one KEPLER, a learned man, hath added some new ones, as follow, viz:

A semisextile, charactered SS, consisting of 30 degrees.
A quintile: Q, consisting of 72 degrees.
A tredecile: Td, consisting of 108 degrees.
A biquintile: Bq, consisting of 144 degrees
A quincunx: Vc, consisting of 150 degrees.

I only acquaint you with these, that finding them anywhere you may apprehend their meaning

This seems as good as saying that he is explaining them because the student will come across the symbols in an ephemeris and needs to know what they are, but he doesn't rely on them in practice. I also find it curious that the semi-square and sesquiquadrate were not listed here too, but appear in the natal section which was written later.

Hopefully there is no need to speculate now that we have 'lots and lots' of Lilly, and easy access to so many extra charts outside of his horary examples. I think this would be an interesting point to prove if we can.

I think this would be an interesting point to prove if we can

I agree. The hunt is on! It sounds an interesting piece of research.

I also find it curious that the semi-square and sesquiquadrate were not listed here too, but appear in the natal section which was written later.

I accept this is more speculation on my part but one thing that occurs to me is the time lag between Book 2 and 3. How long was that? Perhaps Lilly developed his thoughts in this area. It was after all a very new area of astrology. His comments in Book 3 are certainly far more open than those of Morin who comes out all guns blazing vs the new Keplerian aspects.

Reading Book 3 it feels like Lilly is cramming his references to the minor aspects at the end of the book. There are various possible reasons for that. Firstly, that these were recent techniques in Lilly's astrology which he had only incorporated late in the day. Secondly, that Lilly recognised the book would be his legacy on natal astrology and he didn't want to appear 'out of date' on recent developments in astrology. He therefore listed these aspects just for completeness. One thing you have to note about Lilly was his sense of balance. A third possibility, is that due to all the turmoil in his personal life he recognised this was an omission in the rest of the text and hastily tried to correct this at the end of the book.

As you suggest one chart is better than a thousand speculations........