Skyscript Astrology Forum

Recently I've been having a frustrating time attempting to learn astrology.

What's been getting to me? A lack of clarity and consistency.

I've been reading Christian Astrology and if anything makes me skeptical of astrology, it's Lilly's methods.

What do I mean?

He'll apply rules sometimes and ignore them other times. He'll lay out a list of significators and then when he actually goes to the chart he'll start incorporating things and interpreting things sometimes slipping in and out of the rules.

Significators in general are a good example of this; sometimes a planet in a house is interpreted as representing that house (Venus in the 10th means honor or a nobleman for example) and then sometimes it only signifies what it rules (Venus signifies money through ruling the 2nd). There's no consistency whatsoever in when a planet signifies one thing and when it signifies another; sometimes we take the natural significations, sometimes the house significations, and sometimes rulership. How do you know when it represents what? It seems, from reading Lilly, that you either guess or you use the gift of hindsight to decide.

I guess what I'm looking for is a more definitive form of traditional astrology with actual rules; having to decide what a planet represents at this particular time when it could actually represent a multitude of things is frustrating and extremely dubious. This is why predictions are so ridiculously vague; that direction from Mars could mean about 10 different things and in hindsight it's very easy to claim that you knew which one..if any at all. These natural/accidental signification conflicts are about 99% of the reason that I'm becoming increasingly skeptical about astrology.

Are there any traditional astrologers whom I may study that delineate charts in a more objective manner? Having to randomly decide what a planet signifies is not objective in any manner whatsoever. So far Morin may be the best option because he actually attempts to be somewhat scientific in his work.

It seems so odd to me that just a few days ago you were describing Lilly as your favourite author, and yet so quickly he seems to become the worst in your eyes. I think the problem is not that Lilly is inconsistent, but you've expected to get "quick learning" from a book that requires a lot of study and consideration.

(Venus in the 10th means honor or a nobleman for example) and then sometimes it only signifies what it rules (Venus signifies money through ruling the 2nd).

That sort of thing is quite usual, and not a failing of Lilly's approach. Morinus might be more to your liking but honestly, if you are looking for a scientific structure or objective approach I think you are going to have the same frustrations with all traditional authors.

if you are looking for a scientific structure or objective approach I think you are going to have the same frustrations with all traditional authors.

Exactly. The practice of astrology is not an applied science like chemistry. Furthermore, if you look at the soft sciences like psychology or sociology, you'll find much of the same thing. After all there are 7 planets, 12 signs and 12 houses to signify absolutely everything. There is bound to be some overlap.

As for Morinus, I'm not so sure you would find him any easier. Venus in the 10th, would be Venusian type honors. If she rules the 2nd honors via wealth or honors bring wealth. If she rules the 5th honors from or for your children. There is always a connection between the two houses, and there are always other things they can mean. Venus in the 10th a good relationship with your boss or a beautiful female boss, but there are always connections just as there is always more than one possible meaning. The meaning becomes clearer depending on what else is going on the chart. The trick is knowing what to apply when, not memorizing rules.

Deb wrote:It seems so odd to me that just a few days ago you were describing Lilly as your favourite author, and yet so quickly he seems to become the worst in your eyes. I think the problem is not that Lilly is inconsistent, but you've expected to get "quick learning" from a book that requires a lot of study and consideration.


That sort of thing is quite usual, and not a failing of Lilly's approach. Morinus might be more to your liking but honestly, if you are looking for a scientific structure or objective approach I think you are going to have the same frustrations with all traditional authors.

Lilly still remains my favorite. He was the first author from the time period that I was introduced to and the first traditional astrologer that I'd ever read. That still doesn't stop him from being frustratingly unclear and confusing and it doesn't stop astrology from being a tad unclear at times.

As per the quick learning thing, that's only under the presumption that I've been studying Lilly for only these last few days. I've been studying Lilly for about a year and a half now which is by no means enough time to master his work, but more than enough time to get a grasp on the basic rules and distinctions. Where do I stand now? I still can't tell what a planet represents at that particular moment.

In horary chart's sometimes he'll take a square to Saturn as representing just simple misfortune. Other times he'll take Saturn's house rulership into consideration, so if Saturn rules the 11th we can say hmm, the misfortune may come from his friends and if it sits in the 5th maybe it means that the querent's friends afflict him and he finds out about it through his children? Or maybe his friends use his children to hurt him?

Yes, I agree that I want a more objective approach and clear approach to astrology. I don't see myself as guilty of "quick learning" because I've been reading this stuff for nearly two years now.

Tom wrote: Exactly. The practice of astrology is not an applied science like chemistry. Furthermore, if you look at the soft sciences like psychology or sociology, you'll find much of the same thing. After all there are 7 planets, 12 signs and 12 houses to signify absolutely everything. There is bound to be some overlap.

As for Morinus, I'm not so sure you would find him any easier. Venus in the 10th, would be Venusian type honors. If she rules the 2nd honors via wealth or honors bring wealth. If she rules the 5th honors from or for your children. There is always a connection between the two houses, and there are always other things they can mean. Venus in the 10th a good relationship with your boss or a beautiful female boss, but there are always connections just as there is always more than one possible meaning. The meaning becomes clearer depending on what else is going on the chart. The trick is knowing what to apply when, not memorizing rules.

As someone involved in the soft sciences I somewhat see what you mean, but even then it's a little more clear.

Let's use anxiety as an example.

Anxiety could be a symptom of a few different disorders, just like a planet could signify a few different things. So what determines what anxiety signifies and when? In psychology we haves rules that determine what it represents.

Did the person just fight in a conflict or experience trauma? That anxiety may be PTSD.

Is there no specific reason for the anxiety? Has it been around for at least 6 months? Then it's generalized anxiety disorder.

Is it just anxiety that came and went? Then it's just a bout of anxiety.

Don't get me wrong I see what you're saying and I can agree that (like with Astrology) the "significations" do have overlap, but in Psychology it's a tad easier and more clear to whittle down the significations based on rules, as you're suggesting is the same for Astrology.

That still doesn't stop that fact that there's not just some overlap, but extreme overlap in significations in astrology. The Sun could be your father, your honor or your health. The fact that what it means changes based on what you're looking for just makes me a little uncomfortable....and that's not Lillly's fault.

To be fair to both of you, you're both correct in saying that I'm approaching astrology like a hard science; add these planets to this condition and they mean this. I don't even approach my own work like this as someone in psychology.

This is weird to say, but perhaps I need to start looking at astrology like I would in identifying psychological disorders; look for a "symptom" and then look for rules that help me whittle down what that planet is a symptom of. [/b]

The Sun could be your father, your honor or your health. The fact that what it means changes based on what you're looking for just makes me a little uncomfortable....and that's not Lillly's fault.

Since we are dealing with so few symbols, that it means what we're looking for might be the only option. But this is where Morin is a bit different.

When we take a planet like the Moon and we say it represents, the wife, the mother, the sister(s), aunts, grandmothers etc not to mention emotions, fertility and so on, we are saying the Moon is the general significator for all these things. Morin argued (and quoted Cardan in doing so) that it is not reasonable for the Moon to mean all these things in every chart. And he gave us a way to determine what the Moon does and does not mean in each chart.

For example, Moon in the 7th means the wife, not the mother. Moon in the 10th means the mother not the wife or sisters. He argued that a planet in a house strongly represented what the house represented if the planet had an analogy consistent with the house. This by itself wouldn't give us much to work with, so he added that if the planet with the proper analogy ruled or aspected the ruler of the house with the proper analogy, the planet could signify what the house represents without being in the house.

I said he made it more precise, not easier.

hi tom,
can you direct me to the carden material that morin might have quoted as i am curious about that. thanks.

Most, if not all of the traditional authors do not give a comprehensive delineation for any combination. It may well be the case that a planet in a given house and sign signifies everything, from its natural significations to the house it is in and that it rules.

In light of this, as those who inherited the (interrupted) tradition, we have a lot of work cut out for us. We need to organise the information that we have now before we can delineate charts more systematically and completely. Even after that, we need to check the consistency between the traditional theories (on which delineations are based) and what actually happens in real life. For that purpose, it is crucial to gather sufficient empirical data on real life people so that we may be able to prove the veracity of our delineations.

In other words, it is going to a lot of time before we can design more definitive approaches of delineations to astrology.



In the mean time, I suggest that you try to organise the information from CA by yourself. Note the patterns that repeat themselves. Make generalisations. Try to extrapolate these generalisations in real charts and observe your results. Record them. Try and try again.

For example, in Maternus's Mathesis, I observed that the phases of the Moon changes the effects the Moon has on the planets of different sect. The waxing and full Moon is aligned to the diurnal sect. Despite being of the same sect, a waxing Moon is harmful when it aspects Venus and Mars. I have not tested this with real charts, so I do not know how true this is, but that is for the next step of the research.

Larxene wrote: In the mean time, I suggest that you try to organise the information from CA by yourself. Note the patterns that repeat themselves. Make generalisations. Try to extrapolate these generalisations in real charts and observe your results. Record them. Try and try again.

Funny, I just decided to try this out about an hour ago and then I get online to see this

What I basically did was read about the length of life technique from Lilly and then the same technique from Henry Coley, both contemporaries.

Instead of slavishly following rules I sort of just zoomed out and saw what they had in common and tried to understand what was the essential core of what they were looking at. I wrote down both of their methods, thought about it and then wrote down my own significations based on what they said.

I ended up coming up with an algorithm that takes the essentials of what they were saying and even determined that "length of life" is kind of a misnomer. It seems that the technique is more about determining strength of life and resilience to illness and death. I came down to considering the condition of the 1st house, that house's ruler, the luminary of the time, and the Moon (somewhat secondarily).

I still need to look at some more charts, but in charts with people who die early, the indicators of life in their chart are just sort of weak. JFK had his chart ruler in an unfortunate house under the beams with his Sun in an unfortunate house as well. His 1st house ruling the 8th house squaring the Moon also didn't help.

What I like about doing things this way is the thought process that it opens up. I know WHY I'm looking at what I'm looking at. I feel a little stupid for complaining about things now.....despite the fact that the length of life technique doesn't specifically say "JFK will be shot" it does show that his life strength isn't that strong and his life is in danger therefore making it less likely that he'd live a long life. This checks out historically; even if JFK hadn't been shot, he suffered from poor health and was ill frequently.

Once again I feel stupid for complaining...I don't know why I didn't consider reading this kind of stuff more analytically.....and actually practicing astrology rather than reading about it.

can you direct me to the carden material that morin might have quoted as i am curious about that. thanks.

I can only point out the quote in AG book 21. Very little of Cardan has been translated into English. What follows is mid paragraph on page 12 of Astrologia Gallica book 21 - Baldwin translation (AFA). Words in brackets are mine)

"But because of this general indifference [of Ptolemy in not being more specific about the role of general significators] one could not assume that that the Sun specifically means of one these things any more than another [father, husband, king etc]. If it were taken to stand for everything -- that is, the father husband, position in life, etc, -- everyone would agree that that would be absurd and contrary to experience. In fact Cardanus seems to ridicule this very idea in ch. 6 of his Liber de Revolutione in the Commentary when he states that Ptolemy introduced a great deal of confusion when he assigned several meanings to one significator, and made the Moon for example the significator of the body, the morals, the health, the wife, the mother, daughters but also maid-servants and sisters. Says Cardanus:"What then must be the condition of the Moon in the horoscope of one whose wife had died in childbirth but himself lived a long life, who had many healthy daughters but also maid-servants who ran away, who had a sound body but a mother who died young and who himself showed a poor moral character." "

What Morin and Cardan are saying is that a planet cannot mean all of its significations in every chart or even any one chart. Morin argues that the placement primarily, rulerships, secondarily, and aspects third tell us which of these significations are indicated in any one chart.

thanks very much tom. i apologize for getting you to type all that. i have book 21 as well.. cheers james

sworm09,

In addition to your interest in exploring CA, I would recommend a lecture given by 'Bernadette Brady on length of Life...

See the link and the article is at the bottom of the link

http://www.bernadettebrady.com/articles.htm