Minderwiz
Turning the Chart - questions on other people's health
Following Lee's question about his brother, and the issue of turning the chart, I have had a re-read of Lilly. On the question 'If the absent party be alive or dead?' He counsels strongly to be careful in choosing the right significator for the other party but to the effect that Lee got it right - brother takes third house.
Lilly refers to the cusp of the absent person's house as his 'ascendant' an obvious reference to turning the chart. He then judges on the basis of whether the person's significator is 'either in the fourth or eighth either from his own ascendant or of the Figure (chart), that configuration is oneargument that man or woman enquired after is deceased'
Note 'one argument' i.e. it's not conclusive in itself.
The same applies to being in the twelfth house either of the chart or from the third and in opposition or square from a malefic or with the Sun unfortunate or afflicted
Being in the sixth of the chart or from the third is a sign of sickness as is a square or opposition from Lord 6.
Any aspect to the benefics will ameliorate the harm, strong essential dignity is likely to ameliorate the harm too.
He concludes by saying
'I do only observer if the significator of the absent be strong and separated from a fortune and in good house, the absent lives, if he was afflicted or lately in square or opposition of the infortunes he was perplexed or suffered much misery, according to the nature of the house whence afflicted but I judge him not dead unless together with that mischance the lord of the eighth do unfortunate him'
I think you would need several indicators of death or sickness before you leapt to that conclusion - simply being in an unfortunate place is a testimony but it's not a sufficient one to draw an adverse conclusion. Remember Frawley's injunction about the 'default' answer.
In such a question the default must be that the person is alive and well, and this will only be overturned if there are several indicators of death or illness.
Following Lee's question about his brother, and the issue of turning the chart, I have had a re-read of Lilly. On the question 'If the absent party be alive or dead?' He counsels strongly to be careful in choosing the right significator for the other party but to the effect that Lee got it right - brother takes third house.
Lilly refers to the cusp of the absent person's house as his 'ascendant' an obvious reference to turning the chart. He then judges on the basis of whether the person's significator is 'either in the fourth or eighth either from his own ascendant or of the Figure (chart), that configuration is oneargument that man or woman enquired after is deceased'
Note 'one argument' i.e. it's not conclusive in itself.
The same applies to being in the twelfth house either of the chart or from the third and in opposition or square from a malefic or with the Sun unfortunate or afflicted
Being in the sixth of the chart or from the third is a sign of sickness as is a square or opposition from Lord 6.
Any aspect to the benefics will ameliorate the harm, strong essential dignity is likely to ameliorate the harm too.
He concludes by saying
'I do only observer if the significator of the absent be strong and separated from a fortune and in good house, the absent lives, if he was afflicted or lately in square or opposition of the infortunes he was perplexed or suffered much misery, according to the nature of the house whence afflicted but I judge him not dead unless together with that mischance the lord of the eighth do unfortunate him'
I think you would need several indicators of death or sickness before you leapt to that conclusion - simply being in an unfortunate place is a testimony but it's not a sufficient one to draw an adverse conclusion. Remember Frawley's injunction about the 'default' answer.
In such a question the default must be that the person is alive and well, and this will only be overturned if there are several indicators of death or illness.