Study Notes: Chrisitan Astrology

[Minderwiz]

In techniques and methods, Lilly is closer to Valens than he is to the modern lot. Yes, changes happened over those 1,500 years but there are fairly clear lines of development, even allowing for the fracture between Hellenistic and the Persian/Arab revival.

But it's nothing like that fracture at the end of the seventeenth century and beginning of new approaches under Alan Leo. which concentrated on personality and elevated the Sun sign above all else (until Pluto was discovered).

 

[RohanMenon]

Next (second house) question.

The querent is demanding money from another person (either money he loaned to that person, or not). Will he get it?

01. Significators: Lord of Ascendant and Moon for the Querent. Lord of the second house signifies the money in question. Lord of the 7th represents the party to which the demand will be made.

02. See if the querent's significators (LoA, Moon) aspect (including conjunction) the planet in the *8th* [1] (I would have thought Lord of the 8th would work too, but Lilly doesn't mention it).

a. If this planet be a benefic, or
b. the aspect made is a good one (sextile, trine, conjunction) the querent will get the money.
c. If the planet in the 8th or its Lord is a malefic, the querent will still get the money if it is in reception with LoA or Moon (but perhaps with some difficulty?)
d. If no reception exists (to planet in 8th or 8th Lord) the querent will not get his money, or only with so much labor, it won't be worth it.

03. If the Lord of 8th be in the 1st, or 2nd with Lord of second receiving him (lord of 8th) then querent will get his money. No reception, no money (Lilly also mentions the Lord of the 7th. I'm not sure if 7th Lord can substitute for the 8th Lord in the above)

04. If the Lord of the Ascendant *and* the Moon (Did Lilly mean "or the Moon"?) conjuncts a benefic in the Ascendant sign, or a sign intercepted in the Ascendant, the matter will be affected.

05. If LoA *or* the Moon conjunct ( I am reading 'joined' as conjunct. Maybe it means only 'aspects'? ) a malefic in the ascendant sign, but the malefic has essential dignity *and* receives the LoA or Moon, the querent will get his money.

06. If LoA or Moon is 'joined' (again, I read this to mean conjunct) to a benefic and is in the 10th or 11th house, the querent will get his money even if there is no reception to this benefic.

07. "from this Judgment we exempt Kings, Princes, Noblemen and such, who pay Debts slowly, and on whom the Law takes little notice.".

In other words if Trump Enterprises owes you money, you are screwed.Ha!

[1] 8th since it is the 2nd of the 7th, so house of 'substance of the party quesited after' , in other words, the 'wealth' house of the person to whom the demand is made.

 

[Minderwiz]

Next (second house) question.

The querent is demanding money from another person (either money he loaned to that person, or not). Will he get it?

01. Significators: Lord of Ascendant and Moon for the Querent. Lord of the second house signifies the money in question. Lord of the 7th represents the party to which the demand will be made.

02. See if the querent's significators (LoA, Moon) aspect (including conjunction) the planet in the *8th* [1] (I would have thought Lord of the 8th would work too, but Lilly doesn't mention it).

Lilly does mention it:

The Seventh House and the Lord thereof signify him or her of whom he intends to demand or borrow money: In proceding to judgement.
See of the Lord of the Ascendant or the Moon be joined to the Lord of the eighth, who is Lord of the Substance of the party quesited after, or be joined or in aspect to a planet positied in the eighth...

a. If this planet be a benefic, or
b. the aspect made is a good one (sextile, trine, conjunction) the querent will get the money.
c. If the planet in the 8th or its Lord is a malefic, the querent will still get the money if it is in reception with LoA or Moon (but perhaps with some difficulty?)
d. If no reception exists (to planet in 8th or 8th Lord) the querent will not get his money, or only with so much labor, it won't be worth it.

03. If the Lord of 8th be in the 1st, or 2nd with Lord of second receiving him (lord of 8th) then querent will get his money. No reception, no money (Lilly also mentions the Lord of the 7th. I'm not sure if 7th Lord can substitute for the 8th Lord in the above)

Lilly says:
...but if the Lord of the seventh, or of the eighth house be in the first or the secondand neither have reception, he will hardly or ever procure his demands...

If one or both of Lords 7 and 8 are in the first or second but neither has reception, it's going to be hard to get the money. He does say that if the Lord of the eighth is in the first or second, with reception, then there's a good chance he will get the money. So my reading is that to get the money, under this clause we need Lord 8 in reception in the first or second house.

Why not Lord 7? As I see it, Lord 7 in the first or second is only proof of the desire to provide the money but the money can only be provided if its there in the first place (or can be quickly produced). Lord 8 also in reception shows that the money's good as well as the intentions. Lilly's not really interested in intentions at this point, more is the money good.

Clearly if the intention isn't there (Lord 7 in the first or second without reception) then no matter if the money is good or not, the person of whom it's demanded won't pay up. If the money's not good (Lord 8 without reception) it can't be provided.

[/quote]

04. If the Lord of the Ascendant *and* the Moon (Did Lilly mean "or the Moon"?) conjuncts a benefic in the Ascendant sign, or a sign intercepted in the Ascendant, the matter will be affected.

As in the next paragraph Lilly uses LoA or the Moon, joined to an infortune, I think Lilly means what he says. To be sure the money is going to be paid up, both LoA and the Moon have to satisfy this particular requirement (or if both of them satisfy different requirements, that may well still work).

It would be tedious for Lilly to go through every permutation so I think this boils down to you need both of these to be sure the money will be provided or individually the LoA and the Moon have to both indicate success according to the criteria Lilly has laid down.

05. If LoA *or* the Moon conjunct ( I am reading 'joined' as conjunct. Maybe it means only 'aspects'? ) a malefic in the ascendant sign, but the malefic has essential dignity *and* receives the LoA or Moon, the querent will get his money.

06. If LoA or Moon is 'joined' (again, I read this to mean conjunct) to a benefic and is in the 10th or 11th house, the querent will get his money even if there is no reception to this benefic.

Lilly often uses the term corporeal conjunction, or bodily joining to describe a conjunction so I would be tempted to say that if Lilly simply says joining, he's allowing aspects as a process of joining two or more planets in this particular passage. But elsewhere he does say See if the LoA or the Moon are joined or in aspect to a fortune', which seems to suggest that he means two different things here. For the moment, I'd take 'joining' to mean 'aspect' and 'bodily joining' as a conjunction.

 

[RohanMenon]

Thanks Minderwiz that is very clear

as always

 

[RohanMenon]

This seems to be a specialization of the previous question.
Here the focus is that the querent is somehow 'inferior' to the quesited, and the question is whether the querent would get his wages/grants etc from the superior party.

The Lord of Ascendant and Moon signify the querent. The Lord of the 10th signify the quesited (party).

"The 2nd house and the Lord therof are to be considered for the querent". I interpret this to mean that these stand for the querent's finances/estate.

The 11th House and Lord stand for the quesited's estate.

If the LoA or Moon 'joins' (see Minderwiz's clarifications above, I am taking it as 'aspects') to the Lord of the 11th or any planet in the 11th and if this planet be a benefic, not 'impedited' or ill disposed (by which I think Lilly means - not having any harsh aspcets from malefics, and having strong essential and accidental dignity) then the querent will get his wages, money, etc from the 'superior party'.

If the Moon and/or LoA is aspected by a malefic, or received into the dignites of a malefic, then the querent shall obtain his money but after much repeated requests, petitions, pleading etc

If there is an aspect between the significators but one of the significators is a malefic and there is no reception, then the querent shall not receive the money

Lilly advises us to be very careful to observe the planet's essential dignities, mutual reception and by *which* of their mutual dignities they receive each other (by which I think lilly refers to mutual reception by domicile being stronger than say, mutual reception by term)

 

[RohanMenon]

When the events foretold (here getting money, becoming rich etc) will happen.

Some complicated language here, but essentially
01. see if the LoA/Moon (the querent's significators) apply to an aspect (including conjunction) with a planet signifying the quesited (here lords of 7th, 8th, and any planets in those houses).

02. Note the degrees remaining for the aspect to perfect.

02. See if there is any reception between these planets.

03. If both planets be in cadent houses, the degrees denote days. If fixed, months, if Movable, weeks.

Another scheme: IF both planets in angles, then years. If one is angular, and another succedent, then months. IF one is angular and another cadent, then months, If one is succedent and another cadent, then weeks. Lilly cautions that these are rough schemes, and shouldn't be blindly adhered to.

04. Now Lilly examines a doctrine of the "ancients" which is as follows
a. If the planet signifying the quesited is one sign with the Lord of the Ascendant,
(i) if the Lord of the Ascendant is more ponderous amongst the two (querent and quesited significators) , then the matter will be brought to perfection when the planets perfect their conjunction, irrespective of whether there is a reception between the planets or not.
(ii) If the Lord of the Ascendant is the lighter one, *and there is a reception between the planets, then the matter will be brought to perfection when the planets perfect the conjunction.
(iii) iif the Lord of the Ascendant is the lighter one *and* if the quesited significator does not receive the Lord of the Ascendant, then the matter will not be affected, *unless* (a) the conjunction happens in an angular house, and/or (b) one of the significators is in his own joy, (but here Lilly proposes *signs* which are domiciles of the planets as its 'joy'. The more 'positive' of the signs belonging to each planet - so Virgo for Mercury, Aquarius for Saturn, Libra for Venus, and Sagittarius for Jupiter)then the matter will not be affected, *unless*
(i) the conjunction happens in an angular house, and/or
(ii) one of the significators is in his own joy, (but here Lilly proposes *signs* which are domiciles of the planets as its 'joy'. The more 'positive' of the signs belonging to each planet - so Virgo for Mercury, Aquarius for Saturn, Libra for Venus, and Sagittarius for Jupiter).

Lilly now comments on the above doctrine that notes that 'single reception by exaltation' (by which he seems to mean that the presence of the planet in the above sign) is not enough, and then " the matter profiteth not". But, he says when there is *mutual* reception, between the significators, which are both benefics, *then* with positive aspects (not just conjunction) the matters 'very certainly' happens, and even perfects with square and opposition.


05. If there is a benefic or Lord of Quesited is in the ascendant, and have essential dignity (of any kind) there, then the number of degrees between the planet and the cusp in the ascendant denotes the time to perfection. This distance in degrees is mapped to days, months etc, as per stardard mappings and/or the astrologers discretion

 

[RohanMenon]

Lilly now gives an example of the "will I be rich?" query.

The querent, a merchant of London, asks
1. If he should be rich or subsist of himself without marriage?
2. By what means he should attain wealth?
3. The Time When?
4. If it would continue.

Chart cast for July 26 1634 NS 11:05 AM London
Tropical, Regiomontanus

ASC 14 Libra 20
H2 07 Scorpio 04
H3 07 Sagittarius 42
IC 18 Capricorn 47
H5 26 Aquarius 18
H6 22 Pisces 52

Sun 23 Leo 14
Moon 19 Leo 05
Mercury 17 Leo 14
Venus 25 Leo 31
Mars 16 Libra 13
Jupiter 17 Cancer 36
Saturn 15 Sagittarius 24 Retrograde
North Node 21 Pisces 16
PoF 00 Scorpio 11

First Lilly examines the diurnal motion of each planet and decides if it is low or fast.

To understand this first we make a table of the mean motions of planets.
from http://www.skyscript.co.uk/gl/slow.html

Sun 00 degrees 59 minutes
Moon 13 degrees 10 minutes 36 seconds
Mercury 01 degrees 23 minutes
Venus 01 degrees 12 minutes
Mars 00 degrees 31 minutes
Jupiter 00 degrees 05 minutes
Saturn 00 degrees 02 minutes

and for completeness, though Lilly doesn't use them

Uranus 42 seconds
Neptune 24 seconds
Pluto 15 seconds


I think what Lilly is doing here is taking the motion of a planet in the 24 hours enclosing the horary chart moment and then deciding if it is fast or slow by comparing against their average moment

So for this chart he says

Sun moves 57 minutes, therefore slow
Moon moves 11 degrees, therefore slow
Mercury - not calculated!
Venus moves 1 degree 13 minutes so swift
Mars moves 35 minutes, greater than average, so swift
Jupiter moves 13 minutes , as compared to average of 5 minutes, so very swift
Saturn moves 2 minutes, therefore he is slow (hmm he seems to be using an average motion less than 2 minutes)

Occidental Oriental status
In this chart,
Mercury is occidental
Venus is occidental
Mars is occidental
Jupiter is oriental
Saturn is occidental

Now he examines the dignities of the Planets. as per Lilly's dignity calculation table. http://www.skyscript.co.uk/dig5.html


Saturn in 15 Sagittarius .
By Lilly's table we have

Positives
3d house + 1
Not combust +5
Total = 5 + 1 = 6

Negatives
Peregrine -5
Retrograde -5
Occidental -2
Slow -2
Total = - ( 5 + 5 + 2 + 2) = -14

Total score = 6 - 14 = -8.

Jupiter is in 17 Cancer
Positives
1. Exaltation +4
2. Direct +4
3. Swift +2
4. Free from combustion +5
5. In the 10th +5

No negatives (but Lilly says, that since there is a square with Mars, there should be a negative, though the aspect is not partile - fwiw I think it is pretty close)


and so on.
In the end he has these scores
Saturn -8
Jupiter 20
Mars 9
Sun 8
Venus 18
Mercury 13
Moon 5

The Part of Fortune is technically in the 1st, but near the 2nd cusp, so Lilly asks us to treat PoF as being in the second

Lilly hasn't detailed how he came up with his judgment of the PoF, ("hath therefore but
3 testimonies of strength, which taken from 5 Debilities, Part Of Fortune is found weak by 2
testimonies:") but there is a table earlier in the book which he uses to 'score' the PoF

there are couple of oddities.
1. He assigns a positive score to the PoF not being combust/under the beams, with no negative score for being so.
(hmm I didn't know *parts* could be combust. That doesn't make any sense)
also i'm not sure why PoF should be weak in *Virgo* (the other weak signs are ruled by Saturn or Mars - though again he says PoF 'neither gets nor loses' in Aries, but still has a score of 5. I have no idea how to interpret this.

I think the takeaway here, is that before rushing to judgment on a horary (or natal) first do an evaluation of each planet and lot in it.
(to be cont'd)

 

[Minderwiz]

Lilly includes statements on speed of motion in all his planetary descriptions, at the beginning of Book I. For Saturn he says that the middle motion is 2 minutes and one second, so technically, he's right, it is slow being just below average. Whether it should still get all its minus points is, of course, debatable.

I slavishly followed Lilly's calculations, when I started Horary but soon realised that in practice, they are simply a guide and not there to be obeyed with virgo like zeal for detail. As they all relate to different phenomena, I honestly don't see how they can be added. How do you add the daily motion to the position relative to the Sun and the aspect from Mars or Jupiter?

It's a matter of trying to sum up whether the planet has more positive features than negative features as an overall estimate and that's judgement not maths. As Lilly himself says, Science must be tempered by Art.

I don't follow his dignities for Fortune either, nor a possible state of combustion. By Lilly's time I think too much had been lost sight of and he's trying to apply techniques which were never meant to be applie in the way that he applies them.

If you look at his house placements, you will see that they follow Hellenistic priniciples in the main, that is there are good and bad places and the house numbers are more or less what they would have been then.

Sign placements: In effect rulership by Jupiter, Venus, Sun and Moon is good and where Pisces is involved it gets a extra point, as both benefics have major dignities, and where Taurus is involved, it gets an extra point because Moon and Venus have major dignities there.

Conversely, rulership by Saturn or Mars is bad. Mercury is in between. As Ptolemy does not vary the calculation with Sect (though he seems to believe in Sect), There is no distinction between day and night rulership. So he treats Saturn by Day, as bad as Saturn ruling by night.

The conjunction with fixed Stars is OK, though giving scores is not really worth it. But treating it as being combust or not seems to be pointless and I get the feeling he's got his source from someone else, writing in the past.

You will find Lilly clearly advances the opinions of his predecessors, sometimes simply for information, sometimes he approves, often he criticises in the light of his own experience.

 

[RohanMenon]

Very helpful

I don't mind the 'scores' so much, as it gives a beginner something concrete to do vs be paralyzed by a chart.

Of course you are right, they can't be added together in any meaningful sense. at best divided into positive and negative testimony lists.

 

[RohanMenon]

Shelving astrology studies for a while

(identical message as in the Valens thread. )

Life is suddenly "interesting" (as in the old Chinese curse) and immense ramp ups at work and health crises in the family mean I don't have the time or energy to undertake my daily explorations of astrology till the interesting times abate.

This thread is temporarily halted (from my end, anyone is welcome to contribute). I hope these study notes, and more importantly Minderwiz's amazing answers, help people who tackle this fascinating text. When life is less frantic, I'll return to this thread.

Till then, have a great time everyone.