Advertisement

Rulerships in Horary

topic posted Sun, January 4, 2004 - 10:50 AM by  Maybe
Share/Save/Bookmark
I am interested in how other people deal with rulership issues in deliniation of a horary chart. From my experience it seems as though the trans-saturn planets give so much valuable insight into interpretation that I hate to just discard them, but they also have seemed a bit unreliable as far as actual even timing...
posted by:
Maybe
Washington
Advertisement
  • Re: Rulerships in Horary

    Thu, February 12, 2004 - 10:03 AM
    I wish I could help on this matter, but I do not actually use horary astrology.Im more of an electional kind of guy.I guess it really is time for me to start experamenting with it tho.
    • Re: Rulerships in Horary

      Thu, February 12, 2004 - 1:04 PM
      I actually haven't even begun to look at electional astrology, but I have heard that it is related somewhat to horary... any information you would like to share about electional astrology or good books/sites about it would be greatly appreciated. Horary astrology is by far my favorite... it has endless rules and some people find it rather tedious, but it makes me feel like a detective... it's amazing stuff.
      • Re: Rulerships in Horary

        Fri, February 13, 2004 - 1:34 PM
        I see electional astrology as looking for a good date for initiateing an activity based on matching the theme of the activity with the theme of the day.I dont really know any sites or books specificly tailored to the subject, but google does wonders. ^_^
  • Unsu...
     

    Re: Rulerships in Horary

    Fri, March 26, 2004 - 10:33 PM
    I have read several books on Horary by modern authors and all of these books are based on "Christian Astrology" by William Lilly, 1647:

    "Simplified Horary Astrology", By Ivy M. Goldstein-Jacobson, 1960
    "Horary Astrology Rediscovered", By Olivia Barclay, Q.H.P., 1990
    "Handbook of Horary Astrology", by Karen Hamaker-Zondag, 1993
    "Horary Astrology Plain & Simple", by Anthony Louis, 1998

    Ivy Goldstein-Jacobson, whose sun is at 23 Aries, doesn't even mention "Christian Astrology" by William Lilly and goes ahead and uses the trans-Saturnian planets directly. She particularly bothered me when she included a table of "Planetary Days & Hours" on page 40 with no explanation. She did not include Ptolomy's "Table of Essential Dignities."

    Karen Hamaker-Zondag, did mention "Christian Astrology" in a footnote on page 5, but did not include Ptolomy's "Table of Essential Dignities", but instead chopped up this table and sprinkled partial bits of it throughout the book. She dropped the topic of planetary days & hours completely. On page 6, she used the trans-Saturnians to re-define the day and night rulership of the signs. But on page 49 she ignores the trans-Saturnians to list the planets in "Face" (she calls it
    "Chaldean Rulerships").

    Anthony Louis, mentioned "Christian Astrology" in the preface and included Ptolomy's "Table of Essential Dignities." He actually discusses the pros/cons of using modern methods such as dropping the use of planetary days & hours. But on the topic of planetary rulership he went traditional with the 7 planets and the new trans-Saturnians are mostly secondary.

    He would apply the trans-Saturnians to modern topics such as Uranus ruling computers, Neptune ruling film making and Pluto ruling psychoanalysis.

    Olivia Barclay closely follows William Lilly and uses the trans-Saturnians in a secondary way. On page 46 she says:
    ''In horary the outer planets usually only add information to what is
    indicated by the traditional ones. I mean the "yes" or "no" answer to
    a question, the "headlines," can usually be judged without them.''

    So to do Astrology in a "Classical" way would be to follow Olivia Barclay and William Lilly.

    (From what I have written so far one might think that I follow William Lilly. But, his interpretation of the twelfth house is embarrassing.
    On pages 464-466 he discusses:
    "If one be Bewitched or not" and "Natural Remedies for Witchcraft"
    I much prefer Karen Hamaker-Zondag's Jungian analysis in her book, "The Twelfth House", 1992.)

    As far as I see it, the central problem of using the trans-Saturnians in a logical way is how to redefine/transform Ptolomy's "Table of Essential Dignities" for modern use.

    So far as I can tell, no one yet has done this cleanly and logically.

    The days of the week are named after the first planet of the first hour of the day from the "planetary hours & days." This same ordering of the planets appears in Ptolomy's "Table of Essential Dignities" in the "Faces" of the signs. A new version of Ptolomy's table to include 10 planets instead of 7 could give us 10 days a week instead of 7!

    Weeks of 10 days were tried out during the French Revolution of 1789, but did not last long. (Hey wasn't this about the same time the Uranus was discovered?)

    Some people do not consider Pluto to be a planet, so maybe there should be 9 days a week. Wasn't a new planet just discovered? Maybe there should be 11 days a week...
    • Re: Rulerships in Horary

      Sun, March 28, 2004 - 9:50 PM
      Mars, thank you so much for the helpful post. What do you think about using midpoints in horary Astrology? Would you use the trans-saturn planets in the midpoint structures or not? On a side note, Burmese astrology uses 8 different days during their week and their whole astrological system is based upon the day of the week you were born. Their extra day is wednesday night, and that is ruled by the north node and is the part of the week that is considered 'out of time'. Interesting stuff...
      • Unsu...
         

        Re: Rulerships in Horary

        Mon, March 29, 2004 - 2:40 PM
        I have looked through the books and do not see a reference to midpoints. Mostly just the plain Ptolomaic aspects are used, conjunction, sextile,square, trine and opposition.

        Of course planets at the midpoint of an opposition will be in square. And planets at the midpoint of a trine will be in sextile.

        Classical purists do not use the trans-saturnians. And they don't appear to use midpoints either.

        But hey, this is the 21st Century. Most modern horary Astrologers make their own rules. And ultimately, what ever you find that works for you is good.

        Night and day are important to classical horary. If the sun is above the ascendant-descendant line then one set of planets rule the signs. If the sun is below, then another set of planets rule the signs.

        See Ptolomy's "Table of Essential Dignities" for a list.
        • Re: Rulerships in Horary

          Fri, May 7, 2004 - 12:50 PM
          I have not found it necessary to include trans saturnian planets or midpoints (mainly because the just make things complicated) in horary.
          The idea is to make a simple judgement to a simple question.
          I started to use the rules in "the only way to learn horary & electional astrology" as they are simple and effective.
          occasionally the outer planets get in to my judgements but mostly everything can be associated with the inners quite adequately in my experience.
          Regards
          Dennis
          www.astrolodge.co.uk is the place for astrology in london for anyone who may be living or visiting
          • Unsu...
             

            Re: Rulerships in Horary

            Sat, May 29, 2004 - 12:57 PM
            Hi Maybe,

            There certainly isn't a general concensus on this, but I would not be inclined to through out trans-saturn planets either. I would, however, limit my use of them to when they appear conjoined or opposed another planet, or on an angle. In other words, I would use them kind of like Fixed Stars, but with looser orbs:)I find that astrology works nicely without them though, whether you are practicing Horary or not. This topic kind of falls into the area of research.
            • Unsu...
               

              Re: Rulerships in Horary

              Sat, May 29, 2004 - 1:08 PM
              I guess I should mention that I don't use the trans-saturn planets for rulership purposes at all. First of all, it is symmetricly inaccurate.....and I don't feel that the nature of Scorpio, Aquarius and Pisces has changed because of them. I also doubt the research that was involved in assigning the outer planets. (this could stem into a debate about the lack of accountibility in Western Astro today, but I won't go there:P:P) I use trans-saturns in an associative application only.
              • Re: Rulerships in Horary

                Sat, May 29, 2004 - 1:34 PM
                I just heard Robert Hand give the best lecture at NORWAK about the philosophical principles on which the greeks founded their astrological systems-- form vs matter and all of that. Anyway, after listening to where this all came from I think I will stick with classical rulerships.

Recent topics in "Classical Astrology"

Topic Author Replies Last Post
man loves man for sex Unsubscribed 0 October 20, 2014
wedding date chart Immi 6 June 8, 2013
Whole Sign Houses Chris 20 February 13, 2012
venus in Hydra? Kendra 0 December 21, 2011