Home  Weekly Horary  Tara Programme  Tutorial  Articles  Irish Astrological Association  Tara Publications   William Lilly

Awards  Other Websites  Vancouver   Book List   Glossary   My Horoscope  What's New?  Réalta   Tapes

Planetary Stations   Planetary Ingresses   New & Full Moons

 

 

Lilly says...A Reference Guide to the Considerations Before Judgement

"This question fals not under the notion of vulgar rules, or must the Astrologian expect particular rules to governe his Fancy in every question; it was well said, A te & a Scientia, for I doe daily resolve such questions as come not into the vulgar rules of Guido or Haly".

William Lilly. "Christian Astrology" p. 452.


Introduction

The rules, or to use the more common 20th century term, strictures, governing whether a horoscope may be judged in horary astrology (which have been unquestionably followed by the adherents of William Lilly during this last century) were never really rules or strictures in the first place.  What Lilly stated in his Christian Astrology, pages 121 - 3, has been misread and misinterpreted by recent generations of horary astrologers.

Throughout the past decade, the debate in horary astrology concerning the so-called "strictures governing the judgement of horoscopes" has continued unabated.   This debate refers to a number of what Lilly called considerations before judgement.   These have been misinterpreted as meaning that the astrologer can be prevented from reaching a judgement when one or more of them appear in a horary chart.  Nearly all the books published on horary within the last hundred years agree that there are horoscopes which can be judged and others that cannot.

Christian Astrology is regarded by many today as the Bible of horary.  Although this belief is somewhat exaggerated, it is nevertheless true that its pages offer a comprehensive guide to the rules of interpretation.  The question is, did Lilly in practice diligently follow the considerations before judgement that he had outlined?   Did he flatly refuse to judge horoscopes when one or more of the considerations appeared?

The word consideration, according to the 17th century usage. (The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, OUP, 1983 ed.) means "the action of looking at; beholding, contemplation, reflection, meditation".  This definition throws a new light on what have always been regarded as strictures, the rules forbidding interpretation which the astrologer was forbidden to break and which could not be infringed.  In my opinion the astrologer is asked to look at, contemplate, or reflect upon the considerations when they appear in a horary question, not to decide if one chart is judgable and another is not.

There is no cause to doubt the validity of the answers that Lilly gave to the questions in Christian Astrology.  At no time during his life did any of his contemporaries ever accuse him of cheating; in fact, several of his political predictions have been confirmed by history.  Therefore we can proceed along the lines that he successfully obtained the correct results, and use his charts for testing the considerations. (See Peep's diary where Booker accused Lilly of giving the answers clients wanted)

I propose to write this article as a reference guide only, and not a study of Lilly's methods of judging horoscopes.  I shall refer to each so-called rule of stricture and show where Lilly ignored them in his analyses of various horoscopes.  For easy reference the considerations have been numbered 1 to 12 and quoted from Lilly's own definitions.


Consideration 1

"All the ancients that have wrote of questions, do give warning to the astrologer that before he deliver judgement he well consider whether the figure is radical and capable of judgement; the question then shall be taken for radical, or fit to be judged, when as the Lord of the hour at the time of proposing the question, and erection g the figure, and the Lord of the ascendant or first house, are of one triplicity, or be one, or of the same nature.

As for example; let the Lord of the hour be Mars, let the sign of Scorpio, Cancer or Pisces ascend, this question is then radical, because Mars is Lord of the hour, and of the watery triplicity, or of those signs Cancer, Scorpio or Pisces.

Again, let the Lord of the hour be Mars, and Aries ascend, the question shall be radical, because mars is both Lord of he hour and sign ascending.

Let the lord of the hour be Mars, and let the sign Leo ascend, here, although the Sun is one of the Lords of the fiery triplicity, and sole Lord of the sign Leo, yet shall the question be judged; because the Sun, who is Lord of the ascendant, and Mars who is Lord of the hour, are both of one nature, viz. hot and dry."

Although Lilly judged 11 charts where the lord of the hour did not comply with this consideration, in this study they are referred to as non-radical.  He also judged 14 horoscopes where the consideration applied and which are listed below as radical.   There were 10 horoscopes where he omitted the lord of the hour and proceeded to judge them nevertheless.  The horoscopes can be identified by their page numbers in Christian Astrology on the far left hand side of the following tables.

Non-Radical

Page Lord of the hour Nature Ascendant Asc. ruler Nature
177 Sun Hot/dry Libra Venus Cold/moist
219 Sun Hot/dry Libra Venus Cold/moist
238 Jupiter Hot/moist Virgo Mercury Cold/dry
286 Venus Cold/moist Scorpio Mars Hot/dry
385 Saturn Cold/dry Leo Sun Hot/dry
392 Mars Hot/dry Capricorn Saturn Cold/dry
395 Jupiter Hot/moist Scorpio Mars Hot/dry
417 Mars Hot/dry Virgo Mercury Cold/dry
419 Sun Hot/dry Taurus Venus Cold/moist
468 Mars Hot/dry Gemini Mercury Cold/dry
472 Sun Hot/dry Aquarius Saturn Cold/dry

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Radical

Page Lord of the hour Nature Ascendant Asc. ruler Nature
135 Mars Hot/dry Leo Sun Hot/dry
162 Venus Cold/moist Cancer Moon Cold/moist
165 Moon Cold/moist Cancer Moon Cold/moist
200 Venus Cold/moist Libra Venus Cold/moist
240 Moon Cold/moist Virgo Mercury Cold/dry
289 Saturn Cold/dry Virgo Mercury Cold/dry
389 Moon Cold/moist Virgo Mercury Cold/dry
389 Mercury Cold/dry Virgo Mercury Cold/dry
401 Sun Hot/dry Scorpio Mars Hot/dry
421 Mercury Cold/dry Capricorn Saturn Cold/dry
436 Mars Hot/dry Aries Mars Hot/dry
439 Mercury Cold/dry Virgo Mercury Cold/dry
442 Mercury Cold/dry Virgo Mercury Cold/dry
452 Saturn Cold/dry Capricorn Saturn Cold/dry
467 Mars Hot/dry Cancer Moon Cold/moist

Where the lord of the hour is omitted:

Pages 152, 196, 290, 397, 399, 415, 437, 455, 470, 471.


Consideration 2

"When either 00 degrees, or the first or second degrees of a sign ascend especially in signs of short ascensions, viz. Capricorn, Aquarius, Pisces, Aries, Taurus, Gemini, you may not venture judgement, unless the querent be very young, and his corporature, complexion and moles or scars of his body agree with the quality of the sign ascending".

The only horary with an early degree is found on page 417.  The ascendant is a 2.29 Virgo.


Consideration 3

"If 27, 28 or 29 degrees ascend of any sign, it's no ways safe to give judgement, except the querent be in years corresponding to the number of degrees ascending; or unless the figure be set upon a time certain, viz. a man went away or fled at such a time precise; here you may judge, because it's no propounded question".

There are no examples of an ascendant with a late degree in any of the horoscopes in Christian Astrology.


Consideration 4

"It's not safe to judge when the Moon is in the later degrees of a sign, especially in Gemini, Scorpio or Capricorn".

There are no examples of the Moon in the later degrees of any of these signs.


Consideration 5

"It's not safe to judge when the Moon is in the Via Combusta, which is, when she is in the last 15 degrees of Libra, or the first 15 degrees of Scorpio". (Since the Sun and Moon are effected by the Via Combusta, these degrees could be the moiety of their orbs)

There are two examples of the Moon in this area of the horoscope, especially in its weakest position in Scorpio, where it's in fall, and in the rulership, triplicity and face of the lesser malefic Mars.

p. 415.    The Moon is at 8.20 Scorpio.

p. 468.    The Moon is at 6.20 Scorpio.


Consideration 6

"All manner of matters go hardly on (except the principal significators be very strong) when the Moon is void of course; yet somewhat she performs if void of course, and be either in Taurus, Cancer, Sagittarius or Pisces".

p. 152.    The Moon is at 26.43 Pisces.

p. 238.    The Moon is at 29.53 Virgo.

p. 385.    The Moon is at 28.09 Sagittarius.

p. 401.    The Moon is at 27.33 Leo

p. 471.    The Moon is at 29.10 Aquarius.

NOTE:  When I first wrote this article in 1992 it was my belief that the Moon appearing at the end of a sign and not applying by aspect to another planet before changing sign was void of course.  I do not accept this theory today.


Consideration 7

"You must also be wary, when in any question propounded you find the cusp of the seventh house afflicted, or the lord of that house retrograde or impedited, and the matter at that time not concerning the seventh house, but belonging to any other house, it's an argument the judgement of the astrologer will give small content, or any thing please the querent; for the seventh house generally has signification of the artist".

p. 196.    The seventh ruler, the Moon is at 15.29 Scorpio in fall and applying to combustion.

p. 200.    The seventh cusp is at 4.37 Aries.  Mars is in fall square Saturn conjunct the 7th cusp.

p. 415.    The 7th cusp is at 12.14 Aries.  Saturn is conjunct the cusp of the 7th at 17.33 Aries, although this horary is a 7th house matter.


Consideration 8

"If Saturn be in the ascendant, especially retrograde, the matter of that question seldom or never comes to good".

p. 437.    Saturn is retrograde in the first house at 20.57 Aries and in fall.


Consideration 9

"Saturn in the seventh either corrupts the judgement of the astrologer, or is a sign the matter propounded will come from one misfortune to another".

p. 200.    Saturn is conjunct the 7th within 2.30 degrees.

p. 395.    The 7th cusp is 8 Taurus with Saturn in the 7th at 24.22 Taurus.

p. 415.    The cusp of the 7th is 12.14 Aries with Saturn at 17.33 Aries.


Consideration 10

"If the lord of the ascendant be combust, neither the question propounded will take, or the querent be regulated".

p. 219.    The ascendant is Libra with Venus in the 7th house at 14.25 Aries, the Sun is at 20.56 Aries.

p. 238.    The ascendant ruler is Mercury in the 10th at 24.45 Gemini while the Sun is at 00.31 Cancer.


Consideration 11

"The Lord of the 7th unfortunate, or in his fall, or terms of the infortunes, the artist shall scarce give a solid judgement".

There are 22 horoscopes where the lord of the 7th is in a weak position, 17 of these show the ruler to be peregrine, 3 in fall and 2 in detriment.

p.135.    Saturn is at 10.09 Sagittarius retrograde and peregrine.

p. 152.    Mars is at 11.00 Sagittarius and peregrine.

p. 162.    Saturn is in fall at 14.40 Aries.

p. 165.    Saturn is at 15.05 Taurus and peregrine.

p. 177.    Mars is at 16.12 Libra in detriment and peregrine.

p. 196.    The Moon is at 15.29 Scorpio and in fall and peregrine.

p. 200.    Mars is at 1.50 Cancer in fall.

p. 219.    mars is at 11.06 Virgo and peregrine.

p. 238.    Jupiter is at 5.00 Leo and peregrine.

p. 240.    Jupiter is at 2.57 Gemini in detriment.

p. 289.    Jupiter is at 25.12 Gemini in detriment and peregrine.

p. 385.    Saturn is at 14.53 Taurus and is peregrine.

p. 390.    Jupiter at 25.24 Taurus is peregrine.

p. 392.    The Moon is at 4.10 Leo and is peregrine.

p. 399.    Saturn is at 11.59 Aries and in its fall.

p. 415.    Mars is at 20.53 Gemini and is peregrine.

p. 417.    Jupiter is at 4.40 Gemini in detriment.

p. 421.    The Moon is at 10.20 Leo and is peregrine.

p. 442.    Jupiter is at 5.41 Leo and is peregrine.

p. 467.    Saturn is at 11.25 Taurus and is peregrine.

p. 468.    Jupiter is at 28 Leo retrograde and is peregrine.

p. 473.    The Sun is at 3 Gemini and is peregrine.


Consideration 12

"When the testimonies of fortunes and infortunes are equal, defer judgement, it's not possible to know which way the balance will turn; however, defer your opinion till another question better inform you".

This is a sound piece of advice which leaves the decision up to each astrologer as to whether to judge the chart or not.  Since Lilly judged all the horoscopes in Christian Astrology we have no evidence as to how he would have dealt with this consideration.

NOTE.  In fact we do have the evidence of the previous 11 considerations.  Also it seems very suspicious that he recommended waiting for a second more clearly defined question to arise.


In the following table, the numbers on the far right hand side show the number of times that each consideration before judgement is to be found in his collection of horoscopes.

See below:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 No lord of the hour 10
  Lord of the hour disagrees 11
2 Early degree 1
3 Late degree 0
4 Moon in later degrees of Gemini, Scorpio or Capricorn 0
5 Moon in the Via Combusta 2
6 Moon void of course * 5
  except Taurus 0
      "      Cancer 0
      "      Sagittarius 1
      "      Pisces 1
7 Cusp of the 7th afflicted 5
8 Saturn retrograde in the ascendant 1
9 Saturn in the 7th 2
10 Ruler of the ascendant combust 2
11 Ruler of 7th unfortunate, in fall or terms of infortunes

22

*  At the time of first writing this article, the generally accepted version of a void of course Moon was that being at the end of a sign it could not aspect another planet or the ascendant before changing signs.  This of course was not really what Lilly intended.  See void of course Moon in the tutorial.

The only truly radical charts according to the modern interpretation of Lilly's considerations are: pp. 389, 436, 439 and 452.

Strictly speaking, by today's standards, these are the only horoscopes that are fit to be judged.

It should be noted that only three considerations were not demonstrated, namely numbers 3, 4 and 12.  Therefore we can't tell from Christian Astrology how Lilly would have dealt with them.  Yet judging from his methods, it is reasonable to say that he would not have allowed them to prevent judgement.

The lord of the hour was the only consideration that Lilly regarded as a rule which clearly stated whether the horoscope was radical and fit to be judged.  None of the remaining considerations were referred to as being radical or non-radical. there is enough evidence to show that the lord of the hour does not prevent the radicality of a horary.   Lilly did not allow it, when in disagreement with the ascendant and its ruler, to prevent him from judging charts, therefore there is no good reason for retaining it.

The only horoscopes free from any considerations are on pages 389, 436, 439 and 452.   Only 4 out of 35 judgements!  If Lilly had been as rigid with the considerations as some of today's astrologers, he could never have written Christian Astrology.


Conclusion

The lesson of this reference guide is that Lilly did not allow any of the consideration before judgement to prevent him from judging horaries.  He obviously did not see them as total barriers to resolving questions as many modern astrologers do.  They were not commandments handed down on tablets of stone, but were to be thought about and brought into the interpretation of the chart as an aid to answering the question.  When any of the considerations before judgement appear in a horoscope, the astrologer is advised to take them in to the judgement.  It now seems that every horary can be judged.   The astrologer is helped and guided by the considerations before judgement and not hindered by them or prevented from judging the chart, in fact they can be a blessing in disguise.

It is now time for a change in thinking in the practise and teaching of horary astrology.  Students of horary have been mislead for far too long having been taught that the rules cannot be broken.  In fact, there are no rules or strictures preventing judgement of a horary chart but rather a number of considerations which guide and assist the astrologer in answering the question.

First published in The Astrologers' Quarterly. Vol 63. no. 1 Winter (December) 1992.

© Maurice McCann 1992


Postscript

Writing now on the 25th February 1998, I would firmly state that the considerations before judgement in my experience cannot prevent the judgement of horaries.  In my practise I ignore them completely and have never found that they have caused me to make mistakes or been the cause of giving wrong answers.  If they do have any influence, which I doubt, it may be in descriptions of people or articles. 


Return to Articles

Return to Home page