I was reading PFN's comments about using the secondary significators in another thread, and his comments about the moon caught my attention. In a recent romantic horary concerning apparently unrequited love, a woman asked"Will X ever want me?" The question was not intended in the sexual sense, but in a serious romantic partner sense.
The major significators did not aspect but the moon is on the descendent by less than a degree. Does this have any significance? Thanks for your answers.

Does this have any significance?

Of course it does, it's the Moon, after all. Do you mean, is it the quesited's co-significator? I would have to disagree. It's more likely still co-sig for the querent.

Lilly's rules on Marriage (C H A P. X L I X) might help, if you haven't read Christian Astrology already.

... behold what application the Lord of the ascendant or Moon hath with the Lord of the seventh, and what application that Planet hath from whom the Moon is separated, with the Planets to whom she doth apply, or Sun with Venus; For if the Lord of the ascendant or the Moon apply to the Lord of the seventh house, it doth signifie the Querent shall have his or her desire, yet with many petitions, solicitations and prayers: And if the application be by square or opposition, and with reception, it signifieth that it shall be brought to passe with a kind of slownesse, labour and travell: but if the Lord of the seventh apply to the Lord of the ascendant, or the Planet to whom the Moon doth apply, unto the Planet from whom she is separate; or if the Lord of the sevent be in the ascendant, the matter shall be brought easily to passe, with great good will of the man or woman quesited after; chiefly if there be an application by trine or sextile aspect.

Which love most, or desire it most.

The Lord of the seventh in the ascendant, the party desired loveth best: The Lord of the ascendant in the seventh, the Querent loveth best; and so with the other Significators, for those that apply argue most love,&c.

IMO, this "loves most" (which will be looked at by who's swiftest, who receives, etc. too) also pertains to the Moon, as co-sig for the querent - Moon in the 7th house.

Hello Lakewind, Tanit...

Answering the question, I find that yes, the Moon is really important if it is conjunct the DC. Now, although important, that is not necessarily the best possible scenario for her to be in. Also, in my previous post, I said that the Moon works as co-significator for the querent to some extent. I'll explain what this *to some extent* means to make clear my position.

First of all, some quotations from Lilly regarding marriage in book II:

...Lord of the 7th be in the Ascendant, or apply to the Lord thereof, it will willingly be consented to by the party desired; If the Lord of the Ascendant or the Moon apply to the Lord of the 7th, or be in the 7th, the Querent shall obtaine his purpose by his owne labour...

The significators of the party desired, not beholding the Significators of the Querent, noteth the love of some other more then the Querent, or an aversnesse to the party now enquiring.

Contrary to all the rules of the Ancients, I have ever found, that when the Lord of the 7th hath been in the Ascendant, the Querent hath loved most, and when the Lord of the Ascendant was in the 7th, the Quesited loved best.

I find these extremely important and I'll explain why as my post unfolds...

But first about what I think of the Moon: for a long time the Moon has been regarded as co-significator for the querent, and several astrologers seems to think that this makes her interchangeable with the significator of the querent itself. I do not believe this to be true at all. The Moon is the most inferior body, is the fastest one, and shares the greatest likelihood to our world of corruption. So it is to her that beffals the function of primarilly transmiting influences to the resolve of matters in horaries, the most lunar of astrological arts. So, the Moon may carry the influence of the querent, the quesited, or both. She may even carry a third party influence that will change the course of a horary for better or worse.

About the horary presented by Lakewind, the Moon in the descendant is a clear testimony of the love the querent has for the quesited, yes. It is quite a common scenario in love horaries actually, Moon in 7th or in 1st, showing the allignement of the chart to the matter proposed, and it may be a sign that the querent has been despairing or even crying (literally) over the matter. Now, the fact that the Moon is in the 7th, in a place inimical to the AC, shows that it is the querent that has to go the distance, and that is why it is worse than if the Moon was in the 1st. Now, the position of the Moon does not readilly nullify the situation the primary significators are in, as we can see in Lilly's second quotation.

So, in order to see if this Moon is able to perfect the matter, we would have to look at which planet it applies to. Generally the ideal scenario would be for this Moon to not be in aversion to the primary significators and Venus, and applying to either, while at the same time translating the light of these primary significators - Lilly says quite often that an application to Venus also perfects the matter, I'd say that Venus should not be in aversion to the primary significators, or at least inside a strong/good house; but mostly, this is a astrologer's call situation. So, there may be other planets making it possible then, such as the Sun, or even Jupiter, if they have dignity in the houses inquired after or are favourable in some way. Mallefic ones would just deny the matter, most likely.

Now, all that is without taking reception into consideration. After looking at application and it's kinds, we may look at receptions for further testimony. The third quotation is Lilly's disagreement with what he has written before in the same chapter, which was possibly the literal transcription of what the ancients had left for him (or what he understood of them). I tend to agree with Lilly. When you look to whom has fallen hard, the ruler of the 7th inside the 1st means, plain and simple, that the querent's ruler receives the 7th one (provided there is no aversion between rulers) and to receive is to favor, in this case, to love. The same in the opposite scenario. That probably is where Frawley confusion steamed from, since he had this backwards. This quotation underlying Lilly's true opinion is lost in the middle of the chapter on matters of the 7th house in book II, and is easy to go unnoticed.

The same rationale can be applied to the Moon to a certain extent, when the Moon is in the 7th, it means the matter is received by the querent, but it is not as if you could say that it is exactly the same as if the 1st house ruler were there (unless we had a Cancer/Capricorn axis). There is a difference, and this Moon inside 7th means, from the quesited point of view, that there is awareness of the present situation, and that have been some action regarding it. What kind of action? That we should define looking at the Moon's last aspect.

Well, I hope this makes clearer my position regarding the Moon's function in a horary chart.

John Frawley's book mentions this and shows that it suggests that the querent wants a relationship with the person, but it doesn't show whether or not she will get one, just that her 'heart' is focused upon one at the time of the horary.
In other words it is simply describing the situation as per the querent's story.

Well, as usual in this forum, very interesting answers. Thank you. I should have kept the chart info, but I believe the moon had separated from Saturn in Libra and was applying to Jupiter retro in Pisces, Lord 7. This will not perfect, of course. I'm inclined to think I gave the right answer, "no". I wish I could read Lilly, but his language frustrates me too quickly. Thanks again.

When you look to whom has fallen hard, the ruler of the 7th inside the 1st means, plain and simple, that the querent's ruler receives the 7th one (provided there is no aversion between rulers) and to receive is to favor, in this case, to love. The same in the opposite scenario.

We've been down this road before, but I still don't get this concept. I also rarely see the quesited's ruler in the 1st, which contradicts what he says (regarding disagreeing with the ancients). I usually find the querent to be fondest (often an unrequited romance) and their ruler in the 7th and/or swiftest. Anyone else have the opposite happening?

A significator shows a thinking person with their own wants/needs, which means there's no reason to think that wherever they are has anything to do with how someone else feels about them. Where they are is how they feel and behave, not how someone else feels or behaves.

Whether querent is in the 7th or quesited is in the 1st, there is a connection between them this way, which would more likely be via choice (unless you are somehow forced into a marriage). Why would you choose to be in your 7th house if you are disinterested?

Lilly mentions career rulers in the same way as the quote I posted on marriage and who is fondest. If the MC ruler is in the 1st (also if 1st ruler is in the 10th), that is quite favorable to get the job and might show interest by the employer more so than the querent, IMO (depending on other factors). The house you are in is your environment in the question. Why would an employer be in your house if they are disinterested?

If someone doesn't care about you, they will be self-interested, not in their 7th house, your house, of other people. That is illogical to me.

Here's the career quote:
CHAPTER LXXXII, Of Government, Office, Dignity, Preferment, or any place of Command or Trust, whether attainable or not?

The Lord of the lOth in the lst, so he be a lighter Planet then the Lord of the lst, though no aspect be betwixt them, yet shall he attain the Place or Office desired; but with more ease and lesse labour when the Lord of the lOth is in the ascendant, and is either going to Conjunction, Sextile or Trine aspect with the Lord of the lst.

An aspect might not even necessary, in other words (obviously depending on the over all indicators in the chart). Why would no aspect be necessary to get a job if you are fond of the job via the 10th ruler in the 1st?

Tanit wrote:A significator shows a thinking person with their own wants/needs, which means there's no reason to think that wherever they are has anything to do with how someone else feels about them. Where they are is how they feel and behave, not how someone else feels or behaves.

Whether querent is in the 7th or quesited is in the 1st, there is a connection between them this way, which would more likely be via choice (unless you are somehow forced into a marriage). Why would you choose to be in your 7th house if you are disinterested?

...

Here's the career quote:
CHAPTER LXXXII, Of Government, Office, Dignity, Preferment, or any place of Command or Trust, whether attainable or not?

The Lord of the lOth in the lst, so he be a lighter Planet then the Lord of the lst, though no aspect be betwixt them, yet shall he attain the Place or Office desired; but with more ease and lesse labour when the Lord of the lOth is in the ascendant, and is either going to Conjunction, Sextile or Trine aspect with the Lord of the lst.

An aspect might not even necessary, in other words (obviously depending on the over all indicators in the chart). Why would no aspect be necessary to get a job if you are fond of the job via the 10th ruler in the 1st?

I see your point Tanit. Actually, this would bring to the fore a very complex point.

I do not agree that the significator's house position to be strictly defined by choice (although a set of choices has led your path, who consciously chooses to be in a 12th house - hospitals as patient - 8th - fatality - or 6th - diseases -?). The house position of a significator is double folded, since it represents the querent, but also represents how the querent is seen by rulers of places friendly and inimical, being a combination of choices and external influence.

All in all, it is just the way life operates.

But after your post, I do get the strangeness of it all when you think that a 7th house ruler pops in the 1st, being the domicile of the querent, and we say that it is the querent who is the fondest, or when a 10th house ruler inside 1st points that it is again the querent's mind the one set on getting a job. To be quite frank, I do not see the presence of the 7th house ruler inside the 1st as a good testimony at all, because that is the place where inevitably the planet will find detriment, and the opposite situation can not be all that good as well, so, to see who is fonder would be a lesser trouble in this scenario. But as strange as it is, I do get a lot of 7th house rulers inside the 1st in love concerned horaries

I'll have to think this all over, and I thank you for pointing that out.

I agree with PFN--I've never really seen the Moon as interchangeable with the querent's 'significator'. In my practice, the Moon indicates where the emotional attachments are. These attachments need not be positive or negative, nor need they be logical. Nor will the querent necessarily base his/her decisions on them. In the 7th House, the Moon can indicate an emotional attachment to another person--but as I said, this need not be positive. In fact, it can be an absolute hatred of that person, and this depends on the sign placement, aspects, condition of the dispositor, etc. It can mean that the querent is attached to his/her view of that person, and 7th House is really one's reflection of self, that in some cases, one has disowned and projected on another person(as we are all so eager to disown our negatives, and cling to our positives). So much depends upon attendant conditions.

When you have feelings, positive or negative, about someone, then you have invited them emotionally into your life, to some extent. It may or may not have anything to do with your intent for the situation, or what the other person's intent is--which are described in large part by the other, primary rulers in the chart, etc., which can include, though not necessarily, the Moon.

Initially I had taken the line of PFN. That a planet received is akin to a planet loved by the lord of that house.

However, ASC lord on the DC is in detriment, so this is a terrible place to be... how can this possibly be positive and signify anything good?

It may just as easily signify that the querent is actually at the mercy of the quested, and that the quested is in control of the situation and the querent. If this is a question regarding an open enemy, do you want your sig to be in the 7th in detriment? No chance.

I take a different view point on this now. I'm inclined to agree with the quote which Tanit made

The Lord of the lOth in the lst, so he be a lighter Planet then the Lord of the lst, though no aspect be betwixt them, yet shall he attain the Place or Office desired; but with more ease and lesse labour when the Lord of the lOth is in the ascendant, and is either going to Conjunction, Sextile or Trine aspect with the Lord of the lst.

If the ASC ruler is in a certain house, it experiences that house on the terms of the lord of that house. Which may be alien to the native, and place that person out of sect.

Yet, if the lord of a house be in the 1st it brings all matters of that house to the native. The querent to me has the power over those houses.