Typically when you ask a horary question you examine the quality of the significator and its relationship to the quesited. But what can you conclude if the significators are dignified but not connected by any aspect?

Take for example a career question in which Capricorn rises. You ask, "Will I be content in the quality of my career job?"

You have Saturn in Scorpio in the 11th, and you have Venus in Libra in the 10th. The career, it looks like, is in great shape!!! But what about the lack of aspect between Saturn and Venus?

That was a hypothetical. I recently asked a horary about a third party, so I turned the chart (not sure if this is appropriate but I did it). So, the significators were Saturn (Capricorn Descendant) and the 5th from that, which is ruled by Taurus (Venus in Libra). ASSUMING I picked out the significators correctly, I can't derive much from the horary, except maybe that the lack of aspect shows a "no," and that Venus position in the 12th from 7th shows the quality of the significator.

But yeah, the question, how do you interpret the horary if sigs don't apply but are dignified?

Are you speaking of simply determining matters of state, or of situations concerning an outcome?

I'm a but in a hurry, but I would assume that a lack of aspect between the main significator or the moon, or transfer or collection would denote a no with regards to the latter.

Bonatti expresses a rule on placement; if the ruler of the subject asked about, were placed in the first and strongly situated and not afflicted, this could show a yes, ideally with the moon assisting or some other benefic placed in the matter asked about and in aspect to the ruler of the 1st. The way I see it, by being placed in the first, the planet is directly in that house (sign) as opposed to aspecting the sign from another location.

Regarding dignity, I always viewed it as showing the resources at a planets disposal, denoting the quality of whatever house this planet is placed in, but do think it can also denote good and bad generally (example: within a moral context, or showing something as stable).

But as for a "yes" all of the sources I have read seem to require a connection by the above mentioned criteria. If the planets cannot see each other then they are unable to form a partnership and out anything into action.

A state of contentment requires no application, but essential and accidential dignity is good. Signifiators in amicable placements indiates a yes. There is no wrong. Planets in cadent houses don't mean wrong, but tend to o for a deep dig. Good luck with ventures!