Planets in houses as significators, not lords

1
Hi,

I am just learning trad astrology and recently joined a horary astrology group on Facebook. I noticed that some horary astrologers use planets in houses as significators, rather than lords of houses. For example, somebody used the Sun as significator of an employer using the logic that it was lord of the hour, in the 10th house and had a natural signification of authority. The Sun was used in preference to the 10th house ruler.

I was just having a quick look through some traditional literature and couldn't immediately find anything to back this up. To be fair, I didn't look very thoroughly. I was wondering if any other experienced horary paractitioners out there have found cases where choosing planets in houses as significators rather than the ruler of the house cusp is more effective, and if so, when.

Would be most interested in your thoughts / experiences!

Thanks,

Martin

2
Hi Martin,

Although I primarily do natal astrology, I have some thoughts on this you might find helpful. The issue as I see it, is that signification or indication is a broad concept, and planets can signify things in many ways. For example, in the instance you mentioned, the Sun signifies authority figures both in his own right ("naturally" or "universally"), and also because of his being located in the house of authority. Of course the lord of the tenth also signifies authority, but for a different reason: it rules or manages that house.

In a case like this you can favor the planet in the place, or the planet ruling it. My own reworded version of what Zoller and Morin say, is that the planet in a place is more "immediate" than its lord. So the Sun indicates the authority figure in a more immediate, vivid sense, and he should play an important role in describing the situation. But it's often the case that the planet ruling a place gets the last word, much as when a parent says, "I pay the bills around here, so we're doing it my way."

Sometimes you have to let the chart speak for itself. For instance, if the question was about an authority figure, and the lord of the Ascendant is applying to that Sun in the 10th, it might show the connection you're looking for -- in that case, the lord of the tenth plays the lesser, more descriptive role, because the Sun in the tenth has done the job (though I wouldn't completely disregard the lord of the tenth). I can't speak for Lilly, but Bonatti gives examples of questions that are perfected because they involve a planet in the place of the question, and not necessarily its lord.

So both planets signify, one does so more immediately but not necessarily giving the last word. Most textbooks on questions emphasize the lord for good reason, but they will also include examples where planets in a place play the defining role.

Those are some of my thoughts, I hope they are helpful.

Best,
Ben
www.bendykes.com
Traditional Astrology Texts and Teaching

3
Yes, those are indeed some helpful thoughts you've got there! I have a tendency to over-think. Letting the chart speak for itself is an art that is hard for me to learn (or should that be unlearn?).

Incidentally I just got a horary query from a friend yesterday with an obvious case of significator-in-house action. Again, the significator was Lord of the Year. What are the chances eh? :)

Thanks for your quality thoughts.

Martin

4
? planet located in a particular house becomes even more important in this regard if it also has some authority i.e. essential dignity there, like the Sun in Aries in the 10th, for example. The greater the essential/accidental dignity (along with the helpful planet-house analogies as well as "joys") , the greater its potential to bring the matter(s) to pass.


Regards,
Goran
http://7heavenastrology.wordpress.com
http://klasicnaastrologija.wordpress.com

5
Ben wrote:I can't speak for Lilly, but Bonatti gives examples of questions that are perfected because they involve a planet in the place of the question, and not necessarily its lord.
I can support with an example from Lilly's case files. perhaps the clearest demonstration of this is in Lilly's chart about acquiring Master B's houses (Christian Astrology, p. 219). Lilly is signified by Venus in Aries on the cusp of the 7th, applying to the Sun in Aries in the 7th house. he takes the Sun to indicate the seller, not Mars (7th-ruler), and determines from this applying Venus/Sun conjunction that he should inquire further into the matter as the Sun will receive Venus by exaltation. it's an interesting judgement and worth reviewing further to get a handle on how and when to substitute an emplaced planet for the house ruler in assigning significators.
http://wadecaves.com | hello@wadecaves.com

6
Masha'allah speaks precisely about this principle in his "On Reception"

A planet in the house of the matter, if benefic, will perfect the matter even if it doesn't have any essential dignity there (it is of course much better if it does have at least some authority) and it doesn't receive the Moon/lord of the ascendant. If it receives, so much the better.

The same applies to a dignified malefic, reception isn't required. If that malefic has no authority and it offers no reception, then it will destroy the matter as well as when it chances to commit its disposition to another malefic which offers it no reception.

A planet located in the 1st house also acts according to these principles.

Regards,
Goran
http://7heavenastrology.wordpress.com
http://klasicnaastrologija.wordpress.com