Astrologer Interview: Benjamin Dykes (Part 2 of 5)
August 5, 2008 by Nina Gryphon
This is part 2 of 5 of our interview with traditional astrology translator and practitioner Ben Dykes. Read part 1 here, if you missed it.
—
NG: Since you started speaking about Masha’allah and Sahl, the most recent translation: one of the things that I noticed is that you pulled together a lot of shorter texts, even more so than the Bonatti. Bonatti has treatises but here there’s a bunch of books. I was trying to understand why you selected some of the texts that you did. Are these all of the ones available by Masha’allah and Sahl? What were your criteria?
BD: They were the most readily available for one thing. They are also among the most famous. But I do have some other works by Sahl, for example. There’s one on the magical use of precious stones, which I only have in one manuscript edition. But it’s hard to read and uses a lot of Latin terms for gems and minerals that don’t necessarily match up with modern terms you could simply look up in a minerology book now. So I didn’t feel like it was worth, right now, taking the time to do this short text and then end up delaying the entire book. There are other works that I have. There are two longer works by Sahl and Masha’allah that I’ll eventually get to. I plan on using at least one of them in my next book. But the ones I selected for Works of Sahl & Masha’allah are among the most famous, the most influential, the most quoted in the medieval tradition, and they were more readily available.
NG: When I first read your Bonatti translation, he cites a lot of older Arabic authors, and I wondered if that was the next logical step for you to then go a step back from even Bonatti’s sources.
BD: That was a big part of my reasoning. I wanted to know what the earlier authors had said, in part because people like Sahl and Masha’allah were active during the most fruitful period of Arabic astrology, and their texts were so central for later authors. There were also two other reasons. The first was that I had noticed changes between the two editions of Bonatti I worked on, concerning the question of whole-sign houses and quadrant houses. There had been editorial interference in the texts, so that in the earlier edition the text might speak of a planet in the fifth, let’s say, and it would be very clear from the Latin that we were talking about the fifth sign. But in the later edition, the word endings had been changed so that they referred to houses and possibly domiciles at the same time: so that there was some distortion involved. I wanted to know what was going on with the earlier authors. I had seen them use whole signs more, so I was very curious about that.
The other issue was that I’ve been very interested in the transmission of Greek material to the medievals, and I wanted to see to what extent Greek concepts had been communicated to the Persians and the Arabs, because some of these techniques and approaches are not as evident in the Latin period. So I wanted both to work back from Bonatti and forward from the Greeks, and see what was going on during this Persian/Arabic period.
NG: You started with Bonatti: is that just because that’s the text you encountered first and it was perhaps the most cohesive? Did you ever have the sense that maybe you should have done something else first?
BD: Several things had come together. Zoller makes extensive use of Bonatti in his course, so while I was already familiar with Bonatti I also wanted to know what else he said. It was also the text that was presented to me by this manuscript collector. Compared with some other translations that are available in Latin it was a very pleasing Latin style. It was easier to work with. There are other Latin translators like Hugo de Santalla and Robert of Ketton, for example, or Hermann of Carinthia, who adopt a very different Latin style from that of Bonatti or John of Spain. It’s slower going. You sometimes have to read between the lines, because sometimes verbs that are implied but not expressed. But Bonatti has a really pleasing Latin style. So a lot of things came together at once that made Bonatti the obvious choice.
NG: For you as an astrologer, what was the most exciting thing for you in each of those texts? Was there a method or technique or approach that you thought: “Wow, this is great, this will really impact my own practice and understanding of astrology in some way?”
BD: There are two recent things that both come from the Sahl and Masha’allah book. First, I think I have finally cracked the code for understanding the debilities of detriment and descension. I think I have figured out how they work and I have started to use them in this new way in charts, and they work. I’d always treated them as debilities, but you don’t always get a clear sense from every author what they think the differences between them are. But Sahl and Masha’allah say enough that we now know what they are. And some of it has to do with traditional attitudes towards physics, for example in the case of detriment. So that’s one thing I find very exciting.
The other thing, which comes from Greek concepts and was transmitted into the Arabic period, is the importance of the planets aspecting their own domiciles or signs. Planets that do not aspect their own sign have a harder time bringing about the matters pertaining to that house. It’s like they can’t communicate with it, they don’t receive support, they can’t support the house: so a planet not aspecting its own sign is going to show certain bad things for that topic. It’s something that is mentioned in Bonatti but he does not use it as consistently and clearly as they do, and this is something else that I think will be important for medieval astrologers in the future.
NG: One of the things that I found fascinating were the ways in which Bonatti texts really differ from the later authors. By the time you get to a few hundred years later you essentially end up with certain things are very different just like the issue you mentioned. I’m glad that you are reading the texts as an astrologer to bring out these threads that you feel have kind of been pushed in to the background but may be quite essential.
BD: Yes, there are certain things that I have to do solely as a translator, but I do think being an astrologer is useful. You notice things that might not seem to be of much importance if you were just looking at things from a translation perspective.
[Read Part 1 of the interview with Ben Dykes.]
[Read Part 3 of the interview with Ben Dykes.]
Astrologer Interview: Benjamin Dykes (Part 1 of 5)
August 2, 2008 by Nina Gryphon
I was delighted to speak with Dr. Ben Dykes, a traditional astrologer and translator of ancient astrology texts. He published a comprehensive translation of medieval astrologer Guido Bonatti’s Book of Astronomy last year (a first in English), and, just last month, Works of Sahl and Masha’allah, two 8th-9th century astrologers. I will be reviewing his latest book this coming week.
Ben Dykes studied astrology with Robert Zoller, earning his AMA degree. A traditionalist through and through, he also taught philosophy at the University of Illinois. He currently practices astrology and translates texts full-time from his home in Minnesota.
NG: I would like to talk to you about why you started doing translations and what you envision the overall plan for your translation work to be? What do you hope to achieve?
BD: Some years ago I was studying under Robert Zoller and practicing medieval astrology. I had studied Latin for a number of years in high school and college, and I was interested in seeing what other translations were out there, since not a lot of medieval material had been translated at that point. In 2004 or 2005 I found out that a local university library had a copy of Abu Ma’shar’s Flowers in Latin. And it had never been translated. I decided to experiment and have some fun, and I found that translating it was really enjoyable. I thought this it would be useful to a lot of astrologers and myself if I started doing translations. Speaking of which, a totally revised version of the Flowers will be included in my next book.
At that time I had also met a friend who had been a collector of Arabic and Latin manuscripts for about 20 or 30 years. And he had tried at various times to get some of these manuscripts and printed editions translated, but had run into various problems. I had expressed an interest in translating Bonatti, and it turned out he had a copy of the 1550 edition of Bonatti: so he gave me a photocopy and encouraged me to work on it. I found it totally engrossing, really had a wonderful time with it, and that’s how I got started.
Along the way I was researching some of the citations that Bonatti had made from other works, and I found I could get a lot of them on microfiche and microfilm from various libraries. So in the course of translating Bonatti I suddenly found myself doing partial translations and examinations of a whole bunch of other works. This spawned an idea in my head that in addition to doing charts, I both needed and wanted to continue to translate. It was partly because of my own interest and partly because I was presented with this opportunity, but also there were very few medieval sources out there in English.
NG: I assume it was the translation process you found enjoyable. What about it do you enjoy? What about it was particularly fulfilling for you?
BD: First it was uncovering a lot of material I had not seen before. In Zoller’s course for example, there are some partial translations of some material in Bonatti and other works, but you don’t get the full scale treatment of every possible topic. This is not a criticism of his course—it’s just that a full-scale translation would be so huge, there would be no room for the course lectures themselves without making it impossibly large.
I was discovering new things. I was discovering more of the traditional cosmology and concepts, and that interested me, too. When you translate you have to be very careful about every word that you’re writing, which means you are paying very close attention to exactly what the astrologer is saying. You’re not just looking a topic up in the book and skimming it. You have to examine carefully how each part of the book relates to other parts. So it’s a little bit of detective work. Some of it is just straightforward learning.
The other thing I found really interesting and important is that there are certain technical terms we take for granted in astrology, which, if you look at them from the perspective of the original languages, although they are still used as technical terms they have really concrete meanings that make the text and the techniques come to life in a way that you won’t necessarily see if you are not paying attention to them.
One easy example is the word “Ascendant.” In Latin, the word literally means “what is ascending,” and in Arabic they call it “the rising.” Normally if we just take “Ascendant” as a straightforward technical term in English, you often think that it’s the degree of the Ascendant. But the medievals often made clear distinctions between the degree of the Ascendant and the Ascendant pure and simple: when they talk about the Ascendant pure and simple they often mean the entire rising sign.
So if you’re paying attention to the grammar and what the word actually is, you find that the meaning is not always the same. A planet in the ascending sign is going to be described as being “in the Ascendant,” but you won’t necessarily understand that fact if you’re not paying attention to the language.
Another example that I recently discovered, which I wrote about in the introduction to the Sahl book, is the idea of the angles. The Greeks used the same word to talk about both the axial degrees (let’s say, of the Mid-heaven) and the whole-sign angles (the first sign, the tenth sign, the seventh and the fourth). The Greek word actually has sticking or stabbing connotations.
Now in Arabic, the word that they use is watad, which means a “stake”: like a stake or a pole you stick in the ground. Actually, a tent stake is specifically what it meant. But when you get to the Latin, the authors do not use the normal words for stakes, pegs, poles, that kind of thing. They usually use the word angulus which we translate as “angle.” Now the thing is that an angle or angelus in Latin means a “corner,” like the corner of a room. There is no relationship between that word and the very concrete idea of sticking something in the ground or having a point which the degrees of the Mid-heaven and the Ascendant are. So there is a distortion involved. There’s a distortion about what is really meant. When we say “angle” does it mean the axial degree itself? Does it mean some space around the angle or following the axial degree? Or does it mean the whole sign itself? This is going to affect our interpretations.
I have an idea about why some of the Latin authors were using the word angelus, and that is if you look at a square medieval chart, you see that the houses of the Ascendant and the Midheaven and the other angles form square corners. But since those corners are defined by the axial degrees, there’s a distortion involved that doesn’t capture some of the meanings already there in Arabic and Greek.
So those are some of the things I’m uncovering that I’m very excited about. It means we’re going to have to look at some of our techniques differently. And it means that some of the ignorance about these issues was passed on to later Renaissance and early modern astrologers.
[Read Part 2 of the interview with Benjamin Dykes.]
Free Astrology Reading: Where Is My Daughter’s Necklace?
July 14, 2008 by Nina Gryphon
I gave my daughter a silver heart necklace with diamonds in it as a special present. In early March this year she moved overseas to begin a new life with her partner in London. A week after she arrived, she noticed that it was missing and although we have both looked, we cannot find it. It has special meaning to us both and we would like to know if it was taken (in either country) or if it has been left or put somewhere. She wore it the last two weeks before she left on her trip but presumed she had it with her when she packed.
—J.
Dear J.,
Horary is great at finding lost objects, and it tends to work best with the querent’s feedback. Although I like lost object charts, the blog is probably not the best medium to do them, as the communication is more one-directional than in a consultation. Despite that, I hope this reading gives you some ideas about where to look. The horary chart for your question is below:
First, let’s find the planetary significator of the lost necklace. It is your daughter’s, so we would look to the second and fourth houses from the fifth house of children. Jupiter, ruler of your daughter’s second house of possessions, describes the necklace: it is expensive, as are all Jupiter things.
Next, let’s see if the necklace will be found. There are no aspects between Mars (your daughter’s planetary significator) and Jupiter (the necklace), or between Mars and the Moon, which rules all lost objects. However, we do have the Moon applying to its dispositor, Venus, which is a testimony of recovery. We also see that Jupiter is angular, so it is more likely to be found.
I don’t think the necklace was stolen, partly because Jupiter is angular, and it doesn’t sound like you have specific suspicions of theft. Most things really do get lost or mislaid.
Here are some places where the necklace could be:
-
In your daughter’s office, hallway, corridor, or some other “communication” area. [Jupiter in your daughter's 3rd house.]
-
With your spouse, or in your spouse’s room. [Jupiter is in your 7th house of partners.]
-
With your daughter’s sibling, or in their room. [Jupiter is in your daughter's 3rd house of siblings.]
-
It may be near a door (the planet is near a cusp), and near, on, or under the floor, as Jupiter is in an earth sign. It may also be near where it should be, as Jupiter is near a house cusp. Ask your daughter to do a thorough search again among her jewelry.
-
Might be opposite a window, a light source, something bright or golden (Jupiter is opposite the Sun).
Good luck with your search, and let me know what happens!
[For private, in-depth astrology readings, visit the Gryphon Astrology readings page, or click the PayPal button at top left.]
Who Will Be the Next U.S. President? An Astrological Analysis
July 13, 2008 by Nina Gryphon
To finish our series on the next U.S. president, today’s post will comapre the astrological charts of Barack Obama and John McCain for presidential or “royal” qualities. We have looked at their horoscopes individually, but now we can compare the candidates’ horoscopes side by side for strengths and weaknesses. There has been a great deal of debate about the candidates’ real birthtimes; all our posts take the commonly accepted times for the candidates. If the birthtimes turn out different than those currently known, all bets are off.
Barack Obama’s Horoscope: Presidential Enough?
We have looked at the “royal” characteristics in Obama’s horoscope from two ancient astrologers’ perspectives – that of William Lilly and Guido Bonatti. Their rules are similar but not the same. The analyses below sum up the findings from the previous analyses.
Obama’s Strongest Card: The Sun in Leo in the 6th house. This is not a very strong card, as the Sun is under the horizon and in a malefic house with no major aspects. The next strongest card is in even worse shape, with Mars, ruler of the 10th house of honor, in the 8th house and trine Saturn in Capricorn in the malefic 12th house. Most importantly, Obama’s horoscope does not appear to have any prominent royal stars to help lift him to the presidency. Because of the relative weakness of Obama’s chart, McCain’s horoscope would have to be weaker still for McCain to lose the 2008 election.
Obama’s Horoscope for Autumn 2008: Obama’s Venus will be active by secondary progressions, aspecting his natal Part of Fortune and conjoining the North Node. This is beneficial in general, but Venus is not one of the significators in Obama’s chart promising fame or prominence. Interestingly, his solar return for 2008 shows Jupiter in the 7th house of opponents, an interesting parallel to McCain’s 2008 solar return (see below). Again, the relative strengths of the horoscopes matter: McCain’s horoscope would have to be weaker than this to lose to Obama.
John McCain’s Horoscope: By a Hair?
McCain’s Strongest Card: Two royal stars, Spica and Hercules, are near the Ascendant and Midheaven, but barely within the acceptable orbs. Still, this is better than Obama’s horoscope, which does not have royal stars. McCain also has a very favorable (though not strictly royal) star, Canopus, right on his Midheaven. This star is also conjunct George W. Bush’s natal Sun.
McCain’s natal Mars-Jupiter trine is quite lucky as well. Mars is in the fortunate 11th house trining Jupiter in Sagittarius in the 3rd house. This configuration was active by primary direction when McCain was shot down in Vietnam and nearly died. That itself was not very lucky, but his miraculous survival against the odds certainly was.
McCain’s Horoscope for Autumn 2008: His progressed Sun trines the Midheaven in January 2008, his progressed Midheaven trines the Moon (ruler of the natal Midheaven) in April 2008, and progressed Mars trines the Moon in October 2008. The luminaries are not especially strong in McCain’s chart, but the Midheaven itself is. When the Midheaven is “lit up” by the Sun and Moon, William Lilly says that these promise “great preferment…and shall govern the Common-wealth.” Mars, again, is a fortunate planet for McCain. McCain’s solar return has Saturn on the 7th house cusp of opponents, possibly indicating misfortune for his opponent.
John McCain’s horoscope appears to be slightly more presidential and luckier than Obama’s, so assuming the candidates’ birthtimes are correct, McCain has an ever-so-slight advantage over Obama for winning the 2008 election.
Astrology Book Review: The Strengths of the Planets (Astrologia Gallica 18)
July 12, 2008 by Nina Gryphon
Why Review Astrological Books?
There are innumerable astrology books out there; many are not very useful, but a few are worth their weight in gold. The problem is, how to find them. The astrological book market being what it is, many of the best books are not heavily marketed or advertised, and these gems often do not register in the public awareness. To address this, Gryphon Astrology will feature a weekly or biweekly book review column to help you find some of the best available astrological publications. The frequency of the column will depend on our book acquisition funds!
If you have written or published an astrology book you would like reviewed on Gryphon Astrology, please contact me at nina [at] gryphonastrology.com or write to me here (don’t forget to include your contact info).
Astrologia Gallica, Book 18: The Strengths of the Planets
Written by: Jean-Baptiste Morin
Translators: Pepita Sanchis Llacer and Anthony Louis LaBruzza
Recommended For: Intermediate or advanced astrologers comfortable (or who wish to get more comfortable) with concepts like planetary dignities, mutual reception, and qualities of the houses. Great for exploring the nuances of planetary rulerships and interrelationships at a theoretical level, supported by many real-life example horoscopes.
Jean-Baptiste Morin was a 17th century French physician and astrologer who wrote prolifically; his most famous and longest work being the huge Astrologia Gallica. This monumental work is being gradually translated, volume by volume, by dedicated astrologers who can read Morin’s Latin treatise.
Morin saw his work as an elucidation of much older astrological tradition from the medieval and Arabic times. In the process of cleaning up after the “confused and inadequate” ancient astrologers, as he calls them, he ends up making changes to the tradition. As a result, his works are commonly considered to comprise “the Morin system,” which is based on, but sometimes varies from earlier astrological tradition.
Many of the earlier volumes of Astrologia Gallica are astronomical/astrological and philosophical treatises, not of immediate interest to working astrologers or hobbyists. The present volume, Book 18, is extremely useful, however. Morin discusses in great detail the strengths and weaknesses of the seven visible planets, and the ways these qualities manifest in practice.
For example, Morin explains how a planet can rule two different signs, one of which may not be in apparent agreement with the planet’s elemental nature. His example is Jupiter, which rules Sagittarius and Pisces. Jupiter, in Morin’s view, has an outward fiery nature, which puts it in agreement with the fire sign Sagittarius; however, he also says that Jupiter has a watery hidden side, which is compatible with the water sign Pisces. As a result, whenever Jupiter resides in any fire sign, his fiery domicile, Sagittarius, is strengthened. The same is true for Pisces when Jupiter passes through a water sign.
While this is a logical approach to planetary rulership, it is rather different from the way ancient authorities may have approached the topic. Sign rulership theory is but one of the many examples of Morin’s subtly changing or re-emphasizing parts of the existing astrological tradition. In that sense, the Morin reader gets one view of the astrological tradition, but it is by no means the only view or even the prevailing practice.
Later in the book, Morin tackles the way planets are affected by reception. He makes the point that mutual reception between planets is only beneficial when either of the planets can offer something constructive to the other. Morin likes to use contemporary astrological charts, and he gives the example of a contemporary named de Hayes who had been decapitated by order of the King. The native’s mutual reception between Mercury in Pisces, ruler of the eighth house of death, and Jupiter in Gemini, situated in the eighth house, could not save him, as both planets were in signs of their detriment and so had nothing positive to offer the native.
The book is full of gems such as this, with many examples clearly illustrating Morin’s approach and conclusions. Morin goes on to discuss planetary strength based on planets positions relative to luminaries; planetary strength based on their motion (speed and direction); and planetary strength based on diurnal or nocturnal condition.
The second part of The Strengths of the Planets discusses planetary strength based on position in the chart; aspects and house positions. Here, Morin revamps the relative strengths of the houses, based on a simplified point system. The results are interesting and somewhat odd, whereby the malefic eighth house is given 3.5 points, but the ninth house is only given 2. While Morin gives his reasons for assigning the point values he does, his assignments do not always coincide with older authors’ use of the houses. For example, the ninth house, associated with religion, higher learning, and travel, is considered more benefic and “stronger” than the eighth house of death, even though the ninth is cadent and the eighth is succedent.
The Strengths of the Planets is slim, weighing in at 131 pages, but it bears slow, careful reading, to extract maximum value. The book was first translated from Latin into Spanish by Pepita Sanchis Llacer, and then translated into English by Anthony Louis LaBruzza. The translation is extremely readable and accessible by modern-day audiences, no doubt largely thanks to the skill of the translators. The book is heavily footnoted and annotated by both translators, as well as by the renowned astrological writer and translator of other Morin books, James Holden. Robert M. Corre, a disciple of Morin, also contributed many footnotes to the translation.
The Strengths of the Planets costs $17.95 at astroamerica.com.
Can John McCain Become President? Another Look at His Horoscope
July 11, 2008 by Nina Gryphon
John McCain may or may not have the horoscope of a potential president; the evidence is underwhelming thus far. We looked at McCain’s horoscope a few days ago, and while there were some redeeming features, it was not an outstanding presidential horoscope. Interestingly, this election year does not have a clear winner from an astrological perspective. Barack Obama’s horoscope is equally finely balanced. We long for the days of Bill Clinton, whose horoscope broadcast “royal” astrological characteristics far and wide.
Today, we will look at John McCain’s presidential qualities from Guido Bonatti’s perspective, as detailed in his treatise on nativities.
John McCain for President?
Bonatti’s Criterion 1: What is the condition of the Sun, the 10th house and its ruler, and the Part of the Kingdom (I used Asc + Moon – Mars for McCain’s day chart, as per Bonatti’s tract on Arabian Parts), and the ruler of the Part?
McCain’s Horoscope: The Part of the Kingdom in McCain’s chart falls at 2 Aries, where it is opposed by Mercury in Libra in the 12th house, and ruled by Mars in Leo in the 11th house. Mercury is not very strong in McCain’s horoscope, but Mars is well-placed in the fortunate 11th house, trine Jupiter in Sagittarius in the 3rd house.
The planets should be strong by sign and/or aspect from benefics. None of the planets are strong by sign, but Mars is trine a powerful benefic, Jupiter in its own domicile, Sagittarius.
Bonatti’s Criterion 2: For the planets listed above, the oriental planets should aspect the Sun and the occidental ones should aspect the Moon and Saturn.
McCain’s Horoscope: Only one of these conditions is true for McCain, and it probably isn’t worth much for king-making purposes: Venus in Virgo (the sign of its fall) is occidental and opposes Saturn in Pisces, retrograde in the 6th house.
Bonatti’s Criterion 3: The condition of the almutens of the 10th and 1st houses should be strong. In McCain’s chart, those are the Moon and Saturn, respectively.
McCain’s Horoscope: Neither planet is very strong in McCain’s horoscope; the Moon is in the sign of its fall, in the lowest part of the horoscope, while Saturn is weakly placed in Pisces in the 6th house.
Bonatti’s Criterion 4: Angular benefics above the horizon should aspect the Sun and Moon, or a planet in the midheaven, preferably with reception. The luminaries should be in masculine signs, with the planets named in Criteria 1 and 3 in good condition.
McCain’s Horoscope: The Sun and Moon are not aspected by benefics above the horizon, and the luminaries are feminine. The only truly “royal” complex is Mars in Leo trine Jupiter in Sagittarius, which has likely saved McCain time and again.
John McCain does not have an overwhelmingly Presidential horoscope, a similarity he shares with Barack Obama. However, as we saw in the previous post about his horoscope, John McCain does potentially have two royal stars, Spica and Hercules, near his Ascendant and Midheaven, which would be enough to give him the election.
In addition, McCain has a very powerful (though not strictly royal) fixed star right on his Midheaven; Canopus. Vivian Robson writes that Canopus on the Midheaven gives “great glory, fame and wealth, dignity and authority by the help of an old clergyman or influential person.” Perhaps this would be enough to get him to the White House!
Later: The Grand Finale. A post comparing our findings on Barack Obama and John McCain’s horoscopes, and which candidate, in our humble opinion, is better positioned to win the 2008 elections.
Interview with Astrologer Deborah Houlding (Part 3 of 3)
July 10, 2008 by Nina Gryphon
This is the third and last part of Gryphon Astrology’s Interview with astrologer Deborah Houlding. If you have missed them, read Part 1 and Part 2 of this interview first.
Deb will be lecturing on forensic astrology this September in San Francisco.
Can we expect a forthcoming book on horary astrology or on another astrological topic from you? What books do you have out already?
Yes, there will be a forthcoming book, and I hope to have several forthcoming books on horary before too long, but I have a few large projects currently nearing completion and these are my priority for the moment. I came close to publishing a book on horary astrology a few years ago, but then all of these new translations started becoming available, and I decided to research and re-evaluate my understanding of some of the traditional writings on horary technique before committing myself to print.
I am pleased now, that I have not rushed to publish a horary book so far, because I feel that my theoretical knowledge has become far more robust over the last few years, and I want the book that I write to be a sum of my astrological knowledge, and not a summation of a stage where I was still exploring some of the theoretical principles.
One of the long term projects I have been doing involves going through Christian Astrology again, annotating it with more explanations and cross-references to other texts. I published an annotated version of Christian Astrology before, but that is out of print, and it was getting ready for an update anyway. Unfortunately the electronic files were lost, so it has been the case of starting again from scratch.
Although it has been more time-consuming, in a way it’s a good thing that I’ve started again from the beginning, because now I don’t have any restrictions in being tied to an old format. I do enjoy this sort of work, but it’s a monster of a project. Sometimes I wonder if I am seriously preparing something for publication, or using it as a place to park my own endless notes and annotations! Of course, I also wrote Houses: Temples of the Sky a few years ago, and that is still available.
You have a well-established astrological presence on the web with your website. I discovered it a few years ago, but it took me some time to realize that it belonged to a Deb Houlding. The site really is not about you, but about astrology, which is rare and refreshing.
I did not want the site to be just about me, as part of me does not like too much attention (I have the Moon in Virgo in the 4th house), but because of that, I think, people have been extraordinarily generous in letting me use their content on the site. One person could never have done it all, and I think because the site was always about the astrology first and foremost, other people have contributed much more than if I had made it all about myself and my own views. I found that I would just start something, try out an idea on the site, and someone else would volunteer to make it happen and take it further; so if someone else was involved, I was now more invested in it myself.
I am finally now thinking of putting up a small personal site, separate from the Skyscript website, that will talk about upcoming events and such. But at the moment having time for students and my own research is my main priority, and in that respect I know that self-promotion is a double-edged sword, so I’m approaching it with caution.
Thank you for taking the time to talk, Deb, and I look forward to seeing you in California in September!
Deb Houlding kindly provided her birth data, and agreed to share her horoscope with us. The horoscope is below. I didn’t publish the birth data, as I’m old-fashioned and don’t believe in revealing ladies’ years of birth 
John McCain: Biography of a Future President in the Stars?
July 9, 2008 by Nina Gryphon
John McCain may have the biography of a future president, if past events in his life are any indication. From an astrological perspective, whether McCain’s biography and past accomplishments will be sufficient to propel him to the presidency is a different matter altogether. To become president, one has to have a Royal chart, or more accurately, one’s horoscope has to be more royal than those of one’s opponents.
A few days ago, we have examined Barack Obama’s horoscope for potential indicators of royalty. Today, we will look at McCain’s presidential potential according to the rules of the English astrologer, William Lilly, and later, we will post a comparison of the royal potential of each candidate’s horoscope.
John McCain: The Biography of a King?
Royal Criterion 1: The Sun and Moon, their aspecting planets, the ruler of the midheaven (the house of honor and glory), and any planets in the midheaven should be in their own signs or exaltations.
McCain’s Horoscope: Neither the Sun nor the Moon are in their own signs, and neither aspects other planets. The ruler of the midheaven is the Moon, which is in the sign of its detriment, Capricorn, and it is in the fourth house, the lowest point of the chart. There are no planets in the midheaven. The best and most favorable piece of evidence in this criterion is that the Sun is in the benefic 11th house, where it is elevated above the earth. However, the Sun is in Virgo, where it has dignity by face, which is only a minor strength.
Royal Criterion 2: The above planets should be angular (in the 1st, 7th, 10th, or 4th houses).
McCain’s Horoscope: the planets we are considering are the Sun, the Moon, and Mars. Of these, only the Moon is angular, and it is in the lowest angle (the fourth house), the one least associated with worldly success and renown. However, Mars and the Sun are in the 11th house, which is very benefic and lucky, but it is not strictly in keeping with this criterion.
Royal Criterion 3: Any of the above planets, including the angles, should be conjunct one of the Royal stars (Aldebaran, Hercules, Regulus, Spica, Lucida Lancis, and Cor Scorpionis).
McCain’s Horoscope: McCain has the Royal star Spica within about 5° of the Ascendant. The Midheaven is within about 6° of the Royal star Pollux. It is said that Spica brings “unexpected honor beyond the native’s hopes and capacity,” which could certainly bring the presidency.
Judgment: By William Lilly’s standards, John McCain does not have an overwhelmingly royal chart, but a royal star on the Ascendant and Midheaven may well be all that’s needed to win the presidency.
The challenge of John McCain’s horoscope is that his birth time is given as exactly 9 a.m.; if he was born just a few minutes before 9 a.m., the Ascendant and Midheaven would move, and it may be that the royal stars would no longer be within range. Alternatively, if he was born a few minutes after 9 a.m., the royal stars could be sitting directly on his Ascendant and Midheaven, and he would be a shoo-in for the presidency. Therefore, there is some uncertainty regarding the quality of McCain’s horoscope.
In the next few days, we will look at the royal potential of John McCain’s horoscope from the perspective of the medieval astrologer Guido Bonatti, and then we will post an astrological comparison of the presidential potential of Barack Obama and John McCain.
Interview with Astrologer Deborah Houlding (Part 1 of 3)
July 7, 2008 by Nina Gryphon
English astrologer Deborah Houlding will be presenting astrology classes in San Francisco this September. Deb is a well-known traditional astrologer (though she may eschew that label, as she explains in the interview), and her San Francisco classes teach astrology with hair on it. She calls it “forensic astrology,” as the methods reveal specific details about past events or specific persons. Deb is also the founder of the astrology website, Skyscript.
I talked to Deb last week about her upcoming workshop and her thoughts on astrology.
Nina Gryphon: You will be doing a workshop in the San Francisco Bay area in September 2008, focusing on ‘forensic horary’. What do you mean by ‘forensic horary’?
Deb Houlding: The workshop called ‘forensic horary’ concentrates on how we deal with what I call ‘the mystery charts’ – lost items, missing pets, thefts, abductions, and those situations where we have no idea what happened or who might have been involved. A lot of the emphasis is on how to discover the identity or appearance of someone essential to the question. My goal for the workshop is to help astrologers feel more confident about their approach to these charts, and to show them how to get a very good description about something or someone that is known, and then to successfully project that technique onto the unknown. The goal is to get astrologers looking forward to those charts instead of dreading them! It is a workshop with broad appeal because it is about clarifying some of the basics of horary astrology, whilst discussing methods that are de-emphasized in modern discussions of traditional techniques.
NG: Why did you decide to teach a workshop specifically about this aspect of horary astrology?
DH: On the surface, the notion of “forensic” horary is partly about having a dramatic, and intriguing title to the workshop, but ultimately, it conveys the principle of needing to break down, analyse and fully investigate the depth of meaning that is built into the planetary significators. Mostly, horary astrologers barely scratch the surface of the information they could get from the planetary significators, and this workshop shows that the key to discovering the meaning of these charts lies in understanding the symbolism as it relates to something that has already happened. I am always keen to stress that planetary signification is meaningful, that the selection of the planets used is never random, so getting every drop of reliable descriptive information that we can get from the main significators is essential. We see Lilly doing this in so many of his judgments; even though it was not necessary to the querent’s question. He will often tag a few comments about physical descriptions to the end of his judgements, as if he was constantly monitoring his notes and updating his knowledge. He sometimes goes into great detail, describing the persons involved, even though the physical description might not seem relevant to the querent’s concern.
Even though the physical or psychological description is not what the querent specifically asked about, it is still part of the question. The premise behind this is that everything in a horoscope is significant. So if Mars symbolizes the querent in a horary question, the person will be Martial in some way, in their psychological involvement, or in their appearance somehow.
NG: Can you talk about your approach to astrology? Whose methods do you use? William Lilly’s or someone else’s?
DH: William Lilly is the greatest influence on my astrology. I am constantly going through his books, and I am still finding things that I thought I understood, realizing that what I once thought is not what he had meant at all! Now, with Ben Dykes’s Bonatti translation in English, I’ve found it especially valuable to go through Bonatti and find passages that Lilly translated; and of course Bonatti himself was translating the passages out of yet older authors, such as Masha’allah, Haly or Sahl, even back to Dorotheus. So there is a long line of tradition behind many of the passages published in Lilly’s Christian Astrology, and scrutinizing this tradition is – I think – very helpful in terms of constantly re-evaluating my own understanding of traditional astrology and the symbolism of horary. But I do not exactly think of myself as a traditional astrologer, because all of us living here today are essentially modern people. I see myself as someone in the continuing tradition of astrology, but ultimately, none of us can get away from being a product of our times.
[Continue to Part 2 of the interview with Deborah Houlding.]
Where Was Barack Obama Born? Under a Presidential Star?
July 6, 2008 by Nina Gryphon
Barack Obama may have been born in Honolulu, but the question astrologers everywhere are asking is whether he was born under a “royal” star, that is, whether his horoscope is sufficiently “royal” (or presidential, here in the U.S.) for Obama to win the 2008 election.
Two days ago, we examined Obama’s horoscope by the criteria of the astrologer William Lilly. Today, we will look at Obama’s horoscope using the criteria of medieval astrologer Guido Bonatti, who knew a thing or two about the horoscopes of kings and warlords.
Was Barack Obama Born Under a Royal Horoscope?
Bonatti’s Criterion 1: What is the condition of the Sun, the 10th house and its ruler, and the Part of the Kingdom (I used Asc + Moon – Mars, as per Bonatti’s tract on Arabian Parts), and the ruler of the Part?
Obama’s Horoscope: The Part of the Kingdom in Obama’s chart falls at 28.50 Libra, so it is square Saturn in the 12th house, and ruled by Venus in the 5th house. None of the planets named are angular, which is an important condition for kingship. The planets should also be strong by sign and/or aspect from benefics. Only the Sun qualifies, as it is in Leo, but it is in the malefic 6th house and therefore underground. We do have Mars, ruler of the 10th house of honor and dignity, in the 8th house. Mars trines Saturn in Capricorn; but Saturn is retrograde and in the 12th house, so it is not going to be able to contribute much to Mars.
Bonatti’s Criterion 2: For the above planets, the oriental ones should aspect the Sun and the occidental ones should aspect the Moon and Saturn.
Obama’s Horoscope: None of these conditions are true for Obama, but one: Mars, which is occidental in the chart, does aspect Saturn.
Bonatti’s Criterion 3: In addition to the above planets, we must examine the almutens of the 10th and 1st houses (in Obama’s chart, those would be Mars and Saturn, respectively).
Obama’s Horoscope: Both Mars and Saturn are in malefic houses, the 8th and 12th. They aspect each other by trine, which is somewhat helpful. Saturn is in its own sign, which makes it more benefic, but it is retrograde, indicating some kind of flaw in Obama’s attempt to seek the presidency. Retrograde planets “shoot in the wrong direction,” as it were; the native has the right idea, but there is a fundamental problem in acting on it.
Bonatti’s Criterion 4: Angular benefics above the horizon should aspect the Sun and Moon, or a planet in the 10th, preferably with reception. The luminaries should be in masculine signs, with the planets named in Criteria 1 and 3 in good condition.
Obama’s Horoscope: Obama does have benefic Jupiter above the horizon trine his Moon (the same Moon that is in the general vicinity of the royal star Aldebaran), though there is no reception between them. There are problems, though; Jupiter is in the malefic 12th house, and it is retrograde, so it is unclear how much benefit it can bestow on the Moon. Moreover, in Obama’s chart, Jupiter has greater signification regarding Obama’s wealth than his career.
As with Lilly’s methods, Bonatti’s criteria show that Obama’s horoscope does not really scream “President”, but as mentioned before, his chart must be compared to McCain’s in order to see who holds the best cards for this year’s Presidential election.
Stay tuned: We will subject McCain’s horoscope to the same dissection as Obama’s this coming week, with a final comparison of the two charts for presidential potential.
Badges
