Astrology Quarterly Articles

Writers' Guidelines | Archives | Articles | Book Reviews

Counting on Tradition, Part 1 - Sue Ward

Excerpt from Astrology Quarterly, Volume 70, No. 4, Autumn 2000

One of the most frequently quoted reasons for the use of traditional methods is that they form a secure base from which to work. As far as I am concerned, this is true. Whether this crops up in conversation or in reading, it is not long before the exceptions are trotted out. A few of these exceptions are that some of the essential dignities do not 'work', the new planets must 'obviously' supplant the traditional seven in some respects; Chiron has to figure somewhere; the planetary orbs are too wide, not wide enough or too imprecise. Eventually, you will realise that what they are in fact saying is that they are not traditional astrologers at all, but are simply using some of its principles.

Most of the arguments centre around horary astrology because that is the most common use for traditional methods. What is often forgotten, if understood in the first place, is that there was only one astrology. In our modern era, specialisation has become almost self-defeating, in that research can become too narrow to be of practical use. As a result, we have a wide variety of astrological applications all apparently requiring their own sets of techniques and methods. Traditional methods, on the other hand, apply universally.

My reason for this preamble is that I will be demonstrating some traditional techniques and applying them to the nativity. It is only in very recent years that astrologers, in any number, have worked with these techniques and there are still many who use the traditional for horary and modern for nativities.

A technique which is often used in horary, but which has even greater value in natal work is that of scoring the planets. There are a variety of systems of scoring among the many different modern schemes, but this one has a long history of development and accounts for most of the more important facets of the traditional way. The result is a comparative list of strengths and weaknesses with, usually, one planet having the greatest strength. This planet becomes the Lord (or Lady) of the Geniture (LOG) and is the chart ruler in most respects.

The second major scoring system is that of ascertaining the temperament by evaluating the balance of the bodily humours. These correlate with the triplicities of fire, earth, air and water, but rather than simply counting how many planets are in each, we need to look at the planets and the natures of the signs in which they are located.

What I hope to show is how very helpful these two pieces of information are before any attempt is made to analyse the detail of the chart. In fact, I have found them to be essential to chart analysis.

Pros and Cons

With a planetary scoring system, we are given the means with which to assess each heavenly body. Just because a planet is in its own sign does not necessarily make it strong overall. Conversely, a planet out of its own sign does not necessarily mean that it is very weak.

Once we know whether a planet will act in its best or worst form (or somewhere in between), we not only have the measure of the person, but also of the events we might predict from whichever method of directing we use. There are many instances of astrologers predicting, say, great wealth or good fortune from a direction of Jupiter, when the natal condition of that planet is less than good.

Where the temperament is concerned, we need to know how the native operates, how they act and react in general terms. There is little point in telling a choleric (fire) person that they will achieve in a slow and steady way. There is nothing slow or steady about the truly choleric individual. So, we can make a judgement about how the native will approach life and thus how we can temper and adjust our analysis, and how best to advise our client.

Writers' Guidelines | Archives | Articles | Book Reviews