I’m reading an interesting book by Petros Eleftheriadis HORARY ASTROLOGY: Step by Step. I will review it at a later date (when I have finished reading it and digesting it). But the reading sparked some thoughts about this.

Horary astrology is defined as the “astrology of the hour” or a “look at the hour”. It is designed to answer specific questions in a “yes or no” way. Will I get that job? Will I marry so and so? Will I get that raise or promotion? Is such and such an investment profitable?

For those of us who use the pendulum it seems a big waste of time to go through such a laborious process – erecting a chart, analyzing it, sorting through all the complexities – just to answer this kind of question. The pendulum, in the hands of an experienced practitioner, will answer these questions in seconds.

Yet, in spite of this, Horary Astrology is worth studying. If we understand that the horary chart – cast for the moment that the astrologer receives the question – is really a natal chart and should be approached this way – its uses become apparent to the student.. The insights that horary brings can be applies to Natal readings and vice versa.

In Horary one has to identify the significators of the issue involved. Then one must determine the strength or weaknesses of these significators. Are they dignified by sign, by house, by triplicity, term or face? What kinds of aspects do they receive? What planets are applying to a stressful or happy aspect to them? Based on this the Astrologer can answer the question.

These practices – this kind of analysis – is very useful in a Natal chart too. Studying horary will improve one’s skills in reading Natal charts.

There are problems with Horary Astrology. Most of the literature on it is from medieval times. These are the sources. So the modern planets, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto are not used – even though they are very effective in understanding the Horoscope. (This is one of the main problems in classical astrology as well.)

The logic behind the use of triplicities, terms and faces, escapes me. I’m sure there is a logic to these things, but I haven’t yet understood it. Further, different authorities give different versions of these things. There doesn’t seem to be a consensus.

I’m of the opinion that Horary Astrology needs to be updated and modernized. We should keep its many strong virtues – assessing the strength and weakness of planets, looking at upcoming applying aspects, identifying the significators and their strengths and weaknesses – but using Uranus, Neptune and Pluto in the analysis and using them as house and sign rulers.

I think I would scrap the ancient view of triplicities, terms and faces and replace them with decanates – a far more logical approach.

Read the Horary Horoscope the way you would read a Natal chart.