The Tradition LIBRARY

The editorial team and I knew that a central resource for astrologers was not a new idea, but to dedicate it to Traditional astrological texts might be a little more novel. We had intended to bring this project to your attention in the New Year, but the extensive research done by Peter Stockinger and I revealed such a wealth of practical instruction that we couldn't let the moment pass.

The initial impetus for our taking on yet more work was that there is, as we are all aware, some very poor quality and poorly researched material out there upon which many have relied. As an example, the rather jaded opinions about William Lilly have persisted simply because no-one has published properly researched biographies. So many of those available rely on Derek Parker's William Lilly: Familiar to All published in 1975, even though it is clear that this is not and was not intended to be a definitive or in-depth biography. This is not to say that biographers aren't entitled to their opinions, but in order that those might be taken seriously, the reader needs to know the sources on which they are based. In the case of Parker's biography, sources are not provided, therefore those who rely upon this biography for their own derivatives perpetuate the errors and misapprehensions.

For me it was shocking to find that the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography – that singular source of biographical histories – has followed this same pattern with its biography of William Lilly. Furthermore, its biography of John Gadbury continues these very same failings and indeed is in contradiction to another of its biographies, that of Dr. Nicholas Fiske. Peter Stockinger and I didn't expect to find so much evidence of slanted views and inadequate research. It might be said that, as students of William Lilly, Peter and I are not the best people to be doing this work and that we would impose our own "slanted views". That is certainly a possiblilty and we did approach it from a far more sympathetic point of view than have other authors and commentators. However, we have produced *all* of our sources for the interested to investigate, so any suspected partisanship is easily checked and, if necessary, corrected by others.

It was for these reasons that we accelerated the Library project – we were fed up with the situation and thought that others might be, too, thus we have presented for you (and for animal welfare) source material which will assist your studies and understanding. I can say that without fear of contradiction because I have studied and transcribed so many of the documents. In my opinion, the various lists of aphorisms are essential reading for all astrologers. Written towards the end of Lilly's life – and he was very aware that it was the end of his life – they demonstrate an astrological and magical maturity to which we can only aspire. These abstracts are intended to enhance our understanding of astrology and its practise; we, the editors, gain very little from this, if anything at all. So, we need encouragement through your support to continue with this project.

Let's take the opportunity to look at the facts.

The Tradition Journal

The third edition of the Tradition journal is now available by following the link to the right. It's packed with first class articles, and new to our contributors is Jerome Libon from Belgium who has submitted a thesis on Francis Bacon. As previously mentioned here is my collaboration with Peter Stockinger, Monster of Ingratitude; a detailed investigation into the notorious relationship of William Lilly and John Gadbury. It was a fascinating and revealing study. There are lots of other goodies including the results of the Animodar statistical study whose results might raise a few eyebrows.

Remember that all proceeds go to animal welfare and rescue.

The Tradition Library

This brand new project can be found at http://thetraditionjournal.com/library , pop over there and take a look at what's on offer. While you're doing that please give a thought to the animals and their welfare.

Lilly and Gadbury

Peter Stockinger and I have just completed a paper entitled "Monster of Ingratitude" and which will be published in the forthcoming edition of The Tradition journal (due to be released in September).

Scholarship into the history of astrology has improved over the last ten or fifteen years and has brought us a huge amount of information regarding astrology's development from many perspectives. However, biographical information about those who practiced astrology in centuries past is not of such a high standard. There are several reasons for this, not least a lack of autobiographical material. It was from this point of view that Peter and I examined the relationship between William Lilly and John Gadbury.

This rather large piece of research has taken several months to complete, but still leaves many questions unanswered. However, what we did discover was that those few biographies of William Lilly are markedly flawed. Most researchers rely upon Derek Parker's "Familiar to All" which, whilst it presents one of the earliest biographical texts about Lilly and which hasn't been bettered, presents very few sources as grounds for the author's opinions. Nonetheless, it is those opinions that we find most frequently in subsequent biographies of the astrologers of 17th century England, particularly those of Lilly and Gadbury. Indeed, much of the personal detail regarding Lilly's life found in Parker, can be found nowhere else. It may be that Parker had access to material unknown to us, but there are no references with which to follow this up. (It may be that a full and detailed review of "Familiar to All" is required in order to test the assertions made there against known sources.)

We have attempted to address these, largely unsubstantiated, opinions and present source material which leads to alternative, and often very different, conclusions. As an example, the main theme of our paper is the infamous contention between Lilly and Gadbury and our research shows that it has been misconstrued by historians throughout. This study has brought to light a number of other doubtful areas relating to Lilly's contemporaries, too, but our remit precluded going very far with that; we had already far exceeded our original intentions.

The paper contains:

• brief biographies of the two men;
• the beginning of their acqaintance and how it came about;
• how the enmity began, developed and ended;
• the rather one-sided pamphlet war;
• others involved in the contention;
• a study of the published material;
• all sources of information;
• alternative conclusions based on the above.

We hope to draw the attention of astrologers to an area which requires far closer attention than it has attracted hitherto, and perhaps encourage others to proceed in this research. Furthermore, we hope to demonstrate that Gadbury's work is far from reliable and could easily be replaced by that of a better qualified author of the period, such as John Partridge. That is, if astrologers want to investigate the art as it stood post-Lilly and as it collided with the new science.

Presentation Links

The link to my presentation God, the Universe and Everything, has been corrected. You should be able to download the video without problem now.

You can find it by going to my web site (link right), and clicking on "Articles" at the top of the home page.

An Explanation of Horary

I've uploaded to my web site another video presentation entitled An Explanation of Horary: How it Works. It is a brief, introductory view of the subject, but I hope that you'll find it helpful.

The Primary Problem with Venus

I want to present a few thoughts on the nature of Venus, but I don't pretend that they are definitive. These ideas are supplemental to my lecture, God, the Universe and Everything which can be found at my web site as a video presentation.

The problem is that the nature of Venus is variously described as cold and moist, and/or hot and moist; Lilly states in Christian Astrology that Venus is both of Air and Water, both phlegmatic and sanguine (p73). (For a discussion of the humours, please refer to the Traditional Horary Course materials and Luis Ribeiro's article in The Tradition journal, both of which also refer to the application of the humours.) However, taking Lilly's statement that Venus has two pairs of primary qualities, and because this is difficult to apply in practice, I'll address the question of why or how this situation arises. I will not go into great detail here, and so interested readers are referred to my other articles and lectures for more information, but perhaps most appropriately the presentation mentioned above.

I have been lecturing on the philosophy and basis of astrology for some years now, and it is to those ideas that I now refer. Genesis I says, "In the beginning, God created the Heaven and the Earth.", this describes a primary division and can be interpreted in a number of ways. However, the next lines state, "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep [water], and [then] the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." The imagery produced here is one of gender and generation, thus the masculine (active) Heaven and the feminine (receptive) Earth. So, for our purposes, the first or primary division of Creation was one of gender. When we talk about the primary qualities or natures of the planets, it is to this that we refer, otherwise it isn't primary. Thus, Venus is primarily feminine.

The next division, after the creation of Light, is of day and night, representative of time, and these are connected with the previous division of space, above and below. In my interpretation of Genesis I, these two divisions overlap and lead to the creation of the four elements by secondary division. The whole story is one of fertility through division, and through that we can deduce the source of the creation of benefics and malefics. The former corresponds to fertility and productivity, the latter to barrenness and destruction. Jupiter and Venus are designated as benefics because of their power of moderation, or fertility. The two qualities required for fertility are heat and moisture, thus Venus, as a benefic, can correspond to these qualities. However, primarily it is feminine and thus corresponds to coldness and moisture, and the qualities of the night, thus phlegmatic.

This is one way of explaining how it might be that Venus can be both Airy and Watery. In application, the context will be important, thus if you are searching for beneficence, the hot and moist natures are important; if you are looking for a primary quality, then coldness and moisture have priority. For example, when we are examining the planetary hour, we should look at Venus in its primary mode as cold and moist; its secondary nature as a benefic might be used in other applications, such as in the calculation of temperament. In the latter, because it provides a guide to balance or imbalance, productivity or non-productivity, we need to look at the planets and their positions as significant of one or the other. Thus, Venus would be dealt with as the lesser benefic, productive, fertile, and progressive and thus, sanguine.

God, the Universe and Everything

I have now added a transcript of the presentation to the "Articles" page on my web site.