13
Tzadde wrote:11th is the joy of Jupiter, the general significator of children, so there is a connection. Also, in nativities children can be signified by both 5th and 11th.

And no, really doesn't matter what are the words of the question, what matters is the intention, the search for an answer. It is the child that you are interested in, not his name or his origin.
Do you want houses 5 AND 11 eleven to be signifcators of children in horaries too?
And can you quote please an authority (or more) for your opinion in in the last sentence of passage one, Tzadde?

Johannes

14
johannes susato wrote:
Tzadde wrote:11th is the joy of Jupiter, the general significator of children, so there is a connection. Also, in nativities children can be signified by both 5th and 11th.

And no, really doesn't matter what are the words of the question, what matters is the intention, the search for an answer. It is the child that you are interested in, not his name or his origin.
Do you want houses 5 AND 11 eleven to be signifcators of children in horaries too?
And can you quote please an authority (or more) for your opinion in in the last sentence of passage one, Tzadde?

Johannes
I tend to agree with Tzadde, fully. House 11th is a house for children just as 5th is, and it can and should be used in horary just as any other level of astrology (mundane, natal, electional). If for nothing else, just because it is 5th from 7th, and a child have always two biological parents.

Some quotations: in "The Houses, Temples of the Sky", by Deb Houlding, The Wessex Astrologer, pg. 41, section "11th Houses associations through history.... others (classical): good luck, hope, attainement of desires, freed persons, friends, gifts, children."

In Al Biruni's "The Book of Instruction in the Elements of the Art of Astrology", translation by R. Ramsay Wright, pg. 61, section "462. Indications relating to horary questions... XI: The treasury of the Sultan, its officials, trouble in the office, foreigner's child, servants child, things which are unsound, beautiful, advantageous, the begginings of affairs, friendship of the great, bribery, food."

In Valen's Anthology, Book I, digital edition, translation by M. Riley, we see:

pg. 39:

"6. The <XI> Place of the Good Daimon. Many Configurations. The Hearing and the Beholding Signs Must Also Be Investigated.

If Jupiter is in the Place of the Good Daimon, the native will be fortunate, possess a good income, and have many children. If it is also the ruler of the Lot of Fortune, the native will be rich and blessed. If Mercury is in conjunction with it, the native will be and imperial steward and will be happy in his children."

pg. 41:

"15K;16P. Nine Names of the Places.
<Name>
The God <IX> the father
The Goddess <III> the mother
The Good Daimon <XI> children
The Good Fortune<V> marriage
The Bad Daimon <XII> diseases
The Bad Fortune <VI> injuries
The Lot of Fortune and
The Ascendant - I - life and livelihood
Daimon mental activity
Midheaven <X>=MC action/occupation
Love desire
Necessity enemies"

I'm pretty sure there are other quotes and better than these I've put, but right now I can not remember where or into which works.

About the second part expressed in Tzaddes post:
And no, really doesn't matter what are the words of the question, what matters is the intention, the search for an answer. It is the child that you are interested in, not his name or his origin.
I wholeheartedly agree with him on this point, although it's not a rule exactly, defended by this or that author, but a philosophical standpoint: the wording of a question is never all that important, although a precise wording can indeed help the astrologer to understand what is really the problem of the querent. Even so, the chart will point you in the direction of the querent's true meaning, but even before that, you should be able to interpret the querent's desire all the same, and not always will it be clear cut in the wording iself. Still, we should always keep in mind that the querent may be deliberately dishonest or manipulative, in which case we can be mislead, not to our fault. If that is the case, there is little we can do to help those who do not want real help, but are trying to take some kind of advantage or come out on top. Either way, it would be a witless thing to do, because fate will not bend itself on a whim, but people will insist on being delusional sometimes. Anyways, in the field of linguistics there is a discipline called pragmatics that can help make my point clearer:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatics

Finally, about having two houses signifying the same thing at the same time, that is helpful, actually, and happens throughout astrology all the time. Both Lot of Fortune and the Ascendants are related to life, and the Sun and the Moon. We just establish priorities accordingly, using criterias. The 5th is the most traditional place for children we have, the radical one, and so, it is, chiefly, the one we look at, still, testimonies to the 11th add up to that, and can help to make a better judgment when there is a clear stalemate between testimonies (which happens quite often). Finally, the use of the 11th for adopted children is sound, as it is a child from "another", a theme belonging to the 7th house.

All in all I defend that it is the sum of testimonies that points to a more correct answer, meaning, a answer closer to reality, and not a single one, no matter how heavy it is. So, conflicting testimonies points to a mediocre state of affairs, generally, where a lot of good ones points to fortune and the contrary, to unfortunate developments.
Last edited by PFN on Mon Jul 16, 2012 9:14 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Paulo Felipe Noronha

15
Hi all

thanks PFN.
There are a quite few books one comes to mind that said if 5th makes no sense *in native's chart* in another words if 5th does not gift the person with a child, then look at 11th.

Thanks everyone

CD

16
R.J. Smith wrote:
A child can never be assigned to the 7th house, UNLESS lol you buy into the late Joan McEver's foolish theory that the child is somehow "equal" to the parent(s).
Or, unless your client name is Woody Allen