Chart in CA

1
Does anyone have a copy of CA that isn't the Ascella version? I am interested in the event chart on page 473. The date and time given for this chart are Monday, 13th May, 1664 at 12.29pm. However, the chart itself appears to be one for Tuesday, 14th May at 12.29 AM. I checked with the original copy and it definitely says 12.29pm. The delineation is for the am chart with an Aquarian ascendant. There is a misprint in the details of the modern chart of the Ascella version which shows the am chart. I am wondering whether the Earl did leave at 12.29am on the Tuesday or whether Lilly made a mistake in the drawing up of the chart and he left at 12.29pm. Or is the mistake mine? Does anyone have a copy of CA that shows the modern chart as well and what does it say?

2
Hi Sue,

I obviously have the Ascella version and the original :) I can?t see any misprint, so if this doesn?t clear the matter up let me know the details of what it is so that I can check this further.

The Ascella version includes a reproduction of the original chart and a modern computerised equivalent. The original chart includes all the data available for the chart ? given as 12:29 PM Monday 13th May 1644. But it?s clear that the chart was cast for 12:29 am on Tuesday 14th May using the civil calendar. Monday was still the ?planetary day? which shifts to Tuesday at sunrise, and it?s probably a common error to think of half past midnight as 12:29 pm ? I know I?ve made that mistake before.

The modern chart shows the closest computerised match. The data given is 0:37 am LMT 24 May 1644. The ten days difference in date is because of the conversion from the Old Style to the New Style calendar.

I can believe Lilly would make the mistake of calling half past midnight 12:29 pm instead of 12:29 am; in fact I?m not even sure that would be such a mistake in Lilly?s times; but I can?t imagine that an astrologer?s of Lilly?s experience would fail to spot that a chart intended for noon was cast at midnight, so I?d say we can trust the chart details to be correct.

Hope this helps
Deb

3
Well, that's interesting. Your explanation does clarify things. Thanks. However, in the Ascella reprint I have, (I assume it's one of the earlier ones because it has a laminated cover) the 'closest computer match' chart has the details for the previous chart, i.e. 29 Oct, 1645. It is obviously just a misprint. The actual chart is the right chart but I didn't have the details that you just provided of 0:37 am LMT 24 May 1644. I wouldn't have been confused then. Well, maybe not as confused. :)

4
Hi Deb and Sue,

I have a recently published retyped copy of CA, from Astrology Classics (www.astroamerica.com) 2004. It, too contains both the original chart, and in an appendix, a modern chart. I looked at the original chart. What I noticed is that all the other origianal charts have a large block style letter "P", but in this chart, the letter "P" is is written in something of a fancy cursive script.

Also this chart has the day of the week "munday." None of the other charts I looked at mentioned the day of the week. However the Sun is clearly at the bottom of the chart as it should be shortly after midnight. Perhaps, Lilly didn't draw this chart, and no one caught the error.

Tom

5
I don't have a printed copy of CA. I have the version that I downloaded for free. This version doesn't seem to have any text about this chart. All it has it a facsimile version, that is very hard to read. From what I can make it, this is another chart dealing with the English Civil War but how does it relate to the section dealing with 12th house matters? Does anyone know why this one page was not retyped and why it was only given as a facsimile?
Mark F

6
Tom wrote:

What I noticed is that all the other origianal charts have a large block style letter "P", but in this chart, the letter "P" is is written in something of a fancy cursive script.

Also this chart has the day of the week "munday." None of the other charts I looked at mentioned the day of the week. However the Sun is clearly at the bottom of the chart as it should be shortly after midnight. Perhaps, Lilly didn't draw this chart, and no one caught the error.

Tom
I noticed this too, Tom. My theory is that there was never an astrologer called Lilly and it was just a group of people who compiled a whole lot of stuff under the name of William Lilly, surely an anagram for some deep, hidden meaning. This would account for the discrepencies in the way the charts were delineated and why we have new rules for the first time - such as the one for combustion. :lol: