skyscript.co.uk
home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more



John Frawley

John Frawley





















Books by John Frawley:
The Real Astrology

The Real Astrology Applied

Horary Astrology - an extracted chapter from The Real Astrology - by John Frawley




Not only in the structures by which it seeks to comprehend the universe, but also in the structures of the science itself, astrology is remorselessly hierarchical. That well-known tenet of Hermetic doctrine, so carelessly bandied by so many who flee screaming from the very thought of cosmic hierarchies, 'As above, so below,' implies quite clearly that there is an above and there is a below. This understanding runs throughout astrology; there is no astrology without it: no matter how attached we may be to our egalitarian social beliefs, they will not work when applied to the cosmos.

The traditional authorities laid down a strict hierarchy of 'subjects fit to be judged', matters into which astrologers might usefully pry. The subjects are as follows:

  1. States and great nations
  2. Dynasties and families
  3. Kings and potentates
  4. Individual nativities
  5. Elections
  6. Horary questions
In the hierarchy of importance, the traditional texts always start from the top and work downwards; this can be seen in any description of the planets, which will always start with Saturn and work in through the celestial spheres to finish with the Moon. We might contrast modern texts, which typically start with the Sun and then work in exactly reverse order from the Moon outwards, noting that this order conforms neither to astrological theory nor to the modern model of the structure of the solar system and is thus totally arbitrary. The beauty of astrology is that it gives a completely coherent intellectual model; the modern mockery of astrology is nothing but a random pastiche.

As might be expected, traditional didactic texts start the student from the bottom and lead him gradually upward. So the first subject to be covered is the lowest on the list: horary astrology, which is the art of answering specific questions by judging an astrological chart for the moment at which the question is asked. The traditional teacher has a careful belief that it is better to start with what is easier and work towards what is more difficult. The study of modern astrology invariably begins with birth-charts, which is akin to confronting children in the first year of elementary school with the differential calculus. A few of those who master natal astrology will find their way to a study of horary, as if that small proportion who study maths at university were finally to be introduced to the multiplication tables. This might not be unconnected with the lack of mastery prevalent today.

From horary, we come to electional astrology. This can be seen as horary back-to-front: while horary takes the moment and judges the likely consequence, in electional astrology we take the desired consequence and look for the moment most likely to produce that result. Only then do we come to the thorough study of natal astrology; for only through having attained mastery of horary and elections will the student have acquired sufficient knowledge to be able to soundly judge the infinitely more complex matter of a human life.

But even natal astrology, the be-all and end-all of the craft today, is but a stepping stone on the path to the three highest sections in our list of subjects, which together comprise 'mundane' astrology: the astrology of the world, traditionally considered the flower and the crown of astrological learning. The lowest branch of mundane, kings and potentates, is but a short step from natal astrology. Here, we judge the life and reign of individual monarchs. With dynasties and families we take a longer view, watching the rise and fall of royal families; from there we pass to judgement of the fall and swell of history as empire follows empire and dominance passes from nation to nation. As we might expect, we see here not just a hierarchy of meaning, but also a hierarchy of technique: in horary, we are much concerned with the movements of the Moon, the lightest of the planets; in mundane, we deal primarily with the 'great chronocrators', the time-keepers of the cosmos, the outermost planets, Jupiter and Saturn. Following the traditional pathway we shall start our ascent with a consideration of horary.

Of all the forms of traditional astrology, it is horary that falls most strangely on the modern ear. The idea that a question can be asked, a chart of the stars drawn for that moment and the answer to that question deduced from what it shows, sounds bizarre. It stretches the theories of planetary causation that are foisted onto astrology somewhat beyond their reasonable limits, implying as it does that, for instance, Saturn should suddenly find itself responsible for someone's lost ear-ring and have to dash around the cosmos deciding what shall happen to it. To the modern mind, horary makes no sense at all, even less so than tarot or I-Ching, where the questioner does at least have contact with the cards or the coins: the stars are immutable and are not to be shuffled to match the state of the querent's unconscious. Yet work it does, and with great accuracy, providing verifiable, concrete answers to the questions asked, whether these questions be on public issues, the major business of a person's life, or even day-to-day trivia such as "Where is my watch?" or "Have I got time to have a bath before the repair-man arrives?"

Horary was the staple of most astrologers' business in the past, for a variety of reasons, only one of which is the material fact that few people knew their date and time of birth with any accuracy (even today, the accuracy of most given birth-times is doubtful: almost everyone lacking the dubious privilege of being born into a family of astrologers seems to be born on the hour or on the half-hour). When the king summoned the court astrologer to find out if he should marry the princess or invade the next kingdom, horary is what the astrologer would almost invariably have used. Quick, precise and efficient, it provides more bang for the astrological buck than any other form of the craft, and hence, as it allows for quick turnover and impressive results, found favour with skilled professionals. One sets the chart and finds the answer 'instantly', according to William Lilly, one of the masters of the craft. Instantly is perhaps an exaggeration, but in his day (the Seventeenth Century) the norm was for an astrological consultation lasting some fifteen or twenty minutes. This brief time would include social niceties and payment, the asking of the question and explanation of the situation, the astrologer adjusting his daily chart for the exact moment at which the question was asked, his telling the client -- if a 'convincer' were necessary -- where on their body they had warts, moles or scars (all deduced from the chart), and finally judging the chart and giving the answer. Quick, precise and efficient.

If we liken the conventional idea of the birth-chart reading to general medical practice, horary is like surgery: it cuts straight to the point. By concentrating on one issue alone, it gives a close and detailed focus on that issue, in a way that is not possible from a birth-chart, without - the exercise of greater amount of subtlety than most astrologers possess and a greater amount of work than most clients can afford. A birth-chart reading, for instance, may suggest that the native is likely to marry this year; it will not, however, say whether Bill or Tom is the man in question, or that it is unwise to plan the reception outdoors because it is going to rain on that day .Similarly -- and this is perhaps the most immediately impressive use of astrology -- it will not reveal the whereabouts of your lost cat/ring/handbag/whatever. From the practitioner's point of view, the client, even if asking for a birth-chart reading, will usually have some specific issue on their mind; it is far simpler to deal with that issue than to attempt to unravel a whole life-time of specific issues - - most of which do not concern the client at that moment.

The assumption behind horary is that the question is an existent thing in its own right. It is conceived when it enters the mind, and born when it is understood by the person who is in a position to answer it: in this case, the astrologer. So the astrological chart cast for the moment at which the astrologer understands the question is, as it were, the question's birth-chart. This holds true even if the question is understood at what is, apparently, a completely random moment, such as the moment at which the astrologer picks the letter containing the question from his door-mat, or when he returns a message left on an answerphone: logically a request for information is born only when it reaches the ear of the person who can provide that information. The relevance of even these supposedly chance moments to the issue at hand can be seen from the frequency with which the charts cast for them show verifiable events in the past which are datable from the chart. In fact, even though it is not done consciously, the querent exercises precise control over the moment of the question. Often, if the question is being asked by phone, the querent will hesitate, make small talk, change his mind, change it back again, ask the question, decide not to ask it, change its form -- and then finally decide "OK, this is it: here is the question." This can invariably be shown as a quite unconscious process of fine-tuning, often waiting for the moment when the Ascendant of the chart (which always represents the querent), moves from one sign to another. In the traditional cosmos, there is nothing random; there is no pure chance. Everything is connected and everything has meaning.

That the querent chooses this particular moment to ask this particular question is a consequence of absolutely everything that has happened in his life up to that point. There is a reason why this querent phones the astrologer while working, while that one waits until her lunch-break; why this one boldly picks up the phone and dials, while that one hesitates and puts it off. The differences - - far more plentiful and mostly far more subtle than these examples reveal --are directly pertinent to the question asked; thus also the differences in the astrological chart consequent upon these pertain to the judgement of that question.

The great majority of horary work is predictive, for which it has incurred the wrath of both the churches and modern science to a greater extent than any other form of astrology; many astrologers, indeed, both past and present have condemned horary for just this reason - and not only the ones who lack the knowledge to make it work. Alan Leo denounced it as 'THE CURSE OF THE SCIENCE AND THE RUIN OF THE ASTROLOGER', [1] although it had been the making of many abler than he. The desire for prediction does usually betray a lack of trust in God, and as such is not to be encouraged; we are reminded again of the warning given with what was revealed to the angels Harut and Marut in Babylon: 'We are only a temptation, therefore disbelieve not (in the guidance of Allah)'. [2] Yet the very possibility of being able to predict from the stars, and the intricacy of the structure of the universe, can also be a light on the path to God. For this, however, both artist and querent must always be aware that all is subject to the Will of God. This statement, so stressed by the traditional authorities, seems to the sceptical modern as a 'get-out clause'; but it is an intrinsic part of the whole attitude, without which judgement is impossible. In our astrological hierarchy, the lesser is ever contained within the greater; the fate of a man is contained within the fate of his country, and since there is no greater than God, the spheres of the universe are enclosed by His will. Judgement is also evidently always subject to the fallibility of the astrologer, though even the traditional authorities emphasise this rather less.

Finally, in this section, it must be said that since the republication of William Lilly's classic text-book, Christian Astrology, in 1985, horary, understood or misunderstood to varying degrees, has begun to establish a beachhead for itself in the modern world. Within modern astrological circles, indeed, the words 'horary' and 'traditional' are more or less synonymous, however much this misrepresents the vast depth of traditional astrology. By seeing the tradition as offering only horary, which the moderns lack the techniques to perform, they can avoid having their own strange ideas of natal astrology challenged by other ideas that actually work. Horary cannot be done at all with modern methods - as those text-books which attempt to demonstrate such a method make perfectly clear.

When will the repair man arrive ?


Let us consider an example to show how simple horary can be. I had been told that the electricity repair-man would arrive at some time that morning. I wanted to have a bath, so, knowing that nothing is more certain to make the door-bell ring than settling into the tub, I cast a horary to find out exactly when he would arrive. [3]

When will the repairman arrive ?

The querent is always shown by the planet ruling the Ascendant, in this case Jupiter. At 0 degrees of Aquarius, Jupiter has no strength; being so close to the Sun, the most destructive position a planet can hold, confirms my total lack of power in this situation. Trapped in the twelfth house, the section of the chart concerned with imprisonment, there is nothing I can do other than wait. The repairman's position is quite different. He is shown by the Moon, ruler of the sixth house, as repairmen are rumoured to be our servants. In its own sign, Cancer, it is very strong: he is in control of the situation.

I had expected to see his planet applying to aspect - probably by conjunction - either the Ascendant or my significator. The distance his planet would have to travel in order to complete the aspect would then show the time that must elapse before his arrival. I was horrified to see his significator, which is moving round the chart in an anti-clockwise direction, just entering the sixth house, the house of servants. This can be read quite literally: the repairman is going into his own house. The Moon makes no major aspects to any of the traditional planets before leaving its sign: this is further confirmation that he is going nowhere except home. And so it proved.

Horary judgements are only rarely as straightforward as this, largely because horary questions are only rarely this simple: profound as may be my desire for my bath, "When will the repairman arrive?" has none of the emotional complexity of the tangled situations from within which querents usually pose their questions. The principles, however, remain the same. Muddy situations inspire muddy charts, but the same few simple rules applied patiently and with care will unravel the most knotted bundle of conflicting passions.

Horary can deal with a variety of differing types of question. Questions of state seek an understanding of how things actually are at that moment, looking for information that is veiled from the querent, such as "Where are my keys?" or 'Am I pregnant?". We can peer back into the past, with queries such as "Did the cleaner steal my ring, or did I just lose it?" Most often, however, questions are directed into the future, asking if, how or when a certain event will take place.

The technical principles for judging charts set for such questions as these are in essence simplicity itself. Most significantly, for all that they must be applied with subtlety of understanding, these techniques are fixed. There is not the slightest question of intuition, except in the sense of Polyani's formulation of intuition as 'tacit knowledge', - that is, the way that a mechanic knows what is causing that squeak without necessarily being able to articulate the reasons why, large experience having made certain stages in the reasoning process redundant. Any competent astrologer looking at the same chart should, allowing for human fallibility, reach the same conclusions. Intuition in the common understanding of the word - or even in its higher and original meaning of intellection as regards a particular fact or allotment of knowledge - has nothing to do with it: the client can get 'intuitions' from his next-door neighbour; from an astrologer he requires the truth.

These techniques involve first locating the planet that signifies the querent; then the one that signifies the thing they are asking about. If these planets meet by aspect, we have the possibility that the thing will happen; if they do not, it won't. Once we have found that an aspect is there, bringing the two planets together, we must assess the strength of the planets, in order to determine whether they are strong enough to make the event happen; then we evaluate the nature of their connection with each other to find out if they both want the event to happen. If the planets are adequately strong, if they share an interest in making the event happen and if they meet by aspect, we may judge - within as always the possible limits of prediction, as all is ever subject to the will of God -that the event will come to pass.

So if the question were "Will Susie go out with me?" and the chart showed my planet and her planet coming to immediate aspect, this would be an encouraging start to judgement. The aspect provides, as it were, the occasion, without which nothing happens. If both our planets were strong, the chart would look rosier still, as we both have the ability to act. Suppose her planet were weak: no matter how desperate she was to go out with me, any obstacle would prove too much for her to surmount. The chart would show the nature of the obstacle: perhaps she is afflicted by the planet that would represent her father, so we could judge that he will not let her see me. Finally, we examine the way in which the two planets regard each other. In this situation, the ideal would be for my planet to be in a sign ruled by her planet, while hers falls in a sign ruled by mine: this would show intense mutual feelings. If her planet were not in any part of the zodiac ruled by mine, we would judge that she is not interested in me. As the asking of the question implies a certain level of interest, we might expect my planet to be in some part of the zodiac ruled by hers; if, however, it were in one of my own signs it would show clearly that I have no real interest in her, but just want the kudos of being seen with Susie, the prettiest girl in the school. We might make do with planets that do not indicate any interest in each other, but do show a shared interest in something else, as evinced by their both being in parts of the zodiac ruled by a third planet: we don't think much of each other, but we do both want to go to the dance.

As with the lovely Susie, so with any other issue. In the example about the repairman, his planet is very strong, while mine is weak: he can choose what happens, while I cannot. His planet is in a sign ruled by itself: his main priority is his own business. His planet is in Cancer, a sign where my planet, Jupiter, is said to be exalted; this is an important dignity, so I am clearly of some significance to him; unfortunately of not nearly as much significance as he is to himself. In sum, he has the power, while I don't; he is more interested in himself than in me; there is no aspect to bring us together. In this instance, I would happily have settled for an aspect without any indications of his interest in me: I should have been happy if he had turned up; I would not have minded if were thinking of something else while he was working. If the context were different and I were asking about Susie, the amount of interest she had in me would be of the utmost significance.

Suppose I ask "Will I get this job?" My planet strong in the chart would indicate that I have the ability and qualifications to merit it. My planet could be weak in either of two ways: if it is in a part of the zodiac where it has no power, it would suggest that I am weak of myself - in this context, I lack whatever is necessary to get the job. It might, however, be in a congenial part of the zodiac but be afflicted by another planet or by being in an unfortunate part of the sky relative to the horizon: I have the necessary skills, but something gets in the way - maybe I arrive at the interview drunk (my planet weak by being in the house of self-undoing), or perhaps my undoubted abilities are overshadowed by the urgent need to find a post for the chairman's new son-in-law (my planet afflicted by another). Even if my study of the chart revealed that I lack the strength to deserve this job, all might not be lost. Perhaps the planet representing the job has something in common with my own, so I dig out my old school tie or rehearse the secret handshake knowing that this will outweigh my inadequacies. But for all this, if the two planets representing me and the job fail to meet each other in aspect, nothing will happen. No matter how promising the situation, I will not get the job: perhaps the company decides not to hire new staff after all; perhaps great-uncle Silas dies, relieving me with his riches of all need to work: the chart will indicate which.

Where is my fish?


Before turning to a consideration of the basic tools with which astrology works, by which we assess the relative strengths, interests and possible actions of the actors in whatever drama we are watching, whether it be the non-arrival of the electricity man or the demise of a great empire, let us examine a last example of horary, which makes clear some of the apparently problematical issues surrounding this branch of astrology more even than any other. This chart was judged by one of the greatest masters of the craft, William Lilly.

Lilly practised during the Seventeenth Century, acquiring a reputation for accurate, specific astrology stretching far beyond the shores of his native England, a fact that presents us again with the two options: either our ancestors were singularly stupid, or he had at least some measure of the abilities which he claimed. The bulk of his practice was in horary; his surviving notebooks show him dealing with some 2000 clients a year, a depth of practical experience which combined with a huge breadth of study to enable him to write Christian Astrology, a text-book of horary and natal astrology that was, suffering varying degrees of distortion, to be the standard work on the subject until Alan Leo put the dying corpse of astrology out of its misery two and a half centuries later.

Lilly had ordered some fish and a bag of Portuguese onions to be sent from London to his home, just up-river in Hersham. But when the warehouseman arrived at Lilly's house, instead of delivering the goods he told the astrologer that the warehouse had been broken into and the fish stolen. Lilly set a horary chart to find the thief. [4]

Where is my fish ?

In a question of theft, a planet without strength placed in an angular house often shows the thief, while the Sun or Moon in the Ascendant in one of its own dignities shows that the thief will be discovered. Here, Jupiter is without strength and angular, while the Moon , in its dignity, is in the Ascendant. Jupiter is the natural ruler of the rich and noble, but Lilly decided that a gentleman was unlikely to burgle warehouses to steal fish. He did, however, take note of the sign that Jupiter is in: Scorpio, a water sign. The Part of Fortune, which falls at 17 degrees of Cancer, represents the querent's 'treasure' in the chart; Lilly's treasure here is his missing fish, so its being in Cancer, another water sign, is of significance. Mercury, ruler of the second house in the chart, and as such significator of Lilly's property - his fish - is in the third water sign, Pisces. Considering this evidence and the circumstances of the theft, Lilly decided that the thief must be connected with the water, probably by working on the river (Jupiter in water sign) and the fish must be in some moist place (Part of Fortune and Mercury in water signs).

The Moon usually works as secondary significator of the querent, so its immediate formation of an aspect with Mercury (the property) shows that the querent will recover it. Unfortunately, Mercury is very weak in Pisces: the aspect shows that the fish will be recovered, but this weakness shows that it will be found in less than pristine condition. Lilly judged that he wouldn't recover the fish intact, but that he would get some of it back. The chart has told him that he will discover the thief and recover some of the goods. This judgement has been made by the application of fixed rules: Lilly is not employing his intuition.

Apart from a weak planet in an angular house, the thief can also be shown by the ruler of the seventh house. Here, this is Mars. Mars is on the point of leaving Scorpio, which is its own sign. This suggested that the thief had recently moved house, or was just about to do so (the technical term house was commonly applied both to sections of the chart and to the signs of the zodiac). Combining the indications of the two possible significators of the thief, Jupiter and Mars, Lilly was able to work out a physical description of the man. After making enquiries, he heard of a fisherman with a reputation for thieving who had just moved to a house by the river, as was shown by the chart's emphasis on water signs. Tall and well-built with fair complexion and reddish-yellow hair, his appearance was typical of Mars combined with Jupiter. Lilly had his suspect.

Armed with this combination of astrology and detective-work, he approached the local magistrate, who readily granted a warrant to search the man's house and provided him with a bailiff to enforce it. They found part of the fish, at which the thief confessed all, explaining that the rest had already been eaten. Lilly grumbled at the man's wife about the fate of his Portuguese onions - not knowing what they were, she had made soup out of them - but then relented and let them keep the remains of their loot.

As we have seen, the discovery of the thief and the retrieval of the fish are shown, clearly and according to set rules, in the chart; but these predictions depended on certain actions to make them happen, actions which need not, apparently, have been taken. The chart guided Lilly to the thief. Having found the thief, many people would not have confronted him. This was a small community: Lilly might have been frightened of the consequences of his accusation, or uncertain of his judgement and scared of embarrassment if he had got it wrong. He wasn't. This was the same Lilly who, shortly after arriving in London as a young man, had performed a mastectomy on his master's wife, and who was later to risk execution with his vehement astrological propagandising on behalf of Parliament during the Civil War: he wasn't one to back down from a challenge. Then, to allow the prediction to come true, Lilly had to be in a position to obtain a warrant to search the thief's house. Few modern astrologers would find much sympathy arriving at their local police station waving a chart and claiming to know who had stolen their belongings. Lilly had a strong reputation as a worthy citizen and an accurate astrologer. The wealth he had gained through his astrological practice had made him the magistrate's social equal, so he would have found no problem in obtaining the warrant.

Lilly's character and circumstances were necessary factors in the accuracy of the prediction. But it it is reasonable to think that had the circumstances, including Lilly's character, been different, he would not have asked this particular question at this particular time. If, for example, he were timid, he might well have spent another hour worrying about the situation before asking the question, resulting in a different astrological chart; if his reputation as an astrologer had not made him the social equal of the magistrate, he could probably not have afforded to order the fish in the first place. The chart itself is a product of the man and the situation just as much as whatever takes place in the life; unless we are to make the rather bizarre, but currently fashionable, assumption that life is a succession of random events, the two must be meaningfully connected. There is only one possible set of circumstances that could have led to that exact prediction being made at that exact moment. That set of circumstances is the one, and the only one, that had actually arisen. Anything else exists only in the world of hypothesis, as the product of man's tireless fancy.

It is easy to see now why most modern astrologers, from choice or ignorance, have no truck with horary, and why many of them become surprisingly excitable when the subject is raised: the prospect of there being a verifiable, accurate astrology based on sound principles inevitably touches a sore spot.

Some moderns have managed to deal with the threatening intrusion of reality into their nebulous dream-world by breeding an unearthly creature called 'psychological horary'. This strange product of genetic engineering knows nothing so vulgar as providing a simple answer to a simple question, but must delve into the psychological motives for that question having been asked. Had William Lilly been foolish enough to have demanded of one of these astrologers "where is my fish?" he would have received the response "What does your fish mean to you?" What strange psychological quirk makes you want to know what has happened to the fish that someone has stolen from you? In this way, reality is reduced to its customary place as an adjunct to the client's psyche, and what happens in the life is of no importance other than as a means of casting light on our own kaleidoscope of whirling mental fixations. We might note in passing that such attitudes absolve us from the necessity of any engagement in the world, for whatever we may perceive as wrong-doing is merely our psychological projection, and so we may justifiably admire ourselves in our mirror while the world burns around us.

We might suspect that William Lilly would have given the enquiry "What does the fish mean to you?" a short and dusty answer; we might certainly suspect that using the chart only to analyse this question would not have put the fish on his dinner-table - but to think such thoughts reveals our lack of sophistication: "What does your dinner mean to you?" Any question is construed as an invitation to the contemporary astrologer to trample through the querent's psyche. Whilst some may find this titillating we cannot but regard it with abhorrence. Indeed, René Guénon has pointed out that what the mind keeps unconscious it keeps unconscious for good reason; it does not do to go poking around in it. [5] The amount of psychic detritus we see all around us is not unconnected with the Twentieth-Century fashion for doing just that. All manner of unsavoury genies have been released from bottles in which they slumbered quite safely; they are not easily returned.

While we are most certainly wrong to reduce the great benefit of horary astrology to a means of psychological analysis, we are wrong also to think that the importance of horary is in the immediate results that it offers. Whether we can find the lost ring or determine whether the repair-man will arrive on time is not, in the great scheme of things, a matter of any significance. As horary is the doorway to astrology, the celestial science, we are given a few sweets to tempt us inside. We are provided with some immediate verification of the truth behind the science; yet it does not do to place too great an importance on these proofs. The point, as always in astrology, is to look beyond towards the Divine. "We shall show them Our portents on the horizons and within themselves until it will be manifest unto them that it is the Truth" [6] but we must not become attached to the portents: the signpost is not the destination.




Notes & References:
  1 ] Alan Leo, Modern Astrology, II/Vll:10 (1896), pp. 434-7; quoted in Patrick Curry, A Confusion of Prophets, p.165 Collins & Brown, London, 1992. Leo's capitals.
Back to text

 
  2 ] The Holy Qur'an, 2:102.
Back to text

 
  3 ] January 22nd 1997, 9.07 am GMT, London.
Back to text

 
  4 ] February 20 1638 n/s. 9.00 am LMT, Hersham
Back to text

 
  5 ] The Reign of Quantity, p.279. 3rd edn. Sophia Perennis, Ghent, USA, 1995
Back to text

 
  6 ] The Holy Qur'an, 41:53
Back to text

 


John Frawley is the editor of The Astrologer's Apprentice magazine, and tutor of the Apprenticeship Courses in Horary, Electional and Traditional Natal Astrology. The book from which this work is extracted, The Real Astrology, was awarded the Spica Award for International Astrology Book of the Year in 2001. His follow up book, Real Astrology Applied is now available and a further title The Horary Textbook will soon be due for publication. For details of John's work, publications, appearances and courses, visit his website at http://www.johnfrawley.com.
© John Frawley
http://www.skyscript.co.uk

Horary Astrology
print version
This is the printer friendly version. To go to the web friendly version click here >>
       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated