Not all Aspects are Aspects!

By Maurice McCann

Introduction

One of the great assumptions in contemporary astrology is that aspects always produce results of some kind. However, it has been taught throughout the ages that this doesn't always happen. There are times when the action of one of the planets in the aspect can prevent perfection. On other occasions a third planet can interfere, therefore impeding one from reaching the other. The difficulty has always been in recognising these dangers, as they are not easily seen in the horoscope.

Furthermore, it was taught that when two planets were not in any recognisable aspect they could somehow combine their energies and mysteriously produce results. The astrologers of old held that planets had the ability to do this. They believed that a third planet could mediate between the two and bring them together as if in aspect. Unfortunately these teachings seem to have got lost over recent decades.

It's true that some memory of these ideas persist today as some astrologers recognise that under certain conditions aspects may or may not work. There are those who believe that squares and oppositions alone are enough to negate aspects. Others think that reception or mutual reception can save them. There is also the opinion that peregrine planets can make aspects ineffective, and that combust planets are unable to form aspects.

It's said that planets without aspect can work with mutual reception. Since we are not certain whether all of Ptolemy's essential dignities are correct or not, there is some doubt about receptions. There are, after all, a number of different versions of the triplicities and terms, and the origins of his exaltations are certainly in doubt. Therefore different astrologers will agree or disagree on the value of an aspect. At present there are no hard or fast rules, it's merely the opinion of the individual astrologer.

These beliefs and others that are similar, are based upon the astrologer's own individual judgement as to whether the aspect will work or not. Here the astrologer's judgement and discretion decides upon the aspect's ability to function. With the planetary movements under discussion, it will become quite clear there is no ambiguity, only set procedures. Procedures that help instil a greater confidence in the astrologer's ability to interpret the natal horoscope.

Planets in aspect

Sometimes planets in aspect are not what they may seem. On the 11th June 2001 a number of examples of these effective and ineffective aspects took place.

Retrograde Mercury applied by opposition to retrograde Mars. However, Mars had other ideas of its own. Before Mercury could reach the exact degree of Mars, Mars first opposed Jupiter. This was Mars' way of cold-shouldering or rejecting Mercury in favour of Jupiter. The expected opposition between them didn't materialise; the aspect proved unproductive. It was as if it didn't exist, it may as well not be there. Yet this was not the only quandary that Mercury and Mars found themselves in, there was more to come.

Before Mercury could reach the degree of Mars, the Sun, which was nearer in degrees to Mars, completed its opposition to Mars. This move stopped the Mercury Mars aspect dead, leaving Mercury helpless for a second time. On top of all this Mercury itself was responsible for causing imperfection since on the 29th June it turned stationary direct at 21.17 Gemini while Mars occupied 17.48 Sagittarius. Perhaps Mercury gave up chasing Mars, since Mars continued through its retrograde motion to pull further and further away from it? Besides Mercury apparently had had enough of being blocked by the previous two movements.

Although Mercury is strong in its own sign, it is very weak in other ways. It raises the question as to the value of essential dignities. A planet may gain lots of points through essential and accidental dignities but if it is involved in the wrong kind of planetary movements it might as well be given the same points as peregrine. The worst condition of all for a planet may well be unaspected, or where it is prevented from perfecting with other planets as described above.

Planets not in aspect

On the same date Venus and Saturn were placed in signs next to each other, Taurus and Gemini. There were no Ptolemaic aspects to bring them together. Venus applied by square to Neptune and Saturn applied by trine, but they could not aspect each other. This formation, where two planets apply to a slower planet than themselves, enables the slow planet to draw them together as if in aspect, just like a magnet.

One other example of a planetary movement was taking place on this same day. Venus was able to act as an intermediary between Mercury and Neptune, even though no aspect existed between them. Venus had separated from Mercury by sextile and now applied to Neptune by square. Venus was able to mix their forces as if in aspect. Normally Mercury and Neptune would be dismissed as unable to function in the horoscope and Venus' crucial involvement would go unnoticed. Vital components such as these can so easily be overlooked in the natal chart.

Conclusion

Next time you look at a natal horoscope check whether the planets in aspect will perfect with each other or not. One of them may become stationary and by turning away from the second planet fail to complete the aspect. Next, see if one of them first aspects a third planet or a third planet intervenes before they themselves can conclude their aspect.

Look also at planets not in aspect and see if they both apply to the same slow planet since this can cause them to join forces. Finally, check if a fast moving planet separates from one and applies to the other by one of the Ptolemaic aspects.

Some horoscopes may contain many such planetary movements, but remember not all of them need to be analysed at first. Take it step-by-step; isolate the ones in your client's opinion that are likely to be the most important. Consulting your client can help in this respect, they know their own personalities a little better than you do. Many more attributes will now come to the surface and a higher degree of accuracy obtained. Deeper levels of interpretation that have never been reached before can be accomplished. If astrologers consider the above and are willing to give them a try, then a greater amount of success must surely follow.

Horoscope Data 11th June 2001. 12.00 Noon, DST. Any location.

Biography

Maurice McCann has been an astrologer for 25 years of which the last 20 years have been spent as a professional working astrologer. He has a Diploma in Higher Education on the history of astrology during the English Civil War period as well as a BA (Hons) degree in the same subject. He was at various times, chairman of the Astrological Lodge of London and its treasurer; he was a co-director of the Meonen School of Horary Astrology for many years and is currently editor of Réalta, the journal of the Irish Astrological Association. He was co-author of Eclipses published by Aquarian Press (1989) with Derek Appleby, and is the author of The Void of Course Moon published by Tara Astrological Publications (1997). He is also creator of Tara - horary astrology a computer software program for horary astrology. He has also researched and written widely on astrology. He is a regular contributor to a wide variety of international astrological journals and his essays have appeared in several anthologies on the subject. He has also lectured in many countries, from Russia to Canada and the USA and from Australia, Germany, Norway and Denmark to Belgium, Italy and Yugoslavia as well as in his native Ireland and the United Kingdom.

Website: http://www.tara-astrology.com