Thread by @edwardW2

In this thread I will add my observations about two early english translations of the works of Claude Gariot on astrology.

These works are significant, as they are amongst the earliest sustained bks on astrology in English, but also contain echoes of what you find in Lilly...

As you can see above, there are two editions of the work. The first was published (according to EEBO) by Thomas Purfoot in 1583. The Second edn, Published in 1598, is more than double the length of the first edn, and contains many substantial differences, as well as a new section

<You can tell the difference between the two edns, because the 1583 edn is printed in blackletter, and the 1593 edn is in Roman type. The images i use in this thread are from the EEBO scans of the books, which may be downloaded if you have a library subscription, etc.>

<the 1598 edn can be freely accessed at internet archive, here> archive.org/details/b30330…

The 1598 edition begins rather standardly-- explaining the natures of the signs and the planets. It has a rather cute little volvelle, or chart for you to check the dignity of a planet at any given point in the zodiac...

This is then followed by another circular chart showing the masculine, feminine , azemene etc degrees, but does not explain them. As we all know, such degrees were discussed in Lilly's Christian Astrology:

https://twitter.com/edwardW2/status/1337672913424531457

The next most interesting thing is Dariot's concept of Reception, which is found in Chapter 8: Dariot is describing a *aspect based* reception, something that is only beginning to be revived...

Here is the above extract transcribed into more modern type, by the good people of EEBO.

In brief, it seems to be a combination of the aspect-based reception and the more usual "mutual reception": when a planet aspects its sign/exaltation/triplicity ruler, AND that the first planet is, in some way the dispositor of its sign ruler.

Dariot's example is Venus in Taurus, and the Moon in Cancer: Both planets are in reception: Venus recieves the ruler of her exaltation by a sextile, and the Moon recieves the ruler of her triplicity, likewise by sextile.

Conversely, "If both two [planets] be in dignities one of another, having also dignity in the place where they are", or the reception is by sextile or trine, it is all the more perfect

Dariot continues that there is an "inferior" form of this reception, if the planets are the rulers of the sub-sign levels of dignity (i.e. Bound and Face)....

This passage strikes me as being more confused than it should. Instead of describing two forms of reception (i,e. where a planet aspects its sign-ruler OR the planets are in each other's signs) the two methods get squashed together, (i.e. aspect AND each other's signs)...

... thus making it a lot rarer. I do not know if Dariot might have actually intended this, or is this a fault of his terse writing style, or the translator. In any case, it is easy to see why Aspect-based reception was eventually forgotten-- it by this metric, it would be...

... and extremely rare event; Lilly's re-definition as "Planets in each other's signs" would seem positively refreshing.

The section then continues into the essential dignities/debilities of the planets, or as Dariou calls them "The accidental forces, strengths and fortunes / Misfortunes" of the planets.

His definition of the Via Combusta is from 13 Lib-9 Scorpio.

The via combusta seems to be a debility that affects all planets.

He also adds another constellational debility associated with the moon: When the moon is in Gemini, she is debilitated, as it is the 12th sign from Cancer.

[iirc a similar thing is found in Vedic astro?]

The next section concerns the houses. This section is particularly interesting, as it still gives the Ancient Greek names of the houses (eg the 2nd house is called Hope, the 3rd the Goddess, the 12th the Evil Spirit)

At this point, it is a good idea to disgress towards the 1598 edn's treatement of the section.
archive.org/details/b30330…
As you can see, each entry has been considerably expanded...

Most interestingly, this edn of Dariot gives fixed planetary and zodiacal associations to each of the houses (eg 1st house is ruled by Saturn and Aries). This idea eventually found its way into Lilly's Christian Astrology

https://twitter.com/edwardW2/status/1293753981433311232

...

It is my opinion that this later went on to become the inspiration for the "12 letter alphabet" of modern astrology, which is presently maligned by more historically inclined astrologers...

nonetheless, it is interesting to note that this "12 letter alphabet" only comes up in the 2nd edn, not the first. More research is needed to find out why this is so...

Moving on, we are then introduced to a method of finding the lord of any house, or "almuten". This is considerably more subtle than the modern method of looking at the planet that rules the sign on the cusp...

Instead, you are supposed to look at the planets that rule *all* levels of essential dignity of the degree of the cusp, and find which has the most dignities. If there is a tie, you are to further look at which planet is more angular, or is in a more proper degree....

EG; If the ascendant is in 22 Ari; Mars in 6th house, Sun in 10th.
The dispositors of the asc. are:
S: Mar+5
Ex: Sun +4
Tr: Sun +3
Bound/term: Mars, +2
Face: Venus +1

Totting up the scores, Mars scores +7 (Sign + bound). the Sun scores +7 (exaltation+ tr), and Venus scores +1

There is thus a tie between the Sun and Mars for the almuten of the ascendant, both scoring +7 points. However, since the Sun is in an angular house, as opposed to Mars, which is Cadent, it is the Sun that is the ruler of the ascendant.

Dariot also notes that you can consider degree-based astrology for this purpose; eg if a masculine planet was in a masculine degree would strengthen it; likewise if it was in a degree of increasing fortune. The converse would be true if it was an an Azemene degree...

This rather complicated account of finding the ruler of a house tells us several interesting things
1- it implies the use of a quadrant house system, or at least an equal house system. One cannot use whole sign houses under this system, bc if you did the almuten of each hse..

... would default to the strongest planet on the first degree of each house.

2 - As shown above, the sign-ruler of a house is not necessarily the house's ruler in this system
3- Rather than dealing with essential dignities alone when deciding the house-ruler, one must also consider what we'd now call accidental dignities- eg angularity or degree position.

All in all, it is also easy to see why this method fell out of favor to our modern method of using the sign-ruler of the house cusp as the lord of the house: In order to use Dariot's method, you have to memorise some 360 pieces of information-- the dispositorship of every degree

of the zodiac. By contrast, the modern method only demands you memorise 12 pieces of info: the rulers by sign.

In any case, with the exception of the angularity requirement, the 2 mthds often yeild the same planet-- after all, the sign ruler has a disproportionate share of the dignities of any given point.

I forgot to add a foruth observation: Dariot considers the Exaltation to be a form of dignity, which entitles the exalted planet to some "ownership" of that sign, rather than what we now treat it: a kind of "borrowed fortune", distinct from the ownership domicile entails...

Returning to the first edition, after some discussion on how to actually use the ephemeris and plot the planet's positions, we are given an account of how to calculate certain "Parts" or "Lots". Three lots are given:

* Four lots
They are so calculated:
1: "The part of life" in the Day: From Jupiter to Saturn, projected on the Ascendant. Reverse if night.
2: Part of fortune: From the sun to the Moon, projected on the asc. reverse if night

3: Part of death: From Moon to Cusp of 8th, and projected "From the sign wherein Saturn" (no reversal)
4: The part of the "interficient or killing planet": From the lord asc. to the Moon, and projected on the lord of the asc's position

I cannot find any instructions in the book on what you do with the Lot of death (i.e. are you supposed to project it from 0 degrees of the sign Saturn is in, or is it his degree position?).

IN any case,some interesting observations:
1: Dariot tells us that the part of life is to be used in illness horaries to (presumably) determine the patient's survival.
2;the 2 other lots Dariot mentioned are dealing with literally life-and-death issues, which is presumably...

... why dariot mentioned them,
3: Notice that the Lord of Death is calculated from the cusp of the 8th house-This again implies the use of quadrant houses in astrology.

the rest of the book is dedicated to what we might call astrology proper-- the interpretation of charts. The only branch of astrology the Dariot treats here is horary, and even then, an extremely narrow selection of possible questions. What follows are the chapter headings...

of the horary section, which would hopefully form a snapshot of what questions people in the time of Elizabeth I found especially troubling:

Ch 22: "To know whether any man that is absent, be dead or alive"

23: "Whether any man shall have or possess riches & substance, and at what time"
27 [sic] : To know whether a man shall keep or leave his servant
25: "To know whether a man shall obtain that woman in marriage which he desireth"

26: Whether a man shall enjoy the goods & dowry of his wife
27: OF the speedy or slack return of him that taketh in hand any journey, and of such things as shall happen in the journey
28: [...] whether a man shall obtain the dignity or office he desireth or seeketh for

29: "Whether a man shall have the thing he hopeth or looketh for"
30: "Of a man's secret enemies:
30[sic] Whether any man shall have or possess riches & substance & at what time

31: "of the inquisition or searching out of brethren"
< not so terrifying as it sounds, basically a variation on the lost person horary, but for siblings>
32: "Whether any man will possess and enjoy the house or land that he desireth to buy"

The book rounds off with a short section on elections, and a table of planetary hours. Thus closes the book, just over 100 pages long.

At this point, readers may note that many of the hoary questions are similar to those in lilly-- as indeed, are many of the concepts within. All of them are well-developed, about 60-70 years before Lilly...

However, as is evident from the above situation, the book is clearly a very touch-and-go matter; the process of casting a horoscope, for example, occupies less than 6 pages. By Contrast, Lilly's Christian astrology is much, much more substantial in every way,,,

Let us now proceed to the 1597 version. As mentioned above, this version is much expanded. It is well over double the length of the first edn, not least bc of an addition of a separate treatise on medical astrology, itself a hundred or so pages long
archive.org/details/b30330…

we shall leave discussion of that for later.

Let us return to the first part; namely general astrology. As mentioned above, the contents have been much expanded. The section on zodiac signs, for example, is now in tabular format... archive.org/details/b30330…

... as is the section on planets.
archive.org/details/b30330…

Shortly afterwards, we come to possibly one of the most enduring parts of the book: For the first time, in English, we find a set of tables for "point scoring" planets by dignity. People familiar with Lilly would recognise this practise at once...
archive.org/details/b30330…

there is even a separate section for the part of Fortune, a division which is reflected in lilly.

Still, it is interesting to note where the differences with Lilly. Dariot does not distinguish between Essential and accidental dignities; they are just lumped together...

In turn, whilst Lilly mentions specific fixed stars that are especially [un]lucky for planets to be conjoined to, here Dariot just notes that a planet conjoined a star "Of its own nature" is by default a dignity.

Fast-forwarding to the medical section of the book, dariot provides some interesting flowcharts of finding significators
archive.org/details/b30330…

This is immidiately followed by a list of 28 lunar mansions-- archive.org/details/b30330… a list which was copied, wholesale by William Ramesey, writing in the 17thc: books.google.com/books?id=EyZlA…

Later on in that book, we encounter another essential dignity table. This one seems to be a more direct predecessor of William Lilly's, wherein the deignites are separated by essential and accidental...
archive.org/details/b30330…

The last chart is particulary interesting, as it shows an essential dignity table, similar (but not identical) to the one that we are all used to seeing in Christian astrology, published half a century later:
books.google.com/books?id=cExRA…

In any case, Dariot did have an impact on Lilly. Lilly's Christian Astrology goes so far as to give "Dariot abridged" in the section concerning illness.
books.google.com/books?id=cExRA…

In turn, Lilly's Bibliography of astrological works also cites the 2nd edn of Dariot in English, books.google.com/books?id=cExRA…

The French version of Dariot, as kindly provided by @AstrologieAuric
gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt…

It should be noted that this French edn of Dariot does not include the fixed sign/planet correspondences to the 12 houses. gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt…

In turn, i erroneously said above, that Dariot did not mention how to use the masculine and feminine degrees.

https://twitter.com/edwardW2/status/1353320196249800704

This is false. He discusses them in Chapt 4: (French gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt… / tr. in 1st english edn/ modern transcription by EEBO)

An interesting thing found in the medical section of the 2nd edn of Dariot is this table of planetary friendship and enmity. archive.org/details/b30330…