Recently I am reading Lilly very intensively and have noticed that he saw the angular houses as slow because Angular houses equate with fixed Signs
and fixed signs are slow and cadent houses fastest because they are "falling down
" at the end.Also the Cardinal signs are seen as slow.For instance when the Ascendant moves towards a planet in the first house, distance 2 degrees, he takes 2 years (Ascendant Libra which is Cardinal as well and apparently the fastest) and planet in Scorpio.
Anthony Louis, Karen Hamaker-Zondag, Derek Appleby, all say the contrary: Cardinal and Angles are fast. John Frawley mixes everything a littlebit.
So my question is: what is the nowadays norm? Up till now I have of course done like Louis does but after reading Lilly who was a REALLY good horary astrologer, I start doubting. Or do I take Frawley's advice and think:"OK, a planet in an angular house has a good deal of accidental dignity which increases the planet's power so in the end it goes fast after all!!
What are those of you who do horary astrology usually do?
just quickly: does a housecusp
move faster than a planet or is it just taken as a neutral move? Why can we take an Ascendant moving towards a planet in the 1st instead of saying, "the planet in the 1st just separated from the Ascendant, like if Mars is there, could we not say that the querent could have had an accident recently or something else to do with a Mars energy? When do we choose to move the Ascendant over the separating planet? I would be very grateful to have someone shed some light on this. Thanks for the feedback on this.