"most accurate" isn't the wording I'd put forward. horary is certainly is astrology's most incisive branch, capable of delivering a level of detail that smokes the other divisions.

horary is why I struggle with how we're framing the conversation about decolonising astrology. 1/ https://twitter.com/SparkAstrology/status/1282673311626006528

horary methodology just works. it can open doors no other branch can. similar to, but so much more complicated than, the planetary dignity scheme, you can't just pluck out a technique and replace it and assume there won't be a damaging impact on capability. 2/

I think things often appear to be one way, but until you see it working in every context (which includes horary), it's tough going to substantiate claims that you've triangulated a problem that needs fixing. 3/

it's generally been my advice that those who want to bring astrology in line with modern thinking (whatever the framework) perhaps should temporarily suspend those efforts and first develop mastery level in horary astrology. first learn the rules to effectively break them. 4/

I apply similar-ish logic to the use of asteroids, hypothetical planets, midpoints, minor aspects: if you don't have a complete, well-rounded grasp on underlying principles (beyond one or two eras, beyond one or two sources), you're likely to misidentify the problem. 5/

I've scoured, but haven't yet seen an example of decolonising astrology itself that makes sense to me. I'm imperfect and so I'll be the first to suggest it could be the fault of my own cognition. I think what people are trying to say is, decolonise the consultation itself. 6/

now that's a very different proposition, one every astrologer must support. I don't take sides on this: if we're going to decolonise (mind, heart, actions), that must include consultation spaces. these efforts should co-exist alongside astrologers' social justice work. 7/

the conversation is different when we're talking about astrological principles themselves. the foundation is so intricately laid, the tapestry is tightly interwoven. it is, however, very easy to infer anachronistic origination theories using inductive logic. 8/

to clarify that last: reaching a conclusion from a specific example which relies on a core principle, and assuming we can apply that conclusion to the core principle itself. logic doesn't work that way. we need to employ deductive reasoning, from the general to the specific. 9/

when I hear 'decolonise astrology', two things happen: 1) I know I'm in the company of someone who's mind and heart align with mine, who sees the value in human-centred reparative justice; and, 2) my mind jumps to, 'what does decolonise mean to them?' I usually ask. 10/

for my part, I work in a Western (tropical) tradition. the early texts of this tradition are syncretic and combine elements of Greek, Persian, Egyptian thought; and even these ideas stem from earlier Babylonian and Mesopotamian influences, and beyond. 11/

we know that texts traveled all over Asia Minor and into India, then back again, with interpolations along the way. ideas expand Westward into Europe, translations continue and the revered attitude to older texts supported the conscious refining over generations. 12/

we're talking about an era quite unlike ours. historically it was important to demonstrate the lineage of an idea, whose authority you could draw from. today, especially for those raised in America, individualism and exceptionalism turn these ideas on their head. 13/

before we can demonstrate mastery over the ideas that precede us, we're already seeking to impress our views and our mindsets. the results are a mixed bag; some good things come out of this, but so too we overestimate our insight and contribution. 14/

I used to compile ideas published by astrologers in the 70s/80s/90s/00s alongside parallel quotes from antiquity to demonstrate that 1) the idea wasn't new, we just didn't understand it in the first place; and 2) the older sources said it better. lost to a hard drive crash! 15/

anyway, back to decolonisation. I'm unclear who is doing the colonising: is it the original author? the translators? the people who are carrying the books from region to region? the curators of texts in libraries? the commentators? the practitioners? 16/

so I'd pose this question, and usually get what I think is a fair response back: "I don't actually know; I suppose what I mean is..." and then we'd enter into a discussion about how to use astrology in a consultation setting that doesn't lean on colonial frameworks. 17/

and I'm happy for the convo to go there. it's important, it's big work, and I think in some ways we both acknowledge how massive a task it is to conceptualise what decolonising astrology is, let alone set out to achieve, and that risk/reward of that path is unknown. 18/

purpose of this thread is to encourage everyone to learn horary. learn how these symbols work in their most mundane, face-palm ways. master that technique, then master elections, and nativities and medical (if that is of interest). that's a lifetime of work. 19/

opportunity to carry the torch of astrology forward, through informed innovations, informed alterations, will present themselves. I think we will learn that occasions for alteration and innovation will be rarer than we suspect; decolonising counseling is where the gold is. 20/