The horary literature speaks of planets being in the state of “cazimi” or “in the heart of the Sun,” meaning that that are located within 17 minutes of arc from the center of the Sun. Since, to the human eye, the Sun measures about 34′ of arc in diameter in the sky, being in cazimi means that the body of the planet overlaps the body of the Sun, at least along the ecliptic. Lilly notes that “all Authors doe hold a Planet in Cazimi to be fortified thereby” (CA 113).
Most astrologers ignore the latitude of the planet above or below the ecliptic and define cazimi solely in terms of the planet’s projection onto the path of the Sun. It is possible that the originators of the cazimi concept had in mind that the planet should overlap the body of the Sun both in latitude above or below the ecliptic as well as in longitude along the ecliptic. In such a case, the body of the planet would overlap the body of the Sun in all directions from the center of the Sun.
Recently I was reviewing some old horary charts and came across an example in which the significator of the quesited was in cazimi, but the outcome was quite negative for the querent. The chart of one presented by Ivy Goldstein-Jacobson on page 212 of her famous book Simplified Horary Astrology (1960). I hadn’t noticed the cazimi in this chart because Ivy made a typo in drawing of the chart, and the cazimi condition was not apparent from looking at the chart in her text.
Here is the chart done by modern computer (without Ivy’s typo). The data is 14 Sep 1946 at 17:36 PST in Los Angeles, CA. (I adjusted the time Ivy gave by one minute to match the Ascendant of the chart in her book. ). Ivy used Placidus, but this chart is in Regiomontanus. None of the planets change houses with the change of house systems in this example.
The context of the question is that the querent was concerned about her husband’s violent temper and his infidelity. She apparently suspected that her husband wanted to divorce her. After reading the chart, Ivy told the querent that there would indeed be a divorce, but the querent told Ivy that she would not give him a divorce. In February following the horary, the husband came home very late and the querent confronted him. He then beat her up, packed his things and left her, moving to another state where he was able to secure an uncontested divorce in September of 1947, about a year after the horary question.
Ivy had apparently placed the Sun in her drawing of the chart at 22 Virgo 36, when in fact the Sun was as 21 Virgo 36 at the moment of the question. As a result, Mercury at 21 Virgo 43 was in cazimi, or the heart of the Sun, and supposedly strongly fortified and in a very fortunate position according to most horary authors. Nonetheless, Mercury rules the 7th cusp of her marriage, which was on the rocks because of her violent and unfaithful husband.
Ivy judged that there would be a divorce because Mercury, the marriage, was tightly square Uranus, the modern planet of disruption and divorce. Traditional astrologers, who ignore the modern planets, might have a harder time seeing divorce in this chart, perhaps arguing that Mercury is so strong in this chart that Mercury, as the husband who wants the divorce, will prevail over Jupiter, the querent, who is debilitated by being in her 8th house of loss and death. Perhaps also, the Sun as ruler of the 6th (the 12th of the 7th) signifies the dissolution of the marriage and the husband (Mercury) is greatly fortified by being in the heart of the Sun.
A final note: the latitude of Mercury in this chart is 1 N 35 and the latitude of the Sun is always 0 degrees because it travels on the ecliptic, thus by latitude Mercury is well outside the “heart of the Sun.” Perhaps to be truly fortified and rendered fortunate by its intimate contact with the Sun a planet needs to be truly overlapping the Sun’s body both in ecliptic longitude and latitude. This is an idea worth further exploration.