The more I delve into medieval geomancy manuscripts, the more I realize how different authors tended to put together different bundles of go-to techniques for interpreting the geomantic chart. There is always some overalap, yet not every author mentions every technique. The company of houses is one such technique. The book from Peter of Abano I am currently translating does not mention it: he tends to have a very trimmed down, minimalistic approach. However, the technique is found in other authors, so I’ll discuss it and leave it up to the reader to decide whether to experiment with it or not.

The Technique

The technique is quite simple. We start from the presupposition that the aim of a geomancy chart is to see whether the figure of the querent comes into contact with the figure of the quesited, as already discussed, because such contact, called perfection, signals the querent coming into possession of the thing quesited about (though there are exceptions, when the querent wishes to get rid of something, for instance.)

Usually, if at least one of the four modes of geomantic perfection discussed in my previous article does not show up in the chart, it’s game over. According to some authors, though, we can also see perfection in other ways, and this is where the Company of Houses comes in.

The twelve houses of a chart are said to be paired as follows: the first with the second; the third with the fourth; the fifth with the sixth; the seventh with the eighth; the ninth with the tenth; the eleventh with the twelfth. It is important to note that, although, say, the third house is next to the second, the second and the third house are not in company: only the first with the second and the third with the fourth.

Let us suppose I want to know whether I will meet with my sweetheart. In general, I would want the house of the querent (me, the first house) to perfect geomantically with the house of the quesited (my sweetheart, the seventh house). Let us furthermore suppose that this does not happen. According to the proponents of the Company of Houses, this negative testimony can be overruled.

We look at the house my house is accompanied with, in this case the second, or the house the quesited is accompanied with, i.e., the eighth. Let’s take the second house as an example. The first kind of company is if the figure in the second house is the same figure as that of the first; the second kind of company is if the figure in the second is ruled by the same planet as the figure in the first; the third kind of company is if the figure in the second is opposite the figure in the first; the final kind of company is if the figure in the second shares the same Fire line (e.g., Via and Puella, who both have a single fire line).

This figure is the opposite	Of this figure
Cauda	Caput
Conjunctio	Carcer
Puella	Puer
Acquisitio	Amissio
Albus	Rubeus
Tristitia	Laetitia
Fortuna Minor	Fortuna Major
Populus	Via

When any of these four conditions is realized, the figure in the second house can act as a co-significator for the querent, and may perfect the chart in his stead.

Do you need this?

Frankly? No. You can do what you please, of course, but this reeks of “Methinks I saw mine lass turn into a dragon”, that is, how people used to come up with stuff to fill books with. Even worse, it reeks of last-ditch effort at wringing a “yes” out of a negative chart.

In some cases, what is called Company of Houses is already covered by the four regular modes of perfection. When it isn’t, it is, as far as I am concerned, at most a very, very, very weak testimony, so much so that I don’t take it into consideration. Of course one may come up with all sorts of philosophical excuses why this technique is important, but if you ask me, it feels like a useless complication of a simple divination system.

MQS