However wouldn?t Morin's argument that the opposite meanings would reverse at the equator also count for the equinoxes (which in fact are also a sort of ?nodes?) and therefore alter the signs?

Not in Morin's mind, or at least I don't think so. What follows is my understanding of what he might have said. It isn't the last word on his thoughts or even my own.

There are two points that have to be kept in mind. The first is that the Sun issues its influence universally and without discrimination. It issues only solar influence and that is the same everywhere: north south east and west. The difference is in how it is received. The Sun melts wax and hardens clay. The solar influence on both is identical, but the results are different because that which is receiving them is different. Wax does not behave the same way as clay when both are subjected to 100 degree heat.

The second is this: Morin believed that the Sun was at 0 Aries at the creation. I have no idea how he thought he knew this. When the Sun returns to 0 Aries each year it reinforces its influence universally and without discrimination. Therefore the effects in the northern and southern hemispheres might be different, it is due to how those effects are received.

Notice, too, he is dealing with the effects of the Sun, not some point. 0 Aries is always with us.

This also brings us to the final point: the Sun does not affect the sign. The sign affects the Sun. Planets get their influence from the signs they rule, not vice versa. The Sun, as stated above pours forth its influence universally and without discrimination. What is emanated from the Sun is modified by the Sign. The constellations may be reversed below the equator, but I don't believe the signs are reversed. I ran two charts on solar fire one each for above and below the equator, and it calculated both for the same sign rising. I may need an Aussie to straighten me out on this.

Tom

Tom wrote:This also brings us to the final point: the Sun does not affect the sign. The sign affects the Sun. Planets get their influence from the signs they rule, not vice versa. The Sun, as stated above pours forth its influence universally and without discrimination. What is emanated from the Sun is modified by the Sign. The constellations may be reversed below the equator, but I don't believe the signs are reversed. I ran two charts on solar fire one each for above and below the equator, and it calculated both for the same sign rising. I may need an Aussie to straighten me out on this.

Tom

Somewhere I read that Morin although very Ptolemy oriented he differed in the explanation of rulerships and exaltations. Ptolemy gave climatological reasons and Morin explained the signs as a background of the (9th?) sphere which passed the effects to Earth and got mixed with the planets' effects. This model depended on the geocentric model and therefore he must have objected to heliocentrism. I hope I can find the places where I read this when I have more time. (The university libraries on which I depend for the use of computers have limited opening hours during summer.)

This explanation model would therefore indeed not be affected by 'flip over ' effects on the southern hemisphere.

What you say about the charts is correct. At 18:00 Sidereal Time 0?Aries is rising and 0?Capricorn is culminating, the stars in these signs remain the same in Australia. North of the equator 0? Capricorn is in the south of the sky but if we go south along the same meridian 0?Capricorn rises and at the Tropic of Capricorn it is above our heads in the zenith. More south the 0?Capricorn culminates in the north. 0?Aries remains on the eastern horizon as long we stay on the same meridian on earth. The issue is if the exaltations and rulerships are climate or otherwise (daylight hours) related to the signs then one may consider a 'flip over' of the signs in Australia. Since Morin must have believed in other influences than climatological, eventually combined with the Earth's creation chart, the 'flip over' was not relevant in his eyes.

Many traditional astrologers claimed Venus was cold and moist, Morin went with warm and moist. Finally all astrologers say that Jupiter is mildly warm and mildly moist, Morin said Jupiter was mildly warm and mildly dry.

Our comparisons of planetary patterns with the weather in Western Europe for several years tend to confirm Morin's opinion on the qualities of Venus and Jupiter.

Ren?

This is one of the places where Morin follows Ptolemy. Ptolemy defined Venus as "temperate in warmth & moisture" and Jupiter "moderately warming". This is the basis of them being temperate and benefic (creative) planets.

When the planetary temperaments scheme gets simplified into hot & dry / cold & wet, etc; we start to drift away from the original classifications.

Tom wrote:Look at the other planets that rule two signs. Mars is hot and dry, and rules Aries and Scorpio, cold and wet. They are opposites and all four qualities are present in Mars. The Same is true for Venus who rules warm moist Libra, and cold dry Taurus. Mercury and Saturn follow suit. Jupiter is different in the most commonly accepted scheme. Jupiter rules cold wet Pisces and warm and dry Sagittarius. If Jupiter is warm and moist he has no strong affinity for either Pisces or Sagittarius. Morin solves this little problem by maintaining Jupiter is warm and dry like the fire sign Sagittarius. Now the symmetry is perfect.

Then in this view the rulerships of the planets (excluding Sun and Moon) have one sign according to their qualities and the other opposite to it? I find this quite confusing because it seems more logic that those planets wouldn't 'feel at ease' over there. These rulerships and elements opposing issues were rather considered a problem by Johannes Kepler. http://cura.free.fr/docum/15kep-en.html ?4-4.

Then in this view the rulerships of the planets (excluding Sun and Moon) have one sign according to their qualities and the other opposite to it?

Yes, and notice each planet rules one masculine and one feminine sign. So Mars, a masculine planet, has a feminine expression and Venus, a feminine planet, has a masculine expression. There is nothing in traditional astrology in the above that is unusual. The only thing that is unusual is Jupiter who does not have an opposite expression under the usual system. In that sense Morin's "correction" is a minor one. Mars, Venus, Saturn and Mercury (a little problematical) all rule masculine and feminine signs. They all rule opposites. Jupiter does, too, but Jupiter is not "in synch" with either of them, hence Morin's idea.

These rulerships and elements opposing issues were rather considered a problem by Johannes Kepler.

Kepler did go against the grain now and again.

Tom

Tom wrote:I thought I'd add this, since it had slipped my mind and then I saw it on another astrology site. It has relevance. Morin said that the place where the eclipse falls on an angle is the place where it will have the greatest effect. I've never looked at that before.

That sounds very logic to me. I think the exact position in MC is near there where the maximum of the eclipse occurs, near Iwo Jima and the Mariana Trench etc.

Since Venus and Mars conjunct the Eclipse point in August and October respectively perhaps it would be interesting to note the places where these planets are at an angle during the eclipse.

I put the chart up for my local area in Southern CA so I could look at it and it seems to me the two most interesting points to this chart are, the eclipse is at a Critical Degree in a Cardinal Sign and that it is trine within 3 degrees of Uranus

It also looks to me as though we might get to see it, it should happen about 10 minutes before sundown on the 21st for us. 7:35 pm


it seems to me that a solar eclipse in a critical degree screams Major problems??? combine that with a promise of chaos... and well!

China is indeed having serious problems in its western provinces where they have had to send a number of troops, as well as they are not happy with North Korea right now any more than we are and our economic problems cause them economic problems hence one of the reasons they dont really want the west to be in recession. they can't afford it.

two things to consider with the 4 july chart for the US

Pluto is at 27 Cap, so almost opposite, and Mercury at 24 Cancer, nothing else really applying

no real line up with any of the Treaty of paris Planets,

the US Constitution was adopted on 17 Sept 1787 however adn there we have Uranus at 29 Cancer and Sun at 24 Virgo, depending on when it was actually adopted, Moon could be late scorpio to early Sag, so antoher possible alignment.

anyway a few things to think about, Uranus alignments, even nice ones can be obnoxious.

Granny

Hi Granny,

I'm afraid the eclipse just won't be visible in California. Here's a picture of the path of the eclipse. http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEmono/TSE ... E2009.html

That's a great link. I especially like these two images for showing where the path cuts across the main populated areas:

http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEmono/TSE ... -fig02.GIF

http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEmono/TSE ... -fig03.GIF