Eddy wrote:]Next spring the next Saturn Uranus conjunction will be closer to a sextile/trine aspect to the 22 July eclipse point, perhaps having some effect. Or do you mean that the activation can also be done with particular positions not necessarily to the eclipse point?

I believe not necessarily to the eclipse point. See article of Marco Fumagalli in CieloeTerra site.

It's in Italian but pictures are intuitive.

http://www.cieloeterra.it/articoli.sich ... huan3.html

Then you can see Placido analysis of the revolt of Masaniello in my blog where Placido shows how he considers recurring positions (Fumagalli mentions this article which was originally translated in Italian by Bezza for the book Arcana Mundi)

So I would consider the eclipse point, but even an angle or a transit by a malefic, something like that,

margherita

I printed Marco Fumagalli's article and will look at it this weekend.

In the meantime have a look at this list of recent earthquakes, 3 earthquakes of more than 7.0 on one day. That area (West-Pacific) is very restless. Perhaps rather than viewing these and those of the last weeks as single events one could also look at it as part of a larger pattern. I think we should also keep an eye on the Mars transit over the eclipse point (15 October). http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/rec ... es_big.php

Gjiada wrote:I believe not necessarily to the eclipse point. See article of Marco Fumagalli in CieloeTerra site.

It's in Italian but pictures are intuitive.

http://www.cieloeterra.it/articoli.sich ... huan3.html

Hi Margherita,

Unfortunately I don't read Italian, but as far as I understood the pictures and tables the repeating of patterns (which are not necessarily related to the 'radix' positions of the Luminaries of each eclipse) play a role. In Fumagalli's example the Jupiter-Saturn trines and Mars' positions related to each of the three discussed eclipses. One question about the first table ( 'the three superiors of the eclipse preceding the earthquake?'). Some aspects have 'm' behind it. What does it mean? mundo? Jupiter-Saturn were for along time in trine aspect, but the lunar eclipse nr.2 list gives Jupiter-Saturn square symbol with 'm' behind it. I just wonder what it means. They were then 101? (a very wide square) apart.

Eddy wrote: Some aspects have 'm' behind it. What does it mean? mundo? Jupiter-Saturn were for along time in trine aspect, but the lunar eclipse nr.2 list gives Jupiter-Saturn square symbol with 'm' behind it. I just wonder what it means. They were then 101? (a very wide square) apart.

Sorry for the late reply, I was out Rome for an astrological congress.

Yes m stands for mundo. In fact Jupiter hourly distance is 0.74, Saturn 5.38

They are in a different quadrant so their distance is 5.38+0.74= 6.12, where 6 hours is a square in mundo.

And yes they don't consider just the place of Light but for example some stars which in Renaissance literature are listed as violent stars, like Regulus, Antares, Sirius, Aldebaran, Orion.

The examination of outer planets come from Tetrabiblos, II,5:

One part of the observations, required in forming predictions in cases of this nature, relates to the locality of the event, and points out the cities or countries liable to be influenced by particular eclipses, or by occasional continued stations of certain planets, which at times remain for a certain period in one situation. These planets are Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars; and they furnish portentous indications, when they are stationary.

Let me know if you need some other indication,
margherita

Thanks for the clarification Margherita, now I know what the 'm' means.

Interesting that the Andromeda nebula is used. I didn't know that classical astrologers used it in astrology. Actually it is in fact not a 'nebula' in the astronomical sense (a cloud of gas, like for example the Orion nebula) but it's a galaxy like ours at a distance of 2 million lightyears (the closest galaxy to us), a huge group of stars. Yet we see them as a nebula because of the large distance. It's a nice object in a pair of binoculars. Probably not visible with the eye in Rome.

More astronomical info,
http://seds.org/MESSIER/m/m031.html
http://www.solstation.com/x-objects/andromeda.htm

Interesting that the Andromeda nebula is used.

It is interesting, not only from the perspective as a 'nebula' (cloudy patch) but also from the persective of the Andromeda Galaxy being of closest neighbour and considered by some as our 'twin' galaxy. Personally, I have not worked a lot with the galactic centre at approx. 26 Sagittarius, but I think the meaning and position of the Andromenda Galaxy should be compared in relation to this. These thought are obviously around and fully developed somewhere.

Eddy wrote: Interesting that the Andromeda nebula is used. I didn't know that classical astrologers used it in astrology.

Marco Fumagalli says that it was not unknown to ancient astrologers but it had not a real astrological meaning.

But nebulae are very dangerous in astrology so he thinks it could have an influence,

margherita

Gjiada wrote:But nebulae are very dangerous in astrology so he thinks it could have an influence.

I've always wondered why nebulae were beleived to be dangerous, especcially they have been associated with blindness. Perhaps this is because too look at a nebula/nebulous object one has to look at it not directly but 'peripherously' because the most sensitive spot on the eye's retina is not straight behind but a bit aside.

In Richard Hincley Allens's 'Star names:...' you can find a lot on stars.
on google books http://books.google.nl/books?id=x4qVPl- ... pe&f=false
Praesepe in Cancer was in ancient days the only known nebula (p.113).
Even, "Halley, in 1716 knew only six" ('nebulae') p. 391, footnote.
The Pleiades were always known as a group of stars, but they seem nebulous because they are so close to eachother.
Andromeda nebula is discribed on p. 39, not available in this version but available on this (older?) version of Hinckley Allen's book. Same page
http://books.google.nl/books?id=x4qVPl- ... pe&f=false
A century ago astronomers believed it a new solar system forming, but several decades later photography/or spectography showed that the 'nebula' was built out of stars.

Curtis SWN wrote:Forecasting catastrophes like earthquakes, hurricanes, etc has got to be an inexact science at best. What planet rules disaster? Pluto, Neptune, Saturn, Uranus? Don't they all?

Curtis

The first choice would be Uranus, for sudden, catastrophic events.

When you have a cranky, eccentric planet which has virtually toppled
98 degrees sideways, anything can happen. Uranus must be the weirdest
planet in the solar system.

In Chaldean and Indian numerology, number 4 people (I am one, Obama
another), ruled by Uranus (and Rahu), are prone to sudden shocks in life.