Graham wrote:

Yes, that is a big problem. Fagan said they should be calculated from 0? Taurus.

Fagan said that because he believed the true zodiac began with Taurus, but now we know that the zodiac as such always began with Aries.

To get round it, I wouldn't use rulerships in DCs, and also I would only use the truly harmonic ones like the D9 (many are based on strange jumps ans so on).

DCs...???

True, some of the Indian varga charts aren't truly harmonic charts. But taking the navamsa, for example, the way I've isolated the Krishnamurti ayanamsa is by precise degree overlap of navamsa planets to natal positions. This is a primary way that birth charts are distinguised from each other, particularly navamsa planets that fall exactly on natal cusps.

deleted

Graham wrote:

Th?r?se wrote:
the way I've isolated the Krishnamurti ayanamsa is by precise degree overlap of navamsa planets to natal positions. This is a primary way that birth charts are distinguished from each other, particularly navamsa planets that fall exactly on natal cusps.

Graham replied:
If you've got a very precise birth time, you could use it to test different ayanamsa. If you're sure about your ayanamsa, you could use it to rectify! But are you sure you're not tweaking the birth times a bit?

I don't generally tweak birth times. I suppose I might with involved research, but I've only looked at singleton charts or small groups of charts such as murderers.

Also, I trust that you've checked that you don't get even sharper results if using the fixed signs as the starting post for the harmonic calculation? To do this, which will make the first navamsa of Ta-Le-Sc-Aq = themselves (rather than Ar-Cn-Li-Cp = themselves),

I would never sidestep tradition like that any more than I'd consider any planet but Mercury as lord of Virgo and exalted there. The Indian navamsa is very old, and very traditionally secure. I've researched it for more than 30 years. You are welcome to experiment as you like, however!

Graham, I'm saving the remainder of your post for a later answer when I have more time. Thanks for the discussion!

deleted

Graham, I have little time today, but perhaps you didn't know that I began my sidereal career in the Fagan school (Taurus navamsa), and after study and experimentation later moved to the Indian system. (Some of my published articles are in those early western sidereal magazines from the 1970s.) I even still have my original Fagan novien tables that I photocopied from one of his articles, so I'm familiar with the sign adjustment you mentioned.

All my life since being introduced to astrology in 1965 (!!), I've studied and researched the zodiac and techniques. I don't believe that one can question tradition until one has fully mastered a topic. And no one has fully mastered astrology as it is such a vast and comprehensive Cosmic study.

It's now commonly accepted that India's horoscopic astrology has its basis in Hellenistic and Arabic astrology. Way back then there was only one astrology which eventually branched into the tropical west and the sidereal east.

Cyril Fagan was a bit weak on history as he didn't have the advantage of the many translated texts we have now, beginning in the 1990s. If Fagan was alive today, he would have to revise a number of his conclusions about the origin of astrology and the zodiac.

Questions concerning the beginning of the sidereal zodiac would be an interesting discussion in light of number symbolism. This subject was introduced on this topic (Phil), but left hanging. I've started a new number topic on the sidereal forum with part of Phil's message, but no one has posted yet. Would you like to move your zodiac beginning sign questions to that topic? http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8162

(This topic already has six pages which means it's getting too long for some new readers to swallow.)

Good idea - have now moved them, plus your replies, and deleted my messages from here. Not sure I did it in the right way...
Graham

Graham,

Oh, I was thinking mainly of moving a few ideas from posts, but I see you've moved a number of entire posts to the numbers topic. Well...I'll have some time later this evening to read through what you've moved. I hope Phil and maybe others will have comments about number symbolism and the zodiac. As I said, I don't recall Cyril Fagan saying anthing about number symbolism.

Th?r?se
I've been drawing up some charts in SF, using house system "0? Aries" for easy comparison (no 0? anything else option, of course!). Saving them, then putting the original in the middle of the screen, and on one side the usual (cardinal-based) navamsa, and on the other the fixed-based Fagan one (calculated from the D1 using offset of 13?20). Makiing sure the ayanamsa is invisible, so I don't know which is which while comparing. As usual in astrology (law of probability, no doubt), some correspondences of degree+sign can usually be found for both. But the ones that turn out to be the fixed based ones are more impressive so far (e.g. MC same sign+degree TTM if original recorded time tweaked by 11 seconds - navamsa is of course very sensitive to slight rectification). This is very interesting, had never thought of using navamsa like this!
Graham

The navamsa overlap has nothing to do with how many overlaps there are, but how appropriate they are to the person's life. Also the navamsa signs are very important, so you have to have a handle on the basic meaning of each of the 12 signs. There is a big difference, for example, between navamsa Capricorn and Aquarius. Also, is the appropriate planet exalted or in its own sign in the navamsa, for example?

To test the navamsa we have to use real life charts of well known people and what they are famous for.

Graham, here is a chart you can look at. I was searching my files for something and accidentally found this chart marked for the Fagan novien measured from zero Taurus. So it was one of my research charts in the distant past that I don't recall. This chart is on the AstroDatabank site:

Ian Brady
2 January 1938
12:40 p.m.
Glasgow, UK

Scottish homicide; he and his girl friend, Myra Hindley, were sentenced to life in prison for the sadistic murders of three, possibly four young people. E. Williams in his biography, "Beyond Belief," 1969, relates how they took pictures and recorded the sounds of their victims during torture and death. (Additional biographical data on the ADB site.)

We can compare the Krishnamurti navamsa and the Fagan novien. Natal planets are bolded.

Krishnamurti
22 Aries 50 ascendant

6 Cancer 29R Pluto
6 Cancer 14 navamsa Mercury
6 Cancer 55 navamsa Venus

28 Leo14R Neptune
27 Leo 02 navamsa Saturn
28 Leo 18 navamsa Pluto

Navamsa Moon in fall in Scorpio, natal house 8 (7 degrees from the cusp, a bit far...)

Fagan-Bradley
21 Aries 51 ascendant

Venus and Mercury in Libra not conjunct a planet. Also Venus is "at home" (good) in Libra. These planets fall in natal 7th.
(No planets conjunct natal Pluto.)

17 Sagittarius 36 Sun
18 Sagittarius 13 novien Saturn
19 Sagittarius 28 navien Pluto

Novien Moon in 21 Pisces, but out of orb to natal Saturn at 5 Pisces.
Novien Jupiter is exalted in Cancer,which should be good.

(Fagan used the term "novien" rather than navamsa. It's a good way to keep the Taurus navamsa separate from the Aries navamsa.)

We can see why it's necessary to test a number of similar charts (say serial murderers) since both Krishnamurti and Fagan have "hits." However, Krishnamurti has more navamsa hits, and they are more exact and significant.

Yes, to adjust to the novien chart which software calculates from Aries, just move each navamsa planet forward by a trine. (Aries to Leo, Taurus to Virgo, etc.) The degrees remain the same as in the Aries navamsa.

Thanks Th?r?s
Yes, these conjunctions you give with KM navamsa look impressive (if we stretch the tradtion to include the outers, and why not?).
But really, we should test the navamsa and the novien with the same ayanamsa, if we want to test novien against navamsa, which is what interests me. The Fagan-Bradley ayanamsa is obviously out.
Graham

Graham F wrote: Yes, these conjunctions you give with KM navamsa look impressive (if we stretch the tradtion to include the outers, and why not?).
But really, we should test the navamsa and the novien with the same ayanamsa, if we want to test novien against navamsa, which is what interests me. The Fagan-Bradley ayanamsa is obviously out.
Graham

I suppose we could use the same ayanamsa, but those who follow Fagan are so very fixed on the 15 degrees Aldebaran zodiac. So if we use the same ayanamsa for both the Aries and Taurus zodiacs, we're taking a step away from the western Sidereal school. Members of that school call themselves Sidereal with a capital "S." All others in their view are only sidereal with a small "s". This is how they distinguish Fagan's astrology from others.

But I don't mind at all using the same ayanamsa for testing. That saves having to calculate two different charts. But it's easier to distinguish the Aries and Taurus zodiacs by using "novien" for the Taurus zodiac.

Using the Krishnamurti ayanamsa with Brady's novien chart, we lose the Saturn/Pluto conjunction to the natal Sun, but then these are close to the Moon. Mars is two degrees from equal cusp 3 in Gemini. You've probably already worked out these positions.

Any thoughts about the stellium in Sagittarius? For those who don't have the chart: Mercury, Venus, Sun, MC, Moon in Sag, dispositor Jupiter in fall in Capricorn.

10 Cap 05 natal Jupiter
10 Cap 00 Alpha Cap, Giedi Prima