Phil, Cyril Fagan was dogmatic on a number of points, and some of these points have turned out to be distinctly wrong based on later scholarship. Fagan's main contribution was the re-discovery of the sidereal zodiac, but some of his historical conclusions were obviously incorrect.

In retrospect one wonders about the quality of Fagan's scholarship. Fagan was not academically trained, and he made some serious mistakes. In this age of the Internet and electronic publishing it's difficult for us to realize that in the past a researcher had to use a great deal of effort to find basic historical information. You had to dig up whatever you could find in black and white printed material, and perhaps researchers were fortunte enough to have had access to specialized microfilmed files.

However, many of Fagan's strictly astrological observations were insightful and unique. They are as valid today as they were when Fagan was alive. I am posting some of those observations and comments on this thread.

I introduced this thread mainly as a way of introducing younger students to Cyril Fagan. I'm not a dedicated disciple of Fagan myself as I combine principles of India's astrology with Hellenistic and western classical concepts (sidereally applied) in my own work.

Therese, I agree with you for the most part, and probably 100% in spirit. I?ve found that his writings are, as you say, thought provoking, even when incorrect. And I agree with you that it?s important that all of us, in this internet/Amazon age, realize that in the past, knowledge was scarce. Those who worked hard to seek out knowledge are to be applauded. The one negative thing I feel Fagan introduced or propounded was his narrative of having ?rediscovered? some true knowledge that the rest of us poor saps just can?t accept. It?s not just proposing a different viewpoint ? it has more of an ?everyone?s been wrong for almost two millennia, you guys are still all wrong, thank goodness I?ve revealed the truth? kind of feel to it. And I think it?s more than just a feel, frankly. I?m sure that going through his works, that story is essentially spelled out. I?ve always found it divisive, and in this sense actually detrimental to astrology, especially in the face of our critics.

Modern academic works have stated flatly that the ancients were ?tropicalists and siderealists?, both at once. There is a supervenient concept, and its history and meaning are nuanced and fascinating. Having read Fagan, I?ve always wondered how much of the stark division between the two that he works hard to build up and then rails against ? it?s essentially his brand ? relates to his own conclusion that he himself is some sort of heroic ?rediscoverer?. The man never did anything wrong to me, I?m not out to get him. But I have to say that when I myself read him, it seems time and again like this is the tale I?m being sold. And then I read the academic literature, and learn that the whole ?war? he?s been fighting isn?t really there at all!

And I?m enjoying your thread, to be sure. I just for some reason find myself wanting to share my experience with Fagan?s writings with the same younger students of astrology. The art is ancient, and there?re many ways to look at it. I?d beware folks who draw lines in the sand and claim to possess the only ?right? way of approaching things. As the academics show us, the people who know best have many more questions than answers.

Phil wrote:

The one negative thing I feel Fagan introduced or propounded was his narrative of having "rediscovered" some true knowledge that the rest of us poor saps just can't accept. It's not just proposing a different viewpoint. It has more of an "everyone's been wrong for almost two millennia, you guys are still all wrong, thank goodness I've revealed the truth" kind of feel to it. And I think it's more than just a feel, frankly. I'm sure that going through his works, that story is essentially spelled out. I've always found it divisive...

Rather like when it was finally discovered that the earth was round rather than flat? Fagan never made a secret of his opinion that the tropical zodiac was as he called it, "a Greek error." Phil, everyone has a right to his or her opinions and beliefs. Yes, indeed, Fagan was sure he was correct. But there is no need to feel that Fagan was divisive.

Let's suppose you are at an astrological conference, and at dinner you find yourself sitting across the table from Cyril Fagan. Could you honestly provide irrefutable evidence that the tropical zodiac is a valid entity, and that rulerships work just as well in practice as they do in a sidereal zodiac? Could you do that?

Has anyone ever proven the validity of the tropical zodiac? Not that I'm aware of, though many thousands of astrologers use that zodiac for their astrological work. (There has been some research support for the sidereal zodiac, but perhaps none that would pass academic scrutiny.)

My view is that each historical development in any area has a reason for being. Often developments are born, they live their course, make a contribution and then they die. The tropical zodiac has been very valuable as a tool that opened astrology to a less fatalistic outlook. The concept of free will has been introduced, and the idea that individuals can work positively with planetary energies.

It's been discovered since the time of Alan Leo and Charles Carter that signs have distinct "energies" and patterns that help us to understand one another. (The trigon energies and three modes.) Tropical astrology has provided all these concepts.

Then there is India which uses astrology in a much more fatalistic manner. But India has preserved sidereal calculations. Maybe, just maybe, Fagan's contribution is pointing to the truth of sidereal mathematics while India has to learn to be less fatalistic and recognize that individuals can use personal incentive to adjust planetary energy for more positive outcomes. We CAN control our destinies, at least to some extent. This is a contribution of tropical astrology.

Remember that Cyril Fagan used the tropical zodiac for 25 years before moving to the sidereal zodiac. He spent many years in investigation and study. No doubt as the sidereal picture dawned on him, it was hugely exciting for him, a true "Eureka!!" moment. All his old astrological beliefs and practices fell away. Yet, he was willing to admit the validity of tropical OBSERVATIONS. He never questioned those, but simply adjusted them to underlying sidereal signs.

Logically there cannot be two systems of planetary rulerships for signs of the zodiac that work equally well. If we had even ONE very careful and precise controlled research study which tested planetary rulership, one zodiac would fail. Logic decrees this. Then we could stop debating, and take the best from each system.

Cyril Fagan had his role to play in the great drama of astrological history. We can't conclude that it was all a useless show of one man's ego.

In light of all this, it would be very interesting to look at Fagan's birth chart. His data as well as the contradictions of the precise birth hour are listed on the ADB site:
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Fagan,_Cyril
I use his mother's time because it places 15 degrees of sidereal Leo on the ascendant as well as Leo on the navamsa ascendant. Solar Fire adjusted Fagan's mother's LMT time (11:45 am) by adding 25 minutes for standard time.

Want to test house rulerships? Get out your medical astrology reference books. Fagan was almost totally deaf from age 7. Maybe we can learn something from studying his chart.

Hello Phil,

Re: "It has more of an "everyone's been wrong for almost two millennia, you guys are still all wrong, thank goodness I've revealed the truth" kind of feel to it."

Don't feel bad, not at all!

Cyril Fagan is known to have used Alexander Marr's rectification of Fagan's chart as the absolute correct time. Additionally, Alexander Marr has written numerous times of the vast superiority of the Tropical measurement... Alexander Marr completely dropped Sidereal in favor of Tropical.

Or the way I like to write it, Cyril Fagan, when searching out his exact birthtime, deferred to a Tropicalist...

James

Atlantean wrote:

Cyril Fagan is known to have used Alexander Marr's rectification of Fagan's chart as the absolute correct time.

Its interesting that Alexander Marr is often misleadingly listed as a siderealist. The Solsticepoint website still incorrectly states he was a siderealist:

http://www.solsticepoint.com/astrologer ... lists.html

http://www.solsticepoint.com/astrologer ... /marr.html

However, in an old post here on Skyscript Isaac Starkman (who worked with Alexander Marr) set the record straight:

Isaac Starkman wrote:

In all his books and articles Alexander Marr never used the Sidereal Zodiac like Cyril Fagan or Brigadier Firebrance, the editor of Spica. Indeed, he took some of their techniques and applied them into the Tropical Zodiac, like Fagan's PSSR system.

I quote from the foreword of Marr's book Prediction I:
The discoveries of the eminent astrologer Cyril Fagan split the astrological world into three main camps: Tropical, Sidereal, and what the late Brigadier Firebrance termed "Little Bastard Zodiac", where precession is expunged from charts whilst maintaining the tropical zodiac?I hope to persuade Siderealists that transits to the radix should be applied in the tropical manner, that is, disregarding precession. However, in regard to return charts, both Tropical and Sidereal Solar Returns are valid."
Marr wrote many articles in Spica, the Sidereal journal, because it was at that time the only journal that agreed to publish his articles. That could be the source for the error of classifying him as siderealist

On the rectification of Fagan's chart I understand Alexander Marr heavily relied on primary directions to rectify natal charts did he not? So although house rulers might have varied the basic directions would be the same irrespective of zodiac. In the days before computer software it was quite an onerous prospect to take on primary directions without a strong mathematical bent. I dont find it that odd that Cyril Fagan may have sought out the expertise of a primary directions specialist like Alexander Marr. Plus Marr was clearly a bit of an outsider from the tropical mainstream of that era too. As Isaac Starkan said the only publication that would publish Marr's ideas was the western sidereal publication Spica. This probably added to a sense of solidarity with Fagan and Brigadier Firebrance who was the editor of Spica.

Our moderator here (Martin Gansten) is an example of a siderealist who has written a successful book on primary directions that has been widely read by astrologers of all backgrounds. Moreover, he runs a popular course on traditional primary directions. I am aware that many prominent tropical astrologers have completed the course. By the same kind of logic as you use above would you suggest studying with Martin Gansten somehow undermines these astrologers tropical credentials? I hardly think so.

Mark

Atlantean wrote:

Cyril Fagan is known to have used Alexander Marr's rectification of Fagan's chart as the absolute correct time.

I had never read that before, but doesn't this give the lie to Fagan being closed minded to all things tropical? If it's true that he enlisted Alexander Marr to help rectifiy his birth time, then he was open minded and open hearted enough to recognize a tropical astrologer who in his view was highly technically skilled. Alexander Marr had adopted the Topocentric house system and used primary directions to precisely time events. Primary directions are basically zodiac independent.

Mark, thanks for the Isaac Starkman quote, and the biographical notes for Alexander Marr. Very interesting and helpful! Also kudos to your comments regarding tropical astrologers who have studied with Martin Gansten.

Here is Cyril Fagan's own rectification of his birth chart. (Krishnamurti ayanamsa) Perhaps it's the rectification that he requested from Alexandar Marr, though Fagan would have used his own ayanamsa with the Synetic Vernal Point. This would make all planetary positions 59 minutes less than the Krishnamurti positions.

Therese Hamilton wrote:

Also, as Fagan suggests, planetary aspects can take priority over sign attributes. Sometimes a sign simply manifests a type of energy that is only perceptible when living or conversing with a person. This makes sign research extremely difficult unless one follows a profession relating to a sign whose ruler is prominent. Planetary interaction is always stronger than sign attributes.

This is powerful and I totally agree with you and Fagan.
If I could use a snippet from my own natal chart to demonstrate this concept.
I have a tight Venus/Pluto conjunction (within 5 minute orb) and conjunct Uranus (within 2-1/2 degree orb) all of which sextile Neptune (again, within another 2-1/2 degree orb) Of course the rulers of my luminaries are tied up in this as can be seen by my signature.
If you were to know me in real life, I would be the most Un-Libran person you could ever know. That is, I do not fit the description of a typical Sun sign Libran or one that is further "pacified" by the Pisces moon too.. and yet my Pisces moon is not weak as its in the Gibbous waxing phase and conjunct my out of sign IC but not tight (6-1/2 degree orb)
I would be seen by others as somewhat of a loner, strong willed and quite self sufficient in life.
But hey, don't take my word for it, here's the proof..
PS: I'm not sure how to upload an image on this site without 3rd party hosting... Therese, how did you do yours above without linking to external sites?

Ok, got this working now...

For comparison, here are the Krishnamurti sidereal and Tropical birth charts for Cyril Fagan. The charts are set for his own rectified time of birth.

RodJM wrote:

PS: I'm not sure how to upload an image on this site without 3rd party hosting... Therese, how did you do yours above without linking to external sites?)

I go to the Tinypic site, and ask to upload an image. Then there is the "browse" choice, and I find the file on my computer which I've saved to jpeg from Solar Fire.

Then before uploading I choose the image size from the list which is the choice for message boards.

After the image is on the screen, then you block the image code for "Forums and Messaage Boards" and paste it into the Skyscript screen where you are typing.

Yes, Rod, I'd like to see your natal chart if you want to post it. Tinypic will ask you to type in a code which they give you a few seconds later. This has something to do with preventing spam on the site. I think I had to register first a while ago for the photo sharing site, Photobucket, which must sponsor Tinypic.

I always think it's a good idea to post charts in both the tropical and sidereal zodiacs for rulership comparison.

Rod, is your signature tropical or sidereal?

Therese Hamilton wrote:RodJM wrote:

PS: I'm not sure how to upload an image on this site without 3rd party hosting... Therese, how did you do yours above without linking to external sites?)

I go to the Tinypic site, and ask to upload an image. Then there is the "browse" choice, and I find the file on my computer which I've saved to jpeg from Solar Fire.

Then before uploading I choose the image size from the list which is the choice for message boards.

After the image is on the screen, then you block the image code for "Forums and Messaage Boards" and paste it into the Skyscript screen where you are typing.

Yes, Rod, I'd like to see your natal chart if you want to post it. Tinypic will ask you to type in a code which they give you a few seconds later. This has something to do with preventing spam on the site. I think I had to register first a while ago for the photo sharing site, Photobucket, which must sponsor Tinypic.

I always think it's a good idea to post charts in both the tropical and sidereal zodiacs for rulership comparison.

Rod, is your signature tropical or sidereal?

Thanks Therese,

Yes, I have an a/c with photobucket, but for some reason that site always slows down my browser dramatically and I'm on a wireless connection which doesn't help from my part of the world either..

I will post it, just taking some time.. (finally done!) see my last post.

My signature is sidereal. For anyone who has planets in the approx 24 - 30 degree range of tropical zodiac will have the same zodiac sign in sidereal, but I know you already know that.

Rod, thanks for posting your chart. Since you have Sagittarius rising, Jupiter is the magnet that attracts planetary energy to yourself. The placement of Jupiter is very interesting because it changes signs between the Fagan and Lahiri/Krishnamurti ayanamsas. It's very "old" with Fagan (last degree of Aries) , and very "young" with L/K, 59 minutes into Taurus with K. So either Mars or Venus disposits your Jupiter. Can you identify with either position of Jupiter?

The two planets that influence Jupiter are the Aquarian Saturn (square) and the Pisces Moon (sextile). (But with Fagan these aspects are out of sign.) The Moon gains additional strength because it's on your navamsa ascendant, assuming that your birth time is correct. It all goes back to having a very clear sense of the attributes of each planet.

Can you identify with a lunar or Saturn influence? Often it's difficult to sense a sign influence if planets are in the early degrees, and that's where your Sun, Jupiter, Saturn, Mercury and Moon are--in early degrees of signs, so (as you know) the tropical signs will be the same. What fun!!

It may be that the Venus-in-Leo stellium doesn't refer to you at all, but to some circumstances in your life. But there is a Sun-Venus mutual reception which you should notice. This connects the 9th and 11th houses, and there will be a Venus influence on the Sun. It's the mutual reception that will be dominant with your Leo and Libra planets. Then Venus is connected to both Uranus and Pluto. You should see this influence in 6th and 11th house affairs since Venus rules those houses. And relationships, of course. But I leave the details up to you!

P.S. Despite what the books say, the 11th house doesn't rule group affiliation. The 11th has to do with gain and patronage from others, especially as relating to monetary flow and favors. Sometimes the 11th is simply good luck at certain times in the life, and it can have to do with material comfort or the lack of it.

Rahu is trine your Sun and Mercury. That can relate to interest in astrology and metaphysics. If your asc lord Jupiter is in early Taurus, that adds the influence of Neptune since it's in early Taurus (1? 25') in the navamsa.