hoping to throw a request out there. I'm in need of a theoretically-sound resource (and I say that as someone with a healthy respect for tradition, if you get my point) that lists countries with their sign rulerships. all the lists I have include countries that either no longer exist, or have merged with neighboring countries to form new nations. some designations are still very much relevant, but would hate to overlook an association because the list is simply outdated.

also, noticed for the US there are 2 charts used -- one with Sag rising, one with Gemini rising. anyone know of a location that openly discusses the merits of either, and their sources? and why the original chart was challenged?

hi wca,

nic campions book of world horoscopes is considered the definitive guide for data on countries and does cover a lot of ground on the topic of charts for the usa which you ask about as well. however, it isn't broken down along traditional lines of country and sign.. for that you might have to consider ben dykes latest mundane series which i haven't personally read. failing that - hopefully mark or someone else can come and add more light on your inquest.. marc penfield has some books that i believe are out of print which focused on city data and etc, but it might have only been for the usa. good luck.

http://www.bendykes.com/aw1.php

I personally like the 7GE34/5 US Rising, there's a taut little triangle with Uranus, Aldebaran & USA ASC ... there was a new moon there in the late 80's early 90's just about the time of a progressed new moon (Aquarius) in the 4July 1776 chart ... that I take for the beginning of the Aquarian Age and equate it with the inception of the internet which certainly has changed our consciousness ... Sagittarius is out of the question because, mainly, any chart after sunrise has a void of course moon, and since there is general agreement that the US sunsign is Cancer, a void of course moon does not make sense to me ...

Gemini rising ... sign of the Twins, USA being 'born' in Philadelphia, brotherly love ... and the 18AQ10 moon concomitent with the 7GE34/5 asc explains Obama's success -- his Asc is 18AQ03 ... incidentally, the Twins appear in the indigenous American zodiac, or rather the concept of duality, with the stars of Gemini appearing as Copulating Peccararies ... Effing Pigs to put it technically

In fact if you look at all the contenders the last time out ... a goodly handful had 18AQ10 conjunct within a degree or two some major horoscopic factor -- Michelle Bachman, Donald Trump, Newt Gingrich come to mind

As for the "original" chart -- well, grab your musket ... Sibley first proposed the Sag rising chart ... I personally came across the GE rising when I first started studying astrology in the year of the US Bicentennial or shortly thereafter ... Bob Jansky had a self-printed pamphlet on the US election with all the candidates and other relevant charts which I bought as Chicago's Astrologer's Medium ... Jansky used the 7GE rising for the US chart. I tested it out later basically w/progressions (and converse progressions) secondaries ... the clincher 'proving' it for me was the progressed eclipse in the mid-60's on Spiro Agnew's birthday when all the lights went out on the eastern seaboard -- I think something like 10 states involved. The exactitude of the progression with the manifestion was a matter of 18 hours ...

wcsa wrote:

hoping to throw a request out there. I'm in need of a theoretically-sound resource (and I say that as someone with a healthy respect for tradition, if you get my point) that lists countries with their sign rulerships. all the lists I have include countries that either no longer exist, or have merged with neighboring countries to form new nations. some designations are still very much relevant, but would hate to overlook an association because the list is simply outdated.

I will deal with your two questions separately. Firstly, the issue of a 'theoretically sound' approach to single sign rulerships for countries. mmm not at all an easy task I am afraid!

In Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos we have designation of single signs to countries. Ptolemy's system is based on astrological directionology with different triplicities and signs assigned different continents and portions within those parts of the world.

However, other ancient astrologers seem to have used a different approach in assigning triplicities to directions so came up with different designations for countries.

A third approach seen in Teucer of Babylon and Vettius Valens uses the sidereal location of constellations in relation to latitudes for parts of the world.

Looking at cities (or Empires) Ptolemy recommends the foundation charts for a city. Failing that we can look at the ASC or Sun or Moon. Quite similar to the approach of national charts in modern astrology.

The Perso-Arabic and later medieval tradition largely used Ptolemy designations but added their own. Its often unclear where these were derived from. They may have been related to a concept of astrological geography, or foundation charts or some other logic based on perceived national characteristics based on sign.

These single sign associations were expanded in in the late 19th century by astrologers like Sepharial and Leo to North America , Asia, Africa and Australasia, with signs linked to countries such as Japan, Brazil , Argentina Australia etc. Where they derived these newer sign associations from is not always clear. It may have been derived from Grimm and Sepharial's new system of astrological geography derived from London as the world epicentre based on time zones. Equally, they may have used foundation charts for some locations with either the ASC or Sun sign used.

As I hope you can see the whole picture of sign associations with countries is quite chaotic. Adding all the traditional sources together will give you a theoretically thorough understanding but whether that makes it 'sound' in practical astrological terms is another question entirely! As you point out many of the countries listed no longer exist. Equally, traditional sources can tell us little about the vast majority of countries in the Americas, Africa, East Asia, or the countries in the Pacific.

Those wanting to go back to Ptolemy could try to assign new sign associations for newer countries based on directionology. But with our knowledge of world geography today much greater we would probably need to assign a new fixed geodetic centre. That is one of the basic problems with any fixed system of astrological geography. For early astrologers that was Rhodes but later Ptolemy used Gibraltar. We all need to agree on a fixed centre for the entire earth. Where is that? Sepharial used Greenwich, London, England based on the global adoption of GMT as the basis of world time zones. However, as one astrologer wryly commented 'the main problem with this system is that it assumes God is an Englishman!''

Even if we can agree a fixed geodetic we still have another problem with this kind of approach. While continents may change and shift at an incredibly show rate human culture does not. Are Italians of today similar to the militaristic Roman Empire? Or is Britain of the ancient Celts similar to the inhabitants of that same Island today? How similar is modern Scandanavia to the the lands of the Vikings? You get my point I hope. Wih a fixed geodtic used by Ptolemy or Sepharial countries sign association remain immutable despite the major political, social, and religious changes that can take place.

It has to be said that one of the main tools used by traditional astrologers in mundane work was ingress charts. The Perso-Arabic astrologers were the first to promote this technique for mundane work. They would look at the Aries ingress and other quarters of the year. They also used ingress charts prior to the foundation of a dynasty or for a Jupiter-Saturn conjunction.

Ingress charts were the main tool to analyse events by country until after WWII when Charles Carter promoted national charts. Ingres charts are still a very viable approach and suffer none of the practical problems of agreeing sign associations for countries.

Many traditionalists are critical of the modern use of national charts in favour of ingress charts because there are often several possible charts for one country. You often find heated discussions on the ''one true'' national chart for a country. This raises a question of whether a country has a single birth moment or not. I dont tend to think countries are exactly like nativities so several key moments can be key. There is also the question of whether a fundamental change in government can change the astrology of a country.

So what sources to refer you too? Well certainly, Ben Dykes 3 volume series on mundane astrology 'Astrology of the World' is highly recommended. Ben Dykes devotes most of his second volume to a study of ingress charts. The third volume has yet to be published:

http://www.bendykes.com/aw1.php

For modern books I agree with James that Nicholas Campion's The Book of World Horoscopes is undeniably the best volume available on national horoscopes.

For foundation charts for individual cities I recommend Marc Penfield's series of books on the horoscopes of each continent. Penfield has now written a volume for every part of the world. While Penfield's coverage of national charts is not as thorough as Nicholas Campion his presentation of charts for cities is excellent and comes up with a lot of hard to find material.

http://www.amazon.com/Horoscopes-USA-Ca ... 0866904654

http://www.amazon.com/Horoscopes-Latin- ... c+Penfield

http://www.amazon.com/Horoscopes-Europe ... 6YM57BYDNT

http://www.amazon.com/Horoscopes-Africa ... c+Penfield

http://www.amazon.com/Horoscopes-Asia-A ... 6YM57BYDNT

Looking at just the USA another highly recommended book is Horoscopes of U.S. States and Cities by Carolyn Dodson.

http://www.amazon.com/Horoscopes-States ... 6YM57BYDNT

wcsa wrote

also, noticed for the US there are 2 charts used -- one with Sag rising, one with Gemini rising. anyone know of a location that openly discusses the merits of either, and their sources? and why the original chart was challenged?

I'm afraid the topic is a lot more complicated than two charts! Just restricting ourselves to July 4th 1776 there have been numerous charts proposed with the following rising signs: Gemini, Virgo, Libra, Scorpio and Sagittarius. Within that there are several competing times proposed. So today there are over a dozen charts proposed for July 4th 1776. Plus many astrologers think other dates/times are more important. That gives us another 10 charts at least.

I actually, tried to resolve questions like yours on the forum by opening a locked thread discussing most of the key charts with links to articles. Unfortunately, it has slipped down the forum. Here it is:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8343

Mark

SG Foxe wrote:

Sagittarius is out of the question because, mainly, any chart after sunrise has a void of course moon, and since there is general agreement that the US sunsign is Cancer, a void of course moon does not make sense to me ...

A lot of traditional astrological authorities would disagree with your perception that the Moon is void of course in the Sagittarius rising chart for the USA. Its true many modern astrologers have adopted the notion of void of course Moon is one when a Moon late in sign perfects no aspect before changing sign. However, this is an over simplistic attitude. Many traditional sources make clear the Moon is only void of course if it leaves the sign without being in an applying aspect to another planet. The Moon doesn't have to perfect the aspect in the same sign. The aspect can actually perfect across the boundary. This is the way William Lilly and several other medieval astrologers applied the concept. Based this this understanding the Moon is not VOC in the Sagittarius rising chart as it is within orb of a trine to Venus across the sign boundary.

Mark

Yeah, Mark,

A lot of people disagree with me about a lot of things -- such as I consider mercury dignified in Aquarius, and the Greeks got astrology from Persia apr?s Alexander, not vice versa and Christ's biofather was Herod the Great

I thought I responded to this thread months ago, but it appears that I haven't. I wanted to thank everyone who replied for their help, with specific comments in the posts that follow.

james_m wrote:hi wca,

nic campions book of world horoscopes is considered the definitive guide for data on countries and does cover a lot of ground on the topic of charts for the usa which you ask about as well. however, it isn't broken down along traditional lines of country and sign.. for that you might have to consider ben dykes latest mundane series which i haven't personally read. failing that - hopefully mark or someone else can come and add more light on your inquest.. marc penfield has some books that i believe are out of print which focused on city data and etc, but it might have only been for the usa. good luck.

http://www.bendykes.com/aw1.php

thanks so much. I purchased Campions "World Horoscopes" on your suggestion, and did find some of what I'm looking for. will couple this with other resources I have found since this post. thank you James!

SGFoxe wrote:I personally like the 7GE34/5 US Rising, there's a taut little triangle with Uranus, Aldebaran & USA ASC ... there was a new moon there in the late 80's early 90's just about the time of a progressed new moon (Aquarius) in the 4July 1776 chart ... that I take for the beginning of the Aquarian Age and equate it with the inception of the internet which certainly has changed our consciousness ... Sagittarius is out of the question because, mainly, any chart after sunrise has a void of course moon, and since there is general agreement that the US sunsign is Cancer, a void of course moon does not make sense to me ...

while we make disagree on what defines a void of course Moon (I see you and Mark have had this conversation so I won't pick it up further), I certainly think there's going to be an interpretive difference if the Moon has to cross sign boundaries to make her next aspect. doesn't maker her void, I happen to be with Mark on this, but is still an interesting note.

SGFoxe wrote:Gemini rising ... sign of the Twins, USA being 'born' in Philadelphia, brotherly love ... and the 18AQ10 moon concomitent with the 7GE34/5 asc explains Obama's success -- his Asc is 18AQ03 ... incidentally, the Twins appear in the indigenous American zodiac, or rather the concept of duality, with the stars of Gemini appearing as Copulating Peccararies ... Effing Pigs to put it technically

In fact if you look at all the contenders the last time out ... a goodly handful had 18AQ10 conjunct within a degree or two some major horoscopic factor -- Michelle Bachman, Donald Trump, Newt Gingrich come to mind

if I remember correctly, Olivia Barclay supported a Gemini rising ascendant as well, if for no other reason than because she couldn't picture a nation with Sagittarius rising that relied on cars as much as the US does -- Sagittarius should be a walking nation! she then comments that Sagittarius is fitting for Australia, given its national symbol of the kangaroo with its strong thigh muscles. all this is documented in her "Horary Astrology Rediscovered."

Mark, wow, so grateful for your thorough reply. I can see why James hoped you'd weigh in.

Mark wrote: Firstly, the issue of a 'theoretically sound' approach to single sign rulerships for countries. mmm not at all an easy task I am afraid!

yes, I was getting a sense of that myself while I was sorting through the material.

Mark wrote: Looking at cities (or Empires) Ptolemy recommends the foundation charts for a city. Failing that we can look at the ASC or Sun or Moon. Quite similar to the approach of national charts in modern astrology.

this makes complete sense to me. noticed it a lot in 17th century literature -- cities being specifically named due to the sign rising on their ascendant at foundation/incorporation.

Mark wrote: The Perso-Arabic and later medieval tradition largely used Ptolemy designations but added their own. Its often unclear where these were derived from. They may have been related to a concept of astrological geography, or foundation charts or some other logic based on perceived national characteristics based on sign.

great, this is excellent information. I knew about the Perso-Arabic additions, but was concerned I missed some text that explores the reasoning. will continue to be on the lookout in case it crops up, but it is helpful to know that the reasoning isn't patently obvious.

Mark wrote: These single sign associations were expanded in in the late 19th century by astrologers like Sepharial and Leo to North America , Asia, Africa and Australasia, with signs linked to countries such as Japan, Brazil , Argentina Australia etc. Where they derived these newer sign associations from is not always clear. It may have been derived from Grimm and Sepharial's new system of astrological geography derived from London as the world epicentre based on time zones. Equally, they may have used foundation charts for some locations with either the ASC or Sun sign used.

As I hope you can see the whole picture of sign associations with countries is quite chaotic. Adding all the traditional sources together will give you a theoretically thorough understanding but whether that makes it 'sound' in practical astrological terms is another question entirely! As you point out many of the countries listed no longer exist. Equally, traditional sources can tell us little about the vast majority of countries in the Americas, Africa, East Asia, or the countries in the Pacific.

great point, definitely poses and interesting question for mundane astrologers wishing to recall the traditional methods. going to need to sit on this for some time.

Mark wrote: Those wanting to go back to Ptolemy could try to assign new sign associations for newer countries based on directionology. But with our knowledge of world geography today much greater we would probably need to assign a new fixed geodetic centre. That is one of the basic problems with any fixed system of astrological geography. For early astrologers that was Rhodes but later Ptolemy used Gibraltar. We all need to agree on a fixed centre for the entire earth. Where is that? Sepharial used Greenwich, London, England based on the global adoption of GMT as the basis of world time zones. However, as one astrologer wryly commented 'the main problem with this system is that it assumes God is an Englishman!''

Even if we can agree a fixed geodetic we still have another problem with this kind of approach. While continents may change and shift at an incredibly show rate human culture does not. Are Italians of today similar to the militaristic Roman Empire? Or is Britain of the ancient Celts similar to the inhabitants of that same Island today? How similar is modern Scandanavia to the the lands of the Vikings? You get my point I hope. Wih a fixed geodtic used by Ptolemy or Sepharial countries sign association remain immutable despite the major political, social, and religious changes that can take place.

I suppose my follow up question on this would be (and this might be my own ignorance here), is it really theoretically unsound to use the rising signs of national foundation charts? my personal preference would be to use those signs for countries that have long had zodiacal association (Spain, for instance). but it was my assumption that directionology was employed by Ptolemy because foundation charts were not known or could not be found. it seems like the cleanest way to sort through this to use the sign rising in the foundation charts, just as we would for anything else that has a seed moment.

Mark wrote: It has to be said that one of the main tools used by traditional astrologers in mundane work was ingress charts. The Perso-Arabic astrologers were the first to promote this technique for mundane work. They would look at the Aries ingress and other quarters of the year. They also used ingress charts prior to the foundation of a dynasty or for a Jupiter-Saturn conjunction.

Ingress charts were the main tool to analyse events by country until after WWII when Charles Carter promoted national charts. Ingres charts are still a very viable approach and suffer none of the practical problems of agreeing sign associations for countries.

Many traditionalists are critical of the modern use of national charts in favour of ingress charts because there are often several possible charts for one country. You often find heated discussions on the ''one true'' national chart for a country. This raises a question of whether a country has a single birth moment or not. I dont tend to think countries are exactly like nativities so several key moments can be key. There is also the question of whether a fundamental change in government can change the astrology of a country.

as it happens, I'm looking for this zodiacal information for my ingress charts. I am with you on this -- ingress charts are the way to go. but knowing zodiacal rulerships helps you to isolate what foreign countries might be involved in, say, a Moon square Saturn that falls on the 10th/7th angles. hope that makes sense.

thank you so much for the links, have explored them all including the forum link. much appreciated, Mark!

wca wrote:

While we make disagree on what defines a void of course Moon (I see you and Mark have had this conversation so I won't pick it up further), I certainly think there's going to be an interpretive difference if the Moon has to cross sign boundaries to make her next aspect. doesn't maker her void, I happen to be with Mark on this, but is still an interesting note.

I totally agree with you an aspect across the sign boundary is not as straightfoward as one within sign. I remember Deborah Houlding teaching this in her horary classes too. Its kind of seen as some 'unfinished business' to be got through before the aspect can perfect.

I think this fits the Sag rising USA chart perfectly. The Moon applies across the sign boundary to Lord 6 and 11 (Venus). This fits the fact that the settlement of 1776 and the constitution of 1789 left the issue of slavery unresolved. Slavery fits the 6th house association while the 11th =freedom from bondage. But it took an incredibly bitter and traumatic American Civil war to overcome that. Moreover, its legacy has left ripples into the 20th century and beyond in the civil rights movement of the 1960's and the ongoing problems overcoming racial discrimination to this day.


SGFoxe wrote:

Gemini rising ... sign of the Twins, USA being 'born' in Philadelphia, brotherly love ... and the 18AQ10 moon concomitent with the 7GE34/5 asc explains Obama's success -- his Asc is 18AQ03 ... incidentally, the Twins appear in the indigenous American zodiac, or rather the concept of duality, with the stars of Gemini appearing as Copulating Peccararies ... Effing Pigs to put it technically

In fact if you look at all the contenders the last time out ... a goodly handful had 18AQ10 conjunct within a degree or two some major horoscopic factor -- Michelle Bachman, Donald Trump, Newt Gingrich come to mind


if I remember correctly, Olivia Barclay supported a Gemini rising ascendant as well, if for no other reason than because she couldn't picture a nation with Sagittarius rising that relied on cars as much as the US does -- Sagittarius should be a walking nation! she then comments that Sagittarius is fitting for Australia, given its national symbol of the kangaroo with its strong thigh muscles. all this is documented in her "Horary Astrology Rediscovered."

I agree with Ron Howland that too many astrologers totally ignore or downplay historical evidence when considering the viability of a mundane chart. They start to play with charts and rectify first. Or they follow an intuitive hunch that the national characteristics of a country fit a particular sign. They may never even get round to considering the historical evidence if they become convinced by a chart they thinks 'works'. But lots of things can look plausible astrologically. When the facts completely contradict a chart time I think we need to show some humility and accept that.

The Gemini rising chart is simply not sustainable if you look at the historical evidence. Its an astrological fairy tale invented by astrologers to make the astrology match their pre-conceptions. But could the chart still work? Many claim it does. Two possible explanations. Firstly, it mirrors some other charts that are accurate. For example, the Vivian Robson version of the Sag rising chart is vertially the direct opposite of the popular Gemini rising chart with the ASC/DESC angles reversed. A second, more radical interpretation is whether a 'radical' mundane chart is more to do with the consciousness of the astrologer than the chart itself. This brings up the little explored and controversial topic of mundane astrology as a form of divination just like horary.

Mark

Does anyone know of a horoscope for London?

Does anyone know of a horoscope for London?

Not that I managed to track down. Here is the thread where I asked the same question

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2632