Hello Therese,

I cannot agree with you that the discussion between Tom and myself was as you put it 'irrelevent'. It may not have been personally interesting to you but that is a different matter. I think Tom has a point that one cannot discuss a figure like Nixon without a reasonable understanding of his life and times. As Nixon was a poltical person to his core that intrudes on politics.

I should say I didn't pick Nixon to be awkward. I just noticed he was a good change-over of signs and rulerships between the two zodiacs. I kind of wish I had chosen the astrologer Maurice McCann's chart now.

As for your desire to keep the discussion exclusively sidereal I am confused why you suggested in your previous post I put charts up in both zodiacs. I think its a useful comparison. Not least because there are very few traditional siderealists out there. There wouldn't be much of a thread going on here without the participation of tropical astrologers too.

I understand your desire to keep the thread on track as you see it. However, I can tell you that after nearly 7 years on this forum just creating a thread doesn't mean you can have editorial control how it evolves. Sometimes it is a bit frustrating when it feels like a a thread runs away from you as the original poster. However, quite often the tangents are as informative as the original focus of the thread. Its an occupational hazard of posting on forums like Skyscript.

Anyway, I am looking forward to your delineation of Nixon...over to you!

Mark

Mark wrote: I dont recognise most of the tropical astrologers apart from Hand, Schmidt ,George and Forrest. I wouldn't have thought most psychological astrologers would do all that well in a test aimed at prediction. I assume this was the pre-traditional Demetra George? It would have been interesting if the tropical group would have done better with more traditional practitioners present. For a straight sidereal-tropical test there should be the same number of practitioners in each group.

I dont understand the scores. But it looks like Schmidt didn't have a good day.

It would be an interesting experiment to repeat with people around today. A larger sample of charts would be more statistically relevant.

Mark

I used ''predictions? ?in the wider sense - i.e. If Joyce said she had a good relationship with her mother and someone said the same or said the opposite then this would merit a tick or cross next to it. However, if the reasons why did not have some similarity to Joyce?s then it would get neither. The main problem with this test was we were relying on Joyce's account of her own life (self-attribution theory) and I think I recall Joyce had been exposed to some astrology directly, so this may have compromised her account. Nevertheless a number of events and timings were there and it?s unlikely Joyce would have deliberately falsified any, or much, information. What would be the point?


George used Porphyry, Lot of Fortune and various asteroids. She commented that having widely experimented with 'modern astrology' over 25 yrs (based on her 'Authentic Self' this is highly improbable) ''the Asteroids is the only one that remained stable??. She focused a lot on the lunation phase.

Traditional wise we have:
Dreyer, (Vedic, Whole Sign , No Outers).

Hand ,although as I alluded to earlier (as you might know re- his Post Modern Article), he thinks Medieval Horoscopy is the way to go re events/timings, but where ?psychological analysis? is required one needs to immerse oneself in the more high brow and clearer 20th century literature. Clearer as in not the fuzzy or vague 20th century often New Age type stuff. (What I call psycho-babble).

Schmidt, didn't really commit himself to the life events, or psyche, and spent his time mainly explaining how a Hellenistic astrologer would go about a preliminary analysis. Thus 0 ?hits? and 0 ?misses?. Where he did offer something more markable I found it impossible to evaluate. For example, he commented in her early life she was a little invisible or not noticed much, nothing in Joyce?s story could persuade me whether or not this was something she had suggested one way or the other.

In relation to this thread it may be of interest that the 2 Sideralists had more similarity in what they didn't get right, but less in what they did!

A tough test to my mind. If this was a proper test (as you suggest) then unless they had all been given a chance with 20 charts or so it would be a little presumptuous to draw many conclusions. I.E. Roberts may have got lucky and George unlucky. Nasser concluded at the end all had done well and revealed something about Joyce. This would not be the reaction of the intelligent person in the street, so to speak!

I would not describe my own analysis as forensic but perhaps detailed, i.e. it has some margin of error but hopefully not excessive. I ought to read it again one day and compare results.

Book came out in 2004. I?m sure you would find it a very interesting read. It?s not a book that would inevitably result in someone engaging in a frantic and intense study of traditional astrologies but it might persuade some conceptions need looking into more deeply. No doubt a similar book comparing 6 traditional tropical models with 6 traditional sidereal models, or something like this, would interest some folks here. Maybe you should/could organise it?

Tom wrote:

It might make for an interesting thread one day for people here to erect a speculative chart for Bond

Frawley used to have some fun with speculative charts for fictional characters (Santa Claus), semi fictional characters (Barbie and Ken), and genres (he figured out a chart for jazz). In most cases his method was to take a date and use the pre-"natal" eclipse for a "birth" date.

James Bond first appeared in print upon the publication of the novel "Casino Royale" - April 13, 1953. The eclipse that preceded that publication date was:

Feb 14, 1953
1:10:14 AM GMT
London, UK (Fleming's birthplace)

Lo and behold 19 Scorpio 54 rises. Mars, ASC dispositor, is in Aries showing his independence and is posited in the 4th house of home and country. Mercury, ruler of the 10th is exactly conjunct the Arabic part of violence. Venus, lady of the 7th is in Aries showing his inability to be tied down to one woman, but posited in the 5th house of pleasure shows his true feelings towards the fair sex.

I think we have a workable chart.

A chart for Jazz. Was he attempting some humour here re-trad or modern. Do you have the data?

I can see a narrative/rationale of sorts for Casino Royale and Bond's character drawn up like this. Venus strikes me as a reasonably tight delineation. Aries is nowadays seen as quite a loyal sign and Sagittarius the promiscuous monkey in the Zodiac. As to why, and would this contradict earlier conceptions ?

However, Bond didn't strike me as a Sun in Aquarius. although this is the more recent Psychological (more Uranian) Aquarian which may differ to Frawley's, and your notions. Solar wise I think I would have plumped for Leo.

Mark wrote:

As for your desire to keep the discussion exclusively sidereal I am confused why you suggested in your previous post I put charts up in both zodiacs. I think its a useful comparison. Not least because there are very few traditional siderealists out there. There wouldn't be much of a thread going on here without the participation of tropical astrologers too.

I didn't want to keep the discussion exclusiviely sidereal, Mark, but I do get discouraged with posts that meander far away from the central topic. For example, your comments on Nixon's chart were instructive and interesting from the tropical point of view. But now there are a number of posts that don't really relate to Nixon's chart, and I have yet to post my Nixon comments.

I suppose that's what I'd like to see. You posted Nixon's chart, so I'd like to see several different perspectives on the astrology of the chart. I plan to concentrate only on "the chart of a king" and that king's downfall due to Watergate.

Is Nixon's Sidereal Chart the Natal Chart of a King?

From the viewpoint of the ancient astrologers, Nixon's chart should clearly show kingship since be reached the pinnacle of power by becoming president of the United States. And sidereally we do have a very powerful chart:

The ascendant is Leo, and the domicile lord is the Sun in Sagittarius in its own triplicity in the 5th.

The Sun's dispositor, Jupiter in Sagittarius, is in its own domicile and triplicity. These planets are in the benefic 5th house a house "of doing business."

Jupiter is joined by 9th lord, Mars, and Mercury. That makes a close stellium of Mars, Mercury and Jupiter plus the Sun in Sagittarius. The Sun is two degrees from trining the ascendant, which brings it to the fore. The Mars-Mercury-Jupiter combination is in the terms of Jupiter and closely sextiles Venus, lord of the 10th. So the personal power of the Ascendant is linked to the house of profession and fame.

Abu'Ali places the "east" (ascendant) first in importance for the profession, followed by the midheaven, then the 7th and finally the 4th pivot.

I ran off the page of lots from Solar Fire. Albiruni's "part of success" is at 9Ari54 trine Jupiter (the ascendant lord's dispositor) at 9Sag08. The lord of the part itself, Mars, applies to Jupiter within two degrees. (But Mercury is between the two in the same degree as Mars, which suggests trouble since it's out of it's domicile and triplicity.)

Directly on Nixon's ascendant are the Part of Administrators (25Leo08) and also the parts of Rectitude (correct in judgement) and Hope. But the Part of Lawsuits is close by at 23 Leo, and we might use that to predict the seriousness of the Watergate scandal.

I believed that the elevated Saturn should be highlighted for the year Nixon resigned. Saturn is the lord of the 6th and 7th houses in the sidereal chart, so it rules malefic houses. At least the 6th is malefic, but certainly the Watergate scandal deeply affected his wife, the 7th. The solar return chart for Nixon's birthplace for the year of his resignation (1974) puts natal Saturn directly on the ascendant squaring Venus in the 10th. (Venus is also natal 10th lord.) So Nixon's resignation brought that configuration to the fore. In Jyotish the dexter (backwards) square from Saturn is considered very powerful. Natal Moon (12th lord) is also near the zenith point in the resignation solar return.

If we set the solar return chart for Washington, D.C., 17 Gemini rises. Transiting Saturn and the south node are directly on natal Pluto above the ascendant (and in Nixon's 10th house.) (Natal Pluto at 6 Gemini, transiting Saturn at 6 Gemini and the south node at 4 Gemini.)

Transiting Saturn is also opposing natal Mars-Mercury-Jupiter in house 7.

I know that Pluto isn't used in traditional readings. You can take Pluto out of the chart, but Saturn still opposes natal Mars-Mercury-Jupiter in the 7th.

I had planned on looking up quotations from traditional texts, but haven't found the time. I might add these later to indicate how they operate in Nixon's chart.

So basically we have a very powerful ascendant for the chart, and the Saturn square Venus clicked right into place at the time of the Watergate scandal and Nixon's resignation. I may try to post the bi-wheel chart to show how the solar return transits operated in the chart. Thanks, Mark, for the instructions. The Solar Return bi-wheel with the outer wheel cusps is a special creation by sidereal astrologer Matthew Quellas. It's not in the original program.

A note on the temperament of public figures: It's my policy not to work with temperament in these cases because the lives of public figures are so entirely public that they are playing a role. We don't know how they behave in privacy with their families, except through the "tell-alls" that are sometimes published.

For Nixon, if we want to use Saturn as the indicator of his rather taciturn seeming personality and stiff demeanor, then I'd point to the navamsa chart which has Saturn exactly square the ascendant. (Yes, I do use the navamsa, the 9th harmonic chart, in conjunction with traditional techniques. It's much more of an inner psychological chart than the natal chart.)

And remember: what is observed about tropical Capricorn is also true of sidereal Sagittarius. This is a masculine sign, which can be quite concentrated and determined in its life direction, but quietly so.

Also with temperament, there can be controversy about what is personality, what is character and what is temperament. Since temperament may be hidden under the surface, I tend to avoid the topic. But with Fern we did have a consensus from teachers who had plenty of time to observe her. So I believe the conclusions regarding temperament in Greenbaum's book may be quite valid.

Something I just noticed: Nixon's chart has Beta Orion, Rigel in the degree of the MC. Rumen Kolev would have seen that right away. Also, Fomalhart, one of the four royal Persian stars, is in the degree of Venus, sidereal 10th house lord. These are ecliptic degrees, not co-risings or in mundo.

In my opinion, Hitler's chart works perfectly with the standard accepted birth time everyone uses. If I had time to collect dates in his life, I could illustrate how the chart works.

Dracon, I find your posts about the decans very interesting. I have all the books with decan descriptions, but have never really tested them in charts. I believe I remember that Ben Dykes has a paper on his web site that covers the various descriptions of the decans from different texts.

Edit: I just checked Ben Dykes' site. He has these three sets of decan meanings:

?Ibn Ezra: ?Picatrix: ?Agrippa

I look forward to reading the comparative look at Nixon.

I don't see anything wrong with using Richard Nixon as a case to study. His life was very public and even if we don't agree politically on certain issues/traits, much of it is a matter of public record.

Additionally, Watergate (imo) has to be considered. Leaving out Watergate is like talking about Neil Armstrong without mentioning the Moon Landing or O. J. Simpson and leaving out the murders.

When someone says Neil Armstrong, the average person thinks "first man on the moon." When someone says O. J., the average person thinks of the murders and the armed robbery. (the substantial football career and Hertz ads are eclipsed!)

When someone says Richard Nixon, the average person thinks Watergate. It is the major cause of his infamy.

One question...besides the "natal delineation" approach to looking at Nixon, will we also be looking at the astrology at events? Because that analysis would likely succeed or fail based on correct assignation of rulerships and Sidereal vs. Tropical will by necessity have two very different takes on that.

Again...very interesting topic!

James

But the point in this thread isn't Tropical vs Sidereal, it is applying what are widely-known as Tropical techniques to a Sidereal zodiac.

I don't think it has been mentioned yet, but Saturn is in the 10th sign, out-of-sect and Rx which signifies a fall from standing. The year Nixon resigned the East of the Year was transiting natal Saturn in the 10th (Therese mentioned this, if I remember correctly). If we look to the releasings from the Lot of Spirit at this time we have Capricorn ruling the major period with Taurus taking over the years, again activating this natal Saturn in a big way.

As for him being "Saturnian" or whatever, why look to the lord of the Asc primarily? Montulmo suggests (via Ptolemy) we look to the almuten of the Moon and Mercury to come up with a combination. In this case, Mars is almuten of the Moon but does not regard it, so experience would guide me towards Saturn and Mercury is ruled completely by Jupiter.

Hello Konrad

Re: "But the point in this thread isn't Tropical vs Sidereal..."

No, but of course, when speaking of some fundamental understanding relating to two quite separate paradigms, it is natural that comparisons come into play.

Re: "As for him being "Saturnian" or whatever, why look to the lord of the Asc primarily?"

Other than the fact that it's normally very reliable? I've always thought (even back then) that Nixon looked depressive (or let's say overly-serious, ie. take Jupiter and look 180? away), even when he is smiling. If we create a "picture" of Nixon through Astrology and it doesn't capture that element, then it must be an incomplete (flawed) picture.

To me, he's Capricorn and Saturnian through and through. It makes it hard to see him as a Sagittarian, unless we are going to change what Sagittarius means. Using the Tropical, we have Sun, Mercury, and Jupiter in Capricorn and Saturn disposes the ruler of his Ascendant. In the Sidereal, we have Sun, Mercury, Mars, and Jupiter in Sagittarius; and Jupiter disposits the ruler of the Ascendant.

Nixon as Sagittarian/Jupiterian??? Only if we change what Sagittarian/Jupiterian means. For every ounce of Sag/Jup, we have a pound of Cap/Sat.

Still, I am infinitely curious how the aspects at events speak to the correct rulerships. I think that will speak volumes, perhaps much beyond natal delineation, which can quickly become subjective beyond reason/definition.

Very interesting conversation!

James

Nixx wrote:

A chart for Jazz. Was he attempting some humour here re-trad or modern. Do you have the data?

John saw and sees astrology everywhere. He did charts for Barbie and Ken and had a lot of fun with them even to the point of predicting (somewhat accurately) their breakup. How seriously a reader wished to take this was up to him or her.

For Jazz he first noted the defining quality of jazz as a balance of freedom and structure and the obvious significators for that are Jupiter and Saturn. He noted the two claimants to the "invention" of jazz, Buddy Bolden and Jelly Roll Morton (Morton took boasting to a level that would make Muhammad Ali blush). Since their birth dates are questionable never mind the times, he chose the pre natal eclipse to work with and in Bolden's case there is a Saturn Jupiter square. And so that becomes our chart for jazz. He then builds on it and compares it to other significant charts.

Aug 23 1877
11:12 PM GMT
New Orleans LA USA
Not sure why he used GMT perhaps converting it to LMT was a pain.

The entire article is in The Astrologer's Apprentice No. 19 which can be downloaded for a few dollars from John's website.

http://www.johnfrawley.com/mag.html

There is some really good astrology contained in the article. Whether or not there is an actual chart for jazz I can't say. In truth Buddy Bolden was more of a transitional figure than an inventor. But he certainly didn't come after any jazz musician. Enjoy.