Skyscript Astrology Forum

Atlantean wrote:

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

.

Dont forget from a traditional perspective his Aquarian Moon (tropical) is largely Saturn ruled too. However, Mercury does partake here too and Mars is the exalted ruler of Capricorn. Nixon was an outstanding scholar and a lawyer.

I agree the sidereal rulerships dont seem that convincing in this chart. I have studied lots of other strongly Saturnian (tropical) charts that shift to a Jupiterarian focus in sidereal. For example J. Edgar Hoover.

Mark

Atlantean wrote: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

I don't see it as being reliable at all. The Asc ruler on its own is not sufficient to detail something as complex and constructed as a human persona. I mean I don't even know how someone can be "a Capricorn" or "Sagittarian" when it is just a section of the sky in which different planets do different things at different times.

I mentioned Montulmo earlier and he says of Saturn:

"But if Saturn is badly disposed and falling in a place not proper to him, it signifies that the native will be envious, sad, timid, solitary and lazy; he will not want to dress or adorn himself well; he will settle upon his own counsel...will esteem unhapiness, misery and deception...he will not hold the truth about anyone..."

He goes on to state that Saturn in a middling condition is somewhat less severe. Add in Jupiter (with Saturn as they are taken as a pair, not two seperate testimonies) and you have someone:

"Of good counsel and opinion, a helper of the king...intelligent...patient"

But most importantly at the end of this section:

"Know as a general dictum that when you have judged the soul by means of the association of the planets with each other, preserve the authority of the more principal or that planet which is stronger..."

This means the one who is more angular, is more public (Valens also states that Malefics are more foreful in their significations). Here that is a Rx, out-of-sect Saturn. So regardless of who disposits the Sun or the Asc or whatever, since Saturn is a significator of the soul and is in one of the most active places, he will be the one that is most immediate to anyone looking in from the outside. I don't know much about Nixon, but who here can say whether or not Jupiter truly has some sort of signification in this man's "soul"?

Konrad wrote:

I don't know much about Nixon, but who here can say whether or not Jupiter truly has some sort of signification in this man's "soul"?

It probably is important to know more about the demeanour of this man to properly assess how accurate the astrology is here.

Remember for Ptolemy the soul or anima didn't mean the common notion we have today of some personal eternal essence. Following Aristotelian thought he was referring to how the person thought both instinctually (Moon) and in terms of rational thought (Mercury). The later astrologers described this as 'The Lord of Manners'.

Its not all Saturn even in tropical. Ptolemy and the Greeks didn't use Almutens so all the dignities need examined. Mars is prominent here too as it is exaltation ruler in Capricorn, in sect and oriental of the Sun. However it is in aversion to Mercury which makes its influence less reliable and consistent. The Moon has a role as triplicity ruler of his Mercury while Venus is bound ruler of the Moon.

Looking at the Almutens though Saturn emerges as the most influential planet on both Mercury and the Moon. Plus we have the ASC ruler in a domicile ruled by Saturn.

Mark

Mark wrote:Konrad wrote:

I don't know much about Nixon, but who here can say whether or not Jupiter truly has some sort of signification in this man's "soul"?

It probably is important to know more about the demeanour of this man to properly assess how accurate the astrology is here.

Remember for Ptolemy the soul or anima didn't mean the common notion we have today of some personal eternal essence. Following Aristotelian thought he was referring to how the person thought both instinctually (Moon) and in terms of rational thought (Mercury). The later astrologers described this as 'The Lord of Manners'.

Its not all Saturn even in tropical. Ptolemy and the Greeks didn't use Almutens so all the dignities need examined. Mars is prominent here too as it is exaltation ruler in Capricorn, in sect and oriental of the Sun. However it is in aversion to Mercury which makes its influence less reliable and consistent. The Moon has a role as triplicity ruler of his Mercury while Venus is bound ruler of the Moon.

Looking at the Almutens though Saturn emerges as the most influential planet on both Mercury and the Moon. Plus we have the ASC ruler in a domicile ruled by Saturn.

Mark

I'm not sure how this above applies to looking at a chart Sidereally?

I know as much as the general man in the street does about Nixon, Mark. My point was we can see, using the Sidereal zodiac, how Saturn is evident in the man's demeanour but Jupiter cannot be discounted just because us looking from afar cannot see it in him and most especially while Saturn as one of the significators is pivotal.

Konrad wrote:

I'm not sure how this above applies to looking at a chart Sidereally?

Ok you caught me. It doesn't. It was shamelessly tropical. I quoted you for the quality of the soul reference. Also your earlier comment on the whether the chart was really 'Saturnian'. I decided to stick with the comparative focus.

Konrad wrote:

I know as much as the general man in the street does about Nixon,

Fair enough. My comment really only made sense in the context that I have actually met you and know just how young you are! Its clearly not apparent in the depth of your knowledge or maturity of your comments here. I wouldn't expect many people under 30 to know anything about Nixon at all.

I am a bit better informed in that respect. I actually have an MA in American history and Nixon was on the historical curriculum even in my time 25 years ago.

Konrad wrote:

My point was we can see, using the Sidereal zodiac, how Saturn is evident in the man's demeanour but Jupiter cannot be discounted just because us looking from afar cannot see it in him and most especially while Saturn as one of the significators is pivotal.

Yes using the sidereal chart the major dispositors of the soul are Jupiter (Mercury) and Saturn (Moon). Personally, I dont think the ASC ruler can be ignored. Many traditional authorities look at this too. As the dispositor of the Sun this makes the emphasis on Jupiter even stronger here. Arguably Jupiter is Lord of the Geniture too sidereally.

The sidereal Saturn has an interesting connection to the Moon through reception. Saturn is in the exaltation and triplicity of the Moon while the Moon is in the domicile of Saturn. Its not a mutual reception as no aspect within planetary orbs is involved but it is what Ibn Ezra called a generousity or liberality.

Mark

Mark wrote:
Looking at the Almutens though Saturn emerges as the most influential planet on both Mercury and the Moon. Plus we have the ASC ruler in a domicile ruled by Saturn.

Mark

I agree too.

Saturn is absolutely the ruler of the soul.

And this Saturn is not very good, especially for Ptolemy according which Saturn is always awful even when it is well put.
Here it's against its sect, and retrograde (seeing from picture it should be at its station), and cadent and peregrine.

I believe everybody can easily find what Ptolemy says about the second station of an ill disposed Saturn ....

I would say in addition that Mercury with Mars tends to make the public scandal.

My idea is that planets against sect should be destructive of every effect, they grant and then suddenly destroy.

margherita

Margherita wrote:

Saturn is absolutely the ruler of the soul.

And this Saturn is not very good, especially for Ptolemy according which Saturn is always awful even when it is well put.
Here it's against its sect, and retrograde (seeing from picture it should be at its station), and cadent and peregrine.

I believe everybody can easily find what Ptolemy says about the second station of an ill disposed Saturn ....

I would say in addition that Mercury with Mars tends to make the public scandal.

My idea is that planets against sect should be destructive of every effect, they grant and then suddenly destroy.

Ok we agree on all that. Surely though the more interesting question is about the eminence of the man?

He was elected Vice President after the 1952 race when President Eisenhower was elected. He was re-elected as Vice-President again 1956.

He only lost the 1960 Presidential election against Kennedy by a tiny margin. Kennedy won on the smallest margin in American electoral history before the Bush-Gore Presidential election result of 2001. Despite allegations of major ballot rigging in both Illinois and Texas ( both states won by Kennedy) Nixon refused to contest the result. It has subsequently come to light that ballot rigging by the Mafia in Chicago probably swung the whole state in Kennedy's favour. At the end of his term of office as vice president in January 1961, Nixon and his family returned to California, where he practiced law and starting writing.

This would have been the end of most political careers but Nixon made a remarkable political comeback after stepping back politically during the Barry Goldwater candidacy for President in 1964. That campaign was a political disaster for the Republicans. Lyndon B Johnson beat Goldwater in a landslide victory. Johnson won over 61 percent of the popular vote, the largest percentage since 1824.

Ironically, the very fact Nixon was out of party politics at this point helped him as he was one of the very few leading Republican figures untarnished by the Goldwater debacle. He played a major role in building the party back up after this.

Nixon went on to win both the the 1968 and 1972 Presidential elections. So there was obviously greatness in the man. I think Therese picked that up and perhaps that is a more interesting approach here than simply writing the man off. That is too easy. He obviously had character flaws but there were also remarkable ability in the man.

Mark

Well looking at the trigon lords of the Sect Light we have the Moon taking up the first part of life, Venus the 2nd. Valens suggests we use the ascensional time of the stronger of the two to determine when the uptake in eminence and prosperity will happen and at his birth latitude, Aquarius' time is 23.5 years which is mid-1936 onwards.

When he gained the presidency, his Spirit was in a Capricorn/Capricorn period. This whole period will have that bit extra oomph since Capricorn is in a pivot from Fortune and interestingly signifies the beginning of the chain of events which eventually lead to his fall from power. Some people don't think he should only be remembered for Watergate but the fact is that for most people with only a passing knowledge of him, that is all they know him for. We can see from the position of Capricorn relative to Fortune and Saturn's position in the 10th sign that this will be a period of great professional accomplishment for him but because Saturn is in the state he is, it will also provide his biggest infamy which came to a head during the Capricorn/Taurus period in 1974.

EDIT: I would just like to note that the day ruler of both election days for him was Taurus further highlighting the importance of this 10th house Saturn.

Atlantean wrote:

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

I've tried to show that the solar return for the most discussed event in Nixon's life, his resignation following the Watergate scandal, is right on target for the rulerships: The elevated Saturn square the 10th house lord, Venus ended his career as president. A very big fall from grace.

The ancients didn't talk about whether a person was "Saturrnian" or "Jupiterian." They noted whether the planets were in the proper signs and places to bring about specific results. So the sidereal chart has the requisitely benefic planetary placements for a rise to the presidency. Does the tropical chart have this? No one has yet looked at the placement of the ascendant lord and 10th lord for a position of high kingship.

I see confusion here in the discussion. Members are bringing in modern tropical thought rather than looking at Nixon's chart the way the ancient astrologers would study it for his rise to power. The stellium in Sagittarius, including the ascendant lord and ascendant lord dispositor in its own sign and triplicity, describe the power of rise in the birth chart, not the man's personality. Then Saturn square the 10th lord, Venus (activated in the birth chart), very accurately describes his departure from the presidency.

It seems that the astrologers of India have noted that the 5th house is active in the charts of politicians, so it's often called a political house. I believe the reason this house often contains benefic planets in political charts is because the 5th is one of the strongest "benefic" places. Planets here trine the ascendant, so give the ascendant strength and power. (Or the opposite if the planets are badly placed by sign.) So in Nixon's tropical chart the Sun (so closely aspecting the ascendant) is in Capricorn, out of sect and triplicity in a sign inimical to itself.

Mark wrote:

Nixon went on to win both the the 1968 and 1972 Presidential elections. So there was obviously greatness in the man. I think Therese picked that up and perhaps that is a more interesting approach here than simply writing the man off. That is too easy. He obviously had character flaws but there were also remarkable ability in the man.

Yes, and this is how the energy of sidereal Sagittarius would express. It's a sign of both ability and stability. Sidereally we can relate his character flaws to the Moon in Capricorn in the 6th house. In the sidereal the Moon is the 12th lord, and in the 6th in a sign of Saturn, it has few redeeming qualities. The Moon was Nixon's weakness.

The 9th harmonic chart isn't used in western traditional astrology, but in that chart Mars and Mercury in Gemini are square the Moon in Virgo. This is a clear picture of "lies" and dishonesty. So we have two very different takes on Nixon: the benefic Sagittarian stellium which brought him to power, and the afflicted natal Moon.

Any birth chart must have signatures of power if the owner of the chart is elected twice to the presidency of the United States. And in the sidereal zodiac the Aries trigon of signs (Aries, Leo, Sagittarius) contain that power if the proper planets are found in those signs. In Nixon's chart the Sun and Jupiter are very powerful in Sagittarius.

Therese Hamilton wrote:
I see confusion here in the discussion. Members are bringing in modern tropical thought rather than looking at Nixon's chart the way the ancient astrologers would study it for his rise to power. The ancients didn't talk about whether a person was "Saturrnian" or "Jupiterian." They noted whether the planets were in the proper signs and places to bring about specific results.

.

But are you sure? Have you ever given a look to a Medieval/Renaissance manual?

Moreover we gave - I think Mark and Tom too with the rest of people who commented the chart- highlighted just a small side of Nixon's chart.

If we want to talk about the excellence of rank, for example Nixon has Jupiter and Mars accompanying the Sun (with Mars near the heliacal rising I guess from the chart, I did not check) and Venus follows the Moon.

Moreover we have the same ruler of the soul who puts together the sides of the soul, and Mercury is in Capricorn. It looks like we are NOT in front to a stupid, all the opposite....But Saturn against hairesis would wait in order to manifest....

In order to say when we should see profections/directions/returns----let us see other comments, but in my opinion Nixon is a chart which works very well tropical.

margherita

Therese wrote

I see confusion here in the discussion. Members are bringing in modern tropical thought rather than looking at Nixon's chart the way the ancient astrologers would study it for his rise to power.

To be fair Therese I think that confusion may stem at least in part from the way you started off this whole topic with a discussion of temperament. Hence it led to a legitimate expectation of discussion of character. I actually think that is perfectly legitimate and worthwhile.

I think Atlantean has been totally up front about not being a traditional astrologer so it is hardly surprising his comments dont coincide with normal expectations on a traditional thread.

One can obviously look at a chart like this in various ways:

1 Eminence indications
2 Character/temperament
3 Key life events tied to astrology

Mark