Janis wrote:There is always a fly in the ointment with a malefic ruling the hour even if the chart appears radical from a traditional perspective which was not the case by disagreement with the nature of the sign and its ruler unless we count exaltation. Radicality by exaltation might be a hint to overvaluing.

Yes, I thought about this. Mars as LHr and in the situation he is in secures victory for Argentina, but he is an infortune - and maybe a fortune in the same role would have provided more goals and a more convincing raid.

I think The Iran vs Nigeria game ended draw because both sides had very powerful testimonies backing them. First Iran being Lord 1 had its Lord Jupiter conjunction with POF. Which is one single powerful testimony. I thought the moon on the cusp of 4th house for the descendant could over rule the testimony of Lord 1 conjunction with POF. The moon not being in the Lord 7 but rather in 4th house makes both testimonies equal. and that calls for a draw.

Andrew Bevan wrote:

There are several approaches but the luminaries and the fortunes may in a general way indicate the favourites.

Yes but the logic of using the Moon for the favourite was that it symbolises the balance of public opinion. Perhaps, its inherently, more tricky in football where both teams have popular support. Still, perhaps useful to assess ?giant killer? results.

Andrew Bevan wrote:

Argentina - Bosnia Herzegovina
The handicap should be tried here, too. Mars is LHr and almuten of the Ascendant. He is culminating in the Midheaven with the Moon's north node, and in Libra, the sign associated with Argentina.

I know you have used this single sign association system for decades with some success. Especially in the Eurovision Song Contest! I have always been curious how far back these associations go. Some are obviously quite ancient like the associations of many of the European countries. Many of these can be linked to Ptolemy (2nd century CE). Although others (Scotland, Norway, Portugal, etc) seem to be medieval additions.

Certainly locations in the Americas, Asia and the Pacific seem to have got their associations much later. Its not really clear on what basis. From what I have been able to gleam so far much this was developed by either Alan Leo or Sepharial as they both listed Argentina under Libra. Still, I have never really found a logical reason why Libra was assigned here.

We do have a strong contender for the national chart of Argentina. Its the chart for the Declaration of Argentine independence from Spain on July 9th 1816 at the Congress of Tucuman. No time

Rectified charts for Argentina:

? July 9, 1816, 8:26:22 pm GMT, in Tucuman - rectified chart by Hugo Bonito by using his own special technique of twin dates (fechas gemelas in Spanish)
? July 9, 1816, 4:26:20 pm GMT, in Tucuman - rectified chart by Alexanderr Marr by using the primary direction technique

Although with a symbolic noon chart we do have Libra rising. Whatever, the rising sign its clear the chart is heavily Cancerian with a full Moon in Capricorn.

http://www.astro.com/nat/natar_e.htm

Mark

I just found this interesting article on the chances of the major contenders based on transits to their national charts. I was intrigued that the author had been thinking along similar lines to myself about how Jupiter played out in these charts. She gives details of finalists & winners for previous finals where Jupiter was in Cancer as it is this year.

http://www.theastrologyroom.com/guides/ ... razil-2014

Mark

Mark wrote:I just found this interesting article on the chances of the major contenders based on transits to their national charts. I was intrigued that the author had been thinking along similar lines to myself about how Jupiter played out in these charts. She gives details of finalists & winners for previous finals where Jupiter was in Cancer as it is this year.

http://www.theastrologyroom.com/guides/ ... razil-2014

Mark

Thanks for the link Mark, I found this bit interesting

Finally, what about defending champions, Spain? Back in 2010, when the World Cup was hosted by South Africa, Jupiter had just entered Aries, joining surprising, exciting Uranus in that sporting sign. Energetic Mars was in meticulous Virgo.

bearing in mind Spain's style of play (tiki-taka? or somesuch; tippy-tappy springs to mind), Virgo would be perfect for them, so maybe assigning a team according to their current style makes as much sense as using a national horoscope or sign?
So many of the signs seem arbitrary. For instance, I see Germany is considered Aries here but there was a strong medieval tradition that associated them with Scorpio.

GP wrote:

So many of the signs seem arbitrary.

I agree. Its actually a mess. I think the problem is that there are at least two totallly different systems being used to assign signs to countries. One based a system of directionology found in Ptolemy and other ancient astrology. Another, based on inceptional charts for the founding of countries or cities. Then there is a third group where noone seems clear how countries were assigned a sign. All the single sign associations for Latin American countries is an example. But it also applies to many of the single sign associations for Europeans such as Scotland (Cancer), Norway (Scorpio), Portugal (Pisces), Ireland (Taurus )etc. These later associations were added to associations derived from Ptolemy's system leaving us with a messy smorgasbord of sign assignations.

That is why I prefer national charts. Although that can be tricky too if you have more than one national chart (as you usually do!). For example, Brazil has several charts.

GP wrote:

I see Germany is considered Aries here but there was a strong medieval tradition that associated them with Scorpio.

There wasn't a German state before 1871 so I dont know what medieval Scorpio chart you could be referring to. Indeed, there was no such thing as ''Germany'' in the Middle Ages. No term in medieval German existed for what we now know as "Germany." It was only in the 1500s that the term Deutschland came to be used and the term received its nationalistic ring only in the nineteenth century. There were numerous German speaking principalities at one time so I am sure some must have come under Scorpio. For example, Lilly states the northern part of Bavaria was under the influence of Scorpio.

I like this article by the German astrologer Richard Vetter which looks at German astrological identity in terms of its national flag. He also discusses historically significant charts in German history:

http://astroinfo.astrologix.de/politik/srg/blarego.htm

We also had a discussion on the intricacies of German charts on the mundane forum. The astrological consensus seems to be a strong Capricorn element in the German national chart.

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... afa366c70b

Mark

Mark wrote:
There wasn't a German state before 1871 ..... Indeed, there was no such thing as ''Germany'' in the Middle Ages. No term in medieval German existed for what we now know as "Germany." It was only in the 1500s that the term Deutschland came to be used and the term received its nationalistic ring only in the nineteenth century.

This is only partly true. The term "deutsch" was first used in the course of the tenth century.
On 10 November, 911, Conrad I was elected and crowned the first ?German? king (in Forchheim).
However, the origin of the "Holy Roman Empire" is commonly linked with the coronation of Otto I (Otto der Gro?e) - crowned by the Pope in Rome, February 2nd, 962. The complete name of the Empire was "Heiliges R?misches Reich deutscher Nationen" - i.e. Holy Roman Empire of German Nations - (note the plural - nations - then used with respect to the ethnis diversity of the "Germanic" population - Saxons, Bavarians etc..)
Especially the chart of the coronation is worth studying. It formed the fundamentals of what was to become Germany. And it might still work.

LL

Lunlumo wrote:

This is only partly true. The term "deutsch" was first used in the course of the tenth century.

Ok Lunlumo. I will defer to your superior knowledge in this area. I frankly, plagiarised those comments from a University prospectus on medieval Germany!

http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/fcurta/Germany.html

Lunlumo wrote:

This is only partly true. The term "deutsch" was first used in the course of the tenth century. On 10 November, 911, Conrad I was elected and crowned the first ?German? king (in Forchheim).

Interersting. Although as I understand it within this Kingdom of East Franonia there seem to have been numerous duchies such as of autonomous stem duchies (Franconia itself, Bavaria, Swabia, Saxony and Lotharingia). Have you looked at this chart yourself?

Lunlumo wrote:

However, the origin of the "Holy Roman Empire" is commonly linked with the coronation of Otto I (Otto der Gro?e) - crowned by the Pope in Rome, February 2nd, 962. The complete name of the Empire was "Heiliges R?misches Reich deutscher Nationen" - i.e. Holy Roman Empire of German Nations - (note the plural - nations - then used with respect to the ethnis diversity of the "Germanic" population - Saxons, Bavarians etc..)
Especially the chart of the coronation is worth studying. It formed the fundamentals of what was to become Germany. And it might still work.

I see. I had thought Otto's kingdom extended well beyond German speaking areas though? Although its borders obviously shifted a lot over time I had always assumed The Holy Roman Empire was a mixture of various linguistic groups on top of German speakers such as Czechs, Poles, Italians, Slovenes etc.

Very interesting though. Good material to post up on the mundane forum I think.

Mark

Thanks for responding, Mark.
Actually the matter should better be dealt with in the Mundane Forum.
The "Reich" was not a "state" in the modern sense of the word, this is true. As a result it vanished (in 1806), when nationalism spread in Europe (provoked by the French Revolution).
The second "Reich" (Jan 1871-Nov 1918) was a state - but being a state it could not be the "Reich" again.
Not to mention the "Third Reich" - which was far from being a "Reich", it soon turned out to be its very opposite. Possibly/probably the years 1933/1945 meant the final and total destruction of what once had been Germany.
So, maybe the 962 chart indeed no longer corresponds to post-war developments.
LL

Lunlumo wrote:

Actually the matter should better be dealt with in the Mundane Forum.

Agreed. Time to get back to some football!

M

GP wrote:

I see Germany is considered Aries here but there was a strong medieval tradition that associated them with Scorpio.

There wasn't a German state before 1871 so I dont know what medieval Scorpio chart you could be referring to. Indeed, there was no such thing as ''Germany'' in the Middle Ages. No term in medieval German existed for what we now know as "Germany." It was only in the 1500s that the term Deutschland came to be used and the term received its nationalistic ring only in the nineteenth century. There were numerous German speaking principalities at one time so I am sure some must have come under Scorpio. For example, Lilly states the northern part of Bavaria was under the influence of Scorpio.

Mark

Just to say I was thinking of the likes of French astrologers such as Pierre Turrel & Richard Roussat who associated the German region generally with Scorpio, rather than any specific chart.

Today June 18 at 17.00 BST (13.00 BZT2) Porto Alegre we have Australia v Netherlands. ASC 8 LI 06, chart radical. As Netherlands are strong favourites they get the Ascendant.

Venus is the LHr and L1 in its own sign but in H8
Mars is L7 in its detriment but in H1

Australia are probably the weakest side in the competition and we would need some very strong testimonies to back them to win. Without that, I have to go for Netherlands.