Aside from the normal problems of working out when a country begins, the Declaration of Independance is the normally accepted idea and works well for modern countries, there are a number of other problems.

Wars and Occupations.

The biggest problem is that what happens if a country is snuffed out of existance and then ressurects itself. Only a few countries, like Kosovo, the USA and Yugoslavia were invented out of nothing, most countries that are reborn versions of countries that had existed before in the past at least in name.

This has a particular resonance, since if a country is occupied by another power, how long must it be occupied for it's original Horoscope to be invalidated and upon liberation, does it keep the old Horoscope, or does it get a new one. And what Horoscope governs for instance resistance fighters and the ilk and the government in exile, or the occupiers 'governer'? Is it the Horoscope of the annexation of their own country, or the original Horoscope of their countries birth, or the Horoscope of the occupying countries birth.

There doesn't seem to be a consistant system for what constitutes an event drastic enough to erase the countries original Horoscope and give it a new one. It is also the case that regime changes often, but not always impart a new Horoscope upon the country. Maybe the important thing is continuality of regime, not occupation as such.

So if a country is occupied and the original government is reinstated, the old horoscope still stands, while if the original government is not reinstated, then a new government brings with it a new Horoscope. The problem is then what constitutes a discontinuity. Does something like a militery coup create a new Horoscope, if it does then it would follow that a very large number of countries are being incorrectly Horoscoped at the moment. England would not be 1066 but would be the date of the rise to power of William III, the last time the English government was couped.

Does something like a militery coup create a new Horoscope, if it does then it would follow that a very large number of countries are being incorrectly Horoscoped at the moment.

hi You could consider whether any event such as a coup could be clearly represented in a pre-existant chart , and if so then the earlier chart is probably still radical

Some people consider mundane events and look for angularity ie interaction with Asc/Desc or MC/IC as a supplementary 'proof' of the veracity of a chart.

I suppose you could consider the symbolic 'weight' of the moment as being a pointer.

Coups could be major events in otherwise stable regimes but in a country racked by constant upheavel such an event would probably constitute a continuation of an established process and the charts that go with it

mike c

Coups could be major events in otherwise stable regimes but in a country racked by constant upheavel such an event would probably constitute a continuation of an established process and the charts that go with it

hi again whilst on the general "revolution" chart subject I thought I might share an idea with all you goodly people

A couple of years back I was musing on using the Nodal axis and contemplating what nodes actually were , and this lead to a discovery of sorts.

I noticed that in Mundane charts countries born out of revolution and coup tend to have a lunar position travelling south of the Nodal axis and countries physically created by already existing political orders tended to have the Moon travelling North of the nodal axis.

What I mean by that is the Moon is North if further on in the zodiac than the North Node and South when further advanced than the South Node. Ie the North Node is where the Moon is travelling Northwards of the plane of orbit intersection or vice versa with the South Node.

For instance consider the US chart (whichever it makes no difference) the Moon is travelling South of the South Node. I think of this as "revolutionary" signature Or consider in contrast any of the charts of countries created by the UK as a colonial power ie the May 1948 Israeli chart with the Moon almost at its most northerly position in relation to the Nodes (ie at 90 degrees). Israel as an entity was created out of land 'parceled out by the British, who chose the moment of birth. Even though obviously it was against a backdrop of violence.

In contrast take the 1980 Zimbabwe chart where a new birth of the nation was forced by insurgency within preexisting borders. Ie the nation was not physically created but given a new revolutionary rebirth. Here the Moon is around the area of its Southern bending, just past 90degrees.

this is worth looking at, check some charts you'll see what I mean, and worth considering the ramifications I feel.

regards mike c

Slayer of Cliffracers wrote:Aside from the normal problems of working out when a country begins, the Declaration of Independance is the normally accepted idea and works well for modern countries, there are a number of other problems.

Wars and Occupations.

The biggest problem is that what happens if a country is snuffed out of existance and then ressurects itself. Only a few countries, like Kosovo, the USA and Yugoslavia were invented out of nothing, most countries that are reborn versions of countries that had existed before in the past at least in name.

This has a particular resonance, since if a country is occupied by another power, how long must it be occupied for it's original Horoscope to be invalidated and upon liberation, does it keep the old Horoscope, or does it get a new one. And what Horoscope governs for instance resistance fighters and the ilk and the government in exile, or the occupiers 'governer'? Is it the Horoscope of the annexation of their own country, or the original Horoscope of their countries birth, or the Horoscope of the occupying countries birth.

There doesn't seem to be a consistant system for what constitutes an event drastic enough to erase the countries original Horoscope and give it a new one. It is also the case that regime changes often, but not always impart a new Horoscope upon the country. Maybe the important thing is continuality of regime, not occupation as such.

So if a country is occupied and the original government is reinstated, the old horoscope still stands, while if the original government is not reinstated, then a new government brings with it a new Horoscope. The problem is then what constitutes a discontinuity. Does something like a militery coup create a new Horoscope, if it does then it would follow that a very large number of countries are being incorrectly Horoscoped at the moment. England would not be 1066 but would be the date of the rise to power of William III, the last time the English government was couped.

It is a tough subject to contemplate. Discovery of America should really be that...when it was discovered (or born)
Why the declaration of indep is used I'm not sure, I guess we just go along and accept it as valid.

It is a tough subject to contemplate. Discovery of America should really be that...when it was discovered (or born)
Why the declaration of indep is used I'm not sure, I guess we just go along and accept it as valid.

Hi its probably a better idea to test the chart. If you believe the Discovery chart is valid then test it against events

I think a lot depends on the astrologer's personal philosophy on what ANY chart represents.

I personally think if a moment in time is deemed important enough a proven radical chart can be active to transits or progressions either after or before the event. Often a succession of mundane charts for different stages in the development of a nation show strong connections, almost as though one is a chart derived from the other.
regards
mike c

hi You could consider whether any event such as a coup could be clearly represented in a pre-existant chart , and if so then the earlier chart is probably still radical

Some people consider mundane events and look for angularity ie interaction with Asc/Desc or MC/IC as a supplementary 'proof' of the veracity of a chart.

I suppose you could consider the symbolic 'weight' of the moment as being a pointer.

Coups could be major events in otherwise stable regimes but in a country racked by constant upheavel such an event would probably constitute a continuation of an established process and the charts that go with it

mike c

Well, the problem is that there doesn't exist any real standard for 'how stable a country must be', in order that a coup doesn't constitute a new horoscope. There is also the problem of what exactly constitutes a discontinuity of regime.

In unstable regimes, I cannot see why the rules would be any different as it were. A coup is obviously a coup, however often it occurs.

It is a tough subject to contemplate. Discovery of America should really be that...when it was discovered (or born)
Why the declaration of indep is used I'm not sure, I guess we just go along and accept it as valid.

Because the Declaration of Independance is the birth of the USA as a seperate nation/political regime. When America was discovered, the USA didn't yet exist.

The declaration of Independance is significant because it was when the USA was Invented. In America's case, since there has been continuity of regime since that point, the validity of the declaration's Horoscope still stands today.

The problem is with less stable countries like England.

Take England/Britain, there are a number of possible Horoscopes based upon the same criteria.

The coronation of Athelstan the Glorious.
August 2nd 924. England is Leo.
(Kingdom of England annexed by Denmark)

The reign of Edward the Confessor
8th June 1042. England is Gemini.

The coronation of Edward I the Confessor.
3rd April 1043. England is Aries.

The cororonation of Harold Godwinson
January 5 1066. England is Capricorn.

The coronation of William I
December 25 1066. England is Capricorn.

The coronation of Stephen
December 26 1135. England is Capricorn.

The coronation of Henry IV.
13 October 1399. England is Libra.

The coronation of Edward IV.
28 June 1461. England is Cancer.

The coronation of Henry VII.
30th October 1485 England is Scorpio.

Oliver Cromwell's regime.
16 December 1653. England is Saggitarius.

Charles II coronation.
29th May 1649. England is Gemini.

William III coronation.
11th April 1689. England is Aries.

So basically there are a lot of possible points with at least as much validity as Englands Chart as the rise of William the Conquerer, the normally used Chart.