Srsedna wrote:

After much observation, this is the way I see it (as a tropical astrologer): a regular solar return and a precession-corrected solar return for a given year complement each other. I think the "law" behind this is that, just like time, revolutions are both "absolute" (i.e., a complete 360 against the background of fixed stars) and "relative" to a moving starting point related to the planet in question, (which is, of course, tropical 0 Aries for the sun) and both perspectives add details of a complete image. The easiest way to prove this is to study solar returns for deaths: in the cases where death is vaguely hinted in the tropical solar return, it will be blatantly evident in the precession-corrected return (as Isaac says, angles seem to be more important in them and you will find angular Plutos and Mars very often), [and the opposite is also true: sometimes death will be more evident in the tropical return.]

Srsedna, I think your statement is trying to say that we can have our cake and eat it too. (Just use the return which most clearly seems to show death!) The only way to answer the precessed/non-precessed return question is with a well controlled research project. We actually have ideal data to check death returns with the Astrologers' Memorial site (if it's still active).

But then you say:

I agree with Isaac that lunar returns should always be precession-corrected, and I add that this law would explain why (at least in my experience) tropical lunar returns are so vague and seemingly unrelated to actual events: because for a revolution of the moon, it makes no sense to take tropical 0 Aries as a reference point!

So I'm confused because these two statements (Death is seen in both tropical and precession corrected returns, but lunar returns should always be precession corrected) seem to contradict each other?

Hi Therese,

Thanks for your message; I see how I struggled with words a bit, but what I meant (TLDR at the bottom), in other words, was that:

1) I have the suspicion -and am still researching it- that you should look at both solar returns, i.e., corrected and uncorrected because they complement each other in ways that are still not understood. I have always found indicators of death in regular, tropical solar returns when looking back at them, but many times I was unsatisfied with said indicators, because they were rather general and I had seen them come up in non-deadly returns as well. When I heard about precession-corrected SRs I reviewed a handful of cases and ended up with the impression that, for the year of the deaths, both returns had indicators, with one of the returns always being more dramatic than the other. I am aware that this might be an induction from me, that's why I wanted to share the idea and see if others have similar results. So far I haven't found a case where death is vague or absent in both returns for the year of death.

2) Just as tropical solar returns have their companion in precession-corrected ones, lunar returns should have a companion too. I started studying this under the assumption that this should be about tropical lunar returns and their precession-corrected counterparts, but I soon got frustrated because the precession-corrected LRs were highly accurate while the uncorrected ones didn't seem to match the facts much, unless you forced your interpretation a lot (the actual reason why I had stopped looking at them a long time ago). Then, it occurred to me to treat the north node as a "secondary" reference point for the lunar cycle instead of the vernal equinox, which was maybe appropriate for the Sun, and to look at the charts of the moment in which the transiting moon was in the same angle from the transiting NN as they were in the radix, and the results surprised me.

TLDR: Returns are twofold: the chart for the moment the planet in question returns to the same position against the background of fixed stars, and the chart for the moment the planet in question returns to the same position relative to its node. In the case of the Sun, the "node" is the vernal equinox.

Please do note that I'm not arguing for the use of the tropical or the sidereal zodiac here; you can apply these methods sidereally by locating the vernal equinox and the north node in the sidereal chart and using them as your reference points for the companions of the SR and the LR. Of course, in that case the names would be different because the "correction" (which is an unhappy word for this usage anyway) would be made to the returns relative to the vernal equinox and the north node.

srsedna

thanks for your thoughtful and well considered comments.. i like what you say about the nodes of the sun being the equinoxes.. i have read that before, but no one talks about it.. very good!

i was thinking it would be interesting to do a study on the idea of how much relevance the solar and lunar returns have on the coincidence of how they appear in the year or month before a person dies.. i would be willing to do a chart comparison using a tropical and sidereal chart for the same person to see how the results pan out... the challenge would be to find a chart to begin that everyone could agree upon, or of relevance..

i know that kobe bryant has just died with a number of others including one of his daughters.. there is an A rated birth chart for the daughter that died at adb - here
https://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Bryant,_Gianna

i could use this as an example if others were receptive to this, or another chart if not.. thoughts??

alternatively, we could use robert zollers chart who just passed away a few days ago.. rated A from memory.. https://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Zoller,_Robert_E.

My mentor Alexander Marr made a comprehensive study on both Zodiacs, and `while publishing articles in the Sidereal magazine Spica, he always preferred to work with the Tropical Zodiac. It is not illogical at all to use the precession in Tropical returns. Marr applied also the PSSR technique, discovered by the siderealist Cyril Fagan and applied it to the Tropical zodiac with immense success.
Srsedna mentioned the solar returns: According to Marr, in solar returns, both the tropical and precession corrected should be tested: sometimes the tropical solar return is better than the return with precession and vice versa. But in lunar return, only the precessional returns are effective, at least in most cases.
Here is what he wrote in his book Prediction, page 19: “ As long as siderealists evaluate their cyclic charts without comparing them to the radix, the sidereal zodiac may be used, and some promising results are possible. However, readers doing practical work and evaluating the most effective astrological phenomena for reasons of truth and simplicity should use the tropical zodiac throughout.???
If one has time, read chapters 3, 4, 7, 8 in Marr’s prediction.
I fully agree with Therese Hamilton that the only way is to perform a controlled research.
James: Gianna Bryant is not a good example, as she was young, age 13, so the recession is only 11’ but this case is an example for the need to compute also the demi lunar return, i.e. harmonics 2nd. In this demi chart for 21 January 2020 Neptune is on MC orb 1 degree (in tropical the orb is 5 degrees) and Node on Asc orb 2 degrees, ( in tropical the orb is 7 degrees).
In the converse demi lunar return, Pluto on Asc orb 2 degrees (in tropical the orb is 7 degrees).
It is better to use examples for peoples in age 40 or more.
I don’t have the location of death for Robert Zollers.

thanks isaac,

you put a lot of faith in alexander marr... regarding the issue of precession, he's using a sidereal system here....

i agree with you on using a person older, as opposed to younger, as there will be more of a distance gap to highlight the importance of precession, which is highlighting the importance of the sidereal zodiac... as for his study - i would have to see his study on the comparison.. does he share this work in his books? my thinking is ( for fun) we could do a limited experiment right here and see how they compare..

Gianna Bryant's case is impressive. Have you noticed, in the radix, the grand cross formed by tight squares/opps between Pluto, Venus, the Moon and the 8th house cusp?

The precession-corrected lunar return of Jan 8 has:

-ASC opposite natal ASC (orb is a bit more than 1 deg in long, but only 21' in declination--they're in a contraparallel). Note: I'm assuming she was in Calabasa at this moment, the orb would be tighter if she was in Santa Ana.
-ASC square natal Jupiter Rx in Scorpio (orb less than 30')
-Neptune in the 8th house of the LR (I pay attention to this because Neptune is rising in her radix).

The (tropical, prec-corr) demi-return of Jan 21 has that Pluto-Saturn conjunction sitting in the 8th house cusp and then Sun and Mercury in 8 too, while the Moon makes a wide opposition to the ASC and Mars square MC.

Now, the node-based lunar return happened on Jan 15 and it has Neptune rising, a couple degrees from natal Uranus in Gianna's h1. The moon is in conjunction with the natal house 8 cusp (5 degs, Placidus) but does not seem to aspect anything else. I was expecting more connections to that natal grand cross, but only the MC is near natal Pluto (again, 5 degs).

In the solar returns I observe:

Tropical regular: crowded h12, including Neptune in the cusp, getting squared by Mars and Jup in h2 and h8 respectively, and the Moon, which is, curiosly enough, only 1' shy of a perfect opposition to the Moon of the node-based return (this could mean nothing, I know). Also MC and Saturn opposite North Node, both squaring that h12 Mercury (ruler of Gianna's natal h8 ).

Tropical, precession-corrected: ASC on natal Mars, MC on natal Venus, therefore squaring Moon and Pluto and opposing the h8 cusp. The Moon in this return has reached a tight conjunction to the natal North Node.

Finally, I had never given converse returns a try before, and my first experience (with Gianna's death too) was spooky enough:

Converse regular solar return: Mars in h8, Pluto sitting on the cusp of the 12th squaring Saturn in the 3rd.
Converse, prec-corr solar return: angular Mars, angular grand cross between MC, Mercury, ASC and a Uranus-Neptune conjunction near the IC. In both cases, the Moon was opposite Saturn (tighter orb in the precession-corrected one).

The impression I get is that the varying positions of ASC, MC, house cusps and the moon between the moments of a tropical and sidereal solar return have something to tell us. If I'm not mistaken, only 4.5 hours passed between the two in Gianna's case, but it was already enough to add a second layer to the interpretation. I can't help to wonder if the arc between the two lunar positions, which gets wider and wider as we age, becomes a sort of sensitive zone for the year in question.

Isaac Starkman wrote: James: Gianna Bryant is not a good example, as she was young, age 13....
It is better to use examples for peoples in age 40 or more.
I don’t have the location of death for Robert Zollers.

srsedna,

i agree with isaac here.... actually it might be better to start a new thread if you want to talk about gianna's chart... use her as an example if you'd like... maybe i will comment on a different thread on it.. maybe others will here too.. cheers james

What about these two?

https://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Chirac,_Jacques

https://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Jones,_Terry

PS: I'm still not sold on the concept of converse returns. I see how converse movement makes sense as a way of calculating primary directions, but actually going back in time to look at returns feels a bit... wrong. What is your actual experience with it, friends?

thanks srsedna,

perhaps you could pick one with AA rated time and we could proceed on a new thread on this.. i would be up for it...

as for converse data - it appears alexander marr was influenced by the work of rc davison.. i am guessing at this, but these ideas are from a previous generation of astrologers who were into this... rc davisons book the technique of prediction is a good starting point to get more of an appreciation for this idea...

chiracs chart looks like a good starting point... we need to figure out important dates in his life and work backward... lets find some important dates for him..

I checked 3 events for Jacques Chirac, using my rectification for 11.56.50GMT Asc 19Aqu23’ which is close to the recorded time of noon.
1. 7 May 1995 elected as President
In the rular return for 19 April, there is nothing , but in the tropical Uranus on IC and Sun on Desc,
In the demi lunar return for 4 May Jupiter on Asc and Venus on IC, while in tropical Saturn on IC , Mercury on Desc and Pluto on Asc-
2. 5 May 2002 reelected
In the lunar return Sun on Desc, Uranus on IC
In the converse lunar return Sun exactly on MC. In the tropical Jupiter close to Asc
3. 26 Sep 2019 death
In the lunar return for 7 Sep Pluto on IC
In the converse demi lunar return Sun, Saturn and Neptune on Desc, Mars, Pluto and Jupiter on MC

Hi Isaac,

I'm getting different angles for Chirac's last lunar return (Sep 7, tropical and precession corrected, 11:01 am). The highlights I think are ASC of the LR in natal h8, squaring (1 deg 19) natal Pluto in h6 and the MC of the return opposite (0 deg 45) natal Saturn in h12. Also, h8 cusp (Placidus) square natal ASC.

Node-based lunar return (Sep 17, 12:06 PM): Moon square natal Saturn (0 deg 57) in h12, Moon parallel natal chart ruler Uranus, (0 deg 19) ASC of the return semisquare natal Moon (0 deg 25)

I'll start a thread later to discuss the solar returns plus active progressions at the time of death.

i have looked at chiracs chart before and although it is rated AA, i haven't been convinced of its accuracy.. i know this is weird and apparently it is gotten off a birth cert, but i am saying this because i have looked at his chart before and for some reason it doesn't resonate with me...

i do want to talk about some generalities here though.. back to the concept of lunar returns and having to use precession for a 90-95 accuracy rate.. as i said - this really gives credence to the sidereal system as i see it, in spite of what alexander marr concludes...

and, with regard to what mr. marr concludes, another very hot topic in astrological circles is the issue of relocated charts.. mr. marr suggests one has to do a relocated chart for the solar return.. does he advocate this for lunar returns as well?? if not, it seems problematic to me to advocate them for the solar return but not for the lunar return...

i just finished reading a book by dr. k s charak called 'a textbook of varshaphala'.. i am presently reading another book by him called 'predictive techniques in varshaphala... varshaphala is the word used in the indian branch of astrology called tajika for solar returns, or annual charts.. the indians have a whole system in place which seems much more sophisticated then anything i have seen in western astrology and this would include the work from traditional astrology literature which includes the importance of the profection lord for the year and etc. etc.. i don't know who borrowed from who here, but the profection year lord is referred to as the muntha in indian astrology and has an important role in arriving at the lord of the year, but is not automatically treated as the lord of the year as i understand it is in western traditional astrology...

but, what i wanted to express was dr. charaks idea on relocating the solar returns to the place a person is living... he comes down hard on this concept and pans it thoroughly..

let me quote you from page 15 of the book i am presently reading, although he said something similar in the previous work..

""significance of the place of birth.. it needs to be emphasized that the place of birth has a permanent impact on the life of a native... the calculation of the cusp of the ascendant in the annual chart... needs to be made from the place of birth no matter where the native resides at the time of the commencement of a given year of his life.... this means that the ascendant in the annual chart for a particular year of life can't be manipulated by changing one's place of residence.. one can cast the annual charts for several years in advance and study them beforehand in conjunction with the natal chart.. the suggestions of some astrologers to their consult-tors to move to a supposedly more appropriate location on the earth around the time of the annual return to ensure a more convenient or favourable ascendant during a particular year of life is nothing but an exercise in ignorance."""

now, i know there are some astrologers who advocate for the importance of relocation charts, myself included, but i have never advocated for the replacement of the relocation chart over the natal chart, whether natal or solar return...

so, right away there are some outstanding issues that we may not be in agreement with here and may not be able to move forward with any agreeable results..

my basic question to isaac - since you advocate for relocated solar returns based of alexander marrs work, what is yours or his position on lunar returns and location?? thanks.. james