skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

*** Saturn, George W Bush, and the USA

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Mundane Astrology & World Events
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 4130
Location: England

Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2003 12:16 pm    Post subject: *** Saturn, George W Bush, and the USA Reply with quote

9 Oct 2003

Garry Phillipson:

Some of you might be interested to take a look at the upcoming transit of Saturn to the Suns of Dubya & the USA. I've already written a bit about this in the latest 'Transit', here:

http://www.astrologer.com/aanet/pub/transit/sep2003/garry.htm

so won't repeat myself here.

Does anyone has any thoughts about this?

PS - as well as posting on this forum, I know Kim Farnell (editor of Transit) would also be very interested in any feedback on this subject, so please let her know too. This means you can get extra mileage from your hard astrological work!

[Charts for Bush and the USA chart Garry is referring to in his article have been pasted below - Deb]





----------------------------

Graelhaven:

interesting Article. I looked at the chart for august 5, 1974, and the chart for june 5 2004, (its mentioned that SAturn would be same place in june, so I just randomly picked a day) On that day, mars is at 18 of Cancer, almost exactly where Venus was in the 1974 chart. (17 cancer 52) this is the first thing about this chart that attracts my attention. I suspect that when mars conjunct Saturn just previous to this, the trouble will begin brewing. I wonder what happened the last time saturn crossed Shrubs sun? and did it station retrograde at that time? certainly would like to know what shrub was doing in 1974? he would have just turned 38 in july 1974. This would certainly give some clues.
Moon will be at 10 degrees cap, so this is at a full moon,
with Mars in cancer, its fall.
mercury at 29 of taurus, just passed Algol (perhaps there was indiscriminet/unfortunate communications)
venus at 19 of gemini, quite close to Shrubs Uranus and USA Mars. and is trine to USA MOON.(love of unusual communication?)
Mars, again it sits at 18 of cancer where venus sat in 1974... interesting aspect.
Nixon was paranoid about the US love of hIm, W seems to love conflict, so perhaps indicator of basis of situation?
Jupiter will be JUST Past Shrubs natal mars! so he may have been overdoing...(which brings up Moon at 10 degrees cap in 6th house in June. moon is in detriment but also in mutual reception with Saturn and approaching perfect opposition same day)
Uranus is just past trine USA jupiter at 6 degrees of pices by not quite one degree.
perhaps a change in USAs fortunes (for the better one would hope)But it also retrograde or stationary going back toward trine...
(we certainly have a lot of work to do to improve our fortune right now)
neptune is sitting in Aquarius in the general vicinity of the USA natal moon, and will be for quite a while, I suspect this is not a very significant planet in this chart. its loosely a quincunx with sun but really, we all know shrubs ideals are not in synq with anyones but his own pocket.
Pluto in 6th house of health may be very significant to both US and shrub as it is in opposition to USA natal mars and shrubs natal uranus. and the last interesting aspect I see is that chiron is conjoining US natal Pluto...a hard lesson perhaps? which is in opposition to USA natal mercury! communication. Now, I see all these lovely aspects, but putting them together in a meaningful way is just a bit beyond me. At a glance I would say that Bush will likely not be re-elected due to his underhanded behavior concerning war, money, etc... and lying about everything. HE may even, if I read the health indicators properly become ill or harmed in connection with his unethical behavior. But I must admit I come to this discussion with my own prejudices. I cant stand the man and tend to look for dire readings in charts related to him.

PS - I also note that Shrubs natal chiron, moon and jupiter are in the claws of Scorpio all being within the 15 Libra to 15 Scorpio evil path... but are trine with transit sun and TNeptune. All in Air... so perhaps some saving grace here somewhere? sun 14 gemini, neptune 15 aquarius...

------------------------

Tom:

While the comparison to Nixon is tantalizing for the Bush haters, I think we need more than one example to set a trend. I looked at the two Saturn transits to the US Sun prior to 1974, admittedly briefly, but I didn’t find much to buoy their spirits

The first to occur during the 20th century was in Late August 1915. Woodrow Wilson was President, and World War I began a year earlier. The US was not yet involved. Wilson’s Sun is at 7 Capricorn, a Saturn sign, and his natal Saturn is at 11 Cancer, so this year was his second Saturn return. Wilson married in December of 1915 for the second time. His first wife passed away not too long before his second marriage, and no, there was no hanky panky that we know of. All accounts are that they met after the passing of the first Mrs. Wilson.

There were no momentous events in US history in 1915, but America would enter WWI shortly after Wilson’s re-election in 1916, by which time Saturn had moved into early Leo.

The next transit to the US Sun by Saturn occurred in June of 1945. Harry Truman was President, having taken over after the death of FDR only months earlier. In May of 1945 Germany surrendered and in August, Japan would surrender ending WWII. June 1945 did bring the signing of the UN Charter. The transit coincided with happier events despite Saturn being in his detriment. Truman’s natal Sun is at 18 Taurus and his natal Saturn is at 10 Gemini.

The plight of Richard Nixon is cited in the original post. Nixon’s natal Sun is at 19 Capricorn a Saturn sign, and his natal Saturn is at 27 Taurus Rx. There is no readily apparent connection to Nixon’s untimed natal chart and the transit to the US Sun. We’d have to look to progressions, etc to find the connection.

Which brings us to W. He will be the first President whose natal Sun and US Sun are so close. His second Saturn return will follow in a year or so. The Sun is in his 12th house and rules his ASC. Saturn rules both his 7th and 8th (cusps are on Aquarius), and 6th (Capricorn). Using the US chart mentioned by Gary Phillipson, Saturn would rule the 2nd and 3rd houses.

Since W’s Sun is in the 12th, what happens, if anything, might be kept secret. It could be an illness (Saturn ruling the 6th conjuncts the Sun who is also the ASC ruler), perhaps a debilitating one like Woodrow Wilson’s stroke. I suppose it could indicate death, but we’d need more than the ruler of 8 contacting the ruler of the ASC since he’s already been there done that 29 years ago. Wilson’s stroke caused major Constitutional crisis since there was no mechanism for the Vice President to assume the Presidency unless the President died. The 25th Amendment changed that, and should a President become seriously disabled, the Vice President can assume the duties of President provided the Constitutional requirements are met.

Superficially at least, there doesn’t seem to be a trend here. We’ve had a wedding, the end of a world war, and a court decision that brought about the President’s resignation. The latter two are endings, and Saturn is the planet of endings, but two of the events are happy (end of war, beginning of marriage) and Saturn is not a happy guy most of the time, and especially not in Cancer. It looks like a unique event, if anything significant happens at all, and references to the past, therefore, won’t help us.

------------------------

Graelhaven:

so burst my bubbble why dont cha!

Okay lets see, 1945 the first atom bomb was dropped in August, however it was tested earlier so perhaps you can say that the entry of the US into the "nuclear" age was a black moment in history (except that I dont think of it that way, just postulating a theory) the death of FDR a few months earlier culminating in Trumans having to take over the presidency. I suspect Truman would disagree with you on whether or not that was a good thing. He hated the decisions that were left for him to make, though he shouldered the responsibility like the good honest person he was. The darkest parts of WWII were the last parts, so you might also think of the saturn passing over the sun as the darkest hour just before the dawn in 1945.

Wilson... not being quite up to snuff on the Wilson Era I went back to look some things up... Nothing significant huh? what do you call the sinking of the lusitania in 1915, Secretary of State Bryan resigned from office because he feared the strict responsibility speach given by wilson in february same year would force him to declare war, instead by some heavy negotiations he got the Germans to promise not to shoot indiscriminantly, which lasted until 1917, when they started up again and Wilson declared war and re-instituted the draft. Also the SS EAstland sank near chicago that year, guess it was a year for shipwrecks. the sinking of the lusitania lead to the investigation and arrest of several german americans who were running a spy and propaganda ring out of the Hamberg steam line main office... I suspect, consideringt he Zimmerman papers that the 1915 pass had much more 12 house hits than others??? must check... Okay Wilson handled the situations pretty well. and last little point. Wilson did Not start the UN in 1915, he started the league of nations, the miserable faillure that preceded the UN, though he did found the idea, which later netted that organization.

one before that 1886...wasn't that the start of the big drought and depression? will look... VEG!

-----------------------------

Graelhaven:

the 1886 transit brought with it the Haymarket massacres and its after math, the Knights of Labor and racial discussions, the riots against chinese and the forcible displacement of over 500 chinese from their homes and then america in Seatle Washington... I'm getting a theme here... labor and racism... of course that does make sense because when jobs become scarce people start trying to weed out competition, however unethical... hence WWII and Germany... nothing on the presidential side I can really sink my teeth into, however the supreme court made the ruling that Corporations have the same rights as individuals... and Coke was invented... the fight for an 8 hour work day was lost with the haymarket massacre and put on hold for a while...

----------------------------

Graelhaven:

the saturn pass of 1856 saw a horribly bloody year in the fight over kansas ... would it be a free state or slave state... it was an election year and though there was a democrat in the white house (pierce) Buchanan was put forth as the democratic party representative and won.... (part of the reason he won was because he'd been out of the country for the last two years so was not involved with the Kansas Mess!)

I think that somewhat qualifies as a presidential saturnian pass... =)

by the way Tom, glad your home, hope the vacation was nice...

------------------------------

Tom:

Hi Beth,

Vacation was wonderful but too short as they all are.

I thought about the Lusitania but didn't check the date and relied on my "infallible" memory. I thought it was 1916. It certainly was an important event. The reason I thought it was 1916 is that was an election year and the slogan "He kept us out of War" helped get Wilson re-elected, and then he promptly got us into the War and the sinking of the Lusitania was part of the justification. I just don't see 1915 as a year that put undue stress upon the President like an impending impeachment would do. The job is stressful every year, but the Lusitania certainly must have caused serious concern in the White House in 1915.

Truman was under enormous stress as FDR kept him in the dark a lot then -PRESTO-Harry was President. I suppose the surrender of Japan could be looked at as the beginning of a darker atomic age, but at the time, there were a lot of Happy Americans celebrating VJ Day, and the end of a war is a good thing. Saturn deals with endings so I'd look elsewhere for atomic age significators.

Nixon's end was certainly due in no small part to his personal shortcomings, but the transit to the US Sun hit nothing in his natal chart. The question put by Phillipson is interesting because, unlike any of the previous transits to the US Sun, Saturn didn't conjunct the President's Sun and perhaps contacted little else in the President's chart[which says something about trying to predict world events using transits to leaders' charts alone]. It is unavoidable in W's chart. So I'd look for some personal-political connection -- not simply being around when the stuff hits the fan like Truman was. This is why a debilitating injury or illness makes some sense. Anything serious that hits the President personally can have an effect on the rest of the Nation and the world; and the reverse is true as well.

However, I never said Wilson was party to the signing of the UN Charter. I said Truman was President then. That too, is a beginning and I would hesitate to see Saturn as part of that event.

--------------------------------

Sue:

I'm surprised no-one has mentioned the Jupiter/Saturn conjunction 'curse' that has befallen each President elected in those years with the conjunction in an earth sign - since 1840 I think. That is 7 of them, all but two in the first term. Only Reagan (who was elected under an air sign) survived and only just. Apparently, it was a lot worse than we have ever been led to believe. I just checked to see if he has any 12th house stuff. He doesn't but has the US ascendant (Sibley chart) in his 12th.
I think Tom is right when he says that if anything does happen to Bush, there is a good chance that it will be kept from the public. Reminds me of that movie 'Dave' with Kevin Kline who impersonated the President after he had a stroke. I read once that someone doesn't get elected unless their chart ties in closely with the chart of the US. There has been a lot of talk about how things might have been different today if Gore was President. I'm not sure about this but I do think a different President would have been elected if things had have been different.

-------------------------------

Tom:

I thought about this so-called "curse" but decided to omit it on the grounds that it doesn't make any sense astrologically. Yes, every President elected in a year ending in zero since 1840, with the exception of Ronald Reagan, died in office. How that might tie into the Saturn Jupiter conjunction in earth signs is quite beyond me.

Roosevelt died of natural causes in his third term, the only President elected to more than two terms, and it was during the second term after 1940 (his fourth term) that he died. Kennedy of course was asassinated (For all you folks old enough to remember it, does it seem possible that this Nov 22 will be the 40th anniversary of his death?), and Reagan, elected in 1980 about the time of an air conjunction, didn't die, but as Sue said came awfully close.

Roosevelt served at least part of one and probably one full term too many, and as a result, the 22nd Ammendment to the US Constitution was passed in 1951 limiting the number of terms a President can hold office. George Washington had it right all along -- two terms is enough.

The 25th Ammendment was passed in 1967. This allows the President himself (or herself for all you first woman President hopefuls)to cede his (heh, heh, heh) authority without resigning, or allows the Vice President and a majority of the principal members of the executive department to take power from a disabled President. Congress has passed laws specifying how this is to be done. This was done a couple of times when Ronald Reagan was undergoing surgery and perhaps one or two times since. The chances of a Woodrow Wilson scenario repeating itself are therefore limited. One would hope, however, that it would be with great reluctance, and only in the most dire circumstances that the President's authority would be usurped. In that case the Vice President would become President, possibly temporarily, and the usual succession of office would be in force after that.

Why not look at the chart for the last "Great Conjunction" and compare it to the US Chart and to G.W. Bush's chart for some assistance here? I'll try to do that later today.

---------------------------------

Graelhaven:

I believe she means the US jupiter in Cancer which is water sign. however I dont know exactly how that relates.

but I did point out in my first post that there are some serious illness and overdoing it pointers in there.

Also, that is an election year, I'm hoping the country does a hell of a lot better this time round in choosing. I'm afraid I go arround thinking "bush out the door in 2004" rather a lot!

------------------------------------

Sue:

Actually, I meant the fact that Jupiter and Saturn were in conjunction in Taurus when G.W. was elected. I was being a little flippant at the time but I have been thinking about it. Tom, you ask what it might have to do with anything astrologically. I'm still thinking about this but it brings up the point that we were discussing regarding Mars. Is there really such a line between what is astrologically significant and what isn't? That every President who has died in office after being elected during these conjunctions is a fact. Jupiter/Saturn conjunctions are a fact. Whether these conjunctions can be tied into the charts of these Presidents and be pinpointed as a significant contributing factor to their deaths is debatable. I don't know. I haven't looked. What I would be more interested in is looking at the symbolism that these conjunctions bring to the nation at the time of these elections. Jupiter and Saturn are an archetypal pair. One planet is about growth and expansion whereas the other organizes and sets limits. Whereas Jupiter has the potential to leap in blindly, taking many risks (war in Iraq perhaps) Saturn needs to recognise that there is a process to follow when successful advancement is to be maintained (rebuilding of Iraq perhaps). There is often a danger of swinging from one to another. With the conjunction it is more important to find the set of checks and balances of the archetypal pair. Of course, this doesn't say anything about whether G.W. is going to become a victim of the curse. JFK didn't die because he was elected in a year that saw a Jupiter/Saturn conjunction. He also didn't die because his transits were bad. He died partly because he didn't heed the warnings of risk that were showing in his chart at the time. But he also died because he was part of the energy of the time that saw several prominent people assassinated.
I haven't really thought all of this through yet but I think we need to look beyond the mere technicalities of what transits are transiting what chart.

----------------------------------

Graelhaven:

Wow, then I think its even more significant that you have the flip side saturn Jupiter conjunct next summer. At least I would think

this brings me to another observation I keep forgeting to ask... Nixon...how can one make a comparison without his data being included? you would really need to compare his and w's data now wouldnt ya? just a thought!

------------------------------------

Tom:

Sue and Beth,

You both probably know that the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction or Great Conjunction was used as a generational marker in medieval astrology similar to the way Pluto is used by moderns. We speak of the Pluto in Leo generation or the Pluto in Virgo generation in much the same way as our predecessors used Jupiter Saturn. Ingress charts are cast for this conjunction and determinations made. There is no "leaders will die" signature that I'm aware of.

Since 1840 Seven Presidents died in office. Harding and Roosevelt died of natural causes, the others were assasinated. The "year ending in a zero" phenomenon coincides roughly with this great conjunction in earth signs of late; as Sue says, this is undeniable. But symbolically it doesn't seem to make any sense. We need to pay attention to it, but if the phenomenon is not associated with any known astrological meaning, that is tough to do.

We have an abundance of astrological techniques and computers to do the "dirty work" for us, so if someone wants to make the substantial effort to find an astrological link, they are free to do so, and the computer age is the best time to do this.

Beth wrote: this brings me to another observation I keep forgeting to ask... Nixon...how can one make a comparison without his data being included? you would really need to compare his and w's data now wouldnt ya? just a thought! MissB

Exactly, and Sue makes the same point a bit differently. I've said this before and I'll say it again, right from the mouth of my first astrology teacher Joan Negus: "Transits are not enough." And I'll add especially with mundane astrology. If we want to make the effort to make astrological sense of what might be a significant event, the transit of Saturn over the US and W's chart, we need to look at lots of things, to wit: The chart of the Great Conjunction cast for Washington DC (or NYC as Robert Zoller recommends); that chart should be compared to the USA chart (pick one) and both charts should be compared to the President's chart and the conjunction chart. You might even want to do composite charts with W and the USA or W and the conjunction chart. Then, check this against the previous conjunctions and the deaths of Presidents or transits of Saturn to the US Sun. In short there is one heck of a lot of work here with no promise of results. And I didn't mention progressions or directions either.

Mundane astrology done properly is difficult and time consuming, and this is why I can't get too excited about predictions based only on transits, and why so many astrologers are so often wrong. Transits are not enough.

----------------------------------

Sue:

Quote:
You both probably know that the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction or Great Conjunction was used as a generational marker in medieval astrology similar to the way Pluto is used by moderns. We speak of the Pluto in Leo generation or the Pluto in Virgo generation in much the same way as our predecessors used Jupiter Saturn.


Precisely my point. It is an important cycle that has significance beyond a simple transit. The fact that Presidents keep poping off when elected under one isn't quite the point. Chances are that if Bush was shot tomorrow, he would be more likely to survive than JFK did because of the advances of medical technology. It was the only thing that kept Reagen alive. It isn't their deaths that are significant (although it is for them), it is the energy under which these deaths occured. One way or another it will be expressed, if not through the death of the President, through another significant event. Maybe September 11 was the event that symbolically expressed a similar thing. . When JFK died, it meant far more than an individual who happened to be famous losing his life. Of course I am far too young to remember this happening Wink but it is an event that is still deeply ingrained in the psyche of most of the world, particularly Americans. Having an understanding of what this cycle brings isn't necessarily about transiting points to any chart. As President, Bush is simply the person out front who is the embodiment of the current energies.
I don't believe that this conjunction will always bring such tragedy. It's not the conjunction but how it is handled that brings the difficulties. I have read on a number of occaisons that the assassination of JFK changed the world, as did Sept 11. But I believe these things happened because the world was struggling to change - not the other way around. This conjunction challenges us to break free of the existing order. It is up to us how we respond to that.

-----------------------------

Tom:

>>Of course I am far too young to remember this happening <<

Rub it in why don't you?

There isn't much of anything in your post that I would disagree with. About the only thing is that Kennedy might have survived given the current state of medical technology. My understanding is the wounds were too masive for any hope of anything other than a vegetative life, if that. You are correct about Reagan however. In 1963, he most likely would have died, despite the fact that he walked into the hospital under his own power (until he was outside camera range whereupon he collapsed).

My point is not that we should disregard the "great conjunction" only that it should, as all astrological events, be taken in context. I remember reading something, and I forget where, about Saturn being in difficulty in Taurus: Jupiter in earth isn't too comfortable for expansion either.

I tried researching the Great Conjunction with what medieval texts I have, but with no luck. The ones I have all seem to be concerned with nativities only. Unless I missed it, Ptolemy doesn't mention it at all.

I think it is time to go to the chart itself -- Later I hope.

Tom

--------------------------------

Tom:

FOr those interested enough to cast the chart for the last Great Conjunction, it occurred on May 28, 2000, 15:59 GMT.

Cast it for Washington DC. Jupter and Saturn are smack on the MC and their dispositor, Venus is combust in Gemini.



The conjunction itself, and the conjunction MC square W's natal Venus ruler of his natal 4th and the intercepted Taurus in the natal 10th. Since Venus disposits the conjunction she seems to be taking on more and more significance. I hope others take a look at this. I'll try to do so as well.

-----------------------------

Graelhaven:

let me see if I understand you. Venus deposits the conjunction, and she is combust?

------------------------------

Tom:

Yes. The conjunction is in Taurus, and Venus is the dispositor of the conjunction as she rules Taurus. Therefore, Venus will have some sayso over the effects of the conjunction. Venus well placed will have a beneficial effect. Venus poorly placed will have a negative effect.

The fact that Venus is the dispositor is a generally positive thing as she is a benefic. The negative effects of benefics aren't usually so bad. But being combust will seriously hinder her influence good or bad. This is a mixed bag here.

If the conjunction was, say, in Virgo, and Mercury was combust in say Sagittarius, that would be a very bad influence.

---------------------------------

Garry:

First off, many thanks Tom & Miss B for all the posts on this topic, some really interesting stuff there.

Of course it would be hopelessly simplistic to anticipate (or hope for) Bush’s forced exit from office just because it happened once before under the transit of Saturn over the US’s Sun. But at the same time there should be something in common between the times when this transit has happened in the past, don’t you think?

Here are the dates of the last 4 instances of this transit (just showing the first ‘pass’ each time for simplicity’s sake – Saturn actually went retro over the Sun & then direct again in 1915-16, & 1974-5):

14 July 1886
29 August 1915
28 June 1945
9 August 1974

It struck me the other day that maybe the whole Nixon business is a bit misleading for the 1974 transit. Of course the symbolism is relevant to Nixon; but from 9th August on, Gerald Ford was president so it has to apply to him too in some way. Those of you who know more about American history than me, see what you make of this idea about the meaning of the transit:

In ’74 we have Ford, suddenly thrust into office. He hadn’t even been vice-president very long, and became the first and only unelected chief executive (until Bush, but that’s another story hmm?). Kissinger was still in place, who in many ways seems to have been the chief subverter and manipulator. It seems plausible that Ford must have felt quite isolated at this time; almost as if the cabin boy was suddenly made captain, and still had to cope with the rest of the crew.

You’ll guess that I’m going with ‘isolation’ for the Saturn theme here.

Before that, in ’45, Truman was in office – had only been there a couple of months, with Roosevelt dying in April. So suddenly Truman has responsibility for decisions about the terms of peace, rebuilding of half the world, and whether to use the atom bomb descending on his shoulders. And as the negotiation of national boundaries etc began, the alliance between the US & the USSR became increasingly shaky. So maybe Truman would have felt a little more isolated than usual too.

In 1915 – Woodrow Wilson had (as Miss B notes) lost his wife a year previously, and was reportedly devastated by that; then his secretary of state, Bryan, resigned two months before the transit. The US was on the verge of being pitched into war against Germany, which Wilson didn’t want, but he didn’t want to be too soft on Germany either. So can we notch up another instance of an isolated president here? It seems plausible to me, though I’ll be the first to say that ‘plausible’ is definitely the word, not ‘overpowering’. I’m hoping that some of you will have some more ideas/info that will either take this idea on or demolish it.

Going back to 1886 – well, this is where my theory falls to the ground. Grover Cleveland got married on 2nd June 1886, a little over a month before the transit of Saturn to the US’s Sun was exact. At age 49, this was his first marriage. So this is really the complete opposite of the ‘isolation’ theme that I’ve been developing so far as I can see. I could try the line that ‘He probably became isolated from the process of government because of the focus on his new bride’, but (a) I don’t know if that’s true, (b) let’s face it, it’s a bit contrived anyway isn’t it? What do you think? As I say, I’m no authority on US history so there could well be things that would either strengthen the ‘isolated leader when Saturn transits Sun’ hypothesis or blow it out of the water altogether.

An interesting aside: the USA’s progressed Sun (always assuming you’re happy with the chart I use, see article in Transit ref’d at the beginning of this thread) fell at the following degrees at the first pass of Saturn over the Sun each time:

1886: 0 Scorpio
1915: 29 Scorpio
1945: 29 Sagittarius
1974: 29 Capricorn

And then the 2003/4 pass will be at 28 deg 59 mins Aquarius (if you go for 26th Oct 2003 as the significant date) or 29 deg 37 mins Aquarius (if you go for 11th June 2004). Seems as if the symbolism of the transit should in some way be linked to the Sun’s position in the last degree of a sign. But I don’t feel like I have anything like enough information to say anything intelligent about what that might be!

This Business of Degrees

Could I just raise one more thing whilst I’m about it? As per the last paragraph, there are two possible dates for the transit of Saturn to Sun in this chart. At 26th Oct 03, Saturn stations before turning retro at 13 deg 14 mins of Cancer. The USA’s Sun is (again, in the chart I’m using) at 13 deg 20 mins.

So the question arises, does this count as exact because Saturn has reached the Sun’s degree? Or do we have to wait until 11th June 2004, when Saturn finally reaches 13 deg 20 mins?

I have a little theory to introduce to the discussion here. In an interview I recorded with Rob Hand in 1997, he said this:

Quote:
“The word ‘partile’ in modern English, comes from the Latin ‘partilis’ which is a direct translation of the Greek word moirikos which means ‘according to the degree’. And – this is the interesting point – it doesn’t mean within sixty minutes (as moderns would think it means); it means they are in the same degree – or the equivalent degree of the sign, so if you had a trine from 13.59 to 14.01 that is not partile. If you had a trine from 13.01 to 13.59 that is partile, because they are in the fourteenth degree in both cases.

“So the Greeks, rightly or wrongly, had a quantum view – literally – of the zodiac. The zodiac is made out of a hierarchy of quanta (the actual term is morion; that word means allotment, or lot, as in ‘a lot of land’ or ‘a person’s lot in life’. In fact, the word for degree – ‘moira’ is a derivation of that) and these degrees, these moria are exactly what John Addey accused them of being – little boxes. And the Greeks would have said, ‘Yes! We know they’re little boxes! This is the way they are supposed to be! Because the universe is not a continuum; it is a series of discontinuous quantities!’ Well, guess what folks! That’s exactly what physics is telling us.”

So – extrapolating a little from what Rob Hand says there – it seems there’s a plausible case for saying that reaching the same degree should be enough to deliver the major effects of the transit.

But has anyone had a chance to observe transits like this – where a planet enters the same degree as a planet but then goes retrograde before perfecting the aspect – and find out from experience whether the transit proper kicks into action under such a circumstance?

Whew. Thanks anyone who read all the way to the end of this post.

---------------------------

Graelhaven:

the issolation idea...perhaps if you think in terms of or combine with the idea of fatherliness, the concept might be more exact? clevelands new wife if I recall was 21.

Gerald Ford and Harry Truman were both, I think very good examples of people having to take over a situation where they were outsiders and the situation was grave and they had to wing it and they did so very well.

W? well his wagon load of misdirection is beginning to land on his doorstep. One can hope he's burried in it.

Now what I'm looking for at home in my forrest of books is info on the 1827 transit. all the others I found stuff online, that one seems too quiet. =)

I'd like more info on this back and forth motion of planets myself... =) Similarly I'd like to know, if a planet is in your natal chart reversed then how is effected differently by transit than a forward facing planet? (okay I ask strange questions I know.)

---

article related that I just read and found very interesting. thought I'd forward. MissB

http://www.widgetsworld.co.uk/search/go.php?art_id=1634

it appears to be on the Mountain Astrologer Web site...

----------------------------

Garry:

Hmm, thanks for ref'ing that. Still a week to go before Saturn stations, so maybe it's a bit early to evaluate what has happened so far. I'm interested, though, by the furore which is rumbling away in the background about somebody within the White House having named a US secret agent to the press. Bush seems to be hoping this will go away, but will it prove to be a case of it appearing to go away as Saturn goes retro, then coming back to prominence next year when Saturn finally hits his & the US's natal Suns?

--------------------------------

Graelhaven:

I think Shrub has a very bad habit of thinking just because he says the sky is pink with purple polka dots, everyone is supposed to ignore the fact that its blue.
The arrogance he displays (in my opinion) borders sociopathic behavior. Lets just say I wont be surprised if he is offed, that a so called "retired" agent does the deed. They take a real deep dislike to threats like that. And make no mistake it is a death threat from within the whitehouse, not a leak. (that's my high opinion of that family showing) Anyway I'll be interested to see how this all plays out.


Last edited by Deb on Fri Oct 31, 2003 7:39 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GarryP
Moderator


Joined: 23 Oct 2003
Posts: 213
Location: UK

Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:37 pm    Post subject: Saturn Stations Reply with quote

On 24th October, around the time Saturn stationed, George Bush gave a speech to the Australian Parliament, thanking them for their support in the Iraq war. He was jeered by a couple of MPs from the Green Party, and a guy whose father is held in Guantanamo Bay. All three jeerers were ejected.

That seems to fit reasonably well with the fact that Saturn stationed just before reaching the Suns of Bush & the (Sibly) USA. Criticism reaches him, but its power is weak and the critics are soon moving backwards, away from Bush. It will be interesting, now, to see whether the actual transit of Saturn over those Suns (in June next year) sees a stronger version of this incident, where the criticism can't be turned back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 4130
Location: England

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2003 4:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I suspect that there’s more going on with Bush than we’re aware of but it is strange how he seems to be evading the headlines right now.

I know it’s only a related issue, but I was always interested in how Bush’s natal Sun captured the US Sun and dragged it into the 12th house – and how the sextile with Tony Blair’s 12th house Sun at 15 Taurus tied them into a relationship of working together against issues of covert terrorism. I don’t make judgements on that, I imagine all political leaders work mainly behind the scenes, but these pair seem to be particularly sensitive to the need to unite and confront such issues.

Both leaders are having to deal with the fact that public support is low right now and they are facing open criticism. I’d anticipated that more would be made of that and expected that as one struggled, so would the other, because as Saturn hits Bush’s Sun, it sextile’s Blair’s Sun and conjuncts his natal Uranus. Instead the timing coincided with health scares concerning Blair’s heart – very graphic.

It will be interesting to see how the full scenario plays out. But I think it’s worth fitting Blair into the picture because he is very sensitive to contacts over 15 Cancer too.



Blair was taken to hospital with concern over a regular heartbeat on 20 October. Perhaps Bush and Blair are both being very wise and deliberately lying low right now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
graelhaven



Joined: 22 Oct 2003
Posts: 82

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2003 4:36 pm    Post subject: tony blair Reply with quote

I've always rather liked blair, now I see why. I have wondered at his working with the evil shrub, they seem like such opposites. I hope he gets well.

MissB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3435
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2003 7:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

>>I suspect that there’s more going on with Bush than we’re aware of but it is strange how he seems to be evading the headlines right now. <<

He does have a 12th house Sun, but only yesterday he gave a press conference, and he was in the news last week criticizing the press which always brings howls of protest from the press as they think they are above criticism. I don't know that he is lying any lower than any other time. He is a rather low key individvidual.

On the other hand, I've been told, I never worked it out despite having the data, that his temperament is highly choleric. That doesn't seem to fit with what we see on TV.


>> know it’s only a related issue, but I was always interested in how Bush’s natal Sun captured the US Sun and dragged it into the 12th house <<

This is interesting. I've never seen this concept before, but perhaps we've never had a President whose Sun was conjunct the Nation's Sun. Why do you say that he dragged the US Sun into the 12th house. Why didn't the US Sun drag this private man into the limelight?

>and how the sextile with Tony Blair’s 12th house Sun at 15 Taurus tied them into a relationship of working together against issues of covert terrorism. I don’t make judgements on that, I imagine all political leaders work mainly behind the scenes, but these pair seem to be particularly sensitive to the need to unite and confront such issues. <<

I looked at the sextile as demonstrating Blair's friendship to the American Sun, not necessarily to G. W. Bush. He may very well like GW Bush, but Tony Blair has stated that the UK and the USA have a common heritage and that to break off relations or not support one another is "madness (his word. I think the quote was a something like this "The destruction of the Anglo-American alliance is the way of madness")." To me this is an alliance between Blair's Sun and the US Sun, and less a personal alliance. Blair's position is, in part, philosophical.

>>Both leaders are having to deal with the fact that public support is low right now and they are facing open criticism.<<

Tony Blair's lack of support seems to have as much to do with domestic issues as it does with Iraq. We don't hear much about British domestic issues in the US, but spending so much of my life in a car, I manage to pick up some BBC braodcasts which are played on National Public Radio. It makes for interesting listening.

Some of Bush's numbers are low; however, poll numbers are static, international and national issues are not. It is also true that Pesidential numbers are always lowest in the third year of a term ('What has he done for ME lately?), and polls taken close to the weekend for publication in the Sunday papers are considered to be the least reliable, so check out when the poll was taken. One number that has not changed significantly since 9/11 is that the public still believes that the Republican party is more trusted with issues relating to terrorism than is the Democrat party. With all signs pointing to an economic rebound (some say it is already here and the stock market is reflecting that) the only major issue will be security (assuming nothing spectacular occurs between now and Nov 2004). That will be good for W and his party.

How would these political numbers relate to the astrology? Well, Saturn is a grumpy guy, but he builds and lends structure. Destruction is also a possibilty with Saturn. It seems to depend on how well we are prepared when the potentially destructive issues arrive at our doorstep. If W can maintain his hold, and his party's hold as well, on the sensitive issue of national security, he has a solid (Saturn word) advantage going into an election year. The sextile to Tony Blair's chart, could mean the same. The Tories are in, according to what I hear, disarray, so Mr. Blair's problems will come from within (secret enemies?), if he is in danger of the support of his party and his position.

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 4130
Location: England

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2003 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well I did say before I'm not much of a political observer. By evading the headlines I only meant that he doesn't seem to be dominating them (always a good thing over here since media coverage tends to focus on the negative and scandalous). And by Blair and Bush lying low I only meant that they are managing to avoid the critical spotlight - at least over here. What I should have said about Bush was, well nothing at all really - I don't know half enough to comment Smile

Quote:
>>I know it’s only a related issue, but I was always interested in how Bush’s natal Sun captured the US Sun and dragged it into the 12th house <<

This is interesting. I've never seen this concept before, but perhaps we've never had a President whose Sun was conjunct the Nation's Sun. Why do you say that he dragged the US Sun into the 12th house. Why didn't the US Sun drag this private man into the limelight?


With the US Sun on the 8th house cusp? That might imply the US chart drags his Sun into the 8th house and becomes the death of him (joke).

Actually, it was just a phrase. It wasn't meant to imply anything politically negative, which is why I said I don't make a judgement on that particularly. However, one of the most interesting things I noticed about the synastry between the Bush and the US chart when I first looked at them years ago was the way the conjunction between the two Sun's suggested he would resonate strongly to national issues, and the fact that this contact occurred in his 12th house would suggest that the national concerns he would most effectively be able to bring to light would have 12th house themes attached to them. Now when I say 'bring to light' I don't necessarily mean he will expose them - again that's just a phrase, but in some way he would be bound towards dealing with them and being confronted by them. The same is true of Blair. I think everyone with a 12th house Sun has to deal with murky issues or areas where they are tied, where there's a sense of being oppressed and a struggle to confront enemies and opponents because the enemy is subversive - or themes of that nature. If the birth chart is that of a political leader, they are tied to the identity of the nation so it’s hard to distinguish whether they bring it to the nation or the nation brings it to them, or they forge it through each other – the end result is the same.

I'm not suggesting that either Bush or Blair creates these issues, but that they are in them and will have a hard time trying to avoid them. It’s interesting how many of the agendas that the public notices them working on together bring complex and uncomfortable agendas to the fore. That may or may not reflect well on them and that’s irrelevant too, because regardless of how we see it, it may still be the best course of action for the long term. No one has an easy time trying to sort out difficult issues.

Quote:
Tony Blair's lack of support seems to have as much to do with domestic issues as it does with Iraq.


I don't think so. Blair traded on trust and he's lost a lot of credibility over the lack of WMD. Also there was an extremely damaging public inquiry into the suicide of an intelligence source, the very nature of which was bound to throw bad light on the so called 'spin' the government gave over the need for war. This was very typical of what I'd call 12th house issues - he was in one of those positions where you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't. It gives all the advantages to his political opponents to maintain the pressure.

Blair can talk his way out of domestic issues, and I think the British public generally feel that whatever governement we have they are all going to screw up to a certain degree. What finishes a political career over here is scandal, because then the press are relentless in feeding it and highlighting it and it never goes away until the politician does. The pressure is off Blair right now because the papers only have enough space for the Tories stabbing each other in the backs and the Diana disclosures, which of course are huge. I keep meaning to find time to review the astrology of that - there's a story and a half brewing there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 4130
Location: England

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2003 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The other thing about politics here is that a lot of damage can be done by accusations that can never be proved, if at the same time they can’t be disproved. One speculation that poses a big threat to Blair through the manoeuvrings of his hidden enemies is the suggestion that continues in the press that his heart concerns are more serious than he has been or is letting on. Just knowledge that there was a concern at all would be reason enough for some of his less loyal colleagues to scatter around and discuss the delicate matter of what they would do if there was a need to select a new leader or if Blair needed to take things a little easier and retire – who would they choose, where would their allegiances lie? Who knows what seeds of political intrigue are being set as a result of something that happened now but didn’t appear to be so serious at the time. The last labour leader died of a heart attack whilst in office, which is when Blair came to power.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sue



Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 945
Location: Australia

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2003 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

One of the interesting things is that our Prime Minister (that would be John Howard and not John Major as the Americans like to call him) has completely escaped this scrutiny. He has a Leo Sun that is right on the cusp of the 2nd and 3rd houses. The attitude is that we all know he lied and manipulated but what can you do anyway? He even went to great lengths when Bush was here to keep him away from public scrutiny.
The Australian chart has a Capricorn Sun at around 10 degrees. Almost opposite that of the US Sun and George Bush's Sun. It has been embarrasing to watch Howard's behaviour towards Bush. Sycophantic to a point of being nauseating. I have heard the comment that the big difference is that Australia didn't suffer any loss of life and this is why Howard has managed to get away with it. It would possibly be a different story if Australians continued to die in the same way as British and mostly Americans are.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3435
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2003 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Deb,

>>Well I did say before I'm not much of a political observer. By evading the headlines I only meant that he doesn't seem to be dominating them (always a good thing over here since media coverage tends to focus on the negative and scandalous). And by Blair and Bush lying low I only meant that they are managing to avoid the critical spotlight - at least over here. What I should have said about Bush was, well nothing at all really - I don't know half enough to comment <<

OK I understand you better than before. And I should have realized that you meant GW Bush was not receiving headlines over there. He still gets lots of them over here. That is where I got confused. My misunderstanding, Deb. Thanks for that clarification.

>>With the US Sun on the 8th house cusp? That might imply the US chart drags his Sun into the 8th house and becomes the death of him (joke).<<

I assumed you would use the Gemini rising chart, but I wasn't really thinking of any particular house. I actually liked what you said. I hadn't thought of the idea of one Sun dragging the other into its realm. My first instinct would be that the greater in importance of the two charts, i.e., the chart of the nation, would shape the President, not vice versa. However, it is also true that each leader puts his own imprint on the nation, at least temporarily. The idea intrigues me, and I didn't mean my comments as any kind of criticism. I'm just groping with a new idea.

Now, your mentioning of the 8th house does have significance. G. W. Bush was elected in 2000 a year ending in a zero. From 1840 until 1980, every US President elected in a year ending in a zero died in office, but not necesesarily in the first term. Ronald Reagan broke the cycle, but there was an assasination attempt made on him in 1981, and it is only recently that we learned how close he came to death.

There is no obvious planetary cycle of 20 Years. Noel Tyl wrote in his book Predictions for a New Millennium that the "Presidential Death Cycle" coincides with a Pluto, Mars, or Neptune being at 13 - 16 degrees of a fixed sign. When Ronald Reagan was shot, no planet was at 13 - 16 degrees fixed. Neptune will hit 13 Aquarius next summer I believe. The one President elected when a planet was at 13 - 16 degrees fixed not in a year ending in a zero was Richard Nixon who resigned from office -- the only time in American history this has happened. Being dragged into the 8th house may be more prophetic than you think. Noel's prediction, however, is based on the Gemini rising chart, which has a 13 Aquarius MC. The Sagittarius rising chart, has nothing of significance at 13- 16 fixed. The irony is Noel credits an astrologer who first devoped this theory as one who was using the USA Scorpio rising chart that has a 16 Leo MC.


>>Actually, it was just a phrase. It wasn't meant to imply anything politically negative, which is why I said I don't make a judgement on that particularly.<<

I knew that.

>>However, one of the most interesting things I noticed about the synastry between the Bush and the US chart when I first looked at them years ago was the way the conjunction between the two Sun's suggested he would resonate strongly to national issues, and the fact that this contact occurred in his 12th house would suggest that the national concerns he would most effectively be able to bring to light would have 12th house themes attached to them. Now when I say 'bring to light' I don't necessarily mean he will expose them - again that's just a phrase, but in some way he would be bound towards dealing with them and being confronted by them. The same is true of Blair. I think everyone with a 12th house Sun has to deal with murky issues or areas where they are tied, where there's a sense of being oppressed and a struggle to confront enemies and opponents because the enemy is subversive - or themes of that nature. If the birth chart is that of a political leader, they are tied to the identity of the nation so it’s hard to distinguish whether they bring it to the nation or the nation brings it to them, or they forge it through each other – the end result is the same. <<

I understand. What troubles me, astrologically about Blair's 12th house Sun is that he has four signs in the 12th house. Pisces is on the cusp, and his Sun is in Taurus -- two signs away. This is, of course due to his being born at a higher latitude. But as you noted, terrorism is a 12th house issue and both men do have their Suns in the 12th using, I suppose, any quadrant house system. Seems to validate them a bit.


>>Blair traded on trust and he's lost a lot of credibility over the lack of WMD<<

I just saw a political cartoon today that began with a statement that we found no WMDs therefore they never exisited. The rejoinder is: "We haven't found Saddam. Does that mean he never existed?"


>>I think the British public generally feel that whatever governement we have they are all going to screw up to a certain degree.<<

This is a healthy attitude. We seem to put so much faith in our government to solve all problems despite the evidence that they generally make things worse. May we import it?

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
graelhaven



Joined: 22 Oct 2003
Posts: 82

Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tom,

1) I do like the neptune solution! sounds good to me. (I refuse to pretend I'd be sorry to see such an evil being go, even if I'm NOT a person who'd effect the solution) but I still think he'll go through a serious health problem thqt he's been keeping secret, and maybe suddenly. all those 6th house transits next summer.

2) how many jokes do we have in America about "honest" politicians. I think we share the sentiment, I just think we hope to hard we're wrong.

MissB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Mundane Astrology & World Events All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated