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

Anthony Louis hypothesis about old electional chart.
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Sidereal Astrology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Stefan



Joined: 31 May 2012
Posts: 162
Location: Stockholm

Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 3:32 pm    Post subject: Anthony Louis hypothesis about old electional chart. Reply with quote

Some reflections from Anthony Louis blog:

Might be interesting to read for the general sidereal public:

http://tonylouis.wordpress.com/2013/10/23/the-foundation-of-baghdad-tropical-versus-sidereal/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1366
Location: California, USA

Posted: Sat Oct 26, 2013 8:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the reference, Stefan. It's so nice to see another name on the sidereal forum! Though there are many views, there are only a handful of Skyscript members who post here.
In the past I remember doing some work on Baghdad's chart, but I can't find that work, so will have to start over. The chart is a really good one showing how the sidereal zodiac has to be used when checking transits and solar returns for important Iraq dates. We have three astrological references that I know of:

(1) James H. Holden's "The Foundation Chart of Baghdad" Holden sets the chart for Saturday, 31 July 762 in the Julian calendar.

(2) Konrad's "Masha'allah and the Founding of Baghdad" (esmaralda-astrology.com) I cannot read the chart on the site because of poor graphics quality. Konrad applies ancient techniques in discussing the chart. An interesting read!

(3) Anthony Louis' blog: "The Foundation of Baghdad--Tropical versus Sidereal" The chart in this article is set for 2:50 p.m. Anthony Lewis has used the Fagan-Allen ayanamsa which places Mars at 29 Taurus 24. Using whole sign houses Mars does not aspect the ascendant. http://tonylouis.wordpress.com/2013/10/23/the-foundation-of-baghdad-tropical-versus-sidereal/

If the ayanamsa is changed to Lahiri or Krishnamurti, Mars moves to Gemini, which is entirely appropriate in light of Iraq's history of conflict, violence and bloodshed. All three astrologers give a Sagittarius ascendant for Baghdad's chart. When I compute the chart later I'll be able to see the exact difference between the tropical and sidereal zodiacs in A.D. 762.

I hope to have time this weekend to post the Baghdad chart with some comments on transits and solar returns for important dates.
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
astroart



Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 146
Location: Varna, Bulgaria

Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 7:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Therese,

the best choice in the science is to use not the secondary sources but the primary. See please this one:

http://archnet.org/library/documents/one-document.jsp?document_id=3776


Greetings,

Dimitar
_________________
http://www.astro-art.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1366
Location: California, USA

Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 5:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dimitar, that link left me puzzled. What to read? Can you quote from the reference you advise? I don't have the time for extensive reading. Are you saying that the date astrologers are using for the foundation of Baghdad is incorrect or open to question?

Thanks,
Therese
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
astroart



Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 146
Location: Varna, Bulgaria

Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 9:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Please read, pp.61-66, from the chapter VI " Some Evolutionary and Cosmological Aspects to Early Islamic Town Planning" of the book "Theories and Principles of Design in the Architecture of Islamic Societies" , Ibrahim Allawi, 1988 (the link to this chapter I published in my previous post).

There you will find the opinions of two old authors about the horoscope of Baghdad : al-Biruni(XI) and Ibn al-Faqih(IX). The author of the book, Ibrahim Allawi, also published facsimile of the original horoscope of al-Biruni preserved in the single MS in the Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris.

Pay special attention on p. 65 from the same book.

Dimitar
_________________
http://www.astro-art.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1366
Location: California, USA

Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dimitar, it took me a few minutes to get the hang of using the Digital Library. So I have studied the pages you suggested, especially page 65.

Now what am I supposed to be noticing? Am I correct in that the chart was set with the ascendant and Jupiter in 6 degrees of Sagittarius?

I did note in the table of positions on page 65 that Mercury was placed in the wrong sign, in Gemini. Modern computation places Mercury in the last decanate of Cancer. (both tropical and sidereal) Or aren't these zodiacal positions? Actually I don't understand the modern computations in the table.

Is this a zodiac question? We know that the Persian sidereal zodiac was set in the year 564. The zero point was ten minutes east of Zeta Piscium. Since I use Krishnamurti tables, this is a difference of 3 degrees 53 minutes from the Krishnamurti zero Aries point. If we take the 2:40 pm foundation position of Jupiter (in the Krishnamurti zodiac) at 2 Sag 15, and add 3 degrees 53 minutes, the result is 6° 08' Sagittarius. [later edit to correct 43' to 53']

By Al Biruni's time the tropical zodiac was in use, so his calculations may be tropical.

Therese
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm


Last edited by Therese Hamilton on Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:58 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1366
Location: California, USA

Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 8:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The link Dimitar gave to ancient city planning was quite interesting to read. I've had some time to check the modern tropical calculations for Baghdad's horoscope given in the book (page 65). Several of these positions are off base from those given by today's astrological software. The book was published in 1988, the time period when good DOS based astrological software was just entering the market. The author of the book obviously didn't have this software at his disposal. Here is a comparison of software based calculations (Solar Fire 5) with those given in the book. True tropical positions are given in parenthesis.

Sun
10 Leo 58 (10 Leo 47)

Saturn
1 Ari 25 (1 Tau 27)

Jupiter
8 Sag 48 (8 Sag 47)

Venus
2 Can 58 (2 Cnc 44)

Mercury
26 Gem 53 (26 Cnc 54)

Moon
27 Lib 29 (27 Lib 37)

Mars
2 Gem 04 (6 Gem 55)

Saturn and Mercury are both misplaced by sign in the table. Perhaps this was some kind of careless oversight since the degrees are nearly correct, but one sign off. The signs for Saturn, Venus and Mercury (tropical) are incorrect in the two ancient sources listed in the table.

Ibn al-Faqih (10th century) places Jupiter exactly at 6 degrees of Sagittarius to synchronize with the original city plan. However, the tropical position of Jupiter at that time was 8 degrees 47 minutes. As I wrote in my previous post, Jupiter is in or near the sixth degree of Sagittarius in the Persian sidereal zodiac used at the time of Baghdad's foundation. James Holden's 2:40 PM time places both Jupiter and the ascendant in a degree that equates to 6 Sagittarius in the old Persian zodiac. (2+ degrees Krishnamurti or Lahiri)

If no one disagrees with the information in this post, I can post some transits to Baghdad's chart for significant dates. The 2:40 PM sidereal chart seems to work well.

Therese
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm


Last edited by Therese Hamilton on Mon Dec 30, 2013 3:00 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
astroart



Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 146
Location: Varna, Bulgaria

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2013 8:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OK.
I will clear my post.
_________________
http://www.astro-art.com/


Last edited by astroart on Sat Nov 09, 2013 11:03 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1366
Location: California, USA

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2013 9:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dimitar, here we are discussing the chart of the Foundation of Baghdad, and I'll continue with that topic. Perhaps you would like to start a new topic for your zodiac concerns?

Therese
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1366
Location: California, USA

Posted: Sat Nov 09, 2013 10:31 pm    Post subject: U.S. Invasion of Iraq Reply with quote

Baghdad's foundation chart is very valuable because it's a historically timed chart that is centuries old. One of the great cities of the Muslim world, we're familiar with Baghdad as the capital city of the modern Republic of Iraq. Baghdad's birth chart clearly shows the unmistakable value of sidereal mathematics, in this case, timed transits for significant dates centuries after the foundation chart.

I've calculated two birth charts for Baghdad, one in the Krishnamurti sidereal zodiac and the other in the tropical zodiac to show a comparison of contemporary transits, and why tropical astrologers such as Robert Hand use precession correction for solar returns. Solar returns are nothing but transit charts for the Sun's return to its birth position each year.

I've used James Holden's time of 2:40 pm for the foundation chart. BBC News-Middle East has a very good summary of events for Iraq over the centuries. Of the many significant dates for Baghdad, I've chosen 20 March 2003, the invasion of Iraq led by U.S. forces. Saddam Hussein's government was overturned, and this date marked the beginning of years of violent conflict with various groups competing for power.

The bloodshed and violence continues today (November, 2013) with the potent Uranus-Pluto square. Uranus is passing back and forth over Baghdad's 15 Pisces degree IC (Lahiri/Krishnamurti) while the Pluto 90 degree angle from Sagittarius holds tight.

News reports give an approximate 5:30 a.m. time for the entry of the U.S. into Iraq, so I've set the transit charts for that time. Baghdad's natal chart, however, provides the base chart for transits. In March 2003 the Pluto-Saturn opposition crosses the sidereal Baghdad Ascendant/Descendant axis. Saturn is just approaching Mars on he 7th cusp, and exactly conjoined Baghdad's Mars in early April of 2003. On the day of the invasion transiting Moon was in partile trine to transiting Saturn on cusp 7.

In the March 20 transit chart, Uranus opposes Baghdad's 9th house Leo Sun, the regime or sovereign person in power (Hussein). Mercury (7th lord, relationships with other countries) is at the nadir with transiting Sun. This places the military action firmly on Baghdad's home base and affecting the very land the city occupies (4th house). From a high point of power (9th), the Sun is now at the nadir with its 7th house opponent. Baghdad's transiting ascendant lord, Jupiter, is powerless in the 8th.

With an invasion we'd expect to see an active Mars, and on the day of the invasion transiting Mars was in 15 degrees of Sagittarius, Baghdad's ascendant sign, and in partile square to Baghdad's IC.



The tropical transits are not descriptive of this supremely important day for Iraq and Baghdad. Transiting Jupiter is on the 9th (equal) cusp conjoining natal Sun in Leo and in partile trine to natal Jupiter. In the tropical chart we do have Saturn in Gemini squaring the MC/IC axis, but transiting Mars makes no close aspects to Baghdad's natal chart, and the Saturn/Pluto opposition is far from the angles out of orb of aspecting natal Mars. Saturn is 16 degrees past the conjunction to natal Mars.


_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
fredericus



Joined: 31 Jul 2008
Posts: 3

Posted: Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Please, see also:

THE HOROSCOPE OF BAGHDAD
historical, astronomical, and astrological notes
by Juan Antonio Revilla
http://www.expreso.co.cr/centaurs/posts/mundane/baghdad.html

and

Astrologer Peter James Clark
Foundation Chart for Baghdad
http://classicalastrologer.me/2008/05/07/foundation-chart-for-baghdad/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Stefan



Joined: 31 May 2012
Posts: 162
Location: Stockholm

Posted: Thu Nov 14, 2013 3:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Therese and others..
I follow along this thread with interest as I opened the thread. However I
have not much anything to contribute here myself so I leave it to the schoolars here to explore. Astrological history is not my strong side.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 4130
Location: England

Posted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 4:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What we do know of the date of this chart is mainly secured by the historical record of its planetary positions. So to use one of the dates that is widely agreed on, but then alter the planetary positions to ones that are less fitting with those recorded seems illogical to me. (I suppose this criticism applies more to Anthony Louis’s attempt to get Mars out of Gemini and into Taurus, despite the fact that the historical descriptions of the chart note the placement of Mars in Gemini). Having manipulated this chart myself, from many angles and types of zodiac, it doesn't seem possible to get a better match of the recorded planetary positions using a sidereal zodiac rather than a tropical one. Either way we have the problem of some planets being a few degrees adrift, but overall the tropical zodiac allows the better match.

A couple of years ago I gave a lecture on this chart in Italy – building in a lot of arguments made by Ibrahim Allawi, in the paper recommended by Astroart. I remain very impressed by certain elements of Allawi’s paper, and like the point he makes about the determination of the ascendant; however, his comments on the historical record of the planetary positions seem to have been taken up as authoritative recently, even though there are several obvious errors in his account of Al-Biruni’s record, as shown in his table on p.65. Having been (and still being) completely open-minded in terms of sources and zodiacs, I would say that the best historical source of the data remains that recorded in Al Biruni’s Chronology of Ancient Nations – an English translation is available from Paulo Silva’s Astrologia Medieval site on this link (the date and chart are given on pp.262-3):
http://www.astrologiamedieval.com/tabelas/Al-Biruni_The_Chronology_of_Ancient_Nations.pdf

Allawi claims that Al Biruni only has the year right “but errs in fixing the day”, which (Allawi says) equates to 23rd July 762 [JC]. But it doesn’t, Al Biruni reports the date as being 23rd Tammuz, year of Alexandri 1074, which equates to 30 July 762 JC, as noted by Pingree in at least two of his papers. Allawi says the correct date should be 31 July 762 (BC), based on the older report of Ibn Faqih; and since he argues that the (few) planetary positions we have from Ibn Faqih appear to match this (Mercury and Saturn are clearly wrongly reported, whilst the Moon and Mars are omitted); he concludes that we should treat this date as the correct one. He leaves the implication that Al Biruni’s version of the chart is unreliable and about 7 days off the correct date.

I don’t see how his argument deserves the weight it has been given. When the omissions and obvious mistakes in Ibn Faqih’s text are ignored, both historical authors give more or less the same positions, and note the same degree and minute for the Sun. The historical variance of this one day might be nothing more than the historical convention of beginning dates by sunrise (Greeks and Romans = 31st) or sunset (Arabs = 30th). It’s important to bear in mind that all astrologers aim to record the date and time that best matches the planetary positions according to their own calendrical systems. Al Biruni’s reported figures (if we ignore Allawi’s flawed account of them), are actually very close to what we generate with modern software in the equivalent Gregorian calendar date of 3rd August 762. A time of around 3:30pm LMT Baghdad gives 6 Sag rising, and the Moon – at 14 Libra – is then close to the 19 Libra actually reported by Al Biruni; not the 29 Libra, that Allawi says he reports. This mistake, which is now widely reproduced by astrologers, appears to be based on Allawi simply assuming a date rather than checking Al Biruni’s recorded positions carefully, and astrologer's following Allawi's lead.

I agree with Allawi’s assumption that Al Biruni had access to Ibn Faqih’s reported planetary positions. He had better access than we do; and what we have left of it is pretty useless, except for the fact that some elements of it confirm the reliability of what has been reported by Al Biruni.

Therese, what I like about your chart is that it has the Moon close to the position reported by Al Biruni, and Mars in Gemini as it should be - I could be persuaded except the Sun is too far adrift from its reported position.
I argue that one of the motivating factors for the selection of this date, is that the accessional chart of Caliph Al Mansur, the founder of Baghdad, has Jupiter at 9 degrees Aries (so the Sun-Jupiter trine in the foundation chart creates a grand trine with Jupiter in the accessional chart for its ruler). The two main historical sources agree in telling us the Sun should be at 8.10 Leo, and I think that position has to be a pivotal one for setting the chart because it’s unlikely that computational differences would generate an error of more than a degree or two on that. Using a tropical zodiac for the time I mentioned on 3rd August 762 (GC) places the Sun at 9.48 Leo according to modern software; not exact, but close enough in a chart that fits very well with the rest of Al Biruni’s reported positions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 3365
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 5:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i have been following this thread with interest as well. thanks deb for the informative post which brought new information that i was unfamiliar with. here is a chart cast to replicate what i understand from debs post. i will change it, if it needs to be changed. thanks.


screen shot
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1366
Location: California, USA

Posted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 6:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just looked in on the Skyscript forum after being away for some time as there was no activity on the sidereal topics. I'm involved with Christmas guests and activities at this time, but it might be best to copy part of a post I wrote earlier since this topic hasn't been current:

"....We know that the Persian sidereal zodiac was set in the year 564. The zero point was ten minutes east of Zeta Piscium. Since I use Krishnamurti tables, this is a difference of 3 degrees 53 minutes from the Krishnamurti zero Aries point. If we take the 2:40 pm foundation position of Jupiter (in the Krishnamurti zodiac) at 2 Sag 15, and add 3 degrees 53 minutes, the result is 6° 08' Sagittarius."

We must use the ancient Persian zodiac tables (which were sidereal) to obtain the positions mentioned in the old documents. Those tables give us the required six degrees of Sagittarius for the Ascendant and Jupiter. However for modern transits and return charts we can use our modern calculations as the old Persian zodiac is no longer in use. To see the degrees as they were calculated when the foundation chart was chosen (give or take a few minutes), we add 3° 53' to our modern Krishnamurti positions. [Edited to correct a 10 minute error, 43' to 53']

We know that Masha'Allah used sidereal tables. One reference for this is on page 16 of Benjamin Dykes' Persian Nativities, Volume 1: Masha'allah and Abu'ali.
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm


Last edited by Therese Hamilton on Mon Dec 30, 2013 3:07 am; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Sidereal Astrology All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
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