Mundane Matters: The National Chart
24 March 2008
What are National Charts? And if so which one?
First published in Astrology Quarterly Autumn 2008
National charts are fairly common in modern astrology. If
you attend any group which ventures into deeper waters than
natal astrology then it won’t we long before you come
across a chart for a country which happens to be in the news.
They will probably have been taken from The Book of World
Horoscopes by Nicholas Campion but the person presenting
the chart will almost certainly not have read the notes outlining
the events or paid any attention to the phase of historical
development of the particular country. Neither will they have
given any thought to what constitutes the chart they are looking
at. If you’re going to use national charts then you
should spend at least a moment considering what this chart
is. Mundane astrology is difficult enough without getting
hold of the wrong end of the stick at the beginning. With
natal charts you have a definite, discrete event – birth
– but a country chart isn’t so straightforward.
I’ve been trying to write this article for sometime.
The material and ideas I’ve collected could probably
hold their own as a Politics MA thesis. I have tried to balance
the political theory with astrological considerations. There
are concepts which the astrologer needs to consider and ponder
upon before they can make any astrological judgement. It’s
a matter of appreciating what you’re doing.
The first thing to be aware of is that the use of national
charts is a modern idea made popular by Charles Carter following
the second world war. Prior to this areas, countries and towns
were considered to be ruled by different signs. Focus, via
eclipses or planetary conjunctions, on particular signs would
affect the corresponding towns. These rulerships are laid
down in many books from Ptolemy onwards and aren’t given
very much credence by modern astrologers. The astrologer would
have considered the astrology of the town or area in the following
way:
The sign ruling the town is ascertained
by noting the hour and minute of the occurrence of important
events, laying foundation stones, opening buildings, beginning
public ceremonies, and other affairs that influence the
community as a whole or a considerable portion of it. A
map of the heavens is calculated for this time in the usual
way, and in a series of such maps one zodiacal sign will
be found to rise oftener than the others. This is the ruling
sign and when it does not rise, it may be found culminating
or setting or it will contain the Moon. [1]
This makes a bit more sense of “Gemini rules London”,
doesn’t it? It also refers to one of my pet ideas: repeating
degrees but more of that later. Coming back to national charts
we have a couple of extremely important points to note. First,
what is the event you’ve set this chart for? What happened
which merited being judged as the beginning of a country?
And moving on from that what political entity, for want of
a better term, are we looking at? The answer most commonly
given to this last question is “The State”.
The concept of the state belongs to the modern world, and
by modern I mean the last three hundred years. The entry for
“State” in the Penguin Dictionary of Politics
begins with the following:
The State may be the most commonly-used
and the most opaque term in the whole of political vocabulary.
Even the derivation of the term is obscure, and in many
cultures (including early medieval European society, to
take one example) it would be hard to specify what word
should be translated as ‘State’. It is easier
to define it negatively; the State is, for example, opposed
to the mere ‘government’. Governments come and
go, at least in democracies, without changing the State.
[2]
A more useful concept may be that of the ‘Nation State’:
Nation-state describes a context in which
the whole of a geographical area that is the homeland for
people who identify themselves as a community because of
shared culture, history, and probably language and ethnic
character, is governed by one political system. Such contexts
are the common experience today, but are not necessarily
any more natural than other forms that have been common
in history. There were, after all, no nation states in Classical
Greece, though there was clearly a Greek nation, which sensed
that all Greeks had more in common than a Greek could have
with a barbarian, and shared language, religion, culture
and historical identity. Instead there were a number of,
often warring, city-states, and no sense of what we mean
by ‘civil war’ attached, say, to the Sparta-Athens
conflicts. [3]
The entry goes on to relate the rise of the nation state
with the decline of the Holy Roman Empire and the rise of
nationalism in the 19th century. Some states arose early in
the timeline due to geographical factors– UK and France
– but some didn’t coalesce until very recently
– Germany and Italy. More recent states have been formed
almost entirely by the colonial legacy – India and Pakistan,
much of the Middle East and Africa. These modern legal/constitutional
entities are certainly not the same “thing” as
the spirit of the land or the essence of a people or nation.
They may catch a flavour of these things but that is all.
In Mundane Astrology Nicholas Campion makes the
following point about the state:
Generally speaking the modern nation state
is a legal entity created by the nation for the purpose
of regulating itself through the means of a constitution.
The nation itself may be considered to be a group of people
who share a common heritage, language and culture, and who
physically occupy a particular geographical location. Obviously
there are many instances of nations who have no state, such
as the Palestinians, the Basques or the Kurds, and of states
which contain more than one nation, such as the Soviet Union
and the United States, but the general pattern holds. [4]
Then there is the question of data. The most simple charts
to establish are those based on constitutional changes: a
change in the law brings about a new constitutional entity.
- The 1801 UK chart is for the union of Ireland with the
existing union of England, Wales and Scotland and because
it was a legal change took effect at midnight according
to British law.
- The various French republics were declared legally. We
are currently on 5th Republic.
- Most post colonial states achieved independence through
a legal change of status. Independence was recognise on
a certain day at a certain time.
The more complex problems come from changes due to events
which are not clearly identifiable or documented such as coups
and revolutions. You almost always have problems clarifying
the time with this type.
- Iraq becoming a republic in 1958, overthrowing the royal
family
- People’s republic of China
- Various incarnations of Russia and the Soviet Union
The examples given so far are quite straight forward but
there is also the case where power has effectively been transferred
although the legal process is yet to catch up with events,
or that the declaration of intent is made ahead of a political
power base being built up and constitutional power being transferred.
- Colonial states did not “get independence”
over night. There would have been a slow transfer of the
day to day affairs before official independence.
- The Republic of Ireland first declared independence in
1916 but did not achieve legal independence until 1921 and
then only as a free state. The republic was not established
until 1949.
- Israel declared independence the afternoon before legal
independence was due to be granted.
What we’re talking about here are de jure –
backed by the law – and de facto power – actual
power but not enshrined in law. For instance the United States
declared independence in 1776, defeated the British in 1781
(de facto) with the surrender of the Yorktown but did not
achieve legal sovereignty (de jure) until 1783. You may have
one or the other but not necessarily both. For a full explanation
of this I refer you to the excellent introduction to the Book
of World Horoscopes, which I have drawn heavily upon
for this article. An extension of this idea is the signing
of a treaty. Is the treaty ratified before the parties sign
it? Usually it is ratified after the signatories bring it
into existence. And once it is ratified when does it become
law? If you have more than a handful of signatories the time
between first signing and last signing could be significant.
Take, for instance the creation of the United Nations, the
following is from Book of World Horoscopes:
The signing ceremony began at 6.00 am. and
was not expected to be complete until mid-afternoon. Following
this, each country had to ratify the treaty separately,
and the organisation was scheduled to come into force when
a majority of states had done this. Shortly after 3.00 pm.
on 24 October 1945 the requisite number of states ratified
the treaty when the USSR, Byelorussia and the Ukraine deposited
their ratification documents in the US State Department
in Washington. At 4.45 pm the United Nations came into existence
when the U.S. Secretary of State signed a protocol of deposit
of ratification. [5]
There is also another chart which is set for the proposal
of the idea of such a body. Interestingly the proposal for
the UN has a Venus Neptune opposition while the ratification
chart has a Venus Neptune conjunction.
Staying with declarations of independence for a moment,
there are another points to consider. Will the declaration
be recognised and will it be successful? Some declarations
of independence are short-lived, some grow into glorious states
in their own right. What ever actually happens the chart for
independence will be part of the story of the parent state,
rather like your child’s wedding is a big event for
you as well as them. You can expect lots of synastry as they
are intimately connected.
Kosovo
has recently declared its independence from Serbia
who most certainly do not accept it. Some countries have recognised
it, some have not. You can see the impetus to independence
within that chart and the relationship to Serbia and the continuing
story through the synastry.
Consider the Kosovo declaration. Nothing says “Independence”
like the Sun conjunct the North Node trine to Mars, does it?
Put together with an exact Moon Jupiter opposition you get
a flavour of self determination, moving away from vested interests,
power structures and traditional hierarchies.
Looking at Serbia you see Mars conjunct the South Node,
perhaps showing the military overtones of the situation the
country emerged from. The chart is taken from the signing
of the treaty of Berlin which established Yugoslavia, and
many other Balkan states, and concluded the war between the
Ottoman Empire and Russia. What is interesting is that this
conjunction in Leo is tightly conjunct the ascendant of Kosovo.
No wonder this is a highly emotive time.
Serbia has the Moon at 10 Capricorn which is close to the
Moon Jupiter opposition of Kosovo, another note of fighting
against tradition, notions of homeland and control, all Cancer/Capricorn
issues, especially when you’ve got Uranus trine/sextile
to it.
The recent eclipses are also active and implicated. The solar
eclipse at 17 Aquarius is near the ascendant/Mars combination.
The lunar eclipse at 1 Virgo puts the Moon right on the MC
of Serbia and the Sun right on the IC, symbolic of land, territory
and sovereignty. A more appropriate piece of symbolism is
hard to think of. Many charts have harsh charts but they describe
the birth of the country aptly enough.
This bring us to the subject of “which is the correct
chart?” and that will take us swiftly on to when does
one chart make way for another. Now this has never struck
me as a problem but I know it’s driven friends of mine
to distraction. If you’re steeped in natal astrology
you expect one chart and can get quite upset when asked to
deal with more than one. It’s not that you can’t
you can’t cope with more than a certain amount of planets,
that’s not what I’m saying at all. It’s
the underlying principle which doesn’t sit comfortably.
Now let us have a closer look at this. It comes as a bit
of a shock to students when they realise that charts continue
to receive transits after the person has died. Consider Jane
Austen. In 1995 when the classic BBC adaptation of Pride
and Prejudice was first aired Jupiter was in Sagittarius
which conjoined her Mercury (6°), then her Sun (24°),
IC (22°) and squared her Virgo ascendant (24°). Saturn
was also in Pisces and would also have squared these points.
There was also a critically acclaimed film of Sense and Sensibility
by Ang Lee made at the same time. Recent transits of Pluto
to mid mutable degrees match with Keira Knightly’s Pride
and Prejudice and last year’s Jupiter in Sagittarius
brought us more BBC adaptations. Not a terribly serious example
but you can see that charts continue to receive transits.
If the natal of a person chart can do this, why not a chart
for a country?
The point is that countries are not born. They were in existence
before whatever event took place. With the possible exception
of Surtsey*, countries don’t just spring
into existence. The land was there and the people existed
before they decided to organise themselves in that particular
way. Perhaps “birth chart” is not the correct
term for these charts? We very used to using interchangeable
terms to describe these figures we look at: horoscope, birth
chart, natal chart , natus…
We don’t think about the underlying implications of
these terms. I don’t want to come over like the grammar
police, I just want to point out an unrecognised assumption.
Language is extremely important, it creates the channels which
our thoughts flow through. We need to be aware that the language
we use may be taking us off track without our knowledge.#
If something is “born” it implies that one chart
is correct and will lead us down the path searching for the
one true chart for “xxxx” and that way lies madness.
I am prepared to face the possibility that the mundane charts
we have access to are only part of the story. When I think
about this I have an image of iron filings being sprinkled
on paper which is held over a magnet. You can’t see
the magnetic field directly but you can see the patterns that
the filings make. I have a feeling that important event charts
for a particular country may act in very much the same way.
Patterns will emerge, degrees and planetary patterns will
be repeated. Event charts will be transits to a chart even
if that data is lost to us. Following Charles Carter’s
reasoning there must be a chart for humanity which runs behind
everything else, if only we could establish the correct data.
Following from this you don’t have to have one single,
undisputed chart for a country. The UK is a good example here.
Not only have we been going for some time but we have had
several different legal identities. Within these different
charts degrees repeat – 10 Capricorn for example in
the UK story, 8 fixed in the Middle East story – and
themes are repeated – such as Venus Neptune with the
UN as mentioned above. It’s not unheard of that one
chart works very well for one matter i.e. business and economics,
and another works better for wars and conflict. We can look
at this as if we’re slicing the orange in a different
way. Above and beyond these considerations is the matter of
the role of the astrologer in judicial astrology. I’m
saving that one up for the summer column. Campion has this
to say on the topic:
The question we pose of various national
horoscopes should therefore be not is this the correct horoscope?
But rather what is the significance of this horoscope? What
does it signify? The notion of the true and false horoscope
is as rigid a straightjacket as the idea that countries
have birth charts. If divinatory astrology is a language,
dealing with signs, it follows that significance should
be the primary means of judging whether a particular horoscope
is relevant or not. Firstly, the historical event for which
the horoscope is cast should be significant. Secondly the
planetary picture within the horoscope should itself be
significant. And both historical and astrological significance
can only be judged by the mundane astrologer. That is, there
is no horoscopic mundane astrology independent of the astrologer’s
ability to select, discriminate and judge. [6]
What I’m trying to say is don’t just run out
a chart without thinking about it first, though this should
be a standing order to all astrologers not just those doing
mundane work. The quality of data, despite much work by mundane
practitioners, is still very poor. If you cite an event then
make a proper note of the source. With the internet this shouldn’t
be a problem, it is no trouble to copy a hyperlink and news
sources don’t tend to disappear. Campion had this to
say in 1995:
Yet in mundane astrology the situation is
a bleak as ever. Horoscopes are poorly researched, and are
often set for wholly inappropriate events and dates. Rectified
charts are interspersed with those based on accurate times.
Sources are misread and even invented. Frequently no adequate
sources are given. [7]
Let me make it clear that I’m not bad mouthing rectification.
Indeed, I haven’t come across many who are willing to
put the hours in use this technique effectively. The point
I’d like to emphasise is that data is our weakest link,
both in quality and in the way we manipulate it. I should
also make it clear that Book of World Horoscopes
is an amazing book, a mammoth task which allows us to investigate
infinitely more national charts than before. Indeed it is
required reading for anyone who is interested in mundane astrology.
What I am saying is that while national horoscopes are incredibly
powerful we should understand and appreciate the limitations
and the nature of the beast we are trying to examine.
Lets conclude by looking briefly at some of the UK family
of charts to pick out the repeating themes and degrees. This
collection isn’t exhaustive but these are the more popular
charts. I haven’t included any from the Civil War period,
principally because that period is very difficult to summarise.
If you have Book of World Horoscopes there are extensive
notes.
We start with the coronation
of William the Conqueror, a particularly popular chart
which still resonates and is particularly good when considering
England rather than the UK. A time of noon is always stated
but on checking before writing this I discovered that there
is no evidence for this. Another instance of why you should
re-read the notes regularly. Points to note are the Sun at
9 Capricorn, Pluto at 3 Pisces, Neptune at 22 Taurus, Mars
at 8 Aquarius and the Moon square Uranus at 29/28 Pisces/Sagittarius.
The 1265
chart is for Simon De Montfort’s summoning of representative
citizens to parliament. There is no time for this but the
block of Aquarian planets is deeply significant of representative
government. It was far from what we would recognise as democracy
today but was a significant event in our story. Note the Mars
Saturn conjunction at 21/23 Taurus and Sun at 8 Aquarius.
Interestingly the transits in September 1997 when the devolution
referendums were taking place put transiting Uranus on the
Sun and Mercury and Jupiter on the Venus, not to mention Mars
opposite itself.
James
taking the throne on Elizabeth I’s death sees the
Moon at 9 Capricorn square the Sun at 12 Aries, Uranus at
11 Taurus, Saturn at 3 Sagittarius and Venus at 4 Pisces,
Jupiter at 21 Scorpio and the Moon trine Uranus. We are starting
to see a pattern emerging.
James, as we learnt in school was King of England and also
King of Scotland. It wasn’t until 1707 that the countries
were unified to make Great
Britain.
Continuing our story we have Mercury at 11 Taurus, Jupiter
at 21 Leo, Moon at 28 Virgo, Saturn at 4 Gemini, and the Sun
and IC at 20/21 Taurus. These degrees are certainly marking
out some king of underlying significance.
1801 brings us to the formation of the United
Kingdom when Ireland is formally brought into the fold
and is probably the most popular and reliable chart for forecasting
concerning the UK.
The story continues with the Sun at 10 Capricorn, Mars at
11 Taurus, Saturn at 23 Leo, Pluto at 2 Pisces and the Moon
Uranus contact has now become a quintile.
The last chart in the story, so far, is for the reorganisation
after partition when Northern Ireland was created.
Some believe that this should be the primary chart for the
UK but this bring us back to the idea of “one, true
chart”. We should note the repeats: Pluto at 10 Cancer,
Moon at 23 Cancer, near the 1801 Moon, Venus at 25 Scorpio,
Jupiter at 8 Scorpio. Interestingly for a political reorganisation
Mars is conjunct the Moon of the 1265
chart.
The repeats I’ve point out are not exhaustive. I’m
sure there are plenty more and one of the reasons I’ve
reproduced the charts is so you can work on this your selves.
What ever the significance of 11 fixed, 23 fixed, 10-12
cardinal, 2-4 mutable, we can see that they continually receive
emphasis over time.
Some points are part of a wider story of human civilisation
as they repeat through many stories, some are our very own.
Now we need to put our minds to figuring out why.
[*] Surtsey is a volcanic island
off the southern coast of Iceland, it is also the southernmost
point of Iceland. It was formed in a volcanic eruption which
began 130 meters below sea level, and reached the surface
on 14 November 1963.
[#]To quote a current beer advert: “Get
the head right and everything else will follow”.
References
[1] Mundane or National Astrology, Green,
HS, p78
[2] Penguin Dictionary of Politics, Robertson,
p307
[3] Penguin Dictionary of Politics, Robertson,
p224
[4] Mundane Astrology, Baigent, Campion
and Harvey p97
[5] Book of World Horoscopes, Campion, Nicholas,
p395
[6] Book of World Horoscopes, Campion, Nicholas,
p48
[7] Book of World Horoscopes, Campion, Nicholas,
p35
Select Bibliography
Mundane Astrology, Baigent, Campion and Harvey,
2nd Edition, 1992, Aquarian Press
Book of World Horoscopes, Campion, Nicholas,
2nd Edition, 1995. Current edition is 4th.
Penguin Dictionary of Politics, Robertson, David,
1985. Not the latest edition
Mundane or National Astrology, Green, HS, 1911,
modern reprint
An Introduction to Political Astrology, Carter,
CEO, 1951
Anima Mundi, Harvey, Charles, CPA press
Raphael’s Mundane Astrology, Raphael, ebook.
|
