| moses_chapter.pdf |
This article was published in the 2012 book edited by Frank C Clifford: Astrology: The New Generation.
The pdf version of the article above is much prettier and shows some charts.
Moses Siregar III
A Personal Biography
No free will about it, I was born into astrology. My mother, an
astrology student since before I was born, had me reading Liz Greene’s
children’s book, Looking at Astrology, when I was in the first grade –
something I had completely forgotten until I found the book in my
early 20s and discovered that the Sun signs of the kids in my firstgrade
class were scribbled on its pages. Turns out, the kid who had
convinced me that he controlled an underground lair full of beautiful
women was a Libra. Smooth, that one was. During my first nodal
return in Scorpio in 1994 I found myself (once again, with gratitude
to Mom) at the Metropolitan Atlanta Astrological Society. That night
I heard David Railey lecturing about the Moon’s nodes and Steffan
Vanel lecturing about Liz Greene’s psychological astrology; over the
next few years I would attend many lectures at MAAS, including one
by Dennis Harness, who stoked a flame in me that would turn into
a great love of Vedic astrology. In those early years, I read Rudhyar,
Greene, Forrest, Hickey and Arroyo. Now in 2012 I’m experiencing
my second nodal return and I’m working on an astrology book of my
own, a book on locational astrology. This topic has been the focus of
my consulting work since 2003, and I’ve lectured on the subject at
astrological groups around North America. Over the last decade I’ve
spoken at UAC, ISAR and ACVA conferences; I became a co-founder
and the first president of the Association for Young Astrologers: and
I’ve organized The Blast Astrology Conference in Sedona, Arizona.
I’m ISAR C.A.P. certified and a certified Astro*Carto*Grapher. I’ve
been a mostly full-time consulting astrologer since 1994. I do my best
to do no harm.
Chapter Eight
A NEW LOOK AT
LOCATIONAL ASTROLOGY
& ASTRO*CARTO*GRAPHY
Moses Siregar III
Locational astrology, or astro-locality, has become a popular
branch of astrology frequently used to help individuals find their
‘best places’ on Earth. The late Jim Lewis and those who have
followed in his footsteps deserve credit for the prominence of this
new approach to astrology. Lewis of course called his approach
Astro*Carto*Graphy, or A*C*G. Charles Harvey and Michael
Harding, in their book Working with Astrology, called A*C*G one of
the three most important modern advances in astrology – the other
two being harmonics and midpoints.1
A Brief History of Locational Astrology and
Astro*Carto*Graphy
Before Lewis, locational astrology was more commonly utilized
for the purposes of mundane astrology rather than natal astrology.
Earlier astrologers who correlated zodiacal qualities with places on
earth include Manilius, Ptolemy, al-Biruni, Lilly, Raphael, Green,
Sepharial, Carter, Johndro, and Wynn.2
Applying locational astrology techniques to individual nativities
with an emphasis on angular planets at the moment of birth, which
is what the term astrocartography (without asterisks) normally
refers to, was perhaps initially developed by Cyril Fagan more than
anyone else, even though Fagan didn’t write a great deal about the
subject or do much to popularize the idea (as Lewis certainly did).3
Charles Jayne wrote in a 1985 article, ‘As far as I have been able
to determine, the Astro-Cartographic method was first developed
by Cyril Fagan.’4 In 1966, ten years before Lewis wrote his famous
Astro*Carto*Graphy booklet, Fagan used the technique in his
‘Solunars’ column in the magazine American Astrology. In that
article he looked at the chart of a woman born on June 29, 1940, at
9:15 am GMT, 31N35, 105W50. He wrote:
"With Uranus on the Ascendant in conjunction with Algol,
it is not surprising that she mentally has been pushed to
points of extreme desperation. A distant removal from
her place of birth will displace the natal Uranus from this
dangerous position… Should this unhappy girl wish to
remedy matters, she should remove sufficiently far away
from her place of birth to put her Sun and Venus on the
Midheaven; she will then know fame and happiness."
Fagan also explained why he would not recommend an angular
Jupiter line for this woman, even though he would normally
recommend that a person ‘bring the benefics, principally the greater
benefic Jupiter, onto an angle.’ The reason he gave is that her Jupiter
was closely conjoined with Saturn (among other reasons).
In Fagan’s 1971 book, Primer of Sidereal Astrology, which he cowrote
with Brigadier R. C. Firebrace, there is an appendix about
the ‘Calculation of planets in mundo’. In his Solunar column
Fagan also wrote about parans in the context of both natal and
relocated locations.5 Of course two of the key elements of Lewis’s
Astro*Carto*Graphy are drawing ‘in mundo’ maps6 and using
parans for relocation work.
Kenneth Irving wrote to me that Jim Lewis ‘was certainly steeped
in the hard-as-nails technical approach of Fagan & Bradley,’ but
says that Lewis was ‘genuinely surprised’ when Irving showed him
examples of Donald A. Bradley’s maps from American Astrology. He
said that Jim Lewis ‘sincerely didn’t think anyone else had done
this before him, and I had no reason to doubt him.’ He also thought
it was unlikely that Jim Lewis would have read the contents of
any given past column written by Fagan or Bradley. Irving also
said that ‘Bradley did use the idea of locality in regard to birth
charts extensively, but as far as I know never through the use of
maps.’ Jim Lewis gave particular credit to Donald A. Bradley, the
only astrologer Lewis listed by name in the dedication of his 1976
booklet, Astro*Carto*Graphy.
Without a doubt one of Jim Lewis’s most significant contributions
was his popularization of natal astro-locality maps. Before
Jim Lewis, astro-locality maps were employed in astrological
literature as early as 1941 but only for mundane purposes, such as
showing the angularity of planets at the moment of the winter
solstice.7
I consider Jim Lewis a modern astrological giant for developing
and promoting astrocartography, and I feel profoundly grateful
for all that I have learned from his work. However, in this article
I won’t focus on the countless places where I agree with Lewis
but instead on some major elements of Astro*Carto*Graphy
that I want to examine critically. Because Astro*Carto*Graphy is
such a pervasive influence on astrocartography, I believe that all
astrologers interested in locational astrology should look deeply
into A*C*G’s origin and legacy.
Before I go further, a bit about myself. I have supported myself
as an astrologer since 1994, and ever since the Jupiter–Uranus
opposition in 2003 (a transit I remember because I also have
Jupiter–Uranus opposed natally), I have made at least two-thirds
of my living as a practicing locational astrologer. Because I review
my clients’ histories and look over all the previous locations where
they have lived, I estimate that I’ve been able to ask questions
about and confirm the results of well over 5,000 relocated charts,
including techniques like parans and local space lines. I am only
one astrologer, but I have done my best to test the popular theories
of astro-locality, and in this essay I’ll share some of the things I have
learned.
To Map or Not to Map?
For me there’s an ironic element in this quote from Jim Lewis at his
‘Professional Training and Certification Seminar’ in 1993:
"25 years ago when I started doing astrology, Locational
Astrology was hardly talked about at all. The only thing
they did was if you were going to move to a new city
they might relocate your chart to that city and read it as if
you had been born there. But all of these new techniques
like A*C*G, and local space and geodetics, nobody talked
about because it simply did not exist, and that was only
25 years ago. Also, there were only about 10 books on
astrology at that time – it was real easy to read them all."8
The ironic element for me is that the only technique mentioned
above that focuses primarily on an astrological chart is the one that
Jim Lewis seems to give the least weight to: the relocated chart.
A*C*G, local space and geodetics are viewed as lines on geographical
maps. These techniques also refer back to the natal chart but they
can change the astrologer’s focus from charts to maps, and I feel
that the map-first mentality of locational astrology has led to some
problems.
Astro-locality maps are invaluable tools. I use maps extensively
as I look at A*C*G (including parans), local space and geodetics
(from tropical and sidereal natal placements), as well as finer
techniques like midpoints and aspects to angles. But I have
found that far too many astrocartographers put the cart before
the horse, the map before the chart, not only when it comes to
analyzing astrocartography but also in that many astrologers
skip over the fundamentals of interpreting astrological charts and
rush over to fascination with shinier modern inventions, whether
astrocartography or anything else (there are too many to name).
I’ve been there too. I began as a modern, groovy psychological
and spiritual astrologer, but the accuracy of my astrological work
grew by leaps and bounds when I began to study more traditional
astrology, particularly Vedic astrology in my case.
Too many astrology students and locational astrologers seem
to have abandoned the gold mine that is the natal chart and the
relocated chart in combination. Most, though certainly not all, of
the information locational astrologers need can be found in those
two places. I would never want to give up any of the astro-locality
techniques that I use – such as the parans and in mundo positions
of A*C*G and Cyclo*Carto*Graphy (C*C*G), local space and
geodetics – but if forced to choose only one astro-locality tool, I
would reluctantly give up everything else and focus on the natal
and relocated charts in combination.
A*C*G and Fame
Lewis’s work emphasized angular natal planetary lines and the
fame that sometimes comes with those positions. He co-wrote with
Ariel Guttman The Astro*Carto*Graphy Book of Maps. The subtitle
of the book reads: ‘The Astrology of Relocation: How 136 Famous
People Found Their Place.’ Although parans are also mentioned in
these 136 case histories, the book is nearly 300 pages of examples
of famous people doing famous things in places where they have
angular planetary lines. Lewis’s 1993 certification seminar shows
this same emphasis on angular planetary lines.
So it’s not surprising, because of Lewis’s example, that
astrologers tend to put such emphasis on angular planetary lines
when studying and practicing locational astrology – even though
most clients don’t come asking where they can find fame. Most of
my own clients just want to be happy, and I’ve found that living
close to angular lines more often leads to unhappiness because the
angular lines indicate places where one’s life experience will be so
intense – for better or for worse and usually some of both. More on
that below.
Lewis cited the Gauquelin research in his 1993 certification
seminar, and rightly pointed out that what Gauquelin discovered
is that the natal chart’s angles are powerful places for famous
people:
"Gauquelin… found out… if you were born in a place where
Mars is in the Midheaven, you have a more chance than
statistical average of becoming a more successful athlete.
He took the charts of 50,000 French people and excerpted
a couple thousand outstanding athletes and found that
far more than statistically predictable, the outstanding
athletes had Mars in the zone near the Midheaven in their
charts… The Gauquelins have shown that it only works
for eminent French athletes, for outstanding French
athletes. It didn’t work for the second string, little leaguer
types. That’s an important thing, angularity of a planet
brings it into personal and collective attention."9
In Lewis’s certification seminar he talks about a ‘spectrum of
health’ for each planet. He asked his students to come up with
examples for each planet when denied/repressed/projected,
assimilated and famous. For instance, according to his examples,
denied Neptune would be psi-cops and skeptics who appear on
TV, assimilated Neptune would be ‘alcoholics anonymous’, and
famous Neptune would be Gandhi, Timothy Leary and Bill Wilson
(founder of Alcoholics Anonymous).10 It’s worth noting that Lewis
routinely considered the highest potential for any planet to be the
achievement of ‘fame’ connected with that planet, while his work
in astrocartography focused on angular planets.
On the other hand, also in his 1993 certification seminar, Lewis
said, ‘That reminds me to remind you that the point in A*C*G is not
to find someplace to go to become rich and famous… The point in the
study of astrology is to become a whole person, a complete, entire
person.’11 Lewis had a clear interest in a psychological approach to
A*C*G. But maybe because so much of his A*C*G literature and
teaching was about angularity and fame, I believe that many people
have acquired the wrong idea about astrocartography.
Most people are more interested in happiness than fame.
They’d rather have money in the bank, good friends, satisfying
relationships, a nice home and fulfilling work. Yet too many people
seem to think locational astrology is about, above all else, moving
to an angular planetary line, even though this is so often not a good
recipe for happiness. People talk about what happened when they
went to their Jupiter line, or Mars line, etc. They wonder which
new angular line they should go live on. We think these lines are
what locational astrology is all about, but that is a very dangerous
misunderstanding.
Full Volume: The Price of Angularity
I have found that, as a general rule, living a comfortable distance
from angular lines – rather than very close to such lines (I’ll say
that within 150 miles qualifies as ‘very close’, but that’s a general
guideline rather than a hard boundary) – is more often the best
choice. This is because angular planetary lines, when we live
very near to them, give us the full, intense force of any given
planet’s significations according to our unique natal charts – and
most planets in our charts promise more than just lollipops and
gumdrops.
Jim Lewis was well aware that the natal condition of a planet
is important when analyzing A*C*G lines. He knew that not all
Jupiter lines are created equal. But I can understand, when looking
at the emphasis of his teachings, why so many people focus more
on the generic positions, such as VE–ASC, SUN–DSC and so on.
Because even though Lewis explained the more nuanced truth and
the importance of seeing the planet’s situation in the natal chart,
he still focused his teachings and writings on the sheer power of
angular planets in astrocartography.
I’ve learned that living on a major A*C*G line is like turning up
the volume on that planet to ‘11’. In other words, it’s asking that
planet to become so emphasized in your life that you can never get
away from its generic significations (Mars as Mars) and its specific
natal significations (Mars in your chart). Most planets in any chart
exist under a combination of easy and difficult conditions – mixed
bags. Maybe your Mars is in Cancer (its fall or depression), but it’s
also in a trine to Jupiter in Scorpio (a mutual reception) and a tight
square to Moon in Aries (a more complicated mutual reception
because of the square), while ruling the 7th and the 12th Houses
(the 12th being a relatively challenging house, with the 7th being
for the most part an inherently positive house). Living on that Mars
line would likely lead to a lot of intense experiences – sometimes
very enjoyable, other times very unpleasant. This is not just because
Mars can be considered a natural malefic – something we don’t
want to lose sight of – but also because of its specific placement in
the above chart.
A Good Planet Is… Hard to Find
Ideally we could all live close to the angular lines of relatively pristine
planets in our charts. A pristine planet is dignified by sign, ideally
by rulership (i.e. Moon in Cancer), mutual reception or exaltation
(Moon in Taurus), although exaltation is a more complicated
condition which can also indicate some powerful challenges, such
as when the exalted planet rules difficult houses in either tropical
or sidereal astrology (those houses being primarily the 6th, 8th and
12th). A pristine planet should be well aspected and its aspects would
ideally involve harmonious reception (e.g. Sun in Sagittarius trine
Jupiter in Aries; Jupiter rules Sagittarius and the Sun is exalted in
Aries). A pristine planet would rule over the more positive houses
(such as the angles and the 5th and 9th – though different houses
can be considered positive depending on the person’s work and
interests) while not ruling over the more difficult houses. A pristine
planet sits in a positive house where it is also comfortable. A pristine
planet would be disposited by similarly pristine planets, or at least
by planets well positioned overall. Whether a pristine planet should
be direct or retrograde is too complicated to sum up here – it’s not a
simple matter of saying that retrogrades are mostly bad (something
that some traditional Western astrologers say) or that retrogrades
are mostly good (something that many Vedic astrologers say). And
when looking at what makes for a well-placed planet, there are too
many possible considerations to mention. Different astrologers will
focus on different conditions. Some may use midpoints, others may
use the Vedic nakshatras, while others will use the Egyptian terms
and so on.
Traditional astrology gets a bad rap from many astrologers who
don’t understand it. I love modern astrology, but I believe modern
astrologers ought to be able to also use traditional concepts to
become better at making predictions without losing the positive,
humanistic and psychological spirit of modern astrology.
Locational astrologers need to be able to make predictions. We
need to be able to say what we think it would be like for client A to
live on her angular line B. But to make these kinds of predictions
we need to be able to differentiate a complicated, difficult Jupiter
line from a relatively straightforward, positive Jupiter line. Many
concepts from traditional astrology help us to do this. Just as
modern astrologers recognize the difficulty of a planet in a T-square
with Saturn, Chiron or Pluto, traditional astrologers recognize
the difficulty of a planet in its fall with a weak dispositor, who
is involved with challenging reception (e.g. Sun in Gemini trine
Jupiter in Libra), who rules difficult houses while also sitting in a
difficult house. We don’t need to judge any of these conditions as
inherently good or bad; we just need to recognize challenges for
being what they are, as well as for the opportunities they offer.
Close to the Edge? Or Far, Far Away?
Back to angularity in astrocartography. One of the reasons we tend
to focus on the A*C*G lines is because when someone finds a great
line – for his or her unique chart and his or her unique interests
and goals – the results can be spectacularly good. Living on a line
that works well for you can be profoundly life-affirming because it
can give you much stronger connections with other people in that
place. A good angular line can in fact give us a certain amount of
fame, even if just locally. The way this usually manifests is that
we’re more socially or professionally connected, or both, in such
places. We’re not just in the background there; we’re front and
center in the flow of life. Having the volume turned up to ‘11’ can
be great when you really love the song you’re listening to (i.e. when
you work well with the planet in question) and when you want to
be more prominent or more connected to whatever is happening
locally, or perhaps even nationally or internationally.
The problem is that few planets in any given chart work very
well at full volume. And in many charts – perhaps as many as half
the charts I see in my work – there may not be a single planet that
I can recommend turning up to ‘11’. In other words, with roughly
half the clients I work with, no planet comes even close to being
in relatively pristine condition. For example, in charts where hard
aspects predominate, it’s often difficult to recommend any major
lines because if Mars squares your Moon then that aspect will be
profoundly felt and experienced whether the person lives on a
Mars line or a Moon line. And if nearly all of one’s planets are in
difficult squares, oppositions or quincunxes then it will be hard to
find a comfortable place close to a major A*C*G line.
When someone lives on the line of a planet whose condition
is mixed (some nice stuff, some major challenges), all of those
conditions will manifest in that place. It’s like asking the planet
to hit you with its best shot. It’s almost like having a continual
transit from that planet. How many people would like to have a
major Saturn transit every single day? Or a major Jupiter or Venus
transit, for that matter – sometimes you have to be careful what you
wish for.
On the one hand, these conditions will manifest according to
the nature of the line in question. For example, living just east of
a difficult Mars–ASC line will put Mars in the 12th House of the
relocated chart, so its story will play out in a noticeably 12th-House
way. Living just to the west of a Mars–ASC line will put Mars in the
1st House of the relocated chart, so in that case the effects will be
felt most strongly in the 1st House.
But on the other hand, living close to any major Mars line – no
matter which angle – will activate the natal story of Mars, including
its aspects and whichever houses Mars rules natally and whichever
houses it resides in natally.12 All of the planet’s natal conditions will
manifest in such a place, including reception if there is any, essential
dignity or lack thereof, declination, connections with fixed stars,
important midpoints, nakshatras and other Vedic considerations
such as shad bala, terms/bounds, sect and any other factor one can
study and use.
Another consideration is that some people are more likely than
others to enjoy the intensity of angular lines. For example, a younger
person wanting to experience all that life has to offer, including
its lessons, may want to live near his or her major A*C*G lines.
Living near a major line likely means greater successes and greater
failures, though the balance of success and failure will depend on
the unique natal planet in question. On major lines we are likely to
have more significant relationships with more people, so living on
major lines usually leads to more significant friendships; however,
the individual situation has to be taken into consideration – living
on the line of a planet ruling one’s natal 12th may symbolize a good
deal of isolation and hardships instead.
Meanwhile, those who would rather live in relative seclusion
and privacy, or who simply don’t mind being in the background
socially, ought to give serious consideration to not living near a
major A*C*G line. For example, an older person looking to retire
in a place that will be mellow for her, who isn’t concerned about
having a great deal of social prominence, should probably avoid
her major A*C*G lines unless maybe she has one of those pristine
planets in her natal chart and can find those lines somewhere on
habitable land (i.e. not out to sea or in the middle of a war zone).
In my experience it’s more common to find people who say
that they cannot live comfortably on their angular lines. Many
people come to me, I think, because the major line they are living
on is too intense. In some cases these people have been told by
Astro*Carto*Graphers to go and live on these major lines. They may
enjoy the positive things that the major line seems to give them, but
they also find that the problems that come with those major lines
are too much to handle on a daily basis.
Living on a major line is intense, though it can be a very good
kind of intense in the case of a well-placed natal planet; but in most
cases it’s intense in both positive and negative ways. Living far
from major lines is mellow but that can also indicate a place that is
boring or unfulfilling, as well as lacking in social connections. Let’s
think then… how can we get the best of both scenarios? The energy,
activity and connections of a major line as well as the sustainable
mellowness of a place with no major lines?
Often the best solution is to live a moderate distance from a major
line. That way, you can experience some of the positive intensity of
a major line without too much of the negative intensity. And you
can have the more mellow experience of not living terribly close
to a major line, but without the boredom or sense that ‘nothing
is happening’ that can prevail when living too far from angular
planetary lines.
How Far Is Too Far, and How Close Is Too Close?
Now you might be wondering, then how far away should you
be? First, let me restate that if you do have a planet in relatively
pristine condition in your chart, it may be worth trying to live very
close to that line. If you’re in the half of the population13 that has at
least one of these very well-placed planets in your natal chart, you
might still have only one or two such planets (and having four such
planets is probably the most I’ve ever seen – one or two is much
more common according to my way of assessing things). Then you
have to hope you can find a livable place near one of these lines,
in a country where you want to live, with weather you like, where
you can find a good job and on an angle where you’d like to have
that planet.
One more caveat before getting into distance and orbs. The
emphasis on astro-maps has taken the attention of many astrologers
away from relocated natal charts. I think this is really tragic, and
for more than one reason. For example, you may have one of the
nicest Venus placements in creation, but it might also be the case
that when you get that Venus on your ASC, you end up with every
other planet in your relocated chart in either the 12th, 8th or 6th
House: that’s almost certainly not good. Venus would still give you
her wonderful results, but the rest of the relocated chart would
most likely drag you down.
Now the orbs. First, the bad news. Orbs are always debatable
and astrologers rarely agree on them. For example, Jim Lewis said
that individual parans have an orb of influence up to 1.5–2 degrees
of latitude on either side of the line,14 but most practicing locational
astrologers I’ve spoken with use a smaller orb, often 1 degree on
either side, which is the orb I used for many years.15 In recent years,
based on client histories, I’ve started to look only at ½ of a degree of
latitude as my orb for a strong paran, although I still find that there
is some influence up to a full degree of latitude away.
Lewis put his emphasis on maps rather than charts, so he
measured orbs in inches on his maps as well as in miles. He said:
‘On the A*C*G map, the official version, the orb is about 3/8 of an
inch either side of the line and that equates to about 700–800 miles
either side of the line; that’s a huge orb, like 1,500 miles with the
line in the center of it. However, I assure you that the lines are not
nearly as strong if you’re at the edge than if you’re right under the
line.’16
Although he taught that in mundo mapping and mapping
according to zodiacal longitude were ‘both true’,17 he emphasized
a brilliant mapping technique that he pioneered: astronomically
accurate maps that showed lines for actual rising, setting,
culminating and anti-culminating planets in mundo, rather
than astrological ASC, DSC, MC and IC lines. He favored in
mundo mapping so his orbs were distance based and given in
miles.
My practice – which is just a matter of preference – is to look
at maps with lines drawn for zodiacal longitude before looking
at maps drawn in mundo. I probably do it this way because I
emphasize the natal and relocated charts more than maps. The
nice thing about this approach is that it allows you to use an orb
measured in zodiacal longitude, or degrees. When using a degreebased
orb, here’s what I recommend: 8 degrees at most from any
angle in the relocated chart.18 Roughly, any planet within 3 degrees
of an angle has ‘strong’ influence, any planet 3–6 degrees from an
angle has ‘moderate’ influence, and any planet 6–8 degrees from an
angle has a ‘weak’ though still important influence. The numbers
can also be expressed as a fraction or percentage. For example, a
planet 2 degrees from an angle has 75% of its maximum influence,
or 6/8. A planet 3 degrees from an angle has 62.5% of its maximum
influence, or 5/8.
Degree-based orbs aren’t fully sufficient, however, when the in
mundo position of a planet is significantly different from its position
according to zodiacal longitude. For example, Pluto might be 4
degrees from the IC in the relocated chart, which is what I would
say is 50% of a full-strength Pluto line. But in mundo that same Pluto
might go right through the location in question, meaning that it’s at
full strength according to its in mundo position.
A similar problem can happen the other way around, though.
When using distance as the basis for one’s orb when looking at a
map, both in mundo and zodiacal positions have to be considered.
But a zodiacal degree-based orb doesn’t work when looking at a
geographical map drawn in mundo.
Distance-based orbs and zodiacally measured orbs can be hard
to compare like apples to apples, because they’re actually different.
Using my own chart as an example, I’ve seen that when a sign
of long ascension is rising, 8 degrees of zodiacal longitude (from
the ASC) can work out to roughly 525 miles; when a sign of short
ascension is rising, 8 degrees from the ASC can equal less than 300
miles. It’s complicated.
I favor degree-based orbs while mapping with zodiacal positions,
because that’s in keeping with how we read natal charts and because
that’s what I’ve found to work so reliably. In mundo positions are
also very important to consider, though, so in those cases I tend
to ‘eyeball’ the range with a distance-based approach and in that
event I use something like 500 miles as the outer range.19
Okay, now we can get back to what a medium-strength angular
line would be, for those times when we want some of the energy of
a major angular line but without too much intensity, as well as some
of the mellowness of not living too close to major lines but without
too much boredom. Measured in zodiacal longitude, to be safe,
we’re looking at something in the 4–6 degree range for a planet that
we like fairly well; in other words, the planet should be between 4–6
degrees from an angle in the relocated chart. Using 6–8 degrees can
definitely work too, but then the effect is weaker; however, this can
be a safer, better choice when dealing with a natural malefic that we
also like, such as a well-placed Saturn or Mars, or any planet in a
very mixed condition (such as a planet with close, difficult aspects
or some other very challenging condition).
When measuring the same thing using an in mundo map and
distance, 200–350 miles is roughly the equivalent of a 4–6 degree
range, and 350–500 miles is roughly the equivalent of a 6–8 degree
range. Beyond that, in my experience the line isn’t powerful enough
to have a major effect. But I also think it’s harder to be precise
about guidelines for distance-based orbs, so you should use these
distance-based orbs at your own risk.
A Chart Has Twelve Houses, Not Just Four Angles
Now the ironic thing for me is that in getting into a critique of
some commonly held ideas about Astro*Carto*Graphy, I’ve so far
ended up doing one of the things I wanted to warn people away
from: putting too much emphasis on the angular lines. It’s true
that the angular lines are by far the most powerful influences, so
it’s very important to know how they work and how to work with
them. But one of the big problems with Astro*Carto*Graphy as it is
commonly practiced is that many people think so much about their
angular lines and not nearly enough about the rest of the positions
in the relocated chart.
It could also be said that many people focus on the angular lines
to the exclusion of local space, parans or geodetics. All of these
things are very important. But I’ve found that the relocated chart
itself is an incredibly important tool and it’s one that is ignored by
too many.
I don’t have the scope in this essay to go into great detail about
how I work with the relocated natal chart. I’m working on a
locational astrology book that I hope to complete sometime in 2012
or 2013, and I’ll be focusing on relocated natal charts a great deal in
that book. For now, I’ll leave you with a simple, powerful traditional
technique for analyzing a relocated natal chart, something as basic
and fundamental as it gets.
Look at the condition and
position of the ruler of the
ASC in the relocated chart.
If Libra is rising in the
relocated chart and Venus
is in the 12th House
in her fall in Virgo
dealing with some very
hard aspects, you’ll
definitely want to make
a note of it because
Venus’s placement will
tell a reliably potent story
about what it would be
like for the individual to live
in that location. In this location
the person may feel intensely isolated,
invisible to others or unpopular. He or she might feel extremely
limited by financial conditions, or might have harsh experiences
with intense or critical women. There may be a powerful feeling of
entrapment, in general, or of being stuck in menial roles or difficult
working conditions.
If Scorpio is rising and Mars is in Capricorn in the 3rd House
and well aspected, then Mars’s dignity will shine through in the 3rd
House (for better or worse, but most likely for the better overall in
this case) and that symbolism will describe a great deal about what
the individual would experience living in that location. Maybe
he or she will have a powerful drive to write, or to study some
subject or to focus on creativity – which will lead to significant
success or notoriety. Maybe the person will very effectively
use communications technology, make good
use of a scientific mind or communicate clear and
specific ideas through his or her work. On
the downside, maybe this person will argue
too much with others or have intensely
competitive relationships with siblings or friends.
Maybe ambition and too much work, or too much mental energy
or long commutes and too much traveling will become a problem, leading to a major imbalance.
For extra credit do the above in both tropical and sidereal
astrology. It’s not hard to do after you’ve practiced it. Just consider
the placement of the ruler of the ASC in the sidereal zodiac as well
as in the tropical zodiac and blend whatever you find, similar to
how you would blend different bits of information in any given
chart.
Maybe the person who has Libra Rising and Venus in Virgo
in tropical astrology has, in the same location, Virgo Rising with
Mercury in Virgo in the 1st House in sidereal astrology. That would
change the picture quite a bit, wouldn’t it? Although we would still
expect the challenges shown by the Libra Ascendant with Venus
in Virgo, the sidereal picture shows a very different story. We’d
expect the person to be able to experience great success in a realm
signified by Mercury or Virgo. Maybe the person still feels trapped
and unloved (Venus in Virgo in the 12th), but nonetheless enjoys a
great education or has a shrewd business sense that leads to a good
income (Mercury in Virgo in the 1st) – along with great expenditures
or losses (Venus in Virgo in the 12th). Maybe the person finds a
good job that requires good organizational ability or technological
knowledge (Mercury in Virgo in the 1st), but has major problems
with female co-workers harming her reputation behind her back
(Venus in Virgo in the 12th).
Our knowledge of astrology will always be imperfect. While
technical proficiency is a wonderful goal, we’re flawed human
beings and there will always be a great deal more we don’t know.
Still, we should always do our best for each client and we should
study and research our craft as much as we can, because our work
can change someone’s life in dramatic fashion, for better or worse.
We have to develop our humanity, because with some compassion
and wisdom we can hope to make a positive difference in others’
lives. Technical knowledge is precious but it is not as useful as a
kind heart, a receptive ear and a humble spirit. Always do your
best.
References and Notes
1. Martin Davis, From Here to There, The Wessex Astrologer, 2008, pp.
11–12.
2. Ibid., p. 1. This includes, but is not limited to, correlating nations with
zodiacal qualities. Also see footnote 7 on Wynn.
3. I have spent a considerable amount of energy researching this topic
and I’ve spoken with Kenneth Irving, among others, about who
first developed and wrote about the techniques of astrocartography.
As far as I can tell at this time, Cyril Fagan seems to be the most
deserving of credit for at least being the first to write about the basic
approach of astrocartography for relocation purposes. And some
of the other astrologers who are sometimes credited for developing
astrocartography tend to be siderealists who were friends of Cyril
Fagan, such as Firebrace, Duncan and Bradley. To me the evidence
points toward astrocartography, as we generally think of it today,
coming out of this group, with Fagan the most likely candidate for
the lion’s share of gratitude. I’ll continue to research this topic for my
upcoming book on locational astrology.
4. Charles Jayne, Considerations magazine, Volume XIX, No. 1, p. 10. The
article was written in 1985 but published in 2004. See http://issuu.
com/considerations/docs/19-1
5. Cyril Fagan, The Solunars Handbook, 1976, p. 101. The Solunars Handbook
is a collection of excerpts from Fagan’s 1953–1970 ‘Solunars’ column in
American Astrology.
6. In mundo maps show astronomically correct rising, setting,
culminating and anti-culminating positions for the planetary lines,
rather than lines that correspond to zodiacal longitude, i.e. the ASC,
DSC, MC and IC.
7. Wynn, in his own astrological magazine Wynn’s Astrology, published
a map in August, 1941 with mundane concerns related to World War
II and Adolf Hitler; this map included some personal lines for Hitler,
but those lines were geodetic positions rather than angular planets for
Hitler (i.e. not A*C*G). Martin Davis writes that in 1957–58 Donald
178 Moses Siregar III
Bradley published a hand-plotted map showing the rising, setting and
culminating lines of all the planets (around the entire world) for the
1958 sidereal ingress of the Sun into Capricorn.
8. Jim Lewis, transcript from his ‘Professional Training and Certification
Seminar’, 1993, p. 7 (produced by Continuum, edited and transcribed
by Karen McCauley and Lori Osborne, June 1998).
9. Ibid., p. 22.
10. Ibid., p. 15.
11. Ibid., p. 50.
12. I say, ‘whichever houses it resides in’, because it may reside in more
than one house natally when we consider multiple house systems.
13. Pardon my gross estimation.
14. Lewis seminar, op. cit., p. 33.
15. One degree of latitude can be anywhere from 68.703 miles to 69.407
miles because of the Earth’s slightly ellipsoid shape. So about 69 miles
or 111 km.
16. Lewis seminar, op. cit., p. 26.
17. Ibid., p. 25.
18. I’ve had people try to convince me that 9 degrees is a better orb,
but I just haven’t seen that angular planets have noticeable enough
influence beyond 8 degrees.
19. And it may be the case that we should use different distance orbs
with in mundo positions depending on how quickly the ASC/DSC axis
is moving in any given region at any given time.
The pdf version of the article above is much prettier and shows some charts.
Moses Siregar III
A Personal Biography
No free will about it, I was born into astrology. My mother, an
astrology student since before I was born, had me reading Liz Greene’s
children’s book, Looking at Astrology, when I was in the first grade –
something I had completely forgotten until I found the book in my
early 20s and discovered that the Sun signs of the kids in my firstgrade
class were scribbled on its pages. Turns out, the kid who had
convinced me that he controlled an underground lair full of beautiful
women was a Libra. Smooth, that one was. During my first nodal
return in Scorpio in 1994 I found myself (once again, with gratitude
to Mom) at the Metropolitan Atlanta Astrological Society. That night
I heard David Railey lecturing about the Moon’s nodes and Steffan
Vanel lecturing about Liz Greene’s psychological astrology; over the
next few years I would attend many lectures at MAAS, including one
by Dennis Harness, who stoked a flame in me that would turn into
a great love of Vedic astrology. In those early years, I read Rudhyar,
Greene, Forrest, Hickey and Arroyo. Now in 2012 I’m experiencing
my second nodal return and I’m working on an astrology book of my
own, a book on locational astrology. This topic has been the focus of
my consulting work since 2003, and I’ve lectured on the subject at
astrological groups around North America. Over the last decade I’ve
spoken at UAC, ISAR and ACVA conferences; I became a co-founder
and the first president of the Association for Young Astrologers: and
I’ve organized The Blast Astrology Conference in Sedona, Arizona.
I’m ISAR C.A.P. certified and a certified Astro*Carto*Grapher. I’ve
been a mostly full-time consulting astrologer since 1994. I do my best
to do no harm.
Chapter Eight
A NEW LOOK AT
LOCATIONAL ASTROLOGY
& ASTRO*CARTO*GRAPHY
Moses Siregar III
Locational astrology, or astro-locality, has become a popular
branch of astrology frequently used to help individuals find their
‘best places’ on Earth. The late Jim Lewis and those who have
followed in his footsteps deserve credit for the prominence of this
new approach to astrology. Lewis of course called his approach
Astro*Carto*Graphy, or A*C*G. Charles Harvey and Michael
Harding, in their book Working with Astrology, called A*C*G one of
the three most important modern advances in astrology – the other
two being harmonics and midpoints.1
A Brief History of Locational Astrology and
Astro*Carto*Graphy
Before Lewis, locational astrology was more commonly utilized
for the purposes of mundane astrology rather than natal astrology.
Earlier astrologers who correlated zodiacal qualities with places on
earth include Manilius, Ptolemy, al-Biruni, Lilly, Raphael, Green,
Sepharial, Carter, Johndro, and Wynn.2
Applying locational astrology techniques to individual nativities
with an emphasis on angular planets at the moment of birth, which
is what the term astrocartography (without asterisks) normally
refers to, was perhaps initially developed by Cyril Fagan more than
anyone else, even though Fagan didn’t write a great deal about the
subject or do much to popularize the idea (as Lewis certainly did).3
Charles Jayne wrote in a 1985 article, ‘As far as I have been able
to determine, the Astro-Cartographic method was first developed
by Cyril Fagan.’4 In 1966, ten years before Lewis wrote his famous
Astro*Carto*Graphy booklet, Fagan used the technique in his
‘Solunars’ column in the magazine American Astrology. In that
article he looked at the chart of a woman born on June 29, 1940, at
9:15 am GMT, 31N35, 105W50. He wrote:
"With Uranus on the Ascendant in conjunction with Algol,
it is not surprising that she mentally has been pushed to
points of extreme desperation. A distant removal from
her place of birth will displace the natal Uranus from this
dangerous position… Should this unhappy girl wish to
remedy matters, she should remove sufficiently far away
from her place of birth to put her Sun and Venus on the
Midheaven; she will then know fame and happiness."
Fagan also explained why he would not recommend an angular
Jupiter line for this woman, even though he would normally
recommend that a person ‘bring the benefics, principally the greater
benefic Jupiter, onto an angle.’ The reason he gave is that her Jupiter
was closely conjoined with Saturn (among other reasons).
In Fagan’s 1971 book, Primer of Sidereal Astrology, which he cowrote
with Brigadier R. C. Firebrace, there is an appendix about
the ‘Calculation of planets in mundo’. In his Solunar column
Fagan also wrote about parans in the context of both natal and
relocated locations.5 Of course two of the key elements of Lewis’s
Astro*Carto*Graphy are drawing ‘in mundo’ maps6 and using
parans for relocation work.
Kenneth Irving wrote to me that Jim Lewis ‘was certainly steeped
in the hard-as-nails technical approach of Fagan & Bradley,’ but
says that Lewis was ‘genuinely surprised’ when Irving showed him
examples of Donald A. Bradley’s maps from American Astrology. He
said that Jim Lewis ‘sincerely didn’t think anyone else had done
this before him, and I had no reason to doubt him.’ He also thought
it was unlikely that Jim Lewis would have read the contents of
any given past column written by Fagan or Bradley. Irving also
said that ‘Bradley did use the idea of locality in regard to birth
charts extensively, but as far as I know never through the use of
maps.’ Jim Lewis gave particular credit to Donald A. Bradley, the
only astrologer Lewis listed by name in the dedication of his 1976
booklet, Astro*Carto*Graphy.
Without a doubt one of Jim Lewis’s most significant contributions
was his popularization of natal astro-locality maps. Before
Jim Lewis, astro-locality maps were employed in astrological
literature as early as 1941 but only for mundane purposes, such as
showing the angularity of planets at the moment of the winter
solstice.7
I consider Jim Lewis a modern astrological giant for developing
and promoting astrocartography, and I feel profoundly grateful
for all that I have learned from his work. However, in this article
I won’t focus on the countless places where I agree with Lewis
but instead on some major elements of Astro*Carto*Graphy
that I want to examine critically. Because Astro*Carto*Graphy is
such a pervasive influence on astrocartography, I believe that all
astrologers interested in locational astrology should look deeply
into A*C*G’s origin and legacy.
Before I go further, a bit about myself. I have supported myself
as an astrologer since 1994, and ever since the Jupiter–Uranus
opposition in 2003 (a transit I remember because I also have
Jupiter–Uranus opposed natally), I have made at least two-thirds
of my living as a practicing locational astrologer. Because I review
my clients’ histories and look over all the previous locations where
they have lived, I estimate that I’ve been able to ask questions
about and confirm the results of well over 5,000 relocated charts,
including techniques like parans and local space lines. I am only
one astrologer, but I have done my best to test the popular theories
of astro-locality, and in this essay I’ll share some of the things I have
learned.
To Map or Not to Map?
For me there’s an ironic element in this quote from Jim Lewis at his
‘Professional Training and Certification Seminar’ in 1993:
"25 years ago when I started doing astrology, Locational
Astrology was hardly talked about at all. The only thing
they did was if you were going to move to a new city
they might relocate your chart to that city and read it as if
you had been born there. But all of these new techniques
like A*C*G, and local space and geodetics, nobody talked
about because it simply did not exist, and that was only
25 years ago. Also, there were only about 10 books on
astrology at that time – it was real easy to read them all."8
The ironic element for me is that the only technique mentioned
above that focuses primarily on an astrological chart is the one that
Jim Lewis seems to give the least weight to: the relocated chart.
A*C*G, local space and geodetics are viewed as lines on geographical
maps. These techniques also refer back to the natal chart but they
can change the astrologer’s focus from charts to maps, and I feel
that the map-first mentality of locational astrology has led to some
problems.
Astro-locality maps are invaluable tools. I use maps extensively
as I look at A*C*G (including parans), local space and geodetics
(from tropical and sidereal natal placements), as well as finer
techniques like midpoints and aspects to angles. But I have
found that far too many astrocartographers put the cart before
the horse, the map before the chart, not only when it comes to
analyzing astrocartography but also in that many astrologers
skip over the fundamentals of interpreting astrological charts and
rush over to fascination with shinier modern inventions, whether
astrocartography or anything else (there are too many to name).
I’ve been there too. I began as a modern, groovy psychological
and spiritual astrologer, but the accuracy of my astrological work
grew by leaps and bounds when I began to study more traditional
astrology, particularly Vedic astrology in my case.
Too many astrology students and locational astrologers seem
to have abandoned the gold mine that is the natal chart and the
relocated chart in combination. Most, though certainly not all, of
the information locational astrologers need can be found in those
two places. I would never want to give up any of the astro-locality
techniques that I use – such as the parans and in mundo positions
of A*C*G and Cyclo*Carto*Graphy (C*C*G), local space and
geodetics – but if forced to choose only one astro-locality tool, I
would reluctantly give up everything else and focus on the natal
and relocated charts in combination.
A*C*G and Fame
Lewis’s work emphasized angular natal planetary lines and the
fame that sometimes comes with those positions. He co-wrote with
Ariel Guttman The Astro*Carto*Graphy Book of Maps. The subtitle
of the book reads: ‘The Astrology of Relocation: How 136 Famous
People Found Their Place.’ Although parans are also mentioned in
these 136 case histories, the book is nearly 300 pages of examples
of famous people doing famous things in places where they have
angular planetary lines. Lewis’s 1993 certification seminar shows
this same emphasis on angular planetary lines.
So it’s not surprising, because of Lewis’s example, that
astrologers tend to put such emphasis on angular planetary lines
when studying and practicing locational astrology – even though
most clients don’t come asking where they can find fame. Most of
my own clients just want to be happy, and I’ve found that living
close to angular lines more often leads to unhappiness because the
angular lines indicate places where one’s life experience will be so
intense – for better or for worse and usually some of both. More on
that below.
Lewis cited the Gauquelin research in his 1993 certification
seminar, and rightly pointed out that what Gauquelin discovered
is that the natal chart’s angles are powerful places for famous
people:
"Gauquelin… found out… if you were born in a place where
Mars is in the Midheaven, you have a more chance than
statistical average of becoming a more successful athlete.
He took the charts of 50,000 French people and excerpted
a couple thousand outstanding athletes and found that
far more than statistically predictable, the outstanding
athletes had Mars in the zone near the Midheaven in their
charts… The Gauquelins have shown that it only works
for eminent French athletes, for outstanding French
athletes. It didn’t work for the second string, little leaguer
types. That’s an important thing, angularity of a planet
brings it into personal and collective attention."9
In Lewis’s certification seminar he talks about a ‘spectrum of
health’ for each planet. He asked his students to come up with
examples for each planet when denied/repressed/projected,
assimilated and famous. For instance, according to his examples,
denied Neptune would be psi-cops and skeptics who appear on
TV, assimilated Neptune would be ‘alcoholics anonymous’, and
famous Neptune would be Gandhi, Timothy Leary and Bill Wilson
(founder of Alcoholics Anonymous).10 It’s worth noting that Lewis
routinely considered the highest potential for any planet to be the
achievement of ‘fame’ connected with that planet, while his work
in astrocartography focused on angular planets.
On the other hand, also in his 1993 certification seminar, Lewis
said, ‘That reminds me to remind you that the point in A*C*G is not
to find someplace to go to become rich and famous… The point in the
study of astrology is to become a whole person, a complete, entire
person.’11 Lewis had a clear interest in a psychological approach to
A*C*G. But maybe because so much of his A*C*G literature and
teaching was about angularity and fame, I believe that many people
have acquired the wrong idea about astrocartography.
Most people are more interested in happiness than fame.
They’d rather have money in the bank, good friends, satisfying
relationships, a nice home and fulfilling work. Yet too many people
seem to think locational astrology is about, above all else, moving
to an angular planetary line, even though this is so often not a good
recipe for happiness. People talk about what happened when they
went to their Jupiter line, or Mars line, etc. They wonder which
new angular line they should go live on. We think these lines are
what locational astrology is all about, but that is a very dangerous
misunderstanding.
Full Volume: The Price of Angularity
I have found that, as a general rule, living a comfortable distance
from angular lines – rather than very close to such lines (I’ll say
that within 150 miles qualifies as ‘very close’, but that’s a general
guideline rather than a hard boundary) – is more often the best
choice. This is because angular planetary lines, when we live
very near to them, give us the full, intense force of any given
planet’s significations according to our unique natal charts – and
most planets in our charts promise more than just lollipops and
gumdrops.
Jim Lewis was well aware that the natal condition of a planet
is important when analyzing A*C*G lines. He knew that not all
Jupiter lines are created equal. But I can understand, when looking
at the emphasis of his teachings, why so many people focus more
on the generic positions, such as VE–ASC, SUN–DSC and so on.
Because even though Lewis explained the more nuanced truth and
the importance of seeing the planet’s situation in the natal chart,
he still focused his teachings and writings on the sheer power of
angular planets in astrocartography.
I’ve learned that living on a major A*C*G line is like turning up
the volume on that planet to ‘11’. In other words, it’s asking that
planet to become so emphasized in your life that you can never get
away from its generic significations (Mars as Mars) and its specific
natal significations (Mars in your chart). Most planets in any chart
exist under a combination of easy and difficult conditions – mixed
bags. Maybe your Mars is in Cancer (its fall or depression), but it’s
also in a trine to Jupiter in Scorpio (a mutual reception) and a tight
square to Moon in Aries (a more complicated mutual reception
because of the square), while ruling the 7th and the 12th Houses
(the 12th being a relatively challenging house, with the 7th being
for the most part an inherently positive house). Living on that Mars
line would likely lead to a lot of intense experiences – sometimes
very enjoyable, other times very unpleasant. This is not just because
Mars can be considered a natural malefic – something we don’t
want to lose sight of – but also because of its specific placement in
the above chart.
A Good Planet Is… Hard to Find
Ideally we could all live close to the angular lines of relatively pristine
planets in our charts. A pristine planet is dignified by sign, ideally
by rulership (i.e. Moon in Cancer), mutual reception or exaltation
(Moon in Taurus), although exaltation is a more complicated
condition which can also indicate some powerful challenges, such
as when the exalted planet rules difficult houses in either tropical
or sidereal astrology (those houses being primarily the 6th, 8th and
12th). A pristine planet should be well aspected and its aspects would
ideally involve harmonious reception (e.g. Sun in Sagittarius trine
Jupiter in Aries; Jupiter rules Sagittarius and the Sun is exalted in
Aries). A pristine planet would rule over the more positive houses
(such as the angles and the 5th and 9th – though different houses
can be considered positive depending on the person’s work and
interests) while not ruling over the more difficult houses. A pristine
planet sits in a positive house where it is also comfortable. A pristine
planet would be disposited by similarly pristine planets, or at least
by planets well positioned overall. Whether a pristine planet should
be direct or retrograde is too complicated to sum up here – it’s not a
simple matter of saying that retrogrades are mostly bad (something
that some traditional Western astrologers say) or that retrogrades
are mostly good (something that many Vedic astrologers say). And
when looking at what makes for a well-placed planet, there are too
many possible considerations to mention. Different astrologers will
focus on different conditions. Some may use midpoints, others may
use the Vedic nakshatras, while others will use the Egyptian terms
and so on.
Traditional astrology gets a bad rap from many astrologers who
don’t understand it. I love modern astrology, but I believe modern
astrologers ought to be able to also use traditional concepts to
become better at making predictions without losing the positive,
humanistic and psychological spirit of modern astrology.
Locational astrologers need to be able to make predictions. We
need to be able to say what we think it would be like for client A to
live on her angular line B. But to make these kinds of predictions
we need to be able to differentiate a complicated, difficult Jupiter
line from a relatively straightforward, positive Jupiter line. Many
concepts from traditional astrology help us to do this. Just as
modern astrologers recognize the difficulty of a planet in a T-square
with Saturn, Chiron or Pluto, traditional astrologers recognize
the difficulty of a planet in its fall with a weak dispositor, who
is involved with challenging reception (e.g. Sun in Gemini trine
Jupiter in Libra), who rules difficult houses while also sitting in a
difficult house. We don’t need to judge any of these conditions as
inherently good or bad; we just need to recognize challenges for
being what they are, as well as for the opportunities they offer.
Close to the Edge? Or Far, Far Away?
Back to angularity in astrocartography. One of the reasons we tend
to focus on the A*C*G lines is because when someone finds a great
line – for his or her unique chart and his or her unique interests
and goals – the results can be spectacularly good. Living on a line
that works well for you can be profoundly life-affirming because it
can give you much stronger connections with other people in that
place. A good angular line can in fact give us a certain amount of
fame, even if just locally. The way this usually manifests is that
we’re more socially or professionally connected, or both, in such
places. We’re not just in the background there; we’re front and
center in the flow of life. Having the volume turned up to ‘11’ can
be great when you really love the song you’re listening to (i.e. when
you work well with the planet in question) and when you want to
be more prominent or more connected to whatever is happening
locally, or perhaps even nationally or internationally.
The problem is that few planets in any given chart work very
well at full volume. And in many charts – perhaps as many as half
the charts I see in my work – there may not be a single planet that
I can recommend turning up to ‘11’. In other words, with roughly
half the clients I work with, no planet comes even close to being
in relatively pristine condition. For example, in charts where hard
aspects predominate, it’s often difficult to recommend any major
lines because if Mars squares your Moon then that aspect will be
profoundly felt and experienced whether the person lives on a
Mars line or a Moon line. And if nearly all of one’s planets are in
difficult squares, oppositions or quincunxes then it will be hard to
find a comfortable place close to a major A*C*G line.
When someone lives on the line of a planet whose condition
is mixed (some nice stuff, some major challenges), all of those
conditions will manifest in that place. It’s like asking the planet
to hit you with its best shot. It’s almost like having a continual
transit from that planet. How many people would like to have a
major Saturn transit every single day? Or a major Jupiter or Venus
transit, for that matter – sometimes you have to be careful what you
wish for.
On the one hand, these conditions will manifest according to
the nature of the line in question. For example, living just east of
a difficult Mars–ASC line will put Mars in the 12th House of the
relocated chart, so its story will play out in a noticeably 12th-House
way. Living just to the west of a Mars–ASC line will put Mars in the
1st House of the relocated chart, so in that case the effects will be
felt most strongly in the 1st House.
But on the other hand, living close to any major Mars line – no
matter which angle – will activate the natal story of Mars, including
its aspects and whichever houses Mars rules natally and whichever
houses it resides in natally.12 All of the planet’s natal conditions will
manifest in such a place, including reception if there is any, essential
dignity or lack thereof, declination, connections with fixed stars,
important midpoints, nakshatras and other Vedic considerations
such as shad bala, terms/bounds, sect and any other factor one can
study and use.
Another consideration is that some people are more likely than
others to enjoy the intensity of angular lines. For example, a younger
person wanting to experience all that life has to offer, including
its lessons, may want to live near his or her major A*C*G lines.
Living near a major line likely means greater successes and greater
failures, though the balance of success and failure will depend on
the unique natal planet in question. On major lines we are likely to
have more significant relationships with more people, so living on
major lines usually leads to more significant friendships; however,
the individual situation has to be taken into consideration – living
on the line of a planet ruling one’s natal 12th may symbolize a good
deal of isolation and hardships instead.
Meanwhile, those who would rather live in relative seclusion
and privacy, or who simply don’t mind being in the background
socially, ought to give serious consideration to not living near a
major A*C*G line. For example, an older person looking to retire
in a place that will be mellow for her, who isn’t concerned about
having a great deal of social prominence, should probably avoid
her major A*C*G lines unless maybe she has one of those pristine
planets in her natal chart and can find those lines somewhere on
habitable land (i.e. not out to sea or in the middle of a war zone).
In my experience it’s more common to find people who say
that they cannot live comfortably on their angular lines. Many
people come to me, I think, because the major line they are living
on is too intense. In some cases these people have been told by
Astro*Carto*Graphers to go and live on these major lines. They may
enjoy the positive things that the major line seems to give them, but
they also find that the problems that come with those major lines
are too much to handle on a daily basis.
Living on a major line is intense, though it can be a very good
kind of intense in the case of a well-placed natal planet; but in most
cases it’s intense in both positive and negative ways. Living far
from major lines is mellow but that can also indicate a place that is
boring or unfulfilling, as well as lacking in social connections. Let’s
think then… how can we get the best of both scenarios? The energy,
activity and connections of a major line as well as the sustainable
mellowness of a place with no major lines?
Often the best solution is to live a moderate distance from a major
line. That way, you can experience some of the positive intensity of
a major line without too much of the negative intensity. And you
can have the more mellow experience of not living terribly close
to a major line, but without the boredom or sense that ‘nothing
is happening’ that can prevail when living too far from angular
planetary lines.
How Far Is Too Far, and How Close Is Too Close?
Now you might be wondering, then how far away should you
be? First, let me restate that if you do have a planet in relatively
pristine condition in your chart, it may be worth trying to live very
close to that line. If you’re in the half of the population13 that has at
least one of these very well-placed planets in your natal chart, you
might still have only one or two such planets (and having four such
planets is probably the most I’ve ever seen – one or two is much
more common according to my way of assessing things). Then you
have to hope you can find a livable place near one of these lines,
in a country where you want to live, with weather you like, where
you can find a good job and on an angle where you’d like to have
that planet.
One more caveat before getting into distance and orbs. The
emphasis on astro-maps has taken the attention of many astrologers
away from relocated natal charts. I think this is really tragic, and
for more than one reason. For example, you may have one of the
nicest Venus placements in creation, but it might also be the case
that when you get that Venus on your ASC, you end up with every
other planet in your relocated chart in either the 12th, 8th or 6th
House: that’s almost certainly not good. Venus would still give you
her wonderful results, but the rest of the relocated chart would
most likely drag you down.
Now the orbs. First, the bad news. Orbs are always debatable
and astrologers rarely agree on them. For example, Jim Lewis said
that individual parans have an orb of influence up to 1.5–2 degrees
of latitude on either side of the line,14 but most practicing locational
astrologers I’ve spoken with use a smaller orb, often 1 degree on
either side, which is the orb I used for many years.15 In recent years,
based on client histories, I’ve started to look only at ½ of a degree of
latitude as my orb for a strong paran, although I still find that there
is some influence up to a full degree of latitude away.
Lewis put his emphasis on maps rather than charts, so he
measured orbs in inches on his maps as well as in miles. He said:
‘On the A*C*G map, the official version, the orb is about 3/8 of an
inch either side of the line and that equates to about 700–800 miles
either side of the line; that’s a huge orb, like 1,500 miles with the
line in the center of it. However, I assure you that the lines are not
nearly as strong if you’re at the edge than if you’re right under the
line.’16
Although he taught that in mundo mapping and mapping
according to zodiacal longitude were ‘both true’,17 he emphasized
a brilliant mapping technique that he pioneered: astronomically
accurate maps that showed lines for actual rising, setting,
culminating and anti-culminating planets in mundo, rather
than astrological ASC, DSC, MC and IC lines. He favored in
mundo mapping so his orbs were distance based and given in
miles.
My practice – which is just a matter of preference – is to look
at maps with lines drawn for zodiacal longitude before looking
at maps drawn in mundo. I probably do it this way because I
emphasize the natal and relocated charts more than maps. The
nice thing about this approach is that it allows you to use an orb
measured in zodiacal longitude, or degrees. When using a degreebased
orb, here’s what I recommend: 8 degrees at most from any
angle in the relocated chart.18 Roughly, any planet within 3 degrees
of an angle has ‘strong’ influence, any planet 3–6 degrees from an
angle has ‘moderate’ influence, and any planet 6–8 degrees from an
angle has a ‘weak’ though still important influence. The numbers
can also be expressed as a fraction or percentage. For example, a
planet 2 degrees from an angle has 75% of its maximum influence,
or 6/8. A planet 3 degrees from an angle has 62.5% of its maximum
influence, or 5/8.
Degree-based orbs aren’t fully sufficient, however, when the in
mundo position of a planet is significantly different from its position
according to zodiacal longitude. For example, Pluto might be 4
degrees from the IC in the relocated chart, which is what I would
say is 50% of a full-strength Pluto line. But in mundo that same Pluto
might go right through the location in question, meaning that it’s at
full strength according to its in mundo position.
A similar problem can happen the other way around, though.
When using distance as the basis for one’s orb when looking at a
map, both in mundo and zodiacal positions have to be considered.
But a zodiacal degree-based orb doesn’t work when looking at a
geographical map drawn in mundo.
Distance-based orbs and zodiacally measured orbs can be hard
to compare like apples to apples, because they’re actually different.
Using my own chart as an example, I’ve seen that when a sign
of long ascension is rising, 8 degrees of zodiacal longitude (from
the ASC) can work out to roughly 525 miles; when a sign of short
ascension is rising, 8 degrees from the ASC can equal less than 300
miles. It’s complicated.
I favor degree-based orbs while mapping with zodiacal positions,
because that’s in keeping with how we read natal charts and because
that’s what I’ve found to work so reliably. In mundo positions are
also very important to consider, though, so in those cases I tend
to ‘eyeball’ the range with a distance-based approach and in that
event I use something like 500 miles as the outer range.19
Okay, now we can get back to what a medium-strength angular
line would be, for those times when we want some of the energy of
a major angular line but without too much intensity, as well as some
of the mellowness of not living too close to major lines but without
too much boredom. Measured in zodiacal longitude, to be safe,
we’re looking at something in the 4–6 degree range for a planet that
we like fairly well; in other words, the planet should be between 4–6
degrees from an angle in the relocated chart. Using 6–8 degrees can
definitely work too, but then the effect is weaker; however, this can
be a safer, better choice when dealing with a natural malefic that we
also like, such as a well-placed Saturn or Mars, or any planet in a
very mixed condition (such as a planet with close, difficult aspects
or some other very challenging condition).
When measuring the same thing using an in mundo map and
distance, 200–350 miles is roughly the equivalent of a 4–6 degree
range, and 350–500 miles is roughly the equivalent of a 6–8 degree
range. Beyond that, in my experience the line isn’t powerful enough
to have a major effect. But I also think it’s harder to be precise
about guidelines for distance-based orbs, so you should use these
distance-based orbs at your own risk.
A Chart Has Twelve Houses, Not Just Four Angles
Now the ironic thing for me is that in getting into a critique of
some commonly held ideas about Astro*Carto*Graphy, I’ve so far
ended up doing one of the things I wanted to warn people away
from: putting too much emphasis on the angular lines. It’s true
that the angular lines are by far the most powerful influences, so
it’s very important to know how they work and how to work with
them. But one of the big problems with Astro*Carto*Graphy as it is
commonly practiced is that many people think so much about their
angular lines and not nearly enough about the rest of the positions
in the relocated chart.
It could also be said that many people focus on the angular lines
to the exclusion of local space, parans or geodetics. All of these
things are very important. But I’ve found that the relocated chart
itself is an incredibly important tool and it’s one that is ignored by
too many.
I don’t have the scope in this essay to go into great detail about
how I work with the relocated natal chart. I’m working on a
locational astrology book that I hope to complete sometime in 2012
or 2013, and I’ll be focusing on relocated natal charts a great deal in
that book. For now, I’ll leave you with a simple, powerful traditional
technique for analyzing a relocated natal chart, something as basic
and fundamental as it gets.
Look at the condition and
position of the ruler of the
ASC in the relocated chart.
If Libra is rising in the
relocated chart and Venus
is in the 12th House
in her fall in Virgo
dealing with some very
hard aspects, you’ll
definitely want to make
a note of it because
Venus’s placement will
tell a reliably potent story
about what it would be
like for the individual to live
in that location. In this location
the person may feel intensely isolated,
invisible to others or unpopular. He or she might feel extremely
limited by financial conditions, or might have harsh experiences
with intense or critical women. There may be a powerful feeling of
entrapment, in general, or of being stuck in menial roles or difficult
working conditions.
If Scorpio is rising and Mars is in Capricorn in the 3rd House
and well aspected, then Mars’s dignity will shine through in the 3rd
House (for better or worse, but most likely for the better overall in
this case) and that symbolism will describe a great deal about what
the individual would experience living in that location. Maybe
he or she will have a powerful drive to write, or to study some
subject or to focus on creativity – which will lead to significant
success or notoriety. Maybe the person will very effectively
use communications technology, make good
use of a scientific mind or communicate clear and
specific ideas through his or her work. On
the downside, maybe this person will argue
too much with others or have intensely
competitive relationships with siblings or friends.
Maybe ambition and too much work, or too much mental energy
or long commutes and too much traveling will become a problem, leading to a major imbalance.
For extra credit do the above in both tropical and sidereal
astrology. It’s not hard to do after you’ve practiced it. Just consider
the placement of the ruler of the ASC in the sidereal zodiac as well
as in the tropical zodiac and blend whatever you find, similar to
how you would blend different bits of information in any given
chart.
Maybe the person who has Libra Rising and Venus in Virgo
in tropical astrology has, in the same location, Virgo Rising with
Mercury in Virgo in the 1st House in sidereal astrology. That would
change the picture quite a bit, wouldn’t it? Although we would still
expect the challenges shown by the Libra Ascendant with Venus
in Virgo, the sidereal picture shows a very different story. We’d
expect the person to be able to experience great success in a realm
signified by Mercury or Virgo. Maybe the person still feels trapped
and unloved (Venus in Virgo in the 12th), but nonetheless enjoys a
great education or has a shrewd business sense that leads to a good
income (Mercury in Virgo in the 1st) – along with great expenditures
or losses (Venus in Virgo in the 12th). Maybe the person finds a
good job that requires good organizational ability or technological
knowledge (Mercury in Virgo in the 1st), but has major problems
with female co-workers harming her reputation behind her back
(Venus in Virgo in the 12th).
Our knowledge of astrology will always be imperfect. While
technical proficiency is a wonderful goal, we’re flawed human
beings and there will always be a great deal more we don’t know.
Still, we should always do our best for each client and we should
study and research our craft as much as we can, because our work
can change someone’s life in dramatic fashion, for better or worse.
We have to develop our humanity, because with some compassion
and wisdom we can hope to make a positive difference in others’
lives. Technical knowledge is precious but it is not as useful as a
kind heart, a receptive ear and a humble spirit. Always do your
best.
References and Notes
1. Martin Davis, From Here to There, The Wessex Astrologer, 2008, pp.
11–12.
2. Ibid., p. 1. This includes, but is not limited to, correlating nations with
zodiacal qualities. Also see footnote 7 on Wynn.
3. I have spent a considerable amount of energy researching this topic
and I’ve spoken with Kenneth Irving, among others, about who
first developed and wrote about the techniques of astrocartography.
As far as I can tell at this time, Cyril Fagan seems to be the most
deserving of credit for at least being the first to write about the basic
approach of astrocartography for relocation purposes. And some
of the other astrologers who are sometimes credited for developing
astrocartography tend to be siderealists who were friends of Cyril
Fagan, such as Firebrace, Duncan and Bradley. To me the evidence
points toward astrocartography, as we generally think of it today,
coming out of this group, with Fagan the most likely candidate for
the lion’s share of gratitude. I’ll continue to research this topic for my
upcoming book on locational astrology.
4. Charles Jayne, Considerations magazine, Volume XIX, No. 1, p. 10. The
article was written in 1985 but published in 2004. See http://issuu.
com/considerations/docs/19-1
5. Cyril Fagan, The Solunars Handbook, 1976, p. 101. The Solunars Handbook
is a collection of excerpts from Fagan’s 1953–1970 ‘Solunars’ column in
American Astrology.
6. In mundo maps show astronomically correct rising, setting,
culminating and anti-culminating positions for the planetary lines,
rather than lines that correspond to zodiacal longitude, i.e. the ASC,
DSC, MC and IC.
7. Wynn, in his own astrological magazine Wynn’s Astrology, published
a map in August, 1941 with mundane concerns related to World War
II and Adolf Hitler; this map included some personal lines for Hitler,
but those lines were geodetic positions rather than angular planets for
Hitler (i.e. not A*C*G). Martin Davis writes that in 1957–58 Donald
178 Moses Siregar III
Bradley published a hand-plotted map showing the rising, setting and
culminating lines of all the planets (around the entire world) for the
1958 sidereal ingress of the Sun into Capricorn.
8. Jim Lewis, transcript from his ‘Professional Training and Certification
Seminar’, 1993, p. 7 (produced by Continuum, edited and transcribed
by Karen McCauley and Lori Osborne, June 1998).
9. Ibid., p. 22.
10. Ibid., p. 15.
11. Ibid., p. 50.
12. I say, ‘whichever houses it resides in’, because it may reside in more
than one house natally when we consider multiple house systems.
13. Pardon my gross estimation.
14. Lewis seminar, op. cit., p. 33.
15. One degree of latitude can be anywhere from 68.703 miles to 69.407
miles because of the Earth’s slightly ellipsoid shape. So about 69 miles
or 111 km.
16. Lewis seminar, op. cit., p. 26.
17. Ibid., p. 25.
18. I’ve had people try to convince me that 9 degrees is a better orb,
but I just haven’t seen that angular planets have noticeable enough
influence beyond 8 degrees.
19. And it may be the case that we should use different distance orbs
with in mundo positions depending on how quickly the ASC/DSC axis
is moving in any given region at any given time.