Arena wrote: Thu May 23, 2019 6:27 am
Mars partile 0,04 square SSR EP.
I'm sure you will find that this, on which you focussed later in your post, is not a valid contact. The point we write as "Eastpoint" in the chart is not a valid ecliptical point - it's just an approximation of where squares to MC occur
in right ascension.
The ecliptical squares to MC do represent
theoretical angles which, however, don't stand up on investigation. They are the 4th/10th house cusps in Morinus, called the upper and lower Midequator (ME), and represent drawing a great circle through the Eastpoint at right angles to the
equator (instead of the ecliptic), and then seeing where this intersects the
ecliptic. Though it sounds like a bit of a bastard calculation, all sorts of "intersections" are theoretically valid, so I took a few months a couple of years ago and tested it. Besides casual watching by transits to birth charts, I did an intensive look at a thousand or so mundane charts (which have proven our single best tool in assessing angular structures). I found that overall the effects, in those charts where they could be distinguished from other angularities (i.e., not simply "also on IC"), their apparent effect was random and often contradictory.
Which is a long way of saying: Relax, there's nothing to ecliptical squares to the EP.
This is really a quite lovely, benefic, even
soft Solar Return. I'll give a full work-up in the next post. While relationship
changes (evolutions) are very much in play, these rise from evolutions inside of you that are unfolding through the year that may (or may not) work out as
circumstantial (event) changes.
IF natal relocated chart is considered it gets more interesting since the t. Uranus will be so close to rel. EP, and it also puts t. Venus square to that rel EP.
Contacts of SSR planets to local natal angles are indeed important. That would apply to the Uranus, but not the Venus (since squares to EP aren't valid). - I probably woukd make an exception in this case, because Venus' square
to Uranus is valid: WI wouldn't take it as an angular Venus, I'd take it as an aspect to Uranus answering the question "And exactly what kind of transiting Uranus do we expect?"
Not only that, but this also shows the SSR ASC partile my n. Venus with n. Jup on the opposite side
Yes! That's the main feature of the chart. (That, and your Pluto somewhat widely square Asc.) That's the lovely expression I mentioned above. When I calculate the angularity orbs, I'll know for sure whether I can say it's the main feature of the chart. (That and transiting Jupiter being the
only foreground planet in the Solar Return itself.)