The 45 U.S. Presidents to date have the following natal Moon-sign characteristics:
HIGH: Sagittarius (7 times)
LOW: Aquarius (0 times)
Second-highest occurrence is Leo (6) with Aries third (5), so the political, ambitious, commanding "Fire" signs account for 18 of 45 examples (40%), instead of the expected 25%. (Second lowest is Pisces with 1.)
Using this as a baseline, let's examine the Novien placements. These are really extreme swings! The probability is an even 1/12 odds of the Moon being in any given Novien. Here are the highs and lows:
HIGH:
7 in Aries
6 in Capricorn
5 in Virgo, Pisces
LOW: 1 in Aquarius
One of the "Fire" signs takes the lead and, most interestingly, the least-common natal Moon-sign is also the least-common Novien Moon sign.
As a contrast, let's look at these as Navamsas. (All we have to do is roll everything back a trine.) We get:
HIGH:
7 in Sagittarius
6 in Virgo
5 in Taurus, Scorpio
LOW: 1 in Libra
The high, Sagittarius, is the same as the most-frequent natal Moon sign (though that's where the similarity ends).
I'm unclear what conclusions, if any, to draw from these. Because most of the patterns are triplicity related, and triplicity is preserved between the Navamsa and Novien, there does not seem a huge distinction.
The simplest comparative breakdown is:
NOVIEN HIGH: Aries, Capricorn (Virgo, Pisces)
NOVIEN LOW: Aquarius
NAVAMSA HIGH: Sagittarius, Virgo (Taurus, Scorpio)
NAVAMSA LOW: Libra
Neither of these breakouts really resembles the natal Moon patterns for the same group, though there are a couple of interesting similarities.
STUDY - U.S. Presidents - Navamsa vs. Novien
- Jim Eshelman
- Are You Sirius?
- Posts: 19062
- Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm
- Jim Eshelman
- Are You Sirius?
- Posts: 19062
- Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm
Re: STUDY - U.S. Presidents - Navamsa vs. Novien
I just updated the above to include all intervening presidents. In the course of doing so, I also automatically incorporated any "improved" birth data.
I still do not see this as giving us any decisive information.
I still do not see this as giving us any decisive information.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
www.jeshelman.com