Steve & Jim - examples of mundane angle contacts

[Jim Eshelman]

From a conversation with Steve this morning, it occurred to me to give another example of how to use the following new tool in synastry:
http://solunars.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=1544

The question, not fully resolved in my mind, is whether synastry contacts of one person's planets to another's angles should be taken mundanely or ecliptically. To dig into this, we need to look at examples. I posted the John Dee vs. Queen Elizabeth example above, and it had some fascinating mundane angular contacts that don't appear in the ecliptical contacts. It's only one case, though... so we should look at more.

Take, for example, Steve's chart in comparison to mine. First, let's note some important ecliptical contacts to angles:

2°20' Vir J's Asc
2°50' Vir S's Sun
7°27' Vir S's Venus

27°55' Lib S's Asc
29°42' Lib S's Jupiter
1°53' Sco J's Venus

These are all quite good and fine as they stand. They show strong marks of friendship, mutual affection, and respect, which is a nice context for, say, our partile Mars-Mars opposition (that has usually worked out like team mates on the same competitive team rather than as conflict). (There are other aspects, too, but they don't apply to the present questions. Our charts are available to anyone on this forum, so of course feel free to look on your own.)

And we know without looking that Steve's Sun to my Asc is going to be the same mundanely as ecliptically (Sun always has no latitude), and his Venus won't get a lot closer. The interesting one is the question of whether my Venus gets closer to his Asc and even to his Jupiter. Maybe it's a bad example because the aspects are all fine either way, but I wanted to check it anyway.

So, grab a copy of the spreadsheet linked above and make one for Steve - using the ST, latitude, etc. of my birth chart on tab 1 - and one for me, using the ST, latitude, etc. of Steve's birth chart on tab 1, and here's what we get:

0°00' J's Asc
0°29' S's Sun
4°29' S's Venus

Notice that the Venus is, indeed, a little closer, but, as expected, not much. (About half a degree.) Anyone using a 5° orb would not have counted it ecliptically, and would have counted it mundanely, but they're about the same.

0°0' S's Asc
1°30' S's Jupiter
6°27' J's Venus

For this one, the orbs get wider. This chart pair is a better argument for taking these ecliptically. For example, my Venus conjoins Steve's Jupiter 2°11' ecliptically and almost 5° mundanely - the ecliptical between the planets is much better. My Venus is about 4° from his Ascendant ecliptically and six and a half degrees mundanely - again, the ecliptical is better.

So... this gives the opposite leaning as the Dee-Elizabeth charts. It isn't a perfect example, because the contacts are all arguably valid either way we measure it. Nonetheless, the relevant orbs are tighter on this example ecliptically.

This is just me doing the foot soldier work of cranking out one example after another.

[Jim Eshelman]

I might as well add Marion's and my charts here as well. This one has a heavy pro-ecliptic bias from the start, because her local Asc is only 0°04' from conjunct my Moon. Nonetheless, let's break down what else is there.

Ecliptically, we get the following:

1°53' Sco J's Venus
4°53' Sco M's Dsc

27°31' Ari M's Mercury
1°38' Tau J's L MC
1°53' Sco J's Venus
2°06' Sco J's Pluto
3°51' Leo M's Mars
5°13' Leo J's L Asc
7°07' Leo M's Uranus

15°59' Leo M's Moon
27°24' Aqu J's Moon
28°28' Aqu M's L Asc

Now let's compare this to the mundane contacts.

22°42' J's Venus [This is much wider than 3°00' ecliptical]
0°00' M's Dsc

24°05' J's Pluto
26°40' M's Mercury
28°15' M's Mars
28°51' J's Venus
0°00' J's L MC, L Asc
1°42' M's Uranus

25°57' J's Moon [This is MUCH wider from angle than ecliptical 0°04']
27°01' M's Moon [This adds a mundane Moon-Moon op. we don't otherwise have]
0°00' M's L Asc

Two of the three sets heavily favor the ecliptical. The really interesting one, though, is Marion's planets around my local angles, primarily because of the new aspects that appear. For angularity, Her Mercury to my local MC is about the same either way, same with her Mars and Uranus to my local Asc.

For aspects, though, notice that her Mercury is < 3° of square my Pluto, instead of about 5° (it fits). Her Mars is slightly farther from my Pluto mundanely (I could argue this either way). A really fitting aspect is that her Mercury comes within 2°11' of conjunct my Venus instead of double that (4°22'). Her Mars square my Venus, already close (1°58') ecliptically and on both of our angles, is a 0°36' conjunction (hard to distinguish, because it is super powerful either way, maybe no practical difference). Also, her Uranus is much closer to my Venus, being 5°14' ecliptically and 2°51' mundanely.

So, it's a mixed bag. Most of the angularities are unchanged or favor ecliptical. Aspects between planets, though, have quite a few difference, especially with aspects appearing or tightening mundanely, and that especially in the local charts.

Again, just doing the foot soldier work of checking case after case after case.

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

Again, just doing the foot soldier work of checking case after case after case.

Everybody needs a good 'foot soldier' learning Sidereal Astrology.

[Arena]

Marion has a Mars-Uranus conj wrapped around your local ASC? How does that work out for you guys? Do you fight a lot? Is she brutally honest and brings out adventure in you?

[Jim Eshelman]

We almost never fight at all, if by "fight" you mean something with acrimony. We are both bold, direct etc. and match on that quite well. Direct, say what's there good or bad.

It also squares' here natal Asc, Mars closer and, yes, she's known for extreme candor that some people think of as brutal.

Her Uranus is also exactly semi-square my Sun. Years into the relationship, it is rare that it doesn't have the feel that it's new.

[Arena]

Her Uranus is also exactly semi-square my Sun. Years into the relationship, it is rare that it doesn't have the feel that it's new.

Ok Jim, but what you say here can also be explained simply by her Uranus on your ASC. I don't like semi or sesqi ... it just doesn't sound real to me

[Jim Eshelman]

Her Uranus is also exactly semi-square my Sun. Years into the relationship, it is rare that it doesn't have the feel that it's new.

Ok Jim, but what you say here can also be explained simply by her Uranus on your ASC. I don't like semi or sesqi ... it just doesn't sound real to me

Sure. But the other is closer. Semi-squares and sesqui-squares are quite potent in synastry, as in transits. In fact some of our most important interchanges are 45 and 135, including her Uranus to my Sun (0°21'), her Sun to my Mars (0°06'), and her Jupiter to my Venus (1°58')

Your interpretation ignores the fact that I perceived her the same way when we knew each other in locations thousands of miles different. That is, it refers to conditions here, but not to the permanent relationship or circumstances when we wander away from here, even though those are times when the Uranus affect is even more pronounced.