Solunars by Aldebaran Sidereal Academy

There is always a bit of talk about the "Age of Aquarius" in astrological circles. Ironically, Tropicalists seem into this topic, considering the tropical longitude of the VP is 0 Aries 0' 0" for all time by definition. The most common Tropicalist answer boils down to "The sidereal zodiac is valid for determining astrological ages and for no other purpose". I will be kind and settle for calling that last statement {bs}.

OTOH, I would be interested in hearing some thoughts from a Sidereal perspective.

• Do astrological ages have any significance? If not, we can skip the rest of the questions.
• Is the change of ages a gradual process over centuries or is it fairly abrupt?
• Is it needful, helpful, or at least interesting to know the day and the hour?
• Is that hour when the sidereal longitude of the VP is 30 Aquarius 0' 0", or some other.

My own take on these questions:

• Not much, but maybe just a little.
• Gradual.
• Interesting, but not important.
• When the VP enters Aquarius. My guess is July 4, 2376 per the James Hynes SVP tables booklet. This date I regard as an amusing coincidence and no more, and may be just a little bit off--we may be able to calculate the SVP more accurately in 2017 than Hynes was able to.

mikestar13 wrote: Fri Sep 22, 2017 4:53 pm Do astrological ages have any significance? If not, we can skip the rest of the questions.

Maybe. There is at least some indication that the Vernal Point is a valid chart factor in its own right, of the same sort as, say, the lunar nodes, so it is highly conceivable that its sign position is relevant. It's also easy to conceive of the last 18 centuries as extremely Piscean, and the two millennia before that has more Arietian (e.g., more uniformly imperial).

So... maybe.

Is the change of ages a gradual process over centuries or is it fairly abrupt?

100% of all evidence known to me points to there being no fuzziness whatsoever about sign cusps. While there could conceivably be "leader" adaptation and setup, this doesn't really match how sign crossings work. So the actual effect would be expected to begin when the equinoxes move into Aquarius-Leo.

In fact, there's something I just realized about this "no cusp-fuzzies" principle: It explains why Sidereal ingresses have no "lead time," but solar and lunar returns do: They aren't the same kind of phenomenon. Lunar returns routinely are operative about 24 hours before they occur. Ingresses don't appear to be operative even one minute before they occur. This suddenly makes sense on realizing that solar and lunar returns are formed by aspects - a luminary conjoining its natal position - and aspects are gradual phenomena that flow in to maximum effect and flow out again. One feels them coming (in all forms) before they are exact. Ingresses, on the other hand, are actual sign entries, and signs appear to have no vagueness about their boundaries. The difference between 29°59'60" of one sign and 0°00'00" of the next is a quantum leap.

Is it needful, helpful, or at least interesting to know the day and the hour?

Maybe theoretically, but I doubt it matters in practice. Conceivably an Equinox Ingress chart could be a valid chart, but (aside from the theoretical problem of calculating the right time), I'm skeptical of its importance.

Is that hour when the sidereal longitude of the VP is 30 Aquarius 0' 0", or some other.

That's the theory

...July 4, 2376 per the James Hynes SVP tables booklet. This date I regard as an amusing coincidence and no more, and may be just a little bit off--we may be able to calculate the SVP more accurately in 2017 than Hynes was able to.

There are calculation fuzzies. The movement is so slow that the slightest error would throw calculations off, and any small changes in, say, lunar perturbations would change the actual nutation. (For that matter, a sufficiently large nuclear explosion could shift the obliquity a hair, and that would make a big difference.)

Mike, you raise some very interesting questions. According to the scholars, Giorgio De Santillana & Hertha Von Dechend in their book (a very dense read) Hamlet's Mill:

The Precession Cycle and its ages determines world-ages, each numbering thousands of years. Each age brings a World Era, a Twilight of the Gods. Great structures collapse, pillars topple which once supported great fabrics; floods and all kinds of cataclysms herald the shaping of new precessional worlds (ages).

Indeed precession is a very slow process which appears meaningless. As for myself, I put my faith in the ancient sages endeavoring to understand their symbolism left with their ancient monuments pertaining to any sound astronomical discoveries about Precession.

Hamlet's Mill is a volume of work proving with all the great ancient myths, the Precession Cycle was deemed of vast importance ushering in alternating dark and enlighten historical precessional ages. When the time is right for me, I will try to come back to your thread and offer more what I have absorbed about the Precession Cycle. There is indeed some very interesting (new discoveries) about the Precession Cycle. IMO, Giza Monuments represent a precise Precessional Clock and is indeed a great mystery, and Fagan/Allen equal 30 degree division of the Sidereal Zodiac is a huge key imo, for seeing/understand what the monuments on Giza represent pertaining to the Precessional Cycle. As to the exact meaning of this Giza Precessional Clock--its any ones guess. I think as human kind gets closer to 30 degree Aquarius (2369 AD) (the actual beginning zero point) of Sidereal Aquarius using Fagan/Allen (Bradley) Sidereal Zodiac--more will slowly be revealed to the consciousness of humans.

Nobody can actually answer your question about the VP since there are different opinions on that. It is not sure that the astrological age is measured by the exact date that VP is 30° Aquarius, since a lot of people believe it should be the sign seen at heliacal rising at the spring equinox (the sign you actually can see in the night sky just before the Sun comes up to the horizon).

The heliacal rising constellation at the vernal equinox is based on the last zodiacal constellation rising above the Eastern Horizon just before dawn and before the light of the approaching Sun obliterates the stars on the eastern horizon. Currently at the vernal equinox the constellation of Aquarius has been the heliacal rising constellation for some centuries. The stars disappear about one hour before dawn depending upon magnitude, latitude, and date.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrological_age

There is evidence that suggests that the heliacal rising was the measurement used.

As many testimonials of ancient astronomy show, the first morning visibility of a star or constellation, i.e. the heliacal rising, was the most important observation used for temporal orientation.

http://cura.free.fr/xxv/21sepp2.html

The archeo-astronomer Sepp Rothwangl in Considerations About the Start of the Age of Aquarius[11] claims that, in ancient times, a new constellation rising on the eastern horizon before Sunrise on the morning of the Northern Hemisphere spring equinox was the main criterion for the start of a New Age. Rothwangl also states that such a change from Pisces to Aquarius has already occurred, thus indicating the arrival of the new Age of Aquarius.
...
in 2016 at the vernal equinox, the Sun (VP) sits in the constellation of Pisces, though the constellation of Pisces cannot be seen. The Vernal Point will remain in the constellation of Pisces for many more centuries. However, if you are awake one hour before dawn, when the stars are still visible on the eastern horizon, the last stars seen rising up from the eastern horizon before the sky turns blue is the constellation of Aquarius.
...
Therefore, the constellation of Aquarius is currently the visible heliacal rising constellation. The constellation of Aquarius has been the visible heliacal rising constellation for centuries. The conundrum is that, based on the Vernal Point located in the constellation of Pisces, we are supposedly in the Age of Pisces and will remain so for many centuries while based on the visible heliacal rising of the constellation of Aquarius, we are in the Age of Aquarius and have been in the Age of Aquarius for centuries. The latter assertion is substantiated by historians who claim the arrival of Modernity occurred about 500 years ago

https://macroastro.wordpress.com/tag/vi ... al-rising/

The method Arena describes would not seem to lend itself to as crisp a date as VP 30 Aquarius, though this is not an argument against it. I've read less crisp definitions. In a early siderealist source (I forget which) the author wrote something like "the ancients would have regarded it as being the age of Taurus as long as the first new moon of the year(year beginning at the equinox) occurred as a rule in Taurus."

For clarity, due to uncertainties in calculation, we can't know the exact day and hour of VP 30 Aquariums now (as Jim described), but can estimate circa 2370 with an an uncertainty of a decade or three, not several centuries. We will of course know it fairly exactly when it happens. We can predict the VP's position on 1/1/2018 (for example) with very, very near certainty. So we can regard VP 30 Aquarius as exact in principal. This presupposes the Fagan-Bradley calculation of the SVP is correct, which I am entirely certain.

But if the astrological ages have a gradual transition rather than an abrupt one, maybe a method which produces a less crisp date would be better.

I am quite mindful of Jim's description of how sign ingresses work, and fully agree with him. The Tropical Sun Sign"Astrology" notion of "born on the cusp"
originates from the unwitting observation by TSSA's perpetrators that while most (tropical) Geminis are actually (sidereal) Tauruses some really are Geminis.

Again, all of this depends on astrological ages being meaningful.

mikestar13 wrote: Sat Sep 23, 2017 10:50 am For clarity, due to uncertainties in calculation, we can't know the exact day and hour of VP 30 Aquariums now (as Jim described), but can estimate circa 2370 with an an uncertainty of a decade or three, not several centuries.

Actually, no, we can get much closer. It is very nearly July 4, 2376. Barring very extreme planetary shifting in the meantime (that would likely be so severe as to destabilize, if not threaten, human existence), this wouldn't move by more than a few days - a few weeks in extreme condition. If Solar Fire calculated to better than a second, or even rounded differently, I'd give a "best current calculation" date, but it's quite close to the Hynes calculation.

The other problem with this is that... just maybe... the SVP is 1" off. It's no more than 2", and probably no more than 1", and normally I wouldn't recommend any change at all. But the tests I ran (with many times the amount of data Bradley first use) both came out to shifting (to the nearest second) 1" in the same direction. The only place we might ever see this matter is in the displacement by a couple of weeks of a sign-transition of the vernal point - that none of us will live to see.

Trying to get a little geekier on this:

Solar Fire rounds the last digit, so that an SVP of 0°00'00" Pisces is anything between 0°00'00.5" Pisces and 29°59'59.5" Aquarius. It doesn't flip and give us assign change to 30°00'00" or 29°59'60" Aquarius he way I'd like.

But maybe we can fake it and get close - depending, of course, on obliquity not changing, delta T (for UT to ET conversion) not flying out of range (as it surely will do), and Solar Fire minor calculation shortcomings (which might be there, though I have no evidence they are there).

Anyway... For 0:00 UT, SF gives SVP July 5, 2376 as 0°00'01" Pisces, and July 6 as 0°00'00" Pisces. That means (if we act as if all the calculations are correct) it flips past 0°00'00.5 sometime on July 5. It still has 0°00'00" Pisces at 0:00 UT on July 8, but has 29°59'59" Aquarius for the start of July 9, so it crosses 29°59'59.5" sometime on July 8. That means (based on these calculations) it crosses from Pisces to Aquarius sometime late on July 6 or early on July 7.

Delta T is the least stable factor in all of these calculations (as you know if you've every seen a chart of even the last century or two of Delta T shifts). They estimate 940 seconds (about 15 minutes of time), which, if accurate, is no big deal (narrower than our possible calculation range); but there is no particular reason to think we actually know what Delta T will be three and a half centuries in the future.

But, playing along with the fiction...

Getting more granular in our calculations, I find that the SF SVP shifts from 0°00'01" Pisces to 0°00'00" July 5 at 23:24 UT. It then shifts form 0°00'00" Pisces to 29°59'59" Aquarius July 8, 15:42 UT. Motion is probably pretty linear, so we can average these two and - with all the caveats about imprecision above - get a date and time of July 7, 2376, 7:33 UT.

By the purest of one-chance-in-twelve coincidence, the Moon is in Aquarius at the time. If there is any astrological validity to the vernal point's sign position, one surely would think that the world would especially feel a little more Aquarius-like in the two to three days surrounding this transition. One might even take the most meaningful transition as being Moon's Aquarius ingress, which occurs July 4, 2376, 8:10 AM EST in Washington, DC - subject, of course, to any variations in Delta T over current projections.

Mike, it just occurred to me that you have routines in place for calculating SVP, and could give it to us to, say, thousandths of a second for 0:00 on these few days?

Hmm, since looking back may give us something more to go on, I might as well give the same treatment to the Pisces Age. At least we know Delta T values reasonably well, and some of the other irregularities are evened out.

Solar Fire's transition from 0°00'01" to 0°00'00" Aries occurred between May 17, 221 AD, 19:40 UT. It passed from 0°00'00" Aries to 29°59'59" Pisces May 20, 221 AD, 19:52 UT. The cut-over, then, was theoretically their midpoint, May 19, 221 AD, 3:46 UT.

The closest aspect in the whole chart is Venus square Neptune - also Uranus (which is opposite Sun) trine Neptune. One could argue from the astro-map that it shows a cultural shift to central Europe and a suppression of the near Middle East, then eventually a leadership specifically in Washington... it's all quite clear in the map... except this would presume not only an exact, to parts of a second, precision in the SVP, but also unfailing calculations and, especially, precision in the Delta T value, which was over 2 hours at the time by best modern determinations.

Jim Eshelman wrote: Sat Sep 23, 2017 11:28 am ...Mike, it just occurred to me that you have routines in place for calculating SVP, and could give it to us to, say, thousandths of a second for 0:00 on these few days?

What I have is the ability to programmatically access the Swiss Ephemeris dll's (on which Solar Fire is based) and calculate the unrounded value of the ayanamsa for those dates, which converts trivially to SVP. This will give us values to whatever accuracy the Swiss Ephemeris is capable of. I need a bit of time to write a very simple program, and to download some ephemeris files from astro.com which cover the relevant dates. I only have the set that covers the current time period, as I haven't cast any charts from 2000 years ago. My existing self-written astrology software uses the unrounded ayanamsa value internally but doesn't export it, so something new (but quite easy to write) will be needed.

Maybe I should get off my a** and get back to coding a precessed mundoscope tool while I'm at it. But in any case, I will have those SVP positions in a couple of days and will post them to this thread.

With some caveats, the Swiss Ephemeris dll calculates the SVP at 30 Aquarius 0' 0" on June 16, 2376 at 17:54:28 UT to the nearest second.

First this assumes that I have followed the Swiss Ephemeris programmers documentation about how to account for nutation correctly. I think this is likely, but far from certain--the instructions are rather complex. I am pretty sure a nutation correction is needed: using the raw return value of the get_ayanamsa dll function gives a March 21, 2376 date.

Also, at some point (2006?), the Swiss Ephemeris switched to using a more modern method of calculating precession and nutation than was available to Hynes. I don't know if the Solar Fire version Jim has is using the Swiss Ephemeris dll that uses the new method or not. The difference in arc would be quite small, but could make a few days difference in time. I will do some more research at astro.com and publish what I find.

Thanks, Mike. If you want another way to check nutation, do you have the Stahl SVP ephemeris? It has a table in the back for calculating nutation.

Jim Eshelman wrote: Sun Sep 24, 2017 12:59 am Thanks, Mike. If you want another way to check nutation, do you have the Stahl SVP ephemeris? It has a table in the back for calculating nutation.

I never had a copy, just the Hynes booklet, which I've lost in the mists of quite a few moves over the decades. The research is fascinating and I will need it for precessed mundoscopes anyway (though ignoring nutation may be "accurate enough" in that case--which my Pisces Sun is OK with, but my Aries Moon conjuct Mercury, not so much.)

Jim Eshelman wrote: Sat Sep 23, 2017 11:28 am Solar Fire rounds the last digit...

There is a setting in SF (I believe it's in Preferences) to turn off rounding, so that it reports the lower minute or second of arc. I set this early on, so I don't get false reports of a planet/point being in the next constellation in the occasional marginal case.

One can create a VP ephemeris at intervals of every hour or minute; I have done this. Maybe it's possible to have SF create VP ingress (egress, actually) charts but I'll have to do that when I get home - unless someone beats me to it.

-Derek

mikestar13 wrote: Sat Sep 23, 2017 10:50 am In a early siderealist source (I forget which) the author wrote something like "the ancients would have regarded it as being the age of Taurus as long as the first new moon of the year(year beginning at the equinox) occurred as a rule in Taurus."

Fagan, always challenging conventions and getting people to think of things in different ways. is probably the source you're thinking of. I believe he published this in a Solunars article in 1959. I can confirm the exact issue when I get home.

Arena wrote: Sat Sep 23, 2017 8:54 am It is not sure that the astrological age is measured by the exact date that VP is 30° Aquarius, since a lot of people believe it should be the sign seen at heliacal rising at the spring equinox (the sign you actually can see in the night sky just before the Sun comes up to the horizon).

Fagan had this covered, too. He was always reminding his readers that ancient astrology was visual, and in an alternative theory he suggested the constellation of the rising Full Moon, not merely the rising constellation itself. Details, again, after I get home.

-Derek

DDonovanKinsolving wrote: Sun Sep 24, 2017 8:23 am

Jim Eshelman wrote: Sat Sep 23, 2017 11:28 am Solar Fire rounds the last digit...

There is a setting in SF (I believe it's in Preferences) to turn off rounding, so that it reports the lower minute or second of arc. I set this early on, so I don't get false reports of a planet/point being in the next constellation in the occasional marginal case.

It's called "Round angles instead of truncating," and doesn't apply to sign changes regrettably. The values go from, e.g., 0°00'00" Pisces to 29°59'59" Aquarius. At the time they change signs, it would be nice to have them go to 30°00'00" (or 29°59'60") Aquarius.

One can create a VP ephemeris at intervals of every hour or minute; I have done this.

Great idea! I missed the obvious and did it manually by narrowing to a time range and doing a new chart for every minute until it changed.

Yes, ancient astrology was visual.

But Astrological Ages is a quite modern idea that I can't trace any earlier than late 1800s. I think it arose from the "turn of the century" approach to 1900 and Queen Victoria's likely (and then actual) death.

After a much more extensive perusing of the Swiss Ephemeris programming documentation:

1. The function get_ayanamsa already accounts for nutation in longitude, so no additional adjustment is required for SVP ingresses. With that in mind, the Swiss Ephemeris has the SVP at 30 Aquarius 0' 0.000000" on March 21,2376 at 11:20:28 UT to the nearest second. This is the day after the vernal equinox of 2376. I have been unable to discover anything additional to explain the discrepancy with Solar Fire.

2. Correction for nutation in obliquity will be needed for the precessed mundoscope. I have a bit more learning to do.

Solar Fire can compute the conjunction of the Vernal Point with the beginning of sidereal Pisces this way:

1. Create a points files containing “Vp.” I named mine simply “SVP.”

2. In SF, go to Dynamic > Transits & Progressions.

3. Set the start date to Jan. 1 2376 and the search length for 1 year. Set a location. Tic the selections “Transits to Transits” and “Sign Ingress.” Under Point Selection, Transits, enter “SVP.” Under Aspect Selection, enter Harm01 (or whichever file you prefer containing a conjunction).

4. Select “View.” The calculations will begin and the entry will display. Click on “View Chart”. I got July 8, 2376 15:34:10 UT.

All of this comes with Mr. E.'s caveats about accuracy, revised mathematical models, and the uncertainties of relevance.

-Derek

It was in the May 1959 issue of American Astrology that Fagan counter-proposed that Astrological Ages were marked by the background constellation of the visual New Moon. He asserted, without a supporting citation, “The true beginning of an Age was sought among the dates when the crescent moon of the 1st Nisan, which commenced the ecclesiastical 'New Year's Day,' was seen to fall consistently among the stars of the constellation that indicated the 'New Age.'” He then gave a listing of then-recent visual New Moons:

1st Nisan Began at Sunset at Babylon
Gregorian: Long. New Moon
1957 April 1: Aries 1°48'
1958 March 21: Pisces 19 35
1959 April 8: Pisces 29 21
1960 March 28: Pisces 29 30

He says, “Viewed in this light it is apparent ... that we are not yet [out] of the Arien Age and are in fact only beginning to enter the Piscian Age...” He goes on to say: “In effect this means that during the last two thousand years or so, the world has been living in the Iron Age of Aries, ruled by Mars, the god of violence, wars and dictatorship. It is only now beginning to enter the Piscian Age. It is customary for the modern astrologer to refer to what he believes to be the passing 'Piscian Age' as that of Christ and his fishermen disciples, of baptism by water, the great development in water and sea power and so forth. Oh, how easy it is for the mind to beguile itself! Surely the dominant influence of the last two millennia has been the rule of Mars with its crop of dictators, sovereign governments and catastrophic world wars? The vernal equinoctial point left the constellation Taurus about 1957 B.C. when it entered that of Aries, yet we find the effigy and worship of the Bull dominant in all the great religious cults right down to the beginning of the Christian era. This is probably because the true Taurean Age did not end until about then. In the horoscope for the 1st Nisan 786 B.C. when the exaltation degrees of the planets originated, the crescent New Moon was in the 3rd degree of Taurus, and it is probable that the true Arien age began to dawn about this period.”

As I said, Fagan was always challenging people to think differently. His discussions about the Astrological Ages was always in the context of criticizing other, patently false astronomical assertions coming out of Theosophical and related literature. It does seem that he accepted the basic premise of the Ages, rightly or wrongly; or maybe he was just taking the idea and running with it.

-Derek

That's the equivalent of saying we're in the age of Sagittarius because New Years Day on our civil calendars occurs when the Sun is in Sagittarius. It's a calendar date, and calendars can be changed to make any day New Years Day.

Thanks for pulling that article out and posting the information.

Jupiter Sets at Dawn wrote: Sun Sep 24, 2017 11:30 pm That's the equivalent of saying we're in the age of Sagittarius because New Years Day on our civil calendars occurs when the Sun is in Sagittarius. It's a calendar date, and calendars can be changed to make any day New Years Day.

Which is yet another challenging way of thinking about it!

-Derek

The precession was considered the basic mechanism of the universe by the Egyptians, controlling not only astronomical phenomena but all human and biological development. Giorgio de Santillana, ‘Hamlet’s Mill

One of the Illustrations from ‘Hamlet’s Mill’ showing what Santillana strongly believes is an ancient Egyptian glyph symbolizing Precession.
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/haml ... /horus.gif

Another link explaining the content of Hamlet's Mill

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamlet%27s_Mill

Hamlet's Mill began a revolution in understanding the profound sources of ancient mythology. Although it tottered on the edge of oblivion for years, it has reemerged as the fundamental inspiration for many progressive researchers who find the precession of the equinoxes lurking within ancient creation myths around the world.

Just found this pdf about Hamlet’s Mill…
http://www.incapabledesetaire.com/edito3/hamlet.pdf

Jim Eshelman wrote: Sun Sep 24, 2017 11:04 am Yes, ancient astrology was visual.

But Astrological Ages is a quite modern idea that I can't trace any earlier than late 1800s. I think it arose from the "turn of the century" approach to 1900 and Queen Victoria's likely (and then actual) death.

Well as you know, Steve and I are both quite interested in the Giza pyramids as an astronomical clock of sorts and if it is possible that the Sphinx dates back to the age of Leo and is a symbolism of the Leo and Aquarius (a man's head on the Leo's body), then the idea of the astrological ages dates back to ancient history that we don't have enough information about. So let us not dismiss something we do not know for sure.

I highly recommend John Anthony West book ‘Serpent in The Sky.’ This is a well-researched book about Ancient Egypt and is a very inspiring read, also free online. John is battling cancer now and my heart feels for him, at one time in my life John and I became close to each other through a-lot of phone calls. On page 104 in John’s book, 1979, he wrote.

In other words, it was Egypt’s astronomy, interpreted for its astrological significance, that guided the entire course of her art and architecture (Giza). On a practical level, this means that the sages of Egypt were deliberately and knowledgeably organizing the ambiance or atmosphere of an entire civilization in harmony with cosmic requirements. In principle, it should be possible, through a study of Giza’s monuments, their dates, (astronomical) alignments, consecrations, symbolism, proportions and so on to retrieve some of this astrological lore.

Well, in the late 80’s-early nineties, Robert Bauval proved with new technology of computers/ precessional-astronomical program, that the Giza monuments were a Precessional Clock with a beginning date in c. 10,500 BC (beginning of the precessional age of Leo) and end date of c. 2370 AD (beginning of the precessional age Aquarius. If you are interested in Bauval's Giza precessional clock correlations, I highly recommend your read Bauval’s book— “The Message of the Sphinx,” paying very close attention to Chapter 4. If you master the understanding of Chapter 4—Giza starts acting as some type Revelation for those who can understand Precessional Astronomy, and any kind of Revelation speaks only to our hearts-- even though we may all formulate our own truths to exactly what the Revelation means. But, I am convinced this Giza Revelation has something to do with the boring slow astronomical movement of the astrological Precessional Ages of the 12-30-degree equal divisions of the Sidereal Zodiac.

Speaking as a Siderealist, what Bauval correlated at Giza with the Precessional Clock (astrological ages), is dead on correct, because it dovetails the exact precessional age TIMES for Bradley’s correlations for the precise equal 30- degree divisions of the Sidereal Zodiac. What are these ancient Egyptian Sages trying to convey to us who understand Bradley’s and Bauval’s work???

Back in Sept when Mike started this thread, I wanted to post a-lot more, but was very busy laying groundwork to a Developer of small shopping centers for some possible future business pertaining to a paper I wrote several years ago about the coming new trend with ‘Concept Theaters,’ a personal passion.

In 1977 I spent a-lot of time with a husband (astrologer) wife (high grade psychic) team in Chicago. I am in the middle of a thread about my angular Natal Jupiter-Node life theme, and I can now see/realize how this Jupiter-Node theme has greatly expanded my individual personal Horizon—with certain books. The Psychic told me I was going to be “initiated” into some ancient knowledge with books (Mercury-Virgo) pertaining to Ancient Egypt (AE). Believe me, at this time (1977) I did not take this Psychic seriously, but now 40 years has elapsed, and I can truly see now what the Psychic saw with my future pertaining to certain books about AE. For anyone interested, here is a list of the books I have absorbed about AE.

1: Secrets of The Sphinx, by Andrew Raymond. A simple book written in laymen terms pertaining to a personal revelation that occurred to Andrew. A quote from this book:

The Giza Sphinx stands guard at the gates of a 25,800-year natural astronomical cycle known as the Precession Cycle.

2: Serpent In The Sky, The High Wisdom of Ancient Egypt, by John Anthony West. I highly recommend this book and it is free online at:
http://sayno2legalcrime.info/serpentsky.pdf
As a personal test seeing if you think this book would appeal to your inner being, go to link and read the short Forewords by Peter Tompkins & Robert Masters.

3: The Orion Mystery, by Robert Bauval and Adrian Gilbert. A book mainly written about Robert Bauval’s personal ‘Revelation’ discovering the 3 Pyramids on Giza are a ‘SKY’ representation of the 3 Belt Stars in Orion. Mr. Bauval’s personal ‘Revelation’ came to him after studying Giza with a trained engineering mind, and then one day while in the Cairo Museum noticing an areal photo of the Giza Pyramids, with the smallest Pyramid off-set to a 45-degree angle from the other two Pyramids. This led Robert to discover with the advent of PC technology and a Precessional Program—Giza is representing a Precessional Clock with a beginning Precessional date of c. 10,500 BC (30-degree Leo Lion-Sphinx), and an end Precessional date of 2,370 AD (30-degree Aquarius- Man), encompassing the full Precessional cycle of c. 26,000 years.

4: The Message of the Sphinx, by Robert Bauval & Graham Hancock. A follow-up book to Orion Mystery-- with a-lot more details correlating Bauval’s Precessional work at Giza. Pay very close attention to Chapter 4.

5: Secrets of the Great Pyramid, by Peter Tompkins. A quote from this book:

The precession was considered the basic mechanism of the universe by the Ancient Egyptians, controlling not only astronomical phenomena but all human and biological development.

6: The Dawn of Ancient Astronomy, by J. Norman Lockyer. A well-researched book pertaining to “The Study of the Temple-worship and Mythology of the Ancient Egyptians.” Lots of Precessional correlations.

7: Sacred Science, by R.A. Schwaller Delubicz. The work which inspired John Anthony West to write his book— “Serpent in the Sky.” Schwaller relays with his work, the Ancient Egyptians were in possession of a high 'Sacred Science' pertaining to natural laws of geometric astronomy. (Precession a part of the Sacred Science)

8: Last, but not least, “Astrological Origins” by Cyril Fagan, our Farther of Sidereal Astrology. A comprehensive study of Ancient Egyptian symbols as they relate to Astrology.

Mike, I realize you have a-lot of down time and thought you may be interested in reading some of these books---they sure have peaked a-lot of my interest in ancient knowledge's.

For the people of Ancient Egypt, the Pharaonic priesthood maintained the cult of Osiris, one of renewal and reincarnation. For the elite of the Temple it taught the Christ-like principle of Horus the Redeemer, of freeing oneself from the Karma of reincarnation, of a return to Cosmic Man, bodiless yet fully aware. Hence the value of de Lubicz work and West’s analysis of Ancient Egypt. What would be the point of keeping alive the tradition of the Sacred Science of the Ancient Egyptian if it were not applicable to this life and to afterlife, for those who keep coming to earth in search of a way to immortality? Peter Tompkins, Foreword to West’s book ‘Serpent in the Sky, The High Wisdom of Ancient Egypt.

This Foreword was written long before Bauval’s brilliant work with Precessional Astronomy Monumentized at Giza. There is correlating evidence that ‘Osiris’ has symbolic representation of Orion, and Orion’s 3 Belt Stars are represented on the Giza Plateau as a Precessional factor. It may be what is represented on the Giza Plateau with Precessional Astronomy is actually very important for us to endeavor to understand as a possible personal revelation---for our afterlife’s. It seems to me as certain souls slowly approach this Precession beginning point of 30 degree Aquarius, the more certain facet's of Giza is being correlated to the Precession Cycle with the 12 equal 30 degree divisions of the Sidereal Zodiac. I am trying to find Cayce's (American Psychic) exact quoted words--where he stated in the early 40's: the time has arrived where souls from Ancient Egypt are reincarnating into the Earth Plane. If there is any truth in these words by Cayce, then it may be possible certain souls are discovering more real truths about Giza. In other words, the Precessional TIME has arrived with the Precession Cycle itself for a re-discovery of things that certain souls in Ancient Egypt bequeath to themselves, realizing they would be re-discover at a certain time in the future with the 'eternal' cycle of Precession.

In support of this view I may state that looking after ruined Ancient Egyptian monuments was recognized as one of the duties of the Pharonic Kingship's. J. Norman Lockyer, 'The Dawn of Astronomy.

"I have caused monuments to be raised to the gods; I have embellished their sanctuaries that they may last to posterity; I have kept up their temples; I have restored again what has fallen down, and have taken care of that which was erected in former times." Translated by Brugsch, p.188 "Egypt"