Distinguishing Solar vs. Lunar ingresses

[Jim Eshelman]

I wanted to let everyone know what I see as the next big region to explore in Sidereal Mundane Astrology: I suspect that there is far more difference than we have historically acknowledged between solar ingresses and lunar ingresses.

Obviously there are differences in time periods, but not as extreme as one might think. For example, the Quarter solar ingresses cover time periods only about three times as long as the Monthly Caplunar. Nonetheless, the length of time has something to do with the different results we see in each group. (I'll mention one key way below.)

Here's the main deal: For a large collection of "bad" events (disasters, tragedies, destruction, loss of life, generally bad stuff), both solar and lunar ingresses heavily favor malefic and disruptive planets on angles, in contrast to benefics and neutral planets being least often angular. That's always been clear. However, which malefics and disruptive planets are most prominent is starkly different in solar ingresses vs. lunar ingresses.

From casual observation, it's entirely clear that lunar ingresses are the primary weather forecasting charts. This may be for as simple a reason as the fact that these charts change more often, as does the weather: They naturally signify more transient, shifting conditions. The lunar ingress affinity for showing weather patterns reminds me (a lot!) of lunar return tendency to especially show shifting health matters: It's not that health problems can't be shown in a solar return, but rather than they're pretty reliably shown in lunar returns.(Again, this may be a difference between acute or transient health conditions that we most notice vs. chronic or drawn-out - reflecting the different time periods.

I also notice that the monthly and weekly forecasts I make from lunar ingresses (aside from the weather!) just don't perform as well. It's not that I don't know how to read the charts, I think, because my forecasts from the Capsolar alone (and the other solar ingresses to a lesser degree) are usually close to perfect. What's the difference? Is it just the periods of time involved?

This BTW is aside from the fact that, when looking at specific events, the lunar ingresses score better at showing past events than do solar ingresses do. All the reliable techniques correctly describe the time and type of event 7 times out of 8 or better (about 88% of the time or better), but solar ingresses are about 89-90%, Caplunars 91%, weekly lunar ingresses about 92-93%. So it's not that the week charts are weak charts - far from it!

So, what are the differences? I summarize below. These summaries are based on over 400 events currently cataloged in Sidereal Mundane Astrology (some of those only in an unreleased new edition), which means between 2,000 and 2,500 individual charts. Leaving out the pointedly positive events, the following is true of the remainder:

Overall Angularity
Taking ALL angularity for these "bad" events - in solar ingresses, lunar ingresses, and daily methods - the TOP TWO planets are Saturn (849) and Mars (793). Disruptive Uranus and Pluto come next (but after a drop-off). The LOWEST SCORING are the neutral Moon (508) and Mercury (636) and the benefic Venus (599) and Jupiter (641). (Sun and Neptune are quite neutrally in the middle.)

Angularity in Daily Methods
Daily methods are the conjunction of Capsolar and Cansolar Quotidian angles to transiting and ingress planets, and transits across Capsolar and Cansolar angles. The results for this are barely distinguishable from the overall results above:

The TOP TWO planets are Saturn (272) and Mars (271), dramatically ahead of all the others. The LOWEST SCORING are the neutrals and benefics, Moon (134), Jupiter (190), Mercury (193), and Venus (195). (Sun, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto are most neutrally in the middle.)

Angularity in Solar Ingresses
With solar ingresses, the pattern changes quite a lot. They have a distinctive character.

The TOP TWO planets are Saturn (158) and Pluto (148), dramatically ahead of all the others (with Mars [128] a distant third). The LOWEST SCORING are the luminaries and benefics with the surprising addition of Neptune (!): Jupiter at the far bottom (95), and then Neptune (100), Moon (102), Sun (109), and Venus (111).

Saturn and Pluto dominate the top - shoving Mars to a distant third, with Saturn in the lead.

Angularity in Lunar Ingresses
Lunar ingresses then substantially flip around the solar ingress pattern while preserving the essential malefic-benefic division.

The TOP TWO planets are Mars (136) and Neptune (127), with Uranus 125) a close third. The LOWEST SCORING are the luminaries, benefics, and neutrals: Venus (84), Mercury (85), Moon (96), Sun (98), and Jupiter (103).

Whereas the solar ingresses favor Saturn and Pluto, the lunar ingresses favor Mars and Neptune - with Saturn and Pluto dead in the middle, quite neutrally! I find this fascinating.

Some Thoughts...
These preferences aren't new or unique just to the current set of charts. It has been true since the beginning (and sustained true through all the years of adding more data) that Saturn and Pluto have been most angular for the solars, Mars and Neptune for the lunars, and Mars and Saturn for the dailies.

Most categories of "bad" events have Saturn more likely to be angular in solar ingresses and Mars more angular in lunars, with both of them strong in the dailies. A few categories of events are exceptions, but even fires and earthquakes have this distinction. I can think of one reason for it based entirely on pure odds: Slow-moving planets on solar ingresses are more likely to also transit those solar ingress angles during the year, increasing the chance that slow-moving planets on Capsolar or Cansolar angles will also mark the final ("daily") timing of the event. In contrast, faster planets like Mars need more time to travel around the chart and transit one angle and then the other, so their odds are improved by spinning the roulette wheel of new lunar ingresses every week. - However, this isn't a perfect explanation since it entirely ignores the behavior of Neptune, which is slow like Saturn and Pluto yet most angular in lunar ingresses.

I think there might be a fundamental difference, not yet articulated, between solar vs. lunar ingresses. I don't want to leap to easy conclusions but, for example, having these horrible events have Mars and Neptune most common in lunar charts while Saturn and Pluto are most often angular in solar charts sounds like the lunar ingresses are reflecting bad events most often in terms of heightened, frightened emotion, while the solar ingresses are showing more objective breaking and destruction. I'm sure it's not that simple (I'm sure!), but it provides an example.

My plan is to review all the cataloged events examining only the solar ingresses and their maturity in daily timing (transits and quotidians), then separately study the whole catalog of events only in terms of the lunar ingresses and, probably, the quotidians. This will give me the chance to get a different subjective feel which, in turn, might turn me onto something.

But I encourage all of you - based on observation - to throw in whatever evidence and ideas you have as well.

Off on the next leg...