Thanks Amelia,

Once again invaluable data. Thanks for sharing all this. I must print all this off. I know very little about financial astrology but all this information has intrigued me to explore further.

I have noted the BOE tip!

I had a look at some Scottish data. Interesting that the Scottish Parliament has its Sun exactly opposing the UK (1801) Sun. In addition the leader of the Scottish National National Party (Alex Salmond) has his Sun on the same IC/Sun point in Capricorn.

I wouldn't really agree that Scotland is almost independent already though. As things stand we have a lot less power than some regional governments in countries like Germany or Spain. The Scottish Parliament does not have tax raising powers even though it can pass its own laws on many areas. There seems to be a political consensus of all parties here to seek more powers from Westminster. However, that would not constitute the kind of fraught crisis I see pluto on the IC/Sun representing.

One chart I would expect to see reflecting any move to independence is that for the Scottish National Party (SNP). However, I am not find finding many significant transits to the Scottish National Party (SNP) chart (1934) around the 8-10 degrees Capricorn/Cancer mark although the chart is untimed. The chart may have a Cancer ascendant if its AM but its 7 degrees Leo set for noon. The SNP Sun is around 17 Aries/Mars 18 Aries. The SNP Jupiter is in Libra so will square Pluto from there. The Moon around 22-24 Capricorn. It has its Pluto opposition at 22 Capricorn. None of this seems to fit too smoothly to the UK 1801 chart. If independence was on the cards I would expect some quite dramatic signs considerably earlier. Maybe Lunlumo is right and I need to give the 1927 chart a go. I will need to work through a lot of key dates in the party's history to try and rectify this chart to see if it supports a Cancer ascendant around 7-9 degress.

We do have another chart some astrologers claim for Scotland of (1005). Thats certainly puts the English 1066 chart in the shade for age! This chart (and a few other possibilities) seems to have been missed by Campion in his otherwise outstanding book. I still haven't checked the 1005 chart in much detail yet as I am a little suspicious of medieval coronation charts like this and the 1066 chart timed for noon.

Mark

Transiting Pluto is going to conjunct the United Kingdom chart (1801) IC and Sun during 2012-2014.

However, while any historical mundane chart for a nation is surely never insignificant, and a nation's historical charts may be more useful than the current one for investigation, depending on the context of the inquiry, British astrologers, and indeed astrologers the world over, still operate under the delusion that the Republic of Ireland is not an independent state, a claim perpetuated, whether conciously or not, by astrologers who continue to use the old fashioned, 'Rule Britannia', horoscope by default, representing what is now a defunct nation. This may touch upon politics, but the fact that the 1801 chart does not reflect the UK as it exists today, is quite factual. Maurice McCann would agree. As an Irishman, then is his national horoscope the 1801 chart? This can't be, as Ireland has had it's own horoscope for over eighty years! As has the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Check your passport, it'll tell you what country you live in on the front cover.

None the less, the 1801 chart is indeed the horoscope of the current form of the Union Jack (which controversially, was never changed to exclude the cross of St. Patrick when the Irish Republic disbanded), and as the internationally recognised symbol of Britain and the British, it most certainly isn't insignificant in exploring British affairs, and definately the most appropriate chart to use to explore any British flag-waving event.

I don't then, disagree that the period to which you refer might not be a very interesting time for Britain and the British, as this chart represents everything that comes under the Union Jack, but does not represent our true identity. I just wanted to point this out as I consider it to be a matter of importance.

The national chart for the UK as it exists today, is represented in the horoscope set for midnight, of the 12th April, 1927, set for London.

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2003

During the period to which you refer, transiting Pluto will be gearing up to oppose this charts mundane Pluto position, at Cancer 13.50, the first time this will have occured. So Pluto has a significant role in this chart too.

The breakup of the United Kingdom. Scotland gained its own devolved parliament in 1999 . The separatist Scottish National Party formed their first administration last year and continue to carry high public support. Might the nationalists be able to achieve their political objective of a vote on independence from the UK? I note that when Pluto crossed the UK MC in 1922 the Irish free State was formed. Again issues of identity and uprooting of old traditions come to mind with the break up of the UK.

When considering Anglo-Scottish relations, then the most appropriate chart to consider is surely the May 1st 1707 chart, representing the unification of Scotland to England (and Wales), to form the nation of Great Britain (much to what I said earlier about sometimes a historical chart being more important depending on the context of the inquiry). It will be interesting to observe what is going on with Scotland during the period that you mention, but I would think that a much more interesting time to watch out for is rather sooner than 2012-2014, and that is when Pluto comes to the area of Capricorn 04.43, which is the ascendant of the 1707 chart, set for midnight. This is interesting in light of what you said about the forming of the administration of the Scottish National Party last year, given Pluto's very recent ingress into Capricorn. More interesting still, is where you observed that the 1801 chart representing the union of Great Britain and Ireland, had the Irish Republic disband with Pluto crossing an important angle, the MC, in mind of the fact that the chart representing the unification of Scotland and England will also have Pluto crossing an important angle, the ascendant. Pluto will reach the degree of the ascendant of the 1707 chart, reaching Capricorn 04.00 in January 2010. Where Scotlands independence is concerned, here's a very interesting time indeed to look out for!

Dozens, if not hundreds of states, institutions and laws started on a January 1st (Germany in 1871 too - that chart is still working, by the way). In other words the transit of Pluto over the degrees 8-11 will have worldwide consequences - and one has to take into account the fact that at the same time Pluto will be square Uranus.

Interesting comment. A significant time for the world at large then. Pluto will be square to Uranus as you said, and in the 1801 chart, Pluto packs a punch on the IC, and Uranus will be right on the DC also during the time period.

We have a similar debate here in the UK around whether the 1801 chart or the later 1922 or 1927 charts are most valid.

Well, it isn't a debate as such, the fact of the matter is, the nation as it exists today is represented in the 1927 chart, although of course the 1801 chart is very significant for reasons explained. It's not a question of whether this or that chart is valid, which is an obsolete argument, as every historical chart of every nation is always valid, but the question is one of which is the most appropriate to explore, which I reiterate, depends very much on the context of the inquiry.

I still think the 1801 chart responds extremely well to transits etc despite the theoretical arguments why it shouldn't work any more due to subsequent legal and constitutional changes.

Of course it responds well to transits and such where British affairs are concerned, because it is a British chart. What are the theoretical arguments as to 'why it shouldn't work any more' to which you refer? This isn't true, and I am aware of no such theories.

In regards the UK charts I am beginning to create a personal chart data base of key events since 1922 to see which chart for the UK ( 1801, 1922 or 1927) resonates best with historical events.

In mundane astrology, there isn't really such thing as, 'The One Chart', the chart for the nation as it exists at any given moment, should be always the latest chart, and so the 1927 one for modern Brits, but as I've said, it depends entirely on the context of the inquiry to determine which is or are the most significant chart or charts to use for investigation.

I am a little suspicious of medieval coronation charts like this and the 1066 chart timed for noon.

Yes, me too. However, I would just ride with it, as the zenith of the Sun is symbolic of kingship, much to the reason that traditionally kings were coronated at noon, and so William very probably was crowned at this time, given that heavenly symbolism still meant something in those days. If he wasn't, then the symbolism is still there, so it isn't insignificant.

Astrologers however, who should know the difference between clock time and natural time, will often set symbolic charts for noon by the clock, rather than the partile conjunction of the Sun to the MC, which is proper, astrological noon.

Hello Draco,

Wow! Thats some post!. A lot of very interesting points. A lot of valid comments too. I agree the 1707 chart is very relevant to English-Scottish affairs although the timing and location is debateable. Some Scottish astrologers use the date the Act of Union was passed by the Scottish Parliament rather than the English parliament.

As someone of part Irish ancestry I do find your tone on the 1801 chart rather judgemental and loaded. There have been a lot of historical injustices to the Irish people but I would rather stick to the astrology here. You seem to be making a lot of negative assumptions about astrologers using the 1801 chart. I am fully aware that the majority of the island of Ireland is now a separate country and would not use ANY UK chart if looking at the Irish Republic. However, one could make exactly the same argument about using the 1927 chart for affairs concerning the Irish republic. Its inappropriate and incorrect.

Lets not forget though that like it or not part of Ireland still remains part of the UK (the part Maurice McCann comes from I believe). I think that is why the 1801 chart still has relevance to UK affairs. None of that denies your point about the changes brought about by the separation of the Irish Free state and later Republic of Ireland. I see the logic of using the 1927 chart. However, as an empiricist I want to see if the astrology reflects this point. Sometimes there are very good arguments why a chart should work theoretically but they are not as powerful astrologically. Theoretically, the 1066 chart should not be used as England no longer exists as separate country. Still, still some astrologers use it regarding specifically 'English affairs'.

There does seem to be a confusion in your argument. On the one hand you argue quite forcefully why the 1927 is the correct chart for the UK yet also state later there are no sole correct charts? Which is it?

If mundane charts all conformed to the argument that they should be based on current legal and constitutional reality there would be no astrologers using any charts for the USA dated from 1776 as the USA did not exist at that time. Noone seriously argues 18th century American charts (1776, Federal constitution, Presidential) only apply to the 13 states exclusively. The logic of what you are saying would seem to be creating a new chart for each state joining the the Union. Equally we should exclude California or Florida as these were not part of the original USA. In reality we go back to the earlier charts even if the nature of the USA has changed fundamentally.

I accept its a different point when part of an original state separates like the Irish Republic from the UK. Do the charts for Germany in 1871 or Russia in 1917 still have relevance even though the modern states have changed fundamentally in territorial boundaries and legal and constitutional status? I know some astrologers still use the 1871 chart for Germany. I am sure they are aware most of Prussia is now in Poland/Russia. I prefer to keep an open mind on such questions. That doesn't mean I am ignorant or unaware of historical reality.

Unfortunately, I have no more time to properly reply until the end of the week. I will be in touch as they say.....

Hi Lunlumo,

Yes I agree it was clearly Bonn where the Republic began.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Law_ ... of_Germany

I think I got confused by the following statement on this site:

http://www.astrologyweekly.com/countries/germany.php

Federal Republic proclamation 23 May 1949, 4:44 pm CED, Berlin, but actually the constitution came into effect at midnight the next day and the chart for this moment works better.

I thought this implied a proclamation from West Berlin and then the Basic Laws taking effect in Bonn the next day but that doesn't seem correct.

They must be relocating the 1949 chart to Berlin retrospectively as you are. Seems odd that they state the actual proclamation coming from Berlin though. Must just be an error or simply poor wording on their part I assume. I haven't had access to my copy of Campion's book lately but will have a look at what he says.