skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Lilly's Considerations
compiled by D. Houlding
Book II of Carmen Astrologicum by Dorotheus
translated by David Pingree
Compiled by Deborah Houlding
The Babylonian Astrolabe: the Calendar of Creation, by Rumen K. Kolev
Reviewed by Gill Zukovskis

Skyscript Astrology Forum

100 years since the Titanic
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Mundane Astrology & World Events
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4180
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2012 9:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Daz Madragal wrote:
Quote:
You would expect malevolent fixed stars to congregate around this Greek tragedy but the fact is there are precious few to mention. Yes Vindemiatrix is culminating - amidst many others - however there is nothing particularly special about this as most of us would have more fixed stars conjunct our own planets & angles compared to this 'historic event'. Surely that is cause for concern.


I am not convinced that the delineation of event charts is really that useful. At best they teach us planetary combinations or say fixed stars to look for in foundational charts. We obviously cannot predict with such charts so it becomes nothing more than an astrological parlour game to explain what has happened retrospectively. The foundational charts here such as the launching and departure charts in contrast contain the real astrological seeds of the event. Moreover, it would be possible for an astrologer to look at such charts and make a prediction.

However, in regards Vindemiatrix its worth pointing out this star is traditionally known as ‘the widow maker’. That fits very well here as due to the ‘women and children first’ philosophy predominant at the time women and children were generally all put on to the life boats first. Hence the number of male deaths on the Titanic dramatically exceeded female deaths. 75% of adult women survived the Titanic while only 20% of men did so. The Titanic was indeed a widow maker.

http://www.anesi.com/titanic.htm

Focusing on the foundational charts the launching and departure charts have several fixed star links. As Andrew pointed out the launching chart had Mars on Scheat which is specifically linked to death by drowning. Moreover, the Sun was on the martial potentially violent fixed star Aldebaran.

The departure chart has for the fateful voyage had South Asellus on the Ascendant. This star is in the constellation of Cancer and according to Ptolemy of the nature of the Sun and Mars. Robson links this star to ‘’danger of violent death, accidents and burns’. To the ancient Chinese this part of the Sky comprised a lunar mansion known as the Ghosts and was linked to death.

The Sun (ASC ruler) is on Baiten Kaitos. This star is in the constellation of Cetus. Cetus was the sea monster or whale sent by Neptune to devour Andromeda. Ptolemy stated this star was of the nature of Saturn. Appropriate or what?

Venus ( Lord 10 by Whole sign) on the fixed star Scheat. Linked to death by drowning.

Having said all this I dont think an obsessive focus on just one approach is really the point. Fixed stars are just one of the additional tools in the box for traditional astrologers along with things like antiscion points, lots/parts. and degree associations. They should support a full delineation not be the whole basis of it.

Daz Madrigal wrote:
Quote:
Rudhyar wrote these words pertaining to natal charts but just move it onto the mundane level and it explains the situation perfectly. It is time for everyone to open their eyes beyond hidebound tradition and except that the old ways whilst still relevant are limited in scope. I have no doubt that a quick glance at the harmonics for this chart will bring this tragedy into true focus with a clarity beyond fixed stars, qualities, debilities etc.


Your fully entitled to your opinion Greg but ultimately that is all it is. Unless you want to offer us a practical demonstration. I do still feel Sabian symbols are an exceptionally vague tool which should at best should be on the fringes of astrology. The fact they can be made to retrospectively explain just about any event is not a recommendation for their effectiveness in my opinion but rather testament to their extreme vagueness and lack of any possible falsification. Fixed stars in contrast have generally more crystallised clear cut associations which make it more difficult to stretch their interpretation in the completely fluid 'stream of consciousness' way Sabian symbols are all too frequently applied.

As for moving beyond tradition I dont follow your point. People here use many approaches developed in modern astrology. A good example is the national chart which only dates back just over 60 years. Use of outer planets is common. Then there are astro-locality techniques that many mundane astrologers use. These only date back a few decades but they seem a valid approach. I would be interested to see harmonics applied in mundane charts. Harmonics was all the fashion astrologically for a while but seems to have gone out of popularity. I have no objection to exploring new ideas. What I have difficulty with is attempts to oversimplify and dumb down the core traditional teachings of astrology in the name of 'progress'.

Mark
_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus


Last edited by Mark on Sun Apr 15, 2012 2:51 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
daz madrigal



Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 331

Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 9:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Titanic Collision chart is probably slightly wrong from what I can gather therefore fixed stars on angles at least are probably not a good idea to adhere to on this occasion.

Nearly all data..suggests the time of impact was 11.40 pm, 20 minutes later than Andrews chart.

http://www.titanic-titanic.com/titanic_timeline.shtml

Cruise ship to hold Titanic service
The Press Association‎ - 8 minutes ago
A spokeswoman for the cruise said when the clocks reached 11.40pm on the ship - the time the Titanic hit the iceberg - the captain would make ...

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5hysnuiPO23s6Vnc8WofkjENiQPCg?docId=N0301261334432494270A

G
_________________
Mad Daz's Place, quiet but never boring
http://pinkmelon.proboards82.com/index.cgi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4180
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 2:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Greg,

Thanks for highlighting the error on the chart time for the collision. I may be wrong but it looks to me that the data Andrew was working on was not his but actually provided by Olivia Barclay as part of her Qualifying Horary Certificate (QHP).

Your quite right any fixed star positions on the angles will not be correct in that event. It also impacts on other things like the location of lots. In the circumstances I felt the need to re-examine all the times Andrew gave in his article for both the launch and departure of the Titanic.

astronor

Regarding the departure of Titanic from Southampton contemporary accounts do seem to confirm the ship set off just before noon as displayed in Andrew's article.

However, while Andrew lists the time of the launch of the Titanic as the 31st of May 1911 at 12:28PM I have seen this website where another astrologer states the launch actually took place at 12:15pm.

http://astrologyworldnews.com/?p=57#comments

I did some digging and have found an online contemporary account of the launch of the Titanic printed the day after in Belfast on June 1st 1911.

http://www.irelandseye.com/titanic/launch.htm

As the account says:

Quote:
The ceremony had been fixed for a quarter past twelve, and ten minutes before that time a red flag was hoisted at the stern of the vessel. Five minutes later two rockets were discharged shortly afterwards the explosion of another rocket was heard, and at 12.13 the spectators had the joy and satisfaction of seeing the vessel in motion. It was a wonderful and awe-inspiring sight and a thrill passed through the crowd as their hopes and expectations were realised. The ship glided down to the river with a grace and dignity which for the moment gave one the impression that she was conscious of her own strength and beauty, and there was a roar of cheers as the timber by which she had been supported yielded to the pressure put upon them. She took the water as though she were eager for the baptism, and in the short space of 62 seconds she was entirely free of the ways. Belfast Newsletter, 1st June 1911


So we have a clear cut contemporary account that the launch of the Titanic actually began at 12:13pm and took approximately a minute until all the ship was in the river free of supports. So a time of 12.13 or 12.14 seem reasonable times to use for the launch of Titanic.

I dont have time to go into a full delineation today but here I hope (!) is the chart for the collision with the revised time. I am relying on the location coordinates provided by Andrew:



Please point out any errors! I was personally quite confused on what timing the 11.40pm was based on. Most souces just say based on 'ships clock'. However, I discovered this from a footnote on Wikipedia:

Quote:
At the time of the collision, Titanic's clocks were set to 2 hours 2 minutes ahead of Eastern Time Zone (UTC−05:00) and 2 hours 58 minutes behind Greenwich Mean Time.[1] In other words, her time was close to UTC-3 (only 2 minutes ahead).


The time of the Titanic collision was therefore 02.38 GMT/UT.

In fairness Andrew did this research 27 years ago(!) and there has been a wealth of new historical information that has emerged since then. Plus he didn't have the luxury of the internet or astrology software then. Moreover, as I stated earlier I think he may have been using data provided by Olivia Barclay as part of his QHP course.

Just as a quick hit and run fixed star analysis for now- the MC is close to the malefic fixed star Algorab in the constellation of Corvus the Crow. According to Ptolemy it is of the nature of Saturn and Mars. In Babylonian belief this constellation was known as the Raven and symbolised the bird carrying the souls into the underworld.

This star was on the rising degree of the chart for the first attack on the Twin Towers in New York city in 2001. It was also on the IC in the chart for the Lockerbie bombing (1988) along with Mars on the MC. This star was on the MC for the attack on the USS Cole (2000) and the first Japanese airboune attack on the mainland of Hawaii in 1941.

Just prior to the collision Jupiter was rising in paran with the fixed star Algol (02:12) as the malefic fixed star Algol set in the west. I will be back with a proper fixed star description later.

As I said in my last post I still think far too much fuss is made over event charts like this and not enough on foundational charts which are the root of them. Still, I suppose considering the drama and tragedy of the event with all the media attention around the centenary its hardly surprising in this case.

I know Andrew is going to be busy for a quite a while with an astrological tour up in northern Norway and also a workshop he is running in Warsaw, Poland. I am sure he will get back to us when he has the time.

Mark
_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus


Last edited by Mark on Sun Apr 15, 2012 9:34 pm; edited 5 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4180
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

After some confusion over chart times for the Titanic I have decided to display all three charts for its launch, departure and collision below with the updated research on times.

The Launch chart




The Departure chart



The Collision chart


_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4180
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As I stated earlier I relied on the co-ordinates for the collision chart provided by Andrew.

I haven't researched this topic and I dont have the time or inclination to spend more on this topic. However, I think its only fair to point out I have just found an article on the Titanic collision by the astrologer Mark Lerner. Lerner gives slightly different co-ordinates. In particular he states the collision occured at the following co-ordinates:

41N43'55 49W56'45

With all the wealth of information out there on Titanic I suspect Lerner has probably had access to more accurate scholarship on the matter than was available in 1985.

Here is Mark Lerner's display of the chart:

http://www.marklernerastrology.com/shop/images/TitanicWRKBC1.GIF

As you can see it only produces a slight difference in the chart.

Here is the full article:

http://marklerner.wordpress.com/

Its an interesting contrast as Lerner is using asteroids rather than fixed stars. I note he gives the same time as I did above (02:38GMT) which is reassuring!

Mark
_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Astraea



Joined: 04 Oct 2004
Posts: 300
Location: Colorado, USA

Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Titanic's last reported position was later found to have been inaccurate by 13.5 miles. She sunk more or less straight down, with the bow, stern and major wreckage located within seconds of 49W57/41N44 (as Lerner correctly states).

The time of the collision is more problematic. I am not aware of any authorities who dispute an 11:40 PM collision time, but the time standard will forever be argued because ship's time was not identical with Atlantic time, and it was never ascertained in the hearings whether or not ship's time had been updated between the time of the collision on April 14 and her sinking in the early morning hours of April 15. Some people just state LMT, but that doesn't solve the problem.

For coordinate data, see: http://www.titanic-titanic.com/titanic_wreck_location.shtml

For a lengthy and very detailed discussion of issues involving time onboard the ship, see this forum thread: http://www.encyclopedia-titanica.org/forums/articles-technical-matters/4746-chronology-sinking-titanic.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Mundane Astrology & World Events All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated