OoP

How to Verify a National Horoscope

(excerpt from ther book Political Astrology by Michael O'Reilly)

In 1988, astrologer Nicholas Campion produced the first edition of what became a classic text in "mundane astrology", The Book of World Horoscopes. Carter introduced the concept, and presented a handful of interesting national charts, but the vast majority of national charts remained unknown until Campion came along. His encyclopedia-styled project included sections on virtually every nation in our global village.

The introductory material establishes Campion's sorely-needed scholarly approach to the field, with the objective of moving the rest of the astrological community toward a more realistic perspective of astrology in the modern world. So many astrologers rely on the individual's natal horoscope without understanding or tuning in to the larger geopolitical trends. And so many get bogged down in mumbo-jumbo metaphysics and historical narratives. With the over 400 national charts presented in The Book of World Horoscopes, an astrologer can make successful predictions for the home nation, or many other nations around the globe. Campion sets the bar high, but provides the means to make the leap. "Experiment with the charts," he advises. "Make predictions - and yes, prediction remains a perfectly valid exercise: one successful prediction reveals more about the nature of the universe than a hundred retrospective studies or metaphysical models."

One would think that making a successful prediction requires an accurate national horoscope, but Campion suggests that this isn't necessarily so. The horoscope can act as a straightforward analytical tool, or as a divinatory aide, like a crystal ball. Astrologers come in both flavors, and Campion does not denigrate those who view the charts with their third eye, even if the chart is historically inaccurate. A case in point is the Gemini Rising U.S. horoscope. By his estimate, about half of American astrologers use the Gemini Rising chart for the United States, even though not one shred of documentary evidence has ever been produced to support an early morning signing of the Declaration when Gemini was Rising. From all the accounts, the signing took place somewhere between 10 am and 5 pm, not 2 am and 3 am. Campion suggests we might as well argue that the Moon is made of cheese, "Perhaps it is, but all our current evidence indicates that it isn't."

In the extensive section on the U.S. horoscope, Campion offers the likely explanation for how the Gemini chart became so popular. It's based on the importance of Uranus in 1776, since this planet rules revolutions and breaks from the past. In 1861 the most prominent astrologer in the U.S. was Luke Broughton, and he was of the opinion that Uranus was the "significator" for the American Revolution. The practice of that era was to put the ruling planet on the Ascendant, and since Uranus was in Gemini, Gemini became the Rising sign. As Campion writes, this horoscope was meant "as a symbolic chart which was not intended to represent a precise historical moment." Luke Broughton was Evangeline Adams' teacher, and when she became famous in the early 20th century, fans everywhere picked up on the chart she used for the U.S., which was Broughton's Gemini Rising horoscope.

The section on U.S. horoscopes presents evidence and commentary for three other, more likely, candidates for the national horoscope. These include Virgo Rising (10:30 am), Scorpio Rising (2:00 pm), and Sagittarius Rising (4:50 pm and 5:10 pm). Other nations have similar conflicts about the most appropriate birth moment, notably Russia and Great Britain. Again, Campion presents the relevant historical background, so readers can make their own educated guesses, and then test the charts in practice. Eventually, using The Book of World Horoscopes, a consensus will be built on which national charts work best, but it means working through the mythology (or tradition) and finding the truth. The proof of an accurate national horoscope is in making consistent predictions, and as Campion notes in his introduction, this means that the natal chart should provide the potential for specific events based on normal interpretations.

In this area, Campion is a harsh critic. He admonishes those astrologers who "prove" a national chart by connecting a few transits during historical incidents to the natal horoscope. These astrologers omit the relevance of natal conditions that might lead to such incidents, as well as subsequent transits or progressions to the same natal points to see if similar events are repeated. Without this rigorous process, any national chart can be "proved." Campion challenges astrologers to develop a better methodology when validating a national horoscope. This means establishing the potential for specific events according to traditional natal interpretations, and then testing how this potential unfolds through the course of repeated transits and progressions. What The Book of World Horoscopes provides is a starting point for this process, the primary horoscopes for each nation. It's up to astrologers to build upon this edifice, to test each one and find out which work best.

The following section, based on Campion's comments, serves to establish a methodology for differentiating between alternative candidates for the U.S. and other national horoscopes.

1. Documented Birth Moment

The correct national horoscope should be based on historical facts. With regard to the U.S. horoscope, this self-evident point alone would seem to negate the possibility of the Gemini Rising horoscope, since no one has been able to document the possibility of an early morning signing. Several U.S. horoscopes are based on dates other than July 4, 1776, and they have historical records to back up their potential as the "correct" horoscope. As for July 4, 1776, the acceptable range of possible times starts around 9:00 am which, according to the Journals of the Continental Congress taken from the original minutes of the meetings, was the time that Congress assembled. The latest possible time is 5:10 pm according to Ebenezer Sibley, an astrologer and Freemason who published the first U.S. horoscope for this time in 1787. Times between 9:00 am and 5:10 pm represent the range verifiable by the historical record. Perhaps the best reference on this is Ronald Howland's A Chronology of American Charts. The problem is that, in practice, the Gemini Rising horoscope actually works better than most of the candidates within the acceptable time range.

2. Internal Consistency

The correct horoscope must make astrological sense. The Rising Sign must describe the national character, and each of the natal planets in their respective houses should also describe a facet of the national character. Astrologers have become adept at describing natal factors, and especially how the preferred Rising Sign fits the national character. This item is highly subjective, but is a necessary component of the overall picture. The problem here is that many astrologers will use their explanation of the Rising Sign as the total explanation of why their horoscope is the correct one without exploring other candidates that demonstrate the same national character traits in other ways (more on this when we compare the Scorpio Rising chart with Gemini and Sagittarius). A more difficult problem is that astrologers tend to avoid describing the natal potential that would lead to the more fascinating historical cycles. The death of the American president about every 21 years is the best example, but cycles of war, economic boom-bust cycles, and technological innovations are other notable examples.

3. Historical Events

Working with these criteria is the most exciting and also the most difficult. Once one has an accurate national horoscope, it can be used to make predictions about the future. The most important historical events in the nation's history should demonstrate precise outer planet transits and progressions to the natal horoscope at the time of the event. Without this verification, the horoscope is useless. Major progressions and transits should consistently manifest as major events, while minor transits and progressions lead to relatively minor events. This is the nature of astrology, and without these correlations, the preferred national horoscope doesn't ring true.

The problem with this process is that many astrologers will take an isolated event and show how well it corresponds to a major transit or progression to their preferred horoscope. Campion addresses this dilemma as a chronic deficiency in methodology. He writes, "if insufficient attention is paid to the symbolism of the original horoscope or to the evaluation of subsequent transits or progressions, any chart can be proved to work."

In other words, before correlating a specific event to the national horoscope, the astrologer must show how the natal planets suggest a certain class of events. Then, if transit X brought about a major event, what happened during previous or subsequent transits of X? This process is virtually ignored by astrologers attempting to prove the validity of a national horoscope. The difficulty is that it requires a great deal of research, combined with a sophisticated knowledge of astrology and history.

To sum up, in order to demonstrate the validity of a national horoscope, first it needs a documented, historical foundation. Then, the natal planets need to be interpreted and described according to what kinds of events would be expected when they're activated. Finally, describe the actual historical events that verify the projected natal meanings. Astrology is based on cycles, and similar transits and progressions over the same natal point should manifest in similar historical events.