|
| Foreword
| Contents
| Prologue
| Reviews |
| Chapter 1
| Chapter 2
| Chapter 3
| Chapter 4
| Chapter 5
| Chapter 6
| Chapter 7
| Chapter 8
| Chapter 9
| Chapter 10 |
| Astronomy Quiz
| Appendix 1
| Appendix 2
| Appendix 3
| Appendix 4
| Appendix 5 |
Appendix 3 SEVEN STARS
|   |
Magnitude |
Position,1989 |
Motion |
Latitude |
| Algol |
2nd |
26 Tau 01 |
7.2' |
+22° |
| Aldebaran
| 1st |
9 Gem 38 |
8.2' |
- 5° |
| Antares |
" |
9 Sag 36 |
8.1' |
- 5° |
| Betelgeuse |
" |
28 Gem 36 |
8.4' |
-16° |
| Pollux |
" |
23 Can 04 |
8.8' |
+ 7°
|
| Regulus |
" |
29 Leo 40 |
7.4' |
0° |
| Spica |
" |
23 Lib 41 |
7.1' |
- 2° |
|   |
Position,1989 |
Motion |
Latitude |
| Galactic Centre |
26 Sag 43 |
8.3' |
- 6° |
| Black hole Scorpio X-1 |
5 Sag 42 |
8.3' |
-15° |
| Black hole Virgo A |
1 Lib 38 |
8.3' |
+13° |
Astrologers don't often use the fixed stars, and no wonder with books on the subject listing hundreds of them, as would make one dependent on the book, for reference. To avoid this, here are only the very brightest ones, in or close to the zodiac. Seven stars are here listed, all of them first-magnitude and within twenty degrees of the ecliptic - except for Algol, which has such an evil reputation that it seemed a shame to omit it. These stars are all in our local-neighbourhood region of the galaxy. In contrast, three zodiacal black-hole positions are given, below. The galactic centre is the site either of a small black hole, or a white hole, according to one's theoretical bias: it has to be a discontinuity of some kind. Two more huge ones in distant galaxies are given (I doubt whether these have any relevance). The 'motion' column gives the movement per decade in arcminutes, to be added or subtracted from the epoch positions. For example, to find the longitude of the star Regulus in 1959, three decades before 1989: it is moving at 7.4' per decade, which gives 29°28' - 3 x 7.4' = 29° 06' Cancer If one also wanted to use Alcyone the bright Pleiades star at 30 ° Taurus, one should bear in mind that it is some thirty degrees from the ecliptic, so a planet 'in conjunction' with Alcyone is still that distance away from it. Or, if someone wants to use Sirius in a chart, you might wish to make a disparaging comment on how it is forty degrees away from the ecliptic. William Blake had his Sun conjunct Antares, as gave a fierce intensity to his prophetic visions. Jimi Hendrix had a Venus-opposition-Saturn aligned with the Antares-Aldebaran axis, as may have helped with the 'cataclysmic chords' of his music. Lady Diana had the royal star Regulus (Lion's Heart) conjunct her north node, relevant for producing an heir to the throne, plus Spica on her MC, star of good fortune and abundance, and Algol on her Venus signifying difficulties in relationship. 'She had two of the best stars, and the worst' as Wanda Sellar said to me. Pluto reached Antares in May of 2000 (god of darkness meets heart of the Scorpion), when I felt that it lived up to its reputation: hellish scenes appeared in the Bosnian war, with images of rape-camps (that later turned out not to exist), while America was convulsed by a sexually poisonous theme involving its president. That transit seemed more significant than the much-hyped millenium eclipse of the previous year, but no astrology journal mentioned it. In February/March of 2001, British farming was devastated by the worst-ever Foot-and-Mouth epidemic, with Jupiter and Saturn in the Bull constellation and Saturn conjoining Algol the 'Medusa's head'. Sources: Eric Morse, The Living Stars, 1988; Galactic Studies, Philip Sedgwick. |