Dennis Elwell, in Astrology Quarterly, Summer 1998It has always seemed to me to be providential, if not positively miraculous, that viewed from our planet the disc of the Moon is exactly the same size as that of the Sun, a fact seen to dramatic effect when the Sun is totally eclipsed. This is among the many astronomical coincidences that intrigue Dr Kollerstrom, and from which he deduces that the universe is more than mere mechanism. For astronomers, of course, the happy correlation between the relative diameters and distances of the sun and Moon arises from pure chance. The issue for astrologers is whether they accept that verdict, and if not, what other explanations there might be.
Some astrologers, while recognising that a solar eclipse seems to produce 'effects' on earth, will simply accept the astronomer's version. Others could well believe that, within the total organism of Earth and heavens, eclipses serve a purpose which would not be achieved without the existence of the physical mechanism, no more than we could translate out intentions into action without the mechanism of bones and sinews. There may indeed be cosmic intentions, and in that context one recalls that Rudolf Steiner described eclipses as valves which permit the exchange of certain spiritual forces between the earth and its cosmic environment.
Reading these thoughtful essays, I realised afresh what a loss it is that astrologers have yet to reach a consensus on what sort of universe they are living in. Nor have they developed their special view of reality in a coherent and comprehensive way. In blinding contrast, astronomers have no doubt at al about the nature of their universe, but the author's audacious thesis is that astrology has yet much to teach them. He deplores the schism between astronomy and astrology that has lasted for three and a half centuries, and suggests that with the millennium upon us it might be possible to work towards a reconciliation.
If only! The big question is whether astrology, as it stands at present, possesses the vitality to struggle meaningfully with mechanistic science. Dr Kollerstrom is fascinated by the paralleles to be drawn beten the physical characteristics of the planets and their astrological significance, and offers some eye-opening facts. Thus he describes how the Voyager space probe arrived at Uranus, to discover that it and its moon Miranda had all the bizarre eccentricities that astrologers might have suspected. He goes on: 'After managing so well their precision hardware for the Voyager mission, the astrophysicists ought now to turn to the astrologer, who could hep them appreciate what it al means. Otherwise they will merely be left with a lot of gee-whiz data that cannot be pieced together.'
Apart from pointing out that the latest observations of the solar system tend to confirm astrological expectations, it must be doubted whether current astrological knowledge is so well organised that it could even begin to piece them together to demonstrate 'what it all means.' Astronomers would be more convinced if astrologers had told them, in advance of the mission, what Voyager would find. So we are back with the familiar problem, of how astrology can offer a more robust challenge to conventional explanations, or at least to augment them. Some of the ten essays in this volume expose the inadequacies of those explanations, as one draws away from the 'third rock from the Sun' to observe the Moon and planets. Needless to say, while astrophysicists admit to gaps in their understanding, they insist that given time the laws of physical science will prove adequate - and without any assistance from astrologers, thank you!
Nick Kollerstrom believes that astronomy and astrology are two sides of the same coin. Obviously both study the heavens. But surely they can only belong to the same coin to the extent that astrology is prepared to embrace the causal mechanisms of physical science, otherwise they must remain poles apart, approaching phenomena like eclipses from utterly different standpoints? Part of the reason that astrology does not present a united front is that whereas some researchers are not prepared to look beyond physical explanations for observed astrological effects, for others the value of astrology is that it points to causes which are supraphysical. Until astrologers reach agreement among themselves they perhaps do not deserve to be heard.
The picture might have been different if giants like Kepler and Galileo, with a foot in both camps, had effectively reconciled the differences in their own minds. Two of Kollerstrom's illuminating essays, and two appendices, are devoted to Kepler and Galileo, and make it plain that the latter's astrological interests have been suppressed by a hard-nosed science anxious to claim it for their own.
Nick Kollerstrom is himself admirably positioned to present an astrology in which direct physical effects on the one hand, and synchronistic phenomena on the other, can co-exist. His previous publications have included lunar planting and the planetary metals, both subjects on which he might find some measure of official scientific interest, if not approval. Yet he is not afraid to step outside the strict parameters of physical science, as here, with an essay about the baffling media attack on astrology over its alleged omission of the '13th sign' of the zodiac, Ophiuchus.
He present a chart for sunrise on the day the story broke, and finds planetary links with another attack by 18 Nobel laureates and other leading scientists some 20 years earlier. I must say I pondered for a long time over the Ophiuchus chart, as he calls it, because it is important to ask what any chart is really saying. If we claim it represents reality, then what reality, whose reality? For astrologers this chart marked a spontaneous media campaign in which their most publicised tenet - a 12-sign zodiac- was held up to ridicule, without them being able to mount an effective defence. Yet from the rationalist viewpoint it represented a major triumph over superstition, a breath of fresh air, and there must have been much smugness among the 'I told you so' brigade to find themselves thus vindicated. Or is a chart like this neutral, giving comfort to neither side? Does it represent a non-partisan comment on earthly events from some higher level of description?
Maybe astrology itself is all about a higher level or organisation, and should not strain its unique insights too far for the sake of reaching an accommodation with the discoveries of physical science. Those discoveries are usually provisional, and on their way to becoming something else, which - at a rendezvous in the far future -may be more easily reconciled with the astrologer's vision. Meantime, in the bridge-building necessary for an eventual understanding, astrologers like Nick Kollerstrom offer a safe pair of hands.
Diana Rosenberg, The Mountain Astrologer, Jan 1998"With the new millennium, astronomy and astrology have got to come together! They've been together during the most creative epochs in human history, such as the Renaissance .. we've had three and one-half centuries of this tragic schizoid split!"
NK, personal conversation, 6.17.97
Nick Kollerstom, an astrologer with a Ph.D in the History ofv Science, has set himself an ambitious goal: he will be satisfied with nothing less than restoring the glorious structure of the real sky to astrologers, and its anthropocentric meaning, mystery, and wonder to astronomers. To this end he has written Interface, Astronomical Essays for Astrologers, a collection displaying his wide range of erudition and study.
Each essay elucidates an area he has studied in depth: the exquisite patterns woven by the planets in their long-term cycles; the senselessly rigid scientific training that teaches astronomers that they absolutely may not use their imagination to understand the significance of their discoveries; the images beamed from space probes that affirm the ancient 'signatures' of the planets; the mysterious resonance tying the Earth to the length of Venus's day; details (and proofs) concerning the activities of Galileo and Kepler as astrologers, with new information about Galileo's horoscope; the recent flap over Ophiuchus being "the 13th sign"; the 1975 CSICOP attack by 186 scientists; the emergence and development of our zodiac of signs and its source constellations; the Galactic Alignment of 1999 (when the Galactic Equator reaches an exact intersection with the ecliptic), which can only happen once every 13,000 years!
As Melanie Reinhart's excellent foreword points out, "Nick's work opens the door on the world of symbols and correspondences elucidated through connections old and new." In each essay he highlights the extraordinary "coincidences" that form the structure of our celestial habitat: for instance, the fact that the Moon can exactly eclipse the sun because the Sun is 400 times larger than the Moon in diameter, and 400 times farther away; the amazing synchrony of the Saros cycle: for synodic cycle months it comes to 18 years, 11 1/3 days, equal to those of the Node-cycle months of 18 years, 11 1/3 days, equal to Apogee-Perigee months of 18 years, 11 ‡ days. And then there's the Metonic cycle, wherein 235 Synodic periods of the Moon equals 19 cycles of the Earth around the Sun, to within two hours!
I found synastry conections between the charts of famous astronomer/astrologers fascinating. I noticed, for instance, that Galileo's Neptune is the same degree as Kepler's Mars, and Galileo's North Node is the same degree as Kepler's Mercury! The difficult attempt at collaboration between Kepler and Tycho Brahe was certainly not helped by the fact that Brahe's Pluto was on Kepler's MC, and Nick points out that while Tycho's chart had a predominance of septiles, Kepler's, in contrast, was chock full of quintiles, demonstrating their essentially incompatible temperaments. Another "coincidence" that Nick discusses is the virtually exact opposition of the Royal Stars Aldebaran (the Bulls Eye) and Antares (the Scorpion's Heart). These two doozies turn up on virtually every turning point, including national, racial, religious and nuclear issues! And there's more ...
The Germans have a saying klein aber oho! (small, but oh my!). In only 92 pages Dr. Kollerstrom manages to condense vital information in astrology/astronomy. He has put the matter simply: "Let us hope that astrologers and astronomers can learn to communicate on this matter. There is, after all, only one sky above us."
Nick Campion in The Astrological Journal, September 1997Nick Kollerstrom is one of the sharpest and most original thinkers in contemporary astrology. He has been stimulating the astrological world with his work and insights for over twenty years and if he has a particular genius it is in his ability to reconcile astronomy and astrology, science and symbolism. And it's that word symbolism that is most important, for while most scientists believe that astrology can be understood through reductionist number-crunching, Nick understands that the phenomenon itself depends on a willingness to see significance in symbols. But he also, with his lunar-planting work (with Simon Best) and Kolisko experiments, has illustrated the alchemical proposition that the material world is permeated with the same principles represented by the planets. This latest collection of Nick's work contains a variety of essays on Kepler, Galileo, Ophiuchus, Venus, Space Probes and Planetary Images and the sidereal zodiac. It makes delightful reading and is sure to open astrologers minds to new possibilities, in particular, perhaps, raising their sights from their charts to the stars.
