Grand Cross

Minderwiz

Kibeth - the word 'planet' comes from the Greek for 'wanderer' - it's a 'wandering star' - so yes in Astrological terms the planets are 'stars' however in the main it's the wanderers that count in Astrology, simply because they move. Some of the fixed stars have also been given meaning - around 50 or so - but whilst that seems are lot, it is microscopic relative to the number of stars in the sky,

The Northern Cross can be seen in the sky (well depending on where you live and the time of year) but a Grand Cross cannot. It's impossible to go outside and look up in the sky and point one out. The reason for this is obvious with a moment's thought.

Such patterns are not asterisms, they are the result of drawing actual lines on a chart. Now humans work by pattern recognition and we do like to impose patterns on what we see - the Rorscach tests support that view. But not all patterns have to have meanings.

If Asteroids and points were allowed the situation at the moment is one of multiple Grand Crosses!!! cast a chart and look. My points here are that:

The more objects you allow, the more likely it becomes for a Grand Cross to be common - so what does it show besides the obvious aspects?

The planets that compose it cannot be ignored and indeed Mark Edmund Jones made that same point in his 1974 book on Aspect patterns. At some point we might well have Pluto, Uranus, Neptune and Chiron forming such a pattern so everyone on Earth born in a period of a year or so will have one in their charts (assuming there's a human race left by then) - does that make them a 'special feature' worthy of note?

One which comprises Moon, Mercury, Mars and Jupiter is fleeting, for only an hour or so - Very few people will have it in their charts - are the two Grand Crosses to be treated in the same fashion? (well I'm sure that some would take the former as a sign of the second coming or Armageddon or similar, so I suppose it would be worthy of note LOL)

Does the pattern impose a greater reality on the aspects? I can't prove that it does not, nor I think can anyone prove that it does. However if you start to treat the pattern as being the important thing and the aspects as having less importance, then IMHO you are putting the Astrocart before the Astrohorse (Pegasus??) LOL

Look to the fundamentals first - a Grand Cross, in itself,may or may not be an interesting secondary or tertiary feature the aspects between the planets may well be of primary importance
 

dadsnook2000

My view, again.

Four decades of chart work have shown, many times over, that paran-squares and oppositions constitute a powerful grand cross issue for the subject. In this case, it is even more powerful as it is aligned with the chart's powerpoints--the angles. While 90 degree squares are strong aspects to consider, the paran squares are far more potent as they, by definition, have to involve the chart angles.

As for asteroids comprising or being part of grand crosses, you have to realize that some 1400 significant asteroids spread around the zodiac will probably create a hundred or more grand crosses exact with 20 seconds of arc. It is just too much to deal with. If you just take angular asteroids, you'll still have too much to deal with. Martha Lang Wescott, the most diligent authority on asteroids, was a student of mine for several years. I know a bit about them but their use has to be a cautious one, keeping their role and impact in the proper perspective.

I thank you for your offer to interpret Assange's chart, but I've learned that Grand Cross subjects have so much happening on a periodic basis that following their life path is tiring. They wouldn't pay much attention to what was said or offered anyways, especially this poor soul. He has his own vision and his own devils to deal with. I already understand enough about him to satisfy any curiosity I might have. Dave
 

Kibeth

What I WOULD have liked to understand is what on Assange's chart makes him intellectually superior to 99% of the world (he's a a hacker). The government systems he's invaded are undoubtedly one of the best protected in the world. And what makes him an ethical one (most hackers will destroy the systems they invade without a second thought, but not Assange). He is a maverick for sure. What makes him move to the beat of a different drum from others? If his chart shows signs of insanity (afflicted Saturn for instance)? He's a fascinating character and nowhere near repulsive, personally.
 

dadsnook2000

Assange, as I see him.

I don't see him as intellectually superior in any way. His Mercury-MC opposite Mars-IC gives him a combination of argumentiveness, fear, angry thoughts, a sense of being subject to attack or disagreement. Along with this is Neptune-Ascendant opposite Saturn-Descendant, giving him a personal vision (Asc.-Nep) that had to be parsed relative to the reality of other's views. Was he right, were they right?

Then, you have these planets all in paran-square with each other and involve the angles. We have other concerns with this chart as well. Sun & Moon sextile and trine the horizontal axis --- his core personality is involved with how he reconciles his vision and his sense of the world's social structure (Desc. axis). With these chart constructs, he is not mentally superior, he is just another person with some really deep complexes that have to dealt with on a moment by moment basis. Distrust, fear, anger, deciet, limitations, communication to others and understanding of them. And all of this is a swirl of possibilities --- I don't see him getting personally involved in this.

Is he a hacker? Perhaps, to some extent. He didn't steal much of what is on Wikileaks. Others did. Others are the hackers or the thieves of records and information who pass it on to Wikeleaks. He is a facilitator by virtue of providing a technology framework which others can use and which he doesn't have to be personally involved moment by moment. He is seen as being the bad guy --- perhaps he is, but I see him as a facilitator with mischief on his mind and a reluctance to be personally, directly involved. I see him as being distant, at arms length to getting his fingers dirty.

Ethical. I don't think so. Neptune-Saturn square Mars point to depression, emotional control lacking in terms of how one acts, how one thinks. The vertical axis is in fixed signs of feelings, the horizontal axis is in mutable, thinking signs. If it was the other way around it might not be so bad. But his dreams, vision and manner of assessing the motives and relationships of/with others. Hence the distrust indicated by Mercury opposite Mars. No strong sense of ethics here, its all personal smoke and mirrors in which what he thinks is what is his reality is.

There is no personality attributes which are detestable. What is there is a person who wrestles with his own snakes and in doing so makes others do the same so that he can use the outside world to compare to his inner world. We all do that to some extent. He has just involved others in doing it for him. Dave
 

Minderwiz

Before we go any further on the dissection of Julian Assange, can we establish how reliable Dave's quoted chart details are?

Getting an accurate recorded birth time is always the issue facing an Astrologer, even the client/subject themselves can be unreliable, either through imparting false accuracy for what is in reality an estimated birth time or simply going on what they have been told by a relative. Many countries do not, as a matter of course, record the birth time on the birth certificate.

Now following up Dave's post I've found two different times quoted from two successively viewed websites. The Mountain Astrologer recently (7th Dec 2010) ran an article on it's website claiming to have access to insider information from someone who has seen the birth records:

http://mountainastrologer.com/tma/birth-time-for-julian-assange

This would yield a different Ascendant and MC to that quoted by Dave It also has Jupiter more angular than Neptune.

I checked for another reference and got a completely different time from

http://darkstarastrology.com/julian-assange-horoscope-eris/

Which is also different from Dave's and has Neptune/Saturn nowhere near an angle, thus (if true) invalidating most of Dave's conclusions

So we now have three possble Ascendant/MC combinations from 3 successive sources. No doubt there are more variants out there.

So Dave, what is your source and how reliable is it?
 

Kibeth

dadsnook2000 said:
Is he a hacker? Perhaps, to some extent. He didn't steal much of what is on Wikileaks. Others did. Others are the hackers or the thieves of records and information who pass it on to Wikeleaks. He is a facilitator by virtue of providing a technology framework which others can use and which he doesn't have to be personally involved moment by moment. He is seen as being the bad guy --- perhaps he is, but I see him as a facilitator with mischief on his mind and a reluctance to be personally, directly involved. I see him as being distant, at arms length to getting his fingers dirty.

Ethical. I don't think so. Neptune-Saturn square Mars point to depression, emotional control lacking in terms of how one acts, how one thinks. The vertical axis is in fixed signs of feelings, the horizontal axis is in mutable, thinking signs. If it was the other way around it might not be so bad. But his dreams, vision and manner of assessing the motives and relationships of/with others. Hence the distrust indicated by Mercury opposite Mars. No strong sense of ethics here, its all personal smoke and mirrors in which what he thinks is what is his reality is.

This one is easiest to address.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange#Hacking

says:

"In 1987, after turning 16, Assange began hacking under the name "Mendax" (derived from a phrase of Horace: "splendide mendax," or "nobly untruthful").[2] He and two other hackers joined to form a group which they named the International Subversives. Assange wrote down the early rules of the subculture: "Don’t damage computer systems you break into (including crashing them); don’t change the information in those systems (except for altering logs to cover your tracks); and share information".[2]

In response to the hacking, the Australian Federal Police raided his Melbourne home in 1991.[19] He was reported to have accessed computers belonging to an Australian university, the Canadian telecommunications company Nortel,[2] and other organisations, via modem.[20] In 1992, he pleaded guilty to 24 charges of hacking and was released on bond for good conduct after being fined AU$2100.[2][21] The prosecutor said "there is just no evidence that there was anything other than sort of intelligent inquisitiveness and the pleasure of being able to—what's the expression—surf through these various computers".[2]"

And the fact that it takes ability to hack, and how many in the world can claim that they've hacked into a computer before? Over 99% of the modern world can't. AND those who did also vandalized the systems they hacked into. Like release a virus/worm/etc that exploits a working system to the world.
 

Kibeth

@ Minderwiz

Townsville 6 Australia 07/03/1971 14:05

^ It's anyone's guess, but I'll take this one.
 

Minderwiz

@Kibeth

Well on the basis of my investigation to date, I'd agree with you, or at least the possible span of time quoted by TMA.

I have found several Astrologers who have commented that the Interpol Arrest warrant was their first information about Assange's natal details, and that that warrant gave time of birth as 'unknown' However the Warrant is reported as giving the date of birth as 3rd July 1971. This is now widely quoted on the web, even for non-Astrological purposes. On 3rd July the Sun cannot possibly be at 29 Cancer as quoted by Dave - his chart must relate to a birth date much later in July, around 22nd/23rd depending on rounding of the degree.

Now Dave may well have access to a more reliable source than TMA and Interpol,though as an established professional journal I would have thought that they would have done a proper verification of their source (hopefully) and I would have thought that Interpol would also have reliable sources

I'm not sure of the recording of birth times in Australia - the Interpol warrant implies that the data is not recorded on the birth certificate, or at least was not recorded at the time of his birth. The TMA supports that inference by specifically saying that the data was not on the certificate but was from associated medical records of the birth. Perhaps an Australian member can shed light on the practice there - is it National or by State?

Edited to add

Assange seems to have been very mobile in the last few yeas, so we might also need to consider whether Dave's reading applies to the 'present' Assange - can the shift of location mitigate those squares/oppositions as they are now no longer angular? (assuming they were in the first place and assuming that a peripatetic existence qualifies as 'relocation')

In particular, would the paran squares hold if relocated to another place - the planet involved my not have been simltaneously angular on the date of birth at the new location, at any time at all during that day.

Apparently registration of births in Australia is a State function, so anyone know if Queensland records birth times?
 

Minderwiz

For Kibeth

I can't respond to your PM because your inbox is full and you need to clear space. I've tried several times but the site is adamant that you have to act first LOL
 

Kibeth

@ Minderwiz

I've cleaned up some messages now. Sry, didn't know the box was full.

Ahhh ... It appears the mobile lifestyle goes even further back.

According to The New Yorker
link: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/07/100607fa_fact_khatchadourian?currentPage=all

"Assange’s mother believed that formal education would inculcate an unhealthy respect for authority in her children and dampen their will to learn. “I didn’t want their spirits broken,” she told me. In any event, the family had moved thirty-seven times by the time Assange was fourteen, making consistent education impossible."

What we do know is he's a Sun Cancer and the Mother plays a very important part of a Cancer's life from a very young age. Thus it was Nurture, perhaps partly, that made him rebellious to the establishment, as compared to Nature, which we try to derive from his natal chart.

I've also wondered about the white hair. Rather unusual for a man still in his prime. I thought it was his natural color was platinum blond until I read this (from the same source):

"In 1999, after nearly three dozen legal hearings and appeals, Assange worked out a custody agreement with his wife. Claire told me, “We had experienced very high levels of adrenaline, and I think that after it all finished I ended up with P.T.S.D. It was like coming back from a war. You just can’t interact with normal people to the same degree, and I am sure that Jules has some P.T.S.D. that is untreated.” Not long after the court cases, she said, Assange’s hair, which had been dark brown, became drained of all color."

What really makes this guy tick? This evidence suggests "his son"!


@ Dave

If his chart concurs that his life was smoke and mirrors, illusions, then it'd be about tearing them down. Isn't it?