Solar Eclipse conjunct natal North Node

I totally agree eclipses are after all New Moons, I just call them "on steroids" LOl (I hope Susan Miller will fogive me taking this from her). Usually what happens at an eclipse time to me is not a particular event but a chain of events that lead to changes. They are usually everyday events. Like at the last Solar Eclipse on this same North Node which I cited above. The changes affected my life for many years to come and in a sense - forever, being able and willing to take responsibility of myself, work, etc. I read that a Solar Eclipse affects the career as a rule. Last one on this point did so. Now, I'm trying to figure out if this one will do the same or is it 7th house stuff, or is it both - may be a partner, may be a boss...

I know you don't use Neptune and Pluto but I do because they've worked for me, Neptune rules the 2nd, Pluto - the 10th and since this lunation happens in the 10th and the nodes return will also happen in the 10th, I keep an eye on him. By the way, Mars's transits (if I should look at him as ruler of the 10th) are almost always zero productive for me. I can't even recall last time when he as felt by me. Mercury usually brings more significant results, especially when it comes to my son as a ruler of the 5th.

I'll be grateful if you can just take a quick look, I can use just a few guidelines and start digging myself from there. I don't know much about all the technics you use but I do know progressions, directions and solar charts. Thank you.

Some comments on the Metonic Cycle

Ronia said:

I'll be grateful if you can just take a quick look, I can use just a few guidelines and start digging myself from there. I don't know much about all the technics you use but I do know progressions, directions and solar charts. Thank you.

Click to expand...

OK I'll do that

I did do some charts relating to the Metonic Cycle, which you might find useful in respect of the last part of your question = the Node Return. I've kept yout natal details out of this post as you did not publically disclose them, but if you want the relevant charts I can send them to you (or at least the relevant details).

Strictly speaking the Metonic Cycle is the time between two New Moons which occur on the same day of the year and in the same or very nearly the same zodiacal degree. This period is 19 years with only a very small error. This is not quite the same as the time taken for the Nodes to return to the same degree, which is 18.6 years - known as the Draconic period. The difference between the two cycles is due to the difference between tropical lunar month of just over 27 days and the synodic month of 29.5 days. The Metonic cycle is called after Meton of Athens who first (as far/as we know) codified it about 432 BC, though it was known well before that. It therefore has influenced Astrology for well over 2,500 years.


The New Moon before You birth occurred on October 5th at 11 degrees 16 minutes of Libra. Fast forward 19 years to October and a New Moon occurs at 11 degrees 58 Libra. Go forward to October 5th 2013 and it will occur at 12 degrees 22 minutes of Libra. The timings are not precise but the trend is clear, the degree of the New Moon is creeping forward slightly each cycle.

Now if you look at your Solar Return aged 19 (Tropical not precessed) You will find that on the days of your Solar Returns you also had a Lunar Returns. Look forward to your Solar Return in 2013 and you will find that the same happens again - your Solar Return and Lunar Return occur on the same day (and close together) This will happen whether we use True Node or Mean Node (though I have used Mean Nodes for my charts).

Here we have two clearly relevant events, which do not depend on which measuring technique you use for the Nodes and to which you can apply standard techniques relating to Solar Returns and Lunar Returns.

You used the term 'on steroids' for eclipses, (incidentally there are four eclipses scheduled of this year so I'd be interested if you 'felt' the previous two and indeed the next two) so you might consider these two events Solar Returns on steroids LOL The are special days (foreshadowing special years/months?)

It will be worth considering whether anything significant happened at age 19, especially in that first month. That might give you a guide to whether the next one is going to be significant too - though obviously you will need to look at the chart. You will get further ones but the 19 year cycle will separate them, so ages 18, 38, 57, 76 and 95 are the ones to look out for.

Minderwiz, thank you for taking the time!

You can post the charts here, they may help someone else too, at least as a technic. I don't know anything about this cycle but at age 18 not 19, in 1993 (this is the same time as I had a Solar Eclipse at the same degree as this one), as I wrote above, I took charge of my life seriously. I got my first job, I realized I was alone, I started paying my bills, I decided I was going to go to the university and started preparing myself while working at the same time. It was a life changing time. Unfortunately I can't remember the exact month but in any case it would have been past the summer. I finished school around June, then vacation, so I wouldn't have started working before September. It was a gradual process that happened in a couple of months - all these realizations and decisions. It set the tone for a very long time ahead. At 19, in 1994, I got enrolled in the university and practically my studies started in October. I can't remember anything else but I think I may have begun a very serious relationship around this time, it lasted five years and I ended another one which had lasted on and off for years as well, we met in high school.

Those were not happy times overall. There was a feeling of loneliness and burdensome experiences. Despite the successes - job, studying, contacts, the overall feeling I remember is not positive.

I do feel the eclipses if they are close to a planet or angle or point. This year I recall a Lunar Gemini/Sagittarius one which hit my Neptune and indeed, there was an impact, on the personal front, very Neptunian in nature. I know it because I had expected it, one of the very few things I have predicted for myself correctly. LOL There were however progressions to support it too.

I have never known about these Solar and Lunar returns in particular years, more to read! I keep raking my mind but I can't recall anything else for 1994... I'll think more carefully and I'll take a look at those charts, may be they will help my memory. Thanks again for explaining all that and for taking a look.

This is the first time I've looked at this phenomenon, so please bear with me. Could you please confirm your location on your nineteenth birthday. I have cast them on the basis that you were in Bulgaria at that time but, as I know you emigrated for a time, I just want to make sure I've got the 'right' chart in terms of location.

I'd also like to just check up on the precession correction, I only tried the Tropical but in principle the same should be true of that, as precession will affect all planets equally. However I'd be happy to see it in black and white LOL.

I also want to check a couple of other predictive techniques for the same period, just to see how things stack up. I'm obviously not going to do more than present the info and give you some tips, though I think you will also look at your secondary progressions as well.

I'll also include the outers in the chart so that you can check them as well.

Edited to add:

I've checked using precession correction, it works at 19 (not surprisingly) at 38 it's still within reasonable bounds as though it's the previous day, it's only a matter of 12 hours or so (though much wider than the tropical differences) but by 57 there's over a day difference between Solar and Lunar Return. A precession correction factor would seem to be necessary, though as Meton used the stars for his calculations I would anticipate that he effectively used sidereal years. However precession is cumulative so perhaps he didn't follow the cycle through for more than a couple of observations.

Or more likely I'm missing something obvious LOL. Dave as a user of precession correction will no doubt point out my errors (I hope)

Minderwiz, I was here, yes, I had just finished school at 18, in Sofia. I didn't leave this country until much later, around my Saturn return, though I travelled a lot.

I'm sorry for not being much aware of all these precession corrections, I don't really understand the issue.

Ronia said:

Minderwiz, I was here, yes, I had just finished school at 18, in Sofia. I didn't leave this country until much later, around my Saturn return, though I travelled a lot.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the location, that is what I used, so I don't need to recast any charts

Ronia said:

I'm sorry for not being much aware of all these precession corrections, I don't really understand the issue.

Click to expand...

Well it's only important if you have taken up Dave's method of casting precession corrected solar returns. Precession in a nutshell is the cumulative slight difference between the Sun's travel through a Tropical Year (from Vernal Equinox to Vernal Equinox) and the Sidereal Year (Sun's return to the same point in the Constellation of Aries). This cumulative amount is equal to 1 degree further travel for the Sun every 72 years in it's sidereal cycle compared to its tropical cycle. At age 19 the difference is just over a quarter of a degree, but by 57 it's nearly a full degree and by 76 it's just over a full degree. as you grow older your precessed solar return comes increasingly later, so by 72 there's approximately a day's difference between the two.

I use Tropical Returns, but do occasionally look at the precessed ones, but in this case we can ignore precession (Dave might want to comment on that separately)

Incidentally I very stupidly ignored the fact that the Moon travels faster than the Sun and so over time it's 'lead' over the Sun in precessed solar returns will grow.

Thanks for the explanation! I've never used precession... I don't know how it has affected my Solar Returns, they seem to work well enough for me, but I'm learning, of course. Trying to limit my technics until I feel really comfortable with them.

Precession correction

I would like to add clarification to a point that Minderwiz noted. Precession is indeed cumulative, one degree of shift in the Sun's position (relative to the star background) over 72 years does not seem to be much.

BUT, CONSIDER THIS. When constructing a Solar Return chart, if one was some 36 years of age, the Sun position would be corrected by half a degree. This results in the MC of the Solar Return chart being advanced 12 hours or 6 signs, totally changing the interpretive meaning of the chart. So, the big important point is not that the Sun's position shifts a few minutes of a degree but that the time associated with that shift causes the chart to be shifted dramatically --- changing the interpretation greatly.

Many astrologers use Solar Returns, read them as if they were a natal chart, and find them not to be overly useful. I wonder why. Solar Returns should be read as "cyclic" charts, which are read in terms of their angular activity. Only those planets at/near angles are considered. "Wait", you say, doesn't this give too little information to gather from the Solar Return? No. Consider two points:

1) Isn't it better to have one, two or three angular planets that provide a simple, clear statement rather than have hundreds of inter-related factors that present a complex and confusing statement?

2) Being a cyclic chart, the Solar Return chart can be proportionately "advanced" from one MC position to next year's MC position on a daily basis. One can read the daily charts to see how the Solar Return's meaning changes and evolves over time. It is like having a daily diary that can be written and read ahead of time.

I don't want to simplify that second point. It takes some capability as an astrologer to employ these methods. They are not for beginners. But, gosh, are they effective. There are other forms of cyclic charts which are easier to use for beginners as well as being effective tools for experienced and professional astrologers. For those who are interested in these astrological approaches they may visit my blog site to see examples of how it is all done. There are some three years of archives to review. Dav

Well, this would mean that not using precession gives a totally inaccurate Solar Return... If the angles move so significantly with precession, then it would make the non precessed chart totally off. But I've noticed my Solar Returns are quite correct actually... How does this work? Planets are still conjuncting either natal planets or angles, even if the chart is not precessed.

Ronia said:

Well, this would mean that not using precession gives a totally inaccurate Solar Return... If the angles move so significantly with precession, then it would make the non precessed chart totally off. But I've noticed my Solar Returns are quite correct actually... How does this work? Planets are still conjuncting either natal planets or angles, even if the chart is not precessed.

Click to expand...

I'll not anticipate Dave's reply too much, but I do remember him posting once that he saw precessed charts as more indicative of 'real world events' and tropical solar returns more indicative of psychological factors. I'm taking that from memory so I hope he's going to step in there. There's an argument that both charts show different dimensions of the same thing and one throws light on the other and vice versa.

I don't routinely precess solar returns but I've seen enough of Dave's methods to know that they work and work well. As Dave says even half a day's worth of precession at age 36 moves the angles through approximately 180 degrees (sometimes a bit more sometimes a bit less) so the chart is different and different planets can be at the angles. I didn't wish to imply that half a day was of no value in interpretative approaches. Don't forget that in half a day the Moon can move some 6 degrees and in a day 12 or 13 degrees, so that alone and the angular change can make for a very different reading from the chart.

A traditional view of the Solar Return is in some ways quite different than Dave's method but on some consideration the same points hold true. The Solar Return is a cyclical chart (slightly different cycle). As Dave says, it is not read as a natal chart is read. There is a comparison of the angular change from the natal chart, angular planets are very important in the reading, and an analysis of aspects between return chart and natal chart made.

The advantage of Dave's method is that he can direct the angles through the rest of the year on a daily basis. There's no similar technique for the traditional SR. Either Lunar Returns have to be used (which don't give daily charts) or an alternative method has to be used - Lilly used Profections which can be directed on a daily basis. I have experimented with those and I do find that they are quite effective, but again it takes some degree of knowledge to do that (though simple profections are quite easy) and of course you really need some software that can do the calculations for you.

a couple of years ago when Dave was writing his book and I was doing the thread on Traditional Approaches, I used these methods and Primary Directions on the chart of Bill Clinton, which Dave featured in his book. Although not producing identical predictions, they were close enough to Dave's findings to validate both his methods and the traditional approach - In other words it's quite possible to use different techniques form different approaches and still come to the same conclusions. That's the beauty of Astrology.