Grand Cross

dadsnook2000

Assange's chart

Some charts are very difficult to read objectively without having either extensive knowledge and information about the subject (public and personal) or being in direct dialog with the subject.

The problem comes from linking each astrological symbol and each grouping of symbols to specific actions, responses, feelings, attitudes and situations. We do this often on this list and other places where we practice, BUT we don't always have to deal with a Grand Cross type of chart with that pattern at the angles. This is a tough challenge.

The information you have noted is helpful in contributing to the discussion about him and the consequences of his current direction in life. As I had noted about his Neptune-versus-Saturn pattern, which I also have in my chart, he seems to be confusing reality (as seen by others) with idealism (as seen by him). This is one of those astrological patterns which can be used as a bridge between taking a vision and making something practical happen with it. I did this through marketing, sales, product engineering (in my work life) and through astrology and tarot and graphic arts (in my personal life).

It is my normal practice to start assessing a chart based on the one or two most prominent factors -- in Assange's case this meant the Sun-Moon and the Grand Cross. Unfortunately, this is a very entwined and complex set of symbols AND the nature of his family life and adult life only complicates it further.

Perhaps we should contrast this with another GC chart. Dave
 

Minderwiz

dadsnook2000 said:
Some charts are very difficult to read objectively without having either extensive knowledge and information about the subject (public and personal) or being in direct dialog with the subject.

The problem comes from linking each astrological symbol and each grouping of symbols to specific actions, responses, feelings, attitudes and situations. We do this often on this list and other places where we practice, BUT we don't always have to deal with a Grand Cross type of chart with that pattern at the angles. This is a tough challenge.

Yes reading a chart cold is never easy and there can be quite a few problems with getting an accurate reading, not having access to the subject being one of them

Dadsnook2000 said:
It is my normal practice to start assessing a chart based on the one or two most prominent factors -- in Assange's case this meant the Sun-Moon and the Grand Cross. Unfortunately, this is a very entwined and complex set of symbols AND the nature of his family life and adult life only complicates it further.

Perhaps we should contrast this with another GC chart. Dave

Yes that seems a good idea. Kibeth has just posted a thread specifically on Assange and no doubt that will yield some pertinent information which we can use here.

I'm still not sure about those paran squares and relocation - perhaps you can clear that one up before we go on.

I haven't got any charts with a GC in it, as we've ruled out my own on the grounds of it using the nodes. Perhaps you have one that you can put in, or if anyone has such a chart they could 'donate' it. Then we can contrast it with Assanges's chart, as you suggest.
 

Astraea

Hi to all. I have been following this thread with interest and unfortunately cannot add much to it, as I am unable to type for very long. But I did want to make a couple of points.

First, it bears repeating that Assange's data is speculative at this point, even though the chart it yields seems to fit; until we see actual corroboration of birth time (his date and place of birth are confirmed by Interpol), everything said about personal points like the angles must be regarded as provisional.

Second, in Dadsnook's interpretation of the chart, the Sun is stated to be at 29 degrees of Cancer, which cannot be true for a July 3 birthday. So I wonder what date of birth Dadsnook is actually using.

Minderwiz' points about parans and relocation seem quite relevant to me, as well. But until we know for certain what Assange's angles are, we can't really have a good discussion about parans - relocated or not.
 

dadsnook2000

Relocation and chart patterns

The planets at the angles of Assange's natal chart are important in that they are an imprint he carries for life. That said, a relocation (not a short stay) to a new "home" area will change the angles and the positioning of planets at those angles---unless one moves a corresponding distance such that a natal angle is brought to another angle based on the new location. This happens more than one might think. Yoko Ono, moving from Tokyo to New York city is one case, Enrico Fermi moving from Rome to Chicago where he built the first Atomic Pile is another case that comes to mind.

However, when it comes to Solar Returns, if one is at or near the latitude of their birth then it is quite possible to have the natal angles at the solar return angles. They will definitely show up on the S/R charts progressed angles during the coming year. In these cases, the natal imprint will be strongly reaffirmed.

Whereas Assange seems to have shifted his base of operations from the southern hemisphere to Europe, this may not be the case for him. However, when any of the GC planets are activated by a transit or a S/R or daily chart angle then the whole GC pattern will be either activated or ready to act if another factor or two is involved. Since there are always other planets moving around, those factors are likely to occur from time to time.

Remember, Leopards don't lose their spots, they just adapt to different hiding places. If stand by my views that he is sneaky and doesn't trust others. This not only shapes his public ventures but is a reflection of his private life---for this we must be sympathetic. Dave
 

Astraea

dadsnook2000 said:
The planets at the angles of Assange's natal chart are important in that they are an imprint he carries for life.
But what data are you using to arrive at those angles? We can't speak of angles until we have a reliable birth time.

Edited to add: Sun could only be at 29 degrees Cancer on July 23, not on July 3; and the angles stated in the above post (Sag Asc., Leo MC) do not correspond with those of the speculative 2:05 PM birth time discussed above, and referenced in a separate thread.
 

dadsnook2000

Birth time

I am using the data of July 23, 1971 at 2:05 PM, Townsville, Australia 146E48 19S16. That yields an MC of 16 Leo, an Ascendant of 8 Sag. For this data, the chart is valid. If anyone has another date and/or time and/or place, we can cast a chart for that alternative. This is the only data I have to work with. Dave
 

Astraea

Dave, earlier in the thread, several references were made to an anonymous source who claims to have seen a birth record (not a birth certificate) stating a time of 2:05 PM on July 3, 1971. This is the time and date reported (but unverified) by The Mountain Astrologer and Skyscript. Interpol gives his date of birth as July 3, 1971. A July 23 date of birth seems unlikely and puts any serious discussion of those angles out of reach, at this point.

Edited to add: The specific post referenced above is #15.
 

Minderwiz

But of course if he was born on 3rd July, at 14:05 as quoted - by TMA/Skyscript - NONE of the four planets would be sufficiently angular - Saturn at 1 degree Gemini is 46 degrees from the Descendant at 17 Taurus. that is the worst but Neptune is 13 degrees away from the Ascendant, and Mars 15 degrees away from the IC.

If we wind the chart back to Mercury on the MC from its 'natal' position in the ninth, Mars moves to the fifth House, Saturn is on the cusp of the eighth and Neptune on the cusp of the second.

So how confident are you that there was a Grand Cross to begin with?

Where did you get the date of 23 July from?

And it seems curious that you used a time of 14:05 which matches the time quoted on TMA and Skyscript - either they've read the data incorrectly or you have - so let's have your source so we can put this to bed. If your source is reliable I can also contact Deb Houlding and let her know.
 

Astraea

Minderwiz said:
But of course if he was born on 3rd July, at 14:05 as quoted - by TMA/Skyscript - NONE of the four planets would be sufficiently angular
Yes, exactly. We need to have a well sourced set of data before we can reliably interpret angular configurations in an individual's chart.
 

Minderwiz

Furthermore a 20 day discrepency significantly affects the Sun/Moon relationship which you and I both a lot of emphasis on

If the date really is 3rd July, your whole reading unravels

If the date is really 23rd then Deb Houlding had better be told before she makes an even bigger fool of herself

Please help Dave