Astrologer Interview: Dr. H. (Regulus Astrology), Part 2 of 3

January 3, 2009 by Nina Gryphon

This is Part 2 of Gryphon Astrology’s three-part interview with Dr. H. of Regulus Astrology. Read Part 1 of the interview here.

—+++—

NG: What is another technique you worked with that did not prove accurate?

DH: A more general delineation technique I have had problems with is the hierarchical style of evaluating planetary condition by both quality and quantity. Much of this can be traced to Bonatti (if not earlier) with his demands that planets be ‘fortunate and strong’ to deliver effects. In my early student days, I was led to believe that should one of the Ascendant rulers be in detriment/fall and located a cadent house (usually 6^th or 12^th) that surely the person would reject significations of that planet as a life outlet for something better signified by a planet with some essential dignity in some other succedent or angular house. But this doesn’t hold water.

In the example I gave – an afflicted malefic in the 6^th house with some claim to the Ascendant – whenever the malefic in the 6^th was activated dynamically the individual suffered tremendous pain, illness, or took on a position of servitude. The individual appeared incapable of choosing a better life outlet. While this is a natal example, this kind of behavior has important implications for mundane astrology.

Bonatti, for instance, rejects a planet conjunct the Midheaven in an Ingress figure as Significator of the King should it have no essential dignity. So he would discard Saturn/Aries on the 10^th cusp in favor of some other planet to delineate the actions of the King. Maybe Bonatti is wrong. Perhaps the planet most closely aspecting the MC signifies the King whether or not it has any essential dignity.

NG: I think you’re right about Bonatti’s rejection of potential significators of the King if they had no essential dignity, or other afflictions. Do you think this is more an issue of bad astrology, or more of self-protection or buttering up the boss by the astrologer? If we use Bonatti’s method, as in your example, it would mean nothing bad could ever happen to the King.

DH: First off, even if the significator of the King is itself benefic, an aspect from a malefic can still harm the King so I have to disagree with your last comment. The March 2008 Aries Ingress is a good example with Sun/Aries a logical significator for the King in many geographical locations yet the Sun is square Mars/Cancer. This does not bode well for the King.

In any case, I don’t think it’s self-protection because the only way an astrologer can truly protect himself is to quit his job if he sees bad events for the King on the horizon, especially if a fall from power is forecast. I don’t think it’s buttering up the boss either because the only way the King would know the astrologer is buttering him up is for the King to have a sufficient understanding of the methodology that the King would know the astrologer was intentionally biasing his predictions. Since most Kings probably did not have that level of expertise this is really a moot question.

But more to the point: why would Bonatti go to such lengths in creating a checklist of over 50 questions for determining the significator of the King if instead he could just lie and make something up! Instead I think what’s going on here is Bonatti’s hierarchical style of delineation reflects his own personal philosophy which is extremely class conscious. That’s my instinct based on my read of Bonatti.

Besides Kings, another example is his discussion of sexual proclivities when delineating marriage. When he starts delineating conditions for ‘foul and filthy coitus’ we should ask ourselves: foul and filthy for whom? Heads of state wouldn’t want to get caught up with this. But suppose one is dealing with a professional hooker whose life is enhanced by ‘foul and filthy coitus.’ Is this such a bad condition for a hooker assuming she uses condoms for protection? Maybe not.

Regarding other techniques I tested, I also have problems with the notion of quantity: that angular, succedent, and cadent planets respectively deliver 100%, 50%, and 25% percent of their power. Consider the delineation of children. In Bonatti’s approach, children are promised if any significator of children (Jupiter, Venus, Moon, Mercury, Lord 5^th, P.Fortune, P.Children & their lords) are located in houses favorable for children (1^st, 11^th, 10^th, 7^th). Significators must also be in the fruitful water signs or the rather fruitful signs of Taurus, Sagittarius, and Aquarius. As an example, both Mercury and Venus in the sign of Taurus are correct planets in the correct sign; but if placed in the 12^th house children would not be predicted.

Rudy Giuliani’s natal figure (footnote 2) features this condition, yet he has a son and a daughter. Mercury signifies the son; Venus, the daughter. In the 1985 solar return prior to Andrew Giuliani’s birth on January 30, 1986, Taurus rises, with Mercury making its return to Taurus and joined by the North Node. Mercury rules the 5^th of children in the return. In effect an incorrect house placement for the significator of children in the natal was modified by an angular house placement in the return. So the idea that Mercury in the 12^th house delivers only 25% of its power is flat out wrong. Andrew Giuliani was born with more than an arm and a leg. He was fully-formed.

NG: Does that mean that dynamic triggers (such as progressions, Solar Returns, etc.) can compensate for faulty natal placements? Up to what point can the dynamic compensate for the faulty natal?

DH: So far the only technique capable of compensating for faulty natal placements I have found is the solar return. And if that is true, then the natal placement is modified for as long as the solar return is active and not a day longer. Keep in mind that these modifications can cut both ways.

George W. Bush’s 2005 solar return is an excellent example of how the hidden affairs of the 12^th house in the natal chart are made manifest when the 12^th house of Cancer is moved to the 10^th house in the solar return. Just two days into his solar return he fell off his bicycle in London the same day London was racked with a multiple bombing of the transportation system (July 7, 2005). Later in the year was the Hurricane Katrina disaster and negative publicity for the rendition of enemy combatants. So the hidden 12^th natal house was revealed in 2005 for everyone to see.

At this point some astrologers will start jumping up and down on mitigating natal chart placements by relocation. I mention this because in my early days it seemed such a logical notion that I made trips to physically relocate for my solar return for three or four years running. My testing shows birthday relocation does not work and I outline some concrete steps for those wishing to test the validity of relocation in Chapter 10. As it turns out I was quite fortunate that the relocated charts failed to work; had they done so I think I would have been maimed or killed several times over.

NG: In your working papers on Barack Obama’s birth time, you mention the need for out of sample tests to determine the accuracy of the given time. What exactly is an out of sample test, and how is it performed?

DH: A rectified chart can be likened to an econometric model whose independent variable is time and whose dependent variable is life. Models are based on a data sample; for rectification the sample consists of life events. Out-of-sample data is simply life events which occur during a time period not used to build the model.

For a nativity like Obama, there are two ways to do this. Now 47 years old, one might restrict life events through the age of 41 for rectification testing. Build the rectification model with life events through September 2002 and stop. All life events occurring from September 2002 to the present are considered out-of-sample. Now test these out-of-sample life events against the rectified model to see if the rectified horoscope based on life events through September 2002 could properly forecast events following September 2002 to the present. If the results are favorable, the model passes muster.

A second approach is to use all life events to date as the sample used to build the model. Then treat new events which occur in real time as out-of-sample events. Test these events against the model in real time. The second approach is what I have taken with Obama.

For Obama, I published a rectified time of 7:54:28 PM, Ascendant = 27AQ09’17”, on November 20, 2007 and have been watching the chart unfold ever since. Any predictive method used to create the rectification model can be employed in a real time test. Some techniques, like monthly profections, can help confirm the Ascendant sign. Other methods, like directions and dynamic activity to Arabic Parts, can confirm the exact degree and minute of the rectified Ascendant. So let’s get our hands dirty.

Consider this solar arc direction:

July 24, 2008. direct solar arc Ascendant trine Sun.

This is actually the only solar arc direction of a planet to either the Ascendant or Midheaven for the entire calendar year of 2008. So for using solar arc directions as a tool for out-of-sample tests, this is it.

Sun is the universal significator of fame and power. In the sign he rules, Sun/Leo is flamboyant and should produce an event conducive to projecting fame and power which is long lasting. What happened? This is the exact date Obama spoke at the Victory Column in Berlin, the most high profile campaign event of the year prior to the Democratic National Convention. The following day he met with French President Nicolas Sarkozy. In mundane astrology, France is assigned to Leo. Obama met with the French (Leo) President and discussed what amounted to a partnership with France for defeating the Taliban in Afghanistan. Business partners and open enemies are assigned to the 7^th house, the location of Obama’s Sun.

This event appears a match to the solar arc direction. It is evidence in favor of the rectification, but more events need to be tested. Arguably, one could make the case that this solar arc Ascendant trine Sun should really time his August 28 acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention, meaning the rectified time is in error by four minutes of degree, the amount needed to change the birth time to push the recomputed solar arc Ascendant trine Sun measurement to August 28 instead of July 24. One can go crazy with this, making adjustments for every new event. I prefer to wait at least six months and preferably a year before making an assessment.

One also has to realize that making these micro adjustments not only changes the Ascendant trine Sun direction but literally every other direction measurement used to build the initial model.

Dynamic activity to Arabic Parts is also helpful for out-of-sample tests. I first started to look at the Part of Servants 25AR54 and its antiscion 4VI06 after Obama’s foreign policy advisor Samantha Power was fired after making some ill-mannered comments about Hillary Clinton. It turns out that Power’s March 7, 2008 resignation was timed by the transit of Saturn located at 4VI08, only two minutes of degree from the antiscion of the Part of Servants. Continuing the saga was Jim Johnson’s forced resignation from the Vice President vetting committee on June 11, 2008 timed by the converse transit of the South Node located at 4VI05. Finally, after Saturn went direct and passed over the part’s antiscion again, Wes Clark stuck his foot in his mouth on June 29, 2008 when he made the following comment on John McCain: “I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.” Saturn was positioned at 4VI25 on that date, a bit wide of the part’s antiscion, but still close.

While Clark was not officially employed by the Obama campaign as far as I know, he was up until this time a contender for the VP slot. Shortly after his June 29 gaffe he disassociated himself from the Obama campaign. Maybe the Wes Clark gaffe is irrelevant. But there is no doubt that Samantha Power and Jim Johnson were employees and were terminated from the Obama campaign.

Identifying Saturn and the South Node as significators for the termination of employees is crucial to the logic of this out-of-sample test. Employees are assigned to the 6^th house. While some might assign employee termination to the 9^th house (4^th of the end-of-the-matter from the 6^th by derived houses), I have found the 1^st house (8^th from the 6^th) more reliable for employee termination. For Obama, Saturn rules the 1^st; South Node is positioned in the 1^st. Both Saturn and the South Node are significators for the death and/or termination of employees based on rulership and position.

There are some other events I have looked at, such as the transit of Pluto to the Part of Faith as a timer of Obama’s earlier Reverend Wright fracas. Overall I remain happy with the rectified model despite the official birth certificate time of 7:24 PM posted on June 12 by the Daily Kos blog. At the end of the day it is the horoscope which consistently works on an out-of-sample basis that I will always choose as a professional astrologer.

This is hard work; real roll up your sleeves kind of stuff. After doing it awhile one gets a better appreciation of why dedicated medieval predictive astrologers can take on only a handful of clients. I doubt I could ever service more than two or three clients if I use all the tools at my disposal.

Footnote 2: b. May 28, 1944, Brooklyn, NY, 6:02:37 AM EWT, Ascendant – 14GE454; Dr. H’s rectification.

—+++—

Read Part 1 of the interview with Dr. H. of Regulus Astrology.

Read Part 3 of the interview with Dr. H. of Regulus Astrology.

Bookmark to