Jim Eshelman

Feel free to post your full birthdata. We'll attach a natal chart for you. Discuss your own chart, tell us what you've learned from it, ask questions, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4402
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Jim Eshelman

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:44 am

For others reference (though most of you have the information), here's my chart. Per birth certificate: October 10, 1954, 4:13 AM, Rochester, IN.

I lived in Rochester until May, 1973 when I moved briefly to Lafayette, IN, and then to Greencastle, IN for a year and a half. Late in 1974 we moved to Indianapolis, which I left June 5, 1975, relocating to Southern California. I was in various parts of Orange County (Irvine, Placentia, etc.) for a few months, and then moved to West Hollywood, CA in December 1975. We moved to Los Angeles (essentially the same coordinates, but LA proper) in the last half of 1977 and have lived in the same place ever since. (I had dual residence here and in San Diego from roughly the start of 1981 to the start of 1983 - I forgot the month, but February is a good estimate for both the going and the return.)

ImageImage
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4402
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:45 am

I thought I would use my chart to make a few remarks about houses. Please remember the usual caveats : I can't say for certain that houses exist. Anecdotally, I'm sufficiently confident that they exist, but there is no statistical study that yet has validated the existence of houses. (This could be because of the statistical and mathematical complexities of this particular matter.) Therefore, anytime I talk about houses I'm not actually vouching for them existing (unless, of course, I say otherwise).

Where I have found what appears to be validity is on the matter of planets in houses, as identified by looking narrowly at those factors that would be expected to show the strongest presence in a chart: The houses of Sun and Moon (and, if existing, a stellium) appear to disclosed pronounced themes in the life.

My caveating out of the way, a few remarks...


First, I am certain that any validity to houses is to be measured mundanely, not ecliptically. (Were I convinced of an all-ecliptic house method, such as Equal House / Zenith System, that would be a different matter; but I'm not.) In examining different piles of charts over the years where there are house difference of Sun and Moon in different house systems, the only two that have produced anything resembling consistent results are Campanus and Regiomontanus; and, of these, the last couple of times I studied the matter (in the late '80s or early '90s), Campanus came out better.

Therefore, we are looking at the Campanus Mundoscope as the correct way to measure house placement.

In the small studies I did, the question of house cusp orbs was, of course, of interest. I used the best timed charts I could so that, at least in the aggregate, birth time imprecision was not likely a factor. One of the things that gives me a bit more confidence that there is a real phenomenon here is that there is a particular behavior that had unusual consistency through essentially every pile of charts I ever subjected to this: Planets within 1° of a house cusp (either side) "belonged" to the house. Also, planets in the 1°-2° range (actually in the lower numbered house, but 1°-2° from the higher numbered house's cusp) seemed to be a blend. Finally, it almost never occurred that I was even tempted to interpret a planet more than 3° from a house cusp (on the lower numbered house side) as part of a house, although (to layer my caveats) my own Neptune (2°27' east of the 2nd cusp) is a noteworthy exception: One could most easily argue that I have a traditional "Neptune in 2nd" temperament.

Why any cusp at all, when I don't allow this for signs? For one, it may be that house cusps don't actually exist as such - as divisions. They may be an entirely different sort of phenomenon than signs (they almost certainly are). Also, this could be a time factor rather than a space factor: For example, if it were so that astrological factors took, say, 4 to 8 minutes to "settle in" this would not show more than a couple of seconds for a Sun position, and only 2'-4' of Moon position (which seems too much, though); but it would be 1°-2° of house placement. (In all of this, I'm just thinking aloud.)

DODEKASCOPE
So, in a 12-house model, I would look at my Mundoscope above and list my house placements as:

1st - Sun, Neptune
(with acknowledgement of my remark on Neptune above)
2nd - Saturn, Mercury
3rd - Venus (less than a degree from the cusp)
4th - Mars (consider the Neptune remarks as affecting the Mars placement)
6th - Moon (which is unrelated to the symbolism ofMoon conjunct Descendant )
11th - Jupiter, Uranus
11th/12th blend - Pluto

Of much more orthodox (and immediately useful) relevance is the issue of foreground vs. background.

The only foreground planet is Moon, 3°15' from Descendant. I see Venus and Pluto as in the immediate background, which I see as maximizing at the cadent cusps. By the mid-quadrant model, we would expect my Mercury-Saturn to be the most background, with Mercury being complicated by the distinctive Mercurial character of a Virgo Sun. On the background planets, though, the most background - Venus & Pluto - come right to the angles in Los Angeles. (Most people find hidden parts of themselves uncovered as they move significantly west <s>.) Therefore, they are most evidently background in my earliest life, and least so after I moved west.

From the natus, though, I list: Foreground Moon; Middleground Sun, Neptune, Mars, Jupiter, Uranus; Background Saturn, Mercury, Venus, Pluto.

OCTOSCOPE 1
One of my two earliest articles ever published (at age 16) was on the Octoscope. It had some errors, but at least stands to show my early interest. That fell away - it didn't really seem to give the information it was supposed to, certainly not as clearly as the dodekascope, But in talking about the houses, and their reflection in the Mundoscope, it's worth revisiting those to discuss how one could make an octoscopic assessment if one chose.

What I've termed "Octoscope 1" is the original presentation of dividing the eight watches at the primary angles and the midquadrants. This has a certain elegance, since each of the eight "watches" has both foreground and background ranges. It's the only version that made any logical sense to me. In the Mundoscope you can see these divisions as the horizon, meridian, and the middle line (15°00') of the succeedent cusps.

By this means, using my chart as an example, we get the following breakdown:

1st Watch - Pluto
2nd Watch - Jupiter, Uranus
5th Watch - Moon
6th Watch - Mars
7th Watch - Venus
8th Watch - Sun, Mercury, Saturn, Neptune

OCTOSCOPE 2
Fagan's final view on the Octoscope was that the watches are centered on the angles, not bounded by them. This never made sense to me, since some significant areas of life - e.g., livelihood - are entirely background. This doesn't match anything I know to be true in astrology. (I'm not talking about individual charts. You could argue in the affirmative, for example, in my own chart. But neither in traditional astrology, Sidereal observations, nor the Gauquelin data is there any hint that planets in the traditional 11th house are the primary - nearly exclusive? - mark of earning one's living.)

Nonetheless, here's how you would recognize it if you wanted to look at it: Watches run 22°30' either side of the angles and of the mid-quadrants. By this means, using my chart as an example, we get the following breakdown:

1st Watch - Sun
2nd Watch - Pluto, Jupiter, Uranus
5th Watch - Moon
6th Watch - Mars
8th Watch - Mercury, Saturn, Neptune, Venus
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4402
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Jim Eshelman » Fri May 12, 2017 10:50 am

Some other, obscure-leaning details of my chart. In many cases (e.g., the stars) I don't have a clue what they mean :) In others (e.g., planetary nodes) I have a pretty strong idea.

Moon opposite Denebola (1°01')
Mercury conjunct Alphecca (0°13') & Acrux (0°12')
Venus opposite Algol (0°27')
Mars opposite Pollux (0°26') (No, I'm not fond of boxing.)

Mercury's S. Node (2°04' Lib) conj Neptune (0°44')
Venus' S. Node (17°08' Lib) conj Mercury (0°12')

Chiron (29°02' Sag) conj Mars (0°07')
Eros (1°14' Sag) conj IC (0°32')
Icarus (0°25' Sag) conj IC (1°21')
Hera (2°11' Leo) conj Pluto (0°05'), sq Venus (0°18')
Hidalgo (2°01' Sco) conj Venus (0°08'), sq Pluto (0°04')
Pallas (0°21' Lib) conj Neptune (0°59')
Panacea (17°17' Ari) op Mercury (0°03')
Persephone (17°49' Lib) conj Mercury (0°29')
Proserpina (1°30' Ari) op Neptune (0°10')
Tisiphone (22°18' Pis) op Sun (0°10')
Urania (2°28' Vir) conj Asc (0°09')
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

coolcoolwcr
1st Warning by Admin
1st Warning by Admin
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 5:59 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by coolcoolwcr » Wed May 31, 2017 7:32 am

what I can see , your Jupiter Uranus conjunction makes your a pioneer in groups matters, such as starting this sidereal astrology forum

And mercury Saturn in 2nd house makes you very calculating in money matters

Sun Neptune in first house, sun in first house makes you a leader role, and Neptune , leadership in spiritual matters such as astrology.

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4402
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Jim Eshelman » Wed May 31, 2017 7:14 pm

coolcoolwcr wrote:
Wed May 31, 2017 7:32 am
And mercury Saturn in 2nd house makes you very calculating in money matters
One example of why I have low confidence in houses: Your statement couldn't be further from the truth. :D
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

coolcoolwcr
1st Warning by Admin
1st Warning by Admin
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 5:59 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by coolcoolwcr » Thu Jun 01, 2017 7:42 am

well at least I know you are an author and mercury in 2nd could mean money from writing books. Saturn conjunct mercury makes your opinion systematic and looks professional.

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4402
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Jim Eshelman » Thu Jun 01, 2017 9:14 am

coolcoolwcr wrote:
Thu Jun 01, 2017 7:42 am
well at least I know you are an author and mercury in 2nd could mean money from writing books. Saturn conjunct mercury makes your opinion systematic and looks professional.
On the last sentence, where you speak of character instead of events, you are quite right (and thank you for the compliment). On the former, though, you are still missing the fact: Areas in which I write books don't usually 0roduce enough money to match the costs of having written them. If every month I got as much money as all the royalties I've made in the last 40+ years of writing, I'd barely be able to pay the rent and feed us. I don't exactly call that making money :)
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

Profit
Meteorite Member
Meteorite Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:39 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Profit » Mon Oct 02, 2017 12:32 am

Briefly looked at your natal chart(s) this evening. One was cast for Rochester and another natal cast for Los Angeles... Pluto on the ASC in LA... and Venus at the IC... Is this a paran square? Do you find LA to enhance your life to such an extent that this (now) is your 'natal' from where all lunars etc are calculated? Regulus Rising.... now that is simply 'presidential'.... :P

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4402
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Jim Eshelman » Mon Oct 02, 2017 6:31 am

Profit wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 12:32 am
Pluto on the ASC in LA... and Venus at the IC... Is this a paran square?
Technically no, because Pluto rises bodily several degrees before Venus crosses IC. But the ecliptical square is only 0°13', so quite potent.
Do you find LA to enhance your life to such an extent that this (now) is your 'natal' from where all lunars etc are calculated?
I don't at all consider the local my natal chart now - one never loses one's natal (e.g., I'm strongly lunar). But yes, all lunars etc. are calculated for here or, rather, for where I am at any given point in time: My mid-October Demi-SLR will be calculated for Grand Junction, CO, because that's where I'll be when it sets up. My new SSR will be calculated for Denver. But it will then immediately relocate back to LA when I return a few days later (and will relocate to all places in between as I pass through them).
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

Profit
Meteorite Member
Meteorite Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:39 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Profit » Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:45 am

Agree with your formula for casting charts where ever you happen to be at the time..... Also... agree that we never lose the nature or effects of our natal birthplace.... When i looked at your upcoming SSR for LA I was struck with its potential.... Would you share your thoughts on your upcoming SSR and how you intend to celebrate? Also, Enjoy your birthday to the MAX! Denver should have you in fresh company...

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4402
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Jim Eshelman » Wed Oct 04, 2017 6:31 am

Profit wrote:
Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:45 am
Agree with your formula for casting charts where ever you happen to be at the time..... Also... agree that we never lose the nature or effects of our natal birthplace.... When i looked at your upcoming SSR for LA I was struck with its potential.... Would you share your thoughts on your upcoming SSR and how you intend to celebrate?
See the thread in the SSR section on my upcoming SSR, which it looks like you've already seen. (This is the natal astrology section of the forum.)
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jupiter Sets at Dawn
Synetic Member
Synetic Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 7:03 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Jupiter Sets at Dawn » Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:44 am

Jim Eshelman wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 6:31 am
My mid-October Demi-SLR will be calculated for Grand Junction, CO... My new SSR will be calculated for Denver. But it will then immediately relocate back to LA when I return a few days later (and will relocate to all places in between as I pass through them).
You guys got snow tires, right? Maybe chains for the mountain passes? Those areas are real good with snow plows, but not good enough for ordinary California tires.

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4402
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Jim Eshelman » Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:56 am

Jupiter Sets at Dawn wrote:
Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:44 am
Jim Eshelman wrote:
Mon Oct 02, 2017 6:31 am
My mid-October Demi-SLR will be calculated for Grand Junction, CO... My new SSR will be calculated for Denver. But it will then immediately relocate back to LA when I return a few days later (and will relocate to all places in between as I pass through them).
You guys got snow tires, right? Maybe chains for the mountain passes? Those areas are real good with snow plows, but not good enough for ordinary California tires.
We've been mindful of this and haven't taken extra steps other than to monitor weather trends. None of the rentals from Southern California have these options, so Marion is also checking how to get chains en route if needed. It isn't likely we'll run into that except maybe at the highest altitudes of Rocky Mountain National Park near the continental divide, but we might. (We're renting a larger vehicle than our car for sleeping purposes, so we're limited by what the rental office has on hand - or possibly one of their other offices closer to the mountains.)

We'll be about 5K, and generally 7K-14K for most of the fortnight,
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jupiter Sets at Dawn
Synetic Member
Synetic Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 7:03 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Jupiter Sets at Dawn » Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:38 pm

Jim Eshelman wrote:
Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:56 am
It isn't likely we'll run into that except maybe at the highest altitudes of Rocky Mountain National Park near the continental divide, but we might.
Glad you're on it.
The forecast here for the next couple weeks said Denver will get snow but it won't get here.

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4402
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Jim Eshelman » Wed Oct 04, 2017 2:56 pm

I'm showing Denver warmer than that, though we may not get as far above Estes Park as we wish.

Monday, when we cross from Grand Junction to Denver, is (predicted to be) the coldest everywhere, and that's showing as 29-38 (low to high) in Denver, mostly sunny. The next day, when we're doing things around Denver, it already steps up to predicted 32-51 and sunny.

Estes Park on 11th-12th is from above freezing to mid-50s. Canon City is 41-66 and sunny the next day. And so forth.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

Profit
Meteorite Member
Meteorite Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:39 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Profit » Wed Oct 04, 2017 4:03 pm

If you got the time... some great hot springs in Glenwood Springs.... A very 'western' hotel where Teddy Roosevelt stayed is in Glenwood!

Profit
Meteorite Member
Meteorite Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:39 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Profit » Wed Oct 04, 2017 4:22 pm

I'm not that familiar with your 'site' here.... Wish I could say I was... I will now go to the section on Solar Returns and see what you wrote...

Thanks!

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4402
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Jim Eshelman » Wed Oct 04, 2017 5:47 pm

Profit wrote:
Wed Oct 04, 2017 4:03 pm
If you got the time... some great hot springs in Glenwood Springs.... A very 'western' hotel where Teddy Roosevelt stayed is in Glenwood!
Hmm, that's on the 70 halfway from Grand Junction to Denver. We have a reasonably easy 4 1/2 hour drive Monday, and that might make a nice midway stop to look (but no time to really settle into hot springs).
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4402
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Bye-bye, Saturn for now

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue Dec 05, 2017 8:48 am

By tomorrow, transiting Saturn will have left the partile orb of square my Ascendant and be on its way deeper into the Sagittarian starfield. This ends nearly a year of almost uninterrupted Saturn transits to my Moon and natal angles. (Saturn entered partile orb of square my Moon on New Year's Eve last December.)

'It will be good to again see what it feels like not to be under uninterrupted, unremitting Saturn. (I have to get through Neptune's transit to my progressed Moon, which lasts now through January, before I'm likely to trust how anything feels.)

This also launches a new cycle, as Saturn finishes rounding the IC: I now get to decide what the next 30 years of my life will be about.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

SteveS
Sidereal Field Agent
Sidereal Field Agent
Posts: 589
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:11 am

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by SteveS » Tue Dec 05, 2017 8:52 am

This also launches a new cycle, as Saturn finishes rounding the IC: I now get to decide what the next 30 years of my life will be about.
:)

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 4402
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Jim Eshelman » Sat Dec 09, 2017 11:37 am

Back in high school, I got local geodetic survey maps and measured the exact longitude and latitude of the spot where I was born. Being born in a small town, it didn't really matter much, but I wanted to do it anyway. I was born at Woodlawn Hospital (which is now at a different location) and, because I knew the hospital pretty well, I was able to get the exact second of latitude and longitude of the delivery room.

Today, of course, we'd walk in with a GPS device and read it off the screen... or use Google Earth! Technology has made many things possible today that were impossible or difficult40-50 years ago.

Those numbers are lost somewhere in files that are in storage, but it occurred to me today to pin them down again. The old hospital has been torn down, but I know the new library is there. Search maps.google.com for "Fulton County Public Library, Rochester Indiana" and you get a pointer to the center of the library, which is only a few yards from the old delivery room. Look in the browser address bar and the long URL ends with the exact coordinates, 41.0676082, -86.2192975. This converts to 41N04'03'', 86W13'09''

Solar Fire, based on The American Atlas, gives 41N03'53", 86W12'57". ACS locations are mostly for post offices (in large cities you can look up the post office by name, when it has a distinctive name, and it shows. I lived almost 40 years two blocks from the Oakwood Post Office in Los Angeles, so I could always use Oakwood, CA for my location. It wasn't a town called Oakwood, just the name of the PO.)

As you can see, the two sets of coordinates match to the nearest minute, so there is no real, critical difference. It doesn't change the location of the angles by even a minute of arc, though it does change them by seconds, and this actually might be useful for primary angles.

So, as long as I'm in a nit-picky mood with these numbers today, here they are. For the standard Rochester coordinates (post office), my angles are:

MC 1°46'07" Gemini
Asc 2°20'14" Virgo

And for the exact spot I was born, they are:

MC 1°45'56" Gemini
Asc 2°20'05" Virgo

It's a small town.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jupiter Sets at Dawn
Synetic Member
Synetic Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 7:03 pm

Re: Jim Eshelman

Post by Jupiter Sets at Dawn » Sat Dec 09, 2017 3:43 pm

Jim Eshelman wrote:
Sat Dec 09, 2017 11:37 am
Back in high school, I got local geodetic survey maps and measured the exact longitude and latitude of the spot where I was born. Being born in a small town, it didn't really matter much, but I wanted to do it anyway. I was born at Woodlawn Hospital (which is now at a different location) and, because I knew the hospital pretty well, I was able to get the exact second of latitude and longitude of the delivery room.
OMG, I did the same thing! Including knowing where the delivery room was. I was persuaded by something I read in AA (I think written by Bradley) that it wasn't worth bothering with, but I still have the info in storage.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest