The Novien - Fagan's views

Q&A and discussion on the meanings of the Zodiacal Constellations, Sun and Moon sign-meanings, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

The Novien - Fagan's views

Post by Jim Eshelman » Mon May 08, 2017 6:34 pm

A summary of Cyril Fagan's final views on the Novien.

The Hindu Navamsa is identical with the Western "9th Harmonic Chart." The Novien is identical except that it presumes that the zodiac starts at 0° Taurus, rather than 0° Aries. The net effect is that all positions are 120° later in the Novien than in the Navamsa. The idea to shift the starting point to 0° Taurus came from Garth Allen (Donald Bradley), who "suggested that to be consistent the Navamsas, if genuine, should also commence from the beginning of Taurus and not from the beginning of Aries, as is the present custom." Fagan concluded, "Without realizing it, his casual remark led to the unearthing of the long lost kernel of true lunar interpretation, thus adding enormously to the understanding of the effects of the Moon in astrology."

"In novienic charts it is customary to make the Moon's novienic longitude the 'Ascendant' and to arrange the rest of the 'houses' on the equal Division System," Fagan wrote.

He gave examples showing that he found value in interpreting the second and third level Moon-signs (the Novien Moon and Novien-of-Novien Moon). He also showed natal planets about the Novien and interacting with its positons (especially the Moon) with aspects. He indicated (I think imprudently) that the generations of Moon-signs could be used for rectification, pinning down the right sub-sign of Moon as a way of refining Moon's natal longitude.

Seemingly following the Hindu model of whole-sign conjunctions, he wrote that, "Should it [Novien Moon] fall in a sign that is natally occupied by a planet then the native's disposition and way of life will partake of the intrinsic nature of that planet. For instance, should the Novien fall in a sign that holds the natal Jupiter, then the native will be in a perpetual state of good humor, be fun loving, gay and optimistic. But should the sign hold Saturn, then the native will be constantly morose, dispirited, mean, complaining and somewhat antisocial... The reverse of this is likewise significate; namely, when the Novien of a planet interchanges with the natal Moon, or with one o its noviens."

He felt the original purpose, or raison d'etre, of the noviens was to serve as a type of aspectarian. "In all probability this may have been the original and authentic method of determining effective aspects in vogue... and may indicate that existing methods of doing this are false. In short, the birth chart is only intended to show the zodiaical emplacements of the planets... and their positons in the mundane sphere. Whereas the novien is a more intimate and personal chart [emphasis added], depicting the true destiny of the individual by means of the mutual aspects subsisting between the planets, which are frequently not at all apparent in the birth chart."

"The environment of one's own making is... indicated by one's Moon constellation and by its noviens." [He gives examples of this.]

"In matters of sex, particular attention must be paid to the disposition of the Moon and her noviens... Every constellations has its own particular mode of erotic behavior which need not be detailed here but which the astute reader will quickly determine for himself. Here again such behavior is conditioned by the natal Venus and her configurations."

"The humors are likewise denoted by the Moon, her aspects, and her noviens."
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: The Novien - Fagan's views

Post by Jim Eshelman » Mon May 08, 2017 6:34 pm

Arena wrote:When I was reading his book the other week, I stumbled upon this and my first thought was: "why did he say 0 Taurus, but not 0 Pisces?" Why do we not use the same degree or sign for the sidereal zodiac when casting the Novien?

If the tropical Navamsha chart uses 0 Aries as the start, why would the sidereal not go by the sign before (and not the sign after), like we are used to?

I am not saying that it should be, I am just asking why?

What I understand from his book is that he sees the Novien chart like the Indians see the D9 Navamsha, mainly as an indicator of the person's life, relationships and partners after age 28/32? From what I understand the sign of the Dsc in the D9 would describe the charachter of the spouse/partners/relationships by looking at the sign opposite to the Moon's sign as the Moon is supposed to be on the ASC in the Novien. It also speaks of the placement of the Moon, Sun and Venus in the D9 chart.

The chart is the division of the 9th house, so it would also indicate 9th house matters in one's life?

I found this online "D9 = Divisional Chart 9. A shorthand for "Nava-Amsha", a sanskrit word meaning "ninth feature/characteristic/facet"

It is supposed to give an indepth view into the 9th bhava(house), which stands for bhagya(fortune), higher-learning. It is also used as a short-cut to judge planetary strengths, taking into account their positions in D9 - stuff like Vargottama etc."

"In Vedic Astrology the Navamsa or 9th Harmonic chart (D9 chart) is said to be a microscopic view of the 9th House and therefore the hidden undercurrent of our fate. It is basically to predict marriage life of the native, spouse and life in later stage (after 32 years)."
(https://www.quora.com/What-is-a-D9-chart)

Why wouldn't we use the D7 chart for marriage and partner?

In my own case I can see that the sign on Dsc (the opposite sign from the Novien's Moon's sign) in the Novien(but not the D9 Navamsha) chart does indeed describe my partner after age 32 (my current partner). It's Virgo.

In his book that I have (POSA), Fagan does not explain very well how he wants to use the Novien chart. He gives some kind of hints that we can use it to assess spouse and even time marriage, but he does not state how (p115 last paragraph).

On page 116 he goes on to say that the most important aspects in the Novien are those to the Moon.
At the bottom of p. 116 he seems to indicate that one could find out the timing of death.

On p. 120 he says God help those children whose parent's or teachers have their Mars configured to the child's Moon ... am I right to assume he is talking about the Novien's Mars and Novien's Moon?

Are there any further articles he published about this that we can find or have posted in here as that chapter about Novien is not sufficient to understand how exactly to use it?

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: The Novien - Fagan's views

Post by Jim Eshelman » Mon May 08, 2017 6:35 pm

SteveS wrote:Arena wrote:
Fagan does not explain very well how he wants to use the Novien chart. He gives some kind of hints that we can use it to assess spouse and even time marriage, but he does not state how (p115 last paragraph).

Yes, it should be understood Fagan co-authored POSA with Brigadier R.C. Firebrace and this book was only meant to be a “Primer” for Sidereal Astrology. Fagan’s wife Pauline wrote about this book:
It was my husband’s hope that this book could be rewritten and made more comprehensive. But, alas, time ran out for Cyril Fagan before this task had been accomplished.

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: The Novien - Fagan's views

Post by Jim Eshelman » Mon May 08, 2017 6:36 pm

Arena wrote:When I was reading his book the other week, I stumbled upon this and my first thought was: "why did he say 0 Taurus, but not 0 Pisces?" Why do we not use the same degree or sign for the sidereal zodiac when casting the Novien?
??? I don't understand where this question is coming from. Why would he have said 0° Pisces?
If the tropical Navamsha chart uses 0 Aries as the start, why would the sidereal not go by the sign before (and not the sign after), like we are used to?
The question of "What is the first sign of the zodiac?" is complicated and may not have a single answer. But, the best theoretical answer is the historical answer: In nearly every nation on earth where astrology had (what appear to be) independent origin, the first sign of the zodiac was always Taurus.

Aries only gained footing due to the invention of the Tropical zodiac. When astrologers began to think that the vernal equinox as marking the start of things, it was at the start of Aries. Until then, Aries was never thought of as a "first sign."

PS - I wonder if your term "tropical Navamsa chart" is a typo? There has never been a Tropical Navamsa chart except here and there when a modern Tropical astrologer has copied this technique from Hindu astrology.
On page 116 he goes on to say that the most important aspects in the Novien are those to the Moon.
Yes, I haven't finished copying all of the main points from Astrological Origins yet, but this is definitely his position. It has also seemed true to me. The relationship of Moon to the number 9 penetrates through multiple traditions in ancient times, and seems the part of the Navamsa that screams loudest. (At the time we are having this conversation, I still have a [TO BE CONTINUED] at the bottom of the second post above.)
Are there any further articles he published about this that we can find or have posted in here as that chapter about Novien is not sufficient to understand how exactly to use it?
Fagan wrote numerous articles in his "Solunars" column in American Astrology near the end of his life. I'm copying the main content from his final book, Astrological Origins, as reflecting his final thoughts and summation on the matter. (I know there is a section in Primer, though that was added a bit earlier; and my copy of Primer is deep in a storage locker somewhere. I think I haven't opened it in 30 years. If I had it at hand I'd end by adding any main points from it that aren't in AO, but the two chapters in AO do represent his final summation.)

I'm adding this thread now for a couple of reasons. One, I think Fagan's thoughts on this should have a place here on Solunars.net. Two, I've been pondering some half-radical thoughts on the subject (thoughts, therefore speculative), and don't want to introduce them without having Fagan's views securely represented.)
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: The Novien - Fagan's views

Post by Jim Eshelman » Mon May 08, 2017 6:36 pm

SteveS wrote:Jim wrote:
The relationship of Moon to the number 9 penetrates through multiple traditions in ancient times, and seems the part of the Navamsa that screams loudest.
Indeed, I totally agree! Going by memory from an aged mind, I think Fagan presented good historical evidence the Moon with # 9 originated from Ancient Egypt (AE), and very little true astrological knowledge was taught outside the astrological priesthood of AE—AE was very secretive about their universal knowledges. The best evidence I have seen of numbers being associated with Planets comes from the so-called Magic Squares found in certain materials. You can go to the following link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_square and see numbered symbolism with the Moon is based on the square of 9. I have worked with the so-called magical squares (Sun) with talismans but IMO, the actual knowledge how these squares are to be applied has been lost. But, using my best guess, I would bet they have something very important to do with ‘numbered vibration’. I do know ‘numbered vibration’ was one of the 7 Hermetic Principles originating in our known history with AE.

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: The Novien - Fagan's views

Post by Jim Eshelman » Mon May 08, 2017 6:37 pm

Arena wrote:
In short, the birth chart is only intended to show the zodiaical emplacements of the planets... and their positons in the mundane sphere. Whereas the novien is a more intimate and personal chart [emphasis added], depicting the true destiny of the individual by means of the mutual aspects subsisting between the planets, which are frequently not at all apparent in the birth chart.
So now the question needs to be asked. WHY? Why the 9th harmonic and emphasis on that? Did he speak of any other harmonic charts to reveal something in particular like they do in India - or did he only speak about the 9th? And did he or they have a pile of test charts where they show this harmonic chart to be this important?

Now I've noticed other astrologers have said that you should never ever compare different harmonic charts as they do not "speak to each other" in terms of aspects between the two charts (or more). But Fagan seems to want to use the natal and compare to the Novien like you give examples of above.

Not that I wouldn't want to explore the possibility since the Novien Moon of mine has a partile opp. to Jupiter that is not to be seen in the natal chart and I wouldn't mind see being played out in life :)

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: The Novien - Fagan's views

Post by Jim Eshelman » Mon May 08, 2017 6:37 pm

Arena wrote:
In short, the birth chart is only intended to show the zodiaical emplacements of the planets... and their positons in the mundane sphere. Whereas the novien is a more intimate and personal chart [emphasis added], depicting the true destiny of the individual by means of the mutual aspects subsisting between the planets, which are frequently not at all apparent in the birth chart.
So now the question needs to be asked. WHY? Why the 9th harmonic and emphasis on that? Did he speak of any other harmonic charts to reveal something in particular like they do in India - or did he only speak about the 9th? And did he or they have a pile of test charts where they show this harmonic chart to be this important?
No others, no. BTW, the term "harmonic chart" didn't exist in his life, but the equivalent he would have had to follow would be the numerous Hindu vargas. The reason he paid attention to it at all is that a Hindu astrologer he regarded as a friend and highly respected, K.H. Kharegat, strongly urged him to give it another look; so he took the question to Donald Bradley, and that's where the Taurus fiducial originated.

The reason for the importance is that, in India, the Navamsa is held in the highest regard, far outstripping all the other vargas put together. It is routinely seen alongside the horoscope as if it's the rest of the horoscope (much as I often do with the mundoscope). In most sectors of astrology in India, the two are regarded as nearly inseparable, but they use it for substantially different purposes and in substantially different ways.

The reason (theoretical reason) it might show that scope of intimacy (his word) is that the Navamsa is regarded as being the more detailed expression of the lunar side of a person - an inner, psychological expression in contrast to the rasi (horoscope) as an expression of the experience of the world. (Hindu astrology is much more eventish with little psychological focus until very modern times, so the lunar aspect would be the deeper one.)
Now I've noticed other astrologers have said that you should never ever compare different harmonic charts as they do not "speak to each other" in terms of aspects between the two charts (or more). But Fagan seems to want to use the natal and compare to the Novien like you give examples of above.
Yes, that's definitely something he says, and that's where it makes a huge difference whether the Navamsa or Novien is the way to go. Notice, btw, that it's pretty smart to say that the two layers "don't speak to each other" unless you have the correct definition of the zodiac, which not even the Hindu systems have. If you displace the natal positions a degree, this throws the Navamsa/Novien off 9° for every planet - no wonder they do aspects by whole signs! Only if the zodiac is accurate to within 6'-7' will a Navamsa/Novien position be accurate to within a degree.

But there is also a question of whether these are legitimate zodiac expressions - real placements - or whether this is just an aspectarian, like a 40° dial. Fagan definitely sided with the idea that these are real placements.
Not that I wouldn't want to explore the possibility since the Novien Moon of mine has a partile opp. to Jupiter that is not to be seen in the natal chart and I wouldn't mind see being played out in life :)
The aspect side of things is where this has been so convincing to me for 40 years. If going any depth into a chart (especially a particular planet), I'll look at all 10°-multiple aspects (just read them off the face of the chart). These seemed solid to me, and then I watched in 1975-76 as skilled Siderealists who made much of their living working astrology booths at fairs would just spot these left and right and zing right into the meat of a topic. So I see your Moon at 25°01' something, and your Jupiter at 4°54' something, and go, "Oh, yeah, a 6' micro-aspect." In the Navamsa/Novien this works out as a 6' x 9 (still partile) Moon-Jupiter opposition.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: The Novien - Fagan's views

Post by Jim Eshelman » Mon May 08, 2017 6:38 pm

Danica wrote:an idea for further research:
if Novien is not just an aspectarian, then it should be sensitive to transits! (at least the novienic Moon)

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: The Novien - Fagan's views

Post by Jim Eshelman » Mon May 08, 2017 6:38 pm

Cool idea.

Solar Fire won't be much help, though. It doesn't calculate these. I did a test of transits to my Novien Moon and it produced what seemed to be random results. I'll have to spend more time to figure out what it's doing but, in general, SF seems not to store positions that it works against, but to generate them afresh when it is doing calculations like transits, and it doesn't like "mixed framework" interaction.

There's always the manual way :)

Example:
Natal Moon 27°24'00" Aquarius
pseudo-zodiac Moon for calculation fudging 10°44'00" Pisces
Novien Moon 6°36'44' Libra
Calculated transit to Moon: Venus conjunct it November 24, 2015, 4:19 PM PDT

Hmm, if I click "View Chart, it actually shows Venus conjunct Novien Moon. But Venus IS 23°16' Virgo. it shoved the calculations into the pseudo-zodiac (SVP 19°59'23" Pisces) and then ran straight transits, i.e., matched the framework of the chart getting transited.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: The Novien - Fagan's views

Post by Jim Eshelman » Mon May 08, 2017 6:39 pm

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:Could you just cast a chart for the Novien Moon and read the transits from that?

For instance a chart for Novien Moon 6°36'44' Libra in Hollywood CA (I think that's close as I can get on astrodienst) would be Oct 25, 1954 @ 5:38:28 AM. So checking transits to that point, Venus would be partile conjunct the Novien moon on Dec 6th this year.

What did I miss?

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: The Novien - Fagan's views

Post by Jim Eshelman » Mon May 08, 2017 6:39 pm

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:Could you just do a chart for the Novien Moon and read the transits from that?

For instance chart for Novien Moon 6°36'44' Libra in Hollywood CA (I think that's close as I can get on astrodienst) would be Oct 25, 1954 @ 5:38:28 AM. So checking transits to that point, Venus would be partile conjunct the Novien moon on Dec 6th this year.
Yeah. Good idea. Force a lunar return to that location and do transits to Moon-only for that.

SF gives a "return" of Moon to that location September 16, 2015, 10:53:26 PST, Limiting for the present purpose to only 4th harmonic aspects, for November I get only Mercury conjunct the Moon on November 2 - hardly marking anything unusual.

Checking Saturn through Pluto transits for 1973 to present doesn't produce, at a quick scan, any hits on days (or even months) of particular note, but these may need closer scrutiny to recognize.

Taking it broadly, Uranus was transiting conjunct that Moon from December '74 to September '75, and that was the period my wife and I were moving toward separation, I uprooted and came to California permanently (but not when the aspect was exact), and ... oh, yeah, final decision to divorce was in September on last pass. Interesting.

The Saturn transits for late '75 to mid-'76 don't ring true. The next Saturn late '82 to fall '83 are a bit more fitting, but hardly dead-on. Pluto's repeated conjunction December ''83 to October '84 should have been something dramatic, decisive, clear cut, and that sort of thing really started in mid-1985, not before. (I took a particular step in my spiritual training in November '84, but time lines of the approach and conclusion don't seem to align with this period - I'll look at diaries for something more specific.)

Saturn again through most of '91, doesn't ring true from memory. Then Uranus early '96 to... OK, here it is, November 18, 1996. That's an EXACT DATE of a very fitting event, a significant relationship rupture arising out of disclosures and revelations that propelled my life into a whole different direction. This is very interesting, especially because it is not wholly different from the Uranus conjunction two decades earlier.

Saturn and Neptune were in tag-team March '98 to March '99. Not a great time, nothing easy to pin down (but LOL that would fit the aspect), arguably a time of general depression and reformulation between life stages.

Saturn again for a single pass July 2005 seems (based on the biggest events of that general time that come to memory) to be a total miss. Two events of major positive tone and outcome happened soon after that and were in the planning stages.

October 2012 had another Saturn. Nothing from memory or diary.

But... this is interesting.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: The Novien - Fagan's views

Post by Jim Eshelman » Mon May 08, 2017 6:40 pm

Now, the next thing to check is whether transits to Navamsa Moon (120° earlier) have anything to show when examined this way. There were fewer of them.

Saturn conjunct Moon August '73 to April '74. Possibly arduous in the sense that I was starting college, but mostly this was an opening up of things, meeting my first wife and getting married, and a lot of excitement and "breaking loose." A Uranus time, not a Saturn time.

A single Saturn pass September '80 also was not in a Saturn period. I was working hard, but bringing to a head the Mattel project and getting a large bunch of money. Saturn for working hard, but that would not usually be for a Moon transit. Other things were happening that propelled a big career opportunity soon after.

Neptune opposed Moon repeatedly February '84 to October '85. Hard to assess. Stuff was happening fast and furious in '85, but it doesn't really seem Neptune. I was elected to a board of directors against everyone's expectations, was involved in a corporate election that nearly put me at the head of an international fraternal organization (but a position I didn't want), and then in September took on new levels of management responsibility... crazy, yeah, but not really Neptune events.

Saturn through most of '88, but unless you just take "lots of work" as a key, it misses the tone entirely - things were going very well, emotionally upbeat, and starting to build too major entities that would be of vast importance to me in the years following. (You can find Saturn keywords in all this, but they don't match the tone.)

A brief one-pass Saturn conjunction June '03 (I'd have expected something either a year-plus sooner, or two or three months later), seems a miss.

Pluto... that should be a big one. January to November '09. Have to check the diary to remind myself what year a certain event happened.... no, I had the wrong year in mind. I can't identify anything for this period.

Uranus April '11 to January '12. Nothing in particular. Too early and too late.

Not impressed.
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Nabu
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun May 07, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: The Novien - Fagan's views

Post by Jim Eshelman » Tue Jan 02, 2018 7:20 am

One of the tests we previously agreed might be useful to determine whether Novien or Navamsa positions were objective placements (in the same sense as "real planets") was to watch them for major transit. I've been watching transiting conjunctions, oppositions, and squares to them on and off for a couple of years without clear signals - partly because there are always so many different things going on from day to day, and partly because other placements interfered (e.g., my SSR Moon for a year was square my Novien Moon so it was impossible to meaningfully study the transits to Novien Moon).

I've pretty well concluded that Navamsa Moon is not subject to transit - and have no conclusion on Novien Moon yet. I consider nothing conclusive so far.

But I bring it up now because today transiting Saturn opposes my Navamsa Moon exactly. Obviously, I hope it has no value :). If you don't hear from me again, presume there might have been something to it. :twisted: :mrgreen:
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com

SteveS
Synetic Member
Synetic Member
Posts: 1197
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:11 am

Re: The Novien - Fagan's views

Post by SteveS » Tue Jan 02, 2018 7:51 am

:)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest